Don Thayer

Falmouth, KY

Don Thayer 10 months, 1 week ago on Diane Mitsch Bush: Support Amendment 66

We aren't "investing" in our childrens' futures, we're having our taxes increased. If we pass this, when will we get hit with the NEXT "investment"(tax increase)? And after reading this article, I have very little idea how the state is ACTUALLY going to spend my money. I started school in 1st grade and graduated as an honor student because I applied myself, grades 1-12 worked just fine. Stop manipulating our emotions with the "need" for state funded preschool, kindergarten, and "talented-and-gifted students"(are you kidding?). How does funding all this extra eduction create jobs or attract businesses? Are these businesses that will profit from the school system, therefore the state government, and therefore Colorado taxpayers?

You - meaning the Colorado state government - have already given us unfunded mandates, yet you expect us to trust you with even MORE money?

Sorry, but I'm not impressed with your use of cute terminology such as "sound investment in our children's future", "high-quality, innovative P-12 education", or "21st century workforce". Get your spending under control.

0

Don Thayer 10 months, 3 weeks ago on Connie Sigler: We are a republic

Absolutely, Connie, thanks for reminding everyone. There is far too much misinformation and manipulation out there.

0

Don Thayer 1 year, 1 month ago on Rob Douglas: Sen. Graham’s proposed boycott

Why is no one commenting on the fact that Snowden told 'we the people' that our government is violating our Constitutional rights by spying on us? Rob, you're dropping the ball big time.

0

Don Thayer 1 year, 1 month ago on Rob Douglas: Udall and the 4th

James Madison would NOT approve, he would be rolling in his grave. Mark Udall is NOT doing far more than most in Congress, he is absolutely complicit in allowing the U S Government to spy on Americans. He knew of it and had an obligation to tell 'We The People' that it was happening and to demand Congress, the Senate, and the President put a stop to it immediately. Instead, he sat back and watched until a real American made it public. Is he demanding whistle-blower protection for Snowden? No, he isn't. Clapper already knowingly lied to Congress, admitted it, yet Udall isn't demanding charges be brought against him. Udall is ASKING how the Patriot Act is being interpreted when he should be TELLING him how it should be interpreted. Rob, man up and call Udall out on this like you should be doing.

0

Don Thayer 1 year, 3 months ago on Hill Blackett Jr.: 2nd Amendment

Scott, you're dishonest. Mark didn't say the 2nd Amendment allows that regulation. It doesn't. And it's the punk that is the problem, not the gun. The 2nd Amendment IS an absolute right until it's amended. Do you really accept the government being better-armed than civilians? Apparently you do. Why, so they can keep us in line? Isn't that a police state?

0

Don Thayer 1 year, 3 months ago on Hill Blackett Jr.: 2nd Amendment

It doesn't violate "well regulated", it violates "the right of the people to keep and bear arms". I haven't said I disagree with limits, I've said the 2nd Amendment stands AS WRITTEN. Amend it.

0

Don Thayer 1 year, 3 months ago on Hill Blackett Jr.: 2nd Amendment

My point on these forums is that currently, the 2nd Amendment stands AS WRITTEN. It's obsolete and should be amended, but state laws, common sense laws, DON'T overwrite the 2nd Amendment. Do you agree?

0

Don Thayer 1 year, 3 months ago on Hill Blackett Jr.: 2nd Amendment

I'm simply arguing the right of gun ownership. I quoted the May 8 Militia Act because it defines the militia. The Act of May 2 defines its use. Gun control advocates argue the "regulated militia" clause allows government to restrict or control some types of arms. I'm simply saying the clause requires just the opposite, it requires militia members to own military arms, not just hunting arms. The Act of May 8 also defines militia membership, basically male citizens 18-44 years old. Therefore, even if the clause does allow restriction of arms(which I don't believe), it doesn't apply to women, teenagers, or men over 44 years old. Therefore, arms of any kind can't be restricted for those people. I believe the current law regarding the militia is the Militia Act of 1903, with later amendments, which includes male citizens 18-44, female military officers, and former military men up to 64 years old. This Act requires the government to issue weapons to militia members when they're called to serve, but it doesn't restrict civilian ownership, and if it did, it doesn't overwrite the U S Constitution.

0

Don Thayer 1 year, 3 months ago on Hill Blackett Jr.: 2nd Amendment

No. Did you work on the excavating at Red Rover Resort? I laid the block for the building.

0

Prev