Deerthug

Happy Birthday! Hope you enjoy your day!

AMEN!!

I love leaving my troubles and thoughts behind when I'm at camp. - Jordan Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

I'm trying the 2 blade Swhackers Mechanicals this season. The broadhead test comparison video convinced me to switch from Rage and T3 to Swhackers.

Nice looking Smoke pole. You need to get it dirty and put one down this coming ML season!

I see the coons are mooning your trail cam. LOL! Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Good idea. Curious as to what that thing was that looked like some feathers that came into view from the right of the camera at the 1:03 and 1:10 mark?

I'm going to start shopping at garage sales too. Maybe I'll get lucky like you Bubba. Good luck with it!

The only thing i ever forgot was my thermacell. I realzed that sitting in my one-man chair blind turkey hunting a couple of years ago and swatting at flies, no seeums and mosquitos wont bring them in. Lol. Since then i started packing my stuff several days before i go up to camp.

Oops. Sorry guys. Try it now.

The next 28 days are going to Ddddrrrraaaaaggggggg!

Spent the morning prepping my yard for reseeding next week by spraying down the weeds and setup some small doggy fences to keep my dog out of the bushes and nooks and crannies in my backyard. Tomorrow and Monday I will be spending time with the family and resting. Thank God the kids are back in school come Tuesday.

I agree with you that if someone bashes my Christian beliefs I woudn't sit on my hands either. But the Bible says in Matthew 5:44 Love your enemies and pray for those that persecute you. So after I give those non-believers and those who bash Christianity a piece of my mind, I will pray for them.

Maybe because she always refers to God as a "she" in her posts. Just my opinion.

LMAO . . . that was a good one Eddie

Early, If you took the time to read my previous posts you would have learned that I did but now regrettably vote for Obama in 2008. Why did i vote for BO? I knew you would ask. Well I got tired of the trillions of "our tax money" spent by GWB on the never ending war in Iraq which i did not believe was warranted unlike Afghanistan which clearly was warranted because they admittedly attacked us. But that is a topic for an entirely new thread. Now before you get all bent out of shape, yes I do support our troops and in fact do not blame them but congratulate them and praise them for putting their lives in harms way so I can feel safe in my country knowing that my family and friends are protected from those who hate Americans with a passion. I along with the many others were hoping for a "change" after the huge debt that GWB put our country in; taking the huge surplus created by Clinton and reversing it ten fold, so we voted for BO. I had hope that like Clinton, BO would have concentrated the last 4 years at least on trying to reduce the debt somewhat. But rather than working to reverse the debt all he did was make it even higher. I think his main agenda at that time was to make history - becoming the first black president. I congratulate him on that and that alone. Moreover, I am afraid of his unspoken plans should he be re-elected for another term. If he is re-elected he has nothing to lose and I'll bet my first born he will run this country into the ground. It's already into a downward spiral, not to mention take away or at least extremely limit our 2nd amendment rights. The democrats have already done that in our State albiet through good ole Mikey. (Notice I didn't call them God -given this time). You mess with my right to protect and defend my family from harm then you are not getting my vote. So to answer your question, I am man enough to admit when the republicans screw up. You too should man/woman - up (no disrespect just not sure) and admit when the democrats royally screw up. There is never going to be a happy medium for any of us until this Country is turned right side up and our leaders, whomever they may be actually lead for all our benefit and not for theirs. And no matter who takes office in January, until our leaders protect our borders, protect our people and work toward making America #1 again nothing is going to "change".

Well lets see how well BO and JB do at the DNC and then we can compare apples to apples on their facts

Welcome aboard!

Good luck with the new home WNY!

Well stated Steve

I came across this article last year from a Pro-life website: Lifenews.com. Even the pro-lifers don't feel that Roe v. Wade will be overturned that easily. Here's just some excerpts from the article: (Lifenews.com 10/6/11) At a Labor Day forum sponsored by the “Tea Party” for the Republican candidates for president, one of the panelists, Professor Robert George, asked the five candidates who participated whether, in an effort to overturn Roe v. Wade, 410 U.S. 113 (1973), they would support Congressional legislation to declare the unborn child a “person,” as that word is used in § 1 of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution. Section 1 provides, in part, “nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.” The purported authority for such legislation is § 5 of the same Amendment which provides that “Congress shall have power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article [referring to the Fourteenth Amendment].” Three of the candidates–Rep. Michele Bachmann, former Speaker Newt Gingrich and businessman Herman Cain–said that they would support such legislation; one–Rep. Ron Paul–said that the issue of abortion is one for the States, not the federal government, to decide; and one–Gov. Mitt Romney–indicated that he opposed such legislation because it would precipitate a constitutional crisis between Congress and the Supreme Court. (Emphasis added) At the same forum, the candidates were also asked whether they would support Congressional legislation removing the appellate jurisdiction of the Supreme Court over cases challenging abortion regulations. The Supreme Court’s abortion decisions can be overturned only by an overruling decision of the Court itself or by a federal constitutional amendment. Congress has no power under § 5 of the Fourteenth Amendment to define the unborn child as a “person” for purposes of § 1 of the Amendment, when the Court has held (in Roe) directly the opposite. Removal of the Supreme Court’s appellate jurisdiction over abortion cases would not affect the binding force of those decisions and would actually prevent a differently constituted Court from overruling Roe and Casey. The proposals made to the Republican presidential candidates at their “Tea Party” forum do not offer a realistic means of overturning Roe v. Wade and do not deserve the support of the pro-life community. Roe can be overturned only by a decision of the Court itself overruling Roe or by a federal constitutional amendment–neither a federal statute enacted under § 5 of the Fourteenth Amendment defining the word “person” as used in § 1 of the Amendment, nor a statute removing the Supreme Court’s appellate jurisdiction over abortion cases would have that effect. P.S. Ooops left this part out: First, removing the Supreme Court’s appellate jurisdiction over abortion cases would not affect the precedential force of the Court’s abortion decisions. Under the Supremacy Clause of the United States Constitution, both lower federal courts and state courts would continue to be bound by Roe, as modified by Casey. Article VI of the United States Constitution provides, in part, that “This Constitution . . . shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding.” And under art. VI, “all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation to support this Constitution . . . .” Second, ironically, removal of the Supreme Court’s appellate jurisdiction over abortion cases would actually prevent a differently constituted Court from overruling Roe and Casey, and returning the issue of abortion to the States. That would not appear to be in the best interests of the pro-life movement or unborn children. Third, removal of the Supreme Court’s appellate jurisdiction over abortion cases would effectively leave lower federal courts and state supreme courts as the final arbiters of what is and what is not allowed with respect to the regulation of abortion. Under current law, a decision by either a federal court of appeals or a state reviewing court giving an overbroad reading to the abortion liberty may be reviewed and rectified by the Supreme Court. If the Court’s appellate jurisdiction were removed, however, there will be no mechanism for correction of such decisions. Moreover, there could be a profusion of conflicting decisions among federal courts, among state courts and between federal courts and state courts, as to what abortion regulations are permissible, with no possibility of Supreme Court review.

Here's some interesting info on Reagonomics and Clinton v. Bush: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reaganomics#Results http://money.usnews.com/money/blogs/capital-commerce/2007/04/18/bush-vs-clinton-the-economic-verdict hmmmmm........

Well i think there is a better chance of the current administration taking away our gun rights than a new Romney run administration taking away abortion rights. Obama has nothing to lose.