Democrats propose taking Trump’s finger off nuclear trigger

Saying they fear President Trump with his finger on the nuclear trigger, two congressional Democrats introduced legislation Tuesday that would prevent the White House from launching a nuclear first strike without a declaration of war from Capitol Hill.

Sen. Edward J. Markey and Rep. Ted W. Lieu said their bill was designed to put a check on Mr. Trump, who during the presidential campaign had sent mixed signals on his thoughts about nuclear proliferation and the possibility of a U.S. first strike.

“It is a frightening reality,” Mr. Lieu, California Democrat, said of Mr. Trump, saying the new president showed a lack of understanding of U.S. capabilities.

U.S. law and American military policy does give the president the power to initiate a nuclear strike. Mr. Trump during the campaign said he would not strike first — but immediately added he would also be prepared and “can’t take anything off the table.”

The two Democrats first introduced their bill during the campaign season last year, but it didn’t advance. It’s also unlikely their new bill would clear a GOP-controlled Congress this year.

150 Comments - what are your thoughts?

  • AKLady says:

    “Nationalism and Socialism had to be redefined and they had to be blended into one strong new idea to carry new strength which would make Germany great again.” Adolph Hitler 1934.

  • AKLady says:

    Trump in charge of America’s military and weapons is a nightmare.
    The man is nothing but a selfish, egotistical bully.

  • Larry Squire says:

    As I read and read I see more reason to impose TERM LIMITS.. now is the time
    2 3 year terms for the House and 2 4 year terms for the Senate

  • inquisitive says:

    This is to funny seeing as how the only pres to nuc anyone was Truman.

  • Born in the South and proud says:

    Stupid dumb butts, I guess by their thoughts we just need to get out the white flags……..screw em all

  • Tiger says:

    Good luck may you have as much luck stopping Trump as the Republicans has trying to stop Obama.

  • Richard Frick says:

    Sen. Edward J. Markey and Rep. Ted W. Lieu are two illegal aliens attempting the overthrow of the USA. What knowledge did Obslama have about anything except what the puppeteer Soros told him? They are the ones that need restrictions .

  • Bob says:

    Too bad that these idiots know what it takes to order a first strike. The President, any President, can’t just “push a button” and the missiles fly. They need to quit watch Hollywierd depictions of the events a research reality.

  • Ron Long says:

    I do not believe that they thought his thing through. If we had to wait for Congress to act to defend against a nuclear attack there would be no US to worry about, nothing but the rubble and dead people. There are just minutes to act or react. Do they realize that being in DC that their sorry asses would be among the first to be vaporized? Talk about stupid dimwits!!

  • HWayneS says:


  • Sherrille Wrenn says:

    This is all about ok we passed this showing Trump can’t be trusted as president so lets boot him and install hillary. thats what this is all about.

    1. Mary Lou says:

      No way we can let that happen!!

  • James Maxwell says:

    I am not nearly as worried about Donald J. Trump pushing the button as I was
    with the Democrat Socialist muzzie in the Oval office. O’mau-mau’s hatred
    of the United States and all that we stand for made him want to destroy us
    by any means possible. His so called Red Line in the Sand over Syria and
    other cluster flusters around the world giving away money to terrorist
    nations and selling radioactive material to the Russians and letting the
    Iranians go balls to the wall to develop their weapons along with N Korea
    put us at more risk than any person in our history.

  • roboteq says:

    Once again, Progressives acting like issues are the opposite of what they really are. President Trump is not the one behaving irresponsibly by letting hundreds of potentially dangerous convicted criminals out of jail or allowing thousands of potentially dangerous illegal aliens to enter the U.S. I would be a lot more worried about Hillary Clinton having access to our military and weaponry. It isn’t President Trump supporters rioting, destroying property and attacking people in the streets.

    1. AKLady says:

      Neither did President Obama.
      Why do you lie?

      1. roboteq says:

        How is it you think I am lying? Do you dispute that Obama has let potentially dangerous prisoners out of jail? Do you dispute that Obama has allowed potentially dangerous illegal immigrants into the U.S.? If you dispute these verifiable truths that have been very well documented, I must disregard your thinking as being delusional. I am not sure how anyone can not know these things.

        1. roboteq says:

          I believe we all can agree that drug dealers possessing illegal firearms can be considered potentially dangerous;
          “Scanning the list of convicted criminals due to enjoy an early release courtesy of the President we discover that the category “non-violent drug offenders” includes convicts who illegally possessed a firearm.”

          1. roboteq says:

            I am going to also assume that the most liberal Progressive is not going to dispute that American citizens being murdered by illegal aliens is a bad thing, and that illegal aliens prone to murder and other violent crimes are potentially dangerous.
            “Illegal immigration is not a victimless crime. All across the country, Americans are having their lives forever changed by criminal aliens.”

          2. AKLady says:

            Americans being murdered is a bad thing, but it happens every day. The vast majority of murders are one-time act of incredibly strong emotion. Acts that are very unlikely to ever reoccur. Cognitive control mechanisms can become damaged..

          3. roboteq says:

            So you don’t dispute that Obama let dangerous criminals free to do harm to Americans or that Obama let dangerous criminals into the U.S. even though they are here illegally, you just don’t care that there are more criminals murdering Americans because we are going to get murdered every day anyway? Does this really sound rational to you? Since we already have people doing harm to us it is OK for our leaders to allow even more people to do harm to us. Is that what you believe is a rational way to think?

          4. AKLady says:

            Educate yourself.
            Increase your reading comprehension.

          5. roboteq says:

            I do educate myself by reading and exploring factors of issues from several viewpoints. A little to the left and a little to the right usually puts the truth about in the middle. I do not expose myself to any extremist viewpoints to either extreme because I don’t want to look ridiculous for being manipulated by what amounts to mostly untruthful opinions.

            Speaking of comprehension, are you aware that in Russia and China, they execute a lot more that we put in jail? May we conclude that you would have preferred that Obama had executed those he set free rather than setting them free? That seems a bit harsh.

          6. AKLady says:

            Actually, your capital punishment data is wrong.
            Ranked by quantity: Iran, Iraq, Saudi Arabia, China, United States. (International Business Times).

            Of the countries considered to be industrialized, just four countries continue to perform capital punishment: the United States, Japan, Singapore, and Taiwan

          7. AKLady says:

            America has more prisons than all the other modern world combined.
            America has more prisoners than all the other modern world combined, including Russia and China.

          8. roboteq says:

            What is your point? I agree that most people in prison in the U.S. should not be there. Prison has become just another Socialist program. What does this have to do with the fact that Obama set criminals with illegal firearms charges against them free? These are people who were conducting illegal activities while possessing illegal firearms, we can be pretty sure the firearms were not meant for defensive purposes only. How many innocent American citizens need to die by stray bullets from warring drug dealers before you admit that letting these people loose on the streets was not a good idea? There were plenty more prisoners with completely non-violent charges who could have been released.

          9. AKLady says:

            Reagan closed the mental hospitals. Prisons now house the mentally ill, but without providing them with treatment.

          10. roboteq says:

            Once again, this has nothing to do with the conversation. Ironically, once again, you are wrong. My son was diagnosed with mental illness while in jail and was provided proper treatment which has helped him very much.

          11. AKLady says:

            Your son was very lucky.
            You should be in the front line for change.

          12. roboteq says:

            I don’t know what that means. But, yes, my son has been fortunate in life. It would be nice if he understood that.

          13. AKLady says:

            ..Every living human on this planet is potentially dangerous.

          14. roboteq says:

            Especially those of you who are willing to make excuses for alleged leaders who allow known criminals to be freed and illegally continue entering the U.S.

          15. AKLady says:

            For thw most part, the laws under which they were convicted have ben repealed.

        2. AKLady says:

          Every living human on this planet is potentially dangerous.

          1. roboteq says:

            Deja vu, or are you stuttering?

          2. AKLady says:

            No, just repeating fact for someone who seems to be hard of hearing.

          3. roboteq says:

            Do you even realize that you have not only supported the comments I made, but have admitted to being ok with Americans being murdered by convicted criminals who were set free on the world by Obama and illegal aliens who have been allowed to repeatedly enter and stay in the U.S. because of Obama? Do you realize that you have posted no rebuttal to my comments and have not offered a shred of evidence that your accusation that I am a liar has any rational whatsoever? I don’t mean this to be mean, in case you have some sort of disability, but are you capable of rational thought?

          4. AKLady says:

            Right-wing ignorance is not only a documented fact, it is a self-admitted fact. The U.S. Census clearly documents that the red states have the highest school dropout percentages.

          5. roboteq says:

            Once again, are you not capable of following a conversation or providing support for your ridiculous sounding opinions? You have yet to post one fact, let alone show support for one. Why do you just keep changing the subject by posting unrelated insults that have no meaning?
            You called me a liar. I asked you to dispute what I posted. You did nothing. Now you have posted some out of the blue accusation that Right-wing persons are ignorant. What does this have to do with your calling me a liar? What does this have to do with your not showing anything to support your bumper sticker mentality postings?
            Is it turrets syndrome? I’ll bet that’s what it is; you have some odd form of turrets. You just spew out inane comments because of an illness. I am so sorry. I will try to be more sensitive to your affliction. Go ahead; spout out some other irrelevant accusation or incomprehensible utterings. We’ll pray for you to get well.

          6. roboteq says:

            Back to the subject, maybe you could explain why you support Obama for allowing illegal immigrants to stay in the U.S. to Laura Wilkerson, whose 18 year old son Joshua was tortured and murdered by an illegal immigrant. Or maybe you could convince the family of Jill Sundberg, an American citizen who was shot to death 13 times by 5 illegal immigrants, why it’s ok for violent foreigners preying on Americans have been allowed to stay in the U.S. illegally by Obama.
            I am sure you can give all of the families of victims of violent crimes and murders committed against them by foreigners who have snuck into the U.S. illegally comfort in your beliefs that the law has not applied to these violent animals due to Obama’s arrogant disregard for law and American lives.

          7. AKLady says:

            Suggest you read the 5th and 6th Amendments to the Constitution. Then, take note of the deficit spending and the national debt.

            The number of violent Americans far outnumber immigrants, legal or otherwise, in our prisons. Common sense clearly shows that the last thing an illegal alien wants is to be caught and deported.

            There is no comfort to be given to any family that has suffered violent crime. However, you exaggerate the level of crime committed by illegal immigrants The right-wing press also makes those exaggerations..

          8. roboteq says:

            The bottom line, lady, is that you are advocating the release of convicted criminals and illegal aliens allowed to walk the streets of the U.S., murdering American citizens, all because Obama allowed it. You called me a liar for pointing this out and now you have proven that you will go to any length of deceit to justify your hateful nature of advocating Americans to be murdered by criminals. There is no reason to try to communicate with such a hateful, despicable person who would make excuses for American citizens being allowed to be murdered by criminals. I will pray you come to your senses, mostly so that you will stop advocating extreme violent crimes by those who should not be allowed to walk the streets of the U.S.

          9. AKLady says:

            More of our citizens are murdered by American citizens than are even bruised by an illegal, let alone killed by one.
            You paranoid, brainwashed, Trump groupies do not have even an ounce of common sense among you.

            The last thing an unauthorized immigrant wants is the spotlight of law enforcement shining upon them. I will pray you come to your senses.

          10. roboteq says:

            Back to the purpose of this conversation, I do believe posters such as AKLady have shown that it is not President Trump we need to keep “The Button” away from, but rather Progressive fools such as AKLady, which Hillary Clinton is just like.

            Just as Hillary Clinton believed she was under fire in Bosnia, AKLady doesn’t believe that illegal aliens have murdered many American citizens. I suppose the delusional prefer to stay delusional.
            Here is a whole list of American’s murdered by illegal aliens who Progressive haters can ignore;

          11. AKLady says:

            Putting words in other people’s mouths is the same as lying? Why do you lie? What do you gain from lying?

          12. roboteq says:

            And, without ever once addressing any issue of discussion, you have circled back to accusations that I am lying. Again, your accusations have no basis.

            Simple question; Do you support actions that result in the murders of innocent Americans? Are you capable of answering a simple question?

          13. AKLady says:

            It is not a simple question.
            It is a an attempt to entrap.

            More of our citizens are murdered by American citizens than are even bruised by an illegal, let alone killed by one.

            The last thing an unauthorized immigrant wants is the spotlight of law enforcement shining upon them. I will pray you come to your senses.

          14. roboteq says:

            It is a simple question. It is not a trap. It is exactly what it appears to be. I am not a deceitful person, I am only trying to have a rational conversation with you.

            I’ll try putting it another way to make you feel less paranoid that I am trying to do anything other than get an honest comment from you. If you could do something to prevent any additional murders of innocent American citizens, other than what other American citizens have done, would you support doing what will prevent innocent Americans from being murdered?

          15. AKLady says:

            Your question is an attempt to entrap.

            Immigrants, legal or otherwise, are no more likely to murder than anyone else in this country.

            The last thing an unauthorized immigrant wants is the spotlight of law enforcement shining upon them. I will pray you come to your senses.

          16. roboteq says:

            OMG! How do you function day to day? Don’t answer, it was rhetorical.

            Unless you are planning on deceiving yourself with your answer, there is no way “I” can entrap you for answering my question honestly.

            How about this; If an American citizen told you that they were going to kill some random, innocent person tomorrow, for whatever reason, and you had every reason to believe they were going to do so, would you do anything to prevent that American citizen from murdering someone?

          17. AKLady says:

            A person cannot be arrested for thinking.
            One could lie about someone making such a statement.

          18. roboteq says:

            Are you seriously so deceitful and hateful that you are not going to answer a simple question of morality? Let me make this easier; I would absolutely contact the police if I believed someone was serious about saying they were going to kill someone else for no particular reason. I would also do whatever it takes to prevent any citizen of any country, as well as any person in the U.S. whether legally here or not, from being killed.

            The only possible reason for you not answering questions is that you know you can only answer in ways that will discredit your honesty and your morals. That is so pathetic.

          19. AKLady says:

            Blah, blah, blah, lie, insult …repeat ad nauseam.
            Tedious, boring, repetitive …
            Yes, your racism and religious bigotry are pathetic.
            If you make the accusation you are advocating, yoi best have evidence to back it up. Else, you can be sued,

          20. AKLady says:

            You are confused.
            I advocate law.

            If you disagree with the U.S. Constitution, I suggest that you take the issue up with your elected representatives.

          21. roboteq says:

            You claim you advocate law. So you support upholding the law that clearly states that there is a due process of law in order for non-Americans to enter the U.S. and that to enter the U.S. in any other manner is a criminal action? Do you advocate all law? The U.S. Constitution has nothing to do with this conversation.

          22. roboteq says:

            Why did you delete this post?

            ” AKLady

            Again, your statement is based on racist assumptions.

            1:10 a.m., Saturday Jan. 28 | Other comments by AKLady”

          23. AKLady says:

            The U.S. Constitution has everything to do with this conversation, The 5th and 6th Amendment applies to EVERYONE within out borders.

          24. AKLady says:

            You obviously have no concept, whatsoever, as to the meaning of “due process” within the American legal system.

          25. AKLady says:

            Good night.
            Even way over here in Alaska, it is getting late.

          26. roboteq says:

            You just said it; THEY ARE ILLEGAL! THEY ARE CRIMINALS. How do you justify to all of the immigrants who are going through legal processes to live and work in the U.S.? It is legal immigrants who are the most affected by the criminals. What exaggerations have I made? If one American citizen is murdered by criminals who could have been kept out of the U.S., that is one too many. I have cited two specific cases that, in your hateful nature, you have chosen to ignore. How does someone ignore innocent American citizens being murdered? What kind of person are you that you promote that American citizens be murdered by criminals? Are you willing to die in order to promote those criminals?

          27. AKLady says:

            Suggest you read the 5th and 6th Amendments to the Constitution. Then, take note of the deficit spending and the national debt.

            Everyone charged with a penal offence has the right to be presumed innocent until proved guilty according to law in a public trial at which he has had all the guarantees necessary for his defense

          28. roboteq says:

            Released prisoners were already proved to be guilty and illegal aliens are not included in the Constitutional rights of American citizens.

          29. AKLady says:

            Everyone with the U.S. Borders, and within its territorial borders, are covered by the U.S. Constitution. Nothing, whatsoever, in the Constitution limits it application to “citizens”.

          30. AKLady says:

            Everyone within the U.S. and/or its territories are governed by the Constitution. We do not have one set of laws for citizens and another set of laws for noncitizens.

          31. AKLady says:

            Whether they are defending the Trump or bleating for Obama, so-called conservatives are always against America. They are either traitors or idiots, and on the matter of America’s self-preservation, the difference is irrelevant.

          32. AKLady says:

            Once again, are you not capable of reading.

          33. roboteq says:

            For goodness sake, you are just going in circles. I can learn nothing from you if all you are going to do is keep repeating the same nonsense accusations. I am sorry I tried to have a conversation with you. Have a blessed, albeit ill informed life.

          34. AKLady says:

            Thank you.
            Your input is always welcome
            It says so much about you.

          35. AKLady says:

            Yet another link. Maybe you can find this one?

          36. roboteq says:

            CNN and every other source I found on high school drop outs disagree with your opinion. Looks like the highest dropout percentages are in urban areas, which are all blue areas.

          37. AKLady says:

            Please increase your reading comprehension.
            I did not provide an “opinion”
            I provided fact and cited the source.
            Interestingly, U.S. Census Data is self-reported.

          38. roboteq says:

            You have provided absolutely nothing to be comprehensive about. All you continue to do is to spew out accusations and unsubstantiated claims. You have not provided support for your claims, only claim that some unknown U.S. Census Data is your source. Do you have a link for such a U.S. Census Data report? I can’t find anything by U.S. Census reporting that shows high school dropout data by political region. The only thing I can find is by ethnic diversity, mostly for Black and Hispanic students.

            So, no you have not done one thing you are claiming you have done. You don’t seem to be able to “comprehend” that unsupported claims are just opinions.

            Playing your game by your rules, anyone can make any claim and claim their information came from anywhere. So far, your claims have no merit whatsoever…they are mere opinions.

          39. roboteq says:

            I have already searched this site. There is nothing I can find supporting your claim that there are more high school drop outs in red states. Are you delusional, or did you lie, thinking no one would check?

          40. roboteq says:

            It is true that your comment about every living human on this planet is potentially dangerous. My being hard of hearing however has no bearing on words typed on a computer screen. Just saying.

          41. AKLady says:

            “Hard of hearing” is a metaphor that has been in use for a very long time..
            Just saying …

  • justinwachin says:

    The Soviet Union feared President Reagan because they thought he was crazy enough to use America’s nuclear weapons. The Russians did not fear President Obama because they knew he lacked the spine and public support to carry out any of his threats.

    The best way to avoid having to use nuclear weapons is to scare your enemies into thinking you would use them without giving it a second thought. The Democrats are having trouble accepting a strong leader after eight years of a weak, incompetent leader.

    1. AKLady says:

      No one “feared” saint Reagan, the Hollywood Actor.
      Strong leader? Trump is a wannabe dictator.
      He has already begun attacking the Constitution.
      The 1st. 2nd and 5th Amendments do not meet his approval and must be abolished.

      1. justinwachin says:

        The Soviet Union did according to information which leaked out after the USSR fell.

        Could you elaborate on how President Trump is trying to abolish the first, second and fifth amendments? I have made the case of how President Obama tried to eliminate the first, second and tenth amendments, but I have not seen any action which would lead me to believe President Trump is trying to undermine the Constitution.

        1. AKLady says:

          Obama made no attempts to repeal the first, second and tenth amendments; none whatsoever.

          If you want to restrict who your customers are, you open a club with limited membership, not a business open to the public. Under American law, discrimination of any form is illegal.

          Given the huge number of murders taking place using guns, something needs to be done. The gun you buy at the yard sale may have been used in a murder last week. If a law enforcement investigation leads to your ownership of the gun, your life is going to become very complicated.

          1. justinwachin says:

            (1) In the aftermath of the Benghazi attack, President Obama, Hillary and Susan Rice were traveling around blaming the attack on a YouTube video and suggested in public comments that we might need to consider placing some things, like criticism of Islam, off limits.

            (2) President Obama tried repeatedly to get gun control. Most believe Merrick Garland would have been a staunch voice on the Supreme Court for gun control.

            (10) Obamacare and the gay marriage issue both should have been ruled unconstitutional since they sought federal powers over issues which were reserved for the states. The Constitution does not grant the government power to control health insurance or to determine the terms of marriage.

            (1 & 13) People have the right to refuse service when it conflicts with their religious beliefs. The gay marriage anti-discrimination laws which you hinted at amounts to slavery, which was outlawed by the 13th amendment. The government can’t constitutionally require a photographer or baker to service a gay wedding. I did not include this in my original comments because these issues relate to state or local ordinances rather than a federal law.

            As we saw on Sept. 11, 2001, guns aren’t need to highjack planes or kill large numbers of people. Explosives have the potential of doing more damage more quickly. Guns don’t murder people. Guns are tools used by murderers to kill people. We need to deal with the source of the problem. We have an entertainment industry which too often glamorizes violence. We also have an abortion industry which murders more people every day than all the guns in our nation ever will. A person’s chances of death is much greater in their mother’s womb than on the streets of any American city.

            By the way, President Obama is a big supporter of the baby slaughter industry. The guns that he and Eric Holder put into the hands of criminals as part of their Operation Fast & Furious are still being used to kill people. Maybe the government needs to get out of the illegal gun sales business.

          2. AKLady says:

            1. Opinion is not fact.
            2. More opinion.
            10) Equal rights is a Constitutional issue, therefore. within federal enforcement.
            (1 & 13) If you serve the public, you have no right to discriminate based on gender, sex, religion, race …

          3. justinwachin says:

            First of all the numbers in parenthesis are the constitutional amendments I was referring to.

            The Benghazi coverup was about more than Barack Obama’s presidential campaign. Their statements on the YouTube video clearly indicated they were considering some sort of restrictions on videos which were critical of Islam. After the YouTube lie was discovered that destroyed their ability to use that to push for speech controls.

            Merrick Garland’s past decisions led gun rights advocates to be concerned about his stand on gun control. Fortunately we will never know how closely their fears matched reality since Garland will not be considered to replace Scalia.

            The First Amendment says “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof…” In the case of the photographer and the baker they believe that homosexuality is wrong and that their participation in a gay wedding would be wrong. Their belief should be the deciding factor in whether they participate in a gay wedding. This would be about like require a Muslim caterer to serve a bacon and ham dinner.

            The (13) refers to the 13th amendment which outlawed slavery. The ability of one person to force someone to provide a service against their will amounts to slavery. In the old days slaves were forced to raise cotton for their masters against their will. Under gay rights laws, creative professionals are forced to make cakes and take pictures for their would-be masters against their will.

            The only difference is that in the days of slavery the whips were used by the masters against the slaves. In homosexuality the gay couple uses their whips on each other in their kinky sex acts.

          4. AKLady says:

            Hate speech is a crime.

            Hate speech is not covered by the 1st Amendment.

            If you open a business serving the public, you may not discriminate on any basis.

            If you wish to deny service based on your religious beliefs, open a private club.

            No cover-up took place.

          5. justinwachin says:

            You need to read the Constitution. The Supreme Court has ruled that hate speech is protected by the first amendment. The Supreme Court has yet to rule on whether these laws forcing someone to serve gay marriages is unconstitutional–spoiler alert, they are unconstitutional on the basis of the first and 13th amendments.

            There was a coverup on the nature of the Benghazi attacks. That is what Congress has been trying to get to the bottom of since 2013. That is what opened the door to Hillary’s email scandal. The fact is the Obama administration lied to the American people to help his re-election bid. Although he won, his lie helped cost Hillary her chance at the presidency.

          6. AKLady says:

            The First Amendment protects us from the government. It does not apply to relations between private persons. The First Amendment, like all individual rights in the Constitution, is not absolute.

            Obscene speech, for one, carefully defined by the Supreme Court, has been removed from 1st Amendment protection.

            Speech that is likely to cause violence is not protected by the 1st Amendment. In this country there is no right to speak fighting words.

            The issue of homosexuality is no different than any other form of discrimination. People do not choose to be homosexual. Research has documented heritability. The method by which the trait is passed has not yet been clearly defined. In many ways, the science of genetics remains in its infancy.

          7. justinwachin says:

            The point I made was President Obama set the stage to put limits on free speech using the YouTube lie that he and his administration promoted following the Benghazi attack.

            While the Court has put some restrictions on the First Amendment, people have the right to speak words which offend others. The Court has generally been reluctant to limit the First Amendment. For example, they allowed the KKK to march through Skokie, Illinois. They have also scaled back what was covered by the fighting words doctrine.

            Since the Obama premise collapsed when the truth got out about Benghazi, no one knows if he would have had any success limiting what could be said about Islam. The Supreme Court invalidated several of his overreaches of power.

            It has not been proven that people have no choice in homosexuality. That position has been advocated to try to help homosexuality gain non-discrimination coverage. In the early years of the 20th century similar claims were made about criminal behavior–that some people were born to be thiefs, murderers, etc. Considering how many thiefs and murderers are sent to prison that theory doesn’t seem to have many adherents today.

          8. AKLady says:

            Truth about Benghazi?
            General Carter Ham offered Stevens additional military security — not once, but twice.

            Just because YOU REFUSE TO ACCEPT SCIENCE does not make homosexuality a choice.

            No species has been found in which homosexual behaviour has not been shown to exist, with the exception of species that never have sex at all, such as sea urchins

            Same-sex Behavior Seen In Nearly All Animals, Review Finds”, Science Daily

            Bagemihl, Bruce (1999). Biological Exuberance: Animal Homosexuality and Natural Diversity. St.

            Martin’s Press. ISBN 978-0312253776.

            Dorit, Robert (September–October 2004). “Rethinking Sex”. American Scientist. Retrieved 2007-09-11.

            Wells, R. S. (1995). “Community structure of Bottlenose Dolphins near Sarasota, Florida”. Paper presented at the 24th International Ethological Conference, Honoluly, Hawaii.

            Frans de Waal, “Bonobo Sex and Society”, Scientific American (March 1995), p. 82ff

            Frans B. M. de Waal (2001). “Bonobos and Fig Leaves”. The ape and the sushi master : cultural reflections by a primatologist. Basic Books. ISBN 84-493-1325-2.

            Bagemihl, Bruce (May 2000). “Left-Handed Bears & Androgynous Cassowaries: Homosexual/transgendered animals and indigenous knowledge”. Whole Earth Magazine (archived by Archived from the original on August 15, 2000. Retrieved 13 December 2013.

            Eric Silver (2 August 1999). “Gay vulture couple raise surrogate chicks”. The Independent. London. Retrieved 2009-09-21.

          9. justinwachin says:

            My comments related to Benghazi was the effort by the Obama campaign to blame this on a YouTube video and to suggest we may need to limit free speech.

            I have no problem accepting science. I reject junk science. The claims you make about homosexuality have not been proven. Yes there are gay rights activists who have published papers trying to prove the point, but papers have a way of supporting the viewpoints of the paper’s creator. If you spend a little time you can find papers which support just about any idea.

            If I reviewed the papers you cite I could probably find flaws in the logic or study methodologies. I’ve got better things to do with my time than to critique the studies you listed. Most of the studies I have read would not survive the peer review process. The tobacco companies funded lots of research which seemed to indicate their products were safe. Every study needs to be read with a certain amount of skepticism.

          10. AKLady says:

            Actually, there are many valid, scientific studies regarding the heritability of homosexuality. I suggest that you inform yourself better in regard epigenetics.

          11. justinwachin says:

            I’ve got better things to do than to spend time being indoctrinated in the gay rights agenda. This is nothing more than a ploy by gay rights groups to try to win big in the affirmative action game. This movement has a long wish list. As one item is accomplished they move to the next. If they are unable to dupe enough citizens to vote for their agenda they will start shopping for sympathetic judges and have them to force this on us.

          12. AKLady says:

            Science denier.
            This is the 21st Century.
            The Bible was written in the 6th century BC.

          13. justinwachin says:

            I’m not a science denier. I am a junk science denier. There is no science proving that a person is born gay. If it were, I would not be reading about it in the comments section of 1776Coalition.

            I’m aware it’s the 21st century. Thanks for peppering that cliche into the discussion. Science did not change as the world moved from the 20th century to the 21st.

            The Bible was written over a number of years. Moses penned his part long before the 6th century B.C. Other parts of the Old Testament are were written after the 6th century B.C. The New Testament was written after Jesus died in 27 A.D.

          14. AKLady says:

            Your science is out of date.

          15. justinwachin says:

            No it isn’t. People are still feverishly searching for a gay gene. It hasn’t been found. Even if a common gene was found among homosexuals there would still be no proof that the gene caused the person to be gay, bisexual or transgender. Until some link is found your claims really are nothing more than speculation or wishful thinking.

          16. AKLady says:

            American ignorance and hate, is it not beautiful to observe. Tell me, do you also claim to be Christian?
            No species has been found in which homosexual behaviour has not been shown to exist, with the exception of species that never have sex at all, such as sea urchins and aphis.

            Scientists find DNA differences between gay men and their straight twin brothers

            Here’s What We Know About the Science of Sexual Orientation

            Study of gay brothers may confirm X chromosome link to homosexuality

          17. justinwachin says:

            I am a Christian. I don’t hate anyone and I’m not ignorant. I’ve also got enough sense to call junk science by its name.

            Just because something appears in a newspaper or is posted on a web blog doesn’t mean it is true. If you read most of these stories you will use find the word “may,” “might,” or “could” used in several key sentences. There is a reason such a seemingly insignificant word is used. There is not definitive proof that the point is true. Words like may, might or could indicate something is possible but not certain. For example: If you see clouds in the sky it MAY rain. If you step outside and get wet from rain droplets falling from the sky you would say it IS raining.

            Although I’m sure the creator of would be happy for you to break a big story like genetic evidence for homosexuality on their website, the information you have provided does no such thing. If definitive proof that homosexuality is inherited is ever found, you can rest assured you will not have the exclusive on making the announcement.

          18. AKLady says:

            Anything that contradicts your opinion falls under “junk science”. That is falls under bigotry and ignorance.

            Even the “Speed of Light” is a theory.
            The atom bomb functions on a theory.

            Your science education is wanting, and your knowledge base is extremely out of date.

          19. justinwachin says:

            I knew if this continued long enough that you would eventually label me as a bigot and ignorant. It doesn’t matter how much name calling you do. This is still junk science.

            NO gay genes have been discovered. The research done in this area usually gets down to a range of genes, which varies by researcher. Some of these researchers may honestly want to find a gene others are merely seeking to find another lucrative research grant.

            You may want to be careful about what you wish for. If a gay gene is ever discovered, it will only be a matter of time until tests are developed to see whether unborn babies carry such a gene. If you think gays have it rough now imagine what will happen when people can decide to abort a baby because a gene sequence says it may turn out to be gay.

          20. AKLady says:

            You might want to update your science.
            I suggest you educate yourself about the science of epigenetics. It is the study of changes in organisms caused by modification of gene expression rather than alteration of the genetic code itself.

          21. justinwachin says:

            My science is up to date. Homosexuality is still not linked in any way to genetics. Some people are trying to make a link but so far there is nothing to prove their point.

            If you want to be gay that is your choice. You are not some victim of a genetic mishap. It seems you are moving toward the notion that homosexuality is a mental defect or illness which the victim has no choice in.

          22. AKLady says:

            noun: epigenetics
            the study of changes in organisms caused by modification of gene expression rather than alteration of the genetic code itself.

          23. justinwachin says:

            There is still no research proving this. Homosexuality is a choice not a genetic expression.

          24. AKLady says:

            Brueckner F, Armache KJ, Cheung A, et al. (February 2009). “Structure–function studies of the RNA polymerase II elongation complex”. Acta Crystallogr. D. 65 (Pt 2): 112–20. doi:10.1107/S0907444908039875. PMC 2631633. PMID 19171965.

            Ceballos M, Vioque A (2007). “tRNase Z”. Protein Pept. Lett. 14 (2): 137–45. doi:10.2174/092986607779816050. PMID 17305600.

            Amaral PP, Dinger ME, Mercer TR, Mattick JS (March 2008). “The eukaryotic genome as an RNA machine”. Science. 319 (5871): 1787–9. Bibcode:2008Sci…319.1787A.

            Berk V, Cate JH (June 2007). “Insights into protein biosynthesis from structures of bacterial ribosomes”. Curr. Opin. Struct. Biol. 17 (3): 302–9. doi:10.1016/ PMID 17574829.

            Selbach M, Schwanhäusser B, Thierfelder N, Fang Z, Khanin R, Rajewsky N; Schwanhäusser; Thierfelder; Fang; Khanin; Rajewsky (September 2008). “Widespread changes in protein synthesis induced by microRNAs”. Nature. 455 (7209): 58–63. Bibcode:2008Natur.455…58S. doi:10.1038/nature07228. PMID 18668040.

            Palmero EI, de Campos SG, Campos M, de Souza NC, Guerreiro ID, Carvalho AL, Marques MM (2011). “Mechanisms and role of microRNA deregulation in cancer onset and progression”. Genet. Mol. Biol. 34 (3): 363–70. doi:10.1590/S1415-47572011000300001. PMC 3168173. PMID 21931505.

          25. justinwachin says:

            I’m sure these references will be useful if someone wants to read more about the subject.

          26. AKLady says:

            All depends upon how much truth and fact is wanted. Given the right-wing school dropout rate, most probably could not understand the material, even if they read it.

          27. justinwachin says:

            So what is the school dropout rate for right wing vs. left wing?

            Considering the abundance of reading material available to people today I doubt anyone is going to read those papers. Looking at the titles I doubt they deal with homosexuality at all, unless it is in passing. When I was writing papers in microbiology in the 1980s the titles I chose generally related to the main content. I’m going to guess the same can be said for these citations you provided.

          28. AKLady says:

            They deal with epigenetics .
            Maybe you should “engage” your brain before “thinking”.

          29. justinwachin says:

            As stated someone may read them but I doubt it. My brain is engaged. That’s what is causing a problem for you. I’ve got too much sense to fall for your junk science. You may want to look for an easier mark and move on.

          30. AKLady says:

            Epigenetics is not “junk science”.
            Your brain has undergone petrification,

          31. justinwachin says:

            I guess if you are trying to justify something you will grasp for straws. From what I’ve read even people who view epigenetics more highly than I are not completely sure that it can explain homosexuality.

            If epigenetics is able to explain homosexuality perhaps that could open the door to fetal testing to determine if a developing baby is likely to be born gay or possibly open the door to finding a cure for homosexuality. I’m guessing the gay rights movement would not support finding a cure for homosexuality.

          32. AKLady says:

            Why would you want to change something that is a part of the natural order? Homosexuality takes place across all of the animal kingdom.

          33. justinwachin says:

            I will keep that in mind the next time I see two animals getting affectionate with each other,

            What does this have to do with the original story about Democrats wanting to take President Trump’s finger off the nuclear trigger? I don’t recall the story mentioning a herd of gay animals leading the effort.

          34. AKLady says:

            Over the past 20 years, there have been a number of epigenetic tags linked to homosexuality. Studies also indicate homosexuality is familial, seemingly passed by the mother.

          35. justinwachin says:

            All homosexuals I have met have two eyes, two ears and a nose. That doesn’t mean any of those features cause homosexuality or are caused by homosexuality.

            So in other words, if you are gay, blame your mother.

          36. AKLady says:

            People stopped searching for a “gay” gene several decades in the past. Your science is out of date.

          37. justinwachin says:

            I think you are trying to play both sides of the aisle. You have sent out a list of references which tell about research being done in this field and now you say that people stopped searching for a gay gene decades ago.

            Either they are searching or they aren’t. This isn’t one of those situations where both answers are correct.

            You need to move on and troll somewhere else. With every one of your posts it becomes increasingly clear you have no idea what you are talking about.

            As I stated much earlier in this exchange, homosexuality is not inherited. You nor anyone else can show that it is. The problem is not my science.

          38. AKLady says:

            Suggest that you research epigenetics.
            Homosexuality is familial.
            Your science is out of date.
            With everyone of your insults, it becomes increasingly clear that you have no desire to increase your knowledge.

          39. justinwachin says:

            You keep going in circles. On one thread of comments you indicate there is a genetic tie and on the other you say there isn’t. Pointing out your playing both sides of the issue is not an attempt to insult.

            There is no proof that homosexuality is hereditary. Many of the homosexuals I know are the only one in their family that is gay.

            Your real problem isn’t my science. Your problem is that I have no problem challenging your assertion that your claims have no basis in actual science. The claims you are making fall within the realm of junk science which is used to con gullible people into supporting bad policy.

          40. AKLady says:




            noun: epigenetics

            the study of changes in organisms caused by modification of gene expression rather than alteration of the genetic code itself.

          41. justinwachin says:

            I’m familiar with the term. You have already disavowed this in one of your earlier posts. I agree with that post. Homosexuality is not determined by a person’s genes or how they express themselves.

          42. AKLady says:

            Suggest you increase your reading comprehension. You might want to look up the terms that you obviously do not understand.

          43. justinwachin says:

            So which is it–homosexuality is a lifestyle choice which the person can celebrate or homosexuality is a condition which the poor victim had forced upon them?

            It really can’t be both.

          44. AKLady says:

            Grow up.

          45. justinwachin says:

            I’m grown up. Maybe you missed the question. So which is it–homosexuality is a lifestyle choice which the person can celebrate or homosexuality is a condition which the poor victim had forced upon them?

          46. AKLady says:

            noun: epigenetics
            the study of changes in organisms caused by modification of gene expression rather than alteration of the genetic code itself.

          47. justinwachin says:

            Let’s say you are right. Maybe that would make it possible to cure homosexuality. I’ve met several homosexuals that didn’t seem to be happy being gay. Maybe the gay pride movement should focus on raising money to cure the modification of gene expression which causes homosexuality.

  • Askjrsk says:

    Communists want control and power. They will be gone in two years as the SWAMP is drained.

  • Irene Elizabeth Grooms says:

    What they should be worried about is who is here in our country that Obama let in

    1. Askjrsk says:

      Obama has given much to worry about.

  • Ramon1710 . says:

    Markey and Lieu need to be assigned to a permanent “fact finding” mission in Iran.

    1. Askjrsk says:

      Or Siberia with George Schwartz Soros

      1. Ramon1710 . says:

        Russia has a special place in its heart for that critter.

        1. Askjrsk says:

          Let’s fulfill that dream in their ❤️

        2. Askjrsk says:


  • teaman says:

    Do you know what is really frightening?……It’s when a dummycrat opens their mouth about anything. Just look at their dismal record for the past eight years. More money spent than any other congress with absolutely NO worth while accomplishments!!

    1. AKLady says:

      Why do you need to tell these lies?
      Why do you embarrass America this way?
      Why do you believe it is acceptable to lie?
      Why do you believe it is acceptable to repeat lies?

  • RuFus92 says:

    The capacity of ignorance in Democrats just tortures my mind, what is it that they do to get elected? How can we as a nation be so collectively naïve to keep electing them to serve in government. This party is no longer representative of what it was and has progressed to the platform of destruction of America and it’s Constitution.

    1. Askjrsk says:

      They are not to be trusted

      1. AKLady says:

        The overwhelming majority of violent criminals are Republicans.

        Hitler was ultraconservative. Hitler was put in office by right-wing Germans. Totalitarianism is ALWAYS conservative in nature.

        Trump is following Hitler’s politics, almost to the letter, right down to the “Make ______ great again”.

    2. AKLady says:

      The “Red” states have the highest levels of poverty (U.S. Census).
      The “Red” states have the largest number of school dropouts.
      (U.S. Census).

  • itsfun says:

    Those ridiculous bills will never see the light of day. Remember how Harry Reid never allowed any Republican health care bills out of committee.

  • Stephen Howe says:

    This will never happen. The Demwits are already sorry they cleverly changed the rules 8 years ago.

  • JC says:

    Markey and Lieu—two communists from communist states—these guys are so un-American—they have no business in our government

    1. Retired says:

      These guys are as smart as Peelosi ,we must pass it to see what is in those 2700 pages of ACA.

    2. AKLady says:

      When Trump starts WW III, will you bit in America’s uniform?
      The only service you give is lip service.

  • David Stewart says:

    Those Dimwitocrats; Anti-Republic to the bitter end; so dependably Anti-American!

    1. Askjrsk says:

      Absolutely. They want control but will be gone in two years!

    2. AKLady says:

      “Nationalism and Socialism had to be redefined and they had to be blended into one strong new idea to carry new strength which would make Germany great again.” Adolph Hitler

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Keep the Fake News Media in check.

Don’t let the MSM censor your news as America becomes Great Again. Over 500,000 Americans receive our daily dose of life, liberty and pursuit of happiness along with Breaking News direct to their inbox—and you can too. Sign up to receive news and views from The 1776Coalition!

We know how important your privacy is and your information is SAFE with us. We’ll never sell
your email address and you can unsubscribe at any time directly from your inbox.
View our full privacy policy.