Home Non Cigar Related
Options

Colorado Democrats get taken out in special election

phobicsquirrelphobicsquirrel Posts: 7,347 ✭✭✭
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/11/us/colorado-lawmaker-concedes-defeat-in-recall-over-gun-law.html?pagewanted=all

Two people from the democratic party in Colorado got recalled over some laws that were passed to limit guns. One was limiting 15 rounds, and another was id checks in order to stop the loopholes of giving weapons to anyone. I like guns and all but I think this just shows how moronic our culture is. I mean you have elected officials making women have invasive ultrasounds, getting rid of women services, destroying collective bargaining rights, allowing chemicals to destroy our environment, and opening the door to anyone with massive amounts of money to buy our elections ... a bit of gun control is the one that gets people to take to the streets and oust elected officials. Down right pathetic and just shows how dumb we are.

Comments

  • Options
    beatnicbeatnic Posts: 4,133
    They were voted out because they voted against the will of their constituents. Plain and simple.
  • Options
    Amos_UmwhatAmos_Umwhat Posts: 8,586 ✭✭✭✭✭
    beatnic:
    They were voted out because they voted against the will of their constituents. Plain and simple.
    Ya gotta start somewhere!
    WARNING:  The above post may contain thoughts or ideas known to the State of Caliphornia to cause seething rage, confusion, distemper, nausea, perspiration, sphincter release, or cranial implosion to persons who implicitly trust only one news source, or find themselves at either the left or right political extreme.  Proceed at your own risk.  

    "If you do not read the newspapers you're uninformed.  If you do read the newspapers, you're misinformed." --  Mark Twain
  • Options
    stephen_hannibalstephen_hannibal Posts: 4,317
    beatnic:
    They were voted out because they voted against the will of their constituents. Plain and simple.
    So much truth.

  • Options
    raisindotraisindot Posts: 1,294 ✭✭✭
    beatnic:
    They were voted out because they voted against the will of their constituents. Plain and simple.


    They were voted out by 51% of their constituents--49% voted against the recall. That's hardly a plurality. Even Obama won his second election by a higher percentage.

    Still, the lesson for politicians is quite clear...go against the gunowners at your peril.
  • Options
    webmostwebmost Posts: 7,713 ✭✭✭✭✭
    raisindot:
    beatnic:
    They were voted out because they voted against the will of their constituents. Plain and simple.


    They were voted out by 51% of their constituents--49% voted against the recall. That's hardly a plurality. Even Obama won his second election by a higher percentage.

    Still, the lesson for politicians is quite clear...go against the gunowners at your peril.
    What percentage do you need before it counts?
    “It has been a source of great pain to me to have met with so many among [my] opponents who had not the liberality to distinguish between political and social opposition; who transferred at once to the person, the hatred they bore to his political opinions.” —Thomas Jefferson (1808)


  • Options
    beatnicbeatnic Posts: 4,133
    raisindot:
    beatnic:
    They were voted out because they voted against the will of their constituents. Plain and simple.


    They were voted out by 51% of their constituents--49% voted against the recall. That's hardly a plurality. Even Obama won his second election by a higher percentage.

    Still, the lesson for politicians is quite clear...go against the gunowners at your peril.
    I think the lesson learned in Colorado was that the conservatives used the democrats' techniques of "get out the vote", and beat them at their own game.

    And that lesson for liberal politicians? When you put it to the vote of the people, liberal policies always fail. Let's get the people to vote on immigration, taxes, abortion, affirmative action, etc. The libtards would be running for the exits to France.
  • Options
    Amos_UmwhatAmos_Umwhat Posts: 8,586 ✭✭✭✭✭
    beatnic:
    raisindot:
    beatnic:
    They were voted out because they voted against the will of their constituents. Plain and simple.


    They were voted out by 51% of their constituents--49% voted against the recall. That's hardly a plurality. Even Obama won his second election by a higher percentage.

    Still, the lesson for politicians is quite clear...go against the gunowners at your peril.
    I think the lesson learned in Colorado was that the conservatives used the democrats' techniques of "get out the vote", and beat them at their own game.

    And that lesson for liberal politicians? When you put it to the vote of the people, liberal policies always fail. Let's get the people to vote on immigration, taxes, abortion, affirmative action, etc. The libtards would be running for the exits to France.
    I don't disagree, because what you say is true. It is also true if extreme conservative policies are all that's in place.

    The problem with Democracy, in pure form, as someone once said, is that it's the belief that 300 million idiots are smarter than one genius.

    WARNING:  The above post may contain thoughts or ideas known to the State of Caliphornia to cause seething rage, confusion, distemper, nausea, perspiration, sphincter release, or cranial implosion to persons who implicitly trust only one news source, or find themselves at either the left or right political extreme.  Proceed at your own risk.  

    "If you do not read the newspapers you're uninformed.  If you do read the newspapers, you're misinformed." --  Mark Twain
  • Options
    phobicsquirrelphobicsquirrel Posts: 7,347 ✭✭✭
    beatnic:
    raisindot:
    beatnic:
    They were voted out because they voted against the will of their constituents. Plain and simple.


    They were voted out by 51% of their constituents--49% voted against the recall. That's hardly a plurality. Even Obama won his second election by a higher percentage.

    Still, the lesson for politicians is quite clear...go against the gunowners at your peril.
    I think the lesson learned in Colorado was that the conservatives used the democrats' techniques of "get out the vote", and beat them at their own game.

    And that lesson for liberal politicians? When you put it to the vote of the people, liberal policies always fail. Let's get the people to vote on immigration, taxes, abortion, affirmative action, etc. The libtards would be running for the exits to France.
    Liberal policies are actually more popular than you think. Medicare, social security, epa, gi bill, dot, and many other programs poll rather high in approval. Though the thing is, programs such as these have to get over a hump of BS being thrown at them. The ACA for example is hated on both sides, however it's a step. Sure some don't like it cause it's corporate welfare and why spend so much time and money on something new when we already have medicare? I mean just integrate it slowly to all ages, though that's the end goal for some reason our little country needs to take baby steps.

    Thing is, for whatever reason people think that assault rifles and unlimited ammo is part of the 2nd amendment. It's really silly but hey the NRA is about one issue and they are really good at that issue. Sadly people get more up in arms over anything that has to do with guns than most anything else. I mean the majority of people in the country are in favor of universal background checks ... but it caused a recall in Colorado. go figure. Sad that something like this triggers people to get out and vote.
  • Options
    beatnicbeatnic Posts: 4,133
    phobicsquirrel:
    Liberal policies are actually more popular than you think. Medicare, social security, epa, gi bill, dot, and many other programs poll rather high in approval.

    I mean the majority of people in the country are in favor of universal background checks ...

    I didn't bring up any of those policies. I agree with parts of most of them.

    Can you give me data on the universal background checks claim that you make? I feel that most Americans don't want the government checking on them when they exercise their second amendment rights.
  • Options
    Ken_LightKen_Light Posts: 3,537 ✭✭✭
    With those guns, we can change all that other nonsense back. Without them, we cannot. Guns are the breaking point because after it has been passed, there is no turning back.
    ^Troll: DO NOT FEED.
  • Options
    firetruckguyfiretruckguy Posts: 2,522 ✭✭✭
    phobicsquirrel:
    http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/11/us/colorado-lawmaker-concedes-defeat-in-recall-over-gun-law.html?pagewanted=all

    Two people from the democratic party in Colorado got recalled over some laws that were passed to limit guns. One was limiting 15 rounds, and another was id checks in order to stop the loopholes of giving weapons to anyone. I like guns and all but I think this just shows how moronic our culture is. I mean you have elected officials making women have invasive ultrasounds, getting rid of women services, destroying collective bargaining rights, allowing chemicals to destroy our environment, and opening the door to anyone with massive amounts of money to buy our elections ... a bit of gun control is the one that gets people to take to the streets and oust elected officials. Down right pathetic and just shows how dumb we are.
    Squirrly, Read the laws they pushed upon the gun owner in Colorado. They are the dumbest things ever thought up. I, gun owner #1, hand my daughter my pistol, I just broke the law as it stands now. One cannot transfer ownership to one other without a private background check..........and yes, that means handing a firearm to someone else.
    The over 15 round ban on clips was thought up by a lawmaker in Colorado who was brilliant enough to think that every time you shoot a 30 round clip, its "used up" and cannot be used again. Thus, rendering Colorado free from 30 round clips in no time........
    51 Sheriffs from around the state appose the new gun laws, filing a lawsuit against them. They have outright refused to uphold any of the new gun laws, saying they are unenforceable as they are written.

    I am all for sensible gun laws and background checks. How about having all the medical fields report psychological issues with a individual to a database that can flag a potential issue.........

    Just a thought
  • Options
    raisindotraisindot Posts: 1,294 ✭✭✭
    beatnic:
    And that lesson for liberal politicians? When you put it to the vote of the people, liberal policies always fail. Let's get the people to vote on immigration, taxes, abortion, affirmative action, etc. The libtards would be running for the exits to France.


    Perhaps this is true in the region where you live. But certainly not I live. Gun control measures, pro-choice measure, pro gay rights measure, pro-affirmative action measures would pass every time in my state. Most cities in our state have passed tax overrides that have increased real estate taxes to fund the building of new schools, preservation of wetlands, etc. Maybe these measure don't always pass with a huge plurality, but they're often close

    In any case,I'd much rather live in a "libtard" area with excellent schools, free access to abortion, no sex-based gender discrimination, and among the lowest percentage of gun-related deaths in the country--which is where I live today, in a state that, contrary to myths perpetrated by the right, is right in the middle of the pack or in some cases lower than most in terms of state income tax rates, sales taxes, and real estate taxes.

    Certainly would rather live in my "libtard" state than in the many right-wing states whose politicians taking away a woman's constitutionally guaranteed right to abortion, to states that are outlawing gay marriage, which harms absolutely nobody, to states that are forbidding the teaching o evolution, to states that are gerrymandering voting districts and applying totally unneeded photo ID requirements to suppress the political power of minorities, to states that are decimating education budgets so they can give bigger tax breaks to greedy corporations, to all the border states that try to hoodwink Americans into thinking that hiring 100,000 more border guards is anything other than a workfare program to cure their chronic unemployment problems.

    But y'know, that's just me. Your mileage will differ.
  • Options
    beatnicbeatnic Posts: 4,133
    raisindot:
    beatnic:
    And that lesson for liberal politicians? When you put it to the vote of the people, liberal policies always fail. Let's get the people to vote on immigration, taxes, abortion, affirmative action, etc. The libtards would be running for the exits to France.


    Perhaps this is true in the region where you live. But certainly not I live. Gun control measures, pro-choice measure, pro gay rights measure, pro-affirmative action measures would pass every time in my state. Most cities in our state have passed tax overrides that have increased real estate taxes to fund the building of new schools, preservation of wetlands, etc. Maybe these measure don't always pass with a huge plurality, but they're often close

    In any case,I'd much rather live in a "libtard" area with excellent schools, free access to abortion, no sex-based gender discrimination, and among the lowest percentage of gun-related deaths in the country--which is where I live today, in a state that, contrary to myths perpetrated by the right, is right in the middle of the pack or in some cases lower than most in terms of state income tax rates, sales taxes, and real estate taxes.

    Certainly would rather live in my "libtard" state than in the many right-wing states whose politicians taking away a woman's constitutionally guaranteed right to abortion, to states that are outlawing gay marriage, which harms absolutely nobody, to states that are forbidding the teaching o evolution, to states that are gerrymandering voting districts and applying totally unneeded photo ID requirements to suppress the political power of minorities, to states that are decimating education budgets so they can give bigger tax breaks to greedy corporations, to all the border states that try to hoodwink Americans into thinking that hiring 100,000 more border guards is anything other than a workfare program to cure their chronic unemployment problems.

    But y'know, that's just me. Your mileage will differ.
    Don't you just love this country. You are free to live in a godless community with high taxes, group thought, and big brother protection, and I'm free to live in a place that just lets me live free.
  • Options
    webmostwebmost Posts: 7,713 ✭✭✭✭✭
    beatnic:
    Don't you just love this country. You are free to live in a godless community with high taxes, group thought, and big brother protection.
    My new motto
    “It has been a source of great pain to me to have met with so many among [my] opponents who had not the liberality to distinguish between political and social opposition; who transferred at once to the person, the hatred they bore to his political opinions.” —Thomas Jefferson (1808)


  • Options
    VulchorVulchor Posts: 4,848 ✭✭✭✭
    Who would want to live in a godless community? No false prophets, no religious zealots, no biblical hypocrisy to justify ones actions, no way to use guilt and fear over the congregation------hmmmm.
  • Options
    beatnicbeatnic Posts: 4,133
    Vulchor:
    Who would want to live in a godless community? No false prophets, no religious zealots, no biblical hypocrisy to justify ones actions, no way to use guilt and fear over the congregation------hmmmm.
    And no love.
  • Options
    phobicsquirrelphobicsquirrel Posts: 7,347 ✭✭✭
    beatnic:
    Vulchor:
    Who would want to live in a godless community? No false prophets, no religious zealots, no biblical hypocrisy to justify ones actions, no way to use guilt and fear over the congregation------hmmmm.
    And no love.
    love? really didn't know that was only for religious types...

    Vulchor, I'd be down to live in a place like that. It would be a nice experiment. I guess, though it isn't conclusive but you can look at the more religious areas of the country then look at the ones that are not and can get an idea. not that I think because someone has a religion they are crazy (cuz crazies are all around on all sides) but I do think it is time we stop molding our societies off of it. I mean so much death has happened because of "religion".
  • Options
    beatnicbeatnic Posts: 4,133
    phobicsquirrel:
    beatnic:
    Vulchor:
    Who would want to live in a godless community? No false prophets, no religious zealots, no biblical hypocrisy to justify ones actions, no way to use guilt and fear over the congregation------hmmmm.
    And no love.
    love? really didn't know that was only for religious types...

    Vulchor, I'd be down to live in a place like that. It would be a nice experiment. I guess, though it isn't conclusive but you can look at the more religious areas of the country then look at the ones that are not and can get an idea. not that I think because someone has a religion they are crazy (cuz crazies are all around on all sides) but I do think it is time we stop molding our societies off of it. I mean so much death has happened because of "religion".
    God is love!. Where do you get your love from? Is it just the chemical reactions in your brain?
  • Options
    Amos_UmwhatAmos_Umwhat Posts: 8,586 ✭✭✭✭✭
    beatnic:
    phobicsquirrel:
    beatnic:
    Vulchor:
    Who would want to live in a godless community? No false prophets, no religious zealots, no biblical hypocrisy to justify ones actions, no way to use guilt and fear over the congregation------hmmmm.
    And no love.
    love? really didn't know that was only for religious types...

    Vulchor, I'd be down to live in a place like that. It would be a nice experiment. I guess, though it isn't conclusive but you can look at the more religious areas of the country then look at the ones that are not and can get an idea. not that I think because someone has a religion they are crazy (cuz crazies are all around on all sides) but I do think it is time we stop molding our societies off of it. I mean so much death has happened because of "religion".
    God is love!. Where do you get your love from? Is it just the chemical reactions in your brain?
    Aaaaaaaaaaaaand, Pandora's Box is open.........

    My feelings have already been expressed on the subject, so, an aside.
    I took an introductory philosophy class that brought up a version of Beatnic's question, and B.F. Skinner was brought up, in terms of a philosophical condition known as sphexishness. My reaction to the question, based on knowledge from experience, was to ultimately reject Skinner, and Sphexishness, and led me to about 3 more years of reading.

    I'm interested to see if anyone answers Beatnics question, I think it's the reason we're here. At all.
    WARNING:  The above post may contain thoughts or ideas known to the State of Caliphornia to cause seething rage, confusion, distemper, nausea, perspiration, sphincter release, or cranial implosion to persons who implicitly trust only one news source, or find themselves at either the left or right political extreme.  Proceed at your own risk.  

    "If you do not read the newspapers you're uninformed.  If you do read the newspapers, you're misinformed." --  Mark Twain
  • Options
    webmostwebmost Posts: 7,713 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Vulchor:
    Who would want to live in a godless community? No false prophets, no religious zealots, no biblical hypocrisy to justify ones actions, no way to use guilt and fear over the congregation------hmmmm.
    Cause everyone knows that there are ...
    No false prophets among atheists, mister Marx
    No zealous atheists, that's obvious
    No unrestrained solipsism to justify one's actions
    And most of all, obviously people comport themselves so much better when they fear no consequences and feel no guilt.

    Come on, Vulch. Pause and take a breath. What are you afraid of? The Spanish Inquisition? This is the 21st century. Get over it. Are you afraid that a Christian nurtured on the Bible may feel a moral conviction to open an orphanage in the Dominican Republic and solicit our help on this forum to help build a chow hall?

    It's not religion which corrupts; it's power. When people on a moral mission gain power, then they feel compelled to do evil in order to accomplish good. Let's read that again.It's power which corrupts; not religion. When people feel a moral superiority, they do bad to acheive good. That's as true of atheists like Lenin, Stalin, Mao, or PolPot as it is of Torquemada. Power corrupts. Good intentions is the method of corruption. As Mom used to say: "The road to Hell is paved with good intentions." Powerless religion is reduced to moral suasion and good example. Only good can come of that.

    _____________________________

    Did you hear about the poor fatherless neglected Christian boy who grew up to lead a life of crime and drugs and thuggery? Knocked over several stores, stole cars, shot up heroin, beat up his girlfriends one after another, left a trail of abandoned bastids? Finally caught, thank Marx, robbing a liquor store with a sawed off shotgun (which would never have happened if they had only thought beforehand to declare liquor stores no gun zones). Went to prison. Hard time. There, he found Atheism. Read their Madeline O'Hare's book. Took it to heart. Absolutely turned his life around 180 degrees. Came out of prison determined to make amends. Put his hat on frontwards, wore a belt, got a job, went straight, determined to make amends, apologized to his exes, contributed to his bastids, counseled other ex-cons and helped them go straight. Model citizen, good husband, providing father. Did you hear about this guy? Did you?

    No. You didn't. Why? Because it always happens exactly the other way around, my friend, exactly the other way round. You and I may not need an AA meeting once a week; but my sister and her husband really do. In exactly the same sense, you and I may flatter ourselves we do not need a church meeting every week; but so many of our brethren do work hard at making themselves better by weekly acknowledging there's a benevolent power more important than themselves. Christian religion in the 21st century is not Al Qaeda.

    Hey, I don't buy the twisted and gruesome mythology of it any more than you do. But don't let that disbelief turn you so blind leftist intolerant.

    “It has been a source of great pain to me to have met with so many among [my] opponents who had not the liberality to distinguish between political and social opposition; who transferred at once to the person, the hatred they bore to his political opinions.” —Thomas Jefferson (1808)


  • Options
    beatnicbeatnic Posts: 4,133
    Amos Umwhat:
    beatnic:
    phobicsquirrel:
    beatnic:
    Vulchor:
    Who would want to live in a godless community? No false prophets, no religious zealots, no biblical hypocrisy to justify ones actions, no way to use guilt and fear over the congregation------hmmmm.
    And no love.
    love? really didn't know that was only for religious types...

    Vulchor, I'd be down to live in a place like that. It would be a nice experiment. I guess, though it isn't conclusive but you can look at the more religious areas of the country then look at the ones that are not and can get an idea. not that I think because someone has a religion they are crazy (cuz crazies are all around on all sides) but I do think it is time we stop molding our societies off of it. I mean so much death has happened because of "religion".
    God is love!. Where do you get your love from? Is it just the chemical reactions in your brain?
    Aaaaaaaaaaaaand, Pandora's Box is open.........

    My feelings have already been expressed on the subject, so, an aside.
    I took an introductory philosophy class that brought up a version of Beatnic's question, and B.F. Skinner was brought up, in terms of a philosophical condition known as sphexishness. My reaction to the question, based on knowledge from experience, was to ultimately reject Skinner, and Sphexishness, and led me to about 3 more years of reading.

    I'm interested to see if anyone answers Beatnics question, I think it's the reason we're here. At all.
    Yikes! Glad I didn't read that stuff. It would have twisted my brain all up. Good thing I have "free will".
  • Options
    VulchorVulchor Posts: 4,848 ✭✭✭✭
    I will certainly agree the power corrupts Web. and no doubt moreso than "religion". Its the combination where it gets scary. Also, I think religion is fantastic for some people, and when used correctly----for society as a whole. Its the extreme or the forcing of it is where it gets crazy.

    And Beat, I will not try to convince you to feel otherwise, but to deny love (like anger, sadness, despair, etc) cannot be directly related in proven studies to chemical releases in the brain would be like denying the earth is round. Is that because god made the brain and us to feel that way? We know each others feelings on that. But to say without God there is no love is absurd. Perhaps if you believe, the general sense god creates it....I can understand. But if in the more specific sense youre saying an atheist cannot be happy----that seems a little obtuse.
  • Options
    beatnicbeatnic Posts: 4,133
    I don't believe in aethests. Agnostics, yes.
  • Options
    Amos_UmwhatAmos_Umwhat Posts: 8,586 ✭✭✭✭✭
    beatnic:
    Amos Umwhat:
    beatnic:
    phobicsquirrel:
    beatnic:
    Vulchor:
    Who would want to live in a godless community? No false prophets, no religious zealots, no biblical hypocrisy to justify ones actions, no way to use guilt and fear over the congregation------hmmmm.
    And no love.
    love? really didn't know that was only for religious types...

    Vulchor, I'd be down to live in a place like that. It would be a nice experiment. I guess, though it isn't conclusive but you can look at the more religious areas of the country then look at the ones that are not and can get an idea. not that I think because someone has a religion they are crazy (cuz crazies are all around on all sides) but I do think it is time we stop molding our societies off of it. I mean so much death has happened because of "religion".
    God is love!. Where do you get your love from? Is it just the chemical reactions in your brain?
    Aaaaaaaaaaaaand, Pandora's Box is open.........

    My feelings have already been expressed on the subject, so, an aside.
    I took an introductory philosophy class that brought up a version of Beatnic's question, and B.F. Skinner was brought up, in terms of a philosophical condition known as sphexishness. My reaction to the question, based on knowledge from experience, was to ultimately reject Skinner, and Sphexishness, and led me to about 3 more years of reading.

    I'm interested to see if anyone answers Beatnics question, I think it's the reason we're here. At all.
    Yikes! Glad I didn't read that stuff. It would have twisted my brain all up. Good thing I have "free will".
    Not sure if you understood what I'm saying, I believe in free will, Skinner didn't. My philosophical readings reinforced my beliefs, in God, and Free Will. Or, perhaps you were being sarcastic?
    WARNING:  The above post may contain thoughts or ideas known to the State of Caliphornia to cause seething rage, confusion, distemper, nausea, perspiration, sphincter release, or cranial implosion to persons who implicitly trust only one news source, or find themselves at either the left or right political extreme.  Proceed at your own risk.  

    "If you do not read the newspapers you're uninformed.  If you do read the newspapers, you're misinformed." --  Mark Twain
  • Options
    beatnicbeatnic Posts: 4,133
    Amos Umwhat:
    beatnic:
    Amos Umwhat:
    beatnic:
    phobicsquirrel:
    beatnic:
    Vulchor:
    Who would want to live in a godless community? No false prophets, no religious zealots, no biblical hypocrisy to justify ones actions, no way to use guilt and fear over the congregation------hmmmm.
    And no love.
    love? really didn't know that was only for religious types...

    Vulchor, I'd be down to live in a place like that. It would be a nice experiment. I guess, though it isn't conclusive but you can look at the more religious areas of the country then look at the ones that are not and can get an idea. not that I think because someone has a religion they are crazy (cuz crazies are all around on all sides) but I do think it is time we stop molding our societies off of it. I mean so much death has happened because of "religion".
    God is love!. Where do you get your love from? Is it just the chemical reactions in your brain?
    Aaaaaaaaaaaaand, Pandora's Box is open.........

    My feelings have already been expressed on the subject, so, an aside.
    I took an introductory philosophy class that brought up a version of Beatnic's question, and B.F. Skinner was brought up, in terms of a philosophical condition known as sphexishness. My reaction to the question, based on knowledge from experience, was to ultimately reject Skinner, and Sphexishness, and led me to about 3 more years of reading.

    I'm interested to see if anyone answers Beatnics question, I think it's the reason we're here. At all.
    Yikes! Glad I didn't read that stuff. It would have twisted my brain all up. Good thing I have "free will".
    Not sure if you understood what I'm saying, I believe in free will, Skinner didn't. My philosophical readings reinforced my beliefs, in God, and Free Will. Or, perhaps you were being sarcastic?
    :) I was being sarcastic.
  • Options
    Amos_UmwhatAmos_Umwhat Posts: 8,586 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Well, at first I thought so, hoped so, but my brain was truly fried from a frantic and frenetic 14 hours in ICU, and I thought "did he really miss the point? surely not." Then, I had to know.
    WARNING:  The above post may contain thoughts or ideas known to the State of Caliphornia to cause seething rage, confusion, distemper, nausea, perspiration, sphincter release, or cranial implosion to persons who implicitly trust only one news source, or find themselves at either the left or right political extreme.  Proceed at your own risk.  

    "If you do not read the newspapers you're uninformed.  If you do read the newspapers, you're misinformed." --  Mark Twain
  • Options
    fla-gypsyfla-gypsy Posts: 3,023 ✭✭
    I never realized that teaching Bible lessons to 6-8 year olds for the last 20+ years was so subversive and damaging to them and our great liberal society. I will cease at once!! Maybe I will take up a more pure religion to teach them like "The doctrine of Global Warming" instead of Loving your neighbor, honoring your parents, and not stealing, killing, lying, etc...
  • Options
    Bob_LukenBob_Luken Posts: 10,316 ✭✭✭✭✭
    phobicsquirrel:
    Thing is, for whatever reason people think that assault rifles and unlimited ammo is part of the 2nd amendment.


    Muzzle loading rifles WERE assault rifles in 1791.
  • Options
    webmostwebmost Posts: 7,713 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Bob Luken:
    phobicsquirrel:
    Thing is, for whatever reason people think that assault rifles and unlimited ammo is part of the 2nd amendment.


    Muzzle loading rifles WERE assault rifles in 1791.
    It is absolutely no accident that the proliferation of rifles and muskets coincided with an end to so many centuries of oppressive monarchy. Gunpowder was the great equalizer. Not ideas. Not good intentions. Force. Not a democratic party platform at a joyous convention. Not a U.N. resolution. Blood. Not persuasion. Murder. Not a duck hunter's gun permit. Revolt. As soon as your fed up peasant could put a hole through a knight's steel suit from a distance, then the king's arrogant goon was no more powerful than a brave citizen. That changed the world profoundly. The balance of power shifted. Right there. Why did Paul Revere ride at midnight? To warn New Englanders that legally appointed authority excercising martial law in time of peace were coming TO SEIZE THEIR WEAPONS. Why did Paris storm the Bastille? IT WAS AN ARMORY. Do you think these tyrants all woke up one day and just decided to abdicate all their grandiose pilth and power and go get a job? No. Ordinary people had to risk their lives, murder their goons, and throw them out. No easy task.

    Bullets bought ballots. Bullets and blood. Assault weapons ARE power to the people.

    The irony is that Liberalism back then understood this fundamental principle. Now, the same label is applied to the enablers of tyranny. Liberalism back then believed in the rights of the individual. Now, it wants to take every conceivable prerogative from people. From the right to drink a big gulp to the right to shoot a tyrant. Modern liberal philosophy can only thrive where the history of real liberalism is ignored.

    The history of tyranny is not over. You think it's over? Here, take a look, at what faced people who assembled to protest their elected Government handing huge sums of their hard earned money to the barons of wealth. A noxious practice which still continues. What century does this remind you of:

    image

    Wake up. Smell the gunpowder. Your shortsighted timidity is sentencing our grandchildren to ruthless tyranny. Which is, alas, the natural state of man.

    “It has been a source of great pain to me to have met with so many among [my] opponents who had not the liberality to distinguish between political and social opposition; who transferred at once to the person, the hatred they bore to his political opinions.” —Thomas Jefferson (1808)


  • Options
    fla-gypsyfla-gypsy Posts: 3,023 ✭✭
    webmost:
    Bob Luken:
    phobicsquirrel:
    Thing is, for whatever reason people think that assault rifles and unlimited ammo is part of the 2nd amendment.


    Muzzle loading rifles WERE assault rifles in 1791.
    It is absolutely no accident that the proliferation of rifles and muskets coincided with an end to so many centuries of oppressive monarchy. Gunpowder was the great equalizer. Not ideas. Not good intentions. Force. Not a democratic party platform at a joyous convention. Not a U.N. resolution. Blood. Not persuasion. Murder. Not a duck hunter's gun permit. Revolt. As soon as your fed up peasant could put a hole through a knight's steel suit from a distance, then the king's arrogant goon was no more powerful than a brave citizen. That changed the world profoundly. The balance of power shifted. Right there. Why did Paul Revere ride at midnight? To warn New Englanders that legally appointed authority excercising martial law in time of peace were coming TO SEIZE THEIR WEAPONS. Why did Paris storm the Bastille? IT WAS AN ARMORY. Do you think these tyrants all woke up one day and just decided to abdicate all their grandiose pilth and power and go get a job? No. Ordinary people had to risk their lives, murder their goons, and throw them out. No easy task.

    Bullets bought ballots. Bullets and blood. Assault weapons ARE power to the people.

    The irony is that Liberalism back then understood this fundamental principle. Now, the same label is applied to the enablers of tyranny. Liberalism back then believed in the rights of the individual. Now, it wants to take every conceivable prerogative from people. From the right to drink a big gulp to the right to shoot a tyrant. Modern liberal philosophy can only thrive where the history of real liberalism is ignored.

    The history of tyranny is not over. You think it's over? Here, take a look, at what faced people who assembled to protest their elected Government handing huge sums of their hard earned money to the barons of wealth. A noxious practice which still continues. What century does this remind you of:

    image

    Wake up. Smell the gunpowder. Your shortsighted timidity is sentencing our grandchildren to ruthless tyranny. Which is, alas, the natural state of man.

    All I can say is Wow! That is the best reply I have seen in some time to the absolute idiocy that has assimilated the Liberal/Progressive movement (so called). They seem to forget that part of the DOI about "The consent of the governed".
Sign In or Register to comment.