Topic: Defeated!
started by: Self-Banished
Posted by Self-Banished on Apr. 17 2013,5:26 pm
New York TimesWashington Post
CNN and other liberal weiny outlets all reporting the extended background firearms ck was defeated a little while ago.
Looks like some of the senators got some balls and stood up again Bumbler.
President Bastard has said this is not over, BRING IT TOUGH GUY!
Posted by nedkelly on Apr. 18 2013,6:30 am
(Self-Banished @ Apr. 17 2013,5:26 pm)
QUOTE
New York Times
Washington Post
CNN and other liberal weiny outlets all reporting the extended background firearms ck was defeated a little while ago.
Looks like some of the senators got some balls and stood up again Bumbler. President Bastard has said this is not over, BRING IT TOUGH GUY!
Washington Post
CNN and other liberal weiny outlets all reporting the extended background firearms ck was defeated a little while ago.
Looks like some of the senators got some balls and stood up again Bumbler.
President Bastard has said this is not over, BRING IT TOUGH GUY! The NRA is my GOD, I will need no other. NRA knows all and is the answer for every problem, not the wishes of the majority of the people of the U.S. May your gloating soon end SB...
...ned
Posted by pepi la pew on Apr. 18 2013,7:42 am
It couldn't happened to a nicer IDIOT. I hear he is so livid he couldnt even speak with out his teleprompter. 
Posted by Self-Banished on Apr. 18 2013,7:52 am
(nedkelly @ Apr. 18 2013,6:30 am)
QUOTE
(Self-Banished @ Apr. 17 2013,5:26 pm)
QUOTE
New York Times
Washington Post
CNN and other liberal weiny outlets all reporting the extended background firearms ck was defeated a little while ago.
Looks like some of the senators got some balls and stood up again Bumbler. President Bastard has said this is not over, BRING IT TOUGH GUY!
Washington Post
CNN and other liberal weiny outlets all reporting the extended background firearms ck was defeated a little while ago.
Looks like some of the senators got some balls and stood up again Bumbler.
President Bastard has said this is not over, BRING IT TOUGH GUY! The NRA is my GOD, I will need no other. NRA knows all and is the answer for every problem, not the wishes of the majority of the people of the U.S. May your gloating soon end SB...
...nedI hate to burst your bubble Deadeye but I'm not a member of that organization.
I had to watch msnbc Tia am, poor Micah and Joey were pissed.
Posted by Grinning_Dragon on Apr. 18 2013,8:36 am
(nedkelly @ Apr. 18 2013,6:30 am)
QUOTE
(Self-Banished @ Apr. 17 2013,5:26 pm)
QUOTE
New York Times
Washington Post
CNN and other liberal weiny outlets all reporting the extended background firearms ck was defeated a little while ago.
Looks like some of the senators got some balls and stood up again Bumbler. President Bastard has said this is not over, BRING IT TOUGH GUY!
Washington Post
CNN and other liberal weiny outlets all reporting the extended background firearms ck was defeated a little while ago.
Looks like some of the senators got some balls and stood up again Bumbler.
President Bastard has said this is not over, BRING IT TOUGH GUY! The NRA is my GOD, I will need no other. NRA knows all and is the answer for every problem, not the wishes of the majority of the people of the U.S. May your gloating soon end SB...
...nedI would like to know what this majority is, and why a majority is able to infringe upon Enumerated Rights?
What is interesting is the last gallup poll reveals only 4% feel gun control is important. So of that 4% is this where the 90% rests? If so, that is such a small number of people wanting BS background checks and other BS, in order for law abiding people to PROVE their innocence in order to exercise their Enumerated Right to Keep and bear Arms.
Enumerated Rights ARE NOT at the mercy of someone's feelings or this BS need to feel safe. There is NO Right to safety.
I myself prefer the dangers of Freedom over peaceful slavery.
Posted by Common Citizen on Apr. 18 2013,11:16 am
4%? You wouldn't think that listening to the lame stream media. In fact, up until the Boston bombing you would think that was the #1 issue in America. The media is the Obama administrations lap dogs and people like Ned are their sheep.
Posted by MADDOG on Apr. 18 2013,11:19 am
Don't forget that The Man Who Would be King already signed < 23 gun laws > by executive order back in January.
Posted by Self-Banished on Apr. 18 2013,12:02 pm
I see Franken voted for this yesterday.He looks tired, maybe we should help him go back to SNL next year. I think he'd be happier.
Posted by Grinning_Dragon on Apr. 18 2013,12:56 pm
(Common Citizen @ Apr. 18 2013,11:16 am)
QUOTE
4%? You wouldn't think that listening to the lame stream media. In fact, up until the Boston bombing you would think that was the #1 issue in America. The media is the Obama administrations lap dogs and people like Ned are their sheep.
Of course not. The media is odumbo's lapdog and listening to those uneducated talking head buffoons made it out that a super duper majority of people supported this, all the while online was a different story and showed very little support for this BS, and smelled BS a mile away in this regard.
I have yet for anyone to explain to me how an Enumerated Right is subject to the majority of votes? This county isn't a democracy nor is a Right subject to mob rule bent on emotionalism and illogicality.
Posted by SimpleLife on Apr. 18 2013,2:26 pm
(MADDOG @ Apr. 18 2013,11:19 am)
QUOTE
Don't forget that The Man Who Would be King already signed < 23 gun laws > by executive order back in January.
Godwin's law.
Posted by davejar on Apr. 18 2013,2:34 pm
I personally want all guns out of the hands of all American citizens. Only police and military and security guards should have guns.Alas, Constitutionally, my personal opinion means squat, because the 2nd amendment allows most of us to bear arms. So be it.
Oh, Congress will eventually pass some new gun control laws, which will do diddly to protect any of us.
Posted by Self-Banished on Apr. 18 2013,3:18 pm
^ brought to you by azzholes anonymous
Posted by White Pride on Apr. 18 2013,3:26 pm
(davejar @ Apr. 18 2013,2:34 pm)
QUOTE
I personally want all guns out of the hands of all American citizens. Only police and military and security guards should have guns.
Alas, Constitutionally, my personal opinion means squat, because the 2nd amendment allows most of us to bear arms. So be it.
Oh, Congress will eventually pass some new gun control laws, which will do diddly to protect any of us.
Alas, Constitutionally, my personal opinion means squat, because the 2nd amendment allows most of us to bear arms. So be it.
Oh, Congress will eventually pass some new gun control laws, which will do diddly to protect any of us.
BAAAA!
(damned sheeple)
I bet the government does NO HARM to the American citizens either, right?
Posted by Grinning_Dragon on Apr. 18 2013,4:45 pm
(davejar @ Apr. 18 2013,2:34 pm)
QUOTE
I personally want all guns out of the hands of all American citizens. Only police and military and security guards should have guns.
Alas, Constitutionally, my personal opinion means squat, because the 2nd amendment allows most of us to bear arms. So be it.
Oh, Congress will eventually pass some new gun control laws, which will do diddly to protect any of us.
Alas, Constitutionally, my personal opinion means squat, because the 2nd amendment allows most of us to bear arms. So be it.
Oh, Congress will eventually pass some new gun control laws, which will do diddly to protect any of us.
Why do you feel the police, military and rent a cops are more qualified to Keep and bear Arms than anybody else? Are those types of people less likely to be human or something?
The average weapon owner trains and spends more time at the range than your proposed masters of should only be allowed weapons. Your short sighted, illogical fallacy will accomplish nothing and ensure nothing.
Posted by Grinning_Dragon on Apr. 18 2013,7:46 pm
Posted by Grinning_Dragon on Apr. 18 2013,9:33 pm
Another good one.
Ahhh, The tears of the anti gun/anti Constitution are sweet.
Posted by Self-Banished on Apr. 18 2013,10:32 pm
^^oh that is just precious
Posted by Common Citizen on Apr. 18 2013,11:34 pm
But wait...nothing up my sleeve...PRESTO!!QUOTE
Vice President Biden told White House allies in the gun control fight Thursday that President Obama will be announcing new executive actions on gun violence in the days after the Senate voted down a gun violence bill.
Now you know what they mean when guys like Liberal say elections have consequences.
Get off your arse and vote...
...nuff said.
Posted by MADDOG on Apr. 19 2013,6:39 am
(SimpleLife @ Apr. 18 2013,2:26 pm)
QUOTE
(MADDOG @ Apr. 18 2013,11:19 am)
QUOTE
Don't forget that The Man Who Would be King already signed < 23 gun laws > by executive order back in January.
Godwin's law.
No, reality.
Posted by nedkelly on Apr. 19 2013,7:08 am
(Self-Banished @ Apr. 18 2013,7:52 am)
QUOTE
(nedkelly @ Apr. 18 2013,6:30 am)
QUOTE
(Self-Banished @ Apr. 17 2013,5:26 pm)
QUOTE
New York Times
Washington Post
CNN and other liberal weiny outlets all reporting the extended background firearms ck was defeated a little while ago.
Looks like some of the senators got some balls and stood up again Bumbler. President Bastard has said this is not over, BRING IT TOUGH GUY!
Washington Post
CNN and other liberal weiny outlets all reporting the extended background firearms ck was defeated a little while ago.
Looks like some of the senators got some balls and stood up again Bumbler.
President Bastard has said this is not over, BRING IT TOUGH GUY! The NRA is my GOD, I will need no other. NRA knows all and is the answer for every problem, not the wishes of the majority of the people of the U.S. May your gloating soon end SB...
...nedI hate to burst your bubble Deadeye but I'm not a member of that organization.
I had to watch msnbc Tia am, poor Micah and Joey were pissed.
One would never know you weren't a member of the NRA. Are you only a unpaid schill for them?
???...
Posted by Self-Banished on Apr. 19 2013,7:18 am
(nedkelly @ Apr. 19 2013,7:08 am)
QUOTE
(Self-Banished @ Apr. 18 2013,7:52 am)
QUOTE
(nedkelly @ Apr. 18 2013,6:30 am)
QUOTE
(Self-Banished @ Apr. 17 2013,5:26 pm)
QUOTE
New York Times
Washington Post
CNN and other liberal weiny outlets all reporting the extended background firearms ck was defeated a little while ago.
Looks like some of the senators got some balls and stood up again Bumbler. President Bastard has said this is not over, BRING IT TOUGH GUY!
Washington Post
CNN and other liberal weiny outlets all reporting the extended background firearms ck was defeated a little while ago.
Looks like some of the senators got some balls and stood up again Bumbler.
President Bastard has said this is not over, BRING IT TOUGH GUY! The NRA is my GOD, I will need no other. NRA knows all and is the answer for every problem, not the wishes of the majority of the people of the U.S. May your gloating soon end SB...
...nedI hate to burst your bubble Deadeye but I'm not a member of that organization.
I had to watch msnbc Tia am, poor Micah and Joey were pissed.
One would never know you weren't a member of the NRA. Are you only a unpaid schill for them?
???... Nope, just expressing my views as instilled in me by my parents and mentors as I've gone thru life.
Not some left wing media drivel that sheep like you exspouse.
Posted by MADDOG on Apr. 19 2013,8:19 am
Don't feel alone, SB. I'm not a member either. You don't need to be a member of the NRA to believe in the Second Amendment.
Posted by Rosalind_Swenson on Apr. 19 2013,3:08 pm
(MADDOG @ Apr. 19 2013,8:19 am)
QUOTE
Don't feel alone, SB. I'm not a member either. You don't need to be a member of the NRA to believe in the Second Amendment.
Heck, I don't even own a gun or a single bullet and I believe in and support the 2nd Amendment.
Posted by Self-Banished on Apr. 22 2013,6:24 am
Watching MSNBC this am, they are still lamenting their loss last week,still trying to push a questionable background check which would end up as a national registration.Then I saw clips from the weekend shows trotting out the relatives of the victims, using them as whores to promote their agenda. So many "what if's" and "blames"
These people need to fulfill their own wishes, move to a country with gun control they approve of and renounce their citizenship.
Posted by davejar on Apr. 22 2013,12:21 pm
(Self-Banished @ Apr. 22 2013,6:24 am)
QUOTE
Watching MSNBC this am, they are still lamenting their loss last week,still trying to push a questionable background check which would end up as a national registration.
Then I saw clips from the weekend shows trotting out the relatives of the victims, using them as whores to promote their agenda. So many "what if's" and "blames"
These people need to fulfill their own wishes, move to a country with gun control they approve of and renounce their citizenship.
Then I saw clips from the weekend shows trotting out the relatives of the victims, using them as whores to promote their agenda. So many "what if's" and "blames"
These people need to fulfill their own wishes, move to a country with gun control they approve of and renounce their citizenship.
A little harsh there, won't you say?
Posted by Grinning_Dragon on Apr. 22 2013,12:26 pm
(davejar @ Apr. 22 2013,12:21 pm)
QUOTE
(Self-Banished @ Apr. 22 2013,6:24 am)
QUOTE
Watching MSNBC this am, they are still lamenting their loss last week,still trying to push a questionable background check which would end up as a national registration.
Then I saw clips from the weekend shows trotting out the relatives of the victims, using them as whores to promote their agenda. So many "what if's" and "blames"
These people need to fulfill their own wishes, move to a country with gun control they approve of and renounce their citizenship.
Then I saw clips from the weekend shows trotting out the relatives of the victims, using them as whores to promote their agenda. So many "what if's" and "blames"
These people need to fulfill their own wishes, move to a country with gun control they approve of and renounce their citizenship.
A little harsh there, won't you say?
NOPE.
Calling a spade a spade is not harsh, just reality.
Posted by MADDOG on Apr. 22 2013,12:37 pm
What part would you say is harsh? This? QUOTE
These people need to fulfill their own wishes, move to a country with gun control they approve of and renounce their citizenship.
What's harsh about it? Should we change the Bill of Rights? That way you could tell all the people who are proud to live in a country with these enumerated rights to leave if they don't like it??Don't worry. Obama is one sore loser. He isn't done. Some of you may want to pay a little closer attention to what attempts are happening in Minnesota on gun control.
< HF237 >
Posted by Self-Banished on Apr. 22 2013,1:25 pm
^ won't get to read it till tonight MD, kinda hard with an IPhone but I did notice one of the proponent people on it, Phyllis Kahn, why am I not surprised, f£*#ing nut job. 
Posted by MADDOG on Apr. 22 2013,1:46 pm
Good grief, your liberal legislators in St. Paul must feel like underachievers the way they are trying to pass anti-Constitutional bills.< HF238 > A bill for an act relating to public safety; establishing equal penalties for offenders who unlawfully possess firearms on school property;amending Minnesota Statutes 1.42012, section 609.66, subdivision 1d.
< HF239 > A bill for an act relating to public safety; establishing equal penalties for persons who possess guns on private property after being ordered to leave the premises; amending Minnesota Statutes 2012, section 624.714, subdivision 17.
< HF240 > A bill for an act relating to public safety; firearms; improving mental health screening for persons applying for firearms permits; amending Minnesota Statutes 2012, sections 624.7131
Need I go on?
< HF241 > A bill for an act relating to public safety; establishing a crime for manufacturing, transferring, or possessing certain assault weapons; providing for the disposal or registration of existing assault weapons; defining terms; classifying data; clarifying language; providing criminal penalties; amending Minnesota Statutes 2012, sections 13.87
< HF242 > A bill for an act relating to public safety; establishing a crime for manufacturing, transferring, or possessing large-capacity magazines; defining terms; providing criminal penalties; amending Minnesota Statutes 2012 sections 624.712
< HF243 > A bill for an act relating to public safety; establishing a crime for manufacturing, transferring, or possessing large-capacity magazines; defining terms; providing criminal penalties; amending Minnesota Statutes 2012 sections 624.712, by adding a subdivision; proposing coding for new law in Minnesota Statutes, chapter 624.
< HF244 > A bill for an act relating to public safety; making it a crime to falsely report the loss or theft of a firearm; expanding the crime of transferring certain firearms to an ineligible person; making a person convicted of these crimes ineligible to possess a firearm; amending Minnesota Statutes 2012, sections 609.165
Man, your liberal friends in St. Paul need to take another closer look at dihydrogen monoxide. Hundreds of people die each year from breathing too much of this into their lungs. They need a law passed to make this stuff illegal.
Posted by Liberal on Apr. 22 2013,4:48 pm
QUOTE
Man, your liberal friends in St. Paul need to take another closer look at dihydrogen monoxide. Hundreds of people die each year from breathing too much of this into their lungs. They need a law passed to make this stuff illegal.
dihydrogen monoxide is water, not air, and breathing any amount is usually harmful to the lungs.
Posted by MADDOG on Apr. 22 2013,6:57 pm
Yup, according to the CDC hundreds die every year from unintentional drownings. You have a higher chance of drowning than getting shot by a person with a rifle.
Posted by davejar on Apr. 22 2013,7:10 pm
I almost always disagree with the liberal and progressive crowd, but they have every right to be American citizens, even if they don't agree with several parts of the Constitution, including the Bill of Rights.1st Amendment right of free speech trumps the other amendments.
Posted by MADDOG on Apr. 22 2013,8:16 pm
(davejar @ Apr. 22 2013,7:10 pm)
QUOTE
1st Amendment right of free speech trumps the other amendments.
Why is that?
Posted by Grinning_Dragon on Apr. 22 2013,9:21 pm
(davejar @ Apr. 22 2013,7:10 pm)
QUOTE
I almost always disagree with the liberal and progressive crowd, but they have every right to be American citizens, even if they don't agree with several parts of the Constitution, including the Bill of Rights.
1st Amendment right of free speech trumps the other amendments.
1st Amendment right of free speech trumps the other amendments.
Does not work that way. /Sigh
Posted by davejar on Apr. 22 2013,11:10 pm
(MADDOG @ Apr. 22 2013,8:16 pm)
QUOTE
(davejar @ Apr. 22 2013,7:10 pm)
QUOTE
1st Amendment right of free speech trumps the other amendments.
Why is that?
Because it is FIRST...duh...kinda like the First family, Adam and Eve...whose original sin affects all that followed, excepting Mary and Jesus, of course.
Posted by Grinning_Dragon on Apr. 22 2013,11:23 pm
(davejar @ Apr. 22 2013,11:10 pm)
QUOTE
(MADDOG @ Apr. 22 2013,8:16 pm)
QUOTE
(davejar @ Apr. 22 2013,7:10 pm)
QUOTE
1st Amendment right of free speech trumps the other amendments.
Why is that?
Because it is FIRST...duh...kinda like the First family, Adam and Eve...whose original sin affects all that followed, excepting Mary and Jesus, of course.
Wow, just wow.
That is NOT how the Constitution works.
Posted by MADDOG on Apr. 23 2013,5:57 am
QUOTE
Because it is FIRST...duh
I wonder what school they taught that GD?
Posted by Grinning_Dragon on Apr. 23 2013,6:25 am
(MADDOG @ Apr. 23 2013,5:57 am)
QUOTE
QUOTE
Because it is FIRST...duh
I wonder what school they taught that GD?
Maybe the same school in which a 4th grade teacher made the students write this; “I am willing to give up some of my constitutional rights in order to be safer or more secure.”
Gotta love the ineptness of some teachers and their will and desire to push and brainwash kids their political ideologies.
Posted by Self-Banished on Apr. 23 2013,7:30 am
^ stop that GD, gives me that cold shiver up my back. 
Posted by Glad I Left on Apr. 23 2013,9:17 am
(davejar @ Apr. 22 2013,11:10 pm)
QUOTE
(MADDOG @ Apr. 22 2013,8:16 pm)
QUOTE
(davejar @ Apr. 22 2013,7:10 pm)
QUOTE
1st Amendment right of free speech trumps the other amendments.
Why is that?
Because it is FIRST...duh...kinda like the First family, Adam and Eve...whose original sin affects all that followed, excepting Mary and Jesus, of course.
I can't believe I read that. I sure as hell hope he was not being serious... (facepalm)
Because obviously he forgot to include Joseph (facepalm x2)
Posted by MADDOG on Apr. 24 2013,12:51 pm
Yesterday Pew poll on how Americans reacted to Senate vote. You can see how deeply seated the 90% is.
Posted by MADDOG on Apr. 24 2013,12:56 pm
(davejar @ Apr. 22 2013,7:10 pm)
QUOTE
1st Amendment right of free speech trumps the other amendments.
Using your line of thinking, the Second Amendment must be the second most important then?
Posted by Self-Banished on May 02 2013,4:19 pm
So I'm watching the local news this AM and the story I heard was that the legislature are dropping any gun legislation this year Guess the dopey libs want to keep their jobs
This battle won,
But the war is far from over.
Posted by Glad I Left on May 03 2013,2:45 pm
(davejar @ Apr. 18 2013,2:34 pm)
QUOTE
I personally want all guns out of the hands of all American citizens. Only police and military and security guards should have guns.
Alas, Constitutionally, my personal opinion means squat, because the 2nd amendment allows most of us to bear arms. So be it.
Oh, Congress will eventually pass some new gun control laws, which will do diddly to protect any of us.
Alas, Constitutionally, my personal opinion means squat, because the 2nd amendment allows most of us to bear arms. So be it.
Oh, Congress will eventually pass some new gun control laws, which will do diddly to protect any of us.
I am 99.875% certain this comes from the same guy:
QUOTE
I am a Conservative who wants to ban all guns (hand guns, shot guns, and rifles), except for the military, the police, state troopers, and security guards. I would consider an exception for hunters killing game for food, but they would have to store all guns and ammo in a designated place that only they could access.
And anyone using a gun to injure or hurt someone or to commit some other crime, like robberies and such, should get the death penalty
And anyone using a gun to injure or hurt someone or to commit some other crime, like robberies and such, should get the death penalty
< Another Forum >
Look under Politics/Money section and the thread Ban all Guns with these exceptions
Posted by Grinning_Dragon on May 03 2013,7:53 pm
(Glad I Left @ May 03 2013,2:45 pm)
QUOTE
(davejar @ Apr. 18 2013,2:34 pm)
QUOTE
I personally want all guns out of the hands of all American citizens. Only police and military and security guards should have guns.
Alas, Constitutionally, my personal opinion means squat, because the 2nd amendment allows most of us to bear arms. So be it.
Oh, Congress will eventually pass some new gun control laws, which will do diddly to protect any of us.
Alas, Constitutionally, my personal opinion means squat, because the 2nd amendment allows most of us to bear arms. So be it.
Oh, Congress will eventually pass some new gun control laws, which will do diddly to protect any of us.
I am 99.875% certain this comes from the same guy:
QUOTE
I am a Conservative who wants to ban all guns (hand guns, shot guns, and rifles), except for the military, the police, state troopers, and security guards. I would consider an exception for hunters killing game for food, but they would have to store all guns and ammo in a designated place that only they could access.
And anyone using a gun to injure or hurt someone or to commit some other crime, like robberies and such, should get the death penalty
And anyone using a gun to injure or hurt someone or to commit some other crime, like robberies and such, should get the death penalty
< Another Forum >
Look under Politics/Money section and the thread Ban all Guns with these exceptions
That isn't a conservative, that is a fracking fascist.
Posted by Botto 82 on May 03 2013,10:48 pm
The authors of the Second Amendment never imagined a populace as stupid as ours. Consider...
Posted by Self-Banished on May 04 2013,6:16 am
(Botto 82 @ May 03 2013,10:48 pm)
QUOTE
The authors of the Second Amendment never imagined a populace as stupid as ours.
Consider...
Consider...
Ah yes but our founding fathers never imagined an entitlement system like we have now, a welfare system that breeds contempt and sloth, a justice system that coddles the guilty and hobbles the innocent, an immigration policy that more and more turns our soverenty to sh!t.
I hear stupidity every time an anti gun person opens their mouth and spews forth the talking points of the liberal left, the repeat and repeat, "no one needs this certain gun for hunting" or "no one needs so many bullets in a magazine"and one of my favorites "just take a double barrel and shoot through the door"
The purposed legislation is nothing more than a means to an end, an incrementalism to a point of control. The liberals can't stand that some people are independent, they want control over our lives.
The second amendment is not about hunting it's about defending oneself and with our ineffective justice system with a catch and release philosophy it's never been needed more. Our founding fathers probably didn't imagine a populace as stupid as we have now but they probably never imagined the far left in this country either.
Posted by alcitizens on May 04 2013,10:09 am
Speaking of stupid..
Posted by MADDOG on May 04 2013,11:44 am
By jov Alki, I think you just solidified Botto's post. QUOTE
The authors of the Second Amendment never imagined a populace as stupid as ours.
Posted by Self-Banished on May 04 2013,6:20 pm
(alcitizens @ May 04 2013,10:09 am)
QUOTE
Speaking of stupid..
Well your boy's not doing so hot either,
Unemployment's down to 7.5% Jesus, how great is that?
Gas is still $3.50 plus
Our economy is ripping along at what, maybe 1%
Stock markets doing great, but when they're printing $85 billion a month how could it not be.
And finally, amongst the other bullish!t, president Bastard refuses to recognize that we're under siege by terrorist( yep, that word, terrorist)
Yes indeed folks, we're on a gravy train with biscuit wheels
Posted by MADDOG on May 04 2013,10:21 pm
(alcitizens @ May 04 2013,10:09 am)
QUOTE
Speaking of stupid..
< TOTUS poll >
Posted by alcitizens on May 06 2013,8:46 am
How many kids would have been killed in a classroom with a flintlock rifle when the Constitution was written in the 1700's? I support the second amendment but there should be limits and 90% of the population supports Universal Background Checks.. Republicans can kiss their chances of taking control of the senate goodbye!!
Posted by Self-Banished on May 06 2013,9:36 am
^ a flintlock? Do you have any inclination at all as to has stupid that comment is???
Posted by Grinning_Dragon on May 06 2013,10:15 am
Oh, alki.And the 1st Amendment only applies to the printing press and the quill.
That 90% figure is based on polls that were conducted in 3 states. So obviously that reflects the US as a whole.
The proposed UBC would never have worked without mandatory registration and would be too costly to implement.
Posted by Rosalind_Swenson on May 06 2013,10:19 am
Maybe some research on the link between prescription drugs and violence should be done instead of just focusing on gun control efforts.
Posted by MADDOG on May 06 2013,10:34 am
Damn GD, you beat me on the quill thing. Alki isn't capable of thinking on his own. In the 1700's there was no internet. Get off. Alki requires liberal brain assistance.
Posted by Grinning_Dragon on May 06 2013,11:17 am
(MADDOG @ May 06 2013,10:34 am)
QUOTE
Damn GD, you beat me on the quill thing. Alki isn't capable of thinking on his own. In the 1700's there was no internet. Get off. Alki requires liberal brain assistance.
That argument like the one alki uses is nothing more than a logical fallacy. I bet he is the uneducated dolt that wrote that letter to the editor that thinks the US is a democracy and is subject to mob rule.
Posted by alcitizens on May 06 2013,3:11 pm
Bunch of blow from a bunch of Republitards and not one mention of them blowing their chance at taking control of the senate.. Y'all will never get the ball if you keep playing defense.. Score!!
So MD, you think a madman can walk into a school and blow away a bunch of kids with his connection to the internet?
Why not use a quill feather as GD has mentioned..
Posted by Wolfie on May 06 2013,4:25 pm
There are already background checks in place at most state levels and completely at the federal level for buying a firearm. Here in Minnesota you have to submit to a background check to buy a handgun or an "assault" style rifle. On the federal level you must submit to a NCIC check at time of purchase, though as it was supposed to check to see if you not only have any felony convictions but any mental health issues, the federal check is lacking in the mental health check portion due to the fact that most bleeding heart mental health professionals refuse to pass along any info to the feds or even the state level about their patients.
Posted by MADDOG on May 06 2013,5:23 pm
(alcitizens @ May 06 2013,3:11 pm)
QUOTE
So MD, you think a madman can walk into a school and blow away a bunch of kids with his connection to the internet?
Why not use a quill feather as GD has mentioned..
Why not use a quill feather as GD has mentioned..
I think with the internet, a few fireworks artillery and your mom's canning pressure cooker you could do it.
Posted by Self-Banished on May 06 2013,6:41 pm
(alcitizens @ May 06 2013,3:11 pm)
QUOTE
Bunch of blow from a bunch of Republitards and not one mention of them blowing their chance at taking control of the senate..
Y'all will never get the ball if you keep playing defense.. Score!!
So MD, you think a madman can walk into a school and blow away a bunch of kids with his connection to the internet?
Why not use a quill feather as GD has mentioned..
Y'all will never get the ball if you keep playing defense.. Score!!
So MD, you think a madman can walk into a school and blow away a bunch of kids with his connection to the internet?
Why not use a quill feather as GD has mentioned..
Y'all? Y'all??
Is your real name Buford?
Posted by Glad I Left on May 06 2013,6:52 pm
(alcitizens @ May 06 2013,3:11 pm)
QUOTE
Y'all will never get the ball if you keep playing defense.. Score!!
To be fair, the only way you can get the ball is to not have it in the first place, thus playing defense enables you take the ball, otherwise you'd be on offense and would already have said ball and therefore would not need to take it since you would already have it.
Posted by alcitizens on May 10 2013,7:19 pm
Republicans commit one technical foul after another..
Posted by Self-Banished on May 11 2013,6:54 am
^and democraps don't?
Posted by MADDOG on May 11 2013,9:00 am
Don't bother alki. He's still trying to decipher what GIL said.
Posted by Glad I Left on May 11 2013,9:30 am
(alcitizens @ May 10 2013,7:19 pm)
QUOTE
Republicans commit one technical foul after another..
After two you are ejected.
Posted by MADDOG on May 14 2013,11:13 am
(Grinning_Dragon @ May 06 2013,11:17 am)
QUOTE
(MADDOG @ May 06 2013,10:34 am)
QUOTE
Damn GD, you beat me on the quill thing. Alki isn't capable of thinking on his own. In the 1700's there was no internet. Get off. Alki requires liberal brain assistance.
That argument like the one alki uses is nothing more than a logical fallacy. I bet he is the uneducated dolt that wrote that letter to the editor that thinks the US is a democracy and is subject to mob rule.
Who is this frickin' idiot who thinks we live in country that is a < democracy? > You'd have thought that when he was challenged with the facts he might have sought some form of reference and figured out he was wrong.
(edited 11:23am)
How's that go again?
"I Pledge of Allegiance to the flag of the United States of America, and to the democracy(?) for which it stands, one nation, under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all."
Posted by Self-Banished on May 14 2013,5:12 pm
^I remember saying that pledge every day, the last 10 or so years it means less and less to me everyday
Posted by MADDOG on May 14 2013,9:20 pm
Just try to remember SB. It's "I Pledge of Allegiance to the flag of the United States of America, and to the republic for which it stands, one nation, under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all."(Self-Banished @ May 14 2013,5:12 pm)
QUOTE
^I remember saying that pledge every day, the last 10 or so years it means less and less to me everyday
Now that you mention it. It kind of reminds me of going to the cemetary to visit a past friend.
Posted by alcitizens on May 14 2013,9:20 pm
(MADDOG @ May 14 2013,11:13 am)
QUOTE
You'd have thought that when he was challenged with the facts he might have sought some form of reference and figured out he was wrong.
(edited 11:23am)
How's that go again?
"I Pledge of Allegiance to the flag of the United States of America, and to the democracy(?) for which it stands, one nation, under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all."
(edited 11:23am)
How's that go again?
"I Pledge of Allegiance to the flag of the United States of America, and to the democracy(?) for which it stands, one nation, under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all."
A liberal democracy may take various constitutional forms: it may be a constitutional republic, such as France, Germany, India, Ireland, Italy, or the United States, or a constitutional monarchy, such as Japan, Spain, or the United Kingdom. It may have a presidential system (Argentina, Brazil, Mexico, the United States), a semi-presidential system (France and Taiwan), or a parliamentary system (Australia, Canada, India, New Zealand, Poland, the United Kingdom).
< http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liberal_democracy >
Our democracy is no doubt a constitutional republic and our constitutional republic is no doubt a democracy..
Complicate the simple why don't you?
Posted by Grinning_Dragon on May 15 2013,6:16 am
(alcitizens @ May 14 2013,9:20 pm)
QUOTE
(MADDOG @ May 14 2013,11:13 am)
QUOTE
You'd have thought that when he was challenged with the facts he might have sought some form of reference and figured out he was wrong.
(edited 11:23am)
How's that go again?
"I Pledge of Allegiance to the flag of the United States of America, and to the democracy(?) for which it stands, one nation, under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all."
(edited 11:23am)
How's that go again?
"I Pledge of Allegiance to the flag of the United States of America, and to the democracy(?) for which it stands, one nation, under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all."
A liberal democracy may take various constitutional forms: it may be a constitutional republic, such as France, Germany, India, Ireland, Italy, or the United States, or a constitutional monarchy, such as Japan, Spain, or the United Kingdom. It may have a presidential system (Argentina, Brazil, Mexico, the United States), a semi-presidential system (France and Taiwan), or a parliamentary system (Australia, Canada, India, New Zealand, Poland, the United Kingdom).
< http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liberal_democracy >
Our democracy is no doubt a constitutional republic and our constitutional republic is no doubt a democracy..
Complicate the simple why don't you?
NO
Posted by MADDOG on May 15 2013,1:45 pm
Alki must have went to school with this nescient Thorson. Our nation is ruled by law not the flavor of the week majority.
Posted by Botto 82 on May 15 2013,2:57 pm
(MADDOG @ May 15 2013,1:45 pm)
QUOTE
Alki must have went to school with this nescient Thorson. Our nation is ruled by law not the flavor of the week majority.
(alcitizens @ May 14 2013,9:20 pm)
QUOTE
Our democracy is no doubt a constitutional republic and our constitutional republic is no doubt a democracy..
No, it's a representative republic. Shame on your schoolteachers for filling your head with something otherwise.
Posted by MADDOG on May 15 2013,5:12 pm
Exactly. At present we have 50 republics forming one nation. Each republic sends people to the nation capital to represent them. Two senators who represent the state and (x) number of representatives who carry the people's voice. It's a representative form of government, not majority rules. The Constitution gives us our natural rights.
Posted by Common Citizen on May 15 2013,5:30 pm
(alcitizens @ May 14 2013,9:20 pm)
QUOTE
(MADDOG @ May 14 2013,11:13 am)
QUOTE
You'd have thought that when he was challenged with the facts he might have sought some form of reference and figured out he was wrong.
(edited 11:23am)
How's that go again?
"I Pledge of Allegiance to the flag of the United States of America, and to the democracy(?) for which it stands, one nation, under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all."
(edited 11:23am)
How's that go again?
"I Pledge of Allegiance to the flag of the United States of America, and to the democracy(?) for which it stands, one nation, under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all."
A liberal democracy may take various constitutional forms: it may be a constitutional republic, such as France, Germany, India, Ireland, Italy, or the United States, or a constitutional monarchy, such as Japan, Spain, or the United Kingdom. It may have a presidential system (Argentina, Brazil, Mexico, the United States), a semi-presidential system (France and Taiwan), or a parliamentary system (Australia, Canada, India, New Zealand, Poland, the United Kingdom).
< http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liberal_democracy >
Our democracy is no doubt a constitutional republic and our constitutional republic is no doubt a democracy..
Complicate the simple why don't you?
Dangerous
Posted by Grinning_Dragon on May 15 2013,7:35 pm
(MADDOG @ May 15 2013,5:12 pm)
QUOTE
Exactly. At present we have 50 republics forming one nation. Each republic sends people to the nation capital to represent them. Two senators who represent the state and (x) number of representatives who carry the people's voice. It's a representative form of government, not majority rules. The Constitution gives us our natural rights.
The Constitution does not give us anything, it Enumerates natural Rights. The Constitution is what restricts the govt, not the people.
Also at one time, and we need to go back to this. Was that the people elected their person for the house of representatives(what we do now) and the State legislature elected the senators to represent the state.(what we need to go back to)
Posted by MADDOG on May 15 2013,8:53 pm
(MADDOG @ May 15 2013,5:12 pm)
QUOTE
The Constitution gives us our natural rights.
I stand corrected on that. "Give" was a poor choice of wording.
Posted by Grinning_Dragon on May 15 2013,9:17 pm
(MADDOG @ May 15 2013,8:53 pm)
QUOTE
(MADDOG @ May 15 2013,5:12 pm)
QUOTE
The Constitution gives us our natural rights.
I stand corrected on that. "Give" was a poor choice of wording.
I guess I should have said, "I think what you meant was..."
It's all good.
Posted by dualheart on May 22 2013,2:35 am
wow it is great
Posted by MADDOG on May 25 2013,8:24 pm
< senators-vow-to-oppose-un-arms-trade-treaty >There is some chatter that this may have already occurred.
QUOTE
Obama Quietly Signs Firearm And Ammo Killswitch Order
President Obama has side-stepped Congress by implementing portions of the UN Small Arms Trade Treaty through an executive order which can be used to ban the import of all firearms, ammunition and related supplies and accessories.
While patriots across the nation rejoiced when the US congress rejected flat on its face an attempt to force the United States into the UN Small Arms Treaty just weeks later a more sinister ulterior motive has been revealed.
Today, President Obama by passed congress and signed an executive which gives the federal government a power to completely ban the importation of guns, ammunition and even parts and accessories related to firearms.
While the UN Small Arms Treaty would have prevented the United States from both importing and exporting weapons, Obama has effectively signed on to the treaty with his new executive order while allowing the United States to export weapons of deaths to covertly funded clandestine operations in overseas nations where it seeks to further its imperialistic agenda.
At the same time, with nearly every other nation in the world signing on to the UN Small Arms treaty, other nations are now banned from doing the same which further leverages the United State’s power of shotgun diplomacy in nations that refuse to be puppets for the globalist elites that control America.
< Obambino snake bite >
President Obama has side-stepped Congress by implementing portions of the UN Small Arms Trade Treaty through an executive order which can be used to ban the import of all firearms, ammunition and related supplies and accessories.
While patriots across the nation rejoiced when the US congress rejected flat on its face an attempt to force the United States into the UN Small Arms Treaty just weeks later a more sinister ulterior motive has been revealed.
Today, President Obama by passed congress and signed an executive which gives the federal government a power to completely ban the importation of guns, ammunition and even parts and accessories related to firearms.
While the UN Small Arms Treaty would have prevented the United States from both importing and exporting weapons, Obama has effectively signed on to the treaty with his new executive order while allowing the United States to export weapons of deaths to covertly funded clandestine operations in overseas nations where it seeks to further its imperialistic agenda.
At the same time, with nearly every other nation in the world signing on to the UN Small Arms treaty, other nations are now banned from doing the same which further leverages the United State’s power of shotgun diplomacy in nations that refuse to be puppets for the globalist elites that control America.
< Obambino snake bite >
The U. N. will be coming with this.
< http://www.un.org/disarmament/ >
Posted by MADDOG on Jun. 07 2013,2:28 pm
June 5, 2013 QUOTE
< UN Gun Control Treaty Signing Period Opens; U.S. "Looks Forward" to Signing >
As we have reported, several provisions of this treaty significantly diminish the scope of the right to keep and bear arms.
First, the Arms Trade Treaty grants a monopoly over all weaponry in the hands of the very entity (approved regimes) responsible for over 300 million murders in the 20th century.
Furthermore, the treaty leaves private citizens powerless to oppose future slaughters.
An irrefutable fact of armed violence unaddressed by the UN in its gun grab is that all the murders committed by all the serial killers in history don't amount to a fraction of the brutal killings committed by "authorized state parties" using the very weapons over which they will exercise absolute control under the terms of the Arms Trade Treaty.
Article 2 of the treaty defines the scope of the treaty’s prohibitions. The right to own, buy, sell, trade, or transfer all means of armed resistance, including handguns, is denied to civilians by this section of the Arms Trade Treaty.
Article 3 places the “ammunition/munitions fired, launched or delivered by the conventional arms covered under Article 2” within the scope of the treaty’s prohibitions, as well.
Article 4 rounds out the regulations, also placing all “parts and components” of weapons within the scheme.
Perhaps the most immediate threat to the rights of gun owners in the Arms Trade Treaty is found in Article 5. Under the title of “General Implementation,” Article 5 mandates that all countries participating in the treaty “shall establish and maintain a national control system, including a national control list.”
This list should “apply the provisions of this Treaty to the broadest range of conventional arms.”
Mark it down: Within months, the federal government (likely under the management of the Department of Homeland Security) will begin compiling a list of who owns, buys, sells, trades, or transfers any firearm, as well as the ammunition, parts, and components of those weapons.
After creating this database, the federal government will be required under the provisions of Article 5(4) of the Arms Trade Treaty to “provide its national control list to the Secretariat, which shall make it available to other States Parties.”
As we have reported, several provisions of this treaty significantly diminish the scope of the right to keep and bear arms.
First, the Arms Trade Treaty grants a monopoly over all weaponry in the hands of the very entity (approved regimes) responsible for over 300 million murders in the 20th century.
Furthermore, the treaty leaves private citizens powerless to oppose future slaughters.
An irrefutable fact of armed violence unaddressed by the UN in its gun grab is that all the murders committed by all the serial killers in history don't amount to a fraction of the brutal killings committed by "authorized state parties" using the very weapons over which they will exercise absolute control under the terms of the Arms Trade Treaty.
Article 2 of the treaty defines the scope of the treaty’s prohibitions. The right to own, buy, sell, trade, or transfer all means of armed resistance, including handguns, is denied to civilians by this section of the Arms Trade Treaty.
Article 3 places the “ammunition/munitions fired, launched or delivered by the conventional arms covered under Article 2” within the scope of the treaty’s prohibitions, as well.
Article 4 rounds out the regulations, also placing all “parts and components” of weapons within the scheme.
Perhaps the most immediate threat to the rights of gun owners in the Arms Trade Treaty is found in Article 5. Under the title of “General Implementation,” Article 5 mandates that all countries participating in the treaty “shall establish and maintain a national control system, including a national control list.”
This list should “apply the provisions of this Treaty to the broadest range of conventional arms.”
Mark it down: Within months, the federal government (likely under the management of the Department of Homeland Security) will begin compiling a list of who owns, buys, sells, trades, or transfers any firearm, as well as the ammunition, parts, and components of those weapons.
After creating this database, the federal government will be required under the provisions of Article 5(4) of the Arms Trade Treaty to “provide its national control list to the Secretariat, which shall make it available to other States Parties.”
Posted by Grinning_Dragon on Jun. 07 2013,8:04 pm
John Kerry is a POS, and should be removed from office and locked up.He DOES NOT have the approval of the Senate to sign the treaty, doing so is an act of treason.
Second, even if the Senate does ratify the treaty, a treaty cannot supersede the Constitution or any of the Enumerated Amendments, if any of the provisions of said ratified treaty are in conflict with the Constitution, said treaty is dead, null and void.
Third, in order to comply with the provisions of this treaty, laws would need to be created and put into place. Just because a Senate ratifies a treaty, does not automatically put the laws into place.
Fourth, what jurisdiction would the UN have here in the United States? ZERO. If ratified, and Congress failed to put into place de facto UNCONSTITUTIONAL laws, or if one of the States here in the US does not comply with the treaty it would violate the spirit of the treaty. So in essence the UN is nothing more than a paper tiger with gummy bear teeth. *BONUS* Blue helmets make for excellent target practice.
Fifth, a single State can challenge the treaty on Constitutional grounds, which will put the ratified treaty in peril.
Posted by Grinning_Dragon on Jun. 07 2013,9:05 pm
double post.
Posted by Self-Banished on Jun. 08 2013,6:09 am
You mean if those nice young people with their blue helmets come to my door and ask for my weapons I can say no? Imagine that.
Posted by MADDOG on Jun. 08 2013,6:51 am
Posted by Santorini on Jun. 12 2013,3:47 pm
(MADDOG @ May 14 2013,11:13 am)
QUOTE
(Grinning_Dragon @ May 06 2013,11:17 am)
QUOTE
(MADDOG @ May 06 2013,10:34 am)
QUOTE
Damn GD, you beat me on the quill thing. Alki isn't capable of thinking on his own. In the 1700's there was no internet. Get off. Alki requires liberal brain assistance.
That argument like the one alki uses is nothing more than a logical fallacy. I bet he is the uneducated dolt that wrote that letter to the editor that thinks the US is a democracy and is subject to mob rule.
Who is this frickin' idiot who thinks we live in country that is a < democracy? > You'd have thought that when he was challenged with the facts he might have sought some form of reference and figured out he was wrong.
(edited 11:23am)
How's that go again?
"I Pledge of Allegiance to the flag of the United States of America, and to the democracy(?) for which it mstands, one nation, under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all."
I have to point out there is no comma after nation...no pause.
It's "...one nation under God, indivisible..."
Just had to get that out there!!!
When we recite the pledge we " pledge our loyalty to the govt that is itself a Republic, a form of government where people are sovereign."
Suppose to be a profession of loyalty and devotion not only to the flag, but to a way of life. (Source home of hero's)
Posted by Santorini on Jun. 12 2013,4:16 pm
People, there is so much wrong in this country...where do we even start to clean it up 
Seriously, like the other poster I don't have weapons but I'm all for the 2nd amendment. And the 14th ( search & seizure), and free speech for everyone...not just a select few who bark loudest over political correctness, and I could go on and on...we are a nation divided...torn and broken...how do we fix it..can we!!!
Posted by Grinning_Dragon on Jun. 12 2013,6:40 pm
(Santorini @ Jun. 12 2013,4:16 pm)
QUOTE
People, there is so much wrong in this country...where do we even start to clean it up
Seriously, like the other poster I don't have weapons but I'm all for the 2nd amendment. And the 14th ( search & seizure), and free speech for everyone...not just a select few who bark loudest over political correctness, and I could go on and on...we are a nation divided...torn and broken...how do we fix it..can we!!!
Seriously, like the other poster I don't have weapons but I'm all for the 2nd amendment. And the 14th ( search & seizure), and free speech for everyone...not just a select few who bark loudest over political correctness, and I could go on and on...we are a nation divided...torn and broken...how do we fix it..can we!!!
Search and seizure would fall under the 4th Amendment, the 14th Amendment is more or less an incorporation Amendment.
In other news.
Here are the senators that voted to give your rights to the U.N.:
Baldwin (D-WI)
Baucus (D-MT)
Bennet (D-CO)
Blumenthal (D-CT)
Boxer (D-CA)
Brown (D-OH)
Cantwell (D-WA)
Cardin (D-MD)
Carper (D-DE)
Casey (D-PA)
Coons (D-DE)
Cowan (D-MA)
Durbin (D-IL)
Feinstein (D-CA)
Franken (D-MN)
Gillibrand (D-NY)
Harkin (D-IA)
Hirono (D-HI)
Johnson (D-SD)
Kaine (D-VA)
King (I-ME)
Klobuchar (D-MN)
Landrieu (D-LA)
Leahy (D-VT)
Levin (D-MI)
McCaskill (D-MO)
Menendez (D-NJ)
Merkley (D-OR)
Mikulski (D-MD)
Murphy (D-CT)
Murray (D-WA)
Nelson (D-FL)
Reed (D-RI)
Reid (D-NV)
Rockefeller (D-WV)
Sanders (I-VT)
Schatz (D-HI)
Schumer (D-NY)
Shaheen (D-NH)
Stabenow (D-MI)
Udall (D-CO)
Udall (D-NM)
Warner (D-VA)
Warren (D-MA)
Whitehouse (D-RI)
Wyden (D-OR)
These men and women DIRECTLY VIOLATED their oaths of office in which they swore to uphold and protect the Constitution. While, in reality, they should be hanged for treason... they damn sure need to be voted out of office.
These senators voted to let the UN take our guns. We have been betrayed by our own elected officials.
Posted by MADDOG on Jun. 12 2013,10:43 pm
I see both Minnesota senators voted to give the Minnesota peoples' guns to the U.N. I'd say the best thing for the state would be if everyone who voted for those traitors just turn their guns in now. It's probably best in the long run if those people aren't armed anyway.
Posted by Rosalind_Swenson on Jun. 12 2013,11:33 pm
(Santorini @ Jun. 12 2013,4:16 pm)
QUOTE
People, there is so much wrong in this country...where do we even start to clean it up
Seriously, like the other poster I don't have weapons but I'm all for the 2nd amendment. And the 14th ( search & seizure), and free speech for everyone...not just a select few who bark loudest over political correctness, and I could go on and on...we are a nation divided...torn and broken...how do we fix it..can we!!!
Seriously, like the other poster I don't have weapons but I'm all for the 2nd amendment. And the 14th ( search & seizure), and free speech for everyone...not just a select few who bark loudest over political correctness, and I could go on and on...we are a nation divided...torn and broken...how do we fix it..can we!!!
QUOTE
we are a nation divided...torn and broken...how do we fix it..can we!!!
YES WE CAN! Sorry, couldn't resist.
I definitely think we can fix our problems. More people need to realize and acknowledge them first though. Some of these things are huge and scary, and it sucks talking about them, but we have to. I have some ideas, and I'm sure you and others do too. But I'm pretty sure one person can't do much on their own.
Telling friends, family- (that's the hardest one), co-workers, police, people we know that are in the military, city officials, the AL Tribune people. We do the same thing out in the real world that we've been doing in the forum. Sharing information and talking. - Hopefully in the real world there will be alot more talking and alot less name calling though. Write problems down and show them where they can find the info online so they can see the truth for themselves. We can make pamphlets and distribute them everywhere. Nothing is going to change if more people aren't aware of all these problems.
^It's a start anyways. And I'll say it again: I'm pretty sure one person can't do much on their own.
Or we can just keep going about our lives pretending everything is fine, and deal with the consequences of doing nothing.
Posted by Liberal on Jun. 13 2013,10:09 am
QUOTE
Telling friends, family- (that's the hardest one), co-workers, police, people we know that are in the military, city officials, the AL Tribune people. We do the same thing out in the real world that we've been doing in the forum. Sharing information and talking.
Why is telling family the hardest? Is it because your family will have no problem telling you what they really think about your mental health?
One thing I wonder about you conspiracy kooks. When all that top secret wikileaks stuff went online, what evil things did you discover the government was responsible for?
Posted by Rosalind_Swenson on Jun. 13 2013,12:03 pm
(Liberal @ Jun. 13 2013,10:09 am)
QUOTE
QUOTE
Telling friends, family- (that's the hardest one), co-workers, police, people we know that are in the military, city officials, the AL Tribune people. We do the same thing out in the real world that we've been doing in the forum. Sharing information and talking.
Why is telling family the hardest? Is it because your family will have no problem telling you what they really think about your mental health?
One thing I wonder about you conspiracy kooks. When all that top secret wikileaks stuff went online, what evil things did you discover the government was responsible for?
Wikileaks? Why you bringing up wikileaks? The other things we've been bringing up in the forum isn't enough for you? Or you just looking for more things to try pointlessly arguing about? -Especially since MSM barely mentions any of the really big things in the wikileaks files, and the government only responds to them as "damaging to National Security". So there's no proof in those files that those things are true. Assange and Manning are just enemy #1 and 2 for no good reason.
Water shortages? Must not be a big deal to you. Disappearing and dying bees? No big deal again? Nuclear power plant problems? - Oh yeah, that's right, according to you there are no problems, even though it's been several decades since we've been using them and still to this day have no idea what to do with the waste. - Not to mention the other problems.
Indefinite detention of American citizens and stripping of rights? We shouldn't worry about that silly thing, the government would never ever use that power, they just gave themselves that power because they could.
Killing of American citizens with no trial or explanation? Eh, so what, at least one of the four they killed probably had it coming, I'm sure the government will never do anything like that again.
Corporations/banks keeping a revolving door of employees with Presidential administrations and almost every single government agency? No big deal, we can just pretend the policies these people help make are actually a good thing. We can keep pretending that the revolving door corporations/banks share with the agencies that are supposed to be watchdogs over those very same companies/banks are a good idea, because all these people are so trustworthy. We can keep bailing out the banks, keep printing more money, keep poisoning the air, land and water. Everything will be fine.
Government able to spy on the citizens? Who cares. Even though they've used private information in the past to blackmail, threaten and even destroy lives. - I'm sure they would never do that again. The government should know everything about each one of us, and we should know as little as possible about them. - That's what keeps us safe.
We should keep invading/starting wars in other countries. We should keep killing hundreds of thousands/millions of innocent people in other countries and putting in puppet leaders for those countries. - Those things keep us safe. Nobody in our government should ever be held accountable for anything. We should just turn a blind eye each time they lie, and like good little Americans we the people should just ignore all their previous lies that contradict the new ones.
Nope, liberal doesn't see any problems in this country. Nobody else should either.
We should just wait until things get worse.
Posted by Liberal on Jun. 13 2013,3:11 pm
So why is it hardest to explain your goofy theories to family? Is it because your family has no problem calling you crazy?What sort of "big things" did the main stream media ignore in the wikileaks info?
Posted by Rosalind_Swenson on Jun. 13 2013,4:15 pm
liberal:QUOTE
So why is it hardest to explain your goofy theories to family? Is it because your family has no problem calling you crazy?
Nope, not at all. It's hardest discussing these things with family because those are the people we worry most about upsetting. It's kind of nice to not know about some of the things that are going on. I've only talked to a few family members about some of the things.
You're the only person who thinks I'm nuts. You and all those forum people who call you and send you private messages.
When I tell people about all the people who keep switching back and forth between certain corperations and government they are skeptical. Until I show them proof. Then they are quite surprised. when I show them some of the things that have happened as a consequence, then they're angry.
If you ask a person why we invaded Iraq, they'll say it was because of 9-11, or because Hussein had WMD's or because he was an evil guy. Most times people just shrug and say they aren't actually sure. Show them the proof that we had a huge part in Iraq having WMD's in the first place, and show them the declassified documents which show that we knew in advance how horrible it would be for innocent people by destroying their water facilities. People get pissed. Tell them to find any mainstream national news that informed us of what was REALLY causing so many deaths, specifically lack of safe water, or to find any mainstream national news pointing out those declassified documents, they don't understand why they can't find any mention of either.
Mention the NDAA and indefinite detention- people REALLY have a hard time believing that one. Show them the proof and they're shocked, and very confused why they can't find any mention in mainstream national news about the group of people suing Obama over it.
Bring up nuclear power plants. Nobody wants to talk about those at all. Most people KNOW at least partly, how dangerous and stupid they are.
Bring up Ruby Ridge and Waco, I haven't talked to a single person on those two things who doesn't think the government was completely in the wrong, and havne't talked to one person who doesn't think some heads should have rolled.
Show people how many reporters/journalists have been harassed and even jailed for trying to cover stories the government doesn't want covered, they're shocked and angry.
More and more people all the time are realizing how unAmerican America actually is.
liberal:
QUOTE
What sort of "big things" did the main stream media ignore in the wikileaks info?
You're the master at derailing and getting off topic into an area you feel you can argue argue argue. I think you must be an avid scholar of Schopenhauer's ways to win an argument. But that only works when the other person hasn't figured out what you're up to.
< http://www.mnei.nl/schopenhauer/38-stratagems.htm >
Besides, like I said already:
QUOTE
Wikileaks? Why you bringing up wikileaks? The other things we've been bringing up in the forum isn't enough for you?
Posted by Santorini on Jun. 13 2013,5:29 pm
(Grinning_Dragon @ Jun. 07 2013,8:04 pm)
QUOTE
John Kerry is a POS, and should be removed from office and locked up.
He DOES NOT have the approval of the Senate to sign the treaty, doing so is an act of treason.
Second, even if the Senate does ratify the treaty, a treaty cannot supersede the Constitution or any of the Enumerated Amendments, if any of the provisions of said ratified treaty are in conflict with the Constitution, said treaty is dead, null and void.
Third, in order to comply with the provisions of this treaty, laws would need to be created and put into place. Just because a Senate ratifies a treaty, does not automatically put the laws into place.
Fourth, what jurisdiction would the UN have here in the United States? ZERO. If ratified, and Congress failed to put into place de facto UNCONSTITUTIONAL laws, or if one of the States here in the US does not comply with the treaty it would violate the spirit of the treaty. So in essence the UN is nothing more than a paper tiger with gummy bear teeth. *BONUS* Blue helmets make for excellent target practice.
Fifth, a single State can challenge the treaty on Constitutional grounds, which will put the ratified treaty in peril.
He DOES NOT have the approval of the Senate to sign the treaty, doing so is an act of treason.
Second, even if the Senate does ratify the treaty, a treaty cannot supersede the Constitution or any of the Enumerated Amendments, if any of the provisions of said ratified treaty are in conflict with the Constitution, said treaty is dead, null and void.
Third, in order to comply with the provisions of this treaty, laws would need to be created and put into place. Just because a Senate ratifies a treaty, does not automatically put the laws into place.
Fourth, what jurisdiction would the UN have here in the United States? ZERO. If ratified, and Congress failed to put into place de facto UNCONSTITUTIONAL laws, or if one of the States here in the US does not comply with the treaty it would violate the spirit of the treaty. So in essence the UN is nothing more than a paper tiger with gummy bear teeth. *BONUS* Blue helmets make for excellent target practice.
Fifth, a single State can challenge the treaty on Constitutional grounds, which will put the ratified treaty in peril.
Agreed...
But what about UN Agenda 21
Seems so much us going on so on behind the scenes it's hard to keep up?!