PHOENIX -- About a dozen people carrying guns, including one with a military-style rifle, milled among protesters outside the convention center where President Barack Obama was giving a speech Monday -- the latest incident in which protesters have openly displayed firearms near the president.
Gun-rights advocates say they're exercising their constitutional right to bear arms and protest, while those who argue for more gun control say it could be a disaster waiting to happen.
Phoenix police said the gun-toters at Monday's event, including the man carrying an AR-15 semi-automatic rifle slung over his shoulder, didn't need permits. No crimes were committed, and no one was arrested.
The man with the rifle declined to be identified but told The Arizona Republic that he was carrying the assault weapon because he could. "In Arizona, I still have some freedoms," he said.
Phoenix police Detective J. Oliver, who monitored the man at the downtown protest, said police als
rest of story:
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/08/18/dozen-protesters-guns-outside-obama-speech/
Quote from: Diane Amberg on August 18, 2009, 02:26:43 PM
I'm glad it didn't happen, but I wonder how fast that man would had been dead if he even looked like might have made a move to touch his weapon. I would have stood Fa-a-a-a-r away from him, just in case.
He would have been fine if he went to touch it. He also wasn't stupid enough to shoulder his weapon at that location and made a move on the building. Now that would have solicited a fatal response.
But what it did prove is that we can manage our own lives. Want to bet that if someone was to start shooting at the president he would have been one of the first ones to respond with lethal force against the attacker??
I have a cop friend back in atlanta that says that he would rather be in a firefight with armed citizens as his backup support than have cops from atlanta as his backup support. The reason is that he does evals on cops and the "rules" for cops to qualify are so low that it allows 3 missed shots out of 10. He calls that pitiful and unacceptable when your average citizen that owns guns won't miss but 1 shot out of ten, and the avid gun owner won't miss any.
Diane, I don't know about Red, but, I don't believe you because you say that you are not for gun control then turn around and say that it should be a state issue, or you advocate a total registry for firearms.
Thats because she lives in a place and is in a profession that sees the effects of gun violence every day.
Then she and anyone else living in those places should know that the "gun" is not the problem..
Any law abiding true 2nd amendment believer knows that.
But I'm not going to repeat myself ... so I'll leave it at that..
Quote from: pamsback on August 22, 2009, 08:23:45 AM
Thats because she lives in a place and is in a profession that sees the effects of gun violence every day.
Well thats one reason why you don't see that kind of violence in those cities that don't restrict gun ownership. :) criminals aren't stupid, they would rather prey on those who do not have a means to protect themselves than risk getting shot.
Diane, you're right, I do not believe you. It appears to me that you are on
the leading edge of many liberal trends and that you'll support some kind of
method for the Fed's to take the guns of Americans or to keep Americans from
obtaining ammo.
If it makes you, several of you, feel better to call me a liar help yourself. You twist my questions and answers however you want anyway. I just got thoroughly swatted, so I'm done. Have it anyway you want.
Eight new gun bills signed by Arizona Governor Jan Brewer:
Waiting until the last possible moment, Arizona governor Jan Brewer on July 13 signed all eight gun-related bills enacted by the state legislature in 2009. Two crucial bills, Constitutional Carry and penalty reduction for discreet carry without a permit, failed passage at the last minute and didn't make it to her desk. The eight bills signed into law, which will become effective on Sep. 30, 2009 (except SB 1242, effective immediately), are:
HB 2569 Smuggling people for profit, involving a deadly weapon
SB 1113 CCW in liquor-licensed places OK without drinking, unless no-gun signs
SB 1088 Domestic violence protection extended to romantic or sexual partners
SB 1168 Parking lots cannot ban firearms locked in vehicles, with exceptions
SB 1242 Exemptions from CCW and more for more "proper authorities"
SB 1243 Defensive display of a firearm in self defense defined and protected
SB 1437 AZ High School Marksmanship Program instructor definition expanded
SB 1449 Retroactive self-defense clarification
http://arizonaccwpermit.wordpress.com/2009/07/31/eight-new-gun-bills-signed-by-arizona-governor-jan-brewer/
http://www.abc15.com/content/news/phoenixmetro/central/story/Arizona-governor-approves-law-allowing-guns-in/5cCTyK4b1ky35CnwUhbfgQ.cspx
http://www.azfamily.com/news/local/stories/phoenix-news-071409-parking-lots-bill.3d119beb.html
Good thing to see the AZ fixing the errors in their laws that circumvent the constitution. Keep it up arizona.
I've lived in many open carry states as well as permissive carry states and the crime is far less in them than any other state. IF the law abiding people are allowed to carry, criminal activities decline rapidly.
Quote from: Teresa on August 22, 2009, 09:42:27 AM
Then she and anyone else living in those places should know that the "gun" is not the problem..
Any law abiding true 2nd amendment believer knows that.
But I'm not going to repeat myself ... so I'll leave it at that..
Hell Teresa I'm pretty sure she DOES know that.
I know I sure as hell do so.......yall preachin to the choir in MY case.
You know, I'm not quite sure how many direct insults I'm supposed to swallow. Now I'm supposed to be going to go off and lead some sort of liberal charge to stop people from having guns? That is totally insane talk. Oh sure, I'll call Joe Biden and be sure he takes Elk County's guns away first. You'll finally have somebody to shoot at to justify all the ammunition and food you are hoarding for when I come to get you? You are clever people I'll give you that. I'm all for states having the right to set age limits on how old you have to be to be out there freewheeling it with a gun. Some how that has turned into I'm for gun control????? That's just my own personal opinion and I hope you choke on it. Delaware's state constitution has gun ownership protection in it too. It's fine with me. Only I can decide how I feel about things, not you. So you call me a liar....big deal. I've had it with the innuendo..only "true patriots" do this or that, only certain people speak "true words" about certain things. Hogwash. That doesn't make the rest of us liars. This country was built for All its citizens, east, west, rural, suburban, city, not just.... (Wink,wink,nudge,nudge) a chosen few conservatives. What happened to MY free speech? Now I'm supposed to limit the threads I can be on? Gee, how many a day am I allowed? You are determined to call me a liberal, so how about if I call a couple of you skin head white supremacist bigots and see how you like it....prove you aren't. See, the old cow CAN kick. Apparently only a few can make jokes and I'm not one of them? Warph, read the bottom of your own page about people with a sense of humor.You put it there for all to see, but it doesn't apply to you? Several of you have been deliberately baiting me, now lay off. Billy, I told you before, I've never had a typing class in my life and I told you go ahead and tease me about it because you'd be right. I know it sucks. I'm a little better I think, but it's still two fingers and I'm not quite ready to try touch typing. If I do, I promise you you'll be able to tell.
Jeese. I only said 3 sentences................................... :o
Who pissed in your cheerios............ ::)
We received this from a Down Range member and I think it is very appropriate to share with you. This person brings up excellent thoughts on this issue.
Hello to you, and to Michael, I would like to add in something to this, "wearing guns when POTUS comes to town."
We all agree that it is legal for these people to wear their guns in Open Carry and I would do the very same if I lived in a state that allowed open carry (I live in Florida). I would wear openly to one of these POTUS events simply because I have seen the footage of the gentleman from Louisiana who was attacked by SEIU people, the ones in the purple shirts, and I would not want to be accosted by them or ACORN activists. While I am not wanting a show down of sorts with anyone I would also take steps to let others know that I will defend myself should they decide to lay hands on me or my wife.
Why is it that Fox News and others directly in the gun culture only see the protesters as protesting about gun restrictions? Why is it that the only motivation considered for wearing openly is to protest Obama's bent on removing all forms of guns? Why hasn't anyone from the gun culture interviewed people from New Hampshire or Arizona and asked them what their motivations were to open carry at a presidential event? I would like to know and I would like for you Michael or Tom Gresham or any of the gun culture insiders to expose the flip side to this, that SCIU people or Acorn people are disrupting and sometimes violent to us, "Mob crowds."
I believe it is doing a great disservice to fellow gun owners who legally exercise their right to carry. Why is it in poor taste to carry at a POTUS event? It's perception thats why, and while the MSM uses this episode to put down gun owners and supporters of the Second Amendment the gun culture, to my view, seems to be following lock step with them in condemning instead of opting to support these brave people who attended these events, allowed their pictures to be taken, interviewed by CNN and mocked, face possible alienation by their neighbors, friends and family. For me I salute them and as I say, if I could do it I would too. Can we not remember why we carry for protection to begin with? It's to defend and not to attack. To enable us to hopefully back out of a dangerous situation, to get clear of a bad thing going down, to protect me, myself and I as well as our family members so we can go home at the end of the day and love one another as family and friends.
I do not see the actions of the protesters as damaging but an opportunity to speak out as the gun culture and say, "Hey, I would too! Who wants to be attacked by ACORN for exercising our First Amendment? I wouldn't do it to provoke but to defend.
Your Thoughts?
The People ARE trying to get the message across that it ISN'T JUST gun rights, it's about the governments entire attitude toward the people and their blatant ignorance of the Constitution.
Quote from: Diane Amberg on August 22, 2009, 09:55:02 PM
You know, I'm not quite sure how many direct insults I'm supposed to swallow.
I can understand if someone called you a leftist-liberal-know it all-bong smoking hippie, how that could be taken as an insult. However, when a person says that he doesn't believe you because of your own words, how is that an insult?
Quote from: Diane Amberg on August 22, 2009, 09:55:02 PM
Now I'm supposed to be going to go off and lead some sort of liberal charge to stop people from having guns? That is totally insane talk.
You're right, that is insane. Espcially since no one here said that you were leading anything. Re-read the post, he wasn't saying that you were personallly leading the charge, just that you were in agreement with it.
Quote from: redcliffsw on August 22, 2009, 01:48:48 PMIt appears to me that you are on the leading edge of many liberal trends and that you'll support some kind of method for the Fed's to take the guns of Americans or to keep Americans from obtaining ammo.
Quote from: Diane Amberg on August 22, 2009, 09:55:02 PM
I'm all for states having the right to set age limits on how old you have to be to be out there freewheeling it with a gun. Some how that has turned into I'm for gun control?????
So, in your opinion, we can own firearms, but we hae to be a certain age before we can carry? Not only that but you support "total gun registry", how is that NOT gun control? Last time I checked, the U.S. Constitution was pretty clear "...the right of the people to keep and bear arms SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED."
Quote from: Diane Amberg on August 22, 2009, 09:55:02 PM
This country was built for All its citizens, east, west, rural, suburban, city, not just.... (Wink,wink,nudge,nudge) a chosen few conservatives.
Thats true Diane. But it seems these days that it is only the conservatives who are fighting to keep our Constitution in place, and protect our rights and liberities from governmental encroachment.
Quote from: Diane Amberg on August 22, 2009, 09:55:02 PM
What happened to MY free speech? Now I'm supposed to limit the threads I can be on? Gee, how many a day am I allowed? l.
No one is limiting your free speech or trying to tell you how much you can post. However, there are some (myself included) that are tired of insults hiding behind smilies ;D . Espcially from someone who likes to point out grammical errors and the difference between THERE and THEIR, and then gets offended when someone uses satire and sarcasm to defend themselves.
Quote from: Diane Amberg on August 22, 2009, 09:55:02 PM
You are determined to call me a liberal, so how about if I call a couple of you skin head white supremacist bigots and see how you like it....prove you aren't. See, the old cow CAN kick.
Apparently, the "old cow" can also go back on things she has said. Whatever happened to (and I am paraphrasing here) "we shouldn't call names, or make generalizations"?? Doesn't that show a lack of our "class"??
Quote from: Diane Amberg on August 22, 2009, 09:55:02 PM
Apparently only a few can make jokes and I'm not one of them? Warph, read the bottom of your own page about people with a sense of humor.You put it there for all to see, but it doesn't apply to you?
Correct me if I am wrong, but his reply with the batman thing was a form of sarcasm and satire. I for one thought it was rather creative. What is the problem...did the "old cow" get mad when she got kicked back???
Quote from: Diane Amberg on August 22, 2009, 09:55:02 PM
Several of you have been deliberately baiting me, now lay off.
Yeah, as if you haven't done before. Oh, and by the way, where was this attitude that baiting is wrong when wilma was doing it to others on this fourm?
Teresa, none what I said was aimed at you, but somebody who I respect DID pee in my Cherrios, 'nuff said.
I don't like being called a liar. As far as grammatical checks, there are hundreds I haven't touched. The "their and there" thing was meant to be funny. It was aimed at Batman and Robin not WARPH, who has apparently lost his sense of humor. Billy, I do not have a copy of the constitution sitting beside my breakfast plate so I can check every day to see who is harming the constitution today. My life has more parts that that. I apologize for losing my temper, but I've had enough. Yes, my right to freely post HAS been attacked. You won't get to twist my words at me or hold me responsible for what other people say any more. I deleted your ammo dump. I am and have been a patriot in ways that would make your jaw drop, but since the players are still alive I can't say more. I don't care for the "real patriots,"and "real citizens" stuff because it implies, by extension, that there are fake patriots and fake citizens if they don't agree with every word you say. No, I don't care for the name calling and swearing and many of you have toned it down a lot.
I do believe that if states want to have gun registry they should have it, so what. Billy, the whole country is not Elk County nor is it all rural, the rest of us do deserve some consideration too. I got snapped at because I told the truth about how I felt about Hershey and Westmoreland AT THE TIME. You don't want to know how I felt about McNamara! I had information that none of you had and never will. As far as Jane's snappy comment about what did Westmoreland tell me personally? Nothing from him personally, but don't ever count me short on who I did know, do know, and who I did have information from back then. Washington is not that far from here. Blue thumb tacks anyone?. I've already said too much.
What M and M said to me was totally uncalled for.They have no idea who I am but that was just plain mean! They meant for it to hurt and it did. I'm over it and I will come back swinging if I must.
To a couple of you I suggest you move to a Commonwealth. There are four of them. Even though it doesn't mean much anymore, I think the way you feel you'd be much happier there because of what is written in the old paperwork. So call me the devil if it makes some of you feel better. I really don't care any more. Why ask me about Wilma? She and some of the others can very well speak for themselves. As far as "thin skin", that's a two way street. Lump it !
This is really sad. I have been reading all of these posts...On a couple of other threads, as well...
I don't blame Diane for how she feels. I may disagree with some of what she posts, but then I disagree with some of what the rest of you post, as well...I don't post my views on any of your relative levels of intelligence because I happen to know that MY rights end where your rights pick up...It's called being civilized...You know...That intangible that differentiates us from the rest of the animals? Personal attacks have no place on a public forum such as this. Acting so base, common and petty should be beneath all of you as adults. Schoolyard attacks, such as what I have been reading, are ridiculous at any age but especially so, coming from supposed adults. If you want to argue states' rights, constitutional validation issues, etc., then do so in a colleagial manner...Just the facts...Leave the "your ugly and your momma dresses you funny" crap out of it.
Cat, I agree and can easily agree to disagree when needed. I'm sorry I lost my temper, but enough is enough. I will cut 'way back on my posting.
Quote from: Catwoman on August 23, 2009, 01:26:52 PM
This is really sad. I have been reading all of these posts...On a couple of other threads, as well...
I don't blame Diane for how she feels. I may disagree with some of what she posts, but then I disagree with some of what the rest of you post, as well...I don't post my views on any of your relative levels of intelligence because I happen to know that MY rights end where your rights pick up...It's called being civilized...You know...That intangible that differentiates us from the rest of the animals? Personal attacks have no place on a public forum such as this. Acting so base, common and petty should be beneath all of you as adults. Schoolyard attacks, such as what I have been reading, are ridiculous at any age but especially so, coming from supposed adults. If you want to argue states' rights, constitutional validation issues, etc., then do so in a colleagial manner...Just the facts...Leave the "your ugly and your momma dresses you funny" crap out of it.
Cat,
I was about to "go off" with both barrels and probably tick off all but a few on here, but for now I'll just add what I had written to my "ammo" folder and try to play nice. However, if those who don't agree with my right to have an opinion that is different from theirs keep throwing ever larger stones, they WILL get hit with a very large boulder from me.
Charles
Shoot...As long as the boulder falls on your foot first and gives you the biggest bruise, then fling away!
Touche!
Quote from: Diane Amberg on August 23, 2009, 11:06:23 AM
Billy, I do not have a copy of the constitution sitting beside my breakfast plate so I can check every day to see who is harming the constitution today. My life has more parts that that.
As does mine Diane, But what is wrong with keeping tabs on what the gov't is doing? As citizens it is our duty to keep it in check.
Quote from: Diane Amberg on August 23, 2009, 11:06:23 AM
I apologize for losing my temper, but I've had enough.
So it is okay when you do it but not others? Talk about a double standard.
Quote from: Diane Amberg on August 23, 2009, 11:06:23 AM
You won't get to twist my words at me or hold me responsible for what other people say any more.
How am I twisting your words? The only thing that I have done is call you out on what you've said.
Quote from: Diane Amberg on August 23, 2009, 11:06:23 AM
I am and have been a patriot in ways that would make your jaw drop, but since the players are still alive I can't say more. I don't care for the "real patriots,"and "real citizens" stuff because it implies, by extension, that there are fake patriots and fake citizens if they don't agree with every word you say.
Now who is twisting words? I am curious, why is it okay for you to "feel the way you do" and have your opinions, but its not for others who may disagree with you? If someone feels a certain way about a group of people, isn't that their right?
Quote from: Diane Amberg on August 23, 2009, 11:06:23 AM
I do believe that if states want to have gun registry they should have it, so what. Billy, the whole country is not Elk County nor is it all rural, the rest of us do deserve some consideration too.
Well, for starters it violates the Constitution. Not only the 2nd, but in my opinion the 9th, 10th, and 14th, admendments as well. When have I ever said that the whole country is Elk County? I am well aware that the world does not end at the county line. I have lived in San Diego, Kittery, Charleston (S.C.), Fayetville (N.C), Clarksville (TN), and Hopkinsville. I have seen both coasts and lived in large cities. I choose to live in a rural community because I don't want my kids growing up in an enviroment that resembles a sewer. Which in my opinion is what most cities have become.
Quote from: Diane Amberg on August 23, 2009, 11:06:23 AM
Why ask me about Wilma? She and some of the others can very well speak for themselves. As far as "thin skin", that's a two way street. Lump it !
The reason I asked you about wilma is you seem to like to group people together, espcially those you feel are "attacking" you. You got mad because you felt you were being baited. When wilma was doing this to me, you were pretty much silent on the matter. But you are right I shouldn't have asked you about wilma and I apologize for grouping you in with her.
As for being thin skinned I'm not, but if I disagree with you or anybody else, or see a contridiction in something you said I will call you on it. So lump it yourself. Have a nice day ;D
Billy,
You're reading things in Diane's post that just arent there. She is apologizing for losing her temper, she's not talking about anyone else, just herself. She also never said that there's a problem with other people having their own opinion. I think you're being a little oversensitive, even though you claim to not be thinned skinned. Speaking of thinned skinned, were you one of the people who jumped down Diane's throat for her comments on spelling errors? Or where those some other thin skinned forum posters?
Looks good from here, Billy. I'm agreeing with your summary.
MAgine that.................
Ok, now for a good fight.
Billy, you just gave me a good example. Maybe this will help you understand me. I made a STATEMENT about the whole country and Elk Kansas being not being rural. In no way did I attribute that statement to you. No quotation marks, nothing. So why did you find it necessary to say that you didn't make that statement? Well, duh....I think most readers would know that I made it, not you. Nobody, including me has said there is anything wrong with keeping tabs on the Go'vt. We all should, but you and a few others seem to be totally obsessed with it. You and I are both entitled to have our opinions, but some of the stuff that gets written on here really worries me. Just recently there was one that said something, after a tape, about now that the military is on "our side" we can take over or some such. I don't have the direct quote. You don't think that would worry some people who read that?
I will not make ANY more comments about spelling and grammar, not the funny ones, not even for the writers who see the humor in it. I don't mind it being done to me, never have, I love word humor, but it seems to be such a hot button.... I should have known that some people must have defended their right to stay ignorant about such things back in school. I would just like to know if someone would please tell their children's teachers when to stop waisting their time so they can use that time for math or something else. If you go 'way back in the posts you will find that several of the biggest posts about that weren't even mine, or Wilmas!! I was /am a teacher. Just like being a Marine, once a teacher always a teacher! Yes, I'm being very sarcastic.
I wasn't prepared to have to defend myself at any time on any thread from anyone who said,"When did I say".... that was new to me. It must be a middle America thing. When I joined, that kind of thing just wasn't happening.Then the world changed, and so did this forum. Using "when did I say".... is a clever tactic to divert way from the real issues that were being discussed and is meant to put the other writer on the defensive, IMHO! So I started using it myself, except I get called on it. Now, I'll try something your style. Back in that other post, when did I say there was anything "wrong" with keeping and eye on the Govn't? We just seem to disagree on how to do it. I choose to do it through our elected officials that WE, for better or worse, elected. Some of you seem to be advocating a violent over throw of the standing GOV"t that the MAJORITY of the country elected. Al and I have been working on some simple but effective ways of cutting prescription costs. We will soon send a letter explaining our ideas. I'm just not into the "bluff and bravado" stuff. I could write more and may later, but I have some other things to go do. We lost another friend, at 96. I think he and Judy's Mom got to heaven about the same time. So go ahead, take my post apart line by line. See if you can find the spelling errors I put in on purpose for you to gloat over, and pick at my typing all you want, I know it's bad.
I don't have the exact words i used, and dont remember where it is but I know I said that with the military on our side, the military being dissatisfied with the way things are going with obama and congress, we have no worries about obama or congress attempting to use the miltary to control us when we decide to put Congress and the president back in their place. IF they attempt to continue to usurp authority and all peaceful means to stop them aren't working then its time to use force.
BTW there is something seriously wrong with this congress and administration when you have the servicemen upset and ready to honor their oath and defend the constitution against Congress and the president.
srkruzich, your words from yesterday in "Marine Speaks out at town Meeting"
Quotethis congress had better wake up. With the military on our side we have the ability to toss them out of office with force if we have to!
Who exactly is "we"?
I get it, you fear government, all government.
You know what I fear - EXTREMISTS.
I fear people who clamor for anarchy as much as I fear people who want pure totalitarianism. I fear pure unfettered capitalism as much as I fear pure communism.
And out of the roughly 250,000,000 people that live in this great nation of ours, a nation that you seem to hate, I believe alot more of them are closer to my political mindset, than they are to yours.
I'm not posting in these threads to try and convert you, and other extremists, to my viewpoint.
I will not be bullied off of this forum again. I will continue to voice my opinion so that those in the center know there are viewpoints being expressed that aren't ultra anything.
From the Center,
Charles
I WIN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I WIN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Line number 19-------------------------see paste------------
(when did I say there was anything "wrong" with keeping and eye on the Govn't?)
what do I win?
Larryj
Flint, I admire your gumption. And not a foul word in the lot.
Steve, I suspect you are, like many, are getting most of your information from conservative TV (do you have a TV?) and perhaps radio, but I just don't get the sense of military dissatisfaction that you do. I have no doubt there is some, there always is, no matter who the President is. But I think the numbers are not so big. They are over there, or wherever doing their job. I doubt that defending the constitution from their own commander in chief is high on their list. If that got out they could be dealt with most severely, IMHO. I know some guys who are home to stay now and they sure don't talk that way. I know we still disagree on some things, but thank you for moderating the way you write. I really do appreciate it. I don't tend to trust a lot of what is said for the cameras in those town hall meeting, and I mean on both sides.They aren't genuine anymore because it's too easy to put ringers in and again I do mean on both sides. We have a telephone version on the health care issue going on here tomorrow night. ( Larry, there is more than one but I'll give you a hug for that one, keep looking.)
We is the people that hold the constitution dear to our hearts and if we have to toss them, we will set it right by putting in people that will conform to the constitutions requirements.
I don't fear government, I do not trust government. That is why Government is chained down by the constitution. Only when Government attempts to usurp power that it was not granted, do i fear its capabilities to overthrow the people. IF you can't get them under control peacably, then force will be necessary.
No one is bullying you charles. At least i haven't. I am a libertarian so i am neither right or left.
Quote from: flintauqua on August 24, 2009, 05:01:58 PM
srkruzich, your words from yesterday in "Marine Speaks out at town Meeting"
Quotethis congress had better wake up. With the military on our side we have the ability to toss them out of office with force if we have to!
Who exactly is "we"?
I get it, you fear government, all government.
You know what I fear - EXTREMISTS.
I fear people who clamor for anarchy as much as I fear people who want pure totalitarianism. I fear pure unfettered capitalism as much as I fear pure communism.
And out of the roughly 250,000,000 people that live in this great nation of ours, a nation that you seem to hate, I believe alot more of them are closer to my political mindset, than they are to yours.
I'm not posting in these threads to try and convert you, and other extremists, to my viewpoint.
I will not be bullied off of this forum again. I will continue to voice my opinion so that those in the center know there are viewpoints being expressed that aren't ultra anything.
From the Center,
Charles
Quote from: Diane Amberg on August 24, 2009, 05:58:39 PM
Flint, I admire your gumption. And not a foul word in the lot.
Steve, I suspect you are, like many, are getting most of your information from conservative TV (do you have a TV?) and perhaps radio,
No i don't have a tv and my radio only gets 1 station and thats kote.
Quotebut I just don't get the sense of military dissatisfaction that you do. I have no doubt there is some, there always is, no matter who the President is. But I think the numbers are not so big. They are over there, or wherever doing their job. I doubt that defending the constitution from their own commander in chief is high on their list.
I have three sons in the military and all 3 are leaving. The reason is there is a conflict between this admins policies and upholding their oath to protect the constitution.
And if you think that they do not have the constitution as their highest priority, your sadly mistaken. SOme might not, but the majority do.
You are fixing to start seeing many servicemen leaving in droves as soon as their 8 years are up.
QuoteIf that got out they could be dealt with most severely, IMHO. I know some guys who are home to stay now and they sure don't talk that way. I know we still disagree on some things, but thank you for moderating the way you write. I really do appreciate it. I don't tend to trust a lot of what is said for the cameras in those town hall meeting, and I mean on both sides.They aren't genuine anymore because it's too easy to put ringers in and again I do mean on both sides. We have a telephone version on the health care issue going on here tomorrow night. ( Larry, there is more than one but I'll give you a hug for that one, keep looking.)
Well i know several marines and they aren't at all worried about being dealt with. Their oath protects them.
Quote from: Diane Amberg on August 23, 2009, 11:06:23 AM
Billy, the whole country is not Elk County nor is it all rural, the rest of us do deserve some consideration too.
Quote from: Diane Amberg on August 24, 2009, 11:44:54 AM
Billy, you just gave me a good example. Maybe this will help you understand me. I made a STATEMENT about the whole country and Elk Kansas being not being rural. In no way did I attribute that statement to you. No quotation marks, nothing. So why did you find it necessary to say that you didn't make that statement? Well, duh....I think most readers would know that I made it, not you.
Actually, Diane, if you look at the sentence structure of the first statement of yours that I posted, you make the implication that I said Elk county is the rest of the world. As a teacher you should know this. With the use of the comma after my name you direct this sentence at no one else, with your useage of the word "too" you imply that I have not considered the rest of the country.
Quote from: Diane Amberg on August 24, 2009, 11:44:54 AM
Nobody, including me has said there is anything wrong with keeping tabs on the Go'vt. We all should, but you and a few others seem to be totally obsessed with it. You and I are both entitled to have our opinions, but some of the stuff that gets written on here really worries me.
You are right Diane, when it comes to my freedom I am obsessed with keeping tabs on those who are trying to take it away. Some of the things that get written on here worry me as well, espcially when it comes from so-called moderates.
Quote from: Diane Amberg on August 24, 2009, 11:44:54 AM
Just recently there was one that said something, after a tape, about now that the military is on "our side" we can take over or some such. I don't have the direct quote. You don't think that would worry some people who read that?
Not if they had read the entire post. If they did they would have seen that srkruzich said "...if we need to."
Quote from: Diane Amberg on August 24, 2009, 11:44:54 AM
I should have known that some people must have defended their right to stay ignorant about such things back in school. I would just like to know if someone would please tell their children's teachers when to stop waisting their time so they can use that time for math or something else.
Again, I'll go back to the reading comprehension and sentence structure comment I made earlier.
Quote from: Diane Amberg on August 24, 2009, 11:44:54 AM
I wasn't prepared to have to defend myself at any time on any thread from anyone who said,"When did I say".... that was new to me. It must be a middle America thing. When I joined, that kind of thing just wasn't happening.Then the world changed, and so did this forum. Using "when did I say".... is a clever tactic to divert way from the real issues that were being discussed and is meant to put the other writer on the defensive, IMHO!
I am not trying to divert attention away from anything. However, when you make an implication that I said something at least have the gumption to back it and be able to point out when I said it.
Quote from: Diane Amberg on August 24, 2009, 11:44:54 AM
. Now, I'll try something your style. Back in that other post, when did I say there was anything "wrong" with keeping and eye on the Govn't?
How else would you interpt this comment...
Quote from: Diane Amberg on August 23, 2009, 11:06:23 AM
Billy, I do not have a copy of the constitution sitting beside my breakfast plate so I can check every day to see who is harming the constitution today. My life has more parts that that.
Quote from: Diane Amberg on August 24, 2009, 11:44:54 AM
Some of you seem to be advocating a violent over throw of the standing GOV"t that the MAJORITY of the country elected.
No one at any time has advocated that. Some have said to vote them out, but not overthrow.
Quote from: Diane Amberg on August 24, 2009, 05:58:39 PM
I suspect you are, like many, are getting most of your information from conservative TV (do you have a TV?) and perhaps radio, but I just don't get the sense of military dissatisfaction that you do. I have no doubt there is some, there always is, no matter who the President is. But I think the numbers are not so big.
I would suggest that you do a little research on the group "Oath Keepers", it may suprise you.
Quote from: Diane Amberg on August 24, 2009, 05:58:39 PM
They are over there, or wherever doing their job. I doubt that defending the constitution from their own commander in chief is high on their list. If that got out they could be dealt with most severely, IMHO.
It may have changed since I took it (I doubt it, but maybe) but my oath clearly stated "...to defend the Constitution, against enemies both foreign and domestic." I know it was high on my list.
Steve, you're in the "center" and you remind me of Captain William A. Wash, of the 60th Tennessee Mounted Infantry CSA (Southern), writing in his memoirs about his time served as a prisoner in the Yankee (northern) prison at Johnson's Island, OH.
"On the first day of June, 1864, there came to my address the first number of the Courier des Etats Unis, a French paper published in New York, for which Lieut. Tobey, of Arkansas, and myself had subscribed, and in reading which we whiled away many happy hours together. Lieut. T. belonged to our French class, and was one of my warmest friends and most constant companions. Though he was born and reared in the State of Maine, he was as true as the truest to our cause, entertaining liberal and conservative views about all subjects. I did not then, nor do I now, think much more of the Southern radical "fire-eater" than of the Northern radical republican; both overdid the fair thing."
Stay right in there.
rc
Billy, and this is addressed to you and at you and about you, you don't know as much about English as you think. Pick away all you want. It won't bother me any more. Have at it. Sometimes when others have posted before I respond, I do add the name of the person to whom I am speaking, so there is no confusion as to the person I am addressing. If you honestly think everything is all ABOUT instead of to you, you are sadly mistaken and more self centered than I thought. I'd been trying to talk about issues, but you won't allow that. So the gloves are off. Ya wanna attack the person instead of the issues at hand? You don't wanna accept my opinions as just that, my opinions?....have at it.
Holy Crap, talk about the pot calling the kettle black!!! :o You haven't addressed the issue of this thread since it started. And just for the record, at least in this thread, YOU came at ME first, chick, so you can stick your comment about attacking people!!
Here's an idea..........move on already. Diane is a pretty smart person from what I can tell from readin her.....She just don't agree with all of what yall say. Yall ragged her till she twisted off on you....a lot more politely than I would have :P and now you're actin all innocent like "what did I do?" Cracks me up.........
Billy, and I do mean you. I had my poke at you and I won't participate in who shot whom first any longer. Besides, Mom always liked me better than you any way! ;D ;D ;D I'll still state my opinions from time to time and you can do what you want with them.
Quote from: pamsback on August 25, 2009, 06:31:37 AM
and now you're actin all innocent like "what did I do?" Cracks me up.........
That runs real deep both ways Pam........ I've about listened to all the "Poor me" whining I can stomach... and I'm certainly not standing by myself in this area... So lets just agree that you can stand on your side with your "smart" people.. and the rest of us will take our sides.. whichever they will be....
Now... as far as the little snide crack of being "self centered"............?? well.........
Just for the record .......... Billy is about the least self centered person I know..
Now!! I think it is apparent the feelings in here.....so since that is on the table I suggest we get this thread BACK to the topic at hand or I will lock the damned thing!
And yes Diane... I said Damned... :o
Oh yeah flint... EXTREMISTS?? Trust me.. Our whole government is made up of EXTREMISTS!! Far left socialist America destroying extremists... And I don't FEAR the government... I loath them....... for what they are trying to do to this great country...
Teresa, you made yourself very clear.
Quoteyou can stand on your side with your "smart" people.. and the rest of us will take our sides.. whichever they will be....
Not sure but I THINK YOU been included in that "smart" group a time or two. So has Billy so has Red so as usual MY side will be over here....listenin to EV ERYbody and stayin as far away from "GOVERNMENT" ANY form of government as humanly POSSIBLE.
Quote from: Teresa on August 25, 2009, 08:28:31 AM
I will lock the damned thing!
Then why don't you rename the whole Politics Category what it really is, the "Ultra-Right Thought's Only Board, No Others Need Tread, Except Anarchists." Because by the above statement, that is what you are saying.
Why don't you trample on the First Admendment a little more.
Not everything and everyone that goes against the views from the far right is leftist, and I'm tiried of being told by a bunch of self-rightous demagogues, in various forms of the press (this one included) of how I and others like me are just "sheeple".
Well guess what, there's another name for us sheeple - "THE SILENT MAJORITY"
And this one has gotten tired of being silent.
From the CENTER,
Charles
This is so funny. "don't trample on my 1st amendment rights ".Then I refer back to the 'obama Health Care Bill ' thread and reply # 70 tells bigpoppapeck---and I quote--"We have been having civilized discussions and debates on here lately,post something intelligent or don't post at all" unquote. I guess ol bigpop dosen't have the same rights as others.
Never said I'm perfect, there isn't a person on this Earth that is. Yes I can say things that are hypocritical. And I will own up to it when it's presented as such. bigpoppa riled me up with "so you be a good sheep and let the farmer do ya" and I got a little turked off.
From the Center
Charles
I found this thread to be totally annoying.I did find myself reading all of it though. By what I consider a very fair grading scale; only 3 posts or about 7% of this thread is on topic. The rest fit in the category of I just needed to blow off some steam. Thanks Steve for the original post, and to Warph and Kjell for your posts. I know we all argue and get off topic so I am not trying to lecture anyone here. Just stating my off topic opinion and getting something off my chest.
David
Easy Flint ole' boy........... ;) Teeter in the center too long and you'll be likely to fall on one side or the other and hurt yourself. But there is lots of people who ride the fence and if you are comfortable there..then by all means stay there.
No one is asking that you put on your muzzle...
Knock yourself out and snarl and bark at the moon all you want. I sure as hell do.. Sometimes it bites me in the ass.. and sometimes it doesn't..
I haven't seen me or anyone else tell anyone here on any side of the lines that they can't voice their opinions..
We don't have the same beliefs.. but we DO have the same rights.
But politics ( and I think even more than religion) is over the top passionate. And right now, with all that is going on that is so against America..it's not going to get better as far as tempers, passion and the huge urge to give someone a permanent ..'swirly'. ;D
Generally people seek out forums where they share common bond.. ( Guns, Scrap booking, Genealogy, Farming, Horses, Cars... etc) Most forums as in our other websites the Down Range and CasCity Shooting websites, you have like minded people.... and even if you disagree you still have that knowledge that you are on the same side.. Hense the comradeship and bond.
Not so in a forum like this when it is basically a coffee shop where you have a stew pot of mixed everything with very different diverse interests going at one time.. And in the case of discussing Politics...There will be sides taken. And those sides will be strong.
I say this to you all and also to myself... I get waaaayyy too emotional and upset sometimes for my own good which is the main reason I stay away from this forum for the most part. My choice.... as it is all of yours, to do and be where you enjoy being.
But if we are going to be stuck in here together, we have to try to play nice.
I realize that we all have a breaking point.. (I won't let anyone trash my friends) so I've hit mine on several occasions..but still as Kjell 'my internet boss' **I hate publicly acknowledging he's my boss) :P points out to me... and I quote:
" It is a public forum and unless you want it to become a lower class website, then you have to remain in control of yourself and make sure that threads do not get too far out of hand. If they do, it is your job Teresa to put your own feelings and opinions aside and as the moderator, make sure that they get back on tract or lock the abusive thread and allow it to cool off..and to make sure that YOU are cooled off also".
Spoken like someone who has been at this a long long time... :)
Come on people....We all know that it's obvious that everyone is convinced that they are correct in all that they believe. I don't think that anyone is going to change anyone else's mind on anything in this section. You couldn't budge me on my convictions and I don't think I'm alone . So state your opinions in as strong a manner as you can.. but Please... lets all leave the sandbox tantrums home.
And David.. there are a lot of things I find on this forum annoying... but once again.. we are a hodgepodge of different people with different backgrounds and beliefs. Sometimes it's refreshing...and sometimes it's annoying.. We just have to all deal with it.
Hopefully we will be able to carry on in here and address the topics and not the personality's..
Quote from: dnalexander on August 25, 2009, 11:21:10 AM
I found this thread to be totally annoying.I did find myself reading all of it though. By what I consider a very fair grading scale; only 3 posts or about 7% of this thread is on topic. The rest fit in the category of I just needed to blow off some steam. Thanks Steve for the original post, and to Warph and Kjell for your posts. I know we all argue and get off topic so I am not trying to lecture anyone here. Just stating my off topic opinion and getting something off my chest.
David
I don't care if a topic goes off topic, its the way it goes.
Quote from: flintauqua on August 25, 2009, 09:12:40 AM
Quote from: Teresa on August 25, 2009, 08:28:31 AM
I will lock the damned thing!
Then why don't you rename the whole Politics Category what it really is, the "Ultra-Right Thought's Only Board, No Others Need Tread, Except Anarchists." Because by the above statement, that is what you are saying.
Why don't you trample on the First Admendment a little more.
[/quote]
LOL Uhmm flint, the first amendment doesn't apply in this forum. :P Teresa owns it and the 1st amendment only applies to the people in dealing with government.
QuoteNot everything and everyone that goes against the views from the far right is leftist, and I'm tiried of being told by a bunch of self-rightous demagogues, in various forms of the press (this one included) of how I and others like me are just "sheeple".
And my views are neither far right nor far left! :) Their libertarian views. Constitutional views.
Quote from: srkruzich on August 25, 2009, 12:18:12 PM
LOL Uhmm flint, the first amendment doesn't apply in this forum. :P Teresa owns it and the 1st amendment only applies to the people in dealing with government.
I do own it Steve.. but 1st amendment still applies.. :)
Quote from: Teresa on August 25, 2009, 12:48:27 PM
Quote from: srkruzich on August 25, 2009, 12:18:12 PM
LOL Uhmm flint, the first amendment doesn't apply in this forum. :P Teresa owns it and the 1st amendment only applies to the people in dealing with government.
I do own it Steve.. but 1st amendment still applies.. :)
Yes i do understand that, and it applies because you wish it to. You don't legally and constitutionally have to though. :)
Imagine how dull these forums would be if Teresa ran around locking threads. I may have been upset at the occasional lack of moderation, but in the end, at least she's fair.
Sorry, I was thinking and typing rather slowly, so this kind of refers back a few posts.
In my opinion, a public forum, like this one, is a hybrid of "press" and "assembly". If people with one set of generally common viewpoints are allowed to express those viewpoints, then others should be allowed also.
I mis-interpreted the tone and context of what Teresa meant in the quote I threw back at her. My gracious apology for jumping to an incorrect conclusion.
The one point I have been trying to make is this:
Not everyone that isn't far right is a leftist, not everyone that isn't a strict libertarian is in favor of totalitarianism. (And I am not lumping libertarians and the far right together, I know those are two completely different spectrums, based on two very different sets of ideals and beliefs.)
If the far right and the strict libertarians would stop lumping everyone that doesn't believe as vehemently as they do into the same category as their polar opposites, they might find out that we do share a lot in common.
Do I think Ron Paul is the devil? No, I agree with a quite a few of his positions. Would I vote for him for President.? No.
Did I vote for Obama? No. Do I believe he is the devil incarnate? No.
Do "we the people" need to do something about an out of control Congress and/or Federal Government? Yes. Is every member of the House, Senate, Supreme Court, and every person in every agency of the administrative branch evil? No
I could say more, but it's time for the wife and I to celebrate my birthday.
From the Center
Charles
Well you have a wonderful Birthday Flint.. Relax and enjoy being old.. errr old-er.. yeah.. older... 8)
Have a Happy Birthday - and be a good boy. Don't blow cake icing all over the table when you "put out the candles", and make sure you have a HUGE wish!!
Thank you ladies. Started to go out and about, but Angie got called in to work. That's what happens when you live three blocks from the plant. (McKee Baking, makers of Little Debbie snack cakes, Yum-Yum.) And since I'm still in what I thought would be a short gap in my employment history . . . things revolve around her. Oh, what am I saying, everything revolves around her anyway. :P ::) ;D
Perhaps, my difficulty in finding gainful employment has altered my demeanor of late. That and being on the downhill side of Forty. ;D
I'll try to remember the above words when formulating my posts here in the politics section. :)
Charles
I want to get this in here before the thread gets locked for being off subject. Happy Birthday Charlie! ;D ;D
Happy Birthday ;D
Hope you have a wonderful evening on your birthday.
Happy Birthday, Charlie...Hope that you get to eat 'from the center' out on the cake! ;D ;D ;D
Actually, that would be Angie, she doesn't like all the icing on the "extremes". ;D
Thank you all for the well wishes. 8)
Charles
I have been busy today what with the babysitting my granddaughter and running some errands, but I didn't want to miss wishing you a happy happy birthday. Enjoy!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Larryj
Here in Wonderland:
The horse and mule live thirty years
And never knows of wines and beers.
The goat and sheep at twenty die
Without a taste of scotch or rye.
The cow drinks water by the ton
And at eighteen is mostly done.
The dog at fifteen cashes in
Without the aid of rum or gin.
The modest, sober, bone-dry hen
Lays eggs for noggs and dies at ten.
But sinful, ginful, rum-soaked men
Survive three-score years and ten.
And some of us...though mighty few
Stay pickled 'til we're ninety-two.
Happy Birthday, Flint... The Rabbit ;)
Getting back to Arizona.... At a town hall meeting in his home state, sometimes-Republican Sen. John McCain was asked by an audience member, "I would like to know how the president is getting by with all of this money [he's spending]. It's against the Constitution. Doesn't he know we still live under a Constitution?"
McCain: I'm sure that he does. I'm sure --
Audience: (laughter)
McCain: No, no, I'm serious. I'm sure that he does and I'm sure that he respects the Constitution of the United States.
Audience: (groans)
McCain: No, no, no, no. No, I -- I -- I -- I really do. I -- I am absolutely convinced of it.
Audience Member: No!
McCain: I just believe, my friends, that there is a fundamental difference in philosophy and about the role of government. That's why we have competition for public office and competition amongst parties and competition about different ideas and visions for the future of America. I am convinced the president is absolutely sincere in his beliefs.
Audience: (groans)
McCain: But he's -- wait a minute. Wait a minute. He is sincere in his beliefs. We just -- we just happen to disagree, and he's the president of the United States and let's be respectful.
In a friendlier atmosphere on ABC's "This Week," McCain said, "I look at this as an opportunity right now. ...Wouldn't it be a good idea for us Republicans and Democrats to sit down with the president? ... There's so many areas that we are in agreement on."
In a nutshell, that's why McCain lost in November.
He just doesn't get it.
Actually, I think he gets it more than we recognize. I don't agree with John McCain's policies, nor do i agree with Obama, but what i do see is the degradation of the political process. People no longer speak about issues with honesty and respect. Things are being said about the current government that are downright lies. I think that the right is going to an extreme and dark place that has the potential to cause major rifts in our society.
People like to compare Obama to hitler, but when you look at some of the actions and statements by the far right, they are very similar in nature to the national socialists of pre-ww2 germany. Substitue muslims for jews and there you have it. I think McCain, Powell, and other centrists recognize the trend and are trying to stop it. We saw McCain in the campaign make efforts to try and tone down the rhetoric against Obama and the left. Maybe it did contribute to his loss, but it wasn't the reason. A few lines out of McCain aren't going to reverse the negative sentiment created by 8 years of Bush and friends.
As for Obama not knowing the constitution, he was a professor of constitutional law. We sit here and talk about second amendment or first amendment, but if he were on these forums, he'd probably put us all to shame with his knowledge of the constitution.
Obama is a product of the set that were indoctrinated to believe that the constitution is a living document. Instead of him believing it to be the Law of the Land in which Government must obey, he believes it can be changed at will to fit whatever agenda he plans to put in place. He along with the judicial system attempt to circumvent the proper proceedure for amending the constitution by legislating constitutional law. Right now he's handicapped in that, because the judicial branch is divided. What we really need is judges up there that are constitutionalists first, and liberal/conservative second. We also need a president and congress that are constitutionalists first.
how has the current administration tried to circumvent constitutional law?
Quote from: Anmar on August 29, 2009, 04:16:20 PM
how has the current administration tried to circumvent constitutional law?
Lets see, nationalizing banks, nationalizing auto industry, two things that are NOT the job of Government. Its duties are specifically outlined and owning business's are not one of them.
Quote from: srkruzich on August 29, 2009, 04:58:38 PM
Quote from: Anmar on August 29, 2009, 04:16:20 PM
how has the current administration tried to circumvent constitutional law?
Lets see, nationalizing banks, nationalizing auto industry, two things that are NOT the job of Government. Its duties are specifically outlined and owning business's are not one of them.
That was the Bush administration's doing. I said CURRENT, try to keep up
Quote from: Anmar on August 29, 2009, 05:19:04 PM
Quote from: srkruzich on August 29, 2009, 04:58:38 PM
Quote from: Anmar on August 29, 2009, 04:16:20 PM
how has the current administration tried to circumvent constitutional law?
Lets see, nationalizing banks, nationalizing auto industry, two things that are NOT the job of Government. Its duties are specifically outlined and owning business's are not one of them.
That was the Bush administration's doing. I said CURRENT, try to keep up
Hmmm lets see your still blaming everything on bush now. Obamas had the office for 8 months now. He's doling out the dough. Try his stimulus bill. Thats outside of the powers granted by government, and this "attempt" at siezing healthcare is another avenue that is outside of the powers of government.
Lets also take a look at the deficit. He's by far spent more money and subjected us to more debt than any other president in history. Thats not constitutional as well as not legal according to balanced budget laws on the books.
Cap n Trade isn't constitutional as well. Thats another takeover of Industry.
We might just might get lucky and make it through til next years elections without any disasterous bills being passed, and by then we can remove them from power and set the balance of power back to where it belongs.
i'm playing devils advocate, you keep saying xyz violates the constitution, what part does it violate? What laws are there that says the budget has to be balanced? With the exception of Clinton, no president has balanced the budget since Jackson.
And yes, I blame bush for the bailouts, because he's the one that implemented them. In fact he did so in spite of congress and his own party. They voted against the auto bailout, so he went around them and used the TARP money that was already approved for the banks. Why do you insist on blaming the current administration for something Bush did? Don't you think that's dishonest?
Just out of curiosity, how much of the kazillion dollar bailout promises were ever really paid out, actual checks written, and how much has been paid back?
Quote from: Diane Amberg on August 29, 2009, 10:08:26 PM
Just out of curiosity, how much of the kazillion dollar bailout promises were ever really paid out, actual checks written, and how much has been paid back?
Now Diane why did you have to bring that up? If people start investigating what happened with the bailout money, next thing ya' know we will have to find a new way to finance all the black budget items. There goes the Area 51 Christmas party. :D
David
Quote from: Anmar on August 29, 2009, 09:53:08 PM
i'm playing devils advocate, you keep saying xyz violates the constitution, what part does it violate? What laws are there that says the budget has to be balanced? With the exception of Clinton, no president has balanced the budget since Jackson.
And yes, I blame bush for the bailouts, because he's the one that implemented them. In fact he did so in spite of congress and his own party. They voted against the auto bailout, so he went around them and used the TARP money that was already approved for the banks. Why do you insist on blaming the current administration for something Bush did? Don't you think that's dishonest?
Not at all, Obama used his authority to reverse a bunch of things the last administration started, yet he hasn't used it to stop the automotive bailouts, the tarp funds. ect. he's in fact pushing them through.
Quote from: Anmar on August 29, 2009, 03:22:31 PM
People no longer speak about issues with honesty and respect.
With the exception of our founders, when have they (politicians) ever used honesty and respect?
Quote from: Anmar on August 29, 2009, 03:22:31 PM
Things are being said about the current government that are downright lies. I think that the right is going to an extreme and dark place that has the potential to cause major rifts in our society.
What lies? You want to talk about dark places and major rifts in our society, okay, lets look at the lefts push to eliminate our 2nd admendment, to limit the 1st admendment. Lets talk about the appointment of communists, marxist, and special interest spokesmen, not to mention terrorists, to positions of power in our government that are answerable only to the president. Lets look at how the president himself pushes a healthcare reform bill based on the idea that people can't afford to pay for healtcare, yet he wants to pass a Cap & Trade bill that will cause the price of electricty, as he puts it, to "skyrocket".
Quote from: Anmar on August 29, 2009, 03:22:31 PM
People like to compare Obama to hitler, but when you look at some of the actions and statements by the far right, they are very similar in nature to the national socialists of pre-ww2 germany. Substitue muslims for jews and there you have it. I think McCain, Powell, and other centrists recognize the trend and are trying to stop it. We saw McCain in the campaign make efforts to try and tone down the rhetoric against Obama and the left. Maybe it did contribute to his loss, but it wasn't the reason. A few lines out of McCain aren't going to reverse the negative sentiment created by 8 years of Bush and friends.
Oh please, I don't see the "right" taking over the banks, auto industry, and private businesses. It isn't the "right" that is calling for the creation of a Civil Defense Force, that is just as well funded, trained, and armed as the military. Just for the record, pre-ww2 jews weren't hijacking planes, beheading people, beating their women, forcing their children to marry pedophiles, calling for the extermination anyone who didn't agree with them. The negative sentiment was created when radical muslims thought it would be a good idea to crash a couple planes into the WTC, Pentagon, and kill thousands. No one on the Right is calling for the extermination of all muslims, only those that continue to war against us.
Well Billy........you hit it head on........... :)
I'll give you this~~ plus 10
(http://i273.photobucket.com/albums/jj216/marshalette/resized.jpg)
I just have to ask this, and I'll probably get slammed for it, but Steve you brought up the subject of " Civil Defense Force" which makes me think of the interment camps or whatever they were called. I have yet to see any of that written in main stream or moderate media. I did find it some time ago in one or two conservative pieces, which seem to quote each other, but nowhere else. The only thing I could find that was even close was one piece on preparing some places for hurricane victims if a Katrina ever happened again. What has become of all that? Another question....Why WERE pre WWII Jews so terribly discriminated against? One more. What is happening now to step on your 2nd amendment, except for the same few public folks talking to stir the pot? Is there a House or Senate bill that I don't know about?
Quote from: Diane Amberg on August 30, 2009, 11:03:02 AM
I just have to ask this, and I'll probably get slammed for it, but Steve you brought up the subject of " Civil Defense Force" which makes me think of the interment camps or whatever they were called.
I don't remember saying anything about a civil defense force. I think one of the other fellas talked about obamas campaign goal of creating a civilian military equal to that of our national military. On that i am ABSOLUTELY against that kind of power that can be used against our civilians. IF he charters a force like that he can bypass the constitutional law that prevents miltary from being brought against the cilvilians because it would not be a official national military. It would equate to the WW2 germanies SS
QuoteWhy WERE pre WWII Jews so terribly discriminated against?
Uhmm discriminated? I think that what happened is that the jews are a people that take care of their own. They do business with other jews and that in itself makes the community profitable. I think that germany was going downhill in spending and hyperinflation not ulike what will happen here if we don't get obama under control with this spending, and the germans h ad to have a scape goat so they chose the jews. I personally believe that if hitler had of exterminated the jews, he would have started on christians. Hitler was no christian. He was an occultist and delved into black arts.
QuoteOne more. What is happening now to step on your 2nd amendment, except for the same few public folks talking to stir the pot? Is there a House or Senate bill that I don't know about?
Lets see, the attempt to serialize ammunition and requiring us to turn in all unserialized ammunition that we might have is a start. THen you have Holder who is hell bent on registration. Registration is how hitler disarmed germany and came to power. THE ONLY reason why this government doesn't usurp its authority is because they know that they would have a war and they don't know who has guns and how many are out there. Now every year we have to go through an attempt at our second amendment being assaulted by some bill or another. THis is getting rather old and tiresome.
The simple fact is that there is no valid reason to restrict gun ownership. The criminals don't give a rats ass about laws, and will always have guns no matter what. So why all the restrictions, legislation to register, or background checks ect. Theres no criminal that is going to go buy a gun from a pawn shop or gun shop and go through background checks. They are criminals and dont' want exposure. SO they go steal, buy blackmarket, guns and commit crimes. THe only deterrent to crime is the law abiding citizen that is carrying
More On Internment Camps
by Chuck Baldwin - August 28, 2009
http://www.chuckbaldwinlive.com/c2009/cbarchive_20090828.html
Sorry Steve, wrong person this time, it was Billy. One of you brought it up the first time many months ago and I wondered what had happened since then. I haven't seen anything since then and no sign of anything around here and I'm in a position to know. Red, I read Chuck Baldwin, and most all of that whole page of listed articles. I know you'll disagree, but he and a few others like him are creating their own herd of "sheeple" on the other side of the fence, IMHO. Steve, I didn't know about the ammunition registration business and in spite of some calling me a liar over it I don't think gun control per say works and I know every old saw there is about what gun control does. But it isn't just about criminals. I recently had a discussion on a local forum about getting kids ready to go back to school and refreshing their kids about age appropriate actions involving fire safety ,track safety and gun safety. Some of the bad actors in our county will just toss guns out the window and run if they think the cops are near. Parents need to be sure their kids know what they want the kids to do if they happen to fine one. For the little ones, its don't touch and tell a grownup. We have a lot of Suburban people here who want nothing to do with guns, are totally for gun control and don't even want their kids to know anything about guns. To me that's dangerous too. Those are the kids who accidentally shoot each other because they don't know ANYTHING about guns. Yes, I'm talking again, I'll go away now since some of you hate me so much.
Referring to red's post.
Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah.
Chuck Baldwin will find the absolute worse possible explanation for anything that is done by the federal government. Every assumption he has made, and is accepted as gospel by all of his far-right and/or border-line anarchist believers, can be refuted, and most has already been refuted on this forum in previous threads.
I could do a "billy" and go line but line, but I really am tired of fighting the same thing over and over.
But, that's just my opinion. An opinion held by a majority of America. The majority of America that you far-rightists and/or strict libertarians continue to badger and ridicule because we won't blindly believe the likes of Chuck Baldwin, Al Benson Jr., and Donnie Kennedy and his brother.
And now, on top of everything else that gets thrown at us, we have to defend our positions on religion too? Give me an eF'in break.
We, the center of this great Nation, are not your polar opposites, and thusly not your enemy. If the far-right and strict libertarians would accept that, and work with us, maybe we could do something about the extreme-leftists and those who want totalitarianism.
Instead, just keep alienating us by calling us un-christian, and saying we are not "True Americans." See how far that gets you in 2010 and 2012.
From the center,
Charles
Flint-
I'm not accepting Baldwin, Benson, the Kennedy's or anybody else's articles as gospel and I doubt
that anybody else on this forum expects you to accept them or any others - but I can tell you that
I do believe the Bible as Gospel which is too far right for many in this land these days.
People know their people. You say that you are in the majority of America. So you are expecting
another victory in 2010 and 2012?
"Can two walk together, except they be agreed?"
Rc
Quote"Can two walk together, except they be agreed?"
Yeah...they can be adults and agree to disagree, get down to work, go around the stickin points and accomplish somthin.......but that would be too friggin EASY........
Diane, I'm not trying to "slam" you or anything but go to youtube and do a search on "FEMA Camps". Or checkout infowars.com. Some may seem a little far fetched, but when you look at the Executive Orders, our own history, and the positions against personal liberty that the current adminstration takes, the idea of interment camps is certainly plausible.
As for the 2nd amendment, you bring up a good point. During the Katrina aftermath why were law-abiding citizens disarmed by law enforcement personnel? The gov't knows that it cannot just come out with a bill that bans firearms, so they do it in small doses, little bits at a time. The assault on guns can be viewed as a case study in Progressive tactics.
The pre-ww2 Jews were chosen as scapegoats because at the time germany was in financial straits. A lot of the more "better off" were Jewish, as were the heads of quite a few banks. So, like the current administration, Hitler targeted them as "evil, rich capitalist types" and blamed the country's problems on those that were in control of the money.
Srkruzich, Hitler had started on Christians, something like 10 million of them. But you are right, the numbers would have been higher if he hadn't been stopped.
Red, I just looked at that article you posted by Chuck Baldwin, very interesting. Kinda goes along with one of my original posts on this forum. In it, I posed the question "Does anyone here feel like their is something more to what is going on?" (something like that, can't remember the exact wording) What I was getting at is that I feel that the framework is being laid for something far more sinister than what we have seen thus far. To be honest I am somewhat hesitant about broaching the subject on the forum.
Billy, I thinking you're right on.
Billy, I really am trying to keep an open mind about all this, I do think some of what is written is very far fetched, BUT, the disarming of private citizens during Katrina seemed to be over the top. Of course I wasn't there personally, but had friends who did go down to help and they said the local police seemed scared to death part of the time. Some took off and left other police officers to fend for themselves. All kinds of operational mistakes were made that put some groups in jeopardy, but that is for another time. The local police caused the problem with the weapons. There was no big government take over as far as the guns were concerned. The pre plans broke down. Martial law had not been declared and I believe, after a time, the weapons situation returned to normal. To my knowledge, the temporary gun ownership crises didn't grow into a permanent gun control law any more that what they may have already had at the time. I suspect we could also do a search of our own history and find lots of conspiracy theories that amounted to nothing also. It is very true that big business over the years, and especially long back, did manipulate things successfully for personal gain, but that's another topic too.
Diane --- talk to the people at Greensburg, KS. and ask them how the gov't came in and took all of their guns and weapons, after the tornado.
Maybe then you might change your mind , just a tad, about this.
Were they ever given back? If not, then that's totally wrong. Was martial law declared? Who took them? FBI? (How should I change my mind? I agreed with Billy.) I just hoped that later, peoples' guns were returned.
Quote from: Diane Amberg on August 31, 2009, 12:14:50 PM
Were they ever given back? If not, then that's totally wrong. Was martial law declared? Who took them? FBI? (How should I change my mind? I agreed with Billy.) I just hoped that later, peoples' guns were returned.
Excuse me when did the Government EVER have the right to confiscate guns?? If they came here they wouldn't get mine thats for sure, unless their willing to take the bullets first!
Or the other way around.
Quote from: greatguns on August 31, 2009, 03:54:46 PM
Or the other way around.
well they might but not without some of mine going towards them.
Yo Steve, I was just asking for information, not having an opinion. I wondered if it was to protect from looters, but I have no idea. Why did the owners allow them to be taken?
Quote from: Diane Amberg on August 31, 2009, 09:03:18 PM
Yo Steve, I was just asking for information, not having an opinion. I wondered if it was to protect from looters, but I have no idea. Why did the owners allow them to be taken?
Some owners were intimidated into giving them up. The cops showed up and locked n loaded against the owners. Some of the citizens refused to give them up and the cops backed down. I remember watching the reports and when Gen honore came in and took charge, he was on tv when a group of cops came by with automatic weapons locked n loaded and aimed at the civilians and he jumped their butts and told them to ground their weapons or else. The cops were a big problem in New orleans.
Actually I was referring to Greensburg and the tornado that did so much damage. (in response to something Jo had just said) I wondered why the residents there gave up their weapons and to whom.
Yes, I saw Gen. Honore coming into new Orleans just like Patton. I was very impressed with him. (He also told the men in his own trucks to lower their weapons too.) Yes, the cops were a real pain.