Bill Gives Attorney General Power To Designate Gun Owners, Tax Protesters As Terroris

[Jamie6.5]

The thing that gets me about these debates is that all one needs to do is look at:

Which candidate(s) do the various gun control groups support?
These are nearly always Democrats. I would say 97% or more.

Who runs on anti gun issues? (ie. McCain's "close the gun show loophole" statement was the same as BHO's and Hillary's)

Who runs on pro-gun issues?

Who does the more leftist of the media support?
This one helps in internet debates. It cracks me up when people start quoting Olberman, Maddow, Mathews and others from MSNBC.

Yes, I am a "righty."
Does that make me GOP?
Nope, not lately!

 

[PlayboyPenguin]

Yes, I am a "righty."
Does that make me GOP?
Nope, not lately!

There is nothing wrong with being right of center. I am slightly right of center on some topics and far right of center on others. I am also far left on some topics. That does not make me a centrist and trying to pretend to be is intellectually dishonest. Unfortunately it is a game the neo-cons have been playing as of late. They have been outed as the fox's in the hen house they truly are but instead of changing their ways they have decided to try and change their label and hope no one notices the fluffy tail sticking out from under the chicken suit when they start clucking.

As for what did Bush do for gun rights in the six years of unrestricted reign he enjoyed, besides the one thing I mentioned above all he did was give lip service to the right. Why didn't they pass that carry bill when they knew they had the votes? Could it be because they knew they had the votes and that was the problem? When it failed they could not have blamed the dems.

As for what has Obama done, so far all he has done is give a little lip service to the middle. Only time will tell what else he does but I refuse to run around like an idiot screaming that the sky is falling. All that does is alienate every American to the left side of the far right. I suspect all he will accomplish will not be much. Just as they are now pretending they do not have the votes to fulfill their promises because if they actually did try to do as promised they would not be able to blame the GOP when they declined to pass it. That is the same excuse they use to the far left when asked why they are not pursuing tougher gun laws.

PS: Another thing we all need to remember is that "middle" does not mean correct. In some cases the right is correct and in some the left is correct. The middle is sometimes the correct position but often it is merely a position of compromise and sometimes even a position of apathy or misunderstanding.

Just like with gun laws. What is portrayed as the "middle" is not the middle because what is portrayed as the right side of the argument is not truly the majority opinion of the right. The left portrays the minority far right as the majority opinion and therefor people to the left appear more centered. If most people understood the majority opinion of the right (IE: freedom of ownership and carry with reasonable restrictions like no guns for felons, mentally ill, etc.) they would probably think "that sounds reasonable" and there would be no need for compromise...but instead they are constantly force fed the opinions of radicals and told "this is how the other side feels."

 

[cameronhu]

As for what has Obama done, so far all he has done is give a little lip service to the middle. Only time will tell what else he does but I refuse to run around like an idiot screaming that the sky is falling. All that does is alienate every American to the left side of the far right...

...and give certain people an excuse to drive up gun prices, bogart ammo and make life generally more difficult for those of us who actually enjoy shooting.

 

[Stomper]

This whole thread should be proof to any anti-gun individual that gun owners are NOT a bunch of "simple-red neck-bubba's" who aren't very bright and just want to shoot everything that moves, but rather the vast majority of gun owners are sophisticated thinkers & debaters who are quite civilized EVEN while being a tad on the bombastic side.




This has been a good debate, but I now have to jump this train as its starting to give me a headache... I gues that's why I made for a better soldier than a politican!

 

[PlayboyPenguin]

This whole thread should be proof to any anti-gun individual that gun owners are NOT a bunch of "simple-red neck-bubba's" who aren't very bright and just want to shoot everything that moves

Right, some of us are "complicated-red neck-bubbas" who prefer to shoot things that do not move. They are much easier to hit.

.and give certain people an excuse to drive up gun prices, bogart ammo and make life generally more difficult for those of us who actually enjoy shooting.

How did I manage to forget that little bit of info. Yes, the hysteria is very good for a few groups of people. Gun retailers, right wing talking heads, and reactionist politicians. All of whom care nothing about the long term damage the hysteria does to the movement...as long as they get theirs now.

 

[Jamie6.5]

There is nothing wrong with being right of center. I am slightly right of center on some topics and far right of center on others. I am also far left on some topics. That does not make me a centrist and trying to pretend to be is intellectually dishonest. Unfortunately it is a game the neo-cons have been playing as of late. They have been outed as the fox's in the hen house they truly are but instead of changing their ways they have decided to try and change their label and hope no one notices the fluffy tail sticking out from under the chicken suit when they start clucking.

Penguin, I have been involved in political discussions since (roughly) 1972. I started voting in '77, when I achieved voting age (21 back then).
I would like to point out that the rhetoric I read coming from you sounds so much like every left wing elitist liberal/progressive argument I have ever heard it's amazing.
Do they pass out play books in college for you guys to read from?
The name calling is atrocious. Neo-cons, bushies, right wing fanatics, wackos etc. It adds up to ridicule as well, which is the last bastion of a losing argument in a public forum.
Can you comment without bashing someone. Either directly or indirectly?
Can't you just be honest and acclaim your love for "the chosen one" and his elitist intellectual/secular- progressive agenda?
In terms of "intellectual honesty," I think you need to start with yourself.
You have spewed some of the most far left verbage I have seen in a public forum. The absolute worst I have seen in a gun forum.
All the while professing your "right of center" views.

If you are right of center then I must be somewhere waayyy out there on the right.
If gun rights were that important to you, you'd have voted for the only true 2ndA advocate that ran in '08.

Please stop telling everyone here they have nothing to worry about from Obama and the Democrat party. The core of the Democrat party has been opposed to 2ndA rights for some time and I have the legislative records to prove it. The only time they don't is when they are lying about it to get elected.
You said so yourself.

At the core of your message is the obvious contempt you hold for the GOP and it's supporters. You repeat it time and time again.
One only has to read through the political threads you have participated in to see it. Maybe you should try that.

As someone who has voted on all sides of the aisle for 35 years I find your rhetoric of obfuscation offensive.

I feel I deserve an apology. A public one.

This is public and not a private message because I feel there are many members here that deserve the same. You practice a verbal sleight-of-hand in your political messages about the right PP, but it is there if one has the honesty to see it for what it is.

 

[cameronhu]

... you sounds so much like every left wing elitist liberal/progressive argument I have ever heard it's amazing....
Can't you just be honest and acclaim your love for "the chosen one" and his elitist intellectual progressive agenda?..

Something about people in glass houses and stone throwing comes to mind.

 

[PlayboyPenguin]

Something about people in glass houses and stone throwing comes to mind.

Yes, but more than that when neo-con mouthpieces start chanting I just hear..."goosestep...goosestep...goosestep...salute...goosestep...goosestep...goosestep...salute."

Can you comment without bashing someone. Either directly or indirectly?

If you found that statement to be "bashing" I must have "bashed" the nail right on the head in your case.

 

[Jamie6.5]

Neo-con? I was conservative long before the term was coined.

And the offensive lock step ridicule of the right by the left continues.
I lived in Eugene long enough to recognize it for what it is boyz.

Apology please.

Something about people in glass houses and stone throwing comes to mind.

Yes, but more than that (when neo-con mouthpieces start chanting) I just hear..."goosestep...goosestep...goosestep...salute...goosestep...goosestep...goosestep...salute."

 

[Jamie6.5]

Oh, and thank you for validating my argument.
You too hu.

 

[Trlsmn]

Penguin, I have been involved in political discussions since (roughly) 1972. I started voting in '77, when I achieved voting age (21 back then).
I would like to point out that the rhetoric I read coming from you sounds so much like every left wing elitist liberal/progressive argument I have ever heard it's amazing.
Do they pass out play books in college for you guys to read from?
The name calling is atrocious. Neo-cons, bushies, right wing fanatics etc. It adds up to ridicule as well, which is the last bastion of a losing argument in a public forum.
Can you comment without bashing someone. Either directly or indirectly?
Can't you just be honest and acclaim your love for "the chosen one" and his elitist intellectual progressive agenda?
In terms of "intellectual honesty," I think you need to start with yourself.
You have spewed some of the most far left verbage I have seen in a public forum. The absolute worst I have seen in a gun forum.
All the while professing your "right of center" views.

If you are right of center then I must be somewhere waayyy out there on the right.
If gun rights were that important to you, you'd have voted for the only true 2ndA advocate that ran in '08.

Please stop telling everyone here they have nothing to worry about from Obama and the Democrat party. The core of the Democrat party has been opposed to 2ndA rights for some time and I have the legislative records to prove it. The only time they don't is when they are lying about it to get elected.
You said so yourself.

At the core of your message is the obvious contempt you hold for the GOP and it's supporters. You repeat it time and time again.
One only has to read through the political threads you have participated in to see it. Maybe you should try that.

As someone who has voted on all sides of the aisle for 35 years I find your rhetoric of obfuscation offensive.

I feel I deserve an apology. A public one.

This is public and not a private message because I feel there are many members here that deserve the same. You practice a verbal sleight-of-hand in your political messages about the right PP, but it is there if one has the honesty to see it for what it is.

Thank you for recognizing this for what it is! He has a bad habit of diverting, cherry picking and making unsubstantiated statements to make his point.

One sure thing though ask him for proof and you will receive more of the above in it's place, show him undeniable proof and he will minimize it or ignore it.

 

[Jamie6.5]

deleted double

 

[Trlsmn]

Yes, but more than that (when neo-con mouthpieces start chanting) I just hear..."goosestep...goosestep...goosestep...salute...goosestep...goosestep...goosestep...salute."

Playboy has a bad habit of labeling those who he can't win an argument with.

 

[Jamie6.5]

I know Trlsmn, obfuscation and misdirection. I swear he's plugged in to Dem party headquarters.
It's as bad as what they do in the press!

 

[Trlsmn]

Originally Posted by cameronhu
Something about people in glass houses and stone throwing comes to mind.

Yes, but more than that (when neo-con mouthpieces start chanting) I just hear..."goosestep...goosestep...goosestep...salute...goosestep...goosestep...goosestep...salute."

What's funny here is that I don't think Playboy realizes to whom cameronhu was referring to.

 

[cameronhu]

What's funny here is that I don't think Playboy realizes to whom cameronhu was referring to.

My point here, is that if one is serious about obtaining an apology on the grounds of name calling, one shouldn't be calling others names. Kind of a "do unto others thing," if you catch my drift.

 

[Jamie6.5]

My point here, is that if one is serious about obtaining an apology on the grounds of name calling, one shouldn't be calling others names. Kind of a "do unto others thing," if you catch my drift.

Okay Hu. Show me. Show me/us one time in this thread where I called you or PP or anyone a name.
I never even referred to the left as whackos. But I have put up with you and the playboy spewing hateful names for the right wing.
Yes I have pointed out that Dems tend to be leftist and gun banners.
Show me different.

I have put up with references from PP about my and others inability to grasp legalities etc. As if only his and your superior(sic) minds can understand the law etc. Even when you both have been proven wrong. The condescension has been thick at times, but not by me.
Show me where I called you anything derogatory.

SHOW ME!

And when you are done with that, would you like to try and refute anything I said in that post?
Or is ridicule your only response?

 

[Trlsmn]

And when you are done with that, would you like to try and refute anything I said in that post?
Or is ridicule your only response?

Or <gasp> apologize for the groundless accusation.

My point here, is that if one is serious about obtaining an apology on the grounds of name calling, one shouldn't be calling others names. Kind of a "do unto others thing," if you catch my drift.

The problem is the left always wants to use fairness and logic when it suits them, when it proves them wrong they resort to name calling and labeling.

 

[PlayboyPenguin]

I have put up with references from PP about my and others inability to grasp legalities etc. As if only his and your superior(sic) minds can understand the law etc. Even when you both have been proven wrong. The condescension has been thick at times, but not by me.
Show me where I called you anything derogatory.

You see...the thing is that it is not slander if it is true. Simply pointing out that you are just spouting baseless rhetoric with no factual basis is not slander or name calling.

So far all you have done is make assumptions and use Feinstein as a source of information while ignoring reality. You want to try and portray Feinstein as typical of the left which is just dishonest. The fact that you want to continue that tactic and then pretend you are being attacked when someone points it out is also typical...typical neo-con tactics.

You want to accuse people of labeling you that is fine. But when the label fits and your behavior supports it you have to expect it and not whine about it. When it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck...

PS: When someone accuses you of ignorance (not the worst thing in the world) stating you are older than them does not address nor dismiss the charge. It simply means you just may be "old" and ignorant. I would come up with a better "appeal to authority" than simply stating the year you started voting.

 

[Trlsmn]

You see...the thing is that it is not slander if it is true. Simply pointing out that you are just spouting baseless rhetoric with no factual basis is not slander or name calling.

Did you miss where proof was shown, would you like me to point it out?

So far all you have done is make assumptions and use Feinstein as a source of information while ignoring reality. You want to try and portray Feinstein as typical of the left which is just dishonest. The fact that you want to continue that tactic and then pretend you are being attacked when someone points it out is also typical...typical neo-con tactics.

Proof is not an assumption, proof was show, would you like me to point it out?

You want to accuse people of labeling you that is fine. But when the label fits and your behavior supports it you have to expect it and not whine about it. When it looks like a duck...

You sure look like a duck to me!


Cherry picking!

Why don't you quote a post and then break it down?