Senate to Vote on Anti-gun Kook for 'Regulatory Czar'

[CEF1959]

If the Monkey comment offends you I'm sorry. It was not meant to be an insult. I have a strange sense of humor.

I don't know enough about Cass Sunstein to make the case of Kookery or not Kookery. I do not agree with his philosophies about animal rights, gun control, or hunting. I'm not happy he's been appointed nope.

Not RED vs BLUE
Quit hating

See no Monkey this time. I trust you can comprehend this version?

Apology accepted. Thanks. Understood in the context you've explained it, it was fine.

And I don't think most of us are hating here, just tussling vigorously because it's stuff we care about. Like my dad used to say, "If you can't pee in the tall grass with the big dogs, get back on the porch with your momma."

But your reminder to keep it civil is a good one.

 

[Trlsmn]

So you didn't mean to call me a "typical leftist". You were merely inquiring whether I was going to be a typical leftist without intending to suggest I actually was one?

Really? OK. If that's your story, I'll accept it. If that's your point, I'll go with it and thank you for the clarification.

If that is your position, I'll go dig up the threat and racist thingy. OK?

Other than correcting "So you didn't mean to" to "I didn't", Bingo you got it right!

 

[CEF1959]

Ok, I'll accept that retraction. Thanks. But the suggestion that you didn't mean to suggest I was a "typical leftist" is not honest, and you know it. It's clear from the context. Why else would you have used that term. Anyway...

Here's one thread with a threat at #42. Note he not only warns me that it wouldn't be a good idea to show up at an NWFA event ("I'm just sayin'" he warns), but refers to the White House as "the black house" now that Obama is there. Nice.

http://www.northwestfirearms.com/forum/showthread.php?t=11237

You, Sparky, chimed in a few posts down and piled on with one of your usual well-thought out posts. But, tellingly, you had nothing bad to say about the threatening or racist comment of your colleague. You seemed pretty supportive of that whole line of posts. Hmm. Wanna explain that?

And when I pointed out the threatening and racist remarks at #56, the mods closed the thread almost immediately. And rightly so. That kind of stuff is just way beyond the pale.

Then there are the usual well-wishers, like Frog who said here in the past week that I should get on a bicycle "and ride out in heavy traffic." Nice. You can find that one yourself.

But no one here is an extremist kook. That's just a term reserved for respected scholars with whom people disagree on policy issues.

 

[gunnoob75]

Wow.

That's not even close to a physical threat.

And painting the whitehouse black? That's Racist? I mean, it's not like "Good" and "Evil" are represented by Black and White, or anything like that.

Geeze, you're the only kook here.

 

[CEF1959]

Get real. What planet do you live on? You don't think that was intended as a warning? What, you think he was saying I might have to buy my own beer if I showed up? Someone might fail to introduce himself if I showed up? Baloney. He knew what he was saying, I knew what he was saying, and so did everyone else: If you show, you might be hurt. That was the intended message, understood by all.

And calling the White House "the black house" now that Obama is there is OK with you? Really? Not racist at all? Whoa nelly.

And it's OK to tell a guy to get on a bicycle and ride out in heavy traffic? What is that, a wish for good exercise? Um no.

If you believe those things, duly noted. If you don't think that's dangerous, kooky stuff, feel free to say so. Try sending those messages to the White House website. Enjoy the visit from the Secret Service.

 

[gunnoob75]

What the **** is wrong with you?

No, he wasn't threatening you. You're full of too much bubblegum. It means not a damn person is going to be nice to you, no one is going to converse with you, and no one is gonna want you to sit with them. That is in no way physical violence.

The word "black" does not always mean skin color, you bubbleguming ignorant hillary-clinton wanna-be. I want a black T-shirt. I'm wearing a black t-shirt. You're a black hearted buffoon. Get real, dude. And grow up.

CEF: "You obviously need to grow up, with the language you're using..."

Adults can use bad words too. So don't even say it.


Edit: I apologize, Wichaka. But it needed to be said. I accept the consequences of my actions.

 

[CEF1959]

What the **** is wrong with you?

No, he wasn't threatening you. You're full of too much bubblegum. It means not a damn person is going to be nice to you, no one is going to converse with you, and no one is gonna want you to sit with them. That is in no way physical violence.

The word "black" does not always mean skin color, you bubbleguming ignorant hillary-clinton wanna-be. I want a black T-shirt. I'm wearing a black t-shirt. You're a black hearted buffoon. Get real, dude. And grow up.

CEF: "You obviously need to grow up, with the language you're using..."

Adults can use bad words too. So don't even say it.


Edit: I apologize, Wichaka. But it needed to be said. I accept the consequences of my actions.

One can see through the two auto-edit "bubblegums" by using the "quote" function. That was really inappropriate and didn't "need to be said." It has nothing to do with being an adult, but everything to do with being normal and civil.

What would you say about Cass Sunstein if he posted the message you just did? See why I keep saying that referring to him as a kook is ironic?

 

[gunnoob75]

Of COURSE the white house will take it as a race thing. Because the LEFTISTS love to play the race card.

Just like you are doing!

Wow, coincidence.

 

[CEF1959]

Still think University of Chicago Professor Cass Sunstein is the kook?

 

[Trlsmn]

http://www.northwestfirearms.com/forum/showthread.php?t=11237

You, Sparky, chimed in a few posts down and piled on with one of your usual well-thought out posts. But, tellingly, you had nothing bad to say about the threatening or racist comment of your colleague. You seemed pretty supportive of that whole line of posts. Hmm. Wanna explain that?

#1: 1959, quit while you're behind and I wouldn't suggest coming to an NWFA Meet and Great after starting this thread! You might not like how you are treated. Just sayin'

That's not a threat though it's easy to grab onto and be used for your agenda! It does show a lack of tolerance and it's not the way I treat someone of a differing opinion. I do not and would not condone that statement so to group me as a party to that statement is in error as you will never see me posting or endorsing such as that!

And when I pointed out the threatening and racist remarks at #56, the mods closed the thread almost immediately. And rightly so. That kind of stuff is just way beyond the pale.

That is exactly how I would have handled it if I was in the same position as the mods. I must ask how do you know he wasn't admonished by the mods in private? For the record that racist remark was in bad taste by my standards and has no place here but I'm not in a position to make policy here

Then there are the usual well-wishers, like Frog who said here in the past week that I should get on a bicycle "and ride out in heavy traffic." Nice. You can find that one yourself.

Again it's not a threat to ask someone to kindly FOAD it's more of a suggestion. It's on the same level as your calling the general membership here Kooks and Taliban. So if you are criticizing Frog I suggest you also turn it inward!

But no one here is an extremist kook. That's just a term reserved for respected scholars with whom people disagree on policy issues.

I can't help but point out that in doing a search you have used that word more than every other member combined. Just sayin"

 

[CEF1959]

Tell you what, write to www.whitehouse.gov with this message:

"Mr. President: quit while you're behind and I wouldn't suggest coming to our meeting of gun owners after what you have said. You might not like how you are treated. Just sayin'."

See how that goes. If the Secret Service doesn't contact you, I'll agree on this board that such a message is not a threat and pay you $20. If, as you say, such a message is no threat, it should be easy pickings.

Deal?

And yes, there are a lot of kooks on here. There, I said the word again. I just can't help myself. Kook. See? I can't stop. Kooky. Dang, it's like having a bad case of the hiccups. Kook. See? I gotta get a glass of water or something. It's kooky. Maybe if I eat a cookie, that will help

 

[Trlsmn]

Tell you what, write to www.whitehouse.gov with this message:

"Mr. President: quit while you're behind and I wouldn't suggest coming to our meeting of gun owners after what you have said. You might not like how you are treated. Just sayin'."

See how that goes. If the Secret Service doesn't contact you, I'll agree on this board that such a message is not a threat and pay you $20. If that message is no threat, it should be easy pickings.

Deal?

And yes, there are a lot of kooks on here. There, I said the word again. I just can't help myself. Kook. See? I can't stop. Kooky. Dang, it's like having a bad case of the hiccups. Kook. See? I gotta get a glass of water or something. It's kooky. Maybe if I eat a cookie, that will help

Not sure who you're addressing this post to so I don't know how to comment. You're comparing Apples and Oranges anyway. Since the president wasn't personally involved in the whole discussion the statement would be out of context so your point is not relevant.

 

[CEF1959]

Not sure who you're addressing this post to so I don't know how to comment. You're comparing Apples and Oranges anyway. Since the president wasn't personally involved in the whole discussion the statement would be out of context so your point is not relevant.

It was addressed to you. Is that a chicken I hear?

 

[Trlsmn]

It was addressed to you. Is that a chicken I hear?

Not sure what you mean by that? I did address the facts of your post though, feel free to comment on that.

 

[CEF1959]

No, I'm saying if you thought the "threat" against me wasn't a threat, send a similar message to the White House and see how they perceive it. If they say it's no problem, I'll admit I was wrong and give you $20. If you think you are right that should be an easy 20 bucks. Plus you get the pleasure of my having to admit that I was wrong and you were right.

Of course, if you are wrong and I am right (really really unlikely), you get a visit from the Secret Service.

So, Sparky, whatcha say? Got the stones? Or are you just all talk?

 

[Trlsmn]

No, I'm saying if you thought the "threat" against me wasn't a threat, send a similar message to the White House and see how they perceive it. If they say it's no problem, I'll admit I was wrong and give you $20. If you think you are right that should be an easy 20 bucks. Plus you get the pleasure of my having to admit that I was wrong and you were right.

I'm saying there is a difference because you need to take the thread as a whole and remove your name and insert Barak Obama in place of your posts and then what was said was relevant.

To compare my above example and some one anonymously sending what you wrote out of the blue to the White house are not the same thing so Apples and Oranges, aka your example has no relevance and thus it doesn't make your point of proof of a threat!

Of course, if you are wrong and I am right (really really unlikely), you get a visit from the Secret Service.

So, Sparky, whatcha say? Got the stones?

Do you? It's your idea! run with it!

Or are you just all talk?

That's your talk! I back my own plays!

 

[gunnails]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LsRK3DNoa_Q

 

[gunnoob75]

CEF, you can post whatever you want, Chief.

Just don't take things out of context.

 

[CEF1959]

Trlsmn: Cluck cluck cluck.

Sorry to call you out on your manhood, but you demanded we discuss threats.

 

[Trlsmn]

Cluck cluck cluck.

You don't know me very well!