what utter rubbish. how much beer and booze do you drink? what’s the difference if you use alcohol or pot to distort reality? and what’s wrong with using either to calm down from a day at work and a long drive home in rush hour traffic? conservatives believe that, if you want to smoke pot, do it as long as you don’t hurt anybody in the process. it’s the govt’s war on its own people who cause the danger by keeping it illegal. if it could be bought from the liquor store, juan down the street wouldn’t be selling it.

Obviously, a liberal. I made an observation, you discounted my comment as if it were trash (rubbish). You no doubt are someone I am glad I do not know in “real life”

I am blessed

Oh, I forgot to mention, you attacked my personal character and my ability to deal with reality. Obviously, a self righteous, sanctimonious, arrogant liberal has spotted an opportunity.

Joseph Goebbles, Reich Minister of Propaganda for Adolph Hitler said:

“If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it. The lie can be maintained only for such time as the State can shield the people from the political, economic and/or military consequences of the lie. It thus becomes vitally important for the State to use all of its powers to repress dissent, for the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, the truth is the greatest enemy of the State.”

Paul Lundgren said: “It has always been interesting to me how easy it is to spread a rumor and build or destroy someone’s reputation. It’s as easy as opening your mouth or moving your fingers.

I say that if you can convince enough people that grass is purple, though it take generations of repeating the lie, then grass becomes purple because it is accepted to be so by more people than it is not. Any one who insists that grass is green (no doubt a conservative) can be branded as a colorophobic bigot. He or she can then be marginalized, ostracized, criticized for a fool, persecuted, and eventually even murdered for their view, should the majority decide that colorophobics should be killed.

This is the bedrock assumption and principle of socialism, Nazism, Communism, Totalitarianism and any other political system wherein the people are not free to think. Liberals love it because it relieves them of the necessity of thought or responsibility for individual conceptualizing.

As one liberal hero, Martin Luther King Jr. noted: “Nothing pains some people more than having to think.”

We don’t wnat them exterminated, we just want them to go home. Barring that, THEY need to stop their incessant push for Shariah law. If they want to live here, then accept OUR laws and culture. BTW, I notice you don’t/won’t give Christians the same latitude. Flashy speaks from both sides of his mouth. Soon, you will have to come down off your lofty perch on the fence. Which side of the fence will you come down on?

ValDM…so i don’t err in responding to what you are asking….clarify what you’re meaning when you say I don’t give the same latitude to christians.

Every time someone responds that we need to get on our knees and pray to the God of our fathers (which I firmly believe), you always have something quite nasty to say about it. I’ve been reading your posts for more than 6 months, and you’ve made yourself quite evident in your leanings. Pro-Mulim; Anti-Christian. I’ve seen it more times than I can count. If you say it often enough, the meaning becomes clear, and your meaning has become as clear a crystal.

Actually Val, I poitnt out the fallacies of the religion being used as a supporting argument foisting a policy of behavior upon the rst of the non member population. And by non member, i speak of those who are not the sect which the writer blongs to…not just the overall religion. If a Muslim was doing the same, my response would be similar. If a Hindu was doing the same, my response would be similar.

What someone holds as a personal belief is their private concern. When they wear it on thier sleeve so to speak, and state I should submit simply because it’s what they believe…ain’t gonna happen. Same as if they try and change history using thier own religious dogma to try and subvert the facts.

Ever read The Rise and Fall of the Roman Empire by Gibbons? You know it’s a reference book used by almost all who study history right? though some parts are challenged from time to time as more comes to light, even after over 100 years it still remains the most cited reference when dealing with the Roman Empire.

Know what gibbons states as the two primary reasons for the fall of the Empire? And not the gradual fall, it went from being as large as the US in trritory and three armies to losing those great armies and the western part in less than 100 years. He cited Barbariansim as one reason…the constant pressure from without. He also cited Christianity. Because Christianity…of all the large religions, punsihes independent philosophical thinkingand replaces it with a blessing upon ignorance and belief in a supernatural being providing answer to all. It replaces free thought and variety with a demand for adherence to ancient fables ad rejectio of anything not in agreement with its monotheistic religious tenets. And they push those tenets on all who are not of the faith.

Yes…Islam does much of the same, but I have yet to be told I must adhere to the tenets of its followers in setting forth policy of this nation and I have yet to be told by a Muslim this nation was founded upon any sect’s religious principles.

If there was a “sharia law’ trying to be foisted upon us, I would challenge it and fight it as I do now with the “christian law’ time and again attempted to be foisted upon me. To date, any such claim that ‘sharia law’ was being attempted in ths nation has proven to be hyped fake lies.

You may believe in any belief system you choose. You may worship under any sect you desire. But do not try and foist your religious tenets and belief upon me claiming they are superior to all other thought. Do not think that attempts to create a “christian taliban nation’ is acceptable.

When was the last time you heard of a Muslim evangelist? When was the last time you heard of a Christian evangelist?

One wants a christian theocracy? fine…go somewhere in the world and knock yourself out. But don’t think implementing a theocracy here is going to be acceptable.

Believe what you may. be my guest. Don’t try and foist it upon society as the ‘true’ belief and we’ll be fine.

ValDM,
Funny thing, but most of the Muslim religious extremists just want US to go home. They want us to take our culture, our McDonalds and our Levis and let them have their own culture.

As for Sharia law, there has never been such a straw man. The U.S. is in no danger of loosing it’s identity to Sharia. Our courts are not bending over backwards and allowing Sharia to supersede our laws. We don’t turn a blind eye when a Muslim violates U.S. law in the exercise of their own. This is just one more instance of those in power using fear to keep the rest of us in our place.

Well, let’s see, there’s this:
http://www.visajourney.com/forums/topic/262224-sharia-law-comes-to-dearborn-michigan/

And this:
http://www.familysecuritymatters.org/publications/id.6719/pub_detail.asp

You should probably tell that to the fine people of Dearborn and N.Y. Sharia courts are operating in the U.S. BTW, if you didn’t get a chance to watch any of the confirmation hearings re: Kagan, you might want to look into that. She says that she would turn to Int’l law for “more insight”. Sharia law may not be on your radar, but it certainly is for many more people. If it isn’t strongly stood against now, it will be right around the corner for us all.

Read especially about the part that women are required to enter the mosque through a side door:
http://sixthcolumn.blogspot.com/2004/12/dearborn-michigan-americas-muslim.html

Liberals are a confusing breed of people to say the least. They say they are for women’s rights but then stick up for the very anti-women Muslims.
They are trying their best to rid America of Christians, but then stick up for the Muslims who seem to be involved in almost every conflict around the world.
Could it be that the pushy controlling Liberals feel a kinship with the pushy controlling Muslims?

Dave – what you said is something I had found quite the conundrum for years and years – especially the rights of women – were they only for some women and not others – I think watching and being a part of the movement years ago, then came the verbiage and examples that we were not to be involved in the rights of women elsewhere – none of our business, not our right to become involved, etc. – just that one aspect in the beginning found me more and more turned away from the left. Then it only continued with more and more illogical events after another. Just an aside – Silly it’s ok to make fun of a nun’s mode of dress, but watch your mouth with a Muslim woman.

I think as time goes on, Liberty, thanks to the Internet and Fox Business Channel (John Stossel, Judge Napolitano), more and more people are going to wake up to the twisted mindset that is possessed by Liberals. That is why they are working to control the Internet and silence Conservative Radio — too many people are waking up.
Liberals are out for power and redistribution of the wealth, and they will do and say anything to accomplish those goals.

Dave, I think perhaps you are correct in your assessment – It seems to me I had a fine nun in history class, that oftentimes said, “Girls, knowledge is power.” Loved that woman, of course, as Denniso says, we are not as educated as them. Educated they may be but are they educated?

Dave – This is one incident in this huge country out of all the incidents that happen on a daily basis. The Dearborn administration apparently is trying to keep peace by being stupid. I cannot imagine these charges will get anywhere. I do not believe this points to our country being taken over by Sharia law!

Tell that to the non-muslims in Dearborn, Karolyn.

Perhaps, isolated? However, it seems like a door has been opened more than a crack.

a large segment of the Muslim population here are American citizens. They are home!

Hey Skip,

Those Town Hall meetings were an opportunity for the public to voice their opinion of dissatisfaction with the choice of a health care bill being forced on them. If the trend of ignorance continues, look for more episodes of violence to occur as people become more disillusioned with the political system.

Truth is not “owned”. Truth “is”.

Almost time for tea. Now where is that silly cat.

“It isn’t hard to win a debate with a Liberal if you realize that their main weapons are personal attacks and fear-mongering” <– Dave H

Errr DaveH… tell us again what arguments you've won? Those you refuse to answer or stomp off after pouting like a child? That kind of "win"?

A good debate with a Conservative brings out the best of both sides. Any debate with an extremist wacked right winger brings out the fun as they sputter and foam when their 'facts' are exposed as being made up lies programmed into their simplistic minds….

Flashdunce, I wouldn’t even think for a moment that you would think I won any debate with you. A person has to have a modicum of intelligence to know they’ve lost. You don’t.

HFlashman writes:
“…as they sputter and foam when their ‘facts’ are exposed as being made up lies programmed into their simplistic minds…”

Projecting again I see.

OOOH…or should I say ouch?LOL!

Well said, DaveH. And we also must not be afraid to face the truth, whatever that is. If we are not willing to confront the bogyman at the door, he will destroy us.

What most often happens is, when we face the monster head on, he turns out not to be as big as we feared.

never try to teach a pig to sing. it’s a waste of time and it annoys the pig.

LOL.

The spirit that was freed through abortion is free to come back if it so desires – reincarnation.

you have some proof of this “reincarnation”?

Ah so it’s ok to perform abortions apparently via Carolyn – cause the spirit can reincarnate. You good with that Vicki? Now if we can only talk to one of those reincarnated souls and get the real scoop.

Does Karolyn have some proof of this thing “spirit”?

There is much more to be found online, but this story is one that is particularly striking. The boy, who at 2 was particularly interested in planes, and as he got older, it became apparent that he knew a lot more than he should with no previous instruction, turning out to be the reincanation of a downed pilot during WWII.

http://abcnews.go.com/Primetime/Technology/story?id=894217&page=1

I also have a dear friend who regressed her son through hypnotism to past lives.

One can never prove the existence of a spirit or soul, but one just KNOWS it exists.

and how do we “know” it reincarnates?

vicki vicki vicki – you just know.

Karolyn thank you for the anecdotal evidence to support re-incarnation. Now why do we have the right to deprive the spirit of the body it selected? This also tends to support the argument that a child is a child from conception since the spirit of that “child” already exists, already has free will and already has selected that woman to be the birth mother.

I’m sorry I’m being silly with Karolyn. I have no recollections of dying before so I don’t remember any of the truths about these things. And I do look forward to that part of dying – the knowing.

Vicki – that was an excellent comment. Your posts are always impressive – that one is a good one to ponder.

Vicki – We all, as spirit, create our own lives, even to the spirit that is freed through abortion. That spirit is freed to come back if it so wishes.

Karolyn says:
“Vicki – We all, as spirit, create our own lives, even to the spirit that is freed through abortion. That spirit is freed to come back if it so wishes.”

So why is it ok to free the spirit against its will when it is inside the mother but NOT ok to free YOUR spirit against your will while you sit there?

libertytrain thank you.

I DO have freedom over my own body. However the child has freedoms too. There are 2 of us in this question. Did anyone ask the child?

Vicki..define when an embryo becomes a “child” …

That is a VERY good question and shows that you DO think. Though some here have their doubts. Now I ask you, when indeed does a collection of cells become a child?

Until we have an accurate way of determining that I STRONGLY recommend we err on the side of caution and go with abstinence and adoption and forget about abortion.

Vicki – Here’s how I see it, for what it’s worth.

The Spirit of God issues forth continually. It is Life Itself. If Life is present, God is present, as the two cannot be separate.

Solomon, the wisest man to ever live according to the Bible said the spirit enters into the child in the womb.

And there is nothing wrong with death. Why does everybody think that death is such a terrible thing?

Death isn’t a terrible thing when it’s a natural event. It’s the natural culmination of life. But your conversation seems to be on an abortion thread – why not kill all then since death isn’t a bad thing.

As I replied above, we all create our own lives. When we “die”, it is our own creation.

By that logic, it was ok for the shooter in Tucson to kill those adults and child because they had planned on dying at that moment in time. Too many holes in that concept for me.

Karolyn – And you mock ME for saying things you deem unprovable.

Sheesh.

JKO,
My conscience is clear, thank you.
Hitler and Stalin were never right in any sense of the word, just liberal wishful thinking.

Ok Michael, here’s a fair qustion. If neither Hitler or Stalin were Right wing dictators…whom in history would you say were?

Well Flash for all of your alledged brilliance it would seem you can’t quite grasp the base concept.

Far right = -(ANARCHY,)-
FAR LEFT = ++

So how odd is it there is no leader when total ANARCHY exist.

Yet under complete and total CONTROL we have both
“NAZI and MARXIST” rule.

People don’t respond to this FREAK of Nature, do yourselfs a big favor any of them that have such mindless post are bought and paid for..
Unlike you whom he is working very hard to inflame, why he makes more $$$$$ when you respond to his mindless rants.

Just stop responding, Can I make that anymore clear to you all?

Seriously Time? you can’t cite a Right wing dictator in all of history? And you say not to take me seriously when you can’t grasp the simple concepts of political ideology????

Time…hear that calling in the background? That’s your mama saying to get home because it’s time to change your diaper. Come back when you grow up.

HFlashman,
Nuts!

Michael…care to explain? I have no knowledge of any Right wing dictator named ‘Nuts’. Or is that what you’re saying since you were called on your stance?

You can’t even asnwer the question…and you expect someone to think of you as an intelligent person? Jeesh ….

Flash makes my point abundantly clear yet again.

There truly is no cure for aggressively stupid.

So hows that alleged trucking Biz of yours going Bubba?

Hitler and Stalin were both Socialists. We have provided referential proof to that time after time. But Flashdunce and JKO are determined to turn the facts upside down with, as usual, no proof whatsoever. This folks, is Liberalism at its finest.
What will they try to convince us of next? That taxes are a figment of our imagination? That the Federal Debt (now $14 Trillion) is a figment of our imagination?

HFlashman says:
“Ok Michael, here’s a fair qustion. If neither Hitler or Stalin were Right wing dictators…whom in history would you say were?”

There were none for the political spectrum we look to the dimension of 0 government to total government. The claim of right wing with respect to hitler, stalin etc are disinformation for the purpose of deliberate confusion.

In the proper spectrum (0-100% government) we find that ALL of the dictators are on the 100% side. That people of the time called them left or right or up or down is irrelevant.

Here is a lesson for those wishing to become wiser.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N4r0VUybeXY

MichaelJ,

Right wing dictators:

Franco, Hitler, Ghenghis Khan, Idi Amin, Vlad the Impaler, Caesar, Pinochet, Clive of India, King George, Mussolini, Victor Emanuel III, King Louis, Marie Antonteette, KAISER bill, Salazaar, Greek millitary dictators, Turkish dictators, National Party of South Africa, King Leopold, Hirohito, Caligula, Tamerlane, Kings of Saudi Arabia, Kings of Nepal, Sueharto, Kaing Kai Chek, Argentna;s millitary dictators, Pakistan army regimes, Atilla the Hun, Kings of Bulgaria, Brazlian army regime, Marcos, Charles I, James VI, Petain, Diaz, Mobutu, Horthy, Ottoman Sultans, King Herod, Ivan the terrible, Tsar Nicholas, Manchu emperors. Chin Emperors, Shoguns, Austrian Emperors, Karl Von Hapsburg, Phillip of Spain, Elizabeth I, Henry VIII, Bloody Mary, Napoleon III, The Bourbons, The Yuogoslav kings, Romanian kings, Nero, Somoza, Ashante kings, Iranian shahs, The King of Thailand, Dutch royal family, Elizabeth Bathory

Coal miner writes:

“Right wing dictators:” followed by a long list. I ask. Any supporting evidence? Start by defining right wing.

Vocki, LOL! Thought I’d mention that reading your comments is a real pleasure, you are a real asset to this blogsite as are so many others…you always manage to “hit ‘em ‘tween the eyes” with facts.

OOPS…Vicki…

There goes Dave H. again turning the facts upside down. You repeat your B.S. so much you actually believe it.

DaveH says:
“But Flashdunce and JKO are determined to turn the facts upside down with, as usual, no proof whatsoever.”

then Eddie47D says:
“There goes Dave H. again turning the facts upside down.”

I begin to see why people think Eddie47d is a parrot.

Thanks JeffH.

Putting Dave in his place,right where he belongs,so many hypocrites so little time!

HFashman,

Leftwing and rightwing dictatorship:

In fact dictatorship dates to dawn of civilization and left ideas are pretty modern. So 99% of dictatorships in history (yep, starting from ancient Greek tyrannies till Hitler, Franco and then to numerous modern days military juntas. And off course Saddam was right wing).
Right wing leader uses brute force of loyal troops and police. Rightwing dictatorships favor cult of power, nationalism and sometimes even nazi ideas.
Leftist, while often also making good use of police state, rely on utopias of social equality (unthinkable before industrial era, though Plato and Aristotle imagined ideal societies, none have blamed slavery). So in left-wing dictatorship people are sacrificing their comfort, freedom and even lives in the name of magnificent dream. So prison is in minds, no reason in oppressing everyone, just imprison or execute those who dare to doubt ideology.
Left tyranny is very close to theocracy, thats why communism must be atheistic, religion is competing for souls of people (alternative brainwasher). Though religion is about happiness in afterlife, while communism is about happiness in this mortal realm, but for other generation (so people sacrifice themselves for their grandchildren).

It looks like lots of people here are completely ignorant. Thats sad, “ignorance is power” (for tyrants) as saying from 1984 goes.

Is that the humble opinion of your Leftist college professor?That socialists like Hitler and Stalin were right wing?Socialism is Leftist to its very core.It is a brainchild of Engels and Marx.Simon and Owen had these things firmly in mind,but it was Marx,and Engels that made them manifest in modern culture.These men were purely leftist in every sense of the word.Hitler and Stalin were offshoots of the same branch regardless of their personal feelings on the matter.Some nut-case college professor has clouded your mind with lies.And like so many others you have chosen to believe them because it sounds plausible.You and your ilk are the reason for the anger that is manifest in the fabric of America today. Misinformation by ultra-educated liberals is the main symptom of the malaise in this nation.Its eventual outcome is for the sickness to explode in the society causing both tragedy and civil unrest,if not all out civil war.I pray that this does not happen,but the ignorance of the leftist media has made the outcome nearly unavoidable. It is truly a case of the blind leading the blind.Sad commentary on Americas future.

OK Thaw…I’ll ask the same of you as I did Michael…let’s see if you have the backbone to answer. If neither Hitler or Stalin were Right wing dictators…whom in history would you say were?

Julius Caesar,Napoleon Bonaparte,and I am certain that the list would grow as I go on.But you have very little ideas,brought forth by very little actual education.You have a college background that is tainted by leftist oversite.It is because of this that you cannot fathom the wreckage that you bring to the nation.Why do you seek to misguide others,by perpetuating lies taught to you by liars?Is it your intention to mislead others?Are you satiated by doing so?Again….the blind leading the blind.

Napoleon was interesting in where he began his plot to take over the world. He began studying as a child how to do this. His theory, I think was don’t get mad, get even.

Caesar and Napoleon….hokayyyyyy. Never studied history I take it …

Oh Mr.Lashman…do you posess a history book from the 1850′s as I do?I actually own a two book biography of Napoleon,written by someone that knew him.Someone who was not an Historian,but was there with him.Again you have clouded information which doesnt come from legitimate sources.Some quasi-elitists have educated you incorrectly.You have been duped,and you dont like the fact.Silly how when you call others out and they provide an answer that you cannot abridge their facts with idiosyncracy.You engage in treating others as you claim they treat you,but that is the tactic of your kind.Farewell my friend,see that your obscure vision gets corrected by doing your homework in real Historical context and not as a product of on-line usage.

Prove to us, Flashdunce, that Hitler and Stalin were right-wingers. You’re the one making the claim, so the onus of proof is on you.

thawtmonger, you are wrong. Flashdunce has not been duped. He knows damn well what the truth is. He just prefers not to speak it. He is a typical Liberal misinformer, and obviously feeds at the trough. Why else would he try so hard to spread his Liberal lies?

LOL…I find it laughable that a few state Hitler and Stalin were not Right wing dictators…and the only “right wing dictators’ anyone has cited so far are Caesar and Bonaparte. LMAO at that one. How about Idi ? Or the Shah? Or Khomeni? Or Duvalier? Somosa? Franco? Mussilini? Batista? Suharto? Allende? Any of those maybe?

I find it laughable, Flashdunce, that you continue to state your claims even though you have proven time and again that you have no credibility. Try some references, since you word means nothing to us.

This is important enough that I shall answer the question again here

HFlashman says:
“OK Thaw…I’ll ask the same of you as I did Michael…let’s see if you have the backbone to answer. If neither Hitler or Stalin were Right wing dictators…whom in history would you say were?”

What the people called the tyrants, left, right, up, down is irrelevant. In the proper spectrum (0-100% government) we find that ALL of the dictators are on the 100% side.

Here is a lesson for those wishing to become wiser.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N4r0VUybeXY

Flashman; I proved to Dave H. on a previous day why Hitler was a right winger and he is still blowing smoke. His silliness get’s rather boring after a while.

DaveH – It’s the liberal way. Repeat a lie enough times and they think it will become true.

While I won’t argue about Hitler being either right or left Stalin was definately left in fact he was far left.

Vicki says:
Your comment is awaiting moderation.
January 13, 2011 at 3:04 am

eddie47d says:
“Flashman; I proved to Dave H. on a previous day why Hitler was a right winger and he is still blowing smoke.”

Actually you did no such thing. We have however offered plenty of evidence that Hitler was a left wing liberal socialist. That you continue to ignore our evidence is evidence that your mind is not as open as you claim.

Here we shall do it again.
http://democraticpeace.wordpress.com/2009/05/23/hitler-was-a-socialist/

Of course the entire argument is meaningless since left, right, up, down are not at all well defined but one thing IS very nice and objectively measurable. 0-100% government. In this political view left and right wing are not what is important. The amount of government and what restrictions placed on government abuse of power is.
In this view it doesn’t matter if the government is called left wing or right wing. All that matters is how much and what protections.

My bad that I put 2 links in one post. Moderators feel free to delete the post with 2 links

Here is the link to the explanation of 0-100% government and where hitler falls on it.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N4r0VUybeXY

That’s at least the 4th time that video has been posted and although a good one it certainly doesn’t prove that Hitler was left wing by any stretch. There are several comparisons of American right wingers to Hitlers behavior so it would actually be better if his name wasn’t even brought up. It’s been used and abused by everyone whether left or right.

DaveH,

Hitler hated socialism and communism,he called it a Jewish invention.George lincoln Rockwell was once asked was he a leftest.He went ballistic,he said he never was on the side left,but on the right.He even challenge Robert Welch to duel for calling him a communist.Write to American Nazi party and they will give you the same answer.He was an extreme rightwinger

HFlashman,

FBI Report:

Attacks committed by people who favor individual freedoms over governmental regulation are classified as right-wing domestic terrorism. Such extremists may be motivated by issues of race, such as the Ku Klux Klan, or other issues, such as opposition to abortion or immigration. According to the FBI, right-wing terrorists often take “racist and racial supremacy and embrace antigovernment, antiregulatory” platforms. Far-right movements often blend political rhetoric with racial undertones, despite recent attempts to reach a broader audience by eliminating racial language. Authorities do not categorize people with extreme right-wing political ideals as threats unless the group they are affiliated with demonstrates a real potential for violence.

eddie47d says:
“That’s at least the 4th time that video has been posted and although a good one it certainly doesn’t prove that Hitler was left wing by any stretch.”

Very good. You actually watched the video. Now go back to the statements where it is linked and you will NOT find that I have claimed that the video proved anything about Hitler other than he was on the side of total government. And the video doesn’t actually prove even that. The video uses what we already know about Hitler to make a point about total government and how it goes by many names including but not limited to Nazism.

Now let me direct your attention to the link in the post just above.
http://democraticpeace.wordpress.com/2009/05/23/hitler-was-a-socialist/
Where much evidence IS presented to compare Hitler to Socialist.

Eddie47d: “There are several comparisons of American right wingers to Hitlers behavior…”

Since you thoughtfully neglected to provide any cites this assertion will be added to the (growing) pile of eddie47d’s fast (imaginary) facts.

Poor JKO, another victim of our public education system. Someone, please, send him an actual history book written before 1975.

It is unlikely that either JKO or Flashdunce are victims. More likely they are just practicing the Liberal method of misinformation:
http://www.newmediajournal.us/staff/fsalvato/2010/10012010.htm

Wouldn’t that be wonderful ! We can only hope. I wonder how the feds case against America’s sheriff is stacking up. As usual they will pursue it till they get the results they want. I wish we had more like him in our country.

Obama is a narcicist, and cares only about himself.

Eddie the Mindreader. He knows what both the president and Ronald are thinking. And he has the nerve to call Ronald shallow for expressing his opinion.
But then, I guess, as a Union member, Eddie has had to rationalize a lot of underhanded actions.

You seem to know what Ronald Reagan was thinking and quite a few others. It’s called opinion Dave H. so quit being the dummy. I don’t want your intelligence quotient to go down any further.

Eddie47d,

Drink some more kool-aid.

I can’t the right wing bought up all the packets.

I simply cannot understand the hate for Obama. It just baffles me. I don’t care if he went to church every day and used God in all his speeches, these people would still hate him. He is simply a human being just like everybody else, who has a family he loves and a country he is doing his best for. He may not be right in all he does, but I believe he is not just doing it for himself. I believe that any politician gets into politics for the good of the country. However, of course, so many are tainted by the Washington and lobbyists.

I simply cannot understand your hatred for Conservatives, Karolyn. Perhaps you could explain that to me.

Come on, Dave! I don’t hate anyone! I really don’t – never have.

I was mocking you, Karolyn. If you want to act like a Liberal drama queen, accusing people of being haters because they don’t like being stepped on, then expect me to treat you the same.

Karolyn never said anything about Conservatives so why are you putting words into her mouth. I thought you didn’t like that you big ol’ hypocrite. Yes,Karolyn he does that to me all the time.

No one rational hates BO. We hate his policies, his agenda, and the road he’s trying to take America down. Other than that I’d drink a beer with him, especially if he bought it.

gunner, my sentiments exactly. Well said and very true.

I do not hate Obama. I do not know him. I do not even hate his policies for I know them not.

I DO hate the policies enacted in his name and as reported in multiple news outlets both unbiased and biased.

Vicki, ditto on that.

Karolyn – Why are you libs so obsessed with hate? And how is disagreeing with him hatred?

He is destroying America. I really hate that. But, to quote Queen Hillary, “I’m sick and tired of being told that if we disagree with this administration that we are not patriotic. We are Americans, and we have the right to question and disagree with ANY administration!”

And why is it okay that there is so much hatred of Bush coming from the Left?

James…actually, it would be accurate to say some extremists want to secede from the union…a small minority of people. So it needs to be asked….how can they be viewed as ‘patriots” or considered as Americans when they want to dissolve the union?

Our loyalty is to the Constitution not to a Federal Gvt. that constantly violates it.

Gunner…which Constitution? The one you think or the real one? Because whatever you’re thnking is not even close to the reality of our Constitution.

Here is the Constitution (which all government officials swear to uphold):
http://www.cato.org/constitution/constitution_en.html

For those who don’t take Flashdunce’s word for it (that is anybody with half-a-brain).

Dave….then why do you keep citing references and saying things in re: ‘the constitution’ which has no bearing on what the SCOTUS rulings define our Constitution as stating/meaning?

Unlike you, Flashdunce, I give people references to back up what I claim. You should try it, since you have no credibility on this board.

HFlashman’s proofs by bald assertion are rather droll.

I bet Gunners understanding of the Constitution is closer to reality then HFlashmans. I can use only their understanding of the 2nd Amendment to tell . I could question both to list for me what enumerated rights are granted to the people by the Constitution but that is too easy.

I could question both to list for me what enumerated rights are granted to the people by the Constitution but that is too easy. <—Vicki

Go ahead. If you include the Bill of Rights only? Or the Consitution without the Amendments? Or the entire document as amended?

Under the first fourteen, known as the Bill of Rights…we have five enumerated. But we should not forget the Ninth, which Justice Douglas in his concurring opinion in Roe v Wade stated we have Rights thereunder, not detailed in the Constitution and as yet undetermined, but which are present.

Which for me is a very interesting point. I think if he did not rule the 14th to be the determinant area in his decision of Roe v Wade, he would have found the Right as given through the Ninth.

Now Brandeis and Learned Hand both hinted that the Ninth may be more than boilerpalte by stating there is nothing in the Constitution that is meaningless…but Douglas to date is the oly one to state that the Ninth has meaning which may be far reaching and perhaps the most sweeping of all within the Constitution in determining the extent of what Rights we have.

Now if you want to open up the discussion as to what some past decisions discussed what may be within the Constitution but as yet undecided…especially if you talk about Brandeis in his opinions especially concerning Speech and Privacy, and Cardozo when dealing with the 10th …

So when you decide to ask Vicki…be certain to detail if you mean the Constitution as amended, as it stood prior to amendment etc.

BTW Vicki…since I don’t believe I have ever enumerated what I believe the 2nd stands for, your statement as basing your opinion on what we (gunner and I) may see as it standing for is somewhat …well…uninformed.

But for laughs, why don’t you go ahead and tell me what I believe the 2nd Amendment holds and why it is in the Constitution.

HFlashman writes:
“I could question both to list for me what enumerated rights are granted to the people by the Constitution but that is too easy. <—Vicki

Go ahead. If you include the Bill of Rights only? Or the Consitution without the Amendments? Or the entire document as amended?"

HFlashman: "So when you decide to ask Vicki…be certain to detail if you mean the Constitution as amended, as it stood prior to amendment etc."

I would of course mean this instance in time which thus would mean the entire Constitution including all amendments as they are TODAY since there are amendments which have also been repealed.

Shall I take the rest of what you wrote to be your answer to my simple question?

HFlashman asks me:
“But for laughs, why don’t you go ahead and tell me what I believe the 2nd Amendment holds and why it is in the Constitution.”

It is not my place to put words in your mouth so why don’t you tell us what you believe about the 2nd Amendment, its meaning, and why it is in the Constitution. You did say on January 12, 2011 at 10:00 am:

“I’m not anti 2nd Amendment..but quite honestly if i lived next door to half the posters on this board, I’d be mighty worried for the safety and well being of my family knowing these folks pack armor.”

There is a hint of what your opinion may be. Feel free to elucidate.

That is the biggest load of double-speak that I have seen from Flashdunce yet. And that is exactly why I posted the link to the Constitution, so that anybody can easily see that Flashman’s comments are a load.
Don’t buy a used car from that man.

I believe Flashdunce thinks he is impressing us. Yeah, he did. That was an impressive display of a true BS artist.

Flashypants doesn’t even know the Bill of Rights is the first TEN amendments not the first fourteen.

Oh…again Mr. Lashman,you mean the one that separates church from state?You mean the one that gives lawbreakers the right to be conducting their unborn children into our nation,and then considered citizens?Which Constitution do you believe in?This shooting was not the result of mental issues,it was the result of “govern”mental issues.The guy didnt start aiming at just anyone.He sought out a politician,and ended up with a federal judge.If that isnt political,then I dont know what is.It seems to me that it is possible that he was angry at Miss Gifford.A politician,I might add.Now there is a following of trying to dissuade political discouse in the wake of a political shooting!How arrogant are those in the media to try to claim this man is insane?He is an assassin.He shot a politician with the intention of bringing about her demise.What wing of the spectrum he came from is irrelevant.He is a micro-cosm of todays America.On the fringe of dissolvence is where we stand.And the leaders we have been forced to choose from are sorely lacking in solutions to our dilemna.Wake up you sleeping society!This is merely the beggining,not the outcome.Politicians would have you believe that this is the public’s illness…what a lie!It is a direct reflection of their ill-fated choices to ignore the opinions of the citizenry.Now they seek to point the finger at us!I do not advocate violence of any kind,yet I am finally disposed to comment on the reality of the situation.In a nation where there are tens of millions of firearms,And no army on earth can march in to confiscate them all,it would seem like insanity has taken hold of governmental senses.It is indicative of their blatant disregard for reasonable thinking.They will not point the finger at Muslims which threaten the populace under religious proclivities,but they will make every citizen pay for that threat by feeling them up in the airport to ensure the safety of all!What a mockery of justice this is in our nation!Do we continue to tolerate these abuses?Is it politically correct to be complacent in the face of losing our liberties?Can we survive if we are continually foisted with this type of guilt by association?Wake up sleeping society!

Yeah, we know, Flashdunce, that you would expect people to continue playing in a game where you are breaking all the rules. If they don’t continue playing, they are “extremists” in your twisted view of the world.
Do you really think that your adolescent attempts of manipulation with labeling fall on receptive ears amongst intelligent people?

A really fun thing to do in games and debates is to ignore the other sides rule breaking. Your side breaks no rules and still beat them. Used to do that in volleyball all the time .

Vicki,
I like the idea of ignoring the misdeeds of the left. Sounds about like what happened on Nov. 2nd.

The Constitution of the United States, dummy. Not the one for the Soviet Union or Cuba which you follow.

Gunner…i never read the Cuban Constitution, though I have read the Soviet Constitution.

Interestingly enough, there was a study perfomed in the late 70′s where researchers stripped the names from the two Constitutions (US and USSR) and substituted made up names. They had two groups read the two. The group compaosed of self described Conservatives said the US Constution was ‘communist’ and decided they would prefer the USSR version to live under. The self described Liberals were just the opposite.

HFlashdance,
Again I say Nuts!

Michael, I wouldn’t classify Jared Loughner as ‘right’ or ‘left.’ From what I’ve read he’s an emotionally disturbed person, who targeted Rep. Giffords because she was admired and successful, while he was rejected by everyone who knew him and fired from almost every job he had. A high school teacher said his almost daily high-pitched shrieking, running around the classroom clutching his crotch, gave her visions of the Columbine massacre and made the hair on the back her neck stand up. ‘Right’ means insisting that Congress stay within its constitutional boundaries, while ‘left’ means abandoning the consitution and becoming evermore socialistic – government control.

No, James, both left-wingers and right-wingers (at least those in leadership positions) want bigger government. They just have different agendas. The left-wingers’ hearts bleed with other peoples’ money, and the right-wingers want to save everybody from themselves. Both agendas require the force of Big Government and neither obey the Constitution.
While the right-wingers are much more palatable to me, given that I am a hard-working, healthfood nut who is unaffected by the efforts of the right-wingers to save me from myself, they are still nevertheless contemptuous of the freedom of the citizens.
Also, one has to wonder if the Leaders on either side really believe what they say, or if they are just taking advantage of the ignorant voters to further their wealth and power. It is common for people to seek more, especially those personality types that gravitate to positions of power.

Betty – What Michael J. says is true. We are aware that Right/Left is one monster at the top.

But the Right/Left paradigm is being used by them to divide and inflame the masses. And among the masses, the Left is the vehicle this monstrous agenda is working in and from.

Further, events like these are scheduled when necessary to clamp down on those who are considering the voice of the people. Haven’t you noticed that they happen when most needed to further limit freedoms and silence the people’s voices?

Read about the game plan. It’s all in black and white, for all who want to know just what’s taking place. Spelled out in great detail.

And yet we choose to believe in random acts. Not that they don’t exist. But acts like these are a result of intense indoctrination, and they seem to be strategically placed to further an agenda.

http://www.eutimes.net/2011/01/top-us-federal-judge-assassinated-after-threat-to-obama-agenda/

Thanks, Kate. It is interesting that not much was mentioned in the news about the judge.

Funny that we have to go to the European news to get the real scoop.

Yeah…like the EU Times is a good reliable source . Might as well use the Weekly World News as well.

http://weeklyworldnews.com/headlines/26535/alien-spaceships-to-attack-earth-in-2011/

Maybe, Maybe not, Flashdunce, but one thing’s for sure — you have absolutely no credibility.

And Flashdunce, do you have any references to dispute that a federal judge was shot?
All I saw in your comment was a diversionary tactic of ridicule.

kate8, Thanks. As we see more and more coincidental “disasters”, I am just amazed at the relationships of these disasters to a particular agenda and how they seem to affect freedom and current political issues. I’m just sayin’…

LOL….and now we’re seeing the beginnings of another “hit list’ like was made up for Clinton. LOL

The problem with paranoia is that it is not proof you are safe.

OMG, Kate. They’ve interviewed classmates, teachers, whoever they could find. The facts are that this guy was NUTS! I’ve seen what he wrote. A mind like that does not need any help to end up perpetrating violent acts. If you have never lived with someone who is mentally ill, you will never understand what they are like. Why this constant blaming, blaming, blaming? why is EVERYTHING a conspiracy? The longer I continue to read on this site, the more paranoia I am seeing. I do understand where it comes from, and there are numerous possibilities that there are conspioracies; however, not everything that happens is a government related conspiracy.

Karolyn,
You said: “If you have never lived with someone who is mentally ill, you will never understand what they are like”.

Gosh Karolyn, guess I never contemplated the horrors of you living with you.

Gee! Aren’t you just the cute little 5 year old!

Karolyn – I understand what it is to deal with the mentally ill more than you can ever know.

I alson know the the mentally ill are the most easily influenced, especially if they are prone to delusions of grandeur. They make the perfect patsys.

I just don’t believe he acted on his own. Not impossible, but just because of the nature of the situation, I’m willing to bet that he had someone behind him.

Kate8,
Ever see the movie, The Manchurian Candidate?

Good point, Bruce.

Its harder to bring socialism on a united people.besides he might bag a few crackers this way! Any one think with the congress about to start on his Obama care bill and all that this American Want to be just sacrificed some people who were not that close to him, John M. Roll, helped break the one gun bill, Obama wants total European gun laws here. The Rep. Gabrielle Giffords did not vote as Obammer would have it, it is noted that Jared Lee Loughner had other government connections where he bloged, this could be put out to whip around attention and actions just as congress is about to start to help our want to be olive office holder. Look what he has sacrificed so far, it is not that much father to think he would do such to achieve his down fall of America, hell don’t sound any more insaine then there attacks on the tea party or Sarah Palin, personalty I think this sounds a lot more like what they would do!

not true!

Frothing a Liberal agenda for popularity gains in 2012, nothing more!

The point is that in all cases – right or left wing – laws that already exist are being broken. Those same laws would have been broken had we added 100 new laws. We don’t need to make more laws!!! We need to enforce the laws we have.

In AZ now we can carry a weapon on our person. Wonder how many would have died had several people been doing this on the day of this tragedy?

In point of fact, one of the tacklers of the shooter was carrying a gun. But a 33 bullet magazine was already emptied into 20 souls by the time anyone could tackle or shoot. Can any sane person tell me why anyone in this nation requires a sidearm with 33 bullets and two or three reloads? There is only one category of potential targets – not geese, not antelope, but fellow humans. Why!? Are we so degenerate as a nation that we will devolve to solving all problems with a Glock 19? We are goners as a civilization if this mentality persists an pervades. Hunting animals is perhaps OK; hunting fellow humans is not acceptable.

You obviously don’t know much about shooting, skip. When young, I had a single-shot shotgun which I could reload in less than 2 seconds. With a pocket full of shotshells, I could get off 5 rounds in about 10 seconds (accurately).
There are people out there much faster than I was. Here’s one (yeah, I know it isn’t a shotgun):
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iS9uGktUCrY

My point is that, if somebody wants to create mayhem, there’s not a whole lot we can do about it. The best we can do is to have a political system that isn’t a zero-sum game, like Socialism is (that is, for every winner there must be a loser).
With Freedom and Free Markets, anybody who wants to put in the effort can be successful. Only those, who stubbornly refuse to make any effort, would suffer. With that kind of Freedom would come a much more prosperous and happy society, thus less angry nutcases.
Vote Libertarian, For Individual Freedom, Personal Responsibility, Free Markets, and Limited Government.

http://libertarianparty.org/platform

“When young, I had a single-shot shotgun which I could reload in less than 2 seconds. With a pocket full of shotshells, I could get off 5 rounds in about 10 seconds (accurately).” <— Dave H

When I was young, I had to walk to school five miles, barefoot, knee deep snow, uphill both ways. Which is more believable than your tall tale.

You’re showing your ignorance, Flashdunce. I provided a video which shows just how fast a practiced shooter could shoot. Did you not watch it?
And please, don’t project your lack of veracity onto me.

I commented on your claim when you were young. Nothing else.

And for those who still aren’t convinced that a 30-round magazine wouldn’t be necessary for mayhem:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XXVNypPUGto

Skip, adding more regulation and eventually rendering law abiding citizens powerless to defend themselves isn’t the answer either. The more rope you give Government, the more they hang us with it, remember that!_If we allow more gun regulation, eventually the law abiding will only be left with an empty barrel. Powerless is where they want us. God gave us the rights to bear arms and Government wants to play God and take them away.

Some backup for you, Angel:
http://mises.org/journals/qjae/pdf/qjae7_3_6.pdf

Thanks for the link DaveH, I saved it to desktop!

HFlashman,

“When I was young, I had to walk to school five miles, barefoot, knee deep snow, uphill both ways”.

You and me both.

JKO,
My guess, several more. The man had a semi auto Glock with 30 ROUND CLIPS! Let’s be conservative and say that a mad man looking to hit a target and anyone around it could unload those 30 rounds in about 10 seconds. By the time anyone could react he had already done the damage. Now lets add 3 or 4 citizen shooters to the mix. They hear shots fired, turn in the direction they think the shots came from and what? They fire on the first person they see holding a gun? Maybe they pick the right target and take him out, but just as likely in a panicked crowd they get bumped or miss due to inexperience in these situations.

This isn’t Hollywood folks. Regular, untrained citizens in a crowd can not be depended on to do the work of trained police officers. Arizona may once have been in the heart of the “old west”, but those days are past. Then again, the Laws of Tombstone back in 1880s were more strict then Arizona’s current laws, so maybe they should learn a lesson here.

The only lesson I’ve learned here is that you are Dreaming. So where were those trained officers? Who brought down the suspect? How many trained officers will we have to hire to protect us from madmen?
The answer is that we can’t afford it. And if we could, how do we guarantee that those trained officers don’t become the madmen? We can’t. Shite happens.
By the way, the Distict of Columbia has by far the highest murder rate in the country and up to the recent Supreme Court decision they had the strictest gun-control in the country. How do you explain that, Liberal?
Some reality. Note that Arizona’s murder rate has actually been declining in recent years, yet their gun-control laws were very loose compared to most other states:
http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/murder-rates-nationally-and-state

Kinetic1, you realy need to get a grip on reality!

How about that sheriff in Pima county (the one on the blame the Right bandwagon) who said he would NOT enforce any laws against illegal immigration, even if Arizona’s new law was upheld by the courts.

Does that mean that we can all just ignore laws we don’t like? Not only that, but he slammed Sheriff Arpaio for enforcing the law!

I would think that if law enforcement can selectively enforce laws, we can, too. The libs just seem to want it both ways.

JiimCO
and your point being that their are no nuts on the left, this has been going on befor we were a nation and will go on as long as we are a nation, mentel illiness has no color or political backing it is a part of world history, mad people have and will do what mad men do,, kill mame and rape ,, you remimber idi amin that would kill his people put them in his freezer and cook and eat the long pigs what about hitler and hussein, as joe friday said on dragnet facts mam just the facts

Of course there are left wing nuts, anyone growing up in the 60′s would remember the various groups bombing, robbing banks and advocating the downfall of the government. We freely admit that they were wackos … it is this writer and many others that can’t admit that just maybe there are loonies on the right that hear the Palin’s, Beck’s and Limbaugh’s preach about lock and load and actually take the next step.

Did you even read Bob Livingston’s article, JiimCO? It doesn’t appear that way to me. Do you know the difference between defensive and offensive?
Bob was refuting the efforts by the Liberal Media to pin the shootings on the Conservatives. I didn’t see anywhere in his article where he was blaming the Liberals for the shootings.
Putting words in peoples’ mouths seems to me to be a common Liberal tactic.

JimCO,

What about Barry saying last year “we are going to hit them hard”, “If they bring a knife to the fight, we will bring a gun” Do those phrases ring a bell? Made by the alleged POTUS.

JimCO,
You forgot to mention the jihadist from Fort Hood. But of course you would. There are loonies everywhere (both sides of the aisle). The point of the article is that the liberal media and liberals in general have taken a tragedy and USED that tragedy for their own GAIN.

Well heaven forbid that a political party would use a tragedy to their advantage … there was a time that a republican could not get in front of a mike without invoking 9/11to push whatever agenda. What kind of country would this be today had Bush been allowed to spy on, arrest without any recourse, then rendition his own citizens?Oh wait, he already did … and you’re all worried about Obama ignoring our Constitution?

Yes, heaven forbid. NO ONE should make a profit (any kind of profit) off of death and tragedy.

Here we go with the 911 thing again. Look up the roll call votes on the Patriot Act, JiimCO. In the Senate only one Democrat voted against the Bill. In the House, Democrats did better, but still only 30% of Democrats in the House voted against the Bill.

ValDM,
Calling for a ban on 30 round magazines is not about a “Democratic agenda”, it’s about common sense. Hand guns are meant for target shooting, self defense and murder. You don’t need 30 loaded rounds to shoot a target and you’re unlikely to need 30 loaded rounds to defend yourself (if there are that many people coming after you, you have bigger problems to consider.) That leaves nuts like this guy who want to kill and wound as many people as he can. So why do we need these extended clips?

Good Grief, Kinetic. Have you ever seen how fast a skilled shooter can replace a clip? Banning high round clips would accomplish nothing. In fact, it would make the weapon much more concealable if the shooter didn’t have 4 extra inches of clip protruding from the butt of the gun.

I see you missed my point. The left got right with the program in the blame game (see Sheriff Dimwit’s comments of the same day). Then we get all the MSM talking heads doing the same blame game. I wasn’t talking about guns, I was talking about the Left’s propensity to jump on ANY opportunity/tragedy/death to spin it to look like they’re on anyone’s side but THEIR OWN. They put the spin out before the smoke had cleared. In that fashion, they PROFITED.

ValDM and before the poor dead folks were cold and the wounded were taken to the hospital.

Kinetic1,

He doesn’t need the extended clip, but it is his right to have one. Congress doesn’t need to infringe on our second amendment rights by trying to legislate gun control.Guns do not kill, mentally unstable minds do!

why do we need cars that go 120 or faster? when most of the posted speeds are at most 70, I will tell you why because that’s what the people want! and because this is the USA, NOT NORTH KOREA, OR CHINA, OR ENGLAND, IT’S CALLED FREEDOM TO CHOOSE,

Good point Steve, but wasted on Liberals. They know nothing of freedom of choice unless it’s about an unborn child.

That’s the problem the total lack of common sense! I know this sounds horrible but just maybe we’re lucky this wacko only used a handgun. What if he used that old Chevy pickup as a weapon and driven it through the crowd murdering and maiming many more people. This is an age old argument that shouldn’t be. A weapon is an object and is not inherently evil it’s the person and or intent of the use of that object that may be Judged.
I pity those of you that can’t see this.
Disarming good and free people only leads to more death and suffering.

DaveH writes:
“Good point Steve, but wasted on Liberals. They know nothing of freedom of choice unless it’s about an unborn child.”

They don’t even honor freedom of choice there. They never asked the CHILD.

Let’s see. Use Jimmco’s logic and tell me what conclusion you come to here:
New Orleans is the murder capital of the US.
There were 179 murders in New Orleans in 2009.
New Orleans population is about 300,000 people, with about 60% of the population being Black.

JimCO, nut cases are nut cases, no matter the color, creed, religion, or political affiliation. Just because I listen to O’Reilly, or Limbaugh, or Beck, does not automatically make me a redneck, KKK member, skinhead, or any other of a plethora of radical groups. Get real. However, I am armed at all times, legally, and will put a hole in anyone who tries to forcefully take my weapon, do me or mine harm, or do grave damage to anyone where I witness it. Without guns we will all be victims…

You sound like “a pot smoking leftest” also Flashman.

You’re told the facts and true state of affairs and, like a problem child throwing a tantrum….you toss back the insult. Bruce, even a problem teenager has more common sense that you display.

I have heard far more violent and hateful speech coming out of the left than the right. Get real, when Bush was in office the left was driving around with “Kill Bush” bumper stickers, making movies about killing Bush and putting out art glorifying killing Bush. Now when someone dares to question liberal policies the “hate speech” accusations are made?

BTW – what is your “proof” he was right wing? You demand proof that he was left wing, but immediately counter with him being right. I don’t know of any conservatives reading the Communist Manifesto or Mein Kampf. While there has been no substantial evidence submitted to support where he truly lies, on the surface things point to the left.

Survivor..I never have stated he was Right or Left…I stated several times he was a raving lunatic. If you think that means i’m saying he was Right wing extremist, that’s your definition of what a Right wing extremist is…

There’s no ‘on the surface’ saying he was anything..unless you want to give redence to someone saying they were ‘friends’ with a loner who had no friends or social life. (I’d say it was to get their name in the paper…or a sympathizer of the extreme Right trying to plant a label).

Finally…I highly doubt you saw any bumper stickers saying ‘kill Bush’ etc…for those will get you a visit from the Secret Service and likely a court appearance. Quit lyin’ …

Hflashman has his beliefs and does his best to present them here. We can agree with him or not. But he has never posted anything remotely violent – not even in humor – so I think that is an unfair accusation.

True conservatives can win the debate of ideas if we toss off the garbage name-calling rhetoric and also free ourselves of the agenda imposed on us by the billionaires who control the Republican party and use it for THEIR will.

A lot of people say WE THE PEOPLE here. I believe that. But is it not WE THE SHEEP: I refuse to embrace someone because of the (R) by their name and I refuse to demonize someone because of the (D) by their name. And I refuse to do these things DESPITE the actions (perceived or otherwise) of people I oppose politically.

Hflashman has his ideas of policy, we have ours. If we win the debate on ideas, we can win the elections too.

Andrew. Well stated. Reasoned debates with realistic solutions and questions will almost always come out with the better solution or compromise. I’m never afraid of debating my philosophy, reasoning, and offered solutions in a reasoned style. Your call for reasoned thought and thinking is well taken and hopefully will be followed.

Like a problem child throwing a tantrum?
You are indeed oblivious, aren’t you Flashdunce?
From sweet, innocent Flashdunce’s previous comment:
“return from the abyss of the ranting, screaming, violent and hate supported speech practiced by the extreme right.”
“The wacked Right is now saying the shooter was a leftist”
“you’re viewed as extremist lunatics who are edging towards being socially inept, cast aside as not having ideas or solutions worthy of merit or consideration, and looked upon as a group of lunatics”

Good grief, see a shrink, Flashdunce.

Dave..which statement do you disagree with?

What’s to agree or disagree with, Flashdunce? I was merely pointing out your hypocrisy.

HFlashman
thank you flashless people like you make me proud to be a tea party conseritive republican that see the word thru clear eyes and ears not the rose colored glass view you have that with out any facts to back you up this country was and is a republic ruled by the people not goverment we have laws that are not enforced by your goverment that has put us on a path to distruction,where gays and illegals have more rights then i do a goverment that steal money form the ones that earned and give it to ones did not,take my rights as a citizen and give to one that is not and have no rights,so i am an extremist so be i am in good company washington hamelton rever henry lincoln reagan

HFlashman,

Yea, damn proud!

Marvin and Bill;

If you want to be minimalized and perceived and considered as a member of an extremist fringe group and being a person who is a few fries short of a Big Mac deal…such is your right.

HFlash…Alinsky would be proud of you as would Karl.

and your point is????

Well said Steve B!

Steve B
to they that want gun control, i say move to mexico, they have it and only now the crooks have all the guns, to me gun control is take a firm grip and aim and hit what you are shooting at the only good reason to point a gun at any thing is for food or protection or practice

I wonder what EXCUSE the Liberal News Media will cook up now for this tragedy?

I agree, Be Vigilant of enemies Foreign and DOMESTIC.

Mostly the latter.

I read things like this and I wondered how do they know the daily activities of the President. For much of his daily agenda is secret for security reasons.

How do you know such things and feel qualified to openly judge their substance and effect?

I know he has a security briefing every morning but what it’s about or the decision made, I’m not privileged to know. So how can you?

Can you tell me? I want to know too!

Bob,
I can’t help you with your lack of knowledge. You will have to do your own study to improve that.
One place to start though would be Mises.org.

Our wars have enslaved us and few truly free us(WWII may be an exception).How about rejecting wars and those sheeple who follow the fools into these wars.

“How about rejecting wars and those sheeple who follow the fools into these wars.”

Sounds an awful lot like you want to return to the viet nam days where solders are cursed, spit on, and worse when they return.

You’re the kind of creep who foments these problems by butting into other peoples’ life choices. I’m glad I don’t live next door to you, Flashdunce. I would have to spend entirely too much of my time making certain everything on my property was locked down.

Sorry, Independant. That was meant for Flashdunce below. Don’t know if the software screwed up, or there is just a loose nut on the keyboard this morning.

IT,
All I heard was a call to reject our “leaders” dragging us into unnecessary wars. I suppose you could interpret the words “those sheeple who follow” to mean our soldiers, but I read this as a condemnation of those citizens who blindly accept the excuses for going to war.

We’ve learned a lot since Viet Nam. I believe most Americans today are proud of our soldiers and only wish to see them safe. Sure, there have been some soldiers who have overstepped the bounds, but there always will be, but it makes matters worse when our government chooses to involve us in more than we have the man power to accommodate. You can’t send soldiers back for 3, 4, or 5 tours of duty and expect them to be ok.

No prob Dave I read the all the post so realized it wasn’t ment for me.

I.T.; Never said any such thing so keep on dreaming.

eddie47d
would you care to inlighten us as to what war has to do with a sick nut case doing what they do mame murder and rape ,the law shoud have been on alert this nut had been arrested numerus times ,if you want to place blame, it was not the 1st amendment it was a lack of doing their job by the sheriff and city police ,and who was the first to screem the right wing nuts caused this ,a liberal open border sheriff that said i will not do the job i swore to do

Marvin…actually, the guy was never arrested. He had a clean arrest record which was why he was allowed to by the Glock and the 30 round add on.

I’m not anti 2nd Amendment..but quite honestly if i lived next door to half the posters on this board, I’d be mighty worried for the safety and well being of my family knowing these folks pack armor.

Was that a Freudian slip, Flashdunce — pack “armor”. Because you know they need to protect themselves from you?

Actually, Marvin…he didn’t (to quote you), “MAME, murder, and rape” (a little spell-check might help some of you folks…but I digress)…

…he MURDERED. With a GUN.

And no one is blaming the gun, in spite of the spin Ben and his far-right loon cohorts may try to put on this…they’re blaming the shooters.

And who are “the shooters”?

Answer: THE PEOPLE WITH GUNS.

And maybe more to the point, the people with guns who seem to feel the need to carry guns around with them in public.

And since the nutty NRA argument with Columbine and the like was that, ‘if people were allowed to carry guns with them in school, this wouldn’t have happened’…we can now see that this doesn’t hold water, since this happened in a place where all the gun-happy Arizonians *could* carry their concealed handguns, and yet…the only hero who ended up taking the murderous gunman down, WAS A WOMAN…without a gun.

Some heroes you lot are.

A WOMAN…no, wait…an *unarmed woman* no less…has the bravery to tackle the crazed gunman, while all whimpering blow-hard gun fanatics were hiding behind their precious little pistolas, and cowering in pant-wetting fear.

In other words, your guns didn’t help you, and in fact…made matters worse, because no one thought anything of some guy (who isn’t a police officer) walking into a public place with a holstered handgun. Had it not been a normal occurrence for some guy to walk into a public place with a holstered handgun, security could have been on that gun-shooting maniac much quicker, or maybe even stopped him before he opened fire on all those innocent civilians.

So…let’s talk about some stiffer gun-control laws, shall we…?

Here’s an article y’all might find interesting, and one that will get Ben’s panties all in a twist, no doubt…

http://www.fpif.org/articles/gun_crazy

Dogma-Free says:

“…A WOMAN…no, wait…an *unarmed woman* no less…has the bravery to tackle the crazed gunman, ………. security could have been on that gun-shooting maniac much quicker, or maybe even stopped him before he opened fire on all those innocent civilians.”

Really? If there was security as you claim why did it take an unarmed woman to take down the suspect? What was security doing? Playing in their wet pantys?

And why were you attacking the security people (you know the ones with the pistolas) if they were really there? And why did the (phantom?) security people fail to take down the shooter so that an unarmed woman had to take the initiative and tackle the shooter? I notice she was smart too and waited for the shooter to reload. Again makes me wonder what “security” was doing.

Dogma-Free says: “So…let’s talk about some stiffer gun-control laws, shall we…?”

I think your logic above already shows how useful such a talk would be.

Vickie; The shooting happened within seconds. I doubt if security or even an armed civilian could have stopped that first clip from being emptied.

Right-On Marvin There Have Been Manny Mistakes Made By Sheriff Dip-Shit Who Sounds Like Mister McGoo And Janet Nappys His Sister, Yikeess, And They Are Guarding Our Borders?? Give The People Of Arizona A Break, Put One Person In Charge Of Security The Best And Toughest Sheriff Joe And Send The ACLU Anti-Americans Anti-Christians To Kenya With The Manchurian Pres Obama. God Bless America & LT Col Lakin & Sarah Palin POTUS Soon.

eddie47d says:
“Vickie; The shooting happened within seconds.”

Were you there? Do you have a video of the incident? Please share.

“I doubt if security or even an armed civilian could have stopped that first clip from being emptied.”

Was the shooter using a machine pistol shooting 15 rounds a second?

Properly trained you could draw your firearm from a holster and place 2 shots in a tight group (4 inch circle) into the center of mass of the shooter in 1.5 seconds. Really fast people can do even better. Now unlike your feel good opinion of doubt I actually have some facts to back up my assertion. http://www.frontsight.com/courses/gun-training.asp
Go ahead and tell Dr. Piazza of your doubts. He will be happy show you that armed civilians are more than able to stop a shooter like the one in Arizona.

I’ll stand by what I said Vickie so drop your cowgirl attitude.

eddie47d says:
“I’ll stand by what I said Vickie so drop your cowgirl attitude.”

Only a fool would stand by a statement that has been shown to be in error.

eddie47d… I have mixed feelings about the conflicts and wars we get into. I guess it depends on the day and the mood I’m in whether I believe they are necessary or not. At this point, I think we need to bring our military home and put them on our boarders. Once that gets ‘fixed’, maybe we can fix another country’s problems…

Well, maybe we don’t need to ‘fix’ another country’s problems. Maybe they can do it for themselves…you know, since they’re all adults and such.

The catch is, war is not necessary for any of us ordinary civilians. It does not benefit us, or the people of our armed forces.

It does, however, benefit a small number of extremely rich folks…somewhere…who then become even more rich because of it. Or maybe, they feel more secure, because the US military can be used to help secure some of their investments or holdings through the control of a foreign region…and the cost of subsequent human lives be damned.

Now, the world wars were a little different, in that it became necessary for us to fight in them…but at the core of it all, they never should have been started in the first place, as they were the products of greed and ego.

Then again, greed and ego have been two of the most prominent trademarks of mankind since its inception.

Dogma,
Why was it necessary for us to fight in the World Wars?

Big egos and phony treaties started WWI.

DaveH,
If Republicans in the House and Senate vote no on legitimate grounds, that’s fine, but that is not what they are doing. House Republicans defeated a bill passed unanimously by the Senate that would oppose child marriage. They supported the idea of a bipartisan fiscal commission, but when President Obama endorsed it, 6 Republican co-sponsors, Sam Brownback, Mike Crapo, John Ensign, Kay Bailey Hutchison, James Inhofe, and John McCain changed their minds. Despite supporting PAYGO legislation to reduce the deficit, John McCain, George Voinovich, Susan Collins, and Olympia Snowe all turned tale and voted against it when it came up for a vote.

Time and time again the Republicans have chosen party over people and voted against policies they once supported (or even wrote) in an effort to weaken the President. How do you justify voting against a bill to condemn the forced marriages of 11 and 12 year old girls? Do Republicans support the freedom of middle aged men to buy child brides? And how can “fiscally responsible” Republicans reject PAYGO? Bottom line, they were burned when President Clinton co-opted some of their legislation and now they would rather weaken our nation than allow another Democrat to succeed.

You do realize, don’t you that we already have laws on the books about marriage/age. This didn’t need to be addressed by fed legislators, but by the states. Why don’t you mention the REAL fact about why this particular bill was defeated? Did it maybe contain a bunch of PORK? Was it, in fact, another of those bills that “must be passed so we can see what’s in it”? Get some REAL facts before you try to convince anyone that you know what you’re talking about.

ValDM,
Are you pointing out facts about the bill that I missed? No, you’re just reacting without any research. If you had bothered to do any background work you’d know that the bill is a response to underage marriage in OTHER countries where we provide aid. There was no “pork” involved. In fact, the bill was crafted to make the best and most fiscally responsible use of resources already in place. It was simply an effort to curb a practice that most civilized people find reprehensible. An effort to save thousands of defenseless girls from a life of de-facto slavery. An effort to help curb the spread of AIDS. Yep, the Republicans showed the Libs! Big win for the “Christians” wouldn’t you say? And what about the other bills? Why did the co-sponsors listed change their vote? Could it have had something to do with a call from the leadership to close ranks against the Democrats?

From now on, before you counter based on the assumption that I (or anyone else for that matter) don’t know what I’m talking about, you’d better make certain that you have a clue.

Well, I guess you got me told. I thought we were talikng about bills having to do with OUR country. If the bill didn’t have anything to do with OUR country, then it shouldn’t have anything to do with OUR congress. We’re not in the business to be the world’s legislators (but you would think so with our congress so over poweringly interested in anywhere but here). Be that as it may, WE do not have any say-so in how another country conducts its business, unless it affects OUR business. I don’t care what OTHER countries are doing, so long as it DOESN’T get brought here. I DON’T live in those other countries, so WHY would my elected officials be concerned about enacting a law that does not affect their own CITIZENS?

Kinetic; It’s hard to get most states to do anything. The Feds always have to step up to the plate to get anything done.

Dictating the terms of marriage is NOT one of the Federal Government’s Constitutional powers, Kinetic.
I know, it falls under the “interstate commerce” clause because the newlyweds will be buying things. For those that didn’t catch on, the previous sentence was sarcasm.

There you have it folks. DaveH is a supporter of Gay Marriage. You’re coming around Dave….you’ll see the Light soon.

Flashman you are so high school.

Libery…is that not what DaveH said? “Dictating the terms of marriage is NOT one of the Federal Government’s Constitutional powers,”

Actually, Flashdunce, if you bothered to read my posts, you would know that I am Libertarian. No secret there. We believe in Freedom, no matter how repulsive it might sometimes be. And we don’t think it’s anybody’s business who freely partners up. We also don’t think the Government has any business in those free contracts. So, for instance, we don’t think the Government has a role in forcing unwilling ministers to marry people. You get it, Flashdunce? Freedom.
And Flashdunce, to come around to your way of thinking would be to abandon my morality and my principles of Freedom. It isn’t going to happen. So just keep hoping and dreaming.

Flash the high school freshman – I’ve read enough of Dave this last year or so to understand how he values freedom as I believe he so eloquently just reiterated to you.

Dave,

You are wrong, I would say no and not give it to them. If it means dying for my refusal, then so be it. I would rather die for refusing to cave into some jackass, than live the rest of my life having to live the rest of my life with the regret and anger for being spineless.

What? I was using that as an example in defense of the Republicans saying “NO”!

Why is no one mentioning the inflence of Hollywood on our kids? Becaue the violence and propaganda coming from there has a far greater impact than any political speech could, which I doubt he ever heard, anyway.

Possibly on another list or thread I noticed the hypocrisy of the liberal who tells us that Videogame/Film/TV violence has no effect on people so is ok and then tell us that CONSERVATIVE political speech drives people to do horrible violence.

We probably should bring up that more often with these liberals.

inetersting that liberal leaning demonstrations and protests seem to have more violent encounters.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lqwurTqX4pA

Someone asked below about which liberals were defending free speech/press in movies and video games (the violence) and I was unable to easily find a cite so I will withdraw the assertion that they are being hypocritical. They are of course busy trying to restrict free POLITICAL speech due to the incident in Arizona.

Vicki – It’s perfectly okay to have an opinion based on your own perceptions. We don’t always need to have a link to someone else’s assertions to back us up. Some things are just obvious.

kate8 says:
“Vicki – It’s perfectly okay to have an opinion based on your own perceptions. ”

I realize that however our opinions are much stronger in the minds of the readers if we have reasons for our beliefs and facts for our assertions.
And I get to learn new things by going out and finding those facts and or reasons

“Bill, there’s no such thing as half-freedom or “regulated freedom”. Freedom either exists or not.

OTOH, there are things that cannot be prevented. Sh*t happens, that’s it.”

well perhaps a noble thought, those ideas of freedom are not a reality or the case, today or yesterday.

The only place you might enjoy such freedoms as you suggest is to be a hermit, hide out in the Appalachian Mountains somewhere making moonshine and courting your sister or marooned on a small tropical island in the Pacific with monkey breath.

There is no, has never been “absolutes” or ‘purities” that’s ever endured the test of time, not in this world.

Freedom is a perception and comes in degrees. That you and I enjoy many freedoms fails to make us completely free.

The truth is, I know few people that would enjoy such freedom.

and yes, $hit happens and it happens a lot when we expose ourselves or entertain undisciplined thoughts and behavior.

I think maybe we should consider listening to the Greeks (of the past) about freedom.

“Without law there can be no freedom.” and why this is so.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N4r0VUybeXY

Bob – Perhaps. But how do we know what is truth and what is deflecting the truth?

I recall, soon after the incident, the police reported that they were looking for a second person, a “handler”. Seems he had one, and it seems that he has disappeared. Hmmmm.

We don’t know if he acted alone or if he was planted as a loose cannon. I’m sorry, but those in power have a whole bagful of tricks and a whole army of operatives, both willing and unwitting. And they have been set up in position, complete with history and scenario.

If a story sounds a bit too pat, too mundane, it probably is.