(11-19-2018, 05:55 PM)Classic-Xer Wrote: [ -> ] (11-19-2018, 04:20 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: [ -> ] (11-17-2018, 10:01 PM)Classic-Xer Wrote: [ -> ] (11-17-2018, 07:31 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: [ -> ]Well, you certainly get a pass on that kind of shit if you are running for president in 2016 or appointed for a supreme court position in 2018.
The next one, you should probably have something more substantial than word of mouth and hear say and a victim who was only there for show who couldn't answer specific questions or give us anymore specific details related to her accusation. Me, I think it was something she probably heard and that she gave more credibility to by using her name.
She had great credibility, and after she spoke the Republicans were thinking Kavanaugh might have to withdraw. But she was scheduled in the morning while Kavanaugh was given prime time. The testimony of the victim in such cases of rape or direct physical assault is often the only testimony to go by. In this case it was referred to the Justice Dept under Trump who did not give witnesses the chance to speak. Kavanaugh's friend could not have told the truth without implicating himself, and wasn't given immunity. Even then Mr. Judge would have had to be shamed for what he did. She gave lots of details, and just because the Republicans say she didn't does not make it so. The fact is that Republicans have no ground to stand on when making accusations against Democrats of this kind. They are always hypocrites and are guilty of far worse.
If she actually had great credibility. Kavanaugh wouldn't be sitting where he is today. I assume the witness's weren't willing to lie for her under oath. Did she seem believable at first, did she cry enough to convince some of the judges and the play by play announcers/ annalists who were watching her testimony and sharing their views and opinions with the audience. Yes, it was quite a spectacle that was loaded with all kinds of blue drama. I'm sure there were some pinko's who thought he should withdraw/ be withdrawn as soon as they heard/learned about her coming in to testify on TV. Pinko Republicans are pretty squeamish and worried about how people feel about them and their precious images and so forth. Well, you can keep them and you can tax them as much as you want to tax them.
I don't know too many pinko Republicans. Most if not all are Trumpists. That's not pinko.
She did have credibility, and one witness I assume did not want to tell the truth under oath, and the rest of them were ignored. It was Kavanaugh who cried and yelled and screamed and showed himself unfit to serve, but since he is right-wing the Republicans supported him.
(11-19-2018, 06:03 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: [ -> ]I don't know too many pinko Republicans. Most if not all are Trumpists. That's not pinko.
She did have credibility, and one witness I assume did not want to tell the truth under oath, and the rest of them were ignored. It was Kavanaugh who cried and yelled and screamed and showed himself unfit to serve, but since he is right-wing the Republicans supported him.
I saw what any normal person who has a high level of integrity would act after they've been falsely accused, falsely portrayed as a horrible person and feeling as if they're being railroaded. My suggestion, get that mob rule mentally that the blues enabling for years under control because we are a heavily armed population who will us them when the time comes and a group who will feed the Democrats to the groups of angry blue mobs for them to do with as the please during the 4T.
BTW, you can see pinko's on any popular blue news outlet these days. The bulk of never Trump Republicans who jumped ship when Trump won the primary are a bunch pinko's. The Republicans who jumped ship when the Tea Party showed up & made waves were pinko's. BTW, I don't know many of them either.
(11-19-2018, 06:26 PM)Classic-Xer Wrote: [ -> ] (11-19-2018, 06:03 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: [ -> ]I don't know too many pinko Republicans. Most if not all are Trumpists. That's not pinko.
She did have credibility, and one witness I assume did not want to tell the truth under oath, and the rest of them were ignored. It was Kavanaugh who cried and yelled and screamed and showed himself unfit to serve, but since he is right-wing the Republicans supported him.
I saw what any normal person who has a high level of integrity would act after they've been falsely accused, falsely portrayed as a horrible person and feeling as if they're being railroaded. My suggestion, get that mob rule mentally that the blues enabling for years under control because we are a heavily armed population who will us them when the time comes and a group who will feed the Democrats to the groups of angry blue mobs for them to do with as the please during the 4T.
BTW, you can see pinko's on any popular blue news outlet these days. The bulk of never Trump Republicans who jumped ship when Trump won the primary are a bunch pinko's. The Republicans who jumped ship when the Tea Party showed up & made waves were pinko's. BTW, I don't know many of them either.
He wasn't falsely accused. Blasey-Ford has nothing to gain by coming forward with this story. She was 100% credible, and Kavanaugh and the Republicans behaved abominally, and so did the voters who came out to back him on election day. They were the mob. Accusing people peacefully protesting this extremist takeover of our supreme court by putting a rapist on it of being a "mob" was a cynical denial of democracy and the right of free speech, and we will defend our rights against you.
Republicans give over 90% support for Trump and he gets approval ratings in the 40s because of this. The pinko pundits don't appear to make any traction among rank and file Republicans. Btw the never Trump Republicans are often among the most conservative members of the party, such as William Kristol. Trump critic Sen. Jeff Flake is a man of principle, but he voted for Kavanaugh anyway and is very conservative.
Back to the gun problem... Denver. Chicago.
It seems to be part of the culture now that if you are going to commit suicide, you take as many as you can with you. I am certainly not opposed to the psychiatric community trying to spot risks, and including some sort of due process that includes protection agains spurious accusations. Let the blue try to make prohibition work if they can.
But I am not seeing much action on that front.
Not yet, but "prohibition" of AR-15s and other war weapons might well happen within the next decade sometime.
(11-19-2018, 05:55 PM)Classic-Xer Wrote: [ -> ] (11-19-2018, 04:20 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: [ -> ] (11-17-2018, 10:01 PM)Classic-Xer Wrote: [ -> ] (11-17-2018, 07:31 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: [ -> ]Well, you certainly get a pass on that kind of shit if you are running for president in 2016 or appointed for a supreme court position in 2018.
The next one, you should probably have something more substantial than word of mouth and hear say and a victim who was only there for show who couldn't answer specific questions or give us anymore specific details related to her accusation. Me, I think it was something she probably heard and that she gave more credibility to by using her name.
She had great credibility, and after she spoke the Republicans were thinking Kavanaugh might have to withdraw. But she was scheduled in the morning while Kavanaugh was given prime time. The testimony of the victim in such cases of rape or direct physical assault is often the only testimony to go by. In this case it was referred to the Justice Dept under Trump who did not give witnesses the chance to speak. Kavanaugh's friend could not have told the truth without implicating himself, and wasn't given immunity. Even then Mr. Judge would have had to be shamed for what he did. She gave lots of details, and just because the Republicans say she didn't does not make it so. The fact is that Republicans have no ground to stand on when making accusations against Democrats of this kind. They are always hypocrites and are guilty of far worse.
If she actually had great credibility. Kavanaugh wouldn't be sitting where he is today. I assume the witness's weren't willing to lie for her under oath. Did she seem believable at first, did she cry enough to convince some of the judges and the play by play announcers/ annalists who were watching her testimony and sharing their views and opinions with the audience. Yes, it was quite a spectacle that was loaded with all kinds of blue drama. I'm sure there were some pinko's who thought he should withdraw/ be withdrawn as soon as they heard/learned about her coming in to testify on TV. Pinko Republicans are pretty squeamish and worried about how people feel about them and their precious images and so forth. Well, you can keep them and you can tax them as much as you want to tax them.
The Republican Party operates practically as a cadre party now with lockstep conformity on practically all issues. If one recognizes such, then the confirmation of Kavanaugh seems inevitable in retrospect. The result was fixed much as legislative success was predictable for the agenda of the highest levels of the Communist Party in the old Soviet Union.
(11-19-2018, 06:26 PM)Classic-Xer Wrote: [ -> ] (11-19-2018, 06:03 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: [ -> ]I don't know too many pinko Republicans. Most if not all are Trumpists. That's not pinko.
She did have credibility, and one witness I assume did not want to tell the truth under oath, and the rest of them were ignored. It was Kavanaugh who cried and yelled and screamed and showed himself unfit to serve, but since he is right-wing the Republicans supported him.
I saw what any normal person who has a high level of integrity would act after they've been falsely accused, falsely portrayed as a horrible person and feeling as if they're being railroaded. My suggestion, get that mob rule mentally that the blues enabling for years under control because we are a heavily armed population who will us them when the time comes and a group who will feed the Democrats to the groups of angry blue mobs for them to do with as the please during the 4T.
BTW, you can see pinko's on any popular blue news outlet these days. The bulk of never Trump Republicans who jumped ship when Trump won the primary are a bunch pinko's. The Republicans who jumped ship when the Tea Party showed up & made waves were pinko's. BTW, I don't know many of them either.
It is possible to be or simulate outrage when standards suddenly change, when behavior that was once acceptable becomes deplorable, disqualifies one from following ones profession. This seems to have happened here. It is common with 4Ts that what used to be acceptable under the old set of morality is rejected by a more inclusive morality which enlarges "All men are created equal." Women are not playthings anymore. Those who treated them as such have to pay a price.
"Pinko" seems to be a general pseudo insult more associated with Xer's world view than anything else. The word once meant communist, an association with the old Soviet Union or China. With the word being associated with 'socialism', I anticipate it will be applied to anyone who wants to promote the general welfare, something true Americans used to be proud of, something the US Government is charged to do.
Those who embraced Trump over the establishment were both tired of Establishment Republicans and their habit of supporting the elites, and deplorables who took cover under the Republican Southern Strategy. I can sympathize with the former, while deploring the deplorables. I can see classic communists favoring abandoning loyalty to the capitalists. Marx did see some real problems, if not the correct solutions. However, communists are not the Trump base or Trump. They are too tiny a minority.
I would like to reject prejudice, and would like it to be un American, but alas prejudice is quite historically American. As American as fighting it.
(11-19-2018, 08:29 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: [ -> ]Not yet, but "prohibition" of AR-15s and other war weapons might well happen within the next decade sometime.
There you go again. Blaming the weapon is not in the realm of psychologists, with declaring an individual a risk.
There are any number of people, including an alcohol prohibition era Supreme Court precedent, which identify "war weapons" as the most protected by the Second. The militia, which is charged among other things with repelling invasions, must have personal access to the most common firearms used by armies. You need an amendment (or at least a stacked Supreme Court willing to legislate from the bench) to end that.
(11-19-2018, 09:07 PM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote: [ -> ] (11-19-2018, 08:29 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: [ -> ]Not yet, but "prohibition" of AR-15s and other war weapons might well happen within the next decade sometime.
There you go again. Blaming the weapon is not in the realm of psychologists, with declaring an individual a risk.
There are any number of people, including an alcohol prohibition era Supreme Court precedent, which identify "war weapons" as the most protected by the Second. The militia, which is charged among other things with repelling invasions, must have personal access to the most common firearms used by armies. You need an amendment (or at least a stacked Supreme Court willing to legislate from the bench) to end that.
Bob is correct. The US has tried any number of prohibitions and none have lead to good results.
The War on Drugs, gunz banz, tobaccy bans, alcohol prohibition, soft drink taxes, abortion bans, are all the same. Subjective morality laws don't work. , It's pretty simple, actually . Demand creates its own supply. The law of supply and demand trumps any legislative law.
(11-19-2018, 08:55 PM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote: [ -> ]It is possible to be or simulate outrage when standards suddenly change, when behavior that was once acceptable becomes deplorable, disqualifies one from following ones profession. This seems to have happened here. It is common with 4Ts that what used to be acceptable under the old set of morality is rejected by a more inclusive morality which enlarges "All men are created equal." Women are not playthings anymore. Those who treated them as such have to pay a price.
...and who sets the standards? A political culture can be very slow and incremental for decades and then strike swiftly and harshly upon people who have been getting away with with the recently-condemned behavior.
Quote:"Pinko" seems to be a general pseudo insult more associated with Xer's world view than anything else. The word once meant communist, an association with the old Soviet Union or China. With the word being associated with 'socialism', I anticipate it will be applied to anyone who wants to promote the general welfare, something true Americans used to be proud of, something the US Government is charged to do.
In the murky rhetoric of Classic X'er, it does not even make sense. Marxism-Leninism is practically dead as an ideology in part because it is no longer revolutionary. There are people deluded into believing that it still is a vibrant philosophy with solutions for the nastiness that millions still endure.
Is a 'pinko' someone who dissents with pure plutocracy? The people who believe in the unqualified dominion of asset owners are themselves a tiny minority.
Quote:Those who embraced Trump over the establishment were both tired of Establishment Republicans and their habit of supporting the elites, and deplorables who took cover under the Republican Southern Strategy. I can sympathize with the former, while deploring the deplorables. I can see classic communists favoring abandoning loyalty to the capitalists. Marx did see some real problems, if not the correct solutions. However, communists are not the Trump base or Trump. They are too tiny a minority.
Trump pulled a big con. People who voted for him could not recognize that he cared only about his overweening ego. Many believed him when he excoriated educated people. But instead of "Blessed are the poor" in the Beatitudes, Trump offered "Blessed are the stupid", or as he expressed it "I love low-information voters", as if ignorance were a great virtue. I see great achievements by scientists, engineers, mathematicians, writers, artists, and composers without my life would be far poorer.
Quote:I would like to reject prejudice, and would like it to be un American, but alas prejudice is quite historically American. As American as fighting it.
Bigotry and viciousness are as predictably recurring as resistance to them, just as we can expect warm air masses and cold ones to succeed each other with violent storms in between. I live in Michigan, and I have seen the last winter storms often the worst, with a cold front with 20F air displacing warm, humid 75F air. First comes a severe thunderstorm, and then a cold rain, followed by a blizzard that lays down an incredible amount of snow that may have recently been the 'juice' of the recent warm spell. It seems like defeat. But the sun, getting higher every day and being in the sky ever longer, radiates its heat upon the last gasp of winter. The snow melts and the plants start to bloom, and temperatures become more like those of June than like January.
(11-19-2018, 09:07 PM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote: [ -> ] (11-19-2018, 08:29 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: [ -> ]Not yet, but "prohibition" of AR-15s and other war weapons might well happen within the next decade sometime.
There you go again. Blaming the weapon is not in the realm of psychologists, with declaring an individual a risk.
There are any number of people, including an alcohol prohibition era Supreme Court precedent, which identify "war weapons" as the most protected by the Second. The militia, which is charged among other things with repelling invasions, must have personal access to the most common firearms used by armies. You need an amendment (or at least a stacked Supreme Court willing to legislate from the bench) to end that.
No, Bob is not correct. Weapons of war don't belong on the streets or in individual's gun collections. Owning weapons of war is not protected by the constitution. The militia consisted of citizens with muskets; AR-15s are not the same; they are killing machines. And reminding us that militias were needed to repel invasions also reminds us of how out of date the Second is. It needs to be repealed someday, yes. But No, we
don't need armed citizens to repel invasions anymore. Citizen armies are not legal; that's why Koresh was attacked. And the Black Panthers too in the late sixties.
And mass murderers are not a well-regulated militia. That's all AR-15s are used for: mass murder. They are useless otherwise, and certainly have nothing to do with any "sport." Assault weapons bans were legal for 10 years; the ban should have been permanent, that's all. But since confiscation is not in the cards, bans on sales is all we can do. It's a start.
But you two don't seem ready to budge from your values lock on this issue, but it's also useless for you to argue with me about it. But we do it for the spectators, I guess, assuming there are any who may have open minds. They are hard to come by on the internet these days. But no, people are coming to their senses and will realize that weapons of mass murder should be outlawed, legally and in accordance with the constitution, and that the weapons facilitate the crime.
(11-19-2018, 06:26 PM)Classic-Xer Wrote: [ -> ] (11-19-2018, 06:03 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: [ -> ]I don't know too many pinko Republicans. Most if not all are Trumpists. That's not pinko.
She did have credibility, and one witness I assume did not want to tell the truth under oath, and the rest of them were ignored. It was Kavanaugh who cried and yelled and screamed and showed himself unfit to serve, but since he is right-wing the Republicans supported him.
I saw what any normal person who has a high level of integrity would act after they've been falsely accused, falsely portrayed as a horrible person and feeling as if they're being railroaded. My suggestion, get that mob rule mentally that the blues enabling for years under control because we are a heavily armed population who will us them when the time comes and a group who will feed the Democrats to the groups of angry blue mobs for them to do with as the please during the 4T.
BTW, you can see pinko's on any popular blue news outlet these days. The bulk of never Trump Republicans who jumped ship when Trump won the primary are a bunch pinko's. The Republicans who jumped ship when the Tea Party showed up & made waves were pinko's. BTW, I don't know many of them either.
Another point, is that Kavanaugh portrayed HIMSELF as a horrible person, by the way he behaved, and so did the Republican senators who defended him. This circus should have caused more people to vote Democratic. While it may have done so, a little bit, in the blue states, as part of the 38-seat turnover in the House, in the red states the loonies voted to put more loony Republicans in the senate, rewarding Kavanaugh and the loonies already there for their horrible behavior with 2 more seats. It's like giving more candy to a crying baby.
(11-19-2018, 08:55 PM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote: [ -> ] (11-19-2018, 06:26 PM)Classic-Xer Wrote: [ -> ] (11-19-2018, 06:03 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: [ -> ]I don't know too many pinko Republicans. Most if not all are Trumpists. That's not pinko.
She did have credibility, and one witness I assume did not want to tell the truth under oath, and the rest of them were ignored. It was Kavanaugh who cried and yelled and screamed and showed himself unfit to serve, but since he is right-wing the Republicans supported him.
I saw what any normal person who has a high level of integrity would act after they've been falsely accused, falsely portrayed as a horrible person and feeling as if they're being railroaded. My suggestion, get that mob rule mentally that the blues enabling for years under control because we are a heavily armed population who will us them when the time comes and a group who will feed the Democrats to the groups of angry blue mobs for them to do with as the please during the 4T.
BTW, you can see pinko's on any popular blue news outlet these days. The bulk of never Trump Republicans who jumped ship when Trump won the primary are a bunch pinko's. The Republicans who jumped ship when the Tea Party showed up & made waves were pinko's. BTW, I don't know many of them either.
It is possible to be or simulate outrage when standards suddenly change, when behavior that was once acceptable becomes deplorable, disqualifies one from following ones profession. This seems to have happened here. It is common with 4Ts that what used to be acceptable under the old set of morality is rejected by a more inclusive morality which enlarges "All men are created equal." Women are not playthings anymore. Those who treated them as such have to pay a price.
"Pinko" seems to be a general pseudo insult more associated with Xer's world view than anything else. The word once meant communist, an association with the old Soviet Union or China. With the word being associated with 'socialism', I anticipate it will be applied to anyone who wants to promote the general welfare, something true Americans used to be proud of, something the US Government is charged to do.
Those who embraced Trump over the establishment were both tired of Establishment Republicans and their habit of supporting the elites, and deplorables who took cover under the Republican Southern Strategy. I can sympathize with the former, while deploring the deplorables. I can see classic communists favoring abandoning loyalty to the capitalists. Marx did see some real problems, if not the correct solutions. However, communists are not the Trump base or Trump. They are too tiny a minority.
I would like to reject prejudice, and would like it to be un American, but alas prejudice is quite historically American. As American as fighting it.
Oh Bob, you keep allowing your partisan views to get in the way of your judgement/logic. Right now, you're a blue who has at least shown me some ability to be able to relate and understand the rural reds view of things. Now, the purples are much harder to figure out because the purples have values that are similar to the blues. Actually, the blues tend to use our values quite a bit. Of coarse, a purple wouldn't embrace socialism or support those who associate with the term or use the term to advance themselves or agree with the views of those who describe themselves as half Marxists or partisan hacks. No, the purples are pretty much American to the core and have no interest in adopting European ideologies of old or accepting rulers.
Bob, the pinko Republicans are the type of folks who jump ship or bail or turn their tail and run back to the Democratic side where they actually belong when the political waters and the rhetoric gets a little rough for them. Do you remember Sean Love, Sean Love was an example of what I referred to as a pinko or squeamish Republican who one can't really count on when things/times start getting to rough for them. As I've mentioned before, the reddish voters are in the process of eliminating the weak and the squeamish from the Republican ranks in advance of the crisis period. How did the everyone should have right to own a home turn out in 08? Yes, the Bush wing equally as responsible as the Obama/Sanders and the Clinton wings. Well, we've pretty much gotten rid of/eliminated the Bush wing.
(11-20-2018, 12:15 AM)Eric the Green Wrote: [ -> ]Another point, is that Kavanaugh portrayed HIMSELF as a horrible person, by the way he behaved, and so did the Republican senators who defended him. This circus should have caused more people to vote Democratic. While it may have done so, a little bit, in the blue states, as part of the 38-seat turnover in the House, in the red states the loonies voted to put more loony Republicans in the senate, rewarding Kavanaugh and the loonies already there for their horrible behavior with 2 more seats. It's like giving more candy to a crying baby.
A horrible person like myself would have completely flipped it around and began persecuting Amy Klobuchar and the black dude and Hispanic chick who didn't seem to know what country they live in or the basic laws and the Constitutional that relate to the country that they claim to be associated with but are some how still unable to relate with most of it.
(11-20-2018, 12:10 AM)Eric the Green Wrote: [ -> ]No, Bob is not correct. Weapons of war don't belong on the streets or in individual's gun collections. Owning weapons of war is not protected by the constitution. The militia consisted of citizens with muskets; AR-15s are not the same; they are killing machines. And reminding us that militias were needed to repel invasions also reminds us of how out of date the Second is. It needs to be repealed someday, yes. But No, we don't need armed citizens to repel invasions anymore. Citizen armies are not legal; that's why Koresh was attacked. And the Black Panthers too in the late sixties.
And mass murderers are not a well-regulated militia. That's all AR-15s are used for: mass murder. They are useless otherwise, and certainly have nothing to do with any "sport." Assault weapons bans were legal for 10 years; the ban should have been permanent, that's all. But since confiscation is not in the cards, bans on sales is all we can do. It's a start.
But you two don't seem ready to budge from your values lock on this issue, but it's also useless for you to argue with me about it. But we do it for the spectators, I guess, assuming there are any who may have open minds. They are hard to come by on the internet these days. But no, people are coming to their senses and will realize that weapons of mass murder should be outlawed, legally and in accordance with the constitution, and that the weapons facilitate the crime.
The gun question has many dimensions. What the founding fathers believed, what they wrote into law, what is the law of the land, is not in question. That the values of the red are more in alignment with the early Industrial Age is not in question. What should be in question is what the constitution
should say, which means there is no clear supermajority, which is intended to repeal or change the constitution.
You just think the constitution should say what you believe it should say, and you are a partisan hack. Thus, the evidence is ignored by you.
Also, for years the Jim Crow interpretations were widely accepted and still are by a few who think prohibition would somehow work in this case. If you read your history, you become very aware of how the Jim Crow courts were out to remove federal enforcement of the Bill of Rights and fabricated any excuse possible to say the federal government had no business enforcing those rights. They were so sure of their prejudice that they would use any pretext. You should actually read some of the old Jim Crow precedents.
(11-20-2018, 02:32 AM)Classic-Xer Wrote: [ -> ]Oh Bob, you keep allowing your partisan views to get in the way of your judgement/logic. Right now, you're a blue who has at least shown me some ability to be able to relate and understand the rural reds view of things. Now, the purples are much harder to figure out because the purples have values that are similar to the blues. Actually, the blues tend to use our values quite a bit. Of coarse, a purple wouldn't embrace socialism or support those who associate with the term or use the term to advance themselves or agree with the views of those who describe themselves as half Marxists or partisan hacks. No, the purples are pretty much American to the core and have no interest in adopting European ideologies of old or accepting rulers.
Bob, the pinko Republicans are the type of folks who jump ship or bail or turn their tail and run back to the Democratic side where they actually belong when the political waters and the rhetoric gets a little rough for them. Do you remember Sean Love, Sean Love was an example of what I referred to as a pinko or squeamish Republican who one can't really count on when things/times start getting to rough for them. As I've mentioned before, the reddish voters are in the process of eliminating the weak and the squeamish from the Republican ranks in advance of the crisis period. How did the everyone should have right to own a home turn out in 08? Yes, the Bush wing equally as responsible as the Obama/Sanders and the Clinton wings. Well, we've pretty much gotten rid of/eliminated the Bush wing.
And I find your way of using crude insulting language and personal definitions makes your writing harder to understand and easy for blues to reject. It does not reflect positively on the ideals you are trying to spread.
I also find it interesting that you are trying to get smaller and keep only the most fanatic. Others are trying to pick up votes to submerge you. It is as if you desire the violence that settled the questions of the old Industrial Age. I think you are in the wrong era here.
(11-20-2018, 02:55 AM)Classic-Xer Wrote: [ -> ] (11-20-2018, 12:15 AM)Eric the Green Wrote: [ -> ]Another point, is that Kavanaugh portrayed HIMSELF as a horrible person, by the way he behaved, and so did the Republican senators who defended him. This circus should have caused more people to vote Democratic. While it may have done so, a little bit, in the blue states, as part of the 38-seat turnover in the House, in the red states the loonies voted to put more loony Republicans in the senate, rewarding Kavanaugh and the loonies already there for their horrible behavior with 2 more seats. It's like giving more candy to a crying baby.
A horrible person like myself would have completely flipped it around and began persecuting Amy Klobuchar and the black dude and Hispanic chick who didn't seem to know what country they live in or the basic laws and the Constitutional that relate to the country that they claim to be associated with but are some how still unable to relate with most of it.
I notice an attempt to develop some style. A little self-effacing humor. That is very American -- especially Silent. That sort of humor is heavily fossilized now.
Kavanaugh inappropriately accused Amy Klobuchar of being a problem drinker by asking the impertinent question, to effect "Isn't everybody?"
"Dude" and "chick" reduce people to their sexuality, so avoid using them in a professional context or relating them to a professional context unless they are in fact used. Formalities matter greatly in the Senate, where people are not identified as "the black dude (from New Jersey)" or the "Hispanic chick". I don't know of any Hispanic females in the Senate. Biracial Americans like Cory Booker and Kamala Harris are Americans in ways that I am not.
Parts of America are difficult for many Americans to relate to. If I am in Appalachia I am obviously a tourist. Its cultural norms are foreign to me.
(11-20-2018, 03:47 AM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote: [ -> ] (11-20-2018, 12:10 AM)Eric the Green Wrote: [ -> ]No, Bob is not correct. Weapons of war don't belong on the streets or in individual's gun collections. Owning weapons of war is not protected by the constitution. The militia consisted of citizens with muskets; AR-15s are not the same; they are killing machines. And reminding us that militias were needed to repel invasions also reminds us of how out of date the Second is. It needs to be repealed someday, yes. But No, we don't need armed citizens to repel invasions anymore. Citizen armies are not legal; that's why Koresh was attacked. And the Black Panthers too in the late sixties.
And mass murderers are not a well-regulated militia. That's all AR-15s are used for: mass murder. They are useless otherwise, and certainly have nothing to do with any "sport." Assault weapons bans were legal for 10 years; the ban should have been permanent, that's all. But since confiscation is not in the cards, bans on sales is all we can do. It's a start.
But you two don't seem ready to budge from your values lock on this issue, but it's also useless for you to argue with me about it. But we do it for the spectators, I guess, assuming there are any who may have open minds. They are hard to come by on the internet these days. But no, people are coming to their senses and will realize that weapons of mass murder should be outlawed, legally and in accordance with the constitution, and that the weapons facilitate the crime.
The gun question has many dimensions. What the founding fathers believed, what they wrote into law, what is the law of the land, is not in question. That the values of the red are more in alignment with the early Industrial Age is not in question. What should be in question is what the constitution should say, which means there is no clear supermajority, which is intended to repeal or change the constitution.
You just think the constitution should say what you believe it should say, and you are a partisan hack. Thus, the evidence is ignored by you.
Also, for years the Jim Crow interpretations were widely accepted and still are by a few who think prohibition would somehow work in this case. If you read your history, you become very aware of how the Jim Crow courts were out to remove federal enforcement of the Bill of Rights and fabricated any excuse possible to say the federal government had no business enforcing those rights. They were so sure of their prejudice that they would use any pretext. You should actually read some of the old Jim Crow precedents.
I will not budge on my views of prohibiting sales of AR-15s. Arguments will have no effect on me. Political parties have nothing to do with this, and I don't agree with what you believe the constitution says. I don't subscribe to views that result in thousands and thousands of needless deaths. Sorry. Jim Crow was repression of blacks. Gun violence facilitated by technology is killing of blacks and people of all races. Where we agree, we can agree.
(11-20-2018, 08:54 AM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote: [ -> ] (11-20-2018, 02:32 AM)Classic-Xer Wrote: [ -> ]Oh Bob, you keep allowing your partisan views to get in the way of your judgement/logic. Right now, you're a blue who has at least shown me some ability to be able to relate and understand the rural reds view of things. Now, the purples are much harder to figure out because the purples have values that are similar to the blues. Actually, the blues tend to use our values quite a bit. Of coarse, a purple wouldn't embrace socialism or support those who associate with the term or use the term to advance themselves or agree with the views of those who describe themselves as half Marxists or partisan hacks. No, the purples are pretty much American to the core and have no interest in adopting European ideologies of old or accepting rulers.
Bob, the pinko Republicans are the type of folks who jump ship or bail or turn their tail and run back to the Democratic side where they actually belong when the political waters and the rhetoric gets a little rough for them. Do you remember Sean Love, Sean Love was an example of what I referred to as a pinko or squeamish Republican who one can't really count on when things/times start getting to rough for them. As I've mentioned before, the reddish voters are in the process of eliminating the weak and the squeamish from the Republican ranks in advance of the crisis period. How did the everyone should have right to own a home turn out in 08? Yes, the Bush wing equally as responsible as the Obama/Sanders and the Clinton wings. Well, we've pretty much gotten rid of/eliminated the Bush wing.
And I find your way of using crude insulting language and personal definitions makes your writing harder to understand and easy for blues to reject. It does not reflect positively on the ideals you are trying to spread.
I also find it interesting that you are trying to get smaller and keep only the most fanatic. Others are trying to pick up votes to submerge you. It is as if you desire the violence that settled the questions of the old Industrial Age. I think you are in the wrong era here.
If Classic Xer could get beyond his threatening and insulting language, he could communicate better, I agree. We can all improve our communication skills.
(11-20-2018, 09:35 AM)pbrower2a Wrote: [ -> ] (11-20-2018, 02:55 AM)Classic-Xer Wrote: [ -> ] (11-20-2018, 12:15 AM)Eric the Green Wrote: [ -> ]Another point, is that Kavanaugh portrayed HIMSELF as a horrible person, by the way he behaved, and so did the Republican senators who defended him. This circus should have caused more people to vote Democratic. While it may have done so, a little bit, in the blue states, as part of the 38-seat turnover in the House, in the red states the loonies voted to put more loony Republicans in the senate, rewarding Kavanaugh and the loonies already there for their horrible behavior with 2 more seats. It's like giving more candy to a crying baby.
A horrible person like myself would have completely flipped it around and began persecuting Amy Klobuchar and the black dude and Hispanic chick who didn't seem to know what country they live in or the basic laws and the Constitutional that relate to the country that they claim to be associated with but are some how still unable to relate with most of it.
I notice an attempt to develop some style. A little self-effacing humor. That is very American -- especially Silent. That sort of humor is heavily fossilized now.
Kavanaugh inappropriately accused Amy Klobuchar of being a problem drinker by asking the impertinent question, to effect "Isn't everybody?"
"Dude" and "chick" reduce people to their sexuality, so avoid using them in a professional context or relating them to a professional context unless they are in fact used. Formalities matter greatly in the Senate, where people are not identified as "the black dude (from New Jersey)" or the "Hispanic chick". I don't know of any Hispanic females in the Senate. Biracial Americans like Cory Booker and Kamala Harris are Americans in ways that I am not.
Parts of America are difficult for many Americans to relate to. If I am in Appalachia I am obviously a tourist. Its cultural norms are foreign to me.
Well, the black dude from New Jersey and the Hispanic chick from California and the Caucasian chick from Minnesota are supposed to be members of a political wing of a national party that no longer views issues or judges people or makes their decisions on the basis of ones race or gender. The Silents had class and got away with it by doing it with class. Well, we've moved beyond that as a society. Class no longer matters, the tolerance of society pertaining to what is viewed as acceptable or willing to live with has greatly increased to the point that just about anything goes these day. The social protections that women once grew up and learned to understand and learned take advantage of or enjoyed as women are disappearing and women are no longer being judged on the basis of their gender. Unfortunately, Amy Klobuchar ain't quite up to par with me or my values and if we were to ever meet she'd find out how far she was/is behind ordinary purples (men and women alike) like me. Bob doesn't seem to understand that there's two groups of progressives, a blue group that's fighting like crazy to protect itself and the systems they use to control and a reddish group who is working to break the cycles that has been trapping people and holding people back for years. BTW, according to you and your views of those who live in your area and view of those around you, you live in a poor God forsaken place like Appalachia.