Bipartisan Senate group proposes ‘no fly, no buy’ gun measure

[Bob Butler 54]

(03-24-2018, 10:52 AM)Classic-Xer Wrote: I don't really know what a Whig is today. I don't know what the Whig's were about, what the Whigs stood for, what their values were way back when while they were still around as a political force and politically active as a group. As far as blue, I thought it was a clever move for a politically bias group to switch their political color from red to blue. The color seems to mean more to the blues and the blue narrative than it does to the reds. According to the blues, I'm a red. OK, whatever, I'm a red. According to the blues, reds are racists. OK, whatever, I must be a red who isn't a racist.

I think the Republicans should stick with good old red white blue and stick with America first and stick with American tradition and the American dream. The Democrats seem to have no clue as to what their loosing, what groups/who their actually supporting and what they're voting to let go of/ loose at this point.

I watched a documentary series on Netflix yesterday. It's called Wild Wild Country. It's about a clash between a small rural town in Oregon and a liberal cult from India. You should watch it and I think you'll understand where America is at right now. I emphasis (LIBERAL) cult and you should focus on the cult. You should focus on how the cult acts, how the cult operates, the cults view of the American people living in the small town and be honest with yourself as you watch it. You will see many similarities between the cult and the liberal progressives today. I see a similar clash coming between the liberal progressives and the United States of America. The old Democrats involved in the struggle are either dead or no longer physically/mentally able to fight. But, there's a new political breed representing them today.

For most of my career I worked around Route 128 and MIT, but for a while I was in Colorado Springs. They had so much open space, enough to abuse. Population density does effect how people think. What seems right in one place to one resident is very wrong elsewhere to another resident of somewhere else. The better educated one is, the more you see the results of a bunch of people living together, the more you see the consequences, the more you see the reality of many people in a small place.

I was first called a Whig on this web site. I was called so by Virgil Saari, who was emphatically not a Whig. In fact, he advocated the return of certain royal lines. What is a Whig these days? Other than long gone? We believe that progress is nigh on inevitable, and the direction if change is human rights, democracy and inclusiveness. Does that mean the opposition seeks to abuse others, to advance the 1%, to protect privileged positions? Yes and no. They cling to old privileged positions. They resist change. They seek to mess up other people's lives in order to improve their own.

I am sympathetic with the modern blue, but perhaps take a longer term perspective. The modern reds are heirs to monarchy, to slaveowners, to robber barons. They see nothing wrong with advancing their own cause at the expense of others. I see the ever increasing productivity and population as a solvable problem, but the gap between the haves and have nots must be looked at. You cannot be as blind to consequences as many reds seem to be.

I gained benefit from progress, and want to share a minimum amount of it with others. I am very aware of progress. I do not want to share lightly, or dismiss its importance. Global warming and the limits to expansion are real. So are reds with their heads in the sand. Ignoring problems and wishing for yesterday won't hack it in the long term, though clinging to the past may last the lifetimes of those living.