Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Bipartisan Senate group proposes ‘no fly, no buy’ gun measure
(02-13-2019, 12:03 PM)Classic-Xer Wrote:
(02-11-2019, 11:04 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: I'm a sharp tool and I'm colored blue, and no I don't quite understand what you think I am doing. But I know you referred to white male civil rights, which shows your priorities are based on race and gender. Blues like me, we are interested in rights for everyone. Well, except maybe your right to own a gun; that depends.....
I referred to civil rights that equally pertain to white people in general  and males in general (all males). Like I said, I'm not deaf and  blind or unable to read and decipher and so on. I have some issues with writing and typing related to lack of doing regularly but that's about it. So, what are blues doing promoting/supporting/advancing/accepting the views of racist or bigoted people? You do understand that's what you're/blues are doing right. So, what's your issue with white people and white males in particular. I'm not directly related to an old  slave owner or a person who fought for the Confederacy or a person who fought against integration. Yes, you're a sharper tool affiliated with a shed of tools that are mostly dull or one of the smartest people in a room full of idiots or one of the more clever people in a market full of clueless and naive people. Are you really as good as you claim?

You ignore the militia clause in the Second Amendment. At the time of the American Revolution people typically used their flintlock muskets as the weapons with which they would be most comfortable with as tools or warfare. They did not bend plowshares into swords. It is only after weapons specialized for military use came into existence, as around the American Civil War, that soldiers trained to use government-issued firearms. Such objects as artillery had no obvious use in civilian life -- and using those required training and discipline. From the American Civil War on, the weapons that have killed the most people in warfare  (I am not counting genocide, which is better described as organized crime than as warfare, and much of it is done with 'small arms', including machetes that have legitimate agricultural use as in 'cutting down the tall trees' in Rwanda) are artillery. Do you want or need a Katyusha rocket launcher which decimated German soldiers on the Eastern Front? Maybe if I have a war museum I might want one...

I cannot interpret "a well-regulated militia being necessary for the defense of a free State" to imply that such persons as idiots, lunatics, criminals, addicts, and habitual drunks have any right to keep and bear arms. The Second Amendment does not have a non-discrimination clause as do some other Amendments, but if it did it would have such language as a prohibition of federal or state law discriminating against people on such matters as race, color, national origin, gender, partisan affiliation, physical handicap, age above minority or the mercifully-obsolete 'previous condition of servitude' in keeping and bearing arms. Handicapped and elderly people who would never be recruited any militia into probably would never be denied the right to bear arms.

Children, criminals, lunatics, addicts, idiots, and habitual drunks might be reasonably denied any right to bear arms. Were I a judge and had the authority I would deny a firearm to someone involved in an abusive relationship (the person being abused is easily overpowered for the weapon). The classes denied the right to bear arms still have most other enumerated freedoms, including the right to free speech.
The ideal subject of totalitarian rule is not the convinced Nazi or the dedicated Communist  but instead the people for whom the distinction between fact and fiction, true and false, no longer exists -- Hannah Arendt.


Reply
(02-13-2019, 12:03 PM)Classic-Xer Wrote:
(02-11-2019, 11:04 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: I'm a sharp tool and I'm colored blue, and no I don't quite understand what you think I am doing. But I know you referred to white male civil rights, which shows your priorities are based on race and gender. Blues like me, we are interested in rights for everyone. Well, except maybe your right to own a gun; that depends.....

I referred to civil rights that equally pertain to white people in general and males in general (all males).

Yes, that's what you said. You refer to rights for whites and males. Why not to rights for all people? For anybody? Do you support the same rights for all people?

Quote:Like I said, I'm not deaf and blind or unable to read and decipher and so on. I have some issues with writing and typing related to lack of doing them on a regular basis but that's about it. So, what are blues doing promoting/supporting/advancing/accepting the views of racist or bigoted people on their side? You do understand that's what you're/blues are doing right. So, what's your issue with white people and white males in particular.

My issue is with people who only are concerned with white people and white males in particular. That's an issue I have with you, then, because that's your only concern, it appears. Why not be concerned with the rights of anyone?

Quote:I'm not directly related to an old slave owner or a person who fought for the Confederacy or a person who fought against integration. Yes, you're a sharper tool affiliated with a shed of tools that are mostly dull or one of the smartest people in a room full of idiots or one of the more clever people in a market full of clueless and naive people. Are you really as good as you claim?

Well, I must not be as sharp as I claim, because I can't really decide who is sharp and who is dull, as easily as you apparently can. Wink But, I'm glad you think I'm one of the sharper tools in the shed of tools that are mostly dull.
"I close my eyes, and I can see a better day" -- Justin Bieber

Keep the spirit alive;
Eric M
Reply
(02-14-2019, 12:51 PM)Eric the Green Wrote:
(02-13-2019, 12:03 PM)Classic-Xer Wrote:
(02-11-2019, 11:04 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: I'm a sharp tool and I'm colored blue, and no I don't quite understand what you think I am doing. But I know you referred to white male civil rights, which shows your priorities are based on race and gender. Blues like me, we are interested in rights for everyone. Well, except maybe your right to own a gun; that depends.....

I referred to civil rights that equally pertain to white people in general and males in general (all males).

Yes, that's what you said. You refer to rights for whites and males. Why not to rights for all people? For anybody? Do you support the same rights for all people?

Quote:Like I said, I'm not deaf and  blind or unable to read and decipher and so on. I have some issues with writing and typing related to lack of doing them on a regular basis but that's about it. So, what are blues doing promoting/supporting/advancing/accepting the views of racist or bigoted people on their side? You do understand that's what you're/blues are doing right. So, what's your issue with white people and white males in particular.

My issue is with people who only are concerned with white people and white males in particular. That's an issue I have with you, then, because that's your only concern, it appears. Why not be concerned with the rights of anyone?

Quote:I'm not directly related to an old slave owner or a person who fought for the Confederacy or a person who fought against integration. Yes, you're a sharper tool affiliated with a shed of tools that are mostly dull or one of the smartest people in a room full of idiots or one of the more clever people in a market full of clueless and naive people. Are you really as good as you claim?

Well, I must not be as sharp as I claim, because I can't really decide who is sharp and who is dull, as easily as you apparently can. Wink But, I'm glad you think I'm one of the sharper tools in the shed of tools that are mostly dull.
Your issue with me is that I'm pretty sharp. Now, I can't change what I am or change the fact that I was born a white male. Now, if you want to use them (my race and gender) against me to spite yourself then go ahead. I don't care about what eventually happens to you for being viewed as associated with me. I don't care if a minority based system that's racist decides that people like you deserve to die or deserve to sit at the back of a bus or deserve to be refused services for old deeds associated with Democrats. I don't care if the Democratic party remains the party of segregation and I don't care if the black caucus remains the black caucus and has to compete with other racial caucus's who view themselves as more racially superior to them.
Reply
(02-18-2019, 01:37 PM)Classic-Xer Wrote:
(02-14-2019, 12:51 PM)Eric the Green Wrote:
(02-13-2019, 12:03 PM)Classic-Xer Wrote:
(02-11-2019, 11:04 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: I'm a sharp tool and I'm colored blue, and no I don't quite understand what you think I am doing. But I know you referred to white male civil rights, which shows your priorities are based on race and gender. Blues like me, we are interested in rights for everyone. Well, except maybe your right to own a gun; that depends.....

I referred to civil rights that equally pertain to white people in general and males in general (all males).

Yes, that's what you said. You refer to rights for whites and males. Why not to rights for all people? For anybody? Do you support the same rights for all people?

Quote:Like I said, I'm not deaf and  blind or unable to read and decipher and so on. I have some issues with writing and typing related to lack of doing them on a regular basis but that's about it. So, what are blues doing promoting/supporting/advancing/accepting the views of racist or bigoted people on their side? You do understand that's what you're/blues are doing right. So, what's your issue with white people and white males in particular.

My issue is with people who only are concerned with white people and white males in particular. That's an issue I have with you, then, because that's your only concern, it appears. Why not be concerned with the rights of anyone?

Quote:I'm not directly related to an old slave owner or a person who fought for the Confederacy or a person who fought against integration. Yes, you're a sharper tool affiliated with a shed of tools that are mostly dull or one of the smartest people in a room full of idiots or one of the more clever people in a market full of clueless and naive people. Are you really as good as you claim?

Well, I must not be as sharp as I claim, because I can't really decide who is sharp and who is dull, as easily as you apparently can. Wink But, I'm glad you think I'm one of the sharper tools in the shed of tools that are mostly dull.
Your issue with me is that I'm pretty sharp. Now, I can't change what I am or change the fact that I was born a white male. Now, if you want to use them (my race and gender) against me to spite yourself then go ahead. I don't care about what eventually happens to you for being viewed as associated with me. I don't care if a minority based system that's racist decides that people like you deserve to die or deserve to sit at the back of a bus or deserve to be refused services for old deeds associated with Democrats. I don't care if the Democratic party remains the party of segregation and I don't care if the black caucus remains the black caucus and has to compete with other racial caucus's who view themselves as more racially superior to them.

I wish you were a bit sharper; you might realize that being more concerned with white people and white males in particular, just because you are white and male, is a narrow-minded attitude and best, and a racist attitude at worst. A truly sharp person would realize that all humans have the same rights and deserve the same basic needs met. That is something that any sharp person would care about, because rights denied anywhere is rights denied everywhere, and rights denied to anyone is rights denied to you and me too.
"I close my eyes, and I can see a better day" -- Justin Bieber

Keep the spirit alive;
Eric M
Reply
(02-18-2019, 11:04 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: (to Classic-Xer) I wish you were a bit sharper; you might realize that being more concerned with white people and white males in particular, just because you are white and male, is a narrow-minded attitude and best, and a racist attitude at worst. A truly sharp person would realize that all humans have the same rights and deserve the same basic needs met. That is something that any sharp person would care about, because rights denied anywhere is rights denied everywhere, and rights denied to anyone is rights denied to you and me too.

Well said.  This is actually a defining issue of our times.  Of all people, David Brooks, conservative columnist for the NY Times, made that case in detail, and fretted about the 60 years we have spent dividing everyone into separate camps or, worse, into single units.  We're all human and have the need for the same things, including the understanding and support of our fellow humans.  There's no future in Bowling Alone.
Intelligence is not knowledge and knowledge is not wisdom, but they all play well together.
Reply
(02-18-2019, 11:04 PM)Eric the Green Wrote:
(02-18-2019, 01:37 PM)Classic-Xer Wrote:
(02-14-2019, 12:51 PM)Eric the Green Wrote:
(02-13-2019, 12:03 PM)Classic-Xer Wrote:
(02-11-2019, 11:04 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: I'm a sharp tool and I'm colored blue, and no I don't quite understand what you think I am doing. But I know you referred to white male civil rights, which shows your priorities are based on race and gender. Blues like me, we are interested in rights for everyone. Well, except maybe your right to own a gun; that depends.....

I referred to civil rights that equally pertain to white people in general and males in general (all males).

Yes, that's what you said. You refer to rights for whites and males. Why not to rights for all people? For anybody? Do you support the same rights for all people?

Quote:Like I said, I'm not deaf and  blind or unable to read and decipher and so on. I have some issues with writing and typing related to lack of doing them on a regular basis but that's about it. So, what are blues doing promoting/supporting/advancing/accepting the views of racist or bigoted people on their side? You do understand that's what you're/blues are doing right. So, what's your issue with white people and white males in particular.

My issue is with people who only are concerned with white people and white males in particular. That's an issue I have with you, then, because that's your only concern, it appears. Why not be concerned with the rights of anyone?

Quote:I'm not directly related to an old slave owner or a person who fought for the Confederacy or a person who fought against integration. Yes, you're a sharper tool affiliated with a shed of tools that are mostly dull or one of the smartest people in a room full of idiots or one of the more clever people in a market full of clueless and naive people. Are you really as good as you claim?

Well, I must not be as sharp as I claim, because I can't really decide who is sharp and who is dull, as easily as you apparently can. Wink But, I'm glad you think I'm one of the sharper tools in the shed of tools that are mostly dull.
Your issue with me is that I'm pretty sharp. Now, I can't change what I am or change the fact that I was born a white male. Now, if you want to use them (my race and gender) against me to spite yourself then go ahead. I don't care about what eventually happens to you for being viewed as associated with me. I don't care if a minority based system that's racist decides that people like you deserve to die or deserve to sit at the back of a bus or deserve to be refused services for old deeds associated with Democrats. I don't care if the Democratic party remains the party of segregation and I don't care if the black caucus remains the black caucus and has to compete with other racial caucus's who view themselves as more racially superior to them.

I wish you were a bit sharper; you might realize that being more concerned with white people and white males in particular, just because you are white and male, is a narrow-minded attitude and best, and a racist attitude at worst. A truly sharp person would realize that all humans have the same rights and deserve the same basic needs met. That is something that any sharp person would care about, because rights denied anywhere is rights denied everywhere, and rights denied to anyone is rights denied to you and me too.
I'm not concerned about white people or concerned about what happens to a group of dumb white people either. Unfortunately for you and every other dumb white person here, I'm not motivated by race or gender. I'm not morally or socially obliged to vote for a black person because they're a black person or vote for this and support that because it's related to black people or related to the interests of a powerful group of black politicians in Washington DC. I'm glad to see that your finally able to see things my way in your own strange way. If you were sharper and not as narrow minded, it wouldn't have taken over a decade to reach a common sense understanding that American rights relate to every American regardless of their race, gender, class and so forth.
Reply
(02-19-2019, 02:28 PM)Classic-Xer Wrote:
(02-18-2019, 11:04 PM)Eric the Green Wrote:
(02-18-2019, 01:37 PM)Classic-Xer Wrote:
(02-14-2019, 12:51 PM)Eric the Green Wrote:
(02-13-2019, 12:03 PM)Classic-Xer Wrote: I referred to civil rights that equally pertain to white people in general and males in general (all males).

Yes, that's what you said. You refer to rights for whites and males. Why not to rights for all people? For anybody? Do you support the same rights for all people?

Quote:Like I said, I'm not deaf and  blind or unable to read and decipher and so on. I have some issues with writing and typing related to lack of doing them on a regular basis but that's about it. So, what are blues doing promoting/supporting/advancing/accepting the views of racist or bigoted people on their side? You do understand that's what you're/blues are doing right. So, what's your issue with white people and white males in particular.

My issue is with people who only are concerned with white people and white males in particular. That's an issue I have with you, then, because that's your only concern, it appears. Why not be concerned with the rights of anyone?

Quote:I'm not directly related to an old slave owner or a person who fought for the Confederacy or a person who fought against integration. Yes, you're a sharper tool affiliated with a shed of tools that are mostly dull or one of the smartest people in a room full of idiots or one of the more clever people in a market full of clueless and naive people. Are you really as good as you claim?

Well, I must not be as sharp as I claim, because I can't really decide who is sharp and who is dull, as easily as you apparently can. Wink But, I'm glad you think I'm one of the sharper tools in the shed of tools that are mostly dull.
Your issue with me is that I'm pretty sharp. Now, I can't change what I am or change the fact that I was born a white male. Now, if you want to use them (my race and gender) against me to spite yourself then go ahead. I don't care about what eventually happens to you for being viewed as associated with me. I don't care if a minority based system that's racist decides that people like you deserve to die or deserve to sit at the back of a bus or deserve to be refused services for old deeds associated with Democrats. I don't care if the Democratic party remains the party of segregation and I don't care if the black caucus remains the black caucus and has to compete with other racial caucus's who view themselves as more racially superior to them.

I wish you were a bit sharper; you might realize that being more concerned with white people and white males in particular, just because you are white and male, is a narrow-minded attitude and best, and a racist attitude at worst. A truly sharp person would realize that all humans have the same rights and deserve the same basic needs met. That is something that any sharp person would care about, because rights denied anywhere is rights denied everywhere, and rights denied to anyone is rights denied to you and me too.
I'm not concerned about white people or concerned about what happens to a group of dumb white people either. Unfortunately for you and every other dumb white person here, I'm not motivated by race or gender. I'm not morally or socially obliged to vote for a black person because they're a black person or vote for this and support that because it's related to black people or related to the interests of a powerful group of black politicians in Washington DC. I'm glad to see that your finally able to see things my way in your own strange way. If you were sharper and not as narrow minded, it wouldn't have taken over a decade to reach a common sense understanding that American rights relate to every American regardless of their race, gender, class and so forth.

Well that sounds nice, but I still wonder from your words whether you feel morally or socially obliged to vote for a white person because they're a white person or vote for this and support that because it's related to white people or related to the interests of a powerful group of white politicians in Washington DC. I have always been sharp enough to know that American rights relate to every American regardless of their race, gender, class and so forth, and no-one has to be that sharp to understand that.
"I close my eyes, and I can see a better day" -- Justin Bieber

Keep the spirit alive;
Eric M
Reply
(02-19-2019, 10:44 AM)David Horn Wrote:
(02-18-2019, 11:04 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: (to Classic-Xer) I wish you were a bit sharper; you might realize that being more concerned with white people and white males in particular, just because you are white and male, is a narrow-minded attitude and best, and a racist attitude at worst. A truly sharp person would realize that all humans have the same rights and deserve the same basic needs met. That is something that any sharp person would care about, because rights denied anywhere is rights denied everywhere, and rights denied to anyone is rights denied to you and me too.

Well said.  This is actually a defining issue of our times.  Of all people, David Brooks, conservative columnist for the NY Times, made that case in detail, and fretted about the 60 years we have spent dividing everyone into separate camps or, worse, into single units.  We're all human and have the need for the same things, including the understanding and support of our fellow humans.  There's no future in Bowling Alone.

Yup.
"I close my eyes, and I can see a better day" -- Justin Bieber

Keep the spirit alive;
Eric M
Reply
(02-19-2019, 05:12 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: Well that sounds nice, but I still wonder from your words whether you feel morally or socially obliged to vote for a white person because they're a white person or vote for this and support that because it's related to white people or related to the interests of a powerful group of white politicians in Washington DC. I have always been sharp enough to know that American rights relate to every American regardless of their race, gender, class and so forth, and no-one has to be that sharp to understand that.
You're a white male, do I seem to feel morally or socially obliged to support you and your views and those you favor politically?
Reply
(02-19-2019, 05:14 PM)Eric the Green Wrote:
(02-19-2019, 10:44 AM)David Horn Wrote:
(02-18-2019, 11:04 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: (to Classic-Xer) I wish you were a bit sharper; you might realize that being more concerned with white people and white males in particular, just because you are white and male, is a narrow-minded attitude and best, and a racist attitude at worst. A truly sharp person would realize that all humans have the same rights and deserve the same basic needs met. That is something that any sharp person would care about, because rights denied anywhere is rights denied everywhere, and rights denied to anyone is rights denied to you and me too.

Well said.  This is actually a defining issue of our times.  Of all people, David Brooks, conservative columnist for the NY Times, made that case in detail, and fretted about the 60 years we have spent dividing everyone into separate camps or, worse, into single units.  We're all human and have the need for the same things, including the understanding and support of our fellow humans.  There's no future in Bowling Alone.

Yup.
Yep. You might as well get used to the idea of Bowling Alone and paying your own way because America is in the process of further separating right now. You want to live your life sitting on a couch, smoking pot and being paid for nothing then you move to a blue area where living that way is viewed as acceptable as long as you vote Democratic.
Reply
(02-20-2019, 01:00 AM)Classic-Xer Wrote:
(02-19-2019, 05:14 PM)Eric the Green Wrote:
(02-19-2019, 10:44 AM)David Horn Wrote:
(02-18-2019, 11:04 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: (to Classic-Xer) I wish you were a bit sharper; you might realize that being more concerned with white people and white males in particular, just because you are white and male, is a narrow-minded attitude and best, and a racist attitude at worst. A truly sharp person would realize that all humans have the same rights and deserve the same basic needs met. That is something that any sharp person would care about, because rights denied anywhere is rights denied everywhere, and rights denied to anyone is rights denied to you and me too.

Well said.  This is actually a defining issue of our times.  Of all people, David Brooks, conservative columnist for the NY Times, made that case in detail, and fretted about the 60 years we have spent dividing everyone into separate camps or, worse, into single units.  We're all human and have the need for the same things, including the understanding and support of our fellow humans.  There's no future in Bowling Alone.

Yup.
Yep. You might as well get used to the idea of Bowling Alone and paying your own way because America is in the process of further separating right now. You want to live your life sitting on a couch, smoking pot and being paid for nothing then you move to a blue area where living that way is viewed as acceptable as long as you vote Democratic.

We blues don't accept the dichotomy between understanding the need for support of fellow humans, and living life on a couch smoking pot and being paid for nothing. That dichotomy is the red ideology, I understand that; and it's got you hooked; but it has no relation to reality. But I understand, a lot of reds want to separate from the blues and live in that fantasy. It won't work for you, but if you guys want to try it and separate from blue America somehow, I am not of a mind to stop you.
"I close my eyes, and I can see a better day" -- Justin Bieber

Keep the spirit alive;
Eric M
Reply
(02-20-2019, 12:22 AM)Classic-Xer Wrote:
(02-19-2019, 05:12 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: Well that sounds nice, but I still wonder from your words whether you feel morally or socially obliged to vote for a white person because they're a white person or vote for this and support that because it's related to white people or related to the interests of a powerful group of white politicians in Washington DC. I have always been sharp enough to know that American rights relate to every American regardless of their race, gender, class and so forth, and no-one has to be that sharp to understand that.
You're a white male, do I seem to feel morally or socially obliged to support you and your views and those you favor politically?

No indeed, but you seem morally or socially obliged to support those white males whom you agree with, more or less.
"I close my eyes, and I can see a better day" -- Justin Bieber

Keep the spirit alive;
Eric M
Reply
(02-20-2019, 01:00 AM)Classic-Xer Wrote:
(02-19-2019, 05:14 PM)Eric the Green Wrote:
(02-19-2019, 10:44 AM)David Horn Wrote:
(02-18-2019, 11:04 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: (to Classic-Xer) I wish you were a bit sharper; you might realize that being more concerned with white people and white males in particular, just because you are white and male, is a narrow-minded attitude and best, and a racist attitude at worst. A truly sharp person would realize that all humans have the same rights and deserve the same basic needs met. That is something that any sharp person would care about, because rights denied anywhere is rights denied everywhere, and rights denied to anyone is rights denied to you and me too.

Well said.  This is actually a defining issue of our times.  Of all people, David Brooks, conservative columnist for the NY Times, made that case in detail, and fretted about the 60 years we have spent dividing everyone into separate camps or, worse, into single units.  We're all human and have the need for the same things, including the understanding and support of our fellow humans.  There's no future in Bowling Alone.

Yup.
Yep. You might as well get used to the idea of Bowling Alone and paying your own way because America is in the process of further separating right now. You want to live your life sitting on a couch, smoking pot and being paid for nothing then you move to a blue area where living that way is viewed as acceptable as long as you vote Democratic.

America has grown as far apart as it can in part because the people who now dominate the political debate believe that survival is a privilege to be earned by the masses through their suffering for the elites who have unbridled appetites for aristocratic indulgence. People are catching on, and it is only a matter of time before enough people lose all faith in the economic order that they reject that plutocratic ethos.

It is easier to exploit an atomized people, as shown in Pinochet's Chile, where the only people with any right to organize were the well-heeled interests who got a world made for themselves alone. Commie methods of repression and propaganda served to enforce plutocracy. When I was in college I met people from there, and they told me that it was even worse than American media said. It was as awful as Soviet-style Communism, except that the regime
kept impressing upon the common man that he was nothing more than a machine of meat, differing only from livestock in that cannibalism is abhorrent.

Trump's core constituencies are either people who resemble the exploitative elites of the past in other countries -- or dumb-or-numb white people.
The ideal subject of totalitarian rule is not the convinced Nazi or the dedicated Communist  but instead the people for whom the distinction between fact and fiction, true and false, no longer exists -- Hannah Arendt.


Reply
(02-13-2019, 12:03 PM)Classic-Xer Wrote:
(02-11-2019, 11:04 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: I'm a sharp tool and I'm colored blue, and no I don't quite understand what you think I am doing. But I know you referred to white male civil rights, which shows your priorities are based on race and gender. Blues like me, we are interested in rights for everyone. Well, except maybe your right to own a gun; that depends.....
I referred to civil rights that equally pertain to white people in general  and males in general (all males). Like I said, I'm not deaf and  blind or unable to read and decipher and so on. I have some issues with writing and typing related to lack of doing them on a regular basis but that's about it. So, what are blues doing promoting/supporting/advancing/accepting the views of racist or bigoted people on their side? You do understand that's what you're/blues are doing right. So, what's your issue with white people and white males in particular. I'm not directly related to an old  slave owner or a person who fought for the Confederacy or a person who fought against integration. Yes, you're a sharper tool affiliated with a shed of tools that are mostly dull or one of the smartest people in a room full of idiots or one of the more clever people in a market full of clueless and naive people. Are you really as good as you claim?

Does anyone think that the right to bear arms would be denied to people on the basis of race or ethnicity?

The Second Amendment is written to ensure that the States have the right to form militias for quick action against such concerns as existed in the late eighteenth century (pirates, Indian attacks, slave revolts) that we obviously do not have today, and emergency responses to invasions. Or perhaps usurpation of power as many feared.

The official state militias have evolved into state police forces and the state National Guard units, and those have valid purpose.

I can think of circumstances under which I would have a firearm. Dangerous animals such as bears or big cats nearby? Drug activity? For the garden variety of crime, dogs are effective under most circumstances. Three of these

[Image: 220px-Rottweiler_standing_facing_left.jpg]

can be about as scary as one of these

[Image: 200px-Panthera_tigris_-Franklin_Park_Zoo...281%29.jpg]

should one misbehave in the presence of the dogs. Burglars, muggers, and rapists are meat. Dogs have all the characteristics of animals usually considered man-eaters, as I have posted in Wikipedia: strength, power, agility, speed, voracity, cunning, large sharp claws and teeth, and great bite force. (This has stuck). If one dog is not large enough to kill and eat a man in a predatory attack, several medium-to-large dogs can attack as if one giant predator. Besides, it has no predatory intent to kill like a bear or Big Cat. Even a small dog can maul someone badly, and risking an attack from even a Yorkshire terrier which is as ferocious as a bear or Big Cat is not worth some criminal objective. I have gotten inadvertent scratches by a cocker spaniel and needed hospital treatment for the infection that came from the painful laceration.

...At some time it might be appropriate to re-write the Second Amendment so at the least that it has a non-discrimination clause for both possession of firearms as for their confiscation.

Can you admit that a government that can deny people the right to keep and drive a car has a model for gun control? Don't you think that a gun owner should have to pass a test on gun safety? Sample test question:

15. What is a safe place for keeping a firearm

a. within the reach of its owner
b. in a secret place that nobody knows about
c. in a locked cabinet for which only responsible people have the key or know the combination
d. in the passenger compartment of any licensed motor vehicle
The ideal subject of totalitarian rule is not the convinced Nazi or the dedicated Communist  but instead the people for whom the distinction between fact and fiction, true and false, no longer exists -- Hannah Arendt.


Reply
(02-20-2019, 01:00 AM)Classic-Xer Wrote: Yep. You might as well get used to the idea of Bowling Alone and paying your own way because America is in the process of further separating right now. You want to live your life sitting on a couch, smoking pot and being paid for nothing then you move to a blue area where living that way is viewed as acceptable as long as you vote Democratic.

Having spent my adulthood in the minority political sphere, I know it's hard to accept the fact that your view of things isn't being appreciated.  I'm sad to say that you may be emerging into that world right now.  Since everything runs in multi-decadal cycles, your time in the spotlight is probably over … or nearly so.  How you deal with that is entirely up to you.

And btw, no one is advocating for sloth and pandering. You can pretend if you wish, but it's not so.
Intelligence is not knowledge and knowledge is not wisdom, but they all play well together.
Reply
(02-20-2019, 03:30 PM)David Horn Wrote:
(02-20-2019, 01:00 AM)Classic-Xer Wrote: Yep. You might as well get used to the idea of Bowling Alone and paying your own way because America is in the process of further separating right now. You want to live your life sitting on a couch, smoking pot and being paid for nothing then you move to a blue area where living that way is viewed as acceptable as long as you vote Democratic.

Having spent my adulthood in the minority political sphere, I know it's hard to accept the fact that your view of things isn't being appreciated.  I'm sad to say that you may be emerging into that world right now.  Since everything runs in multi-decadal cycles, your time in the spotlight is probably over … or nearly so.  How you deal with that is entirely up to you.

And btw, no one is advocating for sloth and pandering.  You can pretend if you wish, but it's not so.
So, I/we should ignore and dismiss or pretend we haven't seen what Ocasio-Cortez officially released as being included in the Green New Deal. You better speak to her about the Green New Deal its going to reward sloth. Now, I don't know how important she is to the higher ups. Oh that's right, she's already been promoted to a higher up which means she must be viewed as important to the high ups. The new liberal system is so strange compared to the old liberal seniority system. I guess a young fresh pretty new face is more important than time and learning through experience these days. If I seem critical that's because I can be just as critical as the liberals. I can be critical and can be more critical and can be even more critical and be more critical than that too. You've seen me at my least critical level and at my more critical level. I've spent my adulthood in the majority political sphere voting on central issues that pertain to me and most people. Yes, my spotlight will eventually fade and go out. Nothing lasts forever.
Reply
(02-21-2019, 02:16 AM)Classic-Xer Wrote:
(02-20-2019, 03:30 PM)David Horn Wrote:
(02-20-2019, 01:00 AM)Classic-Xer Wrote: Yep. You might as well get used to the idea of Bowling Alone and paying your own way because America is in the process of further separating right now. You want to live your life sitting on a couch, smoking pot and being paid for nothing then you move to a blue area where living that way is viewed as acceptable as long as you vote Democratic.

Having spent my adulthood in the minority political sphere, I know it's hard to accept the fact that your view of things isn't being appreciated.  I'm sad to say that you may be emerging into that world right now.  Since everything runs in multi-decadal cycles, your time in the spotlight is probably over … or nearly so.  How you deal with that is entirely up to you.

And btw, no one is advocating for sloth and pandering.  You can pretend if you wish, but it's not so.

So, I/we should ignore and dismiss or pretend we haven't seen what Ocasio-Cortez officially released as being included in the Green New Deal. You better speak to her about the Green New Deal its going to reward sloth. Now, I don't know how important she is to the higher ups. Oh that's right, she's already been promoted to a higher up which means she must be viewed as important to the high ups. The new liberal system is so strange compared to the old liberal seniority system. I guess a young fresh pretty new face is more important than time and learning through experience these days. If I seem critical that's because I can be just as critical as the liberals. I can be critical and can be more critical and can be even more critical and be more critical than that too. You've seen me at my least critical level and at my more critical level. I've spent my adulthood in the majority political sphere voting on central issues that pertain to me and most people. Yes, my spotlight will eventually fade and go out. Nothing lasts forever.

The problem is that our society seems to already reward being rich and powerful and making all else meaningless. We live in about as pure a plutocracy as is possible. It demands work but pays it less than it used to even though the economy has become more productive.

The paradigm of recent years has become tired and dreary. The new economic order will be about experience and not about filling lives with more consumer schlock -- especially if the consumer schlock comes with a hefty price tag of debt that people cannot pay easily.

You claim to be in the political minority, yet you have been in the effective majority in American politics in the times of both the Contract for America and the Tea Party, both of which did well in entrenching the power of America's elites of ownership and upper management. Those elites have been successful in exploiting resentments about demographic and cultural change on behalf of their own enrichment, power, and indulgence. Those elites want no independent and prosperous middle class, and they want to abandon the consumer economy so hat those elites can live in the sort of splendor that one associates with sultans while most Americans become poor no matter how productive they may be.  You fail to recognize that you could be a victim of the desire of elites to ensure that America neatly divides between wealthy predators and impoverished prey. Those elites want you to be another serf or peon. They want a nation of debt-bonded toilers, a modern equivalent of sharecroppers in the presence of an elite that lives incredibly well. I spend a couple years in Arkansas around 1970, and I saw that -- it was ugly.

I can say of their dream that I will hate life itself. I will take no delight in the ostentatious display of wealth and privilege, much of it offensive and even destructive, by people who make my life miserable. Little could be more meaningless. We are entering a post-industrial world, and its potential had better improve our lives. We are in the latter stages of a 4T, which could include a final, destructive denouement that has yet to begin but could be over in a few short years. After that we will enter another High in which the culture has become omnibus in nature, in which widespread prosperity is the norm, inequality of the lord-and-peon sort is an abomination, and opportunity for people rising in the ranks is an expectation. It will look much like the 1950s, with more homogenization of economic results. The extreme partisanship of recent years will implode as America become less tribal in its politics. Remember: organizations with generous funding from America's economic elites (FreedomWorks!, Club for Growth, Citizens United, and Americans for Prosperity) have fostered such tribal politics in support of divide et impera, and Donald Trump has tried to make that ugly trend mainstream. It is failing -- and flailing.

I remember hearing elderly Polish-Americans and Italian-Americans recalling their childhood poverty before the Second World War but who had made their way into the American middle class without having to deny their origins. They spoke with no longing for the good old days. To paraphrase an ad slogan, I have been around long enough to see a few things -- and then some. I listened to the elderly of the 1960s and 1970s... I know things that many young people do not know. I am one of those elephants with a long memory, and I know where to look when my information runs out for the time.

You need to be critical of people of unrestrained greed and whose economics are sadism. You need pay attention to the critiques of bureaucratic and economic power. Our economic elites are on the same moral plane as medieval lords, slave-owning planters, the economic masters of Germany who bankrolled Antichrist Hitler into power in Germany and supported the militaristic expansion of Japan, and the nomenklatura of Commie states. Of the latter, they could exploit people, contrary to Marxist theory, as badly as any aristocracy despite owning little but the proceeds of their administrative positions. America's elites have played salami tactics upon us Americans long enough in politics -- and we are getting wise.
The ideal subject of totalitarian rule is not the convinced Nazi or the dedicated Communist  but instead the people for whom the distinction between fact and fiction, true and false, no longer exists -- Hannah Arendt.


Reply
(02-21-2019, 02:16 AM)Classic-Xer Wrote:
(02-20-2019, 03:30 PM)David Horn Wrote:
(02-20-2019, 01:00 AM)Classic-Xer Wrote: Yep. You might as well get used to the idea of Bowling Alone and paying your own way because America is in the process of further separating right now. You want to live your life sitting on a couch, smoking pot and being paid for nothing then you move to a blue area where living that way is viewed as acceptable as long as you vote Democratic.

Having spent my adulthood in the minority political sphere, I know it's hard to accept the fact that your view of things isn't being appreciated.  I'm sad to say that you may be emerging into that world right now.  Since everything runs in multi-decadal cycles, your time in the spotlight is probably over … or nearly so.  How you deal with that is entirely up to you.

And btw, no one is advocating for sloth and pandering.  You can pretend if you wish, but it's not so.

So, I/we should ignore and dismiss or pretend we haven't seen what Ocasio-Cortez officially released as being included in the Green New Deal. You better speak to her about the Green New Deal its going to reward sloth. Now, I don't know how important she is to the higher ups. Oh that's right, she's already been promoted to a higher up which means she must be viewed as important to the high ups. The new liberal system is so strange compared to the old liberal seniority system. I guess a young fresh pretty new face is more important than time and learning through experience these days. If I seem critical that's because I can be just as critical as the liberals. I can be critical and can be more critical and can be even more critical and be more critical than that too. You've seen me at my least critical level and at my more critical level. I've spent my adulthood in the majority political sphere voting on central issues that pertain to me and most people. Yes, my spotlight will eventually fade and go out. Nothing lasts forever.

The Green New Deal merely recognizes what's already happening: Capital is taking all the gains, technology is taking all the jobs and cronyism is making sure that taxes fall on the middle class and spending goes to the top.  It also recognizes that the path forward requires an all new energy system and infrastructure focused on eliminating the need for fossil fuels.  How we get there seems to be your issue.  Jobs for everyone?  Yes, because we'll need a lot of workers in new jobs before this is done, and fewer in older jobs that created most of the pain.  You can't just snap your fingers and make that happen.  Getting there is hard.

So the GND is not a road map.  It's a vision statement.  It will be decades in the making, so it's a Millennial plan, not one for the likes of you and me.
Intelligence is not knowledge and knowledge is not wisdom, but they all play well together.
Reply
(02-21-2019, 01:36 PM)David Horn Wrote:
(02-21-2019, 02:16 AM)Classic-Xer Wrote:
(02-20-2019, 03:30 PM)David Horn Wrote:
(02-20-2019, 01:00 AM)Classic-Xer Wrote: Yep. You might as well get used to the idea of Bowling Alone and paying your own way because America is in the process of further separating right now. You want to live your life sitting on a couch, smoking pot and being paid for nothing then you move to a blue area where living that way is viewed as acceptable as long as you vote Democratic.

Having spent my adulthood in the minority political sphere, I know it's hard to accept the fact that your view of things isn't being appreciated.  I'm sad to say that you may be emerging into that world right now.  Since everything runs in multi-decadal cycles, your time in the spotlight is probably over … or nearly so.  How you deal with that is entirely up to you.

And btw, no one is advocating for sloth and pandering.  You can pretend if you wish, but it's not so.

So, I/we should ignore and dismiss or pretend we haven't seen what Ocasio-Cortez officially released as being included in the Green New Deal. You better speak to her about the Green New Deal its going to reward sloth. Now, I don't know how important she is to the higher ups. Oh that's right, she's already been promoted to a higher up which means she must be viewed as important to the high ups. The new liberal system is so strange compared to the old liberal seniority system. I guess a young fresh pretty new face is more important than time and learning through experience these days. If I seem critical that's because I can be just as critical as the liberals. I can be critical and can be more critical and can be even more critical and be more critical than that too. You've seen me at my least critical level and at my more critical level. I've spent my adulthood in the majority political sphere voting on central issues that pertain to me and most people. Yes, my spotlight will eventually fade and go out. Nothing lasts forever.

The Green New Deal merely recognizes what's already happening: Capital is taking all the gains, technology is taking all the jobs and cronyism is making sure that taxes fall on the middle class and spending goes to the top.  It also recognizes that the path forward requires an all new energy system and infrastructure focused on eliminating the need for fossil fuels.  How we get there seems to be your issue.  Jobs for everyone?  Yes, because we'll need a lot of workers in new jobs before this is done, and fewer in older jobs that created most of the pain.  You can't just snap your fingers and make that happen.  Getting there is hard.

So the GND is not a road map.  It's a vision statement.  It will be decades in the making, so it's a Millennial plan, not one for the likes of you and me.
Well, according to her, we have twelve years to radically change just about everything related to all of us or we are all going to be dead in twelve short years. So, I guess that's our life span as an entire species. Now, I don't go to her church if she even goes to a church. I don't share her lifestyle if her lifestyle centers on reading books by liberals, watching liberal documentaries, reading information posted by liberals on liberal websites and information she gathers from her liberal peers and liberal family members.

I'd say The Green New Deal recognizes the difference between the two America's and only recognizes and only addresses the issues and future needs related to one of them. Now, I can't speak for people like you because people like you seem to have this crazy notion in their heads that they know more than everyone else.
Reply
(02-21-2019, 11:40 PM)Classic-Xer Wrote: Well, according to her, we have twelve years to radically change just about everything related to all of us or we are all going to be dead in twelve short years. So, I guess that's our life span as an entire species. Now, I don't go to her church if she even goes to a church. I don't share her lifestyle if her lifestyle centers on reading books by liberals, watching liberal documentaries, reading information posted by liberals on liberal websites and information she gathers from her liberal peers and liberal family members.

Come on!  No one claims the end is neigh.  The REAL claims about 12 years has to do with permanent damage, and that's true. The climate changes, assuming we do nothing to mitigate them, will cause major dislocations and extreme costs, but life will go on.  But understand the concept of hysteresis. The full effects will be decades arriving.

Think of it as analogous to a huge tank full of water with a small hole in the bottom. The floot gets wet right away, but the flood doesn't happen until the tank empties. That's what baking the planet is like.

C-Xer Wrote:I'd say The Green New Deal recognizes the difference between the two America's and only recognizes and only addresses the issues and future needs related to one of them. Now, I can't speak for people like you because people like you seem to have this crazy notion in their heads that they know more than everyone else.

As far as I know, both Americas share the same air, suffer in the same storms, and eat from the same food stock. The GND is a grand plan fix it all. It may be overly ambitious, but it's grounded in science and economics.  What I fail to see is suffering for some and not all; benefits for some and not all. The options are narrowing. If not this or something similar pretty soon, the mitigation required will REALLY get hairy!
Intelligence is not knowledge and knowledge is not wisdom, but they all play well together.
Reply


Possibly Related Threads...
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  Hawaii bill would allow gun seizure after hospitalization nebraska 17 2,917 05-05-2019, 10:05 AM
Last Post: misswali
  Rand Paul Leads Bipartisan Effort to End Warrantless Surveillance nebraska 3 1,307 05-06-2018, 08:14 PM
Last Post: dcgal
  Menendez gets his first challenger in Senate race: An 'out of the box' Libertarian nebraska 0 568 01-28-2018, 12:17 AM
Last Post: nebraska
  Gov. Malloy Asks Legislature to Expand Gun Control and Ban 'Bump Stocks' nebraska 0 688 01-22-2018, 05:56 AM
Last Post: nebraska
  Alderman proposes higher fines, more inspections for gas stations nebraska 0 525 01-20-2018, 06:40 AM
Last Post: nebraska
  Senate Votes To Reauthorize FISA Without Substantial Reforms nebraska 0 657 01-18-2018, 08:31 PM
Last Post: nebraska
  Bipartisan bill would ban ‘bump stocks’ for rifles in NY nebraska 0 573 01-15-2018, 12:54 AM
Last Post: nebraska
  Leaving dogs in cars could escalate into a felony under Senate bills nebraska 0 566 01-12-2018, 06:43 AM
Last Post: nebraska
  Senator proposes sovereignty as a way to economic development nebraska 9 2,044 01-09-2018, 08:12 PM
Last Post: nebraska
  Senate report on CIA torture is one step closer to disappearing nebraska 2 824 01-06-2018, 09:40 AM
Last Post: nebraska

Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)