Hate America?

[Tgace]

another interesting excerpt from it....

It is true that voters tend to see the Republicans as the party of the rich. Asked whether Bush paid more attention to the interests of large corporations or of ordinary Americans, 54 percent said the former, 41 percent the latter. Voters who cited the economy as their most important issue went for Kerry five to one, and voters who said that what mattered most to them was a candidate who “cares about people like me” opted for Kerry over Bush three to one. In view of Bush’s regular-guy persona and Kerry’s patrician remoteness, the reason for this must have been simply that Kerry was the Democrat.

Yet when it came to policy, the answers tilted in a different direction. Asked whether government should “do more to solve problems” or “is doing too many things better left to businesses and individuals,” voters opted for the latter by 49 to 46. Asked whether Bush’s tax cuts had been good or bad for the nation’s economy, 41 percent said good and 32 percent bad. Asked whom they would trust to handle the economy, they gave the edge to Bush by 3 percentage points.

Taken together, these numbers suggest that the problem for the Democrats goes beyond voters who choose to put other issues ahead of economic ones. The problem is whether the party can win even on economic issues. While Bush suffered from the mediocre performance of the economy during his first term (Presidents always get more blame or credit for this than they deserve), and while the Democrats retain the cachet of being the party of the common man, support for their economic policies has been leaching away.

This erosion is something that the Democrats, who already trail Republicans on issues of national security and values, cannot afford. If it continues, and unless the party can fulfill Cherny’s goal of developing some new vision, they will win the presidency or Congress only when scandal or recession or defeat in war lays the Republicans low. The rest of the time, the GOP will reign. If this is the abyss into which the pundits peered, little wonder that they became so deranged. Hard, brutish times indeed.

 

[Tgace]

Try to win an election on "the sky is falling"...good luck. Like the sky hasnt looked low for previous generations of Americans.

If you have so little faith in the American spirit, go dig a fallout shelter.

Or..
1. Buy some land in the country.
2. Pay off your debts.
3. Buy gold.

I would also add some guns, ammo, water purifiers, a big pick-up truck and a horde of gasoline. Perhaps a copy of the Turner Diaries.

 

[Tgace]

Andy, heres a good speech about the 2nd Amendment and the Rep/Dem...Con/Lib split. Dont get too hung up on the whole "gun" thing the speech itself has a lot content appropriate to this thread.

http://home.earthlink.net/~ttursine/speech1.htm

 

[Makalakumu]

Try to win an election on "the sky is falling"...good luck. Like the sky hasnt looked low for previous generations of Americans.

One isn't going to win with that kind of attitude, but I can't think of a positive way to deliver the message. Can you?

If you have so little faith in the American spirit, go dig a fallout shelter.

http://www.energybulletin.net/2877.html

Or..
1. Buy some land in the country.
2. Pay off your debts.
3. Buy gold.

I would also add some guns, ammo, water purifiers, a big pick-up truck and a horde of gasoline. Perhaps a copy of the Turner Diaries.

Hey, good idea! I've never heard of the Turner Diaries, though...

I would add, "invest in alternative energy" to the list.

 

[andy]

Yet another great article. I wonder though.
will those that need to consider it bother reading?

 

[michaeledward]

michaeledwards?
care to comment on my grammer? or the points i raised. (because my grammar sucks) but the points are legit,--

since my grammar lacks I tried to clarify my points

I don't think I recognized any new points you raised. I already commented on the points you did raise; your fact needs to be checked, because it is erroneous. And, I do not think the Brady Bill is 'extreme'.

well thanks for the english lesson.

You're welcome.

as for the stats I found-I didn't gather them, I was simply clarifying where i read them.

Is that the statistic that said there were 200,000,000 gun owners getting fed up? I'm quite ceratin that the source from which you gatherd your facts did not state there were that many gun owners in the country. The source probably didn't indicate that the gun owners, however many their are, were getting 'fed up'.

It's quite clear the liberal stance on gun control cost alot of dems the positions of power they enjoyed.

This is not quite clear to me. You can certainly attempt to clarify the point for me further. Please demonstrate where there has been an abandonment of democrats because of 'gun control'.

Also, the quote on the brady bill was from bill clinton not I. As for checking someones background to see if they are one shy of a sixpack?--Of course thats a good idea.

I saw the quote from Bill Clinton. I was not disputing that a part of the 1994 Republican Revolution was due to the Brady Bill.

But this does not make 200,000,000 Americans law abiding gun owners. The fact is incorrect.

And, if it is a 'good idea' to check someone's background, how do you define this good idea as something other than 'gun control'? And, if it is a 'good idea', how is it that only the 'fringe', as you describe in the next quote, seems capable of voicing this 'good idea'.

It's the fringe gun grabbing groups that played a keyrole in bringing the democrats down.

I don't understand.

The Democratic Party in the United States, according to the last election, represented more than half of the country (Democrats received more votes than Republicans), and yet you premise that 'fringe' groups control the party. The logic in this statement escapes me.

For example: the misrepresentation of an assault weapon versus a semi-automatic that was constantly played out with the the so called "assault weapons ban."'

I don't understand what you are saying with this sentence.

the number of guns in america and the source could only take the count from those civilians that cared to share the info. Obviously not everyone took the time to take the study. (If i understand your point)I myself did not make an assumption sir, it was a quote from a source you may or may not choose to consider.

I believe I said that, or at least inferred that. I believe I said I believe the number of weapons owned in the United States is greater than the 200,000,000 that you referenced. Obviously, I did consider your source. I concluded it was, probably, inaccurate.

 

[andy]

so will you misdirect mike? or will you read from the sources you asked me for?

or will you infer other issues to missdirect. play around the issue- but the point was made for all to see if any cares to read. jeez my grammar sucks.

maybe we should focus on my spelling

 

[Tgace]

Yet another great article. I wonder though.
will those that need to consider it bother reading?

Probably not. Its easier to place the blame on the "vast right wing conspiracy" than it is to really look at why people are turning away....

 

[michaeledward]

so will you misdirect mike? or will you read from the sources you asked me for?

or will you infer other issues to missdirect. play around the issue- but the point was made for all to see if any cares to read. jeez my grammar sucks.

maybe we should focus on my spelling

Andy ...

For what information, specifically, should I read from the 'just facts' web site?

That is the only site, you have pointed me to at this juncture, correct?

 

[andy]

mike---hee,hee
how many other sources do you want friend?
or maybe I should elaborate on your subtle misdirection of topics?

 

[michaeledward]

Well, Andy, I guess I would have to ask, "What is your point?"

You started with this:

In answer to the comment about the democrats losing the seats of power all across the country--
It's because of the extreme leftist stance on gun control that was taken in the 1990's
there are around 2 hundred million private gun owners in america that were getting fed up. Yes, thats not the only reason but it is a large one.
​

I asked you to check your facts, because it is highly unlikely that the gun owning population of the United States is the 200,000,000 you claim.

We also discussed the 'extreme leftist stance' on gun control includes such things as background check, which you then called a "good idea".

It's quite clear the liberal stance on gun control cost alot of dems the positions of power they enjoyed. Also, the quote on the brady bill was from bill clinton not I. As for checking someones background to see if they are one shy of a sixpack?--Of course thats a good idea. It's the fringe gun grabbing groups that played a keyrole in bringing the democrats down. For example: the misrepresentation of an assault weapon versus a semi-automatic that was constantly played out with the the so called "assault weapons ban."
​

Is there another point you are trying to make? If there is, I can't see it.

 

[sgtmac_46]

Well, Andy, I guess I would have to ask, "What is your point?"













You started with this:

In answer to the comment about the democrats losing the seats of power all across the country--






It's because of the extreme leftist stance on gun control that was taken in the 1990's
there are around 2 hundred million private gun owners in america that were getting fed up. Yes, thats not the only reason but it is a large one.






​

I asked you to check your facts, because it is highly unlikely that the gun owning population of the United States is the 200,000,000 you claim.

Actually, the total number of gun owners is 70 Million...which makes it a significant number of the electorate. Firearms ownership is a bigger issue to me than abortion (which I have no opinion one). It's a bigger issue for most of the people I know than abortion, yet abortion gets played up in the media far more. I'd be more tempted to vote Democrat, if they didn't align themselves with gun-grabbers like HCI.




The big political issues for me that make me vote Republican are:

Foreign policy
Gun Control
Crime and Punishment


Other than those issues, I could be persuaded to vote Democrat on many topics where I ride the fence, such as:

The environment
Social Security/Privatization
Health Care Reform
Taxes

But i'm not willing to sacrifice those first issues.

We also discussed the 'extreme leftist stance' on gun control includes such things as background check, which you then called a "good idea".

It's quite clear the liberal stance on gun control cost alot of dems the positions of power they enjoyed. Also, the quote on the brady bill was from bill clinton not I. As for checking someones background to see if they are one shy of a sixpack?--Of course thats a good idea. It's the fringe gun grabbing groups that played a keyrole in bringing the democrats down. For example: the misrepresentation of an assault weapon versus a semi-automatic that was constantly played out with the the so called "assault weapons ban."












​

Is there another point you are trying to make? If there is, I can't see it.

Why don't you name some more of those "Reasonable extreme leftist stances".


Background checks are a compromies issue. Most leftists support the outright ban of firearms, but they know that is not possible in this political environment, so they use the foot in the door tactics, i.e. the "appearance" of reasonable gun control measures. Once the population accepts those measures, the gun grabbers decide other "reasonable" measures are necessary, and so on, until they manage to pass legislation, such as the recent "cop-killer bullet legislation", under the radar under the guise of "reasonable" gun control.

Lets examine how this works under the guise of the recent attempt by Ted "Chappaquidick" Kennedy to pass this little "reasonable sounding" legislation past congress. Kennedy wanted to ban "cop-killer" bullets. Sounds reasonable, right, I mean nobody wants bullets designed to "kill cops". Problem is, there is no such bullet as a "cop-killer" bullet, it's a smoke mirrors deception.

What Kennedy wanted to do was ban any bullet capable of penetrating soft body armor. That includes virtually every round fired from any rifle. This law, in essence, would backdoor ban ammunition for every hunting rifle, shotgun, or high-powered pistol in the country. What Kennedy was trying to do was score a backdoor victory making every long gun in the country ammunitionless. How's that for "honest", "reasonable" gun control.

When this was pointed out, the "right wing media" got on the bandwagon, accusing hunters of wanting to shoot deer with "cop killer bullets" (you could write that off as the moronic mental ability of the average reporter, I could accept that explaination).

Much of the lefts "reasonable" gun control legislation is like this. They use rhetoric and propaganda, along with out right distortion of the facts, to give the appearance of "reasonable" gun control legislation. Ultimately, however, they have no intention of passing reasonable gun control leglistation, as in their minds they've already come to the conclusion that the only "reasonable" gun control leglislation is the outright BAN of the private ownership of firearms.

Sorry, no sale. I am the NRA!

But I will tell you about real "reasonable" gun control measures, backed by the NRA (and opposed by many of the gun grabbers as well as the ACLU). Operation Exile is a program whereby many state governments have passed laws enhancing sentencing on violent felons in possession firearms. In effect, it makes it a felony for felons to even possess ammunition. The NRA backed this, supported it, and helped put it in place. It's TRULY reasonable because it punishes those who abuse firearms, not those who don't. It puts criminals who possess firearms BEHIND BARS for a long time. Now THAT'S reasonable (and opposed by the left, go figure). What's MORE?! It actually WORKS!!! The left doesn't like it because it punishes criminals, not law abiding gun owners (the lefts true target).

http://www.usdoj.gov/usao/nyw/proj_exile.htm
http://www.dcjs.virginia.gov/exile/
http://www.vahv.org/Exile/index2.html
http://www.senate.gov/~rpc/releases/1998/Exile-kf.htm
http://www.nraila.org/News/Read/Releases.aspx?ID=693
http://www.nracentral.com/project-exile.php

Compare this to such ill advised gun control schemes as "Gun buy backs", where cities and private foundations buy back guns, no questions asks, for a moderate price. Sounds reasonable, right? The result was, however, an INCREASE in stolen firearms. Drug users were stealing guns to "fence" to the police because they knew they could unload them, no questions asked. Brilliant.

 

[andy]

Geez louis
with all those facts that the-- sgtmac-- brought to the table, I don't know how to argue against his points. Unless maybe I read some of them.
but if i did that : then my perception might be changed. So I guess I won't read his sources.

 

[michaeledward]

Geez louis
with all those facts that the-- sgtmac-- brought to the table, I don't know how to argue against his points. Unless maybe I read some of them.
but if i did that : then my perception might be changed. So I guess I won't read his sources.

sgtmac has earned his way on to my ignore list.

andy, if you have something you want to say, please say it.

If you want to argue with sgtmac's words, I am not going to play. Sorry.

 

[Bester]

Hey Andy: You need to read this: 7 Easy Ways to Online Respect or, The Dummies Guide to Forum Behavior. It's located in the support forum here.Might help you.

Otherwise, unless you have something to add to the conversation besides sarcasm, and rudeness, I suggest you be quiet. This is a place for serious discussion.

 

[andy]

Actually, I have contributed to this conversation earlier. But was meant with a bit of misdirection and a bit of smugness (I won't name names )
I will stand by my viewpoint-sgtmac has made some very good points. I was simply acknowledging them.

 

[sgtmac_46]

Actually, I have contributed to this conversation earlier. But was meant with a bit of misdirection and a bit of smugness (I won't name names )
I will stand by my viewpoint-sgtmac has made some very good points. I was simply acknowledging them.

I actually feel honored to have earned a place on Ward's distinquished "ignore list". I know I must be doing something right. It's high praise to be ignored by folks like Ward. It means they've lost the debate of ideas, and are simply praying you'll go away. I'm touched.

 

[Tgace]

Gee..I would have thought I would have beat you onto it.

 

[sgtmac_46]

Gee..I would have thought I would have beat you onto it.

Who says you haven't?

 

[Makalakumu]

Ee gads! The delusions of granduer!