Trump Wants Nancy

Fogdog · Nov 18, 2018

Olive Drab Green said:
I’m a Constructivist. Everything is a social construct. Looking through the policies of the Libertarians in my area, they were more centrist than anything. They supported legalizing on a larger scale than the Democrats, they supported health care. I believe in the Second Amendment but also support regulation of fully automatic firearms and explosives. I can do the same thing with a semi-automatic “hunting rifle” chambered in 5.56mm or 7.62mm NATO as I can with a semi-automatic rifle with a pistol grip and picatinny rail, and the automatic/burst function isn’t really used by riflemen in combat. Like, we’re more about accurate, sustained fire to pop heads that pop up while SAW gunners and 240s keep heads down. I believe that to give up your right to bear arms is a sure road to oppression in the long run. My point is, I kind of straddle between the two, but I lean more Left than Right. I believe we need regulations to a degree where there is as little compromise of personal freedom as possible, but to the degree that people are not taking advantage of each other through an underhanded cycle of institutional poverty and other forms of “subliminal” oppression.

The US libertarian movement is based upon a status quo capitalist "winner takes all" ideal. Their basic concepts such as a thing they call "market forces" and that a free market means an unregulated one just plays into the hands of the wealthy. Libertarian think tanks like the Mises Institute come out and say that they reject science and mathematics in favor of unproven pseudoscience that they call praexeology. Their definition of praexeology is just a big word that stands for their own unproven and unscientific beliefs in human behavior. Some of the shit libertarians say are vile, such as, employers should be able to demand anything as a service for their paycheck, even sexual favors. "If you don't want to give me head, you are free to find a job elsewhere". As if human rights should be for sale.

Nobody is seriously talking about taking guns away from peaceful people. What some Democrats are talking about is restricting future sales of mass murder weapons and tracking gun sales to make it harder for guns to get into the hands of violent people. If you don't threaten anybody, especially your partner, and if you don't commit violent crimes, you keep your guns. I don't think this somehow makes us less free. I think it makes us free from people who would menace and coerce using their guns.

Olive Drab Green · Nov 18, 2018

SB85 said:
I fully support citizens in their right state of mind being able to own firearms for hunting along with using as a last result in terms of self defense. There needs to be some strict enforcement of regulation to keep guns out of the hands of crazy nut jobs though. The problem is many folks on the right think when someone speaks on regulation that means to take the guns away from everybody.

We aren’t guaranteed the right to bear arms for hunting and self-defense, but also to prevent oppression from a tyrannical government. It was adopted because the British attempted to disarm all Colonists.

I agree, crazy Right Wingers use it as a political coal for the engine. If the Dems wanted to ban firearms, they would have done it by now after 8 years. They realize it’s a politically and sociologically complex situation that we’re still trying to figure out how to approach.

Olive Drab Green · Nov 18, 2018

Fogdog said:
The US libertarian movement is based upon a status quo capitalist "winner takes all" ideal. Their basic concepts such as a thing they call "market forces" and that a free market means an unregulated one just plays into the hands of the wealthy. Libertarian think tanks like the Mises Institute come out and say that they reject science and mathematics in favor of unproven pseudoscience that they call praexeology. Their definition of praexeology is just a big word that stands for their own unproven and unscientific beliefs in human behavior. Some of the shit libertarians say are vile, such as, employers should be able to demand anything as a service for their paycheck, even sexual favors. "If you don't want to give me head, you are free to find a job elsewhere". As if human rights should be for sale.

Nobody is seriously talking about taking guns away from peaceful people. What some Democrats are talking about is restricting future sales of mass murder weapons and tracking gun sales to make it harder for guns to get into the hands of violent people. If you don't threaten anybody, especially your partner, and if you don't commit violent crimes, you keep your guns. I don't think this somehow makes us less free. I think it makes us free from people who would menace and coerce using their guns.

See, I disagree with the Right economically. It’s not a race to see who can control all the resources, that kind of shit throws the entire global environment out of balance which is imminently cataclysmic. I believe there’s enough for everyone to be comfortable and happy, and I am totally opposed to the social construct of a sociopoliticoaristocratic elite. People need to care about each other and their environment as much as themselves. We need a symbiotic relationship, not a parasitic one. When I say Libertarian, I mean I’m more about personal freedom, in line with natural law, rather than vying to control so much that your practices and endeavors manifest global warming or otherwise wreak havoc on the population or environment, to include regulation that supports and creates the super-wealthy. I think one idea we need to consider is dissolution of big corporations that inflate the economy so far above baseline that the poverty class can’t touch the ground and they strangle. Their gains are usually gotten unethically most of the time, anyway. I’m more about the Constitutional security of personal freedom. I also think we need to disestablish the for-profit prison abomination. Freedom and Community are both important to me, and the cold, political machine, which is tied to big industry is a proven threat to both.

Fogdog · Nov 18, 2018

Olive Drab Green said:
See, I disagree with the Right economically. It’s not a race to see who can control all the resources, that kind of shit throws the entire global environment out of balance which is imminently cataclysmic. I believe there’s enough for everyone to be comfortable and happy, and I am totally opposed to the social construct of a sociopoliticoaristocratic elite. People need to care about each other and their environment as much as themselves. We need a symbiotic relationship, not a parasitic one.

I was surprised when you said you voted for libertarian because you've seemed to me to be left leaning economically and to socially. Libertarians are anything but that. Libertarian leaders don't say what you just said. They say that human rights are subservient to capital. The thing is, when somebody tells me who they are, I listen. I think libertarian philosophy is vile.

A lot of Trump supporters didn't believe Trump would actually try to take down the ACA without something better to replace it. They picked and chose what they wanted to believe. It turned out they should have listened and believed that Trump meant what he said when he promised to repeal the ACA. If Trump had said he'd support making pot legal without restrictions, I'd still vote against him for all the other things he says. Same goes with Libertarian.

Given all you said, why did you not support the Green Party instead? I follow and sometimes support the Oregon Green Party.

Olive Drab Green · Nov 18, 2018

Fogdog said:
I was surprised when you said you voted for libertarian because you've seemed to me to be left leaning economically and to socially. Libertarians are anything but that. Libertarian leaders don't say what you just said. They say that human rights are subservient to capital. The thing is, when somebody tells me who they are, I listen. I think libertarian philosophy is vile.

A lot of Trump supporters didn't believe Trump would actually try to take down the ACA without something better to replace it. They picked and chose what they wanted to believe. It turned out they should have listened and believed that Trump meant what he said when he promised to repeal the ACA. If Trump had said he'd support making pot legal without restrictions, I'd still vote against him for all the other things he says. Same goes with Libertarian.

Given all you said, why did you not support the Green Party instead? I follow and sometimes support the Oregon Green Party.

To be honest, I don’t know a lot about the Green Party. I was more focused on policy concerning cannabis and social reform than economy. Had I explored a bit further, I probably would have voted Green Party if they were on the ballot. I had already expected Dems in my area to win, though, and they did. I also wanted my particular Rep to go to Hell, because I reached out to her on an issue concerning medical cannabis and she asked if I wanted a service dog instead. She was Republican, and was just trying not to state her opposition to Cannabis.

Olive Drab Green · Nov 18, 2018

The problem with the Right is, they try to equate “personal freedom” with “the right to rule the world by whatever means necessary.” That’s not personal freedom, that’s infringement on personal freedom. When society no longer serves the People, but an individual or select few, it is no longer a society nor a philosophical good. It is tyranny, fascism, and dictatorship dressed in red, white, and blue clothing. We’ve taken this concept—which has no reality of its own—so far, that it may eventually destroy us all. The illusion must come to an end, and we have to start doing the right thing.

Budley Doright · Nov 18, 2018

Olive Drab Green said:
We aren’t guaranteed the right to bear arms for hunting and self-defense, but also to prevent oppression from a tyrannical government. It was adopted because the British attempted to disarm all Colonists.

I agree, crazy Right Wingers use it as a political coal for the engine. If the Dems wanted to ban firearms, they would have done it by now after 8 years. They realize it’s a politically and sociologically complex situation that we’re still trying to figure out how to approach.

See that’s the thing about the second amendment and how it’s allowed for the proliferation of handguns, assault weapons and pretty much anything that was meant to kill a person. The second amendment was written in a different time and had not meant to get you guys where you are today. They had muskets for fuck sake, not AR’s and Glocks. But because that was written in your constitution it is used as a tool and defended as a right ....... IMO lol. For the record I do wish I could carry but know bad things would happen

.

Olive Drab Green · Nov 18, 2018

Budley Doright said:
See that’s the thing about the second amendment and how it’s allowed for the proliferation of handguns, assault weapons and pretty much anything that was meant to kill a person. The second amendment was written in a different time and had not meant to get you guys where you are today. They had muskets for fuck sake, not AR’s and Glocks. But because that was written in your constitution it is used as a tool and defended as a right ....... IMO lol. For the record I do wish I could carry but know bad things would happen .

I disagree about era of creation being a valid rebuttal, and believe that if the government has weapons, we should at least have equal basic firearms to secure against tyranny. That was the intent of the Second Amendment. I’m all for allowing people to carry their choice of melee weapon, though, too.

I dunno, that’s not just my opinion, though. That is the culture and Constitution here in the US. You’re entitled to your beliefs, your culture is different. You’re Canadian, I believe.

Columbine happened during the AWB of ‘94, and it was two kids who weren’t even of age to buy firearms. If someone is intent on killing you, they will find a way to do so. I believe—to a degree—that (over)regulation only puts the law-abiding defendant at risk of not being able to fend off an assailant. I really do wish we lived in a world where we didn’t need guns and peace was commonplace. Unfortunately, that’s not the case. Say the “bad guy” is a machinist and he’s made his own gun because he wasn’t able to source one on the Mexican BM, for whatever reason. It’s not like you can control what people create.

Rob Roy · Nov 18, 2018

Budley Doright said:
See that’s the thing about the second amendment and how it’s allowed for the proliferation of handguns, assault weapons and pretty much anything that was meant to kill a person. The second amendment was written in a different time and had not meant to get you guys where you are today. They had muskets for fuck sake, not AR’s and Glocks. But because that was written in your constitution it is used as a tool and defended as a right ....... IMO lol. For the record I do wish I could carry but know bad things would happen .

Different time argument eh? Lame.

So freedom of the press only means the crappy old wooden printing presses that existed in 1790 and anybody using modern printing technology today shouldn't have that right protected ?

UncleBuck · Nov 18, 2018

Rob Roy said:
Different time argument eh? Lame.

So freedom of the press only means the crappy old wooden printing presses that existed in 1790 and anybody using modern printing technology today shouldn't have that right protected ?

Freedom of the press doesn’t mean you can spy and steal from Americans

That kinda thing will land you in prison. Just ask Julian assange

Budley Doright · Nov 18, 2018

Olive Drab Green said:
I disagree about era of creation being a valid rebuttal, and believe that if the government has weapons, we should at least have equal basic firearms to secure against tyranny. That was the intent of the Second Amendment. I’m all for allowing people to carry their choice of melee weapon, though, too.

I dunno, that’s not just my opinion, though. That is the culture and Constitution here in the US. You’re entitled to your beliefs, your culture is different. You’re Canadian, I believe.

Columbine happened during the AWB of ‘94, and it was two kids who weren’t even of age to buy firearms. If someone is intent on killing you, they will find a way to do so. I believe—to a degree—that (over)regulation only puts the law-abiding defendant at risk of not being able to fend off an assailant. I really do wish we lived in a world where we didn’t need guns and peace was commonplace. Unfortunately, that’s not the case. Say the “bad guy” is a machinist and he’s made his own gun because he wasn’t able to source one on the Mexican BM, for whatever reason. It’s not like you can control what people create.

I see your point but really do you honestly believe that your 2nd amendment is stopping a government take over? You guys are killing each other, not protecting yourselves, but I do see the perceived threat. Hell if I was allowed to travel down there I think I would want one, everyone else seems to lol. Have you even had to use a gun to protect yourself (in civilian life), honestly protect yourself? Our cultures, IMO, are not different, just the laws, perhaps that has lead to a different mindset but not culture. As for access to guns, your argument has no merit, that would be the same as the bad guy can build a nuke so I should be able to have one, there is no end game. We have the same debate here re the government is taking all our guns, hasn’t happened and I for one am not that worried it ever will. Again I get it and doubt you guys can make any meaningful changes, the 2nd amendment being a huge stumbling block for that change. The only way would be a total handgun ban and any weapon that can hold more than 5 rounds. Ok I’ll run, I’m sure I’ll be the target of flying rocks, torches and pitchforks lol

Olive Drab Green · Nov 18, 2018

Budley Doright said:
I see your point but really do you honestly believe that your 2nd amendment is stopping a government take over? You guys are killing each other, not protecting yourselves, but I do see the perceived threat. Hell if I was allowed to travel down there I think I would want one, everyone else seems to lol. Have you even had to use a gun to protect yourself (in civilian life), honestly protect yourself? Our cultures, IMO, are not different, just the laws, perhaps that has lead to a different mindset but not culture. As for access to guns, your argument has no merit, that would be the same as the bad guy can build a nuke so I should be able to have one, there is no end game. We have the same debate here re the government is taking all our guns, hasn’t happened and I for one am not that worried it ever will. Again I get it and doubt you guys can make any meaningful changes, the 2nd amendment being a huge stumbling block for that change. The only way would be a total handgun ban and any weapon that can hold more than 5 rounds. Ok I’ll run, I’m sure I’ll be the target of flying rocks, torches and pitchforks lol

I definitely understand and sympathize where you’re coming from. It’s not like I don’t understand the points of what you’re saying or anything. Things are definitely fucked up right now. You’re right about people killing each other. I believe that if people could somehow cease to be effected by this social illusion being projected by the powers that be and recognize what needs to be done to fix this broken system (i.e. get corporate lobbying out of politics, term limits, no more corporate sponsored incumbents) rather than become complacent and entranced by the division being wrought from the heat of the situation being subliminally dictated by the 1%, we could probably focus on ousting the corruption from Washington together. People just need to figure out a way we can stop seeing two where there’s one. I just feel it’s unwise to disarm, especially at such a critical point. The Right is already mailing pipe bombs and shooting people. Seek to find a way to counter division, but it’s definitely necessary to protect yourself these days.

schuylaar · Nov 18, 2018

Olive Drab Green said:
I said it yesterday, I think, but I believe Pelosi is connected to Trump, as is McConnell, Lindsey, and Ryan. She’s talking moving forward while everybody else talking about impeachment and getting down to business.

which is why she should pass the baton.

i don't understand the chuck and nancy thing though.

trump uses them as a punching bag whenever convenient.

it really is insulting that MSN is saying that she is unopposed and have to talk about it 24/7 to convince us..similar to hillary.

this is 2016 all over again.

she doesn't want to move forward, she wants things 'the way they were'.

i wasn't going to post this but i just got my hair cut like that, so.. :mrgreen:

schuylaar · Nov 18, 2018

Olive Drab Green said:
See, I disagree with the Right economically. It’s not a race to see who can control all the resources, that kind of shit throws the entire global environment out of balance which is imminently cataclysmic. I believe there’s enough for everyone to be comfortable and happy, and I am totally opposed to the social construct of a sociopoliticoaristocratic elite. People need to care about each other and their environment as much as themselves. We need a symbiotic relationship, not a parasitic one. When I say Libertarian, I mean I’m more about personal freedom, in line with natural law, rather than vying to control so much that your practices and endeavors manifest global warming or otherwise wreak havoc on the population or environment, to include regulation that supports and creates the super-wealthy. I think one idea we need to consider is dissolution of big corporations that inflate the economy so far above baseline that the poverty class can’t touch the ground and they strangle. Their gains are usually gotten unethically most of the time, anyway. I’m more about the Constitutional security of personal freedom. I also think we need to disestablish the for-profit prison abomination. Freedom and Community are both important to me, and the cold, political machine, which is tied to big industry is a proven threat to both.

trump just signed a prison reform bill :lol:

schuylaar · Nov 18, 2018

doublejj said:
don't impeach trump now.....just use the house to stymie the republicans until 2020 and after thump leaves office then we can arrest him and try him and put him in prison for life....

there are 36 sealed indictments waiting to drop..that's a hella lot- he may have no choice as to finishing out his term.

remember, kushner tried a back channel to russian embassy via car trunk.

they're in some deep shit with the russians and are unapologetic about it.

Counterchekist‏@counterchekist Mar 2

Spoiler alert: ASSange is going to prison. #GRU

SB85 · Nov 18, 2018

schuylaar said:
there are 36 sealed indictments waiting to drop..that's a hella lot- he may have no choice as to finishing out his term.

remember, kushner tried a back channel to russian embassy via car trunk.

they're in some deep shit with the russians and are unapologetic about it.

I really don't think he is going to face any real charges which could lead to his arrest.

schuylaar · Nov 18, 2018

SB85 said:
I really don't think he is going to face any real charges which could lead to his arrest.

they have shell companies and money launder.

they guy's as dirty as the day is long how could he NOT go to jail?

if trump doesn't go to jail at some point i will have lost faith in all that is our country.

SB85 · Nov 18, 2018

schuylaar said:
they have shell companies and money launder.

Trump should have been locked up years ago for all the dirt he has done in new york & jersey.

Olive Drab Green · Nov 18, 2018

schuylaar said:
trump just signed a prison reform bill

If he did, it certainly isn’t because he’s just a swell guy. I’ll bet it was one reason he sacked Jeff Sessions, since he’s one of the worst tough-on-crime anti-Cannabis Republicans.

schuylaar · Nov 18, 2018

Olive Drab Green said:
If he did, it certainly isn’t because he’s just a swell guy. I’ll bet it was one reason he sacked Jeff Sessions, since he’s one of the worst tough-on-crime anti-Cannabis Republicans.

a grifter con man is always thinking about how he can gain through lies, smoke and mirror.

he just forgot there's YT of everything he's ever said.

he admitted on live tv he fired comey over the russian investigation..that's pretty damning evidence.

to be indicted, the probability MUST exist..a grand jury has already decided.

36.

Trump Wants Nancy

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member