POLITICAL THREAD
- Thread starter kybobcat
- Start date
I am having a problem with some moles, I wonder if ACE carries rocket mortars.
I've had bad experience with those. Have started using bunker busters instead. Really gets to the root of the problem.
I agree with most of this post except for the implication that perpetual poverty has little to do with personal choices individuals make. Many people are born with the deck stacked against them. I was. Uneducated parents (maybe fifth grade). My dad was a coal miner who worked in many different non-unionized mines making enough to barely get by and often out of work. Mom of course stayed home and raised the kids. But Dad somehow had some personal pride and my mother was an incredible money manager (skinflint). There was no welfare to fall back on except the "commodities" available then and my dad was too proud to take even those.
I was the first in my family to complete high school. To do that was a personal choice. One other boy beside myself in my junior high class graduated high school. The other guys dropped out. Not only did I graduate but I actually studied and learned what I was taught - a personal choice. One has to do more than just show up and goof around.
So I graduated, found a good job, settled down and had a good life? Wrooong. Not only were there not any good jobs to be had but there were not even any bad jobs.
What to do? I faced a stacked deck. No job to be had and none foreseeable being brought in to the hills of Eastern Kentucky. Do I stay and remain with family and friends and live a life of poverty? Or do I leave all that behind, pack a suitcase and go someplace where I could possibly find a decent job?
A personal choice had to be made. I packed a suitcase, stood by the highway with my thumb stuck out and made my way 400 miles "up North" where there were good jobs to be had. I was fortunate enough to have a relative there to move in with until I could find a job and get established. I did find that good job and escaped poverty. This led to the other members of my family getting out of the poverty pocket.
In the USA everybody has a chance. Some are born on third base, some on second and some on first. But everyone not physically or mentally impaired gets to stand at home plate with a bat in their hand and with the ball coming across the strike zone.
Last edited:
Great story. Many claim to be victim of circumstances. They're actually victims of accepting circumstances.
![[roll]](http://l.yimg.com/j/assets/img/emoticons/classic/roll.r191677.gif "roll [roll]")
I think it’s pretty dumb that the 2 items that we talk about the most - guns and abortion - happen to be the 2 that are the least likely to undergo any overhaul in the foreseeable future.
1) nobody is taking your guns
2) abortion will remain legal
Let’s spend our energy on talking about things that can actually affect our lives. In many ways, This is exactly what Trump is doing - focusing on things that most Americans can relate to - safety, lower taxes, jobs, etc.
1) nobody is taking your guns
2) abortion will remain legal
Let’s spend our energy on talking about things that can actually affect our lives. In many ways, This is exactly what Trump is doing - focusing on things that most Americans can relate to - safety, lower taxes, jobs, etc.
You're the one who needs to take the step back, not @cardkilla. Any of the billionaires like Warren Buffet, Bill Gates et al. have plenty enough money to buy the weapons you're talking about. You really think it's a good idea that an eccentric rich person has nukes and can cause global nuclear destruction on a whim? History teaches us that technology always reduces in price and size as time goes on. Down the road we should all be able to buy suitcase nukes?
Except for all of the legislators and 'activists' trying to do just that.
The difference is that the right to bear arms is specifically stated in the Constitution. The right to abort a child is not. The SC shoe-horned abortion rights in under the guise of a right to privacy. Here's where in the Constitution the right to abort a child come from:
Amendment IV
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized
Does anyone seriously believe that the framers of the Constitution would have possibly seen these words as a basis for a right to abort an unborn child as a last-ditch method of birth control?
Last edited:
A year ago I would have agreed with John but the rhetoric we are seeing right now is another level.
Listen to yourself, you unhinged lunatic.
You are scared that Bill Gates or Warren Buffett is going to buy a nuclear bomb and blow up the world if we don't restrict the Second Amendment.
Do you realize how goddam stupid you two sound?
We need to restrict the Second Amendment, because if not an eccentric American billionaire might buy a nuclear bomb and blow the world up. Christ.
God you people have fallen off the deep end.
Is this guy for real? Gotta be a troll account right?
The point wasn’t that we should RESTRICT the second amendment to keep people from having nukes, the point was that the second amendment is ALREADY limited. I’ve never even heard of someone arguing that the second amendment applies to all arms including nukes and I live in a very conservative area. Your only argument against the parkland shooter legally buying nukes is that he doesn’t have the money. You think it’s a constitutional right for a citizen to privately own nuclear weapons and you’re calling ME a lunatic.
Got this email from my son's school today - seems like a logical step to take.
Parents,
Before you head home for the day, we wanted to make you
aware that tomorrow morning we will have a metal detector set up in one of our
classrooms on campus. A few of our students will be asked to participate in
a demonstration to see how the machine works. This will not be for everyone. It
will only be a few randomly selected classes.
Thanks,
Lester Diaz
Frederick Douglass High School Executive Principal
Parents,
Before you head home for the day, we wanted to make you
aware that tomorrow morning we will have a metal detector set up in one of our
classrooms on campus. A few of our students will be asked to participate in
a demonstration to see how the machine works. This will not be for everyone. It
will only be a few randomly selected classes.
Thanks,
Lester Diaz
Frederick Douglass High School Executive Principal
He has to.
The last thing people (conservatives in Utah) remember about him was how much of a pussy he seemed going up against Barry.
It will be the similar with Matt Jones. He’ll have to pivot center, but who campaigns for Jones that doesn’t screw that up?
Schumer, pelosi, Schultz?
Maybe a Judd or Yarmouth endorsement?
The only centrist Dem I can think of is Manchin. Does that carry any weight here?
Yeah, that's my only argument. The Parkland shooter would have went to his local nuke store and bought a nuke, but he didn't have the money.
You guys are lunatics. It was your lunatic counterpart Cardkilla that brought up nukes. Trying to fear monger about people buying nuclear weapons if we don't put limits on the Second Amendment. I'd say you lose the ability to think rationally when talking about guns, but I don't think you actually possess that ability in the first place.
"Muh 2nd Amendment bad people buy nuke bombs"
Idk what's going on, so excuse me if Romney ain't trying to run for president again..
But, if he is, it's only because Trump paid him to. Big Don is gonna cake walk to a second term. He'll probably pay Hillary to run again
But, if he is, it's only because Trump paid him to. Big Don is gonna cake walk to a second term. He'll probably pay Hillary to run again
and all that got wiped out 1 day later. The market is now as bipolar as Cheeto face.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.ws...-dollar-face-historic-difficulties-1522063947
China now dropping the US dollar for oil procurement- also reading that Russia will do the same as they continue to cooperate more closely with China
I think that might actually be a much bigger deal than just about anything else in the news right now
This is how “big wars “ get started
(Messing around with the portfolios of The Uber Rich)
China now dropping the US dollar for oil procurement- also reading that Russia will do the same as they continue to cooperate more closely with China
I think that might actually be a much bigger deal than just about anything else in the news right now
This is how “big wars “ get started
(Messing around with the portfolios of The Uber Rich)
I'm sure that in 1985, plutonium is available in every corner drugstore, but in 1955, it's a little hard to come by.
There is already a shitload of restrictions to the 2nd amendment so saying that adding any more is unconstitutional is a pretty weak argument. The 2nd amendment was unfortunately very poorly written so it's completely up to federal courts to decide how far to allow the restrictions to go. The right to bear arms already doesn't mean any arms being produced. Because of this we just go back and forth over small meaningless restrictions depending on which party has power. So much energy is wasted on guns and abortion, 2 items that are so trivial to the countries long term health. We already have plenty of guns and we also have a very healthy population for available land & resources so less babies right now is not a bad thing, we don't want to become India. We should be focused on companies and people amassing a destabilizing amount of wealth and power and abusing the american people to get both. or focused on balancing the federal spending and paying off our massive debt. or focused on getting the **** out of the middle east and helping europe block off the flow of refugees before it becomes a 2nd middle east. or focused on bitch slapping the shit out of Putin before he pushes the eastern europe block to war. or focused on refilling the highway fund so we can update our deteriorating infrastructure to meet rapidly increasing demand.
Activists can't do anything to you. Legislators are smart enough to know that if forcible removal of firearms was ever attempted, it would be a shit storm. Never going to happen.
So what you're saying is, you love Cardkilla. Lol
@cardkilla asked a simple question:
And your equally simple response was this:
I think you need to quit calling other people crazy and turn that lens inward. How many people if you walked up to them on the street would agree with the statement, "The 2nd Amendment guarantees me the constitutional right to own a nuclear weapon."?
Hollywood thinks their life is more important than yours...
you forget the well regulated part. so as long as the government allows you to have a BB gun your right to bear arms isn't infringed. not infringed doesn't mean as much as you want and anything you want. It just means you have to have access to at least some kind of "arms". The amendment should have been more specific on the militias and on how far they wanted "shall not be infringed" to go. did they want the populace to have cannons or just muskets? did they want the militias to be what has now turned into the national guard? that would give our current society a better framework to work with.
http://nymag.com/daily/intelligence...-always-guaranteed-the-right-to-own-guns.html
http://time.com/4431356/nra-gun-control-history/
you guys need to read up on how much the rules of the 2nd amendment have changed recently. It used to be widely regarded that it was very open to interpretation and regulation until the NRA changed course and highly politicized the argument in favor of more guns. Back when states where passing gun laws against blacks the NRA was all for gun control. The NRA used to be a gun responsibility organisation and helped write and push for some landmark gun control bills. They didn't turn into a lobbying wing for guns until the late 70's.
For over 200 years after the adoption of the Second Amendment, it was uniformly understood as not placing any limit on either federal or state authority to enact gun control legislation. In 1939 the Supreme Court unanimously held that Congress could prohibit the possession of a sawed-off shotgun because that weapon had no reasonable relation to the preservation or efficiency of a “well regulated militia.”
http://time.com/4431356/nra-gun-control-history/
you guys need to read up on how much the rules of the 2nd amendment have changed recently. It used to be widely regarded that it was very open to interpretation and regulation until the NRA changed course and highly politicized the argument in favor of more guns. Back when states where passing gun laws against blacks the NRA was all for gun control. The NRA used to be a gun responsibility organisation and helped write and push for some landmark gun control bills. They didn't turn into a lobbying wing for guns until the late 70's.
For over 200 years after the adoption of the Second Amendment, it was uniformly understood as not placing any limit on either federal or state authority to enact gun control legislation. In 1939 the Supreme Court unanimously held that Congress could prohibit the possession of a sawed-off shotgun because that weapon had no reasonable relation to the preservation or efficiency of a “well regulated militia.”
Why would I say that to anyone? I'm not the goddam idiot that thinks Americans are going to go out buying nuclear bombs.
And yes, I'd say there's probably a 50/50 shot out on the street that if I asked someone if there were no laws preventing people from buying nuclear bombs, would they be afraid some ultra rich American would go out and spend a billion dollars or whatever the hell a nuclear bomb costs on a bomb to blow the planet up they would say yes. Because a lot of people are goddam idiots like you lunatics.
