Like us on Facebook


Follow us on Twitter





Page 5 of 11 FirstFirst ... 34567 ... LastLast
Results 61 to 75 of 155
  1. #61
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    The Land Beyond the Wall, VT
    Posts
    7,136
    vCash
    1500
    There's nothign odd about it. There are rules in this forum on how we are to engage one another. Amsternet repeatedly disobeys these rules with appreant impunity.

    I do not view Feinstein as you do. I ahve my reasons, and you have yours. I think that needs to be okay. According to Amster, it isn't. Anyone who disagrees with he/ she/ it is instantly plastered with words like moronic, idiot, idiocy, lunacy, irrational, illogical, etc etc etc. He/ she/ it started this ROE in this forum, and I am happy to follow through and return the favor to soeone who demands tolerance through intolerance.

  2. #62
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Where the smog meets the shore
    Posts
    31,755
    vCash
    1490
    Seems government and the media has successfully created another hot button distraction issue. They're magicians in that sense. Let the parties fire you up with abortion debate sleight of hand, while in the background they get away with other public policy atrocities.

    All they've done is made more money off donations by the passionately paranoid on each side.

    Would like to see the influx of funding support the NRA or other lobbying areas have received over the last few months.....the flip side as well.

  3. #63
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Amsterdam/Maryland
    Posts
    693
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by Patsfan56 View Post
    There's nothign odd about it. There are rules in this forum on how we are to engage one another. Amsternet repeatedly disobeys these rules with appreant impunity.

    I do not view Feinstein as you do. I ahve my reasons, and you have yours. I think that needs to be okay. According to Amster, it isn't. Anyone who disagrees with he/ she/ it is instantly plastered with words like moronic, idiot, idiocy, lunacy, irrational, illogical, etc etc etc. He/ she/ it started this ROE in this forum, and I am happy to follow through and return the favor to soeone who demands tolerance through intolerance.
    You've got a nice line in hyperbole, but it's not my fault if you can't read what's written. I did not call you "insane", anywhere. I argued against what I see as your absurd comparison, DIFI vs NRA. You have your opinion and expressed it, I responded in a non-personally offensive manner as per forum rules, using terms that are in common use everywhere, and you're still complaining?

    I will certainly admit that I sometimes use language that may be extremely blunt and in-your-face to someone like you who completely disagrees with me, but I speak from the heart about things that I have strong views about, not because I'm trolling for a reaction. It also stems from the fact that I so often see people posting things as their gospel that are just plain wrong, as Stephkyle also alluded to. Some of us feel a need to react when we see something we know is BS. Of that, I am guilty.

  4. #64
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    38,229
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by subroc View Post
    Well, it is nice to have all the hate filled anti-constitutionalists listed in one place.
    Sometimes, I have to just assume things are sarcasm in order to keep what faith I have in humanity still intact.
    Visit my Blog.



    "Glad the GOP finally came out with an Obamacare alternative. Can't wait to see their alternative to the Iraq War." - @LOLGOP

  5. #65
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    6,286
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by Patsfan56 View Post
    There's nothign odd about it. There are rules in this forum on how we are to engage one another. Amsternet repeatedly disobeys these rules with appreant impunity.

    I do not view Feinstein as you do. I ahve my reasons, and you have yours. I think that needs to be okay. According to Amster, it isn't. Anyone who disagrees with he/ she/ it is instantly plastered with words like moronic, idiot, idiocy, lunacy, irrational, illogical, etc etc etc. He/ she/ it started this ROE in this forum, and I am happy to follow through and return the favor to soeone who demands tolerance through intolerance.
    But shouldnt you need to have some substanative experience regarding her tenure to draw an opinion from?As I recall you are not a Californian,so the first national exposure she has had didnt come until 1992.She has been re-elected to her seat three times already,and make no mistake, although her district is heavily Democratic, Ca has a Rich history of voting outside of party when someone doesnt do thier job.

    And here is the important part,this all being true, it seems ,just as certain media outlets spent a great deal of time demonizing Nancy Pelosi,it would appear (on the surface) to me,that youve taken something youve "heard" and ran with it.
    That does offend me.Its rumor mongering,its charecter asassination,and its not even based on anything that has any true anchor in reality.Your words have power,they sway opinion.
    You are completely entitled to your own views and opinions,but for me anyways when someone offers something up that is wildly out of focus and on a topic that doesnt seem to be a subject of knowledge I cringe at the disservice to our community that is being done.

    Diane Feinsteins position on Gun control may be extreme,but her motives are honorable and her ethics and charecter are stellar.

  6. #66
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Bay Area
    Posts
    22,461
    vCash
    500
    The title here is not mine. I took it from Addicting Info which then linked to that link. Instead of posting the link to Addicting Info page, I put the direct link to NRA's post.

  7. #67
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Orange, CA
    Posts
    7,734
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by Patsfan56 View Post
    An outrage against common decency? Ease up off the throttle there. I'm not a fan of the NRA, but neither am I a fan of someone, anyone, who spends their professional life trying to delegitimize and otherwise limit the bill of rights.
    I think anyone who doesn't look at the Bill of Rights from the perspective of the framers and the time period they were in is truly the person who is delegitimizing the Bill of Rights. It's like the Bible. People still believe in it, but the majority of people who do don't practice the act of stoning children who disobey them to death. That's because the Bible, like the constitution, is bound to the time in which it was written. Parts of the Bill of Rights do not translate properly into modern day American society. That's not to say we should discount the Bill of Rights, but we should factor in the fact that the country and its citizens have changed over the past 200 years.

  8. #68
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    10,400
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by GA16Angels View Post
    I think anyone who doesn't look at the Bill of Rights from the perspective of the framers and the time period they were in is truly the person who is delegitimizing the Bill of Rights. It's like the Bible. People still believe in it, but the majority of people who do don't practice the act of stoning children who disobey them to death. That's because the Bible, like the constitution, is bound to the time in which it was written. Parts of the Bill of Rights do not translate properly into modern day American society. That's not to say we should discount the Bill of Rights, but we should factor in the fact that the country and its citizens have changed over the past 200 years.

    I agree. I cannot seriously believe that the framers were thinking about lap dances when they wrote freedom of speech or religious drugs when they wrote of freedom of religion. I can't see them conceiving machine guns, automatic shotguns and assault rifles.

    I think we'd all be better off with a little common sense interpretation.

  9. #69
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Baltimore now, but born and raised on the south side of Chicago.
    Posts
    6,803
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by jomota View Post
    I agree. I cannot seriously believe that the framers were thinking about lap dances when they wrote freedom of speech or religious drugs when they wrote of freedom of religion. I can't see them conceiving machine guns, automatic shotguns and assault rifles.

    I think we'd all be better off with a little common sense interpretation.
    Yes dudes banging their slaves knew lap dances.

    Quote Originally Posted by MrPoon
    man with hair like fire can destroy souls with a twitch of his thighs.

  10. #70
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    19,669
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by jomota View Post
    I agree. I cannot seriously believe that the framers were thinking about lap dances when they wrote freedom of speech or religious drugs when they wrote of freedom of religion. I can't see them conceiving machine guns, automatic shotguns and assault rifles.

    I think we'd all be better off with a little common sense interpretation.
    I see what you're saying, but anytime you leave aspects of the Constitution open to subjective analysis, it can open up alot of problems.

  11. #71
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Posts
    6,234
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by The Schmooze View Post
    I see what you're saying, but anytime you leave aspects of the Constitution open to subjective analysis, it can open up alot of problems.
    That may be true, but, that is exactly how much litigation is handled. If it were truly objective, there would be no need for judge and jury, just submit briefs to a computer.
    Here is the question of the day, does anyone think that wealthy people should pay a lower percentage of their income to taxes than middle class people? Don't argue tax brackets, just a simple question. Do you think someone earning 46 million dollars should pay a lower percentage of their income than say someone earning sixty thousand?

  12. #72
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    19,669
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by cabernetluver View Post
    That may be true, but, that is exactly how much litigation is handled. If it were truly objective, there would be no need for judge and jury, just submit briefs to a computer.
    I agree with you there. Judicial review of course being the prime example.

  13. #73
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    10,400
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by The Schmooze View Post
    I see what you're saying, but anytime you leave aspects of the Constitution open to subjective analysis, it can open up alot of problems.
    There is no safe or comfortable answer. It almost seems like there should be another Constitutional Convention.

    One odd thing about the Constitution that a always found ironic…blacks had the right to vote before women did.

  14. #74
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Orange, CA
    Posts
    7,734
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by jomota View Post
    There is no safe or comfortable answer. It almost seems like there should be another Constitutional Convention.
    Thomas Jefferson believed that every country's constitution should have an expiration date (approximately 20 years) at which time a new one would be written. The main reason for this is because he didn't believe the dead should rule the living. The French live by this philosophy. They're on their sixth constitution I believe.

  15. #75
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Central California
    Posts
    4,121
    vCash
    1500
    The Journal News exercises it's first amendment rights and publishes a list of people that probably don't share the opinions and world view of the editorial staff by being law abiding owners of firearms.

    The NRA exercises it's first amendment rights by publishing a list of organizations that don't share it's opinions or world view by not supporting the second amendment.

    Seems to me that they're both using the same tool to show the approval/disapproval of the second amendment. One is lauded for it's bold new approach and the other is just stupid?

    I didn't see that the NRA was saying to do anything to any one on the list, boycott or otherwise.....
    " I have only three rules, be on time, pay attention, and play like hell on Sunday"

    -John Madden

Page 5 of 11 FirstFirst ... 34567 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •