WalterWhite Posted May 23, 2015 Report Share Posted May 23, 2015 otherwise you're racist LOL http://www.salon.com/2015/05/22/7_ideas_completely_lost_on_people_who_are_fiscally_conservative_but_socially_liberal_partner/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LogicIsForSquares Posted May 24, 2015 Report Share Posted May 24, 2015 Oh Christ. They will try to find every way possible to make fiscal responsibility look "evil". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Browns149 Posted May 24, 2015 Report Share Posted May 24, 2015 "I’m pro-choice! I’m pro-same-sex-marriage! I’m not a racist! I just want lower taxes, and smaller government, and less government regulation of business. I’m fiscally conservative, and socially liberal.” Throw in love of the 2nd ammendement And you got someone I will vote for Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LogicIsForSquares Posted May 24, 2015 Report Share Posted May 24, 2015 Would never get elected unfortunately. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clevfan4life Posted May 25, 2015 Report Share Posted May 25, 2015 "I’m pro-choice! I’m pro-same-sex-marriage! I’m not a racist! I just want lower taxes, and smaller government, and less government regulation of business. I’m fiscally conservative, and socially liberal.” Throw in love of the 2nd ammendement And you got someone I will vote for It's called libertarian isn't it? How did the Tea Party get away with calling themselves libertarians for so long? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LogicIsForSquares Posted May 25, 2015 Report Share Posted May 25, 2015 It's called libertarian isn't it? How did the Tea Party get away with calling themselves libertarians for so long? Because there aren't enough libertarians with a wide audience to call them out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clevfan4life Posted May 26, 2015 Report Share Posted May 26, 2015 Because there aren't enough libertarians with a wide audience to call them out. you're probably right. I'd sign up for the libertarian party in a heartbeat if they got rid of the whacko right wingers that want to weasel abortion, gays and contraception into every fucking political discussion. A "true" libertarian doesn't give a fuck about what other people do with their own bodies so long as it doesn't preclude him doing with his/her own body what they want. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StinkHole Posted May 26, 2015 Report Share Posted May 26, 2015 It's called libertarian isn't it? No, it isn't. Libertarians, and even some democRATS do not necessarily subscribe to the "I’m pro-choice! I’m pro-same-sex-marriage!" blather. They can be personally opposed to both but at the same time believe government involvement in these matters is overreach. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BaconHound Posted May 28, 2015 Report Share Posted May 28, 2015 "I’m pro-choice! I’m pro-same-sex-marriage! I’m not a racist! I just want lower taxes, and smaller government, and less government regulation of business. I’m fiscally conservative, and socially liberal.” Throw in love of the 2nd ammendement And you got someone I will vote for You had me until the 2nd Amendment, sorry but militias in the 21st century are a scary thing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LogicIsForSquares Posted May 28, 2015 Report Share Posted May 28, 2015 You had me until the 2nd Amendment, sorry but militias in the 21st century are a scary thing. I am with you. Street gangs and criminals should be the only people carrying guns outside of police and military. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BaconHound Posted May 28, 2015 Report Share Posted May 28, 2015 I am with you. Street gangs and criminals should be the only people carrying guns outside of police and military. Don't forget about school shooters Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LogicIsForSquares Posted May 28, 2015 Report Share Posted May 28, 2015 Don't forget about school shooters Maybe hire the friendly neighborhood street gangs to defend the schools? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Browns149 Posted May 28, 2015 Report Share Posted May 28, 2015 You had me until the 2nd Amendment, sorry but militias in the 21st century are a scary thing. A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed. END OF STORY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
calfoxwc Posted May 28, 2015 Report Share Posted May 28, 2015 Bacon - "well regulated militias are an EXCELLLENT thing. This subject has come up before, obviously. And some in the past have said "but we HAVE our army, so we don't need citizens to be armed" which is exactly wrong. You just have to correctly define terms, regardless of how liberals work to redefine terms every time they have a fight to fight, which is often. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Militia Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
calfoxwc Posted May 28, 2015 Report Share Posted May 28, 2015 Although, I think it's incorrect that they talk about the military reserves being professional, by definition, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Professional reservists do not make their living going to training for a week once every couple of months or whatever the time frame is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gftChris Posted May 28, 2015 Report Share Posted May 28, 2015 I think the line "A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state" is probably open to debate. The right bear arms stems from that, so if you can prove the former, the latter follows. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
calfoxwc Posted May 28, 2015 Report Share Posted May 28, 2015 Liberals think everything is "open to debate" because they can just change definitions of words to fit. It's very strnage. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gftChris Posted May 28, 2015 Report Share Posted May 28, 2015 Liberals think everything is "open to debate" because they can just change definitions of words to fit. It's very strnage. So there's no question for you that a militia is necessary for the security of the state? On the subject of everything being 'open for debate' - it's the spirit of questioning everything that makes me do it, and probably a lot of other people you think are liberal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westside Steve Posted May 28, 2015 Report Share Posted May 28, 2015 So there's no question for you that a militia is necessary for the security of the state? On the subject of everything being 'open for debate' - it's the spirit of questioning everything that makes me do it, and probably a lot of other people you think are liberal. It would be helpful, again, to remember the circumstances that made the Second Amendment necessary. WSS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clevfan4life Posted May 28, 2015 Report Share Posted May 28, 2015 Liberals think everything is "open to debate" because they can just change definitions of words to fit. It's very strnage. then join a militia. I want to see military style readiness. Otherwise it's a bunch of fat slobs with a chew in their fat moufs heading out for a weekend of drinking and shooting. That's not what the old boys had in mind when they mentioned a well regulated militia. Fucking boners. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LogicIsForSquares Posted May 28, 2015 Report Share Posted May 28, 2015 then join a militia. I want to see military style readiness. Otherwise it's a bunch of fat slobs with a chew in their fat moufs heading out for a weekend of drinking and shooting. That's not what the old boys had in mind when they mentioned a well regulated militia. Fucking boners. Could you imagine the pants shitting terror that would result of people actively creating a large number of "well regulated militias"? As is, you get people losing their minds over the very few militias that exist. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clevfan4life Posted May 28, 2015 Report Share Posted May 28, 2015 I'd join one if they were actually Pro. Run by former soldiers and not stupid fgt gun enthusiasts who have a hankerin to shoot some colored folk. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DieHardBrownsFan Posted May 28, 2015 Report Share Posted May 28, 2015 I think the line "A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state" is probably open to debate. The right bear arms stems from that, so if you can prove the former, the latter follows. Hey! We beat ya'll brits with militia's. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Legacy Fan Posted May 28, 2015 Report Share Posted May 28, 2015 I think the line "A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state" is probably open to debate. The right bear arms stems from that, so if you can prove the former, the latter follows.Plenty of links/references out there that support the notion that "well regulated" means "well supplied" because the Colonial army/ militias weren't. The amendment was ratified to make sure that wouldn't ever be a problem. The "right to bear arms" however exists as a "right". Much in the way that there are "unalienable rights to life liberty & the pursuit." That to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed. <<< (that one is important, but conveniently ignored) Also... and to 'secure,' not grant or create, these rights, governments are instituted. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BaconHound Posted May 29, 2015 Report Share Posted May 29, 2015 Maybe hire the friendly neighborhood street gangs to defend the schools? Or the police Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BaconHound Posted May 29, 2015 Report Share Posted May 29, 2015 I'm all for a regulated right to bears as opposed to an absolute one. If a citizen in this country feels that he or she is more safer with a firearm or two, have at it. But the best thing about this thread is anyone thinking that everyday citizens could in any way, shape or form take on the US Military Machine. Grab your Desert Eagle and hop in your Hummer but a single aircraft carrier fully loaded will eliminate your state. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LogicIsForSquares Posted May 29, 2015 Report Share Posted May 29, 2015 I'm all for a regulated right to bears as opposed to an absolute one. If a citizen in this country feels that he or she is more safer with a firearm or two, have at it. But the best thing about this thread is anyone thinking that everyday citizens could in any way, shape or form take on the US Military Machine. Grab your Desert Eagle and hop in your Hummer but a single aircraft carrier fully loaded will eliminate your state. Yeah no one has ever carried on extended guerilla warfare and defeated a superior military. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BaconHound Posted May 29, 2015 Report Share Posted May 29, 2015 Yeah no one has ever carried on extended guerilla warfare and defeated a superior military. Not US citizens vs US Military. That's the crazy part of the US Military is the 21st century, not really fighting for anything. The pundits will talk about "freedom" and "democracy" but try to imagine if a military force mobilized against us in Canada and truly threatened our sovereignty. Screw the drones and "tactical" air strikes. The US Military has the firepower to turn Canada into a dust cloud in a week without even pushing the button. Forget tanks, Blackhawks or fighter jets, the US Aircraft Carrier firepower alone is indefensible but add submarines to that, laughable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
calfoxwc Posted May 29, 2015 Report Share Posted May 29, 2015 It's the PRINCIPLE of the whole thing. Maybe the doecsh sp? maybe drug cartels....crime syndicates gone wild, who knows? but the right to bear arms is the last defense of families and groups of families when the worst times ever happen. And those worst times will never really have a chance as long as Americans have guns. That's why it is in the 2nd Amendment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StinkHole Posted May 29, 2015 Report Share Posted May 29, 2015 I'd join one if they were actually Pro. Run by former soldiers and not stupid fgt gun enthusiasts who have a hankerin to shoot some colored folk. That was really stupid and narrow minded Cleve. Probably learned that from those "intellectual" liberals you hang with...those same fucks that taught you that the Tea Party is the KKK operating under a different name. The fact is that many civilian militias are comprised of ex-military. The militias main objectives are to defend the Constitution and to resist an overreaching government. Militias do not discriminate. Anyone can join as long as you share the same principals. They reject anyone who advocates violence or conspires to commit criminal activity....but asshole liberals such as yourself would rather believe the actions of those fringe radicals you may find as being the norm. Heres a list. Why don't you add meaning to your meaningless life and sign up. http://www.libertyfederation.com/state_list_of_militia_groups Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.