The Civil War of the Grand Old Party
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
26-04-2016, 09:49 AM
RE: The Civil War of the Grand Old Party
(26-04-2016 06:07 AM)Lord Dark Helmet Wrote:  
(26-04-2016 02:13 AM)morondog Wrote:  And at that time you idiots will cheerfully go to war against the principles of democracy? Welcome to Third World warlord heaven Rolleyes

America is not a democracy. The bill of rights are considered natural rights, not to be taken away by vote of the majority of people. If the 2nd amendment is to be changed, it should be done through the amendment process. If 51% of the country thinks guns should be banned, that doesn't mean they should be. Just as if 51% of Americans are christian, we are all not forced to be christian.

That would be pure democracy, and yes, I agree, America is not that. But you do at least nominally hold to democratic principles in the making of your laws, if you flout them so easily, how long before you guys become a basket case like every other shithole in the world?

We'll love you just the way you are
If you're perfect -- Alanis Morissette
(06-02-2014 03:47 PM)Momsurroundedbyboys Wrote:  And I'm giving myself a conclusion again from all the facepalming.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes morondog's post
26-04-2016, 09:59 AM
RE: The Civil War of the Grand Old Party
(26-04-2016 09:24 AM)Shai Hulud Wrote:  
(26-04-2016 12:15 AM)Thumpalumpacus Wrote:  I'd have to think about it, but Kasich is the only Republican I'd even consider. I dislike his stance on reproductive rights, and I dislike his comments on re-invading Iraq -- those are two big issues with me, candidate notwithstanding.

Kasich does, however, have the advantages of not being either batshit crazy, or a congenital liar. There's that.

Leaving aside the people wanting to commit treason and launch an uprising to destroy the rule of law in our nation; how do you feel about Romney then as a brokered convention candidate? Part of me wonders if he could actually do well under the "Make Politics Bland Again" banner.

Why do we need Romney? Doesn't Kasich fit that mold?

Shackle their minds when they're bent on the cross
When ignorance reigns, life is lost
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
26-04-2016, 10:16 AM
RE: The Civil War of the Grand Old Party
(26-04-2016 07:02 AM)Gawdzilla Wrote:  The 2A is irrelevant today. It was implemented because the States didn't want a standing army, and thought local militias would be sufficient to defend the frontier settlements from Indian raids and the coastal town from pirate attacks.

Invoking the 2A without consideration of the first clause, the one that states WHY people should be allowed to bear arms, is hypocritical. It's as bad a wrapping oneself in the flag. I've yet to see a "well-regulated militia" meet for drills.

I live in kind of rural area in Idaho, so, I can not defend myself in case of intruder or wild animal like a wolf?
True LOVER OF FREEDOM would never said such ridiculous thing.
NO MAN can take from me my right to defend myself ANY WAY I can.
Gun sounds like a great idea for me.

English is my second language.
I AM DEPLORABLE AND IRREDEEMABLE
SHE PERSISTED WE RESISTED
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
26-04-2016, 10:20 AM (This post was last modified: 26-04-2016 10:23 AM by Alla.)
RE: The Civil War of the Grand Old Party
(26-04-2016 09:27 AM)Lord Dark Helmet Wrote:  Good luck finding people to control drones from a group that sympathizes with the uprising. As I said before, only 10% of military members identify as Democrat. Most of the officers are conservative republicans as well.

100 million armed Americans, 70% or more of the U.S. military. This civil war would last a day at most.
.
Sounds good to me. Thumbsup

.
(26-04-2016 09:27 AM)Lord Dark Helmet Wrote:  You think Americans just keep guns for fun? Most of us keep guns for self defense. The day the government attempts to take that ability from us is the day the government is replaced.

We will not disarm. Ever.
amen, brother.
P.S. I know you are an atheist, so please, don't get offended for calling you "brother" and for using word "amen". It is just feels like the best word to me to show my agreement with the TRUTH you say.

English is my second language.
I AM DEPLORABLE AND IRREDEEMABLE
SHE PERSISTED WE RESISTED
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
26-04-2016, 10:24 AM
RE: The Civil War of the Grand Old Party
(26-04-2016 07:02 AM)Gawdzilla Wrote:  The 2A is irrelevant today. It was implemented because the States didn't want a standing army, and thought local militias would be sufficient to defend the frontier settlements from Indian raids and the coastal town from pirate attacks.

Invoking the 2A without consideration of the first clause, the one that states WHY people should be allowed to bear arms, is hypocritical. It's as bad a wrapping oneself in the flag. I've yet to see a "well-regulated militia" meet for drills.

"Well-regulated" meant "in good working order".
And that meant that the citizens must have arms as it is the citizens who constitute the militia.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
26-04-2016, 10:36 AM
RE: The Civil War of the Grand Old Party
(26-04-2016 09:59 AM)BnW Wrote:  
(26-04-2016 09:24 AM)Shai Hulud Wrote:  Leaving aside the people wanting to commit treason and launch an uprising to destroy the rule of law in our nation; how do you feel about Romney then as a brokered convention candidate? Part of me wonders if he could actually do well under the "Make Politics Bland Again" banner.

Why do we need Romney? Doesn't Kasich fit that mold?

He does, but he lacks the bonus points of still being "a first". First Mormon President with Romney...who was so overconfident last time, he failed to write a defeat speech.

Need to think of a witty signature.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
26-04-2016, 11:03 AM
RE: The Civil War of the Grand Old Party
(26-04-2016 05:50 AM)Lord Dark Helmet Wrote:  If this scenario ever needed to take place, it wouldn't be just an "uprising."

45% of the military comes from the south and a recent poll of active military members showed that less than 10% identify as Democrats. When the time comes, that firepower won't be on your side. The military might stay neutral, or they will be on the side of the revolution. In fact, I could see see military leaders leading the charge to overthrow a fully Democrat government and Court that was threatening to alter the 2nd amendment.

I highly doubt that. A veteran myself who maintains ties with the military and veteran communities, I have a pretty good idea how seriously the Oath is taken, and to be honest, don't really take kindly to folks aspersing the fidelity of the men and women serving our country today -- especially that they'd place partisan politics above their Oath. I don't buy it.

When you add to that the two-plus centuries of doctrine suborning military leadership to civilian leadership (even when it produced stalemate in Korea and defeat in Vietnam!), I highly doubt that this scenario of yours is anything more than NRA masturbation.

(26-04-2016 09:24 AM)Shai Hulud Wrote:  Leaving aside the people wanting to commit treason and launch an uprising to destroy the rule of law in our nation; how do you feel about Romney then as a brokered convention candidate? Part of me wonders if he could actually do well under the "Make Politics Bland Again" banner.

I detest Mitt Romney, and I'm not alone. His stance on reproductive rights is typically Republican (as is Kasich's, to be fair). His misunderstanding of the Separation Clause, and mischaracterization of the secular movement in America, makes me think that he's sandbagging about his faith:

Romney Wrote:We separate church and state affairs in this country, and for good reason. No religion should dictate to the state nor should the state interfere with the free practice of religion. But in recent years, the notion of the separation of church and state has been taken by some well beyond its original meaning. They seek to remove from the public domain any acknowledgment of God. Religion is seen as merely a private affair with no place in public life. It is as if they are intent on establishing a new religion in America - the religion of secularism. They are wrong.

[...]

We should acknowledge the Creator as did the Founders - in ceremony and word. He should remain on our currency, in our pledge, in the teaching of our history, and during the holiday season, nativity scenes and menorahs should be welcome in our public places. Our greatness would not long endure without judges who respect the foundation of faith upon which our constitution rests. I will take care to separate the affairs of government from any religion, but I will not separate us from 'the God who gave us liberty.'

Source: http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story...d=16969460

I understand that he would have preferred to not discuss his faith, but the fact is that he has such a profound misunderstanding of a crucial element of our Constitution makes me shudder at the prospect of him getting to nominate a Supreme Court justice.

Real Clear Politics has him losing by over 6% to Clinton in a hypothetical contest. I think for that reason alone the RNC won't allow his selection.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like Thumpalumpacus's post
26-04-2016, 11:10 AM
RE: The Civil War of the Grand Old Party
Romney ran and lost. I can't imagine them running him again. Kasich has his warts but he's got the best chance against Hillary. Cruz will lose at least the same states that Romney lost. Hard to handicap Trump but my sense is he gets killed in a general election.

Shackle their minds when they're bent on the cross
When ignorance reigns, life is lost
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like BnW's post
26-04-2016, 12:09 PM
RE: The Civil War of the Grand Old Party
(26-04-2016 11:03 AM)Thumpalumpacus Wrote:  
(26-04-2016 05:50 AM)Lord Dark Helmet Wrote:  If this scenario ever needed to take place, it wouldn't be just an "uprising."

45% of the military comes from the south and a recent poll of active military members showed that less than 10% identify as Democrats. When the time comes, that firepower won't be on your side. The military might stay neutral, or they will be on the side of the revolution. In fact, I could see see military leaders leading the charge to overthrow a fully Democrat government and Court that was threatening to alter the 2nd amendment.

I highly doubt that. A veteran myself who maintains ties with the military and veteran communities, I have a pretty good idea how seriously the Oath is taken, and to be honest, don't really take kindly to folks aspersing the fidelity of the men and women serving our country today -- especially that they'd place partisan politics above their Oath. I don't buy it.

When you add to that the two-plus centuries of doctrine suborning military leadership to civilian leadership (even when it produced stalemate in Korea and defeat in Vietnam!), I highly doubt that this scenario of yours is anything more than NRA masturbation.

(26-04-2016 09:24 AM)Shai Hulud Wrote:  Leaving aside the people wanting to commit treason and launch an uprising to destroy the rule of law in our nation; how do you feel about Romney then as a brokered convention candidate? Part of me wonders if he could actually do well under the "Make Politics Bland Again" banner.

I detest Mitt Romney, and I'm not alone. His stance on reproductive rights is typically Republican (as is Kasich's, to be fair). His misunderstanding of the Separation Clause, and mischaracterization of the secular movement in America, makes me think that he's sandbagging about his faith:

Romney Wrote:We separate church and state affairs in this country, and for good reason. No religion should dictate to the state nor should the state interfere with the free practice of religion. But in recent years, the notion of the separation of church and state has been taken by some well beyond its original meaning. They seek to remove from the public domain any acknowledgment of God. Religion is seen as merely a private affair with no place in public life. It is as if they are intent on establishing a new religion in America - the religion of secularism. They are wrong.

[...]

We should acknowledge the Creator as did the Founders - in ceremony and word. He should remain on our currency, in our pledge, in the teaching of our history, and during the holiday season, nativity scenes and menorahs should be welcome in our public places. Our greatness would not long endure without judges who respect the foundation of faith upon which our constitution rests. I will take care to separate the affairs of government from any religion, but I will not separate us from 'the God who gave us liberty.'

Source: http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story...d=16969460

I understand that he would have preferred to not discuss his faith, but the fact is that he has such a profound misunderstanding of a crucial element of our Constitution makes me shudder at the prospect of him getting to nominate a Supreme Court justice.

Real Clear Politics has him losing by over 6% to Clinton in a hypothetical contest. I think for that reason alone the RNC won't allow his selection.

I understand your points, but if some in the military saw the government as actually illegitimate then they might take that to mean their oath is null and void. Consider

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Chas's post
26-04-2016, 12:15 PM
RE: The Civil War of the Grand Old Party
(26-04-2016 12:09 PM)Chas Wrote:  
(26-04-2016 11:03 AM)Thumpalumpacus Wrote:  I highly doubt that. A veteran myself who maintains ties with the military and veteran communities, I have a pretty good idea how seriously the Oath is taken, and to be honest, don't really take kindly to folks aspersing the fidelity of the men and women serving our country today -- especially that they'd place partisan politics above their Oath. I don't buy it.

When you add to that the two-plus centuries of doctrine suborning military leadership to civilian leadership (even when it produced stalemate in Korea and defeat in Vietnam!), I highly doubt that this scenario of yours is anything more than NRA masturbation.


I detest Mitt Romney, and I'm not alone. His stance on reproductive rights is typically Republican (as is Kasich's, to be fair). His misunderstanding of the Separation Clause, and mischaracterization of the secular movement in America, makes me think that he's sandbagging about his faith:


Source: http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story...d=16969460

I understand that he would have preferred to not discuss his faith, but the fact is that he has such a profound misunderstanding of a crucial element of our Constitution makes me shudder at the prospect of him getting to nominate a Supreme Court justice.

Real Clear Politics has him losing by over 6% to Clinton in a hypothetical contest. I think for that reason alone the RNC won't allow his selection.

I understand your points, but if some in the military saw the government as actually illegitimate then they might take that to mean their oath is null and void. Consider

They would be in the wrong in the described instance. A legally elected government decides to make a policy change those who oppose it are in the minority. At what point does a gun nuts love of guns override democratic process?

(31-07-2014 04:37 PM)Luminon Wrote:  America is full of guns, but they're useless, because nobody has the courage to shoot an IRS agent in self-defense
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Revenant77x's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: