The assault weapons are designed "killing machines" they are not designed for sport or hunting. There is no need for these types of machines in our society. It's reported that there are over 300 million guns in America, how many more do you need to feel "safe?". Feinsteins bill does nothing about banning pistols, rifles or shotguns. There is a large majority of Americans in favor of enhanced background checks.
There is widespread abuse in the name of the 2nd amendment and regulations are needed if we are to keep America a civil society.
Perhaps you should read the bill before they pass the bill so you know what is in it. Senator Feinstein's bill does in fact ban shotguns, rifles, and pistols if they have ONE military characteristic. So, a pistol with a laser sight, or a shotgun with a pistol grip, or a rifle with a collapsible stock, will all be banned.
This is no more than a 'knee-jerk' reaction to the Sandy Hook tragedy. Senator Feinstein is making political points rather than addressing the real issue of keeping firearms out of the hands of nutcases and not out of the hands of responsible legal gun owners.
Seems some here just want all guns legal no matter what! Why do you need a laser sight for your pistol? Why do you need a pistol grip for a shotgun? People can still buy a shotgun or a pistol, just nor "military grade" ones.
I think most reasonable people agree with this. Only the bullheaded seem to disagree.
The laser sight improves accuracy. It keeps my two rounds to the body, one to the head, in the aggressor where they belong. It keeps them from flying down the street into my neighbor's living room or a passing automobile.
The folding stock and pistol grip allows control of the weapon in confined spaces like the inside of my house.
I'll excuse your ignorance given your lack of experience and credibility in matters of law enforcement and firearms.
Senator Feinstein is interested in only one thing, banning law abiding citizens from legally owning firearms. She's a politician, so I expect lies and deceit.
"It keeps my two rounds to the body, one to the head, in the aggressor where they belong"
Kind of proves the case right there that these weapons are only for killing people. Not for hunting or sport or anything practical. They are the instruments of murder that enable anyone that feel they are being troubled by an "aggressor" to take lethal action with minimal thought of consequence.
So thanks for proving my point - instruments of murder should be banned.
"She's a politician, so I expect lies and deceit."
Sounds so much like Bull153 here in just about very way. Why is that?
Such weapons are not only for killing people. It is a big reason, though. It is called self-defense. If an intruder bent on harming YOU or YOUR family breaks into your home in the middle of the night, what will you do? Call 9-1-1 and hope an officer is close enough to stop the criminal? I won't, I'll call 9-1-1 and they can haul his dead or wounded carcass out. No one has the right to harm my family or me.
Instruments of murder should be banned. Talk about a straw man. By that faulty reasoning, the Mercedes that was used to run over an ex-husband several times killing him should be banned. Every kitchen knife in American should be banned. Every lethal chemical ever used to murder someone should be banned. Any item ever used to crush someone's skull should be banned. Every pillow used to smother an infant should be banned. You, sir, are just ridiculous.
Perhaps I sound so much like Bull153 because we are both concerned conservatives? After all, if you believe the garbage spouted by TheSovereign, we are all just lock step clones.
The only point proven is what has been said about you before. You have no clue when it comes to law enforcement and firearms. Why is that?
I don't think you understand your argument. First, kitchen knifes have a purpose other than murder. So do lethal chemicals. Now, contradicting your argument, chemicals that can be used to harm are HIGHLY REGULATED and CONTROLLED!
So, if you are being intellectually honest , are you suggesting that guns have the same restrictions as ANTHRAX? That does seem to be what you are saying.
Saide note: Amazing how the more you post, the more and more and more you sound EXACTLY like Bull153.
You are the one having trouble understanding. First, guns have other purposes besides murder. Self-defense is one, target shooting another, hunting a third. Granted, I can't drive my gun to the grocery store, but you can't defend yourself with your pillow.
Next, not all chemicals that harm are highly regulated and controlled. I can go to the hardware store and buy mouse traps with arsenic or bug spray with lethal chemicals in them and not even show an ID. To buy spray paint and jumbo markers you have to prove you are 18, to buy arsenic you only have to have cash or a debit card.
Finally, fully automatic weapons, bazookas, and mortars are highly regulated and controlled as they should be. So is anthrax. Your argument is as full of holes as your head.
The only point proven is what has been said about you before. You have no clue when it comes to law enforcement and firearms. Again, why is that?
This is for all the emotionally dependant knee jerk reactionaries lacking in critical thinking and are always ripe for favoring and promoting an emotional response rather then a well reasoned one.
The FBI reports that more americans are killed by hammers than firearms each year.
I just can't wait until those who have replaced critical thought with only emotionally based responses begin protesting the sale of hammers in front of the Home Depot, Lowes, True Value and ACE Hardware. We truly live in a world of emotionally manipulated MORONS!!!! Including way too many of our elected leaders.
Call me old school but I prefer a President with an administraition that when faced with a national challenge can provide us with true effective solutions based in fact rather than a politically motivated agenda presented to us in the form of a dog and pony show.
Hyperbole is not worth much of anything.
First, you did not read the article. "murders committed with a rifle." WITH A RIFLE!!! If you add ALL firearms, handguns alone kill more people than hammers.
Here are the ACTUAL statistics:
- 323 murders committed with a rifle
- 496 murders committed with hammers and clubs.
- 8,775 murders committed with firearms
Facts tell a much different story. One would think that a person throwing around the word "MORON" would actually have looked at the facts before making his ill informed diatribe. Shame that was not the case here.
Now, regardless of the facts, let's look at the knee-jerk emotional response from Friendo in and of itself: Hammers have many uses other than killing people. Name one other use an assault rife has than killing people or threatening people with death and you might have a point.
Sad that so many people care more about their prejudices than reality.
I think you are on the right track, you just need some clarification. Yes, the article and the statistics refer to rifles and not firearms in totality.
But here is the key issue. There is such a fervor to ban 'assault weapons' of which rifles are a major component. Yet an astronomical number of murders are committed annually with handguns, yet Senator Feinstein herself said when introducing her bill "I'm not going after handguns or shotguns..." So what is the true motivation here? 6,220 citizens were murdered with handguns in 2011, the latest FBI crime report available shows. Only 323 people died by 'assault weapons'/rifles. 20 times more Americans murdered with handguns and the champion of gun control isn't interested in going after handguns? She also is apparently not interested in going after the criminals who use firearms to murder our citizens, or the mentally ill who commit the most heinous crimes with guns.
Can you say hypocrisy? I knew you could!
Proponents claim that 'assault rifles' serve no purpose other than to kill or threaten people. They refuse to admit that rifles such as the AR-15 can be used for hunting, a legitimate sport. Unlike with a bolt action rifle if the animal is only wounded and gets away, the AR-15 allows a second killing shot without having to operate the bolt. They refuse to admit that like archery, such weapons are enjoyed for target shooting. Target shooting is a recognized Olympic sport, although admittedly currently a .22 bolt action rifle is used in competition. So, there are legitimate uses for such weapons despite the claims of the anti-gun crowd.
Hammers killed more people in 2011 than rifles. That is a fact. (496-hammers/clubs; 323-rifles). Another fact is that twice as many Americans were killed by hands and feet than rifles - 728! How do you ban 'assault feet'? Cut them off after the first offense?
The most startling fact that anti-gun lobbyists don't want to address is that there has been a steady decline in murders in the US, from 14,916 in 2007 to 12,664 in 2011. There were 10,129 murders by firearms in 2007, and only 8,583 in 2011. Yet firearms ownership ballooned, with over 300 million guns owned in the US. It is amusing to note that there are more guns owned in the US now yet fewer murders by guns.
Maybe the anti-gun crowd should be looking at getting and keeping criminals off the street and the mentally ill from obtaining firearms instead of trying to take firearms away from responsible law abiding citizens?
D27 - ICRD
“Sometimes I wonder whether the world is being run by smart people who are putting us on or by imbeciles who really mean it.” - Mark Twain
"...it seems fairly obvious that if more people had a gun, less people would be inclined to try to hit them in the head with a hammer." - Awr Hawkins
The reason "murder" is down is because of the rapid developments in the medical field. Less people die every year from injuries, including gun wounds.
The FACT is that more Americans are shooting each other every year. There roughly 100,000 injured or killed by firearms last year. That is WAY UP from 2002 - the height of the assault rife ban - where about only 60,000 people were injured or killed by guns. Here are the sources:
Again Bull153, it would help if you based your opinions on REALITY rather than your imagination.
"After witnessing the shark feeding frenzy of the liberals who want to take weapons away from law abiding citizens..."
Nobody, I repeat, NOBODY is coming to take your guns or your Bibles. Quit being so paranoid. The bill simply stops the sale and importation of certain weapons. If you already have one, black helicopters are not going to start circling your house and drones will not follow you to work... Jesus Freakin Christ, all you paranoid people freakin amaze me with your fear mongering...your balloon just never lands, does it?
I'm not in a balloon, Larry. You sound like you're in a spaceship, though.
If the ultimate goal of the anti-gun crowd is not the complete removal of every firearm in the United States - ala England and Australia - then why is it necessary to have a national registry of legally owned firearms?
Why is there so much emphasis on controlling guns owned by law abiding responsible gun owners and none on identifying and controlling access to firearms by the mentally ill? Rather than try and force new gun laws onto the books, why aren't Senator Feinstein and her cohorts trying to enforce existing laws directed against criminals to keep them away from guns and in prison where they belong?
It is because of people like Diane Feinstein and the Governor of New York that rational people to purchase weapons that the Government wants to ban. As long as the Government is less concerned about my safety I will do what it takes to protect myself and my family.
It isn't fear mongering, it is practical safety. So, you can worry about black helicopters and drones, I won't. But you better worry about your safety, because I don't have to worry about mine.
D27 - ICRD
"The safety of the people shall be the highest law." - Marcus Tullius Cicero
"We must respect the past, and mistrust the present, if we wish to provide for the safety of the future." - Joseph Joubert
So let me ge this straight, according to Bull153:
WRONG: to have national registry of guns.
RIGHT: to have a national registry of the mentally ill.
So according to him, we should control people - law abiding people - but not control actual instruments of murder? Also, if we applied his "anti registration" logic to his own argument, it would seem Bull153 is arguing for the " complete removal of every [mentally ill person] in the United States."
It is sad some cannot even be intellectually consistent and must resort to constant hypocrisy. Again, seems like paranoia and imagination are getting in the way of reality for some here.
"If the ultimate goal of the anti-gun crowd is not the complete removal of every firearm in the United States - ala England and Australia - then why is it necessary to have a national registry of legally owned firearms?" - Paranoia - A mental disorder
"Why is there so much emphasis on controlling guns owned by law abiding responsible gun owners and none on identifying and controlling access to firearms by the mentally ill?" - Law abiding gun owners dont have to worry, those who need assault weapons and military style weapons are paranoid - a mental disorder
" As long as the Government is less concerned about my safety I will do what it takes to protect myself and my family." - Conservatives, always looking to create a large nanny state its always about growing government
"It isn't fear mongering, it is practical safety." - more paranoia - a mental disorder
It seems that those with the mental disorders are the ones who are telling us the government wants to take away our guns away. Are you going to listen to those with mental disorders, they will spend all your tax dollars trying to keep the boogie man away. With this many statements falling into the paranoid mental disorder category, here is someone who society should be concerned with.
Such extremism from the right, and then they cant figure out why Americans arent voting for them.
I'd like to see your doctorate in psychology and mental health, or did you just stay in a Holiday Inn Express last night? Your responses are becoming more ridiculous and less factual every time you post.
Rather than answer legitimate questions, you accuse the right of being paranoid. We both know that is baloney, and worse. When you can't base an argument on facts, you try with emotions.
How you can say conservatives are looking to create a nanny state is truly unbelievable, since it is the current administration and liberals in general who seek to make Americans dependent on government, NOT the other way around.
Accusing conservatives of being mentally ill does nothing to support your side of the discussion, and only shows how desperate you are when faced with facts and logical questions. It isn't extremism, it's common sense, a commodity that you seem to lack.
D29 - ICRD
“A desire to be in charge of our own lives, a need for control, is born in each of us. It is essential to our mental health, and our success, that we take control.” - Robert F. Bennett
"..you better worry about your safety, because I don't have to worry about mine."
Bull, exactly why would I have to worry about my safety?
I am really surprised that you even ask that question, my friend. You know as well as I do that the world we live in is a dangerous place. We don't live in Mayberry anymore. You can't leave you front door open and you car un_locked with the keys in it like we used to do so many years ago.
There are nutcases that murder children and shoot movie viewers. There was a drive by on Hwy 99. Two people were stabbed on North Main Street. A bus driver was shot and a child taken from a school bus. A police officer was killed and two deputies wounded. A woman in Chicago lost her last child to gun violence after her other three had been killed in years past. Homes catch fire, and earthquakes are a distinct possibility. So if you AREN'T worried about your and your family's safety, I worry about YOU.
What will you do if a burglar breaks into your home? What will you and your family do if there is an earthquake? What if you are confronted by someone wanting to harm you or your family? What will you do? Have you thought about these things and are you prepared? I have and I am.
So when I say you better worry about your safety, it isn't a threat, it is a genuine concern. These days, everyone should be worried about their safety and have plans for when emergencies occur. It is simple common sense.
D29 - ICRD
“It is better to be prepared for an opportunity and not have one than to have an opportunity and not be prepared.” - Whitney M. Young, Jr.
“To be prepared is half the victory.” - Miguel de Cervantes Saavedra
"you accuse the right of being paranoid" - you are now generalizing when you say "right", I wasn't trying to be quite so broad.
"How you can say conservatives are looking to create a nanny state is truly unbelievable," - Yep, and its just as unbelievable that the "Liberals" are trying to do the same as you stated:
"since it is the current administration and liberals in general who seek to make Americans dependent on government, NOT the other way around."
See, this is a baseless claim that for some unknown propaganda reason, you state as if a fact, which it isn't. And might I add, it is quite extreme and divisive of you to imply that this is what the Democrats want.
You have clearly written about social behaviors that there should be regulations on so as regular people will not have to be subjected to such behavior. You are basically saying that our society is not sophisticated enough to adapt to each others individuality, and that we need to have a multitude regulations in order to keep everyone in line, like a nanny would do.
"Accusing conservatives of being mentally ill does nothing to support your side of the discussion, and only shows how desperate you are when faced with facts and logical questions" - quite a broad conclusion on your part, desperate attempt on your part to frame the conversation. Just what is my side when it comes to this discussion? And when have I been faced with facts and logical questions?
You have been the one to imply that the problem with guns is that the mentally ill have easy access to them. Then we see Conservatives in state houses and conservatives across the land say extremely insane things that they are going to do to protect their right to bear "guns" which is not in the Constitution, as opposed to "arms" as the Constitution says. I also see where Conservatives are implying that they need those guns to protect them from the Government, and I think they mean ours. It all sounds mentally challenged to me.
Its all a game, its just a side show to what is really happening. No one is looking to take anyones guns away, but how else can the right try and garner any support without first making a straw man. FringeNoise does it every day.
"Have you thought about these things and are you prepared? I have and I am."
Yep, spoken like a true paranoid delusional type.
Seems many of these unapologetic gun fanatics have these "wild west shootout" fantasies where it seems they ALWAYS emerge as the victor and the would-be perpetrator is taught a lesson.
REALITY tells a much different story. Those persons with guns in the home were at greater risk than those without guns in the home of dying from a homicide in the home. he risk of dying from a suicide in the home was greater for males in homes with guns than for males without guns in the home .
These are FACTS as opposed to paranoid delusions and imagination. I guess it is up to individuals which is more important to them.
It is amazing how you continue to paint conservatives as mentally challenged when there is no substantiation. You might as well say all Democrats are aliens from Mars. Wanting a secure nation that follows the laws and the Constitution isn't insane, it is what many Americans over the centuries have fought and died for. But you want to turn American into the United States of Europe. You want the Government to control every aspect of our lives from what we can eat and drink to what guns we can own. You and the liberals are the insane ones.
You can try to defend the current administration all you want, but the fact is that with Mr. Obama's second term all the damage he's done in his first term will double. If you like Obamacare wait until we have Obamaguns and Obamagration. Amnesty for law breakers. Most firearms illegal. Thanks, but no thanks.
Fox News is the only fair and balanced news organization out there. Every other news agency is so far up the President's butt there is no way anything they report is factual. Only Fox News provides factual reporting from both sides. I know you don't believe it, but that is OK. We can agree to disagree.
Those who fail to prepare for emergences are going to fail. It has nothing to do with wild west shootouts, but everything to do with personal safety. Ask the lady who saved herself and her kids by blowing away the dirtbag that broke into her home. Or the 90 year old veteran who was attacked in his home by two punks who he shot and killed. Earthquakes and fires have nothing to do with shootouts or suicide, but you best have a plan for those emergencies as well.
Game? No, sir, not a game. A very serious assault on America. How Barack Obama got elected for a second term is beyond me. There must be far more stupid Americans than I thought there were. I hope we still have a United States in four years.
D30 - ICRD
“I predict future happiness for Americans if they can prevent the government from wasting the labors of the people under the pretense of taking care of them.” - Thomas Jefferson
“It could probably be shown by facts and figures that there is no distinctly American criminal class except Congress.” - Mark Twain
"I hope we still have a United States in four years."
Yeah, at best that is baseless hyperbole; at worst it is just outright paranoid delusions.
"How Barack Obama got elected for a second term is beyond me. There must be far more stupid Americans than I thought there were."
So now everyone who voted for President Obama is "stupid?"
And really, the FOUL LANGUAGE is highly inappropriate.
Really, this post proves TheSovereign's point far better than his own post does.
President Obama got re-elected because the GOP did not adjust to the changing demographics of the country and put up a candidate that only appealed to a minor segment of the population.
You are right. There are far too many Americans who believe in the President's "Nanny America" where they don't have to work, they don't have to contribute, they don't have to pay taxes because of all the entitlement programs that the Obama administration has created or expanded.
This administration refuses to tackle the important issues facing this nation. Campaign reform, the major plank of his first administration, has been ignored. Immigration reform was ignored during his first term with the exception of the 'Dream Act' which Mr. Obama used his magic pen to implement when smarter and cooler heads determined THREE TIMES that it was a bad policy.
So now, while hundreds of thousands of Americans still wait in broken homes and tent cities for FEMA aid the President promised, he jets off to Las Vegas to give a speech taking credit for the actions of the bipartisan group of senators in trying once again to pass some type of border security and immigration reform.
Mr. President, do what you swore to do twice now. Uphold and defend the Constitution of the United States. Quit tying the hands of the very agency that protects the internal security of the USA and let them round up these illegal immigrants. What do we do with these 11 million illegals? Simple. Take them to the border and point the way home. They found a way into this country, now they can find a way back. I am sick of hearing that we need them here. Baloney! There are thousands of legal immigrants waiting to be allowed in. If we eliminate the illegals, then we have the space and jobs they are taking up now available for new immigrants. Mr. Obama wants to expand his base by making these 11 million legal. That is shameful, and typical of "King" Obama.
D30 - ICRD
"President Obama flew to a rally in Las Vegas last night. However, he did not visit any of the casinos. You know why? When you're $16 trillion in debt, they don't let you in." – Jay Leno
"One of President Obama's winning points last night was about how sanctions against Iran are crippling their economy. And believe me, if anyone knows how to cripple an economy, it's President Obama." – Jay Leno
"The good news for the White House is that unemployment has dropped to 7.8 percent, right where it was when President Obama took office. So Obama has gone from 'Change you can believe in' to 'Can you believe there's no change.'" – Jay Leno
Really? Wow! Seems more they post, the more we see there is no real logic behind these critiques. It is all just petty politics and old fashioned racism.
These people just seem more and more delusional and desperate the more popular Obama gets.
I think the whole "guns don't kill people, people kill people" argument to be bs. What are guns made for? A gun is made for combat, a gun is an efficient killer and if it doesn't kill you it can mangle you. That's the reality. I don't support the ban on assault weapons because I believe the workers have every right to arm themselves and to revolt against capitalism. "Under no pretext should arms and ammunition be surrendered; any attempt to disarm the workers must be frustrated, by force if necessary."-Marx, 1850
But conservatives want to talk about how liberals aren't tackling the real problems, that the violence comes from other social problems(which is true) but our conservative politicians only make conditions worse for those that are committing the violence. Cut welfare, food stamps, medicare, medicaid, social security, fight against unions which don't want to cut wages and benefits, etc. What is the answer? More God, more police militarization.
Bull you want to fight gangs but you don't want to legalize marijuana and you've showed no interest in helping poor people out(and if you're like most conservatives you don't care to).
" But you want to turn American into the United States of Europe. You want the Government to control every aspect of our lives from what we can eat and drink to what guns we can own. You and the liberals are the insane ones." - Are you talking about me, because if you are, it just further proves my point. You are making a good argument to question your soundness to own a gun with the many paranoiac fears that you express.
Good luck finding where I made those arguments. You have no clue what I "want", you are too busy building straw men, and fighting windmills to even have the slightest idea what I "want." You are an extremest, I am not. I look like a moving target because I am not tied to one ideology, especially one that forces me to suspend reality to get their way.. I prefer to see logical and reasonable processes utilized to get the work of the people done, as opposed to subject-able accusations along with the fear mongering of one Party in the middle of a major identity crisis going on across the country. They have gone too far, they they did the same thing the Democrats did in the 80s and 90s. Thats pendulum two party politics for you. Now they are looking for a new brand. What will their new look be? Are they ditching the old white guy look?
The right has governed so poorly when in control, with scandal ridden, and fiscally irresponsible that your whole gig now is to blame those who have been cleaning up after the conservative disaster of the 2000s, so it is their strategy to blame this President and the Democrats for the fall out of that train wreck. Its like you all are constantly trying to prove the Democrats are as bad as the Conservatives. After all, you guys are always saying things like "worse than Watergate." This is a high water mark for Conservatives, and it set the Conservative movement down the "Tricky Dicky" school of Conservative politics. Win at all cost, its not cheating if its for the good of the country!!
"Mr. Obama wants to expand his base by making these 11 million legal. That is shameful, and typical of "King" Obama." - "Don't do what Reagan did, because you will be a socialist nazi Muslim if you do! All hail St Ronnie."
Don't do as we have done, do as we tell you, its all about what we tell you. Its about control, and the fear that someone is going to keep your political movement from gaining control, so you spend your whole time trying to make the President look as bad as past Conservative Presidents instead of looking for sound solutions. Its not about solutions, its about control. Just read what you write.
"Just read what you write."
Right because it is FILLED with HYPOCRISY!
Bull153 calls PResident Obama here "King Obama" when in prior blogs, Bull153 ADVOCATED President Obama have a more powerful executive privilege. WHICH ONE IS IT BULL153!!!
"You have no clue what I 'want'". Yes, I do. You have been very clear that you hate conservatives and are no more a moderate than you claim I am. Extremist? Perhaps because I see where this country is headed...I am a bit extreme. For all your protestations you are just like our Commander in Chief... No commander and no Chief Executive.
You are quite happy with the policies of the current administration. Fixing the train wreck? No more like adding to it. Mr. Obama is on track to jack up the national debt to over 20 Trillion dollars by the time he finally leaves office. He is jacking up his administrations spending by triple what George Bush spent. That is fixing the train wreck? No, not at all. He is burdening your and my great grandchildren with massive debt with his destructive policies. He's not fixing a damn thing. What he can't get approved by Congress he uses his magic pen to get implemented.
Control... yes, our great administration is leading us forward. Forward into an economic disaster we may never recover from. The idiots in Washington just let him do it. Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi are just shills for Mr. Obama's train ride to oblivion.
Ronald Regan has been dead for years. Yet you continue to deride his accomplishments. It's time for you to get with the current problems instead of blaming the past. Barack Obama will go down in history for two things. Being the first black President and the worst president in history.
You condemn and fear the conservatives. That is fine. Your way and the President's way is the wrong way. One day you'll wake up and see it for yourself. I hope it isn't too late.
Don't question my mental soundness. You should question others who post here under many names and many guises. There is your proof of lack of mental soundness. Mine, Sir, is just fine. When you become a competent mental health physician, I might listen to what you might opine. Otherwise you are no more than another blogger with his own opinion, nothing more.
D31 - ICRD
"If it is not right do not do it; if it is not true do not say it.” - Marcus Aurelius
“To be persuasive we must be believable; to be believable we must be credible; credible we must be truthful.” - Edward R. Murrow
Bull, "What will you do if a burglar breaks into your home? What will you and your family do if there is an earthquake? What if you are confronted by someone wanting to harm you or your family? What will you do? Have you thought about these things and are you prepared? I have and I am."
That is really being paranoid there Bull. I could ask you those same questions, just what would you do?
As for me, now remember, I probably have more guns than you do but I do not see the need to own any kind of assualt weapon or a magazine with a thousand rounds of ammo. If you do, then you are just straight out paranoid as hell pal... That is what we are talking about, assualt weapons and severe multi ammo clips. That's it.
Now, what exactly would you do? What would you do if 5 gunmen got into your house while you were sleeping, snuck into your bedroom and stuck a gun in your mouth? This happened to a friend of mine across town and he has about as many guns as I do. What would you do?
Larry, Larry, Larry... Come on now, trying to turn things around on me accomplishes nothing. To answer the questions, I have plans for emergencies of all kinds, I have discussed these things with my family, and I have an emergency preparedness kit assembled and ready in case it is needed. Have you done the same? Being prepared is a far cry from being paranoid.
I couldn't care less how many guns you own. I only care about the ones I own and the attempt to deny me the right to own and purchase the ones I wish to. Please note in my last two posts I didn't say anything about assault weapons or magazine size. Believe me, I can adequately defend myself with what I own, and I don't have a magazine that holds a hundred rounds, much less a thousand.
You may not feel the need to own an assault rifle, I may not feel the need to own an assault rifle, but there are Americans who do, and they should have the right to do so.
I'm not going to spell out the steps I take to protect myself, but rest assured that despite what happened to your friend, I am more likely to be struck dead by lightning than have five bad guys sneak in my home and put a gun in my mouth. But, to be fair, I would do exactly what they said and hope I didn't die. I assume that's what your friend did, and what you would do. The point is, never let it get that far.
So, again... have you planned for such emergencies and are you prepared?
D31 - ICRD
“Today, we need a nation of Minutemen, who are not only prepared to take arms, but citizens who regard the preservation of freedom as the basic purpose of their daily lives, and who are willing to consciously work and sacrifice for that freedom” - John Fitzgerald Kennedy
“All men are prepared to accomplish the incredible if their ideals are threatened.” - Hermann Hesse
Five guys come into my house and put a gun in my mouth I'm going Jet Lee on them, I don't need a assault rifle ;)
""Mr. Obama is on track to jack up the national debt to over 20 Trillion dollars by the time he finally leaves office. " - this is an "out your derrière statement with no context, and I am sure you have no way of actually putting it into context, much like your statement that I'm "quite happy with the policies of the current administration." - I don't have a ridged, mindless, "you are either with us or you are against us" attitude, and I may agree with some of this President's policies, but there are just as many policies and decisions that I don't agree with, but I am not going to say ridiculous, immature things about him just because I don't agree with his decision. That is where you and I differ, you see ideology and Party above the freedoms and principles of the founders. It is very stereotypical of you an most conservatives.
Now, as to you and your claim that President Obama will "jack up the National debt to over $20 trillion dollars", first off, this is nothing more than Conservative hyperbole. Either you are misrepresenting the truth intentionally, or you have been watching too much FringeNews, but the reality is, Congress is the only branch that can spend money, not the President.
Then when it comes to Congress passing a President's requested policies, well, President Obama's increase in spending his last 4 years is the lowest of any President in over 60 years. The last two fiscally responsible Conservative President's, Reagan and W Bush saw increase in the 8 to 10% range where this radical spend spend spend President has only seen a 1.6% increase in spending.
The only thing jacked up is what you are trying to sell us on.
"Forward into an economic disaster we may never recover from. " - From the mouths of babes, you just gave America the perfect reason to never vote for a Conservative again, because they had an "economic disaster we may never recover from."
I love when these fringy types make it so easy for me. first it was Canative, and now its Bull153 proving why Conservatism is a short lived and dying at a glacier pace.... a modern Climate Change type of glacier pace. For those who are football fans, Conservatism is to the American political scene as the "Run and Shoot" was to football, started with such promise, but was as short lived as any other gimmick.
More sarcasm, I see. KarenPearsall will appreciate it, she doesn't seem to recognize nor appreciate mine.
D31 - ICRD
“Experience is that marvellous thing that enables you to recognize a mistake when you make it again.” - Franklin P. Jones
Lol because you do it all wrong. But yeah it's funny to see conservatives talk about how Obama is destroying the economy. Opposed to the conservative plan to help the economy? HAHAhAhAHAAHAHA.
I don't have it wrong, it's just misunderstood!
Mr. Obama isn't destroying the economy... it is already destroyed. Unemployment back up to 7.9 percent. Shutting down his 'Jobs Committee' that met four times in two years... Yep, we're toast.
Conservatives have a better plan. As opposed to the communist plan to help the economy... Hehehehehe...
D32 - ICRD
“Communism is like Prohibition, it's a good idea but it won't work” - Will Rogers
“Communism teaches and seeks two objectives: unrelenting class warfare and the complete eradication of private ownership” - Pope Pius XI
What's the conservative plan? Cut Medicare, Social Security, food stamps, welfare programs, cut taxes, deregulate, etc?
That first quote is so stupid, prohibition was never a good idea, stay away from my booze! And the second quote is accurate to some extent.
Bull,"The point is, never let it get that far."
....and how would you accomplish that?
"So, again... have you planned for such emergencies and are you prepared?" Short answer, no. I don't have hidden weapons, or a bunker in my back yard stocked with canned goods. I have a couple of flashlights here and there in case the lights go out, that's it. I am not going to live my life in a constant state of paranoia, worried that Obama's secret army (As one idiot wrote in the paper a few days ago), coming to get my guns and bibles.
You said yourself you would probably stand a better chance of getting hit by lightning than someone breaking into your house with a gun, so why are you worried? I know, it's the Obama secret army, right?
Oh, by the way Larry, when is the next meeting of the secret army, I need to get it on my calendar? LMAO!!!!!
You either lack comprehension skills or you just like to try and push people's buttons. I already told you I won't discuss details of my personal security. Suffice it to say, unlike your friend, I have taken steps to prevent anyone from being able to enter my home undetected, which would render the scenario of five guys with guns around my bed moot. Even though I am retired, I still practice situational awareness when I am out and about. There are still a lot of people who are offended by the fact that I placed them behind bars for various legitimate reasons, so I make sure that I avoid them when I can and l keep an eye on them when I can't.
I'm sorry that you think things like a simple emergency kit and a plan to get out of the house in case of a fire are cause for paranoia. I don't have a hidden bunker filled with canned good nor do I live in a constant 'state of paranoia'. I do have an emergency kit stocked with supplies. I've discussed different emergencies and how to handle them with my family. So, when the next earthquake hits or some other emergency occurs, I'll be ready, and that, my friend is NOT paranoia.
Since I don't believe there is any 'secret army', I won't worry one bit about them coming to take anything. You can, if you want.
I did NOT say I "would probably stand a better chance of getting hit by lightning than someone breaking into your[my] house with a gun." What I did say was " I am more likely to be struck dead by lightning than have five bad guys sneak in my home and put a gun in my mouth." I still believe that. But there is the chance that some crazed drug bum or loony gang member might try. That's why I am prepared.
I like you, Larry. I do. I wish you were better prepared, and that's not paranoia.
D34 - ICRD
“I am prepared for the worst but hope for the best” - Benjamin Disraeli
“Winning is the science of being totally prepared.” - George Allen
I'm not sure, but I heard it's February 14th at Hoffman's house in Santa Rosa, 1313 Delusional Avenue. Open bar at 4:00 PM, dinner at 6:00 PM, and the meeting starts promptly at 7:00 PM... ;)
D34 - ICRD
“Delusion arises from anger. The mind is bewildered by delusion. Reasoning is destroyed when the mind is bewildered. One falls down when reasoning is destroyed.” - Bhagavad Gita
Bull, just relax why don't you? Get a couple of flashlights, and try to remember where the doors are so you can get out quickly, if you have trouble remembering, they have these little signs at Target to label your doors "Door to Back Yard" "Door to Garage" "Door to Front yard". Forget the one that says "Door to Laundry Room" that will just confuse things unless you want to get some wash done before Obama's Private Black Army gets there. :-) (That's not for you, that's for that idiot who wrote that last dumb letter, Dale I think...)
Saw this on Facebook, and I felt the irony needed to be shared as another Conservative talking point falls short:
"Chris Kyle (the U.S. Military's deadliest shooter survived 4 tours in Iraq) was killed near his home Saturday by a gun, while holding a gun, surrounded by guns.
The NRA'S assertion that 'more guns make us safer" has bee shot full of holes."
Here is another one that I saw that should raise a smile or two:
"Two hours after the picture of President Obama skeet shooting came out in the press, the GOP came out in favor of repealing the 2nd Amendment." - LMAO!!!!!!
Kindly provide the source of your information. The articles I read said the investigation was on-going. Where did you discover that Chris Kyle was "...holding a gun, surrounded by guns." From what little I know that was released, they were at the range to help this guy who had PTSD. There were three people there. I doubt they were 'surrounded by guns'.
According to the LA Times article I read "They [officials] said there were no witnesses to the shootings." So I ask again, how can you make such exaggerated claims?
It's a shame you have to sensationalize a tragedy to make your point.
D35 - ICRD
“There are some people so addicted to exaggeration that they can't tell the truth without lying.” - Josh Billings
I still like you. I just hope you never have to face someone armed who wants to hurt you or your family; or have to suffer a natural disaster like back East.
As I said, being prepared does not equal being paranoid. So if the President's secret army shows up, don't come over. There won't be room in my hideaway............. ;)
D35 - ICRD
"Man is the most intelligent of the animals - and the most silly." - Diogenes
"Know your enemy and know yourself and you can fight a hundred battles without disaster." - Sun Tzu
So Bull153, you are saying two people at a gun range to practice shooting did not have guns?? You seem to have an amazing imagination!
Also, your comments are borderline threats. It is a shame this forum does not have standards to prevent people such as yourself from making comments that could be considered violent threats.
Isn't it ironic that some gun-nuts invented an Australia "adventure" to flee the evil "King Obama" when Australia has some of the toughest gun laws around?
"It's a shame you have to sensationalize a tragedy to make your point." - Dont you hate it when a non-conservative takes a page out of your playbook? I can see that you do.
So answer the question.
Or are you becoming as much of a liar as Hoffman/crimeriddendump?
D35 - ICRD
“Great talker, great liar.” - French Proverb
LOL!!!! The IRONY of Bull153's quotes keep cracking me up!! Another good one Bull153!
Also, I like how Bull153 here keeps trying to pretend that there are no guns at gun ranges.
Here is the quote I'm liking lately:
"There are some people ... [who] just will not live in an evidence-based world. And that’s regrettable. " - Hillary Clinton
"So answer the question.
Or are you becoming as much of a liar as Hoffman/crimeriddendump?" Gandhi stated "you become what you hate" so maybe I am becoming as much of a liar as you are. I hope I don't sink that low.
Since you won't answer the question, you already have.
That's sad, now I've lost respect for you.
D35 - ICRD
“A man is never more truthful than when he acknowledges himself as a liar” - Mark Twain
LOL!! Seriously, these quotes keep getting more and more ironic coming from Bull153!!!
When is that move to Australia happening again Bull153? When will you have your moment of "truth?"
Also, if the top sniper in the US/World is shot by surprise, how does someone with far less training/skills think they will ALWAYS win against an armed opponent? ARROGANCE and IGNORANCE are dangerous companions.
The truth is , the more guns are available, the more likely guns will harm someone. That is a simple fact.
Bull, ".. I just hope you never have to face someone armed who wants to hurt you or your family.."
So you are saying you would be prepared for any armed bad guy approaching you with evil intentions? Really?
Cops get killed all the time by bad guys with guns, who could be more prepared than a Cop? But yet you say you are prepared? Do you have an integrated early warning system installed at the molecular level of your being or something? Do you walk around with your head on a swivel and your hand on several weapons all at once?
The truth is, nobody is prepared for some bad guy who decides to stick a gun in your face Batman. Nobody, not you, not me, Nobody...
As for Obama's secret black army, I don't live in that paranoid Right Wing Bubble, you do... :-)
Yes, I am prepared. Yes, cops get killed by bad guys with guns. But, you don't survive almost forty years of being a cop in some of the most dangerous places in the world by NOT being prepared. I know that someone really determined could get to me and harm me. I'm no Batman or Superman and I have no molecular warning device. What I do have is years of training, common sense, and the ability to sense when something isn't quite right. I've taken steps to protect myself and my family, and I hope every day I never have to use them. Make no mistake, though. I WILL if I have to. I have for forty years, and I am not going to stop now.
As for the secret army, I guess you missed the wink at the end of the comment. The only one who thinks there is might be a secret army is Hoffman/crimeriddendump. After all, he's the one hosting their next meeting... ;)
D35 - ICRD
“Anger is only one letter short of danger” - Unknown
“Nothing in the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity.” - Martin Luther King, Jr.
LOL! AGAIN, the irony of these quotes is AMAZING!!! Almost as amazing as the arrogance of the whole above post.
Also Bull153, you should reset your "ICRD" counter. Putting my screen name in your post is hardly ignoring anything.
But then again, you are proving my point about how little reality and facts matter to you; only your imagination.
Bull, being a Cop for 40 years or 50 years or 60 years doesn't make you imune to violence and please don't pretend to have some kind of 6th sense no one else has. Even if you did sense someone on the street was going to do something, how would you stop it?
Wonder if Bull knows there are bad guys in Australia too.. Since Australia was originally a penile country, their bad guys have probably evolved into super sensitive retired Cop detectors. Especially those with 40 or 50 years of bad guy sniffing powers.
Whatcha gonna do now? Where you gonna run? Where you gonna hide?....Body Snatchers...
My friend, now you are being silly and disingenuous, almost as bad as Hoffman. No one said I was immune from violence, I have said and will continue to say I am prepared, better prepared than you.
Talk about a ridiculous open-ended loaded question. What would you do? It depends on many factors just as it did every day I went to work. You mentally prepare for potential problems based on your knowledge of the area, crimes that have occurred, and any intelligence from sources. What I would do if 'someone was going to do something' depends on many factors. I might simply call 9-1-1 and be a great witness, or I might be forced to intervene myself. I know one thing. I'd do something.
I disagree with your '6th sense' comment. Believe what you want, but experienced cops sense things and see things that the average citizen doesn't. We've been trained that way, and anytime I am out of my house I am situationally aware of the hazards out there. It's not paranoia, it's common sense.
I'm familiar with Australia, and I am not worried. You see, they have banned guns there. No one, not even the evil 'super sensitive retired Cop detectors' have guns anymore. So, I will be perfectly safe, and won't need to run and hide from the body snatchers. No one is allowed to have any dangerous weapons, all kitchen knives are registered with the Government, and chefs have to go through special training along with butchers to possess large knives and cleavers. Hunting knives are maintained at the sporting clubs, and you have to be a member to use one, and only within the club. So, I'll be perfectly safe, perfectly! By the way, it's 'penal' country... 'penile' refers to Hoffman.
D36 - ICRD
“It's too bad that stupidity isn't painful.” - Anton LaVey
“The two most common elements in the universe are hydrogen and stupidity.” - Harlan Ellison
I was being facetious with the penile comment...
Back to your amazing powers of bad guy intentions...you know of course that everyone knows you have no such powers and just smile to themselves when ever you imply that you do, right?
So you agree with the gun banning laws of Australia. You say you will feel safe there because of them. (facetious again)
Ok, here is a direct question, not open ended. A couple of bad guys stick a gun in your face. They don't want to rob you, they want to kill you. Are you prepared for that? Please step out of the bubble before you answer.
You are still being silly and disingenuous. I can be just as facetious as you. But I think your use of 'penile' was just an honest mistake, and not planned. Even so, you did describe crimeriddendump / Hoffman perfectly.
As for Australia, I said they banned guns, I didn't say I agreed. There you go putting words in my mouth again. Besides, it's their business, not mine.
...and your question. I'm not playing your ridiculous 'what if' game anymore. If you haven't accepted that I am better prepared for an emergency than you are by now, nothing more that I say will change your mind.
Why ask silly questions when you don't believe me in the first place? If you want to play games, play with Hoffman. He's an expert on everything. Just ask him...
D36 - ICRD
“In fact, one thing that I have noticed . . . is that all of these conspiracy theories depend on the perpetrators being endlessly clever. I think you'll find the facts also work if you assume everyone is endlessly stupid.” - Unknown
“Stupidity is the deliberate cultivation of ignorance” - William Gaddis
Now, this was both educational and informative! Finally some facts rather than uninformed drivel...
Piers Morgan Blasted by Ted Nugent
Colorado Dems Seek To Hold Firearms Makers Liable For Gun Crimes
"Democrats in Colorado on Tuesday announced proposals that would hold firearms manufacturers liable for damage in.flicted with the guns they produce, the Denver Post reported." - In my humble opinion, this is taking things in the wrong direction. Firearm manufacturers' are no more liable for the results of their product causing the death of a person or persons, anymore than an automobile manufacturer is.
This article that I am referencing goes on to say:
"But as University of Denver law professor David Kopel told the paper, the lawmakers would first have to get around a federal law passed in 2005 that prevents gun manufacturers from being held responsible for crimes committed with their products."
So, that should settle it then, correct? There is a Federal law that says the gun manufacturers can not be held liable for the damage their product may cause. Not really, you see, the Democrats have learned how to use the Conservative game book. I will show you what I mean:
"Colorado Senate President John Morse (D) said some people believe the federal ban infringes upon states' rights." - See, there it is, the "Federal ban infringes upon state's rights" argument that the Conservatives like to use when they don't get what they want.
The same is true for the Medical Marijuana states, where they claim states rights are being infringed upon by the Federal Government. Both the gun advocates and the Marijuana advocates, plus Hemp advocates, all say that the Federal Government is infringing on their states rights. It seems that they are either all correct, or all wrong. This is one of those areas where the current Supreme Court would risk looking hypocritical to their stand on small unobtrusive Government if they rule against the responsibility of the Federal Government to regulate "ARMS", but do claim that they have the responsibility to regulate your personal liberties, and to regulate your ability to grow and produce products that would compete too strongly for a sizable chunk of a multitude of highly established industries.
Too far is too far, and it should be pointed out when it happens because it is being done by both sides of the duopoly that we are stuck with, and it won't change until we find a viable alternative.
LOL!!!! Ted Nugent?????? Factual????? HAHAHAHA!!!!!
-- Right, Yemen is peaceful just like the US! FACT!!!
-- 100,000 Americans are shot every year; WHO CARES! FACT!
-- 99.99% of the gun owners of America are ... Perfectly harmless. Non-gun owners are the ONLY people that commit crime. FACTS!
Yep, "facts" alright. That is, if the imagination of a has-been rock star is to be taken over actual empirical evidence, scientific study, and actual expert knowledge.
Also, quite HYPOCRITICAL of Bull153 who normally DEMANDS people have qualifications or certification before expressing opinions is so eager to accept the imagination of an aging rockstar over actual evidence.
Interestingly enough, municipalities still have the right to say what is OK to sell in their boundaries. To use a very specific example from your post, Manteca ran a medical marijuana shop ou tof town claiming it was illegal, but, has roughly a dozen gun shops. Now, what Manteca CAN'T don is say that marijuana is illegal in Manteca. Same thing with guns. Manteca could prevent the sale of guns in Manteca, but could not make guns illegal to own.
Unlike gun owners, ALL medical marijuana patients are REGISTERED with the state and have LIMITS set and records kept of all purchases. Failure to meet any of these could result in PRISON!
So I agree, guns should probably be regulated EXACTLY like medical marijuana.
You aren't REALLY expecting a truthful answer from him, now, are you?
D37 - ICRD
“To be persuasive we must be believable; to be believable we must be credible; credible we must be truthful.” - Edward R. Murrow
LOL! There he goes again with the ironic quotes. This guy should probably learn to take his own advice ...
To tell you the truth I was expecting a vague reply without any real answer at all. One thing that I always noticed about confronting mhoffman about his/her multiple online id's is that he/she doesn't really lie about it, but is never really clear either. Like the subject is being avoided.
Crimeriddendump/Hoffman has been caught lying on several occasions, so it baffles me why he won't just say he isn't. There is so much proof that was eliminated when he was banned and each new identity was removed. For those who have been here for a while, there is no doubt that this is Hoffman... and biased... and abides... and CentralValleyMonitor... and Thad56... and try_thinking... and stop_plagiarizing... and on and on.
He's even still trying to add new identities, but the system is blocking new bloggers. EUgrad and changeless were his latest attempts. You can type the names in the user block at the top of the search-users page to see the comments that never made it to the blogs....
D37 - ICRD
“One comes to believe whatever one repeats to oneself sufficiently often, whether the statement be true of false. It comes to be the dominating thought in one's mind.” - Robert Collier
Bull, didn't I say to please step out of the bubble before you replied?
"I am better prepared for an emergency than you..."
Of course you are, you're Batman... :-)
"That's sad, now I've lost respect for you." - I was never trying to gain YOUR respect. Pretty arrogant of you to think that anyone here gives a crap about your respect.
You are an extreme conservative, that is about as low as one can go in my book, and your respect is the farthest thing I am concerned with. You are an example of what is wrong with society, and I will continue to exploit that example. Keep up the good work, you give me so much material to work with. You have become the new Canative. Keep up the good work, people are finally realizing that the Conservatives are the one's causing all of the issues. Fringenoise ratings are sinking, and they have been steadily loosing credibility amongst Americans. That's how it goes.
"After all, if you believe the garbage spouted by TheSovereign" - at least what I say is fact based and not based on some traditions and fabrications of special interest groups.
Just because your movement is dying doesn't mean I am spouting "garbage", I am pointing out the damage and the lies that the conservatives try and get away with.
Too bad for you.
I am beginning to believe, native, bull and 44 are all one and the same person. :-)and Maybe Fredo. :-0
Bull posted a link to: Ted Nugent Blasts Piers Morgan, Defends Gun Owners: 'Would You Leave Us The Hell Alone?
I too ask.... TED NUGENT?!?!?!?!?!?!!!!!
"That Nadine, what a teenage queen
She lookin' so clean
Especially down in between
What I like"
TED NUGENT - WANG DANG SWEET POONTANG LYRICS
Family Values spokesman.
...and you'd be wrong, as usual..
D39 - ICRD
"Don't push yourself to try to be right in everything 'cause sometimes being wrong makes you a better person." - Unknown
You have a point there crimeriddendump.
Also I don't place much value on what Mr Nugent say's .
Certainly wouldn't ask him for advice on anything..
I don't like where he stands on animal rights,as a matter of fact he doesn't believe animals should have ANY rights.
There are others things about Mr Nugent that I take issue with as well,but since I'm strongly in favor of animal rights that one gets under my skin in particular
Holding an entertainer accountable for his musical lyrics is just as bad as holding an actor accountable for their movie characters. Ted Nugent isn't the only musician to use bawdy lyrics in his songs. You can name many, and probably gangster rappers are the worst. Why is there no outrage about singers who advocate killing police and murdering each other?
Ted Nugent is speaking about a single issue. Like any source, you can choose to accept his position or not. It isn't about family values. I wouldn't vote for him for father of the year, but I certainly agree with his stance on gun control.
D40 - ICRD
“I'm a musician at heart, I know I'm not really a singer. I couldn't compete with real singers. But I sing because the public buys it..” - Nat King Cole
“I have a simple life. I mean, you just give me a drum roll, they announce my name, and I come out and sing. In my job I have a contract that says I'm a singer. So I sing.” - Tony Bennett
The jury is still out on that subject. Besides, it happened over forty years ago, how long are you going to hold on to that charge which may in fact be untrue. Finally, Jimmy Carter gave a blanket pardon to all draft evaders, some 100,000 or more.
According to Snopes, the statement you made has not been confirmed. There is as much evidence that it is untrue as there is supporting it.
President Clinton, among others, used the system to avoid military service. No condemnations are made against him, but because another young man chose a different route to use the system, he's branded a coward. That is patently unfair.
D40 - ICRD
“The one bonus for not lifting the ban on gays in the military is that the next time the government mandates a draft we can all declare homosexuality instead of running off to Canada.” - Lorne Bloch
No, it was allegedly Ted Nugent. Mitt Romney received four deferments for the draft between student deferments and religious one. Just as Bill Clinton used the system, so did Mitt Romney, yet I don't hear any criticism of Mr. Clinton. At least Mr. Romney went overseas for his religious beliefs, Mr. Clinton did it for selfish reasons.
How Mr. Clinton accomplished this is an interesting story in itself. In a Snopes article, it discusses the rumor that Bill Clinton was the first pardoned felon to be elected President. That is not true, but he did pull in favors from his draft board and not report for service as he was required to do. He had valid excuses, and was never charged with draft evasion.
I also point out that there were over 100,000 other draft dodgers during the war. At the height of the war in 1968, some 540,000 US troops were in Vietnam. That's 1/5 of those who were fighting. The population of the United States in 1968 was a little over 200 million and about 4 million people were in the military. That is two percent of the population. Given that maybe 2/3 of the population were women and children that leaves about 67 million people available to serve. If you eliminate people too old for military service that brings it down to about 20 million. Discounting that there were some women in the military at the time, that still leaves about 16 million men available for service. 100,000 fled from service, were the rest cowards too because they didn't serve?
D40 - ICRD
“I oppose registration for the draft . . . because I believe the security of freedom can best be achieved by security through freedom.” - Ronald Reagan
“Draft registration destroys the very values that our society is committed to defending.” - Ronald Reagan
Muhammad Ali, or Cassius Clay as he was known at the time, converted to Islam and was considered a minister of the Islam faith. In the racially insensitive period (the jury was all white) Mr. Clay was convicted of refusing induction into the armed services and sentenced to five years in federal prison with a $10,000 fine, the maximum punishment allowed.
He was no draft dodger. He refused service on grounds he felt were justified. He stood for his beliefs and accepted punishment unlike the 100,000 who fled the country. He was not the only resister that was tried and convicted, but he certainly was the most notable.
D40 - ICRD
“One life is all we have and we live it as we believe in living it. But to sacrifice what you are and to live without belief, that is a fate more terrible than dying.” - Joan of Arc
Hello Bull153, Giving a link to Nugent's stance on gun control, you observe, "Now, this was both educational and informative! Finally some facts rather than uninformed drivel..." But Nugent is cherry-picking statistics to support his OPINION. Because you happen to agree with him does not make it fact nor is the position of those with whom you disagree "uninformed drivel". Re-read the source that you feel is so "educational", "informative", and fact-filled. There are, as noted by other posters here, counterpoints, challenges, and fallacies to Nugent's opinions. As crimeriddendump pointed out, the "99.99% of gun owners are law abiding and harmless" is hyperbole at best. The former LA police officer who was fired in 2008 and and just retaliated by killing 3 people and terrorizing the area was no doubt, respected, legal and harmless until suddenly, he wasn't.
You chastise TheSovereign for ridiculing Nugent's supposed family values (where he posted some of Nugents bawdier lyrics) by saying, "it isn't about family values", but in the interview that YOU supplied, Nugent himself MAKES it ALL about family values when he opines that the problem isn't guns themselves, but the rot of society's morals and decline of values. If he is setting himself as the moral judge of society's norms, attitudes and actions, then his OWN attitude, ACTUAL WORDS and actions are fair game. You make a straw man argument when, commenting about gangster rappers, you ask TheSovereign, "Why is there no outrage against singers who advocate killing police and murdering each other?" Seriously? I cannot believe that you have NEVER heard of ANY public outcry against or media attention focused on the violent and misogynistic lyrics of certain rap music. Google it to be "informed and educated", there are numerous instances.
While Capitalists_Nightmare IS making a judgment call in labeling Nugent a coward and that OPINION can certainly be contested, he is not wrong in pointing out the irony that a man who is such a gun advocate PURPOSEFULLY avoided the Vietnam draft. You suggest that the "charge may be untrue", but again, the source you cite uses Nugent's OWN WORDS in the interview. Nugent himself sets up the charge by making those assertions in the magazine interview in the first place. As for the 40 years time frame, and the Carter pardon for draft dodgers, that is irrelevant. World War Two has been over for almost 70 years and I STILL hold Hitler accountable for HIS actions. Nugent compares quite favorably to Hitler, but the concept of holding people responsible for their actions, despite the passage of time, remains valid. Again, you are creating straw man arguments when you bring up Clinton. It has been well documented in the media that he also avoided the draft and he took his hit by right-wing pundits because of it. Don't pretend he went unscathed. You don't "hear" certain criticisms, because you seem rather selective in your "listening". Sincerely, Karen
Muhammad Ali may of been convicted but never spent time in jail, he remained free on appeals.
You may not consider him a draft dodger while others fled the difference being Mr Ali was well known and had certain opportunities at his disposal that other young men didn't have so for their own personal reasons chose to refuse the draft and fled.Ali was able to refuse and fight through with legal means.
Ted Nugent has gone back and forth through the years trying to dismiss the interview to the magazine where He describes with his own words how he avoided the draft.Both Ali and Nugent were able to get out of serving.My confusion is the religious reason Ali used when his career was based in violence, boxing is violence.
Atleast Ali has stood by his reason and never tried to change it with the years.
All the others that felt they had to flee were no less then Ali or Nugent their reasons were to them just as important.
Another sure sign the Conservative party is drifting away, is when they are left defending someone who has represented the opposite of what they stand for in their representations because he shares on extreme aspect with them.
But then, there is nothing "family values" or "values" at all about the Conservatives, those are just advertising catch lines like "whiter whites" and "the real thing." We all know that these advertising slogans work on a select group of gullible people since we know people bought the "Flowbee" and the "in the egg, egg beater." There is a sucker born every minute, and they believe that Conservatives have some kind of family values. Good advertising but no substance.
Ted Nugent is the perfect spokesperson for the dysfunctional Conservatives. After all, who else is willing to sit in their own crap in order to get their way?
You take Ron to task for his Ted Nugent post. "...Nugent is cherry-picking statistics to support his OPINION." You haven't? Others who post here haven't? You criticize him for a post you say he claims is 'fact filled'. I read his post, where does it say 'fact-filled? I believe he said 'some facts', and that is factual.
You also said in reference to the ex-LAPD officer on the run that he "was no doubt, respected, legal and harmless until suddenly, he wasn't." He was fired, as you say, in 2008 and you contend he was respected until he suddenly went off the deep end? I'd say not many respected him over the five years since he was fired! He is a mental case that based on his manifesto probably never should have been a police officer or in the military to begin with. He ceased to be a responsible gun owner the minute he decided to murder someone.
I didn't see where Ron chastised anyone, unless you claim that "Holding an entertainer accountable for his musical lyrics is just as bad as holding an actor accountable for their movie characters." is chastising. Even so, it is a far cry from the 'chastising' that TheSovereign has piled on Ron consistently. You don't feel comments like "I was never trying to gain YOUR respect. Pretty arrogant of you to think that anyone here gives a crap about your respect." and "You are an extreme conservative, that is about as low as one can go in my book, and your respect is the farthest thing I am concerned with. You are an example of what is wrong with society..." are chastising? Those statements seem OK to you as long as they are not made by a conservative.
There have been cases of outrage over rap lyrics, but nothing to the degree of objections to gun ownership and violence. There has been little said since 2009, and usually after a rapper has been gunned down. Google that and be "informed and educated".
What does gun ownership have to do with avoiding the draft? They are two separate issues. Conscientious objectors have served honorably in non-combat and even combat roles, one even won a Medal of Honor. I'd say a majority of those wouldn't want to own a gun. Avoiding the draft in a war you don't believe in doesn't equate to not being a responsible gun owner.
You say you hold Adolf Hitler accountable for his actions 70 years ago as well as Ted Nugent. So at what point do you stop holding people accountable? If you are going to stick to that principle, then you need to hold everyone accountable for every action. That includes draft dodgers like Bill Clinton, Dick Cheney, and the 100,000 others who fled from the draft. The Presidential pardon given by Jimmy Carter apparently doesn't matter to you. As for Bill Clinton, only the right was critical just like only the left was critical of Mitt Romney's lack of service. I don't think you can fairly say Ron was the only one with 'selective listening'. You've done your fair share from what I see.
Muhammad Ali was most certainly a draft resister. Whether he was a draft dodger depends on one's definition. In my opinion, a dodger is one who flees the country to avoid service. The thousands who went to Canada were certainly draft dodgers. Bill Clinton dodged the draft by going to England to study. Mitt Romney avoided the draft by going to France to preach.
Mr. Ali stood up for his convictions and was convicted. Whether he served a day in jail or not is moot. He was convicted for his convictions. President Carter's pardon makes it all irrelevant today.
While Muhammad Ali's employment as a professional boxer is considered violent, he claimed to have converted to Islam and became a Minister. How one reconciles that is their own business.
There is no doubt that anyone who was a draft dodger or a draft resister had what they felt were valid reasons. Unfortunately at the time, draft evasion was a crime. It is hard to find a good reason to commit a crime.
There is little point in commenting on your post. You are quite outspoken about your disdain for conservatives and their beliefs.
I wonder what happened? I can remember a time when I first started blogging here that the emphasis was on fair and civil discussions of topics of interest. I recall the many comments accusing the Manteca Bulletin of being nothing more than a conservative newsletter run by the city council.
It is amusing, yet sad, to see that for the most part, these blogs have become nothing more than a forum for pushing the liberal agenda and cheerleading the curent administration's activities. Quite some change in a year or so.
It is quite apparent that with a few exceptions, like rozemist, who is for the most part liberal in her views but is willing to civilly discuss any topic, and KarenPearsall, who is much more liberal and is less likely to discuss conservatives in a positive or neutral way, this has become a conservative bashing slugfest. I've seen people literally driven away by the disingenuous comments and pure hatred displayed by many here. I accept I was a part of that for a bit, but I also recognize that some here are adept at 'pushing the right button' to get an uncivilized response.
Therefore after today I will cease participating here. I have other pressing activities that allow me little free time for these endeavors, and considering the many disagreeable participants here, my time is better spent elsewhere.
Let me guess, they are "both" going to Australia...
I might be excited if I thought this was genuine unlike the dozen or so other times he has "taken his ball and gone home."
With all fairness in mind Bull153 was the first one to talk about losing his respect for Sovereign as well as calling him a liar ( I think he'd tell you this as well) ,and then it escalated from that point on between the two of them.I don't think that they hate each other but they're very opposites.I do believe their comments get to the point of insults.
I have seen a lot of mean spirited comments in this forum (you yourself have participated in some,and you owned that)
I don't agree that pushing of the buttons are reasons to go off on other members, I don't agree with any personal insults or any comments that are directed personally with the intentions to be cruel ,to bully, embarrass or pick a online verbal fight , when discussions can no longer be civil even if disagreeing then it is time to reevaluate whether its worth discussing anything with the button pusher.
I have seen a pattern develop here in the blogs as well not exactly the way you're seeing it but I do see that there are some personal comments being directed towards particular bloggers that I find difficult to be a witness to .
I don't like this Australia thing that has continuously been circled around "will the person go ,will they not" it's childish and it's meant to be taunting .It's a personal comment which is inappropriate. Should we really as forum members be concerned with a members trips or not..
This is the type of comments that really put the forum in a bad light.
And might very well scare potential members from joining in ,who wants to think they're going to be gone after personally ,or that they will be questioned repeatedly on who they are or aren't by the insinuation their screen names are bogus or that person is that person.
I don't care who is who ,I only want to respond to the person making the comment, why should I be looking for something else.
I'm disappointed that know one but myself and Karen has called anyone out on this and one other regular member has even joined in thinking it's amusing ,a joke but it isn't a joke ,it's never funny to try and embarrass others.
When people fail to be able to communicate with one another but instead only want to ridicule or insult one another is when communication ceases ,nothing will be heard or understood only the words of insults will be left to be remembered.
You have a political bone to pick with the forum as I see it (only my opinion),I don't! I have a problem with the behavior that often takes place in the forum.
It will remain to be seen if this behavior is something that I want to be apart of or not,because I really am being apart of it when I say nothing ,it's like a silent participation .
Hello 44Magnum, The point about Ted Nugent cherry picking facts to support his opinion is NOT that other people do or don't do the same thing, it is that the interview is an OPINION piece from Nugent's perspective, not "fact" in itself. There is an important distinction there. I am aware that Bull153 did not use the phrase "fact filled", that is why I did not put those words in quotation marks in my post to him, in contrast with "educational" and "informative", which he DID say. He did seem to imply, in my opinion, that Nugent's interview was more informational and fact driven, rather than the opinion piece it really was.
My comment about the police officer ("was no doubt respected, legal and harmless until suddenly, he wasn't ") was meant as a counterpoint to Nugent's claim about 99.99% of gun owners being "harmless". But my comment is actually only speculation. The same can be said for YOUR assertion that "I'd say that not many respected him over the last 5 years since he was fired!" Do you have proof of this or a source to confirm your claim? Not much has been released to the public concerning his relationships. You claim he is a "mental case" that "probably never should have been a police officer or in the military to begin with". You base this on the rantings in his manifesto which do not necessarily show his state of mind previous to his firing. Since we are speculating here, I would suggest that what he perceived as an unjust termination ate away at his mental stability, ultimately leading to the tragic events. I agree with you that "He ceased to be a responsible gun owner the minute he decided to murder someone". The question is: How can we prevent previously "responsible gun owners" from acting irresponsibly? I wish I had the answer.
I am not interested in the insult fest between TheSovereign and Bull153. My comment about Bull153's rap music analogy was to show that Bull153's claim that "it isn't about family values" was contradicted by Nugent's ACTUAL WORDS in the interview. Don't make this about "picking on the poor conservative". My counter-response to Bull153's post has to do with the logic and rational (or lack thereof) behind his arguments.
You are comparing 'apples to oranges' when you try to link rap music lyrics to gun ownership. Bull153's comment had to do with rap messages compared to Nugent's bawdy song lyrics.
I think you DO have a valid argument about gun ownership and the draft. I can see that someone could be absolutely obsessed with guns and still not want to fight in a war where he could actually be killed. Point taken.
Lastly, I may forgive someones' past mistakes (myself included), but I believe that people ARE accountable for their actions (no expiration date) and excusing Nugent's arrogance and manipulation of draft policies because they happened 40 years ago (especially since his arrogant attitude is well intact) is not acceptable, in my opinion. Sincerely, Karen
My favorite butt. Excuse me, button pusher. I can assure you I'm not going to Australia or anywhere else for the foreseeable future. I've invested in a home, my family has activities and friends here, and I don't like uprooting them.
I know I've taken a break or two in the past. I don't recall ever 'taking my ball and going home'. I doubt even Ron has quit here a 'dozen or so times'.
Your excitement is of no concern to me. "Good day, Sir!"*. I just decided that I was going to become one less target for your stupidity. "I said good day!"*
* Fez from 'That 70's Show'.
You have expanded on my comments far better than anyone could. I agree with your perspective and apologize for my part in the unpleasant behavior that has run rampant here. This has become a forum for insults and attacks rather than a place for discussion of events and issues. Perhaps the lack of more varied participants may be part of he reason. You know that as siblings grow up there tends to be some jealousy and infighting among them. This may be what is happening here with just about a half dozen regular contributors.
You have demonstrated the qualities of a responsible blogger far better than anyone. I wish I were able to do as well as you do. I would strive to if I were to stay here.
The blogs suffer when personal animosity is involved. I am very reluctant to discuss any plans or activities I may have for fear of the ridicule and attacks they would generate. Just being friends with Ron has branded me as an enemy of the state. As you point out, the childishness over Ron's pending assignment in Australia is unforgivable. I know from talking to him how excited he is and how difficult some of the hurdles in going have become. He has overcome them and I know he'd like to talk about the trip, but won't out of fear of the reaction. I suspect that one day in the near future he'll just wish everyone well and be gone.
There are certainly political issues and differences among us, but there is no reason they can't be civilly discussed and responsibly debated. The personal animosity will always be a factor in this forum until, quite frankly, some people grow up.
As for being silent, perhaps others might take that as acquiescence, but I see it more as a silent protest. Why participate when you don't believe in the uncivil behavior displayed? I doubt any of the regulars believe you accept such behavior. You never have.
Your response is noted. I appreciate your candor. I have nothing more to add to our discussion.
"I might be excited if I thought this was genuine unlike the dozen or so other times he has "taken his ball and gone home.""
And counting apparently ...
Hello rozemist, You have eloquently stated some of this forum's continuing problems. Like you, I don't care what someone uses as their screen name, how many different names they use to post, or how many (or few) "identities" these names are a cover for. It is important to respond to the ideas and opinions being expressed, rather than get caught up in silly games such as certain forum members' take on "Where's Waldo?", namely: "Who is Hoffman?"(or who isn't), "Who is moving (or not) to Australia, over-used "Three Stooges" comparisons, or a litany of Conservative sins exaggerated and outlined only to "push buttons". I view all of that as a mere distraction, although some posters do seem to get some type of enjoyment from such 'bantering'. It is puzzling to me why differences of opinion seem destined to lead to insults, snide personal references, and attacks on one's character in this forum. However, I did want to share this with you: I was looking at the on-line Opinion section of the Modesto Bee where readers post comments in response to letters. Guess what? The comments are WAY WORSE than most of the behavior on this forum. I am talking absolutely TOXIC!!! I was looking at letters about abortion, which is a controversial subject, of course. But the level of deliberate nastiness, disrespect, name-calling, personal baiting, and the obvious twisted pleasure both conservatives and liberals derived from verbally gutting one another was astonishing. The Bulletin's forum definitely needs improvement, but we seem positively civil and genteel, compared to the Bee. I just wanted to offer that perspective. As far as appearing complacent because you "say nothing" and so you feel like a "silent participant", I think that you are expecting too much of yourself. If you responded to EVERY SINGLE insult, violation, or example of childish or thoughtless behavior on this forum, you would have awfully sore fingers from all your constant typing. An occasional reminder that we should hold ourselves to higher standards should be sufficient, otherwise we risk sounding like nagging moms. I can't speak for you, but I tried to raise my children (with my husband's invaluable help) the best that I could, but have little interest in being a den mother to the members of this forum. I will sometimes offer suggestions or observations, but readers can take it or leave it. Usually, I respond when I think someone who otherwise normally offers interesting or thought-provoking posts seems to have "gone off the rails" and degenerated into infantile comments, because I value what that person often is capable of contributing when not in a snit or 'insult-war'. I believe that you are the voice of reason and moderation on this forum and are well-respected as such. Sincerely, Karen
Hello 44Magnum, Things will never change on this blog unless you "be the change you want to see". I know that sounds trite and corny, but it is true. If you leave this forum, you might be less agitated or annoyed, but by staying and leading by example (not succumbing to returning insults, no matter how tempting) you could actually help make things different, hopefully even improved. If there are few conservative voices on this forum (and I agree with that assessment), leaving only skews the balance even further. One of the saddest posts I read recently was from canative62, who wrote how he had found another site where he had 2,000 followers who agreed with him. Although he sounded very content, I felt bad that he had narrowed his world so tightly to only dealing with those who reinforced exactly what he thought. No challenges to think differently, look at (not necessarily accept) another perspective, or learn to co-exist respectfully along side those with whom we disagree. That, in my opinion, is truly sad. I feel that encounters and discussions I have with those with differing opinions offer the potential to teach me something whether that be to change my mind or reinforce my original perspective. The mindset of "I'm leaving this forum because there are too many liberals", is a limiting one, indeed. Every new post, every newly-created blog, we have the chance to wipe the slate clean and debate or discuss a new topic with fresh eyes and on level ground. We can let go of past insults and grievances, if we so choose. If you do decide to leave this forum, I send you my good wishes, but I think it is a lost opportunity, both for you and the forum. Sincerely, Karen
I was moved sincerely by these particular words of yours" Every new post, every newly-created blog, we have the chance to wipe the slate clean and debate or discuss a new topic with fresh eyes and on level ground. We can let go of past insults and grievances, if we so choose. "
This is so true. It can be done, all one has to do is make the effort.
We do need people, with different views it keeps things so much more interesting in the forum and in life .
Seeking out people who" only are in agreement with oneself " would seem to teach us nothing, probably a tad boring as well.
Your right I don't want to be a Den Mom either, raised my boy's .
I need to step back when things become pretty harsh in here, nothing says I need to read the comments I find unsettling. Take breaks when needed :-) and speak out occasionally when needed but not let others poor behavior get too far under my skin.
It's sad to think there's even worse behavior going on in other forums, I don't know what's wrong with some people,
I've wondered is it due to the safety one might feel sitting behind a computer ,being anonymous thinking that allows for some people to say what they might not in person .
You've always used your real name, but many including myself don't.
We are each and everyone of us accountable to others and ourselves for our words, and our behavior ,maybe we can be anonymous to others but we can't hide from ourselves.
Your comments always leave me with a clearer perspective Karen ,they are reasonable and logical.
I won't in the future consider myself a silent participant.
Visit the Tracy Press if you want to see toxic.
I poke my finger in the eye of conservatives every chance I get, but I can see a time when I agree with Republicans again. Actually, I have, I enjoy reading Frum and Sullivan. I have spoke positively of Chuck Hagel in this forum, and justifiably he is now being honored with the responsibility of the Secretary of the Defense. There are a number of former Republicans that I like, and all seem to have either left the party, or the party became too extreme for them.
Here is my deal, I am stuck with a two party system and both parties are terrible, but the one, the conservatives, are extreme. They cheat, they lie, they present misperceptions as facts, they try to win on technicalities as opposed to winning the hearts and minds of the American people. They only want to divide the nation so they can gain and retain power for the sake of controlling others for their own gain. Worst of all, they have no solutions, just punishments. No new ideas or visions, just looking backward, and about taking away.
I know it sounds like more of the same, right? Sovereign hates Conservatives and he is on one of his rants, but the difference between what I do here and what the Conservatives do is, I am open about what I am doing. I am challenging and exploiting the words and actions of the Conservatives in the various political offices held around the country. I support what I say with more than just my own opinion. I only respond to insults, I don't open with a personal insult, except for one, when I call them a Conservative. Now the Conservatives like to play the passive-aggressive game, where they feign indignation for you pushing back, such at this:
"and KarenPearsall, who is much more liberal and is less likely to discuss conservatives in a positive or neutral way, this has become a conservative bashing slugfest."
See there Karen, you get back handed because you are less likely to discuss Conservatives in a positive or neutral way, which makes me wonder what expectation is there of Karen? In what manner is a "neutral way" supposed to act? Quietly? Passively? Why bother coming to this site if she is a Liberal only to be neutral while you and Bull get to say whatever Conservative BS you want? I keep telling you two to find blog sites that don't allow comments if you do not want to be questioned or criticized for the crazy things you guys say.
Then, there is the snide way of complaining when Conservative is used like a dirty word, or an insult, but have no reservations saying something like:
"It is amusing, yet sad, to see that for the most part, these blogs have become nothing more than a forum for pushing the liberal agenda and cheerleading the current administration's activities." - See, liberal agenda, what the heck is that? So what is it Randy, is it that you are jealous of someone like Larry, a self professed Liberal, because he gets to brag about the things he see this administration fighting for because they coincide with his views? Does it upset you that you actually have to explain your stance with a Liberal like Karen because she isn't buying what you are selling as if it were the gospel? I will say that for a moment I thought she stole my gig, but then I realized that I am not the only one who sees it. It was refreshing to see. Challenging the perception is the first step to making change happen. Perception is all the Conservatives have, and that is all we see from the bloggers on the right.
Crimeriddendump has stated on numerous occasions that he was a Republican, C_N has been very open about his views and they aren't Liberal, Redeyerider has carved himself out a center-right-non-committed-to-a-party stance that isn't Liberal, and I am certainly not a Liberal or a Conservative, nor a Republican or Democratic. So what Liberal agenda is being presented here?
Your real complaint isn't that this is a Liberal site, its that it isn't a Conservative site. You and Bull are the one's who have to defend their ground and Conservatives aren't used to that, they expect everyone to believe what they are saying. We don't share your belief that we should be critical of everything this President does as the Conservatives on this blog do. You all have done it so much that there is the Chicken Little stigma tied to everything Conservatives claim. Its a lack of any credibility, since it was their policies that drove us from prosperity and on the way to being out of debt, to the worst economic crash in 70 years in a very short period of time. What hurts the Conservative credibility even more is that they can't own up to the economic failings their policies have caused, and the inability for the followers to realize the same.
I have to both agree, and disagree with Karen on a couple of points that she made. I to agree with what she said about Canative. You may not believe this, but I do miss dueling with him. You know he was looking up an answer when you challenged him, and the same was true for myself. I have learned so much more by looking for information to defend a point, and getting caught up in 20 similar and even more interesting subjects related to the one I was looking to defend, expanding my knowledge. I too was saddened when he said that he was content with his multitude of followers on his new site because his expanding has ended. There is a water level that is achieved when like minded people only stay with like minded people, where there is no one to challenge the status quo.
I respectfully disagree with Karen when she stated "Hello 44Magnum, Things will never change on this blog unless you "be the change you want to see". I know that sounds trite and corny, but it is true." - First, that does sound corny, and I disagree that the site would change by Randy, or Bull, or Crimeriddendump, or myself, because we are who we are, and there is a very small handful who actually write blogs. Most people either come here because they like what is being said in the blog, or because they like the comments. I believe they like the comments, and especially the back and forth since I watch the viewer count and it shoots through the roof when there is the bickering going on, and when there are intelligent comments being made there is hardly any movement. What will really change this blog is when there are more contributors and not necessarily more commenters.
Roze just posted a brilliant blog just recently, and I encourage her to write more. They get easier each time, and you can learn so much when putting one together. I have seen certain subjects that have piqued Karen's interests, and she should contribute, as well as Midwest Girl, and Batgal, Momo, more from DLangdon and then we have a diverse community of ideas and interests where we can't get labeled as having an "agenda." I would like to also point out Caroll, who is diligently trying to point out a section of town that can stand some improving. More voices will drown out the bickering… to a degree, bit the bickering can go back to being a sideshow and not the show.
Sometimes I miss Anthony, he kept me inspired.
Hello TheSovereign, I found your posts to be quite informative and I did appreciate it when you noted 44Magnum's backhanded compliment in his assessment of me. I had to laugh when I first read his comment and even re-read it several times to make sure I wasn't misinterpreting it. Oh well, we can only control our own words and actions, not someone else's perception of us, which is colored by their own perspective. I agree with you that this forum would benefit if more people (yourself included) wrote more blogs on a variety of topics. I don't know whether it is so much the bickering, back and forth comments or "feuds" that attract readers or more the nature of controversial subjects or issues which inherently spark passionate debate. I really miss Anthony002's well-reasoned, informative posts. I wish that he would still occasionally contribute, at least on national or large scale issues, because these wider subjects affect us all, no matter where we live locally. Maybe we can use him as an inspiration and try to fill the void, although with his unique voice, that will be hard to do. Sincerely, Karen