GlockTalk.com
Home Forums Classifieds Blogs Today's Posts Search Social Groups



  
SIGN-UP
Notices

Glock Talk
Welcome To The Glock Talk Forums.

 
  
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 02-18-2013, 16:53   #61
Ruble Noon
"Cracker"
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 11,018
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cambo View Post
I didn't dislike everything about Ron Paul, but I don't think he was electable either. None of the republicans running stood a chance. I figured the guy with the most money had the best shot, but apparently he didn't want it, just like his predecessor in 2008.
This

Political Issues


vs. this



Political Issues
Ruble Noon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-18-2013, 17:20   #62
Gundude
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 7,042
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cambo View Post
Thank you for finally acknowledging your party's desire to control guns. It's important to me because I find some of the stuff they come up with disgusting. Many individual states are in the process of creating their own laws which will deprive people of their rights. These bills/laws are created by democrats. Although the republicans are far from perfect, I don't see any of them trying to restrict 2nd amendment rights.
I don't have a party. If you read any of my posts back to 2003, you will never find one where I state Democrats don't have a desire to control guns.

Some people may have confused Democrat's reluctance to pursue gun control with a lack of desire to do so, but I'm not one of those people. Democrats have been reluctant to pursue gun control. Not because they don't want to, but simply because it has been too perilous politically. Recent shootings may have caused them to hope otherwise, but they are most likely mistaken.

That said, I don't care about what a party wants, only about what it can or can't do. Democrats can't enact gun control at the federal level, so I don't get wrapped around the axle over every stupid proposal that comes out of them.

Strangely enough, I seem to be one of the very few who actually has faith in Republicans to prevent any gun control. Why is that? Why do I actually expect Republicans to do their jobs in this instance while members here who are actual Republicans are crying as if an AWB is a done deal?
Gundude is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-18-2013, 17:43   #63
Kablam
Senior Member
 
Kablam's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 2,526
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gundude View Post
I don't have a party. If you read any of my posts back to 2003, you will never find one where I state Democrats don't have a desire to control guns.

Some people may have confused Democrat's reluctance to pursue gun control with a lack of desire to do so, but I'm not one of those people. Democrats have been reluctant to pursue gun control. Not because they don't want to, but simply because it has been too perilous politically. Recent shootings may have caused them to hope otherwise, but they are most likely mistaken.

That said, I don't care about what a party wants, only about what it can or can't do. Democrats can't enact gun control at the federal level, so I don't get wrapped around the axle over every stupid proposal that comes out of them.

Strangely enough, I seem to be one of the very few who actually has faith in Republicans to prevent any gun control. Why is that? Why do I actually expect Republicans to do their jobs in this instance while members here who are actual Republicans are crying as if an AWB is a done deal?
They sure are trying to stink it up at the state level with full support of the fed level progressives. In some cases they will get some state legislation through. I think the progressives are using that to deflect attention from their real failures with the economy, the debt ceiling deals, and terrible foreign and domestic policy results.

I disagree with your sentiment that it doesn't matter what an idological group (party) WANTS to do, it only matters what they CAN do. That's wrong in my mind.

Last edited by Kablam; 02-18-2013 at 17:46..
Kablam is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-18-2013, 18:04   #64
Gundude
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 7,042
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kablam View Post
I disagree with your sentiment that it doesn't matter what an idological group (party) WANTS to do, it only matters what they CAN do. That's wrong in my mind.
It's impossible for any party to "want" everything exactly as how you (or I) want it. There are too few parties and too many people for that to be possible.

Therefore, I'm only concerned with what they're able to do, not with what they want. That's why I like gridlock. I like government shutdowns even more. More often than not, the conflict between parties will give me more of what I want than any party by itself will. That's how the system was designed, right?
Gundude is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-18-2013, 19:49   #65
John Rambo
Raven
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Tampa, Fl.
Posts: 9,017
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cambo View Post
Centrists, we haven't seen much of you recently because you are hiding in shame due to the fact your democrat masters are on a gun control roll. You have nothing to say for yourselves and rightly so. Still, I'd like to give you a chance to redeem yourselves and show us how much better democrats are for gun ownership than republicans. So, if you are up to the challenge, here it is - list all of the republican politicians that you can, who have SPONSORED or CO-SPONSORED new gun control bills at the local, state or federal level. Here's the catch, any said bill must have been introduced in the year 2012 or 2013 - there will be no digging up Reagan out of the grave to prove your point. As a pre-emptive strike, Flipper 348, Mitt Romney's name will not be acceptable because he did not sponsor a bill or even mention an assault weapon ban in 2012 or 2013. Challenge On!!!!

P.S. - I would list all democrat politicians who are sponsoring gun control, but glocktalk doesn't have enough bandwidth for that.

Two ticks Libertarian, one tick Liberal according to the compass test. I figure that makes me a 'centrist'? I didn't vote for that scumbag either time (I voted for the other scumbag) and the only way anyone gets my guns is barrel first.

Any more questions, or do you want to keep throwing a temper tantrum at nobody?

Last edited by John Rambo; 02-18-2013 at 19:51..
John Rambo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-18-2013, 21:39   #66
Cambo
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Texas
Posts: 2,911
Quote:
Originally Posted by John Rambo View Post
Two ticks Libertarian, one tick Liberal according to the compass test. I figure that makes me a 'centrist'? I didn't vote for that scumbag either time (I voted for the other scumbag) and the only way anyone gets my guns is barrel first.

Any more questions, or do you want to keep throwing a temper tantrum at nobody?
I didn't ask for your ideology, I asked for those who vote democrat to provide a short list of republican lawmakers who have sponsored gun control legislation. Obviously, in all these posts, it hasn't been accomplished.
__________________
Browning Hi Power, the Ultimate 9mm
Cambo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-18-2013, 21:41   #67
Cambo
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Texas
Posts: 2,911
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ruble Noon View Post
This

Political Issues


vs. this



Political Issues
So why didn't he win the nomination in 2008 or 2012?
__________________
Browning Hi Power, the Ultimate 9mm
Cambo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-18-2013, 23:22   #68
JohnnyReb
Lifetime Membership
Senior Member
 
JohnnyReb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: FEMA REGION III
Posts: 5,165
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cambo View Post
So why didn't he win the nomination in 2008 or 2012?
Google ron paul delegate theft.

posted using Outdoor Hub Campfire
__________________
Confederate General Albert Pike: The struggle against oppressive authority is universal and eternal.
JohnnyReb is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-19-2013, 00:08   #69
TX OMFS
Lifetime Membership
Right wing nut
 
TX OMFS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Texas
Posts: 2,506
Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnnyReb View Post
Now I'll play "nice and fair". Explain how the Republican party will start winning elections?
Your previous post did that pretty well. I agree w/ most of it.

Here's the point: a good politician can bring in votes based on economics without excluding all social issues. Hell, Obama got re-elected based on social issues while tap dancing around economics.

A third party won't help the conservative cause. It will only get Democrats elected. It's a waste of time to keep a two party system and simply change the Republicans' name to something else. All you did was describe how the Republicans might win, not how a third party could win.

Finally, Ron Paul didn't get elected because he doesn't understand politics. Same problem you've identified in Republicans at large.
__________________
Bad decisions make good stories.
TX OMFS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-19-2013, 07:42   #70
John Rambo
Raven
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Tampa, Fl.
Posts: 9,017
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cambo View Post
I didn't ask for your ideology, I asked for those who vote democrat to provide a short list of republican lawmakers who have sponsored gun control legislation. Obviously, in all these posts, it hasn't been accomplished.
I thought you just asked for centrists to talk to you about democrats and republicans and gun control? Well, being a centrist, I'm telling you that you're arguing with a straw man.
John Rambo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-19-2013, 08:00   #71
series1811
CLM Number
Enforcerator.
 
series1811's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Retired, but not expired.
Posts: 14,311
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gundude View Post
It's impossible for any party to "want" everything exactly as how you (or I) want it. There are too few parties and too many people for that to be possible.

Therefore, I'm only concerned with what they're able to do, not with what they want. That's why I like gridlock. I like government shutdowns even more. More often than not, the conflict between parties will give me more of what I want than any party by itself will. That's how the system was designed, right?
I guess if we all post enough, we finally find some common ground.

I like gridlock, too, because it personifies Thomas Jefferson's observation that "he who governs least, governs best".
__________________
I sure miss the country I grew up in.
series1811 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-19-2013, 08:31   #72
volsbear
Lifetime Membership
IWannaBeSedated
 
volsbear's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Illinois
Posts: 12,111
Quote:
Originally Posted by JFrame View Post
You have to understand that on this forum, there are centrists, and then there are "centrists." The latter are people who introduce themselves by loudly proclaiming to be centrists, "but..." And then go on to spew a litany of leftist talking points. The "centrist" part is just a bit of misdirection -- nothing more.


.
Agreed, but the OP surely doesn't win over any supporters for his judgemental tone, does he.

I'm probably a centrist by definition. But I haven't voted for a democratic running for a meaningful office in a VERY long time.
__________________
"Fast is fine. But accuracy is final."

"He'd look better with lividity" - BlueIron

Black Rifle Club - RRA-PSG
S&W Club - 22227
volsbear is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-19-2013, 10:10   #73
Kablam
Senior Member
 
Kablam's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 2,526
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gundude View Post
It's impossible for any party to "want" everything exactly as how you (or I) want it. There are too few parties and too many people for that to be possible.

Therefore, I'm only concerned with what they're able to do, not with what they want. That's why I like gridlock. I like government shutdowns even more. More often than not, the conflict between parties will give me more of what I want than any party by itself will. That's how the system was designed, right?
I agree with you here, but you missed my point. What a particular group/party WANTS to do is more important to me than what they actually CAN do. It's how that group/party expresses its ideology. In our example of gun control, the dem progressives want to disarm us. The fact that they WANT it is enough for me to decide not to support them on this issue. Whether they CAN or not is irrelevant as that only reflects current conditions. As soon as a political opportunity is afforded, they will try to push the agenda. That's why we have the assault on the 2nd that's going on now.
Kablam is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-19-2013, 10:13   #74
Gundude
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 7,042
Quote:
Originally Posted by series1811 View Post
I guess if we all post enough, we finally find some common ground.

I like gridlock, too, because it personifies Thomas Jefferson's observation that "he who governs least, governs best".
That is why it's far more concerning to me to see the Republican party become so much like the Democrat party. Far more concerning than the positions of the Democrat Party alone.

Instead of being on the defensive for being labelled the party of obstruction and the party of "no", Republicans should revel in it and make the people remember that that's exactly their job.

Opposing a magazine limit would be a good place to start.

ETA: And above all, they need to stop running candidates who could just as easily run as Democrats. Primary voters in particular need to take heed.

Last edited by Gundude; 02-19-2013 at 10:14..
Gundude is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-19-2013, 10:19   #75
Paul7
New Guy
 
Paul7's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: East of Eden
Posts: 13,676
Quote:
Originally Posted by Slug71 View Post
We'd be in the same situation right now under Romney!!.... :rolleyes::banghead:

Sandy Hook caused this situation. Still would have happened under Romney....

The way some people here think just blows my mind. You are as blind to facts as the damn liberals....
Romney wouldn't be pushing for an AWB, and he wouldn't be appointing liberal activist judges to the SCOTUS.
__________________
“I don’t believe that people should be able to own guns.” Obama to John R. Lott Jr. in a private conversation at the University of Chicago.
Paul7 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-19-2013, 10:30   #76
JohnnyReb
Lifetime Membership
Senior Member
 
JohnnyReb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: FEMA REGION III
Posts: 5,165
Quote:
Originally Posted by Paul7 View Post
Romney wouldn't be pushing for an AWB, and he wouldn't be appointing liberal activist judges to the SCOTUS.
Activist judges? Like John Roberts?

You have no idea what he would have done. If he would of asked Congress for "sensible" gun control, the party would be in an even worse position.

But it's all if's at this point. The justices have to be confirmed by congress. That's where we need to get conservatives.

posted using Outdoor Hub Campfire
__________________
Confederate General Albert Pike: The struggle against oppressive authority is universal and eternal.
JohnnyReb is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-19-2013, 10:37   #77
JFrame
Senior Member
 
JFrame's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Mid-Atlantic, US of A
Posts: 32,219
Quote:
Originally Posted by volsbear View Post
Agreed, but the OP surely doesn't win over any supporters for his judgemental tone, does he.

I'm probably a centrist by definition. But I haven't voted for a democratic running for a meaningful office in a VERY long time.

I'm guessing you and I might be pretty close. I took one of those political spectrum tests, and wound up just a hair toward the conservative side of center, both on the x- and y-axis.

And your comment about your voting record applies to me also.


.
__________________
"When newspapers are controlled, it's amazing how ignorant and immune from pressure the government can be." -- Amartya Sen

--
JFrame is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-19-2013, 10:42   #78
whoflungdo
Senior Member
 
whoflungdo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: MS
Posts: 6,586
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gundude View Post
That is why it's far more concerning to me to see the Republican party become so much like the Democrat party. Far more concerning than the positions of the Democrat Party alone.

Instead of being on the defensive for being labelled the party of obstruction and the party of "no", Republicans should revel in it and make the people remember that that's exactly their job.

Opposing a magazine limit would be a good place to start.

ETA: And above all, they need to stop running candidates who could just as easily run as Democrats. Primary voters in particular need to take heed.
What would you call someone who voted for a candidate who is actively anti 2A, belongs to a party that part of it's platform is to restrict law abiding citizens from exercising their 2A rights, and then blame republicans for not stopping the person and party they voted for in the first place?

How can you complain when the people you voted for submit and pass the legislation the have repeatedly said they want passed?
__________________

GTDS Certified Member #9
whoflungdo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-19-2013, 10:53   #79
volsbear
Lifetime Membership
IWannaBeSedated
 
volsbear's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Illinois
Posts: 12,111
Quote:
Originally Posted by JFrame View Post
I'm guessing you and I might be pretty close. I took one of those political spectrum tests, and wound up just a hair toward the conservative side of center, both on the x- and y-axis.

And your comment about your voting record applies to me also.


.
That's exactly where I scored.
__________________
"Fast is fine. But accuracy is final."

"He'd look better with lividity" - BlueIron

Black Rifle Club - RRA-PSG
S&W Club - 22227
volsbear is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-19-2013, 12:49   #80
Gundude
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 7,042
Quote:
Originally Posted by whoflungdo View Post
What would you call someone who voted for a candidate who is actively anti 2A, belongs to a party that part of it's platform is to restrict law abiding citizens from exercising their 2A rights, and then blame republicans for not stopping the person and party they voted for in the first place?

How can you complain when the people you voted for submit and pass the legislation the have repeatedly said they want passed?
I voted for that candidate with full knowledge that Republicans would keep the House. I mentioned in many posts before the election that that was an important part of my decision. I voted based on the totality of the makeup of the government. It was a vote based on creating the most possible gridlock and conflict in government. It appears to be working pretty well so far, although the Republicans have the appearance right now of being willing to bend over a little more often than even I though they would. However, I'm still hopeful it's just a ploy.
Gundude is offline   Reply With Quote

 
  
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump




All times are GMT -6. The time now is 02:10.




Homepage
FAQ
Forums
Calendar
Advertise
Gallery
GT Wiki
GT Blogs
Social Groups
Classifieds


Users Currently Online: 501
116 Members
385 Guests

Most users ever online: 2,672
Aug 11, 2014 at 2:31