U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 02-06-2013, 11:05 AM
 
Location: NJ
16,831 posts, read 11,772,825 times
Reputation: 10826

Advertisements

CNN should cover Jimmy Hoffa's jrs list of enemies that he directed his thugs to 'take out'.

That is a direct threat and endorsed by the president who stepped up to the podium right after Hoffa and said not a peep.

The media just makes stuff up and attempts to give it 'life'.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 02-06-2013, 11:09 AM
 
5,265 posts, read 2,671,643 times
Reputation: 3491
Quote:
Originally Posted by A&M_Indie_08 View Post
Yawn, another idiotic thread by Liberals talking out of their butts without thinking


We should post a list of the enemies of progressives..... that would make more sense

Carry on ******* fools with your backward ignorance
Wouldn't backward ignorance be forward thinking? Oh, I see, you're not proficient in English. That's painfully obvious. You can tell the intelligence of a person by how many childish slurs they hurl...you're winning that war bud.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-06-2013, 11:12 AM
 
3,349 posts, read 2,650,494 times
Reputation: 1700
Quote:
Originally Posted by biggunsmallbrains View Post
Wouldn't backward ignorance be forward thinking? Oh, I see, you're not proficient in English. That's painfully obvious. You can tell the intelligence of a person by how many childish slurs they hurl...you're winning that war bud.
Thanks for proving my point..... there is no forward thinking in the thread, only kneejerk reactionary hate..... continue with the hate......

Come back to us when you get past the 4th grade educationally Ok? ...Bud?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-06-2013, 11:13 AM
 
Location: Clear Lake Area
2,076 posts, read 3,909,559 times
Reputation: 1966
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cavaturaccioli View Post
The worst kind of cosmopolitanism is the belief that the US almost automatically suffers in comparison with other countries. If that were even remotely true, there'd be mass emigration instead of mass immigration. What do citizens of these 'superior' countries see in America that your typical, jaded, pessimistic, cynical American liberal doesn't? Why does the operating motto of so many on the left in this country seem always to be 'We suck'?
Overall, I don't believe the US suffers in comparison to other countries. But there are aspects of this country where we lag behind others. Openly dismissing that fact as "jaded" and "pessimistic" is sticking your head in the sand:
  • Slavery - love it or leave it
  • Denying women's suffrage - love it or leave it
  • Separate but equal - love it or leave it
  • Sodomy laws - love it or leave it
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-06-2013, 11:15 AM
 
Location: Old Bellevue, WA
18,794 posts, read 14,237,332 times
Reputation: 7950
Quote:
Originally Posted by LostInHouston View Post
NRA's enemies list: Most of America - CNN.com
...I do think we need common sense regulation solutions similar to what we find in the vast majority of wealthy, civilized countries.

What is your definition of "common sense regulation?" For me, "common sense" would be a regulation that might conceivably have prevented the mass shootings that produced the current discussion. None of the proposals I've heard of would do this. Just take the Sandy Hook case--the shooter reportedly did try to buy a gun and was denied. So instead he killed his mother and took her guns. So no 'universal background check' would have stopped him.

Moreover he was in Connecticut, which has a statewide "assault weapons" ban in place. So the mothers' guns, which were legally owned from all accounts, would have been 'de-assaultized' (no bayonet lug, flash hider, etc.). So an "assault weapons" ban would not have stopped him.

What's your definition of "common sense?"
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-06-2013, 11:17 AM
 
5,265 posts, read 2,671,643 times
Reputation: 3491
Quote:
Originally Posted by A&M_Indie_08 View Post
Thanks for proving my point..... there is no forward thinking in the thread, only kneejerk reactionary hate..... continue with the hate......

Come back to us when you get past the 4th grade educationally Ok? ...Bud?
Isn't "*******" hate? Or do you justify anything that dehumanizes others? You seem to have the hate "speech" down pat. I'm sure your expertise lies in the fourth grade too.

Last edited by biggunsmallbrains; 02-06-2013 at 11:27 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-06-2013, 11:20 AM
 
36,617 posts, read 16,016,925 times
Reputation: 8309
Quote:
Originally Posted by LostInHouston View Post
NRA's enemies list: Most of America - CNN.com

I really dislike that the fear-mongers over at the NRA use their propaganda machine to make the gun debate a black or white issue when most Americans see it somewhere in the middle. I have no desire to see all guns banned... but I do think we need common sense regulation solutions similar to what we find in the vast majority of wealthy, civilized countries.
"we need common sense regulation solution"

What one man may see is common sense, another man may see the same thing as nonsensical!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-06-2013, 11:22 AM
 
Location: Old Bellevue, WA
18,794 posts, read 14,237,332 times
Reputation: 7950
Another aspect of "common sense" to me would require that we know the meanings of the words we are using. Confucious said that the (paraphrase from memory) 'beginning of wisdom is calling things by their right names.'

We couldn't have a "common sense" discussion about cars if we didn't know the difference between a wheel and tire. How can we have a "common sense" discussion about guns when most of the leading voices on one side don't seem to know the difference between "clip" and "magazine," or "bullet" and "round," and use terms like "assault weapon" for which few could give a usable definition?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-06-2013, 11:24 AM
 
51,752 posts, read 41,676,653 times
Reputation: 32312
Quote:
Originally Posted by biggunsmallbrains View Post
You can tell the intelligence of a person by how many childish slurs they hurl...
You didn't really think this through did you?

Spoiler
Nice user name. Well, at least you admit it so props for that.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-06-2013, 11:24 AM
 
Location: Wasilla, Alaska
17,850 posts, read 20,191,865 times
Reputation: 6487
Quote:
Originally Posted by LostInHouston View Post
NRA's enemies list: Most of America - CNN.com

I really dislike that the fear-mongers over at the NRA use their propaganda machine to make the gun debate a black or white issue when most Americans see it somewhere in the middle. I have no desire to see all guns banned... but I do think we need common sense regulation solutions similar to what we find in the vast majority of wealthy, civilized countries.
You may not want to see guns banned, but everyone on the NRA's list does and has said so. It does not matter what "most Americans" want, the only thing that matters is what the US Constitution says. Contrary to popular belief, we do not live in a democracy, we live in a constitutional republic where the rule of law supersedes mob rule.

When the US Constitution states that a right shall not be infringed, it means that the right cannot be restricted or limited. There is no compromising with "shall not be infringed," the US Constitution does not say that a right shall be "infringed some of the time," or "infringed when popular," or "infringed when unpopular." So why would any rational individual seek a compromise when that compromise infringes on their right? Where is the middle-ground for infringing on someone's right? Either you are infringing on someone's right, or you are not. It is indeed "black and white", there is no middle-ground. Either you support infringing on the rights of others, or you do not.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 02:48 AM.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top