Oh those vicious anti Dems


PDA






dmallind
February 8, 2006, 11:44 AM
Steel yourselves if you will my brave armed brethren and step into the slavering maw of the dreaded DU forums.

DU, where my Blue Dog style economic preferences are portrayed as fascist corporatism.

DU, where Hilary is probably more hated than she is here, but from the other side of the political aisle (they see no difference between HRC and GWB - honest!)

DU, where anyone who has a house greater than 1100sq ft and drives anything that gets less than 35mpg is called an environment-raping thug

I'm not making up any of these things. DU is an example of groupthink just like THR is, and is equally ready to eviscerate anyone but the black and white purists.

So you can imagine what they think of RKBA right?

Right? Betcha?

Go see.......

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x2089732

If you enjoyed reading about "Oh those vicious anti Dems" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
taliv
February 8, 2006, 11:55 AM
i think there are more THRers on DU than democrats

CAnnoneer
February 8, 2006, 11:57 AM
The more rabid they are, the more they marginalize themselves. They won't be winning any elections any time soon with that attitude. That is what the Howard Deans of the world do not understand.

They hate HRC? Excellent! She is going to find herself mighty lonely in 2008. :)

foghornl
February 8, 2006, 12:00 PM
I have tried, and I mean honestly tried to read stuff on Demo Under...

But as always, within 15 minutes, I am hurling my breakfast/lunch into the Round File 13, from all of the full spin left :barf: :barf: :barf: :barf: :barf:

dmallind
February 8, 2006, 12:01 PM
The more rabid they are, the more they marginalize themselves. They won't be winning any elections any time soon with that attitude. That is what the Howard Deans of the world do not understand.

They hate HRC? Excellent! She is going to find herself mighty lonely in 2008. :)


So you didn't read the thread then eh?

dmallind
February 8, 2006, 12:04 PM
One thing to remember is DU does not equal "normal" Dems any more than Free Republic = "normal" Republicans.

Both these activist sites attract the extremes - the "true believers" who want an echo chamber for their extremism.

Now with THAT population, the fact that a lot of DU gun threads are either equally balanced or slightly pro-gun tilted tells us a lot. The specific thread I posted was not a needle in a haystack - I just opened it this morning in the late breaking news forum.

You can see from the post count of most of the reasonable voices (which are all but one or two) on this thread that they are hardly recent THR lurkers who pop in to make a gun argument - but die hard DU posters and activists who have very reasonable views on RKBA.

one-shot-one
February 8, 2006, 12:14 PM
but i'm not going to read that b.s.
i know we should know our enemy but i just can't read between the stupidity.

cosine
February 8, 2006, 12:18 PM
but i'm not going to read that b.s.
i know we should know our enemy but i just can't read between the stupidity.

Go read it. It's not as bad as you think.

dmallind
February 8, 2006, 12:34 PM
Here's a taste....

Problem is, the anti-gun lobby isn't concerned about the types of guns
Edited on Wed Feb-08-06 10:38 AM by benEzra

used in CRIMES so much as they are the types of guns that American gun owners like to own and shoot...

The #1 gun used in violent crime is the lowly .38/.357 caliber revolver. The only long gun in the Top Ten is the 12-gauge hunting shotgun. The #1 rifle is the lowly .22LR squirrel rifle. And most gun crime is committed by CRIMINALS, not by people who have never had so much as a speeding ticket.

Meanwhile, the anti-gun lobby has spent immense effort and political capital trying to outlaw nontraditional-looking civilian rifles owned by people with squeaky clean records, like my wife and I.

"Packaging" the gun ban du jour is not and has never been the party's problem. The gun ban du jour mentality IS the problem.

If the anti-self-defense lobby put half the effort into enforcing current law against criminal gun trafficking, possession, and use as they have trying to steal guns from our gun safe, they might have done something about criminal gun violence. Maybe I'm jaded, but their legislative priorities show clearly that criminal violence is NOT what they care about...

BigRobT
February 8, 2006, 12:49 PM
Can I die in shock ??? :eek:

I was flabbergasted to see the pro-gun sentiments coming, from all places, the DU!!!! Life never ceases to amaze me !!

Thefabulousfink
February 8, 2006, 12:53 PM
While they are fairly evenly split on 2S issues, and have things (both good and bad) to say, can someone please explain this to me?

The majority of people in America voted for Kerry

I have seen this repeated in multiple times on DU and by other democrats, but where they watching an election that I didn't know about? Think what you want about Bush, from the mulitiple news cast that I was watching on Election Day 2004, I was under the impression that Bush won the popular vote (if by just a narrow margin).:scrutiny:

boofus
February 8, 2006, 01:14 PM
Completely irrelevant. It doesn't matter what a few of their constituency thinks when Kennedy, Kerry, Feinstein, Klinton, Schumer, Boxer, Lautenberg and their like run the party.

I'm still waiting for a $8000 check from the democratic party to reimburse me for the money they screwed me out of via AWB and 1986 MG ban before I will consider throwing them a vote.

Bush won the popular vote by approx 4 million. About the same number of total NRA members. Poetic justice if you ask me.

dmallind
February 8, 2006, 01:35 PM
While they are fairly evenly split on 2S issues, and have things (both good and bad) to say, can someone please explain this to me?



I have seen this repeated in multiple times on DU and by other democrats, but where they watching an election that I didn't know about? Think what you want about Bush, from the mulitiple news cast that I was watching on Election Day 2004, I was under the impression that Bush won the popular vote (if by just a narrow margin).:scrutiny:


If you really don't know it is based on some rather stretched thoughts about vote counting on proprietary-software machines which come from one of two companies - one founded by a Republican Senator and one owned by Bush's OH campaign coordinator.

I certainly have my doubts about the security and traceability of Diebold et al - as should anyone regardless of partisanship when a non-auditable "black box" controls our most basic political freedom, but again I remind you, DU is not a home for moderates any more than Free Republic is on the other side, so some of the ideas are a bit on the loony fringe side.

G36-UK
February 8, 2006, 01:48 PM
Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't BenEzra a member here?

I read it daily. The worst of it comes from mainly two people, BillBuckHead and Paladin.

I find it amazing that they consider the NRA a bunch of liars, yet defend the VPC, who have a far worse track record on the truth.

Anyone else notice Bill brings out those daft pics of the NRA head with the muskets whenever he's losing an argument?

dmallind
February 8, 2006, 01:55 PM
Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't BenEzra a member here?

I read it daily. The worst of it comes from mainly two people, BillBuckHead and Paladin.

I find it amazing that they consider the NRA a bunch of liars, yet defend the VPC, who have a far worse track record on the truth.

Anyone else notice Bill brings out those daft pics of the NRA head with the muskets whenever he's losing an argument?

Hadn't noticed but would not be surprised.

Of course there are no pro-gun Dems so can't be so! :rolleyes:

The truth is the general masses of Dems are split fairly closely. The point about the relatively receint shift in Dem leadership away from a more truly liberal view of the RKBA dating from the two Kennedys, MLK etc may have a point. Either way there is clearly plenty of grassroots and mid-level support for gun ownership and relaization that criminals are the problems rather than guns.

Also good to see some data on NRA support for Dems. Now if we can get THR memes going that don't aurtomatically associate anyone left of Brownback with inevitable confiscation we'll be getting somewhere....

CAnnoneer
February 8, 2006, 01:56 PM
Completely irrelevant. It doesn't matter what a few of their constituency thinks when Kennedy, Kerry, Feinstein, Klinton, Schumer, Boxer, Lautenberg and their like run the party.

I am afraid I must agree.

The basic mechanics of it is that the Feinsteins of the world are financed by wealthy liberals and unions of poor brainwashed liberals. Both groups are vehemently anti-gun and would never split a hair about which gun is bad and which not so bad. For them, all guns are bad.

Interesting nontheless. And no, I did not go read the DU thread because idiocy makes me physically sick.

hillbilly
February 8, 2006, 02:03 PM
I don't know how else to say this, other than in a very blunt style.

So here goes.

I really don't give a damn about what a couple of folks post on DU about guns.

That doesn't matter at all to me.

What does matter is the voting record of the Democrats over the past decade when it comes to gun rights.

Who passed the AWB in the first place? Who was the tie-breaking vote in the US Senate on the AWB?

Who vetoed CCW in Wisconsin? Who guaranteed that the veto overturn failed?

Who was constantly obstructing CCW in Missouri last year?

Who brought legislation to the floor of the US Senate only a year ago that, if passed, would have banned all centerfire rifle ammunition currently in the US?

Who killed the frivolous lawsuit bill the first time it came around last year?

So a couple of posters over at DU see the light on gun rights.

Big whoop-de-freakin'-do.

Show me Schumer and Feinstein and Kennedy and Boxer and Blagoevich (spelling?) and all the other anti-politicians with the big "D" out by their name brought to heel, and then I'll get excited.

But even then, I won't trust them at all.

I'm a native Arkie. Bill Clinton never showed any signs of being anti-gun until he got on the national stage of the Democrat party. None. Zero.

Once he got on that stage, he became the most anti-gun president of the century.

Did Al Gore from Tennessee show any anti-gun signs when he was still just little old Al Gore from Tennessee?

I don't think so. But once he came to national prominence in the D party.....

Change the fundamental outlook of the national party, and I'll get excited.

But no matter how excited I get, I'll still never trust the national party, because I've been burned too many times by it in the past.

And yes, I voted for Slick Willy the first time around in 1992.

Fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice, etc..............

hillbilly

MechAg94
February 8, 2006, 02:04 PM
Last I heard, ALL Dems were not anti-gun, just many of the screaming leftists. It just so happens that some of them are in leadership positions.

I thought it was pretty well known that many of the most active anti-gun organizations were funded by a small numbers of very rich people. Since it was only a few years ago that my home town was almost entirely Democrat, it doesn't surprise me that there are some reasonable Dems out there.

I remember following a DU link after that Supreme Court property rights case last year. Some of those guys actually blamed Scalia and Thomas and the other hated conservatives for it before someone pointed out that it was their own liberal judges who voted for it. I was happy to see that most of them were for property rights. It reinforces my belief that if you really went issue by issue carefully, there are really not very many issues which most Americans really disagree on.

Too bad none of that matters since those Dems keep electing the same idiots to office. (unlike some of the Repub idiots) :)

middy
February 8, 2006, 02:26 PM
You know, I once attended a meeting of the "Workers World Party" or "Socialist Workers of the World" (I can't remember the name exactly), just to see what they were like. It was a full-on capital-C Communist group meeting at the UW-Madison campus student union. This was in 1988, before the fall of the Berlin wall.

Their platform was pro-gun-ownership. For obvious reasons.

Needless to say, it didn't make me feel warm and fuzzy.

Not that (most of) the people at DU are communists, I'm just saying...

cosine
February 8, 2006, 02:33 PM
Hillbilly posted some concrete examples of what happens under anti-gun Dems. Those few poster on DU seem to be reasonable with their approach to RKBA. Good for them.

Now, those people have to affect their party to create more pro-gun Dems in leadership positions.

Dravur
February 8, 2006, 06:11 PM
In this country, as opposed to many in Europe and around the world, we form our coalitions before we vote as opposed to a parliament style which forms coalitions after the votes are in. This leads us to the Republican and Democratic party. The republican party generally includes more libertarians and conservatives with the democrats contain more liberals and socialists.

Conservatives, in principle, stand for freedom of the individual, including state rights, freedoms of gun ownership etc. Liberals, on the other hand, tend to favor collectivism and a large invasive government...

As a gun owner and one who values self determination, a smaller government and individual freedoms, I vote for the block that BEST represents me, the Republicans. Does every republican vote the way I want them to? nope. Does every democrat vote incorrectly? nope.

One of the things that you have to remember when voting for your block is who has the power in that block. Clearly, the radical left has taken over the democratic party, leaving the fiscally responsible Scoop Jackson wing of the party out. If democratic gun owners want their gun rights protected, either fix your party or join the one that in theory, does.

Just bought a barely used Model 70 HVB in .223 today. Yep, gonna hunt me some Priarie Poodles and send the headcount off to PETA, just to aggravate them...

Standing Wolf
February 8, 2006, 06:20 PM
I think those individuals are getting a lot more attention than they deserve.

Lucky
February 8, 2006, 06:59 PM
" I have been a rabid gun control supporter for years until...

Until I realized that bush thinks he is the king. I don't know what this crazy man will do next and he has the military, Secret Service, FBI and NSA at his beck and call. I now believe that the NRA might be right about an armed populace being more difficult to subjugate."


Whatever, that's awesome. Either there is a pro-gun 3rd column at work, or people might actually be giving up their pre-conceived mis-informed unlegitimate stereotypes about firearms! Or both, I guess.

I'm not American, but even I recognize the significance of someone on the Democratic Underground posting that they have rediscovered the importance of the 2nd amendment, and not being flamed, but supported.

Kodiaz
February 8, 2006, 07:07 PM
I think I've seen a "Benezra" posting here on THR. He's doing a really good job on this DU thread defending our rights

+1 to this Benezra guy

Lobotomy Boy
February 8, 2006, 08:08 PM
Ben Ezra has posted some of the most intelligent, thought-provoking writing I've read on THR. I've never been over to the DU site, but I can't imagine his writing there is any less perceptive.

Helmetcase
February 8, 2006, 08:20 PM
I was a member there, and was scoring a lot of points against some of the dumber anti's over there...so they banned me.

I'm back under another screen name...let's see how long before they catch on and can me again.

BenEzra is my main man. :D

Maxwell
February 8, 2006, 08:23 PM
I believe it was denis miller (or one of those comics) who gave a lengthy rant that ended with words to the effect of "one of these days when the revolution starts, the anti-gun stance will take an ironic crap in their mouths".

Sad, but true.

You cant want to turn the government over and at the same time give those officials the absolute power of law and force. Your "peoples army" wont last long.

If I was the libs, I'd be pushing rkba even harder than the conservatives.

beerslurpy
February 8, 2006, 09:54 PM
You know, I once attended a meeting of the "Workers World Party" or "Socialist Workers of the World" (I can't remember the name exactly), just to see what they were like. It was a full-on capital-C Communist group meeting at the UW-Madison campus student union. This was in 1988, before the fall of the Berlin wall.

Their platform was pro-gun-ownership. For obvious reasons.

Needless to say, it didn't make me feel warm and fuzzy.

Not that (most of) the people at DU are communists, I'm just saying...

Well, that makes them useful idiots. There are many fundamental differences in culture between here and early 20th century Russia that completely negate the possibility of a 1917 style violent revolution here. For one, the peasants in russia were largely disarmed and obedient, americans tend to be relatively heavily armed and independent minded. These differences have endured into the 21st century.

Gun ownership helps to blunt the impact of violent nutcases because they are always the minority and in a heavily armed society, that means they will be essentially unable to force their will upon the populace. A violent fascist, theocratic or collectivist putsch will fail because unlike russia, overthrowing the government is merely the first small step in overcoming a large, heavily armed and unsympathetic populace that doesnt view you as legitimate rulers.

Change in America comes from the ground up, and democracy ensures that power changes hands peacefully. Civilian armament prevents the more egregious forms of power-grabbing that have troubled other nations. When you see communists acting like the black panthers, rejoice, for they will soon be smacked down. When you see them acting like Martin Luther King, be worried, for soon they will be taxing you.

GoRon
February 9, 2006, 08:34 AM
If the national Dems are going to change their stripes on gun control it is going to be due to grassroots pressure.

The same type of pressure that is driving the anti war, anti Bush agenda in the party now.

Maybe if the Dems move to the center on gun rights the Republicans will move from the center to the right.

antsi
February 9, 2006, 08:54 AM
Completely irrelevant. It doesn't matter what a few of their constituency thinks when Kennedy, Kerry, Feinstein, Klinton, Schumer, Boxer, Lautenberg and their like run the party.

Right.

Hillbilly's on it, too.

Helmetcase
February 9, 2006, 08:56 AM
If the national Dems are going to change their stripes on gun control it is going to be do to grassroots pressure.

The same type of pressure that is driving the anti war, anti Bush agenda in the party now.

Maybe if the Dems move to the center on gun rights the Republicans will move from the center to the right.
I would think they'll have to. They've been taking the gun owner vote for granted for so long that if and when they actually have to compete for gun votes, they'll have do more than just offer the RKBA the token lip service they've been giving it. Two parties competing for RKBA votes = good for us, whether liberal or conservative.

Manedwolf
February 9, 2006, 09:00 AM
Can I die in shock ??? :eek:

I was flabbergasted to see the pro-gun sentiments coming, from all places, the DU!!!! Life never ceases to amaze me !!


Logical, to me.

People who already didn't like the current administration are perhaps more likely to realize "Hey, we could be heading down the fascist road here, I better be able to defend my family IF THAT HAPPENS..."

More likely, perhaps, than the sorts of extremists who think that their current leaders are some sort of deities who can do no wrong, despite the immigration/border issues, the illegal wiretaps, the unitary-executive leanings, the blatant cronyism in the placement of incompetent political appointees, the erosion of civil rights, the failure to nail bin Laden, etc, etc....

Wouldn't it be ironic if more and more Dems turned to pro-gun because of this being a wake-up call, that, much as in the early 1770's, rampant and blatant government abuse of power demonstrates that sometimes, You Can't Trust Government, and that ultimately, you're responsible for defending your own freedom and the safety of your family?

While at the same time, the extremist Freepers, I think, would scream about the need to feel secure even if it means giving up rights, right up to and past the point where Big Government declared that semiauto long guns and high-cap mags are only something "a TERRAHIST would use" and took them all away...and not make a fuss about it.

Yeah, there will always be blissninnies. But I'm seeing more and more Dems realize:

1. Civil rights are going to hell in the name of thumbsucking false "security"
2. Bush doesn't even seem to WANT to secure the borders - this is totally bipartisan now
3. New Orleans...police and nat'l guard leaving people defenseless by taking their guns
4. If this keeps going this way, nobody will be able to defend my family but me
5. To defend myself, I need an adequate weapon
6. Hey, I just tried to buy a weapon, and it's a nightmare of stupid laws and red tape.
7. I can't defend my family because of these stupid laws in my state

So there you go...cause for rising change.

XLMiguel
February 9, 2006, 09:55 AM
+1 BenEzra

He posted a very well thought out essay a while back on why "reasonable gun control" was a done deal and why teh grabbers ought to bugger off and move onto real problems-

cbsbyte
February 10, 2006, 02:42 PM
It's funny but I am seeing more Pro-gun Democrats getting elected in Mass, than Republicans. Actually, our Republican governor is a Statis and believe's in strict gun control. If Mass Democrats in general are willing to change their stance on Guns, than so can the DNC. It might take some years but maybe if all started supporting more pro-2Ad Democrats then the change can made quicker.

G36-UK
February 10, 2006, 06:23 PM
He posted a very well thought out essay a while back on why "reasonable gun control" was a done deal and why teh grabbers ought to bugger off and move onto real problems-

And as I recall, the aforementioned over-zealous antis tried to pick apart his argument, with very little success. Cue connecting him to the NRA.

orionengnr
February 10, 2006, 06:49 PM
I probably ought to bookmark his post; it will come in handy in future discussions of this type.

FPrice
February 10, 2006, 06:57 PM
DU is an example of groupthink just like THR is,

THR is groupthink?

Have you read the thread about the wearing of Special Forces clothing in public???

ElTacoGrande
February 10, 2006, 07:13 PM
Can I die in shock ??? :eek:

I was flabbergasted to see the pro-gun sentiments coming, from all places, the DU!!!! Life never ceases to amaze me !!

There are lots of no-compromise pro-gun people on DU. a) Even Dems who hate guns are starting to realize that they are throwing away national elections over this pointless issue and b) there are some Dems who are gun owners and truly support gun rights, just like everyone here on THR.

The DU gun forum has got plenty of people who feel exactly the same way we (THR) feel about guns. And I know there are people like me on THR who probably agree with the people on DU on a lot of liberal issues like the environment, the war in Iraq, the death penalty, gay rights (including marriage), on and on.

I've said it before and I'll say it again:

Gun rights are not a partisan issue. Caring about gun rights is not exclusive to conservatives. Gun rights cut across every political viewpoint and party. The more inclusive we are the more solid we will be.


Witness the current situation in KS with CCW: The main force behind the CCW bill is a Dem and the main force against it is the Repub gov, who will veto it.

The more partisan we make this issue, the weaker we are.

antsi
February 10, 2006, 11:26 PM
There are lots of no-compromise pro-gun people on DU. a) Even Dems who hate guns are starting to realize that they are throwing away national elections over this pointless issue and b) there are some Dems who are gun owners and truly support gun rights, just like everyone here on THR.

The more partisan we make this issue, the weaker we are.

I'm not making it a partisan issue.

The party that consistently supports gun control, the party that throws out people like Kennedy, Feinstein, Schumer, Daley, etc, is the one that's making it a partisan issue.

In-state politics is sometimes a different animal. In very conservative states, like much of the South and some of the Midwest, you will often get Democrats who are somewhat less noxious on gun rights issues. Oftentimes these same Democrats become rabid anti's once they get up on the national stage (case in point: Al Gore).

I don't see the Dems really changing their stripes on this. I think it is likely they will tone down their anti-gun act during election season. Once they get elected, if they get elected, I see more of the same old anti-gun idiocy coming from them.

odysseus
February 11, 2006, 01:25 AM
I am scared... someone hug me. :p

Maxwell
February 11, 2006, 08:47 AM
Gun rights are not a partisan issue. Caring about gun rights is not exclusive to conservatives.

It should never have been a partisan issue, but its been so for some time.
Alot of the democrats in power feel they can legislate the nation into a kinder gentler place. They figured that the common man no longer needed such a crude instrument with a warm and loving government to guide him.

Thats just not how the world works.

Whats ironic is that now theyve caught the fear bug. They see how a government can turn away from their ideals and just keep going no matter how loud they shout or how many blogs they write. They also see how even an insane number of cops on the street still wont keep the crooks out your house. Worse yet, they've seen its cost them votes.

This realisation comes after theyve been happily disarming themselves and everyone around them for the last half century.


...so now their interested in gun rights again?

The founding fathers and many conservatives would say: "Welcome back. How was your trip?"

Manedwolf
February 11, 2006, 08:50 AM
I'm not making it a partisan issue.

The party that consistently supports gun control, the party that throws out people like Kennedy, Feinstein, Schumer, Daley, etc, is the one that's making it a partisan issue.


Like Bloomberg (R) blaming the NRA for police shootings...

RealGun
February 11, 2006, 08:56 AM
i think there are more THRers on DU than democrats

Judging by the posts on THR lately, I have to wonder who is influencing whom.

Malone LaVeigh
February 11, 2006, 11:52 AM
When you see communists acting like the black panthers, rejoice, for they will soon be smacked down. When you see them acting like Martin Luther King, be worried, for soon they will be taxing you.
Heck, "they" may even be sitting next to you on the bus...

Firethorn
February 11, 2006, 01:04 PM
I've seen this multiple times on the DU.

While they're definitly not as pro-gun as we are, they're suprisingly rational about it. Many appear to be progun. There are those that think the NRA is a Republican arm, having to 'work' on making the candidates acceptable to gun owners.

Heck, having an 'enemy' in the whitehouse is at least making many of them think about the true meaning of the 2nd amendment.

Maxwell
February 12, 2006, 03:05 PM
They've got short attention spans, the thinking wont last long.
Once they get another Dem in power any thoughts of needing weapon rights will go flying out the window.

beerslurpy
February 12, 2006, 03:16 PM
Problem is that electing 10 pro-gun dems will still leave like 40 more senior anti-gun dems already in the Senate. Even worse, the most anti of them are also the most senior, so you can bet they will be chairing committees. Do you really want Kennedy to be the chair of the Senate Judicial Committee? Do you think Alito would make it to the supreme court if the dems had a 10-8 majority with feinstein and kennedy on the committee?

Youre really asking for a lot of trust here. And I dont think that trust is warranted.

Lobotomy Boy
February 13, 2006, 07:32 AM
The party that consistently supports gun control, the party that throws out people like Kennedy, Feinstein, Schumer, Daley, etc, is the one that's making it a partisan issue.

"The party" doesn't throw out weinies like Kennedy and Feinstein. Weiny state organizations in weiny statest throw out weiny candidates like that.

In-state politics is sometimes a different animal. In very conservative states, like much of the South and some of the Midwest, you will often get Democrats who are somewhat less noxious on gun rights issues. Oftentimes these same Democrats become rabid anti's once they get up on the national stage (case in point: Al Gore).


And when a Dem from a pro-gun state votes against gun rights, he or she soon finds him or herself looking for a new job. Do you suppose that A-hole Daschle has realized what a bone-headed move voting to renew the AWB was for a South Dakota senator (from either party)? Probably not, because he doesn't seem all that perceptive. I suspect his momma drank some.

RealGun
February 13, 2006, 07:58 AM
And when a Dem from a pro-gun state votes against gun rights, he or she soon finds him or herself looking for a new job.

That certainly wasn't true in SC. We had to wait for a career Senator to retire. Fritz Hollings, a former Governor, was a left wing Democrat and a buddy of Ted Kennedy, F- on the the GOA scale of gun rights ratings. He was replaced by an A-rated (GOA) Republican moving over from the House (Jim DeMint). The only thing apparent is the power of incumbency, making one think that too many voters don't have a clue except for name recognition.

RavenVT100
February 13, 2006, 08:36 AM
I find it highly amusing that the most prolific poster on DU's gun forum who hangs out in the "anti" camp happens to be Canadian. Not from Canada, in Canada. Yes, DU being as extreme as it is apparently cannot dig up anyone willing to push the agenda day in and day out from their own country, so they had to import. And here I thought you actually had to be a US citizen to be Democrat.

Lobotomy Boy
February 13, 2006, 08:58 AM
I've got a lot of friends who are Democrats. I regularly argue gun politics with two in particular. One is a "sporting purposes" hunter who opposes handguns and guns with "militaristic appearances (he's a dolt). The other has no opinion one way or another on guns. I agree with both on a lot of policies, like gay rights and abortion rights. Neither can understand why I vote Republican. The condemn me for being a "single issue" voter. I explain since I am as likely to marry a gay as I am to have an abortion, the single issue of gun rights means a lot more to me than either of those issues. I tell them that if they want me to vote for a Democrat, put up a candidate that is a Second Amendment purist. They hem and haw and mutter how despicable it is to be a single issue voter, and I tell them that until the Democrats abandon their idiotic anti-gun stance, they will continue to lose national elections in all but a few liberal enclaves.

The ball is in their court. Democrats are going to have to choose between abandoning dogmatic ideology and oblivion.

KriegHund
February 13, 2006, 09:27 AM
I'm not making up any of these things. DU is an example of groupthink just like THR is, and is equally ready to eviscerate anyone but the black and white purists.

I digress. After making a post on DU about how i support closing the border
"I would wear that shirt proudly. (me reffering to a shirt that said something like "If you dont speak english then learn it")

I was banned within minutes.

Here, at least, people are free to disagree and not be banned.

And have you looked at the 'rules' they have? Everything you say must be in favor of "Democratic Ideas". I dont see things like that here.

Lobotomy Boy
February 13, 2006, 10:21 AM
Here, at least, people are free to disagree and not be banned.


Most of the time, maybe, but not on the days when Art's Grandma got out of the wrong side of bed. Check out the following thread and tell me why Art locked it:

http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=182838

Clearly gun related, and within the rules of the forum. Near as I can tell, humor is still allowed, at least if it is gun-related.

cosine
February 13, 2006, 12:04 PM
Most of the time, maybe, but not on the days when Art's Grandma got out of the wrong side of bed. Check out the following thread and tell me why Art locked it:



Clearly gun related, and within the rules of the forum. Near as I can tell, humor is still allowed, at least if it is gun-related.

Um, I'll guess because there already is a humor thread in General Gun about that topic, and that was posted in L&P and I didn't see any legal or political content in it, just content making fun of a politician's accident. :rolleyes:

On the other hand, I like your story in post #51.

And have you looked at the 'rules' they have? Everything you say must be in favor of "Democratic Ideas". I dont see things like that here.

As far as I remember, there are no requirements about particular political beliefs being neccesary for membership here at THR.

progunner1957
February 13, 2006, 01:28 PM
They may call themselves "Democrat underground" but let's call them by their true name - "Socialist Underground."

How these people came to hate America, the Constitution, our own military and what the American flag stands for is way beyond my means to comprehend. Their pathalogical rage is like an emotional disorder.

FPrice
February 13, 2006, 02:34 PM
Most of the time, maybe, but not on the days when Art's Grandma got out of the wrong side of bed. Check out the following thread and tell me why Art locked it:

Probably bad taste on the general tone of the thread.

Lobotomy Boy
February 13, 2006, 09:23 PM
Bad taste is shooting your hunting buddy in the face. I've been hunting since 1969, and I have never come close to doing anything like this. If I ever do, the world will have the right to ridicule me, too.

jeepmor
February 13, 2006, 09:56 PM
Bad taste is shooting your hunting buddy in the face.

Just read an article where Cheney peppered a friend who was not practicing good hunting safety on comcast.net yesterday.

Gun control is hitting what you aim at, not politicians deciding my right. The decision is mine to make, I'll take a 10mm please.

Yes, we have some political zealots that equate gun ownership to crime, these people are narrow minded dolts that would change their minds instantly should some foreign power roll in with any force. And they would be singing the praises of each and every gun owner for standing up and protecting our homeland while the military got it's act together and showed up with support.

We now have air marshalls (packing CCW, no less) on nearly every domestic flight to insure 9/11 type of thing does not happen again. I'm not going to change that, it's quite overdue in my opinion.

As a Japanese general once said (paraphrasing) "We could never invade America, there would be a gun behind every blade of grass." And I am a firm beleiver that we should keep it that way.

Owning a gun is a right as an American that few other countries allow, particularly handguns. Try owning a handgun in Canada.

jeepmor

jeepmor
February 13, 2006, 10:06 PM
They may call themselves "Democrat underground" but let's call them by their true name - "Socialist Underground."

How these people came to hate America, the Constitution, our own military and what the American flag stands for is way beyond my means to comprehend.


Too bad we can't just ship them all to the islands out in the middle of the ocean somewhere so they can build the society of their dreams while they all leave us the heck alone. Let them build their utopia, then find out what the real world is all about. Wonder if they would create a society that they have a right to express their opinions openly and converse of utter political dissent as we can so freely in this land we call America?

So many of these dolts seem to want to take away the very freedom that allows them to express the opinions they hold.....what a juxtapose position to live in.

I have a friend who leans towards socialism quite heavily, but I don't think he sees his rantings as I do. Which is usually me just tolerating his freedom of expression, something he seems to be willing to fight for the loss of..... yes, pathological rage is a social disorder.

Sure, I can come up with a long list of complaints about the government, who doesn't, but at least I'm in a place that I'm free to speak them openly, and freely should I wish to.

jeepmor

antsi
February 13, 2006, 10:48 PM
Too bad we can't just ship them all to the islands out in the middle of the ocean somewhere so they can build the society of their dreams while they all leave us the heck alone.

jeepmor

The problem is, they need all the mechanics and farmers and construction workers and all the other red-voting blue-collar folks that they despise so.

All their Gyneco-Marxist Eco-Feminist Women's Studies doctoral dissertations won't take them very far when they have to eat them, drive them, and live in them. Eventually they'd wind up crying for want of a few rednecks to build them a house, fix their car, and kill something for them to eat.

Strings
February 13, 2006, 11:09 PM
>All their Gyneco-Marxist Eco-Feminist Women's Studies doctoral dissertations won't take them very far when they have to eat them, drive them, and live in them. Eventually they'd wind up crying for want of a few rednecks to build them a house, fix their car, and kill something for them to eat.<

Ummm... sounds like a self-solving problem to me...

If you enjoyed reading about "Oh those vicious anti Dems" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!