"Liberals" and guns - stand up!

It seems like people naturally need an opposition to blame all bad things on and duck responsibility. A large number of folks of any political type love to overlook the faults of their own party, and harp on the faults of others.

Click to expand...

Nobody is blaming Liberals for all of the evils of the world, just accurately describing the considerable number evils they do promote.

If people are going to adopt the mantle of "liberal" then they can take responsibility for the evils that liberals promote.

If the exact % of liberals who are in favor of gun control isn't 99%, it's close to that number.

Not all Democrats are gun grabbers and not all Republicans support RKBA.

Click to expand...

Perhaps.

But it must be pointed out, that 25 years ago it really looked like the 2nd amendment was on it's last legs, going the way of the 3rd amendment. What saved it, was the republican resurgence lead by Reagan. If it wasn't for the republicans, there is no doubt we'd be living with English/Australian style gun laws right now. And that can still happen if the Democrats ever take power again.

I'm a radical right wing liberal.

I tick off everyone eventually. I look at each issue and decide what seems to be the best answer. Sometimes, that means I end up supporting things I don't like, in order to support things that are more important to me, or in order to preserve my own freedom.

I think if everyone would just agree with me, all the time, the world would be a much better place.

Democrat, Republican, liberal, conservative... Those labels are simplistic and meaningless.

Click to expand...

Call my cynical, but all that those labels tell me is that the various factions are willing to split hairs over varying degrees of statism.

You and I are told we must choose between a left or right, but I suggest there is no such thing as a left or right. There is only an up or down. Up to man's age-old dream--the maximum of individual freedom consistent with order--or down to the ant heap of totalitarianism. Regardless of their sincerity, their humanitarian motives, those who would sacrifice freedom for security have embarked on this downward path.

Ronald Reagan, October 27, 1964

Click to expand...

A lot of wisdom there.

I am a Liberal. I have guns.


Not for long. By voting gun grabbers into office, you're going to lose those guns.

I think if everyone would just agree with me, all the time, the world would be a much better place.

Click to expand...

You gotta wait your turn. Art gets to be Emperor of the Universe first. Then you.

I'll stand up as a Democrat and liberal. My "progressive" friends think I'm to the right of Ghengis Khan; which makes me feel I'm probably about where I ought to be. I'm politically active and sometimes Democrats do things that drive me nuts. Ditto for Republicans. I guess if I had to "sound bite it" I am more comfortable with folks who invent "rights" willy nilly than with folks who assert society and government hit its apogee about a century ago and we've been going to heck ever since.

I think we should debate taxes, social policies, etc. But I'm also going to recognize that some folks can't care for themselves and will need government help. I'll also acknowledge that every assistance program will get abused, and you have to police it. To my mind we have far too many mentally ill folks on the street as it is and adding the elderly and physically disabled to the roster of folks living on the street is not my idea of a compassionate society.

As for schools, it's almost too depressing to contemplate as I watch my four month old daughter nap here next to me. Our public schools having been in a death spiral for a long time and if we don't do something soon it won't just be the kids who suffer. After all, every felon started out somewhere...

Ok - flame on gentlemen.

You liberals are all creatures of the communist conspiracy

rwc, a comment that's only half a joke has to do with today's national-level liberal Democrat: "Liberals judge by intent; Conservatives by results."

My take on this is that today's labels are almost meaningless. My hostility is toward those who almost always--if not always--see government as THE solution for social problems.

Ties in with the old "Give a man a fish, or a fishing pole?" thing. My preference is to help people help themselves, as opposed to just helping.

So if one has an attitude of caution about the methodology of governmental programs, and tends to judge them as to efficacy, the appellation "Liberal" does not necessarily fit.

, Art

Personally I think we should get rid of income tax altogether and institute a national VAT (Sales tax). Everyone would be taxed fairly under such a system. Make a sort of exemption card for verifiably poor people.

Click to expand...

You do understand the DRAMATIC difference between a VAT and national sales tax, don't you?

Hi All-

Justin the Moderator hit the nail on the head a few posts back with regard to STATISTS that are cut from both liberal and conservative cloth...they're both extremely dangerous. The liberals simply can't keep a straight poker face with regard to their throbbing desire for an all-encompassing central government.

My friends don't understand why I get frustrated with so-called "DMV roadblock inspections" for license, registration, and insurance. Perhaps they're naive, but they just don't get it, nor do they understand that their mindset is part of the problem. Statists of all flavors are bound to say, "It is part of the War on TerrorTM and we have to do our part. If domestic roadblocks catch just one bad guy focused on killing people, it's worth sacrificing a bit of our freedom..."

The government that governs least governs best.

~ Blue Jays ~

those who almost always--if not always--see government as THE solution for social problems.

Click to expand...

I can understand your frustration. I am involved in the legislative process every year and there are no shortage of folks who head to the legislature to solve their problems, social or not (don't get me started on large corporations who need govt. help to "compete").

I think it is a combination of folks with genuine problems looking for help, politicians unwilling to say no, and a lack of recognition by both that some problems are intractable and the ability of govt., or anyone to change things, is limited or non-existent. No one ever got votes by making a habit of saying "No" to constituents. After all, why not just sponsor a bill that would make them happy, let it die in committee, and then shrug your shoulders and say "We tried. Now about my fundraiser next week..."

Nope. Blanket insults and demonization do not inspire me to help in the cause even if I do agree with it, sorry guys - until your language gets more restrained and more positive, not to mention more accurate, I'm not calling for you. Neither will I join most of the gun lobby groups - they are political partisans instead of cause and advocacy partisans.

Click to expand...

PLUS

I am a Liberal. I have guns.

Click to expand...

EQUALS

Not for long, if you keep supporting those who would take them while failing to fight to keep them.

Like 80% of the self described liberals I encounter, they embrace that label less out of understanding what the goals of the leadership of the DNC want, and more to reject being associated with the intollerant reputation that the dark, creepy authoritarian conservatives have cultivated.

The whole things such a freaking mess.

I think a "liberal with a gun" would be in search of a representative political party.

I join Barbara and RWC

and add that I am a

Bona Fide Liberal Gun Nut

Like 80% of the self described liberals I encounter, they embrace that label less out of understanding what the goals of the leadership of the DNC want, and more to reject being associated with the intollerant reputation that the dark, creepy authoritarian conservatives have cultivated.

Genius analysis - both major parties are disasters and cater to lunatics of their most extreme fringes. As stated by Justin and others, they are terrible statists who just differ a tad in what tyranny they support.

both major parties are disasters and cater to lunatics of their most extreme fringes.

Click to expand...

From my view, they both cater to the extreme moderates -- trying to pander to the masses to get elected and taking the either the solid left or right for granted. I find this to be the most discusting.

I can see (and agree with) the idea that the liberal/left wants to impose tyranny over us. The examples are numerous and well known.

However, there seems to be this idea that the right wants too also, but I don't see it. Rather, I see the right as trying (with the left fighting desperately to stop them) to get government off our backs.

Can someone show the right trying to impose social controls over us, that's on-par with the obvious liberal/left attempts? Frankly, volentary school prayer doesn't scare me, that the left wants an even more confiscatory tax policy and civilian disarmament does.

I see the right as trying (with the left fighting desperately to stop them) to get government off our backs.

Click to expand...

LOL.

You have got to be ????ing kidding me.


Let's see:

Terri Schiavo case (Really what business did the Feds have in this, after 7 years of legal precedent supporting the husband)

The gay marriage fiasco/bans

TSA (Which is reported to largely be a huge failure with the private screeners actually doing better)

Increasing the Federal defecit to massive levels in the past 4 years.

Wanting to censor TV and Radio, and now cable/satellite TV and punish offenders with jail time. http://www.mtv.com/news/articles/1499643/20050406/index.jhtml?headlines=true WOO WOO WOO IT's THE MORALITY POLICE WOO WOO WOO.

Creating a huge new Federal bureaucracy, The Department of Homeland Security (Why not just keep everything under the DoJ)

Wanting the government to decide for people that abortion isn't correct.


These all seem to be mostly Republican plans trying to heap more government on us. Anybody who thinks the Republicans are any more for limited government than the Democrats is a delusional moron. Same ????, different day.

Terri Schiavo case

Click to expand...

You mean, the civil rights of an American Citizen isn't worth any attention?

The gay marriage fiasco/bans

Click to expand...

Gay marrage bans are due to people of those states voting for the bans, the overwelming majority of Americans oppose gay marrage. If anything, it's a good example of the liberal/left imposing their will extra-constitutionally on the people, i.e. tyranny.

TSA (Which is reported to largely be a huge failure with the private screeners actually doing better)

Click to expand...

It was the liberal/left that insisted that the screeners be government employees.

Increasing the Federal defecit to massive levels in the past 4 years.

Click to expand...

That's a problem, but I don't see how that is going to lead to tyranny, or how liberal/leftists are any less to blame.

Wanting to censor TV and Radio, and now cable/satellite TV

Click to expand...

You mean, like Al and Tipper Gore wanted to do?

Creating a huge new Federal bureaucracy

Click to expand...

When has a liberal/leftist shied away from creating more bureaucracy or government programs? Never.

Wanting the government to decide for people that abortion isn't correct.

Click to expand...

Abortion is an issue which still divides the American people, and politicians reflect that.

If that's the best you can do, I'm going to have to say the liberal/left is far more dangerous to our liberties than the right is.

Hi All-

Attributed by dloken to conservative Republicans:

• Terri Schiavo case
• The gay marriage fiasco/bans
• Transportation Security Administration
• Increasing the Federal defecit to massive levels in the past 4 years.
• Censorship of TV and radio and punish offenders with jail time. Non-biased source provided -- http://www.mtv.com
• Creating a huge new Federal bureaucracy, The Department of Homeland Security
• Wanting the government to decide for people that abortion isn't correct.

Click to expand...

The two mega-buck "biggies" in your list are the two newest departments, the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) and Department of Homeland Security (DHS). Both of them were zealously pushed by liberal Democrats who had to save face after years of "downsizing" intelligence, military, and law enforcement budgets.

As far as the deficit goes, our economy was sliding downhill in 1998/1999 after the Internet bubble burst and all those absurd e-companies went belly-up. While I'm not a genius, I always said that the average consumer doesn't want to pay shipping to have a 50-lb bag of dogfood shipped to his/her door when they can just drive to the supermarket. That nonsense and irrational exuberance was destined to come to a screeching halt. President Bush subsequently inherited an economy in very perilous condition at his inauguration.

Also contributing to the financial difficulties was that pesky problem of jetliners crashing into downtown Manhattan and Washington, D.C. (did you forget about that event?) which led to renewed intelligence and military spending against our terroristic enemies who know no borders.

The other topics listed don't directly impact American families in terms of the pocketbook or security like the others you've mentioned, but they do have a secondary effect. They can almost be categorized as social/societal in nature...

~ Blue Jays ~

I should clarify: I'm a libertarian (medium size L?)

Very liberal: Pro-civil rights, even ones that annoy others, like keeping government out of marriage. I'm a tree-hugging, anti-racist, hairy-legged feminazi.

Very Conservative: I don't see the government as a good solution to the issues listed above, since they are societal issues, rather than goverment issues. I am opposed to abortion (with some exceptions.) If I'd rather keep my money and spend it on causes that are important to me than pay it to the government. I believe in personal responsibility, hate taxation, and the accompanying bureaucracy, and to say I'm pro-Constitution is somewhat of an understatement.

Hence, me: Radical, right-wing liberal.

You don't even want to hear about my religious beliefs which are just as nifty.

Gay marrage bans are due to people of those states voting for the bans, the overwelming majority of Americans oppose gay marrage. If anything, it's a good example of the liberal/left imposing their will extra-constitutionally on the people, i.e. tyranny.

Click to expand...

Civil rights are not subject to majority approval. If 51% of American voters wanted to ban firearms, I wouldn't care. The will of the majority does not give them the right to rip civil liberties from the minority. Rights are not given by the government, nor by the majority. They are provided by the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God, according to our Declaration of Independence. In other words, you are born with these rights.

The Bill of Rights does not claim to be the only rights possessed by the People. It is only a few of the rights retained by the people.

Amendment IX

The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.

The will of the majority does not give them the right to rip civil liberties from the minority.

Click to expand...

Since there was never a "right" to gay marrage, then nothing was ripped from anyone. Marrage has been, for thousands of years, defined as one man and one woman. I'm sure the founding fathers would agree.