card carrying liberals on THR?

Status
Not open for further replies.

hornadylnl

Member
Joined
Dec 11, 2006
Messages
375
In the locked threads about the Scooter Libby commutation, I couldn't believe how many way left leaning posters that were posting there. I can't for the life of me figure out how a pro 2nd amendment guy could vote for a Democrat. I don't care if a democratic candidate for US senator or representative is staunchly pro gun, a vote for them is a vote for Reid and Pelosi to majority leader. They will in turn vote to take away our 2A.

Here is my next question of left leaning members of THR? Are you members of a labor union? I can't figure out what else would draw you to the Democrat party.

Disclaimer: I'm a staunch conservative and I consider many of today's republicans to be just as bad as any Democrat. Unfortunately, I'm only left with the choice of voting Republican in elections. I will not waste a vote on a 3rd party candidate that stands no chance of ever being elected to anything. If you are only left with the choice of having your hand or head cut off, which do you choose?
 
I can't for the life of me figure out how a pro 2nd amendment guy could vote for a Democrat.

Unfortunately, I'm only left with the choice of voting Republican in elections. I will not waste a vote on a 3rd party candidate that stands no chance of ever being elected to anything.

OK, I'll bite.

The two quoted lines above are there to demonstrate a dichotomy btw, the first is very uncompromising, the second is the opposite. Just something to think about, nobody is of a single mind in all things.

First it's a fallacy to assume that a republican vote is a vote for your 2A rights. There is a lot of bad gun legislation out there, and it wasn't voted in with every republican present in opposition. More importantly, remember that the BOR is not wholly represented by 2A alone. What about 10A and the historically republican tendency to walk all over it until it's a laughing stock? How about the 4th, 5th, and 6th amendments, which plenty of our reps of all stripes, and this administration in particular, are happy to throw right out the window?

I believe in preserving my rights as spelled out in the BOR, not just clinging to one of them and playing lip service to others because it makes me uncomfortable when people with convictions opposed to my own exercise them.

What am I talking about? There's the standard list of well hashed out examples. The feds running over the states perfectly legal right to enact medicinal marijuana legislation is a fine example. The whole gay marriage ruckus is an even better one. What in the world the federal gov't has to do with that is beyond me, it certainly doesn't fall under the powers expressly granted them. It makes me uncomfortable that the same representatives who champion 2A rights for the cause of "liberty" are also willing to trample all over those citizens because they don't believe in either the letter or the spirit of the law, they believe in the letter or spirit of the law when it is in line with their group agenda. In the aforementioned instance, the "party line" seems to be all about freedom and personal liberty except "for them homo's cuz they make us uncomfortable".

Real freedom includes a lot of being uncomfortable. It also includes a lot of standing up for people you don't necessarily agree with.

Don't think I'm just attacking the republicans, I'm simply pointing these out as your post seems to indicate that the repubs are the "defenders" of our rights. Nonsense, they're the defenders (when it pays) of a couple of our rights that are more dear to some people than others. They're happy to trash the rest.

That sword cuts both ways. The Dems want to tell you all about your civil liberties out of one side of their mouths while taking them away with the other. Don't construe the above argument to be an endorsement of the democratic party.

In answer to your third party statement, I have to say that I have almost always voted third party / independent. I have to vote for the people who represent my beliefs, even if the system in place means their chances are slim or none. The alternative is the lesser of two evils approach you mention, which is not acceptable to me. My vote is a precious thing, I cannot in good conscience squander it on the "least offensive" candidate.

Here is my next question of left leaning members of THR? Are you members of a labor union? I can't figure out what else would draw you to the Democrat party.

I am currently a member of a labor union. My current employment is my first "union job", and my opinion on the pros and cons of labor unions has not changed. A full discussion of unions and their place in the world would not serve much to answer your curiosity however, and is an endeavor unto itself. The assumption however that being a member of a union makes one a Democrat however, is false.

In answer to your implied question which is "who are all these people?" you refer to as "way left leaning", allow me to clarify my own position, and in the process perhaps muddy the waters a little further, beyond our simple assumptions about "Democrats and republicans" by laying out my position on some of the common topics of the day.

I believe in our rights to own firearms.
I support capital punishment
I am pro-choice
I support a streamlining of our immigration process while opposing any "amnesty" for criminals already in our country.
I support same-sex marriage rights.
I oppose a variety of "nanny-state" nonsense, especially government health care. I've seen the way these people run the DMV, I don't want em in my medicine cabinet.
I'd like to see the federal government get back to their real job, and stop sending all my hard earned money to third world countries full of angry little stick people whose main export is religious and ethnic extremism.
I support the various "right to die" initiatives.

the list goes on...

So you can see, there isn't a nice packaged "platform" that I can get on, and I'm not signing on to one that supports of my convictions while sacrificing others. Hence, I have to pick and choose my candidates carefully, where I can find them, without regard for their party affiliation, if any. As you can imagine, I often vote libertarian.

I hope this provides a little insight into my "liberal" views, and perhaps some food for thought about our pre-packaged notions of political affiliation.
 
As the LP bumper stickers say "I'm pro-choice on everything"

It is my personal belief that evil is when one free man imposes his will on another free man(against his will).
 
I couldn't believe how many way left leaning posters that were posting there. I can't for the life of me figure out how a pro 2nd amendment guy could vote for a Democrat.
I'm not a Democrat but I side with Democrats on some issues. I'm not a single issue voter and will not vote for someone just because of guns. My favorite example for this is Alan Keyes. If the republican party gives me a candidate that is so opposed to freedom as he is, I won't vote him just because I like his stance on 1 issue.
 
I don't know why.

But I will answer also. As Noxx said there is more than one plank in a platform. 2A rights are important to me, but the right to be be secure in my home free from illegal search and seizure is equally important.
Illegally detaining "enemies of the state" without a trial while commuting a "good buddies" sentence shows a lack of respect for the rule of law.
Conservative by definition means to preserve the existing order and resist change. The Republican party seems to be quite happy to change things to suit their lobbyists needs, just as much as the Dems. If any party would work to reduce government interferance in citizens lives I would support them.
I tend to vote on any given candidates position on the matters that I deem important and not vote a straight party line. In fact I think that anyone that votes straight party line or on only one plank of a candidate platform is not voting wisely.
And no I am not a member of a labor union.

Wheeler44
 
No, not all Democrats are anti-gun. Just the ones leading the party and setting the agenda. I suppose pro-gun Democrats are hoping to change it from within. Sometime. Maybe. Hopefully.

As long at the party's platform is anti-gun, then every time you vote for a Democrat pro-gun senator or congressman, you are giving the floor to Nancy Pelosi. That they are pro-gun is irrelevant. If Nancy Pelosi weren't the speaker of the house, the anti-gun legislation wouldn't hear discussion.

No, gun ownership is not the only issue. It's the DEFINITIVE issue.

Before you criticize Bush's handling of Libby, read "The Last Days" by Barbara Olsen. If you want to split up pardons by party, Democrats lose bad.

Detaining people who want to kill me in combat is better than shooting them on sight. That the war is inconveniently long is unfortunate, but which would you rather have, detainees held in limbo, or released detainees who go home to Afgahanistan, start fighting again, and make our soldiers who are fighting them realize that they don't need to take prisoners, since they will be fighting the same people again anyway? On second thought, go ahead, release them.

Jose Padilla is the only exception I can think of in this.
 
In the locked threads about the Scooter Libby commutation, I couldn't believe how many way left leaning posters that were posting there. I can't for the life of me figure out how a pro 2nd amendment guy could vote for a Democrat. I don't care if a democratic candidate for US senator or representative is staunchly pro gun, a vote for them is a vote for Reid and Pelosi to majority leader. They will in turn vote to take away our 2A.
I'm an independent liberal. I'm militantly pro-gun.

Here in Ohio, we went from an anti-gun dolt Republican governor to an apparently staunch pro-gun Democrat. Unless Strickland does something especially stupid before his term is out, I'll be voting for him.

In the last election, we went from an NRA F rated Republican Senator (the spineless loser DeWine) to a D- rated Democrat. I won't be voting for him, because he is consistently anti-gun, but if there's ANY alternative, I won't vote for Voinovich either, who is equally anti-gun, and who stalled concealed carry in Ohio for years.

I'm hoping that Thompson gets the Republican nomination, because if he doesn't, there's no Republican likely to get the nomination that I'd ever vote for. Likewise, the only Democrat I'd even consider is Richardson, and he's got virtually no chance of being nominated. In a Giuliani (or Romney) vs. Clinton (or Obama) race, I just stay home because the four of them are all anti-gun fanatics.
 
Agree, the threat of revolution is one of the pillars of democracy in my book.
Shouldn't gun legislation be the 1 thing you don't worry about then? Shouldn't the guns defend themselves? If you'll give up all your freedom just to "get" to keep your guns, what are you protecting with them?
 
Shouldn't gun legislation be the 1 thing you don't worry about then? Shouldn't the guns defend themselves? If you'll give up all your freedom just to "get" to keep your guns, what are you protecting with them?
Will Bush let me bring my guns with me to Gitmo if he decides to hold me there indefinitely, incommunicado, without filing charges or honoring habeas corpus?

--Len.
 
Will Bush let me bring my guns with me to Gitmo if he decides to hold me there indefinitely, incommunicado, without filing charges or honoring habeas corpus?
As long as you have guns, you don't have to go. You might get killed NOT going, but you don't have to go. That's why authoritarians in BOTH parties don't want you to have them. That goes for Giuliani AND Daley.
 
Shouldn't gun legislation be the 1 thing you don't worry about then? Shouldn't the guns defend themselves? If you'll give up all your freedom just to "get" to keep your guns, what are you protecting with them?

Legislating into an unarmed populace smacks of Stalinism to me. If I believed that, in my heart, was happening, I would proudly lead the charge, even to my death. But I do not believe that, I believe we are led my many truly good men. Though of those good many, some are too far removed from their common roots.

American democracy is alive and well, but the tree hasn't been trimmed in a while. A true libertarian such as Dr. Paul is my gardener of choice. He may make detrimental changes in office, but those changes will lessen the Federal government. The Fed can always grow larger, when it gets too large I am afraid it will be impossible to trim as it will be self supporting, self promoting, and self sustaining.
 
I didn't post in that libby thread, but I tend to be liberal, left-leaning on some issues, and conservative on others(like immigration). I'm registered independent, and I belong to 3 unions: screen actors guild, american federation of television and radio artists and actor's equity. I don't base my votes solely on the 2A issue..I rarely vote republican, because of their support for the war but I might vote for ron paul, if he can get the nomination.
 
As long as you have guns, you don't have to go.
We pro-RKBA types like to say that, but it's mostly talk. How many of us are really going to make our heroic last stand holding off the forces of tyranny with our battle rifles? Do we really plan on being Wacoed or Ruby Ridged for our principles?

If we aren't all talk, then where were we when the folks at Waco were being Wacoed, and the folks at Ruby Ridge were being Ruby Ridged? Where were we when habeas corpus was suspended, and Bush started listening to our phone calls and reading our mail to "protect" us "Merkins" from "tourists"?

I agree that they'll round up the guns before they start rounding up the Jews (or whoever the enemy du jour will be), but that didn't save José Padilla, and it won't save you or me--and when the time comes, rounding up the guns probably won't be that hard either. Once upon a time, the English jealously guarded their right to be armed, too. Some living Brits can even remember those days.

--Len.
 
I think the modern anti-2a liberal will die with the baby-boomer generation. The Pelosis and Boxers of this world are too old to be considered "cool" by the younger generation. [Grammaw had to get out the soap, water and broom to clean up Low Road language.]

Frankly, I'd probably lean more left than I do, but those SOBs always seem to want my guns and my money (taxes).
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I'm really proud that this thread hasn't turned into a bashing so far and lets keep it that way. Like an earlier poster stated, the 2a is our guarantee that we keep all the rest. If we lose our 2a, what are we going to do when they do take our other rights? Throw stones at soldiers carrying M16's?

I haven't kept up with all the republican debates so far. If McCain wins the nomination, I simply won't vote for president and I'm undecided as to whether or not I will vote for Guliani. He's a liberal in rino clothes. What we need are more Ronald Reagans and Barry Goldwaters.

The reason I see a vote for a third party as a waste is the 92 election. A vote for Perot was essentially a half of a vote for Clinton. The majority of Perot voters would have voted for Bush Sr. if Perot hadn't run. Their is a reason Hillary said she wanted to kill Nader in 2000. He was seen as stealing votes from Gore. I would not hesitate to vote a third party candidate if there was a viable one. I won't vote for a Democrat for dog catcher simply because once a candidate declares themselves as a Democrat, I believe they are assigning themselves the platform of the Democrat party. I'm against everything the Democrat party stands for; abortion, wealth redistribution, socialism, sky high taxes, peace even if it means giving away our country, etc.
 
I can't for the life of me figure out how a pro 2nd amendment guy could vote for a Democrat. I don't care if a democratic candidate for US senator or representative is staunchly pro gun, a vote for them is a vote for Reid and Pelosi to majority leader. They will in turn vote to take away our 2A.


I have voted for the LP presidential candidate since 1980 except in the last two presidential elections in which I held my nose and voted democratic as the lesser of two evils. I vote Libertarian in every race they have someone running if there isn't a LP candidate I do research and vote for the individual most closely resembling my beliefs in small govenment at both the state and federal level.
In my opinion often the Republican party is no better than the Democrats, it is just a matter of which rights will be defended or legislated against, neither appears particulary good at reading a few simple sentences in a contract between the people and it's government outlining what is and isn't allowed. The traditional republican is one I can get behind but I haven't seen one of them in the time I've been old enough to vote.
I also am pretty angry and tired of the constant fear mongering from both sides but I am really tired of hearing we are violating your rights and fighting a stupid, foolish, expensive war in the wrong damn country (let's try Saudi Arabia where the expletives deleted were from) so you can feel safe from the evil terrorists. I am a grown up and an American, I don't need to be protected thank you very much. My chances of dying in a motorcycle accident are and always have been much greater than ever even meeting a terrorist let alone being blown up or shot by one. And if the state of WI would get their heads out of their nether regions maybe I could legally carry and that would lessen my worry of those big bad Islamo fascists even more.


I believe in our rights to own firearms.
I support capital punishment
I am pro-choice
I support a streamlining of our immigration process while opposing any "amnesty" for criminals already in our country.
I support same-sex marriage rights.
I oppose a variety of "nanny-state" nonsense, especially government health care. I've seen the way these people run the DMV, I don't want em in my medicine cabinet.
I'd like to see the federal government get back to their real job, and stop sending all my hard earned money to third world countries full of angry little stick people whose main export is religious and ethnic extremism.
I support the various "right to die" initiatives.

So you can see, there isn't a nice packaged "platform" that I can get on, and I'm not signing on to one that supports of my convictions while sacrificing others. Hence, I have to pick and choose my candidates carefully, where I can find them, without regard for their party affiliation, if any. As you can imagine, I often vote libertarian.


Noxx said this part really well.


Here is my next question of left leaning members of THR? Are you members of a labor union? I can't figure out what else would draw you to the Democrat party.

Nope, never been, probably never will. I have too many problems with authority to play well in any large organization even if I might get more than I can negotiating my own wages and bennies.
 
Do any of you think that habeus corpus should apply to non citizens captured on the battlefield? I do believe that American citizens should have the right to a fair trial but not enemy combatants on foreign soil. I don't see why America has to be the only country that abides by the Geneva convention. Our soldiers should not have to take unneccesary risks for fear of being thrown in prison over a Geneva convention violation.
 
Almost no one will stand up to the governbment, and the few that do will lose, and be rediculed as 'crazies'.

They don't have to worry about takling our gun rights when they take away all the others first. Right now, anyone can be 'disappeared;. If the government decided you are a 'terrorist', you can be arrested without charge, held without charge, be shipped off to a foreign country for extreme rendition.

Now imagine an anti-gun president gets elected. He/she could label you a gun owner as a domestic terrorist and give you the above treatment. No warrant required. No right to challenge your arrest or imprisonment. They don;t even have to reveal to anyone that you are being held.

Think about that.
 
Legislating into an unarmed populace smacks of Stalinism to me. If I believed that, in my heart, was happening, I would proudly lead the charge, even to my death.
Thats kind of the point that I'm having a hard time articulating well. If you believe you have the right to be armed and would defend that right, why sacrifice other rights? Jose Padilla, alberto gonzales, and a republican senate that fell 1 vote short of approving a ban on flag burning a week before the 4th of july a year ago....what rights are we protecting? If you're willing to give up your arms because you were told to, then I guess I see why you'd make the sacrifices but it seems like it gains nothing. If you intend to never cede your right to arms then why not postpone having to use them as long as possible by protecting your rights through other channels?

Do any of you think that habeus corpus should apply to non citizens captured on the battlefield?
What defines a battle field? If there is a real battlefield then I think the threat they pose is obvious, if we're taking people going about their daily life on the streets and in their homes I think evidence of their threat needs to be shown and tested.
 
Do any of you think that habeus corpus should apply to non citizens captured on the battlefield?

Suicide bombers are not people, we can't hang them so f-em, let them rot in Gitmo. I have respect for any man who will fight for his people, but not those cancerous heaps of sh## and "Jihadi" manipulation that are suicide bombers.

Legitimate foreign fighters deserve a voice.
 
I'm not sure where I'd sign up to get a liberal card, so I'm not really a "card carrying liberal" in that sense. I am rather left of center (though I have no sympathy for coercive schemes of any sort), and have way more posts on Democratic Underground than I have on THR. Since the early 2000's, I've tended to find more common ground with Dems on a lot of issues relating to individual choice, free speech and press, education, health care issues (I'm not convinced an NHS is the only solution, but I agree that the current system is close to being broken), alternatives to drug prohibition, foreign policy, etc. than with repubs.

I am not a "party" voter, though; an individual candidate's stands on civil liberties and whatnot are a great deal more important to me than what letter that candidate has after their name. I've long been registered as an independent, for that reason.
 
I believe the foundation of freedom is the right to property. Property doesn't just include land. It is your right to yourself and possesions as well. No, I don't believe that an 8 month, 29 day unborn child is it's mothers property. If you can stab that baby's skull as it is being delivered, why can't we euthanize alheimers patients and the like?

Which party wants to deny your right to property? Hillary is on record saying she wants to take from some to give to others.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top