fortelling major shift in attitude

Status
Not open for further replies.
R

rancher

Member
Joined
Jul 19, 2005
Messages
6
two events are foretelling a coming major shift in how americans veiw goverment and their protection. the supreme ct ruled in "castle rock vs gonzales" that the police do not have a duty to protect indivuals and the new orleans /katrina disaster drove that point home.don't look to goverment for your portection and care in major events.in other words you are responnsible for being prepared until order can be restored .stay tuned
 
the country has been shifting toward pro-gun for a while.
These events might even get the deep blue states moving.
The people in Cali sure are taking notice and that's amazing.

AFS
 
I have always been confused as how the Democrat party and liberals became anti-second amendment. It is a recent change. It is a very illiberal stance. I try to get my mind around it and the only thing I can come up with is the cange has come about because the Democrat party is not liberal per se anymore it is leftist and least it hard core base is.
 
I have always been confused as how the Democrat party and liberals became anti-second amendment. It is a recent change. It is a very illiberal stance. I try to get my mind around it and the only thing I can come up with is the cange has come about because the Democrat party is not liberal per se anymore it is leftist and least it hard core base is.
Click to expand...
I agree with you, they have definately moved away from liberty and towards authority. hopefully they'll realize it won't get them ellected and move back.
 
The Democrats being anti gun is hardly a new development.

The major shift in attitude on the federal level came about during FDR's "New Deal" inthe 1930's.

Wealth redistribution and gun control go together like peanut butter and strawberry jelly.
 
I've seen that map a whole bunch of times and it confuses the hell out of me.
Looking at it Cali should be ultra consertative.

Strange, very strange.

AFS
 
No surprise, really, AFS - look at the population figures for the "blue" counties, and you'll find they handily outnumber all of the "red" counties put together. The Democratic Party is increasingly a party of highly urbanized regions.
 
illiberal? the tip of the iceberg...

I have been thinking lately that 'hegemony or perish' was on-target.

the Democrats are tasked with passing legislation reducing personal freedoms (AWB, anti-smoking laws, seatbelt laws, helmet laws, environmental legislation, etc)

the republicans are tasked with enacting huge centralization of power in the federal govt and the executive office in particular; as well as broadening the powers already established. (patriotacts, kelo, 'federalizing' airport security, federalizing 'emergency response' in the works, moving every agency with any power under DHS, etc)

together they are creating themselves the ultimate overseers an unaccountable sovereigns of the most powerful and wealthiest nation in known history.

the end game, for them at least, is to be King of the Hill. To get their man (or woman!) into the Oval Office.

everything else is a brushfire (terry schiavo, baseball players using steroids, etc) to keep people frm realizing that.

C-
 
The blue areas are all dense urban centers with a high degree of govt dependence. That blue chunk near Miami in Florida contributes about 80 percent of the democratic votes in this state.

The quickest solution is to starve the cities of federal and state funds and let them die. Places like NYC, LA and Baltimore are terribly inefficient and have choking amounts of tax, regulations and corruption. This is why many businesses and residents have already left. To win, we would have to make the cities largely unlivable by causing the public infrastructure to collapse. Kind of like NOLA. You think LA is going to keep going Democrat?

Unfortunately, we have crap like the Transportation Bill that fed a ton of pork into those cities, and state governments that suck the rest of the state dry to support themselves. The corruption and inefficiency doesnt matter if we keep picking up the slack for them.
 
There is something really nasty and sick about big cities. To live in one you must conform to the government. I think that is why you see such outlandish styles in clothing and personal behavior because it is the only freedom the people have left. I realized this with my trip to NYC. How anyone gets used to the constant traffic noise, sirens going off and the smell is amazing. I was appaulled when the trash all got put out at night for the next pick-up. I felt like I was in a garbage dump. No one there seemed to notice. Just like they were used to such small isles in stores and cramped seating in resturants. Everyone walks around ignoring everyone else. I'm sure that the rural way of life seems just as odd to the city dwellers. They would probably miss the noise and the people and the concrete and fake landscape.
 
The quickest solution is to starve the cities of federal and state funds and let them die.
Click to expand...
Here's a quick exercise for you: take a look at the states that send more money to the Feds than they get, and take a look at the states that receive more than they send.

Then, tell me which color more accurately represents the states that received more money than they paid. Is it blue, or is it red?

I'll even do the research for you: go read the Tax Foundation's report on the subject of spending vs. taxes. Boils it down pretty nicely by state.
 
There is something really nasty and sick about big cities. To live in one you must conform to the government. I think that is why you see such outlandish styles in clothing and personal behavior because it is the only freedom the people have left. I realized this with my trip to NYC. How anyone gets used to the constant traffic noise, sirens going off and the smell is amazing. I was appaulled when the trash all got put out at night for the next pick-up. I felt like I was in a garbage dump. No one there seemed to notice. Just like they were used to such small isles in stores and cramped seating in resturants. Everyone walks around ignoring everyone else. I'm sure that the rural way of life seems just as odd to the city dwellers. They would probably miss the noise and the people and the concrete and fake landscape.
Click to expand...

Hi, I am one of those big city folks. You dont realize how bad it is while you're living here. When I was looking at universities to go to in ny state I got accepted at morrisville university. They are known for equine science. When I went to visit the campus in the dead of the winter in upstate ny it was freezing up there. To me at the time the 'rural' way of life was totally odd. Not much pavement, people, what are those?, transportation is a tractor. Talk about culture shock! I can imagine any of the rural living folks visiting our city would freak too.. :)

What little people I got to meet were very nice though. :)
 
The ONE thing I loved about NYC was the getting to see a Broadway play. Cats was wonderful. Wintergarden theater. Small place. 10.00 ticket. Bravo. But to live there I decided I would need to be RICH major RICH. I mean have my own driver. No more Cabs for me. Someone to drop me off outside and pick me up. If you are RICH it would be a wonderful playground. If however you are poor it is the worst of the worst place to be as is any city. Heck you can live in Arkansas and on two person minimun wage job actually own a home that has a yard that could be several acres. No gangs or drive by shooting to tempt your children. Less racism too despite the so called common knowledge on the subject.
 
I have always been confused as how the Democrat party and liberals became anti-second amendment. It is a recent change. It is a very illiberal stance. I try to get my mind around it and the only thing I can come up with is the cange has come about because the Democrat party is not liberal per se anymore it is leftist and least it hard core base is.
Click to expand...
As a party position it is indeed a relatively recent change, dating from the late '80's and early '90's when the communitarians (scary bunch) took over the party via the Democratic Leadership Council. Gun confiscation and a host of other police-state measures have long been the Holy Grail of the communitarian movement, which finds disciples in both parties. Bill Clinton was a communitarian, not a traditional liberal in the mold of, say, JFK (who was pro-2ndA and an NRA life member, FWIW).
 
I'm familiar with those numbers but I am really suspicious as to how they break down. What percentage of those payouts are entitlements? I would imagine that Florida receives an enormous amount of "federal spending" in the form of old people getting checks. A few million old people here and there and you are looking at serious money.

Surely you cant be proposing that Florida, land of the budget surplus and no income tax is somehow less efficient than CA, permanently in debt and drowning in local tax. Florida is a 1.00 on your scale, so I guess we would break even by seceding.
 
The Democratic party was the party that passed the laws right after the Civil War in the south banning the carrying of weapons by blacks. It was the Republicans who passed the Freedman's Act and the 14th Amendment, which were partly designed to fix those laws.

The 1934-1935 laws were the next chapter, but most Democrats were still pro-freedom on guns until the 1960s. It was the assassinations of MLK, JFK, and Robert Kennedy that made the change, along with the urban riots of the 1960s, which scared urban liberals and made them want gun control. Hubert Humphrey said some very pro 2nd amendment things in his career.

The identification of the Democrats with gun control has grown stronger as the Democrats have increasingly abandoned their liberal heritage for a more statist philosophy that seeks a stronger, more powerful state.

There was no morning when all the Democrats woke up and said, "Gosh, I think I'll be anti-gun today." It was a gradual process.
 
The people in Cali sure are taking notice and that's amazing.
Click to expand...
I was in a gun store during the whole Katrina thing and a soccer mom looking woman was in there buying her first gun. She said something like, "Looking at all that's happening in NO, I want to get a gun." That's here in a major urban center in California.

I think things are changing here. The Dems have thrown away two presidential races over gun control (they ran hard-core gun banners who can't get the votes they needed in Florida or Ohio). They are going to have to drop this if they ever want to get back in power. Here in California, we can see what the effects of CCW have been in the aprox. 40 states that now allow it (answer: a small but noticeable drop in crime).

So it may be changing.

The big problem here is that our legislature is so gerrymandered that none of the elections are competitive, at least not after the primary. I'm hoping that Prop 77 might fix that.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top