armedandsafe
Member
Only she knows and she ain't tellin' (yet.) 
Pops
Pops
This liberal finally gets it.
- Thread starter Derek Zeanah
- Start date
- Status
RocketMan
Member
I listened through the section mentioned, and then a ways beyond. She has no clue as to the meaning of the 2nd Amendment.
mordechaianiliewicz
Member
While I believe that the 2A is definetely still in effect (ie, it would work as meant in the gravest extreme), I believe that we are still a good amount away from it.
The issue is that there isn't just right and left. But also, Authoritarian and Libertarian. Those libs on the more libertarian side often do get into guns because of their fear of government. The issue is that authoritarians are in ascendency amongst both the right and the left.
Until we can turn the tide on that trend... we're screwed.
The issue is that there isn't just right and left. But also, Authoritarian and Libertarian. Those libs on the more libertarian side often do get into guns because of their fear of government. The issue is that authoritarians are in ascendency amongst both the right and the left.
Until we can turn the tide on that trend... we're screwed.
bobernet
Member
The only value left in the terms left/right, liberal/conservative or Democrat/republican is in their identification of the particular special interests most catered to by the statists bearing the moniker.
The freedom-loving, personal liberty-respecting, let me live my life and I'll let you live yours American has no representation in American government any longer.
Both the left and the right are totalitarian fascists. They want government to "manage" every aspect of life from who you sleep with to what you put in your body to how much businesses can charge for their products.
It is sad when the debate is about gay marriage, rather than why the government is meddling in personal relationships and playing games with tax codes based on a person's romantic life. It is sad when the debate is about whether to penalize big business or prop-up big business rather than why the government is meddling with the free market at all.
It is sad when the debate is prayer or evolution or religion in government schools rather than why the government is indoctrinating children with politicians' values instead of parents'.
As long as the statists (who all share a common goal and purpose) can keep us fighting and debating with each other over whose money to take and to whom it should be given, we will never regain our freedom to have the government stop stealing from ALL of us.
Back on topic, maybe Naomi doesn't yet understand all the implications of the fundamental right to self-defense, and hence the 2A. We should support her understanding growing toward liberty and stop throwing around useless labels.
The tragedy of our country is not our takeover by "liberals" or the lack of universal health care, it is the loss of Americans' critical thinking skills.
The freedom-loving, personal liberty-respecting, let me live my life and I'll let you live yours American has no representation in American government any longer.
Both the left and the right are totalitarian fascists. They want government to "manage" every aspect of life from who you sleep with to what you put in your body to how much businesses can charge for their products.
It is sad when the debate is about gay marriage, rather than why the government is meddling in personal relationships and playing games with tax codes based on a person's romantic life. It is sad when the debate is about whether to penalize big business or prop-up big business rather than why the government is meddling with the free market at all.
It is sad when the debate is prayer or evolution or religion in government schools rather than why the government is indoctrinating children with politicians' values instead of parents'.
As long as the statists (who all share a common goal and purpose) can keep us fighting and debating with each other over whose money to take and to whom it should be given, we will never regain our freedom to have the government stop stealing from ALL of us.
Back on topic, maybe Naomi doesn't yet understand all the implications of the fundamental right to self-defense, and hence the 2A. We should support her understanding growing toward liberty and stop throwing around useless labels.
The tragedy of our country is not our takeover by "liberals" or the lack of universal health care, it is the loss of Americans' critical thinking skills.
Titan6
member
Too bad I missed this thread when it was fresh....
Could have had a lot of fun with this comment:
Strange how even well educated people are revisionist historians. Although it might be said about "some" of the founding fathers.
If that isn't truth in a teacup I don't know what is. You talk to them about it and than they say... well he isn't a "real" conservative.... not a "real" liberal or whatever.
Don't think it will ever change, or has ever really been any different either. Another good reason to not support political parties as well. They want your money and will send it wherever, even when the candidate opposes your views simply because they are part of the party. Join if you need to, in order to vote... but don't send them money, give it to the candidate instead, if you can find one worthwhile.
Could have had a lot of fun with this comment:
Strange how even well educated people are revisionist historians. Although it might be said about "some" of the founding fathers.
.
If that isn't truth in a teacup I don't know what is. You talk to them about it and than they say... well he isn't a "real" conservative.... not a "real" liberal or whatever.
Don't think it will ever change, or has ever really been any different either. Another good reason to not support political parties as well. They want your money and will send it wherever, even when the candidate opposes your views simply because they are part of the party. Join if you need to, in order to vote... but don't send them money, give it to the candidate instead, if you can find one worthwhile.
She is not completely correct in her statements.
The founders recognized that many people would not be interested in the deep thinking that is required to understand some of these issues. They seemed to feel it was the duty of those with wealth and power to guide those who did not wish to learn for themselves.
In fact, it was almost unheard of for someone of more common means to become an elected official until fairly recently. it was considered to be a burden to be borne by the upper class, because they had been blessed with wealth and could afford to do so.
It was generally expected that all classes would rally to help each other when necessary, even if it did not always happen that way in practice.
Titan6
member
The point was is that these are badly misused labels that have been co-opted by the media and certain political organizations. For example Al Gore is often considered a big time liberal. Al Gore also burns books and new music CDs. These are not normally the actions of a liberal.
WildeKurt
Member
See how the demonize
The danger to the 2A comes from 'both sides.' Each 'side' demonizes the other to garner support to get or remain in power. Meanwhile both sides serve other masters. The core of both Republican and Democratic parties are very close. Both are 'neo' It's just that now the Republicans pander to the RKBA crowd more than the Dems. It would serve our interests and the countries if we brought more 'liberals' or 'progressives' to our cause. In reality our cause at it's core is about adhering to the constitution and that for that which it stands. The party's masters are more concerned with the concentration/accumulation of wealth and power. The only thing that stands between us and them is the constitution. (And the founders knew it!)
The danger to the 2A comes from 'both sides.' Each 'side' demonizes the other to garner support to get or remain in power. Meanwhile both sides serve other masters. The core of both Republican and Democratic parties are very close. Both are 'neo' It's just that now the Republicans pander to the RKBA crowd more than the Dems. It would serve our interests and the countries if we brought more 'liberals' or 'progressives' to our cause. In reality our cause at it's core is about adhering to the constitution and that for that which it stands. The party's masters are more concerned with the concentration/accumulation of wealth and power. The only thing that stands between us and them is the constitution. (And the founders knew it!)
DonP
Member
The question, previously well defined, is does she really "get it" ... or is it another case of "BDS" Bush Derangement Syndrome.
I always use a basic test on that kind of question.
If the speaker/writer is foaming at the mouth over the "loss of all of our basic freedoms" and spends most of the coversation talking about the last 6 years or so and about wiretaps, suspension of habeas corpus, torture etc, but ... never once mentions the 4th amendment violations of cameras being used to monitor law abiding citizens 24/7 in every major US city by almost universally Democrat run administrations (Chicago, NYC, Detroit, etc.) then I judge it as most likely BDS.
I don't think she "gets it". I think it's a convenient posture for her right now to sell her book to a broader audience that otherwise would have nothing to do with her writing. If Hillary or Obama takes over all her concerns will magically disappear overnight, along with homelessness and every other social ill. No more New York Times headlines about anything bad.
The reason some of the real far leftie types have all of a sudden discoverd the 2nd is that a bunch of them have decided that it may be useful for them. Because a surpisingly large group of them truly believe that: 1. Bush will refuse to leave office at the end of his term, 2. That Bush and Cheney will declare a national emergency, 3. Put the US under Martial Law and 4. Start rounding up outspoken liberals and progressives to put in prison or the secret camps that Halliburton is secretly building somewhere in the Southwest and Blackwater will be staffing. (I couldn't make this stuff up if I tried and drank heavy people.)
Short answer, no, I don't think Naomi gets it and I think she is a closet Capitalist that wants to make her book sell to as many people as she can.
I always use a basic test on that kind of question.
If the speaker/writer is foaming at the mouth over the "loss of all of our basic freedoms" and spends most of the coversation talking about the last 6 years or so and about wiretaps, suspension of habeas corpus, torture etc, but ... never once mentions the 4th amendment violations of cameras being used to monitor law abiding citizens 24/7 in every major US city by almost universally Democrat run administrations (Chicago, NYC, Detroit, etc.) then I judge it as most likely BDS.
I don't think she "gets it". I think it's a convenient posture for her right now to sell her book to a broader audience that otherwise would have nothing to do with her writing. If Hillary or Obama takes over all her concerns will magically disappear overnight, along with homelessness and every other social ill. No more New York Times headlines about anything bad.
The reason some of the real far leftie types have all of a sudden discoverd the 2nd is that a bunch of them have decided that it may be useful for them. Because a surpisingly large group of them truly believe that: 1. Bush will refuse to leave office at the end of his term, 2. That Bush and Cheney will declare a national emergency, 3. Put the US under Martial Law and 4. Start rounding up outspoken liberals and progressives to put in prison or the secret camps that Halliburton is secretly building somewhere in the Southwest and Blackwater will be staffing. (I couldn't make this stuff up if I tried and drank heavy people.)
Short answer, no, I don't think Naomi gets it and I think she is a closet Capitalist that wants to make her book sell to as many people as she can.
Zundfolge
Member
Fine, this one leftist happens to get it right on one sliver of one issue.
The simple fact that she still REFUSES to champion laissez-faire, free market capitalism still makes her an enemy of liberty ... she's just slightly less obnoxious an enemy than she was when she advocated disarmament of the people.
I still bet she supports things like registration, licensing, and banning some guns (like "Assault" weapons, .50BMG rifles and anything else that's too fun).
But hey, its a start ... remember Thomas Sowell and David Horowitz used to be a Marxists.
The simple fact that she still REFUSES to champion laissez-faire, free market capitalism still makes her an enemy of liberty ... she's just slightly less obnoxious an enemy than she was when she advocated disarmament of the people.
I still bet she supports things like registration, licensing, and banning some guns (like "Assault" weapons, .50BMG rifles and anything else that's too fun).
But hey, its a start ... remember Thomas Sowell and David Horowitz used to be a Marxists.
mordechaianiliewicz
Member
I started out as a liberal Democrat, long, long ago. Now, most people think I sound like Pat Buchanan if he were in favor of legalized gambling, prostitution, and drug decriminalization.
I effectively became a libertarian (except with a little econ nationalism thrown in), and it took a few years, and analyzing things. This lady could change her views.
But, I wouldn't put money on it.
I effectively became a libertarian (except with a little econ nationalism thrown in), and it took a few years, and analyzing things. This lady could change her views.
But, I wouldn't put money on it.
Titan6
member
Strange, I used to sound like Pat Buchanan. Now, most people think I sound like a libertarian as well. I still don't consider myself to be a libertarian though. Merely very, very strongly in favor of liberty and very hateful towards authoritarian dicatatorships. Maybe I am just getting old.
SamTuckerMTNMAN
Member
the most powerful weapon
we have is to get others of dissimilar political views to see the light on RKBA. I too have made this apparent to friends from across the aisle, now some of us shoot together. If there is any one political thing to extend a hand of friendship on it's the right for an indidivual to keep and bear arms.
Do what you can to not alienate, but educate. Example. Data. Articulation. Compassion. And help them see that what you fear, they also do, and how does RKBA play a role in this affair.
The future of the Republic IS at stake.
st
we have is to get others of dissimilar political views to see the light on RKBA. I too have made this apparent to friends from across the aisle, now some of us shoot together. If there is any one political thing to extend a hand of friendship on it's the right for an indidivual to keep and bear arms.
Do what you can to not alienate, but educate. Example. Data. Articulation. Compassion. And help them see that what you fear, they also do, and how does RKBA play a role in this affair.
The future of the Republic IS at stake.
st
SamTuckerMTNMAN
Member
a Ron Paul supporter
st
rocinante
Member
WELL DUH. Are we suppose to ignore who sponsors all the anti-gun legislation? If you are a liberal and "get it" then educate your political professionals. Until then when "I can't carry because I am a felon but my bodyguards have full automatics" Senator Ted Kennedy and his irk sponsoring anti-gun nonsense like microstamping and not unequivocally supporting an individual RKBA 2nd amendment position I think I can continue to do that equivalence test. Yep liberal == anti-gun still returns true.
Thernlund
Member
Having watched the video, and now having finally finished reading this thread, I am left with a feeling in the pit of my soul.
The feeling is that of a person who must climb a mountain the size of Everest, but stands at its base wearing nothing more than shorts, a t-shirt, and some sandels.
-T.
The feeling is that of a person who must climb a mountain the size of Everest, but stands at its base wearing nothing more than shorts, a t-shirt, and some sandels.
-T.
Titan6
member
Saying someone is something does not make it true.....
Since modern "liberals" do not believe in the essential goodness of the human race, autonomy of the individual or protection of civil liberties, pray tell how are they liberals other in name only? A LINO?
Amen to that.
During the Clinton years, many Republicans didn't have a problem with what was being done, but rather who was doing it. Likewise, most liberals will go back to sleep as soon as a Democrat takes office. And the people will continue to lose.
mordechaianiliewicz
Member
There isn't a two-party system when it comes to government power, nor is there one when it comes to civil liberties, balanced budgets, or even foreign policy.
It is only two parties inasmuch as there is a pissing contest between two sides that engage in the exact same business.
Call the Republicans the Genovisis and the Democrats the Gambinos. For those of us out there concerned with the future of the Republic, we're gonna be paying protection racket money regardless of who gets shot at the card table when they have their little wars. And if we try to stop, or inpede the machine in any way, they'll team up to defeat serious threats to their mechanism.
I realized awhile back the real enemy is the bureaucracy that supports the politicians along with the businesses who are almost entirely dependent on tax dollars.
But try to stop either bureacracies or those business interests, and you won't go very far.
It is only two parties inasmuch as there is a pissing contest between two sides that engage in the exact same business.
Call the Republicans the Genovisis and the Democrats the Gambinos. For those of us out there concerned with the future of the Republic, we're gonna be paying protection racket money regardless of who gets shot at the card table when they have their little wars. And if we try to stop, or inpede the machine in any way, they'll team up to defeat serious threats to their mechanism.
I realized awhile back the real enemy is the bureaucracy that supports the politicians along with the businesses who are almost entirely dependent on tax dollars.
But try to stop either bureacracies or those business interests, and you won't go very far.
OP
OP
Dude, it's from November. Pre-change and all that.
- Status
