One Political PlazaSM - Home of politics
Home | Political Digest | Active Topics | Newest Pictures | Search | Login | Register | Help
Posts for: straightUp
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 ... 351 next>>
Mar 16, 2018 17:02:15   #
proud republican wrote:
I was watching news today and images of these kids screaming at NRA President Trump "Blood is on your hands!!!"..Today was National Walk Out Day...What it really should of been National Walk In Day...Teachers should of say to kids instead of screaming and calling people that dont agree with you all kinds of names why dont you kids stay in school, finish graduate and then if you want to change the world go into politics...and change it!!!.....Right now kids are doing dirty job of DNC!!!
I was watching news today and images of these kids... (show quote)

Oh, c'mon PR..! Those kids are standing up for what THEY believe. Don't denigrate them just because they happen to disagree with your opinions. Besides you have ZERO evidence to suggest there is any connection between these kids and the DNC. If there is any association with Democrats at all, it's that the only politicians standing up for these children are Democrats... that doesn't mean the kids are working for the DNC. Jesus...

proud republican wrote:

Of course what happened in Florida was horrible, but its not an isolated thing...It happened many times before, so my question is why Congress didnt do anything when Columbine happened, when Sandy Hook happened,when Polytech happened??

Seriously? You have to ask? Congress jumps into action every single time. For instance, right after Sandy Hook, Senator Dianne Feinstein and 24 Democratic cosponsors introduced S. 150, the Assault Weapons Ban of 2013. I guess you weren't paying attention. The problem is the influence the NRA has on Congress, which explains why these bills either don't get passed or get so limited by the time they do that they become inert.

proud republican wrote:

Do you really think you gonna get rid of NRA??.. Not a chance of these happening!!! 5 million members strong and counting!!!

As far as I know, that isn't the objective. The objective is to take weapons of war off the streets. That doesn't mean we have to get rid of the NRA, it just means we have to defeat their lobby in Congress and pass some decent laws. Each time there is a shooting, the number of Americans favoring gun control increases. 8 out of 10 Americans support the recent moves by Dick's Sporting Goods and Delta Airlines... eventually, there will be enough numbers to where democracy will defeat the wealth and corruption of the NRA lobby, unless of course Trump and Sessions succeed at shutting down our democracy and installing the 4th Reich. ;)

proud republican wrote:

Do you really think you gonna get rid of all the guns??? There are 11 million guns out there....

Again, that is not the objective. The arguments that say gun control advocates are trying to get rid of all the guns or that they are aiming to take away the 2nd Amendment are what you call, strawman arguments. The NRA is trying to convince you that if you don't oppose efforts to regulate the industry we will loose the 2nd Amendment and all our guns. I support stricter regulation of any weapons designed to maximize killing capacity. Maximum killing capacity is strictly the business of warfare. There is no need for it within a civil society. Yes, criminals will happen, I have myself been shot AT (he missed) by a street criminal. I didn't happen to have my gun ON me at the time, but if I did, I would not have needed more than the 9-rounds it has to defend myself against that one guy. (I can usually hit my target in less than 9 tries.) Crime rarely happens in large numbers... if a civilian EVER winds up facing off with a large group of criminals, it probably means he is also a criminal ...and seriously, if you can't bring down a buck without 30 rounds, you should take up knitting.

You DON'T NEED maximum killing capacity for hunting or self-defense. So STOP defending every move to regulate assault weapons. Next, you'll be saying nuclear disarmament violates the 2nd Amendment. Good Lord, there's gotta be a line somewhere. It's the difference between sanity and outright stupidity.

proud republican wrote:

What we all need to do is remember what family used to be...For example in my family my parents knew who my sister's and mine friends were,,also we had real conversations at the dinner table..I know all my son's friends.But now in age of social media i understand how hard it is to keep with your teen,but we as parents have to, we dont have a choice!!

I'm glad we can at least agree on some things. The World Wide Web just had it's 25th year anniversary and the founder addressed an event in Europe saying that social media has really turned out to be far more damaging than he had ever imagined it could be. I blame a lot of that on commerce for optimizing the online experience for sales rather than the benefits of communication and sharing. The more commerce can isolate you the better they can profile your buying patterns. I applaud your resolve to enforce the family network in the face of social media.

proud republican wrote:

Also you need to talk to your kids about bullying...We all been bullied at some point of our lives and its not fun!! i know i have been there..So teach your kids to stand up to bullies and protect those kids that cant protect themselves...

Also a good idea.

proud republican wrote:

Maybe then all this horrible nightmare will go away..Its up to us, adults to do something about it, and let kids study, go to school without being afraid of not coming home....I bet you most of these kids on TV probably dont know anything about the world..I bet they cant tell you how many continents there are, or where Uganda is, but they sure do know how to yell and call people names on TV...Its a shame that us grown ups didnt teach them better...

I like what you are suggesting about doing our part as adults and I think it can make a difference... certainly worthwhile. But... I seriously doubt it will make the nightmare go away. Honestly, it's just not enough... it's like preparing for amputation with an aspirin. I think better upbringing can help, but I think regulating weapons designed for maximum killing will help a lot more. I think you also need to consider the fact that the world isn't the same as it was when we were "the way we used to be". Wealth is far more concentrated now than it's been in well over a generation, globalism has diminished sovereign power and our national resources have long passed their peaks. What this boils down too is that there will be an increasing rate of disenfranchised people and under that increasing rate, there will be another increasing rate ...of people loosing their cookies.

Given our current bearing, we are heading toward conditions that will encourage more desperation and more crime - not less.

proud republican wrote:

So Congress this is your wake up call !!Do your job, and dont expect kids do yours!!!

Mar 16, 2018 14:48:42   #
Singularity wrote:
I find you irritating. And I know its intentional on your part. As you expect, it impairs my desire to care enough about you to give a shit and I find constipation stifling to my creativity.

If you wish to persist in remaining so pissy, I shall probably seek greener pastures and nicer playmates.

LOL - You're doing fine. As I'm sure you know, there's an abundance of sheep on this site that get pissed off at anyone who isn't following the flock and if you present a solid argument they will turn it into an irrelevant and emotional torrent of outrage and insult, but don't let that deter you.

There are also a number of us with a little more intellectual freedom that can understand and appreciate your view. ;)
Mar 16, 2018 14:30:24   #
Stephen Hawking was an amazing scientist. His passing is a great loss in the world of science and advanced thinking. In reading the comments on this thread it seems most people have respect for him as a scientist but many disagree with his views on God, which is fine but I see a lot of people insisting that he "hated" God. So here's a quote where he calmly explains his view...

“God is the name people give to the reason we are here,” he said. “But I think that reason is the laws of physics rather than someone with whom one can have a personal relationship. An impersonal God.”

You can't "hate" an impersonal God.

Throughout human history, God has taken many forms, the Christian form is only one of thousands, but many Christians insist THEIR version is the real one (*sigh*) and when someone has a different idea they are immediately accused of "hating God". Hawkings didn't hate God. Like Einstein and many other men of science, God did have a place in his views - it just didn't fit in with the version that Christians think everyone should be forced to follow.

For all we really know, Stephen Hawking is in some after-life where he arranged for a healthy body and a nice cloud to sit on, a fair distance from where God is hurling Christian Evangelists to Hell for following false prophets. ;)
Mar 16, 2018 14:05:27   #
eagleye13 wrote:
"I barely even know who he is. Some guy with money, apparently a Democrat" - sUp

Do you think I give a crap if you don't know much about Soros or care?

Well, if your constant streaming of anti-Soros material is any indication, yes, I do. LOL

eagleye13 wrote:

Should we be surprised?
No; but thank you for your interest, sUp.

There's a lot to stay current on these days eagle, I can't stay abreast of the news AND all the conspiracy theories and when you posts these endless parades of links, it's easy to loose interest. If Soros is SO bad that I should be paying attention I suggest you skip the landfill for a change and present a more focused argument. Find the one thing he's doing that poses the greatest threat to our democracy and we can start there. OK?
Mar 16, 2018 13:50:22   #
mactheknife wrote:
You're the one who claims no law was broken in hiring illegal aliens. You look it up.

Look, mac - if someone says NO law was broken what exactly are you expecting them to look up? What if I said it's illegal to eat carrots? Are you going to look for the law that says it's okay to eat carrots to prove that I'm wrong? LOL - You really don't think things through, do you?

YOU are the one that is claiming they DID break the law. Remember that? You said... "an illegal alien was just hired by a government agency in California. That is a crime." ...and THAT my little friend, is a claim that there *IS* a law against hiring that alien, which means you should be able to FIND that law. See how that works? But you can't find the law to back that up can you? So what's the problem? Is it too hard or look for? Are you just another one of those bigots that don't care if there really is a law or not and calling them criminals is just your style of hatred?

Just so you know, I *did* look for the laws that support the claim made by the little weasel, Jeff Sessions... because unlike you, I don't actually say things without verifying them first. So when I say there is no federal law that conflicts with the California sanctuary laws, I'm not just making that up, it's a statement based on my own efforts to find such a law and the empty results of that search. Now there are a LOT of laws out there, so I reserve the possibility that I could be wrong. Part of the reason why I'm provoking you folks is for the off-chance that maybe one of you HAVE found such a law that maybe I missed. I would think anyone of you would LOVE to prove me wrong. So I'm giving you that chance. :)

So far, NONE of you have been able to find a single federal law, constitutional law or treaty signed under the authority of the United States that conflicts with the sanctuary laws in California. Pair that with the strong claims made by all of you that California is breaking "the law" and well it really exposes the degree of hatred you have for people you don't even know and your willingness to accuse people of things you can't prove.

mactheknife wrote:

I'm not angry at people like you, just disappointed.

Well, based on what I know about you so far, I hope to continue "disappointing" you. ;) Sorry, mac - being a bigot just isn't my thing.
Mar 16, 2018 13:09:55   #
byronglimish wrote:
Modern day Nazis are Antifa punks..

No, modern day Nazis are the white supremacists that actually CALL themselves Nazis, run around with swastikas and vote for Trump. Antifa is a backlash of young disorganized punks that are willing to beat the crap out of the Nazis but lack the patience and organization to actually destroy them. We were hoping they would chill out a little and it looks like they have.
Mar 16, 2018 12:06:24   #
eagleye13 wrote:
sUp; Who are you branding as "Nazi leaders"?

I'm describing Sessions, in particular as a Nazi because of his history of nasty assaults on entire groups of innocent people, which the Nazis were famous for doing. But also, the entire Trump Administration has been flooding the nation with misinformation about these people while fanning the flames of hatred which the Nazis were also famous for. I could use other references too but the Nazis just happen to be the textbook example.

eagleye13 wrote:

Well my little Black Pot:

the black pot analogy only applies to people who are themselves guilty of what they accuse others of. I'm not a Nazi - we both know this.

eagleye13 wrote:

Soros, the Nazi collaborater in all his gory:


George Soros: Evil Zionist Puppet Master Exposed

10 Things You Didn't Know About George Soros

Yeah, I know you're obsessed with Soros. I really don't know why you keep waving that tired old flag. Soros isn't the inspiration for the left that you seem to think he is and if you notice, no one here actually responds when you regularly pull out the Soros dummy for a beating.

I've told you this many, many times. I don't give a rats ass about Soros. I barely even know who he is. Some guy with money, apparently a Democrat (which I am not)... and apparently got tangled up with Nazis during the occupation of his country when he was an adolescent.


None of that has ANYTHING to do with me or the discussion.
Mar 16, 2018 11:40:55   #
mactheknife wrote:
Nonsense, StaightUp, an illegal alien was just hired by a government agency in California. That is a crime. Go and look it up or consult a lawyer.

It's interesting that you say it's a crime but can't actually point to the law that makes it a crime. Instead, you tell ME to look it up. You don't even mention what kind of agency hired the alien. Not all agencies are held under the same laws. Wanna try again?

Here's a tip (for when you're arguing with someone who isn't stupid)... when you claim someone is breaking a law, it's a good idea to actually reference that law. Otherwise, you're just another angry guy making noise.

Maybe you can get Loki to help you - I've noticed that at least he has the ability to look up laws.
Mar 16, 2018 11:23:48   #
kankune wrote:
I agree! Any criminal that they have turned loose on the streets of innocent people, and committs a crime again (which you know they're going to) should be a held responsible for the crime they committed!

LOL - Apparently you and zilla have missed a lot of the discussion... It's been decided. Sessions has no case. Your Nazi leaders are going to need to actually legislate laws first before they can arrest people for breaking them. No one on this thread has been able to point to a single federal law that California is breaking (gee big surprise). I challenged them all and they came up with... nothing.

...'just noticed your comment - "(which you know they're going to do)"... That's kinda says a lot about you kankune. No innocent until proven guilty crap in your world, right? When people assume that other people they don't even know are bad people just based on their category (black, Mexican, Muslim, alien...) it's called prejudice.
Mar 15, 2018 18:50:50   #
eagleye13 wrote:
Of course. We are not about to write a book here to cover the subterfuge going on behind the scenes.
Trump is the only one elected in decades to go after some of it.
Hillary the bought Beast, would have finished off what was left of this Republic.

Now, this is where we see things different.

Yes, I think Hillary is part of the neoliberal centrist hub of American politics and she would have furthered the globalist agenda that's been driving U.S.Foreign policy since 1945. What we have to understand here is that the physical world has changed significantly since 1945. For the most part, the neoliberal centrist understand all this, Hillary included. Trump, is a wildcard. He was elected against all the odds on the back of a populist movement based entirely on frustration.

What is clear so far is that his East Coast real-estate world really doesn't link to any neoliberals of the calibre you would normally see at a Clinton Foundation event, much less a summit at Davos. If it did we would have seen it by now. So Trump might not be part of their club, but that doesn't mean he's in any position to do anything about them. Trump's "attack" on the neoliberals is mostly wishful thinking ...and a LOT of posturing on Trump's part. ;)
Mar 15, 2018 18:01:00   #
lindajoy wrote:
Federal law supersedes state law, period.

We all got the "period" part linda... we understand the rule... The part I'm trying to get people to see is... WHAT federal law? It's like you're a cop giving a driver a citation for "something" and when the driver asks what "something" means, the cop gets in his face and says "I am the LAW! Period!"... lol ..."You did SOMETHING!"... lol - seriously, though. It's the same thing. To my knowledge, neither Trump nor Sessions has mentioned a single federal law and so far I've not seen anyone here mention a single federal law in conflict with California's sanctuary law. Not one. Why?

It doesn't matter if you "ARE THE LAW"... You still need an actual law for someone to actually break it and until that happens the supremacy clause is irrelevant.

lindajoy wrote:

For the Legislature of this state and its governor to determine otherwise and enact the "sanctuary state" bill is based on the exact same principles that South used back in the 1860s...

Defiance? Yeah, I guess you could say that

Probably not the same thing though, the union wasn't quite as dependent on the South in 1860 as it is on California today. This is why Trump hates us so much. He knows he can't control us. Trust me, Trump could do a lot better for you folks if he just stopped thinking about California. Who knows - maybe we'll agree to cooperate and keep the scary aliens out of Arizona, Nevada and Oregon, would that work?
Mar 15, 2018 17:38:09   #
eagleye13 wrote:
Here is the problem as I see it. Democrats pretend to care about the needy. The hypocrisy is just so blatent.

There's a spectrum eagle - just like there is on the Republican side. Toward that moderate "Clinton/Bush" center, corporate power is global, in fact it's hegemonic, guaranteed by the Supremacy Clause that keeps popping up on this thread. "This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land;
This is precisely the law that made dubby Bush impeachable when he broke with the U.N. and invaded Iraq, but more to the point - incorporated investment groups (you call them "banksters") are signing contracts with sovereign governments that bind these nations to economic obligations TO the corporations.

eagleye13 wrote:

A lot of Republicans fall for the MIC "War on Terrorism" BS, when it is the CFR elitists that set this up.

Yes. A lot Democrats fall for it to.

eagleye13 wrote:

BTW; the Dems pretend to fight this BS also.

The MIC and the "war on terrorism" BS is almost entirely a matter of foreign policy. Remember what I said about foreign policy and partisan politics? I call it the "partisan zero" because there *IS* no partisan politics in foreign policy.

eagleye13 wrote:

The root of the "problem" is Political Zionists and their dupes running the show. Big Money keeps this scam in tact.

What do you mean by "Political Zionists"?
Big Money - yes, I see that. It's plutocracy, dude. ...and there's no partisan politics in plutocracy either. Totally different game at that level.

eagleye13 wrote:

It comes down to the D's & R's that are bought by the CFR/TC/Bilderberg Group that fight for the spoils of being in power.

Ugh! You ALWAYS do this to me!

Seriously though - you DO realize that they are only examples of the problem, right?
Mar 15, 2018 15:35:01   #
byronglimish wrote:
Well then, you are where, you should fuss, no muss..

yup - I'm pretty happy here in California. :)

byronglimish wrote:

just let the illegal aliens do as they please

Well, thanks for the suggestion but we're all about equality here which means we expect EVERYONE... citizens AND aliens to abide by the same set of rules. Just because I oppose discriminatory laws doesn't mean I advocate lawlessness.

byronglimish wrote:

and one day it may please one, to harm you or yours..

You can say the same thing about U.S. citizens which commit the vast majority of violent crimes in the U.S. So, like I said, we expect EVERYONE to abide by the same set of rules. It doesn't matter if the belligerent is a citizen or an alien, if he breaks into my house he is breaking the law and in California I have the right to shoot him with my double-barrel 12-gauge. Besides, the possibility of harm is ALWAYS there byron and the more free a society is the more dangerous it will be. Since my family values freedom, we've come to accept the danger that also comes with it. So, I guess trying to SCARE me into shutting out the immigrants will be about as effective as your pointless flak about homosexuals.

byronglimish wrote:

but one thing is for sure..after the wetbacks finish their chores in your neighborhood..they go back to the shithole neighborhoods, where you sun worshiper Progs.. don't have to look at them until their next shift..


byronglimish wrote:

How many illegal aliens have you had over for dinner?

Oh, I see... 'gonna try shame now ;) ...or maybe hypocrisy, is that the angle? LOL

Like most people, I don't just invite strangers over for dinner. It really doesn't matter if they are aliens or citizens, I have to get to know you before I invite you over. That being said, good luck trying to find the double standard in a personal policy where the only discrimination is whether I know you or not. ;)
Mar 15, 2018 14:40:39   #
eagleye13 wrote:
sUp; what's up?!
We having fun today?

Hey eagle... you know I always have fun doing this. ;)

eagleye13 wrote:

What happens when the worker Bee population can no longer feed the growing "needy" population?

Simple. The needy population suffers. But needy populations have ALWAYS been around eagle... People get sick, people get disabled, people get old - we have thousands of years of history to see what happens when societies loose their capacity to support the needy and from what I can tell it's always a matter of will rather than actual capacity.

At present our society has more than enough capacity to support our needy population, we just don't have the will. Part of the problem is that we're disenfranchised and as such we just don't care about each other anymore and since we are probably (aside from maybe North Korea) the most compliant culture in the modern world (as in "baaa, baaa") it's easy for the plutocracy to convince Americans that we should abandon the needy and instead devote our capacity to their personal revenue streams under the guise of things like national defense.

In simple terms, there is no profit to be made in helping old people or broken people, but there is a ton of profit to be made from war and corporate scams.

When the American people wake up and realize they are basically being controlled and harvested by the plutocracy like crops, there might be a revolt and our society might get some of it's humanity back. It would be a shame of this didn't happen until after all the white people are old and needy and the worker bees are all brown.
Mar 15, 2018 13:59:02   #
byronglimish wrote:
Must have hit a soft spot on the flatlander truth..

Why? Because I can tell the difference between local pride and the deeper hatred issues you seem to have?

byronglimish wrote:

Why are you male Progs always infatuated with other men asses??

Well, if you weren't so gay, you would know what a "stick up the ass" is a reference to an attitude not an actual dildo or whatever it is you're imagining.

byronglimish wrote:

It's not a wonder that you are most comfortable in the "Homosexual State of Californication"..and wise people who are able, are leaving the queer State too..but it does sound appropriate for you and yours..'party on, pee wee'..

So is it just your basic lack of understanding about the issues that prompt you to make irrelevant comments? If you're trying to insult me with your homosexual references it won't work. I'm secure enough in my sexuality not to be threatened by it and honestly, homosexuals don't bother me. Why would they? Also, just because so many homosexuals in uptight regions like rural Oregon are closet-cases doesn't mean they don't exist. If anything, I admire the culture in which homosexuals are free to be themselves.
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 ... 351 next>>
Home | Latest Digest | Back to Top | All Sections
Contact us | Privacy policy | Terms of use - Forum
Copyright 2012-2018 IDF International Technologies, Inc.