jay-are

It's a paradox. It is great to have the freedom to criticize, but we should recognize that it doesn't make sense to criticize in a way that causes all of us to have to sacrifice some freedom to appease complainers. We can disagree, but we have to allow disagreement. We cannot disagree and then battle to silence those who disagree.

Facists will lull you into a false sense of security too. We on the right believe we are better off keeping ourselves secure, rather than sacrificing freedom to depend on the state to secure us.

Searching Loc: Rural Southwest VA

I can't disagree with you here.

saltwind 78 Loc: Murrells Inlet, South Carolina

I can't believe that the real truth is something that we all can believe in. All of us can't believe in the same thing! The truth is difficult to get. Some of us can't even believe in proven scientific law. To get everybody to believe in the same political and/or religious truth just ain't gonna happen. All we can ever hope for is a mutual respect for each others beliefs and opinions.

straightUp Loc: California

Floyd - you touch on some very interesting points. First, to answer the title question. I am here to for several reasons.

1. To learn. Sometimes on forums like this you can find someone with a perspective you haven't thought of before. 'Gotta say, that doesn't happen often on THIS site, which leads me to my second reason.

2. To practice conveying my ideas to closed minded people or people with limited comprehension skills. Of course it's easier to communicate with educated people, but the problem with that is that they usually already know what I am trying to say. The real challenge is a dialog with a more "typical" folks who are already brainwashed by the simple-minded antics of their cultural influences. Many times, their responses to my posts are so far removed from any kind of reality that I can sit for minutes just trying to figure out where to even start.

3. To draft op-eds that I post on my various sites and sometimes more widely read publications. It's always a good idea to test ideas in a place where people are bound to have issues with your ideas. Again, I find other sites more useful for flushing out errors in my work, but this site is loaded with members that take an instance dislike to my ideas, so again there's that challenge - to actually get them to read it.

I wanted to comment on your point about... "Our life's have been alike in more ways that they differ."

This is a 5-star observation! I wish more people would see this. The way liberals and conservatives typically view each other for instance... You would think they're from different planets, but the reality is, they have far more in common than they think.

If I could make one simple idea be understood by members of this forum it would be that EVERYONE wants life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness and the #1 force that drives the denial of these things isn't the corporation, nor is it government, nor political party, nor is it gay people, black people, Muslims or socialists. The #1 threat to our life, liberty and pursuit of happiness is the place money has taken as the most important thing in America. More important than people. Even more important than God, which is saying a lot for a nation with such puritan influences.

straightUp Loc: California

Well stated.


Actually, facists are more famous for creating a feeling of insecurity, usually through a developed sense of nationalism where all outside influences (foreigners and immigrants) are mistrusted. Facism is after all, a form of exclusion, which is why it's considered a right-wing extremity.


Then why are so many on the right depending on the military to defend us? The military *IS* the state, is it not?

jay-are

I don't think so many on the right are depending on the military to defend us. I think the right is fighting tooth and nail to protect our second amendment right to bear arms in order to defend ourselves, against the military, if need be.

The right believes in a strong military to protect the USA from foreign attackers. The idea is to protect the free nation that was founded. That is protecting the freedom, not being tyrannized by the military.

lpnmajor Loc: Arkansas

We get so caught up with "correcting" one another that the discussion quickly gets derailed into attack/defense. No one is totally right and no one is totally wrong. Those who refuse to accept that fact will always try to interrupt those who do, simply because deep down they know their behavior is wrong.
We have come to associate "compromise" with "defeat". Who started that trend? The politicians did, in an attempt to create further divide between the parties, as a way of getting independent votes which are still the "king maker" vote. The rest of us fell for it as well because we didn't know better. Now we do so there's no excuse for continuing the charade. Let the politicians play their games, WE are here to get beyond that and see if there is a way we can influence what goes on.
Everyone's view has value as no one person can "see" everything. Combining many different views gives a more accurate picture of things. Trying to correct someone else's view is a waste of time and arrogant to boot. How can I know what you see? You have to tell me and I have to accept that and compare it to my own. I can then adjust my own view, if I need to, or not.

jay-are

You wrote: We have come to associate "compromise" with "defeat".

Let's see, we want to repeal Obamacare. When we compromise with the Democrats, we still have Obamacare. That is defeat in my view. If you don't accomplish the goal, you are defeated.

straightUp Loc: California

I respect that notion and as a gun owner myself I have always stood by the 2nd Amendment for that very reason. You would probably be surprised to know how many liberals actually agree. The misunderstanding seems to spring out from the gap between the 2nd Amendment and the NRA. The 2nd Amendment says we have the right to bear arms. It doesn't say we have a right to buy and sell any kind of gun we want without any kind of control. Only the the NRA is saying that. The reason why I disagree with the NRA is because I think the innocent lives lost every year to idiots and crazies with easy access to highly damaging weapons validates the effort to try and curb the casualties by introducing "reasonable" limits while still allowing citizens the right to defend their homes.

Neither my Colt .44 or my 12 gauge Winchester are capable of killing a classroom of students within a few seconds, but it's enough for me to defend my home against intrusion.

So... you're probably going to ask about the point of the 2nd Amendment. How can I defend myself from the military if it comes to that, with a shotgun and a pistol? Or what about the slippery slope? Once gun control is established can it be expanded? What if the government later decides I can't even keep the low impact guns that I have? Well, if the government is going to do that at all, the gun control that Democrats are pushing certainly isn't a prerequisite.

It took me a while to figure this one out, but I've come to the realization that in all seriousness I could spend my entire life savings on an arsenal of military-grade weapons and it STILL wouldn't be enough. That's because the days of being able to defend your liberties with a rifle disappeared almost 100 years ago. Since then we have become much more integrated with and dependent upon a commercial, economic system. All anyone with the power needs to do is cut you off and you can stand in the snow for days without food or water with your guns waiting for an army that will never arrive... and loose just the same. Or if they're THAT worried about you, then they can send in a drone and kill you before you even know it. It won't matter how many guns you have.

This isn't the 19th century anymore and it seems those on the right have a real hard time realizing this, especially the NRA.

saltwind 78 Loc: Murrells Inlet, South Carolina

The way to protect freedom isn't gun ownership. The way to protect freedom is vigilance, education, and making your voice heard. My .357 isn't going to do a hell of a lot against a bunch of Abrams tanks, writing my representatives in state and federal government is far more important. Education is a real problem in the past few decades. Education in math, science, and technology is where all the effort is going. As a retired history and government teacher, I am very concerned that these subjects have taken a back seat. I don't know how many times students have asked me why we even need to study history and government.

Floyd Brown Loc: Milwaukee WI

Your quote says it all

"The #1 threat to our life, liberty and pursuit of happiness is the place money has taken as the most important thing in America. More important than people."

To many on this site fail to see just who is causing the most problems in that area.



This is where the heart of our problems are.

Floyd Brown Loc: Milwaukee WI

Having more & bigger weapons is not going to save the world for Us.

If we are to have a safe & secure place to live we will only have it if we can bring our self to trust each other

Floyd Brown Loc: Milwaukee WI

The state of health care in the US is in bad shape.

Good, bad or indifferent Obamacare is an attempt to do something towards those ends.

It is easy to be against Obamacare but what or how much would you pay or do for better health care. I don't need you answer I just what you to think about it.
do

jay-are

All that sounds good, but it is all rationalization to convince yourself of a lie. The lie is that all the Democrats are suggesting is reasonable restrictions.

The reality is that there is no need for reasonable restrictions, because the guns are not the problem. The violence is caused by the people not the guns. Once you get that truth firmly planted in your understanding, you realize that what the Democrats really want is for no one to have guns other than authorities. You can deny it all you want, and you will be lying to yourself and me.

That is clearly unconstitutional, and the Democrat's gun control needs to be opposed because of that reason alone. It doesn't matter anything about all the different kinds of arms. The fact is that the Democrats do not want citizens to bear arms and we established a protection from that desire in the Bill of Rights.

I don't need an automatic weapon that can fire 200 rounds per minute to protect my property from an animal, or a burglar, but I have the right to own it if I want, and I may need it to protect myself from the military, or a foreign invader. I don't have the right to commit a crime with it, but I do have the right to own it. The crime can be punished. The right of ownership must be preserved.

If that right is not protected, the Bill of Rights is of no use.

Floyd Brown Loc: Milwaukee WI

Rest easy I will not put you in front of a gun to get my way.

If I can not reason with words. I will trust that you trust in me to not seek to harm you. Yes I will give you the benefit of doubt.

Now we would really be getting some where if you could see that giving the benefit of doubt to others is the basis for living together.