Rocket Scientist
Member
He pretends to be a conservative that looks at the facts, yet continues making statements like these. Right.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
PoliGAF 2013 |OT1| Never mind, Wheeeeeeeeeeeeeeee
- Thread starter ClovingWestbrook
- Start date
- Status
I don't really see the point in passing a bill when the main weapon deaths are from handguns, not assault rifles. It's like putting a bandaid on your foot when you have a cut on your finger.
The only thing I have in common is guns, so I feel rather insulted.
Doesn't the term 'disarmament' typically refer to thinks like eliminating nuclear arms and not gun control laws? An AWB is in no way a form of disarmament of American citizens.
I know, I'm disappointed too, I get all my political talking points from image macros otherwise.
This is pretty significant, I think. Obama for America has reorganized and is now an advocacy group called "Organizing for Action."
From Political Wire:
It will function separate from the DNC entirely and use the Obama campaign's enormous amounts of data to organize people and support his second term agenda.
From Political Wire:
It will function separate from the DNC entirely and use the Obama campaign's enormous amounts of data to organize people and support his second term agenda.
Fenderputty
Banned
This has nothing to do with what I said. Your description of added restictions on the types of weapons being owned isn't even close to a disarmament. You're speaking in hyperbole.
As I posted about this a little bit ago, the point is that urban gun violence and mass shootings are different problems. Mass shootings involve different people shooting different guns at different other people for different reasons than everyday gun violence. We just had a pretty bad mass shooting, so it shouldn't be surprising that people want to do something about mass shootings. You might argue that this doesn't solve the problem of urban gun violence, but it's not like we were working hard on that problem before, so why would there be surprise that we're not working on it now? Honestly, if you really want to solve urban gun violence, we can do it in one step: expand welfare. (Maybe two steps, because you want to put money in schools too.)
I think you're missing the elephant in the room: the Southern strategy, yet again. A reactionary strategy is an anti-public education strategy, and so is any strategy that seeks to maintain a permanent underclass. People didn't have this attitude about public education when schools were segregated! Or rather, they didn't have this attitude about white public education. But now that their tax dollars are paying to educate people of color, they'd just as soon take them out and establish private schools -- that people of color, by and large, can't attend. Part of that process is reviling public schools and public school teachers to make it easier to cut funding for them.
Glad to see they've wizened up, they should have done it a lot sooner.
Tamanon,
Long time no see! Will you join Michelle and I for dinner? It'll be at the usual place.
Thanks,
Barack
YOUR PAYMENT INFO HAS BEEN SAVED, CLICK THE LINK BELOW TO DONATE YOUR SUGGESTED AMOUNT OF $220 TO ENTER
--
I wonder how Obama's massive network will benefit or impact the Democratic nomination or support the nominee in 2016, if at all.
GOP eyes new election laws
He's baaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaack...
Now he can kindly fuck off again. As well as the whole GOP. Wouldn't this essential give power to the gerrymandered house districts and not the state as a whole?
He's baaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaack...
Now he can kindly fuck off again. As well as the whole GOP. Wouldn't this essential give power to the gerrymandered house districts and not the state as a whole?
Fenderputty
Banned
Yes.
Are they going to keep him around this cycle? I don't understand why they'd kick Steele out after their huge wins in 2010 and keep this loser around after getting pummeled.
While I don't mind this, I know conservatives are going to hate this. They already complain about "useless people feeding on the system, on my tax dollars. get a job you bum". Though publicly they don't say it like that, that's what they mean if you speak to them about it.
As an aside, there's quite a few people on welfare who act entitled and it's very annoying. This is anecdotal.
I wish they'd increase funding for schools and decrease military funding. I wish we'd stop being so expansionist as of late, in terms of trying to get our influence into the middle east and spend it on ourselves instead. I'd really like to see 10 students per teacher, even in the bigger schools. Around 10 students is about the max for one teacher with no TA where they can help students individually during classtime, as well as after class.
It's the new talking point from the right.
My guess is that it tested better than "assault rifle ban", same as "pro life" tested better than "anti abortion".
And generally, I think we should totally build our policies to accommodate people who are preparing to kill our troops.
speculawyer
Member
They are seriously considering adjusting the rules so they can win with a minority of the votes. The GOP hates democracy. Do they realize that they will ultimately implode if they go down that path?
They approve of apartheid in Israel, why not bring it here?
If there is any justice it will explode in their faces.
Preibus tricked Steel into losing his job using his powers from the 14th dimension, a void that Preibus turned into a living hellscape using his reality altering powers. So far the GOP has been unable to trick him into saying his name backwards in order to banish him back to the void from whence he came.
I love the Onion.
ClovingWestbrook
Banned
I knew you'd like that.
So much for the big talk. Hopefully the House follows.
But PoliGAF told me Obama was a secret Republican who would cave at first chance.
ClovingWestbrook
Banned
It entertains me, honestly. The idiots will die out... they always do.
Fixed and it's obviously Malia and Sasha who are making the decisions. Right PD?
Rocket Scientist
Member
Is this where I link to an old post of mine where I said this was going to be a big thing for the 2nd term? HowdoesIPoligaf.gif
Oh right, you're not a conservative who doesn't look at the facts, you're just a guns rights advocate who doesn't look at the facts.
You don't need to play a hand perfectly if your opponents has a 7, a 2, a joker and rules for draw and stud poker.
ClovingWestbrook
Banned
Yes... well, if sanity means short debt limit increases instead of a one year or more increase...
Wall Street is going to lose a lot of money even on a short default/shutdown.
Money talks.
Fenderputty
Banned
I hear stories like this and it makes me happy I've never joined.
ClovingWestbrook
Banned
Cornyn, Ryan, Koch bro's... yea, the GOP lost this battle.
Rocket Scientist
Member
Obama caving again smh.
If they assure people that we absolutely won't default, then it doesn't matter. I mean, I guess it's silly, but logically there isn't much of a difference.
Yep, that's why I wasn't terribly worried about it.
That's a veiled statement?
Do they need 2/3 votes or just a simple majority to change voting laws? I don't know if they have filibusters in state senates. What are the odds of this? I still think it is low right now but if they lose another presidential election.....
Messing with election law is like wiring your house, if you try and do it odds are you'll get shocked. The push back if they do this will be bigger than when they were trying to get voter ID laws on the books.
It's more than that, in the long term, a strategy which is built around winning with the minority of the votes is a losing one, pretty much by definition.
If you don't laugh at our political process and discourse you will go insane, so it's best to approach things like that lightly.
Doc Holliday
SPOILER: Columbus finds America
I just heard David gregory say the dumbest shit on Morning Joe
paraphrasing:
At some point Obama needs to do something about entitlements in order for this economy to be unleashed.
WTF!?|!|
paraphrasing:
At some point Obama needs to do something about entitlements in order for this economy to be unleashed.
WTF!?|!|
The Librarian
Banned
OKAY. So if the military won't fire on US citizens, and even if they do, they have planes that can drop bombs and a whole other assortment of fancy equipment that makes owning a gun useless, why do people need guns? What "right" is there? Do you need to own a gun just to have it? Why do people feel the need to own something designed to kill other people?
I don't get it.
I don't get it.
Simple. By reducing the ability of a population to spend, retire, be healthy or be educated, you massively increase the momentum of an economy.
During election season, I'd hide most of the people who made irritating political posts. Afterwards, I added them back and since then, only my father-in-law has made some remark I glazed over, I just know it had the word Obama in it.
Although I have many conservative relatives and some friends, none of them talk about guns much save for one who is not conservative in general.
He is a gun advocate, but he is in favor of the type of control that involves psychological tests and tiers for what they can get. However, he is on "Only Important" updates because 99% of his posts are just picture shares.
Rocket Scientist
Member
Huh, are you arguing against any and all gun ownership?
Because some people feel like they can't defend themselves without guns.
Back home we used to call them pussies, but nothing demystifies guns like mandatory military service.
You don't recognize self defense as a legitimate reason to want to own and keep firearms legal?
Frank the Great
Banned
The second you engage a conservative in a hypothetical argument about fighting against an imaginary tyrant, you've already lost because you are arguing against a strawman. Nobody is proposing confiscating guns, or making gun ownership illegal.
Instead, the argument is about where to draw the line. For instance, nobody believes citizens have the right to own tanks, jets, rocket propelled grenades, etc. If you get the conservative to follow his logic consistently to the conclusion that citizens ARE entitled to tanks and jets (to be able to fight against the military), then you have won the argument by making him look ridiculous. If you get him to admit that the only real issue is line-drawing, then you have elevated the discussion and can have a sane discussion without all the tyrant talk.
As a general matter, I've noticed that reductio ad absurdum is a great technique to use against conservatives, because they like portray complicated issues as having simple solutions usually stemming from emotions. These kinds of emotional views are easily taken to the extreme. The argument technique does not completely defeat the conservative, it just gets them to argue better. For instance, if someone says "government should stay out of private industry" it is easy to just list all the horrible consequences that would result (ie. no inspection of food or drugs, no licensing of doctors, tolls on every road, no government contracts for private companies, etc.). This shifts the conversation into the more nuanced and liberal-friendly "how MUCH government should be involved in private industry?" or "how MUCH regulation is necessary?"
Almost all of policy-making is just finding the right way to draw lines between competing interests. Conservatives hate portraying issues that way. As a side note, I'm obviously only talking about extreme conservatives. There are plenty who you can past the absurdum argument and go straight to a reasonable discussion. I've noticed the gun issue makes them all kind of nuts though.
From conversations held long ago among friends:
(1) Hunting, keeping deer population in check
(2) Protection in case someone breaks into a house
Rocket Scientist
Member
Dutch news is calling out the Republicans' plan to change voting in blue states as bullshit. I'm assuming other countries and news sources are calling it what it is too. If it's already hitting international news, I can't imagine they're not going to get a crazy amount of backlash at home too.
- Status