U.S. Politics - Page 621 - CyclingNews Forum

Go Back   CyclingNews Forum > Cafe > General

General Grab a short black and come join in the non-cycling discussion. Favourite books, movies, holiday destinations, other sports - chat about it all in the cafe.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #6201  
Old 01-10-13, 22:14
VeloCity's Avatar
VeloCity VeloCity is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 3,096
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Scott SoCal View Post
Even more unintended consequences.

http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/m...e-decline.html

Quote:
PPP's newest national poll finds that the NRA's image has declined over the last three weeks following Wayne LaPierre's controversial press conference the week before Christmas. The NRA now has a negative favorability rating, with 42% of voters seeing it positively while 45% have an unfavorable view. That represents a 10 point net decline in the NRA's favorability from the week before the press conference
Added value:

Quote:
Congress emerged from the fiscal cliff debate with a 7% approval rating, with 81% of voters disapproving of it. But the two parties aren't going in for equal blame. While the Democrats in Congress aren't popular (-12 at 38/50) their approval rating is a net 48 points better than their Republican counterparts (-60 at 15/75).
Reply With Quote
  #6202  
Old 01-10-13, 22:19
patricknd's Avatar
patricknd patricknd is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: houston texas
Posts: 1,656
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hugh Januss View Post
We do seem to have more than our share of nutbars. Sometimes I think we should just give 'em all Texas, to run their own little country in, and see how that works out. They'd probably just keep invading Louisiana though, because they wanted crawdads.
we don't need 'em, and besides, i wouldn't want you to have to relocate
Reply With Quote
  #6203  
Old 01-10-13, 22:22
Hugh Januss's Avatar
Hugh Januss Hugh Januss is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: socal
Posts: 5,891
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by patricknd View Post
we don't need 'em, and besides, i wouldn't want you to have to relocate
Don't need 'em because you have enough of them already, you mean?
__________________
"Science flies us to the moon. Religion flies us into buildings."

Proud member of the Clinic 1200
Reply With Quote
  #6204  
Old 01-10-13, 22:29
patricknd's Avatar
patricknd patricknd is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: houston texas
Posts: 1,656
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hugh Januss View Post
Don't need 'em because you have enough of them already, you mean?
no, he moved
Reply With Quote
  #6205  
Old 01-10-13, 22:38
Scott SoCal's Avatar
Scott SoCal Scott SoCal is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Southern California
Posts: 4,152
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hugh Januss View Post
And here I always thought that advocating an armed uprising against your own country's government was treason.
You might want to read up on the genesis behind the second amendment and modern interpretations.

Quote:
But it may be correctly inferred that the Framers foresaw that in extreme circumstances armed citizens might need to rise up against tyranny. Such a drastic situation raises key questions about the Second Amendment: if despotic leaders emerge and the Constitution's design is nefariously compromised, [75] does the Second Amendment still provide a realistic means by which to resist tyranny? Can armed civilians, either as part of a well regulated militia or as individuals formed into ad hoc militias, still check the power of a tyrannical standing army?

This might be a good jumping off point;

http://www.saf.org/LawReviews/Dunlap1.htm
__________________
Instigating profanity laced tirades since 2009
Reply With Quote
  #6206  
Old 01-10-13, 22:42
Scott SoCal's Avatar
Scott SoCal Scott SoCal is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Southern California
Posts: 4,152
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by VeloCity View Post
Didn't you just call him a nutter?

And what "constitutional rights", exactly? No one is taking his guns away from him, the only thing that might be done is restrict the sales of certain types of weapons and ammunition. And I seem to remember that Obamacare was in fact deemed constitutional.

So really he's calling for the violent overthrow of a legally-elected government just because he doesn't like their policies. There's a word for that.

Treason (noun \ˈtrē-zən\): the offense of attempting by overt acts to overthrow the government of the state to which the offender owes allegiance or to kill or personally injure the sovereign or the sovereign's family.

Pretty close, anyway. These are your folks, Scott. Deal with the consequences.
Hey man, you think it's treason then as a citizen, you have the power to go and arrest him. Have at it.

Quote:
Didn't you just call him a nutter?
Sure did. I don't agree with him.

If you are going to prosecute every stupid thing said publicly then you are going to be extremely busy.

Again, you picked the fight.
__________________
Instigating profanity laced tirades since 2009
Reply With Quote
  #6207  
Old 01-10-13, 22:49
Scott SoCal's Avatar
Scott SoCal Scott SoCal is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Southern California
Posts: 4,152
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by VeloCity View Post
Executive Orders (as of today):

Obama - 147
GW Bush - 291
Clinton - 363
GH Bush - 165
Reagan - 380

If Obama's ruling by executive fiat then GW Bush and Ronald Reagan were outright dictators.
You do realize your boy has been in office not even 1 full term, right?

How many of those executive orders by other Presidents dealt with potentially striking down parts of the constitution?

Quote:
"The President is going to act, there are executive orders, executive action that can be taken. We haven't decided what that is yet. But we're compiling it all with the help of the Attorney General and all the rest of the cabinet members as well as legislative action, we believe is required," said Biden.
How should this be interpreted?
__________________
Instigating profanity laced tirades since 2009
Reply With Quote
  #6208  
Old 01-10-13, 22:52
Scott SoCal's Avatar
Scott SoCal Scott SoCal is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Southern California
Posts: 4,152
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by VeloCity View Post
Even more unintended consequences.

http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/m...e-decline.html



Added value:
So that poll explains why the NRA's membership is ballooning.
__________________
Instigating profanity laced tirades since 2009
Reply With Quote
  #6209  
Old 01-10-13, 23:05
Hugh Januss's Avatar
Hugh Januss Hugh Januss is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: socal
Posts: 5,891
Default

Quote:
“In 1986, the N.R.A.’s interpretation of the Second Amendment achieved new legal authority with the passage of the Firearms Owners Protection Act, which repealed parts of the 1968 Gun Control Act by invoking “the rights of citizens … to keep and bear arms under the Second Amendment.” This interpretation was supported by a growing body of scholarship, much of it funded by the N.R.A. According to the constitutional-law scholar Carl Bogus, at least sixteen of the twenty-seven law-review articles published between 1970 and 1989 that were favorable to the N.R.A.’s interpretation of the Second Amendment were “written by lawyers who had been directly employed by or represented the N.R.A. or other gun-rights organizations.” In an interview, former Chief Justice Warren Burger said that the new interpretation of the Second Amendment was “one of the greatest pieces of fraud, I repeat the word ‘fraud,’ on the American public by special-interest groups that I have ever seen in my lifetime.”
I feel like my constitutional rights are being infringed upon by the NRA, and their deep pockets.
__________________
"Science flies us to the moon. Religion flies us into buildings."

Proud member of the Clinic 1200
Reply With Quote
  #6210  
Old 01-10-13, 23:07
Hugh Januss's Avatar
Hugh Januss Hugh Januss is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: socal
Posts: 5,891
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Scott SoCal View Post
So that poll explains why the NRA's membership is ballooning.
Yup, the nutbars are gathering together as everyone else realizes more and more just how whacked they are.
__________________
"Science flies us to the moon. Religion flies us into buildings."

Proud member of the Clinic 1200
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 06:53.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Copyright 2006 - 2009 Future Publishing Limited. All rights reserved. Future Publishing Limited is part of the Future plc group. Future Publishing Limited is a company registered in England and Wales with company registration number 2008885 whose registered office is at Beauford Court 30 Monmouth Street Bath, UK BA1 2BW England.