Poor Old Dear Leader

[churchmouse]

No - I don't - please read my post again - I said that he is partially culpable. To the degree he was lied to - I don't hold him at fault. To the degree that he did it out of hubris I condemn the action. NOTE that I said that "we will never know" what percentage was which. I did not hear Reagan use the term "bitter - clinging to their guns and religion". He reached out to people that he disagreed with. I don't recall hearing such derision from Bush I either. For all of his faults, I don't recall hearing such divisive rhetoric from GWB either. And to give credit where it's due - Clinton started out divisive - but had the good sense to extend the olive branch. And he had the political capital he needed when he needed it. Obama has shown no such inclination. If you repeatedly deride people and don't work with them, and screw them over at every turn - sooner or later they get wise, pick up their marbles and go home. As for Breitbart and Infowars, no, I don't read them (any more than I watch PMSNBC or any other right or left slanted crap). THEY are not the President. THEY don't determine policy. HE does. The other Presidents, both D and R, seem to have remembered to not crap in their nest. Obama - unlike the others has been incessantly flinging manure like a chimpanzee with a mental disorder.

Now that is the best.....+1 on the mentally dis-ordered Chimp

Rep gun will not fire.

 

[jrogers]

"This place is just as guilty of political tribalism as, say, DemocraticUnderground."


Total crap !

DU bans people incessantly.

Ha! A fair point.

It's still more an echo chamber than is healthy. I'd love to see more people drop the false Left/Right Progressive/Conservative dichotomy and actually discuss specific issues without the Culture Warrior foolishness. For example, I envision a world in which a homosexual, interracial couple can open carry Glock 18s at their wedding in Central Park. Sadly I don't think either will ever happen.

Now that is the best.....+1 on the mentally dis-ordered Chimp

I earnestly hope neither you nor AP has considered the subtext of calling our CiC a chimp. This is not the sort of thing that reflects well on the progun cause.

 

[Hotdoger]

It won't never happen in leftist controlled NYC, that's for sure.

 

[ArmedProgrammer]

Ha! A fair point.It's still more an echo chamber than is healthy. I'd love to see more people drop the false Left/Right Progressive/Conservative dichotomy and actually discuss specific issues without the Culture Warrior foolishness. For example, I envision a world in which a homosexual, interracial couple can open carry Glock 18s at their wedding in Central Park. Sadly I don't think either will ever happen.I earnestly hope neither you nor AP has considered the subtext of calling our CiC a chimp. This is not the sort of thing that reflects well on the progun cause.

Uhhmm.. dang... actually I hadn't. It was in reference to the "crap in their nest" issue - and chimps well known (and much joked about - ask Jet Girl) tendency to fling excrement. Any other possible subtext had not occurred to me. I would suggest that anyone who's first thought was the racist connotation should probably examine their own sensitivities. As I have said many times - I have ZERO problem with the color of Pres. Obama's skin - I have a LOT of issues with the content of his character. (To borrow a phrase from a person that I highly respect.).For the record, I would suggest that the fastest way to get to the Central Park you reference above would be a vote for Rand Paul or Ted Cruz. Are you prepared to go there? Of the current crop of leaders capable of attracting more than 5% of the vote - It isn't through Obama, it isn't through Chris Christie, it isn't through Santorum, and it dang sure isn't with Hillary... I can't think of a faster way to get to where you want to go. Are you ready to vote for liberty and go with a Paul/Cruz sort of ticket?

 

[jrogers]

Uhhmm.. dang... actually I hadn't. It was in reference to the "crap in their nest" issue - and chimps well known (and much joked about - ask Jet Girl) tendency to fling excrement. Any other possible subtext had not occurred to me. I would suggest that anyone who's first thought was the racist connotation should probably examine their own sensitivities. As I have said many times - I have ZERO problem with the color of Pres. Obama's skin - I have a LOT of issues with the content of his character. (To borrow a phrase from a person that I highly respect.).For the record, I would suggest that the fastest way to get to the Central Park you reference above would be a vote for Rand Paul or Ted Cruz. Are you prepared to go there? Of the current crop of leaders capable of attracting more than 5% of the vote - It isn't through Obama, it isn't through Chris Christie, it isn't through Santorum, and it dang sure isn't with Hillary... I can't think of a faster way to get to where you want to go. Are you ready to vote for liberty and go with a Paul/Cruz sort of ticket?

On this forum it seems pretty common to decry any claims of racism as ridiculous on their face, but I've seen and heard plenty of overtly racist posts and statements directed at our current CiC since his campaign began. While it's perfectly possible that you didn't have that intent, it's a legitimate reading that one unfamiliar with the Tale of Jet Girl is more likely to make. I don't mean to accuse or castigate you, it's just that sometimes gun owners are our own worst enemies. We've all seen the guys who go out and try to provoke a reaction while open carrying, thus making things difficult for others who just want to be comfortable while open carrying without making an unnecessary scene. I believe that every one of us should be an ambassador for gun rights.

None of which addresses your position on the PotUS' character, to which you are certainly entitled. While I disagree that he is nearly as awful a leader as some portray him here, I too take issue with quite a few of his decisions.

I'm not ready to vote for Paul or Cruz. I believe that they are both dangerous men who would do more harm than good to our nation. I do agree that none of the others you listed are a viable option either.

 

[joncon]

I used to think Carter was the worst president in my lifetime. An then along came Obama.

 

[ArmedProgrammer]

I'm not ready to vote for Paul or Cruz. I believe that they are both dangerous men who would do more harm than good to our nation. I do agree that none of the others you listed are a viable option either.

OK - who you are AGAINST is now clear. I personally fail to see what is so dangerous about Rand Paul. Smaller Government is the fast track to what you describe. So who are you FOR? It's great to be against this and against that - but it's all just mental masturbation - nothing is REALLY going to happen unless you actually have someone you SUPPORT. Voting for "None of the above" sounds great on paper - but it doesn't actually ACCOMPLISH anything - gridlock at best. I could see Johnson maybe being closer to your thinking?? If so - he has a long way to go to get the name recognition and message out.

 

[churchmouse]

Ha! A fair point.

It's still more an echo chamber than is healthy. I'd love to see more people drop the false Left/Right Progressive/Conservative dichotomy and actually discuss specific issues without the Culture Warrior foolishness. For example, I envision a world in which a homosexual, interracial couple can open carry Glock 18s at their wedding in Central Park. Sadly I don't think either will ever happen.

Point taken but seriously....it is how he acts at times.

You wish to see a country as you described...So do I.




I earnestly hope neither you nor AP has considered the subtext of calling our CiC a chimp. This is not the sort of thing that reflects well on the progun cause.

I wish we could say what is on our minds (within reason) and not have any one jump to a conclusion as to say Race or ethnic bias ^^^

Office held.....that office does not command respect unless actions and leadership are respectable.

Job or position held...same thing IMHO

I do agree with you to a point but really...he does act out sometimes. In my eyes he has acted more as the Coward in Chief. JMHO and nothing more.

 

[jrogers]

OK - who you are AGAINST is now clear. I personally fail to see what is so dangerous about Rand Paul. Smaller Government is the fast track to what you describe. So who are you FOR? It's great to be against this and against that - but it's all just mental masturbation - nothing is REALLY going to happen unless you actually have someone you SUPPORT. Voting for "None of the above" sounds great on paper - but it doesn't actually ACCOMPLISH anything - gridlock at best. I could see Johnson maybe being closer to your thinking?? If so - he has a long way to go to get the name recognition and message out.

Hobson's choice is no choice at all. Every candidate of whom I am aware holds positions that directly oppose my own. I agree that it's not productive to just stand in opposition, but neither is it productive to vote against one's own interests. I assure you: come election day I will hold my nose and vote for the candidate I believe will do the least harm.

Gridlock, by the way, is often the best possible outcome. I don't support "small government" in the sense that the modern Libertarian Party uses the term because I belive that it is not in our national interest to defund regulatory organizations like the FDA and find Libertarian claims about the ability of rational actors in free markets to self-regulate naive at best and more often dangerously disingenuous. Thus remains gridlock occasionally broken to accomplish necessary business then swiftly reinstated as a viable option.

I wish we could say what is on our minds (within reason) and not have any one jump to a conclusion as to say Race or ethnic bias ^^^

Neither of which I claimed. I gave both the benefit of the doubt. The subtext is inarguably there, however, and demands clarification.

I do agree with you to a point but really...he does act out sometimes. In my eyes he has acted more as the Coward in Chief. JMHO and nothing more.

A HO to which you have every right. To me that title seems hyperbolic and at odds with reality, but we will probably not ever agree on the matter.

 

[Trigger Time]

People who support Obama and his administration are traitors to this country. Enough said.

 

[cobber]

If foreign policy is so simple by all means let us know what your approach would be.

Which is not to say that the Administration has deftly handled a complex situation, but that doesn't legitimize standing on the sidelines and heckling.

Don't draw lines you have no plan to defend?

Don't grandstand unless you intend to act swiftly and decisively?

Practice what you preach re multilateralism?

Don't speak out of one side of your mouth "We can't wait for Congress" and then in another breath gush about how great the Constitution is, and how you have to consult Congress before committing US forces. After you already drew the red line?

STFU about Bush, when you're proving to be a chip off that block?

Consult the Russians and Chinese before grandstanding?

Nothing complex about it. The present administration are simply gasbags, and not to be taken seriously by players on the world stage. This has been a media campaign, to shock and awe the press and the LI voters. Now the rubber hits the road.

NO MORE POPCORN FOR YOU!

 

[churchmouse]

Hobson's choice is no choice at all. Every candidate of whom I am aware holds positions that directly oppose my own. I agree that it's not productive to just stand in opposition, but neither is it productive to vote against one's own interests. I assure you: come election day I will hold my nose and vote for the candidate I believe will do the least harm.

Gridlock, by the way, is often the best possible outcome. I don't support "small government" in the sense that the modern Libertarian Party uses the term because I belive that it is not in our national interest to defund regulatory organizations like the FDA and find Libertarian claims about the ability of rational actors in free markets to self-regulate naive at best and more often dangerously disingenuous. Thus remains gridlock occasionally broken to accomplish necessary business then swiftly reinstated as a viable option.




Neither of which I claimed. I gave both the benefit of the doubt. The subtext is inarguably there, however, and demands clarification.




A HO to which you have every right. To me that title seems hyperbolic and at odds with reality, but we will probably not ever agree on the matter.

The bias statement was not directed at you as an individual. Just a general statement to the mindset of the PC crowd that is setting the standards for so many.

I understand how you could see my HO in that way. Our CiC has through his own actions formed my opinion and as stated...it is mine but I am not alone with it.

 

[Blackhawk2001]

Lincoln and LBJ would give him a run for his money.

I'm not old enough to remember Lincoln as CiC, but I do remember Lyndon Johnson. Yes, nobody I knew liked him, but at least nobody thought he was playing for the other team.

 

[jrogers]

The bias statement was not directed at you as an individual. Just a general statement to the mindset of the PC crowd that is setting the standards for so many.

That's fair. I believe that it's prudent to take a reasonable level of care not to offend, but there are those who take the effort to an unreasonable level.

 

[churchmouse]

That's fair. I believe that it's prudent to take a reasonable level of care not to offend, but there are those who take the effort to an unreasonable level.

Many are to easily offended these days and us the PC card like a club.

Extremists everywhere.

I try not to intentionally offend unless responding to something terribly offensive. Not always successful but do make that effort.

 

[spirit390]