The Down Range Forum
Member Section => Down Range Cafe => Topic started by: twyacht on November 17, 2011, 09:03:59 PM
-
Even at 51 years old, this post's author, is a growing recognition that by God, this Country is not always a happy and jolly place.
Moreover, sometimes when the SHTF, having a firearm, can be the difference between Gun Owner and Victim.
http://www.americanthinker.com/2011/11/should_i_buy_a_gun.html
I have never owned a gun. Matter of fact, I have fired a gun a grand total of one time in my life. I shouldered a shotgun out in the north Georgia woods when I was nineteen years old and fired at a milk bottle filled with water as a target. The kick from the gun nearly tore my shoulder off, since I obviously had no clue what I was doing. I have no idea if I came close to hitting that jug.
I have never wanted to own a gun. I fish. No need to shoot fish, though I am sure that takes place. I have never been hunting. I am not opposed to it in any way; it just works out that I have never been asked to join a hunting party by my father or brother-in-law -- and considering my lifetime gun résumé to this point, that is, for their sake, likely a very good thing.
What I have done is held a pistol in self-defense. Robbed at gunpoint when I was working at a gas station off Interstate 20 east of Atlanta in 1978, I grabbed the pistol the owner kept under the counter and (for some silly eighteen-year-old-full-of-vinegar-manhood-thingy) chased the dirtbag out the door. Of course, I had already hit the silent alarm, and the next person yelling at me to drop the gun was the second person who had pointed a gun at me in the span of six minutes -- only he was wearing a cool blue uniform and waving a standard-issue .357 magnum of the DeKalb County Police Department.
So my personal, limited experience with guns is not good. Actually it's just this side of tragic. But I have considered, and now again am considering, buying a gun. I've been checking them out over the past few months. Looking at pump shotguns, mostly -- the lighter, the better. I think of things like "one round in the chamber in case I have to fire immediately" and "if I can pump it and get the perp's attention without firing, then I need to make sure there are 3-5 rounds loaded and the spread pattern is right" and to make sure I get double-aught ammo to be able to take someone out in one shot if need be. Do I need a trigger lock, or will the safety be fine if the weapon is loaded (who wants to be a rookie fumbling to load shells when urgency is at a premium?).
My stepmother is taking shooting lessons. Seriously. She is trying to choose right now between a couple of guns -- one was a 9-millimeter Luger, I believe. She announced that she was doing this while I was thinking of doing the same. Though I lean shotgun, if for no other reason than, well, easier to hit stuff, y'know. Her motivation for "granny gunning up" is on target with mine: the peace of mind that, should I need a gun, I would have it and know how to use it.
This, though, is not about what type of gun, or really even a gun at all. This is about the tenor of the times. At age 51, I have been around long enough to know the difference between unease and unrest. There are also levels of unrest. Right now, this is unrest that strongly threatens to grow into greater unrest.
While most of us have been rightly concerned about attacks on our soil in this post-911 world, "Washington" has done its "official public warning" best to attempt to convince us that the real and immediate threat is internal.
Now, we conservatives know full well that what "Washington" was talking about was a political ploy aimed at trying to sell the concept to the American voting public that right-wing militias connected to the Tea Party, armed by the NRA and under the direction of the Republican National Committee, are such a direct physical danger to the life and limb of regular people that we need to keep those folks in check.
My current concern is that "Washington" is about to be correct -- only, like my shooting grade,180 degrees off-target.
Across the nation there has been an ongoing debate over the past three weeks or so. Are those troublemakers within "Occupy" really connected to "Occupy"? Are they opportunists seeking to use this "movement" to create havoc and potential anarchy? The reason that question is asked is to seek a biased-journalistic way to distance any violence from those who have supported (and still do, since there has been no condemnation) "Occupy" publicly (read: Democrats and, more expressly, President Obama). That question is nothing but irrelevant spin. We should have a long discussion sometime about irrelevant spin in newsrooms, but let's stay on track for now.
Of course, "Occupy" owns any violence connected to it in any fashion, even if (and that's a strong "if") it did not commit that violence directly. It did, without argument, seed that violence, and then it sought to take advantage of it to place direct blame on the police. I am not absolving authorities, but if there are a couple of veterans who suffered serious injuries at Occupy Oakland, the fact is that Occupy Oakland is responsible for damage done in direct altercations since it initiated those confrontations.
Back to my gun. I am not overly concerned about any direct confrontation from anyone in any current "Occupy" movement. But I am very concerned about the potential for violence coming from the seed of Occupy.
These elements were emboldened by mostly liberal mayors who allowed that seed to be planted in a park in their town. Rather than immediately enforce laws that would apply to anyone else (like, say, at a Tea Party rally), those mayors played political footsie with the Obama administration and Democrat leadership and allowed this "grassroots movement" to ignite the hoodlums, thugs, gangs, Marxists, and general lowlifes that exists on the far left of our political spectrum. Occupy is made up of and attracted (still does) a violence-seeking mob that sought to exploit a political unwillingness in liberal bastions to forcibly tackle them head-on from the jump.
If Occupy wants to burn liberal inner cities to the ground, a lot of Republicans will simply shake their heads. If Occupy spreads beyond that and seeks to do direct damage to traditional Americans in our communities, then Occupy is going to find out fast that the rules of the past, where people like us relied solely on authorities to defend us, won't be in effect. I will be blunt. If they want a fight, they had darn well be ready for what punching back looks like. There is a reason "Occupy Cheyenne" didn't make any real noise. It's not the cops with tear gas guns that would be the problem -- it was the pickup trucks that drive the roads of very conservative southeast Wyoming every day with stickers that say "Hell ya' that's a real gun in that gun rack."
It is that unrest that has settled over me. I have never quite felt this way. That these liberal, indoctrinated morons who defecate in the streets of New York can actually spark a following that would spread to Kalamazoo, Kankakee, or Kearney. And since that happened, we have more idiots jumping on this, and suddenly you have "Occupy (insert name of your subdivision)." Not mentioned, yet, is the potential for what could take place the night of and day after the next presidential election. Especially if Obama loses. Especially if he loses like Al Gore lost in 2000.
No, these are unique times. Times when I consider something that I had not really thought of before. It might be time for me to arm myself.
*For the record, if I do choose to purchase a weapon. I will take lessons. Since I know you would plead for me to do so.
***
"Remember that Jefferson told us that the Second Amendment would not be needed until they tried to abolish it. There are people who have that in mind right now. The personal ownership and usage of firearms is not a common aspect of today's culture worldwide. It is up to Americans - those who know what it means to be an American - to uphold the light of liberty in the face of those both here and elsewhere who would extinguish it. We see the hysterics who feel that the abolition of firearms would bring about major changes in the human psyche, and that crime would disappear. We cannot reason with these people because they are impervious to reason, but we can expose them to ridicule and frustrate their political clout. That is a job not just for the National Rifle Association, but for everyone. If you want to make a resolution for the coming century, resolve to do something in defense of liberty every day, and by liberty, of course, we mean true liberty - the right to keep and bear arms. Without that liberty all other liberties are meaningless."
Col. Jeff Cooper
***
Another Citizen is starting to get it.
-
I feel like Chris Mathews with a tingly thing going up my leg, that's a first! ;D
-
Guy is making a good start....and seems to see the projected danger of OWS.
However, he hasn't recognized that a very real threat has existed well before that movement. Also, he seems to be leaning towards a pump shotgun as his sole firearm weapon for SD.
Either he spends all of his time at home, and always watches TV and makes coffee with his shotgun at hand, and carries his shotgun out to get the morning paper or he hasn't considered all the possible threats to which he is exposed.
He does realize he needs training and is aware that those in the "gun culture" would strongly encourage him to obtain it, so perhaps he is getting other input to guide his future choices also.
It is very good, encouraging and "warming" (not quite a tingle up my leg yet) that he is making his first steps towards self protection.
-
I mostly agree with the above posts. Kudos to the guy for getting a clue and buying (and here is where I really give him credit), learning to safely use, a gun. But still, OWS as a life changing threat? I think that if you wanted to chase them off, the most effective means would be a bar of soap, hair trimmers and a job application. ;D
FQ13
-
I mostly agree with the above posts. Kudos to the guy for getting a clue and buying (and here is where I really give him credit), learning to safely use, a gun. But still, OWS as a life changing threat? I think that if you wanted to chase them off, the most effective means would be a bar of soap, hair trimmers and a job application. ;D
FQ13
I think that you have too much faith in bottom feeders. These idiots are looking for any excuse they can find to start rioting. They have been threatening violence from the beginning, and they have already committed it. Look at Oakland, and New York yesterday. They want chaos and destruction because they see it as the only way to get back at the man. By dismissing these clowns you are turning your back on a very serious threat. Just look at who is supporting them. It's a literal who's who of violent offenders in American history.
-
JC, you have to remember that FQ did not "learn" history, he "was taught" history.
Instead of following his curiosity to find out why or how historical events occurred the way they did , he was instructed in a series of answers his indoctrinators wanted him to parrot back on tests.
-
I think that you have too much faith in bottom feeders. These idiots are looking for any excuse they can find to start rioting. They have been threatening violence from the beginning, and they have already committed it. Look at Oakland, and New York yesterday. They want chaos and destruction because they see it as the only way to get back at the man. By dismissing these clowns you are turning your back on a very serious threat. Just look at who is supporting them. It's a literal who's who of violent offenders in American history.
I am both dismissing them and turning my back. However, I have both eyes open and a glock in my waistband and an AR and shotty in my bedroom. I am calm and confident in apeacful end to this idiocy. I am not however,stupid. ;)
FQ13 who really does think that this the "cool new thing" and it will pass with the ice and snow. However, as I've said before, these folks are pissed for the same reasons the Tea Party is pissed, even if their tacitics and solutions differ. The reason is crony capitalism that marries Wall Street, K Street and the Hill in a way that screws us. The protests will go away, the anger won't.
-
I am both dismissing them and turning my back. However, I have both eyes open and a glock in my waistband and an AR and shotty in my bedroom. I am calm and confident in apeacful end to this idiocy. I am not however,stupid. ;)
FQ13 who really does think that this the "cool new thing" and it will pass with the ice and snow. However, as I've said before, these folks are pissed for the same reasons the Tea Party is pissed, even if their tacitics and solutions differ. The reason is crony capitalism that marries Wall Street, K Street and the Hill in a way that screws us. The protests will go away, the anger won't.
This is what will get you killed. You cannot be REactive to these groups. They are spoiling for violence. This is not something you can ignore and it will go away. We have to stand up to these little punks, or they WILL push their agenda to force the establishment of martial law. That is one of their goals. They WANT violence. It's all they know. They are on camera threatening to fire bomb Macy's. They already destroyed a Men's Warehouse. (which is ironic since it was a supporter)
-
I am both dismissing them and turning my back. However, I have both eyes open and a glock in my waistband and an AR and shotty in my bedroom. I am calm and confident in apeacful end to this idiocy. I am not however,stupid. ;)
FQ13 who really does think that this the "cool new thing" and it will pass with the ice and snow. However, as I've said before, these folks are pissed for the same reasons the Tea Party is pissed, even if their tacitics and solutions differ. The reason is crony capitalism that marries Wall Street, K Street and the Hill in a way that screws us. The protests will go away, the anger won't.
don't go there Tom, don't go there Tom, don't go there Tom.
FQ seems to overlook the fact that the majority of the OWS crowd including the organizers, is composed of "progressives" (communists ) and Unions with strong ties to the furthest left wing of the Dem party.
The remainder are the scum of society.
Black racists, Nazis and the KKK ?
Explain to me how anything good can come from this mix.
What they represent is the beginning of the end of the Cold war, and we lost.
-
They are on camera threatening to fire bomb Macy's.
The guy who threatened this (and who was arrested) is a mental patient living at home with his parents. In fairness, he no more represents the OWS crowd than Klansmen and Tim Mcveigh types represent the Tea Party. Every Movement has its wing nuts. I have never said I agree with these folks. I do think that the source of their frustration isn't too different than ours. While they may not be 100% allies, they might be useful on issues like NAFTA, police powers, free speech, and government transparency. One needs to think strategically. You take what you can get while you can get it and then renegotiate later.
FQ13
-
The guy who threatened this (and who was arrested) is a mental patient living at home with his parents. In fairness, he no more represents the OWS crowd than Klansmen and Tim Mcveigh types represent the Tea Party. Every Movement has its wing nuts. I have never said I agree with these folks. I do think that the source of their frustration isn't too different than ours. While they may not be 100% allies, they might be useful on issues like NAFTA, police powers, free speech, and government transparency. One needs to think strategically. You take what you can get while you can get it and then renegotiate later.
FQ13
Dude, the KKK has endorsed the OWS crowd.
-
Dude, the KKK has endorsed the OWS crowd.
The KKK endorses anyone who hates the government and will get them in front of a news camera. They are the white version of Al Sharpton.
FQ13
-
http://www.downrange.tv/forum/index.php?topic=17894.0
http://www.downrange.tv/forum/index.php?topic=17902.0
http://www.downrange.tv/forum/index.php?topic=17954.0
-
The guy who threatened this (and who was arrested) is a mental patient living at home with his parents. In fairness, he no more represents the OWS crowd than Klansmen and Tim Mcveigh types represent the Tea Party. Every Movement has its wing nuts. I have never said I agree with these folks. I do think that the source of their frustration isn't too different than ours. While they may not be 100% allies, they might be useful on issues like NAFTA, police powers, free speech, and government transparency. One needs to think strategically. You take what you can get while you can get it and then renegotiate later.
FQ13
He represents EXACTLY who these people are! You seem to think that you can use these people to advance some kind of agenda? What do you think the WH is doing? That's WHY BHO supports them. He can use the violence and destruction that they perpetrate to advance HIS agenda. You know the destroy American and everything she stands for agenda. Then again, you voted for him, so maybe that's what you want? ::)
-
He represents EXACTLY who these people are! You seem to think that you can use these people to advance some kind of agenda? What do you think the WH is doing? That's WHY BHO supports them. He can use the violence and destruction that they perpetrate to advance HIS agenda. You know the destroy American and everything she stands for agenda. Then again, you voted for him, so maybe that's what you want? ::)
Wow, I let him save face by just saying he was lazy and stupid. ;D
-
Wow, I let him save face by just saying he was lazy and stupid. ;D
Just getting tired of trying to reason with the unreasonable. They don't want to acknowledge the facts and see the occupy crowd for what they are then they deserve what's coming.
-
Just getting tired of trying to reason with the unreasonable. They don't want to acknowledge the facts and see the occupy crowd for what they are then they deserve what's coming.
Again I will give FQ the benefit of a doubt and say he has his head in the sand, instead of where I really think he has his head. ;D
-
http://www.downrange.tv/forum/index.php?topic=17894.0
http://www.downrange.tv/forum/index.php?topic=17902.0
http://www.downrange.tv/forum/index.php?topic=17954.0
Try this one, the KKK endorsing McCain. Did he want their support? Does it reflect on you as a McCain voter? I think not.
FQ13 who is not endorsing the OWS. Just saying that there is more to the story here than can be dismissed in a Sean Hannity sound bite. Lets understand that 'gotcha" BS like this aside, the left and right seem to agree that there is something rotten in DC and Wall Street, and it needs to be fixed. How we fix it is up for debate. That it needs to be fixed seems pretty self evident. I am hoping the folks on the hill are getting the message. Otherwise Tar and Hemp are going to be growth industries in the next couple of years.
-
I don't know much about what McVeigh thought or believed.
But when FQ got me thinking about the feelings I have about it, I find I think he would be more likely to side with the OWS than the Tea Party.
He didn't see like the type to try to work for change by using the voting booth.
-
Wow, I let him save face by just saying he was lazy and stupid. ;D
Ok, I may have crossed a line with that, and if I did I apologize. I did not intend to get personal. I just don't understand how someone who is intelligent, and knows how to spot a threat (from being here as long as FQ has) fails to see the OWS crowd as such a threat. These people ARE dangerous and prone to violence. Sure you try to single out one or two and say that they don't represent the group. But look at who is behind the group, funneling money in, and giving them instructions.
I would put money on it, that you could pull aside anyone who is rallying these protesters and you would find that they are ACORN, or union, or any of the other scumbag organizations that have said they support it. Most of these protesters are nothing more than useful idiots trying to feel important. (Or just looking for cover to cause problems) Look hard at the leadership. It is a very frightening list.
-
Ok, I may have crossed a line with that, and if I did I apologize. I did not intend to get personal. I just don't understand how someone who is intelligent, and knows how to spot a threat (from being here as long as FQ has) fails to see the OWS crowd as such a threat. These people ARE dangerous and prone to violence. Sure you try to single out one or two and say that they don't represent the group. But look at who is behind the group, funneling money in, and giving them instructions.
I would put money on it, that you could pull aside anyone who is rallying these protesters and you would find that they are ACORN, or union, or any of the other scumbag organizations that have said they support it. Most of these protesters are nothing more than useful idiots trying to feel important. (Or just looking for cover to cause problems) Look hard at the leadership. It is a very frightening list.
And what would the Democrats (or just us non Republicans) say JC? Could it be that the Tea Party is funded by the corporations who are shipping our jobs overseas, stopping a crackdown on illegal immigration, getting government bailouts, and paying millions a year for the best Congress money can buy? They would say that the corporations and GOP regulars are laughing their asses off at these reformers who can be bought off with a fig leaf appointment of a Sarah Palin to what we all knew was a losing Presidential ticket. Meanwhile, the usual suspects, who would welcome real reform about as much as a case of the clap, continue in power in the Senate and in Congress. They'd say the Tea Party are the useful idiots, being bartered between the theocrats of the religious right, and the secular party regulars on K street. And the idea of reform? Well, only a commie talks about change right? But hey, I'll give you a free Gadsden flag bumper sticker. It'll go nicely with your Boehner and McConnell Bobblehead dolls. If you order now, you will even get a free Rommney/Gingrich 2012 T shirt (made in China). >:( :-X
FQ13
-
And what would the Democrats (or just us non Republicans) say JC? Could it be that the Tea Party is funded by the corporations who are shipping our jobs overseas, stopping a crackdown on illegal immigration, getting government bailouts, and paying millions a year for the best Congress money can buy? They would say that the corporations and GOP regulars are laughing their asses off at these reformers who can be bought off with a fig leaf appointment of a Sarah Palin to what we all knew was a losing Presidential ticket. Meanwhile, the usual suspects, who would welcome real reform about as much as a case of the clap, continue in power in the Senate and in Congress. They'd say the Tea Party are the useful idiots, being bartered between the theocrats of the religious right, and the secular party regulars on K street. And the idea of reform? Well, only a commie talks about change right? But hey, I'll give you a free Gadsden flag bumper sticker. It'll go nicely with your Boehner and McConnell Bobblehead dolls. If you order now, you will even get a free Rommney/Gingrich 2012 T shirt (made in China). >:( :-X
FQ13
That one sentence shows you don't know squat about the Tea Party.
For starters, if you had a clue what you were talking about you would be aware that the Rep. leadership hates the Tea Party, and the Tea Party members aren't exactly happy with the Republican leadership.
Which kills the idea of your Boner bobblehead.
-
That one sentence shows you don't know squat about the Tea Party.
For starters, if you had a clue what you were talking about you would be aware that the Rep. leadership hates the Tea Party, and the Tea Party members aren't exactly happy with the Republican leadership.
Which kills the idea of your Boner bobblehead.
BS Tom. The GOP is cashing in on the Tea Party left, right and center and you know it. Show me a GOP official who doesn't publically love them. Show me a Tea Party rally where even a formerHouse Speaker like Gingrich isn't there to claim "beltway outsider" status ::). The Tea party is being told that DC = Democrats and therefore they should vote GOP and things will be better. Well, thats half true. You and I both know they are being sold a bill of goods by the usual suspects who are using them and sayin "Sure we'll respect you in the morning". In fairness, Bachman and Cain are the only real outsiders in the race. Guess what? The GOP is not all hugs and puppies about either. Granted they have baggage, but if the Tea Party weren't being played, Newt, Santorum, and Romney wouldn't even be in the race. It would be Cain, Bachman and Paul.
FQ13
-
Show me a GOP official who doesn't publically love them
Lindsey Graham, Mitt Romney, John McCain, Carl Rove, Olympia Snowe, Susan Collins, I can do this for awhile,....
http://articles.businessinsider.com/2011-07-20/politics/29998872_1_debt-ceiling-tax-increases-party-insiders
http://www.theuptake.org/2010/09/27/rift-pits-tea-party-against-republican-moderates/
http://www.theatlanticwire.com/politics/2010/09/moderate-republicans-mount-fight-against-tea-party/22983/
The Middle Strikes Back
aka RINO's....
I can keep going....But the establishment Republicans are against the Tea Party...They are just as bad as Dems.....and we haven't weeded them out yet...
God, you guys drift posts...... :-\
-
Show me a GOP official who doesn't publically love them
Lindsey Graham, Mitt Romney, John McCain, Carl Rove, Olympia Snowe, Susan Collins, I can do this for awhile,....
You forgot Charlie Crist. Lets try a few non-blue dogs in waiting. Like I don't know, Boehner, or (re-elect me because of pork) McConnell, or Brownback, or.. the list goes on. Guys who have been in DC too long and will pretend to be reformers to stay there longer. You know I speak the truth TW.
FQ13 Who can't resist posting this, I'd apologize to the Republicans out there, but we all know I'd be lying. ;) ;D
-
Your right FQ, just don't contradict yourself. The establishment GOP is just as opportunistic as the Left. But the Tea Party, minority that was a reality slap in the Nov. 2010 mid terms shows the chameleon ability embedded in the GOP, that, like McRomney and others, will change stripes for political gain and power even if they oppose the Tea Party...
the old addage "Vote The Bums Out",...applies to members of both parties.
-
Your right FQ, just don't contradict yourself. The establishment GOP is just as opportunistic as the Left. But the Tea Party, minority that was a reality slap in the Nov. 2010 mid terms shows the chameleon ability embedded in the GOP, that, like McRomney and others, will change stripes for political gain and power even if they oppose the Tea Party...
the old addage "Vote The Bums Out",...applies to members of both parties.
Here's my point TW. If the Tea Party, or OWS were serious they'd cross party lines. If the Tea Party endorsed some Blue Dogs like Testor or Crist, or if OWS endorsed Snowe? Then both parties would listen to them. If you ain't got that swing, you ain't got a thing, well, its Holy Writ in politics. The GOP ignores blacks, the Dems ignore Born Agains, and they both love latinos. Why, because the latinos swing both ways. If the Tea Party was smart, they'd endorse a few conservative Dems (or third party candidates, though that's risky), just to get the undivided attention of the GOP leadership who might start taking them seriously in terms of power, not rhetoric.
FQ13
-
If the GOP ignores blacks, as you posted, why on earth did George W. Bush, appoint more "blacks" to real positions like cabinet level, than Slick Willy or even BHO?
Just what does "ignore" mean?
that again contradicts Herman Cains success, and that of Allen West.....still trying to figure that out,....may have to open my Hahn Pinot Noir to try to get to that answer... ::)
-
If the GOP ignores blacks, as you posted, why on earth did George W. Bush, appoint more "blacks" to real positions like cabinet level, than Slick Willy or even BHO?
Just what does "ignore" mean?
that again contradicts Herman Cains success, and that of Allen West.....still trying to figure that out,....may have to open my Hahn Pinot Noir to try to get to that answer... ::)
You might need that bottle, because I am going to say good things about W. He may have been a thick, wrongheaded sumbitch, but he was never a racist. ;D He hired Powell because Powell (likeCheney) gave him the gravitas he was lacking in FP and reassured the voters that he was ready for prime time. Powell was hired because of his resume, not his race. Same with Condi. She's a bit more controversial because some of GHW's folks thought she was under qualified, and there are rumors she and W. were an item (in which case, go W. ;)). Still again, I will pay you $100 a head for any black voter who pulled the lever for W. because of Condi. It was a merit hire for good or ill. Politics were secondary here. W. has few good traits, but not giving a damn about race is one of them, and I give him full credit for it.
As for ignore? It means that the GOP has been hostile too or, passive about, black political concerns. The old racist Southern Dems like Strom Thurmond became Republicans and the GOP has played the Southern strategy on and off since 1960. Don't deny it TW, because you are a Southern boy like me. We can talk issues like crime, drugs and welfare and affirmative action, and we know were we'll end up. Still, times have changed. The GOP has gotten a clue. Blacks love school choice. Dems hate it, and that's good for the GOP. Most blacks are homophobic. It puts them closer to the religious right than the Dems on issues like gay marriage and adoption. Cain is trying to extend that to economic issues and I wish him luck. Still, poll any AA neighborhood on a generic Republican versus a generic Democrat, and 9 out of 10 respondents will pick the Dem. The GOP will not invest heavily on getting the black vote unless Cain gets the nod. And even then? He's running against another black guy. Their bigger challenge is getting the rednecks to vote black.
Sorry, but its true.
FQ13.
-
You refuse to get it FQ, The reason the Tea Party will not work with dems is because the dem party platform is essentially a list of things the Tea party opposes.
Bigger Govt, pro Union, less defense, more "social" spending, pro illegal immigration, the list goes on and on of things the Dems advocate that have been proven to be either failed, or bad for America, or both.
Compromising with dems is like letting a kid only run 1/2 across the busy street, he's still going to get hit.
The reason the Republicans have opposed everything the Dem try to pass is not because they are "the Party of no", it's because the Dems proposals have been stupid, ineffectual, or unneeded.
It's only over educated, under learned people like you who can't grasp that.
-
You refuse to get it FQ, The reason the Tea Party will not work with dems is because the dem party platform is essentially a list of things the Tea party opposes.
Bigger Govt, pro Union, less defense, more "social" spending, pro illegal immigration, the list goes on and on of things the Dems advocate that have been proven to be either failed, or bad for America, or both.
Ok, so Reagan's amnesty for illegals (the very last one ::)) was good for America? I guess W.'s unwillingness to crack down on the border while he was Texas governor or POTUS is in keeping with Tea Party values too? (I must be a commie for bringing that up :o) How about Reagan's ban on FA weapons? Or the fact that it took a combination of Republicans and Democrats to get W. to allow the AWB to sunset? How about Reagan's drug war? Oh, wait, maybe the Tea Party should support the Patriot Act, or perhaps the pork barrel spending that took place in the 12 years the GOP controlled the House and Senate, and the 6 years W. sat in the White House. After all, W. vetoed exactly, oh, ZERO, budgets rife with deficit spending when the GOP was in the majority. >:(
My point Tom, is if you reduce this to a matter of partisanship not principle, you are a tool of the establishment who wants to divide us into boxes so we don't unite against them. If I had my way we would do away with parties (better known as factions) and vote for people. That won't happen, but yeah, if you say party A is good and party B is evil without looking at the people running, I think you are an idiot.
FQ13
-
The AWB was "allowed" (wrong term IMHO), to expire was because the mere peasants that make up the voting majority had realized it was and is a failure.
and guess what?,....Politicians actually represented an actual Republic...Because the axe was going to fall on their pretty little necks if allowed to continue.
So if what your saying is true, Allen West is what, a mere anomaly? A mere token politician who won a heavily Dem. district? Perry, Brewer both Republicans, are trying to crack down on the borders and getting hammered and sued by who?
The categorization of "folks" is a Dem playbook chapter. Just ask BHO "The One Who Will Unite Us",.....FAIL.....The drift continues with two very obvious things:
1) No textbook political party gets it.
2) The Tea Party principles resound with more of the country than without.
Congressional Approval has been hovering right around the almighty 9%......Even below the IRS. Tar & Feathering levels if you asked me.
-
As for West? Yeah, I do think he's an anomally. There aren't two like him out there, and he hit the right district in the right year, saying the right things. Think of him as the GOP's Dennis Kusinich. You have to admire the man, but you'll never duplicate him, don't even try. He is just a force of nature that defies logic and political wisdom, and comes around once in a decade if you're lucky.
FQ13