The Down Range Forum
Member Section => Politics & RKBA => Topic started by: alfsauve on May 18, 2009, 06:59:12 AM
-
I'm on board. I'm willing to trade some groceries for some guns....or better ammo. I've got a bunch of tomato plants out back. How many boxes of 9mm can I get for a bushel of tomato's?
(http://i252.photobucket.com/albums/hh20/alfsauve/WillWorkforAmmo.jpg)
-
Your avatar should be a t-shirt. I love the new with the old. It makes a simple but profound statement.
-
Your avatar should be a t-shirt. I love the new with the old. It makes a simple but profound statement.
+1.....
"Technology may change, Principles do not"
-
+1.....
"Technology may change, Principles do not"
I'd give you the comment of the day award, but Eric hid the trophy.
-
Use Mine.....
+1.....
"Technology may change, Principles do not"
I'd give you the comment of the day award, but Eric hid the trophy.
(http://i384.photobucket.com/albums/oo283/tsbevins/ist2_604777-miniature-trophy-blank.jpg)
-
Use Mine.....
(http://i384.photobucket.com/albums/oo283/tsbevins/ist2_604777-miniature-trophy-blank.jpg)
+1
-
I have sinned! OH! I have sinned greatly. I confess. I downloaded the picture from some forum who did the modification. I further cropped it from my avatar.
Okay, I'm not that bad. (I do this for a living........creating media) The original came from "http//Army.Mil" Pictures on official government web sites are not copyrighted. I've seen this on other websites but credited to a different battle. I'll take the Army description as it was Lexington/Concord. Here's the link and here's the original pictures
http://www.history.army.mil/art/225/225-War.htm (http://www.history.army.mil/art/225/225-War.htm)
(http://www.history.army.mil/art/225/Stand-t.jpg)
I don't remember where I got the modified version. Maybe from AR-15.org.
-
+1.....
"Technology may change, Principles do not"
We have a viable marketing tool here. Quality work my friend.
-
We have a viable marketing tool here. Quality work my friend.
I'd buy one for $20 bucks if it went to the right cause. I'd prefer it not say NRA on it, as that causes a lot of folks to just tune out. But, Technology Changes Principles Don't, with that picture, it might cause folks to think.
FQ13
-
I'd buy one for $20 bucks if it went to the right cause. I'd prefer it not say NRA on it, as that causes a lot of folks to just tune out. But, Technology Changes Principles Don't, with that picture, it might cause folks to think.
FQ13
Only one problem with that slogan. The people who oppose us have no principles.
-
Only one problem with that slogan. The people who oppose us have no principles.
Its not really a problem; we have the numbers.
-
Its not really a problem; we have the numbers.
That's what I thought before the Presidential election. :(
-
That's what I thought before the Presidential election. :(
Doesn't matter, we still have the guns. "self righteous indignation" and "politically correct attitudes" are no match for a bullet to the head, of course if you want to brain shoot a liberal you have to hit them in the ass.
-
Doesn't matter, we still have the guns. "self righteous indignation" and "politically correct attitudes" are no match for a bullet to the head, of course if you want to brain shoot a liberal you have to hit them in the ass.
The only problem with that is that some of them have their heads so far up you'll have to shoot them about mid-shoulder.
-
speaking of.......liberals.......
-
That's what I thought before the Presidential election. :(
People bought the packaging of BHO. Slowly more people will see him for the clown he actually is.
-
What was the actual vote count count anyway ? The MSM made a big stink about the 2000 election but never mention that Bill Clinton NEVER won the POPULAR vote, only the Electoral college.
In other words the majority voted AGAINST him. He just took the right states to get in.
-
What was the actual vote count count anyway ? The MSM made a big stink about the 2000 election but never mention that Bill Clinton NEVER won the POPULAR vote, only the Electoral college.
In other words the majority voted AGAINST him. He just took the right states to get in.
If you go popular vote, I believe you have to go back to the '60s to find a Dem with more than 50 percent of the vote.
-
What was the actual vote count count anyway ? The MSM made a big stink about the 2000 election but never mention that Bill Clinton NEVER won the POPULAR vote, only the Electoral college.
In other words the majority voted AGAINST him. He just took the right states to get in.
The same coud be said for W.. Gore beat him by about 500,000 votes in 2000. Its that pesky Constitution again. This isn't a flippant remark either, its a serious question. Has the Electoral College out lived its usefulness/relevance? Should we go to a nation wide popular vote rather than doing it state by state? I have my opinion, but will hold my fire as I want to hear your views.
FQ13
-
I think we need to return to the old days when there were standards as to who could vote. No vote for welfare, (back in the 30's they could not buy tobacco either)
-
The same coud be said for W.. Gore beat him by about 500,000 votes in 2000. Its that pesky Constitution again. This isn't a flippant remark either, its a serious question. Has the Electoral College out lived its usefulness/relevance? Should we go to a nation wide popular vote rather than doing it state by state? I have my opinion, but will hold my fire as I want to hear your views.
FQ13
There are several ways to go with this one. No! Abandoning the remnants of the Constitution would be the end of the Republic. It's headed that way now. The founding fathers knew that majority vote was mob rule. Not much has changed. The problem today, is there are too many people voting with "no skin in the game" to quote our feckless leader. I say we try Ross Perot's idea and run the country like a business. My version: the more taxes you pay the more votes you have. Everyone defaults to one vote, but the folks paying the tab have the say; kinda like when dad took the family out for dinner. He's paying. He's picking.
P.S. Fair tax now! fairtax.org (http://fairtax.org)
-
Thread drift, big surprise right ;D
Here's how you solve our domestic economic problems :
1) End the war on drugs it's been a multi trillion dollar money hole and an abject failure. As we have spent all this moneysupply has continuously increased and price has dropped. Instead of spending billions annually to make Columbians, Mexicans etc rich, Legalize and tax it same as tobacco and alcohol. Eliminate the "forbidden fruit" temptation, Demand, the driving force of the market, (not "evil drug dealers" ) will stabilize, and then begin to decline, just like with booze after the repeal of prohibition, Tax revenue will increase , price reductions due to no risk distribution means that thefts to buy drugs will be reduced, Prison populations, overcrowding and costs will be reduced, drug dealers would have recourse to the court system to settle conflicts thereby reduce violence.
2) No more Foreign aid except to our staunchest allies, Israel, England, and maybe a couple others, no more giving billions to every shit hole and Dictator on the planet, most of them hate us so to hell with them, let them starve or learn to stand on their own. Evict the UN, Turn their buildings into worker housing.
3) Close the border and get rid of the illegal aliens, Give them 30 days to leave on their own after that asset forfeiture, and blacklisted for future LEGAL immigration, Employers hiring them jailed Companies fined $25,000 per illegal.
4) Govt agencies not listed in the Constitution cut, Pay for congress cut 50% staff cut 50%
5) Scrap the current tax code, Fund the federal Govt through Tariffs, States through "Sin taxes" on booze, tobacco, drugs, gambling, and prostitution.
6) Entitlements, NONE, Employers and Employees pay into UNTOUCHABLE fund designed to finance unemployment and social security. ANY POLITICIAN WHO TRIES TO STEAL THIS LIKE JOHNSON DID IS TO KILLED IMMEDIATELY, PUBLICLY.
7) Foreign made goods shipped into the country are taxed X% goods made overseas by American Companies then shipped here are taxed X+5% Foreign owned companies that manufacture here pay X-5%
8) Only the employed,laid off or retired gun owning CITIZENS may vote, conscientious objectors must qualify as EMT's and , like gun owners, have current qualifications and equipment.
I could come up with more but it's getting late.
-
There are several ways to go with this one. No! Abandoning the remnants of the Constitution would be the end of the Republic. It's headed that way now. The founding fathers knew that majority vote was mob rule. Not much has changed. The problem today, is there are too many people voting with "no skin in the game" to quote our feckless leader. I say we try Ross Perot's idea and run the country like a business. My version: the more taxes you pay the more votes you have. Everyone defaults to one vote, but the folks paying the tab have the say; kinda like when dad took the family out for dinner. He's paying. He's picking.
P.S. Fair tax now! fairtax.org (http://fairtax.org)
You know, I find myself torn. I read a good book and I want to reccomend it. Yet if I do, I feel I'm being a patronizing academic jackass (no disrespect to you avatar). Sometimes though, the risk of seeming pompous is worth it as I got taught by people a lot smarter than me who reccomended books written by folks who were smarter than them. So I offer this in the the same spirit I reccomend a good song. Aristotle's Politics. A (for short) said there were 3 types of ideal regimes, and 3 types of corrupted regimes. From best to worst they were:
IDEAL
Monarchy, with a philosopher king, the best, the wisest, the most virtous at the helmn
Aristocracy, with more or less equals who were talented and virtous leading the republic
Polity or Timocracy; depending on the translation, with all stake holders, eg the property owners (taking into account those of us who have property in our trade, plumbers, teachers, doctors etc, ie the employed), having a voice, as their self interst equates to the self interest of the city.
DEGRADED REGIMES (worst to best)
Tyranny, the rule for the benefit of one man eg Zimbabwe
Oligharchy, rule of the rich over the poor, for their own benefit (something I think you come close to Borosometal with you $1=1 vote theory, as I think I'm just as good as Bill Gates)
Democracy, mob rule, with every idiot given a vote
Aristotle decided that Democracy was the least bad option as all voices would be heard. Given than monarchy could become tyranny, and aristocracy could become oligarchy, better democracy, where the voice of the philosopher king, and the natural aristocrats and the property owners could be heard to temper the masses and lead them to the common good, than just the voices of the few arguing out of self interst. I'm not a 100% Aristotelian, and I don't want to be obnoxious, I just thought I'd throw that out there. Your mileage may vary.
FQ13
-
The principles America was founded on were intended to lead to the Polity, What we would nowadays call a "meritocracy".
The malfeasance of party politics as personified by the "Chicago machine" and NY's "Tammany Hall" machine, have reduced it to an Oligarchy ( aside for FQ, Russia would have been a good example of this, where the Govt and Organized crime are the same people ) where you can buy any office you can afford, bidding for BO's Senate seat was around $500,000.
-
Thread drift, big surprise right ;D
Here's how you solve our domestic economic problems :
1) End the war on drugs it's been a multi trillion dollar money hole and an abject failure. As we have spent all this moneysupply has continuously increased and price has dropped. Instead of spending billions annually to make Columbians, Mexicans etc rich, Legalize and tax it same as tobacco and alcohol. Eliminate the "forbidden fruit" temptation, Demand, the driving force of the market, (not "evil drug dealers" ) will stabilize, and then begin to decline, just like with booze after the repeal of prohibition, Tax revenue will increase , price reductions due to no risk distribution means that thefts to buy drugs will be reduced, Prison populations, overcrowding and costs will be reduced, drug dealers would have recourse to the court system to settle conflicts thereby reduce violence.
2) No more Foreign aid except to our staunchest allies, Israel, England, and maybe a couple others, no more giving billions to every shit hole and Dictator on the planet, most of them hate us so to hell with them, let them starve or learn to stand on their own. Evict the UN, Turn their buildings into worker housing.
3) Close the border and get rid of the illegal aliens, Give them 30 days to leave on their own after that asset forfeiture, and blacklisted for future LEGAL immigration, Employers hiring them jailed Companies fined $25,000 per illegal.
4) Govt agencies not listed in the Constitution cut, Pay for congress cut 50% staff cut 50%
5) Scrap the current tax code, Fund the federal Govt through Tariffs, States through "Sin taxes" on booze, tobacco, drugs, gambling, and prostitution.
6) Entitlements, NONE, Employers and Employees pay into UNTOUCHABLE fund designed to finance unemployment and social security. ANY POLITICIAN WHO TRIES TO STEAL THIS LIKE JOHNSON DID IS TO KILLED IMMEDIATELY, PUBLICLY.
7) Foreign made goods shipped into the country are taxed X% goods made overseas by American Companies then shipped here are taxed X+5% Foreign owned companies that manufacture here pay X-5%
8) Only the employed,laid off or retired gun owning CITIZENS may vote, conscientious objectors must qualify as EMT's and , like gun owners, have current qualifications and equipment.
I could come up with more but it's getting late.
Oddly enough Tom, I find myself in 100% agreement except for a few minor quibbles on point 3 (I'd give them six months if they registered with INS and a + rating if they could provide good character references and functional English to enter legally, albeit with a cutoff date)
I also disagree with part of points 4, 5 and about 25% of six, but I still like like it. I think we have come to a partway meeting of the minds, which should scare the crap out of any sane person who follows this board (both of them). ;D
FQ13
-
Oddly enough Tom, I find myself in 100% agreement except for a few minor quibbles on point 3 (I'd give them six months if they registered with INS and a + rating if they could provide good character references and functional English to enter legally, albeit with a cutoff date)
I also disagree with part of points 4, 5 and about 25% of six, but I still like like it. I think we have come to a partway meeting of the minds, which should scare the crap out of any sane person who follows this board (both of them). ;D
FQ13
Funny, Your quibble about #3, I was getting lazy in my typing, ;D the 30 days was an arbitrary number. My beef is with ILLEGAL immigration. 4,5,6, are financial matters that are really not my strong point they would need adjustment to make things work out properly.
One hard no compromise rule though, NO F%^KING deficit spending, just like at home if you can't afford it then do with out.
-
Funny, Your quibble about #3, I was getting lazy in my typing, ;D the 30 days was an arbitrary number. My beef is with ILLEGAL immigration. 4,5,6, are financial matters that are really not my strong point they would need adjustment to make things work out properly.
One hard no compromise rule though, NO F%^KING deficit spending, just like at home if you can't afford it then do with out.
Again, I'm almost on board. Just like at home, with mortgages and car loans and business loans, sometimes borrowing makes sense. BUT to make it clear to the pols and the voters who listen to their promises, it should be tied to a certain percentage of revenue, eg taxes. Yes that new (name your favoite project, is nice) but understand its going to cost you. Suddenly, it doesn't seem so shiny and new any more. Its like the difference between a new $5000 visa and that same card when its maxed out. Its a whole different animal when your trying to make monthly minimums and wondering what all that crap you bought was in the first place. If we tie borrowing to say ten to fifteen percent of tax revenue, I think we'd get everyone's undivided attention.
FQ13
-
Maybe some sort of punitive measures, for an example, if they borrow at 3% interest their pay is cut 3%, that should keep it to a minimum ;D
-
Hell in socal they give gift cards for guns. I'm sorry but my guns bring home the bacon in my house so i wont be trading them in for food.
-
Hell in socal they give gift cards for guns. I'm sorry but my guns bring home the bacon in my house so i wont be trading them in for food.
Go to the OTHER thread then, some of us think they would get better results giving out guns for donated food
OOPs that's THIS thread, ;D
-
FQ13 you patronizing academic jackdonkey! ;D
The sharing of knowledge is never patronizing, its the manner it which it is done. You, my friend, have failed to meet the patronizer smell test. The mere fact that you worried about coming across in that manner is enough to show that it is not the case.
I like to illustrate principles with exaggeration. The tax dollars paid for number of votes is such an illustration. Yes, it would be an Oligarchy, however it would be an Oligarchy of the successful as defined by taxes paid. Our current president is an example of the exact opposite. Never has so unaccomplished a man held the office of POTUS. As his policies are revealed daily this fact is held in sharper contrast, but I digress (as has this thread as Tom has mentioned ;))
Back to the original point I was attempting to make. Most folks voting today would not be able to vote (me included) had we kept to the original plan set forth by the Founding Fathers. Regardless of the perfections of ideals and principles, they must be implemented by fallible human beings. One could argue that we presently are operating (or not) under an Oligarchy. Senators no longer represent their state legislature as designed, but party stances and continued re-election, votes are bought with the very dollars confiscated from those who actually produce, and the lights are going out in Reagan's shining city upon the hill*. I mentioned the FairTax, if you haven't looked into it you should. It removes the controlling power of the Washington insiders, moves the tax burden to consumption and removes that burden from production. You can choose whether or not to pay taxes, while making the USA an international tax shelter, but that's a different thread (or not) altogether. So in deference to the spirit of the thread, if anyone has guns, I have food and will be glad to trade. ;)
*"I've spoken of the shining city all my political life, but I don't know if I ever quite communicated what I saw when I said it. But in my mind it was a tall proud city built on rocks stronger than oceans, wind-swept, God-blessed, and teeming with people of all kinds living in harmony and peace, a city with free ports that hummed with commerce and creativity, and if there had to be city walls, the walls had doors and the doors were open to anyone with the will and the heart to get here. That's how I saw it and see it still." -Reagan 1989, farewell speech.