PDA

View Full Version : Rumsfeld and Ashcroft in legal Jeopardy



cotts135
12-30-2008, 07:16 AM
Don Rumsfeld and John Ashcroft may be in for some long nights talking to their lawyers about their policies during the Iraq war.

http://www.newsweek.com/id/176044

I think this is good news. Let the Justice system sort this out and if there were laws violated let them prosecute.

K.Bullock
12-30-2008, 10:51 AM
I think this amounts to two things: more wishful thinking from the left, a slow week for the editors of newsweek. Or in more technical terminology ...fluff.:rolleyes:

Bob Gutermuth
12-30-2008, 11:02 AM
Newsweak??? Sounds more like Pravda or Izvestia reporting. I hope W does issue a blanket pardon to all the alleged "conspirators" listed in this left wing fantasy. I hate to think how many of today's liberals would have tried to indict MacArthur, Ike, Patton, Cordell Hull et al 60 odd yrs ago.

Marvin S
12-30-2008, 01:16 PM
GW should get the "Donkey of the Year" award for allowing a group of people with little to offer gain a majority.

In 3 weeks GW Bush is outa there. The donkeys have the whole ball of wax with a socialist agenda. This is to divert attention from the fact that the BO administration & his allies, the lefties, have little too offer of substance.

I hope GW issues a blanket pardon to everyone involved & we can get on with the business of dealing with the Agenda that is about to settle in our nations capital.

I predict Leno will have considerable fodder for his new program.

Patrick Johndrow
12-30-2008, 01:28 PM
Sounds like someone needs to get a life to me.

cotts135
12-30-2008, 04:54 PM
It amazes me every time I see it. Die hard, chest thumping, conservatives who preach that this is a country of laws and not men who see it as a badge of honor that no man is above the law, will make exceptions to the people who govern us.
Can someone explain to me how this is.?

Hew
12-30-2008, 05:39 PM
It amazes me that limp-spined liberals forget who owns all the guns in this country as they promote their version of Soviet-esqe political cleansing by trying to retroactively punish policy decisions they didn't agree with once they have attained power. If ya'll keep pushing, eventually you're going to get some push back. ;-)

So answer this...if you're tickled pink because you think that Rumsfeld and Ashcroft are in jeopardy, then you have to agree that the 8 members of Congress (4 of whom were Dems, including Pelosi) who signed off on the interrogation techniques should be standing in the defendents box along with them. So should Cheney. So should Bush. So should every person in the military and the CIA who participated in an interrogation you disaprove of, as you're well aware that "I was just following orders" isn't an adequate defense. Where do you draw the line of culpability with your political pogrom?

Bush should issue a blanket pardon...not as any sort of admission of guilt, but to protect the assets of hundreds/thousands(?) of Americans who served their country from having to defend themselves against the threat of frivilous civil lawsuits by every left wing flying moonbat group with an axe to grind.

Pete
12-30-2008, 06:54 PM
Hew
That was beautiful man
We aut to give a metal to those who stacked up naked terrorists and put leashes and collars on them,,,,and we should have given a promotion to the one with the idea


Pete Eromenok

cotts135
12-30-2008, 07:24 PM
It amazes me that limp-spined liberals forget who owns all the guns in this country as they promote their version of Soviet-esqe political cleansing by trying to retroactively punish policy decisions they didn't agree with once they have attained power. If ya'll keep pushing, eventually you're going to get some push back. ;-)

I know all you manly men who call yourselves conservatives and have guns, think that anyone who doesn't think like you do are weak or limp spined. I can tell you from working 22 yrs as a Corrections officer in NY that some of these guys who yelled the loudest how tough they were and owned guns were some of the biggest pus#%$ I knew. The guys that didn't say much and who I am sure you would consider weak, were the guys who were there when you needed them most.


So answer this...if you're tickled pink because you think that Rumsfeld and Ashcroft are in jeopardy, then you have to agree that the 8 members of Congress (4 of whom were Dems, including Pelosi) who signed off on the interrogation techniques should be standing in the defendents box along with them. So should Cheney. So should Bush.

As I have posted in here before, I have no problem with that at all. If you were involved then you need to be held accountable if the courts find that a crime was commited.



So should every person in the military and the CIA who participated in an interrogation you disaprove of, as you're well aware that "I was just following orders" isn't an adequate defense. Where do you draw the line of culpability with your political pogrom?

It didn't work for Germans at Nuremburg did it? The punishments were different though.


Bush should issue a blanket pardon...not as any sort of admission of guilt, but to protect the assets of hundreds/thousands(?) of Americans who served their country from having to defend themselves against the threat of frivilous civil lawsuits by every left wing flying moonbat group with an axe to grind.

This is really nonsense. It seems you could rationalize anything that doesn't fit neatly into your hypocritical thinking.

If they broke the law then be man enough to be held accountable for it..

Marvin S
12-30-2008, 07:50 PM
If they broke the law then be man enough to be held accountable for it..

Just like William Jefferson Clinton was?

YardleyLabs
12-30-2008, 09:52 PM
So it's a big crisis warranting impeachment when a President lies about screwing around and it's of no consequence when a President and his men lie and break the law in matters directly related to their public responsibilities? Personally, I think both are important but that what happens in a person's admittedly messed up personal life is of minor consequence in comparison with what is done in connection with official duties. Nixon tried to assert a form of presidential privilege, saying that any action ordered by the President could not be a crime. It was a neat theory but it doesn't hold water under our laws. Bush/Cheney have tried to assert similar privilege. I believe that it's important that we reject the notion of such an imperial presidency unless you are eager to see Obama wield that same sort of autonomous authority. I am not and I voted for him.

I also hope that Bush issues a blanket pardon. It will avoid tearing the country up trying to assign blame for things that never should have been permitted to happen and will stand as a monument to the abject moral failure of this administration. During his first campaign, Bush said he would restore honor to the White House. He has left it much more stained than he found it. Hopefully the next crowd will do better. If not, we should throw them out as well.

Interestingly, a Presidential pardon would offer no protection against civil suits. It also offers no protection against prosecution by any number of countries which allow universal jurisdiction for war crimes. FWIW, Clinton was held accountable for his mis-deeds both in civil court where he paid a lot in damages and in state court.

K.Bullock
12-30-2008, 10:56 PM
I know all you manly men who call yourselves conservatives and have guns, think that anyone who doesn't think like you do are weak or limp spined. I can tell you from working 22 yrs as a Corrections officer in NY that some of these guys who yelled the loudest how tough they were and owned guns were some of the biggest pus#%$ I knew. The guys that didn't say much and who I am sure you would consider weak, were the guys who were there when you needed them most.



As I have posted in here before, I have no problem with that at all. If you were involved then you need to be held accountable if the courts find that a crime was commited.




It didn't work for Germans at Nuremburg did it? The punishments were different though.



This is really nonsense. It seems you could rationalize anything that doesn't fit neatly into your hypocritical thinking.

If they broke the law then be man enough to be held accountable for it..
You say manly men like that is a bad thing.. What else are men supposed to act like ....womanly men?

As for the other generalizations, simply because you project a position does not make it so. Who in the world said anything like guys that yell the loudest are the toughest? That is simply a ridiculous rant. Isn't it the liberal leftist terrorist credo, those who whine the loudest eventually get their whacked out version of reality to become public policy? I see in the news that again Israel is the bad guy because they won't sit down and take their rocket attacks like good boys and girls. And not surprisingly the media demands to know why don't they just leave the poor terrorists alone. ...the world is turned upside down.

K.Bullock
12-30-2008, 11:00 PM
Just like William Jefferson Clinton was?

Marvin that is just plain silly, you know very well Clinton is a Democrat and above reproach. ;)

Patrick Johndrow
12-31-2008, 02:49 AM
Sounds like someone needs to get a life to me.

again.....

Hew
12-31-2008, 03:34 AM
I know all you manly men who call yourselves conservatives and have guns, think that anyone who doesn't think like you do are weak or limp spined. I can tell you from working 22 yrs as a Corrections officer in NY that some of these guys who yelled the loudest how tough they were and owned guns were some of the biggest pus#%$ I knew. The guys that didn't say much and who I am sure you would consider weak, were the guys who were there when you needed them most.
Oh, now this is rich...a former CO advocating that his military counterparts should be subject to criminal and civil lawsuits for following policies and procedures established by people way over their head. If you need help with that, here it is in terms you can grasp...

For 22 years you did full body cavity searches of inmates. You didn't see the harm in them...they served to protect the COs/staff and prisoners. They'd been done for years and were authorized by your boss. But a new govenor takes over and changes the policy as he thinks full body cavity searches are inhumane and violate prisoners' dignity and rights. A month later a subpoena server knocks on your door to let you know that you're being sued by Amnesty International for all those body cavity searches you did. Now go tap into your 401k because you're gonna need some money for an attorney. Perhaps instead of cavity searches, feel free to substitute solitary confinement, isolation cells, one shower per week, or any of the other "inhumane" acts you committed on prisoners if that helps you wrap your head around the concept of criminalizing policy after-the-fact.

I'm sure your military CO brethren appreciate you for "being there for them when they need you most."

cotts135
12-31-2008, 07:27 AM
Oh, now this is rich...a former CO advocating that his military counterparts should be subject to criminal and civil lawsuits for following policies and procedures established by people way over their head. If you need help with that, here it is in terms you can grasp...

For 22 years you did full body cavity searches of inmates. You didn't see the harm in them...they served to protect the COs/staff and prisoners. They'd been done for years and were authorized by your boss. But a new govenor takes over and changes the policy as he thinks full body cavity searches are inhumane and violate prisoners' dignity and rights. A month later a subpoena server knocks on your door to let you know that you're being sued by Amnesty International for all those body cavity searches you did. Now go tap into your 401k because you're gonna need some money for an attorney. Perhaps instead of cavity searches, feel free to substitute solitary confinement, isolation cells, one shower per week, or any of the other "inhumane" acts you committed on prisoners if that helps you wrap your head around the concept of criminalizing policy after-the-fact.

I'm sure your military CO brethren appreciate you for "being there for them when they need you most."

Your missing one point Hew. What I did and when I did it was legal at the time. My contention is that what Rumsfeld and Ashcroft have done is illegal.
I will be perfectly happy to let the courts decide that question and to live with that decision.
What I don't want to see is a bunch of Sgt's and private's swinging in the wind for policies that were made by unethical politicians. This is what happened at Abu Ghraib and instead of standing behind policies that they endorsed they ran away from them and blamed the incident on some "bad apples". What I would like to see is that the pardons Bush is going to give out, that they go to the guys in the trenches, the guys that were ordered to do the dirty work for them. Anyone above them should be held accountable.

badbullgator
12-31-2008, 09:17 AM
[quote=cotts135;378618]Your missing one point Hew. What I did and when I did it was legal at the time. My contention is that what Rumsfeld and Ashcroft have done is illegal.
[quote]


Perhaps the best example of someone having their head so far up their ass that they canít tell if it is day or night. It is OK when applied to me, but not for others.......:rolleyes:

greg magee
12-31-2008, 09:26 AM
Your missing one point Hew. What I did and when I did it was legal at the time. My contention is that what Rumsfeld and Ashcroft have done is illegal.
I will be perfectly happy to let the courts decide that question and to live with that decision.
What I don't want to see is a bunch of Sgt's and private's swinging in the wind for policies that were made by unethical politicians. This is what happened at Abu Ghraib and instead of standing behind policies that they endorsed they ran away from them and blamed the incident on some "bad apples". What I would like to see is that the pardons Bush is going to give out, that they go to the guys in the trenches, the guys that were ordered to do the dirty work for them. Anyone above them should be held accountable.

It doesn't just stop at sgt's and privates. Reagan and Poindexter turned Oliver North into the most screwed over Marine in history.

Rosemary Westling
12-31-2008, 09:27 AM
It amazes me every time I see it. Die hard, chest thumping, conservatives who preach that this is a country of laws and not men who see it as a badge of honor that no man is above the law, will make exceptions to the people who govern us.
Can someone explain to me how this is.?

Cott: Try not to get involved with these RTF "Conservatives." Seems they don't want a discussion. They have their opinions and they are going to stick them despite the facts/information.

You will have to pry their opinions out of their cold dead heads to to get them to think rationally.

Try not to confuse them with the facts. Their minds are made up.

badbullgator
12-31-2008, 09:29 AM
Cott: Try not to get involved with these RTF "Conservatives." Seems they don't want a discussion. They have their opinions and they are going to stick them despite the facts/information.

You will have to pry their opinions out of their cold dead heads to to get them to think rationally.

Try not to confuse them with the facts. Their minds are made up.

Rigggghhhtttttt and your mind is as open as a 24 hour convience store:rolleyes:
Two way street honey

cotts135
12-31-2008, 10:38 AM
[quote=cotts135;378618]Your missing one point Hew. What I did and when I did it was legal at the time. My contention is that what Rumsfeld and Ashcroft have done is illegal.
[quote]


Perhaps the best example of someone having their head so far up their ass that they canít tell if it is day or night. It is OK when applied to me, but not for others.......:rolleyes:

You living in another dimension? Read everything I said not just part of it and do me a favor the next time you quote me use the whole quote
not just the part that suits your needs

Obviously your mindless submission to whatever the government says and your lack of critical and objective thinking is going to make it impossible to change your mind on what should be done in this case. My point in this whole thread is that there should be an investigation and if there is enough evidence to indict them then do it.
I think it safe to say you would disagree with that, and that's fine, but I think doing so says that these guys are above the law and that's something I think is wrong.

Hew
12-31-2008, 11:23 AM
Your missing one point Hew. What I did and when I did it was legal at the time. My contention is that what Rumsfeld and Ashcroft have done is illegal.
Bush authorized the interrogation methods with an executive order. Executive orders have the force of law. So those interrogation methods were legal at the time.


What I don't want to see is a bunch of Sgt's and private's swinging in the wind for policies that were made by unethical politicians.

That's strange, because earlier in this thread I could have sworn you agreed with the premise that "I was just following orders" is not an acceptable excuse. If it's crystal clear to you that illegal torture occured, then surely it should be crystal clear to the "torturers" as well, no? As a former CO, would you have followed an order that you thought was illegal/immoral? So maybe you can clarify...do torturers have legal liability for their actions or not?

Yardley was right...pursuit of these lawsuits does nobody any good. But if you're contending that only Rumsfeld and Ashcroft should be tried, then you're all but agreeing this is nothing more than political hackery and payback at its ugliest.

Bob Gutermuth
12-31-2008, 11:25 AM
What are all the liberals crying about? Thanks to the gullability of many of the electorate, you have your guy in the White House, and control both houses of congress, so get over yesterday already and start working on the better future that Comrade Obama promised us. OR are you going to run the country like a bananna republic and spend all your time prosecuting everything that the previous administration did or tried to do during its term?

Me, I'm part of the conservative underground that will continue to resist until we throw these momsers out in 2012.

JDogger
12-31-2008, 10:18 PM
Me, I'm part of the conservative underground that will continue to resist until we throw these momsers out in 2012.

Bob, what's a momser? Do you refer to "momism", 'an excessive devotion to mothers', or to the Greek God Momus, the God of mockery and censure?

My Mom wants to know,

JD

...and talk about crying, here's Unca Bill for ya,

http://www.retrievertraining.net/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif As expected...
...the after-election crowd is just as similar as the crowd prior to the election...and exhibiting the same demeanor.

HEY...all you lefties...YOU WON...YOU ARE SUPPOSED TO BE HAPPY...YOU ARE SUPPOSED TO BE IN A HEALING MOOD. YOU HAVE ELECTED THE "SECOND-COMING" (Proof is supplied by no less an authority that a person named Remington...a dude with an honorable gun name spewing anti-gun rhetoric in almost every post)

Now that we have discussed how much you are in lock step with the 'messiah'...happy for all the blessings he'll bestow on the great unwashed...you know the lesbians and gays...how much you'll enjoy sharing your wealth with those that have none...how happy you'll be to have your new neighbors from south of the border filling your schools to overflowing, while spitting on the flag (hey..it's their RIGHT) and giving the bird to those showing any respect for the USA by reciting their Pledge of Allegiance.

Your elation should be unrestrainable, as you view the losers in the process of eating their own, and whining and moaning because they've been duped into thinking they had a winner, not realizing he was selected by the same press that selected the aforementioned messiah.

Why are you the least bit concerned about the economy, when I watched so many of your constituents that were so well educated by your new leader, that they will no longer need to make house payments, or auto payments, and they can party hardy when that big check comes in the mail from their saviour Obama.

But you should be concerned about the withdrawal so many of those hard working campaign followers are going through. I say keep those donations flowing, so those campaign workers don't need to go on welfare, and become embarrased. And I know you'll do it happily, because your messiah would want you to be happy and fulfilled.

That's why it's so disheartening to not see a special fund get started to begin the tax collecting, even before it's required after the messiah takes office. Just think of how many constituents you could help right now, when they really need it....and before they 'get educated' into realizing it ain't gonna happen... because you and I both know they were voting for Santa, the Easter Bunny, and the tooth fairy all rolled into one.

Like I warned before, keep your powder dry boys, because in these folks eyes, you ARE the haves. Just because you voted to enable all these have-nots, don't think it gives you a free pass. So laugh it up...be joyous for the fun season ahead. Keep smiling, so everybody will wonder what you are up to.

And just to show y'all, my hearts in the right place, I leave you with some light poetry.

UB

The election is over,
The talking is done.
My party lost, your party won.
So let us be friends,
Let arguments pass.
I'll hug my elephant,
You kiss your ....donkey
__________________
Waaah, waaah, waaah!!! regards,
JD

Bob Gutermuth
12-31-2008, 10:42 PM
Momser is a Yiddish word that refers to the legitimacy of one's birth.

shootncast
01-01-2009, 07:45 AM
Is this The Retriever Training page or did I accidentally sign up to www.spewyourpoliticalbullshitonme.com?

cotts135
01-01-2009, 08:48 AM
Bush authorized the interrogation methods with an executive order. Executive orders have the force of law. So those interrogation methods were legal at the time.
Generally speaking you are correct. However EO's can be challenged in the court system as to their lawfullness.



That's strange, because earlier in this thread I could have sworn you agreed with the premise that "I was just following orders" is not an acceptable excuse. If it's crystal clear to you that illegal torture occured, then surely it should be crystal clear to the "torturers" as well, no? As a former CO, would you have followed an order that you thought was illegal/immoral? So maybe you can clarify...do torturers have legal liability for their actions or not?

In an absolute way I am afraid they do. Trust me I don't like this at all and that's why I suggested they get a pardon


Yardley was right...pursuit of these lawsuits does nobody any good. But if you're contending that only Rumsfeld and Ashcroft should be tried, then you're all but agreeing this is nothing more than political hackery and payback at its ugliest.

I disagree with Yardley on this. To overlook it is almost to condone it which leads to more law breaking. At a minimal my thoughts are that a thorough investigation be done.

Not contending that only Rumsfeld and Ashcroft be tried that is what was in the Newsweek article. Again I am not partial to any political party, if your involved and you broke the law then you need to held accountable.

JDogger
01-01-2009, 11:21 AM
Momser is a Yiddish word that refers to the legitimacy of one's birth.

Aah... you meant mamzer. Actually then, the plural would be mamzeyrim

Bob Gutermuth
01-01-2009, 11:36 AM
Its been a while since I perused The Joys of Yiddish but I believe there are several spellings listed. Who would think on this forum someone else would know Yiddish??

Julie R.
01-01-2009, 11:56 AM
Is this The Retriever Training page or did I accidentally sign up to www.spewyourpoliticalbullshitonme.com? (http://www.spewyourpoliticalbullshitonme.com?)


Shootncast, this is the Political forum section created by the site owner to keep political discussions separate from the main, RETRIEVER TRAINING section. If you dislike political talk don't let the sun set on you :-P but some of us enjoy discussing politics amongst largely like-minded folks and baiting the dozen or so liberals who regularly try to impose their trilateral humor on us.

M Remington
01-01-2009, 03:24 PM
UB, I'm not anti gun at all. I hunt and shoot skeet and trap. Hell, I even belong to a gun club.

But, I don't think there is no reason for people to own some types of weapons.

Hoosier
01-01-2009, 04:00 PM
UB, I'm not anti gun at all. I hunt and shoot skeet and trap. Hell, I even belong to a gun club.

But, I don't think there is no reason for people to own some types of weapons.


Bet they love ya. Do tell em which guns they should throw in the garbage.

M Remington
01-01-2009, 04:10 PM
You know it! I drive up in my import with my Obama-Biden sticker on the back, Beatles music blasting.

Then, after I break some targets, I tell them that assault rifles have no purpose other than to kill people. I also tell them that I don't have a problem with extensive background checks because anyone owning a gun should be sane. Finally, I tell them how the NRA creates boogey men and Second Amendment conspiracies so that people will donate to the organization--Wayne LaPierre doesn't work for free.

After I have laid out my left-wing argument, I head off to Starbucks for a hazelnut latte.

JDogger
01-01-2009, 05:48 PM
Its been a while since I perused The Joys of Yiddish but I believe there are several spellings listed. Who would think on this forum someone else would know Yiddish??

Who would think? I agree with you on the mamzeyrim in Washington. We just got rid of a bunch, and in three weeks, a few more.

JD

Bob Gutermuth
01-01-2009, 07:46 PM
Ban liberals not firearms:D

JDogger
01-01-2009, 09:33 PM
Ban liberals not firearms:D

Bob, you're funny :D.

From a gun totin', tobacco chewin', duck killin', retriever trainin', liberal, enjoy a prosperous and Happy New Year.

Ya need me more than you want to admit regards,

JD

Bruce MacPherson
01-02-2009, 01:48 AM
You know it! I drive up in my import with my Obama-Biden sticker on the back, Beatles music blasting.

Then, after I break some targets, I tell them that assault rifles have no purpose other than to kill people. I also tell them that I don't have a problem with extensive background checks because anyone owning a gun should be sane. Finally, I tell them how the NRA creates boogey men and Second Amendment conspiracies so that people will donate to the organization--Wayne LaPierre doesn't work for free.

After I have laid out my left-wing argument, I head off to Starbucks for a hazelnut latte.

Now that'll get em stirred up, love the visual.

Gun_Dog2002
01-02-2009, 02:14 AM
You know it! I drive up in my import with my Obama-Biden sticker on the back, Beatles music blasting.

Then, after I break some targets, I tell them that assault rifles have no purpose other than to kill people. I also tell them that I don't have a problem with extensive background checks because anyone owning a gun should be sane. Finally, I tell them how the NRA creates boogey men and Second Amendment conspiracies so that people will donate to the organization--Wayne LaPierre doesn't work for free.

After I have laid out my left-wing argument, I head off to Starbucks for a hazelnut latte.

And i bet your LAW abiding friends love the fact you want to take them away from them, but leave them in the criminals hands.

/Paul

Hew
01-02-2009, 06:21 AM
UB, I'm not anti gun at all. I hunt and shoot skeet and trap. Hell, I even belong to a gun club.

But, I don't think there is no reason for people to own some types of weapons.
What does hunting and shooting trap/skeet have to do with the 2nd Ammendment? I suppose Joe Stalin was quite a fan of our 1st Ammendment since he owned some pencils and paper.

Patrick Johndrow
01-02-2009, 09:01 AM
Then, after I break some targets, I tell them that assault rifles have no purpose other than to kill people. I also tell them that I don't have a problem with extensive background checks because anyone owning a gun should be sane. Finally, I tell them how the NRA creates boogey men and Second Amendment conspiracies so that people will donate to the organization--Wayne LaPierre doesn't work for free.


The NRA does a great job protecting OUR gun rights and the “boogey men” have names Nancy Pelosi, Barack Hussein Obama, Rod Blagojevich, not to mention the throng of Kool Aid drinking left-wingers

FYI, I went coyote hunting last weekend with my Bush Master AR15

dixidawg
01-02-2009, 09:04 AM
I tell them that assault rifles have no purpose other than to kill people. I also tell them that I don't have a problem with extensive background checks because anyone owning a gun should be sane. Finally, I tell them how the NRA creates boogey men and Second Amendment conspiracies so that people will donate to the organization--Wayne LaPierre doesn't work for free.



Are you sure your name isn't really Jim Zumbo?

Hoosier
01-02-2009, 11:00 AM
You know it! I drive up in my import with my Obama-Biden sticker on the back, Beatles music blasting.

Then, after I break some targets, I tell them that assault rifles have no purpose other than to kill people. I also tell them that I don't have a problem with extensive background checks because anyone owning a gun should be sane. Finally, I tell them how the NRA creates boogey men and Second Amendment conspiracies so that people will donate to the organization--Wayne LaPierre doesn't work for free.

After I have laid out my left-wing argument, I head off to Starbucks for a hazelnut latte.

This is why our gun range requires members to be in the NRA. Keeps out a lot of the riff raff. Usually non NRA members are people we wouldn't want to be around. The gun range is a nice place to go and be around like minded people. Same as a gay pride parade would be for a lot of liberals. I sure as hell wouldn't go sit around at a gay pride event and tell em they should ban sodomy.(even though I consider it gross)

K.Bullock
01-02-2009, 06:34 PM
You know it! I drive up in my import with my Obama-Biden sticker on the back, Beatles music blasting.

Then, after I break some targets, I tell them that assault rifles have no purpose other than to kill people. I also tell them that I don't have a problem with extensive background checks because anyone owning a gun should be sane. Finally, I tell them how the NRA creates boogey men and Second Amendment conspiracies so that people will donate to the organization--Wayne LaPierre doesn't work for free.

After I have laid out my left-wing argument, I head off to Starbucks for a hazelnut latte.
I drive up in my import, with a caramel machiatto latte, another german import by HK. And I mind my own business, blast away have a nice time and good conversation then go home.

I am beginning to think it is something genetic in a hyper-liberal that makes them think that they hold some mysterious key to wisdom and knowledge.

It is fortunate that you must be an NRA member to belong to the gun club where I shoot. It is one place the PC gestapo has not invaded. ...we even put up Christmas decorations. ;)

Julie R.
01-03-2009, 03:18 PM
UB, I'm not anti gun at all. I hunt and shoot skeet and trap. Hell, I even belong to a gun club.
http://i490.photobucket.com/albums/rr266/MouseOnAFeedsack/gayboy.jpg

But, I don't think there is no reason for people to own some types of weapons.

We're glad you can appreciate guns, too.

YardleyLabs
01-03-2009, 08:10 PM
...
It is fortunate that you must be an NRA member to belong to the gun club where I shoot. It is one place the PC gestapo has not invaded. ...we even put up Christmas decorations. ;)

Kevin, I'll admit it worked with me. I enjoyed shooting at a local gun club for several years until Wayne LaPisser took over at the NRA and made it clear that promoting a radical conservative, agenda was more important than promoting safe use of firearms through training classes and competition. I quit rather than continue to send them my dues (Needless to say, after more than 10 years they still ask me for money.). I moved my shooting to a commercial firing range used almost entirely by cops who look like flaming liberals when compared with the current leadership of the NRA.

K.Bullock
01-03-2009, 11:57 PM
Kevin, I'll admit it worked with me. I enjoyed shooting at a local gun club for several years until Wayne LaPisser took over at the NRA and made it clear that promoting a radical conservative, agenda was more important than promoting safe use of firearms through training classes and competition. I quit rather than continue to send them my dues (Needless to say, after more than 10 years they still ask me for money.). I moved my shooting to a commercial firing range used almost entirely by cops who look like flaming liberals when compared with the current leadership of the NRA.


Wow Jeff ..you really do not like Wayne Lapierre;). I'll admit that he is not my all time favorite either, and I get tired of the sensationalist alerts and constant pleas for money. The reality is that they are the only organization gun owners have to speak out in defense of our second amendment rights. They'll get my support as long as the constitution can be reinterpreted to suit someones Utopian fantasies..

For what it's worth I think the reason anyone must be a NRA member to join the Gun club is because the clubs insurance is through the NRA also.

Franco
01-04-2009, 12:53 AM
I don't have any problems calling a spade, a spade. I've been critical of both Democrats and Republicans! They have both created the current financial mess, failed foreign policy, failed domestic policy and lack leadership. It won't change over the next 4 or 8 years. Torture? I'm all for it if it keeps American citzens safe, it's just that SIMPLE to me. It should be an option available to our President. Sometimes you have to hurt someone to protect your own, a concept foreign to some. Maybe too many of us have lived too sheltered a life and think we live at Strawberry Fields. Assualt Weapons? Sometimes people need killing. If someone broke into my house my option would be to pick up the defense weapon that has the most killing potential. Or, if many long guns are banned I may need an automatic 6mm to defend my rights. How else will they be able to pry it from my cold dead fingers? I was in Los Angeles during the Rodney King riots in 91. Anyone remember that truck driver getting bashed in the head with a brick?Well, that won't happen to me.The Korean families living in the downtown LA area saved their families and businesses because they had assult riffles.And, there will be more riots and violence because the world is neither fair or safe. Bob G, welcome to the underground. Lets call it the ADF(American Defense League) in the future.Julie, that photo is halarious. UB, keep posting your great material!

Pete
01-04-2009, 07:29 AM
know all you manly men who call yourselves conservatives and have guns, think that anyone who doesn't think like you do are weak or limp spined. I can tell you from working 22 yrs as a Corrections officer in NY that some of these guys who yelled the loudest how tough they were and owned guns were some of the biggest pus#%$ I knew. The guys that didn't say much and who I am sure you would consider weak, were the guys who were there when you needed them most.




Dah no giant DAH
you are dealing with criminal minds,,,you are dealing with pathological liars and scitzo's
If you are putting them on the same plane as someone who gets up early 5-7 days a week and works his balls off till dark,,,and who has to fight the F,n government to keep a small portion of the fruits of his labor then maby you should be catgorized in the same boat as your clients



I guarantee your clients are liberal and would suck whatever they can from an honest person
Criminals love the liberal mindset.

Pete

Lisa S.
01-04-2009, 03:56 PM
I don't have any problems calling a spade, a spade. I've been critical of both Democrats and Republicans! They have both created the current financial mess, failed foreign policy, failed domestic policy and lack leadership. It won't change over the next 4 or 8 years. Torture? I'm all for it if it keeps American citzens safe, it's just that SIMPLE to me. It should be an option available to our President. Sometimes you have to hurt someone to protect your own, a concept foreign to some. Maybe too many of us have lived too sheltered a life and think we live at Strawberry Fields. Assualt Weapons? Sometimes people need killing. If someone broke into my house my option would be to pick up the defense weapon that has the most killing potential. Or, if many long guns are banned I may need an automatic 6mm to defend my rights. How else will they be able to pry it from my cold dead fingers? I was in Los Angeles during the Rodney King riots in 91. Anyone remember that truck driver getting bashed in the head with a brick?Well, that won't happen to me.The Korean families living in the downtown LA area saved their families and businesses because they had assult riffles.And, there will be more riots and violence because the world is neither fair or safe. Bob G, welcome to the underground. Lets call it the ADF(American Defense League) in the future.Julie, that photo is halarious. UB, keep posting your great material!

Fantastic post! :cool:

badbullgator
01-05-2009, 11:10 AM
UB, I'm not anti gun at all. I hunt and shoot skeet and trap. Hell, I even belong to a gun club.

But, I don't think there is no reason for people to own some types of weapons.

Ah, so since you THINK that it should be that. There is a reason we all have the choice to own weapons and it has nothing to do with hunting, skeet, or even necessarily protecting yourself from someone breaking into your home. It amazes me how misunderstood a very simple thing like the second amendment is.

I would guess that since you drive a sub compact hybrid that you donít see why people should be allowed to own SUVís or trucks... I seldom see anyone calling for forced ownership of guns so why do you feel that you should have forced restrictions on gun ownership by those legally entitled to own firearms? Choice is a good thing because it allows you to decide for yourself and not someone to decide for you. No two people in this world will agree on the same things and that is why you can chose not to own those scary black guns while I can chose to own as many of them as I can get my hands on. How exactly do I do you any harm by owning assault weapons?

We are a nation that is less than 300 years old and we are very fortunate that our government and society has run pretty smoothly with the exception of the Civil War. This is not always the case in many other countries and things here could change in the blink of an eye. In all likelihood anarchy, revolutionÖ on a large scale is not going to occur here and we all hope it does not. We also hope that we are never involved in a war that comes to our shores and that too seems like a very unrealistic possibility, but it is in fact a possibility none the less. Much like an insurance policy that you hope to never use owning the best form of protection you can is in your best interest. I hope that my firearms are never used for anything more than killing birds and tasty mammals and if that is the case I will pass them along to whoever I see fit in my will, but should some catastrophic event ever occur I will at least give myself and family a fighting chance to defend ourselves against whoever is meaning us harm, be it an outside force or a tyrannical government.

BTW- you used a double negative (don't think there is no reason). Are you just yanking us? Do you really mean you think there are reasons, becasue if you don't think there are no reasons you must agree that there are in fact reasons

zeus3925
01-05-2009, 11:28 PM
Seems to me this thread is about intelligent as the average cement block. Its facts are based on so much bull roar and worth about as much as a warm pitcher of horse drain.

dixidawg
01-06-2009, 07:12 AM
Thank you for your input. You have added tremendously to the discussion.