1 - 10 Next
In response to:

America at the Tipping Point (Part 1)

William6382 Wrote: 1 hour ago (2:59 PM)
Check Loyal Dem's prior posts. What he writes sounds plausible only to the most die hard liberals, which he is not.
In response to:

America at the Tipping Point (Part 1)

William6382 Wrote: 1 hour ago (2:56 PM)
Carter approached the Presidency from the perspective of a born again Christian American who was unrealistically optimistic about the goodness of mankind and the ability of government to foster it. Obama is approaching the Presidency from the perspective of a technically American agnostic who is realistically cynical about the role of gender and race and the ability of the government to exploit it for its own ends. The bottom line for Carter was to achieve America's promise, although he proved inept. The bottom line for Obama is to punish America and he is succeeding, probably beyond his wildest dreams.
"We aren't -- or shouldn't be -- defined by race, gender, class, politics, or anything else." As someone who has helped many people discover their roots, I have found that they often reject anything that does not fit the life story they have created for themselves. Facts do not seem to matter when they conflict with fantasy. Democrat balkanization attempts notwithstanding, it is not others who define us. We define ourselves and live our lives accordingly.
He has a problem answering that question himself. Much like Obama, he grew up with a mixed heritage - Jewish and Puerto Rican. He was named Gerald, but his Puerto Rican relatives called him Geraldo, a name he would not use until it landed him a job as a "Hispanic" reporter.
In a sane world you would be absolutely right. The fact is that certain guns have been banned, thereby making the guns themselves illegal. Yes, the governments that have done so are criminal, but they have succeeded.
So the real issue is that the government under Malloy is falling short of the wealth redistribution expectations of the state's liberals.
I'm in Maryland where gun control legislation enacted in 2013 created a legal minefield for people who simply want to "keep and bear arms" legally. On the one hand more than 80 firearms were banned by name, but current legal owners can keep theirs. On the other hand many firearms that were formerly "regulated" by requiring a waiting period between purchase and pick-up, are now "cash and carry." Firearms with more than two "assault weapon characteristics" are no longer legal in the state, but one I recently bought had five of the characteristics and was deemed by the state to be legal. It fires the same round as the banned AK-47 and is more accurate. Magazines with a capacity of more than 10 rounds can no longer be bought or sold in Maryland, but owners can not only keep the ones they have, they can buy them out of state and bring them back to Maryland legally. In some cases if they come with a firearm, the dealer is allowed to mail them out of state for the buyer to pick up and bring back. And let's not forget the additional $200 in up front costs that the state imposed on hand gun buyers to acquire a Handgun Qualification License." While those of us who want to abide by the law continue to jump through the legislative hoops that make little or no common sense, the bad guys are not "infringed" at all. Tell me again what these laws achieve.
In response to:

The 20 Best Quotes From Greg Gutfeld

William6382 Wrote: 8 hours ago (8:19 AM)
15) "You know you're getting close to the truth when someone is calling you a racist."
In response to:

Irresponsible Choices

William6382 Wrote: 8 hours ago (8:12 AM)
Hillary hitched her wagon to her husband's star. She allowed herself to be humiliated because as he rose in power she was there to reap the benefits. Her "credentials" are those of a woman who sold herself willingly. The latest transaction was accepting the position of Secretary of State when she sold herself to someone she can't stand because it moves her toward what she wants. If the world thinks our current President is a feckless clown, imagine what they will think of Clinton 2.0.
"No Democratic presidential candidate has won a majority of white men since Lyndon B. Johnson in 1964." Proof positive that the majority of non-whites and non-males just aren't that smart. On the other hand they feel good about themselves and have the best of intentions.
1 - 10 Next