At least one liberal "gets it"

"We should have learned by now that prohibition is ineffective"

I continue to preach - if you depend on the controlling of others to create your "perfect" world - I ask "Just how is that working out for you?"
 
There's liberal and then there's sheep. Nothing about being liberal would imply support for gun control. But everything about being a liberal sheep today says you have to support it or be deemed some kind of crazy oddball.

I had to spend a bit of time with the in laws this weekend. Between my father-in-law who thinks Bush/Cheney can do no evil, and my mother-in-law who thinks we're morally obligated to protect everybody from themselves, I get it from both sides. Boy is my head always aching when I leave there.
 
My Favorite:

I wouldn't say "love" is necessary (3+ / 0-)
Recommended by:pattyp, lightfoot, NMDad

And, quite honestly, every gun owner I know is also a Democrat.

But it is not unreasonable to want some form of gun control, and it is possible to have that without ignoring the second ammendment.

by BoiseBlue on Mon Apr 21, 2008 at 04:08:43 PM PDT

I'm a pacifist (0+ / 0-)
I find guns despicable and inherently evil.

To me, the absolute most important issue ANY of us has, and this nation has, is that we are currently being ruled by a gang of immoral war criminals. -Hornito

by discocarp on Mon Apr 21, 2008 at 04:27:50 PM PDT

Count me amoung the Gun Grabbers (1+ / 0-)
Recommended by:discocarp

I have no intention of debating this with my fellow kossacks and democrats here. It is as intractable as issues of faith.

Just know that there are plenty of us out here that believe very differently about the role of weapons in a civilized and enlightened society... and the insanity of advocating MORE arms in a country where children lie slain in our streets. To us, your argument is an abomination of the highest order.

But we have a place in Democratic Party, and we have no intention of running off to Ralphie and the Greens. We are going to stay here and keep working for more of those sensible regulations we believe essential. We are not alone and those regulations are constitutional and the very core of our beliefs. You are free to disagree, democratically.

Peace Out.

by fblau on Mon Apr 21, 2008 at 06:07:24 PM PDT
 
Last edited:
this is an excellent article. It takes a lot of bravery to stand up and defend 2A as a consistent part of the liberal agenda. Thats a lonely position to take, but you can't call for power to the people if you try to take away their means to exert power, and valuing peaceful resistance does not invalidate self defense.
 
Well, "true" liberals. The liberals of years past, would be appauled at what is proposed in the name of liberalism these days. Gun ownership back then was a very liberal concept.

Of course, the same can be said of modern conservatives.
 
There's also a heart-warming display of hard-core liberals devouring their own in progress over at the DU. [smile]

Ken

Slightly OT, but take a read through
www . democrati c u nderground.com/forums/rules_detailed.html
"We ban conservative disruptors who are opposed to the broad goals of this website. If you think overall that George W. Bush is doing a swell job, or if you wish to see Republicans win, or if you are generally supportive of conservative ideals, please do not register to post, as you will likely be banned."
www . democrati c u nderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=118&topic_id=160510&mesg_id=161233
[rolleyes]
So, if you think for yourself, or if you'd consider voting for a Republican/other candidate or a candidate with "conservative ideals" over a Democrat that you don't agree with, you're not allowed to post there.

Sure, it's the board owner's right to enforce those rules, but in doing so they're demonstrating that they're just as much part of the problem as the people they're railing against.[sad2]
 
Last edited:
Slightly off-topic...

I hope some of the mods here have gotten some good time off to rest up for the work they will have to do when the DU moonbats start posting here. It's just a suggestion but you people really shouldn't leave links to places like DU hot - they can trace back from where it came from and the we're up to our necks in moonbats and freaks here in no time. I could be wrong but other places don't leave links hot to them for a reason...

Joe R.
 
they can trace back from where it came from and the we're up to our necks in moonbats and freaks here in no time.

Exactly why everybody should be running Firefox with the refcontrol extension installed. As far as I'm concerned, nobody has any business knowing where I followed a link from...
 
Joe - Thanks...duly noted, and un-linked.

Edited to add: Anyone using Opera can turn off referrer logging through Tools > Preferences > Advanced > Network > uncheck "enable referrer logging"
 
Last edited:
I'll have to look for "refcontrol" as I use FF at home. As for the OP - Brilliant.

The comments, OTOH, make my brain hurt.
 
Edited to add: Anyone using Opera can turn off referrer logging through Tools > Preferences > Advanced > Network > uncheck "enable referrer logging"

Some sites won't work unless you have referrer logging turned on. Refcontrol with Firefox has a bit more control to help in this situation. It will let you automatically have referrers if the last page you visited was at the current site, and a no referrer if it wasn't. So every site you visit thinks your referrers are working like normal, but it looks to the site like you just opened the browser fresh and typed the URL for the site into the address bar.
 
I'll have to look for "refcontrol" as I use FF at home. As for the OP - Brilliant.

The comments, OTOH, make my brain hurt.


Yea, I've looked at some of the comments from DU and I feel like I lost a few brain cells reading that stuff. Where do these people come from and how have they made it this far in life?

Joe R.
 
Back
Top Bottom