I Can't Believe I'm Rooting for Harry Reid

Status
Not open for further replies.
Rating - 100%
31   0   1
Joined
Jan 27, 2009
Messages
13,371
Likes
3,040
Location
Central NH and Boston Metro West
How does James Webb, the Democrat from WV vote on gun issues?

(putting flack jacket on)

He's a great American and is pretty conservative. He's a West Point grad, highly decorated Marine Corp Vietnam Vet and was Reagan's Undersecretary of the Navy, then Assistant Secretary of Defense.

I read his book Born Fighting and he seemed to fit into the Republican mold pretty well, except that I think he has some respect for the 4th and 5th Amendments.
 
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Joined
Sep 7, 2010
Messages
352
Likes
18
i would say that the importance of being pro-gun, along with pro-free speech, and pro bill of rights in general, is paramount...moreso than being in support or opposed to a government bailout of any kind. on the one hand, you have a government using their power as given to them by the people, to direct funds in a way in which they see fit. on the other hand, you've got support, or opposition to the very fundamentals of the country. defy the constitution and what do we have left? it is the very being of this country, and should be held in the highest regard by the citizens of the US, and the lawmakers. but especially the citizens. the importance trumps that of anything else imo...
 
Rating - 100%
31   0   1
Joined
Jan 27, 2009
Messages
13,371
Likes
3,040
Location
Central NH and Boston Metro West
The thing is that people don't seem to understand that these rights while not absolute (the classic "fire" in a crowded movie house comes to mind) they are very nearly so.

There is a thing in the news now about a group of Jesus freaks who protest at fallen Iraq or Afghan war Vets' funerals. The amazing thing is they aren't even protesting anything the vet or the military did.
They are protesting that the sins of homosexuals are the reasons these men died. Very strange. Kindof disturbing.

The families of these vets are suing the group to stop them from continuing to protest at funerals.
I find it funny because the families are trying to abridge the rights (however idiotically exercised) that their relative died to defend.

As distasteful and disrespectful as their protests are, I think their speech is protected by the 1st Amendment.

The supreme court is hearing arguments on this, I believe this week.
 
Rating - 100%
8   0   0
Joined
Sep 15, 2009
Messages
12,146
Likes
3,057
Location
SC
There is a thing in the news now about a group of Jesus freaks who protest at fallen Iraq or Afghan war Vets' funerals.

Those guys are not real Christians (because real Christians do not hate anyone). They are the Christian equivalent of a R.I.N.O.
 
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Joined
Sep 7, 2010
Messages
352
Likes
18
in the case of the westboro church vs. that family, i would obviously side with the family out of empathy for their loss and gratitude towards the fallen...

normally i would side with the defendants, in this case, westboro, however, in their case, i believe it's stated that the soldier was directly targeted in the speech. this could be construed as hate speech, or speech intended to incite a violent or non peaceful outcome. the courts have ruled in the past that hate speech is not protected. so in my opinion on that matter, i would say that westboro would have to change their tactic in regards to the approach they used at that particular funeral.

we all know they are filthy pieces of crap due to their general message...but to restrict their speech is to infringe on MY rights as well, and im not cool with that.
 

Titan

Banned
Rating - 100%
4   0   0
Joined
Feb 7, 2008
Messages
5,997
Likes
357
Location
South Eastern MA
Bush spent his first four years with a Republican congress, and spent like crazy. More to the point, every big spending bill passed during Bush's presidency was supported by the White House. Even TARP. He gets blame because he deserves it.

Bush and his first term Congress 'spent like crazy', in part, because we had been attacked by terrorists. A response was necessary overseas and at home via Homeland Security 'investments'. It was also necessary to kick start an economy reeling from the after effects of the terror attack. People's confidence had to be restored and 'the ownership society' looked to be a better gamble than government serfdom. It was mismanaged but worth a shot at the time.

Obviously there was the normal motivation to spend like crazy in order to convince voters that 'one was bringing home the bacon', but there were also national imperatives that required some attention.
 
Last edited:

Pilgrim

Moderator
NES Member
Rating - 100%
14   0   0
Joined
Aug 24, 2005
Messages
16,008
Likes
1,255
Location
RETIRED, at home or wherever I want to be
We've gone from Harry Reid being a friend of the 2A(the original subject), to government spending, to sandpaper rubbers, to term limits, to gay marriage, to Jesus freaks, to what's a real Christian then to freedom of speech and finally to pork.

Think this thread has drifted enough yet?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom