Ted Nugent, You gotta see this!

Every time I see Ted Nugent defend our rights I am more and more impressed with his ability to speak. He makes his case in a very blunt yet eloquent manner.

Bravo Ted!
 
I love everything he stands for and his ability to eliminate all the BS to get to the point very quickly. Manlove? Maybe.[grin]
 
Fixxah said:
I love everything he stands for and his ability to eliminate all the BS to get to the point very quickly. Manlove? Maybe.[grin]
Click to expand...

You're still ok John. Manlove of Nugent, Chuck Norris, & Clint Eastwood is acceptable. [wink]

All BS aside, I think he's fabulous as a performer & as a spokesperson for rational patriots. I have love for the Nuge too. [wink]
 
Last edited:
Even the insects on this planet has a mechanism for self defense, what's hard to understand about survival and self defense for human beings?
 
He has the right idea but conveys it in a piss-poor manner.. the self promoting, draft dodging, loudmouth Alpha male a**h*** is an embarrassment to gun owners everywhere.

I really have a problem with gun owners who think this derelict is good for our image. [thinking]

And FWIW... I thought he kicked ass back in 78 with "Double Live Gonzo", but
his music career took a sharp downturn after that.
 
LoginName said:
He has the right idea but conveys it in a piss-poor manner.. the self promoting, draft dodging, loudmouth Alpha male a**h*** is an embarrassment to gun owners everywhere.
Click to expand...

I don't see how that's being "piss poor". Sounds like he just cuts to the chase.

And about the "draft-dodging"? He gets more points in my book for telling the government to go fly a kite because he won't kill on behalf of the state. If my number was drafted, I'd do the same thing. In fact, I'd probably record the video of me burning the ticket and post it on YouTube.

Ted Nugent is a true patriot when it comes to gun-rights too. Should there be any restrictions? Yes answer: "No." Which is the correct answer. And you don't need a piece of paper to tell you that you can protect yourself. Brilliant answer. The Founding Fathers simply enumerated it so that neo-liberals and their gun-grabbing cronies have a significant obstacle to hurdle.

However, I disagree with him on several other important issues, especially foreign policy.
 
LoginName said:
He has the right idea but conveys it in a piss-poor manner.. the self promoting, draft dodging, loudmouth Alpha male a**h*** is an embarrassment to gun owners everywhere.

I really have a problem with gun owners who think this derelict is good for our image. [thinking]

And FWIW... I thought he kicked ass back in 78 with "Double Live Gonzo", but
his music career took a sharp downturn after that.
Click to expand...


Sorry, but I disagree. He's got the Balls to speak up and go public which most don't have anymore. If we had more people like him the neo-con libs would have their tails between their legs a heads buried in the sand wondering what the hell just hit them [angry2]

But I do agree his double live gonzo kicked some major a$$. Saw him in Springfield in the early 80's and my ears are still ringing [laugh]
 
Nugent is a good guy on 2nd stuff, one of the best infact.

too bad he's a hardcore drug warrior. Which means he believes in absolute liberty to K&BA, which is good, but he also believes the Govt. has a place telling us what we can or can't do with our bodies.

Liberty. you are either 100% free, or 100% a slave. there is no in between... just the illusion of being in between. And it's freedom for all, or freedom for none. If big bro can selectively limit our freedoms as Big bro see's fit, then none of us are free to begin with.

remember, the fundementals of freedom. Personal liberty, and private property. you are your own man, on your own land, and no one may come and adjust your behavior until it effects another free man on his own land.

Lets try and get back to that folks. it would be good for us.
 
animal8526 said:
Nugent is a good guy on 2nd stuff, one of the best infact.

too bad he's a hardcore drug warrior. Which means he believes in absolute liberty to K&BA, which is good, but he also believes the Govt. has a place telling us what we can or can't do with our bodies.

Liberty. you are either 100% free, or 100% a slave. there is no in between... just the illusion of being in between. And it's freedom for all, or freedom for none. If big bro can selectively limit our freedoms as Big bro see's fit, then none of us are free to begin with.

remember, the fundementals of freedom. Personal liberty, and private property. you are your own man, on your own land, and no one may come and adjust your behavior until it effects another free man on his own land.

Lets try and get back to that folks. it would be good for us.
Click to expand...

+6 Amen to that. When people find out I'm a Libertarian 100% in favor of decriminalizing all drugs, they assume I must have a selfish motive because I smoke weed or something. I don't do any drugs. None. Not a harmless drug like pot nor a dangerous drug like tobacco.

I am simply against government interference in victimless crimes, I am not pro-drug. Just because I believe a person has the inherent right to inject themselves with heroin (or drain cleaner if they like), doesn't mean I think it's a good idea, it's just not the government's business. It could BECOME their business if a drug user chooses to commit a crime to continue their habit.

But arguing that we should ban drugs because a person might commit a crime, sounds a teensy bit similar to another argument we're all familiar with.
 
JohnM said:
+6 Amen to that. When people find out I'm a Libertarian 100% in favor of decriminalizing all drugs, they assume I must have a selfish motive because I smoke weed or something. I don't do any drugs. None. Not a harmless drug like pot nor a dangerous drug like tobacco.

I am simply against government interference in victimless crimes, I am not pro-drug. Just because I believe a person has the inherent right to inject themselves with heroin (or drain cleaner if they like), doesn't mean I think it's a good idea, it's just not the government's business. It could BECOME their business if a drug user chooses to commit a crime to continue their habit.

But arguing that we should ban drugs because a person might commit a crime, sounds a teensy bit similar to another argument we're all familiar with.
Click to expand...


bingo. you and I are on the same page pardner.
 
ted

i didn't know about ted until i saw him on cam and company, and i had never seen the videos. thanks for bringing them up.

i guess i don't really care what his past was all about, he is pro 2nd and
speaks boldly about it.

we should be more vocal about it instead of hiding it as if we were the
criminals....

The governor can take his legislation where the sun don't shine.

nuff said.

JimB
 
animal8526 said:
he also believes the Govt. has a place telling us what we can or can't do with our bodies.
Click to expand...

I have never heard him say such a thing. He gives his friends grief for doing it and he doesn't believe in doing it BUT I've never heard him say that he believes the government can get involved in the process. IMHO he believes that we should have the strength and conviction to police ourselves.
 
Snapshot said:
I have never heard him say such a thing. He gives his friends grief for doing it and he doesn't believe in doing it BUT I've never heard him say that he believes the government can get involved in the process. IMHO he believes that we should have the strength and conviction to police ourselves.
Click to expand...

Er.... Ted is for HUGE government when it comes to drugs. Ted thinks a man doesn't need a piece of paper (the bill of rights) to give him permission to defend himself, it is an obvious and inherent right. Yet he believes if a man finds a poppy, a weed, or a mushroom growing on his own land and eats it, the government should have the right to arrest and jail him.

Now, lest anyone accuse me of thread hijacking, note this is a TED NUGENT THREAD about guns and freedom, I will not talk about drugs, except to QUOTE TED NUGENT'S OWN WORDS, with links to the quotes-

http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=30247

I am aware there are prominent conservatives who make strong arguments in favor of legalizing drugs. Their argument is that legalizing drugs will take the crime out of drugs. Not only do I not believe that, but I have never been in favor of pouring gas on a blazing fire in hopes of extinguishing it, which is what I believe will happen if ever we are foolish enough to legalize drug use in America.

We have all the laws we need to fight drugs. What America needs is the will-power and a renewed warrior spirit to crush evil and evil doers.

We need a Drug Czar who will commit to the American people to stopping at least 50% of the illegal drugs flowing into the country within the first year of the Obama Administration. That's the kind of leadership America wants and deserves from its government.

Call me, President Obama. Hippies, dope heads, corrupt politicos and various other human debris hate me, which makes me the perfect man for the job.

As Drug Czar, I would charge our mayors and police departments to commit to fighting the drug gangs their top priority. Our inner cities will remain war zones until we commit to taking the trash out.
Click to expand...


Please notice in the quote below how he does NOT differentiate drug users from drug kingpins, a similar conflation technique that anti-gunners use (from the same link):

I am not naïve enough to believe we can ever fully eradicate drugs. However, as America's Drug Czar, I would put a big hurt on the drug kingpins and consumers like they have never seen. Every American who smokes dope, manufactures, buys or sells meth or uses any illegal drugs is aiding and abetting the enemies of America. Case closed. This spiritual inbreeding and cannibalism must be identified, admitted to and stopped immediately. America can, and must do this. Good over evil. Next.
Click to expand...

You know what? There are hundreds more quotes, they are all the same, you can google for more, no point beating a dead horse. I don't care what anyone's stance is on Government and drugs, but please understand that Uncle Ted is not a Libertarian, not even close. He's for big, monster, thuggish government when HE wants it, and offended when anyone else does.
 
JohnM said:
Yet he believes if a man finds a poppy, a weed, or a mushroom growing on his own land and eats it, the government should have the right to arrest and jail him.
Click to expand...

For a second there I was going to stand corrected. Then I re-read the page you linked to. Ok... his bit about legalizing drugs is definitely off however I still do not believe that what you say above is true. He does not appear to be talking about any drugs you may find growing on your own. He's talking about the stuff you buy from illegal drug cartels because it supports violent people... which I completely agree with. You may be a harmless pot smoker but the money you give to the dealer ultimately winds up in the hands of people who aren't exactly stand-up citizens.

However unlike Uncle Ted, I do think legalizing it will solve many problems. The weak links who need it to get by will burn out and wind up in a ditch and the stronger ones will either stop or never have started in the first place. Drugs, IMNSHO are a sort of Darwinism accelerator.
 
Snapshot said:
For a second there I was going to stand corrected. Then I re-read the page you linked to. Ok... his bit about legalizing drugs is definitely off however I still do not believe that what you say above is true. He does not appear to be talking about any drugs you may find growing on your own. He's talking about the stuff you buy from illegal drug cartels because it supports violent people... which I completely agree with. You may be a harmless pot smoker but the money you give to the dealer ultimately winds up in the hands of people who aren't exactly stand-up citizens.
Click to expand...

So you don't stand corrected when presented with facts directly contradicting your statements? I suppose that's your prerogative. I specifically linked to a statement of his saying he would come down hard on drug USERS. How do you think he proposes to differentiate the drug user that smokes pot that was bought from Mexico versus the drug user that smokes pot that was grown in a backyard in California? The answer- he doesn't differentiate.

Ted Nugent is a great supporter of the 2nd Amendment, but he is not a person in favor of small government when it comes to other personal freedoms, in other words, he is a typical Republican, though sometimes mistaken for a Libertarian.
 
animal8526 said:
Nugent is a good guy on 2nd stuff, one of the best infact.

too bad he's a hardcore drug warrior. Which means he believes in absolute liberty to K&BA, which is good, but he also believes the Govt. has a place telling us what we can or can't do with our bodies.

Liberty. you are either 100% free, or 100% a slave. there is no in between... just the illusion of being in between. And it's freedom for all, or freedom for none. If big bro can selectively limit our freedoms as Big bro see's fit, then none of us are free to begin with.

remember, the fundementals of freedom. Personal liberty, and private property. you are your own man, on your own land, and no one may come and adjust your behavior until it effects another free man on his own land.

Lets try and get back to that folks. it would be good for us.
Click to expand...

JohnM said:
+6 Amen to that. When people find out I'm a Libertarian 100% in favor of decriminalizing all drugs, they assume I must have a selfish motive because I smoke weed or something. I don't do any drugs. None. Not a harmless drug like pot nor a dangerous drug like tobacco.

I am simply against government interference in victimless crimes, I am not pro-drug. Just because I believe a person has the inherent right to inject themselves with heroin (or drain cleaner if they like), doesn't mean I think it's a good idea, it's just not the government's business. It could BECOME their business if a drug user chooses to commit a crime to continue their habit.

But arguing that we should ban drugs because a person might commit a crime, sounds a teensy bit similar to another argument we're all familiar with.
Click to expand...

Right. Ted Nugent correctly understands that the state should not be able to use force against those who rightly defend themselves from the slime of society. In fact, he goes further and recognizes that the Second Amendment is just an enumeration and therefore it's unlikely "repeal" by a Constitutional amendment matters little (so to speak).

Unfortunately, he has long supported using police force against individuals who chose to use drugs recreationally. Which I find rather oxymoronic given his sentiment on self-preservation; Nugent basically suggests that "You can defend your life and the life of your family, but I'll use force against you if you chose to put a plant in your body without the state's permission." Doesn't make sense to me either.

I like how he also thumbed his nose to the government over the draft. Some people label him a draft-dodger. So Nugent also recognizes that the state should not be able to kidnap you and enslave you for it's wars or whatever it wants from you (this is also questionably constitutional given that there's an amendment that forbids slavery).

He's got a mixed record I guess. I hope he gets religion on "freedom" though. He'd be an excellent champion for liberty IMHO.
 
JohnM said:
Er.... Ted is for HUGE government when it comes to drugs. Ted thinks a man doesn't need a piece of paper (the bill of rights) to give him permission to defend himself, it is an obvious and inherent right. Yet he believes if a man finds a poppy, a weed, or a mushroom growing on his own land and eats it, the government should have the right to arrest and jail him.

Now, lest anyone accuse me of thread hijacking, note this is a TED NUGENT THREAD about guns and freedom, I will not talk about drugs, except to QUOTE TED NUGENT'S OWN WORDS, with links to the quotes-

http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=30247




Please notice in the quote below how he does NOT differentiate drug users from drug kingpins, a similar conflation technique that anti-gunners use (from the same link):



You know what? There are hundreds more quotes, they are all the same, you can google for more, no point beating a dead horse. I don't care what anyone's stance is on Government and drugs, but please understand that Uncle Ted is not a Libertarian, not even close. He's for big, monster, thuggish government when HE wants it, and offended when anyone else does.
Click to expand...

thanks for doing the legwork on that.

again folks. true liberty for all free men, or vieled slavery for everyone regardless.
 

Similar threads

  • Locked
Navy scrubbed this photo can you see why?
Replies
17
Views
737
Mountain
Mountain
Fudds gotta fudd. No AR class in Maine.
Replies
6
Views
474
rogersmithiii
R
Can you guys tell me what this is?
Replies
7
Views
495
LittleCalm
L
We need 200 people like this in congress. NH residents, you need this woman in congress.
Replies
14
Views
450
Broc
Broc
Gotta love the NBA...
Replies
2
Views
257
Dennis in MA
Dennis in MA
Back
Top Bottom