Fairweather Posted January 23, 2009 Posted January 23, 2009 ...this dumbass? [video:youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=opxuUj6vFa4 Quote
No. 13 Baby Posted January 23, 2009 Posted January 23, 2009 You're kidding - right? How can anyone not love the guy who said of GW Bush, "Well, he shatters the myth of white supremacy once and for all." Quote
STP Posted January 23, 2009 Posted January 23, 2009 That's the same fellow who's introducing a law to register and regulate essentially all gun owners. So, despite Heller vs District of Columbia, we have a Congress and a President who has a record of intruding on 2nd Amendment rights. Take that with the attorney general, Eric Holder, and you have support for what MattP asserted a way back. Quote
tvashtarkatena Posted January 23, 2009 Posted January 23, 2009 The 2nd Amendment is silent on the subject of registering weapons. Quote
Mal_Con Posted January 23, 2009 Posted January 23, 2009 Heller vs District of Columbia does not address registration in fact the Supremes said the 2nd allows "reasonable regulation" but just prohibits an outright handgun ban like the had in DC. e.g. only criminals and gang bangers can have handguns. Quote
joblo7 Posted January 23, 2009 Posted January 23, 2009 You're kidding - right? "Well, he shatters the myth of white supremacy once and for all." :lmao: Quote
Fairweather Posted January 24, 2009 Author Posted January 24, 2009 You're kidding - right? How can anyone not love the guy who said of GW Bush, "Well, he shatters the myth of white supremacy once and for all." You didn't click on the link. It's not Rangel we're talking about. Quote
Fairweather Posted January 24, 2009 Author Posted January 24, 2009 The 2nd Amendment is silent on the subject of registering weapons. The constitution is also silent on the bar coding of infants, the internet, automobiles, and restaurant food. So, what? Had Madison, Adams, Jefferson known our country would be rife with adults in need of a continuous mental spoon-feed, like you, they would have thrown in the towel and hollered "God save the king!" in unison. Quote
billcoe Posted January 24, 2009 Posted January 24, 2009 One doesn't see Robert Reich called a dumbass too often. Liberal...sure, professor, OK, ...short...absofrigganloutly:-) Dumbass, not too often. As a former "White Male Construction Worker" myself, I always felt like I could take care of myself and wasn't to concerned. Of course, there was that time where my boss went bankrupt during the 20% interest rate days, and I missed getting 5 paychecks (got some partial $ here and there) with the end result that I when I had finished my very last sack of potatoes, I had to dive into the garbage where I'd so stupidly tossed the peelings the day previous to pull out the skins so that I could eat something for 2 more days. The part of the sound bites on the video that seems to strike me wrong is the assumption that at the root: what they are talking about is taking away money from those who have it and giving it to those they deem worthy. In doing so, as a forced measure, it makes the gesture which could have been highly altruistic, meaningful and beautiful: a morally bankrupt one with bad feelings on both sides. The good that a person would have felt about voluntarily contributing to a person in need goes away. Furthermore, the government doesn't appear to but rarely be concerned about "teaching a man to fish", but usually settles for "giving the man a fish". This makes the poor folks feel indebted: not in a good way, but more like a beggar, unable to do achieve success on their own and dependant on da Gobment. I don't want to see folks starve, or even have to pull out their potato peelings to eat though, even if it didn't use to bother me when I had to do it. On the other side of the transaction it makes those who have money have less. They then do not want to give any to anybody for any reason since it's getting forcefully yanked from them already and to top it off da Gobment usually winds up wasting a shitload before they even start to feed the man that fish with the result that productive money goes down a shithole never to reappear again and both the recipient and receiver have strange non-happy feelings or feel like shit about it. It ain't healthy. However, what can you do? Quote
Fairweather Posted January 24, 2009 Author Posted January 24, 2009 His proposal that these jobs not go simply to "highly skilled workers" casts doubt on his intelligence. I don't know about you, but when I drive across a bridge I like to think it was designed and built by the most qualified and highly skilled workers available and not patched together by the recipients of a social welfare program. Quote
bradleym Posted January 24, 2009 Posted January 24, 2009 hey fw, i saw you on tv the other night... [video:youtube] Quote
No. 13 Baby Posted January 24, 2009 Posted January 24, 2009 You boys are outnumbered, Fairyweather -- and your days of privilege are over. Quote
Gary_Yngve Posted January 28, 2009 Posted January 28, 2009 i'm all confused about tax rebates. the dems opposed them under bush. now obama wants them to arouse the economy. but now the pachyderms are against them? Quote
bradleym Posted January 28, 2009 Posted January 28, 2009 i'm all confused about tax rebates. the dems opposed them under bush. now obama wants them to arouse the economy. but now the pachyderms are against them? yesterday, on libtard radio, i heard this line of argument: tax cuts amount to quick(er) stimulus, whereas spending is considered more effective (lower $ per job created) but is slower to take effect. the primary reason, i think, is that obama is trying to include repubs, for the present. soon perhaps, even obama will have to remind boehner that 'i won, you didn't' and get on with it. Quote
jmo Posted January 28, 2009 Posted January 28, 2009 The 2nd Amendment is silent on the subject of registering weapons. "Shall not be infringed" Quote
JoshK Posted January 28, 2009 Posted January 28, 2009 I don't know about you, but when I drive across a bridge I like to think it was designed and built by the most qualified and highly skilled workers available and not patched together by the recipients of a social welfare program. As opposed to the lowest cost bidder? I agree with the assertion that you'd rather not have dumbasses building your bridge (neither would I), but there is certainly nothing to guarantee that ConstructCoInc, or whoever gets the contract, is going to do any better of a job. Remember when our floating bridge sank? -j Quote
sobo Posted January 28, 2009 Posted January 28, 2009 I don't know about you, but when I drive across a bridge I like to think it was designed and built by the most qualified and highly skilled workers available and not patched together by the recipients of a social welfare program. As opposed to the lowest cost bidder? I agree with the assertion that you'd rather not have dumbasses building your bridge (neither would I), but there is certainly nothing to guarantee that ConstructCoInc, or whoever gets the contract, is going to do any better of a job. Remember when our floating bridge sank? Reminds me of something John Glenn (??) said when a reporter asked him how he felt about being shot into space (paraphrasing now): "I'm sitting atop the world's largest Roman Candle, built by the lowest bidder." Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.