Democrats seeking supermajority in Congress
Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 22

Thread: Democrats seeking supermajority in Congress

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    1,437

    Democrats seeking supermajority in Congress

    Ok, recently someone brought up the topic of a Democratic supermajority in Congress, and I basically said it was hogwash. That's true in light of current numbers. However, they are in fact seeking that, and they're pretty close to getting it in *this* upcoming election so I guess I was wrong. I was so focused on the presidential and some local races I didn't notice what was going on around me. Well, hit me with a frying pan and call me stupid.

    Anyway...if this mixes with Obama, it will almost certainly lead to a serious attempt at a new AWB and probably a lot of other stupid stuff as well. The gun lobby will really need to take a hard line to prevent some significant erosion in civil liberties.

    I'd rather live in abject poverty than be owned by the government. Socialism makes me sick.

    The shifting landscape -- driven in large part by economic unease -- leaves Democrats almost certain to dramatically expand their 51-49 majority in the Senate, according to independent analysts and political strategists in both parties.

    But whether Democrats can reach the 60-vote threshold depends on the outcome of races like the one in North Carolina, where Republican Sen. Elizabeth Dole is seeking a second term in a race that was never supposed to be close.
    Silent Running, by Mike and the Mechanics

  2.   
  3. #2
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    The Heart of Dixie
    Posts
    1,225
    I hate liberals!!

  4. #3
    The country is going to change from what it was in the beginning. We will not be allowed to fight for our rights or beliefs.

  5. #4
    hates a strong word bud

  6. #5
    Happy is Obama and all other traitors pictures on a milk carton.
    By faith Noah,being warned of God of things not seen as yet, moved with fear,prepared an ark to the saving of his house;by the which he condemned the world,and became heir of the righteousness which is by faith Heb.11:7

  7. #6
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    1,437
    Quote Originally Posted by jwtollett21 View Post
    hates a strong word bud
    Maybe it is, but maybe it's an accurate descriptor. How would you summarize your feelings towards a group of people who are actively working to override what it means for one to exist? Think about the meaning of control in a person's life. An individual cannot be truly sovereign unless they have full authority over their own actions. A natural extension of one's self is often one's possessions, or what part of the wide world they personally have under their control.

    Now if I own a bowl, or a gun, or a house, or whatever, I have it and control it. I own it myself, as much as I own myself. It is an object that I inhabit, I handle, etc. Or maybe it's a choice that I make to homeschool my children, or to invest my money (even in Marxist terms, it's transformed labor, and I should be able to own that labor) where I wish.

    So here comes an outside force - a collection of other people - people who do not own these things, coming and saying that they can have partial control well. Their extension of power over those items necessarily destroys some element of my ability to control what should be *my* property, or the educational journey of my own children.

    This is generally known as stealing. It is a brutal violation that cages one in and prevents full self-ownership, short of disposing of one's entire set of cares in the world. Only animals should be ruled by such oppression.

    So as I and many others see it, liberals who believe this seizure of private property and these nonsense "community" values are essentially saying that we are not human beings. We are no better than dogs who fetch or sit on command. Why should I not hate someone who sincerely wishes to leave me without my humanity?

    Marx and all his "redistribute the wealth" ilk sicken me. Why should I, the confirmed owner of my efforts and my labor, and one who might even exchange labor with another for both our benefit, be forcibly put to release ownership of that? If he hadn't had his head up his ass, he'd have noticed from the beginning that this made him a tremendous hypocrite. It's too bad Obama can't recognize the same thing, and stop trying to burglarize us all because his constituency is incapable of fully recognizing their own ability to live their own lives.

    As a side note, I actually get along with most people, including liberals, in real life. But I do hate systems that I feel are attempting to control the way I live my life. So, I won't bite anyone or anything like that.
    Last edited by toreskha; 10-16-2008 at 11:46 PM.
    Silent Running, by Mike and the Mechanics

  8. #7
    Quote Originally Posted by toreskha View Post
    Maybe it is, but maybe it's an accurate descriptor. How would you summarize your feelings towards a group of people who are actively working to override what it means for one to exist? Think about the meaning of control in a person's life. An individual cannot be truly sovereign unless they have full authority over their own actions. A natural extension of one's self is often one's possessions, or what part of the wide world they personally have under their control.

    Now if I own a bowl, or a gun, or a house, or whatever, I have it and control it. I own it myself, as much as I own myself. It is an object that I inhabit, I handle, etc. Or maybe it's a choice that I make to homeschool my children, or to invest my money (even in Marxist terms, it's transformed labor, and I should be able to own that labor) where I wish.

    So here comes an outside force - a collection of other people - people who do not own these things, coming and saying that they can have partial control well. Their extension of power over those items necessarily destroys some element of my ability to control what should be *my* property, or the educational journey of my own children.

    This is generally known as stealing. It is a brutal violation that cages one in and prevents full self-ownership, short of disposing of one's entire set of cares in the world. Only animals should be ruled by such oppression.

    So as I and many others see it, liberals who believe this seizure of private property and these nonsense "community" values are essentially saying that we are not human beings. We are no better than dogs who fetch or sit on command. Why should I not hate someone who sincerely wishes to leave me without my humanity?

    Marx and all his "redistribute the wealth" ilk sicken me. Why should I, the confirmed owner of my efforts and my labor, and one who might even exchange labor with another for both our benefit, be forcibly put to release ownership of that? If he hadn't had his head up his ass, he'd have noticed from the beginning that this made him a tremendous hypocrite. It's too bad Obama can't recognize the same thing, and stop trying to burglarize us all because his constituency is incapable of fully recognizing their own ability to live their own lives.

    As a side note, I actually get along with most people, including liberals, in real life. But I do hate systems that I feel are attempting to control the way I live my life. So, I won't bite anyone or anything like that.

    +1. Very well put. Thanks for posting this. Something else that gets me is the Obamas and Clintons and Marxs and all other socialists/communists when talking about redistributing the wealth refer to the money of the working middle class not their own wealth. You would think that the sheeple would be able to see that but then again there are none so blind as they that will not see.
    By faith Noah,being warned of God of things not seen as yet, moved with fear,prepared an ark to the saving of his house;by the which he condemned the world,and became heir of the righteousness which is by faith Heb.11:7

  9. #8
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    somewhere in north texas
    Posts
    599

    All i will say is...

    YOU BETTER NOT COME TO MY HOUSE.

  10. #9
    actually Obama wants to redistribute the wealth of the wealthy. You know the ones making a quarter of a million dollars or more a year. Like all the fat cat wall street guys, the warren buffets, the obamas, bush's, mcains. The ones who can afford to pay a little more in taxes. Us normal guys who work everyday will actually pay less under oBama. Thats what he say's so i guess we will see.

  11. #10
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Honolulu, HI & Salt Lake City, UT
    Posts
    2,797
    Quote Originally Posted by jwtollett21 View Post
    actually Obama wants to redistribute the wealth of the wealthy. You know the ones making a quarter of a million dollars or more a year. Like all the fat cat wall street guys, the warren buffets, the obamas, bush's, mcains. The ones who can afford to pay a little more in taxes. Us normal guys who work everyday will actually pay less under oBama. Thats what he say's so i guess we will see.

    Why take from those guys and give to the others? Everyone has the opportunity to work hard and make the best of the hand they're delt. Don't know about you, but I'm not into taking handouts. I'd rather bust my tail and get by rather than take handouts from others.



    gf
    "A few well placed shots with a .22LR is a lot better than a bunch of solid misses with a .44 mag!" Glock Armorer, NRA Chief RSO, Pistol, Rifle, Shotgun, Muzzleloading Rifle, Muzzleloading Shotgun, and Home Firearm Safety Training Counselor

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Quantcast