Obama meets with Bloomberg

Firearms related political discussion forum

Re: Obama meets with Bloomberg

Postby MJY65 on Thu Dec 17, 2015 1:08 pm

Citiot wrote:Regarding da-Rānch (long a sound), yes, heavy union influence there, but, keep in mind that this is protected under the Bill of Rights:

"...Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances...." It also also connected with the implied "right to associate."

Collective Bargaining is really no different than an industry group pulling together (associating) and creating a PAC or hire a lobbyist (peaceably assemble). I don't think it is fair to do what the opposition is doing by supporting one part of the Bill of Rights and not the other.


It's not my intention to turn the thread into union bashing, but I think the Bill of Rights applies to the government prohibiting the right to assemble. There is nothing in there that prevents a private business from being run as a non-union shop.
MJY65
 
Posts: 1068 [View]
Joined: Sun Feb 03, 2013 7:35 am

Obama meets with Bloomberg

Postby xd ED on Thu Dec 17, 2015 1:18 pm

Make no mistake, I am neither bashing, nor blindly endorsing labor unions, at least in the private sector. Collective bargaining is a part of free association.

There could be long and interesting discussions about the pros and cons of labor unions, but not here/ now.
LET'S GO BRANDON
User avatar
xd ED
 
Posts: 9108 [View]
Joined: Fri Jun 18, 2010 6:28 pm
Location: Saint Paul

Re: Obama meets with Bloomberg

Postby igofast on Thu Dec 17, 2015 2:49 pm

MNblockhead wrote:...
We have let our fear of terrorists allow two administrations to erode and threat our right of due process. I don't see a Clinton, Trump, or Cruz presidency addressing this. Rand Paul would, but has no chance at the presidency.
...


Absolutely agree. We got the Patriot Act from Bush - so voting (R) obviously doesn't guarantee our liberties won't be trampled. Trump has already made statements that he doesn't have any problems with going against the 1st or the 14th. I don't believe we would be any better off with him that with Hillary as far as eroding rights. Truthfully, if those are my choices I will vote (I) or pencil in Rand.

photogpat wrote:Get the (R)'s to embrace science, stay away from women's bodies and stay out of the bedroom would be a good way to ensure I never vote (D) again...


Yep. For as much as a 'gun guy' I am, these are some of the reasons I have historically voted (D).
User avatar
igofast
 
Posts: 340 [View]
Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2012 3:30 pm
Location: Saint Cloud, MN

Re: Obama meets with Bloomberg

Postby Citiot on Thu Dec 17, 2015 3:25 pm

Wonderful and civilized discussion.

This is making the rounds on social media. Wonderful....

https://www.facebook.com/GunOwners/videos/10153410573131701/
Citiot
 
Posts: 184 [View]
Joined: Sun Nov 03, 2013 7:33 pm

Re: Obama meets with Bloomberg

Postby Randygmn on Fri Dec 18, 2015 3:24 am

MNblockhead wrote:This scares me and it scares me that more people are not upset about this.

I'm a recovering liberal, who still has many liberal tendencies, and there is a lot about the right side of the American political spectrum that I'm not comfortable with.

I can't be as informed as I would like to be about every political issue, but I have a personal litmus test of sorts to help me make voting decisions: will putting you in office serve to protect or erode our civil rights?

We have let our fear of terrorists allow two administrations to erode and threat our right of due process. I don't see a Clinton, Trump, or Cruz presidency addressing this. Rand Paul would, but has no chance at the presidency.

It shocks me that my liberal friends don't see an issue with the no-fly/terrorist list being used to deprive people of their constitutional rights. They shouldn't even be able to be used to prevent you from flying without due process.

That said, where were all the my conservative friends years ago? We don't seem to care about secretive watch lists until they affect us. This is why we all need to defend our civil liberties and the civil liberties of other, even if we disagree with or don't like them.

I know many of my very conservative friends love to hate on the ACLU, but this is one area where they are doing a lot of the hard work:
https://www.aclu.org/blog/speak-freely/ ... s-freedoms

Many of my friends are surprised when I say that the two groups I donate the most to are the ACLU and NRA. I don't need to explain the importance of the NRA to anyone on this board, but despite the ACLU's historic oversight on the 2nd amendment (that said, the stances of local chapters vary on this state-to-state), there is no other organization that has done as much and as been as effective in defending our freedoms of speech and religion and our due process and equal protection rights.

Our civil liberties are entwined. You start weakening one area, it starts to unravel and weak the others. Protecting our 2nd Amendment rights means staunching defending the other, especially—in our current environment—the 1st, 5th, and the 14th.


A few things- what should've scared everyone in the country, but was mostly scoffed at by the left was weaponization of the IRS. That there isn't a half dozen people, including Lois Lerner, sitting in prison right now is one of the biggest disappointments I've ever had in government.

You're wrong about Ted Cruz. If nothing else, he cares deeply about the constitution, due process and the rule of law. And I'd venture to say he's the most pro 2A candidate in the field.

I don't want to bash liberal democrats, but I'll simply say that the left in this country is so extreme, dysfunctional and corrupt that nothing on the right compares. Anyone who has a passion for the 2A (my primary issue) couldn't possibly consider voting D. I'll remind everyone that the day after Obama made his statement, Hillary confirmed that we should be exploring Australian gun ownership policies. For those that forget, they enforced mandatory CONFISCATION FOR COMPENSATION. And the presumptive Dem nominee thinks that's appropriate.
Randygmn
 
Posts: 901 [View]
Joined: Sun Dec 15, 2013 3:52 pm

Re: Obama meets with Bloomberg

Postby LePetomane on Fri Dec 18, 2015 5:21 am

Citiot wrote:Point taken, but it's a bit more complicated. I'm what they call a "woodtick" liberal from northern MN. The (D)s up there are totally pro-2A, sorta fiscally conservative, etc. Without the (D)s from rural MN, we wouldn't have the gun freedoms we have now. My vote kept those guys in office.


I never could understand that concept. But didn't these voters you refer to support Governor Dayton, too? His taxation policies have been disastrous for the "working prosperous" in this state.

I have found that true conservatives in Minnesota are hard to come by. Most politicians who refer to themselves as that are just lighter versions of their opponents.
Donald Trump got more fat women moving in one day than Michelle Obama did in eight years.
LePetomane
 
Posts: 2521 [View]
Joined: Tue Dec 04, 2012 9:57 am
Location: Here, there and everywhere.

Re: Obama meets with Bloomberg

Postby MJY65 on Fri Dec 18, 2015 5:26 am

LePetomane wrote:
Citiot wrote:Point taken, but it's a bit more complicated. I'm what they call a "woodtick" liberal from northern MN. The (D)s up there are totally pro-2A, sorta fiscally conservative, etc. Without the (D)s from rural MN, we wouldn't have the gun freedoms we have now. My vote kept those guys in office.


I never could understand that concept. But didn't these voters you refer to support Governor Dayton, too? His taxation policies have been disastrous for the "working prosperous" in this state.


That's where I was trying to go with my earlier post. Not only Dayton, but Nolan, Franken and Klobuchar who have actively supported restrictions on gun rights. Now, If someone voted for Tom Bakk and against the other 3, that's a different story, but I suspect ballots marked that way are as rare as unicorns.
MJY65
 
Posts: 1068 [View]
Joined: Sun Feb 03, 2013 7:35 am

Re: Obama meets with Bloomberg

Postby Bearcatrp on Fri Dec 18, 2015 7:10 am

igofast wrote:Truthfully, if those are my choices I will vote (I) or pencil in Rand.

I was pissed off one year not liking my choices so I penciled in Micky Mouse.
Bearcatrp
 
Posts: 3043 [View]
Joined: Sun Mar 16, 2014 7:57 pm

Re: Obama meets with Bloomberg

Postby Citiot on Sat Dec 19, 2015 11:38 am

Did some more thinking. Back to the "secret list without due process."

I am actually scared about what is going on. I am educated, rational, can think "critically" and have read and thought about the anti's proposals with an open mind. I'm just an simple family man.

I more or less stole what Trey Gowdy said here: https://www.facebook.com/GunOwners/videos/10153410573131701/ and incorporated that into the major argument on car registration and "kayak and Subaru Wiper Blade registration (I bet the, ahem "honorable" Kim Norton reads this forum, Hi Kim! This is former DFLer Citiot! I've changed parties to R mostly because of you!!!! You can't delete this post HA HA! Kim, why don't you register on this site and let's have a discussion. I can pretty much guarantee that the admins will not delete your posts)

Let's extend that to some of the Bill of Rights. What I did was simply invert the "lists" from a "you cannot list" to a "you are allowed list." Eventually, as the do-not-fly list increases to the majority of people (probably everyone on this forum), it would turn into a "government allows list".... a "permission list."

1st Amendment could look something like this:
a) You can practice government approved and tracked religions as long as you register your religion and church location with the federal government.
b) You can freely speak as long as you get on the "free speakers" list
c) You can gather and create groups as long as you are on the "free assembly list" and the group is tracked by the government.
d) You can publish anything you want as long as you are on the approved "press list" and that your newspaper, blog, etc are on the approved publication list.
e) You can't address any issues with the government unless you are on the approved "petitioners list"

4th would look something like this:
a) You and your house can be searched anytime unless you are on the "non unreasonable search and seizure list"

5th would look something like this
a) You are not allowed due process and any rights can be taken away at any time, unless you are on the "liberty list"

6th would look something like this:
a) You can be imprisoned indefinitely for any suspicion unless you are on the "speedy and fair trial list"
b) You cannot know what you are charged with unless you are on the "know what the charges are list"
c) You cannot face your accusers unless you are on the "licensed to face accusers list"
d) You must defend yourself in court unless you are on the approved "able to hire a lawyer list" and that the lawyer is on the registered and approve barrister list.

8th would look something like this:
a) You are subject to any punishment including torture unless you are on the "non-torture list." Any torture is open for use unless that particular torture is on the banned torture list.

Of course the anti's will say this is ridiculous and plug their ears and say "la la la la la la."

But once the 2A goes away, it is very realistic. For example, Germans aren't dumb. They cranked out pretty much the best engineers and scientists for the last century. They got hoodwinked by the Nazi party. If it could happen there, it can happen here.
Citiot
 
Posts: 184 [View]
Joined: Sun Nov 03, 2013 7:33 pm

Re: Obama meets with Bloomberg

Postby 2in2out on Sat Dec 19, 2015 3:39 pm

They just. don't. get it.

Bloomberg news:
Self-Assured Obama Will Leave It on the Field for Gun Control

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/self-assured-obama-leave-field-100000228.html

Self-Assured = arrogant?

By choosing to move forward only with executive actions, Obama avoids being tied down in another protracted congressional battle he would likely lose.


Then, why do it? Could it be because he's trying to do something that everyone except him realizes would be bad?

The trade-off is that the steps Obama takes won’t be as far-reaching and may be more vulnerable to legal challenge.


Legal challenge... as in, unconstitutional, maybe?

The narrative seems more transparent than it has in the past. Maybe I'm just getting better at seeing through their statements, but I think the polls are really telling the story - more and more people are also seeing through it all, and disagree.

I saw another news article from another source that claimed the gun rights people didn't understand that feeling safer (because we had a gun) doesn't mean we are safer. Well, DUH! This is what we've been saying for a long time. The difference is that they believe they're safer WITHOUT guns. They've twisted the message to make it mean what they want it to mean, but that's not going to change anyone's opinion.
"...the liberties of the American people were dependent upon the ballot-box, the jury-box, and the cartridge-box; that without these no class of people could live and flourish in this country..." ---Frederick Douglass
User avatar
2in2out
 
Posts: 1014 [View]
Joined: Wed Feb 25, 2009 10:19 am
Location: SE MN

Re: Obama meets with Bloomberg

Postby atomic41 on Sat Dec 19, 2015 8:02 pm

Citiot wrote:Did some more thinking. Back to the "secret list without due process."

I am actually scared about what is going on. I am educated, rational, can think "critically" and have read and thought about the anti's proposals with an open mind. I'm just an simple family man.

I more or less stole what Trey Gowdy said here: https://www.facebook.com/GunOwners/videos/10153410573131701/ and incorporated that into the major argument on car registration and "kayak and Subaru Wiper Blade registration (I bet the, ahem "honorable" Kim Norton reads this forum, Hi Kim! This is former DFLer Citiot! I've changed parties to R mostly because of you!!!! You can't delete this post HA HA! Kim, why don't you register on this site and let's have a discussion. I can pretty much guarantee that the admins will not delete your posts)

Let's extend that to some of the Bill of Rights. What I did was simply invert the "lists" from a "you cannot list" to a "you are allowed list." Eventually, as the do-not-fly list increases to the majority of people (probably everyone on this forum), it would turn into a "government allows list".... a "permission list."

1st Amendment could look something like this:
a) You can practice government approved and tracked religions as long as you register your religion and church location with the federal government.
b) You can freely speak as long as you get on the "free speakers" list
c) You can gather and create groups as long as you are on the "free assembly list" and the group is tracked by the government.
d) You can publish anything you want as long as you are on the approved "press list" and that your newspaper, blog, etc are on the approved publication list.
e) You can't address any issues with the government unless you are on the approved "petitioners list"

4th would look something like this:
a) You and your house can be searched anytime unless you are on the "non unreasonable search and seizure list"

5th would look something like this
a) You are not allowed due process and any rights can be taken away at any time, unless you are on the "liberty list"

6th would look something like this:
a) You can be imprisoned indefinitely for any suspicion unless you are on the "speedy and fair trial list"
b) You cannot know what you are charged with unless you are on the "know what the charges are list"
c) You cannot face your accusers unless you are on the "licensed to face accusers list"
d) You must defend yourself in court unless you are on the approved "able to hire a lawyer list" and that the lawyer is on the registered and approve barrister list.

8th would look something like this:
a) You are subject to any punishment including torture unless you are on the "non-torture list." Any torture is open for use unless that particular torture is on the banned torture list.

Of course the anti's will say this is ridiculous and plug their ears and say "la la la la la la."

But once the 2A goes away, it is very realistic. For example, Germans aren't dumb. They cranked out pretty much the best engineers and scientists for the last century. They got hoodwinked by the Nazi party. If it could happen there, it can happen here.


This is a brilliant post :exactly:
atomic41
 
Posts: 442 [View]
Joined: Wed Feb 11, 2015 7:24 pm

Re: Obama meets with Bloomberg

Postby greenfarmer on Fri Dec 25, 2015 11:07 am

Citiot wrote:
LePetomane wrote:
Citiot wrote:I primarily vote (D), but these things have convinced me to vote (R) at least for the next election cycle. I bet lots of (D) folks are doing the same.


Bloomberg is a Republican but behaves like a liberal democrat.

With all due respect, you're part of the reason that these guys are in office. Regarding the second comment concerning (D) folks voting (R), I think they have a long way to go before they wake up,


Point taken, but it's a bit more complicated. I'm what they call a "woodtick" liberal from northern MN. The (D)s up there are totally pro-2A, sorta fiscally conservative, etc. Without the (D)s from rural MN, we wouldn't have the gun freedoms we have now. My vote kept those guys in office.

As I get older, things get blurrier and blurrier. I voted for Obama for each election. Primary motivating factors was getting our troops out of the middle east and universal health care. Turned out, he didn't do what I thought he was going to do.

He did the first thing, but it created a power vacuum that created ISIS.

As far as universal health care, he didn't do enough. Medicare should have extended to cover more than just the retired folks. Obamacare turned out to be a complicated mess.

Global warming is a fact.

Abortion is wrong.

I take those "what party are you" online tests and I vacillate around quite a bit. Sometimes I am even libertarian (but I think that has more to do with my personal success through life). Heck, sometimes I end up in the "green" party.

But one thing we can for sure agree on is that the current (D) party is not what it was. I now see it as a threat and the only thing to stop the erosion of our rights is to vote (R) even though some of the (R) platform makes me barf.



So your one of them that I can thank for raising my health insurance?

Obama and his "messy dream" of an idea of "obamacare" has been the biggest mess, and destruction to health care than ever thought of by anyone!

I'm now paying for atleast 2-3 other people to be covered because my premiums have skyrocketed.

Before "obamacare", I had a "group" plan, thru BCBS. Paid for by me, since i'm the "employer". It covered myself, my daughter, and my nephew who works for me. That group plan cost me 564 a month at the time. Then my nephews son was born, and we added him, then it was 721 a month. Very good coverage we had. Fast forward to obamacare. We had to nix the group. The premiums went to over 1200 a month for us 4. So we went to individual plans. My insurance for my daughter and I was 623/mo and my nephew and his son was close to the same. Now, fast forward to 2015. I had to go in and "renew or change" my insurance plan. My new health insurance for my daughter and I went to 861 a month for the two of us! (to keep the same coverage) That's over 10,000 a year. Luckily my nephews wife was able to take him and their son under her insurance, and her employeer paid for it. So I didn't have to pay for his anymore. But have to make up the difference in a "bonus".

What a joke obamacare has made of our health insurance.

I did what ever sane person would do under obamacare. I cancelled mine, had the wife take our daughter under hers thru her work, and that's 285 a month that it's going to cost us, and i'm just going to pay the penalty every year since I cancelled mine. Also wrote to Al Frankenstein, and took copies of the papers and sent them with to him, and upped my life insurance.

Thanks a lot Obama! You have confirmed my suspicions. Your the biggest disgrace in office this country has ever saw. And have ruined every step forward this country has made in the last 50 years, by your 8 years in office.
greenfarmer
 
Posts: 343 [View]
Joined: Fri Feb 08, 2013 11:43 am
Location: kinda by the SW Metro, but a little further out in the sticks.

Re: Obama meets with Bloomberg

Postby Randygmn on Mon Dec 28, 2015 7:19 pm

Greenfarmer,
I pray everyday that Divine Justice pays a comprehensive visit to the Obama household.
Randygmn
 
Posts: 901 [View]
Joined: Sun Dec 15, 2013 3:52 pm

Re: Obama meets with Bloomberg

Postby greenfarmer on Tue Dec 29, 2015 9:24 am

Randygmn wrote:Greenfarmer,
I pray everyday that Divine Justice pays a comprehensive visit to the Obama household.


Well as much as i'd like to, I just can't wish ill will upon someone.

But I will say, Obama hasn't done anything in office to warrant his pension he will receive after his 8 years!

Now there was a big article this morning in the fishwrap factory, about Obama wanting to use his exectutive order powers to change the gun control. When is this guy going to learn? When is he finally going to understand that there's a President, and congress, and they work together with checks and balances, so not one single person can govern this country like a "King" or "Dictator"... I don't care what his mindset is, what his skin color is, or name is. He's no more entitled to do what he wants, or follow his agenda, than any other president this country has ever had.

I'm willing to bet that in the last two elections, 80% of the people that voted for him, didn't vote for him because of his political stance, his stance on foreign policy, or troops or anything else. They voted for him because of skin color. This guy hasn't gotten anything right in almost 8 years. All he has done is mess this country up and set it back 50 years. He's been an enabler for racism to make its way back, and become a headline and topic again. Between him, and these activist groups like BLM, they have done more to make their agenda more resented by people than they have to get people on board with their agenda. Mainly because of their tactics and they way they try to get their message out. Obama has stuck more time and money into furthering his agenda, and wasted more than we could ever comprehend.

I honestly can't stand how much money he has thrown at other countries for aid, for helping them out, helping out people who won't, or can't help themselves. And hasn't done a thing to take care of our own. I'm sorry, but I have a huge problem with the ethics of people in office when there's so many Vets out there, who aren't getting the help or benefits they should be getting. These men and women fought, and served their country. They fought for our freedoms, liberties, and rights we have. And yet, we don't do near enough for them. And I have a huge problem with Obama throwing money at others, when we have ones here who need our help first. The government throws money to ferguson to rebuild. How much have they helped that area out after all of the rioting and looting? But yet we have veterans that did nothing other than serve their country and fought for each and every one of us. And there isn't enough done to help them.

Kids have off of school on Martin Luther King day, and off on Presidents day. But yet they go to school on Veterans day? Give me a break! It's been that way for years, and yet nobody has the heart to change it? The moral compass to correct it? that's completely wrong! We celebrate those people, but don't celebrate the people that have done as much for this country as any President has? Because they are the ones doing the dirty work. They are the ones fighting for all of us, and yet all they get is a day on the calendar and a couple of programs in select communities, and that's it. Geez, I have a day on the calendar too. My birthday, and I get as much recognition as a person who gave their life for this country. That's completely wrong!

Sorry about the rant. I just get upset when I read on a GUN FORUM that someone here voted for Obama. All he's done is attack our rights, but yet someone here voted for him. Makes absolutely no sense to me at all.
greenfarmer
 
Posts: 343 [View]
Joined: Fri Feb 08, 2013 11:43 am
Location: kinda by the SW Metro, but a little further out in the sticks.

Re: Obama meets with Bloomberg

Postby LarryP on Tue Dec 29, 2015 2:44 pm

LarryP
 
Posts: 1181 [View]
Joined: Mon Jan 10, 2011 3:57 pm

PreviousNext

Return to Politics

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests

cron