We get to pick lesser of two evils my friend.

Presently I’m on Republicans side, even though I don’t agree with lots of stuff they do.

Ike was right, once you create cash cow incentive, it’s very hard to get rid of it.

FortWayne says

We get to pick lesser of two evils my friend.

Presently I’m on Republicans side, even though I don’t agree with lots of stuff they do.

I haven't voted GOP yet, I was planning to in 2020. Let's be clear, I blame the Democrats for being the driving force for pushing the country towards statism, but the establishment GOP also has a hand in this as well. Trump was a breath of fresh air, hated the big state, not scared to stand up to the MSM, and fervently in support of American centric policies

Yet even him, he couldn't stand up to the military industrial complex and other big government entities. I have no doubt he did so under duress, because the guy publicly threatened to veto the spending bill, but he still signed it when it got to his desk.

As it is now, the US is headed towards a future where government continues to get bigger and bigger, and individual freedom becomes less and less important. I'll probably be dead by the time it becomes a full statist nation, but I just don't see the Constitution/Bill of Rights surviving for much longer. I mean, the country came one SCOTUS vote away from losing the 2nd Amendment in DC vs Heller. I could see that right disappearing in a century if the makeup of the court becomes more left leaning.

The 1st amendment is quickly disappearing. There will soon be laws criminalizing using the wrong pro-nouns, saying the wrong words, typing the wrong words. It won't be around for much longer either.

The U.S is becoming a victim of the tragedy of the commons. Too many unproductive, lazy people, many third world illegals, and statist immigrants from the EU and Asia are changing the political landscape of the country. These people are far too willing to give up their individual rights to the government, and let the government run their lives.

Trump may have been a last grasp at preserving the U.S as a model of a "free nation", but make no mistake, signing the Omnibus was a step in the wrong direction.

Agreed. Terrible spending bill. Politico made fun of Rand for opposing it, tells you how much the left loves this bill.

We need rand paul for 2020

CBOEtrader says

We need rand paul for 2020

I voted for his father twice, donated money to him.

Rand Paul would be a real reversal of the drive towards big government, but I have a feeling the CIA would assassinate someone like him if he miraculously was elected POTUS. A guy like Rand would be a huge threat to big government entities and they would not take it lightly.

mell says

tells you how much the left loves this bill.

Sanctuary cities funded, PP still funded. DACA kids of course left to fend for themselves though. Democrats don't really care much for DACA kids, they'd rather maintain the status quo where illegals are tolerated, some able to succeed, but the majority of them living in squalor, working low wage under the table jobs, but voting Democrat.

Patience by Tuesday Chuck Schumer is going to be Howling from the Rafters, as it were.
Over all of the shit Trump got and what he can do with his 800bln.
The Army Corp of engineers doesn't need Congress to tell them what projects they can take on or not.
wink wink!

So we have many elements in the bill that we wanted. Just to look at a few of them, we’re providing $654.6 billion in total discretionary funding for defense. It’s a record. All records for defense.

Vox is already seething

https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2018/3/23/17156900/omnibus-spending-bill-trump-statement

Rand Paul would be ideal.
He pisses of both sides on the regular.

Goran_K says

Yet even him, he couldn't stand up to the military industrial complex and other big government entities. I have no doubt he did so under duress, because the guy publicly threatened to veto the spending bill, but he still signed it when it got to his desk.

This is true, Goran.

What we need to do is start voting tactically.

If I lived in WI-01, I would vote against Ryan. Even if I had to vote for the flaming Leftist Teacher. Why? Punishment. Make it REALLY hard for them to bullshit.

Ryan and McConnell promised the wall and budgets, "If we just gave them another chance... the Supermajority in the Senate... Blah Blah Blah."

They had chance after chance after chance, and they have to go. This is yet another time Ryan's Congress has refused to pass a real budget, just chunks of omnibus spending. It's been going on for years and years now.

Trump has so many irons in the fire, I don't think he could have really veto'd this and opened yet another front, but I don't think he'll let this happen again.

Feux Follets says

From the Drudge Report. Anyone from the base want to admit they've been had by a snake oil salesman ?

How many Ryan Omnibuses did Obama sign again?

How dare any asshole not vote against their best interest.

There was absolutely no freakin' reason Lyin' Ryan and Mitch McChina had to introduce this spending bill. The Filibuster threat was bullshit.

TwoScoopsPlissken says

I don't think he could have really veto'd this and opened yet another front, but I don't think he'll let this happen again.

The big issue was that Congress waited (again) until the 11:00 hour to vote and pass it. It gives the President virtually hours to make a decision to sign or veto. Can you imagine what Rachel Maddow,Morning Joe and Chris Cuomo would have said if he vetoed it?

The headline would have read "Trump shuts down the Government)!!!!!!

Sniper says

The headline would have read "Trump shuts down the Government)!!!!!!

That's what they wanted, Trump is going to slow walk their funds, while he uses his discretionary pork to fund his projects Congress wont fund.

What would it take to create a viable third party?

Goran_K says

it just goes to show, both parties are beholden

FortWayne says

We get to pick lesser of two evils my friend.

You're making me post this again:

Feux Follets says

Given the extreme running off at the mouth that Potus has displayed since back in early 2016 this should not have been a problem to make a decision especially for a "stable genius" of all people - the Stephen Hawking of deal making - not.

What were his choices with only a few hours to go until government shut down?

How about placing blame where it belongs, on the game congress plays right up to the deadline. It's not like they didn't know when the shutdown was going to happen.

Patrick says

What would it take to create a viable third party?

A decent candidate for starters.

You available?

Sniper says

You available?

Maybe one day. First I'd like to work out a coherent platform that could possibly get the enthusiastic support of 51% of the population.

Goran_K says

FortWayne says

We get to pick lesser of two evils my friend.

Presently I’m on Republicans side, even though I don’t agree with lots of stuff they do.

I haven't voted GOP yet, I was planning to in 2020. Let's be clear, I blame the Democrats for being the driving force for pushing the country towards statism, but the establishment GOP also has a hand in this as well. Trump was a breath of fresh air, hated the big state, not scared to stand up to the MSM, and fervently in support of American centric policies

Yet even him, he couldn't stand up to the military industrial complex and other big government entities. I have no doubt he did so under duress, because the guy publicly threatened to veto the spending bill, but he still signed it when it got to his desk.

As it is now, the US is headed towards a future where government continues to get bigger and bigger, and individual free...

I do think the 2nd amendment is going to be amended at some point, but it's going to be because of abuse of those rights. Guns are being stockpiled by a minority of disgruntled Americans that fear other Americans. All it will take is for them to flip and turn their gun power on other Americans, triggering a brutal civil war. After that is done you can kiss goodbye to gun freedoms.

ThreeBays says

Guns are being stockpiled by a minority of disgruntled Americans that fear other Americans. All it will take is for them to flip and turn their gun power on other Americans, triggering a brutal civil war.

You need a clarifier to "Americans". Those Americans will be the politicians/legislators and law enforcement who try and unconstitutional take away those guns. The American who swore to "uphold the constitution", but don't, will be the ones hunted down.

ThreeBays says

After that is done you can kiss goodbye to gun freedoms.

After that, the gun owners will finally be in charge.

Oh, I'd be careful calling them a "minority". It only takes 3%.

Some are slow learners,many more will DIE DUMB!

Republicans ban bump stocks. Bump stocks don't kill people.
Regulating "Corporations are People" Free Market manufacturing.
Republicans killing Entrepreneurial Capitalism.
Yes! Republicans will destroy America.

Patrick says

What would it take to create a viable third party?

Enough Republicans & Democrats,dying.
Maybe 140,000,000 non-voters having enough. I'm delusional!

Sniper says

ThreeBays says

Guns are being stockpiled by a minority of disgruntled Americans that fear other Americans. All it will take is for them to flip and turn their gun power on other Americans, triggering a brutal civil war.

You need a clarifier to "Americans". Those Americans will be the politicians/legislators and law enforcement who try and unconstitutional take away those guns. The American who swore to "uphold the constitution", but don't, will be the ones hunted down.

ThreeBays says

After that is done you can kiss goodbye to gun freedoms.

After that, the gun owners will finally be in charge.

Oh, I'd be careful calling them a "minority". It only takes 3%.

I think it's a fantasy that wouldn't end well for gun owners.

This old age is slowing me down.
To late?

I TOLD YOU SO!

Patrick says

What would it take to create a viable third party?

A better first question is why are less than 20% of Americans deciding who will be the President?

People are stuck in 1776. Devolution is obviously real. How about we bring the USFEDGOV and it’s System of Governance into the 21st century. Why is it not desirable to have more people participating in the process?


First I'd like to work out a coherent platform that could possibly get the enthusiastic support of 51% of the population.


Personal Responsibility over ones health, the only way to truly be free. Staple the food pyramid to The Cross and burn that shit, and have The State fess up that The Liberals were wrong, and if you eat The Food Pyramid, you’re going to be at the doctors office frequently, scratching your heads over why you’re having adverse reactions to the things you put in your body. It’s not the butter, it’s the margerine. When you’re not at the doctors you’ll be watching tv where the largest advertisers are pharmaceutical companies who like how ll the shit you consume in media is designed to get a reaction of you, of Fear. The Mexicans are coming for your jobs and the niggers are going to be raping err pumping all your white bitches, if we let them use Cannabis...err plant based medicine in general, would surely pave the way for a Healthcare system to compete with Land Owners for the last drops of Economic Rent that Labor has to give.

There is nothing more popular in this country politically than Rescheduling Cannabis. Fact

So why do you continue to support Politicians like Donald Trump who will sit a top the entire System lobbing wild shots at anyone he chooses any time of day, somehow feels he’s changed things from MAGA to KAG, hasn’t had the courage or business acumen to stand up and do what’s right. To speak the Truth?

He’s too busy doing the only thing he know how, selling bullshit as one of the best marketers in the game (as if that’s some valuable trait). Oh he tweeted that he would veto the ominbus bill LOL i see, Fart of the Deal he was blabbering on about it yesterday blaming the Democrats? WTF

ThreeBays says

All it will take is for them to flip and turn their gun power on other Americans, triggering a brutal civil war. After that is done you can kiss goodbye to gun freedoms.

That would never happen. 3 Percenters are nationalistic (overwhelmingly), why would they attack America? That sounds like a leftist fantasy.

Also, you severely underestimate how effective the armed militia would be, and over estimate how effective statist/leftist would be at countering them.

Many of the NRA's board members, many who have their own hobbyist gun channels, are former military comprised of NAVY Seals, officers with Command experience, and other special forces. The general Apple Seed participant is a top notch shooter who could put three .223 rounds into the middle of a quarter at 100 yards.

What do leftist have? Guys who don't know what gender they are? Soy boy cucks who majored in Comp Lit to try and get into the pants of a fat retarded feminist? Most of these guys don't even know how to EAT without there being a Whole Foods Market 1.2 miles away, let alone hunt, dress, butcher their own food while surviving off the land.

How the fuck do leftist win a Civil War against the armed militia? I'd estimate one average rifleman would force multiply to around 10-20 soy boy cucks.

All I see is lots of Democrats/leftist being put into mass graves, and their leftist leaders swinging by their necks until dead. It would be a joke of a conflict. You seriously don't want that to happen (neither do I).

Tenpoundbass says

MAGA GOOGOO KAG KAG KAG!

Goran_K says
... All I see is lots of Democrats/leftist being put into mass graves, and their leftist leaders swinging by their necks until dead. It would be a joke of a conflict. ...

As I was mentioning, the 2nd amendment will be destroyed by an abuse of that freedom by a concentration of power used to turn against other Americans.

Feux Follets says

Wasn't the official U.S. line for Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan etc. ?

Exactly. That's what happens when an armed militia engages in asymmetrical warfare against a usurpatious government. The government forces get their asses kicked even with OVERWHELMING military force to muster.

Thank you for proving my point about why the 2nd amendment is so valuable.

ThreeBays says

Yet even him, he couldn't stand up to the military industrial complex and other big government entities. I have no doubt he did so under duress, because the guy publicly threatened to veto the spending bill, but he still signed it when it got to his desk.

Trump has no ideology to stand on. He goes by instinct, without a plan and whatever seems to resonate with his base and he sees as popular. Remember his earlier comments on DACA and Gun violence where he personally supported democrats on that but flipped once his base flipped out.

Beyond that he is in the claws of Putin, for one reason or another.

ThreeBays says

As I was mentioning, the 2nd amendment will be destroyed by an abuse of that freedom by a concentration of power used to turn against other Americans.

Which would never happen. 3 Percenters don't believe in concentration of power (that's the antithesis of the meaning of the 2nd amendment and the founders vision), that's leftist/democrats who want that, and they would die on that hill. There is literally no way an army of soy boy fucks beats a militia of pissed off 3 percenters.

Goran_K says

ThreeBays says

As I was mentioning, the 2nd amendment will be destroyed by an abuse of that freedom by a concentration of power used to turn against other Americans.

Which would never happen. 3 Percenters don't believe in concentration of power (that's the antithesis of the meaning of the 2nd amendment and the founders vision), that's leftist/democrats who want that.

The quarter of Americans that own guns don't believe in the concentration of power. However the 3 percent that own most of the guns ARE a concentration of power. It's not a matter of belief.

Feux Follets says

I did ?

Yes you did.

Was Vietnam/Afghanistan solid proof that armed militia can withstand a national army through the use of small arms and IEDs? 16 years going and Afghanistan is still in turmoil?

You think the 2nd amendment really has no value?

ThreeBays says

The quarter of Americans that own guns don't believe in the concentration of power. However the 3 percent that own most of the guns ARE a concentration of power. It's not a matter of belief.

So? The NRA has 5,000,000 members (nearly 6 million members now that David Hogg started opening his mouth). They are a concentration of power against a tyrannical government. You have a problem with that? Do you want the concentration of power to only be with the Federal government?

See? This is proving my point that leftist want power concentrated with the government.

Tim Aurora says

Trump has no ideology to stand on.

YAY! All of America's troubles in the past few decades have been ideologues and their shitty ideology.

errc says

A better first question is why are less than 20% of Americans deciding who will be the President?

People are stuck in 1776. Devolution is obviously real. How about we bring the USFEDGOV and it’s System of Governance into the 21st century. Why is it not desirable to have more people participating in the process?

I take it then you are opposed to the EU, in favor of Scottish and Catalonian Independence.

Goran_K says

How the fuck do leftist win a Civil War against the armed militia? I'd estimate one average rifleman would force multiply to around 10-20 soy boy cucks.

I see you as a threat from Putin. Trying to sow discord among Americans or it is pure fluff

That said, if the militia tries to take over with a civil war, there will be no America. North will secede along with West. ( No you cannot stop that with guns ). That is where the money is. I think rest of America will look more like Russia, an autocratic state ruled by a demagogue as the 10th-20th economy of the world, totally irrelevant in the world affair and gradually becoming poor ( Democratic states contribute more to the economy than they receive by a vast margin) much like Russia. The other America will be richer and much more advanced and more progressive, though no longer a power like before.

After realizing that, even the militia thinking about civil war, will stop in their tracks.

Feux Follets says

But as I type, aren't you of the camp that believes our military can kick ass when ever where ever just because we're Murica ?

Uh no. I was against the Iraq and Afghan wars (the ones your hero Hillary voted for). I think we should let the muslims sort themselves out.

Tim Aurora says

I see you as a threat from Putin. Trying to sow discord among Americans or it is pure fluff

Given the efficiency of guerilla groups, it seems more like it's Putin that is engineering this campaign to ban firearms.

Goran_K says

Thank you for proving my point about why the 2nd amendment is so valuable.

Same reason the Japanese never dreamed of actually invading the continental USA. They hesitated in planning an occupation of Hawaii given the firearms ownership rate.

"A rifleman behind every blade of grass" - Admiral Yamamoto

Goran_K says

Was Vietnam/Afghanistan solid proof that armed militia can withstand a national army through the use of small arms and IEDs? 16 years going and Afghanistan is still in turmoil?

Compare that with countries that achieved independence through peaceful methods, India, China, Taiwan. Compare that with economy of Afghanistan, Pakistan and Vietnam. Even before US went their Afghanistan was failed state as everyone had their own gangs and militia. Believe me , in the aftermath, these militias will have power struggle of their own

Point is guns have their value ( and no one is taking all the guns) but creating a gun state or a militia state, is sure short way of creating a failed state.

Goran_K says

ThreeBays says

The quarter of Americans that own guns don't believe in the concentration of power. However the 3 percent that own most of the guns ARE a concentration of power. It's not a matter of belief.

So? The NRA has 5,000,000 members (nearly 6 million members now that David Hogg started opening his mouth). They are a concentration of power against a tyrannical government. You have a problem with that? Do you want the concentration of power to only be with the Federal government?

See? This is proving my point that leftist want power concentrated with the government.

I don't think that the power of gun owners is comparable to the power of the modern government with drones, nukes, etc.. but I acknowledge your point about messy gorilla warfare.

I don't think that anyone wants power concentrated with the government - and also I don't think anyone wants to have to defend themselves from rogue citizens.

TwoScoopsPlissken says

Given the efficiency of guerilla groups, it seems more like it's Putin that is engineering this campaign to ban firearms.

While at some places it may be that Putin is playing both sides, Russian support to NRA is well established.

Tim Aurora says

Compare that with countries that achieved independence through peaceful methods, India,

Not peaceful. That's the Ghandi Myth. There were attacks on the British every day, hundreds of casualties a month. The Brits had to quit India because the British Indian Army and Navy mutinied when the Brits convicted Indian National Army members. There was no way the British Public would have paid for the British Army to occupy India, nor any public desire to draft the hundreds of thousands of British Soldiers that would be required at a minimum. It was force that forced the British to quit India.

Official Downing Street Plans were to delay the transfer until 1980.

TwoScoopsPlissken says

That's the Ghandi Myth. There were attacks on the British every day, hundreds of casualties a month

Partially true. British left India as they could not make any money from Indians due to non-cooperation. It is the economy stupid ( not directed towards you)

Mr. Forrest Gump: "Stupid is as stupid does."

Get him a crying towel!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=2&v=ttSvzy_FeSw

ThreeBays says

I don't think that the power of gun owners is comparable to the power of the modern government with drones, nukes, etc.. but I acknowledge your point about messy gorilla warfare.

Go do some research about the cop, Chris Dorner, in LA and read how ONE experienced guy with a gun tied up HUNDREDS of cops during his manhunt.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/feb/14/christopher-dorner-last-stand-manhunt

Now multiply that by hundreds of thousands at least across the country. Remember, it takes 3% and there are over 100 million gun owners in the country (do the math).

The lesson America should have learned from Vietnam, SoViet Afghanistan, and others is simply this: you can’t declare war on the people and expect to win.

You can declare war on a regime, face down an army or a navy, destroy a foreign government and the like... but if your conflict ever escalates to include the people of a nation, you’re going to lose.

This is what Leftists don’t understand. If they ever actually get power enough to make the nationalist conservative Americans concerned they will face a backlash that will drive them from that power and probably from America entirely. Trump’s election was just a hint of what can happen when conservatives get a little bit angry and think the establishment are trying to actually destroy the country.

Goran_K says

Feux Follets says

Wasn't the official U.S. line for Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan etc. ?

Exactly. That's what happens when an armed militia engages in asymmetrical warfare against a usurpatious government. The government forces get their asses kicked even with OVERWHELMING military force to muster.

Thank you for proving my point about why the 2nd amendment is so valuable.

I missed the news when the Iraqui and Afghani were victorious. I did hear that the US has killed 15,000 Isis fighters for every American soldier Isis has killed though.

Quigley says

This is what Leftists don’t understand. If they ever actually get power enough to make the nationalist conservative Americans concerned they will face a backlash that will drive them from that power and probably from America entirely.

Not every decision against you is WAR. It is a democracy and as the governments change, the control and policies will change. There are numerous governments in the world with far more gun control than USA and they are flourishing just fine.

Also, no one is against guns but want some "gun control" . It made sense 100 years ago when there was no police forces in the wild wild west but that is not the case now. At some point tanks, stinger missiles can do far more damage than to protect the citizen. Limits are already there , we are just looking readjust that.

Tim Aurora says

Also, no one is against guns but want some "gun control" .

Tim Aurora says

Limits are already there , we are just looking readjust that.

OK, so what specifically do you want done? What NEW laws need to be written? It's already a felony to shoot and kill someone.

What NEW laws will change that and make criminals obey?

ThreeBays says

I missed the news when the Iraqui and Afghani were victorious

We've been fighting the rag-tag goat herders, with basic weapons in Afghanistan with our "mighty" military forces for how long? 15 years? Have we won yet?

But you think that same military will have no problems against 100 million experience shooters in the US?

Really?

Tim Aurora says

Partially true. British left India as they could not make any money from Indians due to non-cooperation. It is the economy stupid ( not directed towards you)

No offense taken.

Ghandi was a weirdo religious fanatic who thought India should be an primitive agrarian country under his peculiar brand of Hinduism which was far out of the mainstream. He thought Dalits and others should know their place, not be uppity, and trust upper caste individuals like him and never organize or get saucy. He was also a sex pervert who declared a vow of chasity but had an enema fetish, especially if administered by pretty young girls. Basically, a kind of pegging dude.

Ghandi was a non-entity after 1942. After that, it was all Congress and the Pakistani sepratists under Jimah, who employed political pressure, and various revolutionary groups with endless violence against the British. Ghandi wanted Peace Talks with Germany and wanted the Jews to apologize for their industrialization and modernization in Germany. Ghandi was a primitivist who believed all ills came from modern society and wanted to go back to the Stone Age.

It was Subhas Chandra Bose's legacy of violent resistance that eventually won India her independence.

Sniper says

OK, so what specifically do you want done? What NEW laws need to be written? It's already a felony to shoot and kill someone.

What NEW laws will change that and make criminals obey?

WE all decide that includes you . It should be on the table and we should discuss that like civil people and not fan the flame of conspiracy theory like Russia wants us to. There are many countries to look at as model including Australia.

And for record, I am just for licensing to own a Assault weapons which should go to check your background. I am afraid that Islamic terrorist may find USA a very fertile place for terrorist attacks.

Criminal can always get guns, just like in other countries, and so can you if you are a law abiding citizen.

Tim Aurora says

WE all decide that includes you . It should be on the table and we should discuss that like civil people and not fan the flame of conspiracy theory like Russia wants us to. There are many countries to look at as model including Australia.

Australia has an effective ban on firearms for all intents and purposes. We're not doing Canadian or Australian style gun control, forget it.

If you want to save lives, restrict pistols to CCW holders or those over 35 and that might knock out a chunk of suicides and homicides. Rifles, including so-called "Assault Rifles" and Shotguns, have very little to do with the murder rate.

Also, ANY plan to further restrict firearms must come with Federal Laws that supercedes State Laws about forcibly hospitalizing the Mentally Ill. And not just for 72 hour evaluations, but permanent hospitalization. Cruz didn't fall through a crack, he fell through about 30+ cracks, over and over and over again because Liberals have made it almost impossible to hospitalize somebody. No deal with out it, in my mind.

Those that say anything about banning any firearm should be tried as domestic enemies.

Republicans have the right to be maimed & killed by those that invoke the 2nd.
Wonder how many Rep/Cons & their ilk will die in the next mass shooting?
Hey Republicans! There is nothing you can do to stop it.
There is a silver lining to the 2nd Amendment cloud!

Oh, Baby Dyke.

I think you are very misinformed

TwoScoopsPlissken says

Ghandi was a weirdo religious fanatic who thought India should be an primitive agrarian country under his peculiar brand of Hinduism which was far out of the mainstream.

He was the one who saved Muslims from slaughter in Bengal

TwoScoopsPlissken says

He thought Dalits and others should know their place, not be uppity, and trust upper caste individuals like him and never organize or get saucy.

Totally wrong. He brought Dalits in the mainstream

TwoScoopsPlissken says

He was also a sex pervert who declared a vow of chasity but had an enema fetish, especially if administered by pretty young girls. Basically, a kind of pegging dude.

His sexual innuendo do not interest me.

Can you give some reference or all you have is some conspiracy theories.

Tim Aurora says

He was the one who saved Muslims from slaughter in Bengal

You mean, he prevented Hindus from taking revenge against their Imperialist Muslim Oppressors who committed atrocities against them for centuries.

Islam did not spread to India by missionaries, but with the sword.

Tim Aurora says

Totally wrong. He brought Dalits in the mainstream

Pretty much no Dalit Activist agrees with you. Dalits overwhelmingly identify Ghandi as a "Problematic" figure.

https://medium.com/@dalitdiva/why-it-is-time-to-dump-gandhi-b59c7399fe66

Here at the top results on Google for "Ghandi Dalits"
http://lmgtfy.com/?q=ghandi+dalits

It's entirely either "Ghandi sucked for us Dalits" and previously ignorant Leftie Nonviolent Westerns saying "Wow, I didn't know the Dalits hated Ghandi"

Tim Aurora says

Can you give some reference or all you have is some conspiracy theories.

You can read Mountbatten and all the rest. I've read them, and I don't have their quotes handy, but they viewed Ghandi as a useful idiot, because he excluded any violent revolutionaries from his platform, he always stopped his movements whenever the British asked - just when they were being truly effective, he was actually quite dovish on Indian Independence as was willing to settle on Dominion Status.

Tear up that piece of ass wipe but save the 2nd. It might be needed to invoke Trump's " 2nd Amendment solution"
when the Declaration of Independence is used to stop this failing Republican dictatorship..

There is nothing more fun than insurrection,rebellion & revolution when real Americans stop the Republican destruction of the U.S.A.

For starters, how about:
"If somebody calls the police and says they want to be committed or they're going to do some fucked up shit, the police are obligated to mentally hospitalize him."

That would have stopped Cruz, since we know he called 911 at least once begging to be hospitalized. Instead, he got a police interview and they left him at home.

(Posted in Wrong Thread)

Tim Aurora says

And for record, I am just for licensing to own a Assault weapons which should go to check your background.

OK, first, what is a "Assault weapon"? Can you give me a link to a supplier or manufacturer's page where I can buy one? My firearm supplier has no idea what that is.

Second, do you know what a 4473 form is?

Tim Aurora says

Criminal can always get guns, just like in other countries, and so can you if you are a law abiding citizen.

Exactly right about criminals. So, why are the Democrats against law abiding citizen buying them to protect themselves and their families?

TwoScoopsPlissken says

Is she going to cry that her 1st amendment rights are violated when she has to use a clear backpack, and everyone will see what she's carrying?

https://patrick.net/post/1314688/2018-03-24-the-special-snowflakes-get-what-they-wished-for-parkland-school-requiring-clear-backpacks

Goran_K says

Done with Republicans and Democrats, yup. Done.

Another follower leaves the religion of the divisiveness paradigm, finally realizing that while the coin has two sides, it's still the same coin.

Sniper says

when she has to use a clear backpack,

You are assuming that "it" is a "she". A clear microaggression, or misdemeanor according to CA laws.

NuttBoxer says

Goran_K says

Done with Republicans and Democrats, yup. Done.

Another follower leaves the religion of the divisiveness paradigm, finally realizing that while the coin has two sides, it's still the same coin.

Actions speak louder than words

Feux Follets says

Hubris, Ignorance are the reason were are still there.

And all this time I thought it was for the poppies.

Tim Aurora says

I see you as a threat from Putin. Trying to sow discord among Americans or it is pure fluff

Great minds think alike.

RafiMaas says

Tim Aurora says

I see you as a threat from Putin. Trying to sow discord among Americans or it is pure fluff

Great minds think alike.

I knew there was a connection.

So sad...

Sniper says

Second, do you know what a 4473 form is?

Is there something wrong with beefing up the 4473?

Hmmmm....

But the House Armed Services Committee version of the annual Pentagon policy bill included a common-sense provision to make sure the Pentagon isn't tasked with paying for the wall: "Section 1039. Rule of construction regarding use of Department of Defense funding of a border wall. None of the funds authorized to be appropriated by this act or otherwise made available for the fiscal year 2018 for the Department of Defense may be used to plan, develop or construct any barriers, including walls or fences, along the international border of the United States."
...
An amendment was offered by Republican Reps. Steven Palazzo and Trent Kelly from Mississippi (which has coastline but no land border) to strike Section 1039. That means Pentagon money could be spent to construct a border wall. In the normal process of things, this amendment would have been accepted by the Rules Committee and then debated and voted on by the full House of Representatives. But nothing about this amendment can be called normal.

The Rules Committee took this one amendment and labeled it, "proposed to be adopted." In the arcana of House rules, this means that voting for the rule governing consideration of the bill was also voting for this amendment. This is known as a "self-executing rule." The ranking Democrat on the committee, Rep. Louise Slaughter of New York, offered an amendment to strike the self-executing portion of the rule and was defeated in committee on a party-line vote of 4-8.

On the House floor, the vote on the full rule passed. And at the end of a long and exhausting day (and story), that means Pentagon money can be used to construct a border wall. Talk about governing under the cover of darkness.

https://www.usnews.com/opinion/economic-intelligence/articles/2017-07-19/congress-slyly-diverts-pentagon-money-to-fund-donald-trumps-border-wall

There was no Darkness, if the auto-execution rule passed the committee and the rule passed on the House Floor. The author is the leader of a fake Taxpayer Group that only fights Border Security and Enforcement spending, but loves handouts to refugees and the like.

The new rules went into effect in 2018...

RafiMaas says

Sniper says

Second, do you know what a 4473 form is?

Is there something wrong with beefing up the 4473?

How many more pages and questions does it need?

TwoScoopsPlissken says

that means Pentagon money can be used to construct a border wall.

Shouldn't it say "can't be used"

Last summer, two Republican Reps got that Section 1039 language that prohibited Defense Funds from being used to build the Wall, removed.

This is very interesting though - somebody was so worried about the possibility of building the wall and putting up a barrier to mass illegal immigration they tried to preclude the possibility of Defense money going towards it by writing Section 1039. For 2018, this section was struck.

If it didn't get snuck back into this spending bill, it means the Donald can use Pentagon money to build the Wall, on top of the $1.6B.

Consider this tweet after Trump signed the spending bill:


#10FeetHigher #BuildTheWall

TwoScoopsPlissken says

No - in the original 2017 bill, it said can't be used.

My bad

If it ain't possible, why is Upchuck so scared?

Trump’s pursuit of defense dollars to finance the U.S.-Mexico border wall underscores his determination to fulfill a campaign promise and build the barrier despite resistance in the Republican-led Congress. The administration’s last-minute negotiations with lawmakers to secure billions more for the wall failed and Trump grudgingly signed the spending bill last Friday after a short-lived veto threat.

...

"This would be a blatant misuse of military funds and tied up in court for years. Secretary Mattis ought not bother and instead use the money to help our troops, rather than advance the president’s political fantasies,” Senate Minority Leader Charles E. Schumer (D-N.Y.) said in a statement to The Washington Post.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/trump-privately-presses-for-military-to-pay-for-border-wall/2018/03/27/d79907a2-31c9-11e8-9759-56e51591e250_story.html?utm_term=.983d3d433947

I think Trump will try to get funding another way, but if he doesn't get it, he'll spend the Defense Money.

Interesting that Congress is SO DESPERATE not to have the Wall, they try to block every loophole and erect every "barrier" (such as restricting it to chain link fencing) they can think of.

If they truly believe the Wall won't work, why the desperate attempts to obstruct and anticipate loopholes? Because they know it will, and their lobbyist masters don't want their cheap labor restricted. And banks probably want their drug dealing money laundering accounts to stay nice and fat with US Dollars, HSBC Style.