Guns at Town Hall Meetings

[MoonShadow]

It never ceases to amaze how the bubbas of our country behave. Imagine, taking an assault rifle to a town hall meeting where Obama was presenting. Not only is this disrepectful, it is an embarrassment that someone would carry such an item to a town hall meeting where the President of his country is making a speech.


PHOENIX - About a dozen people carrying guns, including one with a military-style rifle, milled among protesters outside the convention center where President Barack Obama was giving a speech Monday — the latest incident in which protesters have openly displayed firearms near the president.



http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/32457652/ns/politics-white_house/

[Sanslines]

Remember 1966? Remember Star Trek?

"In the Star Trek universe, humans (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_(Star_Trek)) developed faster-than-light (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Faster-than-light) space travel ("warp drive (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warp_drive)") following a nuclear war and a post-apocalyptic period in the mid-21st century. According to this universe's timeline, the first warp flight occurred on 5 April 2063. This technological feat attracted the attention of the Vulcans (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vulcan_(Star_Trek)), an advanced alien race, who then made first contact (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_contact_(science_fiction)) with Earth (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earth). Aided by the scientific and philosophical teachings of the Vulcans, humans largely overcame many Earth-bound frailties and vices by the middle of the 22nd century, creating a quasi-utopian (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Utopia) society in which exploration and knowledge replaced material wealth as the human civilization's central pursuit. Humans then united with other sentient (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sentience) species (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Species) of the galaxy (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milky_Way), including the Vulcans, to form the United Federation of Planets (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Federation_of_Planets)."

Sadly, it has been almost 45 years since the proclamation about replacing material wealth with knowledge and intelligence has been made. The current health care debate has clearly demonstrated that we have such a long way to go to reistablish common sense and a desire to seek factual knowledge and understanding rather then acceptance of lies that are based upon personal ignorance.

I don't think that the Vulcans will be contacting Planet Earth any time soon!

[MoonShadow]

LOL Sanslines. How I loved the old Star Trek series!

Intelligence? Common Sense? We are not evolving very much along these lines. :(

[Steve78621]

This new trend of taking guns to town meetings is a bad idea. Where will it end? Sooner or later some fool will just start shooting when someone comes up with an idea the gun toteing fool doesn't agree with. We need to turn American culture around pretty quickly or we may not be able to call this country a democracy in a few more years. Guns at town meetings are just there to intimidate free discussion and to bully people into silence. A really, really bad trend!

[flnudist]

I personally don't have a problem with Americans expressing their constitutional rights by "Peacefully Assembling and Bearing Arms". Like the AZ officer stated in the article, they were not breaking any laws or doing nothing wrong by merely being present during a speech.

[Sanslines]

LOL Sanslines. How I loved the old Star Trek series!

Intelligence? Common Sense? We are not evolving very much along these lines. :(

Given the constant threats against the President, bringing guns to any event where the President is present does not demonstrate common sense.

No doubt some will take their brains and common sense to town hall meetings with the President. The others.............well....they will bring their guns instead.

[FoUTASportscaster]

As for the Star Trek reference, we have to have a nuclear war and a post-apocalyptic period in order to advance. Seems we are still people well on our way to war.

[maliakei]

I don't like the idea of anyone (except military or police), bringing loaded weapons to a political event. Seeing protesters bring them would make the atmosphere feel more dangerous & distracting for everybody.

[BinCo]

The guy's a moron and a danger to the 2nd ammendment.

Anyone with half a brain knows that this is not the time and place to openly carry a gun. I would half expect the police to stand right beside the guy the entire time. I know if it was my patrolman I would expect him to do just that.

There are just better ways to express your opinion than to carry at a political gathering like that when it is such a heated debate. What will happen is that someone else will try to wrestle the gun away and it will go off. Wrong or right, it's just plain dumb and asking for trouble. It is clear that he also is intimidating the opposition. In the least it is a suppression tactic. Of course, he is not that concerned about suppressing other people, as long as he is not being suppressed by those flaming Socialists.

Him using the 2nd ammendment as a reason is an insult to the responsible gun owners in this country. I would never carry any of my guns to a political debate. Most assuradly not to one that the President was at. I really feel that this guy and those like him are using their guns for intimidation.

[BinCo]

I personally don't have a problem with Americans expressing their constitutional rights by "Peacefully Assembling and Bearing Arms". Like the AZ officer stated in the article, they were not breaking any laws or doing nothing wrong by merely being present during a speech.

These town hall meetings are anything but peaceful assemblies.

The very least I would expect from an officer would be to check that the gun is unloaded. In Colorado you need a CCP to carry a loaded weapon, and this would be a case for someone going to court to possibly lose that CCP for endangering the public.

[LamontCranston]

I don't like the idea of anyone (except military or police), bringing loaded weapons to a political event. Seeing protesters bring them would make the atmosphere feel more dangerous & distracting for everybody. Except for the military and police that time at Kent State University... "four dead in Ohio" sings Neill Young. Nothing really changes, just the calendar and the players.

[BinCo]

Except for the military and police that time at Kent State University... "four dead in Ohio" sings Neill Young. Nothing really changes, just the calendar and the players.

Amen to that.

[Naturist Mark]

Gee ... what do you suppose would have happened if armed protesters showed up at a presidential appearance during the last administration?

[Naturist Mark]

Except for the military and police that time at Kent State University... "four dead in Ohio" sings Neill Young. Nothing really changes, just the calendar and the players.

Not quite sure what your point is Mike ... are you saying that the national guardsmen at KSU were similar to today's locked and loaded teabaggers hanging out at presidential town hall venues?

[BinCo]

Gee ... what do you suppose would have happened if armed protesters showed up at a presidential appearance during the last administration?

You would have gotten a wonderful vacation on a sunny warm island in the caribbean. What else could you want?

[LamontCranston]

Not quite sure what your point is Mike ... are you saying that the national guardsmen at KSU were similar to today's locked and loaded teabaggers hanging out at presidential town hall venues? My point is that the military and police can't always be trusted with weapons at political events. I'm not in anyway condoning firearms in public places, just pointing out that when the gov't wants silence, they don't always get it, even when they insist. You'll recall that the U.S. did exit Viet Nam without the objective.

It could be we're transitioning from politics to civil unrest. What we need is another long winter so folks can sit inside and be spoonfed propaganda in two-part harmony from the media machine instead of out talking amongst themselves, getting ideas, voicing opinions, and demanding change. There's just too much thinking and talking going on and methinks the suits in power are becoming uneasy.

[flnudist]

Gee ... what do you suppose would have happened if armed protesters showed up at a presidential appearance during the last administration?

I would think nothing would happen just like this time.

Speaking as a Law Enforcement Officer standpoint, what folks don't understand is that ALL people have the same rights. And as long as they aren't breaking or haven't broken any laws then the police have to treat them the same way as everyone else. We might watch them a little closer but we can't stand over them and try and intiminate them.

I answer calls almost everyday about Homeless people being in the county parks sitting at the picnic tables and the Complainant doesn't think they should be there because they are dirty and smell. Well I tell the complainant that this is a PUBLIC park and yes the homeless folks are just as "Public" as they are.

The point is just because someone is doing something you don't like, it dosen't make it wrong or illegal.

OK....... Stepping off my soapbox now :D

[maliakei]

I was too young to remember the Kent Univ shootings, but found this article on the questions as to how and why this happened.

http://dept.kent.edu/sociology/lewis/lewihen.htm

[NudeAl]

I for one think this was total BS and I feel they are a danger not so much to the president but to the 2nd Amendment. I disagree that the only persons who should have firearms is the police and the military. I believe that there is a time and a place for everything and a town hall meeting where the president is scheduled to speak is absolutely the wrong place, no question about that. I wonder what their agenda was other than some sort of intimidation tactic WTF were they thinking????

Has any responsible media interveiwed them to see what they were trying to accomplish? Perhaps they are trying to bring te gun debate to the fore front. If the right can get the left stirred up about bringing back the gun ban they will be able to whittle away support from those who feel strongly about the 2nd Ammendment I would suggest that the anti-gunners stay off this subject and do not take the bait. If they do they will be playing into someones else's agenda. Sniff, sniff, hmm smells like a trap to me.

[Agde]

From the article:
"Phoenix police Detective J. Oliver, who monitored the man at the downtown
protest, said police also wanted to make sure no one decided to harm him."

Dare one dream that someday the Phoenix police will be just as conscientious about protecting a naturist woman downtown?

Seriously, can anyone not understand why Europeans find America so disturbingly fascinating?

[Naturist Mark]

I would think nothing would happen just like this time.

As I recall people were arrested for having anti-Bush t-shirts, because of the danger those shirts would have posed to the president

...

but loaded guns would have been OK?

[Naturist Mark]

I was too young to remember the Kent Univ shootings, but found this article on the questions as to how and why this happened.

http://dept.kent.edu/sociology/lewis/lewihen.htm

I was there. Kent I mean, not at the shootings. But I was just a few blocks away.

I was at my elementary school - 3rd grade. The National Guard used our playground as their camp. We stayed inside for recess since there were men with guns outside.

[Fitz1980]

I personally don't have a problem with Americans expressing their constitutional rights by "Peacefully Assembling and Bearing Arms". Like the AZ officer stated in the article, they were not breaking any laws or doing nothing wrong by merely being present during a speech.

Funny how when the Black Panthers did the same thing, legally assembling and carrying legal arms, the conservative types flipped out.

[Sanslines]

The point is just because someone is doing something you don't like, it dosen't make it wrong or illegal.

OK....... Stepping off my soapbox now :D

A person can always be charged with a violation of a law. There are some very nebulous, catch all laws on the books. Many laws are deliberately written in such a way as to allow for leeway in application of those laws. If all laws were written in very exact and specific language, then there would be a never ending and growing list of millions of laws and even then there would never be enough laws.

The question of wrong or illegal is somewhat subjective and interpretive.

[Sanslines]

I was there. Kent I mean, not at the shootings. But I was just a few blocks away.

I was at my elementary school - 3rd grade. The National Guard used our playground as their camp. We stayed inside for recess since there were men with guns outside.


Damn..........you be old!

[Mosquito_Bait]

The only thing I find encouraging about this incident is that even my NRA member friends think that there should be limits on the types of firearms that can be carried in public. I will be interested to see the NRA's official position on this and whether they agree to reasonable limits that prohibit carrying assault rifles in public or whether they continue to spiral in toward an ever more extreme position.

[Fitz1980]

It could be we're transitioning from politics to civil unrest. What we need is another long winter so folks can sit inside and be spoonfed propaganda in two-part harmony from the media machine instead of out talking amongst themselves, getting ideas, voicing opinions, and demanding change. There's just too much thinking and talking going on and methinks the suits in power are becoming uneasy.

Isn't propaganda from the media machine exactly why most of the protesters are going to the meetings and shouting sound byte lies over the speakers who are attempting to explain rather complex issues?

Taken from Bill Maher

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/bill-maher/new-rule-smart-president_b_253996.html
And before I go about demonstrating how, sadly, easy it is to prove the dumbness dragging down our country, let me just say that ignorance has life and death consequences. On the eve of the Iraq War, 69% of Americans thought Saddam Hussein was personally involved in 9/11. Four years later, 34% still did. Or take the health care debate we're presently having: members of Congress have recessed now so they can go home and "listen to their constituents." An urge they should resist because their constituents don't know anything. At a recent town-hall meeting in South Carolina, a man stood up and told his Congressman to "keep your government hands off my Medicare," which is kind of like driving cross country to protest highways.

I'm the bad guy for saying it's a stupid country, yet polls show that a majority of Americans cannot name a single branch of government, or explain what the Bill of Rights is. 24% could not name the country America fought in the Revolutionary War. More than two-thirds of Americans don't know what's in Roe v. Wade. Two-thirds don't know what the Food and Drug Administration does. Some of this stuff you should be able to pick up simply by being alive. You know, like the way the Slumdog kid knew about cricket.

Not here. Nearly half of Americans don't know that states have two senators and more than half can't name their congressman. And among Republican governors, only 30% got their wife's name right on the first try.

Sarah Palin says she would never apologize for America. Even though a Gallup poll says 18% of Americans think the sun revolves around the earth. No, they're not stupid. They're interplanetary mavericks. A third of Republicans believe Obama is not a citizen, and a third of Democrats believe that George Bush had prior knowledge of the 9/11 attacks, which is an absurd sentence because it contains the words "Bush" and "knowledge."

People ***** and moan about taxes and spending, but they have no idea what their government spends money on. The average voter thinks foreign aid consumes 24% of our federal budget. It's actually less than 1%. And don't even ask about cabinet members: seven in ten think Napolitano is a kind of three-flavored ice cream. And last election, a full one-third of voters forgot why they were in the booth, handed out their pants, and asked, "Do you have these in a relaxed-fit?"

And I haven't even brought up America's religious beliefs. But here's one fun fact you can take away: did you know only about half of Americans are aware that Judaism is an older religion than Christianity? That's right, half of America looks at books called the Old Testament and the New Testament and cannot figure out which one came first.

And these are the idiots we want to weigh in on the minutia of health care policy? Please, this country is like a college chick after two Long Island Iced Teas: we can be talked into anything, like wars, and we can be talked out of anything, like health care. We should forget town halls, and replace them with study halls. There's a lot of populist anger directed towards Washington, but you know who concerned citizens should be most angry at? Their fellow citizens. "Inside the beltway" thinking may be wrong, but at least it's thinking, which is more than you can say for what's going on outside the beltway.

And if you want to call me an elitist for this, I say thank you. Yes, I want decisions made by an elite group of people who know what they're talking about. That means Obama budget director Peter Orszag, not Sarah Palin.

Which is the way our founding fathers wanted it. James Madison wrote that "pure democracy" doesn't work because "there is nothing to check... an obnoxious individual." Then, in the margins, he doodled a picture of Joe the Plumber.

[alfredr]

I haven't seen or heard any reporting on whether any of the guns at the town hall meetings were loaded, or even if the owners were carrying ammunition. After all....

"Guns don't kill people, bullets kill people." But an unloaded gun can still intimidate if you don't know it's unloaded. As can a baseball bat.

Does anyone else see any parallels between the people who took their guns to show their support for the right to keep and bear arms (and I can see some validity to openly carrying an unloaded gun as a demonstration of my right to do so) and a 'nudist' (or whatever you want to call him if you don't agree with his tactics) pushing the envelope of where and when he goes naked, like Steven Gough, for instance?

A bit beyond what most people think is smart or acceptable and not sure if it helps or hurts the cause?

[Skinview]

The only thing I find encouraging about this incident is that even my NRA member friends think that there should be limits on the types of firearms that can be carried in public. I will be interested to see the NRA's official position on this and whether they agree to reasonable limits that prohibit carrying assault rifles in public or whether they continue to spiral in toward an ever more extreme position.

First off, the fools with the guns at the town hall meetings are morons. That said, your NRA member friends who think there should be limits on what types of guns can be carried in public are the same dim wits who believe in free speach as long as someone doesn't say something they don't like. The above monologue by Bill Maher comes to mind. NRA people like that are the reason that Gun Owners of America exists.

I have never heard an official NRA position regarding open carry of firearms. Offhand, I would expect the NRA to support the Second Amendment on that. "A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed." Arms suitable for militia use are the heart of that right.

You might get an official NRA position against open carry of thermonuclear weapons. Firearms are something else.

[BinCo]

As I recall people were arrested for having anti-Bush t-shirts, because of the danger those shirts would have posed to the president

In Colorado a case was finally dismissed against a woman who had a sign that said "McCain = Bush". She was harrassed and removed from a public meeting place that she was in front of. Another group of 3 were forceably removed from a Bush rally in 2004 because the car they arrived in had an anti-war bumper sticker on it.

If you think that the last admin would have put up with someone bringing a firearm to a public meeting you are fooling yourself. The few public meetings that idiot had used metal detectors to get into and usually had city blocks cleared and protestors put in cages blocks away. The crushed the first ammendment rights of anyone who protested them.

These idiots are the reason that more gun laws will be pushed upon us. Then they will cry about it and bring guns to a health care rally and then more laws will be written. There are places that CCP does not allow, they can post it on the private buildings, but you can be sure that any government office, school, library and post office does not allow guns inside. I don't see any of these goons standing around getting their 2nd grader into class carrying an AR15.

Anyone who doesn't see that these morons are using their guns as a means of intimidation of the people at the rally, and possible future rallies, is fooling themselves.

[BinCo]

I haven't seen or heard any reporting on whether any of the guns at the town hall meetings were loaded, or even if the owners were carrying ammunition. After all....

"Guns don't kill people, bullets kill people." But an unloaded gun can still intimidate if you don't know it's unloaded. As can a baseball bat.

Does anyone else see any parallels between the people who took their guns to show their support for the right to keep and bear arms (and I can see some validity to openly carrying an unloaded gun as a demonstration of my right to do so) and a 'nudist' (or whatever you want to call him if you don't agree with his tactics) pushing the envelope of where and when he goes naked, like Steven Gough, for instance?

A bit beyond what most people think is smart or acceptable and not sure if it helps or hurts the cause?

Good points. I also think that you would be a target for carrying a pipe.

[BinCo]

Looks like some of this was staged.

http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/2009/08/obama_townhall_gun_toters_have.html

[Naturist Mark]

I haven't seen or heard any reporting on whether any of the guns at the town hall meetings were loaded, or even if the owners were carrying ammunition. After all....

One who was asked if his gun was loaded said "It is stupid and dangerous to carry an unloaded gun." and police have stated that you must assume that every gun is loaded.

Lynette "Squeaky" Fromme was just released from prison after 34 years for pointing an unloaded gun at President Ford in 1975.

[Kouak]

A person can always be charged with a violation of a law. There are some very nebulous, catch all laws on the books. Many laws are deliberately written in such a way as to allow for leeway in application of those laws. If all laws were written in very exact and specific language, then there would be a never ending and growing list of millions of laws and even then there would never be enough laws.

The question of wrong or illegal is somewhat subjective and interpretive.

This is why I believe that laws should have a section at the beginning of them to state the spirit of that law. This would guide law enforcement, prosecutors, and judges in interpreting the law. This would prevent a law from being misapplied to someone just because they want to punish a person, and need some law to use. At least the laws they use will be applicable.

[Naturist Mark]

Looks like some of this was staged.

http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/2009/08/obama_townhall_gun_toters_have.html

Nearly all of the town hall rowdiness has been staged. The gun toters in Arizona were mainly recruits of Ron Paul activists called out by a radio show. The "tree of liberty" guy in Vermont was also a Ron Paul teabagger. The protesters inside the town halls were recruited by emails from astroturf fake grassroots groups including FreedomWorks and the 60 plus Association with specific instructions on how to disrupt the meetings and prevent serious discussion. Katy Abram, the "ordinary housewife who was never involved in politics before" who lambasted Arlen Specter turns out to be a veteran teabagger and Glenn Beck 9-12 organizer. "Independent" healthcare protester at a Wisconsin town hall meeting, Heather Blish, was actually the former GOP vice-chairman of her county. The nut who was dressed down by Barney Frank yesterday was a Lyndon LaRouche cultist.

[gmoney]

Him using the 2nd ammendment as a reason is an insult to the responsible gun owners in this country. I would never carry any of my guns to a political debate. Most assuradly not to one that the President was at. I really feel that this guy and those like him are using their guns for intimidation.

It was a peaceful demonstration. You don't get it do you?

Gee ... what do you suppose would have happened if armed protesters showed up at a presidential appearance during the last administration?

They would have taken you hunting. It's already been clearly stated the president was not in harm's way. Just how close do you think he really was?

Isn't propaganda from the media machine exactly why most of the protesters are going to the meetings and shouting sound byte lies over the speakers who are attempting to explain rather complex issues?

Taken from Bill Maher
Bill Maher and the huffington post are both far left, off their rockers and wackos.
How can anyone respect Maher for anything? He's a big joke.

If you think that the last admin would have put up with someone bringing a firearm to a public meeting you are fooling yourself. The few public meetings that idiot had used metal detectors to get into and usually had city blocks cleared and protestors put in cages blocks away. The crushed the first ammendment rights of anyone who protested them.




Anyone who doesn't see that these morons are using their guns as a means of intimidation of the people at the rally, and possible future rallies, is fooling themselves.

The last administration wasnt full of gun banning freaks that this one has.
How did they intimidate anyone? It was peaceful.
The problem is you people think LAW ABIDING US CITIZENS are dangerous.
You need to look at CRIMINALS for your problems and quit blaming everything on the average citizen but you can't do that cause that would be discrimination to you....

[BinCo]

It was a peaceful demonstration. You don't get it do you?

The last administration wasnt full of gun banning freaks that this one has.
How did they intimidate anyone? It was peaceful.
The problem is you people think LAW ABIDING US CITIZENS are dangerous.
You need to look at CRIMINALS for your problems and quit blaming everything on the average citizen but you can't do that cause that would be discrimination to you....

Actually I don't think that LAW ABIDING US CITIZENS are dangerous. I just have enough comprehension of the law to understand that there is a time and place for you and I to excersize our rights. You have the right to freedom of speach, you can't walk into a crowded room and yell fire. You have the freedom of religion, you can't use that freedom to sacrifice the local pet population. You have the right to peacable assemble, you can't incite a riot. You have the right to freedom of the press, you can be held liable for your printing. You have the right to bear arms, you can't bring them into a courtroom, plane, train, school, library, etc..... You have the right to a trial by a jury of your peers, you don't get to be the only one deciding on your peers. You have the right against unlawful search and seizure, you smell of alcohol when you're pulled over and you will be searched and seized.

There is a time and place for demonstrations. If these town hall meetings were about gun control I would absolutely say that people should be allowed to bring their guns to the rally. SMART ones will bring the gun unloaded. If it's just about demonstrating my gun rights, why bring them loaded?

It's a known fact that this president has daily threats against his life and you are concerned about some wack job who was TOLD to bring his gun to a town hall meeting on HEALTH CARE???? If I brought a bunch of fireworks to the meeting, in a city that it was legal in, would I be thought to be endangering people with my stupidity or just excersizing my rights?

Gmoney, these idiots are going to help fan the flames of anti-gun nuts by bringing guns to a health care rally. If they were smart, they would either keep them hidden or leave them at home. I know a few people who have CCP's and they are taught, in Colorado, that you don't flash your gun around. It's a tool that is used by these people to intimidate the crowds. To intimidate the opposition from even showing up for fear that one of these guys might go postal on the crowd. It's no different than bringing a baseball bat or pipe to an arguement with the neighbor.

As a gun owner and gun rights advocate I have to stand on the other side of these nut jobs. Please do NOT consider them the average gun owner.

[Fitz1980]

It was a peaceful demonstration. You don't get it do you?


Yea I'm sure if some Black Panthers showed up, strapped with AR-15's in a "peaceful demonstration" against your guy it would have been fine with you.


Originally Posted by Naturist Mark View Post
Gee ... what do you suppose would have happened if armed protesters showed up at a presidential appearance during the last administration?
They would have taken you hunting. It's already been clearly stated the president was not in harm's way. Just how close do you think he really was?


Yea I'm sure that the administration that had people arrested for wearing T-shirts that denounced their guy would be fine with the opposition showing up with guns, or is that why Bush's people not only made anyone attending one of his "town hall" meetings not only go through a metal detector but also sign a loyalty oath and promise that they would only ask certain "questions"?

The last administration wasnt full of gun banning freaks that this one has.

This one isn't either; that's just a lie that wingnut central uses to scare wingnuts into following them. Personally I think that the gun guys were really trying to get harassed by the cops so that they could go on Faux News and say "jack booted thugs tried to take guns ways from us law abiding citizens."

How did they intimidate anyone? It was peaceful

Who intimidated who? During Bush's administration law enforcement was told to use force on peaceful protesters. I was in college with several "radicals" who attended protests at a time when the mainstream media wouldn't even give fair coverage to left-wing protests for fear of being called 'soft on terrorism.' They said that pretty much everyone at those rallies got the $hit kicked out of them by the cops, while the cameras were off of course.


The problem is you people think LAW ABIDING US CITIZENS are dangerous.
You need to look at CRIMINALS for your problems and quit blaming everything on the average citizen but you can't do that cause that would be discrimination to you....

No; the problem is that you people need to realize who and what constitutes a law abiding citizen. Your side is the one that arrested people for wearing a shirt with a message that you didn't like.

[Mosquito_Bait]

MY perception is that the gun-toters went to the town hall meetings hoping to provoke a confrontation and gain sympathy for their position that the government is run by jackbooted thugs who want to take their guns away. Their ploy seems to have backfired. Not even the NRA is defending them. The national conversation is now about the need to ban people from walking around in public carrying assault rifles.

[MoonShadow]

Those who showed up publicly carrying an assault rifle or any other "gun" were blatantly being disrepectful and arrogant!

Further, law abiding citizens wouldn't show up showing their "guns". They would, if they carry, left them in their vehicles or at home if they were attending such an event.

Good points made, Fitz, Binco, and mosquito-bait!

[txvic]

I really don't get the whole town hall fiasco that has been on the news lately. As for the guns, I am surprised that there were no arrests. Don't get me wrong, I am a gun owner and believe I have the right to own them. But who in their right mind would carry them and have them on display at a public meeting? They are lucky they were not taken out by the police... As for the uproar in general. I don't think anyone really knows what they are talking about. I think everyone is scared because of it. I am not big into politics and I don't have all the ins and outs of the healthcare debate. All I hear is government run insurance to compete with private insurance and what it is going to cost.

[Fitz1980]

They are lucky they were not taken out by the police...

I think that's what they wanted. Than they could go on Fox News and say "Obama and his jack booted thugs want to take away guns from law abiding citizens, just like we've been saying."

I like how the right keeps saying that the gun guys were "plants." No a plant would be if they were liberals carrying around guns pretending to be conservative to make the conservatives look bad.

[gmoney]

Yea I'm sure if some Black Panthers showed up, strapped with AR-15's in a "peaceful demonstration" against your guy it would have been fine with you.




Yea I'm sure that the administration that had people arrested for wearing T-shirts that denounced their guy would be fine with the opposition showing up with guns, or is that why Bush's people not only made anyone attending one of his "town hall" meetings not only go through a metal detector but also sign a loyalty oath and promise that they would only ask certain "questions"?



This one isn't either; that's just a lie that wingnut central uses to scare wingnuts into following them. Personally I think that the gun guys were really trying to get harassed by the cops so that they could go on Faux News and say "jack booted thugs tried to take guns ways from us law abiding citizens."



Who intimidated who? During Bush's administration law enforcement was told to use force on peaceful protesters. I was in college with several "radicals" who attended protests at a time when the mainstream media wouldn't even give fair coverage to left-wing protests for fear of being called 'soft on terrorism.' They said that pretty much everyone at those rallies got the $hit kicked out of them by the cops, while the cameras were off of course.




No; the problem is that you people need to realize who and what constitutes a law abiding citizen. Your side is the one that arrested people for wearing a shirt with a message that you didn't like.
Comments just like yours are why we in this country will never get along with each other. Is there any existing rights you feel standing up for ?
Do you understand what a terrorist or a socialist is?

Those who showed up publicly carrying an assault rifle or any other "gun" were blatantly being disrepectful and arrogant!

Further, law abiding citizens wouldn't show up showing their "guns". They would, if they carry, left them in their vehicles or at home if they were attending such an event.

Good points made, Fitz, Binco, and mosquito-bait!

Arizona has an open carry law and that is why they where displayed.
You don't understand nor will you ever understand. Your too far to one side of the middle...

[Fitz1980]

Do you understand what a terrorist or a socialist is?

I do understand. Most of the people on the right bashing the president do not.

Terrorism is violent targeting of a civilian population in order to bring about a political goal.

Socialism is the government owning & controling the means of production.

What's your point?

Comments just like yours are why we in this country will never get along with each other. Is there any existing rights you feel standing up for ?

HAVE YOU READ A GOD DAMNED THING I'VE EVER POSTED HERE?

I've stated on this very board several times that I own a gun and do believe in the right to bare arms. I also believe in freedom of speech and of the press. I'm a nudist, so I like having the freedom to be naked. I think that all of the world's religions are false but respect anyone's right to follow one, but I don't want they imposing their religious beliefs on anyone else.

[LamontCranston]

Looks like some of this was staged. You mean the entire protracted health care debate over the last two months in order to divert attention from troop escalations, a spike in casualties, violence, an election in Afghanistan and missile strikes with civilian "collateral damage" in Pakistan along with still rising unemployment and zero photo ops of construction projects with Stimulus money?

Yes, probably.

[gmoney]

I do understand. Most of the people on the right bashing the president do not.

Terrorism is violent targeting of a civilian population in order to bring about a political goal.

Socialism is the government owning & controling the means of production.

What's your point?



HAVE YOU READ A GOD DAMNED THING I'VE EVER POSTED HERE?

I've stated on this very board several times that I own a gun and do believe in the right to bare arms. I also believe in freedom of speech and of the press. I'm a nudist, so I like having the freedom to be naked. I think that all of the world's religions are false but respect anyone's right to follow one, but I don't want they imposing their religious beliefs on anyone else.

1st let me say "MY guy" is a myth you made up. I favor no one. I dont favor far right, far left or in the middle.
I make my own choices and they are varied. I belive in freedom, whether thats to be nude, tote a gun, or speak my mind.
you think "the black panthers" are intimitading, thats a laugh.
I certainly felt safer with regards to my rights with Bush then I ever will with nobama. Why do you refuse to see him for what he is?(view his voting record)
Please don't refer to me as "you people". That shows you are the narrow minded one in this debate.
Your showing your true colors these days.......and they ain't pretty...you are wanting a socialist nation?

[Fitz1980]

1st let me say "MY guy" is a myth you made up. I favor no one. I dont favor far right, far left or in the middle.
I make my own choices and they are varied. I belive in freedom, whether thats to be nude, tote a gun, or speak my mind.
you think "the black panthers" are intimitading, thats a laugh.
I certainly felt safer with regards to my rights with Bush then I ever will with nobama. Why do you refuse to see him for what he is?(view his voting record)
Please don't refer to me as "you people". That shows you are the narrow minded one in this debate.
Your showing your true colors these days.......and they ain't pretty...you are wanting a socialist nation?

You're accusing me of wanting a socialist nation when you clearly don't understand what socialism is. You say that I refuse to see Obama for what he is and than spout falsehoods about what he supported. You felt safer under Dubya/Cheney and than refer to the guy I supported as nobama and I'm the one who's true colors ain't pretty?

[Sanman]

BinCo posted this link earlier, but maybe some missed it....

http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/2009/08/obama_townhall_gun_toters_have.html

Especially watch the video there. They mentioned that they called the police before even showing up to let them know their peaceful intentions and that they would be carying guns. The police were actually quite greatful that they made the courtesy phone call and they stayed well in sight of the police to be sure they would not be accused of stirring up trouble.

Here's one other interesting video how MSNBC spun it differently, and basically lied to make it out to be a racial issue.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=scE-VrpnU9M

[FoUTASportscaster]

Do you understand what a terrorist or a socialist is?

Judging by this comment, I am certain that you don't know what a socialist is and just follow whatever you are told.

If you went to a public school, you might be a socialist.
If you got a drivers license, you might be a socialist.
If you have ever used the police, you might be a socialist.
If you would use the fire department instead of letting your house burn, you might be a socialist.
If your city picks up your garbage, you might be a socialist.
If you went to a public college, you might be a socialist.
If you have ever driven on the interstate highway system, you might be a socialist.
If you have ever entered a park, you might be a socialist.
If you have ever taken mass transit, you might be a socialist.
If you have ever flown out of an airport, you might be a socialist.
If you have ever supported our troops, you might be a socialist.

Truth is, likely you are confusing communism and socialism. Mainly, we simply oppose communism because the other super power in the day was one and we needed something to vilify them. Every country in the world has some socialist programs. The U.S. is no different.

Socialism becomes a bad word when Reupublicans don't want something passed. They merely say it is socialist and ignorant people who don't know better immediately oppose it. It is easier than educating themselves and allows them to keep watching American Idol unintterupted by the real world.

You don't understand nor will you ever understand. Your too far to one side of the middle...

Funny, I was thinking the same about you.

[MoonShadow]

You're spot on, FoUTAsportscaster!

In reading these threads many do think socialism is communism. As mentioned in an earlier post somewhere in all of this ... it was clear that a lot of posters lump the two together.

Good post!

[BinCo]

BinCo posted this link earlier, but maybe some missed it....

http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/2009/08/obama_townhall_gun_toters_have.html

Especially watch the video there. They mentioned that they called the police before even showing up to let them know their peaceful intentions and that they would be carying guns. The police were actually quite greatful that they made the courtesy phone call and they stayed well in sight of the police to be sure they would not be accused of stirring up trouble.

Here's one other interesting video how MSNBC spun it differently, and basically lied to make it out to be a racial issue.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=scE-VrpnU9M

Please also note that the NPR story was done in the evening and the youtube vidoe showed MSNBC in the morning. Throughout the day facts were being brought to light that the so called average people were in fact staged and coached. That's what the NPR story was about. Eariler in the day every news network was talking about the guy with the AR15. He was the one with the biggest gun, he was the only black guy of the 12 that brought guns. An interviewer would be reprimanded from their boss for missing the bigger gun story and the black guy story.

I still say, if I was the cops I would let them bring the gun and inform them that it's our JOB as officers to protect the public. We will have an officer within hand's reach of you at all times. If you make an offense move to the gun we will stop you. If someone else reaches for the gun, we will stop them.

[FoUTASportscaster]

You're spot on, FoUTAsportscaster!

In reading these threads many do think socialism is communism. As mentioned in an earlier post somewhere in all of this ... it was clear that a lot of posters lump the two together.

Good post!

Thank you! After initially reading this post:

Socialism is the government owning & controling the means of production.

I was going to let it go. But since you brought it up, the above is communism, not socialism. From dictionary.com

noun
1. a theory or system of social organization that advocates the vesting of the ownership and control of the means of production and distribution, of capital, land, etc., in the community as a whole.
2. procedure or practice in accordance with this theory.
3. (in Marxist theory) the stage following capitalism in the transition of a society to communism, characterized by the imperfect implementation of collectivist principles.

In the community is the sticking point. Communism is purely government control. Non-profits, for example, are another form of socialism.

[Sanslines]

Heck, by most definitions, we don't even have a capitalist system:

Capitalism vs Socialism

http://www.idebate.org/debatabase/topic_details.php?topicID=400

In capitalism, the market determines price, including pay - the price of labour. If some people are paid huge sums, that is because other people believe they have unique talents which are worth paying for. If they fail to perform, then they will stop being rewarded so highly. This is all part of a dynamic capitalist system which values individuality and rewards ability and risk-taking.

Yeah right! CEO's drive their companies into bankruptcy and they walk away with golden parachute millions while their employees walk away penniless. So much for capitalism.

Capitalism may use the language of human rights, but it only really respects the right of the weak to starve in the gutter, and the right of the strong to keep them there. Socialism understands rights more widely and fully, and provides for the right to work, the right to an education, and to health care free at the point of use. It cannot be right for a few individuals to block the progress of all towards these great goals.

As some have so steadfastly clung to in this forum, let those who don't have health insurance drop dead for so long as they have their (perceived) health care, then who cares about anyone else.

[BinCo]

The sad part about the fight about Socialism is that we have some of it everyday. An amount of socialism is required to have a functional society. You know that anywhere in this country a stop sign is a red octogon. The FAA makes private companies meet a standard of care for their private aircraft. There is a lot more socialism in the US than some of these goons think. They are just being fed information about it.

[jon71]

Making threats against the President and other officials is a felony as it should be. Waving guns around is at least an implied threat if not an overt one. Law enforcement should at least consider criminal charges.

[gmoney]

Making threats against the President and other officials is a felony as it should be. Waving guns around is at least an implied threat if not an overt one. Law enforcement should at least consider criminal charges.

Now you want criminal charges for someone exercising their rights.
What is wrong with this world?

[Naturist Mark]

if I was the cops I would let them bring the gun and inform them that it's our JOB as officers to protect the public. We will have an officer within hand's reach of you at all times. If you make an offense move to the gun we will stop you. If someone else reaches for the gun, we will stop them.

And don't attempt to move out of range of our police sharpshooters on the roof.

[jon71]

Now you want criminal charges for someone exercising their rights.
What is wrong with this world?

There is no right to threaten violence or murder.

[Fitz1980]

Now you want criminal charges for someone exercising their rights.
What is wrong with this world?

The opposition had people arrested for wearing the wrong shirts. These people wanted to get arrested so that they could say "see Obama wants to take guns from law abiding citizens" and instead they were left alone. Not only that but they even got interviewed on the Mainstream (hehehe) Liberal Media (TM).

[Sanman]

I still say, if I was the cops I would let them bring the gun and inform them that it's our JOB as officers to protect the public. We will have an officer within hand's reach of you at all times. If you make an offense move to the gun we will stop you. If someone else reaches for the gun, we will stop them.

Actually, they did say that in the video that a cop was within 10 feet of him at all times.

The sad part about the fight about Socialism is that we have some of it everyday. An amount of socialism is required to have a functional society. You know that anywhere in this country a stop sign is a red octogon. The FAA makes private companies meet a standard of care for their private aircraft. There is a lot more socialism in the US than some of these goons think. They are just being fed information about it.
Socialism is still not required in these examples. There are tons of examples of accepted standards outside of any government control. Think of all the electronic connectors (USB, RJ45, RS232, etc.). Every manufacturer in the world makes cable jacks to specific standards, yet these aren't socialist in the least. In fact, they are a free-market solution for intercompatibility with other manufacturers.

[Smiley]

The only thing I'll say about this is that an armed society is a polite society. Think about it. . . .

[Mosquito_Bait]

The only thing I'll say about this is that an armed society is a polite society. Think about it. . . .

Guns are everywhere in Somalia, Afghanistan, and Iraq. Those societies are not very polite. They also aren't very safe. Gun ownership is strictly regulated in Britain and Japan, and they are two of the politest and safest societies on the planet.

[NudeAl]

Making threats against the President and other officials is a felony as it should be. Waving guns around is at least an implied threat if not an overt one. Law enforcement should at least consider criminal charges.

Read the story again they called the police ahead of time letting them know what they were going to do. They weren't arrested because they weren't violating any laws. They did not wave any guns around their firearms were either holstered or on thier shoulder on a sling. Open carry is legal in many parts of the US expecially in the west. I am not defending what they did I think it was stupid and disrespectful and counter productive to the rights of gun owners. That being said the fact remains that they did not break the law.

[Sanslines]

That being said the fact remains that they did not break the law.

For now, but you can be assured that those morons did nothing but provoke others into taking action to creatnig new laws to prevent guns at political town hall meetings. Politicians will certainly react and do something when their own well being can be potentially threatened.

[LamontCranston]

Gun ownership is strictly regulated in Britain and Japan, and they are two of the politest and safest societies on the planet. Well, Japan since 1945...

[Skinview]

Guns are everywhere in Somalia, Afghanistan, and Iraq. Those societies are not very polite. They also aren't very safe. Gun ownership is strictly regulated in Britain and Japan, and they are two of the politest and safest societies on the planet.

Switzerland has far more guns per capita than any of those places. The swiss are very polite as far as I can tell. And the violent crime rate in the UK is nothing to be proud of. Last I checked , it was worse than the US.
In Somolia, there are a lot of people with guns killing a lot of people who don't have guns. Those people with guns are killing on behalf of the government, which is not at all unusual in history.

[Skinview]

Capitalism may use the language of human rights, but it only really respects the right of the weak to starve in the gutter, and the right of the strong to keep them there.That is nonsense. There is no profit in that, which is why that isn't happening.

Socialism understands rights more widely and fully, and provides for the right to work,Socialism has been a failure around the world. It has been overthrown in eastern europe, and places that still practice it are economic basket cases. Go move to Noth Korea and starve.


education, and to health care free at the point of use.Free???? Ha ha ha, ROTFLMAO! You don't pay taxes? The US has socialized education, and US high school students have some of the lowest scores in the western world, and the world's most expensive education system. Thats socialism for ya.

[Naturist Mark]

Switzerland has far more guns per capita than any of those places. The swiss are very polite as far as I can tell.Not to tourists ...
And the violent crime rate in the UK is nothing to be proud of. Last I checked , it was worse than the US.Yep, violent crime as a whole is significantly higher in Britain (most people don't realize that crime rates in the US have been on a long steady decline). But murder rates in the US are still several times higher than Britain's. So perhaps we are both politer, and deadlier ...
In Somolia, there are a lot of people with guns killing a lot of people who don't have guns. Those people with guns are killing on behalf of the government, which is not at all unusual in history.What government? The government of Somalia controls several blocks in one city. Yep, no government, free men unfettered by government oppression, Sunny Somalia - a libertarian paradise.

[Naturist Mark]

Socialism has been a failure around the world. It has been overthrown in eastern europe, and places that still practice it are economic basket cases. Go move to Noth Korea and starve.

"Noth" Korea and the former eastern bloc were Communist.

Personally I prefer Capitalism, properly fettered to prevent the excesses of Robber Barons and Wall Street hooliganism. But if you are going to harp on the failure of Socialism, choose a nation with actual socialism, like Sweden - which has already pulled itself out of the recession while the US still lingers. So have those other bastions of EuroSocialism France and Germany.

Of course EuroSocialism - which is what Obama is incorrectly accused of imposing on the US - is notable for its strong democratic traditions and friendliness to free enterprise and capitalist business.

Let's talk about American socialism for a moment, from the Atlantic:

<blockquote><h3><a href="http://correspondents.theatlantic.com/conor_clarke/2009/06/what_socialism_looks_like.php">What Socialism Looks Like</a></h3>

Have you heard that the United States is headed toward socialism? Jonah Goldberg <a href="http://blogs.usatoday.com/oped/2009/06/dont-call-it-socialism.html">says</a> it is. Alabama Senator Richard Shelby <a href="http://www.cbsnews.com/blogs/2009/05/29/politics/politicalhotsheet/entry5048566.shtml">says</a> it is. Phyllis Schlafly <a href="http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=32095">says</a> it is. Richard Viguerie <a href="http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124389683909574071.html">says</a> it is. The Republican National Committee <a href="http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2009/05/20/rnc-officially-condemns-dems-march-toward-socialism/">says</a> it is. We must be getting pretty close.<br><br>How close? This is what socialism looks like:<br><br><br>

<span class="mt-enclosure mt-enclosure-image" style="display: inline;"><img alt="socialism chart.png" src="http://correspondents.theatlantic.com/conor_clarke/socialism%20chart.png" class="mt-image-center" style="margin: 0pt auto 20px; text-align: center; display: block;" height="322" width="579"></span>The hot-pink portion of this pie chart is the percentage of listed American business assets that have recently been nationalized by the American government (ie, General Motors). Obama's version of socialism is so sneaky you can hardly see it! <blockquote>

[usuallylurk]

For now, but you can be assured that those morons did nothing but provoke others into taking action to creatnig new laws to prevent guns at political town hall meetings. Politicians will certainly react and do something when their own well being can be potentially threatened.

Not just that -- every four years, a beautiful process unfolds in New Hampshire -- the first-in-the-nation Presidential primary. While some criticize that system, New Hampshire and Iowa afford ordinary citizens the opportunity to directly vet a Presidential candidate. Yes, you can have a cup of coffee and meet any candidate you like, and ask him or her any question - with the cameras rolling.

It's a very open system - minimal security, friendly, open, you can ask questions, have your picture taken ... etc. etc. Bring the kids and teach them the political process, let them see it close up, let them meet a man or woman who may be the next President of the United States. My daughter grew up observing that process. Last January, my 83-year-old mother cried when she got to meet Hilary Clinton. I, personally, have met and spoken with many candidates over the years during the NH primary campaign. You learn a lot, and you end up making your own decisions.

This guy bringing a gun to a town meeting may have jeopardized the intimacy of the New Hampshire (and Iowa) systems. And because I live in Massachusetts BUT am literally "surrounded" by New Hampshire, and I receive those opportunities, I will miss that accessibility if they have to shut it down for security reasons.

And it hurts the rest of the country in the process, because candidates that cannot handle the man or woman in the coffee shop, or church basement, or high school auditorium in New Hampshire or Iowa usually don't get to the White House. You screw up there, your campaign ends there.

[Fitz1980]

Free???? Ha ha ha, ROTFLMAO! You don't pay taxes? The US has socialized education, and US high school students have some of the lowest scores in the western world, and the world's most expensive education system. Thats socialism for ya.

Nice try but the nations that outranked us are MORE socialist than we are. Finland, the UK, France, Canada, New Zealand, Australia, Ireland, Sweden, Austria, Belgium, Iceland, Norway, ect.

http://www.siteselection.com/ssinsider/snapshot/sf011210.htm

[Sanslines]

That is nonsense. There is no profit in that, which is why that isn't happening.

Think about the entire picture and compare it to our vanishing middle class. Think about all those who can't afford to pay medical bills. There is no profit in that either.

Socialism has been a failure around the world. It has been overthrown in eastern europe, and places that still practice it are economic basket cases. Go move to Noth Korea and starve.

Socialism in Eastern Europe? You have confused Communism with Socialism. Eastern Europe was part of the Soviet Communist Bloc or have you already forgotten? Refresh your memory with the Iron Curtain 'nations'?

[Sanslines]

"Noth" Korea and the former eastern bloc were Communist.

Another prime example of someone who doesn't know the difference between Capitalism, Communism, and Socialism and the countries which represent(ed) those systems to varying degrees. Poor Skinview, he needs to review his history.

Personally I prefer Capitalism, properly fettered to prevent the excesses of Robber Barons and Wall Street hooliganism. But if you are going to harp on the failure of Socialism, choose a nation with actual socialism, like Sweden - which has already pulled itself out of the recession while the US still lingers. So have those other bastions of EuroSocialism France and Germany.

Of course EuroSocialism - which is what Obama is incorrectly accused of imposing on the US - is notable for its strong democratic traditions and friendliness to free enterprise and capitalist business.


If American is so anti-socialist, then why did American in the process of rebuilding nations after WW II allow Socialism to take root in those nations? Was the real 'fear' about Communism or was the real 'fear' about Socialism? In those days, more people seemed to understand the differences between the two systems. Today, people are so uninformed that they honestly think that Communism and Socialism are the same thing. How bad can it get? We need to find a poll to find out just how many Americans believe that we presently live under a Communist system. Believe me, they live among us - lol.

[LamontCranston]

Not just that -- every four years, a beautiful process unfolds in New Hampshire -- the first-in-the-nation Presidential primary. While some criticize that system, New Hampshire and Iowa afford ordinary citizens the opportunity to directly vet a Presidential candidate. Yes, you can have a cup of coffee and meet any candidate you like, and ask him or her any question - with the cameras rolling.

This guy bringing a gun to a town meeting may have jeopardized the intimacy of the New Hampshire (and Iowa) systems. I lived in NH for 12 years and also participated in the primary coverage. I agree the candidates are very accessible and take a lot of speaking time to develop their messages.

I disagree that one incident far away with harm the process. Candidate Jack Kennedy spoke on the city hall steps in Nashua and was later assasinated as President, Bobby Kennedy shot at a convention, then we had 9/11 and all the Homeland Security / Patriot Act rules put in. Still, the Primary beat goes on.

Also, folks don't seem to realize that a "town hall meeting" where a polititian makes remarks and takes unscripted questions from an audience was invented by Bill Clinton during the 1990 Presidential Primary. He was accessible, local, answered people's questions not on his agenda and he won. Now they all do it, but they are not all as good as Bill Clinton so it sometimes falls apart.

Anyway, I think these health care town hall meetings are all about theater and nothing really about substance. Substance would come from public hearings on Capital Hill like where we saw those auto company CEO's or AIG executives grilled. That's theater too, but at least we see people who are responsible for part of the problem.

All the polititians are doing now is selling the program and laying groundwork for the big tax increase hoping they won't later be voted out.

[Fitz1980]

Socialism has been a failure around the world. It has been overthrown in eastern europe, and places that still practice it are economic basket cases. Go move to Noth Korea and starve.


First of all Socialism was never practiced in the Eastern Bloc Countries, see if you can wrap your head around that. I can try to explain it slower if you think it will help.

Second, Socialism is practiced in many of the nations with the highest standard of living in the world.

Third, Obama's policies aren't European style socialism.

Fourth if you want Laissez-faire capitalism I'd suggest that you move to Mexico and starve.

[Skinview]

"Noth" Korea and the former eastern bloc were Communist.

Personally I prefer Capitalism, properly fettered to prevent the excesses of Robber Barons and Wall Street hooliganism. But if you are going to harp on the failure of Socialism, choose a nation with actual socialism, like Sweden - which has already pulled itself out of the recession while the US still lingers. So have those other bastions of EuroSocialism France and Germany.

Of course EuroSocialism - which is what Obama is incorrectly accused of imposing on the US - is notable for its strong democratic traditions and friendliness to free enterprise and capitalist business.

Let's talk about American socialism for a moment, from the Atlantic:

<blockquote><h3><a href="http://correspondents.theatlantic.com/conor_clarke/2009/06/what_socialism_looks_like.php">What Socialism Looks Like</a></h3>

Have you heard that the United States is headed toward socialism? Jonah Goldberg <a href="http://blogs.usatoday.com/oped/2009/06/dont-call-it-socialism.html">says</a> it is. Alabama Senator Richard Shelby <a href="http://www.cbsnews.com/blogs/2009/05/29/politics/politicalhotsheet/entry5048566.shtml">says</a> it is. Phyllis Schlafly <a href="http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=32095">says</a> it is. Richard Viguerie <a href="http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124389683909574071.html">says</a> it is. The Republican National Committee <a href="http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2009/05/20/rnc-officially-condemns-dems-march-toward-socialism/">says</a> it is. We must be getting pretty close.<br><br>How close? This is what socialism looks like:<br><br><br>

<span class="mt-enclosure mt-enclosure-image" style="display: inline;"><img alt="socialism chart.png" src="http://correspondents.theatlantic.com/conor_clarke/socialism%20chart.png" class="mt-image-center" style="margin: 0pt auto 20px; text-align: center; display: block;" height="322" width="579"></span>The hot-pink portion of this pie chart is the percentage of listed American business assets that have recently been nationalized by the American government (ie, General Motors). Obama's version of socialism is so sneaky you can hardly see it! <blockquote>
You left out Amtrak, the US Postal Service, primary and secondary education, state colleges and universities, etc. And what is the corporate income tax rate? That is effective ownership, if they take a cut of the profits.

[Skinview]

First of all Socialism was never practiced in the Eastern Bloc Countries, see if you can wrap your head around that. I can try to explain it slower if you think it will help.Please try. Who owned the means of production?

Second, Socialism is practiced in many of the nations with the highest standard of living in the world.Um, no. There are nations with mixed economies that manage to get along. In fact, even the Soviet Union limped along thanks to a huge underground market economy.

Fourth if you want Laissez-faire capitalism I'd suggest that you move to Mexico and starve.Mexico is not as rich as we are, but they aren't starving like they have in North Korea. If you really want to see a free market island of wealth surrounded by a sea of socialist poverty, check out the old Hong Kong and Maoist China.

[Skinview]

Nice try but the nations that outranked us are MORE socialist than we are. Finland, the UK, France, Canada, New Zealand, Australia, Ireland, Sweden, Austria, Belgium, Iceland, Norway, ect.I wouldn't say their education systems are significantly more socialist. The differences in results are mostly due to cultural differences. But whatever the cause, we do have socialized education, and it is often a failure.

[Skinview]

Not to tourists ...
Yep, violent crime as a whole is significantly higher in Britain (most people don't realize that crime rates in the US have been on a long steady decline). But murder rates in the US are still several times higher than Britain's. So perhaps we are both politer, and deadlier ...
What government? The government of Somalia controls several blocks in one city. Yep, no government, free men unfettered by government oppression, Sunny Somalia - a libertarian paradise.
Somalia has also managed to sustain a free market economy which, according to the UN, outperforms those of many other countries in Africa.
-wikipedia

But the place might be closer to an anachy than Jeffersonian libertarianism.

[BinCo]

An excellent and concise difference between Communism and Socialism from
http://www.wisegeek.com/what-is-the-difference-between-socialism-and-communism.htm


Socialism and communism are ideological doctrines that have many similarities as well as many differences. It is difficult to discern the true differences between socialism and communism, as various societies have tried different types of both systems in myriad forms, and many ideologues with different agendas have defined both systems in biased terms. Some general points distinguishing the two concepts, however, can still be identified.

One point that is frequently raised to distinguish socialism from communism is that socialism generally refers to an economic system, while communism generally refers to both an economic and a political system. As an economic system, socialism seeks to manage the economy through deliberate and collective social control. Communism, however, seeks to manage both the economy and the society by ensuring that property is owned collectively, and that control over the distribution of property is centralized in order to achieve both classlessness and statelessness. Both socialism and communism are similar in that they seek to prevent the ill effects that are sometimes produced by capitalism.

Both socialism and communism are based on the principle that the goods and services produced in an economy should be owned publicly, and controlled and planned by a centralized organization. Socialism asserts that the distribution should take place according to the amount of individuals' production efforts, however, while communism asserts that that goods and services should be distributed among the populace according to individuals' needs.

Another difference between socialism and communism is that communists assert that both capitalism and private ownership of the means of production must be done away with as soon as possible in order to make sure a classless society, the communist ideal, is formed. Socialists, however, see capitalism as a possible part of the ideal state and believe that socialism can exist in a capitalist society. In fact, one of the ideas of socialism is that everyone within the society will benefit from capitalism as much as possible as long as the capitalism is controlled somehow by a centralized planning system.

Another difference between socialism and communism is centered on who controls the structure of economy. Where socialism generally aims to have as many people as possible influence how the economy works, communism seeks to limit that number to a smaller group.

A single payer system is not any more socialist, or wrong for you and I to pay, into than a pacifist not being able to declare that they want none of their taxes to go to military spending.

What is being proposed is a public option, which only allows people to buy into medicare instead of being lucky enough to have a job that offers healthcare. There are many companies, large and small, that either offer NO healthcare, or offer healthcare at such a high price that it leaves the employee less than 50% of their paycheck. Hey, I can get healthcare, but I can't have a roof. It's a great way my stepson put it once when he was a MANAGER at an autoparts store.

I have a neighbor who is absolutely against ANY sort of public option. YET, when he was diagnosed with tongue cancer and could not work for 7 months his boss was kind enough to continue to not only pay his healthcare, but actually pay his salary. This goon has no f'in clue as to how lucky he is and how incredibly rare his boss is. He is a die-hard Republican and figures everyone should be there own responsibility. I pointed out that about 99.99% of the other companies in this country would not have been able to keep him employed, yet alone paid, and he just tells me that HE made all the right choices and others have not. You can't reason with a meathead like this. So don't bother trying. All I can do is sit back and watch Karma get her just revenge.

[BinCo]

I wouldn't say their education systems are significantly more socialist. The differences in results are mostly due to cultural differences. But whatever the cause, we do have socialized education, and it is often a failure.

I would disagree. Our schools are so localized that they are more of a tax funded republic than a socialist system. Schools are locally controlled. They have to meet a certain level of Federal and State standards to keep getting funding, but they are certainly NOT controlled by the Fed's or the State. Throw into the mix the immense number of home school and private schools and you have a system with an incredible amount of choice. This thread is not about schools, but keep in mind that home and private schools openly discriminate against students that public schools are not allowed to discriminate against. So the tables are tilted in favor of home and private by allowing them to legally pick the cream of the crop. In the news now and then you hear about a private school that tries to get public funding. As soon as they are told that they will have to admit any student, they suddenly are able to get enough funding without using the public option.

[Naturist Mark]

You left out Amtrak, the US Postal Service, primary and secondary education, state colleges and universities, etc. And what is the corporate income tax rate? That is effective ownership, if they take a cut of the profits.

Taxation is ownership ... oh boy. BTW ... the corporate income tax rate for most of the largest corporations (http://money.cnn.com/2008/08/12/news/economy/corporate_taxes/) is ... zero.

Do you notice what is similar about all those "government" run companies (and schools) that were listed? They all provide services, they all benefit the economic infrastructure, but none manufacture goods.

Now class, who remembers the definition of socialism?

[Fitz1980]

First of all Socialism was never practiced in the Eastern Bloc Countries, see if you can wrap your head around that. I can try to explain it slower if you think it will help.
________________________________________
Please try. Who owned the means of production?


First that was communism, which is not the same thing as socialism.

Second it was a small group of politically influential people who controlled the means of production. Sure they spoke of "the people" but if you want to give rhetoric the status of truth than China really is a Republic by and for the people, rather than a communist police state.



Quote:
Second, Socialism is practiced in many of the nations with the highest standard of living in the world.
___________________________________
Um, no. There are nations with mixed economies that manage to get along. In fact, even the Soviet Union limped along thanks to a huge underground market economy.


What do mixed economies and the old USSR have to do with each other?

And by get along do you mean have a higher standard of living than the USA? And if they are not truly "socialist" but instead "mixed economies" than why are you calling Obama's proposed policies socialist, when they are quite to the right of these nations; which you already said aren't socialist, but just mixed economies?

BTW here's the nations that rank above the US by the Human Development Index:
Iceland, Norway, Canada, Australia, Ireland, Netherlands, Sweden, Japan, Luxembourg, Switzerland, France, Finland, Denmark & Austria. Funny how that idiot who suggested moving to a place with more liberal economic and social policies said North Korea rather than one of those 14 NATIONS that have a higher standard of living and a more liberal government than anything that Obama has proposed.


Mexico is not as rich as we are, but they aren't starving like they have in North Korea. If you really want to see a free market island of wealth surrounded by a sea of socialist poverty, check out the old Hong Kong and Maoist China.

First what does Maoist China have to do with socialism? They were Communist.

Second what does socialism have to do with Obama when by your own admission nations with much more leftist economic policy than his aren't even socialism (they're just "mixed economies")?


All the polititians are doing now is selling the program and laying groundwork for the big tax increase hoping they won't later be voted out.

Which, even if it were true would still be more morally correct than the Republicans who lay the groundwork for a big tax increase with the expressed plan that they will do nothing but put it off until the pendilium of power swings back in the other direction (and it always has, always will) and leave it for the next guy. Heck I called this back in 2002, when Bush & co had turned a surplus into a deficit in less than two years. I said that they did it because the instant gratification feels better than knowing that you are just getting it on credit. Than when someone with a more far reaching plan comes in to clean up the mess the Republicans can say "this is the man who raised your taxes." Damn I'm tired of being right all of the time.

[Skinview]

What do mixed economies and the old USSR have to do with each other?There really wasn't a pure communist economy in the Soviet Union. It was in fact, a mixed economy. A massive amount of goods and services that the state couldn't supply were produced by an underground market economy.

And by get along do you mean have a higher standard of living than the USA?They don't.

And if they are not truly "socialist" but instead "mixed economies" than why are you calling Obama's proposed policies socialist, when they are quite to the right of these nations; which you already said aren't socialist, but just mixed economies?Obama wants to introduce more socialist components, or increase the degree of socialism, into the US economy. I don't know anyone who says he is going to completely replace the US economic system with a socialist one.

BTW here's the nations that rank above the US by the Human Development Index:
Iceland, Norway, Canada, Australia, Ireland, Netherlands, Sweden, Japan, Luxembourg, Switzerland, France, Finland, Denmark & Austria. Funny how that idiot who suggested moving to a place with more liberal economic and social policies said North Korea rather than one of those 14 NATIONS that have a higher standard of living and a more liberal government than anything that Obama has proposed.Most of them are not wealthier than the US. I don't know offhand what fluffy factors the HDI uses, but in raw per capita purchasing power, the US ranks about 6th in the world, maybe 4th. The only countries that clearly top us are, in order from richest first:

Luxembourg, Norway and Singapore.

Some arab states may also rank up there.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_(PPP)_per_capita

Singapore is a bastion of free market capitalism. It is wealthy despite having no natural resources at all.

Norway has a mixed economy, but it is also swimming in oil:

"The country is richly endowed with natural resources including petroleum, hydropower, fish, forests, and minerals. Large reserves of petroleum and natural gas were discovered in the 1960s, which led to a continuing boom in the economy. Norway has obtained one of the highest standards of living in the world in part by having a large amount of natural resources compared to the size of the population. The income from natural resources includes a significant contribution from petroleum production and the substantial and well-managed income related to this sector.

"Export revenues from oil and gas have risen to 45% of total exports and constitute more than 20% of the GDP. Only Russia and OPEC member Saudi Arabia export more oil than Norway, which is not an OPEC member.

"Hydroelectric plants generate roughly 98–99% of Norways electric power."

I can imagine how the US would rank with resources like that.

Luxembourg is the size of a postage stamp, and 60% of its labor force lives in other countries. 28% of its GDP comes from a largely foriegn owned financial sector. I'm not sure, but I don't think its economy is particularly mixed, either.

[Naturist Mark]

Obama wants to introduce more socialist components, or increase the degree of socialism, into the US economy. I don't know anyone who says he is going to completely replace the US economic system with a socialist one.

I must have missed the news on the corporations that Obama plans to nationalize. Can you clue us in?

By the way... GM, Chrysler, AIG, Wall Street et al don't count. 'Twas "W" what did that. Neither does Health Care reform - no health care companies are under consideration for nationalization.

Maybe his nationalization plans are hidden in the same secret bill as the "death panels" and gun confiscation plans.

[Fitz1980]

I don't know offhand what fluffy factors the HDI uses

It uses "fluffy things" like life expectancy, literacy, educational attainment, and GDP per capita.


but in raw per capita purchasing power, the US ranks about 6th in the world, maybe 4th. The only countries that clearly top us are, in order from richest first:

You are talking about the domestic product (GDP) at purchasing power parity (PPP) per capita, the value of all final goods and services produced within a nation in a given year divided by the average (or mid-year) population for the same year.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_(PPP)_per_capita

And in fact the US is 6th, 4th and 8th on that list. It's 3 diferent places because there are three different lists. One using International Monetary Fund data, another using World Bank data & a third using data from The World Factbook, provided by the Central Intelligence Agency.


Luxembourg is the size of a postage stamp, and 60% of its labor force lives in other countries. 28% of its GDP comes from a largely foriegn owned financial sector. I'm not sure, but I don't think its economy is particularly mixed, either.

I'm actually having a hard time finding info about Luxembourg's politics, probably because they speak three languages there and none of them are English. If I spoke French or German I would probably be able to find more. What I do know is that their two biggest political parties are the Christian Social People's Party, which while conservative by European standards is liberal by US standards. The second biggest political party is the Socialist party.

[missouriboy]

Since this thread was about Town Hall Meetings, I'll revert to that subject for a moment.Nearly all of the town hall rowdiness has been staged...And "staging" (http://www.freedomsphoenix.com/Letter-to-Editor.htm?EdNo=001&Info=0068011) works both ways.

[Fitz1980]

Since this thread was about Town Hall Meetings, I'll revert to that subject for a moment.And "staging" (http://www.freedomsphoenix.com/Letter-to-Editor.htm?EdNo=001&Info=0068011) works both ways.

Taken from your link:

I am very dismayed about what I learned about our current White House.
The amount of control and manipulation was unbelievable. I felt I was not living in the United States of America , more like the USSR !! I was physically nauseous.

So when Bush spent 8 years making everyone at his "town halls" sign loyalty oaths and even had a couple arrested for wearing anti-Bush T-shirts it wasn't that big of a deal. But when Obama buses in 900 people (including *****GASP***** members of Planned Parenthood) and still hands out 1,500 tickets to random locals it's the USSR?

[MoonShadow]

LOL -- you guys got him good!

Yup, this is the good ole USSR! Criminy, it always continues to amaze me how stupid people are.

[Mosquito_Bait]

UBS did a study of the cost of living, wages, and purchasing power in several cities around the world. Zurich, Sydney, Luxembourg, and Dublin all ranked ahead of the major US cities in the study. The study can be found at the following link.

http://www.ubs.com/1/e/about/news.html?newsId=170250

European governments are heavily involved in their economies and conservatives in the US refer to them as socialist, but the Europeans are still prosperous and they still have similar political freedoms as the US. In some ways, the Europeans have more freedom. The Europeans certainly have greater freedom to go nude on a beach.

[Fitz1980]

Back to the topic of guns at town hall meetings.

http://tpmmuckraker.talkingpointsmemo.com/2009/08/pastor_of_gun-toter_at_obama_event_day_before_even.php

Chris Broughton, the man who brought an assault rifle and a handgun to the Obama event in Arizona last week, attended a fiery anti-Obama sermon the day before the event, in which Pastor Steven Anderson said he was going to "pray for Barack Obama to die and go to hell", Anderson confirmed to TPMmuckraker today.

"I don't obey Barack Obama. And I'd like Barack Obama to melt like a snail tonight," Anderson said in the sermon.

The sermon, which was titled "Why I Hate Barack Obama" and also contained virulent anti-gay themes

Very Christian of him, speaking of hate for individuals, instead of sinful behaviors and praying for people do die. Guess his Bible only has 9 commandments.

[FoUTASportscaster]

Wow, it is truly amazing what kind of hate can be accomplished in the name of religion.

[pagevalleynude]

I personally don't have a problem with Americans expressing their constitutional rights by "Peacefully Assembling and Bearing Arms". Like the AZ officer stated in the article, they were not breaking any laws or doing nothing wrong by merely being present during a speech.

Really??:confused: I guarantee you, if this happened a year ago...if people stood outside a Georgie Bush Junior rally, packing heat...you bet your ever-loving a*s*s the Secret Service would've swooped in!!!
No, you're proving my point about fascism in America, pal!!!:mad: In fact, I made a YouTube video today on that very subject (packing heat at rallies). You may want to look at it.

www.youtube.com/DCSportsNut

[Naturist Mark]

Remember the assault rifle toting protester at Barack Obama's Aug 17 Arizona town hall meeting?

Here is the sermon he listened to his pastor give the night before.

http://www.faithfulwordbaptist.org/081609p.mp3

http://chattahbox.com/images/2009/08/paster_steve_anderson.jpg
Pastor Steven Anderson

<blockquote>In his August 16, sermon entitled, “Why I Hate Barack Obama,” Anderson viciously attacked President Obama in the name of God, preaching to his congregation that God wanted them to hate Obama and that as a supporter of abortion rights, he was a murderer who deserved the death penalty, just like the gays.

“God Hates Barak Obama, I hate Barack Obama. I hate Him. God wants me to Hate Barack Obama.” “Someone who commits murder should get the death penalty, said Anderson.

Anderson then compared President Obama to Adolf Hitler and Joseph Stalin, as “…evil sadistic butchers of history.”

“A madman is in control of this country,” said Anderson. “Barack Obama is one of the rulers of the darkness of this world,” screamed Anderson.
ChattahBox (http://chattahbox.com/us/2009/08/20/pastor-anderson-god-punishes-gays-with-the-death-penalty/)</blockquote>

Rev Anderson also has problems with gays and the Methodist Church ...

We are hearing a relentless drum beat of "death" talk on wingnut radio, Fox news, and even elected leaders of the Republican party. This kind of talk has consequences. We've seen it before, during the civil rights movement. What was dismissed as "rhetoric" often inspired the fearful and borderline into action ... and we saw the assassinations of civil rights workers, leaders and politicians.

We've already seen deranged fans of wingnut media kill police officers, Unitarian congregants, and abortion doctors. Now we are seeing furious unhinged 'teabaggers' at congressional town hall meetings, and the implied menace of openly armed protesters outside presidential appearances.

It isn't hard to see where this is heading.

[NudeAl]

I am afraid you are right Mark.

I see all these protestors on the news spouting these crazy things and it concerns me. They really believe the crap they are spouting, the birthers, the deathers, all the Palin lovers who are so ignorant and hateful. It just goes to show that racism is never far away it is boiling just under the surface. The thin veneer of our civilized society has worn away. Racism is on the rise in my area, though it never truely went away. I am only an hours drive away from Hayden, Idaho once home of one of the biggest of the white supremacist compounds in the country. They are recruiting again, flyers have appeared on cars in the area. The current economic situation has something to do with it however I think that it goes back further to the election and the campaign BS. If we observe racism and do nothing to stamp it out then we are no better than those who spout these vile things. I do not associate the Republican Party with these peope however if they do nothing to resist and debunk the myths and wild accusation of this faction then they are no better then the common skinhead thugs. In fact if they fan the flames and there is a firestorm as a result then they should be held accountable just as Tom Metzger was held accountable for the death of a black man at the hands of skinheads even though he wasn't there and took no part in the actual beating. Words that inspire these acts have consequences and I hope they learn that sooner rather than later. I wonder why there are no strong voices in the media shouting down these outright lies? I guess it doesn't seem to be all that important anymore to stand up for these things.

[txvic]

Religion through the ages has always been full of violence in one form or the other. It would be amazing at the number of people have been killed (murdered) in the name of God. I could be wrong but I don't think this is want God had in mind. The Bible says love thy neighbor as thyself. I didn't see where it said this is only applicable if thy neighbor believes the same as you... Correct me if I am wrong.

[Mosquito_Bait]

...
<blockquote>In his August 16, sermon entitled, “Why I Hate Barack Obama,” Anderson viciously attacked President Obama in the name of God, preaching to his congregation that God wanted them to hate Obama and that as a supporter of abortion rights, he was a murderer who deserved the death penalty, just like the gays.

“God Hates Barak Obama, I hate Barack Obama. I hate Him. God wants me to Hate Barack Obama.” “Someone who commits murder should get the death penalty, said Anderson.

Anderson then compared President Obama to Adolf Hitler and Joseph Stalin, as “…evil sadistic butchers of history.”

“A madman is in control of this country,” said Anderson. “Barack Obama is one of the rulers of the darkness of this world,” screamed Anderson.
ChattahBox (http://chattahbox.com/us/2009/08/20/pastor-anderson-god-punishes-gays-with-the-death-penalty/)</blockquote>
...

If I hadn't already given up on religion, this would have been enough to make me do so.

[MeBNude]

Txvic has a very good point. I wasn't at all sure that I believed in god until last year when I finally realized that I don't have a problem with a higher power and spirituality. It is what people have done in the name of god that has bothered me all along.

[pagevalleynude]

I am afraid you are right Mark.

I see all these protestors on the news spouting these crazy things and it concerns me. They really believe the crap they are spouting, the birthers, the deathers, all the Palin lovers who are so ignorant and hateful. It just goes to show that racism is never far away it is boiling just under the surface. The thin veneer of our civilized society has worn away. Racism is on the rise in my area, though it never truely went away. I am only an hours drive away from Hayden, Idaho once home of one of the biggest of the white supremacist compounds in the country. They are recruiting again, flyers have appeared on cars in the area. The current economic situation has something to do with it however I think that it goes back further to the election and the campaign BS. If we observe racism and do nothing to stamp it out then we are no better than those who spout these vile things. In fact if they fan the flames and there is a firestorm as a result then they should be held accountable just as Tom Metzger was held accountable for the death of a black man at the hands of skinheads even though he wasn't there and took no part in the actual beating. Words that inspire these acts have consequences and I hope they learn that sooner rather than later. I wonder why there are no strong voices in the media shouting down these outright lies? I guess it doesn't seem to be all that important anymore to stand up for these things.

I do not associate the Republican Party with these peope however if they do nothing to resist and debunk the myths and wild accusation of this faction then they are no better then the common skinhead thugs.

Problem is, the modern-day GOP is not unlike the Nazis of 60-70 years ago. They surrendered their party a long time ago to religious zealots, like the Germans surrendered their sanity to Hitler. Sad, but true.:(
There's not anything else I can add to this, really.:mad:
(Sorry, NudeAl, for taking the quote out of your context. But you can understand my point, right??)

[BinCo]

Religion through the ages has always been full of violence in one form or the other. It would be amazing at the number of people have been killed (murdered) in the name of God. I could be wrong but I don't think this is want God had in mind. The Bible says love thy neighbor as thyself. I didn't see where it said this is only applicable if thy neighbor believes the same as you... Correct me if I am wrong.

You might want to look into a wide variety of Pagan religions. Most of them are non-evangelical and earth loving. They do not preach hatred and have FAR more tolerance for other points of view. But not the religions that want to burn them at the stake.

[Lord Drakkus]

You might want to look into a wide variety of Pagan religions. Most of them are non-evangelical and earth loving. They do not preach hatred and have FAR more tolerance for other points of view. But not the religions that want to burn them at the stake.

I've actually noticed that Wiccans tend to tolerate even the catholics, that LITERALLY tried to burn them at the stake! Considering tolerance of others (other than murderers, etc.) is one of the things I pride myself on, I nearly became Wiccan, but it just didn't work out.

I have to agree though, as a whole the pagan religions are definitely more grounded than most of the christian ones.

[MoonShadow]

I agree, Lord Drakkus...IF one chooses a religion of any kind, they are more what we think religion should be about.

I love how topics change course. This is what makes some topics so unique. :) But there are those who think the Second Amendment is their "religion". LOL

[BinCo]

Moonshadow. I must say that very few people choose their religion. Mostly it is what they are brought up with.

I was brought up with no religion at all.

[Skinview]

I always thought Wicca was a cool religion. A bit eccentric, but much less dangerous than the Abrahamic religions. And then there are the skyclad rituals... Some days I wish I wasn't an atheist.

[BinCo]

I always thought Wicca was a cool religion. A bit eccentric, but much less dangerous than the Abrahamic religions. And then there are the skyclad rituals... Some days I wish I wasn't an atheist.

I married into the Wiccan religion. I'm still an atheist, but they are all my friends and are all cool with me, and to me. They don't try to change me at all, just accept me for who I am. I must say that it is a nicer feeling than being ostracized by the Christians.

[missouriboy]

Taken from your link:

So when Bush spent 8 years making everyone at his "town halls" sign loyalty oaths and even had a couple arrested for wearing anti-Bush T-shirts it wasn't that big of a deal. But when Obama buses in 900 people (including *****GASP***** members of Planned Parenthood) and still hands out 1,500 tickets to random locals it's the USSR?:confused:

I reviewed the report at the link I gave, and could find NO mention of Bush. The lady was reporting on HER OWN experience at a CURRENT EVENT. She was making no attempt whatsoever to cover all of history, that I could tell. Therefore, no, there was no comparison made, or implied, to any other administration. Did you actually see any comparison in there?

My own post was in response to a post that opined the demonstrations by the "public" at Town Hall Meetings were most likely "staged." My post was to show that the government also "stages" those events, not just the protesters.

I also thought it said that only 600 tickets were handed out to locals, out of 1500 that were printed.

[Fitz1980]

:confused:

I reviewed the report at the link I gave, and could find NO mention of Bush. The lady was reporting on HER OWN experience at a CURRENT EVENT. She was making no attempt whatsoever to cover all of history, that I could tell. Therefore, no, there was no comparison made, or implied, to any other administration. Did you actually see any comparison in there?[/i]

Taken from your link and my quote of it

I am very dismayed about what I learned about our current White House.
The amount of control and manipulation was unbelievable. I felt I was not living in the United States of America , more like the USSR !! I was physically nauseous.

If Obama's people bussed in 900 supporters and handed out the other half of the invites locally shouldn't she be happy that the current White House is being much more free and opened than the previous one, which insisted in 100% control and manipulation of their "public events?"

[Sanman]

Democrats do this, Republicans do that.... seems its time everyone wise up and vote 3rd party! Dem and Rep both are the same. Dems tax you and tell you they're taxing you, Reps tax you in secret by means of inflation from printing money.

[missouriboy]

...shouldn't she be happy that the current White House is being much more free and opened than the previous one?You would have to ask her, not me. But she already gave her answer, didn't she? Are you happy when something makes you "physically nauseous"?

[missouriboy]

Democrats do this, Republicans do that.... seems its time everyone wise up and vote 3rd party! Dem and Rep both are the same. Dems tax you and tell you they're taxing you, Reps tax you in secret by means of inflation from printing money.Exactly so! It's big government and its political skulduggery that is the problem, not just one party or the other. But partisan fanatics can't see that, they think "their" party can do no wrong! The two major parties are just opposite sides of the same corrupt coin, and pushing for either one of them, no matter which, is just begging for more of the same abuse. I think it was Albert Einstein who said, "Insanity is doing the same thing over and over, and expecting the results to be different." It's too bad it takes so long for diehard partisans to realize this and outgrow their folly.

To me, it's really easy to see that Dems & Reps foment this partisanship battle purposely, to keep the gullible distracted, while they (the politicians) pat each other on the back in congratulations each time either side succeeds in gouging more money and/or power for themselves, as a group. It works great for them, doesn't it! The proof is right before our eyes, if we would just open them and see.

If the political class in Washington really were working for the best interests of the American people, instead of for themselves and for their elite handlers, any halfway intelligent person could immediately think of at least 97 things that would be going down differently than they have been for the last few decades, at least. Think about it!!

[Sanslines]

If the political class in Washington really were working for the best interests of the American people, instead of for themselves and for their elite handlers, any halfway intelligent person could immediately think of at least 97 things that would be going down differently than they have been for the last few decades, at least. Think about it!!

Politicians work for their own best self interests first followed by the lobbyists who support them with enormous amounts of money. The existing system would not exist as it is if people would stop being so apathetic and demand change. Yet, look at health care now. The demand for change from some people is met by strong resistance from others that want no change. The real reason that we are in so many messes now is because people have allowed it to happen.

[MoonShadow]

Sanslines, how very true. WE have allowed what is going on in DC now to happen. The real blame is on us for what our government has become.

[missouriboy]

If the political class in Washington really were working for the best interests of the American people, instead of for themselves and for their elite handlers, any halfway intelligent person could immediately think of at least 97 things that would be going down differently than they have been for the last few decades, at least. Think about it!!The very next day, after posting the above, I came across this Letter to the Editor written by a man in Indiana. It's just one example of the things thinking people should realize.... Whenever I hear that our troops are fighting for our rights and freedoms in Iraq, my blood boils. We were told the same thing about Vietnam. Now how did our rights and freedoms get from Vietnam to Iraq? If our troops were really fighting where our rights and freedoms are under constant attack, they would be surrounding and opening fire on our capitol buildings, court houses and police stations.

Our soldiers enlist for honorable reasons but are sent into harm's way by corporate owned traitors in Washington. Still, they are operating outside the Constitution under UN resolutions. But the truth is that those who raise their hands and swear to uphold and defend the Constitution from all enemies foreign and domestic, in fact are the enemies of the Constitution and swear to it and claim authority by it, then relegate it to the trash bin! The people in Iraq and Afghanistan don't hate our rights and freedoms. Our own police, judges and politicians hate our rights and freedoms.

What would we do if foreign troops were occupying our country? I challenge people every day to ask themselves: Where do we draw the line?

Signed, ***Well, maybe those people with guns at Town Hall meetings are starting to draw that line. Common observation proves that voting has no effect... if it did, it would be made illegal.

(*** The letter was signed with a full name, but I shall not presume to put it on the Internet.)

[Sanslines]

The very next day, after posting the above, I came across this Letter to the Editor written by a man in Indiana. It's just one example of the things thinking people should realize.... Well, maybe those people with guns at Town Hall meetings are starting to draw that line. Common observation proves that voting has no effect... if it did, it would be made illegal.

(*** The letter was signed with a full name, but I shall not presume to put it on the Internet.)

What, prey tell, are those people going to do with their guns at town meetings. Shoot people? Perhaps they should enroll in university history classes instead.

Those who are not racists and have open minds might even learn something form the philosophy of Martin Luther King in such classes. During King's time, it was all too easy to pick up guns and resort to violence. Had King tried that approach, he would have been arrested and tossed in jail to rot for an eterninty. However, he had the wisdom to realize that the way to achieve the changes that he wanted was through peaceful means. With such peaceful means, he showed the hate mongering racists for who they are and in the end overcame them.

If people honestly want real change, then they must do it through peaceful means. One of the reasons that we do not have change is because too many people are too damn lazy to get off their asses, go to DC like some of us do, and demonstrate on the national mall.

[BinCo]

I'm going to have to say that ALL the common sense is being drained from the so-called debate. There is not debate, it's a screaming match.

http://www.nj.com/ledgerlive/index.ssf/2009/08/health_care_reform_town_hall_n.html

How can this total jerk make a complaint like "now some woman in a wheelchair has more rights than me" NO, you stupid sawdust for brains tool of the right wing hate machine, she has the microphone, you don't. Wait your turn.

[missouriboy]

What, prey tell, are those people going to do with their guns at town meetings. Shoot people?Only in self-defense, hopefully. Rather, what the man did is a statement to the gun-grabbers that says, "I assert my constitutional right to bear arms. Be thus advised." A right that cannot be exercised is no right at all, and the constitution does NOT say "except at Town Hall Meetings". Millions of citizens apparently agree, based on sales of guns and ammunition since January.

[Sanslines]

Only in self-defense, hopefully. Rather, what the man did is a statement to the gun-grabbers that says, "I assert my constitutional right to bear arms. Be thus advised." A right that cannot be exercised is no right at all, and the constitution does NOT say "except at Town Hall Meetings". Millions of citizens apparently agree, based on sales of guns and ammunition since January.

There is a time and a place for everything. Millions of people do not agree for they did not bring guns to town hall meetings. There is a much larger problem here then just bringing guns to town hall events. This is just another example of the death of civility and common sense. Obama already covered irrational outbursts such as this with his "cling to guns and religion" statement. Sadly, there are certain politicians who seem to be mainly from the Repub party and have been doing nothing but promoting fear, hatred, and intolerance over the past few years. Decent people need to do the right thing by standing up and voting them out of office as fast as possible.

[Mosquito_Bait]

Only in self-defense, hopefully. Rather, what the man did is a statement to the gun-grabbers that says, "I assert my constitutional right to bear arms. Be thus advised." A right that cannot be exercised is no right at all, and the constitution does NOT say "except at Town Hall Meetings". Millions of citizens apparently agree, based on sales of guns and ammunition since January.

If you were to interpret the Second Ammendment as a right for anyone to bear arms anywhere at anytime, then convicted felons would be able to keep guns in their prison cells. This obviously is not the case.

The wording of the Second Ammendment is so awkward that can be interpreted to mean just about anything. Whatever right the ammendment attempts to protect is mudded by setting it in the context of a "well regulated militia". Also, the word "arms" is not defined. Does it include hand grenades, bazookas, and anti-aircraft missiles? Is it limited to smooth bore weapons of the types that were common at the time that the ammendment was written? The recent Supreme Court decision interprets the ammendment as defining a general right to keep arms for self protection, but this is a stretch as the ammendment refers to militias and not self protection. The Supreme Court decision was split and the interpretation will probably change again in the future.

[Sanman]

I like what Judge Andrew Nipolitano says as his main "catch phrase".... "The camera is the new gun". Keep those cameras rolling!

[missouriboy]

Millions of people do not agree for they did not bring guns to town hall meetings.OK, but not the same "millions," right? There are about 320 of them in the US now (millions of people). Millions of people don't drink coffee either, but that also has no effect on the veracity of my statement.
Obama already covered irrational outbursts cuh as this with his "cling to guns and religion" statement.I thought that was the most un-presidential statement a man could make. How could a president ever cast aspersions on any citizens who assert their constitutional rights? Only if he is "anti-constitution," I guess, as many politicians nowadays are. Of course, I realize there are legions of people who just hang in awe on everything that comes out of that man's mouth.
Sadly, there are certain politicians who seem to be mainly from the Repub party and have been doing nothing but promoting fear, hatred, and intolerance over the past few years. Decent people need to do the right thing by standing up and voting them out of office as fast as possible.Mainly from the Repub party, huh... :rolleyes: Well, if you really want change in government, just never vote for the incumbent. Of either party.

[MoonShadow]

These idiots who bring their guns to town hall meetings are just being disrepectful. This has nothing to do with their precious Second Amendment rights. They have the right to bear arms so why in the name of hell are they toting their guns now to town hall meetings? Showing their second amendment rights? Phooey! They are just being arrogant and disrpectful.

[Navigator]

These idiots who bring their guns to town hall meetings are just being disrepectful. This has nothing to do with their precious Second Amendment rights. They have the right to bear arms so why in the name of hell are they toting their guns now to town hall meetings? Showing their second amendment rights? Phooey! They are just being arrogant and disrpectful.

I agree they're being disrespectful Moonshadow...but I don't think that's "just" the only thing they're doing.

In they're minds, they're purposely implying a threat to anyone who doesn't have the same political views as they do. They feeling their macho. They're thinking, even believing, that they're showing they are better than those more mature (and usually better educated) individuals who are not armed so, therefore, their political beliefs must also be better than other beliefs...at least in their minds.

The point the wingnuts and gunnuts always want to ignore, is that the 2nd amendment...and Heller...only gives them the "right" to own a weapon. The "right" to do anything with it, or even with ammunition for it, is up to the legislature of each state, and in some cases, even minor agencies of the Federal Government like the National Park Service. And states are increasingly noting the dangers involved in allowing this level of maturity to carry weapons.

I've noted before that California doesn't allow guns in State or National Parks in California and the BLM restricts them severely in places in Nevada. My wife and I just did a road trip through numerous National Parks all across the country and...without exception...all National Parks that we visited are banning guns.

Yellowstone, for example, gives everyone a pamphlet when they arrive at a gate. The first thing it says...in big capital letters...is this:

"THESE ACTIONS ARE ILLEGAL

1. Possessing a firearm or weapon, including state-permitted concealed weapons."


I think we can expect the National Park Service's views to proliferate across the country as the public becomes aware of the implied threat...and real danger...in allowing immature right-wing whackaloons to carry loaded guns around to get their macho on.

[LamontCranston]

These idiots who bring their guns to town hall meetings are just being disrepectful. The local/state/federal authorities can carry firearms, clubs, tasers, dogs, body armour, force you to remove your shoes, dump your shampoo bottles, and have tactical units with snipers on speed dial and no one sniffs, but when the citizenry shows up with a shotgun there's an uproar.

The point is we can and have disagreed with the King and the Federal authority -- on several occasions and recently as history goes -- and it's OK to remind them that we can again. It is happening in other parts of the world today and it can happen here. They work for us, not the other way around.

It seems to me that Congress may have touched a hot stove with this health care reform and they might be well-served to dial back on the scope and cost.

Having said that, carrying a weapon into a crowd is stupid. There are better ways to make the same point.

[nimrod]

Well, if you really want change in government, just never vote for the incumbent. Of either party.

That is what it is really about right there, if you do not like what is happening vote the idiot out. I do not think that there are enough people that are willing to do so though because they are so party loyal that they will vote along the party lines no matter what, and that is either side.

[Fitz1980]

It seems to me that Congress may have touched a hot stove with this health care reform and they might be well-served to dial back on the scope and cost.

That's just what THEY want you to think. The insurance companies, Hannity, Limbaugh and the rest; want to keep things the way that they are and they're scaring the crap out of people who don't know any better to get it done. Truth is that these people don't even really care or know that much about healthcare, government spending or the economy. If they did they would have perhaps voiced some opinion when Bush ran up the biggest debt in history in order to cut Paris Hilton's taxes; but not a peep until a brown man from the Democratic party gets into office and suddenly wanting to reform healthcare is the biggest evil since Hitler. In my lifetime certain people have always been psycho when a Democrat was in office. Remember the conspiracy theories on talk radio and from Pat Robertson during the Clinton years? But now with Obama it's gone from crazy to "my next door neighbor's dog told me to kill those women" crazy. If it hadn't been healthcare it would have been something else. It would have been what ever other issue became Obama's main issue. You'd have crazy lunatics repeating lies and disinformation and carrying guns to show that they are a power base. The day of Obama's inauguration I had some customers at my bar talking about how they and their families would be ready when Obama's people came to take their guns away.

[pagevalleynude]

These idiots who bring their guns to town hall meetings are just being disrepectful. This has nothing to do with their precious Second Amendment rights. They have the right to bear arms so why in the name of hell are they toting their guns now to town hall meetings? Showing their second amendment rights? Phooey! They are just being arrogant and disrpectful.

Thank you. My sentiments exactly.:mad:

[pagevalleynude]

That's just what THEY want you to think. The insurance companies, Hannity, Limbaugh and the rest; want to keep things the way that they are and they're scaring the crap out of people who don't know any better to get it done. Truth is that these people don't even really care or know that much about healthcare, government spending or the economy. If they did they would have perhaps voiced some opinion when Bush ran up the biggest debt in history in order to cut Paris Hilton's taxes; but not a peep until a brown man from the Democratic party gets into office and suddenly wanting to reform healthcare is the biggest evil since Hitler. In my lifetime certain people have always been psycho when a Democrat was in office. Remember the conspiracy theories on talk radio and from Pat Robertson during the Clinton years? But now with Obama it's gone from crazy to "my next door neighbor's dog told me to kill those women" crazy. If it hadn't been healthcare it would have been something else. It would have been what ever other issue became Obama's main issue. You'd have crazy lunatics repeating lies and disinformation and carrying guns to show that they are a power base. The day of Obama's inauguration I had some customers at my bar talking about how they and their families would be ready when Obama's people came to take their guns away.

Friday, on my YouTube channel (www.youtube.com/DCSportsNut), I'll talk about this and other topics. At least this is giving me something to talk about that day...:D

[Illinois59]

These idiots who bring their guns to town hall meetings are just being disrepectful. This has nothing to do with their precious Second Amendment rights. They have the right to bear arms so why in the name of hell are they toting their guns now to town hall meetings? Showing their second amendment rights? Phooey! They are just being arrogant and disrpectful.

Maybe those who have to carry a gun to town hall meetings just feel powerless and somehow need to get attention. They can't provide facts and logic to justify their viewpoint so all they have left is the threat of causing someone's death to get their point across. In recent years we have been seeing the emergence of the lowest level of humanity courtesy the far right wing (a.k.a. wingnuts) so I would not be surprised if one day we wake up to the news of some gun-toting fruitcake going on a killing rampage at a town hall meeting.

[LamontCranston]

That's just what THEY want you to think. The insurance companies, Hannity, Limbaugh and the rest; want to keep things the way that they are and they're scaring the crap out of people who don't know any better to get it done. Truth is that these people don't even really care or know that much about healthcare, government spending or the economy. If they did they would have perhaps voiced some opinion when Bush ran up the biggest debt in history in order to cut Paris Hilton's taxes; but not a peep until a brown man from the Democratic party gets into office and suddenly wanting to reform healthcare is the biggest evil since Hitler. In my lifetime certain people have always been psycho when a Democrat was in office. Remember the conspiracy theories on talk radio and from Pat Robertson during the Clinton years? But now with Obama it's gone from crazy to "my next door neighbor's dog told me to kill those women" crazy. If it hadn't been healthcare it would have been something else. It would have been what ever other issue became Obama's main issue. You'd have crazy lunatics repeating lies and disinformation and carrying guns to show that they are a power base. The day of Obama's inauguration I had some customers at my bar talking about how they and their families would be ready when Obama's people came to take their guns away. This is what I call a "kitchen sink" argument... used to have them with my ex-wife all the time. All sorts of things are listed here and none of them advance the cause. I can't even tell what you're talking about.

That's just what THEY want you to think. The insurance companies, Hannity, Limbaugh and the rest; ... Truth is that these people don't even really care or know that much about healthcare, government spending or the economy. This part shows you're not paying attention. The insurance companies know *precisely* what's going on and are successfully gaming the government. Some applied for status a investment bank (or bought a failing bank) and became eligible for TARP bailout funds. That's a BIG TIME power broker move involving billions of dollars. Hannity and Limbaugh are tiny nothing blowhards by comparison.

President Obama ran a two-year plus campaign and got himself elected president. He beat the Clinton political machine and all the while sniped and harrassed by Hannity and Limbaugh and other empty suits on the TV dial. That too was a BIG TIME power play.

Forcing General Motors and Chrysler into bankruptcy was a BIG TIME power move. Imagine the conference table: we want $20 billion or we'll file bankruptcy and the answer was "you're fired the rest of you get out and file bankruptcy." A Democratic administration with the UAW labor union hanging out there? Remarkable really. Pres. Obama is swinging a big bat and making contact. I have to admire the swing.

The people on TV and the radio are insignificant hot air. The people in power want to push the illegal immigrants and indigents out of the hospitals and into the provider network, they need to raise your taxes to fund it, and they want full credit so as to get re-elected at mid-term. I'm not saying there's anything inherently wrong with that, but that is the position you're defending. Know it and say it.

Please don't group Hannity and Limbaugh into the same group as the Washington and board room power brokers. They aren't in the same league. They want controvery for ratings. That's it. Don't feed it.

[BinCo]

I would not be surprised if one day we wake up to the news of some gun-toting fruitcake going on a killing rampage at a town hall meeting.

Or a Jewish Holocost Museum?

[Fitz1980]

You would have to ask her, not me. But she already gave her answer, didn't she? Are you happy when something makes you "physically nauseous"?

Not particularly. But I'd rather ask her how come when a president who's been much more free and opened than the guy who was in there for the past 8 years suddenly she's getting "physically nauseous?" Could it be because he's a member of the other party? Could it be because he's a brown man with a foreign sounding name? Could it be because Boss Limbaugh and the rest of the right-wing echo chamber told her to? Could it be because she, like most of these idiots is like Sarah Palin's youngest?*

*and BTW I don't have a problem with special needs people; but I don't think that they should be dictating policy.

[Naturist Mark]

From Tom Tomorrow (http://dir.salon.com/topics/tom_tomorrow/)

http://images.salon.com/comics/tomo/2009/09/08/tomo/story.jpg

[Skinview]

The point the wingnuts and gunnuts always want to ignore, is that the 2nd amendment...and Heller...only gives them the "right" to own a weapon.The 2nd Amendment also covers bearing arms. We have the right to own arms and take them with us as we travel.

states are increasingly noting the dangers involved in allowing this level of maturity to carry weapons.I would say its the other way around. State laws regarding the bearing of arms are much more liberalized than they were twenty years ago. Almost all states now allow people carry concealed firearms, when they did not before.


Yellowstone, for example, gives everyone a pamphlet when they arrive at a gate. The first thing it says...in big capital letters...is this:

"THESE ACTIONS ARE ILLEGAL

1. Possessing a firearm or weapon, including state-permitted concealed weapons."
That is supposed to change with recent legislation. I don't know when it goes into effect, or how old the pamphlet is.

[Fitz1980]

Please don't group Hannity and Limbaugh into the same group as the Washington and board room power brokers. They aren't in the same league. They want controvery for ratings. That's it. Don't feed it.

I'd say that they are a bit more than that. They are the mouthpieces for the power brokers in Washington. Fox News does more than generate controversy for ratings. They motivate millions of people to political action. They essentially are responsable for those millions of people at the Tea Party protests. They spread lies and disinformation.

On a broader scale the corporate right-wing echo chamber media is responsable for these protests at town hall meetings, where people are fighting against their own best interests thanks to a corporate backed disinformation campaign.

[missouriboy]

If people honestly want real change, then they must do it through peaceful means. One of the reasons that we do not have change is because too many people are too damn lazy to get off their asses, go to DC like some of us do, and demonstrate on the national mall.Demonstrate? Bingo! I think you've hit on it, m'boy!

The fellow who was peacefully carrying that legal firearm was demonstrating, that's what he was doing, he was up off his lazy *** and was PEACEFULLY DEMONSTRATING!!! :laugh:

Not ALL demonstrations have to be exercised on the national mall to be useful. And the legal gun he was carrying was symbolically equal to poster-signs that other demonstrators often carry.

No need for us to get our panties all knotted up over that. The police did their duty by watching the situation extra closely, while still allowing a citizen to exercise his constitutional rights.

[Sanslines]

Demonstrate? Bingo! I think you've hit on it, m'boy!

The fellow who was peacefully carrying that legal firearm was demonstrating, that's what he was doing, he was up off his lazy *** and was PEACEFULLY DEMONSTRATING!!! :laugh:

Not ALL demonstrations have to be exercised on the national mall to be useful. And the legal gun he was carrying was symbolically equal to poster-signs that other demonstrators often carry.

No need for us to get our panties all knotted up over that. The police did their duty by watching the situation extra closely, while still allowing a citizen to exercise his constitutional rights.

Oh come now. Unless you were at this event you don't know what kind of job the police were doing. This demonstration had absolutely nothing to do with guns. It was a political rally. People needed to bring their common sense and intelligence to this rally - not guns.

[Sanman]

A point that many still miss, the constitution does NOT GRANT any rights. The constitution simply lists a few (not all) of our natural rights, and that the government made a contract with the people saying it will not make laws that violate these rights.

[missouriboy]

Sanman, that's VERY close! But let me make this clarification: the government didn't make any contract with the people, because that particular government did not yet exist at the time. The people ("We the People...do ordain and establish...") created the government when they ratified the document that defined the rules of said government.

But you're correct that the constitution doesn't grant rights to the people. Instead, it's the people granting powers to the government.

[missouriboy]

Oh come now. Unless you were at this event you don't know what kind of job the police were doing. This demonstration had absolutely nothing to do with guns. It was a political rally. People needed to bring their common sense and intelligence to this rally - not guns.Oh come now. Unless you were at this event you don't know what kind of action the demonstrator with the gun was doing. And by extension of THAT logic, this whole thread is invalid, except for those posts made by people who were "at this event."

One report I read stated that the police chief was consulted before allowing the man to continue carrying the gun, the chief advised that he was within his rights, and that an officer stayed within ten feet of him at all times thereafter.

So I stand by my post, and will not engage in a Stu-like 10-page nitpick about it, except to add this: the man's "equal" rights are NOT subject to the opinions of others about what he "needs" to bring to a political rally. :)

[Sanslines]

Oh come now. Unless you were at this event you don't know what kind of action the demonstrator with the gun was doing. And by extension of THAT logic, this whole thread is invalid, except for those posts made by people who were "at this event."

That's right for the most part there is a great deal of pure speculation. However, we can use common sense (just as judges do in a court of law when they consider circumstantial evidence). Commone sense tells us that anyone who brings guns to a political rally is doing so because he or she wants to use their show of force to intimidate others. A health care town hall meeting is NOT a gun rally. A gun rally is an entirely separate issue as common sense plainly tells us.

One report I read stated that the police chief was consulted before allowing the man to continue carrying the gun, the chief advised that he was within his rights, and that an officer stayed within ten feet of him at all times thereafter.

So I stand by my post, and will not engage in a Stu-like 10-page nitpick about it, except to add this: the man's "equal" rights are NOT subject to the opinions of others about what he "needs" to bring to a political rally. :)


Everyone has rights. If you believe that such disrespectful displays are appropriate anywhere and everywhere, then you keep on promoting it. Just do not be surprised when other groups in society rise up and put and end to it through the force of law.

As an example, nudity is not legal in many states yet it may be tolerated depending how those who are nude treat others. If they demonstrate tolerance and respect for others, then they will generally get a certain degree of tolerance and respect in return. If they demand their rights and shove their nudity into the faces of others, then they will get a different result. It all depends what people really want. If they want to advance their cause, then they need to think with their brains and use common sense to achieve their end goal. If they want to play games and force their selfish interests upon others, then they should not be surprised when society turns against them.

Martin Luther King certainly understood these basic concepts. Why is it so hard for others today to understand them too.