Results 1 to 18 of 18

Thread: Liberal Hypocrisy

  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Newport News, Va
    Posts
    181

    Liberal Hypocrisy

    So directly OC related BUT I was sitting here in Afghanistan and I was stuck watching Meet the Press and the topic of gay marriage was being discussed. I was watching Meathead (Rob Reiner) and Al Sharpton discuss "civil rights" and equality, etc. As I choked down my dinner, I thought... Where are these bone heads with regards to enumerated rights outlined in the Constitution? They are complete idiots and hypocrits! As I read my newly purchased Federalist and Anti Federalist Papers, I think to myself... Why are "gay marriage rights," which aren't enumerated, carry more weight or are more important than my enumnerated (NOT GRANTED) right to keep and bear arms.

    Its seems to me, if the liberals applied their own very flawed logic, we would be OCing EVERYWHERE... There, now its OC related.... lol

  2. #2
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Fairfax Co., VA
    Posts
    18,766
    Quote Originally Posted by AFCop View Post
    So directly OC related BUT I was sitting here in Afghanistan and I was stuck watching Meet the Press and the topic of gay marriage was being discussed. I was watching Meathead (Rob Reiner) and Al Sharpton discuss "civil rights" and equality, etc. As I choked down my dinner, I thought... Where are these bone heads with regards to enumerated rights outlined in the Constitution? They are complete idiots and hypocrits! As I read my newly purchased Federalist and Anti Federalist Papers, I think to myself... Why are [rights]
    which aren't enumerated, carry more weight or are more important than my enumnerated (NOT GRANTED) right to keep and bear arms.

    Its seems to me, if the liberals applied their own very flawed logic, we would be OCing EVERYWHERE... There, now its OC related.... lol
    Its because the proponents aren't really interested in rights. They're interested in telling others what to do; they're just using the rights argument to sell their point. As you noticed, if they were really interested in rights, they'd be arguing for all rights, not for some but against others.

    Gay marriage isn't really about rights. Its about forcing the rest of society to give advantages to gay married partners that hetero married partners shouldn't have gotten in the first place. Government gave tax breaks and recognitions to hetero marrieds that it had no business giving. So, of course, the gays claim they deserve the same privileges that heteros didn't deserve.

    I not only don't care if gays marry, I support their right to vow a lifelong committment to one another. But, I'll be damned if I'll go along with giving them or any hetero couple special tax breaks or privileges that I have to pay for in increased taxes just so some politicians can score more political support. The point isn't that gay and hetero marrieds shouldn't have tax breaks; the point is give the tax breaks to everybody.

    A marriage is essentially a contract. Let government record the contract, and let the courts sort out contract disputes if divorce is needed. Maybe let government have some involvement for legal necessities related to adoption. Otherwise, hands off. Its just another avenue for politicians to aquire favor and steal our money using the euphemism taxes.
    Last edited by Citizen; 03-31-2013 at 01:41 PM.
    I'll make you an offer: I will argue and fight for all of your rights, if you will do the same for me. That is the only way freedom can work. We have to respect all rights, all the time--and strive to win the rights of the other guy as much as for ourselves.

    If I am equal to another, how can I legitimately govern him without his express individual consent?

    There is no human being on earth I hate so much I would actually vote to inflict government upon him.

  3. #3
    Regular Member Beretta92FSLady's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    In My Coffee
    Posts
    5,278
    Well, since I'm a homoredneck gun toting Liberal, I will answer this question.

    Yes, the Right to bear Arms is enumerated in the Constitution, it states nothing about AR-style rifles or high capacity magazines.

    I should mention that Gay Marriage/Rights will soon be Enumerated Rights in the Constitution. I suppose we will see whether it is or not. I know what your probably thinking about my asserting Gay Marriage/Rights is enumerated, "Do Beretta92fslady know the difference between a enumerated, and implied Right?"

    First, are enumerated Rights more significant than implied Rights?

    Second, The Right to keep and bear Arms is Enumerated, but the specific type of Arm is implied.

    You don't care much for Civil Rights...you must be comfortable, and right at home there in Afghanistan. You certainly must sleep better there at night, than here in Freedom hating, Civil Rights loving America.
    Last edited by Beretta92FSLady; 03-31-2013 at 01:43 PM.
    I don't mind watching the OC-Community (tea party 2.0's, who have hijacked the OC-Community) cannibalize itself. I do mind watching OC dragged through the gutter. OC is an exercise of A Right. I choose to not OC; I choose to not own firearms. I choose to leave the OC-Community to it's own self-inflicted injuries, and eventual implosion. Carry on...

  4. #4
    Regular Member WalkingWolf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    North Carolina
    Posts
    12,278
    Lobbyists, and social engineers are not interested in rights, they are interested in the growth of their pocketbook. Even supposed gun rights organizations are nothing more than lobbyists that are interested in making a buck off of rights. That is why under their helm we are in the mess we are in. They look out for the vendors that stuff their pockets, in return they stuff the pockets of politicians, and in the long run we the citizens end up being forced to pay and beg for our rights.
    It is well that war is so terrible otherwise we would grow too fond of it.
    Robert E. Lee
    The patriot volunteer, fighting for country and his rights, makes the most reliable soldier on earth.
    Thomas Jonathan "Stonewall" Jackson
    What separates the winners from the losers is how a person reacts to each new twist of fate.
    President Donald Trump

  5. #5
    Regular Member Beretta92FSLady's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    In My Coffee
    Posts
    5,278
    Quote Originally Posted by WalkingWolf View Post
    Lobbyists, and social engineers are not interested in rights, they are interested in the growth of their pocketbook. Even supposed gun rights organizations are nothing more than lobbyists that are interested in making a buck off of rights. That is why under their helm we are in the mess we are in. They look out for the vendors that stuff their pockets, in return they stuff the pockets of politicians, and in the long run we the citizens end up being forced to pay and beg for our rights.
    The corners we paint ourselves.

    You seem to have nowhere to go, my friend.

    No wonder you feel you have no Liberty, Freedom, and are under tyranny.
    I don't mind watching the OC-Community (tea party 2.0's, who have hijacked the OC-Community) cannibalize itself. I do mind watching OC dragged through the gutter. OC is an exercise of A Right. I choose to not OC; I choose to not own firearms. I choose to leave the OC-Community to it's own self-inflicted injuries, and eventual implosion. Carry on...

  6. #6
    Regular Member WalkingWolf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    North Carolina
    Posts
    12,278
    Quote Originally Posted by Beretta92FSLady View Post
    The corners we paint ourselves.

    You seem to have nowhere to go, my friend.

    No wonder you feel you have no Liberty, Freedom, and are under tyranny.
    Please do not try to put words in my mouth I did not say? That would make such statements a lie, and you a liar.
    It is well that war is so terrible otherwise we would grow too fond of it.
    Robert E. Lee
    The patriot volunteer, fighting for country and his rights, makes the most reliable soldier on earth.
    Thomas Jonathan "Stonewall" Jackson
    What separates the winners from the losers is how a person reacts to each new twist of fate.
    President Donald Trump

  7. #7
    Regular Member Beretta92FSLady's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    In My Coffee
    Posts
    5,278
    Quote Originally Posted by WalkingWolf View Post
    Please do not try to put words in my mouth I did not say? That would make such statements a lie, and you a liar.
    I didn't say you said anything.

    Stating an observation is not putting words in your mouth.

    Don't be a drama king about it.
    I don't mind watching the OC-Community (tea party 2.0's, who have hijacked the OC-Community) cannibalize itself. I do mind watching OC dragged through the gutter. OC is an exercise of A Right. I choose to not OC; I choose to not own firearms. I choose to leave the OC-Community to it's own self-inflicted injuries, and eventual implosion. Carry on...

  8. #8
    Regular Member Deanimator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Rocky River, OH, U.S.A.
    Posts
    2,086
    Quote Originally Posted by Beretta92FSLady View Post
    Well, since I'm a homoredneck gun toting Liberal, I will answer this question.
    It would have been better for you to have answered it intelligently.

    Quote Originally Posted by Beretta92FSLady View Post
    Yes, the Right to bear Arms is enumerated in the Constitution, it states nothing about AR-style rifles or high capacity magazines.
    Nor does the First Amendment say anything about telephones, television, the internet or recording of police in public, in the pursuit of their duty.

    Quote Originally Posted by Beretta92FSLady View Post
    I should mention that Gay Marriage/Rights will soon be Enumerated Rights in the Constitution. I suppose we will see whether it is or not. I know what your probably thinking about my asserting Gay Marriage/Rights is enumerated, "Do Beretta92fslady know the difference between a enumerated, and implied Right?"
    Clearly you don't.

    I'm in favor of gay marriage... which makes the frequently UTTERLY inane arguments of some of its proponents all the more painful.

    You remind me of the dolt I heard on the radio who stated that polygamy wasn't protected the way that gay marriage is because it's "weird" and not "traditional". Kind of strange given the ubiquity of polygamy throughout history. But when you can't reason logically, you HAVE to fall back on special pleading.

    Please, stop advocating for gay marriage. You do that cause more harm than the Westboro Baptist Church could in a thousand years.
    --- Gun control: The theory that 110lb. women have the "right" to fistfight with 210lb. rapists.

  9. #9
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Thru Death's Door in Wisconsin
    Posts
    13,154
    Quote Originally Posted by AFCop View Post
    Its seems to me, if the liberals applied their own very flawed logic, we would be OCing EVERYWHERE... There, now its OC related.... lol
    "Liberal" is the wrong brush, either too broad or too fine-tipped narrow. Try progressive, using an effective definition not synonymous with hated liberals.
    The American right is as progressive as the American left, L,D, and R are each progressive in their own way.

    Only The Constitution Party represents America's conservative Country Class against the progressive Ruling Class. Why do you think we're so PI$$ED at the repugnicans and only a little less at the teabaggers? They might be fiscally conservative but they're socially liberal, or they might be foreign-policy conservative but big government statists. Lieberaltarians? They don't give a PFWWWT as long as they get their ganga mon.

  10. #10
    Regular Member Beretta92FSLady's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    In My Coffee
    Posts
    5,278
    Quote Originally Posted by Deanimator View Post
    It would have been better for you to have answered it intelligently.
    *fluff*


    Nor does the First Amendment say anything about telephones, television, the internet or recording of police in public, in the pursuit of their duty.
    Which is why they are not protected absolutely.


    Clearly you don't.

    I'm in favor of gay marriage... which makes the frequently UTTERLY inane arguments of some of its proponents all the more painful.

    You remind me of the dolt I heard on the radio who stated that polygamy wasn't protected the way that gay marriage is because it's "weird" and not "traditional". Kind of strange given the ubiquity of polygamy throughout history. But when you can't reason logically, you HAVE to fall back on special pleading.

    Please, stop advocating for gay marriage. You do that cause more harm than the Westboro Baptist Church could in a thousand years.

    Your favor is irrelevant. Who are you to tell me what I have a Right to do? Sounds anti-Libety, and anti-Freedom to me.

    Polygamy, I could care less...doesn't sound practical to me. The issue isn't polygamy...it's forty+ year old heterosexual men wedding with 13 year old girls.
    Last edited by Beretta92FSLady; 03-31-2013 at 02:34 PM.
    I don't mind watching the OC-Community (tea party 2.0's, who have hijacked the OC-Community) cannibalize itself. I do mind watching OC dragged through the gutter. OC is an exercise of A Right. I choose to not OC; I choose to not own firearms. I choose to leave the OC-Community to it's own self-inflicted injuries, and eventual implosion. Carry on...

  11. #11
    Regular Member Beretta92FSLady's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    In My Coffee
    Posts
    5,278
    Quote Originally Posted by Nightmare View Post
    "Liberal" is the wrong brush, either too broad or too fine-tipped narrow. Try progressive, using an effective definition not synonymous with hated liberals.
    The American right is as progressive as the American left, L,D, and R are each progressive in their own way.

    Only The Constitution Party represents America's conservative Country Class against the progressive Ruling Class. Why do you think we're so PI$$ED at the repugnicans and only a little less at the teabaggers? They might be fiscally conservative but they're socially liberal, or they might be foreign-policy conservative but big government statists. Lieberaltarians? They don't give a PFWWWT as long as they get their ganga mon.
    \


    Thank you for verifying that all are Progressive. You left out Constitutional Party for some reason...another Progressive party.
    I don't mind watching the OC-Community (tea party 2.0's, who have hijacked the OC-Community) cannibalize itself. I do mind watching OC dragged through the gutter. OC is an exercise of A Right. I choose to not OC; I choose to not own firearms. I choose to leave the OC-Community to it's own self-inflicted injuries, and eventual implosion. Carry on...

  12. #12
    Regular Member Deanimator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Rocky River, OH, U.S.A.
    Posts
    2,086
    Quote Originally Posted by Beretta92FSLady View Post
    Which is why they are not protected absolutely.
    Nonsequitur. What IS?





    Quote Originally Posted by Beretta92FSLady View Post
    Who are you to tell me what I have a Right to do? Sounds anti-Libety, and anti-Freedom to me.
    I didn't say you COULDN'T ineptly argue for gay marriage.

    I said you SHOULDN'T

    And you SHOULDN'T... unless your goal is rhetorical self-abuse instead of actually achieving legal gay marriage.

    Quote Originally Posted by Beretta92FSLady View Post
    Polygamy, I could care less...doesn't sound practical to me.
    It's been "practical" for tens of thousands of years.

    Quote Originally Posted by Beretta92FSLady View Post
    The issue isn't polygamy...it's forty+ year old heterosexual men wedding with 13 year old girls.
    Equally illegal whether you marry one or five. Another nonsequitur substituted for reasoned argument.

    But that's generally how you can tell if you're talking to a progressive rather than a liberal. If what's being said is the intellectual equivalent of an hysterical rant in Rodong Shinmun, the odds are it's coming from a progressive.
    --- Gun control: The theory that 110lb. women have the "right" to fistfight with 210lb. rapists.

  13. #13
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Newport News, Va
    Posts
    181
    First, I never said I was for or against gay marriage and I did that for a reason. My comment was specifically on their visceral comments for one but not the other.

    As for as enumerated right to AR style, assault weapons or high cap magazines, they are infact.... Shall not be infringed! To follow my hero, Piers (sarcasm), I have yet to hear a coherent argument from the progressives :-) on how a collapsable butt stock or pistol grip make a rifle that functions the same as others, exempt from Constitution protection!!!

    Also, it is your opininion that my 30 rnd mag is high, I consider it standard capacity.

    But on a different note, assault weapons are already highly regulated, even semi auto rifles with short barrels are regulated (via paperwork/tax stamp).

    I support legal equality for everyone, including gay people. I do not however, agree with changing the definition of marriage. Get rid of DOMA, the Fed gov has no Constitutional power to enact such a law.

    Furthermore, I never said I didnt care about civil rights, I was merely pointing out abhorent hypocricy...

    Am I off base to think that you are twisting what I said and trying to bait me into something it was never meant to be?

    And since we are on the topic of hypocricy, what makes Law Enforcement better then me? Why do they get exempted BUT I wouldn't? I have received far more training and vetting then active or retired LE.. Oh, I forgot about the administrations assault on us right wing extremists..... LMAO!

  14. #14
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Richmond, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    1,171

    Well, There you go again.

    Quote Originally Posted by AFCop View Post
    First, I never said I was for or against gay marriage and I did that for a reason. My comment was specifically on their visceral comments for one but not the other.

    As for as enumerated right to AR style, assault weapons or high cap magazines, they are infact.... Shall not be infringed! To follow my hero, Piers (sarcasm), I have yet to hear a coherent argument from the progressives :-) on how a collapsable butt stock or pistol grip make a rifle that functions the same as others, exempt from Constitution protection!!!

    Also, it is your opininion that my 30 rnd mag is high, I consider it standard capacity.

    But on a different note, assault weapons are already highly regulated, even semi auto rifles with short barrels are regulated (via paperwork/tax stamp).

    I support legal equality for everyone, including gay people. I do not however, agree with changing the definition of marriage. Get rid of DOMA, the Fed gov has no Constitutional power to enact such a law.

    Furthermore, I never said I didnt care about civil rights, I was merely pointing out abhorent hypocricy...

    Am I off base to think that you are twisting what I said and trying to bait me into something it was never meant to be?

    And since we are on the topic of hypocricy, what makes Law Enforcement better then me? Why do they get exempted BUT I wouldn't? I have received far more training and vetting then active or retired LE.. Oh, I forgot about the administrations assault on us right wing extremists..... LMAO!
    Never expect logic or common sense from the victicrats. They don't want equality, but domination.

    If somebody doesn't like guns, I do not advocate they own or carry one. I do however expect them to respect my right to own, carry and buy the guns I want without government interference.

    Stay safe. Hope you get stationed in Virginia when your tour is up.

  15. #15
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Newport News, Va
    Posts
    181
    Quote Originally Posted by va_tazdad View Post
    Never expect logic or common sense from the victicrats. They don't want equality, but domination.

    If somebody doesn't like guns, I do not advocate they own or carry one. I do however expect them to respect my right to own, carry and buy the guns I want without government interference.

    Stay safe. Hope you get stationed in Virginia when your tour is up.
    I am... Langley since Nov 2012....

  16. #16
    Regular Member sudden valley gunner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Whatcom County
    Posts
    17,338
    There are very few "liberals" any more, a word rooted in freedom, not centralized control..........
    I am not anti Cop I am just pro Citizen.

    U.S. v. Minker, 350 US 179, at page 187
    "Because of what appears to be a lawful command on the surface, many citizens, because
    of their respect for what only appears to be a law, are cunningly coerced into waiving their
    rights, due to ignorance." (Paraphrased)

  17. #17
    Regular Member OC for ME's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    White Oak Plantation
    Posts
    12,273
    Gays are not focused on the tax breaks. They are focused on the ease with which a wife/husband is granted rights and privileges by simply saying "I do" after the county gives them a marriage license. No other paperwork required. No last will and testament required, no power of attorney for 'X' required, no just walking up to a drone bureaucrat and saying "I'm Mr./Mrs. John/Jane Q. Public" required. Having the complete and unfettered authority to do whatever and whenever and not one drone bureaucrat saying boo really is nice. But, Charter Cable will not talk to my wife because she ain't named on the bill.....being married ain't all that and a bag of chips.

    If it were primarily about taxes then getting married would be the last thing I would have done. I needed servants to work the land without pay. Making babies is far easier than "buying" babies.
    "I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than to those attending too small a degree of it." - Thomas Jefferson.

    "Better that ten guilty persons escape, than that one innocent suffer" - English jurist William Blackstone.
    It is AFAIK original to me. Compromise is failure on the installment plan, particularly when dealing with so intractable an opponent as ignorance. - Nightmare

  18. #18
    Regular Member OC for ME's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    White Oak Plantation
    Posts
    12,273
    Quote Originally Posted by Beretta92FSLady View Post
    Well, since I'm a homoredneck gun toting Liberal, I will answer this question.

    Yes, the Right to bear Arms is enumerated in the Constitution, it states nothing about AR-style rifles or high capacity magazines.

    I should mention that Gay Marriage/Rights will soon be Enumerated Rights in the Constitution. I suppose we will see whether it is or not. I know what your probably thinking about my asserting Gay Marriage/Rights is enumerated, "Do Beretta92fslady know the difference between a enumerated, and implied Right?"

    First, are enumerated Rights more significant than implied Rights?

    Second, The Right to keep and bear Arms is Enumerated, but the specific type of Arm is implied.

    You don't care much for Civil Rights...you must be comfortable, and right at home there in Afghanistan. You certainly must sleep better there at night, than here in Freedom hating, Civil Rights loving America.
    Your gayness does not make you an expert on any subject. You have the enumerated right to speak on any subject. You being a liberal simply means that we should expect you to speak on any subject and expect that speak to include what your fellow citizens should think on that subject as you. Typical of liberals to promote anti-liberty and anti-citizen speak.
    "I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than to those attending too small a degree of it." - Thomas Jefferson.

    "Better that ten guilty persons escape, than that one innocent suffer" - English jurist William Blackstone.
    It is AFAIK original to me. Compromise is failure on the installment plan, particularly when dealing with so intractable an opponent as ignorance. - Nightmare

Posting Permissions

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