Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 26

Thread: Republican National Convention 2016

  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Thru Death's Door in Wisconsin
    Posts
    13,153

    Republican National Convention 2016

    Monday's Line-up. http://convention.gop/post/147558746...gram-announced


    Daily Themes & Headliners:
    Monday: Make America Safe Again
    Headliners: Melania Trump, Lieutenant General (ret.) Michael Flynn, U.S. Senator Joni Ernst (R-Iowa), Jason Beardsley and U.S. Rep. Ryan Zinke (Mont.).

    From attacks on our own soil and overseas to the tragedy in Benghazi, the policies of Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton have left us vulnerable. Our immigration system is broken, leaving our country open to security threats and the negative consequences of illegal immigration. A Donald Trump administration will listen to and learn from our nationís heroes who have put themselves in harmís way and pursue a national security strategy and foreign policy that will strengthen our military and make America safe again.
    I am responsible for my writing, not your understanding of it.

  2. #2
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    earth's crust
    Posts
    17,838
    Trump has already said he approves of many laws related to the RKBA including those that infringe upon our RKBA.

    So it will be interesting ... his VP nominee has lizzurd tendencies too ...

    I don't look to politicians or the .gov to protect my rights .... I certainly let them know not to mess with them ...

    The GOP convention may be fun. Not being a member I watch snippets of youtube of interest. I'm sure members will post links
    Last edited by davidmcbeth; 07-18-2016 at 12:42 PM.

  3. #3
    Regular Member 77zach's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Marion County, FL
    Posts
    3,005
    "hero", "vulnerable" "strong military". How can any sentient being even bear listening to GOP drivel. I like to think that people are more informed and reasonable than they are. Human nature cannot be undone. We are doomed. Let Hitlery Klinton come. Just let the whole thing sink to the bottom.
    ďIf the natural tendencies of mankind are so bad that it is not safe to permit people to be free, how is it that the tendencies of these organizers are always good? Do not the legislators and their appointed agents also belong to the human race? Or do they believe that they themselves are made of a finer clay than the rest of mankind? Ē -Bastiat

    I don't "need" to openly carry a handgun or own an "assault weapon" any more than Rosa Parks needed a seat on the bus.

  4. #4
    Regular Member twoskinsonemanns's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    WV
    Posts
    2,489
    Quote Originally Posted by 77zach View Post
    "hero", "vulnerable" "strong military". How can any sentient being even bear listening to GOP drivel. I like to think that people are more informed and reasonable than they are. Human nature cannot be undone. We are doomed. Let Hitlery Klinton come. Just let the whole thing sink to the bottom.
    I agree. It's absurd. How exactly did hillary contribute to us being vulnerable to the attacks we've suffered? What exactly would trump have done that would have stopped these attacks? Let's take the TX or LA cop shoot... what exactly would either candidate do to prevent that?
    I have heard zero specific suggestions from the R/D party that would have any impact whatsoever.
    The only party that has proposed anything that could influence the racial problems we have is the L party. Their proposal to end the war on drugs could possibly have a positive effect on the black community.
    "I support the ban on assault weapons" - Donald Trump

    We are fast approaching the stage of the ultimate inversion: the stage where the government is free to do anything it pleases, while the citizens may act only by permission - Ayn Rand

  5. #5
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Thru Death's Door in Wisconsin
    Posts
    13,153
    Or equally possibly, a negative effect on all communities lacking self-control and restraint.
    I am responsible for my writing, not your understanding of it.

  6. #6
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Thru Death's Door in Wisconsin
    Posts
    13,153

    GOP leaders stamp out anti-Trump push at ... Convention, skip roll call vote

    GOP leaders stamp out anti-Trump push at Republican National Convention, skip roll call vote

    http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/...rump-push-rnc/

    TRUMP the establishment. TRUMP the Grumpy Old Party, it's over. TRUMP 2016
    I am responsible for my writing, not your understanding of it.

  7. #7
    State Researcher
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Utah
    Posts
    4,795
    Quote Originally Posted by twoskinsonemanns View Post
    I agree. It's absurd. How exactly did hillary contribute to us being vulnerable to the attacks we've suffered? What exactly would trump have done that would have stopped these attacks? Let's take the TX or LA cop shoot... what exactly would either candidate do to prevent that?
    I have heard zero specific suggestions from the R/D party that would have any impact whatsoever.
    Full disclosure: I'm not a Trump fan. That said....

    What exactly did Reagan do differently than Carter that brought about the end of the Cold War and the collapse of the Soviet Union rather than perpetual appeasement and learning to live with aggressively expanding communism as a fact of life? Carter was a very smart man, a nuclear engineer by training. He was a very moral, decent man who truly cared about the well being of both the nation and of individuals. He analyzed situations carefully and often came to the conclusion that nothing could be done.

    Reagan was overly simplistic. When asked his plans for the Cold War his answer was almost laughably thoughtless as well as needlessly antagonistic, "Simple. We win, they lose." And yet there was direction there. And given direction to actually win the cold war rather than just not losing, lots of smart, dedicated men got to work. Policy starts with high level goals. Working with PM Lady Thatcher, Pope John Paul, and the Polish Solidarity movement, the US applied tremendous pressure to the USSR while avoiding directly escalating from cold into actual shooting war. Working with the Democratically controlled congress, Reagan struck deals to increase military spending that the Soviets couldn't match.

    What exactly did Reagan do that Carter had failed to do? One very simple thing that was easy to mock: He set a policy and then followed through.

    Now, Reagan wasn't perfect so before the bashing starts, this is a singular example of how setting a high level policy and then following through can yield tremendous effect over modest time periods.

    Just yesterday I was talking to a federal prosecutor who happens to be a Democrat. His one great disappointment with Obama is that Obama has attacked the Law Enforcement community before the facts were in. From his comments after the Boston incident (leading to the beer summit) to his whole, Travon "looks like my son" comments, he has set a tone less becoming a President and Chief LEO and more like some bitter street thug. Rhetoric at the Presidential level matters. Obama has used his position to increase the belief that cops are racist murderers who get off scott free, while also ignoring how the actions of individual black men too often give just cause for police to fear for their lives. This has increased the likelihood of angry or unstable individuals taking violent actions against police officers.

    What might Trump or any non-Prog president do to materially reduce the risk of attacks on cops? He might speak out on personal responsibility. He might speak out on getting an education and job skills rather than using or dealing drugs. He might advocate to congress for changes in welfare programs to encourage getting off the dole and gaining some self-respect.

    I don't know what Trump will do. I don't much trust him.

    But I do trust Hitlery to do the wrong thing almost every single time on almost every single issue.

    Quote Originally Posted by twoskinsonemanns View Post
    The only party that has proposed anything that could influence the racial problems we have is the L party. Their proposal to end the war on drugs could possibly have a positive effect on the black community.
    To be clear, the Libertarians have proposed more than just ending the war on drugs. They propose legalization. That works ok for users and dealers. As seen in Amsterdam, it doesn't work so well for non-users stuck living in areas where users and dealers congregate.

    Ending the war--and use of warlike tactics--on drugs is long overdue.

    Legalization may not be such a good idea for either individuals prone to abuse or for communities where abusers and deals might tend to congregate.

    Charles
    All experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. Thank heaven we do not permit a few to impose anarchy.

    "With Anarchy as an aim and as a means, Communism becomes possible."
    --Marxist.org

    "Communism and Anarchy [are], a necessary complement to one another. "
    --PETER KROPOTKIN, "Anarchism: its philosophy and ideal." 1898.

  8. #8
    Regular Member twoskinsonemanns's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    WV
    Posts
    2,489
    heh. The GOP makes me laugh. I do agree that it is over though.
    "I support the ban on assault weapons" - Donald Trump

    We are fast approaching the stage of the ultimate inversion: the stage where the government is free to do anything it pleases, while the citizens may act only by permission - Ayn Rand

  9. #9
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Thru Death's Door in Wisconsin
    Posts
    13,153
    End the WoD and the observant Mormons will rule the world.
    I am responsible for my writing, not your understanding of it.

  10. #10
    State Researcher
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Utah
    Posts
    4,795
    Quote Originally Posted by Nightmare View Post
    End the WoD and the observant Mormons will rule the world.
    Who would want to rule such a cesspit as this world is, with or without the War on (or abuse of) drugs?
    Last edited by utbagpiper; 07-18-2016 at 05:56 PM.
    All experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. Thank heaven we do not permit a few to impose anarchy.

    "With Anarchy as an aim and as a means, Communism becomes possible."
    --Marxist.org

    "Communism and Anarchy [are], a necessary complement to one another. "
    --PETER KROPOTKIN, "Anarchism: its philosophy and ideal." 1898.

  11. #11
    Regular Member hammer6's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    1,169
    Quote Originally Posted by utbagpiper View Post

    Legalization may not be such a good idea for either individuals prone to abuse or for communities where abusers and deals might tend to congregate.

    Charles

    that would probably make sense...if alcohol were illegal.
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    doubt is a distraction from reality. fear is acknowledging doubt as reality.

    it's time to tap in to a higher reality; the one you were made for.

  12. #12
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Thru Death's Door in Wisconsin
    Posts
    13,153
    IIRC, and I have been divorced from my Mormon sailor's-dream (from Pocatello) wife for 40+ years, observant Mormons are denied alcohol.
    I am responsible for my writing, not your understanding of it.

  13. #13
    Regular Member twoskinsonemanns's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    WV
    Posts
    2,489
    Quote Originally Posted by hammer6 View Post
    that would probably make sense...if alcohol were illegal.
    It really ought to be. With all these "communities lacking self-control" we really shouldn't leave the choice up to each individual commoner.
    The same could perhaps apply to high caliber assault rifles of doom.
    "I support the ban on assault weapons" - Donald Trump

    We are fast approaching the stage of the ultimate inversion: the stage where the government is free to do anything it pleases, while the citizens may act only by permission - Ayn Rand

  14. #14
    Regular Member hammer6's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    1,169
    Quote Originally Posted by twoskinsonemanns View Post
    It really ought to be. With all these "communities lacking self-control" we really shouldn't leave the choice up to each individual commoner.
    The same could perhaps apply to high caliber assault rifles of doom.
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    doubt is a distraction from reality. fear is acknowledging doubt as reality.

    it's time to tap in to a higher reality; the one you were made for.

  15. #15
    Regular Member solus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    here nc
    Posts
    6,870
    Quote Originally Posted by utbagpiper View Post
    snipp...

    Now, Reagan wasn't perfect so before the bashing starts, this is a singular example of how setting a high level policy and then following through can yield tremendous effect over modest time periods.

    Just yesterday I was talking to a federal prosecutor who happens to be a Democrat. His one great disappointment with Obama is that Obama has attacked the Law Enforcement community before the facts were in. From his comments after the Boston incident (leading to the beer summit) to his whole, Travon "looks like my son" comments, he has set a tone less becoming a President and Chief LEO and more like some bitter street thug. Rhetoric at the Presidential level matters. Obama has used his position to increase the belief that cops are racist murderers who get off scott free (sic), while also ignoring how the actions of individual black men too often give just cause for police to fear for their lives. This has increased the likelihood of angry or unstable individuals taking violent actions against police officers.

    snipp

    Ending the war--and use of warlike tactics--on drugs is long overdue.

    Legalization may not be such a good idea for either individuals prone to abuse or for communities where abusers and deals might tend to congregate.

    Charles
    mate, your political analogy is comparing kumquats and Middle Eastern grown figs since only thing separating Carter from Reagan was the one term GA governor & peanut farmer brought his arrogant & egotistical nationally inexperienced GA mafia advisers with him and then only listened to their sage advice regarding legislative matters, domestic issues, and world politics. it wasn't Reagan who was knowledgeable, per se., but rather he listened to experienced and knowledgeable support staff ~ and Nancy!!

    your quote: ...cops are racists murders who get off scot-free...unquote...mate, do ya ya think taking away the nice LE's QI might mitigate their quick use of deadly force against this country's citizens (i'll let you pick the citizen's skin tone) where citizens fear for their lives during interactions with this nation's LE.

    a concern to all of this nation's CC/OC citizens (again, mate you may pick the citizen's skin tone) should be the ability for someone to make a malicious 911 call, with complete impunity, about those who are carrying, being a danger to the community's citizens and the resulting police response. especially in lieu of current police interactions.

    thank goodness NC's CHP is attached to an individual's DL, in turn to the vehicle plate, which the NICE LE runs and discovers the driver probably has a firearm in the vehicle.

    finally, your kind attention Charles, et al., is directed to Portugal, who in 2001 successfully legalized substances... https://www.drugpolicy.org/sites/def...on_Feb2015.pdf

    won't happen in this country because of the HUGE amount of $$$$$ spent on personal, their training, firepower & equipment coupled with the personnel's training of same, ad nauseam.

    ipse
    Last edited by solus; 07-19-2016 at 11:53 AM.
    I'm only human; I do what I can; I'm just a man; I do what I can; Don't put the blame on me; Don't put your blame on me ~ Rag'n'Bone Man.

    Please do not get confused between my personality & my attitude. My personality is who I am ~ my attitude depends on who you are and how you act.

    Remember always, do not judge someone because they sin differently than you do!

    Get your facts first, and then you can distort them as much as you please. Mark Twain

  16. #16
    State Researcher
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Utah
    Posts
    4,795
    Quote Originally Posted by hammer6 View Post
    that would probably make sense...if alcohol were illegal.
    So because booze is legal we have to tolerate legalized meth, heroine, LSD, and whatever else chemists might cook up tomorrow?

    Perhaps we might observe that the damage done to both users and non users because of alcohol abuse and tobacco use is high enough to give pause before rushing out to legalize additional addictive and/or mind altering drugs.

    Twenty-plus years ago I was singing the legalization song based on Amsterdam's then recent "successful" efforts to reduce social costs of drug use by effectively legalizing recreatonal drugs. For the last 10 or 15 years nobody on the pro legalization side wants to talk about the Netherlands. When even SNL makes fun of the problems of used condoms and dirty needles on play grounds in that country, it is clear that such major social experiments take more than a few months to yield their full social impact. Honest observers would look at Amsterdam and realize legalization is not a panecea. The less honest ignore all examples they don't like and move from talking about Amsterdam in the 90s to Portugal today. Tomorrow it will be Ireland while ignoring the social costs of legalized drugs in Portugal. For that matter notice how few will honestly dicuss the problems starting to show up in poor neighborhoods in Colorado as a result of legalized pot.

    Drug abuse is a complex personal and social problem without easy answers it seems.


    Charles
    Last edited by utbagpiper; 07-19-2016 at 04:32 PM.
    All experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. Thank heaven we do not permit a few to impose anarchy.

    "With Anarchy as an aim and as a means, Communism becomes possible."
    --Marxist.org

    "Communism and Anarchy [are], a necessary complement to one another. "
    --PETER KROPOTKIN, "Anarchism: its philosophy and ideal." 1898.

  17. #17
    State Researcher
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Utah
    Posts
    4,795
    Quote Originally Posted by Nightmare View Post
    IIRC, and I have been divorced from my Mormon sailor's-dream (from Pocatello) wife for 40+ years, observant Mormons are denied alcohol.
    To clarify , observant Mormons are not "denied" anything. But like those who observe to live by many religious or moral codes, observant LDS choose to abstain from various conduct. This includes choosing to abstain from consuming alcohol.

    Charles
    All experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. Thank heaven we do not permit a few to impose anarchy.

    "With Anarchy as an aim and as a means, Communism becomes possible."
    --Marxist.org

    "Communism and Anarchy [are], a necessary complement to one another. "
    --PETER KROPOTKIN, "Anarchism: its philosophy and ideal." 1898.

  18. #18
    Regular Member solus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    here nc
    Posts
    6,870
    Quote Originally Posted by utbagpiper View Post
    So because booze is legal we have to tolerate legalized meth, heroine, LSD, and whatever else chemists might cook up tomorrow?

    Perhaps we might observe that the damage done to both users and non users because of alcohol abuse and tobacco use is high enough to give pause before rushing out to legalize additional addictive and/or mind altering drugs.

    Twenty-plus years ago I was singing the legalization song based on Amsterdam's then recent "successful" efforts to reduce social costs of drug use by effectively legalizing recreatonal (sic) drugs. For the last 10 or 15 years nobody on the pro legalization side wants to talk about the Netherlands. When even SNL makes fun of the problems of used condoms and dirty needles on play grounds in that country, it is clear that such major social experiments take more than a few months to yield their full social impact. Honest observers would look at Amsterdam and realize legalization is not a panecea (sic) The less honest ignore all examples they don't like and move from talking about Amsterdam in the 90s to Portugal today. Tomorrow it will be Ireland while ignoring the social costs of legalized drugs in Portugal. For that matter notice how few will honestly dicuss (sic) the problems starting to show up in poor neighborhoods in Colorado as a result of legalized pot.

    Drug abuse is a complex personal and social problem without easy answers it seems.


    Charles
    mate, such a disappointment this post is full of such misinformation since there is no legalization of soft substances in the country but rather Nederland has adopted a policy of non-enforcement!! specifically, quote: Cannabis remains a controlled substance in the Netherlands and both possession and production for personal use are still misdemeanors, punishable by fines. According to current gedoogbeleid the possession of a maximum amount of five grams cannabis for personal use is not prosecuted. The statutes are kept on the books mainly due to international pressure and in adherence with international treaties. unquote https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drug_p...he_Netherlands

    portugal's 15 year legalization of substances has produced significant benefits to their society...you may read them here...https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drug_policy_of_Portugal

    i am sorry tho mate,substance abuse is our society's complex problem not a personal problem as you as stating. our society needs to address investigate causal issues leading to individual's abusing substances so mitigation of the problem w/o concern on what it will cost us or the government's profit centers.

    ipse
    I'm only human; I do what I can; I'm just a man; I do what I can; Don't put the blame on me; Don't put your blame on me ~ Rag'n'Bone Man.

    Please do not get confused between my personality & my attitude. My personality is who I am ~ my attitude depends on who you are and how you act.

    Remember always, do not judge someone because they sin differently than you do!

    Get your facts first, and then you can distort them as much as you please. Mark Twain

  19. #19
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    earth's crust
    Posts
    17,838
    I don't care what you put into your body ... its your body, wreck it if you want to !

  20. #20
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Thru Death's Door in Wisconsin
    Posts
    13,153

    LA Times' Kirchik suggests military coup to remove President TRUMP.

    Kirchick goes on to argue that Trump is a nascent authoritarian, whose illegal military orders ó such as torturing terrorists ó the military would be required to ignore, and then resist by force.

    Curiously, Kirchick cannot fathom Hillary Clinton doing anything illegal with the military (despite her mis-handling of classified national security information, or her evident pride in the Libya war, which Congress never approved):

    http://www.breitbart.com/california/...esident-trump/

    If Trump wins, a coup isn't impossible here in the U.S.

    http://www.latimes.com/opinion/op-ed...nap-story.html
    I am responsible for my writing, not your understanding of it.

  21. #21
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    earth's crust
    Posts
    17,838

    Military coup against Trump ! So are the wishes of the LA Times

    http://www.breitbart.com/california/...esident-trump/

    Really? The guy done nothing at all...zip, nil, niff in any official capacity.

    Wackos are the LA Times.

  22. #22
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Bothell
    Posts
    586
    Quote Originally Posted by davidmcbeth View Post
    http://www.breitbart.com/california/...esident-trump/

    Really? The guy done nothing at all...zip, nil, niff in any official capacity.

    Wackos are the LA Times.
    How would we do that, if they're taking our guns?

  23. #23
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2016
    Location
    Lynchburg
    Posts
    590
    He wants the military to do it when he gives them orders they cannot legally follow.

    Nemo

  24. #24
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Thru Death's Door in Wisconsin
    Posts
    13,153
    "Legally"? Provide a proper citation please.
    I am responsible for my writing, not your understanding of it.

  25. #25
    Campaign Veteran since9's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Colorado Springs, Colorado, USA
    Posts
    6,787
    Quote Originally Posted by Va_Nemo View Post
    He wants the military to do it when he gives them orders they cannot legally follow.

    Nemo
    Quote Originally Posted by Nightmare View Post
    "Legally"? Provide a proper citation please.
    Legal," as in commensurate with the military oaths:

    Enlistment:

    "I, [name], do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. So help me God."

    Officer:

    "I, [name], do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. So help me God."

    "The Oath of enlistment is something that every service member must promise and adhere to for his/her entire military career. From the Oath, you can see that you will be defending the Constitution - not a person. Discipline and accepting orders is sworn to. Finally, you vow to face the UCMJ (Uniform Code of Military Justice) should any disputes arise." (Source)

    Because our oaths bind us to "the supreme Law of the Land," our U.S. Constitution, and not to any individual, even enlisted members are only bound to follow the orders of the President and officers appointed above them "according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice."

    These checks and balances against tyranny exist throughout the Armed Forces. They prevent any officer, or civilian in command, including the President, from controlling the military by issuing unlawful orders. I sincerely hope and pray all members of our Armed Forces can spot the difference between a lawful order and an unlawful one in a heartbeat.

    The SAME oath of office is given to all law enforcement officers and civilian officers (mayors, councilmembers, Congressmen, etc.), for precisely the same reason: To bind loyalty to our U.S. Constitution (the supreme Law of the Land) and thereby thwart tyranny at all levels.

    Thus, when Nemo says, "He wants the military to do it when he gives them orders they cannot legally follow," he means the military is bound by oath to our "supreme Law of the Land" i.e. our Constitution, and we therefore cannot legally follow orders -- even from the President -- which do not conform to the Constitution, the UCMJ, and the full body of federal law.

    Case scenario: If I were back on active duty, and the President ordered me to bomb a U.S. city, I would be bound by oath and the UCMJ to refuse, as his order would be unlawful.

    Understand now?
    The First protects the Second, and the Second protects the First. Together, they protect the rest of our Bill of Rights and our United States Constitution, and help We the People protect ourselves in the spirit of our Declaration of Independence.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

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