RunRyder RC
WATCH
 3 pages [ <<    <     1     ( 2 )     3     NEXT    >> ] 1594 views POST REPLY
HomeOff Topics News & Politics › Americans are waking up! Time to turn up the heat on Obama
05-29-2013 10:12 PM  5 years agoPost 21
Phaedrus

rrKey Veteran

S. Orange County, California

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

Actually what I was talking about was the OP making a point that it was significant that 55% of the people in a poll thought Obama was covering something up. If 55% is significant and supports the argument that he was indeed covering something up then it must follow that several polls showing that in excess of 80% of people support universal background checks is at least as meaningful, if not more so.

But the response seems to be that Obama is certainly lying and look, 55% of the people in a poll agree. But the 80% plus in the background check polls are all misinformed or stupid or it does not matter since we do not live in a pure democracy. The hypocrisy just drips off the responses.

AMA Leader Member
Go FASST, or Go Home!!
Team Futaba

PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR  Quote
05-29-2013 10:42 PM  5 years agoPost 22
SteveH

rrProfessor

Texas

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

Tried once to explain to you the difference in two totally different types of surveys and subject matter, but you just insist on being a whiny, bitchy little liberal. Seems there is no reasoning or explaining to you people.

The government cannot give you anything without first taking it from someone else.

PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR  Quote
05-29-2013 10:49 PM  5 years agoPost 23
Phaedrus

rrKey Veteran

S. Orange County, California

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

Tried once to explain to you the difference in two totally different types of surveys and subject matter, but you just insist on being a whiny, bitchy little liberal. Seems there is no reasoning or explaining to you people.
Yes, I got your "explanation". I just think it is nonsense. For your poll everyone is well informed and fully cognizant of all parts of the subject matter.

For the polls you do not like the respondents are all misinformed idiots.

Sorry, but that is utter nonsense "logic".

"Whiny, bitchy little liberal"? I like it, has a nice ring to it. Very snappy comeback as well. You Sir, are truly an intellect to be reckoned with!!

AMA Leader Member
Go FASST, or Go Home!!
Team Futaba

PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR  Quote
05-29-2013 10:52 PM  5 years agoPost 24
dilberteinstein

rrNovice

texas - USA

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

zurgena
Man Phallus is a dousche.People want answers and rather than stand up and demand answers with the rest of us,he plays a game of deception.
Ahhh...that is the liberal way...misdirection, deception, confusion, change the subject.

Don't contribute, don't solve, just muck up the thread...typical.

90% of life is "showing up"

PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR  Quote
05-29-2013 11:45 PM  5 years agoPost 25
drdot

rrElite Veteran

So. California, Orange County.

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

fwiw..

...Slick....Phallus...?

Man...you can't make this stuff up....

BC

PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR  Quote
05-30-2013 12:02 AM  5 years agoPost 26
spaceman spiff

rrKey Veteran

Tucson

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

Hivoltage
We are talking about guns...not 10 years ago.
We were talking about waking up....

98% of americans support the latest Fluffy Bunny Bill, but no one knows what it is or how it will be used by the next micro king.

PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR  Quote
05-30-2013 12:07 AM  5 years agoPost 27
drdot

rrElite Veteran

So. California, Orange County.

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

fwiw...

"the next micro king.".....Is Walkera coming out with a new heli..!!..?

BC

PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR  Quote
05-30-2013 12:12 AM  5 years agoPost 28
spaceman spiff

rrKey Veteran

Tucson

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

and some folks will try to elect it.

PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR  Quote
05-30-2013 12:58 AM  5 years agoPost 29
fla heli boy

rrKey Veteran

cape coral, florida

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

But the 80% plus in the background check polls are all misinformed or stupid or it does not matter since we do not live in a pure democracy. The hypocrisy just drips off the responses.
Totally miss the point....again. Just because a majority of people support trampling on the 2nd, doesn't mean it should be done. Constitutional law is the cornerstone of our Republic.
If you read any part of the bill at all, you'd see that it's based on building the database to get info on all guns and their owners. That's step one in confiscation.
Just because Obama says he won't means squat. He's backtracked on so many of his "promises" that they are completely worthless. Maybe one day you'll open your eyes and realize that everything he does is contrary to what he says he's going to do.

PS - more importantly, would you really rather live in a pure democracy?? (this oughta be good... )

PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR  Quote
05-30-2013 01:30 AM  5 years agoPost 30
Phaedrus

rrKey Veteran

S. Orange County, California

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

Can any of you Constitutional Scholars elucidate why the current background checks are legal and have not been determined to violate the Second Amendment?

I'd like actual case law, not something posted on Jimmy Bob's I Hate the Gubbermint website.

AMA Leader Member
Go FASST, or Go Home!!
Team Futaba

PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR  Quote
05-30-2013 01:38 AM  5 years agoPost 31
Phaedrus

rrKey Veteran

S. Orange County, California

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

But once again we have strayed from my original point. Why is it acceptable to use one poll if it supports your position, especially if only by a slim margin, while dismissing numerous other polls that do not support your position, especially when the preponderance of those polls are overwhelmingly against your position?

How is that NOT hypocritical thinking??

AMA Leader Member
Go FASST, or Go Home!!
Team Futaba

PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR  Quote
05-30-2013 02:30 AM  5 years agoPost 32
spaceman spiff

rrKey Veteran

Tucson

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

Let's not forget this poll...
Perhaps helping explain Democrats' problems, an AP-GfK poll this month showed that 49 percent of Americans support stricter gun laws. That was down from 58 percent who said so in January

Back ground checks potentially are an infringement, especially if the process is misused. Considering the recent IRS misbehavior and the witch hunt gun ban culture that showed itself recently, I am not inclined to give any little bit of authority to those clowns.

We should be taking authority away from them, not give them more.

PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR  Quote
05-30-2013 02:31 AM  5 years agoPost 33
Dennis (RIP)

rrApprentice

Oregon

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

How is that NOT hypocritical thinking??
Depends on which side you are on.

PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR  Quote
05-30-2013 02:45 AM  5 years agoPost 34
SteveH

rrProfessor

Texas

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

How is that NOT hypocritical thinking??
I've told you twice already. Go back and read it again sloooowly and just maybe you can grasp it if you try a little harder.

The government cannot give you anything without first taking it from someone else.

PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR  Quote
05-30-2013 03:48 AM  5 years agoPost 35
InvertedDude

rrVeteran

USA

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

Phaedrus
Out of all people, you disappoint me with your higher intelligence. You and I know damn well polls can be manipulated to fix an agenda.

Out of everyone, you should be well aware of the deceptions in the Obama Administration and ongoing scandals. Remember, the Government doesn't give a rat ass about you or your personal freedoms. The Government is only concerned about consolidating more power and finding legal and illegal loop holes around the Constitution. Hell, they have even gone as far as calling the Constitution out dated.

I do not know how else to put it in plain words for you. It should be raising alarm bells in your dome on how things have progressed worse than better.

1)IRS targeting
2)HOLDER abusing his power
3)Liberal Democrats protecting their fake emperor
4)Obama's handling of armed forces
(If we were in power and started to target Liberals and Democrats, how would you react?) This is not the American way. Once again, Obama doesn't give a rat ass and wants to destroy the fabric of our country. You are just too ignorant to see that!

Do you honestly advocate that Uncle Sam is being clean and honest with the citizenry?

Criminals DO NOT obey laws and making laws more restrictive for the law abiding citizen is beyond foolish and clearly exposes the Government's true agenda.

We should be taking power away from Uncle Sam and telling him to shut the *uck up! Government is made to serve the citizens not the other way around!

You Liberals and Communists have won most of the education and the brain washing of our youth to think more like Liberals. You people are messing up a beautiful country. As simplified or ignorant as it may sound, I often wonder, do Liberals want to live in a Communist State? I have studied Liberalism and it is very closely contracts to Communist idealism.

I am appalled and ashamed when I ask a simple question to people on how to recite the Constitution. Most people just stare at me with blank eyes as they speak these words, "Do we have a Constitution?"

I do not expect any of these words to make sense to you.

USA is a republic not a democracy!

PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR  Quote
05-30-2013 04:16 AM  5 years agoPost 36
flybarless

rrKey Veteran

Torrington, CT

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

When they have asked every American the same question, I might believe a poll.
I have never been polled, ever.

Also the latest report on immigration says 23% percent of the country can not speak english, so how did the other 13% answer the poll questions?

Just remember -- if the world didn't suck, we would fall off.

PM  EMAIL  Attn:RR  Quote
05-30-2013 05:22 AM  5 years agoPost 37
GREYEAGLE

rrElite Veteran

Flat Land's

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

Padreaus : You absolutley are Correct : In What happened - Your Statement
why the current background checks are legal and have not been determined to violate the Second Amendment?
It is was Just One of the Subtle Ploy's and tactic's to Erode our Civil Liberties - Eating the Elephant one bite at a time - that was completed ----Loss of LIBERTY !!!

Search and Confiscation is accepted along with many other thing's Citizens do not recognize : The IRS scandal part just exploded on them !!! Along with the AP wire tapping. Personal data mining ect.

Their Is very Little Written Case law - Maybe if they go back to the earliest day's of the Nation - But they just got SHOT.

The directed attacks on Civil Liberties are everywhere - by the bushel full. Got to look for them - many just accept them - like social medical care and immigration
. They do not recognize what is lost

With that being said : The closest parallel that is happening with the National OBAMA Agenda - To The Society - is a Close template of the Fabian Revolution. Form of Marxism

To Over Come a society without warfare : Their is very much more occurring though - It is international :

Sorry for the long read : It's a Cut and Paste:

It should or may help, many recognize the PLOY of what is occurring to the United States's.

Please I encourage it be read slowly with attention

Fabian Society

v Primary Sources v

In October 1883 Edith Nesbit and Hubert Bland decided to form a socialist debating group with their Quaker friend Edward Pease. They were also joined by Havelock Ellis and Frank Podmore and in January 1884 they decided to call themselves the Fabian Society. Podmore suggested that the group should be named after the Roman General, Quintus Fabius Maximus, who advocated the weakening the opposition by harassing operations rather than becoming involved in pitched battles.

Hubert Bland chaired the first meeting and was elected treasurer. By March 1884 the group had twenty members. In April 1884 Edith Nesbit wrote to her friend, Ada Breakell: "I should like to try and tell you a little about the Fabian Society - it's aim is to improve the social system - or rather to spread its news as to the possible improvements of the social system. There are about thirty members - some of whom are working men. We meet once a fortnight - and then someone reads a paper and we all talk about it. We are now going to issue a pamphlet. I am on the Pamphlet Committee. Now can you fancy me on a committee? I really surprise myself sometimes."

George Bernard Shaw joined the Fabian Society in August 1884. Nesbit wrote: "The Fabian Society is getting rather large now and includes some very nice people, of whom Mr. Stapelton is the nicest and a certain George Bernard Shaw the most interesting. G.B.S. has a fund of dry Irish humour that is simply irresistible. He is a clever writer and speaker - is the grossest flatterer I ever met, is horribly untrustworthy as he repeats everything he hears, and does not always stick to the truth, and is very plain like a long corpse with dead white face - sandy sleek hair, and a loathsome small straggly beard, and yet is one of the most fascinating men I ever met."

Over the next couple of years the group increased in size and included socialists such as Sydney Olivier, William Clarke, Eleanor Marx, Edith Lees, Annie Besant, Graham Wallas, J. A. Hobson, Sidney Webb, Beatrice Webb, Charles Trevelyan, J. R. Clynes, Harry Snell, Clementina Black, Edward Carpenter, Clement Attlee, Ramsay MacDonald, Emmeline Pankhurst,Walter Crane, Arnold Bennett, Sylvester Williams, H. G. Wells, Hugh Dalton, C. E. M. Joad, Rupert Brooke, Clifford Allen and Amber Reeves.

Early talks at the Fabian Society included: How Can We Nationalise Accumulated Wealth by Annie Besant, Private Property by Edward Carpenter, The Economics of a Postivist Community by Sidney Webb and Personal Duty under the Present System by Graham Wallas.

In 1886 Frank Podmore and Sidney Webb carried out an investigation into unemployment. In the Fabian Society pamphlet, The Government Organisation of Unemployed Labour they advocated the funding of rural land armies but declined to endorse large-scale public employment as they feared it would encourage inefficiency.

By 1886 the Fabians had sixty-seven members and an income of £35 19s. The official headquarters of the organisation was 14 Dean's Yard, Westminster, the home of Frank Podmore. The Fabian Society journal, Today, was edited by Edith Nesbit and Hubert Bland.

The Fabians believed that capitalism had created an unjust and inefficient society. They agreed that the ultimate aim of the group should be to reconstruct "society in accordance with the highest moral possibilities". The Fabians rejected the revolutionary socialism of H. M. Hyndman and the Social Democratic Federation and were concerned with helping society to move to a socialist society "as painless and effective as possible".

The Fabians adopted the tactic of trying to convince people by "rational factual socialist argument", rather than the "emotional rhetoric and street brawls" of the Social Democratic Federation. The Fabian group was a "fact-finding and fact-dispensing body" and they produced a series of pamphlets on a wide variety of different social issues.

In 1889 the Fabian Group decided to publish a book that would provide a comprehensive account of the organisations's beliefs. Fabian Essays in Socialism included chapters written by George Bernard Shaw, Sydney Webb, Annie Besant, Sydney Olivier, Graham Wallas, William Clarke and Hubert Bland. Edited by Shaw, the book sold 27,000 copies in two years.

William Morris, a former member of the Social Democratic Federation, and founder of the Socialist League, strongly criticised the Fabian Essays in the journal Commonweal. Morris disagreed with what he called "the fantastic and unreal tactic" of permeation which "could not be carried out in practice, and which, if it could be, would still leave us in a position from which we should have to begin our attack on capitalism over again".

The success of Fabian Essays in Socialism (1889) convinced the Fabian Society that they needed a full-time employee. In 1890 Edward Pease was appointed as Secretary of the Society. His duties included keeping the minutes at meetings, dealing with the correspondence, arranging lecture schedules, managing the Fabian Information Bureau, circulating book-boxes and editing and contributing to the Fabian News.

In 1890 Henry Hutchinson, a wealthy solicitor from Derby, decided to give the Fabian Society £200 a year to spend on public lectures. Some of this was used to pay Fabian members such as Harry Snell, Ramsay MacDonald, Graham Wallas, Catherine Glasier and Bruce Glasier to travel around the country giving lecturers on subjects such as 'Socialism', 'Trade Unionism', 'Co-operation' and 'Economic History'.

Hutchinson died four years later leaving the Fabian Society £10,000. Hutchinson left instructions that the money should be used for "propaganda and socialism". Hutchinson selected his daughter as well as Edward Pease, Sidney Webb, William Clarke and W. S. De Mattos as trustees of the fund, and together they decided the money should be used to develop a new university in London. The London School of Economics (LSE) was founded in 1895. As Sidney Webb pointed out, the intention of the institution was to "teach political economy on more modern and more socialist lines than those on which it had been taught hitherto, and to serve at the same time as a school of higher commercial education".

The Webbs first approached Graham Wallas, now one of the most prominent members of the Fabians, to become the Director of the LSE. Wallas agreed to lecture there but declined the offer as director, and W. A. S. Hewins, a young economist at Pembroke College, Oxford, was appointed instead. With the support of the London County Council (LCC) the LSE flourished as a centre of learning.

On 27th February 1900, Edward Pease represented the Fabian Society at the meeting of socialist and trade union groups at the Memorial Hall in Farringdon Street, London. After a debate the 129 delegates decided to pass Hardie's motion to establish "a distinct Labour group in Parliament, who shall have their own whips, and agree upon their policy, which must embrace a readiness to cooperate with any party which for the time being may be engaged in promoting legislation in the direct interests of labour."

To make this possible the Conference established a Labour Representation Committee (LRC). This committee included two members from the Independent Labour Party, two from the Social Democratic Federation, one member of the Fabian Society, and seven trade unionists. Some members of the Fabian Society had doubts about this and Edward Pease personally paid the affiliation dues.

In 1912 Beatrice Webb established he Fabian Research Department. Its first secretary was Robin Page Arnot. He was later replaced by William Mellor. As Paul Thompson pointed out in his book, Socialist, Liberals and Labour (1967): "Its secretary was William Mellor and another leading member G. D. H. Cole, both young Oxford Fabians and both Guild Socialists. Together in April 1913 and March 1914 they led two attempts to disaffiliate the Fabian Society from the Labour Party. They failed, but when Cole resigned in 1915 he was able to take the Research Department with him, thus depriving the Fabian Society of its most talented younger members and resulting in its subsequent stagnation in the 1920s."

greyeagle

PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR  Quote
05-30-2013 05:24 AM  5 years agoPost 38
drdot

rrElite Veteran

So. California, Orange County.

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

fwiw..
Unbiased polls...?
All I need to do is determine what org funded the poll....Neither Left nor Right are without sin in the rigging arena.....SCOTUS is a group of old folk wearing ill fitting black dresses.....Espousing political opinions of their chosen ideology.
....You mean those are laws?...No, only opinions..Carrying the weight and worth of yours or mine.......

BC

PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR  Quote
05-30-2013 07:36 AM  5 years agoPost 39
Phaedrus

rrKey Veteran

S. Orange County, California

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

You and I know damn well polls can be manipulated to fix an agenda.
This is more or less the issue at hand. You folks do not questions polls that support your views. Yet, when numerous polls support the opposite of your views then suddenly polls are all biased against you. You cannot have it both ways.

It's been fun watching Gallup try to explain why they had Romney winning when nobody else did. The best part was the Faux Gnus viewers who were flabbergasted that Romney lost. How could Gallup and Faux steer them wrong. Rove was the poster child for this. He was still saying Romney won even as Romney was calling Obama to concede!!

AMA Leader Member
Go FASST, or Go Home!!
Team Futaba

PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR  Quote
05-30-2013 07:39 AM  5 years agoPost 40
Phaedrus

rrKey Veteran

S. Orange County, California

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

When they have asked every American the same question, I might believe a poll.
I have never been polled, ever.
Also the latest report on immigration says 23% percent of the country can not speak english, so how did the other 13% answer the poll questions?
Imagine my shock that the mathematics behind limited sample polling seems to be a mystery to you.

I suppose using your logic there is no such thing as lightening, because, you know, you've never been hit by it.

AMA Leader Member
Go FASST, or Go Home!!
Team Futaba

PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR  Quote
WATCH
 3 pages [ <<    <     1     ( 2 )     3     NEXT    >> ] 1594 views POST REPLY
HomeOff Topics News & Politics › Americans are waking up! Time to turn up the heat on Obama
 Print TOPIC  Make Suggestion 

 6  Topic Subscribe

Saturday, July 21 - 8:48 pm - Copyright © 2000-2018 RunRyder   EMAILEnable Cookies

Login Here
 New Subscriptions 
 Buddies Online