Originally Posted by Marx & Lennon

I don't see the 2nd as a right to self defense, personally. We have that right already without involving guns at all. Citing it as a justification for wide-spread ownership of guns is a bit specious. So far, we've avoided mass gun-toting during bad times, but the next time the economy falls apart or strife rises from <pick any source you like>, we'll see if 300 million guns are a good idea. If it goes bad, it will go very bad.

Have you ever read the 2nd Amendment objectively with your mind open?

Originally Posted by Classic-X'er

The African Americans and Hispanic Americans probably won't ever agree.

They can agree that White Power is a shared menace.

Originally Posted by MordecaiK

For middle class whites like most of us maybe, who have police who come promptly and are professional and polite maybe, but not for African Americans and increasingly not for poor whites either.

Since having guns is of no use or advantage to anyone, it is not an advantage for blacks and poor whites to have guns. What needs to be done is have police who come promptly and are professional and polite regardless of neighborhood, race or class. If we can just have the government we deserve and pay for, then there's no need to defend against it. It helps to hire police who are from the neighborhoods and peoples they patrol.

When and where police have a habit of showing up after a crime has been committed or show up with such overwhelming force that the person who called the police can be in as much risk as the perp (I realise that this is not common, but this is the perception and it does sometimes happen, and a segment of the population can't get out of trouble with the law, often for offences they did NOT commit), then people need weapons with which to defend themselves. If you would understand some of the dilemmas that African-Americans face these days, read "On the Run: Fugitive Life in an American City" by Alice Goffman. The cellphone videos have given us a window on this reality.

People think they need guns, so they can't be outlawed or confiscated. I understand that. But that doesn't mean the people are right. Guns just kill people; that's all they do. Noone needs one. There are alternative means of self-defense. The Black Panthers are going to have a special on PBS. They thought they needed guns to protect themselves from the police. Black Lives Matter hasn't gone down that road yet, which is good, and they probably know what happened to the Panthers because of their guns. No, shootouts are not the answer to police or crime in black and poor neighborhoods. It certainly turns the police and the public against the poor.

Originally Posted by Marx & Lennon

H-m-m-m. Statistically, those teachers you hate are more likely to be Republicans than Democrats, conservatives than liberals, and disaffected than any of them. Most coke addicts don't give a rat's ass about anyone or anything other than themselves. The same applies to narcissists.

I didn't hate them. I pretty much ignored them. They were a couple of young progressive (upper middle class) minded, JFK inspired Democrats doing their part for society. She was an emotional twit and he was a doofus.

Originally Posted by pbrower2a

They can agree that White Power is a shared menace.

White Power ain't all that big.

Originally Posted by pbrower2a78

Stop same sex marriage!

Defend/Don't mess with the traditional definition of marriage.

Originally Posted by pbrower2a78

Guns for anyone who wants them!

Legal guns should be available to anyone who wants them.

Originally Posted by pbrower2a78

Creationism forever!

Religious freedom is a Constitutional right.

Originally Posted by pbrower2a78

School prayer!

If done respectfully or in private, what's the problem?

Originally Posted by pbrower2a78

Tax cuts increase tax revenues!

They do!

Originally Posted by pbrower2a78

Never recognize Cuba!

Don't suck up to Castro

Originally Posted by pbrower2a78

Never recognize Iran!

We recognize them and we don't trust them.

Originally Posted by pbrower2a78

Rheingold is my beer, the Dry Beer!

Miller High life, the Champagne of Beer!

Originally Posted by Classic-X'er

Defend/Don't mess with the traditional definition of marriage.

Screw it!

Legal guns should be available to anyone who wants them.

Only if they're legal, according to the Democrats and Hillary Clinton!

Religious freedom is a Constitutional right.

People have the right to be stupid.

If done respectfully or in private, what's the problem?

No problem.

They do!

Supply side is voodoo

Don't suck up to Castro

Deal with him. He's there; deal with it!

We recognize them and we don't trust them.

We don't recognize them, and we don't trust them. The Ayatollah is 1000 times better than Assad, whom he props up.

Miller High life, the Champagne of Beer!

To hell with beer. Ickypoo!

Friday: lots of NH polls out today:

Trump Rubio Cruz Kasich Bush
29.......12.......12.......9.......9
29.......19.........7.....13.....10
30.......17.......15.....10.......9
34.......15.......14.......8.......8
36.......15.......12.....14.......8
average NH:
31.6....15.6....12.....10.8....8.8

National: Quinnipiac
31.......19.......22.......3.......3 (Carson 6)

Sanders Clinton
54..........39
50..........41
55..........40
54..........38
average
53.25 39.5

National: Quinnipiac
42..........44


Rubio still has a way to go, but subtract about 5 from Trump, and Rubio may gain a few. Trump wins.
Clinton already gaining ground on Sanders from where she was a few days ago in some polls.
Sanders always does well on Quinnipiac polls. Now he's almost caught up with Clinton, if this is right.

Originally Posted by Classic-X'er

Have you ever read the 2nd Amendment objectively with your mind open?

As far as I know he is human. Objective open minded thought might be an unreasonable expectation.

Average of 2 NH polls today:

Trump 34.5
Rubio 15
Cruz 11
Kasich 13.5
Bush 9

Sanders 54
Clinton 41

Originally Posted by Classic-X'er

Defend/Don't mess with the traditional definition of marriage.

Americans are no longer opposed to same-sex marriage. In view of all the nasty and pointless stuff done to gays and lesbians, I am willing to put them in the marital mainstream. What's the harm? Pornography does more harm to 'traditional marriage' than do two gays or two lesbians marrying.

Legal guns should be available to anyone who wants them.

Even criminals, lunatics, idiots, and people with protective orders for the defense of their spouses or ex-spouses?

Religious freedom is a Constitutional right.

So is stupidity. Creationism is intellectual junk that will never do anyone any good. It is telling that the Roman Catholic Church teaches evolution -- because it doesn't want youth to have another cause to reject Roman Catholicism.

If done respectfully or in private, what's the problem?

The problem comes when public officials or school leaders push a particular religious teaching in a prayer contrary to the values of members of the class in a public (and hence secular) school.

If some student wishes to say grace or pray for divine guidance before a spelling test -- fine. That is unorganized and private. If you are a devout Jew you have no desire to participate in a prayer that ends "In Jesus' Name we pray".

(to yours truly, who said with mockery,

Tax cuts increase tax revenues!

They do!

Only if taxes are preposterously high. There is some point at which increased taxes result in no more revenue because they cramp efforts. Question: where is the empirical evidence to suggest where the 'optimum' for tax collection is. Of course, nobody says that maximization of tax revenues is a desirable end.

Don't suck up to Castro.

We recognize them and we don't trust them.

And why does America need to carry a grudge against the Cuban government, which is not a genocidal or terrorist regime, when that grudge effectively hurts the Cuban people?

We may need Iran to use its military muscle against the Infernal State.

Miller High life, the Champagne of Beer!

"Rheingold is my beer -- the Dry Beer!" is a reference to a numbing, obnoxious advertising jingle. I forget who used that as an example. Heinlein? Clarke? Asimov?

Bill Maher has a good handle on Republicans today. They tell ZOMBIE LIES

Lies that never die. Unlike Democrats, when Republicans get caught in a lie, they don't have to stop saying it. The lie doesn't stay dead!
https://youtu.be/jc5Kxy0Ts8g?t=17m30s

Death panels in Obamacare?
Obamacare empowers insurance companies. It's a government takeover?
It pays for illegals?
Fracking doesn't cause earthquakes!
Voter fraud?
Cut taxes for the rich and it trickles down!
Dick Cheney didn't even bother in his return from the dead to update the lies he told about Iraq the first time.
Noone will sign up for Obamacare!
Climate change being a hoax is good enough for Hannity!

Originally Posted by Classic-X'er

White Power ain't all that big.

Ask Michael Donald about that. Well, don't, because some KKK thugs beat him to death and strung him up.

Originally Posted by pbrower2a

Ask Michael Donald about that. Well, don't, because some KKK thugs beat him to death and strung him up.

One incident isn't all the big of an issue.

Originally Posted by Eric the Green

Bill Maher has a good handle on Republicans today. They tell ZOMBIE LIES

Lies that never die. Unlike Democrats, when Republicans get caught in a lie, they don't have to stop saying it. The lie doesn't stay dead!
https://youtu.be/jc5Kxy0Ts8g?t=17m30s

Death panels in Obamacare?
Obamacare empowers insurance companies. It's a government takeover?
It pays for illegals?
Fracking doesn't cause earthquakes!
Voter fraud?
Cut taxes for the rich and it trickles down!
Dick Cheney didn't even bother in his return from the dead to update the lies he told about Iraq the first time.
Noone will sign up for Obamacare!
Climate change being a hoax is good enough for Hannity!

The death panels were brought up by conservatives, addressed politically and removed from Obamacare. Obamacare subsidizes insurance company losses and dictates coverage's. Fracking might cause an earthquake. Voter fraud is hard to prove and disprove, which leaves voters wondering. I recall, there was a political action group associated with Obama's election campaign that was convicted of voter fraud following his election.

Originally Posted by Classic-X'er

One incident isn't all the big of an issue.

It was big enough to get one of the perpetrators a seat in Ol' Sparky.

Originally Posted by Classic-X'er

The death panels were brought up by conservatives, addressed politically and removed from Obamacare. Obamacare subsidizes insurance company losses and dictates coverage's. Fracking might cause an earthquake. Voter fraud is hard to prove and disprove, which leaves voters wondering. I recall, there was a political action group associated with Obama's election campaign that was convicted of voter fraud following his election.

Tell us Xer, exactly what was the 'death panel' provision in the ACA?

Let's see if you are as 'smart' as Sarah Palin.

Next to Kasich, Rubio has been my biggest concern. I was hoping Trump/Cruz would lock him into repeated third place finishes and eventually people would get tired of him. I was also hoping the three govs (Kasich, Christie, Bush) would nip away at Rubio and help keep him no higher than 3rd.

While the result of tonight's debate has a good chance to keep Rubio in third, I no longer care about that outcome. I'm more than happy to have the "boy in the bubble" be the GOP nominee. The guy is a empty suit.

Amazing how post-tonight debate, the Establishment is flipping to Kasich.

pssss, Establishment, Kaisch expanded Obama's Medicaid = DOA

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/...b01d80b246965e

According to Marco Rubio, practically everything that Barack Obama has done has been intended to wreck America -- to make America like other countries.

Empty suit, indeed.

Originally Posted by playwrite

Tell us Xer, exactly what was the 'death panel' provision in the ACA?

Let's see if you are as 'smart' as Sarah Palin.

I don't know, the provision that she took issue with was removed from the bill. BTW, the bulk of the 'smart' Democrats who passed it didn't have a clue what was in it.

Originally Posted by Classic-X'er

I don't know, the provision that she took issue with was removed from the bill.

As neutral as you can get.

Originally Posted by wikipedia

"Death panel" is a discredited political term that originated during the 2009 debate about federal health care legislation to cover the uninsured in the United States. Sarah Palin, former Republican Governor of Alaska, coined the term when she charged that proposed legislation would create a "death panel" of bureaucrats who would decide whether Americans—such as her elderly parents or children with Down syndrome—were "worthy of medical care". Palin's claim however, was widely debunked and has been referred to as the "death panel myth", as nothing in any proposed legislation would have led to individuals being judged to see if they were worthy of health care.

Palin's spokesperson pointed to Section 1233 of bill HR 3200 which would have paid physicians for providing voluntary counseling to Medicare patients about living wills, advance directives, and end-of-life care options. Palin's claim was reported as false and criticized by the press, fact-checkers, academics, physicians, Democrats, and some Republicans. Other prominent Republicans such as Newt Gingrich and conservative talk radio hosts Glenn Beck, Rush Limbaugh and Michelle Malkin backed Palin's statement. One poll showed that after it spread, about 85% of respondents were familiar with the charge and of those who were familiar with it, about 30% thought it was true. Due to public concern, the provision to pay physicians for providing voluntary counseling was removed from the Senate bill and was not included in the law that was enacted, the 2010 Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. In a 2011 statement, the American Society of Clinical Oncology bemoaned the politicization of the issue and said that the proposal should be revisited."Death panel" is a discredited political term that originated during the 2009 debate about federal health care legislation to cover the uninsured in the United States. Sarah Palin, former Republican Governor of Alaska, coined the term when she charged that proposed legislation would create a "death panel" of bureaucrats who would decide whether Americans—such as her elderly parents or children with Down syndrome—were "worthy of medical care". Palin's claim however, was widely debunked and has been referred to as the "death panel myth", as nothing in any proposed legislation would have led to individuals being judged to see if they were worthy of health care.

Palin's spokesperson pointed to Section 1233 of bill HR 3200 which would have paid physicians for providing voluntary counseling to Medicare patients about living wills, advance directives, and end-of-life care options. Palin's claim was reported as false and criticized by the press, fact-checkers, academics, physicians, Democrats, and some Republicans. Other prominent Republicans such as Newt Gingrich and conservative talk radio hosts Glenn Beck, Rush Limbaugh and Michelle Malkin backed Palin's statement. One poll showed that after it spread, about 85% of respondents were familiar with the charge and of those who were familiar with it, about 30% thought it was true. Due to public concern, the provision to pay physicians for providing voluntary counseling was removed from the Senate bill and was not included in the law that was enacted, the 2010 Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. In a 2011 statement, the American Society of Clinical Oncology bemoaned the politicization of the issue and said that the proposal should be revisited.

For 2009, "death panel" was named as PolitiFact's "Lie of the Year", one of FactCheck's "whoppers", and the most outrageous new term by the American Dialect Society.

The word "Orwellian" fits that pair of words ("death panel") turned into a lie in its own right.

It is looking like the Democratic Party establishment has resorted to cheating to help Hillary.

Average of 5 Sunday New Hampshire polls:
Trump 32.2
Rubio 15
Cruz 12.8
Kasich 12.4
Bush 9.8

Sanders 54.2
Clinton 40.6

We shouldn't need a whole new thread to note that there are a fair number of down ticket progressive Democratic candidates who are running against the Democratic Establishment for House and Senate seats (rather like a liberal-progressive-socialist counterpart to the 2010 Tea Party) and that Bernie, if he should win, might have plenty of company and that even if he loses, a new breed of Democrats may well not cooperate at all with a Republican president.
See https://newrepublic.com/article/1290...nning-congress