Getbig Bodybuilding, Figure and Fitness Forums
Getbig Main Boards => Politics and Political Issues Board => Topic started by: Dos Equis on March 28, 2018, 11:29:39 AM
-
More confirmation that those kids are being manipulated.
Despite media narrative, study says teenagers made up just 10 percent of March for Our Lives crowd
Alex Pappas By Alex Pappas | Fox News
A university professor studying large-scale, Trump-era protests in Washington says the media is giving the wrong impression about who made up the crowd during last weekend’s anti-gun March for Our Lives demonstration.
“My research tells a different story about who participated in the March for Our Lives — and it is more complicated and less well-packaged for prime time,” University of Maryland sociology professor Dana R. Fisher wrote in a Wednesday story for the Washington Post.
Fisher’s study indicates that -- while news coverage focused on the teenagers marching for gun control in the wake of last month’s shooting at Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Florida --- 90 percent of the crowd was actually adults. She said the average age of adults in the crowd was just under 49.
Planned Parenthood, Move On and the Women's March all playing a role in the March for our Lives; Washington Free Beacon reporter Stephen Gutowski examines who's really behind the gun control push.Video
The truth behind the 'student-led' March for our Lives
“Contrary to what’s been reported in many media accounts, the D.C. March for Our Lives crowd was not primarily made up of teenagers,” Fisher wrote. “Only about 10 percent of the participants were under 18.”
Fisher said her team sampled 256 people who were randomly selected.
Her research will become a book titled “American Resistance” and will be published after the midterm elections.
Fisher also expressed skepticism that all those who showed up to the march were there primarily because of their views on guns. Some, she said, came for entertainment.
Students are demanding action in response to the deadly school shooting in Parkland, Florida. Griff Jenkins reports from Washington D.C.
“The March for Our Lives had the allure of a free concert — in fact, the event’s website maintained a list of performers but never listed the speakers," she said. "But it is one thing to turn out to watch Lin-Manuel Miranda and Ariana Grande perform, and quite another to vote in the midterm election in November.”
The research follows an imaging company saying the turnout for the march was much less than claimed by its organizers.
Organizers of the demonstration claimed Sunday that some 850,000 people attended the pro-gun control event.
But Virginia-based Digital Design & Imaging Service Inc., which uses aerial photos to calculate crowd sizes, reported the event’s peak crowd size was at 202,796 people.
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2018/03/28/despite-media-narrative-study-says-teenagers-made-up-just-10-percent-march-for-our-lives-crowd.html
-
I haven't been following closely but this claim by the researcher doesn't surprise me. I would expect that there would be limited children with the means to travel to these marches, and that what the kids want are certainly in line with what many adults want, and those adults tend to have the means to attend rallies. I wasn't thinking the majority of the crowd was youngsters
-
More confirmation that those kids are being manipulated.
Despite media narrative, study says teenagers made up just 10 percent of March for Our Lives crowd
Alex Pappas By Alex Pappas | Fox News
A university professor studying large-scale, Trump-era protests in Washington says the media is giving the wrong impression about who made up the crowd during last weekend’s anti-gun March for Our Lives demonstration.
“My research tells a different story about who participated in the March for Our Lives — and it is more complicated and less well-packaged for prime time,” University of Maryland sociology professor Dana R. Fisher wrote in a Wednesday story for the Washington Post.
Fisher’s study indicates that -- while news coverage focused on the teenagers marching for gun control in the wake of last month’s shooting at Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Florida --- 90 percent of the crowd was actually adults. She said the average age of adults in the crowd was just under 49.
Planned Parenthood, Move On and the Women's March all playing a role in the March for our Lives; Washington Free Beacon reporter Stephen Gutowski examines who's really behind the gun control push.Video
The truth behind the 'student-led' March for our Lives
“Contrary to what’s been reported in many media accounts, the D.C. March for Our Lives crowd was not primarily made up of teenagers,” Fisher wrote. “Only about 10 percent of the participants were under 18.”
Fisher said her team sampled 256 people who were randomly selected.
Her research will become a book titled “American Resistance” and will be published after the midterm elections.
Fisher also expressed skepticism that all those who showed up to the march were there primarily because of their views on guns. Some, she said, came for entertainment.
Students are demanding action in response to the deadly school shooting in Parkland, Florida. Griff Jenkins reports from Washington D.C.
“The March for Our Lives had the allure of a free concert — in fact, the event’s website maintained a list of performers but never listed the speakers," she said. "But it is one thing to turn out to watch Lin-Manuel Miranda and Ariana Grande perform, and quite another to vote in the midterm election in November.”
The research follows an imaging company saying the turnout for the march was much less than claimed by its organizers.
Organizers of the demonstration claimed Sunday that some 850,000 people attended the pro-gun control event.
But Virginia-based Digital Design & Imaging Service Inc., which uses aerial photos to calculate crowd sizes, reported the event’s peak crowd size was at 202,796 people.
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2018/03/28/despite-media-narrative-study-says-teenagers-made-up-just-10-percent-march-for-our-lives-crowd.html
So it was more about the music and less about the speakers? Or they didn’t know who the speakers would be?
-
More confirmation that those kids are being manipulated.
Despite media narrative, study says teenagers made up just 10 percent of March for Our Lives crowd
Alex Pappas By Alex Pappas | Fox News
A university professor studying large-scale, Trump-era protests in Washington says the media is giving the wrong impression about who made up the crowd during last weekend’s anti-gun March for Our Lives demonstration.
“My research tells a different story about who participated in the March for Our Lives — and it is more complicated and less well-packaged for prime time,” University of Maryland sociology professor Dana R. Fisher wrote in a Wednesday story for the Washington Post.
Fisher’s study indicates that -- while news coverage focused on the teenagers marching for gun control in the wake of last month’s shooting at Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Florida --- 90 percent of the crowd was actually adults. She said the average age of adults in the crowd was just under 49.
Planned Parenthood, Move On and the Women's March all playing a role in the March for our Lives; Washington Free Beacon reporter Stephen Gutowski examines who's really behind the gun control push.Video
The truth behind the 'student-led' March for our Lives
“Contrary to what’s been reported in many media accounts, the D.C. March for Our Lives crowd was not primarily made up of teenagers,” Fisher wrote. “Only about 10 percent of the participants were under 18.”
Fisher said her team sampled 256 people who were randomly selected.
Her research will become a book titled “American Resistance” and will be published after the midterm elections.
Fisher also expressed skepticism that all those who showed up to the march were there primarily because of their views on guns. Some, she said, came for entertainment.
Students are demanding action in response to the deadly school shooting in Parkland, Florida. Griff Jenkins reports from Washington D.C.
“The March for Our Lives had the allure of a free concert — in fact, the event’s website maintained a list of performers but never listed the speakers," she said. "But it is one thing to turn out to watch Lin-Manuel Miranda and Ariana Grande perform, and quite another to vote in the midterm election in November.”
The research follows an imaging company saying the turnout for the march was much less than claimed by its organizers.
Organizers of the demonstration claimed Sunday that some 850,000 people attended the pro-gun control event.
But Virginia-based Digital Design & Imaging Service Inc., which uses aerial photos to calculate crowd sizes, reported the event’s peak crowd size was at 202,796 people.
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2018/03/28/despite-media-narrative-study-says-teenagers-made-up-just-10-percent-march-for-our-lives-crowd.html
LOL
I'd love to hear this retard logic
-
I saw a little shit on TV, probably about 16 years old, acting like he was in charge of something. Like he'd been given command of a powerful force, and was now representing. Total fantasyland.
Sorry, man. Live a damn life, first. Gain some wisdom. Don't expect a person to believe a word you say at such a young age, speaking on something so important. Something that's impossible for you to have gained a proper perspective toward.
It just shows how upside down everything's become, that it'd be so much as slightly possible anyone would take this stuff seriously. Thanks, MSM!!
::)
-
Does anyone feel a sense of confidence in these kids, and what they're saying? Based on what?
-
Does anyone feel a sense of confidence in these kids, and what they're saying? Based on what?
remember back to when you were 16. I know I thought most issues were black and white. only as I aged, and traveled the world did I learn that there are shades of gray, things I once thought with 100% conviction were true or right, weren't so cut and dried now. But now I'm 53, and I hear adults saying stupid things on a regular basis. Most flat earthers are probably adults. So while I share with you, that young kids probably haven't experienced life enough to dictate what is right, just the mere fact that someone is an adult, doesn't mysteriously qualify their opinion as the right one either.
-
remember back to when you were 16. I know I thought most issues were black and white. only as I aged, and traveled the world did I learn that there are shades of gray, things I once thought with 100% conviction were true or right, weren't so cut and dried now. But now I'm 53, and I hear adults saying stupid things on a regular basis. Most flat earthers are probably adults. So while I share with you, that young kids probably haven't experienced life enough to dictate what is right, just the mere fact that someone is an adult, doesn't mysteriously qualify their opinion as the right one either.
Oh, I know. It's almost a sick comedy these days, with terminal stupidity in all direction and all stages of life. MSM has done its job. I can only say it makes it all the more unlikely that a kid, meaning someone who's never known anything but to be surrounded by such a reality, could possibly have the clarity of mind to so boldly step forward with "the right way" (if that's what these kids think they're doing - and it sure looks like it). They're just allowing themselves to be used as cheap little pawns, is the fact, since they can't possibly have seen their way through the ideas they claim to hold.
-
There's no possible way the students who witnessed their friends being massacred could possibly really care about gun violence. The fact that a bunch of adults share their opinions is proof the kids don't really care or genuinely hold those opinions. The fact that the changes there advocating for have been mentioned many times before (and have broad support in this country) is proof they don't really share these opinions. If they really cared they would have thought up a bunch of different action items rather than ones that have been mentioned many times before and of course no adults would support the cause. That's how you know they are all being manipulated. It's all so "obvious".
-
There's no possible way the students who witnessed their friends being massacred could possibly really care about gun violence. The fact that a bunch of adults share their opinions is proof the kids don't really care or genuinely hold those opinions. The fact that the changes there advocating for have been mentioned many times before (and have broad support in this country) is proof they don't really share these opinions. If they really cared they would have thought up a bunch of different action items rather than ones that have been mentioned many times before. That's how you know they are all being manipulated. It's all so "obvious".
If something's there: WHERE is the argument for it? For all this noise, where in the world is the exact claim?
Problem is, you'll find it's missing. That's because it never existed in the first place.
Here's an idea for these kids: try to find your best argument BEFORE you go out there to tell others what to do. If you can't convince yourself, then take your lesson and move on. Don't waste your time, and more importantly don't waste ours.
-
If something's there: WHERE is the argument for it? For all this noise, where in the world is the exact claim?
Problem is, you'll find it's missing. That's because it never existed in the first place.
Here's an idea for these kids: try to find your best argument BEFORE you go out there to tell others what to do. If you can't convince yourself, then take your lesson and move on. Don't waste your time, and more importantly don't waste ours.
the argument for what?
Why they suddenly care about gun violence in schools?
Hmmm, I wonder what could have prompted them to take action
That's a mystery we'll probably never figure out
-
the argument for what?
Why they suddenly care about gun violence in schools?
Hmmm, I wonder what could have prompted them to take action
That's a mystery we'll probably never figure out
To do... ? Make noise? What do they hope to accomplish, and how do they explain that it'll pan out as they say? (It'll first require making an actual claim, though. Can't forget that small detail!)
-
To do... ? Make noise? What do they hope to accomplish, and how do they explain that it'll pan out as they say? (It'll first require making an actual claim, though. Can't forget that small detail!)
spoken words sound like "noise" to you.
maybe that's why you can't figure out their "actual claim"
They put it in writing for you so if written words don't also show up as noise in your brain maybe this will shed some light (though for some reason I suspect not)
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/commentisfree/2018/mar/23/parkland-students-manifesto-americas-gun-laws
You make another great point. What the fuck do they hope to accomplish with rallies, speeches, and activism
That's never accomplished anything in the history of human kind
-
There's no possible way the students who witnessed their friends being massacred could possibly really care about gun violence. The fact that a bunch of adults share their opinions is proof the kids don't really care or genuinely hold those opinions. The fact that the changes there advocating for have been mentioned many times before (and have broad support in this country) is proof they don't really share these opinions. If they really cared they would have thought up a bunch of different action items rather than ones that have been mentioned many times before and of course no adults would support the cause. That's how you know they are all being manipulated. It's all so "obvious".
Typical nonsense post from you.
-
Typical nonsense post from you.
typical inability from you to refute or debate anything I've said
-
typical inability from you to refute or debate anything I've said
You made the statement, you prove it.
-
words sound like "noise" to you.
maybe that's why you can't figure out their "actual claim"
They put it in writing for you so if words don't also show up as noise in your brain maybe this will shed some light (though for some reason I suspect not)
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/commentisfree/2018/mar/23/parkland-students-manifesto-americas-gun-laws
You make another great point. What the fuck do they hope to accomplish with rallies, speeches, and activism
That's never accomplished anything in the history of human kind
Oh, I dunno. Maybe the same thing BLM hoped to "accomplish" by blocking roads and pissing-off other common individuals who may be trying to get somewhere important and who hold no direct relationship to bad cops? All the while without ever taking any measured action against an actual bad cop?
Something like that, maybe?
But I'll look at your MSM link, today, since I trust you've actually read it and that you believe it explains the mystery.
-
And, yes, noise. Meaningless, mindless, NOISE. The telltale of a false movement in the age of electronic information and "social media" (oh brother).
-
There's no possible way the students who witnessed their friends being massacred could possibly really care about gun violence. The fact that a bunch of adults share their opinions is proof the kids don't really care or genuinely hold those opinions. The fact that the changes there advocating for have been mentioned many times before (and have broad support in this country) is proof they don't really share these opinions. If they really cared they would have thought up a bunch of different action items rather than ones that have been mentioned many times before and of course no adults would support the cause. That's how you know they are all being manipulated. It's all so "obvious".
-
Typical nonsense post from you.
It's far from nonsense. It draws attention to the false argument Las Vegas was trying to make
-
It's far from nonsense. It draws attention to the false argument Las Vegas was trying to make
Then I'd say "drawing attention" is about the best that could be hoped for, and the true explanation for what the kids are doing.
OK, you've got our attention. What are you trying to say?
That's all to be found, so far. That's it.
-
whatcha doing rabbi ???
-
See, here's the problem. Straw, for example, frequently refers to "an opinion" or "these opinions" to say that the kids have applied thought to the matter and have prepared themselves to tell the world about a better way they've found.
They've done everything but that, though. They forgot the most important part.
But I'll (reluctantly) look at the MSM information Straw Man posted. Maybe some brilliance exists after all, and it'll turn out we've somehow produced a Super Generation who can solve our problems and make everyone non-violent and without need for protection.
-
Oh, I dunno. Maybe the same thing BLM hoped to "accomplish" by blocking roads and pissing-off other common individuals who may be trying to get somewhere important and who hold no direct relationship to bad cops? All the while without ever taking any measured action against an actual bad cop?
Something like that, maybe?
But I'll look at your MSM link, today, since I trust you've actually read it and that you believe it explains the mystery.
Did these kids block roads or do anything like that
All they did was make some speeches and talk about their murdered friends
-
You made the statement, you prove it.
prove your inability to refute or even debate anything I've said?
ok
here you go
Typical nonsense post from you.
-
Did these kids block roads or do anything like that
And I do thank them.
All they did was make some speeches and talk about their murdered friends
How's that supposed to help, though? How's it any more meaningful than what BLM's done?
-
More confirmation that those kids are being manipulated.
Despite media narrative, study says teenagers made up just 10 percent of March for Our Lives crowd
Alex Pappas By Alex Pappas | Fox News
Since when did support become manipulation? I support these youths, even though I've never spoken to any one of them. Any parent or would be parent should have an interest in gun violence, particularly as it pertains to school age youth....their children or could be their children someday.
I call FAKE NEWS!
-
OK, so I read that statement. Lots of "why let people do this?" and "why let people do that?" with little to no substance.
That's not convincing. It reminds me of a pretzel, which looks so cool, but the design doesn't make sense.
They refer to "irreparable damage to the hearts and minds of the American people" without showing how their suggested "repair" is going to work. But they can't do that, you see, because it's impossible.
Here's an idea:
Have these kids asked themselves why so many individuals have arrived at a state of mind in which they see clear to losing their shit? Why a broken America is going to make broken people? No, because all these kids have ever known is a broken America. They don't know anything else.
God bless them, but they don't know shit from shinola. They have been pawned, and in the truest sense.
Best advice to them, as indivduals, is to think for themselves -- and to prove it to themselves before ever trying to act out.
-
So it was more about the music and less about the speakers? Or they didn’t know who the speakers would be?
Exactly. Just another garden variety partisan political rally.
-
And, yes, noise. Meaningless, mindless, NOISE. The telltale of a false movement in the age of electronic information and "social media" (oh brother).
Yep.
-
Since when did support become manipulation? I support these youths, even though I've never spoken to any one of them. Any parent or would be parent should have an interest in gun violence, particularly as it pertains to school age youth....their children or could be their children someday.
I call FAKE NEWS!
So you think 90 percent of the participants were actually teenagers, the teenagers were actually listed as speakers, entertainers were not, etc.?
-
OK, so I read that statement. Lots of "why let people do this?" and "why let people do that?" with little to no substance.
That's not convincing. It reminds me of a pretzel, which looks so cool, but the design doesn't make sense.
They refer to "irreparable damage to the hearts and minds of the American people" without showing how their suggested "repair" is going to work. But they can't do that, you see, because it's impossible.
Here's an idea:
Have these kids asked themselves why so many individuals have arrived at a state of mind in which they see clear to losing their shit? Why a broken America is going to make broken people? No, because all these kids have ever known is a broken America. They don't know anything else.
God bless them, but they don't know shit from shinola. They have been pawned, and in the truest sense.
Best advice to them, as indivduals, is to think for themselves -- and to prove it to themselves before ever trying to act out.
When I was their age, hippies and other anti-war protesters were less than clear about their goals too. This is often a given with youth. That being said, both individually and collectively, they had a huge and lasting impact on the future.
These young adults seek change and probably believe any change is good because it is movement as opposed to stagnation. Just as banning certain weapons won't stop all violence such as some of them have witnessed first hand, there is no one solution that can fix a broken America or its broken people. We can accept things as they are if we chose or we can make an effort for change. Realistically, change will happen but it isn't likely to happen quickly.
-
And I do thank them.
How's that supposed to help, though? How's it any more meaningful than what BLM's done?
Great point
Their friends were gunned down in their school almost 6 weeks ago and these kids haven't yet solved the problem of school shootings
What a bunch of slackers
-
Great point
Their friends were gunned down in their school almost 6 weeks ago and these kids haven't yet solved the problem of school shootings
What a bunch of slackers
Is it possible they could think before acting, then? Or is that too much to ask.
-
Great point
Their friends were gunned down in their school almost 6 weeks ago and these kids haven't yet solved the problem of school shootings
What a bunch of slackers
;D
-
Is it possible they could think before acting, then? Or is that too much to ask.
You mean deep thinking like this?
(https://scontent.fsan1-2.fna.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/29541872_2052951981585047_969848577345675472_n.jpg?_nc_cat=0&_nc_eui2=v1%3AAeHJPpq6hAUM-G1-dvFmEGBHeYqNTIPS5OxIfS6R0LbJMExiTOOWaEJWMUq9yyE4k379S1_prA8l6sUU8M7oUoRX0s6NIsqRTiVRERU0k2eN7g&oh=9e251f32d2380d317cf222cc3d89e7bf&oe=5B30AAAF)
-
When I was their age, hippies and other anti-war protesters were less than clear about their goals too. This is often a given with youth. That being said, both individually and collectively, they had a huge and lasting impact on the future.
How'd you describe that impact, Prime?
These young adults seek change and probably believe any change is good because it is movement as opposed to stagnation. Just as banning certain weapons won't stop all violence such as some of them have witnessed first hand, there is no one solution that can fix a broken America or its broken people. We can accept things as they are if we chose or we can make an effort for change. Realistically, change will happen but it isn't likely to happen quickly.
Them's some Famous Last Words, right ther'!
;D
As far as "movement" as a way to ascertain, I guess, something or other: Where the hell are we going?
-
But you understand that such eager willingness to create loud noise, march around waving stuff, chant in unison whatever the hell everyone around you chants, while generally acting angry and agitated and upset -- demands thought, first. If you're going to do it, then at least think about it before you step outside. Otherwise, guaranteed, you're someone's pawn.
The thing about a "protest" or "demonstration" OF the sort MSM loves to broadcast far and wide, is that it's a like a pyramid in structure. The base, the part which appears to support it, is made up by pawns, always. Right there, we've got a problem.
The question, then, is about the point. How fitting. What the hell's the point and who is behind it?
But way to go for using kids. All heart, man. Just beautiful.
-
But you understand that such eager willingness to create loud noise, march around waving stuff, chant in unison whatever the hell everyone around you chants, and generally act angry and agitated and upset -- demands thought, first. If you're going to do it, then at least think about it before you step outside. Otherwise, guaranteed, you're someone's pawn.
The thing about a "protest" or "demonstration" OF the sort MSM loves to broadcast far and wide, is that it's a like a pyramid in structure. The base, the part which appears to support it, is made up by pawns, always. Right there, we've got a problem.
The question, then, is about the point. How fitting. What the hell's the point and who is behind it?
But way to go for using kids. All heart, man. Just beautiful.
Really, all we have is you, and some like thinkers claiming they haven't given it thought.... based solely on the fact they disagree with your cherished idea of what is the right answer.
-
Really, all we have is you, and some like thinkers claiming they haven't given it thought.... based solely on the fact they disagree with your cherished idea of what is the right answer.
Okay. They're angry. Is that right?
If not: What are they saying? After all this, I'm looking to find a spare scorecard.
-
And no answer to violence has been found, at last check.
-
Okay. They're angry. Is that right?
If not: What are they saying? After all this, I'm looking to find a spare scorecard.
I think they are frustrated. I think a lot of americans are
-
And no answer to violence has been found, at last check.
But if it's any consolation, there may be a trillion things more likely to affect a person at any moment. If it's true that independent thought was applied by the kids, then it raises a question why they're not in pursuit of one of those problems, instead. A huge crowd of them would be great.
Wouldn't it be nice for them to be able to explain themselves, at least?
???
-
But if it's any consolation, there may be a trillion things more likely to affect a person at any moment. If it's true that independent thought was applied by the kids, then it raises a question why they're not in pursuit of one of those problems, instead. A huge crowd of them would be great.
Wouldn't it be nice for them to be able to explain themselves, at least?
???
I think they put out a written list of proposals
-
I think they are frustrated. I think a lot of americans are
Due to concern for others, would you say?
-
I think they put out a written list of proposals
Yes, I read it.
-
Here's one for you. Pharmaceutical dope, and how the drug makers and distributors went into overdrive producing and shipping the stuff out by the ton, only to cause the exact outcome that should be expected. Citizens ruining their lives, ending their lives, spending their last months in miserable condition, creating a massive problem directly impacting every kid, every day, and in every school.
Why shouldn't, and why wouldn't, "independent" thought, concerned thought along these lines - if it was ever used as claimed, lead the kids to a problem so much closer to home, and right in their faces, as that? If the idea is to prevent tragedy, and I don't doubt for one moment these kids in their hearts would like to prevent tragedy, then here's a problem they should've arrived at long before guns - IF independent thought was used. Something that actually surrounds and involves them every single day. So why guns? Unlike potential shooters, who remain unknown, the distributors of drugs are clearly named and have business cards. They can be dealt with, now, if tragedy is to be stopped. No guesswork involved as to who the culprit will be in the next opiate death, probably happening in the next few moments.
Don't talk about independent thought when it comes to these kids. The fact they chose a remote fight in which they can't even hold a proper stand, tells you that very little thought was given at all. It also tells you how subject they are to manipulation.
Get real.
-
Here's one for you. Pharmaceutical dope, and how the drug makers and distributors went into overdrive producing and shipping the stuff out by the ton, only to cause the exact outcome that should be expected. Citizens ruining their lives, ending their lives, spending their last months in miserable condition, creating a massive problem directly impacting every kid, every day, and in every school.
Why shouldn't, and why wouldn't, "independent" thought, concerned thought along these lines - if it was ever used as claimed, lead the kids to a problem so much closer to home, and right in their faces, as that? If the idea is to prevent tragedy, and I don't doubt for one moment these kids in their hearts would like to prevent tragedy, then here's a problem they should've arrived at long before guns - IF independent thought was used. Something that actually surrounds and involves them every single day. So why guns? Unlike potential shooters, who remain unknown, the distributors of drugs are clearly named and have business cards. They can be dealt with, now, if tragedy is to be stopped. No guesswork involved as to who the culprit will be in the next opiate death, probably happening in the next few moments.
Don't talk about independent thought when it comes to these kids. The fact they chose a remote fight in which they can't even hold a proper stand, tells you that very little thought was given at all. It also tells you how subject they are to manipulation.
Get real.
If I read that right... you are suspicious of them or don't give them credibility because they didn't march on pharmaceutical companies before marching on stricter gun laws after another mass shooting in a school?Is that an accurate assessment?
-
If I read that right... you are suspicious of them or don't give them credibility because they didn't march on pharmaceutical companies before marching on stricter gun laws after another mass shooting in a school?Is that an accurate assessment?
More than that, it hasn't even occurred to them to do it, from what it appears. Once again: Where's the alleged "independent thought"?
???
And btw: what are the chances MSM would be "busy" the day schoolkids decide to organize against Media's partner, Big Bad Pharma? Higher, even, than the people their drugs kill.
In every direction, it's manipulation. Now they've dragged kids into it. How low will they go next?
-
Virtually no one in that crowd, percentage-wise, has had any personal history involving anyone being shot in a school. That's a fact. Everything about it, every word, every image, that a kid in that crowd can associate with a shooting in a school, has come by way of MSM. Let's get that straight.
Unlike drug deaths.
Once again: WHERE is the "independent" thought?
-
Virtually no one in that crowd, percentage-wise, has had any personal history involving anyone being shot in a school. That's a fact. Everything about it, every word, every image, that a kid in that crowd can associate with a shooting in a school, has come by way of MSM. Let's get that straight.
Unlike drug deaths.
Once again: WHERE is the "independent" thought?
There is very little. They are essentially reading a script.
-
It's far from nonsense. It draws attention to the false argument Las Vegas was trying to make
I guess that's your opinion, whatever that's worth.
-
I guess that's your opinion, whatever that's worth.
I'd say the exchange rate between my opinion and yours is about 2 cents to 2 cents
-
There is very little. They are essentially reading a script.
Yeah. I don't think anyone would deny the kids want a better world, as a general rule. Of course. They're the ones who must live in it, if for no other reason. And anyone, kid or not, who's found a heart wants it, for sure, because that's the way to go. (The fact that giving up guns leads in the opposite way, is another story.)
But any idea these kids have "just seen friends shot" no less than "right in front of them" and that their "traumatic experience" has led them to protest (something or other) is some of the silliest silliness on record. Really, really incredible. Kids are natural drama queens and kings, while also being easily outsmarted and led. Those are the truths.
A much greater question, then, is which creeps decided to lead them against the kids' true interest.
-
Yeah. I don't think anyone would deny the kids want a better world, as a general rule. Of course. They're the ones who must live in it, if for no other reason. And anyone, kid or not, who's found a heart wants it, for sure, because that's the way to go. (The fact that giving up guns leads in the opposite way, is another story.)
But any idea these kids have "just seen friends shot" no less than "right in front of them" and that their "traumatic experience" has led them to protest (something or other) is some of the silliest silliness on record. Really, really incredible. Kids are natural drama queens and kings, while also being easily outsmarted and led. Those are the truths.
A much greater question, then, is which creeps decided to lead them against the kids' true interest.
Objection, leading or loaded question inferring something that hasn't been established yet
-
How'd you describe that impact, Prime?
Them's some Famous Last Words, right ther'!
;D
As far as "movement" as a way to ascertain, I guess, something or other: Where the hell are we going?
The hippie movement was a direct effect on the laws that were created to prevent drug use that still exist today. The hippie movement also affected the Civil Rights Movement, which eventually resulted in several laws giving African Americans and women the same rights and white men, including the equal rights to vote and to an education and work. Women are no longer expected to be housewives and it is accepted if a woman wants to have a job.
Distinct appearance and clothing was also one of the immediate legacies of hippies. Since that time, a wide range of personal appearance options and clothing styles, including nudity, have become more widely acceptable, all of which was uncommon before the hippie era.
After the hippie movement, African Americans, working women, homosexuals, nudity and non-traditional apparel all became generally more accepted. Without the hippie movement, the United States would not be as free and adoptive as it is today. The 1960s was a highly influential time and the hippies were highly influential people. Bob Dylan, a musical sensation and activist of the hippie movement said, “People today are still living off the table scraps of the sixties. They are still being passed around – the music and the ideas.”
Where are we going? Some would say, 'to hell in a hand-basket'. I say real change mostly happens very slowly. Since the pendulum swings both ways, it can sometimes be very hard to see any permanent changes, but they are there never-the-less. Change can be for the better and it can be for the worst. Whether it's one or the other, is a matter of perspective.
-
Yeah. I don't think anyone would deny the kids want a better world, as a general rule. Of course. They're the ones who must live in it, if for no other reason. And anyone, kid or not, who's found a heart wants it, for sure, because that's the way to go. (The fact that giving up guns leads in the opposite way, is another story.)
But any idea these kids have "just seen friends shot" no less than "right in front of them" and that their "traumatic experience" has led them to protest (something or other) is some of the silliest silliness on record. Really, really incredible. Kids are natural drama queens and kings, while also being easily outsmarted and led. Those are the truths.
A much greater question, then, is which creeps decided to lead them against the kids' true interest.
The activists who are funding them and providing “logistical” support.
-
Is it possible they could think before acting, then? Or is that too much to ask.
WTF- how do you know they didn't "think" before "acting"?
-
Virtually no one in that crowd, percentage-wise, has had any personal history involving anyone being shot in a school. That's a fact. Everything about it, every word, every image, that a kid in that crowd can associate with a shooting in a school, has come by way of MSM. Let's get that straight.
Unlike drug deaths.
Once again: WHERE is the "independent" thought?
cool - can you provide the source for your "fact"
Also, why does that matter?
Since when is it a requirement that you need a personal history of being shot in a school to have an opinion on gun violence, access to guns, etc..
-
Virtually no one in that crowd, percentage-wise, has had any personal history involving anyone being shot in a school. That's a fact.
cool - can you provide the source for your "fact"
Also, why does that matter?
Since when is it a requirement that you need a personal history of being shot in a school to have an opinion on gun violence, access to guns, etc..
"Virtually no one" and "percentage wise" are incompatible statements; one disproves the other. Thus, taken in combination, there is no fact to prove.
-
"Virtually no one" and "percentage wise" are incompatible statements; one disproves the other. Thus, taken in combination, there is no fact to prove.
I would say if he said Literally no one.... you would be right and I see where you are coming from, but virtually no one and percentage wise aren't incompatible
-
I would say if he said Literally no one.... you would be right and I see where you are coming from, but virtually no one and percentage wise aren't incompatible
You're right. Thanks, I just learned something new...the definition of virtually verses that of literally. I'll choose the word virtually because I don't like to speak in terms of absolutes or literals, preferring instead to allow for variables no matter how insignificant. You can see this in many of my posts on Getbig. I've been accused of being non-committal by a few folks here. Perhaps I am.
-
@ Ag and Straw: How many do you claim, again, for the number? Better part of a million, was it? Just a quarter-million? Half-million, something? Don't tell me it was a spontanteous "mass-revelation" complete with every bit the funding that it lacks in logic, and don't tell me anything but that the fewest of them have lost friends or have seen friends injured by madmen with guns. That'd be called bullshit.
Once again, please get real. The fantasyland you live in gets turned off with the TV, but it appears you're quite slow on the draw to realize it.
-
Btw, Straw.
cool - can you provide the source for your "fact"
Also, why does that matter?
Since when is it a requirement that you need a personal history of being shot in a school to have an opinion on gun violence, access to guns, etc..
You're showing your hand, Big Chief. Is your TV off by any chance? :D
-
Yes, Prime and Ag: Not to diminish the experience of those who did lose someone in a shooting. I understand it'd suck. But let's not selfishly capitalize on it, either, is the loud and clear message to those behind the push to take guns. That makes it much worse, and twice so with the false promises.
-
WTF- how do you know they didn't "think" before "acting"?
Um, must be by the way they acted.
-
Prime, do you mean the housing part of that which was (i think) 1968? Civil Rights Act itself, almost positive was 1964.
-
You're right. Thanks, I just learned something new...the definition of virtually verses that of literally. I'll choose the word virtually because I don't like to speak in terms of absolutes or literals, preferring instead to allow for variables no matter how insignificant. You can see this in many of my posts on Getbig. I've been accused of being non-committal by a few folks here. Perhaps I am.
cool
-
@ Ag and Straw: How many do you claim, again, for the number? Better part of a million, was it? Just a quarter-million? Half-million, something? Don't tell me it was a spontanteous "mass-revelation" complete with every bit the funding that it lacks in logic, and don't tell me anything but that the fewest of them have lost friends or have seen friends injured by madmen with guns. That'd be called bullshit.
Once again, please get real. The fantasyland you live in gets turned off with the TV, but it appears you're quite slow on the draw to realize it.
Don't try and zero me in on numbers. it's irrelevant to the message and the movement.
-
I'd expect it to not be mostly teens, as parents would need to bring them and I'm sure there's a bunch of college kids and old liberals there as well to try and do away with guns. 10% does seem a bit low though to be honest. Either way, there are a lot of groups who don't like guns or gun ownership and I'm sure they're probably trying to ride the wave with the students.
-
Would anyone admit this independent thoughtfest (of an anti-gun rally) has revealed the true power of MSM? If the feelings among these kids, as individuals, are so genuinely intense for urgent action - then it becomes really interesting to note that they've been affected by it only as far as their TV sound goes.
How does that fit in with their experience (for the one example) of being surrounded by opioid abuse, spreading like a fast wildfire in front of their eyes? How did MSM pull such a trick, to take their attention off what's right in front of them - a problem that by all means should arouse a sense of urgency in their lives - and put it somewhere else, which of all the darnedest things, just happens to be guns?
Who's doing the thinking at that point? The authenticity of the entire thing is now in doubt.
-
So whose fight is this, exactly?
???
To those who claim to support it: What do you have to say for yourselves? How did you decide to fight this fight, if (somehow) it wasn't in the same way as these kids?
Fill in the missing pieces, please, so we can move forward on the same page.
-
Ok, Dudes. Consider yourself called, then. Thank you for your time. :D
-
But you must see the insanity in all this. The notion of saying, confidently (as done on another thread), "wouldn't it be swell if potential killers didn't have access to military-style weapons?" goes forward relying upon some idea that a person can trust who turned in which weapons, to include practicing criminals.
Well, what happens if you're then faced against a criminal with one?
The only response can be "oh, that stuff doesn't happen. please!"
Lmao, this stuff is nuts. Why'd you raise it in the first place, if it doesn't happen.
We simply cannot escape the fact this is about people. Not guns. If we took the tiniest fraction of this concern, and applied it to our people, we'd be light-years ahead of the game. We'd be too busy making the score to waste time gabbling over a bullshit fight which isn't even ours to begin with. The Lying Media Machine could be put out of business, with the culprits held to answer.
-
Is my computer malfunctioning. I'm only seeing one side of a conversation. Did someone block me?
-
Is my computer malfunctioning. I'm only seeing one side of a conversation.
Mm, no. Sounds like what you do in every thread.
Did someone block me?
Maybe it's a mental block, from trying to answer post #71
Look, Buster. How bout you cut the crap and answer the damn question.
;D ;D
-
So whose fight is this, exactly?
???
To those who claim to support it: What do you have to say for yourselves? How did you decide to fight this fight, if (somehow) it wasn't in the same way as these kids?
Fill in the missing pieces, please, so we can move forward on the same page.
What are we talking about? The fight about gun control?
Whose fight is it? Everyone who is tired of seeing senseless killings and the easy access to weapons that shouldn't be available to people with issues
-
What are we talking about? The fight about gun control?
No. I want your very best manicotti recipe. Let's see what you got.
Whose fight is it? Everyone who is tired of seeing senseless killings and the easy access to weapons that shouldn't be available to people with issues
Do you at least respect J.P. Stevens' proposal?
-
No. I want your very best manicotti recipe. Let's see what you got.
Do you at least respect J.P. Stevens' proposal?
If that is the judge.. no I dont
-
If that is the judge.. no I dont
Is it because of difficulty you see in trying to follow through? Or is it something else you disagree with?
-
Is it because of difficulty you see in trying to follow through? Or is it something else you disagree with?
I don't have a problem with responsible people owning guns. I would like stricter regulations on it but the average person should be able to own hunting rifles and handguns.
-
And still more confirmation that these kids are being manipulated. This is right out of the Media Matters/David Brock/liberal playbook. They did it to Bill O'Reilly. They tried to do it to Sean Hannity. There is no way that kid came up with this idea on his own with the list of her advertisers at his fingertips.
Advertisers bail as Laura Ingraham goes on vacation
Share Tweet Reddit Flipboard Email
MONEYWATCH April 2, 2018
Advertisers continued to exit Laura Ingraham's show on Fox News even as the host takes a weeklong break from the network.
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/laura-ingraham-advertisers-drop-show-she-goes-on-vacation/
-
And still more confirmation that these kids are being manipulated. This is right out of the Media Matters/David Brock/liberal playbook. They did it to Bill O'Reilly. They tried to do it to Sean Hannity. There is no way that kid came up with this idea on his own with the list of her advertisers at his fingertips.
Advertisers bail as Laura Ingraham goes on vacation
Share Tweet Reddit Flipboard Email
MONEYWATCH April 2, 2018
Advertisers continued to exit Laura Ingraham's show on Fox News even as the host takes a weeklong break from the network.
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/laura-ingraham-advertisers-drop-show-she-goes-on-vacation/
Tmk I haven't even seen this kid yet, but that's only because the whole thing is so objectionable it's impossible for me to follow. But I do wonder if he's the sapsucker who was on TV the other day, pretending to be our king.
-
Tmk I haven't even seen this kid yet, but that's only because the whole thing is so objectionable it's impossible for me to follow. But I do wonder if he's the sapsucker who was on TV the other day, pretending to be our king.
His comments about his parents, the NRA, Rubio, Loesch, etc. are pretty outrageous. And he refused to accept Ingraham's apology. Punk move.
-
Laura Ingraham is a placeholder imo. She's someone we're expected (by msm) to trust to have our best shot ready on issues like this, and open borders, and other common interests -- yet time and again she doesn't quite seem to deliver.
With all the connections and information she has at her whim, it seems difficult to believe she'd so often fail to make the punch. That's if she really has our interest at heart to begin with.
-
His comments about his parents, the NRA, Rubio, Loesch, etc. are pretty outrageous. And he refused to accept Ingraham's apology. Punk move.
OK, that's a to-do. I've heard enough about this interview to know it's something to watch.
-
Tmk I haven't even seen this kid yet, but that's only because the whole thing is so objectionable it's impossible for me to follow. But I do wonder if he's the sapsucker who was on TV the other day, pretending to be our king.
Rather than objectionable, I find it remarkable that these near-adults are able to coalesce over something bigger than themselves. They example many of the generation Z characteristics.
-
His comments about his parents, the NRA, Rubio, Loesch, etc. are pretty outrageous. And he refused to accept Ingraham's apology. Punk move.
I don't think that refusing to accept an apology is bad. Some apologies might be insincere or someone might just think an apology is not enough. However, I wonder how he will react when the tide turns against him. Will he pull the "just a kid" or "survivor" card?
-
OK, that's a to-do. I've heard enough about this interview to know it's something to watch.
Here is a summary of him waxing eloquent.
-
Here is a summary of him waxing eloquent.
Without a doubt, David enjoys the attention he's getting. I'd like to hear from someone different for a change.
-
Rather than objectionable, I find it remarkable that these near-adults are able to coalesce over something bigger than themselves. They example many of the generation Z characteristics.
Even when they've been directed to do that, for an issue they cannot offer a Point A to Point B -- an issue that requires ignoring part of the big picture in order to fight it?
All things bigger than ourselves are not better, as I'm sure you know (the runt you are!! :P ;D). It makes a dangerous game to play without your brain on board.
-
I don't think that refusing to accept an apology is bad. Some apologies might be insincere or someone might just think an apology is not enough. However, I wonder how he will react when the tide turns against him. Will he pull the "just a kid" or "survivor" card?
I agree that not all apologies are equal, especially the non-apology apology that starts with "if I did anything wrong."
But this particular instance? What she said wasn't that bad. And she took responsibility for it. Plus this kid has been acting like a punk. He is a little too full of himself.
He already plays the kid card when he is asked tough questions.
-
Without a doubt, David enjoys the attention he's getting. I'd like to hear from someone different for a change.
Me too. Just not him.
-
I don't have a problem with responsible people owning guns. I would like stricter regulations on it but the average person should be able to own hunting rifles and handguns.
By saying you "don't have a problem" with it, do you mean to say you do have a problem with an attempt to remove them? A problem that goes beyond the simple fact it looks impossible to do.
-
Without a doubt, David enjoys the attention he's getting. I'd like to hear from someone different for a change.
I'm going to check that out. But if you'd like to hear from someone different, then it tells me you may be unconvinced. That something may be missing for you.
-
By saying you "don't have a problem" with it, do you mean to say you do have a problem with an attempt to remove them? A problem that goes beyond the simple fact it looks impossible to do.
I think an attempt to remove the guns already out there is unrealistic
-
I think an attempt to remove the guns already out there is unrealistic
If it was (somehow) not seen as unrealistic: Would you be okay with it?
-
Without a doubt, David enjoys the attention he's getting. I'd like to hear from someone different for a change.
-
If it was (somehow) not seen as unrealistic: Would you be okay with it?
Removing the AK47's and AR15 type weapons would be ok with me,. But it's not feasible
-
Removing the AK47's and AR15 type weapons would be ok with me,. But it's not feasible
Why?
-
Ag, why don't you just come around? You're on the side of reality.
No need to make a pledge to violence. No need to do anything but what you're doing -- only now you refuse to accept bullshit that can't be shown. That's all.
-
Why?
The real question is why are we asking permission to exercise our rights? Why does the left get to decide what they are OK with? Last time I checked the constitution restricts the government not the people.
-
Not her. She's too hyper. It's like she's on speed or something.
-
The real question is why are we asking permission to exercise our rights? Why does the left get to decide what they are OK with? Last time I checked the constitution restricts the government not the people.
The left gets to decide what they are okay with, they don't get to decide what the right is okay with.
I don't know where you checked what the constitution does out, but you are wrong. It is a myth that the Constitution restricts government (congress) and not the people, despite what Ron Paul said in 2008.
Dr. Paul is far from alone in this bizarre delusion. If there's anything the far right regards as dogma, it's that the "intent" of the Constitution was to restrain, inhibit, intimidate, infantilize, disempower, disembowel, and generally smack Congress and federal bureaucrats around. "Does anyone seriously believe that when the Founders gathered in Philadelphia 220 years ago they were aspiring to control the buying decisions of individual consumers from Washington?" Sen. Tom Coburn asked.
-
The left gets to decide what they are okay with, they don't get to decide what the right is okay with.
I don't know where you checked what the constitution does out, but you are wrong. It is a myth that the Constitution restricts government (congress) and not the people, despite what Ron Paul said in 2008.
Dr. Paul is far from alone in this bizarre delusion. If there's anything the far right regards as dogma, it's that the "intent" of the Constitution was to restrain, inhibit, intimidate, infantilize, disempower, disembowel, and generally smack Congress and federal bureaucrats around. "Does anyone seriously believe that when the Founders gathered in Philadelphia 220 years ago they were aspiring to control the buying decisions of individual consumers from Washington?" Sen. Tom Coburn asked.
Then why is there a bill or rights? Have you bothered to read the federalist papers? Or perhaps the ruling in U S v. CRUIKSHANK?
-
It is a myth that the Constitution restricts government (congress) and not the people, despite what Ron Paul said in 2008.
The Constitution gives the people certain inalienable rights, like the right to use our first amendment to defend undesirable people on the internet. Or the right to keep and bear arms.
-
The Constitution gives the people certain inalienable rights, like the right to use our first amendment to defend undesirable people on the internet. Or the right to keep and bear arms.
Not to get too technical, but inalienable rights are not given to us by the Constitution. We have them with or without the Constitution. The Constitution just prevents the government from taking those rights away, without due process.
-
Not to get too technical, but inalienable rights are not given to us by the Constitution. We have them with or without the Constitution. The Constitution just prevents the government from taking those rights away, without due process.
Spot on
-
Not to get too technical, but inalienable rights are not given to us by the Constitution. We have them with or without the Constitution. The Constitution just prevents the government from taking those rights away, without due process.
You knew what I meant. ;D
-
You knew what I meant. ;D
Hey aren't you my gimmick? Am I talking to myself?? :o :D
-
Hey aren't you my gimmick? Am I talking to myself?? :o :D
well played ;)
-
Here is a summary of him waxing eloquent.
Yes, he may be the same one I saw before. Probably so. Attitude is just the same, so I can only hope there isn't more than one of them. But with all the apparent praise he's getting for speaking so meaninglessly on the subject, other kids will figure it's the way to go for all the things they don't care to think much about. That's dangerous to our future. Other kids should be busy kicking his butt for the threat he causes, really, even more than for his attitude.
I looked for a transcript, thinking he'd been a guest on her show (believing all the fuss started there). Come to find out it's entirely over a twitter post which included the word "whining" within information that otherwise leads to show he has a 4.0 or 4.1 or whatever. But, of course, that becomes a way he may now be safely seen (by many) as a "very intelligent" person who's applied due thought on the subject. In turn, of course, helping to counter the reality that he hasn't said anything useful.
Anyone else could've seen it coming from a mile away, especially with so little information necessary to do that. But Laura Ingraham, a major figure who's expected to hold our ground through MSM, couldn't. No, she could only see to do the exact opposite of that.
Strange how fake it looks.
-
Not to get too technical, but inalienable rights are not given to us by the Constitution. We have them with or without the Constitution. The Constitution just prevents the government from taking those rights away, without due process.
Alive in the one, but dead in the other.
-
The real question is why are we asking permission to exercise our rights? Why does the left get to decide what they are OK with? Last time I checked the constitution restricts the government not the people.
Because that's how a democracy works. ::)
It is interesting how this kind of outrage is limited to unilateral support of that specific right and all the inane (and insane) conspiracy theories that come along with it, yet when it comes to other constitutional rights, people who have posted in this thread are perfectly fine with curtailing them, if they can convince themselves it's balanced by the greater good. Constitutionally protected voting rights? Fuck 'em. Unreasonable search and seizure? Who gives a shit?
-
And still more confirmation that these kids are being manipulated. This is right out of the Media Matters/David Brock/liberal playbook. They did it to Bill O'Reilly. They tried to do it to Sean Hannity. There is no way that kid came up with this idea on his own with the list of her advertisers at his fingertips.
Advertisers bail as Laura Ingraham goes on vacation
Share Tweet Reddit Flipboard Email
MONEYWATCH April 2, 2018
Advertisers continued to exit Laura Ingraham's show on Fox News even as the host takes a weeklong break from the network.
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/laura-ingraham-advertisers-drop-show-she-goes-on-vacation/
They likely have advisers- which is reasonable for anyone on the national stage, especially a teenager- but that doesn't mean they are being manipulated.
-
Because that's how a democracy works. ::)
It is interesting how this kind of outrage is limited to unilateral support of that specific right and all the inane (and insane) conspiracy theories that come along with it, yet when it comes to other constitutional rights, people who have posted in this thread are perfectly fine with curtailing them, if they can convince themselves it's balanced by the greater good. Constitutionally protected voting rights? Fuck 'em. Unreasonable search and seizure? Who gives a shit?
Really? So the law basically means nothing? I have posted about the CLOUD act, and the attack on the 4th amendment. But this is what .gov does, get people all riled up about one thing, in this case the 2nd amendment, and do an end around to fuck us on the 4th. Patriot act and all this trade freedom for safety bullshit, people need to wake up
-
Really? So the law basically means nothing? I have posted about the CLOUD act, and the attack on the 4th amendment. But this is what .gov does, get people all riled up about one thing, in this case the 2nd amendment, and do an end around to fuck us on the 4th. Patriot act and all this trade freedom for safety bullshit, people need to wake up
Didn't say the law means nothing. It's great that you posted about some of these other things, but you're kidding yourself if you think that this an issue of the left deciding what's best for everyone else. The specific things I mentioned in my last post have been defended almost exclusively by the hard-righters on this board.
-
Didn't say the law means nothing. It's great that you posted about some of these other things, but you're kidding yourself if you think that this an issue of the left deciding what's best for everyone else. The specific things I mentioned in my last post have been defended almost exclusively by the hard-righters on this board.
What I was referring to was is when you hear "I'm OK with people having hand guns and hunting rifles, but no one needs an AR-15" argument. Which primarily comes from leftist, who by all accounts are scared to death of guns, probably don't own, touched, or even seen a real one. Yet they know exactly what some should or shouldn't have.
-
Because that's how a democracy works. ::)
It is interesting how this kind of outrage is limited to unilateral support of that specific right and all the inane (and insane) conspiracy theories that come along with it, yet when it comes to other constitutional rights, people who have posted in this thread are perfectly fine with curtailing them, if they can convince themselves it's balanced by the greater good. Constitutionally protected voting rights? Fuck 'em. Unreasonable search and seizure? Who gives a shit?
Fair point. No question that some (many, most) alleged conservatives were all about pumping endless money into conjob wars abroad, endless money into mysterious new alphabet entities whose reasons can't be explained (security, ya kno!), all while further helping to butcher our own freedom at home. Pure hypocrisy, yes. Confidence in them now, no. Laura Ingraham wouldn't be their go-to gal, for one thing, if it weren't true.
-
IOW: The world may be soon doomed. We're waiting for MSM to announce the spontaneous crowds of "enlightened" teenagers gathered in the streets, all chanting "Peace and Security!" as they happily celebrate (what's seen by them as) good work.
-
Then why is there a bill or rights? Have you bothered to read the federalist papers? Or perhaps the ruling in U S v. CRUIKSHANK?
1. The first ten amendments, which make up the Bill of Rights, help define the Constitution.
2. Have you? All 85 of them? The 85 articles and essays were written promote the ratification of the United States Constitution.
3. The verdict was guilty, overturned by the U.S. Supreme Court. The Supreme Court in Cruikshank severely limited the ability of the federal government to protect the civil rights of newly freed African-Americans. The federal government would not achieve the power to effectively protect civil rights until well into the 20th century.
-
Gun Owners Buying Guns At Record Pace in March – Thanks David Hogg!
Barack Obama still reigns as the greatest gun salesman in history. But David “Camera” Hogg wants a shot at that title. All the talk of gun control provided inspiration for Americans to buy a record number of guns in March.
In fact, the 2,767,699 NICS checks from March 2018 stand as the third most of any month, ever.
The FBI launched the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) back in 1998. Since then, the FBI has completed 285.5M checks successfully. Granted, not all of those represent firearm sales, the numbers do represent a gauge of firearm-purchase and -permitting activity.
Looking deeper into the FBI’s NICS numbers, about 1.4 million of those March 2018 checks came from firearm sales. These include 781,000 transactions for handgun purchases and just shy of 541,000 for long guns.
http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2018/04/john-boch/gun-owners-buying-guns-at-record-pace-in-march-thanks-david-hogg/
-
Too bad red's such an unflattering color. Whatever shall we do.
???
-
Linked for relevance: http://www.getbig.com/boards/index.php?topic=644155.0