I have to admit, you fooled some of the FReepers with your admitting everything everyone already agrees on about Kerry, so you gave nothing up there, but you didn't fool me. I am a detective. LOL
Posted on 10/21/2004 8:12:29 AM PDT by independent5
Hi, I'm new here. I'm an independent so not all of my views are conservative in nature. Am I welcome to post here? Is this is this the appropriate (general/chat) forum to post this in?
Those men who fought against the British Crown understood how tyrannical any man can become when he has power and put provision within the construct of our Government to ensure that our people could overthrow their government when need be. That is what I feel the second amendment is all about.
That's exactly what I think about the second amendment. Its purpose is to make sure the citizenry can rise up and defeat a tyrannical government.
Protagoras,
I've never posted at DU and didn't know what it was until someone suggested that I post at CU.
I have seen no disruptive behavior from this poster. The open market place of ideas does not deserve to be attacked by trolls, nor JimRob's site infiltrated by disruptors, but independant5 has taken time to respond not only on this thread but on others as well in a coherent, discussion based tone.
If he is a known troll in a new form, then Zot away. If not, then this may be someone we can help through reasoned discourse.
I have to admit, you fooled some of the FReepers with your admitting everything everyone already agrees on about Kerry, so you gave nothing up there, but you didn't fool me. I am a detective. LOL
Y'know, I'm so glad you weren't around when I was much younger and trying to determine what my beliefs were. I tended to lean more liberal back then.
Working for a large oil company while Carter was president was what solidified my beliefs in the Republican party. Til then I had never been personally affected by who was in power. Carter and working for Exxon changed my thinking forever.
Instead of labeling him troll, let's educate him. We have alot of bright minds here on FR and while he does use some of the 'buzzwords' of the liberal party, the fact he signed up and has answered questions posed to him as honestly as he can, means to me he's got an open mind.
READ HIS STATEMENTS
Here are his points, minus the smoke and mirrors.
One of which I do like very much -- and that's the tax-cut rollback on the top 1%
I also understand why he voted against the partial birth abortion ban -- I do wish they had drafted the bill better. I might actually lean Kerry here.
Though I was not happy that Bush didn't push the assault weapons ban more.
Now I don't know why Kerry voted against the first Gulf War or against funding the troops. Neither sound good to me
But, again to be fair, I understand that there are often reasons for votes that appear, on the surface, to be ridiculous.
I felt like Bush, for some reason or another, wanted war in Iraq.
The problem, if that's true, is that the Bush administration lied to me about why we're there.
The whole WMD thing doesn't please me at all ... it really makes it look like we rushed into things.
You don't rush into sending your friends and neighbors to fight and possibly die
I feel like a lot of people have been callous towards the deaths of our troops
They have done so by failing to put a face on those troops, but rather used just a number.
But there was something that did stick, and that was that so many people just don't really understand the seriousness of going to war.
We can't take a face off of our military, the military is our son, our daughter, our father or mother, sister or brother. This is why I feel so strongly about how Bush handled Iraq.
I'd say Bush has made me most uncomfortable with his handling of Iraq.
I get the impression that Bush is going to hurt our foreign policy,
damage our reputation in the world, which, despite what I've heard some conservatives say, is something to be very concerned with.
It hurts trade and it hurts the lives of our citizens who live and work overseas -- beyond other things.
I do know that there has actually been a net job loss during the Bush administration.
I think its a combination of the times and the Bush policies.
Can you tell me anything good about Kerry?
YOU PEOPLE REALLY THINK THIS DU TROLL IS HONEST? HE'S A TROLL. C'MON FREEPERS, WAKE UP! LOL
Protagoras, you've made your point repeatedly & the mods are alerted. Can you give it a rest, already?
Independent5, as a show of good faith, how about answering my question in reply #75?
Read 'em again. I just posted them again. He has no open mind, he came here to find a way to get this nonsense out without getting booted again.
Independent5, as a show of good faith, how about answering my question in reply #75?
Absolutely. I'll look it up and get right back to you.
You got it. Be sure to ping me when he's exposed. Ta Ta
Newbie
OK. So how do know that defeating tyranny won't require, in your terms, killing ~600 people per minute? Obviously governments must think that capability is pretty important in warfare, or they would spend money on machine guns.
I'm sorry I missed this one, otherwise I would have replied earlier.
What do you have against the top 1%? Why shouldn't they pay the same proportion of their income that the rest of us do?
I don't have anything against them. But they do pay the same proportion of their income as the rest of us do -- because we're all on the same bracket. I do support progressive tax brackets -- and here's why I think so: $100 means a lot more to someone who only makes $1000 a year than does $1,000,000 for someone who makes $10,000,000 a year.
Maybe that's justifiable, but whatever you tax people for better be pretty dang important.
Yes, I agree. And I want our government to slash tons of programs that aren't important ... and I am of the opinion that there are plenty of those. But I could be wrong. I just can't imagine that there isn't a ton of waste when we spend billions of dollars.
BTW, if you think it's hyperbole for me to say taxation is taking money at gunpoint, try not paying your taxes for a while and see how long it takes for someone to show up carrying a gun.
Haha, nah, I understand.
My first screenname was registered in 1998. I should have kept it.
OK. So how do know that defeating tyranny won't require, in your terms, killing ~600 people per minute? Obviously governments must think that capability is pretty important in warfare, or they would spend money on machine guns.
I don't know that. But I'd wager that our government would only be worth overthrowing if we had 150 million Americans that wanted it overthrown. Otherwise we're screwed. 150 million Americans with pistols, shotguns, rifles, hand grenades, and home-made bombs is more than enough to take out the U.S. army let alone giving them all assault weapons.
Still, I do think honest people should have access to assault weapons, but how do you separate the honest ones from the dishonest? How is it accomplished? I'm just trying to be practical.
Right out of the liberal talking points, and before that, the communist manifesto.
Should the average citizen be allowed to have nuclear weapons?
Mine was in 1998 too, I just forgot my password. We are around the same "age". BTW, if anyone knows the password to the screenname "Boethius", let me know. This is a bit unweildy at times.
Which ones?
Protagoras,
You don't think that you could reach a point where you have more than enough money to live your life the way you would like? If you can reach that point, then some of your income becomes less important to you.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.