Which just goes to show that while it’s easy to deny evolution, it’s a lot harder to actually *fight *against millions of years of painstaking selection for those who’d fuck the most and the earliest ;).
To be completely fair, at the Democratic debate the other night Bernie Sanders expressed some rather similar ideas: Bernie Sanders on guns at the debate.
Obviously Sanders didn’t use anywhere near the same level of inflammatory wording, but the implication that gun control is needed in heavily black urban areas, though not in heavily white rural regions, fits in nicely with the thinking above.
I’m not really getting that implication, at least not from the quotes in the text. All I get is that gun control is a state issue.
Well, O’Malley said “It was not about urban and rural,” referencing his own ability to pass meaningful gun control legislation in a state with extensive rural areas. Sanders replied “it’s exactly about rural.” You could be right that the author of the article is misinterpreting what Sanders meant by this, and quite possibly I am too, but I had the same “oh dear, that doesn’t sound good” feeling. In re-reading the transcript, I do see more clearly Sanders’s point that gun control in seen differently in more urban states vs. more rural states, and maybe that is all the senator is saying. I still don’t think it sounds good.
I will admit that I come into this discussion with the very firm belief that Sanders is wrong on guns. I think in particular that his vote to shield gun companies from being sued was absolutely unconscionable, and I think he is being disingenuous when he tries to say that he’s not actually in favor of shielding them (“This was a large and complicated bill” doesn’t cut it). So it’s entirely possible that I’m predisposed to read more into his answers on guns than he actually put in.
Anyway, carry on.
Honestly, nobody is going to be able to do anything about guns so why bother? That’s why I don’t worry too much about candidates’ fiscal policy either.
Not a good thing, btw.
That’s not learned helplessness. It’s realism and wise use of resources. I pick my battles. Guns are now a third rail of American politics. Democrats would own both elected branches if people didn’t think they were all secretly (or weren’t openly) anti-gun.
That’s why I choose candidates based on their views on other social policies.
Fiscal policy is a bit different in that I don’t doubt the ability of presidential candidates to influence that policy, just that I doubt the ability of that policy to influence economic development over the long term. The result is the same, though; I generally discount candidates’ views on economics.
Guns are a social policy – a health issue right up there with car crashes.
Trade agreements directly and greatly affect economic development over the long term.
I didn’t say there weren’t a social policy. That’s why I specifically distinguished other social policies.
Ted Cruz, not wanting to lose the bigot vote, says he’ll kick the gays back out of the military.
Why do you hate the Baby Jesus, Mr. Kitchen?
[QUOTE=Yahweh, God of the Jews and Christians, as quoted by Moses the Lawgiver]
A thief must make full restitution. If he is unable, he is to be sold because of his theft.
[/QUOTE]
Anyway, auctioning off criminals to the highest bidder might be one way to address the federal deficit. What are we bid for Dennis Hastert?
In a separate matter, the fact that the co-author of Huckabee’s fittingly titled Character Is The Issue (:smack:) has had the “allegations against him of sexual battery of a female victim between the ages of 11 and 14 sustained” is really reaching. What will libtards complain of next? Where do Moses or Jesus argue against heterosexual relationships? Many 11-year old girls these days have past puberty.
America is lucky to have great moral figures like Mike Huckabee ready to lead us away from the jihadist preachings of slime-balls like Jim Webb or Lincoln Chafee.
God bless America!
Since there’s no “Despicable Republican Deed of the Day” thread, I’ll post this here.
I missed it, but according to Chris Matthews, this ad (the video right at the top of the link) ran during the Dem debate. They not only repeat long-debunked lies about Benghazi, but they put them in the mouths of the four Americans who died there.
No matter how cynical you are, you can’t keep up.
Might be an upgrade in values that they are ruthlessly exploiting diplomats who died for their country rather than soldiers. Sorta. Kinda.
Meh. Birth control methods can fail, too. Granted, someone who *professionally *advocated abstinence over birth control may not have been using any birth control, or not consistently.
AIUI, she was professionally advocating abstinence AS birth control.
But evidently not using that one…
I agree with Sanders, probably more than he himself does. And it’s not about race. There are rural blacks and urban whites. It’s about the fact that a firearm is a more consistent deterrent than a phone call to 911 when you live in the boonies, or for that matter when you’re a black, Native American, or someone else the police don’t actually respond to. Guns really aren’t seen as a menace in rural areas, because the risk of killing someone with a stray bullet is low. They’re a blight in urban areas. This is hard to resolve.
I see that the pro-Clinton side have suddenly decided they’re purists on gun control if it lets them tar Bernie Sanders with urban white liberals. Well, fine. Maybe that will lose them delegates in rural states and minority populations who agree with Bernie Sanders on this issue, because he’s right.
The funny thing is, Bernie’s originally from Brooklyn. He’s taken a moderate path on gun rights not out of any personal affinity for guns, but for pragmatic reasons of democratic politics. Howard Dean, also of Vermont, has a much more pro-NRA record (and that is exactly why the GOP feared him so much in 2008).
Honestly, the pro-gun-control position is a sign that the Democratic Party hasn’t been committed to leftism. How can you win the war to reform your society when you’ve unilaterally disarmed?
The surface meaning is apparently “Racism is a tragic symptom of our terrible sinfulness, and if only we opened our hearts to God’s grace he would heal our divisions, so we should definitely spend our time lamenting (other) people’s general sinfulness instead of doing anything to combat racism in particular.”
The dogwhistle meaning seems to be “Non-white people commit a lot of crimes so naturally white people develop racist prejudices against them.”
But he’s OK with the slaughter of young WHITE men? :eek:
So that makes **three **molesters of underage girls (Duggar, Nugent and Perry) who are close associates of Huckabee. This is getting to be a disturbing pattern…