# This is why you must never vote for a democrat



## Rambunctious (Dec 12, 2018)

If you believe in free speech.....


----------



## Rambunctious (Dec 12, 2018)

Guys like this swamper dem is why we can never allow them to take our guns away....this kind of jackass is what the founders foresaw when they wrote the 2nd amendment.....stop voting for democrats...they have collectively lost their minds.....


----------



## candycorn (Dec 12, 2018)

Rambunctious said:


> Guys like this swamper dem is why we can never allow them to take our guns away....this kind of jackass is what the founders foresaw when they wrote the 2nd amendment.....stop voting for democrats...they have collectively lost their minds.....


_
"they have collectively lost their minds"_

But they won the House.

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!!


----------



## Rambunctious (Dec 12, 2018)

I wonder how many of his cohorts feel the same way...how dare he say he would love to regulate your words?....unbelievable and very chilling....


----------



## Rambunctious (Dec 12, 2018)

candycorn said:


> Rambunctious said:
> 
> 
> > Guys like this swamper dem is why we can never allow them to take our guns away....this kind of jackass is what the founders foresaw when they wrote the 2nd amendment.....stop voting for democrats...they have collectively lost their minds.....
> ...


I'll bet he didn't say this during his campaign...see dems have to lie to win....


----------



## Rambunctious (Dec 12, 2018)

Maybe the people voting for him need to get a copy of the constitution and read it...all of it not just the parts your idiot public school teacher talked about....


----------



## candycorn (Dec 12, 2018)

Rambunctious said:


> candycorn said:
> 
> 
> > Rambunctious said:
> ...



He was going to say it but he was waiting for a payment from Mexico

As are we.


----------



## Rambunctious (Dec 12, 2018)

I'm just happy the guy said it on national TV...hopefully it will shorten his career in politics...because anyone that feels they way he does does not belong in our government....


----------



## Rambunctious (Dec 12, 2018)

candycorn said:


> Rambunctious said:
> 
> 
> > candycorn said:
> ...


Its not funny candycorn...one day your speech may be unacceptable to someone like him....


----------



## william the wie (Dec 12, 2018)

Rambunctious said:


> Guys like this swamper dem is why we can never allow them to take our guns away....this kind of jackass is what the founders foresaw when they wrote the 2nd amendment.....stop voting for democrats...they have collectively lost their minds.....



Present evidence that they have ever had a mind to lose.


----------



## eagle1462010 (Dec 12, 2018)

Path of Europe......................We should never go there.............


----------



## Rambunctious (Dec 12, 2018)

william the wie said:


> Rambunctious said:
> 
> 
> > Guys like this swamper dem is why we can never allow them to take our guns away....this kind of jackass is what the founders foresaw when they wrote the 2nd amendment.....stop voting for democrats...they have collectively lost their minds.....
> ...


My bad on that one.....lol


----------



## Crepitus (Dec 12, 2018)

Rambunctious said:


> If you believe in free speech.....


And this is why you should never vote republican:


----------



## Death Angel (Dec 12, 2018)

Rambunctious said:


> If you believe in free speech.....


He's a chinaman. What do they know about Western FREEDOM.


----------



## S.J. (Dec 12, 2018)

Death Angel said:


> Rambunctious said:
> 
> 
> > If you believe in free speech.....
> ...


About as much as a Kenyan.


----------



## Pogo (Dec 12, 2018)

Rambunctious said:


> If you believe in free speech.....



You should punch "play" on your own video.

Dumbass.


----------



## MarcATL (Dec 12, 2018)

Rambunctious said:


> I'm just happy the guy said it on national TV...hopefully it will shorten his career in politics...because anyone that feels they way he does does not belong in our government....


Aren't you sons-of-bitches running around telling us NOW that it's not about what one *SAYS*, but about what one *DOES!?!?!???*


----------



## Rambunctious (Dec 12, 2018)

Pogo said:


> Rambunctious said:
> 
> 
> > If you believe in free speech.....
> ...



I did dummy...oh I know he back tracked as soon as he heard himself...but for an elected official to even contemplate curtailing free speech is enough for me.....but not for you I guess....


----------



## Rambunctious (Dec 12, 2018)

MarcATL said:


> Aren't you sons-of-bitches running around telling us NOW that it's not about what one *SAYS*, but about what one *DOES!?!?!???*


Free speech and freedom to associate and freedom of thought....Marc! you are either for it 100% or you are against it....and if one is against it they are living in the wrong country.....


----------



## Moonglow (Dec 12, 2018)

Fake news
He said:


> After CNN host Brianna Keilar praised Lieu for the "clever" stunt, she wondered if Democrats should have used more of their time to question the Google leader about how it and other tech companies can work to prevent the spread of conspiracy theories and other online trolling.
> 
> "It's a very good point you make," Lieu said. "I would love if I could have more than five minutes to question witnesses. Unfortunately, I don't get that opportunity. However, I would love to be able to regulate the content of speech. The First Amendment prevents me from doing so, and that's simply a function of the First Amendment, but I think over the long run, it's better the government does not regulate the content of speech."





> Lieu got attention a day earlier when Google CEO Sundar Pichai testified at a House Judiciary Committee hearing, assailing conservative claims of the tech giant's bias against them by reading positive and negative stories about Republican Reps. Steve Scalise (La.) and Steve King (Iowa), the latter of whom has repeatedly courted controversy with racially charged remarks


That doesn't seem to jibe with what the OP is claiming.
Lieu: 'I Would Love to Be Able to Regulate the Content of Speech' but First Amendment Stops Me


----------



## Pogo (Dec 12, 2018)

Rambunctious said:


> Pogo said:
> 
> 
> > Rambunctious said:
> ...



Apparently you didn't, Chuckles.  You see, there was already a thread on this, in which I posted his words, verbatim, to wit:

>> “I would love to be able to regulate the content of speech, the First Amendment prevents me from doing so and that’s simply a function of the First Amendment. Over the long run, it’s better that government does not regulate the content of speech... I would urge these private-sector companies to regulate better themselves, but it’s really nothing that I believe government can do” <<
​NOW you see what I mean about vetting what The Blazes feed you?  They're counting on your not to.  
_Now_ look where you are.


----------



## Rambunctious (Dec 12, 2018)

Pogo said:


> Rambunctious said:
> 
> 
> > Pogo said:
> ...



When he said this..."I would love to be able to regulate the content of speech"

That was all I needed to hear...why wasn't that enough for you?....


----------



## Pogo (Dec 12, 2018)

Rambunctious said:


> Pogo said:
> 
> 
> > Rambunctious said:
> ...



Obviously it was all you needed.  You're fucking stupid.
 Unfortunately I know about "context".  It changes your whole world.


----------



## Rambunctious (Dec 12, 2018)

Pogo said:


> Obviously it was all you needed. You're fucking stupid.
> Unfortunately I know about "context". It changes your whole world


Just remember one thing...the angrier you get the more fun I have.....that kind of says it all about you....


----------



## Pogo (Dec 12, 2018)

Rambunctious said:


> Pogo said:
> 
> 
> > Obviously it was all you needed. You're fucking stupid.
> ...



Whatever, Kleenex-boi.  I ain't the one harrumphing over cherrypicked sentence fragments.  Am I.


----------



## Rambunctious (Dec 12, 2018)

Pogo said:


> Whatever, Kleenex-boi. I ain't the one harrumphing over cherrypicked sentence fragments. Am I



Kleenex boi?.....what in the world is that?....are you being insulting?....if so how?....*he* said it Pogo...you heard it Pogo....you give him the benefit of doubt Pogo...I don't...the subject matter is way to crucial and important to Real Americans...are you a Real American Pogo?....


----------



## regent (Dec 18, 2018)

Rambunctious said:


> Pogo said:
> 
> 
> > Whatever, Kleenex-boi. I ain't the one harrumphing over cherrypicked sentence fragments. Am I
> ...


What if you don't like guns, do you have to give up your citizenship.


----------



## Rambunctious (Dec 18, 2018)

regent said:


> What if you don't like guns, do you have to give up your citizenship


No just as long as you respect the 2nd amendment to our constitution....


----------



## regent (Dec 18, 2018)

Rambunctious said:


> regent said:
> 
> 
> > What if you don't like guns, do you have to give up your citizenship
> ...


Well you seem like a gun lover so perhaps you can explain why guns are so important in your life.


----------



## Rambunctious (Dec 18, 2018)

regent said:


> Well you seem like a gun lover so perhaps you can explain why guns are so important in your life


The right to defend myself and my property is whats important to me....do I "love guns"?...no...its a tool just like anything else....


----------



## Dan Stubbs (Dec 19, 2018)

Rambunctious said:


> regent said:
> 
> 
> > What if you don't like guns, do you have to give up your citizenship
> ...


They showed their true colors back in the 60s when they refused to seat elected reps to the Democratic Convention in Chicago and the Democrats replaced them with other people.  This was not fair or Democratic.  

They have tried to enslave voters by making promises that they never keep.  The have taken the Black voters down a road of dependency and some have followed, but the world changes and so have the people.  We have become more educated and vote by thinking and not the lies that we use to believe in.  A good example is Salt and Pepper on www.youtube.com


----------



## Dan Stubbs (Dec 19, 2018)

regent said:


> Rambunctious said:
> 
> 
> > regent said:
> ...


They are used for hunting for food,  protection again illegals who want to enter, crime in general, and the Government invasion of my Rights.


----------



## regent (Dec 22, 2018)

I hope people  would think again about fighting the government for their gun rights. During the war I was an MP for a time and once a month we would have "crowd control drill."' Our MI's were complete with bayonets as we marched against the crowd. Would we have shot if ordered to? There was never any question by any of us about shooting Americans if ordered.


----------



## Dick Foster (Jan 21, 2019)

regent said:


> I hope people  would think again about fighting the government for their gun rights. During the war I was an MP for a time and once a month we would have "crowd control drill."' Our MI's were complete with bayonets as we marched against the crowd. Would we have shot if ordered to? There was never any question by any of us about shooting Americans if ordered.


Which only underscores the need for the 2nd amendment and why the founders, in their wisdom put it in our constitution.
Do you even try to think before talking or typing? I only ask because that was a really silly statement. Perhaps you shouldn't really be in the military. Apparently you have no concept of the oath you swore.


----------



## regent (Jan 21, 2019)

Dick Foster said:


> regent said:
> 
> 
> > I hope people  would think again about fighting the government for their gun rights. During the war I was an MP for a time and once a month we would have "crowd control drill."' Our MI's were complete with bayonets as we marched against the crowd. Would we have shot if ordered to? There was never any question by any of us about shooting Americans if ordered.
> ...


I thought the oath had something to do with obeying orders, and I believe we would have obeyed. Sounds like the second amendment says military people that took  an oath to obey orders  should disobey the orders? Can't win.


----------



## dblack (Jan 21, 2019)

Rambunctious said:


> If you believe in free speech.....



Is he talking about Google and Twitter?


----------



## hadit (Jan 21, 2019)

Rambunctious said:


> If you believe in free speech.....



He went full potato. Never go full potato.


----------



## progressive hunter (Jan 22, 2019)

regent said:


> Dick Foster said:
> 
> 
> > regent said:
> ...


I think i says lawful orders


----------



## joaquinmiller (Jan 22, 2019)

progressive hunter said:


> regent said:
> 
> 
> > Dick Foster said:
> ...



Sort of.  It says, "according to the regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice."  What they don't say is you seldom, if ever, get to debate the legality of an order at the time it's given, and refusal to obey can get you shot. 

The "well-regulated militia" of the 2nd Amendment was an instrument of the state, codified in law.  Teabilly Fucksticks think otherwise.


----------



## joaquinmiller (Jan 22, 2019)

Rambunctious said:


> Pogo said:
> 
> 
> > Rambunctious said:
> ...



Absolutely!  There's nothing like a truncated quote.  My favorite is Jesus said, "Go and sin."


----------



## regent (Jan 22, 2019)

So did we solve that problem?


----------



## Dick Foster (Jan 24, 2019)

regent said:


> Dick Foster said:
> 
> 
> > regent said:
> ...



The oath actually has to do with LAWFUL orders not any order. The operative word here is lawful.


----------



## regent (Feb 1, 2019)

Dick Foster said:


> regent said:
> 
> 
> > Dick Foster said:
> ...


And who decides "lawful order"? And how much time is given to research lawful order? And if still wrong in defining lawful order is the GI held responsible?


----------



## Dick Foster (Feb 3, 2019)

regent said:


> Dick Foster said:
> 
> 
> > regent said:
> ...


I suppose common sense for the most part. And there's not nearly enough of that around today.


----------



## regent (Feb 11, 2019)

Rambunctious said:


> Guys like this swamper dem is why we can never allow them to take our guns away....this kind of jackass is what the founders foresaw when they wrote the 2nd amendment.....stop voting for democrats...they have collectively lost their minds.....


As soon as the conservatives got into power with the second president, John Adams, they passed a law making it illegal for liberals to criticize the government, or conservative, government officials. The law was the "Sedition Act", and the next president, liberal Thomas Jefferson, got the law dropped and America entered into the "Era of Good Feelings". Freedom of speech is important to liberals, guns are important to conservatives.


----------



## Picaro (Feb 14, 2019)

regent said:


> Rambunctious said:
> 
> 
> > Guys like this swamper dem is why we can never allow them to take our guns away....this kind of jackass is what the founders foresaw when they wrote the 2nd amendment.....stop voting for democrats...they have collectively lost their minds.....
> ...



Jefferson got the law dropped because it was merely an attempt at shutting him and his allies down, not because of any grand egalitarian principle he had. Jefferson is also the first President to use Federal troops against American citizens, enforcing his embargo, so let's not get all misty eyed over The Jefferson Myth; he was a great man by virtue of his time and place, and role in the country's founding, not for his moral and political consistency. He had a great first term as Prez, one of the best in our history, but his second term was a dictatorship and set several bad precedents, including Lincoln's, which effectively ended Constitutional law  in the U.S., making  it merely lip service and largely a joke, ruled by judicial whim from then on. If you can appoint the Court, you can do whatever you want as President and/or a Party. 'Freedom of speech' is not something favored by Democrats at all.


----------



## Dick Foster (Feb 14, 2019)

Picaro said:


> regent said:
> 
> 
> > Rambunctious said:
> ...


----------



## Picaro (Feb 15, 2019)

Was Calley following lawful orders in his mass murder of civilians? Seems the Airborne troops who landed and stopped him suffered for their 'defective' interpretations of ' lawful orders', while Calley got off with a relative wrist slap in comparison.


----------



## regent (Feb 20, 2019)

Dick Foster said:


> Picaro said:
> 
> 
> > regent said:
> ...


When Jefferson became president he merely had to use the same law




Dick Foster said:


> Picaro said:
> 
> 
> > regent said:
> ...










Jefferson could have used the Sedition Act to stifle any criticism of him or the Antifederalists, but he didn't. Jefferson also did not approve of the Marshall-Court nor it's decisions.


----------



## Picaro (Feb 22, 2019)

Jefferson didn't use the law because he didn't need it; his Party was so dominant it was superfluous and he could make more political points by rejecting it than using it.


----------



## regent (Apr 3, 2019)

william the wie said:


> Rambunctious said:
> 
> 
> > Guys like this swamper dem is why we can never allow them to take our guns away....this kind of jackass is what the founders foresaw when they wrote the 2nd amendment.....stop voting for democrats...they have collectively lost their minds.....
> ...



Might check out the BjIl of Rights and see why liberals pushed the Bill and conservatives opposed it.


----------



## william the wie (Apr 3, 2019)

Beating my usual drum the SALT deduction cap reduced tax revenues by nearly 10% (source my calculator) in NY.  IL,CA, MA and NJ are probably in even worse shape but all of the business channels and most of the financial analysts are concentrated in NYC. With the tax base flight that is happening now and the proposed taxes to "improve" SALT revenues round two will happen before the primary season is done. "Grapes of Wrath" is likely to be seen in reverse in the Blue Wall prior to the conventions. The epic clown car of the Ds, the Which hunt and other problem such as the college bribery scandal is going to do even more damage to the Ds and the rescue package for the D states will be just full of concealed poison pills worded ever so nicely. That will do long term damage to the D franchise as well. So, voting for the Ds may not be on the table for much longer.


----------



## regent (May 24, 2019)

william the wie said:


> Beating my usual drum the SALT deduction cap reduced tax revenues by nearly 10% (source my calculator) in NY.  IL,CA, MA and NJ are probably in even worse shape but all of the business channels and most of the financial analysts are concentrated in NYC. With the tax base flight that is happening now and the proposed taxes to "improve" SALT revenues round two will happen before the primary season is done. "Grapes of Wrath" is likely to be seen in reverse in the Blue Wall prior to the conventions. The epic clown car of the Ds, the Which hunt and other problem such as the college bribery scandal is going to do even more damage to the Ds and the rescue package for the D states will be just full of concealed poison pills worded ever so nicely. That will do long term damage to the D franchise as well. So, voting for the Ds may not be on the table for much longer.


Democrats have a secret weapon and it can be found in the White House, that is if Trump is not impeached and removed from office or resigns.


----------



## william the wie (May 24, 2019)

Dream on. Nadler and Schiff are terrified of what may happen to them. Just watch their reactions to Barr being put in charge of declassification of witch hunt evidence.


----------

