The Republican Party's Problem in One Simple Question...

[Seawytch]

What freedom have YOU lost?

Freedoms we all have lost and you have just proved what I stated, you don't even see it.

Well, we invested in our country publicly in the 1920's. Whether the government bans smoking, demands that you wear a seat belt or spies on you is a matter of electing the kinds of people with those opinions. Either, way we shouldn't stop investing in our country.

Where do you get freedom with stopping investing in our country?
The more freedom we have the more we can invest in our country.
The bigger the government becomes the less we the private sector have to invest.

LOL,

The damn private sector doesn't do things in our countries interest like warn the population of that hurricane, tornadoes or flash flood. It doesn't demand clean food or water!!! Shit, it does the opposite! And as it is doing the opposite it runs away to southern Asia to find people just above slaves to take advantage of. I am not against the private sector but we need government REGULATIONS on them and of course public sector investment.

Reasonable regulations not over the top crazy regulations.

Name them. What "over the top regulations" have been passed?

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

PEACH174 SAID:

“Freedom of Speech, most especially when it offends.
Freedom to exercise our religion
The banning of certain guns and ammo and clips.
The right for us to be secure in our houses ,papers, effects and unreasonable search and seizures.”

Ignorant, unfounded nonsense.

You've 'lost' no freedom of speech.

Neither the Federal government nor any other jurisdiction in the United States has enacted a measure denying you or anyone else freedom of expression, including the right to engage in offensive or hate speech.

Measures prohibiting owning certain firearms and restrictions on magazine capacity have been upheld as Constitutional by the Federal courts.

And your 4th Amendment rights remain fully intact, no measures have been enacted denying you your right to privacy – indeed, it's you and most others on the right hostile to privacy rights.

So you've 'lost' no freedoms, you retain the same rights and liberties today as you possessed on January 20, 2009 at 11:59 AM EST.

 

[peach174]

Freedoms we all have lost and you have just proved what I stated, you don't even see it.

Name one.

Freedom of Speech, most especially when it offends.
Freedom to exercise our religion
The banning of certain guns and ammo and clips.
The right for us to be secure in our houses ,papers, effects and unreasonable search and seizures

Examples of the government restricting your free speech?

Your right to keep and bear arms has not been infringed upon. Reasonable regulations have been found Constitutional.

The Patriot Act was not crafted in a vacuum and certainly not by liberals.

Try again.

Have you seen the news with protestors lately?
pepper spray, tear gas, rubber bullets and flash-bang stun grenades against peaceful protesters.

Supreme Court ruled that banning hand guns in D.C. as unconstitutional

Part of the Patriot Act was just ruled unConstitutional
It was expanded under Obama.
Part of Patriot Act ruled unconstitutional - US news - Security NBC News

Links to this expansion? The case you linked was from 2004.

The government has passed no laws abridging or restricting your right to free speech.

Well...maybe the protest zones around funerals...but again, that wasn't liberals.

Instead of seeing the value in allowing everyone to say what they think, we are being taught in America today that there is speech that is acceptable and speech that is not acceptable.
You seem to think that it must be done by the government, it can't because of the 1st amendment, so it must be taught and attacked.
This is what I am talking about that you don't even see this.

The link was from 2007 not 2004
Patriot Act Extension Signed By Obama
add the National defense authorization act.
President Obama Signed the National Defense Authorization Act - Now What - Forbes

 

[peach174]

Freedoms we all have lost and you have just proved what I stated, you don't even see it.

Well, we invested in our country publicly in the 1920's. Whether the government bans smoking, demands that you wear a seat belt or spies on you is a matter of electing the kinds of people with those opinions. Either, way we shouldn't stop investing in our country.

Where do you get freedom with stopping investing in our country?
The more freedom we have the more we can invest in our country.
The bigger the government becomes the less we the private sector have to invest.

LOL,

The damn private sector doesn't do things in our countries interest like warn the population of that hurricane, tornadoes or flash flood. It doesn't demand clean food or water!!! Shit, it does the opposite! And as it is doing the opposite it runs away to southern Asia to find people just above slaves to take advantage of. I am not against the private sector but we need government REGULATIONS on them and of course public sector investment.

Reasonable regulations not over the top crazy regulations.

Name them. What "over the top regulations" have been passed?

What the hell is wrong with you?
Many of us have put up the links and said over and over again and again what they are.
Do you have a problem with your memory?

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

PEACH174 SAID:

“Have you seen the news with protestors lately?
pepper spray, tear gas, rubber bullets and flash-bang stun grenades against peaceful protesters.

Supreme Court ruled that banning hand guns in D.C. as unconstitutional

Part of the Patriot Act was just ruled unConstitutional
It was expanded under Obama.
Part of Patriot Act ruled unconstitutional - US news - Security NBC News”

At least you're consistent at being ignorant and wrong.

Crowd and riot control measures by law enforcement don't constitute a 'violation' of freedom of speech or assembly; jurisdictions are at liberty to keep clear government owned public places. See Clark v. Community for Creative Non-Violence (1984).

In no jurisdiction in the United State are all firearms banned, every American everywhere has the ability to possess a handgun for lawful self-defense.

And that a Federal court has held a provision of the PA as being un-Constitutional is an example of your civil rights being protected, not a 'loss' of your rights and liberties, where the PA was enacted by a republican Congress and signed into law by a republican president.

 

[peach174]

PEACH174 SAID:

“Freedom of Speech, most especially when it offends.
Freedom to exercise our religion
The banning of certain guns and ammo and clips.
The right for us to be secure in our houses ,papers, effects and unreasonable search and seizures.”

Ignorant, unfounded nonsense.

You've 'lost' no freedom of speech.

Neither the Federal government nor any other jurisdiction in the United States has enacted a measure denying you or anyone else freedom of expression, including the right to engage in offensive or hate speech.

Measures prohibiting owning certain firearms and restrictions on magazine capacity have been upheld as Constitutional by the Federal courts.

And your 4th Amendment rights remain fully intact, no measures have been enacted denying you your right to privacy – indeed, it's you and most others on the right hostile to privacy rights.

So you've 'lost' no freedoms, you retain the same rights and liberties today as you possessed on January 20, 2009 at 11:59 AM EST.

Say the wrong thing that is offensive where you work and see how fast you lose your job.
You are all proving in what I said you don't even see it let alone how they are doing it.
What in world do you think is going on when the left in this nation is defending ISIS over cartoons?

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Both parties play to their extremist base.
Republicans play to their slash, cut and burn idiots
Democrats play to the pc police and the whiners.

False equivalency, nothing the democrats do compares with the wide ideological swing republican candidates must perform to run for president.

Precisely! The Republicans are the same folks who said in 1972 that the McGovern nomination meant the demise of the Democrat Party because of the radical swing to the Left! Such extremism, they dutifully pointed out, meant that governing coalitions among the various factions in the Democrat party would be impossible.

And yet, here they are. Far off in the Right Wing wasteland licking their chops as if the history lessons they taught do not apply to themselves.

Between 1988 and 1992 democrats managed to accomplish what republican are either unwilling or incapable of doing: relegate the extremists in the party to the political backseat; since 1992 democrats have won four of the last six General Elections.

Sadly, today the extremist are getting into power of both parties. The republicans extremist thinks it is wise to kill off all of our investments and science institutions!!! Look who's trying to weaken America now.

Disagree.

Extremists in the democratic party remain quietly in the backseat, having little or no influence in overall party policy.

Indeed, the democrats have benefited from the fact that what was once perceived as 'extreme' 30 years ago has now become mainstream.

A majority of Americans support the right of same-sex couples to access marriage law.

A majority of Americans support immigration reform.

A majority of Americans support a woman's right to privacy and choice.

And a majority of Americans support decriminalizing private, personal use of marijuana.

Most of the democratic policy positions are inline with that of a majority of the American people, democratic policy positions are for the most part mainstream, where most republicans have moved further to the right, becoming more extreme and out of touch with a majority of the American people.

As long as republicans continue to pursue their extreme and radical agenda, they'll continue to lose General Elections.

 

[Nosmo King]

Both parties play to their extremist base.
Republicans play to their slash, cut and burn idiots
Democrats play to the pc police and the whiners.

False equivalency, nothing the democrats do compares with the wide ideological swing republican candidates must perform to run for president.

Precisely! The Republicans are the same folks who said in 1972 that the McGovern nomination meant the demise of the Democrat Party because of the radical swing to the Left! Such extremism, they dutifully pointed out, meant that governing coalitions among the various factions in the Democrat party would be impossible.

And yet, here they are. Far off in the Right Wing wasteland licking their chops as if the history lessons they taught do not apply to themselves.

Between 1988 and 1992 democrats managed to accomplish what republican are either unwilling or incapable of doing: relegate the extremists in the party to the political backseat; since 1992 democrats have won four of the last six General Elections.

ROFLMNAO!

See: 1994

Each and every two term president since World War II has lost his party's control of congress during the mid term elections in his second term. 1992 and 2014 were not history making elections, they were history repeating elections.

Those with a good knowledge of history know that. And we know that it is nothing indicative other than the vagaries of the electorate.

 

[Synthaholic]

If Maddow were correct, she'd have an audience.

She does have an audience.

 

[peach174]

PEACH174 SAID:

“Have you seen the news with protestors lately?
pepper spray, tear gas, rubber bullets and flash-bang stun grenades against peaceful protesters.

Supreme Court ruled that banning hand guns in D.C. as unconstitutional

Part of the Patriot Act was just ruled unConstitutional
It was expanded under Obama.
Part of Patriot Act ruled unconstitutional - US news - Security NBC News”

At least you're consistent at being ignorant and wrong.

Crowd and riot control measures by law enforcement don't constitute a 'violation' of freedom of speech or assembly; jurisdictions are at liberty to keep clear government owned public places. See Clark v. Community for Creative Non-Violence (1984).

In no jurisdiction in the United State are all firearms banned, every American everywhere has the ability to possess a handgun for lawful self-defense.

And that a Federal court has held a provision of the PA as being un-Constitutional is an example of your civil rights being protected, not a 'loss' of your rights and liberties, where the PA was enacted by a republican Congress and signed into law by a republican president.

Yes both parties are doing it, I have said so many times and the PA was extended by Obama.

Just ignore the peaceful part of what I said.
Of course we have to have control over crowds and riots.

The D.C. gun ban, enacted in 1976, prohibited anyone other than law-enforcement officers from carrying a firearm in the city. Residents were even barred from keeping guns in their homes for self-defense.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

If Maddow were correct, she'd have an audience.

She does have an audience.

So do i

 

[Synthaholic]

I'm surprised Jon Huntsman isn't running.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

I'm surprised Jon Huntsman isn't running.

Wasn't he the old professor in The Paper Chase

 

[Synthaholic]

If Maddow were correct, she'd have an audience.

She does have an audience.

So do i

Then you admit she is correct.

If Maddow were correct, she'd have an audience.

​

Thanks for playing, Frank.

 

[Synthaholic]

I'm surprised Jon Huntsman isn't running.

Wasn't he the old professor in The Paper Chase

No, that's John Houseman.

Huntsman is like Charlie Crist with half the Tan Intensity.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Between 1988 and 1992 the democrats successfully made their way out of the political wilderness by rejecting extremism – the question is: do republicans have the collective intelligence to do the same.

Throughout our history the American people have consistently rejected extremism, be it left or right – and appropriately so.

 

[M14 Shooter]

Between 1988 and 1992 the democrats successfully made their way out of the political wilderness by rejecting extremism – the question is: do republicans have the collective intelligence to do the same.

Scoff..
What happened in the 1994 election, and why?
.

 

[Stephanie]

I guess Maddcow doesn't do Google, If she did it would show what Party exactly IS Filled with losers, haters and flat out liars.

they kicked the Democrat party out of control of Congress after ONLY SIX years of their Dear ugly Leader the Democrat Obama being if office. but lets not let that get in her way

snip:

There are currently 31 Republicans, 18 Democrats, and one independent that hold the office of governor in the states. Additionally, 2 Republicans, 2 Independents and 2 Democrats (one is also a member of the PPD) serve as governors of United States Territories and Mayor of the District of Columbia.

• List of current United States governors - Wikipedia, the free ...