Nov 2023 Mod notice:
There may be other, more specific, threads about some aspects of US politics, but this one tends to act as a hub for all sorts of related news and information, so it's usually one of the busiest OTC threads.
If you're new to OTC, it's worth reading the Introduction to On-Topic Conversations
and the On-Topic Conversations debate guidelines
before posting here.
Rumor-based, fear-mongering and/or inflammatory statements that damage the quality of the thread will be thumped. Off-topic posts will also be thumped. Repeat offenders may be suspended.
If time spent moderating this thread remains a distraction from moderation of the wiki itself, the thread will need to be locked. We want to avoid that, so please follow the forum rules
when posting here.
In line with the general forum rules, 'gravedancing' is prohibited here. If you're celebrating someone's death or hoping that they die, your post will get thumped. This rule applies regardless of what the person you're discussing has said or done.
Edited by Mrph1 on Nov 30th 2023 at 11:03:59 AM
^
You might want to add the disclaimer that those 20 percenter "crusaders" are out to do what they think is best for the country, just to clear that up for those of us who aren't Jesus-People.
That's honestly one of my biggest sticking points with the GOP. I might actually be ok with voting Republican if the jesus-freaks would un-hijack the fucking party. Or if we could have a conservative AND secular party. I have a knee-jerk reaction that whenever anyone claims we're a Christian Nation or equates "American Values" with Christianity. Said knee-jerk reaction is an ass kicking.
It really pisses me off that as a nation we brag about being all equal and shit, and in the same breath people say that if your values aren't "christian values" it's Un American. Which is what they are automatically insinuating when the words "American Values" are used before or after a description of suggested or current legislation that is purely driven by Christians. That attitude makes me want to punch a baby.
edited 9th Jun '13 8:15:30 AM by Barkey
![]()
Sorry Bark. I thought that was implicit.
![]()
Geez, relax, Bark. Most Christians, like me, don't care if you want to be a card-carrying heathen and have male orgies. It neithers adds to nor takes away from my paycheck so...
They argue with their overlords, but they still loyally serve them. And don't be fooled, he's not the only one.
edited 9th Jun '13 8:16:20 AM by TheStarshipMaxima
It was an honor^^
No, they aren't, but it's rude and presumptuous to assume everybody wants them, or that you aren't being a Good American if you disagree with them. The biggest roadblock between me and the Republican Party is probably religion. The bible thumpers have attached themselves to the GOP like fucking leeches or something, they want to suck the party dry and not leave any real room for people who don't have religiously fueled opinions on gays and abortion, which are some of the major sticking points that the GOP runs into opposition on, and one of my major reasons that I don't vote for them.
If not for Palin and all her crusader talk, I would have voted Mc Cain, since I really like him.
The reason I have an axe to grind against Christians is because all the major Christian lobbies in DC essentially send the message that secular conservative opinions are not wanted or desired in the Republican party, and that you can either get in line and vote with them or you don't matter. A major part of the Republican Party is represented by groups like Focus on the Family and Citizens United, who are both sacks of shit who I refuse to be associated with politically(I.E. not voting for the parties they have a controlling stake in)
edited 9th Jun '13 8:20:12 AM by Barkey
Meh, I'm not going to be buying what they're selling unless they change their tune on gays and abortion, which isn't going to happen. If the Democrats ever think I'm being harsh about their party because of the gun laws, I have just as much fervor when it goes the other way around with the Repubs.
I just get really sick and fucking tired of loudmouth Christians acting like they own this country, and the rest of us should just feel grateful to live here.
Barkey, I think the big disconnect that most people here have with you on gun control is that you're talking about the state level, because that's what effects you, while everyone else is talking about the federal level, because that's what makes the news. We've had the gun control conversation before, and we're largely on the same page, but just looking at it from opposite directions. You're focused on being allowed to have the things you want, because right now you, in California, are not allowed to have them. I'm focused on keeping guns out of the hands of people who shouldn't have them, because right now, nationally, I see that as the larger problem.
Part of the issue is that I think gun control becomes more effective the larger scale it is. If it's at the local level, and all you need to do to get an illegal gun is drive to another city, then obviously that's not very helpful. On the state level it's better, but still problematic. On the national level, it becomes much harder to just go somewhere else to buy your guns, because now you have to deal with customs and whatnot. I'm not saying that it'd be 100% effective, but I do think it would be way better than the alternatives.
That's why I think that we need to have tighter gun regulation on a national scale. I completely agree with you that the state of gun control in places like California has gone way over the bounds of reasonable — but at the same time, places like Florida have the exact opposite problem ("stand your ground", anyone?), so some intervention at the federal level (in both directions, saying "no, you can't ban scary cosmetic features" as well as "no, you can't just buy guns off the street for cash") is necessary.
I'm not at all optimistic about it actually happening, though. Unfortunately.
Really from Jupiter, but not an alien.About banning cosmetic features: some could use it. Diamantés and gold plating? Do not belong on a firearm, imo.
If you need regulation to save your blushes, then: hey...
I think there is room for bedazzlement legislation: restrict it to the holster and/or gun container.
edited 9th Jun '13 9:14:42 AM by Euodiachloris
Shit, if you got the money then bedazzle your AK all you want I guess.
^^
The reason I bandy on the way I do about federal regulation sometimes though, is that perhaps as a result of where I live, I almost don't trust our legislatures to come up with a federal gun control standard that doesn't fuck over the whole country. Maybe it's because of the ridiculous standards I've been laying out that I'm used to, but my nightmare scenario is that if the NRA and other gun groups relent and let something federal pass, it's going to be Commiefornia: National Edition.
And the worst part of all is that it won't do that much, because states will still be able to do gun control, they'll just be able to do it stricter than federal. But since states can do as they wish in this regard, I kind of feel ok with, say, Kansas, doing whatever the fuck it wants to without the feds getting in the way.
Where I live is a lost cause, but I don't want other states to have to go through what I am, ya know?
Now if someone said "Enact a federal standard and then take away states rights to make laws regarding gun control" I'd be like "Fuck yeah, let's do it so we're all equally miserable. Long as Feinstein/Hilldog/Boxer ain't writing the bill, I'm ok with it." If we're going to have thorough federal gun control instead of using loose guidelines, we need to take those rights away from the state legislature.
edited 9th Jun '13 9:11:15 AM by Barkey
I admit my views on gun control are influenced by missouri being the opposite of California. here, the pro-gun side won a loooong time ago and now randomly kick gun control while its down by passing more and more laws ensuring further and crazier gun rights constantly and acting like theyre in constant danger of eradication by secrut librul armies
Its really hard to feel sympathy for gun rights when you have crazy state congressmen with what can best be described as spiky permed blond christian hair passing laws ensuring you cant be fired for owning a gun (in a heavily conservative state, no less) because she heard one time of someone getting fired for it, yet she refuses to believe anyone in missouri has ever been fired for being gay.
edited 9th Jun '13 9:35:23 AM by midgetsnowman
![]()
Well, I don't think you could forbid states from making any gun control laws at all, but you could set a "floor" as well as a "ceiling" when it came to gun control. That's why I mentioned getting something like "you can't ban cosmetic features" as well as "closing the gun show loophole" being enacted at the federal level.
![]()
He will haunt you to the grave.
Hamilton wanted to model the US government very closely of the British Government.
edited 9th Jun '13 11:44:57 AM by DeviantBraeburn
Everything is Possible. But some things are more Probable than others. JEBAGEDDON 2016Governor Jay Nixon vetoes large corporate tax cut bill
Senator Mark Udall (D-CO): Obama administration should have been ‘more transparent’
edited 9th Jun '13 12:11:42 PM by DeviantBraeburn
Everything is Possible. But some things are more Probable than others. JEBAGEDDON 2016

Hell fucking yes. The Tea Party isn't taken seriously by any self-respecting Republican anywhere in these 50 states. Like I said, I'm not an advocate for same-sex relations, but I'm perfectly disgusted by the witch-hunt this McCarthy wannabes insist on.
Just like the Democrats, the Republicans are 65% decent enough guys who'll kowtow to get votes, 20% crusaders out to genuinely do what's best for the country, and 10% lunatics funded by Karl Rove who, I genuinely believe, hate the United States and are out to destroy it by any means necessary.
In short Taoist, the bad guys are pretty badly outnumbered here. They just make a lot of noise, and nowadays, people are intimidated by noise.
It was an honor