Chaos and Corruption

OP
R

Rye Catcher

Platinum Member
Joined
Nov 21, 2019
Messages
3,784
Reaction score
1,912
Points
910
WASHINGTON — At a virtual congressional hearing in May, Sen. Jerry Moran, R-Kan., asked Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin for help. A struggling trucking company in his state was on the brink of collapse and needed government support.

Eager to assist, Mnuchin assured the senator that “we will look at that specific company and see what we can do and get back to you.”

That company, YRC Worldwide, had lost more than $100 million in 2019 and was being sued by the Justice Department over claims it defrauded the federal government for a seven-year period. But six weeks after the hearing, YRC received a bailout from the Treasury Department — a $700 million loan in exchange for a 30% stake in the business. The company’s stock price soared 74%, although it has come down since.



Well, the swamp is still there and has become more toxic than any White House of Political Party in our lifetime.




Yeah, because Trump exposed them for the corrupt scum they are. And you want to keep the corrupt scum there.

Which makes you either stupid, or scum.

I'll let you choose.
This is not a rebuttal, bozo, it's a logical fallacy, to wit: ad hominem. Grow up bozo, your act is old and insipid.





Ummm, look up the definition of ad hominem, dude.
Gee bozo, I'm very familiar with logic and logical fallacies. Your post [ "Which makes you either stupid, or scum" ] has no relevance to my lead in thread, "chaos and corruption". Two words which anyone who has watched Trump and his Administration with eyes and ears wide open are well aware of in their words and deeds. Calling someone out as stupid or scum is a classic example of a personal attack, aka that educated and knowledgeable people recognize as an ad hominem.

Calling you bozo is not such a fallacy, it is an apt description of your pollyanna sense of the Trump Administration. One which is inept, incompetent and anti democratic.





The only person exhibiting pollyannaish behavior is you.

You categorically ignore the most corrupt administration this country has ever seen, the obummer admin, because you are a stalinist like they are.

So, yes, YOU have demonstrated that you ARE indeed scum.
"Stalinist" Proof you are an ignoramus and a damn liar. As I stated, grow up and try (if you can) to post something substantive, thoughtful or thought provoking. Off course with your head in the sand, I know this won't happen.

View attachment 373042





You are a stalinist through and through. No government is too much government so long as they are from your side.

You want guns taken away from the law abiding. That is the first step for the stalinists.

Armed citizens are a threat to your power. Disarmed sheep are to be sheared.
Another damn lie: "You want guns taken away from the law abiding". I have written numerous times as to my opinion on gun control: I support the right of sober, sane and law abiding citizens to own, possess and have in their custody and control a firearm, within reasonable conditions, imposed by State Governments with the approval of the people. Such conditions might require a license, and / or the registration of firearms in the possession / ownership.

Your second damn lie is this: "No government is too much government so long as they are from your side."

I have written too often that donald trump is a megalomaniac, and his supporters believe every, or most everything he does by fiat is okay. Thus sending Federal Troops into Portland using force against protesters and detaining citizens without identifying themselves as peace officers, denying them a phone call and failing to provide a bail hearing within 48 judicial hours is the example of too much government. Something I oppose and you it seems support.




Yes, licensure leads to confiscation. It has ALWAYS done so.

You feel that guns should only be in the hands of those you approve of.

Just like the Party Apparatchiks in the USSR.
LOL. When in the US has any jurisdiction required a license to own a firearm and then without Probable Cause take their firearms? Maybe you are not a biddable fool, maybe you are a paranoid schizophrenic.






New York, for one. Chicago, for another. Look up the Sullivan Law. But I am talking about government, and as we know government is corrupt. The laws that the Nazis used to disarm the populace were enacted by the Weimar Republic.
"Like most rights, the right secured by the Second Amendment is not unlimited. From Blackstone through
the 19th-century cases, commentators and courts routinely explained that the right was not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose.

"For example, the majority of the 19th-century courts to consider the question held that prohibitions on carrying concealed weapons were lawful under the Second Amendment or state analogues. Although we do not undertake an exhaustive historical analysis today of the full scope of the Second Amendment, nothing in our opinion should be taken to cast doubt on longstanding prohibitions on the possession of firearms by felons and the mentally ill, or laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings, or laws imposing conditions and qualifications on the commercial sale of arms.

"We also recognize another important limitation on the right to keep and carry arms. Miller said, as we have
explained, that the sorts of weapons protected were those “in common use at the time.” 307 U. S., at 179. We think that limitation is fairly supported by the historical tradition of prohibiting the carrying of “dangerous and unusual weapons.”"
Link is to Salia's comments in Heller

There is no such things as The Sullivan Act, and no record that Chitown or NYC ever imposed a law for every gun owner to be licensed.
 

JusticeHammer

Gold Member
Joined
Apr 20, 2017
Messages
2,450
Reaction score
769
Points
210
WASHINGTON — At a virtual congressional hearing in May, Sen. Jerry Moran, R-Kan., asked Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin for help. A struggling trucking company in his state was on the brink of collapse and needed government support.

Eager to assist, Mnuchin assured the senator that “we will look at that specific company and see what we can do and get back to you.”

That company, YRC Worldwide, had lost more than $100 million in 2019 and was being sued by the Justice Department over claims it defrauded the federal government for a seven-year period. But six weeks after the hearing, YRC received a bailout from the Treasury Department — a $700 million loan in exchange for a 30% stake in the business. The company’s stock price soared 74%, although it has come down since.



Well, the swamp is still there and has become more toxic than any White House of Political Party in our lifetime.




Yeah, because Trump exposed them for the corrupt scum they are. And you want to keep the corrupt scum there.

Which makes you either stupid, or scum.

I'll let you choose.
This is not a rebuttal, bozo, it's a logical fallacy, to wit: ad hominem. Grow up bozo, your act is old and insipid.





Ummm, look up the definition of ad hominem, dude.
Gee bozo, I'm very familiar with logic and logical fallacies. Your post [ "Which makes you either stupid, or scum" ] has no relevance to my lead in thread, "chaos and corruption". Two words which anyone who has watched Trump and his Administration with eyes and ears wide open are well aware of in their words and deeds. Calling someone out as stupid or scum is a classic example of a personal attack, aka that educated and knowledgeable people recognize as an ad hominem.

Calling you bozo is not such a fallacy, it is an apt description of your pollyanna sense of the Trump Administration. One which is inept, incompetent and anti democratic.





The only person exhibiting pollyannaish behavior is you.

You categorically ignore the most corrupt administration this country has ever seen, the obummer admin, because you are a stalinist like they are.

So, yes, YOU have demonstrated that you ARE indeed scum.
"Stalinist" Proof you are an ignoramus and a damn liar. As I stated, grow up and try (if you can) to post something substantive, thoughtful or thought provoking. Off course with your head in the sand, I know this won't happen.

View attachment 373042





You are a stalinist through and through. No government is too much government so long as they are from your side.

You want guns taken away from the law abiding. That is the first step for the stalinists.

Armed citizens are a threat to your power. Disarmed sheep are to be sheared.
Another damn lie: "You want guns taken away from the law abiding". I have written numerous times as to my opinion on gun control: I support the right of sober, sane and law abiding citizens to own, possess and have in their custody and control a firearm, within reasonable conditions, imposed by State Governments with the approval of the people. Such conditions might require a license, and / or the registration of firearms in the possession / ownership.

Your second damn lie is this: "No government is too much government so long as they are from your side."

I have written too often that donald trump is a megalomaniac, and his supporters believe every, or most everything he does by fiat is okay. Thus sending Federal Troops into Portland using force against protesters and detaining citizens without identifying themselves as peace officers, denying them a phone call and failing to provide a bail hearing within 48 judicial hours is the example of too much government. Something I oppose and you it seems support.




Yes, licensure leads to confiscation. It has ALWAYS done so.

You feel that guns should only be in the hands of those you approve of.

Just like the Party Apparatchiks in the USSR.
Do you believe "shall not infringe" is sacrosanct and wife beaters, sexual predators, violent criminals convicted of sexual battery, armed robbery or other infamous crimes, alcoholics with three DUI's, persons in a criminal gang and those detained civilly as a danger to themselves or others and non citizens should have 2nd Amendment Rights?
If I understand your babbling, no. With rights comes responsibility. On the flip side, those of us that are law abiding citizens you can leave your grimy commie paws off.
 

westwall

Diamond Member
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Apr 21, 2010
Messages
66,581
Reaction score
19,223
Points
2,180
Location
Nevada
"Like most rights, the right secured by the Second Amendment is not unlimited. From Blackstone through
the 19th-century cases, commentators and courts routinely explained that the right was not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever
and for whatever purpose.

"For example, the majority of the 19th-century courts to consider the question held that prohibitions on carrying concealed weapons were lawful under the Second Amendment or state analogues. Although we do not undertake an exhaustive historical analysis today of the full scope of the Second Amendment, nothing in our opinion should be taken to cast doubt on longstanding prohibitions on the possession of firearms by felons and the mentally ill, or laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings, or laws imposing conditions and qualifications on the commercial sale of arms.

"We also recognize another important limitation on the right to keep and carry arms. Miller said, as we have
explained, that the sorts of weapons protected were those “in common use at the time.” 307 U. S., at 179. We think that limitation is fairly supported by the historical tradition of prohibiting the carrying of “dangerous and unusual weapons.”"

There is no such things as The Sullivan Act, and no record that Chitown or NYC ever imposed a law for every gun owner to be licensed.
WASHINGTON — At a virtual congressional hearing in May, Sen. Jerry Moran, R-Kan., asked Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin for help. A struggling trucking company in his state was on the brink of collapse and needed government support.

Eager to assist, Mnuchin assured the senator that “we will look at that specific company and see what we can do and get back to you.”

That company, YRC Worldwide, had lost more than $100 million in 2019 and was being sued by the Justice Department over claims it defrauded the federal government for a seven-year period. But six weeks after the hearing, YRC received a bailout from the Treasury Department — a $700 million loan in exchange for a 30% stake in the business. The company’s stock price soared 74%, although it has come down since.



Well, the swamp is still there and has become more toxic than any White House of Political Party in our lifetime.




Yeah, because Trump exposed them for the corrupt scum they are. And you want to keep the corrupt scum there.

Which makes you either stupid, or scum.

I'll let you choose.
This is not a rebuttal, bozo, it's a logical fallacy, to wit: ad hominem. Grow up bozo, your act is old and insipid.





Ummm, look up the definition of ad hominem, dude.
Gee bozo, I'm very familiar with logic and logical fallacies. Your post [ "Which makes you either stupid, or scum" ] has no relevance to my lead in thread, "chaos and corruption". Two words which anyone who has watched Trump and his Administration with eyes and ears wide open are well aware of in their words and deeds. Calling someone out as stupid or scum is a classic example of a personal attack, aka that educated and knowledgeable people recognize as an ad hominem.

Calling you bozo is not such a fallacy, it is an apt description of your pollyanna sense of the Trump Administration. One which is inept, incompetent and anti democratic.





The only person exhibiting pollyannaish behavior is you.

You categorically ignore the most corrupt administration this country has ever seen, the obummer admin, because you are a stalinist like they are.

So, yes, YOU have demonstrated that you ARE indeed scum.
"Stalinist" Proof you are an ignoramus and a damn liar. As I stated, grow up and try (if you can) to post something substantive, thoughtful or thought provoking. Off course with your head in the sand, I know this won't happen.

View attachment 373042





You are a stalinist through and through. No government is too much government so long as they are from your side.

You want guns taken away from the law abiding. That is the first step for the stalinists.

Armed citizens are a threat to your power. Disarmed sheep are to be sheared.
Another damn lie: "You want guns taken away from the law abiding". I have written numerous times as to my opinion on gun control: I support the right of sober, sane and law abiding citizens to own, possess and have in their custody and control a firearm, within reasonable conditions, imposed by State Governments with the approval of the people. Such conditions might require a license, and / or the registration of firearms in the possession / ownership.

Your second damn lie is this: "No government is too much government so long as they are from your side."

I have written too often that donald trump is a megalomaniac, and his supporters believe every, or most everything he does by fiat is okay. Thus sending Federal Troops into Portland using force against protesters and detaining citizens without identifying themselves as peace officers, denying them a phone call and failing to provide a bail hearing within 48 judicial hours is the example of too much government. Something I oppose and you it seems support.




Yes, licensure leads to confiscation. It has ALWAYS done so.

You feel that guns should only be in the hands of those you approve of.

Just like the Party Apparatchiks in the USSR.
LOL. When in the US has any jurisdiction required a license to own a firearm and then without Probable Cause take their firearms? Maybe you are not a biddable fool, maybe you are a paranoid schizophrenic.






New York, for one. Chicago, for another. Look up the Sullivan Law. But I am talking about government, and as we know government is corrupt. The laws that the Nazis used to disarm the populace were enacted by the Weimar Republic.
"Like most rights, the right secured by the Second Amendment is not unlimited. From Blackstone through
the 19th-century cases, commentators and courts routinely explained that the right was not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose.

"For example, the majority of the 19th-century courts to consider the question held that prohibitions on carrying concealed weapons were lawful under the Second Amendment or state analogues. Although we do not undertake an exhaustive historical analysis today of the full scope of the Second Amendment, nothing in our opinion should be taken to cast doubt on longstanding prohibitions on the possession of firearms by felons and the mentally ill, or laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings, or laws imposing conditions and qualifications on the commercial sale of arms.

"We also recognize another important limitation on the right to keep and carry arms. Miller said, as we have
explained, that the sorts of weapons protected were those “in common use at the time.” 307 U. S., at 179. We think that limitation is fairly supported by the historical tradition of prohibiting the carrying of “dangerous and unusual weapons.”"
Link is to Salia's comments in Heller

There is no such things as The Sullivan Act, and no record that Chitown or NYC ever imposed a law for every gun owner to be licensed.






Without a license from the government no person can legally own a handgun in Chicago or New York.

And yes, there was indeed a Sullivan Act written by a corrupt Democrat. Go figure.
 

JusticeHammer

Gold Member
Joined
Apr 20, 2017
Messages
2,450
Reaction score
769
Points
210
WASHINGTON — At a virtual congressional hearing in May, Sen. Jerry Moran, R-Kan., asked Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin for help. A struggling trucking company in his state was on the brink of collapse and needed government support.

Eager to assist, Mnuchin assured the senator that “we will look at that specific company and see what we can do and get back to you.”

That company, YRC Worldwide, had lost more than $100 million in 2019 and was being sued by the Justice Department over claims it defrauded the federal government for a seven-year period. But six weeks after the hearing, YRC received a bailout from the Treasury Department — a $700 million loan in exchange for a 30% stake in the business. The company’s stock price soared 74%, although it has come down since.



Well, the swamp is still there and has become more toxic than any White House of Political Party in our lifetime.




Yeah, because Trump exposed them for the corrupt scum they are. And you want to keep the corrupt scum there.

Which makes you either stupid, or scum.

I'll let you choose.
This is not a rebuttal, bozo, it's a logical fallacy, to wit: ad hominem. Grow up bozo, your act is old and insipid.





Ummm, look up the definition of ad hominem, dude.
Gee bozo, I'm very familiar with logic and logical fallacies. Your post [ "Which makes you either stupid, or scum" ] has no relevance to my lead in thread, "chaos and corruption". Two words which anyone who has watched Trump and his Administration with eyes and ears wide open are well aware of in their words and deeds. Calling someone out as stupid or scum is a classic example of a personal attack, aka that educated and knowledgeable people recognize as an ad hominem.

Calling you bozo is not such a fallacy, it is an apt description of your pollyanna sense of the Trump Administration. One which is inept, incompetent and anti democratic.





The only person exhibiting pollyannaish behavior is you.

You categorically ignore the most corrupt administration this country has ever seen, the obummer admin, because you are a stalinist like they are.

So, yes, YOU have demonstrated that you ARE indeed scum.
"Stalinist" Proof you are an ignoramus and a damn liar. As I stated, grow up and try (if you can) to post something substantive, thoughtful or thought provoking. Off course with your head in the sand, I know this won't happen.

View attachment 373042





You are a stalinist through and through. No government is too much government so long as they are from your side.

You want guns taken away from the law abiding. That is the first step for the stalinists.

Armed citizens are a threat to your power. Disarmed sheep are to be sheared.
Another damn lie: "You want guns taken away from the law abiding". I have written numerous times as to my opinion on gun control: I support the right of sober, sane and law abiding citizens to own, possess and have in their custody and control a firearm, within reasonable conditions, imposed by State Governments with the approval of the people. Such conditions might require a license, and / or the registration of firearms in the possession / ownership.

Your second damn lie is this: "No government is too much government so long as they are from your side."

I have written too often that donald trump is a megalomaniac, and his supporters believe every, or most everything he does by fiat is okay. Thus sending Federal Troops into Portland using force against protesters and detaining citizens without identifying themselves as peace officers, denying them a phone call and failing to provide a bail hearing within 48 judicial hours is the example of too much government. Something I oppose and you it seems support.




Yes, licensure leads to confiscation. It has ALWAYS done so.

You feel that guns should only be in the hands of those you approve of.

Just like the Party Apparatchiks in the USSR.
Do you believe "shall not infringe" is sacrosanct and wife beaters, sexual predators, violent criminals convicted of sexual battery, armed robbery or other infamous crimes, alcoholics with three DUI's, persons in a criminal gang and those detained civilly as a danger to themselves or others and non citizens should have 2nd Amendment Rights?
If I understand your babbling, no. With rights comes responsibility. On the flip side, those of us that are law abiding citizens you can leave your grimy commie paws off.
On further review I think yes.
 
OP
R

Rye Catcher

Platinum Member
Joined
Nov 21, 2019
Messages
3,784
Reaction score
1,912
Points
910
WASHINGTON — At a virtual congressional hearing in May, Sen. Jerry Moran, R-Kan., asked Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin for help. A struggling trucking company in his state was on the brink of collapse and needed government support.

Eager to assist, Mnuchin assured the senator that “we will look at that specific company and see what we can do and get back to you.”

That company, YRC Worldwide, had lost more than $100 million in 2019 and was being sued by the Justice Department over claims it defrauded the federal government for a seven-year period. But six weeks after the hearing, YRC received a bailout from the Treasury Department — a $700 million loan in exchange for a 30% stake in the business. The company’s stock price soared 74%, although it has come down since.



Well, the swamp is still there and has become more toxic than any White House of Political Party in our lifetime.




Yeah, because Trump exposed them for the corrupt scum they are. And you want to keep the corrupt scum there.

Which makes you either stupid, or scum.

I'll let you choose.
This is not a rebuttal, bozo, it's a logical fallacy, to wit: ad hominem. Grow up bozo, your act is old and insipid.





Ummm, look up the definition of ad hominem, dude.
Gee bozo, I'm very familiar with logic and logical fallacies. Your post [ "Which makes you either stupid, or scum" ] has no relevance to my lead in thread, "chaos and corruption". Two words which anyone who has watched Trump and his Administration with eyes and ears wide open are well aware of in their words and deeds. Calling someone out as stupid or scum is a classic example of a personal attack, aka that educated and knowledgeable people recognize as an ad hominem.

Calling you bozo is not such a fallacy, it is an apt description of your pollyanna sense of the Trump Administration. One which is inept, incompetent and anti democratic.





The only person exhibiting pollyannaish behavior is you.

You categorically ignore the most corrupt administration this country has ever seen, the obummer admin, because you are a stalinist like they are.

So, yes, YOU have demonstrated that you ARE indeed scum.
"Stalinist" Proof you are an ignoramus and a damn liar. As I stated, grow up and try (if you can) to post something substantive, thoughtful or thought provoking. Off course with your head in the sand, I know this won't happen.

View attachment 373042





You are a stalinist through and through. No government is too much government so long as they are from your side.

You want guns taken away from the law abiding. That is the first step for the stalinists.

Armed citizens are a threat to your power. Disarmed sheep are to be sheared.
Another damn lie: "You want guns taken away from the law abiding". I have written numerous times as to my opinion on gun control: I support the right of sober, sane and law abiding citizens to own, possess and have in their custody and control a firearm, within reasonable conditions, imposed by State Governments with the approval of the people. Such conditions might require a license, and / or the registration of firearms in the possession / ownership.

Your second damn lie is this: "No government is too much government so long as they are from your side."

I have written too often that donald trump is a megalomaniac, and his supporters believe every, or most everything he does by fiat is okay. Thus sending Federal Troops into Portland using force against protesters and detaining citizens without identifying themselves as peace officers, denying them a phone call and failing to provide a bail hearing within 48 judicial hours is the example of too much government. Something I oppose and you it seems support.




Yes, licensure leads to confiscation. It has ALWAYS done so.

You feel that guns should only be in the hands of those you approve of.

Just like the Party Apparatchiks in the USSR.
Do you believe "shall not infringe" is sacrosanct and wife beaters, sexual predators, violent criminals convicted of sexual battery, armed robbery or other infamous crimes, alcoholics with three DUI's, persons in a criminal gang and those detained civilly as a danger to themselves or others and non citizens should have 2nd Amendment Rights?
If I understand your babbling, no. With rights comes responsibility. On the flip side, those of us that are law abiding citizens you can leave your grimy commie paws off.
That is exactly what I've posted. Law abiding citizens will obey the law, and as the law stands today Scalia in Heller put shall not be infringed into proper perspective. Simple minded as you are, you might be able to extrapolate what is needed to keep firearms from those noted in my "babbling" above.
 

New Topics

Most reactions - Past 7 days

Forum List

Top