doublegunshop.com - home Forums Militia Enroute to Bunkerville

Pretending that the anti-gun Socialist Progressives here actually have something of value to debate here just lends them credibility that they don't deserve. I find it tiresome and time consuming repeatedly offering proof of the follys and failures of Liberalism and attacks on our Constitutional Rights, especially the RTKBA. All of the proof you, Jim, Dave K, craigd, Doug, J.R.B., and others provide is simply ignored in order to advance a dishonest, hypocritical, and Socialist agenda. Diplomacy worked so much better after Shock and Awe, D-Day, and dropping bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. I don't spar with liars. I go for the knockout.

And this isn't just practice here. The Leftist lies and LULLING are intended to have immediate and lasting effect. You and I Mike continue to disagree in this area... but our conversations will remain civil because they are honest. Your plea for civility is not rooted in a desire to freely advance lies and Socialism. I respect that just as I respect many other opinions I am not in complete agreement with.

I've asked for proof of where playing nice with any of our Libtards has in any way persuaded them or changed their minds.

Still nothing.

It is my opinion that being civil in a civil discussion allows me and the other person to be open to each other's arguments. I am secure in my beliefs. But I might have a chance to persuade the other person to adapt my point of view. If I am uncivil and I call him names he can't consider my point of view at all, much less ever have a chance of embracing it.

I have both sold and had salesmen working for me for many years. I know how to sell tangible and intangible products.

And Dale Carnegie agrees with me.

Certainly I can't say "On June 3, 2013 Dave in Maine, while having a discussion with me on this board, publicly acknowledged that he had become convinced that the Republicans were right about how wrong Affirmative Action was and Dave conceded that both he the Democratic Party had been wrong about it all along."

But certainly you can't provide an example of someone here that, as a result of being called "libtard" by you, joined the Tea Party wing of the Republican party, can you?

Keith,
I very much appreciate how hard ranchers work to provide affordable food for the American public. My grandparents had a dairy farm in western N.Y. where I grew up and I fully understand how hard the work can be and how little the economic reward is at times. At the same time I feel anyone running a for profit business on our Federal lands should pay a use fee. All hunters pay an 11% excise tax on guns, ammo etc due to Pittman-Roberts which brings in hundreds of millions of dollars each year to support wildlife habitat. Link here:

http://www.nssf.org/factsheets/PDF/PittmanRobertsonFacts.pdf

More BLM seizing of land this this time in Texas.

Mike, I am in complete agreement with your last several posts regarding the tone of our discussions here. I believe I fully understand Keith's position and certainly share his frustration at the Sisyphusian nature of discussions with members who have a different outlook. Always surprises that what seems so obvious to me, isn't.

However, I don't see the value in ever decreasing the size of the tent (to paraphrase SKB) where we hold our discussions. I have little interest in reminding myself and seven other people of the rightness of our views. I know some members have referenced the number of views some of our more heated threads garner but it seems likely to me that many, many of those views are from the same group of us checking the latest posts and deciding whether to chime in again.

On a larger scale, I think I am correct when I say that millions of GOP voters didn't, because Romney wasn't "their guy". This after 4 years of arguably the worst presidential performance in modern history. If you want the Democrats out, you must find a way to include more. Perfection is the enemy of good!

I have no illusions that I may change the mind of some hard core lefty. But I am also utterly aware that the response of the right to the bullshit that emanates from the hard left utterly alienates millions of undecided, especially younger voters.

The reality is that there is an increasingly urban voter and old Republicans die every day, replaced by young Democrats. This is the quandry, in my view, and being angry and bitter doesn't solve it.

Just to inject a little personal experience here: IMHO it's like my relationship with my ex wife. Without getting into it here, I have plenty of reason to be angry and bitter. And boy, would it feel good to express that now and again. BUT, my son was five when I discovered what was going on. He's nine now. And my every interaction with my ex is through the lens of what results in the best outcome for my son when he is 25. Not what makes me feel good now. It's called delayed gratification and exercising properly my real and fundamental responsibilities.

What makes that easy is to see how my boy is developing, utterly free from the insecurity and self doubt that comes too often to children in similar circumstances. As any child needs and should have, he has a positive relationship with both his mother and father.

The Right needs to express leadership on the difficult issues that face all Americans. Being angry and bitter won't win that battle in the long term.

One of the key reasons Obama was reelected (besides successfully covering up Benghazi and voter fraud) along with Romney not playing to the base-your point about how many conservatives stayed home is correct, it in the Millennials vote,not the independents.The left has now has a big problem in losing them as they have aged and suffered from a poor job market,obamacare,high levels of student loan debt to name just a few.

From Pew reasearch

http://www.americanthinker.com/2014/03/are_the_millennials_reliably_leftist.html

" The Millennials will have encouragement in that direction as they face �higher levels of student loan debt, poverty, unemployment and lower levels of wealth and personal income than their two immediate predecessor generations (Gen Xers and Boomers).� The continuing recession is especially hard on Millennials, who came of age expecting to be ushered into the good life enjoyed by their television-celebrity role models just when the economy tanked and good jobs dried up. They are the ones upon whose backs the financial burdens of ObamaCare rest."

Dave, that is encouraging research in some ways. Specifically their openness to change politically, moving towards the right. Although it's not a given. What is sad but not surprising is the information the poll reveals about the lack of historical knowledge or sensible moral compass, leaving them open to misinformation.

I have a 24 year old nephew, fits this profile to a tee. However, he is smart and somewhat curious. Was with him recently over Easter. His default position is a young lefty who thinks Obama is great. But scratch the surface and he willingly admits he knows nothing about any of this stuff. So I can lead him to the water and I can get him to drink. But not by calling everyone on the left a Libtard. Being angry and bitter about these things just causes him to turn off.

Mike and canvasback, You guys are the ones who naively expect that you might change King Brown, nca225, Dave-in-Maine, etc.

I never said I could change them. It's more than obvious that we can't. I don't even try... I just illuminate their lunacy, hypocrisy, and dishonesty whenever I have the time. I don't try to sugar coat anything either. These are grown adults who are moronic enough to believe that a politician like Obama, with a 100% anti-gun voting record as a state legislator and as a U.S. Senator, would not be a threat to our 2nd Amendment rights.

Either they are that stupid, or they are that dishonest and agenda driven, for they not only consistently support the anti-gun Liberal Democrats, they also attempt to convince other gun owners that they are not a threat.

James, when you talk about the success that the Democrats have had garnering supporters, you must acknowledge that they have done that by name-calling, hurling insults, mud slinging, telling total lies about good men like Mitt Romney. They preach about having civil discussions while they call you a racist, bigot, homophobic, woman hating, cretin. The guys you are trying to influence and win as friends are slicing your balls off and stabbing you in the back. Good luck with that.

I'll bet even ol' Dale Carnegie had his limits. I'd like to recommend the book that was written by his evil twin.

Agreed, but for me, not so much a use fee, but a fee for restricting others. Say corral and and other buildings, water rights etc., unless the family has grandfathered rights. Two hundred some agents sweeping in on a multimillion dollar operation might raise questions.

True, not just hunter pay through the P-R tax, but the efficiency of administering that budget is extremely questionable. May be, but I haven't seen any reports that Mr. Bundy has not paid his income taxes derived from that profit, or not paid any other fees or taxes attached to the ranching industry. So many other interests have their hand in the P-R pot that some feel a fee should be charged for public land access to hunt.

Just this morning the whouse announces that they want interstate tolls so they can collect an additional 320 billion in 'taxes'. Don't our income taxes cover that and various recent stimulus packages gave our 'infrastructure' a shot in the arm. It's never enough, but it's also clear non pc activities will slowly be priced out of reach.

SKB, I totally agree that ranchers who graze cattle on Federal lands should pay a fee. Almost all do as far as I know. Bundy has not paid due to his dispute, which he feels is not resolved. The government response to that was way out of porportion to what needed to be done. And it now appears that Harry Reid and Co. may have had some nefarious reasons for confiscating Bundy's cattle and attempting to force him off that land. And it sure wasn't going to save any desert tortoises of improve access for hunters.

So ranchers pay grazing fees and cattle eat grasses and leave manure behind... Just as the great herds of bison did for hundreds of thousands of years before. Rocky Mtn. Bill was trying to make the point that the ranchers are taking more value than they pay the government, i.e., that they are Welfare Bums. Most likley, that is true to a small extent, or it wouldn't be economically reasonable. Rocky Mtn. Bill was also forgetting the great value he takes without compensating the government whenever he hunts, fishes, or camps on those Federal lands. The Pittman Robinson tax he paid on the few shells he fires are probably a much smaller percentage of value received than the cattle ranchers get. And the ranchers subsidy has the added benefit of keeping food costs lower for all of us. Rocky Mtn. Bill's sage grouse hunting does nothing for anyone but him. But Liberals are always quick to want to restrict others while ignoring their own sins. See this recent thread:

http://www.doublegunshop.com/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=364591#Post364591