# Where is Para.?



## Slowalkintexan (Feb 6, 2007)

Maybe he’s not up yet, however, I was sure he would have something to say about the debate, even though he has vowed not to ‘get political”

Have a blessed day, ya’all.


----------



## paratrooper (Feb 1, 2012)

I'm up, and I did watch the debate. My wife is a _Trumpste_r, and she wasn't impressed with the way he conducted himself.

I'll say this one more time. If these two idiots are the best that this nation can come up with, we're in a real world of hurt.


----------



## denner (Jun 3, 2011)

Too bad Hillary's not in the mix.


----------



## paratrooper (Feb 1, 2012)

I'm no fan of Hillary, but I'd sure love to see her walk up to Donald and put him in a rear arm bar lock. 

Just for the record, I am actively doing my best* NOT* to engage in P&R. But......it is a work-in-progress.


----------



## RK3369 (Aug 12, 2013)

paratrooper said:


> I'm up, and I did watch the debate. My wife is a _Trumpste_r, and she wasn't impressed with the way he conducted himself.
> 
> I'll say this one more time. If these two idiots are the best that this nation can come up with, we're in a real world of hurt.


 Sad to say I agree, we are in a world of hurt. But the basic problem is expecting government to do ANYTHING FOR US other than provide for the common defense and domestic tranquility. That's their constitutional mandate. Beyond that, people need to learn to take care of themselves and therein lies our problem. 99% of Americans can not do that anymore.


----------



## Goldwing (Nov 5, 2014)

RK3369 said:


> 99% of Americans can not do that anymore.


Wow! I am a one percenter!

GW


----------



## RK3369 (Aug 12, 2013)

Goldwing said:


> Wow! I am a one percenter!
> 
> GW


Welcome to the club!


----------



## Goldwing (Nov 5, 2014)

paratrooper said:


> I am actively doing my best* NOT* to engage in P&R. But......it is a work-in-progress.


Yup me too!









GW


----------



## paratrooper (Feb 1, 2012)

RK3369 said:


> Sad to say I agree, we are in a world of hurt. But the basic problem is expecting government to do ANYTHING FOR US other than provide for the common defense and domestic tranquility. That's their constitutional mandate. Beyond that, people need to learn to take care of themselves and therein lies our problem. 99% of Americans can not do that anymore.


Gotta say, you are spot on! No one believes in individual responsibility anymore. No one wants to take the blame and say, I messed up and I'll make it right.

They're all too quick to point fingers and assign blame as they see fit. I could go on and on, but it's beginning to feel a bit political.


----------



## Shipwreck (Jan 26, 2006)

Last night as I watched the debate - I noticed that sometimes Joe would talk and look at the moderator like normal. And sometimes, he would stare off into space as he talked. His eyes never moved when he did this. I told my son that I'd bet he had someone talking in his ear, and he was just repeating what they said. THAT was his debate prep - on how to do that and get away with it, IMHO...

Well, look at this... (there are 2 short vids - watch them both)

He was wired up...


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1311253137869680643


----------



## paratrooper (Feb 1, 2012)

Shipwreck said:


> Last night as I watched the debate - I noticed that sometimes Joe would talk and look at the moderator like normal. And sometimes, he would stare off into space as he talked. His eyes never moved when he did this. I told my son that I'd bet he had someone talking in his ear, and he was just repeating what they said. THAT was his debate prep - on how to do that and get away with it, IMHO...
> 
> Well, look at this... (there are 2 short vids - watch them both)
> 
> ...


Supposedly, Trump was going to demand that Biden agree to have his ears checked for just such a possibility.

Don't know if it came to fruition though.


----------



## RK3369 (Aug 12, 2013)

God damn...friggin snake. Worthless POS. And people actually believe he is competent??? Well, if he wins I wonder how many months before the Dems invoke the 25th Amendment and put Harris in charge?


----------



## Shipwreck (Jan 26, 2006)

paratrooper said:


> Supposedly, Trump was going to demand that Biden agree to have his ears checked for just such a possibility.
> 
> Don't know if it came to fruition though.


In the news yesterday, that was talked about that before the debate. But Biden would not agree, so they could not forcibly check him


----------



## paratrooper (Feb 1, 2012)

Shipwreck said:


> In the news yesterday, that was talked about that before the debate. But Biden would not agree, so they could not forcibly check him


These are crazy times, and crazy people are wanting to be in charge.


----------



## denner (Jun 3, 2011)

Some lying and cheating goin on! I really like how Biden said the Obama/Biden administration was responsible for the economic boom we had.

I remember very high unstable gas prices at the pump, record debt, and the economy sucked, bad trade deals, more specifically with China under it's continued favored status.

Trump does more work in a day than sleepy Joe does in a year.


----------



## RK3369 (Aug 12, 2013)

denner said:


> Some lying and cheating goin on! I really like how Biden said the Obama/Biden administration was responsible for the economic boom we had.
> 
> I remember very high unstable gas prices at the pump, record debt, and the economy sucked, bad trade deals, more specifically with China under it's continued favored status.
> 
> Trump does more work in a day than sleepy Joe does in a year.


Here's some of Obama and Biden's "outstanding economic performance".......worst GDP of any President since WWII.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/louisw...ns-the-gold-for-worst-economic-recovery-ever/

Even The NY Times said Obama had the lowest GDP growth of any 
President since WWII....... https://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/07/29/ranking-the-presidents-by-g-d-p/

Biden's economic record is a effin JOKE!!!!


----------



## desertman (Aug 29, 2013)

What people have to realize is that if the Democrats take control of all three branches of government which is a very real possibility, the United States of America as a Constitutional Republic will be gone forever.

It's the party's platform not the individual who's running for public office that counts more than anything. It's the party that pulls the strings. Their nominee's will do or say anything just to get elected. Once they've achieved that then all bets are off.

The Democrats have already proposed stacking the Supreme Court, adding DC and Puerto Rico as states, eliminating both the electoral college and senate filibuster. Encouraging and fostering illegal immigration with promises of free health care and other government entitlements. Reparations for slavery.

If DC and Puerto Rico become states that will add 4 additional senate seats and congressional representation in the Democrats favor.

Ending the filibuster will allow for a simple majority to pass any and all legislation.

Ending the electoral college will guarantee that state's such as California and New York will determine all future presidential elections.

Stacking both the Supreme Court and Federal Courts of Appeal will ensure that any and all legislation passed by a Democrat controlled legislature will be ruled on as Constitutional regardless of what the Constitution says.

They will flood this nation with so many of the world's most impoverished people in order to create a majority underclass of which they will use to maintain their power structure into perpetuity.

We will have evolved into a one party rule authoritarian state. If this is what you want for the United States of America then vote Democrat this upcoming election. This is some really serious shit folks. If we lose this one there will be no going back. We've gotta' go out and vote for whomever is on the Republican ticket even if you can't stand the son of a bitch. Is it any wonder that that loathsome swine Biden refuses to answer any questions as to what he plans for America?


----------



## Goldwing (Nov 5, 2014)

If they win and make laws that go against our Constitution and bill of rights I, as well as millions of others will become reluctant outlaws. 
We need Amy Coney Barrett confirmed ASAP!

GW


----------



## RK3369 (Aug 12, 2013)

Goldwing said:


> If they win and make laws that go against our Constitution and bill of rights I, as well as millions of others will become reluctant outlaws.
> We need Amy Coney Barrett confirmed ASAP!
> 
> GW


And if guns are outlawed we could all become felons. I believe this is a very real possibility if the government is controlled by the Dems and the court has majority Left wing justices.

.....and, of course, there is another issue the Left is chomping at the bit to put into place nationally....one question, is this going to promote racial harmony???

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/sep/30/california-slavery-reparations-law


----------



## RK3369 (Aug 12, 2013)

RK3369 said:


> And if guns are outlawed we could all become felons. I believe this is a very real possibility if the government is controlled by the Dems and the court has majority Left wing justices.
> 
> .....and, of course, there is another issue the Left is chomping at the bit to put into place nationally....one question, is this going to promote racial harmony???
> 
> https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/sep/30/california-slavery-reparations-law


...one more vote for abandonment of any personal responsibility. 
I believe there is a religious term called "end of days".....I think it is on its way....


----------



## desertman (Aug 29, 2013)

RK3369 said:


> *And if guns are outlawed we could all become felons.* I believe this is a very real possibility if the government is controlled by the Dems and the court has majority Left wing justices.
> 
> .....and, of course, there is another issue the Left is chomping at the bit to put into place nationally....one question, is this going to promote racial harmony???
> 
> https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/sep/30/california-slavery-reparations-law


*We all have to refuse to comply.* Just as the majority did when they passed New York's "Safe Act". Better yet every God damn one of us should arm up and storm our state capitals and dare them to arrest us. What the f'k could they do? There would not be enough jail space to detain us not too mention tying up and crippling our criminal justice system for decades as each case would have to go to trial.

This doesn't even take into consideration the 10's of thousand's of law enforcement and military personnel that are strong supporters of the 2nd Amendment with their own private arms that would be declared contraband as well. I have no doubt in my mind that this would spark the next civil war.

Obviously none of us wants that. But it may have to come to that. The 2nd Amendment was written into the Constitution for precisely that reason. I don't think that these f'n Democrats have any idea of what the ramifications of their actions will be? I don't think that they have any f'n idea of the strength and resolve of those of us who strongly support not only the Constitutional Law but the entire principles of which this country was originally founded. We were given the greatest country in the world hopefully we can keep it. If that's not worth fighting for than *NOTHING* and I mean *NOTHING* is.

"The debate over gun control can be summed up thusly: Those of us who don't like guns in the hands of our non-costumed brethren, will vote to ensure men with guns, under the guise of the "law," will come and take the property that is rightfully yours, killing you should you resist our will sufficiently."

"There are only a few laws in history that are universally applicable. One of these is that the ruling classes do not want the peasantry armed. They will do what they can to convince you that to be armed is dangerous. They will attempt to do this while they themselves are surrounded by armed body guards. Idiots will not notice this hypocrisy and sycophants will ignore it. Fools will surrender their arms in the name of "safety". They will insensibly surrender their liberty at the same time. This is how slaves are made."

*"The law has been used to destroy it's own objective; It has been applied to annihilating the justice that it was supposed to maintain; to limiting and destroying rights which it's real purpose was to respect. The law has placed the collective force at the disposal of the unscrupulous who wish, without risk, to exploit the person, liberty, and property of others. It has converted plunder into a right in order to protect plunder. And it has converted lawful defense into a crime, in order to punish lawful defense." "But it is also true that a man may live and satisfy his wants by seizing and consuming the products of the labor of others. This process is the origin of plunder." --- The Law by Frederic Bastiat (1801-1850) French economist, statesman.*


*Massive noncompliance with SAFE Act | Hudson Valley One*
hudsonvalleyone.com/2016/07/07/massive...
Jul 07, 2016 · "The lack of registration is a massive act of civil disobedience by gun owners statewide." Opposition to the SAFE Act has been widespread across upstate New York, where 52 of the state's 62 counties, including Ulster, have passed resolutions opposing the law.


----------



## paratrooper (Feb 1, 2012)

"End of days". 

It might just be me, but I feel that we are a lot closer than we believe. 

My grand-daughter is pregnant with her 3rd child. None of the extended family is overly excited about it.


----------



## desertman (Aug 29, 2013)

paratrooper said:


> "End of days".
> 
> It might just be me, but I feel that we are a lot closer than we believe.
> 
> My grand-daughter is pregnant with her 3rd child. None of the extended family is overly excited about it.


Well regardless of what you think of politicians. Then you've gotta' go out and vote against any and all Democrats. Make no mistake about it they've made their positions crystal clear to anyone who's paid any attention to their rhetoric and propaganda over the last few decades. They're just chomping at the bit to obtain absolute power and control. These people are f'n serious we have to take them for their word or we can ignore them at our own peril.

*These are just their positions on the 2nd Amendment:*

"If I could have gotten 51 votes in the Senate of the United States for an outright ban, picking up every one of them . . . Mr. and Mrs. America, turn 'em all in, I would have done it. I could not do that. The votes weren't here."--*Diane Feinstein, (D) U.S. Senator from California*

In an op-ed published in the New York Times Tuesday, the 97-year-old former Supreme Court justice argues that advocates for stricter gun control legislation should take the next step and demand the removal of the Second Amendment entirely. --*John Paul Stevens (D) former Supreme Court justice*

"Instead, we should ban possession of military-style semiautomatic assault weapons, we should buy back such weapons from all who choose to abide by the law, and we should criminally prosecute any who choose to defy it by keeping their weapons," he wrote. "The ban would not apply to law enforcement agencies or shooting clubs."--*Eric Swalwell (D) U.S. Representative from California*

"I believe&#8230;..this is my final word&#8230;&#8230;I believe that I'm supporting the Constitution of the United States which does not give the right for any individual to own a handgun&#8230;."--*Jan Schakowsky, (D) U.S. Representative from Illinois*

"No, we're not looking at how to control criminals &#8230; we're talking about banning the AK-47 and semi-automatic guns."--*Howard Metzenbaum, (D) former U.S. Senator*

"If a bill to ban handguns came to the house floor, I would vote for it."--*Pete Stark, (D) U.S. Representative from California*

" &#8230;we need much stricter gun control, and eventually should bar the ownership of handguns"--*William Clay, (D) U.S. Representative from Missouri*

"Banning guns is an idea whose time has come."--*Joseph Biden, (D) Vice President of the United States and current candidate for president*

"I shortly will introduce legislation banning the sale, manufacture or possession of handguns (with exceptions for law enforcement and licensed target clubs)&#8230; . It is time to act. We cannot go on like this. Ban them!"--*John Chafee, (D) Former U.S. Senator from Rhode Island*

"We have to start with a ban on the manufacturing and import of handguns. From there we register the guns which are currently owned, and follow that with additional bans and acquisitions of handguns and rifles with no sporting purpose."--*Major Owens, (D) U.S. Representative from New York*

"My staff and I right now are working on a comprehensive gun-control bill. We don't have all the details, but for instance, regulating the sale and purchase of bullets. Ultimately, I would like to see the manufacture and possession of handguns banned except for military and police use. But that's the endgame. And in the meantime, there are some specific things that we can do with legislation."--*Bobby Rush, (D) U.S. Representative from Illinois*

"Banning guns addresses a fundamental right of all Americans to feel safe. The National Guard fulfills the militia mentioned in the Second amendment. Citizens no longer need to protect the states or themselves."--*Dianne Feinstein, (D) U.S. Senator from California*

"All of this has to be understood as part of a process leading ultimately to a treaty that will give an international body power over our domestic laws."--*Charles Pashayan, (D) U.S. Representative from California*

"Confiscation could be an option&#8230;mandatory sale to the state could be an option."--*Andrew Cuomo, (D) Governor of New York*

"Hell yes we're gonna' take your AR-15's" ---*Beto O'Rourke (D) former U.S. Representative from Texas and Democrat candidate for president*

"I don't believe people should to be able to own guns."-- *Barack Obama (D) former President of the United States *during conversation with economist and author John Lott Jr. at the University of Chicago Law School in the 1990s)

"We need a new paradigm because both sides are in the corner and they could come to the middle," Schumer said. "Those of who are pro-gun control have to admit that there is a Second Amendment right to bear arms... once we establish that there is a constitutional right to bear arms we should have the right admit, and maybe they'll be more willing to admit, that no amendment is absolute after all."--*Chuck Schumer, (D) U.S. Senator from New York*

"We can't just stand behind you and say we support our men and women in law enforcement community and then not have the laws on the books that help you do your job every day," he said. "And it's time as a city we have an assault weapon ban. And it's time as a state that we have an assault weapon ban. And it's time as a country that we have an assault weapon ban."--*Rahm Emanuel, (D) former Mayor Chicago, Illinois*

"We need to do something, at the very least, perhaps, about the high-capacity magazines that were used in this crime."--*Richard Blumenthal, (D) U.S. Senator from Connecticut*

"We cannot let a minority of people-and that's what it is, it is a minority of people-hold a viewpoint that terrorizes the majority of people." On Australia's gun ban "So I think that's worth considering," Clinton said. "I don't know enough details to tell you how we would do it or how it would work. But certainly, the Australian example is worth considering."----*Hillary Clinton (D) former U.S. Senator of New York, Secretary of State and Democrat candidate for president*

George Stephanopoulos pushed Clinton twice on whether people have a right to own guns on ABC News' "This Week": "But that's not what I asked. I said do you believe that their conclusion that an individual's right to bear arms is a constitutional right?" Clinton could only say: "If it is a constitutional right..."

"I can find nothing in the Second Amendment's text, history, or underlying rationale that could warrant characterizing it as 'fundamental' insofar as it seeks to protect the keeping and bearing of arms for private self-defense purposes."--*Steven Breyer, (D) Supreme Court Justice*


----------



## RK3369 (Aug 12, 2013)

There really isn’t a Democrat who supports the second amendment, except perhaps Joe Manchin, and most of the time I’m not too sure about him. This nor any other time in the future is the time to cede control to the Democrats.


----------



## desertman (Aug 29, 2013)

RK3369 said:


> There really isn't a Democrat who supports the second amendment, except perhaps Joe Manchin, and most of the time I'm not too sure about him. This nor any other time in the future is the time to cede control to the Democrats.


If they've got a (D) next to their name I will never under any circumstances vote for that individual. PERIOD!!! Even if I can't stomach their Republican opponent. I'll always vote Republican as not voting is out of the question. Sometimes it boils down to the lessor of two evils. The Democrat Party as a whole is inherently evil especially nowadays. They are far more radical than they were a few short decades ago.

Voting third party is not a viable option. With a third party system you could end up with someone that got 34% of the vote that 66% would be vehemently opposed to if the 66% were split evenly.


----------



## RK3369 (Aug 12, 2013)

For the last several elections my voting has been driven by choosing the lesser of two evils. If you vote third party, just stay home. It’s the same as not voting.


----------



## stokes (Jan 17, 2017)

In all my years of voting I have never voted for other than the lesser of 2 evils.I first voted in 1974 and in all those years the only "D" I pulled the lever for was an assemblyman in Bklyn who did something directly for me.


----------



## desertman (Aug 29, 2013)

stokes said:


> *In all my years of voting I have never voted for other than the lesser of 2 evils.*I first voted in 1974 and in all those years the only "D" I pulled the lever for was an assemblyman in Bklyn who did something directly for me.


Oh I have, Romney and Flake, McCain a close second. When it comes to voting for a RINO or a Democrat I'll take my chances with a RINO. It's more important for me that the Republicans control the legislature as a whole. It's their platform that's more important.

I'm against the Democrat Party's platform and damn near everything that they stand for. They are far worse now than they were before the black militant was elected president. Although they've been on slow brew over the last couple of decades he was the catalyst for what we see going on today. He's the one who's empowered those who want to tear this country apart at the seams.


----------



## RK3369 (Aug 12, 2013)

Yup. I have challenged people to show me where the constitution says it’s the federal government’s responsibility to take from me to give it to somebody else who’s too lazy or stupid to do something for themselves but, as we all know, it happens every day. Remember, there was no federal income tax before 1913, I believe, yet the government put together an army to fight the civil war, so how did all this tax and spend come about? How? FDR and his clones who thought that government spending was the way out of the Great Depression. Big mistake, and we have not fixed it yet. No, we’ve gone the other way...public housing, section 8, Medicaid, TANF, food stamps, free school lunches, and now the Dems are pushing Medicare for all and expansion of Obamacare. This is a one way highway to the breakdown of society, and we are already seeing evidence of it arriving. The 16th Amendment gives the government the power to impose an income tax, but it doesn’t say for what purpose. Simply taking it from anyone and giving it to someone because they are too lazy to work or get an education or job training does not seem like an appropriate use of the money. I feel no personal obligation to support those too lazy to work and achieve for themselves.


----------

