Barack Obama, our next President

"The road ahead will be long. Our climb will be steep," Obama cautioned. Young and charismatic but with little experience on the national level, Obama smashed through racial barriers and easily defeated ... Full Story

Since: Dec 10

Location hidden

#823725 Dec 17, 2012
mdbuilder wrote:
<quoted text>
Hey pal, you voted for big government, not me. So what do you suggest, legalize and regulate, a legal free for all, legalize and tax? What's the difference? Colorado is already feeling the effects of legal pot. We have to quit treating illegal guns and illicit drug use as illnesses or minor offenses. Who, in this country, is afraid of being disciplined? I'll tell you, NO ONE. From adolescence to the grave, law breakers have little or nothing to fear. Parents can't discipline and the system won't. Until that changes, it won't matter whether we're Democrat, Republican, or Libertarian.
You're 0 for 2, I've never voted Dem or GOP sheepdip.
John Galt

Temecula, CA

#823726 Dec 17, 2012
TheIndependentMajority wrote:
<quoted text>
Armed security/law enforcement in schools-God bless their hearts.
Only the bullies, miscreants and those with protective authority problems, would have issue with that.
Police do not belong in schools, spying on people. Most police officers lack the appropriate education and demeanor to interact with children on a daily basis. Allowing this leads to surrender of our rights, like the muggers who work for the TSA.

Armed security can be provided at much lower cost using existing school personnel with appropriate training.
ole_47

Oklahoma City, OK

#823727 Dec 17, 2012
DEMOCRATS help save us from....

Elavators and escalators!

30 brave souls are killed each year by crazed escalators/elevators...

SAVE US...pass a law NOW!!!!!!

http://www.cpwr.com/pdfs/pubs/research_pubs/e...

Since: May 11

Loysville, PA

#823728 Dec 17, 2012
John Galt wrote:
<quoted text>
Speaker Boehner has already made a move to increase taxes provided that Obama is willing to move on spending.
Obama refuses to compromise in any way.
So we go over the fiscal cliff.
(The Norquist pledge is just a red herring, not worthy of discussion.)
You wish the Norquist pledge was a red herring. Conservatives hold that about their pledge to thus country.

Don't you find the conservstives approach to this as rather telling?

The Democrats want those who are doing well in the economy to give up their Bush tax cut, to help raise revenues.

The Conservatives want to protect the wealthy while demanding old people get less from Medicare to save money.
John Galt

Temecula, CA

#823730 Dec 17, 2012
sonicfilter wrote:
Somehow, the tea leaf-reading of what frontiersmen living 230-plus years ago thought about gun ownership takes precedence over the actual consequences of a current situation where guns are so easily obtained and used.
http://news.firedoglake.com/2012/12/14/though...
The U.S. Constitution is timeless, not to be changed by isolated current events.

However, a ban on military-style weapons may be appropriate, provided that it does not ban commonly used hunting rifles. The legislation should be very specific, with no latitude for bureaucrats to define the weapons.

“Amor patriae.”

Since: Feb 08

Eastern Oregon

#823731 Dec 17, 2012
RealDave wrote:
..My pick up has a bullet hole in it.
My old pick up had one.
Yep, guns are safe.
I see a pattern here. You must be well known in your community.
John Galt

Temecula, CA

#823732 Dec 17, 2012
Nj raider 1 wrote:
<quoted text> He did have an assault rifle. He left it in the car. They think he realized he would'nt have made it far-that people would've seen him coming so he just used the 2 handguns (a glock & a 40 cal I think). I don't know how more gun regulations will affect this type of thing statistically, but I do know more guns are not the answer. If someone is hell bent on a mission of carnage more guns can only cause more problems & a greater chance of shooting a innocent by stander. You think them gangstas don't be strapped everyday & still wind up with they heads blown off. What you gun nuts are suggesting is just cuz you have a gun you'll be able to see something like this coming. A gun is not protection, a vest (bullet proof) is protection. This whole discussion is stupid. If that's what it takes to save our children then we as parents can't be too ignorant to put it on the table (a real strict assault rifle ban & more strict & highly enforced fun law proud).
The shooter apparently shot the victims (at least his mother) in the head.

So much for your "bullet proof vest."

Since: Dec 10

Location hidden

#823733 Dec 17, 2012
Fenris the Big Bad Wolf wrote:
<quoted text>
I dont know; the left uses the same argument for the right on gun control all the time (ie saying they "LOVE" their guns). Is that any less insanely stupid? If so, that's quite an unfair double-standard.
That's a good analogy. Pro-choice people love abortion every bit as much as pro-gun people love mass murders with legal weapons. Its really the same argument for both sides.
sonicfilter

Indianapolis, IN

#823734 Dec 17, 2012
The Crisis of American Conservatism: Inherent Contradictions and the End of the Road

In this essay, we will examine how the paradoxes of American conservatism have unfolded and revealed themselves during the period of the last three or four decades. We begin our discussion by noting the three distinct dimensions that have always defined American conservatism. The original and traditional American conservatism of the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries collapsed in a great debacle during the Great Depression of the 1930s, but this was followed by a creative reinvention of American conservatism during the Great Stagflation of the 1970s. This reinvented conservatism experienced its own debacle during the current Great Recession, which began in 2007 and which continues into the 2010s. We conclude with a review of the current condition of what was once a reinvented, but now seems to be YET another collapsed conservatism, in the light of the elections of 2012. The decisive defeats of the Republican party, particularly in the Presidential and Senatorial elections, have demonstrated that American conservatism will once again have to be reinvented and the Republican party will have to appeal to new constituencies or they, like the Federalists, Whigs, and traditional conservatives before them, will disappear or be eclipsed.

http://www.fpri.org/articles/2012/12/crisis-a...
sonicfilter

Indianapolis, IN

#823735 Dec 17, 2012
The Next Ron Paul?

Rep. Justin Amash takes on John Boehner and the "old GOP."

http://www.theamericanconservative.com/articl...

“Amor patriae.”

Since: Feb 08

Eastern Oregon

#823736 Dec 17, 2012
Tenzing wrote:
<quoted text>
You're 0 for 2, I've never voted Dem or GOP sheepdip.
That's it? BFD. You made a statement about big government and the war on drugs - no solutions? No ideas? You're a drive-by, sheepshit.

Since: Dec 10

Location hidden

#823737 Dec 17, 2012
John Galt wrote:
<quoted text>
Yet you support raising taxes to maintain the size of government instead of emphasizing cutting government programs.
Many conservatives would support tax increases coupled with significant budget cuts to move toward a balanced budget.
However, in the current environment, the "fiscal cliff" is preferable to Obama's ridiculous plan.
Nope, I advocate fiscal responsibility, a completely alien concept to the modern GOP. It was your side that massively increased the size of the government and institutionalized the deficit spending that you now blame on Obama. Not that Obama has done anything to pull it back but y'all broke it so y'all own it.

Deficit spending is theft and y'all want to have these wars and entitlements y'all should be willing to pay for them.
ole_47

Oklahoma City, OK

#823738 Dec 17, 2012
Democrats help!

PEOPLE are self-igniting...

BAN Mexican food...

{'First Irish case' of death by spontaneous combustion}

Lets get a handle on this before it gets out of control...

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-150326...
sonicfilter

Indianapolis, IN

#823739 Dec 17, 2012
Two Thoughts about Guns, Risks, and Safety

Two: This same warning against implementing policy decisions based on vivid-but-very-unlikely events applies to the people who are claiming that the answer to school massacres is arming our teachers. It’s especially ironic that this recommendation comes almost invariably from people who also believe in smaller government, because their chosen response to tragedy would be a government-mandated logistical quagmire: some government agency would have to buy the guns, train the teachers, set and enforce policies about gun storage and appropriate use, and so on and so on. And of course all this would just leave teachers with less time to confront the real and often quite serious problems they face every day.

I could write a very long blog post listing what’s wrong with the plan to arm teachers, especially the various unintended consequences that would spring from such a policy implemented nationwide. We can be absolutely sure that within a few years more people would be killed by teachers who fired their weapons accidentally or in misplaced anger or fear, or by students who stole their teachers’ guns, than have ever been killed in school massacres like those in Newtown and Columbine.

But what troubles me most about this suggestion — and the general More Guns approach to social ills — is the absolute abandonment of civil society it represents. It gives up on the rule of law in favor of a Hobbesian “war of every man against every man” in which we no longer have genuine neighbors, only potential enemies. You may trust your neighbor for now — but you have high-powered recourse if he ever acts wrongly.

http://www.theamericanconservative.com/jacobs...

Since: Dec 10

Location hidden

#823740 Dec 17, 2012
John Galt wrote:
<quoted text>
Only after it was all over and the police arrived.
Serious question: "lockdown" or "run like hell"?
There was an incident here on Friday night when two fugitives from an armed jewelry store robbery supposedly ran into a building at Cal State Fullerton. Police "locked down" the campus, refusing to let students leave the building and surrounding the building with heavily-armed paramilitary cops on overtime. After several hours, they finally figured out that the bad guys weren't there.
My point is that the "lockdown" theory is promoted by cops to help get the bad guys, not to protect innocent civilians.
I dunno, interviews I heard this morning indicated that cover in place worked to some extent.

“It's always darkest 'fore dawn”

Since: Jul 08

When's dawn?

#823741 Dec 17, 2012
ole_47 wrote:
<quoted text>
Ask your 19 year old daughter abouts guns the next time she's being raped by the some Occupy Wall St idiot....
Raped at gun point? Regular people who need an assault rifle and a 100 round clip to feel safe should be banned...
John Galt

Temecula, CA

#823742 Dec 17, 2012
OldRaider wrote:
<quoted text>
Nice try John, the religious nut-jobs are your buddies not ours. The really ironic thing is that if the Republican party also threw out NRA nut-jobs like yourself and was left with only fiscal conservatives I might think about voting Republican.
Each person is entitled to their own religious beliefs, but should not attempt to impose them on others. That includes atheists, whose anti-religious beliefs should not be imposed on others.

Just because a person supports the Constitution does not make them a member of any organization.

A fiscally conservative party free of religious influence will develop eventually. If the Republicans refuse to change, a new party will form and render the Republicans obsolete.

Our allegiance is to small-government conservatism, not to a party.

Since: Dec 10

Location hidden

#823743 Dec 17, 2012
Fenris the Big Bad Wolf wrote:
<quoted text>
I believe its supposed to be, which illustrates why gun control is and always will be a joke......
Medical records are not public. It would probably show up if an individual was institutionalized by a court.
John Galt

Temecula, CA

#823744 Dec 17, 2012
carol wrote:
<quoted text>
It's right and good that a president speak on behalf of a grieving nation at a time like this.
What was disconcerting to me was the campaign-like applause by those in attendance when the president was introduced to address the families and the nation.
It was not a time to be introduced as if at a political rally or the audience to clap like performing seals this time.
It was a somber time that needed no introductions and for the audience to respectfully remain silent.
That really bothered me.
If this event was in a church or part of any sort of religious observance or memorial, applause is never appropriate.

Note that I did not see the Obama campaign event.
proud2bwhite

Sherman, IL

#823745 Dec 17, 2012
Its a sad and sick thing to use the death of these children as a tool for a liberal agenda , but as it is ,the sick sad minds of liberals will not let a good tragedy go to waste.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Chicago Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Once slow-moving threat, global warming speeds ... (Dec '08) 7 min Patriot AKA Bozo 46,695
Messianic Jews say they are persecuted in Israel (Jun '08) 8 min JOEL 69,391
Amy 9-18 31 min edogxxx 35
BARACK OBAMA BIRTH CERTIFICATE: Suit contesting... (Jan '09) 38 min loose cannon 178,068
Ill. House Approves Legalizing Same-Sex Civil U... (Dec '10) 53 min maurizio74 49,849
Abby 9-19 56 min Kuuipo 6
Amy 9-19 1 hr Kuuipo 11
Topix Chitown Regulars (Aug '09) 3 hr edogxxx 98,231
•••
•••

Chicago Jobs

•••
•••
•••

Chicago People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

•••

Chicago News, Events & Info

Click for news, events and info in Chicago
•••

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]
•••