I first noticed the sweat on their brows when I went to the pro-gun threads and kept mentioning Bloomberg and his plan to them.

And now, 2 more pro-NRA candidates were easily defeated, and one by one each and every other one in important states shall too.

The house is going democratic
The senate will hold

and the changing congress, new demographics, and a major Presidential win in 2016 will
mean the Supreme Court will soon be 7 to 2 and a new reinterpretation of the 2nd shall come true.
Won't be instantly, but the irony is, the NRA by being so absolute has made it so much
easier than it would have been.
regardless of any gun control it is happening.

Working for a gun-free in the streets America.

But they might as well.

They are only for selling guns.

http://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=&imgrefurl=?o%3D76&h=303&w=321&sz=13&tbnid=QrJBcaNYM8aSXM:&tbnh=90&tbnw=95&zoom=1&usg=__S8Nv5CrewfDQVrGSMb8HWFSrPa4=&docid=3Lv95ZdZgjQ1MM&sa=X&ei=lGYyUeG8O8OGjALCvoGACQ&ved=0CEkQ9QEwBQ&dur=249

the state itself is not as liberal as NYC is
There are parts very conservative.

Now if only the anti-gun states can set up border patrols like California does to keep out any produce, it would be a good thing.
Put a ring around it like a vaccine for a new panademic does.

someone on a liberal board wanting checkpoints at borders!
So, how would these checkpoints work? Stop and search every car/truck crossing the border? Much like Mike's stop and frisk in NY?

If its good enough for California, it's good enough for me.

Gotta treat guns and the NRA like terrorists and terror orgs.
Which is what guns are WMDs. Real WMDs.

And it would be voluntary.

No one is allowed to bring guns to NYC anyhow.

Did you know, the rate of deaths from guns in the blue states is % wise way less than those in red states.

Once a new congress, a new SCOTUs and a new reinterpretation of the 2nd by a better court, it will be able to redefine and create new laws.

No one needs a workable gun on the streets.

Collectors can keep them in their house, with proper of course modification to them.

And all office buildings in NYC have protections from Oklahoma and the first WTC attack
and cars cannot enter garages. Nor are cars allowed now in the immediate parking areas at airports in NY.

It can be done.

Let the states that don't care keep their guns in those states.
Then people in states that don't want them can not have their 1st amendment right
to free assembly violated by a bullet and gun in a movie theatre, town hall, supermarket or school.

Checkpoints at borders? And by the way, not every road into california has a checkpoint.

I find it very sad that you, on a liberal website, would post such nonsense.

and thankfully, that will never happen again that way.

guns kill. Bullets kill.

and most people here are for some way of dealing with the problem of the rightwing extremists using guns as a political tool.

Like the kind meek doctor killed in a Church of all places.

Conn. brought it all home. It was the final straw. People had enough.

and nothing can stop the shape of things to come as the (c) song goes.
Won't be instant, but guns in the streets will be a thing of the past, and the USA can live as a civilized society.

(BTW, the republicans should not mind an individual state doing as they please.
After all, don't republicans and libertarians believe in states rights?

And we can make guns in the street as rare as republicans want to make a woman's choice.
Which has been reinterpreted many times.

All it takes is new politicians, those no longer blackmailed by the NRA.
One dollar more than the NRA from this time forward to defeat their holding politicians hostage.

In a sense, Scalia himself opened up a new technique with his oration on federal guidelines in southern state elections.
That in itself can now legally apply to the 2nd too.

After all, one act is the same as the other.

As Ben Franklin said" An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure" and he was maybe talking about getting guns off the street.

After all Alexander Hamilton/AAron Burr can't legally duel in the streets of New York in 2013.

I find it incredibly sad that a so called progressive would call for checkpoints at borders. This is RW nuttery at it's worse.

So, how would it work? Stop and search every car/truck? Interrogate everyone that comes across the state border?
Tear vehicles apart on a suspicion?
You want to do away with the IV Amend.?

Your pals on the USSC took care of that; you have no real way to stop LEO from searching your vehicle.

and then ask them if you can leave, if they say no, then ask them to get their superior officer there to explain why you're being detained, and make sure you record everything.

And why would you call them my pals?

90% of car searches are consensual. People don't like to say 'no' to cops. I tell my clients to say no and to refuse to talk to them. Many don't follow this advice and suffer the consequences.

He tried to tell me that I had no choice and that's when I demanded his superior officer and I recorded everything that went on which pissed him off even more.
His Sgt. arrived and got my side of the story and told me I was free to leave with his apologies.

Never ever consent to a search and if possible, record everything for possible use in court.

Franklin meant that to those who are addicted to guns and bullets
People addicted to guns are beholden to them
therefore they give up their liberty and think a false icon (the gun and bullet) will save them.
unfortunately, there is always a faster gunslinger that will prove them wrong to have believed in their false icon didn't do a dang thing.

Guns are NOT liberty, nor are they safety. Guns are faux idols

How Orwellian of you..

and he meant that one can be free but if one has anyone at all they care about,
or responsiblity to anything, they are NOT free at all.
though they can be, if they shuck it all and give up.

with a gun, one is beholden to a 1% lobby group and the onlyting one has to fear is fear itself

and gunslingers always fear someone, something, the shadows
they think everyone is out to get them
and that losing their gun/bullet will be the end all

guns in an ugly way, are the blanked schroeder schlept around with

guns never saved anyone, but yet people continually believe in them.

with a gun, one has no wits
with a gun, one doesn't have the option of backing off
with a gun, one fires

and all the phony million dollar nra soundbytes from the past have been vanished

guns are an addiction, as is sugar, as is cigarettes, as is gambling

freedom is chucking the addictions
it's all in the mind

an individual has the power to say NO loudly to the hypnotic trance that is a gun
and an individual has the wisdowm to know, that someday someone will have a bigger gun
and a faster finger. At which point their faux idol won't help them anymore
imho.
feel free to take the opposite view

and he used his wits and rode the bus
He did not need a weapon
and he was a detective because he was shot in the back and forced to retire from the force.

So, yeah, I am very Orwellian. Harry-Orwellian. Greatest role by the greatest tv actor ever.

finally all shows are now on dvd


[img][/img]

It would appear your hero did need a weapon after all.

http://www.popmatters.com/pm/review/163226-harry-o/

is that the new meme?
all the people that dislike Bloomberg use the word "my hero".
quaint.
very quaint.

however, no, he did not much use a gun.

he used his wits.

(Why WB chose to use him with a gun in a publicity shot you would have to ask them.
Probably in an attempt to get even better ratings than it got.
This show was a great look at the politics of tv.
Critics loved the show.
Viewers loved the show.
It got great ratings and defeated shows against it.
But the powers that be at ABC were changing, and the new hated the old and sad to say it was cancelled after 2 seasons.

But NO he did not use the gun.
And though he was an ex-cop, the current cops couldn't stand him, he was a pain in their rear.

One should watch the show.
Best tv actor, male, of all time.
Died way too young.

but again, love your choice of word.
Why is it people who argue against me on gun threads always one after another,
use the same exact sound bytes?

"Why is it people who argue against me on gun threads always one after another,
use the same exact sound bytes?"

For the same reason we look up, and all say the sky is blue - because it is.


Clearly, that never occured to you.

of his baffling tirades, you'd know that "liberal" or "progressive" are not words easily applied to graham4anything.

but what I've seen makes my skin crawl.

I never thought I would see someone on a liberal discussion board wanting checkpoints at state borders.
I thought this was RW nuttery, not progressive values.

I think at one point he even said he had no problem with the Patriot Act.

that a large percentage of the time cars are waved through the checkpoints without stopping, and when it rains, they aren't stopped AT ALL.

Hell, there's an immigration checkpoint on I-15 north of Fallbrook that is manned about 30% of the time.

Can also look for evidence of bigotry, TParty/Republican Affiliation, etc.

Besides, don't have to get them all the first time. {Partial Sarcasm Thingy}

Get real.

There really is a GSA and it is in full panic mode right now. Just not over guns.

NRA used to be better known as FDR's "National Recovery Act."

"CNS" is used by two news services, "Christian News Service" and "Conservative News Service."

During the Reagan years, GSA was in the middle of a major scandal, literally billions of $$$ vanished.

The GSA still pays for offices that are unfinished and have never been used.
("60 Minutes" did a segment on this recently.)

http://newsfeed.time.com/2012/04/18/gsa-scandal-so-what-does-823000-buy-you-in-las-vegas/

They got a black eye over this one.

Or at least they used to be when I went to them in the early 90's.

The best deal I ever got was a palette of 12 working oscilloscopes for $5.00, which I sold to engineering students at my college for between $100 and $500 each.

I nearly bought a lighthouse in the Chesapeake for $8000, but somebody sniped me.

There's a difference?

how all those gunless chefs with membership in the National Restaurant Association feel about all the attention the other NRA is getting...

Pretty soon GSA is going to stand for everything and nothing

I guess I may not be correct. They can threaten all they want, since the majority wants some controls I think it will happen some day. They threaten, we can threaten and since the votes will be on our side we can elect more members than they can. If we find NRA backing a candidate then we can go in the opposite direction.

they don't care one whit if the gun is legal or not, they are against them

Keep the guns inside.
Collectors can keep them
One can go to a shooting gallery and get a gun like those who go to a minigolf course get
a putter and golfballs.
And hunters can use bow and arrow.
And those worried about protecting their own home, can easily still have a gun IN THEIR HOUSE but not in the street.

The days of NRA blackmail against candidates is over.
And do you think candidates prior to the Mayors against Guns were able to speak freely against guns?
The NRA targeted and still does every candidate.
And prior, no one wanted to go against them in fear of what they do.

now someone has the back of the candidates that wasn't there before.

Who are you to decide what liberals should be for? Who made you the arbiter of all things liberal?
There are thousands and thousands of liberals who are pro gun, have CCW's, like to hunt, who are you to tell them what they should be for?

as Bob Dylan (c) sang "and the times, they are a 'changing."

keep your guns in your home or on your property.

then they are not in the street.

no one wants to take them away from your property.

Just not in the streets.

Put a ring around it.

Just like one cannot drive into the Capital building, one should not take their gun out in the street.

you don't get to tell people what they can and can't do/believe in.
That's what the RW does.
If someone wants to hunt with a rifle, who are you to tell them how to hunt? Who are you to tell someone they can't carry a gun if they pass all of their states qualifications to do so?
Who are you to decide what constitutes a liberal?

It's not like I have any more power than my vote, so why are you bothered with an opinion on a political chat board?

After all, bantering back and forth is how a discussion goes.

So you have your opinion, I have mine.

However, to have effective gun control means getting guns legal and illegal off the streets except for law enforcement, and then only whilst on duty.(They too will need to leave their guns secure in the police station).

No one needs a gun inside a movie theatre, restaurant, and especially a bar.
Crazy to think one can argue who is better, Bob Gibson or Sandy Koufax and get shot dead in a bar. (me, I want both on the same team. At least both were in the better league.)
Nobody was better than either of them. (and neither cheated like Roger Clemens is said to have done).

Perhaps the two best Dodger pitchers ever, although Orel Hershiser comes close.
Myself, I'm more of an Angels fan and they had one of the all time best pitchers ever, Nolan Ryan and don't forget the only Angel's pitcher to ever throw a perfect game, Mike Witt.

But Drysdale was not on the very top like Gibson and Koufax, followed by Marichal and Seaver.
Then Drysdale. i am not an American league fan. Pitchers don't bat now, it's not baseball to me.
anyhow...

I don't like the designated hitter, pitchers should hit also. The only time American League pitchers hit is during interleague play or during the World Series.

And you were no more a Pararescuman/"PJ" in the United States Air Force, the "Navy Seals" of that branch of the service, than my kitty cat was. Laughable stuff.

Nope, don't care, and this will be my last comment to you on this subject.

Particularly in a northern Illinois district.

This is getting to be one of those 'which side are you on?' situations, and as this issue percolates towards the up-coming Congressional election, persons who say they are gun owners and say they are Democrats are going to have to decide if they are loyal to the gun-fetishism promulgated by the NRA, or if they are loyal to the political programs of President Obama's administration, and seek the defeat of Republicans in the House and Senate.

That gets to be a sticky wicket sometimes.

It has nothing whatever to do with any actual proposed law or promulgated regulation, for none of these are by the remotest stretch of anything but LaPierre's or his ilk's imagination in the slightest degree un-Constitutional. You are talking, when you make comments like that, like the sort of cretin who waves signs of President Obama with a Hitler mustache. I would like to think better of you, as we have had some reasonable exchanges in the past, but if you set out to make that difficult to do, it will quickly become not worth the necessary effort....

It has nothing to do with the Ehnnahhrraayyee, but with our rights as Americans. And I'm still the same guy that you've had those previous conversations with. Nobody said you had to like any particular weapon I may own, but please don't let yourself get snookered into thinking that anyone who doesn't fall in line with every portion of the official White House script is in some way a LaRouchebot chanting incoherently about Glass-Steagall outside of a chicken coop.

That is straight 'Team NRA' bull-shit, and if you trot it out here, you can expect to be called on it, and you can expect people to change their opinion of you, and regard you as a shill for the worst elements of right-wing reaction in the country, who are happy and eager to enable illegal arms trading and the supplying of guns to murderers, and who do so spouting a virulent racism and a treasonous attitude towards the United States of America.

The choice is yours, Sir: back water on the ludicrous assertion that supporting President Obama on gun regulations is opposing the Constitution, or be known on this forum as an acolyte of LaPierre and a gun-fetishist of the most risible and contemptible stripe.

Besides, I've been here long enough for people to make up their own minds about me. What's it been, over nine years now? Your prophecy of ostracism ain't gonna happen. Besides, what would you do without a pain in the ass like me?

We can agree to disagree without being disagreeable. Agreed?

It is not possible to agree without being disagreeable. The statement you made is pure 'Team NRA' bull-shit, and makes where you stand on this matter, and the quality of your stand, clear to everyone who may read this exchange. You align with LaPierre, with 'Gun Owners of America', with the whole gun fetishist mob, as foul a collection of racist traitors as has ever been seen outside the old secession crowd: that is what stating supporting President Obama on gun regulations is opposing the Constitution means.

You're sounding rather desperate, using the old "You're standing with racist traitors" tactic. All because I'm convinced that a ban on semi-automatics is unconstitutional. What, I'm not allowed to have convictions anymore? Come on, man.

You want to improve the background check system and extend it to all gun show purchases? Fine by me; maybe it could have prevented Virginia Tech without restricting my rights. But as far as bans on semi-autos and magazines go, just consider that since gun owners in America have been forced to compromise again and again ever since 1934, don't act so surprised that gun owners have decided to push back.

Just who you are aligning with: the most reactionary, racist, and treasonous elements of our political life. Of course, you are free to do this, just as people are free to call attention to your doing it, and to draw their own conclusions from your doing it.

You can drop innuendos and threaten all you want, but do you really think you're going to show me the error of my ways by doing so?

I am aligning with Democrats, and you cannot bully me into associating with racists and traitors, can you? Of course not.

Besides, here's what you said:

This is getting to be one of those 'which side are you on?' situations, and as this issue percolates towards the up-coming Congressional election, persons who say they are gun owners and say they are Democrats are going to have to decide if they are loyal to the gun-fetishism promulgated by the NRA, or if they are loyal to the political programs of President Obama's administration, and seek the defeat of Republicans in the House and Senate.

My response:

Aye, there's the rub - President vs. Constitution

You see what I did there? I reframed your earlier assertion. You were demanded loyalty to one or the other, and I changed the game before you knew what happened. Gotta watch the absolutist thinking, but I already discussed that.

You are not being threatened; what you have done, and its proper consequences, are simply being described. By adopting that language, you have aligned yourself with the sort of racists and treasonous cretins who parade with pictures of President Obama with a Hitler moustache and worse. That is a plain statement of fact, something self-evident, contained in the very words themselves. They are your words, Sir, and so long as you stand by them, stating you have aligned yourself with racist and treasonist far-right cretins is simply a statement of fact.

Your inability to perceive this is not my problem. I can own a "politically incorrect" rifle that uses 30-round magazines and still support civil rights, so no matter how many times you repeat that tired old canard, I shall remain exactly where I started, and you'll be reduced to recycling your older arguments in the hopes that they'll pan out in the end. Indeed, I see that this has already started.

A ban on semi-automatics is unconstitutional. Fact. People deserve rights regardless of race, color, creed, gender, sexual orientation, or credit score. Fact.

Now try to have a good evening. The unstoppable force and the immovable object could both use a mug full of a delicious beverage right about now.

Adopting that line aligns you with the most poisonous elements of our political life, a crowd of racists rife with treasonous views of our government. That is a plain fact, however much you may not like seeing it spelled out cold.

Repetition is the heart of marketing; what people have heard or read many times they remember, and what people remember tends to become what they think of some item, or on some matter, so do not imagine you are scoring anything remotely like a point by noticing my use of similar language in successive posts here on this matter. I want people to remember that you have said, plain and clear, that supporting President Obama on gun regulation is opposing the Constitution, which is exactly what the sort of racist cretins who wave banners depicting President Obama with a Hitler moustache proclaim, exactly what poisonous toads like Wayne LaPierre howl at podiums, exactly what the Republican Tea-Party line is going to be in the up-coming Congressional election. To talk their racist, treasonous talk, Sir, is to walk their walk, is to assist them in their political campaigns and aims. It is that simple. You may not like it, but there it is.

I must also say that I have never read such a frank endorsement of the Big Lie technique:

To claim supporting President Obama on gun regulations is opposing the Constitution is aligning oneself with the worst elements of the right wing in our country, a pack of racists who sport banners depicting President Obama with a Hitler moustache, whose attitudes towards our government and our country are treasonous and insurrectionist. As a political issue reaches the voting point, there are in our system only two sides, and one must choose which side one is on. Here, one either aligns with gun fetishists steeped in racism and treason, or one aligns with our President, President Obama. It ought to be an easy choice for anyone describing himself or herself as a leftist, as a progressive, as a liberal, as a Democrat: a leftist, a progressive, a liberal, a Democrat, will stand with President Obama, and not with a pack of racist traitorous trash.

That is the plain fact at hand. You have failed to coerce me into rolling over on my big and whimper like a dog that's been beaten into submission. I tried to keep this discourse civil, but you made the choice to make it ugly. So now you have forced my hand, and you must bear the consequence for doing so.

In your case, the consequence is that you have failed to convince me (or anyone else on DU with half a brain) that I am somehow racist or treasonous just because I am convinced that a semi-auto ban is unconstitutional, and everyone will see how your efforts to somehow paint me with the same brush that you do the teabaggers have been smashed to pieces like eggshells on granite. You may think you're being cutesy by repeating the same thing over and over again, but I can create a simple toy that is capable of doing the same thing. Either that, or I can buy a talkative parrot.

You made your bed, now you have to lie in it.

That is what pressing the line that supporting President Obama on gun regulations is opposing the Constitution does to a man. It is exactly the same line pressed by racist cretins who flourish posters depicting President Obama with a Hitler moustache, and by taking up yourself the line that to support President Obama on gun regulation is to oppose the Constitution you have ranged yourself alongside that crowd of racist traitors to our Democracy. I do not expect you like having the plain political meaning of your stance, that supporting President Obama on gun regulation is opposing the Constitution, laid out in plain language for all to see, but I do appreciate your continued complaints at my pointing out that by claiming that supporting President Obama on gun regulations is opposing the Constitution you have aligned yourself with the worst elements of gun fetishism and racist and traitorous right-wing reaction in our political life, since it gives me fresh opportunity to re-iterate the simple fact that you, by claiming that to support President Obama on gun regulation is opposing the Constitution, have aligned yourself with the worst elements of gun fetishism and right-wing racism and treason in our country.

I won this debate. Accept it.

By claiming that to support President Obama on gun regulations is opposing the Constitution, you have ranged yourself alongside that crowd of racist traitors to our Democracy which delights to flourish banner depicting President Obama with a Hitler moustache. I do not expect you like having the plain political meaning of your stance, that supporting President Obama on gun regulation is opposing the Constitution, laid out in plain language for all to see, but I do appreciate your continued complaints at my pointing out that by claiming that supporting President Obama on gun regulations is opposing the Constitution you have aligned yourself with the worst elements of gun fetishism and racist and traitorous right-wing reaction in our political life, since it gives me fresh opportunity to re-iterate the simple fact that you, by claiming that to support President Obama on gun regulation is opposing the Constitution, have aligned yourself with the worst elements of gun fetishism and right-wing racism and treason in our country.

Otherwise you wouldn't take the effort to repeat the same tired old slander over and over again. But hey, I can repeat stuff, too...

Why should such an amusing spectacle discomfit me in the least?

What you are peddling here, Sir, is straight 'Team NRA' bull-shit, and you know it is straight 'Team NRA' bull-shit. It has nothing whatever to do with any actual proposed law or promulgated regulation, for none of these are by the remotest stretch of anything but LaPierre's or his ilk's imagination in the slightest degree un-Constitutional. You are talking, when you make comments like that, like the sort of cretin who waves signs of President Obama with a Hitler mustache. When you trot straight 'Team NRA' bull-shit out here, you can expect to be called on it, and you can expect people to change their opinion of you, and regard you as a shill for the worst elements of right-wing reaction in the country, who are happy and eager to enable illegal arms trading and the supplying of guns to murderers, and who do so spouting a virulent racism and a treasonous attitude towards the United States of America.

I do not expect you to like having the plain political meaning of your stance, that supporting President Obama on gun regulation is opposing the Constitution, laid out in plain language for all to see, but I do appreciate your continued complaints at my pointing out that by claiming that supporting President Obama on gun regulations is opposing the Constitution you have aligned yourself with the worst elements of gun fetishism and racist and traitorous right-wing reaction in our political life, since it gives me fresh opportunity to re-iterate the simple fact that you, by claiming that to support President Obama on gun regulation is opposing the Constitution, have aligned yourself with the worst elements of gun fetishism and right-wing racism and treason in our country.

Or simply admit that I have the high moral ground and walk away before you make yourself look even more foolish.

However, flattery gets you nowhere, not with me, not on this matter.

By claiming that to support President Obama on gun regulations is opposing the Constitution, you have ranged yourself alongside that crowd of racist traitors to our Democracy which delights to flourish banner depicting President Obama with a Hitler moustache. I do not expect you like having the plain political meaning of your stance, that supporting President Obama on gun regulation is opposing the Constitution, laid out in plain language for all to see, but I do appreciate your continuing to provide me fresh opportunity for pointing out that by claiming that supporting President Obama on gun regulations is opposing the Constitution you have aligned yourself with the worst elements of gun fetishism and racist and traitorous right-wing reaction in our political life.

What did they say the definition of insanity is? Doing the same thing over and over and over again and expecting a different result every time.

Keep convincing yourself that everything you say is true. A semi-auto ban will indeed violate the Constitution. God bless the Democratic Party. If you don't like it, you're always free to leave.

This 'I know what i am but what are you?' stuff does not even work on kindergarten playgrounds anymore.

What you are peddling here is straight 'Team NRA' bull-shit, and you know it is straight 'Team NRA' bull-shit. It has nothing whatever to do with any actual proposed law or promulgated regulation, for none of these are by the remotest stretch of anything but LaPierre's or his ilk's imagination in the slightest degree un-Constitutional. You are talking, when you make comments like that, like the sort of cretin who waves signs of President Obama with a Hitler mustache. When you trot straight 'Team NRA' bull-shit out here, you can expect to be called on it, and you can expect people to change their opinion of you, and regard you as a shill for the worst elements of right-wing reaction in the country, who are happy and eager to enable illegal arms trading and the supplying of guns to murderers, and who do so spouting a virulent racism and a treasonous attitude towards the United States of America.

I do not expect you to like having the plain political meaning of your stance, that supporting President Obama on gun regulation is opposing the Constitution, laid out in plain language for all to see, but I do appreciate your continued complaints at my pointing out that by claiming that supporting President Obama on gun regulations is opposing the Constitution you have aligned yourself with the worst elements of gun fetishism and racist and traitorous right-wing reaction in our political life, since it gives me fresh opportunity to re-iterate the simple fact that you, by claiming that to support President Obama on gun regulation is opposing the Constitution, have aligned yourself with the worst elements of gun fetishism and right-wing racism and treason in our country.

than my kitty cat is/was. It's really a disgraceful, dishonorable thing to pretend to be a veteran when you are not. Pro-tip, Mr. NRA.

My nephew is a Marine sniper who has seen duty in Afghanistan. If you're going to suggest that I cannot honor a family member who has served with honor in one of the toughest jobs in the armed forces, be my guest. The dishonor rests on your shoulders alone.

Now run along and play or I will taunt you a second time, Mr. Gun-Grabber.

you never served in the Marines and yet sport the avatar as if you did. And there is no explanatory verbiage, say, in your sig line, to explain this rather sudden revelation of yours that you have a "nephew" who is a "Marine sniper." And you want to talk about "dishonor"! That's some funny stuff, there.

"Now run along and play or I will taunt you a second time, Mr. Gun-Grabber." - Really? Did an adult really just type that sentence and hit the "Post my reply!" button? It's no wonder the pro-NRA side in the Gungeon is having such a hard time holding it's own in the sensible gun regulation debate here on DU.

(My father was a Marine, so I can say that! (ya know - just to honor HIS service!))

up and pretend I'm an Air Force Vet! Just to honor HIS service! Great idea!

"Rather sudden revelation?" Haven't been paying attention, have you? But then, it's all about you, isn't it? Everything has to revolve around you. Fortunately, I'm not bound by your rules, so run along and play like a good boy.

You have nothing better to do than to pounce on little ol' me. I am your life now. I have solved you.

Enjoy the day.

without an explanatory sig line or other verbiage to indicate who you are honoring. See here:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=2457294

It is misleading at the very least. Like I said, you won't do the right thing here. You should, but you won't. At least you keep kicking this thread allowing that many more DU'ers to see it. They are free to make up their own minds about the matter.


Edit: added sentence.

You have made a mountain out of less than an anthill and tried to put words in my mouth as well. You have tried to imply that I am misleading DUers by using a Marine logo the same way you use your chosen icon. And you have failed. Because that is what you do - fail. And by misleading your fellow DUers, you have failed again.

I have prayed that my enemies would look ridiculous. And my prayer has been answered.

Walk away. You have lost.

to the score: "I have prayed that my enemies would look ridiculous. And my prayer has been answered" is a quote from Voltaire, only slightly paraphrased, and you have not credited the author.

Keep digging; the rest of us will keep laughing.

"Walk away. You have lost." -



Edit: typo.

you should.

"You have made a mountain out of less than an anthill"

You keep telling yourself that. I'll bet there a plenty of Marines - real Marines - who would disagree.

"What did they say the definition of insanity is? Doing the same thing over and over and over again and expecting a different result every time...."

One can only imagine then that if that bumper-sticker is indeed true, all those who practice the cello consistently are insane...

I've ever seen posted from a pro-NRA shill aka "pro gun progressive"* on Democratic Underground, bar none.

In point of fact, you had your metaphorical head handed to you in this sub-thread - and repeatedly.



*( )

This oughta be fun.

You may want to edit in order to not confuse the issue.

http://www.acronymfinder.com/GSA.html

GSA__General Services Administration (US government)
GSA__Google Search Appliance
GSA__Geological Society of America
GSA__Graduate Student Association (Rice University; Houston, Texas)
GSA__Global Semiconductor Alliance (formerly Fabless Semiconductor Association)
GSA__Genetics Society of America
GSA__Gerontological Society of America
GSA__Gay-Straight Alliance Network (since 1998)
GSA__Glasgow School of Art
GSA__General Sales Agent
GSA__Geological Society of Australia
GSA__Government Services Administration
GSA__Group Security Association
GSA__GNSS Supervisory Authority (European Satellite Navigation Agency, Brussels, Belgium)
GSA__Gaming Standards Association (Fremont, CA)
GSA__Geological Survey of Alabama
GSA__Girl Scouts of America
GSA__Georgia Strait Alliance
GSA__Governor's School for the Arts
GSA__Green Schools Alliance
GSA__GameSpy Arcade (multi-player gaming service)
GSA__Genetic Sexual Attraction (adoption-related syndrome)
GSA__Government Services Agency
GSA__Germany, Switzerland, Austria (licensing)
GSA__Gas Supply Agreement
GSA__General Services Agreement
GSA__George Stevens Academy (Blue Hill, ME)
GSA__Goethe- und Schiller-Archiv
GSA__General Service Agency
GSA__Guest Services Agent
GSA__General Somatic Afferent (nerve)
GSA__Gwinnett Soccer Association (Lilburn, Georgia)
GSA__Game Sprite Archives (video games)
GSA__Gay Student Alliance
GSA__Great Salinity Anomalies
GSA__Granny Smith Apple
GSA__Gainesville Soccer Alliance (Florida, USA)
GSA__GameShark Advance (game hacking device)
GSA__Game Spy Arcade (game utility)
GSA__Giardia Specific Antigen (test for diagnosing giardiasis)
GSA__Global Security Architecture
GSA__Gateway Security Appliance (Symantec)
GSA__Graduate Staff Assistant (university position)
GSA__Gas Suspension Absorber (part of CFB power plant)
GSA__Government Supply Agency
GSA__General Structural Analysis
GSA__Greater Shadow Armor (Asheron's Call game)
GSA__Guest Service Attendant (various businesses)
GSA__Georgia Society of Anesthesiologists
GSA__Game Show America
GSA__Grover Search Algorithm (quantum searching of databases)
GSA__Garden Seed Association
GSA__Greater Shadow Amuli
GSA__Group Services Agreement
GSA__Gale-Shapley Algorithm (input/output queuing)
GSA__General Somatic Afferents
GSA__Goldfish Society of America (Fort Lauderdale, FL)
GSA__Good Shepard Academy
GSA__Galvanised Steel Armour
GSA__Global Software Application
GSA__General Survey Act of 1824 (authorized the president to use Army engineers to survey road & canal)
GSA__Guest Signature Activation
GSA__Generalized Significant Adiposity
GSA__General Support Artillery (US DoD)
GSA__General State Aid (Illinois)
GSA__German Sociological Association
GSA__German Speakers Association (various locations)
GSA__Gas Station Advertising (Plymouth, MN)
GSA__General Security Agreement
GSA__Global Strategic Alliance (various locations)
GSA__Glass-Steagall Act of 1932
GSA__Giornalisti Specializzati Associati (Italian: Specialized Associated Press)
GSA__Gold Standard Accreditation (various organizations)
GSA__Gold Star Award (various organizations)
GSA__Government Sponsored Agency
GSA__Graduate School of Architecture (various schools)
GSA__Grove Street Advisors (Wellesley, MA)
GSA__Ground Support Aircraft (gaming)
GSA__Guided Self Assessment (various organizations)
GSA__Grower-Shipper Association (California)

Thanks for trying, but these NRA fanatics are from another planet, where there is only one amendment and no body to the Constitution.