Republicans are the party of emotional, knee-jerk responses. They don’t care about facts, truth, or their fellow Americans. They are emotional children and incapable of empathy.
Just a FYI. This may help you understand how her mind works. I don’t know for certain, but this is the only way I can make sense of it. The original definition of a fascist was:
Fascism The principles or methods of the Fascisti—Fascist, I. A member of the Fascisti. II. Of or pertaining to the Fascisti.
Fascisti … The members of a patriotic society in Italy, animated by a strong national spirit, and organized in connection with a repressive movement directed against the socialists and communists and the disturbances excited by them during 1919 and the years following, which regarded the government as criminally negligent in failing to deal with these disturbances, and took measure on its own account, often violent ones, to combat them, and which developed into a powerful party obtaining political control of the country in Oct., 1922, under its founder and leader, Benito Mussolini, as prime minister; hence, the members of a similar society or party elsewhere.
If you want to loosen up the definition a little you would conclude the following. If you are opposed to socialism and/or communism you are a fascist. Nazis Germany was opposed to Soviet socialism (worldwide socialism, versus national socialism). Both sides were competing for, essentially, the same mind share. Nazis were allied with Italy and shared the common political alignment with fascism.
Hence, her twisted mind can conclude that since you are opposed to socialism/communism you are a fascist Nazi.
Who would have guessed lying about Biden’s cognitive health for 2 yrs, refusing to do an open convention for a new nominee, never mentioning public healthcare & embracing fracking, the Cheneys & a yr long slaughter of children in Gaza wouldn’t be a winning strategy?
Anyone with half a brain? But I thought liberals’ whole thing is being smart? It’s not? They actually just blindly cheer the parade of rickety optics wrapped up in New York Times fonts that is the modern Dem Party?
Well at least it’s time for the dusty hacks & careerists to spread their feathers wide post election and blame Russia and third party candidates. That should fix things.
This was a large donor to the Democrat party. I find this guy most interesting. His take on things, at best half right, at least puts the blame on Harris and the Democrat party.
I find it very telling that all the other whining I see on the web about Harris’s loss is based on introspection. It does not include asking republicans why they voted the way they did. And, one would think, they should especially be asking people who usually vote for democrats why they voted for Trump in this election.
I see, again and again, insistence the voters are sexist, racist, white nationalist, and/or fascist. Nevermind that black men, and all Latinos voted for Trump in greater numbers than in 2020. And in some counties a larger fraction of blacks voted Republican this year than they have since the 1870s! Nevermind these evil voters wouldn’t be pushing lawsuits through the courts that make it easier for individuals own guns and training them on how to defend themselves from the likes of the KKK, men who women, and a fascist government.
Their mindset is it always someone else’s fault. The problem is not they are trying to sell an inferior product. The problem is the people are too stupid and/or evil to buy it. In an individual, this sort of reasoning is a strong indicator of mental illness. It can be argued it means the same thing in a group.
An Arizona prosecutor said the man arrested in the three-time shooting of a Democratic National Committee office in suburban Phoenix had more than 120 guns and over 250,000 rounds of ammunition in his home, leading law enforcement to believe he may have been planning a mass casualty event.
How it the world can someone extrapolate from the given data to the stated conclusion? How many guns and rounds of ammo can someone utilize in “a mass casualty event”?
I could see two or maybe three guns. And what, perhaps 300 rounds of ammunition? If you are shooting a rifle quickly, you should let the barrel cool down. Do this every minute or so. So, switch guns for a minute and then continue with first gun. A third gun in case one of your guns gets a jam. After a couple hundred rounds your kill zone is almost for certain going to be empty.
My assertion is that most gun owners can supply the needs of a near maximal “mass causality event”. And they would not have to buy more than one or two extra boxes of ammo to do it.
120 guns and 250,000 rounds of ammunition is evidence of something much different than a “mass casualty event.” It could be any number of things. However, the prosecutor’s hypothesis doesn’t even get on the bottom of that very long list.
The only thing the prosecutor has done with this claim is provide proof she is unable to think clearly.
Burlington Vermont, population about 45,000, decided to “defund the police” and went from 105 police officers to 74. Then, when they realized it was a mistake, upped the approved staffing level to 87. The result:
According to Fox, “violent crime is up significantly in Burlington, with crime data showing that aggravated assault has increased 40 percent and gunfire has gone up nearly 300 percent. Some local residents told Fox they find it ‘dangerous’ to be out in public at night.”
…
In a letter posted to its Facebook page on Wednesday, the Burlington Police Officers Association — the union that represents the city’s officers — charged city leaders with failing to support its officers, which the union said was reflected in the fact that Vermont Police Academy cadets showed no interest in working in the city.
They now have 68 police officers.
It isn’t going to get better anytime soon:
If Burlington residents are truly making the connection between leftist policies and the results that follow, it isn’t showing up in the election results. In the March election that returned Traverse to office, VTDigger reported, the city elected a candidate from the Progressive Party as mayor and gave Progressives a fifth seat on the 12-member city council.
Democrats hold six seats and an independent holds one.
So a city that was run by a Democratic mayor and council in 2020 is now run by a Progressive mayor and Democratic/Progressive council.
Okay, I just want to add that the shooter was a 20-year-old kitchen worker from nearby Bethel Park in Pennsylvania. According to a CNN report, a senior law enforcement official said that he bought 50 rounds from a local gun store hours before the rally.
Shouldn’t that have been reported? Somebody buys…a 20-year-old white guy? I mean we’ve seen that many times now. Young white men with guns and nobody reported that he bought 50 rounds of ammunition?
“50 rounds of ammunition”? Out of touch with reality?
I wonder what she would think if she knew it is nothing special when this white guy buys buys 5,000 rounds of ammunition and/or assembles 2,000 rounds.
The firearms industry, looking to expand beyond its shrinking base of white male gun owners, has focused its marketing efforts on Black, Latino, and Asian Americans. If successful, such efforts can only increase gun death and injury in these communities.
Interesting. The VPC is claiming the “gun death and injury” rates in non-white communities will increase if their gun ownership rates increase. And that most guns are currently owned by white males… who happen to have much lower “gun death and injury” rates than the black males. That doesn’t make any sense. One would expect that since white males have low “gun death and injury” rates we should encourage other to look to them for clues as to how to obtain those same low “gun death and injury” rates. Such as owning guns and learning how to use them to defend yourself.
Logical thinking is not what gun control people are known for. This is just another data point demonstrating they have crap for brains and/or they are evil and deliberately lying because they want those non-whites to continue having high “gun death and injury” rates.
One problem with the court’s approach is that it is formalist, pedantic—soulless. It wrongly suggests that the court should give the words in a statute a form-over- substance significance that focuses on dictionaries, and historic word usage while ignoring the basic right at stake or the basic evil a law aims at ending. In the abortion case, an anti-abortion court could have turned the decision on weighing a life or potential life protected by the Constitution against the liberty of a woman to control her own body—another right protected by the Constitution. Rather than methodically marching to the foregone conclusion that women had no rights historically, the court could have overturned Roe simply by restriking the balance of rights in favor of a life or potential life that might be lost in abortion. Rather than spending their time fixated on the interior life of a gun, the court in Cargill could have considered what the law was obviously aimed at limiting—guns that mindlessly spew multitudes of bullets and threaten public safety. Laws have values in them—life, liberty, public safety, etc., and when the court ignores them in favor of games with words, it undermines respect for the institution.
I dropped my jaw in amazement reading this. He thinks judges should weigh the pros and cons and examine how they feel about the topic to decide the case? Really? That is the job of the legislators when making the laws. If he were to have it his way we would end up with bump stocks being legal or illegal depending upon which judge was assigned to our case. Abortion doctors and the women who employed their services would be sent to jail or on their way, again, depending on what judge they were assigned or perhaps even the mood of the judge that day.
Word mean things and the law depends on the precise meaning of the words used to create those law. If not, then the result will be injustice and chaos. You just won’t know what is an ordinary everyday activity and what a multiple year felony.
This guy is a former judge! Well, maybe this is the reason he is a former judge. He has crap for brains.
The reason that liberals think that you’re a Nazi is because they live in a universe constructed solely of CNN stories. Their universe contains an entirely different timeline, like one of those science fiction shows in which somebody goes back in time and changes something important. In their universe, the BLM riots were completely peaceful. None of the people who ran BLM took the money and ran. George Floyd neither attacked the cops nor died of a self-administered overdose. Trump mocked a disabled person, told everybody to drink bleach, gave a fiery, Hitler-style speech in which he exhorted white-supremacist minions carrying Nazi flags to literally attack Congress, etc. You’re not going to break through to them, because they really believe this stuff, with the intensity of a religious fanatic who won’t change his mind even if he sees videos demonstrating that he’s wrong. Your best bet is to treat them like schizophrenics who have hallucinated an entirely different world into existence.
Insomnus (@nighttimemedia) Posted on X, March 4, 2024
There are numerous other hallucinations and/or hoaxes they also believe. The human brain is an amazing thing.
The political right is not without its share of wacko beliefs, but the left certainly seems to go farther afield in their alternate timelines.
We all know that because of the ammunition magazines that can be strapped on to so many pistols that these become automatic weapons similar to AK-47s. Pistols with stabilizing braces have a reputation in this modern America, though they have been formally forbidden and prohibited, regulated for almost 90 years.
These are the type of people making the law to govern our country.
With people this stupid, ignorant, and/or evil at the top we don’t need enemies. We need their delegated powers stripped down asymptotically close to zero.
The only good thing to come out of anti-gun legislation is their votes put their character on public display.
That’s where we seem to fall down as a society. Not that we take constitutional rights away from people, but rather that we be more careful about who it is that we allow to exercise those rights in our society.
How about we be more careful about who is allowed to exercise their 1st Amendment rights? We are not going to take Figliuzzi’s constitutional right away, we just aren’t going to allow him to exercise his right to say stupid crap like this in our society.
Also, there won’t be a problem with a hostile government confiscating the arms of U.S. citizens. The government agents tasked to do the collecting will have the ammunition being freely offered. And since civilians recreationally consume ammunition at about the same rate as the U.S. military consumed it during WWII, the numbers indicate Johnny is going to be disappointed in the outcome.
Let’s inhibit criminal behavior a little bit by assigning the code to gun and ammunition stores so that when someone has bad intent when buying a weapon, there’s an alert in place that stops that from happening,
Anti-gunners believe all kinds of crazy things which aren’t true. Those crazy beliefs do tend to have the common denominator of bolstering their sense of moral supremacy though.
What’s the efficacy of banning these magazine clips? I will tell you these are ammunition, they’re bullets, so the people who have those know they’re going to shoot them, so if you ban them in the future, the number of these ‘high capacity’ magazines is going to decrease dramatically over time because the bullets will have been shot and there won’t be any more available.
Diana DeGette U.S. Representative to Congress from Colorado 2013
Is it a lie? Or is it profound ignorance? I could go either way on it. I’m certain many people would believe her. And that false belief will increase the likelihood of passing magazine bans.
Just keep in mind that people like her are making the laws you will be prosecuted with.
Only the right wing gun nut teachers carry guns,a lot of them so t and flat out refuse to.These undervalued/ underpaid teachers should be able to go into their schools knowing a shooter armed with an semi automatic weapon will not be able to enter because they weapons are illegal
Notable strong law states like Illinois and Maryland remain plagued with high gun violence in their biggest cities—in large part because they’re targeted by traffickers. Indeed an outsized share of likely trafficked crime guns recovered in Illinois begin their journey in states with weak laws. And Virginia, which had weak gun purchase laws until 2020, has long been the top supplier of crime guns into Maryland. At the other end of the scale, states like New Hampshire, Vermont, and Rhode Island have unusually low gun death rates compared with their somewhat weaker policies, in part because they are buffered by robust laws among other states in the region.
If guns are freely available in one state how do they imagine restrictions, or even complete bans, in an adjacent state will reduce the criminals using guns the free state?
Who do they think will believe such crap? Being as generous as possible, this is crazy talk. But are they really crazy? The more likely explanation is this is the best deliberate lie they could come up with. Lies and deception it’s what they do.
I can think of less believable lies, but not by much. They could have invoked Markley’s Law to explain the differences.
If Americans where brave enough they could give up all their guns and use their bodies as weapons, they could learn martial arts, self defense, knives attacks and even fight with swords to “defend” themselves but they are too fat and lazy to do something brave. A bunch of fearful cowards. If you rely in a gun to be “secure” you have a big, big problem and try to use a stupid logic to justify guns is not going to solve it.
As I read things like this I wonder if when they get the words out and then read their own delusions, do they realize it is crazy talk and publish it anyway? Or do they actually think it is something profound and is enlightenment for the dimwitted masses?
Another hypothesis I have about this sort of thing, and it is particularly obvious here, is the phrase “stupid logic”. This could be interpreted at least two different ways. One is that they believe gun rights advocates use faulty logic. And the other is that logic as a means of determining proper courses of action is stupid. There are many people who abhor reason. I suspect the great mass of gun control advocates are of this opinion and idly-raven17 is one of those.
