Dear Republicans: I’ve Had it With Your Ignorance

republicanignoranceAt some point with many things that drive you crazy you hit a breaking point, and I might have just reached mine.

Now this isn’t aimed at sensible Republicans, I know there are a few out there.  The problem is the key part in that that sentence “a few”— very few, and seemingly getting smaller every day.

I can handle ideological difference.  I can handle reasonable debate on issues such as immigration, taxes, our deficits and war.  But what I can’t handle is utter stupidity.  Just sheer ignorance about issues where not even the slightest bit of common sense seems to be prevalent in someone’s thought process.

It terrifies me that many of these people drive out on our roads without someone telling them what to think and do.

For example, someone like Sarah Palin.  You see, we had the yearly White House Correspondence dinner this week.  It’s a tradition that goes back to 1920 and something that almost every President has attended.

But here this twit just had to tweet about it…

Well first, it probably wasn’t even her that sent the actual tweet.  I’m sure she’s too damn dumb to figure out how to properly use Twitter.

But still, her Twitter account sent out a tweet, and in pure Palin ignorance she basically said ‘while the rest of the country is out there working our asses off, the DC assclowns throw themselves a nerd prom.’  The keyword being working our asses off.

Excuse me?  She’s working her ass off?  Exactly what the hell is this bumbling idiot doing these days?  She failed as a VP candidate, quit as governor, her shows (plural) failed and Fox News fired her—what the hell is she doing?

And heaven forbid that one night of the year, in an American tradition spanning 93 years, some of those in our nation’s capital poke fun at one another and have fun.   That makes them assclowns?  I know what it is, she’s still pissed off that she’ll never be present at one of these dinners.  I mean hell, when you get fired from Fox News because you’re too much of a headcase, joining the likes of Glenn Beck in that respect, that says enough about what kind of assclown you are.

Then there’s the continued debate on gun regulation.  I swear, if I hear “guns don’t kill people, people kill people” again my head might just pop right off.

Is alcohol an issue with drunk driving?  Or is it just the people?  No, alcohol is an issue with drunk driving, which is why we regulated it.  Now I know what’s coming, “But drinking isn’t a right!”  Who gives a crap.  Just because it’s a right doesn’t mean it isn’t a problem.  Gun ownership might be a right, but that doesn’t suddenly negate the fact that guns are part of the problem!  Just because over 200 years ago a group of men wrote a document that gave us the right to bear arms, doesn’t mean those arms are excused from ever being included as part of a problem with violence that includes those arms.

Many during that time argued slavery was a right too.  In fact, many of the Founding Fathers were slave owners.  Can we just finally agree that maybe their judgement on every issue wasn’t exactly perfect?  Especially considering that during their time guns were single-shot muskets, not rapid fire semi-automatics with large magazines.

And if you think this government fears an armed populous, you’re clearly too mentally unstable to own a gun.  How well did that work out for the south during the Civil War?  Overthrow the government did they?  Oh no, that’s right, they got their asses kicked by the federal government and had to free their slaves.  And this was when our government, and military, were much weaker.

Then the whole “homosexuals are sinners” argument.  Let’s just put it like this: If you’re a Christian,  you have but one judge and that’s God.  If homosexuals are to be “dammed to hell” as millions of these right-wing Christians believe, then so bet it—let them find that out when they face God. Until then, shut your mouth, live your own life and worry about your own damn sins.  Because I’m sure you’re guilty of plenty.

But for the rest of us who are sane, we all know people are born the way they are born.  Our sexual orientation isn’t a choice.  As a Christian, I believe God made both straight and gay individuals.  Our actions toward others determine what kind of people we are, not who we love.

And of course there are the Republicans who hate Obama more than they claim to love the United States.  You know who you are.  The ones who would rather have millions of people lose their jobs, homes and family if it would make President Obama look bad.  The ones who call yourselves “proud patriots” yet hate our government, hate millions of Americans and seem to love some version of the Constitution that’s never existed.

Oh, and for you “the Republican opposition to President Obama has nothing to do with race” people—spare me.  I live in Texas, you know how often I hear conservatives who don’t know I’m a liberal call Obama some racially derogatory word?  I’ll just say it’s more than I hear him called President.

But let’s just take a look at this image that compares Republican majority states and the states of the Confederacy:

But I’m sure there’s no coincidence with that—none at all.

I’ve just had it with people who seem to live in some alternate reality where facts, history, science, math and common sense are all vulgar words and thoughts.

Where the use of critical thinking seems to be taboo for millions when it comes to discussing the issues which face our nation.

Again, I’m not asking that we agree upon every issue.  I’m simply asking that when we begin to discuss these issues, we’re discussing them in the same dimension of reality.

And right now it’s not even close to happening.

Allen Clifton

Allen Clifton is a native Texan who now lives in the Austin area. He has a degree in Political Science from Sam Houston State University. Allen is a co-founder of Forward Progressives and creator of the popular Right Off A Cliff column and Facebook page. Be sure to follow Allen on Twitter and Facebook, and subscribe to his channel on YouTube as well.

Comments

Facebook comments

  • Bravo!

  • Well put, Allen.

  • Excellent article.

  • I just soiled myself. Thumbs up, brother!

  • Exactly. And I was born in one of those states and live in another. These Republicans were Southern Democrats until the Civil Rights Movement–does that tell you something?

    • they Southern Democrats until Regan not civil rights.

      • No, they began to bolt in the 1964, but not all at once. Lyndon Johnson said rather famously in 1964 or so, “we have lost the South for a generation”. He said that to Bill Moyers in ’64. And if we count a generation as being 20 years, then 3 generations have passed and things are today much worse in the South.

        But African Americans also switched to the Democratic party, as did many of the so-called Eisenhower Republicans in the Northeastern states.

        The world of American politics was hit by a huge earthquake back then. We’re still making our way out of the rubble today.

      • Some southern Democrats started splitting their ticket in the 50s — right after Democrat Harry Truman integrated the military. They’d vote for Dixiecrats for congress or governor, but for Eisenhower or Nixon for president. They started to officially change parties after Kennedy and Johnston started pushing civil rights and the Republicans defended segregation in the ’64 election. That’s when Strom Thurmond joined the GOP.

        Once the Voting Rights Act of 1965 finally enforced blacks’ 15th amendment right to vote, blacks and white liberals started beating Dixiecrats in southern Democratic primaries. A lot of Dixiecrats switched to the GOP after they lost control of their state party machinery. Most of the switches happened during the 60s, 70s and 80s, but it continued at a trickle even after. For example, Virginian Vergil Goode didn’t quit the Democrats until the late 90s. He left the GOP recently and ran for president as a minor party candidate in 2012.

      • Sorry, Joe, but that’s just not true.

  • Very well said!!!!! Right to the point & how liberals think how can it not be? Are fore fathers were the first liberals who thought of the future & help form this great country of OURS, they didnt do it alone, the farmers, merchants, the middle class of the time, fought for the betterment of this country. The liberals who believed in the rights of the people. Granted they didnt include all plp but they grew to realize it has to be all people of this country. We were a young country it takes time to get it right, but we have gained on this but we still have improvements to make.

    • heysup

      Umm…liberals believe in personal freedom but economic governmental control. Truly giving all of the power to the people power is Libertarianism.

      I’m not saying one is correct over the other, I’m just pointing out that there’s a difference.

      • I’m sorry to correct you – but in no way do liberals believe that we need to have governmental control in economics. There should be some regulation, but capitalism, or form thereof. Liberals are progressives – maximum social personal freedom, governmental protection of civil liberties, and reform as in politics or religion.

      • I’m a liberal, and capitalism or as it should be called GREED AND STUPIDITY needs to be eliminated.

        occupy wall street? No, I have a better solution, ELIMINATE WALL STREET, and throw all of the scumbag bankers in jail. Then execute all ceos that have sent american jobs overseas since they are traitors to america.

      • You’re confusing capitalism with corporatism. We don’t have capitalism in the US, and haven’t for about 100 years. Our money is just a debt instrument created by a corporation that calls itself the “Federal Reserve.” This corporation is owned exclusively by old-money banking families and the Rockefeller family. They are the real banksters. Not only do they get to issue the money that we have to use, by law, they also get to make up the rules for banking and investing however they like. The way they like it is whichever way makes them the most money, the fastest.
        The solution is simple: By ending the Federal Reserve corporation’s control over every inch of the economy and letting real Capitalism come back, Wall St. will be powerless to ever rob us again.

      • Interesting concept. What amazes me, is that most everywhere it is illegal to gamble. Now certain places like Nevada, and every Native American Reservation have casino’s but they are under very very tight rules.

        However the biggest casino in the world is WALL STREET, which has very few rules.

        So my suggestion, is we take all the gambling rules experts in Vegas, and they make the rules for Wall Street investments… and put the bankers on the same legal feet of gamblers.. you cheat you go to jail.. (or get beat up by some thugs in and SUV.)

      • Laurie

        Plus the salaries these CEOs make are criminal while they will not even pay their workers what they deserve or provide them with decent benefits. It is disgusting how the difference in wealth distribution between the wealthy and the middle class has widened over the past decade. We need to pay our policemen, firemen, and teachers the money they so deserve. We need to increase the minimum wage. The economy is not going to get much better if we do not take measures to decrease the difference between the wealthy and middle classes and do something to help the poor help themselves, We need to take care of our Seniors who have worked all their lives and are still living in poverty. Our Healthcare system will bankrupt its people before too long. Pharmaceutical companies are out of control. Obama Care is a good start-once it is implemented the country will realize its benefits. Tweaks can be made along the way to make it better.

      • Labels are pretty confining. Does every liberal believe…does every libertarian believe..? I don’t think so.

      • suburbancuurmudgeon

        Libertarianism is “everyone for himself”. Power will never be shared equally which is why we need government to look after the interests of the powerless.

        What exactly does the government control economically? You mean they should keep corporations and Wall Street from fleecing us?

      • That’s absurd. We do not need the government to baby sit us. This is real life we can’t make everything rainbows and butterflies for everyone. You want a better life? You’d better work for it and stop being depending on those food stamps while you go out and buy drugs, alcohol and cigarettes.

      • baby sit? your right on that sentiment, but can the people test new medicines, without a government body? can they ensure food is safe? shouldn’t there be laws that prevent large companies from stomping out smaller competitors? if i opened a coffee shop, and starbucks wanted me gone, they can sell their product at a loss, much longer than i can, and when i’m gone as a competitor, they will raise their prices. you don’t see an issue with this? unregulated capitalism is more dangerous than communism, and the sooner you close minded republicans get that through your heads, the sooner we can work together to find the best balance between the two.

      • History shows us that 99.99% of the time, government actions only enrich the top 0.01% of the people. Wall St. can only screw us over if we give them rules that let them. That’s what Clinton did. Every time we change the rules for banking, banksters will figure out how to use those rules to their advantage. More laws will always equal more loopholes and opportunities to rob the working class. By only having a very small amount of very strict and well-defined banking rules, we might one day be able to become solvent and eventually prosperous. I could fix banking, forever, by eliminating all laws on the books now and replacing them with only three laws.

      • TEAPARTY

        You are the only person I’ve seen here that has made any sense.

      • Blue Wolf Bosh

        Libertarianism does not give all of the power to the people,

        Libertarianism keeps and puts more power in the hands of the rich 1%er’s and the corporations that already have rigged and worked the “capitalistic, free market” system to gain a head start and unfair advantages over “We the People”.

        It’s like claiming to hit a home run when you start out on third base.

  • Chuck

    sorry, alcohol doesn’t drive. people do.

    • That is why we regulate the alcohol so stupid people dont drive drunk and when you do and get caught you go to jail.

      • But stupid people drive drunk quite often as do teenagers.

      • So, what exactly is your suggestion, Jim? That we don’t have any laws at all, because none can guarantee a 100% compliance rate? I know a place just like that. You’ll love it! It’s called Somalia. I’ll even help you pack.

    • Alcohol is a drug, it degrades the part of the brain that functions reason, for a time being. Since drunk people have limited functions due to alcohol, people die so therefor alcohol does kill!

  • pugulis

    I agree with almost everything you wrote, with the exception of one thing. You bring up gun control. And scoff at the idea that it’s a right. And then compare it to slavery. Well, I have to point out something you seem to have missed. A constitutional amendment was necessary to end slavery once and for all. And that’s where I have a problem with our current gun debate. If we as a country want to change our gun laws, by adding background checks or making certain guns illegal, I may not agree with it. But we live in a democracy. And when 90% believe in something, we should seriously think about doing it. My problem is the how. We need to do what we did with slavery. We need a constitutional amendment. Not just a law. That would be the legal and proper way to deal with it.

    • Also to Drinking alcohol – one banning it, and one giving it back – making drinking a right…

    • Sym Smith

      We have a Standing Army, Navy, Air Force and Marine Corp. Even a National Guard. There really is no need for a Civil Militia. In addition, there are Police Forces in all but the most minor of Jurisdictions. Little of this existed…when the specific Amendment was written, and even Native Americans were steamed-up..!!. WE must be awfully careful. There are some who would rebel against the Federal Government, and even against local Governments. There are some Local Officials…who would join a rebellion. Do we really need Insurrection?. Some think that insurrection is easy and exciting,,and that Political Grievances equate to personal attacks. All of this is exacerbated by the reduction of a “White Majority”.in this Country. We should begin to work at making it work. It is what brought us to this point. Even Brazil is growing, having seen us as an example, and so is Mexico. Let us not adopt a “Fool’s Journey to a Fool’s Destination”.

  • TJ

    Wow. Well said!

  • zmoellers

    If I remember correctly, a big reason the North won the war because the South by and large was not industrialized. The South these days is industrialized.

    Also, the Confederate states were largely Democratic, and would remain so into the 60s and 70s. About the time of the Civil Rights movement. The Republican party was started mainly to stop slavery, and then morphed into what we have now.

    Also, guns really don’t kill people. People do. When’s the last time you saw a gun get up, aim itself, and shoot someone?

    • DonColorado

      We recently saw a 5-year-old get up and shoot someone — his two-year-old sister.
      Guns don’t kill people, 5-year-old boys kill people.

      • asdf

        Haha I don’t agree with you, but that was well said, sir.

      • I’m a liberal, and that was a case of stupid parenting, the idiots forgot the FIRST AND #1 RULE OF GUN SAFETY, which is to automatically assume all guns are loaded. The parents in that case should have been thrown in jail for first degree murder.

      • suburbancuurmudgeon

        Yeah, but the NRA doesn’t like the idea of MANDATORY gun locks and thinks the cops are just sitting around waiting to bust down your door and check on your gun locks.

        How about we regulate stupidity?

      • First degree murder? Not unless the parents planned to kill that little girl and deliberately arranged things so it would happen. A more appropriate charge would be negligent homicide or manslaughter.

      • Surroundedbyfanatics

        The gun was loaded and the mother had witnessed the child playing with it before she left the house. Children do not have the reasoning ability to understand that a gun that has been gifted to them is not a toy. Once again marketing guns to kids and buying them for kids should be a crime!!!! Common sense anyone?

      • I agree Bobbie Jo-I consider myself a progressive on most issues, but I am also a gun owner who grew up in a hunting family. I haven’t yet commented on this particular case yet, because, terrible as it is, it isn’t the norm. I now have the guns I had as a child, albeit, locked up so my kids don’t have ready access to them. Plus, I’m a veteran and my husband is getting ready to retire, and both of us agree on the need for background checks and sensible regulation. Though, today’s gun culture (whether it’s urban gun use, or folks who live in the woods as we did) is so worrisome to me. It’s not the same as it was when I was a child. As a child, none of our guns were locked up, though, we didn’t have “toy” guns because guns are NOT toys. I think I grew up in a very different family mentality. Today, folks don’t have that cautious mentality, yet scream about their 2nd Amendment rights (which, BTW, are NOT absolute, per Supreme Court Justice Scalia, one of our most conservative justices). What they selfishly don’t recognize is that with this freedom comes HUGE responsibility. Most folks who blindly scream about their 2nd Amend rights view guns (in the everyday of life) as their other toys. Which is really too bad.

        Think about tribes in South America and Africa, where toddlers grow up handling fire and machetes, yet we don’t permit our kids to have butter knives until they’re in elementary school- we won’t give the kids a butter knife, but we’ll give them a gun without the required supervision and caution. Even shop classes in high schools, where students use power tools, have supervision and safety training. Yet, we don’t require this of our kids who are not trusted with a butter knife yet given a firearm… I’m just struggling to wrap my head around all the nonsense…

    • meme 1005

      Industrialized or not, the south has no chance against the military of the federal government.

      • durrr

        Please pick a part of the country that WOULD stand a chance against the military and the Federal Government.

      • It would take the next 5 largest militaries combined I believe to even equal the US

      • Cid

        if the south left there would be no military
        Army 86% Southern
        Navy 79% Southern
        Marines 92% Southern
        AirForce 68% Southern
        so the south has no chance right?

      • Brielle

        You do realize that the military is federal? Texas does not have any military. The U.S. has a military.

    • Amen.

    • News flash. Cars don’t turn on their own ignitions and go out and drive drunk and kill someone with no driver in the car, but we still regulate cars AND the drivers behind the wheel.

      • You are right and wrong. We regulate people not the cars they drive. The only regulation you could possibly be talking about is the price and that just keeps poor people from owning nice things.

      • Really? So, if we don’t regulate cars, why in hell am I paying for my car to be registered with the State every year? Why do I need to pay for and provide proof of my car passing a smog inspection? You think it’s okay to drive anywhere at any speed? Park anywhere for any length of time? If so, I’m guessing you get ticketed and towed A LOT.

        Yours is a nonsense argument. Of course we regulate cars. And if we regulated guns to even half the degree we regulate cars, we’d have a far safer nation.

      • Cid

        Sorry but there is more regs about guns than cars look it up oh and in few states there is no smog test.

      • Heather Gray

        you are responding with facts and slightly complex examples to someone who thinks at the level of bumper sticker slogans and no deeper.

      • I don’t know what planet you liberal -shit-stains live on, but here in the Communist state of New York. You stains regulate the cars on the road. Its called a New York State vehicle inspection and surprise they charge for it!

      • Surroundedbyfanatics

        Who are you arguing with Harley? Christian is one of your’s! LOL

      • Redrose999

        Harley Bobb, New York is far from Communist it’s run by a bunch of corporate ass kissers who only care about their big business buddies. It’s a Capitalist Fascist state that is starving out us little folks. Get your facts straight and follow the money dude. You can just look for who pays into who’s elections, and who is voting what way.

        Also about your guns, if you gave a damn about the fist amendment you would have been there supporting every protest with your presence and gun, even the ones you don’t agree with. Only a few brave folks dared to do it. You folks only care about your opinions, not the first amendment. It’s about hording guns until you explode.

      • Heather Gray

        i don’t know about you, but I live where people don’t call each other names like that. Can’t imagine the people who have to live next door to you, serve you in restaurants, pack your groceries and no doubt sit next to your sanctimonious self in church on Sundays. Just disgusting.

      • Brielle

        Just as we regulate people not the guns they shoot.

      • sandra1947

        Manufacturers of automobiles have many regulations required by the government to insure safety, seat belts for one and environmental controls, We also regulate the drivers, testing, insurance, registration, etc. Why not the same controls for guns, why are they immune? Why don’t you look up the information to find out how much cars are regulated, these just came off the top of my head.

      • Thats not a constitutional right bearing arms is…

      • Surroundedbyfanatics

        Nowhere in the constitution does it say that sales of weapons can’t or shouldn’t be regulated. If the Founding Fathers ever had had the misfortune to witness the gore and destruction just one nut with a semi-automatic weapon is capable of they would never have taken the position that everyone should be able to own one.

      • mechgogo

        On that logic do you think they’d have enshrined the 1st Ammendment if they could see some of the stuff that’s on the internet these days? And they DID have repeating weapons back then. Not many and not as advanced but the pepperbox and duckbill pistols come to mind as does the multi-barrel weapon commonly used at sea.

      • dianne

        Because guns are a right there shouldn’t be any regulation? Are you kidding me. Why? Because the NRA said so. I’m really tired of that BS. Well regulated militia does not interpret to every idiot can own one without restrictions and regulations.

    • If you look at the Lincoln Republicans they were for big government. During the reconstruction they actually had to FORCE THE SOUTH AT GUNPOINT to have a public school system. They were so devoted to an agrarian lifestyle we had to drag them kicking and screaming into the industrial revolution by imposing things like patent laws, health clinics, road investment, etc.

      • and they fought this tooth and claw, often outright murdering Republicans (who today would be Democrats) for trying to modernize the southern states.

      • And bragged about it. “We have done our level best [to prevent blacks from voting] … we have scratched our heads to find out how we could eliminate the last one of them. We stuffed ballot boxes. We shot them. We are not ashamed of it.” — Ben Tillman, Dixiecrat senator from South Carolina

        They overthrew biracial elected governments at gunpoint in Louisiana, Mississippi, and South Carolina in the 1870s, and in North Carolina in the 1890s. They also used violence to break Republican (and ex-Confederate general)William Mahone’s hold on Virginia in the 1880s. The violence they used against civil rights activists in the 1950s and 60s was part of a LONG tradition.

    • suburbancuurmudgeon

      People with guns kill people. Bullets kill. You don’t poke your finger through someone’s head.

    • Not to mention the fact that they fought using conventional tactics against a numerically and materially superior opponent.

    • well, I know of a gun that was loaded, and leaning on the fence and the guy went to step over the barbwire, and it jiggled the gun which shot him in the gut…. Now I am not saying guns kill people, unless you smash someones skull in with the stock. However, it has been proven by many skilled forensic specialists that the metal and lead spherical object propelled from that said “harmless weapon” can and does kill.

      So, let us leave the guns alone and just go after the bullets… cuz bullets DO KILL PEOPLE.

  • haters have to hate. Open your mind and free your soul

  • Florida voted for Obama. Where are the rest of the states, not just the south east?

  • andy

    “Again, I’m not asking that we agree upon every issue. I’m simply asking that when we begin to discuss these issues, we’re discussing them in the same dimension of reality.” That concept is all well and good but the idea of compromise means that you meet in the middle. It does not mean that one side is correct and the other is not. I am impressed that Mr. Clifton managed to write an article and not once fault George Bush. For the record about two weeks into the Obama presidency I turned to one of my liberal friends and said “If this is how you felt for the past 8 years, I am sorry.”

    • Ryan

      The problem with THAT is that we have met in the middle, only to have you guys move right, then met in the middle again, only to have you guys mover right. I myself am done. No, YOU move.

  • As the arch bigot Archie Bunker said, “I’ve made up my mind, so don’t try to confuse me with the facts!” As I say, the opposite of progress is often called Congress. Sadly, both are true today. By the way it is a right to drink, but we are curbed by laws that offer consequences when we over do it. The 18th Amendment banned it, the 21st said it can not be banned. Via Ipso facto it is a right, in my view. So, Cheers!

    • That’s not what the 21st Amendment said. The 21st Amendment repealed the 18th in section 1, but section 2 adds “The transportation or importation into any State, Territory, or Possession of the United States for delivery or use therein of intoxicating liquors, in violation of the laws thereof, is hereby prohibited.” So states and territories CAN ban booze, and the federal government will back them up if they do.

  • Alcoholic beverages have been Constitutionally protected since the repeal of Prohibition. It is up to states to regulate them.

  • “I’ve just had it with people who seem to live in some alternate reality where facts, history, science, math and common sense are all vulgar words and thoughts.”

    And here I am, starting to think the same of your emotion-heavy, reason-light article. The problem, as I see it, is that the Republicans and Democrats have divided some portions of freedom and keep people like you arguing over which scraps of freedom are important enough to excuse their transgressions. Try actual freedom for a change. All of your arguments here are filled with half-truths and equivocation, comparing unrelated matters as though there is a connection, and using flawed foundational premises to structure your subsequent arguments.

    • I agree with you!

    • Is it that you would rather not discuss things rationally, but stick to your beliefs not matter what?? Are discussion and compromise scary for you?? That’s all this article was really saying. Sorry you were confused.

      • Discussion is fine. Rational discussion is in short supply in this article. It is nothing but a list of classic informal fallacies. Compromise is hardly virtuous when the issue is aggression versus non-aggression. That would be an example of the “Middle Ground fallacy.” There is no non-zero just level of aggression in society.

        Government regulation of firearm ownership is massively aggressive violence. Government regulation of marriage is a massive level of violence. Government regulation of narcotics, business, travel, etc. all require a massive level of violence. There can be no compromise. It’s like saying there should be compromise between slaveholders and abolitionists. It was attempts to find compromise between those beliefs that built the foundation for the War between the States.

  • hell yes!!. in a nut shell. I love you rant!

    • durr

      >I love you rant!
      >love you rant
      >you rant
      Lrn2Grammar

  • Take a valium, calm down and shut the fuck up.

  • Excellent!!

  • asdf

    Abe Lincoln was a conservative, just saying. Btw, blaming an entire party for the ignorance of the biggest talkers of it is like calling all christians (without exception) hateful evil biggots because of Westboro. I’m an atheist myself, but you can’t preach against biggotry and then say that an entire group of people is dumb. That’s just as bad.

    Look, you make some fantastic points and I agree with a lot of what you have to say. But name calling won’t get you anywhere. Do what you do best and point out the evils of each specific issue. Please don’t ruin your own message with hate. I know you’re better than that.

    Otherwise, thanks for the great reads of the past!

    • Agree – I went on a rant about the same subject, before I saw your post…

    • David

      Westboro Baptist Church doesn’t have a major news network spreading its message. Those biggest talkers you mention are the biggest talkers because there are too many of them for you fringe folk to get a handle on.

      Perhaps I come from a limited perspective, because I live thick in the middle of a Bible belt state, but the fact is, I know reasonable, clear-thinking, INDEPPENDENT-thinking conservatives like you. I used to count myself one of them (I’m a moderate, so everyone hates me right now). Unfortunately they are in the clear, extreme minority here, as well as on national television. If you want to argue that the tea party and the tea party mentality does not adequately represent all conservatives, then you’ll be hard-pressed to find any sort of congressional or media evidence to back up your claim. And you need that evidence. You need it bad.

      I’m with you. I’m encouraged to see you post your comment. I wish more like you would do so. That more sensible conservatives would be vocal and speak out with reason and moderation. But the fact remains that I for one no longer call myself conservative because its current accepted definition no longer accepts my views, and month to month, year to year, there are more and more like me. The conservative party has already been redefined. If the party is ever going to represent reasonable, intelligent conservatives like you again, then the definition will have to once again change, this time for the better.

      • David

        *independent

      • asdf

        I’m actually not conservative. I’m Libertarian. On the political spectrum, I believe in economic and personal freedom (to give you a good idea of my beliefs, Penn Jillette is my hero haha). Conservatives value economic freedom from government but bigger control of personal freedoms to keep the morality of people in check. So that’s one thing haha.

        As for the other point you made, I tend to agree with you. Then again, I don’t exactly like most of the most outspoken of any party (besides Penn…that could just be a personal flaw in myself though). The extremists always seem too confident to change their ways or to see fault in their side. But I agree that most of the mainstreme conservatives on television are, well, pretty biased and easy to pick apart. So yeah, I agree.

    • nyknyk

      Lincoln was not a Conservative, not even close. You forget something important about the cyclical nature of political thought.

      One era’s radical idea is the next era’s conservative belief.

      Allow me to provide some examples.

      Adam’s, Jefforson and all The Framers were deeply radical against the English Conservatives. (think about the Declaration, most radical document of its age!)

      Lincoln’s Republicans were radical reformers against conservative slave owners.

      The Chinese Communist Party, once revolutionaries, now conservatives in power.

      See the pattern? It is why in political thought the term “revolution” is used, we are all just spinning round that wheel.

    • frankie

      Actually Lincoln was a liberal. Look at all his decisions while in office, they all lean liberal. As a matter a fact, every single great president in our history would be considered a liberal today..

    • Abe Lincoln was a conservative? How do you figure that? Was it his expanding civil rights? His support for tax hikes, including the introduction of a progressive income tax? His calls for increased government spending on infrastructure and education? HIs pushing government economic aid to individuals? The way he called labor superior to capital? His condemnation of the anti-immigrant movement in the 1850s? Or maybe it was his anti-war activism in the 1840s.

      I’m not saying you can’t find *any* conservative policies he supported. But can you find enough to outweigh all the liberal stances I’ve listed here? I find it somewhat hard to believe.

    • Lincoln was not a conservative by any stretch of the imagination he espoused many radical views during his Presidency. his whole party was founded to confront slavery. too bad it had to change into what it has become today.

    • Lincoln was not a conservative. The GOP in his day was liberal and progressive. How times have changed.

  • sssloan

    I moved to Seattle from the South 3 years ago for these very reasons. I just couldn’t raise my kids in such an ignorant, intolerant culture. When will common sense finally prevail in this country?

    • How you enjoying those those protests in Seattle?

      • Surroundedbyfanatics

        The protests in Seattle are not generally about guns and religion.

      • John E. Conway

        Far more than the racially motivated dragging deaths and toddler shootings in Texas.

    • beelady950

      It is possible to raise a critical thinking, enlightened, and intellectual democrat in the South. But it takes a lot of talks around the dinner table, additional reading assignments outside of school, and plenty of support for them when their views differ from their peers making them the object of ridicule. Asside from the issues, the most important priority for the Democrates is to protect the middle class which is mostly everyone. At least this is what my local Democratic Party organization defines as their most important priority. At our last meeting several members acknowledged the frustrations when talking to GOP supporters. It is hard to talk to people about protecting the middle class when they are whipped into a frenzy over “taking our guns away”, abortions, the civil rights of homosexuals, and hatred of a black president. All other more important issues like minimum wage, and student loans are not even on the minds of those folks.

    • redjelly39

      I moved from Texas to Oregon/Washington 13 years ago.

  • Allen: I am a gay, liberal, living in the great heaven of Gomorrah, also known as Los Angeles. I get your frustration, however, just like we are very unhappy with the few republicans that are barking the loudest, we are not doing ourselves any favors by sinking to their level – which is what you partially did in this article. You can not call the Constitution a piece of paper, this pisses them off – and you can agree wholeheartedly that it is not just a piece of paper.
    In addition, pointing out that Christians are the problem for homosexual rights isn’t necessary either. There are other religions that have problems with gay rights, not just Christians. Just like they think all illegal immigrants are Mexican or all Muslims are jihadists, we can not fall into the same trap and think that all gay haters are Christian. There are many Christians who are opposed to gay rights, but there are also many that are for it – and you degrade them just as much when you put a hate slant on all Christianity, as if.
    In addition, don’t blame republicans – you agree with this point – however, you do it. Let’s point out who the bigot, racists, fascists are – the Tea Party Republicans, sort of a different sort. We have Republicans on our side with the gay rights movement, let’s keep them there and just trash the Tea Party.
    What do you think?

    • CJ

      As long as the Republicans are allowing themselves to be led around by the nose by the radical fringe wingnut teapubs, then yes, the Republicans are to blame. Yes, there are still moderates in the party – but they need to take control back. Until they do, they’re part of the problem.

  • Guns don’t kill people, people kill people. Beer doesn’t make us drive home drunk and it sure doesn’t tell us to drink it. So people are the problem not the objects. If people cannot use responsibly then they deserve consequences but don’t try and blame an object that does nothing more than what we will it to.

    • David

      Like cars.

    • The only thing that will stop a 5 year old with a gun is a 2 year old with a gun. Wayne L.

      • Actually the only thing that will stop a 5 year old with a gun is Mom and Dad taking some grownup parental responsibility and not allowing a kid that young to handle a firearm unsupervised. Those tragedies are textbook cases of criminal negligence and need to be prosecuted as such

    • Me

      …you have to prove you are old enough to purchase liquor and there are a myriad of laws curtailing its use. You can’t drink openly on the street. Bars only open during specific hours. Vendors of alcohol are held liable when they over-serve a patron. Those with a history of drunk driving are not allowed in the drivers seat with any tiny amount in their blood.. yes, rational regulation and we’re all better off for it.

    • Guns do kill people, bullets don’t come out of your fingers. Beer does make you drive drunk, when you’re drunk you think you can do anything. Seems people can’t be trusted to do as they should so the tools they use to cause havoc need to be regulated.

      • No, they should be punished once they prove they can’t be trusted. You don’t restrict their rights because of what they might do or what a numerical minority of gun owners have done.

      • sandra1947

        Really? Then why all the safety regulations and equipment put in cars to save ourselves from ourselves? It’s been painfully obvious in the last few months with all the children getting hold of guns and killing themselves, friends or family that there are really very few “responsible” gun owners. Everyone is responsible until they are not. No one wakes up in the morning and says I’m going to irresponsible with my gun today, it happens.

      • mechgogo

        Actually the scumbags who choose to murder innocent people say pretty much that, if only through their actions. And with the millions of guns in private hands those stories of kids dying because Mommy and Daddy are drooling baboons, while still tragic,STILL represent a statistically insignificant minority. And again, just because my neighbor is an imbecile, why should I have my rights infringed on the basis that we have something in common and that I might emulate his idiocy? If my neighbor is male and rapes someone, should I be forced to wear a male chastity device because I *might* do the same thing?

      • Dianne

        Like wait until after they kill 28 children and adults we can punish them?

      • mechgogo

        Yes. Because that’s how a free society works. You deny someone their civil liberties AFTER they demonstrate that they can’t exercise them responsibly. We don’t deny people freedom of speech because they *might* incite a riot or require chastity devices be worn in public because someone *might* commit rape or prostitution. I’m a liberal and it always amazes me how my fellow leftists are all about civil rights except for this issue. And that example you cited? Statistically insignificant minority. Mass shootings make up a tine fraction of a percent of homicides in America but because they are big an flashy they get everyone worked up. Meanwhile MOST guns in this country never get pointed at a person at all or only do so in defense of a law abiding citizen in response to criminal assault. But yeah, let’s take the guns away. After all, a senior citizen or a five-foot-four woman can handle themselves in a knife fight against multiple professional criminals, right?

      • Cletus

        Take your fingers out of the situation and bullets don’t come out of the gun either

      • sandra1947

        Sorry, but your statement doesn’t make a lot of sense to me. Explain Cletus.

      • just saying

        no fingers…..no trigger pull.

      • TEAPARTY

        Sandra, I have lots of guns that have killed no one. How is that possible? I also have a chainsaw that has killed no one and a car that has killed no one despite the fact that each of those tools could be used for murder.

      • sandra1947

        I’m glad that so far you are a responsible gun owner. Both of the other tools you mention have safety features on them that protect you and others. Why not guns?

      • mechgogo

        Really? Beer **makes** you drive drunk? Ummmmmm **NO** . Beer makes you drunk. Beer makes you less inclined to wise choices. YOU CHOSE TO DRIVE DRUNK. Same with guns. You CHOSE to shoot someone without cause. Or not. Blaming an inanimate object for your own poor choices is immature, irresponsible and frankly stupid

    • Surroundedbyfanatics

      You are the guy he is talking about Christian. Using your logic why have laws or regulation for anything? Using that lame old excuse is just ridiculous. 90% of us think that we can and should better regulate the sale of firearms. Furthermore buying a deadly weapon for a child is worse than stupid, it should be criminal.

      • Cid

        i’m sorry but being as if me and my dad didn’t go out and hunt than my mom and 3 sisters would not of had food to eat i have been hunting sens i was .

      • So you hunted with a semi-automatic, military-styled piece and 150 rounds of ammo for each kill, did you? Have anything left on the carcass to eat when you were finished spraying it with an unending hail of hollow-point, exploding bullets? No? That’s not how you hunted for meat? What part of the call for ‘common sense’ was unclear to you? No one wants to take your hunting guns.

      • Carol sometimes you miss. And sometimes you need the rifle for defense against humans. Who you sometimes miss. Or don’t go down with the first shot. Or bring friends to the party who don’t listen to reason when the first idiot drops. As a liberal gun owner I can say pretty definitively that most gun owners agree there should be reasonable regulation aimed at punishing criminal misuse of a firearm. The point of contention comes from what precisely reasonable regulation constitutes and the seemingly endless attempts to tell the law abiding majority “Well, you don’t NEED that type of gun.” Sorry, but I’m 41 years old, been paying my own rent since 1987 and what I don’t need is someone who isn’t paying my bills telling me what I do and don’t need.

      • just saying

        Been paying my own rent for 20 more years than you have–although I am not sure why that is important.There are ways to solve disputes with out bringing out a gun. Seriously, if I was in a place where I had to worry about being able to take somebody down and needing more than one shot to do it, I would be moving someplace I didn’t have to think about that. I grew up around firearms, and still enjoy shooting targets myself. I know plenty of hunters, and most are extremely mindful of their gun use. None of the hunters I know think AK47 type rifles are good for hunting. Bottom line is that most regulations stem from people behaving irresponsibly and the majority gets tired of having to deal with it. Personal freedom should not take someone else’s freedom away.

      • mechgogo

        I agree wholeheartedly that there are ways to solve some (key word SOME) disputes without a gun. And as a gun owner I don’t support that being the first choice in every case. However, there are times when a gun is the best solution to the problem. Like say when some sociopath either breaks into your home or cuts loose in a public venue looking to propel himself into infamy as he commits suicide by cop, taking a bunch of innocents out with him. Or when some woman or senior citizen is accosted by someone larger and stronger and better able to handle themselves in an unarmed conflict. Tell me, do you get in many car wrecks? No? Then why wear a seatbelt? Had your home broke into often? No? Then why lock your doors? Had your house catch fire terribly often? No? Then what’s up with the fire extinguisher? Or the spare tire for your car? Do you **really** live somewhere so strewn with road-debris that you genuinely **need** that extra tire?

        And you’re right; personal freedom should not take away someone else’s freedom. That being said please tell me what freedom I and the rest of the law-abiding majority of gun owners are depriving you or anyone else of by simply possessing a high-capacity rifle and not bothering anyone who isn’t bothering us.

      • melloe

        Yeah, my Grandpa taught me to track game and hunt when I was very young…with a octagonal barrel 22 as old as he was, and no bullets for months just carrying it around. learning how load, carry and handle it. The I got a real bullet. for the next hunt. And lost it when I loaded it too soon holding it wrong. So, we know that part of the story…what part of reasonable controls interferes with anything you learned?

      • mechgogo

        It’s the definition of “reasonable” that becomes the sticking point. What’s yours?

      • melloe

        I read through the bill that was put forth, ( not the one the propaganda machine printed ), and by-in-large it seemed reasonable to me. But then, I don’t need a 30 round clip or 100 round magazine for anything I own. a shotgun is the best home defense in any case.

    • SirNose

      Guns were made and designed to maim, inflict damage and to kill. As far as I am concerned there is no such thing as an “accidental shooting”. The gun and bullet did what they were designed to do. So yes, “People do kill people”. Until a gun can pull it’s own trigger…

  • Colby Marshall

    Brilliant explanation of the problems liberals have- i find myself really wishing the “other side” read things like this to get some views of liberal perspective the way I read Fox News simply so I can know what conservatives are reading and believing. Unfortunately, I don’t know that they’ll make it here, but we can hope.

  • living in a “red” county as I do…because I stand up for and post my opinion of, my love for the democratic party, and my disdain for the republican party,.. I’m loosing friends on facebook I never knew I had! lol.. I have to admit I’m not loosing any sleep over it…

    • suburbancuurmudgeon

      Yep. I had three conservative “friends” disown me because I think our health care system needs an overhaul.

      • Still does -Obamacare is a bust unless you’re an insurance company- then it is a monopoly–

      • suburbancuurmudgeon

        No kidding. It will get more people insured but never addressed the premium cost.

      • rt

        Can’t resist the urge to prove Allen Clifton is right?

      • said who it a bust the repukes

      • Stephen Sachs

        Obamacare is far from ideal. We can thank Max Baucus and other conservaDems for shooting down single payer or a public option. The HealthCare industry has many in congress in their pockets. Republicans in congress are not worth commenting on.

      • Victor Lequerique

        That’s why we need a “one payer” system. Medicaid for all.

      • Charles Vincent

        It does need reformed but the ACA isn’t the answer to that problem.

      • suburbancuurmudgeon

        It’s better than doing nothing.

      • Charles Vincent

        Not really, nothing would be light years better and an actual solution woul be that much better as well

    • Alexis Betancourt

      you might lose some friends but you just got me as a new friend. Welcome to Facebook. you can friend me anytime.

  • GothicProphet

    If the amendments grant rights (not the right way to think about the Constitution, btw) then the 21st gives folks the right to drink… so long as their state allows it.

  • Actually drinking is a right. It was taken away for awhile, then given back!! But I still cant buy a beer on a Sunday at some places…

  • Well said!

    I also contend that the last legally registered owner of a weapon is held partially responsible for crimes or injuries that happened through its use. This would include manufacturers.

    If a weapon is stolen from the current legally registered owner, and, if a timely report of its loss/theft is reported, the legal owner is not liable.

    If, however, this happens too often to an owner who’s obligation it is to keep the weapon safe and secure, then there should be consequences to that, too.

    These laws would make any seller of a gun go the extra mile to make sure the buyer meets all legal requirements.

    I think it’s a start…

    P.S. I think any adult that buys a child, who shouldn’t be left alone without a babysitter, a lethal weapon, their rights to own a weapon should be revoked. (And my mind is imagining other things done to them…)

  • bravo, great comments

  • My friend Scriptwriter: I agree with the concept that, I must say here, I sense only in the development of the text that has escrito.Y also think that this was inspired by a comment on the same site, which was published yesterday.

    If words and content are correct is easier to understand what the that the use, want to convey, but even so, I agree with you.

    I think, first, that reality is one and that the concept of “reality alterma” is an expression which, when used in science fiction books, is not there.

    You must have wanted to refer to a distortion of reality, the product of minds altered by some external element and / or interno.Alterada eg, if the person (s) making a disease that takes you away from the real reality, or also on factors exogenous can be multiple, so we could name a S.Palin moving away from a true reality (IQ border, structure or function of your personality rustic confined to its poor intelligence environment that allows you to perceive, internalization of values ​​limited by the fact mentioned above and by having a “condition” pre-natal “as psychopathy of not providing this ability, etc.) and entering what intellectual novelist Mario Vargas Llosa called: Reality ficticia.Esta product of the imagination is still the product of what she really somos.En the scenery and costumes recreate or Starring naracion but, as in all of us, in the arcella with which shape our fictions that our truth, our reality.

    You also speaks of sexuality and dare genero.Me extend their views so that some readers have not been arrested a short analysis of the subject may have an explanation that may give you a point of view more to take or discard.

    Sexuality is innate and all with ella.Pero sabemos.Nacemos as in the majority of issues related to sexuality, many find it difficult entenderlos.Asi, there are still people who believe walk juntillas.que humans-not only in anatomy but in their essence, they are the instincts, preferences, affections, love-born men or mujeres.Y, we know, it is not.

    Homosexuality, heterosexuality, bisexuality are not “correjibles curable.” First: Because correspond to the scope of the ways nature creates beings humanos.Segundo: Because endeavor to be a product of “divine” (not meeting another word just this). Thirdly Porrque secualidades being different due to the formation of beings, not a convenient stop for a istante enfermedad.Creo here to define this concept: For there must have existed prior health condition.! The varieantes to heterosexuality are, as “hair color, intelligence, etc. a Natural Condition.

    And thus was born vive.Y human beings are born with a significant number of conditions that speaks little but that there, are there, but leave them the Laws heterosexual spread its wings without picking on these, as if it happens with sexuality.

    Abuse is that here.For this space to comment I stop.I want me touch on gun control and concept included a assault weapon in the hands of Senator Cruz as a premise to develop some statements and conceps; points, I will then if I is allowed.

  • I’m an old liberal white woman in the South. While most of what you point out is true, it is erroneous to imply that all red states are in the South. That is simply not true and it was misleading to use only a sectional map as opposed to one that reflects all the states.

  • The guns and slaves in the U.S. and its legality explicacion.Not almost born together but one is dead level of an amendment and the other has “grows healthy and well fed, but, supercharged and presented to society in an already obsolete and anachronistic constitutional amendment.

    It’s been more years of someone can justiticar.Y is that in the time that American society. in matters such as the purchase and possession of weapons, anchored to the past without reasonable justification or …., publishable.

    The famous knight Don Money has grabitado-and still does-on their existence, their presence and role in impudica heinous killings.

    I go to work (unemployment exists only in the head of the lazy …) and it aqqui Cia.vendran dejo.Cruz and then.

    Oh, on the topic about the stupidity that bothers me in its definition and context, so no one cares about my concerns here, in this place, no place for “The word dumb” for those who do not have someone to listen to a voice .

  • My friend Scriptwriter: I agree with the concept that, I must say here, I sense only in the development of the text that has writer.Y also think that this was inspired by a comment on the same site, which was published yesterday.

    If words and content are correct is easier to understand what the that the use, want to convey, but even so, I agree with you.

    I think, first, that reality is one and that the concept of “reality alterm” is an expression which, when used in science fiction books, is not there.

    You must have wanted to refer to a distortion of reality, the product of minds altered by some external element and / or interno.Alterada eg, if the person (s) making a disease that takes you away from the real reality, or also on factors exogenous can be multiple, so we could name a S.Palin moving away from a true reality (IQ border, structure or function of your personality rustic confined to its poor intelligence environment that allows you to perceive, internalization of values ​​limited by the fact mentioned above and by having a “condition” pre-natal “as psychopathy of not providing this ability, etc.) and entering what intellectual novelist Mario Vargas Llosa called: Reality ficcion.This product of the imagination is still the product of what she really somos.En the scenery and costumes recreate or Starring naracion but, as in all of us, in the arcella with which shape our fictions that our truth, our reality.

    You also speaks of sexuality and dare genero.Me extend their views so that some readers have not been arrested a short analysis of the subject may have an explanation that may give you a point of view more to take or discard.

    Sexuality is innate and all with it.But we now.Born as in the majority of issues related to sexuality, many find it difficult understand.And, there are still people who believe walk joins.that humans-not only in anatomy but in their essence, they are the instincts, preferences, affections, love-born men or mujeres.Y, we know, it is not.

    Homosexuality, heterosexuality, bisexuality are not “corregible curable.” First: Because correspond to the scope of the ways nature creates beings humanos.Second:Because endeavor to be a product of “divine” (not meeting another word just this). Thirdly Why sexualites being different due to the formation of beings, not a convenient stop for a put a sick.I think here to define this concept: For there must have existed prior health condition.! The varieantes to heterosexuality are, as “hair color, intelligence, etc. a Natural Condition.

    And thus was born vive.Y human beings are born with a significant number of conditions that speaks little but that there, are there, but leave them the Laws heterosexual spread its wings without picking on these, as if it happens with sexuality.

    Abuse is that here.For this space to comment I stop.I want me touch on gun control and concept included a assault weapon in the hands of Senator Cruz as a premise to develop some statements and conceps; points, I will then if I is allowed.

  • My friend Scriptwriter: I agree with the concept that, I must say here, I sense only in the development of the text that has writer.Y also think that this was inspired by a comment on the same site, which was published yesterday.

    If words and content are correct is easier to understand what the that the use, want to convey, but even so, I agree with you.

    I think, first, that reality is one and that the concept of “reality alterm” is an expression which, when used in science fiction books, is not there.

    You must have wanted to refer to a distortion of reality, the product of minds altered by some external element and / or interno.Alterada eg, if the person (s) making a disease that takes you away from the real reality, or also on factors exogenous can be multiple, so we could name a S.Palin moving away from a true reality (IQ border, structure or function of your personality rustic confined to its poor intelligence environment that allows you to perceive, internalization of values ​​limited by the fact mentioned above and by having a “condition” pre-natal “as psychopathy of not providing this ability, etc.) and entering what intellectual novelist Mario Vargas Llosa called: Reality ficcion.This product of the imagination is still the product of what she really somos.En the scenery and costumes recreate or Starring naracion but, as in all of us, in the arcella with which shape our fictions that our truth, our reality.

    You also speaks of sexuality and dare genero.Me extend their views so that some readers have not been arrested a short analysis of the subject may have an explanation that may give you a point of view more to take or discard.

    Sexuality is innate and all with it.But we now.Born as in the majority of issues related to sexuality, many find it difficult understand.And, there are still people who believe walk joins.that humans-not only in anatomy but in their essence, they are the instincts, preferences, affections, love-born men or mujeres.Y, we know, it is not.

    Homosexuality, heterosexuality, bisexuality are not “corregible curable.” First: Because correspond to the scope of the ways nature creates beings humanos.Second:Because endeavor to be a product of “divine” (not meeting another word just this). Thirdly Why sexualites being different due to the formation of beings, not a convenient stop for a put a sick.I think here to define this concept: For there must have existed prior health condition.! The varieantes to heterosexuality are, as “hair color, intelligence, etc. a Natural Condition.

    And thus was born vive.Y human beings are born with a significant number of conditions that speaks little but that there, are there, but leave them the Laws heterosexual spread its wings without picking on these, as if it happens with sexuality.

    Abuse is that here.For this space to comment I stop.I want me touch on gun control and concept included a assault weapon in the hands of Senator Cruz as a premise to develop some statements and conceps; points, I will then if I is allowed.

  • suburbancuurmudgeon

    Here’s a solution. Since they can’t secede, cut all Federal funding to those states and let them go it alone since they seem to hate government spending so much. We’ll welcome any of their refugees as long as they don’t whine about “big government comin’ to take my guns” or any other ridiculous claims.

  • Guest

    I agree with the concept that, I must say here, I sense only in the development of the text that has writer.Se que lo que escribo en mis primeras leneas no esta vinculado al CENTRO temaatico del articulo pero,en los primeros parrafos que publica se da por hecho que usted puede discutir sobre temas que estam dentro de la realidad y no dan mucha cabida a la estupidez;aserciones con las que no coincido plenamente.Asi pues,permitame dddddar algunas ideas respecto a estos:

    If words and content are correct is easier to understand what the that the use, want to convey, but even so, I agree with you.

    I think, first, that reality is one and that the concept of “reality alter” is an expression which, when used in science fiction books, is not there.

    You must have wanted to refer to a distortion of reality, the product of minds altered by some external element and / or interno.Alterada eg, if the person (s) making a disease that takes you away from the real reality, or also on factors exogenous can be multiple, so we could name a S.Palin moving away from a true reality (IQ border, structure or function of your personality rustic confined to its poor intelligence environment that allows you to perceive, internalization of values ​​limited by the fact mentioned above and by having a “condition” pre-natal “as psychopathy of not providing this ability, etc.) and entering what intellectual novelist Mario Vargas Llosa called: Reality ficcion.This product of the imagination is still the product of what she really somos.En the scenery and costumes recreate or Starring naracion but, as in all of us, in the arcella with which shape our fictions that our truth, our reality.

    You also speaks of sexuality and dare genero.Me extend their views so that some readers have not been arrested a short analysis of the subject may have an explanation that may give you a point of view more to take or discard.

    Sexuality is innate and all with it.But we now.Born as in the majority of issues related to sexuality, many find it difficult understand.And, there are still people who believe walk joins.that humans-not only in anatomy but in their essence, they are the instincts, preferences, affections, love-born men or mujeres.Y, we know, it is not.

    Homosexuality, heterosexuality, bisexuality are not “corregible curable.” First: Because correspond to the scope of the ways nature creates beings humanos.Second:Because endeavor to be a product of “divine” (not meeting another word just this). Thirdly Why sexualites being different due to the formation of beings, not a convenient stop for a put a sick.I think here to define this concept: For there must have existed prior health condition.! The varieantes to heterosexuality are, as “hair color, intelligence, etc. a Natural Condition.

    And thus was born vive.Y human beings are born with a significant number of conditions that speaks little but that there, are there, but leave them the Laws heterosexual spread its wings without picking on these, as if it happens with sexuality.

    Abuse is that here.For this space to comment I stop.I want me touch on gun control and concept included a assault weapon in the hands of Senator Cruz as a premise to develop some statements and conceps; points, I will then if I is allowed

  • Thank you! That made my day. 🙂

  • I agree with everything you said here. But, man, you need an editor/proofreader. Your writing is sloppy!

  • Yes! I commiserate! (but I will disagree on a small point. I was raised Eastern Orthodox and drinking alcohol is our right because wine is the blood of Christ.)

  • Inxqueen

    Applause! Thank You! I swear I’m gonna print out a bunch of these and start handing them out!

  • “At some point with many things that drive you crazy you hit a breaking point, and I might have just reached mine”

    I know what you mean. We Conservative have pretty much given-up with your Democratic Communist party.

    I live in the communist state of New York and you liberal-shit-stains have ruined it. I long for the days of Nelson Rockefeller and the death penalty.

    • Surroundedbyfanatics

      Sounds like you would fit right in with some of the good ol’ boys down here in Tennessee. But please stay in NY.

  • it’s “correspondents” not correspondence, but otherwise, a nice rant.

  • Thinking Guy

    I grew up in the Midwest, parts of which (especially my home town) are as bad as the worst of the South. I had to leave. I moved to the San Francisco Bay Area of California as soon as I could afford to escape the close-minded ignorance, racism, homophobery, etc of Michigan. It was like PARADISE to finally be surrounded by the thinking people of the Bay Area. We can actually have CONVERSATIONS, exploring all sides of issues, almost always without the “n-word” being bandied about re the president, or various other religious rants about “AIDS is God’s revenge on homos”, blah blah blah. Hell, the kneejerk reactionaries uneducated bumpkins of my youth were. Heaven, being able to hold a rational discussion in a far more educated part of the world is!

  • Don’t pretend red states are all southern – last I checked there were at least a dozen northern red states too. I get that you were trying to make a good point, but that graphic is pretty misleading.

  • dave

    Ok, so let me get this…because the southern states are republican they are racist….you do know that those states you highlighted were democratic states during the civil war right? That it was the republican party of the north that was hell bent on freeing the slaves. Might want to add that little tid bit of information.
    Also, make your comments on fire arms and alcohol all you want. If i leave my rifle alone with ammunition is it going to kill anyone? If I leave a bottle of vodka on a table is it going to make a car crash into oncoming traffic. The answer is no to both questions. The variable that is the cause of death with fire arms and drunk driving is human beings making poor life choices. Quite blaming inanimate objects for the actions of humans. I am disgusted with this generation (I’m 25) and their lack of responsibility. We have turned into a nation of undeserving lazy citizens with no respect or concept of hard work. I am ashamed of my generation and anyone who believes they should not be held acountable for their actions. Also before you go blasting me for not being an Obama fan, just remember I voted for him in his first term. I however refused to vote for anyone in this last election because lets be honest, shit is shit no matter what color it is.

    • your argument doesn’t give all the facts-such as the fact that the
      parties were historically the opposite to what they are today. The party
      of Lincoln, the republican party that freed the slaves (and did so
      largely based on commerce issues rather than human rights issues) is no
      more. The democratic party which was largely the slave owners of the
      south during the early years, consider slave ownership “right” but,
      once again, that party is also the opposite today from what it was when
      it began. Things began changing during the civil rights era, but really
      evolved when Reagan was running for office (you’re young, so you may not know the particulars of Reagan). Reagan announced his intent to run for pres by declaring “I believe in states’ rights”, in Philadelphia, Mississippi,
      known at the time for the murder of three civil rights workers who had
      been trying to register African-Americans to vote during the civil
      rights movement. Reagan’s focus on southern states with this
      declaration made a huge difference, and the southern states pivoted
      politically to the extreme right during that time. Add to that the fact
      that the south tends to be more evangelical, and with the evangelical
      teaparty that has essentially taken over most of the Repub party, this
      gives them a strong political base in the south.

  • “Then
    there’s the continued debate on gun regulation. I swear, if I hear
    “guns don’t kill people, people kill people” again my head might just
    pop right off.

    Is alcohol an
    issue with drunk driving? Or is it just the people? No, alcohol is an
    issue with drunk driving, which is why we regulated it. Now I know
    what’s coming, “But drinking isn’t a right!” Who gives a crap. Just
    because it’s a right doesn’t mean it isn’t a problem. Gun ownership
    might be a right, but that doesn’t suddenly negate the fact that guns
    are part of the problem!”

    Author,
    the regulation you’re alluding to is the fact that we have made it
    illegal to operate a vehicle while drunk. In a similar fashion we have
    made it illegal to kill a person with firearms. Unfortunately people
    still get DUIs and people still kill people. the alcohol did not drive
    your car into a lamp post, you abused the alcohol and made a series of
    poor decisions. However, since you bring up the issue of spirits I
    would bring up the consummate success that was prohibition, and how the
    illegalization of a generally accepted part of American culture leads
    not to prohibition, but criminalization. I also wonder, how long do you
    think it would take for the Mexican cartels to re-tool their criminal
    structure to start soliciting illegal firearms as well as illegal drug.

    Author, you seem to be among a growing number of American citizens that
    is opposed to the idea of personal responsibility. You feel that a
    person cannot possibly be at fault, and one must blame the tool, or the
    environment, or the circumstances. This trend is troubling in the
    extreme because people increasingly lack personal responsibility,
    personal accountability, and testicular fortitude.

  • The title alone is ignorant. As an independent, I’m weary of both parties, their self interests and their flocks.

  • writer on the right

    apparently the genius author of this trash never studies history as it was the republicans/conservatives who enacted civil rights while the democrats wanted to keep Jim Crow the law of the land. It doesn’t take much to be a progressive commentator, other than a keyboard. Any type of stupidity passes for clever repartee with the leftards.

    • Reply clever?. God!!

      If your job is to accept everything you say, end up mistaken as a “red neck” and beyond the line Mason … His coprolalia should concern in inverse relationship to my concern to me.

      Ignorance of history that speaks to me and, of course, you have to see Clinton with the definition of “stupidity” that yours is a very deep experience, and give an opinion on the inexactutud in use in the article on cuestion.Esta not intended as a pedantry or anything, but adjust the touch

  • Clinton: It is important to now what we are talking about Clifton.And also accep the opinions against…For example,you use Stupidity in your article in wrong way.Here the reference:
    From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
    For other uses, see Stupidity (disambiguation).

    Stupidity is a lack of intelligence, understanding, reason, wit, or sense. It may be innate, assumed, or reactive – “being ‘stupid with grief’ as a defence against psychological trauma”,[1] a state marked with “grief and despair…making even simple daily tasks a hardship.”

  • Well said.

  • I think then, that it is time to talk about VALUES, to distinguish GOOD AND THE GOOD.Not talking about of the stupidity Allen.
    As often happens in the case of freedom of expression, things happen in reverse in the opinion of a sound understanding of the citizen of the country … or almost all.
    The atrocities we hear and read in the mass opposition to the President; unstructured trials of its management (Column reminds C.Matteus?), The pathological behavior GOP bipeds like Cruz, Palin and company, the deterioration of the White House authority, undermined, Vex, surrounded by “representatives of the people (?) that scavenge the garden with a house of government to form a trench, that and much more offended judgment, creating in us the desire to say … to write … to protest.
    Such ignominy of a few tens of guy making him one Yogurt life to 98% of the population.
    As and when evoid.How do?
    It is they, the others, those who do evil in places of both concepts good.Si understand the effect on one or a billion human.Is beings as a moral issue, and decidedly deep ideological and moral rather than in any way question of “stupid” as you argue insists.
    And. .., maybe one of the solutions is not stupid but smart.Accept the ideas of those who are more gifted intellectually and culturally, as long as they can distinguish and align with the common good and not evil, that according heard, they filled their bank accounts in various tax havens.
    I wanted to broaden my views on gun control but I did not, to avoid the work of another opinion put mine in the back of your drawer now.

  • BRAVO! Could not have said it better myself.

  • gronk50mn

    You make some very good & important points, but I need to take exception to one phrase in particular: “right-wing Christians”- No such thing exists! I don’t pretend to be a devout Christian, but I did grow up with a strict Christian background – First: define the term “Christian”; it means follower of Christ. Christ was a socialist pacifist – he used what the few provided to care for the many. His Only commandment was “to love your neighbor as yourself” Period. Love. Accept. Forgive.

    Second; He was a proponent of ‘passive resistance’ – he never fought back, instead, turning his cheek to his adversaries, to the point of dying rather than fighting.

    I see no sign of any of these qualities in the American ‘right-wing’.

    There does exist, in several forms, a “religious right”; among these I would count the vocal Tea- baggers from whom we hear a near constant din of “fight, protect, God is on our side etc., etc.” Also included on that religious right, would be the Taliban, and many other groups who’s ultimate goal is a strict theocracy – exactly what the Founding Fathers explicitly railed against!

  • Surroundedbyfanatics

    Bravo! Allen Clifton articulated this beautifully. It is that smug self-righteous tone that I hear that the holier-than-thou conservative nit wits use when declaring so passionately that “We want our country back!” that drives me up a tree. Back from who? And why is this only “their” country? Who died and left them the deed?
    Dressing up like George and Martha does not make you patriots, nor does draping yourself in the flag, bible in one hand and flag in the other. Turn off the talking heads like Rush, Beck, Hannity et al and buy a real book written by a real historian if you want to educate yourself with facts. Until then don’t try to cram your uneducated, misinformed, bigoted views down my throat!!

  • I agree with your every word. I live in Texas too. It can be difficult being a liberal down here as you very well know. You’re a great American Mr. Clifton.

  • It’s going to change in Florida come 2014. We are fed up. It’s never been like this in Florida before, not even under Jeb Bush. They’ve pushed the limits too far this time. Their so-called amendments didn’t even get through in 2012. Rick Scott is trying to play the moderate card as his hand picked Lt. Governor is under investigation for her fraudulent charity and its ties to illegal gambling.

  • Smokey S

    you just showed the southeast …. why didn’t you show all the states

  • blowtorch

    I hate Democrats more than I like Republicans and it’s comments/letters like this that only inflame and anger sensible middle-of-the road conservative independents like me……my family was solid Blue collar Democrat until we saw the likes of Billy Boy Clinton and the ignoramus Hillary and after 50 years of solid Democrat voting my father changed to Republican….today’s progressive Democrats have hijacked the Democratic party to one of loud mouth, disrespectful, God denying, baby killing “pro choice” (the choice was when a woman “chose” to have sex without foresight and responsibility to prevent creation of a life!), free loading on Government social programs, entitlement seekers!! May God help us all.

  • This article should be printed EVERYWHERE!

  • blowtorch

    We live in a rural non-red state where everybody owns guns (and has since I was little) and if the Democrats keep trying to ram this gun control nonsense down everybody’s throat I know of many self-proclaimed Democrats here that will be voting against our (D) congressional leaders so much so the media has reported that these Democratic congressmen are likely to vote against it lest they fear being kicked out come election time.

  • Al HardKnight

    What a moron… maybe the reason the Republican majority is in the former Confederate States is because so many of the people there know what the Democrats did and tried to continue to do to them. The really funny part is this jackass believes so much of what he’s spouting. I don’t have a problem with gays. It’s not a lifestyle for me, but … I’m not gay. That’s their life. And I work for a living. Palin may not, I don’t know what she’s doing now, but I DAMNED SURE DO! And I don’t appreciate the government telling me I’m going to subsidize the lives of fools, idiots, and lazy people, or I’m going to jail. Seen too many people with tattoos, ridiculous nails, weaves, multiple piercings, etc. and they’re paying for cigarettes with the new food stamp cards.

  • Hawkeye

    Seems like there’s a little ignorance to go around on all sides. For instance, misuse of the term “populous” (a adjective noun meaning highly populated area) for “populace” (a noun meaning the people who are the residents of the area).

    • Hawkeye

      Talk about ignorance — mine, for instance. Is it ignorant not to proof-read a comment about ignorance? “Populous” is an adjective meaning highly populated). “Populace” is a noun meaning the people who are the residents of the area.

  • I’m an atheist, so I really couldn’t care less about anyone’s lifestyle being a “sin,” or the “sanctity of life” as it related to fetuses. As far as the banking sector shenanigans goes, though, it’s been left entirely up to the conservatives to actually address and solve our usury-theft crisis. Democrats are to busy making sure gays can marry each other and Unions can chase jobs to China. Sweating the small stuff while we’re being crushed by the big stuff doesn’t make sense. I’m not racist or faithful, but I would prefer to side with the south if it came down to bullets.

  • Heather Gray

    she can’t believe her own assclownishness didn’t get her elected or invited…

  • Doesn’t the 21st amendment make drinking a right, technically?

  • Peter Gatliff

    Well living in South Western Oklahoma and a Liberal Democrat , I now know how General Custer felt surrounded by the hostile natives. Their all brainwashed by the right wing media down here.

  • Blue Wolf Bosh

    I’m sure that there are a few “sensible Republicans” out there, as well as a few true conservatives.
    Unfortunately much of the right wing have become the fRight wing and far too many conservatives have become ideologues who are conservative in name only and both have moved so far to the extreme right they are now just to the left of Ghengis Khan. Meanwhile most democrats have moved just to the left of where “sensible Republicans” once stood, when there was such a thing as “sensible Republicans”.

  • This is muddled writing: ‘The problem is the key part in that that sentence “a few”— very few, and seemingly getting smaller every day.” The points are sort of clear, but the author needs a course in Writing 101.

  • Jim Austin

    I’ve had a [small] number of friends, friends that I’ve known a l-o-n-g time that I always thought of as rather intelligent and good human beings. However, when I’ve seen these friends post items that want to take other Americans RIGHTS away (due to religious freedom, needing a helping hand, having to prove their innocence, etc.) I call them on it AND remind them that those RIGHTS are for ALL Americans. They turn into some kind of a rabid Nazi animal, spouting that “those people (other AMERICANS, mind you) don’t deserve any” of the RIGHTS that the rest of us enjoy…then they unfriend me.
    I won’t stand for ANYBODY infringing on the RIGHTS of anybody else, and though I conscientiously chose not to serve IN THE MILITARY (of which I’ve been yelled at that my opinion doesn’t matter due to MY decision), I still serve my country and my fellow man on a daily basis. It’s not hard to see just who the AssClowns are…they often drape themselves in the American flag, spouting patriotic slogans, all the while wiping their…feet…on the Constitution and the Bill of Rights.

  • Elaine Mostafa

    I am surrounded by Republicans at work and have to listen to their anti-Obama crap every day. One day, after there was long conversation between a client and the receptionists about how Obama has ruined everything and that he somehow stole the elections, I piped up and said that I voted for Obama (they all said that they didn’t know anyone who voted for Obama), the client was very upset and the receptionist told me that I couldn’t speak that way in this county. Keep in mind that I am a veterinarian. I replied that I said nothing wrong and that we should not entertain political conversations in a professional work office. Their conversations really scare me sometimes as they are obviously spewing out Fox News without thinking for themselves. Even my own republican family members can’t be civil with me in a conversation concerning the issues and they still hate my husband because he was brought up Muslim, but does not even really practice anymore. It is a sad state of affairs when they won’t even get to know my husband (or me for that matter) because of our political differences. That’s why sometimes I like my husband’s family better, for they have accepted me and care more about me than my own family.

  • russel heim

    Reading asinine ( excuse my French!) comments like this is like the Obama presidency and their promise of the most open presidency ever along with Pelosi’s comment you have to read the bill to see what is in the bill!!!! As far as your bringing race into the issue, this has become the official DEM word to work with as the MSNBC talkers associated anyone who voted for Romney to be racists , so what do you expect as everything and everyone that has a problem with Obama is called a racist; ignorant; etc.. This is just like the comment I heard from Ellison on MSNBC where he derided people who thought of Muslims every time there was a terrorist act and he said you have to separate politics from religion; yet, every time you see a shooting, the talking heads of the DEMS
    make an allusion to the Radical right such as the racist Tea Party; NRA; etc. There is too much talk and not enough thinking and I hope a degree in Political Science allows you to address this statement or is it you hear what you want to hear?????

  • russel heim

    I believe you comment about freeing the slaves kind of exposes your “critical thinking”? The civil war was fought over taxation as the north wasn’t happy with the South trading with other countries and not paying the tariffs so the North barricaded the southern ports? Isn’t this what actually created the Civil war and when no one cared about the so-called war, the north reinvented the reason for the war so the northern businessmen could collect their taxes/tariffs!

  • Aloanstar

    Every word is right on the money! This is one of the most articulate op-eds I have ever read.

  • Laurie

    Amen-you have written everything I am thinking very eloquently. I could not have said it better myself. The Republican party is going down if they do not wise up pretty soon. Unfortunately the American people are suffering because of their prejudice against President Obama. He is doing very well and could accomplish so much more for the American people if he did not have to fight against these idiots. I am an independent. I am in favor of good ideas no matter which party they come. These days I do not agree with anything I am hearing out of the Republican party. It just sickens me.

  • Matthew Reece

    “If you are for gun control, then you’re not against guns, because the
    guns will be needed to disarm people. You’ll need to go around, pass
    laws, and shoot people who resist, kick in doors, and throw people in
    jail, and so on; rip up families, just to take away guns. So it’s not
    that you’re anti-gun, because […] you’ll need the police’s guns to
    take away other people’s guns, so you’re very pro-gun, you just believe
    that only the government (which is of course so reliable, honest, moral,
    virtuous, and forward-thinking) should be allowed to have guns. So
    there’s no such thing as gun control, there’s only centralizing gun
    ownership in the hands of a small political elite and their minions. Gun
    control is a misnomer.” -Stefan Molyneux

  • Anthony F.

    I really like how this article was put together. It really speaks on how bad the Republican party has become. I mean they repeat the same argument over and over, hoping to get change. I believe that is the definition of insanity.

  • Bouldergeist

    The highest and best use of an assault rifle is to unload its contents into the body of a tyrant. The absolute right to assassinate a tyrant in defense of lives and liberties has been recognized since the Peloponnesian War, and is even memorialized on Virginia’s State Seal (sic semper tyrannis).

    You don’t have to overthrow a country. A few well-placed assassinations and refusals to convict would do. And if the people have firepower sufficient to be a credible threat to our rulers, we can restore our liberty. I know how much libs like Allen hate the Founding Fathers, but Patrick Henry wisely counsels us to “Guard with jealous attention the public liberty. Suspect everyone who comes near that precious jewel. Unfortunately, nothing will preserve it but downright force. When you give up that force, you are ruined.”

  • Terry E. Christian

    *populace
    *damned

  • Will

    I will vote for the person who represents being EQUAL, fair, honest and objective, regardless of ‘party affiliation’. Granted, lately it hasn’t been anyone belonging to the Republican Party……..and the GA-8th representative and the two senators from GA have been lax in actually GETTING ANYTHING DONE WORTH GETTING DONE. My vote is EARNED, not just ‘given’ to some stupid-ass bonehead candidate.

  • David Meaders

    Several common sense points on issues such as gun rights “were written in to the constitution” = Yeah, well “during that time [they] argued slavery was a right too”

  • Bean

    PopulACE.

  • Llama Mmama

    THANK YOU!

  • Ana T

    This is absolutely beautiful.

  • John Boner

    @Brian Gilbertson You might have the lowest IQ on the board. Congrats!

  • Thomas Grinley

    Wow, you actually have a degree in political science? I wouldn’t have known it from your childish rant. You had some possibly valid points in your argument but obscured them with an immature tirade.

  • Donald Katterhenry

    First, you seem to neglect the fact that the Civil war was between the industrial/urban heavy north and agrarian south. the Gun control debate is nation wide there will not be such a simple dividing line if that debate came to blows, and to say they got their asses handed to them is to ignore the fact that the war lasted for 4 years and the north suffered greater casualties than the south (596,000 vs 490,000).

    Second, yes we restrict alcohol purchases but not ban it, are you implying that we need to start background checks for every purchase of alcohol? Do you realize anyone with the money can purchase a car? or gas? even those under the age of 16. You do not need to be licensed or pass a background check each time you purchase a new car of fill your tank.

    Last of all you can hate the way the government is being run and still love your country. That is the true role of a patriot, to defend the country not only from foreign enemies but also from tyrannical powers.

  • David Kempton

    I hope you realize that “Republican ignorance” is just another facet of Roger Ailes’ Big Lie. The GOP has always ignored any facts or statistics that did not agree with their greedy positions. Never in the history of the US has the GOP doen anything FOR the people, only TO the people. That’s why it was so important to assert that “Corporations are People,” so they can elect Monsanto as President and Halliburton as vice. Then ALL the laws will be pro-corporation, and the selling of America can proceed apace.

    There is no America left, we have lost ot to the greed of the right. You will ONLY recover by physically and contextually removing ALL Republican “politicians” (politics is the art of compromise, these idiots will not, so BY DEFINITION they are NOT politicians) from ALL government posts, federal to local. De-franchise the Republican Party and display it for what it is – a cabal of rich, greedy white males whose acknowledged goal is the destruction of the middle class and the United States. These are simply TRAITORS, and if you won’t treat the as such, we are hopelessly lost.

  • Scud

    “Guns don’t kill people, people do.” That’s true, but try this simple test.Point your finger at someone and demand their wallet. Note the result. Now, point a gun at someone and demand their wallet. Again, note the result. Are there any factors you can think of to explain the difference in results? You might well just have grown up.

  • Kat

    IMHO, this who political nonsense is not about red vs. blue… it’s about people vs. state. The government is run by people trying to help themselves and themselves only. Why would they care about the rest of us other than to make money off of us? If you follow any one side of politics then you have yet to realize that no politicians are in it for us. The government is not for helping the people anymore.

    As for the gun issue I believe it has to do with our society. The U.S. has one of the highest mental illness rates in the world. Switzerland has almost no gun laws and they are doing great. Japan has extremely strict gun laws and they are doing great as well. But those countries I believe are low on the mental illness scale.

    The U.S. is pretty much… special… mentally. So I believe we need a unique solution to this gun issue that is unlike other countries. The sane need a way to protect ourselves from the insane and the criminals (who, might I add, will get guns whether they are legal or not).

    So, taking sane people’s guns away is just not an option. Perhaps there is a way for it to be harder for the mentally unstable and the criminals to acquire guns legally or illegally.

  • David Schapiro

    The biggest problem is the fact that both the “right” and the “left” spend to much time on trying to prove each other wrong, whilst most of America, which I believe is moderate gets stuck in the crossfire. It’s time we shed our labels and simply do what is logical and right for the people, by the people

  • deb

    I swear these damn Republicans especially Palin, make my brain hurt .

  • Kevin RN

    I live in North Florida in a Bright Red area & still see bumper stickers & signs for George. W. Bush. The amount of hate is tremendous & is completely unreasonable. There is no arguing w/ these hard right wingers because they believe that God is on their side.

    I have had people get mad at me because I am a Born Again Atheist & actually will have a discussion about the faults of the Bible but they will not listen at all but are very quick to condemn me to hell. The especially get angry if I ask them if they believe that God flooded the Earth & killed everyone except Moses & his family along w/ 2 of every animal. Then they start yelling at me if I ask them if they like worshiping a Mass Murderer.

    It is unbelievable how anti-science they can be. They are dissociated w/ any facts that do not come from the Holy Book like talking to a burning branch or someone having the power to part a sea or even a talking snake.

    They also believe only in part of the 1st Amendment which says “right to bear arms” but do not want anything to do w/ a “well regulated militia”. I have less of a problem w/ sane & qualified people owning guns to shoot than allowing anyone to own a gun. In Florida, a person can be insane & own as many guns/ammo as they want as long as they have never been Baker Acted or arrested.

    This has made a friend of mine who was in the military for 26 yrs. choose to live in Seattle instead of his hometown of Jax. Beach because he has a new bride who is Chinese & is afraid for her safety.

    Disgusting.

  • wrmcnich

    great screed. on point. btw, it would be easier to read if you used subjunctive mode appropriately and used the correct words – populace, not populous, for example.