Politics

[CJW]

New member with three posts, and all of them here. You should try a different approach.

Do you hunt? Why not introduce yourself first before posting political memes?

And a negative reaction score. I had no idea that was possible.

 

[Red Leg]

The return of the abortion debate to the legislative bodies (state and congress) is an important cultural inflection point. However, this decision, at least in my opinion, is the most seismic of the session. Most surprisingly, it is delivered as a sweeping set of guidance rather than a narrow case-based decision. The climate change hysterics will now have their day of public tantrums.

BREAKING: Supreme Court Deals Major Blow to EPA Power

townhall.com

https://www.foxbusiness.com/politic...iden-climate-agenda-serious-blow-epa-decision

 

[Doug3006]

"Really, you are going to post something this stupid here? LOL.."

When browsing through the last couple of pages of this thread, I thought my posts where quite appropriate. Stupid memes trying to provoke/put down people with other opinions..

Do you condone all the slagging off of all other viewpoints that do not conform with your views? I agree that my posts where made to provoke, but is my viewpoint not valid because it does not align with yours?

And is africahunting.com a website/forum only for those that agree with you? Referring to you calling my post stupid.

Stig, you have the right to say (and post) whatever you like….within reason and under the moderator’s judgement. I for one say, post away! The members of this forum have the right to call your posts stupid, wrong, evil, uninformed or whatever they wish. The 1st Amendment cuts both ways. I personally found your post amusing…..but probably not for the reasons you posted. Carry on.

 

[Doug3006]

The return of the abortion debate to the legislative bodies (state and congress) is an important cultural inflection point. However, this decision, at least in my opinion, is the most seismic of the session. Most surprisingly, it is delivered as a sweeping set of guidance rather than a narrow case-based decision. The climate change hysterics will now have their day of public tantrums.

BREAKING: Supreme Court Deals Major Blow to EPA Power

townhall.com

https://www.foxbusiness.com/politic...iden-climate-agenda-serious-blow-epa-decision

100%. THIS is the big news of the current SCOTUS session. The Court has essentially castrated the alphabet agencies. They may have ended the delegation of law making power by the Legislative branch to the Executive branch. The implications are mind boggling.

 

[sgt_zim]

100%. THIS is the big news of the current SCOTUS session. The Court has essentially castrated the alphabet agencies. They may have ended the delegation of law making power by the Legislative branch to the Executive branch. The implications are mind boggling.

This is a long time coming. Congress has, for far too long, delegated what is essentially law-making power to executive agencies. As a bunch of feckless cowards, it allows them to dodge being criticized for crappy legislation that heavily burdens us.

 

[Wheels]

Congress doesn't really even write laws anymore. Lobbyist and special interest groups do all the work, then submit it to Congress who make it intentionally vague so the bureaucracy can define and enforce it. This way Congressmen and women do not have to vote on controversial issues.

This SCOTUS session has been one of the most transformative in my lifetime.

 

[JOHN GRENZ]

 

[Stig]

@PARA45 You are right! Bad manners from my side. I will go and introduce myself and possible leave politics to others.

 

[sgt_zim]

Congress doesn't really even write laws anymore. Lobbyist and special interest groups do all the work, then submit it to Congress who make it intentionally vague so the bureaucracy can define and enforce it. This way Congressmen and women do not have to vote on controversial issues.

This SCOTUS session has been one of the most transformative in my lifetime.

Regulation has always been used to reward cronies. It is the big industry insiders who usually craft the language for regs, and they're always crafted to the benefit of the established players, to the detriment of all other participants (producers as well as consumers) in a given market.

I hold the view that if there are any regulations that actually benefit us, it is quite by accident because that's never really the intent.

 

[375 Ruger Fan]

This is from the Babylon Bee.........riveting testimony

Jan. 6 Committee Says Cassidy Hutchinson Told Them That She Heard Mark Meadows Say That A Secret Service Agent’s Friend’s Cousin’s Husband Once Heard That One Of Trump’s Other Aides Said She Thinks She Heard Him Say He Wanted To 'Do An Insurrection'​

 

[cpr0312]

 

[Ray B]

The other option for its such as Stig is to push the ignore button. Personally I prefer the warrior option of keeping my enemy closer than my friends, so I note what it says even if I give it no credibility.

 

[Randy F]

This is from the Babylon Bee.........riveting testimony

Jan. 6 Committee Says Cassidy Hutchinson Told Them That She Heard Mark Meadows Say That A Secret Service Agent’s Friend’s Cousin’s Husband Once Heard That One Of Trump’s Other Aides Said She Thinks She Heard Him Say He Wanted To 'Do An Insurrection'​

This sounds like a Harris quote.

 

[WAB]

"Really, you are going to post something this stupid here? LOL.."

When browsing through the last couple of pages of this thread, I thought my posts where quite appropriate. Stupid memes trying to provoke/put down people with other opinions..

Do you condone all the slagging off of all other viewpoints that do not conform with your views? I agree that my posts where made to provoke, but is my viewpoint not valid because it does not align with yours?

And is africahunting.com a website/forum only for those that agree with you? Referring to you calling my post stupid.

In the words of Mike Pence, ‘you are entitled to your own opinion, you are not entitled to your own facts’.

 

[Wheels]

 

[BSO Dave]

I won't call this one stupid, just woefully ignorant.... More far-left talking points based in fiction:

It's absolutely not hypocritical to be pro-life and support the death penalty same time. You can be pro-life for the innocent and still believe that the penalty for capitol murder should be death.. I see that you are Scandinavian so I will explain that in the USA, the death penalty is reserved for 1st degree murder which is defined as the premeditated, deliberate taking of a life much like the decision to abort a child in the second or third trimester.

The hard truth is that armed security the schools is just one of several practical, immediate solutions to address school shootings. Why do you think schools are the target of choice of this mentally deranged killers? They are soft-targets. Training and arming willing competent staff members and employing armed private security or police would significantly mitigate if not deter completely any future school shootings.. So, I hate to destroy your talking point, but in reality, guns in schools would save lives, not endanger them..

The kids in cages is just another contrived falsehood in the very long line of bullshit narratives created by the left... The truth is that Comrade Obama was actually the POTUS when the first photos of "kids in cages" where taken. Furthermore, "the so-called cages" were nothing more than temporary improvised chain-link enclosures used to contain the massive flood of immigrants that continue to overwhelm our Southern border. When you have thousands upon thousands of illegal immigrants crossing the border daily, you have to do something to contain them in the short term, and the "cages' were hardly inhumane by any crisis standard. These "caged" children got better food and health care than they ever did in their home country...

Your last three pics claiming that republicans are against all of these various social welfare programs the USA funds is also complete and total bullshit. The majority of Americans democrat, republican, and independent have always supported social programs that are designed to provide temporary relief for those US citizens in the lowest income categories. What most Americans are against are corruptions and exploitations of these programs whereby people live off the government indefinitely. Most Americans are also in opposition to these types of benefits being granted to illegal aliens before US citizens.

Get your facts straight and try again..

 

[SaintPanzer]

So, here's what I don't understand about all the SC angst I'm reading in the mass market media:

Right there, in the first amendment, I see: "...or prohibiting the free exercise thereof..."
At the same time, I'm being told that "not all rights are absolute..."

Right there, in the second amendment, I see: "...shall not be infringed."
At the same time, I'm being told that "not all rights are absolute..."

In the ninth amendment I see: "The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people."
At the same time, I'm being told that "The founders could not have imagined..."

In the tenth amendment I see: "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."
At the same time, I hear the term "end of democracy" and "disgusting ruling", as well as "The founders could not have imagined..."

Am I the only one that sees the hypocrisy in "not all rights are absolute..."?

Am I the only one that sees that referring a topic to the states, or to the people enhances democracy?

Is there anyone on the left who can be intellectually honest enough to discuss this?

 

[Doug3006]

So, here's what I don't understand about all the SC angst I'm reading in the mass market media:

Right there, in the first amendment, I see: "...or prohibiting the free exercise thereof..."
At the same time, I'm being told that "not all rights are absolute..."

Right there, in the second amendment, I see: "...shall not be infringed."
At the same time, I'm being told that "not all rights are absolute..."

In the ninth amendment I see: "The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people."
At the same time, I'm being told that "The founders could not have imagined..."

In the tenth amendment I see: "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."
At the same time, I hear the term "end of democracy" and "disgusting ruling", as well as "The founders could not have imagined..."

Am I the only one that sees the hypocrisy in "not all rights are absolute..."?

Am I the only one that sees that referring a topic to the states, or to the people enhances democracy?

Is there anyone on the left who can be intellectually honest enough to discuss this?

Is there anyone on the left that is intellectually honest? No, not many. The battle cry of liberals world wide is “Baby Wants!” Nothing will ever constrain their limitless wants, which only the Government can satisfy.

 

[375 Ruger Fan]

What's With the Democrats' Abortion Obsession?

The whole abortion thing kind of baffles me because it is absolutely bizarre that anyone would choose this particular hill to die on or, rather, to kill a bunch of babies on.

townhall.com

An excerpt from the linked article:

I mean, if you want to find a constitutional right, I don't think it's too much to expect that you actually find one rather than just assume one. Of course, playing founding documents Mad Libs with the Constitution is a specialty of the left. For instance, they found abortion in the Constitution lurking behind those penumbras and emanations, but they can't seem to find the right to keep and bear arms even in the sentence that says you've got a right to keep and bear arms.

 

[Newboomer]

So, here's what I don't understand about all the SC angst I'm reading in the mass market media:

Right there, in the first amendment, I see: "...or prohibiting the free exercise thereof..."
At the same time, I'm being told that "not all rights are absolute..."

Right there, in the second amendment, I see: "...shall not be infringed."
At the same time, I'm being told that "not all rights are absolute..."

In the ninth amendment I see: "The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people."
At the same time, I'm being told that "The founders could not have imagined..."

In the tenth amendment I see: "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."
At the same time, I hear the term "end of democracy" and "disgusting ruling", as well as "The founders could not have imagined..."

Am I the only one that sees the hypocrisy in "not all rights are absolute..."?

Am I the only one that sees that referring a topic to the states, or to the people enhances democracy?

Is there anyone on the left who can be intellectually honest enough to discuss this?

The Constitution reads one way. The libtard left wants to change it to suit their twisted agenda. Rights are absolute, privileges are fluid. They are attempting to make people believe that everything should reflect their fanaticism, hence the babble about revising or rewriting the Canstitution.