The Politics Thread... - Page 127 - Doberman Forum : Doberman Breed Dog Forums
General Off Topic Chat This forum is to be used to post about Non Doberman topics. Do you want to post about your spouse, car, job? Test your signature? Post here

 248Likes
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
post #3151 of 6145 (permalink) Old 11-09-2012, 05:11 PM
Alpha
 
monicaei's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 4,230

Gallery Pics: 0
Visit monicaei's Gallery
Thanks: 5,320
Thanked 9,090 Times in 2,896 Posts
                     
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jennie ATX View Post
Anywho, none of this will stop until we elect somebody OUTSIDE of the major parties.

Election Day Perspective: 6 Things to Keep in Mind - Conor Friedersdorf - The Atlantic
agreed, but sadly it's about as likely as growing wings.

We really don't even HAVE 2 parties, IMO. It's devolved into a one party system- the CorporateDemicans.

All the blustering about this being the end of America since Obama got elected is silly. For all the political posturing and pandering to their bases, they were gonna do essentially the same things.

Still spend more than we can afford running around in the middle east on a 700 billion + budget

Still refuse to tap into a huge revenue stream by removing Corporate Welfare from the tax code.

Either would the continue Bush tax cuts. Neither will effect any useful environmental policies, although Obama will give it more lip service than Romney.

The healthcare thing wasn't going away with Romney, no matter what he said. The thing was BASED ON HIS PLAN. It may have been tweaked if he were elected but I doubt substantially altered.

Things would continue in the direction, good or bad, that they were headed regardless who won.



Neither would

Last edited by monicaei; 11-09-2012 at 05:17 PM.
monicaei is offline  
Advertisement
 
post #3152 of 6145 (permalink) Old 11-09-2012, 05:25 PM
Alpha
 
MsMoppett's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 907
Location: New Orleans, LA
Dogs Name: Penelope the cat
Titles: An old lady in a fur coat...

Gallery Pics: 2
Visit MsMoppett's Gallery
Thanks: 1,011
Thanked 1,790 Times in 639 Posts
Images: 2
                     
Quote:
Originally Posted by monicaei View Post
NOOOOOO!!!!!

Hey MsMopett did you see GCDRs new cuties? Want a puppy? We have plenty. We all agree that we are pro puppy around here.
... I am in the midst of an ongoing conversion effort to get one of my co-workers to move in with his fiancee and let me rent his house-- wait for it-- with a YARD! He says... sometime soon. WAAHH! Is Luke still being fostered? I think he's adorable...I'd love to have him.



"Rooooooooooooooooo!"
MsMoppett is offline  
The Following User Says Thank You to MsMoppett For This Useful Post:
monicaei (11-09-2012)
post #3153 of 6145 (permalink) Old 11-09-2012, 05:30 PM
Alpha
 
MsMoppett's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 907
Location: New Orleans, LA
Dogs Name: Penelope the cat
Titles: An old lady in a fur coat...

Gallery Pics: 2
Visit MsMoppett's Gallery
Thanks: 1,011
Thanked 1,790 Times in 639 Posts
Images: 2
                     
Quote:
Originally Posted by dobermansrule View Post
I think you just described the path any country takes - just my armchair view of history. Human nature is all I can chalk it up to. There has to be a reason that for centuries the masses were ruled - by emperors, kings, queens, dictators. Democracy in it's US form is a relatively new experiment - and it's failing. Trying to tie this thought back to my original point about fiscal cliff... it's always been a few controlling all the wealth at the expense of sheeples - throughout history. Even communism failed - that was supposed to be the pure allocation of everything to the people, wasn't it?
Well, I wouldn't say this is innate human nature and that humans have always acted this way. Not always. The beginnings of such a perspective in human history began relatively recently. Humans have been around on this planet as we know them for appx 40,000 years. Up until appx 3,000 years ago, we were hunter/gatherer and forager. 3,000 years ago it dawned upon us to start domestication and agriculture, which has literally led to the rest. Marriage included. It began the concept that land and resources could be possessed, and eventually that human labor itself could be made a commodity and bought, traded, and sold. The possession of land under crops led to a lot-- a LOT-- of problems that we have today.



"Rooooooooooooooooo!"
MsMoppett is offline  
The Following User Says Thank You to MsMoppett For This Useful Post:
dobermansrule (11-09-2012)
post #3154 of 6145 (permalink) Old 11-09-2012, 05:54 PM
Eschew Prolixity
 
melbrod's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 14,974
Location: Colorado
Dogs Name: Kip, Capri (RIP)
Titles: Kip Mr. Behavior; Capri Mis-Behavior, DS#15
Dogs Age: 10 years Dec. 15, 2005, 7 years Dec. 14, 2008--January 20, 2016
Gallery Pics: 6
Visit melbrod's Gallery
Thanks: 37,391
Thanked 37,013 Times in 11,491 Posts
Images: 6
                     
Click here to find out how melbrod became a supporter
Many many animals pair off for a time, mostly to raise kids. For some, it may only be for a month or two; for some (geese, for example) it is for a lifetime (though I've heard they cheat occasionally). How is that different from marriage? On what do you base your statement that marriage is something new (relatively speaking).
melbrod is offline  
post #3155 of 6145 (permalink) Old 11-09-2012, 06:05 PM
Alpha
 
monicaei's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 4,230

Gallery Pics: 0
Visit monicaei's Gallery
Thanks: 5,320
Thanked 9,090 Times in 2,896 Posts
                     
Quote:
Originally Posted by melbrod View Post
Many many animals pair off for a time, mostly to raise kids. For some, it may only be for a month or two; for some (geese, for example) it is for a lifetime (though I've heard they cheat occasionally). How is that different from marriage? On what do you base your statement that marriage is something new (relatively speaking).
Is EmilyB's gay penguin couple married?

So wait, you consider paired geese "married" but not gay people? Based solely on procreation, after menopause are you no longer married? What about infertile couples? Couples who chose not to have children?

Also, geese don't need health insurance or pay taxes or visit hospitals, as far as I know.

Marriage is a legal contract between 2 people. It was originally concocted to be a financial transaction, and women were the chattel being bought and sold. It has evolved over time and currently conveys certain protections and benefits under the law for some people. I'm not sure about geese.
monicaei is offline  
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to monicaei For This Useful Post:
GingerGunlock (11-09-2012), Rosemary (11-09-2012)
post #3156 of 6145 (permalink) Old 11-09-2012, 06:19 PM
Eschew Prolixity
 
melbrod's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 14,974
Location: Colorado
Dogs Name: Kip, Capri (RIP)
Titles: Kip Mr. Behavior; Capri Mis-Behavior, DS#15
Dogs Age: 10 years Dec. 15, 2005, 7 years Dec. 14, 2008--January 20, 2016
Gallery Pics: 6
Visit melbrod's Gallery
Thanks: 37,391
Thanked 37,013 Times in 11,491 Posts
Images: 6
                     
Click here to find out how melbrod became a supporter
I am challenging that the idea that marriage is a new practice which coincided with the beginnings of agriculture--it must depend on your idea of what marriage is whether you think it is new or not.
melbrod is offline  
The Following User Says Thank You to melbrod For This Useful Post:
GRAYGHOST (11-10-2012)
post #3157 of 6145 (permalink) Old 11-09-2012, 06:21 PM
Alpha
 
monicaei's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 4,230

Gallery Pics: 0
Visit monicaei's Gallery
Thanks: 5,320
Thanked 9,090 Times in 2,896 Posts
                     
Quote:
Originally Posted by melbrod View Post
I am challenging that the idea that marriage is a new practice which coincided with the beginnings of agriculture--it must depend on your idea of what marriage is whether you think it is new or not.
Then I think the pair bonded gay penguins are married.
monicaei is offline  
The Following User Says Thank You to monicaei For This Useful Post:
melbrod (11-09-2012)
post #3158 of 6145 (permalink) Old 11-09-2012, 06:31 PM
Alpha
 
MsMoppett's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 907
Location: New Orleans, LA
Dogs Name: Penelope the cat
Titles: An old lady in a fur coat...

Gallery Pics: 2
Visit MsMoppett's Gallery
Thanks: 1,011
Thanked 1,790 Times in 639 Posts
Images: 2
                     
Quote:
Originally Posted by melbrod View Post
Many many animals pair off for a time, mostly to raise kids. For some, it may only be for a month or two; for some (geese, for example) it is for a lifetime (though I've heard they cheat occasionally). How is that different from marriage? On what do you base your statement that marriage is something new (relatively speaking).
I'm saying that marriage and monogamy are not equal and that all social/group primates (unless you exclude humans as the only.. aherm.. aberration) are not monogamous. None.

Our current idea of marriage is that it is a binding commitment to another individual as a contractual obligation under the vision of the law/higher power/religion. It takes a third party observing the action and agreement, which makes it "real" and binding. I don't think any other groups of animals in the world have this sort of arrangement wherein other members of that species must acknowledge a "joining" of a pair to make it binding. Initially, it was begun as a trade for other resources-- be them peace, access to water or food, land, or new genes to infuse into a population.

If it were human nature to be monogamous, why do we expended so much effort over 3,000 years or more to try and stamp out adultery to no avail?

Also, amongst members of societies of animals that do share the trait of true monogamy, they only breed for one purpose-- reproduction. Sex for pleasure and not for reproduction is hardly ever observed if at all, and sex only occurs when the female is ovulating.

If you are trying to correlate that goose monogamy is anything like human marriage, we are greatly missing the mark.



...basically my point is that there's nothing really "holy or sanctimonious" about marriage, and it is definitely not human nature.

ETA: and the reason why it is new is that it there are many ways in which we can tell that foraging societies and hunter-gatherer societies had a very small concept of monogamy, and that the traditional narrative of why marriage exists is completely off base. We think that marriage exists because the father of a child wants to ensure that the child getting the benefits of his resources (Food, protection) is 100% his. Paternity certainty. Females desire a protector and a good genetic partner. More and more mounting evidence shows that this traditional narrative is quite incorrect, and that using sex as a currency in many social relationships was quite beneficial, and innately human.



"Rooooooooooooooooo!"

Last edited by MsMoppett; 11-09-2012 at 06:37 PM.
MsMoppett is offline  
The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to MsMoppett For This Useful Post:
melbrod (11-09-2012), monicaei (11-09-2012), River (11-10-2012), Rosemary (11-09-2012), the_discowhore (11-10-2012)
post #3159 of 6145 (permalink) Old 11-09-2012, 06:43 PM Thread Starter
Alpha
 
dobermansrule's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 14,479
Location: ∞∞
Dogs Name: quincy
Dogs Age: 10/8/2006 - 10/4/2014
Gallery Pics: 0
Visit dobermansrule's Gallery
Thanks: 9,517
Thanked 30,599 Times in 9,776 Posts
                     
Quote:
Originally Posted by MsMoppett View Post
Well, I wouldn't say this is innate human nature and that humans have always acted this way. Not always. The beginnings of such a perspective in human history began relatively recently. Humans have been around on this planet as we know them for appx 40,000 years. Up until appx 3,000 years ago, we were hunter/gatherer and forager. 3,000 years ago it dawned upon us to start domestication and agriculture, which has literally led to the rest. Marriage included. It began the concept that land and resources could be possessed, and eventually that human labor itself could be made a commodity and bought, traded, and sold. The possession of land under crops led to a lot-- a LOT-- of problems that we have today.
Thanks. good perspective. Damn farmers.
dobermansrule is offline  
The Following User Says Thank You to dobermansrule For This Useful Post:
MsMoppett (11-09-2012)
post #3160 of 6145 (permalink) Old 11-09-2012, 06:45 PM Thread Starter
Alpha
 
dobermansrule's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 14,479
Location: ∞∞
Dogs Name: quincy
Dogs Age: 10/8/2006 - 10/4/2014
Gallery Pics: 0
Visit dobermansrule's Gallery
Thanks: 9,517
Thanked 30,599 Times in 9,776 Posts
                     
Quote:
Originally Posted by RottenVonSpotten View Post
Lol. Okay when I refer to conservative, I mean the everyday Republican.

I agree with your second point, but - and I'll use the correct word here - a lot of republicans did not believe climate change was real for a very long time and I bet there are plenty out there that still don't believe in it....in fact, I'm pretty sure some of them are our elected officials.

My issue with your liberalisms is that they are general, in my opinion. As an example, I am liberal but do not believe in free healthcare. Here comes the nonpolitically correct side of me:I think fat people, people that aren't health conscious, and smokers shouldn't be allowed to have free healthcare. I also don't believe in just giving people what they want. Unfortunately for me, I am my own party. I did vow to myself that after this election, I will only be voting third party.
sorry, dear, you are not a liberal you woulld be ostracized (sp?) and outcast from the local liberal circles.

The Torches and Pitchfork's Party, however - we have a big tent.
dobermansrule is offline  
The Following User Says Thank You to dobermansrule For This Useful Post:
RottenVonSpotten (11-11-2012)
post #3161 of 6145 (permalink) Old 11-09-2012, 06:50 PM Thread Starter
Alpha
 
dobermansrule's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 14,479
Location: ∞∞
Dogs Name: quincy
Dogs Age: 10/8/2006 - 10/4/2014
Gallery Pics: 0
Visit dobermansrule's Gallery
Thanks: 9,517
Thanked 30,599 Times in 9,776 Posts
                     
Quote:
Originally Posted by monicaei View Post
agreed, but sadly it's about as likely as growing wings.

We really don't even HAVE 2 parties, IMO. It's devolved into a one party system- the CorporateDemicans.

All the blustering about this being the end of America since Obama got elected is silly. For all the political posturing and pandering to their bases, they were gonna do essentially the same things.

Still spend more than we can afford running around in the middle east on a 700 billion + budget

Still refuse to tap into a huge revenue stream by removing Corporate Welfare from the tax code.

Either would the continue Bush tax cuts. Neither will effect any useful environmental policies, although Obama will give it more lip service than Romney.

The healthcare thing wasn't going away with Romney, no matter what he said. The thing was BASED ON HIS PLAN. It may have been tweaked if he were elected but I doubt substantially altered.

Things would continue in the direction, good or bad, that they were headed regardless who won.



Neither would
Government spending is like a gas - it will expand to fill the available volume. Your logic, albeit good, is flawed if you over look the fact that the government will only spend more as revenue goes up. They have no Off switch. No accountability.
dobermansrule is offline  
The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to dobermansrule For This Useful Post:
Dictator (11-09-2012), GRAYGHOST (11-09-2012), mark100pe (11-13-2012), melbrod (11-09-2012)
post #3162 of 6145 (permalink) Old 11-09-2012, 07:13 PM
Eschew Prolixity
 
melbrod's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 14,974
Location: Colorado
Dogs Name: Kip, Capri (RIP)
Titles: Kip Mr. Behavior; Capri Mis-Behavior, DS#15
Dogs Age: 10 years Dec. 15, 2005, 7 years Dec. 14, 2008--January 20, 2016
Gallery Pics: 6
Visit melbrod's Gallery
Thanks: 37,391
Thanked 37,013 Times in 11,491 Posts
Images: 6
                     
Click here to find out how melbrod became a supporter
Hey, I got a conspiracy theory totally made up by me for us to ponder! LOL

This much is true:
"CIA Director David Petraeus abruptly announced his resignation Friday, admitting to an extramarital affair, which he called 'extremely poor judgment' and 'unacceptable' behavior."

I think Obama was trying to blackmail Petraeus (head of CIA), scheduled to testify before Congress in a few days, into telling some false narrative on Benghazi.

He's played that kind of game before ("Obama became a U.S. senator only by virtue of David Axelrod’s former employer, the Chicago Tribune, ripping open the sealed divorce records of Obama’s two principal opponents.

One month before the 2004 Democratic primary for the U.S. Senate, Obama was down in the polls, about to lose to Blair Hull, a multimillionaire securities trader. But then the Chicago Tribune leaked the claim that Hull’s second ex-wife, Brenda Sexton, had sought an order of protection against him during their 1998 divorce proceedings.")

Petraeus, gathering the shreds of his honor and dignity about him, wouldn't play--revealed his affair and resigned from the CIA.
melbrod is offline  
The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to melbrod For This Useful Post:
Dictator (11-09-2012), dobermansrule (11-09-2012), GRAYGHOST (11-09-2012), mark100pe (11-13-2012)
post #3163 of 6145 (permalink) Old 11-09-2012, 07:21 PM Thread Starter
Alpha
 
dobermansrule's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 14,479
Location: ∞∞
Dogs Name: quincy
Dogs Age: 10/8/2006 - 10/4/2014
Gallery Pics: 0
Visit dobermansrule's Gallery
Thanks: 9,517
Thanked 30,599 Times in 9,776 Posts
                     
Quote:
Originally Posted by melbrod View Post
Hey, I got a conspiracy theory totally made up by me for us to ponder! LOL

This much is true:
"CIA Director David Petraeus abruptly announced his resignation Friday, admitting to an extramarital affair, which he called 'extremely poor judgment' and 'unacceptable' behavior."

I think Obama was trying to blackmail Petraeus (head of CIA), scheduled to testify before Congress in a few days, into telling some false narrative on Benghazi.

He's played that kind of game before ("Obama became a U.S. senator only by virtue of David Axelrod’s former employer, the Chicago Tribune, ripping open the sealed divorce records of Obama’s two principal opponents.

One month before the 2004 Democratic primary for the U.S. Senate, Obama was down in the polls, about to lose to Blair Hull, a multimillionaire securities trader. But then the Chicago Tribune leaked the claim that Hull’s second ex-wife, Brenda Sexton, had sought an order of protection against him during their 1998 divorce proceedings.")

Petraeus, gathering the shreds of his honor and dignity about him, wouldn't play--revealed his affair and resigned from the CIA.
I could believe that.

and what's totally ironic about it all is suddenly virtue matters in a candidate, like issues from people's divorces and stuff, when in reality, based on who people elect, virtue doesn't matter squat. It's a great tool though. And it never hurts to have a major media outlet in your pocket.

May the candidate that is best for the country win!!!! cough cough
dobermansrule is offline  
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to dobermansrule For This Useful Post:
GRAYGHOST (11-11-2012), melbrod (11-09-2012)
post #3164 of 6145 (permalink) Old 11-09-2012, 07:50 PM
Alpha
 
monicaei's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 4,230

Gallery Pics: 0
Visit monicaei's Gallery
Thanks: 5,320
Thanked 9,090 Times in 2,896 Posts
                     
I certainly wouldn't be shocked. Politicians aren't exactly honest, trust worthy people.


Quote:
Originally Posted by melbrod View Post
Hey, I got a conspiracy theory totally made up by me for us to ponder! LOL

This much is true:
"CIA Director David Petraeus abruptly announced his resignation Friday, admitting to an extramarital affair, which he called 'extremely poor judgment' and 'unacceptable' behavior."

I think Obama was trying to blackmail Petraeus (head of CIA), scheduled to testify before Congress in a few days, into telling some false narrative on Benghazi.

He's played that kind of game before ("Obama became a U.S. senator only by virtue of David Axelrod’s former employer, the Chicago Tribune, ripping open the sealed divorce records of Obama’s two principal opponents.

One month before the 2004 Democratic primary for the U.S. Senate, Obama was down in the polls, about to lose to Blair Hull, a multimillionaire securities trader. But then the Chicago Tribune leaked the claim that Hull’s second ex-wife, Brenda Sexton, had sought an order of protection against him during their 1998 divorce proceedings.")

Petraeus, gathering the shreds of his honor and dignity about him, wouldn't play--revealed his affair and resigned from the CIA.
monicaei is offline  
The Following User Says Thank You to monicaei For This Useful Post:
melbrod (11-09-2012)
post #3165 of 6145 (permalink) Old 11-09-2012, 08:37 PM
Alpha
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 381

Gallery Pics: 0
Visit ssgharkness020147's Gallery
Thanks: 269
Thanked 438 Times in 230 Posts
                     
Quote:
Originally Posted by RottenVonSpotten View Post
Luckily for you, conservatives have more in common with jihadists than liberals do.
Typical liberal vitriol.

I genuinely don't understand why you libs don't just move to Canada, merry old England, or France. There's no need to destroy the values that make this country great when you could just live in a place that already spoon feeds their wards of the state with government entitlements.
ssgharkness020147 is offline  
The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to ssgharkness020147 For This Useful Post:
Dictator (11-09-2012), GRAYGHOST (11-09-2012), mark100pe (11-13-2012), VZ-Doberman (11-09-2012)
post #3166 of 6145 (permalink) Old 11-09-2012, 08:47 PM
Alpha
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 6,652

Gallery Pics: 0
Visit VZ-Doberman's Gallery
Thanks: 9,189
Thanked 16,589 Times in 5,110 Posts
                     
Quote:
Originally Posted by melbrod View Post
Hey, I got a conspiracy theory totally made up by me for us to ponder! LOL

This much is true:
"CIA Director David Petraeus abruptly announced his resignation Friday, admitting to an extramarital affair, which he called 'extremely poor judgment' and 'unacceptable' behavior."

I think Obama was trying to blackmail Petraeus (head of CIA), scheduled to testify before Congress in a few days, into telling some false narrative on Benghazi.

He's played that kind of game before ("Obama became a U.S. senator only by virtue of David Axelrod’s former employer, the Chicago Tribune, ripping open the sealed divorce records of Obama’s two principal opponents.

One month before the 2004 Democratic primary for the U.S. Senate, Obama was down in the polls, about to lose to Blair Hull, a multimillionaire securities trader. But then the Chicago Tribune leaked the claim that Hull’s second ex-wife, Brenda Sexton, had sought an order of protection against him during their 1998 divorce proceedings.")

Petraeus, gathering the shreds of his honor and dignity about him, wouldn't play--revealed his affair and resigned from the CIA.
I find the timing of this rather suspect.
VZ-Doberman is offline  
The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to VZ-Doberman For This Useful Post:
Dictator (11-09-2012), melbrod (11-09-2012), MsMoppett (11-09-2012), ssgharkness020147 (11-09-2012)
post #3167 of 6145 (permalink) Old 11-09-2012, 08:49 PM
Alpha
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 381

Gallery Pics: 0
Visit ssgharkness020147's Gallery
Thanks: 269
Thanked 438 Times in 230 Posts
                     
Y hello thar gun control:

That didn’t take long. Less than a day after President Obama’s re-election, the administration breathed new life into the United Nations‘ previously comatose treaty regulating guns.

Last July, the U.N. General Assembly began formal discussion of the Arms Trade Treaty, which seeks to establish “common international standards for the import, export and transfer of conventional arms.” Talks on the controversial agreement were put on indefinite hiatus after the United States requested an extension to the time allotted to negotiate the agreement. Gun rights supporters blasted the treaty as it inched toward approval, and many suspected U.S. procedural maneuvers were intended to delay the treaty so it wouldn’t become a topic of discussion during the election. It appears these suspicions were correct since “indefinite” turned out to mean until hours after Mr. Obama was re-elected.

The administration line is that the treaty applies only to firearms exports and poses no threat to domestic gun owners. “We seek a treaty that contributes to international security by fighting illicit arms trafficking and proliferation, protects the sovereign right of states to conduct legitimate arms trade, and meets the concerns that we have been articulating throughout,” an administration official said. “We will not accept any treaty that infringes on the constitutional rights of our citizens to bear arms.”

It is hard to take the White House response seriously. The treaty instructs countries to “take the necessary legislative and administrative measures, to adapt, as necessary, national laws and regulations to implement the obligations of this treaty.” The agreement’s language is so broad, vague and poorly defined it could be stretched in a variety of ways that would pose a threat to the Second Amendment. Treaty backers also want to insert provisions forcing ratifying states to promote a variety of fashionable left-wing causes including “sustainable development,” even though they have nothing to do with the arms trade.

Though the treaty is supposed to be about “gun exports,” its provisions can still be applied domestically. Activist judges adjudicating cases arising under the treaty and enabling legislation could see to that. The definition of international commerce could follow the same expansive logic liberal courts have used to redefine “interstate commerce.” Anything that indirectly or incidentally affects the trade in arms would fall under its control.
A ratified treaty, with constitutional authority, could be interpreted in a way that applies to any imported weapon or round of ammunition, those made with foreign components, those containing imported materials, those that might some day be exported, and those capable of being exported. If it affects the overall arms market, it could be said to be part of “international” trade, even if the item never leaves our shores. In practice this logic would give the government free rein to regulate all weapons, foreign and domestic. With the election out of the way, the White House can move swiftly to get the treaty through the U.N. General Assembly and up to the Senate by the summer of 2013. Elections have consequences.


Read more: EDITORIAL: Gun ban back on Obama's agenda - Washington Times EDITORIAL: Gun ban back on Obama's agenda - Washington Times
Follow us: @washtimes on Twitter
ssgharkness020147 is offline  
The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to ssgharkness020147 For This Useful Post:
Dictator (11-09-2012), dobermansrule (11-10-2012), GRAYGHOST (11-09-2012), mark100pe (11-13-2012)
post #3168 of 6145 (permalink) Old 11-09-2012, 08:52 PM
Alpha
 
blueberry's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 1,365
Location: bloomington, In
Dogs Name: Blueberry (RIP), Huckleberry, Chloe-berry
Titles: great pests
Dogs Age: 5,3
Gallery Pics: 4
Visit blueberry's Gallery
Thanks: 4,566
Thanked 3,139 Times in 917 Posts
Images: 4
                     
Roll Call: Voted for Obama and.....
I work, pay my taxes, believe in God and don't/expect a handout! Ever! I am so tired of people saying Obama supports are lazy and don't work.

I think the only way the deficit can be cut is raise some taxes, stop wasting money, cut spending (a lot of spending....including defense) and raise the retirement age (this should include MY age range). Everybody wants something done as long as it does not affect them.....well it needs to affect everyone!

Last edited by blueberry; 11-09-2012 at 09:01 PM.
blueberry is offline  
The Following User Says Thank You to blueberry For This Useful Post:
monicaei (11-10-2012)
post #3169 of 6145 (permalink) Old 11-09-2012, 09:01 PM
Alpha
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 381

Gallery Pics: 0
Visit ssgharkness020147's Gallery
Thanks: 269
Thanked 438 Times in 230 Posts
                     
Quote:
Originally Posted by blueberry View Post
I am so tired of people saying Obama supports are lazy and don't work.
Despite right or wrong, it is an easy generalization to make when most of the country see's things like this:

Obama Bucks - YouTube
ssgharkness020147 is offline  
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to ssgharkness020147 For This Useful Post:
Dictator (11-09-2012), mark100pe (11-13-2012)
post #3170 of 6145 (permalink) Old 11-09-2012, 09:09 PM
Eschew Prolixity
 
melbrod's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 14,974
Location: Colorado
Dogs Name: Kip, Capri (RIP)
Titles: Kip Mr. Behavior; Capri Mis-Behavior, DS#15
Dogs Age: 10 years Dec. 15, 2005, 7 years Dec. 14, 2008--January 20, 2016
Gallery Pics: 6
Visit melbrod's Gallery
Thanks: 37,391
Thanked 37,013 Times in 11,491 Posts
Images: 6
                     
Click here to find out how melbrod became a supporter
I agree. Cut Spending. FIRST. Then I might believe Congress is able to raise taxes responsibly.
melbrod is offline  
The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to melbrod For This Useful Post:
blueberry (11-09-2012), Dictator (11-09-2012), GRAYGHOST (11-10-2012), mark100pe (11-13-2012), monicaei (11-10-2012)
post #3171 of 6145 (permalink) Old 11-09-2012, 09:16 PM
Alpha
 
blueberry's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 1,365
Location: bloomington, In
Dogs Name: Blueberry (RIP), Huckleberry, Chloe-berry
Titles: great pests
Dogs Age: 5,3
Gallery Pics: 4
Visit blueberry's Gallery
Thanks: 4,566
Thanked 3,139 Times in 917 Posts
Images: 4
                     
Quote:
Originally Posted by ssgharkness020147 View Post
Despite right or wrong, it is an easy generalization to make when most of the country see's things like this:

Obama Bucks - YouTube
There will always be people that take advantage of any situation but I don't think everyone else she be punished for it. There are plenty of working people getting food stamp....they don't make enough money. Should their children go with out because of somebody else? I know there are plenty of people on welfare and disability who should be working.....I don't know how to fix it. This is not a new problem....Welfare/Medicare fraud has been going on forever. It's not fair to attach it to Obama....people in general need to grasp a little personal responsibility.
blueberry is offline  
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to blueberry For This Useful Post:
monicaei (11-10-2012), MsMoppett (11-09-2012), Rosemary (11-09-2012)
post #3172 of 6145 (permalink) Old 11-09-2012, 10:49 PM
Got mutt?
 
Rosemary's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 11,589
Location: Southeast Texas
Dogs Name: Ilka (Mutt), Leo (GSD); Lily (APBT)
Titles: They have titles from a total of 7 different organizations
Dogs Age: Ilka 6; Leo 4; Lily 2; Lucky 2000-2014
Gallery Pics: 0
Visit Rosemary's Gallery
Thanks: 34,660
Thanked 27,023 Times in 9,036 Posts
                     
I just heard where some Republican in Georgia, who was running for Congress unopposed, wound up with an opponent anyway. Yep, Charles Darwin got almost 4000 write-in votes. Of course, being British (and oh, yeah, dead), he wouldn't have been able to serve if elected.


Lily Dale- A Melody Unchained NTD PKD-T ADP-L2
CA Speed Queen Leontine Von Washateria ITD PKD-T D-CRO-Preliminary ADP-L2
Ilka Of Pear Orchard Cemetery BN RE CA CGC ATD PKD-T CRO-1 NCO-1 ADP-L2
Lucky Rat Dog CGC ~2000-2014~ Requiescat In Pace
“Dance as if no one who is qualified to commit you is watching!” Julie Flanery, Founder of Rally FrEe
Rosemary is offline  
post #3173 of 6145 (permalink) Old 11-09-2012, 11:34 PM
Eschew Prolixity
 
melbrod's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 14,974
Location: Colorado
Dogs Name: Kip, Capri (RIP)
Titles: Kip Mr. Behavior; Capri Mis-Behavior, DS#15
Dogs Age: 10 years Dec. 15, 2005, 7 years Dec. 14, 2008--January 20, 2016
Gallery Pics: 6
Visit melbrod's Gallery
Thanks: 37,391
Thanked 37,013 Times in 11,491 Posts
Images: 6
                     
Click here to find out how melbrod became a supporter
Even if he were alive, Darwin might have had a tough time serving. His health wasn't very good. From Wikipedia:

"The strain took a toll, and by June [he was relatively young at close to 30] he was being laid up for days on end with stomach problems, headaches and heart symptoms. For the rest of his life, he was repeatedly incapacitated with episodes of stomach pains, vomiting, severe boils, palpitations, trembling and other symptoms, particularly during times of stress such as attending meetings or making social visits."

A reason to research your candidate before voting for him.

Last edited by melbrod; 11-09-2012 at 11:52 PM.
melbrod is offline  
The Following User Says Thank You to melbrod For This Useful Post:
Dictator (11-09-2012)
post #3174 of 6145 (permalink) Old 11-10-2012, 12:00 AM Thread Starter
Alpha
 
dobermansrule's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 14,479
Location: ∞∞
Dogs Name: quincy
Dogs Age: 10/8/2006 - 10/4/2014
Gallery Pics: 0
Visit dobermansrule's Gallery
Thanks: 9,517
Thanked 30,599 Times in 9,776 Posts
                     
Quote:
Originally Posted by ssgharkness020147 View Post
Y hello thar gun control:

That didn’t take long. Less than a day after President Obama’s re-election, the administration breathed new life into the United Nations‘ previously comatose treaty regulating guns.

Last July, the U.N. General Assembly began formal discussion of the Arms Trade Treaty, which seeks to establish “common international standards for the import, export and transfer of conventional arms.” Talks on the controversial agreement were put on indefinite hiatus after the United States requested an extension to the time allotted to negotiate the agreement. Gun rights supporters blasted the treaty as it inched toward approval, and many suspected U.S. procedural maneuvers were intended to delay the treaty so it wouldn’t become a topic of discussion during the election. It appears these suspicions were correct since “indefinite” turned out to mean until hours after Mr. Obama was re-elected.

The administration line is that the treaty applies only to firearms exports and poses no threat to domestic gun owners. “We seek a treaty that contributes to international security by fighting illicit arms trafficking and proliferation, protects the sovereign right of states to conduct legitimate arms trade, and meets the concerns that we have been articulating throughout,” an administration official said. “We will not accept any treaty that infringes on the constitutional rights of our citizens to bear arms.”

It is hard to take the White House response seriously. The treaty instructs countries to “take the necessary legislative and administrative measures, to adapt, as necessary, national laws and regulations to implement the obligations of this treaty.” The agreement’s language is so broad, vague and poorly defined it could be stretched in a variety of ways that would pose a threat to the Second Amendment. Treaty backers also want to insert provisions forcing ratifying states to promote a variety of fashionable left-wing causes including “sustainable development,” even though they have nothing to do with the arms trade.

Though the treaty is supposed to be about “gun exports,” its provisions can still be applied domestically. Activist judges adjudicating cases arising under the treaty and enabling legislation could see to that. The definition of international commerce could follow the same expansive logic liberal courts have used to redefine “interstate commerce.” Anything that indirectly or incidentally affects the trade in arms would fall under its control.
A ratified treaty, with constitutional authority, could be interpreted in a way that applies to any imported weapon or round of ammunition, those made with foreign components, those containing imported materials, those that might some day be exported, and those capable of being exported. If it affects the overall arms market, it could be said to be part of “international” trade, even if the item never leaves our shores. In practice this logic would give the government free rein to regulate all weapons, foreign and domestic. With the election out of the way, the White House can move swiftly to get the treaty through the U.N. General Assembly and up to the Senate by the summer of 2013. Elections have consequences.


Read more: EDITORIAL: Gun ban back on Obama's agenda - Washington Times EDITORIAL: Gun ban back on Obama's agenda - Washington Times
Follow us: @washtimes on Twitter
well, you do realize, with an approximate 50/50 popular vote, Obama feels he has a mandate now.
dobermansrule is offline  
The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to dobermansrule For This Useful Post:
Dictator (11-10-2012), GRAYGHOST (11-10-2012), mark100pe (11-13-2012), ssgharkness020147 (11-10-2012)
post #3175 of 6145 (permalink) Old 11-10-2012, 04:32 AM
Alpha
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 381

Gallery Pics: 0
Visit ssgharkness020147's Gallery
Thanks: 269
Thanked 438 Times in 230 Posts
                     
Quote:
Originally Posted by dobermansrule View Post
well, you do realize, with an approximate 50/50 popular vote, Obama feels he has a mandate now.
Yep. And he knows there's no way Congress will play ball with him on GC, much easier to sign an international treaty that only needs to be ratified by the demo controlled Senate.
ssgharkness020147 is offline  
The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to ssgharkness020147 For This Useful Post:
Cindylouwho (11-10-2012), Dictator (11-10-2012), GRAYGHOST (11-10-2012), mark100pe (11-13-2012)
Advertisement
 
Reply

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now



In order to be able to post messages on the Doberman Forum : Doberman Breed Dog Forums forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.

User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.

Password:


Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.

Email Address:
OR

Log-in









Human Verification

In order to verify that you are a human and not a spam bot, please enter the answer into the following box below based on the instructions contained in the graphic.



Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Linear Mode



Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On

 
For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome