View Full Version : the enemy of my enemy is my friend, say it.
This forum is a small population, relatively speaking; we are all here for our affinity of firearms ownership and usage, in any capacity.
That being said, is upholding the Constitution the baseline that galvanizes our kinship despite religious / cultural backgrounds?
I feel that society / govt. is forcing me to pick sides lately by expressing my position on topics that carry so much weight, others can infer my overall position as a whole. Ex. Im anti-abortion, so then I must be Christian, which means im likely conservative, which means I must be a gun owner, which means.... Something along those lines...I just dont want dissension between my peers. We can all agree that the Constitution being upheld is a universal desire correct, our archetype?
Magic_Salad0892
03-25-13, 18:02
Yes. I may disagree with several members on this board about several social issues. But I still believe that we're all on the same side.
boggyboy72
03-25-13, 18:20
Yes. I may disagree with several members on this board about several social issues. But I still believe that we're all on the same side.
No doubt.
buckshot1220
03-25-13, 18:46
I think I speak for all on here when I say that the Constitution is the Supreme Law of the Land. It is not a living, breathing document as the opposition would argue. It certainly is not a "flawed document" as our current POTUS would have you believe.
The only dissension I see on this board of any meaningful quantity has more to do with social issues (abortion, gay marriage, the blurry line between separation of Church and State etc.). Some believe that since this country was founded on the basic teachings of Christianity and the necessity of the family unit that we should hold true to that, while others believe the Separation of Church and State holds a stricter meaning.
Regardless of our minor quarrels, as a community we portray and hold true that Personal Responsibility is paramount.
buckshot1220
03-25-13, 18:50
I feel that society / govt. is forcing me to pick sides lately by expressing my position on topics that carry so much weight, others can infer my overall position as a whole. Ex. Im anti-abortion, so then I must be Christian, which means im likely conservative, which means I must be a gun owner, which means.... Something along those lines...I just dont want dissension between my peers. We can all agree that the Constitution being upheld is a universal desire correct, our archetype?
Although the current state of affairs may be forcing gun owners to band together like never before, it is also further polarizing the two-party system on a national level like never before.
It is a double-edged sword.
Yes. I may disagree with several members on this board about several social issues. But I still believe that we're all on the same side.
I'll even go shooting with them and have a great deal of respect for a lot of people here that I disagree with on certain issues.
--
None of the social issues that we banter about should really matter when it comes to drawing our alliances. What should really matter is our views on government spending - this is the big kahuna.
Here is a little litmus test: Would you vote for repeal Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid. I mean abolish them right now and receive no benefits for what you've paid into via FICA.
If you you would vote to perpetuate those programs, then you are my enemy. We have very little in common. I'm looking to defeat you, and I do not care if you or your family suffers because of the struggle.
VooDoo6Actual
03-25-13, 20:23
“The person who agrees with you 80 percent of the time is a friend and an ally
— not a 20 percent traitor.”
"it’s better to get 80 percent of what you want than zero".
Ronald Regan
I agree about reducing govt spending and no matter what our state in life we have to be willing to reduce govt or we all lose big time. I am within 5 yrs of retirement age but would happily vote to end SSA, MC/MA immediately. I have paid a ton into those programs for 40 yrs and do not expect to see any of it.
If we do not chop govt off at the knees regarding spending then we are GIVING THEM FUNDING TO TAKE OUR GUNS AND ENSLAVE US. only a drastic reduction in spending/taxes will reign in this beast.
If you vote to keep your benefits (job, pension, SSA, labor laws, etc) over individual rights and limited govt then you are the enemy. We can sort out our personal differences on social issues later after we save the Constitution and liberty, but for now we need to vote every rascal that will not protect gun rights or take an axe to the spending budget.
polymorpheous
03-25-13, 21:06
It's social conditioning.
The same concept was used to spring board the GWOT.
http://youtu.be/-23kmhc3P8U
The more this becomes the norm, the more dangerous this line of black and white thinking becomes.
In WI, during the Act 10 union battle and resulting recall election, I started to see comments dehumanizing people with opposing views.
Once we start to see certain people as being less than human, we allow atrocity to occur.
VooDoo6Actual
03-25-13, 21:42
Old Version:
Give a man a fish and he will eat for a day.
Teach a man to fish and he will eat for a lifetime.
Updated Version:
Give a man a welfare check, a free cell phone with unlimited free minutes, free Internet, cash for his clunker, a Chevy Volt, food stamps, section 8 housing, free contraceptives, healthcare & medicaid, ninety-nine weeks of unemployment, free medicine, forgive his student loans and he will vote Democratic the rest of his life…
..even after he's dead.
This forum is a small population, relatively speaking; we are all here for our affinity of firearms ownership and usage, in any capacity.
That being said, is upholding the Constitution the baseline that galvanizes our kinship despite religious / cultural backgrounds?
I feel that society / govt. is forcing me to pick sides lately by expressing my position on topics that carry so much weight, others can infer my overall position as a whole. Ex. Im anti-abortion, so then I must be Christian, which means im likely conservative, which means I must be a gun owner, which means.... Something along those lines...I just dont want dissension between my peers. We can all agree that the Constitution being upheld is a universal desire correct, our archetype?
I have always been an advocate and activist for our Constitution. I agree with your statement, and I encourage you to remember it when the issues challenging our Constitution in the future may not be directly linked to your life, and your political leanings.
When the next "attack" comes and they strip away one more of our rights, will you still be of this mindset?
Want to "chop gov't off at the knees"?
Abolish the Federal Reserve.
Follow the intent of the Founders re: 10th Amendment.
Curtail the 700+ military bases outside of the USA.
Stop all aid to ALL nations. NO EXCEPTIONS.
Tariff ALL goods not manufactured inside the borders of the USA. Period. NO EXCEPTIONS.
Welfare becomes Workfare.
You're now following what the Founders intended - at least their ideals. U can keep SS and Medicare/Medicaid for those who have had there assets tricked from them.
Want to "chop gov't off at the knees"?
Abolish the Federal Reserve.
Follow the intent of the Founders re: 10th Amendment.
Curtail the 700+ military bases outside of the USA.
Stop all aid to ALL nations. NO EXCEPTIONS.
Tariff ALL goods not manufactured inside the borders of the USA. Period. NO EXCEPTIONS.
Welfare becomes Workfare.
You're now following what the Founders intended - at least their ideals. U can keep SS and Medicare/Medicaid for those who have had there assets tricked from them.
MY GOD, THE PERFECT POST.....
It cannot get any better than that.
Yes. I may disagree with several members on this board about several social issues. But I still believe that we're all on the same side.
All right... we'll give some land to the n****** and the chinks. But we don't want the Irish!
:D
Magic_Salad0892
03-25-13, 22:52
MY GOD, THE PERFECT POST.....
It cannot get any better than that.
Agreed.
Mauser KAR98K
03-25-13, 22:58
Want to "chop gov't off at the knees"?
Abolish the Federal Reserve. Best to audited it and make it play by some better rules. It still needs to make and approve bigger loans (I.E. in the time of a big ass war.)
Follow the intent of the Founders re: 10th Amendment. Agreed
Curtail the 700+ military bases outside of the USA. Sounds fine and dandy until we are launched into a large scale war, say the Middle East and North Africa make a coalition and begin invading Southern Europe. Or Russia, or China...or North Korea, which is the most likely, starts a large scale war. Without key bases, staging, mobilizing and staging reserves gets a little difficult.
Stop all aid to ALL nations. NO EXCEPTIONS. I say stop all aid to the people who actually hate us, but we bribe them not to shoot at us. I think Poland needs the aid as Russia still likes to bully it when Putin can get away with it.
Tariff ALL goods not manufactured inside the borders of the USA. Period. NO EXCEPTIONS. Might want stop the tax credit for shipping jobs overseas, impliment a fair tax or flat tax, and get manufacturing up in the U.S. and prices down. If you tariff now, prices will be really out of sight, and the Zombies will be freaking out cause there is a shortage of Iphones.
Welfare becomes Workfare. Agreed.
You're now following what the Founders intended - at least their ideals. U can keep SS and Medicare/Medicaid for those who have had there assets tricked from them.
Read Jefferson vs. Adams. It is about the Election of 1800 and how the U.S. almost dissolved into a civil war. The Founder's intent was up for conjecture even amongst themselves.
Sorry to do this, but the full Libertarian bent to solving the problem will just make another big problem somewhere else. You got gradually resend these policies. And there some Departments and institutions that we still need, but really need to be reformed badly. SS, medicare and medicate the most. Those three are nothing more than a biggy bank the the parents take from from their children.
So you believe a private federal reserve is better than a nationalized reserve? Ran by our own treasury department? The private federal reserve is bring our currency to its knees through devaluation and the country is going with it...
There is absolutely ZERO reason to have foreign military bases in todays world. The failure of your arguement is the fact that WE start those large scale wars......
Fact is we can not afford it, bottom line. Same goes for foreign aid. We cant afford to take care of the U.S., why in the hell are we giving money we dont have to others? Insanity.
None of the social issues that we banter about should really matter when it comes to drawing our alliances. What should really matter is our views on government spending - this is the big kahuna.
Here is a little litmus test: Would you vote for repeal Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid. I mean abolish them right now and receive no benefits for what you've paid into via FICA.
If you you would vote to perpetuate those programs, then you are my enemy. We have very little in common. I'm looking to defeat you, and I do not care if you or your family suffers because of the struggle.
I would vote to repeal it all, immediately.
But I would also support a gradual drawdown of it as well (leaving current recipients and those retiring in the next 10 years still eligible while others would not be), similarly to Ryans (old?) plan.
I suspect that it will be easier to do a drawdown then immediate wipeout of such programs, politically speaking.
So, what this means is, that if you and I can agree to go part way, you don't become the enemy until we've walked together as far as we can.
--
Mauser KAR98K
03-26-13, 00:17
So you believe a private federal reserve is better than a nationalized reserve? Ran by our own treasury department? The private federal reserve is bring our currency to its knees through devaluation and the country is going with it...
There is absolutely ZERO reason to have foreign military bases in todays world. The failure of your arguement is the fact that WE start those large scale wars......
Fact is we can not afford it, bottom line. Same goes for foreign aid. We cant afford to take care of the U.S., why in the hell are we giving money we dont have to others? Insanity.
Did I say I support the reserve as it is now? No. I said it needs to be audited and for it to be played by the same damn rules. Furthermore, Congress and the POTUS can put the co-bash on it by nationalizing it, or creating laws that prevent it from printing money without congressional or executive approval. But we need the reserve to issue loans and the print money as the economy grows (if it ever does under the retard's in charge now).
We starting those large scale wars: lets run the numbers starting 1898.
Spanish-American War, 1898--USS Maine exploded in Havana Harbor; yellow journalists "creating" the war hyperbole.
War started by the U.S. (Really started by the Hertz).
Poncho Villa, 1916--Mexican Outlaw Poncho Villa attacks Columbus New Mexico in 1916. General John Pershing sent to track him down and bring him to justice.
Incursion started by Ponco Villa.
Wold War One, 1917. American Entry-- America entered World War One after the Lusitania was suck and German was pushing for Mexico to invade the U.S. American opinion was mostly to stay out of the war
World War One started by the Black Hand that had a cascading effect of nations declaring war on each other just because. U.S. was not one of those until 3 years in to the war. Not Started by the U.S., but was finished by the U.S.
World War Two; 1941 entrance--America entered World War Two after a "surprise" attack at the Naval Base, Pearl Harbor by the Japanese. After the deceleration of war on the Japanese, Hitler in Germany declared war on the U.S. (technically it was already at war with the U.S. Navy as they were protecting shipping to England).
World War Two started by Japan and Nazi Germany--finished by the U.S.
Korea War, 1950--North Korea invades South Korea. The U.N. Security Council condemns the attack, and the U.S. with other countries fight back on the South Korean Peninsula.
Not started by the U.S. "directly" but by the Communist North Koreans. War is still going on, but no shooting (as of yet.)
Vietnam, 1962-1975--North Vietnam incursions into South Vietnam and creating rebels in the South. America's involvement started as an advisement roll--helping the South Vietnam government, and creating policies--until a full escalation under President Lyndon Baines Johnson. Vietnam would drag out and become a costly defeat for the U.S. in 1975.
Vietnam War technically not started by the U.S., but was escalated to its large scale by the U.S.
Desert Storm, 1991--Saddam Hussein invades Kuwait. His invasion was met by harsh outcries in the international community, including with other Arab states. A large coalition force backed and commanded by the U.S. pushed Saddam's forces out of Kuwait, but did not invade and topple Saddam.
Desert Storm was the response to Saddam's illegal invasion. U.S. pushed him back and crippled his military prowess in the region for a time.
Afghanistan, 2001-current--Al Qaeda plans and finances the 9/11 attacks inside Afghanistan that is ruled bu the Taliban. When asked to give up Osama bin Laden, the Taliban refused. American responses and invades Afganistan to root out Al Qaeda and the Taliban. Nation building and the eradication of the Taliban is not gone well, especially with Pakistan areas in the Hindu Kusch aiding and supply Taliban fighters.
Afganistan started by the Taliban's refusal to give up Osama and Al Qaede after the 9/11 attacks.
Invasion of Iraq, 2003--After the failure of the U.N. security council and the "threat" of WMD's that Saddam was reported to have, the U.S. invades IRaq to topple the regime. Ex-Iraqi military and Jihadist flood the country to attack U.S. Forces and hamper the nation building process.
War started by the U.S.
Grenada, Panama, and Bosnia I excluded because they are not really large, broad conflicts on the scale mentioned above.
So, your argument is false. We do not start a large majority of the wars. Do we start some? Yes; but we are forced to finish others.
Those bases help us logistically in case we need to go in and finish one..say, when North Korea is starved enough to go South. With their current heir, I will not be surprised. This time, China will probably stay out of it. But Kim has a large military force, and they are hungry and desperate.
There are a lot of other areas we can start cutting. I shit load of areas. Hell, there are even bases (drone bases in areas) that do need to be shut down. But we can't gut every base and risk security and interests.
Back on topic. Defend the Second and preserve the others.
Did I say I support the reserve as it is now? No. I said it needs to be audited and for it to be played by the same damn rules. Furthermore, Congress and the POTUS can put the co-bash on it by nationalizing it, or creating laws that prevent it from printing money without congressional or executive approval. But we need the reserve to issue loans and the print money as the economy grows (if it ever does under the retard's in charge now).
No you don't. If you have real non fiat money, you don't need anything of the sort.
There was a post by Submariner in the "top or interesting articles" thread a few weeks ago. Go read it.
And any other good sources on real economic growth and real money.
--
polymorpheous
03-26-13, 01:04
Wow did this thread veer off topic quickly!
GeorgiaBoy
03-26-13, 01:44
Wow did this thread veer off topic quickly!
As per mid 2012 - present GD protocol.
This forum is a small population, relatively speaking; we are all here for our affinity of firearms ownership and usage, in any capacity.
That being said, is upholding the Constitution the baseline that galvanizes our kinship despite religious / cultural backgrounds?
I feel that society / govt. is forcing me to pick sides lately by expressing my position on topics that carry so much weight, others can infer my overall position as a whole. Ex. Im anti-abortion, so then I must be Christian, which means im likely conservative, which means I must be a gun owner, which means.... Something along those lines...I just dont want dissension between my peers. We can all agree that the Constitution being upheld is a universal desire correct, our archetype?
And the Herodians and Pharisees hated each other, but they hated Christ even more. So they put aside their differences temporarily to conspire to kill the Lord. I'm finding out more and more as I grow older that the only real friend I have in this world is my 14 yr old son. I certainly don't have any on this board.
Magic_Salad0892
03-26-13, 03:00
And the Herodians and Pharisees hated each other, but they hated Christ even more. So they put aside their differences temporarily to conspire to kill the Lord. I'm finding out more and more as I grow older that the only real friend I have in this world is my 14 yr old son. I certainly don't have any on this board.
I consider you, and many on this board to be good men. We're almost all friends here.
I consider you, and many on this board to be good men. We're almost all friends here.
Same. I only wonder about the heart of one or two members, but just about everyone here is a good guy, despite any differences of opinion on trivial things.
polymorpheous
03-26-13, 03:07
:cray:
And the Herodians and Pharisees hated each other, but they hated Christ even more. So they put aside their differences temporarily to conspire to kill the Lord. I'm finding out more and more as I grow older that the only real friend I have in this world is my 14 yr old son. I certainly don't have any on this board.
:cray:
That hurts man.
Moose-Knuckle
03-26-13, 03:19
Divide and conquer . . . it's an age old tactic and it works.
Yes. I may disagree with several members on this board about several social issues. But I still believe that we're all on the same side.
I wish I could agree with this statement. However lately I am starting to doubt it. On firearms we all agree. However there are a few of us who are more moderate on other social issues.
Myself and Styer Aug really come to mind.
For myself I am a Gun owning, Pro Gay marriage supporting, Pro Life (in 99% of cases) libertarian leaning financial conservative who also happens to be an atheist and Secular activist.
I often feel like I don't fit in on this board when I read GD. Of course that is why I don't read GD a lot.
There are time I feel like I will be standing side by side with most of the people here on one day. And then the next day be on the other side of the protest line from them. Disagreement is fine. But it seems like some of these issues are so divisive that they carry over.
RogerinTPA
03-26-13, 15:21
Want to "chop gov't off at the knees"?
Abolish the Federal Reserve.
Follow the intent of the Founders re: 10th Amendment.
Curtail the 700+ military bases outside of the USA.
Stop all aid to ALL nations. NO EXCEPTIONS.
Tariff ALL goods not manufactured inside the borders of the USA. Period. NO EXCEPTIONS.
Welfare becomes Workfare.
You're now following what the Founders intended - at least their ideals. U can keep SS and Medicare/Medicaid for those who have had there assets tricked from them.
Agreed, however, if everyone stopped paying their mortgages and credit cards simultaneously for 3 months, that, in and of itself, would bring the banking system, and the Fed, to their knees. One could argue that if all Americans set up Canadian accounts and transferred all our funds and bought Canadian dollars, it would probably collapse our economy. With Canada's relatively new oil assets, their dollar won't be dropping as far as ours and the rest of the worlds will.
Five_Point_Five_Six
03-26-13, 20:32
I'm sure if there was ever a big M4C get together where everyone attended, I'm sure there are some, myself included, who would feel a little guilty about the way we conduct ourselves sometimes. The internet allows us to be somewhat more abrasive than we would be in person.
buckshot1220
03-26-13, 20:45
Wow did this thread veer off topic quickly!
As per mid 2012 - present GD protocol.
We should all get together for the world's largest game of "Telephone" and see what the outcome is.
GeorgiaBoy
03-26-13, 20:57
Personally there isn't a single person on this board whom I wouldn't have a problem sitting down and having a drink with, despite our disagreements.
Yet there are a few that I don't think would share the same feelings about me.
TacMedic556
03-26-13, 21:00
Want to "chop gov't off at the knees"?
Abolish the Federal Reserve.
Follow the intent of the Founders re: 10th Amendment.
Curtail the 700+ military bases outside of the USA.
Stop all aid to ALL nations. NO EXCEPTIONS.
Tariff ALL goods not manufactured inside the borders of the USA. Period. NO EXCEPTIONS.
Welfare becomes Workfare.
You're now following what the Founders intended - at least their ideals. U can keep SS and Medicare/Medicaid for those who have had there assets tricked from them.
100% Agreed.
"Truth is treason in an empire of lies". -Ron Paul
Magic_Salad0892
03-26-13, 23:11
I wish I could agree with this statement. However lately I am starting to doubt it. On firearms we all agree. However there are a few of us who are more moderate on other social issues.
Myself and Styer Aug really come to mind.
For myself I am a Gun owning, Pro Gay marriage supporting, Pro Life (in 99% of cases) libertarian leaning financial conservative who also happens to be an atheist and Secular activist.
I often feel like I don't fit in on this board when I read GD. Of course that is why I don't read GD a lot.
There are time I feel like I will be standing side by side with most of the people here on one day. And then the next day be on the other side of the protest line from them. Disagreement is fine. But it seems like some of these issues are so divisive that they carry over.
And that's okay. Sometimes members get hostile because of how much they care about their beliefs. That doesn't mean they're bad people, or hate us. Even if Belloc doesn't believe gay marriage, I doubt he'd have a problem at all standing next to us trying to prevent the government from using drones, or closing down the federal reserve.
You may be pro-life, but you'd stand with me against a threat to all of us.
Call me a blind optimist, but I truly believe those things. Hostility doesn't mean we're on two different sides. Our opinions cannot be the same. We're free-er than that.
The reason there's less infighting on the left is because they're drones regurgitating what Bloomberg, and the gang have told them.
I don't care if you're an athiest, or pro-life. You have the right to be. And at the end of the day, I don't believe that we have many truly bad people on this board.
But we really need to start showing the comraderie.
A simple test:
Do you love your nation (notice I did not say "country": the nation = the people)?
So you love the ideals set forth by our Founders?
Do you practice a Christ-based philosophy? By that I don't mean religion or church attendance of any denomination. My understanding of the word from my Aramaic-speaking friends means "at one with Creation" and is at odds with dogma.
If you can say "yes" to these or even "pretty much" then we have A basis to potentially become friends. You have a pass.
The rest? We can exchange ideas and learn from one another and grow. For me there are things I vehemently oppose but few ever ask WHY. It's not WHAT you believe or do but WHY you believe or did what you did that tells me more about you.
None of you are consciously anti-American so I would be a horse's ass to claim that you were my enemy.
And that's okay. Sometimes members get hostile because of how much they care about their beliefs. That doesn't mean they're bad people, or hate us. Even if Belloc doesn't believe gay marriage, I doubt he'd have a problem at all standing next to us trying to prevent the government from using drones, or closing down the federal reserve.
You may be pro-life, but you'd stand with me against a threat to all of us.
Call me a blind optimist, but I truly believe those things. Hostility doesn't mean we're on two different sides. Our opinions cannot be the same. We're free-er than that.
The reason there's less infighting on the left is because they're drones regurgitating what Bloomberg, and the gang have told them.
I don't care if you're an athiest, or pro-life. You have the right to be. And at the end of the day, I don't believe that we have many truly bad people on this board.
But we really need to start showing the comraderie.
Well said Magic.
-Jax
I'm sure if there was ever a big M4C get together where everyone attended, I'm sure there are some, myself included, who would feel a little guilty about the way we conduct ourselves sometimes. The internet allows us to be somewhat more abrasive than we would be in person.
Yeah pretty much how I feel.
"The enemy of my enemy is my friend"
Well, as you can see, we are not all friends here.... :laugh:
I'm reminded of a post by Steyr a while back:
Once we got to the point where we were no longer willing to tar and feather a member of Congress we were doomed. So long as Congress never gets us to the point that we are willing to say screw it and start rounding them up, they can pretty much get away with almost anything.
In the meantime they keep us divided with Party A which represents half of our views and Party B which represents the other half of our views and enough extremists to prevent there ever being a consensus of mainstream values.
They indoctrinate the majority of the population with misleading propaganda and futile social efforts so that true equality and the restorations of everyone's rights are not only no longer attainable but unpopular. People are instead encouraged to misdirect their efforts towards noble sounding goals that are either irrelevant, unobtainable or both.
It's the equivalent of the Gov. and associated organizatios with their own agendas shouting "LOOK! Over there! A unicorn!" And while everyone squabbles over whether or not "it could have been a craaaackhead" they have their way.
And IMHO, most of these "social issues" at best are bullshit anyway- for the life of me I cannot understand why they become such heated-topics- or seem to have benefits more incommon with the people who want to see this country brought low, than actually gaining anything of benefit for the people in it.
Personally there isn't a single person on this board whom I wouldn't have a problem sitting down and having a drink with, despite our disagreements.
Yet there are a few that I don't think would share the same feelings about me.
As long as you promise not to wear a UGA hat or shirt...;)
Personally there isn't a single person on this board whom I wouldn't have a problem sitting down and having a drink with, despite our disagreements.
Yet there are a few that I don't think would share the same feelings about me.
Typical liberal "holier than thou" smear job elitism where you present yourself as magnanimous and willing to "sit down with anyone" and then suggest that those you would be willing to meet probably aren't as enlightened or as accepting as you, nor would they extend to you the same courtesy.
:D
Well, as you can see, we are not all friends here.... :laugh:
I'm reminded of a post by Steyr a while back:
It's the equivalent of the Gov. and associated organizatios with their own agendas shouting "LOOK! Over there! A unicorn!" And while everyone squabbles over whether or not "it could have been a craaaackhead" they have their way.
And IMHO, most of these "social issues" at best are bullshit anyway- for the life of me I cannot understand why they become such heated-topics- or seem to have benefits more incommon with the people who want to see this country brought low, than actually gaining anything of benefit for the people in it.
Exactly. A government has a natural tendency to grow larger and more controlling, and it can do so most easily at the expense of the individual citizen and small business (producers without the clout of the super rich).
No matter what we agree or disagree about on policy, we should keep in mind the real enemy is massive government. If you ask for or expect something from the government then you are supporting bigger and more controlling government. If we hold dear our rights then we have to commit to less government: less spending, less tax revenue, fewer regulations, fewer favors, fewer employees, etc.
And that's okay. Sometimes members get hostile because of how much they care about their beliefs. That doesn't mean they're bad people, or hate us. Even if Belloc doesn't believe gay marriage, I doubt he'd have a problem at all standing next to us trying to prevent the government from using drones, or closing down the federal reserve.
You may be pro-life, but you'd stand with me against a threat to all of us.
Call me a blind optimist, but I truly believe those things. Hostility doesn't mean we're on two different sides. Our opinions cannot be the same. We're free-er than that.
The reason there's less infighting on the left is because they're drones regurgitating what Bloomberg, and the gang have told them.
I don't care if you're an athiest, or pro-life. You have the right to be. And at the end of the day, I don't believe that we have many truly bad people on this board.
But we really need to start showing the comraderie.
This is pretty much how I feel, I think.
While I would like my friends to think the same way I do, none of them are 100% there. In fact, I have some friends who are pretty much 100% of the way opposite from the way I think -- pretty much socialists. They are still my friends and if we were in the same area, I'd still hang with them once in a while to enjoy the things we DO have in common (music, or whatever).
There are lots of people on M4C with whom I have jousted on various moral/religious/similar topics, with whom I'd be honored to share a meal or to stand on the firing line at a class, or range, or just out in the desert shooting.
Friendship is much more than just being in agreement in all areas.
I disagree with my socialist and socialist leaning friends on pretty much most political issues. But we can still have a friendship based on other things -- common work/industry, music, whatever.
The only people who need not apply are the pricks. I don't care what their politics are like -- 100% libertarian, or 2A, or 100% liberal socialist -- I have no interest in being your friend.
Here on M4C, I cannot think of anyone off hand who I wouldn't extend a hand to if we met in person, and offer to go shooting together. Your religion (everyone has one), or views on so-called "gay marriage" or "abortion" not withstanding. As long as you are not a prick.
You may not be as high on my totem pole as someone who is much more in tune with my thoughts and values, but as long as you are not a prick you'd be welcome.
What we have here on M4C is a mutual interest in firearms, and a (mostly) mutual interest in the 2A and the right of self defense and similar thoughts.
While we can have lively debates on other issues, that should not separate us out on the issues of the 2A and firearms, either technical, social, or legal.
--
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.