• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

House republican mass shooting strategy revealed in leaked memo: Blame the left, minimize white supr

Media_Truth said:
Please provide 18 links to back your statement. Of course, we all know for the ALT RIGHT Republicans of today, anything other than the Koch Brothers is "far left". The billionaires that control FOX News have ingrained that ideology into their puppet listeners.
Click to expand...

LOL

Another lame strategy.

Prove my statement wrong.

I'll give you one link, then you give me one link, and then I'll give you one link, and so on.

We'll see who steps up, and who runs.

Tides Foundation
 
Media_Truth said:
Actually, Trump and Graham both recently stated their support for "Red Flag Laws". These laws flag at-risk individuals. They went on to say that they should be "disarmed" before they commit an act. Now they seem to backing off this modest, common-sense approach, after being pressured by the NRA. The media will have a field day with this, if they don't follow through on their promises. Expect a large amount of voter backlash.
Click to expand...

Yeah, he did; but I think things have changed on that front. Red flag laws are the epitome of the 'slippery slope'. I'm not for leaving my rights in the hands of leftwing mental health professionals.
 
ocean515 said:
Ok, some are less radical Progressive than others.

What does the Tides Foundation do, and why would they be a major funder of a "Journalism" School?
Click to expand...

Right, and several because I checked aren't "radical Progressive [sic]" at all....

And, gosh, why would a non-profit fund journalism? It's a mystery! The founders thought the press was important enough to single out in the 1st Amendment so I can't imagine why anyone in 2019 would think a competent press was worth having.....:confused:

Nice touch putting "Journalism" in quotes.
 
Anthony60 said:
Winston Churchill? Was he in any recent Presidential administration?
Click to expand...

My apologies for having any awareness of such irrelevancies as "happenings in any place other than the United States of America" or any person other than "the President of the United States of America".
 
TU Curmudgeon said:
Oh, I quite agree that you shouldn't say things like that in public.
Click to expand...

I haven't said them anytime, but you probably are projecting your feeling for Republicans.
 
American said:
Yeah, he did; but I think things have changed on that front. Red flag laws are the epitome of the 'slippery slope'. I'm not for leaving my rights in the hands of leftwing mental health professionals.
Click to expand...

Aren't you the one who advocated locking up (without any access to guns) potentially dangerous persons until those same "leftwing (sic) mental health professionals" certified that it was safe to let them out again?
 
TU Curmudgeon said:
Aren't you the one who advocated locking up (without any access to guns) potentially dangerous persons until those same "leftwing (sic) mental health professionals" certified that it was safe to let them out again?
Click to expand...

I don't remember, was I?
 
American said:
I haven't said them anytime, but you probably are projecting your feeling for Republicans.
Click to expand...

Since BOTH "Republican" and "Democrat" are (in the United States of America) actually meaningless labels that people like to hang on themselves in order to increase their chances of election and/or re-election and have next to nothing whatsoever to do with what legislation the elected person will support or oppose, I'm not quite sure what you mean by that.

You do have to remember that (in the US) if "Party A" introduces a piece of legislation, then "Party B" will oppose it to the death BUT if "Party B" were to introduce an absolutely identical piece of legislation, then "Party A" would oppose it to the death.

In either case, that means that the votes of individual Representatives and Senators have to be "obtained" by promising those individual Representatives and Senators goodies which will help them in their re-election campaigns REGARDLESS of whether those goodies are even remotely connected to the piece of legislation for which the necessary vote is "obtained".
 
ocean515 said:
LOL

Another lame strategy.

Prove my statement wrong.

I'll give you one link, then you give me one link, and then I'll give you one link, and so on.

We'll see who steps up, and who runs.

Tides Foundation
Click to expand...

This is under "about" on that website.

Tides is a philanthropic partner and nonprofit accelerator dedicated to building a world of shared prosperity and social justice.

I guess it's liberal to try to "share prosperity". The ALT RIGHT prefers to keep people on welfare, so that they can complain about them.

As far as the other sites. You made the statement. You back it up, by showing that they are all liberal.
 
American said:
Yeah, he did; but I think things have changed on that front. Red flag laws are the epitome of the 'slippery slope'. I'm not for leaving my rights in the hands of leftwing mental health professionals.
Click to expand...

How will Trump and Graham dance around these promises of Red Flag laws, when the voters want action?
 
TU Curmudgeon said:
My apologies for having any awareness of such irrelevancies as "happenings in any place other than the United States of America" or any person other than "the President of the United States of America".
Click to expand...

Well, I guess you were unaware as to my point.
 
JasperL said:
Right, and several because I checked aren't "radical Progressive [sic]" at all....

And, gosh, why would a non-profit fund journalism? It's a mystery! The founders thought the press was important enough to single out in the 1st Amendment so I can't imagine why anyone in 2019 would think a competent press was worth having.....:confused:

Nice touch putting "Journalism" in quotes.
Click to expand...

My question was what does the Tides Foundation do. Not what kind of operation they are.

And I know what the Knight Foundation is, and MacArthur, and Open Society, etc., etc..

If you can't be honest about it, there is no point in discussing it with you.

I'll move on.
 
Media_Truth said:
This is under "about" on that website.

Tides is a philanthropic partner and nonprofit accelerator dedicated to building a world of shared prosperity and social justice.

I guess it's liberal to try to "share prosperity". The ALT RIGHT prefers to keep people on welfare, so that they can complain about them.

As far as the other sites. You made the statement. You back it up, by showing that they are all liberal.
Click to expand...

Tides is a "accelerator". You know what that means? All it does is gather money and dole it out to radical progressive operations. That way, the money has been laundered and the sources cleaned.

Tides, like the others is a major player in the Progressive Machine.

Now it's your turn, but you won't reciprocate?

The you are eliminated.

No surprise.
 
ocean515 said:
My question was what does the Tides Foundation do. Not what kind of operation they are.

And I know what the Knight Foundation is, and MacArthur, and Open Society, etc., etc..

If you can't be honest about it, there is no point in discussing it with you.

I'll move on.
Click to expand...

That's fine. You are determined to see malevolence in funding a "Journalism" school - scare quotes yours. Not much point engaging that nonsense.
 
Media_Truth said:
How will Trump and Graham dance around these promises of Red Flag laws, when the voters want action?
Click to expand...

One possibility would be to have "Is a member in good standing of the National Rifle Association." be a definitive qualifier for a firearms permit. After all, the NRA is a huge organization with branches in every state and territory so it should be able to know when someone "really shouldn't" have guns.

Besides, letting private enterprise do the task of vetting people means that the government doesn't have to spend the taxpayers' hard earned tax dollars to do something that private enterprise can do more inexpensively and efficiently.

On top of that, the additional dues that the NRA would be receiving can be used to fund the good works that the NRA does in promoting safe hunting practices and that means that (potentially) thousands of lives would be saved due to the decrease in the number of hunters killed because their dogs knocled over the hunter's rifle or shotgun.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom