Jump to content

Recommended Posts

N.R.A. Chief Takes the Stand, With Cracks in His Armor

For three decades, Wayne LaPierre has been the implacable face of the gun lobby, a scourge of the left who argued that giving ground on gun control was akin to giving up on America. So it was remarkable to see the shambolic turn his tenure atop the National Rifle Association has taken showcased last week in federal bankruptcy court in Dallas.

Mr. LaPierre acknowledged that he had secretly taken the N.R.A. into bankruptcy — without telling even his top lieutenants or most of his board — essentially as an end run around attacks from the New York attorney general, who is seeking to shut down the group amid charges of financial mismanagement and corruption. And he made a string of admissions that served largely to underscore the N.R.A.’s disarray and the questions about his own fitness to lead it.

He didn’t know, he testified, that his former chief financial officer had received a $360,000-a-year consulting contract after leaving under a cloud.

He didn’t know that the personal travel agent the N.R.A. had hired to book charter flights for him and his family — the Bahamas was a favorite destination — was charging a 10 percent booking fee on top of a retainer that could reach $26,000 a month.

He didn’t know that one of his former top lieutenants had arranged for his wife to be hired by an N.R.A. contractor, or that her compensation had been billed back to the N.R.A.

And he didn’t fire his personal assistant after it was discovered that she had diverted $40,000 to pay for her son’s wedding and other personal expenses.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Can you cite a credible source?

The National Rifle Association is the very definition of "A well regulated militia".

I'll sit back for a bit and watch the fireworks.

Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, hobie1616 said:

N.R.A. Chief Takes the Stand, With Cracks in His Armor

For three decades, Wayne LaPierre has been the implacable face of the gun lobby, a scourge of the left who argued that giving ground on gun control was akin to giving up on America. So it was remarkable to see the shambolic turn his tenure atop the National Rifle Association has taken showcased last week in federal bankruptcy court in Dallas.

Mr. LaPierre acknowledged that he had secretly taken the N.R.A. into bankruptcy — without telling even his top lieutenants or most of his board — essentially as an end run around attacks from the New York attorney general, who is seeking to shut down the group amid charges of financial mismanagement and corruption. And he made a string of admissions that served largely to underscore the N.R.A.’s disarray and the questions about his own fitness to lead it.

He didn’t know, he testified, that his former chief financial officer had received a $360,000-a-year consulting contract after leaving under a cloud.

He didn’t know that the personal travel agent the N.R.A. had hired to book charter flights for him and his family — the Bahamas was a favorite destination — was charging a 10 percent booking fee on top of a retainer that could reach $26,000 a month.

He didn’t know that one of his former top lieutenants had arranged for his wife to be hired by an N.R.A. contractor, or that her compensation had been billed back to the N.R.A.

And he didn’t fire his personal assistant after it was discovered that she had diverted $40,000 to pay for her son’s wedding and other personal expenses.

If they get back to dedicating themselves to firearm safety I’ll get back to supporting them. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, quod umbra said:

Can you cite a credible source?

The National Rifle Association is the very definition of "A well regulated militia".

I'll sit back for a bit and watch the fireworks.

:lol:

Right

Because sucking up to hostile foreign gov't for cash, and "mis-use of funds" when you're not outright embezzling, is "well regulated"

- DSK

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, Steam Flyer said:

:lol:

Right

Because sucking up to hostile foreign gov't for cash, and "mis-use of funds" when you're not outright embezzling, is "well regulated"

- DSK

This isn't the Hunter Biden thread.

Anyhow, I wasn't speaking of WLaP. I was speaking of the constitutional definition of a well regulated militia.
Sorry you mis-understood.

Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, Steam Flyer said:

:lol:

Right

Because sucking up to hostile foreign gov't for cash, and "mis-use of funds" when you're not outright embezzling, is "well regulated"

- DSK

Did someone spell DNC wrong?....

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, quod umbra said:



The National Rifle Association is the very definition of "A well regulated militia".

 

Parkland school shooter honed skills on a team supported by the NRA , 

Good to see the NRA and La penis using guns for a good cause,

And where was mr. La penis at the shooting?

NRA Head Wayne LaPierre Admits to Hiding on a Yacht After Sandy Hook, Parkland Shootings

Link to post
Share on other sites

Big fonts...... good job.

So I think there is little to argue about regarding guns getting into the hands of those incapable or with bad intent.
Can we agree on that?

So let me walk you through this.  My take.
The issue with The Second Amendment is that the right of the people to own and bear arms is quite explicate. 
The justification spelled out in The Second is so that we the people can insure a free state. Founders had a thing about that, and for good reason.
So if The NRA or similar firearm rights groups are deemed a well regulated militia, which they are, then leverage that to our advantage.
By designating such organizations as well regulated militias, then restrict gun ownership to those who can demonstrate that as an individual we have the necessary skills and understanding of safe and responsible gun ownership.
So within accordance with The Second Amendment, one must present certification and membership to purchase firearms. You haven't violated The Second. What you have done is charged gun ownership organizations to demonstrate that their membership meets constitutional requirements. As such an individual would need to take training (well regulated) to purchase a firearm. Thus such gun organizations would require completion of courses to a member as a condition of membership. Now if such onus is placed upon the NRA or similar, it is quite logical that they would properly vet those who are applying for membership and certification. That being the standard, would such a militia not fully perform or require their membership to demonstrate they are eligible to own a firearm in the form of background checks and free of mental health issues? They would because if they do not, the organization becomes liable.

See that has always been the argument. That there are people unqualified who get their hands on guns. Without government issuing licenses, which there are constitutional issues or concerns with, you have insured properly vetted individuals are the only one's eligible to own guns.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Sol Rosenberg said:

If they get back to dedicating themselves to firearm safety I’ll get back to supporting them. 

What would "firearm safety" look like? We kinda know that, generally. 

And the NRA and SDU are antithetical to the very direction.

 

Sorry, Sol. But you just rejected the NRA, until a transformation.

Link to post
Share on other sites
47 minutes ago, quod umbra said:

So if The NRA or similar firearm rights groups are deemed a well regulated militia, which they are...

Please lay out your bullshit.

  • The NRA is a bold model of poor regulation. See the OP, duh.
  • See their fictional, embarrassing account of history, called The Standard Model of the Second Amendment:
  • The 2nd in Historiographical Crisis: Why the Supreme Court Must Reevaluate the Embarrassing 'Standard Model' Moving Forward Patrick J. Charles
Link to post
Share on other sites

I am sorry you do not get what I have laid out.
I am not sure anything I could say further would overcome your ingrained bias.
I will give it one last shot, short but sweet.
Instead of blaming the NRA or similar orgs, empower them to insure they properly train and vet their membership. If the standard for gun ownership is based upon them qualifying their members, then they shall work tirelessly to avoid the possibility of being held liable.
Hope that helps.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, quod umbra said:

This isn't the Hunter Biden thread.

Anyhow, I wasn't speaking of WLaP. I was speaking of the constitutional definition of a well regulated militia.
Sorry you mis-understood.

I didn't misunderstand at all

https://www.google.com/search?q=NRA+Russian+cash

I'm sure it's all libby-rull media goddam faggot LIES!!!

Meanwhile, even the NY Post who originated the Hunter Biden's laptop story has admitted it was all fiction. But you lap it up anyway huh

- DSK

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, quod umbra said:

I am sorry you do not get what I have laid out.

Everybody gets what you have laid out. It's not like it's a complex thought process or something.

It's just that it's only the usual gun nut bullshit.

Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, quod umbra said:

I am sorry you do not get what I have laid out.
I am not sure anything I could say further would overcome your ingrained bias.
I will give it one last shot, short but sweet.
Instead of blaming the NRA or similar orgs, empower them to insure they properly train and vet their membership. If the standard for gun ownership is based upon them qualifying their members, then they shall work tirelessly to avoid the possibility of being held liable.
Hope that helps.

While are you deflecting? The NRA is clearly a grifting organization playing the rubes for fools. Not only should they be reorganized due to bankruptcy, but it sounds like some folks are looking at jail time. Think that admin who used NRA funds to pay for her kids tuition ain’t looking at some fraud and tax-avoidance fines? Think Wayne ain’t in a little IRS hot water as well?

this has NOTHING to do with the 2A

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I am not deflecting.
I am taking the opportunity to lay out a way forward to strengthen our ability as a society to better protect our Second Amendment rights, while at the same time insure those who are not capable or allowed to own firearms do not have access to them.
And since when did thread drift become a bad thing around here?
Feel free to discuss the merits of what I have laid out..... or you can focus on the shiny objects. Your choice.

Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, SloopJonB said:

Everybody gets what you have laid out. It's not like it's a complex thought process or something.

It's just that it's only the usual gun nut bullshit.

Sorry you do not understand how it would bring about a positive and welcome change to the usual rhetoric.

Link to post
Share on other sites

fuck the nra and amosexual (hobbyist) 'rights', it's time for 'environmental' rights and justice.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, quod umbra said:

I am not deflecting.
I am taking the opportunity to lay out a way forward to strengthen our ability as a society to better protect our Second Amendment rights, while at the same time insure those who are not capable or allowed to own firearms do not have access to them.
And since when did thread drift become a bad thing around here?
Feel free to discuss the merits of what I have laid out..... or you can focus on the shiny objects. Your choice.

The NRA is a corrupt, bankrupt organization. Discuss. or deflect. Your call.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well again, you are relying on The New York Times as the source.
I am not so sure that is a winner.
Ms. James went after the NRA because she wants to see The Second Amendment overturned.
I think it best to let it all play out and see what is what.

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, quod umbra said:

Can you cite a credible source?

The National Rifle Association is the very definition of "A well regulated militia".

I'll sit back for a bit and watch the fireworks.

You have it backward.  The constitution requires Congress to regulate the militias.   The NRA regulates Congress.   

To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress;

 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Steam Flyer said:

:lol:

Right

Because sucking up to hostile foreign gov't for cash, and "mis-use of funds" when you're not outright embezzling, is "well regulated"

- DSK

Organised crime is always preferable to dis-organised crime.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, LB 15 said:

Organised crime is always preferable to dis-organised crime.

Thanks for that....I just dropped my last f'ng slice of Sicilian pizza right on top of my dog's head.....

Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, LB 15 said:

Organised crime is always preferable to dis-organised crime.

You can make a much bigger profit with a smile and a gun than you can ever do with just a smile

- DSK

Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, El Mariachi said:

Thanks for that....I just dropped my last f'ng slice of Sicilian pizza right on top of my dog's head.....

Sicilian pizza in Mexico? Must be about as good as the tacos in Chicago. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, quod umbra said:

Well again, you are relying on The New York Times as the source.
I am not so sure that is a winner.
Ms. James went after the NRA because she wants to see The Second Amendment overturned.
I think it best to let it all play out and see what is what.

Did Wayne declare bankruptcy?  Were they fucking offeth with donor funds?  Yes or no?

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, quod umbra said:

Well again, you are relying on The New York Times as the source.
I am not so sure that is a winner.
Ms. James went after the NRA because she wants to see The Second Amendment overturned.
I think it best to let it all play out and see what is what.

I’m sure you have evidence for your accusations. You’re not just making up motives other than prosecuting financial and fiducial crimes because it’s her job, right?

And if her personal opinions incentivized her, does that mean the NRA can commit crimes without penalty?

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, phillysailor said:

I’m sure you have evidence for your accusations. You’re not just making up motives other than prosecuting financial and fiducial crimes because it’s his job, right?

Tish James made it pretty clear, early on, why she was beginning action against the NRA.
The NRA filed for bankruptcy to avoid punitive damages Ms. James was seeking.
The once mighty New York Times is now a disreputable rag.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Lark said:

You have it backward.  The constitution requires Congress to regulate the militias.   The NRA regulates Congress.   

To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress;

 

Uhgh. Not all militias are state militias. At the time the framers crafted The Constitution and Bill of Rights there were numerous private militias.... Green Mountain Boys being one such example.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I am waiting for an explanation of just how the NRA is a well regulated militia.  A well regulated fund raising operation I would agree with.  The 2A bullshit just never ends.

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, d'ranger said:

I am waiting for an explanation of just how the NRA is a well regulated militia.  A well regulated fund raising operation I would agree with.  The 2A bullshit just never ends.

Because "well regulated militias" hire lobbyists and deploy massive public-relations campaigns to influence the government

- DSK

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, d'ranger said:

I am waiting for an explanation of just how the NRA is a well regulated militia.  A well regulated fund raising operation I would agree with.  The 2A bullshit just never ends.

I'd say more well-oiled than well regulated. It seems they had very few regulations that applied to the top of the pyramid.

Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, quod umbra said:

Uhgh. Not all militias are state militias. At the time the framers crafted The Constitution and Bill of Rights there were numerous private militias.... Green Mountain Boys being one such example.

That's incorrect. They were a militia that was recognized and armed by the colonial gov'ts of New Hampshire and Connecticut, both of who wanted to keep New York from grabbing the territory; and later commissioned by the Continental Congress.

It's also the unofficial name of the Vermont national Guard, which I would guess is actually a well regulated militia nowadays

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Green_Mountain_Boys

You RWNJs would really benefit from learning some actual real history

- DSK

Link to post
Share on other sites

If any one of you gun fearers & haters & freedom despisers here think for one second that the possible demise and/or extinction of the NRA will suddenly stop blacks from murdering 6000 other blacks per annum, over night....or that 380 million LEGALLY owned firearms will immediately be gobbled up by that Great Magnet Fairy in the Sky, or that suicides will drop to three a month, or that crazy people and the Red Flagged will trade in their guns for foam blow darts, or that the hypocritical Hollywooders and 'Rapper's will finally stop making big coin off of guns and criminal behavior....y'all in for one HUGE fuking surprise. Trust me on this one. The NRA is simply the biggest and now possibly the fugliest gorilla in the aquarium right now. But unbeknownst to obviously many of you Venezuelan wannabes......there's a lot more pro 2nd Amendment organizations out there that will quickly (and more efficiently & responsibly & family friendly-ey) take the NRA's place. And I for one.....actually welcome that change of the guard......

Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, El Mariachi said:

) take the NRA's place. And I for one.....actually welcome that change of the guard......

Well, good. Would be nice to see some grifters do some hard time.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, quod umbra said:

Uhgh. Not all militias are state militias. At the time the framers crafted The Constitution and Bill of Rights there were numerous private militias.... Green Mountain Boys being one such example.

The intent of the framers is pretty clear from the constitution.  The Declaration make their fears clear, as do writings by individual framers    Of course they were a disparate lot, as the botched slavery compromise shows.   A reading of Revolutionary war history reveals what life experiences formed their opinions, though some also knew European / English history.  They lacked a competent soothsayer and the document wasn't future proofed especially well. 

They saw militia navies and privateers fail to secure even harbors and coastal water.   They realized warships required a lead to build and converted merchant cruisers were limited to economic warfare.   Therefore they allowed a professional national navy.

They were very concerned about a standing army being used by a central government to control the population.  They forbid barracking in private residences.  They forbid Congress from funding the army for more then two years at a time because they wanted it to go away when no longer in use.  Several of the founding fathers did bless the creation of West Point a decade after the Constitution was written, suggesting some recognized in retrospect the need for knowledge of the sciences of fortification, siege and artillery to be institutionalized in a permanent professional brain trust.   That is the closest I found for acceptance of a professional army by the framers.   In 1784 the US army was 84 soldiers warehousing a few cannon.   

As you said, militias had proven fairly competent for defensive land warfare, though they rarely had the backbone to stand against a bayonet charge by British regulars.  They did see problems where the militias were uncoordinated and lacked a cohesive strategy.   At that time all states were equally vulnerable to invasion, none were inland or islands.   Therefore militias were adequate, but they realized national oversight was needed.   

They were also worried states might coerce other states beyond unequal representation in Congress.   To mitigate this they forbid states from entering treaties with each other and prevented infringement of interstate commerce.   They also assigned Congress the role of regulating various militias and forbid states from raising standing armies of their own.   This was intended to prevent a Kentucky Militia from imposing their will on Ohio, or on Congress.    This clause was added precisely to prevent small militias from trying to overthrow an election by the people.   The electoral congress was a misguided attempt to prevent obvious charismatic idiots and frauds from gaining (or gaming) the popular vote.  It has never worked and should be abandoned. 

A casual reading of history shows the constitution is misinterpreted by conservative judges.   The framers considered militias to be key to local defense.  They had no intention of meddling in foreign lands, with the single stated exception of controlling piracy on the high seas.   They failed to consider evolving technologies such as automatic weapons, mines (aside from sappers), rifled artillery, air craft, etc. that would someday be necessary for defense.  The second amendment made no mention of them at all, but the militias they imagined clearly need them.   

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Raz'r said:

Well, good. Would be nice to see some grifters do some hard time.

Serious question.....how do we stop our American  politicians...from being 'boughten' and paid for by 'special interest groups, companies & corporations'? Isn't there a certain rather important sentence somewhere that reads 'By the people, of the People & for the People ? Or something?.....

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, El Mariachi said:

Serious question.....how do we stop our American  politicians...from being 'boughten' and paid for by 'special interest groups, companies & corporations'? Isn't there a certain rather important sentence somewhere that reads 'By the people, of the People & for the People ? Or something?.....

You must be responding to someone who is advocating restriction on free speech. I'm just enjoying a little schadenfreude at the pickle slimy-Wayne and his slimy team find themselves in. A little IRS enema is coming their way. Sounds like quite a bit of unreported "income" flowing to that cadre of grifters.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, quod umbra said:

Tish James made it pretty clear, early on, why she was beginning action against the NRA.
The NRA filed for bankruptcy to avoid punitive damages Ms. James was seeking.
The once mighty New York Times is now a disreputable rag.

You said Ms James wants to abolish the 2nd Amendment.

I’m asking you to back that up. 

I know that she has called the NRA a criminal operation and even a terrorist organization, but she has backed that up with an investigation that has revealed that mismanagement & financial crimes by the NRA defrauded gun owners and weakened the legitimacy of their advocacy for gun owners & the second Amendment.

Furthermore, it revealed that the NRAs goals were not those of most gun owners, but instead on arms manufacturers profits and personal enrichment.

Show me how prosecuting the NRA for defrauding Americans who support gun rights shows she wants the 2nd overturned.

Ie, you’re full of shit.

Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, Raz'r said:

You must be responding to someone who is advocating restriction on free speech. I'm just enjoying a little schadenfreude at the pickle slimy-Wayne and his slimy team find themselves in. A little IRS enema is coming their way. Sounds like quite a bit of unreported "income" flowing to that cadre of grifters.

Actually....it was a serious question. To everyone here. I'm getting a bit sick & tired of our elected officials putting Corporate money before Main Street......

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, El Mariachi said:

Actually....it was a serious question. To everyone here. I'm getting a bit sick & tired of our elected officials putting Corporate money before Main Street......

Left turn, U turn, anything but talk about Wayne-turn?

Are you a Wayne fanboi or something? How did you get that from anything I wrote?

Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, Raz'r said:

You must be responding to someone who is advocating restriction on free speech. I'm just enjoying a little schadenfreude at the pickle slimy-Wayne and his slimy team find themselves in. A little IRS enema is coming their way. Sounds like quite a bit of unreported "income" flowing to that cadre of grifters.

I would recommend an internal audit conducted by hard working blue collar NRA members armed with the prerequisite  AR 15 you will prolly find Wayne on the yacht they all worked so hard to pay for. Let em start there.

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, El Mariachi said:

Actually....it was a serious question. To everyone here. I'm getting a bit sick & tired of our elected officials putting Corporate money before Main Street......

Modest proposals:

audit trail on all legislation, like the red edit lines on word documents.    Each bit of pork has a signature of the person paid to introduce it.

Force legislators to wear the logos of their sponsors on their suits, like nascar drivers.

have legislators work from their districts by zoom.   Let the lobbyists travel to them.

destroy citizens United.   
tax all political money at 100%   

Tax any church politicizing the pulpit.

Regulate political advertising on social media and internet platforms as we used to do when people watched broadcast tv.   
 

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Lark said:

Modest proposals:

audit trail on all legislation, like the red edit lines on word documents.    Each bit of pork has a signature of the person paid to introduce it.

Force legislators to wear the logos of their sponsors on their suits, like nascar drivers.

have legislators work from their districts by zoom.   Let the lobbyists travel to them.

destroy citizens United.   
tax all political money at 100%   

Tax any church politicizing the pulpit.

Regulate political advertising on social media and internet platforms as we used to do when people watched broadcast tv.   
 

Eminently sensible, so it hasn't a chance.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Raz'r said:

Left turn, U turn, anything but talk about Wayne-turn?

Are you a Wayne fanboi or something? How did you get that from anything I wrote?

Man but you couldn't follow a dozen fuking lit up ambulances in a fuking tunnel. Jfc, that question I asked was completely irrelevant and separate from the NRA & La P's predicament. It was....just a....let's fix America question.

 

Sheesh.....

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Ishmael said:

Eminently sensible, so it hasn't a chance.

You sound like my geologist buddy.....slightly jaded.....:P

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, hobie1616 said:

N.R.A. Chief Takes the Stand, With Cracks in His Armor

For three decades, Wayne LaPierre has been the implacable face of the gun lobby, a scourge of the left who argued that giving ground on gun control was akin to giving up on America. So it was remarkable to see the shambolic turn his tenure atop the National Rifle Association has taken showcased last week in federal bankruptcy court in Dallas.

Mr. LaPierre acknowledged that he had secretly taken the N.R.A. into bankruptcy — without telling even his top lieutenants or most of his board — essentially as an end run around attacks from the New York attorney general, who is seeking to shut down the group amid charges of financial mismanagement and corruption. And he made a string of admissions that served largely to underscore the N.R.A.’s disarray and the questions about his own fitness to lead it.

He didn’t know, he testified, that his former chief financial officer had received a $360,000-a-year consulting contract after leaving under a cloud.

He didn’t know that the personal travel agent the N.R.A. had hired to book charter flights for him and his family — the Bahamas was a favorite destination — was charging a 10 percent booking fee on top of a retainer that could reach $26,000 a month.

He didn’t know that one of his former top lieutenants had arranged for his wife to be hired by an N.R.A. contractor, or that her compensation had been billed back to the N.R.A.

And he didn’t fire his personal assistant after it was discovered that she had diverted $40,000 to pay for her son’s wedding and other personal expenses.

The plan is to file fake-bankruptcy to get away cheap from the NY case, then re-organize in Texas. The only question in my mind is if the NY courts can effectively call that BS and nail them anyway. Wayne's embarrassment is a side show.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, Lark said:
36 minutes ago, El Mariachi said:

Actually....it was a serious question. To everyone here. I'm getting a bit sick & tired of our elected officials putting Corporate money before Main Street......

Modest proposals:

audit trail on all legislation, like the red edit lines on word documents.    Each bit of pork has a signature of the person paid to introduce it.

Force legislators to wear the logos of their sponsors on their suits, like nascar drivers.

have legislators work from their districts by zoom.   Let the lobbyists travel to them.

destroy citizens United.   
tax all political money at 100%   

Tax any church politicizing the pulpit.

Regulate political advertising on social media and internet platforms as we used to do when people watched broadcast tv.   

There used to be this thing called "shame" and it affected politicians somewhat less than most professions but they would still avoid blatant scandal over sex or money.

Now, it's like the Jerry Springer Show. Bring it. Outrageously stupid, outrageously drunk, outrageously crooked, dead girls and live boys, soliciting money from evangelical voters to pay for girlfriends abortions...... USAnians have gotten too much of the gov't they deserve

- DSK

Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, El Mariachi said:

One more beautiful custom from Japan.....Seppuku.....

I’d be willing to organize a training camp complete with self test and bouquet of flowers upon successful completion.  

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Lark said:

Modest proposals:

audit trail on all legislation, like the red edit lines on word documents.    Each bit of pork has a signature of the person paid to introduce it.

Force legislators to wear the logos of their sponsors on their suits, like nascar drivers.

have legislators work from their districts by zoom.   Let the lobbyists travel to them.

destroy citizens United.   
tax all political money at 100%   

Tax any church politicizing the pulpit.

Regulate political advertising on social media and internet platforms as we used to do when people watched broadcast tv.   
 

Reinstate the fairness doctrine applicable to all who are using public airwaves to broadcast.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Mark K said:

The plan is to file fake-bankruptcy to get away cheap from the NY case, then re-organize in Texas. The only question in my mind is if the NY courts can effectively call that BS and nail them anyway. Wayne's embarrassment is a side show.  

"Embarassment" issues? Your analysis is incomplete. We have an active (and secret) hemorrhage/triage situation here, within the NRA

 The NRA is pitted against their former PR firm, Ackerman McQueen, in sworn testimony. The bill for the fracas now stands at $58 million, and is accruing significantly.  The Wayne situation is not sustainable...and the (somewhat) honest influence of Chris Cox had left the building.  Wayne is out of control, and something's gotta give here.

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Lark said:

A casual reading of history shows the constitution is misinterpreted by conservative judges.   The framers considered militias to be key to local defense.  They had no intention of meddling in foreign lands, with the single stated exception of controlling piracy on the high seas.   They failed to consider evolving technologies such as automatic weapons, mines (aside from sappers), rifled artillery, air craft, etc. that would someday be necessary for defense.  The second amendment made no mention of them at all, but the militias they imagined clearly need them.   

So when the Massachusetts Supreme Court said that the second amendment only applies to 18th century technology, were they being conservative, or what? I'm glad the US Supreme Court unanimously reversed that nonsense. The principles of the first amendment and fourth amendment apply to modern tech as it comes along. Why would the second amendment be any different?

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Excoded Tom said:

Why would the second amendment be any different?

Because it doesn't work, as applied. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

It was the one bit of shortsighted specificity the founders demonstrated. They wrote everything else for the ages but they didn't see past muskets and villages when they framed the 2A.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, SloopJonB said:

It was the one bit of shortsighted specificity the founders demonstrated. They wrote everything else for the ages but they didn't see past muskets and villages when they framed the 2A.

Do the righties abandon their originalist dogma when it comes to arms?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm surprised that the believers in originalist dogma even understand the concept of constitutional amendments.

If the constitution was so perfect as originally written, why has it been amended 27 times - and attempted even more times?

By the mere fact of including an amending formula the framers recognized that it was an imperfect, living document.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, AJ Oliver said:

The NRA bankruptcy is a dodge so they can

reincorporate in Texas with its more compliant court system, 

A dodge that likely will backfire on Wayne and the Grifters (not an early 60’s beach band)

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...