EMERGENCY! Social Security Officially Stripped MILLIONS of Their Gun Rights...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sEMTwddSECI
Go to youtube page for supporting links.
Quote from: blades on December 23, 2016, 09:43:55 AM
EMERGENCY! Social Security Officially Stripped MILLIONS of Their Gun Rights...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sEMTwddSECI
Go to youtube page for supporting links.
For how long?
It's a regulation: Obama takes them away; Trump gives them back
Quote from: Ghoulardi on December 23, 2016, 09:53:52 AM
For how long?
It's a regulation: Obama takes them away; Trump gives them back
So says the prophet. Or shouldn't we wait and see?
Cause trump has said he sees no problem taking away someones 2nd without due process.
Quote from: blades on December 23, 2016, 09:43:55 AM
EMERGENCY! Social Security Officially Stripped MILLIONS of Their Gun Rights...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sEMTwddSECI
Go to youtube page for supporting links.
I don't know who's dumber, you or her?
Presidents Do Not Write Law, Only Congress Can!!!I appreciate her passion, I despise her ignorance of the law, and yours as well!
Quote from: blades on December 23, 2016, 09:57:45 AM
So says the prophet. Or shouldn't we wait and see?
Cause trump has said he sees no problem taking away someones 2nd without due process.
Yah, panic, that'll get a lot done.
As far as what Trump says--for which you provided no proof--I'll once again fall back on your the argument you gave Solar with the Glenn Beck video: One sound bite out of how many hours of video?
'Sides, you think Trump wants to be a one term president? He will be if he starts tangling with the second amendment
Quote from: blades on December 23, 2016, 09:57:45 AM
So says the prophet. Or shouldn't we wait and see?
Cause trump has said he sees no problem taking away someones 2nd without due process.
Back up your post with a link. You said it you back it up with link(s).
Quote from: Solar on December 23, 2016, 10:03:55 AM
I don't know who's dumber, you or her?
Presidents Do Not Write Law, Only Congress Can!!!
I appreciate her passion, I despise her ignorance of the law, and yours as well!
Sorry that I thought this to be a serious thing that people should be aware of...But hey at least I didn't make it about Trump.
will have to go back and look to see if she said he was making law. Because Gman said it was about regs. Or of course it's maybe another case of fake news.
Either way an un-elected gov. employee doesn't have authority to take away someones rights...as far as I know...I am a fcking idiot after all
Quote from: walkstall on December 23, 2016, 10:14:50 AM
Back up your post with a link. You said it you back it up with link(s).
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sd8kFGsc-Z0&t=6s
Quote from: blades on December 23, 2016, 10:18:13 AM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sd8kFGsc-Z0&t=6s
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DNDcd1Fe5lg
Quote from: blades on December 23, 2016, 10:18:13 AM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sd8kFGsc-Z0&t=6s
As you said in the Beware The Overcorrection thread, post #19:
the video was a set up in an interview he did...woop de do
this is like when the fake con cons and libs talk about cruz shutting down the government with a fillibuster and then only quoting that he read green eggs and ham..
what did he say the other 23 hrs he spoke??
like
beck Thrump has thousands of hrs of programming and all you got is
he cried for 3 mins of it... a soundbite made after one of the worst massacres in modern history
what did he say the rest of the time???
Quote from: blades on December 23, 2016, 10:18:13 AM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sd8kFGsc-Z0&t=6s
I see no place that Trump said without due process in that youtube.
Quote from: blades on December 23, 2016, 10:16:41 AM
Sorry that I thought this to be a serious thing that people should be aware of...But hey at least I didn't make it about Trump.
will have to go back and look to see if she said he was making law. Because Gman said it was about regs. Or of course it's maybe another case of fake news.
Either way an un-elected gov. employee doesn't have authority to take away someones rights...as far as I know...I am a fcking idiot after all
Oh, really? What color is the sky in your private world?
How about the Supreme Court justices? Are they elected? Can they take away your rights?
What about federal judges?
Quote from: blades on December 23, 2016, 10:16:41 AM
Sorry that I thought this to be a serious thing that people should be aware of...But hey at least I didn't make it about Trump.
will have to go back and look to see if she said he was making law. Because Gman said it was about regs. Or of course it's maybe another case of fake news.
Either way an un-elected gov. employee doesn't have authority to take away someones rights...as far as I know...I am a fcking idiot after all
I think this is one thing the majority of us can agree on.
You fling poo and hope it will stick.
Quote from: blades on December 23, 2016, 10:16:41 AM
Either way an un-elected gov. employee doesn't have authority to take away someones rights...as far as I know...I am a fcking idiot after all
Let's recap, shall we?
Quote2nd Amendment
EMERGENCY! Social Security Officially Stripped MILLIONS of Their Gun Rights...
So what did you do again? You ran with the emotion of another moron that doesn't understand how laws are created.
So quit trying to spin your way out of it, everyone saw what you did here.
Like I said earlier, know the subject you're posting about, because it's obvious you haven't a grasp on this one, and neither does the bimbo up in arms over it.
To be clear, what happened here was illegal and simply is not law regardless of what the twit says about it.
Like Obozo signing an EO stating the Bill of Rights no longer exists. Regardless, it will never be law, no more than this bull shit.
Quote from: Ghoulardi on December 23, 2016, 10:51:53 AM
Oh, really? What color is the sky in your private world?
How about the Supreme Court justices? Are they elected? Can they take away your rights?
What about federal judges?
There was a time when the rule of thumb was that SCOTUS's job was to determine if a law was Constitutional..Today I have no idea.
so I will go with ...NO ...they can't
Quote from: Solar on December 23, 2016, 11:05:03 AM
Let's recap, shall we?
So what did you do again? You ran with the emotion of another moron that doesn't understand how laws are created.
So quit trying to spin your way out of it, everyone saw what you did here.
Like I said earlier, know the subject you're posting about, because it's obvious you haven't a grasp on this one, and neither does the bimbo up in arms over it.
To be clear, what happened here was illegal and simply is not law regardless of what the twit says about it.
Like Obozo signing an EO stating the Bill of Rights no longer exists. Regardless, it will never be law, no more than this bull shit.
What I was trying to do was bring what seemed like an important issue regarding the 2nd to everyone's attention. They can choose to follow or not. And thank you for clarifying some details in the video, That is a benefit of these forums.
And the title was the title for the video...not my words.
Now as to the girl talking, Yes she is a little boisterous to say the least. she is here in Mo. with me and she goes over a lot of detail on Mo. legislation and backs it up with the written legislation. So very informative most of the time. Mixed with a few foul mouth rants
Quote from: blades on December 23, 2016, 11:21:58 AM
What I was trying to do was bring what seemed like an important issue regarding the 2nd to everyone's attention. They can choose to follow or not. And thank you for clarifying some details in the video, That is a benefit of these forums.
Then your title should have been in the form of a question.
QuoteAnd the title was the title for the video...not my words.
You approved it by posting it verbatim, so they became your words.
QuoteNow as to the girl talking, Yes she is a little boisterous to say the least. she is here in Mo. with me and she goes over a lot of detail on Mo. legislation and backs it up with the written legislation. So very informative most of the time. Mixed with a few foul mouth rants
I'm most certain she does, but she really needs to stick with what she knows and leave the conspiracy shit to the Alex Jones of the world.
She even broached the question as to why no one else was addressing such an important topic, even chastised other organizations for not talking about it.
Guess why no one else is talking about it? It's not law and has absolutely no bite whatsoever!
Come on, think for yourself, do some research before you post this nonsense!
Quote from: Solar on December 23, 2016, 12:34:22 PM
Then your title should have been in the form of a question.
You approved it by posting it verbatim, so they became your words.
I'm most certain she does, but she really needs to stick with what she knows and leave the conspiracy shit to the Alex Jones of the world.
She even broached the question as to why no one else was addressing such an important topic, even chastised other organizations for not talking about it.
Guess why no one else is talking about it? It's not law and has absolutely no bite whatsoever!
Come on, think for yourself, do some research before you post this nonsense!
The title of the thread was the subject...The title for the video was not mine to change ...or was it? Is that legal that I change/edit their title.
If this is not happening that's one thing , But it seems as if Obama is trying anything he can get away with before leaving. Now we can keep track and see if anything comes of it.
Just thought it was worth knowing about.
Quote from: blades on December 23, 2016, 12:42:51 PM
The title of the thread was the subject...The title for the video was not mine to change ...or was it? Is that legal that I change/edit their title.
You're the OP, (Original Poster) you create the title of the thread. All I ask, is that it reflect upon the subject so search engines make better use when posting it.
QuoteIf this is not happening that's one thing , But it seems as if Obama is trying anything he can get away with before leaving. Now we can keep track and see if anything comes of it.
Just thought it was worth knowing about.
It's not news that the marxists are trying to make life miserable for all Americans, but regardless, only Congress can write law, it really is that simple.
Keep that in mind whenever you come across novice rants. Just because someone has a website, is by no means proof of their intellect.
Quote from: Solar on December 23, 2016, 12:48:32 PM
You're the OP, (Original Poster) you create the title of the thread. All I ask, is that it reflect upon the subject so search engines make better use when posting it.
It's not news that the marxists are trying to make life miserable for all Americans, but regardless, only Congress can write law, it really is that simple.
Keep that in mind whenever you come across novice rants. Just because someone has a website, is by no means proof of their intellect.
The subject is the 2nd Amendment and I hope to post future relevant info. on the subject. So that's the clearest title I could come up with.
She may not be the sharpest to detail but this is happening and should be kept track of.
I have not seen this on any other source, have you?
Quote from: blades on December 23, 2016, 12:59:47 PM
The subject is the 2nd Amendment and I hope to post future relevant info. on the subject. So that's the clearest title I could come up with.
It does not belong on Poli. Also a better title would have been 2nd Amendment issue?
QuoteShe may not be the sharpest to detail but this is happening and should be kept track of.
I have not seen this on any other source, have you?
No, and for good reason, it's not anything that effects law. Do you even know what the Bill of Rights is?
Quote from: Solar on December 23, 2016, 01:06:19 PM
It does not belong on Poli. Also a better title would have been 2nd Amendment issue?
No, and for good reason, it's not anything that effects law. Do you even know what the Bill of Rights is?
Now on that, he can show you a link.
Quote from: blades on December 23, 2016, 11:15:30 AM
There was a time when the rule of thumb was that SCOTUS's job was to determine if a law was Constitutional..Today I have no idea.
so I will go with ...NO ...they can't
Really? What about Obamacare? That's constitutional--according to the SCOTUS. Does it violate your rights?
Quote from: Solar on December 23, 2016, 01:06:19 PM
It does not belong on Poli. Also a better title would have been 2nd Amendment issue?
No, and for good reason, it's not anything that effects law. Do you even know what the Bill of Rights is?
Could you please move it for me.
And isn't that the point, that Obama is doing every end around the law he can think of to undermine the Bill of Rights.
And could you advise , Is it legal for me to change the title of anything I get from another source?
Quote from: blades on December 23, 2016, 01:28:19 PM
Could you please move it for me.
And isn't that the point, that Obama is doing every end around the law he can think of to undermine the Bill of Rights.
And could you advise , Is it legal for me to change the title of anything I get from another source?
Our title is not their title, so whatever you use as a title here is no one else's business, you can't change their title unless you actually plagiarize their work and call it your own.
For All the Child Left Behinds...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CayQgWVjhh0&feature=youtu.be
Quote from: Solar on December 23, 2016, 02:48:14 PM
Our title is not their title, so whatever you use as a title here is no one else's business, you can't change their title unless you actually plagiarize their work and call it your own.
Just how long do you think blades has been on the net?
From what I can see, he has no way of cutting through the BS from the MSM and thinking for himself. My youngest grandson knows all about what blades is asking in almost every post. Blades needs to take some day classes from a 15 year old Conservative.
Quote from: RURdy4It on December 23, 2016, 03:00:13 PM
For All the Child Left Behinds...
This poster is say blades is part of her BS from the very start. :lol:
ONE of her Subs as she calls blades.
Quote from: RURdy4It on December 23, 2016, 03:00:13 PM
For All the Child Left Behinds...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CayQgWVjhh0&feature=youtu.be
So, mouth, other than popping off in a youtube channel what have you done?
Also, do you really think you win people over to your cause by calling them names? To quote an expression that's all the rage: that's liberal.
Also, you may want to learn the difference between a policy and a law, what you keep pointing to as a law is a policy. Solar is right only congress can make laws.
Quote
Section 8. To make all laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into execution the foregoing powers, and all other powers vested by this Constitution in the government of the United States, or in any department or officer thereof.
https://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/articlei
Quote from: walkstall on December 23, 2016, 03:12:55 PM
This poster is say blades is part of her BS from the very start. :lol:
ONE of her Subs as she calls blades.
I told you I watched her before..so of course I am a sub...shes in Mo. and goes over a lot of local stuff. So it really helps to keep informed .
Quote from: blades on December 23, 2016, 03:58:51 PM
I told you I watched her before..so of course I am a sub...shes in Mo. and goes over a lot of local stuff. So it really helps to keep informed .
DLN. What's up, Tommy? Things get boring at No Holds Barred Liberal Forum?
Quote from: blades on December 23, 2016, 03:58:51 PM
I told you I watched her before..so of course I am a sub...shes in Mo. and goes over a lot of local stuff. So it really helps to keep informed .
Your just a Troll!! :lol:
Quote from: walkstall on December 23, 2016, 04:10:24 PM
Your just a Troll!! :lol:
Aren't we all...
I just try and protect our rights and freedom while doing it.
Quote from: blades on December 23, 2016, 04:23:09 PM
Aren't we all...
No we're not. We usually respect each other.
Quote
I just try and protect our rights and freedom while doing it.
And how do you protect rights and freedoms by trolling?
Quote from: Ghoulardi on December 23, 2016, 04:33:10 PM
No we're not. We usually respect each other.
And how do you protect rights and freedoms by trolling?
Well case in point is this thread...Did you know this happened??
If so why didn't you ring the bell??
Quote from: blades on December 23, 2016, 04:43:15 PM
Well case in point is this thread...Did you know this happened??
If so why didn't you ring the bell??
So now people know Tommy, big smell.
Your girlfriend flapped her yap about it and what did it prove? Did it stop it from going into policy?
What did she do besides running her mouth, DLN?
Write a letter to her congressman/senator? Start a PAC?
Start a fundme page for legal fees to fight it in court?
No.
Yet I notice she's real quick to condemn others lack of action.
Quote from: Ghoulardi on December 23, 2016, 04:46:39 PM
So now people know Tommy, big smell.
Your girlfriend flapped her yap about it and what did it prove? Did it stop it from going into policy?
What did she do besides running her mouth, DLN?
Write a letter to her congressman/senator? Start a PAC?
No.
Yet I notice she's real quick to condemn others lack of action.
You should concern yourself with what you do. Not others. You wouldn't want to get mistaken for a liberal.
Quote from: blades on December 23, 2016, 04:59:52 PM
You should concern yourself with what you do. Not others...That's how liberals behave.
You mean like she did when she criticized everyone for lack of action, Tommy? Or when she made the video excoriating the board? She should concern herself with what she does. Not others. That's how liberals behave, at least according to you.
Quote from: Ghoulardi on December 23, 2016, 05:02:26 PM
You mean like she did when she criticized everyone for lack of action, Tommy? Or when she made the video excoriating the board? She should concern herself with what she does. Not others. That's how liberals behave, at least according to you.
Do you have anything to say about the topic or are you going to spend all your time avoiding it?
Quote from: blades on December 23, 2016, 05:44:29 PM
Do you have anything to say about the topic or are you going to spend all your time avoiding it?
I thought we were discussing the topic. After all, DLN, your girlfriend poked her nose in it, didn't she Tommy? She also obviously doesn't know the difference between a policy and a law.
So again, if she's going to excoriate others for lack of action, what's she done? (On topic Tommy as it was in her response video)
Quote from: RURdy4It on December 23, 2016, 03:00:13 PM
For All the Child Left Behinds...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CayQgWVjhh0&feature=youtu.be
Let's cut the crap! Agencies do not write law, they write rules/policy/code, no matter how much you want to believe it.
Yet you have the audacity to call me a dumbass? Only Congress can write law Bimbette, and where the 2nd Amendment is concerned, no law is to be written, yet Congress has found ways to get around it.
What you're putting forward is that any group can dictate law through simple prescript, not even Democracy, all of which is illegal.
So no matter the office or the rule, the simple fact that they were illegal in the first place, means they are null and void at time of implementation.
Like I said, I appreciate your passion, but for the love of God, stick to subjects you actually understand! This is not one of them!
Quote from: Ghoulardi on December 23, 2016, 05:50:45 PM
I thought we were discussing the topic. After all, DLN, your girlfriend poked her nose in it, didn't she Tommy? She also obviously doesn't know the difference between a policy and a law.
So again, if she's going to excoriate others for lack of action, what's she done? (On topic Tommy as it was in her response video)
So I take it blades/Tommy is not only a Troll but a Shill also. :lol:
Your girl called it an "executive action," Tommy
Here's what NPR said about executive actions:
Quote
By contrast, a presidential executive action is kind of a catch-all term, writes NBC, which quoted an unnamed administration official in 2011 as saying: "It just means something the executive branch does. The use of any of a number of tools in the executive branch's toolbox."
Political writer Tom Murse says: "[Most] executive actions carry no legal weight. Those that do actually set policy can be invalidated by the courts or undone by legislation passed by Congress."
Read more at http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2014/11/20/365467914/so-just-what-is-an-executive-action-anyway
So, inquiring minds want to know, she said in the video she hadn't looked up how to undo an executive action. Why not? Because she'd realize there's nothing to fear and she'd have to find something else to scare people so they would donate to her site?
The Facebook site requesting donations:
https://m.facebook.com/RURdy4It/posts/830526820419333
Quote from: Ghoulardi on December 23, 2016, 10:44:06 PM
Your girl called it an "executive action," Tommy
Here's what NPR said about executive actions:
Read more at http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2014/11/20/365467914/so-just-what-is-an-executive-action-anyway
So, inquiring minds want to know, she said in the video she hadn't looked up how to undo an executive action. Why not? Because she'd realize there's nothing to fear and she'd have to find something else to scare people so they would donate to her site?
The Facebook site requesting donations:
https://m.facebook.com/RURdy4It/posts/830526820419333
Noooo, the sky is falling! She's a drama queen on a mission.
How many times have I said just that, that it is not law no matter how much she proclaims it to the contrary.
What is it with these stupid people, they seem to be attracted to the same flame, all need a boogeyman, all see the end of times just waiting to pounce?
Great discovery Counselor, it appears she has an alternative method to her madness, or rather stupidity.
Money, but then, isn't that usually the case where these people focus on a niche emotion?
Quote from: Solar on December 24, 2016, 05:18:07 AM
Noooo, the sky is falling! She's a drama queen on a mission.
How many times have I said just that, that it is not law no matter how much she proclaims it to the contrary.
What is it with these stupid people, they seem to be attracted to the same flame, all need a boogeyman, all see the end of times just waiting to pounce?
Great discovery Counselor, it appears she has an alternative method to her madness, or rather stupidity.
Money, but then, isn't that usually the case where these people focus on a niche emotion?
Since no one can agree what it is, so for the sake of this discussion lets call it jelly beans.
Well according to jellybeans president Obama has sidestepped the law and violated the 2nd amendment rights of a large part of the people of this country.
Are you one of these people??
Based on the responses I can say with confidence that most of you agree with it and would like me to stop talking about it...
Or am I wrong
Quote from: blades on December 24, 2016, 05:34:26 AM
Since no one can agree what it is, so for the sake of this discussion lets call it jelly beans.
Well according to jellybeans president Obama has sidestepped the law and violated the 2nd amendment rights of a large part of the people of this country.
Are you one of these people??
Based on the responses I can say with confidence that most of you agree with it and would like me to stop talking about it...
Or am I wrong
And even though he's sidestepped the law--for his last month in office--if you bothered to read the highlighted portion of my last post, you'd realize its easily repairable by the next president with legislation.
Oh, and here's where little miss no one acts can be an example for the rest of us, it can also be undone through the courts,
Now let's see the drama queen put her actions where her mouth is.
Quote from: Ghoulardi on December 24, 2016, 05:41:25 AM
And even though he's sidestepped the law--for his last month in office--if you bothered to read the highlighted portion of my last post, you'd realize its easily repairable by the next president with legislation.
Oh, and here's where little miss no one acts can be an example for the rest of us, it can also be undone through the courts,
Now let's see the drama queen put her actions where her mouth is.
Why are you defending Obama???
Quote from: blades on December 24, 2016, 05:53:49 AM
Why are you defending Obama???
Why are you defending someone who hasn't the ovaries to debate her position on the board, but would rather post a one-sided YouTube video where no one has a chance for rebuttal?
To me that's pretty low.
Quote from: Ghoulardi on December 24, 2016, 05:56:32 AM
Why are you defending someone who hasn't the ovaries to debate her position on the board, but would rather post a one-sided YouTube video where no one has a chance for rebuttal?
To me that's pretty low.
How did I defend her???I just posted the only source that I could find for this subject.
So why are you defending Obamas unlawful action...And what proof do you have Trump or anyone else will repeal it?...Or is that just a guess on your part
Quote from: blades on December 24, 2016, 05:34:26 AM
Since no one can agree what it is, so for the sake of this discussion lets call it jelly beans.
Well according to jellybeans president Obama has sidestepped the law and violated the 2nd amendment rights of a large part of the people of this country.
Are you one of these people??
Based on the responses I can say with confidence that most of you agree with it and would like me to stop talking about it...
Or am I wrong
Call it what you like, no one ever said it wasn't real, and that the Marxist didn't try to take action against the 2nd, or rather someone under his command.
However, none of that matters because it's nothing more than a verbal edict by a self anointed king with 26 days left in power.
Let me see if I can get through to you just how stupid it is to get excited over this.
Do you know why we have a Bill of Rights and just how powerful the B of A is over all three branches incluing SCOTUS?
No you do not, or you wouldn't have posted this BS.
Here's your assignment, read the Federalist papers on the B of A, understand why we have it and what it means if it ever disappeared, then come back and tell us just how much damage an executive action can do.
It's your ignorance on the subject that's the real danger, your willingness to react emotionally while the left is doing real damage, but keeps you distracted with this nonsense.
Quote from: blades on December 24, 2016, 06:09:06 AM
How did I defend her???I just posted the only source that I could find for this subject.
So why are you defending Obamas unlawful action...And what proof do you have Trump or anyone else will repeal it?...Or is that just a guess on your part
Why are you defending drama queen's violation of the way a republic works? Republics thrive on debate, not presenting one side, that's propaganda, and by continuing to whine about it your defending her posting propaganda.
Quote from: blades on December 24, 2016, 06:09:06 AM
How did I defend her???I just posted the only source that I could find for this subject.
So why are you defending Obamas unlawful action...And what proof do you have Trump or anyone else will repeal it?...Or is that just a guess on your part
Cut the bull shit Blades, you ran back over there to alert the twit that she had been challenged, so she came over here to get us to hear her nonsensical half hour emotional rant over why we're stupid for not getting emotional over something completely meaningless.
Yes, dumb ass, you left a trail of dirty underwear to follow.
Quote from: Solar on December 24, 2016, 06:11:51 AM
Call it what you like, no one ever said it wasn't real, and that the Marxist didn't try to take action against the 2nd, or rather someone under his command.
However, none of that matters because it's nothing more than a verbal edict by a self anointed king with 26 days left in power.
Let me see if I can get through to you just how stupid it is to get excited over this.
Do you know why we have a Bill of Rights and just how powerful the B of A is over all three branches incluing SCOTUS?
No you do not, or you wouldn't have posted this BS.
Here's your assignment, read the Federalist papers on the B of A, understand why we have it and what it means if it ever disappeared, then come back and tell us just how much damage an executive action can do.
It's your ignorance on the subject that's the real danger, your willingness to react emotionally while the left is doing real damage, but keeps you distracted with this nonsense.
How is posting the only source for this action being emotional??
Like you said it has happened, So what becomes of it has yet to be seen.
But the emotional responses trying to discredit something that has happened are telling...
How about we just relax and see what becomes of it.
In other words lets wait until confiscation start and go from there.
Quote from: Ghoulardi on December 24, 2016, 06:13:53 AM
Why are you defending drama queen's violation of the way a republic works? Republics thrive on debate, not presenting one side, that's propaganda, and by continuing to whine about it your defending her posting propaganda.
Since you seem to believe that Trump will reverse this please provide something that says Trump even knows what this is let alone will repeal it?
Not to do so might confirm your defense and support of Obama
Quote from: blades on December 24, 2016, 06:18:43 AM
How is posting the only source for this action being emotional??
When your panicing before you know the facts...that's emotional
Quote
Like you said it has happened, So what becomes of it has yet to be seen.
So let's speculate, bounce off the walls for 20 minutes, and find we're in the same place, right?
Quote
But the emotional responses trying to discredit something that has happened are telling...
You mean like drama queens emotional response to the facts? Very telling...
Quote
How about we just relax and see what becomes of it.
In other words lets wait until confiscation start and go from there.
Here we are, back to the sky is falling
Quote from: blades on December 24, 2016, 06:18:43 AM
How is posting the only source for this action being emotional??
Like you said it has happened, So what becomes of it has yet to be seen.
But the emotional responses trying to discredit something that has happened are telling...
How about we just relax and see what becomes of it.
In other words lets wait until confiscation start and go from there.
Really, then how did she find it? Yes, it's been posted about by the NRA, but like most thinking Americans, they knew it was nothing to get excited over, that there was much bigger issues at hand.
Do your own search and quit playing the damned fool.
Sooo, did you look up the relevance of the Bill of Rights yet?
Quote from: blades on December 24, 2016, 06:24:03 AM
Since you seem to believe that Trump will reverse this please provide something that says Trump even knows what this is let alone will repeal it?
Not to do so might confirm your defense and support of Obama
Because it was an illegal action and does not require Trump undoing anything.
The moment this is challenged in court, it will be tossed in the trash, it has no basis in law!
Quote from: Ghoulardi on December 24, 2016, 06:13:53 AM
Why are you defending drama queen's violation of the way a republic works? Republics thrive on debate, not presenting one side, that's propaganda, and by continuing to whine about it your defending her posting propaganda.
Not a response Tommy as always you dodge the issue
Quote from: Solar on December 24, 2016, 06:29:55 AM
Really, then how did she find it? Yes, it's been posted about by the NRA, but like most thinking Americans, they knew it was nothing to get excited over, that there was much bigger issues at hand.
Do your own search and quit playing the damned fool.
Sooo, did you look up the relevance of the Bill of Rights yet?
Yes I can tell from the topics in the discussion that there are for more important things that the BoR's and the 2nd...
You have your priorities and I have mine...and Hilary and Harry are far down on my list since they are GONE and no longer relevant.
Quote from: blades on December 24, 2016, 06:37:43 AM
Yes I can tell from the topics in the discussion that there are for more important things that the BoR's and the 2nd...
When you can get the information from someone that knows the difference between a policy and a law let us know. Also let us know when you find someone who has the courage to debate their claims.
Quote
You have your priorities and I have mine...and Hilary and Harry are far down on my list since they are GONE and no longer relevant.
Yah, but some obscure policy that would be thrown out the minute it hits court, OMG run for your lives
For a self professed consitutional conservative you sure don't know how the constitution works
Rather than pushing panic buttons and sounding alarm claxions, all you have to do is a Google search.
Quote
The NRA has already prepared proposals for corrective action, and we certainly hope they will be given favorable consideration by the incoming administration.
https://www.nraila.org/articles/20161223/grandma-got-run-over-by-obama-ssa-finalizes-new-gun-prohibition-rule
QuoteWe found several problems with the websites' claims.
• The new policy would not ban all Social Security recipients from owning guns. Rather, it would only affect the small fraction who are deemed mentally incompetent, and who are thus are barred from purchasing guns under the law.
• The policy is not yet in force. When we reached out to the Social Security Administration, a spokesman responded, "We are still developing our policy."
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2015/jul/30/blog-posting/websites-say-obama-policy-change-means-seniors-gun/
Note the SSA spokesman caalled it a policy, not a law
Quote from: Ghoulardi on December 24, 2016, 07:24:41 AM
Rather than pushing panic buttons and sounding alarm claxions, all you have to do is a Google search.
https://www.nraila.org/articles/20161223/grandma-got-run-over-by-obama-ssa-finalizes-new-gun-prohibition-rule
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2015/jul/30/blog-posting/websites-say-obama-policy-change-means-seniors-gun/
Note the SSA spokesman caalled it a policy, not a law
why is it you cry like 3 yr old when I won't call out Obama for anything and then when I do, you defend him??
And when are you going to provide proof that Trump even knows about this , let alone reverse it??
Quote from: blades on December 24, 2016, 07:49:01 AM
why is it you cry like 3 yr old when I won't call out Obama for anything and then when I do, you defend him??
Why is it your girlfriend cries like a three year old, but won't allow anybody to rebutt? And you defend her by continuing to spread her inability to know the difference between a policy and a law?
Quote
And when are you going to provide proof that Trump even knows about this , let alone reverse it??
When are you going to answer the above question?
The Sky is Falling.
(https://conservativepoliticalforum.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi1222.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fdd488%2FJequus%2Fa1.gif&hash=c0ef139e8910e94dff5e78bbcafd1e8e8397e0d7)
Quote from: Ghoulardi on December 24, 2016, 08:14:14 AM
Why is it your girlfriend cries like a three year old, but won't allow anybody to rebutt? And you defend her by continuing to spread her inability to know the difference between a policy and a law?
When are you going to answer the above question?
I have no idea why she would do anything. So if you have a problem with her then go to youtube and tell her...or wait here , but your crying to me is just emotional childish behavior.
Obama is trying to sidestep the BofR's and your defending him by trying to discredit the whole issue.
Now please provide the proof to your claim that Trump even knows about this..
Quote from: blades on December 24, 2016, 08:28:51 AM
I have no idea why she would do anything. So if you have a problem with her then go to youtube and tell her...or wait here , but your crying to me is just emotional childish behavior.
Haven't told me why you insist on spreading her policy-law lie. And that does have to do with you.
Quote
Obama is trying to sidestep the BofR's and your defending him by trying to discredit the whole issue.
Now please provide the proof to your claim that Trump even knows about this..
Happily, please provide proof where I claimed Trump knows it.
Quote from: Ghoulardi on December 24, 2016, 08:31:39 AM
Haven't told me why you insist on spreading her policy-law lie. And that does have to do with you.
Happily, please provide proof where I claimed Trump knows it.
Children should be seeen and not heard when adults are talking
Quote from: blades on December 24, 2016, 08:48:10 AM
Children should be seeen and not heard
Does this mean your going to be seen and not heard?
Congratulations, your already rickety credibility just took another blow.
What do you think? An insult will hide how your ginning up this whole SSA has a policy where it'll lead to confiscating guns.
So the proof I claimed Trump knew it please
Quote from: blades on December 24, 2016, 07:49:01 AM
why is it you cry like 3 yr old when I won't call out Obama for anything and then when I do, you defend him??
And when are you going to provide proof that Trump even knows about this , let alone reverse it??
Playing word games is the behavior of a child.
You said he would reverse it...so that would mean he knows it exists
Quote from: Ghoulardi on December 23, 2016, 09:53:52 AM
For how long?
It's a regulation: Obama takes them away; Trump gives them back
Your words not mine
Quote from: blades on December 24, 2016, 06:37:43 AM
Yes I can tell from the topics in the discussion that there are for more important things that the BoR's and the 2nd...
You have your priorities and I have mine...and Hilary and Harry are far down on my list since they are GONE and no longer relevant.
Which came first and why? Bill of Rights or the Constitution?
Once you understand this, you will see why this is pure policy and could never be law and why your little bimbo has her panties in a knot over nothing.
Quote from: blades on December 24, 2016, 08:52:10 AM
Playing word games is the behavior of a child.
You mean like claiming a policy is a law?
Quote
You said he would reverse it...so that would mean he knows it exists
That's not a claim, that's your feeble attempt to interpret a claim.
Quote from: blades on December 24, 2016, 07:49:01 AM
why is it you cry like 3 yr old when I won't call out Obama for anything and then when I do, you defend him??
And when are you going to provide proof that Trump even knows about this , let alone reverse it??
So getting your ass handed to you for crying wolf, is somehow in your view, supporting the Marxist?
What a dumb ass!
Quote from: blades on December 24, 2016, 08:53:49 AM
Your words not mine
And just were does it say Trump knows?
Quote from: Ghoulardi on December 24, 2016, 09:01:22 AM
And just were does it say Trump knows?
That's my point ...How will he give something back if he doesn't even know about it...
So wheres your proof??
Quote from: blades on December 24, 2016, 09:04:00 AM
That's my point ...How will he give something back if he doesn't even know about it...
So wheres your proof??
So where's your proof he doesn't know?
And your lack of understanding English iss astonishing. He could presently not know, but be notified at some future date.
And considering his relationship with the NRA, that's not a far stretch, as, unlike your girlfriend, the NRA is doing something
Now about that policy-law lie you keep spreading
Quote from: blades on December 24, 2016, 09:04:00 AM
That's my point ...How will he give something back if he doesn't even know about it...
So wheres your proof??
:lol:
Two can play this game. Where's your proof that Trump doesn't knows?
Quote from: Ghoulardi on December 24, 2016, 09:07:49 AM
So where's your proof he doesn't know?
And your lack of understanding English iss astonishing. He could presently not know, but be notified at some future date.
And considering his relationship with the NRA, that's not a far stretch, as, unlike your girlfriend, the NRA is doing something
Now about that policy-law lie you keep spreading
The point was you made a claim and then failed to back it up. How do you know he will???
Show your proof or admit you were just guessing. You said it now you own it.
Quote from: blades on December 24, 2016, 09:18:41 AM
The point was you made a claim and then failed to back it up. How do you know he will???
Show your proof or admit you were just guessing. You said it now you own it.
Again your moving the goal post.
First it was prove he knew it, you got that now you want something else.
Seems like all liberals, Tommy, you have a double standard: it's okay for you to guess and we should treat those guesses like reality, but its wrong for everyone else.
So prove your claim he won't change it.
After all, Tommy, you too are doing nothing but guessing.
Prove to me they'll be conviscating guns. Oh, that's right that's also a guess.
You said it, now own it
This whole thread is nothing but one long guess of yours
Quote from: Ghoulardi on December 24, 2016, 09:23:09 AM
Again your moving the goal post.
First it was prove he knew it, you got that now you want something else.
Seems like all liberals, Tommy, you have a double standard: it's okay for you to guess and we should treat those guesses like reality, but its wrong for everyone else.
So prove your claim he won't change it.
After all, Tommy, you too are doing nothing but guessing.
Prove to me they'll be conviscating guns. Oh, that's right that's also a guess.
You said it, now own it
This whole thread is nothing but one long guess of yours
You are truly a person in need of help. This might explain how Trump barely won against Hilary
Quote from: blades on December 24, 2016, 09:36:41 AM
You are truly a person in need of help. This might explain how Trump barely won against Hilary
Back at you slick.
I'm not running around whining I have to tell the truth, then gets policy and law confused
I'm not the one condemning someone for guessing when all you do is guess
So where's the proof Trump doesn't know?
Where's the proof guns will be confiscated because of this policy?
Quote from: blades on December 24, 2016, 09:36:41 AM
You are truly a person in need of help. This might explain how Trump barely won against Hilary
It was all those millions you donated him trying to screw the Repubs. Backfired didn't it. Hoisted by your own petard.
Barely won? Barely won? He won in an electorial college landside.
Your mask is slipping
Quote from: blades on December 24, 2016, 09:36:41 AM
You are truly a person in need of help. This might explain how Trump barely won against Hilary
Of 306 electors pledged to vote for Donald J. Trump 304 voted for him, 2 voted for someone else.
Of 232 electors pledged to vote for Hillary Clinton 227 voted for her, 5 voted for someone else.
So Trump kicked her ass by 79 votes, and you call that "barely won." :lol:
snip~
QuoteThe Electoral College on Monday voted for Donald J. Trump to win the presidency. Seven electors, the most ever, voted for someone other than their party's nominee.
snip~
QuoteHillary Clinton, three of the state's 12 electoral votes went to Colin L. Powell, the Republican former secretary of state. One more elector voted for Faith Spotted Eagle, a Native American leader.
And all this for the NYT Hillary's state.
http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2016/12/19/us/elections/electoral-college-results.html
Quote from: walkstall on December 24, 2016, 09:57:46 AM
Of 306 electors pledged to vote for Donald J. Trump 304 voted for him, 2 voted for someone else.
Of 232 electors pledged to vote for Hillary Clinton 227 voted for her, 5 voted for someone else.
So Trump kicked her ass by 79 votes, and you call that "barely won." :lol:
snip~
snip~
And all this for the NYT Hillary's state.
http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2016/12/19/us/elections/electoral-college-results.html
That's all he got against Killary???
Quote from: blades on December 24, 2016, 09:18:41 AM
The point was you made a claim and then failed to back it up. How do you know he will???
Show your proof or admit you were just guessing. You said it now you own it.
Last chance here son. There's a reason your argument is stupid, because it doesn't need Trump to undo an illegal policy move by the marxists!
So show me you understand the Bill of Rights and reply to my earlier post.
Quote from: Solar on December 24, 2016, 08:56:43 AM
Which came first and why? Bill of Rights or the Constitution?
Once you understand this, you will see why this is pure policy and could never be law and why your little bimbo has her panties in a knot over nothing.
Quote from: Solar on December 24, 2016, 10:15:42 AM
Last chance here son. There's a reason your argument is stupid, because it doesn't need Trump to undo an illegal policy move by the marxists!
So show me you understand the Bill of Rights and reply to my earlier post.
I never made an argument about it. I just posted a video about a story of something that has happened, and like all topics people gave their opinions and comments.
As for what you said you will have to ask G about it. He is the one that brought Trump into it.
I prefere it stay on topic
Quote from: blades on December 24, 2016, 10:22:49 AM
I never made an argument about it. I just posted a video about a story of something that has happened, and like all topics people gave their opinions and comments.
As for what you said you will have to ask G about it. He is the one that brought Trump into it.
I prefere it stay on topic
Cut the bull shit! Do you think we all can't read?
You posted this bull shit and assumed it to be correct, and that right there is all the evidence one needs to see you are clueless as to how our Republic functions.
Now answer my question, I want to see that you have at least a tiny understanding of our system.
I want an explanation, not some copied answer.
Quote from: Solar on December 24, 2016, 10:33:51 AM
Cut the bull shit! Do you think we all can't read?
You posted this bull shit and assumed it to be correct, and that right there is all the evidence one needs to see you are clueless as to how our Republic functions.
Now answer my question, I want to see that you have at least a tiny understanding of our system.
I want an explanation, not some copied answer.
If this is a fake story then delete it. Because I believe that it actually happened, but I could be wrong.
As for an explanation, I have no opinion. you make a good case. And I hope you are right that it gets squashed it SCOTUS.
Quote from: blades on December 24, 2016, 10:37:47 AM
If this is a fake story then delete it. Because I believe that it actually happened, but I could be wrong.
It's not a fake story, it'a fake conclusion moron!
QuoteAs for an explanation, I have no opinion. you make a good case. And I hope you are right that it gets squashed it SCOTUS.
Jeez, it doesn't even go to SCOTUS, it's an illegal policy from the get go!
Last chance to show you understand our Republican form of Govt.
Quote from: blades on December 24, 2016, 10:37:47 AM
If this is a fake story then delete it. Because I believe that it actually happened, but I could be wrong.
As for an explanation, I have no opinion. you make a good case. And I hope you are right that it gets squashed it SCOTUS.
I am sure the thread will stay, to show people how stupid you are.
Let see you have no opinion, yet you have been posting BS for 4 pages.
Quote from: RURdy4It on December 23, 2016, 03:00:13 PM
For All the Child Left Behinds...
:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
Blades is an "intelligent" sub?
Oh, where to start. In your own words:
QuoteThe President had nothing to do with this -- other than tell the Social Security Administration "this is what I want you to get done - find a way to do it.".
Sweetheart, that's what an "executive action" is. First of all, there is no definition in the law for "executive actions". That is when the President just "tells" an agency what he wants. An executive order would legally tell an agency or department on what to do. An "executive action", as Hussein has even said, is a recommendation. It's adorable you take it seriously.
You did get an important point right: "People need to know how the government works". I agree. For example, you said "Trump can't just take this back". Yes, he actually can. He can "tell" them (via "executive action" -- where he "tells" them what he wants, like in your own words quoted above) to stop it. If that didn't happen for whatever reason, he can issue an executive order. In your video, you admitted that you didn't know if he could issue an executive order, which made me spit my coffee all over my monitor. No wonder we have blades coming over here, sticking his nose in the CPF hole thinking he smells honey, only to get stung multiple times, forcing him to run back to your channel wimpering. You really should take your own advice and learn how the government works, because you get gullible people to parrot your idiocy.
And, no, blades was correct -- he is an idiot.
To all RURdy4it's viewers, here's a quick lesson: yes, the President can issue an executive order to tell the SSA what to do.
And blades, this is not a "fake story", but thanks for taking the time to understand the issue before posting it. As RURdy4it said, this hasn't really been out there. Here's a new, innovative way to find some stories on this issue. It's a very complicated tool, but should help you find stuff on the internet: http://bfy.tw/98g6
After weekend bloodbath, Chicago police chief makes surprising admission about city's tough gun laws
The head of the Chicago Police Department is now admitting that more gun laws don't necessarily result in less gun violence because criminals don't "play by society's rules."
Chicago, a city run by Mayor Rahm Emanual, former White House chief of staff to President Barack Obama, reported double the number of killings throughout Christmas weekend this year than last year. At least 27 people were shot, 12 of them fatally, according to ABC News.
Chicago Police Superintendent Eddie Johnson said during a news conference on Monday that most of the shootings between Friday evening and Sunday evening were "targeted attacks" by gang members going after rival gang members who were gathered for Christmas and holiday parties. The Chicago Tribune reported 90 percent of those fatally shot were involved in gang activities, had criminal histories or were previously known to police.
The deaths bring to more than 750 the number of gun-related deaths in Chicago just this year. As ABC News also noted, it's the first time in more than two decades that Chicago has seen more than 700 people die in a single year as a result of gun violence.
http://www.theblaze.com/news/2016/12/26/after-weekend-bloodbath-chicago-police-chief-makes-surprising-admission-about-citys-tough-gun-laws/
Quote from: blades on December 26, 2016, 04:04:55 PM
After weekend bloodbath, Chicago police chief makes surprising admission about city's tough gun laws
The head of the Chicago Police Department is now admitting that more gun laws don't necessarily result in less gun violence because criminals don't "play by society's rules."
Chicago, a city run by Mayor Rahm Emanual, former White House chief of staff to President Barack Obama, reported double the number of killings throughout Christmas weekend this year than last year. At least 27 people were shot, 12 of them fatally, according to ABC News.
Chicago Police Superintendent Eddie Johnson said during a news conference on Monday that most of the shootings between Friday evening and Sunday evening were "targeted attacks" by gang members going after rival gang members who were gathered for Christmas and holiday parties. The Chicago Tribune reported 90 percent of those fatally shot were involved in gang activities, had criminal histories or were previously known to police.
The deaths bring to more than 750 the number of gun-related deaths in Chicago just this year. As ABC News also noted, it's the first time in more than two decades that Chicago has seen more than 700 people die in a single year as a result of gun violence.
http://www.theblaze.com/news/2016/12/26/after-weekend-bloodbath-chicago-police-chief-makes-surprising-admission-about-citys-tough-gun-laws/
What does this have to do with the 2nd Amendment?
This has been going on for years and b o has done nothing about it.
Quote from: walkstall on December 26, 2016, 04:21:11 PM
What does this have to do with the 2nd Amendment?
This has been going on for years and b o has done nothing about it.
If you don't know I can't help ya...SORRY.
Quote from: blades on December 26, 2016, 04:23:41 PM
If you don't know I can't help ya...SORRY.
Translation: I don't know either, I just felt like posting it here
Quote from: RURdy4It on December 23, 2016, 03:00:13 PM
For All the Child Left Behinds...
RURdy4it, I know blades is an "intelligent sub", as you put it, but can you keep him over there? Maybe get an electronic fence or something.
Quote from: blades on December 26, 2016, 04:47:13 PM
TAXED YOUR A FUCKING NIGGER TO!!!
Quote from: taxed on December 26, 2016, 05:30:36 PM
RURdy4it, I know blades is an "intelligent sub", as you put it, but can you keep him over there? Maybe get an electronic fence or something.
I'd recommend a hotwire, but he isn't really a fast learner and her electric bill would go through the roof.
Quote from: Solar on December 26, 2016, 05:39:53 PM
I'd recommend a hotwire, but he isn't really a fast learner and her electric bill would go through the roof.
:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
Wonder if RURdy4it reported this:
Quote
Congress agreed to review a final rule by the Obama administration that would wrongly strip law-abiding Americans of their Second Amendment rights.
Last year, the Social Security Administration finalized a propose rule to ban certain recipients who use a representative payee from owning firearms. This ill-conceived action stripped the right to keep and bear arms without due process from some of the most vulnerable Americans.
The review process is expected to move forward in the house and receive a vote as early as next week. "We are pleased that congress is moving swiftly to ensure that law-abiding Americans' constitutional rights are respected," concluded Chris W. Cox, executive director, NRA-ILA.
Read more at http://louderwithcrowder.com/congress-obama-social-security-gun/
Quote from: Ghoulardi on January 26, 2017, 02:33:22 AM
Wonder if RURdy4it reported this:
Read more at http://louderwithcrowder.com/congress-obama-social-security-gun/
Funny. Isn't this what we tried to tell this moron, that it was not law until Congress cleared it?
Congress didn't clear it, so what we claimed was correct, that only Congress writes law.
If I told her that I was confiscating her land and property, would she so willingly and naively believe it? Sheesh, what a gullible twit.. :lol:
Are you getting ready to apologize RURdy4it?
Quote
The House on Thursday struck down an Obama-era regulation that could block some recipients of disability benefits from buying guns.
The House voted 235-180 to roll back a rule that required the Social Security Administration to report people who receive disability benefits and have a mental health condition to the FBI's background check system. The database is used to determine eligibility for buying a firearm.
Critics said the rule stripped Second Amendment rights from people who are not dangerously mentally ill, such as those who have eating disorders or mental disorders that prevent them from managing their own finances.
Read more at http://thehill.com/regulation/317634-house-republicans-block-obama-era-gun-rule
Quote from: Ghoulardi on February 05, 2017, 05:36:16 AM
Are you getting ready to apologize RURdy4it?
Read more at http://thehill.com/regulation/317634-house-republicans-block-obama-era-gun-rule
RURdy4it, wasn't that the bimbo twit that thought EO's were somehow law? :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
Quote from: RURdy4It on December 23, 2016, 03:00:13 PM
For All the Child Left Behinds...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CayQgWVjhh0&feature=youtu.be
http://www.guns.com/2017/03/01/trump-signs-repeal-of-obama-era-social-security-gun-ban/
:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
Did you LISTEN to this MORON?
Executive orders are issued by Presidents executive actions are things that happen within the adimistration.............BECAUSE OF THE EXECUTIVE ORDER....IE "POLICY" NOT "LAW"
nobody tell this dummy any different let her continue to show how stupid she really is.
:popcorn:
Quote from: taxed on March 01, 2017, 02:02:39 PM
http://www.guns.com/2017/03/01/trump-signs-repeal-of-obama-era-social-security-gun-ban/
:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
But did the bimbo learn anything?
Wanna bet she thinks she was the reason it was even an issue, that in truth, it would have slipped through and became law without her making noise over it. :rolleyes: