Why don't you own a gun?

"NOYB" wrote in message
link.net...

"Don White" wrote in message
...
Didn't you say you don't have a gun??

Correct. I don't own a gun. I was speaking rhetorically.

I'm a Democrat. I believe in gun rights and the death penalty. I also
believe that when a corporation fouls the environment, its principals should
be arrested immediately, same as murders, rapists, etc. WTF am I??? I'm
totally confused!

"John H" wrote in message
...

If you're referring to his "pretty much the same" comment, he was being
sarcastic, John. I think you've missed obvious sarcasm before. We're
gonna
have to agree on some sort of little symbol, just for you. :-)


No, I was referring specifically to, "...Bush ordered men under his
control into combat so that his father's and his Vice President's
companies could roll up tremendous profits."

Well....all his other reasons have pretty much evaporated. He says our main
goal was to eliminate Saddam because he was a bad boy, but we've done
nothing about other bad boys, so that reason is silly. Why not stomp on
Sudan? We know that's a zoo full of terrorists, too. How about Indonesia and
the Phillippines?


Sounds like 'hate talk' to me. If their were an iota of truth in the
accusation, Clark, Dean, Kerry, et al (especially Sharpton) would have
already used it.

They don't need to.

NOYB wrote:
I'm still waiting for a list of your conservative beliefs. Or did you post
it already...and the list was entirely blank?


Like many facts & events in the real world, it passed you by, didn't it?

http://groups.google.com/groups?q=re...e+princip les

Here is the text

The resident right-wing whackos of this newsgroup
have shown consistent disregard for what is
really "conservative" and what is really
"liberal." It's not likely that most of them will
ever learn anything, much less the following
principles, but at least I have tried.

Conservatives believe:

The gov't should be fiscally restrained.

The country's military should be maintained or
increased in strength to the extent of
being able to defeat any realistic threats.

Criminals guilty of certain heinous acts deserve
the death penalty.

Every right comes at a cost, and every priviledge
carries a corresponding obligation.

Morals are not relative, and principles are not a
matter of inconvenience. In the same light,
hypocrisy regarding morals, ethics, and principle
is one of the most repugnant human failings.

The status quo of social and economic order should
be maintained, or adjusted to
meet certain demands. (Note: the corresponding
liberal belief is that the social and
economic order of society is secondary to the
needs of individuals, and that the
status quo should not be respected.) This is
probably the core divider between real
conservatism and liberalism.

I strongly believe in all these things, and yet am
not a cheerleader for President Bush. Tub thumping
for one's favorite politico is partisanship, not
conservatism.

Regards
Doug King

"DSK" wrote in message
...
NOYB wrote:
I'm still waiting for a list of your conservative beliefs. Or did you
post
it already...and the list was entirely blank?


Like many facts & events in the real world, it passed you by, didn't it?


http://groups.google.com/groups?q=re...e+princip les

Here is the text

The resident right-wing whackos of this newsgroup
have shown consistent disregard for what is
really "conservative" and what is really
"liberal." It's not likely that most of them will
ever learn anything, much less the following
principles, but at least I have tried.

Conservatives believe:

The gov't should be fiscally restrained.

The country's military should be maintained or
increased in strength to the extent of
being able to defeat any realistic threats.

Criminals guilty of certain heinous acts deserve
the death penalty.

Wow. You're more conservative than me on this one.


Every right comes at a cost, and every priviledge
carries a corresponding obligation.

Morals are not relative, and principles are not a
matter of inconvenience. In the same light,
hypocrisy regarding morals, ethics, and principle
is one of the most repugnant human failings.


It's funny that you specify morals, ethics, and principle as conservative
traits. I agree...and it's the opposite of liberal traits.



The status quo of social and economic order should
be maintained,

Bzzzzzt. Nice try, but no. Under the status quo, Americans currently pay a
progressive tax. Conservatives abhor the idea of a progressive tax...which
is designed to undo the status quo and take more money from the wealthy and
give it to the poor via government entitlements.


or adjusted to
meet certain demands.

I'm ok with that as long as it's equitable and across the board. That's why
we should have a flat tax. Wanna raise my *rate*? Then everybody's *rate*
is increased.

NOYB wrote:
It's funny that you specify morals, ethics, and principle as conservative
traits. I agree...and it's the opposite of liberal traits.

That you say this only shows that you don't really know what morals &
ethics are. Perhaps you should look up the definition of 'ethos' to get
started.

Anyway, some liberals have principles too. And some people, such as
yourself and our current President & Vice President, give lip service to
the idea of principles but really act out whatever is most expedient &
profitable.

Principles that are abandoned at the first (or even the second) hint of
trouble aren't really principles, are they?

As for adopting an unwanted child, I only know what you yourself have
told me (and the rest of the group)... that you might have considered it
but did not actually do it.

DSK

Doug Kanter's "improved" list:

increased taxes for the rich
affirmative action for minorities
full marriage rights for gays
abortion on demand
filibuster judges who might overrule Roe v. Wade
*the environment*

That's a helluva platform to run on!

"NOYB" wrote in message news:1z8Wb.20660

I'm ok with that as long as it's equitable and across the board. That's
why
we should have a flat tax.

I disagree here, Doc. I prefer to see a national consumption tax of about
10%, coupled with total repeal of any income tax. The national consumption
tax would be implemented with similar exemptions and exclusions as are found
in most sales tax structures today. A very simple form could be submitted
annually documenting income status below a certain threshold for rebate
purposes to the very poor. Benefits would be several: minimal
bureaucracy - the electronic mechanism to account and collect such a tax is
already in place in many states, and is easily copied elsewhere;
substantially increased tax base - ALL monies would naturally fall under the
umbrella of such a tax: criminal income, legitimate income, welfare
payments, inheritance income, etc.; it would almost totally eliminate the
opportunity for Congress to screw up peoples' lives with inept attempts at
social engineering, and it would virtually eliminate the IRS - probably the
most unchecked and abusive bureaucracy this government has ever produced.

"NOYB" wrote in message
hlink.net...
Doug Kanter's "improved" list:

increased taxes for the rich
affirmative action for minorities
full marriage rights for gays
abortion on demand
filibuster judges who might overrule Roe v. Wade
*the environment*

That's a helluva platform to run on!



Gay people have absolutely no effect on you, no matter who they marry.

Frankly, I'm not sure about affirmative action. But, people who know these
things point out that there's a cycle for poor people that's hard to break.
Go also seem to be an expert, however, so I'm interested in your thoughts on
this subject that nobody else can seem to figure out.

"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...
Why don't you own a gun?

I don't hunt, and I live in a gated neighborhood with no crime. I wouldn't
carry the gun for self-defense, since I'm usually in shorts or a t-shirt,
and it would be a nuisance. I'm not fearful of the government, because the
current administration hasn't tried to take away my right to buy a gun.

There are three scenarios in which I could see myself getting a gun:

1) If I started taking long trips by boat in the Caribbean.
2) If some nimrod started harassing my family
3) If the government tried to take away my *right* to own a gun.

In the first situation, I'd go through the natural legal process and buy
one. In the 2nd and 3rd situations, I'd get one through "other" means. I
never said that I *never* owned a gun. I just don't own one right now.