Unit2Sucks said:

---

Look at Mr Tough Guy bragging about child abuse. Do you beat your wife when she talks back to you too or do you save your ass whoopings for defenseless children?

---

Look who's humorless.

Soft parenting is why there are kids who think pulling this garbage is a sensible idea. Sit down and shut up, when you're 18 and insist on being a D-bag, knock yourself out, you just can't live here anymore. Have a nice life!

Life's too short to let your kids act a fool on your watch.

I'm only being half serious, of course, for you sensitive Sallies.

And hitting women is never okay. Unless they're asking for it!

OT = Out of Control

iwantwinners said:

---

And hitting women is never okay. Unless they're asking for it!

---

Or of course if they are iwantwinners' offspring and they have the gall to stand up for a social issue.

Unit2Sucks said:

---

iwantwinners said:

---

And hitting women is never okay. Unless they're asking for it!

---

Or of course if they are iwantwinners' offspring and they have the gall to stand up for a social issue.

---

If they want to actually do something about it, put their ascribed virtue where their moral mouth is so to speak, fine by me, even if I think it's a farce. But virtue signaling to feel good about one's self? No, that will be unacceptable in my house. I won't subsidize that, absolutely not.

iwantwinners said:

---

Unit2Sucks said:

---

iwantwinners said:

---

And hitting women is never okay. Unless they're asking for it!

---

Or of course if they are iwantwinners' offspring and they have the gall to stand up for a social issue.

---

If they want to actually do something about it, put their ascribed virtue where their moral mouth is so to speak, fine by me, even if I think it's a farce. But virtue signaling to feel good about one's self? No, that will be unacceptable in my house. I won't subsidize that, absolutely not.

---

Somebody learned a new phrase recently

Apparently, it is illegal to punish a kid for ditching class to attend a protest any more severely than if they had ditched class to play video games or smoke weed in the park. In other words, the usual punishment for ditching is OK but no special enhancements like suspensions or expulsions just for attending a protest.

I heard this from someone who read it on line, so take it for what it's worth. Maybe Texas laws are different.

This just in: Angered by the noise coming from a party at his neighbor's home, a Menlo Park man fired an assault rifle in his backyard Saturday, prompting a shelter-in-place order and then a manhunt in the usually peaceful Silicon Valley city, police said.

https://www.sfgate.com/news/article/Police-Menlo-Park-man-sought-after-opening-fire-12707599.php

Apparently they don't have a gun problem, they have a noise problem

Just to close the circle here.

Cut to exploding Reich Wing BI posters with exploding heads in 5..4..3..

Blurggle -- "Free unless you don't agree!" -- "Emails" -- "From my cold, dead hands!" -- splort.

BearsWiin said:

---

iwantwinners said:

---

Unit2Sucks said:

---

iwantwinners said:

---

And hitting women is never okay. Unless they're asking for it!

---

Or of course if they are iwantwinners' offspring and they have the gall to stand up for a social issue.

---

If they want to actually do something about it, put their ascribed virtue where their moral mouth is so to speak, fine by me, even if I think it's a farce. But virtue signaling to feel good about one's self? No, that will be unacceptable in my house. I won't subsidize that, absolutely not.

---

Somebody learned a new phrase recently

---

It is part of the coded language of the Alt Right like SJW:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/style/the-coded-language-of-the-alt-right-is-helping-to-power-its-rise/2017/04/07/5f269a82-1ba4-11e7-bcc2-7d1a0973e7b2_story.html

iwantwinners said:

---

Unit2Sucks said:

---

iwantwinners said:

---

And hitting women is never okay. Unless they're asking for it!

---

Or of course if they are iwantwinners' offspring and they have the gall to stand up for a social issue.

---

If they want to actually do something about it, put their ascribed virtue where their moral mouth is so to speak, fine by me, even if I think it's a farce. But virtue signaling to feel good about one's self? No, that will be unacceptable in my house. I won't subsidize that, absolutely not.

---

What is your opinion of Richard Spencer and Milo Yiannopoulos?

BearsWiin said:

---

iwantwinners said:

---

Unit2Sucks said:

---

iwantwinners said:

---

And hitting women is never okay. Unless they're asking for it!

---

Or of course if they are iwantwinners' offspring and they have the gall to stand up for a social issue.

---

If they want to actually do something about it, put their ascribed virtue where their moral mouth is so to speak, fine by me, even if I think it's a farce. But virtue signaling to feel good about one's self? No, that will be unacceptable in my house. I won't subsidize that, absolutely not.

---

Somebody learned a new phrase recently

---

Also a ridiculous phrase to use in this context. If we're talking about kids who are cutting school to go organize and protest for a political cause, that is doing something. It's not just "virtue signaling" if you've got your boots on the ground.

AunBear89 said:

---

It's virtue signaling because he does not agree with the cause. Nothing else matters to the Right - anything that does not fall in to lock goosestep with their agenda, they belittle.

---

Now you're just intentionally misrepresenting other people's views, which is kinda like trolling.

sycasey said:

---

BearsWiin said:

---

iwantwinners said:

---

Unit2Sucks said:

---

iwantwinners said:

---

And hitting women is never okay. Unless they're asking for it!

---

Or of course if they are iwantwinners' offspring and they have the gall to stand up for a social issue.

---

If they want to actually do something about it, put their ascribed virtue where their moral mouth is so to speak, fine by me, even if I think it's a farce. But virtue signaling to feel good about one's self? No, that will be unacceptable in my house. I won't subsidize that, absolutely not.

---

Somebody learned a new phrase recently

---

Also a ridiculous phrase to use in this context. If we're talking about kids who are cutting school to go organize and protest for a political cause, that is doing something. It's not just "virtue signaling" if you've got your boots on the ground.

---

No, it's not, and that's not the intention for many who engage in such acts.

When you purposefully leave your responsibilties for something that could be done anytime, you're affirming to yourself that you are so virtuous that you will inconvenience your own life just to put your BOOTS ON THE GROUND with a picket shouting into the sky, pretending you're accomplishing something, and pretending that anybody gives a sh*t about your sanctimonious virtue. If you're congressmen aren't acting on your behalf, vote them out for somebody who will. Tantrums aimed at attention and self-gratification are unbecoming.

bearister said:

---

iwantwinners said:

---

Unit2Sucks said:

---

iwantwinners said:

---

And hitting women is never okay. Unless they're asking for it!

---

Or of course if they are iwantwinners' offspring and they have the gall to stand up for a social issue.

---

If they want to actually do something about it, put their ascribed virtue where their moral mouth is so to speak, fine by me, even if I think it's a farce. But virtue signaling to feel good about one's self? No, that will be unacceptable in my house. I won't subsidize that, absolutely not.

---

What is your opinion of Richard Spencer and Milo Yiannopoulos?

---

I don't know much about Spencer. All I know is that he's referred to as a white nationalist. I don't know if that's accurate or not, as I've never read his work and I've heard him speak on YouTube for about 5 minutes.

Milo, in my view, is an entertainer and a troll, a troll who actually gets it right sometimes but has very little tact, but that's kind of his appeal (like Trump). You'd want to have a beer with him, but you wouldn't want him to represent you officially, so to speak. I think the way he effectively and efficiently destroys social justice warrior radical feminists with facts and an endearing ambivalence to how such facts make them feel is absolutely hilarious and, on some level, a public service, as so few are willing to do it.

Fewer Jews would have died in Holocaust if they were armed, suggests GOP congressman

You really can't fix stupid.

Trump is having a bipartisan meeting today with members of Congress.

Trump: "A lot of times by the time you go to court, it takes so long to go to court to get the due process procedures, I like taking the guns early."

To Trump's credit, he said the following out loud:

B.A. Bearacus said:

---

Trump is having a bipartisan meeting today with members of Congress.

Trump: "A lot of times by the time you go to court, it takes so long to go to court to get the due process procedures, I like taking the guns early."

---

tRump gives the term "toy brains" a new meaning. Putin must be on the strongest anti giggle pills his laboratories can come up with.

Trump is in favor of upholding the constitution except when he's not. I look forward to seeing how his party responds.

Unit2Sucks said:

---

Trump is in favor of upholding the constitution except when he's not. I look forward to seeing how his party responds.

---

I know right? I mean that's what the courts are for amiright? The ends justify the levels of our outrage though? Are they with us or against us.

How do I put more quarters in this machine to perpetuate this partisan, unprincipled outrage? I look forward to seeing how everyone responds.

This is Beauregard's and Rosenstein's way of signaling that they have it on good information that the reign of the tRump Crime Family is in its death throes:

https://www.axios.com/scoop-jeff-sessions-dines-with-rod-rosenstein-1519865511-4afe726b-6642-4ca5-8ebf-e9f0600df79b.html

With Hope splitting, Jared losing security clearance, Mueller focusing on tRump now, etc, there are just too many leaks in the dike to plug. It is about to burst baby. Critical mass is shortly upon us.



At this point Pence, Kelly and Mattis are probably running a shadow government with the support of the military and the intelligence agencies. The cast and crew of The Apprentice will be allowed to be the figurehead government until Mueller can finish up and then in short order indictments, impeachment, trials, and incarcerations and, if applicable, executions pursuant to the treason statute. The Republic will be saved.

This is why arming teachers is a bad idea.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/crime/7-san-francisco-police-officers-fired-65-shots-at-murder-suspect/ar-BBJHGtq?li=BBnbfcL

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/georgia-teacher-arrested-after-firing-gunshot-in-school-classroom/ar-BBJHGpJ?li=BBnb7Kz

B.A. Bearacus said:

---

Trump is having a bipartisan meeting today with members of Congress.

Trump: "A lot of times by the time you go to court, it takes so long to go to court to get the due process procedures, I like taking the guns early."

---

Even the worst high students can cram for a test at the last minute and retain some of the key points.

Was bizarre during the campaign when Ttump took three different policy positions on abortion within a 24 hour period. Christian Right backed him then and still does after Stormy and the Playmate.

The NRA's primary scare tactic is government confiscating guns. Trump advocated for just that while cameras were rolling, talking over chief enabler Pence. NRA will pull their puppet strings and Trump will back down as usual.

FuzzyWuzzy said:

---

iwantwinners said:

---

BearNIt said:

---

iwantwinners said:

---

Another Bear said:

---

If your issue is that anti-gun folks will want more, you are right. I make no bones about my view that a ban on sales of new assault rifles, however you define that, is only a good first step. Eventually, I want what Australia has, a ban on assault rifle ownership. Or, if it is that much fun to fire one of those things, require that they be locked up at a licensed gun range, not to leave the premises. Australia went from numerous mass shootings to zero. You will still have your random crazy disgruntled ex-employee or spouse who shoots up a place and kills a couple of people with a handgun, but the shooting deaths of 10, 20 or 50 at a time will become exceedingly rare without assault rifles.

---

---

---

---

---

It would be nice if the Supreme Court would restore the original intent of the Second Amendment, which begins " A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State..." If you are a member of a well-regulated Militia you have the right to carry military style weapons, if not you don't.

sp4149 said:

---

FuzzyWuzzy said:

---

iwantwinners said:

---

BearNIt said:

---

iwantwinners said:

---

Another Bear said:

---

If your issue is that anti-gun folks will want more, you are right. I make no bones about my view that a ban on sales of new assault rifles, however you define that, is only a good first step. Eventually, I want what Australia has, a ban on assault rifle ownership. Or, if it is that much fun to fire one of those things, require that they be locked up at a licensed gun range, not to leave the premises. Australia went from numerous mass shootings to zero. You will still have your random crazy disgruntled ex-employee or spouse who shoots up a place and kills a couple of people with a handgun, but the shooting deaths of 10, 20 or 50 at a time will become exceedingly rare without assault rifles.

---

---

---

---

---

It would be nice if the Supreme Court would restore the original intent of the Second Amendment, which begins " A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State..." If you are a member of a well-regulated Militia you have the right to carry military style weapons, if not you don't.

---

It'd be nice of the SCOTUS did a lot of things.

And at least, perhaps, a higher threshold to meet for ownership of firearms as the firearm category gets more lethal. It probably wouldn't pass the supreme court, but what about drug tests for any semi-automatic firearm every year.

Someone please explain to me why American Sniper, Chris Kyle, and his buddy took a Marine with severe PTSD to a rifle range, gave him a loaded weapon (despite the fact he had been acting bizarre on the trip there) and turned their back on him.

Karma...

My understanding (from a SEAL) is that Kyle was an arrogant SOB who thought he was faultless and untouchable. The very notion of him ever thinking he was in danger from anyone/anything is laughable.

To be sure: a SEAL must have a certain amount of arrogance and bravado to become a SEAL. But it also requires a certain amount of self-awareness and introspection to recognize when to hold back. As part of a team, that includes not jeopardizing the success and safety of the team in an effort to achieve individual glory. Kyle was mostly about the glory - not so much the silent warrior type.

I read Carlos Hathcock's book. He was a legendary sniper in Vietnam. He made that shot into the scope of an NVA sniper which was appropriated by Saving Private Ryan. Carlos said it made him sick every time he ended a life but he dealt with it by figuring he was saving American soldiers' lives. I read Kyle's book. I got the drift he thought killing people was amusing. He was also a liar. He claimed to have executed numerous looters while sitting on top of the Superdome after Hurricane Katrina. It never happened. One has to wonder why he would think that would have been ok.

Looks like the conservative side goes radio silent after Trump's gun regulation talkshow.

Not quite. Pence called a quick closed-door pow-wow of NRA honchos, Cheeto Benito, and himself. All sorted out. Frumpy was only joking.