stunthanger.com
General control line discussion => Open Forum => Topic started by: Randy Cuberly on February 12, 2016, 09:45:06 PM
-
More on the UAV Issue from AMA
Randy Cuberly
Academy of Model Aeronautics
Member Communication
Friday, February 12, 2016
Dear AMA members,
We have good news to share. Last night, the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee in the House of Representatives passed the Aviation Innovation, Reform, and Reauthorization (AIRR) Act, which preserves and strengthens the Special Rule for Model Aircraft.
We would like to thank Rep. Bill Shuster of Pennsylvania, Chairman of the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, and Rep. Mark Sanford of South Carolina for their efforts to ensure that this important legislation protects the hobby of flying model aircraft.
The AIRR Act is critical to preserving our voluntary, community-based approach to managing the model aviation community. By strengthening the Special Rule for Model Aircraft, this bill will enhance safety across the recreational community and allow our members, who for decades have flown safely and responsibly within AMA’s community-based safety program, to continue enjoying our hobby without new burdensome regulations.
Among the bill’s provisions, it provides a clear definition of a community-based organization (CBO) and tasks the FAA with developing a process for recognizing qualifying CBOs, both long-overdue tasks for the agency. In addition, the bill makes clear that model aircraft can be used as a teaching tool for science, technology, engineering and math (STEM), as well as aeronautics.
The AIRR act is a strong bill that we are proud to support, but Congress isn’t done with it yet. The full House of Representatives still needs to vote on the AIRR Act and the Senate still needs to work on its own version of the bill. AMA has been actively advocating for our members’ interests on Capitol Hill, and we will continue working with Congress on additional changes that could further protect our hobby.
We may need your help in reaching out to members of Congress to urge them to support the Special Rules for Model Aircraft, which provides critical protections for the model aviation community. Remain vigilant and continue to monitor emails, social media, and www.modelaircraft.org/gov for more information and updates.
Sincerely,
AMA Government Affairs
© 2016 Academy of Model Aeronautics.
5161 E. Memorial Dr., Muncie IN 47302
Tel.: (800) 435-9262; Fax.: (765) 289-4248
All rights reserved.
www.modelaircraft.org
-
Yea, I saw this. Not sure what it will mean.
-
Yea, I saw this. Not sure what it will mean.
It gives the FAA something else from Congress to ignore.
I already wrote my congresscritters in support. Let 'em know that there's at least one voter out there who gives a sh*t.
-
It gives the FAA something else from Congress to ignore.
I already wrote my congresscritters in support. Let 'em know that there's at least one voter out there who gives a sh*t.
You mean something like "SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED?" How much more plane can that be?
We don't need a Clinton- Bush Dynasty or for that fact anymore Lawyers in the senate congress or white house. They have messed it up already give a mechanic a shot at it.
-
Sparky you got my vote!
-
Spark....your "shall not be infringed" is crap....read the rest of the words.....
-
Spark....your "shall not be infringed" is crap....read the rest of the words.....
What.....?????? So you think the 2nd Amendment is Crap? What planet were you born on?
Randy Cuberly
-
The second amendment IS crap....it was written when it was okay for Americans to own PEOPLE.....time to repeal it.
-
You mean something like "SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED?" How much more plane can that be?
We don't need a Clinton- Bush Dynasty or for that fact anymore Lawyers in the senate congress or white house. They have messed it up already give a mechanic a shot at it.
So I take it you're in the "don't vote or let your opinion be known but bitch like hell to people who aren't in power" camp?
Enjoy yourself.
-
Has anyone read the bill? I interpreted a couple of interesting items:
It asks the FAA to review and report on the effectiveness of their silly model aircraft registration requirements within 1 year.
It opens the door to possible personal "compensation" for flying a model in an educational or instructional manner and still be considered as a "model aircraft" and not as a commercial sUAS.
The bill has a long way to go before anything happens.
-
The second amendment IS crap....it was written when it was okay for Americans to own PEOPLE.....time to repeal it.
Rich that's stupid logic. The second amendment has nothing to do with owning people. It has to do with people staying free of a tyrannical government. If the second amendment is repealed you might as well repeal the first fourth and fith and tenth amendments at the same time because they will follow shortly behind it!
America has stayed free from a tyrannical Government until now, maybe not for very much longer if people like you have anything to say about it. Too bad you're too short sighted to see that the second amendment is the one that insures all the others. You are probably right if the Clintons return to power it likely will be repealed. At least until the revolution is over!
What will you and your ilk do during that time? Hide from reality I suppose just like you're doing now.
Randy Cuberly
-
It opens the door to possible personal "compensation" for flying a model in an educational or instructional manner and still be considered as a "model aircraft" and not as a commercial sUAS.
I haven't read the bill, but if they're being thoughtful that's there so that people can be paid to give instruction in flying RC -- which some people do.
-
Rich that's stupid logic.
This sort of thing is why Rich Peabody is so beloved amongst stunt fliers.
Brett
-
America has stayed free from a tyrannical Government until now, maybe not for very much longer if people like you have anything to say about it.
And that last part is really the most disturbing part.
-
The second amendment IS crap....it was written when it was okay for Americans to own PEOPLE.....time to repeal it.
Rich, seems a little history would be beneficial to you.
I appreciate your knowledge of our hobby, but your knowledge of American history is abysmally lacking.
By your "logic", it must also be time to repeal the Constitution and the complete Bill of Rights, plus amendments 11 and 12.
May as well add the Declaration of Independence.
If you weren't aware, all were written mostly by "Americans who owned people".
For a bit of true logic, I'll note that the Bill of Rights DOES NOT confer any rights.
It merely confirms that the enumerated rights (along with others not specified) are natural rights NOT subject to governmental control (history not withstanding) and therefore repeal cannot revoke any of those rights.
Randy is absolutely correct - in the final analysis, the right to bear arms codified in the 2nd Amendment is the ONLY guarantor of ALL American freedoms.
Terry
-
I normally do not get personal on here but Rich, that is the most stupid statement I think I have ever seen on here. Do you even have any concept of why the second amendment was written? HINT...It wasn't to guarantee your right to go deer hunting.
Mike
-
Rich, seems a little history would be beneficial to you.
By your "logic", it must also be time to repeal the Constitution and the complete Bill of Rights, plus amendments 11 and 12.
May as well add the Declaration of Independence.
There's a perfectly good way to amend the constitution by popular movement, but no leftists wants to pursue it, because they know that once they open the topic, all of their pet supposed "rights" that have been invented over the last 40-50 years will be explicitly written out (like unrestricted abortion or gay marriage) by the vast majority who despise what has happened to this country via judicial fiat. So, instead of taking their chances they will just endlessly whine about it and never actually do anything. On the other hand, there is a movement on the conservative side to do exactly that, to address the tortured judicial logic that permits things like endless executive orders and faceless bureaucratic organizations writing reams of regulations with no oversight and no electoral consequences.
Same thing happens with PAMPA. Some of the biggest pains in the ass much prefer to take cheap shots over the internet and via anonymous hate mail, but *never* take 5 minutes to propose their ideas officially so whatever it is could actually be taken on its merits and possibly approved. Peabody was at the top of that list, too, same other members of the "stunt-is-crooked-and-yet-somehow-I-am-obsessed-with-it-so-I-will-be-snarky-because-somehow-that-makes-me-feel-better-while-accomplishing-nothing-useful" club.
Rich broke from his usual rules - never post anything specific but just be nasty rule - by explicitly stating his hatred for America above.
Brett
-
Soo....who's building something....
-
well Sean, I just finished installing bushings in the control horns of my old Sterling Mustang so I can fly it w/o having to register it. ;D
Terry
-
Peabody is just pulling chains, nobody can be that stupid... or maybe not.
-
I got the materials to make the pushrods for the B-25. H^^
-
There's a perfectly good way to amend the constitution by popular movement, but no leftists wants to pursue it, because they know that once they open the topic, all of their pet supposed "rights" that have been invented over the last 40-50 years will be explicitly written out (like unrestricted abortion or gay marriage) by the vast majority who despise what has happened to this country via judicial fiat. So, instead of taking their chances they will just endlessly whine about it and never actually do anything. On the other hand, there is a movement on the conservative side to do exactly that, to address the tortured judicial logic that permits things like endless executive orders and faceless bureaucratic organizations writing reams of regulations with no oversight and no electoral consequences.
Same thing happens with PAMPA. Some of the biggest pains in the ass much prefer to take cheap shots over the internet and via anonymous hate mail, but *never* take 5 minutes to propose their ideas officially so whatever it is could actually be taken on its merits and possibly approved. Peabody was at the top of that list, too, same other members of the "stunt-is-crooked-and-yet-somehow-I-am-obsessed-with-it-so-I-will-be-snarky-because-somehow-that-makes-me-feel-better-while-accomplishing-nothing-useful" club.
Rich broke from his usual rules - never post anything specific but just be nasty rule - by explicitly stating his hatred for America above.
Brett
Wow Brett; Well said. I think we need a Jonah to come and preach to us Ninivites to repent before it is to late. Our great country is printing money faster that a drunken sailor can spend it, and giving it to countrys that hate us. then we pay for those that come into the country illegally to sell drugs and promote terror. We have been calling evil good, and good evil. This government has become oppresive in controlling every business in America in one form or another. We have not lost our freedom, we have given it away. I personally believe that it is already to late to do anything and we are about to see an economic disaster the likes of which we never thought possible. We have given away our childrens inheritance.
-
Soo....who's building something....
Hey Sean,
I'm just finishing my Colossus with a RO Jett 61 for VSC. Also building a Trivial Pursuit for a RO Jett 76, and a Whitely Shoestring for a PA65, and a Tempest II for a PA65, and a Electric Bear, and a Werwage P47 for a PA65 (I must have too many PA65's).
Now aren't you sorry you asked...Guess I have to go to the shop and stop wasting time on crap I can do nothing about except HOPE!
Randy Cuberly
-
Peabody is just pulling chains, nobody can be that stupid... or maybe not.
There are millions of them out there Bob, look at the past couple elections. It's not a maybe, it's real. Scary stuff.
-
That would be FIVE million....and only a handful of Bundys
-
Soo....who's building something....
No, But I did just have one of our control line friends build me a new AR15.
W.W.
-
Soo....who's building something....
All ready to do the final assembly on my three year on-and-off-again ARF Nobler/P-40 bash project. Relieved to finally have it done and get going on something else.
-
The second amendment IS crap....it was written when it was okay for Americans to own PEOPLE.....time to repeal it.
With all due respect to Sparky, the members of this forum and the rules that govern it,
you're a flippin' idiot, peabody. Go somewhere else with your socialist crap.
P.S. Edited because I let my fingers outrun my brain on this issue.
-
With all due respect to Sparky, the members of this forum and the rules that govern it,
you're a flippin' idiot, peabrain. Go somewhere else with your socialist crap.
Thank you Bill J. for saying what I was thinking! And I bet there are a lot of others out here that think peabrain is a flippin' idiot! LL~ LL~ LL~
Jerry
-
Liberals are on the correct side of history....why, women can vote (may someday be able to make decisions governing their bodies themselves instead of relying on old, white guys), blacks are free, and can even vote...there are laws that punish folks for theft and murder, etc.
Somalia is a nice place for all you second amendment folk.....
-
With all due respect to Sparky, the members of this forum and the rules that govern it,
you're a flippin' idiot, peabrain. Go somewhere else with your socialist crap.
Ditto.
And now we've ended up with another very important informational thread destroyed by some wackos search for his own ego enhancement.
-
peabody, I suspect most of us "second amendment folk" are willing to defend (with our guns) to the death your right to your opinions, regardless of how nonsensical.
I wonder, would you say the same of us?
Terry
-
What happened to the ignore key????? ???
-
The second amendment IS crap....it was written when it was okay for Americans to own PEOPLE.....time to repeal it.
I think it's amazing how much foresight the Founding Fathers had when they drafted the Second Amendment. I think they intended for it to cover situations similar to what we are in right now. I think it is the fact that we still do have the Second Amendment that keeps this country from collapsing. You may have only mentioned the two Bundy's in the news right now, but how many more do you think are out there, that if the stuff hits the fan and things go bad, would be standing with them? I think there's one whole hell of a lot of them out there. We have a government that thinks it knows what's best for me better that I do, and will do what it takes to prove it no matter what it costs! They brag about there being over 325,000 drone registrations, and probably have no idea how many of those are actually card carrying AMA members. Like Chris McMillin mentioned, and Sean Elliott told me, people that have pilot ratings and earn their living in aviation can't risk NOT being registered. I would be willing to bet that 25 percent of the current registration are people singularly operating drones or quads, and a small percentage of those are actual commercial operators. How much time, money and resources have been committed to this that could have been better used elsewhere? It's typical of the government to try to cover everything with a blanket than to pinpoint an obvious problem and deal with it directly. We can only "hope" that real "change" is coming down the road!
Type at you later,
Dan McEntee
-
Liberals are on the correct side of history....why, women can vote (may someday be able to make decisions governing their bodies themselves instead of relying on old, white guys), blacks are free, and can even vote...there are laws that punish folks for theft and murder, etc.
Somalia is a nice place for all you second amendment folk.....
Peabody,
I suggest you check your facts with history. It was conservative Republicans that freed the Slaves and gave the vote to Women. Liberals generally do nothing but complain and take credit for everything. Like "Hope and Change" Which means Change everything and use other peoples money to do it!
Liberalism is a mental disorder, defined as a general lack of the ability to actually think of consequences of their actions.
Randy Cuberly
-
Liberals are on the correct side of history...
Democrats, in 1854, passed the Kansas-Nebraska Act. This overturned the Missouri Compromise and allowed for the importation of slaves into the territories. Disgusted with the passage of this Act, free-soilers and anti-slavery members of the Whig and Democratic parties founded the Republican Party -- not just to stop the spread of slavery, but to eventually abolish it.
Emancipation? Republican President Abraham Lincoln issued the Emancipation Proclamation during the Civil War. In 1865, the 13th Amendment emancipating the slaves was passed with 100 percent of Republicans (88 of 88 in the House, 30 of 30 in the Senate) voting for it. Only 23 percent of Democrats (16 of 66 in the House, 3 of 8 in the Senate) voted for it.
In 1872 congressional investigations, Democrats admitted beginning the Ku Klux Klan as an effort to stop the spread of the Republican Party and to re-establish Democratic control in Southern states.
Do you oppose fascism? I should hope so. You would not, however, had you been a liberal in 1920s when the American Left was busy praising this new ideology of coercion and statism emerging in Europe.
Do you oppose communism? I should hope so. But you would not have, however, had you been a liberal in 1920s and 1930s. You would be celebrating the oppressive regimes that were murdering tens of millions of people in the name of “progress.”
Do you oppose needless war and bloodshed? I should hope so. But you would not, however, had you been a liberal in early 20th century, as you would probably have voted for a bitterly racist president who embroiled America in the one the most illogical, consequential and bloodiest conflicts in mankind’s history. Wilson told a delegation of blacks "segregation is not a humiliation but a benefit, and ought to be so regarded by you gentlemen."
Liberals want to use the federal government to take all of our choices away when it comes to guns, education, our retirement and our health care.
That doesn’t mean what you want is always wrong. It does mean that it is not necessarily right.
-
You mean something like "SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED?" How much more plane can that be?
We don't need a Clinton- Bush Dynasty or for that fact anymore Lawyers in the senate congress or white house. They have messed it up already give a mechanic a shot at it.
Why is the first part of the second amendment always ignored?
"A WELL REGULATED MILITIA, being necessary to the security of a free state,
The right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed."
Who then to regulate the militia? Would it not be the body that drafted the second amendment? That body being congress and by extention the federal government?
-
"A WELL REGULATED MILITIA, being necessary to the security of a free state,
The right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed."
Freedom from Britain, I think we've got that covered. Don't you think the militia these days is the police force.
MM
-
Why is the first part of the second amendment always ignored?
"A WELL REGULATED MILITIA, being necessary to the security of a free state,
The right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed."
Who then to regulate the militia? Would it not be the body that drafted the second amendment? That body being congress and by extention the federal government?
Fact is, Jim, it is hardly ignored, commonly by liberals who would like to redefine the term.
At the time the word "regulated" meant simply "organized and drilled", not "controlled" or anything remotely similar.
The militia of the time, as is well established by ALL writings of the day, was defined as all able-bodied males between certain ages (with a few exceptions, e.g., judges and clergy), supplying their own arms.
Some have the false notion that it refers to the National Guard, but that term simply didn't exist until about 1825.
Yes, claims are made of 370-odd years for it, but sorry, it just ain't so - the National Guard is a governmentally controlled organization, not the citizen body referred to in the 2nd Amendment.
One other note - the state militias of the time, referred to as "select militia", were totally distinct from the militia of the general populace, to which the 2nd Amendment refers, as is abundantly clear from the writings of the time.
Studying history is a PITA to many, but it does give one facts to counter emotionalism.
For anyone who cares about the facts behind and concerning the 2nd Amendment, no better place to start than "That Every Man Be Armed - The Evolution of a Constitutional Right" by Stephen P. Halbrook.
No, I don't get a royalty cut.
And MM- are you aware that in EVERY case the courts have held that the police are under NO legal obligation to protect anyone from anything.
Hardly conducive to "the security of a free state".
Terry
-
It seems kinda lame that some possibly good and hopeful news of things moving in the right direction has devolved into this arguing. Heck, the argument topic isn't even direct to the original topic, really.
People are going to have differing opinions, that's a fact.
We should all try to get along. If you think someone is trolling, why react? If they are, you're giving them what they want. If they aren't, then you are starting something yourself that isn't there, right?
(Sigh)!
R,
Chris
-
Yeah, but we're havin' fun while we wait on the results from Congress. ;D
Terry
-
Why is the first part of the second amendment always ignored?
"A WELL REGULATED MILITIA, being necessary to the security of a free state,
The right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed."
Who then to regulate the militia? Would it not be the body that drafted the second amendment? That body being congress and by extention the federal government?
Jim,
One of the things the judge Scalia was good at was reading and understanding what the language actually meant at the time it was written. You have to remember that back in the 1700s, verbiage was different then today. The words may seem clear to us but having read the Constitution and the Bill of Rights many times, I've found I've had to go back to the Federalists Papers to truly understand what out forefather's intentions were.
-
So then if we go back to determine the EXACT INTENT of the framers we have the right to bear single shot muzel loaders, correct? Sounds reasonable.
-
The exact intent of the framers was that citizens be armed with the common arms of the day.
Muzzleloading weapons are no longer the common arms.
Terry
-
The exact intent of the framers was that citizens be armed with the common arms of the day.
Muzzleloading weapons are no longer the common arms.
Terry
Yup. What that means is that the populace SHOULD be able to be equipped with equal weapons as the armed forces. Of course, that ability was taken away a long time ago.
-
Interesting thing about facts: they're still true whether you believe 'em or not.
-
Getting back to the original topic of this thread, while it's the part near and dear to our modellers' hearts, as I understand it (and I'm perfectly willing to be corrected), model aircraft are a minor aspect of the bill, the major part being (perhaps simplistically) transfer of ATC from the FAA to a private, government sponsored organization.
Pro spin: take it from the hands of the FAA who, by fiat, pass laws and levy taxes through "regulations", without redress by the people.
Con spin: don't put it in the hands of a private organization under airline and union control who can regulate to their ends, without redress by the people.
There really are larger issues than model aircraft involved and I think we might all do well to consider the larger impact before adopting a position on AIRR.
Terry
How to Spin an Issue: focus only on the aspects of an issue that suits your views, avoid at all costs directly addressing opposing views in rational discourse.
-
Why is the first part of the second amendment always ignored?
"A WELL REGULATED MILITIA, being necessary to the security of a free state,
The right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed."
Jim, there are lots of arguments going around about what was meant by the original intent of “Militia” when the Bill of Rights was written. I personally think it meant all able bodied males. But, if one wanted to be a stickler, one could reference the current government definition as codified in the current U.S. Code of Federal Regulations, updated at least as of Jan 15, 2015.
10 U.S. Code § 311 - Militia: composition and classes
(a) The militia of the United States consists of all able-bodied males at least 17 years of age and, except as provided in section 313 of title 32, under 45 years of age who are, or who have made a declaration of intention to become, citizens of the United States and of female citizens of the United States who are members of the National Guard.
(b) The classes of the militia are—
(1) the organized militia, which consists of the National Guard and the Naval Militia; and
(2) the unorganized militia, which consists of the members of the militia who are not members of the National Guard or the Naval Militia.
Note the use of the 9th word in section (a). All. Not just those that feel like it. So you could argue that at 52, I am no longer a member of the ”Well Regulated Militia”, even though the argument could also be made that as an ex-Navy member, that is pushed out to 64. But, I guarantee that no anti-gun activist would ever dare to try to make that point. For them to do so would be to argue that EVERY able male between 17 and 45 not only has the right, but the requirement to be armed with those evil black guns.
Just food for thought.
Mark
-
That current definition certainly agrees with the framers' intent, Mark.
For those who still wonder, here's a concise overview of the original usage in these quotes:
http://econfaculty.gmu.edu/wew/quotes/arms.html
They leave little room for argument unless argument is one's only purpose.
Terry
-
Yup. What that means is that the populace SHOULD be able to be equipped with equal weapons as the armed forces. Of course, that ability was taken away a long time ago.
So as a private citizen I should be able to posses nuclear arms?
-
So as a private citizen I should be able to posses nuclear arms?
Point taken Jim.
I was not clear with my comment.
I was in reference to firearms, as was the general gist of the ongoing discussion among the discussion.
-
That current definition certainly agrees with the framers' intent, Mark.
For those who still wonder, here's a concise overview of the original usage in these quotes:
http://econfaculty.gmu.edu/wew/quotes/arms.html
They leave little room for argument unless argument is one's only purpose.
Terry
Excellent quotes complete with sourcing.
Thanks Terry.
-
Interesting thing about facts: they're still true whether you believe 'em or not.
That's the best line I've heard in a long time! LL~ LL~ LL~
-
Excellent quotes complete with sourcing.
Thanks Terry.
Agreed. While I have read and reread the Federalist Papers, I found most interesting the quote from Hubert Humphrey. It reminds me that not that long ago people of conscious could reach across the table, find common ground and work together for the good of all Americans.
-
About 10 to 12 years ago, two very good friends of mine, and friends to a lot of people on the forum, told me a story
about the guy who put this thread into a tailspin. Lets call guy #one Joey, and guy # two is so funny he could make you hurl.
They were at the Nats, and sat down with a group of people to B.S for awhile, This is when they met R Peabody.
After about two seconds they both looked at each other and said the exact same thing..... We don't like him do we?
Some people are fantastic judges of character.
W.W.
-
When and if (which it will) a major hurricane hits Venice, Florida...there will be many anti 2nd amendment citizens trying to buy or borrow firearms to protect themselves...or depending on those with arms to protect them. This happened in Miami after hurricane Andrew. Anyone who was there knows how bad it was. One of my close friends is an avid competitive shooter and lives there. The story is interesting but to make it short he loaned 80 guns out to anti gunners. For those not living here then it was difficult to buy a handgun anywhere within 150 miles of Miami because all the people who didn't own firearms were buying them. That's when the NRA membership spiked.
-
Peabody,
I suggest you check your facts with history. It was conservative Republicans that freed the Slaves and gave the vote to Women. Liberals generally do nothing but complain and take credit for everything. Like "Hope and Change" Which means Change everything and use other peoples money to do it!
Liberalism is a mental disorder, defined as a general lack of the ability to actually think of consequences of their actions.
Randy Cuberly
Democrats, in 1854, passed the Kansas-Nebraska Act. This overturned the Missouri Compromise and allowed for the importation of slaves into the territories. Disgusted with the passage of this Act, free-soilers and anti-slavery members of the Whig and Democratic parties founded the Republican Party -- not just to stop the spread of slavery, but to eventually abolish it.
Emancipation? Republican President Abraham Lincoln issued the Emancipation Proclamation during the Civil War. In 1865, the 13th Amendment emancipating the slaves was passed with 100 percent of Republicans (88 of 88 in the House, 30 of 30 in the Senate) voting for it. Only 23 percent of Democrats (16 of 66 in the House, 3 of 8 in the Senate) voted for it.
In 1872 congressional investigations, Democrats admitted beginning the Ku Klux Klan as an effort to stop the spread of the Republican Party and to re-establish Democratic control in Southern states.
Do you oppose fascism? I should hope so. You would not, however, had you been a liberal in 1920s when the American Left was busy praising this new ideology of coercion and statism emerging in Europe.
Do you oppose communism? I should hope so. But you would not have, however, had you been a liberal in 1920s and 1930s. You would be celebrating the oppressive regimes that were murdering tens of millions of people in the name of “progress.”
Do you oppose needless war and bloodshed? I should hope so. But you would not, however, had you been a liberal in early 20th century, as you would probably have voted for a bitterly racist president who embroiled America in the one the most illogical, consequential and bloodiest conflicts in mankind’s history. Wilson told a delegation of blacks "segregation is not a humiliation but a benefit, and ought to be so regarded by you gentlemen."
Liberals want to use the federal government to take all of our choices away when it comes to guns, education, our retirement and our health care.
That doesn’t mean what you want is always wrong. It does mean that it is not necessarily right.
Well, the discussion has perhaps drifted from the original post, and I wasn’t gonna add to it ... but Randy and Bill, Thanks for posting these comments!
I became interested in politics & history at an early age; my dad encouraged it, and let his young son stay up until the end of every night of both the Democratic & Republican conventions in 1952.
And, for the life of me, I’ve never been able to understand why “African-Americans” are so solidly in the grip of the Democratic party. It would seem any intelligent reader ...
Dennis
-
Speaking of the 2nd amendment, I will be at the range this Sunday for my every other year CCW renewal class. Thank God and a lot of folks who gave their all for the 2nd amendment!!!!
-
Gosh, I hate to change the subject so rudely, but I got an email from AMA just today that said that we had to be registered by February 19, (but the AMA still says only R/C fliers have to register). It doesn't look like I'm going to be able to register by February 19 (of this year, but maybe by next year). So, am I going to be arrested and persecuted? If I am, I expect AMA will jump in front of FAA's armed enforcement agents and provide suitable legal council. LL~ Steve
-
I got the same E-Mail. I will not register. Hope they have a nice cell for me so I can live off the government my remaining years. VD~
-
Democrats, in 1854, passed the Kansas-Nebraska Act. This overturned the Missouri Compromise and allowed for the importation of slaves into the territories. Disgusted with the passage of this Act, free-soilers and anti-slavery members of the Whig and Democratic parties founded the Republican Party -- not just to stop the spread of slavery, but to eventually abolish it.
Emancipation? Republican President Abraham Lincoln issued the Emancipation Proclamation during the Civil War. In 1865, the 13th Amendment emancipating the slaves was passed with 100 percent of Republicans (88 of 88 in the House, 30 of 30 in the Senate) voting for it. Only 23 percent of Democrats (16 of 66 in the House, 3 of 8 in the Senate) voted for it.
In 1872 congressional investigations, Democrats admitted beginning the Ku Klux Klan as an effort to stop the spread of the Republican Party and to re-establish Democratic control in Southern states.
Do you oppose fascism? I should hope so. You would not, however, had you been a liberal in 1920s when the American Left was busy praising this new ideology of coercion and statism emerging in Europe.
Do you oppose communism? I should hope so. But you would not have, however, had you been a liberal in 1920s and 1930s. You would be celebrating the oppressive regimes that were murdering tens of millions of people in the name of “progress.”
Do you oppose needless war and bloodshed? I should hope so. But you would not, however, had you been a liberal in early 20th century, as you would probably have voted for a bitterly racist president who embroiled America in the one the most illogical, consequential and bloodiest conflicts in mankind’s history. Wilson told a delegation of blacks "segregation is not a humiliation but a benefit, and ought to be so regarded by you gentlemen."
Liberals want to use the federal government to take all of our choices away when it comes to guns, education, our retirement and our health care.
That doesn’t mean what you want is always wrong. It does mean that it is not necessarily right.
I hoped someone would put some facts out there. I always like to say, "we have the right to our own opinions, not our own facts. But the last time I jumped into one of these debates, I was attacked from all sides. Now I like to read these posts and sit on my porch cleaning my guns.
Edit: and playing with my model airplanes, which we can all agree "we love". at least we can agree on something.
-
I got the same E-Mail. I will not register. Hope they have a nice cell for me so I can live off the government my remaining years. VD~
LL~ LL~ LL~ LL~