Recruiting Forum Off-Topic Thread II

[Catbone]

The dude literally makes 0 sense

 

[Grey_pilgrim]

The Darth Shiveman comments cracked me up. I've walked between belief and non-belief at times. Faith is something I struggle with. His comment about Cthulhu and the Necronomicon made me laugh. Also, I always enjoyed listening to Christopher Hitchens. His ability to turn a phrase was second to none. He was a very bitter person though.
One of my favorite quotes is from Richard Dawkins which is 'We are all atheists about most of the gods that humanity has ever believed in. Some of us just go one god further'.

 

[Skullbone]

It's almost like there are processes for overturning supreme court decisions that don't involve civil war.

But I totally get it. Losing always makes the wackos from the left threaten to move to Europe and the wackos from the right to start talking about drilling militias.

Nobody likes being a loser. Some take it harder than others.

Who said there weren't other processes? No one. You're trying to twist what I said and meant....again.

 

[Darth_Shiveman]

And yet it is truth. Jefferson was a product of his time. He was a great man who accomplished more good than little nothings like you or me ever will. But I'm sure it makes you feel better about yourself to criticize him.

Jefferson was a great mind and a accomplished a lot, no doubt. But he shouldn't be put on some pedestal. Just because he said something doesn't automatically make it a good or valid idea.

However, the product of his time thing doesn't ring all that true. There were plenty of of his peers who didn't own other humans. John Adams did just as much as a founding father and never owned a soul. Samuel Adams, Thomas Paine, and Alexander Hamilton never owned slaved. Ben Franklin was against slavery as early as the 1750s.

Funny thing is, Jefferson's own words on slavery show he knew it was wrong. But he wasn't willing to give up the luxury he'd grown accustomed to (the man was notoriously bad with money). It was so nice of him to posthumously free the children he had with Sally Hemmings though.







I'm not criticizing Jefferson to feel better about myself. I'm criticizing him because I think it's important to have frank discussions about the flaws and bad qualities of our historic figures as well as their good qualities.

Too many people nowadays prefer the whitewashed version of our history where none of our historic figures had any faults. I think it's misleading and gives us a skewed sense of the past and the present.

We need to understand that our great historic figures were men just like us. Many of them had huge character flaws. Society had major problems as well. It's important to keep that in perspective when people act like the world is ending and our past was filled with nothing but morally upright demi-gods who could do no wrong.

 

[Darth_Shiveman]

If the far left keeps disenfranchising a outnumbered, but still huge chunk of America. It is going to be ugly eventually. I don't know where you live. But here in the lowlife, blue collar, non elitist hinterland I hear those words everyday. There is a growing hatred for the urban elitist left. That is real.

Who is being disenfranchised? Blue collar fold aren't being disenfranchised. The republicans have a majority in the senate and the house of representatives (and it's looking like that will probably stay the same after this election)

People on the right are jus upset because they're not fairing well in the presidential elections lately. And that can mostly be chalked up to the combination of changing demographics in the US and the fact that the GOP is undergoing somewhat of in identity crisis at the moment.



I don't doubt that you hear things about people having contempt for the left. But I highly doubt anything will come of those people's grumblings in the way of revolt or violence. We hear people saying this type of stuff every election cycle.

 

[Darth_Shiveman]

Who said there weren't other processes? No one. You're trying to twist what I said and meant....again.

I had to decide whether my sensibilities and my stomach were more important than sitting by and allowing the end of the Bill of Rights. There is no changing the Supreme Court's rulings if Hillary is elected.

The damage will have already been done and it will be permanent. Nothing short of civil war or a convention of States can change the damage that will be done by the judicial branch if Hillary Rotten Clinton is elected.

2 questions:

1. What exactly were you trying to convey on the bolded part here? It definitely sounds like you're implying a civil war will be necessary to undo any supreme court rulings made after Hillary picks a new SCJ.

2. What pending rulings do you see being so harmful that we'll need a civil war to resolve?

3. How exactly will the Bill of Rights end if Hillary becomes president? Would you not call that hyperbolic?

 

[Ulysees E. McGill]

Jefferson was a great mind and a accomplished a lot, no doubt. But he shouldn't be put on some pedestal. Just because he said something doesn't automatically make it a good or valid idea.

However, the product of his time thing doesn't ring all that true. There were plenty of of his peers who didn't own other humans. John Adams did just as much as a founding father and never owned a soul. Samuel Adams, Thomas Paine, and Alexander Hamilton never owned slaved. Ben Franklin was against slavery as early as the 1750s.

Funny thing is, Jefferson's own words on slavery show he knew it was wrong. But he wasn't willing to give up the luxury he'd grown accustomed to (the man was notoriously bad with money). It was so nice of him to posthumously free the children he had with Sally Hemmings though.







I'm not criticizing Jefferson to feel better about myself. I'm criticizing him because I think it's important to have frank discussions about the flaws and bad qualities of our historic figures as well as their good qualities.

Too many people nowadays prefer the whitewashed version of our history where none of our historic figures had any faults. I think it's misleading and gives us a skewed sense of the past and the present.

We need to understand that our great historic figures were men just like us. Many of them had huge character flaws. Society had major problems as well. It's important to keep that in perspective when people act like the world is ending and our past was filled with nothing but morally upright demi-gods who could do no wrong.

I never said he didn't have flaws. Flaws and all he was a great man. It is easy to sit here hundreds of years later and pick the man to death. He and the other founding fathers of this country are heroes to me. I am not a man like them. And neither are you.

 

[Ulysees E. McGill]

Who is being disenfranchised? Blue collar fold aren't being disenfranchised. The republicans have a majority in the senate and the house of representatives (and it's looking like that will probably stay the same after this election)

People on the right are jus upset because they're not fairing well in the presidential elections lately. And that can mostly be chalked up to the combination of changing demographics in the US and the fact that the GOP is undergoing somewhat of in identity crisis at the moment.



I don't doubt that you hear things about people having contempt for the left. But I highly doubt anything will come of those people's grumblings in the way of revolt or violence. We hear people saying this type of stuff every election cycle.

You will poo poo anything I say in response, but I said originally that it wouldn't happen soon, but know this. It is not just a few people. And it is not just minor grumbling. There are seeds of real hatred being sown in all those backwater flyover states.

 

[Darth_Shiveman]

I never said he didn't have flaws. Flaws and all he was a great man. It is easy to sit here hundreds of years later and pick the man to death. He and the other founding fathers of this country are heroes to me. I am not a man like them. And neither are you.

Never tried to compare myself to Thomas Jefferson. Not sure why I would. I just think as a society we tend to over-idolize a lot of our national icons and it leaves us with a skewed view of history.

But is it Jefferson the man you see as a hero, or Jefferson the symbol? Because a lot of Jefferson's thoughts and actions seem to be in direct conflict to opinions I've seen you express on here. I can go in to more details if you'd like (not gonna list them out because you haven't taken too kindly to pointing out his flaws yet).

Not trying to tell you which founding father you should look up to or anything, but I really think John Adams is probably closer to the mark for you. I highly, highly recommend David McCullough's biography of him if you ever have the chance to give it a read.

 

[Darth_Shiveman]

You will poo poo anything I say in response, but I said originally that it wouldn't happen soon, but know this. It is not just a few people. And it is not just minor grumbling. There are seeds of real hatred being sown in all those backwater flyover states.

Just FTR, what kind of resistance do you see coming from those seeds? I may disagree, but I'm truly curious.

 

[Ulysees E. McGill]

Just FTR, what kind of resistance do you see coming from those seeds? I may disagree, but I'm truly curious.

It depends on if they manage to disarm the masses peacefully or not. When/if the government ever tries to disarm the American people, then it will go bad quickly. I'm not an advocate of violent rebellion. But I don't live in Shangri-La, I know what happens when society as whole disintegrates. The same thing that happens all throughout history. I hope we can hold it together a while longer.

 

[Ulysees E. McGill]

Never tried to compare myself to Thomas Jefferson. Not sure why I would. I just think as a society we tend to over-idolize a lot of our national icons and it leaves us with a skewed view of history.

But is it Jefferson the man you see as a hero, or Jefferson the symbol? Because a lot of Jefferson's thoughts and actions seem to be in direct conflict to opinions I've seen you express on here. I can go in to more details if you'd like (not gonna list them out because you haven't taken too kindly to pointing out his flaws yet).

Not trying to tell you which founding father you should look up to or anything, but I really think John Adams is probably closer to the mark for you. I highly, highly recommend David McCullough's biography of him if you ever have the chance to give it a read.

I know what Jefferson was. I don't understand the need to disavow the greatness he managed to accomplish in spite of his personal vacillation in principles. I do admire John Adams.

 

[Darth_Shiveman]

I know what Jefferson was. I don't understand the need to disavow the greatness he managed to accomplish in spite of his personal vacillation in principles. I do admire John Adams.

Who's disavowing his accomplishments? Acknowledging that the man had character flaws and was a hypocrite on the issue of liberty doesn't undo the great accomplishments he had. It just humanizes him and makes him more interesting.

I mean, even the man's greatest act as president required the guy to compromise his political principles. That's interesting!

If we just brush all the bad stuff under the rug, we're robbing ourselves of our own history.

 

[densojb3]

Hillary for prison 2016!

 

[Darth_Shiveman]

It depends on if they manage to disarm the masses peacefully or not. When/if the government ever tries to disarm the American people, then it will go bad quickly. I'm not an advocate of violent rebellion. But I don't live in Shangri-La, I know what happens when society as whole disintegrates. The same thing that happens all throughout history. I hope we can hold it together a while longer.

Yeah I get that, but what do you think people will actually do? What kind of revolt do you guys expect to see?

Like an actual organized effor at a civil war?

 

[Mick]

"Disarm the masses" How would that even happen? Door to door saying "give me your guns", make everyone a felon, repeal the 2nd. None of that will ever happen. Now if the economy completely collapses (no money, no job, and no food to feed their family) people with guns in rural areas can hunt while others may give in to the guns for food program setup by the government. I really want to hear any kind of scenario where it could happen. The government (federal, state, and local) does not have the manpower to do door to door and if they did try they couldn't let the people they took guns from contact anyone so they would have to be incarcerated. Not enough jails and all of this would have to happen in a communication blackout. Fear is the path to the dark side.

 

[InVOLuntary]

"Disarm the masses" How would that even happen? Door to door saying "give me your guns", make everyone a felon, repeal the 2nd. None of that will ever happen. Now if the economy completely collapses (no money, no job, and no food to feed their family) people with guns in rural areas can hunt while others may give in to the guns for food program setup by the government. I really want to hear any kind of scenario where it could happen. The government (federal, state, and local) does not have the manpower to do door to door and if they did try they couldn't let the people they took guns from contact anyone so they would have to be incarcerated. Not enough jails and all of this would have to happen in a communication blackout. Fear is the path to the dark side.

According to Hillary and many on the left, the second amendment doesn't mean that citizens can personally own firearms. Give her the chance to appoint several SCOTUS justices, and the second amendment can be redefined with a stroke of a pen. They won't knock on your door but they will regulate them into extinction by executive order. It won't happen overnight but over decades. Don't fool yourself, total disarmament of the general public is the left's ultimate goal.

Darth makes it sound like these things can easily be redone but that is simply not the case. Once the laws, regulations and rulings are in place, it's extremely difficult to reverse them.

 

[Ulysees E. McGill]

"Disarm the masses" How would that even happen? Door to door saying "give me your guns", make everyone a felon, repeal the 2nd. None of that will ever happen. Now if the economy completely collapses (no money, no job, and no food to feed their family) people with guns in rural areas can hunt while others may give in to the guns for food program setup by the government. I really want to hear any kind of scenario where it could happen. The government (federal, state, and local) does not have the manpower to do door to door and if they did try they couldn't let the people they took guns from contact anyone so they would have to be incarcerated. Not enough jails and all of this would have to happen in a communication blackout. Fear is the path to the dark side.

In my almost fifty years on this earth, I have seen many things happen, that I never thought could happen.

 

[Darth_Shiveman]

According to Hillary and many on the left, the second amendment doesn't mean that citizens can personally own firearms. Give her the chance to appoint several SCOTUS justices, and the second amendment can be redefined with a stroke of a pen. They won't knock on your door but they will regulate them into extinction by executive order. It won't happen overnight but over decades. Don't fool yourself, total disarmament of the general public is the left's ultimate goal.

Darth makes it sound like these things can easily be redone but that is simply not the case. Once the laws, regulations and rulings are in place, it's extremely difficult to reverse them.

Yeah, because an armed revolt against the government with the most powerful military in human history is the easiest, most viable option.

 

[Ulysees E. McGill]

According to Hillary and many on the left, the second amendment doesn't mean that citizens can personally own firearms. Give her the chance to appoint several SCOTUS justices, and the second amendment can be redefined with a stroke of a pen. They won't knock on your door but they will regulate them into extinction by executive order. It won't happen overnight but over decades. Don't fool yourself, total disarmament of the general public is the left's ultimate goal.

Darth makes it sound like these things can easily be redone but that is simply not the case. Once the laws, regulations and rulings are in place, it's extremely difficult to reverse them.

This why I like you invol. You put my thoughts into words in a lot more clear and concise way than I can. Those actions could eventually lead to armed conflict, but seeing as how the left is alienating the police and military..who would enforce it?

 

[Darth_Shiveman]

In my almost fifty years on this earth, I have seen many things happen, that I never thought could happen.

C'mon man. The cubs were bound to win the pennant at some point or another

 

[InVOLuntary]

Yeah, because an armed revolt against the government with the most powerful military in human history is the easiest, most viable option.

I actually chuckled at this. Where on God's green earth did I even hint at an armed revolt? You're really reaching to pick a fight.

 

[Darth_Shiveman]

I actually chuckled at this. Where on God's green earth did I even hint at an armed revolt? You're really reaching to pick a fight.

That reply was more for the benefit of others here who seem to think Hillary winning the election means an inevitable armed revolt of some sort.

I assumed you were also speaking out in favor of that opinion. We all know the old adage about assuming lol my bad

 

[InVOLuntary]

This why I like you invol. You put my thoughts into words in a lot more clear and concise way than I can. Those actions could eventually lead to armed conflict, but seeing as how the left is alienating the police and military..who would enforce it?

Total disarmament of the American public quickly is not realistic and the left knows it. They'll start by limiting what you can buy. They'll limit how often you can buy. They'll make you have to wait an exorbitant amount of time between purchase and possession. (They do this now with regulated items such as suppressors and short barreled rifles, often taking up to a year after purchase to take possession). They'll regulate ammo and tax both firearms and ammo to where many won't be able to afford it. Once they basically stop the manufacture and importation, then they'll regulate the use. Designated shooting ranges and you'll have to store your firearm at a certified range (this already is the case in Canada). Before long many won't go through the trouble of ownership and just give in. They'll still be many guns in private hands and the black market will be in full force.

How long will it take? I'd say 30-50 years if the left stays in power long enough.

 

[InVOLuntary]

That reply was more for the benefit of others here who seem to think Hillary winning the election means an inevitable armed revolt of some sort.

I assumed you were also speaking out in favor of that opinion. We all know the old adage about assuming lol my bad

I don't think they'll be a large scale armed revolt but I do think there could be some small scale uprisings around the country we've seen this happen on small scales in recent history. I could see it becoming more organized and some small militias doing some gorilla type stuff.