quote:

ORIGINAL: MrRodgers

The right has bloviated, harangued and propagandized for 40 years about how the left wants more govt. more govt. control, i.e., regulations, bigger govt. the party of govt. and the bureaucracy etc., etc. and now this ? Seriously ?

Anarchist: a person who seeks to overturn by violence all constituted forms and institutions of society and government, with no purpose of establishing any other system of order in the place of that destroyed.

The LAST thing in this world the left is...is an anarchist. Don't care who said or wrote it.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Sanity


Another thread is being derailed by some left wingers who dont seem to realize that the Sovereign Citizen threat is more of a left wing threat than anything:

"Although most organizations group Sovereign Citizens with other right wing groups, they are quite unique. Sovereigns do not specifically share the 'supremacist' views of the Klan, etc. Their focus is not on individuals (e.g., minorities, Jews, etc.) rather their focus is on government dysfunction and abuse of authority. Their anti-government ideology is arguably more akin to left wing anarchists than right wing Klansmen."

Something the New York Slimes neglected to mention

(May as well preemptively blame George Bush at this point)

(The Klan was always a Democrat organization BTW)

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

quote:

ORIGINAL: joether

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

quote:

ORIGINAL: cloudboy
"Leftist Anarchist" that's funny. Is that related to a "socialist libertarian?"

So you agree that most leftist ideology is about more and more government control.
However it is an historical fact that anarchists tend to have extreme left wing views.

There is 'mainstream' folks on the left and right of politics in this nation. From there, both have extremists that branch off into different areas. Many often have similarities to 'mainstream' Americans on the left or right. The remainder only seem to share a small or faint agreement to the mainstream. There are even extremists whom are moderates, if you can believe it....

The Southern Poverty Law Center often seems correct in its defining of extremist groups operating in and around the Untied States of America. Not just defining but giving examples of such groups in detail; making it an excellent source of information. On this subject, 'sovereign citizens' are folks that dislike rules of every type. Be they tax codes or posted speed limits. The ultimate in libertarian viewpoint. An utterly dangerous to the citizens of this nation! They are often found in areas that are politically red, ironically enough (or not so, once you understand them). And either in the mid-west or south; again, regions strong with libertarian presence and influence.

Along with all of this, sovereign citizens are quite the opposite from wanting goverment control (or more of it); just the opposite! They are anti-government in viewpoints.

SOURCE

The SCLC is a hypocritical joke led by a man as biased but more cynical than David Dukes.

quote:

ORIGINAL: NorthernGent

quote:

ORIGINAL: Sanity


Another thread is being derailed by some left wingers who dont seem to realize that the Sovereign Citizen threat is more of a left wing threat than anything:

"Although most organizations group Sovereign Citizens with other right wing groups, they are quite unique. Sovereigns do not specifically share the 'supremacist' views of the Klan, etc. Their focus is not on individuals (e.g., minorities, Jews, etc.) rather their focus is on government dysfunction and abuse of authority. Their anti-government ideology is arguably more akin to left wing anarchists than right wing Klansmen."

Something the New York Slimes neglected to mention

(May as well preemptively blame George Bush at this point)

(The Klan was always a Democrat organization BTW)

Doesn't the United States have somewhat of a history of Social Anarchism?

Perhaps not these days, but back in the mid to late 1800s when people arrived from Eastern Europe? We had the same thing here in parts of England when Russians, Poles, Germans came here.

They were watched by the authorities like the proverbial hawk, with meetings broken up and no real chance to gain any sort of foothold. That's what happens when you in any way attempt to subvert the established order. Although play by the rules and you're as free as a bird.

These days, I suppose Noam Chomsky is a social anarchist, but you'd hardly describe him as a threat. Worth listening to, though, whether you agree with him or not.

In certain countries, Anarchism could never possibly be a threat to anything for cultural and historic reasons.

quote:

ORIGINAL: joether

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

quote:

ORIGINAL: joether

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

quote:

ORIGINAL: cloudboy
"Leftist Anarchist" that's funny. Is that related to a "socialist libertarian?"

So you agree that most leftist ideology is about more and more government control.
However it is an historical fact that anarchists tend to have extreme left wing views.

There is 'mainstream' folks on the left and right of politics in this nation. From there, both have extremists that branch off into different areas. Many often have similarities to 'mainstream' Americans on the left or right. The remainder only seem to share a small or faint agreement to the mainstream. There are even extremists whom are moderates, if you can believe it....

The Southern Poverty Law Center often seems correct in its defining of extremist groups operating in and around the Untied States of America. Not just defining but giving examples of such groups in detail; making it an excellent source of information. On this subject, 'sovereign citizens' are folks that dislike rules of every type. Be they tax codes or posted speed limits. The ultimate in libertarian viewpoint. An utterly dangerous to the citizens of this nation! They are often found in areas that are politically red, ironically enough (or not so, once you understand them). And either in the mid-west or south; again, regions strong with libertarian presence and influence.

Along with all of this, sovereign citizens are quite the opposite from wanting goverment control (or more of it); just the opposite! They are anti-government in viewpoints.

SOURCE

The SCLC is a hypocritical joke led by a man as biased but more cynical than David Dukes.

And yet its a major resource for law enforcement across the entire nation. The information is researched, studied, and peer-reviewed for accuracy and fact. That your attempt to belittle the whole of the organization by a smear attack on one person, shows the real hypocrisy here. That you, Sanity, and HunterCA, do not understand the sovereign citizen movement in American says something. That you enjoy firearms as a right, the sovereign citizen takes to the extreme measure. You want to know the sort of people that are....REALLY....undermining the 2nd amendment? These guys!

Because the public, in all its ignorance, assumes someone like you, are like them. Since they are crazy, lunatic, and dangerous; its not hard for gun controllers (the very opposite group to gun nuts) of manipulating concern citizens from grouping gun owners (the opposite but closely aligned to concern citizens) as gun nuts. You and I can have a good discussion on firearm ownership and usage in America. Neither of us, could have that sort of discussion with a sovereign citizen. They dont care about anything or anyone beyond themselves; and think they have the legal proof to show it.

If you wish to maintain your ignorance on the subject matter, that's your freedom. But I am telling you to be very wary about how easily you can be 'dumped' into these crazy and dangerous people just be association with a firearm. 'Guilt by Association' is very common in the media. I find it rather surprising that you and others are rather mystified by this sovereign citizen movement. I would expect this ignorance of this movement (i.e. sovereign citizens) by more liberal and moderate people whom just assume dump you in with that crowd without consideration of fact or reasoning.

quote:

ORIGINAL: joether

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

quote:

ORIGINAL: joether

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

quote:

ORIGINAL: cloudboy
"Leftist Anarchist" that's funny. Is that related to a "socialist libertarian?"

So you agree that most leftist ideology is about more and more government control.
However it is an historical fact that anarchists tend to have extreme left wing views.

There is 'mainstream' folks on the left and right of politics in this nation. From there, both have extremists that branch off into different areas. Many often have similarities to 'mainstream' Americans on the left or right. The remainder only seem to share a small or faint agreement to the mainstream. There are even extremists whom are moderates, if you can believe it....

The Southern Poverty Law Center often seems correct in its defining of extremist groups operating in and around the Untied States of America. Not just defining but giving examples of such groups in detail; making it an excellent source of information. On this subject, 'sovereign citizens' are folks that dislike rules of every type. Be they tax codes or posted speed limits. The ultimate in libertarian viewpoint. An utterly dangerous to the citizens of this nation! They are often found in areas that are politically red, ironically enough (or not so, once you understand them). And either in the mid-west or south; again, regions strong with libertarian presence and influence.

Along with all of this, sovereign citizens are quite the opposite from wanting goverment control (or more of it); just the opposite! They are anti-government in viewpoints.

SOURCE

The SCLC is a hypocritical joke led by a man as biased but more cynical than David Dukes.

And yet its a major resource for law enforcement across the entire nation. The information is researched, studied, and peer-reviewed for accuracy and fact. That your attempt to belittle the whole of the organization by a smear attack on one person, shows the real hypocrisy here. That you, Sanity, and HunterCA, do not understand the sovereign citizen movement in American says something. That you enjoy firearms as a right, the sovereign citizen takes to the extreme measure. You want to know the sort of people that are....REALLY....undermining the 2nd amendment? These guys!

Because the public, in all its ignorance, assumes someone like you, are like them. Since they are crazy, lunatic, and dangerous; its not hard for gun controllers (the very opposite group to gun nuts) of manipulating concern citizens from grouping gun owners (the opposite but closely aligned to concern citizens) as gun nuts. You and I can have a good discussion on firearm ownership and usage in America. Neither of us, could have that sort of discussion with a sovereign citizen. They dont care about anything or anyone beyond themselves; and think they have the legal proof to show it.

If you wish to maintain your ignorance on the subject matter, that's your freedom. But I am telling you to be very wary about how easily you can be 'dumped' into these crazy and dangerous people just be association with a firearm. 'Guilt by Association' is very common in the media. I find it rather surprising that you and others are rather mystified by this sovereign citizen movement. I would expect this ignorance of this movement (i.e. sovereign citizens) by more liberal and moderate people whom just assume dump you in with that crowd without consideration of fact or reasoning.

quote:

ORIGINAL: HunterCA

quote:

ORIGINAL: NorthernGent

quote:

ORIGINAL: Sanity


Another thread is being derailed by some left wingers who dont seem to realize that the Sovereign Citizen threat is more of a left wing threat than anything:

"Although most organizations group Sovereign Citizens with other right wing groups, they are quite unique. Sovereigns do not specifically share the 'supremacist' views of the Klan, etc. Their focus is not on individuals (e.g., minorities, Jews, etc.) rather their focus is on government dysfunction and abuse of authority. Their anti-government ideology is arguably more akin to left wing anarchists than right wing Klansmen."

Something the New York Slimes neglected to mention

(May as well preemptively blame George Bush at this point)

(The Klan was always a Democrat organization BTW)

Doesn't the United States have somewhat of a history of Social Anarchism?

Perhaps not these days, but back in the mid to late 1800s when people arrived from Eastern Europe? We had the same thing here in parts of England when Russians, Poles, Germans came here.

They were watched by the authorities like the proverbial hawk, with meetings broken up and no real chance to gain any sort of foothold. That's what happens when you in any way attempt to subvert the established order. Although play by the rules and you're as free as a bird.

These days, I suppose Noam Chomsky is a social anarchist, but you'd hardly describe him as a threat. Worth listening to, though, whether you agree with him or not.

In certain countries, Anarchism could never possibly be a threat to anything for cultural and historic reasons.

Oh hell ya. I'm plenty close to being an anarchist myself. I actually admire the individualism and that is part of our heritage, you are correct. But, specifically, this is about anarchist terrorists. I admire anarchists if, as I do, they just wonder off and want the government to leave me alone, pave my roads, provide for my defense and a few other things. When you start blowing stuff up to force your point I begin to disagree with you.

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

quote:

ORIGINAL: MrRodgers

The right has bloviated, harangued and propagandized for 40 years about how the left wants more govt. more govt. control, i.e., regulations, bigger govt. the party of govt. and the bureaucracy etc., etc. and now this ? Seriously ?

Anarchist: a person who seeks to overturn by violence all constituted forms and institutions of society and government, with no purpose of establishing any other system of order in the place of that destroyed.

The LAST thing in this world the left is...is an anarchist. Don't care who said or wrote it.

Often anarchists want to destroy current government so that something better will rise from the ashes.

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

quote:

ORIGINAL: joether

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

quote:

ORIGINAL: joether

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

quote:

ORIGINAL: cloudboy
"Leftist Anarchist" that's funny. Is that related to a "socialist libertarian?"

So you agree that most leftist ideology is about more and more government control.
However it is an historical fact that anarchists tend to have extreme left wing views.

There is 'mainstream' folks on the left and right of politics in this nation. From there, both have extremists that branch off into different areas. Many often have similarities to 'mainstream' Americans on the left or right. The remainder only seem to share a small or faint agreement to the mainstream. There are even extremists whom are moderates, if you can believe it....

The Southern Poverty Law Center often seems correct in its defining of extremist groups operating in and around the Untied States of America. Not just defining but giving examples of such groups in detail; making it an excellent source of information. On this subject, 'sovereign citizens' are folks that dislike rules of every type. Be they tax codes or posted speed limits. The ultimate in libertarian viewpoint. An utterly dangerous to the citizens of this nation! They are often found in areas that are politically red, ironically enough (or not so, once you understand them). And either in the mid-west or south; again, regions strong with libertarian presence and influence.

Along with all of this, sovereign citizens are quite the opposite from wanting goverment control (or more of it); just the opposite! They are anti-government in viewpoints.

SOURCE

The SCLC is a hypocritical joke led by a man as biased but more cynical than David Dukes.

And yet its a major resource for law enforcement across the entire nation. The information is researched, studied, and peer-reviewed for accuracy and fact. That your attempt to belittle the whole of the organization by a smear attack on one person, shows the real hypocrisy here. That you, Sanity, and HunterCA, do not understand the sovereign citizen movement in American says something. That you enjoy firearms as a right, the sovereign citizen takes to the extreme measure. You want to know the sort of people that are....REALLY....undermining the 2nd amendment? These guys!

Because the public, in all its ignorance, assumes someone like you, are like them. Since they are crazy, lunatic, and dangerous; its not hard for gun controllers (the very opposite group to gun nuts) of manipulating concern citizens from grouping gun owners (the opposite but closely aligned to concern citizens) as gun nuts. You and I can have a good discussion on firearm ownership and usage in America. Neither of us, could have that sort of discussion with a sovereign citizen. They dont care about anything or anyone beyond themselves; and think they have the legal proof to show it.

If you wish to maintain your ignorance on the subject matter, that's your freedom. But I am telling you to be very wary about how easily you can be 'dumped' into these crazy and dangerous people just be association with a firearm. 'Guilt by Association' is very common in the media. I find it rather surprising that you and others are rather mystified by this sovereign citizen movement. I would expect this ignorance of this movement (i.e. sovereign citizens) by more liberal and moderate people whom just assume dump you in with that crowd without consideration of fact or reasoning.

I have met the head of the SPLC have you?
They have good press and anyone that anyone wants declared a right wing hate group just go to the SPLC and they will do it for you, particularly if you make a contribution.
And there you go trying to use something unrelated to foist your warped version of the 2nd and that same old refrain that if we don't do everything you want you will take all our guns away. I knew a guy who owned over 100 guns and was not half as obsessed with them are you are.

quote:

ORIGINAL: NorthernGent

quote:

ORIGINAL: HunterCA

quote:

ORIGINAL: NorthernGent

quote:

ORIGINAL: Sanity


Another thread is being derailed by some left wingers who dont seem to realize that the Sovereign Citizen threat is more of a left wing threat than anything:

"Although most organizations group Sovereign Citizens with other right wing groups, they are quite unique. Sovereigns do not specifically share the 'supremacist' views of the Klan, etc. Their focus is not on individuals (e.g., minorities, Jews, etc.) rather their focus is on government dysfunction and abuse of authority. Their anti-government ideology is arguably more akin to left wing anarchists than right wing Klansmen."

Something the New York Slimes neglected to mention

(May as well preemptively blame George Bush at this point)

(The Klan was always a Democrat organization BTW)

Doesn't the United States have somewhat of a history of Social Anarchism?

Perhaps not these days, but back in the mid to late 1800s when people arrived from Eastern Europe? We had the same thing here in parts of England when Russians, Poles, Germans came here.

They were watched by the authorities like the proverbial hawk, with meetings broken up and no real chance to gain any sort of foothold. That's what happens when you in any way attempt to subvert the established order. Although play by the rules and you're as free as a bird.

These days, I suppose Noam Chomsky is a social anarchist, but you'd hardly describe him as a threat. Worth listening to, though, whether you agree with him or not.

In certain countries, Anarchism could never possibly be a threat to anything for cultural and historic reasons.

Oh hell ya. I'm plenty close to being an anarchist myself. I actually admire the individualism and that is part of our heritage, you are correct. But, specifically, this is about anarchist terrorists. I admire anarchists if, as I do, they just wonder off and want the government to leave me alone, pave my roads, provide for my defense and a few other things. When you start blowing stuff up to force your point I begin to disagree with you.

That's not really what I meant.

"Individualism" does not equate to Anarchism. You can be an 'individual' from here to eternity providing you play by the established rules, which by extension is a narrow from of Individualism.

"Blowing stuff up" that's because an anarchist isn't necessarily concerned with the perceived wisdom of law, order, the protection of property etc.

The protection of property could possibly mean the preservation of the status quo - to them. I doubt they'd relate to your form of 'Individualism'.

Personally, I don't agree with their goals nor their methods and much prefer social order and change through the ballot box.

quote:

ORIGINAL: joether

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

quote:

ORIGINAL: MrRodgers

The right has bloviated, harangued and propagandized for 40 years about how the left wants more govt. more govt. control, i.e., regulations, bigger govt. the party of govt. and the bureaucracy etc., etc. and now this ? Seriously ?

Anarchist: a person who seeks to overturn by violence all constituted forms and institutions of society and government, with no purpose of establishing any other system of order in the place of that destroyed.

The LAST thing in this world the left is...is an anarchist. Don't care who said or wrote it.

Often anarchists want to destroy current government so that something better will rise from the ashes.

Incorrect. Most observing such individuals would think that. But realize that the anarchist doesnt want a government structure of any kind. Since such structure would force them to behave in a civilized manner. These folks are often the adult version of the 'Lord of the Flies' novel. A society that is constantly in flux, changing, and little regard or memory of what came before it.

Were the Founding Fathers anarchists? Since by your definition, they would be. No, because they wanted a new form of government to immediately take over from the monarchy. In fact, each four to eight years, this nation (the United States) 'destroys' the current government to replace it with another one. Are you going to say the people voting are all anarchists? The Bush and Obama administration are very different from each other. They use the same same legal criteria and laws for the most part. But....how....they go about them are very different. Hence they nor the people that voted them into public office, are anarchist!

quote:

ORIGINAL: NorthernGent

quote:

ORIGINAL: joether

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

quote:

ORIGINAL: MrRodgers

The right has bloviated, harangued and propagandized for 40 years about how the left wants more govt. more govt. control, i.e., regulations, bigger govt. the party of govt. and the bureaucracy etc., etc. and now this ? Seriously ?

Anarchist: a person who seeks to overturn by violence all constituted forms and institutions of society and government, with no purpose of establishing any other system of order in the place of that destroyed.

The LAST thing in this world the left is...is an anarchist. Don't care who said or wrote it.

Often anarchists want to destroy current government so that something better will rise from the ashes.

Incorrect. Most observing such individuals would think that. But realize that the anarchist doesnt want a government structure of any kind. Since such structure would force them to behave in a civilized manner. These folks are often the adult version of the 'Lord of the Flies' novel. A society that is constantly in flux, changing, and little regard or memory of what came before it.

Were the Founding Fathers anarchists? Since by your definition, they would be. No, because they wanted a new form of government to immediately take over from the monarchy. In fact, each four to eight years, this nation (the United States) 'destroys' the current government to replace it with another one. Are you going to say the people voting are all anarchists? The Bush and Obama administration are very different from each other. They use the same same legal criteria and laws for the most part. But....how....they go about them are very different. Hence they nor the people that voted them into public office, are anarchist!

I think the defining feature of Social Anarchism is that it assumes all authority is unjustified, and aims to place authority in the hands of the people. By extension, it assumes that Libertarianism is tyrannical as to them it will inevitably lead to power concentrated in the hands of a few powerful private enterprises. Libertarians, of the United States variety, would argue the opposite, of course; that being that free reign for private interests will inevitably lead to an equal distribution of power and market share. At this juncture, I think it is safe to say that history has proven the libertarians to be wide of the mark.

quote:

ORIGINAL: NorthernGent

And, Sanity, to answer the OP; I think you can rest in peace.

Neither the social anarchists nor 'ISIS' will be turning up at your door any time soon.

quote:

ORIGINAL: HunterCA
Well here's the problem Joe. There is the subject matter and there is the fantasy in your head. I really really do wish to remain ignorant of your fantasy world yes. So, as usual, I'm going to ignore you just like everyone else does. Have a good day.

quote:

ORIGINAL: joether

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

quote:

ORIGINAL: joether

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

quote:

ORIGINAL: joether

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

quote:

ORIGINAL: cloudboy
"Leftist Anarchist" that's funny. Is that related to a "socialist libertarian?"

So you agree that most leftist ideology is about more and more government control.
However it is an historical fact that anarchists tend to have extreme left wing views.

There is 'mainstream' folks on the left and right of politics in this nation. From there, both have extremists that branch off into different areas. Many often have similarities to 'mainstream' Americans on the left or right. The remainder only seem to share a small or faint agreement to the mainstream. There are even extremists whom are moderates, if you can believe it....

The Southern Poverty Law Center often seems correct in its defining of extremist groups operating in and around the Untied States of America. Not just defining but giving examples of such groups in detail; making it an excellent source of information. On this subject, 'sovereign citizens' are folks that dislike rules of every type. Be they tax codes or posted speed limits. The ultimate in libertarian viewpoint. An utterly dangerous to the citizens of this nation! They are often found in areas that are politically red, ironically enough (or not so, once you understand them). And either in the mid-west or south; again, regions strong with libertarian presence and influence.

Along with all of this, sovereign citizens are quite the opposite from wanting goverment control (or more of it); just the opposite! They are anti-government in viewpoints.

SOURCE

The SCLC is a hypocritical joke led by a man as biased but more cynical than David Dukes.

And yet its a major resource for law enforcement across the entire nation. The information is researched, studied, and peer-reviewed for accuracy and fact. That your attempt to belittle the whole of the organization by a smear attack on one person, shows the real hypocrisy here. That you, Sanity, and HunterCA, do not understand the sovereign citizen movement in American says something. That you enjoy firearms as a right, the sovereign citizen takes to the extreme measure. You want to know the sort of people that are....REALLY....undermining the 2nd amendment? These guys!

Because the public, in all its ignorance, assumes someone like you, are like them. Since they are crazy, lunatic, and dangerous; its not hard for gun controllers (the very opposite group to gun nuts) of manipulating concern citizens from grouping gun owners (the opposite but closely aligned to concern citizens) as gun nuts. You and I can have a good discussion on firearm ownership and usage in America. Neither of us, could have that sort of discussion with a sovereign citizen. They dont care about anything or anyone beyond themselves; and think they have the legal proof to show it.

If you wish to maintain your ignorance on the subject matter, that's your freedom. But I am telling you to be very wary about how easily you can be 'dumped' into these crazy and dangerous people just be association with a firearm. 'Guilt by Association' is very common in the media. I find it rather surprising that you and others are rather mystified by this sovereign citizen movement. I would expect this ignorance of this movement (i.e. sovereign citizens) by more liberal and moderate people whom just assume dump you in with that crowd without consideration of fact or reasoning.

I have met the head of the SPLC have you?
They have good press and anyone that anyone wants declared a right wing hate group just go to the SPLC and they will do it for you, particularly if you make a contribution.
And there you go trying to use something unrelated to foist your warped version of the 2nd and that same old refrain that if we don't do everything you want you will take all our guns away. I knew a guy who owned over 100 guns and was not half as obsessed with them are you are.

I've met Dick Cheney, does that mean anything to you?

While the CATO Institute (and many other conservative groups) operates in the manner you say, the SPLC often doesnt. The reasoning is rather simple and straight forward: undermines credibility. That most law enforcement at the local on up to the federal government uses this organization (and others) to define a particular group as dangerous or not. If what you say is true, that the SPLC is not correct on its notion of the 'sovereign citizen' movement; why can I find thousands of videos that show this mentality on display on youtube.com? Or hundreds of books by authors whom are both liberal and conservative that state this movement is crazy and dangerous? From TED talks to conversations with an FBI, these people are crazy and dangerous.

An they are the ones undermining your ability to have a firearm for any reason (constitutional or not). I would think this would infuriate you to no end.....

quote:

ORIGINAL: HunterCA

And I would agree with that. I don't believe that all authority is unjustified. Just "power", as opposed to authority, that is exercised outside of constitutional limits. I see the same point on down the line from the federal government to local governments. In this regard, I'm with the lefties, although I usually won't admit it to them, on big money in politics today. From day one I believed McCain Fiengold, our law dealing with political spending, was a travesty and a joke on the people and it continues to be.

quote:

ORIGINAL: HunterCA

quote:

ORIGINAL: NorthernGent
And, Sanity, to answer the OP; I think you can rest in peace.

Neither the social anarchists nor 'ISIS' will be turning up at your door any time soon.

Lol, I'm betting there are more anarchists per capita in the state in which Sanity lives than any other state. And ISIS has promised that they will visit us and have cells here now plotting things.

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD
You've met Dick Cheney, so that would give you insight if I was claiming he was a great source.

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD
I have met Morris Dees so that gives me some insight on him. I have also met his brother who has the same opinion of him that I do. I know several people who know him personally and except for the leftist he is conning they all say he is a hypocrite.

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD
I am infuriated by people who commit violent crimes.

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD
But unlike you I don't try to make political hay out of everything. It is not they who undermine my rights it is people like you who ignore a dozen armed citizens stopping something like this to pretend that one of these incidents is all that matters.

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD
And yes IT IS A CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT a fact which you have admitted was the intent of the writers but that your great wisdom overrides that.