TakeYouToTasker Posted February 26, 2018 Share Posted February 26, 2018 (edited) 2 hours ago, LA Grant said: EDIT: You keep dropping these things that reveal where you're getting your arguments, btw. Before it was the Wayne LaPierre plagiarism, now it's the multiple "Saul Alinsky" references which you seem to think is some clever insult because you've picked it up from second or third-hand from Newt Gingrich, apparently, either from Glenn or Rush or InfoWars. Try. Using. Your. Own. Brain. https://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424052970204624204577177272926154002 https://newrepublic.com/article/100030/gingrich-alinsky-saul-newt-catholic-carolina For anyone who wants the broad overview of what Tasker's attempting with "Alinsky" & where it comes from: https://www.vox.com/2014/10/6/6829675/saul-alinsky-explain-obama-hillary-clinton-rodham-organizing (The next step is for Tasker to claim, as with the LaPierre quote, that he's actually been using Alinsky as a reference/talking point waaaay before the rest of the Right did. I'm sure he liked it "before it was cool" because libertarians are the hipsters of the right.) Delusions on top of delusions. No, Grant, it's that I'm actually exceedingly well read, and have allowed the contents of my library (a term I'm using broadly) to shape my world view over the duration of my adult life. As such I can pull from a myriad of borrowed ideas (most of the concepts being discussed here aren't new), and I can combine them, discard them, expand on them, or lend them to any argument I'm making. Unlike say, you, for example, I don't get into drawn out discussions on topics where I have no expertise, because it's the height of idiocy to argue from ignorance. When someone is arguing using the techniques of Alinsky's Rules for Radicals, having read the book, I am able to identify it. Further, pointing out where your style of argument comes from isn't an insult, it's an observation. If you, and others on the left, don't like being associated with Alinsky, then stop using his techniques. As for your new go to, which is charges of plagiarism (personalize the argument, Saul!), my posting history proves you wrong, and once again names you either lazy or liar. At some point one would think you'd actually be compelled to make a real argument. Edited February 26, 2018 by TakeYouToTasker Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
row_33 Posted February 26, 2018 Share Posted February 26, 2018 you do good work on here Tasker, don't let him take you down. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deranged Rhino Posted February 26, 2018 Share Posted February 26, 2018 1 hour ago, jmc12290 said: For someone who believes in a Big Pharma conspiracy, you're quite dismissive there, Bob-O. He's not dismissive as much as he's dishonest. As as aside, we've had weeks now of coverage and outrage over this tragedy, compared to two days of coverage on Vegas. Why is that? Vegas had a bigger body count, more opportunities for gun control advocates to make stronger cases than they can in Florida - yet the anti gun people and media ignored Vegas. Why? (People need to start asking the right !@#$ing questions) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
row_33 Posted February 26, 2018 Share Posted February 26, 2018 7 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said: He's not dismissive as much as he's dishonest. As as aside, we've had weeks now of coverage and outrage over this tragedy, compared to two days of coverage on Vegas. Why is that? Vegas had a bigger body count, more opportunities for gun control advocates to make stronger cases than they can in Florida - yet the anti gun people and media ignored Vegas. Why? (People need to start asking the right !@#$ing questions) a children's school is a worse place to attack a CBS lawyer tweeted she was glad the Vegas people were murdered because they were probably GOP country western fans Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deranged Rhino Posted February 26, 2018 Share Posted February 26, 2018 Just now, row_33 said: a children's school is a worse place to attack a CBS lawyer tweeted she was glad the Vegas people were murdered because they were probably GOP country western fans The first explanation isn't why. The second is closer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
row_33 Posted February 26, 2018 Share Posted February 26, 2018 14 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said: The first explanation isn't why. The second is closer. are there any Dems in Congress remaining that served in the military? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted February 26, 2018 Share Posted February 26, 2018 6 minutes ago, row_33 said: are there any Dems in Congress remaining that served in the military? John McCain. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LA Grant Posted February 26, 2018 Author Share Posted February 26, 2018 1 hour ago, DC Tom said: The Constitutional argument is not a dead end, since that's what established the legal basis that "the right to bear arms shall not be infringed." The single biggest flaw in your argument...is that you're a histrionic idiot, actually. But the second-biggest is that you simply pretend the 2nd Amendment doesn't exist. It does. It is not an absolutist argument to point out that the 2nd Amendment exists and protects the right of EVERYONE to own a gun. You can't just dismiss it because it makes you wet your diaper. Infringed =/= inconvenienced. The idea that restrictions violate the Constitution has been debunked, as we've already agreed restrictions are necessary to the 1st Amendment. You can deal with taking a test to buy a gun. Plain and simple. There's no valid argument against it, except "they're not my kids, not my victims, not my responsibility" and/or "i personally didnt shoot anyone so why should i have to be inconvenienced." 1 hour ago, jmc12290 said: I will protect you. As I protect all too shortsighted and stupid to protect themselves. Do we have any proof JMC isn't actually Trump? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BringBackOrton Posted February 26, 2018 Share Posted February 26, 2018 3 minutes ago, LA Grant said: Infringed =/= inconvenienced. The idea that restrictions violate the Constitution has been debunked, as we've already agreed restrictions are necessary to the 1st Amendment. You can deal with taking a test to buy a gun. Plain and simple. There's no valid argument against it, except "they're not my kids, not my victims, not my responsibility" and/or "i personally didnt shoot anyone so why should i have to be inconvenienced." Do we have any proof JMC isn't actually Trump? Except for the people who can't pass the test. Then their right is being infringed upon. Retard. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
row_33 Posted February 26, 2018 Share Posted February 26, 2018 take a test? literacy tests are not required to vote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LA Grant Posted February 26, 2018 Author Share Posted February 26, 2018 43 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said: As as aside, we've had weeks now of coverage and outrage over this tragedy, compared to two days of coverage on Vegas. Why is that? Vegas had a bigger body count, more opportunities for gun control advocates to make stronger cases than they can in Florida - yet the anti gun people and media ignored Vegas. Why? (People need to start asking the right !@#$ing questions) Clearly the only explanation is it must be a conspiracy from the DEEP STATE and/or Hillary. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted February 26, 2018 Share Posted February 26, 2018 12 minutes ago, LA Grant said: Infringed =/= inconvenienced. Yes, it is. Inconvenienced is "infringed" in any other context you care to mention (for one example, voter ID). You're just being disingenuous. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deranged Rhino Posted February 26, 2018 Share Posted February 26, 2018 8 minutes ago, LA Grant said: Clearly the only explanation is it must be a conspiracy from the DEEP STATE and/or Hillary. Why did you decide to come to PPP after Parkland but not after Vegas? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LA Grant Posted February 26, 2018 Author Share Posted February 26, 2018 (edited) 20 minutes ago, DC Tom said: Yes, it is. Inconvenienced is "infringed" in any other context you care to mention (for one example, voter ID). You're just being disingenuous. Who's being disingenuous? If that's your position, that position would also logically oppose the Supreme Court's ruling on child porn, which would absolutely qualify as an infringement on 1A. You don't oppose those infringements, because they don't serve your Constitutionalist/fundamentalist argument. If you're arguing for any psycho to own any gun because any restriction violates 2A, you're also arguing for any psycho to own any media because any restriction violates 1A. If that's your view, fine. That is at least a consistent position. I obviously disagree with it, but you don't get it both ways. 11 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said: Why did you decide to come to PPP after Parkland but not after Vegas? Well, obviously I'm being paid handsomely by George Soros to be a crisis actor. Edited February 26, 2018 by LA Grant Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deranged Rhino Posted February 26, 2018 Share Posted February 26, 2018 8 minutes ago, LA Grant said: Well, obviously I'm being paid handsomely by George Soros to be a crisis actor. I'm asking you seriously. Why did you feel compelled to come down here after Parkland but not after more than twice the number of people got killed in Vegas? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Greybeard Posted February 26, 2018 Share Posted February 26, 2018 On 2/22/2018 at 1:55 PM, DC Tom said: Of course the criminal is dark-skinned... I object to the fact he has a beard. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deranged Rhino Posted February 26, 2018 Share Posted February 26, 2018 https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2018/02/incompetence_wasnt_the_problem_in_broward_county.html#.WpSKOXDBPgE.twitter Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LA Grant Posted February 26, 2018 Author Share Posted February 26, 2018 8 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said: I'm asking you seriously. Why did you feel compelled to come down here after Parkland but not after more than twice the number of people got killed in Vegas? Yeah, as I've said before, I'm not playing this game. Again — we've been through this crap, these tactics are tired. You're not asking me seriously, you're searching for any reason to discredit the argument. This isn't about me, as convenient as that would be for you. 3 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said: https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2018/02/incompetence_wasnt_the_problem_in_broward_county.html#.WpSKOXDBPgE.twitter Just... wow. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deranged Rhino Posted February 26, 2018 Share Posted February 26, 2018 1 minute ago, LA Grant said: Yeah, as I've said before, I'm not playing this game. Again — we've been through this crap, these tactics are tired. You're not asking me seriously, you're searching for any reason to discredit the argument. I am, in fact, asking sincerely. There must be a reason, right? What compelled you to come down to PPP after 17 people died but not when 58 people died in Vegas? You said yourself you want to stop shootings, yet you didn't feel bothered to fight the good fight before. Why now? What changed? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LA Grant Posted February 26, 2018 Author Share Posted February 26, 2018 1 minute ago, Deranged Rhino said: I am, in fact, asking sincerely. There must be a reason, right? What compelled you to come down to PPP after 17 people died but not when 58 people died in Vegas? You said yourself you want to stop shootings, yet you didn't feel bothered to fight the good fight before. Why now? What changed? Why do you think, fool? Because I'm not superhuman, because debating with NRA folks is rarely honest & never fun, because there have been a lot of shootings and I don't have an endless capacity for this BS. If I'd started this thread after Vegas, you'd be asking "well, why didn't you come to PPP for the previous shooting?" as a way to discredit the argument. On and on and on. You want to make this about me. It isn't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts