Are we being purposely divided?

[716er]

37 minutes ago, Bandito said:

Propaganda? You are spewing propaganda! Lies and deceits about the vax and it's efficacy and affect on society.

The lie is “they” forced vaccines on “everyone”

[Tommy Callahan]

1 minute ago, SectionC3 said:

Beats me.  What you’re trying to say is that if no government issues such weapons to servicemembers, then the gun can’t be a weapon of war.  So what is war?  A declared conflict?  A terrorist action?  Harm inflicted by a lone wolf?  A militia action?  The point is that war can be conducted by an entity other than uniformed military, so I don’t ascribe to the point you’re attempting to make. 

Hoax.  That ruling said that the constitution does not contain a right to privacy.  After the same court had a contrary opinion for decades. 

in this country, by both houses of congress. its spelled out.

Shoot, in this country we have war zone level gun crime in many cities. its ignored for the most part. doesnt fit an agenda or something.  So like that non military entity? they use mostly handguns.

 

Having Row be a right under the privacy clause is why she said it was on weak standing

 

 

 

 

[Matt_In_NH]

So we need a thread to talk about forms you fill out to buy a gun?

[Tommy Callahan]

5 minutes ago, 716er said:

The lie is “they” forced vaccines on “everyone”

oh, they tried. if it wasn't for the courts at the 11th hour.

and we wont even get into how many took them cause the voices were threatening they Would loose their jobs if not vaccinated

 

 

[SectionC3]

39 minutes ago, Chris farley said:

in this country, by both houses of congress. its spelled out.

Shoot, in this country we have war zone level gun crime in many cities. its ignored for the most part. doesnt fit an agenda or something.  So like that non military entity? they use mostly handguns.

 

Having Row be a right under the privacy clause is why she said it was on weak standing

 

 

 

 

Hoax.  There is no privacy clause.  It’s the penumbra to which you refer. 

[716er]

If “they” forced the vaccines on “everyone” then “everyone” would have been vaccinated.

 

Millions and millions of Americans are unvaccinated.

 

Facts are facts.

 

 

[SectionC3]

3 minutes ago, Bandito said:

They did and lied about the effectiveness of them. It is not even a vaccine. It is a shot or therapeutic. The rhetoric and lies about the devils serum from the left are what totalitarian regimes do. Thankfully many athletes including Cole Beasley stood their ground and spoke the truth. They are modern day Muhammad Ali's. Yet are vilified for speaking the truth. The media censored truth to promote a globalist agenda and take over of our nation. It is very sickening to watch.

Hoax.  I don’t get sick watching it.  Probably because I’m vaccinated.  You should try it sometime.  Or maybe your lungs can turn to glue if you get COVID.  Not my concern, so long as you don’t gum up our hospital system or use public monies in your treatment. 

[Big Blitz]

7 hours ago, Matt_In_NH said:

Alex Jones is angry and serious and yells.  He has “sources”….the amount of people who go along with him is astonishing.   

What cable news station do you watch?

 

 

I don't watch TV "news."  

[ArdmoreRyno]

52 minutes ago, Matt_In_NH said:

So we need a thread to talk about forms you fill out to buy a gun?

 

We can! lol

 

Thing is, many people who are for gun control (or more of it) have little to no understanding on firearms or the laws we currently have, let alone how you go through buying one.

 

I've said it on the Guns thread... we have people, on both sides, who have no clue. My dad, a devout conservatives, even thought things like "You can get a gun at a gun show and they don't require any background checks at those shows, unlike a gun shop... and... you can convert a firearm to a machine gun by changing a button." Even Fox News gets firearm stuff completely wrong more often than right.

[716er]

14 minutes ago, Bandito said:

Did you respond to this with your mask on? If you can't see how people were forced to take it, then you are a lost soul. A beta male. A sheep who can't handle truth.

 

Millions of people were forced to take it or face threat of losing their jobs, and not be able to live freely as they did before (see vaccine passports in NYC and other major liberal cities). All this for a virus that had a 99.94% survival rate. 

“A beta male. A sheep who can’t handle truth.”

 

You sound like an absolute moron.

 

You have been brainwashed. 

[716er]

Above is another example of the brainwashing discussed in the first post. This guy is unhinged. 

[Doc]

Oh, the hypocrisy!

[All_Pro_Bills]

 

[leh-nerd skin-erd]

4 hours ago, Matt_In_NH said:

I think sources of propaganda are a key component of the subject here.   The topic is very detailed though.   I am not sure about the rich guy you are talking about.  
 

I feel strongly about stop the steal because it is complete bull crap and that has been proven in court time and again.    He had every opportunity to prove a case and the opposite has happened… nothing but made up nonsense.  The opposite is actually true he tried to steal the election and I guess you like that because you like him.  Is that a hardline?  So be it.  I also have a hard line position on student loans you can go to that thread and read my position there.  The “progressive” stuff is also nonsense.  
 

I don’t think trumps win in 2016 was illegitimate.  He identified and influenced the right people to get the win, it was shocking and ultimately brought out how powerful social media is.  

So, circling back on this topic before you move on.  You brought up the divisive nature of politics, wondering if it was purposeful etc.  You were decent enough to acknowledge the legitimacy of Trump's election, something most of the d-leaning folks don't do here. They typically ignore that issue, occasionally suggest they don't want to talk about that sort of politicking, then mumble something about cults and posters past.  

 

Here's my question for you.  If you agree that Trump was elected fairly, how do you square up leaders of the democrat party literally claiming he was not the legitimate President of the US?  How do you square up the former head of the CIA claiming he was guilty of treason?  How do those actions not impact trust and confidence for democrat and undecided voters at election time?   Hillary Clinton, and the DNC of course, worked directly with a foreign national to spread disinformation about her opponent, and were accused of (and settled) election integrity issues because of it. 

 

Do you see that as normal election banter, the back and forth that we see at election time?  No big deal?  Or, perhaps, it's something you find unsavory but felt it was appropriate to have two completely different standards in an attempt to defeat Trump?

 

I guess from sitting here and reading what you've shared, I'd think you would be outraged by the behavior of the dems from 2016-today.  In fact, the WH press secretary was questioned about her comments that Trump stole the election back in 2016, which certainly would seem to cause faith in our election process.  

 

 

 

[Boatdrinks]

21 hours ago, Matt_In_NH said:

This is exactly what I am talking about, you can only see it one way.   If I asked you which side, the left or right actually tried to unconstitutionally steal he presidential election, what would you answer?  This is absolutely backed up by facts in terms of 60 some odd court cases in which every nook, cranny, theory was brought to court and there was no substantial fraud found which could have influenced the election. Those are facts.

Sure , if you buy the Democrats lies. Fact : unverifiable paper ballots were mailed unsolicited. Fact : the Democrat party fought tooth and nail against any and all means of verifying the validity of these ballots , signatures etc. Fact : a U.S. Presidential election had never before consisted of so many paper ballots. So yes, if you ignore this and say no substantial fraud was found you are kidding yourself. The fraud was these ballots and that they were allowed to be used. Since they were allowed, no fraud was “ found”  it simply was allowed to take place right under our noses because the Democrat machine made sure of it.  Trump had sizable leads in swing states and they miraculously evaporated when all the phony paper “ ballots” were counted. The steal happened and was executed by the Democrat party. 

5 hours ago, Matt_In_NH said:

I think sources of propaganda are a key component of the subject here.   The topic is very detailed though.   I am not sure about the rich guy you are talking about.  
 

I feel strongly about stop the steal because it is complete bull crap and that has been proven in court time and again.    He had every opportunity to prove a case and the opposite has happened… nothing but made up nonsense.  The opposite is actually true he tried to steal the election and I guess you like that because you like him.  Is that a hardline?  So be it.  I also have a hard line position on student loans you can go to that thread and read my position there.  The “progressive” stuff is also nonsense.  
 

I don’t think trumps win in 2016 was illegitimate.  He identified and influenced the right people to get the win, it was shocking and ultimately brought out how powerful social media is.  

Trumps win in 2016 had zero to do with social media. It had a lot to do with Hillary Clinton , her putrid ideas and her outright dismissal of many Americans as “ deplorable”. 

[Orlando Tim]

We are being divided intentionally because so many people worry more about kindness than truth. We would rather lie and state "most secure election of all time" when it is absurd than admit the fact that our opposition got something correct. Right now some people are still arguing that the lockdowns through most of 2021 were a good idea, when there is no evidence it saved many lives and lots of evidence it damaged the lives of almost everyone else. It would be mean to point out that we screwed up apparently.

[Matt_In_NH]

15 minutes ago, Boatdrinks said:

 

Trumps win in 2016 had zero to do with social media. It had a lot to do with Hillary Clinton , her putrid ideas and her outright dismissal of many Americans as “ deplorable”. 

This is simply wrong.  Not sure if you think social media having an affect somehow changes how it should be perceived or something but it is well known that Trump had a very sophisticated targeted ad technique that absolutely had an influence.

[reddogblitz]

6 hours ago, BillStime said:

 

Yea ok - sure - maybe. Would you say you’re off to a good start with the most recent elections? 

 

You really are stuck living in the pre-Roe era…

 

 

 

"Protest is Patriotic"

 

Does that apply to 1/6 too?

[BillStime]

3 minutes ago, reddogblitz said:

 

"Protest is Patriotic"

 

Does that apply to 1/6 too?

 

Sure but that wasn't the plan for 1/6 after attendees were incited by speakers, Trump and Proud Boys circling the Ellipse:

 

 

 

 

[Boatdrinks]

22 minutes ago, Matt_In_NH said:

This is simply wrong.  Not sure if you think social media having an affect somehow changes how it should be perceived or something but it is well known that Trump had a very sophisticated targeted ad technique that absolutely had an influence.

Trump’s win wasn’t about a technique or advertising. It was about policy. His ideas made sense and appeal strongly to a large segment of Americans who see through the Democrats lies and policies of lunacy. Also their hatred of American ideals , capitalism and Caucasian Americans.