Obama meets with Bloomberg

[photogpat]

Big surprise - they talk gun control.

http://www.cnn.com/2015/12/16/politics/ ... index.html

[LePetomane]

I wonder if Bloomberg was allowed to bring his armed thug bodyguards.

[Citiot]

Obama meeting with Bloomberg along with Obama's saying It's 'insane' that people on the 'no-fly' list can buy guns is sending chills down my spine. I think we are heading in the direction of "the burning of the Reichstag."

I'm not an ammo-sexual, knuckle dragging, skin-headed, mouth breathing gun-nut, rather I'm a normal, soft spoken, upper-middle-class, intelligent and educated family man.

I primarily vote (D), but these things have convinced me to vote (R) at least for the next election cycle. I bet lots of (D) folks are doing the same.

I don't take this lightly, but what is going on with people wanting to take away rights without due process and getting onto bed with a radical totalitarian billionaire is how things can change in an instant.

My former party seems to be dedicated to taking away that we cannot be "deprived of life, liberty or property without due process of law." The 5th amendment is so basic to American values, I am frighted as to what they are attempting.

Note: I still think that access to health care should be a right. We are human and take care of our own.

[igofast]

...
I primarily vote (D), but these things have convinced me to vote (R) at least for the next election cycle. I bet lots of (D) folks are doing the same.
....

Yep.

[Citiot]

...
I primarily vote (D), but these things have convinced me to vote (R) at least for the next election cycle. I bet lots of (D) folks are doing the same.
....

Yep.

One simple three letter word eloquently describes the "blowback" caused by the liberal radicals. Well done. Pure Shakespeare.

The irony of the anti-2A and anti-5 effort is the blow back is what is oft said..... Obama and Bloomberg are the best gun salesmen in history.

Perhaps we should secretly push for this crap in order to "wake up" the rest of the (D) folks? Do it in a sneaky way though, like post on social media things like "I absolutely believe there should be secret lists... the fifth amendment is only for people the government deems worthy"

[LePetomane]

I primarily vote (D), but these things have convinced me to vote (R) at least for the next election cycle. I bet lots of (D) folks are doing the same.

Bloomberg is a Republican but behaves like a liberal democrat.

With all due respect, you're part of the reason that these guys are in office. Regarding the second comment concerning (D) folks voting (R), I think they have a long way to go before they wake up,

[Citiot]

I primarily vote (D), but these things have convinced me to vote (R) at least for the next election cycle. I bet lots of (D) folks are doing the same.

Bloomberg is a Republican but behaves like a liberal democrat.

With all due respect, you're part of the reason that these guys are in office. Regarding the second comment concerning (D) folks voting (R), I think they have a long way to go before they wake up,

Point taken, but it's a bit more complicated. I'm what they call a "woodtick" liberal from northern MN. The (D)s up there are totally pro-2A, sorta fiscally conservative, etc. Without the (D)s from rural MN, we wouldn't have the gun freedoms we have now. My vote kept those guys in office.

As I get older, things get blurrier and blurrier. I voted for Obama for each election. Primary motivating factors was getting our troops out of the middle east and universal health care. Turned out, he didn't do what I thought he was going to do.

He did the first thing, but it created a power vacuum that created ISIS.

As far as universal health care, he didn't do enough. Medicare should have extended to cover more than just the retired folks. Obamacare turned out to be a complicated mess.

Global warming is a fact.

Abortion is wrong.

I take those "what party are you" online tests and I vacillate around quite a bit. Sometimes I am even libertarian (but I think that has more to do with my personal success through life). Heck, sometimes I end up in the "green" party.

But one thing we can for sure agree on is that the current (D) party is not what it was. I now see it as a threat and the only thing to stop the erosion of our rights is to vote (R) even though some of the (R) platform makes me barf.

[LarryFlew]

Turned out, he didn't do what I thought he was going to do.

Turned out, he didn't do what he said he was going to do. Fixed it and described every politician out there whether D or R.

[MNblockhead]

This scares me and it scares me that more people are not upset about this.

I'm a recovering liberal, who still has many liberal tendencies, and there is a lot about the right side of the American political spectrum that I'm not comfortable with.

I can't be as informed as I would like to be about every political issue, but I have a personal litmus test of sorts to help me make voting decisions: will putting you in office serve to protect or erode our civil rights?

We have let our fear of terrorists allow two administrations to erode and threat our right of due process. I don't see a Clinton, Trump, or Cruz presidency addressing this. Rand Paul would, but has no chance at the presidency.

It shocks me that my liberal friends don't see an issue with the no-fly/terrorist list being used to deprive people of their constitutional rights. They shouldn't even be able to be used to prevent you from flying without due process.

That said, where were all the my conservative friends years ago? We don't seem to care about secretive watch lists until they affect us. This is why we all need to defend our civil liberties and the civil liberties of other, even if we disagree with or don't like them.

I know many of my very conservative friends love to hate on the ACLU, but this is one area where they are doing a lot of the hard work:
https://www.aclu.org/blog/speak-freely/ ... s-freedoms

Many of my friends are surprised when I say that the two groups I donate the most to are the ACLU and NRA. I don't need to explain the importance of the NRA to anyone on this board, but despite the ACLU's historic oversight on the 2nd amendment (that said, the stances of local chapters vary on this state-to-state), there is no other organization that has done as much and as been as effective in defending our freedoms of speech and religion and our due process and equal protection rights.

Our civil liberties are entwined. You start weakening one area, it starts to unravel and weak the others. Protecting our 2nd Amendment rights means staunching defending the other, especially—in our current environment—the 1st, 5th, and the 14th.

[MJY65]

Point taken, but it's a bit more complicated. I'm what they call a "woodtick" liberal from northern MN. The (D)s up there are totally pro-2A, sorta fiscally conservative, etc. Without the (D)s from rural MN, we wouldn't have the gun freedoms we have now. My vote kept those guys in office.

As a former Ranger, I know what you're talking about, but I still don't get it. Other than the union bosses telling guys to vote D, it sounds like most of your key issues could be dealt with better by a Republican. There's no doubt that some of the Iron Range legislators are very pro 2a, but a Ranger or rural Minnesotan voting D on a national level makes absolutely no sense to me.

[photogpat]

Point taken, but it's a bit more complicated. I'm what they call a "woodtick" liberal from northern MN. The (D)s up there are totally pro-2A, sorta fiscally conservative, etc. Without the (D)s from rural MN, we wouldn't have the gun freedoms we have now. My vote kept those guys in office.

As a former Ranger, I know what you're talking about, but I still don't get it. Other than the union bosses telling guys to vote D, it sounds like most of your key issues could be dealt with better by a Republican. There's no doubt that some of the Iron Range legislators are very pro 2a, but a Ranger or rural Minnesotan voting D on a national level makes absolutely no sense to me.

Get the (R)'s to embrace science, stay away from women's bodies and stay out of the bedroom would be a good way to ensure I never vote (D) again...

[xd ED]

I'm not an iron ranger, but my brother married into a clan of them.
Great people to hang out with.
Christian, pro life, pro 2a...

My suspicions are that the mystery is tied to the origins and history of da range.
The earliest days we're an almost colonial, or feudal satellite existence with a thin to nonexistent line between work and every other aspect of life. Lots of eastern big money, and poor immigrants The mine unions changed that and thus I suspect that voting 'D' is learned at the knee of the elders along with the Bible, and learning to clean a rifle.

While the folks I know might not be quick to fill up their gun safes with ARs and an arsenal load of ammo, they are a far more gun friendly bunch than most of the metro area's residents.

[MJY65]

Point taken, but it's a bit more complicated. I'm what they call a "woodtick" liberal from northern MN. The (D)s up there are totally pro-2A, sorta fiscally conservative, etc. Without the (D)s from rural MN, we wouldn't have the gun freedoms we have now. My vote kept those guys in office.

As a former Ranger, I know what you're talking about, but I still don't get it. Other than the union bosses telling guys to vote D, it sounds like most of your key issues could be dealt with better by a Republican. There's no doubt that some of the Iron Range legislators are very pro 2a, but a Ranger or rural Minnesotan voting D on a national level makes absolutely no sense to me.

Get the (R)'s to embrace science, stay away from women's bodies and stay out of the bedroom would be a good way to ensure I never vote (D) again...

I agree with you on every one of those points, but 2a trumps them all in my decision.

[ex-LT]

Bloomberg is a Republican but behaves like a liberal democrat.

Nope.

A Democrat before seeking elective office, Bloomberg switched his party registration in 2001 to run for mayor as a Republican. He defeated opponent Mark Green in a close election held just weeks after the September 11 terrorist attacks. Bloomberg won a second term in 2005 and left the Republican Party two years later. He campaigned to weaken the city's term limits law and was elected to his third term in 2009 as an independent candidate on the Republican ballot line.

Granted, the above is from Wikipedia, but if Bloomberg is a Republican, I'm a fighter pilot. He's a political opportunist, and will loosely affiliate with whatever party he thinks will offer him the best opportunity to further his agenda.

[Citiot]

The last several posts are excellent. While I can't agree with all of them 100%, it is obvious the posters actually think and reason.

I especially liked MNBlockhead's astute summary:

"I can't be as informed as I would like to be about every political issue, but I have a personal litmus test of sorts to help me make voting decisions: will putting you in office serve to protect or erode our civil rights? "

Regarding da-Rānch (long a sound), yes, heavy union influence there, but, keep in mind that this is protected under the Bill of Rights:

"...Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances...." It also also connected with the implied "right to associate."

Collective Bargaining is really no different than an industry group pulling together (associating) and creating a PAC or hire a lobbyist (peaceably assemble). I don't think it is fair to do what the opposition is doing by supporting one part of the Bill of Rights and not the other.

Imagine the irony of a meeting of a large industry group pulling together for bettering themselves, then trying to come up with ways to destroy unions. "freedom of assembly and association for me and not for thee"

The middle class has dwindled very significantly.

The middle class is what drives a healthy economy. The middle class spends most of what they earn thus churning the economy.

Many things have caused the decrease of the large middle class. Things like globalization, poorer education as compared to many "up and coming countries" (they're churning out tons of engineers and scientists) and decrease in union power are contributing to this.

Many people simply consider unions a bunch of dumb, fat guys sitting on lawn chairs with strike signs.

Unions brought us the 40 hour work week, sick leave, medical, safe working conditions, pensions, etc which pretty much all of us here enjoy. Many unions are not really traditional unions, rather, they are "guilds" where they educate journeyman to provide better skilled workers to industry.

BTW, I have never been part of a labor union, but yes, as XD said, much of what I learned (was) at the knee of the elders along with the Bible, and learning to clean a rifle.