Sharp as a Marble - Explains it all

<< You ain't nothin but a hound dog | Home | All gave some >>

Explains it all

Anti-Rights Idiocy , Politics

Remind me again what the hell the term 'liberal' is supposed to mean?

Frustrated liberals are asking why a Democratic-controlled Congress and White House can't manage to close the Guantanamo prison or keep new gun-rights laws from passing.

Preventing rights apparently is the new liberal way.

posted @ 5/24/2009 1:26:46 PM

Comments

DJ says:

on 5/24/2009 5:15:56 PM

Well, this story is why gun rights are necessary:

http://newsok.com/man-has-no-regrets-defending-oklahoma-city-pharmacy/article/3371710

This is personally interesting to me for two reasons:

1) The incident happened at 5:50 PM on Tuesday, May 19th. I drove past that store at about 2:00 PM the same day. That gives me pause, a bit.

2) The pharmacist pulled a gun from his pocket, stopped the first guy with a shot to the head (evidently not quite fatal or disabling), grabbed a Judge from a drawer, went after the second guy, and

"looked back to see the 16-year-old he had shot in the head getting up again. Ersland said he then emptied the Kel-Tec .380 into the boy’s chest as he kept going after the second robber."

Works for me.

Be patient, Robb. Get thee some Hornady Critical Defense rounds for yours.

Linoge says:

on 5/24/2009 5:22:05 PM

Well, honestly, that has always been the "liberal way" - just, these days, they are less uncomfortable with admitting it.

Gun Shy Tourist says:

on 5/24/2009 5:35:17 PM

The definition of a "liberal", is a person who hasn't realized yet that they are really a socialist or a marxist. Be patient and give them time to grow Robb. :)

Robb Allen says:

on 5/24/2009 8:00:15 PM

DJ, those are what I carry for the KT. Don't really plan on one shot one kill, but hopefully they'll give the perp pause enough to leave me the $#&* alone.

DJ says:

on 5/24/2009 9:14:27 PM

My sentiments 'zactly. Note that the second perp ran from the .380 and the first perp died from it.

Michael Hawkins says:

on 5/25/2009 9:31:02 AM

Let's make that: "self-proclaimed liberals" shall we?

Robb Allen says:

on 5/25/2009 9:33:44 AM

Michael, that's fine. Me? I consider myself a Classical Liberal. Today's 'self proclaimed liberals' or 'progressives' tend to be nothing more than socialists, which is the polar opposite of liberal.

Michael Hawkins says:

on 5/25/2009 8:16:07 PM

right on!
Socialisms origins trace back to the movements countering the absolute power of rich capitalists during the original industrial revolution (particularly in great Britain and Belgium)

These movements defended the rights of laborers and their families. Their name was later usurped by people seeking to diminish the rights of the people under the pretense of acting in their favor.

It is important to realize that the most horrible of atrocities are committed under the guise of the greater good, modern day liberalism is no different.

My only regret in opposing them is that most self-proclaimed liberals honestly believe they are doing he right thing.

straightarrow says:

on 5/26/2009 4:49:19 AM

I hate to tell you this Rob, but a "Classical Liberal" under our political system is a political conservative. He can be nothing else, for only a conservative reading of the Constitution of the United States of America allows for classical liberalism.

We are the only nation that has it as a tenet of our founding. We are also the only nation where conservatism and liberalism mean just the opposite of what they do in the rest of the world, politically speaking. It has to do with the direction of the flow of power. We alone of all the world's societies have proclaimed that the power flows from the governed to the governors, and not the other way 'round as in the rest of the world. What is conservatively interpreted here from our constitution recognizes the supremacy of the citizen and is therefore a conservative viewpoint (politically speaking).

What is liberally interpreted here from our constitution is an usurpation of the citizens supremacy and therefore is not liberal at all in the classical sense, as it grants powers to the state to which it is not entitled.

In other nations and throughout history, we being the only exceptions, any easing of the force of government is seen as a "liberalizing" because it allows more freedom to the citizen. Just the opposite of our model, wherein strict adherence to the actual wording of the constitution limits government power and leaves the ultimate authority in the hands of the citizen, in other words, classic liberalism, which provides that citizen the freedom we have declared his due.

Did you know you were a conservative?

DJ says:

on 5/26/2009 3:56:55 PM

Damn, but it's happened again:

http://newsok.com/oklahoma-city-homeowner-kills-intruder/article/3372682?custom_click=lead_story_title

The location is about 300 yards from the pharmacy in the story I linked to above.

DJ says:

on 5/27/2009 2:34:13 PM

Not to beat a dead horse (ahem) but the pharmacist who killed the robber in the story I related above has been charged with first degree murder:

http://newsok.com/oklahoma-city-pharmacist-faces-murder-charge-in-shooting/article/3372941

The money quote:

"The charge alleges Ersland shot Antwun Parker, 16, while he was incapacitated and lying on his back. Ersland’s account of the incident doesn’t match the video or the evidence collected at the scene, according to the affidavit written by Oklahoma City Police Detective David Jacobson."

Apparently the original story didn't tell the whole story.

Comments have been closed on this topic.

Comments

Archives

Categories

Comments

Archives

Categories

Second Amendment

Sharpest Marbles

Blogroll

Funny, as in Ha-ha

Good Reads

Extended Blogroll

Industry Links