WOW DUDE! FOR A MOMENT THERE I THOUGHT YOU WERE MANNY RAMIREZ FOR THE LA DODGERS! LOLZ! Gun control is 4 the weak! Those who oppose gun ownership are too weak to learn how to use them properly. They don't have the backbone to stand up for freedoms because they hide behind Armed secret service or bodyguards! Dude we don't need any more gun laws. Gov. needs to enforce the 1's we have already! Guncontrol is for SOCIALISTS who want to control WE the PEOPLE! Criminals do not obey laws! We need arms!
Funny. Do you really think Nader is on our side? I think he is a branch of the establishment. The environmental lobby is destroying our liberties and he is a tool for them. In my opinion.
First off it is a crime of age not anything else.Look up brain cells and age.People lose just as many brain cells from the age of 70-72 as they did their hole life.The old man is simply brain dead at this point.You can see it in his judgment.The guy strangling his wife is a totally dif idea.Guns and the 2nd amendment is not about hunting.
I know it's not about hunting. Hunting just fits into my back to nature agenda. That's the first step is separating from this current system. The 2nd amendments true purpose is my second step. Protect your property.
I can't get into what seems like lack of parity in laws and criminal prosecutions, or even campaigns which you began with. You were all over the place with that stuff, too many tangents in your Vlogs. BUT...
What you ended up with is exactly what Iraq was about and still is. Replacing a dictatorship with a democratic freely elected government.
So we do try to instill what we have here elsewhere, but when we do we are looked at as war mongers.
It wasn't up to us to create a democratic government in Iraq. We were not invited by the people of Iraq, it was none of our business. Imposing democracy is an oxymoron.
Was Saddam awful? Of course, was he doing anything to us? Ah, no. There are a lot awful leaders, including George Bush.
War mongers, us? No. War profit mongers, Mr. Bush and his friends? Yes.
I got into this with seand, he ended up blocking me.
It wasn't a typical UN sanctioned action, but it was within the legal parameters set down by the UN. Removing Saddam was necessary in order for Iraq to comply, and you can't do that responsibly and leave a vacuum in government. So... we installed democracy.
There is not enough comment space to spell it out for you (the big picture) and what a free democratic Iraq means to the region. I'll just sy you swallowed the partisan BS.
Blocked?!?! wow, sorry to hear that. I don't agree with you, and believe you're the one that swallowed the BS. But differences lead to conversation which leads to education. As long as you're respectful, all is well.
Back to Iraq, did the UN kick Iraq out? And why Iraq, why not Saudi Arabia? It was not our place, we had no business doing it. Is democracy better? Yes, but that wasn't up to us. It was up to the people of Iraq to make that decision. Not Bush.
was it resolution 688? I could look it up but the action taken was legal and warranted by the evidence on hand. Saddam could have prevented it but did not.
The rest is history.
The arguments that exist are partisan and not based on legality, just the screwups and I admit there were plenty.
Insite of it all and the lack of popular support it's beginning to work. Iraq has a surplus of cash that will soon fund what remains to be done, and a stable 'responsible' government will be established.
There is no way any country can have free elections under occupation. I think the flouride and aspartame must be doing its job for someone to reach that conclusion.
Atoyota, There is no way any country can have free elections under occupation. I think the flouride and aspartame must be doing its job for someone to reach that conclusion.
If that's your conclusion I agree that flouride and aspartame is working well for the skeptics.
Personally I felt taking the risk of casting a vote in that environment, and having it displayed as blue dye on your finger? That takes both guts and a desire for a free election and self determination.
WOW DUDE! FOR A MOMENT THERE I THOUGHT YOU WERE MANNY RAMIREZ FOR THE LA DODGERS! LOLZ! Gun control is 4 the weak! Those who oppose gun ownership are too weak to learn how to use them properly. They don't have the backbone to stand up for freedoms because they hide behind Armed secret service or bodyguards! Dude we don't need any more gun laws. Gov. needs to enforce the 1's we have already! Guncontrol is for SOCIALISTS who want to control WE the PEOPLE! Criminals do not obey laws! We need arms!
LoganUpABongHit 3 years ago
VOTE NADER
RichGhettoGolfin 3 years ago
Funny. Do you really think Nader is on our side? I think he is a branch of the establishment. The environmental lobby is destroying our liberties and he is a tool for them. In my opinion.
Bujirock 3 years ago
First off it is a crime of age not anything else.Look up brain cells and age.People lose just as many brain cells from the age of 70-72 as they did their hole life.The old man is simply brain dead at this point.You can see it in his judgment.The guy strangling his wife is a totally dif idea.Guns and the 2nd amendment is not about hunting.
Edgrot 3 years ago
I know it's not about hunting. Hunting just fits into my back to nature agenda. That's the first step is separating from this current system. The 2nd amendments true purpose is my second step. Protect your property.
Bujirock 3 years ago
lol I know but sometimes I like to poke you a little to get you to put out your hole idea :)
Edgrot 3 years ago
We need to control illegal guns. As in unregistered guns.
commodore256 3 years ago
I don't think that I agree with the concept of illegal guns. The idiots doing illegal things with the guns are the problem.
Bujirock 3 years ago
you should spend some time analyzing paris hilton declaring candidacy for U.S. President.
darrin coe
darrincoe 3 years ago
I actually was going to run for President this year. But Barack Obama beat me to it.
Bujirock 3 years ago
you crack me up dude.
if you're serious go for it. although I'd start a little smaller like city council or something.
darrin coe
darrincoe 3 years ago
I can't get into what seems like lack of parity in laws and criminal prosecutions, or even campaigns which you began with. You were all over the place with that stuff, too many tangents in your Vlogs. BUT...
What you ended up with is exactly what Iraq was about and still is. Replacing a dictatorship with a democratic freely elected government.
So we do try to instill what we have here elsewhere, but when we do we are looked at as war mongers.
A lot of people breath easier with Saddam gone.
Atoyota 3 years ago
It wasn't up to us to create a democratic government in Iraq. We were not invited by the people of Iraq, it was none of our business. Imposing democracy is an oxymoron.
Was Saddam awful? Of course, was he doing anything to us? Ah, no. There are a lot awful leaders, including George Bush.
War mongers, us? No. War profit mongers, Mr. Bush and his friends? Yes.
simplytryin 3 years ago
I got into this with seand, he ended up blocking me.
It wasn't a typical UN sanctioned action, but it was within the legal parameters set down by the UN. Removing Saddam was necessary in order for Iraq to comply, and you can't do that responsibly and leave a vacuum in government. So... we installed democracy.
There is not enough comment space to spell it out for you (the big picture) and what a free democratic Iraq means to the region. I'll just sy you swallowed the partisan BS.
Atoyota 3 years ago
Blocked?!?! wow, sorry to hear that. I don't agree with you, and believe you're the one that swallowed the BS. But differences lead to conversation which leads to education. As long as you're respectful, all is well.
Back to Iraq, did the UN kick Iraq out? And why Iraq, why not Saudi Arabia? It was not our place, we had no business doing it. Is democracy better? Yes, but that wasn't up to us. It was up to the people of Iraq to make that decision. Not Bush.
simplytryin 3 years ago
was it resolution 688? I could look it up but the action taken was legal and warranted by the evidence on hand. Saddam could have prevented it but did not.
The rest is history.
The arguments that exist are partisan and not based on legality, just the screwups and I admit there were plenty.
Insite of it all and the lack of popular support it's beginning to work. Iraq has a surplus of cash that will soon fund what remains to be done, and a stable 'responsible' government will be established.
Atoyota 3 years ago
There is no way any country can have free elections under occupation. I think the flouride and aspartame must be doing its job for someone to reach that conclusion.
no2soylentgreen 3 years ago
Atoyota, There is no way any country can have free elections under occupation. I think the flouride and aspartame must be doing its job for someone to reach that conclusion.
no2soylentgreen 3 years ago
If that's your conclusion I agree that flouride and aspartame is working well for the skeptics.
Personally I felt taking the risk of casting a vote in that environment, and having it displayed as blue dye on your finger? That takes both guts and a desire for a free election and self determination.
Yup anyone that can't see that is delusional
or brainwashed.
Atoyota 3 years ago