Understanding Progressives

In case you hadn’t realized that progressives are both completely insane and very dangerous. This comment was among the most popular on a Guardian Bundy hit piece.

ScreenHunter_307 Apr. 19 18.02

A rancher’s armed battle against the US government is standard libertarian fare | Kieran Suckling | Comment is free | theguardian.com

The Guardian worries about NSA spying, but has no problem with Feds sending a massive paramilitary operation to settle a legal dispute with a 67 year old rancher whose family has been raising cattle on that land for 140 years. Their readers want the military to launch lethal drone attacks on political opponents.

Advertisements

About stevengoddard

Just having fun
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

28 Responses to Understanding Progressives

  1. Gunny G says:

    Reblogged this on CLINGERS… BLOGGING BAD ~ DICK.G: AMERICAN ! and commented:
    GyG!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

  2. It would be great if your post made a little sense. Try harder.

  3. D. Self says:

    This a-hole is a product of public education and a State Run Media.

  4. Pathway says:

    These are the same communist inspired and lead peace demonstrators of the 60’s.

  5. Jason Calley says:

    Steve, your post makes an important point — and one that needs to be driven home. If someone tells you that they favor gun control, ask them HOW they plan to implement it. Ask them whether they plan on using persuasion or whether they plan on just passing some laws about it. The answer is always, “Oh, we need to pass some laws!” Ask them, “And if people refuse to comply, what then?” “Then we will fine them or arrest them!” Ask them, “But what if people will not comply? What if they resist?” Invariably, the gun control nuts always base their new system on “If you fail to comply, if you fail to do what we demand, we will send men with guns and body armor to kill you.” I have never met a gun control nut who failed to support having armed men murder peaceful men. It may take a few questions, but the truth is, they have no problem with murder — as long as the person being murdered is someone who disagrees with them. Are they really that hypocritical, or are they simply lying?

    THAT is why free men need to retain arms — because there exists an unscrupulous group of other men who would enslave or murder them, all the while telling us that it is for our own good..

  6. Mike D says:

    EricMaine did a pretty good job there. Another thing the lamb doesn’t realize is it would have the exact opposite effect. Using military weaponry to enforce the collection of grazing fees would be so overboard that instead of quieting anyone down, it could set of some pretty scary events. It would get toward pick a side time as there’d be no sitting on the sidelines.

    • Justa Joe says:

      I was thinking the same thing. Bombing hasn’t done much to stop people from using firearms on any conflict that I can ever remember. It may kill the targeted people,. but every survivor or compatriot of the targeted person has their resolve to pick up arms and fight is increased.

    • Keitho says:

      Sending armed men to collect a purported debt is something only gangsters could be expected to do.

      What have we come to as a nation that we extract payment using menace. The Federal government is completely out of control. Regardless of the wrongs and rights of who owes what sending Feds with guns to collect is the absolute height of hyperbole.

  7. Andy DC says:

    I would assume gun control would simply lead to a black market, as what always happens when you try to control or ban anything.

    if you look back at Waco, you can see that Government people in positions of authority had no qualms about murdering innocent women and children thru incineration in a wholesale fashion. They had no trouble finding people willing to carry out those orders.

    • geran says:

      You’re correct Andy. And Waco triggered the OKC bombing.
      And not ONE government employee was prosecuted.

    • Ben Vorlich says:

      Here in the UK we have incredibly tight gun control. Since Dunblane* it is almost impossible for an honest citizen to own a handgun. It hasn’t stopped criminals obtaining and using handguns on a regular basis, nor has it stopped people going on shooting sprees like Derrick Bird who killed 12 people and injured 11 others before killing himself in Cumbria, and Raoul Moat in Northumbria also in 2010. None of Derrick Bird’s victims could defend themselves.

      Dunblane 16 children and one teacher killed.

      According to Wikipedia for the year to March 2013 gun crime breaks down as
      By crime type:

      Violence against the person:

      Homicide = 30
      Attempted murder/GBH with intent = 503
      Other = 1,484
      Robbery = 2,206

      Burglary = 102
      Criminal damage = 2426 (2,091 of which involved air weapons)
      Other = 1384

      I use the argument how much of the gun crime would be happening if victims were able to defend themselves properly.

      Steve, you are right in your campaign.

    • _Jim says:

      For a little different perspective on this, check out “Cold Zero” by Christopher Whitcomb.

      http://www.amazon.com/Cold-Zero-Inside-Hostage-Rescue/dp/0316601039

      It was not quite as simple as “… murdering innocent women and children thru incineration in a wholesale fashion. ”

      Recorded ‘Title III’ evidence shows that Vernon Wayne Howell ordered the fires lit, and the autopsy shows close-order gun shots to Vernon and one of his first lieutenants, indicating suicides …

  8. Gail Combs says:

    A bit more background:
    From Maurice Strong’s Aspen Institute: Homeland Security and Intelligence: Next Steps in Evolving the Mission (Open and read the PDF) For those who do not know Maurice Strong, he is a Globalist Anti-American pushing CAGW and currently hiding in China after getting caught with his hand in the till in the UN Oil for Food scam.

    Meet the 72 Types Of Americans That Are Considered “Potential Terrorists” by the Obama Administration
    Remember “Ron Paul” bumper stickers were targeted as “Red flags” in Misouri, Tennesee and other states.

    The general rule for me is if Alex Jones says it, don’t take it seriously….

    Some news stories out of Missouri helped with the credibility of the story, especially an article from the Columbia Tribune:

    “The Modern Militia Movement,” the report is dated Feb. 20 and designed to help police identify militia members or domestic terrorists. Red flags outlined in the document include political bumper stickers such as those for U.S. Rep. Ron Paul, talk of conspiracy theories…

    when Neal read the report, he couldn’t help but think it described him. A military veteran and a delegate to the 2008 Missouri Republican state convention, he didn’t appreciate being lumped in with groups like the Neo-Nazis.

    “I was going down the list and thinking, ‘Check, that’s me,’ ” he said. “I’m a Ron Paul supporter, check. I talk about the North American union, check. I’ve got the ‘America: Freedom to Fascism’ video loaned out to somebody right now. So that means I’m a domestic terrorist? Because I’ve got a video about the Federal Reserve?”
    […]
    [S]tate law enforcement officials said the report is being misinterpreted. Lt. John Hotz of the Missouri State Highway Patrol said the report was compiled by the Missouri Information Analysis Center based in Jefferson City and comes purely from publically available, trend data on militias.

    Hotz said MIAC, which opened in 2005, is a “fusion center” that combines resources from the federal Department of Homeland Security and other agencies. It was set up to collect local intelligence to better combat terrorism and other criminal activity, he said.

    “All this is an educational thing,” Hotz said of the report. “Troopers have been shot by members of groups, so it’s our job to let law enforcement officers know what the trends are in the modern militia movement.”….

    http://www.unitedliberty.org/articles/ron-paul-supporters-terrorists

    So the reason given for targeting innocent citizens that do not support Obama (and that is the real description of Domestic Terrorist) is that police are being shot by “conspiracy driven” militia.

    Do note how Hotz first says “Troopers have been shot by members of groups” He doesn’t mention those “groups” are mostly likely criminal gangs or drug runners he just tack onto the end of the sentence ” it’s our job to let law enforcement officers know what the trends are in the modern militia movement.”

    Talk about a slick sales job! Exactly how many police have been shot by Constitution loving “militia groups”? Heck how many cops have been shot period?

  9. Gail Combs says:

    So lets look at those statistics on cop shootings:
    Number Of Officers Killed In The Line Of Duty Drops To 50-Year Low

    The go-to phrase deployed by police officers, district attorneys and other law enforcement-related entities to justify the use of excessive force or firing dozens of bullets into a single suspect is “the officer(s) feared for his/her safety.” There is no doubt being a police officer can be dangerous. But is it as dangerous as this oft-deployed justification makes it appear?

    The annual report from the nonprofit National Law Enforcement Officers Memorial Fund also found that deaths in the line of duty generally fell by 8 percent and were the fewest since 1959.

    According to the report, 111 federal, state, local, tribal and territorial officers were killed in the line of duty nationwide this past year, compared to 121 in 2012.

    Forty-six officers were killed in traffic related accidents, and 33 were killed by firearms. The number of firearms deaths fell 33 percent in 2013 and was the lowest since 1887.

    This statistical evidence suggests being a cop is safer than its been since the days of Sheriff Andy Griffith. Back in 2007, the FBI put the number of justifiable homicides committed by officers in the line of duty at 391. That count only includes homicides that occurred during the commission of a felony. This total doesn’t include justifiable homicides committed by police officers against people not committing felonies and also doesn’t include homicides found to be not justifiable. But still, this severe undercount far outpaces the number of cops killed by civilians…

    Look at Seattle. As Reason points out, 20% of its 2013 homicides were committed by police officers…

    The escalating adoption of military equipment and tactics has also contributed to the steady “justifiable homicide” count.

    The escalating adoption of military equipment and tactics has also contributed to the steady “justifiable homicide” count. No S**t Dick Tracy!

    Militarized police overreach: “Oh, God, I thought they were going to shoot me next”
    Local law enforcement’s often using SWAT teams to do regular police work. The results are frightening — and deadly
    Cheye Calvo the mayor of the small town of Berwyn Heights, Maryland, who went through a police swat team home invasion got a Maryland state law passed (despite fierce opposition by law enforcement) “…on how many times the team was deployed, for what purpose, and whether any shots were fired during the raid. It was a simple transparency bill. It put no limits or restrictions on how often or under what circumstances SWAT teams could be used….” Now why would law enforcement fiercely oppose a modest reporting law like that? One would think they might have something to hide?

    By the following spring, the Maryland Governor’s Office of Crime Control and Prevention released the first batch of statistics. They were predictably unsettling. For the last half of 2009, SWAT teams were deployed 804 times in the state of Maryland, or about 4.5 times a day. In Prince George’s County alone, which has about 850,000 residents, a SWAT team was deployed about once a day. According to an analysis by the Baltimore Sun, 94 percent of the state’s SWAT deployments were to serve search or arrest warrants, leaving just 6 percent that were raids involving barricades, bank robberies, hostage takings, and other emergency situations. Half of Prince George’s County’s SWAT deployments were for what were called “misdemeanors and nonserious felonies.” More than one hundred times over a six-month period, Prince George’s County sent police barreling into private homes for nonserious, nonviolent crimes. Calvo pointed out that the first set of figures confirm what he and others concerned about these tactics have suspected: SWAT teams are being deployed too often as the default way to serve search warrants, not as a last resort…..

    So the police are now terrorizing the local citizens, WITHOUT a justifiable reason and in many cases bungling the job and shooting innocents. Like a kid with a toy gun or an old man in his bed.
    “Why did you shoot me? I was reading a book”: The new warrior cop is out of control ….a SWAT team in Virginia Beach shot and killed security guard Edward C. Reed during a 3:00 AM raid on a private club… among several other innocent people. Of course not one of these officers spent one day in jail. Heck the families can not even sue without the permission of the government!

    Who’s to Blame for Battlefield America? Is It Militarized Police or the Militarized Culture?:
    : https://www.conservativeactionalerts.com/2013/11/whos-to-blame-for-battlefield-america-is-it-militarized-police-or-the-militarized-culture/

    Fact Sheet: Guns Save Lives

  10. Stephen Ray says:

    Someone does not understand them at all. If they did, they would call them what they are. Communists.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s