Last updated on 2015.02.24
House Bill 1116 goes before Senate Judiciary tomorrow morning alongside House Bill 1096. Both bills revise our concealed weapons permit laws. HB 1096 is the mellower of the two, clarifying how the background check for a concealed weapons permit will be conducted and tightening rules to keep immigrants from getting guns. House Bill 1116 goes much further, essentially declaring the concealed weapons permit superfluous and repealing all laws against walking around with a gun hidden in your britches and bras. HB 1116 includes the further absurdity (Section 7) of removing the restriction on giving concealed weapons permits to people who have violated South Dakota weapons laws.
If a gun bill is nuts, you can bet South Dakota Gun Owners is backing it. I read on Facebook the radical gun advocacy group is cold-calling to rouse support for HB 1116. Another friend forwards this SDGO letter backing HB 1116:
Boy, I hope SDGO's gun aim is better than their rhetorical aim. This February 2015 letter contains three absurdities.
First, SDGO exec Ray Lautenschlager asserts that there is an "anti-gun crowd in Pierre." If there is anyone to whom one might apply this appellation in Pierre, they most certainly do not constitute a "crowd."
Second, Lautenschlager says, "The right to bear arms in self defense is absolutely vital." (Beware absolutes... but then what do we expect from a group whose letterhead boasts, "26 Years Without Compromise"?) "Why should a law-abiding citizen first ask permission from the government in order to defend themselves or their family?"
Two points off for failure of number agreement (a citizen... themselves or their family). Ten points off for misstating a question of law: No law-abiding citizens have to ask permission from the government in order to defend themselves or their families. If someone attacks my family, I can throw a punch, throw rocks, or throw my car into gear and get away very quickly. I can call the cops and my lawyer for proper civil protection. I can keep a gun in my house and even walk around town with my gun on my hip if that's what I think it takes to defend my family, all without government's permission.
What I can't do without a permit is sneak my gun into public spaces. When we turned to concealed weapons, we are no longer talking about an absolute right to self-defense. We are talking about surreptitious behavior with a deadly weapon amidst unsuspecting neighbors. If you crave that hazardous privilege, the state can make a case that it has a public interest in imposing the minimal intrusion, less than what we impose on folks driving cars on public roads, of asking you to pay a fee and get a permit so we have a chance to check your background.
Third, SDGO claims that HB 1116 will "restore the God-given rights of law-abiding South Dakotans to bear arms...."
I don't need to consult my Reverend wife to know that Jesus handed out bread and wine, not guns and ammo, at the Last Supper.
Rep. Dan Kaiser (R-3/Aberdeen), a co-sponsor of HB 1116, committed the same constitutional and theological errors in comments at Saturday's Aberdeen crackerbarrel:
Right now, you can legally open carry anywhere in South Dakota, so all of a sudden it’s illegal if your sport coat is over your pistol. The Second Amendment is clear — you have a right to bear and carry arms. I don’t understand how you can outline rights given to you by God and then you have to ask permission from the state to exercise those rights [Rep. Dan Kaiser, statement at crackerbarrel, reported by Bryan Howarth, "Lawmakers Debate Guns, Common Core," Aberdeen American News, 2015.02.22].
The right to bear arms exists in the national constitutions of three countries. Ours comes from a Bill of Rights written 226 years ago. It is far form a divine commandment.
The Second Amendment, like every other amendment, is not absolute. Nor is it Scripture. South Dakota Gun Owners should knock off their misrepresentations, and the South Dakota Legislature should leave our concealed weapons permitting process in place.
That t-shirt is Example 1A of Christianists' propaganda. Terrorist Islamists would be proud of the steps the American Christianists are taking.
I am ashamed of what the American Christianists are doing.
Just guessing that Dan Kaiser is one of those cafeteria Christians who chooses to use his own ignorant view of the Bible as a cudgel rather than a guide.
This is for you Rep. Kaiser.
I have news for these bozoheads, if you want your little guns because you think that will defend yourself against the government, don't look up. When you do, you just might be spotted by something you cannot defend yourself from. These things fly into some pretty hot zones with some pretty sophisticated stuff trying to gun them down. Looks to me like that does not work so well. Their fear of each other make me laugh at them. I can't wait for them to open fire on one another in a misdirected assault. You have to thin the herd, one idiot at a time
Who is fighting the second amendment restrictions that prevent undocumented workers from buying guns to keep the government from deporting them?
these people and these movements ruin gun ownership for hunters and religion for tradititional Christians. why would such powerful groups allow crackpots like this to hang around? it does not sway my opinion in their favor, on the contrary, it moves me away from things that I used to enjoy and toward a total disdain for gun ownership and organized religion.
Jeff, you raise an interesting point. Fourteen of the sponsors of the documentation bill (HB 1096) are also sponsoring the concealed weapons permit repeal (HB 1116). They want to weaken the government's ability to require documents to exercise the right to bear arms, but they want to increase the government's ability to require documents to exercise the right to work. 12% of South Dakotans have concealed weapons permits; surely only some smaller percentage of that subset exercises that right every day, and far fewer actually use those concealed weapons in any way that substantively improves their quality of life. 454,000 South Dakotans—53% of our population—participate directly in our workforce, and almost everyone else in the state depends on some member(s) of that workforce for their daily bread. If permits are tyranny, then the folks sponsoring HB 1096 and HB 1116 are raging against a "tyranny" that hinders the practical liberty of a tiny minority of South Dakotans while strengthening a "tyranny" that, if resisted, would hinder the daily sustenance of nearly every South Dakotan.
It seems to me that everyone of the 9-11 hijackers would still be able to buy all the guns in 'murrica they want,if they were alive. Thanks to the NRA and wingnuts. I guess an armed enemy who might go after a Lib is a friend the NRA will sleep with.
Someone said truth is the first casualty in war. A tip of the hat to that person. This is a war as far as wingnuts are concerned and the more collateral damage,the happier they will be as long as someone has to die.
"...Sell your coat and buy one"? Absurd. A good coat is only worth about a tenth the price of an AR15 in monetary terms but worth a thousand times more in protection from real, actual dangers. And it looks as though SDGO has the NRA schtick down pat; scary scenario, jingoism, then hit 'em up for the cash!
Good point about coats, JonD. The money spent on guns, ammo, and proper training could be spent to meet much more immediate and practical needs. I have never needed to shoot anyone or anything, but I get enormous daily utility from my warm coat.
South Dakota Democrats: go buy the best gun you can afford, practice using it then prepare to defend yourselves and your families from your neighbors.
When are gun owners gonna band together and collect guns for needy school kids? Or would that be SOCIALISM?
Hey little girl,that nasty boy that dunked your pigtails in the inkwell,well now honey just pull your pink .25 and drill the little bas#@$#. That'll learn him. You have that right.
Nick Smith from the Bismarck Tribune on actions in the ND legislature: "HB1157 concealed carry for elected officials bill narrowly defeated. The vote was 45-47."
I am most likely will get thrown under the bus for this, however, it won’t be the first nor will it be the last.
The decision to own and carry a firearm includes accepting an awesome responsibility and should not be taken lightly.
Some people believe they can go out buy a handgun, fill out a form, and poof! they’re protected from all that may harm them.
The key to protection is not the gun, rather the person pulling the trigger. Do they have the skill needed to make sure they hit their intended target? Do they know when to shoot and when not to shoot? The list of questions goes on and on.
Our current system is weak. There is no testing, no proof of proficiency, no proof that person can safely handle a gun. A background check is good, but, it is only a start.
18% of cops public shots fired hit the mark. will look for cite
jeff-u gonna run for something 2016 or sooner?
we need your leadership
MC-you are exactly right.
Most people never consider the possibility of
the gun being wrestled away from them.
MC: "Our current system is weak."
You can say that again.
I actually do have a concealed carry permit because I own guns and didn't want to run afoul of the law if I wanted to transport a firearm to or from a gun range or when hunting etc. I don't carry and that wasn't my reason to obtain the permit, but going through the process enlightened me.
I filled out a form - paid $10, and they said they would run a background check. A week later I came back and they gave me a temporary permit. A week or so after that the permanent permit came in the mail. All things considered it took all of about 10 minutes of my time and the most difficult question I had to answer was whether I lived in the same county for at least 30 days.
There was no assessment of my mental stability beyond a question of if I have ever been found a "danger to self" or a "danger to others" with no evidence required to support either answer. There was no question whether or not I understood how to operate a firearm. There was no test component to prove that I knew when and where I was allowed to carry a firearm.
Now in theory, the "background check" should prevent those with known mental issues or criminal backgrounds from obtaining a permit right? Yet I know someone who was involunarily committed to an inpatient mental health facility and WAS classified as being a danger to ohters... yet he qualifies to have the same permit I do (I have to assume he lied on his application - but he still has the permit). So do the background checks reallly work? I don't think so.
I'd love to see mandatory operation and safety training. I'd love to see a test to determine aptitude, mindset, and knowledge of the firearms. I'd like to see a requirement for an instructor to sign off on such a permit, and I'd love to see a strengthened database to prevent certain people from obtaining (not to mention carrying) firearms such as those convicted of felonies or those who have a diagnosed mental disorder, etc.
Yet I don't expect it to happen. You see there are a lot of people who feel the 2nd Amendment shall be without limitation. They will argue it makes sense to make it harder to get a driver's license than it does to get a CCW permit because there is no right to drive stated in the Bill of Rights. They will fight for everyone to have a gun at all times regardless of criminal or mental history because they feel any limits is a slippery slope which will end with taking all of our guns away. They will argue that everyone should be able to carry those firearms whereever they choose whether it is a courtroom, church, school, or government building because any limits only mean criminals will be the only ones with guns.
The thing is... there appear to be a lot of those types of people, and therefore any middle ground we find will lean more towards more gun rights and less towards common sense.
Sort of makes me wonder what will need to happen before we see a change in policy, and how much havoc and death will we need to deal with when that occurs?
my 18 year old son spent his $10, applied for a permit, took his birthday $ from me and bought a military style rifle (the one i kept saying "no" to, from the local big box), 1000 rounds, and less than 30 days later, shot himself dead in his car as a senior in high school.
the permit showed up in the mail a few days later. none of his family had almost no idea of any of it.
i say, turn that paper work around faster so the high school parking lots can be full of guns. same thing i told stan a. then.
Doesn't much matter what John Q Public wants for gun registration,background checks,etc. The source/authority and by gawd the only people you have to impress is the NRA and they say no way, Jose. Registration leads to confiscation,leads to Obama is taking your guns,leads to outright lies and deception and wingnut pols do the NRA's bidding to get their coveted grades.
Sorry to hear about your loss,Leslie. No parent on Earth should ever have to bury one of their children. The NRA won't care.
I've heard many people saying that what is needed is training in the operation of firearms and in assessment of possible situations where one might be used but I don't really believe that is nearly as much of an issue as is this country's attitude towards guns themselves. Twice in recent years, men who were ex-military and were state certified, professional firearms instructors handed fully automatic combat submachine guns to preadolescent children and just told them to cut loose, with easily predictable results. In one case the child was killed, in the other the "competent" instructor himself died. All the training in the world won't help as long as people handle guns without being constantly focused on what a gun is and what it will do.
Please make no mistake, I still believe in the Second Amendment. The strongest part of America is not our government, or our military, it is our people.
What concerns me is our younger generations are going to learn to fear guns or worse yet, think of them as toys.
We (as parents) need to better job teaching our children to respect, not fear, guns. We need to teach them there is a time and a place to shoot.
leslie, I am so sorry for your loss. I cannot begin to imagine how difficult it would be to deal with losing a child.
MC, thank you for that clear-eyed view. Please work on getting your fellow Republican voters to acknowledge that fact.
In good news, the NRA testified this morning in favor of both HB 1096 and HB 1116, and Senate Judiciary had the guts to tell the NRA no! Both bills are dead! Whoo-hoo!
That story, along with what JonD says, emphasizes the point that we need to change the general attitude about guns. American lore (history, books, movies, video games, culture) makes too many people believe guns are simple problem-solving tools. Far from it. Guns represent a fear that is out of proportion to most of our daily lives. Guns represent a willingness to use deadly force that is out of proportion to the daily problems we face. Guns make violence quick and easy... and violence should be neither.
Rough stuff, Leslie. Words fail me. I'm so sorry.
Certainly puts all else in perspective.
Leslie, I'm so sorry for your loss.
I want to express my sympathy to you to Leslie. What terrible heartbreak. I'm very sorry.
thank you sweet people. it has been some years now. pine ridge is struggling right now.
Does South Dakota have a castle doctrine? Or stand your ground? I tried looking it up and some sites said we do indeed have a castle doctrine but no links to the actual law itself. Can anybody clarify this?
Nevermind. Found it.
22-16-34. Justifiable homicide--Resisting attempted murder--Resisting felony on person or in dwelling house. Homicide is justifiable if committed by any person while resisting any attempt to murder such person, or to commit any felony upon him or her, or upon or in any dwelling house in which such person is.
"or to commit any felony"—so if I run a business, and if I walk into the accountant's office and see her trying to fudge the books to embezzle $1,100 from me, I can shoot her?
Dinah Burns was walking her dog on a path near an elementary school when two men approached her with a baseball bat. One of the men said, “You’re coming with us.” Burns asked what they wanted as she reached into her pocket. When the man with the baseball bat came toward her and raised the bat aggressively, Burns pulled out the firearm she carried. She pointed the gun at them and said, “I have this and I’m not afraid to use it.” Both assailants backed off immediately and fled the scene. Burns and her dog were left unharmed, and no shots were fired. “I’m very thankful that it turned out the way it did, and hope it doesn’t happen again, but I will be prepared,” Burns said. (The Daily Caller, Lancaster, OH, 8/30/14)
I frequently read the stories in the paper about local crime. It's extremely rare that the criminal takes the time to announce his intent and give the victim time to draw her weapon. That's why the victim's weapon is usually used against her. Or him.
Leslie: My condolences, I know it is not easy to talk about.
Craig: I am totally on board. One of the issues I see is the department of health won't share mental health records, citing HIPA rules. We are talking about public safety, so HIPA be damned, share the list. I would like to make it harder for people to get a concealed weapons permit, then let them carry in to more places.
JonD: There is no quick easy answer. We need to understand that guns are not toys. We also need to understand there are better ways to resolve our issues than just to shoot someone. The media has a lot to do with it.
Let's kill all the bills this session then come back with a series of bill next year that will address most of these issues.
A 28-year-old man was sitting on the backyard patio with his wife, 36, at around 10 p.m. when they were approached by a man wearing a mask. The man carried a gun and ordered the couple inside the home where their three young children—ages 6, 13 and 14—slept. Once inside, the husband was able to retrieve his firearm, and he fired it at the masked assailant. The police arrived a short time later, and the gunman was pronounced dead at the scene. The family remained unharmed. “It’s shocking,” a neighbor said. “But he had to do what he had to do to protect his family, his household.” (The Times-Picayune, New Orleans, LA, 8/22/14)
This wasnt a invitation to post stories about people defending themselves with guns. Yes it does happen. Do you know what happens far more often? People killing themselves or children hurting themselves or others. Look it up. When countries regulate guns their sucide rate drops. Facts. Do you think a lower suicide and accident rate is a bad thing? Wheb the second amendment was created the world was a different place. They had no idea how deadly and efficient things would become. For example had the constitution been created today there would probably be rights pertaining to computer crime. Times change. The zeitgeist evolves. So should you.
MC: we clearly need a Blue Ribbon Task Force to study the perceptions driving all these gun bills.
I watched Star Trek last night. Kirk and Spock beamed down to SAC headquarters in 1969 to retrieve evidence of their time travel and preserve the time line. They were armed with phasers. Some Harvey-Korman USAF guard got the drop on them with a six-shooter and made them surrender their superior firepower. Clearly bringing superior deadly force to a fight does not guarantee safety. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lUyd_78oTRQ
We also need to understand there are better ways to resolve our issues than just to shoot someone. The media has a lot to do with it.
Let's kill all the bills this session
Sending mixed messages,aren't we? (snark)
A New England Journal of Medicine study (10/7/93) in 1993 concluded that a gun in the home raised the chances someone in a family will be killed by nearly three times, with the danger to women—who are more likely to be killed by a spouse, intimate or relative—even greater. A 1997 study in the Archives of Internal Medicine (4/14/97) reinforces that danger, finding that the homicide risk for women increased 3.4 times in a home with one or more guns. Taken together with the heightened risk of suicide and accidental deaths posed by guns in the home, these numbers demolish the argument that guns enhance family protection.
From the study @ 10:04 above.
In the interest of full disclosure-I am not anti-gun and I do own and keep guns(2) at HOME.
Yes, but the ammos don't listen nor do they believe those statistics, MFI. It says New England and they immediately relate that to East Coast liberalism. Ammos suffer from moderate to extreme paranoia and that fear brings them right back to the gun shows and Wal Mart for more gun buying. It's a very profitable win win situation for the gun companies. The extreme paranoid ones end up getting hooked on anti-anxiety drugs which drive the paranoia to deeper and deeper madness. Because of the drug happy society, doctors are more than happy to get the pen out from their drug company and write out prescriptions. This country is addicted to everything. I think the corporations want it that way.
I like it. The Star Trek anology is valid in more ways then one.
Just in my lifetime, we've gone from kids solving personsl problems with their fist, to knives, and now guns. Is it any wunder this has happened when the movies, tv, and now games make reincarnation of a life a percieved possibility? Fall off a hundred foot clif, in the movies they can get up and run away. If you get shot gamming, all you have to do is restart the game.
This has gone on long enough that to many people death from violence, is seen not as the final frontier, but only a diversion from life. Unfortunately even most hunters enjoy the adrenaline of the shot and the thrill of the kill more then the the appreciation of a life given and the life taken. It wasnt always this way.
A blue ribbon panel? really? how about a handful of legislators willing to listen to the people (not the nutty left or righteous right) but the main stream of people.
My dear Democrats!
Listen closely, I'm going to give you some REALLY good advice that can help your candidates do better in SD elections!
#1. Many Democratic candidates answer NRA/SD Gun Owners elections questionnaires honestly that they believe in what they call responsible gun control. Conservatives answer they oppose gun control and support those organization's efforts. RINOs mimic the conservative's answers.
#2. Because of their responses or no responses, Democrats are targeted by these groups by VERY active voters and activists.
#3. When gun bills come up in legislature, Democrats speak & vote against the bills. RINOs join them in helping to defeat the bills by routing such bills to committees with heavy Democratic presence and RINOs (Senate Judiciary) to kill the bills so the RINOs wont have to take recorded votes on bills they sponsored (for NRA appearance) but actually oppose http://sibbyonline.blogs.com/sibbyonline/2015/02/only-seven-state-senators-supported-the-smoke-out-on-constitutional-carry.html
#4. When next election time comes. Democrats are honest and stick to their guns ( :-D ) and answer the questionnaires honestly. Conservatives answer honestly and pledge support. RINOs obfuscate their records by again mimicing the conservatives' and give lip-service rhetoric and attack Democratic opponents on 2nd Amendment issues. Voters generally equate Democrats to gun control Republicans to supporting 2nd Amendment.
#5. Gun rights groups use the questionnaires (mainly) to determine grades on candidates. They pass them out to their many avid supporters (D & R) across the state to raise lots of $$ and in opposing gun control advocating candidates.
#6. Because Democrats are honest, they are normally the primary targets. RINOs defuse their records by mouthing the right words and pledging support of the organizations gun rights goals. (Mike Vehle got a "B" and was endorsed by the NRA. When he was targeted by gun groups, he did public ads claiming he was a big supporter of gun rights).
#7. Every year numerous bill advancing gun rights are offered and defeated. Democrats are in the minority but are primarily targeted for opposing gun bills and their RINO gun control allies escape accountability from dishonest rhetoric and answers on gun rights groups election questionnaires.
Change the way you are portrayed! Embrace the legislative votes! Highlight all of those that followed Democratic lead on the issue. Democratic end of session press release highlighting everyone's NRA grade, how everyone voted on this issue, and claim Democratic led them to vote this way!
A. Shows integrity and honesty on the issue while painting the RINOs as hypocrites and liars
B. Properly framed, diffuses the issue and steals the gun groups thunder.
C. Weakens incumbent RINOs with a major portion of their base make them vulnerable in general elections.
D. Instead of attacking mainly Democrats on the issue, gun groups now have multiple targets diffusing their money and efforts away from Democratic candidates.
E. Apply same logic and defenses to the even more powerful Pro-life movement.
Democrats keep their integrity, gain points with the public for integrity & leadership, change the way they are framed in the eyes of the public, dilute the opposition to their candidates, and weaken their political opponents. Win-Win.
why do you care what dems do?
You raise a good point. The way the law is written am I to understand that I can shoot somebody who is stealing from my mailbox? I do believe that in very rare circumstances deadly force may be necessary to save your own life but this law needs more clarification.
Committees with heavy democratic presence? In South Dakota?
@Leslie The old adage "The enemy of my enemy, is my friend." is relevant here. Contrary to the pedestrian belief that SD is a super majority "Republican" controlled state, the reality is that SD is controlled by establishment moderate "Republicans" who have no loyalty to the ideology I believe and support. Too many people are Minnesota Viking fan voters, rabidly loyal to what ever schmuck wears the (R) regardless if that player is throwing plays for bookies. I, like many voters, abhor hypocrites. Outing the RINOs is a good thing for South Dakota and a good thing for the GOP. Nothing wrong with honest debate. Its the dishonest debate that occurs to win elections that is ruining our state and country.
@MFI 30% http://legis.sd.gov/Legislative_Session/Bills/RollCall.aspx?Vote=18966&Session=2015 Realize this bill was sent to be slaughtered by Republicans who claim to support gun rights. Everyone knows Tiezen and Vehle vote consistently against gun rights. If they wanted this bill to pass committee they could have slotted it to Senate State Affairs. They signed the bill as sponsors to curry favor with the NRA, then sent their own bill to be slaughtered. Next year they will switch and they will have the RINOs in the House kill it. They rack up anti-gun votes for the Democrats and curry favor with the NRA.
Sage advice above. Our host is a smart cookie. Surprised he didn't advocate for this already.
@MFI To be clear, the "Republicans" who control the Senate decide what committee gets which bills. This bill was intentionally sent to be killed by some of the very same people who signed on as sponsors. That type of dishonesty and corruption of our legislature is a danger to us all and is what helps cover up other corruption like the EB5 crimes.
bk-i think barry just doesn't like my liberal posts so he cruelly chooses to dilute my devastating all-true personal story with a couple of quick google posts designed to show one youth's unregulated gun death is not relevant to the all important god given slavery protecting constitutional commandment of the 2nd amendment.
i hear yah, barry. i hope you never know what i know about guns in the home, concealed, in the car, and likely through out the high school parking lot trunks of this lil' red state. our kids are smart and responsible, but learn about impulsiveness and mental and emotional stability of young people with guns, fcs before coming here and being an ars.
its a lot like young people with cars. you ever been on mount rushmore road on a friday night? however, once that trigger is pulled, there is never, never an end to that expolsion in peoples' affected lives.
so, as i like to say, and as populare culture has adopted, and as i am now being possibly properly censored for its use, and as Federal Judge Kopf said to SCOTUS about the HOBBYLOBBY religious decision, barry, STFU! ;)
dd- i sent my son's story to tieszen in the last few years when the legislature brought up another gun or carry bill, 'cause i knew him professionally as a cop and supposed he'd be sympathetic. WRONG
It saddens me to hear about your son,Leslie. I know several people that have killed themselves. We as society don't do a good job dealing with death in the first place and with suicide even more so. It hurts me deeply about Pine Ridge and we all need to remember that everyone is dealing with some sort of struggle in their lives.
DD needs to publicly out all this GOP gun rights hypocrisy and corruption that he says is happening. Call the news medias on it, and write the letters to the Editors in all the papers.
The elder brother Novstrup is likely already drafting new legislation to outlaw all these gun bills.
My guess is that DD feels his Republican party is hopeless, so he's trying to work through the Democrats because they are more ethical.
The Republicans are the mess, the corrupt, crony capitalists. But I notice that DD spends his time complaining about what he perceives as Democratic weaknesses. I also notice that his prescription is for Democrats to be Less Honest and more like Republicans.
Seriously, does anyone else find that as funny as I do? Hahaha!
@Leslie I am sorry for your loss.
@Jenny I've done what I could in my own little way.
@Deb Are you joking? Establishment Republicans are running the board across the nation. Have you seen the DNC report on how many state and federal elections Democrats have lost since Obama was elected? Point to me exactly where I said Democrats should be less honest!? Does partisanship blind you to the point you would rather cut your nose off to spite your face? You are being played by the establishment moderates and your candidates are being defeated by their dishonesty. But you did your duty and attacked someone who is not a liberal. You're the winner.
DD, "Have you seen the DNC report on how many state and federal elections Democrats have lost since Obama was elected?"
Do you think gerrymandering is good for these United States of America? Was that what the founding fathers envisioned? Do you think that the push to polarize citizens against each other is a good thing?
Thinking that conservative policies and positions are what won elections is the same as the rooster who thinks he makes the sun rise every morning.
Wow! Those are some ugly, personal attacks meant to damage and hurt. You even picked on my penis... and not in a fun way. What have you accomplished? It would now be difficult to have any respect for your opinions as you don't respect them enough to state them in a civil manner.
DD, I didn't say Republicans are not winning elections. This is what I said about Republicans:
"The Republicans are the mess, the corrupt, crony capitalists."
I said what I meant. They are a mess. They've completely lost their way. They no longer try to promote real conservatism. They are unable to work together, let alone with Democrats, Independents, Greens, etc. Their House of Representatives in DC is in chaos. Their economic plans have been disastrous. They can't even keep the government open!
I attribute their electoral success to gerrymandering, their Diebold voting machines, pandering to the most ignorant and fearful members of the electorate, and billions and billions of corporate dollars.
With all those very serious problems, you complain about Democrats, DD. That makes no sense, unless you feel that resurgent Democrats are a better hope than cleaning up the Republican Party.
I'm with Deb. Sounds like DD wants us to become them to win elections. But then I don't pay close attention to what he says. I prefer being lost and hopeless.
Comments are closed.