Foul-mouthed David Hogg insists all gun owners want to murder children

Video source:
https://d.tube/#!/v/sickofthestupid/phyrklix

 

The clenched fist is not Nazi but other brands of socialism.

 

Good point. The raised fist, or the clenched fist, is a symbol of solidarity and support. It is also used as a salute to express unity, strength, defiance, or resistance.

https://i.pinimg.com/originals/de/ba/c6/debac6790bbc0bc38a358d41ab7d2f56.png

http://greatness.us/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/scan.jpg

http://greatness.us/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/scan0001.jpg

http://www.neofactionapparel.com/item/images/socialistfist.gif

 

One more thing: Adolf Hitler was the leader of the "National Socialist German Workers' Party" (aka Nazis). Socialism and communism have some economic differences, but from a leadership perspective, they are both very similar. For example, in socialism and communism, power is concentrated not in the people, but is concentrated in centralized dictatorial-like leadership. Conversely, the founders of the United States Constitution created a government that is supposed to prevent centralized power in one person, such as concentrated power in a king or in a a socialist/communist leader.

 

SteveFoerster, you are so blessed to live in the United States. The writers of the Constitution were masterful in their written Deceleration of Independence -- and the Bill of Rights is simply astounding. As a United States citizen, you have Constitutional protections that other people around the planet can only dream about. Many foreigners come to the United States for the stability of government, economy, civil rights and civility. Your Constitutional birthrights are remarkable and are envied by the world.

• You can speak your mind without being imprisoned for it.
• You can keep and bear arms without being imprisoned for it.
  
• Government agents cannot search you or your property without probable cause.
• Government agents cannot take your home and property to temporarily quarter soldiers.

 

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-43540708

 

I hate guns, don't own one. But this kid, he's an ignorant, vulgar, self-important little nut.

 

Steve, while the president does have more powers than was contemplated by the Founding Fathers (as does the federal government, but that was their own danged fault for trying to establish a democracy that didn't include everyone as a free citizen, it took a shifting of powers from the states to the fed to fix it), nonetheless, we have a pretty good system all-in-all for preventing a single tin horn dictator from assuming too much power. Even Nixon eventually complied with the Supreme Court order, and we've never had a president refuse to step down at the end of their term.

 

[QUOTE
="SteveFoerster, post: 506701, member: 2417"]The U.S. has a single person who can start trade wars with no recourse to the legislature. That's crazy enough, but even worse, thanks to a single Congressional authorization from over a decade ago that wasn't even a declaration of war, the president can unilaterally start wars... basically anywhere.

However, this is largely the fault of lazy members of Congress who have handed over power after power to the Executive Branch, something most of the founders did not anticipate. But there's no way not to consider that a failure of the idea of separation of powers.[/QUOTE]

I agree. If guns are firing, bombs are dropping, things are being blown to bits and people are dying, that sounds like a war, and the president shouldn't have much at all to due with it being declared. Not his power. So I don't quite get this military action but not a war thing. Doesn't sound like it would've been anticipated as being applied that way by the Founding Fathers. Since the president handles international relations under the Constitution, more-or-less (albeit subject in certain cases to Senate approval), I can see the president's power to set off a trade war as more of a constitutional thing. But no doubt there has been a shift in powers from the states to the fed and from the Article One powers to the Article Two powers over the last two centuries.

 

Retired justice urges repeal of Second Amendment

Full story:
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/03/27/opinion/john-paul-stevens-repeal-second-amendment.html

 

YOUTUBE Puts Warning on Satirical Hogg Video:

Full story:
https://www.libertyheadlines.com/youtube-puts-warning-satirical-video-david-hogg/

 

The fist 10 amendments are superfluous in that they merely accentuate what is implicit in the body of the Constitution. Repealing the 2nd Amendment would change nothing.

 

Decimon, from the viewpoint of the founding fathers, what was their purpose in creating the Second Amendment -- and is their original purpose now antiquated and unnecessary in the 21st Century?

 

The Bill of Rights came from a felt need to highlight certain essential rights.

Perhaps never necessary or desirable. Some feared, rightfully it now seems, that spelling out particular rights would create misunderstanding of the negative rights that are the Constitution.

 

They were worried about that, that's a historical fact. That's why they included the 10th Amendment.

 

For those who don't know: The Tenth Amendment of the United States Constitution is the section of the Bill of Rights that basically says that any power that is not given to the federal government is given to the people or the states.

 

I got to say, David Hogg is quite a gifted speaker for only being 17. It takes some big huevos to get up there and speak to a crowed of thousands. I know, because I used to have to do in the past.

In solidarity, Abner The old school union activist! I just got to say that these kids are amazing. Quite articulate, gifted speakers. One of the kids was eleven!

 

Abner, are you saying that David's Hogg's message is eloquent -- or his delivery of it is eloquent?