Do you have adblock enabled?
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(The Raw Story)   Ted Nugent may know a lot of things - how to play the hell out of a guitar, how to hunt with any type of weapon, how to swing from a vine wearing a loincloth - but he apparently does not understand the meaning of the word "treason"   ( rawstory.com) divider line
    More: Fail, weapons  
•       •       •

20490 clicks; posted to Main » on 23 Jan 2013 at 9:18 AM (4 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



471 Comments     (+0 »)
 
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest
 
2013-01-23 09:02:53 AM  
Maybe he's just working his way up to his eventual suicide because Obama won.

img1-cdn.newser.com

Time to nut up or shut up, Teddy Boy. Can't shiat your pants on this one.
 
2013-01-23 09:06:23 AM  

BronyMedic: Maybe he's just working his way up to his eventual suicide because Obama won.

[img1-cdn.newser.com image 240x160]

Time to nut up or shut up, Teddy Boy. Can't shiat your pants on this one.


Sure he can, don't the bowels tend to release when death occurs?
 
2013-01-23 09:07:59 AM  
He must have really enjoyed his last visit from the secret service to ask for another one so soon.
 
2013-01-23 09:09:30 AM  
How to hunt?  Well, if you call sitting off a guaranteed kill and shooting what amounts to raised cattle "hunting" then...yah.  He's awesome.
 
2013-01-23 09:09:48 AM  
I bet they are, you pants-shiatting coward.
 
2013-01-23 09:14:54 AM  
Speaking to fans during an NBC-sponsored gun show, Nugent said that Obama "is attempting to re-implement the tyranny of King George that we escaped from in 1776," adding: "If you want another Concord bridge, I've got some buddies."

Acts committed by King George which led to the American revolution:

- Navigation Acts (blocked American trade with the French, Spanish, and Dutch)
- Molasses Act (tax for the purpose of making the British export cheaper than that from the French West Indies, "encouraging" colonists to buy British)
- Royal Proclamation of 1763 (restricted settlement west of the Appalachian Mountains)
- Sugar Act (enacted because of colonial evasion of the Molasses Act, also known as the American Revenues Act)
- Currency Act (regulated and restricted the paper money issued in the colonies for the purpose of preventing British creditors and merchants from being paid in depreciated colonial currency, resulted in a shortage of coin in the colonies and complicated the payment of debts)
- Quartering Acts (primary reason for the existence of the Third Amendment)
- Stamp Act of 1765 (required printed materials to be printed on special paper with an embossed revenue stamp, stamps had to be purchased with hard currency [see Currency Act], tax levied for the purpose of paying for the Seven Years' War)
- Declaratory Act (asserted that parliament's authority was the same in the colonies as it was in Britain and therefore could pass laws binding on the American colonies... despite the colonies having no representation in parliament)
- Townshend Acts (series of five laws enacted for the purpose of forcing the colonies to subsidize British occupation and law enforcement in the colonies)
- Tea Act (tax/racket enacted for the purpose of forcing colonists to buy off the surplus of tea from the British East India Company, resulted in the infamous Boston Tea Party)
- Quebec Act (extended Quebec's boundaries to the Ohio River, shutting out territorial claims of the 13 colonies)
- Intolerable Acts (a.k.a. the Coercive Acts, issued in response to the Boston Tea Party, essentially placed the colonies under British military rule. Specifically, Boston Harbor was closed until the debt was paid for the destruction of tea in the Boston Tea Party, the Massachusetts government was placed under the direct appointment and supervision of the British government, trials of accused royal officials were relocated to other colonies or back to Great Britain, and the forced quartering of British troops was expanded.)

The primary theme in all of these acts is governance by a foreign entity and taxation without any representation in parliament.

Similar Acts committed by the Obama Administration:


- ...
 
2013-01-23 09:20:16 AM  
He promised to be dead or in jail by April if Obama won. Hopefully he's a kook of his word.
 
2013-01-23 09:21:01 AM  
Ted Nugent may know a lot of things - how to play the hell out of a guitar, how to hunt with any type of weapon, how to swing from a vine wearing a loincloth - but he apparently does not understand the meaning of the word "treason"

Not even close, subby.
 
2013-01-23 09:21:19 AM  
He's really not that great a guitar player.
 
2013-01-23 09:21:26 AM  
Jebus Christmas. He's gone completely unhinged.

It would be hilarious if the government actually did move to take away Ted's guns. -- Not everyone's guns, just Ted's.
 
2013-01-23 09:21:36 AM  
Headline is wrong. He could never play guitar. He can be flashy, but any kid in a Guitar Center for the first time can out play this ass.
 
2013-01-23 09:21:49 AM  
This latest outrage has given me the sudden urge to purchase one of his albums.

/Or shiat myself in homage, I haven't figured out which, yet
 
2013-01-23 09:22:15 AM  
Nugent is about as reasonable and relevant as Trump. I reckon Trump could do more long-term damage to the world with his money (assuming that it is his money, and not a whole shiatload of leveraged debt), but Nugent seems destined to go out in a blaze of idiocy, Ruby Ridge or Waco style.
 
2013-01-23 09:22:22 AM  
That guy is the worst thing to ever come out of Michigan.
 
2013-01-23 09:22:31 AM  
Ted also looks like he doesn't know the meaning of the words "shower," "shampoo," or "deodorant."
 
2013-01-23 09:23:18 AM  
My birthday is April 17 (ya rly) and I cannot think of a better present than this scumbag dead or in jail.
 
2013-01-23 09:23:24 AM  

Coco LaFemme: pants-shiatting coward.


This is all that needs to be said.
 
2013-01-23 09:23:31 AM  

GiantRex: Speaking to fans during an NBC-sponsored gun show, Nugent said that Obama "is attempting to re-implement the tyranny of King George that we escaped from in 1776," adding: "If you want another Concord bridge, I've got some buddies."

Acts committed by King George which led to the American revolution:

- Navigation Acts (blocked American trade with the French, Spanish, and Dutch)
- Molasses Act (tax for the purpose of making the British export cheaper than that from the French West Indies, "encouraging" colonists to buy British)
- Royal Proclamation of 1763 (restricted settlement west of the Appalachian Mountains)
- Sugar Act (enacted because of colonial evasion of the Molasses Act, also known as the American Revenues Act)
- Currency Act (regulated and restricted the paper money issued in the colonies for the purpose of preventing British creditors and merchants from being paid in depreciated colonial currency, resulted in a shortage of coin in the colonies and complicated the payment of debts)
- Quartering Acts (primary reason for the existence of the Third Amendment)
- Stamp Act of 1765 (required printed materials to be printed on special paper with an embossed revenue stamp, stamps had to be purchased with hard currency [see Currency Act], tax levied for the purpose of paying for the Seven Years' War)
- Declaratory Act (asserted that parliament's authority was the same in the colonies as it was in Britain and therefore could pass laws binding on the American colonies... despite the colonies having no representation in parliament)
- Townshend Acts (series of five laws enacted for the purpose of forcing the colonies to subsidize British occupation and law enforcement in the colonies)
- Tea Act (tax/racket enacted for the purpose of forcing colonists to buy off the surplus of tea from the British East India Company, resulted in the infamous Boston Tea Party)
- Quebec Act (extended Quebec's boundaries to the Ohio River, shutting out territorial claims of the 13 colonie ...


Yeah, I'm not sure what's more dangerous.  His rhetoric or his understanding of American History.
 
2013-01-23 09:24:00 AM  
Ted Nugent is a popular figure in my town. He visits our little town when he goes hunting in our marsh. He has a zebra striped piece of crap truck. I am waiting to see the truck again so I can slap an Obama sticker on it.

/I hate him
//sometimes it feels like I live in Ted Nugentville
 
2013-01-23 09:24:11 AM  

Alfonso the Great: That guy is the worst thing to ever come out of Michigan.


And that bar is set pretty high already.
 
2013-01-23 09:24:31 AM  
That's a big thing the revolutards can't understand - the vast majority of Americans don't agree with their definition of tyranny or oppression.

There will be no popular uprising, you're going to have to kill your friends and neighbors. This will not work out.
 
2013-01-23 09:25:27 AM  
 
2013-01-23 09:25:34 AM  
"we need to fix this as soon as possible."

We live in a democracy. You had your chance in November 2012, and your next one is around the same time in 2016.
 
2013-01-23 09:25:48 AM  
I don't care if Obama can play guitar, I don't care what Ted says about politics.

/play in your own yard
 
2013-01-23 09:26:00 AM  
Methinks this Wacko will be Janet Reno-ed soonishly.
 
2013-01-23 09:26:03 AM  

olddeegee: Headline is wrong. He could never play guitar. He can be flashy, but any kid in a Guitar Center for the first time can out play this ass.


He's a better guitar player than "hunter". I've only been hunting for a few years and I bet I know more than he does and am a shiatton better than him. I actually hunt animals in the wild.

/ok, I sit in a stand and read/doze off/text friends, but still, I'm better than him
 
2013-01-23 09:26:05 AM  

BronyMedic: Maybe he's just working his way up to his eventual suicide because Obama won.


Some people think they gonna die someday, I got news you never got to go.
 
2013-01-23 09:26:25 AM  
It's one of the few crimes in the actual Constitution. The "piece of paper" these guys are always so up in arms about.
 
2013-01-23 09:26:27 AM  

GiantRex: Speaking to fans during an NBC-sponsored gun show, Nugent said that Obama "is attempting to re-implement the tyranny of King George that we escaped from in 1776," adding: "If you want another Concord bridge, I've got some buddies."

Acts committed by King George which led to the American revolution:

- Navigation Acts (blocked American trade with the French, Spanish, and Dutch)
- Molasses Act (tax for the purpose of making the British export cheaper than that from the French West Indies, "encouraging" colonists to buy British)
- Royal Proclamation of 1763 (restricted settlement west of the Appalachian Mountains)
- Sugar Act (enacted because of colonial evasion of the Molasses Act, also known as the American Revenues Act)
- Currency Act (regulated and restricted the paper money issued in the colonies for the purpose of preventing British creditors and merchants from being paid in depreciated colonial currency, resulted in a shortage of coin in the colonies and complicated the payment of debts)
- Quartering Acts (primary reason for the existence of the Third Amendment)
- Stamp Act of 1765 (required printed materials to be printed on special paper with an embossed revenue stamp, stamps had to be purchased with hard currency [see Currency Act], tax levied for the purpose of paying for the Seven Years' War)
- Declaratory Act (asserted that parliament's authority was the same in the colonies as it was in Britain and therefore could pass laws binding on the American colonies... despite the colonies having no representation in parliament)
- Townshend Acts (series of five laws enacted for the purpose of forcing the colonies to subsidize British occupation and law enforcement in the colonies)
- Tea Act (tax/racket enacted for the purpose of forcing colonists to buy off the surplus of tea from the British East India Company, resulted in the infamous Boston Tea Party)
- Quebec Act (extended Quebec's boundaries to the Ohio River, shutting out territorial claims of the 13 colonie ...


You take your 'facts' and your 'knowledge' and you go elsewhere, sir.
 
2013-01-23 09:27:03 AM  
He's pissed because people won't even bit-torrent his albums much less pay for them.

What I would pay for is to watch him keep his April 2012 promise!

/Sure he isn't Palin in drag?
//Has anyone ever seen them together??
 
2013-01-23 09:27:05 AM  
He added that Obama "hires, appoints and associates with communists," and that he's "an evil, dangerous man who hates America and hates freedom. And we need to fix this as soon as possible."

What a farking moron.
 
2013-01-23 09:27:16 AM  
The law enforcement agent who will eventually get to shoot Ted Nugent dead is the luckiest man in the world.
 
2013-01-23 09:27:52 AM  
Ted Nugent's buddies are real tough guys!
 
2013-01-23 09:28:16 AM  
Another Conservative hero.
 
2013-01-23 09:28:54 AM  
Hey Ted, SHUT UP AND SING!
 
2013-01-23 09:29:03 AM  
The man is a coward, a hypocrite, and just an all-around douche bag.

I have no interest in anything he has to say about anything... His music sucks ass, as well.
 
2013-01-23 09:29:24 AM  

born_yesterday: This latest outrage has given me the sudden urge to purchase one of his albums.

/Or shiat myself in homage, I haven't figured out which, yet


Go with shiatting yourself. You won't regret that later.
 
2013-01-23 09:29:35 AM  
Some Conservatives seem to forget that even when your Government does stuff you disagree with, it doesn't mean that they aren't democratically representing you.
 
2013-01-23 09:29:45 AM  
I dunno guys, his insanity is kinda working...

... I wanna buy a gun to protect myself from people like him.
 
2013-01-23 09:29:46 AM  
I'm about as pro second amendment as you can get, but why does anyone listen to this a-hole?

/Mostly Democrat too. That seems to confuse people.
 
2013-01-23 09:29:47 AM  
He's basically making the schoolyard threat that his big brother can beat up your Big Brother.
 
2013-01-23 09:30:44 AM  
It must really hurt to be irrelevant.
 
2013-01-23 09:31:14 AM  
Protected speech.

Probably good for a prolonged and uncomfortable interview with the secret service people.
 
2013-01-23 09:31:36 AM  

Diogenes: He's basically making the schoolyard threat that his big brother can beat up your Big Brother.


His big brother doesn't have Abrams farking tanks, though.
 
2013-01-23 09:32:19 AM  
Jeez, this guy stopped being relevant decades ago. He should just shut up already.
 
2013-01-23 09:32:58 AM  
I like that Ted is upset. It makes me smile.
 
2013-01-23 09:33:07 AM  

born_yesterday


This latest outrage has given me the sudden urge to purchase one of his albums.

/Or shiat myself in homage, I haven't figured out which, yet


You can do a little of both: purchase one of his albums and then empty your bowels on it (rather than in your trousers).
 
2013-01-23 09:33:19 AM  
Dear Ted,
Enjoy your visit from the Secret Service. Inciting people to treason... awesome. (NOT)
 
2013-01-23 09:33:37 AM  
Treason is a charged word, subby.
Its also terribly vague.

The King of England would have charged the Continental Congress with treason for not sitting back and taking his abuse. The Congress themselves found the king to be in violation of our trust as previously loyal citizens.
There's no doubt what either would have done to the other had history delivered one to their opponents gallows.

/To be fair, if a new fracas started as things are now its unlikely to go as either side intends it to.
/Civil wars are messy like that. Which is why they should be avoided.
 
2013-01-23 09:33:48 AM  
Subby forgot "how to avoid the draft."

i48.photobucket.com
 
2013-01-23 09:34:34 AM  

oldfarthenry: Methinks this Wacko will be Janet Reno-ed soonishly.


I hope not. The last thing this country needs is for Ted Nugent to become a sacrifice or martyr. The apocalypse would start (in the mind of the crazies).
 
2013-01-23 09:34:51 AM  
From the article comments: "Advocating for violence is not protected 1st Amendment speech. Declaring yourself ready and willing to foment revolution against a duly elected government is sedition."

I suspect the whole purpose of the first amendment is to protect exactly such declarations.

That aside, people like Nugent don't want democracy, they don't want freedom. They want an extremely authoritarian government that applies its authority to everyone but them and exists mostly to hassle people they don't like. Give an idiot like this enough money to buy a ranch in Texas and he thinks he's a sovreign nation.

And, "hunting" is not shooting domesticated animals on a ranch. Nor does "patriotism" take the form of covering yourself in feces to avoid military service.
 
2013-01-23 09:34:53 AM  

Philip Francis Queeg: He added that Obama "hires, appoints and associates with communists," and that he's "an evil, dangerous man who hates America and hates freedom. And we need to fix this as soon as possible."

What a farking moron.


he is but one mere moron. with access to mass media. the problem is all the sheep who are not famous who also believe and support the same message.

everytime i see one of my fb friends (i have some old friends who are otherwise good people, but they're caught up in the whole crazy right-wing rhetoric) post pics and messages equating obama to hitler i cringe. i want to say something, but can't even think of the words. a comparison to the pure evil genius of hitler is an incredible accusation. obama may or may not be a good president. i don't get into politics. but i assure you he is not in the same league as someone like hitler.
 
2013-01-23 09:35:47 AM  
Meh, bring it. We got guns too and the ones don't shot we can hang.
 
2013-01-23 09:36:24 AM  

GiantRex: Speaking to fans during an NBC-sponsored gun show, Nugent said that Obama "is attempting to re-implement the tyranny of King George that we escaped from in 1776," adding: "If you want another Concord bridge, I've got some buddies."

Acts committed by King George which led to the American revolution:

- Navigation Acts (blocked American trade with the French, Spanish, and Dutch)
- Molasses Act (tax for the purpose of making the British export cheaper than that from the French West Indies, "encouraging" colonists to buy British)
- Royal Proclamation of 1763 (restricted settlement west of the Appalachian Mountains)
- Sugar Act (enacted because of colonial evasion of the Molasses Act, also known as the American Revenues Act)
- Currency Act (regulated and restricted the paper money issued in the colonies for the purpose of preventing British creditors and merchants from being paid in depreciated colonial currency, resulted in a shortage of coin in the colonies and complicated the payment of debts)
- Quartering Acts (primary reason for the existence of the Third Amendment)
- Stamp Act of 1765 (required printed materials to be printed on special paper with an embossed revenue stamp, stamps had to be purchased with hard currency [see Currency Act], tax levied for the purpose of paying for the Seven Years' War)
- Declaratory Act (asserted that parliament's authority was the same in the colonies as it was in Britain and therefore could pass laws binding on the American colonies... despite the colonies having no representation in parliament)
- Townshend Acts (series of five laws enacted for the purpose of forcing the colonies to subsidize British occupation and law enforcement in the colonies)
- Tea Act (tax/racket enacted for the purpose of forcing colonists to buy off the surplus of tea from the British East India Company, resulted in the infamous Boston Tea Party)
- Quebec Act (extended Quebec's boundaries to the Ohio River, shutting out territorial claims of the 13 colonie ...

.
I hate to burst your bubble, but England was not a foreign government as you believe, it was our government.
 
2013-01-23 09:36:42 AM  

Hollie Maea: Diogenes: He's basically making the schoolyard threat that his big brother can beat up your Big Brother.

His big brother doesn't have Abrams farking tanks, though.


LOL.  Very true.  But it was a pretty stupid farking argument back on the schoolyard, too.
 
2013-01-23 09:36:43 AM  
Big mouth coward with a gun.
 
2013-01-23 09:36:57 AM  
And you think Obama knows what "shall not be infringed" means?
 
2013-01-23 09:37:55 AM  
Is treason a hangable offense?
 
2013-01-23 09:38:05 AM  

Alfonso the Great: That guy is the worst thing to ever come out of Michigan.



He's sold more albums than Ford sold Edsels so I would disagree with your premise.
 
2013-01-23 09:39:40 AM  

Anderson's Pooper: Alfonso the Great: That guy is the worst thing to ever come out of Michigan.


He's sold more albums than Ford sold Edsels so I would disagree with your premise.


The main problem with Edsels was that they didn't make noise when you wanted them to. Nugent's got the opposite problem; he won't STFU.
 
2013-01-23 09:39:41 AM  
He's a nutcase. In fact, he's just as much as a mouth breathing nutcase as the people in this thread wishing death upon him.
 
2013-01-23 09:39:48 AM  
Nugent also found himself face to face with Secret Service agents last April after he urged fans to "chop [Democrats'] heads off in November," during the presidential election. He also warned, "if Barack Obama becomes the president in November again, I will either be dead or in jail by this time next year."

TED NUGENT COUNTDOWN

97 days and counting!
 
2013-01-23 09:39:54 AM  

HotWingConspiracy: That's a big thing the revolutards can't understand - the vast majority of Americans don't agree with their definition of tyranny or oppression.

There will be no popular uprising, you're going to have to kill your friends and neighbors. This will not work out.


Actually that's exactly what they want. They want to kill people they don't agree with. They just think that there's a vast majority of people who will agree with them. They want to use violence and threats of violence to force their political viewpoints and they think they hold the popular majority opinions.

These people are sick, and they need to be treated by mental health professionals. Ted Nugent is the poster child for those enhanced mental health and background check rules Obama signed as an executive order. This man should not have weapons - he has made it clear he wants to use them to kill Americans who have done nothing more than disagree with him.
 
2013-01-23 09:40:11 AM  

thurstonxhowell: The law enforcement agent who will eventually get to shoot Ted Nugent dead is the luckiest man in the world.


Never happen. Grade A chickenhawks like Nugent never go down in a hail of bullets, they're found hiding ion their closets crying like children.
 
2013-01-23 09:40:24 AM  

keylock71: The man is a coward, a hypocrite, and just an all-around douche bag.

I have no interest in anything he has to say about anything... His music sucks ass, as well.


Well, to be fair, is is a mainstream Republican.
 
2013-01-23 09:40:38 AM  
This person was also guilty of treason.

And this one....

www.biography.com

And this one too...

www.biography.com
 
2013-01-23 09:40:49 AM  

Thune: And you think Obama knows what "shall not be infringed" means?


I don't know.... Do you know what "Well-Regulated" means?
 
2013-01-23 09:41:27 AM  

strangeguitar: He's really not that great a guitar player.


stranglehold is the jam. it might be easy to play, but can you play it?
 
2013-01-23 09:41:42 AM  

Thune: And you think Obama knows what "shall not be infringed" means?


Should he give us back our machine guns and rocket launchers? MY RIGHTS HAVE BEEN INFRINGED.
 
2013-01-23 09:41:47 AM  

bungle_jr: Philip Francis Queeg: He added that Obama "hires, appoints and associates with communists," and that he's "an evil, dangerous man who hates America and hates freedom. And we need to fix this as soon as possible."

What a farking moron.

he is but one mere moron. with access to mass media. the problem is all the sheep who are not famous who also believe and support the same message.

everytime i see one of my fb friends (i have some old friends who are otherwise good people, but they're caught up in the whole crazy right-wing rhetoric) post pics and messages equating obama to hitler i cringe. i want to say something, but can't even think of the words. a comparison to the pure evil genius of hitler is an incredible accusation. obama may or may not be a good president. i don't get into politics. but i assure you he is not in the same league as someone like hitler.


I hear you. Unfortunately in my case, the idiots equating obama to hitler are my family.
 
2013-01-23 09:42:12 AM  
"He added that Obama "hires, appoints and associates with communists,"

Nugent also doesn't know the definition of "communist".
 
2013-01-23 09:42:20 AM  
His old wound "from 'Nam" is the diaper rash he got while dodging the draft.

You're a coward, Ted.
 
2013-01-23 09:42:57 AM  
What a whole boatload of treasonous bastards look like. They will kill you in your sleep on Christmas!

www.mountvernon.org
 
2013-01-23 09:43:30 AM  

Thune: And you think Obama knows what "shall not be infringed" means?


Your hero George W Bush didn't know what the 4th Amendment was, but that didn't seem to bother you guys.
 
2013-01-23 09:43:39 AM  

Hollie Maea: Ted Nugent's buddies are real tough guys!


I can't imagine a man like him actually having friends.

He seems like a crazed drunk born from a rich family that nobody has the guts to tell to go to his room.
 
2013-01-23 09:43:44 AM  
I'm going to guess he doesn't get a lot of Negros at his concerts.
 
2013-01-23 09:43:55 AM  

cubic_spleen: keylock71: The man is a coward, a hypocrite, and just an all-around douche bag.

I have no interest in anything he has to say about anything... His music sucks ass, as well.

Well, to be fair, is is a mainstream Republican.


Seems like his brand of crazy has become "mainstream" in the GOP these days...No doubt.

It is curious that Patriotic Ted decided not to serve his country when called as a younger man... Like a lot of GOP politicians and pundits who like to wrap themselves in the flag these days.
 
2013-01-23 09:44:04 AM  

olddeegee: Headline is wrong. He could never play guitar. He can be flashy, but any kid in a Guitar Center for the first time can out play this ass.


Kids at Guitar Center play out your ass? Do they pay you for it?

/c'mon, admit it - that's funny
 
2013-01-23 09:44:09 AM  

misanthropologist: Nugent is about as reasonable and relevant as Trump. I reckon Trump could do more long-term damage to the world with his money (assuming that it is his money, and not a whole shiatload of leveraged debt), but Nugent seems destined to go out in a blaze of idiocy, Ruby Ridge or Waco style.


I challenge our conservative Farkers who piss vinegar all day long in every thread to find any liberal celebrity who was half as crazy as these two during Bush's tenure.
 
2013-01-23 09:44:11 AM  

keylock71: Thune: And you think Obama knows what "shall not be infringed" means?

I don't know.... Do you know what "Well-Regulated" means?


.
I do, and I'm sure you don't. It means in to be kept in working order.
 
2013-01-23 09:44:37 AM  

keylock71: Thune: And you think Obama knows what "shall not be infringed" means?

I don't know.... Do you know what "Well-Regulated" means?


Yes, it means "in its natural state". Look up the dictionary definitions from an 18th century dictionary and see for yourself how that phrase was used when the 2nd amendment was written.
 
2013-01-23 09:44:44 AM  
I wish the best to Nugent and hope he speaks loud and long. I want him to be heard by everyone and repeatedly. People like him only solidify the idea of the conservative crackpot with a real world example in face, name and word. And at the current rate of rising stupidity among people like him, it is only a matter of time before he says something else so over the top that it points out just how delusional and irresponsible people like him are.

We need more people like Nugent and James Yeager to seal the deal in enacting responsible gun legislation. We need them to be as crazy as possible to point up the folly of the unlimited gun argument. It is the only way to change the mindset of Crazy American Gun Culture from that of a posse lynch mob to the responsible firearms owners they claim they are (but clearly are not at this time).

www.addictinginfo.org | roctherun.com

And if nothing comes of it in the favor or realistic attitudes towards gun ownership, then we pretty much are where we are now. However, sooner or later these people who are advocating this lunacy will have it at their front doorstep. They should be careful for what they wish for.
Sad. Sad. Sad.
 
2013-01-23 09:46:01 AM  

david_gaithersburg: keylock71: Thune: And you think Obama knows what "shall not be infringed" means?

I don't know.... Do you know what "Well-Regulated" means?

.
I do, and I'm sure you don't. It means in to be kept in working order.


Hey, an internet dude who thinks words have 1 meaning. Yay, I was SURE there weren't any of these guys left!
 
2013-01-23 09:46:03 AM  
Only slightly-related CSB:

I detest this freako from Pluto, but he did say something I found amusing a while back. In some interview, the interviewer made mention of some comment Paul McCartney had made about the Nuge's hunting and that he (Paul) was a vegetarian.

Nuge responded, "Well, if you dropped as much acid as Paul McCartney, you wouldn't eat anything with a face, either."

/CSB
//humblest apologies
 
2013-01-23 09:46:12 AM  

keylock71: Thune: And you think Obama knows what "shall not be infringed" means?

I don't know.... Do you know what "Well-Regulated" means?


Yes, it means "well-maintained" and "operating correctly."

Do you know what "the right of the people" means?
 
2013-01-23 09:46:18 AM  

david_gaithersburg: This person was also guilty of treason.

And this one....

[www.biography.com image 402x402]

And this one too...

[www.biography.com image 402x402]


So was this one..

www.biography.com

And this one..

www.biography.com
 
2013-01-23 09:46:32 AM  
Pants shiatting draft dodger with a penchant for underage girls who is too much of a coward to hunt outside of a fenced in area.
 
2013-01-23 09:46:56 AM  
Nothing says patriotism like inciting an armed insurrection to oust a democratically-elected official.
 
2013-01-23 09:47:17 AM  

misanthropologist: Nugent is about as reasonable and relevant as Trump. I reckon Trump could do more long-term damage to the world with his money (assuming that it is his money, and not a whole shiatload of leveraged debt), but Nugent seems destined to go out in a blaze of idiocy, Ruby Ridge or Waco style.


Maybe he can be head of security at Glenn Becks teatard utopia, then when the whole cult destroys itself, no one will be surprised.
 
2013-01-23 09:48:27 AM  

OhioUGrad: misanthropologist: Nugent is about as reasonable and relevant as Trump. I reckon Trump could do more long-term damage to the world with his money (assuming that it is his money, and not a whole shiatload of leveraged debt), but Nugent seems destined to go out in a blaze of idiocy, Ruby Ridge or Waco style.

Maybe he can be head of security at Glenn Becks teatard utopia, then when the whole cult destroys itself, no one will be surprised or saddened.


FTFY
 
2013-01-23 09:48:38 AM  
Drone strike?

That would be cool, they can show it on MTV.
 
2013-01-23 09:48:39 AM  
My guess is he is dating someone from the secret service and just keeps saying this shiat as an excuse for them to "meet"
 
2013-01-23 09:48:40 AM  
Speaking to conspiracy website World Net Daily earlier in January, the National Rifle Association board member said he believes a new era of civil rights is dawning - one in which gun lovers must become "the Rosa Parks."

You're not helping, asshole.

God, what a farking moran. Put him and Chuck Norris together, and I'd rather spend 6 straight weeks dealing with the bottom of the fark barrel than 5 minutes talking to those two shiatheads.
 
2013-01-23 09:49:19 AM  

vudukungfu: I'm going to guess he doesn't get a lot of Negros at his concerts.


Plenty, but that are all working at the concert venue.
 
2013-01-23 09:49:49 AM  

endmile: bungle_jr: Philip Francis Queeg: He added that Obama "hires, appoints and associates with communists," and that he's "an evil, dangerous man who hates America and hates freedom. And we need to fix this as soon as possible."

What a farking moron.

he is but one mere moron. with access to mass media. the problem is all the sheep who are not famous who also believe and support the same message.

everytime i see one of my fb friends (i have some old friends who are otherwise good people, but they're caught up in the whole crazy right-wing rhetoric) post pics and messages equating obama to hitler i cringe. i want to say something, but can't even think of the words. a comparison to the pure evil genius of hitler is an incredible accusation. obama may or may not be a good president. i don't get into politics. but i assure you he is not in the same league as someone like hitler.

I hear you. Unfortunately in my case, the idiots equating obama to hitler are my family.


luckily, even though the majority of my family are republicans, or at the very least anti-obama, none have shown to me that they are nutjobs about it. i'm neither republican nor democrat...sort of apolitical, i suppose...there is plenty of good and bad on all sides of the political spectrum. in the words of the great violent femmes "i am n-o-t-h-i-n". however, i think obama is trying his hardest (right or wrong, good or bad...but all good in his view) to bring our nation back from the depths that it sunk to in the 8 years prior to his presidency.

and no, i am not blaming bush for all our woes. he and his administration are indeed responsible for a good deal of it, but many of our problems can be traced back to administrations prior to w's time in the white house.

clinton did a lot of great stuff, and under his leadership we grew to the greatest prosperity the nation has seen in my lifetime. but some problems that later grew (whether they started out as problems before or during his term) got pushed off to later year
 
2013-01-23 09:50:00 AM  

david_gaithersburg: This person was also guilty of treason.

And this one....

[www.biography.com image 402x402]

And this one too...

[www.biography.com image 402x402]


The primary difference, being the fact that those men were educated. Ted Nugent is not. He knows nothing of American History, or the reasons for the rebellion against the British Crown, nor does he understand one word of the Constitution nor does he care to. He is a slavering, ignorant self-centered reactionary with fantasies of mass murder and total war.
 
2013-01-23 09:50:46 AM  

Alfonso the Great: That guy is the worst thing to ever come out of Michigan.


Even worse than 100 years of auto industry pollution?

Yeah, I think we can agree on that.
 
2013-01-23 09:51:27 AM  

Lord_Baull: Nothing says patriotism like inciting an armed insurrection to oust a democratically-elected official.


.
If the majority voted to ban gay marriage you would be in support of that too?

How about slavery? To bring back the days of your great grand pappy would probably be a wet dream for you.
 
2013-01-23 09:51:40 AM  

keylock71: Thune: And you think Obama knows what "shall not be infringed" means?

I don't know.... Do you know what "Well-Regulated" means?


And this is where the ignorance is because you just demonstrated that YOU don't know what "Well-Regulated" means.

Back when the Constitution was written the phrase "well-regulated" meant "in good order" or "well running".

They use to refer to clocks as "Well-regulated".

They didn't mean there were laws written by the federal government about how a clock should run.

The phrase "well-regulated" in the Constitution had NOTHING to do with written regulations by the federal or state government, as the person of today would take that phrase to mean.
 
2013-01-23 09:52:12 AM  
strangeguitar

He's really not that great a guitar player.

olddeegee

Headline is wrong. He could never play guitar



Sure - I agree that he is batshiat crazy, but anyone who says can't play guitar is just ignorant....he's been on several Greatest Guitarists lists....he can definitely play a mean guitar.
 
2013-01-23 09:52:28 AM  

Great_Milenko: He must have really enjoyed his last visit from the secret service to ask for another one so soon.


He probably mentioned Al Qaeda and received a free colonoscopy.
 
2013-01-23 09:52:38 AM  
Well, by definition the Revolutionary War *was* treason and sedition against the lawful government at the time.
 
2013-01-23 09:52:49 AM  

give me doughnuts: Do you know what "the right of the people" means?


I do... It means I'm not shiatting my pants that the government is going to come and take the two firearms I do own and that background checks and mandatory firearms training (which I had to pass in order to get my F.I.D.) did not infringe my right, nor prevent me from owning and keeping said firearms... And both firearms are "well-regulated" in both senses of the term. I have no problem with that, at all.

In short, you're barking up the wrong tree with that line of attack, my friend.
 
2013-01-23 09:53:26 AM  

Deathfrogg: david_gaithersburg: This person was also guilty of treason.

And this one....

[www.biography.com image 402x402]

And this one too...

[www.biography.com image 402x402]

The primary difference, being the fact that those men were educated. Ted Nugent is not. He knows nothing of American History, or the reasons for the rebellion against the British Crown, nor does he understand one word of the Constitution nor does he care to. He is a slavering, ignorant self-centered reactionary with fantasies of mass murder and total war.


.
Were you wearing a powdered white wig when you wrote that?
 
2013-01-23 09:54:07 AM  
A lot of people seem to be eager to defend a known pedophile like the Nuge.
 
2013-01-23 09:54:09 AM  

HotWingConspiracy: That's a big thing the revolutards can't understand - the vast majority of Americans don't agree with their definition of tyranny or oppression.

There will be no popular uprising, you're going to have to kill your friends and neighbors. This will not work out.


Given that all we've got to go on is big mouthed jackasses flapping their gums and not even any noteworthy riots or organized law breaking of any sort, one wonders how you've divined anyone's criteria of actionable tyranny. Reading chicken entrails?
 
2013-01-23 09:54:18 AM  

Thune: keylock71: Thune: And you think Obama knows what "shall not be infringed" means?

I don't know.... Do you know what "Well-Regulated" means?

And this is where the ignorance is because you just demonstrated that YOU don't know what "Well-Regulated" means.

Back when the Constitution was written the phrase "well-regulated" meant "in good order" or "well running".

They use to refer to clocks as "Well-regulated".

They didn't mean there were laws written by the federal government about how a clock should run.

The phrase "well-regulated" in the Constitution had NOTHING to do with written regulations by the federal or state government, as the person of today would take that phrase to mean.


And you walked into the trap.

So, if according to you, we can't use "well-regulated" because it's outdated compared to the common venacular of today, then you can't mean "militia" to mean whatever you think it means today because back then it meant something else.

Double-edged swords - how do they work?
 
2013-01-23 09:55:13 AM  
GiantRex

The primary theme in all of these acts is governance by a foreign entity and taxation without any representation in parliament.

Well one of the bigest complaints about Obama from his oposition is that he allows the UN and world opinion to hold too much sway over our actions, and the second is he is recklessly taxing and spending without enough oversight.

Surely the comparison is exagerrated and overblown in every possible way, Rather like comparing a schoolyard bully to Hitler, but it isn't completely from left field.
 
2013-01-23 09:55:27 AM  
Doesn't Ted realize that only so-called-progressives have the right to freedom of speech?
 
2013-01-23 09:56:02 AM  
Far more tame than the crap you and yours spew.

I recall your side walking down the streets with signs saying you want to kill US soldiers and Bush. But you like that.
 
2013-01-23 09:56:14 AM  

Farkage: I'm about as pro second amendment as you can get, but why does anyone listen to this a-hole?

/Mostly Democrat too. That seems to confuse people.



Because he speaks NRA, the only language some 2nd Amendment people seem to speak. I'm an Independent who likes my guns, but I won't associate with the National Retards Association, not only do they NOT represent the actual best interests of gun owners, I also don't want to be on a "list" anywhere... NRA is second only to PETA when it comes to a special interest group with no farking clue how to represent their interests effectively.
 
2013-01-23 09:56:44 AM  

keylock71: give me doughnuts: Do you know what "the right of the people" means?

I do... It means I'm not shiatting my pants that the government is going to come and take the two firearms I do own and that background checks and mandatory firearms training (which I had to pass in order to get my F.I.D.) did not infringe my right, nor prevent me from owning and keeping said firearms... And both firearms are "well-regulated" in both senses of the term. I have no problem with that, at all.

In short, you're barking up the wrong tree with that line of attack, my friend.



Actually I was quoting from the 1st and 4th Amendments, but you just keep right on jumping to the wrong conclusions.
Universal background checks on firearm transfers, and manadatory training for concealed-carry permits are a great ideas.
 
2013-01-23 09:56:46 AM  
All aboard the crazy train............

oops, wrong musician..
 
2013-01-23 09:56:48 AM  

Thune: keylock71: Thune: And you think Obama knows what "shall not be infringed" means?

I don't know.... Do you know what "Well-Regulated" means?

And this is where the ignorance is because you just demonstrated that YOU don't know what "Well-Regulated" means.

Back when the Constitution was written the phrase "well-regulated" meant "in good order" or "well running".

They use to refer to clocks as "Well-regulated".

They didn't mean there were laws written by the federal government about how a clock should run.

The phrase "well-regulated" in the Constitution had NOTHING to do with written regulations by the federal or state government, as the person of today would take that phrase to mean.


You might want to check on what the phrase "bear arms" meant at the time.
 
2013-01-23 09:56:48 AM  

Dr. Whoof: These people are sick, and they need to be treated by mental health professionals. Ted Nugent is the poster child for those enhanced mental health and background check rules Obama signed as an executive order. This man should not have weapons - he has made it clear he wants to use them to kill Americans who have done nothing more than disagree with him.


Bears repeating. The guy is a nutjob.

Wikipedia has other choice quotes from the nutter.
 
2013-01-23 09:56:54 AM  

david_gaithersburg: This person was also guilty of treason.

And this one....

[www.biography.com image 402x402]

And this one too...

[www.biography.com image 402x402]


Most people are aware of that. Here's the thing though: If they lost the war, they'd have been put to death.

Those who did not support their war likely would have supported that result. If Ted Nugent and his buddies take up arms against the US, that's what will happen to them and many in this thread would support it.

Thinking the American Revolution was necessary and proper in no way obligates me to believe that Ted Nugent's revolution is necessary and proper. Why you think it does is a mystery to me.
 
2013-01-23 09:57:06 AM  

coeyagi: Thune: keylock71: Thune: And you think Obama knows what "shall not be infringed" means?

I don't know.... Do you know what "Well-Regulated" means?

And this is where the ignorance is because you just demonstrated that YOU don't know what "Well-Regulated" means.

Back when the Constitution was written the phrase "well-regulated" meant "in good order" or "well running".

They use to refer to clocks as "Well-regulated".

They didn't mean there were laws written by the federal government about how a clock should run.

The phrase "well-regulated" in the Constitution had NOTHING to do with written regulations by the federal or state government, as the person of today would take that phrase to mean.

And you walked into the trap.

So, if according to you, we can't use "well-regulated" because it's outdated compared to the common venacular of today, then you can't mean "militia" to mean whatever you think it means today because back then it meant something else.

Double-edged swords - how do they work?


The militia was, and is, the body of the people. It has been clearly stated back then as well as recently. Feel free to look that up yourself.
 
2013-01-23 09:57:12 AM  

RevMercutio: A lot of people seem to be eager to defend a known pedophile like the Nuge.


Uh, who has defended him? There seems to be universal hatred for Nugent.
 
2013-01-23 09:57:26 AM  
1.bp.blogspot.com
 
2013-01-23 09:57:44 AM  
24.media.tumblr.com
 
2013-01-23 09:58:02 AM  
grew up thinking Ted was cool, he was respected by the ubiquitous hunter culture in Michigan for the most part. You can't go ten steps without hearing 'Fred Bear' within a week of Nov. 15th around here. I saw him in concert 3 or 4 times growing up...whiplash bash was always a good time.
I've played guitar for a couple decades and although I never considered him one of the greats, some of his stuff is ok by me.

all that said, the shiat that has come out of this a-holes mouth in the last several years has been absolutely ridiculous, embarrassing, pants-shiattingly stoopid, Victoria Jacksonian garbage.

I'm sorry this guy was and is associated with Michigan. As a life long Michigander, I'm sorry everyone...very very sorry.

he wont go out in some fire fight, he's a coward, he's all talk. He'd like to incite others to take up arms and go to war, but he sure as hell wont be in the crowd.
He may end up getting in trouble with his mouth, but a guy like that always backs down when real shiat is happening.
 
2013-01-23 09:58:17 AM  
Terrible Ted need a good prescription for multiple mood stabilizing drugs.

/2000mg of lithium per day would be a great start.
//Nugent got out of serving his country by showing up at his draft appointment in filthy clothes and crapped pants. What a patriot.
 
2013-01-23 09:58:51 AM  

david_gaithersburg: This person was also guilty of treason.

And this one....

[www.biography.com image 402x402]

And this one too...

[www.biography.com image 402x402]


Are you equating Ted Nugent with Benjamin Franklin and Thomas Jefferson?
 
2013-01-23 09:58:56 AM  
KingKauff:
He's a better guitar player than "hunter". I've only been hunting for a few years and I bet I know more than he does and am a shiatton better than him. I actually hunt animals in the wild.

/ok, I sit in a stand and read/doze off/text friends, but still, I'm better than him


I'm sure you are. You even got one this year.
 
2013-01-23 09:59:17 AM  

Farkage: I'm about as pro second amendment as you can get, but why does anyone listen to this a-hole?

/Mostly Democrat too. That seems to confuse people.


You want confusion? Wear one of these to the range next time:

skreened.com
 
2013-01-23 09:59:21 AM  

Holocaust Agnostic: HotWingConspiracy: That's a big thing the revolutards can't understand - the vast majority of Americans don't agree with their definition of tyranny or oppression.

There will be no popular uprising, you're going to have to kill your friends and neighbors. This will not work out.

Given that all we've got to go on is big mouthed jackasses flapping their gums and not even any noteworthy riots or organized law breaking of any sort, one wonders how you've divined anyone's criteria of actionable tyranny.


They're happy to tell you. Even if you don't want to know. Apparently we've been under a tyrant for years now, they're just waiting for someone to start shooting I guess.
 
2013-01-23 10:00:06 AM  

Philip Francis Queeg: You might want to check on what the phrase "bear arms" meant at the time.


It meant you could own and use weapons that were equal to, or better than, those used by the most mordern army of the day.
 
2013-01-23 10:00:08 AM  

scarmig: Well, by definition the Revolutionary War *was* treason and sedition against the lawful government at the time.


Yes it was, and without the French naval blockade, Corwallis may have reinforced his troops and won the day at Yorktown.
 
2013-01-23 10:00:32 AM  

david_gaithersburg: Lord_Baull: Nothing says patriotism like inciting an armed insurrection to oust a democratically-elected official.

.
If the majority voted to ban gay marriage you would be in support of that too?

How about slavery? To bring back the days of your great grand pappy would probably be a wet dream for you.


You think that voting in slavery is the same thing as electing a president?
 
2013-01-23 10:00:40 AM  

manimal2878: RevMercutio: A lot of people seem to be eager to defend a known pedophile like the Nuge.

Uh, who has defended him? There seems to be universal hatred for Nugent.


The Romney boys think he's the best thing since sliced bread. Even Mitt likes him because he has low self esteem and likes anyone who says something good about him, or hell even someone who merely says something bad about an opponent of his.
 
2013-01-23 10:00:44 AM  
Cornwallis, rather.
 
2013-01-23 10:00:46 AM  
Ted won't be part of any revolt. That would require a spine.


photos.imageevent.com
 
2013-01-23 10:01:08 AM  

thurstonxhowell: david_gaithersburg: This person was also guilty of treason.

And this one....

[www.biography.com image 402x402]

And this one too...

[www.biography.com image 402x402]

Most people are aware of that. Here's the thing though: If they lost the war, they'd have been put to death.

Those who did not support their war likely would have supported that result. If Ted Nugent and his buddies take up arms against the US, that's what will happen to them and many in this thread would support it.

Thinking the American Revolution was necessary and proper in no way obligates me to believe that Ted Nugent's revolution is necessary and proper. Why you think it does is a mystery to me.


.
I have a silly hang up on an odd concept called freedom, and freedom from tyranny. Sorry, but I do not share your desire to be a mere subject to huge and out of control government.
 
2013-01-23 10:01:10 AM  

david_gaithersburg: This person was also guilty of treason.

And this one....

[www.biography.com image 402x402]

And this one too...

[www.biography.com image 402x402]


hmmmf, just two over-educated elitists who certainly wouldn't fit in with the 21st Century "I got common sense" Real American Patriots.
 
2013-01-23 10:01:12 AM  

give me doughnuts: Philip Francis Queeg: You might want to check on what the phrase "bear arms" meant at the time.

It meant you could own and use weapons that were equal to, or better than, those used by the most mordern army of the day.


Try again.
 
2013-01-23 10:01:13 AM  

Anderson's Pooper: Alfonso the Great: That guy is the worst thing to ever come out of Michigan.


He's sold more albums than Ford sold Edsels so I would disagree with your premise.


Perhaps. But today the Edsel is considered collectible. Ted won't be.
 
2013-01-23 10:01:32 AM  

give me doughnuts: Actually I was quoting from the 1st and 4th Amendments, but you just keep right on jumping to the wrong conclusions.
Universal background checks on firearm transfers, and manadatory training for concealed-carry permits are a great ideas.


Well, shiat. Sorry about that. Hard to tell intent from 12 point Arial sometimes.

Though, I think anyone who want to own any kind of firearm, whether it's concealed-carry or not should have to pass a training course. Seems like common sense to this gun owner.
 
2013-01-23 10:02:26 AM  

JusticeandIndependence: david_gaithersburg: This person was also guilty of treason.

And this one....

[www.biography.com image 402x402]

And this one too...

[www.biography.com image 402x402]

Are you equating Ted Nugent with Benjamin Franklin and Thomas Jefferson?


No, it's just that "treason" can look vastly different depending upon where you are standing.
 
2013-01-23 10:02:54 AM  

david_gaithersburg: I have a silly hang up on an odd concept called freedom, and freedom from tyranny. Sorry, but I do not share your desire to be a mere subject to huge and out of control government.


That's not what we disagree on. Grow up.
 
2013-01-23 10:03:12 AM  

HotWingConspiracy: david_gaithersburg: Lord_Baull: Nothing says patriotism like inciting an armed insurrection to oust a democratically-elected official.

.
If the majority voted to ban gay marriage you would be in support of that too?

How about slavery? To bring back the days of your great grand pappy would probably be a wet dream for you.

You think that voting in slavery is the same thing as electing a president?


.
Please show where I said that? Now voting down the Second Amendment like they just did in NY.......
 
2013-01-23 10:03:33 AM  

david_gaithersburg: thurstonxhowell: david_gaithersburg: This person was also guilty of treason.

And this one....

[www.biography.com image 402x402]

And this one too...

[www.biography.com image 402x402]

Most people are aware of that. Here's the thing though: If they lost the war, they'd have been put to death.

Those who did not support their war likely would have supported that result. If Ted Nugent and his buddies take up arms against the US, that's what will happen to them and many in this thread would support it.

Thinking the American Revolution was necessary and proper in no way obligates me to believe that Ted Nugent's revolution is necessary and proper. Why you think it does is a mystery to me.

.
I have a silly hang up on an odd concept called freedom, and freedom from tyranny. Sorry, but I do not share your desire to be a mere subject to huge and out of control government.


So when are you going to take up arms, Patriot Hero?
 
2013-01-23 10:03:35 AM  

czei: "He added that Obama "hires, appoints and associates with communists,"

Nugent also doesn't know the definition of "communist".


Just one of the many words Ted doesn't know the meaning of. Like "Patriot" and "American".
 
2013-01-23 10:03:54 AM  

thurstonxhowell: The law enforcement agent who will eventually get to shoot Ted Nugents dickdead is the luckiest man in the world.

 
2013-01-23 10:04:19 AM  
Everyone always talks about his pants-pooping draft dodging, but people rarely mention his having himself declared the legal guardian of his 17-year-old girlfriend, when he was 30. That's pretty gross, too.
 
2013-01-23 10:05:03 AM  
Some people grow out of that pathetic grade school bullying phase. And some people, like Ted, instead fully embrace it.
 
2013-01-23 10:05:38 AM  

david_gaithersburg: [24.media.tumblr.com image 850x468]


Are you equating Ted Nugent with Peter Fonda, Dennis Hopper and Terry Southern (plus Jack Nicholson by proxy)?

DIAF
 
2013-01-23 10:06:22 AM  

keylock71: give me doughnuts: Actually I was quoting from the 1st and 4th Amendments, but you just keep right on jumping to the wrong conclusions.
Universal background checks on firearm transfers, and manadatory training for concealed-carry permits are a great ideas.

Well, shiat. Sorry about that. Hard to tell intent from 12 point Arial sometimes.

Though, I think anyone who want to own any kind of firearm, whether it's concealed-carry or not should have to pass a training course. Seems like common sense to this gun owner.


And once upon a time (adjusts onion), the NRA was all about marksmanship and gun safety courses. Hell, I went to a summer camp that had an NRA-sponsored marksmanship/safety class, and I knew a bunch of guys that did it with the BSA.
 
2013-01-23 10:06:26 AM  
FTFA: "The comment was a reference to the Battle of Concord, in which a British soldier broke a standoff and fired upon assembled American militiamen, in what later became known as "the shot heard around the world" that helped launch the Revolutionary War."

...uh, not exactly. Sure, Nugent's comment referenced the Battle of Concord, but the rest of the paragraph is bullcrap of the highest order. The problem is that no one knows who fired first. Americans at the time claimed the Brits shot first, Brits claimed Americans shot first.
 
2013-01-23 10:06:28 AM  

Alfonso the Great: That guy is the worst thing to ever come out of Michigan.


www.peoplequiz.com

It's close, but I think you're right.
 
2013-01-23 10:06:47 AM  

someonelse: Everyone always talks about his pants-pooping draft dodging, but people rarely mention his having himself declared the legal guardian of his 17-year-old girlfriend, when he was 30. That's pretty gross, too.


Yep... Creepy as fark.

I don't know the man personally, of course, but in all the years I've, unfortunately, been aware of Ted Nugent, I've yet to see one redeemable quality in the man-child.
 
2013-01-23 10:07:01 AM  

david_gaithersburg: HotWingConspiracy: david_gaithersburg: Lord_Baull: Nothing says patriotism like inciting an armed insurrection to oust a democratically-elected official.

.
If the majority voted to ban gay marriage you would be in support of that too?

How about slavery? To bring back the days of your great grand pappy would probably be a wet dream for you.

You think that voting in slavery is the same thing as electing a president?

.
Please show where I said that? Now voting down the Second Amendment like they just did in NY.......


There ya go. I'm willing to accept you're just an idiot that doesn't actually read what he's quoting though.

Also, the 2nd Amendment wasn't voted down in NY.
 
2013-01-23 10:07:42 AM  

Philip Francis Queeg: give me doughnuts: Philip Francis Queeg: You might want to check on what the phrase "bear arms" meant at the time.

It meant you could own and use weapons that were equal to, or better than, those used by the most mordern army of the day.

Try again.


Why? I was right the first time.
 
2013-01-23 10:07:59 AM  

david_gaithersburg: [24.media.tumblr.com image 850x468]


George Washington: Men, you face a brutal enemy, determined to crush you...uh, I say you and not we, because I've been shiatting in my pants for a couple of days so...


/what have you done for Ted lately?
 
2013-01-23 10:08:49 AM  

give me doughnuts: And once upon a time (adjusts onion), the NRA was all about marksmanship and gun safety courses. Hell, I went to a summer camp that had an NRA-sponsored marksmanship/safety class, and I knew a bunch of guys that did it with the BSA.


Hell, the first safety course I took was an NRA course. It was excellent.

Having said that, I want nothing to do with the modern NRA. They're not defending my interests or freedoms, they're defending the interests of gun manufacturers with deep pockets.
 
2013-01-23 10:08:49 AM  
Ted Nugent is one of those artists from the '70s that I've heard of, but whose songs I've never actually heard. A bit like Peter Frampton and Gary Glitter.

Frampton only wanted Sonic Youth's watermelon, so I'm going to give him a break.

Glitter and Nugent is a bit of a toss-up. But I'm going to say Glitter was the better human being.

Glitter just farked kids.

Nugent was fine with shiatting his pants so that some other poor bastard would be drafted in his place, and then epitomising the term chickenhawk for the rest of his days.
 
2013-01-23 10:09:07 AM  

maram500: FTFA: "The comment was a reference to the Battle of Concord, in which a British soldier broke a standoff and fired upon assembled American militiamen, in what later became known as "the shot heard around the world" that helped launch the Revolutionary War."

...uh, not exactly. Sure, Nugent's comment referenced the Battle of Concord, but the rest of the paragraph is bullcrap of the highest order. The problem is that no one knows who fired first. Americans at the time claimed the Brits shot first, Brits claimed Americans shot first.


America won. Therefore the British shot first. qed.
 
2013-01-23 10:09:10 AM  

coeyagi: Thune: keylock71: Thune: And you think Obama knows what "shall not be infringed" means?

I don't know.... Do you know what "Well-Regulated" means?

And this is where the ignorance is because you just demonstrated that YOU don't know what "Well-Regulated" means.

Back when the Constitution was written the phrase "well-regulated" meant "in good order" or "well running".

They use to refer to clocks as "Well-regulated".

They didn't mean there were laws written by the federal government about how a clock should run.

The phrase "well-regulated" in the Constitution had NOTHING to do with written regulations by the federal or state government, as the person of today would take that phrase to mean.

And you walked into the trap.

So, if according to you, we can't use "well-regulated" because it's outdated compared to the common venacular of today, then you can't mean "militia" to mean whatever you think it means today because back then it meant something else.

Double-edged swords - how do they work?



Where did i change the definition of "Militia" from its historical norm?

The use of the term "militia" in 1776 actually supports the case i'm making.

misplaced snark - how do they work?
 
2013-01-23 10:09:59 AM  
Acts committed by King George which led to the American revolution:

- Navigation Acts (blocked American trade with the French, Spanish, and Dutch)
- Molasses Act (tax for the purpose of making the British export cheaper than that from the French West Indies, "encouraging" colonists to buy British)
- Royal Proclamation of 1763 (restricted settlement west of the Appalachian Mountains)
- Sugar Act (enacted because of colonial evasion of the Molasses Act, also known as the American Revenues Act)
- Currency Act (regulated and restricted the paper money issued in the colonies for the purpose of preventing British creditors and merchants from being paid in depreciated colonial currency, resulted in a shortage of coin in the colonies and complicated the payment of debts)
- Quartering Acts (primary reason for the existence of the Third Amendment)
- Stamp Act of 1765 (required printed materials to be printed on special paper with an embossed revenue stamp, stamps had to be purchased with hard currency [see Currency Act], tax levied for the purpose of paying for the Seven Years' War)
- Declaratory Act (asserted that parliament's authority was the same in the colonies as it was in Britain and therefore could pass laws binding on the American colonies... despite the colonies having no representation in parliament)
- Townshend Acts (series of five laws enacted for the purpose of forcing the colonies to subsidize British occupation and law enforcement in the colonies)
- Tea Act (tax/racket enacted for the purpose of forcing colonists to buy off the surplus of tea from the British East India Company, resulted in the infamous Boston Tea Party)
- Quebec Act (extended Quebec's boundaries to the Ohio River, shutting out territorial claims of the ...

You take your 'facts' and your 'knowledge' and you go elsewhere, sir.
I hate to burst your bubble, but England was not a foreign government as you believe, it was our government.


I don't agree with the comments, I do agree with the point being made. Overall none of it matters as our level of apathy will do us in anyway, one look at a sweet boobie and we have forgotten the subject at hand. God Bless America! (Though I am not sure that is high on God's "Things to do today list.") And, oh yeah, Nugent is a major A-Hole. Maybe he should try "Hunting" IED's in the Big "A".
 
2013-01-23 10:10:05 AM  

keylock71: someonelse: Everyone always talks about his pants-pooping draft dodging, but people rarely mention his having himself declared the legal guardian of his 17-year-old girlfriend, when he was 30. That's pretty gross, too.

Yep... Creepy as fark.

I don't know the man personally, of course, but in all the years I've, unfortunately, been aware of Ted Nugent, I've yet to see one redeemable quality in the man-child.



If I were to pick someone to be the exact opposite of Ted Nugent, it would have been Woody Allen.
Back to the drawing board.
 
2013-01-23 10:10:15 AM  

BronyMedic: Maybe he's just working his way up to his eventual suicide because Obama won.

[img1-cdn.newser.com image 240x160]

Time to nut up or shut up, Teddy Boy. Can't shiat your pants on this one.


If every Liberal Democrat who proclaimed in 2000 and again in 2004 that they were leaving the US if George W. Bush were elected had actually done so, there would have been no Barrack Obama presidency. If everyone on the Left who said/did something that could be considered disloyal to the US where executed, then we would have had to suffer Jane Fonda workout tapes.

Insurrections are done in support of a nation as well as in opposition to it. They start with people like Uncle Theodore here and the movement grows over time...or not.

I do not support insurrection at this point, I do however very much understand why people would feel that way.
 
2013-01-23 10:10:47 AM  

dc0012c: Farkage: I'm about as pro second amendment as you can get, but why does anyone listen to this a-hole?

/Mostly Democrat too. That seems to confuse people.

You want confusion? Wear one of these to the range next time:


Holy shiat do I need one of those, lol!
 
2013-01-23 10:10:58 AM  
The biggest threat to the Second Amendment isn't liberals, it's idiots like this speaking on behalf of the Second Amendment.
 
2013-01-23 10:11:04 AM  

give me doughnuts: Philip Francis Queeg: give me doughnuts: Philip Francis Queeg: You might want to check on what the phrase "bear arms" meant at the time.

It meant you could own and use weapons that were equal to, or better than, those used by the most mordern army of the day.

Try again.

Why? I was right the first time.


No, I'm afraid you were not. The phrase "bear arms" referred to formal military service. If we want to go strictly by the common definitions of the time, the 2nd Amendment should be recognized as giving the right for everyone to join the military.
 
2013-01-23 10:11:05 AM  

give me doughnuts: keylock71: Thune: And you think Obama knows what "shall not be infringed" means?

I don't know.... Do you know what "Well-Regulated" means?

Yes, it means "well-maintained" and "operating correctly."

Do you know what "the right of the people" means?



And which arms have been taken out of your hands?
 
2013-01-23 10:11:44 AM  

jchic: BronyMedic: Maybe he's just working his way up to his eventual suicide because Obama won.

[img1-cdn.newser.com image 240x160]

Time to nut up or shut up, Teddy Boy. Can't shiat your pants on this one.

Sure he can, don't the bowels tend to release when death occurs?


I don't think butting up was an option but it would be the end result one way or another.
 
2013-01-23 10:12:09 AM  

david_gaithersburg: I have a silly hang up on an odd concept called freedom, and freedom from tyranny. Sorry, but I do not share your desire to be a mere subject to huge and out of control government.


So we should have taken up arms against Bush and his government when they came up with the Patriot Act.  Got it.
 
2013-01-23 10:13:09 AM  
Seems like as good a place as any to voice an idea I've had about your gun laws.

Personally, I think every last American citizen does have the right, guaranteed by your Constitution and committed to by your fore fathers, to own, posses and use firearms. I think every American should own a gun.
That being said, you should have access to those weapons at any time.
In a supervised and restricted setting.
My idea, is you can have your weapons and use them. Only at an approved gun range under the supervision of a range Marshall. You can go, use your guns, but you can never remove them from that supervised setting for any reason. If you want to move them, you must use a bonded mover that will move your weapon from point a to b. Ammunition can only be purchased at an approved gun range for use only at that range. Each round of ammunition has a micro dot stamp embedded in the casting which is impossible to remove. If purchased ammo is used in an illegal setting, the ammunition can be traced back to the seller and owner.

It needs some tweaking, but, it get's around the complaint that politicians want to remove your access to guns. It gets around your possession and use laws and restricts those uses to the intended environment.

Fill in the blanks, be my guest. Your country needs to move forward on this.
 
2013-01-23 10:13:09 AM  

Lord_Baull: give me doughnuts: keylock71: Thune: And you think Obama knows what "shall not be infringed" means?

I don't know.... Do you know what "Well-Regulated" means?

Yes, it means "well-maintained" and "operating correctly."

Do you know what "the right of the people" means?


And which arms have been taken out of your hands?


That was dealt with way up-thread. Try to keep up.
 
2013-01-23 10:13:20 AM  

give me doughnuts: If I were to pick someone to be the exact opposite of Ted Nugent, it would have been Woody Allen.
Back to the drawing board.


I can see that... Though, Woody doesn't tend to publicize his mental problems as often, and I'd give Woody the edge in artistic talent. : )
 
2013-01-23 10:13:30 AM  

Philip Francis Queeg: give me doughnuts: Philip Francis Queeg: give me doughnuts: Philip Francis Queeg: You might want to check on what the phrase "bear arms" meant at the time.

It meant you could own and use weapons that were equal to, or better than, those used by the most mordern army of the day.

Try again.

Why? I was right the first time.

No, I'm afraid you were not. The phrase "bear arms" referred to formal military service. If we want to go strictly by the common definitions of the time, the 2nd Amendment should be recognized as giving the right for everyone to join the military.


How do you reconcile that with the fact the founding fathers were completely against having a standing army?
 
2013-01-23 10:13:55 AM  

oldfarthenry: Methinks this Wacko will be Janet Reno-ed soonishly.


This comment speaks volumes.

You see, it's not so much that the libs are "anti-gun"; it's that they are "anti-independence". They are all for guns, as long as those guns are handled by the government-approved, jack-booted "wacko" thugs they have deluded their selves that they have some marginal amount of control over, despite any and all history lessons to the contrary. '
"We live in a democracy!" is their universal cry, ignoring the fact that the Native Americans who were all but exterminated for their claim to a Democracy, lived in a "democracy" too. And ignoring that their "Democratic" government hides more from them than it reveals these days. How can you even remotely rationalize that you live in a "democracy" when you aren't even half-aware of the conditions of your existence? You are less than pawns in a game played by the rich and influential. Bodies to be thrown at their enemies in wars to protect their cash-flow and their monopoly on control. Just like the Judiciary frowns upon the subject of Jury Nullification because it lessens their absolute rule over the court, those who seek totalitarian rule by the other branches of government have got to lessen the influence of the average citizen through the ability to project force, because that's the role of government, when you distill it down to its bare essence. They always seek to ridicule, "We're not trying to totally disarm the 'gun nuts'!", implying that you've got to be crazy for suspecting that their final goal is totalitarian control. They're not stupid. And they know you're not stupid. So, their only possible resort is to question your sanity and hurl insults. They've got to get you angry so they can paint you as "out of control" and rationalize to their selves and anybody who will listen that you're better off being defenseless and at the mercy of the power-hungry. They ignore the tens of millions of responsible gun owners and focus upon the criminal acts of the extremely few people who don't have any business possessing a gun in the first place, then seek to implicate the responsible gun owners by association.
 
2013-01-23 10:14:01 AM  
The Nuge doesn't go huntin'. The Nuge goes killin'. If the animal in in a pen, it ain't huntin'. But then I wouldn't expect much from a draft-dodger.
 
2013-01-23 10:14:26 AM  

Philip Francis Queeg: give me doughnuts: Philip Francis Queeg: give me doughnuts: Philip Francis Queeg: You might want to check on what the phrase "bear arms" meant at the time.

It meant you could own and use weapons that were equal to, or better than, those used by the most mordern army of the day.

Try again.

Why? I was right the first time.

No, I'm afraid you were not. The phrase "bear arms" referred to formal military service. If we want to go strictly by the common definitions of the time, the 2nd Amendment should be recognized as giving the right for everyone to join the military.



And I'm sure you have a vast list of historical citation to prove this assertion?

/we really need a sarcasm font
 
2013-01-23 10:14:42 AM  

david_gaithersburg: Lord_Baull: Nothing says patriotism like inciting an armed insurrection to oust a democratically-elected official.

.
If the majority voted to ban gay marriage you would be in support of that too?

How about slavery? To bring back the days of your great grand pappy would probably be a wet dream for you.



Sounds like you're not familiar with how elections work.
Actually, that's the only coherent thing I could glean off your post, sorry if I was mistaken and there really isn't any coherency.
 
2013-01-23 10:15:04 AM  

Blue_Blazer: My birthday is April 17 (ya rly) and I cannot think of a better present than this scumbag dead or in jail.


I can't think of a better birthday present for me (September 11th) than to have the DEA raid your house by mistake executing a "no knock" warrant, and lose control of their trigger fingers.

See how that works? Stop wishing people dead or in jail simply because you think the 1st amendment is only for people who agree with you.
 
2013-01-23 10:15:41 AM  

Fart_Machine: The biggest threat to the Second Amendment isn't liberals, it's idiots like this speaking on behalf of the Second Amendment.


Exactly. It's why the rest of us can't have nice things.
 
2013-01-23 10:15:50 AM  
The guy is a miserable musician <b>subby</b>. Quick! Think of a Ted Nugent song! You can't, because his stuff is crap. The pinnacle of his artistic "achievement" was, if I recall correctly, a song whose lyrics include, "Whang, dang, sweet poon-tang." His music is crap, his lifestyle is crap, and his social commentary is crap.
 
2013-01-23 10:15:55 AM  

SixOfDLoC: I suspect the whole purpose of the first amendment is to protect exactly such declarations.


Free speech has limits to its protection such as "clear and present danger" and "imminent lawless action". Basically if Ted's words could be construed as inciting acts of violence or other unlawful activity in the immediate future then it's not protected speech and he could be charged with conspiracy, inciting injury, sedition or whatever.
 
2013-01-23 10:15:59 AM  

Farkage: Philip Francis Queeg: give me doughnuts: Philip Francis Queeg: give me doughnuts: Philip Francis Queeg: You might want to check on what the phrase "bear arms" meant at the time.

It meant you could own and use weapons that were equal to, or better than, those used by the most mordern army of the day.

Try again.

Why? I was right the first time.

No, I'm afraid you were not. The phrase "bear arms" referred to formal military service. If we want to go strictly by the common definitions of the time, the 2nd Amendment should be recognized as giving the right for everyone to join the military.

How do you reconcile that with the fact the founding fathers were completely against having a standing army?


They weren't completely against a standing Army. The US Constitution allows a standing army.
 
2013-01-23 10:16:25 AM  

hdhale: If every Liberal Democrat who proclaimed in 2000 and again in 2004 that they were leaving the US if George W. Bush were elected had actually done so, there would have been no Barrack Obama presidency. /i>

Why should we leave? A dumb asshole being elected by a bunch of dumb assholes isn't reason enough for me to leave my country.

 
2013-01-23 10:16:31 AM  
Also crap, my HTML skills.
 
2013-01-23 10:16:51 AM  
This whole idea of revolution (and succession) disgusts me. Obama didn't steal the election... He was elected by a majority of the voters and earned the majority of the electoral votes. These "patriotic" Americans like Nugent are the real enemy (Just saying.... No real insight in that statement). However, the idea that armed insurrection is the solution because your candidate lost an election? That alone proves that Nugent and his wacko buddies aren't true Americans.

I have several buddies in the military.... and yes, the military isn't overly impressed with Obama (or Democratic candidates in general) but they support their Commander-in-Chief.

Bring it Nugent..... I hope you're smiling when some Republican-favoring Delta or Seal badasses storm your compound and put a bullet between your eyes. Should that happen? Bury him at sea in Lake Michigan so other nuts don't have a gravesite to make a shrine.

/ Michigander who likes Nugent's music but hates his radical ideas
// Yes....Michigan is full of crazy people....Most of them own guns. Show me a state that doesn't have their fair share of nutcases and radicals.
/// I sometimes wish Deer had the intelligence to stalk and shoot idiots like Nugent.
//// Yes.... I own rifles and shotguns.... Yes I hunt .... No I'm not worried about Obama taking my guns away
 
2013-01-23 10:16:51 AM  
I don't think dangerous and crazy people clamoring to be armed with more and more lethal weapons is really going to help their fight against gun regulations.

It's like when you catch a kid scribbling on the wall with a permanent marker, and you take the marker away.  The kid cries, but you don't give him back the marker.  If you do, well...  then you really only have yourself to blame.
 
2013-01-23 10:17:44 AM  

Lord_Baull: give me doughnuts: keylock71: Thune: And you think Obama knows what "shall not be infringed" means?

I don't know.... Do you know what "Well-Regulated" means?

Yes, it means "well-maintained" and "operating correctly."

Do you know what "the right of the people" means?


And which arms have been taken out of your hands?



They are working on that right now.

And raising objections after the fact is too late.
 
2013-01-23 10:18:42 AM  

calm like a bomb: The Nuge doesn't go huntin'. The Nuge goes killin'. If the animal in in a pen, it ain't huntin'. But then I wouldn't expect much from a draft-dodger.


Pretty much the same as GOP "tough guy", Dick Cheney... And that old asshole can't even do that without shooting someone in the face.

Teddy Roosevelt and Eisenhower would be disgusted with what passes for the Republican Party today.
 
2013-01-23 10:18:49 AM  

HAMMERTOE: oldfarthenry: Methinks this Wacko will be Janet Reno-ed soonishly.

This comment speaks volumes.

You see, it's not so much that the libs are "anti-gun"; it's that they are "anti-independence". They are all for guns, as long as those guns are handled by the government-approved, jack-booted "wacko" thugs they have deluded their selves that they have some marginal amount of control over, despite any and all history lessons to the contrary. '
"We live in a democracy!" is their universal cry, ignoring the fact that the Native Americans who were all but exterminated for their claim to a Democracy, lived in a "democracy" too. And ignoring that their "Democratic" government hides more from them than it reveals these days. How can you even remotely rationalize that you live in a "democracy" when you aren't even half-aware of the conditions of your existence? You are less than pawns in a game played by the rich and influential. Bodies to be thrown at their enemies in wars to protect their cash-flow and their monopoly on control. Just like the Judiciary frowns upon the subject of Jury Nullification because it lessens their absolute rule over the court, those who seek totalitarian rule by the other branches of government have got to lessen the influence of the average citizen through the ability to project force, because that's the role of government, when you distill it down to its bare essence. They always seek to ridicule, "We're not trying to totally disarm the 'gun nuts'!", implying that you've got to be crazy for suspecting that their final goal is totalitarian control. They're not stupid. And they know you're not stupid. So, their only possible resort is to question your sanity and hurl insults. They've got to get you angry so they can paint you as "out of control" and rationalize to their selves and anybody who will listen that you're better off being defenseless and at the mercy of the power-hungry. They ignore the tens of millions of responsible gun owners and focus ...


Come down off your cross. The idiot he's talking about is saying they want an armed revolt.
 
2013-01-23 10:19:00 AM  
You guys are laughing at Ted now but as soon as he gets his shiat together, there's gonna be a rebellion.
 
2013-01-23 10:19:19 AM  

Dr. Whoof: This man should not have weapons - he has made it clear he wants to use them to kill Americans who have done nothing more than disagree with him.


Really? He's been saying this shiat for years. He hasn't hurt or killed anybody who disagrees with him yet, because he's not mentally unbalanced. If that happens I'll gladly agree with you...but I'm pretty sure it's not going to happen. I'm not saying I agree with anything that he says, and I really hope I don't take a blow to the had and start thinking that people as fanatical as himself are correct...because then I might end up on the other side of the debate, agreeing with worthless jackasses such as yourself.
 
2013-01-23 10:19:32 AM  

Philip Francis Queeg: give me doughnuts: Philip Francis Queeg: give me doughnuts: Philip Francis Queeg: You might want to check on what the phrase "bear arms" meant at the time.

It meant you could own and use weapons that were equal to, or better than, those used by the most mordern army of the day.

Try again.

Why? I was right the first time.

No, I'm afraid you were not. The phrase "bear arms" referred to formal military service. If we want to go strictly by the common definitions of the time, the 2nd Amendment should be recognized as giving the right for everyone to join the military.


So within the bill of rights, a group of amendments specifically intended to limit government power, they put in an amendment specifically declaring that the government had a right to have weapons? Just in case the double government tried to disarm them or something?
 
2013-01-23 10:20:22 AM  

keylock71: Thune: And you think Obama knows what "shall not be infringed" means?

I don't know.... Do you know what "Well-Regulated" means?


media.tumblr.com
 
2013-01-23 10:21:24 AM  

grokca: You guys are laughing at Ted now but as soon as he gets his shiat together, there's gonna be a rebellion.


He lost his shiat years ago... : )
 
2013-01-23 10:22:20 AM  
I never ceases to amaze me how this guy doesn't drink, or smoke, or do anything of the sort. He is intelligent and very well spoken. Yet, he is such an intollerable, paranoid jerkoff.

And, btw, he is a lousy guitar player.
 
2013-01-23 10:22:55 AM  

Prank Call of Cthulhu: The guy is a miserable musician <b>subby</b>. Quick! Think of a Ted Nugent song! You can't, because his stuff is crap. The pinnacle of his artistic "achievement" was, if I recall correctly, a song whose lyrics include, "Whang, dang, sweet poon-tang." His music is crap


You're absolutely right about that. If you want to know who's a good player, you ask musicians. There are no musicians who respect his musicianship because he has no talent.
 
2013-01-23 10:23:07 AM  
If he cared about gun rights he'd shut the fark up rather than give gun owners a bad name.

\ Is he doing anything but the occasional "Rib Fest America?"
 
2013-01-23 10:23:09 AM  

david_gaithersburg: I have a silly hang up on an odd concept called freedom, and freedom from tyranny. Sorry, but I do not share your desire to be a mere subject to huge and out of control government.


So, to promote freedom, let's agree with a man who hints we may soon have to kill people who hold different political opinions! After all, freedom doesn't include the ability to have different political opinions, so, WAR TIME!

FOR FREEDOM!
 
2013-01-23 10:23:24 AM  

give me doughnuts: Philip Francis Queeg: You might want to check on what the phrase "bear arms" meant at the time.

It meant you could own and use weapons that were equal to, or better than, those used by the most mordern army of the day.



In other words, the militia. The militia could own and use weapons equal to or better than the militia?
 
2013-01-23 10:24:25 AM  
All I know of Ted is his crazy talk, "Cat Scratch Fever" and that he played at a concert (with Toby Keith) in Germany when my husband was in Iraq.

And now I know about his draft dodging ways. What a prick.
 
2013-01-23 10:24:42 AM  

Holocaust Agnostic: Philip Francis Queeg: give me doughnuts: Philip Francis Queeg: give me doughnuts: Philip Francis Queeg: You might want to check on what the phrase "bear arms" meant at the time.

It meant you could own and use weapons that were equal to, or better than, those used by the most mordern army of the day.

Try again.

Why? I was right the first time.

No, I'm afraid you were not. The phrase "bear arms" referred to formal military service. If we want to go strictly by the common definitions of the time, the 2nd Amendment should be recognized as giving the right for everyone to join the military.

So within the bill of rights, a group of amendments specifically intended to limit government power, they put in an amendment specifically declaring that the government had a right to have weapons? Just in case the double government tried to disarm them or something?


No it was stating, at least in part, that the government should not be able to ban groups of citizens from the armed forces.If the Government could say that, for example, followers of a certain political party could not serve in the army, it would make it easier for the army to be used as an instrument of repression against that group.
 
2013-01-23 10:24:43 AM  

tuxbabe: All aboard the crazy train............

oops, wrong musician..


The funny thing is, Ozzy sounds like a nuclear physicist when compared to Teddy Boy...
 
2013-01-23 10:25:09 AM  
Interesting Nugent Facts:

Recorded 31 albums 1967-2001.

Sold over 30 million albums worldwide.

Considered #1 guitar showman in the world.

#1 grossing tour act; 1977, 1978, and 1979.

Of the seven albums he released between 1975 and 1980, five of them were certified Platinum or better.

Attempted to buy the background-music company Muzak so he could shut it down; his offer was rejected.
 
2013-01-23 10:25:21 AM  

Hollie Maea: manimal2878: RevMercutio: A lot of people seem to be eager to defend a known pedophile like the Nuge.

Uh, who has defended him? There seems to be universal hatred for Nugent.

The Romney boys think he's the best thing since sliced bread. Even Mitt likes him because he has low self esteem and likes anyone who says something good about him, or hell even someone who merely says something bad about an opponent of his.


So... nobody that has posted in this thread.
 
2013-01-23 10:26:27 AM  

david_gaithersburg: [Easy Rider pic]


so dirty pot-smoking hippies are cool now? last week you found them despicable.
 
2013-01-23 10:26:48 AM  

give me doughnuts: ... and I knew a bunch of guys that did it with the BSA.

Sick.
 
2013-01-23 10:27:06 AM  

Philip Francis Queeg: Farkage: Philip Francis Queeg: give me doughnuts: Philip Francis Queeg: give me doughnuts: Philip Francis Queeg: You might want to check on what the phrase "bear arms" meant at the time.

It meant you could own and use weapons that were equal to, or better than, those used by the most mordern army of the day.

Try again.

Why? I was right the first time.

No, I'm afraid you were not. The phrase "bear arms" referred to formal military service. If we want to go strictly by the common definitions of the time, the 2nd Amendment should be recognized as giving the right for everyone to join the military.

How do you reconcile that with the fact the founding fathers were completely against having a standing army?

They weren't completely against a standing Army. The US Constitution allows a standing army.


"Another source of power in government is a military force. But this, to be efficient, must be superior to any force that exists among the people, or which they can command; for otherwise this force would be annihilated, on the first exercise of acts of oppression. Before a standing army can rule, the people must be disarmed; as they are in almost every kingdom in Europe. The supreme power in America cannot enforce unjust laws by the sword; because the whole body of the people are armed, and constitute a force superior to any band of regular troops that can be, on any pretense, raised in the United States. A military force, at the command of Congress, can execute no laws, but such as the people perceive to be just and constitutional; for they will possess the power, and jealousy will instantly inspire the inclination, to resist the execution of a law which appears to them unjust and oppressive."

-- Noah Webster - 1787

Now I guess you'll invent something that contradicts this, no?
 
2013-01-23 10:28:33 AM  

Wooly Bully: You're absolutely right about that. If you want to know who's a good player, you ask musicians. There are no musicians who respect his musicianship because he has no talent. he is of marginal talent.


FTFY. I think he sucks, too, but the guy has sold a lot of albums. You don't do that without at least some ability.
 
2013-01-23 10:28:50 AM  

grokca: You guys are laughing at Ted now but as soon as he gets his shiat together, there's gonna be a rebellion.


Yes. Shiat together. Which will be ... never.
 
2013-01-23 10:29:06 AM  

Great_Milenko: He must have really enjoyed his last visit from the secret service to ask for another one so soon.


Actually he has crossed into the realm of the untouchables. Like the cliche of banks etc being too big to fail, this guy is now too famous (infamous) to be murdered. No different than folks like Limbaugh etc.
 
2013-01-23 10:29:23 AM  

Farkage: Philip Francis Queeg: Farkage: Philip Francis Queeg: give me doughnuts: Philip Francis Queeg: give me doughnuts: Philip Francis Queeg: You might want to check on what the phrase "bear arms" meant at the time.

It meant you could own and use weapons that were equal to, or better than, those used by the most mordern army of the day.

Try again.

Why? I was right the first time.

No, I'm afraid you were not. The phrase "bear arms" referred to formal military service. If we want to go strictly by the common definitions of the time, the 2nd Amendment should be recognized as giving the right for everyone to join the military.

How do you reconcile that with the fact the founding fathers were completely against having a standing army?

They weren't completely against a standing Army. The US Constitution allows a standing army.

"Another source of power in government is a military force. But this, to be efficient, must be superior to any force that exists among the people, or which they can command; for otherwise this force would be annihilated, on the first exercise of acts of oppression. Before a standing army can rule, the people must be disarmed; as they are in almost every kingdom in Europe. The supreme power in America cannot enforce unjust laws by the sword; because the whole body of the people are armed, and constitute a force superior to any band of regular troops that can be, on any pretense, raised in the United States. A military force, at the command of Congress, can execute no laws, but such as the people perceive to be just and constitutional; for they will possess the power, and jealousy will instantly inspire the inclination, to resist the execution of a law which appears to them unjust and oppressive."

-- Noah Webster - 1787

Now I guess you'll invent something that contradicts this, no?


You don't believe that the US Constitution allows a standing army? How do you then account for the fact that the United States Army has been in continuous existence since 1789?
 
2013-01-23 10:29:31 AM  

Philip Francis Queeg: They weren't completely against a standing Army. The US Constitution allows a standing army.


And the Second Amendment allowed for the regulation of this standing army by an armed populace.
 
2013-01-23 10:30:14 AM  

david_gaithersburg: This person was also guilty of treason.

And this one....

[www.biography.com image 402x402]

And this one too...

[www.biography.com image 402x402]


Are you British? Because those guys are heroes in my country, the U S of friggin' A.

Someone who wants to overthrow, by force of arms, the legitimate and constitutional results of an election in the USA is my enemy and a traitor (if a US citizen).
 
2013-01-23 10:30:20 AM  
"... whereas, to preserve liberty, it is essential that the whole body of the people always possess arms, and be taught alike, especially when young, how to use them..."

-- Richard H. Lee, Additional Letters from the Federal Farmer 53, 1788
 
2013-01-23 10:30:40 AM  

Thune: misplaced snark


"Snark," the last excuse of the loser.
 
2013-01-23 10:30:40 AM  

keylock71: Having said that, I want nothing to do with the modern NRA. They're not defending my interests or freedoms, they're defending the interests of gun manufacturers with deep pockets.


This is pretty much why I dropped out of the NRA as well. It became clear a few years ago that their mission had changed. We really do need an organization like the NRA of the old days, though - I don't think there's enough of an emphasis on gun safety as there should be.

/don't point it at anything you don't want dead.
//always assume it's loaded
///finger off the trigger until you're really ready to fire.
 
2013-01-23 10:31:32 AM  

Philip Francis Queeg: Farkage: Philip Francis Queeg: Farkage: Philip Francis Queeg: give me doughnuts: Philip Francis Queeg: give me doughnuts: Philip Francis Queeg: You might want to check on what the phrase "bear arms" meant at the time.

It meant you could own and use weapons that were equal to, or better than, those used by the most mordern army of the day.

Try again.

Why? I was right the first time.

No, I'm afraid you were not. The phrase "bear arms" referred to formal military service. If we want to go strictly by the common definitions of the time, the 2nd Amendment should be recognized as giving the right for everyone to join the military.

How do you reconcile that with the fact the founding fathers were completely against having a standing army?

They weren't completely against a standing Army. The US Constitution allows a standing army.

"Another source of power in government is a military force. But this, to be efficient, must be superior to any force that exists among the people, or which they can command; for otherwise this force would be annihilated, on the first exercise of acts of oppression. Before a standing army can rule, the people must be disarmed; as they are in almost every kingdom in Europe. The supreme power in America cannot enforce unjust laws by the sword; because the whole body of the people are armed, and constitute a force superior to any band of regular troops that can be, on any pretense, raised in the United States. A military force, at the command of Congress, can execute no laws, but such as the people perceive to be just and constitutional; for they will possess the power, and jealousy will instantly inspire the inclination, to resist the execution of a law which appears to them unjust and oppressive."

-- Noah Webster - 1787

Now I guess you'll invent something that contradicts this, no?

You don't believe that the US Constitution allows a standing army? How do you then account for the fact that the United States Army has been in continuous existence since 1789?


Neither "the founders were against it" nor "its a bad idea" imply that something is unconstitutional.
 
2013-01-23 10:32:05 AM  

Philip Francis Queeg: Farkage: Philip Francis Queeg: Farkage: Philip Francis Queeg: give me doughnuts: Philip Francis Queeg: give me doughnuts: Philip Francis Queeg: You might want to check on what the phrase "bear arms" meant at the time.

It meant you could own and use weapons that were equal to, or better than, those used by the most mordern army of the day.

Try again.

Why? I was right the first time.

No, I'm afraid you were not. The phrase "bear arms" referred to formal military service. If we want to go strictly by the common definitions of the time, the 2nd Amendment should be recognized as giving the right for everyone to join the military.

How do you reconcile that with the fact the founding fathers were completely against having a standing army?

They weren't completely against a standing Army. The US Constitution allows a standing army.

"Another source of power in government is a military force. But this, to be efficient, must be superior to any force that exists among the people, or which they can command; for otherwise this force would be annihilated, on the first exercise of acts of oppression. Before a standing army can rule, the people must be disarmed; as they are in almost every kingdom in Europe. The supreme power in America cannot enforce unjust laws by the sword; because the whole body of the people are armed, and constitute a force superior to any band of regular troops that can be, on any pretense, raised in the United States. A military force, at the command of Congress, can execute no laws, but such as the people perceive to be just and constitutional; for they will possess the power, and jealousy will instantly inspire the inclination, to resist the execution of a law which appears to them unjust and oppressive."

-- Noah Webster - 1787

Now I guess you'll invent something that contradicts this, no?

You don't believe that the US Constitution allows a standing army? How do you then account for the fact that the United States Army has been in continuous existence since 1789?


Show me where I said the constitution doesn't allow for it. And by the way, good effort at ignoring the quote I so helpfully provided.
 
2013-01-23 10:32:18 AM  

HAMMERTOE: Philip Francis Queeg: They weren't completely against a standing Army. The US Constitution allows a standing army.

And the Second Amendment allowed for the regulation of this standing army by an armed populace.


Did it account for their sheep-like slaughter after trying to enforce this regulation due to their lack of airplanes, tanks, high explosives, and such?
 
2013-01-23 10:34:08 AM  

calm like a bomb: HAMMERTOE: Philip Francis Queeg: They weren't completely against a standing Army. The US Constitution allows a standing army.

And the Second Amendment allowed for the regulation of this standing army by an armed populace.

Did it account for their sheep-like slaughter after trying to enforce this regulation due to their lack of airplanes, tanks, high explosives, and such?


I guess that's why we were done in Afghanistan so quickly too, right?
And that is completely off topic as well. Nice try though.
 
2013-01-23 10:34:21 AM  
Funny how everyone forgets the time President Washington stomped out the Whiskey Rebellion because moonshiners did not want to pay their taxes.
 
2013-01-23 10:34:51 AM  

calm like a bomb: HAMMERTOE: Philip Francis Queeg: They weren't completely against a standing Army. The US Constitution allows a standing army.

And the Second Amendment allowed for the regulation of this standing army by an armed populace.

Did it account for their sheep-like slaughter after trying to enforce this regulation due to their lack of airplanes, tanks, high explosives, and such?


Last time an "armed populace" tried to regulate a "standing army," brother was pitted against brother, slavery was abolished, and the southeast quarter of the country got a 170-year butthurt over the fact that they lost, and hide under the flags of those losers to deny that fact.
 
2013-01-23 10:35:00 AM  
www.ojocientifico.com
Damn he ugly
 
2013-01-23 10:35:18 AM  

SixOfDLoC: keylock71: Having said that, I want nothing to do with the modern NRA. They're not defending my interests or freedoms, they're defending the interests of gun manufacturers with deep pockets.

This is pretty much why I dropped out of the NRA as well. It became clear a few years ago that their mission had changed. We really do need an organization like the NRA of the old days, though - I don't think there's enough of an emphasis on gun safety as there should be.


The country needs more people like you. And if people would acknowledge the Tea Party was formed because the Koch brothers don't want to pay taxes and leave that bullshiat organization then we'd all be better off.
 
2013-01-23 10:36:39 AM  

Farkage: They weren't completely against a standing Army. The US Constitution allows a standing army.

"Another source of power in government is a military force. But this, to be efficient, must be superior to any force that exists among the people, or which they can command; for otherwise this force would be annihilated, on the first exercise of acts of oppression. Before a standing army can rule, the people must be disarmed; as they are in almost every kingdom in Europe. The supreme power in America cannot enforce unjust laws by the sword; because the whole body of the people are armed, and constitute a force superior to any band of regular troops that can be, on any pretense, raised in the United States. A military force, at the command of Congress, can execute no laws, but such as the people perceive to be just and constitutional; for they will possess the power, and jealousy will instantly inspire the inclination, to resist the execution of a law which appears to them unjust and oppressive."

-- Noah Webster - 1787

Now I guess you'll invent something that contradicts this, no?

You don't believe that the US Constitution allows a standing army? How do you then account for the fact that the United States Army has been in continuous existence since 1789?

Show me where I said the constitution doesn't allow for it. And by the way, good effort at ignoring the quote I so helpfully provided.



You said they were "completely against" a standing army. If the were completely against it, it would never have been allowed under the Constitution, nor would one have been in existence continually from the creation of the republic.
 
2013-01-23 10:36:56 AM  
Shut up and fade into obscurity chickenhawk draft dodger.
 
2013-01-23 10:37:00 AM  

david_gaithersburg: I hate to burst your bubble, but England was not a foreign government as you believe, it was our government.


Hmm, a government in which we were afforded no representation.

Kind of like democrats with all the gerrymandering? Democrats aren't represented (fairly) in the legitimate government, demanding we act by revolting against the current government?
 
2013-01-23 10:37:21 AM  

Farkage: calm like a bomb: HAMMERTOE: Philip Francis Queeg: They weren't completely against a standing Army. The US Constitution allows a standing army.

And the Second Amendment allowed for the regulation of this standing army by an armed populace.

Did it account for their sheep-like slaughter after trying to enforce this regulation due to their lack of airplanes, tanks, high explosives, and such?

I guess that's why we were done in Afghanistan so quickly too, right?
And that is completely off topic as well. Nice try though.


I guess it's off topic when I point out that your assertion doesn't work in the real world. Good to know.
 
2013-01-23 10:38:12 AM  

Bloody William: calm like a bomb: HAMMERTOE: Philip Francis Queeg: They weren't completely against a standing Army. The US Constitution allows a standing army.

And the Second Amendment allowed for the regulation of this standing army by an armed populace.

Did it account for their sheep-like slaughter after trying to enforce this regulation due to their lack of airplanes, tanks, high explosives, and such?

Last time an "armed populace" tried to regulate a "standing army," brother was pitted against brother, slavery was abolished, and the southeast quarter of the country got a 170-year butthurt over the fact that they lost, and hide under the flags of those losers to deny that fact.


Bless your heart.
 
2013-01-23 10:39:37 AM  

calm like a bomb: Bloody William: calm like a bomb: HAMMERTOE: Philip Francis Queeg: They weren't completely against a standing Army. The US Constitution allows a standing army.

And the Second Amendment allowed for the regulation of this standing army by an armed populace.

Did it account for their sheep-like slaughter after trying to enforce this regulation due to their lack of airplanes, tanks, high explosives, and such?

Last time an "armed populace" tried to regulate a "standing army," brother was pitted against brother, slavery was abolished, and the southeast quarter of the country got a 170-year butthurt over the fact that they lost, and hide under the flags of those losers to deny that fact.

Bless your heart.


I speak a few words of Southern, and fark you too, buddy!
 
2013-01-23 10:40:29 AM  
"I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my Ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States."
 
2013-01-23 10:41:21 AM  

indarwinsshadow: My idea, is you can have your weapons and use them. Only at an approved gun range under the supervision of a range Marshall. You can go, use your guns, but you can never remove them from that supervised setting for any reason. If you want to move them, you must use a bonded mover that will move your weapon from point a to b. Ammunition can only be purchased at an approved gun range for use only at that range. Each round of ammunition has a micro dot stamp embedded in the casting which is impossible to remove. If purchased ammo is used in an illegal setting, the ammunition can be traced back to the seller and owner.

It needs some tweaking, but, it get's around the complaint that politicians want to remove your access to guns. It gets around your possession and use laws and restricts those uses to the intended environment.

letmelaughharder.jpg

 
2013-01-23 10:41:53 AM  

calm like a bomb: Farkage: calm like a bomb: HAMMERTOE: Philip Francis Queeg: They weren't completely against a standing Army. The US Constitution allows a standing army.

And the Second Amendment allowed for the regulation of this standing army by an armed populace.

Did it account for their sheep-like slaughter after trying to enforce this regulation due to their lack of airplanes, tanks, high explosives, and such?

I guess that's why we were done in Afghanistan so quickly too, right?
And that is completely off topic as well. Nice try though.

I guess it's off topic when I point out that your assertion doesn't work in the real world. Good to know.


So it's okay to ignore parts of the constitution if you have determined they may not "work in the real world"? Interesting. I always thought the proper thing to do would be live by the law of the land or change it. And yes, there are established ways to amend the constitution. It' been done in the past, so I know you'll get right on that.
 
2013-01-23 10:42:09 AM  

Bloody William: Last time an "armed populace" tried to regulate a "standing army," brother was pitted against brother, slavery was abolished, and the southeast quarter of the country got a 170-year butthurt over the fact that they lost, and hide under the flags of those losers to deny that fact.


Actually, last time an armed populace tried to regulate a standing army, Obama set a timetable for withdrawal.
 
2013-01-23 10:42:29 AM  

david_gaithersburg: This person was also guilty of treason.

And this one....

[www.biography.com image 402x402]

And this one too...

[www.biography.com image 402x402]


And this one.....

www.netbrawl.com

And this one.....

media.tumblr.com
 
2013-01-23 10:43:45 AM  

Joe Blowme: "I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my Ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States."


The interpretation of which is generally left to the Supreme Court and our system of checks and balances, not some farkwit "rocker" best known for shiatty lyrics, repetitve riffs, and threatening the democratically elected president of the United States with armed insurrection.
 
2013-01-23 10:45:03 AM  
trea·son /ˈtrizən/ Show Spelled[tree-zuhn] Show IPA
noun
1. the offense of acting to overthrow one's government or to harm or kill its sovereign.
2. a violation of allegiance to one's sovereign or to one's state.
3. the betrayal of a trust or confidence; breach of faith; treachery.

Modern day penalties for treason include long jail sentances and, in some cases, the death penalty.

So, guess what dipshait, keep egging on the guys with more/bigger guns than you and don't see if they apply this law to your forehead.
 
2013-01-23 10:45:46 AM  
The scariest thing about Ted Nugent is he claims to have never tried any drug other than "a half a can of beer."
 
2013-01-23 10:45:54 AM  
Ted, I think this is a great idea. If I where you I'd attack the US military tout de suite.
 
2013-01-23 10:46:03 AM  
Shut up and fade into obscurity chickenhawk draft dodger.

Sorry, he can't as a director of the NRA it is his job to be a policy wonk.
 
2013-01-23 10:46:25 AM  

REO-Weedwagon: Ted Nugent may know a lot of things - how to play the hell out of a guitar, how to hunt with any type of weapon, how to swing from a vine wearing a loincloth - but he apparently does not understand the meaning of the word "treason"

Not even close, subby.


Exactly. Obama, Biden and many members of Congress regularly violate their oaths of office. By my definition, that's treason. Unfortunately, the three branches of the government don't have the spine to clean house and the citizenry's only legal option is the ballot box.
 
2013-01-23 10:46:28 AM  

SixOfDLoC: I don't think there's enough of an emphasis on gun safety as there should be.


Completely agreed... Just look at that moron, who was trying to make a "political point" in Utah a few weeks back.

My grandfather pretty much taught me to shoot (using an old clunky .22 at the rifle range at the Newport Naval Base). Seeing the way some folks these days treat their firearms like fashion accessories or political statements would have drove him nuts.
 
2013-01-23 10:46:40 AM  

GiantRex: Acts committed by King George the British Parliament which led to the American revolution:


It's a minor quibble, but an important one. After all, if the King could do all these things, nobody would have had representation.
 
2013-01-23 10:47:17 AM  

ranak: trea·son /ˈtrizən/ Show Spelled[tree-zuhn] Show IPA
noun
1. the offense of acting to overthrow one's government or to harm or kill its sovereign.
2. a violation of allegiance to one's sovereign or to one's state.
3. the betrayal of a trust or confidence; breach of faith; treachery.


So, basically, the entire federal government is guilty of treason at one point or another.
 
2013-01-23 10:47:29 AM  

Joe Blowme: "I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my Ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States."



And?
 
2013-01-23 10:47:33 AM  

coeyagi: OhioUGrad: misanthropologist: Nugent is about as reasonable and relevant as Trump. I reckon Trump could do more long-term damage to the world with his money (assuming that it is his money, and not a whole shiatload of leveraged debt), but Nugent seems destined to go out in a blaze of idiocy, Ruby Ridge or Waco style.

Maybe he can be head of security at Glenn Becks teatard utopia, then when the whole cult destroys itself, no one will be surprised or saddened.

FTFY


haha nothing of significance will be lost
 
2013-01-23 10:48:24 AM  
Welcome to the liberal mindset. Doesn't matter if you're a musician, author, sports figure or movie star or whatever....once you are tagged a 'conservative' anything you have ever done before sucks and you are an asshat.

/closed-minded reactionaries and bigots
 
2013-01-23 10:48:59 AM  

schubie: The scariest thing about Ted Nugent is he claims to have never tried any drug other than "a half a can of beer."


Straight edge guys who enjoy the lifestyles or livelihoods of generally drug-riddled artists tend to be the most batshiat crazy, aggressive, and wrecked people.
 
2013-01-23 10:49:09 AM  

farkmedown: Exactly. Obama, Biden and many members of Congress regularly violate their oaths of office.



Wow. You're an intellectual giant who totally doesn't deserve the ignore feature.
 
2013-01-23 10:50:08 AM  

Bloody William: Joe Blowme: "I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my Ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States."

The interpretation of which is generally left to the Supreme Court and our system of checks and balances, not some farkwit "rocker" best known for shiatty lyrics, repetitve riffs, and threatening the democratically elected president of the United States with armed insurrection.


Can you cite the part where he was "threatening the democratically elected president of the United States with armed insurrection" in the article because while he mentions a Concord bridge, there is no direct threat to the POTUS. So if the SC says so you are all for it? You have no sense of right and wrong do you? You have to be told how to think and what is right and wrong dont you? I bet you would have supported slavery too because it was the law of the land huh?
 
2013-01-23 10:50:21 AM  

farkmedown: REO-Weedwagon: Ted Nugent may know a lot of things - how to play the hell out of a guitar, how to hunt with any type of weapon, how to swing from a vine wearing a loincloth - but he apparently does not understand the meaning of the word "treason"

Not even close, subby.

Exactly. Obama, Biden and many members of Congress regularly violate their oaths of office. By my definition, that's treason. Unfortunately, the three branches of the government don't have the spine to clean house and the citizenry's only legal option is the ballot box.


It isn't. The founders were very clear about what treason is specifically because they knew hysterical nutjobs would throw the term at everyone they disagreed with politically.
 
2013-01-23 10:52:36 AM  

SixOfDLoC: o


but of course .... but just like any org with a huge following the majority of it's members are too uneducated or ignorant to realize it. I hazard a guess that most of NRA's members are also 'only' FOX News watchers which in itself explains a lot.
 
2013-01-23 10:53:04 AM  

TheBigJerk: david_gaithersburg: I hate to burst your bubble, but England was not a foreign government as you believe, it was our government.

Hmm, a government in which we were afforded no representation.

Kind of like democrats with all the gerrymandering? Democrats aren't represented (fairly) in the legitimate government, demanding we act by revolting against the current government?


Generally its considered proper to attempt legal channels first. And the credibility of this posited revolt is diminished somewhat by failure to address the procedural issues now disenfranchising you when you did hold power, your control over the rest of the government, and your near universal agreement withe Republicans(your alleged oppressors) on every issue of note.

Besides all that though systematic under representation is a decent cause.
 
2013-01-23 10:53:26 AM  

Farkage: calm like a bomb: HAMMERTOE: Philip Francis Queeg: They weren't completely against a standing Army. The US Constitution allows a standing army.

And the Second Amendment allowed for the regulation of this standing army by an armed populace.

Did it account for their sheep-like slaughter after trying to enforce this regulation due to their lack of airplanes, tanks, high explosives, and such?

I guess that's why we were done in Afghanistan so quickly too, right?
And that is completely off topic as well. Nice try though.


The most effective weapon for an insurgency is explosives which is why there was such an outcry when ammonia nitrate was heavily regulated following Oklahoma City.
 
2013-01-23 10:53:39 AM  

schubie: The scariest thing about Ted Nugent is he claims to have never tried any drug other than "a half a can of beer."


Which isn't even true. He talks about drinking wine in Africa on one of his hunts in his book "God, Guns and Rock and Roll."

The guy is all over the place with his 'never done drugs or alcohol' BS, amongst other things. Seriously, he chastises people for making mistakes with firearms (negligent discharges) but any time he's farked up it was a 'lesson learned' and so on.

Used to like the Nuge - now he's just another blowhard.
 
2013-01-23 10:53:51 AM  

Bloody William: schubie: The scariest thing about Ted Nugent is he claims to have never tried any drug other than "a half a can of beer."

Straight edge guys who enjoy the lifestyles or livelihoods of generally drug-riddled artists tend to be the most batshiat crazy, aggressive, and wrecked people.


Now, now...

soundscompelling.com

Though, I wouldn't say he lives the lifestyle of a drug-riddled artist. : )
 
2013-01-23 10:54:05 AM  

Farkage: It' been done in the past, so I know you'll get right on that.


Honestly? Would love to. But out here in the real world I readily concede that the NRA won this argument a long time ago, and current sentiment notwithstanding, it isn't going to change. Everybody gets lots of guns, and the price we pay is that occasionally some asshole is going to shoot a lot of people. But we can't discuss rationally what can be done to change this because FREEDOM!!!! Don't even know why I'm bothering, really.
 
2013-01-23 10:54:45 AM  

Joe Blowme: Bloody William: Joe Blowme: "I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my Ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States."

The interpretation of which is generally left to the Supreme Court and our system of checks and balances, not some farkwit "rocker" best known for shiatty lyrics, repetitve riffs, and threatening the democratically elected president of the United States with armed insurrection.

Can you cite the part where he was "threatening the democratically elected president of the United States with armed insurrection" in the article because while he mentions a Concord bridge, there is no direct threat to the POTUS. So if the SC says so you are all for it? You have no sense of right and wrong do you? You have to be told how to think and what is right and wrong dont you? I bet you would have supported slavery too because it was the law of the land huh?


""If you want another Concord bridge, I've got some buddies.""

It's not even reading between the lines. It's reading the lines then understanding what they mean.

"If you want another Fort Sumter, I've got some buddies."

"If you want another Gulf of Tonkin incident, I've got some buddies."

"If you want another Battle of the Trebia, I've got some buddies."
 
2013-01-23 10:55:09 AM  

keylock71: give me doughnuts: Do you know what "the right of the people" means?

I do... It means I'm not shiatting my pants that the government is going to come and take the two firearms I do own and that background checks and mandatory firearms training (which I had to pass in order to get my F.I.D.) did not infringe my right, nor prevent me from owning and keeping said firearms... And both firearms are "well-regulated" in both senses of the term. I have no problem with that, at all.

In short, you're barking up the wrong tree with that line of attack, my friend.


The 24 EO's that the president signed closes the gun show loophole, which even most gun owners were OK with.

Requiring a background check for every gun transfer is impossible to enforce.

The president has called for congress to ban semi-auto's. The problem is that the anti-gun folks could not tell you the difference between an M16 and an M4 and a 22 Long rifle. Some look scary, so they have to be banned.

Go ahead, ban all semi-auto's, it's total ignorance and you will start a war.

/Been posting this for 2 weeks now
//No visits from the SS
 
2013-01-23 10:55:22 AM  

karnal: Welcome to the liberal mindset. Doesn't matter if you're a musician, author, sports figure or movie star or whatever....once you are tagged a 'conservative' anything you have ever done before sucks and you are an asshat.

/closed-minded reactionaries and bigots


Say, let's talk about The Dixie Chicks, eh motherfarker?
 
2013-01-23 10:55:37 AM  

karnal: Welcome to the liberal mindset. Doesn't matter if you're a musician, author, sports figure or movie star or whatever....once you are tagged a 'conservative' anything you have ever done before sucks and you are an asshat.



No. Really. He is a mediocre guitar player at best.
 
2013-01-23 10:56:00 AM  
Apparently it's not treason if the President is black.
 
2013-01-23 10:57:22 AM  
Still waiting for him to be dead or in jail. Personally, I'm rooting for dead.
 
2013-01-23 10:57:52 AM  
United States."

Yes.... That is the role of the President. Yet how many times has the Constitution been modified to reflect changes in ideals over time? Although alcohol wasn't protected by the Constitution an amendment was created and passed that abolished alcohol. When the government saw the amendment caused more problems than it did good? The law was repealed. The same would be true with guns....

Obama doesn't want my rifles and shotguns... Too much of Michigan's (and other states') economy is dependent on revenue from hunting licenses and hunters purchasing supplies, buying gas to go to their hunting grounds, hotels, food purchases, etc. Even with hunting season the number of Deer-Car accidents is still high here (Imagine how bad it would be if the deer population wasn't culled each year). Finally, the animal rights activists might hate hunting seasons.... But I'm sure they'd hate the slow death from starvation animals face without hunting.

Having said that, I don't see a need for assault rifles (*Yawns at the prospect of accidentally starting another boring "automatic v. semi-automatic nerd rage discussion") or even handguns. I don't use either for hunting. Neither does anyone else I know. The argument of "home defense" is often brought up in support of these weapons. If someone broke into my house I suspect the sound of racking a shell into one of my shotguns or into my lever-action Winchester would be enough for them to take what they already have and leave. I don't have a problem with that. My homeowner's insurance covers replacement.
 
2013-01-23 10:58:16 AM  

pxsteel: Requiring a background check for every gun transfer is impossible to enforce.


There will be no need to enforce it. I have been told that gun owners are law abiding folks, so I am sure they will all follow the new requirement.
 
2013-01-23 10:59:11 AM  

Wrongo: david_gaithersburg: [24.media.tumblr.com image 850x468]

Are you equating Ted Nugent with Peter Fonda, Dennis Hopper and Terry Southern (plus Jack Nicholson by proxy)?

DIAF


.
You do realize that those people are actors who were portraying characters in a story?
 
2013-01-23 10:59:16 AM  

karnal: Welcome to the liberal mindset. Doesn't matter if you're a musician, author, sports figure or movie star or whatever....once you are tagged a 'conservative' anything you have ever done before sucks and you are an asshat.

/closed-minded reactionaries and bigots


The Dixie Chicks.

France.

/That is all.
 
2013-01-23 10:59:37 AM  

Farkage: I guess that's why we were done in Afghanistan so quickly too, right?


Fighters in Afghanistan and elsewhere all have bombs, booby traps and mortars, things which wannabe American neo-revolutionaries are bared from having by law. This notion of engaging infantry units which outnumber and outgun you by trading rifle shots with them is a ludicrous fantasy.
 
2013-01-23 10:59:49 AM  
Crap..... Please add the following information to the post above (I don't know why it was cut off *Shakes tiny fist at the FARK gods*


Joe Blowme: "I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my Ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States."

Yes.... that is the role of the President of the United States....
 
2013-01-23 11:02:08 AM  

Farkage: keylock71: Thune: And you think Obama knows what "shall not be infringed" means?

I don't know.... Do you know what "Well-Regulated" means?

Yes, it means "in its natural state". Look up the dictionary definitions from an 18th century dictionary and see for yourself how that phrase was used when the 2nd amendment was written.


I hardly ever post in Politics threads, and I'm probably just feeding the trolls, but...

I find it the height of ridiculousness that Teahadists and insurrectionists keep trotting out this lame trope when they fulminate about the "true" meaning of the 2nd Amendment ("LOL look it up in an 18th century dictionary libtardz!!!"). I mean, seriously, have YOU ever consulted an 18th century dictionary? Perhaps you should, and the first definitions you should consider looking up would be "gun," "firearm," "matchlock," and "musket". You might be surprised that the all-knowing Founding Fathers had no way of anticipating the leaps in weapons technology that we see today, more than TWO CENTURIES LATER. I mean, today's date and time was an even more remote a future to Jefferson and Adams as the Star Trek universe is to us. Shocking, I know. Oh, and while you're at it, look up the definition of "militia" while you're at it. Then consider consulting an actual history book or two, maybe even some of the writings of the actual Founding Fathers, to gain perspective on what was actually happening at that time and what people actually thought about it.

I know, a truly radical thought. One might even say, revolutionary.

In the meantime, I will continue to enjoy the richly deserved mockery that so richly, skewers, roasts and devours your derp.

/Dammit, now I'm hungry. Roast derp for lunch, anyone?
 
2013-01-23 11:02:58 AM  

Diogenes: david_gaithersburg: I have a silly hang up on an odd concept called freedom, and freedom from tyranny. Sorry, but I do not share your desire to be a mere subject to huge and out of control government.

So we should have taken up arms against Bush and his government when they came up with the Patriot Act.  Got it.


.
Yes.
 
2013-01-23 11:04:28 AM  

david_gaithersburg: Diogenes: david_gaithersburg: I have a silly hang up on an odd concept called freedom, and freedom from tyranny. Sorry, but I do not share your desire to be a mere subject to huge and out of control government.

So we should have taken up arms against Bush and his government when they came up with the Patriot Act.  Got it.

.
Yes.


So why didn't you? Are you a coward?
 
2013-01-23 11:04:53 AM  
One thing the 2012 election did show, very clearly, is that Republicans are sore-losers.
 
2013-01-23 11:06:45 AM  

david_gaithersburg: Diogenes: david_gaithersburg: I have a silly hang up on an odd concept called freedom, and freedom from tyranny. Sorry, but I do not share your desire to be a mere subject to huge and out of control government.

So we should have taken up arms against Bush and his government when they came up with the Patriot Act.  Got it.

Yes.



Careful, your patriotism is showing.
 
2013-01-23 11:06:57 AM  

david_gaithersburg: Diogenes: david_gaithersburg: I have a silly hang up on an odd concept called freedom, and freedom from tyranny. Sorry, but I do not share your desire to be a mere subject to huge and out of control government.

So we should have taken up arms against Bush and his government when they came up with the Patriot Act. Got it.

.
Yes.


Afraid I have to agree as well.
 
2013-01-23 11:08:38 AM  

The Evil Home Brewer: The argument of "home defense" is often brought up in support of these weapons. If someone broke into my house I suspect the sound of racking a shell into one of my shotguns or into my lever-action Winchester would be enough for them to take what they already have and leave. I don't have a problem with that. My homeowner's insurance covers replacement.


Heh... I got a rifle and shotgun in the house, but in the event of someone breaking into my home, I think I prefer to defend my home with the half a hockey stick I have in the closet (next to the gun safe). I like my chances, in my home, in the dark or daylight against any intruder, armed or otherwise....

But that's really just macho masturbatory fantasizing... My home has never been burglarized or invaded and my city has a violent crime rate 5 times the national average. Hell, I can't even remember the last time I had any kind of violent altercation with another person... maybe a first fight or two in high school. It's not my firearms keeping me and the family safe. If anything, it's the fact that every ground floor entrance (doors, windows, and bulkhead) is secured when we're home and alarmed when we're out and I have good relationships with all my neighbors and we keep an eye out for each others' property.

Hell, my elderly Portuguese neighbors, who spend the day peeking between the shades when they hear any noises, are more of a deterrent to scum bags than any firearm.
 
2013-01-23 11:10:11 AM  

david_gaithersburg: This person was also guilty of treason.

And this one....

[www.biography.com image 402x402]

And this one too...

[www.biography.com image 402x402]


"Guilty?"

When were the trials?
 
2013-01-23 11:10:22 AM  

david_gaithersburg: Diogenes: david_gaithersburg: I have a silly hang up on an odd concept called freedom, and freedom from tyranny. Sorry, but I do not share your desire to be a mere subject to huge and out of control government.

So we should have taken up arms against Bush and his government when they came up with the Patriot Act.  Got it.

Yes.


HAMMERTOE: Afraid I have to agree as well.



I find it hilarious the very people that called Liberals "traitors" for disagreeing/hating/deploring the Patriot Act are the same ones now saying we should have taken up arms against the President because we disagreed with the Patriot Act.
 
2013-01-23 11:10:54 AM  
Pants-crapping draft-dodger, pedophile, marginally talented guitarist (hey, he's better than me!), psychopathic chickenhawk...

...can we not all come together and agree that Damn Yankees was a horrible, horrible band?
 
2013-01-23 11:12:21 AM  
Does anybody really think that if there ever were another Concord Bridge Ted Nugent would not be unfortunately busy elsewhere?

All talk. That's how you can spot the p#####s. That's why he didn't go to Nam. That's why he should be dismissed as another tough talking coward today with the rest of the anti-tyranny lot. Either we're repressed and you are shirking your duty to resist or we're not and you're lying.
 
2013-01-23 11:12:22 AM  

keylock71: The Evil Home Brewer: The argument of "home defense" is often brought up in support of these weapons. If someone broke into my house I suspect the sound of racking a shell into one of my shotguns or into my lever-action Winchester would be enough for them to take what they already have and leave. I don't have a problem with that. My homeowner's insurance covers replacement.

Heh... I got a rifle and shotgun in the house, but in the event of someone breaking into my home, I think I prefer to defend my home with the half a hockey stick I have in the closet (next to the gun safe). I like my chances, in my home, in the dark or daylight against any intruder, armed or otherwise....

But that's really just macho masturbatory fantasizing... My home has never been burglarized or invaded and my city has a violent crime rate 5 times the national average. Hell, I can't even remember the last time I had any kind of violent altercation with another person... maybe a first fight or two in high school. It's not my firearms keeping me and the family safe. If anything, it's the fact that every ground floor entrance (doors, windows, and bulkhead) is secured when we're home and alarmed when we're out and I have good relationships with all my neighbors and we keep an eye out for each others' property.

Hell, my elderly Portuguese neighbors, who spend the day peeking between the shades when they hear any noises, are more of a deterrent to scum bags than any firearm.


We have a long hallway that leads to the bedrooms. Truthfully? If someone came down the long narrow hall I'd probably blindly fire a warning shot and then grab my 1863 Springfield with it's lock-ring bayonet. It gives me about a 6 foot reach. In a narrow hallway? I'm bound to hit enough that the intruder leaves.
 
2013-01-23 11:16:14 AM  

HAMMERTOE: ranak: trea·son /ˈtrizən/ Show Spelled[tree-zuhn] Show IPA
noun
1. the offense of acting to overthrow one's government or to harm or kill its sovereign.
2. a violation of allegiance to one's sovereign or to one's state.
3. the betrayal of a trust or confidence; breach of faith; treachery.

So, basically, the entire federal government is guilty of treason at one point or another.


A dictionary definition is irrelevant as it's already defined in the Constitution.

Article III, Section 3:

Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court. The Congress shall have Power to declare the Punishment of Treason, but no Attainder of Treason shall work Corruption of Blood, or Forfeiture except during the Life of the Person attainted.
 
2013-01-23 11:17:11 AM  

God's Hubris: I find it hilarious the very people that called Liberals "traitors" for disagreeing/hating/deploring the Patriot Act are the same ones now saying we should have taken up arms against the President because we disagreed with the Patriot Act.


Oh hell no! I decried that piece of crap from the moment it was announced. It is a huge step in the government treating every last citizen as a potential enemy and does nothing but encourage an adversarial relationship between citizen and government. It mad me regret voting for Bush because it made him responsible for the largest growth in government since the New Deal. In short, it confirmed him as a RINO and a traitor to conservative principles.
 
2013-01-23 11:18:01 AM  

karnal: Welcome to the liberal mindset. Doesn't matter if you're a musician, author, sports figure or movie star or whatever....once you are tagged a 'conservative' anything you have ever done before sucks and you are an asshat.


Which is completely different than how conservatives react to liberal entertainers - boycotts, destroying their recordings, telling them they should just shut the fark up and sing...
 
2013-01-23 11:19:13 AM  

Farkage: Philip Francis Queeg: Farkage: Philip Francis Queeg: give me doughnuts: Philip Francis Queeg: give me doughnuts: Philip Francis Queeg: You might want to check on what the phrase "bear arms" meant at the time.

It meant you could own and use weapons that were equal to, or better than, those used by the most mordern army of the day.

Try again.

Why? I was right the first time.

No, I'm afraid you were not. The phrase "bear arms" referred to formal military service. If we want to go strictly by the common definitions of the time, the 2nd Amendment should be recognized as giving the right for everyone to join the military.

How do you reconcile that with the fact the founding fathers were completely against having a standing army?

They weren't completely against a standing Army. The US Constitution allows a standing army.

"Another source of power in government is a military force. But this, to be efficient, must be superior to any force that exists among the people, or which they can command; for otherwise this force would be annihilated, on the first exercise of acts of oppression. Before a standing army can rule, the people must be disarmed; as they are in almost every kingdom in Europe. The supreme power in America cannot enforce unjust laws by the sword; because the whole body of the people are armed, and constitute a force superior to any band of regular troops that can be, on any pretense, raised in the United States. A military force, at the command of Congress, can execute no laws, but such as the people perceive to be just and constitutional; for they will possess the power, and jealousy will instantly inspire the inclination, to resist the execution of a law which appears to them unjust and oppressive."

-- Noah Webster - 1787

Now I guess you'll invent something that contradicts this, no?


blogs.phoenixnewtimes.com
/I knew I had you favorited for a reason...
 
2013-01-23 11:19:53 AM  

schubie: The scariest thing about Ted Nugent is he claims to have never tried any drug other than "a half a can of beer."


Ages and ages ago (late 80s), I worked a show in Milwaukee (Ted Nugent opened for Aerosmith), and Ted was sitting on a crate backstage chewing on his tongue like a lunatic in the throes of a raging coke bender.  I don't know if that's an indictment of drug use, but he definitely seemed to be on something.

We also couldn't get him to stop farking around backstage. After his set, he hid behind the riser and, like a catty biatch, kept trying to sabotage Aerosmith's set by grabbing Steven Tyler and Joe Perry's ankles every time they walked by (the rumor backstage was that at some point earlier on their tour, Joe pissed Nugent off by calling him "Teddy Two Chords").  Eventually, the problem solved itself when Joe Perry stomped on his farking hand and Ted's bandmates dragged him away before having their tour go up in smoke.

The dude's always been a basket case.
 
2013-01-23 11:20:25 AM  

HAMMERTOE: Bloody William: Last time an "armed populace" tried to regulate a "standing army," brother was pitted against brother, slavery was abolished, and the southeast quarter of the country got a 170-year butthurt over the fact that they lost, and hide under the flags of those losers to deny that fact.

Actually, last time an armed populace tried to regulate a standing army, Obama set a timetable for withdrawal.


Link

The U.S.-Iraq Status of Forces Agreement (official name: "Agreement Between the United States of America and the Republic of Iraq On the Withdrawal of United States Forces from Iraq and the Organization of Their Activities during Their Temporary Presence in Iraq") was a status of forces agreement (SOFA) between Iraq and the United States, signed by President George W. Bush in 2008. It established that U.S. combat forces would withdraw from Iraqi cities by June 30, 2009, and all U.S. forces will be completely out of Iraq by December 31, 2011.
 
2013-01-23 11:20:39 AM  

God's Hubris: david_gaithersburg: Diogenes: david_gaithersburg: I have a silly hang up on an odd concept called freedom, and freedom from tyranny. Sorry, but I do not share your desire to be a mere subject to huge and out of control government.

So we should have taken up arms against Bush and his government when they came up with the Patriot Act.  Got it.

Yes.

HAMMERTOE: Afraid I have to agree as well.


I find it hilarious the very people that called Liberals "traitors" for disagreeing/hating/deploring the Patriot Act are the same ones now saying we should have taken up arms against the President because we disagreed with the Patriot Act.


That's kind of where I was trying to take this.  And not even necessarily to highlight hypocrisy.  Although I do question the honesty of all the "yes" answers so far.  Since compared to the gun thing, the Patriot Act, NDAA etc. barely warrant a peep.

But to my larger point, not every thing we see as government overreach warrants armed insurrection.  We do have many means available to us to express our disagreement and try and effect change or reverse what the government has decided to do.  Granted, once power is given away, it's very hard to win back.  But that's a truism and not specific to our country or mode of governance.

The real problem...the deeper problem...is our Congress.  It either folds to the will of the Executive or does nothing.  It has not served us for at least the past 12 years now.  We should be putting unprecedented pressure on Congress instead of having pissing matches over which pet Constitutional provision we should take up arms over.  The Congress has an oath to uphold and protect the entire document, as it is what defines this country.  All of it.
 
2013-01-23 11:21:35 AM  

odinsposse: farkmedown: REO-Weedwagon: Ted Nugent may know a lot of things - how to play the hell out of a guitar, how to hunt with any type of weapon, how to swing from a vine wearing a loincloth - but he apparently does not understand the meaning of the word "treason"

Not even close, subby.

Exactly. Obama, Biden and many members of Congress regularly violate their oaths of office. By my definition, that's treason. Unfortunately, the three branches of the government don't have the spine to clean house and the citizenry's only legal option is the ballot box.

It isn't. The founders were very clear about what treason is specifically because they knew hysterical nutjobs would throw the term at everyone they disagreed with politically.


If actively working to undermine the constitution he's sworn to uphold isn't giving comfort to the enemy, what is?
 
2013-01-23 11:24:57 AM  

devilEther: david_gaithersburg: [Easy Rider pic]

so dirty pot-smoking hippies are cool now? last week you found them despicable.


.
I'm a well armed Dead Head. So now I hate myself, I did not know that.
 
2013-01-23 11:25:36 AM  

rufus-t-firefly: Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court. The Congress shall have Power to declare the Punishment of Treason, but no Attainder of Treason shall work Corruption of Blood, or Forfeiture except during the Life of the Person attainted.


Relative part emboldened.

Now, let's talk about Fast & Furious for a moment. In the context of the War on Drugs, wouldn't you say that allowing guns into the hands of the drug cartels was indeed "giving our enemies Aid and Comfort"? Sure, the Administration claims to be ignorant. But when challenged in the courts, they attempt to invoke Presidential Privilege. Sounds like a little evidence of Treason, (and subsequent Perjury in obfuscation of the same,) is liable to be uncovered.
 
2013-01-23 11:29:01 AM  

keylock71:
My grandfather pretty much taught me to shoot (using an old clunky .22 at the rifle range at the Newport Naval Base). Seeing the way some folks these days treat their firearms like fashion accessories