Love your blog dude. And there's no denying that Brian Mast served his country and paid a serious price for that service. For that as a US citizen, he has my appreciation.
That said as is the case with 99.9% of all politicians, now that he is a member of that elite group of totalitarians, he has conveniently forgotten about the constitution and the bill of rights. Specifically as a Floridian he has embraced a multitude of popular gun control legislation.
He has claimed his position is justified by the shooting at Stoneman Douglas HS. Of course the actual facts regarding the shooting, that prove failures at the federal (including the corrupt/incompetent fbi), state, local and public school levels, especially the cowardice of the local police and school officials, are of no concern or consideration to him. Now that he is a politician he is obviously anointed with special powers from on high.
So while he claims to support the 2nd, his support only includes guns he thinks you should have and restrictions on those rights based on his elite powers and knowledge granted to him because he's a member of the special people.
Fortunately the vets I know totally support the bill of rights and think Mast is simply a troll. Mast is certainly entitled to his opinion and if he does not want those scary black rifles in his house, well "Vaya con Dios" Mast. The problem of course is these politicians feel entitled to impose their beliefs on the rest of us.
These are the people ruling over us, what a disgrace.
Good morning. I’m glad you enjoy the blog. Please forward some info about his stance on guns. It’s good to have from someone that’s paying attention to him. My email is on the side bar. Irish ☘️
This was an ingenious tactic used to ridicule the commies. More patriots should used "tools" such as this at their disposal to expose the rat-bastard leftists and educate the "fence-riders" in this country.
Overall, I think Mast is pretty good. Yes, his Second Amendment beliefs are obviously wrong, but we _are_ talking about a man whose four children attend - or will attend - a Florida public school. I can understand his new outlook on the Second Amendment, even as I say he is completely wrong. We should work to correct his misunderstanding ot the Second, rather than throwing out the baby with the bath water.
Thanks for the beautiful photo of Bryce Canyon, Irish.
Thanks for keeping us informed. I am a one issue voter on the federal level, now, but am more of an issue voter in the local and state races, as I think that I can have more influence there. So I am focusing only on the 2nd amendment for the federal level. That means that I would not consider having a vote for a candidate who is anti 2nd amendment and anti freedom. But on the state level, I would be a bit more willing to discuss issues with people, and to work to try and effect compromise that can work the best for the most people. While still remaining true to our nations founders, of course.
Jake McCauley of the Institute on the Constitution made a fair point that the killing of that terrorist mastermind was not constitutional. Sure, under congressional Acts since the Founding, but not of the Constitution itself.
We can argue, Yabet, whatever Congress does is lawful. By extension, that would be the same for the other branch of the fedgov, namely the Supreme Court. Whatever they decide, right?
Well, even the miildly interested student of history has seen the fallacy of that. Oh no, no. I am not mentioning the fallibility of man, I am talking of the political nature of law. When that political nature stands up to be even a little bit influential in passing of law (Acts, et al) or judicial opinion, then we are going down the wrong path, i.e, the immoral, unethical, unjust path. And certainly non-Constitutional.
I will not argue if this guy needed killing. That's actually the wrong question. More to the point was it the U.S. government which was to do it?
Irish you have a troll. I have now gotten 2 responses to this one in my email for BS stuff like work from home on the 'puter and male enhancement. Just letting you know.
Hey Jeff. Ya, I've been cleaning up both their shitty spam comments as soon as I can get to them. One is from Pakistan and the other is in Oklahoma. ( according to statcounter and IP searches ) Both have been reported to blogger so we'll see if we can get a clean up on The Feral Irishman comment aisle :)
"You are out of order" in other words stop making us uncomfortable with a situation we can't control
ReplyDeleteMight be the first time they gave a minute of silence for the fallen.
ReplyDeleteWhat a GIANT middle finger!
ReplyDeleteThat prick sitting in the chair Elliot Engle is a disgrace as are almost every demoncRat in Congress
ReplyDeleteI absolutely love it
ReplyDeleteLove your blog dude. And there's no denying that Brian Mast served his country and paid a serious price for that service. For that as a US citizen, he has my appreciation.
ReplyDeleteThat said as is the case with 99.9% of all politicians, now that he is a member of that elite group of totalitarians, he has conveniently forgotten about the constitution and the bill of rights. Specifically as a Floridian he has embraced a multitude of popular gun control legislation.
He has claimed his position is justified by the shooting at Stoneman Douglas HS. Of course the actual facts regarding the shooting, that prove failures at the federal (including the corrupt/incompetent fbi), state, local and public school levels, especially the cowardice of the local police and school officials, are of no concern or consideration to him. Now that he is a politician he is obviously anointed with special powers from on high.
So while he claims to support the 2nd, his support only includes guns he thinks you should have and restrictions on those rights based on his elite powers and knowledge granted to him because he's a member of the special people.
Fortunately the vets I know totally support the bill of rights and think Mast is simply a troll. Mast is certainly entitled to his opinion and if he does not want those scary black rifles in his house, well "Vaya con Dios" Mast. The problem of course is these politicians feel entitled to impose their beliefs on the rest of us.
These are the people ruling over us, what a disgrace.
Good morning. I’m glad you enjoy the blog. Please forward some info about his stance on guns. It’s good to have from someone that’s paying attention to him. My email is on the side bar. Irish ☘️
DeleteIrish:
ReplyDeleteAs requested email sent to you with several links for your reading pleasure.
As is typical, once elected, a politicians beliefs, ethics & positions, become flexible and based on what will keep them in power.
Thus why the founders believed in "limited government" and that politics was "NEVER" supposed to be a career, but a temporary public service.
This was an ingenious tactic used to ridicule the commies. More patriots should used "tools" such as this at their disposal to expose the rat-bastard leftists and educate the "fence-riders" in this country.
ReplyDeleteOverall, I think Mast is pretty good. Yes, his Second Amendment beliefs are obviously wrong, but we _are_ talking about a man whose four children attend - or will attend - a Florida public school. I can understand his new outlook on the Second Amendment, even as I say he is completely wrong. We should work to correct his misunderstanding ot the Second, rather than throwing out the baby with the bath water.
ReplyDeleteThanks for the beautiful photo of Bryce Canyon, Irish.
Secession is the answer,
ReplyDeleteThanks for keeping us informed. I am a one issue voter on the federal level, now, but am more of an issue voter in the local and state races, as I think that I can have more influence there. So I am focusing only on the 2nd amendment for the federal level. That means that I would not consider having a vote for a candidate who is anti 2nd amendment and anti freedom.
But on the state level, I would be a bit more willing to discuss issues with people, and to work to try and effect compromise that can work the best for the most people. While still remaining true to our nations founders, of course.
Jake McCauley of the Institute on the Constitution made a fair point that the killing of that terrorist mastermind was not constitutional. Sure, under congressional Acts since the Founding, but not of the Constitution itself.
ReplyDeleteWe can argue, Yabet, whatever Congress does is lawful. By extension, that would be the same for the other branch of the fedgov, namely the Supreme Court. Whatever they decide, right?
Well, even the miildly interested student of history has seen the fallacy of that. Oh no, no. I am not mentioning the fallibility of man, I am talking of the political nature of law. When that political nature stands up to be even a little bit influential in passing of law (Acts, et al) or judicial opinion, then we are going down the wrong path, i.e, the immoral, unethical, unjust path. And certainly non-Constitutional.
I will not argue if this guy needed killing. That's actually the wrong question. More to the point was it the U.S. government which was to do it?
Rick
Irish you have a troll. I have now gotten 2 responses to this one in my email for BS stuff like work from home on the 'puter and male enhancement. Just letting you know.
ReplyDeleteHey Jeff. Ya, I've been cleaning up both their shitty spam comments as soon as I can get to them. One is from Pakistan and the other is in Oklahoma. ( according to statcounter and IP searches ) Both have been reported to blogger so we'll see if we can get a clean up on The Feral Irishman comment aisle :)
ReplyDelete