Thursday, February 21, 2013

Randi Rhodes on Background Checks

Randi Rhodes


  1. Is this broad on drugs? A nation of laws, eh? If she really thinks so, maybe she should open her big fat pie hole about the criminals on Capitol Hill, in the statehouses and the municipalities.

    orlin sellers

  2. 1. Americans wanted slavery. Americans wanted women treated as second-class citizens. Just because the majority wants to infringe on rights is not good enough.

    2. Why does anyone listen to these voices from on high that talk over callers and take seriously no idea that they didn't think up themselves? It makes me wonder if the gun control freaks from Minnesota that we know so well are about to get their own program.

  3. The show host "Randi Rose", I presume was intent on demonstrating her intellectual superiority (which exists entirely as a figment of her imagination) to these "primitives", the "rednecks" who comprise of the majority of Americans, in a rather simian attempt at mental chest-beating. This broadcast serves as yet another example of the common leftist ploy to falsely present one's intellectual superiority over a carefully chosen idiot, and therefore construct a "Potemkin Village" in place of a factual argument, based on the common assumption that verbal eloquence is a proper metric of intelligence, thus "correctness".

    The main issue is that by controlling access to firearms, the State establishes a Democratic Caste system, where certain classes of person MAY be intrusted with the machinery to defend one's life, family, and liberty. Who are the "criminals" or "drug users" in question? We now trade liberty for a Democratic Apartheid, in which all but the liberal elite is a slave of the welfare State.

    How one justify the continued existence (much less the creation) of a society whose only justification for it's continued existence is the threat of force.

    Thus, I reiterate my previous demand for "NO MORE LAWS".

  4. E.N., Ian, and BigBubba have one thing in common: All three use "simian" as an insult. I suspect that they have more in common than that.

    1. Son, you be crazy. In what sense do I share ANYTHING in common with E.N. or Black Cap, or whatever he may call himself next, besides the usage of the word "simian" to denote one who demonstrates the mental characteristics of a lower ape. Why would such a deranged Statist argue for a libertarian cause? You ought not bite the hand that feeds you, my comrade.

    2. I am not your son. You and I should be equally pleased about that. About the rest of your argument, when you act like a troll, you shouldn't be surprised about being lumped in with the rest of the trolls. You pretend to be a stereotype. In my judgement, you're trying to make my side look bad.

      Look at how you shift into standard English when you're angry. There's another part of my evidence.

  5. Looking at the picture shown here, I do have to say that I miss rotary phones.