Confession

Oct 15, 2016 11:51 AM

wm0083

Views

94316

Likes

3055

Dislikes

553

Everyone wants the part of the government they don't need to go disappear. It's just that different people need different things.

10 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 0

well we dont need so many fucking war machines... I dont think anyone needs them

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

“I only seem liberal because I believe that hurricanes are caused by high barometric pressure and not gay marriage.”

10 years ago | Likes 8 Dislikes 2

So ?? U don't mind cutting on the military? Biggest part of the government

10 years ago | Likes 13 Dislikes 6

You would say that tho...never trust someones opinion of themself...they tend to be biased

10 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 1

Take back your party from the anti-science nut jobs.

10 years ago | Likes 27 Dislikes 8

The anti science thing could be said of both sides

6 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

you spelled tea party funny.

10 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 4

I'm a 38 year old white male liberal, and I don't want to take your guns away.

10 years ago | Likes 11 Dislikes 2

I dont know any liberals who want to take guns away; just the NRA driving the sales of guns;)

10 years ago | Likes 8 Dislikes 0

I don't personally know any anti gun folks, but there's this... https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/petition/ban-ar-15-civilian-ownership

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Yes a petition that's totally accurate

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 1

Well it shows that some people do actively want at least the AR-15 removed from civilian ownership.

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 1

Yes they're are people who belive in a flat earth that does not mean they are in the majority

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 1

Small government is the exact opposite of what conservative parties provide.

10 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

The statement of small gvnmt via conservatives has always baffled me. Many run campaigns on minimizing abortion rights. That IS big govnt...

10 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 2

10 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

10 years ago | Likes 8 Dislikes 4

Well with 320 million people it can only be so small. I get what you're saying but when things get complex you have to make some concessions

10 years ago | Likes 17 Dislikes 2

I'd like to see more state government things, leaving the Fed to handle major stuff.

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

I'm on the fence. It sounds good on paper but then States fuck with people's inalienable rights—blue & red states are both guilty of it too.

10 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

Corruption/lobbyist influence over state governments has gotten so, SO much worse in recent years, though. Can't be trusted.

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Nobody really can be trusted in government anymore

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Small is not in all cases a literal statement. When we say small government we mean a government with less power to affect personal freedom.

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

How is this a confession? Fucking hate this meme.

10 years ago | Likes 16 Dislikes 4

I wish we could go back to a time when politics simply meant different opinions on things but mutual respect, not the shit circus we have

10 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 1

like when al gore lost in that wonky election; came out and said lets all move forward and support our new pres?

10 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

Yep actions based on ideas irrelevant of your opponents opinion

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

I prefer an efficient government, and if a politician's only goal is to go to Washington to screw things up, you are what wrong with it.

10 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

I can understand the concept and want of "small government", but I've never seen a Republican successfully "shrink" the government (1/2)

10 years ago | Likes 39 Dislikes 7

Have you seen Democrats "shrink" the government?

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

I said I understand the want, not that I personally want that vision of "smaller government"

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Usually "small government" means making state legislatures "big governments" that push around both the feds and local governments. (2/2)

10 years ago | Likes 28 Dislikes 1

That's because repubs don't truly want a smaller government.

10 years ago | Likes 26 Dislikes 4

Certainly not, and when they "shrink" things, it always fucks over those already getting fucked over. NC's been doing this shit for years.

10 years ago | Likes 11 Dislikes 2

I hate my state so much now.

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Every time I see Pat McCrory on TV I have an overwhelming urge to flip off the son of a bitch.

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

I have to walk by the NC Executive Mansion downtown every now and then. I like to flip it off on the off chance he's inside looking out.

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Too bad current policies makes it extremely easy to put guns in the hand of those who are unlike @OP-

10 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 1

You prefer small government, I hate the terms small government or large government. I'm a 20 year old liberal gun owner. But I prefer small

10 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 1

Government in some areas. A lot of conservatives like small government in corporations, but they love big government in the military.

10 years ago | Likes 7 Dislikes 2

Stay off roads & bridges, out of armed forces & libraries, stop paying social security & refuse Medicare. Put ur money where ur mouth is.

10 years ago | Likes 19 Dislikes 6

You can wan't smaller government without wanting no government...

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 2

We got that, and it's deteriorating fast.

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

I can respect that, but I feel that it's a little naive to think we can function with a small government. Best thing we can do is get money

10 years ago | Likes 13 Dislikes 5

out of politics. Then we can work on making the government function more efficiently and effectively. But the idea of "small government"

10 years ago | Likes 8 Dislikes 3

fails to take into account the massive amounts of power wealth has in todays age. We have checks and balances on each branch of

10 years ago | Likes 7 Dislikes 3

government, because no one branch should be too powerful. The power of wealth also needs to have checks and balances. Without it they would

10 years ago | Likes 7 Dislikes 3

essentially over take the government, using their wealth to take our freedoms instead of law. We can't let that happen.

10 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 2

I'm not so much for smaller government as I am for efficient government. Which means we need to make sure things are properly funded so they

10 years ago | Likes 86 Dislikes 15

can do their jobs, and we need to make sure they aren't wasting time or money.

10 years ago | Likes 48 Dislikes 4

And frankly, I don't think the common Republican strategy of slashing it all to the ground and then burning what's left to ashes works.

10 years ago | Likes 42 Dislikes 5

Restructuring how gov't budgets work would go a long way to reduce spending. The current system of "spend it or lose next year" (1/2)

10 years ago | Likes 10 Dislikes 2

It's called Baseline Budgeting, and is a real thing. Good luck stopping it.

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 1

(2/2) encourages overspending on what could have been a "cheap" year, out of fear of not having enough during an "expensive" year

10 years ago | Likes 9 Dislikes 0

this right here piss me off, I worked painting state buildings even they didn't need painting because it was in the budget.

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Agreed. Budgets should be considered on a case-by-case basis, rather than by having a blanket policy of any sort.

10 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 0

You might like this video. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1fpNyVl3wWY

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

I've never met anyone in any party who advocates for "big gov't". Dems and Reps both want the smallest gov't that can carry out their agenda

10 years ago | Likes 7 Dislikes 1

Who even needs governments when you've got corporations to step all over your faces. They pretty are the government at this point anyway

10 years ago | Likes 22 Dislikes 11

Coca-Cola is killing us. Somebody save us!

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 6

This sort of stuff usually happens because they collude with the government. No big company can force you to do anything, but the gov can

10 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 2

In the absense of an entity preventing it, what stops a company from forcing you to do something...?

10 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 0

25 year old gun?... It's time for an upgrade

10 years ago | Likes 248 Dislikes 21

Dad?

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Jack Bauer seems content with a (near 25y/o) USP. http://www.arune.com/images/BeJack.jpg

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Is this why my liberal friends think stopping gun sales will take guns off the street? Shit my glock is expired, guess its a crossbow for me

10 years ago | Likes 11 Dislikes 1

People who don't own guns often have a wildly inaccurate idea of how quickly they wear out.

10 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 0

People who don't own guns have a wildly inaccurate idea of them in general i.e. fully semi automatic.

10 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

People who don't own guns (and many who do) frequently have literally no idea how any of it works.

8 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

and just how many were made for the various wars....

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Firearms technology doesn't advance all that quickly. The last big innovation was probably polymer frames, and that started 30 years ago.

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

But comrade, Kalashnikov shoots for 100 year before break. Why replace?

10 years ago | Likes 19 Dislikes 0

Kalashnikov got nothing on JMB

10 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 2

Genuinely laughed and have no idea why

10 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 4

As you might expect, an M1911 was designed in... 1911. And I do think you can get WW2 ones, and use them (If expensive).

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

M1 Garand. You're argument is finished.

10 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

It's a conservative gun, so it'll last I presume

10 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 3

I've got a rifle that's coming up on 86 years

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

No, glock is best!

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

I have a beautiful 25 year old compound bow. I need to get that cleaned up again...

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

I have one that was made in 1931. Tula Mosin hex receiver. :D

10 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 0

I... may have started a mosin family. 1926 and 1929 Izevsk and a 1936 Tula, all hex. Tula isn't matching serials, but has no import mark

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

My Tula has all matching serials and no import marks. Love it to pieces.

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Shot a deer with a rifle from 1908 so idk if 25 years is exactly out of date. Hard to mess up point, pull and powderboom blast

10 years ago | Likes 50 Dislikes 2

In Germany, GDR washing machines are going strong while many new models break after five years.

5 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

I nice 6 shooter never needs an upgrade

10 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 1

Needs a good smith tho ;)

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

IDK, I have a 1911 (Modern, but same design as original) and an M1917. Both still shoot great

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

As a gun owner... old is cool too. I've got a shotgun from the 1850s. P.S +1 for you funny man.

10 years ago | Likes 14 Dislikes 3

Too bad neither party is small government.

10 years ago | Likes 151 Dislikes 8

This is why the libertarian party is growing

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 1

"We need a government that doesn't stick it's nose in peoples business. Also, we need to keep the fucking trannies out of the ladies room"

10 years ago | Likes 19 Dislikes 2

"No abortions, and gay people shouldn't be able to get marry or adopt children"

10 years ago | Likes 11 Dislikes 1

*Married

10 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

There is no current party with a chance of being elected that believes in small government. They say they do, but they don't.

10 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

I'm in the same boat. I think fall more into libertarian... but I don't like their idea to privatize everything.

10 years ago | Likes 35 Dislikes 9

Libertarians a.k.a. People Who Don't Know History.

10 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 2

Then you might be left of democrats.

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

It's called Classical Liberalism, the school of thought that the modern 'left' stole their name from.

10 years ago | Likes 11 Dislikes 1

Ah, that makes sense. Thanks.

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Then you're not a libertarian

10 years ago | Likes 29 Dislikes 6

Hi! Libertarian delegate from TX here. Why do you thing Libertarian means privatize everything? Just curious?

10 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

I feel like I'm a little bit of everything. But I'm closest to them because I like their personal freedoms aspect.

10 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 3

If you're not for privatizing stuff, then you're anything else, other than a libertarian in our political spectrum, besides a communist.

10 years ago | Likes 8 Dislikes 13

I don't think you understand what libertarianism is, honestly.

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

I like privatizing everything but essential services. But you've got a point I guess, that's kind of their cornerstone.

10 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 2

No their corner stone is definitely personal freedom and small government. They see the privatization as an application of that.

10 years ago | Likes 12 Dislikes 1

"I'm sorry, you didn't pay your Fire Service premium this month. Try your garden hose."- Libertarian

10 years ago | Likes 21 Dislikes 8

you say that as if you dont pay for fire service as it is. and your scenario happened to my grandfather.

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 2

Yet you are happy to run your health service this way

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

Not really. Part of libertarian platform is to protect people's life, liberty, and property. Hence no private police or fire dept.

10 years ago | Likes 8 Dislikes 2

By that description they should also support a public health service.

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

I agree. That is the piece that is missing, IMHO.

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

That's my concern. The canadian libertarian party wants to privatize healthcare...

10 years ago | Likes 9 Dislikes 4

Why worry? You could have something like america's healthcare system! A clusterfuck run by greed!

10 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 2

I'm worried it'll turn into that.

10 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

Yeah, it's better to wait until it goes bankrupt to propose that insane idea....

10 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 6

Except privatizing everything is like 99% of the libertarian platform...

10 years ago | Likes 8 Dislikes 1

And I'm cool with privatizing 99% of things. Just not essential services.

10 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 1

such as what?

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 2

Mainly healthcare. But also law enforcement, prisons, fire and rescue things along those lines.

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

Can someone tell me the difference between 'small government' & 'deliberately neglecting anyone who was dealt a bad hand in life'?

10 years ago | Likes 24 Dislikes 8

small government- the idea that governemnt should be as unintrusiuve into the lives of people as possible, doing the absolute minimum in (1

10 years ago | Likes 10 Dislikes 1

regulating peoples lives, and stick to matters that affect the nation as a whole such as national security, international diplomacy, (2

10 years ago | Likes 10 Dislikes 1

and so on. aka: not what any republican has pushed since the party was founded, and high risk of doing the other via lack of regulation (3

10 years ago | Likes 10 Dislikes 1

in business law, tax codes, medical standards/practices/prices, election law, etc. anyway. source: im a democrat. (done)

10 years ago | Likes 7 Dislikes 1

Sounds about right. All republican focus the past 8yrs has been on laws restricting people's constitutional freedoms, and...

10 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 1

Just don't fall for trump's bullshit. A crooked politician is better than a pile of shit

10 years ago | Likes 38 Dislikes 22

0.02 cents have been deposited into your bank account.

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 2

What happens when that crooked politician is also a pile of shit?

10 years ago | Likes 10 Dislikes 2

Smaller pile of shit

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 5

It's pretty easy to get dumb Americans to continue to accept corrupt, big money, career politicians.

10 years ago | Likes 12 Dislikes 24

And trump wouldn't change that. He'd have the most correct presidency since Grant

10 years ago | Likes 14 Dislikes 8

is it still impeachable to lie to the senate? Cause if so straight after the inaugural speech, Trump = Impeached, going on past form

10 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 6

Hillary's a corrupt pile of shit. Trump's just a pile of shit that benefitted from the corruption of politicians like her.

10 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 2

Yet Hillary can actually run this country without throwing it into a lake of oil and setting it ablaze

10 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

I think Trump's capable of running the country. The main problem is his attitude. Personally, I'd rather have him over her, [1/2]

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 1

but he needs to be more level-headed. [2/2]

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 1

I'm all for small government too, however small government often means minimal regulation. Which allows exploitative business practices.

10 years ago | Likes 360 Dislikes 62

Small government at the federal level doesn't necessarily mean small government at the State or Municipal level though.

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Most "exploitative business practices" are by government granted monopolies (e.g., cable). Create problem, then offer regulation as answer.

10 years ago | Likes 7 Dislikes 11

Big government tends to be corrupt, and also allows exploitative business practices so long as the exploiter makes a payoff.

10 years ago | Likes 8 Dislikes 2

Not always as clear as that. Often regulation only hurt the little guys while large companies actually lobby for more regulations.

10 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

Government big or small, the problem is lobbyists, special interest groups, and no term limits.

10 years ago | Likes 28 Dislikes 5

...not that having no term limits is great, but it's just not clear that it will make things any different/better.

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Term limits tend to put power in the hands of the parties to select their preferred candidates, which is the opposite of what you want.

10 years ago | Likes 7 Dislikes 0

minor note, parties count as a special interest group, which was also stated to be an issue. presumably this guy wants boh gone

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Bigger government = more lobbyists

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

maybe in the US

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Tom's River.

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Right. & with climate change on track to destroy the planet as we know it, deregulation would be suicide for profit.

10 years ago | Likes 15 Dislikes 8

could you imagine deregulation of....well, anything? People are far too stupid already...

10 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 1

I cannot. Yet the deregulation of basically everything is what a Republican presidency would mean.. Hello '08 financial crisis 2.0

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

That moment when people debate without attacking one another. This thread ligitimately shows more tact than what the candadites shown.

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

BTW, read up on the term "rent-seeking" to understand how big government grows even bigger thanks to those corporations who profit from it.

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

[deleted]

[deleted]

10 years ago (deleted Nov 4, 2016 3:11 AM) | Likes 0 Dislikes 0

Uh, Enron was in Houston, there, champ, and was regulated (or not) more federally than on the state level.

10 years ago | Likes 15 Dislikes 1

Ha ha! Way to inadvertently support OP's position.

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

Enron?

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

[deleted]

[deleted]

10 years ago (deleted Oct 16, 2016 2:36 PM) | Likes 0 Dislikes 0

And the pipe burst at UCLA lost 20 million. While I agree they shouldn't have been sold it so cheap it's not really that much water.

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

[deleted]

[deleted]

10 years ago (deleted Oct 16, 2016 2:36 PM) | Likes 0 Dislikes 0

Yeah, the pipe water couldn't be used in any way anymore while the Nestle water was expressly so. I was comparing one burst pipe as being 1

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

is ludicrous, estimates vary but put the total cost of the Enron scandal at around 35 billion dollars. ~1/3 of a percent of the US GDP. 3

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

more than half of what Nestle took to compare the amount of water lost. You're saying Nestle fucked California even more than Enron. That 2

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

But California has one of the largest and most invasive governments

10 years ago | Likes 42 Dislikes 5

Enron was more of a federal than a state issue. Also it was based in Texas, not California.

10 years ago | Likes 8 Dislikes 0

Exactly, it's not "capitalism run amock" it's protected corporatism

10 years ago | Likes 38 Dislikes 5

Hey look, somebody who knows their shit. Thank you, foreal

10 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 2

This! In a free capitalism these business practices lead to bankruptcy, not government protection.

10 years ago | Likes 22 Dislikes 4

California's manufacturing is ridiculously regulated, though. Are we talking about different things?

10 years ago | Likes 8 Dislikes 0

Our government today is a big source of exploitative business practices.

10 years ago | Likes 76 Dislikes 13

Because we allow bribery in the form of lobbying. Stop the influence of wealth on congress.

10 years ago | Likes 23 Dislikes 0

The only way to get money out of politics is to make politicians not worth buying. That means less powerful politicians, not more.

10 years ago | Likes 7 Dislikes 4

Ding, winner.

10 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

How are you going to do that without essentially giving all of that power to the wealthy? Deregulating wont work.

10 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 0

A big part of the reason the wealthy are powerful is because they're buying the politicians.

10 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 1

And that would make it worse.

10 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 2

how the fuck do ya figure THAT?

10 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 1

Because all of these corporations that already fuck us over when there are SOME limitations would have zero limitations to their fuckery

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

...because we took away their lobbyists? what? are you even talking about anything in this collection of comments?

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

Regulation doesn't necessarially mean "keeping business honest." It often serves no purpose but to stifle competition from small business--

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 4

or mandate pointless makework for powerful interests. This isn't to say that all regulation is bad, but a lot of exists to benefit the 1%

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 4

The bigger a Govt gets, the more regs it comes up with, and then we end up with: ya can't grow a tomato in your front yard, 1/2

10 years ago | Likes 11 Dislikes 17

And a little girl can't sell lemonade. Smaller Govt has to prioritize and does only important things.

10 years ago | Likes 9 Dislikes 16

People are exploiting the current set of regulations like you wouldn't believe, so why should we have to pay all these agencies/bureaus?

10 years ago | Likes 12 Dislikes 9

Uh, what? Crime is our of control in this city, why do we even pay police?

10 years ago | Likes 13 Dislikes 2

Was trying to say that regulations don't stop people from figuring out how to exploit the system

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 8

Oversight of regulation does, though. When you cut oversight, you declaw regulation... which is exactly what "small govt" types have wanted.

10 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 1

We shouldn't be. Surely we can agree on some middle ground.

10 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 3

The US has been continuously deregulated since the mid 70s. Since then, per capita income stagnated while megacorporations flourished.

10 years ago | Likes 108 Dislikes 30

You *can't* be serious. The first sentence is just delusional. The 2nd is because regularity "complexity is a subsidy" that favors bigger.

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 5

Source?

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Aswell as wall street and other cartels. Just sayin.

10 years ago | Likes 25 Dislikes 8

[deleted]

[deleted]

10 years ago (deleted Dec 18, 2018 4:48 PM) | Likes 0 Dislikes 0

Actually, I've read a few during my masters degree in business management. But sure, can you recommend a particular one?

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

I think the issue here is how people define "deregulation". Business is more regulated now than it ever was. Yet you contend deregulated 1/2

10 years ago | Likes 10 Dislikes 4

Rather, "crony" capitalism--politically connected helping their friends, lead to exploitive business. Usually suppressing COMPETITION... 2/2

10 years ago | Likes 8 Dislikes 3

Also, regulation and enforcement of regulation are two very different things. You can deregulate in practice without changing laws.

10 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

And you can regulate and choose selectively not to enforce on your politically donor CEO friends.

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Yes, though less likely, as they don't directly run agencies.

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

didnt OSHA start in the 70's? didnt emmission standards start in the 70's? wasnt the brady bill and the ASB passed in the 80's/90's?

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 2

wasnt the EPA started by Nixon, (a president in the 70's)?

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

This.

10 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 1

I like small government and state governments in some instances but there are certain things like marriage and unalienable rights 1/2

10 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 0

2/2 that have to be enforced over the entire country not state by state because we have seen it doesn't work well when they get to choose

10 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 0

So you're in favor of nationwide conceal carry legislation instead of state by state piecemeal?

10 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

Sure I am also for having any sale of a gun being only valid with a background check no matter if the sale is between family members

10 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

I am all for guns just every person should not have access to every gun and some should never be sold to anyone besides law/military

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

A Donald trump add was underneath your photo...

10 years ago | Likes 292 Dislikes 21

Funny, my Ad was about PPI.

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Ads are based on what you search.

10 years ago | Likes 16 Dislikes 0

Not really. I get ads for brands I never really interact with.

7 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

10 years ago | Likes 10 Dislikes 1

The Donald is wasting money trying to campaign on imgur? God he has a hopeless campaign.

10 years ago | Likes 25 Dislikes 10

To be fair, I'm probably voting for him. I can say imgur ads has nothing to do with it though lol.

10 years ago | Likes 25 Dislikes 24

https://i.sli.mg/tLpt9o.png If you quote trump being a flip flopping. I'm going to post about a Nmillion things hillary has changed on.

10 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 4

He's going to either split up families or deport American Citizens. He's blatantly going to defy the US constitution with a religious test.

10 years ago | Likes 13 Dislikes 9

Last official plan for immigration I heard was that he wasn't going to be deporting illegals, but he was definitely going to make them start

10 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 5

Then he's a massive hypocrite and his base should be in revolt... they aren't in revolt as they know it's his latest lie.

10 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 3

Paying taxes like normal citizens, and take a stance like the gang of eight, with a path to citizenship. And still plans on building a wall.

10 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 5

I think you triggered Treblaine on that one.

10 years ago | Likes 10 Dislikes 5

Maybe haha.

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 5

but @Treblaine , i mean, he has some good points

10 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 7

Why? He's terrible. He's a liar. You think Hillary might be a liar, just read through the list of all the confirmed lies Trump has told.

10 years ago | Likes 8 Dislikes 7

@TheFineBros has every given rights to vote to whoever he wants, just you @Treblaine.Just be sure to vote to instead of arguing over the net

10 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 2

Why are you bringing right to vote into question? I asked why and I exercised my right to say why not.

10 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 4

Honestly they are both absolutely terrible candidates. I'm just trying to just the less of two evils, and the one more in line with my views

10 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 6

Trump has NEVER served in any governmental position in his entire life, he's never even tried to stand for any other position.

10 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 4

Trump said he would betray his NATO allies on a whim, have you any idea the shitstorm if Hillary even hinted at such an idea.

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 4

As to "in line with your views" Trump is not a conservative just because he's far to the right.

10 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 5

No, they are NOT equally bad, Hillary won't release emails that other people sent her, Trump won't do that OR release his tax return.

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 4

Quit whining and let him vote for whoever he wants to vote because your opinion doesn't mean jack shit on the internet

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 2

Hillary is not a perverted groper, who goes into locker rooms where the opposite sex is changing to oogle at underage models.

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 5

What aren't outright lies are obviously untrue, like that America is in a worst state than it's ever been, by what logic?

10 years ago | Likes 7 Dislikes 5

"Cuz I've been on this planet for INSERT NUMERICAL VALUE years, and my childhood was pleasant, but then life became hard. Thanks Obama!"

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0