destruction of america

[datzenmike]

29 minutes ago, a.d._510_n_ok said:

Sooooooooooooooo........is it possible this is a duo paired in hopes that they will fail.....? Like the puppet masters want their own nominees to be so awful that they can do nothing but lose??? Pic unrelated. 

 

I assume they want to win so why not just skip over Ka-malla in the first place? and promote some winners? First Joe... the Harris is out, then Michelle is in.... That's fucked up. Or are you saying the Democrats are quitting political musical chairs and going home?

[frankendat]

1 minute ago, john510 said:

Maybe Obama is being truthful and sincere when she says she doesn't want to run ? That is possible.

Sure, Michelle who has already sacrificed a considerable amount in the name of playing second fiddle. Michelle who has proven that she isn't shy of fame or to share her opinion. Being President would be awful, but imagine sitting in a room full of people, powerful people stroking your ego and begging you to play? Not only would that be an personal pump bigger than imaginable, you could write your own ticket. OK, I'll  run, 4 years and I get my own island and not some little sinking one, a big one, a cruise boat with a helipad and a personal corporate jet, with on call pilot

[frankendat]

5 minutes ago, datzenmike said:

 

I assume they want to win so why not just skip over Ka-malla in the first place? and promote some winners? First Joe... the Harris is out, then Michelle is in.... That's fucked up. Or are you saying the Democrats are quitting political musical chairs and going home?

I think it is fucked up and it was avoidable, so either they're idiots or there is a plan. I would like to believe they're idiots, I call the Democrats idiots often, but I realize there are Democrats that are smart, very smart. I thought that Michelle for VP was Obamas way to get the "experience" needed to be President . I think she could beat Trump without it, but it gives more years in office for Democrats if they have a Harris and then a Michelle. But, much can happen in 4 years so I am not so sure on that one. Harris has me befuddled, because I don't care about her, I don't see her as a threat, I can't imagine enough people voting for her. The lack of a primary was weird. Hillary worried me, Michelle worries me, as I could see either becoming President and attacking what I value. Harris is just as bad but I can't see her becoming President

[a.d._510_n_ok]

Mike, Michelle is the key. She and Kamala are 180' out from one another. Kamala actually opposed Trayvon riots as Cali AG while Michelle as FLOTUS was all for them. Michelle is a black supremacist who hates Kamala for both campaigning in black face as well as eagerly locking the bruthas up en masse. There is no deep love for her from Hillary, Bill, Barack (despite his lukewarm endorsement of her) + less than a month ago dems wanted her gone because she was gonna cost Joe the ticket with her insufferable idiocy. No. I do not believe dems are deeply in love with Kamala. They are going through the motions because they have to and because they are desperate not to have a red wave sweep congress.

[john510]

19 hours ago, tr8er said:

Walz as VP….  You are about to hear thousands of sound bites about his support of gender reassignment.  Holy fuck we are utterly sidelined with silly issues shit.  

One party runs on making America great and the other runs on it's ok to be gay. And their newest talking point is "weird" ???? That's 4th grade crap kids do.

[frankendat]

Cut and Paste, on Harris, from a gun writer I follow: edited

 

Last year, Biden put Harris in charge of the new White House Office of Gun Violence Prevention, which Biden said would “centralize, accelerate, and intensify our work to save more lives more quickly.”

The Office has no website. Its budget has never been made public. Its staffing levels are not known. It operates in secret, without oversight and wields tremendous power. Only three staffers were identified. 

Almost immediately, it became clear that the Office was an incubator and a clearinghouse for anti-gun policy that it pushed out to blue states.

In December 2023, Harris hosted a gaggle of state lawmakers at the White House to showcase the Office’s new gun-control policies. The names of the attendees were not released, nor were the details of the meetings. None of the meetings were recorded or transcribed.

After overseeing the Office, Harris’ anti-gun rhetoric has sharpened, and it is clear what she has in store for law-abiding gun owners if she replaces Biden on a permanent basis

 

 

“Gun violence is the number-one case of death for children in America — think about that. Not some kind of health disease,” Harris announced Sept. 14, 2023, in a moderated conversation at Hampton University in Hampton, Virginia. “And we don’t have to be very creative to figure it out: assault weapons ban; background checks, because you might want to know before someone can buy a lethal weapon if they’re a danger to themselves or others; red flag laws. That is reasonable.”

Both Biden and Harris cited this number-one-cause-of-death fiction at a host of different venues. They still do, even though it has been soundly debunked.

When they came up with this claim, the White House Office of Gun Violence Prevention cited a 2022 study by the Center for Gun Violence Solutions at Johns Hopkins University — not the most credible of sources. Researchers included adults, both 18- and 19-year-olds in their children’s study. If the adults are excluded from the data set, the leading cause of death for children is motor vehicle accidents.

Harris was undeterred by the fact checkers, which included The Washington Post. She needed guns to be the leading cause of death of children to push for more gun control. For her, the ends justified the means.

Eight days later, Harris repeated the false claim but added a label to her opponents.

“Today, however, gun violence is the number-one cause of death for children in America. But instead of protecting our children, extremists obstruct,” she said.

On Oct. 12, 2023, during a moderated conversation at the College of Southern Nevada in Las Vegas, Harris once again cited the false claim as a reason for more gun control.

“I have been working on this for a long time. And I will tell you that, again, there — there — it’s not rocket science in terms of what we need to do. Okay? But you got a bunch of feckless people who lack courage, who are in the United States Congress, who are pushing a false choice, which suggests you’re either in favor of the Second Amendment or you want to take everyone’s guns away,” she said. “And it’s a false choice.  I’m in favor of the Second Amendment, but we need an assault weapons ban. We need universal background checks. We need red flag laws.”

 

Harris has never stopped citing these false cause-of-death statistics. She brought them up again just two months ago at a moderated conversation at the Walter E. Washington Convention Center in Washington, D.C.

“So, let’s start with the very tragic fact that gun violence is the leading cause of death for children in America — not car accidents, not cancer — gun violence. Number one cause of death for children in America right now. One in five Americans has a family member that was killed by gun violence,” she said.  

National red flag campaign

The U.S. Supreme Court hinted in Caniglia v. Strom, that it may review the constitutionality of red-flag laws.

“This case also implicates another body of law that petitioner glossed over: the so-called “red flag” laws that some States are now enacting. These laws enable the police to seize guns pursuant to a court order to prevent their use for suicide or the infliction of harm on innocent persons. They typically specify the standard that must be met and the procedures that must be followed before firearms may be seized. Provisions of red flag laws may be challenged under the Fourth Amendment, and those cases may come before us. Our decision today does not

The White House didn’t take the hint. Last March, Harris launched the National Extreme Risk Protection Order (ERPO) Resource Center.

“The Resource Center will assist states, local governments, law enforcement, prosecutors, attorneys, judges, clinicians, victim service providers, and behavioral health and other social service providers in optimizing the usage of red flag laws — laws that allows a family member or law enforcement to seek a court order to temporarily take away access to guns if they feel a gun owner may harm themselves or others,” according to a White House “Fact Sheet” released March 23.

The ERPO Resource Center was funded by Department of Justice grants and is operated by the Johns Hopkins Center for Gun Violence Solutions. Its critics have said it is nothing more than a mechanism to bribe the states into implementing red-flag laws.

“The Vice President is calling on states to pass red flag laws and to use Bipartisan Safer Communities Act (BSCA) funding to help implement laws already enacted,” the release states.

Harris has become the country’s highest ranking anti-gun activist. She is not opposed to lying, spinning or gaslighting the public as long as it’s strategic and meets her needs. Neither will she hesitate in demonizing those who oppose her gun control schemes, such as labeling them feckless or extremists.

Quite frankly, Kamala Harris comes across as goofy, but she has surrounded herself with a team of dedicated individuals who are anything but. They are as committed to infringing upon our Second Amendment rights as we are to preserving them.

We underestimate Harris and her team of experienced anti-gun advocates at our peril.

[IZRL]

4 hours ago, frankendat said:

To me, this seems like a statement so often repeated that it is now assumed true without investigation. I will be first to admit, it has been a long time since my days as a delinquent. But, obtaining an illegal firearm was not ridiculously easy, even when I ran in circles of criminals. I wouldn't know where to start to get one now. Please explain. 

There are way more guns than there are people on this planet. If you want one bad enough there are many ways to "acquire" a firearm. Not even sure what you mean by this comment?

 

Edited August 7 by IZRL

[IZRL]

5 hours ago, datzenmike said:

 

Perhaps it's the other way around. The states with strictest gun laws are BECAUSE they are the most dangerous to live in. My chicken and the egg theory.

Your chicken and egg theory doesn't hold water. Either way you look at it, stricter gun laws isn't making these states safer. If they passed these stricter laws BECAUSE the state was so dangerous, and the state is still as dangerous or worse. Than those gun laws clearly didn't work. If it was safer prior to passing stricter laws and then things got more dangerous after implement stricter laws, again... stricter gun laws didn't work.

 

Edited August 7 by IZRL

[Dguy210]

The rumor is Michelle really does NOT want to run. The Obama's already have power and fame and a comfortable life, but most importantly it is the Mike Meme that stops her.  Unverified sources have said that having to deal with the Michelle is actually Mike comments really gets under her skin. Supposedly, having to put up with that daily while being in a high stress job that doesn't really increase her fame or power but does open her up for criticism and trying to carry a crap situation is just not a mess Michelle wants to deal with.

 

Now that is all rumor of course but does make sense. Michelle already has a good life and is well liked by her peers, why should she try and harder for less? I think she just is likely not as ideological as they are doesn't really feel like she owes the Dems that. 

Edited August 7 by Dguy210

[frankendat]

7 minutes ago, IZRL said:

There are way more guns than there are people on this planet. If you want a gun bad enough there are many ways "acquire" a firearm. Not even sure what you mean by this comment?

 

Nobody go self incriminating, but I don't know anyone who has done it. I have only heard of guys doing it with firearms discovered burglarizing houses.  Where would you find those guys? Going to places rough individuals frequent and asking around, gets you labeled as a sucker or a narc, which isn't important because the punishment for either is often the same. SO, that means, to acquire an illegal firearm I need to know people who know people and get an introduction. This is not a hard thing to do, but it takes time. 

If I need a firearm faster, I must steal it. Now I need to find someone with a firearm to steal, or burglarize a store, not impossible, but not easy. My comment is there is a Hollywood driven narrative, that to me seems fantasy, where I need a gun, I go walking down the street in a rough part of town, ask around and in 15min I have a gun. I can't get a gun in 15min legally and I live in a pro gun red state. 

[datzenmike]

 

 

 

 

36 minutes ago, IZRL said:

There are way more guns than there are people on this planet. If you want one bad enough there are many ways to "acquire" a firearm. Not even sure what you mean by this comment?

 

 

Perfect example of something so oft repeated that it's taken for truth. 8 BILLION firearms??? BS. A quick check shows... (and includes law enforcement and military)

 

https://www.smallarmssurvey.org/database/global-firearms-holdings

 

The Small Arms Survey estimates that of the one billion firearms in global circulation as of 2017, 857 million (85 per cent) are in civilian hands, 133 million (13 per cent) are in military arsenals, and 23 million (2 per cent) are owned by law enforcement agencies. Our studies suggest that the global stockpile has increased over the past decade, largely due to civilian holdings, which grew from 650 million in 2006 to 857 million in 2017.

 

https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2019/03/there-are-more-than-1-billion-guns-in-the-world-and-this-is-who-owns-them/

 

 

https://www.amnesty.org/en/what-we-do/arms-control/gun-violence/

[frankendat]

3 minutes ago, Dguy210 said:

The rumor is Michelle really does NOT want to run. The Obama's already have power and fame and a comfortable life, but most importantly it is the Mike Meme that stops her.  Unverified sources have said that having to deal with the Michelle is actually Mike comments really gets under her skin. Supposedly, having to put up with that daily while being in a high stress job that doesn't really increase her fame or power but does open her up for criticism and trying to carry a crap situation is just not a mess Michelle wants to deal with.

 

Now that is all rumor of course but does make sense. Michelle already has a good life and is well liked by her peers, why should she try and harder for less? I think she just is likely not as ideological as they are doesn't really feel like she owes the Dems that. 

That makes sense and is plausible, for a regular person, I don't think those in politics are regular people. There is very little that would tempt me into that shit, but a chance to be part of every history textbook in the world until the end of civilization. Not fame, true legacy, czar style. Name all fifty states, name the capitols, name all Presidents, now name the first state, name the capital of the United States, name the first President of the United States. Realize your answers are likely similar to every educated adult in the western world and a large percentage of the eastern. Additionally, she would complete a power couple greater than any other power couple, a vision of racial, gender and martial equality that would be worshiped by African countries and African Americans. It would make the Obamas legendary. Even if it meant selling out, it is getting a damn good price. I would sell out for the salary of a McDonalds manager guaranteed for life (without working at McDonalds)

[Dguy210]

5 minutes ago, frankendat said:

That makes sense and is plausible, for a regular person, I don't think those in politics are regular people. There is very little that would tempt me into that shit, but a chance to be part of every history textbook in the world until the end of civilization. Not fame, true legacy, czar style. Name all fifty states, name the capitols, name all Presidents, now name the first state, name the capital of the United States, name the first President of the United States. Realize your answers are likely similar to every educated adult in the western world and a large percentage of the eastern. Additionally, she would complete a power couple greater than any other power couple, a vision of racial, gender and martial equality that would be worshiped by African countries and African Americans. It would make the Obamas legendary. Even if it meant selling out, it is getting a damn good price. I would sell out for the salary of a McDonalds manager guaranteed for life (without working at McDonalds)

 

But she already has most of that already right now without doing any extra work. She is already the first "Black First Lady" and she is on record multiple times as NOT being a fan of the politics, which seems to be from what I can see her genuine view on it.  I don't think she is "hungry" enough to want to give up a comfortable life. NOW that doesn't mean she might not get pressured into it by the PARTY.

[IZRL]

35 minutes ago, frankendat said:

Nobody go self incriminating, but I don't know anyone who has done it. I have only heard of guys doing it with firearms discovered burglarizing houses.  Where would you find those guys? Going to places rough individuals frequent and asking around, gets you labeled as a sucker or a narc, which isn't important because the punishment for either is often the same. SO, that means, to acquire an illegal firearm I need to know people who know people and get an introduction. This is not a hard thing to do, but it takes time. 

If I need a firearm faster, I must steal it. Now I need to find someone with a firearm to steal, or burglarize a store, not impossible, but not easy. My comment is there is a Hollywood driven narrative, that to me seems fantasy, where I need a gun, I go walking down the street in a rough part of town, ask around and in 15min I have a gun. I can't get a gun in 15min legally and I live in a pro gun red state. 

 

Come to Arizona and you can buy one at the Walmart parking lot. No questions asked if you know who to talk to.

[datzenmike]

But I'm mad now.

[Dguy210]

8 minutes ago, IZRL said:

 

Come to Arizona and you can buy one at the Walmart parking lot. No questions asked if you know who to talk to.

Well there is another option...

 

 

 

 

But seriously not that hard to make a firearm. On the very crude end an hour at home depot will net you a slamfire shotgun and on the high end a few hours on a 3D printer can get you most of the way there for the (US legal) bits of a firearm. Realistically there are multiple plans online for building 3D printed guns using NO firearms parts (aside from ammo).

[IZRL]

14 hours ago, datzenmike said:

 

Awards are built into the system and cannot be removed. Even if I could you would automatically begin earning them again. I can, and have, made up new awards and bestowed them. Which I have done here, see if you can find it.

 

           

 

[Dguy210]

7 hours ago, Dguy210 said:

hmm... I'm thinking I found one 🤣

 

Edit: digging further in, maybe not. Looks like this award has been around for a while now. Mike is this yours or did it come stock with the board... and how the Hell does someone even earn this? 😁

 

1 hour ago, IZRL said:

 

           

 

 

Lol, did you not see my earlier post? However, I did find that badge assigned to someone else as far back as 2021. 

 

Edited August 7 by Dguy210

[IZRL]

38 minutes ago, Dguy210 said:

 

Lol, did you not see my earlier post? However, I did find that badge assigned to someone else as far back as 2021.

 

Hahaha, no I missed it. I actually saw the badge before I read mikes comment. It popped up at the bottom of my screen and I thought, that's an odd achievement to get, but alright, I'll take it 😆. Now I that I know what it's for, I believe I've earned it 🏆.

[datzenmike]

Probably something to do with PoSt ASS

[jbirds510]

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/29261040/

[datzenmike]

 

 

 

Since about 1945 we've all had radioactive particles in our food too

 

[jbirds510]

1 hour ago, datzenmike said:

 

 

 

Since about 1945 we've all had radioactive particles in our food too

 

No idea. Dguy? Sounds sketch. is it?

 

[yenpit]

17 hours ago, a.d._510_n_ok said:

Sooooooooooooooo........is it possible this is a duo paired in hopes that they will fail.....? Like the puppet masters want their own nominees to be so awful that they can do nothing but lose??? Pic unrelated. 

I read a bit about this theory..............don't remember if I posted here or just on my FB?  The fact that they skipped over Shapiro of PA as VP, apparently sparked this theory.  Something about NOT using their best picks at this point, as to NOT tarnish their "experience" with a loss.  They chose Walz, which even some dems are questioning.  Like you may be implying, 2024 is a losing battle for the dems, let it go, hold on to Senate, gain the House, Trump's hands are basically tied throughout his second term, to make big changes, dems gear up for 2028.............?? 🤔

[yenpit]

17 hours ago, datzenmike said:

 

I assume they want to win so why not just skip over Ka-malla in the first place? and promote some winners? First Joe... the Harris is out, then Michelle is in.... That's fucked up. Or are you saying the Democrats are quitting political musical chairs and going home?

.........perhaps for 2024, then hit hard in 2028? 🤔