On 08-28-20 09:01, Gregory Deyss <=-
spoke to Dale Shipp about Re: Republicans & Trump <=-

The news shows that I watch have prominent Republicans participating, including one who was chairman of the RNC. None of them can stand what Trump is doing to their party. There are also a number of other Republicans who have come out in support of Biden, including ex-cabinet officiers.

Care to share what shows are those that you're watching?

CNN, MSMBC, Foxnews, NBC, ABC, CBS.

I would say that those alleged Republicans breaking away are self
centered and are only are thinking of themselves. If true; they are

You are mixed up. It is Trump who only thinks of himself. The people I mentioned are thinking about the American people and America.

idiots for doing so because it's still very premature. They don't
realize that they will have to answer to the Republican constituents
that got them to Washington, D.C., specially when Biden loses.

Why do you think that they were elected to DC? I see a moderate number
of prominent Republican strategists who have supported the campaigns of previous Republicans for President and for other offices. These are the
people who work behind the scenes to help a candidate get elected. They
are honest people, unlike the number of of people involved in the Trump campaign who are now convicted felons or charged with a felony.

A former Republican Secretary of State spoke in support of Biden during
the Democratic convention. The former chairman of the Republican
National Committee is a frequent commentator speaking against Trump.

What are these folks (the alleged Republicans, whom are riden w/biden) suggesting that Trump did, that would of caused them to go to the darkside.

How about more than 20,000 lies in 3 1/2 years. How about frequent
disregard for the law, including during the Republican Convention. A
small sample of reasons can be found by going to the website makeamericagreat.com .

The Democratic Party is a mess and they are repeating the same
mistakes from 2016. All they do is complain about the other side, they have not indicated any agenda or what they would do differently.

Actually Biden has published much of what he would do. It was the
Republicans who spent much of their convention complaining about the
other side and who did not present any agenda nor platform.

Dale Shipp
fido_261_1466 (at) verizon (dot) net
(1:261/1466)


... Shipwrecked in Silver Spring, Maryland. 02:02:22, 29 Aug 2020
___ Blue Wave/DOS v2.30

--- Maximus/NT 3.01
* Origin: Owl's Anchor (1:261/1466)

Joe Biden said he would "unite this country," but to me that's vague. He hasn't said -how- he would unite us. And on that sour note, I'm not in favo

Didn't Obama say the same thing at election time... twice?

I don't remember him saying that, but probably. The only thing he accomplished in 8 years was 1) bolstered ISIS 2) bolstered North Korea & 3) made
healthcare less affordable.

--- Renegade vY2Ka2
* Origin: Joey, do you like movies about gladiators? (1:229/426)

Joe Biden is a lifelong Democrat. Are you saying, or suggesting,
that Joe Biden should change his party affiliation, becoming the
first full-fledged Communist to be elected POTUS?

Why not? He wants us all to be "united," presumably about policy. Is there a better way to unite us than forcing us at gunpoint?

--- Renegade vY2Ka2
* Origin: Joey, do you like movies about gladiators? (1:229/426)

Re: Republicans & Trump
By: Lee Lofaso to Aaron Thomas on Sun Aug 30 2020 05:47 am

Repealing the 2nd Amendment would help.

Now that HAS to be a troll.
===
Underminer
The Undermine BBS - bbs.undermine.ca:423
Fidonet: 1:342/17
--- SBBSecho 3.11-Linux
* Origin: The Undermine - bbs.undermine.ca:423 - Calgary, AB (1:342/17)

Hello Kostie,

Now that HAS to be a troll. LL>> I am being serious. The 2nd Amendment >>>>> is poorly written,

Firearms function as a force equalizer - no more and no less.

Which is why the state has a militia. With folks in the militia
having the right to bear arms.

If you can follow and agree to the premise that firearms only function as a
force equalizer, what the second amendment does or does not say and what
you think it should or should not say is a completely irrelevant
discussion.

Once upon a time, Japan had no guns. Samurai armed with swords,
serving their shogun. Then Japan had guns. Samurai armed with guns,
serving their shogun. Not liking the result, Japan returned to no
guns, samurai serving their shogun. White came to visit shogun.
Samurai having no guns never had a chance. Shogun not happy.

Guns are manufactured to kill people. Guns do not care who they
kill. And neither do the people who use those guns to kill.

Guns are not a "force equalizer", but a weapon of terror.

There are more public mass shootings in the USA than in any other
country in the world.

Why is that?

Americans own nearly half (46%) of the estimated 857 million
civilian-owned guns worldwide.

India is second, at 71 million.

About 66% of US gun owners own multiple guns.

About 61% of gun deaths in the USA are suicides.

Guns are manufactured to kill people. Usually people who want
to kill themselves, rather than others.

Of course, only one gun is all that is really needed to off oneself.
Along with one bullet.

Personally, I like the Japanese way. No gun, or bullet, required.

I live in Canada where restrictive changes HAVE been made, and the data
after a couple decades of that experiment show that firearm restrictions
have very little to no effect on overall violent crime, homicide, or
suicide numbers.

If someone is intent on killing himself, he is going to find a way
to do it. Even if it kills him. Same if someone is intent on killing
someone else. But most kill themselves before they kill someone else.

Sure, if you remove enough guns you'll reduce the number of people *shot*
but that does not equate to reducing the number of people *killed*

Kind of hard to do a mass shooting with a knife. Columbine would
never have happened if those two kids had been armed only with knives.
Or at Parkland, where scores of other students were murdered.

The latter is a far more important measure in my mind, and requires systemic
cultural changes rather than simple band-aid solutions like gun control.

Japan banned guns, that ban lasting for about a century, before
having to re-introduce it after the White Man made his appearance.
Japan later went to war against Russia, attacked Pearl Harbor, and
invaded much of the Pacific. Today, not many folks in Japan own a
gun. Which is why gun violence in Japan has a death rate of 0.04
per 100,000.

Anyone who's been shown that reality and instead chooses to focus on the
guns means an individual either cannot think logically, or has a political agenda to push that benefits from dishonest language.

I am basing my comments on data and reports that can be easily
verified. One of those sources is the 2018 Switzerland-based Small
Arms Survey (SAS) report. Another source is humanoshpere.org.
But there are other sites that confirm the same thing.

Either way, you should view said individual with extreme caution when
approaching the ballot booth.

St. Paul (the one in the bible) did tell us to "Question everything."

--Lee

--
Get Her Wet Here

--- MesNews/1.08.05.00-gb
* Origin: nntp://rbb.fidonet.fi - Lake Ylo - Finland (2:221/360.0)

Hello Kostie,

Guns are not a "force equalizer", but a weapon of terror.
There are more public mass shootings in the USA than in any other >LL>country in the world.

Do you care about shootings, or killings? They lead in civilian involved
shootings, but barely register in terms of overall violent crime or mass killings as a whole.

Japan has 0.04 deaths per 100,000 people killed by guns.
That pales in comparison with how many people in the USA
who are killed by guns.

There are more public mass shootings in the USA than in any other
country in the world. There is a reason why. That reason is easy
access to guns. No real rules of any kind. Want a gun? Go to a gun
show. No need for any background check. Or anything at all. Just
tell the salesman you are old enough to buy one. That should do it.
Assuming you've got the cash to buy it. Not sure if any of those
dealers allow for buying on credit ...

About 66% of US gun owners own multiple guns.

And? Completely irrelevant to anything.

The more guns, and ammo to go with those guns, the more people
that can be killed. Remember, there are more public mass shootings
in the USA than in any other country in the world.

That's equivalent to changing a discussion about driving age to how many
cars are in a household.

Americans love their guns. The more the merrier.

Data being related does not make it relevant.

Well, it is far easier, and faster, to grab another (preloaded) gun
than it is to reload. Especially when shooting at a large crowd.

Guns are manufactured to kill people. Usually people who want
to kill themselves, rather than others.
Of course, only one gun is all that is really needed to off oneself. >LL>Along with one bullet.
Personally, I like the Japanese way. No gun, or bullet, required.

Ok, if you're seriously comparing the morality of different ways to off
oneself I really have to wonder about your thought process.

Some people are born killers. That is what they do. Kind of like
their life's calling. And when their task has been completed, they
always save one last bullet for themself. Except a few, who either
didn't count right, or chickened out when it came to the end.

If someone is intent on killing himself, he is going to find a way
to do it. Even if it kills him. Same if someone is intent on killing >LL>someone else. But most kill themselves before they kill someone else.

Umm, Ok. That's kind of exactly what my point is - the implement is the last
thing you should be looking at if you actually want to affect change. Changing access to implements without addressing root causes doesn't
actually change anything.

Why did a white kid walk into a black church in South Carolina
and mow down a bunch of black people saying their prayers? What
kind of change did he have in mind? After the cops showed up, he
gave himself up without a fight. Now he is likely to be executed.

Did that make black churches any safer for black folks to pray in?
No. Did that stop white racists from murdering black folks in cold
blood? No. Did that change society's view on the death penalty?
No.

So why have a 2nd Amendment? What does it accomplish?

Kind of hard to do a mass shooting with a knife. Columbine would

Mass *shooting* yes, mass *killing* no.

People who get shot as opposed to some other way usually die.

There's mass stabbing and killings with other bladed weapons ALL THE DAMN
TIME in the world.

The difference being more who are shot die rather than those who
were not.

We've fairly recently seen a mass murder rivaling any shooting conducted
with nothing more than a rental truck.

A rental truck is not a suicide bomber. Although a suicide bomber
can be viewed as a mass murderer.

If you don't like guns, that's fine. But arguing that somehow changing the
second amendment in the US is going to stop all the issues with violence is *at best* just a waste of energy that's far better spent nearly anywhere else. There's major cultural, socio-economic, media, political, and mental health access issues that do *actually* need attention and would *actually* pay dividends. Gun control is at best just safety theatre in the same vein
as the overly intrusive TSA nonsense one has to deal with if travelling in the US. Do you think that preventing a 90 year old woman from carrying too much shampoo onto a plane actually does anything to prevent someone
crashing it into a building?

I'll have to be really careful the next time I am on an airplane.
Those 90 year-old women can be dangerous. Truly dangerous. With, or
without, their shampoo. Or walking stick.

--Lee

--
If PBS won't do it, who will?

--- MesNews/1.08.05.00-gb
* Origin: nntp://rbb.fidonet.fi - Lake Ylo - Finland (2:221/360.0)

On 09-03-20 08:25, Gregory Deyss <=-
spoke to Dale Shipp about Re: Republicans & Trump <=-

You are mixed up. It is Trump who only thinks of himself. The people I mentioned are thinking about the American people and America.

Which people of those, the Republicans who are riden with biden. These people might need your help, because when Trump wins in November the Republican constituents (voters) who those in office will be pissed. Please don't surprised when these people lose their jobs, due to being voted out of office.

None of the ones I am aware of are running for office at the current
time, although one of them was elected to the post of Lt. Governor
before he became the chairman of the RNC.

Trump didn't need to run for President, he did so out of desire
because the country has been going in the wrong direction.

Others, including some close to Trump, have said that he never expected
to win but rather just hoped to boost his business interests. I don't
put a lot of credibility in that statement. But then, who can really
know what goes on in his mind from day to day.

If Trump has thought only of himself, then why is the President
donating his salary every quarter?

Because money is not all that important to him -- power and self
approval is what he craves.

Dale Shipp
fido_261_1466 (at) verizon (dot) net
(1:261/1466)


... Shipwrecked in Silver Spring, Maryland. 02:24:08, 04 Sep 2020
___ Blue Wave/DOS v2.30

--- Maximus/NT 3.01
* Origin: Owl's Anchor (1:261/1466)

On 04 Sep 2020, Dale Shipp said the following...

On 09-03-20 08:25, Gregory Deyss <=-
spoke to Dale Shipp about Re: Republicans & Trump <=-

You are mixed up. It is Trump who only thinks of himself. The peopl mentioned are thinking about the American people and America.

Which people of those, the Republicans who are riden with biden. Thes people might need your help, because when Trump wins in November the Republican constituents (voters) who those in office will be pissed. Please don't surprised when these people lose their jobs, due to bein voted out of office.

None of the ones I am aware of are running for office at the current
time, although one of them was elected to the post of Lt. Governor
before he became the chairman of the RNC.

Trump didn't need to run for President, he did so out of desire because the country has been going in the wrong direction.

Others, including some close to Trump, have said that he never expected
to win but rather just hoped to boost his business interests. I don't
put a lot of credibility in that statement. But then, who can really
know what goes on in his mind from day to day.

Stared off at a good neutral point but then the needle leaned left with your comment who know what goes through his mind, your not paying attention.
What goes through his mind is carried out for the benefit of all Americans.

If Trump has thought only of himself, then why is the President donating his salary every quarter?

Because money is not all that important to him -- power and self
approval is what he craves.

I would disagree with that statement, but everyone wants to be respected. Before he ran for the Presidency, nearly everyone respected Donald Trump. Republicans and Democrats alike. including the African-American civil
leaders.

Andrew Cuomo should be arrested on the grounds of a treasonous threat, suggesting to Donald Trump, don't come to NY, never-mind bodyguards you will need an army. He has one of those by the way.

. ______ ÚÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄ¿ ÚÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄ¿ ÚÄÄÄÄÄÄÄ¿ ÚÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄ¿
_[]_³³Äij³ ³ Fidonet ³ ³FSX Net³ ³ Trump ³ ³ Another Message ³
{ NET 267 ³ ³1:267/150³ ³21:1/127³ ³ Train ³ ³ by Gregory ³
/ 00ÄÄÄÄ00'-¨€ÀÄ00ÄÄÄ00ÄÙ¨€ÀÄ00ÄÄ00ÄÙ¨€ÀÄ00Ä00ÄÙ¨€ÀÄÄ00ÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄ00ÄÄÄÙ

--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A44 2020/02/04 (Windows/64)
* Origin: Capital Station BBS * telnet://csbbs.dyndns.org * (1:267/150)