Comment: As I Have Said...

(See in situ)

In reply to comment: OK I'll use "bear" (see in situ)

As I Have Said...

...more than once, you are NOT for liberty, you are a collectivist to whatever degree.

As to all the hubbub about Farrakhan and Amendment II, as if you do not already know, it is because YOU advanced him as a speaker for the liberty movement and because YOU continue to defend his anti-constitution position on Amendment II and because YOU hold similar anti-constitution positions on firearms.

A 'right' that would require government permission (background check), government registration and government certification/licensing, is not a 'right' at all.

The fact that you believe so, speaks volumes about your underlying ethic and philosophy.

Your desired background checks, registration and certification are accompanied by the specter of denial or failure, which is an unconstitutional government prohibition and an infringement on what is textually an absolute prohibition on government from infringing upon.

Where does Amendment II authorize any of your collectivist-desires?

Since it clearly does not, we are left with YOU advocating, knowingly, against a fundamental liberty and against Amendment II itself along with its prohibition on government from doing exactly what you advocate.

You are faux, yet you are a perfect fit with the GOP and also as a representative of what passes for 'liberty' in Kalifornia and a goodly percentage of its purported 'liberty-advocates'.

Once again, you defend Farrakhan, which in the venue of Amendment II and the underlying fundamental liberty to keep and bear arms, is indefensible.

Your own collectivist-belief related to this fundamental, constitutionally-enumerated liberty is just as flawed and it seems to be directly akin to Louie's.

Go figure.

You continue to either be as ignorant as you present on this issue, or you are deliberately attempting to keep the focus on 'race' and historical oppression, rather than on the fundamental individual liberty at hand and your opposition to its exercise, free from government oppression.

I expect the latter is the case, since you seem to be attempting to use the former as cover for your anti-liberty beliefs.

You can try to dress that pig up an a snazzy tuxedo, give it a shave and a haircut, splash some good-smelling aftershave on it and take it to dinner, but when all is said and done, it is still a pig.

As I see it, you are naught but an insidious gerbil, busily gnawing away at the foundations of fundamental liberty from within and whilst posing as a liberty-champion and a restorer of the republic.

Personally, what you are and what you represent makes me puke-sick.

Just so you know.