Montana & Arizona

You can't vote them out when their leftest ways are being pushed out of our schools or they would teach history the way it happened not the way the socialist the way they are teaching hitler took the guns England took the guns every country that has allowed it to happen has turned into what the American society is falling for when you have a few states that control the vote you are going with their beliefs whether you want to or not David
Like, this is why we have a constitution (frame work of laws) to protect minority groups against the wishes of a suddenly influenced majority determined to effect some change with regard to individual rights - not good to perform atrocities on minorities, for example. the one time popular Hitler and the Jews. Popularity is not a guaranty of individual rights. Then we have the requirement of ratification of the U. S. Constitution that requires 3/4's of vote of congress and 3/4 approval by the states to work. Just voting for or against a certain issue or individual is not a guaranty of individual rights.
 
Like, this is why we have a constitution (frame work of laws) to protect minority groups against the wishes of a suddenly influenced majority determined to effect some change with regard to individual rights - not good to perform atrocities on minorities, for example. the one time popular Hitler and the Jews. Popularity is not a guaranty of individual rights. Then we have the requirement of ratification of the U. S. Constitution that requires 3/4's of vote of congress and 3/4 approval by the states to work. Just voting for or against a certain issue or individual is not a guaranty of individual rights.
This has been proved through history sooner or later we are in trouble. David
 
Going back far enough, we are all from places else where or far away, whether it be New Jersey or some distant foreign land; an exception would be Native Americans. I can see how Governor Gianforte would expand our gun rights by resisting condemnation of various types of fire arms as being "not needed for hunting deers". I believe Governor Gianforte would not veto legislation to allow constitutional carry within Montana by law abiding citizens and this would include all laws and regulations pertaining to firearms. I can see Governor Gianforte resisting Chuck S & Nancy P, both anti gun rights politicians, in any decision, under the governor's prerogative, that would be made at the state level such as appointing a senator or congressional representative.

I believe any assertion that Governor Gianforte would arbitrarily limit access to hunting lands is false and only provided to recruit resistance to prevent his successful election to the governor's office. I can see Governor Gianforte protecting individual and/or taxpayer's property rights. I can see Governor Gianforte encouraging cooperation between hunters/fishers and Montana Parks & Wildlife to enlarge land access within Montana.

Governor Gianforte is a graduate of Stevens Institute of Technology, EE degree and MS, first rate school; Governor Gianforte has has a successful business record in Montana. These are positive attributes not grounds for condemnation as being some outsider.

In your glowing review of Mr Gionforte, aka outsider, you forgot to mention he can punch out reporters instead of debating them intellectually.

If by protecting private property rights you mean bring in wealthy outsiders to buy up cheap Montana lands and further limit Montanan's access to their public lands, I'm sure you are right. Maybe RJ Reynolds and others can continue to buy up Montana...maybe another Yellowstone club full of rich aholes escaping the crap storm they created where they lived last.

I kind of figured that LRH members didn't roll this way...
 
In your glowing review of Mr Gionforte, aka outsider, you forgot to mention he can punch out reporters instead of debating them intellectually.

If by protecting private property rights you mean bring in wealthy outsiders to buy up cheap Montana lands and further limit Montanan's access to their public lands, I'm sure you are right. Maybe RJ Reynolds and others can continue to buy up Montana...maybe another Yellowstone club full of rich aholes escaping the crap storm they created where they lived last.

I kind of figured that LRH members didn't roll this way...
It is Gianforte not Gionforte. He will be Governor of Montana by popular vote of the people to replace old chrony democrats.

Cheap Montana lands? - the asking price for most of these spreads is in the $ millions. What would you propose? - a condemnation of these properties for public use at taxpayers expense, willful neglect, or county seizure and subsequent division as a result of unpaid taxes? I derive some satisfaction from "I'm sure you are right" but I am unsure of how this is related to this issue. Is Mr. Gianforte recruiting rich outsiders to exploit and rape Montana? The rich new-comers or outsiders pay property and income taxes and Montana state tax law requires that tax payments be paid electronically should the amount be over $0.5 million.

Mr. Gianforte is now a Montana politician for real and I would expect he will work to improve land access for all wanting legit access to pursue their sport. Should Governor Gianforte actively plot and facilitate transfers of public lands to private ownership this would be the "kiss of death" for his political career. So far, despite the $ multi million's dumped into this contest for governor by wealthy outsider democrats I have not seen this.

Portraying Mr. Gianforte as a rich New Jersey guy only having exploitation planned for Montana is a bum rap. EE is probably the toughest of all engineering disciplines, Mr. Gianforte has a MS and is smart enough to prevail in politics .

I was unable to determine your location and can only assume you are an outsider, not from Montana, but have the impression that this issue is about wealth and success achieved by others adversely affecting hunting, fishing, and other similar activities by various property transfers.

Mr. Gianforte, truly regrets that unfortunate incident where he bumped into some overly aggressive news reporter who invaded his personal space and pleaded guilty in court and graciously provided restitution. I among others believed this was a "set up" designed to entrap Mr. Gianforte by liberal sympathetic news media. After this unfortunate incident Mr. Gianforte successfully served as Montana's representative in the U.S. Congress and was elected by a big margin from approving Montana voters who voted on his abilities as a manager not as a physical contact "bumper".

I have no intentions of "rolling" over for anything!
 
He will be Governor of Montana by popular vote of the people to replace old chrony democrats.

Agree because Montana has found itself in some weird urban vs rural political struggle. Montana is rural and pro-gun, but so many outsiders have come in, that is changing.

Cheap Montana lands? - the asking price for most of these spreads is in the $ millions. What would you propose?

Of course they are $millions. Price a couple of sections of land in New Jersey or Midwest farmland. I just think if you buy land in a place like Montana were most public land is off the main road by 1/2 to 1 section that you owe access. It can be a footpath, road, 2 tire track to the public land you are blocking. They used to call it being decent when Montana was full of decent people. Now it is nearly impossible to ask permission to get to state land 100ft off the road....cause it is owned by a company, trust, investment group, guy in Chicago...all I want is access to the publicly owned land....

Mr. Gianforte is now a Montana politician for real

He is a choice when no choice really existed, but he did win...

Portraying Mr. Gianforte as a rich New Jersey guy only having exploitation planned for Montana is a bum rap. EE is probably the toughest of all engineering disciplines, Mr. Gianforte has a MS and is smart enough to prevail in politics .

Well, I thought it nicer than calling him a nut job. Have you been to his museum of science that doesn't exist?

I was unable to determine your location and can only assume you are an outsider, not from Montana, but have the impression that this issue is about wealth and success achieved by others adversely affecting hunting, fishing, and other similar activities by various property transfers.

Born a Montanan. Raised in MT. Graduated MSU. Live/work in OH, regrettably. Family lives all over MT.

Nice to meet you.

Mr. Gianforte, truly regrets that unfortunate incident where he bumped into some overly aggressive news reporter who invaded his personal space and pleaded guilty in court and graciously provided restitution.

He regrets being held accountable for that incident. I'm not sure he regrets it at all.

I'm glad you are happy with him. I hope he continues to fund things like the successful block management, stream access and pushing back unsustainable mining.

I also hope he makes time for folks not holding a dollar....for goodness sake, he's not a stripper!
 
Hey Jim:

This would include Twitter & Facebook and even this worthy forum. Things are changing - private but publishing items for public viewing sort of like a newspaper. Any body may sign into a private social media and read it. Should the media stuff be entirely private require a membership & pass word to allow viewing.

As for nibbling away on gun rights - take a look at California with magazine restrictions that have been overruled by court order -2nd amendment? Is the California AG going to nibble away at that decision. Then there is Massachusetts, a gradual strangling of gun rights including bans on AR rifles, shotguns having pistol grips and magazines holding more than a certain amount of cartridges. Want to own a fully automatic weapon, just have a background check and pay a huge amount of tax $ except for certain states that ban machine guns. Violate the law and be punished like jail, fines, & loss of gun rights. Flint locks or AR15's - both contemporary weapons found in households to be used by "well regulated militias".

It seems that the liberal politicians want to ignore any requirement for constitutional ratification - like just do it.

17th Amendment - it would retain the conservative Montana Senator Daines should the Montana legislature go Democrat and conversely retain the self professed Montana value, but liberal, Jon Tester as senator under a Republican state legislature. This gives the people of the state the right to elect their senator. I don't see much conservative opposition to the 17th amendment - it would block conservative & moderate senate candidates from running for office in rabidly liberal states like California - like why bother. Things change, like fortunately in Montana where the libs were tossed out. The 17th Amendment puts more power to people and diminishes the "nobility" status of the U.S. Senate.

Who me - violating my oath of office? I don't have any authority to prevent any body from speaking or voting their choice but when they act without authority to deny my rights, they are violating my rights - an example would be the Missoula city council decision to ban private transfers inside city boundaries that was over ruled by the Republican AG then the Montana Supreme Court. When I did have authority to perform my responsibilities, I was extremely cautious to be in compliance with existing regulations and not to violate any person's rights - not lurch into some feel good stuff.
Sorry, I meant 14th amendment
 
From what I see the major issue that Mr. Gianforte needed to deal with is the assumption that he represented sort of a ruling nobility that was intent on controlling and dominating rural Montana life and seizing land access was a part of this. Being from the liberal, crowded east coast liberal state of Massachusetts, I can appreciate Montana's opportunities for hunting but cannot get excited about Montana fishing - shore access in Massachusetts permitted below tidal high water mark (been there and done that). A tiny shore front property in Massachusetts ($3 mil plus) would have equal value as possibly 1/2 section of remote Montana land - cheap per acre but equivalent in value provided division not planned.

Mr. Gianforte now occupies the number one political office in Montana and being committed to success which requires support from the electorate, any elitist association with those who would screw up Montana's hunting heritage would cause his doom as governor - the people are watching. Being a successful politician involves negotiating solutions with those having different positions and Mr. Gianforte has the ability to do this. I think he wants and needs to be a successful governor and support and votes from a tiny amount of super rich is not enough - somewhat different than creating a private business empire. Like it or not, holding a deed to real estate provides some rights and we live in a capitalist society.

Mr. Gianforte has not bumped into any reporters lately. I cannot get inside his head to analyze his doings but logically he must regret this as it has provided lots of fuel for those out to get him. This unfortunate event happened in 2017 and is continually refreshed by the liberal news media.

Strippers & hookers fill a certain need in our society but don't need votes to practice their trade.
 
Thank you for your interest in our dear beloved United States of America (the arsenal of Democracy), a country that "bailed out" Europe during the last world war that ended in 1945, in part with the defeat of Nazi Germany in May 1945. Upon visiting Norway a few years ago I stood feet away where the Norwegian patriots hung the hated Quisling (Nazi suck-up) for crimes against the people of Norway. Quisling's crimes included placing the Norwegian people essentially on bare subsistence rations that resulted in malnutrition deaths of thousands of infants and elderly.
The history about US bailing out Europe is rather complex. The US stayed nautral until the japanese attacked. German prisoners of war even escaped prison in Canada to return home trough the US. The attack on Perl Harbour marked a new USA that would take responsibility and an leadership that haslasted until this day. Sadly both US and Europe has forgotten what happens when we turn the blind eye towards unjustice and sold out our integrity for quick and short term profitt from China. So when did they hang Quisling? before or after he was shoot? ;)
There is such a thing as an enemy and not having the spine to challenge them is despicable and cowardly. Narcissistic tyrants aren't swayed by intelligent debate, they only understand physical force.
Sure there is, but I'm given the impression that anyone that don't agree with the political views are enemys. I'm not on the left or right side, but firmly in between, but even the right here are rather far left according to US standards. So I must be an enemy then? and god forbid I'm a godless Atheist too!!!! I should probalbly be jerked off with barbwire before burned on a stake and inprisoned if survived.
"Be carefull how you talk about others since it will shape others view not only about them, but also obout you."

No I don't think I will.

This thread is about the Montana and Arizona Senate races. Try to keep on topic
Just don't like what kind of picture there is drawn of political oponents. Should I not stick up for my belifes?
 
The history about US bailing out Europe is rather complex. The US stayed nautral until the japanese attacked. German prisoners of war even escaped prison in Canada to return home trough the US. The attack on Perl Harbour marked a new USA that would take responsibility and an leadership that haslasted until this day. Sadly both US and Europe has forgotten what happens when we turn the blind eye towards unjustice and sold out our integrity for quick and short term profitt from China. So when did they hang Quisling? before or after he was shoot? ;)

Sure there is, but I'm given the impression that anyone that don't agree with the political views are enemys. I'm not on the left or right side, but firmly in between, but even the right here are rather far left according to US standards. So I must be an enemy then? and god forbid I'm a godless Atheist too!!!! I should probalbly be jerked off with barbwire before burned on a stake and inprisoned if survived.

Just don't like what kind of picture there is drawn of political oponents. Should I not stick up for my belifes?
Again, none of what you mention is relevant to the topic at hand. Montana and Arizona.
 
The history about US bailing out Europe is rather complex. The US stayed nautral until the japanese attacked. German prisoners of war even escaped prison in Canada to return home trough the US. The attack on Perl Harbour marked a new USA that would take responsibility and an leadership that haslasted until this day. Sadly both US and Europe has forgotten what happens when we turn the blind eye towards unjustice and sold out our integrity for quick and short term profitt from China. So when did they hang Quisling? before or after he was shoot? ;)

Sure there is, but I'm given the impression that anyone that don't agree with the political views are enemys. I'm not on the left or right side, but firmly in between, but even the right here are rather far left according to US standards. So I must be an enemy then? and god forbid I'm a godless Atheist too!!!! I should probalbly be jerked off with barbwire before burned on a stake and inprisoned if survived.

Just don't like what kind of picture there is drawn of political oponents. Should I not stick up for my belifes?
Thank you for replying to this thread. I admire your ability to use English, being bilingual is a positive attribute.

Yes, I would entirely agree that the United States has not been more proactive in addressing China's aggression and terrible human rights policies. As you probably know, our much respected and loved President Trump has begun a much delayed and needed effort to make China a more neighborly and agreeable nation, able to live amicably among western pacific nations. When I was in Viet Nam I quickly detected that the Vietnamese had no liking for the Chinese - every thing that was inadequate or dirty was attributed to the Chinese. I heard stuff about Vietnamese elephants and some women (Trung sisters) fighting the Chinese many years previous.

We see many Chinese items for sale here in the U.S. such as telescopic sights (scopes) and binoculars - I refuse to buy these. Our large multi item stores like Walmart contain possibly 50% Chinese goods. Half the stuff in my kitchen is Chinese. Most of the lower end optic equipment is made in China - Burris, Vortex, and others. Much of the medical equipment and drugs used in the U.S. are made in China. I once had some Chinese fishing gear but donated it all to a thrift store that employed the handicapped.

In would appear that the term "enemy" causes most of your discomfort. I use the term, enemy, to describe groups or individuals that illegally and without due process strive to deprive me of my rights that are innate or God given - a violation of the U.S. Constitution that I took an oath to defend. The right of self defense is the big one. This goes far beyond politics or political opponents or political process - our enemies use biased judicial process, selected judges, ridicule of targeted groups, arbitrary regulations and taxation to accomplish their objectives. Making the situation just and correct usually involves needless and costly expense to fight through layers of biased decisions.

Thinking about Quisling, I failed to completely research the means of his end. I heard about the Japanese General Yamashita from some Filipinos - he wanted to be shot but was hung - a more suitable end for a war criminal. This event caused a momentary lapse in my thought process. :mad: The Norwegians being a civilized, gentle people probably did not hang Quisling's body up for display.
 
I am planning to contact Montana governor elect, Gianforte to express my views and I might copy and paste the correspondence on this thread. During the campaign I received wads of letter size or larger glossy attack ads that attributed Mr. Gianforte as a promoter of efforts to rape Montana and either lock up or dispose of public lands. I and many others don't like dealing with no trespassing signs or smelling dirty water. Just going to ask real nice like and express my concerns.
 
In would appear that the term "enemy" causes most of your discomfort. I use the term, enemy, to describe groups or individuals that illegally and without due process strive to deprive me of my rights that are innate or God given - a violation of the U.S. Constitution that I took an oath to defend. The right of self defense is the big one. This goes far beyond politics or political opponents or political process - our enemies use biased judicial process, selected judges, ridicule of targeted groups, arbitrary regulations and taxation to accomplish their objectives. Making the situation just and correct usually involves needless and costly expense to fight through layers of biased decisions.
First of all I don't belive in god and to an extent where I don't write it using caps and even if I did I have not read anything about right to bear arms in the bible.
For constitution they can be changed. The Norwegian conatitution fram 1814 stated that Jews and members if Society of Jesus are forbidden to enter the country.
Was our constitution, but it was not righ and it was the right thing to do to have it changed.
It is wrong and plane stupid to defent something just to defend it. Defend something because you think it is right, but others should have the same right to attack it because they think it is wrong.
I dont think a single country has a law that would forbid selfdefence and I doubt any politician ever would take that right away.
I got both family and friends I disagree with both in politics and religion, but we don't refere to each other as enemys.
 
First of all I don't belive in god and to an extent where I don't write it using caps and even if I did I have not read anything about right to bear arms in the bible.
For constitution they can be changed. The Norwegian conatitution fram 1814 stated that Jews and members if Society of Jesus are forbidden to enter the country.
Was our constitution, but it was not righ and it was the right thing to do to have it changed.
It is wrong and plane stupid to defent something just to defend it. Defend something because you think it is right, but others should have the same right to attack it because they think it is wrong.
I dont think a single country has a law that would forbid selfdefence and I doubt any politician ever would take that right away.
I got both family and friends I disagree with both in politics and religion, but we don't refere to each other as enemys.
Thank you for your thoughtful and speedy response in regard to this matter.

To keep the subject somewhat on-track, being a discussion of our enemies who would disregard and treat our 2nd Amendment rights with contempt, in regard to political events in Arizona & Montana, I believe some excursion into the U.S. Declaration of Independence and Biblical events is permissible.

The U.S. Declaration of Independence:

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.

Believe me, dear Sir: there is not in the British empire a man who more cordially loves a union with Great Britain than I do. But, by the God that made me, I will cease to exist before I yield to a connection on such terms as the British Parliament propose; and in this, I think I speak the sentiments of America.


Thomas Jefferson, November 29, 1775[11]

Our founding fathers were God fearing men.

To me, "unalienable Rights" would include self defense, like Life.

The Bible and God: (this gets into kind of graphic stuff)

Right to bear arms- Bible?

13 And David said to his men, "Every man strap on his sword!" And every man of them strapped on his sword. David also strapped on his sword. And about four hundred men went up after David, while two hundred remained with the baggage.

The swords were arms privately owned and controlled and the four hundred were part of a Militia that was well organized by King David. The "baggage" probably included food for lunch, extra weapons & parts, tents and blankets. David, no doubt relied on individuals that in our current military would be supply types to organize the logistical part of the operation.

More - a different event and time.

4 Then a champion[f] came out from the camp of the Philistines. His name was Goliath; he was from Gath. He was close to seven feet tall.[g] 5 He had a bronze helmet on his head and was wearing scale body armor. The weight of his bronze body armor was 5,000 shekels.[h] 6 He had bronze shin guards[i] on his legs, and a bronze javelin was slung over his shoulders. 7 The shaft[j] of his spear was like a weaver's beam, and the iron point of his spear weighed 600 shekels.[k] His shield bearer was walking before him.

Then

40 He (David) took his staff in his hand, picked out five smooth stones from the stream, placed them in the pouch[au] of his shepherd's bag, took his sling in hand, and approached the Philistine.

Then

49 David reached his hand into the bag and took out a stone. He slung it, striking the Philistine on the forehead. The stone sank deeply into his forehead, and he fell down with his face to the ground.

Goliath was one mean nasty mother, big enough to cover a 4X8 foot sheet of stuff standing on end. After removing
Goliath, David did the customary possession of the enemy's weapon and then, as custom for that time, took the
enemy's head to certify a conclusion of the event. David was not issued the sling, or the smooth (no doubt very spherical to allow true flight) by government authority. David was an agent of God and relied and used his unalienable rights to resolve the threat of an aggressor (keep & bear arms).

I have only a casual knowledge of the U.S Constitution and Bible but use both as daily guidance. I have no respect or affection for those who would negate or remove my unalienable rights and would regard them as enemies. This goes far beyond preferences of what is right or wrong.

Any possibility, of placing your native language in (...) next to your English words so I might learn more? Again, I admire your bilingual abilities.
 
Warning! This thread is more than 4 years ago old.
It's likely that no further discussion is required, in which case we recommend starting a new thread. If however you feel your response is required you can still do so.
Top