Jster said
Except it isn't. Neither side, even with the majority, can legislate freely. And that's good. Not everyone in this country agrees, so why should it be that if one group suddenly has power they have ALL of the power?

But you only have two very prominent parties, which is more what confuses the crap out of me.

ImANargleHunter said
But you only have two very prominent parties, which is more what confuses the crap out of me.

There's historical reasons for that. Goes back to Adams v Jefferson. The problem now is that the two major parties make the rules about third party rights, and they can both agree on excluding them.

Tempest said
You think that's bad?Your politicians may be arguing about bullshit. Mine are trying to instate what can only be defined as Gay Jim Crow laws. .-. Only reason it didn't pass is because the actual senate shot it down, not the state.

Just for the record, all the law did was allow *others* to choose whether or not they wanted to discriminate based on religion. It wasn't actually a discriminatory bill. You can find the bill's exact text...... somewhere, I don't know, I don't have my link anymore. It was absolutely a 'religious freedom' bill, just one that would inevitably lead to discriminatory confrontations. Which I think of as good, because it encourages the assholes to kill off their own business by revealing how stupid they are.

I'm a left winger living in Texas, how do you think I feel

Smiral said
I'm a left winger living in Texas, how do you think I feel

Don't worry. If the Mexicans keep flooding in, Texas will be a pocketed blue state before you turn thirty.

Goldmarble said
~~~~In other news, it's fucking New York. The more I hear about the place and the ignorant, worthless asshats who run the place, the more it seems like even Kalifornia has more actual freedom. And I never thought I was say anywhere in the US had less freedom than Cali.Only thing I really can say is....Get the fuck outta dodge while the gettin' is good?

I didnt realize you were one of those.

The Nexerus said
Don't worry. If the Mexicans keep flooding in, Texas will be a pocketed blue state before you turn thirty.

This is actually super true

The Nexerus said
Don't worry. If the Mexicans keep flooding in, Texas will be a pocketed blue state before you turn thirty.

Fascinating ... And by that logic, will the Texans migrate north to make the northern states more republican?

Go green party

This is why I hate any political debate involving my country. Everyone is biased to the far left or far right, the independents and people in the middle-ground are basically non-existent. The older I get, the less complacent I am with the idiocy of the government. I guess I hit my rebellious teenage phase late, because I'm more and more anarchist as time goes on.

Doivid said
I didnt realize you were one of those.

One of those?

People who likes firearms, likes modified cars, and likes the occasional large quantity soft drink? Who doesn't give a damn if you're gay, straight, bi, pan, or asexual...and does wish that at the very least, the laws would be changed to allow same sex couples to have the same rights and responsibilities as "traditional marriages", whether that union is called a marriage or not?

Which "one of those" am I?

Svenn said
Go green party

Oh hey. A fellow third partier!

Our green party is a joke.

Mtntopview said
Fascinating ... And by that logic, will the Texans migrate north to make the northern states more republican?

No, they'll just get swamped out, as has already happened in parts of Texas and probably other areas of the south-western United States.

^ Rick Mercer did a show with Elizabeth May once where they cut down a tree together.

The Nexerus said
No, they'll just get swamped out, as has already happened in parts of Texas and probably other areas of the south-western United States.

Meant to make this an edit. :/

Goldmarble said
One of those?People who likes firearms, likes modified cars, and likes the occasional large quantity soft drink? Who doesn't give a damn if you're gay, straight, bi, pan, or asexual...and does wish that at the very least, the laws would be changed to allow same sex couples to have the same rights and responsibilities as "traditional marriages", whether that union is called a marriage or not?Which "one of those" am I?

One of the people who go on and on about 'Kalifornia' (no idea what the K is supposed to imply) and New York as like communist death camp states, as if you know what they're actually about other than yahoo news articles meant to rile people up.

And I have no idea why you're injecting sexuality into this, because it had nothing at all to do with my post. Little bit tacky there.

Lucian said
This is why I hate any political debate involving my country. Everyone is biased to the far left or far right, the independents and people in the middle-ground are basically non-existent. The older I get, the less complacent I am with the idiocy of the government. I guess I hit my rebellious teenage phase late, because I'm more and more anarchist as time goes on.

I'm hoping the trend of people who want to have discourse outside of that paradigm picks up. It at least seems to be growing, though people giving up on the process entirely is also growing.

Goldmarble said
One of those?People who likes firearms, likes modified cars, and likes the occasional large quantity soft drink? Who doesn't give a damn if you're gay, straight, bi, pan, or asexual...and does wish that at the very least, the laws would be changed to allow same sex couples to have the same rights and responsibilities as "traditional marriages", whether that union is called a marriage or not?Which "one of those" am I?

We should meet up for a shooting day at some point.

Anyways, what's worse is when your idiot liberal government decides to give the RCMP powers to change firearms laws without telling anyone and then decides to ban a shitload of rifles that were never used in a single crime since they were imported, turning thousands of law abiding Canadian citizens into criminals overnight because the property they legally paid for is now apparently illegal.

Bullshit number one.

And the year before, forcing High River to evacuate because of flooding and then taking the opportunity to break into people's houses to confiscate their firearms without warrants and saying the owners can get them back if they prove ownership, which if their house is flooded, might as well be destroyed.

Bullshit number two.

So, to recap, the RCMP has been fucking over law abiding citizens for stupid, inexcusable reasons because they think military-style guns are scary looking, even though they're almost never used for anything illegal. Meanwhile, since 2003, 20 people have been killed by the police using Tasers, which I'd like to point out were meant to prevent people from dying from gunshots.

TL;DR Screw the coddling, ill-informed government that decides that the police should have the ability to change laws instead of enforcing them. I shouldn't have to lose my personal property that I spent nearly $1000 dollars on legally after going through the long process to obtain a license to do so because some asshole with a pen decided that it was a scary looking weapon that might suddenly be converted into an automatic weapon after it passed several inspections and import requirements to demonstrate that it in fact could not. This whole thing makes about as much sense as giving the police powers to ban cars because somebody MIGHT get into an accident with one and be tempted to speed.

"Oh man, those Corvettes go mighty fast. Scary. Better make them prohibited, just to be sure."

It's the exact same thing, only people have committed waaaay more crimes with Corvettes than with the guns they banned.

All because some jackoff Liberal government back in the late 90's decided that the police should have the power to do whatever the fuck they want.

Dervish said
We should meet up for a shooting day at some point. Anyways, what's worse is when your idiot liberal government decides to give the RCMP powers to change firearms laws without telling anyone and then decides to ban a shitload of rifles that were never used in a single crime since they were imported, turning thousands of law abiding Canadian citizens into criminals overnight because the property they legally paid for is now apparently illegal.And the year before, forcing High River to evacuate because of flooding and then taking the opportunity to break into people's houses to confiscate their firearms without warrants and saying the owners can get them back if they prove ownership, which if their house is flooded, might as well be destroyed. So, to recap, the RCMP has been fucking over law abiding citizens for stupid, inexcusable reasons because they think military-style guns are scary looking, even though they're almost never used for anything illegal. Meanwhile, since 2003, 20 people have been killed by the police using Tasers, which I'd like to point out were meant to prevent people from dying from gunshots. TL;DR Screw the coddling, ill-informed government that decides that the police should have the ability to change laws instead of enforcing them. I shouldn't have to lose my personal property that I spent nearly $1000 dollars on legally after going through the long process to obtain a license to do so because some asshole with a pen decided that it was a scary looking weapon that might suddenly be converted into an automatic weapon after it passed several inspections and import requirements to demonstrate that it in fact could not. This whole thing makes about as much sense as giving the police powers to ban cars because somebody MIGHT get into an accident with one and be tempted to speed. "Oh man, those Corvettes go mighty fast. Scary. Better make them prohibited, just to be sure." It's the exact same thing, only people have committed waaaay more crimes with Corvettes than with the guns they banned. All because some jackoff Liberal government back in the late 90's decided that the police should have the power to do whatever the fuck they want.

Let's keep in mind whenever one 'side' pushes a policy/law that gives more power to a group (like the police) it's usually not coming from a political ideology, but instead a precaution against civil unrest. I'm not saying it's impossible that liberals would have supported the law, but by and large anyone at the grass roots level was either complicit or being used. From a purely strategic point of view, it's just practical for holding onto power.