Jump to content


  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About DonJoe

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location

Previous Fields

  • Political Party:
    No Party/Other
  1. Justice Democrats

    Whether or not you argue for nukes or not doesn't matter. The point is the 2nd can be construed to mean it. The 2nd is open to many varied interpretations; it is not clear in what it means. I agree with having an open honest discussion of the issue, with lots of parties involved. Now the discussion seems to revolve around what the NRA wants and what they push in terms of propaganda. The right characterizes the left as wanting to remove all guns from all people, which of course is nonsense. They claim the constitution says they can have any weapon they want, and when I ask where, they claim the 2nd, which in my interpretation doesn't say anything of the kind. You may interpret it differently, and I can see the point. Which leads to my comment that the 2nd is not clear in what it means, nor what is proscribing for the US. A discussion so that the 2nd could be changed to be clear would be helpful. A group of people openly discussing the issue would be helpful, but I doubt that could happen, because the right would flood the discussion with NRA propaganda, telling the left what they supposedly stand for. I expect it would be like the NHB forum, nothing but attacks without substance. But even if we have the conversation here, where do you draw the line on who can have what kinds of weapons? I assume you would somewhere between allowing nukes to anyone, and arresting people for knowledge about how to kill. From my perspective, I am not sure where to draw the line. I don't want the NRA selling weapons of mass destruction to people who are demonstrably insane, nor do I want martial arts instructors across the nation arrested for possessing illegal knowledge. The second part of the question is how to rewrite the 2nd amendment so that it is not subject to such wildly different interpretations.
  2. Justice Democrats

    My point of applying the second amendment to both nukes and thought was to show that the second amendment needs some adjustment. Making nukes legal is just as abhorrent as making thought illegal. There must be some reasoned application. The second amendment in my opinion is not clear in its meaning and does not provide adequate guidance on what should be allowed and what should not.
  3. This is what leads to the dark ages

    I have no personal experience with the Canadian Health care system, however, there are big delays in the US system as well. My wife had to wait almost a year for knee surgery, after it was decided to have the surgery. Primary lymphedema is often not treated in the US, while in Germany it is treated as an in patient at the hospital. My point was that with a more efficient system, we could do more with the doctors we have compared to now.
  4. This is what leads to the dark ages

    ?? Why would we need more doctors? With single payer, health care is more efficient, and people get preventive care reducing the overall load. People see doctors in clinics rather than at emergency rooms. People see doctors before they are critical. People obtain medicine preventing many symptoms rather than going to the emergency room. When the rich are allowed to control the flow of money they keep it for themselves. With scientific innovation, the rich become richer true enough, but as the past 30 years has shown, society may not be better off, with falling standards of living, more people falling into poverty, higher death rates, more illness, etc. I am not saying I oppose education and innovation, on the contrary I strongly favor, encourage and live it; however other factors must also come into play.
  5. Justice Democrats

    People forget the whole text of the Second Amendment: A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed. When the constitution says the right to keep and bear Arms shall not be infringed, what is your definition of Arms, most broadly I consider it to be weapons. To use the broad definition, it would include nukes. Should the common citizen have the right to keep and bear nukes? If you say no, then you are infringing upon his rights. If you say yes, then you are putting civilization at risk. Going the other way, when you regulate weapons, then what about table knives? Should they be banned as well? What about knowledge such as how to kill someone with your bare hands? Should that be banned? If so, then thought can be a crime. Allowing thought to be criminalized is certainly not an attractive option. Restricting the conversation to guns, then you have to define guns. Typically a gun is a device which sends a projectile at a sufficient speed to kill or harm. An intercontinental ballistic missile fits that definition even with a nuke warhead. Perhaps it is something that can be held in your Arms. Then something that sends missiles at aircraft would fit that definition, or perhaps a nuke in a suitcase. In my opinion regulations are required, along with good judgement, something I haven't seen in our government for a long time. I doubt we will see good judgement in the laws or courts for a long time, at least till the current batch of corrupt criminals is removed. When the NRA can simply buy congressmen they can pass any laws they want, regardless of the consequences.
  6. Snowflakes

    I don't agree with the all or nothing concept, but I gotta get something. On health care for example, Obama did not even consider single payer, he actively fought against it; instead pushing the GOP created plan from the Heritage Foundation. I wanted the wars ended, but Obama kept them going. I wanted trickle down abandoned, but alas no change. I wanted people appointed to the judiciary who are not right wingers, instead people who will support the rule of law and in particular the constitution, instead we got Merrick Garland, and we didn't even get him, just so we could please the GOP. Yes, Obama did some good things, and the economy got a tad better, but these are desperate times and we needed action, not more appeasement of the GOP. Guantanamo still has prisoners. Yes, Trump is worse than HIllary, but it appeared both would push the GOP agenda to continue the pillaging of America, the only difference is the rate of the pillaging.
  7. Our Revolution

    How did our government get so far away from the will of the people?? My opinion is that we lost the right to have our votes counted. The so called ballot counting machines were designed with a back door so the totals could be changed at any time. We have significant evidence the vote totals have been changed many times. There are a great many other ways our right to vote has been compromised so that we now have people running all three branches of government who represent a very tiny segment of the population, and perhaps represents other nations as well. Unless we get control and actually have open, honest and fair elections, the people at the top will be free to pillage our nation, as they have been doing for quite some time now.
  8. This is what leads to the dark ages

    To support Trump, you have to be in favor of stupidity.
  9. WaPo: Donald Trump is NOT well

    I hope so, but I have very little confidence in the checks and balances that are supposed to be there. They are all controlled by the GOP who appears to have no interest in good government, supporting the constitution or the rule of law, or of even human decency.
  10. Its not that they just don't care, they are actively going after anyone who is not rich. You might not be rich, but you can be made poorer, till you are dead.
  11. I hope you are correct. Interesting article. I have no confidence in the Supreme court. They have ruled for strictly partisan pleasures for too long to be believed. With GOP appointments for way too long the courts have become so partisan they have forgotten the rule of law. Even when Jill Stein paid millions to have the ballots counted, the courts ruled that they would not be counted, only pushed back through the same fraudulent machines that gave us Trump in the first place. When the courts are that open about committing fraud it is difficult to have confidence in anything else they say.
  12. Will the cons be willing to commit election fraud to keep Ryan's seat? Fraud was committed in Wisconsin to put Trump in office, why would they refuse in this case? If we think they are willing to commit fraud we need to do more than just vote.
  13. Travel ban

    More evidence the GOP has firm control over the courts. They can get away with anything.
  14. I don't see how republicans run on values? What kind of values is it to steal money from poor people and people who work? What kind of values it is that promotes hatred, racism, treason, criminality, war, and on and on. There are no values in the republican party, except steal as much as you can. Pillage the nation.
  15. Meet the 13 Senators

    I hope you are correct. My statement is that it won't happen unless "WE" do something about it. I have been wanting us to do something about it since Reagan installed Trickle down to steal the money from the people who create it. I have been waiting a long time (most of my working life) I am trying to push people to act, to do something about it. Thank you for your encouragement.