So if this is the hill you'll die on, then you'll be just as duped as the Abortion fanatics who yielded the Bush Dynasty.
His answer was a conditional one. "If both sides of the Isle..." creates a lot of wiggle room, and he could always decide there's particular language in a bill that would prevent him from signing.
Do you really NOT want a legally sophisticated, intelligent president with a track-record of having positive legal effects against Big Business, one who walks the walk, one who sides with you more on every other major issue except this one that triggers you? (Pun intended.)
I've given you a cogent argument. Even a good candidate who will perform exactly as you want them to - in the process of getting elected - will say things that will sound like deception to you when he attempts to garner support. You should look for the conditionality of those statements. And every media outlet that's captured by advertising budgets or intelligence apparatus, especially a hungry one like NewsMax who thinks it can be the next Fox, is going to do everything in its power to make sure you don't like that exact candidate. I'm suggesting you're falling for it, rather than remaining non-attached and agnostic, to see where the chips will fall, and follow the larger themes over the noise of the single-issue details.
I don't wish to participate in the cult of leadership, either, and I'm fully aware of the Hegelian gauntlet. But we will either (3 or 4 options) have the continuation of the Machine, as it flexes into full gear, without any resistance at the executive level, or we'll end up with the power vacuum of no leadership, more Biden, or worse, no functional government to ever recover into the future, because a lot of good folks would rather see where violent revolt leads us, rather than take a chance on a guy who breaks with taboo and actually says honest things.
I know that Kennedy has virtue signaled to an audience he needs to cultivate in order to win the White House.
I fully understand how important the 2A is, but I also know that a whole arsenal of rather astonishing EM weapons is waiting in the wings to incinerate your metal guns into lump while you hold them in your hands. Right before the same class of weapons causes your skin to boil when you don't parrot the Dear Leader. Right before your nano-tech-updated booster-topped-off neighbors are caused to see an augmented reality that shows them an alien invasion and renders you in their eyes as a zombie who wants to eat their brains. So it's a much more complicated matter, in my opinion.
As long as we have shot-guns to give the local authorities pause, the 2A is doing its job sufficiently for now. The minute the military reserves start doing to everyplace what they are doing in Lahaina as we speak, and the only option left is full on assault via guerilla warfare, then our problems become much bigger than defending ourselves from tyranny. You won't have a communication network to coordinate anything to effect any significant resistance with anyone, so your deceptively named 'assault rifles' (I agree with you), won't mean diddly.
John Lennon was correct when he said, 'the minute you turn to violence, they know exactly what to do with you.' So the only violence that ethically holds water is immediate self-defense right now. That's it. The technical capacity of a rebellious insurgency to overwhelm the US military to restore freedoms in any meaningful way is a pre-ordained lost cause.
Zero character assassination, unless facts qualify as character assassination.
The mere definition of "assault weapon" is fraud and color of law.
You should delve into these subjects far more.
So if this is the hill you'll die on, then you'll be just as duped as the Abortion fanatics who yielded the Bush Dynasty.
His answer was a conditional one. "If both sides of the Isle..." creates a lot of wiggle room, and he could always decide there's particular language in a bill that would prevent him from signing.
Do you really NOT want a legally sophisticated, intelligent president with a track-record of having positive legal effects against Big Business, one who walks the walk, one who sides with you more on every other major issue except this one that triggers you? (Pun intended.)
There is no hill. There is no dying. I don't require any leaders actually.
Again, I presented troubling facts, and no one has a cogent argument for me. I really don't care how you rationalize the lesser of two evils.
I've given you a cogent argument. Even a good candidate who will perform exactly as you want them to - in the process of getting elected - will say things that will sound like deception to you when he attempts to garner support. You should look for the conditionality of those statements. And every media outlet that's captured by advertising budgets or intelligence apparatus, especially a hungry one like NewsMax who thinks it can be the next Fox, is going to do everything in its power to make sure you don't like that exact candidate. I'm suggesting you're falling for it, rather than remaining non-attached and agnostic, to see where the chips will fall, and follow the larger themes over the noise of the single-issue details.
I don't wish to participate in the cult of leadership, either, and I'm fully aware of the Hegelian gauntlet. But we will either (3 or 4 options) have the continuation of the Machine, as it flexes into full gear, without any resistance at the executive level, or we'll end up with the power vacuum of no leadership, more Biden, or worse, no functional government to ever recover into the future, because a lot of good folks would rather see where violent revolt leads us, rather than take a chance on a guy who breaks with taboo and actually says honest things.
No, you have not.
Did RFK Jr flip-flop on 2a? Yes or No?
Do you appreciate how critical 2a is? Yes or No?
That is what this article is really about.
I know that Kennedy has virtue signaled to an audience he needs to cultivate in order to win the White House.
I fully understand how important the 2A is, but I also know that a whole arsenal of rather astonishing EM weapons is waiting in the wings to incinerate your metal guns into lump while you hold them in your hands. Right before the same class of weapons causes your skin to boil when you don't parrot the Dear Leader. Right before your nano-tech-updated booster-topped-off neighbors are caused to see an augmented reality that shows them an alien invasion and renders you in their eyes as a zombie who wants to eat their brains. So it's a much more complicated matter, in my opinion.
As long as we have shot-guns to give the local authorities pause, the 2A is doing its job sufficiently for now. The minute the military reserves start doing to everyplace what they are doing in Lahaina as we speak, and the only option left is full on assault via guerilla warfare, then our problems become much bigger than defending ourselves from tyranny. You won't have a communication network to coordinate anything to effect any significant resistance with anyone, so your deceptively named 'assault rifles' (I agree with you), won't mean diddly.
John Lennon was correct when he said, 'the minute you turn to violence, they know exactly what to do with you.' So the only violence that ethically holds water is immediate self-defense right now. That's it. The technical capacity of a rebellious insurgency to overwhelm the US military to restore freedoms in any meaningful way is a pre-ordained lost cause.
Have you written to RFK Jr. or his campaign with your 2A concerns?
What have you done for this country? You haven't responded to that question.
So you can't form a cogent argument, and turn it on me? Yeah, I'm not biting. Move along.
Sounds like your scripted reply to anyone that challenges you.
Sounds like you have no arguments, so you make up an inane retort.
Come on now.