-=> Quoting Rich Willbanks to Guy Putnam <=-
 GP> NRA & Republicans (& Demos) are willing tools of the Fascist
 GP> Hegelian dialectic process.  Their aim is to confuse your
 GP> eyes with the Conflict of Opposites (Demo/Repubs,
 GP> NRA/Schumer) while the destruction of Fascism moves
 GP> unobstructed down the center, bringing great pain & death
 GP> down upon you & your family, & to walk-off with your assets
 GP> . . . .
 RW> Guy, a couple of things.  First off (and don't take
 RW> this wrong) calm down a little.  
I'm not angry . . . just disgusted.  How would you feel, watching a whole
heard of sheep following each other over the cliff.  Sick maybe, but not
angry.
 RW> I have never seen
 RW> anyone won over to another side by someone using harsh
 RW> words.  If you want to change mines you have to make
 RW> them think not make them made.
Well they better think fast . . . I'm not getting paid to warp people's
minds, like the media or the NRA.  'Fraid I don't have time for the
"delicate touch." 
 RW> Next... Make sure you are using the correct terms.  How
 RW> do you define Fascism?  From what I have read (I edited
 RW> it a lot because I was only going to make my first
 RW> point) you seem to be equating Fascism and Communism or
 RW> Socialism.  They are three totally different types of
 RW> governing.
Look how warped your thinking has become from trying to focus on the
Conflict of Opposites presented to you by the kept media!  Don't you 
see it?
I'll let Benito Mussolini himself define Fascism.  When asked "What is a
Fascist," Mussolini replied, "I am a Marxist . . ."
"Nazi" stands for "National SOCIALIST Workers Party of Germany."
"USSR" stands for "Union of Soviet SOCIALIST Republics."
You see, you've been watching the Nazis fighting it out with the
Communists, the Conflict of Opposites, right & left; . . . but guess what?
. . . Fascists/Communists are not really opposites at all, but Brothers in
Socialism.  They aren't screwing each other at all, but its you who they
are coming down the middle at with both guns of Socialism balzing, while
you eyes & mind are entertained by the "Opposites."
 GP> No, I'm saying I don't want _any_ more Klintons, Doles or
 GP> Gingriches . . . period.  There's no reason NRA members can't get off
 GP> their bottoms & put some regular folks in leadership so they can run
 GP> things properly.  There's no reason NRA can't support the Constitution
 GP> Party, or create a party from the ranks of gun owners.  Its not an
 GP> impossible goal, especially with the stakes so high.
 RW> Not impossible but until there are changes in the
 RW> election laws it is impractical.  Doing so now, or any
 RW> time soon, will only split the pro gun vote and allow
 RW> even more anti gun people to be elected.  This is one
 RW> reason it hasn't been done.
Well that's the silliest thing I've ever heard!  You're trying to tell me
that if gun owners don't vote anti-gun, then its going to split the pro-gun
vote!  Well, perhaps you are right.  If all gunowners vote anti-gun, then
to get one of them to vote against all anti-gun candidates would, in fact,
split the vote.  Only, it would not be the pro-gun vote as you claim . . .
it would be splitting the anti-gun gun owners vote!
... War is Peace * Freedom is Slavery * Ignorance is Strength --1984
--- Blue Wave v2.12 [NR]
---------------