Are you sure about that?

https://www.npr.org/2022/09/10/1122089076/is-america-a-democracy-or-a-republic-yes-it-is
https://constitutionus.com/democracy/what-type-of-government-does-the-us-have/
https://factmyth.com/factoids/the-united-states-of-america-is-a-democracy/

Yes, I am.

Your Google search should have started with the differences between Constitutional and Democratic Republics and which of the two correlates to the U.S. form of Republicanism, rather than citing the first article to prove yourself correct; an article, mind you, contributed by someone who is a big fan of Obama and his politics, nonetheless.

There are major differences between Democratic and Constitutional Republics that should be understood if you want to be an expert on Republicanism.

Also, the correct definition for empire refers to nations/states/countries/territories/etc. being ruled under one authority.  You are using it in the figurative sense.

Saying a particular entrepreneur built an empire in the recording industry, auto manufacturing, telecommunications, or whatever else is also a common figurative use of the term, but it is not literal. 

i think anytime you add a qualifier to "empire", you are implying it doesn't have the same meaning as the standalone literal term -- i.e. global political empire is not the same as a literal empire: "A political unit having an extensive territory or comprising a number of territories or nations and ruled by a single supreme authority."

I have never met a single person who believes the U.S. is a literal empire, as in the case of nation states that has direct sovereign control over the territories it has influence over. I'm not sure why you are hyper focused on trying to prove yourself right through literal definitions, because it's obvious that people substitute empire interchangeably with imperialistic power because it's easier to say.

Just at you can get your dopamine rush for the day, I will amend my statement and call the U.S. an imperial power instead of an empire going forward.

"Imperialism can be defined as a doctrine, political strategy, practice, state policy, or advocacy that consists in extending power by territorial acquisition or by extending political and economic control outward over other areas. Imperialism oftentimes involves the use of military and economic power, and always aims for more expansion and collective or individual domination."

(https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/imperialism#:~:text=Imperialism%20can%20be%20defined%20as,control%20outward%20over%20other%20areas.)

"The focus of the critique is not just U.S. military power, which is overwhelmingly dominant, but also U.S. cultural influence (rock music, movies, styles of dress and behavior), U.S. political power, which forces countries to change political institutions and practices they would often rather not change, and U.S. economic influences, which force countries to adopt neoliberal policies that often hurt their economies but work to the economic advantage of the United States itself. In all these areas the United States presumes like an old uncle to know best for the rest of the world."

(https://www.encyclopedia.com/history/dictionaries-thesauruses-pictures-and-press-releases/empire-and-imperialism-united-states)

But please tell us how the U.S. doesn't use it's political, economic or military influence to "motivate" other nations to do what it wants, or to put it's nose in everyone's business, thereby disqualifying it from meeting the criteria for being imperialistic.

You need to remember the US is not a republic.  We are a democratic republic.

We are a Constitutional Federal Republic, not a Democratic Republic.

And technically the US is considered an imperialistic power, particularly under the ideologies of Neo/New Imperialism and American Imperialism. So while not technically meeting the definition of an empire nation state, it is still considered a global political empire

I used to rag on her previous voting record and military service exaggerations (the latter when she was in Congress). She has since made amends and seems genuine in her political shift, but her actions will prove if that's true in the long run.

Regardless, people change and grow. Let's hope this is truly the case for her.

they moving to Aiea/pearl city area, by Best Buy. it they haven't moved already

I remember before the first move, they mentioned wanting to move to the (still) empty vacant shop near Waimānalo Beach Park, next to 7-11. They said it would be a lot closer to the range, so better than town.

The owners didn't approve their bid because it "steers away tourists."

Hundreds?

Were more than 3/4ths of the "hundreds" of protestors camera shy?  I counted fewer than 60 in the photo.

If you watched the hearing, there were hundreds of people from all over Moku o Keawe that packed the building, so much so that a large number has to stand outside the for hours, in order to testify

Just like with 3196, the overwhelming majority of testimonies opposed the bill.

This is an interesting topic.  I know 2A guys who voted for Ige, Green, Caldwell, and Rick.  I never asked them their stance on other issues, so maybe despite all being anti 2a, they aren't a single issue voter.  And almost all the HI people I know who moved to Vegas voted blue again. Now for this, IDK what the GOP candidate was like, but I'm going to assume they brought their  HI problems with them to NV. People in Vegas often hate CA people, but HI is no different.

Back to 2A,  IMO if a politician is willing to violate the 2A, what other rights will they violate?  We saw Ige violate peoples other rights and Rick too during covid.

I'm a single issue voter. If they're not pro 2a, then they won't get my vote. And if all are anti 2A, then it's a shit sandwitch and i'll pick the lesser of the evils.

Also the party usually dictates this, but not all the time. Which is why one has to do their own research. A few years ago an anti 2a ran as GOP and won, but people there voted based on party.  Somewhere in NV, I forgot what county. The candidate admitted to tricking the voters when he ran as GOP.

Here's a recent example: Rep Kila is DNC, but he presented a stand your ground bill this year.  Last year, he voted against the sensitive places bills.  I asked him why and he said because my people wanted his vote to go that way.  He said he listens to what his people want him to do and dont' automatically vote down party lines.

Kevin McDonald who ran as DNC against Comrade Karl is pro 2A. He showed up to the floor vote with HIFICO, the one where Chief Ballard and 11 other HPD brass showed up to, to get the mag ban passed.  He also was arrested while exercising his 1A right during covid.

Most Hawai'i and national politicians don't even know what kind of governmental system we have. The ones that do and still violate our rights are the ones who are hoping we don't know our system of government or how it's supposed to be.

Well, I just got back a mailer daemon saying sens@capital.hawaii.gov was undeliverable.  That email address was taken off the on target notice that I got.I had forwarded that notice to the guys on my email address. I hope that some got through.Thats a mimum 100+ That is f'd up.

 At least I sent out a email to Joy so she got that message- never responded though( she never does)

It's capitol, not capital

Ultimately it takes all types and it's great to present a diverse cross-section of points of view, so if anybody is naturally spicy and is devoting their time and energy to defending our rights, then more power to them. I won't judge.


But as debate class teaches, when we're talking to people like Karl Rhoads, it's as unlikely we'll persuade them as it is they'll persuade us. So the goal is to persuade anybody else who may be watching the exchange, who hasn't yet come to their own conclusions. In practice, there might only be one person in a room that hasn't fully formed their opinions yet, and it is for that person that we argue.


So the way I see it, if I'm alone with people who have already been bought and paid for by Bloomberg, then it wouldn't matter if I was extra spicy, because nothing would likely matter anyways. But if I was being televised or there were undecideds in the room... I would dread for the fence-sitters to find me crazy or threatening, especially when the rhetoric from the other side constantly tries to portray non-LEO gun owners as dangerous.

Tell us how you feel about getting spicy, now that the bill has passed.

Old school way is cloth

In my opinion, Rhoads as a political leader needs to learn as much about what he is trying to ban for him to be regarded with respect and integrity.

To try to ban what he is trying to ban while showing he has no real integral knowledge of what he is banning only shows he is pushing an agenda.

He doesn't care.  That's what I get from all of this.

And I don't think for one minute he thinks this SB3196 will decrease crime and increase safety for the people.  He might not know a lot about firearms but he's not stupid.

This guy is going for a complete ban on all firearms from citizens.  SB3196 is just a stepping stone.

If he doesn't care, then he and those like him aren't consenting their decisions to the will of the people. You know how the rest goes.