2aHawaii
General Topics => Political Discussion => Topic started by: macsak on March 21, 2024, 07:04:11 AM
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qz_EcLNSC08
-
Sounds good to me.
-
this one's an hour-and-a-half long. I watched it at 1.25 speed. reflects some soul searching, her view of govt over-reach, political corruption, the deep swamp, etc.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DXuU2Uj7UTw&t=5s (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DXuU2Uj7UTw&t=5s)
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eUgtKxwexbs
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eUgtKxwexbs
Theres a subliminal message in there that said all dentists are armed. Listen closely.
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qz_EcLNSC08
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.
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eUgtKxwexbs
Tulsi is a very astute politician.
But until Americans don't have to worry about universal gun registration and Ammo control,
Country wide acceptance of other states CCW licenses,
and no gun bans for traditional type of rifles like AR15's.
I will be very circumspect about her 2A stand.
:popcorn:
-
If DT picks her that's probably a lock for me, although it's always good to have RFKjr as a back up in case the deep state takes out the orange man.
-
Good to see she's a support of the 2A now. Took a bit longer than I expected.
https://2ahawaii.com/index.php?topic=27278.msg240339#msg240339
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2XS8cYvQufs
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2XS8cYvQufs
Her past stances on the 2nd amendment and her voting record in congress? Nope. I don't. :shaka:
So now she did an "about face" and looks like she is a supporter of the 2nd amendment. That's fine and dandy. All politicians are chameleons. They change. She is no different.
While it won't surprise me one bit that all this hoopla is not really for the benefit of the citizens of this country or for the country itself and just another self-serving political stunt, if her agendas and those of her presidential candidate align with what I feel is needed to redirect the country out of it's current sad state of affairs then she and her presidential running mate deserve the consideration of support.
Some people will look at Tulsi's tendency of changing sides politically as a positive characteristic that shows willingness to change or look at things objectively. And I agree.
However, with Tulsi specifically I tend to proceed a bit more cautiously and with a lot of skepticism.
-
Her past stances on the 2nd amendment and her voting record in congress? Nope. I don't. :shaka:
So now she did an "about face" and looks like she is a supporter of the 2nd amendment. That's fine and dandy. All politicians are chameleons. They change. She is no different.
While it won't surprise me one bit that all this hoopla is not really for the benefit of the citizens of this country or for the country itself and just another self-serving political stunt, if her agendas and those of her presidential candidate align with what I feel is needed to redirect the country out of it's current sad state of affairs then she and her presidential running mate deserve the consideration of support.
Some people will look at Tulsi's tendency of changing sides politically as a positive characteristic that shows willingness to change or look at things objectively. And I agree.
However, with Tulsi specifically I tend to proceed a bit more cautiously and with a lot of skepticism.
Anyone growing up in Hawaii and working with this state's legislature is going to have a belief system that is skewed toward gun control.
The fact that she's been able to leave Hawaii, see how the rest of the country views gun ownership, and has been enlightened to the fact that the 2A is not about hunting and sport shooting is what I think matters.
She might have arrived late to the party, but at least she made it. I've seen her give interview after interview on this topic, and there is nothing in her story that leads me to think she's lying.
People change their beliefs about guns all the time -- most often after being in a situation where they wished they had one.
-
Ok, lets settle this. If she creates an OF, then all will be forgiven.
Sent from my SM-G991U using Tapatalk
-
I'll use any excuse to pull.up this picture again.
What's not to love?
(https://i.postimg.cc/QMgPH7KF/Tulsiguns.jpg) (https://postimg.cc/McTtLvDw)
Spandex is God's gift to men.
-
Her past stances on the 2nd amendment and her voting record in congress? Nope. I don't. :shaka:
So now she did an "about face" and looks like she is a supporter of the 2nd amendment. That's fine and dandy. All politicians are chameleons. They change. She is no different.
While it won't surprise me one bit that all this hoopla is not really for the benefit of the citizens of this country or for the country itself and just another self-serving political stunt, if her agendas and those of her presidential candidate align with what I feel is needed to redirect the country out of it's current sad state of affairs then she and her presidential running mate deserve the consideration of support.
Some people will look at Tulsi's tendency of changing sides politically as a positive characteristic that shows willingness to change or look at things objectively. And I agree.
However, with Tulsi specifically I tend to proceed a bit more cautiously and with a lot of skepticism.
Ditto
Sent from my moto g power (2021) using Tapatalk
-
Maybe she is proving this old joke / saying to be true…
If you’re not a “liberal” when you are young, you don’t have a heart. If you’re not a “conservative” when you’re old, you don’t have a brain.
Her dad is a big supporter of 2A here locally.
Maybe he has something to do about it?
Here is a recent and an old article between the dynamics of their political stances
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/as-tulsi-gabbard-joins-trumps-vp-shortlist-her-father-distances-himself/ar-BB1k7yNo
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/2308274/tulsi-gabbards-father-i-never-realized-how-much-trauma-i-put-her-through/
-
Tulsi's daddy switched from republican to democrat. Tulsi switched from democrat to independent with conservative values.
Scott Saiki said there are two kinds of people who do that. Basically one switches because they no longer support the party's foresight and values. The other one switches out of convenience.
Happens all the time but all of us individually need to decide for ourselves what is their motivation that made them decide to genuinely switch.
-
Tulsi's daddy switched from republican to democrat. Tulsi switched from democrat to independent with conservative values.
Scott Saiki said there are two kinds of people who do that. Basically one switches because they no longer support the party's foresight and values. The other one switches out of convenience.
Happens all the time but all of us individually need to decide for ourselves what is their motivation that made them decide to genuinely switch.
That coincides with a phrase I've heard more and more the last 10-15 years:
I didn't leave the Democrat Party. The Party left me.
The party has shifted so far Left, there's no room now for classic Liberals. Either you're an extreme progressive that agrees with everything the Left espouses, or you're on the Right. Having one opposing opinion gets you kicked out of the nest. Climate Change, transgenders in women's sports / restrooms / locker rooms, abortion up to and after the moment of birth, stricter and stricter gun control, the war in Ukraine, using the justice system to prevent Trump from being elected to another term, and so on.
No better example than Biden: "If you have a problem figuring out whether you’re for me or Trump, then you ain’t black."
You can now be kicked out of your race for disagreeing, too! O0 O0
:crazy:
-
Tulsi's daddy switched from republican to democrat. Tulsi switched from democrat to independent with conservative values.
Scott Saiki said there are two kinds of people who do that. Basically one switches because they no longer support the party's foresight and values. The other one switches out of convenience.
Happens all the time but all of us individually need to decide for ourselves what is their motivation that made them decide to genuinely switch.
:rolleyes: on Saiki. . . that guy is the "I know what's best for everyone. . " mindset. Grown too big for a "Gov't for/by the people". . . sound familiar?
-
it's an old post, but check the "jacket forum" for more on tulsi...
-
Tulsi supposedly rejected RFK’s offer to be his VP pick
https://youtu.be/5vnW9L6119k
-
RFK is now officially a backup candidate in case the deep state assassinates the orange man. They are plainly getting desperate after all.
In that case it might be a showdown between Kennedy and Gabbard.
This is supposing we still have an election by then of course
-
My question is just exactly what kind of "Aloha Spirit" does Tulsi have?
There is the genuine Aloha Spirit that comes from the heart.
Then there is the HSC Aloha Spirit type of spirit. One with an agenda attached.
-
My question is just exactly what kind of "Aloha Spirit" does Tulsi have?
There is the genuine Aloha Spirit that comes from the heart.
Then there is the HSC Aloha Spirit type of spirit. One with an agenda attached.
Is it your contention that the HSC Aloha Spirit definition existed before the HSC decided to give the SCOTUS the bird (which is ironic if you think about it)?
I highly doubt the tie between "no guns in public" and "aloha spirit" was a "thing" before this year.
Given that, it's doubtful Tulsi, nor anyone else, would have described an anti-gun agenda as part of the aloha spirit.
Just saying ...
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aFWBkhahcKA
-
Interesting video. Sounds like Tulsi is getting paranoid about Biden weaponization of government agencies. Makes me think that maybe she knows something that us regular guys can only speculate on.
-
Interesting video. Sounds like Tulsi is getting paranoid about Biden weaponization of government agencies. Makes me think that maybe she knows something that us regular guys can only speculate on.
That's what i was wondering. She used to be on the "inside" of the Swamp, so logically she knows more about the inner workings of the Dems in Congress than those of us on the outside.
Additionally, if i were personally rethinking everything I once believed about gun control and government treatment of gun owners as she says she is, I'd likely do research into all the things I used to accept on face value, such as the real purpose of the NFA and ATF.
The ATF has been in the news lately doing a lot of sketchy stuff under color of "rule making" -- a practice that's now become something resembling lawmaking. Perhaps that's also on her radar as she has become more of a 2A advocate?
In Congress, I'm sure the party dictated how she was supposed to vote on national issues. Hopefully she's now going back and reviewing not only the gun control laws she helped pass, but also the laws that came before which others have piled on since the 1930s.
I don't agree with Braden's (in the video) theory that her suggesting that maybe it's time for the NFA and ATF to no longer exist is a massive swing from a gun control position. Too many agencies and laws were created long, long ago and over time morphed into something totally different.
NFA was a tax plan to make certain firearms too expensive for the average gun owner. Suppressors were added because (from what I read) someone believed it made poaching easier. Nothing at all about their use for killing humans.
The long title for NFA is "An Act to provide for the taxation of manufacturers, importers, and dealers in certain firearms and machine guns, to tax the sale or other disposal of such weapons, and to restrict importation and regulate interstate transportation thereof."
The $200 tax was quite prohibitive at the time (equivalent to $4,555 in 2023).
With a few exceptions, the tax amount is unchanged
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Firearms_Act
$200 is barely a blip in most gun owners' budgets today. We spend that for cellular phone service over a couple of months based on surveys (average is $114/month).
As for the ATF, they originally were a tax enforcement agency (I'm seeing a pattern here). That function was part of the IRS, and they were primarily involved in enforcing laws regarding alcohol and tobacco such as moonshining and bootleg operations -- importing & selling alcohol/tobacco products without the proper tax stamps (i.e. payments).
The taxation of alcohol started in 1791. In 1861, the IRS was created within the Department of the Treasury. They mostly enforced alcohol and tobacco tax laws, since those two industries brought in a lot of tax revenue. The functions of alcohol and tobacco enforcement shifted from the Treasury Department to the Department of Justice in 1930. Throughout the era of prohibition and its repeal, the enforcement of these areas continually changed and their enforcement powers were increased.
In 1972, the ATF was officially created. So, if you look at it from a historical perspective, the ATF is a relatively new agency. It would be simple to disband it and hand off the taxation enforcement functions to the DOJ and/or IRS again. Since taxation has always been the primary reason for the laws under the ATF, that can naturally be done within the IRS. All these new firearm rules are nothing but mission creep. Most of those rules go beyond the scope of existing law, which is illegal/unconstitutional. That function (gun regulations) can and should be handled by Congress. We already have a federal agency that enforces laws -- it's the FBI. The ATF is redundant.
Anyway, that's a long explanation as to why I think any reasoning human being who looks at these two issues would not have to be a staunch 2A supporter to grasp how much the NFA and ATF have strayed from their original intent.
I think slippery slope would not be an inaccurate description of what we've seen happen.
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lDy_LeHb79w