TexasCHLforum.com

Here's a couple of extensive reads from the NRA-ILA. Makes me queasy to think he is even considered a candidate, with as many rights he wants to violate.

http://www.nraila.org/Issues/Articles/R ... &issue=047
http://www.nraila.org/obama/

As much as intelligent people hate him, the not so smart people that think with emotion and not logic love him. We are in for some rough times ahead.

Mr.Scott wrote:As much as intelligent people hate him, the not so smart people that think with emotion and not logic love him. We are in for some rough times ahead.

And everyone that works/goes to a university

As a university professor in the humanities, I have to say, "Hold on there." Let's try to avoid the overgeneralizations.

jbrett2 wrote: As a university professor in the humanities, I have to say, "Hold on there." Let's try to avoid the overgeneralizations.

As a university student in a "conservative" university, I have to say you're the exception. Okay not really, as long as you stay out of...Well either coast and big schools.

jbrett2 wrote: As a university professor in the humanities, I have to say, "Hold on there." Let's try to avoid the overgeneralizations.

I would agree, you are the exception, that is if your not actually a closet liberal with pro-gun beliefs because you fear for your safety if you are unarmed.

It is definitely not an overgeneralization to say that the Universities in our State and our Country are pushing social liberalism down our younger generations throats. The sad part is that we parents are paying them to do it.

First, let me tell you a little about myself. Then, I’m going to get on my soapbox; please accept my apologies for the sermonic rhetoric.

I am an English professor (research field is anthropological linguistics), an NRA member, a TSRA member, an IBRSA member, a holder of an 03 FFL, and a Vietnam combat veteran. I have been married for 35 years, have two grown children, and am anxiously awaiting the birth of my first grandchild in the next week. I have had my CHL since 1995, my carry preferences are government model 1911s, and my choice of canine companions is a 187 lb. Great Pyrenees. I am not, nor have I ever been, a “closet” anything.

Now for the sermon: One of the key premises in the development of the Protestant perspective was Martin Luther’s belief that an unchallenged religious faith was no faith at all. The contemporary university has adopted the same stance—an unchallenged faith in the sciences, the humanities, the social sciences, the arts, and the actions of education, business, and the law is no faith at all. The position of a university faculty member, particularly those of us involved heavily in undergraduate teaching, is therefore the position a type of irritant: we provide students with the opportunities to question the beliefs they bring with them to the university classroom, to question the beliefs they form during their undergraduate experience, to get involved with the discussions created by the subject-matter experts in their chosen fields, and to form their own hypotheses. Unfortunately, as is true in all human activities, not all students choose to accept these challenges, allowing their already formed agendas to drive their university experience. Equally as unfortunately, not all university faculty choose to accept these challenges, allowing their already formed agendas to drive their classroom behaviors. Neither group, however, can be simply excused for their behaviors; refusing to continually question their stances negates Martin Luther’s critical starting premise.

Stepping down from the soapbox, let me offer one more personal statement: years ago I swore an oath to defend the Constitution from all enemies, both foreign and domestic. I have never forgotten that oath, nor have I forgotten the personal responsibilities that the Constitution demands of its adherents.

jbrett2 wrote:First, let me tell you a little about myself. Then, I’m going to get on my soapbox; please accept my apologies for the sermonic rhetoric.

I am an English professor (research field is anthropological linguistics), an NRA member, a TSRA member, an IBRSA member, a holder of an 03 FFL, and a Vietnam combat veteran. I have been married for 35 years, have two grown children, and am anxiously awaiting the birth of my first grandchild in the next week. I have had my CHL since 1995, my carry preferences are government model 1911s, and my choice of canine companions is a 187 lb. Great Pyrenees. I am not, nor have I ever been, a “closet” anything.

Now for the sermon: One of the key premises in the development of the Protestant perspective was Martin Luther’s belief that an unchallenged religious faith was no faith at all. The contemporary university has adopted the same stance—an unchallenged faith in the sciences, the humanities, the social sciences, the arts, and the actions of education, business, and the law is no faith at all. The position of a university faculty member, particularly those of us involved heavily in undergraduate teaching, is therefore the position a type of irritant: we provide students with the opportunities to question the beliefs they bring with them to the university classroom, to question the beliefs they form during their undergraduate experience, to get involved with the discussions created by the subject-matter experts in their chosen fields, and to form their own hypotheses. Unfortunately, as is true in all human activities, not all students choose to accept these challenges, allowing their already formed agendas to drive their university experience. Equally as unfortunately, not all university faculty choose to accept these challenges, allowing their already formed agendas to drive their classroom behaviors. Neither group, however, can be simply excused for their behaviors; refusing to continually question their stances negates Martin Luther’s critical starting premise.

Stepping down from the soapbox, let me offer one more personal statement: years ago I swore an oath to defend the Constitution from all enemies, both foreign and domestic. I have never forgotten that oath, nor have I forgotten the personal responsibilities that the Constitution demands of its adherents.

My appologies sir. It is good to know, not all college professors are pushing the liberal agenda.

"Liberal" is not necessarily bad. JFK was a liberal. Problem is, the people calling themselves liberals-- Ahem, um, I'm sorry, "progressives" -- today aren't liberals, they're socialists.

bdickens wrote:"Liberal" is not necessarily bad. JFK was a liberal. Problem is, the people calling themselves liberals-- Ahem, um, I'm sorry, "progressives" -- today aren't liberals, they're socialists.

I used to think that leftist were more concerned about civil rights and protecting the poor the conservatives were about law and order, and economic opportunity. Either I was wrong or things have changed.

Liberty wrote:

bdickens wrote:"Liberal" is not necessarily bad. JFK was a liberal. Problem is, the people calling themselves liberals-- Ahem, um, I'm sorry, "progressives" -- today aren't liberals, they're socialists.

I used to think that leftist were more concerned about civil rights and protecting the poor the conservatives were about law and order, and economic opportunity. Either I was wrong or things have changed.

Both?

Pinkycatcher wrote:

Liberty wrote:

bdickens wrote:"Liberal" is not necessarily bad. JFK was a liberal. Problem is, the people calling themselves liberals-- Ahem, um, I'm sorry, "progressives" -- today aren't liberals, they're socialists.

I used to think that leftist were more concerned about civil rights and protecting the poor the conservatives were about law and order, and economic opportunity. Either I was wrong or things have changed.

Both?

Probably ...

Liberty wrote:

bdickens wrote:"Liberal" is not necessarily bad. JFK was a liberal. Problem is, the people calling themselves liberals-- Ahem, um, I'm sorry, "progressives" -- today aren't liberals, they're socialists.

I used to think that leftist were more concerned about civil rights and protecting the poor the conservatives were about law and order, and economic opportunity. Either I was wrong or things have changed.

There are many Liberals that feel this way, unfortunately few if none of them are in government today. (I'd consider myself one.)

Then again, I don't know why one has to be at the expense of the other, as all are great things to work toward. When the Republican party (or the democrat party HA!) embrases all four, then I'll become a member.

bdickens wrote:"Liberal" is not necessarily bad. JFK was a liberal.

JFK hated the phony liberals of his day, just as he would today.

03LightningRocks,

Apology accepted.

Perhaps we should now return to examining closely the reasons why we tend to get the political representation we deserve and why we're never satisfied with that representation. I'll offer the first two possibilities: we expect our politicians to be clones of ourselves, and we refuse to become the politicians we want.

I am guilty of both.