Sunday December 28, 2014
Jump to content
The first person I remember to openly speak out against immigration (both illegal and legal) was the much maligned, (and often thought of as a "leftist") and often despised for his blunt observations, novelist and "crank" Edward Abbey.
You don't have to like him to admit he spoke the truth on that issue and many others.
He was no "leftist" by the way, though crank may be accurate in some ways. It's OK to call him that, too, because I think he'd be proud of THAT title. :-)
There is a videotaped interview available on Youtube with some Phoenix journalist taped sometime in the 1980's (Abbey died in 1989) in which he openly espouses his opinion about ending immigration. Just do a google search if you'd like to view it.
Of course, he was called a "racist" for his views on the subject, but I suspect he LOVED to be called by some "derogatory" label. I think it just validated (in his mind) that he was on the right track with his stated opinion.
Of course Abbey just enjoyed pushing people's buttons. Used to openly say Carl Hayden ruined Arizona. Not a statement meant to endear one to most Arizonans. LOL.
We need a few more cranks like Abbey nowadays and a LOT less sheep IMO.
He used to state----------you want to know what Arizona will look like if we have open borders? Take a drive to Sonora and look around. You'll have your answer.
Of course he also railed about global population, yet Fathered 5 children. LOL
I just want to agree with both of you guys on that beautiful rifle and that wonderful movie.
Quigley Down Under (though a rather modern "western", and set in Australia) was just a super film.
The movie had tons of "heart" and a quality message. Not to mention the basic excellent story telling and the gorgeous cinematography. One of my all time favorite movies, EVER.
Now, that Sharps.
I'm not a weapons expert or a "collector" or otherwise knowledgeable about fine rifles, etc.
However, having read numerous books (fiction and non-fiction) about the time period of the mid-1800's, I've read many accounts of the buffalo hunters and their pursuit of Buffalo hides. The Sharps rifle was the "preferred" weapon of choice for the most proficient of them.
Could either of you inform me? Was this fine weapon used in "Quigley" the same weapon spoken of within the tales of Buffalo hunters??
I suspect it to be "one and the same" gun but would appreciate confirmation from the more knowledgeable.
Man, that Quigley guy could sure shoot!!!
Tom Selleck fit that role about as well as anyone could have imagined IMO.
You have your "A" game on today!!
More good advice. Those 10 would be a wonderful starting place.
You have a nice day also!!
This comment was removed by the site staff for violation of the usage agreement.
MY remark had NOTHING to do with lawyers. It is re-quoted below:
"could it be that BOTH parties are to be suspected???"
The remark was aimed at the two parties.
I indicated only that lawyers are abundant in BOTH parties.
Re-read the entire thread. Comprehension should follow!!
Unless it is way too simplistic for you. :-)
"When a woman gets more jail time for writing a bad check than does a man for shooting his neighbor, there is something seriously wrong with our system."
Very well stated Mrs. Chittick!!!
There IS something seriously wrong with our system, I'd contend many serious things wrong.
Too many to list IMO, but apathy among our citizenry is certainly among the top 10!
Our prisons are full, and we keep building more, to house all those "bad check writers" and other non-violent offenders, while (at the very same time!) we refuse to really seriously penalize those that commit horrid acts of violence. I'll quote Waylon Jennings here:
"It's a crazy mixed up world cotillion" I don't know who cotillion is, but I agree that it's crazy out there anymore!
The simple point is Mr. Lemon, that (just like the Democrats in Washington), the Republicans in Washington ALSO are comprised of a vast majority of lawyers.
If "lawyers" is a dirty word, then it follows that Republican lawyers are no different than Democratic lawyers, and as BOTH parties consist of a "majority" of lawyers, well then...........
could it be that BOTH parties are to be suspected???
I did NOT use the word "liberal" anywhere in my post.
What's not to understand??
"Lawyers make up the majority of the Democrats in Washington."
Mr. Haapala posted the above.
The following is also true. I only had to modify one word to post it!!
Lawyers make up the majority of the Republicans in Washington.
I didn't even have to bother to check the accuracy of my statement.
I'm not JUST referring to "elected" republicans. There are strategists and lobbyists and other republicans of all stripes hanging out in DC right along with all those democratic lawyers!!
It is absolutely true that a person pulls the trigger. Guns don't often fire without someone's intent to fire!
I have only one question for any reader to ponder today.
I preface the question with some personal biographical info:
I am old, a white guy, and admittedly sometimes get angry about something.
How many angry old white guys shooting their wives, or girlfriends, or some perceived "enemy" (like the opposing atty. in a mediation situation) does it take to empower the "government" to take away our 2nd amendment right to "bear arms"??
I don't have the answer but suggest the danger is the actual answer may be--------
"Not many more"!!!!
If you pray, better pray for wisdom to quickly inhabit our populace, elected or otherwise.
Last login: Wednesday, January 23, 2013