My wife dragged me to see Dave Chappelle, it was abominable. Not funny, unless calling every man nigger, every woman a bitch, and left leaning/right bashing tickle your funny bone. I wasn't amused, but most in the house thought it great. *shrug*

Yep. Dave Chappelle was one of the Netflix shows I tried to watch. Couldn't make it past the first few minutes.  I gave him a chance in the first place because he had said some sensible things when the recording of Trump's locker room talk came out.  At least he sees some things realistically, but he still held his nose and voted for Hillary, according to this.

http://observer.com/2016/11/dave-chappelle-defends-trump-rips-clinton-shes-not-right-and-we-all-know-it/

I can't remember what turned me off to the show but I couldn't watch it. It may have been the N***** word.  It offends me when whites use it to slur blacks but it also offends me when blacks use it all over the place in reference to themselves and then claim whites cannot do the same even in jest and friendship. It's a double standard and it's hypocritical.

Intelligent Moderate?  You think about your positions?

A thought on the original topic - Socialism is doomed to be defeated by the forces of economics.  Under socialism, everyone is basically equal, so every person has an equal claim on resources.  However there will never be enough to go around, so not everyone can have what they want.  The result must be shortages and therefore misery.

Ergo, socialism is an inferior system.

Intelligent moderate, maybe.  I do think about them, in fact, I endeavor to apply logic, facts and reality before I decide on my position on an issue, and it can change if I get new information. For example, I used to be for capital punishment. Then I found out about corrupt prosecutors and a high rate of innocent people being put to death in my state as a result of those prosecutors, so I became against it, in that context.   But in principle I am for it.  It's just that I figured out that, like in so many things, government can be stupid, corrupt and wrong when it tries to do something, and I feel strongly about protecting the innocent from wrong convictions.

Actually, I am in favor of capital punishment at the point of the crime's commission. In other words, by the would-be victim. And it should apply to any crime of personal assault of body or property.  For example, that flash mob train robbery the other day. The riders should have been armed and should have mowed down those thugs, rather than turn over their wallets and cell phones. So I have no problem with death as a penalty for crime. But whether I would vote for or against the death penalty in the context of our criminal justice system, would all depend. Is DNA technology significantly advanced that the conviction of innocent people has drastically been reduced?  Are there safeguards against corrupt prosecutors?  I don't know, I'd have to look at it when it was put before me.

So what do you call that?  You can hardly call it "moderate" when I advocate blasting to Hell a 14 year old trying to grab my purse, as my ideological position. That's pretty extreme. But since I cannot tell you how I'd vote on the issue, would you say I'm on the fence, or technically moderate on the issue?

I agree with your statement about socialism.

Agreed. I'm done with the Republicans.

Untrue. In Texas it is legal to shoot someone for robbery, burglary, and other thefts of personal property. You may shoot them in the back as they're running off with your hubcaps.

I love Texas.

“Republican leaders and President Trump don't give a sh-t about the people they were trying to hurt,”

Just one more example of projection.

I'm not saying I agreed with it, I'm just saying how they ruled. They ruled based on the issue at hand.

Oh I understood you didn't agree with it.

For the most part, I am safest in my home.  I have locked doors, and windows, a security system, and other things to protect me.  I also have the advantage of knowledge of my environment.  When I leave my home, I am more at risk, even in my vehicle, which if used properly can keep you safer, and even act as a deterrent.  However, when leaving home, we are more at risk.  Do I live in fear, and have paranoia about travelling, or leaving my home?  Not at all.  I often travel without a firearm due to work realities, travelling to other states that don't have reciprocity, airlines, etc.

The Constitution does not limit the right to bear arms to your own home.  Only liberal/progressive courts have done so.     

Exactly, it is not logical.  I think they do it because of emotion - fear of being around someone armed - or the political way to gradually erode our 2nd amendment right.

They said nothing about concealed carry. This case is about whether or not citizens should be allowed to carry concealed weapons in public places.

According to this line of thinking I have a right to defend my life inside my own home but when I'm out and about I shall be prey. Never made sense to me.