TTAG Commentator to German Journo: Don’t Like Our Gun Rights? Go Home

Volker ter Haseborg (courtesy miamiherald.com)

“When I was a student, I spent a semester in Washington, D.C.,” German journalist Volker Ter Haseborg [above] writes in a miamiherald.com editorial entitled Your gun violence scares me.  “One day, my class met a representative of the National Rifle Association. This man didn’t talk about guns. He talked about the U.S. Constitution and the Second Amendment. The man said that he saw his role as a preserver of amendments. He just wanted to save the Constitution. But . . .

the Constitution is from 1789. America has become a modern state with a militant democracy. Why is it so hard to change what is such an obvious deficit? Americans abolished slavery, why is it so hard when it comes to guns? Does bearing a gun really represent the modern American way of life?

Yes. Yes it does. An armed American is the ultimate realization of personal sovereignty enshrined in our Constitution – a concept unfamiliar to Germans. Seriously. Check THIS out.

In the darkest chapter of German history, Hitler’s Nazis armed citizens against the declared state enemies of the Third Reich: Among them were Jews, Gypsies and homosexuals. The cruelty of the second world war influences the Germans until today. As one example, weapon laws were more and more sharpened.

Today, Germany has one of the strictest weapon laws in the world. It is almost impossible for a citizen to get a firearm. Citizens know that the state authority will protect them. Therefore they don’t see any need to take action by themselves.

How screwed-up is that? Ter Haseborg ignores the Nazis’ pre-Holocaust disarmament of ALL of the their enemies – German veterans and “dissidents” as well as Jews – and puts the blame for the Nazi atrocities on the socialists’ arming themselves. “Citizens know that the state authority will protect them?” Those who don’t learn from history are [useful] idiots, paving the way for darkness.

Normally. I don’t agree with those who tell foreign-born antis to piss off. First Amendment and all that. This time I’m right on board with TTAG commentator andypanterra69’s message for Mr. Ter Haseborg:

Another European comes to America’s shores, doesn’t like our freedoms, so we shouldn’t have them. If our nation scares YOU so much for its freedom~ go home. We don’t go to your beloved Germany and ask Germans to change their way of life so afford us the common decency of reciprocating or just go back home.

comments

  1. avatar Fred Frendly says:

    Throw out everything old, if it existed before Obama was born it should be discarded. Like the Constitution, Mercedes Benz, Warsteiner beer, soccer, and Angela Merkel.

    1. avatar barnbwt says:

      That Futurist message is what directly led to Fascist attempts at ‘social engineering.’ When you reject everything you might have stood for, you will truly fall for anything.

  2. avatar Chip Bennett says:

    Citizens know that the state authority will protect them.

    As you said: Americans abolished slavery. If you still want to live as a slave, feel free to do so – in your own country.

    If you love wealth greater than liberty, the tranquility of servitude greater than the animating contest for freedom, go home from us in peace. We seek not your counsel, nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you; May your chains set lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen.

    – Samuel Adams

    1. avatar Dyspeptic Gunsmith says:

      You chose exactly the quote from Mr. Adams that I was going to use.

    2. avatar Geoff PR says:

      “May your chains set lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen.”

      Now *that* was a ‘Fvck Off And Die’ to remember…

      Murrica!

    3. avatar Al M. says:

      This +1

    4. avatar Jjimmyjomga says:

      Those Adams boyz were pretty smart ‘uns.

    5. avatar BLAMMO says:

      Perfect.

    6. avatar Desert Ranger says:

      Damn strait. And remember when the Russians or Isis come calling raise a stein of beer and kiss your ass goodbye, cause the State ain’t gonna do anything except clean up the bloody mess that was you.

  3. avatar GuyFromV says:

    Whatever, Himmler.

  4. avatar Sam I Am says:

    To be uncharacteristically blunt, “You lost the war because of our guns”. It is the reason the continent doesn’t speak German as a first language. How well did your state protect, in 1933, the feeble, the disabled, the slow, the “defective”, the unborn? The German solution to any nagging problem is to destroy it.

    Oh, yeah….our guns were/are also the reason Germans don’t speak Russian !

    1. avatar Joe R. says:

      Out privately held aircraft patrolled for and hunted their subs off of Long Island, NY, (Floyd Bennet Field) and (if caught without peaceable surrender) would have also been shot with privately held guns.

      Our RTKABA will outlive even the idea of America, we don’t even tolerate our own stupid a-hole neighbors needing jobs (our gov’t) to threaten that.

      so GTFO

      1. avatar Sam I Am says:

        Who, me?

        1. avatar Joe R. says:

          No Sam U Is,

          Sorry that was for the hose from (D)eutschland.

          Germany is closing its borders as we speak to the onslaught of “refugees” a/k/a military-aged males without any signs of “spouse or kids.”

          Germany will have to rely on neutral Switzerland to arm itself for that invasion.

          Don’t let foreigners (or your own POS sh_t-head countrymen) disarm you for the next Civil War or war with China.

        2. avatar Sam I Am says:

          Germans would never acknowledge our societal superiority, anyway….we are going to take thousands of refugees without even a thought as to who they might be; it is the right thing to do.

  5. avatar Powers says:

    If the ancestors of white Americans role in slavery over 150 years ago makes those same Americans racist and demands reparations be paid by them, then 75 years makes this guy an active Nazi.
    Of course the previous statement is not true or valid.
    But I agree…Freedom did scare Nazis so maybe its just a natural thing to say for him.
    And I agree again..Go home. We don’t need any more Nazis. Obviously since it was just a few years ago you and your previous generations brought the world to war and murdered millions of innocents. Genocide.
    If I generalize him as a Nazi, as all pro gun people are generalized as racist, children hating terrorists it is again, not valid and untrue. Just speaking in terms he may understand. Fear mongering and cultural stereotyping, and avoiding facts.

  6. avatar Grindstone says:

    I debated a German anti-gunner once. I showed him an article about a woman who lived near me, single mother with an infant, who shot an armed intruder with a shotgun. His first response was “Why wasn’t she charged?”

    Yes, please stay in Germany.

    1. avatar NYC2AZ says:

      Sounds similar to what the typical anti gunner in Boston, New York, or San Fran would say.

    2. avatar Roymond says:

      “Why wasn’t she charged?”

      Because this is a civilized country.

      1. avatar Joe R. says:

        ^ This, Y E S !

        Because we don’t let our stupid (D) head A-hole POS neighbors needing jobs (a/k/a: our “gorvernment”) dictate to us. Who the F are they?

        The RTKABA will outlast even the IDEA OF AMERICA. You better be able to fit the notion of “America” in your a_ _ if you want to steadily chip away at all the little necessary things that keep the rest of us from chucking the rest.

        We don’t need to do “America” if the “bigger” and “smarter” minds crowd appoints themselves “king, god, duke” over us.

        BS!!!

  7. avatar David b says:

    German citizens are in a bit of a pickle. (I love a good German pickle by the way with weinersnitzel.) Muslims continue to flood Germany and pose a (Donald Trump voice) HUGE security, cultural, and social dilemma. In the interest in “fairness” and some long German that means “always apologizing for 2 world wars and we are ashamed to be white”, they will not loosen their firearms restrictions because of the Muslims that would be eligible for possessing them who would then in turn have the potential to wreak havoc on Deutschland.
    We have the same problem here with illegal Mexicans. Those who propose amnesty also support the suppression of gun rights. They want the voting bloc the Mexicans represent, but they don’t trust them with weapons. Many members of both groups–Mexicans and Muslims–do not respect the nations they are in and do not assimilate.
    Those who lose their rights are the red-blooded, patriotic men and women who make a country great–whether they are German or US.

    1. avatar WedelJ says:

      Slow your roll, friend. This country was made because of immigrants. This country became what it is (was, in recent past) because of countless people wishing for a better life and willing to sacrifice and work for it!

      The problem is freeloaders, no matter what country they were born in.

      1. avatar B says:

        The problem is the death of the melting pot. If immigrants don’t want to become Americans they shouldn’t be allowed in. Multiculturalism will be the death of western civilization.

        1. avatar 2Asux says:

          You are correct….LEGAL immigrants, who wished to assimilate themselves or their children.

          You are accurately describing the Balkanization of the country. Worked really well for Yugoslavia and Czechoslovakia.

          Tribalism is the root of hate and distrust in the Middle East and Afghanistan. Welcome to the brave new world.

        2. avatar Roymond says:

          Multiculturalism is fine so long as there’s a common loyalty.

        3. avatar The Old Coach says:

          Multiculturalism is by definition a denial of common loyalty.

        4. avatar george from fort worth says:

          anyone considered what happens when you add two numbers together, then divide by 2? you ALWAYS get a number lower than the largest number in the couplet !

        5. avatar Scoutino says:

          Yes, although USA also refuses hard working immigrants who WANT to become Amercans. I know rather large number of those. They all have their own businesses as they are legally un-employable. Some of them are employers themselves. They pay taxes, mortgages and abide by the law, except that overstayed visa.
          None of them are freeloaders. All of them speak English.
          They spend tens of thousands dollars on immigration lawyers trying to find a way to citizenship. Unless you are lucky enough to win a visa lottery or marry a US citizen there is none! If any of you, legal immigration proposers, know how to even get a green card while being married, too old for college and unlucky in lottery I’m all ears.

        6. avatar int19h says:

          I’ve actually found that many Americans, and especially those who have strong opinion on immigration (legal or illegal), have very little knowledge of how the legal immigration system actually works in this country.

          One thing that sets US apart from other countries that have significant immigration, like say Canada or Australia, is how ad-hoc it all is. There’s no rhyme or reason here, it’s just a bunch of random laws enacted over the decades that don’t add up to any meaningful policy.

          Case in point: skilled immigration. I’m not talking about strawberry pickers here, but people who will come to work in industries that require degrees and experience, and which pay 2-3x the national average (which, of course, results in a significant net positive gain once you account for all the taxes the state collects, secondary jobs created etc).

          In Canada, they decided that they want people like that to immigrate, and so they have a full-fledged separate immigration track just for that thing. It requires a person to come into the country with a job offer on a work visa, basically, and then after a year or two – which is a reasonable period to, first, confirm that the job offer is genuine and that they’re capable of supporting themselves, and also to assess how well the person wants to and is capable to integrate – they can apply for permanent residency (it’s possible to apply without a job offer and without being in the country, but those two things count for a lot of points on the application, so it basically requires some stellar educational achievements, and an otherwise perfect fit).

          Whether one is eligible is determined by a uniform point-based system where things like age, education, work experience, language knowledge, and amount of time spent living in the country all play a part – ideally, they want young adults in late 20s or so, married, with good education and a job, and capable of speaking one, or better yet two, of the country’s national languages. Anyone can look at how those points are computed, see if they’re eligible in advance, and if they’re not, work on improving those aspects that can be improved. You can see how it looks for yourself here: http://www.workpermit.com/canada/points_calculator.htm

          Once PR (what is called “green card” in US) in hand – and that basically gives all rights and privileges except for voting and getting elected – in three years, one applies for citizenship. All in all, it’s a smooth system, with relatively fast (under a year in most cases) processing times, well-defined steps, and clear goals.

          Compare to US. The first thing that you find out is that it doesn’t have an explicit skilled immigration track at all. There is a visa for “extremely gifted” individuals that provides a way to citizenship, but that is basically Nobel laureate level. For the rest of us, if one wants to “work his way” to citizenship, the starting point would usually be an H1-B visa, which is specifically designated as a “temporary worker” visa (i.e. it does not imply the desire to immigrate). Because of that, it has a hard and rather low quota.

          Now normally when you’re in US on a non-immigrant visa, even just applying for permanent residence will result in being immediately kicked out of the country because you have established an “intent to stay”. However, with H1, they have basically hacked around it by designating it as “dual-intent”, meaning that one can apply for a green card without being kicked out. Note that this effectively means that there’s a single visa category that covers both people who are actually in the country temporary and will go back to their homeland and take the money they earned with them, and those who came to stay, even though, pragmatically speaking, the overall effect of these two categories on the economy is very different.

          Green card is generally sponsored by the employer, but unlike Canada, the application is tied to that employer – meaning that if the person decides to go look for another job, they have to start from scratch. Confounding that is the quota on green cards that is established on a per country basis – meaning that some countries basically have no waiting list at all, while others have lists that would take 10 years to fully process at current rates (I’ve heard this being the case for India). So for someone applying today, they basically have to be damn sure that they don’t lose their job for those 10 years, otherwise they’re given something like a month to find a new one or else shown the way out, and if they do find a new one they have to wait for another 10 years since they’re back at the beginning of the queue. This makes long-term planning essentially impossible, and gives employers undue leverage over H1-B employees through the implied threat of firing them and thereby scuttling their green card application (you can figure out how exactly this works when it comes to e.g. salary negotiations).

          On the other hand, it’s much easier to immigrate into US if you have family ties. Basically, a close enough relative is your ticket in (and the list of “close enough” is very generous). And I don’t mean it’s just easier compared to skilled immigration – it’s also easier compared to pretty much any other First World country out there. Taking Canada for comparison purposes again, it grants permanent residence to almost three times more skilled immigrants than family immigrants every year. In USA, in contrast, there are four times as many family immigrants getting green cards than skilled immigrants every year. The difference in outcome is also fairly obvious: a skilled immigrant, by definition, is someone who’s earning their living. The others, not so much. So the more state welfare you have, the more this imbalance in favor of family immigration results in the draining of the welfare budget.

          Is it the intended result? I doubt it. I don’t think any American citizen who is actually aware of it finds it desirable, and I’ve never seen a politician argue in its favor. It’s just something that you guys have by virtue of the inconsistent immigration and naturalization laws that have accumulated by this time.

      2. avatar John L. says:

        Well, yes and no.

        In the US, simply being born within her borders is enough to qualify for citizenship. (Being a citizen is another matter for another thread.) So, all debate of “passport babies” and such aside, there is a straightforward path to assimilation over a few generations, if the underlying culture of both the immigrants and American society supports it. Until quite recently I’d argue that on balance it has.

        This is not the case in Germany, where the descendants of the original Gastarbeiten (guest workers) from Turkey have had, do not have, and their children will have, no path to German citizenship … completely aside from the issue that German culture to all appearances does not want assimilation.

        The Gastarbeiten assuredly weren’t freeloaders.

        1. avatar ropingdown says:

          John L, you missed it. In a moment of confusion the Turkish guest-workers were given German citizenship. It was a huge but irreversible mistake. German workers had been promised it would not happen….but it did.

      3. avatar David b says:

        We don’t need more immigrants. We are good.

        1. avatar Scoutino says:

          Sure. In other words: I’m safely in. Now shut the gate and fvck you suckers outside!

        2. avatar David B says:

          Pretty much that sums it up, but your spelling needs some work. Why should we be stuck with another countries tired, poor, wretched refuse, and homeless people? Contrary to Emma Lazarus, that is not what makes a country great. Are we to take pathetic, emotional, sophomoric drivel and make that foreign policy?
          America does not need to apologize for being great. You need to recognize how we got great and quit tearing down the institutions and traditions that got us there.

        3. avatar int19h says:

          >> You need to recognize how we got great and quit tearing down the institutions and traditions that got us there.

          As far as “institutions and traditions” that pertain to immigration specifically go in US, this would actually mean no entry visas (and hence no notion of “illegal immigration”), and citizenship granted to anyone by request after 10 years of residing and paying taxes.

        4. avatar george from fort worth says:

          red your note several times. not sure i see a point to your observation. as regards to illegals, yes, we are truly all stocked-up. as regards h1b visas, those should be ended and removed from the list of options (do we really, really have a technical skill shortage? or is it just a shortage of entry-level programmers willing to work 100hr weeks for $20k a year?

      4. avatar FedUp says:

        He wasn’t talking about immigrants, at least in the USA.
        He specifically mentioned illegals, as in illegal aliens, not immigrants.

      5. avatar Garrison Hall says:

        Ever hear of “cultural displacement”? It might be informative for you to look up “Aztlan”.
        Just sayin’.

    2. avatar Matt Richardson says:

      Not only am I not uncomfortable with the idea of amnesty for illegal aliens, but I want the immigration process streamlined and simplified. I also strongly believe felons who have served their time should be able to purchase/keep/carry firearms (and vote,) permits/wait periods/background checks are an abomination that flies in the face of our natural rights but we POTG wave our CCWs around as some sort of golden ticket that enters us into an elite club that makes us better than the rest of our community.

      Chew on that for a minute before replying, please. I’ll chuckle and wait…

      1. avatar David B says:

        Ehhh, the whole felon argument flies in the face of reason. Look at the recidivism rate. Prison does not equal rehabilitation. What fairy land utopia do you reside in?

        1. avatar Matt Richardson says:

          I didn’t figure you had sh*t for a solid argument…

          The recidivism rate is a direct result of an overabundance of arbitrary laws and if you think otherwise you’re stoned. The lack of rehabilitation is a two-pronged issue. First; when people are arrested for harmlessly living out their lives as they see fit, why SHOULD they change? Because fascists tell them they should? Nope…

          Secondly; when actual dirtbags are caught and arrested they’re frequently either given a reduced sentence or sent straight home with a slap on the wrist and a stern talking to. Our “justice” system is a complete failure on every level and it if wasn’t so tragically damaging to normal, decent people whose only crime is often just smoking a doobie in the privacy of their own home it would be hilarious.

          So yea, felons’ rights should be fully restored upon completion of the terms of their sentencing, full-stop. If they’re too dangerous to carry a firearm (lol guess what, a lot of them will anyway) they shouldn’t be running around outside the walls of the pokey in the first place.

          I don’t live in any utopia, unfortunately. I’m still stuck here in the real world and surrounded by people that not only know what’s better for everybody else, but they’re convinced they have the moral obligation to force other people to live up to some horsesh*t populist ideal.

          Back to the subject you tried to avoid. Tell me about how them Mexicans are lesser humans and shouldn’t be here.

        2. avatar franklin the turtle says:

          he never said they are lesser beings he simply pointed to the fact that illegals don’t try to assimilate or even respect the rule of law. give us lawful Mexican IMMIGRANTS all day long, as they are only trying to better themselves and our country and they do respect to our laws and culture.

        3. avatar 2Asux says:

          Apparently, the courts have all ruled that the “people” referenced in “We the people” and “right of the people” means those persons present; not restricted to citizens. Thus, criminals retain the rights protected by the constitution, even in prisons. Even though the whole idea that weapons should be prohibited in jails violates the constitution, many see that as an acceptable exception. There is no sensible, reasonable, valid argument for denying any human right to “people” who are not in jail/prison. Rights are rights, or not. And that includes any prohibited speech, such as “hate speech”, the right of humans to defend themselves with whichever weapon they choose (including military class weapons).

        4. avatar David B says:

          This idea that all people are always equal belongs in crazy, theoretical land. There is income inequality, societal inequality, intellectual inequality, moral inequality. For those who are morally inequal, they lose some of their rights. Rape, murder, pillage, steal and it’s prison for you. You’ve lost your freedom.

          For those who disdain the legal process and cut to the head of the immigrant line, they should not have the same rights as citizens or even permanent residents. We do NOT have the moral injunction to make all men our equal; to do so, creates equal misery for all. Stop with this socialistic, Marxist experimentation on this country.

          Next time you’re at Disney World baking in the hot July sun waiting for a ride, imagine that somebody cuts to the head of the line. Not just one, but 300 or 400. Where does that leave you? Are you better off because they are more equal? What about your rights?

        5. avatar int19h says:

          This is specifically referring to equality before law, not to economic equality. This has nothing to do with Marxism.

          The notion that constitutionally protected rights apply to everyone stems logically from the notion of those rights being natural. If you believe in natural rights that exist by themselves, in the absence of the society and/or the state granting them, then of course they cannot be tied to the clearly artificial construct of citizenship. On the other hand, if you believe that only citizens have those rights, and given that citizenship itself is not a right, then all rights are granted (and can be withdrawn, since citizenship itself can be withdrawn).

          Note that none of this precludes the application of law – it just means that said application must respect those natural rights. So an illegal immigrant, by virtue of violating the law of the land, can be prosecuted accordingly – but you still need to provide them with fair trial, respect their right against self-incrimination and privacy for the purposes of gathering evidence, and the punishment cannot be cruel or unusual.

        6. avatar 2Asux says:

          Missed mypoint. The courts ruled the constitution applies to all the “people”, meaning present in the country. As in alive and occupying space. Based on that reasoning, criminals are alive and occupying space. Therefore, criminals currently incarcerated and those released fit the definition created by the courts. Therefore the second amendment applies to current and formerly jailed persons. Such reasoning is consistent with the court-declared right of citizenship based solely on location of birth (14th Amendment). Former SC Justice Robert Jackson was wrong about the constitution not being a suicide pact.

        7. avatar int19h says:

          Of course, it’s only a “suicide pact” if you adhere to the notion that Bill of Rights should be interpreted in the absolute most literal way possible. Which is not supported by historical practice, given that the very same people that wrote it had no problem with, say, libel and slander laws, despite them being seemingly in contradiction with the First.

        8. avatar 2Asux says:

          That means the “inalienable rights” are mere hyperbole, subject to the whim of politicians and courts, making ours a nation unremarkable from all the others; a difference without a distinction (to borrow a phrase). Such a situation makes any constitution moot, un-defendable as a standard, and certainly nothing to promote to the world as a “shinning light on the hill”. No different, actually, from Venezuela.

        9. avatar int19h says:

          Well, with the Constitution being written as it is, those are your only two choices: either a “difference without a distinction”, or a “suicide pact”.

          As an engineer, I’m certainly sympathetic to the idea that such things should really be codified explicitly and then read literally. In other words, that if we want a firm protection of gun rights, but find the idea that jailed criminals should be allowed firearms preposterous, then the corresponding part of the constitution should be phrased accordingly, with an explicit carve-out from RKBA for people duly convicted of crimes.

          Then again, I also think that it would be great if constitutions were written in Lojban rather than English for the authoritative version, for the sake of being as unambiguous as possible.

          I don’t think that either of these two things is going to happen anytime soon, though, so we have to work with what what’s there.

        10. avatar 2Asux says:

          Long, slow slide into the slime. Not sure there is any historical example of a nation reversing or even stopping the decline.

  8. avatar notalima says:

    “Citizens know that the state authority will protect them.”

    I have not received my ‘instant SWAT operator’, and police are heavy to carry about with me. How does that work, exactly?

    1. avatar General Zod says:

      And here’s a doozy: “Hitler’s Nazis armed citizens against the declared state enemies of the Third Reich.” I suppose that’s one (intellectually dishonest) way of putting it. The other way of putting it is “The government used armed paramilitaries to eradicate disarmed citizens whose continued existence was not to be tolerated”. Yes, the “state authority” did such a good job of defending the Jews, Gypsies, and others back in the 30s and 40s, didn’t they? But they’re totally trustworthy now, mein herr. Papers, please…

      1. avatar Old Ben turning in grave says:

        Now that leftists are in charge, nothing bad can ever happen again, and dissent is wrong. We no longer need freedom of speech, the right to keep and bear arms, to be secure in our persons or property, or the right to a fair trial. Surrender yourself to the gentle embrace of the State, citizen! Utopia has been realized at last.

        1. avatar Adub says:

          Gosh, you decribe Venezuela so well! Pro-government paramilitaries are armed to do the government’s dirty work, all in the name of glorious socialism!

          Maybe the New Black Panthers should ask the government for a grant of M-16s to watch polling places in the next election…

  9. avatar William Burke says:

    The truth is that much of German disarmament occurred during the Weimar Republic!

    1. avatar American says:

      Including a law called the “Law on the Disarmament of the People”. A gun-banner’s wet dream

      1. avatar The Old Coach says:

        True that much of German anti-gun law predates Hitler, but as soon as the Nazis had control of local government entities, being a Party member became an affirmative defense against prosecution. Kinda like the Obama administration – we’ll only enforce the law on people we don’t like.

  10. avatar Todd says:

    It doesn’t appear that the German people learned any lessons about propaganda. Then again it was his grandparents that learned the lesson and apparently didn’t bother to pass it on to their kids and grandkids. If anyone should be apprehensive about government control and want it’s citizens to be armed…..
    Much like the mistake our greatest generation made…..the saw such atrocities during WWII they came home and instead of taking about it with their families and explaining that there is evil I the world and sometimes it must be dealt with; they hid it. Not wanting their kids to go through what they did, they spoiled them. That is how the liberal hippies evolved. Now they run DC.

  11. avatar Bud Harton says:

    Germans are real good at engineering and bitch slapping France.

    Not so much on human inalienable rights.

    1. avatar B says:

      Bitch slapping France isn’t much for bragging rights since the 1800’s. New Hampshire could declare war on France and roll into Paris within a week. Not because of actual resistance, but thats just how long it would take for all the hunters to get their SUV’s across the pond to accept their immediate surrender and set up a provincial government.

      1. avatar 2Asux says:

        Great news out of France over the weekend:
        A new national flag is to be established, white fleur de lis on a white background. The second piece of ground-breaking news, leur armée nationale (the French Army) announced delivery of the first of a new main battle tank. Four reverse gears and one forward gear (in case they are attacked from behind).

        1. avatar int19h says:

          I love the Soviet version of this joke.

          A Soviet military advisor in Egypt, shortly after the end of the Six Day War, explains the functioning of the newly-supplied T-72 tank in its special export configuration for Arabs to the local generals: “… okay, and then there’s the gear box. So you’ve got first reverse gear here, then there’s the second reverse, third reverse, fourth reverse, first forward …”

          One of the generals interrupts him timidly: “Excuse me, but what’s the forward one for?”

          Advisor: “Well, what if the treacherous Jews flank you and hit from the rear?”

          (It’s rather amusing that the vast majority of Soviet jokes on the subject of Arab-Israel wars – which are numerous – are supportive of the Jews and dismissive of Arabs, even though the USSR has officially supported the latter.)

        2. avatar Sam I Am says:

          If the Russians determined that selling military equipment to the Israelis would be like poking a finger in the eyeof the US, the Russians would do it.

          Russia supports Arab states because the utter failure of Arab armed forces means a never-ending need to replenish the Russian hardware lost fighting Israel. It’s all about the money. (And maybe a year-round port in Syria).

        3. avatar int19h says:

          Actually, originally it was because Soviets felt betrayed – they supported the creation of Israel heavily and assumed that it would be pro-Soviet. Which it was, for long enough to win their war of independence (they were actually supplied by Soviets among others in it), and then gave them the middle finger and went to be buddies with US instead.

        4. avatar Sam I Am says:

          One would be surprised at the list of countries Israel does business with. The Israelis are quite calculating. A couple of things I am permitted to discuss:
          – The IDF trained Tamil rebels and Indian Army at different parts of the same training site, at the same time
          – Israelis consider all other nations targets
          – Israeli government once asked the US to supply a stock of certain aluminum sheet used to fabricate a specific part for F-16s. The F-16 manufacturer researched and reported that Israel did not make that part for use in F-16s (which Israel had bought). Turned out Israel was planning to compete with the F-16 manufacturer for a contract to provide external fuel tanks to Saudi Arabia.

      2. avatar Desert Ranger says:

        New Hampshire? Please! First, do you realize how many guns we have? Second, no one wants to invade France… Who could stand the wining?

  12. avatar Jt says:

    Wow, he completely ignores the fact that now, 70 years after ww2 ended, Germany thrives under a blanket of security provided by AMERICANS, with guns. We liberated their country along with the soviets, and then stuck out the divided Germany during the Cold War, making that place an economic powerhouse under the Marshall plan. We eventually enabled reunification, and today our troops are still there protecting their citizens. This guy needs to take his foot out of his mouth and instead shove his fist up his butthole.

    1. avatar Jordan says:

      “I have neither the time nor inclination to explain myself to a man that rises and sleeps under the blanket of the very freedom I provide and then questions the manner in which I provide it. I would rather you just said thank you and go about your way. Otherwise, I suggest you pick up a weapon and stand a post. Either way I don’t give a damn what you think you are entitled to.”
      -Colonel Nathan R. Jessup

  13. avatar PavePusher says:

    Bye-bye, fascist.

  14. avatar Noah says:

    “Citizens know that the state authority will protect them. Therefore they don’t see any need to take action by themselves.”

    This seems like a textbook example of Poe’s Law, particularly in light of the previous paragraph’s mention of Nazism.
    While I respect this fellow’s right to say what he will, it doesn’t seem he has a leg to stand on.

  15. avatar pod says:

    Andy hit the nail on the head. Most of us don’t travel overseas and demand that other nations act “more American”, despite the stereotypes of the loud American tourist.

    Furthermore, Germany and other European nations have strict language and assimilation regulations if one is to live there on a permanent basis, i.e. if we were to go to ter Haseborg’s country to live or visit long term, we’d have to learn German and do things the German way.

    And he’s also way off on his own nation’s firearms regulations. Strict, sure, but Germans can and do own firearms of a variety of types.

    And yes, it’s been said but it bears saying again in that people like ter Haseborg might find US gun ownership offensive and distasteful, but they sure have no problems selling us firearms they manufacture. Funny how that works.

  16. avatar B says:

    “In the darkest chapter of German history, Hitler’s Nazis armed citizens against the declared state enemies of the Third Reich: Among them were Jews, Gypsies and homosexuals.”

    Unsaid was the disarming of the victims. This is why I detest Europe, the complete disconnect between reality and their unicorn riding utopian dreams. They’re slitting their own throats right now and they don’t even notice the Damascus steel blade pressed up against their skin.

    1. avatar B says:

      Related, I wonder how well those 30k German police will be able to protect the German populace from the million strong invasion force swarming their borders.

    2. avatar DoomGuy says:

      They don’t want to mention the nazis disarming their victims because they agree with a nazi position on gun control.

      So they white-wash their own history to make it seem like lack of gun control in pre-nazi Germany was the root cause for the nazis rise, the holocaust, and WWII.

      These modern day euro trash are more evil than the people they claim to despise.

    3. avatar Bud Harton says:

      well said!

  17. avatar David says:

    “It is almost impossible for a citizen to get a [legal] firearm.”

    If you can get drugs you can usually get guns – often at the same place. Then there’s that whole 3D printing thing.

    “Citizens know that the state authority will protect them.”

    Most cringe worthy thing that I have read in over a month.

  18. avatar Grant in IN says:

    I think we went a bit overboard with the post-war deprogramming.

    1. avatar ropingdown says:

      Yep. Reminds me of “A Clockwork Orange” on a national scale. And, indeed, the Social Democrat Party in Germany worked to accomplish, by immigration, the same result the U.S. Democrat Party is pursuing with large-scale uncontrolled labor migration into the U.S.

  19. avatar DoomGuy says:

    What’s this? A German both whitewashing his own countries history and manipulating and outright lying about the monsters (who were anti-gun as well) his own country spawned in order to push his own nazi gun control agenda on us?

    Say it ain’t so…

  20. avatar Ralph says:

    What is it with the Bosche? After provoking more wartime deaths than Helen of Troy, they have no problems declaiming their moral and genetic superiority to the people they tried to annihilate.

    I suggest that before Volker Ter Haseborg returns to his beloved Deutschland, he should learn to speak Arabic. Kāfir boy is going to need it uber alles.

  21. avatar Vitsaus says:

    At this point, I really wish that people (especially americans) who don’t like the values of the nation would simply move to these various european utopias that they are always holding up as examples, and let the rest of us keep living in the place our ancestors built. I would also point out that nowhere in the constitution was slavery permitted explicitly, it was a system which existed as the result of enough people allowing it to be perpetuated. It was only when the definition of humanity and citizenship was clarified that there were no more excuses left. That and a civil war. Ironically, it was precisely the armed government (in the south) that allowed disarmed people (the slaves) to be abused by the system.

  22. avatar Gov. William J. Le Petomane says:

    “Americans abolished slavery, why is it so hard when it comes to guns?”

    Uhhh…. is this guy aware that 650,000 men died in the fight to abolish slavery? Adjusted for today’s population that would be several million, which is the approximate death toll you’d expect if America tried to ‘abolish guns’.

    If the government thought it could just tear up the constitution it would insight a civil war that would collapse the world economy sending his beloved 4th Reich into a Wiemar Republic style depression that could facilitate the emergence of a fascist regime.

    THIS IS WHY WE TEACH HISTORY IN SCHOOL!!!

    1. avatar NYC2AZ says:

      Correction: “This is why we used to teach history in school.”

    2. avatar JasonM says:

      The war did not abolish slavery here. Multiple states, including Maryland, Delaware, and West Virginia, maintained legalized slavery throughout the war and afterwards. The emancipation proclamation of 1863 was the first real mention of abolition by the Union government, two years after the war started, and it only applied to the slaves in states that had left the Union (with the condition that had they returned before the proclamation, their slaves would have remained in bondage). The Republicans passed the 13th Amendment when it looked like the emancipation proclamation could lose a legal challenge, which would have given opponents of the imperial presidency the ammunition they needed to dismantle executive orders.

      1. avatar Gov. William J. Le Petomane says:

        ‘The war did not abolish slavery here.’

        So do you think the 13th Amendment would have passed without the war and without Reconstruction? I highly doubt the southern politicians that succeeded from the union over the abolitionist policies of Lincoln would have ratified that amendment. Otherwise the war was the pivotal part of the process.

  23. avatar Dyspeptic Gunsmith says:

    The Germans will learn, as Sweden has learned, what it means to take in so many Muslims. Their rate of assault, robbery and especially rape will go up dramatically, as the Muslim males prey upon an unarmed populace who is unable to respond. Further, as young women in council housing in the UK have learned, political correctness among the bureaucrats and politicians will mean that their rapes will be swept under the rug, and the police will actively resist interfering in the affairs of the Muslims who are practicing their faith as Muhammad did.

    Here’s a little light reading:

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/11057647/Rotherham-sex-abuse-scandal-1400-children-exploited-by-Asian-gangs-while-authorities-turned-a-blind-eye.html

    NB the point where, in the gun control paradise that is the UK today, people trying to speak out about this scandal were threatened with guns, but I’m sure those threatened had none of their own.

    This is the fate that will befall the Germans if they continue to have a government hell-bent on importing savages into their country.

    1. avatar Ralph says:

      No argument here, DG. It’s ironic, though, that seventy or eighty or ninety or a hundred years ago, the only savages in Germany were the Germans.

      Karma is a bitch, and she’s back in heat.

  24. avatar Tom in Oregon says:

    Thankfully, comments are allowed after his “opinion”.

  25. I believe that most are missing the mark. We afford freedoms to to even foreigners who want to come here, live, and tell us what they think. While we may not be able to help him with being “scared,” we can support his right to say whatever he wants. You get to do that here.

    But note, it’s still a very dangerous world. I have no interest in a society where the only guns, and the only gun training, are to be found in the military.

  26. avatar Ing says:

    Do people ever get murdered in Germany? (Nod your head yes, Haseborg.) Raped?Robbed? (Nod your head again.)

    Did the government keep those people safe? (Obviously not…but you can’t say that.) I can’t hear you, Haseborg. DID IT?

    Case closed.

    Go tell you mama she wants you.

  27. avatar Pantera Vazquez says:

    Not the first time I have told a European to shove off. I am employed as a non uniformed armed security officer in a very high end mall. A recently hired employee newly arrived from France nearly had a seizure when it dawned upon her that she would have to spend time around a guy with a gun. I tried my damnedest to soothe her entry by advising her that I am well trained, experienced and here for her protection as violent crime unfortunately is a part of life. She began droning as to how the police handle things in Europe, hence people need no guns nor need to fear them. I attempted to explain our constitution, and how the 2ndA affords Americans the right to self defense, as needing a cop is not the same as having a cop readily available. “Call them” she demanded………I attempted to relay to her the fallacy of the argument-“Do you really believe a person with bad intentions is going to allow you to make a call and wait for the authorities to come to the rescue….leaving you safe in the interim?” Her response was to turn a crimson red like a miffed child. Her visa issues required her to return to Europe last week, but she is scheduled to return in about a fortnight. I sure hope she will take the time to see the differences between living in Our America and being on the other side with the “progressives”, thereby seeing the fallacy of her argument. If not I guess I will get to hear all her anti gun comments when she returns, and continue in my efforts to educate her in the ways of the POTG. Moleon Labe…….Carry On.

    1. avatar Adub says:

      Her attitude reminds me of a 9/11 documentary I watched where people in the Towers called 911 and demanded help, or asked whether they should evacuate before being told to wait for help.

      The government will not save you. You have to try and save yourself first. Sitting around and expecting someone else to come to your rescue is NOT a plan.

  28. avatar int19h says:

    It’s interesting that the guy used this exact term, “militant democracy”. it actually has a very specific meaning in German:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Streitbare_Demokratie

    And it’s not at all applicable to US. In fact, it’s a reverse system: in US, the onus is on people to be militant about their democracy (hence RKBA), whereas in Germany it’s the duty of the government to oppress any political movement that is preceived as undemocratic.

  29. avatar Sian says:

    The concept of the armed soverign citizen is not just unfamiliar to Germans and most Europeans..

    It’s so beyond their usual thinking you’d get better results asking a frog to conceptualize a jet plane. The concept doesn’t even exist in their heads that this is a thing that can exist.

    1. avatar Old Ben turning in grave says:

      I suspect this also contributed to the horsesh!t notion that Nazis and communists are on opposite ends of some meaningful political spectrum. I think, at some level, Europeans simply cannot conceive of not being ruled by one authoritarian oligarchy or another.

      1. avatar Sam I Am says:

        National Socialist Workers Party (Nazi), Union of Soviet Socialist Republics. Socialists, leftists, progressives, both of them. Two massive killing machines ruled by two madmen. The Soviets (Russians) were more proficient and efficient at killing. Stalin killed millions more than Hitler dreamed of, but Stalin gets a pass and all anybody talks about is the evil of Hitler.

  30. avatar Former Water Walker says:

    Yah mein herr-makes me ashamed to be half German. The civilized Nazi madmen has a successor. Fook you and die-Steven Seagal…have fun learning Arabic( my son speaks it fluently-German intellect?LOL

  31. avatar Lagunitas says:

    auslander raus!

    1. avatar 2Asux says:

      ja ! ich verstehe was sie sagte.

      noch einmal.

  32. avatar Stinkeye says:

    “Citizens know that the state authority will protect them.”

    In any context, that sentence would be scary. Coming from a German, it’s f**king bone-chilling.

  33. avatar anaxis says:

    I was stationed for almost 6 years in Germany (Mannheim). I absolutely loved it there and when it came time to consider whether I wanted to do a European-out at the end of my enlistment, I declined for one reason; absolutely no RTKBA. By the end of 2006, the current flood of mid-east immigrants had begun, and I could practically smell where things were going. Though the Polizei were quite efficient and effective, it was easy to imagine a point when they were going to be overwhelmed, and without the option to defend myself, not staying in Germany was a fairly easy choice.
    I never once insisted to my German friends that they should change their laws; as an American, to do so would’ve been considered in extremely bad-taste. And they never suggested that we change our laws at home to match Europe’s, as they knew it would be equally rude. But this individual moron evidently hasn’t gotten that memo.

  34. avatar Gunr says:

    This dude reminds me of an ostrich that buries his head in the sand and refuses to take notice of his surroundings.

  35. avatar Spartan says:

    This guy fails to realize his country slaughtered tens of millions with all manner of firearms by simply disarming its own citizens and those of conquered territories.

    A time machine that magically places this guy on a train to Auschwitz might just wake him up, but I doubt it.

  36. avatar Mark Bennett says:

    “This year will go down in history. For the first time, a civilized nation has full gun registration. Our streets will be safer, our police more efficient, and the world will follow our lead into the future!” – Adolph Hitler, 1935, on The Weapons Act of Nazi Germany

    1. avatar Curtis in IL says:

      Sorry, but that famous quote is completely bogus.

    2. avatar RenderMan says:

      (-‸ლ)

  37. avatar Parnell says:

    His Eurocentric metro-sexual outlook is what scares me.

  38. avatar CoolBreeze says:

    “Citizens know that the state authority will protect them. Therefore they don’t see any need to take action by themselves.” I am speechless. I am stunned at this slave mentality. Let’s see if their new emigrant (NOT migrant) friends can chage his mind when the attendant crime arrives as well.

  39. avatar anomad101 says:

    People also have the right not to own a firearm, they should exercise it. Absence of a firearm is not defenseless, but, a firearm enhances your defense. Not everyone is Chuck Norris. I do not go looking for trouble, it seldom finds me. To me, it is not self defense, it is in defense of those that rely on me, whether they know it or not. Is Germany crime free? Is any country? Not everything is worth shooting anybody over. I have two firearms for those occasions it is worth shooting them over. I sincerely hope those occasions do not arise. What other countries/cultures do not realize, 99.9% of us do not go on killing sprees, the ones that do would do it even without a firearm. We as a society are not to blame for individuals. No one sets out to raise a killer, no more than we do a thief. Old saw I know, but those that blame society for their failings are most likely to kill. Who knows what switch throws in their minds? It is a disconnect from reality. The time might be coming you will have a right to own a firearm, but be a criminal if you ever use it.

    1. avatar pod says:

      Guns are like tattoos – people who have them generally don’t judge someone who doesn’t have them.

  40. avatar Curtis in IL says:

    Don’tcha wonder if all German students are taught the same revised version of history that this guy has been fed?

    1. avatar NYC2AZ says:

      My buddy in high school hosted a German foreign exchange student for a year. During history class, we were going over what the Nazis did to the mentally ill, the Polish, the Jews, the Gypsies, et al. She became visibly upset and began to cry before exiting the classroom. That night, I went over to my friend’s house where him and his sister were talking to the exchange student. She explained to them (before I got there) that in Germany, their history classes go up to the late 1930’s, then go into a brief “we started a war, badshit happened, and we lost” and then they go into the post war reconstruction period. She said she hadn’t seen any pictures that showed the magnitude of the Nazi atrocities. She could’ve been full of it, but she was upset for quite a while after that class and asked a lot more questions about WW2 from our perspective. This was in the late 90’s, so it wasn’t like the internet wasn’t available… but even today there is a lot of revisionist history going around that is widely believed.

      1. avatar int19h says:

        >> She explained to them (before I got there) that in Germany, their history classes go up to the late 1930’s, then go into a brief “we started a war, badshit happened, and we lost” and then they go into the post war reconstruction period. She said she hadn’t seen any pictures that showed the magnitude of the Nazi atrocities.

        This is pure, absolute bullshit, unless perhaps she was from GDR. German history classes focus very heavily on WW2, and especially on the atrocities perpetrated by Germany during it. A visit to the concentration camp museums is mandatory.

        1. avatar NYC2AZ says:

          Good to know. I don’t remember if she was from East or West, but this was ’97, so it would’ve been a while since the curtain came down. I always wondered if she did it because she was embarrassed or something. I never asked anyone while I was in Germany. Not really something I figured I’d bring up in polite company.

        2. avatar germanguy says:

          Even in 1997 she had to hear some of that already. Most exchange students from my country go abroad in the later years, where the history of the second world war was taught, even in 1997 and in the east. Also I have to call bullshit once more: Even th GDR taught about Hitler and especially his crimes, my own history teacher was a student in the 1960’s in east Germany, they had to go to Warsaw and visits in KZ’s were mandatory, but the difference was in the lessons to be learned from that were different then they are taught now. It was just heavily influenced by soviet propaganda.

        3. avatar int19h says:

          >> Even th GDR taught about Hitler and especially his crimes, my own history teacher was a student in the 1960’s in east Germany, they had to go to Warsaw and visits in KZ’s were mandatory, but the difference was in the lessons to be learned from that were different then they are taught now. It was just heavily influenced by soviet propaganda.

          From what I’ve heard, the crucial difference is where the blame was directed, basically. In GDR there was a very clear separation between the “fascist state” and the German people, and all the talk was about how the bad people (i.e. “fascists”) did them, and then the good people (i.e. communists) came and liberated Germany from the bad people, so now it’s all great. In other words, that the nation as a whole did not bear any responsibility. In FRG, it was not so separated, and it was acknowledged that the nation as a whole perpetrated what was done under Nazis, and so some degree of personal responsibility was shared by everyone.

      2. avatar Kyle says:

        It’s Japan I believe that whitewashes the history of their atrocities committed during WWII, not Germany.

  41. avatar lowell says:

    Yes, go home Mr. German. And while you’re at it, since Germany is so generous to immigrants right now can you take the populations of Baltimore, Chicago, NYC, Los Angeles, Seatle, Washington DC, and Boston with you?

    1. avatar Gunr says:

      Does that include our “undocumented” friends from May-he-ko?

  42. avatar Freeheel says:

    I did Nazi that coming…

  43. avatar Gunr says:

    I’d like to see this guy hash it out with Herr Trumph, for 5 minutes.

  44. avatar Kyle says:

    The irony is that Germany has Nazism so fresh in its mind still that the German people are very much against having any kind of truly offensive-capable, powerful military. They do not trust the German government with having that kind of military capability, because of what happened with the Nazis.

    So Americans do not trust the government having a monopoly on arms, but are generally okay with the American government commanding the most powerful military the world has ever seen.

    Germans, by contrast, do not trust the government with a powerful military, but are generally okay with the German government having a monopoly on arms.

    So really, both Americans and Germans are distrustful of their government becoming a tyranny—in fact, Germany possibly moreso.

    They also outlawed Mein Kampf in Germany out of fear of its creating the Nazis again, and now, finally, they are allowing it to be published again in Germany, but only with numerous notes and additions that point out the nonsense of the book and explain why it’s wrong, but which thus also quadruple the length of the book.

    Yet Germany is a “modern” state. One would think being so “modern,” that silly fears over tyrannies forming would be only for the paranoid (eye roll). The term “modern” is also nonsense. We have been in “modern” times since the Renaissance era. It was said in the late 19th century, I think in 1887 or so, that, “Every era thinks it’s the modern age, but this one really is.”

    What seems “modern” at one point can seem quaint and old only a few decades later.

  45. avatar Brian says:

    Stockholm syndrome, plain and simple.
    When the repressed are given a taste of true freedom, they wish not to be free, as that means making decisions for themselves, and they can’t cope with it.
    Choice, and the consequences from those choices, scare those around us, so they try to change us to fit their narratives. When they see us not willing to give up our freedoms, they cry and throw tantrums because they aren’t getting their way.

  46. avatar Chris T from KY says:

    This is why so many Americans are against foreigners coming here. They don’t want to adopt our ways and become American. They want our money and want to change us to the sh!t hole place they fled. These people are parasites. They bring nothing new only old backward ideas.

  47. avatar Specktor22 says:

    “Citizens know that the state authority will protect them.”
    Um where were the authorities when I was being held at knifepoint by a meth-head. Oh yeah, they were nowhere to be seen, but my Beretta 92 sure protected me. Man meth makes people run real fast 😀

  48. Weren’t his ancestors responsible for TWO world wars AND the extinction of 6 million people? If not his ancestors directly didn’t they just stand by and watch the stupidity of the government ruin a nation TWICE. I will call German journalist Volker Ter Haseborg exactly what he is a MORON!
    Am I the only person here that is tired of the opinion of stupid slaves from other countries? We have the 1st Amendment and I will call you stupid, ignorant or any other word that applies every time you express an opinion that violates MY right to be left alone. mrpresident2016.com

    1. avatar 2Asux says:

      But who are the real maroons?

      This journo knows how to live in a command state, knows how to subordinate his life to Der Vaterland, knows how to get the most of a welfare society. We on the other hand have no such skill sets.

      The POTG are NOT THE MAJORITY !! We are the shrinking minority. The election results of the last 40 years demonstrate that the people of this country either embrace stateism, or don’t much care. Not talking about random burps of conservatism (patriotism?), talking about the cultural shifts that move us closer to a socialist/fascist nation. The two most recent burps of common sense ended-up suppressed by the ruling elites. That is how it happens. And don’t confuse the Republican club with conservative values. Repubs have used the “we are not as bad as them” to slowly take the nation down the same path as the Dems (leftists all). The Dems offer swift death of America of old, the Repubs offer a slower demise. Same destination.

      Having guns (even alot of guns) is not protection against the political slide in this country. If the gun culture equated to the anti-socialist wing of politics, why are not the socialist politicians not turned-out of office in mass numbers, at every level? Shouldn’t there be enough people of principle to override every vestige of leftist thinking? We are losing ground because people of principle are a dying breed, and because few people actually vote…and those who do are even a minority of a minority. By now, the POTG should have risen-up and taken back the country.

      We are a nation where the people who work for a living are outnumbered by people who vote for a living. Sadly, the majority of those who still work for a living are all to supportive of those who do not.

      Enjoy what freedom you have left, because they are coming for you (us). First will be the tax on ammunition, then all firearms will have an NFA tax stamp required. Then will come legislation that prohibits insurance companies from providing liability insurance to gun owners/users…which will shutdown private gun ranges and even gun stores. Somewhere along the line, the commerce clause, Article 1, Section 8, Clause 3 of the U.S. Constitution, will be used to stop interstate movement of anything related to gun ownership (the commerce clause is how the feds finally extended civil rights to every state, all over a toothpick). From that event will come roadside safety checks which confiscate unsafe tools and implements (guns and stuff).

      And through it all, the POTG will be forced to accept the inevitable, or try to wage resistance amidst a society hostile to that resistance (rebellions cannot succeed without popular local support…our own revolution depended on people being sympathetic, even though the majority might have preferred to be left alone).

      Leftists never give-up. Non-leftists want a situation where victory is so compelling that the left decides it doesn’t want to keep agitating for change. Non-leftists want to solve problems and go about living their lives. Leftists have no life outside their political agenda.

Write a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

button to share on facebook
button to tweet
button to share via email