My idea of trustworthiness is a tad different. I have a hard time trusting someone who's willing to place dedicated young men and women in direct harm in order to meet some vague and fabricated objective (That would be Iraq if you're scratching your head). Pales in comparison to how someone feels about gun control.
Obama SAYS he supports gun rights but how we votes says very differently.
Who the fuck cares? Gun rights go straight to the bottom of the list in this election.
I care. Maybe your life and the life of your family doesn't matter to you, but it does to me.
But then again, liberals were never known to have courage.
The CONSTITUTION matters, and the 2nd amendment is part of it.
where were you when Georgie was wiping his youknowwhat with it?
I don't particularly like the war in Iraq, nor did I like the Patriot Act.
I am a LIbertarian. (sigh...I have to say this OVER and OVER)
The fact I support gun rights doesn't mean I supported Bush 100% on every issue.
But the fact is, McCain is more agreeable to my values than Obama.
Plain and simple.
And Obama is more agreeable to my values than McCain. (And I'm agnostic on the gun issue)
This what I mean by priorities...
You don't particularly like the war in Iraq - which has severely weakened national defense and ruined countless lives for absolutely nothing...but you're willing to vote against someone committed to ending that war because you disagree with his view of gun control??? You're more concerned about your ability to defend yourself against something that will likely never happen than you are about the military's diminished ability to protect against a constant domestic threat? lol....
So much for logic.
-- Modified on 10/27/2008 1:51:26 PM
I most likely won't ever need to have an abortion, either, but that doesn't mean I want the right diminshed.
The fact I most likely will never need to go on trial for a crime doesn't mean I want trial by jury amended from the Constitution.
That's MY logic. get it now?
The 2nd amendment is just as part of that document as ANY...free speech, trial by jury, right to privacy...
I am not votng to abolish a freedom because I want a war ended.
Some things are bigger than our own wants.
...of how you'll vote. You do realize that you're voting for a pro-life candidate who thinks Roe v Wade as a "bad decision" (his own words). Are you also aware that a few seats on the Supreme Court will likely open up during this next term?
Sounds like someone is terribly misinformed. Have a seat now.
-- Modified on 10/27/2008 2:04:01 PM
WOW, it took three whole posts for the condescension and narcissism to come out. What's next?
and you sound like the arrogant asshole you are.
But since you'rw bringing up abortion, I know how John MCCain feels on the issue. No "misinformation" here, and I NEVER "sit down".
The fact is, abortion is not that important to me.
I am pro-choice, but if comes down to my gun rights, capitalism, and such...I am down with the conservatives.
I don't expect you to understand, but abortion is ONE issue. I also don't expect you to be able to grasp the point my post made.
End of discussion for me.
(I don't cast pearls before swine)
Birth Control is considered (especially Palin and her constituents) to be a FORM OF ABORTION.
I'm sorry but the line of work you do, it should be ON THE TOP OF YOUR LIST.
Gun control? REALLY? GIVE ME A BREAK.
Um, I had my tubes tied 13 yrs ago, so no, it's not much of an issue for me.
I care, yes.... but it's not my number 1 issue. (and wouldn't be no matter whose running for office)
You might want to read this
While I'm sure you're skillfully trained in combat operations and use of weaponry to protect your family and home...that doesn't take away from the fact that nobody except an eroding partisan base gives a damn. There are numerous issues that trump interpretation of the 2nd amendment.
I happen to agree that gun control is mostly pointless - but I just don't give enough of a fuck to vote based on where someone stands on the issue; nor does most of the country, thank God. I'm not really sure how being indifferent to some gun nut's ability to carry, own, and use weapons makes me a coward. I'd say it makes me intelligent enough to prioritize what matters.
Good luck with the ensuing battle that seems to be brewing in your front yard?
-- Modified on 10/27/2008 1:37:58 PM
Seeing how there are 1.4 million violent crimes in this country every year, it seems to matter to me.
To leave people defenseless in the face of violent crime is an issue that MATTERS, despite the fact it may not be popular with SOME people.
(about 80 million ppl in this country own arms, so I doubt that your assertion that "nobody gives a fuck" is entirely true) We are fast becoming a country that doesn't 'give a fuck" about what truly matters, and concerned with what doesn't.
(look at all the koolaid drinking retards voting for a socialist pig, because he speaks eloquently, without knowing a damned thing about what he really stands for)
Something else liberals don't get....substance over symbolism.
My idea of trustworthiness is a tad different. I have a hard time trusting someone who's willing to place dedicated young men and women in direct harm in order to meet some vague and fabricated objective (That would be Iraq if you're scratching your head). Pales in comparison to how someone feels about gun control.
here's the guy that declared unequivocally that he's no George Bush
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J_thonzk7-M
The economy will get fixed. I just hope we don't wake up in a country that people don't recognize.
I would just like to say that in 1993, during a recession, the World Trade Center was bombed by Moslem radicals. The president at the time thought that "it was the economy stupid," so he put that on a back burner and treated it as just another criminal matter that the courts could handle. They got the people who did the bombing, although the "masterminds" were never seriously sought after.
This resulted in what we call an "ooops,maybe we should have done more" on 9-11.
Today, it looks like we are in the middle of an economic crisis, and we are. Although restaurants are full, houses still sell at over 3 mil in L.A., and the hotels in Vegas are jammed. (Just there. I Lost.)
But remember, we were in the depression in 1939, so we focused on the economy, stupid. Within 2 years we realized, on a day that will live in infamy, that the economy, no matter how bad it is, is not the only problem.
Of course there are other pressing issues...and none of them are gun control or a lack thereof; which is sort of what this particular thread is about. Perhaps this would have been a more effective point under a thread that attempted to define the economy as the only issue worthy of discussion; but no one has made that implication. At least not in any of the posts I'VE seen.
an ignorant sonofabitch and a traitor to boot. Get a job and get your stinking hands out of your neighbors pockets. Apparently you see this election as a means of legalized robbery. That is excatly why guns are essential.
..emergency. So you're wrong again. Just because Obama hasn't voted GUNS GUNS GUNS GUNS does NOT mean he supports an across-the-board gun ban.
Do us all a favor and get your information from FACTUALLY BASED sources.
This man does NOT care about gun rights. PERIOD.
READ HIS VOTING RECORD. and just because he doesn't vote 100% against guns (just 99.9%) doesn't make him some saviour for the gun lobby.
Please.
He's a marxist pig. Plain and simple. Anyone who speaks about 'spreading the wealth" is not likely to support my right of self defense.
It's just the socialist way.
Btw, your own source there says that Obama voted against allowing self defense in the HOME.
Maybe it's you that need to read more carefully. That sounds pretty anti-gun to me. (anti self defense too)
One more area McCain has dropped the ball. I seem to recall there are 40 million gun owners and that's probably a conservative estimate.
Gun owners should witness the shooting gallery Chicago has become. Law abiding people are disarmed and the criminal population hunts them as sitting ducks.
and that's how Obama would have it on a grand scale if we let him.
Self defense is a RIGHT, not a privlege.
Hunter all of your points are legitimate. I for one am trained in the use of weapons, and if the shit ever hits the fan I have all the "currency" I need in my basement.
Don't waste your time defending your position to that beligerant assclown. He is not worth a response.
Senator Obama has waffled on the issue.
Which either way is more of a reason to stop with the negativity and maintain fillibuster capability in the senate. Everyone is worried so much about Pelosi and her ilk. This will give them a blank check. Just like W. Sounds fair.
McCain's campaign tactics could well prove disaterous. Even if he does get elected, which IM humble O. Is a snowballs chance in hell after everyone realizes the proof of citizenship thing is a stunt.
-- Modified on 10/27/2008 2:12:39 PM
I let my dues run out on my beloved NRA membership this year precisely because of the nutball fear mongering they were perpetrating in regards to Obama's run.
The fuck'n Supreme Court just ruled a few short months ago, siding with the "RIGHT to individual ownership".
Now that doesn't mean we let our guard totally down; but it certainly puts a hell of an obstacle in front of a new President that already has his plate overflowing with problems to solve.
The Clinton era anti-Second Amendment climate was a huge factor in the Dems losing so many seats as well as the oval office in 2000. It's gonna take about 20 years and a "Columbine" per week for 52 straight weeks before they consider getting seriously pissy at gun ownership again.
I can understand "men" supporting McSAME, but women? Please. GIVE ME A BREAK
1. McSAME/PALIN are Pro-Life, and Palin *specifically* wants to OVERTURN ROE V WADE.
2. McSAME/PALIN and constitutes consider many forms of Birth Control as FORMS of ABORTION. (Give me a break).
3. McSAME/PALIN say it's ok for Viagra/Cialis/etc. to be insured, but not Birth Control? GIVE ME A BREAK
4. McSAME/PALIN want to continue the same baloney "abstinence only" sex education which has shown TIME AND TIME again to be COMPLETELY ineffective.
Yet, you continue to "buy" the logic that Obama is going to take away "your guns?" Give me a break. Seriously, get real.
I know this may be hard to imagine, but abortion is not one of my main issues.
YES, I give more a damn about being able to defend my family than obtaining an abortion, which mostly can be avoided, anyway.
So, yeah.... get real, seriously.
An abortion won't save me if a criminal break into my home. A gun WILL.
Because you find something unimportant doesn't mean we all do.
Obama CANNOT remove the 2nd ammendment WITHOUT the support of 2/3rds of the House and Senate. You REALLY think this is possible? Yes, even among Democrats a HUGE majority of them are BIG supporters of gun rights. And this doesn't even begin to the ENORMOUS media coverage that would occur if this were to happen.
On the FLIP side, the overturning of Roe V Wade? Well, considering that the NEXT president will get potentially two NEW Supreme Court Judges picks. I'd say that this is a MUCH easier thing to change.
GET IT IN YOUR HEAD. OBAMA IS NOT GOING TO TAKE YOUR GUNS AWAY.
It's amazing that you've bought that propaganda, when if you look at LOGIC and REALITY, you'd realize that it is a TALL order for OBAMA to make THAT kind of change.
Also, with the down economy, the war in Iraq & Afghanistan, Middle East Crisis, Energy Crisis, Global Warming, I HIGHLY doubt that TAKING AWAY YOUR GUNS is even on his mind.
-- Modified on 10/28/2008 6:52:31 PM
-- Modified on 10/28/2008 7:44:42 PM