Romney will sign an assault weapons ban. [Archive] - Glock Talk

PDA

View Full Version : Romney will sign an assault weapons ban.


frank4570
10-07-2012, 18:03
I just want to make sure this is absolutely clear.
Romney says if he is elected he will sign an assault weapons ban if one is brought to him. Just like george bush said he would. The republican party is not really pro-second amendment. The guy who is in favor of an assault weapons ban is the guy who will be picking supreme court justices.
Better than the dems? Sure, but not much.
I'll be voting for a guy and party that does not really support the second amendment.
I wish people would stop pretending republicans are pro-second amendment.
Romney supports assault weapons ban? - YouTube

JBnTX
10-07-2012, 18:09
Romney is still a better choice than Obama.

:tongueout:

MAC702
10-07-2012, 18:10
So every four years you can vote for a liberal of one flavor or another, or you can help support a third party, showing the Republicans why they deserve to lose, and actually start making a difference in the long term.

sheriff733
10-07-2012, 18:14
I want to vote 3rd party this time, but my priority is getting the terrorist out of the White House. Next time I'll vote 3rd party for sure.


Outdoor Hub mobile, the outdoor information engine

countrygun
10-07-2012, 18:18
Given Obama's appointee Holder and his words on the topic when speaking for the Administration I find no difference.



"On February 25, 2009 newly sworn-in Attorney General Eric Holder repeated the Obama administration's desire to reinstate the Federal Assault Weapons Ban.[18] The mention came in response to a question, about 20 minutes into a joint press conference with DEA Acting Administrator Michele Leonhart, discussing efforts to crack down on Mexican drug cartels. Attorney General Holder said: "[...] there are just a few gun-related changes that we would like to make, and among them would be to reinstitute the ban on the sale of assault weapons."[19]"

(from Wiki)

Since that clearly illustrates the current Administration's well known attitude I can only conclude that the OP of this thread is just another 3rd party Wanker.:yawn:

frank4570
10-07-2012, 18:22
So every four years you can vote for a liberal of one flavor or another, or you can help support a third party, showing the Republicans why they deserve to lose, and actually start making a difference in the long term.

You can vote for 3rd party if you want to. It isn't going to make any difference either way. You are mistaken if you think the rest of the republicans are going to pay attention to you.
The republicans want the president to be somebody who is not pro-second amendment. They do not hold the same views as you. Leaving a party where you are not wanted is not going to make them feel bad.

jdavionic
10-07-2012, 18:23
I did not support him in the primaries due to a couple of reasons - this was one. However, he will not compromise his base. He's smart enough to understand that would end it for his political future.

Contrast that with Obama who has tried to backdoor restricting gun rights with his EPA nazis and other means. His base wants no part of the 2A. In a second term, Obama will pursue many objectives that were too controversial for the first term. I'm convinced that attacking gun rights is near the top of his list.

As for the third party issue...again. The time to fight for your viable independent candidate has come & gone. The reality is that the race is between two. One of them is the radical incumbent who will win unless the challenger gets enough votes. A vote for any candidate other than Romney will help Obama. Yea, it's a tough pill to swallow...but that's the choices.

concretefuzzynuts
10-07-2012, 18:26
What is the purpose of your post op? To get people to vote for Obama? To get people to waste their vote for a third party and in act vote for Obama? To bad mouth Romney?

I am asking as a libertarian since 1984, who voted Obama in by voting for Ron Paul in 2008. By voting third party you vote for Obama. The choice is quite clear this go around.

LASTRESORT20
10-07-2012, 18:29
berry & his`implanted lemming fools` throughout the gov. are destroying the country....first things first!

Not worried about Romney.....`or` even the closet liberals/Lemmings attacking him.....

G29Reload
10-07-2012, 18:31
I wish people would stop pretending republicans are pro-second amendment.

I wish you Obama supporters would stop posting ancient videos of another time, another place and another election.

In the current era, he has committed to Uncle Ted, no less, that he will sign no antigun legislation.

So take your fail propaganda elsewhere.

He was being interviewed by Tim Russert, for gods sake! ( Dead more than 4 years ago!)

onebigelf
10-07-2012, 18:35
So every four years you can vote for a liberal of one flavor or another, or you can help support a third party, showing the Republicans why they deserve to lose, and actually start making a difference in the long term.

As someone who is active in my local REC (Republican Executive Committee), let me tell you that those of you who are voting 3rd party and dropping out of the GOP aren't showing the party jack, and the ONLY difference you will make is to help the candidate furthest from your views.

Let me explain reality.

The party, if all of the Libertarians, Constitution Party, and conservative Independents got involved, would be about 35-40% conservatives, about 25% big government RINOs (the ones we mostly hate that are fine with big, intrusive government as long as they are the ones running it) and about 35-40% "moderate" Republicans. When all the conservatives get their panties in a twist and go off to be independents and Libertarians and "teach the Republican Party a lesson", here is what happens. The party is made of of less conservatives, the moderates split among multiple candidates, and the RINOs can win the primaries with 25% of the vote. As a party, the GOP doesn't say, "Gosh, how can we get the conservatives back." Instead they say, "Gosh, how can we attract moderate Independents and Democrats."

You want to make a difference? The get back in the game and encourage conservative candidates to run, then vote for them in the primary. The party doesn't choose the candidates, the voters do. When conservatives abandon the party or don't vote in the primaries because they have better things to do, the moderates and RINOs pick the candidate. It's that simple.

Or you can keep whining and ensure the election of the candidate MOST diametrically opposed to your views because the candidate closer to your views is "the lesser of two evils".

John

concretefuzzynuts
10-07-2012, 18:36
We pioneer Libertarians, once had the idea that we could change things, that if enough of us made a stand we could rid the government of the established ruling elite and get back to the constitution.

I still believe that. But to hold fast to that belief and vote for a party that can't possibly win in this election, shows that our party is just as bad and ideologue as the others.

The greater good FOR THE COUNTRY dictates we remove the worst of the two then get back to our constitutional message.

To think this is the election to change all is blind to the needs of change in our country.

countrygun
10-07-2012, 18:52
OBE explained it very well from the political stand point and CFN explained it from the practical standpoint.

There is NO argument left folks, only self-delusion.

frank4570
10-07-2012, 18:54
What is the purpose of your post op? To get people to vote for Obama? To get people to waste their vote for a third party and in act vote for Obama? To bad mouth Romney?

I am asking as a libertarian since 1984, who voted Obama in by voting for Ron Paul in 2008. By voting third party you vote for Obama. The choice is quite clear this go around.

Voting for romney is voting to have a president who supports an assault weapons ban, that is my only point.
Is there a better option? No.

coastal4974
10-07-2012, 18:55
The Obama will give us sharia law.

Snowman92D
10-07-2012, 18:58
I wish you Obama supporters would stop posting ancient videos of another time, another place and another election.

Beat me to it...thanks! :thumbsup:

stopatrain
10-07-2012, 18:58
The second amendment won't even matter if Obama gets another 4 years.

concretefuzzynuts
10-07-2012, 19:01
Voting for romney is voting to have a president who supports an assault weapons ban, that is my only point.
Is there a better option? No.

Sugest you read post #12

nmstew
10-07-2012, 19:05
I want to vote 3rd party this time, but my priority is getting the terrorist out of the White House. Next time I'll vote 3rd party for sure.


Outdoor Hub mobile, the outdoor information engine

Here! Here!

frank4570
10-07-2012, 19:07
Sugest you read post #12

I agree. But you an I are severely outvoted.

frank4570
10-07-2012, 19:11
Here! Here!

It will always be "THE MOST IMPORTANT ELECTION OF ALL TIME." Every time.

GlockinNJ
10-07-2012, 19:11
The best way to assure we keep our 2A rights intact is to support the gun lobbies that controls the Congress.

The President doesn't make laws, he just signs them.

concretefuzzynuts
10-07-2012, 19:12
I agree. But you an I are severely outvoted.

By who? Consider the amount of liberal operatives here for these few months. Then consider the teat sucking lazy class who are so wrapped up in Honey Boo Boo and who dances with what stars.

This is the first of many defining votes that will lead to change. Positive change.

countrygun
10-07-2012, 19:22
By who? Consider the amount of liberal operatives here for these few months. Then consider the teat sucking lazy class who are so wrapped up in Honey Boo Boo and who dances with what stars.

This is the first of many defining votes that will lead to change. Positive change.

Just lay aside the recokulous notion of a their party win in this election and examine what a Romney victory could mean for "conservatives".

Now there are more folks on the left putting the stamp of Conservative on Romney than there are libertarians (or whatever they are this week) saying he isn't.

If Romney wins and manages to make things even a bit better in this Country (hard to do worse) those who have listened to the left migh just get a softer view of what they call "conservatism" something like "Gee Romney isn't so bad this Conservative thing turned some of the problems around".

It sure is a better picture than another 4 of Obama.

Play it smart and position yourself to take some little sliver of the the good if Romney succeeds. If Obama wins and thereis any way, the third party will take the blame. Simply history repeating itself another time.

concretefuzzynuts
10-07-2012, 19:30
Picture a block party.


Conservatives and libertarians are cousins. Republicans are the relatives at the party. Democrats are the drunk brother in laws. Liberals are the envious neighbors who want to call the cops because the party is too much fun. Socialists are the child molesting clown hired for the party who needs the beat down.

Ruble Noon
10-07-2012, 19:34
Just lay aside the recokulous notion of a their party win in this election and examine what a Romney victory could mean for "conservatives".

Now there are more folks on the left putting the stamp of Conservative on Romney than there are libertarians (or whatever they are this week) saying he isn't.

If Romney wins and manages to make things even a bit better in this Country (hard to do worse) those who have listened to the left migh just get a softer view of what they call "conservatism" something like "Gee Romney isn't so bad this Conservative thing turned some of the problems around".

It sure is a better picture than another 4 of Obama.

Play it smart and position yourself to take some little sliver of the the good if Romney succeeds. If Obama wins and thereis any way, the third party will take the blame. Simply history repeating itself another time.

Very possibly the end of the republican party.

F350
10-07-2012, 19:36
The second amendment won't even matter if Obama gets another 4 years.
Nor the rest of the constitution that he blatantly ignores now....

Beware his own words :"This is my last election; after November I'll have more flexibility".

IvanVic
10-07-2012, 19:39
I'd be willing to bet that he does NOT sign an assault weapons ban. Any takers?

MtnBiker
10-07-2012, 19:39
What is the purpose of your post op? To get people to vote for Obama? To get people to waste their vote for a third party and in act vote for Obama? To bad mouth Romney?

I am asking as a libertarian since 1984, who voted Obama in by voting for Ron Paul in 2008. By voting third party you vote for Obama. The choice is quite clear this go around.

I think you called it out very accurately here.

Here's another thought. I really don't think Romney is interested in pursuing more anti-2nd amendment laws, BUT if he is...

He'll still need to focus first on MANY other issues that are more important. The economy, healthcare, the middle east, the national debt...

Only an idiot would take the Presidency at this point and use all his energy to install pet legislation; like Obamacare for instance. :cool:

Given all that, I STILL don't think Romney has any plans to beat down the second amendment. I guess the first indication will be after he is elected; if he keeps Eric Holder as Attorney General.

concretefuzzynuts
10-07-2012, 19:44
if he keeps Eric Holder as Attorney General.

My thought... not a chance.

MOST ALL ADMINISTRATIVE CHANGES INVOLVE MAJOR CHANGES AT THE TOP LEVEL AND OUTSPOKEN SUB LEVELS ARE REMOVED.

seed
10-07-2012, 20:16
As much as I hate lobbying, it is the lobbyists who lobby the members of the House Representatives and the Senate who make the most difference. Once a politician goes national, he will not like the 2nd Ammendment but will respond to members of his party who pressure him because they are vulnerable to their own constituencies.

This is all obvious and known by everybody here, but sometimes gun owners kid themselves into thinking that any president is happy about having a lot of free-thinking gun-owners who theoretically ultimately pose a threat to his position of power.

Providence
10-07-2012, 20:19
NRA endorsed Romney. They wouldn't have done that without assurances.

But... I don't expect anything to be given to us. We will need to hold the Republican's feet to the fire. What will we do if Obama is reelected? Who's feet will we hold to the fire.

frank4570
10-07-2012, 20:19
By who? Consider the amount of liberal operatives here for these few months. Then consider the teat sucking lazy class who are so wrapped up in Honey Boo Boo and who dances with what stars.

This is the first of many defining votes that will lead to change. Positive change.

I voted for a pro-constitution guy in the republican primary, I'll bet you did too. It was made clear that the republican party has no interest in such people.

G29Reload
10-07-2012, 20:21
Voting for romney is voting to have a president who supports an assault weapons ban, that is my only point..

And that point is wrong. Incorrect.

He may have at one time, but does no longer and has said as much.

So your entire post is a fail. Stop parroting a lie.

concretefuzzynuts
10-07-2012, 20:30
edited. This ended up in the wrong thread somehow.

evlbruce
10-07-2012, 20:33
And that point is wrong. Incorrect.

He may have at one time, but does no longer and has said as much.

So your entire post is a fail. Stop parroting a lie.

Find a link; where has Mittens said that signing the MA AWB was a mistake?

I'd be willing to bet that he does NOT sign an assault weapons ban. Any takers?

I'd take that. Mittens will reverse himself again the moment it becomes politically advantageous for him to do so. Say for instance that the polling on gun control flips.

He's done it before there's no reason to believe that he wouldn't do it again.

G29Reload
10-07-2012, 20:44
Find a link; where has Mittens said that signing the MA AWB was a mistake?.

Either learn to read or pay attention.

countrygun
10-07-2012, 20:49
Find a link; where has Mittens said that signing the MA AWB was a mistake?



.

Find a link and show me that the state legislature didn't have enough votes to override a veto.

Show me a link that proves he didn't cooperate in exchange for having some of the more onerous parts removed.

Show me a sign that you have read any of the posts in theis forum that have addressed this,....wait...don't. I'd rather think you are ignorant than spinning up something you know is false.

JFrame
10-07-2012, 20:52
I'd be willing to bet that he does NOT sign an assault weapons ban. Any takers?


...And that would be predicated on the assumption that an assault weapons bill even reaches President Romney's desk in the first place.

Coupled with the NRA's endorsement of Romney, I find him a safe bet not to mess with the 2A (even excluding the other all-important consideration of the nomination of conservative SCOTUS judges).


.

countrygun
10-07-2012, 20:54
...And that would be predicated on the assumption that an assault weapons bill even reaches President Romney's desk in the first place.

Coupled with the NRA's endorsement of Romney, I find him a safe bet not to mess with the 2A (even excluding the other all-important consideration of the nomination of conservative SCOTUS judges).


.

Add to it Obama "will have more flexibility after the election"

and Romney would be trying to be set up for a second term.

stevelyn
10-07-2012, 21:27
At least Romney would be up front and honest about it rather than back-dooring us like the Kenyan pig has been trying to do.

Syclone538
10-07-2012, 21:29
As someone who is active in my local REC (Republican Executive Committee), let me tell you that those of you who are voting 3rd party and dropping out of the GOP aren't showing the party jack, and the ONLY difference you will make is to help the candidate furthest from your views.

Let me explain reality.

The party, if all of the Libertarians, Constitution Party, and conservative Independents got involved, would be about 35-40% conservatives, about 25% big government RINOs (the ones we mostly hate that are fine with big, intrusive government as long as they are the ones running it) and about 35-40% "moderate" Republicans. When all the conservatives get their panties in a twist and go off to be independents and Libertarians and "teach the Republican Party a lesson", here is what happens. The party is made of of less conservatives, the moderates split among multiple candidates, and the RINOs can win the primaries with 25% of the vote. As a party, the GOP doesn't say, "Gosh, how can we get the conservatives back." Instead they say, "Gosh, how can we attract moderate Independents and Democrats."

You want to make a difference? The get back in the game and encourage conservative candidates to run, then vote for them in the primary. The party doesn't choose the candidates, the voters do. When conservatives abandon the party or don't vote in the primaries because they have better things to do, the moderates and RINOs pick the candidate. It's that simple.

Or you can keep whining and ensure the election of the candidate MOST diametrically opposed to your views because the candidate closer to your views is "the lesser of two evils".

John

I always do vote for the least gov and most freedom in the Republican primary, then vote for the least gov and most freedom in the general.

Diesel McBadass
10-07-2012, 21:31
Third parties may get more votes if they put forth good candidates, most third party candidates suck.

frank4570
10-07-2012, 21:54
At least Romney would be up front and honest about it rather than back-dooring us like the Kenyan pig has been trying to do.

You think romney tells the truth?? Seriously??

wjv
10-07-2012, 22:05
That video is 5 years old. . .
I guess in your universe people aren't allow to change their opinions. . .

Looks like your goal is to help Obama win by pushing lies.

countrygun
10-07-2012, 22:13
Very possibly the end of the republican party.

Does it matter that much to you if it is called "The Republican Party"?

You won't be happy if it is reworked by constitutionalists, or you will go to a party with a new name, even if you don't know that it is backed by the same people, if it just has a different name?


BTW fr all the folks whinning away about Romney and guns, who would you rather have in the #2 slot, Ryan or Biden?

GAFinch
10-07-2012, 22:21
Romney's not a gun enthusiast, but that doesn't mean he hates guns either. Gary Johnson seems to be the exact same way. As for the Democrat candidate, communists tend to hate guns, since disarmed citizens are subjects. Mormons tend to be big on personal responsibility, fiscal responsibility, and survival prep. I'll happily vote for him so at least there's a chance that we can avoid an economic disaster at the beginning of the year.

FFR Spyder GT
10-07-2012, 22:30
In the current era, he has committed to Uncle Ted, no less, that he will sign no antigun legislation.

!)

Just like Big George he will not sign "antigun legislation" he will sign EO and BATF regs that ban certain guns.

Big George started the AWB of 1989 BEFORE he moved into the White House and if elected Romney will do the same thing.

Part of the core "Fundamental Beliefs" of the Mormon Cult is to be armed and to unarm your enemy, which, like the Muslims is anyone that isn't part of your Cult.

Zombie Surgeon
10-07-2012, 22:34
I just want to make sure this is absolutely clear.


Yes it is pretty clear:

http://mlkshk.com/r/C0QE

countrygun
10-07-2012, 22:35
Just like Big George he will not sign "antigun legislation" he will sign EO and BATF regs that ban certain guns.

Big George started the AWB of 1989 BEFORE he moved into the White House and if elected Romney will do the same thing.

Part of the core "Fundamental Beliefs" of the Mormon Cult is to be armed and to unarm your enemy, which, like the Muslims is anyone that isn't part of your Cult.


""On February 25, 2009 newly sworn-in Attorney General Eric Holder repeated the Obama administration's desire to reinstate the Federal Assault Weapons Ban.[18] The mention came in response to a question, about 20 minutes into a joint press conference with DEA Acting Administrator Michele Leonhart, discussing efforts to crack down on Mexican drug cartels. Attorney General Holder said: "[...] there are just a few gun-related changes that we would like to make, and among them would be to reinstitute the ban on the sale of assault weapons."[19]"

(from Wiki)


Of course you are now trying to jump on the "Morman" topic as it was predicted your ilk would when Obama got spanked in the debate.

Tell your buddies at DU that we are a couple of steps ahead of them.

Paul7
10-07-2012, 22:40
Romney does not currently support an AWB. By your reasoning we shouldn't have voted for Reagan since he used to be a Democrat.

http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/260411-nra-endorses-romney-calls-him-only-hope-for-firearms-freedom

Gunnut 45/454
10-07-2012, 22:49
frank4570
Then stay home and don't vote! Nice video of then GOV Rommney!:rofl:

alabaster
10-07-2012, 23:28
Oh this is killing me. I have heard too many people say "I would vote Libertarian but_____." If not now then when? I think we're making too many concessions with these 2 parties. I really don't get how people are buying that Romney's saying he's "Pro-gun" nowadays. I'm calling BS on that one.

countrygun
10-07-2012, 23:33
Oh this is killing me. I have heard too many people say "I would vote Libertarian but_____." If not now then when? I think we're making too many concessions with these 2 parties. I really don't get how people are buying that Romney's saying he's "Pro-gun" nowadays. I'm calling BS on that one.

I have voted 3rd party in the past but never again. the whole concept has been taken over by muddleheaded twits that stand no chance of being elected and drooling followers who's wild-eyed look scares rational people.

gwalchmai
10-08-2012, 05:31
I just want to make sure this is absolutely clear.Thanks, Frank. In this and many other threads you've made it abundantly clear that if Republicans don't choose Ron Paul you'll vote for Obama.

I think we got it. Too bad you guys didn't choose holding your breath until you turn blue as your childish tantrum instead. :upeyes:

sheriff733
10-08-2012, 05:56
It will always be "THE MOST IMPORTANT ELECTION OF ALL TIME." Every time.

No, it won't.

I've never felt my way of life was threatened as I do by Obama.


Outdoor Hub mobile, the outdoor information engine

Bren
10-08-2012, 06:03
Romney is still a better choice than Obama.

:tongueout:

Yep - even with him saying that, he's a much better and safer choice for guns than Obama.

AtlantaR6
10-08-2012, 06:04
Romney is from Mass and Obama from Chicago. 2 of the strictest gun law states in the nation.

I'm just saying...

eracer
10-08-2012, 06:24
Contrast that with Obama who has tried to backdoor restricting gun rights with his EPA nazis...Please explain the connection between the EPA and our 2A rights.

Thanks!

sheriff733
10-08-2012, 06:32
Please explain the connection between the EPA and our 2A rights.

Thanks!

They both have A in them.


Outdoor Hub mobile, the outdoor information engine

cowboy1964
10-08-2012, 06:50
I don't believe Romney currently supports a new AWB. That video is quite old. If someone has info to the contrary please post.

Regardless, who do you want appointing the next Supreme Court justice, Romney or Obama? That's what it comes down to.

ModGlock17
10-08-2012, 06:57
Saying it and doing it are two different things. Just look at Obama.

Although saying it is smart. That will get the Dems to work with him on other things, knowing that a Rep house will never send out such a bill. LOL

JFrame
10-08-2012, 07:12
Part of the core "Fundamental Beliefs" of the Mormon Cult is to be armed and to unarm your enemy, which, like the Muslims is anyone that isn't part of your Cult.


Wow -- and here, I thought your opinion that Zero won last Wednesday's debate was the stupidest thing you've ever said...

I guess y'all watched a different debate than the rest of the world watched.


.

Cambo
10-08-2012, 07:18
Frank has previously posted that he doesn't follow the news. In a perfect world, those who don't know the issues wouldn't be allowed to vote.

domin8ss
10-08-2012, 07:26
Interestingly, the NRA had endorsed Romney and Ryan. I doubt they'd do that if he wanted to ban assault rifles.

Additionally, Mormons are so pro gun that Utah has even declared an official state gun. Romney banning assault rifles would be counter to his identity.

Cavalry Doc
10-08-2012, 07:43
Third parties may get more votes if they put forth good candidates, most third party candidates suck.

This :thumbsup:


Show me a candidate that will phase out most of welfare and replace it with workfare. What is left should be a basic sustenance level, with nothing left over for nice rimz on the escalade, smartphones or cable TV.

Phase out food stamps and replace that with soup kitchens.

Audit all of the ambulatory disabled, and put the healthy back to work.

Come up with a secure version of e-verify, and prosecute the hell out of employers that hire illegals, fine companies 100 times the profit they could have made hiring illegals. Make it personally risky and financial suicide to participate in the hiring of illegal aliens. Cut off all social support for illegals, including education benefits, food stamps and welfare. They will self deport.

Dial back some of the stupid gun regulations, like the need for anything special to own or make a suppressor, SBR, front grip on a pistol etc.

National reciprocity, or a national carry license. (I know, why should we need a license, but look how many ignorant people learned something in your last CHL renewal class, until the education system catches up with mandatory firearms training beginning in Junior High, including when you can and cannot use them, we need something)



Cut military spending 20% while making it a much more lethal force, which is very possible. Build the neutron bomb. Build a few of them in fact. Boots on the ground are sometimes needed, but we really need to stop rebuilding our enemies. If we are forced into a fight, we should break them, and leave them for their neighbors to pick the burnt carcass apart.

I haven't met that candidate yet. Someone give me a call if you run into him/her.

Cavalry Doc
10-08-2012, 07:47
Interestingly, the NRA had endorsed Romney and Ryan. I doubt they'd do that if he wanted to ban assault rifles.

Additionally, Mormons are so pro gun that Utah has even declared an official state gun. Romney banning assault rifles would be counter to his identity.

He's not from Utah. He's a Massachusetts liberal. That being said, a Liberal in his first term is much more desirable than a socialist/fascist in their second/last term, especially this one.....

President Obama CAUGHT! Assures Medvedev of flexibility Nuclear missile defense after election.webm - YouTube

GAFinch
10-08-2012, 08:33
Please explain the connection between the EPA and our 2A rights.

Thanks!

Banning lead, which makes ammo expensive.

gwalchmai
10-08-2012, 08:50
This :thumbsup:


Show me a candidate that will phase out most of welfare and replace it with workfare. What is left should be a basic sustenance level, with nothing left over for nice rimz on the escalade, smartphones or cable TV.

Phase out food stamps and replace that with soup kitchens.

Audit all of the ambulatory disabled, and put the healthy back to work.

Come up with a secure version of e-verify, and prosecute the hell out of employers that hire illegals, fine companies 100 times the profit they could have made hiring illegals. Make it personally risky and financial suicide to participate in the hiring of illegal aliens. Cut off all social support for illegals, including education benefits, food stamps and welfare. They will self deport.

Dial back some of the stupid gun regulations, like the need for anything special to own or make a suppressor, SBR, front grip on a pistol etc.

National reciprocity, or a national carry license. (I know, why should we need a license, but look how many ignorant people learned something in your last CHL renewal class, until the education system catches up with mandatory firearms training beginning in Junior High, including when you can and cannot use them, we need something)



Cut military spending 20% while making it a much more lethal force, which is very possible. Build the neutron bomb. Build a few of them in fact. Boots on the ground are sometimes needed, but we really need to stop rebuilding our enemies. If we are forced into a fight, we should break them, and leave them for their neighbors to pick the burnt carcass apart.

I haven't met that candidate yet. Someone give me a call if you run into him/her.I approve of this plan... ;)

IvanVic
10-08-2012, 08:52
No, it won't.

I've never felt my way of life was threatened as I do by Obama.


Outdoor Hub mobile, the outdoor information engine

Yep, and when the liberals become more and more socialist, each election is more important than the previous.

ricklee4570
10-08-2012, 09:22
Here is my prediction to the Ron Paul sore losers. After the election, nobody will be talking about Ron Paul except you guys on this forum.

Snowman92D
10-08-2012, 09:26
Part of the core "Fundamental Beliefs" of the Mormon Cult is to be armed and to unarm your enemy, which, like the Muslims is anyone that isn't part of your Cult.

You'll have to do better than that. I'll still take the Mormon over a Marxist, or a Muslim...or any Black Liberation Theology bastardized combination of the two.

Skyhook
10-08-2012, 10:23
I just want to make sure this is absolutely clear.
Romney says if he is elected he will sign an assault weapons ban if one is brought to him. Just like george bush said he would. The republican party is not really pro-second amendment. The guy who is in favor of an assault weapons ban is the guy who will be picking supreme court justices.
Better than the dems? Sure, but not much.
I'll be voting for a guy and party that does not really support the second amendment.
I wish people would stop pretending republicans are pro-second amendment.
Romney supports assault weapons ban? - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wgZ6AuHnmk0)


Frank, Frank, Frank, do yourself a big favor and research the anti-second amendment bills presented to congress for the past sixty years and note the authors- particularly note the PARTY affiliation of the authors of those anti-second amendment bills. Heck, you might even duplicate your findings if looking at state bills.

Zombie Surgeon
10-08-2012, 10:35
I just want to make sure this is absolutely clear.
Romney says if he is elected he will sign an assault weapons ban if one is brought to him. Just like george bush said he would. The republican party is not really pro-second amendment. The guy who is in favor of an assault weapons ban is the guy who will be picking supreme court justices.
Better than the dems? Sure, but not much.
I'll be voting for a guy and party that does not really support the second amendment.
I wish people would stop pretending republicans are pro-second amendment.
Romney supports assault weapons ban? - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wgZ6AuHnmk0)

0.5%

That is all.

series1811
10-08-2012, 11:07
I just want to make sure this is absolutely clear.
Romney says if he is elected he will sign an assault weapons ban if one is brought to him. Just like george bush said he would. The republican party is not really pro-second amendment. The guy who is in favor of an assault weapons ban is the guy who will be picking supreme court justices.
Better than the dems? Sure, but not much.
I'll be voting for a guy and party that does not really support the second amendment.
I wish people would stop pretending republicans are pro-second amendment.
Romney supports assault weapons ban? - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wgZ6AuHnmk0)

Obama. Second amendment rights champion. Yeah.

:supergrin::rofl::rofl:

denn1911
10-08-2012, 11:21
We need to get Obama out of office. The U.S. can't survive another 4 years with him. Romney has some issues, but I don't think that he'll actively try to support another AWB.

Bren
10-08-2012, 12:14
Frank has previously posted that he doesn't follow the news.

That explains why he's trying to get people to vote for Obama.

G19G20
10-08-2012, 14:52
I want to vote 3rd party this time, but my priority is getting the terrorist out of the White House. Next time I'll vote 3rd party for sure.


Outdoor Hub mobile, the outdoor information engine


http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-eZvSKpptBsI/Tdqj2sbRzfI/AAAAAAAACP0/5N5GQeXhLfk/s1600/wife-battering.jpg

Would that "next time" be 2020? Because if Romney wins, the new RNC rules won't allow any primary challengers and you'll still be expected to support him again even if he turns out to be terrible.

series1811
10-08-2012, 14:58
http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-eZvSKpptBsI/Tdqj2sbRzfI/AAAAAAAACP0/5N5GQeXhLfk/s1600/wife-battering.jpg

Would that "next time" be 2020? Because if Romney wins, the new RNC rules won't allow any primary challengers and you'll still be expected to support him again even if he turns out to be terrible.

Oh, man. You know this one had to have come straight from the DNC or DU. It is that good!

Voting for Romney is just like beating up a woman. Of course, we see it, now. How could we have been so stupid?

Thank you for posting that talking point. I'm converted.

Cavalry Doc
10-08-2012, 14:59
http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-eZvSKpptBsI/Tdqj2sbRzfI/AAAAAAAACP0/5N5GQeXhLfk/s1600/wife-battering.jpg

Would that "next time" be 2020? Because if Romney wins, the new RNC rules won't allow any primary challengers and you'll still be expected to support him again even if he turns out to be terrible.

Wow. You keep sinking to new lows. Is that your sister?

G19G20
10-08-2012, 15:04
Oh, man. You know this one had to have come straight from the DNC or DU. It is that good!

Voting for Romney is just like beating up a woman. Of course, we see it, now. How could we have been so stupid?

Thank you for posting that talking point. I'm converted.

Nice job to both you and Cav for missing the point entirely.

"HE SAYS IT WON'T HAPPEN AGAIN" and "NEXT TIME WILL BE DIFFERENT" are famous last words. Yes yes, Romney's "different" now than he was a few years ago because he said so. I wonder how many times battered wives had heard and thought that same line, only to find out that next time is WORSE than the last time. I guess metaphors are too advanced for the braintrust on GTPI.

countrygun
10-08-2012, 15:08
Nice job to both you and Cav for missing the point entirely.

"HE SAYS IT WON'T HAPPEN AGAIN" and "NEXT TIME WILL BE DIFFERENT" are famous last words. Yes yes, Romney's "different" now than he was a few years ago because he said so. I wonder how many times battered wives had heard and thought that same line, only to find out that next time is WORSE than the last time. I guess metaphors are too advanced for the braintrust on GTPI.


Come to think of it, it does remind me of your posts

"only to find out that next time is WORSE than the last time."

Snowman92D
10-08-2012, 15:11
Wow. You keep sinking to new lows. Is that your sister?

I'm betting it's his wife. You remember him bragging about getting together with a female RP supporter at a political gathering. Maybe his wife objected to some aspect of that? Just sayin'...

countrygun
10-08-2012, 15:15
I'm betting it's his wife. You remember him bragging about getting together with a female RP supporter at a political gathering. Maybe his wife objected to some aspect of that? Just sayin'...


I am afraid the troll is slowing down. the woman should have been black, that way voting for Romney would be wife beating and racist.

Snowman92D
10-08-2012, 15:18
I am afraid the troll is slowing down. the woman should have been black, that way voting for Romney would be wife beating and racist.

Yep....that'd been a "two-fer". That's why I'm betting it's the wife...or perhaps even the girlfriend. :smoking:

G19G20
10-08-2012, 15:22
Yep....that'd been a "two-fer". That's why I'm betting it's the wife...or perhaps even the girlfriend. :smoking:

Actually, I picked that picture out from mug shots of your past dope smoker arrests, after you kicked down the door at 4am, threw a flashbang into a child's lap, then shot their chihuahua for barking at you. That lady had to nerve to ask for your warrant! You showed her who's boss didn't ya Mr. Big Police Officer!

countrygun
10-08-2012, 15:26
Actually, I picked that picture out from mug shots of your past dope smoker arrests, after you kicked down the door at 4am, threw a flashbang into a child's lap, then shot their chihuahua for barking at you. That lady had to nerve to ask for your warrant! You showed her who's boss didn't ya Mr. Big Police Officer!


Ohhh.....the butt-hurt is strong in this one.

:rofl:

G19G20
10-08-2012, 15:43
Ohhh.....the butt-hurt is strong in this one.

:rofl:

So how many posts is that now? Over 2000 in the last month? Nice work. Those shill checks gotta be getting large!

Snowman92D
10-08-2012, 15:44
Ohhh.....the butt-hurt is strong in this one.

:rofl:

Seen it before. It's a really stressful to constantly live in fear of some nameless judge signing off on a search warrant for your house. You combine that, with the stresses of dallying with a female RP campaign worker while partying away from home...and you end up with photos like the one he posted.

I can see the attraction to giving yourself to a messiah...like Saint Ron, or the Golden Child...just to get relief from the unending stress. :smoking:

countrygun
10-08-2012, 16:00
So how many posts is that now? Over 2000 in the last month? Nice work. Those shill checks gotta be getting large!

Sure, I don't actually own any guns and my posts in those forums are a cover.

Despite that, according to your theory, I have a bigger campaign war chest that the libertarian party. BWAhahahahaha.

Ruble Noon
10-08-2012, 16:07
Nice job to both you and Cav for missing the point entirely.

"HE SAYS IT WON'T HAPPEN AGAIN" and "NEXT TIME WILL BE DIFFERENT" are famous last words. Yes yes, Romney's "different" now than he was a few years ago because he said so. I wonder how many times battered wives had heard and thought that same line, only to find out that next time is WORSE than the last time. I guess metaphors are too advanced for the braintrust on GTPI.

Funny how obama's past history is relevant but romney's isn't.

G19G20
10-08-2012, 16:09
Sure, I don't actually own any guns and my posts in those forums are a cover.

Quoted for posterity.


Despite that, according to your theory, I have a bigger campaign war chest that the libertarian party. BWAhahahahaha.

Your first paragraph is interesting because I haven't determined who you actually shill for. Your posts are so ignorant and over the top that you could just be a caricature of a Republican, meant to make any random GTPI viewer think twice about aligning with you on much of anything and choosing the other party. On the other hand, I've had enough experience with real-life Republicans to know that you could just as easily be an actual GOP shill and no one would know the difference. Well played!

Funny how obama's past history is relevant but romney's isn't.

Romney is white and says stuff about God sometimes. That's all that matters to most of the posters here.

jakebrake
10-08-2012, 16:09
Funny how obama's past history is relevant but romney's isn't.

how many m1 s will not be allowed back in america under obama's policies....his current policies?

current policies matter?

Ruble Noon
10-08-2012, 16:14
how many m1 s will not be allowed back in america under obama's policies....his current policies?

current policies matter?

How many imports were banned by HW Shrub?

countrygun
10-08-2012, 16:18
Your posts are so ignorant


.

YOU, YOU, accusing someone else of "ignorance"?????

Shall we go back to your lecture on the history of the Primary system?

Dude, you have, perhaps the lowest credibility rating possible.

BTW,

"Romney is white and says stuff about God sometimes. That's all that matters to most of the posters here."


Ron Paul is a goof and wants to legalize drugs and that is all that matters to the libertarians here.

We can both use broad brushes

Snowman92D
10-08-2012, 16:27
Romney is white and says stuff about God sometimes. That's all that matters to most of the posters here.

It must really burn you that hardly anyone cares that he's a Mormon and supports Israel. :rofl:

G19G20
10-08-2012, 16:30
YOU, YOU, accusing someone else of "ignorance"?????

Shall we go back to your lecture on the history of the Primary system?

Sure, post up the text of that exchange for all to see. Be my guest!


Dude, you have, perhaps the lowest credibility rating possible.

You're still here so that would be impossible.


BTW,

"Romney is white and says stuff about God sometimes. That's all that matters to most of the posters here."


Ron Paul is a goof and wants to legalize drugs and that is all that matters to the libertarians here.

We can both use broad brushes

Im really about done sugar coating this stuff. This entire election has turned into identity politics 101 and mudslinging 101. Discussion of issues and differing viewpoints has been relegated to the wayside while the constant chorus of "he's a muslim!" or some variation has become the rallying cry for the party. It's demeaning to those of us that want a higher level of discourse.

(Btw, all you did with the Paul mention is remind of another position that both Obama and Romney both follow.)

G19G20
10-08-2012, 16:34
It must really burn you that hardly anyone cares that he's a Mormon and supports Israel. :rofl:

Just another position that both Romney and Obama hold. Par for the course for two politicians where the only differences are their skin colors, among other identity triggers.

countrygun
10-08-2012, 16:38
Just another position that both Romney and Obama hold. Par for the course for two politicians where the only differences are their skin colors, among other identity triggers.

You make it too easy




Which part?

Is Obama pretending to be a Mormon now/ Or are you hallucenating again and thinking he supports Israel?

G19G20
10-08-2012, 16:51
You make it too easy

Which part?

Is Obama pretending to be a Mormon now/ Or are you hallucenating again and thinking he supports Israel?

Nothing policy related has changed regarding US gov't support for Israel since Obama was elected. No "aid" of any sort has been repealed, no legislation has been signed condemning Israel in any form, both party platforms contain pro-Israel planks, etc. So it's just another example of how the sitting Pres and the challenger are the same.

countrygun
10-08-2012, 17:13
Nothing policy related has changed regarding US gov't support for Israel since Obama was elected. No "aid" of any sort has been repealed, no legislation has been signed condemning Israel in any form, both party platforms contain pro-Israel planks, etc. So it's just another example of how the sitting Pres and the challenger are the same.


Obama's snubs don't count.

Of course the anti-semitic proclivities of the libertarian party are well known. So you must be hinting that supporting Israel is a bad thing, one way or the other. Care to be a good paulbot drone and tell me why Iran having nuclear weapons doesn't bother you?

countrygun
10-08-2012, 17:57
Romney is white and says stuff about God sometimes. That's all that matters to most of the posters here.

Does this sound like,


"Clinging to guns and Bibles"

to anyone else?

AHA once again, he is showing his admiration and support for Obama.

G19G20
10-08-2012, 18:05
Im still waiting for you to post up my lecture on the history of the primary system. Where is it? You obviously have enough time to whip out the tired "anti-semite" card whenever anyone dares mention US-Israeli policy so clearly you have enough time to back up your own bull **** posts.


Does this sound like,


"Clinging to guns and Bibles"

to anyone else?

AHA once again, he is showing his admiration and support for Obama.

I know the truth hurts and you must say anything to obfuscate the greater point that the vast majority of ABO voters are simply identity politics voters that want someone that looks like them in the WH, while not caring one bit about said candidate's policy positions.

countrygun
10-08-2012, 18:16
Im still waiting for you to post up my lecture on the history of the primary system. Where is it? You obviously have enough time to whip out the tired "anti-semite" card whenever anyone dares mention US-Israeli policy so clearly you have enough time to back up your own bull **** posts.



I know the truth hurts and you must say anything to obfuscate the greater point that the vast majority of ABO voters are simply identity politics voters that want someone that looks like them in the WH, while not caring one bit about said candidate's policy positions.


Ah "RACISM" How Obama of you.

Acujeff
10-08-2012, 18:22
I just want to make sure this is absolutely clear.
Romney says if he is elected he will sign an assault weapons ban if one is brought to him. Just like george bush said he would. The republican party is not really pro-second amendment. The guy who is in favor of an assault weapons ban is the guy who will be picking supreme court justices.
Better than the dems? Sure, but not much.
I'll be voting for a guy and party that does not really support the second amendment.
I wish people would stop pretending republicans are pro-second amendment.
Romney supports assault weapons ban? - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wgZ6AuHnmk0)

The same statement the Obama supporters keep replaying here would be a concern if Romney actually signed anti-2A bills into law, increased gun control or just even left the same amount of gun control in effect when he had the chance while Gov of MA. It was certainly politically expedient for Romney to be anti-2A with a 85% anti-2A Democrat congress, but all his actions, bills and laws show the opposite.

Like Obama, who makes pro-2A statements but all his actions are anti-2A, Romney has flown "under the radar" with the RKBA and all his actions are pro-2A.

Romney has made a few gun control statements over the years but if you actually examine his entire record it is clear Romney signed no anti-2A bills and actually reduced gun control and signed pro-2A bills into law while he was Gov. of MA 2002-2006.

What politicians do is more important, and revealing, than what they need to say to get it done. Romney's record clearly shows, in the face of a veto-proof majority anti-2A congress, he only reduced gun control, removed gun control from bills or signed pro-2A bills. So Romney has already been politically tested on the RKBA and it's all pro-2A which very encouraging for gun owners.

Romney‘s entire record:
http://www.goal.org/newspages/romney.html

Bush made the same kind of statements and was also labeled a threat to the RKBA. But we know now he achieved only a great deal of pro-2A legislation and appointed two pro-2A SC Justices that ruled in favor of Heller and McDonald. It's the only pro-2A strategy that works when dealing with obstructionist anti-2A legislators.

In 2008 Romney was rated "B" by the NRA and Obama was rated "F". Since then, Romney has only become more pro-2A and Obama more anti-2A. Romney would be a much better President for gun-owners than Obama.

G19G20
10-08-2012, 18:31
Ah "RACISM" How Obama of you.

Im not sure it's racism, per se, at least on the whole, though I know there's no shortage of that at play in much of the ABO circles.

On a deeper psychological level, people have an innate desire to relate to people that are like them. Since none of you know Obama or Romney personally, you can only go on what you see or are told. They don't espouse much different policies so you're relegated to deciding who to support based on what you can quantify. That means voting based on measures like someone's race, religion, class, height/weight/hair, etc or any single or multiple combinations of them. It's a well established political principle to play off of this phenomenon and is known as "identity politics". And it works and it's clear why it works.

countrygun
10-08-2012, 18:50
Im not sure it's racism, per se, at least on the whole, though I know there's no shortage of that at play in much of the ABO circles.

On a deeper psychological level, people have an innate desire to relate to people that are like them. Since none of you know Obama or Romney personally, you can only go on what you see or are told. They don't espouse much different policies so you're relegated to deciding who to support based on what you can quantify. That means voting based on measures like someone's race, religion, class, height/weight/hair, etc or any single or multiple combinations of them. It's a well established political principle to play off of this phenomenon and is known as "identity politics". And it works and it's clear why it works.


Well then, here is a candidate tailor made for you,

http://i1231.photobucket.com/albums/ee518/CountryG/Carl.png

G19G20
10-08-2012, 18:51
You really are a dullard, aren't you?

countrygun
10-08-2012, 19:01
You really are a dullard, aren't you?

From you "dullard" is a level you can only hope to rise to, so I will take it as a compliment.

Snowman92D
10-08-2012, 19:38
Discussion of issues and differing viewpoints has been relegated to the wayside while the constant chorus of "he's a muslim!" or some variation has become the rallying cry for the party. It's demeaning to those of us that want a higher level of discourse.

Are you trying to cover for Obama...or are you running a screen for Ron Paul's pandering to Islamists for campaign cash? Hard to tell who you're trying to carry water for some times.

Given the threat that Islam poses for this country, and western civilization in general, I'd say it is a "higher level of discourse". While that's only one of the critical issues at hand, at least it's "higher" than the recurrent, venal clamoring for drug legalization. Doping is bad. It leads to wife-beating and others social ills. :smoking:

TheExplorer
10-08-2012, 19:50
Fast forward to October 8, 2015. Obama will be in office and we will still have our guns. And, no, I'm not Pro-Obama, just realistic.

Question though. If there is a ban, does that affect new sales only?

G19G20
10-08-2012, 19:50
Are you trying to cover for Obama...or are you running a screen for Ron Paul's pandering to Islamists for campaign cash? Hard to tell who you're trying to carry water for some times.


Ron Paul lost. Yall keep telling me that he has lost and is irrelevant. So why is he the basis of every response to my posts, even when it has nothing to do with Ron Paul?

Sounds like most of yall just don't want to address the actual post content because you're wrong and have no counter arguments. If I was running cover for Obama, I'd do my best to bring as many voters to THIS forum as possible just so they could see what it means to align themselves with the average Republican voter's mentality. That would be the best possible thing I could do to help Obama if that was my goal.


Given the threat that Islam poses for this country, and western civilization in general, I'd say it is a "higher level of discourse".

Here we go with the Holy War crap again. Sorry, but arguments over invisible sky men isn't a higher level of discourse. I thought America was so big and strong and exceptional, not quivering little girls worried about some goat herders 7000 miles away.


While that's only one of the critical issues at hand, at least it's "higher" than the recurrent, venal clamoring for drug legalization. Doping is bad. It leads to wife-beating and others social ills. :smoking:

Yeah Ive heard that cops are notorious for spousal abuse and infidelity.

Drug legalization affects Americans every day. You know that around 50% support full mj legalization and even more support medical legalization, right? So how about we talk about what affects Americans on a daily basis instead of invisible sky men?

Snowman92D
10-08-2012, 20:03
Drug legalization affects Americans every day. You know that around 50% support full mj legalization and even more support medical legalization, right? So how about we talk about what affects Americans on a daily basis instead of invisible sky men?

You mean the invisible sky men who fly Boeing aircraft into our skyscrapers? Do you really think that legalizing drugs is a higher level of discourse than the dead and crippled at Fort Hood and elsewhere?

G19G20
10-08-2012, 20:13
You mean the invisible sky men who fly Boeing aircraft into our skyscrapers?

NEVER FORGET!!!!

Just don't mention that more US soldiers have been killed since 9/11 than all those people killed on 9/11. Smart policy there.


Do you really think that legalizing drugs is a higher level of discourse than the dead and crippled at Fort Hood and elsewhere?

Shall I post the myriad of articles daily about people and animals being shot by cops during drug raids? Or parents losing their kids because they smoke weed? Or kids killed by flashbangs? Or the fact that half of our entire prison population is DRUG offenses. Or otherwise very productive people that are one illegal search away from losing their careers over a plant? Which do you really think matters to more Americans in every day life? The cop down the street that may shoot them if their cell phone looks like a gun in the dark or a goat herder living in a cave in Asia?

Snowman92D
10-08-2012, 20:44
Shall I post the myriad of articles daily about people and animals being shot by cops during drug raids? Or parents losing their kids because they smoke weed? Or kids killed by flashbangs? Or the fact that half of our entire prison population is DRUG offenses. Or otherwise very productive people that are one illegal search away from losing their careers over a plant? Which do you really think matters to more Americans in every day life? The cop down the street that may shoot them if their cell phone looks like a gun in the dark or a goat herder living in a cave in Asia?

Whoa...! Better take a minute to get some Windex and wipe the spittle off your computer screen. :rofl:

Relax...after all, you're the one who brought up "invisible sky men". I just pointed out that they fly Boeing aircraft into buildings and...if this weeks extradition of Muslim terrorists from the U.K. to here for trial is any indication...they continue planning to fly planes into our buildings. Invisible or not.

I understand that dope rules your mind, but I can't say that I didn't know that already. Surely you see, based on your outburst, that illegal drug use can make people come unhinged for no good reason. I'm glad you focused that on me, or on the police that have apparently reeled your kite in on at least one occasion in the past. Hope you don't show that side of you to your wife, or that girl you were playing around with at the RP campaign party.

To answer your question, I'd say most Americans are more worried about being a victim of a drug-related crime, than about contrived polls showing Obama is 10 points ahead or that most people want to see dope legalized. Most crime is drug-related, you know. :whistling:

Syclone538
10-08-2012, 21:07
...
Question though. If there is a ban, does that affect new sales only?

It just depends on what the legislation is. The old one was just new sales.

California I think did registration and a few years later confiscation, or you must sell them out of state, but I could be wrong about that.

They could also "close" the "gunshow loophole".

Syclone538
10-08-2012, 21:08
Frank, Frank, Frank, do yourself a big favor and research the anti-second amendment bills presented to congress for the past sixty years and note the authors- particularly note the PARTY affiliation of the authors of those anti-second amendment bills. Heck, you might even duplicate your findings if looking at state bills.

The Ds being anti 2A doesn't automatically make the Rs pro 2A. Rs have been pretty good at the state level with ccw the last 20 or so years, but what have they done at the national level? FOPA '86 with the ****** ******* **** ****** hughes amendment. What else?

G19G20
10-09-2012, 07:34
Whoa...! Better take a minute to get some Windex and wipe the spittle off your computer screen. :rofl:

Relax...after all, you're the one who brought up "invisible sky men". I just pointed out that they fly Boeing aircraft into buildings and...if this weeks extradition of Muslim terrorists from the U.K. to here for trial is any indication...they continue planning to fly planes into our buildings. Invisible or not.

Actually, you brought up the "threat of Islam" and "pandering to Islamists" crap, not me. This was a thread about Romney's AWB record and I said nothing about Islam. You did. You sure you're not a closet pothead? Your memory apparently sucks worse than mine.


I understand that dope rules your mind, but I can't say that I didn't know that already. Surely you see, based on your outburst, that illegal drug use can make people come unhinged for no good reason. I'm glad you focused that on me, or on the police that have apparently reeled your kite in on at least one occasion in the past. Hope you don't show that side of you to your wife, or that girl you were playing around with at the RP campaign party.

Considering how you keep harping on women in my life, I also have to wonder whether you're gay. Those that crusade the hardest against certain things tend to be involved in it privately. Maybe we should ask Larry Craig what he thinks?


To answer your question, I'd say most Americans are more worried about being a victim of a drug-related crime, than about contrived polls showing Obama is 10 points ahead or that most people want to see dope legalized. Most crime is drug-related, you know. :whistling:

Suddenly the threat of Islam isn't a part of the conversation anymore. Way to move the goal posts. Care to define what you mean by "victim of drug-related crime" or am I supposed to just project the most gruesome scenario of a crack addict raping a white woman that I can imagine? Would that also include the fact that the majority of drug-related crime, in the most general sense, is alcohol related? Care to tell us whether you consume alcohol, tobacco, prescription drugs of any sort? They are all drugs.

Snowman92D
10-09-2012, 10:39
Actually, you brought up the "threat of Islam" and "pandering to Islamists" crap, not me. This was a thread about Romney's AWB record and I said nothing about Islam.

Ooooops! Your nose is growing again. I mentioned Islam in response to your rant a couple pages ago:

Discussion of issues and differing viewpoints has been relegated to the wayside while the constant chorus of "he's a muslim!" or some variation has become the rallying cry for the party. It's demeaning to those of us that want a higher level of discourse.

I simply attempted to find out who you're carrying water for...Saint Ron, or the Golden Child...since they're both supporting Islam to the detriment of our nation. Don't even pretend that I'm the first guy here who has noted that, despite your jibbering Paulbot lunacy, you seem to be more than a mere closet supporter of Hussein.

Considering how you keep harping on women in my life, I also have to wonder whether you're gay.

Sorry to ruin your feverish bong fantasies, but I'm not gay, though I'm not surprized that you'd float that idea. Dopers, such as yourself, quickly adopt an if-it-feels-good-do-it set of morals that allow then to engage in homosexuality and other form of sordid behavior, and like you, assume that the rest of the world sees morality the way they do.

Like your bragging here on this forum...bragging, mind you...about cheating on your wife with a bimbo you met at a RP campaign party. As if you assumed that all of us here would admire you for your philandery. So you assume that if someone doesn't agree with cheating on your wife, or beating your wife, as you do...he therefore must be "gay". That's sorta like adding 2+2 and coming up with "5". :rofl:

Suddenly the threat of Islam isn't a part of the conversation anymore. Way to move the goal posts. Care to define what you mean by "victim of drug-related crime" or am I supposed to just project the most gruesome scenario of a crack addict raping a white woman that I can imagine?

Okay...when you jeered at me about "invisible sky men", and I pointed out that they're flying, and planning to fly, Boeing aircraft into our skyscrapers, you responded with a spittle-spewing diatribe about police killing innocent babies and chihuahua dogs. So rather than risk saying something else about the terrorist threat Islam poses to the U.S. (that "higher level of discourse" you spoke of) and making you again feel like a chump...I opted to lower the "level of discourse" and talk about something you would feel more comfy with, i.e., dope and dope crime. I'm only trying to be accomodating...but you're so volatile. Thus my worrying that you treat your wife, and the other women in your life, that way. Are you getting any counselling for that?

Seems odd that the most "gruesome" crime scenario that populates your smoky mind is a white woman being raped. Aside from that picture of a battered woman you posted earlier in this thread, is rape something that fascinates you? I'm curious too as to why you think only white women are fitting victims for the crime of rape. It that your natural view of things, or is it a result of the KKK type indoctrination that RP delegates get in your world?

Acujeff
10-09-2012, 17:31
The Ds being anti 2A doesn't automatically make the Rs pro 2A. Rs have been pretty good at the state level with ccw the last 20 or so years, but what have they done at the national level? FOPA '86 with the ****** ******* **** ****** hughes amendment. What else?


In the last twenty years, if we get any recourse and relief from gun control on the national level it is always lead by the Republicans. The Republican platform, leadership and base have only become more pro-2A.

Here's some that come to mind:
Protecting gun owners and dealers privacy rights with the Tiahrt Amendment and Privacy Protection laws, Hunter Protection laws, "The Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act” and investigating Fast and Furious.

Defeating the old and proposed new AW bans, National Park and public housing firearms bans, UN treaty gun control, and banning gun shows, private gun transfers and sales.

Feel free to post more if I left anything out.

For gun owners - the problem is liberal anti-2A Democrats - predominantly Obama and the Democrat leadership in congress. The threat to our RKBA is always initiated and lead by the Democrats who are proudly, and aggressively, anti-2A and their platform and positions have only become more so.

Republicans created a pro-2A majority on the Supreme Court that resulted in the Heller and McDonald decisions. The Republican platform includes appointing more pro-2A Supreme Court Justices like Alito, Scalia, Thomas and Roberts.

Four US Supreme Court Justices (Scalia, Kennedy, Breyer and Ginsburg) will be 80 or older, and two, Thomas and Alito above 65, by the end of Obama's second term. He could likely appoint 4 more Justices if he is re-elected - all of whom will be making momentous decisions about our lives for decades to come. An anti-2A Court would be free to re-define and dismantle the RKBA out of existence. The current anti-2A Justices have already stated their intention to do exactly that.

Obama appointed anti-2A Justices, Sotomayor and Kagan. Given the opportunity he will do it again. All they need is one more like minded Justice to get a majority of five anti’s and implement their stated agenda through the courts.

If that happens we’ll never see a pro-RKBA victory again in our lifetime.

So who would you prefer to appoint up to four more Justices - the Republicans or the Democrats?

G19G20
10-10-2012, 20:26
This argument has turned into a petty waste of time so Ill be done after this one point.

Ooooops! Your nose is growing again. I mentioned Islam in response to your rant a couple pages ago:

I was referring to the identity politics aspect. "He's not like us Christians so he's gotta go!" That has nothing to do with your rant about the danger of invisible sky men.

You, on the other hand, have proven that you don't care about actual policy by reinforcing that you are only concerned with candidate's religion. White sorta-Christian = good. Black don't-know-but-assume-Muslim = bad.

This country is f'ed.

And you never did define what exactly "drug-related crime" is.

Now where did I put that bong? Ah here it is. Ill toke one in honor of all the dogs you've shot.

Ruggles
10-10-2012, 20:55
"NEVER FORGET!!!!

Just don't mention that more US soldiers have been killed since 9/11 than all those people killed on 9/11. Smart policy there"

Yeah no sense in punching back when attacked, you might just lose the fight huh? Just ball up in the fetal position and take the beating until it stops....Smart policy there.....

countrygun
10-10-2012, 20:57
Now where did I put that bong? Ah here it is. Ill toke one in honor of all the dogs you've shot.

Watch it, that stuff causes Rongoloidism.

Snowman92D
10-10-2012, 21:18
This argument has turned into a petty waste of time so Ill be done after this one point.

Don't blame you. You're running out of dazzle. Remember...you might be able to BS a BSer, but you can't snow the Snowman. :supergrin:


I was referring to the identity politics aspect. "He's not like us Christians so he's gotta go!" That has nothing to do with your rant about the danger of invisible sky men.

So you admit then that you brought up Islam long before I did. As I said previously, I was just trying to figure out who you're carrying water for...Saint Ron, or the Golden Child. It must embarassing for you to be reminded that your "invisible sky men" have been flying Boeing aircraft into our buildings and murdering your fellow Americans en masse.

This country is f'ed.

Now, now...don't be depressed. Ron Paul will run again in 2016. You can maybe be a delegate again, come here and start lots of arguments, party with bimbos at hotel hospitality rooms. You had a good run this year, ginned up 3 or 4% of the registered voters. It'll be better next go-round. You'll see.

Now where did I put that bong? Ah here it is. Ill toke one in honor of all the dogs you've shot.

(Sigh) Okay...but that stuff's bad for ya. Every toke you take is a few more IQ points decayed off your total. Makes it harder to debate people, and you have to admit...you don't have it like you used to. Just sayin'. :smoking:

JFrame
10-11-2012, 08:25
Any time anyone pulls out the race card, it only serves to convince me that they have no real intellectual capital invested in an argument.


.

G19G20
10-11-2012, 18:19
"NEVER FORGET!!!!

Just don't mention that more US soldiers have been killed since 9/11 than all those people killed on 9/11. Smart policy there"

Yeah no sense in punching back when attacked, you might just lose the fight huh? Just ball up in the fetal position and take the beating until it stops....Smart policy there.....

The lunacy of the policy has clearly proven itself 11 years later (twice). Thousands more soldiers killed, untold dead civilians, trillions of dollars spent, yet still fighting with no end in sight.

There's nothing I can say that Clint Eastwood didn't already sum up nicely:

"We didn't ask the Soviets after 10 years how that works out."

countrygun
10-16-2012, 20:59
OK, who still stands by this one, and who wants to claim Obama is no danger to the Second Amendment?

Ruble Noon
10-16-2012, 21:07
OK, who still stands by this one, and who wants to claim Obama is no danger to the Second Amendment?

Sure he is. Problem is the other guy has already proven that he is also.

wjv
10-16-2012, 21:08
OK, who still stands by this one, and who wants to claim Obama is no danger to the Second Amendment?

I'm sure that when he said that he wanted to reintroduce an AW Ban he was talking about an All Wheat Ban, to help those people who are allergic to wheat. . . :tongueout:

frank4570
10-16-2012, 21:14
Sure he is. Problem is the other guy has already proven that he is also.

The actual danger seems to be in the supreme court justices. Obama will select *mostly* democrat types. Romney will select *mostly* republican types. Heller was a 5/4 vote. The next vote could go badly for us.

QNman
10-16-2012, 21:14
OK, who still stands by this one, and who wants to claim Obama is no danger to the Second Amendment?

Sure he is. Problem is the other guy has already proven that he is also.

Except he said he wouldn't. Obama said he would. Choose.

QNman
10-16-2012, 21:16
Sure he is. Problem is the other guy has already proven that he is also.

I'm with you in principle, my friend. But we have a choice - a) or b). Not "None of the above".

We tried in the primaries for something better. We have what we have.

Choose or spectate.

countrygun
10-16-2012, 21:19
Not to mention Obama sounded positively enthusiastic about one

QNman
10-16-2012, 21:20
Not to mention Obama sounded positively enthusiastic about one

Too bad Romney didn't ask him why he didn't pursue one in the first four...

countrygun
10-16-2012, 21:22
Too bad Romney didn't ask him why he didn't pursue one in the first four...

and then tie it to "F&F" as an underhanded attemp to inluence events

concretefuzzynuts
10-17-2012, 03:40
Quote from Obama, 2nd debate:

“My belief is that, (A), we have to enforce the laws we’ve already got, make sure that we’re keeping guns out of the hands of criminals, those who are mentally ill. We’ve done a much better job in terms of background checks, but we’ve got more to do when it comes to enforcement.

“But I also share your belief that weapons that were designed for soldiers in war theaters don’t belong on our streets. And so what I’m trying to do is to get a broader conversation about how do we reduce the violence generally. Part of it is seeing if we can get an assault weapons ban reintroduced. But part of it is also looking at other sources of the violence. Because frankly, in my home town of Chicago, there’s an awful lot of violence and they’re not using AK-47s. They’re using cheap hand guns.”

ricklee4570
10-17-2012, 08:41
Quote from Obama, 2nd debate:

“My belief is that, (A), we have to enforce the laws we’ve already got, make sure that we’re keeping guns out of the hands of criminals, those who are mentally ill. We’ve done a much better job in terms of background checks, but we’ve got more to do when it comes to enforcement.

“But I also share your belief that weapons that were designed for soldiers in war theaters don’t belong on our streets. And so what I’m trying to do is to get a broader conversation about how do we reduce the violence generally. Part of it is seeing if we can get an assault weapons ban reintroduced. But part of it is also looking at other sources of the violence. Because frankly, in my home town of Chicago, there’s an awful lot of violence and they’re not using AK-47s. They’re using cheap hand guns.”

Yup, thats what he said, He has said similar things at different venues for years, yet we keep hearing about how Obama does not want to take away our guns.

I think Romney made it clear, no new gun laws.

Acujeff
10-17-2012, 09:14
Sure he is. Problem is the other guy has already proven that he is also.

That's not true and it's been covered many times in GT threads.

If you actually examine his record it is clear Romney signed no anti-2A bills while he was Gov. He only reduced gun control, removed gun control language from bills, or signed pro-2A bills into law.

The liberal media and Obama supporters are misrepresenting Romney record. The NRA magazines published a link to Romney‘s actual entire record:

http://www.goal.org/newspages/romney.html

http://www.ammoland.com/2012/10/02/gun-owners-do-you-owe-mitt-romney-an-apology-for-your-doubts-must-read-report/#ixzz28AyBR021

Ruble Noon
10-17-2012, 14:09
That's not true and it's been covered many times in GT threads.

If you actually examine his record it is clear Romney signed no anti-2A bills while he was Gov. He only reduced gun control, removed gun control language from bills, or signed pro-2A bills into law.

The liberal media and Obama supporters are misrepresenting Romney record. The NRA magazines published a link to Romney‘s actual entire record:

http://www.goal.org/newspages/romney.html

http://www.ammoland.com/2012/10/02/gun-owners-do-you-owe-mitt-romney-an-apology-for-your-doubts-must-read-report/#ixzz28AyBR021

Dude you are the only one in what is left of the free world that claims Romney is pro gun. As far as this goal that you keep quoting, I've never heard of it. Are you its founding and only member?

countrygun
10-17-2012, 14:29
Dude you are the only one in what is left of the free world that claims Romney is pro gun. As far as this goal that you keep quoting, I've never heard of it. Are you its founding and only member?

and you are the only one who gives a ^&*%.

I would say he is neutral and, based on what he and Obama said last night, romney is the better choice. Nobody else is in the race so....

Ruble Noon
10-17-2012, 14:32
and you are the only one who gives a ^&*%.

I would say he is neutral and, based on what he and Obama said last night, romney is the better choice. Nobody else is in the race so....

People said that romney was the better choice because he promised to end obamacare on day one also. As soon as he got the nomination he started walking that back.

countrygun
10-17-2012, 14:43
People said that romney was the better choice because he promised to end obamacare on day one also. As soon as he got the nomination he started walking that back.

So, you think Obama will end it ,right?

Brilliant!

:rofl::rofl:

Ruble Noon
10-17-2012, 16:09
So, you think Obama will end it ,right?

Brilliant!

:rofl::rofl:

I don't know where you came up with that. I have been consistent with my assertion that obamacare is here to stay.

Acujeff
10-17-2012, 17:16
Dude you are the only one in what is left of the free world that claims Romney is pro gun. As far as this goal that you keep quoting, I've never heard of it. Are you its founding and only member?

Romney's pro-2A record is well documented, and has been proven in the dozens of threads you have high-jacked on GT.

Have you actually ever read Romney's record or the laws and bills he was involved? I've posted them before and you have never provided an actual documented fact of anything Romney has done that substantiates your false claims he is anti-2A.

Just like Obama and the Democrats, you must figure if you keep saying the same lie over and over someone might believe you. But all you have done is ruin your credibility.

Rooster Rugburn
10-17-2012, 17:20
no he won't.

ETA: if you go back 4 years, you'll see I told the McCainovics that the first thing Obama, Pelosi, and Reid would do, was NOT a gun ban. They called me about every name in the book, but I was right. I said then Obama will in a second term, but not a first.

I don't think Romney will in a second term.

Glock26z
10-17-2012, 18:07
Write in Sarah Palin for President and Chuck[Walker Texas Ranger] Norris for Vice President if you have a blank lines on your ballot in 3 weeks. That will make both parties look like you know what. I have said this time before,if you do not like who is running for President,write these two in.

Acujeff
10-17-2012, 18:34
Write in Sarah Palin for President and Chuck[Walker Texas Ranger] Norris for Vice President if you have a blank lines on your ballot in 3 weeks. That will make both parties look like you know what. I have said this time before,if you do not like who is running for President,write these two in.

How is calling to split the vote to ensure Obama gets a 2nd term and let Obama send the USA to hell to teach Republicans a lesson good for gun owners?

Ruble Noon
10-17-2012, 18:35
no he won't.

ETA: if you go back 4 years, you'll see I told the McCainovics that the first thing Obama, Pelosi, and Reid would do, was NOT a gun ban. They called me about every name in the book, but I was right. I said then Obama will in a second term, but not a first.

I don't think Romney will in a second term.

You're probably right, that doesn't make him the stalwart 2nd amendment supporter that some make him out to be however. I also can't find it in me to trust someone that has been on every side of that issue.

This isn't very inspiring either.

“Deadly assault weapons have no place in Massachusetts,” Romney said, at a bill signing ceremony with legislators, sportsmen’s groups and gun safety advocates. “These guns are not made for recreation or self-defense. They are instruments of destruction with the sole purpose of hunting down and killing people.”



http://www.ontheissues.org/2012/Mitt_Romney_Gun_Control.htm

Cavalry Doc
10-17-2012, 19:13
You're probably right, that doesn't make him the stalwart 2nd amendment supporter that some make him out to be however. I also can't find it in me to trust someone that has been on every side of that issue.

This isn't very inspiring either.





http://www.ontheissues.org/2012/Mitt_Romney_Gun_Control.htm

Romney is far from perfect, very far.

Barry is not an inch away from dismal.

Do what you want, but don't ***** when it happens.

Providence
10-17-2012, 19:32
Have you guys read the links Acujeff posted? Do you refuse to accept them? The NRA exists to protect the 2nd Amend. Do you think they are lying? Fooled? Confused? Have you not seen how the trolls come on GlockTalk and try to muddy the waters so you doubt yourself. One candidate wants more gun control. One does not. Simple as that.

countrygun
10-17-2012, 19:45
Have you guys read the links Acujeff posted? Do you refuse to accept them? The NRA exists to protect the 2nd Amend. Do you think they are lying? Fooled? Confused? Have you not seen how the trolls come on GlockTalk and try to muddy the waters so you doubt yourself. One candidate wants more gun control. One does not. Simple as that.

Makes you wonder if they are ignorant or are trying to scare people away from Romney to help Obama doesn't it?

concretefuzzynuts
10-17-2012, 19:46
Have you guys read the links Acujeff posted? Do you refuse to accept them? The NRA exists to protect the 2nd Amend. Do you think they are lying? Fooled? Confused? Have you not seen how the trolls come on GlockTalk and try to muddy the waters so you doubt yourself. One candidate wants more gun control. One does not. Simple as that.

He is consistently right (correct) and consistently ignored by the trolls and non-trolls. IMHO.

Ruble Noon
10-17-2012, 19:55
Have you guys read the links Acujeff posted? Do you refuse to accept them? The NRA exists to protect the 2nd Amend. Do you think they are lying? Fooled? Confused? Have you not seen how the trolls come on GlockTalk and try to muddy the waters so you doubt yourself. One candidate wants more gun control. One does not. Simple as that.

Yeah, the NRA is so thrilled with Romney and his record they waited until this month to begrudgingly endorse him.

As far as Acujeff, his propaganda has been handily debunked.

countrygun
10-17-2012, 19:57
He is consistently right (correct) and consistently ignored by the trolls and non-trolls. IMHO.

Put it in perspective.

They can't push Obama's great economic plan as being superior to Romney's

They can't say Obama is doing a terrific job at foriegn policy

They know that most people cannot be swayed with an argument for the benefits of Obama care.

They know no one is in favor of increasing the defict like Obama has.


BUT, this is a "gun Based" forum. "Gun owners are single minded about that issue, now we can't convince them that Obama is good for gun owners (we tried earlier but his history and the facts got in the way), but if we can convince them that Romney is WORSE.......So we are going to ignore the facts and keep hammering on his signing a bill and ignore the facts surrounding it. We will just keep repeating "He signed a bill, he signed a bill..." over and over."

concretefuzzynuts
10-17-2012, 20:19
Put it in perspective.

They can't push Obama's great economic plan as being superior to Romney's

They can't say Obama is doing a terrific job at foriegn policy

They know that most people cannot be swayed with an argument for the benefits of Obama care.

They know no one is in favor of increasing the defict like Obama has.


BUT, this is a "gun Based" forum. "Gun owners are single minded about that issue, now we can't convince them that Obama is good for gun owners (we tried earlier but his history and the facts got in the way), but if we can convince them that Romney is WORSE.......So we are going to ignore the facts and keep hammering on his signing a bill and ignore the facts surrounding it. We will just keep repeating "He signed a bill, he signed a bill..." over and over."

Who is the quote from?

countrygun
10-17-2012, 20:57
Who is the quote from?

The book of Countrygun, ppg 243

concretefuzzynuts
10-17-2012, 21:04
The book of Countrygun, ppg 243

Oh. I thought it was from pg. 223.

countrygun
10-17-2012, 21:07
Oh. I thought it was from pg. 223.

That was the Readers Digest Edition.

Acujeff
10-17-2012, 21:34
You're probably right, that doesn't make him the stalwart 2nd amendment supporter that some make him out to be however. I also can't find it in me to trust someone that has been on every side of that issue.

This isn't very inspiring either.

http://www.ontheissues.org/2012/Mitt_Romney_Gun_Control.htm


The same statement the Obama supporters keep replaying would be a concern if Romney actually banned guns, signed anti-2A bills into law, increased gun control or just even left the same amount of gun control in effect while Gov of MA. It was certainly politically expedient for Romney to be anti-2A but all his actions, bills and laws show the opposite. He only reduced gun control, removed anti-2A language from bills and signed pro-2A laws.

So Romney has already been politically tested on the RKBA against a congress that was 85% anti-2A and his record is all pro-2A which very encouraging for gun owners.

As President, we would expect him to do the same. How do we know? From his record.

In the same way, Obama makes pro-2A statements but all his actions are abusively anti-2A, some criminally so. How do we know he'll continue abusing his authority with anti-2A executive orders and regulations? From his record.

In addition, Obama will appoint more anti-2A Justices to the Supreme Court in his 2nd term. Only one more Justice makes an anti-2A majority for the next 30-40 years. That means we won't see another pro-2A decision in our lifetime and previous ones can be dismantled or overturned.

http://m.washingtontimes.com/news/2012/jul/30/second-amendment-at-risk-in-second-term/

If Ruble Noon was really concerned about gun owners he would be supporting Romney in defeating Obama, who is the real threat to the RKBA.

Clutch Cargo
10-17-2012, 22:41
Strange, the politicians have forum members referring to sporting arms as "assault weapons"

WISE UP FOLKS!!!! They are talking about a sporting arms ban, not a select-fire arms ban!

Ruble Noon
10-18-2012, 05:40
So we are going to ignore the facts

Yeah, you keep doing that.

1994: backed 5-day waiting period on gun sales

2002: I will not chip away at MA's tough gun laws

2002: My positions won't make me the hero of the NRA

GovWatch: 1994: did not “line up with the NRA”

Support the 2nd Amendment AND the assault weapon ban

I do support the Second Amendment. I would have signed the assault weapon ban that came to his desk. I said I would have supported that and signed a similar bill in our state
So we signed that in Massachusetts, and I’d support that at the federal level.


But I would look at weapons that pose extraordinary lethality.

Let’s get the record straight. First of all, there’s no question that I support 2nd Amendment rights, but I also support an assault weapon ban

http://www.ontheissues.org/2012/Mitt_Romney_Gun_Control.htm

Acujeff
10-18-2012, 11:36
Yeah, you keep doing that.

1994: backed 5-day waiting period on gun sales

2002: I will not chip away at MA's tough gun laws

2002: My positions won't make me the hero of the NRA

GovWatch: 1994: did not “line up with the NRA”

Support the 2nd Amendment AND the assault weapon ban
http://www.ontheissues.org/2012/Mitt_Romney_Gun_Control.htm



That's because Romney’s pro-2A position had to be “under the radar”.

It was the only way to get the MA legislature (85% strictly anti-2A) to actually politically cooperate with Romney and GOAL's pro-2A agenda. That's politics in MA.

So did Romney say one thing and do another? To protect the RKBA - absolutely.

Would he do the same thing as President? If he was facing a majority anti-2A congress -absolutely.

Would he reveal his strategy to the gun control crowd? -absolutely not.

What if he was facing a pro-2A congress or minority anti-2A congress? - he wouldn't have to use this strategy - he would just be straight out pro-2A.

How do we know all this for certain? By his record. What politicians do is more important, and revealing, than what they need to say to get it done.

Romney's record clearly shows, in the face of a veto-proof majority anti-2A congress, he only reduced gun control, removed gun control from bills or signed pro-2A bills. The strength of his character on the 2A is very encouraging for gun owners.

Bush made the same kind of statements and achieved similar pro-2A success. It's the only pro-2A strategy that works when dealing with a majority of obstructionist anti-2A legislators.

Ruble understands "under the radar" because that's been Obama's anti-2A agenda. Obama makes pro-2A statements but all his actions are anti-2A. Ruble has made it abudently clear - on all the threads he's high jacked - he's OK with Obama's attacks on the RKBA. He's only "outraged" at Romney's pro-2A record. So we know Ruble is a hypocrite and not looking out for the interests of gun owners.

countrygun
10-18-2012, 13:14
That's because Romney’s pro-2A position had to be “under the radar”.

It was the only way to get the MA legislature (85% strictly anti-2A) to actually politically cooperate with Romney and GOAL's pro-2A agenda. That's politics in MA.

So did Romney say one thing and do another? To protect the RKBA - absolutely.

Would he do the same thing as President? If he was facing a majority anti-2A congress -absolutely.

Would he reveal his strategy to the gun control crowd? -absolutely not.

What if he was facing a pro-2A congress or minority anti-2A congress? - he wouldn't have to use this strategy - he would just be straight out pro-2A.

How do we know all this for certain? By his record. What politicians do is more important, and revealing, than what they need to say to get it done.

Romney's record clearly shows, in the face of a veto-proof majority anti-2A congress, he only reduced gun control, removed gun control from bills or signed pro-2A bills. The strength of his character on the 2A is very encouraging for gun owners.

Bush made the same kind of statements and achieved similar pro-2A success. It's the only pro-2A strategy that works when dealing with a majority of obstructionist anti-2A legislators.

Ruble understands "under the radar" because that's been Obama's anti-2A agenda. Obama makes pro-2A statements but all his actions are anti-2A. Ruble has made it abudently clear - on all the threads he's high jacked - he's OK with Obama's attacks on the RKBA. He's only "outraged" at Romney's pro-2A record. So we know Ruble is a hypocrite and not looking out for the interests of gun owners.

Highlighted for truth

Ruble Noon
10-18-2012, 15:33
That's because Romney’s pro-2A position had to be “under the radar”.




:rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl:

countrygun
10-18-2012, 15:37
I think Rumble Tune is cracking up under the realization that Obama is going to lose.

Poor guy, after all his hard work to get people to throw away their votes.

Unrealistic expectations lead to disappointment

Acujeff
10-18-2012, 15:57
:rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl:

Inappropriate laughter? Mystery solved.....Ruble is a Joe Biden impersonator!

Ruble Noon
10-18-2012, 16:02
Inappropriate laughter? Mystery solved.....Ruble is a Joe Biden impersonator!

Actually, I was just going to post the you and Countrygun sound like obama and biden with their binders full of women crap. When you can't defend yourself or in your case, your liberal gun banning candidate, attack the messenger.

countrygun
10-18-2012, 16:26
Actually, I was just going to post the you and Countrygun sound like obama and biden with their binders full of women crap. When you can't defend yourself or in your case, your liberal gun banning candidate, attack the messenger.

Romney's position and actions have been well defended.

Now you are demonstrating denial along with the inappropriate laughter.

More of your liberal side is showing

Providence
10-18-2012, 20:00
I will say this...

My hope isn't in Romney completely. I'm voting for him because he is the best of the two candidates who have a chance to win. And he has stated with his own mouth that he thinks that we don't need more gun laws. But I will keep a eye on it. I will keep up on my NRA dues. I'll watch the congress and contact my congressmen. I'll also watch on the state and local level. The watching never stops. That's what we do.

But I'll say it again: o. will do what he can to limit or end the 2nd amendment. O. says he will. Romney says he will not. I'm going with Romney.

Acujeff
10-18-2012, 21:26
I will say this...

My hope isn't in Romney completely. I'm voting for him because he is the best of the two candidates who have a chance to win. And he has stated with his own mouth that he thinks that we don't need more gun laws. But I will keep a eye on it. I will keep up on my NRA dues. I'll watch the congress and contact my congressmen. I'll also watch on the state and local level. The watching never stops. That's what we do.

But I'll say it again: o. will do what he can to limit or end the 2nd amendment. O. says he will. Romney says he will not. I'm going with Romney.



The message we want to send is if any politician abuses our RKBA their actions will be fought and they will be fired by voters. I agree that no group watches better and carries more weight than the NRA.

GW Bush was often categorized as anti-2A but he appointed two pro-RKBA Justices to the Supreme Court giving us the majority to win Heller and McDonald, the AWB was allowed to expire and much pro-RKBA legislation progress was made during his administration. All his actions were pro-2A and that was the end of any successes of the Democrats gun control agenda.

Romney/Ryan and the Republican record, positions and platform are more pro-2A than Bush and we can expect even better results. They are campaigning on dismantling Obama's anti-2A actions in the UN and on the Southern border, appointing a new Attorney General and making sure Fast and Furious is actually investigated and prosecuted, stopping the abuses of the ATF, and appointing up to four more pro-RKBA Supreme Court Justices.

Clutch Cargo
10-19-2012, 02:58
The message we want to send is if any politician abuses our RKBA their actions will be fought and they will be fired by voters. I agree that no group watches better and carries more weight than the NRA.

GW Bush was often categorized as anti-2A but he appointed two pro-RKBA Justices to the Supreme Court giving us the majority to win Heller and McDonald, the AWB was allowed to expire and much pro-RKBA legislation progress was made during his administration. All his actions were pro-2A and that was the end of any successes of the Democrats gun control agenda.

Romney/Ryan and the Republican record, positions and platform are more pro-2A than Bush and we can expect even better results. They are campaigning on dismantling Obama's anti-2A actions in the UN and on the Southern border, appointing a new Attorney General and making sure Fast and Furious is actually investigated and prosecuted, stopping the abuses of the ATF, and appointing up to four more pro-RKBA Supreme Court Justices.

He got elected Governor of Texas because he said he would sign a ahall issue concealed handgun bill. His VERY anti-gun opponent, Ann Richards, said Texans were too stupid to know about carrying concealed weapions.

JFrame
10-19-2012, 04:25
no he won't.

ETA: if you go back 4 years, you'll see I told the McCainovics that the first thing Obama, Pelosi, and Reid would do, was NOT a gun ban. They called me about every name in the book, but I was right. I said then Obama will in a second term, but not a first.

I don't think Romney will in a second term.


This.


.

DOC44
10-19-2012, 04:36
NRA- If obama gets a second term it Katie bar the door concerning our gun rights.

http://video.foxbusiness.com/v/1907127061001/

Doc44

Ruble Noon
10-19-2012, 05:51
Romney's position and actions have been well defended.



Don't you mean well spun?

Ruble Noon
10-19-2012, 15:58
That's because Romney’s pro-2A position had to be “under the radar”.

It was the only way to get the MA legislature (85% strictly anti-2A) to actually politically cooperate with Romney and GOAL's pro-2A agenda. That's politics in MA.

So did Romney say one thing and do another? To protect the RKBA - absolutely.

Would he do the same thing as President? If he was facing a majority anti-2A congress -absolutely.

Would he reveal his strategy to the gun control crowd? -absolutely not.

What if he was facing a pro-2A congress or minority anti-2A congress? - he wouldn't have to use this strategy - he would just be straight out pro-2A.

How do we know all this for certain? By his record. What politicians do is more important, and revealing, than what they need to say to get it done.

Romney's record clearly shows, in the face of a veto-proof majority anti-2A congress, he only reduced gun control, removed gun control from bills or signed pro-2A bills. The strength of his character on the 2A is very encouraging for gun owners.

Bush made the same kind of statements and achieved similar pro-2A success. It's the only pro-2A strategy that works when dealing with a majority of obstructionist anti-2A legislators.

Ruble understands "under the radar" because that's been Obama's anti-2A agenda. Obama makes pro-2A statements but all his actions are anti-2A. Ruble has made it abudently clear - on all the threads he's high jacked - he's OK with Obama's attacks on the RKBA. He's only "outraged" at Romney's pro-2A record. So we know Ruble is a hypocrite and not looking out for the interests of gun owners.

You're pretty good at spin, I would say that you are on par with MSNBC, ABC, CNN. You should get a job at the Boston Globe. :winkie:

It's a bird..It's a plane..It's mitt romney in Stealth Mode. Sneaking under the radar, Mitt Romney, in a parallel universe far, far away, where banning guns is actually supporting the 2nd amendment, signed an assault weapons ban to confuse and distract the gun banning crowd. Working feverishly while undercover Mitt further fooled the gun banners by distancing himself from the NRA and embracing the Brady campaign.
Now that he has emerged from the liberal stronghold, victorious in his deception and achieved the national spotlight, the dangerous game mouse hunter Mitt has shed his stealth armor, no longer needing to act in Stealth Mode or work under the radar and has now embraced the guns, those dangerous guns of exceptional lethality, that he vowed to keep off the streets.

Tune in next week when Acujeff explains how Mitt foiled the evil Scary Reed and the dastardly Fancy Pants Pelosi by bringing socialized medicine to America, dangling it like a carrot in front of their noses, knowing that they couldn't resist the poison treat and would adopt a nearly identical plan which would bring about the downfall of their wonder boy messiah, Barack Obama.

countrygun
10-19-2012, 16:07
Tune in next week when Acujeff explains how Mitt foiled the evil Scary Reed and the dastardly Fancy Pants Pelosi by bringing socialized medicine to America, dangling it like a carrot in front of their noses, knowing that they couldn't resist the poison treat and would adopt a nearly identical plan which would bring about the downfall of their wonder boy messiah, Barack Obama. [/COLOR][/COLOR]

That's what we are voting for, laughing boy.

onebigelf
10-19-2012, 17:00
Romney, might or might not sign any gun legislation passed by both houses of congress (think that'll happen during a Republican administration)?

Obama stood on stage during the second debate and announced in no uncertain terms that he intends to seek a new Assault Weapon Ban. You can bet it won't be time limited this time. He also suggested that he thinks handguns are a major problem.

John

Providence
10-19-2012, 17:09
Obama stood on stage during the second debate and announced in no uncertain terms that he intends to seek a new Assault Weapon Ban. You can bet it won't be time limited this time. He also suggested that he thinks handguns are a major problem.he did even more than that. He said cheap handguns were the problem in Chicago. I wonder what he intends to do about that?

porschedog
10-19-2012, 17:15
Anyone on this forum that believes that O'Bama is still worth considering over Romney is seriously deluded. Wake up and smell the tapioca, guys - O'Bama is a freaking socialist, nutbag, foodstamp-giving, gun-grabber who WILL change the Supreme Court in such a way that we will never recover from.

Mittens is the ONLY choice we have, so stop whining about how it'd be better to have another choice. There isn't one.

Acujeff
10-19-2012, 18:41
Obama and the Democrats are the only party campaigning for more gun control.

Here is Obama in his own words from the second Presidential Debate Tuesday night:

... weapons that were designed for soldiers in war theaters don't belong on our streets. And so what I'm trying to do is to get a broader conversation about how do we reduce the violence generally. Part of it is seeing if we can get an assault weapons ban reintroduced. But part of it is also looking at other sources of the violence. Because frankly, in my home town of Chicago, there's an awful lot of violence and they're not using AK-47s. They're using cheap hand guns.

So there it is. Obama has at long last told you his plans for a second term. And not only is the President saying this, the Democratic Platform says clearly that they want more gun control:

We believe that the right to own firearms is subject to reasonable regulation. We understand the terrible consequences of gun violence; it serves as a reminder that life is fragile, and our time here is limited and precious. We believe in an honest, open national conversation about firearms. We can focus on effective enforcement of existing laws, especially strengthening our background check system, and we can work together to enact commonsense improvements - like reinstating the assault weapons ban and closing the gun show loophole - so that guns do not fall into the hands of those irresponsible, law-breaking few.

If you weren't sure before, you are now. An Obama win will provide 4 years of more oppressive gun control. Even without legislation and congressional authority Obama has shown he freely uses executive orders and regulations to institute his agenda. It won’t be just rifles and large cap magazines but he’ll also target handguns - that just about covers it all.

That means more regulations and executive orders governing every aspect of gun and ammo ownership and commerce, lots more proposed gun control legislation and anti-gun judges and up to four more anti-gun Supreme Court justices. One more gives the anti-2A Justices a majority and we‘ll never see a pro-2A decision again in our lifetime and previous decisions can be overruled or reversed. Obama and the Democrats are not only campaigning on making the expired federal Assault Weapons Ban permanent, but also making guns “childproof”, banning private gun transfers and sales, and regulating ammo purchases.

If that’s OK with you vote for Obama. Or split your vote for a third party which improves the chances Obama will be re-elected. But if it’s not OK - vote for Romney/Ryan and Republican legislators and let’s get rid of the democrats.

concretefuzzynuts
10-19-2012, 20:42
he did even more than that. He said cheap handguns were the problem in Chicago. I wonder what he intends to do about that?

The UN Small Arms Treaty

jbailey8
10-19-2012, 20:44
so every four years you can vote for a liberal of one flavor or another, or you can help support a third party, showing the republicans why they deserve to lose, and actually start making a difference in the long term.

^this

countrygun
10-19-2012, 20:55
^this

You guys continue to crack me up.

You think a third party is something that was invented since you started voting?

Yah, they have really changed the face of American politics in the last 100 years:upeyes:

"In the long term" The only thing that is going to change the Republican party is...well....changing the Republican Party.

There are a lot of people here who have a lot of actual experience at voting third party and many of them say they would do it again in the future, but you folks are insisting on ignoring their experience when they tell you Obama is too dangerous with a second term. Nobody "sold" them that opinion, experience has given it to them.

remember they HAVE voted third before and most of them have said they would again, so just how do you justify sticking your fingers in your ears and ignoring that advice?

jakebrake
10-20-2012, 11:01
^^^^actually, country, they did. they changed the face of politics for 8 years. the nightmare commonly called the clinton era.

thank you ross perot.:steamed:

i learned that lesson a little too late.

TheExplorer
10-20-2012, 11:24
he did even more than that. He said cheap handguns were the problem in Chicago. I wonder what he intends to do about that?

Force Glock to improve their quality.:rofl:

jakebrake
10-20-2012, 11:26
Force Glock to improve their quality.:rofl:
gaston would pound the snot out of him, and he knows it, so that one's out.

LarryNC
10-20-2012, 14:05
It will always be "THE MOST IMPORTANT ELECTION OF ALL TIME." Every time.

I've noticed that too :supergrin: The same old lies from the same old liars. I used to vote a straight republican ticket, but the last election I voted for Ron Paul as a write in candidate and I plan on doing the exact same thing this time. Ronald Reagan used to say that he never left the democrat party, but the democrat party left him. That is exactly how I feel about todays republican party. All the lies, the cheating, and the vote tampering that took place in this years republican primary and convention were enough to make me say that I cannot vote for Mitt Romney. Come election day I will either write in Ron Paul or just not even bother to vote at all. It is ALL so crooked and corrupt. Both the GOP and DNC are liars, murderers and thieves. This two-party system will be what destroys our once great Republic.

countrygun
10-20-2012, 14:14
I've noticed that too :supergrin: The same old lies from the same old liars. I used to vote a straight republican ticket, but the last election I voted for Ron Paul as a write in candidate and I plan on doing the exact same thing this time. Ronald Reagan used to say that he never left the democrat party, but the democrat party left him. That is exactly how I feel about todays republican party. All the lies, the cheating, and the vote tampering that took place in this years republican primary and convention were enough to make me say that I cannot vote for Mitt Romney. Come election day I will either write in Ron Paul or just not even bother to vote at all. It is ALL so crooked and corrupt. Both the GOP and DNC are liars, murderers and thieves. This two-party system will be what destroys our once great Republic.


MOST people who have paid attention will have noticed that there are many here who have voted for a "libertarian' candidate before, some many times, some even voted for Paul in the primaries. Many say they would do so again BUT their actual EXPERIENCE in this world has convinced then that getting Obama out of office RIGHT NOW is more important than "Making a statement" or making themselves feel all warm and fuzzy.

Again, this isn't because they are prone to "panic" "Most important election" influence, or they never would have voted libertarian in the first place.

They have suspended long held beliefs to deal with a real threat in the White House based on what they have learned over the years.

That should make you sit up and take notice.

aspartz
10-20-2012, 14:56
^^^^actually, country, they did. they changed the face of politics for 8 years. the nightmare commonly called the clinton era.

thank you ross perot.:steamed:

i learned that lesson a little too late.
Too bad the GOP learned nothing from the lesson either.

ARS

countrygun
10-20-2012, 16:14
Too bad the GOP learned nothing from the lesson either.

ARS

To bad the libertarians haven't learned.




"Insanity": "repeatedly doing the same thing and expecting a different result"

Snowman92D
10-20-2012, 16:22
Anyone on this forum that believes that O'Bama is still worth considering over Romney is seriously deluded. Wake up and smell the tapioca, guys - O'Bama is a freaking socialist, nutbag, foodstamp-giving, gun-grabber who WILL change the Supreme Court in such a way that we will never recover from.

Mittens is the ONLY choice we have, so stop whining about how it'd be better to have another choice. There isn't one.

If I had a son...he'd talk like porshedog. :thumbsup:

Providence
10-20-2012, 19:27
Getting rid of o. Is too important. With o. we moved to a new level of corruption. A new level of govt. control. A new level of crap! We've got to get rid of O.!

G19G20
10-22-2012, 18:08
Getting rid of o. Is too important. With o. we moved to a new level of corruption. A new level of govt. control. A new level of crap! We've got to get rid of O.!

How exactly is it a new level of corruption? Obama has been doing EXACTLY what both Republican and Democrat administrations have been doing for a long time.

No one can convince me that replacing Obama's administration with GWB administration retreads with Romney as the figurehead is the answer.

countrygun
10-22-2012, 18:20
How exactly is it a new level of corruption? Obama has been doing EXACTLY what both Republican and Democrat administrations have been doing for a long time.

No one can convince me that replacing Obama's administration with GWB administration retreads with Romney as the figurehead is the answer.

If you don't see a difference between Romney and Obama, you can't see to the end of your own nose.

jdavionic
10-22-2012, 18:23
How exactly is it a new level of corruption? Obama has been doing EXACTLY what both Republican and Democrat administrations have been doing for a long time.

No one can convince me that replacing Obama's administration with GWB administration retreads with Romney as the figurehead is the answer.

Here's a simple question. Can you take Obama's platform and show item-by-item how it lines up with Romney's? If so, please do so.

G19G20
10-22-2012, 18:24
If you don't see a difference between Romney and Obama, you can't see to the end of your own nose.

Oh I "see" a difference alright. It's when I turn the tv off and just listen to what they both say and what their records are that I don't "see" any difference. I don't care what my eyes can "see" since I don't vote based on how someone looks.

G19G20
10-22-2012, 18:26
Here's a simple question. Can you take Obama's platform and show item-by-item how it lines up with Romney's? If so, please do so.

Already covered here:

http://www.glocktalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1446818

jdavionic
10-22-2012, 18:30
Already covered here:

http://www.glocktalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1446818

So that's a no then. Got it. Hey, what happened to your Ronbot Avatar?

concretefuzzynuts
10-22-2012, 18:31
Already covered here:

http://www.glocktalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1446818

Yeah but the current gun statements by the two kinda change things, don't you think?

countrygun
10-22-2012, 18:32
So that's a no then. Got it. Hey, what happened to your Ronbot Avatar?

He doen't want to appear to be a butt hurt loser....like the avatar had much to so with it:upeyes:

Cavalry Doc
10-22-2012, 18:35
So that's a no then. Got it. Hey, what happened to your Ronbot Avatar?

http://www.nastyhobbit.org/forum/animated_gifs/sparta-car-crash.gif

G19G20
10-22-2012, 18:37
Yeah but the current gun statements by the two kinda change things, don't you think?

Not if you care what either candidate has ever said in the past before running for President. It's apparent you don't care about records, only hearing what you want to hear right now. I don't function that way.

So that's a no then. Got it. Hey, what happened to your Ronbot Avatar?

It's been retired. The message will continue unchanged but for now, Im going to just remind everyone how nothing will change regardless of which shade of skin they vote for on Nov 6.

countrygun
10-22-2012, 18:40
Not if you care what either candidate has ever said in the past before running for President. It's apparent you don't care about records, only hearing what you want to hear right now. I don't function that way.

What's a maiier not enough juice left to run your Paulbot servos?

QNman
10-22-2012, 18:59
It's been retired. The message will continue unchanged but for now, Im going to just remind everyone how nothing will change regardless of which shade of skin they vote for on Nov 6.

Here's a new avatar for you... you know, to "stay fresh".

http://images3.makefive.com/images/experiences/life/five-fads-you-took-part-in/troll-doll-7.jpg

concretefuzzynuts
10-22-2012, 18:59
Not if you care what either candidate has ever said in the past before running for President. It's apparent you don't care about records, only hearing what you want to hear right now. I don't function that way.


Easy there big dog. I drew no blood, just asked a question.

It does matter that one said more gun laws and one said no more gun laws, in my "hearing what I want to hear" opinion.

G19G20
10-22-2012, 19:01
Here's a new avatar for you... you know, to "stay fresh".

http://images3.makefive.com/images/experiences/life/five-fads-you-took-part-in/troll-doll-7.jpg

Hey, it's white so why not? Now if it was a black one that would be sooooo bad.

onalandline
10-22-2012, 19:04
I just want to make sure this is absolutely clear.
Romney says if he is elected he will sign an assault weapons ban if one is brought to him. Just like george bush said he would. The republican party is not really pro-second amendment. The guy who is in favor of an assault weapons ban is the guy who will be picking supreme court justices.
Better than the dems? Sure, but not much.
I'll be voting for a guy and party that does not really support the second amendment.
I wish people would stop pretending republicans are pro-second amendment.
Romney supports assault weapons ban? - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wgZ6AuHnmk0)

Bull****!!!!!

countrygun
10-22-2012, 19:15
So far, in the last hour or so, Dirkha19Dirkha20 has popped in to several threads/ He has

Accused America of sucking up to Israel

Condemned people for being harsh on Muslims

and

Condemned the FBIs methods of arresting Terrorist plotting bombings.


Any body see a freaking pattern to his posts??????

QNman
10-22-2012, 20:48
So far, in the last hour or so, Dirkha19Dirkha20 has popped in to several threads/ He has

Accused America of sucking up to Israel

Condemned people for being harsh on Muslims

and

Condemned the FBIs methods of arresting Terrorist plotting bombings.


Any body see a freaking pattern to his posts??????

Yes, but this from the poster that thinks the CIA organized the attacks in Benghazi.

countrygun
10-22-2012, 20:56
Yes, but this from the poster that thinks the CIA organized the attacks in Benghazi.

i forgot to add that to the list.

sort of like the Imama who said 9/11 was an Israeli plot to turn the US against Islam.

G19G20
10-22-2012, 20:59
So far, in the last hour or so, Dirkha19Dirkha20 has popped in to several threads/ He has

Accused America of sucking up to Israel

Condemned people for being harsh on Muslims

and

Condemned the FBIs methods of arresting Terrorist plotting bombings.


Any body see a freaking pattern to his posts??????

No, because people here don't recognize patterns. How can someone recognize a pattern while they're busy licking boots?

QNman
10-22-2012, 21:03
No, because people here don't recognize patterns. How can someone recognize a pattern while they're busy licking boots?

Don't know... maybe you can explain it to us. Probably a governmental brainwashing conspiracy, to which those of you with "specific brain types" are immune.

Glockenspiel 25
10-22-2012, 21:09
Laugh it up at my expense, that's fine...I'll have the last laugh on November 4th at approximately 11:05 PM when the lovely Rachel MADDOW announces another 4 year term for Obammie, Osama, Hussein, um whatever else you people derogatorily call him, lol

QNman
10-22-2012, 21:11
Laugh it up at my expense, that's fine...I'll have the last laugh on November 4th at approximately 11:05 PM when the lovely Rachel MADDOW announces another 4 year term for Obammie, Osama, Hussein, um whatever else you people derogatorily call him, lol

"Lovely Rachel Maddow"? Trust me - we'll have the last laugh.

G19G20
10-22-2012, 21:13
Laugh it up at my expense, that's fine...I'll have the last laugh on November 4th at approximately 11:05 PM when the lovely Rachel MADDOW announces another 4 year term for Obammie, Osama, Hussein, um whatever else you people derogatorily call him, lol

Psst....the election is Nov 6th.

QNman
10-22-2012, 21:14
Psst....the election is Nov 6th.

:rofl::rofl::rofl:

Pwned!

He'll have the last laugh - ON NOV 4TH!!

:rofl:

QNman
10-22-2012, 21:15
I shoulda caught that... I was stunned by "Lovely" and "Rachel Maddow" being so close to one another in the same sentence.

Snowman92D
10-22-2012, 21:22
No, because people here don't recognize patterns. How can someone recognize a pattern while they're busy licking boots?

Be careful what you wish for. How are you gonna "recognize" which unattached girl in the hotel hospitality room is the hottest if they're all wearing Sharia-compliant burqa outfits...? :shame:

JFrame
10-22-2012, 21:22
:rofl::rofl::rofl:

Pwned!

He'll have the last laugh - ON NOV 4TH!!

:rofl:

I caught that on another thread.

We shouldn't have said anything -- it would have been fun to have Plasticspoon go to the polling station on Sunday and just stand there with his thumb up his/her ***. http://www.kolobok.us/smiles/big_standart/biggrin.gif


.

countrygun
10-22-2012, 21:22
I shoulda caught that... I was stunned by "Lovely" and "Rachel Maddow" being so close to one another in the same sentence.

That WAS shockingly unexpected, "Crockofsqueal" being wrong, nah, par for the course.

JFrame
10-22-2012, 21:23
I shoulda caught that... I was stunned by "Lovely" and "Rachel Maddow" being so close to one another in the same sentence.

Can there be any doubt that Plasticspoon is, in reality, a person of the lesbian persuasion (not that there's anything wrong with that)? :dunno:


.

countrygun
10-22-2012, 21:28
Can there be any doubt that Plasticspoon is, in reality, a person of the lesbian persuasion (not that there's anything wrong with that)? :dunno:


.


There is nothing worse than a lesbian (like crockofsqueal) with bad taste in women.

QNman
10-22-2012, 21:44
There is nothing worse than a lesbian (like crockofsqueal) with bad taste in women.

:rofl::rofl::rofl:

concretefuzzynuts
10-22-2012, 22:00
Psst....the election is Nov 6th.

Multiple thread fail with the same post on the same night.

The Trifecta of internet fails. And from a liberal.

It's like when the ice cream truck had your favorite flavor!!!