[Jerry]

Originally Posted by SpringerTGO

And just because someone is a Democrat, it doesn't mean they are anti 2a.

This is a free country, which means we can vote for whoever we choose.
So if you don't agree with who anyone votes for, they are socialists who don't love our country?????

You are confusing fact with fiction. It's not because I don't agree. That's the fiction part. The "fact" is, The Obomination IS a socialist and he IS anti Second Amendment.

Originally Posted by SpringerTGO

I guess there are more socialists who don't love their country than real Americans.... because Obama won and you disagree.

You guess correctly. There are now more "give-mes" than those of us that love FREEDOM in this country.

Here is where we are:

“The American people will never knowingly adopt socialism. But, under the name of “liberalism,” they will adopt fragments of the socialistic program, until one day America will be a socialist nation, without knowing it happened.” Norman Mattoon Tomas, Socialist presidential candidate 1944
http://catb.org/~esr/fortunes/rkba.html


This is just around the corner:

"A Democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government it can only
exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves largesse
from the public treasury. From that moment on the majority always vote
for the candidates promising the most benefits from the public treasury,
with the result that a Democracy always collapses over loose fiscal
policy, always followed by a dictatorship. The average age of the worlds
greatest civilizations has been two hundred years. These nations have
progressed through this sequence: From bondage to spiritual faith; from
spiritual faith to great courage; from courage to liberty; from liberty
to abundance; from abundance to selfishness; from selfishness to
complacency; from complacence to apathy; from apathy to dependence; from
dependency back again into bondage." [Alexander Fraser Tyler]

You and your ilk have reached the "dependency" stage. Guess what comes next.

[cowboywannabe]

Originally Posted by SpringerTGO

And just because someone is a Democrat, it doesn't mean they are anti 2a.

This is a free country, which means we can vote for whoever we choose.
So if you don't agree with who anyone votes for, they are socialists who don't love our country?????

I guess there are more socialists who don't love their country than real Americans.... because Obama won and you disagree.

do you deny that the obama regime will try to take away some of our gun rights?

[SpringerTGO]

Originally Posted by cowboywannabe

do you deny that the obama regime will try to take away some of our gun rights?

I can no more predict what Obama has in store for gun rights than I could for any other president.
I don't have your special powers.

[cowboywannabe]

Originally Posted by SpringerTGO

I can no more predict what Obama has in store for gun rights than I could for any other president.
I don't have your special powers.

ok, i will try to put this in a way so you dont have to side step the question....do you think obama will try to attack our gun rights in the next four years?

[SpringerTGO]

Originally Posted by cowboywannabe

ok, i will try to put this in a way so you dont have to side step the question....do you think obama will try to attack our gun rights in the next four years?

OK, I will try to put this in a way that you can understand.
I have no way of knowing if Obama will attack our gun rights. My crystal ball is out of order.

[Jerry]

Originally Posted by SpringerTGO

OK, I will try to put this in a way that you can understand.
I have no way of knowing if Obama will attack our gun rights. My crystal ball is out of order.

I don't need a crystalball. All one needs is a memory or how to use an internet searchengine. The Obaminaton said during the debate that he "SUPPORTS" an AWB. He stated he believes the Second Amendment "GRANTS" people the right to hunt. The Second says nothing and has nothing to do with hunting. And there in lies the problem with liberals... they hear, remember and REPEAT what supports there EMOTIONS. Or deny, deny, deny!!!!

[SpringerTGO]

Originally Posted by Jerry

I don't need a crystalball. All one needs is a memory or how to use an internet searchengine. The Obaminaton said during the debate that he "SUPPORTS" an AWB. He stated he believes the Second Amendment "GRANTS" people the right to hunt. The Second says nothing and has nothing to do with hunting. And there in lies the problem with liberals... they hear, remember and REPEAT what supports there EMOTIONS. Or deny, deny, deny!!!!

He's also been in office for 4 years, and we haven't seen a single piece of anti gun legislation passed.
When he was first elected everyone predicted doom and gloom for gun rights, panic bought everything they could get their hands on, and nothing (other than high prices and shortages) came of it.
Other (republican) presidents ushered in things like the government being able to imprison citizens without trials and tap phones without warrants, but somehow they get a pass because they are for prayer in school?

[Gpruitt54]

Originally Posted by onebigelf

Not even close. Let me answer in equal terms. "You people love to define that murder of children is birth control. You want to dictate that the rest of us have to accept unnatural same-sex relations as "marriage" against the dictates of our religions and our moral values (we've offered to accept civil unions to grant legal rights and been rejected). "

John

Problem is, that one group calls themselves small government, then in fact they love big government, especially when they intrude on peoples personal lives.

That is the point you are unskillfully ignoring. Small government conservative...? There is no such animal!

You really don't want to get into a discussion on so-called conservative morals. Don't think those exist either. However, if you need to change the subject...

[Gpruitt54]

Originally Posted by SpringerTGO

He's also been in office for 4 years, and we haven't seen a single piece of anti gun legislation passed.
When he was first elected everyone predicted doom and gloom for gun rights, panic bought everything they could get their hands on, and nothing (other than high prices and shortages) came of it.
Other (republican) presidents ushered in things like the government being able to imprison citizens without trials and tap phones without warrants, but somehow they get a pass because they are for prayer in school?

Agreed, this is the typical self-delusions that is hallmark of the right. They create straw men then self-righteously knock them down; then proclaim themselves victorious. It is the traveling mistrial show; smoke and mirrors, intended to entertain the ignorant rabble then claim as their base.

This is why these kinds of distractions are created; to keep the ignorant rabble ignorant. It seems to be working perfectly.

[SpringerTGO]

Originally Posted by onebigelf

Not even close. Let me answer in equal terms. "You people love to define that murder of children is birth control. You want to dictate that the rest of us have to accept unnatural same-sex relations as "marriage" against the dictates of our religions and our moral values (we've offered to accept civil unions to grant legal rights and been rejected). "

John

And you would force everyone to watch your kids pray in school. Like there is a shortage of places to pray.
Or how about putting images in front of public buildings?
It's OK for you to impose your religion and "moral values" on those around you. Because yours is, no doubt, the one true religion.

[Jerry]

Originally Posted by SpringerTGO

He's also been in office for 4 years, and we haven't seen a single piece of anti gun legislation passed.

You really are clueless aren't you? The Demorats lost MANY Congregational seats over "gun control". The Republicants lost MANY Congregational seats over "gun control". The Congress was too afraid to SEND ANY GUN CONTROL BILLS TO THE OBOMINATION. Now that he has won a second and last term he may get to seat one or two anti gun Justices. He will try to push for another AWB HE SAID HE WOULD.

Originally Posted by SpringerTGO

When he was first elected everyone predicted doom and gloom for gun rights, panic bought everything they could get their hands on, and nothing (other than high prices and shortages) came of it.
Other (republican) presidents ushered in things like the government being able to imprison citizens without trials and tap phones without warrants, but somehow they get a pass because they are for prayer in school?

They though he would do it because of his "HISTORY". He also said he would not run again if the economy didn't improve. It didn't he ran, he got reelected. He can't run again so there is nothing to stop him from doing as much damage as possible (other than the congress) in the next four years. They didn't stop him the last time why would they this time?

He may not get any gun control passed but it won't be for the lack of trying. Will we hear about it? Probably not! Remember his PROMISE for transparency. It brought us Obama Care, Fast and Furious and the death of an Ambassador, several Seals and assorted other good people.

He talks you believe. Some of us look at the record. The record says he will try for some sort of gun control. The record proves he's a narcissist, socialist liar.

Originally Posted by SpringerTGO

And you would force everyone to watch your kids pray in school. Like there is a shortage of places to pray.
Or how about putting images in front of public buildings?
It's OK for you to impose your religion and "moral values" on those around you. Because yours is, no doubt, the one true religion.

How exactly does one FORCE someone to WATCH someone pray?

This country was built on Christin values. Read the Constitution. ENDOWED BY the CREATOR. So now you what to put the ca-bash on the First Amendment. What part of, "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;" don't you comprehend. What's really funny about this is I'm not a religious man. I just happen to believer in the Constitution and FREEDOM. Exactly how does it cause harm to anyone for someone to pray or put up a religious display. Socialists want to control behavior (when it comes to religion) that cause no harm, yet they will champion pornography and degenerate behavior. The reason they hate the display of religion is because they have no morals and religion promotes morality.

Isn't it telling how the "liberals" want to stop "religious" (Christian religion) displays while promoting the teaching of Suzy Has Two Mommies, Bobby Has Two Daddies and Islam to the children in PUBLIC schools. If you believe I'm wrong... Google is your friend.

[countrygun]

Originally Posted by SpringerTGO

He's also been in office for 4 years, and we haven't seen a single piece of anti gun legislation passed.
When he was first elected everyone predicted doom and gloom for gun rights, panic bought everything they could get their hands on, and nothing (other than high prices and shortages) came of it.
Other (republican) presidents ushered in things like the government being able to imprison citizens without trials and tap phones without warrants, but somehow they get a pass because they are for prayer in school?

He has "More flexibility" now.

[SpringerTGO]

Originally Posted by countrygun

He has "More flexibility" now.

Your point was better thought out, and more logical, but I really enjoyed Jerry's rant more

Jerry..... I don't want my taxes going to pay teachers to waste time with prayer sessions in schools. If you want your kids to pray, there is plenty of time before school, after school, and during weekends. I would have the same position if your kids wanted to interrupt class to bow to Alluh.

[cowboywannabe]

springertgo, it appears that you are an obama apologist. thats o.k. if youd admit it instead of lieing and saying you need a crystal ball to tell others what you think, you are allowed to think arent you?

[Clutch Cargo]

Originally Posted by BADOS

Well, I guess it's time to speak my piece and it won't be pretty.

There will not be any change in the second amendment if Obama is re elected. That being said, if I remember correctly, the second amendment came about while muskets were fashionable. It's time to reassess the law. Our average citizens don't need assault rifles with 100 round drum magazines and you don't need an AK47 to go hunting. These weapons are dangerous in the hands of other than Military or Police. Also, for those people who think a revolutions is coming, I want what your'e drinking.

Methinks you should look up the DOD definition of assault weapon. They are in the business of using weapons, not the politicians. Yes, I DO OWN a real assault weapon.

The framers of the Constitution wanted the SAME weapons in the hands of the populace as in the hands of the militia. Why are you concerned with "assault weapons" when one can kill MANY more people with an 18 wheel truck. There's millions of assault automobiles out there. Look out for that bulldozer!

Do you propose to ban Oldsmobiles?

[SpringerTGO]

Originally Posted by cowboywannabe

springertgo, it appears that you are an obama apologist. thats o.k. if youd admit it instead of lieing and saying you need a crystal ball to tell others what you think, you are allowed to think arent you?

I'm not apologizing for Obama. He was the better of the 2 candidates.
You sound a lot like my GF when you tell me I should know what someone is thinking or planning. You wouldn't have a twin sister, would you?

[cowboywannabe]

Originally Posted by SpringerTGO

I'm not apologizing for Obama. He was the better of the 2 candidates.
You sound a lot like my GF when you tell me I should know what someone is thinking or planning. You wouldn't have a twin sister, would you?

i understand that you wont even guess at what obama might do to our gun rights....its typical of his appeasers.

i dont need a crystal ball to think and make an educated guess as to what somebody might do based on their past.

if you separate from the collective let us know what you think.

[SpringerTGO]

Originally Posted by cowboywannabe

i understand that you wont even guess at what obama might do to our gun rights....its typical of his appeasers.

i dont need a crystal ball to think and make an educated guess as to what somebody might do based on their past.

if you separate from the collective let us know what you think.

Based on the past Obama hasn't done a thing to our gun rights.
You must have a very powerful crystal ball.

[cowboywannabe]

Originally Posted by SpringerTGO

Based on the past Obama hasn't done a thing to our gun rights.
You must have a very powerful crystal ball.

MAGUA UNDERSTANDS APPEASER VERY MUCH.

[Bren]

Originally Posted by SpringerTGO

OK, I will try to put this in a way that you can understand.
I have no way of knowing if Obama will attack our gun rights. My crystal ball is out of order.

How about your TV - did you watch the debate where he said we need an assault weapon ban? Are you at all familiar with thye history of democrats and gun control. If YOU are a democrat, YOU support gun control and have voted for it, whether you think so or not.

[Bren]

Originally Posted by SpringerTGO

Based on the past Obama hasn't done a thing to our gun rights.
You must have a very powerful crystal ball.

If you put blinders on a mule, it keeps him walking in line and limits what he can see. That's how the democrats chose their mascot.

[Jerry]

Originally Posted by SpringerTGO

Your point was better thought out, and more logical, but I really enjoyed Jerry's rant more

Jerry..... I don't want my taxes going to pay teachers to waste time with prayer sessions in schools. If you want your kids to pray, there is plenty of time before school, after school, and during weekends. I would have the same position if your kids wanted to interrupt class to bow to Alluh.

You didn't say "teach" you said "forced to listen to your child pray." I don't believe religion, any religion should be "taught" in public schools. That does mean a child or teacher should be "DENIED" their RIGHT to pray at recess, on brakes on before or after school on school property. It's public property just like the streets that run around it. I guess you would stop a person from praying in the street?

A Christmas-tree and Santa don't represent a religious function, it represents "The Holidays", isn't that what you lefties like to call that time of year. It sure is funny though how The Muslim religion is being "examined, discussed, taught" in public schools while Christianity is taboo. They celebrate Romodon or how ever in the hell it's spelled but don't anyone dare hang up a picture of Santa. Funny how evolution is "taught" but don't mention Creation, that constitutes "religious" speech and will get a teacher fired. Funny how homosexuality is being examined, discussed, taught in public schools while denouncing it will cost a teacher his/her job for hate peach. Education involves discussion all facets, sides and angles of any given subject. All that is being "TAUGHT" is the wrong side of "religion". That's as wrong as teaching religion is "ALL GOOD". How do you feel about your tax money being spent for indoctrination rather than education?

[cowboywannabe]

Originally Posted by Jerry

You didn't say "teach" you said "forced to listen to your child pray." I don't believe religion, any religion should be "taught" in public schools. A Christmas-tree and Santa don't represent a religious function, it represents "The Holidays", isn't that what you lefties like to call that time of year. It sure is funny though how The Muslim religion is being "examined, discussed, taught" in public schools while Christianity is taboo. Funny how evolution is "taught" but don't mention Creation. Funny how homosexuality is being examined, discussed, taught in public schools while denouncing it will cost a teacher his/her job for hate peach. How do you feel about your tax money being spent for indoctrination rather than education? Education involves discussion all facets, sides and angles of any given subject. All that is being "TAUGHT" is the wrong side of "religion". That as wrong as teaching religion is "ALL GOOD".

Jer, i think this thread has run its course, he seems to have an undefeatable ignorance.

[SpringerTGO]

Originally Posted by Jerry

You didn't say "teach" you said "forced to listen to your child pray." I don't believe religion, any religion should be "taught" in public schools. That does mean a child or teacher should be "DENIED" their RIGHT to pray at recess, on brakes on before or after school on school property. It's public property just like the streets that run around it. I guess you would stop a person from praying in the street?

A Christmas-tree and Santa don't represent a religious function, it represents "The Holidays", isn't that what you lefties like to call that time of year. It sure is funny though how The Muslim religion is being "examined, discussed, taught" in public schools while Christianity is taboo. They celebrate Romodon or how ever in the hell it's spelled but don't anyone dare hang up a picture of Santa. Funny how evolution is "taught" but don't mention Creation, that constitutes "religious" speech and will get a teacher fired. Funny how homosexuality is being examined, discussed, taught in public schools while denouncing it will cost a teacher his/her job for hate peach. Education involves discussion all facets, sides and angles of any given subject. All that is being "TAUGHT" is the wrong side of "religion". That's as wrong as teaching religion is "ALL GOOD". How do you feel about your tax money being spent for indoctrination rather than education?

This warrants a thread all it's own.
Religious studies are fine, as long as they are not biased. There is a difference between Santa Claus and nativity scenes in front of a court house.
Homosexuality is not going away by denying it, and at some appropriate age students should probably be taught about it.
There is solid scientific proof about evolution, and not a shred of evidence about "creationism".

As to Obama saying he was against assault weapons during the debate...... Romney said all kinds of things during the debates that he immediately changed his mind on. There seems to be a big difference between saying something during a campaign and actually doing it. Romney would have destroyed the middle and lower class of this country, and bankrupted it in the process. That was the only message he was consistent on. What little actual specifics he gave were b.s. Even mainstream republicans had to hold their noses while voting for him.

[countrygun]

Originally Posted by SpringerTGO

Based on the past Obama hasn't done a thing to our gun rights.
You must have a very powerful crystal ball.

* 1994 to 2001 – Obama was on the board of the anti-gun Joyce Foundation. This foundation is the largest funding source for radical anti-gun groups in the country.
* 1996 – Obama supported a ban on the manufacture, sale and possession of handguns.
* 1999 – Obama proposed a 500 percent increase in the excise taxes on firearms and ammunition. This tax would effectively punish gun owners for buying guns and ammunition.
* 2003 – Obama voted in support of legislation that would have banned privately owned hunting shotguns, target rifles and black powder rifles in Illinois.
* 2004 – Obama voted against legislation intended to protect homeowners from prosecution in cases where they used a firearm to halt a home invasion.



Of cousre that was before he was POTUS, but we call those "clues".