McCain suspends work on the economy

A forum not related to waterfowl for discussing the more controversial and hot topic issues in our world from immigration, politics, the war, etc..

Moderators: Smackaduck, MM

Postby SpinnerMan » Tue Oct 07, 2008 4:56 pm

A politician thinks of the next election; a statesman of the next generation. A politician looks for the success of his party; a statesman for that of the country. The statesman wished to steer, while the politician was satisfied to drift.
User avatar
SpinnerMan
hunter
 
Posts: 16304
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2005 11:24 am
Location: Joliet, IL


Postby Brydog » Tue Oct 07, 2008 5:52 pm

pennsyltucky wrote::rofl: :rofl: sooooo you are voting for obama because you hate paying so little in taxes? because you dont want to own guns anymore, but just cant give them up on your own? because you just cant stand to make decisions on your own so you would like government to do it for you? you like paying astronomical prices for healthcare, and would like the rest of us who dont, to join you?


Give your record player a good tap,,, it's stuck on stupid/brianwashed.

You're just another one of the sheeple being herded to where the Shepard wants you.
You've heard about what Sheperd's do to their sheep haven't you ?

FYI,,, The sky isn't falling. Your guns are safe. The guns BS is brought up in every election cycle by the Retardlickin's as a scare tactic.

Go stand in front of your mirror, slap yourself, and say,,, WAKE UP STUPID !!! :eek:
“I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer God than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours.”
~Stephen Roberts
User avatar
Brydog
Banned
 
Posts: 4941
Joined: Tue Nov 01, 2005 1:00 pm
Location: Lake Isabella Michigan, Houghton Lake Michigan

Postby seastreet » Tue Oct 07, 2008 6:21 pm

Brydog wrote:Your guns are safe.


I guess Obama's Illinois legislation record was just made up by Republicans hacking into the Illinois state legislative files? Obama's record is clear and there for everyone to see. Anyone denying that is retarded and in need of a battery acid enema.
Glimmerjim wrote: I may be slow but I'm dumb!
User avatar
seastreet
hunter
 
Posts: 1686
Joined: Thu Jan 04, 2007 1:56 pm
Location: Downeast, NC

Postby Brydog » Tue Oct 07, 2008 6:23 pm

I thought I just heard Charlie Brown's teacher. :lol: :lol: :lol:

Wonk, Wonk, Wonkity Wonk....
“I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer God than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours.”
~Stephen Roberts
User avatar
Brydog
Banned
 
Posts: 4941
Joined: Tue Nov 01, 2005 1:00 pm
Location: Lake Isabella Michigan, Houghton Lake Michigan

Postby seastreet » Tue Oct 07, 2008 6:31 pm

Brydog wrote:I thought I just heard Charlie Brown's teacher. :lol: :lol: :lol:

Wonk, Wonk, Wonkity Wonk....


Image
Glimmerjim wrote: I may be slow but I'm dumb!
User avatar
seastreet
hunter
 
Posts: 1686
Joined: Thu Jan 04, 2007 1:56 pm
Location: Downeast, NC

Postby semo88 » Tue Oct 07, 2008 6:35 pm

seastreet wrote:
Brydog wrote:Your guns are safe.


I guess Obama's Illinois legislation record was just made up by Republicans hacking into the Illinois state legislative files? Obama's record is clear and there for everyone to see. Anyone denying that is retarded and in need of a battery acid enema.


For the record, I don’t deny Obama’s voting record and acknowledge that he is probably less of a “friend” to gun owners than McCain. That being said…

Obama was an elected official in a very urban district, correct? Urban areas are nearly always subject to higher levels of gun violence. This causes those who are not gun owners to think that if guns are outlawed, crime will go down. Although this philosophy is most likely wrong, this is probably what those in Obama’s district wanted. I would guess Obama, in a bid to get reelected, did what most politicians do to try to get reelected, he listened to his constituents.

His voting record on the issue is clear, but I think you have to consider the circumstances and the location of where he was basing his opinions and his votes. If Obama were a senator in somewhere like where I lived and had the same voting record, not only would he not be reelected, he would probably be run out of office. I realize that I am “liberal” on gun control when compared to some of you, so this explanation may not please everybody, just the way I see it. I’m not trying to cloud and issue or make excuses, just trying to make sense out of it myself.
semo88
hunter
 
Posts: 704
Joined: Fri Sep 28, 2007 6:11 pm
Location: Missouri

Postby seastreet » Tue Oct 07, 2008 6:40 pm

semo88 wrote:
seastreet wrote:
Brydog wrote:Your guns are safe.


I guess Obama's Illinois legislation record was just made up by Republicans hacking into the Illinois state legislative files? Obama's record is clear and there for everyone to see. Anyone denying that is retarded and in need of a battery acid enema.


For the record, I don’t deny Obama’s voting record and acknowledge that he is probably less of a “friend” to gun owners than McCain. That being said…

Obama was an elected official in a very urban district, correct? Urban areas are nearly always subject to higher levels of gun violence. This causes those who are not gun owners to think that if guns are outlawed, crime will go down. Although this philosophy is most likely wrong, this is probably what those in Obama’s district wanted. I would guess Obama, in a bid to get reelected, did what most politicians do to try to get reelected, he listened to his constituents.

His voting record on the issue is clear, but I think you have to consider the circumstances and the location of where he was basing his opinions and his votes. If Obama were a senator in somewhere like where I lived and had the same voting record, not only would he not be reelected, he would probably be run out of office. I realize that I am “liberal” on gun control when compared to some of you, so this explanation may not please everybody, just the way I see it. I’m not trying to cloud and issue or make excuses, just trying to make sense out of it myself.


Problem is that most people think the 2nd Amendment is about your hunting guns. Clue for you... The 2nd Amendment has absolutely NOTHING to do with hunting. As George Washington said most astutely... Firearms are the people's liberty's teeth.
Glimmerjim wrote: I may be slow but I'm dumb!
User avatar
seastreet
hunter
 
Posts: 1686
Joined: Thu Jan 04, 2007 1:56 pm
Location: Downeast, NC

Postby semo88 » Tue Oct 07, 2008 6:46 pm

I agree, it wasn’t addressing hunting guns, but what was your point?
semo88
hunter
 
Posts: 704
Joined: Fri Sep 28, 2007 6:11 pm
Location: Missouri

Postby Brydog » Tue Oct 07, 2008 6:50 pm

Agreed semo88 ! :thumbsup: Same here in the North Country...
“I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer God than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours.”
~Stephen Roberts
User avatar
Brydog
Banned
 
Posts: 4941
Joined: Tue Nov 01, 2005 1:00 pm
Location: Lake Isabella Michigan, Houghton Lake Michigan

Postby seastreet » Tue Oct 07, 2008 7:01 pm

semo88 wrote:I agree, it wasn’t addressing hunting guns, but what was your point?


People are naive in thinking that Obama & Biden aren't coming after your guns. Everyone is forgetting that Biden was one of the authors of the Assault Weapons Ban bill passed in the 90's.

From Obama's website...

V. PROTECT THE RIGHTS OF SPORTSMEN
*Hunting and Fishing are storied traditions in South Dakota. Hunters have access to nearly 5 million acres of public land. While it is known as the pheasant state, South Dakota is also known for its big game, waterfowl, turkey and varmint hunting as well.

*Protect Gun Rights: Millions of hunters own and use guns each year. Millions more participate in a variety of shooting sports such as sporting clays, skeet, target and trap shooting that may not necessarily involve hunting. As a former constitutional law professor, Barack Obama believes the Second Amendment creates an individual right, and he greatly respects the constitutional rights of Americans to bear arms. He will protect the rights of hunters and other law-abiding Americans to purchase, own, transport, and use guns for the purposes of hunting and target shooting. He also believes that the right is subject to reasonable and commonsense regulation.


Yet, when looking for his stances and voting record, here is what I found...


http://www.gunowners.org/pres08/obama.htm

Obama to Get the Dems 'Barack' into the Business of Gun Controlby Erich Pratt
Director of Communications

It sounded like a report from the National Enquirer. **** Cheney and Barack Obama... cousins?

Say it ain't so, Mrs. Cheney.

But in fact, the Vice-President's wife revealed this bombshell in her recent book, Blue Skies, No Fences. According to Lynne Cheney, the current veep and the Illinois Democrat Senator, who wants to be the next president, are distant cousins -- eighth cousins, to be exact.1

When hit with this revelation, the Obama campaign took the news in stride, saying that, "Every family has a black sheep."2

All kidding aside, it's too bad that **** Cheney and Barack Obama didn't do more shooting and target practice together in their youth, because today, they couldn't be more polar opposites when it comes to the Second Amendment.

Whereas one would be hard-pressed to find an anti-gun vote on Cheney's House record -- as he served the state of Wyoming for many years -- Obama's gun record is just simply atrocious.

Oh sure, Obama told Iowa radio listeners last year that he is a "strong believer" in the rights of hunters and sportsmen, and that homeowners should have a firearm "to protect their home and their family." But then in the next breath, he says, "It's hard for me to find a rationale for having a 17-clip semiautomatic [sic]."3

Good thing the ban on magazines that Obama supports was not in effect during the Los Angeles riots of 1992. That's when Korean merchants successfully used their semi-autos -- with large magazines containing multiple rounds -- to keep looters away from their stores. Their businesses remained standing, even while many others (which were left unprotected) burned to the ground.

Obama supports the existing gun control laws on the books. Nowhere in his literature or in his campaign speeches does he stake out a position in favor of repealing any gun control measure that has passed into law.

Not surprisingly, Obama supports the gun ban in the nation's capital, saying the "DC handgun law is constitutional."4 And he is opposed to people using guns for self-defense, when those guns are owned in localities like Washington, DC and Chicago where firearms are banned.

Illinois resident Hale DeMar was prosecuted by the town of Wilmette for using a handgun in his home to defend his family in 2003. Because Wilmette had imposed a ban on the possession of handguns, several Illinois state legislators introduced SB 2165 to protect the right of self-defense for residents like DeMar.

True to form, Obama voted against the pro-gun legislation.5

It is very telling that Obama moved further to the left than most of the liberal legislators in his state. The self-defense bill protecting gun owners like DeMar passed the state senate 41-16 and was later enacted into law over the governor's veto (and over Obama's opposition).

The concealed carry of firearms is another important issue for gun owners, and yet Obama is not only opposed to citizens carrying guns, he supports using federal laws to override those states which currently allow the practice.

In 2004, Obama said he supports a national ban on concealed carry because the states that allow it are "threatening the safety of Illinois residents."6 Never mind the fact that concealed carry laws have improved the safety of citizens in the states that have enacted such laws.7

Obama has also taken a strong position in favor of the Clinton semi-auto ban which sunset in 2004. "I believe we need to renew -- not roll back -- this common sense gun law," Obama said.8

Well, there's nothing that's "common sense" about the Clinton ban. Not only did it outlaw almost 200 types of firearms, legislators like Senator Chuck Schumer of New York tried to amend the law (before it sunset) to include additional types of semi-autos -- even banning classic (wood-stock) long guns such as the Remington shotgun which Senator John Kerry received as a gift during his 2004 presidential bid.9

Bottom line: Senator Obama may not be as gun ban-crazed as the infamous Chuck Schumer. He may not lay awake at night dreaming of ways to disarm honest gun owners. But sure enough, Obama is a committed anti-gunner.

The chart below lays out the key votes and positions that Sen. Obama has taken over the past few years.

Barack Obama's Gun-Related Votes The U.S. Senate Debated:
Obama
Voted:

Supporting concealed carry for citizens: Anti-gun
Banning many common semi-automatic firearms: Anti-gun
Disallowing self-defense in towns where guns are banned: Anti-gun
Imposing one handgun a month restrictions: Anti-gun
Requiring lock up your safety trigger locks: Anti-gun
Protecting gun dealers from frivolous lawsuits: Anti-gun
Outlawing gun confiscations during a national emergency: Pro-gun
Squelching the free speech rights of gun owners: Anti-gun
Restricting the interstate sales of firearms: Anti-gun
Repealing the gun ban in Washington, DC: Anti-gun


Just a few more things Obama supported while a state senator...

He supported a 500 % increase in federal ammo tax

He supported banning "compact" guns

He supported limiting the amount of guns you can purchase

He supported banning all guns sales (except antique) at gun shows

He supported charging a person with a felony offense if a gun is stolen from their home

He supported the prohibition of people under the age of 21 from owning possessing ANY firearm. ( no more youth hunting)

He supported a giant increase in gun dealers licensing fees

He supported making it illegal to sell a gun within 5 miles of a school or park

He supported the ban on police agencies from selling old service weapons to generate funds for new ones.

He was also the director of the JOYCE foundation which is the largest supporter of radical anti gun groups ( he gave $19 million) including 1.5 million to the ultra radical Violence Policy Center.

Here are some upcoming bills and legislation.

Banning all non serialized/encoded ammo

Banning lead bullets

Banning guns that don't "micro stamp"

Banning "large" ammo mags

Ban all conventional ammo as "armor piercing"

Ban "nonsporting" ammo

Banning Hollow point

Banning or prohibitivley taxing handgun ammo

Banning ammo and guns through consumer product legislation.

Banning .25, .32 ,9mm, 5.7x28, and all 50 cal. ammo

Ban All Black talon, Rhino, Hydro shok, and all other ammo specifically for self defense.



Obama voiced support for or voted to enact laws for:

A ban on all handguns

To ban the sale or transfer of all semiautomatic firearms. (that includes your Benelli shotgun)

Ban the right to carry a concealed weapon in everystate, nation wide.

Ban all home ownership of firearms, even for self defense

He vote against a bill that would excuse people who in violation of a gun ban could be prosecuted for defending themselves. (what that means is if you keep your glock after its banned, and shoot someone defending your life, you go on trial for murder)

He supported a law that all firearms must be stored with individual locks regardless of bulk(safe type) storage.

He voted "present" when asked if he was in support of teenage gang member criminals as adults. Even if the gang member killed someone, they could not receive death.

He opposes mandatory sentencing guidelines for armed criminals.

He supports the DC gun ban.



And finally...

Voted NO on prohibiting lawsuits against gun manufacturers. (Jul 2005)

Ban semi-automatics, and more possession restrictions. (Jul 1998)

2000: cosponsored bill to limit purchases to 1 gun per month.

Seems to me that Obama's talk doesn't match his walk. This man as president, with a Democratically controlled Congress would be very dangerous for your second amendment rights.
Glimmerjim wrote: I may be slow but I'm dumb!
User avatar
seastreet
hunter
 
Posts: 1686
Joined: Thu Jan 04, 2007 1:56 pm
Location: Downeast, NC

Postby Pacific Fisher » Tue Oct 07, 2008 10:43 pm

And Neidermeyer,

Let us all not forget that Ronald Reagan supported the Brady Bill.
Pacific Fisher
hunter
 
Posts: 454
Joined: Mon Aug 11, 2008 9:36 am
Location: Gualala, CA

Postby seastreet » Wed Oct 08, 2008 7:13 am

Pacific Fisher wrote:And Neidermeyer,

Let us all not forget that Ronald Reagan supported the Brady Bill.


Reagan's running for POTUS? Why? Did he register to vote in Ohio via ACORN? :huh:
Glimmerjim wrote: I may be slow but I'm dumb!
User avatar
seastreet
hunter
 
Posts: 1686
Joined: Thu Jan 04, 2007 1:56 pm
Location: Downeast, NC

Postby Brydog » Wed Oct 08, 2008 7:36 am

Ronnie Ray Gun can't recall ! :lol:
“I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer God than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours.”
~Stephen Roberts
User avatar
Brydog
Banned
 
Posts: 4941
Joined: Tue Nov 01, 2005 1:00 pm
Location: Lake Isabella Michigan, Houghton Lake Michigan

Postby GroundSwatter » Wed Oct 08, 2008 7:55 am

Problem is that most people think the 2nd Amendment is about your hunting guns. Clue for you... The 2nd Amendment has absolutely NOTHING to do with hunting. As George Washington said most astutely... Firearms are the people's liberty's teeth.


Yes, the second amendment basically is there so that if the government ever got too corrupt or if in a time of crisis, you could defend yourself.

so lets get rid of your right do defend yourself and on to what constitutes a hunting gun.

So handguns obviously aren't used for hunting, oh wait in some states you can hunt for hogs and various other game with them, but b/c they're compact and could be used for self defense lets ban them.

So where do they draw the line of what a hunting gun is? I have an AR-15, I use it for varmint hunting, well lets ban that b/c it has Assault Rifle in the name and has a magazine, even though it is a perfectly good varmint gun.

Oh wait, but my semi auto shotgun its kinda like an assualt gun and the military uses them so it should be banned..

So now we're down to a pump and a bolt action rifle, well those hold multiple rounds, lets toss them. Our military uses pumps and back in WWII they used bolt actions so that can't be that obsolete.

So now I'm down to a single shot shotgun and rifle, but oh wait those things still go boom when you pull the trigger.

So now I'm down to a muzzle loader and a bow and arrow. Going to have to actually fight like the founding fathers and the Indians if someone tries to come into my home. Oh wait but the guy busting in is either a criminal or with the government so he'll have an actual fire arm.

So even if its not directly about my hunting guns, where is the line drawn? Who dictates where the line is? Sure most people shouldn't have fully automatic weapons, nobody should have nuclear weapons, but where does it stop? You technically can hunt and defend yourself with a spear, so maybe we should ban spears and knives.

I thought that after the Washington DC Supreme Court ruling everyone would have a wake up call. Obviously a 5-4 split on your 2nd amendment rights, not just some random bill, but your 2nd amendment rights. Something so important that our founding fathers put it second on the list of things to protect, right behind your freedom of speech. It was just 1 vote away from being taken away and nobody wants to wake up and realize that politicians out there don't want you to own a firearm for hunting, self defense, or otherwise.

I bet that once they get rid of the 2nd amendment, the 1st is soon to follow.
It's a fact that 70 percent of the people who purchase heavier tackle do so with the categorical I just lost a huge snook! Einstein Hairdo.The other 30 percent have either Tarpon Fever or are sporting a hand cramped into a claw from a deepwater grouper.
User avatar
GroundSwatter
hunter
 
Posts: 3643
Joined: Fri Oct 26, 2007 3:22 pm
Location: GTMO from NE Texas

Postby SpinnerMan » Wed Oct 08, 2008 8:07 am

What do you all think will happen when Obama appoints the 5th Supreme Court Justice that rules the 2nd Amendment imposes no practical restrictions on the Government?

Obama said heath care is a "right" but 4 liberal judges said that an actual enumerated right is not. Self protection is a God given right that we were all endowed by our Creator.

Only in a crazy liberal/progressive mind is requiring someone to provide a service at someone else's expense is a God given right. You do not have a God given right to other people's time or money. Obama has this so assbackwards it is ridiculous. What the hell are they teaching them at Havard Law School :huh:

This is the heart of Marxism. One person has a right to other people's time and money.

Once the 5th justice scratches the 2nd Amendment from the Constitution, we will get mob rule. It will be complete bans in some jurisdiction, and some states. Trying to figure out where an when you can keep and bear you arms will be a legal nightmare even worse than the insanity today. The Heller case took a big step in the right direction, but if Obama is elected, there is a very good chance that we will go the completely wrong direction. Every municipality like Chicago is fighting the Heller decision. The Supreme Court will likely hear several cases over the next decade. The last decision is the only one that is relevant.

Brydog, you should understand this. How's that dove hunting over there in Michigan? You think you will get rational gun laws :rofl: :rofl:
A politician thinks of the next election; a statesman of the next generation. A politician looks for the success of his party; a statesman for that of the country. The statesman wished to steer, while the politician was satisfied to drift.
User avatar
SpinnerMan
hunter
 
Posts: 16304
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2005 11:24 am
Location: Joliet, IL

Postby GroundSwatter » Wed Oct 08, 2008 8:26 am

I hate the fact that this country is heavily influenced by lobbyists and
I know the NRA gets a lot of criticism for using scare tactics. I used to feel the same way about it. After the Washington DC case its quite apparent that their scare tactics were not far off the mark.

From my cold dead hands!


Also, the fact that Obama is trying to keep the NRA from airing their ad about his anti-gun legislation kind of supports the fact he is not only against the 2nd amendment, but also against the 1st amendment.
It's a fact that 70 percent of the people who purchase heavier tackle do so with the categorical I just lost a huge snook! Einstein Hairdo.The other 30 percent have either Tarpon Fever or are sporting a hand cramped into a claw from a deepwater grouper.
User avatar
GroundSwatter
hunter
 
Posts: 3643
Joined: Fri Oct 26, 2007 3:22 pm
Location: GTMO from NE Texas

Postby Pacific Fisher » Fri Oct 10, 2008 9:48 am

The Trash Talk Express is looking shabbier by the day.

McCain's violating his pledge to the American people to run a campaign on the issues is making him look like a small, hollow desperate man.

How convenient of him to not want his past of: adultery, the Keating Five censure, a drug addict wife, his own Reverend scandal, Palin's which doctor Reverend, Palin's husband's membership in an anti US government secessionist organization.

His personal attack hate and fear mongering may appeal to the hard core right, but to the average and undecided voter it looks pretty damn sad and not very Presidential.
Pacific Fisher
hunter
 
Posts: 454
Joined: Mon Aug 11, 2008 9:36 am
Location: Gualala, CA

Postby Redline29 » Fri Oct 10, 2008 1:33 pm

Pacific Fisher wrote:The Trash Talk Express is looking shabbier by the day.

McCain's violating his pledge to the American people to run a campaign on the issues is making him look like a small, hollow desperate man.

How convenient of him to not want his past of: adultery, the Keating Five censure, a drug addict wife, his own Reverend scandal, Palin's which doctor Reverend, Palin's husband's membership in an anti US government secessionist organization.

His personal attack hate and fear mongering may appeal to the hard core right, but to the average and undecided voter it looks pretty damn sad and not very Presidential.


Are both hemispheres of your brain connected? You might want to go in for a tune up. It seems you are mis-firing on all cylinders
20 Jan 2009...the beginning of an error.
User avatar
Redline29
hunter
 
Posts: 232
Joined: Tue May 20, 2008 11:55 pm
Location: NW, PA

Postby dudejcb » Mon Oct 13, 2008 4:56 pm

Redline,

your tag is, err, uhhh, well... stupid. Okay.

I looked at your profile to learn more about you, and perhaps get some insight about your posts... but there's not much there. No name. no city, no profession, nothin' except that your from NW Pennsylvania. that narrows it down, cus there's only two or three people and a couple dog livin in those parts.

A riddle wrapped in an enigma, wearing camoflage... Redline
:huh:
What's so funny 'bout peace love and understanding?
User avatar
dudejcb
hunter
 
Posts: 5254
Joined: Thu Nov 30, 2006 8:29 am
Location: SW Idaho

Postby bambibuster101 » Mon Oct 13, 2008 5:38 pm

seastreet wrote:
semo88 wrote:I agree, it wasn’t addressing hunting guns, but what was your point?


People are naive in thinking that Obama & Biden aren't coming after your guns. Everyone is forgetting that Biden was one of the authors of the Assault Weapons Ban bill passed in the 90's.

From Obama's website...

V. PROTECT THE RIGHTS OF SPORTSMEN
*Hunting and Fishing are storied traditions in South Dakota. Hunters have access to nearly 5 million acres of public land. While it is known as the pheasant state, South Dakota is also known for its big game, waterfowl, turkey and varmint hunting as well.

*Protect Gun Rights: Millions of hunters own and use guns each year. Millions more participate in a variety of shooting sports such as sporting clays, skeet, target and trap shooting that may not necessarily involve hunting. As a former constitutional law professor, Barack Obama believes the Second Amendment creates an individual right, and he greatly respects the constitutional rights of Americans to bear arms. He will protect the rights of hunters and other law-abiding Americans to purchase, own, transport, and use guns for the purposes of hunting and target shooting. He also believes that the right is subject to reasonable and commonsense regulation.


Yet, when looking for his stances and voting record, here is what I found...


http://www.gunowners.org/pres08/obama.htm

Obama to Get the Dems 'Barack' into the Business of Gun Controlby Erich Pratt
Director of Communications

It sounded like a report from the National Enquirer. **** Cheney and Barack Obama... cousins?

Say it ain't so, Mrs. Cheney.

But in fact, the Vice-President's wife revealed this bombshell in her recent book, Blue Skies, No Fences. According to Lynne Cheney, the current veep and the Illinois Democrat Senator, who wants to be the next president, are distant cousins -- eighth cousins, to be exact.1

When hit with this revelation, the Obama campaign took the news in stride, saying that, "Every family has a black sheep."2

All kidding aside, it's too bad that **** Cheney and Barack Obama didn't do more shooting and target practice together in their youth, because today, they couldn't be more polar opposites when it comes to the Second Amendment.

Whereas one would be hard-pressed to find an anti-gun vote on Cheney's House record -- as he served the state of Wyoming for many years -- Obama's gun record is just simply atrocious.

Oh sure, Obama told Iowa radio listeners last year that he is a "strong believer" in the rights of hunters and sportsmen, and that homeowners should have a firearm "to protect their home and their family." But then in the next breath, he says, "It's hard for me to find a rationale for having a 17-clip semiautomatic [sic]."3

Good thing the ban on magazines that Obama supports was not in effect during the Los Angeles riots of 1992. That's when Korean merchants successfully used their semi-autos -- with large magazines containing multiple rounds -- to keep looters away from their stores. Their businesses remained standing, even while many others (which were left unprotected) burned to the ground.

Obama supports the existing gun control laws on the books. Nowhere in his literature or in his campaign speeches does he stake out a position in favor of repealing any gun control measure that has passed into law.

Not surprisingly, Obama supports the gun ban in the nation's capital, saying the "DC handgun law is constitutional."4 And he is opposed to people using guns for self-defense, when those guns are owned in localities like Washington, DC and Chicago where firearms are banned.

Illinois resident Hale DeMar was prosecuted by the town of Wilmette for using a handgun in his home to defend his family in 2003. Because Wilmette had imposed a ban on the possession of handguns, several Illinois state legislators introduced SB 2165 to protect the right of self-defense for residents like DeMar.

True to form, Obama voted against the pro-gun legislation.5

It is very telling that Obama moved further to the left than most of the liberal legislators in his state. The self-defense bill protecting gun owners like DeMar passed the state senate 41-16 and was later enacted into law over the governor's veto (and over Obama's opposition).

The concealed carry of firearms is another important issue for gun owners, and yet Obama is not only opposed to citizens carrying guns, he supports using federal laws to override those states which currently allow the practice.

In 2004, Obama said he supports a national ban on concealed carry because the states that allow it are "threatening the safety of Illinois residents."6 Never mind the fact that concealed carry laws have improved the safety of citizens in the states that have enacted such laws.7

Obama has also taken a strong position in favor of the Clinton semi-auto ban which sunset in 2004. "I believe we need to renew -- not roll back -- this common sense gun law," Obama said.8

Well, there's nothing that's "common sense" about the Clinton ban. Not only did it outlaw almost 200 types of firearms, legislators like Senator Chuck Schumer of New York tried to amend the law (before it sunset) to include additional types of semi-autos -- even banning classic (wood-stock) long guns such as the Remington shotgun which Senator John Kerry received as a gift during his 2004 presidential bid.9

Bottom line: Senator Obama may not be as gun ban-crazed as the infamous Chuck Schumer. He may not lay awake at night dreaming of ways to disarm honest gun owners. But sure enough, Obama is a committed anti-gunner.

The chart below lays out the key votes and positions that Sen. Obama has taken over the past few years.

Barack Obama's Gun-Related Votes The U.S. Senate Debated:
Obama
Voted:

Supporting concealed carry for citizens: Anti-gun
Banning many common semi-automatic firearms: Anti-gun
Disallowing self-defense in towns where guns are banned: Anti-gun
Imposing one handgun a month restrictions: Anti-gun
Requiring lock up your safety trigger locks: Anti-gun
Protecting gun dealers from frivolous lawsuits: Anti-gun
Outlawing gun confiscations during a national emergency: Pro-gun
Squelching the free speech rights of gun owners: Anti-gun
Restricting the interstate sales of firearms: Anti-gun
Repealing the gun ban in Washington, DC: Anti-gun


Just a few more things Obama supported while a state senator...

He supported a 500 % increase in federal ammo tax

He supported banning "compact" guns

He supported limiting the amount of guns you can purchase

He supported banning all guns sales (except antique) at gun shows

He supported charging a person with a felony offense if a gun is stolen from their home

He supported the prohibition of people under the age of 21 from owning possessing ANY firearm. ( no more youth hunting)

He supported a giant increase in gun dealers licensing fees

He supported making it illegal to sell a gun within 5 miles of a school or park

He supported the ban on police agencies from selling old service weapons to generate funds for new ones.

He was also the director of the JOYCE foundation which is the largest supporter of radical anti gun groups ( he gave $19 million) including 1.5 million to the ultra radical Violence Policy Center.

Here are some upcoming bills and legislation.

Banning all non serialized/encoded ammo

Banning lead bullets

Banning guns that don't "micro stamp"

Banning "large" ammo mags

Ban all conventional ammo as "armor piercing"

Ban "nonsporting" ammo

Banning Hollow point

Banning or prohibitivley taxing handgun ammo

Banning ammo and guns through consumer product legislation.

Banning .25, .32 ,9mm, 5.7x28, and all 50 cal. ammo

Ban All Black talon, Rhino, Hydro shok, and all other ammo specifically for self defense.



Obama voiced support for or voted to enact laws for:

A ban on all handguns

To ban the sale or transfer of all semiautomatic firearms. (that includes your Benelli shotgun)

Ban the right to carry a concealed weapon in everystate, nation wide.

Ban all home ownership of firearms, even for self defense

He vote against a bill that would excuse people who in violation of a gun ban could be prosecuted for defending themselves. (what that means is if you keep your glock after its banned, and shoot someone defending your life, you go on trial for murder)

He supported a law that all firearms must be stored with individual locks regardless of bulk(safe type) storage.

He voted "present" when asked if he was in support of teenage gang member criminals as adults. Even if the gang member killed someone, they could not receive death.

He opposes mandatory sentencing guidelines for armed criminals.

He supports the DC gun ban.



And finally...

Voted NO on prohibiting lawsuits against gun manufacturers. (Jul 2005)

Ban semi-automatics, and more possession restrictions. (Jul 1998)

2000: cosponsored bill to limit purchases to 1 gun per month.

Seems to me that Obama's talk doesn't match his walk. This man as president, with a Democratically controlled Congress would be very dangerous for your second amendment rights.


I like how everyone quickly changed the subject as soon as this was brought on the forum, ive been reading this thread for a little bit and just thought to stay out of it, but everyone had such quick responses to depend there position until seastreet brought this out to play and nobody walked out on the field to challenge, what CAT GOT YOUR TONGUE!! come on wheres that witty response ive been seeing, oh ya thats right is aint easy to get a come back on something u just might be realizing is right. just my advice, if theres a point on a thread you know nothing about and cant argue then dont come up with some lame response trying to throw everyones attention off the truth, just sit back and shut up until u got something sensible to say. come on now let me hear that damn response...
bambibuster101
hunter
 
Posts: 10
Joined: Sun Aug 03, 2008 8:52 am

Postby jaysweet3 » Mon Oct 13, 2008 10:59 pm

George Bush has been a great uniter in this country. Just about everone hates him. Because of that we have people that want to punish Republicans and vote for a unqualified Democrat. Whenever The disastrous points of the Obama plan are brought to light, everyone who is drinking the kool-ade retorts, Bush, Bush, Bush. I am going to re-quote someone, and say that because of Nixon we had Carter. Is history going to repeat itself?
User avatar
jaysweet3
hunter
 
Posts: 8611
Joined: Thu Jun 30, 2005 8:42 am
Location: N. Illinois

Postby semo88 » Tue Oct 14, 2008 6:03 am

How about this one…because of Carter we had Reagan. Sounds like a pretty good upgrade to me. We had a pretty terrible President, we changed things up and found someone much better. I think that’s the way a lot of “independent” voters will be looking at this election. Things could be bad with Obama, no doubt, but in terms of economy, which is priority number one right now, at least for me, we can’t get a whole lot worse.
semo88
hunter
 
Posts: 704
Joined: Fri Sep 28, 2007 6:11 pm
Location: Missouri

Postby SpinnerMan » Tue Oct 14, 2008 8:16 am

semo88 wrote:Things could be bad with Obama, no doubt, but in terms of economy, which is priority number one right now, at least for me, we can’t get a whole lot worse.
It could get a whole lot worse. Why were the 70's so bad? How did we get the largest depression in American history starting in '29? You need to understand how these happened and you can easily see how it would get a whole hell of a lot worse.

The fundamentals of the economy have been good for about 30 years. People have forgot the stupidity of the past. The economic policies of the 70's or the late 20's and 30's didn't seem stupid at the time. They were typical feel good nonsense that both parties bought into. We are getting both parties to buy into the same kind of nonsense today. That should scare everybody.

What are the fundamentals needed for a strong economy?

Low tax rates. The risk of creating new businesses and new jobs has to be justified.

Free International Trade. We are the greatest country on the planet, but we do not do everything better than other countries. Trade barriers force everyone to pay more to get less.

Free Intranational Trade. Collectively the people know what things are worth and what they aren't. When the government starts imposing restrictions intended to "help" make things "fair" then we are in trouble. Wage and price controls, government mandates, etc., that are set by the government force the economy to perform contortions to accommodate these things. Basically it raises the cost of everything, which means you have to pay more to get less.

Confidence. People felt safe to invest in the U.S. and buy other people's stuff and not stick their money in a coffee can in the basement. This is the one thing that is really in trouble in the current economy. This is always what goes first. If the other three dominos fall, it will get worse then you ever imagined.

Obama is proposing to knock the other three dominos down. The Democratic Congress is promising to knock them down. McCain is promising to leave one standing and he's wobbling the other two. All the politicians are beating down confidence.

The most critical thing in this current election to prevent us from going at least back to the floundering economy of the '70's, if not worse, is a strong Republican contingent in the Senate. If the Republicans can pull of a miracle and win back the Senate, that would be the biggest barrier to preventing a floundering economy.

No matter how fundamentally strong the economy is there will always be economic downturns. These will generally be precipitated by economic bubbles such as the current housing bubble. Just like the internet bubble, the accounting scandal bubble (Enron, et. al.), and the 9/11 attacks, this bubble will move through the economy quickly. Assuming the government doesn't do stupid things to exacerbate it. There were dire warnings that the economy would collapse from the other shocks to the economy in the late 90's and 00's, but they never materialized because the government got out of the way. Obama and a Democratic House and Senate will not get out of the way. They will "help" everybody. It will work as well as they helped the unqualified home buyers that are now going broke instead of getting their financial house in order first.
User avatar
SpinnerMan
hunter
 
Posts: 16304
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2005 11:24 am
Location: Joliet, IL

Previous

Return to Controversial Issues Forum

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: migr82az and 4 guests