User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 7/6/2002 10:59:13 AM EDT
[#1]
Quoted: Anybody stop to think that there might be [b]other[/b] important issues facing our country besides the existence of the AWB? I don't cast my vote based on a single issue, no matter how important that issue may be. I might let a pol [i]think[/i] that I might, to motivate him, but life, and politics is really more complex than that. And exactly what issues has GWB supported you on? Ashcroft's post-911 record (that PATRIOT act he rammed through congress as a start) isn't exactly stellar, and as I said earlier, GWB's "stand" on CFR "Yeah, it's unconstitutional, but I'm gonna sign it" makes him someone worthy of NO RESPECT. Exactly how could we get much worse? |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/6/2002 11:01:41 AM EDT
[#2]
I will 100% vote Libertarian if Bush signs anything with another assault weapons ban in it (which I believe he will in an effort to look like he's a compromiser to the anti-gunners...) I don't see why he should if he thinks about it though. He's not going to pick up Democrat votes, he will lose alot of core Republican voters though...
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/6/2002 11:13:40 AM EDT
[#3]
Quoted: Quoted: Anybody stop to think that there might be [b]other[/b] important issues facing our country besides the existence of the AWB? I don't cast my vote based on a single issue, no matter how important that issue may be. I might let a pol [i]think[/i] that I might, to motivate him, but life, and politics is really more complex than that. And exactly what issues has GWB supported you on? Ashcroft's post-911 record (that PATRIOT act he rammed through congress as a start) isn't exactly stellar, and as I said earlier, GWB's "stand" on CFR "Yeah, it's unconstitutional, but I'm gonna sign it" makes him someone worthy of NO RESPECT. Exactly how could we get much worse? LOL. Ever heard of Clinton? [b][i]Hillary Clinton?[/i][/b] |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/6/2002 11:23:10 AM EDT
[#4]
Quoted: LOL. Ever heard of Clinton? [b][i]Hillary Clinton? And what exactly would the beast from Illinois/Arkansas/New York do? Sign Campaign Finance Reform? Sign some gun control laws? Assault the bill of rights and our constitutional form of government? Call for an amnesty for the millions of illegals in the country? Push for more government interference in our healthcare system? But wait! Bush has either done or said he will do all of the above! I reiterate: How exactly can we get much worse? |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/6/2002 11:34:51 AM EDT
[#5]
Quoted: Quoted: LOL. Ever heard of Clinton? [b][i]Hillary Clinton? And what exactly would the beast from Illinois/Arkansas/New York do? Sign Campaign Finance Reform? Sign some gun control laws? Assault the bill of rights and our constitutional form of government? Call for an amnesty for the millions of illegals in the country? Push for more government interference in our healthcare system? But wait! Bush has either done or said he will do all of the above! I reiterate: How exactly can we get much worse? Hell, Zak, given a Democrat-controlled Congress, she'll do that in her first 90 days. [i]Then[/i] the Libs will get nasty. How can things get worse? [b]Registration.[/b] [b]Confiscation.[/b] [b]Armed confrontation.[/b] [i]That's[/i] how. Or are you one of those who welcomes those things? |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/6/2002 11:48:15 AM EDT
[#6]
Quoted: How can things get worse? [b]Registration.[/b] [b]Confiscation.[/b] [b]Armed confrontation.[/b] [i]That's[/i] how. Or are you one of those who welcomes those things? Of course not! However, I am realistic (cynical?) enough to realize that the republicans will do THE EXACT SAME THING to us, they'll just take a little longer to do it. Changing that party from within probably isn't going to work--it needs to be replaced with something else that actually respects our constitution and our rights. I DON'T believe the Libertarian party is that something else--but I find them to be alot less offensive that GWB and co. Again, look at the above list, and ask yourself if those are the reasons you voted for Bush to begin with. If the answer to that is no, ask yourself if they conflict with your core values. If the answer to THAT question is yes, ask yourself why exactly you will vote to re-elect that man. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/6/2002 11:58:52 AM EDT
[#7]
Quoted: Never said I would. I said the decision involved more issues than just the RKBA. As you have illustrated (in part) above. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/6/2002 12:06:24 PM EDT
[#8]
Quoted: Anybody stop to think that there might be [b]other[/b] important issues facing our country besides the existence of the AWB? Yes there are, like the freedoms that make up the core of the Repulic which are enumerated in the Bill of Rights. I don't know about you but when an elected official indicates he/she supports or signs into law bills that infringe upon the 1st Amendment (Campaign Finance Reform), 2nd Amendment (ban on standard cap magazines, ban on possession of machineguns, ban on "assault weapons"), 4th & 5th Amendments (U.S. "Patriot" Act), there is a definite question as to why there are so many individuals who masochisticly vote time and time again for such policies. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/6/2002 12:10:32 PM EDT
[#9]
Quoted: Quoted: Anybody stop to think that there might be [b]other[/b] important issues facing our country besides the existence of the AWB? Yes there are, like the freedoms that make up the core of the Repulic which are enumerated in the Bill of Rights. I don't know about you but when an elected official indicates he/she supports or signs into law bills that infringe upon the 1st Amendment (Campaign Finance Reform), 2nd Amendment (ban on standard cap magazines, ban on possession of machineguns, ban on "assault weapons"), 4th & 5th Amendments (U.S. "Patriot" Act), there is a definite question as to why there are so many individuals who masochisticly vote time and time again for such policies. I agree with you on some of those issues. Problem is that the great majority of the electorate either doesn't care or disagrees with you (and I). What's your solution? |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/6/2002 12:12:09 PM EDT
[#10]
Quoted: Never said I would. I said the decision involved more issues than just the RKBA. Agreed, though I find RKBA to be a VERY good measure of the other things I look for in a candidate. And I apologize for jumping to conclusions about where you stood--there seems to be ALOT of blind faith in the republican party on this board, to the point of being self-destructive. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/6/2002 12:15:40 PM EDT
[#11]
Quoted: Quoted: Never said I would. I said the decision involved more issues than just the RKBA. Agreed, though I find RKBA to be a VERY good measure of the other things I look for in a candidate. That's very true. And I apologize for jumping to conclusions about where you stood--there seems to be ALOT of blind faith in the republican party on this board, to the point of being self-destructive. No problem at all, Zak. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/6/2002 12:45:34 PM EDT
[#12]
Quoted: Anybody stop to think that there might be [b]other[/b] important issues facing our country besides the existence of the AWB? Of course. The AWB isn't the only reason I'm going to vote against him. Here is a list of other reasons: -Amnesty of Illegals -Welfare for non-Homeowners -Education Bill -Campaign Finance Bill -No Armed Pilots -Farm Bill -Steel Tarriffs -War on Terrorism -Homeland Security Office -USA PATRIOT Act -Federalizing Airport Security -No racial profiling -Terrible Airport Security Measures -Planned War against Iraq |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/6/2002 12:51:18 PM EDT
[#13]
Quoted: Quoted: Anybody stop to think that there might be [b]other[/b] important issues facing our country besides the existence of the AWB? Of course. The AWB isn't the only reason I'm going to vote against him. Here is a list of other reasons: -Amnesty of Illegals -Welfare for non-Homeowners -Education Bill -Campaign Finance Bill -No Armed Pilots -Farm Bill -Steel Tarriffs -War on Terrorism -Homeland Security Office -USA PATRIOT Act -Federalizing Airport Security -No racial profiling -Terrible Airport Security Measures -Planned War against Iraq That's nice. Of course, you'll be voting against any and all members of your Congressional delegation who supported these measures, right? Maybe if enough people get energized, the Libertarian Party can finally make it into the double digits. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/6/2002 12:52:47 PM EDT
[#14]
Is the garand banned?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/6/2002 12:54:35 PM EDT
[#15]
Quoted: Is the garand banned? SSSHHHHHHHH! Don't let them hear you! |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/6/2002 1:03:28 PM EDT
[#16]
Quoted: Is the garand banned? I don't know if this question was tongue in cheek or not, but the Garand [b]IS[/b] banned from importation. Doesn't make the CMP rifle seem as good a deal when you can buy them in Canada for under $150US--you just can't import them into the US. IIRC, Bush the Elder was responsibile for this, though it COULD have been one of Clinton's executive orders--I really don't remember which. (edited because I cannot spell.) |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/6/2002 1:06:36 PM EDT
[#17]
Quoted: Is the garand banned? No, but they sure as hell attempted it with the "demilitarization" section (section 1062) in the defense appropriations bill, S. 1438, last year. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/6/2002 1:55:25 PM EDT
[#18]
This is where we need to be careful. I don't think GW would sign a new ban in 2004, right before the election. He know's damn well that he needs every vote he can muster to stay in office and signing a new ban would place him in great doubt with much of his constituency. This why I think that a new AW ban will not be proposed until after the election in 2004, at which point, I think GW WOULD sign it without hesitation.
I also don't think the dems are going to make this a huge campaign issue in 2004, I think they are slowly starting to learn that this is burning them in elections. I have no doubt though, that they will be all over it by december 2004. Mike |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/6/2002 2:00:44 PM EDT
[#19]
Quoted: That's nice. Of course, you'll be voting against any and all members of your Congressional delegation who supported these measures, right? Probably, yes. The ONLY good member of Congress is Ron Paul. Maybe if enough people get energized, the Libertarian Party can finally make it into the double digits. Maybe, but I don't know if the LP is the answer. I fear that they will be corrupted just like the Dems and the Repubs. They will be more for the party than the principles. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/6/2002 2:06:03 PM EDT
[#20]
Quoted: I did'nt see Republican as a choice in the poll. sure GB may very well be the only Rep. candidate, but if Alan Keyes ran, i'd vote for him. I know its not going to happen, but then neither is liberty. Gorman will probably be the Libertarian candidate running in the next presidential election, but then i stopped reading the Lib press so what do i know. lib I agree Keyes was the man for the job. As far as im concerned Bush is still running nad loosing in my eyes. Offcourse if that idiot Gore won we would be in civil war by now. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/6/2002 2:11:43 PM EDT
[#21]
Quoted: I would still vote Bush. I'd vote a straight party line. Voting Libertarian is like trying to have a kid after you've had a vasectomy - you know what you want, but it aint gonna happen.... I believe that there are Rep's, Dem's, and wanna be's. I won't waste a vote on a no chance wanna be - remember how Slick Willy got in??? And this logic explains why Arizona will likely re-elect McCain, even if a pro 2nd Amendment democrat or third party candidate runs against him. "But he's a Republican. He's GOT to be better than the other candidates." [rolleyes] |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/6/2002 2:39:00 PM EDT
[#22]
Bush said before the 2000 election that he would support the AWB. I knew that when I voted for him. However he did appoint pro-gun John Ashcroft attorney general who is pushing to get the NICS records destroyed and his administration has said the right to keep and bear arms is INDIVIDUAL.
It's a two party system. Like it or not. If you don't like GWB then vote for Keyes or Buchanan in the primary. Flood GWB with letters that say down with the AWB and please DO NOT renew the UNCONSTITUTIONAL 1994 AWB. Let's let GWB know who elected him!!! Also GWB is against the International Criminal Court set up by the UN. He's fighting it right now and doesn't recognize it. Algore would've recognized it 60 times by now. CRC |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/6/2002 2:47:04 PM EDT
[#23]
Quoted: Bush said before the 2000 election that he would support the AWB. I knew that when I voted for him. However he did appoint pro-gun John Ashcroft attorney general who is pushing to get the NICS records destroyed and his administration has said the right to keep and bear arms is INDIVIDUAL. *COUGH* You ARE talking about the same "Justice" Department that urged the Supreme Court NOT to hear Emerson and Haney (best chance to overturn Lautenburg and the 86MG ban to come along in a long while, AND Emerson was our BEST chance to enforce US v. Miller as written) aren't you? I'm sorry, saying in a legal brief "We support the individual rights interpretation BUT we really don't want to change the status quo" is NOT support for the 2nd amendment--it's merely a way of appeasing folks who really ought to know better. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/6/2002 3:03:03 PM EDT
[#24]
Quoted: Its the lesser of two evils. Bush may vote on the ban. But an asshole demoncrap will want or try to ban guns and ammo completly. So you see my logic right ? NO!! The lesser of two evils is still evil. It's this atitude that guarantees that either tweedley-dee or tweedeley-dum will ALWAYS be president, thus advancing the world socialist cause irregardless of which major party is holding the office... |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/6/2002 3:04:39 PM EDT
[#25]
Quoted: *COUGH* You ARE talking about the same "Justice" Department that urged the Supreme Court NOT to hear Emerson and Haney (best chance to overturn Lautenburg and the 86MG ban to come along in a long while, AND Emerson was our BEST chance to enforce US v. Miller as written) aren't you? I'm sorry, saying in a legal brief "We support the individual rights interpretation BUT we really don't want to change the status quo" is NOT support for the 2nd amendment--it's merely a way of appeasing folks who really ought to know better. OHHHH, [b]that's[/b] gonna leave a mark! |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/6/2002 3:07:31 PM EDT
[#26]
Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: I will have to view the whole picture. If Bush signs then yes I win concider voting for someone else. But if that someone else has no chance of winning, and by doing so a demoncrap would beat Bush, Then I will still vote for Bush. Its the lesser of two evils. Bush may vote on the ban. But an asshole demoncrap will want or try to ban guns and ammo completly. So you see my logic right ? Actually, no I don't see the logic. I understand that having a worse candidate win the election is bad, but voting based on the "lesser of two evils" theory simply reinforces the belief held by many politicians that they can get away with breaking the promises and "principles" that got them elected in the first place. I prefer to send them a message by voting them the hell out of the office when they become backstabbers. Colorado's own Gov. Owens is a prime example of this type of slime. I WILL be voting against him in the upcoming election. I refuse to extend the political careers of these idiots just because they're "not as bad" as the other guy. But if buy doing this someone like Al Whore gets in the White house, haven't you just defeated yourself. Now you have someone much worse. What then ? By the time the next elections are here your SOL. We are SOL anyhow. Or would you prefer to wait until you need a cane to get around before..... |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/6/2002 3:13:09 PM EDT
[#27]
Quoted: The only way GWB will get my vote in 04 is if he vetoes a renewed AW/hicap ban--which isn't going to happen, as he already said he's for those things. He lost my vote when he signed CFR--anyone who can call a bill unconstitutional WHILE SIGNING IT is unfit to hold public office, and frankly, rates impeachment--it's a direct violation of his oath of office. I find the general reaction here to be amusing--"Yeah, if he does it, I'll still vote for him--wouldn't want to get someone worse." All I can say is, how exactly could it get worse? What makes you think he wouldn't sign "worse" legislation when it came along the same way someone like Clinton or Gore would? Someone on this board once said (and I agree) that the general feeling around here is that losing your rights is okay--as long as its a republican doing the taking. Amazing, only 2 people on the whole first page... |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/6/2002 3:18:29 PM EDT
[#28]
Quoted: I'll vote for whoever I feel will represent me and my interests. That is the way it's suppose to be. I will not vote for a lesser of two evils. I will vote my conscience and let you wussy 'lesser of two evils' pussy bastards get what you voted for. Voting for the 'lesser of two evils' instead of who you believe in is a compromise of principles and is akin to trading pudding cups for sex in jail. If it's wrong... don't try and justify it with liberal tactics. 'Oh... it's okay to vote for some party that takes away our rights... at least we didn't vote for the party that would take away more important rights...'. It's only a Republic as long as the idiots don't let it become a Democracy.... G*d Bless ya Stealth....... |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/6/2002 3:30:08 PM EDT
[#29]
Quoted: Bush said before the 2000 election that he would support the AWB. I knew that when I voted for him. However he did appoint pro-gun John Ashcroft attorney general who is pushing to get the NICS records destroyed and his administration has said the right to keep and bear arms is INDIVIDUAL. CRC The FBI who keeps NICS records is under Ashcrofts jurisdiction. All he has to do is order the records destroyed. He has not done that. The only reason the govt. said the 2nd was an individual right, was because they didn't want the court to rule that it was. That would have made it the law of the land, they don't want that...... |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/6/2002 3:39:20 PM EDT
[#30]
Funny, no one mentioned the Constitution party..Their platform is here: [url]http://www.ustaxpayers.org/ustp-99p1.html[/url]
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/6/2002 3:44:16 PM EDT
[#31]
Quoted: Well, I'm going to get flamed for this, but even if GW signs an AW ban, I'll vote for him, simply because to do anything else will be to get Al Gore or whatever other dipshit the Democraps put up for election. I'd consider that [b]FAR[/b] worse... I'll hold my nose while doing it, but I'll do it. Why? Think about what you're doing. Right now, we have the choice between "blatant socialist" and "gradual socialist", and if we let either get their way, we lose. The very reason the Republican party won't defend us is because they know we'll vote for them anyway, just to pick the 'lesser of 2 evils'. What you're saying is "I'm willing to lose to socialism, as long as I can slow it down a tiny bit." If the Republicans realize their core voters won't vote for them unless they really start representing us, they'll be forced to change. Sure, we'll lose one or two elections, and put a democrat in office, but if that's what it takes to make Republicans realize they can't screw us over with their socialist garbage, and actually start representing us, then we've benefited in the long run. What do you hope to get by voting for the 'lesser of 2 evils', the "People's Republic of America" in 40 years instead of 30? If you vote for Republicans because they're the lesser of two evils, you vote to lose. You merely buy yourself a little time until you lose, but you admit defeat. The only way we're going to win is if we show the Republicans that they can't stab us in the back every election year is to make them know we won't support them if they don't defend us. It's people like you who will give them support even after they backstab us who have created the 2 party system we now have - blatant socialists, and subtle socialists. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/6/2002 3:59:37 PM EDT
[#32]
I will no longer vote for the 'lesser of two evils', and I am tired of being held hostage by the Republican line that yes, you lost part of the loaf (some of your rights), but the Dem's would have taken the whole thing.
My reps are Republicans, but vote AGAINST the Second, CCW, arming airline pilots, FOR campaign finance reform, favor eliminating the gun show loophole... The AG gives an opinion on the right of individual ownership, but will not let the supremes rule on it, making it an just an opinion that changes with the next administration. That what the Dem's are doing - so what is the difference in the party line? If alwhore/hitlery is screwing me or Bush is screwing me, the net is that I am still getting screwed, one will just finish the job before the other does. We have lost our rights and I see no one on the political horizon that is willing to fight to get them back. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/6/2002 4:01:54 PM EDT
[#33]
Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: LOL. Ever heard of Clinton? [b][i]Hillary Clinton? And what exactly would the beast from Illinois/Arkansas/New York do? Sign Campaign Finance Reform? Sign some gun control laws? Assault the bill of rights and our constitutional form of government? Call for an amnesty for the millions of illegals in the country? Push for more government interference in our healthcare system? But wait! Bush has either done or said he will do all of the above! I reiterate: How exactly can we get much worse? Hell, Zak, given a Democrat-controlled Congress, she'll do that in her first 90 days. [i]Then[/i] the Libs will get nasty. How can things get worse? [b]Registration.[/b] [b]Confiscation.[/b] [b]Armed confrontation.[/b] [i]That's[/i] how. Or are you one of those who welcomes those things? Better now than in 20 years when public school indoctrination has thinned our numbers significantly. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/6/2002 4:02:55 PM EDT
[#34]
Quoted: Anybody stop to think that there might be [b]other[/b] important issues facing our country besides the existence of the AWB? I don't cast my vote based on a single issue, no matter how important that issue may be. I might let a pol [i]think[/i] that I might, to motivate him, but life, and politics is really more complex than that. Gun rights issues is an excellent way to evaluate politicians in general. It goes right down to the very core - are they serving you, or are you serving them? You can tell a lot about a politician by his gun control stance. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/6/2002 6:09:56 PM EDT
[#35]
Lib is like throwing your vote away.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/6/2002 6:39:54 PM EDT
[#36]
Quoted: Lib is like throwing your vote away. As noted above: You have been CONDITIONED to believe that by those who have the most to gain from a two-party system--namely the two major parties. It really is a self-fufilling prophecy, too. Enough people believe they're "throwing their vote away" so vote for one of the two major parties, and wouldn't you know it--only a few "crackpots" actually vote their conscience. But you know what happens when enough of us "throw our votes away?" We actually win. I'm done voting for the "lesser" of two evils. I'd rather "throw my vote away" than give my de facto approval to this state of affairs continuing. And anyone who acts otherwise is a sheep, whether they want to hear that or not. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/6/2002 7:08:09 PM EDT
[#37]
Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: LOL. Ever heard of Clinton? [b][i]Hillary Clinton? And what exactly would the beast from Illinois/Arkansas/New York do? Sign Campaign Finance Reform? Sign some gun control laws? Assault the bill of rights and our constitutional form of government? Call for an amnesty for the millions of illegals in the country? Push for more government interference in our healthcare system? But wait! Bush has either done or said he will do all of the above! I reiterate: How exactly can we get much worse? Hell, Zak, given a Democrat-controlled Congress, she'll do that in her first 90 days. [i]Then[/i] the Libs will get nasty. How can things get worse? [b]Registration.[/b] [b]Confiscation.[/b] [b]Armed confrontation.[/b] [i]That's[/i] how. Or are you one of those who welcomes those things? Better now than in 20 years when public school indoctrination has thinned our numbers significantly. And most of us are in wheel chairs or using a cane......... |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/6/2002 7:12:28 PM EDT
[#38]
Quoted: Lib is like throwing your vote away. A vote of conscience is never "wasted". I hope I am never wrongly accused of a crime and you are on the jury. Only takes 1 holdout juror to free an innocent man. People like you will fold under pressure. You don't even have the courage to vote your conscience..... |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/6/2002 7:40:57 PM EDT
[#39]
Bush wont get my vote regardless, Let me count the ways- Immigration policy, Steel tariffs, Education bill(Teddy wrote it), Farm bill, Campaign finance reform, Medicare prescription drugs, ect, ect.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/6/2002 8:14:48 PM EDT
[#40]
Quoted: Quoted: Lib is like throwing your vote away. As noted above: You have been CONDITIONED to believe that by those who have the most to gain from a two-party system--namely the two major parties. It really is a self-fufilling prophecy, too. Enough people believe they're "throwing their vote away" so vote for one of the two major parties, and wouldn't you know it--only a few "crackpots" actually vote their conscience. But you know what happens when enough of us "throw our votes away?" We actually win. I'm done voting for the "lesser" of two evils. I'd rather "throw my vote away" than give my de facto approval to this state of affairs continuing. And anyone who acts otherwise is a sheep, whether they want to hear that or not. First off, be prepared to welcome the next [b]two party system[/b] president in 2004. [b] D- Gore__50,996,116__48%__21states__266EV R- Bush__50,456,169__48%__30states__271EV Other_____3,874,040___4%___0states____0EV[/b] Looks like the "other" party has a whole shitload of catching up to do. You Libby boy's have to practically uncondition the whole nation. [img]http://www.politicsol.com/gifs/2000map.gif[/img] Quoted: But you know what happens when enough of us "throw our votes away?" We actually win. Got a time frame for this? As I say, enjoy your new Republican or democrapic president in 2004. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/6/2002 8:20:07 PM EDT
[#41]
Quoted: Someone on this board once said (and I agree) that the general feeling around here is that losing your rights is okay--as long as its a republican doing the taking. I have been saying this since before the election. After years of observation, political party sheeple are more predictable than cheap B movies. When they lose, it is the fault of the libertarians. When they get screwed over by their man, you'll hear rationalizations that would make your head spin. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/6/2002 8:29:34 PM EDT
[#42]
I'd vote Libertarian. No more Compromising. Hopefully W will realize the importance of the gun owner vote after his dad signed the importation bill and resigned from the NRA in '92.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/6/2002 8:41:35 PM EDT
[#43]
Quoted: i doubt i'll vote for him no matter what he does with gun laws. he is a tool. he has done jackshit to prevent more planes from being flown into more buildings. are the cockpit doors any stronger? NO. yet he gave billions of are money to the ceo's of the airline industry. it's close to a year since the attacks and all that has happened is he made another layer of worthless gov't. if you ever wondered why he picked tom ridge for homeland security is we, the fine sheep of pa are a swing state Actually, the cockpit doors are a hell of alot stronger, due to steel bars which go across the cockpit doors. I'm not defending Bush, however, because I'm very dissapointed that he allowed his appointed assholes to defy congress and keep pilots unarmed. However, I also would vote for him again, if the alternative was Gore, Hillery or the like. I wish the Liberterians would get there act together. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/6/2002 8:41:47 PM EDT
[#44]
Quoted: Quoted: Lib is like throwing your vote away. A vote of conscience is never "wasted". I hope I am never wrongly accused of a crime and you are on the jury. Only takes 1 holdout juror to free an innocent man. People like you will fold under pressure. You don't even have the courage to vote your conscience..... First off, you're assuming my conscience wants to vote Libby if Bush signs a new AW bill in 2004 but I won't because I'd be throwing my vote away. And serving on a jury trial is a teeny bit different than casting a vote in a presidential election. I do realize he wasn't representing the Libby's, but are you one of those who voted for Ross ( Give us Klinton ) Perot? Just think, maybe 19,741,048 of those HRP votes were cast by people disgusted with the import ban of 1989. Instead of four more for Bush, we got eight years of hell from the biggest jackASS president of all time. [b]1992 William J. Clinton, Democrat 370 44,908,233 George H. W. Bush, Republican 168 39,102,282 H. Ross Perot, Independent . . . 19,741,048 1996 1996 William J. Clinton, Democrat 379 47,401,185 Robert Dole, Republican 159 39,197,469 H. Ross Perot, Reform . . . 8,085,294[/b] |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/6/2002 9:02:51 PM EDT
[#45]
Quoted: Instead of four more for Bush, we got eight years of hell from the biggest jackASS president of all time. Uh, excuse me, but where was the GOP in 1996? [b]THE FAULT LIES SOLELY WITH THE REPUBLICAN PARTY FOR NOT RUNNING A VIABLE CANDIDATE AND NO ONE ELSE.[/b] Did you ever think that maybe people just didn't like Bob "the assault weapon ban is a top priority..(6 weeks later)...the assault weapon ban is a non-issue" Dole? Quit the stupid "pass the blame" game. You sound just like a liberal. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/6/2002 9:04:42 PM EDT
[#46]
Quoted: First off, be prepared to welcome the next [b]two party system[/b] president in 2004. Looks like the "other" party has a whole shitload of catching up to do. You Libby boy's have to practically uncondition the whole nation. First off, I'm not a Libertarian. Secondly, yeah, there's alot of "unconditioning" to do--and I expect most folks will be like yourself, too comfortable with the status quo to even think about another option. Got a time frame for this? As soon as possible--our country can't take much more of the republicans and the democrats. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/6/2002 9:14:46 PM EDT
[#47]
Quoted: First off, you're assuming my conscience wants to vote Libby if Bush signs a new AW bill in 2004 but I won't because I'd be throwing my vote away. That's rather circular reasoning, don't you think? And serving on a jury trial is a teeny bit different than casting a vote in a presidential election. Different, yes, but of equal importance. A wise man once said that the four boxes used to defend liberty are the soap box, the jury box, the ballot box, and the cartridge box. Just think, maybe 19,741,048 of those HRP votes were cast by people disgusted with the import ban of 1989. Instead of four more for Bush, we got eight years of hell from the biggest jackASS president of all time. Just think, if Bush the Elder hadn't signed the damned legislation in the first place, it wouldn't have been an issue. Sometimes you just have to take the rolled up newspaper to the nose of the puppy, or he doesn't learn. Your position is to let the puppy keep shitting all over the house, and not only not discipline him, but actually reinforce the behavior! Sorry, but if that's your idea of "winning" you might want to reevaluate what it is you think you believe in. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/6/2002 9:15:38 PM EDT
[#48]
Quoted: I have been saying this since before the election. After years of observation, political party sheeple are more predictable than cheap B movies. When they lose, it is the fault of the libertarians. When they get screwed over by their man, you'll hear rationalizations that would make your head spin. Yep, it was indeed you. Sorry for not giving credit where due. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/7/2002 2:57:03 AM EDT
[#49]
Quoted: Quoted: Instead of four more for Bush, we got eight years of hell from the biggest jackASS president of all time. Uh, excuse me, but where was the GOP in 1996? [b]THE FAULT LIES SOLELY WITH THE REPUBLICAN PARTY FOR NOT RUNNING A VIABLE CANDIDATE AND NO ONE ELSE.[/b] Did you ever think that maybe people just didn't like Bob "the assault weapon ban is a top priority..(6 weeks later)...the assault weapon ban is a non-issue" Dole? Quit the stupid "pass the blame" game. You sound just like a liberal. So Mr. Autopost, what were you doing in 1996? Were you out demanding a better alternative to Dole? Or did you teach Dole a lesson for his statements by voting for Klinton? Or did you make a futile statement by voting for another useless idiot? Please show me the error of my ways. Guide me into the light.[whacko] |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/7/2002 2:57:48 AM EDT
[#50]
Quoted: Quoted: First off, be prepared to welcome the next [b]two party system[/b] president in 2004. Looks like the "other" party has a whole shitload of catching up to do. You Libby boy's have to practically uncondition the whole nation. First off, I'm not a Libertarian. Secondly, yeah, there's alot of "unconditioning" to do--and I expect most folks will be like yourself, too comfortable with the status quo to even think about another option. There are a couple more years until 2004 with tens of millions to go. At the present rate, it might take about fifty years or more. But by then, “All your guns are belong to us”. SOL. No doubt if your option is Lib, it will get us gore or billary. If that suits you, fine. Not related to this post directly, but relating to the Lib party platform. I don’t think the masses will vote Lib is they come out directly for the legalization of drugs, as stated on their site. You’ll have to condition millions of folks to believe drugs are not all that bad. Guns are hard enough to portray in a good light, add drugs to the mix and it makes for a volatile recipe. Got a time frame for this? As soon as possible--our country can't take much more of the republicans and the democrats. Come on, you outta know the Libby party ain't got a chance in hell to win 2004. Sure I could vote Lib in 2004, but still the numbers don't add up. You can make your statement and vote for what YOU believe in, but be prepared for a democrap pres. [b] Can you honestly say that there’s a chance in hell for a Libby pres in 2004 if Bush signs?[/b] Simple yes/no shall suffice. |
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
