Obama finally forced to resign!

Tube ee:

While I may disagree with you on Obama as the choice of President, I do respect the fact that you gave direct answers with thought and void of being pretentious.

I do admit that it does burn my butt to see a fellow gunowner willing to vote for him. However, I respect your opinion and hope to intelligently debate issues at hand in the future.

Seeing as this thread is about Obama resigning I don't think it's wise to continue the perpetual veering by engaging in rebuttals to your statement (although I REAAALYY want to:D).

I'm sure since it is election year, there will be other oppurtunities...;)
 
I don't recall anyone saying that.
Click to expand...

No lots of people here predicted we would have a new AWB within a year after they took office. I am not going to dig through the archives, but there were many threads back in 2006 about it both here and at THR.
 
Thanks, Tuttle8.

I appreciate it.

As to Senator Obama's resignation from Trinity UCC, while I would have advised him to do so earlier, I can, as much as is possible for a non-believer, try to understand that this must have been a tough call.

I see three ways to look at this:

1) He'd finally had enough. It's hard to say what will push somebody over the edge and force a life-altering decision. I have myself been in situations where my personal loyalties have made me hold on to people for far longer than I should have. Absent the religious dimension, I could understand if this were the case. I suspect that the religious part would make the decision even harder to make, although I cannot know that.

2) He truly believes the ideology of Reverend Wright, but jettisoned him and Trinity because it was hurting his chance to be President. I don't think that's true, but I can can certainly see how someone could come to that conclusion. If it were true, it would be an example of the most cynical ambition and power-lust I can think of, short of actually harming someone to gain power. The primary reason that I don't buy it is that that kind of ambition tends not to be confined... it leaks out in other ways. And I haven't seen anything else beyond Trinity that tells me that Senator Obama has that kind of ambition. Obviously, he's ambitious and seeks power. Duh... he's running for President. But degrees matter.

3) He doesn't believe any of it, but needed to demonstrate his "faith" in order to get elected. Given the statistics, both in terms of people's willingness to vote for non-believers and the percentages of people with the education levels of your average US Senator who are non-believers, I'm sure that, if this is the case, he's not alone. It would not surprise me at all if there were 20-30 atheists / agnostics in the Senate right now... and all of them attend church occasionally and publicly claim to be some species of non-controversial Protestant. Such is the reality of American politics. As an atheist myself, I understand those pressures, albeit to a much smaller degree. I know that I'm very careful who I "come out" to, at least in my real-world life. So, if this is the case, I can't really blame the man for it.

But no matter which conclusion one comes to, we must all admit that we cannot know for sure. None of us can see into another's heart, nor read another's mind. All we can do is decide based on the ambiguous evidence at hand, hopefully with a minimum of preconception. It is no surprise that we're usually wrong when we do.

--Shannon
 
benign.neglect

Sounds like you are a democrat...you need to read the latest article from American Hunter...are you a member of the NRA? If so you should be able to find the article there...and read it BEFORE you say what you are saying about McCain.

I think a lot of people are saying things about McCain and gun control just to justify voting for Obama.

I am not crazy about McCain but there is NO WAY I will vote for either Obama or Clinton...hell will freeze over first.
 
No lots of people here predicted we would have a new AWB within a year after they took office. I am not going to dig through the archives, but there were many threads back in 2006 about it both here and at THR
Click to expand...

No, most of the predictions were that there WOULDN'T be a new AWB until after the '08 elections beacuse the democrats would then be likely have veto-proof majorities in the Congress, and control of the White House. Most of the predictions were that the Democrats wouldn't risk a backlash from a new AWB until after '08.

If Obama wins, and the Democrats pick up the number of Congressional seats they are expecting, the situation will be fundamentally different from 2006. The passage of a new AWB would be a virtual certainty.
 
If Obama wins, and the Democrats pick up the number of Congressional seats they are expecting, the situation will be fundamentally different from 2006. The passage of a new AWB would be a virtual certainty.

Thank you, GWB. At least, the Democrats will continue your support for the AWB. Maybe Mitt Romney will at least know that the AWB he supported will be put in by the Democrats.

If the Democrats win, it will be because of Bush's incompetency. As David Brooks said - Bush went to DC with an ideological view of the world that was incorrect. He was not flexible enough to abandon his 'faith' based view of things. He surrounded himself with Texans of limited intellectual abilities to be able to challenge him or convince him that he needed to change paths. They worshipped him and the perpetual campaign for the GOP was more important than results or the country.

McCain's hope to win is that he can portray himself as not supporting Bush and being more competent than Obama.

The GOP brought this on themselves by being subservient to a cult of personality in the face of evidence of incompetency. The RKBA may pay the price - unlesss Heller saves the day.

Recall, the DOJ came out against Heller as seen on many gun sites and in SWAT. Thanks, again - George. Do another funny dance in Africa or on the steps of the White House, while I see in San Antonio, many young soldiers without legs. Bah.
 
Dat's the truth and it hurts. A squandered presidency when one looks at what proactive one could have done for the RKBA.

Of course, blind loyalty to a failed leader has been pointed out repeatedly by well known conservative commentators.
 
Of course, blind loyalty to a failed leader has been pointed out repeatedly by well known conservative commentators.
Click to expand...

Loyalty aside, Pres. Bush had been blamed for everything from the high price of oil to El Nino. And these same haters are the ones who whine the loudest about Pres. Bush not being a "uniter". It gets real old.
 
sasquatch, just because Bush is blamed for everything that is wrong, doesn't mean that he didn't actually do some wrong.
 
That's the point. He did some things incorrectly.

One has to ask why there is not a ground swell for the GOP? Why is that?

Specifically, on the RBKA issues - he was not the savior folks expect from a Republican presidency.

His performance will not contribute much to the election of a proRKBA candidate.

It is not all or none. Again, folks who don't want to see the man's faults are as bad as those who would hate him no matter what he did.
 
sasquatch, just because Bush is blamed for everything that is wrong, doesn't mean that he didn't actually do some wrong.
Click to expand...

You won't get any argument from me on that one. But to hear some tell it, he is responsible for everything that has gone wrong in the world in the last 7+ years.
 
The Democrats have had control of the House and Congress for two years now, with a president who was on record saying he would renew the AWB. Nothing has passed. Nothing has even left committee. You are fear mongering.
Click to expand...

Neglect:

It is you who is the one being unrealistic here, and not using simple logic.

Why on earth would the Democrats push gun control just before the Presidential election? They want Obama to be elected. That is what needs to happen first. The most foolish thing they could do would be to try to pass such legislation now. Why energize gun owners for the upcoming election??

Besides, while they have majorities, they don't have veto proof majorities. So Bush could easily Veto any gun control legislation that he did not like. And the fact is that many Democratic Senators want to EXPAND on the Assault Weapons ban. They do not want to simply re-authorize the old legislation. And that is all that Bush has agreed to do.

If they instead wait until Obama is elected, then they can pass whatever legislation that they want. And if they can get their number in the Senate up to 60, then the Republicans would not even be able to fillibuster any gun control legislation either. And that is definitely the Democratic plan for this November, to get 60 or more in the Senate. I personally think that they have a good chance at doing that.

So your analysis here makes no sense at all. The Democrats will lay low on the gun control issues for now. And then only revisit them when they are totally in control, and can pass the sort of legislation that they want, without any compromise having to be extended to the Republicans.

.
 
If the Democrats win, it will be because of Bush's incompetency.
Click to expand...

You have to add in Tom DeLay, Dennis Hastert, Dick Cheney, Bill Frist, Larry Craig, Ken Mehlman, Mark Foley, Karl Rove, and many other Republicans who all had a hand.
 
Last edited:
Ok with me. However, the buck stops here is a good aphorism for effects on the presidency. Bush went with Cheney, Rumsfeld and Wulfowitz's failed grand strategy.

I grant you the others like Delay with his emphasis on the GOP Uber Alles - as did Karl Rove - put the country second or third to the party and personal ambition.

If Bush was successful, Craig would be just a humorous scandal of new import. Same with Foley, but not so humorous but little national consequence.

Failed minions are not as important as the real boss.
 
Failed minions are not as important as the real boss.
Click to expand...

The real culprits are the Republicans who wasted their control of Congress for a dozen years. But they, nor their Democratic successors, are not held responsible for their actions as everyone obsesses over the person in the White House.
 
Glenn E. Meyer

Not all Texans are idiots. And Faith based beliefs? I am getting tired of everyone who has no faith to use this as a reason for peoples stupidity. You can be a person of faith and not be stupid and then again you can be a person of faith and be stupid. Same as those who claim to have no faith...they can be just as stupid. The fact is some of us believe strongly in GOD and the fact that we do does not make us stupid or incapable of making sound judgements. Most of us have strong core beliefs but that does not mean we all agree with one another. So please stop throwing that around.

Thanks,
 
The real culprits are the Republicans who wasted their control of Congress for a dozen years. But they, nor their Democratic successors, are not held responsible for their actions as everyone obsesses over the person in the White House.
Click to expand...

Yes and no. Yes the Reps wasted the control they were given. No, they have been held responsible for wasting it. They have been getting trounced in recent elections if you haven't noticed.
 
I am not voting for Obama, but I don't see an Obama presidency as ending the world as we know it. Some things will change. Hopefully he will quit using the US military as his own personal Risk game. We might lose some gun rights. Taxes might go up. Maybe at least he will try to run an honest administration. Hopefully utter defeat of the Republican party will cause it to rethink its conservative roots.
Click to expand...

You lose more of your rights and you don't consider it to be the end of the world? Wow, you have some pretty whack priorities.

Obama will be way worse than Dubya. Not saying that Bush was horrible, but he couldn't done a much better job. I'm not quite sure what the purpose of invading Iraq was.

If you think Obama would run an honest administration, you don't have much experience with politics.
 
Basically, I'm of the opinion that the tide of the last 40 years is turning in our favor, and I also don't think that Senator Obama cares enough about gun issues enough, one way or the other, to risk the damage that would result from pushing it. I don't think he'll go there.
Click to expand...

Hahahahaha!

Sure, sure. You don't have a clue about Obama obviously. Hell, right now McCain is courting the NRA to get their votes. McCain will do a lot less damage to gun rights than Obama will. Obama holds no allegiance to gun owners at all.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top