Prepare yourselves....here it comes

Status
Not open for further replies.

Powderman

New member
Note well, the gradual sidling up to the plate of our two democratic darlings, Hillary and Obama.

Does anyone NOT think that they will run for office--more than likely as a President/Vice President ticket?

Oh, yes they will.

So, I know that there are a LOT of people who will declare that they will "vote their conscience"--but look at the facts here, people:

What did 8 years of Clinton bring us?

The Assault Weapon Ban
The 1986 Machine Gun Ban
The Importation Ban

So, what else do you want?

Mark my words, if these two--if EITHER one of them makes it into office, we are going to have SERIOUS problems.

Unless another party--or an Independent--draws national conservative support, in SIGNIFICANT numbers, the only thing to do is to swallow the pill and vote Republican.

No, I'm not happy with them either--BUT CONSIDER THE ALTERNATIVE.
 
What did 8 years of Clinton bring us?

The Assault Weapon Ban
The 1986 Machine Gun Ban
The Importation Ban
1986 ban? Uh, Clinton wasn't president then, Reagan was. Ok, yes, it was a Democrat heavy Congress at the time, but Billy-Boy himself had nothing to do with that one.
 
Powderman
You really know... "how to win friends and influence people" ;) ...

The last time we split our vote... (for Ross Perot)...

We lost our a$$e$... for several years!

I think we should all pull together to get two conservatives on the Republican ticket... It's not very realistic but hell, it's more realistic than trying to elect an Independent or a Constitutionalist...

Hell, man... we can even get all of us on the NRA membership list... :p :p :p :mad:
 
Hopefully Bloomberg will run as an Independent. He will peel a lot more votes away from Hitlery/obama than a Republican.
 
Actually, the 1986 McClure-Volkmer Act didn't include the closing of the NFA Register until the last minutes before vote. It was a "deal" made to insure the passage of the Act. It doesn't BAN Machineguns. It does close the Register for any new machineguns to be added to it. There's a difference. It's also the one provision that could possibly be changed without involving the Supreme Court.

Under President Clinton, the dress-smear man, Chinese Firearms were totally banned, as well as Chinese Ammunition. He also signed findings that severley restricted the importation of various Milsurp ammunition until Congress finally acted under Restraint of Trade threats.
 
"You forgot about the 8 years of peace"

Lessee, beginning with the first World Trade Center bombing and several overseas incidents, seems more like stalling for time and letting someone else do the dirty work.

I was going to comment on BJs being distracting, but that is just people being people.
 
"You forgot about the 8 years of peace"

Lessee, beginning with the first World Trade Center bombing and several overseas incidents, seems more like stalling for time and letting someone else do the dirty work.
:rolleyes: You just took the "peace" quote way out of context to serve your own argument.
Please read what he actually said again:
You forgot about the 8 years of peace and prosperity for middle-class folks.
I believe he was speaking economically.
 
To say that any president is responsible for peace and prosperity is naive. Clinton served during the World trade Center, the U.S.S. Cole Incident, the bombings of American Embassies, and sent out troops into Somalia, Serbia, Croatia, and so on. It was Clinton that destroyed a pharmaceutical plant in retaliation for the Cole bombing. Faulty intel? Heard that one again, later, and the dems don't think it's an excuse.

Clinton had the opportunity to behead the snake that Al-Queda became, but didn't act on it. The planning for the World Trade Center was accomplished, and many of the perps were entering the country during his tenure as well.

The economy may be saved by a president, along with Congress, but to say that a period of good economic indicators is the result of one man's being in office is truly ridiculous. Most of the groundwork for such a period was laid before he got into office. The economy just isn't that rapid moving when it's improving.

Our current economy is even higher than the Clinton Years. Unemployment is down. Our taxes haven't increased. The price of oil has nothing to do with the president. Hurricane Katrina started that little ripple. Stupid people still think that the federal government should have moved more quickly in Louisiana. They ignore the law that states that the Governor of the state has to ask for federal help first. They also ignore the facts that FEMA is largely a volunteer organization for field work. They require 72 hours minimum to mobilize.

The fact that so many of the mental midgets are able to sit back and think up these half-baked schemes shows that the economy is in pretty good shape, as they aren't working two jobs, at two fast-food stores, to make ends meet.
 
Let's Analyze the Democrap's Promise

Copied from anther forum...


When you have it good you don't have enough sense to realize it.
************************************************

The Democrats promise "A New Direction For America - Vote Democratic"

The stock market is at a new all-time high and America 's 401K's are back.
A new direction from there means, what?

Unemployment is at 25 year lows.
A new direction from there means, what?

Oil prices are plummeting.
A new direction from there means, what?

Taxes are at 20 year lows.
A new direction from there means, what?

Federal tax revenues are at all-time highs.
A new direction from there means, what?

The Federal deficit is down almost 50%, just as predicted over last year.
A new direction from there means. what?

Home valuations are up 200% over the past 3.5 years.
A new direction from there means, what?

Inflation is in check, hovering at 20 year lows.
A new direction from there means, what?

Not a single terrorist attack on US soil since 9/11/01.
A new direction from there means, what?

Osama bin Laden is living under a rock in a dark cave, having not surfaced
in years, if he's alive at all, while 95% of Al Queda's top dogs are
either dead or in custody, cooperating with US Intel.
A new direction from there means, what?

Several major terrorist attacks already thwarted by US and British
Intel, including the recent planned attack involving 10 Jumbo Jets being
exploded in mid-air over major US cities in order to celebrate the
anniversary of the 9/11/01 attacks.
A new direction from there means, what?

Just as President Bush foretold us on a number of occasions, Iraq was
to be made "ground zero" for the war on terrorism -- and just as President
Bush said they would, terrorist cells from all over the region are arriving
from the shadows of their hiding places and flooding into Iraq in order to
get their faces blown off by US Marines rather than boarding planes and
heading to the United States to wage war on us here.
A new direction from there means, what?


Now let me see, do I have this right? I can expect:

The economy to go South
Illegals to go North
Taxes to go Up
Employment to go Down
Terrorism to come In
Tax breaks to go Out
Social Security to go away
Health Care to go the same way gas prices have gone

But what the heck !
I can gain comfort by knowing that Nancy P, Hillory C, John K, Edward K,
Howard D, Harry R and Obama have worked hard to create a comprehensive
National Security Plan, Health Care Plan, Immigration Reform Plan, Gay
Rights Plan, Same Sex Marriage Plan, Abortion On Demand Plan, Tolerance
of Everyone and Everything Plan, How to Return all Troops to the US . in
The Next Six Months Plan, A Get Tough Plan, adapted from the French Plan by
the same name and a How Everyone Can Become as Wealthy as We Are Plan.


Oh, I forgot the No More Katrina Storm Plan and the Outlaw Firearm
Ownership By Law Abiding American Citizens Plan and Re-Write The Second
Amendment Plan.

Now I know why I feel good after the elections.
I am going to be able to sleep soooooo much better at nights knowing
these dedicated politicians are thinking of me and my welfare.
 
The stock market is at a new all-time high and America 's 401K's are back.
A new direction from there means, what?

Making sure that prosperity trickles down to those who don't own stocks, maybe?

Unemployment is at 25 year lows.
A new direction from there means, what?

Ever heard of underemployment? I know people with engineering and CS degrees working at Target or waiting tables. Unemployment numbers don't tell the whole story.

Oil prices are plummeting.
A new direction from there means, what?

Trying to break our dependence on foreign oil in the first place? Reducing our fossil fuel usage? Nothing brings prices down faster than reducing demand.

Taxes are at 20 year lows.
A new direction from there means, what?

Not reducing taxes at the expense of the budget? Attempting to reign in our debt? That's great your taxes are low, I don't want my children to have to foot the bill.

Federal tax revenues are at all-time highs.
A new direction from there means, what?

Reducing spending (or raising taxes) so that the two actually meet?

The Federal deficit is down almost 50%, just as predicted over last year.
A new direction from there means. what?

I'm a fan of surpluses. Or at least much smaller deficits. We used to have the former. That ended sometime between Bush taking office and 9/11.

Home valuations are up 200% over the past 3.5 years.
A new direction from there means, what?

Making sure that either A) this bubble doesn't burst, or B) owning a home is actually within reach of the middle class, which it isn't in some areas.

Inflation is in check, hovering at 20 year lows.
A new direction from there means, what?

They didn't say they'd change everything.

Not a single terrorist attack on US soil since 9/11/01.
A new direction from there means, what?

Post hoc ergo propter hoc. We've had plenty of 5 year (or much, much longer) spans without terrorist attacks on US soil. A new direction might mean continuing this trend while honoring the Constitution, both in word and spirit (except the 2nd, of course...they always do forget about that one).

Anyway, this whole idea that not having any terrorist attacks on our soil since 9/11 thing is either A) the result of any of the current Administration/Congress's actions or B) will necessarily change if we were to alter any of those actions is, at best, flawed logic. At worst, outright stupidity.

Osama bin Laden is living under a rock in a dark cave, having not surfaced
in years, if he's alive at all, while 95% of Al Queda's top dogs are
either dead or in custody, cooperating with US Intel.
A new direction from there means, what?

It could mean taking the 150K people in Iraq and putting them in Afghanistan, scouring those caves, and finding Osama. Of course, it's probably too late for that now.

Several major terrorist attacks already thwarted by US and British
Intel, including the recent planned attack involving 10 Jumbo Jets being
exploded in mid-air over major US cities in order to celebrate the
anniversary of the 9/11/01 attacks.
A new direction from there means, what?

Again, they didn't say they'd change everything.

Just as President Bush foretold us on a number of occasions, Iraq was
to be made "ground zero" for the war on terrorism -- and just as President
Bush said they would, terrorist cells from all over the region are arriving
from the shadows of their hiding places and flooding into Iraq in order to
get their faces blown off by US Marines rather than boarding planes and
heading to the United States to wage war on us here.
A new direction from there means, what?

Finding a way to thwart terror attacks without using our servicemen and women as bomb bait? I'm not a fan of that plan, as I'm one of the ones to be used as bait. Or do you not realize that they're blowing our faces (and legs, and arms) off too?

....and the Outlaw Firearm Ownership By Law Abiding American Citizens Plan and Re-Write The Second
Amendment Plan.

As compared to the "Rewrite the First and Fourth (and some others) Amendment Plan?"

Yes, we ought to have some worries with the new regime, especially as far as firearm ownership goes. But you seem to be painting this perfectly rosy picture of how things are here, which in no way reflects the country I've been looking around at over the last few years. Granted, we aren't exactly living in Crapistan, but that doesn't mean everything is perfect or there's no room for positive change.

EDIT: Also note that I'm not necessarily saying the new batch will actually do all of the above...just that in many of the things you mentioned as though they were "perfection" there is definitely room for improvement. I mean sure, "if it ain't broke, don't fix it"...then again, unlike cars, it's very possible for things to seem to be working fine for you and be very broken for somebody else.
 
Making sure that prosperity trickles down to those who don't own stocks, maybe?

So those that don't take their own initiative to save and invest what money they can set aside should benefit somehow?? Sounds like welfare. Which is yet another crock of crap that needs overhauled. When stocks are up, it means that corporate America is doing well and growing. When big business grows, they employ more people thus more people go to work who wouldn't otherwise and they prosper and contribute to their own savings plan.

Ever heard of underemployment? I know people with engineering and CS degrees working at Target or waiting tables. Unemployment numbers don't tell the whole story.

The statement is directed to UNEMPLOYMENT, not underemployment. If you have a degree it rocket science, widget making or whatever and you don't have a job in your field of expertise, who's responsible for giving you one? If working at Target or waiting tables is all you can get with a degree under your belt, who's fault is it? Certainly not mine or or the government's. Let's see... I go out, get a degree in some engineering field and hit the workforce demanding my government somehow OWES me a job... uh, huh.... :rolleyes: See above comment...

Trying to break our dependence on foreign oil in the first place? Reducing our fossil fuel usage? Nothing brings prices down faster than reducing demand.

Quite a simple plan there. What are YOU doing to help with the plan? Are you installing wind turbines and solar panels on your home to get off the grid? Have you converted your car to bio-diesel and make your own fuel from recycled cooking oil in your garage? Are you refraining from purchasing any plastic products that require crude oil to manufacture? Good idea in concept but takes a HUGE change in lifestyle by everyone to make effective.

Not reducing taxes at the expense of the budget? Attempting to reign in our debt? That's great your taxes are low, I don't want my children to have to foot the bill.

I agree. We should stop supporting the rest of the world as their welfare provider. Foreign aid needs to come to a screeching halt. Domestic welfare needs to be overhauled and re-evaluated. Illegal immigrants need to be deported ASAP! STOP supporting the rest of the world at the expense of the working class by taxing them to death!

Reducing spending (or raising taxes) so that the two actually meet?

See above but without the raising taxes part. I pay more than my share already, thank you.

I'm a fan of surpluses. Or at least much smaller deficits. We used to have the former. That ended sometime between Bush taking office and 9/11.

We haven't had a budget surplus since LBJ and Veitnam contrary to what "some" administrations try to convince you to believe. Get rid of handouts to other countries and you'll notice a huge surplus in the budget.

Making sure that either A) this bubble doesn't burst, or B) owning a home is actually within reach of the middle class, which it isn't in some areas.

So, the Dems have a plan yet again to keep real estate values up yet still within reach of the middle class. I'd like to see this plan...

They didn't say they'd change everything.

Thank God for small favors.

Not a single terrorist attack on US soil since 9/11/01.
A new direction from there means, what?

Post hoc ergo propter hoc. We've had plenty of 5 year (or much, much longer) spans without terrorist attacks on US soil. A new direction might mean continuing this trend while honoring the Constitution, both in word and spirit (except the 2nd, of course...they always do forget about that one).

Anyway, this whole idea that not having any terrorist attacks on our soil since 9/11 thing is either A) the result of any of the current Administration/Congress's actions or B) will necessarily change if we were to alter any of those actions is, at best, flawed logic. At worst, outright stupidity.

Uh... yeah... flawed logic or not... the result was still the same.

It could mean taking the 150K people in Iraq and putting them in Afghanistan, scouring those caves, and finding Osama. Of course, it's probably too late for that now.

In hind sight, it might have been more opportunistic to have a previous administration leader actually take custody of Osama during the multiple chances they had prior to 9/11. Gee... that wouldn't make sense though, right?

Finding a way to thwart terror attacks without using our servicemen and women as bomb bait? I'm not a fan of that plan, as I'm one of the ones to be used as bait. Or do you not realize that they're blowing our faces (and legs, and arms) off too?

So, your view of the war in Iraq is that our service men and women are simply bait?? Not being sure of of what forest you grew up in or what your background is, I find your analogy of the men and women of our armed forces very offensive. These are the same people that do what they do and put their lives on the line to give you the right to spew that garbage from your mouth. War is not pretty. It's not a PC game with imaginary players and imaginary injuries. People die often in gruesome ways often for idealistic values and political motives. You have and enjoy what you have because men and women DIED in similar circumstances and they gave you the right to voice your misguided ideals. I'm not a big fan of war nor of the fact that our armed forces are in Iraq fighting a war that has clearly lost its original purpose for a nation that obviously cannot take responsibility as they should of their own freedoms given by the blood shed from out troops. Should we pull out? Probably. Will Iraq retain its freedom and democracy? Doubtful. Were we justified in taking out Sadaam? Ask the many thousands of people he tortured, murdered, raped, and pillaged.

As compared to the "Rewrite the First and Fourth (and some others) Amendment Plan?"

Yes, we ought to have some worries with the new regime, especially as far as firearm ownership goes. But you seem to be painting this perfectly rosy picture of how things are here, which in no way reflects the country I've been looking around at over the last few years. Granted, we aren't exactly living in Crapistan, but that doesn't mean everything is perfect or there's no room for positive change.

Absolutely we have some worries and that's an understatement! The new Democrat leadership has a clear agenda on the table with the likes of Pelosi at the lead. Bet your bottom dollar that the 2A is going to be under direct fire for these fanatics, it's already begun. I for one, do not see any moves being made for a positive change.
 
Lessee, beginning with the first World Trade Center bombing and several overseas incidents, seems more like stalling for time and letting someone else do the dirty work.

Seems more to me like having an administration with brains rather than having one led by an idiot.

And, since you brought it up, I'll take all the BJs you don't want.
 
Last edited:
Well, I'm middle class and I don't think the government owes me anything. I can take care of myself.

No you aren't middle class. If you make more than $61,000 a year you are FILTHY BLOODY RICH, TAX TAX TAX ! YOU SHOULD BE TAXED MORE!!!! YOU DON'T PAY YOUR FAIR SHARE!!! GIVE IT ALL TO US!!!!! [/democrat off]

According to the UN if you make more than $61k USD/year you are in the wealthiest top 10% of the world population. So it is your job to support a bunch of 3rd world deadbeats with your earnings.
 
Last edited:
According to the UN if you make more than $61k USD/year you are in the wealthiest top 1% of the world population. So it is your job to support a bunch of 3rd world deadbeats with your earnings.

I didn't apply for that job and if it was given to me, I choose to resign that position in favor of the job I chose to train for and already have. I don't want to support any 3rd world deadbeat. I don't want to support a domestic deadbeat. I'm already up to my eyeballs supporting liberal governmental deadbeats.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top