hogwild63

Great pics. Thanks for sharing.

Video from a security camera on the peir was released today I believe. I bet it will be plastered all over the internet.

WHATEVER you do DO NOT agree to arrange any payments with the debt collection agency. Unless they purchased the account from the hospital, the debt collection agency cannot do anything to you or your credit score. The only thing they can do is return it to the original creditor. If they did purchase the account, then they probably bought it for pennies on the dollar and it is not a secured debt so all they bought is the RIGHT to collect on the debt. If they get threaten anything legal, they must by law (Fair Debt Collection Act) intend to follow through with that threat. That means they would have to spend the money to proceed with a judgement against you and they have to prove that it is your debt which would mean having to get the original creditor to go to court with them. Not likely to happen. More likely to happen is that they would offer to settle with you for a lower amount but more than what they purchased for the account. If the original amount of the debt was $5000 and they bought the rights to collect for about $500, then anything they get over that goes into their pocket with no loss to them. My guess is that they have not purchased the account and that would be the FIRST question I would ask them. The second question I would ask them is if they are an attorney. Usually, that puts them in their place. I am a probation officer and several of my probationers work for debt collection agencies. Most of them are narcisistic and enjoy their job alot.

Take a look at this... http://www.credit.com/credit_information/credit_law/Understanding-Your-Debt-Collection-Rights.jsp

Welcome home

Just the smart aleck answer I would expect. That was a straight forward question. I could not find any other web site for Sportsmen for Obama.

I dunno. Ask Acearcher. He's got all the answers. He even promises.

nativetexan, GREAT STUFF!! That needs to be submitted to .... ah, nevermind, who'd publish it?

So what about this, Ace? Is this the organization that is represented in your banner?

That may be so but you may not have the same guns I do or the same amount of guns. If I bet you money that you will still have your guns in 4 years and nothing happens to your guns, then all I am out is money. If I win the bet, we are all out guns and the money invested in them. Most importantly, we would be out a right. I have seen several shooting incidents in the news lately (malls, etc.). I do not think that Obama or the senate will actively go after the guns in the next 4 years - maybe when he is re-elected in 4 years and they believe they have a blank check and a mandate - but I do believe that the political players are in place when another tragic shooting occurs and the public outcry demands that the government do something about it. You may get to keep your hunting guns, but the slippery slope would begin. Remember that MLK was assasinated with a hunting rifle - a Remington Gamemaster 760 pump .30-06. I agree that the laws are already written.

Ace, you conspicuously never responded to this post on the other thread I agree that President-elect Obama (sorry, but George W. Bush is still President for two more months) has been clear on the issue of gun control. Let's review his voting record from his U.S. Senate tenure. SA4615 Voted for gun owners S397 Voted against gun manufacturers (twice) SA1615 Voted against gun owners SA1620 Voted against gun manufacturers SA1623 Voted against gun manufacturers SA1626 Voted against gun owners SA1644 Voted against gun manufacturers And from his time in the Illinois Legislature SB0604 Voted against concealed carry SB-1963 Voted against allowing someone without an FOID to possess a gun while under direct supervision of someone with an FOID SB-356 Voted for a poorly worded bill attempting to define "junk handguns" SB-2163 Voted against lowering the age for an FOID from 21 to 18 SB-947 Voted for additional restrictions on gun shows HB-1096 Did not vote on a bill to legalize handgun hunting for deer HB-515 Voted against this bill which would require that gun owners be notified if a gun they owned was the subject of a records search HB-2576 Voted for this bill which would limit handgun purchases to 1 per month SB-2165 Voted against this bill that would prevent prosecution for self defense use of a firearm even if said use violated local laws By my count, that's 15 votes against the 2nd Amendment, and 1 vote for. So, looking at his voting record, I'd say that we have a very good basis to be concerned for our Constitutional right to bear arms.

politicians prefer unarmed peasants

I like to go "hogwild". It was taken so I added my birth year - 1963.

North Texas Association of Public Employees USWA, Local 9487 I voted for McCain. There are alot more issues that are important to me than just labor laws. I usually vote my enduring values over my pocket book regardless of what the USWA says. I work in a place where 95% are Democrats and have no problem letting you know they are Democrats. They know I vote Republican. When President Bush won his first term, my coworkers anger was quite apparent in their non-verbal behaviors. I said nothing about it for about 2 weeks. When he won the second time, they were quite verbal in their anger. I walked on egg-shells for 2 weeks. For the last eight years, they have not missed an opportunity to let me know when a Republican messed up. Now they are smug and condescending, much like you. I have taken it for the last eight years. Now their savior has arrived; everything will be righted and the world will be a better place. Hope springs eternal. So you are being attacked. Poor me. I say big deal. Get over it. You do not have to threaten to no longer post in the political forum. Your status as a hunter was in question as this board often has anti-hunters posing as hunters to stir the pot. There are usually clues such as misspelled words while trying to articulate in an intellectual manner in order to educate the less informed. They also usually appear on the forums when hunters suffer a political defeat. The original question of this thread is a loaded question designed to stir the pot. What did you expect? You baited the discussion. "but what I wondered if people would attack him based on his race, question his relegion or say he is Un-American b/c his parents were not born in this country." Either you choose words "attack him based..." carefully or you are not aware of your condescending tone. If he is a true fiscal conservative, I doubt he is the only fiscal conservative from which to choose. I do not have to disqualify him on any of those areas "in question". If I am uncomfortable with his race, religion or heritage, I can choose another fiscal conservative to support. I do not have to "attack" him. If you eally want an example of ppl attacking candidates, you only need to look back on the Democratic primaries. Please consider the fact that those of us that voted for McCain and OUR enduring values, do not need our heads examined or are less informed as you are. And seriously, good luck in shotgun season. I hope you get a big buck.

Probation Officer in Dallas County

Ace, I would suggest you check out the diagnostic criteria for Narcissistic Personality in the DSM. You seem to think you are intellectually superior to us and should be recognized as such. Also, you quotes are stirred by hatred as well and are nothing but condescending. You "promise"? By what authority do you make that statement? What credentials do you possess that we should listen to you? I would like you to list them for us that we may be assured that you have "special" knowledge that Obama will do as you/he claims. "the Republican party has been run out of Washington tonight". Really?!! That seems to me to be a comment that is made with a certain amount of relish and arrogance. But then, you will probably find some way to turn this against me.

Where were y'all when all the offensive stuff about Bush was being sent all over the internet? I take this one as a joke just like the ones about Bush.

Remember the contest where you had to find the icon with the letters in it. Scott hid them all over the web site and to find them to complete the code?

Re-reading this thread reminds me of a quote: "If you don't stand for something, then you will fall for anything."

Better yet, slap her on the butt and say, "Get up. You have to take the kid. I'm going hunting!" . . . .

I think we saw from the election that NOTHING is going to stick to this guy because most ppl were afraid of McCain repeating the last 8 years. IMO, only the last 2 were bad and the only thing they had to complain about was the war and other cultural issues they did not agree with (as evidenced by the reversal of Bush's executive orders).

I bet I have none. Let me check. I'll be right back . . . . . Yep. None. I guess you have to be one to get one.

If abortion WAS your issue, then... I think you will be disappointed. I think he will move much faster than ppl thought he would. I do not think Republicans will have not nearly as much influence as he has claimed they will... Obama reviews Bush orders on stem cells, drilling Published - Nov 09 2008 11:17AM CST | AP By STEPHEN OHLEMACHER - Associated Press Writer President-elect Obama's transition chief said Sunday the incoming administration is looking to reverse President Bush's executive orders on stem cell research, oil and gas drilling and other matters. John Podesta said the president can use such orders to move quickly without waiting for Congress to act, highlighting the extraordinary powers a president can wield beyond signing legislation approved by Congress. Podesta said people should expect Obama to use those powers to reverse many policies of the Bush administration. "I think across the board, on stem cell research, on a number of areas, you see the Bush administration even today moving aggressively to do things that I think are probably not in the interest of the country," Podesta said in a broadcast interview. "There's a lot that the president can do using his executive authority without waiting for congressional action, and I think we'll see the president do that," Podesta said. President Bush has limited federal spending on stem cell research, a position championed by opponents of abortion rights. Obama has supported the research in an effort to find cures for diseases such as Alzheimer's. Also, the federal Bureau of Land Management is opening about 360,000 acres of public land in Utah to oil and gas drilling, leading to protests from environmentalists. "They want to have oil and gas drilling in some of the most sensitive, fragile lands in Utah," Podesta said. "I think that's a mistake." Podesta also said Obama is working to build a Cabinet that is diverse. That includes reaching out to Republicans and independents _ part of the broad coalition that supported Obama during the race against Republican John McCain. A top House Republican said there is a willingness to try to work with Obama to get things done. But Rep. Eric Cantor also said to expect Republicans to serve as a check against the power held by Obama and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, a Democrat from California. "There is going to be, I think, a willingness to try and get things done," Cantor said. "But at the end of the day I think you will see a Republican Party in Congress serving as a check and a balance against Mr. Obama's power and Speaker Pelosi's power." Cantor, a Virginia Republican, is running to be the second-ranking Republican in the House _ the job of minority whip. Cantor and Podesta spoke on "Fox News Sunday."

"I researched all the smear campaigns against Obama and they don't hold up as far as I'm conerned." The bipartison websites I checked, the smears were about equal on both sides. If you were offended by the smears against Obama, why were you not offended by the smears against Palin? IMO, the smears were worse and she was just the VP candidate! You have to admit, McCain was smeared as well. It comes with the territory. Right or wrong, the smears against Obama will never reach the heights of those against Dubya. "I've voted republican because of the abortion issue. Well, after 8 years of George W. abortions are still legal. I will not vote for a candidate based on one issue any more." The abortion issue will never go away no matter who is president. It's too polarized of an issue. But I believe it will get worse with Obama at the healm. "McCain is a fine man, but I disagree with his plan to save our economy." If you voted your pocket book, be prepared to make sacrifices in other areas. If things get alot better in the economy in his first term, I think it will be blank check time in 2012. Personally, I think things will get much better for the first term. I think we will see the real Obama in the second term. There is an old saying that if it looks too good to be true, then it probably is. I think he is too good to be true and the issues you mentioned are going to take a beating in 2012. Not that they were my preferences with the Republicans but I took my chances with McCain/Palin.

WHAT?!!!! "its almost like were going back in time to the Civil War and we must wake up and take arms cause the guy we wanted elected didnt get elected byt the same exact process that we fight for ... you guys can't have it both ways ... you want your rights but you slander the guy who was voted in by the same process that got you the rights in the first place its very hypocritical ... " What?!!! I think you're the one that's freaking. That comment is just as inflamatory as stating a temporary boom in gun sales is CHAOS!!! The gun counter was busy tonight. We have a few S&W M&P AR-15's left, one Bushmaster A3 camo left and a few phone calls, but NO ONE was freaking because they could not get an assault rifle tonight. Face it. The man's voting record as a senator was blatant anti-gun . He will not be trusted on this issue for some time. This issue will be a low priority while he deals with the economy, the deficit and 2 wars. Iran will be testing the waters by picking on Isreal to see what kind of reaction it might bring. But when things settle down or if there is another Virginia Tech type incident, then the debate will heat up again. There's an old saying that if it looks to good to be true, it probably is. I say he is too good to be true. Dubya has been slandered for the last 8 years starting with he stole the election. I am not concerned about Obama's feelings at all. It comes with the territory.