TreeStandBowHunter Posted February 10, 2008 Report Share Posted February 10, 2008 I'm just shaking my head. Join the club;) Maybe if we could get some good Republicans to run for office we wouldn't have this problem. America is there own worst enemy and right now, the Democrats have better canidates than Republicans with the exeption of Huckabee and I don't see him going too much further. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strut10 Posted February 10, 2008 Report Share Posted February 10, 2008 Join the club;) ...........the Democrats have better canidates than Republicans with the exeption of Huckabee and I don't see him going too much further. Huckabee excepted, I feel you're still dead wrong and I'll join no club to that effect. A Clinton is a Clinton is a Clinton. You vote for her if you want. I, for one, couldn't sleep at night if I did the same. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TreeStandBowHunter Posted February 10, 2008 Report Share Posted February 10, 2008 Huckabee excepted, I feel you're still dead wrong and I'll join no club to that effect. A Clinton is a Clinton is a Clinton. You vote for her if you want. I, for one, couldn't sleep at night if I did the same. I may not even vote at all, who knows. I still can't believe that America is keeping Osama in the running. Now that is scary and will cause sleepless nights;) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strut10 Posted February 10, 2008 Report Share Posted February 10, 2008 Hillary..............Obama................. Obama............Hillary................... Having a real hard time seeing any substantive difference between the two, politically. Having trouble figuring out why you'd vote for one but question the other's legitimacy to run?? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wtnhunt Posted February 10, 2008 Report Share Posted February 10, 2008 Hillary..............Obama................. Obama............Hillary................... Having a real hard time seeing any substantive difference between the two, politically. Having trouble figuring out why you'd vote for one but question the other's legitimacy to run?? Exactly! Gender and race aside, the two are little if at all different. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JJL Posted February 10, 2008 Author Report Share Posted February 10, 2008 Hillary........O'Bama..............McCain. O'Bama.........McCain.....Hillary. McCain ...........Hillary............O'Bama There's really only one it's the McHillbama. The three headed Liberal Beast the will destroy Conservatism and America. I'd just as soon have Hillary. I hate her as much as the next person, however she has one thing going for her..........She's predictable and can be fought. McCain's a complete wack-job and should be incarcerated. O'Bama is so far left he's off the chart. The problem stems from the fact that it's probably going to be McCain vs. O'Bama............ Hillary will be tabbed as the VP and it's over. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OJR Posted February 10, 2008 Report Share Posted February 10, 2008 CPAC, the conservative group, ranked the candidates as follows: McCain - 82+% conservative voting record! Hillary - 6% conservative voting record! Obama - 0% conservative voting record! I am hearing statements of how "liberal" McCain is! Where is this rational coming from, other than the you are watching too much CNN?????? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JJL Posted February 10, 2008 Author Report Share Posted February 10, 2008 This thread started with John mcCains voting record on the Second Ammendment........NOT CONSERVATIVE. McCain-Lieberman and climate stewardship, he believes that global warming is man-made and you caused it.................NOT CONSERVATIVE. McCain-Feingold campaign finance reform, restricts freedom of speech in violation of the First ammendment....................NOT CONSERVATIVE. McCain-Kennedy immigration bill, provides amnesty for 12,000,000 illegals who are here gives the full rights as citizens. Health care-Education-Tax Rebate-Drivers Licenses......................NOT CONSERVATIVE John McCain supports Hillary's Health care plan..................NOT CONSERVATIVE. John McCain has consistently crossed the aisle to co-author bills in the Senate with the most Liberal Senators in congress...................NOT CONSERVATIVE. John McCain returned home from Viet Nam and found his wife to be crippled from a car accident that occured while he was a POW. He quickly divorced her and remarried his current wife , abandoning his children and family.................................NOT CONSERVATIVE. You need more???????????? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JJL Posted February 11, 2008 Author Report Share Posted February 11, 2008 The conservative voice says this: http://www.theconservativevoice.com/article/30495.html Gunowners.org say this: http://www.gunowners.org/mcdisguise.htm The New York Time's (and they should know what Liberal means) says this: http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=990CE6DE1F3DF937A15752C0A9669C8B63 Need more?????????? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nativetexan Posted February 12, 2008 Report Share Posted February 12, 2008 Ladies and Gentlemen. Here is what drives my vote. Anyone who attacks the second amendment in any way that it will hurt legal gun owners in this country to the point where even the most disadvantaged person cannot legally purchase a firearm and practice this right, will lose my vote. Why? Not because of full auto, semi auto, single shot, sling shot. It is the simple BASIC fact that we are allowing a person to be in office who does not acknowledge one of the BASIC rights in this country, liberal or conservative. I would feel the same way if anyone tried to do the same thing with any other amendment. At times, I despise the press as I feel sometimes they do more harm than good. But I also acknowledge it is their right to speak, and if I don't want to hear it, then this beautifully designed technological device called a "clicker" is right at my finger tips. One effortless press of the finger solves my disgust, and ensures their right. TSBH, I have to ask because I feel your reasoning is flawed. Roll your eyes all you like, but this is serious stuff. My question is, how can you say you don't care but in the same sentence back up that belief with "too many on the streets" and "why does anyone really need one?" That to me says you would just assume see them gone, in all forms of ownership. I don't think I need to throw out the "purchased from the trunk of a car" eulogy here because most of us all know it. When I think about the introduction of gun laws, I take into account the legal gun owner only. Criminals are criminals no matter what law we pass. Now, in case anyone hasn't noticed, this country and its foundation are under attack by a generation of weaklings. People who are afraid to stand up for what is right, and instead of making tough unemotional decisions, they make an "off the hip" decision so nobody immediately suffers. That is a sign of weakness and an inability to preserve this nation's heritage. And the crappy thing about it is they are winning, while the most principled people in the world are sitting back arguing about who is more liberal. I don't care who is more liberal. Liberal is liberal. One may be stronger than the other, but they will band together to help the other succeed. Much like we would as conservatives. The national healthcare horse has been beaten to death and is being served with a side of fries and a large coke. But, I will tell you that the passage of such a thing in this country will ultimately introduce a socialist ideal into an already weak minded majority of a capitalist and democratic nation. People will begin to believe that the government should give them everything, not just healthcare. It may not be in my lifetime, but with these ideals being instilled in our youth and the execution of these ideals by parents and those unwilling to help themselves (or by all means succeed in life), I envision toilet paper lines. And food lines. And "people's cars." Don't think for one minute history won't repeat itself. This may be a different day in age, but the foundations of this country are still very real. Bicker all you like, but I would prefer to at least make an educated attempt at doing what's right to preserve this nation and its ideals. It's the least we can do for all of those military members who are, regretably, rolling in their graves. In reality, people voting for someone because it "suits" them is irresponsible. What we should be voting for is what is right to protect this nation. Even if it hurts us personally. Even if people have to suffer and die. Even if it means that if I want to, I can buy the biggest hand cannon that I want to protect those who are close to me without some teary eyed mother of a dead, drug dealing, gangster kid saying "I don't think you need that." Even if it means that I have to pay a little bit higher freaking taxes to protect this nation the way it needs to be protected. We all need to get over ourselves and stop worrying about self preservation solely. This country allows you to even have the option of self preservation to the manner in which you see fit. Protect it first or your level of self preservation will be up to an elected official. Extreme? Maybe...Think about it... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adjam5 Posted February 12, 2008 Report Share Posted February 12, 2008 I very rarely come in here, and outside of a political joke I never comment in here. BUT... Any hunter/shooter who says " I don't care, they are not after my guns" is in for one heck of a surprise. They contributing to OUR demise as gun owners and hunters. It is your Remington 1100 they are after too; don't kid yourself. Not just the AR's and AK's. That is the type of divide and conquer tactic that splits the gun owners and allows for easy defeat by liberals. Ask Jim Zumbo if "assault rifles" should be banned. "Hunters don't need them". He knows better now. Anyone remember how he almost lost it all over that? The gun issue is a BIG factor in my vote, but not the ONLY factor. It does weigh heavily though in my decision. Hunters and gun owners need to stick together now more than ever or people like PeTa will have a publicly funded office in the White House. This upcoming election has me sick...I can't remember such poor choices for the President of this Great nation. Worse Worse and Worse...not even a bad. No less of evils to pick from. They all are NFG. The Clinton Crime Family is selling their crap and people are buying. Obama...Rhymes with Osama. Need I say more? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Texan_Til_I_Die Posted February 12, 2008 Report Share Posted February 12, 2008 For those of you considering a vote for Hillary Clinton, you might want to take the time to read this Wall Street Journal editorial. If you haven't heard, or don't remember this, it's a real eye opener into the workings of the previous Clinton administration. http://online.wsj.com/article/SB120277819085260827.html?mod=opinion_main_commentaries Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hoosierbuck Posted February 22, 2008 Report Share Posted February 22, 2008 I guess I am surprised that a guy who has dedicated himself to serving in the military in part protect the freedom of his countrymen would be willing to give away with his vote what his own butt is on the line to protect? Am I missing something? It's about the freedom and the Constitution, and who will do it the least damage. I have sworn an oath to uphold the Constitution of the United States and the State of Indiana. I can not reconcile that oath with a vote for HRC or BHO. HB Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Finn Posted February 22, 2008 Report Share Posted February 22, 2008 Don't know, ask the government what they define as an assult rifle, I am not the one who came up with it. You have very strong opinions and yet don't even know how the anti-gun crowd defines assault weapons? I am just saying that if they want to outlaw them, I really don't care because it doesn't affect me. I am more concerned with bigger issues like I mentioned earlier. Mike, it's not only an M-16 that qualifies as "assault" weapons. My Ruger 10-22s would have been illegal to own had some of the proposed laws been enacted. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wtnhunt Posted February 22, 2008 Report Share Posted February 22, 2008 Mike, it's not only an M-16 that qualifies as "assault" weapons. My Ruger 10-22s would have been illegal to own had some of the proposed laws been enacted. Along with most if not all semi auto rifles, many shotguns too. The "assault weapons" term is so vague and general, it can be twisted by gun grabbers. Common misconception by many out there that "assault weapons" only include guns that serve no real purpose to gun owners, which most of us realize could not be the furthest from being true. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Finn Posted February 22, 2008 Report Share Posted February 22, 2008 Along with most if not all semi auto rifles, many shotguns too. The "assault weapons" term is so vague and general, it can be twisted by gun grabbers. Common misconception by many out there that "assault weapons" only include guns that serve no real purpose to gun owners. You're exactly right, William. My Remington 1100 shotgun would have been illegal, too "Assault Weapon" DOES NOT mean fully automatic weapon! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aksheephuntress Posted February 22, 2008 Report Share Posted February 22, 2008 Wow...some really great posts.....lot. :First of all...I am going to vote for McCain. .......I am not stating this to string myself up as a target for anybody's criticism: although,I understand that by posting now, on this thread,I am asking for it. I understand that. My main reasons for posting on this subject today, I will state in a minute. ....I have gotten a lot out of all the various posts, and stances within. I have learned a lot.This IS a crucial issue. WE DO have to bond together , more than ever, to support the constitution. ...I am stating who I support because I respect this forum, and I didn't want to take the liberty to state a few impotant things(which I'll do in a second), and be construed as a person that is posting a peripheral comment, without also having the guts to come out and say who they are supporting.I am not a sheep.(I hunt them.) :I am a McCain supporter.I am definitely in the minority here.(I'm talking about a SUPPORTER...this was my stance, even before the primaries got this far) BUT...nobody can think me of being a coward, or wimp , or a follower just to be popular.(I am not accusing anyone of that, who has posted here, either..). I wonder if there are any other forum members here,-even McCain supporters-??! who have seen this heated debate on this thread, had strong opinions, and quietly clicked to another thread because they didn't want to be an individual, or set themselves up for something. .........at least I'm willing to stand up and state that,without being a wimp.(please grant me that) Also.....I would consider it the most UN-American thing, to NOT VOTE.That is one of our hard-won gifts; part of the beautiful legacy of this great country, and its freedoms.:And, as a woman,I owe it to my great-grandmothers for their patience, and persistence to bring that right to come into being. :The main thing I wanted to state, to maybe bring a thought of hope for our future in your minds, is that RIGHT NOW our family is working on starting a payment plan for all five of our children to have LIFE NRA memberships....(and myself...my guy is a lifer..mine is just regular, right now...)... ...and we promote and support the Friends of the NRA in our community. I work hard on that board each year.(I know a lot of you guys probably do, too). .....Just wanted to let you all know, so even if someone on this forum(like me) bothers you to the point of frustration because you feel he/she is not making an educated choice, just take heart in our NRA efforts . Also...the president is not "King"........ And .........MY big question is...who is going to be VICE-PRESIDENT. ..He/she may very-well-end up being the biggest impact on our country in the short future. ......Food for thought. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevebeilgard Posted February 23, 2008 Report Share Posted February 23, 2008 Join the club;) Maybe if we could get some good Republicans to run for office we wouldn't have this problem. America is there own worst enemy and right now, the Democrats have better canidates than Republicans with the exeption of Huckabee and I don't see him going too much further. i disagree fully. the republicans have much better candidates. what is not there is equal news coverage. "BUSH IS BAD" has hi-lited the news for years now. and did you hear we're losing the war in iraq? i sure did:mad:. our slanted news media is most of the evil in america today. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Missilelock Posted February 23, 2008 Report Share Posted February 23, 2008 I dont see the problem of either party not having decent candidates to run for president. I am sure there are plenty out there. The fact is- - the majority of Americans dont want that type of candidate to be president. The majority of Americans want a morally liberal, & financially liberal president.I can back that fact up by the evidence of who the American people have voted into the choices we have left. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JJL Posted February 23, 2008 Author Report Share Posted February 23, 2008 I dont see the problem of either party not having decent candidates to run for president. I am sure there are plenty out there. The fact is- - the majority of Americans dont want that type of candidate to be president. The majority of Americans want a morally liberal, & financially liberal president.I can back that fact up by the evidence of who the American people have voted into the choices we have left. While that's all very true, there's one important point left out...............the majority of Americans lean Right. This is evidenced by several major beliefs. The Majority of Americans support the 2nd ammendment, the majority oppose illegal immigration, the majority oppose abortion, the majority are Christian, and the majority of Americans support the War. The problem lies in the fact that the MEDIA is liberal and there are enough Dope-Smoking.......Tree-Hugging.......Baby-Killing.......Non-Christians in this country who get to vote, and they vote in huge numbers. When the Conservative vote comes out in Nov. the whole scenerio changes. BIG PROBLEM #2...........McCains NOT a Conservative and will not hold the Conservative vote. Big Screw-up on part of the GOP. Welcome President O'Bama.................Thanks GOP. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Missilelock Posted February 23, 2008 Report Share Posted February 23, 2008 Nope JJL7913- I dissagree with you on the biggest point. The majority of Americans today are not real Bible believing, God fearing Christians, else we would not find ourselves in the mess we are in. Many want to be considered Christians because we are part of a suppossedly "Chistian nation" but ,what they practice , & the way they vote belies the truth. Our nation needs fixed from the bottom up not the top down. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JJL Posted February 24, 2008 Author Report Share Posted February 24, 2008 In 1990 the census bureau reported America as 88% Christian. By 2002 that number fell to 78%. In 2008 that number has fallen to 75%. I'm not the person to pass judgment on the way people worship or believe, however, with that percentage of the population "calling themselves" Christian, maybe it's time we start acting like it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Turtle Posted February 24, 2008 Report Share Posted February 24, 2008 Amendment IX " A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed. " Amendment XIV Section 3 No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice-President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any State, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any State legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any State, to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, Wouldn't this mean none of them should be in office? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.