Obama, Guns & Paranoia

[tommyg]

I am glad it leaves you guys speechless, I am sorry if the truth hurts, Watch your idols cry...me too.....

Speechless,not at all. A liberal never told the truth. I have only 1 Idol and hes not on Earth. Cry well thats the Liberals creed,whine till we get our way. Oh I forgot Blame it on Bush is a Liberal thing also. I bet if your idol tanks you will blame it on Bush.

[Pine Mt Beagles]

[DoubleEagle]

I appreciate your efforts but you surely realize that the point on those questions was made long ago on this thread since it was posted early Dec. It should also be pointed out to you that wikipedia is not a reliable source for anything since it is open to the public. Also, I know that attacking the President of the United States (President Bush) was a popular sport for quite some time, but I believe when he left office the game became pointless. You can only blame him for all the worlds problems for so long before it just sounds like whining.

As far as the economy, like most Americans, you are confused about how much effect the President has on it, good or bad. The congress is where the economy is most influenced. All I ask though is that you stay consistent. If you are putting the state of the economy on the President then do so whether good or bad. If you are going to rightfully put it on congress then do so, good or bad. As of now we have Barrack Obama as President and Democrats leading the House and Senate. It is now their economy and no longer the responsibility of Former President Bush. I know the argument is going to be, well they inherited the worst economy ever (not true but let's accept that position) let's also remember that it was a Democrat Congress that handed that economy over to them as well.

Oh Tim I can read dates and do happen to have a calendar. But somebody decided to rehash this thread last night and your post caught my attention simply because you were asking the right questions. As for the things posted on Wikipedia I dare say it isn't just some liberal, left-wing drivel dreamed up just to slam former President Bush. Before I even searched for it last night I had heard about the Downing Street Memo (from the BBC), the Habbush letter (from Fox News and former US Sec. of Treasury Paul O'Neill along with former CIA officer Phillip Giraldi), and Ahmed Chalabi's dubious resources.
I simply needed something to point you to since you asked and Wikipedia was the fastest resource. Now I suppose I could go out and buy copies of all the various books, back-articles in newspapers, TV news transcripts, and what not... but I doubt I'd change your mind much. Heck I wouldn't really want to. The whole thing was and is pretty much a moot point.

Now the economy on the other hand... I can walk down the street and see how it's affected my town. I've read water and electric on alot of the houses now sitting empty. It used to be Middletown was where people went to get their kids out of Anderson or New Castle. Now they're moving back because they simply can't afford the drive each and every day. Economics become much simpler when viewed in those terms. Now that Democratic Congress you refered to... I believe they have held a slim majority for the past 2 years.

So think of it this way; If you had a pack of Beagles would you be able to change it from Brace Dogs to hard driving Midwest style gundogs in just two years? Sure... if you bought a whole new pack.

But let's say alot of the old pack are still there. Let's say you have 100 dogs in your pack. And out of that hundred 49 are still Brace Dogs and the other 51 are Midwest style gundogs. Would you expect to be able to breed Brace Dog to SPO Dog and completely overhaul your pack in just two years without culling a single dog?

Now I could go on but I think you get my point. Two years is nowhere near long enough to fix the mess we are in. And of course I expect the usual argument about the economy G.W. inherited... a multi-billion dollar surplus is a hard load to handle I'm sure. But before you talk about de-regulation I want you to look at who held the majority when it was passed. Now maybe my two cents isn't worth a hill of beans to you. That's cool. But please don't jump on me for pointing you towards information.

[bluegrass]

Here is what I think is being missed in this Liberal VS Conservative debate we are having here...when we (conservatives) show our anger or displeasure at the current administration, that does NOT automatically equate to a LOVE or COMPLETE AGREEMENT with the former administration...just because I know that OBAMA is a Socialist and dangerous for this country it doesnt mean that I gave blanket approval to the Bush administration....far from it. However, if we criticize the current occupant of 1600 Pennsylvania Ave, the libs immediately start screaming about Bush and how bad he is...newsflash, Bush didnt run again, McCain did.

That being said, its not hatred of Socialism that compels me to write my opinions of Obama, its my love for this country and desire to see its citizens remain free...and I just dont think thats possible with Obama and his rehashed Clinton Cronies running things...unless you are looking for a Government handout and expecting to get one, you are going to be one of the ones that will have to pay more for Obama to suck up to those that do get handouts. Someone here has said that Obama is reaching out to Republicans...I say big fat hairy deal. Just because you have an R next to your name doesnt make you a Conservative. There are waaaay too many RINO's in both houses for my taste. Obama WILL usher in Socialist policies...thats not just my opinion, but the opinion of many, many people with much more education and experience than me. He WILL go after guns, the so called assault weapons ban is just the FIRST STEP...its called incrementalism and the liberals are very good at it. There are those on this very board that advocate OBAMA as president yet refuse to understand or even be open minded enough to see the policies he wants to enact...In politics you are who you surround yourself with...and if you look at Obama's administration so far, you have far left, socialist, inept and downright criminal elements running things. Thats NOT what we are supposed to be....

Tony

[bluegrass]

... a multi-billion dollar surplus is a hard load to handle I'm sure.



Can we please put this foolish notion to rest...there never was a tangible, ready to touch pile of money called a surplus...it was all a projected surplus that never materialized due to a reduction of money taken in by the US Treasury....however, suppose we ACTUALLY had a surplus...do any of you know what that means???



IT MEANS THAT THE GOVERNMENT OVERTAXED THE AMERICAN PEOPLE. Government should NEVER have a surplus...the very idea is ludicrous and an insult to our nation....Government doesnt have ANY money of its own, its all OUR darn money people!!! Government should NEVER operate with a surplus, if they come up with one it should be returned to the people...so all this crap about a surplus is plain crazy.


Tony

[DoubleEagle]

Here is what I think is being missed in this Liberal VS Conservative debate we are having here...when we (conservatives) show our anger or displeasure at the current administration, that does NOT automatically equate to a LOVE or COMPLETE AGREEMENT with the former administration...just because I know that OBAMA is a Socialist and dangerous for this country it doesnt mean that I gave blanket approval to the Bush administration....far from it. However, if we criticize the current occupant of 1600 Pennsylvania Ave, the libs immediately start screaming about Bush and how bad he is...newsflash, Bush didnt run again, McCain did.

That being said, its not hatred of Socialism that compels me to write my opinions of Obama, its my love for this country and desire to see its citizens remain free...and I just dont think thats possible with Obama and his rehashed Clinton Cronies running things...unless you are looking for a Government handout and expecting to get one, you are going to be one of the ones that will have to pay more for Obama to suck up to those that do get handouts. Someone here has said that Obama is reaching out to Republicans...I say big fat hairy deal. Just because you have an R next to your name doesnt make you a Conservative. There are waaaay too many RINO's in both houses for my taste. Obama WILL usher in Socialist policies...thats not just my opinion, but the opinion of many, many people with much more education and experience than me. He WILL go after guns, the so called assault weapons ban is just the FIRST STEP...its called incrementalism and the liberals are very good at it. There are those on this very board that advocate OBAMA as president yet refuse to understand or even be open minded enough to see the policies he wants to enact...In politics you are who you surround yourself with...and if you look at Obama's administration so far, you have far left, socialist, inept and downright criminal elements running things. Thats NOT what we are supposed to be....

Tony

Aww heck Tony... I remember reading this not-so-funny-when-I-thought-about-it thing sent to me from my sister one day. It had the heading of "Where would you expect to find all these people under one roof" or something like that. It then went on to list things like 24 convicted child molesters, 16 convicted rapists, 104 convicted of drunk driving, so on and so forth. I think there was even one or two murderers on there.
So where were all those guys hiding out under one roof? In Congress!!! It was some time ago she sent this but I know alot of the same people are still there. Heck if you count Ted Kennedy there's alot of the drunk driving convictions right there. Either way that's the talent pool most Presidents have to choose from. Past, present, or future we know alot of these politicians aren't Saints. It's why they can't get a respectable job like the rest of us.

[DoubleEagle]

"projected surplus that never materialized due to a reduction of money taken in by the US Treasury"

You hit the nail on the head there Tony. Tax cuts coupled with a crumbling economy gutted our nations Treasury. Now I aint so old that I can't remember the Clinton years. When it comes right down to it I wasn't hurting back then. Come to think of it, with the exception of last years tax stimulus check, I haven't noticed a change in my taxes at all. Still paying in about 26 to 28% of my gross earnings, still getting back less than what I paid in. Still paying the state of Indiana at the end of each year (thanks to some principle earnings which will hopefully get me through my twilight years). And I'm still happy to do it.

Now since I can safely assume you pay taxes too, well, you're entitled to your opinions Tony. You pay for that right every pay day. Same as you pay for the right to walk safe on your streets at night. I'm not gonna get into the same old tired arguments I've been fighting for a year and more. After this last election cycle the Irish has begun to wear a little thin. But I'll leave you with this. I was raised to show respect until somebody earns my disrespect. So until our current President screws up I'm gonna give the man the benefit of the doubt same as I did with President Bush. I'd hope you would do the same for any man, President or not.

[Tim H]

DoubleEagle, I wasn't jumping on you for the information. I also wasn't saying that wiki is only left leaning. Wiki is plain and simple not a reliable source for anything. Many people mistakenly use it as the only source for their information and it is not accurate.

Your response to me shows that you are waffling on who is accountable. When that happens, both parties get a pass. You say that the Democrats should not get the blame for the current economy because they haven't had time to fix it. They have been in charge for 2 years, when did you start feeling the really hard bite from the economy? Within the last 2 years if you're like the rest of this country. You want to give them a pass and blame it entirely on Bush. Ok then stay consistent. When it comes to the banking issue, you want to blame the congress and leave Clinton blameless. That is not consistent. If you keep the shells moving then your favored party is always blameless and it is the other parties fault for everything so your favored party can move forward with impunity.

I was not happy with Bush leaning as far left as he did. I have not been happy that the Democrats broke precedence on many procedural processes to get what they wanted in congress. I was outraged when (despite the entire country being against the bailout) congress (Republican and Democrats) along with the President went ahead and did the bailout.

I prefer to be consistent in principles not in party alliance.

[beaglechase]

no surplus...just lies...democratic bull.... so I guess this means no deficit,,,no war...no economy troubles...all hunky dory...uh.....and you think we drink kool aid....because we see differently WOW,,,,,do you think Bush is the only one to blame,,,,no we have to also include Bush's cabinet, and for 6 years of republican control....can we rationaly blame Clinton..Come on....Who are you to say what Obama is going to do? every democratic president til hereafter, you will try to say, they are going to take away gun ownership.....and blame abortions on any democratic leadership. ...and you feel your so religious,,,,,jesus said your righteousness are as filthy rags....

[tommyg]

[bluegrass]

I prefer to be consistent in principles not in party alliance.



Exactly the difference between Conservatives and Liberals....except with Libs its the other way around...party first, no principles.



Tony

[tommyg]

no surplus...just lies...democratic bull.... so I guess this means no deficit,,,no war...no economy troubles...all hunky dory...uh.....and you think we drink kool aid....because we see differently WOW,,,,,do you think Bush is the only one to blame,,,,no we have to also include Bush's cabinet, and for 6 years of republican control....can we rationaly blame Clinton..Come on....Who are you to say what Obama is going to do? every democratic president til hereafter, you will try to say, they are going to take away gun ownership.....and blame abortions on any democratic leadership. ...and you feel your so religious,,,,,jesus said your righteousness are as filthy rags....

Where you been beaglechase? Democrud Liberals have always rode the Abortion train. Who am I to say what Obama will do one answer Informed. His past record on Abortion and Gun Control and spending is public Record you need to read them. Yes you have drank of and like the Liberal Kool-Aid,weak minded and easy t lead. Keep watching CNN they will let you know how you nwwd to live and vote. Blame Clinton for anything yes I can---he should have been tried for Treasion and hung. I can't belive Bush is being drug over the coals by Liberal scum when he kept the country safe,he is a Hero and should be treated as such.

[beaglechase]

you talk about sore loosers, the republicants can't tolerate eight years or more demorcans getting it done...you guys are realy scared that Obama might succeed it is killing you.....just think if they get the economy going, pull out the deficit, get our men out of a war zone. what will you say Bush already laid the framework, oh how naive

[Dr. Chris]

There are over 80 million gun owners in the U.S. fewer than 3 million belong to the NRA. I agree with many of the stands that the NRA has taken over the years, but wasting millions of dollars to spread and use fear tactics based on lies to get a republican into office is not one of the things I supported. The NRA failed huge this past election and was exposed for many lies. Numbers prove it. By sure numbers, look at the amount of gun owners and hunters that voted for Obama. Some on here act as if you are a gun owner then you must be Republican and against Obama. This simply is not true. Millions of people that own guns, and millions of hunters voted for and support Obama. Obama has repeatedly stated that he wants responsible gun laws. He does not desire nor will he ever infringe on our 2nd amendment or hunters rights. Some of you have complaints about what you think “might happen” or what “they might do” or what they “supposedly” have planned to do. Well so far, plans for ending the war in Iraq and nailing Osama has begun. No plans to infringe on the 2nd amendment or hunters rights have begun and one of Obama’s first major decisions was to cut funds that supported means for women to have abortions. I think so far, so good. Why don’t you wait for him to screw up before you start complaining? I am sure he will, just as they all do. That’s what the rest of the free world is doing with Bush, looking back on all of his mass screw-ups, not what he “might” do in the future.

Click on this link and see what you think: http://www.huntersandshooters.org/

[Tim H]

Dr. Chris, You're right we should talk about what he has done and not what we think he will do. Which also means you should not be suggesting that he will not attempt to ban guns.

In 1996, during Obama's run for the Illinois State Senate, he was surveyed by a Chicago nonprofit, Independent Voters of Illinois about criminal justice and other issues. Obama's answers

Do you support state legislation to:
a. ban the manufacture, sale and possession of handguns? Yes.
b. ban assault weapons? Yes.
c. mandatory waiting periods and background checks? Yes.


Obama has also stated his opposition to allowing citizens to carry concealed firearms and supports a national law outlawing the practice.

Chicago Public Radio in 2004 "I continue to support a ban on concealed carry laws".

He supports reinstating the expired Assault Weapons Ban and making it permanent.

These are facts about what he has done. Do you really believe that he is going to do a complete 180 on these issues? Well let's wait and see. Will you be the one to post if he increases gun control or will you just go silent?