karlunity Posted May 7, 2008 Report Share Posted May 7, 2008 Why in the hell did you hand the state to obamy???? I could see that in Cali or Mass but in the South??? Come on...I could understand it , if it were Dr. Keyes but Obamy?????? Enough with the white guilt ...Obamy is a dam liberal one world UN loving pinko! Jackson, Lee and Puller are NOT gonna be happy with you. If Hill or Obama or little mac win, I am gonna ask CG to hand out my resume to the local schools and head to Canada. I am voting for Dr. Keyes. karl Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bert01 Posted May 7, 2008 Report Share Posted May 7, 2008 i was kinda thinkin the same thing. even though there ure as hell wasn't a good choice to be had. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doble Troble Posted May 7, 2008 Report Share Posted May 7, 2008 Che Obama is bringing out a demographic that doesn't usually vote. This demographic really wants "free" stuff, and believes the government can take better care of them than they can themselves. They may be right, but they're not going to be well taken care of in either case. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
odies dad Posted May 7, 2008 Report Share Posted May 7, 2008 I'm hoping Obama beats the snot out of Hillary in the primaries because I think he will be easier for McCain to beat. I don't care for McCain either but vastly prefer him over either of the other real choices. I would like to vote independent, but still feel that it would be a vote for the Dems. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ken98k Posted May 7, 2008 Report Share Posted May 7, 2008 I'm hoping Obama beats the snot out of Hillary in the primaries because I think he will be easier for McCain to beat. I don't care for McCain either but vastly prefer him over either of the other real choices. I would like to vote independent, but still feel that it would be a vote for the Dems. EXACTLY!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J.B Posted May 7, 2008 Report Share Posted May 7, 2008 I agree, voting independent will only give us gun control. And McCain isnt really anti gun either, alot of people fell for the GOA line about him being anti gun just because he pissed them off with one of his bills(which had nothing to do with guns in the first place). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr.Hess Posted May 7, 2008 Report Share Posted May 7, 2008 If I recall, McCain has a long history of not being a friend of the 2nd Amendment. No AR15's, I forget all, but if Osama and Clinton are a 0, and Heston was a 10, McCain was about a 5. In other words, "How much new gun control can we get away with?" "Right to hunt" BS, etc. Then there's his bill that gave his backer (Soros) total control of the Democratics, ripping out the 1st Amendment, and plenty of other little treasures he's left for us. Right now, I see Little Mac as our next President, 60% chance. 40% chance Hillary. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
911rat Posted May 7, 2008 Report Share Posted May 7, 2008 They voted for Barack because he supports gun rights. It's true! It's on his site. Barack Hussein Sportsman's Rights The Dems won't even count my State. Obama_FactSheet_Western_Sportsmen.pdf Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BradD Posted May 8, 2008 Report Share Posted May 8, 2008 Hmm, didn't say a word about personal defense for law abiding citizens as a right under the 2nd Amendment. And then, of course there is "common sense" regulation for gun ownership. This sounds like the Clinton era "sensible gun regulations". Whoo boy, we're in trouble here. I can hardly wait to get back to those wonderful days, no matter which of those socialists win. Will McCain stand up for us? Sure, as long as the Dems approve it. Republicans and Conservatives, we better start kicking the party in the butt. Bad as it is, at the moment, it's all we have. B. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doble Troble Posted May 8, 2008 Report Share Posted May 8, 2008 The last thing the second amendment is about is sport. It's not even really about self-protection or protection of family and home. It was meant to be about a means to resist a tyrannical government! The founders recognized the importance of this and I think that socialists like Che Obama and liberals like Billary do too – and they don’t like the idea that individual Americans have a responsibility to stand up for what’s right. This is why the second is always spun into an argument about “sportsmen’s rights” and you get weird pictures of John Kerry standing in a field wearing a brand new shooting vest uncomfortably holding a 12 ga SxS (guess his handlers thought he looked bad wearing eye and ear protection). No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms. The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government" -- Thomas Jefferson Every Communist must grasp the truth, 'Political power grows out of the barrel of a gun.' -- Mao Tse-tung The most foolish mistake we could possibly make would be to permit the conquered Eastern peoples to have arms. History teaches that all conquerors who have allowed their subject races to carry arms have prepared their own downfall by doing so. -- Hitler Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
karlunity Posted May 9, 2008 Author Report Share Posted May 9, 2008 QUOTE When the Constitution gave us the right to bear arms, it also made us responsible for using them properly. It's not fair of us as citizens to lean more heavily on one side of that equation than on the other. Jesse Ventura the Constitution gave us the right to bear arms... God gave us the right to bear arms as well as all our other rights. All the Constitution does is LIST some rights and PROHIBIT the government from interfering with their exercise. THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS A CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT..remember if the Constitutional gave us "rights" the Constitution could equally take those rights away..what the government gives..the government may take. No institution may lawfully take a God given right away. Even my fifth graders learn that...Jesse had best report to tutoring after school. karl Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doble Troble Posted May 9, 2008 Report Share Posted May 9, 2008 Hmm, good point karl. 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.