PDA

View Full Version : Elections Mitt Obama


BigChiefFan
06-17-2012, 08:21 PM
Some choice. These guys are working towards the same agenda.

<object style="height: 390px; width: 640px"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/sQusaGv-oMw?version=3&feature=player_detailpage"><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"><param name="allowScriptAccess" value="always"><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/sQusaGv-oMw?version=3&feature=player_detailpage" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" allowScriptAccess="always" width="640" height="360"></object>

Ace Gunner
06-17-2012, 09:43 PM
checkmate coming

La literatura
06-17-2012, 10:30 PM
I knew there was a reason I liked Romney. This video confirms my belief that Romney is a reasonable, pragmatic leader.

DementedLogic
06-17-2012, 11:54 PM
If Democrats were smart, they would vote for Mitt Romney. That would guarantee that it would be at least another 8 years before we have a conservative president.

Chiefshrink
06-17-2012, 11:57 PM
As "We The People" continue to win more seats in the House and Senate this election and elections to come this will force RINO Romney to be more conservative than he likes.

Dave Lane
06-18-2012, 12:22 AM
So isd everyone dead in Mass since this has passed I just have to assume the state sank into the ocean with all the problems gays and debt.

Saulbadguy
06-18-2012, 09:49 AM
If Democrats were smart, they would vote for Mitt Romney. That would guarantee that it would be at least another 8 years before we have a conservative president.

This.

Amnorix
06-18-2012, 09:56 AM
So isd everyone dead in Mass since this has passed I just have to assume the state sank into the ocean with all the problems gays and debt.


Yes we're all dead. I'm sending this from......beyond.

And out here in ......beyond.....unemployment is 2% less than the national average and housing is starting to recover. But don't tell BEP, she's convinced that we're Communist. Or an anarcho-syndicalist commune. Or something.

Johnny Vegas
06-18-2012, 11:51 AM
does not surprise me.

patteeu
06-18-2012, 11:57 AM
Some choice. These guys are working towards the same agenda.

Politicians generally pursue the agenda of the majority of voters.

Radar Chief
06-18-2012, 03:25 PM
Yes we're all dead. I'm sending this from......beyond.

And out here in ......beyond.....unemployment is 2% less than the national average and housing is starting to recover. But don't tell BEP, she's convinced that we're Communist. Or an anarcho-syndicalist commune. Or something.

Did you say something? /BEP

KILLER_CLOWN
06-19-2012, 12:03 AM
I'm laughing at all the intrawebz idiots that see a recovery, GMAFB. Here lemme buy ya a pack of gum and i'll show ya how to chew it.

BigChiefFan
06-19-2012, 01:36 AM
Did you say something? /BEP Stop using partisian bullshit and realize people like BEP know the system is collapsing and it's people like you who refuse to acknowledge the system is ****ed, based on partisian dumbassery.

Radar Chief
06-19-2012, 08:15 AM
Stop using partisian bullshit and realize people like BEP know the system is collapsing and it's people like you who refuse to acknowledge the system is ****ed, based on partisian dumbassery.

You should waste this board’s bandwidth white knighting someone else. It’s not partisan bullshit to recognize BuckEyedPsycho is off her fucking rocker.

notorious
06-19-2012, 08:16 AM
They are nearly the same, but Mitt won't try to suffocate my gun rights, so he gets the nod.

Dave Lane
06-19-2012, 10:24 AM
Stop using partisian bullshit and realize people like BEP know the system is collapsing and it's people like you who refuse to acknowledge the system is ****ed, based on partisian dumbassery.

I assume this is sarcasm. If so well played. BEP is one of the least knowledgeable (except at where to cut and paste crap) on the entire interwebz.

Dave Lane
06-19-2012, 10:24 AM
They are nearly the same, but Mitt won't try to suffocate my gun rights, so he gets the nod.

Yep Obamas going crazy with all these new gun rules.

qabbaan
06-19-2012, 10:28 AM
Romney is a very moderate candidate. He is exactly the kind of Republican candidate that a lot of Democrat voters like to pretend they might vote for, so they can convince themselves and others they are high minded and not beholden to just one party. We will see how true they are to that, I suppose.

They always like to paint their candidates as moderate in the positive, here you have a true moderate up against someone whose political beliefs come from very radical origins and seem to have been formed by the weather underground, rules for radicals, general socialist belief and black liberation theology. On top of that, you have a first term record which is poor by any standard.

It's pretty clear who anyone that is truly moderate should be voting for here...

cosmo20002
06-19-2012, 11:01 AM
Romney is a very moderate candidate.



Romney WAS fairly moderate, but he made it through the R primaries preaching much of the same right-wing nuttery as the other candidates. The flip-flop label is not for nothing.

patteeu
06-19-2012, 12:08 PM
Romney is a very moderate candidate. He is exactly the kind of Republican candidate that a lot of Democrat voters like to pretend they might vote for, so they can convince themselves and others they are high minded and not beholden to just one party. We will see how true they are to that, I suppose.

They always like to paint their candidates as moderate in the positive, here you have a true moderate up against someone whose political beliefs come from very radical origins and seem to have been formed by the weather underground, rules for radicals, general socialist belief and black liberation theology. On top of that, you have a first term record which is poor by any standard.

It's pretty clear who anyone that is truly moderate should be voting for here...

Hear hear!

I never believe any democrat who says they'd be willing to vote for a moderate Republican. If they haven't taken advantage of the opportunity to vote for Bush 41 (x2), Dole, Bush 43 (x2), or McCain, there's no reason for them to start now.

patteeu
06-19-2012, 12:10 PM
Romney WAS fairly moderate, but he made it through the R primaries preaching much of the same right-wing nuttery as the other candidates. The flip-flop label is not for nothing.

What radical conservatism do you think a President Romney would pursue?

cosmo20002
06-19-2012, 12:14 PM
Hear hear!

I never believe any democrat who says they'd be willing to vote for a moderate Republican. If they haven't taken advantage of the opportunity to vote for Bush 41 (x2), Dole, Bush 43 (x2), or McCain, there's no reason for them to start now.

How do you know they didn't? They may have been willing to vote for (what you call) a moderate R, but there were better choices with the other party. "Willing to" doesn't mean "absolutely will."

cosmo20002
06-19-2012, 12:16 PM
What radical conservatism do you think a President Romney would pursue?

If he wants to get anything done, he is going to have to satisfy the Rs in Congress and they keep moving farther and farther to the right.

patteeu
06-19-2012, 12:17 PM
If he wants to get anything done, he is going to have to satisfy the Rs in Congress and they keep moving farther and farther to the right.

Like what?

BigChiefFan
06-19-2012, 01:53 PM
Yep Obamas going crazy with all these new gun rules.


The 9mm is No Defense
Last Thursday, U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder appeared before the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee to answer questions about his role in the deadly “Fast and Furious” gun-running scandal. However, instead of answers, Congress got more defiance, more arrogance, and more wasted time with an attorney general who clearly feels no sense of obligation to the American people or our rule of law.

But for all the stonewalling, there was at least one telling moment at this hearing, and it should concern law-abiding gun owners and all Americans who expect accountability from our government.

In a rash attempt to deflect attention away from himself and his own irresponsibility, Holder let Congress know that the Obama administration is still working toward the day when it can reinstate former President Bill Clinton’s so-called “assault weapons” ban. According to Holder:

This administration has consistently favored the reinstitution of the assault weapons ban. It is something that we think was useful in the past with regard to the reduction that we’ve seen in crime, and certainly would have a positive impact on our relationship and the crime situation in Mexico.


It’s difficult to follow Holder’s logic here, but it goes something like this …

The Obama administration — particularly Eric Holder’s Justice Department — oversaw an epic scandal whereby our own federal government illegally funneled thousands of firearms into the hands of Mexican drug lords. This contributed to the death of one U.S. Border Patrol agent and hundreds of Mexicans.

Despite being head of the Justice Department and our nation’s chief law enforcement officer, Eric Holder claims he doesn’t know how or why this scandal occurred, or even who under his charge may have authorized it. He also refuses to turn over critical documents to congressional investigators that could help prevent something this tragic and corrupt from ever happening again.



Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2012/02/08/holder-tells-congress-the-obama-administration-wants-to-ban-guns/#ixzz1yGb1lxhq

loochy
06-19-2012, 02:41 PM
Name one difference between Mitt

Go.

vailpass
06-19-2012, 02:54 PM
Name one difference between Mitt

Go.

His wife won't leave stains on the furniture or eat apples off the tree without using her hands.

notorious
06-19-2012, 05:31 PM
Yep Obamas going crazy with all these new gun rules.

:facepalm:

Just wait until term 2. There are a ton of gun control maniacs in his administration.

La literatura
06-19-2012, 08:50 PM
:facepalm:

Just wait until term 2. There are a ton of gun control maniacs in his administration.

You're a dumbass.

notorious
06-19-2012, 08:56 PM
You're a dumbass.

Yay!


Name one that isn't a gun control advocate. JUST ONE.

La literatura
06-19-2012, 08:59 PM
Yay!


Name one that isn't a gun control advocate. JUST ONE.

Name one substantial gun regulation that the Obama administration has advocated for.

Also, Tim Geitner.

notorious
06-19-2012, 09:02 PM
Name one substantial gun regulation that the Obama administration has advocated for.

Also, Tim Geitner.

I stated that it would be during his second term.


Thanks for calling a dumbass. It makes me feel all warm and cozy inside.


Good call on Geitner. I guess there is an exception to every rule.

La literatura
06-19-2012, 09:08 PM
I stated that it would be during his second term.

So you can't name a single gun regulation the Obama administration has advocated for? In four years, there have been zero?

notorious
06-19-2012, 09:16 PM
So you can't name a single gun regulation the Obama administration has advocated for? In four years, there have been zero?

Why are you asking me this?

I SAID THE SECOND TERM.

Read. Comprehend. Get back to me.

La literatura
06-19-2012, 09:19 PM
Why are you asking me this?

I SAID THE SECOND TERM.

Read. Comprehend. Get back to me.

Similarly, you have concerns that if Romney is elected, he will mandate Mormonism in his second term?

Can we just impute all these concerns upon candidates with absolutely no evidence?

Obama doesn't seem at all concerned with guns. Nor does his Cabinet. Why base your vote on such a wild speculation?

LiveSteam
06-19-2012, 09:19 PM
Obama = Record gun sales the last 4 years. He saved a lot of mom & pop gun shops around the US with out doing a thing. The AR-15 Franken-gun craze has gone mad under Obama. MAD I TELL YOU!

notorious
06-19-2012, 09:22 PM
Obama = Record gun sales the last 4 years. He saved a lot of mom & pop gun shops around the US with out doing a thing. The AR-15 Franken-gun craze has gone mad under Obama. MAD I TELL YOU!

No kidding. The wait time on some of the evil black rifles is horrific.

notorious
06-19-2012, 09:25 PM
Similarly, you have concerns that if Romney is elected, he will mandate Mormonism in his second term?

Can we just impute all these concerns upon candidates with absolutely no evidence?

Obama doesn't seem at all concerned with guns. Nor does his Cabinet. Why base your vote on such a wild speculation?


The chances that idiotic measures on gun control being passed go up considerably when a Democratic President sits in office.


I will go with history.

On a side note, I am one of the few people that believe that Chicago and New York are OK by passing laws against owning a gun. Let the local governments decide. If people don't like it, they can move.

If laws are passed at the Federal level, there is no escape.

La literatura
06-19-2012, 09:29 PM
The chances that idiotic measures on gun control being passed go up considerably when a Democratic President sits in office.


I will go with history.

Let's see how selective your history reading is. We have a Democratic President in office now. How many idiotic measures on gun control have been passed in that term?

notorious
06-19-2012, 09:31 PM
Let's see how selective your history reading is. We have a Democratic President in office now. How many idiotic measures on gun control have been passed in that term?

Fuck it, you aren't reading my posts, so I am just going to tell you that you are 1000% right about everything you have ever said and are going to say.


Good day.

La literatura
06-19-2012, 09:39 PM
**** it, you aren't reading my posts, so I am just going to tell you that you are 1000% right about everything you have ever said and are going to say.


Good day.

It's nice to see you are capable of saying something intelligent.

patteeu
06-19-2012, 10:20 PM
Similarly, you have concerns that if Romney is elected, he will mandate Mormonism in his second term?

Can we just impute all these concerns upon candidates with absolutely no evidence?

Obama doesn't seem at all concerned with guns. Nor does his Cabinet. Why base your vote on such a wild speculation?

Obama has a history of advocating gun control (a history that conveniently changed when he ran for President, much like his stance on gay marriage which, as we know, has already evolved back in the direction of his pre-POTUS-candidate position).

Romney has no such history of advocating mandated Mormonism.

La literatura
06-19-2012, 10:21 PM
Romney has no such history of advocating mandated Mormonism.

Just because he's been quiet about it so far doesn't mean that he won't push the Mormon agenda down America's throat in his second term. One thing I know about Obama is that he hasn't cared about gun control. But I don't know that Romney isn't going to advocate for the Mormon-takeover. I just want to be consistent here. If Obama is secretly planning on taking all of the guns away (nevermind the SCOTUS' recent rulings on gun rights), then Romney could certainly be secretly planning a Mormon theocracy. Both are wild speculations based on paranoia, not evidence.

cosmo20002
06-19-2012, 11:11 PM
On a side note, I am one of the few people that believe that Chicago and New York are OK by passing laws against owning a gun. Let the local governments decide. If people don't like it, they can move.

If laws are passed at the Federal level, there is no escape.

This puts you in an very odd place among anti-gun control folks. I assume you believe the 2nd Am. guarantees and individual's right to own a gun. Yet you are ok with gun BANS on a local level, which would conflict with the the 2nd Am.

Does your reasoning of "they can move" apply to other constitutional rights? It is ok to deny those rights at the local level because people can just move?

notorious
06-19-2012, 11:20 PM
This puts you in an very odd place among anti-gun control folks. I assume you believe the 2nd Am. guarantees and individual's right to own a gun. Yet you are ok with gun BANS on a local level, which would conflict with the the 2nd Am.

Does your reasoning of "they can move" apply to other constitutional rights? It is ok to deny those rights at the local level because people can just move?

I have been blabbering a lot lately, so I probably didn't convey my thoughts properly.


I have accepted the fact that cities will ban/restrict guns even if it goes against the constitution. I just want it contained at the local level.

patteeu
06-20-2012, 05:49 AM
This puts you in an very odd place among anti-gun control folks. I assume you believe the 2nd Am. guarantees and individual's right to own a gun. Yet you are ok with gun BANS on a local level, which would conflict with the the 2nd Am.

Does your reasoning of "they can move" apply to other constitutional rights? It is ok to deny those rights at the local level because people can just move?

The 2nd amendment wasn't originally intended to limit state and local governments in any way, fwiw.