For all you real Obama supporters (and Pabster)

[Robor]

Originally posted by: RightIsWrong
I guess it's very fortunate for the US that the majority of us are not "One issue" voters like you are Nebor. I honestly believe that you would support, promote and vote for Hitler as long as he told you that you could have any weapon that you wanted.

You are as bad as the Pro-life idiots that believe that as long as a person claims to support that one issue, he can run the country into the ground. Hence, you get incompetent idiots like Bush and then wonder what went wrong.

:thumbsup:

There were people over in the Gaming forums saying they wouldn't vote for Hillary solely based on her stance on mature game ratings. I suggested they raise the minimum voting age.

 

[punchkin]

Originally posted by: PrinceofWands
I would hazard that if you asked the question correctly you'd get between 40 and 60% agreement that revolution was warranted, and between 20% and 40% willing to participate. In fact, just out of curiosity I'll post such a poll here (though I expect the numbers to be about half due to the number of extreme liberals, and the number of upper financial earners (both demographics against revolutionary actions).

You really are nutty. Not everyone thinks as you do. I tend to agree with alchemize that you're full of hot air. A "poll" here is worthless for obvious reasons.

 

[dmcowen674]

Originally posted by: Nebor
http://www.ontheissues.org/Dom...bama_Gun_Control.htm#1

Principles that Obama supports on gun issues:
Ban the sale or transfer of all forms of semi-automatic weapons.

That is out and out rediculous. You're talking about banning approximately 70% of the firearms in the US. Virtually all handguns. Assault rifles. Shotguns. Hunting rifles. Ruger 10\22s.

Completely and totally unacceptable. If he wants to play Lincoln that way, we can go ahead and have another civil war. :thumbsdown:

We need a civil war and it is unavoidable at this point.

It won't be a gun ban that starts it though so stop your worrying.

It will be an all out war against the Corporations that starts it.

 

[Pabster]

Originally posted by: Robor
There were people over in the Gaming forums saying they wouldn't vote for Hillary solely based on her stance on mature game ratings. I suggested they raise the minimum voting age.

It's an understandable reaction. I'd like to ban every naive, apathetic sheeple from casting a vote as well, but that's not the way it works.

And quite honestly, of all the things which disqualify Hillary, her stance on mature video games and censorship is the *least* of my concern. YMMV.

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: punchkin

Originally posted by: PrinceofWands
I would hazard that if you asked the question correctly you'd get between 40 and 60% agreement that revolution was warranted, and between 20% and 40% willing to participate. In fact, just out of curiosity I'll post such a poll here (though I expect the numbers to be about half due to the number of extreme liberals, and the number of upper financial earners (both demographics against revolutionary actions).

You really are nutty. Not everyone thinks as you do. I tend to agree with alchemize that you're full of hot air. A "poll" here is worthless for obvious reasons.

Despite the false appearances of its advocates, gun control is an active position, not a passive one. So who is nuttier? The person who wants to keep his constitutional rights or the person who wants to take those rights away?
If someone was constantly arguing to repeal the 1st Amendment, you'd think they were a real nutjob, wouldn't you? Especially if their arguments were that free speech and free exercise somehow all-by-itself leads to crime, violence, etc., eh? And guess what? That's what most of us think about you.

 

[PrinceofWands]

Originally posted by: punchkin

Originally posted by: PrinceofWands
I would hazard that if you asked the question correctly you'd get between 40 and 60% agreement that revolution was warranted, and between 20% and 40% willing to participate. In fact, just out of curiosity I'll post such a poll here (though I expect the numbers to be about half due to the number of extreme liberals, and the number of upper financial earners (both demographics against revolutionary actions).

You really are nutty. Not everyone thinks as you do. I tend to agree with alchemize that you're full of hot air. A "poll" here is worthless for obvious reasons.

And yet my poll showed EXACTLY what I said it would. In fact, all such polls ever conducted have suggested I'm pretty close in my numbers. Just because you don't like it doesn't mean anything. Find me PROOF to the contrary or admit defeat.

 

[Throckmorton]

You gun nuts really are single-minded. His stance on gun control is the party position, and it's not going to have any effect in the real world. What do you expect his position to be? No gun control? And yet you criticize McCain for being an honest and moral straight talker even if goes against the nutcases in his party.

 

[Vic]

Goddamned single-minded free speech nuts! Always wanting to yell "Fire!" in a crowded theater... think of the children! :|

 

[TheSlamma]

Originally posted by: Carmen813

Originally posted by: Nebor
http://www.ontheissues.org/Dom...bama_Gun_Control.htm#1

Principles that Obama supports on gun issues:
Ban the sale or transfer of all forms of semi-automatic weapons.

That is out and out rediculous. You're talking about banning approximately 70% of the firearms in the US. Virtually all handguns. Assault rifles. Shotguns. Hunting rifles. Ruger 10\22s.

Completely and totally unacceptable. If he wants to play Lincoln that way, we can go ahead and have another civil war. :thumbsdown:

"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"

All it says is that you have the right to arm bears!

"being necessary to the security of a free State"
Explain to me then if the government decided to take away our freedons what do you think it would take to stop them from doing that? Rocks? a Pen and paper?

 

[Nebor]

Originally posted by: TheSlamma

Originally posted by: Carmen813

Originally posted by: Nebor
http://www.ontheissues.org/Dom...bama_Gun_Control.htm#1

Principles that Obama supports on gun issues:
Ban the sale or transfer of all forms of semi-automatic weapons.

That is out and out rediculous. You're talking about banning approximately 70% of the firearms in the US. Virtually all handguns. Assault rifles. Shotguns. Hunting rifles. Ruger 10\22s.

Completely and totally unacceptable. If he wants to play Lincoln that way, we can go ahead and have another civil war. :thumbsdown:

"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"

All it says is that you have the right to arm bears!

"being necessary to the security of a free State"
Explain to me then if the government decided to take away our freedons what do you think it would take to stop them from doing that? Rocks? a Pen and paper?

"The pen is mightier than the sword.... except in a sword fight."

 

[Nebor]

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Originally posted by: Nebor
http://www.ontheissues.org/Dom...bama_Gun_Control.htm#1

Principles that Obama supports on gun issues:
Ban the sale or transfer of all forms of semi-automatic weapons.

That is out and out rediculous. You're talking about banning approximately 70% of the firearms in the US. Virtually all handguns. Assault rifles. Shotguns. Hunting rifles. Ruger 10\22s.

Completely and totally unacceptable. If he wants to play Lincoln that way, we can go ahead and have another civil war. :thumbsdown:

We need a civil war and it is unavoidable at this point.

It won't be a gun ban that starts it though so stop your worrying.

It will be an all out war against the Corporations that starts it.

And those Corporations are allowed to buy new machine guns, something way too dangerous for us peasants to possess.

 

[punchkin]

Originally posted by: PrinceofWands

Originally posted by: punchkin

Originally posted by: PrinceofWands
I would hazard that if you asked the question correctly you'd get between 40 and 60% agreement that revolution was warranted, and between 20% and 40% willing to participate. In fact, just out of curiosity I'll post such a poll here (though I expect the numbers to be about half due to the number of extreme liberals, and the number of upper financial earners (both demographics against revolutionary actions).

You really are nutty. Not everyone thinks as you do. I tend to agree with alchemize that you're full of hot air. A "poll" here is worthless for obvious reasons.

And yet my poll showed EXACTLY what I said it would. In fact, all such polls ever conducted have suggested I'm pretty close in my numbers. Just because you don't like it doesn't mean anything. Find me PROOF to the contrary or admit defeat.

No, your post here was pretty "accurate" although worthless... how many times did you vote? Just because you can't post to any real support doesn't mean that your worthless poll is some kind of support for the notion that Americans would rebel. It's a ridiculous idea that only a pimple-faced youth on an anonymous board would even bring up.

 

[Rainsford]

Originally posted by: palehorse74

Originally posted by: Nebor
http://www.ontheissues.org/Dom...bama_Gun_Control.htm#1

Principles that Obama supports on gun issues:
Ban the sale or transfer of all forms of semi-automatic weapons.

That is out and out rediculous. You're talking about banning approximately 70% of the firearms in the US. Virtually all handguns. Assault rifles. Shotguns. Hunting rifles. Ruger 10\22s.

Completely and totally unacceptable. If he wants to play Lincoln that way, we can go ahead and have another civil war. :thumbsdown:

This is a Supreme court issue, not one for the Executive Branch, so I'm not too worried about it. While I disagree with his stance on the issue, completely, I just don't see any president ever being successful in banning semi-automatic handguns.

You have hit on the very nature of my support for Obama - that is, his stances on individual issues that differ from my own don't bother me. I see the power of the President as very weak compared to the Legislative and Judicial branches. Therefore, a candidate's character is much more important to me than his personal line-item agenda - and I happen to see Obama as one of the only candidates we have who has any true character left.

Listen closely people, this is probably the only intelligent comment in this increasingly ridiculous thread.

Go ahead, Nebor, find a candidate you agree with on every single one of his or her issues. Still looking? We don't elect issues, we elect people. And while I join palehorse74 in disagreeing with Obama's stance on guns, he's still far and away the best CANDIDATE when you consider him as an individual instead of as a collection of issues. Realistically, nobody is going to take away your guns, so stop being such a tool whenever anyone brings the issue up. I mean for the love of God, you gun nut types are easy to lead around by the nose...just tell you that somebody wants to take your guns and you'll do literally ANYTHING. Give me a break.

 

[PrinceofWands]

hehe never mind. I was feeling ornery and felt like provoking, but I really should get back to work instead.

 

[maziwanka]

Originally posted by: palehorse74

Originally posted by: Nebor
http://www.ontheissues.org/Dom...bama_Gun_Control.htm#1

Principles that Obama supports on gun issues:
Ban the sale or transfer of all forms of semi-automatic weapons.

That is out and out rediculous. You're talking about banning approximately 70% of the firearms in the US. Virtually all handguns. Assault rifles. Shotguns. Hunting rifles. Ruger 10\22s.

Completely and totally unacceptable. If he wants to play Lincoln that way, we can go ahead and have another civil war. :thumbsdown:

This is a Supreme court issue, not one for the Executive Branch, so I'm not too worried about it. While I disagree with his stance on the issue, completely, I just don't see any president ever being successful in banning semi-automatic handguns.

You have hit on the very nature of my support for Obama - that is, his stances on individual issues that differ from my own don't bother me. I see the power of the President as very weak compared to the Legislative and Judicial branches. Therefore, a candidate's character is much more important to me than his personal line-item agenda - and I happen to see Obama as one of the only candidates we have who has any true character left.

bingo