McCain - Palin, your true feelings - Page 8
Page 8 of 8 FirstFirst ... 678
Results 71 to 80 of 80

Thread: McCain - Palin, your true feelings

  1. #71
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Michigan
    Posts
    60
    Nobody is qualified to be president. It is an impossible job for one person. That's why every president has a staff of the most what they believe to be intelligent. You look at any CEO of any major company and they had to start somewhere. Like every other job, you will not be the best at it in the beginning but you will grow in to it.

    The Dem's are a do nothing party. They don't want change they want to be left alone. If there was a Dem as president every term for the last 50 years this country would still be in the 50's era. They want to talk about everything and at the same time do nothing to fix it.

    Now, the Republicans are just as bad on the other side, they over due most of what they do.

    In the end all politicians are liars. The question is which liar do you think lies the best.

    Obama might be a good president under different conditions but right now is not an Obama time. He will sink this country with is weak beliefs and lack of backbone.

    For the record, I am not a 1 issue voter. I do not agree with everything when it come to the republican party. I actually agree with the Dem's on some issues but one must prioritize. The gun issue is not about guns, it is about rights. Owning guns is a right. Owning a gun that MUST be disassembled when not being used is a LACK OF RIGHTS.

    It they can take away one right, they can take away other rights.
    Last edited by Landor; 10-04-2008 at 04:53 PM.

  2.   
  3. #72
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Иєш Лєяжşєşŧăŋ
    Posts
    1,084
    Obama's a Socialist...a Marxist. Case closed.
    NRA Life; GOA Life; CCRKBA Life; Trustee, NJCSD; F&AM: 32° & KT
    The Only Answer to a Bad Guy with a Gun - Is a Good Guy with a Gun!
    When Seconds Count...The Police are only MINUTES Away!

  4. I'm not sure there is such a thing as a purely, 100% "one issue voter." We tend to make our voting decisions on a hierarchy of values and concerns. Some rank higher than others, of course. For me, how a candidate deals with the Second Amendment tells me a lot about that individual that goes far, far beyond the single issue of "guns."

    If the candidate does not trust the people with firearms, then it is my opinion that the people should not trust that candidate with any office within the Republic. Heck, if he doesn't trust me with a gun, why should I trust him with my government. Considering the state of the world right now, I would go so far as to say that an opponent of the 2A is an enemy of the Republic and, if empowered, will put us all at risk.

    To that extent, then, I suppose you could call me a "one issue voter." Just smile when you call me that, pardner.

  5. #74
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Indiana
    Posts
    4,650
    Quote Originally Posted by Ektarr View Post
    Obama's a Socialist...a Marxist. Case closed.
    Not to mention a gun grabber.

  6. #75
    Presidential running mates are often chosen not for their leadership or grasp of issues, but as a way to “complete” the candidate’s image to voters, either by complementing their better qualities or ameliorating their weaknesses.

    As a result, voters forget that the VP has the very real responsibility to lead the country if the president dies, is removed from office or is otherwise unable to carry out the duties of the office. One in five presidents has failed to complete his term due to natural death, assassination or the threat of impeachment. Each time, their vice presidents found themselves in charge of, well, everything. This could happen again.

    Consider Sen. Barack Obama, a 47-year-old male. Actuaries tell us that your average 47-year-old man today has a 5 percent chance of dying before Inauguration Day 2017, the date that would mark the end of a two-term presidency. However, in addition to natural death, one in 10 presidents have been assassinated, and there always exists a tiny risk of impeachment. Accounting for those risks, if elected for two terms, Obama has an estimated 16 percent chance of not finishing his eight years in office — a 1-in-6 shot that Sen. Joe Biden will be called on to complete Obama’s presidency.

    The odds for his counterpart, Sen. John McCain, are significantly greater — and in fact, a lot higher than the roughly 1-in-3 chances reported by most media outlets.

    True, your average 72-year-old man has about a 35 percent chance of dying before 2017, according to the actuaries. Factor in the assassination and impeachment risks, however, and that number increases to about 45 percent. Additionally, approximately a quarter of people in their late 70s suffer some cognitive difficulties, according to a March 1995 study published in the Annals of Internal Medicine; the American Journal of Geriatric Psychiatry and Mayo Clinic Study of Aging report approximately a 9 percent chance that a sharp-witted 72-year-old man will develop moderate to severe cognitive impairment by the time he turns 80.

    Add it all up, and you can make the statistical argument that if McCain tries for two full terms, there is only about a 50 percent chance he will make it through all eight years alive, unimpeached and with most of his faculties intact. That gives McCain running mate and Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin, roughly a 50 percent chance — the proverbial flip of the coin — of becoming the next-next president of the United States.

    This is not to say voters should make their decisions based on the possibility that either candidate may for some reason be unable to fulfill his duties. However, given the chances that Biden or Palin could become president, Americans have to take a good look at them and ask: “Do I want this person running this country?”
    Bay State Banner - Letters to the Editor

  7. #76
    Quote Originally Posted by LeavingMass View Post
    Palin may not have a lot of experience but I would rather have her than way left of center Biden. As I have said before experience at doing and being wrong is not the kind I want running the country.
    By faith Noah,being warned of God of things not seen as yet, moved with fear,prepared an ark to the saving of his house;by the which he condemned the world,and became heir of the righteousness which is by faith Heb.11:7

  8. #77
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Indiana
    Posts
    4,650
    Quote Originally Posted by Shoots Running View Post
    I'm not sure there is such a thing as a purely, 100% "one issue voter." We tend to make our voting decisions on a hierarchy of values and concerns. Some rank higher than others, of course. For me, how a candidate deals with the Second Amendment tells me a lot about that individual that goes far, far beyond the single issue of "guns."

    If the candidate does not trust the people with firearms, then it is my opinion that the people should not trust that candidate with any office within the Republic. Heck, if he doesn't trust me with a gun, why should I trust him with my government. Considering the state of the world right now, I would go so far as to say that an opponent of the 2A is an enemy of the Republic and, if empowered, will put us all at risk.

    To that extent, then, I suppose you could call me a "one issue voter." Just smile when you call me that, pardner.

    I agree. This article by Al Doyle on Lewrockwell.com says it all:

    States To Avoid by Al Doyle

    While the suffocating nanny state continues to grow at the local and national levels, some places are even more socialistic than what passes for normal in 21st century America.

    When it comes to these havens for people controllers and Karl Marx wannabes, the idea of "working within the system" to change things for the better is delusional. The ONLY solution for freedom lovers is to get out and stay out of all seven of these hideous People's Republics.

    How did I come up with the worst places in America? What methodology was used? Never mind government economic numbers, Chamber of Commerce puffery and other completely unreliable data. Per capita spending on government schools and the number of Taco Bells in certain areas wasn't considered. Climate didn't enter into the rankings, as that can be a subjective choice heavily skewed by personal preferences.

    Just one factor was used to pick the socialistic seven. Before you accuse me of laziness, rest assured that this single indicator provides utterly reliable and time-tested proof of a state government's attitude towards freedom and taxation.

    What's the common denominator? Just check the state and local gun laws. Without exception, places where emotional, "don't confuse me with the facts" shrieks of gun grabbers are the background music of daily life also overflow with nosy bureaucrats and ever-growing taxation and regulation.

    Anti-Second Amendment laws and undisguised hatred of individual liberty in other areas of life are a natural and predictable combination. If the local commissars despise your AK-47 and Glock pistol, don't expect them to keep their greedy paws off your earnings or the right to do what you see fit on your acreage.

    In alphabetical order, here are America's worst places to live.

    California: No list of anti-Second Amendment places would be complete without this cancer on the body of liberty. Under state law, every gun sale (even between two private parties) is supposed to be performed through and recorded by a licensed dealer, and a 10-day waiting period for gun purchases is required. That rule backfired on hypocritical gun grabbers who came to their senses during the L.A. riots of 1992.

    Anyone who has the misfortune of moving to California must register their handguns with the Department of Justice. State-designated "assault weapons" such as the AR-15 and its spinoffs, all AK-47s, the FN (Fabrique Nationale) .308s and a number of other semi-automatic rifles must be registered with the state. Even those who own inexpensive SKS rifles with a detachable magazine are expected to tell the bureau(c)rats about their weapon.

    Even though he made a fortune in shoot 'em up movies, Republican governor Arnold Schwarzenegger is solidly in the gun grabbber camp. That passes for consistency in the Hollywood mindset.

    District of Columbia/Washington, D.C.: Predictably, the epicenter of the worship of statism has the worst gun laws in America. All handgun ownership is banned, and those who own rifles or shotguns must register with the city.

    Don't plan on using your Ruger 10/22 or Remington 870 for home defense in D.C. if a burglar or crackhead is in the bedroom. All guns must be stored and disassembled or fitted with a trigger lock. Those who must work in D.C. can always live in Virginia.

    Hawaii: This tropical haven for collectivists can make Montana winters look good by comparison. Those who move to Hawaii are required to register every gun they own with the state within 72 hours of arrival. Permits must be obtained for handgun (seldom issued) and long gun purchases. I'll stick with the mainland.

    Illinois: The state's perpetually corrupt and bloated government is obsessed with tracking and restricting law-abiding gun owners.

    It would be difficult to find a more outspoken opponent of the Second Amendment than Chicago mayor Richard Daley. Handguns are already banned in Chicago (tell that to the many gangbangers who use them), and all other guns are supposed to be registered at City Hall, but that isn't enough to satisfy Daley's lust for power.

    On more than one occasion, Daley has stated his desire to see all guns banned. His taxpayer-financed hallucinations include an unsuccessful attempt to create a 100-mile "gun free" zone around Chicago. Where does Daley think he has the right to impose his Stalinist vision on other towns, not to mention residents of Wisconsin and Indiana?

    Never one to refrain from butting in where he has no business or jurisdiction, the mayor also failed in a lawsuit against suburban gun shops. Daley has Mussolini's bluster with 60 fewer IQ points than Il Duce, and he can count on a loyal toady in governor Rod Blagojevich.

    Things aren't much better outside of Chicago. All Illinois gun owners are required to obtain a Firearm Owners Identification Card (FOID) from the state, and the card must be presented to purchase even a single round of ammo. All gun purchases are supposed to be registered with the state.

    Gun phobia is firmly rooted in a number of effete suburbs. Local ordinances ban all gun ownership in Skokie, while handguns are banned in Evanston, Highland Park, Morton Grove, Oak Park, Wilmette and Winnetka. Got a job in Chicago? Commute from northwest Indiana.

    Massachusetts: The locals keep re-electing Ted Kennedy. Need I say more?

    Residents must register with the state and obtain permission from Massa(chusetts) to purchase even a simple single-shot long gun. So-called "assault weapons" are banned, and going through the bureaucratic paperwork and fingerprinting to obtain a firearm identification card doesn't automatically lead to handgun shopping.

    The basic FID is limited to "only a non-large capacity rifle or shotgun and feeding devices and ammunition therefor." Cards are issued by police chiefs. Class A licenses are required for handgun ownership, and random restrictions may be placed on the government permission slip.

    "A complex procedure is set out for the purchase of rifles, shotguns, handguns, their related feeding devices, large capacity firearms and large capacity feeding devices," according to the National Rifle Association. "Care must be taken to have the correct card or license for a particular purchase. It is unlawful to sell, or transfer any firearm, firearm feeding device or ammunition to person without the proper card, license or permit."

    The solution for freedom lovers is obvious: Move to New Hampshire.

    New Jersey: Here's another place that mandates gun owner registration. Only holders of a Firearms Purchasers Identification Card (FID) may legally own a weapon. A permit to purchase "in quadruplicate" must be acquired for each handgun purchase. Handguns must be trigger-locked or disabled in some other way to prevent quick access.

    New Jerseyans sometimes complain about the state's reputation as a less than desirable place to live, but few places offer such an unappealing combination of high cost of living, excessive taxes, traffic jams and hatred of individual liberty. Pennsylvania is a nearby alternative for gun owners.

    New York: Meet the granddaddy of gun/people control. The infamous Sullivan Act of 1911 was the first major anti-gun legislation in America. Sullivan was passed to keep all but well-connected New York City residents from legally owning handguns.

    Big Apple residents were required to register their rifles and shotguns with the city in 1967. Not surprisingly, politicians promised to never raise the $3 per gun fee. It's now $55 per gun to put your name on the city's database/hit list.

    All residents of the state must get a permit if they want to own a handgun. The process can take up to six months. Orwell's Big Brother would feel right at home in Albany or Manhattan.

    Dishonorable mention: Residents of Connecticut, Delaware, Iowa, Michigan and Minnesota are required to get permits for handguns, but rifle and shotgun laws follow the national guidelines. Wisconsin's gun laws are average by current standards, but (as a 10-year cheesehead) I have to put the state on the list because of its confiscatory tax structure and gluttonous state and local government.

  9. #78

    Arrow I give you our next "possible" V.P.

    V.P. candidate Palin Reprimands Her Own Supporters

    From CBS News' Scott Conroy:

    (RICHMOND, VA.) - Protesters at Sarah Palin’s rallies can always expect to be shot down with some choice words from the candidate. But at a rally here today, the confused Alaska governor mistakenly issued a stern rebuke to her own supporters.

    The outdoor crowd was so massive that many were unable to hear Palin speak, so about midway through the Alaska governor’s remarks, some of them tried to take matters into their own hands, shouting in unison, “We can’t hear you!”

    When that didn’t get the candidate’s attention, they tried a new tactic.

    “Louder!” they shouted.

    Palin appeared flustered as she stopped reading from the prepared remarks, which were coming across her teleprompter.

    “I would hope at least that those protesters have the courage and the honor of thanking our veterans for giving them the right to protest!” she admonished the confused crowd.

    Palin’s husband Todd tried to put an end to the awkward episode by approaching his wife on stage and telling her, “They just can’t hear you back there. That’s it.”

    Palin responded, “OK. I’m doing that,” and then continued with her stump speech.

  10. #79
    Yes but I bet she at lest knows who was president when the crash of 29 happened.
    By faith Noah,being warned of God of things not seen as yet, moved with fear,prepared an ark to the saving of his house;by the which he condemned the world,and became heir of the righteousness which is by faith Heb.11:7

  11. This will piss you off more.


    Subject: This is interesting. ?????????????????????? where ohh where


    To All My Friends, this is long, but very important, please take the
    time to read it. It addresses a lot of the questions we have all been
    asking...

    This election has me very worried. So many things to consider. About a year ago I would have voted for Obama. I have changed my mind three times since than. I watch all the news channels, jumping from one to another. I must say this drives my husband crazy. But, I feel if you view MSNBC, CNN, and Fox News, you might get some middle ground to work with. About six months ago, I started thinking 'where did the money come from for Obama'. I have four daughters who went to College, and we were middle class, and money was tight. We (including my girls) worked hard and there were lots of student loans.

    I started looking into Obama's life.

    Around 1979 Obama started college at Occidental in California . He is
    very open about his two years at Occidental, he tried all kinds of
    drugs and was wasting his time but, even though he had a brilliant
    mind, did not apply himself to his studies. 'Barry' (that was the name
    he used all his life) during this time had two roommates, Muhammad
    Hasan Chandoo and Wahid Hamid, both from Pakistan .
    During the summer of 1981, after his second year in college, he made a 'round the world' trip. Stopping to see his mother in Indonesia , next Hyderabad in India , three weeks in Karachi , Pakistan where he stayed with his roommate's family, then off to Africa to visit his father's family.

    My question - Where did he get the money for this trip? Nether I, nor
    any one of my children would have had money for a trip like this when
    they where in college. When he came back he started school at
    Columbia University in New York . It is at this time he wants
    everyone to call him Barack - not Barry. Do you know what the tuition is at Columbia ? It's not cheap to say the least! Where did he get money for tuition? Student Loans? Maybe. After Columbia , he went to Chicago to work as a Community Organizer for $12,000 a year. Why Chicago ? Why not New York ? He was already living in New York .


    By 'chance' he met Antoin 'Tony' Rezko, born in Aleppo Syria
    , and a real estate developer in Chicago . Rezko has been convicted of fraud and bribery this year. Rezko, was named 'Entrepreneur of the Decade' by the Arab-American Business and Professional Association'. About two years later, Obama entered Harvard Law School . Do you have any idea what tuition is for Harvard Law School ? Where did he get the money for Law School ? More student loans?
    After Law school, he went back to Chicago . Rezko offered him a job, which he turned down. But, he did take a job with Davis, Miner, Barnhill & Galland. Guess what? They represented 'Rezar' which is Rezko's firm. Rezko was one of Obama's first major financial contributors when he ran for office in Chicago .
    In 2003, Rezko threw an early fundraiser for Obama which Chicago Tribune reporter David Mendelland claims was instrumental in providing Obama with 'seed money' for his U.S. Senate race. In 2005, Obama purchased a new home in Kenwoood District of Chicago for $1.65 million (less than asking price). With ALL those Student Loans - Where did he get the money for the property? On the same day Rezko's wife, Rita, purchased the adjoining empty lot for full price.
    The London Times reported that Nadhmi Auchi, an Iraqi-born Billionaire loaned Rezko $3.5 million three weeks before Obama's new home was purchased. Obama met Nadhmi Auchi many times with Rezko.


    Now, we have Obama running for President. Valerie Jarrett, was
    Michele Obama's boss. She is now Obama's chief advisor and he does not make any major decisions without talking to her first. Where was Jarrett born? Ready for this? Shiraz , Iran ! Do we see a pattern here? Or am I going crazy?


    On May 10, 2008 The Times reported, Robert Malley, advisor to Obama, was 'sacked' after the press found out he was having regular contacts with 'Hamas', which controls Gaza and is connected with Iran .
    his past week, buried in the back part of the papers, Iraqi newspapers reported that during Obama's visit to Iraq, he asked their leaders to do nothing about the war until after he is elected, and he will 'Take care of things'.


    Oh, and by the way, remember the college roommates that where born in Pakistan ? They are in charge of all those 'small' Internet campaign contributions for Obama. Where is that money coming from? The poor and middle class in this country? Or could it be from the Middle East?


    And the final bit of news. On September 7, 2008, The Washington Times posted a verbal slip that was made on 'This Week' with George
    Stephanapoulos. Obama on talking about his religion said, 'My Muslim
    faith'. When questioned, 'he made a mistake'. Some mistake!


    All of the above information I got on line. If you would like to
    check it - Wikipedia, encyclopedia, Barack Obama; Tony Rezko; Valerie Jarrett: Daily Times - Obama visited Pakistan in 1981; The Washington Times - September 7, 2008; The Times May 10, 2008.


    Now the BIG question - If I found out all this information on my own,
    Why haven't all of our 'intelligent' members of the press been
    reporting this?


    A phrase that keeps ringing in my ear - 'Beware of the enemy from
    within'!!!

Page 8 of 8 FirstFirst ... 678

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Quantcast