Best 2nd amendment protection candidate - Page 4
Page 4 of 8 FirstFirst ... 23456 ... LastLast
Results 31 to 40 of 77

Thread: Best 2nd amendment protection candidate

  1. Quote Originally Posted by weekendskp View Post
    Says you! Bachmann (see correct spelling)was through before she even started. Paul is the only "no compromise" candidate, and everyone on this forum should be supporting him. Cain doesn't agree with SCOTUS, and would let states determine gun rights like Illinois. Romney is not your strong advocate for 2A, and even said basically "not in my back yard" when asked about 2A in Mass. Political experts are changing their tune as of recent to indicate that a long shot like Paul, or even a third party candidate could win the 2012. I see a lot of people, 99%, identifying with the "Occupy" movement, not for their insane socialistic demands, but for the basic message. We got here because all politicians, and most rich CEO/banker types have screwed the U.S. so they could get rich, and it's time for a payback. Support Paul; end the Fed.
    If you are talking about those idiots protesting Wallstreet, I'm damn glad I don't live where you live! People here (almost 100%) deem them as the joke they really are. You've heard of 'Tea Party'? The Wallstreet protesters are 'The Fleas Party'.

  2.   
  3. #32
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    State of Confusion
    Posts
    7,733
    Quote Originally Posted by weekendskp View Post
    Says you! Bachmann (see correct spelling)was through before she even started. Paul is the only "no compromise" candidate, and everyone on this forum should be supporting him. Cain doesn't agree with SCOTUS, and would let states determine gun rights like Illinois. Romney is not your strong advocate for 2A, and even said basically "not in my back yard" when asked about 2A in Mass. Political experts are changing their tune as of recent to indicate that a long shot like Paul, or even a third party candidate could win the 2012. I see a lot of people, 99%, identifying with the "Occupy" movement, not for their insane socialistic demands, but for the basic message. We got here because all politicians, and most rich CEO/banker types have screwed the U.S. so they could get rich, and it's time for a payback. Support Paul; end the Fed.
    Yes, Bachman is also finished. Paul would get my support but I can't agree with his position on drugs... he sounds nutty. There is no strong 2A candidate that will get the nomination. Regarding the protest? Most of them don't even know why they're protesting. I'm a regular guy and no banker or fat cat has screwed me. Anyone who has investments should have made significant profits over the past years. And I'm not handing anythiung over to the masses who aren't bright enough to stake their own claim in this world. The "poor me" attitude is their real enemy. Defeatism... alive and well in America's youth.
    GOD, GUNS and GUITARS

  4. #33
    Quote Originally Posted by tuts40 View Post
    The left is always first to play the race card and in fact it can be said would be the only one's to do so. There are too many examples to start citing here but if someone wants to do just a little research it will be easy to find. The "reverend" Jackson, Sharpton, etc are there simply to stir the race pot and take the cash that results from the racial division they can stir up, particularly when it helps thier lefty buds. Having said that, the black caucus and others (Belefonte, most recently) will call Cain names, such as "bad apple". BTW, Cain's response was beautifull: "I left the Democrat plantation years ago".

    The left plays politics of division be it stirring up class warfare, racial tensions, etc allowing the left supporting major media twist it to make Mr. and Mrs Don't Know Crap Americans believe the right (especially the Tea Party now) is racist and dangerous. Despite what you will say, there is typically although not always a "D" behind the names of those in higher political offices or in elite media stirring such pots, supporting the racial and economic division that fuels controversy. Again, this controversy allows elite media to misrepresent and misreport conservatives and liberals alike attempting to make the former demonized and the latter as fighting for America. Currently, this is the only way anyone with a "D" gets elected to higher office.

    The above tactics would not be needed when this country has enough voting people who hate the ideals this country was founded on and want to dismantle it. If there are enough people who want to sit at the feeding trough, who want everything needed in life with no effort or who simply vote for who is 'cool' or 'hip' or popular having been molded by the media then deception will not be needed. The marxist's and statists (read ObaMao and his handlers) will be able to be themselves without the need to fool any silent majority of mid-right Americans to be voted in time and time again. Sure, we'll have a Venezuela or Greece, but the current younger generation and future generations will not know the difference or care.

    But for now, liberals must continue to pretend to be 'moderate' or even conservative on some issues to be electable. Most "D"'s must have the media twist information to fool Americans to be elected. Juz word, yo.
    So true, so true. I've been saying for years that the liberals/progressives have been very successful in 'dumbing down' the people. They got control of our colleges and universities and brainwashed our kids, some of whom became public school teachers and started with the indoctrination at even earlier ages. (Not all teachers are like this...some are still with "we the people" but are fearful of being strong. We need to encourage and support these.) And then the Hollywood leftists have been contributing to the "numbing down" of the people with years and years of sit-coms that always portray any good American types as ignorant, intolerant, and silly while portraying the far left types (including weirdo's) as smart, tolerant, and lovable. Then you throw in the old mainstream media with years of bias "reporting" and you arrive at the precarious predicament this great Nation is now in. I do believe I see an awakening of "we the people" and shaking off the slumbering state they've been in. We need to return to the original Founding principles of this great Nation. God Bless America....again!
    Happily clinging to God and my guns...not at all bitter.

  5. #34
    I find it amusing when people say Ron Paul is for legalizing drugs because it proves they have no clue as to what his position is. Please research each candidates stance BEFORE you vote.
    Due to the increased cost of Ammunition I will be forced to discontinue warning shots as of now! USAF Chief Master Sergeant, Retired, 1979-2005

  6. Quote Originally Posted by Chief1297 View Post
    I find it amusing when people say Ron Paul is for legalizing drugs because it proves they have no clue as to what his position is. Please research each candidates stance BEFORE you vote.
    If Ron Paul wasn't a politician with a job, he'd be the 'nutty uncle the family has locked in the basement'. (However, I'd still vote for him over that scumbag Obummer.)

  7. The democrats have taken blacks from the cotton platation to the political plantation. Too bad that many blacks are too stupid to educatate themselves to the fact the the democract party want to suppress them and keep them stupid. Most Democrates were members of the kkk, it took a republican to get the civil right act through with much resistance form the D' s. so.....why do allllll the sorry asses end up in the Democates/cult party....maybe Mr. Ed can chime in on that one. Occupied wall street, occupied Atlanta, etc. All Democrates/communist,sorry asses are we starting to see a pattern here.
    "When plunder becomes a way of life for a group of men living together in society, they create for themselves in the course of time a legal system that authorizes it and a moral code that justifies it."Frederic Bastia

  8. #37
    Quote Originally Posted by cougaram View Post
    ...and with Paul wanting to legalize drugs, you can bet there will be many 1/2 minded people voting for him. Too bad their individual votes don't count but 1/2.
    You obviously didn't read or comprehend the earlier post.

    Quote Originally Posted by eXGee11 View Post
    Paul didn't say legalize drugs, he said its a state issue not a federal issue. If your state wants to legalize drugs that's your states business, not the business of federal law.
    "The 2nd amendment was never intended to allow private citizens to 'keep and bear arms'. If it had, there would have been wording such as 'the right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed'." -- Ken Konecki on Usenet, on 27 Jul 1992

  9. #38
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    State of Confusion
    Posts
    7,733
    Quote Originally Posted by Chief1297 View Post
    I find it amusing when people say Ron Paul is for legalizing drugs because it proves they have no clue as to what his position is. Please research each candidates stance BEFORE you vote.
    Watched him say it right into the camera in the GOP debate. Plenty of documentation showing he supports legalizing drugs as a means to reducing crime. He doesn't seen to understand most crime is directly rooted in drug use. He's not electable, he's a spoiler.

    Article - Ron Paul: End the War on Drugs!
    GOD, GUNS and GUITARS

  10. #39
    Dr Paul calls for the end of federal laws against drugs...because the federal government has no constitutional authority regarding anything but the interstate transportation of the drugs. It should be a matter left to states and communities.

    However...if you want to learn a bit more about the incredible stupidity of and insane amount of problems caused by drug prohibition, spend a few hours here: http://www.leap.cc/

  11. #40
    Quote Originally Posted by BC1 View Post
    Watched him say it right into the camera in the GOP debate. Plenty of documentation showing he supports legalizing drugs as a means to reducing crime. He doesn't seen to understand most crime is directly rooted in drug use. He's not electable, he's a spoiler.

    Article - Ron Paul: End the War on Drugs!
    Did you read the article? Did you read the reasoning behind the message? I guess it rings true with me because I get it! I hear the bulk of the readers of this forum saying they want their guns, but here's Ron Paul saying, "You aren't just entitled to your guns, speech, and religion. You are entitled to your freedom to choose what you do with your body.", and you call him a kook, senile, and a nutcase. He's a smart man with the courage of his convictions. His message is the salvation of this country, the greatest democracy, the United States of America, and if you value your freedom, you'll vote for Ron Paul.
    "The 2nd amendment was never intended to allow private citizens to 'keep and bear arms'. If it had, there would have been wording such as 'the right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed'." -- Ken Konecki on Usenet, on 27 Jul 1992

Page 4 of 8 FirstFirst ... 23456 ... LastLast

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