Page 1 of 4 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 80

Thread: 2A/OC Pure partisan politics though

  1. #1
    Regular Member mspgunner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Ellisville, Missouri, USA
    Posts
    1,966

    2A/OC Pure partisan politics though

    Consider the options, vote smart:
    If you pull it, you use it. If you pull it and you don't use it, you've done some thing wrong and you might not get another chance. Think about it before you pack it!
    I worked 24/7 for 2A OC rights! Don't like what I did? Try it yourself, it was my full time job!
    Certified NRA Range Safety Officer - RSO

  2. #2
    Regular Member SovereignAxe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Elizabethton, TN
    Posts
    795
    And voting Republican Party is a suicide pact with Romney (or should I say Wrongney?). What's your point?
    "Anyone worth shooting once is worth shooting twice." -Zeus

    "Someone ever tries to kill you, you try to kill 'em right back!" - Malcolm Reynolds

    EDC = Walther PPQ 9mm

  3. #3
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    St. Joseph, Missouri, USA
    Posts
    184
    I think the point is choose the lesser of 2 evils. Obama has already stated that he don't believe citizens should own guns. Romney has some left views when it comes to gun control, but he has Ryan as his running mate to keep him in check. Romney has no intentions of outright trying to erase the 2nd amendment, Obama does. Altho both are bad choices, voting for someone other than Romney is just throwing a vote away and leaving Obama with an extra vote that does not get cancelled out. Thats the point.

  4. #4
    Regular Member mspgunner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Ellisville, Missouri, USA
    Posts
    1,966
    Quote Originally Posted by Marc View Post
    I think the point is choose the lesser of 2 evils. Obama has already stated that he don't believe citizens should own guns. Romney has some left views when it comes to gun control, but he has Ryan as his running mate to keep him in check. Romney has no intentions of outright trying to erase the 2nd amendment, Obama does. Altho both are bad choices, voting for someone other than Romney is just throwing a vote away and leaving Obama with an extra vote that does not get cancelled out. Thats the point.
    Ah, a post by an informed citizen!

    The NRA has straightened Romney out, he is the best choice. Just as in Missouri politics, money talks abd B/S walks, it's the natural order, like it or not.
    I just spent and hour with the next speaker of the Missouri House and the wife of Dave Spence the next Governor of the State of Missouri.
    We need to get our ducks in a row, 2013 may be the year for Missouri OC rights, better than a "flash" bill!

    The work has begun by a very dedicated group of OC advocates, sorry no previews.............Stay tuned, January through May 2013 is a long way away.
    If you pull it, you use it. If you pull it and you don't use it, you've done some thing wrong and you might not get another chance. Think about it before you pack it!
    I worked 24/7 for 2A OC rights! Don't like what I did? Try it yourself, it was my full time job!
    Certified NRA Range Safety Officer - RSO

  5. #5
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    earth's crust
    Posts
    17,838
    Thanks for the post Mr. Ryan (lol) ... now, tell me why I should vote for YOU, not vote against another person.

    Ya can't? Too bad. Johnson is getting my vote.

    Willard should be the one in the car in the pic ... that's what his candidacy is doing to the country.

  6. #6
    Regular Member SovereignAxe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Elizabethton, TN
    Posts
    795
    I'm sorry, but I'm not a one issue voter, so I will not get sucked into this two party trap that we've been in for about a century now. I'll be voting for who's best for the country on as many issues as possible-not just gun rights.
    "Anyone worth shooting once is worth shooting twice." -Zeus

    "Someone ever tries to kill you, you try to kill 'em right back!" - Malcolm Reynolds

    EDC = Walther PPQ 9mm

  7. #7
    Regular Member Redbaron007's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    SW MO
    Posts
    1,637
    Quote Originally Posted by SovereignAxe View Post
    I'm sorry, but I'm not a one issue voter, so I will not get sucked into this two party trap that we've been in for about a century now. I'll be voting for who's best for the country on as many issues as possible-not just gun rights.

    So who are then voting for?

    If third party, how do think they will be able to influence, make the change you want to see? If King Obama, why is the better choice over Romney? Saying they are both equal is a cop out and is not true and very disingenuous.

    In advance.....thanks for your information.
    "I can live for two weeks on a good compliment."
    ~Mark Twain

  8. #8
    Regular Member SovereignAxe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Elizabethton, TN
    Posts
    795
    Quote Originally Posted by Redbaron007 View Post
    So who are then voting for?

    If third party, how do think they will be able to influence, make the change you want to see? If King Obama, why is the better choice over Romney? Saying they are both equal is a cop out and is not true and very disingenuous.

    In advance.....thanks for your information.
    I'm still undecided, but I can tell you it won't be Nobama or Wrongney. And you're right, they're not equal. Obama is bad for some things (fiscal responsibility, civil liberties), Romney is bad on others (other civil liberties, energy policy). Who's worse? It doesn't matter. If I don't like their policies, I'm not voting for them. It's pretty simple.
    "Anyone worth shooting once is worth shooting twice." -Zeus

    "Someone ever tries to kill you, you try to kill 'em right back!" - Malcolm Reynolds

    EDC = Walther PPQ 9mm

  9. #9
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Jefferson City, Mo., ,
    Posts
    490
    Quote Originally Posted by SovereignAxe View Post
    I'm still undecided, but I can tell you it won't be Nobama or Wrongney. And you're right, they're not equal. Obama is bad for some things (fiscal responsibility, civil liberties), Romney is bad on others (other civil liberties, energy policy). Who's worse? It doesn't matter. If I don't like their policies, I'm not voting for them. It's pretty simple.
    So in other words, your just wasting your vote .....

  10. #10
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    SEMO, , USA
    Posts
    578
    Quote Originally Posted by Marc View Post
    I think the point is choose the lesser of 2 evils. Obama has already stated that he don't believe citizens should own guns. Romney has some left views when it comes to gun control, but he has Ryan as his running mate to keep him in check. Romney has no intentions of outright trying to erase the 2nd amendment, Obama does. Altho both are bad choices, voting for someone other than Romney is just throwing a vote away and leaving Obama with an extra vote that does not get cancelled out. Thats the point.
    Funny thing about choosing the lesser of 2 evils, the end result....EVIL. See, believe it or not, there are some American citizens, who think that voting against your conscience is an even greater evil the allowing the existing system(i.e. two party monopoly) to strong arm us into playing by their rules and not the ones championed by the Founders.

    Case in point, during the RNC a voice vote was taken, to make it almost impossible for delegates for minority candidates(ala Ron Paul) to leverage their votes for changes in the party platform and positions, by changing rules and centralizing the party power in Washington DC. Now I don't know about you, but I call the disenfranchising of grassroots movements by a centralized party leadership, evil. In your book, is this disenfranchisement of it's party's members a big enough evil to equal the disenfranchisement of everyone by the opposition? For many of us, it is.


    I have a theory as too why so many seem to love the two party system. It is simply the "us vs. them" mentality. With a two party system you don't have to bother actually being informed about any topic, all you need to know is what side "we" take. That automatically means that "they" are wrong. The idea that there might be different and valid views need not be considered. It's very similar to the national obsession with sports. It's just "your" team against the other guys. When they win, you win. When they lose, well it was probably bad calls or that POS coach who keeps making all those stupid calls, that you would never make.

    So while many of you may think those who choose to vote for either of the two majority candidates are wasting their votes, they are in fact voting their hearts and convictions. That used to be called the American Way.
    AUDE VIDE TACE

  11. #11
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Somewhere
    Posts
    111
    Quote Originally Posted by Festus_Hagen View Post
    So in other words, your just wasting your vote .....
    "A "no vote" is a preferable option when either of the other two options would be the incorrect options anyway. So, a "no vote" is not wasted when there is no other viable option presented. And I know what you would say about "trying." But, when the option of trying is not enough, there can be no other "responsible" option than.

  12. #12
    Regular Member Superlite27's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    God's Country, Missouri
    Posts
    1,279
    Quote Originally Posted by Festus_Hagen View Post
    So in other words, your just wasting your vote .....
    I'll be voting for the candidate I believe will be the best choice to lead our country.

    Other folks will be voting for "the lesser of two evils".....a candidate they don't even like....... in order to reinforce the two party system so that "the other side" doesn't maintain control of the presidency.

    Even though my candidate has absolutely no chance of winning.....

    .....which one of us is really WASTING their vote?

    I'm not the one who will be voting for a newly crapped P.O.S. because it's fresher and has fewer germs than a day old P.O.S.

  13. #13
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    earth's crust
    Posts
    17,838
    Quote Originally Posted by Festus_Hagen View Post
    So in other words, your just wasting your vote .....
    Write in "George Bush" ... that'll send a message ...

    Would that be a waste of a vote?

  14. #14
    Regular Member OC for ME's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    White Oak Plantation
    Posts
    12,272
    Quote Originally Posted by davidmcbeth View Post
    Write in "George Bush" ... that'll send a message ...

    Would that be a waste of a vote?
    Yes. See the 22nd Amendment.
    "I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than to those attending too small a degree of it." - Thomas Jefferson.

    "Better that ten guilty persons escape, than that one innocent suffer" - English jurist William Blackstone.
    It is AFAIK original to me. Compromise is failure on the installment plan, particularly when dealing with so intractable an opponent as ignorance. - Nightmare

  15. #15
    Regular Member Redbaron007's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    SW MO
    Posts
    1,637
    I know several who like to state they are voting for the candidate (presidential) that best represents there beliefs and politics....usually 3rd party.

    Well, that is a nice warm, fuzzy feeling...but getting past that is the hard part. There is no 3rd party candidate out there that has any chance of winning the WH. So this brings me to my question, why do people vote because of the selfish warm/fuzzy feeling instead of the broader view?

    I will agree, neither are the best choice, but the reality is, that is all we have...so it becomes the lessor of two evils. Oh, by the way, this is nothing new...it's happened in politics for many years, locally to federal.

    With a higher propensity for the next POTUS to appoint Supreme Court Justices; I'll take my chances with Romney rather than with King Obama. In addition, I believe Romney (and a repub congress) has a better chance to repeal/reduce Obamacare's devastating economical burden on our economy.

    That's my $.02.
    "I can live for two weeks on a good compliment."
    ~Mark Twain

  16. #16
    Regular Member Superlite27's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    God's Country, Missouri
    Posts
    1,279
    Quote Originally Posted by Redbaron007 View Post
    Well, that is a nice warm, fuzzy feeling...but getting past that is the hard part. There is no 3rd party candidate out there that has any chance of winning the WH. So this brings me to my question, why do people vote because of the selfish warm/fuzzy feeling instead of the broader view?
    I agree. There is no third party candidate out there that has any chance of winning the WH.

    As far as voting for a "selfish warm/fuzzy feeling" rather than your broader view.....

    Since when did how I vote become your perogative? Since when did my individual vote have to adhere to your definition, or be considered wrong? It's mine. Casting it how I desire is considered "selfish" if it doesn't fit your view of the current state of politics? Here are some options I have with MY vote:

    1) I can simply not vote, whatsoever.
    2) I can vote for Obama.
    3) I can vote for Romney
    4) I can vote for a third party.
    5) I can write in the person I'm going to vote for.

    Hmmmmm. Glad to know you've narrowed my choices down to #3.....or being "selfish" with something that belongs to me: My vote. Simply for not casting it in the same manner, and for the exact reason you choose to cast yours.

    Do I feel good about it? Nope. You're right. The person I am going to vote for will not win. Am I aware of the consequences? Yes. There is a lot riding on the next president's shoulders. Supreme Court picks are one of them.

    But I'm not going to sacrifice my principles and vote for someone I never supported simply because he isn't the person I don't want to win.

    I vote FOR the person I want. That's what I do. That's how I cast my vote.

    If I wanted a warm/fuzzy feeling, I'd W***E myself out and vote for Romney simply because of the impending DOOM forcast if he is defeated.

    But I'm not a W***E. Voting for my candidate fails to give me a warm/fuzzy feeling you say it does. So be it. Maybe the Republican party should have nominated him if they wanted me to vote for their candidate. After all, I vote for candidates because of their values, the opinions they hold, how they govern and legislate, the kind of personality they have, and a myriad other reasons.

    I do NOT vote for candidates simply because they're NOT the crap we're accustomed to. I do NOT vote for candidates because they're the "lesser of two evils". I do NOT follow the rest of the lemmings taking us over the cliff's edge and vote for their reasons.

    I vote for my own reasons, and for my own candidates. If everyone else did so, maybe this country would start heading in the right direction.

    Until then, keep enjoying the fresh turds you keep electing for for everyone else's reasons.

  17. #17
    Regular Member Redbaron007's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    SW MO
    Posts
    1,637
    Quote Originally Posted by Redbaron007 View Post
    I know several who like to state they are voting for the candidate (presidential) that best represents there beliefs and politics....usually 3rd party.

    Well, that is a nice warm, fuzzy feeling...but getting past that is the hard part. There is no 3rd party candidate out there that has any chance of winning the WH. So this brings me to my question, why do people vote because of the selfish warm/fuzzy feeling instead of the broader view?

    I will agree, neither are the best choice, but the reality is, that is all we have...so it becomes the lessor of two evils. Oh, by the way, this is nothing new...it's happened in politics for many years, locally to federal.

    With a higher propensity for the next POTUS to appoint Supreme Court Justices; I'll take my chances with Romney rather than with King Obama. In addition, I believe Romney (and a repub congress) has a better chance to repeal/reduce Obamacare's devastating economical burden on our economy.

    That's my $.02.
    Quote Originally Posted by Superlite27 View Post
    I agree. There is no third party candidate out there that has any chance of winning the WH.

    As far as voting for a "selfish warm/fuzzy feeling" rather than your broader view.....

    Since when did how I vote become your perogative? Since when did my individual vote have to adhere to your definition, or be considered wrong? It's mine. Casting it how I desire is considered "selfish" if it doesn't fit your view of the current state of politics? Here are some options I have with MY vote:

    1) I can simply not vote, whatsoever.
    2) I can vote for Obama.
    3) I can vote for Romney
    4) I can vote for a third party.
    5) I can write in the person I'm going to vote for.

    Hmmmmm. Glad to know you've narrowed my choices down to #3.....or being "selfish" with something that belongs to me: My vote. Simply for not casting it in the same manner, and for the exact reason you choose to cast yours.

    Do I feel good about it? Nope. You're right. The person I am going to vote for will not win. Am I aware of the consequences? Yes. There is a lot riding on the next president's shoulders. Supreme Court picks are one of them.

    But I'm not going to sacrifice my principles and vote for someone I never supported simply because he isn't the person I don't want to win.

    I vote FOR the person I want. That's what I do. That's how I cast my vote.

    If I wanted a warm/fuzzy feeling, I'd W***E myself out and vote for Romney simply because of the impending DOOM forcast if he is defeated.

    But I'm not a W***E. Voting for my candidate fails to give me a warm/fuzzy feeling you say it does. So be it. Maybe the Republican party should have nominated him if they wanted me to vote for their candidate. After all, I vote for candidates because of their values, the opinions they hold, how they govern and legislate, the kind of personality they have, and a myriad other reasons.

    I do NOT vote for candidates simply because they're NOT the crap we're accustomed to. I do NOT vote for candidates because they're the "lesser of two evils". I do NOT follow the rest of the lemmings taking us over the cliff's edge and vote for their reasons.

    I vote for my own reasons, and for my own candidates. If everyone else did so, maybe this country would start heading in the right direction.

    Until then, keep enjoying the fresh turds you keep electing for for everyone else's reasons.
    So you vote based upon your warm/fuzzy feeling. That's ok....as I stated above....that is the hard part (see bold), getting over the warm fuzzy feeling of 'my principal'.....many do not. Voting is each one's own prerogative....correct. Although, from the many I have spoken with and have read on interweb forums, they have stated the very same thing you have espoused...'i vote my principal', which it's usually a for a vote third party candidate, one with zero chance of affecting change...which usually helps the most liberal candidate. True? Or Not?

    Which brings me to my next question, Why would one sacrifice a country's future for selfish desires? Would you not agree this election is very important....especially for our future? Would you agree, if King Obama remains in office, our country will not be better off in four more years? If you answer, no, our country will be better off in 4 more years with King Obama; then let us conclude the conversation.

    However, if you say it probably won't be better off, then why vote for a candidate who has no chance of changing the future for the better; all along allowing the more worse candidate to succeed?

    If we were speaking during the primary times; then I fully support 'I vote my principle' thought. However, this is when the big picture thinking comes in....a different thought process....just FYI, there is no federal right to vote for president.....so when it comes to selecting a commander in chief, it usually boils down to two, picking a third doesn't help the whole US.

    As I have stated before, Romney wasn't my 1st, 2nd, or even 3rd choice...I didn't vote for him in any primary...but the thought of the very liberal King Obama appointing more Supreme Court Justices, forcing more Obamacare onto folks, further re-distributing wealth to those who don't earn it, concerns me greatly. Just those three things alone should trigger something in many peoples minds, that...it is a big picture when voting for the POTUS. Could Romney do somethings similarly...sure, but doubtful, if he wants possible re-election in 2016.

    'nuff said. I climb down from my lil soapbox.
    "I can live for two weeks on a good compliment."
    ~Mark Twain

  18. #18
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Jefferson City, Mo., ,
    Posts
    490
    Quote Originally Posted by Superlite27 View Post
    I'll be voting for the candidate I believe will be the best choice to lead our country.

    Other folks will be voting for "the lesser of two evils".....a candidate they don't even like....... in order to reinforce the two party system so that "the other side" doesn't maintain control of the presidency.

    Even though my candidate has absolutely no chance of winning.....

    .....which one of us is really WASTING their vote?
    You are .
    You say yourself your candidate has no chance of winning, yet you will throw that vote away .

    Some people can maybe stand Obama in the WH another 4 years so he can take away more rights and run the country in the ground some more. I'm not one of those. I'll do whatever is best for the cause and the country to get that SOB out of office . Others kinda like him, I don't judge.

    You will essentially be throwing another vote for the Big Zero .

    I won't.

  19. #19
    Regular Member twoskinsonemanns's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    WV
    Posts
    2,489
    You guys make me laugh. You'd vote for nancy pelosi if she changed her blue undies for red and you put a R an in front of her name.

    Just think about what your going to do, vote for a man who signed a permanent AWB into law, raised fees for gun owners by 400% and invented Obamacare. Not to mention did nothing for the economy of his state.
    That's who you will inflict on the American people? Ugh.

    A vote for Obamney is damn near traitorous.
    "I support the ban on assault weapons" - Donald Trump

    We are fast approaching the stage of the ultimate inversion: the stage where the government is free to do anything it pleases, while the citizens may act only by permission - Ayn Rand

  20. #20
    Regular Member OC for ME's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    White Oak Plantation
    Posts
    12,272
    Quote Originally Posted by twoskinsonemanns View Post
    You guys make me laugh. You'd vote for nancy pelosi if she changed her blue undies for red and you put a R an in front of her name.

    Just think about what your going to do, vote for a man who signed a permanent AWB into law, raised fees for gun owners by 400% and invented Obamacare. Not to mention did nothing for the economy of his state.
    That's who you will inflict on the American people? Ugh.

    A vote for Obamney is damn near traitorous.
    I hardly think that the Mittster's "record" in MASSACHUSETTS is a harbinger of things to come for the other 56 states if he is elected president.
    "I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than to those attending too small a degree of it." - Thomas Jefferson.

    "Better that ten guilty persons escape, than that one innocent suffer" - English jurist William Blackstone.
    It is AFAIK original to me. Compromise is failure on the installment plan, particularly when dealing with so intractable an opponent as ignorance. - Nightmare

  21. #21
    Regular Member Redbaron007's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    SW MO
    Posts
    1,637
    Quote Originally Posted by twoskinsonemanns View Post
    You guys make me laugh. You'd vote for nancy pelosi if she changed her blue undies for red and you put a R an in front of her name.

    Just think about what your going to do, vote for a man who signed a permanent AWB into law, raised fees for gun owners by 400% and invented Obamacare. Not to mention did nothing for the economy of his state.
    That's who you will inflict on the American people? Ugh.

    A vote for Obamney is damn near traitorous.
    Your hyperbole of facts is grossly overestimated.

    No, I wouldn't vote for Pelosi, even with an R. And if she made it through the primaries as a R...I wouldn't.

    Actually, the facts are, Romney re-signed an existing AWB; however, his was less restrictive than the prior one. As to the 400% increased fees, you will have to educate me on that one. Haven't seen that one.

    As to he invented Obamacare....political rhetoric, at best. He signed legislation for his state...did King Obama use some of it, possible, however, Romney also used some of Hilary's diatribe for national Healthcare....so in essence, Hilary gets the credit for Obamacare.

    So based upon your comments, you'll be voting in a manner that allows King Obama to remain in office? Funny, all the things you sight as bad, is what KO would like to do....and you will allow it by not voting in the best interest of the country. Interesting thought process.
    "I can live for two weeks on a good compliment."
    ~Mark Twain

  22. #22
    Regular Member mspgunner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Ellisville, Missouri, USA
    Posts
    1,966
    Quote Originally Posted by OC for ME View Post
    I hardly think that the Mittster's "record" in MASSACHUSETTS is a harbinger of things to come for the other 56 states if he is elected president.
    The saying is "Money talks and B/S walks." There was a reason why Mr. Romney got the endorsement of the NRA. There is a reason why he changed his view of firearms.

    Yes he did do the AWB in MA.

    Can you add 1+1=$

    That is political economics. The NRa did the math, Mr. Romney saw the $um at th ebottom, he is now an oficial 2A supporter. That's American politics!

    NO CHARGE FOR THE CIVICS LESSON.

    Does it SUCK? Yes, but my friends, that's the Americam way, that's business as usual in America.

    Blast away, but that's just the way it is.... If Obummer wins, dig a hole, gather food and water, the walls just may come tumbling down under weight of economic decay. It's called the debt ceiling, and it's falling.
    If you pull it, you use it. If you pull it and you don't use it, you've done some thing wrong and you might not get another chance. Think about it before you pack it!
    I worked 24/7 for 2A OC rights! Don't like what I did? Try it yourself, it was my full time job!
    Certified NRA Range Safety Officer - RSO

  23. #23
    Regular Member OC for ME's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    White Oak Plantation
    Posts
    12,272
    The "permanent" AWB in MA is only as permanent as the electorate will allow it to remain permanent. At this point it seems the citizens of MA are quite comfortable with a AWB, permanent or otherwise.
    "I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than to those attending too small a degree of it." - Thomas Jefferson.

    "Better that ten guilty persons escape, than that one innocent suffer" - English jurist William Blackstone.
    It is AFAIK original to me. Compromise is failure on the installment plan, particularly when dealing with so intractable an opponent as ignorance. - Nightmare

  24. #24
    Regular Member twoskinsonemanns's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    WV
    Posts
    2,489
    Quote Originally Posted by OC for ME View Post
    I hardly think that the Mittster's "record" in MASSACHUSETTS is a harbinger of things to come for the other 56 states if he is elected president.
    Quote Originally Posted by OC for ME View Post
    The "permanent" AWB in MA is only as permanent as the electorate will allow it to remain permanent. At this point it seems the citizens of MA are quite comfortable with a AWB, permanent or otherwise.
    These are called mental gymnastics.
    Romney's political career as the governor of a state does not provide an indication of what he would do as the president of a country? That's gotta be tough to say with a straight face for any intelligent person even the most hard core repubs.

    And then trying to deflect Romney's disgusting AWB with semantics of the definition of the word permanent. His AWB is just as permanent as the 2A.
    "I support the ban on assault weapons" - Donald Trump

    We are fast approaching the stage of the ultimate inversion: the stage where the government is free to do anything it pleases, while the citizens may act only by permission - Ayn Rand

  25. #25
    Regular Member twoskinsonemanns's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    WV
    Posts
    2,489
    Quote Originally Posted by Redbaron007 View Post
    Your hyperbole of facts is grossly overestimated.
    Not really, your just not used to hearing about Mitt without the Fox News spin on it.
    "I support the ban on assault weapons" - Donald Trump

    We are fast approaching the stage of the ultimate inversion: the stage where the government is free to do anything it pleases, while the citizens may act only by permission - Ayn Rand

Page 1 of 4 123 ... 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
  •