This is Who You Voted For!

[OZESS]

After looking at MRS O again.I seen that look be for on my wife its the look of did I forget to unplug the iron or lock the front door again.Could be.

 

[printcraft]

You quoted the post "Walter Williams, a black economics professor has stated that he is glad that his ancestors were brought here from Africa. IMO a black person, or ANY person, has more opportunity here than anywhere else.", implying that Mr. Williams' statement was true.

His statement is false, and I refuted it. Please try to keep up.

So much of the chest thumping on this forum is based on fairy tales; I often wonder why I bother sharing my education.

Please tell me more about your education. Are you a rocket surgeon?

 

[Bunnykid68]

You quoted the post "Walter Williams, a black economics professor has stated that he is glad that his ancestors were brought here from Africa. IMO a black person, or ANY person, has more opportunity here than anywhere else.", implying that Mr. Williams' statement was true.

His statement is false, and I refuted it. Please try to keep up.

So much of the chest thumping on this forum is based on fairy tales; I often wonder why I bother sharing my education.

Nevermind, I misread what you wrote, but I have heard Walter make a statement very similar to that if not exactly like that

 

[Justin Case]

Please tell me more about your education. Are you a rocket surgeon?

 

[Ted]

Don't waste her time if she voted for anyone other than obama.

She is biased.

Its none of my business to whom she cast her ballot. However, her email is back.

"All this for a damned flag" is certainly a possibility to what she said, but please look at this link for a more complete understanding of lip reading:

Bad Lip Reading​

 

[Twangbanger]

Que, can I finally sum up by assuming you're not a Bush-hater? I would think that's pretty safe, being that you were in Desert Storm and all?


;-)


But I find your explanation an awful lot more convincing than Mrs. Obama's...especially since she hasn't given one, that I've heard. And call me old-fashioned, but when you're First Lady, I believe you DO owe us one. "It's my opinion, based on my perspective, and I don't care whether you Get It or not" doesn't cut it, when you represent the Nation. One's husband being elected President, at age 44, is simply unconvincing as a justification for me. I don't get the transformation. It doesn't seem rooted in anything genuine.


Moving on, I don't really think it's up for grabs in 2016, especially if the gilded Clinton Name is atop the ballot again. But I will continue to send my pittance to the Tea Party, and try to get the people in my circle engaged in the Early Vote. Not that it matters in Indiana, but I think that's really where they out-maneuvered us in this election. Of course, the takers may outnumber the makers and all that, but that was already true in 2000, when AlGore won the popular vote (that was the real shot across our bow, we just weren't listening). The other side's "Election Day" is two weeks long in most states. They target neighborhoods, then ask, "Did you know you can vote early?" Then, "Would you LIKE to vote early?" Then, "Would you like us to help you request a ballot?" Then, "Did you receive your ballot?" Then, "Did you send it in yet?"


Meanwhile, our side sits with our thumb up our ass, waiting till Election Day to see how many Republican Working Stiffs show up between 6AM and 6PM...when the other side has already been out there, amassing their margin of victory for two weeks and already has it in the bag before the polls even open (approx. 400,000 votes over 6 states made the difference...in Ohio, Zero was ahead by 2-to-1 a week out, in some estimates of early voting, with a number of votes equal to a third of turnout already reporting...it takes a heck of an Election Day wave to overcome that).


If we do that...and you convince your friends not to throw away their vote on a Rupert...I suppose it's possible we could pull this off But I'm going to continue to breathe normally while waiting for it...

 

[EliteYK]

I love that people continue to call the President "arrogant" or claim that he "lacks humility". These same people criticize him anytime there is the mere hint that America may not be perfect, that our stance on issues has ever been wrong or that we can continue to improve and evolve. It seems clear that anyone who stands for any elected position was a certain amount of confidence, but to stand up and say "The free world needs a leader and that leader should be me." demands a level of arrogance that is simply unmatched and is historically true of Presidents from either party.

 

[Ted]

I love that people continue to call the President "arrogant" or claim that he "lacks humility". These same people criticize him anytime there is the mere hint that America may not be perfect, that our stance on issues has ever been wrong or that we can continue to improve and evolve. It seems clear that anyone who stands for any elected position was a certain amount of confidence, but to stand up and say "The free world needs a leader and that leader should be me." demands a level of arrogance that is simply unmatched and is historically true of Presidents from either party.

I'll argue this point to the contrary with one name during a pivotal time in American History: Harry Truman.

 

[spec4]

You quoted the post "Walter Williams, a black economics professor has stated that he is glad that his ancestors were brought here from Africa. IMO a black person, or ANY person, has more opportunity here than anywhere else.", implying that Mr. Williams' statement was true.

His statement is false, and I refuted it. Please try to keep up.

So much of the chest thumping on this forum is based on fairy tales; I often wonder why I bother sharing my education.

Your cited link doesn't mention Africa where Mr. Williams ancestors are from. The cited link also covers a myriad of circumstances not in question on this thread. My bottom line on the post was that Americans whose ancestors are from Africa, IMO are better off here or have the opportunity to be better off here than had their ancestors never come here. I suspect you knew that though.

 

[Survivalcookie]

I don't buy the "free stuff" stuff. The 47% didn't become 51% in this election. There is no real mandate for socialism. The majority didn't vote for free stuff, though the free stuff helps motivate parts of the Democratic base, just like "pro choice" does, just like "green ****" does, and just like pro-life does for social conservatives.

Obama won because Chicago Democrats know how to win elections. Obama out-maneuvered Romney among a few key voting demographics in the places that mattered most. It was not at all Romney's message against "free stuff". But it was the strategy of the candidate. In the swing states, he brought the wrong weapons to too many fights. He brought sticks to carrot fights, and carrots to stick fights.

I agree they ran more efficient campaign...and yes the GOP needs to start using the same tactics to reach the same base....If I was in charge of the GOP I would make it an effort to start educating people now...especially blacks on what the dems have done to their race.

 

[printcraft]

...... Besides, I don't think anyone voted for Michelle Obama............

Well, we have hope for the future.

Would Michelle Obama Make a Good President Someday? - Forbes

 

[jrogers]

I'm not reading this entire thread given the staggering ignorance of the OP.

There is no look of arrogance on our President's face. This is a bizarre delusion brought on by too many hours of Glen Beck, Michael Savage, Rush Limbaugh, or whatever right wing hatemonger is preferred these days. I can't even keep track of them any more.

The First Lady is welcome to put her hand wherever she pleases. It won't have any effect on how her husband governs. This nonsense is just another "flag pin" flap in which the right wrings their hands and cries tears of joy that they found something to complain about.

I do love that clicking through a few pages quickly led to discussions of race. Stay classy, guys!

 

[Armed-N-Ready]

I'll admit it didn't read every post here but .....

it is obvious that there are some Obama supporters posting here. Will you still side with him when the bans take effect and you are out of work due to a trashed economy?

 

[bart2278]

It's always the current president that is demonized by one side or the other. Your politics are bull****. Both sides have been ****ing this country and our liberty since WW2, and all you do is ***** about the other side. Both parties are degenerates, and it sickening that so many people still play sides. The only redeeming part of having a Republican in office is their stance on firearms.

 

[beararms1776]

I'm still proud of my Country regardless of who's running it. Heck, if it weren't for the socialist intervention of some citizens, I'd be fine operating my own life. Unfortunately, hard efforts, responsibility, dedication, morals, values and all that good stuff, are no longer recognizable to all seeing eyes and no longer pays the bills.

 

[jbombelli]

it is obvious that there are some Obama supporters posting here. Will you still side with him when the bans take effect and you are out of work due to a trashed economy?

Yes, they will. It will all be Bush's fault, or the Republicans in the House, or the Tea Party... but no matter what happens it won't be OBAMA'S fault. Unless of course everything improves, then it will be all him.

They say the Democrats aren't after our guns. LOL. Here's a brief list of what the Democrats have brought us in terms of gun laws:

1. The National Firearms Act of 1934 - Congress had a Democratic majority.

2. Gun Control Act of 1968 - Congress had a Democratic majority.

3. The Hughes Amendment to the Firearm Owners Protection Act - Despite being defeated soundly in a recorded vote, Charlie Rangel declared that it passed and added it to the FOPA as a "poison pill." Reagan signed it to get us the rest of the FOPA. However, it wouldn’t have been there to be signed at all if not for the Democrats trying to defeat the FOPA.

4. The Brady Handgun Law - Congress had a Democratic majority.

5. The Assault Weapons Ban of 1994 - Congress had a Democratic majority.

6. The Lautenberg Amendment - Made the 2nd Amendment a revocable privilege, instead of a fundamental right. Thanks, Charles Lautenberg (a Democrat)

7. Defeated the Thune Amendment, denying us the right to carry - The amendment would have allowed those of us with licenses or permits to carry, to carry in all states that issue licenses or permits to carry.

8. The term “gun show loophole” and a never-ending quest to “close it” essentially outlawing sales between private individuals

9. A never-ending supply of registration schemes

10. The idea that the 2nd Amendment is some sort of “collective” right, while others that mention the “people” are individual

11. Constant lawsuits against gun companies in a shameless effort to drive them out of business

12. Magazine capacity limits in some states - in Ohio, for example, a 30 round magazine is classified as a machine gun.

13. Unapproved firearms lists in some states - like California

14. Unapproved ammunition lists - in New Jersey it is a crime to carry hollow-points.

15. Various assault weapon bans around the country - primarily in Democrat-controlled states.


That is the Democratic Party's stance on guns. I honestly don't understand how someone can say they're pro-gun and a Democrat in the same breath. This is the party that tries to ban guns. This is the party that puts justices on the Supreme Court who want to ban guns. This is the party that WILL ban guns as soon as it's politically expedient for them to do so.

 

[sternn77]

Holy crap! Thank goodness, I thought for a minute I'd found a place I could go to talk about something OTHER than politics for a while. No, I'm not some Librul whackjob, just completely sick of all the political bs from everyone.

 

[printcraft]

Holy crap! Thank goodness, I thought for a minute I'd found a place I could go to talk about something OTHER than politics for a while. No, I'm not some Librul whackjob, just completely sick of all the political bs from everyone.

INGO has more than one section, you are posting in the General Political Discussion forum complaining that everyone is talking politics.


It is a gun site after all, go read about guns.

 

[jbombelli]

Holy crap! Thank goodness, I thought for a minute I'd found a place I could go to talk about something OTHER than politics for a while. No, I'm not some Librul whackjob, just completely sick of all the political bs from everyone.

YOU'RE IN THE GENERAL POLITICAL DISCUSSION FORUM.

 

[sepe]

it is obvious that there are some Obama supporters posting here. Will you still side with him when the bans take effect and you are out of work due to a trashed economy?

Would the Romney supporters still supported him when he instituted bans? Remember, not 2 minutes after Obama said he thinks we need national bans, Romney said if that is what both sides wanted he would do it. Would the Romney supporters still support Romney when his big job plan of "I assure you that you'll have a job in 4 years" doesn't work out?

Both sides need to stop voting for stupid and then playing the blame game. It hasn't gotten the country anywhere and most definitely won't pull the country out of the spiral down the toilet.