RetrieverTraining.Net - the RTF banner
21 - 40 of 60 Posts
Bob -

Hope you are feeling good today.

Would you, or anyone of your conservative brothers and sisters on this board (several of which I'd like to drink beer with BTW), please help me understand how you consider a Senator who spent 5 1/2 years in an enemy POW not conservative enough to be the POTUS?

Like To Get My Arms Around This One Regards,

Joe S.

Thought maybe Bob would field this one, but taking on the mantle of a "conservative brother", I'll attempt to point out the famous *Mavericks'* non-conservative activities.

1. McCain/Feingold...1st amendment
2. McCain/Kennedy...immigration
3. McCain/Algore...global warming
4. McCain/Reed...taxation
5. McCain/Feinstein...gun control

Just some of the areas McCain doesn't quite make the grade of being conservative. Actually, about the ONLY area he passes muster is his views on the military, and is probably the only area that matters to most of my generation at this time, thus his "popularity".

Believe me Joe, there will be many conservatives that will be holding their noses, and voting this fall, probably much like you did when you helped re-elect Clinton in '96. Back then, there was much less to fear from his Whitehouse residency, his relationship with the Chi-coms had been discovered and was being suppressed. About the only thing the people had to fear was keeping their daughters out of his sight.

This coming election is far more serious. If Obama gets in, and actually does what he is promising, we can kiss the middle east goodby. We can also forget about this nations sovereignty...we'll be into the ultimate Woodrow Wilson global UN.

But then, you may think that's the way our country should react to attacks like what happened on 9/11...go to the UN first for their approval to defend ourselves. Oh wait...didn't we jump through those hoops before we went into Irag?

And NOW that everyone has 20/20 vision of what's there, we hear all the pacifists braying and trumpeting what we shoulda done, and how quickly we need to now declare defeat and run! You see Joe, not all former military heroes make good politicians. Chuck Hagel comes to mind. In fact I believe he has lately joined ranks with the dems noteable war hero, John Kerry.

Now, since I have tried to answer your question, admittedly biased as you might expect, let me ask you one. I am expecting a biased answer as well, but am very curious to see your conjecture on this bit of theory.

What do you think might have happened the past 8 years had Gore gotten in...AND what if John Kerry had been elected POTUS and ran the country the past 4 years?

Anxiously awaiting word from Helpy Helperson.

UB
 
Thought maybe Bob would field this one, but taking on the mantle of a "conservative brother", I'll attempt to point out the famous *Mavericks'* non-conservative activities.

1. McCain/Feingold...1st amendment
2. McCain/Kennedy...immigration
3. McCain/Algore...global warming
4. McCain/Reed...taxation
5. McCain/Feinstein...gun control

Just some of the areas McCain doesn't quite make the grade of being conservative. Actually, about the ONLY area he passes muster is his views on the military, and is probably the only area that matters to most of my generation at this time, thus his "popularity".

Believe me Joe, there will be many conservatives that will be holding their noses, and voting this fall, probably much like you did when you helped re-elect Clinton in '96. Back then, there was much less to fear from his Whitehouse residency, his relationship with the Chi-coms had been discovered and was being suppressed. About the only thing the people had to fear was keeping their daughters out of his sight.

This coming election is far more serious. If Obama gets in, and actually does what he is promising, we can kiss the middle east goodby. We can also forget about this nations sovereignty...we'll be into the ultimate Woodrow Wilson global UN.

But then, you may think that's the way our country should react to attacks like what happened on 9/11...go to the UN first for their approval to defend ourselves. Oh wait...didn't we jump through those hoops before we went into Irag?

And NOW that everyone has 20/20 vision of what's there, we hear all the pacifists braying and trumpeting what we shoulda done, and how quickly we need to now declare defeat and run! You see Joe, not all former military heroes make good politicians. Chuck Hagel comes to mind. In fact I believe he has lately joined ranks with the dems noteable war hero, John Kerry.

Now, since I have tried to answer your question, admittedly biased as you might expect, let me ask you one. I am expecting a biased answer as well, but am very curious to see your conjecture on this bit of theory.

What do you think might have happened the past 8 years had Gore gotten in...AND what if John Kerry had been elected POTUS and ran the country the past 4 years?

Anxiously awaiting word from Helpy Helperson.

UB
Hey UB, how you doing?

I understand what you are saying.

What I'm really wondering is how if someone like John McCain (who has had unspeakable horror visited upon him in defense of the country) can find a moderate position does the leadership of right wing of the republican party (who largely lack his direct personal experience) ever stop to think maybe THEY are out of touch.

No, Bill, I don't think we should ask the UN for permission to defend ourselves. But neither you, the POTUS, Hew, Patrick, Bobby G. or the National Intelligence Agency can make the case the Iraq was invaded in self-defense. Nothing has been found to suggest otherwise despite the continued attempts of Senior Political Leadership to link Iraq to 9/11.

I had no problem with Afganistan. Lost a friend there as you may recall. That is a good fight. We went through the Taliban like crap through a goose and should have committed the same 100,000 or so troops to Tora Bora to capture OBL instead of trying to buy him. If we would have lost 4K plus 20K wounded in THAT event, many, me included, would have gone back in uniform in a nanosecond. But...we didn't. I don't know why, but I have my ideas.

I'm going to answer your question a little later this evening, while I don't think my answer will suprise you, I wouldn't consider it biased, either. It is just conjecture on my part so it really doesn't matter.

Again FWIW: I'd only drink with you if you let me buy the first one...

Racquetball League Tonight And I Gotta Go Regards,

Joe S.
 
What do you think might have happened the past 8 years had Gore gotten in...AND what if John Kerry had been elected POTUS and ran the country the past 4 years?

Anxiously awaiting word from Helpy Helperson.

UB
UB -

I don't think electing either VP Gore would have prevented 9/11. I think with the dismal military experience in Africa, VP Gore would have been more willing to focus on Afganistan and not Iraq. Few experienced Commanders want a two front war. In order to go into Afganistan, properly, it may have cost as much in our precious blood but perhaps not as much in our tax dollars.

Sen. Kerry would have, I think, again focused on Afganistan where UBL was hiding.

...but who really knows Bill...it's all conjecture.

I don't know who I'm voting for yet. I don't think we have a real bumper crop of choices so I'm not going to eliminate anyone just yet.

What I'm really waiting for is someone to stand up and lead. You know?

Not Holding My Breath Regards,

Joe S.
 
Please help me better understand how you link Senator Obama and Adolf Hitler.

Kind Regards,

Joe S.
Ok Joe S. My comparison:

They both ( Hitler and Obama) want(ed) radical change and both base their change around socialist principles.

Does anyone really want the Government making choices for them. We have the FREEDOM of choice. When the government steps in we don't. We have the right to bear arms. If Senator Barrack Hussien Obama has his way that right will no longer be our right or even choice. A Lost freedom. He also wants a government health care. This is fraught with problems not the least of which would be the lost of the freedom to decide on your own health care.
Hussien Ossama wants to tax the rich heavily. Translate that into penalize those who are industrious and ambitious and reward those who aren't by giving them more incentives to be unambitious and to get on the welfare train. So then the government takes away that freedom as well. They decide how much you can make...socialism...little by littel...step by step...maybe Hussien Obama won't be that "Hitler" type but every freedom we surrender to the liberal nuts who haven't thought past the election we head down that roads towards dictatorship. Radical you say...but then the people of Germany thought so in the 20's not so much in the late 30's but by then the die was cast.

Those who do not learn from the past are destined to repeat it.

Vote for Freedom. Vote for less Government control. Vote for personal responsibility.


My views anyway.

Rebut me all you want but please don't call me names that only shows your ignorance.
 
I am not a Obama supporter......but, come on. To mention Obama and Hitler in the same sentance is terrible. Hitler slaughtered 6 MILLION Jews, 10 MILLION Russians and several million allied forces. To say that there are ANY similarities between the two is a travesty.
 
We have the right to bear arms. If Senator Barrack Hussien Obama has his way that right will no longer be our right or even choice. A Lost freedom..

While I have no political affiliation, I do listen to what people have to say. We all have our differing opinions about everything. But I keep hearing Obama is against owning guns. I came across this page on Obama's website about this issue. http://www.barackobama.com/issues/additional/Obama_FactSheet_Western_Sportsmen.pdf

So where does everyone keep coming up with him taking our guns?

Just trying to figure out who to vote for regards.....
 
While I have no political affiliation, I do listen to what people have to say. We all have our differing opinions about everything. But I keep hearing Obama is against owning guns. I came across this page on Obama's website about this issue. http://www.barackobama.com/issues/additional/Obama_FactSheet_Western_Sportsmen.pdf

So where does everyone keep coming up with him taking our guns?

Just trying to figure out who to vote for regards.....

Sorry Mary, but no golden star for you. This is an Obama follower propagandist. When you read where Obama has joined the NRA, you 'might' then believe he will fight for the 2nd amendment of the constitution. Just because a President will swear on the Bible to uphold the Constitution of the USA, doesn't mean they will. Some have actually lied about that.

But if you're not a member of the NRA, you might not be as informed about the myriad of gun laws that the anti-gun crowd attempt to have passed almost constantly, in a variety of forms.

UB
 
While I have no political affiliation, I do listen to what people have to say. We all have our differing opinions about everything. But I keep hearing Obama is against owning guns. I came across this page on Obama's website about this issue. http://www.barackobama.com/issues/ad..._Sportsmen.pdf

So where does everyone keep coming up with him taking our guns?
If the purpose of the 2nd Ammendment is to allow Americans just enough guns to hunt and plink targets then you could make the argument that Obama is a supporter of the 2nd Ammendment. But the 2nd Ammendment isn't about hunting and Obama, IMO, is far from a supporter. He is for a permanent assault weapons ban (whatever those are) and has voted to limit gun purchases to one per month.


What I'm really wondering is how if someone like John McCain (who has had unspeakable horror visited upon him in defense of the country) can find a moderate position does the leadership of right wing of the republican party (who largely lack his direct personal experience) ever stop to think maybe THEY are out of touch.
I'm not getting your notion that McCain's POW past somehow conveys upon him the mantle of True Conservative or makes him any more or less right than anyone else. If the base of the GOP wants to keep Bush's tax cuts in place and McCain doesn't then McCain is right because he spent time in the Hanoi Hilton? Maybe the GOP should have let socialist Kurt Vonnegut write the GOP party platform...afterall, he was a POW, too. ;)
 
This is an Obama follower propagandist.
Or someone telling the truth as they know it. There are several cites, at least one that I know of that is non-aligned, that posts similar things about Senator Obama.

Just because a President will swear on the Bible to uphold the Constitution of the USA, doesn't mean they will. Some have actually lied about that.
They sure have, Bill. How's that 4th Amendment thing working out?

I am frequently shocked but no longer amazed by those that advocate change because of changing times in one area (warrentless searches) but decry the extension of that when the exact same logic is applied in a different area (guns).

Change happens. It is inevitable. It has always happened and will always happen. It is the natural law. Living things that do not change are doomed. Ask the dinosars (No, Jerry, not you...:) ).

I think it is very possible that the gun laws in this country ARE going to change. Perhaps not now. Perhaps not in 50 years. But they are going to change. At the current rate, the larger portion of the non-gun owing population is going to demand it at some point. A smart group of people, like many of us and even some of the leadership of the NRA, should be out in front of the issue and try an influence the scope and direction of that change. Failure to attempt to influence the scope and direction of the change now will result in all of us being steamrolled by it later.

The outcome of District of Columbia v. Heller, 07-290 should give us a good idea of if, when and how fast.

Gun Owning Regards,

Joe S.
 
Hi John,

Good to cye you again. (Cye, v. 1. to acknowledge someone on the internet. i.e., "Will I be cyeing you on-line tonight?") ((I just made this up, think it will catch on?))

If the purpose of the 2nd Ammendment is to allow Americans just enough guns to hunt and plink targets then you could make the argument that Obama is a supporter of the 2nd Ammendment. But the 2nd Ammendment isn't about hunting and Obama, IMO, is far from a supporter. He is for a permanent assault weapons ban (whatever those are) and has voted to limit gun purchases to one per month.
Come on, Hew. Do you really think we should be able to go into our local gun store and buy an M-4 with a bunch of high capacity mags and armour piercing ammo incase we are attacked by a heard of rabid rabbits? But this isn't about what we need, is it? This is really about a fear of what happens AFTER we let "them" prevent us from buying whatever gun we want whenever we want it. This is about the fear of "Where do they stop?" They are going to get my great-great-grandfathers damascus barrelled side-by-side. That is what this is really about, isn't it? Just own up to it and we can take the next step. :)

I'm not getting your notion that McCain's POW past somehow conveys upon him the mantle of True Conservative or makes him any more or less right than anyone else. If the base of the GOP wants to keep Bush's tax cuts in place and McCain doesn't then McCain is right because he spent time in the Hanoi Hilton? Maybe the GOP should have let socialist Kurt Vonnegut write the GOP party platform...afterall, he was a POW, too. ;)
I don't think Senator McCain's POW past conveys on him the mantle of True Conservative. I DO THINK Senator McCain's POW past conveys on him a realistic appreciation for this country that no other candidate can come close to matching. I think his time "tied up" (I loved it when he used that line...) helped him to better see what we do well and not so well. An honest person knows that we, as a country, can improve on some things. There are a lot of positions that I don't like about Senator McCain, immigration for one. But I can understand how he feels the way he does.

Again, Hew, you are back to the base. It can't be about finding one person to appeal (pander?) to the base of one political party. It HAS to be about finding someone that can appeal to the majority of the people in the country. We spend a lot of time, effort, energy and money fighting against each other and precious little time fighting for each other in our internal debates.

No, Senator McCain isn't right about the tax cuts because he spent time in the Hilton. He is right because it is difficult to have guns AND butter at the level we currently have the guns. I like the tax cut, too...but my kids are 20 and 22 and I'd rather leave them in better shape.

Hew, we are spending about $2 billion a week on the War. Do you think, with all we are facing in the terms of social security, education, health care and infrastructure that this is the best use of tax dollars? Even you have got to admit we got suckered on Iraq...

I like Prime Rib. Have any nice Prime Rib places down your way?

Take Care My Friend Regards,

Joe S.
 
Or someone telling the truth as they know it. There are several cites, at least one that I know of that is non-aligned, that posts similar things about Senator Obama.



They sure have, Bill. How's that 4th Amendment thing working out?

I am frequently shocked but no longer amazed by those that advocate change because of changing times in one area (warrentless searches) but decry the extension of that when the exact same logic is applied in a different area (guns).

Change happens. It is inevitable. It has always happened and will always happen. It is the natural law. Living things that do not change are doomed. Ask the dinosars (No, Jerry, not you...:) ).

I think it is very possible that the gun laws in this country ARE going to change. Perhaps not now. Perhaps not in 50 years. But they are going to change. At the current rate, the larger portion of the non-gun owing population is going to demand it at some point. A smart group of people, like many of us and even some of the leadership of the NRA, should be out in front of the issue and try an influence the scope and direction of that change. Failure to attempt to influence the scope and direction of the change now will result in all of us being steamrolled by it later.

The outcome of District of Columbia v. Heller, 07-290 should give us a good idea of if, when and how fast.

Gun Owning Regards,

Joe S.


ALL OF US won't be steamrolled, Joe. I'll be pushing up daisies a long time before the change you propose takes place in this country. Matter of fact, more folks in our "fly-over" country are getting 'concealed carry' licenses, so we can start policing our public places that the PC folks seem to think will be handled by the unseen police.

With drug addiction running rampant everywhere, why would you wish upon basically law abiding folks, their guns be melted down? Does the continent of Australia ring a bell?

Please don't bring up the Nation's Capitol as any benchmark of gun control at work. It's the most obvious failure that could be illustrated, and why the only one's noticing are the criminals is beyond me. Do you have any pride in D.C. Joe? Those inhabitants are almost all democrats, right? I would expect them to all be on the cutting edge of illusional, wishful thinking. If not, what on earth possessed them to put Marion Barry into the mayor's office again?

While I can respect your views on what the democratic party once was, I too am frequently shocked by otherwise basically intelligent folks that can argue for that group of misfits in this century. I'm not amazed at the elderly from the Roosevelt era pulling the handle for that party. Like my father, they were born into it, much like their choice of religion.

But when I question them about the various factions that make up that group these days, they are ready to slap my face for even mentioning it. They have their best ostrich costume on. They are so filled with the class envy that is constantly being promoted by your party, they can't even discuss the issues. They will in the same breath, cuss out the oil companies, and tell me how their 401K's are soaring. And when I point out how many shares of oil companies are in their portfolio, they are incredulous. Go figure.

I wish you and your boys well, Joe. I hope they never have to become part of the military. It's never any fun, regardless of how you are serving, or where. But I am damned thankful that our nation has taken the fight to the Middle East, and not sat back and waited until we got innundated with the enemy on our soil.

I know you were only conjecturing, Joe...and so now am I, but I'm betting we would have had a form of a real "Jericho" in the USA, had either of those two names I mentioned earlier been in charge.

BTW, my phone has never been tapped, has yours? My 4th amendment rights are working fine. Guess it must just be your ox getting gored.

No beer, Joe...strictly bourban or Chianti.

UB
 
If you look at Obama's site, he is certainly a supporter of Second Amendment rights. I would guess that he is for reasonable Second Amendment rights. The NRA would like everyone to be able to carry armor piercing bullets and bazookas. If prohibiting those is gun control, I would suspect that the vast majority of Americans are for gun control!

You Obama bashers better get used to the name, in November it will be President Obama. America does not want another four years of Bush's pitiful policies.
 
If you look at Obama's site, he is certainly a supporter of Second Amendment rights. I would guess that he is for reasonable Second Amendment rights. The NRA would like everyone to be able to carry armor piercing bullets and bazookas. If prohibiting those is gun control, I would suspect that the vast majority of Americans are for gun control!

You Obama bashers better get used to the name, in November it will be President Obama. America does not want another four years of Bush's pitiful policies.
I am presently reading the current issue of American Spectator - which contains several articles on the subject of Property Rights. One sentence stood out " The Red threat stopped in 1991 & the Greens began their assault in 1992". One of the biggest threats to property rights is the regulation for the "good of the people" without compensation for the landowner's loss of value.

If there ever was a thought about "reasonable" restrictions - most moderate people would probably agree - but the people that run these organizations dedicated to removing gun rights will never stop until all guns are regulated/removed from personal possession & they have a government contract to support their "unproductive" life style on the backs of the taxpayers.

If it's President McCain will you promise to leave for a country like Cuba where there are no personal guns &/or personal freedoms. Sounds as if that is what you prefer.
 
Sorry Mary, but no golden star for you. This is an Obama follower propagandist. When you read where Obama has joined the NRA, you 'might' then believe he will fight for the 2nd amendment of the constitution. Just because a President will swear on the Bible to uphold the Constitution of the USA, doesn't mean they will. Some have actually lied about that.

But if you're not a member of the NRA, you might not be as informed about the myriad of gun laws that the anti-gun crowd attempt to have passed almost constantly, in a variety of forms.

UB
Hey Uncle Bill... Pretty sure I don't need a gold star for my glorious internet find. I was just asking. My husband is a lifetime member of NRA, and a Republican, but since I am getting the big "D", I am not up on anything, and I admit have been to distracted to pay close attention to politics. I just happened to do a fabulous hairdo on a democrat and I asked her about his views on guns. So she told me about going to his site.

Anyhow, I just wanted to know the scoop and so I posted what came off his site. Makes sense that if he really was for keeping guns, he would be a member of NRA.

In the middle.......
 
Come on, Hew. Do you really think we should be able to go into our local gun store and buy an M-4 with a bunch of high capacity mags and armour piercing ammo incase we are attacked by a heard of rabid rabbits?
No. I really thinkg that we should be able to go into our local gun store and buy an M-4 with high cap mags because we are law abiding citizens with rights conveyed upon us by the 2nd Ammendment to do so.

I DO THINK Senator McCain's POW past conveys on him a realistic appreciation for this country that no other candidate can come close to matching. I think his time "tied up" (I loved it when he used that line...) helped him to better see what we do well and not so well.
Sorry. The notion that McCain sees better what we do well and not so well because he was a POW blows over my head like a Randy Johnson fastball.

Hew, we are spending about $2 billion a week on the War. Do you think, with all we are facing in the terms of social security, education, health care and infrastructure that this is the best use of tax dollars? Even you have got to admit we got suckered on Iraq...
The notion that the war in Iraq is a drain on the economy and it robs other worthy programs of needed funds is a canard. In fact, the war has very little practical impact on our economy. In 2007 the entire military budget comprised 4% of our nation's GDP; still among the lowest percentages in this country's history. I've read estimates that the war in Iraq, specifically, accounts for 1% of our GDP. By comparison, WWII took 38%, Korea 14% and 9% for Vietnam. It's funny that some politicians want to pretend that the war is robbing our kids of schoolbooks, the border of a fence, or free health care to children attending private school and living in $400k houses, but have ZERO problems with massive entitlements and govt. handouts (which comprise a vastly higher % of the federal budget than does the war in Iraq). They never seemed to have qualms about reaching into other people's wallets to pay for PBS, NPR, NEA, etc. Paying for bullets for soldiers protecting Iraqi or Afghani children from being beheaded by thugs: BAD. Paying for Bill Moyers' leftist pablum on PBS and govt. subsidized "art" of plastic Jesus dolls suspended in mason jars of piss: GOOD.
 
Gang related crimes happen through out this country from time to time.
Often they will break into a residence on a hunch of finding a snitch and end up confronting the entire family, in whom may be totally innocent.

To think you have to use a blow gun to protect yourself is comical.

The fact that the real potential of 3 or 4 thugs are tresspassing in my house at 3 in the morning carrying oozies is enough reason for me to have the right to mount a 50 caliber auto to my bed post. Along with a missle launcher just in case they try to escape in their stolen vehical.

We need to get back to quickly executing justice whether in the field or in the courts.
That would fix alot of problems in a hurry for almost no cost. Simple and effective

It would help people understand that they need to behave theirselves.

Same for our borders. The cost would be insignificant and the results would be incredibly effective.
Pete
 
Gang related crimes happen through out this country from time to time.
Often they will break into a residence on a hunch of finding a snitch and end up confronting the entire family, in whom may be totally innocent.

To think you have to use a blow gun to protect yourself is comical.

The fact that the real potential of 3 or 4 thugs are tresspassing in my house at 3 in the morning carrying oozies is enough reason for me to have the right to mount a 50 caliber auto to my bed post. Along with a missle launcher just in case they try to escape in their stolen vehical.
These are the people using guns illegally. Gun control isn't going to stop them. These photos were taken in front of a house I know, next to a truck that belonged to me. The kid in the middle had just been jumped in. After being willingly beaten, he then had to rob someone. The person on the left is Gabriel Clark-Aignor who was the leader of the GTS, and the person on the right is Timothy Becket (Gabes brother).

Aside from the gun control isse, what does each candidate stand when it comes to gang control....

Image

Image
 
There is the risk of an innocent person getting killed crossing the street,,,so therefore should we limit transpertation to bicycles. Oh sorry people fall off bikes and die every year.

When will this insanity end.

I have the right to protect myself and family from anyone anywhere,,and in anyway possible. Chainsaws,brush hogs ,wood chippers,,,toenail clippers or cuticle sissors,,,,it should matter.



When 911 happened I guess we should have just ate it. Or maby wag our finger at the extremists. Or is wagging your finger considered harrassment and encouraging re-ingagement. in which case we should outlaw it. Hell,, God forbid we try to kill one of them and an innocent bystander gets knocked over and scrapes his knee.

There will always be crime and there always was. But if you treat violent crimes as if they were violent you would make it less attractive to engage in. And you would save big money and rid the earth of scumbags

Everyone has civil rights except the honest guy that minds his own buisness. How dare he try to protect himself and possibly injure or kill an innocent member of his family by tring to stop an intruder.

So in order to protect our family or society it is best to bend over and take it.,,, after all somebody may get hurt.
 
No. I really thinkg that we should be able to go into our local gun store and buy an M-4 with high cap mags because we are law abiding citizens with rights conveyed upon us by the 2nd Ammendment to do so.
Techinally the 2nd Amendment or anything in the Constitution does not convey any rights upon us. The Founders recognized that we are born with rights and the Constitution was written as a set of rules for what government can do. The Founders so distrusted the power of goverment that the "Bill of Rights" was enacted to specifically enumerate those rights that goverment may not infringe upon.
 
21 - 40 of 60 Posts