McCain Plays Dirty By Choosing a Woman as His VP

OK. I guess I'm the opposite - I tend to distrust most things that are virally promoted, especially on the web, so it's my normal thing to investigate before buying. I have seen literally hundreds of like smears, posted as truth on this and many other forums, and it gets old, at least to me. I misread where you were regarding this notion of Obama's "terrorism," and I apologize.

 

Yes, politics are dirty,I wish Obama win the campaign.

 

Never did I say that, the arguments you are using smell of propaganda normally stated by the christian right, simple facts.

A gun does not equate to ones views on owning a gun, having an opinion that is as ridiculous as above is exactly why anti gun nuts bash people for owning guns as they somehow think it makes them something they are not. Owning a gun does not make your views anymore powerful than mine on the 2nd amendment, to say otherwise is simply foolish.

Just because a rich yuppy owns a 70 chevelle LS6 in mint condition does not make him know more or support the car more than a mechanic who is in love with the vehicle, just for one reason or another does not have one.

Not at all, owning a gun does not in anyway shape or form alter the 'support' or my position on gun ownership. To me your logic is nothing more than penis envy.

So they drop their principles to support a man many said they could never support, glad to see how 'principled' those people are. I myself will give my vote to someone I actually believe in, more than likely it will be a write in.

McCain, oh how I stuck up for him. Until he rolled over for Bush, until he showed no back bone on so many things, until I learned of his backwards thinking on many items, 'btw he doesn't own a single gun, using your logic he's not very 2nd amendment ' until his true stance on immigration was known. I simply can not support the man anymore, I will not sell out my principles like others.

I thought morals was such a huge issue though?....

 

She's a great conservative, we should drill oil up in America & she wants that to happen. We have to stop getting our oil from other countries. This would also make gas prices very cheap because we're not buying it from TI countries.

 

What do we do when we run out of oil? Higher costs in the US for manufacturing/mining/drilling can also create higher costs than buying from abroad.

 

What do we do when our sources run out? Have no oil? Even though we are standing right over it - most democrats will try to stand up for our Oil sources right now, which (in my opinion) is a dumb decision.

 

That entirely made no sense, nor did it answer the question.

 

Ive noticed that about you, i find myself needing to be more like that, i just hate to have to think that the majority of information available are lies.

We both believe in the second amendment, I am actively participating in this right, you are not. To me, (sorry if you dont agree), but that means i am more pro gun than you and even McCain (which doesnt own a gun now, but did in the past). You have a view on the second amendment, i participate in the right. Apparently it means more to me than you. You can get a gun for less than a couple hundred bucks, a 70 chevelle will cost you a bit more than that, not a very equal example there, but if the man that was in love with it could get it, im pretty sure he would buy the car.

Now if there is some reason why you do not own a gun, like say a felony, or perhaps your wife wont allow it, then fine, but you talk as if you dont have a gun, and dont really care to obtain one, hince your defending that you dont have one.

If you really cared about the second amendment, and were able, you would own a gun




Morals are a huge issue, but not everyone is perfect. And having morals is a basic conscience that helps make a decision. I want my candidate to have a conscience that tell him to protect life, the constitution, and the American way of life.

I would imagine by that time we would have alternatives, but we need help now, not tomorrow!!

I feel we do need to dig in Alaska, in the gulf, and where ever we can until its gone, but in the meantime we need to be searching and developing alternate sources.

 

Totally and absolutely false. To own a gun does not make anyone have a more pro gun stance than the actual stance of an individual, to be pro 2nd amendment does not require gun ownership, owning a gun does not make you have more constitutionally based views on gun ownership than me, nor does it mean you know more on the subject than me.

With your logic I can not support gays to be gay if they want to unless I am gay. I can support an issue just as much if not more than someone, I can actively participate in the 2nd amendment by standing up for citizens rights to own a gun, gun ownership is not a requirement.

I have owned guns, I know how to use them. I simply have no reason to have one ATM.

To own a gun does not for a minute make you more pro gun, all it does is feed the anti gun nuts opinion on gun owners, that they believe owning a gun makes them something it does not.

BTW a mechanic could easily rebuild the chevelle if he chose to, money would not necessarily be the reason he did not have the car, but nice try.

Ahh yes the so called morals that most who claim 'morals' over and over do not actually have. You can not have the 'American' way of life w/o the constitution, I do not believe either candidate brings to the table 'protecting the American way of life'

We could have a real solution now, too bad so many are willing to sell out their principles at every step. I myself will not

BTW digging now wont bring relief 'now' if it ever would. It's simply amazing that all those who are 'drill, drill, drill' don't even know the simple facts of this reality.

 

You have your opinion, i have mine. Mine just makes more since. And i never said "require" . I said if you own a gun, the second amendment means more to you than if you dont, plain and simple.

If you lose your right to own a gun.... How will that effect you personally? It wouldn't, because you dont have any guns. However it would effect me, therefore making it more important to me. Are you too blind to see that?

You can support them all you want, but Gay Rights will mean much more to them (homosexuals) than you. Dont you think a gay person cares more for gay rights than one who wasnt?

Really, so you dont have the need to defend yourself and home, but you believe more in the second amendment than me? Makes a lot of since Grim.

And if a man loved the car enough, and was able, he would do it.PERIOD.

 

No actually it doesn't it gives you something to hold onto tightly, you didn't say 'require' you surely stated it does require to be as big of a pro gun person as yourself and you continue to do so, the meaning is there even if you did not specifically state 'require'.

Ahh but you are wrong again, it would effect me personally. Just because I do not own a gun now does not equal I might not want to own one in the future. Just because I do not protest now does not equate if we lose our right to do so it would 'not effect me' You are using a failed stance of 'I own a gun so I care more about guns than you' trying to totally bypass your actual stance on the issue. Is your stance so weak on the issue that you have to fall back to 'I own a gun you do not'?

Nope not at all, I care about the government staying out of peoples business. They might have more to lose, it does not equate to someone not caring as much as them. 'more to lose' and 'caring about something' are two different things. I also fear the domino effect, making me care for things that do not personally effect me today much more than many people who it would actually immediately effect as I see what can happen if they themselves lose their rights in the immediate time frame.

Here you honestly put the nail in your coffin, you've shown that you care more about owning a gun than you do about the 2nd amendment. Where I care more about the 2nd amendment than I do about owning a gun, they are separate believe it or not and you are showing a classic example of it, a classic example of why if we lose the 2nd amendment we will.

The 2nd is not there for 'defending yourself' in your home. That aspect does get grand fathered in so to speak, that however is not the primary intent. I BTW do not need a gun to 'defend myself' I am more than capable w/o one.

I care far more about the constitution, it's meaning, keeping it the way it is today than I do about my own personal self carrying a fire arm. I'm sorry to say you do not, a clear case of yes I am more pro 2nd amendment than you are, you are more 'it's my gun and I'm keeping it' I am more for reading the constitution as it is and granting those rights and powers to the people, protecting those rights even if I do not currently actively participate in said right as I may some day need or choose to do so.

Owning a gun does not make one knowledgeable in the constitution, nor does it make one pro constitution or 2nd amendment other than 'I gots me a gun' unless they have an argument and stance to back it up. You my friend do not have the knowledge, argument nor stance to back it up, gun or no gun.

Not necessarily, perhaps he loves his family more and decided to put the money into something such as his pesky children's college fund when he sold the car You do not look into things more than the surface do you?

 

I will close this pointless argument with...Your full of crap, have a nice day

 

So in other words your stance is that weak other than 'you gots you a gun'

Good to hear, keep the 'crap a flowing'

 

How is your opinion and simply123's different? Eluding to the notion that you are more "pro gun" than he is, because you don't own a gun, isn't any different that calling him out for believing he is more "pro gun" because he does own a weapon.

What makes you believe you are more "pro gun," other than just saying it?

I own a gun. Am I less "pro gun" than you are, because you do not?

Not a very good argument. It shouldn't be a penis contest, nor should the "Christian right" and bashing "pro gun" owners be an issue. If you don't want to own a gun, that's your right. If you do want to own a gun, that's your right too.

Here's at least one difference (a very substantial difference) between Kerry and Bush on gun control:

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/09/07/eveningnews/main641730.shtml

 

I am for everyone's right to own a gun.*


* except for some classes of convicted felons, and those who do not have the mental capacity to use or own them safely.

 

If you've called your wife the c-word in public then the issue isn't about whether you're not a human being, it's about how big an asshole you are. Why are you giving excuses for a man who is an elected official, who claims to run on a platform of values, the latitude to say that to his wife where it was recorded by journalists? I would never do that and any man that claims to have morals and decency would never have done it.

A man that verbally assaults his wife doesn't get pardoned because he uses the excuse "I was human" or "I acted out of anger." McCain's history shouldn't be whitewashed either.

I despise politicians that have this "do as I say, not as I do" attitude. McCain is such a politician.

 

Did McCain actually call his wife that, or is it just more rumors/smears?

Where is the audio clip?

 

#1 I've still got you on ignore, glancing at posts I can only assume are posted to me. Lets look at this shall we. Simplyg stated the following to me.

With my pro gun stance why on earth would someone ask me such a question?

Let's not bold to try to make a point shall we, I state 'more than likely' as in most cases I am about as extreme as it comes to pro 2nd amendment, of which I believe it's been proven in this thread pretty simple and to the point.

I never stated I am more pro gun 'because I don't own a gun' owning a gun is not a reason one way or the other has been my argument all along, why are you continuing to try to twist things?

Hmm I believe I have stated as much.

Not only from this but my continued pro 2nd amendment stance, above and beyond the normal weak NRA stance, above and beyond 'I gots me a gun'

Again why are you twisting? My entire argument the entire time has been owning or not owning a gun does not equate to somebodies stance on the 2nd amendment, how far one is willing to go, how far their stance is. You are trying to use Simplyg's argument as an argument against me which is simply illogical.

Please again see above, he is the one who decided to question me to the point thinking I was anti gun ownership.

A simple fact that the items he continued to bring up are parroted by many in the Christian right, that is not 'bashing' that is simple facts.

Of course there are going to be differences, the point was on the assault weapons ban.. Kerry could be for strengthening it, the point was many continued to falsely claim in the past that Bush was for getting rid of it and Kerry was for keeping it, where the falsehood lies.

--- at the end of the day their stance is pretty much the same with very trivial differences. Both of them I disagree with...

 

Makes me none difference, either way. Just makes it easier for me to disagree when I see what I believe is a double standard. Respond, or don't.

Depends on who you believe you are. Do you believe everyone knows what's going on in your mind? Are you famous enough that you believe everyone should automatically know what you believe? That's seem a bit self-aggrandizing to me.

I will bold. I believe it makes the point, despite the usual disclaimer such as "more than likely" More than likely. In other words, you do believe you are more progun, and you back it with "more than likely" Not "less than likely." Seems pretty confident to me.

You believe you are more pro gun than he is, and to further illustrate this point, make note that you do not own a gun.

Perhaps it's not everyone else that is "twisiting" things? I can't even begin to count how many times you use the notion of "twisting" with anyone that takes issue with you and doesn't agree with you, word for word. Maybe the problem isn't "everyone else?" Have you ever considered that?

Your opinions are not necessarily facts. I'm confident you believe they are, though. I'm sure I'm not the only one that takes notice of your continued bashing of Christians and opportunities to get a dig on them, even when not warranted. Just an observation.

Pretty simple really. The facts show differently. They are not the same and not close. This is not a trivial difference, to those who truly are "pro gun" and have the intellect to see how adding additional weapons to the ban list is significantly different that not adding any new weapons.

 

Oh really a double standard? Where might I ask? You've proven you like to follow me around like a troll, nothing about 'double standards'

Nope I would not expect someone who does not debate much to know my stance on guns, I however do not appreciate someone making assumptions on something I believe so strongly in.

I am pretty damn confident I am more pro gun, more 2nd amendment than him, I believe it's been proven in this very thread. You do like to bold as you can take emphasis off points that disprove your usual dribble.

Showing yet more reasons I have and will continue to have you on ignore.

I have stated over and over a gun has no bearing on being pro gun or not, are you wearing your reading glasses?

Nope it's not my fault that people like you who have no logical reasoning capability lower themselves to 'twisting' making me point it out. I never stated I am more pro gun because I do not own a gun, yet you continue to claim as such. How about not twisting, how about being a flat out liar, do you like that term better?

Oh so watching TV programs, reading articles in papers, magazines and the net where the religious right makes such claims on a daily basis is an 'opinion' now and not a 'fact'. I am 'bashing Christians' that's funny as I am one.
It's not 'bashing' Christians to simply point out that points being given are brought up by the religious right, far from it.

Actually it is a 'trivial' difference. Both supported the assault weapons ban, both had horrible stances, yet here is good old Gtech, 'mr 2nd amendment' let me put sarcasm there, going to the aid of good old Bush, selling out his principles in order to do so.

Any bill or law has 'trivial differences' slight changes in amounts, slight changes in wordings, that is 'trivial' at the end of the day both supported the assault weapons ban.