It's coming. Are you ready?

Status
Not open for further replies.
SJG, those "mysterious deaths" turned out to be, not to put too fine a point on it, lies. Complete, knowing fabrications of "The Arkansas Project". No matter how many times the truth was told afterwards the evil work had already been done. And you are one of the victims.
Click to expand...

Oh, really? That has to be the best kept secret I never heard of, and given that the MSM never met a Clinton they didn't like, I'm really surprised this wasn't daily front page news.

Suffice it to say it will take more than one guy and a simple statement "No it didn't" to convince me, but I'll be happy to review whatever you consider evidence...feel free to pm me.
 
Snopes.com did a nice job debunking the Clinton deaths thing. I was sucked into that at one point. Snopes is a pretty good resource for making sure you don't parrot stuff that's wrong. I got busted for that one :p
 
realistic voting.

No telling what voting you might have to do in the election but NOW is the time to make the Republicans sweat for their betrayall of conservative values. I'd get in touch with any that are left and bend their ear a bit....or a LOT.

Bush ruined the Republican Party as the home of Conservatism and deserves lots of credit, just like his milktoast, east-coast dad.
 
I personally don't want a woman to be President. I am sorry, but I still believe in chivalry, and a womans place is not at the head of the table. She can be anywhere else she wants, but not there.

When it comes down to it, the President is the one who talks the talk with other countries. That requires an alpha male presence.
 
Sad and true...

Quote: by Blackfork
Bush ruined the Republican Party as the home of Conservatism and deserves lots of credit, just like his milktoast, east-coast dad.
Today 07:35 PM
End Quote...

He had a real opportunity to turn it around before the election and was either too self-absorbed, too stupid; too out of touch with the pulse of America or just plain too arrogant to see that he needed to become a real politician to reverse the momentum against his administration…

I do believe that history will show him ultimately as a pit-bull that had tackled an enormous fight, but was not smart enough to defend his flanks from the hoards of jackals at his heels at home…That is if we have a history after the jihad…

I was in the Philippines earlier this year and it is frightening to understand what potentially can happen to a society that is tolerant of radical religious groups…The outer islands are a death zone for “non-believers”…
 
Our mainstream media is well known for releasing pigeons with great fanfare only to shotgun'em at a convenient time in the future. Since Obama-mania is entirely a creature of the MSM, I want to know why now would they release Obama knowing he will attract unwanted actions in the future?

Team Clinton has a history of proactively dealing with opposition long before the need becomes evident to us mortals. Has MSM released Obama at Team Clinton's urging? Time will tell, won't it?

Yeah, you can call me cynical. It don't make me wrong; just cynical.
 
Not long ago I was listening to liberal talk-show host Jay Marvin on Air America, discussing likely 2008 presidential candidates. He said, "I like Hillary, but I don't think she can win."
 
Snopes.com did a nice job debunking the Clinton deaths thing.
Click to expand...

No no no! Clinton really killed all those people. Just like when he went back in time to enact the '86 machine gun ban.

I personally don't want a woman to be President. I am sorry, but I still believe in chivalry, and a womans place is not at the head of the table. She can be anywhere else she wants, but not there.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I see how all those X chromosomes could get in the way of running a country. :rolleyes:
 
Moderate, you better read this and pray she never gets into real power:
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/AS...kstorenow57-20
Click to expand...
You're kidding, right? Do you learn about all politicians from hit pieces?

I don't believe Hillary can win either (nor would I want her to). She's clearly positioned herself as a hawkish moderate and remains popular in some circles, but for whatever reason there exists a bizarre and irrational distaste, bordering on hatred, for the women among numerous men.

Obama may yet be the 'real deal' - but his eagerness to assimilate into the corporate machine doesn't point that way, and I don't know why he (or anyone else) would be foolish enough to gamble everything on a run with only three years of national exposure.. Didn't John Edwards teach everyone a lesson?
 
She's clearly positioned herself as a hawkish moderate and remains popular in some circles, but for whatever reason there exists a bizarre and irrational distaste, bordering on hatred, for the women among numerous men.
Click to expand...
Because some of us "numerous men" recognize that she's anything but moderate. It's perfectly rational to have a distaste for a socialist who wants to run the country.
 
I find it fantastically depressing that even here, among hardcore gun owners, most people seem to still accept the premise that the right to keep and bear arms is subject to majority opinion and acts of legislation.

I also find it pretty distressing that two years out from the election, the vast majority of y'all are saying, in essence, "Yeah, the Republican candidate will probably suck but I'll vote for him anyway". Instead of simply shrugging and voting for the lesser of two evils, why not make an effort to make sure the guy on the ballot simply isn't evil in the first place?

Normally, I'd expect that role to fall to the Libertarian party, but I would love to be proven wrong. Surely, somewhere within the ranks of the Republican party, there's someone who doesn't suck? And if not, why are you still voting for these people?
 
DocZinn --

I expect you and I believe exactly the same thing for completely opposite reasons. You would say she's a SociaLeftist with some conservative window dressing. I'd say she's a neoConartist with just enough DLC cred to be seen as a moderate. :)
 
and this nation is just not ready to elect a woman.

That said, Barak Obama is black, and this nation is not yet ready to elect a black man yet.

Everyone bristles when I say this, but everyone knows it is true - most people outside of the major urban areas will not vote for a non-White, non-Christian non-male.
Click to expand...

I don't know. I believe you're sort of right.. people in rural or semi-rural areas may be more discriminatory and refuse to vote for them because of race or sex. But those people in rural or semirural areas tend to vote republican anyway, so will it really impact and take away enough from the democratic vote to make any difference? Those urban places in their respective states have a large portion of the states population and often nearly run the state. Most of the most powerful states in terms of electoral votes are liberal as well.
 
Because some of us "numerous men" recognize that she's anything but moderate. It's perfectly rational to have a distaste for a socialist who wants to run the country.
Click to expand...

The most 'radical' piece of Hillary's agenda was universal healthcare - a plan so far from socialized medicine (being a monetary gift to the same HMOs and insurance co's taking their vig today) that the left has been pissed for 13 years. Even if she had proposed legitimate, workable healthcare - that's what Big Business is going to force on you eventually anyway. Wal-Mart (etc.) doesn't want to foot the bill for worker healthcare, pensions and health expenses have crippled American automakers - it's no longer, really, an ideological question, it's an economic issue.

That aside, there's nothing rational about describing anyone to the left of Dubya as a pinko commie Leninist. It's absurd - Hillary went from being a Randroid in college to a neo-liberal yuppie in the '70s and '80s. Remember Whitewater? Shady land deals?
 
When it comes down to it, the President is the one who talks the talk with other countries. That requires an alpha male presence
Click to expand...
.

*blink* *blink*

I’m telling Maggie Thatcher on you!

Yes, the US would and could elect a woman or black president. Add to that that Hillary goes in with most of the Left and East Coast under her belt and you are only a few Electoral College votes away from a nightmare.

If she is elected with a Dem Senate and House, she will go full bore left as soon as it's poetically feasible. And the laws she gets passed, gun related or not, will NOT have sunsets.
 
The laws she gets passed that have no sunsets are bound to be un-Constitutional. That will be true whether the sitting SCOTUS says they are or not. Do with this information what you will.
 
When it comes down to it, the President is the one who talks the talk with other countries. That requires an alpha male presence.
Click to expand...
Eeek!
I'm thinkin' Golda Meir displayed some pretty sizable cojones on many an occasion while leading Israel through some tough years ... As did Mrs. Thatcher in the U.K.

How 'bout a black woman? I've seen Condaleeza Rice in person, and given the paucity of viable candidates in the Republican party, I'd vote for her over many other alpha dogs ...
 
"Alpha males" like Indira Gandhi, Golda Meier, Vigdís Finnbogadóttir, Margaret Thatcher, Angela Merkel...
 
NWO-gun-banning-gulag-building-under-a-private-government-contract
totalitarians in one generation or two.....
Click to expand...

Under Shrubus Minimus we have all of that except for the gun bans.

NWO? Check. See PNAC which folded up its tent and said "Our work here is done."

Gulag-building? Check. Built by KBR and already staffed for "special projects" at the POTUS' pleasure.

Totalitarians? Check. Yoo, Gonzalez, Cheney and Shrubus Minimus all agree that there can be no curbs on the Unitary Executive's authority and that they have the extra-constitutional power to interpret the law. They have also arrogated to themselves the power to declare anyone a non-person. In fact, if we take Ashcroft's words at face value they can kill any US citizen with impunity since "unlawful enemy combatants" may be killed anywhere and anytime purely on Executive whim and the POTUS can declare anyone an enemy combatant.

Gun banning? Not yet. Gun owners are still useful tools. Trot out a flag once in a while, hold up a gun, and press the flesh with the NRA and they'll vote for whomever you want.
 
When the US military has been broken by our domestic leaders in accordance
with bringing them under the global banner, the use for American gun-owners
ceases. From that point on the screws get tightened.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

H
  • Locked
It's official....AWB is DEAD!!!!!!!!!!!!
2
Replies
47
Views
3K
Robert J McElwain
R
P
  • Locked
Is a Clinton & Clinton 2008 ticket possible?
2
Replies
28
Views
1K
Art Eatman
A
G
  • Locked
Gun bills may trigger split
2
Replies
28
Views
3K
Michigander
M
C
  • Locked
GOP Will Let Assault Weapon Ban Expire...(multiple threads)
2 3
Replies
54
Views
1K
LawDog
L
R
  • Locked
Third party votes will kill the Second Amendment
Replies
9
Views
660
Art Eatman
A
Back
Top