haha, that's great! I remember when he did that, that was some quick shooting.
haha, that's great! I remember when he did that, that was some quick shooting.
My signature
You'd think that a guy in the spot light for as many years as he has been, would know not to make funny faces and do awkward things...
SI VIS PACEM PARABELLUM
Scott, thanks for the link, I remember seeing this email earlier and checking snopes. Always a great place to check up on these emails. I was meaning to get to that...
Anyways, I'm not surprised that most of that stuff is bogus. That being said, I think there still are many issues against both candidates that are very valid that need to be looked at.
Like I said earlier, Obama's "spread the wealth" stance is a dangerous one. Competition is the driving force in everything, even in evolution. The weak/lazy lion will not survive and will be killed to kicked out of the pack. If the weak/lazy lion is allowed to 'mooch' off of the strong/ambitious lions, he can still breed with the pack, and create another generation of weak/lazy lions. It is a disease, granted, a curable one.
Now, I'm not saying by any extent of the imagination that we should let people starve, or kick them out. What I am saying is that we need to realize that by handing out money to those who have not earned it will hurt them more than it will be good for them. As with any thing like this, it WILL help some get out of ruts and become more successful, but the numbers will be far fewer.
It is paramount to the survival of this country that we realize 'redistribution of wealth' will only cause more class warfare. "well the rich can still give ME more money..."
It will also create a sense of entitlement, as if that's not already a problem in this country...
As the saying goes: "Give a man a fish and you feed him for a day; teach a man to fish and you feed him for life"
The other issue about Obama that frightens me is his views on the 2nd amendment. He stated in his acceptance speech:
"The reality of gun ownership may be different for hunters in rural Ohio than for those plagued by gang-violence in Cleveland, but don't tell me we can't uphold the Second Amendment while keeping AK-47s out of the hands of criminals"
Sounds logical and well stated, I won't argue there. There is nothing wrong with that statement. However, a look at his voting record says something entirely different:
* Ok for states & cities to determine local gun laws. (Apr 2008) So, does that mean the same can be done for the 1st amendment?
* FactCheck: Yes, Obama endorsed Illinois handgun ban. (Apr 2008)
* Respect 2nd Amendment, but local gun bans ok. (Feb 2008) Once again, can states, cities, etc ban free speech?
* Provide some common-sense enforcement on gun licensing. (Jan 2008)
* 2000: cosponsored bill to limit purchases to 1 gun per month. (Oct 2007) Why one gun a month?
* Concealed carry OK for retired police officers. (Aug 2007) And the rest of us???
* Stop unscrupulous gun dealers dumping guns in cities. (Jul 2007)
* Keep guns out of inner cities--but also problem of morality. (Oct 2006)
* Bush erred in failing to renew assault weapons ban. (Oct 2004) And again, banning assault weapons? Should we ban words?
* Ban semi-automatics, and more possession restrictions. (Jul 1998)
* Voted NO on prohibiting lawsuits against gun manufacturers. (Jul 2005)
http://www.ontheissues.org/domestic/...un_Control.htm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Politic...ma#Gun_control
His actions speak louder than his words. I could write a novel about this, but I'll leave it as it is right now.
Gone but not forgotten: 2004 Tacoma/2006 Fourwheel Camper<br /><br />ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ<br /><br />"Tyrants mistrust the people, hence they deprive them of arms."<br />- Aristotle (384-322 B.C.)
Honestly, I'm solidly in the "none of the above" category myself. I just don't think we should base our decisions on fabrications; so when something like the "50 lies" comes out and no one even thinks to check snoopy, well...
I'm an "old school" republican, and as soon as the party gets back around to those values, I'll be back on board; until then I waffle between the libertarians and the constitutionalists (as do most of you, from what I've read.) Unfortunately neither are a) credible, or b) fully coherent on things like foreign policy (i.e. they scare the poop out of me).
My particular view is no SOB should get a "tax break". Taxes are the funds needed to cover government spending. You want lower taxes, don't ask for the government to spend so gosh darn much. (Candidate match, neither). I can't stand the fact that candidates spend so much freaking time on that, but I understand people are stupid, and don't realize there's no such thing as a free lunch.
ahem... well, that's enough of that.
Scott
2017 blue 4runner ORP / Shrockwork sliders, RCI skids, and a small pile of not-yet-installed bits.
(Proud recipient of $22,000 in damage within the first five months of ownership. Darnit.)
is there a "snopes" to check on sites like snopes.com?
My signature
I don't really think there should be any tax "breaks" either, the opportunities and convenience we have in this country do not come free. My beef is, like you, spending.Originally Posted by scottiac
Honestly, I'm solidly in the "none of the above" category myself. I just don't think we should base our decisions on fabrications; so when something like the "50 lies" comes out and no one even thinks to check snoopy, well...
I'm an "old school" republican, and as soon as the party gets back around to those values, I'll be back on board; until then I waffle between the libertarians and the constitutionalists (as do most of you, from what I've read.) Unfortunately neither are a) credible, or b) fully coherent on things like foreign policy (i.e. they scare the poop out of me).
My particular view is no SOB should get a "tax break". Taxes are the funds needed to cover government spending. You want lower taxes, don't ask for the government to spend so gosh darn much. (Candidate match, neither). I can't stand the fact that candidates spend so much freaking time on that, but I understand people are stupid, and don't realize there's no such thing as a free lunch.
ahem... well, that's enough of that.
In fact, I would have no problem with the tax bracket the way it is, IF THEY WOULD STOP SPENDING AND START PAYING OFF THE DEBT! I'll happily pay more for taxes than someone who makes less than I do if they stopped spending it like a 16 year old with a credit card.
More and more, I'm really iffy on McCain. Both are leading us down the wrong path. Either way, the thing that I want to step away from is politicians and political sides. Sure we all have our ideologies and beliefs, but in the end we are all US citizens. People may not see eye to eye with me on the gun control issue, or the taxes issue, but so long as we can come to an agreement that we BOTH like, the better off we will all be. Regardless of who wins, Obama or McCain, keep in mind that the other political party still is there and they still have their beliefs and values as well, and they are just as valid in their minds as your opinion is in yours.
One thing that we can all agree on with out a doubt:
"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness."
Gone but not forgotten: 2004 Tacoma/2006 Fourwheel Camper<br /><br />ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ<br /><br />"Tyrants mistrust the people, hence they deprive them of arms."<br />- Aristotle (384-322 B.C.)
is there a "snopes" to check on sites like snopes.com?
"Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?"
Decimus Iunius Iuvenalis
SI VIS PACEM PARABELLUM
Fuster, thanks for the quick language/history lesson.
My signature
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote