I Told You So - No Obama Gun Ban

OK people. You can stop the gun and ammo-buying frenzy. Obama has publicly stated that he does not favor pursuing a ban on AK's. I said this when he was elected: He didn't have the support in a congress intent on pursuing other issues. I got crapped on from a truly enormous height for saying it, yet today the president came out and said plainly that this issue is a non-starter. There isn't support in congress (duh!) for a new ban.

For a truly balanced reportage of the issue, here ios Newsweek:

http://www.newsweek.com/id/193589

Jees, Louise Newsweek! Can you maybe PRETEND to be unbiased?

if TAO says so it must be true. he's going to go through the budget line by line too. and there won't be any pork. as long as schumer, pelosi and reid are in charge i won't trust anything out of DC.

The Newsweek article is typical-- full of half truth and misstatements of "facts".
For instance

. . . "Holder skirted questions about reinstating the assault-weapons ban and also about a gaping loophole that permits people to purchase arms at gun shows without background checks." . . .

I don't know about you, but any gun show I've ever been to you had to go thru a FFL to purchase a new weapon, requiring a background check. Used/second hand weapons could be sold between private parties, just like anywhere else.

The article makes it sound like ALL WEAPONS purchased at gun shows are exempted from the federal purchase/background check requirements.
That's the problem with today's media-- they don't get all the facts before they publish their feature.

Ignorant jerks. And that's being polite.

The Newsweek article is typical-- full of half truth and misstatements of "facts".
That's the problem with today's media-- they don't get all the facts before they publish their feature.

Ignorant jerks. And that's being polite.
They have ALL the facts,they just twist them to fit their socialist,anti-second amendment opinions.And in the end that is what they print-opinions and try and pass them off as truth.Sad part is some people believe it to be truth.td

also about a gaping loophole that permits people to purchase arms at gun shows without background checks." . . .

I don't know about you, but any gun show I've ever been to you had to go thru a FFL to purchase a new weapon, requiring a background check. Used/second hand weapons could be sold between private parties, just like anywhere else.

The article makes it sound like ALL WEAPONS purchased at gun shows are exempted from the federal purchase/background check requirements.
That's the problem with today's media-- they don't get all the facts before they publish their feature.

Ignorant jerks. And that's being polite.

You are absolutely right about them misrepresenting the loophole issue. The loophole in question is native to Virginia, where "occasional sellers" (not sure who determines who is an occasional seller) are allowed to sell firearms without requiring background checks at gun shows. These occasional sellers are certainly in the minority at any of these show. I know this because Mayor Bloomberg in NYC is helping $$ run TV ads in the area.

Well, I don't think the article was saying that he was going to completely drop the issue. He is going to lay quiet (like the snake in the grass he is) until he has the support in congress to get it done. I think all this news publicity of shootings and the Mexican drug cartels are part of Obongo's plans.

He is stating that he isn't going to do anything now (probably because he knows that conservative America wouldn't stand for all these bail-outs and gun control legislation at the same time.) I expect him to try it when the bail-out money stops and things calm down a little in the economy.

He is too sneaky to try and do it all at once. He will probably do it gradually: Pass legislation "aimed at" suppressing the supply of assault weapons getting across the border into Mexico. Then, when that doesn't work (as we know the criminals will always have guns), he will start pushing an assault weapons ban as a stiffer measure to "stop the violence" in Mexico. Then, when that doesn't work, the news media will say nothing or tell us lies twisting the truth to make the blind American sheep believe that gun control has made us safer.

I'm sorry, there is no way that taking honest citizens' rights to purchase assault weapons will make our country any safer. That will only make the honest citizen more vulnerable.

He's not going to try to do it until he has more democrats in congress. That will not happen, and anybody who's been around since Nixon knows this to be true. If he does win a second term, he will immediately begin to lose strength as do all second-term presidents as people forget why they elected him, and become obsessed with trivial issues like his choice of colors in the presidential bathroom, and vote his party out of power.

This happens over and over again. I have seen it at least three times. It happened to Nixon, Reagan, Clinton, and Bush II. You younger people will see it over and over again in yours - if you choose to pay attention instead of becoming obsessed with his choice of colors in the presidential bathroom ...

Don't look now, but some of the predicted legislation is already in the works:



http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c111:H.R.45:



In addition, I don't even really watch the news(I don't like the idea of paying for cable, only to have it piss me off) and I have seen an amount of anti-gun propaganda being dished out lately, that I haven't seen since the Columbine incident. I highly doubt they are spending the money for this for the hell of it. Not to mention that a large number of the people in the Clinton administration that were responsible for a chunk of the events ( Waco, Ruby Ridge, etc.) were appointed again in Washington recently.

I really hope you are right, but it just doesn't look that way from where I stand.

Sucker

Don't look now, but some of the predicted legislation is already in the works:



http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c111:H.R.45:



In addition, I don't even really watch the news(I don't like the idea of paying for cable, only to have it piss me off) and I have seen an amount of anti-gun propaganda being dished out lately, that I haven't seen since the Columbine incident. I highly doubt they are spending the money for this for the hell of it. Not to mention that a large number of the people in the Clinton administration that were responsible for a chunk of the events ( Waco, Ruby Ridge, etc.) were appointed again in Washington recently.

I really hope you are right, but it just doesn't look that way from where I stand.

This stuff pops up every 20 minutes or so. It's what we call background noise, and it doesn't stand a chance of passage.

Obama's got too much detritus to clean up from the last administration to waste his political capital on firearms legislation which will surely fail.

One is left to conclude that someone coming on a gunboard and claiming the bolshevik run socialists aren't going to try to infringe on the second must almost to a certainty be justifying and rationalizing a vote for the socialist dirtbag.

IOWs, no offense, but you probably voted for 0bongo. :tongue_sm

That's MO and I'm sticking to it. :mad_small

None taken. You must not have read my post though. Unlike yours mine wasn't partizan and hysterical (Bolshevik? Is that the BEST you can do? A bit out-dated, juvenile, and melodramatic, wouldn't you say?) Mine is an historical look at political trends over the past fifty years. Second term presidents always loose power immediately, and their parties which typically swept into power on a reactionary tide have run their course by the end of four years, and having been required to actually rule, will have contributed enough material to the other party to be vulnerable to a rising tide of opposition. A first term populist president is never more powerful than when he first gains an office, so any opportunities missed at that moment are rarely regained.

That was my dispassionate analysis, and my reason for my opinion. Hysteria doesn't help anybody.

None taken. You must not have read my post though. Unlike yours mine wasn't partizan and hysterical (Bolshevik? Is that the BEST you can do? A bit out-dated, juvenile, and melodramatic, wouldn't you say?)
Not one bit.
It is totally accurate and if you have really looked at this historically, with respect to the socialists, you'd know that was absolutely correct.

Mine is an historical look at political trends over the past fifty years. Second term presidents always loose power immediately, and their parties which typically swept into power on a reactionary tide have run their course by the end of four years, and having been required to actually rule, will have contributed enough material to the other party to be vulnerable to a rising tide of opposition. A first term populist president is never more powerful than when he first gains an office, so any opportunities missed at that moment are rarely regained.

That was my dispassionate analysis, and my reason for my opinion. Hysteria doesn't help anybody.
Some truth to that but clearly we are on VERY new ground here and the current crop is shoving socialism down our throats as fast as they can. Obviously trying to do so before their power wanes, as you note.

However, it is clear they want to infringe on the 2nd and have repeatedly floated ideas for doing so, simply to see the degree of support, the degree of opposition.

Holder
Hildebeast
Pelosi
0bongo
--each has come out and floated various ideas for gun control esp of semi-autos.

If not for the internet, we'd be getting shellacked.

And remember, HISTORICALLY, that the Klintons got the AWban passed at the end of their 2nd year, AND DID SO WITH REPUBLICAN VOTES.

I think your view is hopelessy naive and that you are not nearly so informed as you claim.

Wishful thinking at its worst.

if TAO says so it must be true. he's going to go through the budget line by line too. and there won't be any pork. as long as schumer, pelosi and reid are in charge i won't trust anything out of DC.


I don't trust anything out of that cesspool period, no matter what flavor the regime du jour might be.

And remember, HISTORICALLY, that the Klintons got the AWban passed at the end of their 2nd year, AND DID SO WITH REPUBLICAN VOTES.

I think your view is hopelessy naive and that you are not nearly so informed as you claim.

Wishful thinking at its worst.

Soooooooooo ...

Are you saying you think the Republicans are going to support Obama if he tries to instate a new ban? I think that's pretty far out there. Back during the Clinton years, getting a AW ban passed was no big deal. Of course the Repubs went for it. No one cared back then. They'd be extra stupid this time to hand him a victory on an issue that their base is so fired up over. I don't think they're that stupid.

Soooooooooo ...

Are you saying you think the Republicans are going to support Obama if he tries to instate a new ban?
How many votes do you think they need for cloture in the Senate?

And given that there remain a fair handful of RINOs I'd give it a fair chance.

The problem for them is the anger that it would generate in the general population. AW owners are not a majority at all but we are highly motivated.

I think that's pretty far out there. Back during the Clinton years, getting a AW ban passed was no big deal. Of course the Repubs went for it. No one cared back then. They'd be extra stupid this time to hand him a victory on an issue that their base is so fired up over. I don't think they're that stupid.
They're POLITICIANS.....


They'd screw us in a heartbeat if they thought they could get away with it.
Every one of them took an oath to uphold the Constitution of the United States yet wiped their asses with it in '94, not to mention '89, '86, '68 and '34. Plenty of times prior and since, as well.

Yup, politicians. They have no honor. By definition.


Why did you vote for the socialists?

Pelosi has stated that she WILL < not maybe, not thinking about it but WILL > resubmit a AWB even though she knows it will be a fight. Reid seems to not be ready for this so that's good. What's really funny is Pelosi's response to Holder. Be she really is a "Queen Bee"... not on Mr. Holder's terms but hers.

Nobama knows there's little support today and a good deal of resistance on this one. But others here are correct... they are waiting until they force feed us nationalized health care, nationalized banks, nationalized car manufacturers, nationalized insurance agencies, MORE SOCIALISM.

American memory is short. "They" will forget that the AWB is bad and be reminded by the MSNBC's of the world about all the shootings by wackos going back 10 or 20 years.

I watched Obama's speech in Mexico... he's not ready for an AWB yet. Yet.

A republican will turn on you as easy as a dem. A couple of more shootings and a howling constituancy, they will throw us under the bus to keep their f'n job.

I can not for the life of me believe the blind trust some individuals here have in this political system.

s...

How many votes do you think they need for cloture in the Senate?

And given that there remain a fair handful of RINOs I'd give it a fair chance.

The problem for them is the anger that it would generate in the general population. AW owners are not a majority at all but we are highly motivated.


They're POLITICIANS.....


They'd screw us in a heartbeat if they thought they could get away with it.
Every one of them took an oath to uphold the Constitution of the United States yet wiped their asses with it in '94, not to mention '89, '86, '68 and '34. Plenty of times prior and since, as well.

Yup, politicians. They have no honor. By definition.


Why did you vote for the socialists?

You seem to be an angry, angry man. Be careful. That kind of stress kills people.

As before, you seem to be so wound up in your hatred of me that you are unable to discuss the likelihood of a gun ban passing. I'm not talking about the relative merits of political parties. As you said, and as several others on this thread have said, they have no loyalty. What they do have is self-preservation, and that self-preservation is what's going to keep them from voting against us.

Now stop being childish, and lets talk about this civilly.

You seem to be an angry, angry man. Be careful. That kind of stress kills people.

As before, you seem to be so wound up in your hatred of me that you are unable to discuss the likelihood of a gun ban passing. I'm not talking about the relative merits of political parties. As you said, and as several others on this thread have said, they have no loyalty. What they do have is self-preservation, and that self-preservation is what's going to keep them from voting against us.

Now stop being childish, and lets talk about this civilly.
This post is complete proof that liberalism is a mental disorder.

Angry?
LMAO
At you?
I simply find you ignorant of the very subject you claim to be soooo expert on.

Civily?
So that means I should kiss your ass and not call it like it is?

Hatred of you?

Grandiose delusions for certain.
Typical leftwing pap.

I came here to have a discussion and that is all I have done.
You have answered nothing and now claim I am angry and "hate" you.

Thanks for proving yourself a fool.
I was mistaken to have given you more credit.
I won't make the same mistake again.

Your idea that the pols will not vote against us is further proof of the intellectual inferiority typical of socialists.

You are a disappointment as a worthy debate opponent.

Angry, angry man ...

A republican will turn on you as easy as a dem. A couple of more shootings and a howling constituancy, they will throw us under the bus to keep their f'n job.

I can not for the life of me believe the blind trust some individuals here have in this political system.

s...

+1, mang.

This post is complete proof that liberalism is a mental disorder.

Angry?
LMAO
At you?
I simply find you ignorant of the very subject you claim to be soooo expert on.

You are a disappointment as a worthy debate opponent.


+1
Yeah I'm with dr jarhead. My rifle, slow down there buddy. We are all in the same boat. And its safe to say that most of the politicians in DC are complete scum. If they think they can pass it, or anything else, without comprimising their positions, they will in due time. The media brainwashers are drumming the "gun" word into the USA. I take that as a warning to the coming storm. I've never heard of such mass publicized shootings and "gunmen" before. They're trying to brainwash us into thinking its ok for more gun control. Obama was just testing the waters before jumping in. He needs the media to do some work for a few months, maybe a year.

Nobody's disputing that the politicians will do anything that is good for themselves. My point (again) is that it's clearly not in their best interests to pursue a new ban now.

The reason it's been so hard to find ammo or guns for sale is because people are buying them like never before. It's not just the firearms aficionados either. It's everyone Stores in my area recorded more than 800,000 NICS checks this year. Those are only done once per transaction regardless of how many guns are bought! This means the investment in firearms has transcended anything this nation has ever seen - during a period of shrinking incomes and international financial hard times. This means that regardless of the media storm, regardless of the political rhetoric, more and more people are buying guns. This means the firearms-owning population is rising dramatically. These people are buying, because they are afraid of an impending ban, and they want to be grandfathered in. It also means they will resist a ban.

And that's exactly why the Obama administration ran into a brick wall when they floated the idea. Even staunch proponents of firearms bans came out against the Obama administration proposal. It was dead so fast no one even had a chance to read it before it was shot down.

I didn't say there would be no time in the future when they would take up the cry again. I just said for now the crisis is past. We can slow down the panic. It appears that that's exactly what's happening too. I'm finding 7.62x39mm ammo again in WalMart, and AK's are for sale at Centerfire Systems again - at prices that don't defy the GNP of small nations.

Steady now boys.

my- rifle, my friend,

I have the upmost respect for you and this is not to be taken as a shot across your bow. BUT ( I know you were waiting for it ) It is my firm belief the gun and kit prices will be coming down as vendors who have sat on them realize that their investment is mute without a supply of ammo to go along with it. To a new buyer, what is the sense of buying a .223 anything right now with no ammo available ANYWHERE.

Same in 7.62 and .308. Do you want to buy a $1000 FAL and pay .70 cents per round? Who will buy that rifle unless he already reloads or is sitting on a stash. At that point he controls the sale, not the seller.

I would like to think I'm wrong and a sunny future awats us, but I feel that the UN will become further involved in internation shipping of arms and ammo. Its going global!

a sorry swoop

It is ammo that is in truly short supply right now.

AKs are available.
FALs and ARs also but at a high price.

It is AMMO that is the current issue.
Tough to get and quite expensive when you can.

As for me, I have bought 1 case of 7.62x39, one AK and some small amount of pistol ammo since the 0bongofascist takeover. I bought all before prices and supply really got nuts.

We really don't know how many of these rifles being bought are by first time gunowners, or even new black rifle owners. Many may be just adding to their stash.

I doubt most are going to turn them in when ordered to do so however.

I did my buying during the 2004-2008 interval and am avoiding the ripoff prices of the current feeding frenzy.
Seeing pics of the new Yugos and GP 1975s is tough on me though, I will admit. I am a true AK addict.

Nobody's disputing that the politicians will do anything that is good for themselves. My point (again) is that it's clearly not in their best interests to pursue a new ban now.
Questionable as they seem to concern themselves little with what the People want anymore.

The reason it's been so hard to find ammo or guns for sale is because people are buying them like never before. It's not just the firearms aficionados either. It's everyone Stores in my area recorded more than 800,000 NICS checks this year. Those are only done once per transaction regardless of how many guns are bought! This means the investment in firearms has transcended anything this nation has ever seen - during a period of shrinking incomes and international financial hard times. This means that regardless of the media storm, regardless of the political rhetoric, more and more people are buying guns. This means the firearms-owning population is rising dramatically. These people are buying, because they are afraid of an impending ban, and they want to be grandfathered in. It also means they will resist a ban.
Agree for the most part and hope it is true.

And that's exactly why the Obama administration ran into a brick wall when they floated the idea. Even staunch proponents of firearms bans came out against the Obama administration proposal. It was dead so fast no one even had a chance to read it before it was shot down.
Yet they keep floating ideas.....

I didn't say there would be no time in the future when they would take up the cry again. I just said for now the crisis is past. We can slow down the panic. It appears that that's exactly what's happening too. I'm finding 7.62x39mm ammo again in WalMart, and AK's are for sale at Centerfire Systems again - at prices that don't defy the GNP of small nations.

Steady now boys.
We cannot afford to let up on the pressure as to do so will enable the left to push their agenda. This is why they keep floating ideas. They think eventually they will wear us down.

When it comes to stripping the People of their freedoms, we have to win EVERY time. They only have to win ONCE.
--I've seen it plenty during my lifetime and we'd be well advised to keep it in mind. ALL OF US.

As noted above, I have not taken part in the current frenzy.
I quit my job, am paying for a kid in an out of state Engineering School and have paid off the last $63K of my mortgage since mid-January.
I am tapped out and have other priorities but I bought while the getting was good. Buy it cheap and stack it deep!

Or do what the rest of humanity does:
Buy high, sell low....

I just wanna' know; when are the fat cat dealers going to lower their fear mongering prices? Also who are these rabid ammo consumers and when will they have enough? It really is a joke since most American gun owners would not take to the streets in defense of their weapons or ownership rights, they just want the stuff to squirrel away for showing off or resale profit. Boooo!

I just wanna' know; when are the fat cat dealers going to lower their fear mongering prices?
When supply exceeds demand.
Not likely anytime soon, esp in ammo calibers that are supplied from overseas.

Also who are these rabid ammo consumers and when will they have enough?
I suspect a lot of people got AKs, built severl, etc and didn't worry so much about ammo. Now all of a sudden there is fear that they will not be able to feed their weaponry. On top of that, everyone is watching cost go up, supply dwindle and figures they better buy whatever they can, when they can.
Hell, I'm reading about people buying ammo in calibers they don't even have...

Then you also have the 0bamanation floating various ideas for infringing on the 2nd while skirting Heller. It is having the opposite effect desired, just as the Klinton Gun Ban did.

It really is a joke since most American gun owners would not take to the streets in defense of their weapons or ownership rights, they just want the stuff to squirrel away for showing off or resale profit. Boooo!
The wussification of the american male is well in place but don't count us all out. There will be enough wehn the time comes. IMHO.

yup, ammo is scarce due to panic buying and hoarding. (how many rounds in a hoard?) the vendors are cooperating by offering limited quantities at high prices. i still feel the "ammo accountability act" bullsit rumor and even more bullshit website was secretly sponsored or even created by those who profit most from record ammo sales.
the current poliburo is moving slowly and carefully but i don't trust them for a second. the antis have been slavering for a liberal socialist in the white house for years, i feel vigilance is in order. panic only works against us.

how many rounds in a hoard?

I dont know... how big is your lair??

wtf???! I JUST saw Eric Holder on TV talking about another ban and that this one needs to be permenant

a quote from moterhead

"i still feel the "ammo accountability act" bullsit rumor and even more bullshit website was secretly sponsored or even created by those who profit most from record ammo sales."

Again, no personal disagreement but I must disagree. They can't come in (and they know it ) and take our weapons, so this "drying up" of ammo is to continue. Wait to see our next deer hunting season!

I am sorry to be so negative, but I see no positive.

swoops

Has anyone ever considered that now or in the near future would be an awesome time to implement a special sales tax on ammo?

Our budget mess and the need for revenue.

I wonder if the tax could be retroactive?

Pure speculation but the way I like to look at things is what is the best way to acheive what I want.

Lastly I don't care who says what. Our Government does not want us to own firearms or we can own them but in what the Gov, has defined what they want us to own.

Napolitano has set the sterotypes. Sooner or later someone or some group will fill it. You will see the 5:00 news and the raid will show a Bible and a rifle on a bed condemning those home grown terrorists.

Let's see the baby boomer generation retiring and pissed off because the got screwed out of their ss benefits and they like to vote.

Much more to this whole mess. This mild flu(created) that is bound to come back later this year, will come back with a vengence. Then we will have the chance to implement some form of ML which will in turn allow us to pass all the gun laws we want. Then you will see the CHANGE for real.

i stand by my opinion on the ammo shortage. who profits most by panic buying? i feel the current paranoia is possibly engineered or at least encouraged by the ammo industry. profiteering is the american way. it just makes sense. a lot more sense than ammo licensing laws. bear in mind that heller protects ammo as well as firearms. hel;l, the chicken littles are even dragging out an obscure reference in a PROPOSED treaty that MIGHT be interpreted as a reloading ban. it borders on the ridiculous. like the frog in the french connection said,"you see policemen in your soup"!

Much more to this whole mess. This mild flu(created) that is bound to come back later this year, will come back with a vengence. Then we will have the chance to implement some form of ML which will in turn allow us to pass all the gun laws we want. Then you will see the CHANGE for real.
jawman,
There is nothing about this to make me think this virus is manmade.

It is likely to be back in the Fall, that I will agree with. It will be interesting to see how this takes off in the southern hemisphere this summer.

I expect that this virus will be in the vaccine for this Fall though it is going to be tight timewise. Typically, the flu vaccine has 3 strains, two of fluA and one of FluB and they start production a year ahead, trying to guess at the strains likely to be going around.

I cannot see any concievable way this could result in martial law.

Don't sweat this one, this virus is NOT the sky falling.

OK back to Bullets,

I keep hearing that our supply of .223 is being exhausted in Iraq and Afg. Now I will admit that the vast surplus that was already on hand has been spent. Outside of stepped up rifle training and practice across the board where is all the ammo being used up? Read anything of major engagements...firefights...campaigns? No, I didn't think so. Any other NATO country using it up? No, I don't think so.

It has been cut back and going only to the military. Those who need .223 Remington will get it sooner or later at a price. NATO .223 you can forget about it!

I read tea leaves.

swam swoopi

From Obongo's website (they have taken this down now, but search yahoo and look at the cached page)

"Obama and Biden also favor commonsense measures that respect the Second Amendment rights of gun owners, while keeping guns away from children and from criminals who shouldn't have them. They support closing the gun show loophole and making guns in this country childproof. They also support making the expired federal Assault Weapons Ban permanent, as such weapons belong on foreign battlefields and not on our streets."

Spin that, my rifle.

AS I've said about a hundred times in this thread, it isn't about Obama's intentions. It's about his political strength. This is about gritty political reality. He will never have the strength that he has right now. If he doesn't have the strength to pass an AWB now he never will.

Witness Bush's statement right after his second election when he said that he had been given political capital, and he intended to spend it. He went after Social Security, and his presidency ended then and there. If Obama doesn't have the strength to pass this now he never will.

The man's an astute politician. He knows this, and that's why he's brushed the issue aside in order to marshal his support for things he considers to be more important. As long as nothing extraordinary happens we don't have to worry about this.

What a f... do you guys want more?
He plainly came out and said it?

Looks like I was right.

NO GUN BAN YET.

I'm having a great time now buying up ammo and guns from fools who freaked out and bought guns and ammo like (the) crazy (fools they are). Now they lost their jobs, because of the excesses of the past thirty years, and they can't pay the credit card bills. I guess bankruptcy has cleared their minds a bit. It's OK though,because I'm getting guns and ammo for great prices.

By the way, people. I'm going to check back in here every three months, and remind you of this. If you argue with me you're going to look pretty dumb, because this thread is going to keep popping up to the top.

"I'm getting guns and ammo for great prices."

Oh do tell, last I looked on our site and gunbroker, I have yet to see a "deal".

Romy kits at $300, 7.62 at $250, AMD's if with barrel $400, AK 74 kits at $400, krinks double, yugo m95's double.

Will prices come down to reality in this economy...certainly, back to the $100's???

You keep buying all those bargains up!


swoops :)

The Dems would be fools to try any type of firearms regulatiosn prior to the 2010 elections, they know this. That's why in all the talk about fast food tax, cig tax, alcohol tax, cap and trade, health care tax, etc. you have not heard one word of a firearms tax or ammunition tax.

they have completed their first stage by inserting the racist latino female on the bench.

You will see a slew of firarms related proposals after the 2010 elections (unless they loose the majority).

At a minimum, you will see registration and another AWB.

If you look on Gunbroker for good deals you'll never find anything. It's just a typical auction site where people who don't know what they're buyig get infatuated with "winning" and wait until the last second to bid items way beyond what they're worth.

No I buy from desperate individuals who listened to the fear hype and over-extended themselves to be "protected" only to find they'd been led into a trap by propagandists. I end up with great deals.




You will see a slew of firarms related proposals after the 2010 elections (unless they loose the majority).

At a minimum, you will see registration and another AWB.


Second-term parties ALWAYS lose the majority.

Dont think anything will happen for a while, but eventually they will try a AW Ban!

Looks like I was right.

NO GUN BAN YET.

I'm having a great time now buying up ammo and guns from fools who freaked out and bought guns and ammo like (the) crazy (fools they are). Now they lost their jobs, because of the excesses of the past thirty years, and they can't pay the credit card bills. I guess bankruptcy has cleared their minds a bit. It's OK though,because I'm getting guns and ammo for great prices.

By the way, people. I'm going to check back in here every three months, and remind you of this. If you argue with me you're going to look pretty dumb, because this thread is going to keep popping up to the top.



I can say no asteroids have hit the earth yet.

Does that make me "right"?


:tongue_sm

t

I can say no asteroids have hit the earth yet.

Does that make me "right"?


:tongue_sm

t

Tell that to the dinosaurs! :rofl_smal

I can say no asteroids have hit the earth yet.

Does that make me "right"?


:tongue_sm

t

So far I'm 100% right, and you're 100% wrong. I'm going to keep monitoring this thread to see who's foolish enough to keep claiming that the president is going to pass a gun ban. You won't be able to make your claims in a vacuum.

By the way I just picked up an M1 carbine from a guy who over-extended his credit then lost his job. Really good condition - $250. The Chicken Littles on this board sure did a disservice to a lot of people.

I hope you are/were not personal friends of that guy.

No I don't know him. All the people close to me knew better than to buy all the guns they could cram onto their credit cards.

I can say no asteroids have hit the earth yet.

Does that make me "right"?

t

So far I'm 100% right, and you're 100% wrong. I'm going to keep monitoring this thread to see who's foolish enough to keep claiming that the president is going to pass a gun ban. You won't be able to make your claims in a vacuum.



And how am I wrong?

t

I think the best word to describe this would be..............................YET!

Health care is the testing ground. The ban is not yet, yet is the operative word. If heath care passes he'll be off to our guns. Argue that mr right.

Scott

O is a marxist, marxists cannot co-exist with an armed public. It's really that simple. myrifle, just how smart are you?

Scott

"Our task of creating a socialist America can only succeed when those who would resist us have been totally disarmed." Sara Brady, Chairman, Handgun Control International - O` is to her left, are you getting the picture? They are incrementally testing the walls of the Constitution & damn the poll numbers if they can do away w/ Presidential term limits. Watch what he does, not what he says.

The Bill is written.... but quite Simply you can NOT

(A) Pass a Gun Bill Before Cap / Tax (See tea tax of 1773)
(B) Pass a Gun Bill Before Obama Care
(C) Pass a Gun Bill After Mid Term Elections

They have Every intention to Pass one... they can't be Stopped when they introduce it ! But they must get the rest of their Agenda out of the way first because of the obvious backlash from the Gun Issue

You know theres new rumored speculation that once the Dems pass this Healthcare Reform bill they'll go back to focusing on the other issues they want done, with gun control being one of them.

Do I think it'll happen? Doubt it. With Ted Kennedy gone they lost a powerful anti-gunner but it remains to be seen who replaces him and if any current democratic senators will try to step into his shoes and push for changes to try and earn his "aura".

So far I'm 100% right, and you're 100% wrong. I'm going to keep monitoring this thread to see who's foolish enough to keep claiming that the president is going to pass a gun ban. You won't be able to make your claims in a vacuum.

By the way I just picked up an M1 carbine from a guy who over-extended his credit then lost his job. Really good condition - $250. The Chicken Littles on this board sure did a disservice to a lot of people.

__________________



oh to be young and foolish. the belief that obama wont touch guns is naive. you might want to check a little deeper in your belief that OSAMA/OBAMA does not want your guns- fact is he already stated he wanted a new assault weapons ban- problem was the democrats remembered what happened the last time the supported a law like that- they were voted out of office in masse!
if you think obama wont touch gun laws you sir are a fool!!
regards

There might be a positive thing in this. Obama-rama has broken a lot of his campaign promises, maybe the gun-ban will be one of them....but again I doubt it.

__________________



oh to be young and foolish. the belief that obama wont touch guns is naive. you might want to check a little deeper in your belief that OSAMA/OBAMA does not want your guns- fact is he already stated he wanted a new assault weapons ban- problem was the democrats remembered what happened the last time the supported a law like that- they were voted out of office in masse!
if you think obama wont touch gun laws you sir are a fool!!
regards

My friend you are stating my point. If you go back and read the thread, I say very clearly that this isn't about whether he wants a ban but rather whether he thinks it's worthwhile trying.

As I say over and over and over and over and over in this thread, the President is a pragmatist, and he knows that his core goals will be unattainable if he distracts the politisphere with gun arguments. A new president has roughly three months to get his primary goals accomplished. After that he faces a hard slog to achieve them. As Bill Clinton did, the President has wasted his first three months trying to get bipartizan support from a Republican party that has no intention of supporting him, but every intention of dragging its feet until the President's agenda gets mired in bickering. This they have accomplished.

An "assault weapons" ban would require all of his political capitol which he can only spend once, and he has wasted it trying to be friendly to his opponents who only want him dead and who have publicly stated that they will do anything they can to destroy him. From here on out he will be lucky to get health care insurance passed, much less deal with the broken economy he inherited. A gun ban is wayyyyyyyy off the horizon.

And if you're thinking second term, I suggest you go back and read the thread.

yes
i agree with much of what you say but I do not believe that he will not go after guns. I think he will, eventually push for a gun grab. i hope you are right but i will not place any money on that one. It is just a matter of time. They will try again, and this I am sure of.
regards

I agree with my-rifle. I just agree on the grounds that I don't think government ever can really get much at all accomplished. Obviously there is an agenda out there to ban all guns. Obviously if a handful of people were able to push through every bill that's ever been written, we'd all be in trouble on numerous fronts. Luckily, almost all of the time, calmer heads prevail, whatever does get pushed through gets compromised down to the point of being pretty benign, and life goes on.

First off, we're not even 8 months into this administration.

That said, the Leftists are floundering. They are trying to regain traction on Healthcare as well as Cap and Tax. It is MO they will toss the envirowhackos under the bus and as they are doing, put all their effort into Healthcare in order to save face. They almost have to.

As such, gun control is taking a back seat. For now.

Whether they will move on this later depends on what happens with their larger agenda items.

We MAY be safe for now but I wouldn't count a wounded animal out by any stretch of the imagination.

If the Left loses seats in 2010, as it appears likely, the odds go down for any gun control. I wouldn't trust the Republicans as far as I could throw them though. They screwed us in '86, '89 and '94.

If the Left holds its seats in 2010 then I think they will go after us hard.

2012 and after?
Who knows. The Repubs have demonstrated ample ability to shoot themselves in the foot over and over again.

Personally, I'd like to throw THEM under the bus.

First off, we're not even 8 months into this administration.

That said, the Leftists are floundering. They are trying to regain traction on Healthcare as well as Cap and Tax. It is MO they will toss the envirowhackos under the bus and as they are doing, put all their effort into Healthcare in order to save face. They almost have to.


heh, heh.

Remember that eight months is five months after the end of the honeymoon. If the Democrats can pass the healthcare insurance reform, it's going to either be a fast hard party-line vote or a slow nut-drill of a negotiation that will ultimately cause the administration to throw in the towel and settle for something like free Tylenol for everyone they can lamely call a victory.

As for your second point it's interesting. Kind of makes you wonder whether we're the envirowhackos of the right wing that the Republicans will throw under the bus, eh? In the end though this has grown beyond the Republican party's ability to control. Too many people spent too much on guns in the past eight months to just walk away without fighting a ban.

No I think the Democrats priorities are Healthcare, the economy, then the two wars they have to wind down. That will certainly take them past the mid-point of this term, and if they haven't come up with a big score by then the congressional elections will shift to the right wing, and the Obama administration will completely lose the ability to rule on party-line votes.

They seem to have lost the ability to rule on one party lines already.

That is due to the Town Hall meetings and their fallout IMO. It has really given them problems in their own ranks.

It has also prevented them from making an attempt on gun bans. They are currently diverted from that and forced to focus on one issue.

It's only 8 months but for now, at least, gun control is on hold.

Hopefully he will be a 4 year President.

If you look on Gunbroker for good deals you'll never find anything.

I think you need to stick to politics.



Second-term parties ALWAYS lose the majority.

Easy does it with the BS, there might be some here that take your statements as gospel and will make themselves look silly if they repeat it elsewhere.

Dems had the majority for just over 40 years, didn't lose it until the well known bath they took in '94.

By the way...that was in Clinton's first term :p


t

I agree with my-rifle. I just agree on the grounds that I don't think government ever can really get much at all accomplished. Obviously there is an agenda out there to ban all guns. Obviously if a handful of people were able to push through every bill that's ever been written, we'd all be in trouble on numerous fronts. Luckily, almost all of the time, calmer heads prevail, whatever does get pushed through gets compromised down to the point of being pretty benign, and life goes on.


Call me crazy, but I seriously doubt you would've been sayin' these words on 13 Sept 1994.

t

__________________



oh to be young and foolish. the belief that obama wont touch guns is naive. you might want to check a little deeper in your belief that OSAMA/OBAMA does not want your guns- fact is he already stated he wanted a new assault weapons ban- problem was the democrats remembered what happened the last time the supported a law like that- they were voted out of office in masse!
if you think obama wont touch gun laws you sir are a fool!!
regards


The sheeple want something done about crime, the Dems might remember 1994 but if they want to retain their voting blocks then they'll vote yes on a ban.

Keep in mind that it's not all in the President's hands, there's many players behind the scenes that promote the ban agenda. Know where Brady and them get their money? Same place lots of others get it...the Joyce Foundation.

Look at the JF's budget and you'll see things a lot more clearly about how money instantly creates anti-gun agendas in normally sane people (polititians not included heh heh).

Confronted with studies-this and TV-hit-jobs-that, won't take much for the sheeple to demand their politicos to DO SOMETHING ABOUT THEM GUNS. Won't take long to rush a ban through comittee...

...and Obama would sign whatever was put before him, because that's what a good puppet does.

t

Easy does it with the BS, there might be some here that take your statements as gospel and will make themselves look silly if they repeat it elsewhere.

Dems had the majority for just over 40 years, didn't lose it until the well known bath they took in '94.

By the way...that was in Clinton's first term :p


t

Man, '94 was a lifetime ago. Do you realize how much has changed since then? Furthermore look at what happened to Reagan and Nixon. Second terms started with a promising outlook then spiraled into recriminations, incriminations, and mass desertions from both their party loyalists and their cabinets. Second term presidents always lose their power, and that's realpolitik. If you don't know this by now you must either be pretty young or, well I won't go there.

By the way, it looks like Allied Armaments is going under. Like many vendors they tried to keep up with the hysteria only to find themselves screwed when everyone finally realized their fears of a gun ban were unfounded. To the hysterical Chicken Littles who caused this, thanks for nothing. We're going to end up with a damaged industry, because of this crap.

Falling in late, but I support Dr Jarhead and his backers on this.

To think serious change is not in the works against our interests is delusional.
They are prioritising and developing strategies.

Its the far left loons and neo fascists with Obama as their convenient head who are steering this.

Guns are a bit down the line.

Falling in late, but I support Dr Jarhead and his backers on this.

To think serious change is not in the works against our interests is delusional.
They are prioritising and developing strategies.

Its the far left loons and neo fascists with Obama as their convenient head who are steering this.

Guns are a bit down the line.


You are right, they are prioritizing. Guns are pretty far down the list.

To think though that the left ever develops strategies - now that's delusional. They never pull in the same direction on anything. Case in point, my own senator, Mary Landrieu (D - Louisiana): She represents a district that's pretty evenly split on party lines, and she has to poach Republicans if she's going to win elections. Republicans in Louisiana will NEVER vote for someone who openly supports any form of gun control. There are Democrats like this all over the country, and frankly they're going to have tough enough fights on health care insurance reform, economic recovery, and the two wars that we are on the verge of losing if the American people insist we pull out before winning them.

The president is approaching a year into his first term, and he's accomplished none of his big priorities. Gun control is not one of his big priorities. Just look at the amount of time he has spent talking about the different issues. I haven't heard him advocate an a/w ban since he took office. And don't say that he's going to sneak one by the American public, because the moment any Republicans hear that the president advocating an a/w ban they're going to be on him like gravy on rice. That's the big break the Republicans are waiting for, and they circle around him like vultures waiting for the slightest hint of gun control. With that they can beat him hands-down, and both the Republicans and the president know it.

You are right, they are prioritizing. Guns are pretty far down the list.

To think though that the left ever develops strategies - now that's delusional. They never pull in the same direction on anything. Case in point, my own senator, Mary Landrieu (D - Louisiana): She represents a district that's pretty evenly split on party lines, and she has to poach Republicans if she's going to win elections. Republicans in Louisiana will NEVER vote for someone who openly supports any form of gun control. There are Democrats like this all over the country, and frankly they're going to have tough enough fights on health care insurance reform, economic recovery, and the two wars that we are on the verge of losing if the American people insist we pull out before winning them.

The president is approaching a year into his first term, and he's accomplished none of his big priorities. Gun control is not one of his big priorities. Just look at the amount of time he has spent talking about the different issues. I haven't heard him advocate an a/w ban since he took office. And don't say that he's going to sneak one by the American public, because the moment any Republicans hear that the president advocating an a/w ban they're going to be on him like gravy on rice. That's the big break the Republicans are waiting for, and they circle around him like vultures waiting for the slightest hint of gun control. With that they can beat him hands-down, and both the Republicans and the president know it.
Good points but let's look at this objectively for a minute.

Say it becomes clear that the Dems are going to lose at least one house of Congress in 2010.

There is nothing to stop them from going forward with whatever leftist crap they desire including an AW ban. They are going to lose their seats anyhow.

0bongo will still be Prez for at least 2 more years with Veto power.

AND when is the last time the Republicrats ever rid our nation of leftist infringements of our freedoms?

Hmmmmm, I hear nothing but crickets....


Now the Dems have problems in their own ranks with moderate Democrats, especially those from gunloving states.
That definitely is in our favor at this point.

That said though, I still remember the debate and vote on the first AWban in '94. I NEVER thought they would so obviously violate the Constitution.

Yet they did it. And they did it with Republican votes.


Never, ever, count out those in power who wish to strip us of our freedom.

As always when the Dems are in charge, the rules change, dirty tricks and underhanded tactics prevail. This current Administration and Congress appear to be some of the worst ever in this regard.

This is a TROLL thread if I ever saw one.....Obvious Troll is obvious.

This is a TROLL thread if I ever saw one.....Obvious Troll is obvious.I haven't come to a firm conclusion yet though I initially thought the same.

People who voted for the marxist kenyan and his economic redistribution of wealth, through fasco-socialist means, have to justify their vote. They want the handouts, the perverts and the child butchery so they must rationalize that with the mistaken belief that they will still maintain their freedoms.

The two have ALWAYS been mutually exclusive and that, in fact, is pretty much the history of the Democratic - Fasco-Socialist - Party.

You cannot give the govt ever increasing control over your lives and retain your freedom. They will always seek to limit virtually everything you can do (with the exception of those noted above - however temporary they may be) and claim it is for your own good. Of course.
Beyond the obvious history of the past 5 decades or more, I used to work for the govt in healthcare and their policies became ever more onerous and inefficient, continually attempting to limit the freedom of those they claimed to 'help'.

The so called "entitlements" are like a narcotic for the lazy and obnoxious. Once addicted, they are always chasing the dragon seeking larger and larger doses.

Without these same entitlements their entire coalition of bastard step children would vaporize into thin air.

This ethereal dream of the socialist utopia they hope for, where virtually everything is 'free' and also free of responsibility, is so alluring that even the Republicrats, once infiltrated by the same communists, have jumped on the bandwagon hoping to buy votes the very same way. Yet they fail to realize that there is only so much dead weight to go around. Only so many perverts, so many freaks and so many deadbeats.

Someone has to actually go to the circus, they can't all be in it! :rofl_smal

Yeah, that was longwinded but I had fun typing it. ;)

Weeeeeeelllllllllllllllll...................all I have to say about it so far is if you look at whats going on and we are not even through the 1st quarter of this presidency... well I don't have a lot of hope for our 2A rights. Lets leave it at that. (We definitely are not in the clear just cause nothing significant has happened in 49 of the states so far. I'm in Ca and they are already banning ammo, are guns much of a stretch? I think not.)

I totally agree.

I haven't come to a firm conclusion yet though I initially thought the same.

People who voted for the marxist kenyan Oh! The Drama! and his economic redistribution of wealth, through fasco-socialist means, have to justify their vote. They want the handouts, the perverts and the child butchery so they must rationalize that with the mistaken belief that they will still maintain their freedoms.


Actually everything he's done so far has been through democratic means - via the means laid out by the Constitution of the United States of America. I'm pretty sure you don't think the Constitution is fascist or socialist - do you?


The two have ALWAYS been mutually exclusive and that, in fact, is pretty much the history of the Democratic - Fasco-Socialist - Party.

You cannot give the govt ever increasing control over your lives and retain your freedom. They will always seek to limit virtually everything you can do (with the exception of those noted above - however temporary they may be) and claim it is for your own good. Of course.
Beyond the obvious history of the past 5 decades or more, I used to work for the govt in healthcare and their policies became ever more onerous and inefficient, continually attempting to limit the freedom of those they claimed to 'help'.

Yeah, that was longwinded but I had fun typing it. ;)

Wow. Easy on the hyperbole.

I'm still waiting for the gun ban. I'll bet you a Bulgarian 5.45mm AK74 kit that he doesn't initiate a bill banning assault weapons nationally during his presidency.

Are you willing to put your money where your mouth is?

Oh! The Drama!

Actually everything he's done so far has been through democratic means - via the means laid out by the Constitution of the United States of America. I'm pretty sure you don't think the Constitution is fascist or socialist - do you?

Please show me the Czars in the Constitution ?
Please show me Nationalized Industries in the Constitution ?
Please show me Bailouts in the Constitution ?
Please show me a Birth Cert ... as IS in the Constitution !

I could go on for hours about his Blatant disregard for the Constitution, from Bowing to a Saudi King, to buying Government motors... Don't come here and talk some half baked Bullshit about Democratic and Constitutional, you will be seen as a Idiot.

How about you show where they're forbidden in the Constitution?

He produced a birth Certificate, but when the detractors said that wasn't good enough he realized that he would never win by playing their game, and just ignored them. They would never be satisfied regardless of what he produced.

The Tenth Amendment (Amendment X) of the United States Constitution, which is part of the Bill of Rights, was ratified on December 15, 1791. The Tenth Amendment restates the Constitution's principle of federalism by providing that powers not granted to the national government nor prohibited to the states are reserved to the states or the people.

"The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."

Any More Simple, Elementary questions ?

Please show me the Czars in the Constitution ?
Please show me Nationalized Industries in the Constitution ?
Please show me Bailouts in the Constitution ?


[The President] shall nominate, and by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, shall appoint Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, Judges of the supreme Court, and all other Officers of the United States, whose Appointments are not herein otherwise provided for ...

the Commerce Clause as described in the Supreme Court's opinion in Gonzales v. Raich:

“ The Commerce Clause emerged as the Framers' response to the central problem giving rise to the Constitution itself: the absence of any federal commerce power under the Articles of Confederation. For the first century of our history, the primary use of the Clause was to preclude the kind of discriminatory state legislation that had once been permissible. Then, in response to rapid industrial development and an increasingly interdependent national economy, Congress “ushered in a new era of federal regulation under the commerce power,” beginning with the enactment of the Interstate Commerce Act in 1887 and the Sherman Antitrust Act in 1890.

That took all of ten minutes to find.

Anything else,


Ace

?

Um, I see your Reaching... Commerce clause ? WTF does that have to do with the subject at hand ? Lmao.... I don't think i can keep this "clean" so I will not respond to your rhetoric any further... You know your Wrong, Everyone else knows your Wrong... No sense in my wasting my time proving something that is Obvious...

Oh! The Drama!

Actually everything he's done so far has been through democratic means - via the means laid out by the Constitution of the United States of America. I'm pretty sure you don't think the Constitution is fascist or socialist - do you?
No, but I think Obama and his cabinet are. Pretty much everyone who voted for him also.

I don't really see how letting third party special interest groups write legislation, or making them so large that items are easily hidden, or forcing a vote before they can be read, is in the spirit of our Constitution at all. It is the kind of thing that fasco-socialists do.

I don't see how entitlements are not a violation of the 10th Amendment.
That includes a Healthcare Plan.

I don't see how buying corporations, or making business decisions for them is Constitutional.

I don't see how giving taxpayer dollars to corrupt private organizations in order to skew future elections is Constitutional.

Nor do I see how paying off corrupt bankers with the taxpayers hard earned money, and the money of those not even born yet, is Constitutional.

The indoctrination of schoolchildren I'm also still looking for in the Constitution. Just can't find it.

And while there is no gun legislation pending plenty in his administration sure talked about it. Yeah, that's constitutional.



I'm still waiting for the gun ban. I'll bet you a Bulgarian 5.45mm AK74 kit that he doesn't initiate a bill banning assault weapons nationally during his presidency.

Are you willing to put your money where your mouth is?
Well, according to the Constitution of the United States, which you claim to be knowledgable on, the President cannot initiate a Bill in Congress. He could ask one be done, I suppose, but that is hair splitting.

I don't think there will be an attempt at gunbans any longer. That could change. He's dug himslef a pretty deep hole from what I'm seeing. LOL.

It would take some sort of major event for them to try and in light of Heller they would have a tough go of it. The recent Chicago case should make it even more difficult without a Constitutional Convention.

I think that train has passed also, though I would bet my ass they thought real hard about it back in the early part of the year.

I'll think about it though.

[The President] shall nominate, and by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, shall appoint Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, Judges of the supreme Court, and all other Officers of the United States, whose Appointments are not herein otherwise provided for ...And just when did the Senate approve all of them?

If they did, I sure as hell missed it, and I keep up with this sort of thing quite well.

I guess that wasn't a violation of the Const either.... ;)

Even Feingold has raised concerns about these Czars.
And a pretty short look at this bunch would tell anyone they are fasco-socialists. The last one I saw something about was some sort of damn pervert. Yeah, we need more of them running the nation, alright.

I don't see what the commerce clause has to do with this either.

Besides, the federal govt merely voting themselves power that exceeds the bounds of the Const doesn't make it legal. It merely means that nobody opposed it.

Not going to get rolled back now. Same as SSI and medicare, etc. It all should have been though. All are examples of the govt exceeding its power under its own Constitution.

As for commerce, I see the need, but it should have been done by Const Amend.

Again though, I fail to see what that has to do with much of anything. The argument as it pertains to firearms seems legitimate on our behalf because it isn't meant to merely regulate free commerce but to infringe on the 2nd Amend of the BORs.

How about you show where they're forbidden in the Constitution?

He produced a birth Certificate, but when the detractors said that wasn't good enough he realized that he would never win by playing their game, and just ignored them. They would never be satisfied regardless of what he produced.
Let's see the vault copy.

There is one, isn't there?
They claim there is.
It would have sure been easy to put it up for scrutiny way back in June '08 and silence the entire thing. If there was one that is....
Instead he spent almost $1mil in the courts trying to prevent anyone from getting their hands on it...Somehow I doubt they could have anyhow...

Of course it wasn't his money so big deal. ;)

I have an original of mine and so does everyone in my family.

And where is the hospital record?
There appears to be none.

I can't see the MSM letting this sort of thing go if this were a conservative. Nope, not a chance. There would be all sorts of prying.
And what about college transcripts, etc.

Amazing that you can justify this sort of thing.

And this part:

he realized that he would never win by playing their game, and just ignored them.
Oh yeah, he is oh so noble and above it all.

Just a narcissist playing fools like a fine violin.

Actually everything he's done so far has been through democratic means - via the means laid out by the Constitution of the United States of America. I'm pretty sure you don't think the Constitution is fascist or socialist - do you?


No.


Fine.

So you admit that what he's doing is legitimate as stated by the Constitution of The United States.

That's all.

Nothing else needs to be said.

Let's see the vault copy.

There is one, isn't there?
They claim there is.
It would have sure been easy to put it up for scrutiny way back in June '08 and silence the entire thing. If there was one that is....
Instead he spent almost $1mil in the courts trying to prevent anyone from getting their hands on it...Somehow I doubt they could have anyhow...

Of course it wasn't his money so big deal. ;)

I have an original of mine and so does everyone in my family.

And where is the hospital record?
There appears to be none.

I can't see the MSM letting this sort of thing go if this were a conservative. Nope, not a chance. There would be all sorts of prying.
And what about college transcripts, etc.

Amazing that you can justify this sort of thing.

And this part:


Oh yeah, he is oh so noble and above it all.

Just a narcissist playing fools like a fine violin.


Ahhhhhhhhhhh

So you're a birther

:clown:

Look! It's a clown!

http://www.akfiles.com/forums/showthread.php?t=58195

[The President] shall nominate, and by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, shall appoint Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, Judges of the supreme Court, and all other Officers of the United States, whose Appointments are not herein otherwise provided for ...
What part of that won't register? peabrain.

Scott

Fine.

So you admit that what he's doing is legitimate as stated by the Constitution of The United States.

That's all.

Nothing else needs to be said.
Nice twisting of words. Pretty lame way to try to win an argument. You strike me as the type who would rather key someone`s car than confront them face to face... kinda chickenshit. Careful Ms. Rifle, your slip is starting to show.

Nice twisting of words. Pretty lame way to try to win an argument.
Yes it is, but this is the way the leftist debates.

People can look at what he posted and what I posted, come to their own conclusions. That's how I look at it.

When it comes down to it there is only going to be one way to decide who is going to control this nation and its future.

Divided and polarized, there is less and less middle ground every day.

Nice twisting of words. Pretty lame way to try to win an argument.

Yes it is, but this is the way the leftist debates.



Yep, straight out've the DU playbook.

t

Yep, straight out've the DU playbook.

t


Still think this isn't a major troll thread? Que the FAIL BOAT and AWW JEEZ NOT THIS SHIT AGAIN pics.......

Still think this isn't a major troll thread? Que the FAIL BOAT and AWW JEEZ NOT THIS SHIT AGAIN pics.......


Never said it wasn't. My-Rifle talked himself into a corner with fail, then tried talkin' his way out with even more.

t