American Politics during the Obama Presidency

[QUOTE=Silver Star; 431573]They are for self defense too. Sometimes the best defense is a good offence. When a mob attacks one person. An AK47 beats a pistol. (conclusion=don't put more limits on gun rights) Isn't self defence a basic human right that should not be abridged?

It's not an Assault Weapon Ban. It is a ban on Self Defence under the guise of "protecting" us from rampage shootings.[/QUOTE]Sure, they can be for self-defense. And given the lower incidence of gun deaths by assault weapons, perhaps this is an area where the bad doesn't outweigh the good enough to make a strong argument for a ban.

I'd argue though that most "mob" violence occurs outside a home, so you'd have to be carrying your assault weapon, which seems entirely unrealistic. Not to mention you may be robbed for your weapon, and it falls into the hands of a bad guy. So the "good" of owning an assault weapon really seems largely theoretical.

Sorry to see you repeating the NRA talking points about a "ban on Self Defense". What, you can't defend yourself if you don't have an assault weapon? Puhleease! There are many, many things you can do to avoid harm and to defend yourself, without the need for such a weapon. Just google self-defense without a gun.

In fact, you can [b]increase[/b] your odds of getting hurt or killed, if you are seen reaching for a gun.

I question the need for any weapon that allows you to kill many people very quickly, whether it meets some definition of "assault weapon" or not.

There is no inconsistency in what I said. In your selective quoting Punter, you missed that I said I was willing to give increased regulation a try first. Further, in the national discussion, there is absolutely no broad ban on the table, or even on the horizon. Nobody's waiting to push a bill for a broad ban right after a ban on assault weapons. But down the road, if new measures don't work, and it could be reasonably demonstrated that a broad ban - properly implemented - would work, I would support it.

BTW Punter, it appears you have a credibility issue. You posted awhile back that you learned from me the technique of word substitution to flip arguments around. But you couldn't back it up when I challenged you. Looks like you were just spouting misinformation. Why should anyone believe anything you post ?

[QUOTE=Esten;431590]Why should anyone believe anything you post ?[/QUOTE]What a statement Esten. You are a good guy to monger with BUT your posts are hilarious, even for an ex-socialist like myself. You sadly demonstrate ignorance based on a total lack of real life experience based on your extreme political views. Take it from someone who has been there, done that, and has the tee shirt. Be careful what you ask for Esten, YOU JUST MIGHT GET iT! Your total lack of life experiences betray you and your extreme political beliefs. Get out there dude and expand your horizons. Just look deeper, north of your border and you might not be so confident in your recent political bravado! Enjoy your trip dude. Toymann

"Congressman Jose Serrano (D-N. Y.) has introduced a bill that advocates letting USA presidents stay in office, well, forever. Also known as H. J. Res 15, the bill proposes amending the Constitution to repeal the 22nd Amendment, which bars a president from serving more than two terms in office."

What insanity, I guess some folks just want to live under a dictator. We have been warned as far back as George Washington about the need for term limits.

[QUOTE=Punter 127; 431602]"Congressman Jose Serrano (D-N. Y.) has introduced a bill that advocates letting USA presidents stay in office, well, forever. Also known as H. J. Res 15, the bill proposes amending the Constitution to repeal the 22nd Amendment, which bars a president from serving more than two terms in office."

What insanity, I guess some folks just want to live under a dictator. We have been warned as far back as George Washington about the need for term limits.[/QUOTE]While I agree that the 22nd amendment should not be repealed, I hardly consider Obama to be a dictator!

[QUOTE=Gandolf50;431604]While I agree that the 22nd amendment should not be repealed, I hardly consider Obama to be a dictator![/QUOTE]Nor did I say he was, at least not yet, however I believe if the uber-left gets it's way he will be, and the repeal of the 22nd Amendment would be a good start. It should also be pointed out that Congressman Serrano has introduced similar legislation in the past.

Though I strongly disagree with Congressman Serrano I give him credit for following proper procedure in his attempt to change the Constitution.

[QUOTE=Toymann;431592]What a statement Esten. You are a good guy to monger with BUT your posts are hilarious, even for an ex-socialist like myself. You sadly demonstrate ignorance based on a total lack of real life experience based on your extreme political views. Take it from someone who has been there, done that, and has the tee shirt. Be careful what you ask for Esten, YOU JUST MIGHT GET iT! Your total lack of life experiences betray you and your extreme political beliefs. Get out there dude and expand your horizons. Just look deeper, north of your border and you might not be so confident in your recent political bravado! Enjoy your trip dude. Toymann[/QUOTE]Hey man. We didn't get much reporting from you on your last trip, hope it was a good one.

I'm pretty sure I have some life experiences, they're just different than yours. Why don't you tell us about the evils of socialism north of the border. Is it their lower unemployment rate, their more stable financial system, their universal healthcare, their lower rate of gun homicides, or their broader acceptance of prostitution? LOL Don't be cryptic, tell us what you're referring to!

Question for you. Let's say someone posted that you did something. And you were pretty sure you never did it. So you asked the poster to back their claim up. And all you got back was silence - CRICKETS. The poster had a chance to prove their claim, or come clean, but did neither. Would you believe everything else that person posted? What would you think of that person's character?

[url]http://www.snopes.com/politics/ballot/2012fraud.asp[/url]

This claim of fraud is fraudulent. I am not a fan of Obama, but the facts do not support this claim of fraud. Please take a look at the above site if you are interested. The real fraud is in our media which allowed the economy and obamacare's real status and effects to go unchecked not to mention the Libia debacle. If we had media that would remain non-partisan and just do their damn job our government would be better off in many ways and our citizens could make informed decisions.

Pete

A sad day, Dick Morris was shown the door by Fox News.

Remember this guy? He used to be a regular on O'Reilly. He played the role of the savvy political analyst, with the inside track on what was happening and what was going to happen. And in newsmax style he was always dissing Obama and Democrats, predicting their demise. Some people might say he was an arrogant clown. But he helped drive the right-wing narrative, and made O'Reilly appear more balanced and reasoned than he actually is.

The reason Dick Morris is gone is because he predicted a Romney landslide victory, right up until the final moments. He predicted Romney would win by 325 – 213, and the popular vote by 55% to 45%. And then Obama won by 332 - 206, and the popular vote by 53% to 47%. This is like the guy who sells his house to buy lottery tickets, and loses everything. But worse, because he just didn't get it wrong, it was completely backwards !

Dick Morris was always a joke, and this is a fitting end to his antics.

[QUOTE=Esten;431612]Dick Morris was always a joke, and this is a fitting end to his antics.[/QUOTE]Does that include his time being praised by democrats, advising Cinton since 1978, and helping Clinton win election in 92 and re-election in 96 with specific acknowledgement by both Clinton and Stephanopoulos it was his triangulation policy advise that helped Clinton secure re-election?

Before Clinton he was a repub strategist and post Clinton shifted back towards GOP. Seems like whatever you think of him, at least one side thought he was great until shifting to other side.

Being wrong in one occasion, like his rather epic wrong Romney prediction doesn't make the measure of a man in my opinion. It's the sum total and how they bounce back from epic failures. Will be interesting to see how he recovers from this.

[QUOTE=Esten;431610] Let's say someone posted that you did something. And you were pretty sure you never did it. So you asked the poster to back their claim up. And all you got back was silence - CRICKETS. The poster had a chance to prove their claim, or come clean, but did neither. Would you believe everything else that person posted? What would you think of that person's character?[snip][/QUOTE]Let me be very clear here, I general try to respond in a positive way to request, but I respond to demands with resistance, and I have a tendency to respond aggressively to threatening demands. I took your post as something between a demand and a threatening demand, it certainly was not a request or a challenge from my view. You demanded I do something and you gave me a limited amount of time to comply, as if I would be punished if I failed to comply. I decided it was in everyones best interest to ignore you, just as you have refused to address certain question and refused to discuss some things in the past. Now however if you want to push the issue I will reply, but only in person face to face. You got the balls to talk about it face to face or do you need to grow a pair first?

He got gitmo, the surge, the effect of cash for clunkers, the effect of Obamacare, the idea of where to prosecute terrorists, the expanded roll of the President in fighting terrorists, the whole wire tapping thing, the cost of Obamacare, the economy, Iran's pursuit of nuclear weapons, North Korea's ability to deliver nuclear weapons, simplifying the tax code, stopping pork in bills, being against raising the debt ceiling, the number of "shovel ready programs" to waste our money on, ending income tax on seniors making <50k, ending no-bid contracts of 25K, keeping gas prices low, improving Egypt's view of the US, that a democratic non-Islamic fundamentalist government would take over Egypt, etc. Etc. Etc. Backwards? How is talking to and engaging the terrorists working out. Libya and Africa might give you a clue.

If getting something completely backwards classifies one as a clown, then Obama is the Clown in Chief as he spins his story like a French braid, but those who actually pay attention realize that he has reversed himself so many times I am surprised even he is not dizzy. Oh and don't forget his sudden change in personal ethics on the issues of immigration, government sponsored abortion and gay marriage. Where there is a voting block, their is a new deeply seated long held belief in Obama's psyche. He doesn't have skin, but rather scales.

I'm not saying all his decisions on these issues are out of line with my personal views, because in fact in many cases, his original views were stupid, but he came to see the light. Unfortunately, he lacks the ability, unlike Dick Morris, to say,"I was wrong." Has he appologized to Bush for all the evil lies he told? Has he said,"Bush had most this terrorism stuff correct?" Of course, not. All it takes is a few polls and Obama has another epiphany: he changes his mind for votes and political expediency and not for reasons of deep insight and reflection.

Pete

[QUOTE=Esten;431612]Dick Morris was always a joke, and this is a fitting end to his antics.[/QUOTE]Absolutely. He's been a whoare for years, and would sell his soul and his asshole for another dollar. He has no political ideology. His ideology revolves around money. He would say whatever is necessary to get his face on TV, and thus help his book sales. His next metamorphosis will probably be as a bisexual Christian activist.

About which he will write another book.