American Politics during the Obama Presidency

[QUOTE=Black Shirt]But the tone of of the post evoke the image of Dick Cheney and his way of speaking through the side of his mouth, almost a sneer at the rest of the world.[/QUOTE]Really, a sneer? It was more an expression of taking pleasure via a tried and tested juvenile prank, grossing out your companion.

[quote=]All I know is that if not for the fact that his daughter is gay, he would be glad to shoot them all.[/QUOTE]OK, I know that Dick Cheney has been proven to be Beelzebub but upon what action or quote do you base your assumption? A true Christian, conservative or liberal, while disagreeing with the path that one has chosen, would not resort to violence as a corrective measure.

[quote=]I am now projecting the image of Teddy Roosevelt with his leg on a lion in one of his big game safaris.[/QUOTE]Whilst I respect the rights of others to hunt for trophy game, I prefer to stick to edible species. If I don't plan to eat it, I don't shoot it. If I shoot it, I eat it. [insert your play on words here]

When I am hunting for trophies (you know, a good head to mount) I use my goo-soft ammo.

Now I never saw it that way. But I guess you see what you wish based on your own value system.

[QUOTE=Doppelganger]Now I never saw it that way. But I guess you see what you wish based on your own value system.[/QUOTE]I work with a guy for a long time that claimed he and God were real "tight", but nothing in his life at work displayed that God had any influence on his dealings with his co-workers. So self proclaimations are "self proclaimations".

Anyway, have fun with the chicas in BA. Will be there soon for a cruise, unfortnately with my gf.

As I was told once when I imported one for a few days - "why bring sand to the beach?" Of course the qualifier was my imported "sand" also liked "sand" so we had some pretty nice 3-somes. I swear that girl could find a bi girl in a bar faster than a good bird dog can find a covey of quail! - No Dick Cheney pun intended.

Good luck with GF in BA.

President Obama can sign all of the Treaties he wants. Unless he has 60 votes in the Senate. The Treaty is void. There is no way he can get those votes. Can you imagine a Senator from Montana or Louisana voting for it? They would get hung in their home states.

The Senate need to ratify it, before Osama can do something like that. Overturning State laws and such. Don't think it would pass the Senate, since the southern Democrats will join with the Republicans to block it. Don't think it could even get a majority, let alone 60 votes.

Did any of you rubes read the article? It said that the US was willing to engage in negotiations.

Even still, this is a treaty that would regulate the international arms sale. It has nothing to do with domestic arms sales. Though nice try Syd. Way to try to get everyone worked up into a frenzy to support your own delusional ideas.

You can bet your ass that if the US does end up signing some treaty, it will benefit US arms exporters. Obama's puppet masters will make sure of that.

If we are talking about legislative process, it'll take a little more than 60 senators to overturn the second amendment. That said, if we skip legislative process and move directly to judicial fiat, it might not take so much. It is much more likely that the 2nd Amendment will be attacked via judicial fiat in the form of supreme court rulings that infringe upon the right to bear arms and related issues.

As for the aforementioned article, it is not directly relevant to individual gun ownership, however, it is detrimental to approximately $35b of US economic output and is indicative of the contempt that this administration has for individual liberty and freedom. That should surprise no one as this administration has declared war on the private sector.

[QUOTE=Schmoj]Did any of you rubes read the article? It said that the US was willing to engage in negotiations.

Even still, this is a treaty that would regulate the international arms sale. It has nothing to do with domestic arms sales. Though nice try Syd. Way to try to get everyone worked up into a frenzy to support your own delusional ideas.

You can bet your ass that if the US does end up signing some treaty, it will benefit US arms exporters. Obama's puppet masters will make sure of that.[/QUOTE]

[QUOTE=Wild Walleye]If we are talking about legislative process, it'll take a little more than 60 senators to overturn the second amendment. That said, if we skip legislative process and move directly to judicial fiat, it might not take so much. It is much more likely that the 2nd Amendment will be attacked via judicial fiat in the form of supreme court rulings that infringe upon the right to bear arms and related issues. [/QUOTE]What does THIS article have to do with the 2nd amendment? Last I looked, it had something to do with American citizens "keeping and bearing arms." It is not a constitutional guarantee to be able to sell arms to other countries.

[QUOTE]As for the aforementioned article, it is not directly relevant to individual gun ownership, however, it is detrimental to approximately $35b of US economic output and is indicative of the contempt that this administration has for individual liberty and freedom. That should surprise no one as this administration has declared war on the private sector.[/QUOTE]Again, what does THIS article have to do with individual liberty and freedom? You guys keep wanting to interpret THIS article as some sort of attack against gun owners in the US.

Um, how come this hasn't prompted an alert from the NRA (nraila. Org) If it had real substance, I'd expect a bulletin and letter draft to senators and congressmen. The only issue that's surfaced is Bloomberg trying to put gun shows out of commission.

It's no secret that antigunners have tried to use the illegal gun traffic between the US and Mexico as an excuse to make gun sales harder for everyone. (The logic of which escapes me if they're already illegal. But this seems a little over the top.

Schmoj,

Such tactics are common from the right. They look for opportunities to spread doubt, fear and anger in their followers, who they erroneously refer to as "The American People" as if they were the only people in the country. They deal in emotions.

[QUOTE=BA Luvr]Um, how come this hasn't prompted an alert from the NRA (nraila. Org) If it had real substance, I'd expect a bulletin and letter draft to senators and congressmen. The only issue that's surfaced is Bloomberg trying to put gun shows out of commission.[/QUOTE]Actually the NRA has been warning about the possibility of just such a backdoor attack on our second amendment rights for several years. This is just one more avenue the gun control nuts have been using in an attempt to disarm and control people worldwide.

I would have agreed with others here that it would not have a chance of passing, but if it ever had a chance I suspect now is the time, just look at the bail outs and the health care BS. Legislators voted for these actions without even reading the bills.

As long as this bunch of Chicago power hungry mob scum with all their behind closed door deals and out right vote buying are in power anything is possible, they’ve convinced me of that!

What ever happened to everything being out in the open and even on CSPAM?

Punter 127

Conservative in exile!

[QUOTE=Esten]Schmoj,

Such tactics are common from the right. They look for opportunities to spread doubt, fear and anger in their followers, who they erroneously refer to as "The American People" as if they were the only people in the country. [b]They deal in emotions.[/b][/QUOTE]And we all know that liberals would never resort such a tactic themselves.

ROTFLMAO!

Thanks,

Jackson