Biden chosen as Obama's VP

[Muscletang]

For fuck sakes wafrederick do a little research first and you won't look like such a jackass.

Hale DeMar confronted a burglar in his home in December 2003 and shot him twice, forcing the burglar to flee and to seek medical care. Police arrested Mario Billings at the hospital, but they also charged DeMar with a misdemeanor for owning a handgun:

"A 55-year-old Wilmette man was charged Thursday with weapons violations after he shot and wounded a burglar in his home more than a week ago.
Hale DeMar, of 35 Linden Ave. in the north suburb, was charged with a misdemeanor for violating a state law that required firearm owners to have a valid Firearm Owner’s Identification card, Wilmette police Officer Roger Ockrim said in a news release. DeMar was also cited for violating a village code that prohibits possession of handguns in Wilmette, the release said. Violation of the ordinance is a petty offense carrying a maximum fine of $750 upon conviction."

At the time, Wilmette had its ban in place for 14 years. When the state legislature discovered that Wilmette had essentially charged DeMar for defending his home, several members moved a new law that essentially barred prosecution on handgun bans that arose from incidents of true self-defense. That bill, SB2165, was filed within three weeks of the incident, and took four months to wend its way through the legislature.

On May 25, 2004, the bill finally passed both houses — but without the support of Barack Obama. He voted against SB2165, which didn’t even go so far as to remove the Wilmette handgun ban, but only prevented enforcement in cases of real self-defense. It passed nonetheless, 41-16.
However, the governor vetoed the bill almost three months later, while the legislature was out of session. The original sponsor, Edward Petka, then moved to override the veto in November, and Obama didn’t vote at all on this day. The veto got overridden anyway.

http://hotair.com/archives/2008/06/3...votes-on-guns/

Question: Do you support the banning the manufacture, sale and possession of handguns in Illinois?
Obama: Yes.

Eight years later, he said on another questionnaire that "a complete ban on handguns is not politically practicable" but reasonable restrictions should be imposed.

Flip flop?

http://www.usatoday.com/news/politic...14012588_x.htm

Supports extending the assault weapons ban. Supports national law against carrying concealed weapons, with exceptions for retired police and military personnel. Supports limiting gun sales to one per month.

http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2008/issues/issues.gun.html

[ericn1300]

Originally Posted by Muscletang

http://hotair.com/archives/2008/06/3...votes-on-guns/

Question: Do you support the banning the manufacture, sale and possession of handguns in Illinois?
Obama: Yes.

What the F@#$ is the connection between your link and your question? I see nothing there about "banning the manufacture, sale and possession of handguns in Illinois"

[BNaylor]

Obama's position on gun control is quite obvious although he flip flops on some issues.

FactCheck: Yes, Obama endorsed Illinois handgun ban
Obama was being misleading when he denied that his handwriting had been on a document endorsing a state ban on the sale and possession of handguns in Illinois. Obama responded, "No, my writing wasn't on that particular questionnaire. As I said, I have never favored an all-out ban on handguns."

Actually, Obama's writing was on the 1996 document, which was filed when Obama was running for the Illinois state Senate. A Chicago nonprofit, Independent Voters of Illinois, had this question, and Obama took hard line:

35. Do you support state legislation to:
a. ban the manufacture, sale and possession of handguns? Yes.
b. ban assault weapons? Yes.
c. mandatory waiting periods and background checks? Yes.

Obama's campaign said, "Sen. Obama didn't fill out these state Senate questionnaires--a staffer did--and there are several answers that didn't reflect his views then or now. He may have jotted some notes on the front page of the questionnaire, but some answers didn't reflect his views."

http://www.ontheissues.org/domestic/...un_Control.htm

[ericn1300]

Originally Posted by BNaylor

Obama ........ flip flops on some issues.[/i]

I get so sick of hearing about “flip flopping on issues”. When a man is introduced to conclusive evidence contrary to his beliefs he can do two things 1: flip and change his views to accommodate the new evidence into his reality or 2: flop big time like Bush did when he refused to accept the evidence that there was no reason to go to war in Iraq and ended up causing the killing and maiming over 30,000 Americans and over 500,000 Iraqis.

The web site you linked to doesn't pass the smell test. When they say “Obama was being misleading when he denied that his handwriting had been on a document endorsing a state ban on the sale and possession of handguns in Illinois Obama responded, "No, my writing wasn't on that particular questionnaire” and that site doesn't give any evidence of how he was “misleading” in his statement. Sorry, this is America, innocent until proven guilty.

[BNaylor]

Originally Posted by ericn1300

I get so sick of hearing about “flip flopping on issues”.

So do I but that is your problem. Your man is so inconsistent the crap is flowing out his ears. But sorry that is a matter you'll have to take up with Obama. The guy you and other blind Democrats/Liberals voted for in the primaries and now have to live with his views or positions that changed (flip flopped) since he is now obviously looking for voters that are moderates or on the right to get him into office. How does it feel to be alienated? That would piss me off more since is he very inconsistent compared to the other presidential candidates or even views of his own party and followers (sheep).

Keeping to gun control issues only he certainly flip flopped on the D.C. handgun ban which is a fact.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008...arackobama.usa

Voted nay on:

A bill to prohibit civil liability actions from being brought or continued against manufacturers, distributors, dealers, or importers of firearms or ammunition for damages, injunctive or other relief resulting from the misuse of their products by others.

http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LI...n=1&vote=00219

Voted yea on:

To expand the definition of armor piercing ammunition and for other purposes.

http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LI...n=1&vote=00217

And the list goes on and on.

Since this is a not a criminal matter innocent until proven guilty doesn't count. This is the court of public opinion more like a civil matter where all it takes is a preponderance of the evidence which includes circumstantial or anecdotal. Other than whining or not putting up any facts to rebut what anyone has posted or carrying on an inadequate debate the burden is on you to put up something credible to change my mind or others to vote for him.

As to my link you don't find credible here is a few more. It is your problem if you do not believe it.

During his first run for elected office, Barack Obama played a greater role than his aides now acknowledge in crafting liberal stands on gun control, the death penalty and abortion — positions that appear at odds with the more moderate image he has projected during his presidential campaign.

The evidence comes from an amended version of an Illinois voter group’s detailed questionnaire, filed under his name during his 1996 bid for a state Senate seat.

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1207/7312.html

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0308/9269.html

Here is a few more to ruffle your feathers.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DhL8a...eature=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pk9GwXJNM2c

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=96xd0...eature=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2kFrF...eature=related

[2strokebloke]

You know, I can't give a damn about what Obama has to say about people playing with their toys.

In case you haven't noticed, the U.S. has a lot of much larger issues to address right now. I hate that the campaigns are always run on stupid little issues that have nothing to do with the long term success or failure of our nation, because most Americans are so stupid they'll sit and argue over absolutely idiotic nonsense like gay marriage and gun laws and never press any of their politicians on the bigger issues.

Honestly? Fuck guns.
Let's talk about what we're going to do about energy
What we're going to do about Iraq
What we're going to do about our decaying industrial base - how are we going to keep our economy going for the next century?
What are we going to do about national defense?

All politicians would be more than happy though if all we do as a country is bicker about what little laws we want or don't want.

[BNaylor]

Originally Posted by 2strokebloke

You know, I can't give a damn about what Obama has to say about people playing with their toys.

...........

It is a constitutional issue and even Obama admits that. Obviously you've never owned or used a gun toy and I could care less whether you think it is an issue or not. Contrary to your misplaced comment or belief gun control is a big issue and may determine who the next President of the United States will be.

At least many Americans are smart enough and not stupid to see Obama is not the man to run this country. Finally, McCain is starting to lead in the polls.

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - In a sharp turnaround, Republican John McCain has opened a 5-point lead on Democrat Barack Obama in the U.S. presidential race and is seen as a stronger manager of the economy, according to a Reuters/Zogby poll released on Wednesday.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20080820/...ll_politics_dc

On the issue of Iraq no longer a major issue to decide the outcome of the election. The troop surge is working and many parts of the country have been pacified. If we weren't there in Iraq it would still be run by a ruthless dictator, the region would be more unstable, and the cost of gasoline would be a lot higher. Even the Demos to include Obama have changed their tune on Iraq and see a chance for democracy to take a good foot hold in that region of the world.

[2strokebloke]

This is exactly why the U.S. is in a state of decline. Obviously you and many others have absolutely no foresight and would rather squabble over who should be allowed to enjoy a novelty, than what the country needs to do to maintain its position as a world power.

Regardless, unless you have absolutely no understanding of, or no faith in how the government works - you should know that basically it doesn't matter what the president thinks on a constitutional matter - he can't exactly just go in and change things on a whim. You could get the biggest anti-gun freak in office, and we'd still have the 2nd amendment when his term was over.

[thrasher]

Originally Posted by BNaylor

So do I but that is your problem. Your man is so inconsistent the crap is flowing out his ears. But sorry that is a matter you'll have to take up with Obama. The guy you and other blind Democrats/Liberals voted for in the primaries and now have to live with his views or positions that changed (flip flopped) since he is now obviously looking for voters that are moderates or on the right to get him into office. How does it feel to be alienated? That would piss me off more since is he very inconsistent compared to the other presidential candidates or even views of his own party and followers (sheep).

Keeping to gun control issues only he certainly flip flopped on the D.C. handgun ban which is a fact.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008...arackobama.usa

Voted nay on:

A bill to prohibit civil liability actions from being brought or continued against manufacturers, distributors, dealers, or importers of firearms or ammunition for damages, injunctive or other relief resulting from the misuse of their products by others.

http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LI...n=1&vote=00219

Voted yea on:

To expand the definition of armor piercing ammunition and for other purposes.

http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LI...n=1&vote=00217

And the list goes on and on.

Since this is a not a criminal matter innocent until proven guilty doesn't count. This is the court of public opinion more like a civil matter where all it takes is a preponderance of the evidence which includes circumstantial or anecdotal. Other than whining or not putting up any facts to rebut what anyone has posted or carrying on an inadequate debate the burden is on you to put up something credible to change my mind or others to vote for him.

As to my link you don't find credible here is a few more. It is your problem if you do not believe it.

[/i]

Here is a few more to ruffle your feathers.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DhL8a...eature=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pk9GwXJNM2c

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=96xd0...eature=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2kFrF...eature=related

Seriously? Type John McCain, flip flop, and ANY ONE of these topics into google, and see how many hits you get.

-Offshore drilling moratorium

-Torture

-Bush tax cuts

-Immigration

-Public Financing

-Amnesty

-Duration of Iraq War

-Abortion


The irony in you mentioning blind partisan politics and calling democrats sheep is astonishing...the loudest Baa Baas seem to coming from somewhere other than the "liberals". ALL politicians flip flop in an effort to cater to the centrists. It's nothing new, and it should be expected be of all candidates. To attack one party or the other in this respect is simply ridiculous.

[BNaylor]

Originally Posted by thrasher

Seriously? Type John McCain, flip flop, and ANY ONE of these topics into google, and see how many hits you get.

-Offshore drilling moratorium

-Torture

-Bush tax cuts

-Immigration

-Public Financing

-Amnesty

-Duration of Iraq War

-Abortion

........

Ah! Another sheep or disciple decides to weigh-in. The more the merrier.

Now obviously that is too much work. Whats the matter too lazy to post any links of interest to make it easy for us?

Lets take one for example at random. Torture? You might consider getting the facts straight. From a liberal rag Time Magazine. Subtract 1.

So there is nothing the Democrats would like to do more than portray McCain as a rank hypocrite, someone who has sidled up to George W. Bush and flip-flopped on torture, all for political gain — which is exactly what Democratic National Committee chairman Howard Dean claimed in March. "It is shameful that George Bush and John McCain lack the courage to ban torture," Dean said in a statement. "And it is reprehensible that McCain changed his position on torture just to win an election."

Dean's statement, distributed in a press release, was a political attack meant to raise questions among independent voters. And as with most political attacks, it turned a grain of truth into a misleading landslide of overheated accusation. A review of the record shows that McCain has neither changed his position on torture nor taken sides with President Bush on the substance of the issue.

http://www.time.com/time/politics/ar...729891,00.html

Originally Posted by thrasher

To attack one party or the other in this respect is simply ridiculous.

It is called partisan politics. Same stuff you liberals practice.

[thrasher]

Originally Posted by BNaylor

........

Ah! Another sheep or disciple decides to weigh-in. The more the merrier.

Now obviously that is too much work. Whats the matter too lazy to post any links of interest to make it easy for us?

Lets take one for example at random. Torture? You might consider getting the facts straight. From a liberal rag Time Magazine. Subtract 1.

[/i]



It is called partisan politics. Same stuff you liberals practice.

It's difficult to pick up your real intent over the internet, but my guess is that you know that McCain and Obama are the same when it comes to flip flopping and partisan politics, but that you really don't care and will continue to support McCain and attack Obama until you're blue in the face, regardless of the issue and its merits. You perfectly exemplify the deep political divide faced by this country and why it is so difficult to reach across the table and accomplish things.

[Muscletang]

Originally Posted by ericn1300

What the F@#$ is the connection between your link and your question? I see nothing there about "banning the manufacture, sale and possession of handguns in Illinois"

That link was to the above article and he went on record saying that and changed his position as stated in the USA Today article below that.

Originally Posted by 2strokebloke

Honestly? Fuck liberties.

Fixed.

Originally Posted by 2strokebloke

Let's talk about what we're going to do about energy

Maybe tap into the 1.5 trillion barrels of oil reserves we have in our own country and tell the "green movement" assholes to fuck off? Maybe stop the environmentalist from getting in the way of building new nuclear power plants?

Originally Posted by 2strokebloke

What we're going to do about Iraq?

Maybe let the military do their job and stay the fuck out of their way? I have serveral friends over there and it pisses me off to hear them say what the military knows what to do but the government ties their arms behind their back.

Originally Posted by 2strokebloke

What we're going to do about our decaying industrial base - how are we going to keep our economy going for the next century?

the economy - the government = FTW

Originally Posted by 2strokebloke

What are we going to do about national defense?

Stop gutting the military?

Originally Posted by thrasher

You perfectly exemplify the deep political divide faced by this country and why it is so difficult to reach across the table and accomplish things.

Takes one to know one eh?

The problem is the Democrates were taken over by the "new left" liberal assholes about 40 years ago.

[in super gay voice]Lets save a tree!

Guns are so scary!

Death to the internal combustion engine!

Eating meat is murder![/in super gay voice]

The problem is Repulbicans let the religious right grab ahold of them and not let go.

[super preachy asshole voice]TV and video games are what cause violence!

That cancer patient will die with more dignity because they didn't take pot to stop the pain of that horrible death!

Oh my God it's a nipple!

Gambling is the game of Satan!

Alcohol is liquid evil![/super preachy asshole voice]

[2strokebloke]

Originally Posted by Muscletang

Maybe tap into the 1.5 trillion barrels of oil reserves we have in our own country and tell the "green movement" assholes to fuck off? Maybe stop the environmentalist from getting in the way of building new nuclear power plants?

You do know that the U.S. uses over 19 million barrels of oil a day,right? and the reserves won't mean shit in a decade or two if we tap them now. Also didn't you learn anything at all about the teapot dome scandal and why we have reserves in the first place?
So why waste billions tapping them and refining it, just so we can fuck ourselves over royally later?

Maybe let the military do their job and stay the fuck out of their way? I have serveral friends over there and it pisses me off to hear them say what the military knows what to do but the government ties their arms behind their back.

In case you didn't know, the government tells the military their job. They have no right to bitch about it. That's not saying that government always makes the best choices (Truman basically screwed the whole world over for firing MacArthur, and LBJ and vietnam?) - but that's just part of the job. You don't take a job and then go "oh I can't do what I want here the way I want to - because I have a boss"

the economy - the government = FTW

If you like rats in your hamburgers, and cars that explode...

Stop gutting the military?

Ok I agree. But it's not so much a matter of overall money given to the military, as it is poor budgeting of the money given to them. As with all government funding, a shitload is wasted on wholly worthless items and projects.

[BNaylor]

Getting back on track I mentioned this earlier but how is the selection of Biden supposed to unite the Democratic Party? I see a lot of dissent over Hillary and by her supporters at the Democratic National Convention. A recent CNN poll showed 27 percent of her supporters are planning to vote for Sen. John McCain.

Angry Clinton supporters toast McCain, roast Obama.

http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/08/...iref=hpmostpop

As to recent major polls for what they are worth McCain now leads over Obama including on key issues of leadership, national security and the economy.

A Reuters-Zogby poll released on Wednesday found the Republican senator leading Barack Obama among likely voters by 46 to 41 per cent, sweeping away a seven-point advantage the Illinois senator held in the same survey a month ago.

At the same time, a Los Angeles Times-Bloomberg poll that gave Mr Obama a 12-point lead in June found that the two candidates were statistically tied. Race continues to be a significant factor with nine per cent of voters saying they would feel uncomfortable voting for a black candidate.

Mr McCain's unexpected poll surge has taken aback even his closest advisers. It could trigger a modification of his strategy in the two months after the party convention and before polling day. The RealClearPolitics average of polls has him trailing by less than two per cent.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/news...poll-lead.html

CNN poll: Obama trails McCain on national security.

http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/08/27/poll.security/