JOHN McCAIN IS A LIBERAL GUN GRABBER

[ALS]

Originally Posted by Exbiker

Any change that will ever happen will be a ground swell beginning in the trenches of local government where change can actually happen. Beginning with township supervisors mayors, city council and school boards. You start by infiltrating these and then sending those with successful track records on to the next level.
All Ron Paul voters will likely get a thank you letter from Obamma and Biden next year after you helped destroy any hope we have of a free society.

100% correct. You want to fix it you have to be willing to wait about 16 years. You start by booting and establishment candidates at the local level.
Then move to the county and state level. Then finally to the Congress and Senate. Most of these losers we have now got in back in the seventies and early eighties.
You want to shake up the Congress then start throwing out the city and county councils, mayors and state career representatives.
The idiots we have in Washington would straighten out real quick when they realize their partners in crime at the state level are losing their jobs in mass.
You have a libertarian Governor and Mayor of the biggest city in a state. It gets real hard to look for any real political support and fundraising in that state. I may not be a fan of Jesse the body Ventura but he proved it could be done.

As far as Ron Paul goes I think he is nut. BUT before you Paulies flame me, if we only had a world with three countries U.S. Mexico and Canada, Ron Paul would be a good man for the job. The problem is we live in a much bigger world and Ron Paul is one of the last guys I want in the White House with Islamic Wacho's, Russia and China nipping at our heels.

Protest votes got us Bill and Hillary Clinton for 8 yrs and the Assault Weapons ban. Thank you Ross Perot.

[LastManOut]

Originally Posted by manyplews

Sounds like an Obama supporter !!
There sure is a lot of difference in the Supreme Court justices that the 2 parties have nominated.
I suppose you will tell us that Joe Biden is a 2nd Amendment supporter?

You are old enough to remember:

John Paul Stevens = appointed by a Republican
David Souter = appointed by George Bush Sr.
Sandra Day O'Connor = Ronald Regan appointed her.


So anyone's "what about the Supreme Court Judge appointments" argument can flush that argument.

No to Obama, no to McCain.


You say you want a revolution
Well you know
We all want to change the world
You tell me that it's evolution
Well you know
We all want to change the world
But when you talk about destruction
Don't you know you can count me out
Don't you know it's gonna be alright
Alright Alright

You say you got a real solution
Well you know
We'd all love to see the plan
You ask me for a contribution
Well you know
We're doing what we can
But when you want money for people with minds that hate
All I can tell you is brother you have to wait
Don't you know it's gonna be alright
Alright Alright

You say you'll change the constitution
Well you know
We all want to change your head
You tell me it's the institution
Well you know
You better free your mind instead
But if you go carrying pictures of Chairman Mao
You ain't going to make it with anyone anyhow
Don't you know know it's gonna be alright
Alright Alright

[BucksResident'07]

Originally Posted by LastManOut

So anyone's "what about the Supreme Court Judge appointments" argument can flush that argument.

Whoa, wait a minute here.... For an open and shut case of what type of supreme court justice appointees please review the video of the Saddleback discussions held one week ago through the below link...
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21134540...43091#26243091 - Obama, approx. 13 minute mark.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21134540...43477#26243477 - McCain, approx. 9 minute mark.
Each candidate states which justice(s) they would NOT have appointed.

[libertarian]

I read some of this & just scratch my head. I wonder how bad the "BIG TWO" candidates have to get before people actually relize that they are not required to stick with the two party system.

Is BO worse than Juan McCant, sure he is (in my mind) but that doesn't mean I'm voting for JM simply because he isn't as bad as the other guy.

The big two will always blame 3rd parties for their loss, Repubs have their "rember Perot" chants to scare people just like the Dems blame Nader for the Kerry loss.

[Eugene V. Debs]

Originally Posted by libertarian

I read some of this & just scratch my head. I wonder how bad the "BIG TWO" candidates have to get before people actually relize that they are not required to stick with the two party system.

Is BO worse than Juan McCant, sure he is (in my mind) but that doesn't mean I'm voting for JM simply because he isn't as bad as the other guy.

The big two will always blame 3rd parties for their loss, Repubs have their "rember Perot" chants to scare people just like the Dems blame Nader for the Kerry loss.

The Republicans are better organizationally at dealing with "spoiler" third parties than the Democrats are, thanks to the Leninist organizational structure and discipline brought to the party by the likes of Norquist, Gingrich, Rove and the neocons. Look what they did to the Libertarian Party. Essentially they inflitrated the LP (a Leninist strategy known as "entryism"), shifted them to the right and neutralized them as an independent political force. Barr has essentially pledged not to effect the outcome of the election.

[LastManOut]

If a politician doesn't support ALL of the following Constitutional Amendments-- One through Ten, Thirteen through Fifteen, Seventeen, Nineteen, Twenty-Two through Twenty-Four-- they will not get my vote. I can think of exactly three people in Congress (at most) who would get my vote.

So you aren't voting for McCain either. Good for you.

[Eugene V. Debs]

Originally Posted by BucksResident'07

Whoa, wait a minute here.... For an open and shut case of what type of supreme court justice appointees please review the video of the Saddleback discussions held one week ago through the below link...
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21134540...43091#26243091 - Obama, approx. 13 minute mark.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21134540...43477#26243477 - McCain, approx. 9 minute mark.
Each candidate states which justice(s) they would NOT have appointed.

Problem is that (a) Presidents don't always get their ideal choices through the Senate (e.g. Bork) and must sometimes choose less-controversial appointees and (b) historically Supreme Court picks sometimes have a habit of changing their politics once on the high court (Warren and Brennan were Ike appointees and a Nixon appointee wrote the majority decision in Roe v. Wade).

So while Supreme Court appointees do matter, it's hardly "open and shut" as to the impact they will have. The only thing that is "open and shut" is that both McCain and Obama will appoint justices they believe will expand the scope of the Federal government and Executive power, the only differences will be in which particular areas they want power expanded. Neither candidate wants limited government, you can bet your life on that,

[Eugene V. Debs]

Originally Posted by LastManOut

If a politician doesn't support ALL of the following Constitutional Amendments-- One through Ten, Thirteen through Fifteen, Seventeen, Nineteen, Twenty-Two through Twenty-Four-- they will not get my vote. I can think of exactly three people in Congress (at most) who would get my vote.

So you aren't voting for McCain either. Good for you.

No sir, I am not.

[CoyoteJack]

Originally Posted by LittleRedToyota

that's where we just disagree.

the current federal government is one big fat violation of the 10th amendment. it also constantly and as a matter of policy violates the 1st, 2nd, 4th, and 5th amendments.

mccain does not want to scale back the federal government to bring it back in line with what the constitutin actually says. he doesn't want to limit the "commerce clause" to what it actually says. he doesn't want to limit the "necessary and proper" clause to what it actually says. he doesn't want to apply the 1st, 2nd, 4th, or 5th amendments as they actually read.

no major party nominee in my lifetime has wanted to do any of that.

ron paul wants to, but, of course, he did not get the nomination.

Even if by some snowball's chance in hell Ron Paul was not only nominated but elected none of those things would come to pass.

I've said it before but it seems to bear repeating, there will never be a viable 3rd party starting from the top down. Until true independents (or whichever label sticks) run and win on a State level and create a party containing Senators, Representatives and Governors to support and supply a candidate for President it isn't likely to happen. Even if it did they would accomplish little without Congress.

[SSGF109]

Originally Posted by Gkgas

Not a big McCain fan, but he would be far better then Obama.

Not really! They ALL fold to the anti-gun crowd sooner or later.