2aHawaii
General Topics => Legal and Activism => Topic started by: ren on July 28, 2014, 10:40:28 AM
-
Sick of his stupid ad and his smug look. :grrr: The only source of his statitistics is "President Obama". :rofl:
Does he really really think Hawaii voters are that dumb?
-
Sick of his stupid ad and his smug look. :grrr: The only source of his statitistics is "President Obama". :rofl:
Does he really really think Hawaii voters are that dumb?
yeah
that commercial bugs the spit out of me
i think a lot of R's are gonna pull the D ticket in the primary to vote for ige and hanabata (not that hanabata is much better than schitz)
-
Does he really really think Hawaii voters are that dumb?
[/quote]
Survey says.......YES!!!
And evidently he's right !! :(
-
Sick of his stupid ad and his smug look. :grrr: The only source of his statitistics is "President Obama". :rofl:
Does he really really think Hawaii voters are that dumb?
Unfortunately, most of Hawaii's voters are that dumb (present company here excluded, of course...)
And quoting President Obama is actually pretty "smart" as it allows him plausible deniability should anyone come back and question him on that little "fact." He can always say "I didn't say that, President Obama did..."
For those that don't know, or want to have a fact based response to that little bit of misinformation: The study was from a 1997 Report by the Justice Department, with data collected in 1994, the same year the Brady Bill with the background check provisions was implemented. And while data was collected in 1994, the purchase history of the respondents went back to 1991. The sample size of those polled by phone call for the study was 251. From the responses of those 251 poll participants, it was determined that approximately 40% of gun purchases did not go through a background check. Of course no one using this little factoid never says some of those purchases were private transactions, or that at the time of those purchases, a background check wasn't required. Nor do they point out that despite no legal requirement to do so, a background check was performed in the majority of the sales.
Even the Washington Post, not exactly a "Gun Friendly" publication, gave Obama 3 Pinocchios for this statement.....
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/fact-checker/post/obamas-continued-use-of-the-claim-that-40-percent-of-gun-sales-lack-background-checks/2013/04/01/002e06ce-9b0f-11e2-a941-a19bce7af755_blog.html (http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/fact-checker/post/obamas-continued-use-of-the-claim-that-40-percent-of-gun-sales-lack-background-checks/2013/04/01/002e06ce-9b0f-11e2-a941-a19bce7af755_blog.html)
-
These rats should just make a commercial that says they will give every man, woman, and child $1,000,000,000,000 if you vote for me. Does it matter if they can deliver, or it is even true, or even possible? If they can make you believe, that is good enough.
-
These rats should just make a commercial that says they will give every man, woman, and child $1,000,000,000,000 if you vote for me. Does it matter if they can deliver, or it is even true, or even possible? If they can make you believe, that is good enough.
How about "hope and change"? Oh, wait...
-
I'm willing to be the same members here that reelected that moronic fuckhead in the White House will have no problem voting for this clown. Oh, and it's because they're "not one issue voters." I guess the 2a doesn't rate high enough.
-
I'm willing to be the same members here that reelected that moronic fuckhead in the White House will have no problem voting for this clown. Oh, and it's because they're "not one issue voters." I guess the 2a doesn't rate high enough.
There are an awful lot of people for whom free/highly subsidized (by the government) rent, food, medical care, day care, etc. trumps any other issue... including their Second Amendment-guaranteed natural civil fundamental individual rights. They don't need any legal firearms because the government is already "taking care of them", and besides, if they do want to engage in any illegal activity for which a firearm might be a useful tool, they certainly won't be acquiring a firearm legally, so... no worries. And then there are the self-supporting folks who believe in "social justice" and "equality" and "redistribution of wealth" and gladly hand over as much of their earned income as is "asked" for by the IRS et. al. to use for the betterment of society and the environment, etc. More government, more better! Or am I being too "cynical"?
-
There are an awful lot of people for whom free/highly subsidized (by the government) rent, food, medical care, day care, etc. trumps any other issue... including their Second Amendment-guaranteed natural civil fundamental individual rights. They don't need any legal firearms because the government is already "taking care of them", and besides, if they do want to engage in any illegal activity for which a firearm might be a useful tool, they certainly won't be acquiring a firearm legally, so... no worries. And then there are the self-supporting folks who believe in "social justice" and "equality" and "redistribution of wealth" and gladly hand over as much of their earned income as is "asked" for by the IRS et. al. to use for the betterment of society and the environment, etc. More government, more better! Or am I being too "cynical"?
You're not being too cynical. Unfortunately, your assessment is spot on.
The entitlement mindset has been nurtured and amassed over several decades, and I see our country devolving into a more and more socialist/big government society. The progressive left finally have their President in power (a Marxist ideologue), and it will take decades to recover from this hard shift left. (That is assuming we can even start now to get back to a limited constitutional government.)
Call me paranoid, but I think the tipping point may have been reached and I see us going down the same road as Greece with their massive riots and collapsing infrastructure. Hell, even the CBO predicted - with our current fiscal trajectory - that within a decade we'll be paying more on our interest payments than we do on our military.
What does it all point to? More and more lawlessness and a need to be self reliant. Gee, those two things seem like the perfect environment for needing guns.
I guess that's why I'm a piecemeal prepper.
-
There are an awful lot of people for whom free/highly subsidized (by the government) rent, food, medical care, day care, etc. trumps any other issue... including their Second Amendment-guaranteed natural civil fundamental individual rights. They don't need any legal firearms because the government is already "taking care of them", and besides, if they do want to engage in any illegal activity for which a firearm might be a useful tool, they certainly won't be acquiring a firearm legally, so... no worries. And then there are the self-supporting folks who believe in "social justice" and "equality" and "redistribution of wealth" and gladly hand over as much of their earned income as is "asked" for by the IRS et. al. to use for the betterment of society and the environment, etc. More government, more better! Or am I being too "cynical"?
I share the same view.
I can only surmise that this portion of the population voted for the leadership we have. With that in mind, I hope that this kind of shift to big, overarching, socialist style govt. is temporary and that the working, innovative; truely progressive population can wring it to the right.