Gun owners not welcome.

[Chief Joseph]

Just watched this little jon stewart clip and the most noticeable part to me was their exclusion of "gun owners", not Conservative or Tea Party gun owners, but ALL gun owners. I think liberal gun owners should really consider if they want to support those who even hate them so much.

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/even-jon-stewart-finds-tolerance-at-the-dnc-doesnt-extend-to-conservatives-*****-and-evil/

replace the * with n-a-z-i-s, with out the - and it will work. Didn't know that was a banned word.

[PM9OWNER]

lol @ "tea-baggers"

I still usually vote for Dems. I doubt they will ever ban AR's but if they did I'd still have my beloved pistols and hunting rifles.
I think there are antis on both sides, but definitely more on the liberal side.

Thanks for sharing.

[les strat]

Wow. What a bunch of outstanding people. Winners for sure.:2rolleyes:

Guess since I am white, male, own a gun, southern ("redneck"), and Christian, I am not welcome. That's ok. I tend to hang with people who aren't haters like them.

Like I said in another thread, they thrive on dividing and isolating. As proven here, most of the flock doesn't have the brain capacity to think outside the liberal hand pamphlet (books are too long to read) or comprehend their own irony.


lol @ "tea-baggers"

I still usually vote for Dems. I doubt they will ever ban AR's but if they did I'd still have my beloved pistols and hunting rifles.
I think there are antis on both sides, but definitely more on the liberal side.

Thanks for sharing.

I'd be carefull about what you think you might still have if they ban AR's. Your SA pistols could be next. The hunting rifles, then.....

[PM9OWNER]

I'd be carefull about what you think you might still have if they ban AR's. Your SA pistols could be next. The hunting rifles, then.....

Whatever...

I agree that some of their personal views towards gun owners were unreasonable. But I also think you are unreasonable in thinking that liberals don't have the brain capacity to think outside some "liberal handbook". It seems you are a little closed minded yourself. But what do I know, I can't even comprehend my own Irony.

I can't change nearly all of my other political views just because some people think that a couple liberals can reverse the 2nd amendment.. :2rolleyes:

[Bawanna]

http://i1138.photobucket.com/albums/n538/hopke5/Policecargif-1.gif

[PM9OWNER]

Whoa, OK I'm done. No more political threads for me. :hippie:

[les strat]

Whatever...

I agree that some of their personal views towards gun owners were unreasonable. But I also think you are unreasonable in thinking that liberals don't have the brain capacity to think outside some "liberal handbook". It seems you are a little closed minded yourself. But what do I know, I can't even comprehend my own Irony.

I can't change nearly all of my other political views just because some people think that a couple liberals can reverse the 2nd amendment.. :2rolleyes:


I just go by what I hear come out of their own mouths. They make up my mind for me. I guess I am close minded as I stand firm own my own beliefs that are based on The Bible and our great Constitution, and in that order. I make no apologies for that.

As a fellow gun(s) owner to another, I was just trying to stress the importance of not taking any ban lightly. There is a huge push to not just ban ARs/AKs and other "scary" rifles, but also your right to carry or even own any gun that is semiautomatic or a magazine that hold more than 10 (we've already seen that law). We already have cities that do not allow you to own certain firearms, carry, or even defend yourself without prosecution. It's definitley more than just a couple gun grabbers wanting that right pulled.

I give you Europe as an example: first, gun registration and banning of carry and ownership of certain firearms. Laws passed where you absolutely cannot shoot someone in a home invasion. Then, hunters had to list what rifle they would be using at exactly what date and how many rounds they would have. If you had one more round than listed, felony, and your guns are history. Then, in some countries, laws where passed where you have to keep your guns elsewhere and check them out with lots of paperwork. It just grows, and grows.....

So yeah, I should have a fear of these types that want to ban any weapons whether I own them or not. You and everyone here should too. History often repeats itself.

"The natural progress of things is for liberty to yield and government to gain ground." - Thomas Jefferson


Please read this (http://www.nrapublications.org/index.php/12018/it-will-never-happen-here/) when you have a chance. It's like looking in a mirror that's not too far down the road.

[Bawanna]

Whoa, OK I'm done. No more political threads for me. :hippie:

It's all good, just a reminder that we're watching. I think I'll start using it more often. Hands are going to heck on me, might send a nice message without keyboarding. Hands are important ya know.

We each have our own personal pet peeves as it were and mine is getting personal over things we generally can't control. Not to be confused with disagreeing with another member but personal attacks (not saying you did but I think you were thinking of it) just wad my pantyhose up in knots.

[PM9OWNER]

Good points, and it is definitely a scary thought. I regret suggesting your closed mindedness. Sorry.

I found this interesting:
http://www.gunsandammo.com/2012/09/06/6-creative-ways-mitt-romney-is-courting-shooters/

The article starts by explaining Romney's anti past. He has voted for a 5 day waiting period, and for the assault weapon ban as governor of Mass. in '04.

Has Romney really changed? Or does he just need votes..:confused:

[muggsy]

I can't say for sure if Mitt has changed, but I'd like to think that he's being honest. One damn thing for sure is that Obama hasn't changed. Obama has supported every gun control measure that his fellow democrats have proposed. I'm voting for change in this upcoming election.

[les strat]

Good points, and it is definitely a scary thought. I regret suggesting your closed mindedness. Sorry.

I found this interesting:
http://www.gunsandammo.com/2012/09/06/6-creative-ways-mitt-romney-is-courting-shooters/

The article starts by explaining Romney's anti past. He has voted for a 5 day waiting period, and for the assault weapon ban as governor of Mass. in '04.

Has Romney really changed? Or does he just need votes..:confused:

No harm, no foul. :)

I do believe people's beliefs change and that sometimes people previously had certain mindsets that were wrong, but had good intentions. I am like muggsy in that I believe he is being honest, mainly by his choice in Paul Ryan.

[downtownv]

I always wondered how one can support the gun grabbing democrats AND be a gun owning enthusiast......
Kinda Like John Kerry a self made Nam vet hero that supports a party of the brady billers (Yes Brady was a republican) Bloomberg who wants more gun control yet his city is loaded with criminals that don't care what gun control he puts in place. It's oxymoronic.

[JFootin]

It's oxymoronic.

Moronic at any rate.

[DeaconKC]

Please realize that the President was part and parcel of the Chicago/Daley political machine before elected. This is the same group that has now banned shotguns holding more than 2 rounds, and semi automatic shotgun without allowing "grandfathering" . They just banned them in Chicago. Do you really think that they would stop at "assault rifles" given half a chance?

[PM9OWNER]

Well there are plenty more issues with which I am concerned, but I dare not voice them here. If it came down to just the issue of RKBA, sure I'd be right with ya.

[AJBert]

I had an epiphany just the other day.

I cannot believe ANYONE in this country who voted for the individual who resides in the White House in for another four years. I can list a long number of reasons why they shouldn't, from what he hasn't done that he promised to do to what he has done that has hurt this country. I am so set in my beliefs about this individual that I am flabbergasted how ANYONE can vote for him...

except those on the gov't dole and who are able bodied and of sane mind do NOT want to work. Those folks I understand.

Then it hit me. They are so firm in their beliefs and cannot understand why someone would vote against him! Anything they say will never change my mind and anything I say will never change theirs.

Then I recalled how said individual had said he would "unite" this country and abolish bipartisan politics. He promised changed and that is the only thing he has accomplished since being in the Oval Office.

This country has never been more divided with the exception of perhaps the 1860's. But this time it is not a regional division. This time it crosses all lines, even blood lines.

Yay for change? I think not.

[PM9OWNER]

Very true. There are also a million reasons not to vote for Romney. For me those outweigh his new found enthusiasm for shooters. I'm actually voting more against Romney, than for Obama.

[Chief Joseph]

I do notice you're from Wisconsin. You'd think that what Scott Walker has done to fix the absolute mess the decades of dems did to your state in just a couple of years would be enough to sway you, even way beyond the damage nobama has done in his short time. And of course, it is the true liberal mindset that doesn't mind the weapons being outlawed for "others" is ok so long as YOUR guns are still yours. Just like the rich libtards that are all for the high taxes that "other" rich need to pay, just not themselves.

[tv_racin_fan]

lol @ "tea-baggers"

I still usually vote for Dems. I doubt they will ever ban AR's but if they did I'd still have my beloved pistols and hunting rifles.
I think there are antis on both sides, but definitely more on the liberal side.

Thanks for sharing.

UUMM where have you been sir? Do you not recall the passage of the Assault Weapon Ban and President Clinton signing it into law?

Do you not know that in Massachusettes the democrat controlled legislature passed a bill to PERMANENTLY ban Assault Weapons and that was signed into law?

How about do you know which firearms are included in the Assault Weapon Ban that was last introduced to the US Legislature and is poised to be reintroduced IF President Obama is re elected? Most specifically are you certain that YOUR beloved pistols and hunting rifles are not included? Are they semi automatic pistols and "hunting" rifles?

Now I generally support republican candidates.. HOWEVER, Mitt Romney is the man who signed that Permanent Assault Weapon Ban into law in Massachusettes. He has also flat out said he would sign a National Assault Weapon Ban should congress put it on his desk. He does not believe that the citizens should be allowed to own those weapons, he claims they are not useful/needed for hunting or shooting sports or self defence. The trouble here is the list of weapons that were deeme to be "Assault Weapons" by the last version that was introduced or what that list may entail on the next one.

Oh and by the way... Tea-Baggers generally are registered and consider themelves democrat(s). You see, Republicans are generally against Tea-Baggers getting married

[Chief Joseph]

UUMM where have you been sir? Do you not recall the passage of the Assault Weapon Ban and President Clinton signing it into law?

Do you not know that in Massachusettes the democrat controlled legislature passed a bill to PERMANENTLY ban Assault Weapons and that was signed into law?

How about do you know which firearms are included in the Assault Weapon Ban that was last introduced to the US Legislature and is poised to be reintroduced IF President Obama is re elected? Most specifically are you certain that YOUR beloved pistols and hunting rifles are not included? Are they semi automatic pistols and "hunting" rifles?

Now I generally support republican candidates.. HOWEVER, Mitt Romney is the man who signed that Permanent Assault Weapon Ban into law in Massachusettes. He has also flat out said he would sign a National Assault Weapon Ban should congress put it on his desk. He does not believe that the citizens should be allowed to own those weapons, he claims they are not useful/needed for hunting or shooting sports or self defence. The trouble here is the list of weapons that were deeme to be "Assault Weapons" by the last version that was introduced or what that list may entail on the next one.

Oh and by the way... Tea-Baggers generally are registered and consider themelves democrat(s). You see, Republicans are generally against Tea-Baggers getting married

I have my reservations about Romney too, but right now nobama HAS TO GO. If Romney pulls any progressive crap, he too will be a one term president. While I have fears of Romney, nobama and his commies have PROVEN to be a massive disaster.

[downtownv]

Well there are plenty more issues with which I am concerned, but I dare not voice them here. If it came down to just the issue of RKBA, sure I'd be right with ya.

That's the most important one on this forum:D

[CrabbyAzz]

Very true. There are also a million reasons not to vote for Romney. For me those outweigh his new found enthusiasm for shooters. I'm actually voting more against Romney, than for Obama.

+1
Romney is a poser. Nobody know what he really believes, just that he will say anything to be president.

[wyntrout]

Obama didn't grow up with American values. His past since Hawaii has been suppressed and locked up tight. He still talks about his mentor Frank Marshall Davis and his influence. Obama came to this country with an agenda and has cloaked himself in lies which the Liberal Main Stream Media neglected to check until he became THEIR choice for president, then it would have been RACIST to start checking anything. If you can make your way to this point at Kahrtalk, you can press the keys and find out a lot about Obama, but not at Moveon.com or the like.
Obama not only wants to disarm American citizens, he wants to disarm and weaken our country because of our evil past and colonial expansion. He is destroying our prestige and weakening the military. He has acted unilaterally in giving up our missile defense systems in Europe. He wants to drastically reduce our nuclear weapons and seems willing to do that and then HOPE that the Rooskies and the Chinese will voluntarily CHANGE their ways and become peaceful and human rights promoting countries. China is hoping to build their Navy to surpass ours and claim control of the South and Western Pacific area. Russia is led by an ex-KGB guy who wants to reclaim the past might and glory of the USSR. If Obama has HIS way, we won't be the great shining example of freedom to the free world. Imagine a world where China dominates as we do/did.
The Department of Homeland Security might be becoming Obama's Brown Shirts with unprecedented powers that override our Constitutional rights and protections. Obama and too much of Congress openly scoff at Constitutional limitations on their actions. The Supreme Court will soon be re-writing the Constitution to Obama's "specifications" if he appoints any more judges to that court. Our Second Amendment Rights threaten Obama's plans, as they should, but piecemeal enaction of "laws" or presidential edicts can strip us slowly of our cherished firearms. The "grandfathering" clause works well to allow more and more restrictions on types of weapons until there are NONE left. If you believe he's just going to get rid of the "bad" assault rifles and that is done. Then the next class and the next after that and so on, will eventually get total confiscation accomplished... and sooner than you would think, if you were thinking not in your lifetime.

Wynn

[les strat]

I am basing my vote on way more than just my 2A stance. I believe:

1. Fed govt should get out of the way of business and do not "create" jobs in the private sector. Over-taxing the upper class and corporations causes money and jobs to not trickle down to the working folks and causes businesses to have cutbacks, close, or move overseas. I really do not care about those who are generationally lazy non contributors who want a handout. They can starve.
2. Anyone that is contemplating taking God out of our country's mantras is an enemy.
3. I believe if you can get double homicide for killing a pregnant woman or the mother can go to jail for abusing the fetus while doing drugs while pregnant, that it is indeed a life.
4. Socialism and communism always fails.
5. We are taxed way more than we should be. A 10% flta tax is what the govt can deal with. Otherwise, they can tighten the belt like I have to do.
6. Our country is great becasue of the hard workers, not our government
7. I hold my govt 100% accountable to abide by the Constitution. Otherwise, I feel they should be ousted and jailed.
8. I loathe whiney people who feel entitled.

So yeah, it's way more than the 2A thing.

[CrabbyAzz]

I am basing my vote on way more than just my 2A stance. I believe:

1. Fed govt should get out of the way of business and do not "create" jobs in the private sector. Over-taxing the upper class and corporations causes money and jobs to not trickle down to the working folks and causes businesses to have cutbacks, close, or move overseas. I really do not care about those who are generationally lazy non contributors who want a handout. They can starve.
2. Anyone that is contemplating taking God out of our country's mantras is an enemy.
3. I believe if you can get double homicide for killing a pregnant woman or the mother can go to jail for abusing the fetus while doing drugs while pregnant, that it is indeed a life.
4. Socialism and communism always fails.
5. We are taxed way more than we should be. A 10% flta tax is what the govt can deal with. Otherwise, they can tighten the belt like I have to do.
6. Our country is great becasue of the hard workers, not our government
7. I hold my govt 100% accountable to abide by the Constitution. Otherwise, I feel they should be ousted and jailed.
8. I loathe whiney people who feel entitled.

So yeah, it's way more than the 2A thing.

1. We were there before. It was called the age of the robber barons. I don't think we want to go back.
2. The constitution forbids state sanctioned religion. Blame that on our forefathers.
3. Till it come out, its hers and nobody else's. You can't impose your religion on others.
4. Pure socialism and communism always fail. We are a mix and always have been.
5 I agree the poor and middle class are taxed unfairly.
6. Hard work is great as long as your paid fairly.
7. I agree and they are for the most part.
8. As do I.

[Chief Joseph]

1. We were there before. It was called the age of the robber barons. I don't think we want to go back.
2. The constitution forbids state sanctioned religion. Blame that on our forefathers.
3. Till it come out, its hers and nobody else's. You can't impose your religion on others.
4. Pure socialism and communism always fail. We are a mix and always have been.
5 I agree the poor and middle class are taxed unfairly.
6. Hard work is great as long as your paid fairly.
7. I agree and they are for the most part.
8. As do I.

1. Without those "robber barons", the industrial revolution and the concepts of mass production would not have occurred. It was that that allowed common people to enjoy the fruits of the production. NOT GOVERNMENT.
2. The Constitution forbids state sanctioned religion, NOT GOD. The forefathers could not have envisioned the godless monkeys that are the democrat party.
3. An unborn child is a sentient human being, god or no god, the child deserves the right to live.
4. Agreed, they always fail. So why support the one in office if you think so. All of his administration are affirmed communists, from anita dunn to van jones, his whole family and mentors. We have not always been a mix, thanks to the progressives at the start of last century, and the huge socialist push by fdr and his push of keynsian economics, we are now.
5. The poor aren't taxed at all, and receive payments from the government, don't know how that's being "taxed" unfairly. The rich pay practically ALL the taxes now, don't know how that's "unfair" either.
6. You should be paid market value and no more. This is a competitive world and companies forced to pay more will not be able to compete in the long run. The only place able to sustain have been government and companies that payoff democrats to that receive bailouts and special treatment.
7. Considering how many times "the one" has ignored the Constitution in his power grab, from executive orders, privilege, czars etc... how can you support it and him, not possible.
8. I do too.

[CrabbyAzz]

1. Without those "robber barons", the industrial revolution and the concepts of mass production would not have occurred. It was that that allowed common people to enjoy the fruits of the production. NOT GOVERNMENT.
2. The Constitution forbids state sanctioned religion, NOT GOD. The forefathers could not have envisioned the godless monkeys that are the democrat party.
3. An unborn child is a sentient human being, god or no god, the child deserves the right to live.
4. Agreed, they always fail. So why support the one in office if you think so. All of his administration are affirmed communists, from anita dunn to van jones, his whole family and mentors. We have not always been a mix, thanks to the progressives at the start of last century, and the huge socialist push by fdr and his push of keynsian economics, we are now.
5. The poor aren't taxed at all, and receive payments from the government, don't know how that's being "taxed" unfairly. The rich pay practically ALL the taxes now, don't know how that's "unfair" either.
6. You should be paid market value and no more. This is a competitive world and companies forced to pay more will not be able to compete in the long run. The only place able to sustain have been government and companies that payoff democrats to that receive bailouts and special treatment.
7. Considering how many times "the one" has ignored the Constitution in his power grab, from executive orders, privilege, czars etc... how can you support it and him, not possible.
8. I do too.

2. Actually people didn't make snot until unions. I really don't care for unions, but it's a fact. The robber barons paid next to nothing.

[Chief Joseph]

2. Actually people didn't make snot until unions. I really don't care for unions, but it's a fact. The robber barons paid next to nothing.

Nothing is ever perfect from the start. Even small businesses hired people for room and board only. Ranchers and farmers worked sun up til sun down and sometimes still made nothing. Doesn't change the fact that if these "robber barons" didn't invest and push forward, our economic growth would not have occurred. An economy based on the "worker" as opposed to an economy based on the CONSUMER will fail eventually. Opportunity is the answer, not the guarantee. dems are promising their voters something that is unsustainable.

[PM9OWNER]

There are some extreme posts here. We cannot just look into Obama's past and grant Romney immunity or innocence. Look deep into his career at Bain Capitol. He can be compared to the worst of the slime balls on wall-street. I know you won't search it, but just know he has a shady past as a "turnover specialist", huge numbers of people laid off and enormous profits in his pocket from companies he didn't even own. Hardly someone I want looking over the American economy.

As far as Scott Walker goes, I live in Madison which was hit by his bill hardest. I am however thankful for CCW. I actually saw him at the last badger game.
GO BADGERS!

http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/greed-and-debt-the-true-story-of-mitt-romney-and-bain-capital-20120829#ixzz25YvruIi3

[Chief Joseph]

There are some extreme posts here. We cannot just look into Obama's past and grant Romney immunity or innocence. Look deep into his career at Bain Capitol. He can be compared to the worst of the slime balls on wall-street. I know you won't search it, but just know he has a shady past as a "turnover specialist", huge numbers of people laid off and enormous profits in his pocket from companies he didn't even own. Hardly someone I want looking over the American economy.

As far as Scott Walker goes, I live in Madison which was hit by his bill hardest. I am however thankful for CCW. I actually saw him at the last badger game.
GO BADGERS!

http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/greed-and-debt-the-true-story-of-mitt-romney-and-bain-capital-20120829#ixzz25YvruIi3

Ya, heard a lot about the Bain charge. It's all crap, the guys trotted out by the dems are proven liars and some company's saved by Bain gave speeches for Romney. The whole Bain thing from the left is total BS. As far as looking at nobama's background, it's all still a mystery. No college transcripts, no work history. By far nobama has been the least transparent politician ever. Although things are finally being vetted, no thanks to the left loving lame stream media. Can't wait to go see 2016.

[chrish]

That makes a HUGE assumption that you believe what Bane Capital does is bad and that laying people off is bad, and that turning a profit at whatever level/amount you want is bad. If employees don't like it, they can quit or not do business w/ whatever company, but there is nothing legally, ethically, or morally wrong w/ reducing expense to turn a profit. What would you do, keep all those employees and let the ship go down, ultimately destroying the whole company and then everybody looses their job?

Is it too bad, sure, OK. But it's an owners right to do what they want with their business...not the right of an employee. The only right you have as an employee is to work and negotiate your OWN salary and benefits. Beyond that, it's none of your business...literally.

[JohnR]

That makes a HUGE assumption that you believe what Bane Capital does is bad and that laying people off is bad, and that turning a profit at whatever level/amount you want is bad. If employees don't like it, they can quit or not do business w/ whatever company, but there is nothing legally, ethically, or morally wrong w/ reducing expense to turn a profit. What would you do, keep all those employees and let the ship go down, ultimately destroying the whole company and then everybody looses their job?

Is it too bad, sure, OK. But it's an owners right to do what they want with their business...not the right of an employee. The only right you have as an employee is to work and negotiate your OWN salary and benefits. Beyond that, it's none of your business...literally.
Where are we as a society when this is even up for discussion? Not in a good place, I say. And who caused it to come up for discussion? The Demomarxist Party. I'm not playing their game.

[Bawanna]

" negotiate your OWN salary and benefits."

Unless your forced to be union, then the demomarxist get to negotiate for you and employer expense.

[les strat]

1. We were there before. It was called the age of the robber barons. I don't think we want to go back.
2. The constitution forbids state sanctioned religion. Blame that on our forefathers.
3. Till it come out, its hers and nobody else's. You can't impose your religion on others.
4. Pure socialism and communism always fail. We are a mix and always have been.
5 I agree the poor and middle class are taxed unfairly.
6. Hard work is great as long as your paid fairly.
7. I agree and they are for the most part.
8. As do I.

The question imposed was are we basing our votes just on 2A. I answered with the list the many other things that are important to me. Believing in these things does not make me or anyone a hater or some kind of fringe nut like the libs like to portray.

That video the OP posted is what libs believe conservatives are really like. There is nothing inclusive about the democratic party. Not one thing. It's all about drawing lines, creating division, and exploiting those illusions for an ulterior motive = votes and money to fight all these "extreme conservatives".

Back on topic... a big part of my decision is about which party supports the 2A vs. which would love to see it die.

[johnh]

There is no other issue. Period. The only reason the Left want to end Second Amendment rights is so they can later take the rest of our rights away without meeting armed resistance. Any gun owner voting for Obama or any other anti-gun Democrat away is selling his/her freedom away. They have it codified into their party platform that disarmament is a goal. Obama, Hillary, and others have stated time and time again in the past that they do not believe in gun ownership. They only change their tune to stay in power. Yes, Romney has been guilty of the same thing, but he is a member of a party that by and large stands firmly in favor of preserving our Second Amendment rights. I would rather have a president that the pro-gun party can keep on a leash, than a president that is just biding his time until he can impose the edicts of his leftist, anti-gun, anti-Constitution bosses.

[Bawanna]

Well said boss. Perfect explanation.

I usually don't look forward to winter too much but I can't wait for December this year. Fingers crossed.

[chrish]

I would rather have a president that the pro-gun party can keep on a leash, than a president that is just biding his time until he can impose the edicts of his leftist, anti-gun, anti-Constitution bosses.

Could not be more on the money! He has plenty of Constitutional faults, but the party will keep those in check. Anyone that has been paying attention to the DNC convention cannot deny how out-of-whack they have become. They are completely and utterly NUTS and I for one do not want any ONE of their leadership running what's left of the free world.

[yqtszhj]

Watch the left and the right when it comes to 2A. In 1989 President George H.W. Bush banned certain imported assault weapons including Beretta semi automatic shotguns.

I don't see how Romney could get elected as a Mass. governor without being a liberal but I say give Romney 4 years and if he doesn't act right... Hire a new guy in 2016. Might as well teach all the congressmen a lesson and clean the house and senate too. The debt is going to wipe us all out anyway if they don't fix that. I may need to invest in black powder and a blunderbuss since in the next few years I may not be able to afford real ammo and have to resort to shooting rocks instead of bullets.

[7shot]

I don't see how Romney could get elected as a Mass. governor without being a liberal but I say give Romney 4 years and if he doesn't act right... Hire a new guy in 2016. Might as well teach all the congressmen a lesson and clean the house and senate too. The debt is going to wipe us all out anyway if they don't fix that.

The debt is the issue I'm really concerned and just behind that is my 2nd rights. This has to be the most important agenda our next new presidents tackles!

[Chief Joseph]

The debt is the issue I'm really concerned and just behind that is my 2nd rights. This has to be the most important agenda our next new presidents tackles!

I'm worried about ALL of it, the encroaching sharia law, the un agenda 21 taking all our property rights, the un gun grab, the inflow of illegals choking Americans out of jobs and social benefits. That and the progressives out of control spending our country is under assault an ALL fronts. We either elect a REAL American Conservative or it's all over. And once we're done, the earth will never know freedom again.

[tv_racin_fan]

Being worried about all of it is awesome. However in my opinion John has it right. Without the right to keep and bear nothing else matters. Once you no longer have that right you have become a subject, instead of a citizen.