This thread has been locked, it will not receive new replies. |
Locked on 01/24/2004 6:45:19 AM PST by Lead Moderator, reason:
This thread has degenerated into a flamewar. No more replies. Sheesh. |
Posted on 01/23/2004 5:23:57 AM PST by Apple Pan Dowdy
Don't know. I was just tired of Dane using Reagan to troll on a 2nd Amendment argument.
Huh? Stupid bit of writing by Jonah, in my opinion.
I said in my previous post that I wanted a quote from George W. Bush, himself, not someone ostensibly speaking for him.
Put up or shut up.
Yay! Because I wasn't actually going to. In fact, you actually thanked me at one point for giving my opinion on your initial comment. Posts 166 and 170 respectively.
Also, please pay attention to post 255.Advocating bans and licensing is the same as saying, "You are either too criminally evil or too stupid to own a firearm of this type."
I own firearms of a type she does not approve of and thinks that the government should ban because "nobody needs one." Ergo, she either thinks I'm too stupid to operate one safely. Too inexperienced. Or just plain criminal. Which it is she has yet to come back and explain.
Being called "sad and pathetic" by the likes of you is really no insult. Once you've grown up a bit, why don't you come back and visit us some more.
Oops, nearly forgot this part of your post. I support the President. While there are a couple of areas that I don't see eye to eye on with him at this point my support continues to outweigh my disagreements.
Most of these sort of threads have become just more fodder for the chronic arm-chair-critic complainers and DU trolls who wander the halls of FR. They post the same old trash, over and over, with no new ideas, nothing positive just CARP, CARP, CARP. It's boring. And suspect IMO especially with a line such as I originally objected to from Goldberg.
Prairie
I understand why you believe that. I understand that this is your position.
What my objection has been is that you said that PhiKapMom called you (collective you) evil, stupid, or both.
She did not. You took your predisposition about the bans and licensing and projected it onto PhiKapMom's post to you and declared that PhiKapMom said something she did not say.. hence your use of the word "ergo." Instead of admitting your mistake, you have reposted the same mistake post after post in hopes that sooner or later it will magically become true. You are persistent... I will say that.
As for the rest of your rant about me growing up... well, it is the immature who can't or won't admit they are wrong...so maybe we will just have to grow up together.
In 1992 the total vote in the Presidential race was 105 million. Over 18 million of them were for Ross Perot.
In 1996 only 95 million voted in the Presidential race. Eight million voted for Ross Perot. Perot got 10 million fewer votes in 1996 than in 1992 and 10 million fewer people voted.
In 2000 the vote in the Presidential race was 105 million again. With the same turn out as in 1992 the election in 2000 was a virtual tie. If Perot took votes from the Republican right in 1992 and 1996, why didn't Bush win big in 2000? They sure as heck did not vote for Buchanan.... did they?
The truth is exactly like the exit polls in 1992 and 1996 revealed. Perot drew from both the Bush and Clinton in equal amounts. The exit polls in 92 and 96 showed that had Perot not run, Clinton would still have won the presidency both times.
The right wing fruitcakes like to think they are important... but they are not. They scream at the top of their lungs that there was no difference between Democrats and Republicans... and that is how they always behave. They voted for Perot in 1992. Ten million of them did not vote at all in 1996 and they split right down the middle in 2000. The are never a factor. They don't elect anyone ..They don't defeat anyone. They are not a factor. That is why Karl Rove does not give a hoot what they do. They are not important.
There is no mistake being made. Accept the one I am making trying to reason with you.
It isn't brain surgery. It's just realizing that your projected your feelings about banning and made that PhiKapMom's response. Your projected feelings (valid or not) have nothing to do with her actual words.
Can't come up with a Bush quote so start telling lies about me.
How intellectually bankrupt.
Yes. Actually it does. Very much so. How else do you get a law passed? You drum up support. With guns, it is normally FEAR you try to use as a lever on the public. "Guns cause crime." "Guns are evil." "Guns are only for killing people." "Assault Weapons have no other purpose than to kill lots of people." "We need to ban Assault Weapons because they are too dangerous and civilians have no need of them."
Every sinlge mantra predicated on the assumption that anyone wanting to own one is either a criminal, is dangerous, or is too stupid to do so safely.
Her "actual words" have nothing in common with the REALITY of gun ownership and so-called "assault weapons". Or are you just too stupid to see it? I've tried moderating my language up till now, but this is getting ridiculous.
So the Presidents SPOKESMEN, on multiple occassions, and on the White Houses website, is lying about the Presidents stance on the subject?
Give it a rest moron.
I asked for a quote from Bush and you give me a quote from Ari Fleischer.
And you call me a moron?
Yes, I'm too stupid to realize that I should have just acquiesced to your superior knowledge on what people really mean when their words do not say what you have accused them of saying.
Yes, I'm too stupid to realize that your view on guns is the right, true, and correct one. Anyone who tries to express another opinion is not as patriotic, conservative, or as smart as you.
I can live with your opinion of what makes one stupid.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.