First Presidential Election

gads, i hope this turns things around here, just a little bit?

No checks and balances at the Federal level now - all Democrats. Get ready to lose your guns via HR1022 - California gun laws at the Federal level. It's inevitable so stock up early and often. I feel safer already.

Well, it's after the election and Obama has more than double the Electoral Votes McCain had. I'm so glad he's in, I really hope he can restore America.

WakeCarver said:

While I don't doubt that, I would like to think we are above discussing such nonsense here at Mac-Fourums. No true American would ever consider such an action as it would cause irreparable harm to our country.

Click to expand...

Wow, that kind of echoes of Michelle Bachman... "no true American". Like Dysfunction pointed out, it's a reality and a threat we're going to have to deal with and trying to bury discussion of it in the sand seems to me to be a little too "bush-y".
I would be among the multitude of people who would be absolutely crushed if it did happen, but we have to accept the reality that many presidents have been assasinated or have lived through attempted assassinations. Obama's race, in this country, and even at this time, put a considerably larger target on his back. We need to accept that and to some extent prepare for it.

XJ-linux said:

No checks and balances at the Federal level now - all Democrats. Get ready to lose your guns via HR1022 - California gun laws at the Federal level. It's inevitable so stock up early and often. I feel safer already.

Click to expand...

You talk as though they're all children with no idea of repurcussions or thought for the constitution and bill of rights. A wholesale loss of gun rights is entirely unlikely. you'd be better off focusing your fear and rage somewhere else, like how we're spending billions of dollars and many precious lives on a country with a huge surplus of dough while our economy is suffering - which of course leads to higher crime and you needing your guns to give you the impression of safety.

XJ-linux said:

Where is H. Ross Perot when we need him? I miss the charts and no BS messages. LOL

Click to expand...

Ditto for me!

Its so sad obamas grandma died before seeing him become pesident

eric said:

You talk as though they're all children with no idea of repurcussions or thought for the constitution and bill of rights. A wholesale loss of gun rights is entirely unlikely. you'd be better off focusing your fear and rage somewhere else, like how we're spending billions of dollars and many precious lives on a country with a huge surplus of dough while our economy is suffering - which of course leads to higher crime and you needing your guns to give you the impression of safety.

Click to expand...

Thanks for the advice, but I think I'll cling to my "guns and religion" for now. The police don't prevent crimes, they investigate them after the fact so again, I'll keep what I have thank you. As for the Legislature, I'll quit treating them like children when they quit acting like children, and that includes both parties.

eric said:

you'd be better off focusing your fear and rage somewhere else, like how we're spending billions of dollars and many precious lives on a country with a huge surplus of dough while our economy is suffering

Click to expand...

That country would be the U.S.A. you are referring to? We just spent the surplus of money, some of it saved since the Great Depression. If your parents ask, thats where some of their retirement money was. Enjoy my redistributed wealth. Signing off.

XJ-linux said:

Thanks for the advice, but I think I'll cling to my "guns and religion" for now. The police don't prevent crimes, they investigate them after the fact so again, I'll keep what I have thank you. As for the Legislature, I'll quit treating them like children when they quit acting like children, and that includes both parties.

Click to expand...

you missed my point. while there is a huge disparity between haves and have nots in this country, you will surely see more crime. if you can show me any statistics where having guns in a home prevents more crime then that cause (or accidental deaths/injuries), perhaps i'll reevaluate my view of your perception of safety versus reality of safety.

XJ-linux said:

That country would be the U.S.A. you are referring to? We just spent the surplus of money, some of it saved since the Great Depression. If your parents ask, thats where some of their retirement money was. Enjoy my redistributed wealth. Signing off.

Click to expand...

no... i thought what i wrote was pretty clear - the country we're expending an inordinate amount of life and cash on is iraq.

I love my 2nd amendment rights, but there are just too many more important things at stake, to me at least, to vote McCain.

Obama is definitely not the best candidate when it comes to gun control, but it appears he's going to be leaving the gun control issues for the states to take care of, which is really how it should be.

Hmmm....celebrations in the streets?

Sounds like how a presidential election should end...

eric said:

You talk as though they're all children with no idea of repurcussions or thought for the constitution and bill of rights. A wholesale loss of gun rights is entirely unlikely. you'd be better off focusing your fear and rage somewhere else, like how we're spending billions of dollars and many precious lives on a country with a huge surplus of dough while our economy is suffering - which of course leads to higher crime and you needing your guns to give you the impression of safety.

Click to expand...

actually, increased INVOLVEMENT in these issues (rather than assuming XYZ organization will do it) would remove many of these items from the table. Far too many people complain about these things, then actually DO nothing about it.

XJ-linux said:

No checks and balances at the Federal level now - all Democrats. Get ready to lose your guns via HR1022 - California gun laws at the Federal level. It's inevitable so stock up early and often. I feel safer already.

Click to expand...

After reading the rest of this thread I'm only going to to reply to this post, after this things get silly.

Your above statement while accurate is not entirely true. The Senate will now be the real balance in this administration, at least for the next few years. Without the required majority to ram through whatever they like the Dems will have to compromise and work with the minority to get things moving again. They will have to pick their fights much as Bush has had to the last 4 years. They can't veer off to the left too far or they will be blocked, likely to include members of their own party (lots of moderate Dems). The picture is not that bleak and any attempt to circumvent the Constitution is going to bring down a huge fight.

There is also the likelihood that Obama has already discovered, much as Clinton did in 92, that the only real way to govern this country is as a centrist.

baggss said:

There is also the likelihood that Obama has already discovered, much as Clinton did in 92, that the only real way to govern this country is as a centrist.

Click to expand...

I think that is not only a likelyhood but a statement of fact. There seems to be so much fear from people who seem to be paying too much attention to the wrong sources.

Excellent points on the Legislature needing to collaborate more. That would be sweet IMHO. All politics is compromise as they say. On a side note, fortunately, the US President does not govern this country.

Actually, the executive branch does indeed govern. This is, they enforce the laws that the legislative branch enacts.

Guess it's a question of interpretation. I thought all three branches together were suppose to come together to govern -vs- one of them running the show. MY bad.

One enacts laws, one governs (defined as "conduct the policy, actions, and affairs of (a state, organization, or people)", and why your state Governor is referred to as that ) and the third branch rules on the legality of laws, and enforcement.


sorry, it's a pet peeve.

Dysfunction said:

One enacts laws, one governs (defined as "conduct the policy, actions, and affairs of (a state, organization, or people)", and why your state Governor is referred to as that ) and the third branch rules on the legality of laws, and enforcement.


sorry, it's a pet peeve.

Click to expand...

Very true. However the legislative branch, the Senate in the current climate, is going to be the key to what the executive branch can and can't do. In the end though, if Obama wants to truly succeed and govern effectively he will have to do what W never really did, Compromise.

That's always been the case, and why we don't have a prime minister