GOP OVERPLAYED HAND WITH GAMBLING BILL [Archive]

magoo

11-04-2006, 01:51 PM

http://www.newsday.com/news/politics/wire/sns-ap-gambling-politics,0,6213865,print.story?coll=sns-ap-politics-headlines

AP November 3, 2006, 11:00 AM EST

" NEW YORK -- A Republican-sponsored effort to clamp down on Internet gambling may turn out to be a bad bet for the GOP.

The Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act, which President Bush signed into law Oct. 13, has infuriated many voters who enjoy betting on sports or playing poker online, analysts said.

Other observers, however, see little threat to Republicans from the law, calling it a relatively minor matter to most voters......"

mikechops

11-04-2006, 02:59 PM

http://www.newsday.com/search/dispatcher.front?Query=gambling&target=article

Your link didnt work for me. It's about the 4 th story down on this search.

They sure lost one vote here.

Lawman007

11-04-2006, 03:57 PM

Great article!

"I've been a loyal Republican for over 30 years, and I'm quitting the party I once loved," said Jim Henry, 55, who lives outside San Francisco. "Not because of the Mark Foley scandal or Middle East policy. But because the Republican Party wants to stop me from what I love to do: play poker over the Internet."

"I've talked with Republicans all over the country, and they all understand that this is a theft of our liberty," said lifelong Republican Alan Sheldon, 61, of Loveland, Ohio, whose grandmother taught him how to play poker at the age of 4.

Sheldon, who describes himself as a conservative Christian, said he would not vote Republican next week because of the new gambling law."

I'm also a former lifelong Republican who won't be voting Republican in this election. Go to the polls on Tuesday and throw these fascist bastards out of office. Enough is enough!

Borgland

11-04-2006, 04:17 PM

[ QUOTE ]
They sure lost one vote here.

[/ QUOTE ]

Same here. Even though we can still play poker, for now, I'm still pissed about the bill.

jhans24

11-04-2006, 09:26 PM

It's not just republicans you need to vote against. Here's a list of all Members of the House and how they voted on this bill when it was up by itself.

http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2006/roll363.xml

90% of Republicans and 60% of Democrats voted for it. Find out where your representative stands on the issue and vote accordingly. It's not a R vs D issue, please get educated.

Josh

Autocratic

11-04-2006, 09:38 PM

A. a 30% discrepency is huge.
B. You're correct that it's not all about party.

RobDoral

11-04-2006, 10:32 PM

[ QUOTE ]
It's not just republicans you need to vote against. Here's a list of all Members of the House and how they voted on this bill when it was up by itself.

http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2006/roll363.xml

90% of Republicans and 60% of Democrats voted for it. Find out where your representative stands on the issue and vote accordingly. It's not a R vs D issue, please get educated.

Josh

[/ QUOTE ]

None of the people who introduced the bill were Democrats if I'm not mistaken (though there's a fair chance that I AM mistaken).

Good bills generally get some sort of bipartisan support BEFORE the final vote so the two parties can slap each other on the back and get lots of photo ops.

I'm a little suprised at the proportion of Democrats who voted for it though (thanks for the link). But I also think a lot less than 90% of the Republicans who voted for it really cared that much about the issue. But just before an election when ALL of the House members need votes, who's going to defend online gambling when it's already not legal? Won't someone think of the children?!!! (channeling Mrs. Lovejoy of the Simpsons there)

Really it's Frist and the others who used a procedural trick to get this thing passed in an unrelated bill without any real debate on its merits that we should be pissed at (and mildly irritated that the rules make this sort of thing possible in the first place). It's frankly a blatantly UNdemocratic move. What are we a bunch of godless commies that we pull the same crap the People's Republic of China did? (little John Wayne there)

Now I would argue that Republican politicians are a lot more likely to pass this sort of social regulation than Democratic politicians (also gay marriage bans, that sort of thing) but yes, the Democrats didn't really fight for it did they? I think it's a difference of opinion about the fundamental role of the federal government. I don't believe the government should be in the business of legislating morality at all, but that opens a huge can of worms there.

But there are a hell of a lot more important things than online gambling that should sway our votes. I suspect there are other things these disgruntled voters have on their minds than poker and the bill was just the last straw for them.

saucyspade19

11-05-2006, 12:18 AM

[ QUOTE ]

Really it's Frist and the others who used a procedural trick to get this thing passed in an unrelated bill without any real debate on its merits that we should be pissed at (and mildly irritated that the rules make this sort of thing possible in the first place). It's frankly a blatantly UNdemocratic move. What are we a bunch of godless commies that we pull the same crap the People's Republic of China did? (little John Wayne there)

[/ QUOTE ]

Riders = incredibly common legislative tool. Pork barrel legislation is a huge part of what congress does. Not a shocker that a bill that effects so few people winds up as a rider.

The cold hard fact is, when you say how “Undemocratic” the bill is, you have to ask what is a democracy? Sure, it is protecting the rights of the individual, but in a democracy, majority rules. We, as gamblers (which is how congress perceives us, not as poker players) are in the minority here. The zealots of the religious right love this bill, and it really doesn’t matter to many other people. The proportion of people pissed about the bill compared to the people that support “moralist” legislation is in the favor of the latter.
IMO, a big reason this went through is the economic implications of shipping billions overseas. Online poker is an unregulated, multibillion dollar industry, and it certainly hurts the trade deficit. However, if our government wasn’t retarded, they would have legalized it, found a way to tax it, and then eagerly tried to get china into poker. It could be the freakini anti-Walmart, but they are too busy trying to hold down the moral vote.

MEbenhoe

11-05-2006, 02:29 AM

[ QUOTE ]

IMO, a big reason this went through is the economic implications of shipping billions overseas. Online poker is an unregulated, multibillion dollar industry, and it certainly hurts the trade deficit.

[/ QUOTE ]

This factor is very overrated. Even if online gambling sent $10 billion overseas yearly, it would have virtually no economic impact on a national basis, and would account for less than 1% of the yearly trade deficit.

THAY3R

11-05-2006, 03:19 AM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

IMO, a big reason this went through is the economic implications of shipping billions overseas. Online poker is an unregulated, multibillion dollar industry, and it certainly hurts the trade deficit.

[/ QUOTE ]

This factor is very overrated. Even if online gambling sent $10 billion overseas yearly, it would have virtually no economic impact on a national basis, and would account for less than 1% of the yearly trade deficit.

[/ QUOTE ]

BUT DUDE THE TERRORISTS ARE GETTING ALL OF THAT MONEY ZOMG THE WORLD IS GOING TO DIE

dwatts1350

11-05-2006, 01:59 PM

Anyone who votes against the republicans because of this bill is an absolute moron. My God do you have any idea how much rides on this election? I LOVE poker, just like everyone here. But I'd rather have lower taxes, feel safe, not have San Francisco views put on me, fight terrorism and have a robust economy, than play online poker. I live in the middle of nowhere West Virginia and even I can find a cash game or tournament every day of the week, sometimes multiple games.

Yeah the ban sucks, but there are WAY more important things on the line than online gambling. Also, I didn't see very many, if any, Dems voting against this or fighting it.

Philuva

11-05-2006, 02:17 PM

[ QUOTE ]
not have San Francisco views put on me

[/ QUOTE ]

Seriously dude, you need to stop listening to Fox News.

Lawman007

11-05-2006, 02:24 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Anyone who votes against the republicans because of this bill is an absolute moron. My God do you have any idea how much rides on this election? I LOVE poker, just like everyone here. But I'd rather have lower taxes, feel safe, not have San Francisco views put on me, fight terrorism and have a robust economy, than play online poker. I live in the middle of nowhere West Virginia and even I can find a cash game or tournament every day of the week, sometimes multiple games.

Yeah the ban sucks, but there are WAY more important things on the line than online gambling. Also, I didn't see very many, if any, Dems voting against this or fighting it.

[/ QUOTE ]

This bill is not the only reason that I, a lifelong Republican, will be voting for the Democrats this election, but it is a factor. The other factors are the war in Iraq, the lies that have been told to us, stem cell research, immigration, health care and insurance costs, and many other factors. The Republicans are leading us straight to hell, and they need to go.

fsuplayer

11-05-2006, 03:42 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Anyone who votes against the republicans because of this bill is an absolute moron. My God do you have any idea how much rides on this election?

[/ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I live in the middle of nowhere West Virginia

[/ QUOTE ]

yeah ya do.

moayer

11-05-2006, 04:58 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
not have San Francisco views put on me

[/ QUOTE ]

Seriously dude, you need to stop listening to Fox News.

[/ QUOTE ]

mikechops

11-05-2006, 05:49 PM

[ QUOTE ]

This bill is not the only reason that I, a lifelong Republican, will be voting for the Democrats this election, but it is a factor. The other factors are the war in Iraq, the lies that have been told to us, stem cell research, immigration, health care and insurance costs, and many other factors. The Republicans are leading us straight to hell, and they need to go.

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree with this. Without the bill, I maybe wouldn't have had a spark to detonate my unease with the other things you mention. The way I feel now is throw the bums out.

MyTurn2Raise

11-05-2006, 07:40 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
not have San Francisco views put on me

[/ QUOTE ]

Seriously dude, you need to stop listening to Fox News.

[/ QUOTE ]

[/ QUOTE ]

depends...it actually is the most fair and balanced of the news networks

but, that isn't saying much

jaminbird

11-05-2006, 08:10 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
not have San Francisco views put on me

[/ QUOTE ]

Seriously dude, you need to stop listening to Fox News.

[/ QUOTE ]

[/ QUOTE ]

depends...it actually is the most fair and balanced of the news networks

but, that isn't saying much

[/ QUOTE ]

You sir are crazy, unless I just got 2nd leveled /images/graemlins/frown.gif

saucyspade19

11-05-2006, 08:15 PM

obv noone knows who nancy pelosi is. If you want someone who hates america running the country, vote democrat because that is what is at stake. This could be the second worst thing that could possibly happen to this country, only to hilary clinton getting in office. I will [censored] move to sweden.

bones

11-05-2006, 08:22 PM

[ QUOTE ]
obv noone knows who nancy pelosi is. If you want someone who hates america running the country, vote democrat because that is what is at stake. This could be the second worst thing that could possibly happen to this country, only to hilary clinton getting in office. I will [censored] move to sweden.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, she'll probably start trying to do all sorts of unamerican things like infringing on free speech, right to privacy, protection from illegal search and seizures, and getting us involved in an incredibly costly, inefficient war that will only serve to kill many thousands of americans while basically accomplishing nothing.

asb165

11-05-2006, 08:29 PM

Take this to Politics.

Oberonn

11-05-2006, 08:55 PM

Generally speaking, anyone who has become financially successful leans towards voting Republican. Most Americans, when they first get the right to vote, will vote Democrat because the Republicans want to force their moral views down everyone's throat with legislation.

Eventually the financial considerations will turn these voters to the Republican side. I have only voted for a handful of Democrats in the past 20 years and I have made every effort to sway my son and his friends to make an early jump from Democrat to Republican.

However, with the Republicans now stomping on personal liberties by allowing Homeland Security data to be used against Americans obviously not involved with terrorism, blocking stem cell research, slowly eliminating abortion rights which mean women will be seeking out unsafe alternatives, and trying to eliminate online gambling which means the players will be seeking out alternative funding which will be less secure, I am doubting my own views.

What makes it even worse is the Republicans tried to utterly destroy Bill Clinton when he had an affair with a woman of legal age yet they chase boys below the legal age of consent. What kind of message is this sending? Whatever happened to the old political mantra: "Your position is secure as long as you are not found in bed with a dead girl or a live boy"?

Even so I can not just blindly vote Democrat. I will vote for every Libertarian candidate that is presented as a choice and write in Mike Caro for every office where the only option is Democrat or Republican.

Equal

11-05-2006, 09:24 PM

The real problem is the two-party system.

saucyspade19

11-05-2006, 09:45 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Generally speaking, anyone who has become financially successful leans towards voting Republican. Most Americans, when they first get the right to vote, will vote Democrat because the Republicans want to force their moral views down everyone's throat with legislation.

Eventually the financial considerations will turn these voters to the Republican side. I have only voted for a handful of Democrats in the past 20 years and I have made every effort to sway my son and his friends to make an early jump from Democrat to Republican.

However, with the Republicans now stomping on personal liberties by allowing Homeland Security data to be used against Americans obviously not involved with terrorism, blocking stem cell research, slowly eliminating abortion rights which mean women will be seeking out unsafe alternatives, and trying to eliminate online gambling which means the players will be seeking out alternative funding which will be less secure, I am doubting my own views.

What makes it even worse is the Republicans tried to utterly destroy Bill Clinton when he had an affair with a woman of legal age yet they chase boys below the legal age of consent. What kind of message is this sending? Whatever happened to the old political mantra: "Your position is secure as long as you are not found in bed with a dead girl or a live boy"?

Even so I can not just blindly vote Democrat. I will vote for every Libertarian candidate that is presented as a choice and write in Mike Caro for every office where the only option is Democrat or Republican.

[/ QUOTE ]

nh sir.

I have never felt so alienated by the republican party, yet the fact of the matter is, the democratic platform is "attack what the republicans are doing, then figure out what to do once we get in office." I think it's safe to say that over the last 8 years, politics has polarized where the extreme left and the extreme right are running everything, and the majority of us are in the middle, just trying to live our lives. I [censored] hated that pussy John McCain for jumping ship on the republicans awhile ago in the so-called "gang of 14," and i hated how he exploited baseball's steroid problem to make legislation and put his face everywhere, but maybe this is what we need. A middle of the road guy that can actually straddle the fence. Keep us secure from the people trying to blow us up, let the gays marry, let women abort, and resonably protect personal freedoms in the dangerous new world we live in.

and this thread did take a political turn....probably was never good for nvg to begin with.

Lawman007

11-06-2006, 12:16 AM

YoungGifted

11-06-2006, 03:39 AM

[ QUOTE ]
yet the fact of the matter is, the democratic platform is "attack what the republicans are doing, then figure out what to do once we get in office

[/ QUOTE ]
i stopped reading here

arahant

11-06-2006, 05:13 AM

[ QUOTE ]
obv noone knows who nancy pelosi is. If you want someone who hates america running the country, vote democrat because that is what is at stake. This could be the second worst thing that could possibly happen to this country, only to hilary clinton getting in office. I will [censored] move to sweden.

[/ QUOTE ]
Ok, i know Nancy Pelosi hates America...that's obvious. But we're not voting in CA...do all democrats hate america? or is it just that with nancy as speaker, they will be powerless to thwart her plans?

For those that don't live in CA, Nancy Pelosi actually campaigns here on two slogans:
1) I Hate America, and
2) San Francisco Views (proper pronunciation involves a stereotypically gay lisp, and prolongation of 'views'.

On a related matter...does the south still want to seccede? I know it seemed like a bad idea at the time, but...

mo42nyy

11-06-2006, 05:49 AM

I really don't follow politics at all but John McCain has been against online gambling since there has been online gambling so I know have any idea what you're talking about saucy.

JDalla

11-06-2006, 07:23 AM

All democrats hate America because they're undercover aliens, pretending they enjoy living in the US.

All republicans love America because God tells them we are the greatest. Republicans can talk directly to God, it's quite a perk.

In 2008 I'm voting Eric Molina for president, because he IS God.

kidcolin

11-06-2006, 06:09 PM

JDalla,

lol. nice post.

[ QUOTE ]
Generally speaking, anyone who has become financially successful leans towards voting Republican. Most Americans, when they first get the right to vote, will vote Democrat because the Republicans want to force their moral views down everyone's throat with legislation.

[/ QUOTE ]

... as opposed to the Democrats who want to force their moral views down.... everyone's throat with.... legislation...

fnurt

11-06-2006, 06:18 PM

Right, because the Democrats want to pass legislation forcing everyone to be gay. Ideally, they'd like to see mandatory gay abortions, with a celebratory burning of the flag and/or Bible afterwards.

JDalla

11-07-2006, 12:42 AM

[ QUOTE ]
JDalla,

lol. nice post.

[ QUOTE ]
Generally speaking, anyone who has become financially successful leans towards voting Republican. Most Americans, when they first get the right to vote, will vote Democrat because the Republicans want to force their moral views down everyone's throat with legislation.

[/ QUOTE ]

... as opposed to the Democrats who want to force their moral views down.... everyone's throat with.... legislation...

[/ QUOTE ]

That post was a joke obviously, but on a more serious note, what moral views do Democrats try to force on people with legislation? I really can't think of any, except bipartisian things like outlawing drugs, prostitution, etc.

It's quite a stretch to call "right to choose" a moral view being forced on people... hence the "choose" part.

Please elaborate.

Oberonn

11-07-2006, 04:59 AM

To a Democrat gun control would be a moral view. To a Republican gun control is having a steady hand and a light trigger.

If the Democrats ever got a clue and embraced the right to own firearms the Republicans would have a hard time winning local elections for dogcatcher.

JDalla

11-07-2006, 10:02 AM

I suppose gun control could be seen as a moral view. Good point.

I don't see why either party is so adament about it. on the one hand, it is a "personal freedom," however it has been shown that one is statisticly less safe with a gun in the house (I believe... don't quote me on this one). But Republicans aren't huge on personal freedoms, and Democrats shouldn't care that much anyway cause it's not one of the leading causes of death anyway.

Point is... "X is wrong because it is a sin" is a lot more of a "moral view" than "X is wrong because it isn't safe/ hurts the poor/ is bad for economy, etc. etc."

okietalker

11-07-2006, 06:37 PM

The poster who stated that most voters sart off as Dem and slowly become more Rep is a lot more on the money than most give him credit here. Something to think about when you are making money off of poker is just how much of my profit is Uncle Sam going to want? And when your vote can directly affect your wallet people tend to vote accordingly.

Just a thought.
p.s. I did vote for some Rep's today but mostly it was a good day for Dem's on my ballot. And this is the first time in my life I have voted for a Dem.

ncboiler

11-07-2006, 06:53 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
They sure lost one vote here.

[/ QUOTE ]

Same here. Even though we can still play poker, for now, I'm still pissed about the bill.

[/ QUOTE ]

ncboiler

11-07-2006, 06:57 PM

ncboiler

11-07-2006, 07:01 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Anyone who votes against the republicans because of this bill is an absolute moron. My God do you have any idea how much rides on this election? I LOVE poker, just like everyone here. But I'd rather have lower taxes, feel safe, not have San Francisco views put on me, fight terrorism and have a robust economy, than play online poker. I live in the middle of nowhere West Virginia and even I can find a cash game or tournament every day of the week, sometimes multiple games.

Yeah the ban sucks, but there are WAY more important things on the line than online gambling. Also, I didn't see very many, if any, Dems voting against this or fighting it.

[/ QUOTE ]

You're correct. I love the fact that my emails can now be read, my phone conversations can be listened to, and I can be imprisoned without charge or trial because I am a "Terroist". I don't see how I can't vote Republican. By the way. Before this election I've voted for exactly one Democrat in my 22 year voting career.

Neurotoxin

11-07-2006, 10:54 PM

If the last 6 years doesn't warrant a change in government, then what would it take? Is there even an argument that this was most poorly governed America ever?

tempogain

11-07-2006, 11:03 PM

[ QUOTE ]
To a Democrat gun control would be a moral view. To a Republican gun control is having a steady hand and a light trigger.

[/ QUOTE ]

no, it's a public safety issue.

Shoe

11-07-2006, 11:05 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
To a Democrat gun control would be a moral view. To a Republican gun control is having a steady hand and a light trigger.

[/ QUOTE ]

no, it's a public safety issue.

[/ QUOTE ]

In which way is it a public safety issue? States that have enacted laws to allow their citizens to carry concealed weapons (with a permit) have seen their violent crime rates drop. A criminals biggest fear is that his/her next victim will be armed.

ncboiler

11-07-2006, 11:30 PM

lacky

11-08-2006, 01:38 AM

[ QUOTE ]
But I'd rather have lower taxes, feel safe, not have San Francisco views put on me, fight terrorism and have a robust economy, than play online poker.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'd rather feed my kids, so there is no larger issue for me this election. When you try to fire me from my job, it gets personal, I dont much care about all the rest now.

tempogain

11-08-2006, 02:00 AM

it's not a no-victim morality issue, like gay marriage. you may not agree, and there are certainly arguments in favor of gun possesion, but a gun in the end is a weapon designed to kill people, pure and simple, making the possesion issue a legitimate public safety concern.

PDX_David

11-08-2006, 02:05 AM

Here are 3 quick things that I think about the current state of the Government.

1. Even if they actually cared about the good of the American people when they first got into politics... They stop shortly after, and concentrate only on keeping their jobs and making money.

2. They do not represent us, they represent the businesses and special interest groups that contribute the huge dollars that they find some way to steal or use to keep their jobs.

3. There is only one thing that politicians do 100% of the time in a bipartisan fashion... LIE

The bad news is that there is no end in site...

ubercuber

11-08-2006, 02:11 AM

[ QUOTE ]
Anyone who votes against the republicans because of this bill is an absolute moron. My God do you have any idea how much rides on this election? I LOVE poker, just like everyone here. But I'd rather have lower taxes, feel safe, not have San Francisco views put on me, fight terrorism and have a robust economy, than play online poker. I live in the middle of nowhere West Virginia and even I can find a cash game or tournament every day of the week, sometimes multiple games.

Yeah the ban sucks, but there are WAY more important things on the line than online gambling. Also, I didn't see very many, if any, Dems voting against this or fighting it.

[/ QUOTE ]

This scares me more than terrorists. Obviously we all value safety, but giving up freedom is Bullsh*t.

San Francisco views put on you? That is scarier that right wing conservative views being put on you? Which party is really more likely to "put a view on you"? Relax, mandatory homosexuality is at least 10 years away. Mandatory right wing morality is here today.

iH8poker

11-08-2006, 03:29 AM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
To a Democrat gun control would be a moral view. To a Republican gun control is having a steady hand and a light trigger.

[/ QUOTE ]
no, it's a public safety issue.

[/ QUOTE ]
I really disagree with many dems on gun controll. I like owning a gun or at least that I could own a gun /images/graemlins/smile.gif But Rep, come on, assault riffles?

That's where it's rediculous IMO. I don't feel the 'Iraqi mentallity' is good for the US or applies (let's all buy assault riffles, incase we get taken over, so we make it chaotic) OR the old idea of an assault riffles could actually defeat the government (for rebellion). Who ever hunts, or claims to, with an assault riffle is a [censored].

Now, if we could own tanks and bozokas and anti-aircraft missle launchers...then that is another story, and I'm not really against those too much and would feel much more confident in a coup-de-tete or whatev'. 2000 elections :P?

But owning a fire-arm or semi-automatic 9mm is no big deal. Gangs get them anyway. I suggest everyone buy them, and don't believe in those safety polls, just keep them away from your kids. Without a gun, how the hell are you going to scare people from robbing you? If you have never been robbed, then you don't know. Death is the only thing that scares them, the justice system is a joke...more Marijuana arrests are made than numerous violent crimes combined. My brother almost got killed by a 17yr...he served 3 months in Juv. and vowed vengence...trust me, you don't go to the police to discuss that, you take action yourself. The dirt bag was a drop out with numerous violent crimes under his belt already...I had a college degree and a highly regulated job that would be prohibbited with any felony on my record. He had a big advantage in our interactions as he was not afraid of police involvement where as I was. If he had several bruises one day or a black eye, he goes on about his business, but as a office worker, your looking like a fight club guy. Guns are the only way to even the score. I let the kid know I would kill him and not think twice. It never came down to it, but without a gun, I would end up either being ignored by the police (it took over 30 minutes for them to come to the house during the life threatening incident after the 911 call, they were about 5 to 10 minutes from getting away) or I'd have to threaten to cut him up, which is not near as believable, and he had much better knives (he used a brass-knuckle device that had a 4" blade attached to it, this is very deadly weapon and I have never used one). I'm not letting a gangster live with only minor scaring to deal with if he tries to kill me or 3 months juv. That's just a recipe for vengance and he benefits in the risk vs. reward equation. I don't favor more police involvement at all. I'm fine with a semi-automatic.

satelliter

11-08-2006, 04:38 AM

If my neighbor owns a gun it affects indirectly my safety and the safety of little schoolgirls lately. Unfortunately it's his constitutional right. If my neighbor marries his ferret I will sleep ok though.

ubercuber

11-08-2006, 04:42 AM

Our weapons are worthless against US military, and nobody is taking over the US... nobody hits our shore.

Threatening to kill someone is a bad idea. If your going to kill them, why tip them off? If someone poses a threat to your family, and you believe that justifies killing them...

Surprise is arguably more important than your weapon of choice.

I don't really have an opinion on gun control, I don't hunt, or own a gun.

lol_variance

11-08-2006, 04:47 AM

What if your neighbor gets tired of the ferret and starts looking toward the little schoolgirls? Then you will wish that at least one of your neighbors has a gun. Nothin like a good pistol whipping to flush out those unnatural urges.

satelliter

11-08-2006, 04:53 AM

He shot those 10 girls last week, didn't you hear?

satelliter

11-08-2006, 04:57 AM

If he hadn't had a gun, he could have been easily stopped from harming any of those little girls.

Ace upmy Slv

11-08-2006, 12:33 PM

[ QUOTE ]
The real problem is the two-party system.

[/ QUOTE ]

Exactly

permafrost

11-08-2006, 01:52 PM

[ QUOTE ]
I'm a little suprised at the proportion of Democrats who voted for it though (thanks for the link). But I also think a lot less than 90% of the Republicans who voted for it really cared that much about the issue. But just before an election when ALL of the House members need votes, who's going to defend online gambling when it's already not legal?

[/ QUOTE ]

Given that laws make online gambling "not legal", and that our elected officials should support law enforcement, shouldn't you be surprised that 40% of Dems and 10% of Reps voted to not help with enforcement?

Ace upmy Slv

11-08-2006, 03:36 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
obv noone knows who nancy pelosi is. If you want someone who hates america running the country, vote democrat because that is what is at stake. This could be the second worst thing that could possibly happen to this country, only to hilary clinton getting in office. I will [censored] move to sweden.

[/ QUOTE ]
Ok, i know Nancy Pelosi hates America...that's obvious. But we're not voting in CA...do all democrats hate america? or is it just that with nancy as speaker, they will be powerless to thwart her plans?

For those that don't live in CA, Nancy Pelosi actually campaigns here on two slogans:
1) I Hate America, and
2) San Francisco Views (proper pronunciation involves a stereotypically gay lisp, and prolongation of 'views'.

On a related matter...does the south still want to seccede? I know it seemed like a bad idea at the time, but...

[/ QUOTE ]

Ok, i know Nancy Pelosi hates America...that's obvious.

Statements like this are just moronic. Why do you think statements like these exist and where do they come from? Do you really think she 'hates' America?

No, this is a direct result of her opposition to Bush and the the wonderful Evangilistic Right Wing Republican thought system in our country today. It's the same as the 'If your not religious your not moral' crap in our Government. The thought process is if you don't support Bush, then you don't support America because if your not Christian your not American. She doesn't support Bush and therefore has been deemed anti-American by a lot of biased media avenues.

I am not a big supporter of hers, but I am not going to agree with that idiotic statement that she hates America. I am on the fence about her at the moment and am waiting to see how she handles her new position.

HOWEVER, the biggest positive result from all of the elections has got to be the resigning/firing of Rumsfeld. What a great day for America.

arahant

11-08-2006, 05:51 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
obv noone knows who nancy pelosi is. If you want someone who hates america running the country, vote democrat because that is what is at stake. This could be the second worst thing that could possibly happen to this country, only to hilary clinton getting in office. I will [censored] move to sweden.

[/ QUOTE ]
Ok, i know Nancy Pelosi hates America...that's obvious. But we're not voting in CA...do all democrats hate america? or is it just that with nancy as speaker, they will be powerless to thwart her plans?

For those that don't live in CA, Nancy Pelosi actually campaigns here on two slogans:
1) I Hate America, and
2) San Francisco Views (proper pronunciation involves a stereotypically gay lisp, and prolongation of 'views'.

On a related matter...does the south still want to seccede? I know it seemed like a bad idea at the time, but...

[/ QUOTE ]

Ok, i know Nancy Pelosi hates America...that's obvious.

Statements like this are just moronic. Why do you think statements like these exist and where do they come from? Do you really think she 'hates' America?

No, this is a direct result of her opposition to Bush and the the wonderful Evangilistic Right Wing Republican thought system in our country today. It's the same as the 'If your not religious your not moral' crap in our Government. The thought process is if you don't support Bush, then you don't support America because if your not Christian your not American. She doesn't support Bush and therefore has been deemed anti-American by a lot of biased media avenues.

I am not a big supporter of hers, but I am not going to agree with that idiotic statement that she hates America. I am on the fence about her at the moment and am waiting to see how she handles her new position.

HOWEVER, the biggest positive result from all of the elections has got to be the resigning/firing of Rumsfeld. What a great day for America.

[/ QUOTE ]

Statements like this are only moronic to those who can't detect wild hyperbole or sarcasm that's so obvious it almost loses it's humor.