Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunter's Campfire Barakistan

As did anyone who voted for McCain

Wrong. McCain may not have been great on the 2nd and on gun ownership, but he was and remains FAR better than Hussein. And that, is saying something.

Never said McCain was perfect, or even a "good" choice, but FAR better than Hussein.

Both were for banning semi-autos and banning gun shows. How does that make one anything other than the equal of the other?

Eric Holder. Sonia Sotamayor.

Two prime examples.

Without even getting into the rest of it.

What has any of this got to do with Barakistan?

I agree with you in the sense that McCain is not quite as much of a leftist as Hussein. Maybe even a good bit less leftist. That said (and don't go saying I voted for Obama, because no way in hell I did, nor would have voted for a Democrat), but that said, you have to admit that the Obama catastrophe of a presidency is actually doing good things for the Republican Party. Likely MUCH better things than a McCain presidency would have done. In fact, a McCain presidency would have likely made the Republican Party even worse than it was under Bush. You have to admit that, right?

Great, McCain voted to approve Holder. So we have 3 anti-gun actions out of McCain so that means anyone supporting him supported an anti-2nd Amendment candidate.

Voting to approve is a whole HELLUVA lot different from nominating in the first place. Deference to the executive branch in nomination and getting the DSMFer of their choice for Cabinet positions is a LONG held practice. You want a turd, you'll normally get it. Be careful what you ask for, basically.

Whole lot different from nominating the same.

I am figuring it is business as usual. Back in the 90's (R) politicians and their voters talked like (as in feigned support for) limited government/pro-individual liberty supporters, but once they got control of the house, senate, and presidency the politicians and their voters showed their statist stripes with a big [bleep] you to anyone that truly was limited government/pro-individual liberty supporters.

If McCain voted for a turd most likely he would have nominated a turd.

Well gee, I would hate to flip the bird to tradition and expect any of them to actually go to bat for the oath of office they lied about. They have better than a century of violating that oath so who would want to break up that racket.

Sounds like I've stepped on some anti-gun vote for McCain toes. I didn't ask for a turd, sounds like you did though.

Not saying he wouldn't have, but it'd have been a less stinky turd in all probability, due to the other persons involved in vetting and recommending.

Nope, wrong again.

I voted AGAINST the worst candidate in the history of the U.S.; one ardently and diametrically opposed to my beliefs and values. In order to cast a vote MOST against that POS, I had to vote FOR a far lesser candidate than I would have preferred, especially given that my state was "in play".

Now, JasonB, whom did YOU vote for and why?

So if you didn't vote for McCain, then who did you vote for?

I voted for Baldwin due to his limited government/pro-individual liberty positions that he has held for at least the last 10 years that I have been aware of his existence.

I did vote for McCain, though technically, it was a vote AGAINST Hussein. McCain would not have been my choice, but he was the only option out there that stood a chance of keeping Hussein from the White House. McCain wasn't the perfect choice, and IMHO not even a good choice, but he was a far better choice than Hussein.

I can't fault the Baldwin choice.

So, again, I wasn't wrong.

I think McCain = Hussein and if anything Hussein was the "better" win because at least (R) voters will get mad everytime he gets up in the morning. (R) supporters were already showing their true colors by encouraging a vote for McCain due to Obama's voting for the bailouts so I tend to doubt their level of honesty would have improved any when they got what they wanted.

Gotta ask, if you aren't a registered (R) then why vote for their lemons? A guy on another forum proudly announced he had withdrew his (R) registration (which I took him at his word to be true,) but then got royally pissed off at anyone who pointed out the failings of (R) candidates that he invariably voted for and also criticised anyone promoting various 3rd party candidates. I really fail to see the benefit in voting (R) in the general election no matter what POS gets puked up, but then not being registered as such which prevents voting in primary elections where occasionally (to the tune of almost never) decent candidates can sometimes be found running.

If you think McCain is the equal in dumbphuckitude and in anti-2nd Amendment, anti-gun-ownership, anti-Americanism to Hussein, you're far less intelligent than I gave you credit for.

Other than McCain (as stated on the other thread "Nimrodia", show me where I voted for an (R) party POTUS candidate. Wait, that's right..... you can't. If possible, I vote for the best candidate running (and at times, that's meant (R)s, (D)s, and other party candidates). In 2008, the worst possible candidate I could imagine was running for the (D)s, and the only chance I had to keep that out was to vote for the (R). Which is exactly what I did.

Pretty damn close, and as stated before experience has shown me that an (R) official can rape, rob, pillage with impunity and (R) voters will lie for their candidate just like the sleaziest (D) and their supporters will.

Good for you on 2008 being your first, although you picked a bad time to do it. I made the mistake of voting Bush in 2004 and I make it a point of pride to never make the same mistake twice.