If digging into "Joe the Plumber's" background becomes common practice with the new crew on the hill - mums the word eh?

it's pretty obvious from his behavior during the campaign that this administration will govern thru intimidation and common thuggery. i think we just elected ahmadinejad chavez to the presidency.

It is pretty obvious from how America voted that the masses are asses. How anyone with more than 3 working brain cells could vote for someone who would grab guns and distribute wealth is beyond me. Yet..it happened. How sad.

rk

The great thing about this country is that there are checks and balances. The President doesn't get to make law unilaterally. Virtually all of of the Congressional majority are more moderate than Obama.

I saw it was over the minute he chose Sarah Palin as his running mate. It was obvious to me all along. And all he has to do is sign the world wide gun ban with NATO and we could be in trouble.

Well the heart of the country lost this time. It is kinda wierd knowning the new prez can't live in my home town.Alaska is looking real good to me

If I lived in the same state with George Bush, Will, I believe I would have moved a long time ago. LOL

Will, now we can call you the Dancin' "W". LOL

History will show the results of yesterday to be a sad sad day for this country. Just shows that he who knows how to motivate the "have nots" can win an election. Even worse is what has become of the media in this country; you absolutely can't believe a thing that is reported. We must all become better at digging out the facts for ourselves. Now to figure out where to hide the guns. Remember what happened to Germany? Some of us are old enough for that. All said, today we're still in the best country in the world; hope it remains that way. I really feel sorry for our troops; having been in the military for over 22 years I have concern for them. Enough said; hope I haven't over stepped but if I have....to bad......cbb

Beware fellas.....Big Brother could be watching already!!!!

No wonder were in trouble,looks like everyone has already admitted defeat and is ready to lay down and be walked on. Sorry for any mistakes in my text, i only have one hand and one finger for now. Rich

Far as I can see, you need to watch his wife more. She will put Hillary to shame. She is far more dangerous than Hillary and Hillary ran Slick Willie.

Might better get used to calling each other Komrad! From everyone according to their ability, to everyone according to their need.

We will experience the greatest redistribution of wealth this country ahs ever seen. We will experience the most aggressive gun control legislation this country has ever seen.
we will see the greatest increase inj taxes this country has ever seen
we will see the granting of full rights to 30 million illegal aliens in this country through free health care, free college educations, drastic increases in public asisstance and entitltement programs.

Michele OBama said "The truth is, in order to get things like universal health care and a revamped education system, then someone is going to have to give up a piece of their pie so that someone else can have more."

All in the name of "economic and social justice"

This will be a "co-presidency".
You will see the use of Executive Orders on a scale never before seen to circumvent ocngress to enact their agenda.
Even with the Dems controlling both houses and them wary of thier constituents, O will use htese EO's to enact the most draconian gun control among other things unilateraly.

You will be punished for being successful and working hard. Villified, demonized.

God help this country.

Post deleted by Humpty Dumpty

Ban you? Heaven forfend! Take what you say seriously? It is to laugh!

Based on what we know and can expect about BHO we Americans, especially gun-owning Americans, have some legitimate concerns. Could bad things happen? Yes. Are we going to "let" these things happen? Only to the extent that our opposition is overridden.

American freedom and democracy, and Americans' belief in same, promise to remain strong no matter who occupes the White House and the Congress. Can one make the same claims about Russia under Putin? Most likely not. I think that if they are concerned about "pathetic" and "disgusting" Russians would do well to concern themselves with matters that are a bit closer to home!

Now I realize this is a gun board, but aren't there bigger fish to fry for this guy? Do you all think that his first order of biz is to disarm us all? I did NOT vote for him, and a lot of that decision was because of his potential to infringe on by right to my hobby, but I think the economy, the wars, etc. is a lot higher on the list for him. We have to band together to stop anything like the gun control we all fear. He is not a dictator and still has to answer to a lot of people for his actions. If we implement ourselves as a check and balance with the NRA and other lobbies we have in our corner, I believe we have less to fear. Not to say we should not be vigilent in our observation of his intentions. But I think what happened yesterday was an example of what, a group can do together. We need to be just as effective as they are.

....are you referring to Joe the "I'm not a plumber, but I hope to play one on tv"?....this fraud was uncovered by the press; not the "....new crew on the hill"

Brian,

I'm sure we agree on a lot of things, and I'm not trying to pick a fight, but before concluding that "We will experience the greatest redistribution of wealth this country ahs ever seen... we will see the greatest increase inj taxes this country has ever seen," it's worth taking a look at income tax rates in the U.S. from a historical perspective:

http://www.taxfoundation.org/taxdata/show/151.html

I don't like high taxes either, but it's hard to imagine even in the worst case that upper bracket rates under Obama will be anywhere near as redistributive as they were for much of the 20th century.

No, I didn't vote for him either, but he's the one we got & we must make the best of it. Make no mistake, he will be under a microscope immediately upon taking office. If he turns out to be a bad president we have only ourselves to blame for not getting out the vote for those of our beliefs. They were organized and we were not. A close friend of mine was a poll watcher here in South Carolina for the Republican side. The poll watcher for the Democrats had a list of registered Democrats. As each one voted he would cross the name off his list and late in the afternoon if there was a name there who hadn't voted someione went to pick up him or her and drive them to vote. I can't imagine the Republicans did anything like that anywhere. Voter apathy cost us this election. Hopefully we will learn from it at not too high a price.

Just My Thoughts.......George

A joke I heard on the radio: Barack Obama got in trouble with his kids when he took away 64% of their trick-or-treat candy and redistributed it to the kids who just stayed home watching TV.

Our only hope are those 44 Republican Senators still hanging on. At this moment, we have a 570 vote lead in Minnesoata, a 15,000 vote lead in Oregon with 25% left to count. Even Stevens who was just found guilty of a crime has a lead in Alaska. They are the last best hope for two years for stopping bad legislation.

doubletrouble, in order for BO to attain any of his "world order" socialist programs he must first disarm the American public and render ineffective the Second Amendment which guarantees our Constitution and Bill of Rights.

The right of the people to keep and bear arms is and must continue to be the most importand and precious right we have. It even guarantees out right to free elections - the right to vote.

http://www.govtrack.us/congress/billtext.xpd?bill=h110-1022

Here is a link to the new "Assault Weapons" ban that has already been introduced in the House. With a large majority in Both Houses now that will be quickly acted upon after Obama is sworn in.
All he will have to do is sign this bill and it will become the law of the land. This is a slam dunk when you look at his past record on gun legislation. Will this immediately affect double guns which is our primary interest? No but it's a first step down the road to registration and eventual confiscation.
Obama will also be in the position to adopt the arms proliferation agreement put forth by the United Nations which will further curtail your right to keep and bear arms.
Welcome to socialist reality.
Jim

"world order" socialist programs....where do you get this shit?....Obama stated that he would let the Bush tax cuts expire for people earning over $200,000 a year....that's a far cry from being a socialist program....he made the mistake of referring to this tax cut expiration as a "spreading of wealth" and McCain jumped all over it, calling it socialism....this is no more "socialism" than it was before the Bush tax cuts were implemented.....in view of the record profits posted by Exxon and the spreading distance between the middle class and the wealthy, allowing the tax cuts to expire would seem a good idea....the fact that John McCain repeatedly called this idea "socialist" and proclaimed it LOUDLY doesn't make it socialist....but it would seem that saying it often and loudly does succeed in convincing those who would not bother to look at what was actually said.....

Proportionally I would wager that I am correct if he returns to even 50% max MTR.

Obscenely high rates happened before, there is nothing that says they cant/wont happen again. But to look at those rates which ran as high as 91%; at that time in our history far fewer people were in the middle and uppe middle class. the numbers that were affected by that high rate were far smaller than now. But the rates existed because they were legislated. And you cannot deny he has an extremely liberal social agenda for leveling the playing field and taking pieces of the pie.




The bottom 40% of wage earners pay no income taxes at all. He already said he would raise taxes on all wage earners making over 250,000. Thats a lot of small business owners . they dont pay corporate income tax, they pay it on their gross income only which is what the business earns. Take from the haves and give to the have nots.

Whenever someone starts talking about fairness and economic justice they are enaging in class warfare.

If you think for a minute that we dont have to worry about the MOST LIBERAL MEMBER OF CONGRESS who is now President Elect not wanting to push his own agenda you are living in a fantasy land. Executive orders dont require anything from congress. BHO will be able to legislate whatever he wants without anyones say. he cant you say! Look how many times Bill Clinton used executive orders to do what he wanted.

Will this happen overnight. no. But just like the lobster that you put in a pot of cold water and turn on the stove and he finallyt boils to death without a struggle becuase he gets used to the water as it gets hotter unhtil he is paralized and then cooks, it will creep up on us.

With an executive order BHO can ban whatever he wants. He does not need congress. besides which, both houses are Dem controlled and when the Messiah speaks they will bow down.

This is my opinion. Do I hope I am wrong. yes I do. Does that mean I dont anticipate possible problems. No.

Brian,

Just wondering if you if you did few take a moment to look at the historical tax rate data in the link that I posted. No one in his worst nightmare can imagine the tax rates under Obama would be anywhere close to as redistributive as they were in the 40's through 1980. I wasn't around in the 50's, but I don't think this was a socialist country then, and and don't remember hearing that people referred to each other as "komrad" under Truman and Eisenhower. The state has been interventionist and redistributive to varying degrees for much of the past century, and even if Obama were able to enact most of his program (which is unlikely) we would still be well within historical ranges of goverment activism, with no reason to believe that we are heading towards socialism.

I noticed that you refer to Orwell in you signature line - It is obvious to me what he would have though of attempts to label a modest adjustment in taxes and government social programs as "socialism." This is a good example of Newspeak - a reduction of the range of terms used so that thoughts are simplified, conclusions arrived at easily, and critical thought stifled. For me, calling Obama a "socialist" is equivalent the tendency of some on the left of the spectrum to irresponsibly refer to their opponents on the right as "fascists."

To put it another way, are those who label Obama a socialist really trying to get me to believe that a candidate who proposes a top income tax rate of 35% is not a socialist and one who proposes a rate of 39% is?

As for those who are concerned about the intrusiveness of the government under Obama, have you taken a look at the rules just enacted by Bush increasing the power of the FBI to gather information on us, even if we are not under investigation for a specific offence?

Dave

Dave you make a good point. W gave our rights up. The terrorists fly into the WTC and we as a nation cower down and are OK with throwing away our constitutional rights. Bush should be ashamed of himself. IMO, if Bush wouldn't have gotten the country in such a mess, BHO would NEVER have had a shot at winning this race. I just hope for the best now.

Don't give up hope yet Major. Just as there was a "Special Ops." plan to nail that traitor-[censored] Hanoi Jane Fonda and her dipstick rich hubby Ted Turner- after they bought that property in MT and posted it-even the rivers, and MT has "run of the river access rights"- some ex-well- anyway ex- were plotting to take them out via a sniper op. while they were fly-fishing out there-didn't happen, they never got Rev. Jesse Jackson (yet) but how many Secret Service agents are gonna "take the High Hard One" for McCoon-maybe he'll let them keep their "duty" weapons, as long as they are unloaded and with the trigger locks in place.

The last words old Fat Boy Orson Welles said on his deathbed were "Keep that God*&^%$ Ted Turner and his crayons the Hell away from my movies- Idiots with too much money-Turner, Hollywood, Streisand, etc-they never worry about being mugged or the CCW rights- they have hired body guards- Best thing about having Osama Bahama Mama gone is Biden has so many skeletons in his closet (MBNA Bank "fixes" in DE) that he can be "put in line"-Biden knows he's on the NRA's "fecal roster"-he may be a [censored], but he's NOT a dumb [censored]-

You took too serious what Obama said. It was just presidental campain. I can hardly imagine how he's gonna disarming America. Things will remain the same.

RWF, You need to see your Doc and get your meds adjusted.

I believe if it was BO running against Jessie Jackson then Jessie would be the new prez as he would give more for nothing.Bush the first when he took his oath made his speach of the new world order so BO ain't the first with that idea.I believe if BO would have lost a close onewe would have riots today and the same if he fails to reach office.Because of yesterday our country will change forever and we will have to see just how and much. Good side is if Hillary had won with Obama as V.P. they would probably controlled the Whitehouse for 16 years. Now we have a hope of four.

No offense Geno, but I don't necessarily trust your historical perspective on this one.
Rick
ps. I surely loved Jesse's tears of joy. The ultimate hypocrite.

If all of you truly believe that the events of Tuesday night really means that you will lose all of your gun ownnership rights and your guns, then please start selling them to me for 10% of what they were worth on Monday night.

If you don't want to do this, then please instead consider better educating the 52M voters who elected him, and all those voters who put those large majority numbers of Democratic Senators and Representatives into the Congress, on intelligent gun ownership and responsible use. Teach Democrats to shoot skeet, teach them to hunt game, teach them to target shoot. That will make more of a positive future for all of the gun members on this board then just predicting doom and gloom because of a newly elected USA President.

This post should be moved to the Trapshooter.com bbs where all gun related political post seem to go these days.

BO is not the end of the world. He and the Democrats must be watched and reined in to keep them from going too far. And no I did not vote for BO I voted for the other guy. Look at the results. Many states were decided by less than 5%. The next election may hold vast losses for the Democrats and they, or at least the smart ones, understand that a radical change will cause them to be voted out in less than two elections. Politicians like to stay in office and they will give lip service to the far left and claim the right is preventing them from doing it.

DRM's second point is one we can all agree on. Of all the things we have control over, expanding gun ownership and participation in hunting and shooting sports is our best bet for keeping our hobby and constitutional rights intact.

RWTF: Your lithium level is sub-therapeutic. In any case, say what you want in private, but please stop repeatedly using racial slurs in your posts. Language of this sort on a public forum does nothing to help the cause of gun ownership and the shooting sports.

Aparently Mr. Orlen is one of those liberals who believe politicians tell the truth........Ha!
By the way, Mike, I may decide to start an oil company. And I don't need anybody to set my profit margins for me...Well, unless I get to set profit percentages for those who own gun repair shops.............Grant Marquardt Elgin MN.

Racial slurs my ass- you find one place where I used the "N" word on any of my posts on this fine forum and I'll make a donation in your name and dishonor to the NAACP-I'm not politically correct-neither was my hero Pogo or his replacement from the cartoon "Repo-depot" Doonesbury- Lithium, smithium-sounds like a battery to me.

The only "Meds" I take, prescription variety- would be the famed "Pfizer Rizer"- but if you are so all-fired concerned about my "regime" I'll ask my current Lady if she thinks I need a greater "dosage"> I already know the answer-tell you what there "Slick" you show up with your Dr.'s Diploma and State Board Certification, I'll have 'em checked over (she works in the health care field, by the by) and if you "pass muster" then maybe, just maybe, I'll take your ill-advised "advice" to heart. You must have some big friggin' set of stones to come on board and tell a stranger what meds to take, or get precribed- Piss Off! No meds required for that op.- just a lota Guinness!!

Good on you Timmy Lad- as my GrandFather Sean would often say- "You hope in one hand, and crap in the other, and see which one fills up first"! Myself, I fear the worse as far as a law-abiding hunter, shooter and gun owner- This Muslim in a semi-good suit will try to screw us over-even if the Supremes had voted, let's say- 7 to 2 (I wanted it 9 to zip-didn't we all though?) with the mandate Barracks Bag Boy Bahama Mama got, and the newer high % of his Demmy-Cratz in the House of Reps.-and the odds of at least 2-maybe three openings due to retirements on the Supreme Court during his first four years- Katie, bar the door. We will still have our 2nd. Amendment rights, but they will be "modified until Hell won't have it" and every time some Neo-Nazi skinhead types a la Columbine shoot up a school or a church, we'll get branded with that tarry brush-You think Bloomberg is gonna give up- sure, a few gutsy (and good for them) out of New York State gun dealers have fought back in the courts-but these antis are "on a roll"- where is Chuck Heston now that we really need him- "From my cold dead hands" is the ONLY way the Obama followers will get my weapons- I guaran-damn-tee it-- RWTF

RWTF:

Not trying to give you medical advice, certainly not qualified to do so. Just seems like your stream of consciousness style gets a little pressured sometimes, like the thoughts must really be racing.

You are right, though, that your mental state is none of my business. I do make your use of racial slurs on a public forum my business. You seem like a bright guy, so I find it impossible to believe that you are so ignorant as to believe that the "N word" is the only racial term in our society considered deeply offensive. As an example, read the following, which relates one of your stand-bys:

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,188830,00.html

Foxy is correct about at least one thing: Charley Cawley and MBNA twisted some arms (and tails) in DE. They spread largesse like manure for a while. How deeply Biden was involved in the putsch I don't know; he sold a home under favor-able circumstances; probably the favor was reciprocated. No laws broken I know of but I'm sure the questionable moral probity of someone who actually admits to living on this imperfect planet is an offense to a lot of lilly-white Republicans.

Thanks to Mike O. and KYJON for putting a cap on the crap.

jack

Foxy is correct about at least one thing: Charley Cawley and MBNA twisted some arms (and tails) in DE. They spread largesse like manure for a while. How deeply Biden was involved in the putsch I don't know; he sold a home under favor-able circumstances; probably the favor was reciprocated. No laws broken I know of but I'm sure the questionable moral probity of someone who actually admits to living on this imperfect planet is an offense to a lot of lilly-white Republicans.

Thanks to Mike O. and KYJON for putting a cap on the crap.

jack

I think Missouri has gone to McCain by now, so does that mean he's my prez?
No mandate, for sure, but the dems are holding all the cards and the far left will want their share of the pot!

You guys will be fine, he'll be gone in 5 years, all politicians are the same, as Voltaire said, "They are not born, they are excreted". I guess as well, that if push came to shove and he started some kind of legislation to restrict firearms all you chaps would need to rely on is Texas, they have the right, if memory serves, to cede from the Union...if they so much as threatened that you wouldn't see a president pedal backwards so fast in your life...but the Texans would have to mean it. best, Mike

More like Richard Daley and Chicago style politics.

There's possibly a bit more hope. When the Republicans lost control of Congress in 2006, most of the Democrats who replaced them professed to be pro-gun, pro-2nd Amendment. Now with the Democrats running things, no doubt the West coast and New England liberal elitists will be running the show. The question is how many of these pro-2nd Amendment Democrats who replaced the Republicans will stick to their guns and professed beliefs during the election, or will they buckle to the party leadership and cave in to passing gun control?

The first two attempts at gun control are likely going to be to re-instate the so-called "assault weapons" ban that was a bait and switch lie and to close the so-called "gun show loophole" which is also a sham.

Obama stated that he would give tax "rebates" to people who don't pay income taxes. This is wealth redistribution plain and simple. A few will pay a lot more, some will pay a bit less, many will pay nothing and get a check on the rest of us.

I did review them all the way back to the beginning. I bet no one ever thought they would go to 91% MTR but they did. It happened before; what says they cant do it again. The more he wants to give to those who dont ahve a fair share the more he will take from those who "have too big a piece".

I dont trust him. A leopard cannot change its spots.

Most liberals never met a tax they didnt like.

Why don't you come over here ( http://notssmbbs.com/viewforum.php?f=7 ) to properly discuss your idiotic ideas.
It would be a shame to dirty up this fine board with the skid mark that you would become, when properly debated.

HUMM!! I distinctly recall getting a tax rebate recently from the current Bush administration, even though I no longer pay any taxes for several years. True, I got the minimum amount. Also true that before I retired I paid lots and lots of taxes for lots and lots of years. Seems this "spread the wealth" is quite bi-partisan.

I am still awaiting my "bailout" check from all those hundreds of billions the big financial firms got.

Socialism in America? It has been a homegrown American custom since shortly after the great Depression, loved and expanded by both Republicans and Democrats.

Niklas

Niklas

Wonder what a cheap pander buys? Not much this year as the prez of all the people plus Saudi Arabia is a lame duck and his chosen successor a dead one. Fuel prices should leap up now; probably blame it on increased demand for fuel oil as the weather turns.

jack

like many of the liberals,he does not have the stugats to play with the big boys.Bunch of keyboard cowboys all cowardswho would not say what they post here.Remember the names !!

BTW B Hussian Obama would not answer when asked if those making under 250k would be taxed more.hmmmmm.I know lots folks who make under 250k who will be hurt by the raise in cap gains (note the biggest drop ever in the DOW for the first two days after the he was elected!!)

Davidm, Most of us here are probably old enough to remember the days when the wealthy were in 90% tax brackets. We also remember that virtually all of those wealthy folks were savvy enough to have their accountants exploit a myriad of loopholes that allowed them to pay little or nothing. Enough of those loopholes have been eliminated or reduced that what Obama proposes will have a chilling effect in comparison to the era you cite. Later, you take someone here to task, asking if they even read the link you posted. I would suggest that you also do a little more reading. Instead of swallowing what Obama says, look at what he has done in his short career, especially as it relates to his outright attacks on the Second Amendment. You are now on a Shotgun Forum. You will not find many of us agreeing with your enthusiasm for Obama. Most of us have seen these tactics used before. You have obviously drank the Kool-Aid, but you seem intelligent enough that I have high hopes that you will X-ray the Trojan Horse and see what danger lurks inside. Seriously, before you respond, check his record on handguns, semi-automatics, concealed carry, ammunition bans, firearms taxes, FFL dealer restrictions, self defense in the home, magazine capacities, appointments of pro 2nd Amendment judges, ad nauseum. Please show us proof that we can trust him with our gun rights, not by what he says, but by what he has done. This little excercise will be the beginning of the healing process. The realization that you have been fooled may be a bitter pill, but we're pulling for you and I really hope you will come back from the brink. P.S., I truthfully wasn't all that enthused with McCain either.

keith, in the last 40 days, Obama's message on tax cuts was pure Reagan. That did it. With so much economic anxiety, tax-cutting was his constant refrain. Both candidates offered tax cuts to roughly 100 million people. Obama's were directed to the middle class and the working poor. McCain directed tax cuts to investors. The electoral merits of Obama were obvious regardless of feelings of the different proposals.

Consider what Obama wrote about Reagan in his autobiography The Audacity of Hope, "giving the old man his due,"

"Reagan's message spoke to the failure of liberal government, in a period of economic stagnation, to give middle class voters any sense that it was fighting for them," he said. "He fundamentally changed the terms of the political debate. The middle class revolt became a permanent fixture in national politics and placed a ceiling on how much the federal government could expand."

Of all the presidents of the last 60 years, Obama wrote that Ronald Reagan loomed "largest of all." US presidents almost always cut taxes in recessions. Obama will almost certainly do so again. No matter how you parse this, Obama's tax message was right out of the Gipper's playbook. It's hard to understand why McCain and Company couldn't see it.

Reminded of the anecdote I heard yrs. ago at Atlantic Aviation. H. B. duPont came in one day with a grandson to look over the "spread". Break time so the anecdoter was in the lunchroom and HB stepped up and asked if he could get a dime for the machine to get the lad a soda. "I hever carry money," he said. I have a healthy respect for captains of industry and other well-insulated sorts but I don't worry about their welfare as they have proven proficiency in that dept. Lot of folks out there who have dibs on "my" dime.

jack

Middle class is a new code word for the poor...nobody wants to be known as poor, so its middle class now.
The real middle class will be fine - but we'll have to pay for the really never got off their butts poor. Thats the plan - its payback time.

They didn't see it because it wasn't there. The assertion of your post above is an amazing fantasy of an uneducated imagination.

When Reagan came into office in 1981, the top marginal personal income tax rate was 70%. As he had pledged, the Economic Recovery Act of 1981 cut rates across the board, the top rate being cut from 70% to 50%. In his second term, the 1986 Reform Act cut the top rate from 50% to 28%. In both cases, the "rich" got the biggest cuts because the rates at the top end were so steep. Sadly, the 28% rate never fully phased in, a decision that cost Bush Sr. the White House (the Klinton campaign ran Bush's famous quote "Read my lips - no new taxes" again and again).

Obama has pledged the exact opposite of what Reagan did - an increase in taxes on the "rich", and a cut for the "middle class". His campaign rhetoric was an age-old regurgitated marxist tactic - promising to steal from the rich to buy votes from the peasants. The assertion that "Obama's tax message was right out of the Gipper's playbook" is one of the most outrageous, ignorant, and partisan lies I've ever heard.

BREAD & CIRCUS

After 8 years we are left with only the Circus ...... and the noisy but colorful clowns.

Al

On the various posts I have made addressing Obama's marxist ideology, none of the "local socialists" have said anything about his tight ties to ACORN and its agenda.
Why could this be?

JC

JC, one of the explanations put forth on ACORN's activities is that no ballot box stuffing proceeded or could have proceeded from their overzealous "paper drive". Voter info was falsified rather than lifted from the grave registry, discovered, and tossed out. But Chicago is a toddlin town and historically the bosses know how to raise the dead.

I haven't found any Marxists under my bed. European Marxism replaced technocracies and plutocracies with bureaucracies. We appear to want to keep our plutocrats and technocrats happy, warm and well-fed. Of course, regulation of banking practise will create bureaucrats; fortunately some white-collar unemployment can be relieved by moving the big and medium size dogs from private E to the Federal Reserve (just happened to Bear Stearns' former risk-management expert).

Anyway, all my life I've heard friends and not-so enveigh against the "welfare state". Had a buddy from Corpus Christi in grad school. Real shite-stompin, pickemup truck-drivin, blue sky don't fence me in, I got my own you get yours Republican. When we graduated in '73, the economy wasn't all that hot. He got a CETA (Comprehensive Employment Training Act) job as a historian with a county historical society. I got a job laying up fiberglass in a local boatyard. His daughter is my god-daughter and I still consider him a self-serving hypocrite and pretty much told him as much. With the exception of the GI Bill education allowance and a few bouts of unemployment insurance, I haven't leaned all that hard on our government for handouts. A lot of this crap about "card-carrying liberals" and "Marxist socialists is just crap. I'd as soon see my taxes pay to feed the poor as pay to shoot them.

jack

Nitro, you may impute any motive to me you like but you show no respect for your character or others by calling me a liar---one who says what he knows not to be true. Insults have no place on this board. You should be aware that McCain advocated a 4-per-cent tax cut for the rich and an 0.2-per-cent tax cut for the working poor, perceived as callous and gauche by many.

The Obama plan provided a tax cut of $567 for a family income of $19,000; the McCain plan $19. At $37,000 a year, a tax cut by Obama's plan of $1.024; McCain's $319. Only at $110,000 did the two plans converge. Moreover, Obama promised tax cuts for 90 per cent of all American families. Obama adapted Reagan and Kennedy policies for himself: nonpartisan, nonideological, smart politics.

What's untruthful of Obama's message having a Reagan resonance---of Reagan's tapping into middle class dissatisfaction---and the debate over before it began? As others pointed out here, given the average person's limited capacity to fret over the rich, McCain's drawing attention to Obama's proposed higher tax rates for wealthy Americans was an improbable strategy.

King it boils down to we pay taxes up the ying yang, espically those of us who may employ others and do not sit home watching MTV Cribs and Ophra all day. By the looks of things we are going to have to pay even more for people that do. And for a plethera of new entitlement programs. But that is the fear, look at Wall Street it is terrified of the new administration also.

The republicans arrogance caused an inability to read or even care about the middle class dissatisfaction. That is the feeling that I get with the party of the BUSHIES, they do not give a sh*t about anybody (except Chaney and Rumsfield and OIL) and the people really feel that.

But what is still amazing to me, is our ecomemy is a disaster, we are bogged down in 2 wars, Bush has the Midas touch in reverse(in as everything he touches turns to crap), McCain could not remember if Joe the Plumber was in his presents each night and they picked either a) a dizzy chick from Alaska, or b) someone that just was not ready for the job and if so, shame on them. And even with all of that the Demacrats still only won by 6%. HMMMMMMMMM.

These are hard times and it will get worse. I'm an optimist, though, and think American resilience, resourcefulness and spunk will pull the country and the rest of the world through. Obama has the luxury of being able in a crisis to do things that would not normally be possible in the economy. It will involve sacrifice---there's no other way out---and technology isn't the answer because it can't rewrite the laws of supply and demand and rewire the human character. Leadership, a cool hand inspiring others to work with America will do the trick.

As for the drain of those wars, Iraq is winding down and I think Obama, taking advice from his commanders, will break his promise of an Afghanistan surge. He'll do what we're doing, getting out in 2011 after 10 years of combat and training the Afghan Army to look after the country's security. There's no way to turn a theocracy into a democracy from the outside. Your able defence minister Mr. Gates has emphasized limiting the depths of US military involvement in a country that has ground down foreign armies for centuries.

I want Brian home in one piece.

I explained it to you above, King. I posted the facts. I feel that I have given you all the "respect" that you deserve for your above post. It's real simple. Obama's tax message was NOT "right out of the Gipper's playbook". Reagan's tax policy was the opposite of Obama's, and the theories behind each have nothing in common whatsoever. The statements you made that I responded to in your post above are, factually, utterly false. You posted those statements as fact rather than speculation.

That left three possibilities:

1. You are too fundamentally ignorant of US tax policy - the subject on which you presumed to post comments as fact - to be making such comments, and are so uninformed that you don't know any better. Not a reflection on anyone, as our tax laws, the history of them, and the theories behind them are extremely complex. For the same reason, the information on the issue that you get from mainstream media is extremely unreliable. Most people simply don't have a clue.

2. Your statements were political dogma with no reference to fact, but falsely presented as based in fact.

3. You are well-informed on the issue, but chose to misrepresent the facts in order to fit your needs.

I didn't call you a liar, King. I said you lied. As I do Obama, I assume you to be a reasonably intelligent person, although in your case, perhaps, betrayed by altruism (which I don't believe Obama possesses). I didn't assume "1" above of a reasonably intelligent guy and journalist. If I made a mistake there, then indeed, I went too far, and apologize. For any other possibility, I stand by what I said.



An intellectually and economically sound, proven, and apolitical policy. McCain watched Reagan's tax policies work, and believed in them.



A fallacy invented by Obama's camp. Our working poor pay no income taxes now. How can you cut what is not there?



Obama proposes a tax increase for the "rich" and a cut for the middle class and below. Once again, no trace of Reagan's policies in Obama's tax plan.



Intensely ideological, strictly social, and irresponsible promotion of class warfare when sound, proven economic policy is needed instead.



There's nothing truthful about it whatsoever. Reagan's policies, and the theories and historical experiences behind them, have NOTHING in common with Obama's. Further, Reagan responded to overall dissatisfaction of the country, not middle class dissatisfaction.

Reagan's tax policies were so successful because he was able to grasp a basic, paradoxical, but now well known, truth - high tax rates on the rich REDUCE tax revenue from the rich. They simply "hibernate" in reaction to higher tax rates aimed at them, resulting in a stagnant economy and lower tax revenues.

I remember those days before the Reagan cuts very well. I remember the constant complaints from wealthy clients. "Gee, I'm already making $500,000 a year. If the government is going to take 50-70% of whatever extra I make, why should I take the risk, work the extra hours, and spend the money to open this new division? The headache isn't worth the reward." And so, they didn't. I watched this time after time.

Reagan was no orator, but they didn't call him the "Great Communicator" for nothing. Deeply convinced that he was right about tax policy, he was able to communicate that conviction, and sell it. His tax policy was highly successful, and I was in a good position to watch it work. Despite deep cuts in tax rates on the rich, tax revenues from the rich, if I remember correctly, had doubled by the time he left the White House.

Obama's "plan" is based on neither tax policy theory, nor tax policy reality. His tax message isn't even about economic policy. It's social policy alone, just tired collectivist dogma. "Times are bad, so it must be the rich exploiting the peasants again. Gotta to stay on message. No matter that I'll raise taxes in the segment that will do the most harm to the economy, ultimately shifting that burden to the middle class, I'll just blame it on Bush". Like I said, cynically stealing from their Lordships to buy votes from the peasants, with concern for neither the peasants nor the country as a whole.



Not improbable at all. McCain adopted Reagan's strategy because it was proven, but had little gift as an orator, or salesman. Although unfortunately vacuous, Obama is a fine orator. So was Castro.

...and when Castro overthrew Battista, there was great joy among the masses, and tears of happiness and dancing in the streets.

That's pretty artful casuistry, Nitro. If "McCain watched Reagan's tax policies work, and believed in them," as you say, why didn't he use them as Obama and Reagan did---and won?

It can't be excused as poor skills on McCain's part; he had all the communications tools at hand and two years to use them. It was Obama who used Reagan's pitch of fighting for average Americans, not McCain.

I posted here last week that "Obama is in" because "the conservatives gave it away." There wasn't a world of doubt on election night. One early glimpse of the gathering crowds at Grant Park, with enough flags for a coronation, proved it.

With all the polls blinking blue, the only question was whether it would be a landslide. Let's be honest with ourselves: with rampant greed ruining millions of Americans, a promise of more equitable distribution of wealth was appealing.

Couldn't agree more jack ... grotesque, twisted up ideological thinking. Maybe saying so will get me on someone's list of names to remember.

Jay

Middle class, and "average Americas" excites the masses, but don't be fooled! There isn't enough money to feed the middle class. The handouts will go to those who found drugs and gang banging a faster track to get outta the hood than finishing up high school.
Btw Rabbit, who has to pay to shoot 'em - they do a pretty good job on themselves. The rub is, we have to pay for them being bad shots at the ER and ICU.
DOA is better and cheaper!

King, the only thing this showed is that the very well funded Obama campaign figured a way to shall I say brainwash the young and get the poor urban vote via the help of ACORN. That coupled with the normal democratic vote and presto you get your crowds gathering at Grant Park.

And for the promise of a more equitable distribution of wealth.......why do I get the feeling, that none will be coming my way? Maybe cause I wasn't at the park because I have a job. Just a aspiring plummer, ha ha.

One other thing, if you lived here, would you be all hipped up about this so called appealing re-distribution of wealth gig?

Tim

Intimidation, black lists, historical chimeras, lines in the sand. And I say to myself what a wonderful world?

jack

From Acorn's webpage:



"Acorn says communities need BETTER SCHOOLS
NO to lowering taxes to MILIONAIRES"

If this is not stirring the social pot ...

The worst part of their agenda -in my view- is shown by what they did with New York Schools where they prevented a private for profit organization taking over the worst schools there.
What they want is to run the schools themselves to be able to indoctrinate the children. The agenda is the same over here: no private schools with government help; no vouchers for the people so they can CHOOSE where they get their health care; raising of the minimum wage that only causes unemployment (BTW Acorn campaigns for minimum wage raises but had to be forced by the courts to pay it in California, because they said it did not apply to their workers, go figure).

This "stealth leftist movement" is going on all over the place and we have to be vigilant.

JC

We survived 4 years of WW II with the most liberal President up to that point in charge. If the Germans hadn't invaded Russia I doubt if we would have even been involved in that aspect of the war since the resident socialists and communists were firmly against our particiation. Whether we would have ended up at war with the Japanese is a moot point and another matter entirely.
We are now embarking upon a 4 year period unprecedented in American history with a President who makes Roosevelt look like a moderate. We will have to endure a great deal during this period of that I am certain.
However this journey through the "Twi-Light Zone" will pass and reason and logic will prevail again and in retrospect we'll be looking back on this period as an aberent time similiar to the Carter Presidency. Time has not been kind to the liberal/socialists who surface here periodically. Have any of you ever wondered why not ONE of the Presidents on Mt. Rushmore is a Democrat? Furthermore the only President that has been proposed as an addition to Mt Rushmore has been Ronald Reagan.
Jim

YEA!!!! Let's bring back Herbert Hoover ...... Oh, wait ..... we already had 8 years of that ..... If Ronald Reagan were alive today what do you think he would say about the last 8 years ...... the outrageous deficit ...... the debt to China ........ our destroyed banking system ...... Do you think he would say ....... " Nice job W! " .......


Al

Timothy, the answer to your question is yes. According to the OECD, the US has the most progressive tax system in the world, Canada ranks seventh. Obama's promise was to raise the top marginal rate marginally to finance more cuts for the middle class. Canada redistributes income with an equalization system where the richer provinces transfer billions of dollars annually to the poorer provinces to maintain a national standard of education, health, social welfare services.

Ontario, Canada's industrial heartland with its auto and other manufacturing centres, has become a have-not province with the meltdown; Newfoundland, a have-not province for decades dependant on the fisheries and now booming as a have-province with offshore oil, is ecstatic that it may contribute its millions to needier parts of the country. It's the Canadian way. Legislated. "Have" provinces spread it around.

It's the American way, too. No country on earth has been more generous to other countries of need regardless of race, religion or colour, its defeated included. It was in its interests to do so, as is ours, nationally and internationally. Redistribution is rooted in western civilization, in its Christian ethic, and, not wanting to make too fine a point of it, the top 1 per cent of US income earners, by itself, pays 40 per cent of all income tax revenue. That should be appealing to average Americans, too.

King cutting taxes to the middle class is lip service to get you elected, cutting taxes to small business (and I'm not talking about some bs number of $250K) will get the econemy going.

Moving money around Canada is really like one big entitlement program. No wonder no one cares if someone cries an off color political comment (ie: Jeff Cooper), for someone else will come in with some money and bail you out. The fog on the window is clearing.

Tim

Hoover again. A very good executive in European war relief and the great Mississippi flood of '27. Something tied his hands or his mind in the crash; perhaps he would have done better with the human displacement of the Dust Bowl yrs but we'll never know. FDR tapdanced his way thru the alphabet creating the work camps and agencies which at least suggested a government with eyes open and the very Keynsian WWII saved our bacon by throwing a huge chunk of it down a very big drain on foreign soil. As for the Great Communicator, I have no idea what he would have been told to say about Shrub's Progress.


jack

SO MUCH damage to the "meaning" of political labels and postures. Bush and co. committed the largest spread-the-wealth socialistic act in history of the world, with the 700 BILLION dollar (at minimum) bailout to USA's financial upper crust. That is also perhaps the nastiest thing an outgoing president could do to the next one. Republicans earned themselves title of the biggest borrow and spend the world has ever seen -- an even greater achievement than any tax and spend program any Democrat ever implemented. WHAT IS A POOR INDEPENDENT VOTER TO THINK?!?!?

Republicans performing the biggest socalist giveaway in history -- Democrates now faced with reversing the biggest federal deficit and abdiction of market economics in history. Pardon me if I find most of discussion in this thread akin to reading "Alice in Wonderland".

And to think that a very effective response to a similar but smaller financal crisis was carried out by one of the world's true socialistic countries -- Sweden -- and could serve as primer to USA's attempts to dig themselves out of a major, self-inflicted, deep hole.

Niklas

NP:

At times like this I feel like the Oysters taking a walk with the Walrus and the Carpenter!


AL

To some of the members of this board
I believe Dave Weber had a slightly different concept for this forum. Doubles, not a political soapbox!
"Feel free to use this system to discuss your doubles, drillings, combination guns, other fine firearms, and related material. The rules are really simple: Stay on the subject matter, keep it clean, and contribute answers when you can!"
His words not mine.
Where is Dave Weber, the moderator?

Mike B.

Thanks for the imput Mike. Or maybe you should think twice about jumping on a 8 page thread if you don't like what is on it. Just food for thought. An election only comes once every four years and if you can't bust away from the doubles, drillings, combo guns and other fine firearms and related material, when can ya???

Tim

Mike, aren't you also standing on the soapbox?

JC

Your point of cutting taxes to goose the economy, agree. As for our system a big entitlement program, maybe so. It's our choice; we voted for it and are paying for it. It makes for the strongest economy of the G8, no financial bailouts, no annual deficits but surpluses in trade, no China holding our debt and we've just elected another conservative government to boot. It will have to do until something better comes along.

Yea AL!!! Poor little oysters, getting eaten no matter what. Money in hidey holes seems better every day. Unless you are big enough to get a few million bailout dollars.

Niklas

King, I'm glad your proud of your country, I'm proud of mine too. We're just having some problems right now, but we will work them out and will be stronger because of them. Like we always do and have done.

I'm glad things are working out so well for you guys.

Tim

Timothy S & JayCee et. others.
I apologize to those I have offended, however these kinds of posts do not belong on this kind of forum in my estimation. If that puts me on a soapbox, so be it. There are a myriad of forums to vent your political views. Personally I'm getting tired of this forum being used by some members as their own personal "CHAT LINE". If you do not agree, I will give up my soapbox and consider if this is a site I belong in.
Mike B.

Mike B.,

You are hardly alone in that position. That Dave Weber has allowed this to go so far is equally bothersom.

Niklas

I would prefer to see only those aspects of politics that can and probably will have an influence gun collecting discussed here. However; There has NEVER bee a federal official elected before that is in the position to have such a negative effect on the firearms hobby that the discussion of him and his politics and policies is germane and relevant to out hobby.
It's been my experience that those who complain about these discussions on a firearms board are usually left wing liberals if not overt socialists then thinly discuised. If you are NOT one of these then a quick glance at a thread should tell you that it's not something you would care to read so go on to something else and ignore it.
If you ARE a closet liberal then why don't you knock off the charade and go somewhere else where your ideas are more acceptable.
Your negative posts are nothing more than an attempt to force censorship where none is needed nor IMO would the bulk of the membership here find it desirable. If you want the negative and very biased left wing view of firearms ownership go look at the "mainstraem" news media
Jim

I don't know WTF kinda guns Mike and Niklas are polishing - but Rome may be burning.
After 85 replies and 1889 views, there seems to be some interest.
Prolly you two could learn something from this "CHAT LINE," that is more important to gun owner's and the possible new direction this country is headed in than - Help me - help me, my firing pin is broken!

Well italiansxs, your remarks are, all by them selves, ample evidence why such discussions should be conducted elsewere. The only respectable away I see around that would be if a discussion here would be conducted without uncalled for attempts to label those you don't happen to agree with you and others as "left wing liberals", socialists (which you clearly don't understand at all), etc. And no, I don't happen to fit into either category, or any other that you might recognize.

There is plenty that should be intelligently discussed about potential consequences of Obama et al. on gun owners and users in USA and how that should be constructively delt with. Here is good link to his actual record http://www.ontheissues.org/2008/Barack_Obama_Gun_Control.htm Yes, I do not find it comforting. Surprised?
Your highly biased and absurdly worded attacks are of no constructive value in such an endevour, so crutial to all of us.

Niklas

I did a small local gun show this weekend. The gun sales were incredible and the ammo guy completely ran out. I took a bunch of ammo and also sold out and $600 in ammo is a large amount for me. People are justly afraid. You can be guaranteed that Obummer will use presidential powers to do everything possible to attack guns and gun owners. Yes, he is a socialist if not a Marxist, and yes, the extreme left wing leebs are after us.

One fellow stated that we had no problems because Obummer had stated he was not anti-gun. 4-5 people immediately stated in unison, "And you BELIEVED him!?!"

We had the same problem on the Porsche board I also post on. They solved it by starting a separate forum for political remarks and discussions. Any posted on the regular board are immediatly moved to the other forum. It has saved a lot of bad feelings from other posters.

Lowell:
Have you been into the scotch laced with gunpowder again?

Quote:
"Here is good link to his actual record http://www.ontheissues.org/2008/Barack_Obama_Gun_Control.htm Yes, I do not find it comforting. Surprised?"

Let see If I can get the straight. You don't find it(Obamas record) conforting?
So now you're attacking me for pointing this out and indicating we'rve got some rough times ahead as firearms owners? I'm the one with the highly biased and absurd words?

Quote:
"And no, I don't happen to fit into either category, or any other that you might recognize."

On this I can agree. An individual who doesn't find Obamas record conforting but attacks another for pointing out specifically why this guy is the equivelent to the bubonic plague for gun owners is certainly in an unrecognizable category. . Apparentely you are some type on neo left wing liberal mutant who professes to see a problem yet can see no point in trying to point this problem out to others. I rarely attack someone personally but in this case you are beneath contempt. Please crawl back into you dreamworld and leave dealing with reality to those of us capable of understanding it.

Just what DON'T you understand about reestablishing the "Assault Weapons Ban" and making it permanant as he's already stated he'll do? Lets see if you can answer one point directly or you'll wander off on a tangent like the rest of your socialist brethern.
Jim

Well, Bouvier, the first thing he would say would be: "Nice job handling 911; that was a dastardly attack. The second thing he would say: smart decision, deciding to fight the war on terror in the middle-east, where the terrorists live; rather than fighting it in downtown Manhattan, where we lose badly. Third, he would acknowledge that most people can't even spell deficit, let alone explain it. But he would suggest even deeper tax cuts to the rich, to reduce it. And lastly: he would place the blame for the economic crisis squarely where it belongs, on the backs of the Liberals....... And he would also praise President Bush for his BOOMING economy.....Without which, the Libs would have led us into a deeeeep depression..........Grant.

Sure wish I could rely folks like on you when push comes to shove. But THAT would be living in a DREAMWORLD. Do you really think that USA gun owners and shooters are so dumb that they need you to point out the obvious? And with such devisive language as to alienate a bunch of us in the process? You must me one of those anti-gunners under deep cover, out to forment trouble for gun owners. If not, it would sure be nice if you found some means of turning your nasty language and foul attitude into constructive actions on behalf of your fellow gun owners and shooters.

Niklas

I guess the question is this,are we group that only collects double guns and niave and selfish enough to thinks its ok if they reinstate the AWB,ban handgun sales,increase the tax on ammo (%500),and perhaps let a "arsenal" licence become the law of the land??

I hope not many of us collect and enjoy shooting all types of guns and enjoy the freedom of the second anmendment.But most importantly are not ready to throw our fellow gun owners under the bus.

B Hussian Obama ,a former director of the Joyce foundation hase never stood up for the second amendment in his votes and evert time has voted against us (all of us).
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=6860231852229872583

Let's not bring back FDR either. It was FDR who went on a spending spree and ran up a government deficit to try to boost the economy. His policies helped to keep this nation in the Depression. What got this nation out of the Depression was WWII, not FDR or his policies. Also, FDR wanted America to get involved in the war, but Congress said no until Dec. 7, 1941 happened.

Disappointing, King. Your response doesn't even rise to the level of sophistry, but I'm not surprised. You can't debate the point on the issue because you have no knowledge of it, so you continue to post didactic, false statements. Pathetic. My original evaluation of your post was correct.

[/quote] What got this nation out of the Depression was WWII, not FDR or his policies. Also, FDR wanted America to get involved in the war, but Congress said no until Dec. 7, 1941 happened. [/quote]

Easy to agree that WW2 got USA out of depression. However, for most of remaining nations, folks lives were destroyed or further destroyed (many killed, others lost everything) by WW2 and the diverse messes leading up to and following it. For them WW2, etc. was just a continuation of the nightmare, a nightmare that lasted lots longer in most of world than in USA.

The common discription I read on 05 November in foreign newspapers of Obama's new job is "nightmare". Lets hope that is an exaggeration. Like the Great Depression and WW2, the current financial crisis is consequence of well-intended, often in narrow self interest, actions of large number of people, across political spectrum in many countries.

Niklas