Barack Obama, our next President

"The road ahead will be long. Our climb will be steep," Obama cautioned. Young and charismatic but with little experience on the national level, Obama smashed through racial barriers and easily defeated ... Full Story
LIBERAL COMMUNIST DEM

Nashville, NC

#848190 Jan 27, 2013
Why Do Liberals Hate Guns?

By Lou W.

Have you ever wondered why it is that liberal Democrats hate guns so much? I have. I think about it a lot, whenever I think how nice it would be if New Jersey became a "shall issue" state. Really though, why do liberal Democrats, who like to pose as supporters of individual liberties, hate guns? What is the motivation behind their position? Here are a few thoughts.

1. Liberal Democrats Hate Gun Owners

Gun owners, as a general rule, are more conservative and are more likely to vote Republican. Gun owners are also more likely to join the Armed forces and to give unqualified support to our troops. Gun owners are also more likely to think it was a good idea for people like Richard Nixon to go after communists like Alger Hiss. Many gun owners supported the Vietnam War. Some of them allowed themselves to be drafted and others went so far as to enlist of their own accord. These, however, are all things that liberal Democrats despise. If gun owners are in favor of these hated things, guns must be very bad.

2. Gun Control as a Means to Attain Political Power

Many misguided people have an honest aversion to guns and would prefer the enactment of strict gun control regulations. In this great country they are entitled to their opinion and to vote their beliefs. The liberal Democrats know this and use these people as a means to win elections.

The liberal Democrats are actually an unholy alliance of single issue voting blocs. The liberal Democrats believe that they can win at the ballot box if they support the following issues and groups: abortion, homosexuality, affirmative action, opposition to school vouchers, anti-religious sentiment, radical feminists and big labor unions.

Gun control is just another special interest in their bag of tricks. The best example of this is the assault weapons ban. Every rational person knows that the ban eliminates certain guns based on cosmetic features. Bayonet lugs and flash suppressors do not make semi-automatic guns more deadly or more suitable for criminal use! However, the assault weapon ban is the ideal wedge to use in a heated political debate.("My Republican and Libertarian opponents are against the assault weapons ban!")

3. Liberal Democrats Hate African-Americans

Despite their protestations to the contrary, much of the push for gun control comes from liberal Democrats who want to keep guns out of the hands of black people. Los Angeles, Chicago, Washington D.C. and New York City are places with large minority populations and very restrictive gun laws.

Also, the people who push for gun control come from cushy places where minorities are not welcome (except as servants). How many working class African-Americans hang out in places like Brentwood, California or Beacon Hill and Hyannis, Massachusetts? People who do not want minorities to have guns like gun control.

4. Liberal Democrats Hate the Constitution

The Constitution protects the individual rights of individuals and it protects individuals from the State. Liberal Democrats hate this. They believe that they know what's good for us, how to use our money better than we do, and they know whether I should be allowed to carry a gun on my person to protect myself, my family and my Synagogue. How else do you explain that liberal Democrats find a right to abortion emanating from the penumbra of the Constitution, but cannot seem to find any individual right at all in the Second Amendment?

Judged:

12

12

12

Reply »
Report Abuse Judge it!
LIBERAL COMMUNIST DEM

Nashville, NC

#848191 Jan 27, 2013
Gun Control as a Means to Attain Political Power

Many misguided people have an honest aversion to guns and would prefer the enactment of strict gun control regulations. In this great country they are entitled to their opinion and to vote their beliefs. The liberal Democrats know this and use these people as a means to win elections.

The liberal Democrats are actually an unholy alliance of single issue voting blocs. The liberal Democrats believe that they can win at the ballot box if they support the following issues and groups: abortion, homosexuality, affirmative action, opposition to school vouchers, anti-religious sentiment, radical feminists and big labor unions.

Gun control is just another special interest in their bag of tricks. The best example of this is the assault weapons ban. Every rational person knows that the ban eliminates certain guns based on cosmetic features. Bayonet lugs and flash suppressors do not make semi-automatic guns more deadly or more suitable for criminal use! However, the assault weapon ban is the ideal wedge to use in a heated political debate.("My Republican and Libertarian opponents are against the assault weapons ban!")

Judged:

11

11

11

Reply »
Report Abuse Judge it!

Since: May 11

Loysville, PA

#848192 Jan 27, 2013
LIBERAL COMMUNIST DEM wrote:
Why Do Liberals Hate Guns?
By Lou W.
Have you ever wondered why it is that liberal Democrats hate guns so much? I have. I think about it a lot, whenever I think how nice it would be if New Jersey became a "shall issue" state. Really though, why do liberal Democrats, who like to pose as supporters of individual liberties, hate guns? What is the motivation behind their position? Here are a few thoughts.
1. Liberal Democrats Hate Gun Owners
Gun owners, as a general rule, are more conservative and are more likely to vote Republican. Gun owners are also more likely to join the Armed forces and to give unqualified support to our troops. Gun owners are also more likely to think it was a good idea for people like Richard Nixon to go after communists like Alger Hiss. Many gun owners supported the Vietnam War. Some of them allowed themselves to be drafted and others went so far as to enlist of their own accord. These, however, are all things that liberal Democrats despise. If gun owners are in favor of these hated things, guns must be very bad.
2. Gun Control as a Means to Attain Political Power
Many misguided people have an honest aversion to guns and would prefer the enactment of strict gun control regulations. In this great country they are entitled to their opinion and to vote their beliefs. The liberal Democrats know this and use these people as a means to win elections.
The liberal Democrats are actually an unholy alliance of single issue voting blocs. The liberal Democrats believe that they can win at the ballot box if they support the following issues and groups: abortion, homosexuality, affirmative action, opposition to school vouchers, anti-religious sentiment, radical feminists and big labor unions.
Gun control is just another special interest in their bag of tricks. The best example of this is the assault weapons ban. Every rational person knows that the ban eliminates certain guns based on cosmetic features. Bayonet lugs and flash suppressors do not make semi-automatic guns more deadly or more suitable for criminal use! However, the assault weapon ban is the ideal wedge to use in a heated political debate.("My Republican and Libertarian opponents are against the assault weapons ban!")
3. Liberal Democrats Hate African-Americans
Despite their protestations to the contrary, much of the push for gun control comes from liberal Democrats who want to keep guns out of the hands of black people. Los Angeles, Chicago, Washington D.C. and New York City are places with large minority populations and very restrictive gun laws.
Also, the people who push for gun control come from cushy places where minorities are not welcome (except as servants). How many working class African-Americans hang out in places like Brentwood, California or Beacon Hill and Hyannis, Massachusetts? People who do not want minorities to have guns like gun control.
4. Liberal Democrats Hate the Constitution
The Constitution protects the individual rights of individuals and it protects individuals from the State. Liberal Democrats hate this. They believe that they know what's good for us, how to use our money better than we do, and they know whether I should be allowed to carry a gun on my person to protect myself, my family and my Synagogue. How else do you explain that liberal Democrats find a right to abortion emanating from the penumbra of the Constitution, but cannot seem to find any individual right at all in the Second Amendment?
I am a liberal & I own guns.

Obama has said that he believes that the Second Amendment gives people the right to own guns. As do most people.

Your article is fill of crap.

Judged:

11

11

11

Reply »
Report Abuse Judge it!
LIBERAL COMMUNIST DEM

Nashville, NC

#848193 Jan 27, 2013
iberal Democrats Hate the Constitution

The Constitution protects the individual rights of individuals and it protects individuals from the State. Liberal Democrats hate this. They believe that they know what's good for us, how to use our money better than we do, and they know whether I should be allowed to carry a gun on my person to protect myself, my family and my Synagogue.

How else do you explain that liberal Democrats find a right to abortion emanating from the penumbra of the Constitution, but cannot seem to find any individual right at all in the Second Amendment?

Judged:

10

10

10

Reply »
Report Abuse Judge it!
Waxman

Windsor, CT

#848194 Jan 27, 2013
Democrats are tryng to use a tragedy where a mentally ill person killed children in to whittle away at the second ammenment, but the leftards never complained when Bill Clinton waived State Department rules to allow Loral to sell missile guidance technology to China or light water nuclear reactor technology and a nuclear power plan to N. Korea.

http://www.cnn.com/ALLPOLITICS/1998/05/22/chi...

http://www.abb.com/cawp/seitp202/c1256c290031...

The corrupt, lying left has been trying to blame Rumsfeld for the Nuc transfer, but Clinton was the president, not Rummy.

Judged:

11

11

10

Reply »
Report Abuse Judge it!

Since: May 11

Loysville, PA

#848195 Jan 27, 2013
OldRaider wrote:
Four American adults were murdered at a U.S. Embassy in an unstable hostile country. For months there has been an incessant cry from Republicans to uncover every possible detail regarding how this could possibly have happened, or more specifically, what role Obama had in this tragedy.
Back here in Connecticut twenty little children were slaughtered in their schoolroom and these same Republicans merely shrug their shoulders and claim the incident is being politicized to take their guns.
Is this hypocrisy or stupidity?
Not only that, but there has been a concentrated effort to use to spread lies. How many here & on other threads claim that no assault like rifle was used to kill those kids in Newtown?

It is really pathetic.

Then there are those who say it was planned to promote gun control.

Judged:

10

10

10

Reply »
Report Abuse Judge it!
Waxman

Windsor, CT

#848196 Jan 27, 2013
Democrats are tryng to use a tragedy where a mentally ill person killed children in to whittle away at the second ammenment, while at the same time oBOZO is giving F-16 fighters for free to an enemy.

http://www.foxnews.com/world/2013/01/22/gift-...

Morons here are whining about stupid stuff.

Judged:

10

10

8

Reply »
Report Abuse Judge it!

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#848199 Jan 27, 2013
Pete wrote:
<quoted text>LOL! I'm surprised these idiots know how to read and write. This loon is a copy paste freak with material from extremists sites; certainly not stable enough to own a gun. He has child-like delusions that he's a "good guy" that needs to fight when the "bad guys" come to get him!
I know you are child-like.

Judged:

10

10

10

Reply »
Report Abuse Judge it!

Since: May 11

Loysville, PA

#848200 Jan 27, 2013
John Galt wrote:
<quoted text>
The truth is that Americans see the lawlessness in New Orleans during Katrina and the rampant criminal activity in cities like Chicago and New York and understand the need to defend themselves against the criminal element in society. Americans will not allow a pandering political buffoon like Obama to leave them defenseless in the face of the criminal urban mob.
Another moronic right whiner. Banning assault like weapons is not banning all guns.

The best weapon for home protection is a shotgun.
Waxman

Windsor, CT

#848201 Jan 27, 2013
Pete wrote:
<quoted text>
Ummm, check with your spokespeople, fatboy. The gun hicks are now saying school shootings are a setup by the Government to push gun legislation. You idiots need to get your stories straight before you try to communicate with the normal population about your cowardly delusions.
You like fat boys dumbfk?

Here you go Richard Cramium!

http://fatboy.cc/

KMA retarded, leeching Moonbat.

Since: May 11

Loysville, PA

#848202 Jan 27, 2013
shinningelectr0n wrote:
<quoted text>
Science once said that Bad Blood was behind all human sickness. Science once said that Light Waves were carried by Ether. Science once believed Ptolemy's view of the Solar System. Science once believed that fire was caused by Phlogiston. Science once believed that heat was a fluid as was cold. Science once believed that the Universe was static. Science once believed that stomach ulcers were caused by stress. Science once believed Plate Tectonics was nonsense. Science once believed that String Theory was the answer for the Final Theory of everything.
ImaginaryDave still believes Science says man made global warming is real & a threat.
You would kiss an azz that was jumping off a cliff.
I get it.

We should not believe any science.

You really are a shining example of the rabid right.
PDUPONT

Chicopee, MA

#848203 Jan 27, 2013
discordia wrote:
<quoted text>
Don't forget FDR getting us into WWII and costing us a half million lives. WWI, Wilson? Korea? Viet Nam? More democrat presidents.
FDR got us into WWII? Did you ever hear about Pearl Harbor?
Let's examine what would have happened if we didn't get involved in the European Theater. Before one American set foot on the European continent the Soviets had soundly defeated the German Sixth army and was heading west. Without American forces occupying the bulk of western Europe the Soviets would have marched right to the Atlantic and the Iron Curtain would have encompassed France, Italy , Belgium, Holland and the Scandinavian countries with Spain likely falling in short order. It would have been the Soviets that captured German rocket technology and Werner Von Braun would have been working for them.
PDUPONT

Chicopee, MA

#848204 Jan 27, 2013
discordia wrote:
<quoted text>
They weren't asking for free birth control, like all libs do.
No one was asking for free birth control cretin, only that it be made available under insurance policies that are being paid for by premiums.
You're an idiot!
Waxman

Windsor, CT

#848205 Jan 27, 2013
PDUPONT wrote:
<quoted text>
FDR got us into WWII? Did you ever hear about Pearl Harbor?
Let's examine what would have happened if we didn't get involved in the European Theater. Before one American set foot on the European continent the Soviets had soundly defeated the German Sixth army and was heading west. Without American forces occupying the bulk of western Europe the Soviets would have marched right to the Atlantic and the Iron Curtain would have encompassed France, Italy , Belgium, Holland and the Scandinavian countries with Spain likely falling in short order. It would have been the Soviets that captured German rocket technology and Werner Von Braun would have been working for them.
Yes lugnut. FDR got us into WWII. Bush wasn't president yet, Moonbat.

Since: Dec 12

Location hidden

#848206 Jan 27, 2013
mdbuilder wrote:
<quoted text>
That's kind of simplistic. You assume legalizing drugs would evaporate gangs. Gangs have been a part of society as long as we've had cities, but the brutality we contend with is relatively new. You have to get beyond the accompanying elements of inner-city gangdome and go to the heart of the matter, too much idle time and non-existent family involvement. As you know, having jobs available to our kids isn't enough, they need to see a need for jobs, that comes from the home and vicariously, the government. We encourage idleness by subsidizing it.
So supporting the illicit drug trade is the solution?

Since: May 11

Loysville, PA

#848208 Jan 27, 2013
Waxman wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes lugnut. FDR got us into WWII. Bush wasn't president yet, Moonbat.
I guess you would have surrendered.
WAKE UP DEMOCRATICS

Nashville, NC

#848210 Jan 27, 2013
Comedienne and former star of "SNL," Victoria Jackson, has stirred some heated controversy surrounding an abortion comment she posted to her Facebook page, RadarOnline reports Dec. 16.

Jackson posted a message from her Tea Party friend, Jim Riley. In addition to it, she added her own thoughts to what he wrote. She basically compared the evil killer of the Connecticut school shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary to those of abortion doctors and women who have the procedures done.

The "SNL" comedienne wrote:


"My friend Jim Riley posted:'Wasn't the Connecticut killer just doing what abortionists do every day? It's a wonder we don't have more 20 year old 'dads' doing what women and doctors have been an accomplice to for years in America. When you forget the TEN COMMANDMENTS, people, THIS is what you get."

She didn't stop the insults there.

The 53-year-old Jackson slammed President Obama's speech on Friday after the school shootings.

She wrote:


“Obama dramatically wiped a tear as he said,‘The majority of those who died today were children – beautiful little kids …They had their entire lives ahead of them…

“YEAH OBAMA. SAME AS THE MILLION BABIES YOU HAD ABORTED THIS YEAR.

“ARE YOU CRYING FOR THEM?!”

How do you feel about Victoria Jackson's comments? She's a self-proclaimed conservative activist. Did she cross the line calling those who abort their babies killers like the man who mass murdered 26 innocent people inside a school?

Since: Dec 12

Location hidden

#848212 Jan 27, 2013
John Galt wrote:
<quoted text>
Can't separate by state borders.
New York and California both have distinct regions that do not follow the blue state model.
At least sixty of the sixty-seven counties in Pennsylvania are republican.
California taxation is so top-heavy that 30,000 taxpayers are providing most of the state revenue.
Your last sentence defeats your own argument. Should those 30,000's votes be artificially counterbalanced with low population, low tax revenue districts? Why should someone in a rural red county who has a net negative federal tax bill have their vote artificially buoyed to equal a voter with a net positive tax bill? Get rid of the Electoral College, its an archaic system that no longer serves a valid purpose.
Grey Ghost

Partlow, VA

#848213 Jan 27, 2013
RealDave wrote:
<quoted text> I guess you would have surrendered.
Waxman would have ran screaming like the girlie wimp that he is. Only on here can he live his dream of being a "MAN".
Waxman

Windsor, CT

#848214 Jan 27, 2013
RealDave wrote:
<quoted text> I guess you would have surrendered.
I guess you would have blamed Bush.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Chicago Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Israeli troops begin Gaza pullout as Hamas decl... (Jan '09) 10 min TRD 68,665
Once slow-moving threat, global warming speeds ... (Dec '08) 15 min grave digger 47,501
Ill. House Approves Legalizing Same-Sex Civil U... (Dec '10) 24 min KiMare 50,639
BARACK OBAMA BIRTH CERTIFICATE: Suit contesting... (Jan '09) 33 min jacques Ottawa 179,418
Abby 10-23-14 2 hr pde 10
Amy 10-24 3 hr edogxxx 11
Abby 10-24 4 hr edogxxx 23
Chicago Dating
Find my Match

Chicago Jobs

Chicago People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

Chicago News, Events & Info

Click for news, events and info in Chicago

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]