Buck Hollow Sporting Goods - click or touch to visit their website Midwest Habitat Company

If only the Democrats would............

Iowabowtech, rather than responding to the $5 million remark that McCain made, tongue in cheek or not, can you respond to my argument about the actual issue of trickle down economics being a failed policy of Bush that McCain subscribes to? As you pointed out, the media doesn't pay enough attention to what's really important ---> The issues, not gaffes.
 
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: risto</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Avidhunter</div><div class="ubbcode-body">It would take too long a post, and I doubt anyone on here would read it anyway, to counter all of the right wing arguments and half truths posted online with regards to Obama, so I won't even try. Ahhh, I've rambled on too long, doubtful that anyone read this far anyhow... unlikely that I've changed any minds also /forum/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/wink.gif

Avid,
Just to let you know I respect and have read every word you wrote.

My job and time constraints will not let me write an essay
to let you know my feelings and my two finger typing technique is slow at best.

You are right though in that you will not change my mind.
I am not happy with either candidate but have to go with the lesser of both evils. Noone can tell me that someone with 173 days in the Senate is ready to run this country.

If you could though please look at what I put at the beginning of the thread and let us know what is a lie. </div></div></div></div>

Obama assumed office as Senator of Illinois Jan. 4, 2005. 173 days is actually 2.7 years. Prior to that he was State Senator for 8 years. Length of service, while commendable, does not translate directly into "the most capable" for office, or any career for that matter. It's about judgment and ability, which is more difficult to qualify than length of service is to quantify, to be sure. I doubt anyone would argue that Strom Thurmond would have been qualified to be president, just because he spent 47 years in the Senate.

I can look at the rest of your emailed Republican laundry list later. I've seen exactly the same emailed on behalf of Obama, and could certainly post them as well for others to pick apart /forum/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/wink.gif
 
I just erased a 6 paragraph long reponse on this subject, because I knew it wouldn't make one bit of difference...

Ranting about politics on a forum is like pissing into the wind.... it doesn't get anywere...


I am a Conservative and I vote for candidates that share my morals and values... I will leave it at that..
 
Avid Hunter I used to believe just like you when I was younger. I began to take a long look at it thanks in part to Ronald Reagan, but mostly to growing up and raising a family and really just becoming a more mature thoughtful person.

Now as I stare 50 years old in the face. I am so glad I changed. With the wisdom of years I really can hardly imagine at this point how little I knew at that time compared to how much I thought I knew.

I don't know how old you are but I hope you keep an open mind throughout your life.

Peace.
 
Avid, I guess the reason I'm SO passionate about this is I've been out close enough to see the pointy end of the sword and Obama and his America hating and liberal politics (IMO) scare the crap out of me. I won't change your mind and you won't change mine so I'll let it drop.
God bless you and,
GOD BLESS AMERICA!!!!!!!
 
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Avidhunter</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I support the idea of a flat tax, which neither parties do at the moment. But my idea of a flat tax would include ALL forms of income, so as to include all persons... capital gains, inheritance, you name it. If you are reaping the benefit of any gov't service, which you are if you simply exist - you have access to law enforcement at the local level, and a military at the national level (security), public/state/federal roads and highways, local EMS with 911 etc, the list goes on, you shouldn't be able to completely shelter your income, whatever that might be (inheritance, trust fund, dividends etc) since you benefit from gov't services. That's what some Republicans are trying to get, an income tax free situation by eliminating estate taxes and capital gains taxes. You could argue that they can't get away from paying property tax, but even that has serious loopholes, and property tax only goes to help pay for local services.
</div></div>

I have no problem paying my "fair" share of taxes for the services I use. Which isn't welfare, medicaid, hawki or any other social services they want to force on me. I have experience in these. I have a sister who is "disabled" meaning she is to lazy to work. She once told me while I was on vacation, to get back to work so she has money going into her disability check. After that I swore never to vote for anyone wanting to give my money to the so called less fortunate. I donate time, money and labor to several charities, but I choose them, not someone else choosing it for me. This is why redistribution of wealth is stupid. If you make it you should keep it and pay your taxes for the services you use ie police, fire, streets, schools etc.
 
Avid, Im sorry bud but you dont make any sense. You said in a society where there are few at the top with money and many others struggling to get their piece of the American dream, how can you support the most unfair of all taxes, a flat tax. A flat tax will certainly put the highest burden on the poor. I know you mentioned dividens and capitol gains and inheritace but it still would not offset the poor. When 10 percent are paying 90 of the bill, I just want to know how much more that 10 should pay. I would understand a fair tax, but but a flat tax supporter just goes to show you really dont do your homework you just spew diffent talking points.
 
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Avidhunter</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Iowabowtech, rather than responding to the $5 million remark that McCain made... </div></div>

I was responding to the $5M comment that <u>you </u> made. Arguing tax strategy with you does not interest me. You have your beliefs and talking points lined up and ready to fire irregardless of what I would say. The entire point of my post was to show the lack of morality and willingness to do or say anything it takes to obtain power, stances on political issues aside. And that's a deal breaker right out of the gate for me. If a guy can't make it on his own merits instead of using deceptive tactics and intentional gross overeggerations of the truth, he won't recieve my vote no matter his alignment or lack thereof with my own beliefs on the "issues".
 
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: THA4</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Also, if you are Pro Life, you better be against Capital Punishment, unless you want to get the ol' stamp of hypocrite in my book. </div></div>


are you serious about this?? I was going to stay away from the guts of this discussion as political conversations on web site forums never go anywhere, but this comparison is so very different, and i cannot in clear conscience see how these two things are anywhere close to the same.......

you say "most members of this site" several times, and claim that they need to do some further investigating. maybe you oughta not judge the population that makes up Iowa Whitetail and do a little investigating yourself, as you obviously need to! You are doing a little too much preachin' in my opinion
</div></div>


CAN I GET AN AMEN!!! (spoken in Rev. Wright preachin' tone)
 
Hats off to Avidhunter for having the courage to speak his convictions in the face of over whelming odds. I admire your pluck.

I agree with some of your stuff and I disagree with some. The beauty of a democracy is the "overthrowing” of the government with ballots, not bullets. Back in 17whatever when Thomas Jefferson et.al. wrote the Constitution everybody could afford the technology of the day guaranteeing so called mutual assured destruction. Now days who could afford sophisticated munitions? Last thing I wanna see is extremists, domestic or foreign with ready access to those munitions. Only a civilian controlled military should have those capabilities to ensure the ballot box is used for change not RPGs or smart weaponry. It just scares me to think some domestic militia could try to over throw the government by force because their agenda is not being followed.

As far as pro capital punishment and anti choice or anti capital punishment and pro choice, I agree, a life is a life is a life. Being for one and against the other does seem hypocritical. Doesn’t matter which side of that fence you are on you can’t have it both ways.

Thanks again for coming into the lions den and speaking honestly about your beliefs.

The ‘Bonker
 
so an Innocent unborn child deserves the same rights as a serial killer? or a Killer deserves the same rights as an unborn baby???

sorry, cant wrap my heart and mind around that one.
 
A life is a life is a life.

Isn't a child concieved (born) of original sin and they must be baptised for the sin to be forgiven? Can not a serial killer be forgiven?

No matter how you cut it, a life is being taken and isn't it written some where that only God has the power to take a life?

How about physician assited suicide also know as hospice? Should the terminal cancer patient be made to suffer until the very end or is it OK to load them up on morphine, atavan and fentnyl which makes them more comfy but also hastens death? Isn't that taking a life too?

I'm just saying if it is OK to take a life it shouldn't matter if it is a fetus, a serial killer or grama dying from a disease process.

The 'Bonker
 
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Avidhunter</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
risto said:
Avidhunter said:
I can look at the rest of your emailed Republican laundry list later. I've seen exactly the same emailed on behalf of Obama, and could certainly post them as well for others to pick apart /forum/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/wink.gif </div></div>

When you get time please clean my Republican laundry list for me and let us know. /forum/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/wink.gif

I agree with Bonk also that I admire someone that sticks up for their beliefs if done in a professional way.

That is why I love this country.
 
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: risto</div><div class="ubbcode-body">That is why I love this country.</div></div>

And this site.

The 'Bonker
 
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Fishbonker</div><div class="ubbcode-body">A life is a life is a life.

Isn't a child concieved (born) of original sin and they must be baptised for the sin to be forgiven? Can not a serial killer be forgiven?

No matter how you cut it, a life is being taken and isn't it written some where that only God has the power to take a life?

How about physician assited suicide also know as hospice? Should the terminal cancer patient be made to suffer until the very end or is it OK to load them up on morphine, atavan and fentnyl which makes them more comfy but also hastens death? Isn't that taking a life too?

I'm just saying if it is OK to take a life it shouldn't matter if it is a fetus, a serial killer or grama dying from a disease process.

The 'Bonker </div></div>

Very valid take IMO. Here is a twist that always throws a wrench in things to me however...what if a person is pro life in all the situations you mentioned BUT then you factor in the military and/or self defense. Should we stand idly by and allow ourselves to be overthrown or should we take up arms and defend ourselves and our families? By doing so, we are breaking from the idea that only God has the power to take a life. I am NOT trying to bait you here or be an intentional PIA. I just think it's an interesting paradox and was curious to get your thoughts.
 
I agree with prior posts that at this point most everyone has made up their minds on which candidate they support and how they will vote come November... and I truly hope that everyone of us goes out and takes part in this process. The democratic process is what separates us from so many other countries ruled by despots. I try to avoid creating a political post on here, not because I believe that probably 7 out of 10 members are registered Republicans, but because I know that I probably can't change anyones mind. However, when someone else starts a post arguing against the candidate I support, I do feel the need to respond, respectfully.

Quick reply about my beliefs on taxation. I think a flat tax across the board is the way to go, as I said earlier. No candidate OR party supports this, and so it's a dead issue. Within this context where the possibility of a flat tax is non-existent, I tried to explain what makes the Democrats different than Republicans when it comes to taxation. You can re-read my prior post with this in mind.

I get all kinds of spammed emails almost daily listing the pros and cons of Obama vs. McCain. They are about evenly mixed when it comes to which candidate they support. I don't put much stock into chain emails. You need to do your own homework. I'd start by visiting both of the candidates web pages and reading about their policy proposals on the issues.

I agree with Fishbonker. You can't have it both ways on being Pro Life. If you are against all abortion because you believe in the sanctity of life, you cannot be for capital punishment. No way, no how. The ultimate irony is when you hear about Pro Lifers bombing abortion clinics.

I hate the idea of abortion, don't get me wrong. It should be the absolute last option, especially when you consider that so many couples out there can't conceive to begin with - adoption should be more of a priority. I used to be completely pro-choice, until my wife and I had our daughter. The whole process from pregnancy to delivery was miraculous to behold, and every time I look into my daughter's eyes I cannot even imagine someone wanting to have an abortion. I am however a realist, and I have no doubt that just like Prohibition failed to keep people from drinking alcohol, so will overturning Roe v. Wade fail to stop abortions from happening in this country. That being the case we need to do a better job educating and legislating the issue. Prevention of pregnancy should be the first priority, teaching abstinence alone is ignoring reality. Sex education has a place in our schools just as it has a place in our homes. Our second priority should be promoting alternatives to abortion - such as adoption, and helping young mothers and consequently young families find a place in society, by helping them finish their high school education, and obtaining the skills they need to get a job in order to make the ends meet.

I am avidly pro choice when it comes to rape victims. I am also very much pro-capital punishment.

Anyhow, sorry if I wasted anyone's time here. Expect me to respond against the grain whenever you bring up politics /forum/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/grin.gif
 
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Iowabowtech</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Fishbonker</div><div class="ubbcode-body">A life is a life is a life.

Isn't a child concieved (born) of original sin and they must be baptised for the sin to be forgiven? Can not a serial killer be forgiven?

No matter how you cut it, a life is being taken and isn't it written some where that only God has the power to take a life?

How about physician assited suicide also know as hospice? Should the terminal cancer patient be made to suffer until the very end or is it OK to load them up on morphine, atavan and fentnyl which makes them more comfy but also hastens death? Isn't that taking a life too?

I'm just saying if it is OK to take a life it shouldn't matter if it is a fetus, a serial killer or grama dying from a disease process.

The 'Bonker </div></div>

Very valid take IMO. Here is a twist that always throws a wrench in things to me however...what if a person is pro life in all the situations you mentioned BUT then you factor in the military and/or self defense. Should we stand idly by and allow ourselves to be overthrown or should we take up arms and defend ourselves and our families? By doing so, we are breaking from the idea that only God has the power to take a life. I am NOT trying to bait you here or be an intentional PIA. I just think it's an interesting paradox and was curious to get your thoughts.</div></div>

It's difficult to be consistent if you are truly Pro Life. I do however know someone that fits the bill perfectly, and he has said that he would rather let someone kill him then to kill in self defense. Of course he said that he would try to run away first /forum/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/grin.gif
 
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Avidhunter</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Iowabowtech</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Fishbonker</div><div class="ubbcode-body">A life is a life is a life.

Isn't a child concieved (born) of original sin and they must be baptised for the sin to be forgiven? Can not a serial killer be forgiven?

No matter how you cut it, a life is being taken and isn't it written some where that only God has the power to take a life?

How about physician assited suicide also know as hospice? Should the terminal cancer patient be made to suffer until the very end or is it OK to load them up on morphine, atavan and fentnyl which makes them more comfy but also hastens death? Isn't that taking a life too?

I'm just saying if it is OK to take a life it shouldn't matter if it is a fetus, a serial killer or grama dying from a disease process.

The 'Bonker </div></div>

Very valid take IMO. Here is a twist that always throws a wrench in things to me however...what if a person is pro life in all the situations you mentioned BUT then you factor in the military and/or self defense. Should we stand idly by and allow ourselves to be overthrown or should we take up arms and defend ourselves and our families? By doing so, we are breaking from the idea that only God has the power to take a life. I am NOT trying to bait you here or be an intentional PIA. I just think it's an interesting paradox and was curious to get your thoughts.</div></div>

It's difficult to be consistent if you are truly Pro Life. I do however know someone that fits the bill perfectly, and he has said that he would rather let someone kill him then to kill in self defense. Of course he said that he would try to run away first /forum/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/grin.gif </div></div>

Is this guy Serious?????

He would rather be killed by someone then have to kill in self defense????

Wow!!!

Not me.......You try to kill me and I will Kill you back...
 
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Avidhunter</div><div class="ubbcode-body">It's difficult to be consistent if you are truly Pro Life. </div></div>

In YOUR opinion
 
pondlevi2007.jpg
 
Top Bottom