^^^ He's talking about the "ban all semi-autos" thing.

Which is suspect at best. The site he got it from seems pretty sketchy.

^ I can't find any sites that back it up.

[Edited on February 11, 2007 at 7:14 PM. Reason : .]

2/11/2007 7:13:38 PM

Quote :

"For example, in an October, 2003 Washington Post/ABC poll, by almost a two-to-one margin (62 percent to 33 percent), Americans said that they preferred a universal system that would provide coverage to everyone under a government program, as opposed to the current employer-based system. Similarly, in Kaiser polls from 1992 to 2000, a large majority of the public agreed that the federal government should guarantee medical care for people who don’t have health insurance. In a slightly different question asked more recently by Kaiser in June 2003, more than seven in ten adults (72 percent) agreed that the government should guarantee health insurance for all citizens, even if it means repealing most of the tax cuts passed under President George W. Bush, while less than one-quarter (24 percent) disagreed with this statement."

2/11/2007 7:15:55 PM

In fact, when I google "Barack Obama semi-auto," all I get are forums full of people claiming that he wants to ban them, but not a single actual source.

2/11/2007 7:17:39 PM

I didn't realize that 62% of Americans were far left eyedrb.

2/11/2007 7:20:54 PM

^^ "obama" "gun control"

Quote :

"there was more than one site that mentioned that not to mention that he voted AGAINST a bill that would protect homeowners from being charged if they shot someone legally in self defense in their home... (because the state has a handgun ban) thats pretty shitty ^^ that "poll" said "assault weapons" lol obama had been quoted as saying... "ban civilian ownership of all semi-automatic firearms" so there goes your standard 1911 .45, (attn duck hunters there goes your precious A5 and SBE), my deer rifle, and many other firearms that I own guess what, hunting rifles aren't protected by the 2nd amendment either [Edited on February 11, 2007 at 7:16 PM. Reason : ..once again, don't bring up the NRA... they concede and only care about hunting guns anyway] "

I'm just going with what I found when I googled obamas GC stance, and it came up on almost every site

Quote :

"Ban semi-automatics, and more possession restrictions Principles that Obama supports on gun issues: Ban the sale or transfer of all forms of semi-automatic weapons. Increase state restrictions on the purchase and possession of firearms. Require manufacturers to provide child-safety locks with firearms. Source: 1998 IL State Legislative National Political Awareness Test Jul 2, 1998 "

http://abclocal.go.com/wls/story?section=News&id=2053300

[Edited on February 11, 2007 at 7:26 PM. Reason : if I'm wrong I'll gladly eat crow, but I think he's avoiding his big vote issues]

2/11/2007 7:25:36 PM

banning the sale and transfer is not banning the ownership.

2/11/2007 7:28:33 PM

^^ His reasoning for the first one was "The Obama campaign director released a statement: "This vote was an attempt to override the right of individual communities to enact their own laws as Wilmette did in 1989. Barack Obama has worked tirelessly to protect Illinois communities while recognizing the legitimate rights of sportsmen, which is why the 36,000 law enforcement officials of the Illinois Fraternal Order Of Police endorsed his candidacy" which makes sense I think.

The second position seems retarded to me (banning the sale and transfer of semi-auto weapons), but that quote you cited is from 1998, and Obama's stance could have changed since then.

2/11/2007 7:37:25 PM

http://abclocal.go.com/wls/story?section=News&id=2053300

Nowhere in this article does it say he wants to ban semi-autos.

It's just talking about Alan Keyes (lol) accusing Obama of not respecting gun rights

2/11/2007 7:38:03 PM

"I didn't realize that 62% of Americans were far left eyedrb."

More like uninformed. Yeah it sounds great. Im sure a majority would be for FREE GASOLINE. Its just not practical. Oh you want govt subsidized healthcare? Well congrats, you have it now. You want more? Governments tend to do a good job of effectively running things effciently. I mean Katrina proved that.. now lets give them healthcare.

I wont debate you on healthcare, it is obviously something you dont have enough info to debate. Google it all you want, and still you have no idea what a disaster is coming. Talk to doctors that have left canada, or patients that come from canada to the US for surgery. Or do you like the idea of 60% tax bracket? Yes, it all sounds fantastic. Couple that with the present doc shortage due to govt/ins controlled healthcare... a total control will only insure the downfail and complete lack of care. Just my opinion, from someone who is IN healthcare.

Im done with you nutsmacker, good day to you sir.

2/11/2007 8:32:36 PM

Ahah, so mainstream is defined by ^'s views.

If 62% of Americans are right or left of "mainstream," they're just dumb.

2/11/2007 8:35:10 PM

boone, not what im saying. If a politician said Im going to give the american people free gas.. it sounds great..but not practical. And Im also sure a poll for "would you favor free gas" would come out to be close to 100% for it. It proves nothing. The same with this "free" healthcare.

2/11/2007 8:50:16 PM

Quote :

"Governments tend to do a good job of effectively running things effciently. I mean Katrina proved that.. now lets give them healthcare."

The Katrina failure had nothing to do with government as a general concept. It had to do with a WILLING breakdown in government. When you defund government and put political friends in charge of actual programs that require knowledge and expertise you gurantee they will fail.

Quote :

"I wont debate you on healthcare, it is obviously something you dont have enough info to debate."

so give us some facts, instead of just yelling with no information.

How about this fact. Americans pay 16% of our GDP into healthcare every year. If I remember, no country with universal health care is above 11%. And yet, they 'score' better on almost every measure of citizen health.

2/11/2007 8:50:16 PM

Quote :

"In a slightly different question asked more recently by Kaiser in June 2003, more than seven in ten adults (72 percent) agreed that the government should guarantee health insurance for all citizens, even if it means repealing most of the tax cuts passed under President George W. Bush, while less than one-quarter (24 percent) disagreed with this statement."

Jesus fucking christ you are an idiot. Free gas has nothing to do with this discussion.

2/11/2007 8:52:00 PM

Revolt, IM me. I would be happy to express my views/experiences and concerns with healthcare.

2/11/2007 8:53:18 PM

^^Revenue is up in real dollars since the Bush tax cuts. So I'm not sure what good repealing those tax cuts would do.


[Edited on February 11, 2007 at 9:08 PM. Reason : 2]

2/11/2007 9:06:55 PM

laughter curve

2/11/2007 9:50:01 PM

so you dont want to listen to someone actually in healthcare? Smart. Good day to you sir.

2/11/2007 9:53:16 PM

Both my father, 2 brothers and my brother-in-law are in healthcare and they support nationalized healthcare. What now, Mr. appeal to my authority?

2/11/2007 11:38:50 PM

My uncle is Jesus, the son of God, and he supports universal healthcare too.

2/11/2007 11:40:46 PM

Quote :

"I wont debate you on healthcare, it is obviously something you dont have enough info to debate. Google it all you want, and still you have no idea what a disaster is coming. Talk to doctors that have left canada, or patients that come from canada to the US for surgery. Or do you like the idea of 60% tax bracket? Yes, it all sounds fantastic. Couple that with the present doc shortage due to govt/ins controlled healthcare... a total control will only insure the downfail and complete lack of care. Just my opinion, from someone who is IN healthcare. "

Maybe you should actually read candidate platforms and see that no one has proposed a system similar to Canada or the UK. Single provider was never part of the discussion, dum-dum.

[Edited on February 12, 2007 at 12:51 AM. Reason : .]

2/12/2007 12:51:02 AM

eyedrb, clearly wants you not to support Dennis Kucinich.

2/12/2007 1:01:20 AM

actually, according to wiki, kucinich doesn't even support that.

clearly, he wants you to say "no" to the Communist Party of the USA.

2/12/2007 1:06:01 AM

anyone see the article in the charlotte paper about universal healtcare? Im glad somone is trying to bring it out so people dont get suckered in on this.

2/14/2007 9:14:54 AM

which one? the opinion column?

2/14/2007 11:03:25 AM

http://www.charlotte.com/mld/observer/news/16693525.htm

Hope that works

2/14/2007 11:25:47 AM

Quote :

"Problems with our health care system are leading some to fall prey to proposals calling for a nationalized single-payer health care system like Canada's or Britain's. There are a few things that we might take into consideration before falling for these proposals."

It's a moot point b/c noone has been proposing a single provider system like Britain and Canada. No Dem candidate has proposed such a thing. If they have, I've missed it, but nowhere in the plans of Edwards, Obama, Richardson, and Clinton have single provider systems been proposed, just single payer (and partial at that). This has been stated time and time again, and you continue to ignore it.

[Edited on February 14, 2007 at 12:32 PM. Reason : .]

2/14/2007 12:30:39 PM

http://www.newsobserver.com/559/story/542839.html

Quote :

"Get businesses out of health care. Health care is not part of their core competencies but something they use as a part of labor relations. It creates job lock and distorts employers' hiring and firing decisions."

opposed to

Quote :

"There's a cure for our health care problems. That cure is not to demand more government but less government."

Interesting that both papers have guest columns on health care the same day but from completely opposite sides.

2/14/2007 1:24:49 PM

Quote :

"That cure is not to demand more government but less government"

Its obvious that the market is failing a large number of Americans. Business loves taking that government cash, but is interesting in doing it without government oversight.

2/14/2007 1:37:57 PM

scuba, healthcare is not a free market. It is goverment subsidized now. The problem is people dont want to pay for it. We need to let these states start thier own programs and let them fail before we try it on a national level.

The best insurance out there is medicaid.. and they know it. However, we cant afford to give thier benefits to EVERYONE, like some suggest.

Here is a great article:
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2007/02/schwarzeneggers_folly.html

[Edited on February 14, 2007 at 2:56 PM. Reason : .]

2/14/2007 2:51:40 PM

actually, we could afford to give Medicare to everyone.

federalism is such an amusing topic. Republicans praise it, but then dont want it to happen sometimes. Democrats generally ignore the idea, but then rely on it for some of their ideas. Both parties are pretty hypocritical about it.
Having said that, the phrase, "let the states have it fail" is just plain annoying.

Also, Arnold's plan is dumb. The Mass. plan is similar and just as dumb. Supposedly Easley is thinking about a similar idea. I hope he stops.

2/14/2007 10:08:19 PM

i really need to read his book

that i bought on cd

2/14/2007 10:45:23 PM

revolt, there is no way we could afford the same service as mediciad to everyone. Medicaid pays for viagra, rogaine, hell even listerine.. and in FULL. No way we could afford that for everyone.

http://www.partnersinhealthplan.org/providers/06Medicaid.pdf


Look at that list, all paid in full or one dollar copay. We simply cant afford it.

[Edited on February 14, 2007 at 11:28 PM. Reason : .]

2/14/2007 11:22:29 PM

is that really a list of everything they pay for? jeebus.

its kinda important that there is a big difference between medicare and medicaid. But, it would have been more accurate for me to say that we could afford to provide something similar to those programs for everyone. Obviously it would have to be reworked.

2/15/2007 9:13:35 PM

It's important to note that if you're receiving Medicaid benefits, life is not exactly a picnic. Most broke ass college students don't even qualify for Medicaid.

[Edited on February 15, 2007 at 9:45 PM. Reason : ...]

2/15/2007 9:45:10 PM

Quote :

"""I've got two young daughters who I hope will be athletes. And, you know, the notion that somehow they would be degraded and insulted, and that that would pass as humor, and that NBC would be running that over the public airwaves I think is atrocious," he said."

because of that comment...no

4/12/2007 5:38:58 PM

wow, didn't know he said that


yeah, all black athletes are nappy headed hoes


stfu and quit pandering

[Edited on April 12, 2007 at 5:44 PM. Reason : pp]

4/12/2007 5:43:54 PM

^^ I am with you. I would vote for Satan before obama.


No one is mentioning that there are also white girls on that team. It's not as if Imus stated that the black girls on the Rutgers team are all nappy headed hos.

PS- they do have nappy hair...so does anyone after running a whole game of ball. This is just more cry baby tactics and selective hearing which are apparently very effective.

4/12/2007 6:10:30 PM

I had toyed with the idea of voting for Obama until he came out with that shit bitching about Imus.

4/12/2007 10:52:58 PM

earthdogg's post on the first page wins

4/13/2007 11:29:04 AM

there's something to be said for someone who's not used to (and likely not content with) the bureacracy of executive offices.

[Edited on April 13, 2007 at 5:02 PM. Reason : .]

4/13/2007 5:01:50 PM

"obama returns more than $50,000 in lobbyists' contributions":

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/chi-070413obama-lobbyists,1,108302.story?ctrack=1&cset=true

4/14/2007 1:51:53 PM

Quote :

"Similarly, in Kaiser polls from 1992 to 2000, a large majority of the public agreed that the federal government should guarantee medical care for people who don’t have health insurance."

wow, are people REALLY that stupid? if the gov't would guarantee you medical care if you didn't have insurance, WHY THE HELL WOULD ANY BUY HEALTH INSURANCE?

4/14/2007 9:26:10 PM

After thinking about this more carefully, I retract my previous statements. Obama's statements have ended up being some of the more level headed I have heard in this discussion.

Furthermore, I was previously under the impression that Imus was a shock jock comedian having never listened to his show, but after watching Meet the Press this morning, I found out that he had dozens and dozens of really high profile political guests. This portion of his show removes him somewhat from the the circus of people like Chris Rock and Howard Stern who really never say anything of importance nor have powerful guests and this portion of his show creates a higher level of responsibility in him.

In other words, he was trying to play on both sides of the fence and fell on his nuts. Imus that is.

I am back to considering Obama for my vote, not that any of you care.

4/15/2007 11:22:06 AM

sadly, Barack is the black version of what Edwards was when he first ran for prez. If Barack is the top of the ticket for Dems, they will lose both the House and Senate and of course the GOP will crush him in the general election......

[Edited on April 15, 2007 at 1:50 PM. Reason : w]

4/15/2007 1:50:00 PM

Just FYI

He was asked about Imus' comments, he didnt just say that at random.

4/15/2007 1:54:56 PM

He's certainly not a centrist, as someone mentioned earlier in this thread.

4/15/2007 1:57:52 PM

4/18/2007 10:12:55 PM

instead of HC? oh fuck yes

4/20/2007 10:30:51 AM

Quote :

"Bill Clinton was extremely eloquent and articulate, but he also lied under oath and sold military secrets to the Chinese, among a whole bunch of other shit that pissed me off."

Did this really happen? Even when I considered myself a Republican sympathizer, I wanted to call bullshit.

4/22/2007 5:24:50 PM

Clinton allowed China to launch US satellites at a time when China was giving him a lot of soft money.

The "selling military secrets" line assumes a few things
1) That it was indeed a case of pay-for-play (maybe; the justice dept didn't think so)
2) That allowing other nations to launch our satellites using their rockets was anything out of the ordinary (it wasn't)
3) That China was stealing technology from the satellites
4) That the technology that they were hypothetically stealing was to be used for military purposes.

So yeah, file this right next to the Vince Foster Assassination

4/22/2007 5:43:49 PM