Go Back  HuntingNet.com Forums > Non Hunting > Politics
Hypocrites In Our Ranks >

Hypocrites In Our Ranks

Politics Nothing goes with politics quite like crying and complaining, and we're a perfect example of that.

Hypocrites In Our Ranks

Old 11-11-2012, 08:03 AM
  #1  
LBR
Boone & Crockett
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Mississippi USA
Posts: 15,296
Default Hypocrites In Our Ranks

Rather than distract from another thread...

There are quite a few that claim to be strong supporters of the 2nd Amendment and hunting, but they turn around and support a pollitical party (democrat) who has "gun control" as part of their national platform. Besides that, this same party is strongly supported by some orgainizations who's sole reason for existing is to destroy the rights and priveledges we Americans have to own guns and hunt: i.e. hci, moveon.org, peta, etc.

Here is the "book" definition of a hypocrite.

a person who pretends to have virtues, moral or religious beliefs, principles, etc., that he or she does not actually possess, especially a person whose actions belie stated beliefs.
Here is why I feel we have some hypocrites among us.



Stated belief: supporter of hunting and the 2nd Amendment

Action that belies stated belief: Staunchly and vehemently supporting the democrat party in spite of their being a public enemy of the 2nd amendment and hunters, and their (democrats) embracing aforementioned orgainizations who's sole purpose for existing is the destruction of American rights and priveledges to own guns and hunt.

Even more evidence is that the most recent, most liberal, most anti-gun justices appointed to the SCOTUS were placed there by a democrat POTUS; and less than a week after a democrat POTUS was elected a high-ranking democrat in Congress (feinstein) has already introduce anti-gun legislation that said POTUS has already stated he will support.

Yet rather than police thier own, much less change partys and support politicians that support our right to own guns and our priveledge to hunt, democrats make up excuses and/or just avoid the facts.

There's a word for this kind of person--the word I gave the definition for earlier in this post. Not my opinion, just simple fact.

Last edited by LBR; 11-11-2012 at 08:05 AM.
LBR is offline  
Old 11-11-2012, 08:11 AM
  #2  
Fork Horn
 
streetglideok's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Colorado Springs
Posts: 360
Default

Pretty much it. I think some of it I think is because we have alot of people who get dirty for a living, like me, but their job is unionized, not like me,lol. The union bosses have it hammered into their head, the republicans are anti-union, and out to sink them etc. They fail to mention how much of their union dues are spent on gun control lobbying. They fail to mention, that, without union turmoil, the union bosses would be out of a job. If the union members woke up, and realized, pro-business is pro-union in the long run, they would boot those bosses out the door.
streetglideok is offline  
Old 11-11-2012, 08:16 AM
  #3  
LBR
Boone & Crockett
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Mississippi USA
Posts: 15,296
Default

I think you nailed it--basically that people are too lazy or too ignorant to think for themselves. I have a good friend who is a union worker, has been for a long time. He was a steward for the shop for a long time, and a very good one. He's an avid fisherman, hunter, ourdoorsman. And you couldn't pay him a million dollars to vote for bho.

He's one of the few that thinks for himself. He's a very intelligent, very meticulous kind of guy. He doesn't want someone else controlling his life or telling him when it's ok to blow his nose or who he should vote for. He knows that the dem core is anti-gun, and only uses unions as puppets. Wish there were more like him.
LBR is offline  
Old 11-11-2012, 10:11 AM
  #4  
Boone & Crockett
 
falcon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Comance county, OK
Posts: 11,358
Default

Yep, lots of hypocritical stuff happened last election cycle. We had a choice between an anti-gunner who wants an "assault weapons" ban and an anti-gunner who signed a permanent "assault weapons" ban into law as governor of MA.

Because of Romneys anti-gun record, pro-gun Republican voters stayed home in droves. For the above reason and for other reasons and the anti-gunner with the suntan won.

i voted for neither candidate.

Feinstein is a dedicated gun hater. She sponsors an "assault weapons" ban every congressional cycle. She gets few co-sponsers and her proposed legislation goes nowhere.
falcon is online now  
Old 11-11-2012, 11:23 AM
  #5  
Giant Nontypical
 
jeepkid's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: ****ifornia
Posts: 5,048
Default

Originally Posted by falcon View Post
Yep, lots of hypocritical stuff happened last election cycle. We
Feinstein is a dedicated gun hater. She sponsors an "assault weapons" ban every congressional cycle. She gets few co-sponsers and her proposed legislation goes nowhere.
Except in her home state where all her proposed laws actually get passed...
jeepkid is offline  
Old 11-11-2012, 11:37 AM
  #6  
Boone & Crockett
 
Phil from Maine's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Maine
Posts: 12,269
Default

Originally Posted by falcon View Post
Yep, lots of hypocritical stuff happened last election cycle. We had a choice between an anti-gunner who wants an "assault weapons" ban and an anti-gunner who signed a permanent "assault weapons" ban into law as governor of MA.

Because of Romneys anti-gun record, pro-gun Republican voters stayed home in droves. For the above reason and for other reasons and the anti-gunner with the suntan won.

i voted for neither candidate.

Feinstein is a dedicated gun hater. She sponsors an "assault weapons" ban every congressional cycle. She gets few co-sponsers and her proposed legislation goes nowhere.

No he would not do that! They all told me so at least.. Just ask them they know it all anyways. So it does no good to say anything. They forget is what you learn after you know it all that counts. I would give up on them.. We won the election because of what has been going on with the ranks of the party not with what has not been going on.

Anyways some of us have been given vacations from here for insulting members and this post is an insult to some members here and that appears to be OK with them .. So becarefull if you are not one of them.

I know some would question the insulting part of it. But, it can serve no other purpose than that.

Last edited by Phil from Maine; 11-11-2012 at 11:57 AM.
Phil from Maine is offline  
Old 11-11-2012, 12:53 PM
  #7  
LBR
Boone & Crockett
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Mississippi USA
Posts: 15,296
Default

If Romney is so anti-gun, how in the world could he have gotten the endorsement of the NRA? The NRA has endorsed pro-gun dems (about as scarce as hen's teeth) and had exposed anti-gun Republicans. They have reccomneded neither candidate in some situations because neither had a pro-gun record or both had an anti-gun record.

Romney also chose an avid Pro-Gun advocate and avid hunter as his running mate. If you had trouble figuring out which candidate would be more friendly to gun owners, you are being willfully blind and ignorant.

Voting for neither was a vote for bho, period. There were two choices, other than throwing your vote away/not voting. Romney was far from perfect, and far from my first choice, but he was the only choice for anyone who cares anything about hunting and the 2nd Amendment. At the very least he has given recent lip service to the Pro-Gun advocates. bho has provided actions to the opposite.

Feinstein is a dedicated gun hater.
And a very powerful one in Washington.

She sponsors an "assault weapons" ban every congressional cycle. She gets few co-sponsers and her proposed legislation goes nowhere.
How many times has she had the support of a lame duck POTUS with control of the Senate?

Anyways some of us have been given vacations from here for insulting members and this post is an insult to some members here and that appears to be OK with them .. So becarefull if you are not one of them.
Sorry to burst your bubble, but there are no rules against posting definitions or facts. If you can point out one--JUST ONE--thing I've said that I stated as fact that is blatently false, I will impose a ban on myself. I'm not worried, because you can't do it. If you offered the same challenge, you would be gone unless you have gone back and changed a bunch of posts like you did earlier. I have no problems because I can back up what I say with facts.

I know some would question the insulting part of it. But, it can serve no other purpose than that.
I've said this before, and I'll say it again. If the truth is insulting to you, does the problem lie with the truth, or with you?

Rather than whine about things behind Cal's back (he announced he was out of town) and on the open board (another blatent violation of posting rules), how about doing the adult thing and contacting him if you feel he's not being fair. The only time I act as a mod here is when it's something that needs immediate attention--otherwise it's all Cal. If you are saying he's anything less than 100% fair and honest, then you have more problems than I realized. And you called someone "sore looser"...rotf....
LBR is offline  
Old 11-11-2012, 01:11 PM
  #8  
Boone & Crockett
 
Phil from Maine's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Maine
Posts: 12,269
Default

Rather than whine about things behind Cal's back (he announced he was out of town) and on the open board (another blatent violation of posting rules), how about doing the adult thing and contacting him if you feel he's not being fair. The only time I act as a mod here is when it's something that needs immediate attention--otherwise it's all Cal. If you are saying he's anything less than 100% fair and honest, then you have more problems than I realized. And you called someone "sore looser"...rotf....
lets get this part straight shall we.. I have never went against anyone to any mod period. Like it or not. Yes I do find this post insulting to all members that are not from your particular party. No I do not find all the info you have posted as fact. Especialy when it comes from your party's web site..
Phil from Maine is offline  
Old 11-11-2012, 01:27 PM
  #9  
LBR
Boone & Crockett
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Mississippi USA
Posts: 15,296
Default

lets get this part straight shall we.. I have never went against anyone to any mod period.
Who said you did? do you have a point?

Like it or not.
I could realy care less.

Yes I do find this post insulting to all members that are not from your particular party.
Seems that should be telling you something about the party you support.

No I do not find all the info you have posted as fact.
Point it out. ONE THING. Unlike some people, I keep my word.

Especialy when it comes from your party's web site..
Lol--point that out to. I don't need a "party" to tell me what to think, what to say, what to believe. I couldn't give you the name of a Republican website if you offered me money or put a gun to my head. I don't recall ever going to a Republican website EVEN ONCE! I have been to the dem's site--that is how I KNOW THAT GUN CONTROL IS PART OF THE DEMS NATIONAL PLATFORM.

See--you constantly prove me right. I said if you were to offer me the same challenge, you would be gone with the above post. You can't show one thing I said that isn't true, and you just made up the part about me taking something from my "party's website". I think for myself--I'm not anyone's puppet.

Now, how about you step up? Show us anything I said that isn't true. Did I define "hypocrite" incorrectly? It came straight from dictionary.com , a copy and paste. Was I wrong about some people here supporting the dem party? I don't think so. Am I wrong about feinstein's proposed legislation, or bho already stating he supported it? Nope. Am I wrong stating that the dem party is the party that supports/is supported by the likes of moore, soros, hci, peta, etc. etc. etc. Wrong again. So tell me just what I said that isn't true. I don't blame you one bit for being embarrassed--I'd be embarrassed too if I claimed to be a hunter and supporter of the 2nd Amendment and was supporting the same politicians as the biggest advocates of banning guns and hunting on the planet support. Let's see...there's a word for people like that....hmmm....
LBR is offline  
Old 11-11-2012, 01:52 PM
  #10  
Nontypical Buck
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 2,661
Default

[QUOTE=Phil from Maine;4003647]Yes I do find this post insulting to all members that are not from your particular party.

LBR's post is only an insult to the people it describes....so if his post dosn't describe you Phil why would you feel insulted....???
brewman555 is offline  

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information -

Copyright 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.