GoFuckYourself.com - Adult Webmaster Forum

GoFuckYourself.com - Adult Webmaster Forum (https://gfy.com/index.php)
-   Fucking Around & Business Discussion (https://gfy.com/forumdisplay.php?f=26)
-   -   Obama Vetoes Dirty Koch Brothers Canadian Shit Tubes (https://gfy.com/showthread.php?t=1161846)

tony286 02-25-2015 07:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by L-Pink (Post 20402851)
You never let us down Tony :1orglaugh

Its the truth, if people are going to cry most of the country was for it and he vetoed it. There were lots of things the people were for and congress didnt bring up or voted down. It cant be when its not happening to you then its ok.

Like the GOP having the balls to say elections have consequences,they sure didnt feel that way when the pres won the first time. lol

LA Crew 02-25-2015 07:54 AM

How stressful jobs like politics can affect you.

http://s13.postimg.org/vni1ku3iv/1_Xe_D8_Lb.jpg

dyna mo 02-25-2015 08:16 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tony286 (Post 20403077)
Its the truth, if people are going to cry most of the country was for it and he vetoed it. There were lots of things the people were for and congress didnt bring up or voted down. It cant be when its not happening to you then its ok.

Like the GOP having the balls to say elections have consequences,they sure didnt feel that way when the pres won the first time. lol

2 wrongs make a right to you. unbelievable that people will give up their representation because, hey, BO is getting even with republicans.

dyna mo 02-25-2015 08:23 AM

unreal people think it's OK to use veto power to block legislation the people want.

OMFG a pipeline instead of 1000s of trucks and rail cars, the horror, stop government and save the people from themselves and this armageddon pipe.

thanks for the democracy obama.

dyna mo 02-25-2015 08:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tony286 (Post 20402663)
You mean like most people want min wage increased but congress will do nothing or most people want stricter gun laws but again congress wont do anything?

i see, so according to you, since the government has not done much, if anything, let's not start now.
status quo. unreal.

dyna mo 02-25-2015 08:35 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ********** (Post 20402883)
Hi Rochard,

Tell that to the people in Nebraska. A bunch of property owners refused to let the pipeline on to their land. TransCanada is trying to use eminent domain to get their way. TransCanada takes steps to acquire Nebraska land for Keystone XL

Honest question to republicans : Why on earth would you let a foreign country try such a shitty, sneaky, legal maneuver like this?

a bunch of property owners? you mean like 7 land owners? is 7 a bunch in Canada? You do realize transcanada has the legal right to sue for access? You do realize the SC cleared the way for that right? You do realize BO is OTR stating he would wait for that SC ruling before deciding to be for or against the pipe right?

so you need to be updated, this isn't a shitty sneaky legal maneuver, this is all within the laws established here. 7 wealthy land owners are the few left in the way, they are legally getting sued based on the laws in our country.

BO is an undemocratic thug of a PUSA. He's like one of those punks on a bicycle that gets in the way while you're driving and won't move. fuck him.

Wizzo 02-25-2015 09:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BFT3K (Post 20402504)
Hey, I'm with you buddy - let's get the fuck off of fossil fuels. I can't imagine any reason we aren't moving 100% in that direction, can you?...

https://www.opensecrets.org/lobby/in...ent.php?id=E01

Koch Brothers And ALEC Expand Fight On Clean Energy Users | ThinkProgress

You do realize the oil coming down from Canada isn't the type they made gasoline with?

It's the kind that makes Clothes, Toothbrushes, Ice Chests, CD's & DVD's, Paint Brushes, Detergents, Vaporizers, Balloons, Sun Glasses, Tents, Heart Valves, Crayons, Parachutes, Telephones, Floor Wax, Ballpoint Pens, Football Cleats, Upholstery, Sweaters, Bicycle Tires, Nail Polish, Fishing lures, Tires, Golf Bags, Perfumes, Dishwasher parts, Tool Boxes, Shoe Polish, Motorcycle Helmets, Caulking, Petroleum Jelly, Transparent Tape, Ipods, Faucet Washers, Antiseptics, Food Preservatives, Basketballs, Soap, Vitamin Capsules, Antihistamines, Purses, Shoes, Dashboards, Cortisone, Deodorant, Footballs, Putty, Dyes, Panty Hose, Refrigerant ,Percolators, Life Jackets, Skis, TV Cabinets, Shag Rugs, Electrician's Tape, Epoxy Paint, Mops, Insect Repellent, Umbrellas, Yarn, Fertilizers, Hair Coloring, Roofing, Toilet Seats, Fishing Rods, Lipstick, Denture, Adhesive, Linoleum, Ice Cube Trays, Synthetic Rubber, Speakers, Plastic Wood, Electric Blankets, Glycerin, Tennis Rackets, Rubber Cement, Fishing Boots, Dice, Nylon Rope, Candles, Trash Bags, House Paint, Water Pipes, Hand Lotion, Roller Skates, Surf Boards, Shampoo, Wheels, Paint Rollers, Shower Curtains, Guitar Strings, Luggage, Aspirin, Safety Glasses, Antifreeze, Football Helmets, Awnings, Eyeglasses, Enamel, Pillows, Dishes, Cameras, Anesthetics, Artificial Turf, Artificial limbs, Bandages, Dentures, Model Cars, Hair Curlers, Cold creamMovie film, Soft Contact lenses, Drinking Cups, Fan Belts, Car Enamel, Shaving Cream, Refrigerators, Golf Balls just to name a few things that come from petroleum.

Your right we should get off that shit and go back to living in wood huts with stone tools only. :winkwink:

EonBlue 02-25-2015 09:19 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wizzo (Post 20403153)
Your right we should get off that shit and go back to living in wood huts with stone tools only. :winkwink:

Yep, this is our future once all of the climastrologists and communists are done getting their way:

http://i.imgur.com/nJjyKsU.jpg

The only problem is that this type of lifestyle will require that there be far fewer of us otherwise all of the forests will be cut down and all of the wildlife eaten.


.

crockett 02-25-2015 01:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dyna mo (Post 20403101)
unreal people think it's OK to use veto power to block legislation the people want.

OMFG a pipeline instead of 1000s of trucks and rail cars, the horror, stop government and save the people from themselves and this armageddon pipe.

thanks for the democracy obama.

I see you are now in favor of majority rules, I guess that means we will no longer see you denying global climate change as the majority of the people in this country and the world accept that man has sped up global warming.. Also since 97% of scientist also agree man has sped up the process I assume you will now agree with them, rather than your 3% deniers.

I also assume you will no longer have issues with Obamacare as the Majority of Americans are in favor of it.

It's good to see you finally coming around.. :thumbsup

Rochard 02-25-2015 01:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ********** (Post 20402883)
Hi Rochard,

Tell that to the people in Nebraska. A bunch of property owners refused to let the pipeline on to their land. TransCanada is trying to use eminent domain to get their way. TransCanada takes steps to acquire Nebraska land for Keystone XL

Honest question to republicans : Why on earth would you let a foreign country try such a shitty, sneaky, legal maneuver like this?

Yes, a bunch of property owners refused to let the pipeline on their land. This shouldn't come as any surprise at all. Some people disagree with it, some people don't want the hassle, some just don't want a freaking pipeline running through their land.

This is "not a shitty legal maneuver". This is very common place. My mother works for a power company that builds power plants. You and I don't think about this, but building power plants is a huge undertaking that requires years of research. Plants have to be built in certain locations, near population centers, but also near current power grids and near sources of water. In all cases, power lines have to pass through both public and privately owned land. Once a route is decided on they contact land owners. Obviously, most people don't want power lines running through their back yard or on their land. However, we need power, we need power lines, and eventually they will be built. Some land owners will accept payments for this while others are taken by eminent domain.

I am sure people in California and Arizona didn't want a pipeline, but... People in Arizona need gas so... One way or another the pipeline gets built.

czarina 02-25-2015 01:27 PM

good for him!!

Rochard 02-25-2015 01:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LA Crew (Post 20403083)
How stressful jobs like politics can affect you.

http://s13.postimg.org/vni1ku3iv/1_Xe_D8_Lb.jpg

You are also talking about six years too. I know I've changed a lot in the past six years - and gained a lot weight too.

MK Ultra 02-25-2015 01:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by crockett (Post 20403419)
I see you are now in favor of majority rules, I guess that means we will no longer see you denying global climate change as the majority of the people in this country and the world accept that man has sped up global warming.. Also since 97% of scientist also agree man has sped up the process I assume you will now agree with them, rather than your 3% deniers.

I also assume you will no longer have issues with Obamacare as the Majority of Americans are in favor of it.

It's good to see you finally coming around.. :thumbsup

Just curious about where you get your "facts"

RealClearPolitics - Election Other - Public Approval of Health Care Law

Axeman 02-25-2015 01:44 PM

Though I wish they would build it, I have no issue with him Vetoing it. That's the way its supposed to work. If the congress can't get enough votes to override the veto, so be it. But I also don't complain when the system works when either side fights to block legislation they don't believe in. If nothing gets done as a result, so be it. I don't dislike gridlock. In fact I think its good. The government is already out of control in size and scope, and impossible to have any accountability at this point.

Vendzilla 02-25-2015 01:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MK Ultra (Post 20403448)

Yeah, only 37 % approve of Obamacare and 56% disapprove of it, it's a new low

Also about 59% of Americans want this pipeline

This is why I have that shit stain Crockut on ignore, he talks out his ass way too much!

EonBlue 02-25-2015 02:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by crockett (Post 20403419)
Also since 97% of scientist also agree man has sped up the process I assume you will now agree with them, rather than your 3% deniers.

"Make the lie big, make it simple, keep saying it, and eventually they will believe it."

- Adolf Hitler


.

tony286 02-25-2015 02:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vendzilla (Post 20403469)
Yeah, only 37 % approve of Obamacare and 56% disapprove of it, it's a new low

Also about 59% of Americans want this pipeline

This is why I have that shit stain Crockut on ignore, he talks out his ass way too much!

So you agree with this one then too? Since now we want mob rule
Quinnipiac University. June 24-30, 2014. N=1,446 registered voters nationwide. Margin of error ± 2.6.


"Do you support or oppose stricter gun control laws in the United States?"


Support Oppose Unsure
% % %

6/24-30/14

50 47 3

9/23-29/13

54 41 5

3/26 - 4/1/13

53 42 4

2/27 - 3/4/13

51 42 7

1/30 - 2/4/13

52 43 5

7/8-13/08

54 40 5

dyna mo 02-25-2015 02:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by crockett (Post 20403419)
I see you are now in favor of majority rules, I guess that means we will no longer see you denying global climate change as the majority of the people in this country and the world accept that man has sped up global warming.. Also since 97% of scientist also agree man has sped up the process I assume you will now agree with them, rather than your 3% deniers.

I also assume you will no longer have issues with Obamacare as the Majority of Americans are in favor of it.

It's good to see you finally coming around.. :thumbsup

I'm for majority rules in our Democracy, not in fucking science! jeez.

1. I've never denied climate change
2. i've never had an issue with obamacare

I am OTR here with both of those and have mentioned that to you many times.

2MuchMark 02-25-2015 03:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rochard (Post 20403434)
Yes, a bunch of property owners refused to let the pipeline on their land. This shouldn't come as any surprise at all. Some people disagree with it, some people don't want the hassle, some just don't want a freaking pipeline running through their land.

This is "not a shitty legal maneuver". This is very common place. My mother works for a power company that builds power plants. You and I don't think about this, but building power plants is a huge undertaking that requires years of research. Plants have to be built in certain locations, near population centers, but also near current power grids and near sources of water. In all cases, power lines have to pass through both public and privately owned land. Once a route is decided on they contact land owners. Obviously, most people don't want power lines running through their back yard or on their land. However, we need power, we need power lines, and eventually they will be built. Some land owners will accept payments for this while others are taken by eminent domain.

I hear you, but here's the problem. Eminent domain means "the right of a government or its agent to expropriate private property for public use, with payment of compensation." In this case, it is a Private, Foreign, Corporation that is trying to claim Eminent domain.

EonBlue 02-25-2015 03:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ********** (Post 20403570)
I hear you, but here's the problem. Eminent domain means "the right of a government or its agent to expropriate private property for public use, with payment of compensation." In this case, it is a Private, Foreign, Corporation that is trying to claim Eminent domain.

Eminent domain - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Quote:

Eminent domain (United States, the Philippines), compulsory purchase (United Kingdom, New Zealand, Ireland), resumption (Hong Kong), resumption/compulsory acquisition (Australia), or expropriation (South Africa, Canada) is the power of a state or a national government to take private property for public use. However, it can be legislatively delegated by the state to municipalities, government subdivisions, or even to private persons or corporations, when they are authorized to exercise the functions of public character.[1]

The property may be taken either for government use or by delegation to third parties, who will devote it to public or civic use or, in some cases, to economic development. The most common uses of property taken by eminent domain are for government buildings and other facilities, public utilities, highways, and railroads. However, it may also be taken for reasons of public safety, as in the case of Centralia, Pennsylvania. Some jurisdictions require that the condemnor make an offer to purchase the subject property, before resorting to the use of eminent domain

.

crockett 02-25-2015 04:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by EonBlue (Post 20403483)
"Make the lie big, make it simple, keep saying it, and eventually they will believe it."

- Adolf Hitler


.

So you are saying they are lying about most Americans supporting the pipeline??

Look at this poll...

Poll: 54% of Republicans say that, "deep down," Obama is a Muslim - Vox

It appears 54% of Republicans are fucking morons..

NaughtyVisions 02-25-2015 04:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dyna mo (Post 20403546)
I'm for majority rules in our Democracy, not in fucking science! jeez.

1. I've never denied climate change
2. i've never had an issue with obamacare

I am OTR here with both of those and have mentioned that to you many times.


To go along with my previous statement of "the majority is a bunch of idiots," and to address your question posed to me a page back, I never said that an IQ test was required to vote.

What I'm saying, and what several others are trying to point out to you but you're nitpicking and missing the point (whether deliberate or not) is that sometimes, as someone in a position of power, you have to make decisions that go against the majority, because that majority may not fully understand the issue or the implications related to their point of view.

A simple look at the majority of the comments on any article about Obama vetoing this bill will prove that. The ones who are outraged (and in the majority who support the pipeline) believe this pipeline will bring oil into the US and reduce our gas prices. They also think that this will create thousands of long-term jobs, as opposed to the 35-50 long term and up to 3000 short term (a couple of years or less) jobs that it will actually create. They also aren't aware that the company behind this is NOT required to pay into the fund created for the purpose of expenses relating to leaks/spills/clean-up/etc.

Actually listening to un-informed opinions is idiotic, and I'd be pissed if any President did it, Repub or Dem. Would you buy a book if i recommended it, but knowing I never read it? Of course not, because my opinion would be worthless. Same goes for a good chunk of that "majority" that support the pipeline bill in its current state.

dyna mo 02-25-2015 04:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NaughtyVisions (Post 20403616)
To go along with my previous statement of "the majority is a bunch of idiots," and to address your question posed to me a page back, I never said that an IQ test was required to vote.

What I'm saying, and what several others are trying to point out to you but you're nitpicking and missing the point (whether deliberate or not) is that sometimes, as someone in a position of power, you have to make decisions that go against the majority, because that majority may not fully understand the issue or the implications related to their point of view.

A simple look at the majority of the comments on any article about Obama vetoing this bill will prove that. The ones who are outraged (and in the majority who support the pipeline) believe this pipeline will bring oil into the US and reduce our gas prices. They also think that this will create thousands of long-term jobs, as opposed to the 35-50 long term and up to 3000 short term (a couple of years or less) jobs that it will actually create. They also aren't aware that the company behind this is NOT required to pay into the fund created for the purpose of expenses relating to leaks/spills/clean-up/etc.

Actually listening to un-informed opinions is idiotic, and I'd be pissed if any President did it, Repub or Dem. Would you buy a book if i recommended it, but knowing I never read it? Of course not, because my opinion would be worthless. Same goes for a good chunk of that "majority" that support the pipeline bill in its current state.

I get where you are coming from but here't the thing, it's not nitpicking to think BO should not use veto power to block a bill that has very little consequence and was at the very least and for whatever reason, something the people wanted and Congress actually worked together to pass. It was a step in the right direction and BO could have gone that route and joined in with Congress and shown he is willing and able to compromise.

NaughtyVisions 02-25-2015 05:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dyna mo (Post 20403627)
I get where you are coming from but here't the thing, it's not nitpicking to think BO should not use veto power to block a bill that has very little consequence and was at the very least and for whatever reason, something the people wanted and Congress actually worked together to pass. It was a step in the right direction and BO could have gone that route and joined in with Congress and shown he is willing and able to compromise.

Here's the thing, though, and I've seen very little mention of it. BO never said he would ALWAYS veto the bill and that he was opposed to the pipeline in any way, shape or form.

Look at his statement, and Pelosi's (who, a lot of times I think is bat shit crazy, just for the record):

https://cdn0.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/NBR...XIAE6Kzr.0.jpg

Pelosi:

Pelosi Statement on President Obamaā??s Veto of Keystone XL Pipeline | Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi

Quote:

?This bill was just another Republican special-interest giveaway. It would have handed a foreign company a license-to-leak on American soil because it keeps the special favors and exemptions that allow companies that ship or refine tar sands oil to dodge paying into the Oil Spill Liability Trust Fund ? leaving American taxpayers to foot the bill in the event of a spill. And it would have exempted Keystone from all federal permitting requirements ? including those that apply to every other construction project in the country.

?Today, President Obama stood up for our families, our economy and our environment: vetoing a bad bill that brazenly circumvents a longstanding and proven process already underway to ensure that the Keystone XL Pipeline is good for our country. Whatever one?s position on building the Keystone XL Pipeline, we cannot afford to cut corners on a process that protects our communities.?
Yeah, she took a stab at the Republicans. But the key thing is that last part of her statement:

Quote:

"...Whatever one?s position on building the Keystone XL Pipeline, we cannot afford to cut corners on a process that protects our communities."
So, it appears to me that the veto was because shit wasn't done the right way, and things aren't properly addressed in the bill. I don't think it's an abuse of power to reject something done half-ass. I really don't think he should have signed it to "show he was a team player" if there's things in it that need corrected/fixed/addressed.

To me, this veto and the statements that followed don't say, "fuck you, I'm not working with you on this" They say, "look, I can't accept this the way it is. There's just some more stuff that we need to work out and research that needs done before we can roll with this." But sadly, in our "my team vs your team" mentality, lines were immediately drawn in the sand.

EonBlue 02-25-2015 05:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by crockett (Post 20403610)
So you are saying they are lying about most Americans supporting the pipeline??

Look at this poll...

Poll: 54% of Republicans say that, "deep down," Obama is a Muslim - Vox

It appears I have made the mistake of assuming that you were intelligent enough to know that the quote I posted was posted in the context of the line I quoted from you.

That 97% figure is the big lie. It is pure fabricated bullshit. Same goes for the whole CAGW panic. The climastrologists have led you straight down the rabbit hole and you have willingly followed them without stopping to think for a moment.


Quote:

Originally Posted by crockett (Post 20403610)
It appears 54% of Republicans are fucking morons..

Holy Shit! I never would have guessed you were a Republican.

Emperor Obama will be so disappointed.


http://i.imgur.com/5H9ZjkU.jpg


.

dyna mo 02-25-2015 06:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NaughtyVisions (Post 20403648)
Here's the thing, though, and I've seen very little mention of it. BO never said he would ALWAYS veto the bill and that he was opposed to the pipeline in any way, shape or form.

Look at his statement, and Pelosi's (who, a lot of times I think is bat shit crazy, just for the record):

https://cdn0.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/NBR...XIAE6Kzr.0.jpg

Pelosi:

Pelosi Statement on President Obama?s Veto of Keystone XL Pipeline | Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi



Yeah, she took a stab at the Republicans. But the key thing is that last part of her statement:



So, it appears to me that the veto was because shit wasn't done the right way, and things aren't properly addressed in the bill. I don't think it's an abuse of power to reject something done half-ass. I really don't think he should have signed it to "show he was a team player" if there's things in it that need corrected/fixed/addressed.

To me, this veto and the statements that followed don't say, "fuck you, I'm not working with you on this" They say, "look, I can't accept this the way it is. There's just some more stuff that we need to work out and research that needs done before we can roll with this." But sadly, in our "my team vs your team" mentality, lines were immediately drawn in the sand.


BO said that back in 2012, that he would wait for the impact study, transcanada changed the route and it was approved there but then BO said HIS approval is postponed indefinitely until the Nebraska SC decides on the impact there, they approved it all back in January, now BO is blocking government working by claiming it hasn't been cleared.

in a nation with 10s of 1000s of miles of all kinds of gas pipes and stuff, we know how to lay some pipe.

Mutt 02-25-2015 06:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LA Crew (Post 20403083)
How stressful jobs like politics can affect you.

http://s13.postimg.org/vni1ku3iv/1_Xe_D8_Lb.jpg

a 50 year old man's hair turned gray over 6 years - that's all I see. the same thing happens to the 50 year old school crossing guard.

he could color it, many do, so I guess he likes it or something.

tony286 02-25-2015 06:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mutt (Post 20403676)
a 50 year old man's hair turned gray over 6 years - that's all I see. the same thing happens to the 50 year old school crossing guard.

he could color it, many do, so I guess he likes it or something.

I'm 50 and my hair is brown. You can look at all presidents before and after.they all aged alot on the job,it's an awful job.

Sly 02-25-2015 06:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mutt (Post 20403676)
a 50 year old man's hair turned gray over 6 years - that's all I see. the same thing happens to the 50 year old school crossing guard.

he could color it, many do, so I guess he likes it or something.

Happens to every president. Same with Clinton and Bush. Very stressful job. Surprised they don't look worse.

Mutt 02-25-2015 06:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sly (Post 20403680)
Happens to every president. Same with Clinton and Bush. Very stressful job. Surprised they don't look worse.

most likely because every US president is in their middle age.

stress can age you but I don't think stress has anything to do with graying hair, it's in your genes.

too lazy to google right now to see what science says.

Mutt 02-25-2015 06:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tony286 (Post 20403679)
I'm 50 and my hair is brown. You can look at all presidents before and after.they all aged alot on the job,it's an awful job.

and yet US presidents live long, very long usually - Reagan over 90, Ford over 90, Carter must be close to 90 or over, Bush I same, Nixon over 80

Rochard 02-25-2015 07:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ********** (Post 20403570)
I hear you, but here's the problem. Eminent domain means "the right of a government or its agent to expropriate private property for public use, with payment of compensation." In this case, it is a Private, Foreign, Corporation that is trying to claim Eminent domain.

Not at all. You should read the law, or at least Wikipedia before trying to argue or debate it:

"However, it can be legislatively delegated by the state to municipalities, government subdivisions, or even to private persons or corporations, when they are authorized to exercise the functions of public character."

When building power companies, the company made an offer to lease the land for power lines and other such items. If they refused, they attempted to use eminent domain to take the land. They went to the state government, explained how their power plant benefits the general public, and because the state is always interested in making improvements to the power grid they always backed the power plants.

Not uncommon at all.

You can stick to your argument of eminent domain all you want but it's really not valid. Eminent domain can and will be used. Does it suck for the land owners? Yeah, perhaps. If they were smart they would lease out that land and make a profit off of it for the next one hundred years.

There is just no valid reason not to do this. It will create a fair amount of short term jobs, it will create a few long term jobs, and will benefit everyone. Any discussion about environmental issues is invalid; That oil is going to pass through the US no matter what and this is by far the safest way.

Vendzilla 02-25-2015 09:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tony286 (Post 20403528)
So you agree with this one then too? Since now we want mob rule
Quinnipiac University. June 24-30, 2014. N=1,446 registered voters nationwide. Margin of error ± 2.6.


"Do you support or oppose stricter gun control laws in the United States?"


Support Oppose Unsure
% % %

6/24-30/14

50 47 3

9/23-29/13

54 41 5

3/26 - 4/1/13

53 42 4

2/27 - 3/4/13

51 42 7

1/30 - 2/4/13

52 43 5

7/8-13/08

54 40 5

Polls change
In a Pew Research poll released Wednesday, 52 percent are in support of the protection of gun rights and 46 percent support gun control. This is the first time in two decades that Pew has found more support for gun rights than gun control.

Pew poll: Support for gun rights exceeds gun control - Kendall Breitman - POLITICO

TTI-Rich 02-25-2015 10:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wizzo (Post 20402502)
Woohoo, more awesome train fire destruction in the future!


Fucking Union idiots in his pockets...

Eat a cock you piece of shit cunt.

BFT3K 02-26-2015 12:16 PM

This just came in, via the Canadian pipeline...



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PMNuUJ7gHs8


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 05:23 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
©2000-, AI Media Network Inc123