Just Voted - Ballot Picture Thread!


#1

Oh no! I wasted my vote!!!


#2

I am sure Obama thanks you for not voting Romney the only person who can beat him.


#3

I’m sure Romney thanks me for not voting Obama the only person who can beat him.

Anyway, they can both send me thank you card if they’d like. I’ll throw them both out like I do with their campaign spam mailers.


#4

[quote=“Jebby, post:3, topic:36795”]
I’m sure Romney thanks me for not voting Obama the only person who can beat him.

Anyway, they can both send me thank you card if they’d like. I’ll throw them both out like I do with their campaign spam mailers.
[/quote] Yes only a fool like you thinks they are same.


#5

I don’t think they are the same. Obama never signed a gun ban into law.


#6

[quote=“Jebby, post:5, topic:36795”]
I don’t think they are the same. Obama never signed a gun ban into law.
[/quote] Aww you dont like the 10th amendment?


#7

The right of free men to keep and bear arms trumps any “right” the state may think it has.


#8

[quote=“Jebby, post:7, topic:36795”]
The right of free men to keep and bear arms trumps any “right” the state may think it has.
[/quote] Did he take all arms away??? Nope and if it is unconstitutional then the people of Mass. has the right to bring the case and they should. You cant be for state rights ONLY if you like what they do.


#9

The state has no “right” to infringe on the right of free men to keep and bear arms just like states have no “right” to restrict the speech or free exercise of religion of free men.

Natural rights trump states’ rights.

2nd Amendment trumps 10th.

Anyway, the fact of the matter is Romney signed a gun ban into law. I do not vote for gun grabbers.


#10

Okay I know the concept of State rights is a hard one for Moderates that support Romney to accept, but I will explain it to you in my daily bang head against the wall moment. A State Rights does not supersede the US Constitution. They can add to, but not take away from te provisions set forth in the US Constitution. No state has the right to limit the 2nd Amendment of the US Constitution.


#11

I think people should also read the 9th and 10th Amendments:

The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

People misunderstand one thing: individuals have rights endowed by their Creator. States do not have rights, they have powers, in this case powers given to them by the federal and state constitutions by the people.


#12

[quote=“Dacabeti, post:10, topic:36795”]
Okay I know the concept of State rights is a hard one for Moderates that support Romney to accept, but I will explain it to you in my daily bang head against the wall moment. A State Rights does not supersede the US Constitution. They can add to, but not take away from te provisions set forth in the US Constitution. No state has the right to limit the 2nd Amendment of the US Constitution.
[/quote] Which means Jock unless soneone bringsd the case to a highrer court …Make no mistake they should… Now waiting 5 days for a background check is not draconian even if you don’t like it…The assault weapon ban thing was stupid but so were most at that time. Everyone seems to forget WHERE he was governing.


#13

[quote=“Jebby, post:11, topic:36795”]
I think people should also read the 9th and 10th Amendments:

People misunderstand one thing: individuals have rights endowed by their Creator. States do not have rights, they have powers, in this case powers given to them by the federal and state constitutions by the people.
[/quote] I think you should.


#14

Doesn’t matter where he was governing, he was governor and had veto power. He never should have signed a gun ban into law.


#15

Huh? So its okay to violate the US Constitution if no one is going to challenge it? DO you really believe that insanely moronic drivel?


#16

[quote=“Dacabeti, post:15, topic:36795”]
Huh? So its okay to violate the US Constitution if no one is going to challenge it? DO you really believe that insanely moronic drivel?
[/quote] First yu have to prove it is against the constitution…I think the supreme court decided the assault weapon ban was constitutional. As well as the 5 day waiting period. This is the two issues with the 2nd you have against him. He didn’t send people in to their houses to grab guns…So what is unconstitutional? Also where did he EVER say he would make a federal law to take your guns? He actually said the opposite. He said we need no new laws. Now while I dont agree with his assuly weapon stance does not mean he will take my guns… I leave that to the tinfoil hat wearing Paulbots who want the country to burn cause republicans didnt nominate Paul.


#17

I don’t want the country to burn down. Whether Ron Paul was nominated or not, we’re going down the toilet. Romney isn’t going to fix anything…not that he’ll win anyway.


#18

[quote=“Jebby, post:17, topic:36795”]
I don’t want the country to burn down. Whether Ron Paul was nominated or not, we’re going down the toilet. Romney isn’t going to fix anything…not that he’ll win anyway.
[/quote] What are you clairvoyant???


#19

$16+ trillion in debt
$100+ trillion in unfunded liabilities
Ever expanding federal government
Legalized abortion
Ever shrinking civil liberties and freedom

If you think a change in president will change any of that, you’re delusional.


#20

[quote=“Jebby, post:19, topic:36795”]
$16+ trillion in debt
$100+ trillion in unfunded liabilities
Ever expanding federal government
Legalized abortion
Ever shrinking civil liberties and freedom

If you think a change in president will change any of that, you’re delusional.
[/quote] You keep showing what Obama did and you just helped him some more by idiotically writing in the crazy old man. Yes I think a change in President will help with that cause I believe in the USA!