Bush's Reaction To The Virginia Tech Shootings

Rushlimbo

69charger wrote:

All topics.

Do they talk about the phallic empowerment of a .44 Magnum with a bull barrel? If so I am sooooo there.

cincybearcat

Abuskedti wrote:

Yeah.. and they are valuable people too..

Routine in Iraq - happenes virtually every day.. actually 33 violent unnecessary deaths would be a relatively slow day in that little country

that don't make you puke though

I'm glad you think you can out words in my mouth.

69charger

hippiemom wrote:

Haha ... you have to PAY? I doubt it's $20 worth of entertaining.

That's new. It was free two weeks ago.

my2hands

soulsinging wrote:

or lobby for a constitutional amendment. nothing in the constitution is set in stone amigo. if the public sentiment changes, so can the laws.

nice one.

i havent seen much of it, but if old cock smoker bush slid in gun rights during his message concering this tragedy, then he is an even bigger piece of shit then even I though

do these fuckers have any class at all?

RolandTD20Kdrummer

lol...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=52RWYtAchwo

dkst0426

Man, and here I was thinking all this outrage was something original at first.........

We must have some Stephen Schlesinger readers here.

Wait for it......."Reports have surfaced that the Bush White House knew in advance of the gunman's plot to go on a shooting spree at the Virginia Tech campus on Monday. Nothing was done, so that attention would be diverted from the Gonzales hearing. This is not a conspiracy theory. It makes perfect sense, you dumb/blind/stupid/(other pejorative terms) money/power-hungry Conservative whores."

Step awaaaay from the Huffington Post or Daily Kos, people.......

boxwine_in_hell

onelongsong wrote:

it's throwing water on the crap they will spew about gun control. if you don't like the american constitution; move to a country with laws you agree with.

You're way off base dude. You don't even have any idea what my views are on gun control. I just thought it was extremely offensive and moronic to bring up a political issue where it didn't belong. It just proved to me once again that this President doesn't have a clue and lacks common sense and decency.

boxwine_in_hell

cincybearcat wrote:

It makes me want to puke ot think your first thoughts after this tragedy is to find something to bash Bush about. Fucking pathetic.

What's more pathetic is your misinterpretation of what I said. It has nothing to do with Bush. If God had said the same thing, I would have been horrified.

boxwine_in_hell

69charger wrote:

I challenge anyone on this board to debate Ted Nugent on anything. He is well informed on many subjects. You would lose.

I bet I know more about bathing than Nugent.

69charger

boxwine_in_hell wrote:

I bet I know more about bathing than Nugent.

You probably don't. You need to watch his show "Spirit of the Wild". He needs to not smell as to not alert the animals.

catefrances

69charger wrote:

You probably don't. You need to watch his show "Spirit of the Wild". He needs to not smell as to not alert the animals.

yeah. that's my nine year old son's excuse too. though being underage and with no access to firearms of any kind, he has to kill them animals with his bare hands. LMAO!!

boxwine_in_hell

catefrances wrote:

yeah. that's my nine year old son's excuse too. though being underage and with no access to firearms of any kind, he has to kill them animals with his bare hands. LMAO!!

I love how the guy tries to give me the reason for Nugent's questionable hygiene when I was just trying (apparently unsuccessfully) to make a joke.

dunkman

boxwine_in_hell wrote:

I thought the fact that after the President offered condolences and his shock and horror, etc....that he felt it necessarry to add that he supports people's rights to bear arms was disgusting.

he knows it's a vote winner... he's as thick as his electorate

boxwine_in_hell

dunkman wrote:

he knows it's a vote winner... he's as thick as his electorate

Nice Bill Hicks signature by the way.

boxwine_in_hell

boxwine_in_hell wrote:

Nice Bill Hicks signature by the way.

I might have to change mine to

Hairy Bobbing Man Ass

or

Squeegee Your Third Eye

mammasan

Byrnzie wrote:

So you think that inaction, and silence on this issue is the way to proceed?

First thanks for putting words in my mouth. Secondly each side of this issue will use this tragedy as a political tool which to me is disgusting. The only way top prevent this type of incident from happening is to sompletely eliminate the production of fire arms. Even with the strictest of gun control laws illegal fire arms still make out on the street and people still get killed. For all we know the student that did this bought those fire arms illegally.

redrock

boxwine_in_hell wrote:

I thought the fact that after the President offered condolences and his shock and horror, etc....that he felt it necessarry to add that he supports people's rights to bear arms was disgusting. What a fucking idiot. That was totally dispicable and inapropriate.

What else did you expect from him?

Byrnzie

mammasan wrote:

First thanks for putting words in my mouth. Secondly each side of this issue will use this tragedy as a political tool which to me is disgusting. The only way top prevent this type of incident from happening is to sompletely eliminate the production of fire arms. Even with the strictest of gun control laws illegal fire arms still make out on the street and people still get killed. For all we know the student that did this bought those fire arms illegally.

And you think that eliminating the production of fire arms can be achieved independently of politics? Of course it's a political issue. This is what we elect and pay the fuckers for. They are there to implement and enforce the will of the people, or so we're lead to believe. Incidents like this should be seen to be catalysts for change. The alternative is to do nothing and carry on as normal, like you did after Columbine, e.t.c, e.t.c.

onelongsong

the most ironic thing about this debate is it's distance from reality. nobody suggests a logical solution; they only throw personal opinions back and forth.
americans will always have guns.
1) every oath of office requires the oathee to swear to protect the constitution. failure to do so is an impeachable offence.
2) should congress try to remove this right; armed americans will protect the constitution.
3) as of 2005; 23 states issue conceiled weapons permits and an additional 11 agree to respect that permit in their jurisdiction. thus; passing of any legislation is impossible.
4) the supreme court has always upheld the second ammendment and the right of a citizen to protect himself. this right includes the right to protect oneself against the government.

based on these facts; the only logical solution is education. if laws stopped crime; we'd be a crime free society.

soulsinging

onelongsong wrote:

the most ironic thing about this debate is it's distance from reality. nobody suggests a logical solution; they only throw personal opinions back and forth.
americans will always have guns.
1) every oath of office requires the oathee to swear to protect the constitution. failure to do so is an impeachable offence.
2) should congress try to remove this right; armed americans will protect the constitution.
3) as of 2005; 23 states issue conceiled weapons permits and an additional 11 agree to respect that permit in their jurisdiction. thus; passing of any legislation is impossible.
4) the supreme court has always upheld the second ammendment and the right of a citizen to protect himself. this right includes the right to protect oneself against the government.

based on these facts; the only logical solution is education. if laws stopped crime; we'd be a crime free society.

1) if the constitution is amended, then that oath would no longer protect the 2nd amendment.
2) if the constitution is amended, it would not be congress who removed that right and these armed americans would be conidered what they are: crazy militia terrorists who would be hunted down and jailed for breaking the law.
3) you're right, as of now, there is nowhere near enough popular support to amend the constitution so this is all moot. but this kind of public discourse and a repeated pattern of tragedies like this might change public sentiment. we shall see. in the meantime, people's right to talk about their ideas and opinions RE the guns is ALSO a constitutionally protected one.
4) scotus has upheld the 2nd amendment, but it has also upheld reasonable restrictions on guns. also, again, if the constitution was amended, scotus would stop protecting guns becos it upholds the constitution as it is written. it cannot deny gun rights becos it is in the constitution and if it was not in the constitution, it could do what it damn well pleased with guns.