Clinton is honest; Trump is a liar.

[Bennettjh]

Someone around here has a signature that says "How do you know if a politician is lying? His/Her mouth is moving".

Pretty much sums it up.

 

[printcraft]

[video=youtube;a3RfxNJBArU]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a3RfxNJBArU[/video]


Lying ****.

 

[YahwehsBattleAxe]

Is anybody on this board seriously supporting Clinton?

 

[OakRiver]

Is anybody on this board seriously supporting Clinton? ...

Now, I'm not saying that you have violated this request yet;
https://www.indianagunowners.com/fo...n/12952-posting-about-inciting-civil-war.html

But in case you were not aware of it I just wanted to bring it to your attention before you cross that line. Any site that promotes insurrection is likely to attract attention - and not the good kind.

 

[Captain Bligh]

Is anybody on this board seriously supporting Clinton? ....

Of course. This is a gun owners board not a Republican board. Democrats own guns, too.

 

[Expat]

Of course. This is a gun owners board not a Republican board. Democrats own guns, too.

But apparently don't want to keep them.

 

[jamil]

Of course. This is a gun owners board not a Republican board. Democrats own guns, too.

Because, you know, Democratic Party is so neutral on gun control.

LOL.

Wait. Seriously. It's the official party of gun control zealots. Gun control is officially part of the platform. While it's not necessary for gun owners to support Republican candidates, to support Democrats, gun owners must decide that other attributes of the party outweigh their gun rights. That's a necessary trade off you can't deny.

 

[GodFearinGunTotin]

Because, you know, Democratic Party is so neutral on gun control.

LOL.

Wait. Seriously. It's the official party of gun control zealots. Gun control is officially part of the platform. While it's not necessary for gun owners to support Republican candidates, to support Democrats, gun owners must decide that other attributes of the party outweigh their gun rights. That's a necessary trade off you can't deny.

I think they rely on grid lock and republicans to keep that from going too far astray. They vote for democrats because they're Union members and want their contracts protected or they're LGBQT and want democrats to force you to bake their wedding cakes or they're social security recipients and are afraid Libertarians or republicans are going to make them eat dog food...you know the list. And that list does outweigh their gun rights.

 

[bertnkristi]

She says she does not want to abolish the Second Amendment. She wants to redefine what the Second Amendment means or how it is interpreted.

That is a very intelligent assessmentGodFearinGunTotin . I agree 100%.

 

[jamil]

I think they rely on grid lock and republicans to keep that from going too far astray. They vote for democrats because they're Union members and want their contracts protected or they're LGBQT and want democrats to force you to bake their wedding cakes or they're social security recipients and are afraid Libertarians or republicans are going to make them eat dog food...you know the list. And that list does outweigh their gun rights.

I know. I just want the Democrat gun owners to admit they have to make that tradeoff.

 

[spec4]

Imagine a Dem POTUS, SCOTUS, and Congress. How long do you think it would take for them to implement total confiscation of all firearms?

 

[jamil]

Some people like myself believe this is what's necessary to kick-off Civil War II. Traditional America is too complacent to do anything while they're too comfortable and everything is "normal." IMO, house to house gun confiscation is the event needed to give patriots the high-ground in order to fight back. Just like 9/11 was the catalyst for wars in Afghanistan and Iraq.

Again, INGO has rules against inciting violence. And besides, if it's government intrusion you'd like to see diminished, the Civil War didn't end in less government intrusion.

 

[Mgderf]

"What difference, at this point, does it make"

 

[OakRiver]

Some people like myself believe this is what's necessary to kick-off Civil War II. Traditional America is too complacent to do anything while they're too comfortable and everything is "normal." IMO, house to house gun confiscation is the event needed to give patriots the high-ground in order to fight back. Just like 9/11 was the catalyst for wars in Afghanistan and Iraq.

Thank you for your time. I do not know what your honest intentions are but when a five year old account suddenly resurfaces during a divisive election year, makes all of their posts in a week, and escalates to posting instigation of armed insurrection that sets off too many alarms for me.

 

[BugI02]

And the reality of the situation is you'd better hope if they send the military to confiscate your firearms, that they will disobey that unconstitutional order. Because make no mistake, if they send a Marine scout squad to get your guns, they will get them

 

[churchmouse]

Some people like myself believe this is what's necessary to kick-off Civil War II. Traditional America is too complacent to do anything while they're too comfortable and everything is "normal." IMO, house to house gun confiscation is the event needed to give patriots the high-ground in order to fight back. Just like 9/11 was the catalyst for wars in Afghanistan and Iraq.

I have already warned you in open forum.
I will not do it again.
Insurrection and civil disobedience is not what Ingo is about and we will not allow/tolerate this.
I guess my earlier request not to be forced to baby sit was ignored.

It stops now.

 

[Tombs]

Politifact rates liberal lies as half truths, even when they admit the statement is entirely false.

They rate conservative comments as pants on fire lies just because the comment isn't politically correct.

 

[jamil]

Politifact rates liberal lies as half truths, even when they admit the statement is entirely false.

They rate conservative comments as pants on fire lies just because the comment isn't politically correct.

I have consulted politifact many times and thought their conclusions were based on opinion more than facts. It's like they were sore because the facts weren't what they wanted them to be.

 

[Captain Bligh]

...While it's not necessary for gun owners to support Republican candidates, to support Democrats, gun owners must decide that other attributes of the party outweigh their gun rights. That's a necessary trade off you can't deny.

I will concede the point. There are those who are not one-issue voters, and find value in more of the totality of what Democrats stand for than they find in the totality of what Republicans stand for. They are on this board and they largely stand silent, except in quiet mutual support through reputation comments and PM's. The board is not particularly friendly to those who don't engage in "group think."

 

[Hoosier8]

I'm on break at work, and read this article. I know few, if any, members like Clinton. I'm curious as to what people think about this article. I would like an actual discussion, and not just "She's a liar," "Trump is better," etc. Disclaimer: I have not reviewed the author's sources. I just read it and took it at face value.

Why Can't You Believe Hillary Clinton Is Inherently Honest?

A liberal turning to Politifact is like a prostitute turning to her pimp for advice on going straight. William Safire labeled Hillary a congenital liar in the 90's. Nothing much has changed. Running and ducking under sniper fire anyone?