Well, Lookeee Here...


PDA






ForeignDude
June 11, 2007, 03:47 AM
Check this pic:

http://www.ocshooters.com/
Scroll down about a tenth of the page....

I mean, we all knew it, already -- but the picture does say it all, doesn't it? Say, isn't that "Chucky" Schumer in the background?

Two questions I have:

(1) Can a leopard change his spots?
(2) Who the h**l are those gun owners supporting Giuliani in some of the latest polls?

If you enjoyed reading about "Well, Lookeee Here..." here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
eric_t12
June 11, 2007, 04:37 AM
ahh, a delicious bit of history.

if he recently changed his 2A approach, i still wouldn't vote for him. i have my reasons. many people probably ahve the same, or more if they are from there...

thanks for the article though, i'm definately reminded of why i'm choosing a new direction when i vote this next year.

vito
June 11, 2007, 07:40 AM
So Guliani is anti-2A, so what's new? Do you think he's worse than Hilary, Obama or Edwards? But stop fooling yourself with the Ron Paul nonsense. If you want to protect your gun rights get behind, and send some cash, to a Republican who actually has the chance to win, and who is not antii-gun (even if not always strongly pro-gun). I think Fred Thompson is our best hope. You may not like everything he has done, or not done, but he is a solid conservative, strongly pro-2A, even more strongly pro-American, and has the presence, brains, and character to actually win. Look at the big picture and stop wasting your time, and possibly money on Ron Paul or anyone else who may make you feel good when you think of him, but who has NO CHANCE to beat the Democrats, all of whom want to take your guns away.

jselvy
June 11, 2007, 10:29 AM
Vito,
Why are you so worried about Ron Paul if he has no chance to win. Then again the whole point of a general election is to vote for the candidate that best represents your views on the various issues. He has a chance to win if enough of the people vote for him, the only person with no chance to win is the one who isn't running.

Jefferson

poor_richard
June 11, 2007, 11:31 AM
Is this going to turn into another "Ron Paul Bashing Thread"? One where the anti-RP's say it's better to vote for evil than let evil win (because that is what voting for the lesser of two evils is doing)?

I've heard people say that "it's better to vote for someone you know can win, than someone who has little chance." I had that same attitude after Bill Clinton first took office. I though it was the Perot supporters who put BC in office. Truth is that if George H. W. Bush hadn't turned his back on his base, he quite possibly could have beaten President Clinton. It wasn't the fault of Perot, or his supporters. It was the actions of then President Bush.

Unfortunately, I didn't learn that lesson soon enough. In 2000 I voted for a man who I thought had the best chance of defeating Al Gore, and promptly learned what a "wasted vote" truly was. What GWB did to the framework of this country is abominable. What makes this country great isn't the people, it isn't the current administration, it isn't the government, and it most certainly isn't democracy. What makes the country great is the United States Constitution, and without it we are little different from many other countries. Sure, we may feel better now, but the long term negative affects could well make us long for a merge with a country like Mexico (makes it easier to control the borders you know;) ).

It seems that what a lot of people who are anti-RP don't understand is that, some of us don't want the other Republicrat candidates to get in any less than we want to see any of the Democins get in. Some of us may actually think there is little difference between Rudy McRomney, and Hillary/Obama. Some of us may look at FT's record, and see him as nothing more that a GWB clone (or at least a distant cousin) who voted for a PA that he didn't even have time to read.

This thread was started showing a negative pic of RG, with no mention of RP or FT, yet they are almost immediately dragged into it. Sounds like a lot of people are doing their best to "blast" the "fence sitters" with their own version, and sounds like propaganda in an attempt to convince them. Most people who are voting for RP aren't "fence sitters". They are people who voted for "no more new taxes", and got more new taxes. They are people who voted for "no more gun control" only to see the BATF tripled in size, and more federal (our) money being spent on persecuting gun owners then ever before. They are people who voted for "no nation building" only to get nation building. They are people who looked up the votes to find that RP doesn't just "talk the talk", but actually HAS walked the walk.

Don Gwinn
June 11, 2007, 03:27 PM
Discuss Giuliani here or this thread about Giuliani gets closed.

longrifleman
June 11, 2007, 03:43 PM
OK.

I wouldn't vote for Il Duce for dogcatcher. If he's the Republican candidate, I'm writing in Mickey Mouse.

:neener:

ebd10
June 11, 2007, 08:10 PM
If Il Duce, The Manchurian Canbdidate, or the Massachusetts Mauler get nominated, I'll vote Libertarian. Fred Thompson is an unknown, so I will reserve judgement until more is known. I suspect that the Republican Party is on its way out. Bush has, in his time in office, done more damage to the Republicans, and to the country, than any president in my lifetime. With any luck, the Republicans will be tossed on to the ash heap of history and a true conservative party will emerge to take up the fight.

Matt King
June 11, 2007, 08:14 PM
(1) Can a leopard change his spots?

No. Schumer is no friend of gun owner's, no matter how he makes himself out to be. Just look at his voting record:

* Enforce gun laws on national security grounds. (Dec 2003)
* Renew assault weapons ban - no legitimate use for them. (Nov 2003)
* Penalize cross-state gun traffickers. (Sep 2003)
* Voted NO on prohibiting lawsuits against gun manufacturers. (Jul 2005)
* Voted NO on banning lawsuits against gun manufacturers for gun violence. (Mar 2004)
* Voted YES on background checks at gun shows. (May 1999)
* Voted NO on more penalties for gun & drug violations. (May 1999)
* Voted NO on loosening license & background checks at gun shows. (May 1999)

Car Knocker
June 11, 2007, 08:43 PM
Schumer is no friend of gun owner's, no matter how he makes himself out to be.
Schumer is attempting to pose as a friend of gun owners???????????

Matt King
June 11, 2007, 09:35 PM
Schumer is attempting to pose as a friend of gun owners???????????

My bad. I posted without checking the link.~:o
Anyhow, Guliani is just as bad as Schumer.

wjustinen
June 11, 2007, 10:30 PM
But stop fooling yourself with the Ron Paul nonsense. If you want to protect your gun rights get behind, and send some cash, to a Republican who actually has the chance to win, and who is not antii-gun (even if not always strongly pro-gun). I think Fred Thompson is our best hope.

But hey, at least you're not throwing your vote away on him. Even if he is pretty much same old, same old. Of course RG appears to be more dangerous than our Canadian Liberal pols.

stevelyn
June 11, 2007, 11:02 PM
Tony Soprano.....er Guiliani isn't going to change what he is. His voting record and past history says everything we need to know about him.

If you enjoyed reading about "Well, Lookeee Here..." here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!