I'll be on Gun Talk radio TODAY...

Status
Not open for further replies.

Jim March

Member
Joined
Dec 24, 2002
Messages
8,732
Location
SF Bay Area
I'll be doing a phone interview with Tom Gresham's Gun Talk Radio - http://www.guntalk.com/ at 1:00pm Pacific, today (Sunday). Y'all should find it...interesting :).

I guarantee it'll be a different perspective on California gun rights issues.
 
Jim,

You really came across terrific on the radio! ...I heard bits and pieces, but not all of it... I did catch the "Arnold is the stealth pro-gun candidate", but I missed the explanation:confused:

Great job! And good luck with your new venture!
 
Jim,

Glad to hear that you will be a full time advocate now. I am also glad to hear you are coming here to houston for the conference next week.
 
Unfortunately, I can't *give* a full explanation as to where Arnold's head is at.

I've been told something I can't divulge. Sigh.

I did enjoy Will Durst's line though: Arnold's marriage to Maria Shriver is step one in a genetic experiment to build a bulletproof Kennedy :D.
 
Unfortunately, I can't *give* a full explanation as to where Arnold's head is at. I've been told something I can't divulge. Sigh.

Jim,
Don't tell me your holding back from the public already
or is it gossip that has not been confirmed?
 
feedthehogs said:
Jim,
Don't tell me your holding back from the public already
or is it gossip that has not been confirmed?
More like: trust him that either Arnhole or Bustaborder are stealthy pro-gunners -- laughable on its surface -- something he "heard" but "can't" confirm. Which makes sense, because it's not true.

BTW, I "heard" there are aliens living among us here on Earth, and that there are people living in the center of the Earth in great cities every bit as modern as we have on the surface. Those two unconfirmed rumors are more believable than Jim's fantasy.
 
Oh God. Here we go again.

I'm not going to re-hash it. I have hard data on the subject, entrusted to me by somebody Angel knows and respects.
 
Nobody is going to rehash it, because if there's one more post like the one above from either side of this ancient feud, I'll personally close the thread, ban whoever seems handy and accessible, leave no two stones together and salt the earth.


I hope that was sufficiently clear.
 
Jim: probably better not even to mention you have data if you can't share it... I don't see what the purpose of that is to us out in the gallery - other than 'stay tuned', which you know we already are.
 
May the following be sufficiently politically correct to please the Moderators of this forum. If it isn't, may they delete my account and forget my name.

Lon said:
I don't think Jim is suggesting pro-gun people are voting for anyone but McClintock.
Let's see if that's really true.

McClintock currently ranks third in the polls, among the three candidates being discussed here. Jim says one of the other two is a "stealth" pro-gunner. (Gun-grabbing cops are "pro gun", too -- when it's their guns -- but we'll save that discussion for another day.) And he alleges that the NRA is supporting this "stealthy" entity, whom he described as "pro gun". He also narrowed it down to Bustafool or Arnkennedy. Another poster says he got from Jim's broadcast on Gresham's show that Arnold Schwarzenegger was "the one". (Neither Arnhole or Bustamental is an ally of freedom, no matter what a lobbyist who hides alleged "hard evidence" and "datapoints" says.)

Now assume that you're someone who actually believes what Jim is saying and you live in California and will be voting in this election. Mightn't you consider voting for Arnhole when all of the lovely free media outlets give him such wooing adoration and free advertising and when they tell you he's way ahead of the superior candidate -- and when all of these sellouts in and out of the "GOP" are running around abandoning principles they obviously never had and screaming like cowardly little girls that a Real American like McClintock can't win?

Think about it. Jim doesn't have to say "Vote for Arnie"; he's implying that Arnie's really one of us but in "stealth mode," while knowing that people are afraid to be PRINCIPLED and stand beside the only candidate worth supporting in the entire lineup.
We don't need anti-gunners to destroy us...we can do it well ourselves....
Yep. Lots of evidence for that -- and ain't nobody hiding it, either. But if you really mean "can't we all just get along," here's my answer: http://KeepAndBearArms.com/NRA.

You get the deceitful ones to stop playing POKER with our rights while pretending to be allies, I'll be happy to be nice to them. Until then, I'm more concerned about a knife in our collective back from "allies" than I'll ever be about the Sarah Bradys of the world.
 
Ahhh hell.

Angel, WHY do you do stuff like this?

:confused:

Seriously, what in God's name is to be gained here? Other than dragging my name through the mud, stirring up endless debate where none would otherwise exist?

:banghead:

Great. Just great.

The lesson: I can watch you and your cohorts spout off about stuff you know nothing about, pick fights where none should exist, and if I say *anything* at all, all it means is I get dragged into your endless pissing contests which are about all you ever accomplish.

Now I have to go unruffle a mile's worth o' feathers.

Damn. And for what. So this forum gets dragged into your endless windmill-tilt against the NRA? So I can get labeled an "NRA co-conspirator" because of course, anybody who disagrees with you on ANYthing must harbor evil intent?

Moderators: judge for yourselves who's taken the high road here, and who's dragged who through the muck.

I for one am just flat disgusted. Angel has now used this board as a weapon against me.
 
And he alleges that the NRA is supporting this "stealthy" entity, whom he described as "pro gun".

That there is a bald-faced lie.

I said they appear to be hanging back. I *never* so much as implied where their support is, because I don't have a clue.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top