Thoughts and questions from a right-leaning gun owner in the run-up to Election '08

Status
Not open for further replies.
Frist is a high ranking politician. You can't expect constant ideological purity out of someone like that. His job is to hold the party together and get things done. That includes saying whatever is necessary to motivate the morons in the senate.

However, he has gone to bat for gun owners when it mattered. Back in 2003 and 2004 he did his best to kill the AWB renewals in the senate and to kill the immunity bill when the 4 horsemen got the renewal appended to it. While RINOs like Specter side against gun owners when we need them most (during at tight vote for example) people like Frist have played procedural rules to stack the deck in our favor. He is on our side.
 
the globalist plantation

Frist isn't on my side--not if he sides with Bush on "comprehensive" immigration "solutions" (like Pence) that will make discussions of the 2A moot in five years. You can't look at these problems in a vacuum; they are part of a much larger cultural landscape, of which disarmament is merely one aspect.
 
As opposed to McCain or Guiliani? Lets get some perspective here about what "on our side" really means. No candidate will perfectly represent us. We have to admit that and so we must choose the one that is closest to a good match and throw our support behind them.

You guys really love to criticise, but I dont see any great alternatives being offered.

As Art said, it is a few years off anyway.
 
Republicans (even RINOs though they don't mean it) at least give lip service to the right to keep and bear arms. Heck, the attorney general actually said the second amendment refers to an individual right while the ones the Democrats have put in say that it is only a collective right of the government. the last six years have been nice as anti-gun legislation has not been a priority with the administration or congress. Some may even notice that the Awb was allowed to lapse, there are one or two pro gun supreme court justices, ccw reciprocity has spread, and the law baring frivolous anti gun law suits passed. The current administration stood up to the United Nations where is the Democrats are eager to jump on the communitarian band wagon.

The left would probably like to see a RINO candidate if Hilliary is as unelectable as the left now seems to believe. Rudy or McCain would probably fall right in line with the internationalist agenda of a democratic congress and senate.
 
No candidate will perfectly represent us. We have to admit that and so we must choose the one that is closest to a good match and throw our support behind them.

Excuse me, but this is exactly what they want you to believe. Accept their vision of What Is Possible and play by their rules and we have already lost. It will take a few more years, but the die is cast. Understand that their vision of America--and I mean both parties--cannot co-exist with an armed, informed, self-empowered citizenry. Cannot. To think otherwise is to think that crumbs from the king's table constitutes sharing the feast.
 
It seems to me that the present structure of the House of Representatives is our best hope. While an anti-gun bill may pass the Senate, and be introduced in the House, we have quite reasonable odds of defeating it--which means there is nothing for a President to sign.

Art presents the only solution to this problem. This is by far about the only way things won't get any worse than they are now when it comes to gun control. I to think that the House of Reps is our only hope. Everything else is just a dream.
 
And that leaves us where? After one of the anointed candidates gets elected?
Giuliani's not going to get nominated. He's got almost as many negatives with the Republican base as Hillary.

For me as a gun owner, there wouldn't be any difference between them AT ALL.

I'm not a partisan Republican. I can't see one iota of advantage to a virulently anti-gun Republican over a virulently anti-gun Democrat.

They're the Tweedle-Dee and Tweedle-Dum of gun control. And they'll cheerfully lie between their teeth about it too.
 
And this Republic was once "just a dream."

Sure, let's hold on to the House if we can.

And if we can't? We just accept inevitable serfdom?

NO.

Nobody said anything about accepting serfdom.:confused:

If you ever find us a good candidate for President, just let us know and a bunch of us will be there with you to vote. Not a RINO. An honest for goodness real American that hold's the same principles as your founding fathers. I'm not going to hold my breath for something like that to come out of Harvard or Yale. :(
 
Personaly I have yet to see in my lifetime a canidate that was worth my vote.

Hence why I don't vote.
 
Forgot to mention that if Bruce Willis & or Ron Paul desided to run for prez, they would get my vote, they are the only 2 I would consider voting for.:cool:
 
I'd like to see a Condi Rice / Gingrich ticket.
If Condoleeza Rice ran for President, I would register as a Republican.

If the Republicans nominate Giuliani (as likely as nominating Michael Moore) or McCain, I won't be voting at all.
 
Vote third party and show where we stand.
There is no difference between McCain, Giuliani or Hillary.
In any case, I beleive the one that is going to win is predetermined anyway, but my vote won't be included in their win.
 
Vote third party and show where we stand.

Agreed.....much better than not voting at all as you would essentially be registering your vote as "neither of the above" for the two major parties.

I went along in the last election and voted for the lesser of two evils and will not do so again. The last 8 years should have been the best time to be a gun owner in United States history and they have let us down miserably by not using the weight of their majority to correct the evils done to our rights over the last 70 years.

If the Consitution Party runs a candidate here in MD again I will vote that way this time. I'm not crazy about the overt religious tone to their platform, but as someone has alread suggested, no candidate is perfect and we need to vote for those that closest represent our beliefs.
 
Nobody said anything about accepting serfdom.

If you ever find us a good candidate for President, just let us know and a bunch of us will be there with you to vote. Not a RINO. An honest for goodness real American that hold's the same principles as your founding fathers. I'm not going to hold my breath for something like that to come out of Harvard or Yale.

Maybe we can't depend on the President, Congress, or even SCOTUS to protect our civil liberties? Maybe that's what I'm saying here? Maybe it's beyond expecting the suffrage game to preserve the rights we are already entitled to as God-given?

I don't see much if any help on the way. Condi Rice? No record in elected office. And I didn't see any greatness displayed recently. Yes, she's allegedly an "absolutist" when it comes to the 2A but she hasn't been tested either. I see her as an academically superior woman who somehow found favor with a President whose liabilities now far outweigh his assets. The rest? Gingrich, if electable, might be one to consider. Tancredo's a possibility but right now he's a one-issue candidate; that could change.
 
Last edited:
I have to wonder about the wisdom in suggesting Condoleeza Rice as a potential Presidential candidate. I've no doubt that she's an intelligent person. No one climbs as far up the corporate ladder as she did in a male-dominated field like the petroleum industry without being either a suplerative business person, or a sneaky backstabber. But what has she ever done in any public office to make a difference? Anything?
 
Political realities are called "realities" because they are where the buck stops.

I would love to have Ron Paul as a president, but I think we all recognize that his politics might not go over with the other 80 percent of the populace, some of which votes.

It really does boil down to what is "possible"- not what the mainstream media tells us is possible, but what we, in our wisdom, know is possible. If you can think of a better candidate than Guiliani, lets hear it! If you can think of a better candidate than Gingrich or Frist or Tancredo, DONT HOLD BACK! Tell us!

Once you tell us who the best candidate is, we can start a huge letter writing campaign over the next year and a half to get them motivated into running. Nearly any politician will leap at the chance to become president if he thinks there is enough support out there.
 
It's way too early to have any rational clue about real-world probabilities about the next President. It's all speculation.

This is true, Art. I think it's much better to start making noise now, though, than to wait until someone who isn't amenable to our beliefs starts getting any kind of traction and momentum. Two years may seem like a long time, but there's no doubt in my mind our opponents are looking ahead, and we would be wise to do the same.

Heck, the attorney general actually said the second amendment refers to an individual right while the ones the Democrats have put in say that it is only a collective right of the government.

That was Bush's first AG, though, John Ashcroft. Alberto Gonzales is much less friendly to gun ownership.

No Hillary, no Giuliani, no McCain?

And your plan to stop them is to not vote or just withdraw?

The point is, we all know that no candidate who cares about liberty as we understand it on this forum is going to get near the nomination of either major party, much less get elected.

And that leaves us where? After one of the anointed candidates gets elected?

As marginalized dissidents?

That would be my guess, yes. If, that is, we don't make noise, and carefully consider our strategy now, while there's still time.
There's something we need to consider, though. America didn't get to where it is overnight. It took years of brainwashing and indoctrination by many people and organizations...politicians, the education establishment, the media, you name it. And just as it took a long time for us to get so far from the vision of liberty our Founding Fathers held, it's going to take a while for us to get back to it. How long? Do we have that kind of time? I don't know, but it's something to consider when we speak of a candidate not being perfect. Judas, now I am sounding like those party hacks who talk about the perfect being the enemy of the good as they push their preferred candidates on us, and I HATE that, but what are we to do as we find ourselves here?...
 
Mr. V:

your rhetorical questions aren't proving much of anything. Republicans against guns are FAR more dangerous than liberals against guns. ...

So, at least to me, it's much safer having a gun-grabbing liberal in office than a gun-grabbing conservative...

...

We disagree, especially about your assertion that my rhetorical questions "aren't proving much of anything." They are allowing me to see part of the electorate that has been outside my own experience.

I understand that you prefer to have your firearms confiscated by people who say they will do it and that you won't tolerate being denied everything you want. I've never met adult people like that before. I'm getting very, very scared no matter who might win future elections.
 
Just me, but I can no longer vote for the lesser of two evils - both parties support through their actions - ever larger and ever more powerful government. Therefore, I will no longer compromise my beliefs and values, I will vote third party. If I were to do otherwise, I could not look at myself in the mirror in the morning, nor could I look my children in the face knowing that I had supported those who will take away their freedoms. :(
 
Just for the record, I am not a Republican, nor a Democrat, I have voted an independant vote, and untill I see a real Party I will Remain so, and will comment that I found a Party that really comes close to being a real Party and that is the Constitution Party, after reading their Platrorm, I could go along with them and only found two measures that I would Question, Abortion and Returning to coins as our money, the abortion issue is based on Bible Principles and I'm ok with that with a proviso,their stance is that the Child can not be held responsible for the sins of the father, but I personally hold that in the case of a Morhers Health, a rape, or incest, the woman should be allowed to make the choice as to wheather or not to terminate the Pregnancy.

As to the other issues I have been reading here the central theme is MY GUNS, and Which Candidate is going to respect OUR GUN RIGHTS, let me be perfectlly clear My guns are just as important to me as yours are to you, but there is a Much larger issue here and that is voting for A real Candidate for office That is a Constitutionalist not a Party Member as has been so for a long time now, we need to rturn to a REPUBLIC FORM OF GOVERNMENT.

We as a Votiong Population need to vote for only those people that are STRONG CONSTITUTION MINDED PEOPLE, by that I simply mean they should believe in the Constitution and understand that it is NOT A LIVING DOCUMENT TO BE TRIFILED WITH TO FIT THE WHIMS OF THE FEW . We must return to a Republic Form of Government if we want to see all of our rights returned to us as the Constitution states, We must all get out and vote when Elections come up, if you don't like the Dems., or the Republicans, then vote an independant ticket or choose a third party candidate, and by doing one of the latter two you will send a clear message to the GOVERNMENT that business as usual ain't going to get it anymore.

It was stated the other day on a news network that in the upcomming election that there is a projected voter turnout of 30%, Folks that is a sad statement agianst the Population of this country to think that ONLY 30% OF US ARE GOING TO VOTE, but I bet you if it does not go to the Liking of a lot of us there will 92% of us opining on the lousy results of the Election.

Again if we take control of the vote and insist on voting on those people that want to return this Government back to a Republic form of Government then we have a chance and would no longer have to wory about the 1st, 2nd, or any other of the BILL of RIGHTS as they would be protected by us the voting Public.

We should not be in a position of voting for the lesser of two or more evils, we should only vote for the BEST PERSON FOR THE JOB NO MATTER WHAT PARTY THEY ARE ALIGNED WITH so long as they are Totally aligned with the Constitution, as written, and insist that Judges who are appointed to the FEDERAL COURTS ARE ALSO CONSTITUTIONAL MINDED JUDGES.

I'm probably all wet here but this is the way I see things, I'm tired of hearing about the people in office who are doing everything wrong, and not once have I heard the Voters say that WE REALLY MESSED UP ON THIS ONE, if we didn't put them there, they could not make the decisions they do, think about that for a second, and then tell me who's at fault here them or us?

The last point I would like to make is this as a people of the United States of America, we have got to stop looking for the Federal Government to take care of us, and assume some responsibility for our ownlives and Finances, if we plan our budgets and live within our means we can make it just fine some will have more than others but that is a normal thing,and if those that have less want more they have the opertunity to get more by earning it, the old fashion way.
 
Robert Hairless said:
I understand that you prefer to have your firearms confiscated by people who say they will do it

So instead you prefer to have a gun-grabbing conservative, who sells gun-owners out and makes us look like fringe whackos with no political support whatsoever?

I'm sorry. I guess living in California has made me sensitive to this. Conservative gun grabbers have been just as bad (at times worse) than their democratic counterparts. Ronald Regan, the HERO of conservatives everywhere, banned open-carry here in the state (and of course went on nationally to politically support the Brady bill and the 1994 Assault weapon ban), Deukmejian, also a republican governer here, signed into law the first major California assault weapon ban. Schwarzee didn't like the .50 and now it's no more as well.

Robert Hairless said:
and that you won't tolerate being denied everything you want
Everything I want? I believe the term I used was "nothing", which, instead, is the complete opposite of everything. I looked it up in Webster.
 
I have to wonder about the wisdom in suggesting Condoleeza Rice as a potential Presidential candidate. I've no doubt that she's an intelligent person. No one climbs as far up the corporate ladder as she did in a male-dominated field like the petroleum industry without being either a suplerative business person, or a sneaky backstabber.

As far as I know, Dr. Rice has never worked in the oil industry.

She was on the board of directors of Chevron, but her entire career has been in academia and government.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top