I just cannot do it anymore.

Status
Not open for further replies.
I

Indy Steve

New member
I recently wrote an email to Texas Governor George W. Bush. I expressed my concern about him being middle of the road on Second Amendment issues. I was brief and to the point without being the least bit rude or seeming too much of a "Nut".

I get a written (form letter) today and it explains, among other things, that during his administration he has "Allowed law abiding citizens to protect themselves".

I cannot openly or otherwise support this man and his bid for office. I have also asked the NRA to support a real Second Amendment candidate and that I am running low on cash these days.

Steve
 
I heard George W. Bush say (publicly) that his favorite Supreme court Judge was Antonin Scalia.

Now, if I can think of one judge that I would bet the farm would vote 2nd amendment, it would be Antonin Scalia.

Wouldn't it be great if he was not committed to being pro-gun; but would allow pro-constitution SC judges on the bench who would shoot down the gun laws? It would be political suicide for him to repeal gun laws, yet if the SC did it he could just say "Oh well, we politicians can't do anything about it, the constitution's the constitution".


Battler.
 
Steve, I'm a libertarian / Libertarian. And, voted that way in the last Presidential election.

This election I will vote for George W. No, he's not the best I could hope for, but (1) Gore would be an unmitigated disaster, in very short order; (2) the next President will appoint a large number of Supreme Court Justices, and as noted above, that may be the most significant consideration re: the RKBA; and (3) to be less parochial for a moment, I think George W. will be miles ahead of Gore on defense, economic and other issues.

I normally like to make my statement by supporting Libertarian candidates. But, I think there is a chance, albeit slight, that George W. can help buy time for us to continue to help our fellow citizens understand the truth of the RKBA. Time will tell.

Take care. Regards from AZ
 
Experience teaches that nothing the presidential candidates say will turn out to be true. Battler may have it right, that's the way I'm betting.

Ledbetter
 
Lets not go voting for some small party canadate and split the vote for G.W. :(

He is the best chance we have right now to keep "ALGORE" out of the White House.

------------------
"Who are the militia, if they be not the the people of this country? They consist of now of the whole people, except a few public officers"
George Mason
Second Amendment lover? www.2ndamdlvr.homestead.com/home.html
Support H.R.347 Citizens Self-Defense act of 1999! Sign petition at: www.petitiononline.com/protect/petition.html
 
As November draws ever closer, I think the 'choice' will become even more painfully obvious.
No, GWB is not the best or the brightest; but getting 'Gored' is just another disaster waiting to happen...


------------------
...defend the 2nd., it protects us all.
No fate but what we make...
 
Normally I fully support voting for the candidate you think is the best even if they're from a small third party. I have done so in local elections. But face facts folks: either Bush or Gore WILL be our next president. No ifs ands or buts about it. Unless something happens to one of them (i.e. car wreck, heart attack, etc.) one of them WILL be the next president. No amount of wishful thinking is going to change this. So the question one has to decide is: Which one would you rather have? You're going to get one of 'em. A vote for anybody other than Bush does nothing but help Gore. If Gore wins kiss your guns and rights goodbye. Its not complicated.
 
While reading this topic I'm listening to the shortwave, WWCR at 5.070mHz. They're currently discussing Klinton's background from the days of association with Hanoi Jane.

He is also quoting one of my signature lines, from Lenin.

This was a fairly good description of Klintons background of politics, from when he was a draft dodger, to his escapades as Prez. Make no mistake about it, a vote away from his biggest obstacle is a vote for Gore, and the Socialization of Amerika.

There is but one cure for Gore, at least for another 4 years...


Best Regards,
Don

------------------
The most foolish mistake we could make would be to allow the subjected people to carry arms;
History shows that all conquerers who have allowed their subjected people to carry arms have prepared their own fall.
Adolf Hitler
-----------------
"Corrupt the young, get them away from religion. Get them interested in sex. Make them superficial, and destroy their rugged- ness.
Get control of all means of publicity, and thereby get the peoples' mind off their government by focusing their attention on athletics, sexy books and plays, and other trivialities.
Divide the people into hostile groups by constantly harping on controversial matters of no importance."

Vladimir Ilich Lenin, former leader of USSR
 
Indy, I feel your pain, believe me.

I cannot however ignore the realities of our current situation: Gore or Bush?

Bush has been a very pro-gun Governor for us here in Texas and I am dismayed to hear him speak of more "gun control" (We have to stop using that phrase. Let's use "civil rights attacks). The realities of the current media, and therefore public mood, is that any Presidential candidate that stood up and spoke like Keyes, "no more gun laws and I'm going to abolish the assault weapons ban" would get him thrown to the media dogs for a feeding frenzy. Remember, part of the blame here must go to the general population who is ignorant enough to be "programmed" by the media that "gun control" is "reasonable" and "for the children".

Who knows how this will really turn out. it is possible that if GWB gets elected, he in fact will not lift a single finger to move along any of these proposed gun laws. You know how politics work, Klinton applies pressure to force his agenda, it;s just as possible that GWB could apply pressure to NOT push these issues. Anyway...

For now, it's Bush or Gore.

CMOS

------------------
NRA? Good. Now join the GOA!

The NRA is our shield, the GOA will be our sword.
 
I just have a very hard time choosing the lesser of the two evils after this.

Sure GW is anti-light and I don't want algore in office but when do I vote for what I truly believe and not out of fear? When? Four years from now? Will we be ready to stand then? Will I be more ready? Will my family? When does it stop?

Our country is slipping right out of our hands. Sitting by letting it slip another 4 years is again delaying the final outcome. When will you be ready? The brits, aussies, and canuks (sp?) , were they ever ready?

Man this just stinks.
 
Bottom Line - Vote for the most VIABLE candidate that BEST represents our views and principles.....otherwise quite sniveling about that perfect world that will never be and relize this: No person elected to high office will be totaly supportive of the Second Ammendment. The anti`s rhetoric has resulted in tremendous damage to the perception of our beloved freedom due to an ever increasing acceptance from an American public that does not wish to demonstrate the accountability, responsibility and sacrifice that is required of freedom and liberty afforded under our current constitution......but then most of you already knew that. Tree Rat.
 
"Man this just stinks."

Yup. Sometimes you stand and sometimes you have to retreat and regroup. If Gore wasn't so anti and so inclined to do whatever the media tells him and he wasn't going to get to appoint several Supreme Court justices, I might be inclined to vote third party. If Bush wins in 4 years we'll be faced with similiar decisions EXCEPT the justices will have already been appointed. Supreme court justices will be around for years and can have more far reaching effect than any president. We really do not want Gore appointing them, so... vote Bush, fight a holding action, try not to lose any more ground and see where we are in 4 years, or roll the dice and quite possibly lose the whole enchilada for way more than 4 years to come. Gore appointees just scare the bejeesus outta me.
 
Educate me: Don't these justices have to be "approved" by congress?

------------------
John/az
"When freedom is at stake, your silence is not golden, it's yellow..." RKBA!
www.cphv.com
 
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by John/az2:
Educate me: Don't these justices have to be "approved" by congress?[/quote]

Yep, confirmed by the Senate.

I too sometimes wonder about GWB. However, I seriously think that much of what is reported about him is political spin by his advisors and media reps. Unfortunately, these days that has become a part of the election process for anyone running for office. I really do think that GWB is more pro-2nd-Amendment than some are willing to believe (and I sure hope I'm right).


------------------
ACHTUNG! ALLES LOOKENSPEEPERS!

Das Internet is nicht fuer gefingerclicken und giffengrabben. Ist easy droppenpacket der routers und overloaden der backbone mit der spammen und der me-tooen. Ist nicht fuer gewerken bei das dumpkopfen. Das mausklicken sichtseeren keepen das bandwit-spewin hans in das pockets muss; relaxen und watchen das cursorblinken.
 
Voting for Bush & for campaigning for him. Got a sticker on my car now. Sad fact gun issues are so political that the party is being too middle of the road.

However for me guns are not the only issue. 3rd party for me wastes vote now. Too many other crutial issues next few years to allow a return of socalists/dems to office.
 
Educate me: Don't these justices have to be "approved" by congress?

Yes, but there is no guarantee that the senate will continue to have a Republican majority. How's Gore nominating justices to a democratically controlled Senate sound? That ought to keep you up at night :eek:
 
John/az2

Yes, they have to be confirmed. But, in order to not confirm a nominee, the Senate must come up with a reasonable, politically-defensable explanation for not confirming. The Dems tried to use the pubic hair on the Coke can against Thomas. It didn't work. The Senate just can't sit back and deny the Pres' choices.

If Gore wins and gets his nominees turned down, he could respond with nominees even more anti-gun than the previous ones. You never know, he just might nominate Hillary or Bill as a second or third choice. Okay, maybe not Bill.
 
Bottom Line:

Voting 3rd party, is voting for Gore!

I liked McCain, Keyes, and a plethora of other "contenders", but now the reality is down to this. If you vote for a third party candidate in this next election, when the "GORE CIVAL OBEDIANCE POLICE" show up at your door to take your guns, ITS YOUR FAULT!

------------------
I thought I'd seen it all, until a 22WMR spun a bunny 2 1/4 times in the air!
 
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by MrKandiyohi:
John/az2

The Senate just can't sit back and deny the Pres' choices.

[/quote]

They most certainly can. All that is required is some cajones. THAT is what is lacking, unfortunately. And it takes a 2/3's vote for confirmation, not just a simple majority, so even if the Democrats control the Senate, which they will NOT do after this election, any SC Justice confirmed to the bench will have to have a lot of Republican votes. That doesn't give me much hope, though, as Dole and company perched Ruth Bader Ginsburg up there. She's as liberal a SC Justice as I have ever heard or read about.

With Gore, we certainly get anti-RKBA justices. With Bush, we have about a 50/50 shot. He's just like his old man, no matter how much his supporters don't want him to be. And yes, Bush the Elder did give us Clarence Thomas, but he also gave us David Souter. I guess that makes our overall chances of getting an anti-RKBA SC Justice about 75%. WONDERFUL odds, don't you think?

[This message has been edited by Bob Locke (edited June 20, 2000).]

[This message has been edited by Bob Locke (edited June 20, 2000).]
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top