Is the Republican strategy to "not talk about it"

Consider this, much of the country doesn't care, so why open the can of worms?
If you bring it up, you leave an opening for the Democrats make guns an issue. People may be convinced through sheer repitition.
Anti's would also be up in arms. If they weren't voting before, bringing up the issue will mobilize them.
For the informed firearm enthusiast, the many forums and orginizations will let them know. The better gun store workers know.
 
Consider this, much of the country doesn't care
Click to expand...

And therein lies the problem. We as gun owners are in the minority on this. We always have been.

If gun control becomes a focal point in the election, the press will be all over it like you know what thru a goose and it will not look pretty for us.

The AH's on NYC channel 2 (Dan Rather and company) and 4 are always slipping in gun control but it has been sort of left out. Hillary and Schummer always bring it up.

I personally know gun owners (Republicans) who blame GWB for the economy and the impact that it has had on them, especially their retirement, and are voting Kerry because they are pissed. I CAN see their point.

I'm beginning to feel the pinch of the bad economy right here. I don't buy what "W" says about more jobs since last Fall. My retirement $'s are NOT going as far. My health insurance costs are rising each year. My wife was laid off or as BASF put it, retired (forced) this past Fall and jobs are not that plentiful.

My wife and I will still vote for GWB on Nov. 2nd. and hope for the best. :(
 
Yes, their strategy is to ignore anything even remotely controversial. Particularly Osama Bin Laden, since not getting him shows the DISMAL FAILURE of their war on terror, IMO. They've had 3 years, and didn't do it. Truth be told, I believe Kerry would have been (and would be) tougher on terror, by a landslide, because he would have the bearded one by now, by not diverting all our resources to an unneeded war. I still wouldn't vote for Kerry though.
 
I personally know gun owners (Republicans) who blame GWB for the economy and the impact that it has had on them, especially their retirement, and are voting Kerry because they are pissed. I CAN see their point.
Click to expand...


Well, if you understand next to nothing about how the economy works, I gues I can see how someone would think that.


Oh... wait. I just described the vast majority of Americans!
 
First Freedom said, "Yes, their strategy is to ignore anything even remotely controversial. Particularly Osama Bin Laden, since not getting him shows the DISMAL FAILURE of their war on terror, IMO. They've had 3 years, and didn't do it. Truth be told, I believe Kerry would have been (and would be) tougher on terror, by a landslide, because he would have the bearded one by now, by not diverting all our resources to an unneeded war. I still wouldn't vote for Kerry though."

Based on the track record of the Clinton administration, I have to disagree. When Allied Forces (OK, the UK) found the unreported "yellow cake" uranium, the UN claims of cheating on the arms control agreement were proven.

Don't let your thoughts be controlled by a media, which I am sure, had nuclear armed missiles been found ready to launch in Iraq would claim the war wasn't justified, until the missiles were actually launched.

This is the same media that now calls Rudy Julianie, Arnold Swartzenegger and John McCane "moderates" and accusing them of hiding the "Real Radical Right Wing Republican Party", when only months ago, they were screaming that Arnold was a Nazi, Rudy was destroying the civil rights of New Yorkers by actually enforcing laws already on the books, and calling John a money grubbing profiteer because he was one of the "Keating Five."


Geoff
Who listens with memory engaged. :rolleyes:
 
Particularly Osama Bin Laden, since not getting him shows the DISMAL FAILURE of their war on terror, IMO.
Click to expand...

I wonder if they'll roll him out on a stretcher around mid-October? ;)

Nah, I think that would be a bit too wag the dog even for Shrub.

But then Bubba did get away with cruise missile bombing that pharmaceutical plant killing untold thousands needing medicine in Africa during the height of the Monica thing and still manages to get the NAACP to smooch his behind at every opportunity....

Wow, people are stupid.
 
Kerry would have been (and would be) tougher on terror, by a landslide, because he would have the bearded one by now
Click to expand...
Yeah, Kerry would be much tougher on terror as long as the UN gives him permission to defend the U.S. :rolleyes:
Also, when exactly did you hear Kerry's surefire plan to catch OBL? Last I heard Kerry was still yammering on about Vietnam... I sure haven't heard ANY good ideas to improve anything from him, including the economy. I haven't heard any plans from him to catch "the bearded one" either
 
So? You have a problem with that?


I think it's perfectly acceptable to make an idiotic and unsupportable claim about an idiotic and unsupportable candidate!



:D
 
I am not sure which bearded one they'd be tougher on. Looking at the pictures and video stills they don't seem to be showing a bearded guy with the same nose. Is it the guy with the long thin nose in the photos? Or the guy in the video with the shorter fatter nose? ;)
 
Hey, . . . you guys know the fundamental difference between Osama and Kerry, . . .








Osama really is wanted by millions of Americans. Yeah, . . . for sure, . . . its really true! :D

May God bless,
Dwight
 
That's funny Destructo, since the experts agree with (support) me. We were very close to catching him, and a smidgeon more of resources on the ground would have done it, most assuredly. It's had to predict what Kerry would do actually, so to that extent, I mis-spoke, I guess. But what's NOT hard to see is what shrub actually did, and that is, divert resources AWAY FROM catching the terrorist who ATTACKED US in order to get a secular evil dictator who had the crazy towelheads in his country pretty well contained. So you're right that it's NOT clear what Kerry would have done. But the experts and I agree that what is clear is that if Bush would have truly had as his priority fighting actual terrorism, we would have osama by now - 99.99% chance - shrub has demonstrated he's anything but tough on terror. So it's certainly not a reason to vote for him. Judge appointments to keep activist, "evolving-constitution" idiots off the bench, IS a reason.
 
Which "experts" are these? I'd like to see some proof of this somewhere. If you can show it then very well, but for some reason I highly doubt it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top