John Spencer: Progun conservative trying to unseat Hillary Clinton

steelheart

Moderator
Let's all support John Spencer in his run to unseat Hillary Clinton - if she loses her senate seat in 2006, her chances in 2008 will wither and die. Spencer is a conservative, progun candidate that opposes everything Clinton holds dear (one gun a month, national registry, "assault weapon" ban, hi-cap magazine ban, citizen disarmament).




Clinton foe Spencer fires away at Mayor Bloomberg

By DEVLIN BARRETT
Associated Press Writer
April 6, 2006

WASHINGTON -- Conservative Senate candidate John Spencer attacked New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg on Thursday over gun control, saying Bloomberg is touting "liberal solutions that simply do not work."

In an odd twist, Spencer almost ran into Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton while he visited GOP lawmakers and staff as part of his effort to raise millions of campaign dollars.

As Spencer met with Republicans in a hotel conference room, Clinton and Sen. Charles Schumer were next door in a meeting about the state university system _ apparently the closest Clinton and Spencer have come to running into each other since he joined the campaign.

Spencer's host was Rep. Tom Feeney, R-Fla., who tangled with New York's Republican mayor just last week at a congressional hearing over a crime gun bill.

Bloomberg urged lawmakers to reject what he called a "God-awful piece of legislation," while Feeney accused the mayor of trying to undermine the constitutional right to bear arms and spur more lawsuits against gun makers and dealers.

Spencer on Thursday criticized Bloomberg's stance.

"I think it's another one of these attempted liberal solutions that simply do not work - they go after legitimate citizens, trying to make their lives miserable when they've done nothing wrong and trying to control them," he said.

Spencer is taking political positions to the right of Kathleen Troia "KT" McFarland, who also is seeking the Republican nomination to challenge Clinton. He opposes abortion rights, gay rights, gun control, and affirmative action.

The candidate said he wasn't sure how he would vote on the gun bill Bloomberg despises because he wasn't aware of all of the details, but argued the billionaire mayor's effort was wrong.

"I don't buy into the equation that going after the sellers or merchants or anything else has anything to do with reducing crime, and if someone can show me the statistics where it works, I'd be very interested in seeing it, but they don't exist," said Spencer.

Bloomberg spokesman Stu Loeser responded that the bill in question "has nothing to do with the right to bear arms and everything to with the dangers illegal guns pose to our police officers and citizens."

The gun trace bill would permanently bar the federal government from making public the results of traces of guns used in crimes _ statistics that have been used by New York and other U.S. cities to file lawsuits against gunmakers.

Clinton supports a bill that would do the opposite, and make such gun trace data public.

Attacking Bloomberg and boosting gun rights may help Spencer curry favor with upstate voters considered crucial to any competitive statewide race.

Spencer said he got a good reception at the gathering, where aides laid out a strategy to challenge an incumbent with a huge lead in the polls and a $17 million - and growing - campaign account.

Spencer said he was eager to "take on the myth, the myth I call it, that Sen. Clinton cannot be defeated. I find that to be just an outright myth."

He said his own city, Yonkers was "a microcosm of New York State," and campaign strategists envision a scenario in which he could pick up sizable Democratic votes, particularly among Catholics, "on the Thruway," referring to the line of older cities stretching from Yonkers up to Albany and west to Buffalo.
 
If Hitler himself ran on the Democratic ticket here in NY he would recieve at least 2/3's of the votes cast in the state. In another 20 years it may be 100% due to the fact the only people left here will be dependent on goverment to survive either as a goverment employee or being on welfare. Anyone in between the two has either left or planning to leave within the next 10 years. My bags are packed and I'm ready to go myself.

Just to give you an example of what I'm talking about, here in Erie County the local goverment has offered Bass Pro over 66 million dollars the last 4 years to open a store in the Buffalo area with no strings attached and they won't commit. Maybe I will stay if they give me a couple million, pay my mortgage payments and give me tax breaks for the next 20 years.

kenny b
 
Just as well that I don't live in NY. I can't vote for someone who picks on gays. Goes against my Libertarian values.
 
I hope Spencer can beat her, eat her lunch, pimp-slap her and send her on her way, but MAN does he have an uphill battle on his hands! The Sheeple of NY state would vote for the antichrist, if he ran on the Democrat ticket!:barf: :barf:
 
Un-Seat Hillary

When Hillary was campaiigning in 2000, she made the assumption that Al Gore would be elected and continue Bill Clinton's Socialest programs. After many recounts and a vistit to the Supreme Court Bush was declared the 2000 winner. Her promise of 200,000 New York jobs went down the tubes, then. Bush's re-election didn't do her any good either.
She in in DENIAL, blaming Bush for her inability to be the Senator she promised to be. Anybody who defeats Hillary in 2006 will hopefully kill her 2008 election as President bid.
 
Just as well that I don't live in NY. I can't vote for someone who picks on gays. Goes against my Libertarian values.

Who knows what opposing "Gay Rights" means. If you state that you oppose hate crimes (read making a crime greater for happening to a minority or gay) you are branded as being against minorities or gays. I doubt he is out there saying "lock them up." Just becasue one does not choose to give preferential treatment to one group does not mean one is opposed to said group. I would think opposing preferential government treatment for a group would be very Libertarian...

What is more troubling is I live on Long Island and have never heard of this guy. The GOP in NY is as competititve right now as a lame racehorse at the Kentucky Derby. They are in complete free fall. That is what they get for running nothing but carbon copies of the candidates the Dems put up. Nobody sees a real difference and has therefore given up on them. Apparently this guy is different yet the conservatives of this state have been sold down the river so many times by party leadership that it is like the boy who cried wolf...
 
If you state that you oppose hate crimes (read making a crime greater for happening to a minority or gay) you are branded as being against minorities or gays.
Woah. First of all that's not what a hate crime is. A hate crime is defined by the FBI as a criminal act commited because of someone's actual or percieved membership in a particular group. This most certainly includes crimes against whites and not just crimes against minorities.

Secondly, the classification of a hate crime does not necessarily add a greater penalty. The fact that bigotry as a motivation is due cause for upgrading a charge to the aggravated form is what increases the penalty. Just as mitigating circumstances will decrease penalties, aggravating circumstances will increase them. But again, do not think that hate crimes only apply to minorities.

Just becasue one does not choose to give preferential treatment to one group does not mean one is opposed to said group.
True, but if this guy opposes the right of gays to marry, adopt, or do anything else that heterosexuals are allowed to do, he is no more a friend and proponent of freedom and liberty than Mrs. Clinton.
 
A hate crime is defined by the FBI as a criminal act commited because of someone's actual or percieved membership in a particular group. This most certainly includes crimes against whites and not just crimes against minorities.
Hmmm - so by your definition, the Democrats are guilty of at least considering comitting hate crimes. Remember when Kerry lost the election and some (granted, not all) Democrats were tossing about the question, "Is it proper/ethical to shoot Republicans?"

The fact that they were even thinking in those terms tells us alot about them and their world view - namely, they will stop at nothing to realize their goals.

Not all Democrats - some. And even one who thinks like that is one too many. We don't kill each other over elections - this is America, not Iraq.
 
Hmmm - so by your definition, the Democrats are guilty of at least considering comitting hate crimes. Remember when Kerry lost the election and some (granted, not all) Democrats were tossing about the question, "Is it proper/ethical to shoot Republicans?"
It's the FBI's definition, not mine. "Granted, not all." I think you mean "Granted, not most." Unless you can point me to a source that described just how many Democrats actually posed that question. Otherwise you're just taking the words of one or two people and generalizing the entire group as holding that opinion.

The fact that they were even thinking in those terms tells us alot about them and their world view - namely, they will stop at nothing to realize their goals.
Please; how many times have you and others "hinted" that some kind of violent revolution is in order? Enough to suggest that some people here are no less guilty of that kind of thinking.
 
Otherwise you're just taking the words of one or two people and generalizing the entire group as holding that opinion.
Wrong. I said some, not all. Dead wrong. Read again.

Please; how many times have you "hinted" that some kind of violent revolution is in order? Enough to suggest that you're no less guilty of thinking in those same terms.
Wrong again. I have never advocated violence or revolution at the present time. If I have, prove it.

Is it possible that at some point in the future "The Government" could go so far astray from the Constitution and refuse to answer to We The People that revolution would be justified, according to the criteria set by The Founders?

Unfortunately, the answer is "yes." We are headed down that path, and if we arrive at that destination, we all lose.

Let me go on record here and now as saying that I do not want violent revolution in this nation - what I want is a return to Constitutional government.

Please get that point straight in your mind, Redworm.
 
Wrong. I said some, not all. Dead wrong. Read again.
"granted, not all" I guess that phrase implies a different meaning for you than it does for me.

Let me go on record here and now as saying that I do not want violent revolution in this nation - what I want is a return to Constitutional government.
Well good to know. I just hope others feel the same way. Doesn't it suck to have the opinions of a few fringe radicals unfairly applied to you and others?
 
Doesn't it suck to have the opinions of a few fringe radicals unfairly applied to you and others?
Seriously, Redworm - you can think whatever you like about me. What you think of me is totally irrelevant to my life.:D
 
I never thought it did :confused: I feel my points stand, however. I wouldn't advocate special rights for gays but if Spencer doesn't support full equal rights for gays, including marriage and adoption, then he's no more a friend to freedom than Clinton.
 
So in your opinion, gay rights supercede our Second Amendment rights.
No, in my opinion gay rights are an example of human rights. The second amendment is useless if it's not being used in the defense of human rights.

Quote:
Dictionary {Definition 6} worm:a pitiable or contemptible creature; poor wretch.

Here we have it... (that's what it says here anyway...)
What a wonderful show of maturity; bravo!
 
This Thread Has Been Hijacked!

The point is that the only position Hillary should be in is the one that Monica was in with Slick Willy!!!!!!!!
 
I must beg to differ - the only position Hillary should be in is the prison cell next to Bill's.

Ask Vince Foster about that...

Oh, we can't - he's dead. Comitted suicide by shooting himself in the back of the head.:rolleyes:

I wonder how many people will have to "wake up dead" in order to clear the skeletons out of the closets for Hillary's 2008 run?

Anyone care to start a pool?
 
Back
Top