Remember, only two Senators have been elected president.
And how 'bout a cite to your assertion about "unrestricted firearms ownership"?
So, to get to the heart of it, your objections to Dr. Paul are not based on anything he says, or anything he stands for, but are based on random anonymous postings on an internet board.
A person is known by the company he keeps.
In 2002, spurred by the 1996 campaign finance scandal which involved illegal donations to the Democratic Party from overseas sources and, later, the collapse of Enron, a major contributor to politicians at all levels of the U.S. system, the Congress passed the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act (BCRA), also called the McCain-Feingold bill after its chief sponsors, John McCain and Russ Feingold.
McCain-Feingold wasn't about "prohibiting soft money", it was all about incumbent protection, despite the noble-sounding declarations of the bill's originators.
From everything I've managed to read here and on other boards, it seems to be totally unrestricted firearms ownership. I do not agree with this position and will not vote for or support anyone who does.
You vote for more of the same, you get more of the same. Don't cry about your precious gun rights if you can't be bothered to vote for a true 2A supporter because you only bet on the horse that has the biggest chance of winning the race.
Until we have a perfect human who runs for office, voting will always be a choice between the lesser of two evils.
... sounds like somebody's got some personal political agendas on the block, here...
.A person is known by the company he keeps
Such as the 911 conspiracy theorists? Or the pro-choice crowd? Or the open border card? I don't know if any of these are true, but the fence sitters of the country that listens to the elite media will probably hear Paul get branded on the aforementioned baggages...OTOH, how is Paul damaged goods?
Call me oldfashioned, but I think that if some jerk beats up his wife and gets a domestic charge, he OUGHT to get his guns taken away.
No flames, just a couple of questions:Quote:
Call me oldfashioned, but I think that if some jerk beats up his wife and gets a domestic charge, he OUGHT to get his guns taken away.
Should he lose a Constitutional right for the rest of his life for a misdemeanor?