Webb vs Allen

imported post

This thread is turning into Webster 101

imported post

I was hoping to turn it into Webb-ster 101 . . .

Longshot is right: I don't know my snarks from my snipes:

snipe (sn p) n.1. pl. snipe or snipes
a. Any of various long-billed shore birds of the genus Gallinago or Capella, related to the woodcocks and sandpipers, especially the common, widely distributed species G. gallinago or C. gallinago.b. Any of various similar or related birds.
2. A shot, especially a gunshot, from a concealed place. intr.v. sniped, snip·ing, snipes
1. To shoot at individuals from a concealed place.2. To shoot snipe.3. To make malicious, underhand remarks or attacks.

I would have to agree with both Longwatch and Webb that the democratic party has been a bit Snarky to the pro gun community:

So now the pro-gun community is on a snipe hunt for democratic gun grabbers in the Virginia senate race:

And we are sniping and snarking at Jim Webb -- who is a quality candidate -- solely because he is a democrat:

But a Democratic Caucus who has room for a pro gun Senator Nelson --

http://www.bennelson2006.com/ShowPage.asp?page=Issues.asp.

-- will also have room for a pro gun Jim Webb.

The democratic party eventually is going to be in the Senate majority again -- at least for a while -- possibly (not probably) after this election. If the pressure for change doesn't get its release now, I project that the democratic party will be in the majority by a fairly significant margin in 2008: and then we will really be looking to talk to democrats like Jim Webb.

This sniping snarkiness just gets in the way of real dialogue: which is unfortunate because the pro gun agenda is far more complicated than most "pro gun" politicians realize: I would include both Webb and Allen in that boat, although Webb is learning fast.

If all there is between the pro gun community and democrats like Webb is sniping snarkiness, we will just continue trading polemics, being snide and disrespectful to each other, and talking past each other, rather than grappling with the issues and complexity here.

And as a result, at the end of our snipe hunt, we may be left alone and in the dark, holding our empty bags, and obeying our instructions not to move.

The Donkey

imported post

Lesser of Two Evils:

Many time when I have voted, I was not voting for the person I liked, but the person I disliked the least. Maybe being an NCO in the Army for so long has caused it, but I hate politicians (officers). In my opinion they tend to do more harm than good, common sense is a dirty word, and more often than not,decisions are made bywhats in it for them (yes I know I am generalizing). Most of my votes have gone the the Republican party for these reasons. I am an Independent, and will vote in the direction I feel is best for me and my family period. That said, the Democratic party has some seriously powerful individuals that scare the crap out of me, and I will be voting almost exclusively Republican, praying that the Dem's don't gain power at this time in history.

imported post

The Donkey wrote:

In a way, this reminds me a lot about the way you keep advancing these partisan theories about what must happen when a pro gun democrat gets into the Senate:

Consider -- for example -- Ben Nelson of Nebraska: Democrat. he's been there for 6 years now:

http://www.bennelson2006.com/ShowPage.asp?page=issuesguncontrol.asp

Looks like he'll be there another 6 years.

Not really a softy when it comes to gun control.

So do you think Chuck and Hillary beat him up in the Senate locker room?

Click to expand...

You can't really believe that a couple of pro-gun democrats can stand up to rock-star hillary, or that nancy isn't chomping at the bit to put her "mark" on things, or that first-time officeholders really can do what they want in Congress, do you? They'll do what their party tells them to do until they've been there long enough to do otherwise.

By then it's too late.

I'm much more afraid of a democrat majority than I am of any one candidate.

imported post

Tess wrote:

I'm much more afraid of a democrat majority than I am of any one candidate.

Click to expand...

I agree so much with this statement, on many levels, not just 2A rights.

imported post

It's all well and good to sing the praises of Jim Webb the individual. Actually, I have no major heartburn over anything Webb has said or proposed. Webb's biggest liability is the cabal he will strengthen if he wins: the radical leaders of the Dem party: Pelosi (I know, she is in the House...), Feinstein, Boxer, Hillary, Kennedy, Byrd, Reid. I could go "own and own" as Zell Miller said. Notice what has happened to the traditional "Zell Miller Democrats" in the Senate. Joe Lieberman comes to mind.

Lots of folks want to see the Democrats as the antidote to the Republicans. In this case, the cure is much more dangerous than the illness.

imported post

Dutch Uncle wrote:

Joe Lieberman comes to mind.

Lots of folks want to see the Democrats as the antidote to the Republicans. In this case, the cure is much more dangerous than the illness.

Click to expand...

You hit it on the head Dutch Uncle. If you dont toe the party line you get beat down and kicked out. No matter where you fall on this subject, Mr. O'Reilly's book Culture Warrior has some veryeye opening information on what is going on.

imported post

The Donkey wrote:

So now the pro-gun community is on a snipe hunt for democratic gun grabbers in the Virginia senate race:

And we are sniping and snarking at Jim Webb -- who is a quality candidate -- solely because he is a democrat:

But a Democratic Caucus who has room for a pro gun Senator Nelson --

http://www.bennelson2006.com/ShowPage.asp?page=Issues.asp.

-- will also have room for a pro gun Jim Webb.

The democratic party eventually is going to be in the Senate majority again -- at least for a while -- possibly (not probably) after this election. If the pressure for change doesn't get its release now, I project that the democratic party will be in the majority by a fairly significant margin in 2008: and then we will really be looking to talk to democrats like Jim Webb.

This sniping snarkiness just gets in the way of real dialogue: which is unfortunate because the pro gun agenda is far more complicated than most "pro gun" politicians realize: I would include both Webb and Allen in that boat, although Webb is learning fast.

If all there is between the pro gun community and democrats like Webb is sniping snarkiness, we will just continue trading polemics, being snide and disrespectful to each other, and talking past each other, rather than grappling with the issues and complexity here.

The Donkey

Click to expand...

I think you and Webb need to appreciate the distrust and hostility gun owners have toward the Democrats. After being vilified for more than a generation, 2 years of a 'gun neutral' party platform is not enough time to build up trust and overcome the past. It is not so much whether Webb is pro gun or not, and most people take him at his word that he is. The question is will a Democratic majority do something for us or something to us?

imported post

The correct parallel for Joe Leiberman is George Allen: punished -- not by the democratic party -- but by his own constituents for his Snarkiness, and losing touch with where they are at because he had his mind on "bigger things." The party regs were campaigning FOR him until he lost the primary. So now Leiberman will be in the Senate as an independent

Y'all are still worrying about Hillary (who is on to "bigger things") and Pelosi (who is a house member and basically irrelevant to Webb) but there is no place in your theory for Ben Nelson and similar Boom Boom dems.

The Donkey

imported post

The Donkey wrote:

HY'all are still worrying about Hillary (who is on to "bigger things") and Pelosi (who is a house member and basically irrelevant to Webb) but there is no place in your theory for Ben Nelson and similar Boom Boom dems.

The Donkey

Click to expand...

Hillary co-Sponsored a .50 caliber ban last year, is that what you mean by bigger things?
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d109:SA1621:

imported post

I'd like to amplify on what Longwatch said. I'm in my early 60's and have followed the firearms rights issue for about 50 years. In that time I have lived in 5 northeastern states where the Democrat majority consistently vilified my beliefs as dangerous, extreme, strange, potentially criminal, something to be ashamed of or ridiculed for. For the record I am a hard working, tax paying, law abiding citizen and family man with no criminal history or mental defect. I was bowed but not beaten by the Dem's scurrilous treatment of me, so after 22 years in a traditional state like Virginia, during which time the Republicans have turned back some of the toxic radicalism of the Democrat party, I can comfortably say there aren't enough years left in my life for me to ever trust that party again.

I know quite a number of Democrats personally and am certainly civil toward them, but no longer act defensively about my beliefs or behavior.

I believe in the value of a two party system which ensures active debate and provides the checks and balances so important to our system, but unless and until the Democrat Party repudiates its radical "progressive" (read socialist) agenda and opens under new management, it can go plumb to Hell!

imported post

Webb is a man of his word. If you asked just about anyone (pre-election partisan spinning), that was one of the things that made him stand head and shoulders above many of his colleagues. I have talked to and read things from extreme liberals and extreme right-wingers. All seemed to have a deep respect for the man, much of it linked directly to webb's extremeintegrity.

Thus, I have no fear of him changing his fundamental views ofguns in the future.

Many people here seem to have overlooked the fact that he came out openly as a champion of personal liberties long before the primaries, and was open in his pro-gun stance. Does anyone really think he didthis to gain votes withDemocrats (the people who vote in the Democratic primary overwhelmingly) ?!!! No. instead he stood by his gunsopenly when it was least opportune to do so.He basically said to theDemocratic electorate, "take me as I am or not." Of course, Webb won.Virginia Democrats are not so virulently "anti-gun" as some heremay think, andWebbcarried the state by 6.5%.

His views on guns are not new. They are not created to gain votes from pro-gun people. In fact, if they were the comments I read hereseem to prove they had failed.

Instead what we see is a man who stands by his word even if it does not serve him at the moment. He has even said this race is not the be-all-end-all for him. He just wants to see an end to the ill/flawed policies that have dragged us into foreign policy quagmires on several fronts. With him we get new -independent thinking in the Senate.


Webb is the real deal. He gets my vote.I keep my guns, and we have a true man, a true Virginia,and a brilliant thinker to represent us. With him gun are safe.

imported post

thegools wrote:

Virginia Democrats are not so virulently "anti-gun" as some heremay think, andWebbcarried the state by 6.5%.

Click to expand...

You should meet some of the GA Delegates and Senators around NOVA, they are as anti-gun as possible.

imported post

Regionalism and interest group politics, not party, folks!

Tom Davis (R-VA) has roots here in the increasingly urbanizing Fairfax suburbs: he rates a D+ from the NRA: Dutch Uncle and his party stallwarts probably will have their opportunity to send that piece of GOP to the Senate in 08'. He will be running against a pro gun democrat.

In 2006 it is Allen who is from . . . Southern California? . . . UVa? . . . Bumpass? Well, nobody's sure -- versus Webb, who, when he is not Da Nang is all Gate City and SW VA:

"I began hunting with my father as a very small boy, following him puppylike through dense woods and acting as his retriever when he shot rabbit and squirrel. He gave me my first rifle at the age of eight, as I did with my son. From age five he took me fishing, cutting a branch off a tree and tying fishing line onto it so that I could pull in sunfish while he went for bass. At about the same age he taught me how to both follow and lay a trail in the woods, and how to make an "Indian fire," large enough to cook over by small enough not to be noticed at a distance. When I was ten he gave me my first bait-casting rod. To him, bait-casting was an art form. At his direction, I spent untold hours in the backyard casting a dummy lure into an old bicycle tire, putting a handkerchief between my elbow at my side to keep me from "throwing" the rod at my target, so that I could learn to snap a rod using only my wrist."


http://www.raisingkaine.com/showDiary.do?diaryId=5309


As to the interests these folks represent, Allen gets his money from big oil, chewing tobacco, the financial sector, and Webb from individual donations, unions, and public interest PACs.

For Goldwater in 64', the answer to the problem of regionalism was "sawing off the eastern seaboard, and letting it float out to sea." But that would have taken Webb's woods -- and us -- out to sea with the urbanzied eastern establishment.

But our world is not the same as it was in 64' or 72' or 88':

* yesterday George Will declared the NRA the winner of the election, noting that the democrats had read the tea leaves, and there was "no demand" for gun control;

* The top item on Nancy Pelosi's agenda is bringing free markets to a Republican created Medicare entitlement, over republican opposition, to allow the government to bargain over the price of prescription medications, to cut government spendng;

* Meanwhile, Allen pitches to the left, touting federal support for public schools, historically black colleges, his newfound support by liberal democratic state senators, and criticizing Webb for not being sufficiently sensitive in 1979 to feminist aspirations to occupy combat billets;

* And now Allen's infects our televisions, standing there next to the guy Spanky derisively refers to as "Jawn Warner" saying he wants a "Change of Course" in Iraq.

Folks, the partisan stuff is interesting and all, but polarizing people along party lines over guns is a manipulative trick.

So the next time you hear someone loudly proclaim "Only our party cares about your guns," stop doting on your six shooter: check to make sure that you still have your wallet.

imported post

Why didn't Webb respond to the GOA candidate survey? Does he have an opinion on gun-rights that he does not want the public to know (either pro or anti-gun)?

All I do know is that Allen did respond, and he received an "A" rating from GOA (which is often hard to do).

imported post

VApatriot wrote:

Why didn't Webb respond to the GOA candidate survey? Does he have an opinion on gun-rights that he does not want the public to know (either pro or anti-gun)?

All I do know is that Allen did respond, and he received an "A" rating from GOA (which is often hard to do).

Click to expand...

I can tell you that Webb did respond to the NRA survey TWICE! The first time NRA claimed to have lost the survey results: weeks after the campaign re-sent them, NRA got around to posting Webb's "A" on its website, but had by then prevented Webb's "A" rating from being published in American Hunter magazine.

Kinda suspicious, eh?

This is the first time that I have heard about the GOA survey, so I am going to forward your question to the campaign.

The Donkey

imported post

I still do not know why GOA did not receive Webb's survey.

Considering the way things work among campaign professionals during the last week before an election, it is doubtful that we are going to get an answer to that query before next tuesday.

I can tell you that when I last checked, the campaign was vetting over 900 separate inquiries from different groups -- all of which had to be approved by Webb himself -- and that when, in an effort to get an answer to that question, I opened the door to the room in HQ where the research staff lives -- it appears now 20 hours a day -- the kids in there greeted me with that hundred mile stare you can get if you have been in the field for too long. But the right person wasn't there, and I am not likely to go back there again before Tuesday.

Nevertheless, the link posted here to Webb's website where he lists his answers on the NRA survey should resolve any questions you may have:

http://www.webbforsenate.com/nrasurvey.pdf

Please also find attached a letter from the candidate further detailing his views on these issues, and discussing some of the troubles he has had with surveys in this area.

The Donkey

imported post

I didn't want to start a new thread for this, but I found this column rather telling about our Senator-elect. Somehow I doubt he'll feel free to be this much of an ass to his fellow Dems when they start trying to roll out the gun control bills.



http://www.townhall.com/columnists/GeorgeWill/2006/11/29/jim_webb_is_not_what_washington_needs_more_of

imported post

I agree if Webb didn't want to meet President Bush, then maybe skip the affair all together if that what it is. Personally, from a consertive, not a Republican, yall have completely f***ed yourselves over. I found the best book at Borders yesterday which read "How Republicans have lost the Consertive vote" Republican Party needed a wake up call and Nov 7th delivered it in a big way. Maybe yall can get your act together for 08.