Kelly J
Regular Member
imported post
Fred is going to anounce his run for the Presidency 6 Sept. 2007. It's Official.
Fred is going to anounce his run for the Presidency 6 Sept. 2007. It's Official.
Out of curiosity, what don't you like about him?Since I'm the 59th person to view this reply-less topic, I'll start:
Don't like some of the stuff I've heard about him, never the less, YEAH! Fred's my man! Best of the bunch I believe.
He also has made the statement that the McCain/Fingold Campain Finance law that he supported went south when the senate started messingwith it.100%? Are you sure about that?
Congressman Paul voted against the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act.
The Act was a positive example of the Congress using its Commerce Clause powers in a legitimate manner. It was also tort reform, another power the Congress has that was a positive use, as far as affecting Federal Courts. It was a proper use of the "Elastic Clause" in as much as it was necessary to stop State Courts from interferring in the Commerce of Arms.
Fred Thompson is a conservative who has had 5 years to see the effects of the various legislation he once voted on. He has, since last January, been writing short little essay's on his current views and how he was wrong on other issues.
There's lots to actually like when compared to Rudy McRomney.
100%? Are you sure about that?
Congressman Paul voted against the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act.
The Act was a positive example of the Congress using its Commerce Clause powers in a legitimate manner. It was also tort reform, another power the Congress has that was a positive use, as far as affecting Federal Courts. It was a proper use of the "Elastic Clause" in as much as it was necessary to stop State Courts from interferring in the Commerce of Arms.
Fred Thompson is a conservative who has had 5 years to see the effects of the various legislation he once voted on. He has, since last January, been writing short little essay's on his current views and how he was wrong on other issues.
There's lots to actually like when compared to Rudy McRomney.
Allen I would likeknow something as all of us are not up to speed on the Acronyms what is the PLCA?How exactly, is the PLCA unconstitutional? I've heard these claims before, yet no one comes forth with anything that actually backs up the claim.
As for your link to the GOA... There is almost nothing they say, these days, that is relevant. They rely upon hyperbole and exaggeration to make their claims. Why would I believe a thing they say about Thompson?
I must confess ignorance of these two issues, not that I am not interested, just missed them, as for the GOA (Gun Owners of America) I have mixed feelings about them, at times they seem to be the group to join, and at other times I get the impression that they are a bunch of crazies, I just really do not know how to take them, they say they are the Only No Compromise Group, standing up for our gun rights, that may be so, but they have posted some articles that are seemingly contrary to the facts, and that really bothers me.Sorry Kelly, I should have been more specific. PLCA = Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms.
Gun Locks: Since many States already require the manufactorers to do this, it was no big deal. They ALL give gunlocks, with every new gun, in every State, for several years now, and the price is figured into the purchase. Making it a federal law, affected us how, exactly?
Soft Armor Penetrating Ammo: The text of the law did not give authority to the AG to determine what cartridges were to be classified as armor piercing. It merely stated that the AG shall conduct a series of tests to determine which cartridges would penetrate soft body armor and to report these findings back to the Congress.
That's a far cry from what the GOA insisted it said (and consequently, what) it would do.
Ron Paul was flat out wrong on this law.
Allen wrote:I must confess ignorance of these two issues, not that I am not interested, just missed them, as for the GOA (Gun Owners of America) I have mixed feelings about them, at times they seem to be the group to join, and at other times I get the impression that they are a bunch of crazies, I just really do not know how to take them, they say they are the Only No Compromise Group, standing up for our gun rights, that may be so, but they have posted some articles that are seemingly contrary to the facts, and that really bothers me.Sorry Kelly, I should have been more specific. PLCA = Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms.
Gun Locks: Since many States already require the manufactorers to do this, it was no big deal. They ALL give gunlocks, with every new gun, in every State, for several years now, and the price is figured into the purchase. Making it a federal law, affected us how, exactly?
Soft Armor Penetrating Ammo: The text of the law did not give authority to the AG to determine what cartridges were to be classified as armor piercing. It merely stated that the AG shall conduct a series of tests to determine which cartridges would penetrate soft body armor and to report these findings back to the Congress.
That's a far cry from what the GOA insisted it said (and consequently, what) it would do.
So you r saying that the AG can test it but can't say what would be considered as Armor Piercing? What would you guess the point of the test would be?
`So if a state makes a gun law it is no big deal to you if the Feds make it mandatory? Sorry its a big deall to me.
I know you kbnow how the Government want to save money. They wrote the bill and had an extra sheet of paper so they just penciled in the amendments. That was better the throw away a ggood sheet of paper.
The NRA has compromised on every anti gun bill that has ever come up.. The 68 gun law the brady bill the amendments on this bill. Last year in illinois they even went along with the Gun Show Loophole Bill
Ron Paul was flat out wrong on this law.
I believe that there has been a study on the Body armor issue and it was determined that the current Body armor used by ourlaw enforcement people are designed to stop hand gun ammunition, and it will not stop Rifle Ammo, I might be wrong but I think that was the results of the study.
If memory serves me correctly was not the issue of Gun Locks part of the Brady Law that was passed years ago?
I really don't understand what the big fuss is about Thompson... he appears to be the current GOP condensed into one person, which I guess is what those who adhere to the two-party system are hoping for. Hmpf... I'm still throwing myself behind Dr. Ron Paul.
imperialism2024 wrote:
I really don't understand what the big fuss is about Thompson... he appears to be the current GOP condensed into one person, which I guess is what those who adhere to the two-party system are hoping for. Hmpf... I'm still throwing myself behind Dr. Ron Paul.
He's an actor and his TV show is popular. Sadly, the mass of the population would vote for Paris Hilton or Britney Spears if they were running because they put image and name recognition over substance. This is why Fred has a handful of supporters.
Rupert Murdoch's first 3 choices for president are way too liberal so now Mr Murdoch has decided we should all vote for Mr Thompson. He does this through his propaganda ("you're an anti-American liberal if you don't agree with us") channel called Fox News and, at the same time, ridicules or ignores the only candidate who WILL defend your rights and the constitution - including the 2nd ammendment.
Funny how I see people bickering over some kind of "flaw" in Ron Paul's gun rights voting record. When it comes to this issue I would sooner vote for the person with the 99.5% record than the one with the 60% record.
Finally, with approx. 70% of the population against the Iraq war, even a 5 year old can figure out that should the GOP nominate a pro-war candidate we will have Hillary Clinton as president and we will slip into a gun-free self-defence-free socialist surveillance society just like Great Britain did in 1997 once Blair got elected.
Ron Paul is the republican party's only hope and the only hope this country has of remaining free of the socialism that's creeping around us.
Because no business should be forced by law to sell a particular item. If there's demand for gun locks, the free market should provide them.Gun Locks: Since many States already require the manufactorers to do this, it was no big deal. They ALL give gunlocks, with every new gun, in every State, for several years now, and the price is figured into the purchase. Making it a federal law, affected us how, exactly?
The majority of the externally influenced problems that we face today happen precisely because we strayed outside our own borders. We funded and trained Osama bin Laden, then he killed 3000+ of our citizens. We funded Saddam and helped him into power, then later decide he's evil and has to be removed from power. Our foreign policy constantly has us backing one person to overthrow another. Then, as soon as that happens, the person we were backing gains too much power and the cycle starts over.I admire and respect Dr. Paul, he is and has been a stead fast Constitionalist, to the point of extremism, but that isn't a bad thing, but he has stated that we here in the United States should be separatist and stay clear of the World Problems, and to a degree he is correct but he is also wrong in that assessment to think that if we stay with in our own borders we will not be troubled by the rest of the world, Wish that were so but it just isn't
qednick wrote:imperialism2024 wrote:
I really don't understand what the big fuss is about Thompson... he appears to be the current GOP condensed into one person, which I guess is what those who adhere to the two-party system are hoping for. Hmpf... I'm still throwing myself behind Dr. Ron Paul.
He's an actor and his TV show is popular. Sadly, the mass of the population would vote for Paris Hilton or Britney Spears if they were running because they put image and name recognition over substance. This is why Fred has a handful of supporters.
Rupert Murdoch's first 3 choices for president are way too liberal so now Mr Murdoch has decided we should all vote for Mr Thompson. He does this through his propaganda ("you're an anti-American liberal if you don't agree with us") channel called Fox News and, at the same time, ridicules or ignores the only candidate who WILL defend your rights and the constitution - including the 2nd ammendment.
Funny how I see people bickering over some kind of "flaw" in Ron Paul's gun rights voting record. When it comes to this issue I would sooner vote for the person with the 99.5% record than the one with the 60% record.
Finally, with approx. 70% of the population against the Iraq war, even a 5 year old can figure out that should the GOP nominate a pro-war candidate we will have Hillary Clinton as president and we will slip into a gun-free self-defence-free socialist surveillance society just like Great Britain did in 1997 once Blair got elected.
Ron Paul is the republican party's only hope and the only hope this country has of remaining free of the socialism that's creeping around us.
First off I will Agree to disagree with your take on the situation, I will qualify my following statements with this, I admire and respect Dr. Paul, he is and has been a stead fast Constitionalist, to the point of extremism, but that isn't a bad thing, but he has stated that we here in the United States should be separatist and stay clear of the World Problems, and to a degree he is correct but he is also wrong in that assessment to think that if we stay with in our own borders we will not be troubled by the rest of the world, Wish that were so but it just isn't, Everyone that is backing Paul for the most part is touting his steadfast support of the 2nd Amendment, and the Constitution, it is good to be a strong supporter of both but there is a lot of enemies out there in the World, and even though we would all be armed and willing to protect our Country we could not do it alone, as I stated I admire Paul but he has shown no willingness to address the world stage of events other than to say we should not get involved, just wont work. I respect your support of the man and understand the reasons behind it, I just don’t think he will win the Nomination but if he should win it and he does become the one Candidate for the Republican Party I would support his bid for President.