Who do we vote for?

imported post


As you vote this November, keep this information in mind. I included the Source at the bottom of each section. Check the sources and see the truth.

Barack Obama on Gun Control

Ok for states & cities to determine local gun laws. (Apr 2008)

Fact Check: Yes, Obama endorsed Illinois handgun ban. (Apr 2008)

Respect 2nd Amendment, but local gun bans ok. (Feb 2008)

Provide some common-sense enforcement on gun licensing. (Jan 2008)

2000: cosponsored bill to limit purchases to 1 gun per month. (Oct 2007)

Concealed carry OK for retired police officers. (Aug 2007)

Stop unscrupulous gun dealers dumping guns in cities. (Jul 2007)

Keep guns out of inner cities--but also problem of morality. (Oct 2006)

Bush erred in failing to renew assault weapons ban. (Oct 2004)

Ban semi-automatics, and more possession restrictions. (Jul 1998)

Voted NO on prohibiting lawsuits against gun manufacturers. (Jul 2005)

Source: http://www.ontheissues.org/Gun_Control.htm#Barack_Obama

"I am consistently on record and will continue to be on record as opposing concealed carry."

-Barack Hussein Obama, Junior Senator

Obama's Anti-gun Record

Barack Obama supports handgun registration and licensing...

I know that the NRA believes people should be unimpeded and unregulated on gun ownership. I disagree. I do not object to the lawful use and ownership of firearms, but I do think it is entirely it appropriate for the state to monitor it.

Too many of these guns end up in the hands of criminals even though they were originally purchased by people who did not have a felony. I'll continue to be in favor of handgun law registration requirements and licensing requirements

for training. [Chicago Defender, 7/5/01]

--- http://factcheck.barackobama.com/factcheck2/2007/12/

and more...

The package closes the Firearm Owners Identification (FOID) card loopholes which resulted in the shooting out in Melrose Park. We're eliminating 17 specific assault weapons. There is no reason why anybody should need an assault

weapon to protect themselves or their family,' Obama said. 'We're limiting handgun sales to one a month. We're calling for handgun registration. It's very hard right now to track whether or not a felon has turned in his weapons or if he has a FOID card because we don't know how many weapons he has purchased. [Chicago Defender, 2/20/01]

--- http://factcheck.barackobama.com/factcheck2/2007/12/

Opposes civilian concealed carry

I am consistently on record and will continue to be on record as opposing concealed carry.

--- Mendell, David, "From Promise to Power" (2007), p. 251.

I am not in favor of concealed weapons. I think that creates a potential atmosphere where more innocent people could (get shot during) altercations.

--- Pittsburg Tribune-Review (April 2, 2008).

[Obama] backed federal legislation that would ban citizens from carrying weapons, except for law enforcement. He cited Texas as an example of a place where a law allowing people to carry weapons has "malfunctioned" because

hundreds of people granted licenses had prior convictions.

"National legislation will prevent other states' flawed concealed-weapons laws from threatening the safety of Illinois residents," Obama said.

--- http://www.icadp.org/page236.html (Citing David Mendel, Chicago Tribune, February 20, 2004)

Opposes possession of most semi-automatic rifles

Obama has stated the government needs to permanently reinstate an "assault weapons" ban.

(Obama Calls for Permanent Assault Weapons Ban to Combat Inner-City Violence, Associated Press [via Fox News] [July 15, 2007] and http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2008/issues/issues.gun.html)

(McCain voted against the 1994 crime bill that contained an "assault weapons" ban [see the latter link].)

Voted for a federal ban on most military surplus ammo

Voted in 2005 to classify all Full Metal Jacket ammo in the following calibers as armor-piercing (since they are capable both of being fired from a handgun and of penetrating Kevlar bullet-resistant vests):

223 Remington

308 Winchester

Soviet 7.62x39

Source: http://www.senate.gov/legislative/L...ote_cfm.cfm?congress=109&session=1&vote=00217

Opposes protecting firearms manufacturers from lawsuits due to the misuse of their products.

In July, 2005 Obama voted against S. 397 that passed by a wide margin (65-31) and became law in October, 2005. This act prohibits "civil liability actions from being brought or continued against manufacturers, distributors, dealers, or

importers of firearms or ammunition for damages, injunctive or other relief resulting from the misuse of their products by others."

Probably supports local handgun bans

The campaign of Democratic presidential hopeful Barack Obama said that he "believes that we can recognize and respect the rights of law-abiding gun owners and the right of local communities to enact common sense laws to combat

violence and save lives. Obama believes the D.C. handgun law is constitutional."

--- http://www.sportsmenforobama.org/content/view/34/ (Citing James Oliphant and Michael J. Higgins, "Court To Hear Gun Case," Chicago Tribune, 11/20/07).

(See http://www.scotuswiki.com/index.php?title=DC_v._Heller for background on the case of District of Columbia v. Heller, before the Supreme Court, that will decide the constitutionality of a civilian handgun ban in Washington, D.C.)

Opposed the nomination of Supreme Court justices John G. Roberts Jr. and Samuel A. Alito Jr.

Recent Supreme Court justices John G. Roberts Jr. and Samuel A. Alito Jr. were instrumental to a favorable Second Amendment ruling in the Heller case mentioned above. Obama voted against the nomination of Roberts and Alito.

(McCain voted for the nomination of both justices.) (Roberts' roll call vote, Alito's roll call vote)

source: http://www.guncite.com/gun_control_obama.html

Joe Biden on Gun Control

Keep assault weapons ban; close gun show loophole. (Apr 2007)

Voted NO on prohibiting lawsuits against gun manufacturers. (Jul 2005)

Voted NO on banning lawsuits against gun manufacturers for gun violence. (Mar 2004)

Voted YES on background checks at gun shows. (May 1999)

Voted NO on more penalties for gun & drug violations. (May 1999)

Voted NO on loosening license & background checks at gun shows. (May 1999)

Voted NO on maintaining current law: guns sold without trigger locks. (Jul 1998)

Rated F by the NRA, indicating a pro-gun control voting record. (Dec 2003)

Source: http://www.ontheissues.org/Gun_Control.htm#Joe_Biden

John McCain on Gun Control

I know how to use guns; but I don't own one. (Nov 2007)

Prosecute criminals, not citizens for gun ownership. (Sep 2007)

Don't hold gun manufacturers liable for crimes. (Sep 2007)

Opposes restrictions on assault weapons and ammunition types. (Sep 2007)

Calls for GOP "tolerance" of closing gun show loopholes. (May 2002)

Ban cheap guns; require safety locks; for gun show checks. (Aug 1999)

Supports ban on certain assault weapons. (Aug 1999)

Voted against Brady Bill & assault weapon ban. (Aug 1999)

Guns are a problem, but so are violent web sites & videos. (Aug 1999)

Punish criminals who abuse 2nd Amendment rights. (May 1999)

Youth Violence Prevention Act restricts guns for kids. (May 1999)

Repeal existing gun restrictions; penalize criminal use. (Jul 1998)

Voted YES on prohibiting lawsuits against gun manufacturers. (Jul 2005)

Voted YES on banning lawsuits against gun manufacturers for gun violence. (Mar 2004)

Voted NO on background checks at gun shows. (May 1999)

Voted YES on more penalties for gun & drug violations. (May 1999)

Voted YES on loosening license & background checks at gun shows. (May 1999)

Voted YES on maintaining current law: guns sold without trigger locks. (Jul 1998)

Ban gun registration & trigger lock law in Washington DC. (Mar 2007)

Allow firearms in National Parks. (Feb 2008)

Source: http://www.ontheissues.org/2008/John_McCain_Gun_Control.htm

Sarah Palin

Hunts and fishes, as did her father. (Aug 2008)

Hunts as much as she can; freezer-full of wild game. (Aug 2008)

Supports ending D.C.'s 32-year-old ban on handguns. (Jun 2008)

Lifelong NRA member & champion of right to bear arms. (Feb 2008)

Supports Constitutional right to bear arms. (Nov 2006)

imported post

The government will feed and protect you, ergo, no need for guns. Like the entire EU.

imported post

"Who do we vote for?"

Considering nObama's crappyrecord onsecond ammendment rights plus his recient crapping on the first ammendment a better question is "who do we notwantas POTUS."

Voting for independants is fine and dandy but keep in mind that, in this election at least, the independants dont have a chance to win. We need every vote to keep nObama out of the White House.Voting for a indy might make you feel good but the less votes that McCain gets the more likely it is that Der Fuhrer will win. Then none of us will feel good.And McCain's got a better chance to win than any of the indys do.

Believe me, I'd love to see Ron Paul as POTUS but does anyone really believe that he'll get enough votes to win?

McCain aint exactly my preferred choice but he's a much better choicethan the alternative. I'm voting for McCain, not because I think he's great, but to keep nObama out of the White house. McCain's the best chance to do that.

Maybe we'll acually have someone we truly want to have as POTUSto vote for in '12.

imported post

There will be more than two choices on the ballot.

imported post

drkarrow wrote:

There will be more than two choices on the ballot.

Click to expand...

Yes there will be 3 "choices"

A. John McCain, probably no increased gun control.

B. Barrak Obama, CERTAIN increased gun control.

C. 3rd Party, Obama vote by default.



Don't be stupid people, McCain is a lousy choice, but Palin is one of us, a true champion of our side. With her next in line, we can tolerate McCain. If obama gets in, he'll bring every sort of leftist fruitcake with him, socialism, and surrender to jihad.

imported post

It's really discouraging to read persons on this board, who supposedly have a grasp on the concept of freedom, discussing this topic.
Chuck Baldwin is the only choice, get over it and get ready for what's coming afterwards.

imported post

Chuck Baldwin is the only principled choice. The least weevil is not a principal in anything but democracy.

imported post

never mind (will repost only if someone already wrote a reply)

imported post

...

imported post

PrayingForWar wrote:

Don't be stupid people...

Click to expand...

Speaking of stupid, what's up with your username? Who the hell in their right mind prays for war?

imported post

Vote for the one that tells the truth.

imported post

PrayingForWar wrote:

drkarrow wrote:

There will be more than two choices on the ballot.

Click to expand...

Yes there will be 3 "choices"

A. John McCain, probably no increased gun control.

B. Barrak Obama, CERTAIN increased gun control.

C. 3rd Party, Obama vote by default.

Click to expand...

A 3rd party vote is not an "Obama vote by default".

If someone refuses to vote for either McCain or Obama, but finds a 3rd party candidate he can support, then that vote is completely neutral in the Obama/McCain race.

If someone would normally vote for the Democrat candidate, but finds a 3rd party he likes better than Obama, then that is a vote against Obama.

Remember, the only vote that is ever wasted is one cast for someone other than your first choice.

imported post

Elections often offer no real choice, but only the choice of the "lesser among evils." McCain is OK on many gun issues, not OK on others. Obama however, is arguably the most anti-gun presidential candidate ever to run.

With McCain, we might get a "gun show loop hole closure" law and maybe an AWB of some kind.

With Obama, ANY gun control that manages to pass congress gets signed into law.

Perhaps the bigger question: Which of these two would you prefer to be nominating the Supreme Court justices who will hear the post-Heller cases that will be sure to reach them? Quite a number of the Supreme Court justices are getting along in years with 5 of the 9 over seventy years in age. Three of the eight men have already lived to or beyond the statistical average US male age of 72 and another two are within a couple of years of that age. Ginsburg is within a year of the statistical female life expectancy (76).

Chief Justice
John Roberts = 52

Associate Justices
Samuel Alito = 58
Stephen Breyer = 70
Ruth Bader Ginsburg = 75
Anthony Kennedy = 72
Antonin Scalia = 72
David Souter = 69
John Paul Stevens = 88
Clarence Thomas = 60

Source of approximate ages: http://www4.law.cornell.edu/supct/justices/fullcourt.html

The clock ticks relentlessly for everyone, regardless of political affiliation. The new president could nominate as few as 1 to as many as 4 new Supreme Court justices. Perhaps more. Lots of people don't make it to 72. Heck, Bush might have an opportunity to nominate somebody in the short time he has left, although such a nomination would never go anywhere, given the current makeup of congress.

Some say a Jimmy Carter was necessary to elect a Ronald Reagan. Not sure about that. I don't see any upside to a president Obama.

Don't like McCain on every issue, either. Interestingly, McCain turned 72 in August of this year. At least we'll have Sarah, who is only 44.

imported post

Here's my take on Obama/McCain...

Obama will be very, very bad for the country. However, I believe that McCain will be WORSE - hear me out, please. McCain is NOT a conservative. His name is regularly pinned with some of the most liberal Democrats in the Senate on some very liberal bills. Take the:

• McCain-Kennedy Pro-Amnesty bill
• McCain-Lieberman Stewardship Act (global climate change)
• McCain-Feingold Campaign Finance bill (regulating free speech around the election)
• McCain-Kerry Secure Public Networks Act (giving government access to businesses' encryption keys)
• McCain-Schumer Prescription Drug bill (abolishing patent rights under many circumstances)
• Also check out http://www.gunowners.org/mccaintb.htmfor McCain's gun voting record

If McCain becomes president, the various groups and leaders (Christians, pro-life, 2nd-amendment,secure borders, and so forth) will fall asleep because McCain pretends/claims to support those principles. If Obama becomes president,because he doesn't claim to support those principles,the groups will be on the alert and will hound their congressmen and senators when one of those issues comes up ina bill.

Imust vote with my conscience, therefore I cannot support either of the major party candidates. If Ron Paul was on the ballot, I would be voting for him. Since he isn't, I am voting for the candidate that Ron Paul has endorsed, Chuck Baldwin of the Constitution Party. I highly recommend you check out his Firearms Issue page http://baldwin08.com/Issue-Firearms.cfm. He's a lifetime member of GOA and seems to practice his aim often (check out the first video)! I doubt you could say that of McCain or Obama!

imported post

Write inRon Paul, or maybe vote for Barr. I might be able to vote for Palin, but McLaim is a statist tool. Now that he has conceded Michigan and Nobama is stealing Ohio he is discovering his principled roots. Well he is a part time gun grabber.

4 years of Nobama might just be the catalyst needed for the return of a constitutional republic. Just hope it happens without much bloodshed.

imported post

Do not vote for the Marxist! Do not throw yer vote away on anyone who has no possible chance of winning. 'Kind'a like firin' yer last shot in the air. We have a common enemy... Defeat him.



DEFEAT OBAMA!

imported post

KatieVT wrote:

Here's my take on Obama/McCain...

Obama will be very, very bad for the country. However, I believe that McCain will be WORSE - hear me out, please. McCain is NOT a conservative. His name is regularly pinned with some of the most liberal Democrats in the Senate on some very liberal bills. Take the:

• McCain-Kennedy Pro-Amnesty bill
• McCain-Lieberman Stewardship Act (global climate change)
• McCain-Feingold Campaign Finance bill (regulating free speech around the election)
• McCain-Kerry Secure Public Networks Act (giving government access to businesses' encryption keys)
• McCain-Schumer Prescription Drug bill (abolishing patent rights under many circumstances)
• Also check out http://www.gunowners.org/mccaintb.htmfor McCain's gun voting record

If McCain becomes president, the various groups and leaders (Christians, pro-life, 2nd-amendment,secure borders, and so forth) will fall asleep because McCain pretends/claims to support those principles. If Obama becomes president,because he doesn't claim to support those principles,the groups will be on the alert and will hound their congressmen and senators when one of those issues comes up ina bill.

Imust vote with my conscience, therefore I cannot support either of the major party candidates. If Ron Paul was on the ballot, I would be voting for him. Since he isn't, I am voting for the candidate that Ron Paul has endorsed, Chuck Baldwin of the Constitution Party. I highly recommend you check out his Firearms Issue page http://baldwin08.com/Issue-Firearms.cfm. He's a lifetime member of GOA and seems to practice his aim often (check out the first video)! I doubt you could say that of McCain or Obama!

Click to expand...

Thank you for this post - I also have many of the same views regarding the two main party candidates.

My questions will come in a few, but first a disclaimer: I am not in support of any one candidate at this time, so no accusations of my support for any group please.

So the questions are (in relation to the OP's subject):

Does anyone think that 2nd Ammendment rights are the top issue in this election?

Would a normally more important issue, like the economy or environmental concerns, become secondary if 2nd Ammendment rights were threated?

The reason why I am asking this group is because I am weighing the issues on the candidates and it seems we have some odd conflicts. On the one hand, McCain seems more 2nd Ammend. friendly, but there are questions on how he will handle the economic situation and the future war on terror. The other side is Obama who seems to have a better grasp on the economic and evironmental issues, but is going the way of the Clinton's on firearms issues.

As much as I want to vote for "the guy who will let me keep my guns", I can't ignore his "as long as it takes" attitude on Iraq/future enemies, nor his "tax breaks for big corps. I feel I can't be selfish by voting just for gun issues because as the last few months have showed us, there are bigger issues at stake here. That being said, Im still kind of on the fence about both - thoughts?

imported post

Voting McCain for two reasons:

1) The alternative is 100% unacceptable
2) Get Palin in position to be POTUS in 4 or 8

imported post

Krato88 wrote:

Does anyone think that 2nd Ammendment rights are the top issue in this election? Would a normally more important issue, like the economy or environmental concerns, become secondary if 2nd Ammendment rights were threated?

Click to expand...

I, personally, believe that there are issues that are more important then 2nd Amendment rights. However, we also need to consider that the 2nd Amendment was put there to protect our other rights from tyrants.

You've probably heard Martin Niemoller's "First they came for the Communists..." passage, but I'd seen one for modern times floating around the internet.

I'd also advise you to look closer at Obama's economic suitability.

• Franklin Raines - forced to retire as CEO and Chairman of Fannie Mae when auditing discovered severe irregularities in Fannie Mae's accounting activities (goldenparachute worth $240 mil) -now works for the Obama Campaign as Chief Economic Advisor
• Tim Howard - was CFO of Fannie Mae;'was a strong internal proponent of using accounting strategies that would ensure a 'stable pattern of earnings' at Fannie (i.e. cooking the books) - now alsoa Chief Economic Advisor to Obama
• Jim Johnson - formerexecutive at Lehman Brothers, later forced from his position as Fannie Mae CEO; currently under investigation for taking illegal loans from Countrywide while serving as CEO of Fannie Mae - now Senior Obama Finance Advisor and was selected to run Obama's Vice Presidential Search Committee :shock:

And yes, I'd love to vote for a candidate who was believed to have a good chance of winning, but I was brought up not to vote for the "lesser of two wevvils". I could goon and on -politics is a biginterest for me- but I'll stop now. If you haveanymore questions, I'll try to answer them directly and to the point.

imported post

The reason why I am asking this group is because I am weighing the issues on the candidates and it seems we have some odd conflicts. On the one hand, McCain seems more 2nd Ammend. friendly, but there are questions on how he will handle the economic situation and the future war on terror. The other side is Obama who seems to have a better grasp on the economic and evironmental issues, but is going the way of the Clinton's on firearms issues

Click to expand...

There are plenty of other issues that are as important to me as guns.

McCain/Palin are anti-choice. But their chances of getting a litmus-tested anti-choice conservative on the Court are nil. On the other hand, the others are anti-gun, and their chance of getting an anti-gunner confirmed to the Court are immense.

The Democrats are pro-UN, pro-compromise, pro-conciliation ... which means we lose identity as Americans. McCain/Palin understand we are NOT Europe, Asia, or Africa. I hope they understand that means Europe, Asia, and Africa need not be exactly like us, and I believe they're pragmatic enough to do so.

The democrats haven't a clue what it means to be in the military. They sort of understand they might be able to use the military to their ends, but they don't understand sacrifice or willingness to do what needs to be done, and no more. (Neither does Bush, apparently, though he understands the sacrifice part.)

The democratic crop of "reformers" want to redistribute wealth -- that's socialism, and it's not what I take pride in as an American. They want to regulate private industry into an early grave, and I can't stomach that.

By NOT voting for the lesser of two evils, I allow those who will vote for the greater of two evils to have their way. I'm not willing to allow that either.

So on balance, the gun-grabbing position might as well be my only difference with the democrats, even though it's not the only important one.