Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 48

Thread: Scott Brown (R) to replace Ted Kennedy in MA

  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    4

    Post imported post

    Fellow Gun Owners,
    I am surprised to find that there's no mention of the race between Scott Brown, Republican and Martha Coakley (far left of Ted Kennedy) for US Senate in Massachusetts. On Jan 20, 2010 Mass residents will be voting for the REPLACEMENT for Ted Kennedy. Scott is an excellent candidate who has gained significantly in the past 6 months. Please roll out the marketing machine and help get Scott Brown elected!

    Please visit BrownforUSSenate.com

    Scott'sa good man. A LT Col. in the Reserve, with excellent leadership skills. Martha Coakley is more alignedwith Nancy Pelosi.



  2. #2

    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Northern Virginia
    Posts
    1,128

    Post imported post

    From the Brown Website:

    Gun issues
    I support the Second Amendment and believe that citizens have the right to keep and bear arms as a basic constitutional liberty. I support safe and responsible gun ownership.

    Meaning what?

  3. #3
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    4

    Post imported post

    My guess would be that he supports second amendment rights. Please consider the alternative with Coakley.

  4. #4
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    across Death's Door on Washington Island, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    2,382

    Post imported post

    Where have we heard that before, "the lesser of two weevils"?

  5. #5
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Greensboro, North Carolina, USA
    Posts
    1,052

    Post imported post

    The Donkey wrote:
    From the Brown Website:

    Gun issues
    I support the Second Amendment and believe that citizens have the right to keep and bear arms as a basic constitutional liberty. I support safe and responsible gun ownership.

    Meaning what?
    I'll have to find a source but I've heard he supports reasonable restrictions on guns such as background checks and registration.

  6. #6
    Regular Member Prophet's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA
    Posts
    544

    Post imported post

    tekshogun wrote:
    The Donkey wrote:
    From the Brown Website:

    Gun issues
    I support the Second Amendment and believe that citizens have the right to keep and bear arms as a basic constitutional liberty. I support safe and responsible gun ownership.

    Meaning what?
    I'll have to find a source but I've heard he supports reasonable restrictions on guns such as background checks and registration.
    Two issues I have. First, his snippet about Gun Issues from his campaign page is both trite and lacking. As if he just cut and pasted the statement from a "How to win over gun owners for Dummies" book. Every other issue except for Death Penalty he goes on in great detail on what his support for those issues entails and how those issues speak to him personally. Contrarily, the gun issues is just that generic line that is supposed to whip us all into a tither that he's with us.

    Now, if he's just playing his overwhelming 2A support close to the vest because he's running in Massachusetts, that is very political...but whether its Gillibrand political or sly like a fox political I do not yet know.

    The second problem I may have is this nonsense about registration. If he wants to be for background checks Im ok with that...but if a person supports gun registration then they DO NOT support the second amendment.

    So, how about instead of the lesser of two evils, we get some of the tea bag momentum and elect someone GOOD. Just sayin.

  7. #7
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Greensboro, North Carolina, USA
    Posts
    1,052

    Post imported post

    Prophet wrote:
    tekshogun wrote:
    The Donkey wrote:
    From the Brown Website:

    Gun issues
    I support the Second Amendment and believe that citizens have the right to keep and bear arms as a basic constitutional liberty. I support safe and responsible gun ownership.

    Meaning what?
    I'll have to find a source but I've heard he supports reasonable restrictions on guns such as background checks and registration.
    Two issues I have. First, his snippet about Gun Issues from his campaign page is both trite and lacking. As if he just cut and pasted the statement from a "How to win over gun owners for Dummies" book. Every other issue except for Death Penalty he goes on in great detail on what his support for those issues entails and how those issues speak to him personally. Contrarily, the gun issues is just that generic line that is supposed to whip us all into a tither that he's with us.

    Now, if he's just playing his overwhelming 2A support close to the vest because he's running in Massachusetts, that is very political...but whether its Gillibrand political or sly like a fox political I do not yet know.

    The second problem I may have is this nonsense about registration. If he wants to be for background checks Im ok with that...but if a person supports gun registration then they DO NOT support the second amendment.

    So, how about instead of the lesser of two evils, we get some of the tea bag momentum and elect someone GOOD. Just sayin.
    I'm sorry, tea bag momentum?

    Agreed on the other points.

  8. #8
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    4

    Post imported post

    Guys,

    I think we are missing the point.We can debate the finer points of what makesthe perfect conservative. Even if Scott is not the perfect candidate, he's 100 TIMES better than the alternative.

    Easy choice. My vote is for Brown. Anything else is a vote for "Typical Massachusetts, Politics as Usual."

    -S





  9. #9
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Greensboro, North Carolina, USA
    Posts
    1,052

    Post imported post

    semma77 wrote:
    Guys,

    I think we are missing the point.┬*┬*We can debate the finer points of what makes┬*the perfect conservative. ┬*Even if Scott is not the perfect candidate, he's 100 TIMES better than the alternative.

    Easy choice.┬* My vote is for Brown.┬*┬* Anything else is a vote for "Typical Massachusetts, Politics as Usual."

    -S

    ┬*

    ┬*
    I think we all agree there but even then, you still have to watch out for those that say one thing, get elected, and do something else. It happens all the time and to throw our support behind someone only to be back-stabbed is more painful than electing someone that we knew was against us. It is a matter of knowing where everyone stands and how they've acted on similar issues/policies in the past (if they have such a history).

  10. #10
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    4

    Post imported post

    Yes, we do agree. BTW, not sure if you've heard about how TOTALLY rediculous the Massachusetts Gun Laws are here. Martha Coakley and her gang of liberal thugs have systematically started to dismantle our right to bear arms by enforcement of a confusing, convoluted set of rules. It's brutal up here. All the while, we've got "shoot 'em if you got 'em" NH right next door. I'm 12 miles away from the border where you can basically own anything.

  11. #11
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Greensboro, North Carolina, USA
    Posts
    1,052

    Post imported post

    semma77 wrote:
    Yes, we do agree. BTW, not sure if you've heard about how TOTALLY rediculous the Massachusetts Gun Laws are here. Martha Coakley and her gang of liberal thugs have systematically started to dismantle our right to bear arms by enforcement of a confusing, convoluted set of rules. It's brutal up here. All the while, we've got "shoot 'em if you got 'em" NH right next door. I'm 12 miles away from the border where you can basically own anything.
    Yeah, I've heard and have been keeping track of things on Youtube from some open carriers from Mass. and New Hampshire. Kentucky, I think is the finest example of what we need as far as gun ownership laws, or a lack of laws that is.

  12. #12
    Regular Member Alexcabbie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Alexandria, Virginia, United States
    Posts
    2,290

    Post imported post

    Keep in mind that the Democratic Party has been wholly taken over by the DemonRatz It is vitally important to get a Republican majority in both houses because committee chairmanships all go to the majority party, as does the power of subpoena and other important powers. These are now ALL held by the Ratz.

    The Ratz are using their majority to block debate, to conduct public business in secret, even to egregiously violate the Senate's own rules on parliamentary procedure.

    Senator whatzizname from Nebraska was persuaded to vote yes on Obamacare via an exemption for his state from additional Medicare costs resulting from Obamacare, (which has enraged many State governors). Landrieu from LA was bribed with 385 milion in funds which will assuredly be funnelled through her family's construction firms. This is not just "normal wheeling and dealing" it is out and out high-dollar graft.

    The election of Scott Brown will do one very important thing to hold the line. It wll mean the end of the "filibuster proof majority" in the Senate and enable filibustering of all this nonsense. It will help hold the line until November when we absolutely MUST re-take at least one and very preferably both houses of Congress; and put a stop to this dangerous DemonRat attempt to establish a permanent dependence upon the Federal government and Federal control over the most intimate parts of every individual citizen's very existence.

  13. #13

    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Northern Virginia
    Posts
    1,128

    Post imported post

    Helping to elect a Republican who is luke warm on the second amendment would be pointless.

    Republicans have only one answer to the real challenges of our time: "NO"

    Go DemonRatz!

  14. #14
    Regular Member We-the-People's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    White City, Oregon, USA
    Posts
    2,234

    Post imported post

    Bumpin it up CAUSE TEDDY'S SEAT WILL HAVE A REPUBLICAN BUTT IN IT once he's sworn in.

    The people ahve spoken in a state that has put a liberal in that seat for HOW LONG?

    We have a chance.
    "The Second Amendment speaks nothing to an unfettered Right". (Post # 100)
    "Restrictions are not infringements. Bans are infringements.--if it reaches beyond Reasonable bans". (Post # 103)
    Beretta92FSLady
    http://forum.opencarry.org/forums/sh...ons-Bill/page5

    Disclaimer: I am not a lawyer, nothing in any of my posts should be considered legal advice. If you need legal advice, consult a reputable attorney, not an internet forum.

  15. #15
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    across Death's Door on Washington Island, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    2,382

    Post imported post

    mark edward marchiafava wrote:
    the libertarian Kennedy vs a Republican
    With respect and tongue-in-cheek, which one is that, the oxymoron?

  16. #16
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    across Death's Door on Washington Island, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    2,382

    Post imported post

    And to you, Sir.

  17. #17
    Regular Member Sonora Rebel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Gone
    Posts
    3,958

    Post imported post

    e-mail from the wife; "The Republic is alive and well and flexed its muscles yesterday.
    Take note pseudo ruling class, for the the second time in the history of this great country, the people of Massachusetts have thrown the tea over the side.
    Yeeee-haaaa!"


    A Libertarian candidate in MA has less ofthe same chance asa snowball in hell. If anything... 'twas the Independents who pulled this off.

    We just witnessed the election to the Senate of a future President. A Republican JFK.

  18. #18
    Regular Member Thundar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Newport News, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    4,961

    Post imported post

    The Donkey wrote:
    From the Brown Website:

    Gun issues
    I support the Second Amendment and believe that citizens have the right to keep and bear arms as a basic constitutional liberty. I support safe and responsible gun ownership.

    Meaning what?
    Meaning the Libertarian, Kennedy (no relation to the dead guy) was the only true gun rights candidate.
    He wore his gun outside his pants for all the honest world to see. Pancho & Lefty

    The millions of people, armed in the holy cause of liberty, and in such a country as that which we possess, are invincible by any force which our enemy can send against us....There is no retreat but in submission and slavery! ...The war is inevitableľand let it come! I repeat it, Sir, let it come ůůůů. PATRICK HENRY speech 1776

  19. #19
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    across Death's Door on Washington Island, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    2,382

    Post imported post

    The Donkey wrote:
    I support safe and responsible gun ownership.

    Meaning what?
    Safety is the first act of security theater and the tyrant's tool because no one can be against safety.

    Remember that Bush-41 looked good, Bush-43 looked good and Sarah Palin still looks good. Be careful thinking that Brown (R) looks good standing next to Obungler on top of a Kennedy's grave - hell, even HankT would look good in that company. You might not want hesnither as penisident.

  20. #20
    Regular Member Alexcabbie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Alexandria, Virginia, United States
    Posts
    2,290

    Post imported post

    Oh, fuss fuss fuss! I swear some of you guys want to boil the ocean, I mean the perfect is the enemy of good enough. Brown may not be our "ideal gun candidate" but he's a damn sight better than Cuckoo Coakley. And the shock to the left is palpable. So is the elevation of the mood of the general public; I can sense it among my passengers.

    As I have said a hundred times, the Ratz know better than to directly assault the RTKBA community, so they had pinned their hopes on their precious "filibuster proof" majority to ram everything through. They literally elected a clown - the appalling Al Franken - after one hellacious battle in Minnesota to get it. With such a majority they had hoped to get Obamacare and other legislation passed which would have enabled bureaucrats to issue regulations which could directly or indirectly ultimately make owning a firearm impractical. Now that is gone.

    And, the shock of supposedly safely Democrat Massachussetts electing a Republican to a seat held by one of the worst Statist liberals in history for almost 50 years has got red and purple state Democrats backpedalling.

    Yeah the words "safe" and "responsible" raise red flags, but who here is against being "safe and responsible"?? Who could be?? The devil is in the derfinition, you know. To me being "safe and responsible" means keeping my boogerhook off the bangswitch until I am ready to fire, muzzle discipline, etc; and making sure my weapons don't get into the wrong hands (to include agents of the government). To the Bradyites "safe" means "only in the hands of the police" and "responsible" means turning in your firearms for destruction by the deadline.

    Right now the Massachussetts election means that the levee has been sandbagged. Now we shall see what Mr. Brown does. As Rush Limbaugh once said: "When a politician wants your vote he will tell you whatever he thinks you want to hear. So when considering a candidate for offfice, DON'T listen to what they SAY. You just watch what they do!!"

    Good advice IMHO.

  21. #21
    Campaign Veteran
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Lobelville, Tennessee, USA
    Posts
    2,615

    Post imported post

    The Donkey wrote:
    Republicans have only one answer to the real challenges of our time: "NO"

    Go DemonRatz!
    That's a rather hypocritical view. After all, what has been the DemonRatz answer when Republicans have offered alternative solutions to the healthcare problems?

    NO! NO! NO!

    And what happened to all that bi-partisanship the DemonRatz were promising when they wanted votes. Haven't seen any of that in re the Healthcare bills. The Republicans have been locked out of all the discussions and planning of it.

    Oh, andhow about that transparency Obama, Pelosi, and Ried promised? We haven't seen this much secrecy since the old USSR days.

  22. #22
    Regular Member We-the-People's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    White City, Oregon, USA
    Posts
    2,234

    Post imported post

    The ENTIRE point is that a liberal "safe seat", the one that was able to be held by a drunken, womanizing, unethical, murderer for 50 years has gone to a Republican at a time when it was absolutely necessary for the Republicans to pick up another seat in the Senate.

    The fate of America hinged on the results of the Massachusetts election. Had the democrat won, Soetoro, Reid, and Pelosi would have continued to ram their liberal socialist agenda down the thoats of an American citizenry which has already voiced their extreme displeasure, across all political boundaries, with the direction Barry Soetoro's administration is taking them.

    With the election won by a republican, the super majority held in the Sentate has vaporized before their eyes. Soetoro has seen the writing on teh wall and stepped back, Pelosi has not, and I haven't had time to check on any comments by Reid but I've heard he's now really concerned with "job creation".

    Perhaps the average Joe doesn't see it but had a republican candidate not won, thus giving the party enough votes to be a viable check against the unrestrained democrats, there is no doubt that the second amendment would have suffered. With ANY republican, even one who wasn't pro gun, it is magnitudes safer than it would have been with any democrat (and the remaining super majority in the Senate) in the seat.

    We must now turn the mid term elections into a complete route of the democratic party while simultaneously reminding the republican party that they need to stick to their conservative roots or be replaced.

    Yesterdays election may very well have saved America from an armed and violent revolution that may very well havce resulted from continued unrestrained transformation into a socialist country.
    "The Second Amendment speaks nothing to an unfettered Right". (Post # 100)
    "Restrictions are not infringements. Bans are infringements.--if it reaches beyond Reasonable bans". (Post # 103)
    Beretta92FSLady
    http://forum.opencarry.org/forums/sh...ons-Bill/page5

    Disclaimer: I am not a lawyer, nothing in any of my posts should be considered legal advice. If you need legal advice, consult a reputable attorney, not an internet forum.

  23. #23
    Campaign Veteran
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Lobelville, Tennessee, USA
    Posts
    2,615

    Post imported post

    We-the-People wrote:
    We must now turn the mid term elections into a complete route of the democratic party while simultaneously reminding the republican party that they need to stick to their conservative roots or be replaced.
    Can't be done, unfortunately. I think the senate will only have about a third of the seats up for re-election, and not all of those are currently filled by Dems. Not sure what the House looks like in regards to seats up for re-election.

    But, what we don't get a shot at in the midterms, we'll have more to target in 2012. You'll never get rid of all the Dems, but we might make them rather scarce, at lest for awhile until the Repub's mess up again.

  24. #24
    Regular Member Alexcabbie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Alexandria, Virginia, United States
    Posts
    2,290

    Post imported post

    Task Force 16 wrote:
    We-the-People wrote:
    We must now turn the mid term elections into a complete route of the democratic party while simultaneously reminding the republican party that they need to stick to their conservative roots or be replaced.
    Can't be done, unfortunately. I think the senate will only have about a third of the seats up for re-election, and not all of those are currently filled by Dems. Not sure what the House looks like in regards to seats up for re-election.

    But, what we don't get a shot at in the midterms, we'll have more to target in 2012. You'll never get rid of all the Dems, but we might make them rather scarce, at lest for awhile until the Repub's mess up again.
    Why has "O! Fortuna! been playing in my head every time I think about politics??

  25. #25
    Regular Member We-the-People's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    White City, Oregon, USA
    Posts
    2,234

    Post imported post

    Alexcabbie wrote:
    Task Force 16 wrote:
    We-the-People wrote:
    We must now turn the mid term elections into a complete route of the democratic party while simultaneously reminding the republican party that they need to stick to their conservative roots or be replaced.
    Can't be done, unfortunately. I think the senate will only have about a third of the seats up for re-election, and not all of those are currently filled by Dems. Not sure what the House looks like in regards to seats up for re-election.

    But, what we don't get a shot at in the midterms, we'll have more to target in 2012. You'll never get rid of all the Dems, but we might make them rather scarce, at lest for awhile until the Repub's mess up again.
    Why has "O! Fortuna! been playing in my head every time I think about politics??
    Well we're not going to get a majority but with the tide turned with a sucessful sweep of a few more "traditionally" democrat seats, those democrats who do survive or haven't been up for election will have to either change their tune (and truly work WITH republicans) or face the prospect of still further losses in 2012 and beyond.

    Of course if the republicans don't get their act in order and respond to the popular uprising of the voice of the people, we could end up see sawing back and forth for some time.

    On the bright side, so long as neither side has a super majority, if either side want's to be stupid they won't get anything done. Our system was set up by the founding fathers to do just that in order to make it diffcult to change things.

    Looks like even today, 220+ years after the Constitution was written, that they were pretty derned smart about how government, regardless of how well written the Constitution was, would get out of control should they make it simple to change things.
    "The Second Amendment speaks nothing to an unfettered Right". (Post # 100)
    "Restrictions are not infringements. Bans are infringements.--if it reaches beyond Reasonable bans". (Post # 103)
    Beretta92FSLady
    http://forum.opencarry.org/forums/sh...ons-Bill/page5

    Disclaimer: I am not a lawyer, nothing in any of my posts should be considered legal advice. If you need legal advice, consult a reputable attorney, not an internet forum.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •