Screwed By The Cooch OR

ProShooter · May 29, 2010

imported post

buster81 wrote:

The Roanoke Times is pretty giddy about this.

http://blogs.roanoke.com/rtblogs/dancasey/2010/05/27/huh-gun-lobby-accuses-cuccinelli-of-selling-out/#comments

Gun lobby accuses Cuccinelli of selling out

See? Everyone who stands up yelling "the sky is falling" only gives idiots like Dan Casey something to write about...

6L6GC · May 29, 2010

imported post

you guys know of course that GMU is Ken's alma mater. Guess the dean had a chat with him and the fidelity to the constitution on which he campaigned suddenly was not as critical as he thought.

Tomahawk · May 29, 2010

imported post

longwatch said it. Politicians love it when they can screw you because they think you can't go anywhere else.

You guys act like Cuccinelli is your friend, maybe you've spoken to him, even ate lunch with him or something. But in the end, he is a politician in a position of authority over you, and it in his political interest to screw you to the maximum extent he can get away with it and still survive politically.

You don't talk to cops.

And you don't trust a politician.

So try not to be in denial and "give him a chance". As has been stated, VCDL already gave his office plenty of time to respond, and he blew us all off.

I think I'll go put my Virginia flag up. The one with the bare breast on the seal, not Cooch's G-rated pansy version.

Grapeshot · May 29, 2010

imported post

Much remains to be seen/heard on this.

IMHO - way too soon to be burning bridges.

Yata hey

VApatriot · May 29, 2010

imported post

Grapeshot wrote:

Much remains to be seen/heard on this.

IMHO - way too soon to be burning bridges.

Yata hey

+1

sccrref · May 29, 2010

imported post

Grapeshot wrote:

Much remains to be seen/heard on this.

IMHO - way too soon to be burning bridges.

Yata hey

No reason not to call things the way we see them. It is never a bad idea to let the politicians know when we are not happy with the way they vote or the things that come out of their mouth. It definitely puts him on notice that we are not happy with what he said or what he intends to do. If he straightens up, then we can voice our support. Also, throw him a bone. I agree with what you did for issue a, b and c. However, for issue d, you have missed the mark.

peter nap · May 30, 2010

imported post

sccrref wrote:

Grapeshot wrote:

Much remains to be seen/heard on this.

IMHO - way too soon to be burning bridges.

Yata hey

Click to expand...

No reason not to call things the way we see them. It is never a bad idea to let the politicians know when we are not happy with the way they vote or the things that come out of their mouth. It definitely puts him on notice that we are not happy with what he said or what he intends to do. If he straightens up, then we can voice our support. Also, throw him a bone. I agree with what you did for issue a, b and c. However, for issue d, you have missed the mark.

That's very true Sccref, however "We" is a subjective word.
"We" is where the gun lobby get it's power, when "We" starts to mean "I", that power is lost.

6L6GC · May 30, 2010

imported post

Tomahawk wrote:

longwatch said it. Politicians love it when they can screw you because they think you can't go anywhere else.

You guys act like Cuccinelli is your friend, maybe you've spoken to him, even ate lunch with him or something. But in the end, he is a politician in a position of authority over you, and it in his political interest to screw you to the maximum extent he can get away with it and still survive politically.

You don't talk to cops.

And you don't trust a politician.

So try not to be in denial and "give him a chance". As has been stated, VCDL already gave his office plenty of time to respond, and he blew us all off.

I think I'll go put my Virginia flag up. The one with the bare breast on the seal, not Cooch's G-rated pansy version.

A+ 100% agreed. He is a politician. And, like you said, dont trust a politician

Grapeshot · May 30, 2010

imported post

sccrref wrote:

Grapeshot wrote:

Much remains to be seen/heard on this.

IMHO - way too soon to be burning bridges.

Yata hey

Click to expand...

No reason not to call things the way we see them. It is never a bad idea to let the politicians know when we are not happy with the way they vote or the things that come out of their mouth. It definitely puts him on notice that we are not happy with what he said or what he intends to do. If he straightens up, then we can voice our support. Also, throw him a bone. I agree with what you did for issue a, b and c. However, for issue d, you have missed the mark.

I understand the dissatisfaction with the verbiage, but some have called for his head on a platter and that they would never support him again. That IMHO is overreaction.

If Ken C's rating has moved from 100% (golden boy) to 90%, he is still very much in the pro column and we ought to keep the channels open between us. Communicating through a closed door is most unsatisfactory.

Too it remains to be seen what is below the surface, behind the scenes, on this issue.

Some restraint is not a bad thing. Shots sent too quickly down range cannot be recalled.

Just my 1 1/2 cents worth.

Yata hey

Repeater · May 30, 2010

imported post

6L6GC wrote:

A+ 100% agreed. He is a politician. And, like you said, don't trust a politician

Cuccinelli the politician

The saint of the social busybodies, Virginia Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli, sponsored a brief in the DiGiacinto v. the Rectors and Visitors of GMU case. The wording in the brief came eerily close to a page from the Brady Bunch’s playbook. It went so far as to assert that preschoolers would be at risk if a gun owner carried into a campus building. This after he told the Virginia Citizens Defense League last year the case was “indefensible.”

Well, yeah, it was indefensible, thus the emotion-laden, “think of the children” far-out scenarios. This is the page from the Bradys — if you can’t use logic, then scream with emotion, invent situations, and portray gun owners as idiots who turn from polite citizens off campus to raging lunatics the moment they step on campus.

Guess the Brady’s made a bigger campaign contribution.

There’s one good from this, albeit a small one. Cuccinelli’s silent. That is also unusual.

It seems someone else sees it your way.

richarcm · May 31, 2010

imported post

Although I disagree with Ken on this particular issue.....I think it is ENTIRELY premature and excessively reactionary to completely write him off. He has been our biggest allie on Obamacare, we know that he is at heart pro gun and will side with us on MOST gun issues and we are supposed to throw all of that away because of one relatively minor disagreement on gun policy at George Mason University?

I find this all a bit silly. No we should NOT be happy about this. But I think it is too early to send him to a firing squad. Thats crazy.

Those of you looking for and only accepting the PERFECT politician are setting yourselves up to only always being disappointed. Nobody is perfect and even moreso not everyone is going to agree with what you think. Not me, not most people on this board, not every politician. If you are only accepting of the PERFECT politician then perhaps what you REALLY seek is anarchy?

ProShooter · May 31, 2010

imported post

richarcm wrote:

Although I disagree with Ken on this particular issue.....I think it is ENTIRELY premature and excessively reactionary to completely write him off. He has been our biggest allie on Obamacare, we know that he is at heart pro gun and will side with us on MOST gun issues and we are supposed to throw all of that away because of one relatively minor disagreement on gun policy at George Mason University?

I find this all a bit silly. No we should NOT be happy about this. But I think it is too early to send him to a firing squad. Thats crazy.

Those of you looking for and only accepting the PERFECT politician are setting yourselves up to only always being disappointed. Nobody is perfect and even moreso not everyone is going to agree with what you think. Not me, not most people on this board, not every politician. If you are only accepting of the PERFECT politician then perhaps what you REALLY seek is anarchy?

+1 Well stated.

richarcm · May 31, 2010

imported post

ProShooter wrote:

richarcm wrote:

Although I disagree with Ken on this particular issue.....I think it is ENTIRELY premature and excessively reactionary to completely write him off. He has been our biggest allie on Obamacare, we know that he is at heart pro gun and will side with us on MOST gun issues and we are supposed to throw all of that away because of one relatively minor disagreement on gun policy at George Mason University?

I find this all a bit silly. No we should NOT be happy about this. But I think it is too early to send him to a firing squad. Thats crazy.

Those of you looking for and only accepting the PERFECT politician are setting yourselves up to only always being disappointed. Nobody is perfect and even moreso not everyone is going to agree with what you think. Not me, not most people on this board, not every politician. If you are only accepting of the PERFECT politician then perhaps what you REALLY seek is anarchy?

Click to expand...

+1 Well stated.

BTW...the far left LOVES that you are writing of Ken so quickly. Now they can use it as ammo against conservatism in general.

'Ken Cuccinelli. Too far right for even gun activists. Virginia. We can do better.'

Tess · May 31, 2010

imported post

Tomahawk said it well. Somehow, Cuccinelli has put on some Bill-Clinton-type charisma (which I never could see in either him or Clinton) and convinced many he is their "friend."

It's one thing to have a friend who's a politician. It's quite another to think that will make him any less a politician.

richarcm · May 31, 2010

imported post

Tess wrote:

Tomahawk said it well. Somehow, Cuccinelli has put on some Bill-Clinton-type charisma (which I never could see in either him or Clinton) and convinced many he is their "friend."

It's one thing to have a friend who's a politician. It's quite another to think that will make him any less a politician.

That is obviously true of ALL politicians to SOME degree. I doubt you will get much debate on that from much of anyone. But I think that it is assumed, based mostly off of an agreement on a GEORGE MASON UNIVERSITY POLICY, that he is a total sell out. I think the degree of the policy must be taken into account...its George Mason...as well as his attitude towards guns as a whole. Throughout not just his 5 months as AG but throughout his entire life.

Should we be mad and hold him accountable and expect an explanation. Heck to the yes!!! But I still believe, perhaps I have smoken too much of the crack, that he will always NET us an overwhelming amount of support on gun rights. Just his fight alone on Obamacare....how indirectly applicable is THAT to gun rights?

Tess · May 31, 2010

imported post

richarcm wrote:

Tess wrote:

Tomahawk said it well. Somehow, Cuccinelli has put on some Bill-Clinton-type charisma (which I never could see in either him or Clinton) and convinced many he is their "friend."

It's one thing to have a friend who's a politician. It's quite another to think that will make him any less a politician.

Click to expand...

That is obviously true of ALL politicians to SOME degree. I doubt you will get much debate on that from much of anyone. But I think that it is assumed, based mostly off of an agreement on a GEORGE MASON UNIVERSITY POLICY, that he is a total sell out. I think the degree of the policy must be taken into account...its George Mason...as well as his attitude towards guns as a whole. Throughout not just his 5 months as AG but throughout his entire life.

Should we be mad and hold him accountable and expect an explanation. Heck to the yes!!! But I still believe, perhaps I have smoken too much of the crack, that he will always NET us an overwhelming amount of support on gun rights. Just his fight alone on Obamacare....how indirectly applicable is THAT to gun rights?

It's not just the fact that he submitted the brief (whether or not he wrote it is irrelevant, since it came from his office). The additional fact is that the wording comes directly from Brady Bunch talking points. This is not someone who has any intention of being a "friend" to responsible, gun-owning citizens.

And if he's such a principled man, why is he remaining silent?

richarcm · May 31, 2010

imported post

Tess wrote:

richarcm wrote:

Tess wrote:

Tomahawk said it well. Somehow, Cuccinelli has put on some Bill-Clinton-type charisma (which I never could see in either him or Clinton) and convinced many he is their "friend."

It's one thing to have a friend who's a politician. It's quite another to think that will make him any less a politician.

Click to expand...

That is obviously true of ALL politicians to SOME degree. I doubt you will get much debate on that from much of anyone. But I think that it is assumed, based mostly off of an agreement on a GEORGE MASON UNIVERSITY POLICY, that he is a total sell out. I think the degree of the policy must be taken into account...its George Mason...as well as his attitude towards guns as a whole. Throughout not just his 5 months as AG but throughout his entire life.

Should we be mad and hold him accountable and expect an explanation. Heck to the yes!!! But I still believe, perhaps I have smoken too much of the crack, that he will always NET us an overwhelming amount of support on gun rights. Just his fight alone on Obamacare....how indirectly applicable is THAT to gun rights?

Click to expand...

It's not just the fact that he submitted the brief (whether or not he wrote it is irrelevant, since it came from his office). The additional fact is that the wording comes directly from Brady Bunch talking points. This is not someone who has any intention of being a "friend" to responsible, gun-owning citizens.

And if he's such a principled man, why is he remaining silent?

Well if a single instance means that he is = to Brady then surely we can also find single instances that = ken to the NRA? VCDL? How is he now, because of this relatively small policy, now the equivalent of the Brady Bunch? I think that is slightly exaggerated. The wording...okay sure. Make him answer to it. Keep on him. Keep the fire hot!!! But keep him in perspective. I know you Tess are probably not fond of him because he is so conservative. So his other events in the news probably have something to do with you wanting to crucify him. Thats fine. But I just don't see where this is SUCH a big deal (although possibly symbolic of future problems?) to where we must completely rid Virginia of him. Thats absurd. In my opinion. For however little its worth....

The point is I dont know why he did what he did. But it is GEORGE MASON UNIVERSITY #1 and #2 a drop in the bucket compared to how he has historically sided with gun owners.

But if the consensus is only that we demand an answer...then I'm 100% in agreement! I want to know what this was all about.

peter nap · May 31, 2010

imported post

Tess wrote:

Tomahawk said it well. Somehow, Cuccinelli has put on some Bill-Clinton-type charisma (which I never could see in either him or Clinton) and convinced many he is their "friend."

It's one thing to have a friend who's a politician. It's quite another to think that will make him any less a politician.

I'm curious Tess...You've had a hanging noose in Cuccinelli's neck size since lomg before the election.

Who should we have elected and how do you think we should handle Cuccinelli now?

richarcm · May 31, 2010

imported post

peter nap wrote:

Tess wrote:

Tomahawk said it well. Somehow, Cuccinelli has put on some Bill-Clinton-type charisma (which I never could see in either him or Clinton) and convinced many he is their "friend."

It's one thing to have a friend who's a politician. It's quite another to think that will make him any less a politician.

Click to expand...

I'm curious Tess...You've had a hanging noose in Cuccinelli's neck size since lomg before the election.

Who should we have elected and how do you think we should handle Cuccinelli now?

I think it has less to do with this particular issue than it does that he is just a conservative and that bothers her. This is an easy situation for her to beat him over the head. Not that he hasn't given us one or two already....

I for one have been mildly disappointed in both Ken and Bob. I was hoping more for an unapologetic, unpolitically correct leader like Chris Christie.

peter nap · May 31, 2010

imported post

richarcm wrote:

Tess wrote:

richarcm wrote:

Tess wrote:

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

The point is I dont know why he did what he did. But it is GEORGE MASON UNIVERSITY #1 and #2 a drop in the bucket compared to how he has historically sided with gun owners.

But if the consensus is only that we demand an answer...then I'm 100% in agreement! I want to know what this was all about.

Well said but I'm gonna get an end-of-the-world size tub of popcorn waiting for the responses.:lol:

Screwed By The Cooch OR

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Legendary Warrior

Regular Member

Regular Member

Accomplished Advocate

Regular Member

Legendary Warrior

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Founder's Club Member

Regular Member

Founder's Club Member

Regular Member

Accomplished Advocate

Regular Member

Accomplished Advocate