Results 1 to 18 of 18

Thread: Mail from fiengold campain/ i don't trust this but looking for answers

  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Green County, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    147

    Mail from fiengold campain/ i don't trust this but looking for answers

    i am wondering is this more very cleaver miss quoting , using things he said out of context , i have never considered Russ as a Constitutional Defender personaly , and don't paticulartily care for his politics.

    do we have a Wisconsin carry inteview with any of the candidates of senate , do we have real answers to our questions the way we want to word them



    yesterday i recived a political mailer from the democratic party or wisconsin on behalf of rus Fiengold i tried to "" all the same things they had in the mailer , did anyone else get this
    if we don't have a solid set of answers to the questions from all cadidates should we form questions and try and get them answered as a group on the forum? does anyone know any one in the johnson campain that can get them answered.

    can we take a step to set records strait , i get the feeling Russ voted on some things that he knew were passing ether way so he could pull them out later as evidece to his record. or since the assult weapons ban ended becasue it was not renued is he cleverly saying by voting for it in the first place he was voting for it's end.

    so the mailer sais -

    on the front it sais "wisconsin hunters and gun owners can't trust Ron Johnson"

    then goes on to quote Ron Johnson as saying he "didn't have a problem" with licensing guns ,"like we license cars and stuff" he admitted he found the Constitution "hard to study" and that the second ammendment is "not something I've given a great deal of thought about."

    then on the back it is painting Fiengold as a "lifelong defender of the second amendment"

    giving speccific votes /record

    -principal co-sponsor who helped write wisconsin's own constitutional ammendment establishing the right to keep and bear arms

    - voted to allow citizens to carry loaded guns in national parks

    -voted to end ban on assult weapons

    -supported the recent suppreme court decition to overturn a handgun ban

  2. #2
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Washington Island, across Death's Door, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    9,193
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russ_Feingold#Gun_issues
    Gun issues

    Feingold has a mixed record on gun rights and gun control issues, voting in favor of certain gun control legislation, while also voting to expand certain gun rights. On February 24, 2004, he voted against S.1805, a bill that would have extended the Federal ban on semi-automatic firearms.[36] In 2002, he voted for allowing airline pilots to carry firearms in cockpits.[37] He has spoken in support of the interpretation that the Second Amendment pertains to an individual right to own firearms, and in opposition to proposals for handgun bans and mandatory firearms registration. Recently Feingold took this position when he sided with the conservative majority of the Senate and signed the Congressional amicus in District of Columbia v. Heller.[citation needed]

    On the other hand, he has consistently voted in favor of bills to require background checks for firearms purchases at gun shows, and to require that handguns be sold with trigger locks.

    In March 2004, he explained his position in a speech on the Senate floor:
    “ I have never accepted the proposition that the gun debate is a black and white issue, a matter of 'you're with us, or you're against us.' Instead, I have followed what I believe is a moderate course, faithful to the Constitution and to the realities of modern society. I believe that the Second Amendment was not an afterthought, that it has meaning today and must be respected. I support the right to bear arms for lawful purposes — for hunting and sport and for self-protection. Millions of Americans own firearms legally and we should not take action that tells them that they are second-class citizens or that their constitutional rights are under attack. At the same time, there are actions we can and should take to protect public safety that do not infringe on constitutional rights.[38]
    http://www.diffen.com/difference/Ron...ld#Gun_control

    Gun control

    Ron Johnson does not support licensing or registration of firearms. He believes strongly in the right to bear arms and has said that this will be a deciding factor in his vote on Supreme Court nominees.

    Feingold is also a supporter of the 2nd amendment but is in favor of certain limitations such as The Brady Bill (requiring background checks of gun purchasers), child safety locks and other measures to make firearms less dangerous to gun owners and their families, and requiring the gun industry, like other industries, to maintain its duty of "reasonable care" to its customers.
    Last edited by Doug Huffman; 10-13-2010 at 05:11 PM.

  3. #3
    Founder's Club Member protias's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    SE, WI
    Posts
    7,318
    I trust Feingold about as far as I can throw him.
    No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms. Thomas Jefferson (1776)

    If you go into a store, with a gun, and rob it, you have forfeited your right to not get shot - Joe Deters, Hamilton County (Cincinnati) Prosecutor

    I ask sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people except for a few politicians. - George Mason (father of the Bill of Rights and The Virginia Declaration of Rights)

  4. #4
    Regular Member Canard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    SE, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    148
    Quote Originally Posted by protias View Post
    I trust Feingold about as far as I can throw him.
    Problem is that's about how far I trust Johnson. Lesser of two evils again.

  5. #5
    Regular Member Hunting Mama's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Not deep enough in the Woods, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    92
    I couldn't throw him very far and I don't trust him that much.

  6. #6
    Regular Member johnny amish's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    High altitude of Vernon County, ,
    Posts
    1,025
    Quote Originally Posted by Canard View Post
    Problem is that's about how far I trust Johnson. Lesser of two evils again.
    Well which one do we get, the lesser of two evils, or the evil of the two lessers?

  7. #7
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Washington Island, across Death's Door, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    9,193
    Following the "lesser of two weevils" meme, that gave us Bush-41, I found this - very interesting

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Propaganda#Techniques

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Propaga...opaganda_model

    Some, there are fifty listed, are well practiced here.

    and this http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_cognitive_biases

    more than fifty!
    Last edited by Doug Huffman; 10-13-2010 at 07:13 PM.

  8. #8
    Regular Member anmut's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Stevens Point WI, ,
    Posts
    879
    Quote Originally Posted by Canard View Post
    Problem is that's about how far I trust Johnson. Lesser of two evils again.
    One step at a time. If and when Walker, Johnson and Duffy get elected I recommend sending them a letter or email. Remind them that you expect them to make the right decisions and if they don't they'll be seeing the door the next election.

    Vote them out over and over again until politicians finally realize that government works for us, not the other way around.

  9. #9
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Washington Island, across Death's Door, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    9,193
    Doesn't work that way. They say 'thank you for electing me' and then 'screw you and your tiny special interest' at re-election time.

  10. #10
    Regular Member anmut's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Stevens Point WI, ,
    Posts
    879
    Quote Originally Posted by Doug Huffman View Post
    Doesn't work that way. They say 'thank you for electing me' and then 'screw you and your tiny special interest' at re-election time.
    And they count on you having that give-up attitude to get away with it as well. That has to be the first thing to change.

  11. #11
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Washington Island, across Death's Door, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    9,193
    From our 'parent' organization http://www.vcdl.org/new/realpolitics.htm

    The Real Nature of Politics and Politicians

    America's System Works,

    But Not Why You Think!

    By Michael I. Rothfeld
    .
    Quote Originally Posted by Rothfeld
    The key will be for you and your grassroots activists to aggressively make politicians pay a price for their failure to pay attention to their constituents (you and your group). Every year, every session of the legislature, you must return pushing for your principles.
    That's BLEED political blood for screwing us.
    Last edited by Doug Huffman; 10-13-2010 at 07:16 PM.

  12. #12
    Regular Member JerryD's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    central Wisconsin
    Posts
    120
    Johnson hasn't done any harm to the 2nd but fiengold certainly has.

    Fiengold voting in favor of Supreme court justices that are not 2nd amendment friendly has most certainly done harm.
    I had to change my signature because you know who got upset about it.

  13. #13
    Regular Member anmut's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Stevens Point WI, ,
    Posts
    879
    Quote Originally Posted by Doug Huffman View Post
    From our 'parent' organization http://www.vcdl.org/new/realpolitics.htm

    .That's BLEED political blood for screwing us.
    Printed for a read tonight - thanks Doug

  14. #14
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Washington Island, across Death's Door, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    9,193
    http://www.yourwisconsinvote.org/mat...ide_8.5x11.pdf

    Survey Questions for: Governor, Lieutenant Governor,
    Attorney General, State Senate & State Assembly Candidates
    1. Preserve religious liberty and religious expression in Wisconsin.
    2. Give parents a refundable education tax credit for educational alternatives.
    3. Maintain Gov. Doyle’s statewide, same-sex only domestic partnership registry with select legal
    incidents typically given only to married couples.
    4. Protect home-based education and virtual schools as educational alternatives.
    5. In the state budget, appropriate monies from a designated state fund to balance the budget in
    an unrelated fund.
    6. Require legislative oversight of gaming compacts with Wisconsin Native American tribes.
    7. Legalize carrying a concealed firearm by adult citizens who do not have a felony conviction.
    8. Allow plans that cover elective abortions to participate in Wisconsin in state-based health
    insurance exchanges and receive taxpayer funding under the new health care law.
    9. Require that a person voting in Wisconsin present some form of photo identification.
    10. Appropriate state funds to subsidize human embryonic stem cell research.
    11. Reform current no-fault, no-contest divorce statutes for couples with minor children in the
    absence of abuse, abandonment or adultery.
    12. Protect the right of Wisconsin citizens to choose their own health care insurance plans or to
    choose to not carry health care insurance.

  15. #15
    Regular Member MKEgal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    in front of my computer, WI
    Posts
    4,426
    Quote Originally Posted by Doug Huffman View Post
    That's not particularly helpful because
    a) more people didn't respond than did
    b) the people who did are mostly republicans who anwered the way the group wanted them to
    c) that group is rather biased

    In fact, I recognized the name of their fearful leader from an email I was forwarded some time last year (IIRC), opposing the state law that protected nursing women from harassment. Sounds like they only want to protect some people, some freedoms, and are willing to let others go by the wayside. The only thing strange about that is that they're getting more and more open about it.

    That's why I'm having such a horribly hard time deciding who to vote for in the various races next month. No matter who wins, I'll lose some rights. It's a matter of deciding who's least bad and which rights I'm most willing to compromise.

    Why can't we have a Libertarian in office?

  16. #16
    Campaign Veteran
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    West Allis, WI, ,
    Posts
    299
    Quote Originally Posted by anmut View Post
    And they count on you having that give-up attitude to get away with it as well. That has to be the first thing to change.
    And that is the big difference with this year's election. TEA parties started almost immediately after the 2008 elections when liberals took over the state and federal governments. The gatherings were very impressive, especially given the center-right/right participants whom are generally considered to be the silent majority. I remember Charlie Sykes of AM620 in Milwaukee say after a few of them that only time will tell if this is truly a grass-roots movement or just a fad. Here we are two years later and the movement is still going strong. It is because of this movement that Feingold, Reid, Frank, and many others in the house are who would otherwise be shoe-ins are trailing in the polls. Even more of the incumbents decided that it wasn't worth trying to fight for their seats.

    Right now in WI, conservatives has the opportunity to take over all three branches of the state legislature. If this happens, we stand to benefit greatly WRT changing a lot of the onerous legislation put through by the grown up hippies and feel good people that have been running this state, and many parts of the country, for the last couple decades now. This will be our single greatest opportunity to change, or erase, many of the gun laws on the books that quite frankly are ineffective or just dumb.

    Feingold was a sure liberal vote when Reid needed it. If that is your cup of tea and he supports your causes, then fine, vote your conscience. As for me, I'm voting for the "new guy" Ron Johnson.
    Ecclesiastes 10:2 - "A wise man's heart inclines him to the right, but the fool's heart to the left."

  17. #17
    Founder's Club Member Brass Magnet's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Right Behind You!, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    2,818
    Quote Originally Posted by MKEgal View Post
    That's not particularly helpful because
    a) more people didn't respond than did
    b) the people who did are mostly republicans who anwered the way the group wanted them to
    c) that group is rather biased

    In fact, I recognized the name of their fearful leader from an email I was forwarded some time last year (IIRC), opposing the state law that protected nursing women from harassment. Sounds like they only want to protect some people, some freedoms, and are willing to let others go by the wayside. The only thing strange about that is that they're getting more and more open about it.

    That's why I'm having such a horribly hard time deciding who to vote for in the various races next month. No matter who wins, I'll lose some rights. It's a matter of deciding who's least bad and which rights I'm most willing to compromise.

    Why can't we have a Libertarian in office?
    It's too bad isn't it?
    I was hoping that the tea party wouldn't be latched onto by the neocons or that the republicans would be coaxed back to their roots. In any case, I try to do my work in the primaries to get a decent candidate in and usually end up voting republican, if only because they are more likely to maintain the status quo instead of change things for the worse.

    You seem to have fairly similar political leanings as I do so keep an eye out for candidates endorsed by the Republican Liberty Caucus, and of course, the libertarian party.

    As to the OP, after watching Ron Johnson in the debate he does seem very sincere. He's for free trade, wants to balance the budget, and get rid of the healthcare bill. All things that I'm generally in favor of. Everytime Russ would negatively say that Ron wanted to do this or that I took it as more of a positive and his smug little smirk makes me dislike him even more. He's all for the constitution, but only when it benifits him. For instance, he voted against reciprocity for CCW on 10th amendment grounds, but voted for the healthcare bill which vioulates that same amendment.

    Walker I trust a little less, but I'll vote for him over Barret any day and with the makeup of the legislature Walker won't be able to do too much, and Barret could cause too much damage.
    R[ƎVO˩]UTION

    ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ

    Lex malla, lex nulla

  18. #18
    Campaign Veteran Flipper's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    , Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    1,140
    Quote Originally Posted by Brass Magnet View Post
    It's too bad isn't it?
    I was hoping that the tea party wouldn't be latched onto by the neocons or that the republicans would be coaxed back to their roots. ..............Walker I trust a little less, but I'll vote for him over Barret any day and with the makeup of the legislature Walker won't be able to do too much, and Barret could cause too much damage.
    Agree....although I always look for fiscal conservatives and social moderates....they did exist...maybe they still do.
    Last edited by Flipper; 10-14-2010 at 01:55 PM.
    When in danger you can dial 911 and hope for the police to arrive a few minutes later armed with guns.
    Why do police carry guns?

    The Joyce Foundation funded firearm control empire:
    http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...lFundingR1.png

    "Everything that we see is a shadow cast by that which we do not see." - Martin Luther King Jr.

Posting Permissions

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