Is the pro-2nd Amendment Vote Taken for Granted?

[CampingJosh]

Originally Posted by al45lc

You act as though you have a choice other than the two evils. You don't.
Whether you vote or not, one or the other will be thrust upon you, and if that be the case, wouldn't you rather have it be the lesser?

If I see a chance to kill one of the two evils so that it will be replaced with something good, why wouldn't I choose that?

Political parties die when they become ineffective. They become ineffective when they quit winning elections. We can cut the head off of the beast, and you're asking me to pretend that's not an option because because it doesn't take effect during this next election cycle. Too bad. That's what I mean when I say "I will not take the short term view."

I am in favor of destroying the Republican Party. At this point, I have no confidence that it can be returned to representing freedom. I'm not even sure I'm even convinced the Rs are the lesser of the two evils anymore. You know, spit out the lukewarm.

[gcalloway]

I do not believe the 2nd Amendment granted any rights. Those rights are mine for the simple reason I was born a free man and the 2nd Amendment only acknowledged that those rights exist. As far as the choices for President, I am growing ever more weary of not having someone to vote for, but only someone to vote againist. I consider myself a conservative with conservative values, but do not think gay's getting married would in any way affect my well being or change the way I live. The women's rights issues on contraception and abortion are just that women's rights issue. I do not personally believe abortion is the answer, but that is an issue for the women not old fat men like me. That said I would vote for a rusty tomatato can before I would vote for Obama.

[BlackEagle]

This last election in the UK, I was given a ballot paper. The paper had the symbols of all the parties who had candidates for the House of Commons running in my area. There were about 8 different parties. The list of parties included Labour, Conservative (Tory), Liberal Democrat, Scottish National Party, Socialist, Communist, Greens, United Kingdom Independance Party, a Christian party, and a few others. You vote for a party in this country, not the candidate. The party that gets the most people elected to the House of Commons elects the Prime Minister from their number. This last election no one party had a clear majority so a coalition government has been set up between the Conservative and Liberal Democrat parties. We now have two horses pulling the wagon, but often trying to pull in different directions. I cast my vote for one of the minor parties that didn't stand a chance of winning but which I agreed with most.

A multiplicity of parties has its own set of problems.

[whirley]

Originally Posted by CampingJosh

Voting for someone other than the Republican is NOT a vote for Obama; that's a non sequitur. To think that's the case, you have to work from the assumption that no one would intentionally vote for Obama.

Is a vote for the Green Party or the Communist Party USA a vote for Obama? Of course not; that voter, if limited to only Democratic or Republican, would likely choose the Democratic candidate.

I would rather vote for Obama than Romney, Santorum, or Gingrich. If the Republican Party wins running any of those guys, then the party is in even worse shape moving forward.

Continuing to support the lesser of two evils ensures that you will have two evils eternally. That is the political reality that I'm facing, and I will not take the short term view.

Voting for Obama is just voting for an eventual dictatorship and the death of our Constitution. He and his supporters already have stated they will bypass or ignore our Constitution and the laws based on it. If you beleive that Obama and his ilk are going to protect your/our rights, take another puff on that hop pipe you're smoking. If Obama et al have the best interests of the country in mind, WHY did they spend 18 months forcing through a health care bill no one wanted instead of working to get over 10% of the population back to work?

[BlackEagle]

Electing the president is one thing. The members of the houses of congress balance his power, so even if the president doesn't fit the bill perfectly, any legislation he proposes needs to go through Congress. So the congressional elections will also be important. Replacing senators such as Lugar and other RINO's needs to be a focus also.

Unless he plays dirty and uses agencies to make regulations do what he can't get passed as laws legally, as the current administration is doing, along with other nasty appointment tricks.

[CampingJosh]

Originally Posted by whirley

Voting for Obama is just voting for an eventual dictatorship and the death of our Constitution. He and his supporters already have stated they will bypass or ignore our Constitution and the laws based on it. If you beleive that Obama and his ilk are going to protect your/our rights, take another puff on that hop pipe you're smoking. If Obama et al have the best interests of the country in mind, WHY did they spend 18 months forcing through a health care bill no one wanted instead of working to get over 10% of the population back to work?

I'm under no delusion that Obama is on my side. But I have no delusion that Mitt, Newt, or Rick would be on my side either.

[al45lc]

Originally Posted by CampingJosh

If I see a chance to kill one of the two evils so that it will be replaced with something good, why wouldn't I choose that?

Political parties die when they become ineffective. They become ineffective when they quit winning elections. We can cut the head off of the beast, and you're asking me to pretend that's not an option because because it doesn't take effect during this next election cycle. Too bad. That's what I mean when I say "I will not take the short term view."

I am in favor of destroying the Republican Party. At this point, I have no confidence that it can be returned to representing freedom. I'm not even sure I'm even convinced the Rs are the lesser of the two evils anymore. You know, spit out the lukewarm.

I'm not asking you to pretend anything, there is no Head of the Beast to cut off. That "Beast" you speak of are the PEOPLE, they may not be YOUR kind of people, but they are the voting block you must deal with.
You seem obsessed with restoring some view of the Country you have as you think it once was, that never really existed. The New Deal showed us that in desperate times, many will go with the flow. And views today are far more liberal than in that time.
True, we once were far more Christian and Conservative in views, but that's gone, and it won't be coming back soon. And not without a fight.
Too many have bought into the Big Brother scheme, now the best you can hope for is that they will see the damage being done and turn back, or as I believe to be the case, delay that scheme for as long as possible.
Destruction of the Republican party will leave a void that will not be filled soon, and not by the Libertarians, they simply don't appeal to the swing voters.
Meanwhile, the Demmies will further garner and consolidate their power base, until they will be so strong as to be undefeatable without major bloodshed.
Perhaps this is the prophecy of Jefferson's "Tree of Liberty" remark.
Fact is, you may win one battle in the destruction of the Repubs, but you will lose the war.

[al45lc]

BlackEagle's points are valid, and why I'm dead set against a third party.
When a third party becomes viable, conservatives will be split and alienated from the swing voters, and we will perpetually lose all elections.
Better to have a platform in power that you can associate and deal with, than one that you at at odds with in all repects.
They will ignore us, and leave us out in the cold. If not outright squelch us.

[graehaven]

Originally Posted by whirley

Voting for Obama is just voting for an eventual dictatorship and the death of our Constitution. He and his supporters already have stated they will bypass or ignore our Constitution and the laws based on it. If you beleive that Obama and his ilk are going to protect your/our rights, take another puff on that hop pipe you're smoking. If Obama et al have the best interests of the country in mind, WHY did they spend 18 months forcing through a health care bill no one wanted instead of working to get over 10% of the population back to work?

You are conveniently forgetting the damage perpetrated by the Republicans on this country for the last decade. They are two sides of the same coin (save a select few) who constantly sell out the conservative voter. The republicans share equal blame.

They are quietly voting us toward a dictatorship, regardless of party. It will be a dictator in the WH with either an R or a D next to their name. The party names are meaningless now - they are both moving in the same direction.

[pickenup]

Originally Posted by graehaven

You are conveniently forgetting the damage perpetrated by the Republicans on this country for the last decade. They are two sides of the same coin (save a select few) who constantly sell out the conservative voter. The republicans share equal blame.

They are quietly voting us toward a dictatorship, regardless of party. It will be a dictator in the WH with either an R or a D next to their name. The party names are meaningless now - they are both moving in the same direction.

^^^This^^^

[al45lc]

While this discussion is all well and good, I've yet to see a single viable suggestion for how we get back on track in America by going any other party than the republicans.
The fact is that any third party or independent candidate doesn't stand a chance to win in this political environment, and the demmies would do away with our guns (among other things) in a heartbeat if they could.
If you wish to argue that, fine. But the recent polls show that Paul hasn't a chance, just as I predicted. The writing was on the wall, with the swing voters.
So what's the answer for our immediate future, and most importantly, our childrens and grand-childrens future?
This, I think, is the REAL kettle of fish.
Do we try to bring back what once was with an established party that has a power base, or chuck it all in and go rogue?
Many here speak to the inevitability of our degradation into socialism, yet seem willing to 'throw out the baby with the bathwater' in regards to the only party that has a chance.
Time now to think of the future generations, as opposed to our own personal objections to the way things are.

[raven818]

Originally Posted by graehaven

You are conveniently forgetting the damage perpetrated by the Republicans on this country for the last decade. They are two sides of the same coin (save a select few) who constantly sell out the conservative voter. The republicans share equal blame.

They are quietly voting us toward a dictatorship, regardless of party. It will be a dictator in the WH with either an R or a D next to their name. The party names are meaningless now - they are both moving in the same direction.

Let us not forget, the dems had total control of congress for the last two years Bush was president. And, the dems have had control of the senate, and the presidency, for the last three years.

Making for a total of five years. The " recession " started taking hold in 2007, thanks to barney and franks putting a home in every pot. But there's some good news.

DC and the banks have figured out, and put in place, a new " faster means " of getting folks out of their repossessed home. The same story said, there will be in excess of one million homes repossessed in 2012.

2012, minus 5 years, adds up to, 2007, the beginning of total democratic control. The dems can blame what ever they choose on the evil right, but it's been their ballgame from the get-go, and they've brought us to the mess we are in now..and to add some salt to that open wound, I just heard on the news... we are looking at a 1.2 TRILLION deficit for 2012 ( per the GAO ).

The GAO said obozo grossly understated the figures released by his people.

[langenc]

Originally Posted by pickenup

What ANTI-gun legislation has our current president passed?

He has banned the reimportation of nearly a MILLION M 1 Garands..


The problem as I see it-I always end up voting against someone-never for someone.

A little evil is like a little pregnant. The current crop of candidates, except one, have grown quite a lot. The news media will never allow the one (Ron Paul) to get elected. Too bad we allow them to run the elections.

I was in Harrisburg in 94. I believe. There was a good sized rally (July 4th) and Rick Santorum was telling us all about his position on guns. He was running for the senate, the first time. I dont believe he made all his promises good!!


From post #37 we get the following:

DC and the banks have figured out, and put in place, a new " faster means " of getting folks out of their repossessed home. The same story said, there will be in excess of one million homes repossessed in 2012.


I understand but remember that 800,000 of those owners (or more) should never have been allowed to buy the home. A janitor around here, even w/ union contract, cant afford a $300,000 home.

[CampingJosh]

Originally Posted by al45lc

I'm not asking you to pretend anything, there is no Head of the Beast to cut off. That "Beast" you speak of are the PEOPLE, they may not be YOUR kind of people, but they are the voting block you must deal with.
You seem obsessed with restoring some view of the Country you have as you think it once was, that never really existed. The New Deal showed us that in desperate times, many will go with the flow. And views today are far more liberal than in that time.
True, we once were far more Christian and Conservative in views, but that's gone, and it won't be coming back soon. And not without a fight.

I don't care to "restore" the government of our country to a conservative view (again, I am not a conservative). And we agree that a "conservative" government never did exist in our country.
The view pushed by the Republican Party now would have been viewed as wholly radical at the time Bill Clinton was President. Romney, Gingrich, and Santorum are not conservative as we understood the word fifteen years ago.

If you really believe that the political parties are representing the people who vote for them, why are the politicians so obsessed with misleading the public? Why is the most massive government power-grab in my lifetime titled "The Patriot Act"? Because "The Cutting the Legs out from under the Fourth Amendment Act" doesn't win you re-election. But that's exactly what the act is.
They lie about who they are. They lie about what they're doing. When I believed the Republican politicians meant what they said, I consistently voted for them, too. I was in the same place that the vast majority of our fellow citizens are. But now that I'm aware, I can't un-see the truth. And I can't act like I don't see it.

I don't care to force people who have chosen for themselves not to be Christians to act as though they were Christians. I don't support legislating morality. I don't support drug laws. I don't support gun laws. I don't support traditional marriage laws. I don't think that our government has any role in determining how we live our private lives (and as long as it's not actually interfering with some else's life, it's private).
I support freedom and personal accountability. Those are both views that the Rs and Ds ignore--speaking broadly, as their are individual members of each party that do not match what I'm describing--so I'm not going to support either of those parties.

Too many have bought into the Big Brother scheme, now the best you can hope for is that they will see the damage being done and turn back, or as I believe to be the case, delay that scheme for as long as possible.
Destruction of the Republican party will leave a void that will not be filled soon, and not by the Libertarians, they simply don't appeal to the swing voters.
Meanwhile, the Demmies will further garner and consolidate their power base, until they will be so strong as to be undefeatable without major bloodshed.
Perhaps this is the prophecy of Jefferson's "Tree of Liberty" remark.
Fact is, you may win one battle in the destruction of the Repubs, but you will lose the war.

The Rs and Ds both represent their own power interests. That's it. And that's why I want to destroy the weaker party. I want to create a power vacuum so that some other party has to rise. I don't care if it's not the Libertarian Party does the job; I'm not a member of the Libertarian Party, either.
Side Note: But I do think that--with some branding work--the Libertarian Party could easily fill the vacuum created by the implosion of the Republican Party. If they explain their views in an easy-to-understand way and stay on message, they could win elections now. How many Libertarian voters are there?

I just want a government that leaves me alone. Romney's administration, Santorum's administration, Gingrich's administration, and Obama's administration all fail that test. And if I'm going to lose anyway, I might as well try to send the message about what I do want rather than about what I don't.

And, historically speaking, when a major political party in the US self-destructs, the new party that rises up after it tends to have more influence in our government than did the party that was destroyed. Remember, when the Federalist Party waned, the Democratic-Republican Party split in two. I'm not afraid that the modern Democratic Party will somehow become "undefeatable."

[graehaven]

+1 Josh!

I want a government that follows the frickin' constitution, and doesn't seize any other powers.

[raven818]

The Patriot Act was put in place by Bush. bHo screamed all through his campaign that it had to go.

He not only didn't get rid of it, he's expanded on it.

al awlaki absolutely needed to be put to death. But, killing an American citizen without due process, IMO, was the worse thing I've personally ever heard of, in regard to a POTUS, in my entire life. Nothing else comes close.

I was pleased when it was announced. Since then, I thought it over, often. I don't know where else this kind of " authority " can lead. One could expect it from the Russians, and the rest of those not mentioned as being part of " The Evil Axis ".

bHo, I'm sure, thought of himself as some kind of hero for approving it. But, IMO, take everything he's done in his attempt to " change " America for the worse, and they don't add up to the damage he did, with that one single act.

The next thing we'll find out is, he's passed legislation that says all Americans are subject to arrest, w/o being charged, and can be held indefinitely, without the ability to seek counsel.

Patriot Act? Not even in the same ballpark. Just as well, the games rigged anyway. bHo=1, America=0

[Old Guy]

The problem is that the parties have been taken over by the progressive movement. The only way to possibly salvage this thing is to elect Constitutionalists. However, we need not fool ourselves that this thing can be quickly fixed. It has taken over 100 years of concerted effort to get it into this mess.

[pickenup]

Originally Posted by pickenup

What ANTI-gun legislation has our current president passed?

Originally Posted by langenc

He has banned the reimportation of nearly a MILLION M 1 Garands..

That was done by "executive order" it did not go through the "legislative" process.

Since we are talking about gun bans, we can talk about when BUSH permanently banned 43 DIFFERENT TYPES of firearms from importation. We will never know how many MILLIONS of firearms that potentially affected.

[CampingJosh]

Originally Posted by raven818

The next thing we'll find out is, he's passed legislation that says all Americans are subject to arrest, w/o being charged, and can be held indefinitely, without the ability to seek counsel.

You didn't hear? He already did that. It's called the National Defense Authorization Act, and it authorizes the President to use the military to arrest and imprison US citizens indefinitely without trial. Read more here.

[raven818]

Originally Posted by CampingJosh

You didn't hear? He already did that. It's called the National Defense Authorization Act, and it authorizes the President to use the military to arrest and imprison US citizens indefinitely without trial. Read more here.

Yeah, I heard. I just wanted to remind those who heard/read about it, that it was out there.

Obama’s signing statement seems to suggest he already believes he has the authority to indefinitely detain Americans—he just never intends to use it,”

Maybe(?) that's what he needs his personal Civilian Military for.

Sure, he's gonna get rid of The Patriot Act, close Gitmo, bring the country together as one, and all the rest of the promises to America he's made, and broken.

School books and history books are being rewritten, and as an example of how well that's working, our country's Snipers have never heard of Hitlers SS.

I'm sitting here gritting my teeth, and I'm going to end up with another one of " those " headaches....what the hell for.

[Munch]

DING DING DING, WE HAVE A WINNER Congrats 45auto. You asked the right question! Now, we, as gun owners need to figure out that it isn't the party you vote. More so the person and the ideals that they hold dear. Why don't all of us throw our hats into the next campaign? I hear more logic and sound reasoning here than I have heard from politicians in more than a decade.

[CampingJosh]

Originally Posted by raven818

Yeah, I heard. I just wanted to remind those who heard/read about it, that it was out there.

I figured you knew; otherwise that was incredibly prophetic.

I mostly wanted to post a link to that article so that others would be aware. Can't put information out there too many times.

[BlackEagle]

Thanks for the link. In Jack's link 0 refers to having high school and university students do community service to do something like promote a volunteer or community spirit...the university students would get financial reward.

It puts me in mind of Hitler's youth movement.

[raven818]

Originally Posted by CampingJosh

I figured you knew; otherwise that was incredibly prophetic.

I mostly wanted to post a link to that article so that others would be aware. Can't put information out there too many times.

That was the purpose of my " prophecy ". I think I'll probably allude to it 70-11 more times before November.

Bump.

[gun runner]

Well then why did the people vote for Obozo?