PDA

View Full Version : Voice your opinion on Change.gov


JohnJW
11-07-2008, 8:29 PM
For what it's worth there's little box on top of the AWB urban policy page that says,

http://change.gov/page/-/wrapper/img/ideas_sidebar.gif
http://change.gov/agenda/urbanpolicy/

After you are done laughing it doesn't hurt to click and write something nice, polite, and logical on why you are against AWB.

Seriously, be nice and polite because:
a) you voted for him
b) he is the president-elect
c) like quite a few of boardmembers has pointed out, we don't really know this guy and we don't know if he's the vindictive type or not.

Thank you.

Linh
11-07-2008, 8:39 PM
I know that he has no compassion.

Facts:
1. He's a millionaire
2. He makes at least or close to a million this year
3. His grandma lives in a shack in kenya
4. His brother lives on a dollar a day

So for the poor americans that think he will save them LOL he doesn't even help out his own family. Yes I'm a minority and I hate that word. I'm against affirmative action. People should be hired on their knowledge/skills not on their skin color or because they are short on certain type of people.

We all have an equal opportunity in america unless you're handicap or something.

scfast
11-07-2008, 10:15 PM
For what it's worth there's little box on top of the AWB urban policy page that says,

a) you voted for him
b) he is the president-elect


Thank you.a)Huh?
b)He's not my president

Linh
11-07-2008, 10:33 PM
Personally I rather have another term of President Bush.

dreyna14
11-07-2008, 10:40 PM
Yes I'm a minority and I hate that word.

I am the ultimate in minority. Out of all the people that ever lived, are living, or ever will live, there's only one me. :(

freakshow10mm
11-07-2008, 10:51 PM
I'd rather have Hillary in office than this douche. At least we have history and not a newbie.

Tumerboy
11-07-2008, 10:52 PM
LOL you guys are missing the point. Instead of *****ing to the choir here, click that link, and ***** to the man himself. If you don't agree with what he's doing, TELL HIM. As John pointed out, be polite and relevant. Half-cocked rants will just add fuel to the other side. But the more people we have, emailing them, saying that we don't want another AWB, the better.

JohnJW
11-08-2008, 2:15 AM
Forgot to add that your opinion may weight more if your zip code is from one of those "battle ground" states so feel free to lookup some zip code. For the more dedicated, write from multiple email addresses and zip codes.

Democracy is a popularity contest these days and Change.gov could be a marketing survey tool to judge the political wind, so let your voice be heard.

DedEye
11-08-2008, 3:07 AM
Anyone want to work out a nice, eloquent form letter that we can copy/paste to the site? I agree with the others saying that writing him is a far better use of our time than whining and screaming to people who already agree with us. Let's be proactive and convince him that another ban is political suicide, ineffective and a waste of time. We know it, let's make sure he does.

Hell, even if we don't change his mind, then hopefully we can at least make him recognize the political danger of angering such a large percentage of the electorate.

hawk1
11-08-2008, 8:43 AM
Anyone want to work out a nice, eloquent form letter that we can copy/paste to the site? I agree with the others saying that writing him is a far better use of our time than whining and screaming to people who already agree with us. Let's be proactive and convince him that another ban is political suicide, ineffective and a waste of time. We know it, let's make sure he does.

Hell, even if we don't change his mind, then hopefully we can at least make him recognize the political danger of angering such a large percentage of the electorate.

A far better use of your time is writing your congressman and letting them know what you want and to fight against him. This guy could care less what you or I think. You're not going to convince him of anything if it has to do with black rifles.
Listen for yourself...

C8fAROhy8k0

Bill_in_SD
11-08-2008, 8:53 AM
While I will certainly use the change.org website to let him know what I think, and also write to my congress reps (at least the assemblyman) I also want to let you know what I think.

a) you voted for him
- I did not
b) he is the president-elect
- yes he is, but I think we all know that
c) like quite a few of boardmembers has pointed out, we don't really know this guy and we don't know if he's the vindictive type or not.
- true, but he chose a rather vindictive man as his first choice for his team:
http://cdobs.com/archive/tags/Emanuel/

Bill in SD

mfmayes49
11-08-2008, 10:03 AM
That would be great to voice your opinion on his web site, Trouble is liberals like him is they don't listen. All i get is a reply letter that says in a nice way that I'm not in step with the rest of the country. My collection so far are from Feinstien,Pelosi,Boxer, and various others.

zeleny
11-08-2008, 11:16 AM
Ironically, Obama’s latitudinarian take on an “enumerated constitutional right” affirmed in District of Columbia v. Heller, U.S. Supreme Court 554 U.S. ___ (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/District_of_Columbia_v._Heller), contrasts radically with his rigid affirmation of the right to privacy, conjured from penumbral emanations in Griswold v. Connecticut, U.S. Supreme Court 381 U.S. 479 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Griswold_v._Connecticut). I would be hard pressed to conceive of a more opportunistic reading of our Constitution. Here (http://larvatus.livejournal.com/198466.html) is my take on this disparity.

My contribution to Of the People, By the People (http://change.gov/page/s/ofthepeople) is as follows:I am disappointed to find an expression of support for making the expired federal Assault Weapons Ban permanent. On 26 June 2008, U.S. Supreme Court recognized the right of individuals to bear arms as an “enumerated constitutional right”. In accordance with this ruling, U.S. citizens have the right to keep and bear any “weapons that belong on foreign battlefields”. In the course of his campaign, President-Elect Barack Obama promised to uphold the constitutional rights of law-abiding gun-owners. His advocacy of banning militia weapons belies this promise.I urge other readers to submit their personal feedback. The more of us sound off, the greater the strain on black helicopters.

Tumerboy
11-08-2008, 11:45 AM
That would be great to voice your opinion on his web site, Trouble is liberals like him is they don't listen. All i get is a reply letter that says in a nice way that I'm not in step with the rest of the country. My collection so far are from Feinstien,Pelosi,Boxer, and various others.

Gah! With all the prop 8 protests, I've heard from MANY people here, that "Liberals protest and put up a big stink." and "Conservatives are classy and stay quiet."

"I'm not in step with the rest of the country." Well no ****, the REST of the country they're talking about are the vocal ones! Of course they don't know about our side (or how BIG our side is) if we don't bother to let them know en masse!

M. Sage
11-08-2008, 11:48 AM
I sent him a long and somewhat eloquent letter (no I didn't save it) telling him that he's wrong and rebutting his positions on reducing gun crime.

I don't have much hope that my letter will make it far. Anybody who refuses to recognize that the problem is the culture of death in the inner city is either trying to sell you something, a bigot, stupid, or some combination of all three.

cartman
11-08-2008, 12:06 PM
Address Gun Violence in Cities: As president, Barack Obama would repeal the Tiahrt Amendment, which restricts the ability of local law enforcement to access important gun trace information, and give police officers across the nation the tools they need to solve gun crimes and fight the illegal arms trade. Obama and Biden also favor commonsense measures that respect the Second Amendment rights of gun owners, while keeping guns away from children and from criminals who shouldn't have them. They support closing the gun show loophole and making guns in this country childproof. They also support making the expired federal Assault Weapons Ban permanent, as such weapons belong on foreign battlefields and not on our streets.

It dont look good

JohnJW
11-08-2008, 2:49 PM
A far better use of your time is writing your congressman and letting them know what you want and to fight against him. This guy could care less what you or I think. You're not going to convince him of anything if it has to do with black rifles.
Listen for yourself...


I have to disagree. Most of our congressmen are fairly entrenched in their seats and understand their district well enough to know if the gun issue is relevant or not. Obama on the other hand, from what I've read, is a fairly cautious politicians who thinks before making a move. He does not agree with our AW stance, but given enough response to the AW issue, he will have to factor our collective response into whatever strategy he has. Regardless of what he believes in, publicly acknowledging 2A as an individual right and openly stating his opposition to same-sex marriage are signs that Obama does not want to engage in hot-button issues from both sides. With our economy in a mess and two wars, the last thing Obama wants is to be distracted by hot button issues. He already knows that guns is a hot-button issue and we need to convince him that AW is also a hot-button issue.

Politicians are not in the habit of committing political suicides. Every anti-AWB response to change.gov is one additional spine for our AW porcupine. We will always be in the minority and our only protection is make ourselves an politically unattractive target so they move on to other minorities. . . . sad but true.

CCWFacts
11-08-2008, 3:31 PM
like quite a few of boardmembers has pointed out, we don't really know this guy and we don't know if he's the vindictive type or not.
- true, but he chose a rather vindictive man as his first choice for his team:

I have a really bad feeling about him. I think he will be extremely vindictive, in a way that Bill Clinton never was. I also feel that this cult of personality that's going on with him will give him an unhealthy degree of power and confidence.

But I don't know. No one knows. He's never been in such a position before. I guess we'll find out soon.

hawk1
11-08-2008, 3:55 PM
I have to disagree. Most of our congressmen are fairly entrenched in their seats and understand their district well enough to know if the gun issue is relevant or not. Obama on the other hand, from what I've read, is a fairly cautious politicians who thinks before making a move. He does not agree with our AW stance, but given enough response to the AW issue, he will have to factor our collective response into whatever strategy he has. Regardless of what he believes in, publicly acknowledging 2A as an individual right and openly stating his opposition to same-sex marriage are signs that Obama does not want to engage in hot-button issues from both sides. With our economy in a mess and two wars, the last thing Obama wants is to be distracted by hot button issues. He already knows that guns is a hot-button issue and we need to convince him that AW is also a hot-button issue.

Politicians are not in the habit of committing political suicides. Every anti-AWB response to change.gov is one additional spine for our AW porcupine. We will always be in the minority and our only protection is make ourselves an politically unattractive target so they move on to other minorities. . . . sad but true.

Where to begin? Better yet, I'll focus on one quote you made,
"Regardless of what he believes in, publicly acknowledging 2A as an individual right and openly stating his opposition to same-sex marriage are signs that Obama does not want to engage in hot-button issues from both sides.".

His acknowledgement was pointed directly at "hunting rifles and shotguns" only. Also, his "acknowledgement" said that cities and states "had the right to reasonable gun control laws". He may not want to "engage" it but he damn well will sign anything Schumar, Reid and Pelosi bring him. No matter what you write on change.org...
"From what you read" is not out of the horses mouth, it's written for the horse by someone else. He's been clever in his run up to get elected. Soon you'll hear the real Obama.

CCWFacts
11-08-2008, 4:04 PM
I think many of his supporters are burning for payback against the rural gun owner demographic. That's why I think he will be vindictive and want to punish that demographic.

He has also spent his entire life in a milieu of people who are angry at American values, individualism, and personal responsibility. Not only angry, but who have constructed all kinds of intellectual justifications for their positions, who believe they have the moral right to those positions, and who believe that the ends justify the means.

JohnJW
11-08-2008, 4:36 PM
Where to begin? Better yet, I'll focus on one quote you made,
"Regardless of what he believes in, publicly acknowledging 2A as an individual right and openly stating his opposition to same-sex marriage are signs that Obama does not want to engage in hot-button issues from both sides.".

His acknowledgement was pointed directly at "hunting rifles and shotguns" only. Also, his "acknowledgement" said that cities and states "had the right to reasonable gun control laws". He may not want to "engage" it but he damn well will sign anything Schumar, Reid and Pelosi bring him. No matter what you write on change.org...
"From what you read" is not out of the horses mouth, it's written for the horse by someone else. He's been clever in his run up to get elected. Soon you'll hear the real Obama.

Again, I have to disagree. I view change.gov as Obama's cautiously gaging the mood of the population. He is a self-styled pragmatic politicians not a martyr. If there is overwhelming opposition to the AWB he will not pursue that issue unless he wants to risk loosing control of congress in 2010. He is on a precarious perch with the economic crisis and an American populace with a propensity to restore a counter balance to the executive branch. He does not want to give the Republicans any extra ammunition for 2010. He is too cautious to rock the political boat with hot button issues and that goes for the rest of the Democrats as well. They know they are dealt a pretty lousy hand. For now, we can count on their political ambition to safeguard our AWs.

Beside, a few nice and polite sentences voicing opposition to AWB while potentially worthless doesn't cost the writer anything more than 5 minutes and maybe some pride.

M. Sage
11-08-2008, 5:17 PM
Why should he be scared? Everybody knows (or should; it's a matter of public record) that Obama was on the board of the Joyce Foundation. We knew that, he got elected anyway (with a lot of gun owners even voting for him!).

OldGunTard
11-08-2008, 6:24 PM
I really didn't want to post on politics here, but JohnJw has provoked me. I hope I don't regret it.

Sage and all, please get that the dude's a politician who's trying to represent his constituency. What was appropriate for a representative of a liberal Chicago neighborhood that had lots of murders close at hand is not what's appropriate for the president of the United States of America. There are so many reasonable people here who get unreasonably fixated on certain small or ephemeral aspects of Obama's history that I sometimes perceive an investment in not accepting him. There are plenty of real devils; we don't need to invent them. Barack Obama is a pragmatist who wants to address the big issues, in ways that a centrist America will accept.

Here's what I sent. I'm not *pretending* to be on his side, as I truly am:

I'm a liberal gun owner. During your campaign, I sent you three donations totaling one hundred dollars.

Under "Address Gun Violence in Cities", your plan proposes to "support making the expired federal Assault Weapons Ban permanent, as such weapons belong on foreign battlefields and not on our streets."

You probably have figured out by now that this would be terrible for your mandate. The weapons that were treated by that ban are mainstream hunting and target-shooting rifles possessed in abundance by great numbers of law-abiding citizens. They're embedded in the culture of the battleground states you've just won as well as the red states you'd like to pick up in four years.

The problem with these weapons is not that they're more lethal than other rifles, but rather that they're scarey-looking. The urge to ban them follows not from thoughtful policy, but from unreasoning fear abetted by imagery from Hollywood. Sadly, too few liberal lawmakers understand guns well enough to critically consider the poorly founded pitches of the anti-gun lobby; and the strident message flowing from the NRA is so tuned to the right wing that any truth in the core is discarded by Democrats along with all that bile.

You know better than to be distracted from the world's manifold critical issues by this non-problem. If you allow the congressional majority to pursue it, it can only help to divide this county. On the other hand, many gun owners will come to you if you can convince them that you truly "get it" on their key issue.


* * *

My wife has reminded me to say that she and I both consider the creation of single-payer health care system a critical need for this country.


* * *

We both wish you the very best with your many, enormously difficult challenges. I'm not a prayerful person, so I can't offfer that support; but as the months roll on, I'll be thinking about you and your progress through much of my waking time.

zeleny
11-08-2008, 6:57 PM
What was appropriate for a representative of a liberal Chicago neighborhood that had lots of murders close at hand is not what's appropriate for the president of the United States of America.5 December 2007:There's a Supreme Court case that's going to be decided fairly soon about what the Second Amendment means. I taught Constitutional Law for 10 years, so I've got my opinion. And my opinion is that the Second Amendment is probably--it is an individual right and not just a right of the militia. That's what I expect the Supreme Court to rule. I think that's a fair reading of the text of the Constitution. And so I respect the right of lawful gun owners to hunt, fish, protect their families. Like all rights, though, they are constrained and bound by the needs of the community.15 February 2008:There’s been a longstanding argument among constitutional scholars about whether the Second Amendment referred simply to militias or whether it spoke to an individual right to possess arms. I think the latter is the better argument. There is an individual right to bear arms, but it is subject to common-sense regulation, just like most of our rights are subject to common-sense regulation.15 October 2008:I think that the Constitution has a right to privacy in it that shouldn't be subject to state referendum, any more than our First Amendment rights are subject to state referendum, any more than many of the other rights that we have should be subject to popular vote.So there you have it. According to Barack Hussein Obama, all our Constitutional rights are constrained and bound by the needs of the community, while most of them are subject to common-sense regulation, even though many of them shouldn't be subject to popular vote. Anyone who can make heads or tails of it, is a better man that I am.

More on this here (http://larvatus.livejournal.com/198466.html).

hawk1
11-08-2008, 7:40 PM
On the other hand, many gun owners will come to you if you can convince them that you truly "get it" on their key issue.




This, I vehemently deny. I for one would never be aligned with him...:mad:

I despise this guy for more reasons than just his anti-gun agenda....

OldGunTard
11-08-2008, 7:57 PM
But Hawk, that why I said, "many." Not all, probably not not most.
Cheers ...

hawk1
11-10-2008, 8:36 AM
Did you hear that? That was your "voiced opinion" going straight into the trash can. :rolleyes:

http://www.nraila.org/Legislation/Federal/Read.aspx?id=4227

"Yes We Can . . . Ban Guns"--Obama Announces Gun Ban Agenda Before The Final Vote Count Is In

Friday, November 07, 2008

Senator Barack Obama's presidential campaign slogan, "the audacity of hope," should have instead been "the audacity of deceit." After months of telling the American people that he supports the Second Amendment, and only hours after being declared the president-elect, the Obama transition team website announced an agenda taken straight from the anti-gun lobby--four initiatives designed to ban guns and drive law-abiding firearm manufacturers and dealers out of business:

"Making the expired federal assault weapons ban permanent." Perhaps no other firearm issue has been more dishonestly portrayed by gun prohibitionists. Notwithstanding their predictions that the ban's expiration in 2004 would bring about the end of civilization, for the last four years the nation's murder rate has been lower than anytime since the mid-1960s. Studies for Congress, the Congressional Research Service, the National Institute of Justice, the National Academy of Sciences, and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention have found no evidence that gun prohibition or gun control reduces crime. Guns that were affected by the ban are used in only a tiny fraction of violent crime-about 35 times as many people are murdered without any sort of firearm (knives, bare hands, etc.), as with "assault weapons." Obama says that "assault weapons" are machine guns that "belong on foreign battlefields," but that is a lie; the guns are only semi-automatic, and they are not used by a military force anywhere on the planet.

"Repeal the Tiahrt Amendment." The amendment--endorsed by the Fraternal Order of Police--prohibits the release of federal firearm tracing information to anyone other than a law enforcement agency conducting a bona fide criminal investigation. Anti-gun activists oppose the restriction, because it prevents them from obtaining tracing information and using it in frivolous lawsuits against law-abiding firearm manufacturers. Their lawsuits seek to obtain huge financial judgments against firearm manufacturers when a criminal uses a gun to inflict harm, even though the manufacturers have complied with all applicable laws.

"Closing the gun show loophole." There is no "loophole." Under federal law, a firearm dealer must conduct a background check on anyone to whom he sells a gun, regardless of where the sale takes place. A person who is not a dealer may sell a gun from his personal collection without conducting a check. Gun prohibitionists claim that many criminals obtain guns from gun shows, though the most recent federal survey of convicted felons put the figure at only 0.7 percent. They also claim that non-dealers should be required to conduct checks when selling guns at shows, but the legislation they support goes far beyond imposing that lone requirement. In fact, anti-gun members of Congress voted against that limited measure, holding out for a broader bill intended to drive shows out of business.

"Making guns in this country childproof." "Childproof" is a codeword for a variety of schemes designed to prevent the sale of firearms by imposing impossible or highly expensive design requirements, such as biometric shooter-identification systems. While no one opposes keeping children safe, the fact is that accidental firearm-related deaths among children have decreased 86 percent since 1975, even as the numbers of children and guns have risen dramatically. Today, the chances of a child being killed in a firearm accident are less than one in a million.

motorhead
11-10-2008, 8:55 AM
i , along with a good portion of those who voted against him, thoroughly and completely hate his guts. i'd be willing to bet that at least 40% of america feels the same.

Meplat
11-10-2008, 8:40 PM
Barack Obama is a pragmatist who wants to address the big issues, in ways that a centrist America will accept.

:

Barack Obama is a communist who wants to take your guns and your self determination. Your handle seems to indicate that you are not young. If you are old you do not rate expensive medical treatment in a "single payer" system. Good luck

Nevermore
11-10-2008, 9:17 PM
Note the link and the page contents. Try it yourself. Plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose.

http://i431.photobucket.com/albums/qq34/NevermoreCG/Picture1.png

M. Sage
11-10-2008, 9:47 PM
Yeah, but they forgot to pull it off their campaign site! http://origin.barackobama.com/issues/urban_policy/

I notice that all of the "policy" section is gone of the pres-elect site.

OldGunTard
11-10-2008, 9:58 PM
It would appear that the entire agenda detail has been removed, leaving only a high-level paragraph discussing the most emergent items. It includes nothing about "urban policy" there.

http://change.gov/agenda/

jacques
11-10-2008, 10:06 PM
Note the link and the page contents. Try it yourself. Plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose.

http://i431.photobucket.com/albums/qq34/NevermoreCG/Picture1.png

They must be changing the policy as we type. Soon the truth will come out?

There's a apply for jobs link at the bottom. Maybe we should all go apply for attorney General, or other jobs.

RRangel
11-10-2008, 10:22 PM
Why should he be scared? Everybody knows (or should; it's a matter of public record) that Obama was on the board of the Joyce Foundation. We knew that, he got elected anyway (with a lot of gun owners even voting for him!).

The Joyce Foundation really appears to be under the radar to most. Most gun owners are not members of the NRA where they've been informed. Neither can we expect the mainstream media to be doing an expose on the Joyce Foundation anytime soon. I don't think Obama or any of his people really want more exposure of Joyce Foundation, given Obama, and the organizations slight of hand.

jrdejavux
11-10-2008, 11:05 PM
:90:what a douche bag this clown is BHO

easy
11-11-2008, 6:03 PM
Address Gun Violence in Cities: As president, Barack Obama would repeal the Tiahrt Amendment, which restricts the ability of local law enforcement to access important gun trace information, and give police officers across the nation the tools they need to solve gun crimes and fight the illegal arms trade. Obama and Biden also favor commonsense measures that respect the Second Amendment rights of gun owners, while keeping guns away from children and from criminals who shouldn't have them. They support closing the gun show loophole and making guns in this country childproof. They also support making the expired federal Assault Weapons Ban permanent, as such weapons belong on foreign battlefields and not on our streets.

hawk81
11-11-2008, 6:08 PM
Being nice has never gotten gun owners anything.

M. Sage
11-11-2008, 7:26 PM
Note the link and the page contents. Try it yourself. Plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose.

http://i431.photobucket.com/albums/qq34/NevermoreCG/Picture1.png

ROFL!! I hadn't noticed that your image was taken from the ethics page!!