PDA

View Full Version : who should be govenor


bakokid
12-14-2009, 5:08 PM
From the San Francisco Chronicle story headlined "Meg Whitman makes case on how she's different":

Whitman said she...believes tough gun laws like assault weapon bans and handgun control are appropriate for California.

There's no "difference" here. If she wins, it'll be yet another case of "Meet the new boss. Same as the old boss."

California gun owners accepted Arnold Schwarzenegger, who also made his anti-gun positions known in advance, and look what it got them.

...and i couldnt find poizners stance on this subject.
we dont need anymore arnies comin in and banning 50s and ammo. especially when a 50 has never been used in the commisson of a crime

chris
12-14-2009, 5:22 PM
she will be no different. we thought arnie was different and we got screwed. meg will be nothing more than a mouth piece. yeah she talks about cutting taxes and making this state more business friendly. good luck to her if elected but i doubt she would get an inch out the turds that occupy the legislature.

Glock22Fan
12-14-2009, 5:25 PM
From the San Francisco Chronicle story headlined "Meg Whitman makes case on how she's different":

Whitman said she...believes tough gun laws like assault weapon bans and handgun control are appropriate for California.

There's no "difference" here. If she wins, it'll be yet another case of "Meet the new boss. Same as the old boss."

California gun owners accepted Arnold Schwarzenegger, who also made his anti-gun positions known in advance, and look what it got them.

...and i couldnt find poizners stance on this subject.
we dont need anymore arnies comin in and banning 50s and ammo. especially when a 50 has never been used in the commisson of a crime

Edit:


Much the same, as far as I've read.


It seems as if I was wrong. Later threads (do a google with
"site:calguns.net 'Poizner'" in the search field) suggest that Poizner is relatively ignorant, but generally supportive. He appears willing to learn, willing to consider revoking bad laws and claims to be pro-2nd, but has very little idea as yet of the laws as they affect us Cal Gunnies.

dfletcher
12-14-2009, 6:06 PM
From the San Francisco Chronicle story headlined "Meg Whitman makes case on how she's different":

Whitman said she...believes tough gun laws like assault weapon bans and handgun control are appropriate for California.

There's no "difference" here. If she wins, it'll be yet another case of "Meet the new boss. Same as the old boss."


How's the rest of that song go - "we won't be fooled again". ;)
Although I don't think anyone has to be all that perceptive to know she ain't our friend.

NorCalMama
12-14-2009, 6:08 PM
Write in Tom McClintock... it's what I'm going to do. No other option.

sp_train_77
12-14-2009, 6:11 PM
Write in Tom McClintock... it's what I'm going to do. No other option.

Now there's an idea I can agree with!

GrizzlyGuy
12-14-2009, 6:17 PM
Write in Tom McClintock... it's what I'm going to do. No other option.

Great idea! I have higher hopes for him (http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showpost.php?p=3481694&postcount=3), but that sure can't hurt. :D

bwiese
12-14-2009, 6:56 PM
Current AG Jerry Brown is the only not-antigun person in the CA Gov race.

abalone hunter
12-14-2009, 6:56 PM
I will never use ebay again!

supersonic
12-14-2009, 7:14 PM
As far as the voters ('US' & 'THEM') in California, I am going to finally, for once, and as a 'last word, period' - SETTLE this question of 'how are these morons getting voted into office"; EITHER a) we are truly outnumbered b) we are plagued with dishonest sheeple turncoats in our ranks, or c) the CA political machine is corrupt ***to the point of hard-core liberal/anti's being able to 'bend' numbers as they so choose. (***yes, I know, saying politics are corrupt is like saying sheit stinks) Well, that's my .02 & I'm stickin' to it!;)

just4fun63
12-14-2009, 7:18 PM
Current AG Jerry Brown is the only not-antigun person in the CA Gov race.

Hard to believe "Gov Moonbeam" is our best bet and seems to be on our side :TFH:

ar15robert
12-14-2009, 7:20 PM
I never thought i would say i'd rather have comrade davis as the governor over ahnold.I bet hes laughing his asss off.

I think i am going to have to go with j brown this time around.I use to get a laugh at the guy when he tried to run for pres and campaigned wearing a windbreaker while others were out in suits and ties

SP1200
12-14-2009, 8:59 PM
Current AG Jerry Brown is the only not-antigun person in the CA Gov race.

Yep.

radioman
12-14-2009, 9:34 PM
So far Jerry Brown, I don't think he will take our guns, not like Meg.

Rem222
12-14-2009, 10:06 PM
Tom McClintock.... YES..

Meg.....................NO..

nicki
12-15-2009, 2:52 AM
Many on this board including myself find it hard to swallow that if we want to protect our gun rights, then our choice is Jerry Brown.

The reality is all the so called republicans who are running are RINOs who are openly hostile to our gun rights.

We need to send a message loud and clear to the Republican party and we need to do it at the voting booth and with letters to Michael Steele RNC Chair so that he hears it loud and clear that we will actively support Pro Gun Democrats over anti gun republicans everytime.

We can send a message to the Democratic party that Jerry Brown got our support because of his position on gun rights and that he got our support in spite of his support on other issues.

Nicki

Midian
12-15-2009, 5:31 AM
I voted Mclintock last time around.


Whitman is NWO all the way. Bad news.

CDFingers
12-15-2009, 6:08 AM
Brown came out in favor of the 14th amendment being incorporated against the states.

Here is a link to his brief:

http://www.hoffmang.com/firearms/California-NRA_v._Chicago_Cert_Amicus.pdf

I think California's guns are safe with Brown.

CDFingers

supersonic
12-15-2009, 7:40 AM
Tom Selleck for Governor!!!!!!!!!!!!

pdq_wizzard
12-15-2009, 8:12 AM
Many on this board including myself find it hard to swallow that if we want to protect our gun rights, then our choice is Jerry Brown.

The reality is all the so called republicans who are running are RINOs who are openly hostile to our gun rights.

We need to send a message loud and clear to the Republican party and we need to do it at the voting booth and with letters to Michael Steele RNC Chair so that he hears it loud and clear that we will actively support Pro Gun Democrats over anti gun republicans everytime.

We can send a message to the Democratic party that Jerry Brown got our support because of his position on gun rights and that he got our support in spite of his support on other issues.

Nicki

^^^^^
this !!!!, I am going to reg as a dem just so I can vote for him in the primary. and Mr. Steele will be getting a letter from me (or a reply to his emails that he sends me) :mad:

masticatedwine
12-15-2009, 3:08 PM
The only person who will get us out of this mess is Chelene Nightingale.

As far as Chelene Nightingale’s stance on 2A rights:

The 2nd Amendment strictly limits any interference with gun ownership by saying: "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

Moreover, the right to bear arms is inherent in the right of self defense, defense of the family, and defense against tyranny, conferred on the individual and the community by our Creator to safeguard life, liberty, and property, as well as to help preserve the independence of the nation.
The right to keep and bear arms is guaranteed by the Second Amendment to the Constitution; it may not properly be infringed upon or denied.
Chelene Nightingale upholds the right of the citizen to keep and bear arms. She opposes attempts to prohibit ownership of guns by law-abiding citizens, and stands against all laws which would require the registration of guns or ammunition.
Chelene Nightingale emphasizes that when guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have them. In such circumstances, the peaceful citizen's protection against the criminal would be seriously jeopardized.
Chelene Nightingale calls for the repeal of all federal firearms legislation, beginning with Federal Firearms Act of 1968.
She calls for the rescinding of all executive orders, the prohibition of any future executive orders, and the prohibition of treaty ratification which would in any way limit the right to keep and bear arms.

Not to mention states rights!

I've had the pleasure to meet Chelene and she is an amazing woman! She's tough, and won't cave in or soften up..

Hopi
12-15-2009, 3:13 PM
http://www.nightingaleforgovernor.com/images/chelene%20framed.jpg

http://www.nightingaleforgovernor.com/pages/FlashGallery.html

# To be heard by your elected officials that you employ.

# To freely speak your mind instead of being silenced by political correctness.

# For parents to raise and educate your own children as you, not California, see fit.

# For your vote to be counted and not overturned by political judicial fiat.

# To be an individual without the pressure of collectivists.

# To expect those you elect to abide by the Constitution of the United States of America!

# To bear arms. Bear: to carry, possess, transport. Arms: anything used in battle or to best another.

# Religious freedom, not persecution.

# For a secure nation and state with secure borders and sovereignty.

# To speak English first.

# Priority representation as legal citizens.

# To be united as Americans instead of political racial divides.

# To the fact that all of us are created equally, not separately.

# To preserve the Californian and American culture without guilt.

# To choose life not the pressure of choice.

# To celebrate traditional family values.

# To elect your candidates without big money interest interference.

# To hear from all the candidates, not just the two-party system choices.

# Justice, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness in the land of the free and the home of the brave.

# To have your elected officials working for you, not special interest groups.

# Economic stability supported by capitalism not socialism/communism.

# Small government without big government intrusion.

Freedom!


Thanks for the heads up!! She's not bad at all.....I really wish she had a chance right now....

stormy_clothing
12-15-2009, 3:16 PM
if elected for governor I will not only fight for gun rights I will had out fully loaded M4's with suppressors and grenade launchers and IR lasers to anyone that I like.

vote for me

NightingaleforGovernor10'
12-15-2009, 4:17 PM
Chelene Nightingale holds a strict position with respects to what our Founding Fathers had understood to be constitutional freedoms. With that in mind, The Second Amendment is a constitutional right that all American citizens are entitled to. Further, it is a constitutional right that our Founders had understood to be necessary with respects to holding a check on abusive governmental powers by a free people.

“The 2nd Amendment strictly limits any interference with gun ownership by saying: "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

Moreover, the right to bear arms is inherent in the right of self defense, defense of the family, and defense against tyranny, conferred on the individual and the community by our Creator to safeguard life, liberty, and property, as well as to help preserve the independence of the nation.
The right to keep and bear arms is guaranteed by the Second Amendment to the Constitution; it may not properly be infringed upon or denied.
Chelene Nightingale upholds the right of the citizen to keep and bear arms. She opposes attempts to prohibit ownership of guns by law-abiding citizens, and stands against all laws which would require the registration of guns or ammunition.

Chelene Nightingale emphasizes that when guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have them. In such circumstances, the peaceful citizen's protection against the criminal would be seriously jeopardized.
Chelene Nightingale calls for the repeal of all federal firearms legislation, beginning with Federal Firearms Act of 1968.
She calls for the rescinding of all executive orders, the prohibition of any future executive orders, and the prohibition of treaty ratification which would in any way limit the right to keep and bear arms.

Chelene Nightingale has been a regular guest on many 2A radio talkshows such as the Second Amendment Radio Show with Host, Bill Carns on the Republic Broadcasting Network. The 2A Radio Show is the only daily talk show with a dedicated platform for 2nd Amendment supporters & advocates as well as sport shooters.

Chelene Nightingale is California's only hope for gun owner's rights.

To learn more about Chelene Nightingale and her stance on other issues visit:

www.nightingaleforgovernor.com


She is running for Governor under the American Independent Party banner. This is California's Constitution Party. To learn more about the Constitution Party visit www.constitutionparty.com or www.aipcalif.blogspot.com

**www.nightingaleforgovernor.com**www.nightingalef orgovernor.com**www.nightingaleforgovernor.com**ww w.nightingaleforgovernor.com

NightingaleforGovernor10'
12-15-2009, 4:22 PM
A recent Rasmussen Poll showed that the American people are ready for third party candidate. That Tea Party they are reffering to is the Constitution Party. This party has been at the forefront of bringing constitutional principles back to responsible government-THIS INCLUDES 2A RIGHTS!

Chelene Nightingale DOES HAVE A CHANCE! See for yourself http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/general_politics/december_2009/tea_party_tops_gop_on_three_way_generic_ballot

stormy_clothing
12-15-2009, 4:24 PM
Chelene Nightingale is California's only hope for gun owner's rights.

lol BS already - gun owners are california gun owners only hope for rights not politicians, they people they represent.

you want to save gun owners rights - how about putting it to a vote

Steyr_223
12-15-2009, 4:25 PM
No fan for SPLC but here is what they have to say about her and SOS.

http://www.splcenter.org/intel/intelreport/article.jsp?pid=1530

http://www.nightingaleforgovernor.com/images/photogallery/endfed025.jpg


I am voting for Brown..

NightingaleforGovernor10'
12-15-2009, 4:30 PM
There is a choice for us. www.nightingaleforgovernor.com

Chelene holds a strict position with respects to what our Founding Fathers had understood to be constitutional freedoms. With that in mind, The Second Amendment is a constitutional right that all American citizens are entitled to. Further, it is a constitutional right that our Founders had understood to be necessary with respects to holding a check on abusive governmental powers by a free people.

“The 2nd Amendment strictly limits any interference with gun ownership by saying: "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

Moreover, the right to bear arms is inherent in the right of self defense, defense of the family, and defense against tyranny, conferred on the individual and the community by our Creator to safeguard life, liberty, and property, as well as to help preserve the independence of the nation.
The right to keep and bear arms is guaranteed by the Second Amendment to the Constitution; it may not properly be infringed upon or denied.
Chelene Nightingale upholds the right of the citizen to keep and bear arms. She opposes attempts to prohibit ownership of guns by law-abiding citizens, and stands against all laws which would require the registration of guns or ammunition.
Chelene Nightingale emphasizes that when guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have them. In such circumstances, the peaceful citizen's protection against the criminal would be seriously jeopardized.
Chelene Nightingale calls for the repeal of all federal firearms legislation, beginning with Federal Firearms Act of 1968.
She calls for the rescinding of all executive orders, the prohibition of any future executive orders, and the prohibition of treaty ratification which would in any way limit the right to keep and bear arms.


And to those that say she doesn't have a chance. A recent Rasmussen poll showed that the American People are ready for a third party candidate. (see for yourself http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/general_politics/december_2009/tea_party_tops_gop_on_three_way_generic_ballot )

The Tea Party that they are referring to is the Constitution Party. This party has been at the forefront of restoring constitutional principles-INCLUDING 2A RIGHTS!

visit www.constitutionparty.com to learn more about how our country is being ruined by pogressives!

NightingaleforGovernor10'
12-15-2009, 4:32 PM
The SPLC is a pro-Illegal Immigrant radical liberalist group of anti-Americans.

NightingaleforGovernor10'
12-15-2009, 4:35 PM
if elected for governor I will not only fight for gun rights I will had out fully loaded M4's with suppressors and grenade launchers and IR lasers to anyone that I like.

vote for me

How will you fund this program-with my tax $$?

wildhawker
12-15-2009, 4:41 PM
lol BS already - gun owners are california gun owners only hope for rights not politicians, they people they represent.

you want to save gun owners rights - how about putting it to a vote

I don't care to see my rights put up for a vote.

wildhawker
12-15-2009, 4:47 PM
How will you fund this program-with my tax $$?

Why not arm (those non-prohibited members of) society? I would bet that the cost to provide firearms, ammunition, and maintenance of militia arms (as well as basic training and range time) would incur far less cost than some ongoing law enforcement expenditures and have a far more positive affect on crime statistics.

NightingaleforGovernor10'
12-15-2009, 4:52 PM
http://i66.photobucket.com/albums/h244/ThatBaldwinGuy/cHELENEccw.jpg


Chelene at a Tea Party in San Diego. Perhaps California will fully embrace less restrictive carrying laws if she were governor.

Liberty Belle
12-15-2009, 5:00 PM
The SPLC is a special interest group with an agenda. They are in the business of Hate. If you are not a liberal, open borders activist like them, you are a target. Nappy said gun owners and returning military servicemen were dangerous right wing exremists. Does that make it so? Consider the source.

Isn't it about time we stop holding our noses and HOPE the Rep/Dem will listen to us?? What happened to the Constitution? Have we given up on it already? Many of us haven't. It's time we vote our conscience and for our rights.

wildhawker
12-15-2009, 5:02 PM
They will (http://wiki.calgunsfoundation.org/index.php/McDonald_v._Chicago) regardless (http://wiki.calgunsfoundation.org/index.php/Sykes_v._McGinness) of (http://wiki.calgunsfoundation.org/index.php/Palmer_v._District_of_Columbia)who becomes Governor.

However, if this become less about the issue and more about promoting your candidate we will be contacting you regarding a CGN sponsorship agreement.


Chelene at a Tea Party in San Diego. Perhaps California will fully embrace less restrictive carrying laws if she were governor.

wildhawker
12-15-2009, 5:06 PM
The SPLC is a special interest group with an agenda. They are in the business of Hate. If you are not a liberal, open borders activist like them, you are a target. Nappy said gun owners and returning military servicemen were dangerous right wing exremists. Does that make it so? Consider the source.

Isn't it about time we stop holding our noses and HOPE the Rep/Dem will listen to us?? What happened to the Constitution? Have we given up on it already? Many of us haven't. It's time we vote our conscience and for our rights.

My conscience tell me you should send another donation (http://www.calgunsfoundation.org/index.php/donate) to the Calguns Foundation- people who are actually creating the outcomes we desire.

The Rep/Dem will listen to us because we have a team of people, including the brightest constitutional/firearms attorneys in the United States, who will see to it they listen- or face a Federal *****slap.

NightingaleforGovernor10'
12-15-2009, 5:09 PM
Why not arm (those non-prohibited members of) society? I would bet that the cost to provide firearms, ammunition, and maintenance of militia arms (as well as basic training and range time) would incur far less cost than some ongoing law enforcement expenditures and have a far more positive affect on crime statistics.

Yes, but nonetheless this is MY unalienable right to bear arms. This is not to be enforced nor infringed upon by government. This would require a subjection of my liberty, for it would incur a growth in a new program for distribution etc. I am all for citizens armed-we would have less violence. However, this is my right to bear and not a governments right to impose it's will onto me.




Perhaps, a tax credit to those that purchase guns would be more feasible. What do you think?

professorhard
12-15-2009, 5:09 PM
I would like Marcus Luttrell to be governor. That's someone I would trust.

NightingaleforGovernor10'
12-15-2009, 5:15 PM
Arnold has signed how many anti-gun bills?

Sgt Raven
12-15-2009, 5:31 PM
Arnold has signed how many anti-gun bills?

So, in case you haven't noticed, He's a RINO. :TFH:

NightingaleforGovernor10'
12-15-2009, 5:45 PM
So, in case you haven't noticed, He's a RINO. :TFH:

I guess you don't pick up sarcasm to well eh'

bakokid
12-15-2009, 6:13 PM
The only person who will get us out of this mess is Chelene Nightingale.

As far as Chelene Nightingale’s stance on 2A rights:

The 2nd Amendment strictly limits any interference with gun ownership by saying: "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

Moreover, the right to bear arms is inherent in the right of self defense, defense of the family, and defense against tyranny, conferred on the individual and the community by our Creator to safeguard life, liberty, and property, as well as to help preserve the independence of the nation.
The right to keep and bear arms is guaranteed by the Second Amendment to the Constitution; it may not properly be infringed upon or denied.
Chelene Nightingale upholds the right of the citizen to keep and bear arms. She opposes attempts to prohibit ownership of guns by law-abiding citizens, and stands against all laws which would require the registration of guns or ammunition.
Chelene Nightingale emphasizes that when guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have them. In such circumstances, the peaceful citizen's protection against the criminal would be seriously jeopardized.
Chelene Nightingale calls for the repeal of all federal firearms legislation, beginning with Federal Firearms Act of 1968.
She calls for the rescinding of all executive orders, the prohibition of any future executive orders, and the prohibition of treaty ratification which would in any way limit the right to keep and bear arms.

Not to mention states rights!

I've had the pleasure to meet Chelene and she is an amazing woman! She's tough, and won't cave in or soften up..

tyranny- is that when the govt solves problems by spending money they dont have, then demanding more, and more, and more. or is it when they make us pay for programs and legislation based on unproven "scientific" hoaxes. or is it when they mock and laugh at WE THE PEOPLE, when we voice our opinions.

everyone should understant defense against tyranny would mean military type firearms as well would a well regulated militia. also regulated in this context and given when the document was written would imply well trained. our country faces tyranny much worse than the red coats dished out which needs to be defended against, here in cali we have horrible gun laws that would hender us and should be our primary concern at this point.

Liquidsnake
12-15-2009, 7:55 PM
If Whitman, Poizner, Brown, and company are going to add more gun laws, and Chelene Nightingale isn't then logic would tell me to vote for Chelene, and since gerrymandering is the law of the land in CA wouldn't it make sense to join the American Independent/Constitution Party and support Nightingale, if it doesn't matter who will win between Whitman and Brown and company wouldn't it make sense to vote for Nightingale anyway just to make sure our elections aren't rigged in the first place? www.nightingaleforgovernor.com

bakokid
12-16-2009, 8:30 AM
http://www.votervoice.net/Core.aspx?AID=972&Screen=alert&IssueId=19937

1 min to contact reps....nothin to do with gov, but other important issues

Glock22Fan
12-16-2009, 8:58 AM
if it doesn't matter who will win between Whitman and Brown and company

But it does. Of that bunch, Brown stands out head and shoulders.

Sgt Raven
12-16-2009, 10:41 AM
If Whitman, Poizner, Brown, and company are going to add more gun laws,..snip...

You assume that Brown will add more anti gun laws. Well we know what happens when you assume something. :nono: :troll:

Midian
12-16-2009, 11:40 AM
So if Nightingale ever got elected I wonder if would be weird to periodically think

"I kinda want to nail the Governor."

steadyrock
12-16-2009, 12:29 PM
So if Nightingale ever got elected I wonder if would be weird to periodically think

"I kinda want to nail the Governor."

Ask ElDiabloRobotico about that one.

bakokid
12-19-2009, 8:25 AM
http://www.joincalifornia.com/candidate/4518

bill maze pushing to divide cali and get rid of liberal counties

hawk81
12-19-2009, 10:10 AM
We don't need another governor. What we need is a whole new government in this state.

javalos
12-20-2009, 7:04 AM
There is a choice for us. www.nightingaleforgovernor.com

Chelene holds a strict position with respects to what our Founding Fathers had understood to be constitutional freedoms. With that in mind, The Second Amendment is a constitutional right that all American citizens are entitled to. Further, it is a constitutional right that our Founders had understood to be necessary with respects to holding a check on abusive governmental powers by a free people.

“The 2nd Amendment strictly limits any interference with gun ownership by saying: "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

Moreover, the right to bear arms is inherent in the right of self defense, defense of the family, and defense against tyranny, conferred on the individual and the community by our Creator to safeguard life, liberty, and property, as well as to help preserve the independence of the nation.
The right to keep and bear arms is guaranteed by the Second Amendment to the Constitution; it may not properly be infringed upon or denied.
Chelene Nightingale upholds the right of the citizen to keep and bear arms. She opposes attempts to prohibit ownership of guns by law-abiding citizens, and stands against all laws which would require the registration of guns or ammunition.
Chelene Nightingale emphasizes that when guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have them. In such circumstances, the peaceful citizen's protection against the criminal would be seriously jeopardized.
Chelene Nightingale calls for the repeal of all federal firearms legislation, beginning with Federal Firearms Act of 1968.
She calls for the rescinding of all executive orders, the prohibition of any future executive orders, and the prohibition of treaty ratification which would in any way limit the right to keep and bear arms.


And to those that say she doesn't have a chance. A recent Rasmussen poll showed that the American People are ready for a third party candidate. (see for yourself http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/general_politics/december_2009/tea_party_tops_gop_on_three_way_generic_ballot )

The Tea Party that they are referring to is the Constitution Party. This party has been at the forefront of restoring constitutional principles-INCLUDING 2A RIGHTS!

visit www.constitutionparty.com to learn more about how our country is being ruined by pogressives!

There is no doubt that many Americans are ready for a 3rd party candidate, only this is California, not Idaho, Montana, Nevada, Arizona, or Texas. Don't get me wrong, I like what I see in Chelene Nightingale, but California votes heavily liberal and Democrat, particularly southern and the east bay. I read up on her in her website and see she has no political experience, that is nother strike against Chelene, she's never been on a city council, mayoral, board of supervisors, etc.position, her opponent will use that heavily against her, even though inexperience is not a disqualification factor, it still will not sit well with many Californians who want more than a pretty face. She needs to get her feet wet in actually doing a job, she needs to run for a city council position or something. Californians are fed up with high taxes and inept politicians that cannot fiscally manage this state. I wish Chelene well, heck I will even contribute to her campaign, but currently Jerry Brown is the most viable candidate and has a track record that is good on the 2A.

OneApart
12-20-2009, 7:07 AM
:( Sad to say, I don't think it really matters at this point.....

pd5190
12-20-2009, 7:50 AM
There is one issue that all other issues fall under and that is the removal of all existing legislatures and old party hacks in Sacramento who have failed this state in so many ways. Simply electing a pro gun governor is meaning less unless the legislature has the same political leanings. The state must be made financially sound and then the issues that hold importance for many of us can be dealt with. I can appreciate a pro gun anti illegal alien, pro business, education oriented, safe streets, etc, etc, candidate for governor. Is there one that meets all of those qualifications? If they did and got elected without an Assembly and Senate that is on the same page it will be business as usual.

CDFingers
12-20-2009, 9:36 AM
Jerry Brown will take it.

CDFingers

REH
12-20-2009, 10:10 AM
Write in Tom McClintock... it's what I'm going to do. No other option.

That is who I voted for on the last election. I hope the lesson learned was, just because they have an R after their name, doesn't mean they are our friend.

Chelene
12-22-2009, 12:38 AM
Received an email from a campaign supporter and another email from a member here regarding this thread. Thought I would just correct a couple items. First, I am not a gun expert, however my father (a military veteran) taught my sister and I to handle and use guns and rifles. I have gone out with friends target practicing within the last couple of years. I believe very strongly in the 2nd amendment due to my constitutional views and upbringing.

I am not a novice in politics. In fact, I definitely have more experience than Whitman. I managed a multi-ethnic political 501c3 which was NOT a racist organization as falsely and maliciously defamed by the SPLC! I also was the campaign manager for Art Olivier (Libertarian) for Governor back in 2006. In addition I have assisted in writing initiatives, lobbied in both Sacramento and Washington DC, and organized many political events.

For those supporting Jerry Brown because he may be alright on one issue, albeit an important issue, his Acorn and phone conversation recordings without permission does not bode well for those of us who are liberty-minded.

If anyone has any questions for me, please feel free to email me directly. I clicked on the email option when registering.

I am not here to debate or convince anyone to vote for me. However I am a very passionate constitutional-minded American and determined to help save the Republic! I personally accepted the challenge of running for office when asked because I am frustrated and fed-up with having no choice and then ending up with so-called "elected" officials who do not listen to us!

I am a strong believer in the visions of our founding fathers. We were to govern ourselves, not elect career politicians who tell us one thing and then do another. I believe in freedom of speech, freedom to bear arms, freedom to have faith (religion), freedom to become successful, etc..all without tyranny.

Vote for me or don't vote for me..it is your freedom of choice. But I am definitely Pro-2nd!! I fought to help free one of my good friends back in 2008 when he was arrested and sent to jail because allegedly his gun was not currently legal although he had purchased it at a well-known sporting goods store. I learned during this fight that our gun rights were threatened. My friend was finally released and he is now living a good life still owning guns! But if we the people continue to elect the lesser of two evils, then one day our gun rights may be completely gone, although I personally will not give in.

For those who do not believe we have a chance of winning..the most recent Rasmussen poll is quite encouraging. And in comparison to our 2006 campaign, we have about 5 times the support. Voters are quite awake and frustrated. Many political analysts stated this past election night that they predicted 3rd party candidates would start winning in 2010. Even comedian Dennis Miller stated he thought we would see our first third party candidate president in 2016. The tide is a changin'.

Thank you and best of luck to each of you. Contact me directly if you wish.

yellowfin
12-22-2009, 5:34 AM
Wow, thank you for joining our community, Chelene! :)

lobonegro
12-22-2009, 8:56 AM
For those supporting Jerry Brown because he may be alright on one issue, albeit an important issue, his Acorn and phone conversation recordings without permission does not bode well for those of us who are liberty-minded.

This is the reason I can not vote for JB for governor. From those I have seen, Chelene best represents my interests. 3rd party will not win president, we need to start smaller, i.e. city council, mayor. But Chelene is right, stop voting the lesser of 2 evils, at least on the smaller stage.

gbp
12-22-2009, 9:25 AM
We don't need another governor. What we need is a whole new government in this state.

absolutely correct,,,just too bad they don't all come up for election at the same time.

RedStripes
12-22-2009, 10:32 AM
As long as we keep electing democrats and republicans nothing will change. Both parties are pushing the same agenda. We need someone who will help us get our freedom back:chris:. Not another "politician" who is totally useless and does nothing but flap their fat mouth and try to remove us from our Constitutional rights. Democrats and Republicans both serve the anti-freedom agenda.

Vectrexer
12-22-2009, 12:01 PM
Since they ALL are going suck as compared to what they promise, let's vote for a pro 2A person.

To be real,, I think Arnie is the only person to have delivered on a campaign promise in any form.

Vectrexer
12-22-2009, 12:02 PM
We don't need another governor. What we need is a whole new government in this state.

here! hear! for the most part. there are some gems in our state and local government offices. not many.

AEC1
12-22-2009, 12:11 PM
Who should be governor... ME, I am sure I could do beter then arnold. I would at least not grade BHO with an A grade...

Chelene
01-04-2010, 5:32 PM
Who should be governor... ME, I am sure I could do beter then arnold. I would at least not grade BHO with an A grade...

Amen!! BHO gives himself high marks as well. Definitely neither of them are living in reality..at least not the reality of the people!

And you should run for office! Everyone here should run if they have the desire. Our founding fathers never intended for our country to be ran by "the wealthy elite" and career politicians. They wanted us to govern ourselves! I was asked one year ago and laughed at first to be honest, but after a few weeks of conversations, research, and serious thought...I decided to accept the challenge. We certainly cannot continue down the old path...the results (socialism) are clear today.

Thank you for the warm welcome! And again if anyone has any questions, please email me directly at chelene@nightingaleforgovernor.com.

picasso
01-04-2010, 7:23 PM
What do you all think about Meg Whitman?

Chelene
01-04-2010, 7:31 PM
What do you all think about Meg Whitman?

Well here are some links to help you decide:
http://redcounty.com/meg-whitman-a-big-lib-supporter
http://www.redcounty.com/re-meg-whitman-writing-a-book-part-2-look-co-author
http://articles.sfgate.com/2009-02-13/bay-area/17190174_1_sen-john-mccain-abortion-rights-budget-gap "Whitman said she supports abortion rights - including public funding for abortions - and believes tough gun laws like assault weapon bans and handgun control are appropriate for California."

Hunt
01-04-2010, 7:31 PM
I will never use ebay again!

you mean Ebay/PayPal Gestapo

What do you all think about Meg Whitman?
well she is on the record saying she loves Van Jones, imagine your life run and mandated by a giant invasive ebay/ paypal type gestapo

sumdood
01-04-2010, 7:51 PM
As far as the voters ('US' & 'THEM') in California, I am going to finally, for once, and as a 'last word, period' - SETTLE this question of 'how are these morons getting voted into office"; EITHER a) we are truly outnumbered b) we are plagued with dishonest sheeple turncoats in our ranks, or c) the CA political machine is corrupt ***to the point of hard-core liberal/anti's being able to 'bend' numbers as they so choose. (***yes, I know, saying politics are corrupt is like saying sheit stinks) Well, that's my .02 & I'm stickin' to it!;)

You forgot, people like minded as we are do NOT vote. Do you think the gay agenda gets advanced because they outnumber the heterosexual population? I don't think so, it's because they ALL vote. I'd bet 99.999% of them vote. They all follow politics. How many times do you talk to family or friends and they say, "Oh I didn't have time and it doesn't matter anyway"? Get EVERYONE you know to vote if they think like we do on this forum.

sumdood
01-04-2010, 7:55 PM
Maybe someone should start a poll. "Do you vote?" The results may be interesting.

KylaGWolf
01-04-2010, 8:20 PM
Amen!! BHO gives himself high marks as well. Definitely neither of them are living in reality..at least not the reality of the people!

And you should run for office! Everyone here should run if they have the desire. Our founding fathers never intended for our country to be ran by "the wealthy elite" and career politicians. They wanted us to govern ourselves! I was asked one year ago and laughed at first to be honest, but after a few weeks of conversations, research, and serious thought...I decided to accept the challenge. We certainly cannot continue down the old path...the results (socialism) are clear today.

Thank you for the warm welcome! And again if anyone has any questions, please email me directly at chelene@nightingaleforgovernor.com.

First of all welcome to Calguns.

Here is my concerns with your running for office of Governor of this state.

1. You ran SOS this is a known fact which has had ties to being considered a racist organization. I don't care what the SPLC has to say about you but I can say from what I have seen of that organization in the news I would have to say they may not be far off the mark. That being said while I am not a fan of illegal immigration what is your stance on LEGAL immigration.
In asking that what would you do about illegal immigration in our state. I don't want your canned response I want to know what you already have drawn up to fix that situation.

2. You say you believe in our second amendment rights but I want to know how you would fix things if you were elected for office. Again saying you would repel x, y, and z and leaving it at that is not going to work. I want to know more exact what you plan to do to change things. As you well know even if you manage to get elected you still have to deal with the state representatives making those laws. For your claim to help us get our rights back you would have to either get them all booted out and put in pro second amendment representatives or two declare marshal law type of government which you claim to dislike.

Before you tell me to go to your website I already have and from what I wasn't impressed in the least.

harryford
01-04-2010, 11:20 PM
I don't care to see my rights put up for a vote.

Democracies can take away a persons rights just as easily as a dictator can. Republican forms of government such as ours however, are bound by constitutions that protect the rights of minorities from the opinions of the majorities. If the framers always thought that people would believe in freedom there would have been no point in the Bill of Rights. It is times like these that we must truly be thankful that we have such a document.

Now if only we could get congress to read it............

PonchoTA
01-04-2010, 11:44 PM
There are several of those "representatives" in CONgress that are of the opinion that the government GIVES us our rights, whereas the Bill of Rights was established as protection for what the government CAN'T TAKE AWAY.

We need to remind those idiots that WE are the ones in charge, not them. They are supposed to REPRESENT us (USA = Representative Republic, not Democracy), but instead they do whatever they damn well please, and it's high time we took them to task for it. :yes:

Vote out the incumbents.

.

GrizzlyGuy
01-05-2010, 5:50 AM
Before you tell me to go to your website I already have and from what I wasn't impressed in the least.

Chelene, I visited your web site as well, and I thought it was useful and well put together. I especially liked the newsletters.

But like Kyla, I would like to see a bit more information in the Issues area so that we can better understand where you stand and what you would do as Governor. I would like to see:

1) Regarding 2A, would you support CA nullifying Federal gun laws on 10A grounds, such as is happening in MT and TN?

2) What is your position on AB 390 (http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=255842) and the 'War on Drugs' issue in general?

3) Do you fully support the Constitution Party Platform (http://www.constitutionparty.com/party_platform.php), or are there areas that you disagree or have more nuanced views?

4) Why do you support enactment of the Federal e-Verify system in California (http://www.nightingaleforgovernor.com/pages/issue_immigration.htm) when it has privacy rights and 10A issues, and may not be effective in stemming illegal immigration (http://www.cato.org/pub_display.php?pub_id=9309)?

I realize that my points 2-4 are off-topic for this thread, but I really would like to see that info make it into your web site so that I and others can assess it there. Good luck in the race, it's great to see a person with principles step up, run for office, and try to save our republic from the two parties that are both hard at work trying to destroy it! :D

davescz
01-05-2010, 9:00 AM
What do you all think about Meg Whitman?

Baby killer, enough said about that *****. any one that advocates killing of babies should be lined up and well, you know.
Since she fails to protect the unborn (right to LIFE) I doubt she takes any of our RIGHTS seriously.

thats my thought on her.

bwiese
01-05-2010, 9:10 AM
Baby killer, enough said about that *****. any one that advocates killing of babies should be lined up and well, you know.
Since she fails to protect the unborn (right to LIFE) I doubt she takes any of our RIGHTS seriously.

A candidate that waves a stack of guns and a bag aborted fetuses will have a far greater chance of winning statewide election in CA than will a candidate that's "pro-life" and anti-gun. Look what happened to that idiot grabber Dan Lungren.

The abortion question in CA is over & done with, esp with the proportion of women voting now, with that being their #1 concern. It's the key reason that Republicans usually don't win statewide office. Period.

And it won't change given CA's demographics. We'll have free machineguns and mailorder grenades in CA far, far earlier than we'll ever reverse the "pro-choice" stance in CA. In fact, it's useless in CA to even worry about, since Roe v Wade holds on a national basis and whatever the stupid California Republicans yap about on this issue - "I'm pro life....,", etc. is irrelevant due to this. So all they do is fail the Big IQ test and cost themselves votes.

Steyr_223
01-05-2010, 9:31 AM
In any election money talks..

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2010/01/05/MNQR1BDI5G.DTL&tsp=1

(01-05) 10:12 PST SAN FRANCISCO -- Republican state Insurance Commissioner and gubernatorial candidate Steve Poizner heads into the 2010 election year with $17.5 million in cash on hand and has raised $1.2 million in the campaign reporting period that ended Dec. 31, the campaign said Monday.

Poizner, who donated $15 million of his own money to his campaign last month, is the first candidate for governor to release details of his campaign finance data following the end-of-year deadline.

But a source in the campaign of rival Republican candidate Meg Whitman said the former eBay CEO raised $3.5 million in the last reporting period, putting her total to more than $10 million last year. In addition, Whitman has given $19 million to her campaign.

Other candidates in the race include former Rep. Tom Campbell, a Republican, and Democrat Jerry Brown, the state's attorney general.

All candidates must file detailed campaign finance reports by the end of the month.

Poizner had his "strongest month by far" in December, netting $850,000 in contributions, his campaign spokesman Jarred Agen said. Of the $1.2 million the campaign garnered in the last reporting period, $1.1 million was raised for the June gubernatorial primary with $100,000 set aside for the general election in November, Agen said.

Whitman currently is accepting no donations for the general election.

Poizner's campaign - aiming to underscore differences with Whitman - boasted that more than 99 percent of the $2.46 million it has raised to date have been in-state contributions.

bwiese
01-05-2010, 9:33 AM
Yeah but Poizner's campaign has the stench of death to it.
Consultants are leaving left & right. Those are the guys that win elections for you - and they're moving over to Whitman's camp.

davescz
01-05-2010, 10:25 AM
A candidate that waves a stack of guns and a bag aborted fetuses will have a far greater chance of winning statewide election in CA than will a candidate that's "pro-life" and anti-gun. Look what happened to that idiot grabber Dan Lungren.

The abortion question in CA is over & done with, esp with the proportion of women voting now, with that being their #1 concern. It's the key reason that Republicans usually don't win statewide office. Period.

And it won't change given CA's demographics. We'll have free machineguns and mailorder grenades in CA far, far earlier than we'll ever reverse the "pro-choice" stance in CA. In fact, it's useless in CA to even worry about, since Roe v Wade holds on a national basis and whatever the stupid California Republicans yap about on this issue - "I'm pro life....,", etc. is irrelevant due to this. So all they do is fail the Big IQ test and cost themselves votes.


well I guess you can say the issue of gun rights is over now, we have too many liberals voting, so lets all go away and never give a thought to our Rights again. what a stupid arguement you make.

Just as the right to bear arms is a right that is currently trampled on, so is the right to life. In fact teh right to life is the very reason for the right to bear arms.

becuase of megs stance on killing babies, she is totaly unqualified to lead the state. She does not reconize our most basic and important right, the right to life itself.

one day we may get roe vs wade overturned. mean while we do not need pro-murder people running the state.

I suggest we work on educating voters on all of our rights as protected in our Constitution and Bill of Rights. only then can we be true to our rights as so well advocated by our Founding Fathers.

if we ignore the Right to life, we are no better than hitler.

Our right to bear arms comes from the right to life.

by the way that bag of fetuses is a bag of murdered human babies. Dont dehumanize it, call it what it is, dead babies, or if you must, call them Murdered human fetuses.

Meg is unfit, the worst most immral kind of person, to allow murder of babies.

bwiese
01-05-2010, 12:32 PM
well I guess you can say the issue of gun rights is over now, we have too many liberals voting, so lets all go away and never give a thought to our Rights again. what a stupid arguement you make.

Nope. The battle is much better in favor of recovering gun rights than in overturning Roe v. Wade.


becuase of megs stance on killing babies, she is totaly unqualified to lead the state. She does not reconize our most basic and important right, Millions disagree, and this is an entirely losing position in CA and it will never return. "Right -to-life" votes in CA are, and will from now on, always consistently in the minority. The only way to reverse this is to stop women from voting.


one day we may get roe vs wade overturned. Comparing Roe v. Wade to RKBA issues is poor pairing due to dissimilar status.

Won't happen. There's better legal support for existence of Roe v. Wade in its formulation plus there's stare decisis. Prior gun issues did not have good case law and we only need incorporation.

Also, the existence of Roe v. Wade will actually help gun rights in incorporation issue ... if an Roe supports one of the many unenumerated rights, how can the explicity written 2nd Amendment be voided?


mean while we do not need pro-murder people running the state. I get a feeling my life would be sold out (taxes, guns, freedoms) by the "pro-life" people anyway.

I suggest we work on educating voters on all of our rights as protected in our Constitution and Bill of Rights. only then can we be true to our rights as so well advocated by our Founding Fathers.Who says tumor-like cell growth = life?



Oh, stop that crap.

[quote]Our right to bear arms comes from the right to life.Yes, and I'm not a blastocyst.


by the way that bag of fetuses is a bag of murdered human babies.Yes, I was talking about winning an election.

Practically that doesn't exist because abortions are generally done early where it's just cell growth and the fetus is not really differentiated.



Meg is unfit, the worst most immral kind of person, to allow murder of babies.She probably thinks the same of you for trying to interfere with a woman's life.


Bottom line: my overdramatic statement is just meant to show why Republicans lose - and continue to lose - statewide elections in CA, and why they will never recover.

I'm not really for abortion. I just don't give a crap when so many other important things are there, and I sure as hell don't believe life-worth-saving begins at conception (yes, partial birth abortion is abhorrent and is also generally illegal).

macadamizer
01-05-2010, 12:49 PM
one day we may get roe vs wade overturned. mean while we do not need pro-murder people running the state.

Millions disagree, and this is an entirely losing position in CA and it will never return. "Right -to-life" votes in CA are, and will from now on, always consistently in the minority. The only way to reverse this is to stop women from voting.

Just a minor follow-up, Roe v. Wade just means that states can't interfere with a woman's right to an abortion in certain cases. It doesn't mean that states can't provide more access than the minimum required by Roe.

But the point is, even is Roe v. Wade were overturned today, it wouldn't make abortions illegal. What it would mean is that the states would be free to ban them, or allow them, or whatever. Even if Roe v. Wade were overturned, there is no evidence that California would then go ahead and ban abortions under it's new-found freedom to do so. Abortions would almost certainly remain legal in California even if Roe v. Wade went away.

bwiese
01-05-2010, 12:54 PM
Just a minor follow-up, Roe v. Wade just means that states can't interfere with a woman's right to an abortion in certain cases. It doesn't mean that states can't provide more access than the minimum required by Roe.

But the point is, even is Roe v. Wade were overturned today, it wouldn't make abortions illegal. What it would mean is that the states would be free to ban them, or allow them, or whatever. Even if Roe v. Wade were overturned, there is no evidence that California would then go ahead and ban abortions under it's new-found freedom to do so. Abortions would almost certainly remain legal in California even if Roe v. Wade went away.

Exactly, and you said it far better than I did.

ZRX61
01-05-2010, 1:19 PM
she will be no different. we thought arnie was different and we got screwed. meg will be nothing more than a mouth piece. yeah she talks about cutting taxes and making this state more business friendly. good luck to her if elected but i doubt she would get an inch out the turds that occupy the legislature.

In a related matter:
Northrop-Grumman annouced today it is moving the corporate part out of Ca to DC..

Another business leaving California....

bwiese
01-05-2010, 1:26 PM
In a related matter:
Northrop-Grumman annouced today it is moving the corporate part out of Ca to DC..

Another business leaving California....

Yes, but that's less due to CA situation than practicalities.

If you're doing Fed biz on daily basis, it's better to be close to heart of operation.

NightingaleforGovernor10'
01-05-2010, 4:30 PM
As the OP of this thread, I offer my sincerest apologies for my portrayal of a wonderful gubernatorial candidate. I only have the best intentions with promoting awareness with respects to this VERY REAL alternative to the choices we are offered in politics today.
Again, I am not Chelene Nightingale, just an avid supporter who thought it would be best to reach out to an audience who may not know about this "liberty-minded" candidate. I found this to be an excellent source to do just that, seeing as how political candidates don't usually post in fourms like these. I thought I would benefit this candidate by doing so myself. After seeing the response, however, this may have actually been detrimental to her camapign efforts. I am just really adament about promoting a candidate which I believe to be California's only hope with respects to "roping in" a government out of control.

NightingaleforGovernor10'
01-05-2010, 4:33 PM
Furthermore, I feel that pro 2A voters are way too naive to believe Jerry Brown is a 2A supporter. His nickname "Governor Ballerina" should tell you everything. Ole' Moonbeam is just pandering to get elected. It is "business as usual" if Jerry gets elected.

Here is an article that Jerry Brown supporters should read.
http://www.examiner.com/x-26553-LA-History-Examiner~y2009m10d31-Jerry-Brown--The-California-Democrats-Heir-Apparent

bwiese
01-05-2010, 4:37 PM
Furthermore, I feel that pro 2A voters are way too naive to believe Jerry Brown is a 2A supporter. His nickname "Governor Ballerina" should tell you everything. Ole' Moonbeam is just pandering to get elected.

Supreme Court amicus briefs are not 'pandering'.

Downsizing the Firearms Division and making staff changes is not pandering.

Some of us have significantly better background in knowing AG's stances on these matters. And we're not naive.

Call us back when you're competent. Your candidate is a very nice lady, with some common sentiments but
(1) she's outta her league
(2) she has zero chance. Can she raise $30million in the next few months? Nope.

GrizzlyGuy
01-05-2010, 4:52 PM
Furthermore, I feel that pro 2A voters are way too naive to believe Jerry Brown is a 2A supporter. His nickname "Governor Ballerina" should tell you everything. Ole' Moonbeam is just pandering to get elected. It is "business as usual" if Jerry gets elected.

Absolutely right. If there is one thing you can count on with Jerry, it is his flip-flopping and pandering, even on civil rights issues (http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1868504,00.html):

Early on, Brown had indicated he would fulfill his duties as A.G. and use the powers of his office to defend Prop 8. Indeed, Brown had sided with opponents of gay marriage earlier this year when the state Supreme Court ruled on whether a previous ballot initiative banning gay marriage was legal. As foot soldiers and generals alike on both sides of the war over gay marriage prepared to battle in court, Brown told TIME an evolving understanding of what was at stake prompted him to turn things around.

With an 111-page legal brief that has surprised legal scholars, Brown reversed course and repudiated his previous statements indicating he'd likely support the legality of Prop 8. Instead, on Friday, he urged the state's Supreme Court to overturn the vote, a move that would infuriate conservatives who are still white-hot mad over the court's historic 4-3 decision that earlier this year prohibited all forms of discrimination against gays, and mandated the state issue marriage licenses to gay couples. In a wide-ranging interview, Brown told TIME that his view of the legal merits of the case had evolved over the past several weeks, and explained why he now thinks the right to gay marriage in California is as fundamental as such bedrock principles as the right to property and to liberty itself.

We're supposed to believe Jerry is pro-2A just because he wrote ONE pro-2A brief? Once elected, will he again be telling TIME that "his view of the legal merits of the case had evolved over the past several weeks"? :rolleyes:

wildhawker
01-05-2010, 4:56 PM
Furthermore, I feel that pro 2A voters are way too naive to believe Jerry Brown is a 2A supporter. His nickname "Governor Ballerina" should tell you everything. Ole' Moonbeam is just pandering to get elected. It is "business as usual" if Jerry gets elected.

Here is an article that Jerry Brown supporters should read.
http://www.examiner.com/x-26553-LA-History-Examiner~y2009m10d31-Jerry-Brown--The-California-Democrats-Heir-Apparent

And you're *not* pandering? I don't see how Brown's taking such a substantively antithetical approach to the Dem party line can be so grossly misconstrued, but I suppose you have your own candidate to elect and so must pander to those who present the opportunity for those precious few votes the Constitution party will receive in 2010.

Your "apology" for deceptive practices is anything but. Come back and try again when you don't feel compelled to justify your inappropriate actions.

NightingaleforGovernor10'
01-05-2010, 5:11 PM
And you're *not* pandering? I don't see how Brown's taking such a substantively antithetical approach to the Dem party line can be so grossly misconstrued, but I suppose you have your own candidate to elect and so must pander to those who present the opportunity for those precious few votes the Constitution party will receive in 2010.

Your "apology" for deceptive practices is anything but. Come back and try again when you don't feel compelled to justify your inappropriate actions.

You actions are anything but appropriate! Do you want us all in this thread to just agree with you? Are you the only one allowed to have an opinion because you have raised some money? That sounds pretty commy to me, if thats that case.

I can post whatever I feel is appropriate to the forum. I am doing this for myself now. You can vote for Chelene or not? Frankly I don't care if you do. But you continously do damage by your vicious remarks. I am not paid to promote candidates that I feel are the only REAL choice California has. This is my God given right to spread the awareness all I please!

Sgt Raven
01-05-2010, 6:02 PM
You actions are anything but appropriate! Do you want us all in this thread to just agree with you? Are you the only one allowed to have an opinion because you have raised some money? That sounds pretty commy to me, if thats that case.

I can post whatever I feel is appropriate to the forum. I am doing this for myself now. You can vote for Chelene or not? Frankly I don't care if you do. But you continously do damage by your vicious remarks. I am not paid to promote candidates that I feel are the only REAL choice California has. This is my God given right to spread the awareness all I please!


You chose your screen name and either you represent her campaign or maybe they should ask you to change it. Also you might think twice before attacking a senior member, when most here don't know you from Adam.

wildhawker
01-05-2010, 6:12 PM
You actions are anything but appropriate! Do you want us all in this thread to just agree with you? Are you the only one allowed to have an opinion because you have raised some money? That sounds pretty commy to me, if thats that case.

I can post whatever I feel is appropriate to the forum. I am doing this for myself now. You can vote for Chelene or not? Frankly I don't care if you do. But you continously do damage by your vicious remarks. I am not paid to promote candidates that I feel are the only REAL choice California has. This is my God given right to spread the awareness all I please!

Where to begin...

bwiese
01-05-2010, 6:23 PM
Where to begin...

Relax Brandon. I've tired of beating my head on the desk, too

Sgt Raven
01-05-2010, 6:37 PM
Where to begin...

(Bill Engvall voice) Here's your sign! (Bill Engvall voice) :p

mconrad
01-05-2010, 6:38 PM
Well here are some links to help you decide:
http://redcounty.com/meg-whitman-a-big-lib-supporter
http://www.redcounty.com/re-meg-whitman-writing-a-book-part-2-look-co-author
http://articles.sfgate.com/2009-02-13/bay-area/17190174_1_sen-john-mccain-abortion-rights-budget-gap "Whitman said she supports abortion rights - including public funding for abortions - and believes tough gun laws like assault weapon bans and handgun control are appropriate for California."

Chelene, thanks for taking the time to write. In response to one of Meg's commercials (Write to me at Ask Meg. I want to know what you think), I wrote to Meg. I asked her for her specific position on the second amendment, concealed carry and current California gun laws. I'm still waiting for a response. I'm sure I'll hear from her any day now.

I fear she'll be no better than Arnold, who also talked a good game until he took office. He is no better than Grey Davis was. No more RINOs.

steadyrock
01-05-2010, 8:48 PM
Where to begin...

Just smile genuinely, and say "Bless your heart..."

davescz
01-06-2010, 9:23 AM
Nope. The battle is much better in favor of recovering gun rights than in overturning Roe v. Wade.

Millions disagree, and this is an entirely losing position in CA and it will never return. "Right -to-life" votes in CA are, and will from now on, always consistently in the minority. The only way to reverse this is to stop women from voting.


Comparing Roe v. Wade to RKBA issues is poor pairing due to dissimilar status.

Won't happen. There's better legal support for existence of Roe v. Wade in its formulation plus there's stare decisis. Prior gun issues did not have good case law and we only need incorporation.

Also, the existence of Roe v. Wade will actually help gun rights in incorporation issue ... if an Roe supports one of the many unenumerated rights, how can the explicity written 2nd Amendment be voided?


I get a feeling my life would be sold out (taxes, guns, freedoms) by the "pro-life" people anyway.

Who says tumor-like cell growth = life?

[quoteif we ignore the Right to life, we are no better than hitler.

Oh, stop that crap.

Yes, and I'm not a blastocyst.


Yes, I was talking about winning an election.

Practically that doesn't exist because abortions are generally done early where it's just cell growth and the fetus is not really differentiated.


She probably thinks the same of you for trying to interfere with a woman's life.


Bottom line: my overdramatic statement is just meant to show why Republicans lose - and continue to lose - statewide elections in CA, and why they will never recover.

I'm not really for abortion. I just don't give a crap when so many other important things are there, and I sure as hell don't believe life-worth-saving begins at conception (yes, partial birth abortion is abhorrent and is also generally illegal).[/QUOTE]





MY POST:
your full of crap, (to use your own word) your an anti life baby killing supporter. as far as republicans not winning becuase they are prolife, well we got the anti-life republican in the top position in the capitol, and we all know how good he is at protecting our 2nd Admedment rights. actually more and more females are becoming pro-life. Is the only way we can get good gun laws passed, if we outlaw voting by any one that does not own a gun????

Plenty of sonograms and such show that many many babies are aborted with reconizable human features, your dead wrong in stating otherwise.

guess you better give up hope on the guns issue, it is dead, to many anti-gun liberals, so give up, never try to correct it, you must be wrong, becuase the majority is aginst you. You know milliions of folks are aginst you, you better give up.

the right to carry and abortion do have simualr status, both are an infringement of Civil Rights. The so called "right " to an abortion was made up by some justices, it is nto part of our founding rights, infact it violates teh right to life.

that said, Meg is unfit , I belive her gun record is pretty bad (did she not run ebay, a company that has banned firearms sales?)

if you look at congress, I think you will find a good correlation between anti-life and anti-gun politicans, and find there is a strong correlation between pro-life, and pro gun politicans.

If one respects our most basic right, it stands to reason that person will support the right to protect life with arms.

a politicans that disregards the life of an innocent is more likely to disregard your right to keep arms. simple logic here.

any basic biology text will tell you that yes, a growing tumor is alive. I guess you will think if I stop a criminal from murder I am interfering with his life too?

the right to life is much more important than the "inconvinece" of carrying a baby to term. the selfish would be mom should have never screwed if she dont want a kid. to kill the kid does nto make it right. life has consequences, you screw, you get pregnet you are responsible to that life, and must not kill it.
kind of like the responsibility you have when you keep a loaded gun at home, you have to protect a childs life by not leaving it out and loaded. same goes for a woman that get pregnent, she choose to screw, now she has to take care of the kid, as does the guy he screwed he.


yes, arnold the anti-life republican, all us pro-gunners are so happy with him.

Sgt Raven
01-06-2010, 11:14 AM
......snip.....Blah, blah, blah.....snip......

:TFH: You're not helping your side. :TFH:

Chelene
01-07-2010, 2:08 AM
I am more than happy to answer any and all questions if that is ok with the moderators. Also feel free to email me directly at chelene@nightingaleforgovernor.com. I will admit that it is past 2:00am and after a long day of campaigning, homeschooling, and business...too tired to recall all the questions. I will be out of the office tomorrow, however would like to answer each question...please email me a reminder if I don't address everything now.

And to the kind poster who stated I was out of my league....well over 5 years ago I worked in another industry with absolutely no political experience and since then have managed a campaign, political events, lobbying efforts, invited to meet Ron Paul and endorse his campaign, etc...In addition, I do have political consultants on the campaign that are experts in their field or have been in office or currently in politics. In addition, a governor appoints about 400 "staff positions/advisors" to help manage the state. Our founding fathers did not intend for us to elect "career politicians", instead they wanted us to manage ourselves. I agree the task is overwhelming, but I have always been a determined individual and never look away from a challenge.

We do have too much at stake right now..our freedoms! I am a mother and that is what inspires me daily to give all that I have for their futures.

Regarding the SOS and immigration concern. For one, unless you were reading the pro-amnesty crowds description of SOS, there is no way one could call that organization racist. I worked very closely with Ted Hayes who is a very good friend of mine and we still work together. In addition SOS was a multi-ethnic organization. We were labeled out of fear by amnesty supporters due to our successes, boldness, and youthfulness. I support LEGAL immigration..that is how my mother's family arrived here. I encourage every immigrant to come here legally.

Our webmaster did a great job designing the campaign website. She owns her own websiite design company and really upgraded us from the original. Regarding the content, I am re-writing the platforms. The water issue is complete and now working on education. If you don't like the site, then what improvements would you suggest? Our team is running to help, so we are open to the advice/constructive criticism.

Now onto the questions. First, I do not memorize canned responses. I speak from the heart. And all speeches are written by me. Regarding illegal immigration, since I have worked on that issue for 5 years, I have definite ideas. One, I would cut off all public benefits to illegal aliens. Since there are already laws in the book regarding citizenship, this can be done immediately. In addition, employers need to follow the laws regarding hiring legal citizens or be fined or state benefits cut. Will this solve the problem overnight, no, however when there is no longer the "carrot" dangling, eventually illegal aliens will leave our state. Sure activists will try to fight the law, but I am not someone who backs down. Also cities who declare "sanctuary" from the state will not receive any state benefits. Furthermore, a governor can request the national guard to help secure our borders. I could keep writing here, but this is a 2A site. My other ideas on this subject can be located in various podcasts. I am pretty vocal on this issue.

Regarding protecting the 2A rights. You bet I am repealing gun restriction bills and the first one is definitely AB 962. A legislator can create gun restriction bills every day if they desire, but that is why a strong 2A/constitutional rights governor must be elected. They are definitely coming for our guns and rights in guise of "progressing". It is up to "we the people" to elect the right individuals and to stop voting out of fear. Thank God our founding fathers had guts and we need to follow their lead! No gun restriction bill would get past my desk.

Although we may not have a majority protecting our rights in Sacramento, we do have a few good gems and I believe with the climate in our country right now...more voters will elect liberty candidates. As governor, I would encourage one of those liberty-elected officials to sponsor a bill protecting our 2A. And this right is another reason I strongly support the 10th..in case the Feds decide to pass gun restriction laws.

Ok, it is almost 3:00am..please email me for more answers as I am exhausted.

Grizzly, I thank you for your logic. I enjoyed reading your posts. Since I am too tired to form sentences now..here are some quick responses.

1. YES! YES!!! I gladly signed the 10th amendment centers pledge. The feds were never to have this power over our states.

2. The "war on drugs" will never end as long as there are users. Art and I have debated this topic many times. I know the logic is that if we legalize pot, then it will reduce crime, decrease the cartel power, etc...But I am not about government control. Our state legalized medical marijuana, yet the feds over stepped their bounds and a manager of a center was arrested. Since I am tired, cannot think of his name, etc...Government controls our "medicine" including alternative methods..of course now they want to control our health too. The alcohol industry is controlled. Once something is "legalized" then they find methods to "control" it with additional laws. The "war" will not be won as long as elected officials look the other way while their pockets are being lined. In addition, it will not stop the cartels...there are other drugs they push as well. G., email me so we can correspond more on this point. (I have a campaign appearance late in the day tomorrow..so may not email back until Friday.)

3. When the CP asked me to run for this office, after a few weeks, I finally accepted a meeting with their state and national reps. I told them that I did not believe "social" issues belonged in government. Although I am a Christian, I do not feel like it is the role of government to play "God". I believe only hearts can change society. Government's role is to protect our sovereignty and liberty. The Bill of Rights in my very humble opinion is the perfect form of government and over the years "power" and "citizens' dependence for more government" dismantled our freedoms and rights. I like two parties - Libertarian and the CP, but like any party I do not agree with all the party platforms. I like being in the CP and they have given me the freedom to speak honestly.

4. I am on the fence with e-verify for the privacy reason you mentioned. However until we can manage the illegal immigration crisis, it is a viable temporary solution. Yes, there are pros and cons. But the point is to ensure that employers hire AMERICANS!!

And the original platforms were written in a hurry..and I did ask someone from the campaign team to help as I had very little time before the announcement. I decided that once I had really researched the issues, learned more while campaigning that I would re-write the platforms later. I just started during the Christmas break. I am open to suggestions, although not to "change my mind" just on the importance of the issues.

Thank you G. for the encouragement.

Carpenter 409
01-07-2010, 5:20 AM
Sorry guys I just don't see Nightingale becoming the next Gov.
Yeah we need someone to stand up for our rights but the rest of the state in not ready for a third party. Great example look at Ron Paul, when it came down to the final stretch he went down in flames. We need to find someone in either the GOP or Demo and support them for now.
Better to pick the lesser of two evils then not to have a choice at all.

Carpenter 409
01-07-2010, 7:20 AM
I disagree I think the GOP and the DEMO parties have morphed into the DEMOGOP party and a third party has relevance. I think the tide is turning nation wide,and that if Ron Paul were running today he would have relevance.The lessor of two evils philosophy has driven this country into the ground to the point where it is possible for the socialist party now in control to collapse the dollar.The communists are winning with the help of our own citizens because we keep electing the lessor of the evils.To compromise with the left is to compromise your freedoms.Just sayin is all.

Don't get me wrong I would love to see someone like Chelene Nightingale get elected. The problem is the "Sheeple", those who vote along party lines regardless of whatever there party is doing and whoever they are putting foreword. We are the minority here, don't forget that. Most of Califorian's don't care about Guns or Gun Control. Most people hear Diane Frankenstein say we need to outlaw gun and everything will be safer for everyone and the sheeple eat it up.
Any third party Politico needs to show up the GOP and Demo candidates in debates and needs to be able to get there name out there. The other thing is people getting off there a**es and voting. I wanna say the last vote was like on 20-30% of people voting, whats up with that?
People like Chelene Nightingale don't need to prove to me they are good for us they need to prove to the rest of the state they are qualified. If she can't muster the votes to get elected and be a front runner in the polls or at least very close to the front then I need to protect my interest and go for the next person who I feel will give me the most protection for my 2A rights. There again choosing the lesser of the evils available. Let's say you vote for Chelene and she get 10% of the vote, yes you have made a stand and thumbed your nose at all the non gun people, but while you were making your statement someone like Meg gets elected. So my question to you is are you better off now???

Be realistic when you cast your vote, don't throw it away to make a point.

Carpenter 409
01-07-2010, 8:23 AM
In the short run no we're not better off in the long run yes we are.Because when the Meg whitmans of the world are through,and theres nothing left but the pieces these people will be exposed for what they are.My thinking is that we have got to stop this leftward slide.We're screwed either way we vote so why not vote for a candidate who has the same beliefs as me.Should we risk all our other rights for the sake of one.Theres no guarantee you won't lose that one as well to some back room deal made by a career left leaning politician.Make no mistake my guns are at the top of my agenda,I just don't agree that to keep voting left is a good way to keep them.

Thinking like that makes us all Canon Fodder, I wanna survive this and rally and win but you need a winable position first. If someone like Meg gets elected we will never recover from her anti gun barrage. AG brown will hopefully takes littler bits but survivable bits. You are right though we are screwed either way it's just controlling who is going to screw you and how bad they will do it.

Steyr_223
01-07-2010, 9:48 AM
According to the latest Calguns Poll, Brown is leading followed by Nightingale, Whitman and Poizner..

I am surprised at the number of votes for Di Fi..

Please vote! And vote only once!

Please no shill duplicated/IP accounts..Honor among Calgunners!

:)

The Poll:

http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=256017

Carpenter 409
01-07-2010, 2:04 PM
At this point it shows Brown and Whitman in a close 1st and 2nd place but there is still 9 months to go. Now that the news polls on the net.

Carpenter 409
01-08-2010, 5:55 PM
I'm thinking it's more of a liberal and conservative type of thing than a Republican and Democrat thing.

AyatollahGondola
01-21-2010, 10:18 PM
One, I would cut off all public benefits to illegal aliens. Since there are already laws in the book regarding citizenship, this can be done immediately.

Regarding protecting the 2A rights. You bet I am repealing gun restriction bills and the first one is definitely AB 962. A legislator can create gun restriction bills every day if they desire, but that is why a strong 2A/constitutional rights governor must be elected.

No gun restriction bill would get past my desk.

Although we may not have a majority protecting our rights in Sacramento, we do have a few good gems and I believe with the climate in our country right now...more voters will elect liberty candidates. As governor, I would encourage one of those liberty-elected officials to sponsor a bill protecting our 2A. .

Ok, maybe you could explain how you accomplish these things as Governor. The first one was already tried, and not just by the governor. It was we the people, prop 187, and it was overturned by the federal courts. How would you make it so? Executive order?

On the second one; How does the Governor repeal a law in California?
And further, if a gun law doesn't get past your desk, what about the legislature overiding a veto?

Lastly, are you aware that a 2A effort was attempted in the early 90's by a state senator, and it didn't get off the ground? And the legislature was less populated with liberal gun-grabbers then. If, as you say, "Although we may not have a majority protecting our rights in Sacramento", how would you expect to get a 2A passed as Governor?

rkt88edmo
01-22-2010, 9:22 AM
I am more than happy to answer any and all questions if that is ok with the moderators. Also feel free to email me directly at chelene@nightingaleforgovernor.com. I will admit that it is past 2:00am and after a long day of campaigning, homeschooling, and business...too tired to recall all the questions. I will be out of the office tomorrow, however would like to answer each question...please email me a reminder if I don't address everything now.

You are absolutely welcome to participate here, there is a sticky post at the top of the forum outlining the rules, but they are pretty simple.

yourotherleft
01-22-2010, 9:46 AM
Somehow I don't trust candidate that pour in too much moola into his/her race. In this case, Meg whitman. I heard she's close to spending $39 mil of her money. Wow... does she really care about calif that much??

davescz
01-22-2010, 3:36 PM
:TFH: You're not helping your side. :TFH:



what side you on raven? We cant tell from you "Blah, Blah, Blah" post. perhaps you can add something constructive here rather than attempt to paraphrase what I write with your childish "Blah, Blah, Blah". I guess you have nothing logical to say other than "Blah, Blah, Blah".

SJgunguy24
01-22-2010, 3:38 PM
Gene Hoffman

givens
01-22-2010, 8:00 PM
Conan "CoCo" O'Brien

MP301
01-22-2010, 9:53 PM
Hard to believe "Gov Moonbeam" is our best bet and seems to be on our side :TFH:

Brown is the only way to go this time around. Chelene might be if she had a chance, but in situations like this, it would seem a vote for her reduces our chances. And besides her stand on gun rights which is quite popular here on CGN, what other experience or knowledge does she have? Im a one issue voter for the most part, but even I have my limits

And..anybody figure on how much money Whitman has to spend on this election? Id guess a lot and we need to make damn sure she is crushed for her BS stand on gun issues. Brown has a good chance, Chelene does not.

I am also registering Dem just for the occasion...

Why was Brown called "Moonbeam?"

As Governor, Brown proposed the establishment of a state space academy and the purchasing of a satellite that would be launched into orbit to provide emergency communications for the state—a proposal similar to one that would indeed eventually be adopted by the state. In 1978 an out-of-state columnist, Mike Royko, then at the Chicago Sun-Times, nicknamed Brown "Governor Moonbeam" because of the latter idea. The nickname quickly became associated with his quirky politics[citation needed], which were considered eccentric by some in California and the rest of the nation[citation needed]. In 1992, almost 15 years later, Royko would disavow the nickname, proclaiming Brown to be "just as serious" as any other politician.

P.W.
01-24-2010, 10:13 AM
I respect the choice of those members not going to vote due to the candidate choices but that does nothing but hurt our 2nd Amendment rights even more. Either your apart of the problem or the solution and I would rather take the chance of voting for someone who has proved he is somewhat Pro 2nd Amend. than not voting for no one or voting for another RINO.

Jerry Brown is our best shot at keep the limited rights and hopefully breaking new ground and getting some Bills passed into law that would benefit those of use who enjoy our 2nd Amendment Rights. Those who say they won't vote because of the candidate choices have that right but are just armchair 2nd Amendment supporters and are more apart of the problem and should not be allowed to complain about the problems we will have with a new Governor since they did nothing to help our cause.

I'm giving Jerry my vote because I truly believe he is our best choice and it comes down to Deeds Not Words.

Sgt Raven
01-24-2010, 11:39 AM
your full of crap,


1.) To start use the right word. "You're, YOU ARE, not Your"
2.) Even if you could get Roe v. Wade overturned it wouldn't change things in California one bit.
3.) I'm a conservative that votes Guns 1st and taxes/ spending 2nd. Your main issue is so far off the radar in California and it won't change a thing here. :rolleyes:


what side you on raven? We cant tell from you "Blah, Blah, Blah" post. perhaps you can add something constructive here rather than attempt to paraphrase what I write with your childish "Blah, Blah, Blah". I guess you have nothing logical to say other than "Blah, Blah, Blah".

cortayack
01-24-2010, 2:39 PM
I believe people who disqualify 3rd party candidates are sheeple and part of the problem. How can you say people vote on party lines (which most do) then say we must vote Republican or Democrate. Thats still party lines to me. Both parties have not done sh*t for us in this state. If we keep on having that same mentality about 3rd parties then nothing is ever going to change in this state. But theres hope just look at Massachusetts. I ever thought I would see the day they would elect. a Republican....

P.W.
01-24-2010, 4:44 PM
I believe people who disqualify 3rd party candidates are sheeple and part of the problem. How can you say people vote on party lines (which most do) then say we must vote Republican or Democrate. Thats still party lines to me. Both parties have not done sh*t for us in this state. If we keep on having that same mentality about 3rd parties then nothing is ever going to change in this state. But theres hope just look at Massachusetts. I ever thought I would see the day they would elect. a Republican....


Well if there was a 3rd party candidate that was well rounded and has the experience in the real world I don't think we would count them out, if you know someone who has a chance & whose campaign wouldn't be shot down due to their association with undesirable groups- Please Tell Us Who They Are...

However in this year's election I just don't see any 3rd party candidates who have the influence, experience, fundraising base, not to mention plan to get this state back on track while helping to restore our 2A Rights. Whether some voters count out the 3rd part candidates are due to them not giving them a shot in hell to win or that they do not believe they have the experience, maybe they believe they do not have ability to run state government, or hell maybe they just vote their registered party every time (That is their Right). How can you call them sheeple ? I think those that don't vote or say they will not due to the candidate options are the sheepish ones who shouldn't be allowed to B*tch about the problems in the next Governor's term because they didn't get out and try to fix our situation via Their Vote.

Sutcliffe
01-24-2010, 11:48 PM
In order to get things done, any governor will have to realize that the left leaning state legislature hates guns. Guns will be used as a bargaining tool to achieve other priorties. I don't really think Arnie is or was all that anti gun. I just think it was something he decided he could give in order to get what he wanted.
If we really want change, we need to get someone other than the current regime out of the state capitol.

bakokid
04-26-2010, 7:50 AM
There is no doubt that many Americans are ready for a 3rd party candidate, only this is California, not Idaho, Montana, Nevada, Arizona, or Texas. Don't get me wrong, I like what I see in Chelene Nightingale, but California votes heavily liberal and Democrat, particularly southern and the east bay. I read up on her in her website and see she has no political experience, that is nother strike against Chelene, she's never been on a city council, mayoral, board of supervisors, etc.position, her opponent will use that heavily against her, even though inexperience is not a disqualification factor, it still will not sit well with many Californians who want more than a pretty face. She needs to get her feet wet in actually doing a job, she needs to run for a city council position or something. Californians are fed up with high taxes and inept politicians that cannot fiscally manage this state. I wish Chelene well, heck I will even contribute to her campaign, but currently Jerry Brown is the most viable candidate and has a track record that is good on the 2A.

"no political experience" when i saw politician what comes to mind? we dont want or need anymore career politicians, they are power hungry criminals. many of our founding fathers turned down or were reluctant to take office, and when they did they served few terms when they would have been easily elected. they didn not want power, and that is what made them the best. they governed how they would want to be goverened and not for control, they were not the elitist that we see in govt today. i will not vote for another bad or worse canidate. the dems and reps can go to hell for what they have become and what they have done to us. im either voting Nightingale or writing in mcclintock. and i suggest we as a group of cal gunners to find one of these two to go with then email and tell everyone we know. how much do u want an honest govenor, send the message and do the campaigning for them. nightingale or me or anyone shouldnt need 30million to buy themselves into the govenors seat. we need to wake up and wake others up, there are more than just 2 people running. wwe should vote on the content of their character and not of their wallets. furthermore we need to stop voting with our wallets and voting in these idiots (obama) cause we think they are gonna GIVE us something.

BluNorthern
04-26-2010, 1:46 PM
Don't get me wrong I would love to see someone like Chelene Nightingale get elected. The problem is the "Sheeple", those who vote along party lines regardless of whatever there party is doing and whoever they are putting foreword. We are the minority here, don't forget that. Most of Califorian's don't care about Guns or Gun Control. Most people hear Diane Frankenstein say we need to outlaw gun and everything will be safer for everyone and the sheeple eat it up.
Any third party Politico needs to show up the GOP and Demo candidates in debates and needs to be able to get there name out there. The other thing is people getting off there a**es and voting. I wanna say the last vote was like on 20-30% of people voting, whats up with that?
People like Chelene Nightingale don't need to prove to me they are good for us they need to prove to the rest of the state they are qualified. If she can't muster the votes to get elected and be a front runner in the polls or at least very close to the front then I need to protect my interest and go for the next person who I feel will give me the most protection for my 2A rights. There again choosing the lesser of the evils available. Let's say you vote for Chelene and she get 10% of the vote, yes you have made a stand and thumbed your nose at all the non gun people, but while you were making your statement someone like Meg gets elected. So my question to you is are you better off now???

Be realistic when you cast your vote, don't throw it away to make a point.
Amen to that...throwing away a vote on a third party candidate in this case is folly. I think it'll be either Brown or Whitman, and NO WAY do I want Meg in the drivers seat. What she did with her anti gun stance on ebay should be as clear an indicator as we need.

Legasat
04-26-2010, 2:16 PM
I don't expect ANYTHING regardless of who gets elected Gov.

I will be making a couple more donations to CGF in the coming weeks, as THAT is where I have decided to put my trust.

Aegis
04-26-2010, 6:54 PM
It does not matter who the governor is. The legislature and state senate is the main problem in this state. Unless most of the legislature and state senate is voted out, and that is not going to happen, the state will continue on its present course towards bankruptcy.

SoCalCitizen
04-26-2010, 7:08 PM
Politicians from no experience to most experience= liars. Don't really matter what party they say they represent. Just want you to open your billfold to 'em.

extreme45
04-29-2010, 6:33 AM
Meg scares me. I firmly believe that we need a strong "business" hand on the helm but I am afraid that Meg is just Arnie in drag!!

ned946
04-29-2010, 9:14 AM
She's a RINO

republican in name only

Glock22Fan
04-29-2010, 9:43 AM
Maybe a plan would be to vote Poizner in the primaries. If he wins in the primaries (unlikely), vote for him in November knowing he will probably lose, but the fallback candidate (JB) is also on our side. However, do NOT vote for Meg unless the opponent is NOTJB (in which case he or she is likely to be a nightmare for us).

Oldnoob
04-29-2010, 9:57 AM
At this point I'm kind of giving up fixing CA. Our legislators will keep writing up ridiculous laws either anti gun, raise out tax or just waste our tax money.

The last reminding hope I have is to push a Governor up there to use his/her veto power to stop all those bills. I don't even expect the next Governor to lead or fix anything. Just be a gate keeper.

REH
04-29-2010, 12:57 PM
I voted Mclintock last time around.


Whitman is NWO all the way. Bad news.

Ditto...............................

Ed_in_Sac
04-29-2010, 1:22 PM
Like we are supposed to believe that someone is spending millions of their own dollars to be a public servant, that they are working for US? Really, then you must believe in all of those "internet" five and twenty dollar donations that got no. 44 elected.:43:

vantec08
04-29-2010, 3:36 PM
Right, Oldnoob. Without the voting strength in congress to enforce his/her vetoes, the best we can hope for is a Guv. that wont contribute to the madness.

bakokid
10-11-2010, 2:06 PM
currently listening to jaz mckay on knzr am1560 bad mouthing chelen nightengale while praising meg...what a jack ***. im sick of these socalled conservative media talents only looking at the small picture of dem vs rep when there is huge piles of crap on both sides. u got guys like beck who love exposing conspiracies when it comes to obama and company, but then call anyone else crazy if they even ask a question about a conspiracy that crosses party lines or is bigger than the 2 parties. its also funny because these same media talents talk about their belief in god, but if u believe in god u must also believe in the devil and he is smart and like a good general will attack from any and all angles possible not just head on, thus we have "crazy conspiracy theories." it irratates me when somebody is demonized because they are a truther or birth cert truther, or mention cfl or buildiburg. it seems to me that the more these theories are universally shot down the more it would seem they are worth looking into. i also find it a joke to attack someone called a truther or someone trying to find truth (no matter what it may be) for if u are not a truther what are u.... a liar?
chelene has my vote cause no matter what conspiracy she may want to look into it just show she is not ignorant enough to believe the bs we are fed and she has a healthy skepicism for govt. i vote third party cause i cant decide between hitler and stalin (whitman-brown, mcain-obama) ill let that mistake rest on someone esles concience