PDA

View Full Version : They are Afraid of Your Guns


Pages : [1] 2

NightingaleforGovernor10'
01-04-2010, 12:16 PM
"They Are Scared Of Your Guns"


An open carry revolution is underway in the United States and Californians are participating in the act of exercising their constitutional rights. In fact the second amendment of the Bill of Rights states: “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.”
Yet infringement upon our gun rights is occurring at an alarming rate nationwide. Last year a Homeland Security report was leaked labeling individuals who support the Second Amendment, own firearms, or purchase ammunition as rightwing terrorists.
Perhaps Governor Schwarzenegger had this document in mind when he signed AB 962 into law this past October. The law which goes into effect on February 1, 2011 forces handgun ammunition consumers to leave detailed personal information in addition to thumbprints with licensed ammunition dealers. Furthermore the new law bans direct shipping to California residents who choose to purchase ammunition via the Internet or mail order.
Schwarzenegger, who in the movies portrayed armed characters protecting citizens, suggested that AB 962 will “improve public safety”. Yet in 2009 the state with the least restrictive gun laws, Vermont, was ranked second in the United States for safety! In stark contrast, California is ranked 9th in America for violent crimes. And in the city where our elected officials determine our federal laws, the murder rate is up 134% after Washington DC enacted one of the strictest gun control laws in our nation.
Although fans of big government would like Americans to believe that gun restrictions save lives, FBI statistics prove otherwise. In fact economist John Lott utilized FBI crime statistics from all 3,054 U.S. counties for his 1998 book “More Guns, Less Crime”. Lott determined that violent crimes decreased when law-abiding citizens are allowed to carry concealed weapons.
The members of the Open Carry Movement not only agree with Lott’s assessment, but also realize that criminals, regardless of restrictions, will always find a way to obtain their weapons which are then used on victims.
So with reports confirming that gun restrictions increase crime rates, why is there propaganda suggesting otherwise in order to take away our constitutional gun rights?
Perhaps Jim Hinter, President National Firearms Association, in Canada is correct when he states in the video below: “Let there be no doubt, dictators around the world hate the United States because the United States is free. They are scared of your guns and they are going to come and get ‘em.” http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nDMeDmV0ufU
Our founding fathers tried to protect us from future tyranny by creating our individual freedoms. Further, Thomas Jefferson warned citizens to protect their gun rights: "Laws that forbid the carrying of arms disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes. Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man."
Unfortunately citizens have been “re-educated” into thinking owning guns is only for rightwing terrorists. Thankfully the Open Carry Movement is attempting to change that false ideology before it is too late. Furthermore, what do citizens need to fear if guns were completely taken away? Research gun control history, which has occurred in the Soviet Union (1929), Turkey (1915 -1917), Germany (Hitler era), Guatemala (1970), and currently in Australia for the answer. There are several other examples throughout history that should cause citizens to fiercely protect their right to bear arms.
How can “We the People” ensure our right to keep and bear arms? Study current gun law legislation, call your elected officials and demand they protect the second amendment, vote for candidates who believe in this crucial constitutional liberty, and finally, educate other Americans by joining the growing Open Carry Movement.



Chelene Nightingale
California Gubernatorial Candidate, 2010



Time for "We the People" to take back our Golden State in 2010!

yellowfin
01-04-2010, 12:40 PM
Very nice Chelene! :thumbsup:

wildhawker
01-04-2010, 12:49 PM
Chelene,

You are frighteningly ignorant on these issues.

If you're going to continue leveraging this community for your political purposes you could at least have the decency to support them by advertising with CGN. I await your PM.

-Brandon

picasso
01-04-2010, 12:59 PM
Thanks for posting this! I'm not sure if an international ruling can trample the US Constitution. But,
"When the time comes, I'll hand over my gun with the muzzle pointed opposite my direction with my finger on the trigger and go down trying."

Glock22Fan
01-04-2010, 12:59 PM
Chelene,

You are frighteningly ignorant on these issues.

If you're going to continue leveraging this community for your political purposes you could at least have the decency to support them by advertising with CGN. I await your PM.

-Brandon

Brandon, a bit harsh surely. Honey works better than vinegar.

slamfire
01-04-2010, 1:29 PM
Thanks for posting


cheers

ChuckBooty
01-04-2010, 1:50 PM
The problem that I have with the Constitution party is that they have some wack-o's running for office (I'm not saying that the OP is a wack-o). I left the constitution party and re-joined the Republicans just so that I could vote in the primary for someone other than Mad Max Riekse (http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&ct=res&cd=1&ved=0CAoQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.madmaxforpresident.com%2F&rct=j&q=Mad+Max+Riekse&ei=lnBCS5fLMpH0sQOEivmIBA&usg=AFQjCNG5YUFLQQyg9uCbiajo14FyZ5aGjw).

http://www.madmaxforpresident.com/p-4-100.jpg

Gurney
01-04-2010, 1:51 PM
Chelene, you're feeding the outraged fringe with claims about what "those awful others" want and think.

But there aren't enough people on the fringe to elect you. You want the moderate middle, and they're tired of inflammatory hatespeech and high rant levels.

Stick with facts. Make them pertinent. "Us" and "Them" doesn't serve you well.

AEC1
01-04-2010, 2:08 PM
How dare you support UOC. We dont do that here. We walk the party line. Be careful our you will have the post deleted, and possably be banned... and I KNOW I CANT SPELL!!!

technique
01-04-2010, 2:16 PM
Welcome, Chelene.

choprzrul
01-04-2010, 2:23 PM
"Gene and Chelene until 2014" How's that for a governor's race slogan? Random thought.

Hunt
01-04-2010, 3:22 PM
How can “We the People” ensure our right to keep and bear arms? we have a majority of government school indoctrinated sheeple voting, "The State knows best-Obey" mentality. Until the masses are deprogrammed, there is no hope to use the political system to end the tryanny. Until then, realize it is you vs. the myrmidons, at least with this knowledge you can claim your own personal freedom when and were it is safe to do so.

Hopi
01-04-2010, 3:27 PM
Welcome Chelene!

NorCalMama
01-04-2010, 3:41 PM
Wow, seriously, just wow... and not "wow, I'm impressed"... I'm suprised anyone would come here to push themself at people. It doesn't help get my vote, sorry.

PS-Write in Tom McClintock! He's the ONLY choice and sadly, he won't run!

btw-it's nothing personal, I just don't dig really pushy people when it comes to politics.

NightingaleforGovernor10'
01-04-2010, 3:46 PM
Chelene,

You are frighteningly ignorant on these issues.

If you're going to continue leveraging this community for your political purposes you could at least have the decency to support them by advertising with CGN. I await your PM.

-Brandon

A link to my website promoting CALGUNS.NET
http://www.nightingaleforgovernor.com/pages/links.htm

I have also donated to this organization.

NightingaleforGovernor10'
01-04-2010, 3:49 PM
Thank you!

NightingaleforGovernor10'
01-04-2010, 3:51 PM
Chelene,

You are frighteningly ignorant on these issues.

If you're going to continue leveraging this community for your political purposes you could at least have the decency to support them by advertising with CGN. I await your PM.

-Brandon

I dare you to do better!

Hopi
01-04-2010, 3:51 PM
A link to my website promoting CALGUNS.NET
http://www.nightingaleforgovernor.com/pages/links.htm

I have also donated to this organization.


Just an FYI because I'd really like to see you stick around these parts...

The CGF is a separate and distinct entity from Calguns.net. Brandon (wildhawker) is politely asking you to inquire about supporting Calguns.net through sponsorship if you'd like to continue to use the forum for political reasons.

Thank you for your donation(s) to CGF!!!

G17GUY
01-04-2010, 4:02 PM
I dare you to do better!

Wildhawker is doing excellent in helping the Calguns foundation. He just headed a fundraiser event which raised $35,000 in seven days for CGF!!!

http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=253099&highlight=wildhawker

G17GUY
01-04-2010, 4:11 PM
Also Jerry Brown seems to be out doing you on the 2nd amendment front???

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

http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=200613&highlight=jerry+brown&highlight=jerry+brown

http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=243484&highlight=jerry+brown

NightingaleforGovernor10'
01-04-2010, 4:12 PM
Then why would he be so adament about attacking new members who are willing to contribute to this organization as well?

DTOM CA!
01-04-2010, 4:13 PM
Wow ! A Candidate that is willing to come on this site and support our 2A rights and what is the response : Pay up or get off this public forum. "Politely". I welcome her on this site and hope she keeps posting. I sure have not seen anyone else in the race I am real excited about.

NightingaleforGovernor10'
01-04-2010, 4:15 PM
Jerry Brown the Democrat Socialist? wow...I mean wow. California is most ceratinly in trouble if we believe Jerry Brown is our savior when it comes to our State Sovereignty and our Tenth Amendment Rights (which include our 2A rights).

Hopi
01-04-2010, 4:15 PM
Then why would he be so adament about attacking new members who are willing to contribute to this organization as well?

Parity.

There is a difference between Chelene the person and Chelene the candidate.

NightingaleforGovernor10'
01-04-2010, 4:17 PM
Wow ! A Candidate that is willing to come on this site and support our 2A rights and what is the response : Pay up or get off this public forum. "Politely". I welcome her on this site and hope she keeps posting. I sure have not seen anyone else in the race I am real excited about.
Thank you! Yes, it is quite alarming to come to come to a community in which I support so adamently, only to be attacked. These are my views, and I am running for governor. I understood the title of forum correctly right? 2A. Politics and Laws..yes?

boxbro
01-04-2010, 4:19 PM
Then why would he be so adament about attacking new members who are willing to contribute to this organization as well?

PM him and find out why he posted what he posted.
The open carry movement is a very touch subject and you obviously aren't fully in touch with all the pros and cons.
It would serve you well to get up to date on it if you intend on gaining support from a majority here.
PM'ing WH is a good start.
He probably has some things to say that he would rather do through PM's.

NightingaleforGovernor10'
01-04-2010, 4:21 PM
Parity.

There is a difference between Chelene the person and Chelene the candidate.
As Chelene the Person and as Chelene candidate, I believe I am most aware of who I am. Furthermore, there is no difference between the two. I am a homeschooling mother, a small business owner and patriot who is concerned for her family.

Hopi
01-04-2010, 4:23 PM
As Chelene the Person and as Chelene candidate, I believe I am most aware of who I am. Furthermore, there is no difference between the two. I am a homeschooling mother, a small business owner and patriot who is concerned for her family.

Brandon is a very receptive fella, perhaps it's time for a PM...


Personally, regardless of the spicy nature of the open-carry subject, I think this thread wouldn't have gotten that type of attention had you not linked to your candidacy website at the end of your post. YMMV

NightingaleforGovernor10'
01-04-2010, 4:26 PM
Just an FYI because I'd really like to see you stick around these parts...

The CGF is a separate and distinct entity from Calguns.net. Brandon (wildhawker) is politely asking you to inquire about supporting Calguns.net through sponsorship if you'd like to continue to use the forum for political reasons.

Thank you for your donation(s) to CGF!!!
The forum is titled "2A Politics and Laws". I am allowed to post in here yes? As a constitutional-minded, 2A supporter? or does this require a fee?

G17GUY
01-04-2010, 4:26 PM
Then why would he be so adament about attacking new members who are willing to contribute to this organization as well?


Maybe because your OP comes across as a scare tactic to get people to support and vote for you?

How about the truth about AB962
http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=230676&highlight=ab962

PonchoTA
01-04-2010, 4:34 PM
Chelene,

I for one am very excited about you being in this race! I will be sending a donation soon (next check) to try and help as best I can!

I find myself in agreement with 100% of your stances. I'm glad there's finally a candidate I can vote FOR, rather than someone else "less bad".

:cheers2:
Cheers,
Paul

.

a1c
01-04-2010, 4:35 PM
Jerry Brown the Democrat Socialist? wow...I mean wow. California is most ceratinly in trouble if we believe Jerry Brown is our savior when it comes to our State Sovereignty and our Tenth Amendment Rights (which include our 2A rights).

Wow, that's quite a simplistic and completely inaccurate description of the guy's record and politics. Sounds from your manifesto and your post like all you're doing is subscribe to the "us vs. them" polarization that does nothing but narrow your potential electorate.

bwiese
01-04-2010, 4:36 PM
Jerry Brown the Democrat Socialist? wow...I mean wow. California is most ceratinly in trouble if we believe Jerry Brown is our savior when it comes to our State Sovereignty and our Tenth Amendment Rights (which include our 2A rights).

One battle at a time.

- I vote Guns First.
- I reward politicians w/my vote, ones who've helped us.
- My vote is also intelligently cast for where it has maximal weight/"can win" - voting for a Freak Party etc candidate, no matter how much I love his/her platform, just doesn't fly. We live in reality.

I, and a lot of others here, are voting for Jerry Brown even at the expense of other matters we may disagree with him on. We've seen how well the Republican gov candidates are on guns and how well they can work with legislature.


And you're mischaracterizing the man based on urban legend, which does not serve your candidacy well. Some of your other statements seem to indicate you don't understand some of the legal-political interface in CA gun politics either - dangers of UOC before incorporation, etc.

Certainly during his Oakland mayoralcy (besides a general anti-crime bent as AG). During his Oakland mayoralcy, his pro-biz/anti-crime positions were largely indistinguishable from those of a fairly conservative Republican; his prior background indicates a significant small-L libertarian stance on personal rights.

Kestryll
01-04-2010, 4:56 PM
How dare you support UOC. We dont do that here. We walk the party line. Be careful our you will have the post deleted, and possably be banned... and I KNOW I CANT SPELL!!!

Cry me a river.

You want to play little mister commando do it somewhere else.

We work on REAL progress here not internet tough guy 'Let all start the revolution' crap.

Just for fun, you list what achievements you've made by force and we'll list what achievements we've made by force of law.

Go on, charge the enemy, it'll look grand and we'll play a bagpipe for you.
Then we'll go back to actually doing something.

PonchoTA
01-04-2010, 5:03 PM
Cry me a river.

You want to play little mister commando do it somewhere else.

We work on REAL progress here not internet tough guy 'Let all start the revolution' crap.

Just for fun, you list what achievements you've made by force and we'll list what achievements we've made by force of law.

Go on, charge the enemy, it'll look grand and we'll play a bagpipe for you.
Then we'll go back to actually doing something.

Ouch! That'll leave a mark!

:D

Chelene
01-04-2010, 5:20 PM
First, I appreciate the supporter who posted on my behalf, however I did not write the posts above. I did however write the article for an independent news source.

Second, I can take criticism but I do not scare easily. I lead many marches in gang territory while people threatened our group. I have been a constitutional activist for years and raised by an incredibly fierce Air Force veteran who taught me to use guns.

No, I am not a gun expert, however I am a gun user and do not want my rights taken away! Agree with my article above or not, at least I know where I stand.

I thank those here who are supporting the campaign. I also thank the member who invited me to join last month. This is my second post and appreciate the public forum.

For those who do not want to support a third party candidate, this is your choice. Thankfully according to the most recent Rasmussen and NBC News polls, the majority are actually more interested in third party candidates than ever before. We are losing our country to socialism. Debate time is over..our country had years for political party debates, now we must take a new action in order to prevent the futher dismantling of our freedoms.

Like I stated in my first post last month, vote for Jerry Brown because you honestly feel he will save our state instead of taking us down a further decline, not because you believe he is the only choice, thus the "lesser of two evils".

Finally, I have not met one crazy person in the Constitution Party. Thus far I have met rather intelligent and normal professionals (police officers, attorneys, financial experts, business owners, teachers, etc...).

I thank those who thought they were welcoming me. I will email the campaign team to find out who was posting and let them know they can come here and post as themselves. And again thank you to the individual who invited me to post here last month.

I appreciate everyone here who is trying to save our gun rights. For those who suggested I did not tell the truth in the article I wrote above, the sources were actually taken from the bill itself including quotes and a summary by Arnold who signed the bill.

And yes I absolutely support the Open Carry Movement. I definitely believe based on reading history and biographies that our Founding Fathers would have supported the movement and would be shocked to see how many gun restrictions have been enacted since the signing of the Constitution.

forgiven
01-04-2010, 5:32 PM
Welcome Chelene:)

steadyrock
01-04-2010, 5:36 PM
Chelene,

I for one am very excited about you being in this race! I will be sending a donation soon (next check) to try and help as best I can!

I find myself in agreement with 100% of your stances. I'm glad there's finally a candidate I can vote FOR, rather than someone else "less bad".

:cheers2:
Cheers,
Paul

.


As far as I am concerned, there are two primary factors guiding whether I'll lend my support to a candidate: stances, and aptitude. Guess which one I'm having difficulty with in Ms. Nightingale's case.

bigcalidave
01-04-2010, 5:39 PM
As Chelene the Person and as Chelene candidate, I believe I am most aware of who I am.

First, I appreciate the supporter who posted on my behalf, however I did not write the posts above. I did however write the article for an independent news source.

WTF is going on here now?

slamfire
01-04-2010, 5:43 PM
She calls a spade a spade and isn't afraid to do it aptitude enough for me.

ChuckBooty
01-04-2010, 5:46 PM
WTF is going on here now?

Most likely a campaign staffer wrote the OP.

As far as Jerry Brown being a socialist dem...that may be true. But let's be honest here. Chelene has no chance of winning (unfortunately). There is no money behind her (when compared to the other candidates) and she won't even be a blip on the media's radar. She won't be participating in any debates (televised or otherwise) and she won't get even a fraction of the votes.

So if California's gun owners back her....Jerry may lose. If California's gun owners back JERRY, we will get more "Arnold Style" governing but we'll get our 2A rights.

Chelene...I agree with your entire platform. But I don't want to risk losing our 2A rights if/when you don't win.

Kestryll
01-04-2010, 5:52 PM
As Chelene the Person and as Chelene candidate, I believe I am most aware of who I am.

First, I appreciate the supporter who posted on my behalf, however I did not write the posts above. I did however write the article for an independent news source.

WTF is going on here now?

An excellent question.

Rather obviously and by self-admission both accounts are being used by the same person.

Per the rules that everyone agrees to when joining the forum:
b)No multiple registrations.

Either you failed to read what you agreed to, you chose to ignore the rules or you chose to go back on what you agreed to as a condition for being a member here.

None of these options are what I consider 'good things' in a candidate for public office.

bigcalidave
01-04-2010, 5:54 PM
Kes there are also multiple single posters joined in 2009 on the other thread that they/she posted in, with links to her website.

The only person who will get us out of this mess is Chelene Nightingale.
........ blah blah

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, ...blah blah www.nightingaleforgovernor.com

choprzrul
01-04-2010, 5:54 PM
WTF is going on here now?

I may be wrong, but it looks like she might have had a campaign worker go off the reservation. The tone and substance of her several postings make me think that more than one person is authoring them. It sounds like she has them corral'd for now and her personal articulation seems much clearer. Perhaps a personal sit-down with the Right People here would help clarify the correct direction and help align her battle plans with ours. Just because we have different attack vectors doesn't mean that we should be shooting at each other.

choprzrul
01-04-2010, 5:56 PM
An excellent question.

Rather obviously and by self-admission both accounts are being used by the same person.

Per the rules that everyone agrees to when joining the forum:
b)No multiple registrations.

Either you failed to read what you agreed to, you chose to ignore the rules or you chose to go back on what you agreed to as a condition for being a member here.

None of these options are what I consider 'good things' in a candidate for public office.

Difficult to say if she was responsible for multiple accounts or if someone registered in her name, which would be difficult for her to police.

Kestryll
01-04-2010, 5:58 PM
Most likely a campaign staffer wrote the OP.

She is saying outright that it is her in this post:
As Chelene the Person and as Chelene candidate, I believe I am most aware of who I am.

Both accounts were made a few weeks ago so it's not a case of responding via the staffer's account and then making her own to respond.

Right now I'm not taking a real position on her candidacy, I'm more concerned about the fact that we have rules and they are being broken.

However it does stick in my mind that using apparently disingenuous means to ask for my trust in a public leadership position is not the best move.

bodger
01-04-2010, 6:19 PM
I don't really care. I'm voting for Jerry Brown.

I'll have to hold my nose to do it, and if he's our best hope for a 2A friendly Guv, it's demonstrative of the river of s**t we have to swim in.

Kestryll
01-04-2010, 6:21 PM
Kes there are also multiple single posters joined in 2009 on the other thread that they/she posted in, with links to her website.

Those could very easily be individual supporters making their own accounts and that's fine.

I'd be happier if they registered to actually join the Calguns community and share our hobby and/or passion instead of just to advertise a candidate.
However the rules do not make that a requirement so there's no foul there.

In the case of this thread however there is clearly an admission of multiple accounts and that is an issue.

AEC1
01-04-2010, 6:29 PM
Cry me a river.

You want to play little mister commando do it somewhere else.

We work on REAL progress here not internet tough guy 'Let all start the revolution' crap.

Just for fun, you list what achievements you've made by force and we'll list what achievements we've made by force of law.

Go on, charge the enemy, it'll look grand and we'll play a bagpipe for you.
Then we'll go back to actually doing something.

I do what I can given my circumstances. I have been to two of the OC events here in San Diego. I will be loaded OC'ing every day in a month. Problem is I will do it in IRAQ! When I get home from the war zone I will gladly PLAY COMMANDO!!

technique
01-04-2010, 6:31 PM
I do what I can given my circumstances. I have been to two of the OV events here in San Diego. I will be loaded OC'ing every day in a month. Problem is I will do it in IRAQ! When I get home from the war zone I will gladly PLAY COMMANDO!!

Thank you for your service!:)

Kestryll
01-04-2010, 6:37 PM
I do what I can given my circumstances. I have been to two of the OV events here in San Diego. I will be loaded OC'ing every day in a month. Problem is I will do it in IRAQ! When I get home from the war zone I will gladly PLAY COMMANDO!!

I hope you stay safe in Iraq and come home that way as well.

I do however hope that you exercise a bit less of a Pyrrhic view while over there so you can come home safely and in one piece.

I assume that both you and your commanders are not going to just charge forth and instead will be laying out a plan that will give you the best chance to be victorious with as little damage as possible.

That's what we're doing here.
As we fight for our right any loss is unacceptable.

AEC1
01-04-2010, 6:39 PM
Ouch! That'll leave a mark!

:D

Not at all. I am busy defending yours and Kes's right to free speach, and his right to own this forum and do with it as he pleases. My skin is way to thick for anything he can come up with. I have been to combat 3 times now, with the 4th comming up. He can call me an internet commando all he wants. I KNOW WHAT I DO FOR FREEDOM. He can do it by running this forum and by sending money to lawyers. I will post, send what I can and then go FIGHT!

Lone_Gunman
01-04-2010, 6:47 PM
Arrrgh. Jerry Brown... I am uber conflicted on this one. I understand that he supports 2A and that is paramount for me but I don't trust that he will reign in the out of control spending in Sacramento. I need to find out more about Jerry. I'm hoping that by election time we will have some 2A wins under our belt and with that momentum going I will be able to vote budget issues.

PonchoTA
01-04-2010, 6:50 PM
Not at all. I am busy defending yours and Kes's right to free speach, and his right to own this forum and do with it as he pleases. My skin is way to thick for anything he can come up with. I have been to combat 3 times now, with the 4th coming up. He can call me an internet commando all he wants. I KNOW WHAT I DO FOR FREEDOM. He can do it by running this forum and by sending money to lawyers. I will post, send what I can and then go FIGHT!

Keep your head down, muzzle on target, and your powder dry!

:cheers2:

Paul

:patriot:
EW1(SW/AW)
USN, Ret.

slamfire
01-04-2010, 7:01 PM
No guarantee that jerry won't use any 2A issues as poker chips once he's in same as Arnie.He is a Democrat and more in line with that philosophy.I'm not convinced he wasn't simply pandering to a voting block with any 2A support he may have expressed in the passed.He is also a career politician, read my lips no new taxes.

Chelene
01-04-2010, 7:19 PM
Look...I cannot be held responsible for what supporters write on a forum. I did NOT write the Nightingale posts. I came in here and established ONE membership and did NOT break any forum rules with my ONE account. I do not appreciate the false accusation. I have helped monitor a forum before that focused on illegal immigration and secured borders. I do not need to hide behind multiple names. I have emailed the campaign staff and volunteers and asked them not to post as me!! I can speak for myself!

I was asked to post here last month by a longtime member here. She is a friend from activism. I posted once last month and came here today when a staff member asked if I had visited this site.

I wrote the article that someone else posted! No one writes my articles nor my speeches. Calling me an idiot does not bother me as I have been called much worse. I only care about doing my part to help defend our individual rights. It takes courage to speak publicly on your convictions and run for office. At least I am taking action.

And holding a nose to vote is why we are having our rights taken away! I did a quick google search and one of the top results produced this article:
http://www.examiner.com/x-26553-LA-History-Examiner~y2009m10d31-Jerry-Brown--The-California-Democrats-Heir-Apparent Per the article, former Governor "Moonbeam" is known for being on BOTH sides of an issue, including the gun issue. I do not support BOTH sides...I support ONE side only - FREEDOM! I do not support gun control!

And regarding the tide of majority with respects to voting, the polls are in:
http://www.ppic.org/main/home.asp
http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2009/12/16/wsjnbc-news-poll-tea-party-tops-democrats-and-republicans/
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/general_politics/december_2009/tea_party_tops_gop_on_three_way_generic_ballot

Our campaign is raising funds, but unlike the wealthy two-party elite candidates, we are not going to recklessly spend. We will build our campaign foundation and work diligently. I am a fighter and will continue to fight for freedom. I have been active in politics for over 5 years with many accomplishments and I do not give up easily.

And for those who wish to contact me directly, email me at Chelene@Nightingaleforgovernor.com.

PS. Having run a forum before, you can always check IP addresses which should take care of any questions and confirm that this is my ONE account.

technique
01-04-2010, 7:23 PM
Welcome to the real Chelene!

Hopi
01-04-2010, 7:24 PM
Well, welcome to the real Chelene!


Eta: Damnit Tech!

ChuckBooty
01-04-2010, 7:31 PM
Look...I cannot be held responsible for what supporters write on a forum. I did NOT write the Nightingale posts. I came in here and established ONE membership and did NOT break any forum rules with my ONE account. I do not appreciate the false accusation. I have helped monitor a forum before that focused on illegal immigration and secured borders. I do not need to hide behind multiple names. I have emailed the campaign staff and volunteers and asked them not to post as me!! I can speak for myself!

I was asked to post here last month by a longtime member here. She is a friend from activism. I posted once last month and came here today when a staff member asked if I had visited this site.

I wrote the article that someone else posted! No one writes my articles nor my speeches. Calling me an idiot does not bother me as I have been called much worse. I only care about doing my part to help defend our individual rights. It takes courage to speak publicly on your convictions and run for office. At least I am taking action.

And holding a nose to vote is why we are having our rights taken away! I did a quick google search and one of the top results produced this article:
http://www.examiner.com/x-26553-LA-History-Examiner~y2009m10d31-Jerry-Brown--The-California-Democrats-Heir-Apparent Per the article, former Governor "Moonbeam" is known for being on BOTH sides of an issue, including the gun issue. I do not support BOTH sides...I support ONE side only - FREEDOM! I do not support gun control!

And regarding the tide of majority with respects to voting, the polls are in:
http://www.ppic.org/main/home.asp
http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2009/12/16/wsjnbc-news-poll-tea-party-tops-democrats-and-republicans/
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/general_politics/december_2009/tea_party_tops_gop_on_three_way_generic_ballot

Our campaign is raising funds, but unlike the wealthy two-party elite candidates, we are not going to recklessly spend. We will build our campaign foundation and work diligently. I am a fighter and will continue to fight for freedom. I have been active in politics for over 5 years with many accomplishments and I do not give up easily.

And for those who wish to contact me directly, email me at Chelene@Nightingaleforgovernor.com.

PS. Having run a forum before, you can always check IP addresses which should take care of any questions and confirm that this is my ONE account.

What is your plan to get exposure? How do you plan on attending debates against the elite candidates? How can you win?

Chelene
01-04-2010, 7:36 PM
Welcome to the real Chelene!

Thank you Tech! And Hopi!!

Chuck, I don't want to be off topic or turn this forum into a campaign site, so please email me. Having managed a forum, I want to be respectful. Feel free to contact me directly anytime.

I will sign off now as to honor the posters here who do not appreciate the campaigning. I just wanted to clarify my positions and my "own" message.

bigcalidave
01-04-2010, 7:40 PM
Ok...

Super Spy
01-04-2010, 7:53 PM
Welcome Chelene!

Bill pretty much nailed how I feel. My gun rights are a priority. I have voted 3rd party in the past on many occasions and what has it got me? No where fast! I will vote for Jerry Brown because I think he is miles better than Whitman when it comes to 2A.

I agree with your platform more closely than the Dems or Republicans, but what real chance do you have? In this state you frankly have no real chance of winning without a LOT of financial support. Without this forum I wouldn't even know your name. Clearly some of us here are intrigued by what you have to say, but I don't hear a majority of people saying they'll vote for you. I'd love to have a real 3rd choice, part of being real means electable, and you aren't, you don't have the support, money, or experience and you need at least 2 of the 3 to have a chance.

6172crew
01-04-2010, 7:54 PM
Thank you Tech! And Hopi!!

Chuck, I don't want to be off topic or turn this forum into a campaign site, so please email me. Having managed a forum, I want to be respectful. Feel free to contact me directly anytime.

I will sign off now as to honor the posters here who do not appreciate the campaigning. I just wanted to clarify my positions and my "own" message.

Welcome to Calguns, are you saying you don't know who started this thread in your name?
-6172:chris:

PORCH
01-04-2010, 7:55 PM
She is saying outright that it is her in this post:


Both accounts were made a few weeks ago so it's not a case of responding via the staffer's account and then making her own to respond.

Right now I'm not taking a real position on her candidacy, I'm more concerned about the fact that we have rules and they are being broken.

However it does stick in my mind that using apparently disingenuous means to ask for my trust in a public leadership position is not the best move.


Has no one ever lied on here and said they were someone they were not. It's the internet and people do make stuff up. I think your jumping to conclusions a little too soon. I could easily make up an account and say that I was Jerry Brown. So if Chelene said she only made one account, why not take her word. I know one thing for sure, this thread might have introduced me to the person I vote for governor. I don't think I will be voting for any of the republicans as of now, especially with Meg Whitman being the frontrunner and I don't think I could vote for Jerry Brown unless the republican candidates are really horrible and it looks like one might win. Chelene might just be the ticket. I can finally cast a vote and feel good about it, not just the lesser of two evils.

6172crew
01-04-2010, 8:01 PM
Has no one ever lied on here and said they were someone they were not. It's the internet and people do make stuff up. I think your jumping to conclusions a little too soon. I could easily make up an account and say that I was Jerry Brown. So if Chelene said she only made one account, why not take her word. I know one thing for sure, this thread might have introduced me to the person I vote for governor. I don't think I will be voting for any of the republicans as of now, especially with Meg Whitman being the frontrunner and I don't think I could vote for Jerry Brown unless the republican candidates are really horrible and it looks like one might win. Chelene might just be the ticket. I can finally cast a vote and feel good about it, not just the lesser of two evils.

I think you can go back and read the rules when you signed up and find that 2 names for 1 person isnt ok with his forum.

We have had a few people sign up for a candidate to help in the daily fund raising and getting the message out but not one who says "Im her" and then another "Im really her" in the same thread.

guayuque
01-04-2010, 8:04 PM
Thank you! Yes, it is quite alarming to come to come to a community in which I support so adamently, only to be attacked. These are my views, and I am running for governor. I understood the title of forum correctly right? 2A. Politics and Laws..yes?

Well, thank you for posting. I could not give you my vote under any circumstance but apprciate your reaching out.

As far as the response, you should not be surprised. While I thought this site would feature may thoughtful posts on gun issues, and to be fair there are some, it seems to more that most are quite vitriolic when discussing legal or political aspects. I guess not even a site dedicated to a serious issue is immune to internet poor behavior.

Good luck, Ms. Nightingale, in any event.

guayuque
01-04-2010, 8:08 PM
Cry me a river.

You want to play little mister commando do it somewhere else.

We work on REAL progress here not internet tough guy 'Let all start the revolution' crap.

Just for fun, you list what achievements you've made by force and we'll list what achievements we've made by force of law.

Go on, charge the enemy, it'll look grand and we'll play a bagpipe for you.
Then we'll go back to actually doing something.

I agree with your mission, but the fact is that you do have many internet tough guys "Let's start the revolution" crap dealers here. It is tough to have any reasonable discussion here about policy or the law or how best to go about changing underlying sentiments without being attacked or ridiculed, mostly on the basis of incorrect facts, law or both.

6172crew
01-04-2010, 8:13 PM
I agree with your mission, but the fact is that you do have many internet tough guys "Let's start the revolution" crap dealers here. It is tough to have any reasonable discussion here about policy or the law or how best to go about changing underlying sentiments without being attacked or ridiculed, mostly on the basis of incorrect facts, law or both.

Who has attacked you? There is a little red button on the screen and as a Mod I think I do a pretty good job of making sure you can say anything you want here (within the rules of course).

The only issue I can see is that 2 different screen names show up and claim to be one person.

If Barrack O. signed up here I'd ask the same thing if the thread looked like this one.

ChuckBooty
01-04-2010, 8:19 PM
Thank you Tech! And Hopi!!

Chuck, I don't want to be off topic or turn this forum into a campaign site, so please email me. Having managed a forum, I want to be respectful. Feel free to contact me directly anytime.

I will sign off now as to honor the posters here who do not appreciate the campaigning. I just wanted to clarify my positions and my "own" message.

You don't want to be "off topic"? OK...so what exactly is the topic here? This was a very politician-y answer by the way. You've really NAILED the double speak.

slamfire
01-04-2010, 8:21 PM
Welcome Chelene!

Bill pretty much nailed how I feel. My gun rights are a priority. I have voted 3rd party in the past on many occasions and what has it got me? No where fast! I will vote for Jerry Brown because I think he is miles better than Whitman when it comes to 2A.

I agree with your platform more closely than the Dems or Republicans, but what real chance do you have? In this state you frankly have no real chance of winning without a LOT of financial support. Without this forum I wouldn't even know your name. Clearly some of us here are intrigued by what you have to say, but I don't hear a majority of people saying they'll vote for you. I'd love to have a real 3rd choice, part of being real means electable, and you aren't, you don't have the support, money, or experience and you need at least 2 of the 3 to have a chance.

You may not be able to afford the taxes on your house, the state might be over run with illegal aliens, business might be driven from our fine state due to over regulation and taxes, we might not have the lights burning as often as we might like, gasoline might be priced through the roof, not to mention bridge tolls, but we'll be able to shoot anyone within a three foot radius of us.Pretty narrow minded outlook.But thats just my opinion.And I understand that you are perfectly entitled to yours I just happen to disagree with it so I won't be voting for Brown.

6172crew
01-04-2010, 8:37 PM
You may not be able to afford the taxes on your house, the state might be over run with illegal aliens, business might be driven from our fine state due to over regulation and taxes, we might not have the lights burning as often as we might like, gasoline might be priced through the roof, not to mention bridge tolls, but we'll be able to shoot anyone within a three foot radius of us.Pretty narrow minded outlook.But thats just my opinion.And I understand that you are perfectly entitled to yours I just happen to disagree with it so I won't be voting for Brown.

Who is it your voting for that is going to fix all this?

PORCH
01-04-2010, 8:44 PM
I think you can go back and read the rules when you signed up and find that 2 names for 1 person isnt ok with his forum.

We have had a few people sign up for a candidate to help in the daily fund raising and getting the message out but not one who says "Im her" and then another "Im really her" in the same thread.


The point I'm trying to make here is that someone else could have very easily created an account pretending to be her.

For example let's say that I create a new account "JerryBrown4GOV" and then come on here and talk Jerry up pretending to be him. He has no control over what I do or say. Then let's say Jerry makes his account and comes on here and says that other account is not me. This is my only account. Will you assume that JB made two accounts.

Basically I'm just trying to figure out why you are so positive that she broke the rules when anybody could have created that other account and pretended to be her.

guayuque
01-04-2010, 8:47 PM
Who has attacked you? There is a little red button on the screen and as a Mod I think I do a pretty good job of making sure you can say anything you want here (within the rules of course).

The only issue I can see is that 2 different screen names show up and claim to be one person.

If Barrack O. signed up here I'd ask the same thing if the thread looked like this one.

Are you kidding? If anyone dares support any notion of regulation that is anything short of allowing everyone to carry CCW or LOC they are called "knee jerk liberal", communist, idiot, stupid, etc. The level of discourse is not very congenial, to say the least.

slamfire
01-04-2010, 8:50 PM
I'm voting for a governor not a dictator no one can magically fix all the problems the state faces but I'll put my faith in a conservative philosophy as apposed to a liberal one any day.theres only one pro gun conservative candidate running.The lessor of two evils just dosen't cut it for me anymore.

6172crew
01-04-2010, 9:03 PM
Are you kidding? If anyone dares support any notion of regulation that is anything short of allowing everyone to carry CCW or LOC they are called "knee jerk liberal", communist, idiot, stupid, etc. The level of discourse is not very congenial, to say the least.

I haven't seen that thread,:cool: Like I said before the little red button lets us know if a rule has been broken. One of the rules on CGs is not attacking other members, I will keep an eye out for your reports.

In the mean time I think this thread should get back on topic and if you have somthing to back up your claims then feel free to PM me the info.:)

6172crew
01-04-2010, 9:04 PM
I'm voting for a governor not a dictator no one can magically fix all the problems the state faces but I'll put my faith in a conservative philosophy as apposed to a liberal one any day.theres only one pro gun conservative candidate running.The lessor of two evils just dosen't cut it for me anymore.

I gave McKlintock a few hundred bucks and voted for him, he lost and we were stuck with Arnie. I also voted for Ross P. and I had to serve under Klinton for that one...just sayin':D

slamfire
01-04-2010, 9:27 PM
I gave McKlintock a few hundred bucks and voted for him, he lost and we were stuck with Arnie. I also voted for Ross P. and I had to serve under Klinton for that one...just sayin':D

You have to vote your conscience To compromise with the left is a move to the left.And the country is pretty far left.The left has got us convinced that we have to vote for a rino no one else can win pretty good strategy if your a lefty and it's worked.So all the conservatives vote for Brown that just seems a little upside down doesn't it,especially if you do it on just one issue.

GuyW
01-04-2010, 9:45 PM
Are you kidding? If anyone dares support any notion of regulation that is anything short of allowing everyone to carry CCW or LOC they are called "knee jerk liberal", communist, idiot, stupid, etc. The level of discourse is not very congenial, to say the least.

That's because some of us are trying to regain Constitutional rights, not sell such down the river...

.

6172crew
01-04-2010, 10:01 PM
You have to vote your conscience To compromise with the left is a move to the left.And the country is pretty far left.The left has got us convinced that we have to vote for a rino no one else can win pretty good strategy if your a lefty and it's worked.So all the conservatives vote for Brown that just seems a little upside down doesn't it,especially if you do it on just one issue.


What your saying sounds good but the fact is you will be left with someone who doesn't have your interests in mind. I see your point and have told you my past voting record but I really think the 2nd has taken a beating since the late 80's and it is on top of the lists of things I think about when I vote.

To the OP, or the real OP: Im sorry your thread was highjacked.

383green
01-04-2010, 11:16 PM
Whoever created the original poster's account seems to be unaware that 2010 is abbreviated '10, not 10' (i.e., the apostrophe takes the place of the omitted portion of the word or number). Thus, the account name should have been NightingaleforGovernor'10 instead of NightingaleforGovernor10'.

I'm just sayin', is all... :whistling:

HeyZeus
01-05-2010, 4:02 AM
The problem as I see it is people are jaded with failed promises. Always we are given the lesser of two evils instead of a good choice. You sound good to me
and if you bear with the nonsense you will get my vote. I am glad you came here to enlist our help. Please remember this if you get elected and help us.

I am tired of the tyranny and I feel we will be in a bloody fight unless real people step forward and throw out the politician trash we currently have. They need to remember they work for us or heads need to roll.

Vote them all out!

We need a new hope not the hope forced on us. Lets pray you are it and you have a chance.

ALSystems
01-05-2010, 5:41 AM
You may not be able to afford the taxes on your house, the state might be over run with illegal aliens, business might be driven from our fine state due to over regulation and taxes, we might not have the lights burning as often as we might like, gasoline might be priced through the roof, not to mention bridge tolls, but we'll be able to shoot anyone within a three foot radius of us.Pretty narrow minded outlook.
I can't vote for Brown either even if he is pro 2A. Whitman is worse.

Chelene, I agree with your platform. :iagree:
Sadly you probably need about $100 million to buy your office like Bloomberg did. But I'm still voting for you. I just hope get enough exposure to express your views to the general public. I would really like to see you debate the other candidates. :)

slamfire
01-05-2010, 6:54 AM
What your saying sounds good but the fact is you will be left with someone who doesn't have your interests in mind. I see your point and have told you my past voting record but I really think the 2nd has taken a beating since the late 80's and it is on top of the lists of things I think about when I vote.

To the OP, or the real OP: Im sorry your thread was highjacked.

QUOTE=6172crew;3592028]What your saying sounds good but the fact is you will be left with someone who doesn't have your interests in mind. I see your point and have told you my past voting record but I really think the 2nd has taken a beating since the late 80's and it is on top of the lists of things I think about when I vote.

To the OP, or the real OP: I'm sorry your thread was highjacked.[/QUOTE]

If the conservative base won't support a conservative candidate then we've lost by default.Brown may or may not stave off the demise of the second amendment in California.However we all know the democrat platform does not include the bill of rights as we know it and the eventual outcome will be it's demise.So I'm gonna have to support any conservative who will step foreword or eventually none will.As an example look at what we have to choose from in California.I don't think jerry brown has my interests in mind I think he has his interests in mind and I expect he will act accordingly.

Bad Voodoo
01-05-2010, 7:24 AM
Here's my three-step plan for 2010 and beyond: 1.) Start voting my conscience. I happen to agree with the premise that a vote for either a (R) or (D) at this point, no matter a candidate's position on gun control, is an endorsement of the continued and repeated failure of our state and country's two-party system of government. "Rewarding" JB w/ control of a broken and bankrupt state because he supports a single issue we happen to feel passionate about isn't doing any one of us who chooses to live here, or our kids and their futures, any favors at all. If anything, it digs our financial and 'political ransom' hole deeper in ALL other areas of need in this state; 2.) Count on the United States Supreme Court to continue building the legal foundation for the 2A freedoms we desire in CA, the very same freedoms others in this country enjoy unabashedly; and 3.) Continue monetarily supporting NRA-ILA and CGF, and count on them to use the USSC's future 2A decision(s) as a platform to legally entrench our constitutional rights in this state.

Everyone here has been crowing with overwhelming positivity about the legal and political wins we'll begin piling up in 2010. If that's the case, then we don't need JB running the show further into the ground here. Let the courts and our activism go about the business of protecting our rights, and let someone and something new go about the business of fixing our state. It's time. Vote your conscience.

guayuque
01-05-2010, 7:28 AM
I haven't seen that thread,:cool: Like I said before the little red button lets us know if a rule has been broken. One of the rules on CGs is not attacking other members, I will keep an eye out for your reports.

In the mean time I think this thread should get back on topic and if you have somthing to back up your claims then feel free to PM me the info.:)

Very well, thanks.

guayuque
01-05-2010, 7:34 AM
That's because some of us are trying to regain Constitutional rights, not sell such down the river...

.

Presumptively, everyone here wants robust gun rights, but may have different thoughts on how to go about the goal. Having people attack someone's ideas not with honest debate but pure name calling I don't think is helpful and is indeed hurtful. I even find myself thinking that some of my fellow gun owners are simply unreasonable when it comes to discussion when I read some of the "start the revolution" tough guy crap around here, or when they don't even bother to know the laws and put forth their incorrect two cents. Can you imagine what non-gunowners think? And, don't bother saying who cares what they think, because that is the entire point if we are to convince the public at large.

guayuque
01-05-2010, 7:38 AM
My vote is for Jerry Brown, assuming he wins the nomination. Fiorina and Whitman are in my opinion not very well versed in anything other than running a business, and not well accomplished at that.

California is broken. We have terms limits which should go. We have an initiative system that should go. We have a taxation sytem that needs to be overhauled by restoing Legislative power to assess taxes and some type of reform to Prop 13. That will take a long time to do and will take someone who has the gravitas within government to get it done and the only person even remotely up to the task is Jerry Brown, in my opinion.

bwiese
01-05-2010, 7:39 AM
Everyone here has been crowing with overwhelming positivity about the legal and political wins we'll begin piling up in 2010. If that's the case, then we don't need JB running the show further into the ground here.

Despite this we don't need them throwing out bad laws to see what sticks.
Having a generally friendly veto available thru "transition period" is indeed important, esp with Kamala Harris likely as next AG.

bwiese
01-05-2010, 7:40 AM
California is broken. We have terms limits which should go. We have an initiative system that should go. We have a taxation sytem that needs to be overhauled by restoing Legislative power to assess taxes and some type of reform to Prop 13. That will take a long time to do and will take someone who has the gravitas within government to get it done and the only person even remotely up to the task is Jerry Brown, in my opinion.

You lost me there on taking down Prop 13.

JB has said he's against that or increased taxation.

sargenv
01-05-2010, 7:47 AM
We have a taxation sytem that needs to be overhauled by restoing Legislative power to assess taxes and some type of reform to Prop 13.

I don't usually get in on these and the thread already appears hijacked, but the state already throws money at too many problems and it doesn't solve a thing.. why would you want them to get rid of prop 13 and raise even more taxes for them to waste?

GrizzlyGuy
01-05-2010, 8:23 AM
You lost me there on taking down Prop 13.

JB has said he's against that or increased taxation.

Historical reminder from the LA Times (http://articles.latimes.com/2008/may/29/opinion/oe-stall29):

On a May evening 30 years ago, I left my desk in the newsroom at the Los Angeles Times, grabbed a copy of the early edition of the next day's paper and drove to Lucy's El Adobe Cafe on Melrose for supper. One of the guests at Lucy's that night was then-Gov. Jerry Brown, my former employer (I was his press secretary in 1975).

I showed Brown the paper and its bold Page 1 headline, as I remember it: "Property Tax Assessments Soar." That news, I suggested, made it virtually certain that angry California taxpayers would approve Proposition 13, the tax-cutting constitutional amendment on the primary election ballot the following week.

No way, Brown told me. He was part of a blue-chip coalition of government, business and academic leaders -- plus the state's major newspapers -- that opposed the ballot initiative sponsored by political gadflies Paul Gann and Howard Jarvis. Voters had rejected similar proposals before, and Brown et al were confident they would do so again.


Brown is a political opportunist and flip-flopper. It's hard for me to grasp why people would want to entrust their soon-to-be gun rights with a man whose "principles" are dictated by which way the wind happens to be blowing at the moment.

bwiese
01-05-2010, 8:31 AM
Brown is a political opportunist and flip-flopper. It's hard for me to grasp why people would want to entrust their soon-to-be gun rights with a man whose "principles" are dictated by which way the wind happens to be blowing at the moment.

He may have been against Prop 13.
He's against taking it down and regards it as settled.

And I like to reward folks who have helped us with gun rights.

383green
01-05-2010, 8:38 AM
Brown is a political opportunist and flip-flopper. It's hard for me to grasp why people would want to entrust their soon-to-be gun rights with a man whose "principles" are dictated by which way the wind happens to be blowing at the moment.


Because the wind happens to be blowing in the direction of supporting second amendment rights, and the alternatives are candidates who are demonstrably anti-gun and/or have no chance of winning the election.

Bad Voodoo
01-05-2010, 8:58 AM
And I like to reward folks who have helped us with gun rights.

CA is burning down all around you, yet you "reward" a career full-time politician w/ your vote because he quietly supports one of our constitutional rights? It's not like the guy is out their in vociferous support of our agenda, Bill. In fact, I agree that JB would in fact trade his "quiet support" of gun rights for one of his pet environmental causes in a NY minute given the opportunity. He is part of the overall corruption problem that plagues this state. Voting for JB is akin to cutting off your nose to spite your face. A classic example of the destructive, self-serving behavior voters in this state have exhibited for 20+ years now.

I'll NEVER understand the single-issue voter, especially given the particular circumstance we find ourselves in holding a majority USSC opinion. That's a game changer, period. With that opinion comes the express protection against the typical 'throw and see what sticks w/ AG support' mentality of our full-time legislature. NOTHING would stick with affirmed constitutional protections. In fact, what we should be focused on right now is establishing a part-time legislature with provisions, to mitigate the damage being done by all the "idle hands" currently residing in Sacramento, not condoning/rewarding the same 'ol system of broken politics!

bodger
01-05-2010, 8:59 AM
Because the wind happens to be blowing in the direction of supporting second amendment rights, and the alternatives are candidates who are demonstrably anti-gun and/or have no chance of winning the election.


That sums it up.
It's the difference between being knee deep or neck deep in the river of s**t.

You still have to hold your nose, but wading is easier than swimming. And you might be just that much closer to terra firma.

kcbrown
01-05-2010, 9:21 AM
That sums it up.
It's the difference between being knee deep or neck deep in the river of s**t.

You still have to hold your nose, but wading is easier than swimming. And you might be just that much closer to terra firma.

This is what's known as a "holding action". We've been in a holding action politically for at least the last 50 years. It hasn't worked, as evidenced by the fact that with the sole exception of the judiciary, we've been in a descending trajectory with respect to our freedom for that period of time.

We've got more laws, each of which is a restriction on someone's freedom, than ever before, and it's only getting worse. And all major political players are playing the same game in the same way, with our freedom as the commodity used for payment.

I don't know what the cure for Battered Voter's Syndrome is, but most people have it in spades, because they believe they must vote for the "lesser of two evils". And the problem with that is that every election, the next "lesser of two evils" is a greater evil than the "lesser of two evils" that preceded it.


Frankly, I see no way out of this. Voting your conscience isn't going to work unless there are enough other people who also vote their conscience, as opposed to the lesser "electable" evil. This system is self-perpetuating and it has done an outstanding job of perpetuating itself.

bwiese
01-05-2010, 9:23 AM
CA is burning down all around you, yet you "reward" a career full-time politician w/ your vote because he quietly supports one of our constitutional rights?

You puzzle me, because most folks here are gunrights advocates.

We suffer when we have fractionated non-single-issue voting. The union guys vote union, the gays for for gays, but the gunnies split their vote among half a dozen or more criteria.

And that support from JB has been more than quiet, esp when a key amicus brief has been sent to the Supremes, the DOJ FD was downsized to a Bureau, etc. etc.

As far as CA goes, my neighborhood and employer are certainly not burning down. I'm doing quite well. Hoffmang's doing great, so are a lot of other Calgunners. CA's still a good place to start a business if it's the right kind of business - smart people doing high-value things.

Life is what you make of it.

Yeah, a lot of things in CA suck but can be worked around, bypassed or compensated for. So I can deal with all that other crap just fine, and I focus on working for RKBA.

I'll vote for a bank-robbing, public-defecating transsexual pyromaniac who advocates animal sex - if he shows he's pro-gun.

Show me another viable candidate that's pro-gun - the rest of the fleet are certainly antis. Ms. Chalene Nightengale above, while having some agreeable similar outlooks in certain areas, doesn't have the funds or skills to come close to even making a dent. And don't tell me a Republican gov can do anything else, because at best he can vete and he can't run new legislation since the R's only have 1/3 seats. That even applies to St. McClintock.

Also, it's kinda funny seeing the Repub shills trot out anti-JB stuff not based on fact. When he was mayor of Oakland, he was damned near identical to a pro-biz anti-crime Republican fighting against the Berkeleyite left Oakland City Council.



I'll NEVER understand the single-issue voter, especially given the particular circumstance we find ourselves in holding a majority USSC opinion. That's a game changer, period. With that opinion comes the express protection against the typical 'throw and see what sticks w/ AG support' mentality of our full-time legislature. NOTHING would stick with affirmed constitutional protections. In fact, what we should be focused on right now is establishing a part-time legislature with provisions, to mitigate the damage being done by all the "idle hands" currently residing in Sacramento, not condoning/rewarding the same 'ol system of broken politics!I'll never understand the non-single-issue voter that's a gun owner and complains about gun laws.

You are way, way, way underestimating the fight. Incorporation is the end of the beginning, not beginning of the end. We will just have a means of response. We will indeed win, but it will require time/money/lawyers (lawyers, guns & money!)

We expect more bad law to be thrown up for some time and requiring hashing out in the courts. And remember that Kamala Harris will be AG (almost a given) so having counterbalance is important. CGF's recent fundraising will likely get burned on in part on "keeping Kamala tame". If Alison can hold out til Harris takes over, the gags come off and she may come out of the basement.

wildhawker
01-05-2010, 9:39 AM
At this point, Bill, I'm not so sure she doesn't enjoy the gag.

n-psN4Gdv0M

If Alison can hold out til Harris takes over, the gags come off and she may come out of the basement.

Bad Voodoo
01-05-2010, 10:41 AM
As far as CA goes, my neighborhood and employer are certainly not burning down. I'm doing quite well. Hoffman's doing great, so are a lot of other Calgunners. CA's still a good place to start a business if it's the right kind of business - smart people doing high-value things.

Life is what you make of it.

Interesting. I advocate political reform. You follow with the condescension typical of those well above the poverty line. I don't remember ever lamenting anyone's lot in life, Bill. The fact is, California is broken, whether or not the level of our state's FAIL has reached your particular ivory tower is irrelevant.

CA owns the 6th highest tax rate in the country (not to mention regulatory costs and fees); jobs are leaving the state; the middle-class and rich are both leaving the state in record numbers (and the tax revenue w/ them); economic growth has been receding over the last five years; government spending continues out of control (80% of our deficits are driven by employee costs, i.e., unions); our infrastructure is aging, largely crumbling (think roads, bridges and levees), strategically ignored (think power plants and grid), and/or simply held hostage by environmental special interests (think power AND water); the voter initiative and referendum system has been hijacked by special interests; our voting districts were created in the spirit of partisan gerrymandering; and our state is generally ungovernable in its current form. I mean, just to call out only a few of the problems I could reel in off the top of my head. :rolleyes:

I posit that life in California will get a whole lot worse advocating these kinds of single-issue voting ethics:

I'll vote for a bank-robbing, public-defecating transsexual who advocates animal sex - if he shows he's pro-gun.

Sometimes we have to look past our single issue passions to see the forest through the trees, and at this point in my life I'm not fighting these causes for me - I'm fighting them for my kid and his generation. 2A might be an absolute priority for me if that's all I had to worry about in this state. As you obviously know and are largely choosing to ignore, it's not (I don't care how tall your ivory tower is). I don't enjoy being funneled into 'either/or' mainstream political choices, especially when those choices are aligned to abrogate the various constitutional freedoms I've come to truly appreciate. California is this country's canary, and we're flopping around at the bottom of the cage right now in ALL relevant categories, not just 2A. WE need to fix that. Mitigating and even eliminating the necessary horse-trading with the political elite in this country to "get yours" is a good place to start.

I'd prefer my kid lived in and enjoyed a state where firearms were a source of enjoyment, personal protection and constitutional expression vs. a mandatory tool to survive. You keep playing this game and it will surely become the latter.

GrizzlyGuy
01-05-2010, 11:23 AM
I'll never understand the non-single-issue voter that's a gun owner and complains about gun laws.

That's easy: the Bill of Rights contains ten amendments and not just one. Some of us think that the other nine and our various other liberties and rights are just as important.

The Constitution party does trouble me a bit because they don't seem to care about the 1st amendment (http://www.constitutionparty.com/party_platform.php#Pornography) and apparently don't want to treat gays equally (http://www.constitutionparty.com/party_platform.php#Family). Hypocrisy and inconsistency is vastly greater in the Democrat and Republican parties of course. But The Party of Principle (http://www.lp.org/platform) is really where it's at if you're not a single-issue voter and believe in liberty and justice for all.

stagman
01-05-2010, 12:02 PM
I wish that my ONLY issue with this state was the lack of 2A rights! Life would be wonderful. I would have nothing but time, money and energy to fight for my sons gun rights.

Unfortunately, there are many issues which are currently affecting me more than the hi-cap ban, like struggling to pay bills, and worrying about the out of control debt (myself included.) Does that mean 2A takes a backseat? Not exactly.
So, where does my vote go? I don't know yet. This is turning into a very interesting post, and I truly enjoy the articulate writings on both sides.

Kestryll
01-05-2010, 12:11 PM
At this point, Bill, I'm not so sure she doesn't enjoy the gag.

n-psN4Gdv0M

F6NS8ekZDII

mikeinrancho
01-05-2010, 1:30 PM
My vote is for Jerry Brown, assuming he wins the nomination. Fiorina and Whitman are in my opinion not very well versed in anything other than running a business, and not well accomplished at that.

California is broken. We have terms limits which should go. We have an initiative system that should go. We have a taxation sytem that needs to be overhauled by restoing Legislative power to assess taxes and some type of reform to Prop 13. That will take a long time to do and will take someone who has the gravitas within government to get it done and the only person even remotely up to the task is Jerry Brown, in my opinion.

This kind of thinking makes me even happier I bought a place in Nevada.

wildhawker
01-05-2010, 1:48 PM
F6NS8ekZDII
At this point, Bill, I'm not so sure she doesn't enjoy the gag.

n-psN4Gdv0M

So... taking creative liberties here, could we say that Peter is Gene and Quagmire is Ben?

nitrofc
01-05-2010, 1:51 PM
They should split the State of California into two.
From Sacramento down to the Mexican Border.

Been here all my life and a CA Licensed business owner since 1985 and
I'm sick and tired of getting Fee'd to death.

Unbelievable at times.

wildhawker
01-05-2010, 1:57 PM
They should split the State of California into two.
From Sacramento down to the Mexican Border.

Been here all my life and a CA Licensed business owner since 1985 and
I'm sick and tired of getting Fee'd to death.

Unbelievable at times.

I take it you're interested in maintaining the public infrastructure for an area with no economy and proudly believe you live in Jefferson (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_of_Jefferson)?

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/d/d4/Jefferson_state_seal.jpg

professionalcoyotehunter
01-05-2010, 2:09 PM
They should be!

nitrofc
01-05-2010, 2:22 PM
I take it you're interested in maintaining the public infrastructure for an area with no economy and proudly believe you live in Jefferson (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_of_Jefferson)?

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/d/d4/Jefferson_state_seal.jpg

I'll bet you were just waiting for somebody to say it eh!

Haa ha!

Meplat
01-05-2010, 2:37 PM
"When the time comes, I'll hand over my gun with the muzzle pointed opposite my direction with my finger on the trigger and go down trying."

If we all follow this creed we will prevail. Tho we may not all live to see it.

Kestryll
01-05-2010, 2:39 PM
So... taking creative liberties here, could we say that Peter is Gene and Quagmire is Ben?

Does that make Wes Cleveland?

wildhawker
01-05-2010, 2:46 PM
Does that make Wes Cleveland?

:chris:

Hey, look, a photo of Wes, Kevin and Ivan!

http://www.hollywoodoutbreak.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/10/cleveland_birthofasalesman_0280f.jpg

Kestryll
01-05-2010, 3:02 PM
WOW!!

A rare pic of Gene and Bill having a disagreement!!

http://l.yimg.com/a/i/us/sch/cn/v/v0/w684/233323_400_300.jpeg

Meplat
01-05-2010, 4:44 PM
Welcome! I will give your candidacy very favorable consideration. I am tired of voting for the lesser of evils. I will now vote for what I believe!

First, I appreciate the supporter who posted on my behalf, however I did not write the posts above. I did however write the article for an independent news source.

Second, I can take criticism but I do not scare easily. I lead many marches in gang territory while people threatened our group. I have been a constitutional activist for years and raised by an incredibly fierce Air Force veteran who taught me to use guns.

No, I am not a gun expert, however I am a gun user and do not want my rights taken away! Agree with my article above or not, at least I know where I stand.

I thank those here who are supporting the campaign. I also thank the member who invited me to join last month. This is my second post and appreciate the public forum.

For those who do not want to support a third party candidate, this is your choice. Thankfully according to the most recent Rasmussen and NBC News polls, the majority are actually more interested in third party candidates than ever before. We are losing our country to socialism. Debate time is over..our country had years for political party debates, now we must take a new action in order to prevent the futher dismantling of our freedoms.

Like I stated in my first post last month, vote for Jerry Brown because you honestly feel he will save our state instead of taking us down a further decline, not because you believe he is the only choice, thus the "lesser of two evils".

Finally, I have not met one crazy person in the Constitution Party. Thus far I have met rather intelligent and normal professionals (police officers, attorneys, financial experts, business owners, teachers, etc...).

I thank those who thought they were welcoming me. I will email the campaign team to find out who was posting and let them know they can come here and post as themselves. And again thank you to the individual who invited me to post here last month.

I appreciate everyone here who is trying to save our gun rights. For those who suggested I did not tell the truth in the article I wrote above, the sources were actually taken from the bill itself including quotes and a summary by Arnold who signed the bill.

And yes I absolutely support the Open Carry Movement. I definitely believe based on reading history and biographies that our Founding Fathers would have supported the movement and would be shocked to see how many gun restrictions have been enacted since the signing of the Constitution.

Liberty Belle
01-05-2010, 4:48 PM
I am the one that directed Chelene to this forum. I have known her for a number of years and consider her a good friend. I was of the opinion that a group so passionate about 2A rights would at least have a respect for our other Rights as well. After reading this thread, I'm not so sure the 1A is among them. Bad Voodoo, Grizzly, Slamfire, kcbrown: you have all expressed alot of my thoughts, only better than I could have. Thank you. (and the others that are also independent thinkers). I joined this forum because I am also passionate about my gun rights.....I own guns and I shoot guns. However, I see erosion of not only my 2A rights but all the others, as well. Everyday, more is lost. Where does it end?

I have spent alot of time here reading and learning from the other members. I have nothing but respect for all the posters and their posts, even when I disagreed with them. I have to say, though......DISCLAIMER: This is MY opinion only and should not reflect on anyone else.......it's a sad day when the Mods hijack a serious discussion with cartoons. How disrespectful is that ??? Are not forum members allowed a different opinion than yours? As another poster stated: Not all of us live in such lofty ivory towers as some here apparently do....we have very real worries in our lives that donating to calguns and voting for the "lessor of the two evils" won't solve. We're trying to think toward the future of this state (and our country). We have a responsibility to future generations. It is our legacy and our burden. When is it appropriate to turn to our conscience, if not now?

The above opinions are my own and no one elses.

Meplat
01-05-2010, 4:54 PM
You do not fight because you are going to win; you fight because you are right! If our forefathers had not believed this we would still be part of the british empire.


Most likely a campaign staffer wrote the OP.

As far as Jerry Brown being a socialist dem...that may be true. But let's be honest here. Chelene has no chance of winning (unfortunately). There is no money behind her (when compared to the other candidates) and she won't even be a blip on the media's radar. She won't be participating in any debates (televised or otherwise) and she won't get even a fraction of the votes.

So if California's gun owners back her....Jerry may lose. If California's gun owners back JERRY, we will get more "Arnold Style" governing but we'll get our 2A rights.

Chelene...I agree with your entire platform. But I don't want to risk losing our 2A rights if/when you don't win.

Liberty Belle
01-05-2010, 4:55 PM
PS I will be voting for Chelene. Not because she is a good friend of mine but because her platform is aligned with my beliefs and because I believe it is time to excise the rot among our public servants. They works for us, not the other way around. Incompetence annd corrption have to go if we are to have any future.

Meplat
01-05-2010, 5:00 PM
Outch!!:eek:


I do what I can given my circumstances. I have been to two of the OC events here in San Diego. I will be loaded OC'ing every day in a month. Problem is I will do it in IRAQ! When I get home from the war zone I will gladly PLAY COMMANDO!!

slamfire
01-05-2010, 5:19 PM
I am the one that directed Chelene to this forum. I have known her for a number of years and consider her a good friend. I was of the opinion that a group so passionate about 2A rights would at least have a respect for our other Rights as well. After reading this thread, I'm not so sure the 1A is among them. Bad Voodoo, Grizzly, Slamfire, kcbrown: you have all expressed alot of my thoughts, only better than I could have. Thank you. (and the others that are also independent thinkers). I joined this forum because I am also passionate about my gun rights.....I own guns and I shoot guns. However, I see erosion of not only my 2A rights but all the others, as well. Everyday, more is lost. Where does it end?

I have spent alot of time here reading and learning from the other members. I have nothing but respect for all the posters and their posts, even when I disagreed with them. I have to say, though......DISCLAIMER: This is MY opinion only and should not reflect on anyone else.......it's a sad day when the Mods hijack a serious discussion with cartoons. How disrespectful is that ??? Are not forum members allowed a different opinion than yours? As another poster stated: Not all of us live in such lofty ivory towers as some here apparently do....we have very real worries in our lives that donating to calguns and voting for the "lessor of the two evils" won't solve. We're trying to think toward the future of this state (and our country). We have a responsibility to future generations. It is our legacy and our burden. When is it appropriate to turn to our conscience, if not now?

The above opinions are my own and no one elses.

Don't be to hard on the group we have a diverse community here and there are differences of opinion.We've been alowed to express those opinions compliments of calguns.They could have shut this thread down long ago but it's still running.A little humor does creep in occasionally we all need a good laugh.

NightingaleforGovernor10'
01-05-2010, 5:24 PM
You don't want to be "off topic"? OK...so what exactly is the topic here? This was a very politician-y answer by the way. You've really NAILED the double speak.
Why don't you e-mail the campaign then
www.nightingaleforgovernor.com

NightingaleforGovernor10'
01-05-2010, 5:33 PM
I support the political discourse taking place. At least people are more aware of the alternatives to what has been given to them in the past.

It won't happen with one election, it will take years to overcome the political "two-headed" monster. Don't give up because a certain candidate didn't win, This movement has been growing and growing for a very long time, and now more than ever, people are starting to realize this. The GOP and Dems are no longer looked at as the only viable solution to this state's problems.

I will vote with my convictions and beliefs until the day that I die. Thats the type of commitment I will devote to the Constitution Party. No more voting because of a "R" next to thier name.

G17GUY
01-05-2010, 5:39 PM
I support the political discourse taking place. At least people are more aware of the alternatives to what has been given to them in the past.

It won't happen with one election, it will take years to overcome the political "two-headed" monster. Don't give up because a certain candidate didn't win, This movement has been growing and growing for a very long time, and now more than ever, people are starting to realize this. The GOP and Dems are no longer looked at as the only viable solution to this state's problems.

I will vote with my convictions and beliefs until the day that I die. Thats the type of commitment I will devote to the Constitution Party. No more voting because of a "R" next to thier name.


You have two screen names?

NightingaleforGovernor10'
01-05-2010, 5:41 PM
No this is John Baldwin. An avid supporter of Chelene Nightingale

Kestryll
01-05-2010, 5:42 PM
I was of the opinion that a group so passionate about 2A rights would at least have a respect for our other Rights as well. After reading this thread, I'm not so sure the 1A is among them.
I will be more than willing to fight for your 1st Amendment rights however there are a couple of points that need to be made.

1) This is a private forum as such the 1st does not apply here.
Were this a forum owned and run by the Government then there would be a legitimate claim one 1A grounds.

We have rules that are set by the owner and are expected to be followed, these do not always line up with the 1st Amendment, just as I'm sure you have rules in your home that supersede my right to free speech.

2) No one has said that you or Ms. Nightengale can not post your views and opinions provided those posts are within the boundaries of the rules.
Neither has anyone else been told that and neither is anyone required to agree with or espouse the views of others.

In simple terms, not everyone is going to share your views and they are going to tell you that. As long as it's done in context o the thread and not rude or derogatory they are as welcome to post as you are.

I have to say, though......DISCLAIMER: This is MY opinion only and should not reflect on anyone else.......it's a sad day when the Mods hijack a serious discussion with cartoons. How disrespectful is that ???
This is an open discussion which means that like most threads there will be 'thread drift'. We try to balance keeping things on topic with allowing a free-form discussion.
If you've been reading this forum for any time you will have noticed that these little sidebar vignettes are fairly common as a thread reaches triple digit posts. These are rarely complete redirections of the thread and in the normal flow of discussion things usually come back around to the topic.

Are not forum members allowed a different opinion than yours?
Apparently they are or we would not be having this discussion would we?
I'd like to return this question to you however, it seems to me that one of your concerns is that the majority of posters do not share your enthusiasm for Ms. Nightengale's candidacy and you find that troubling.
Are they not allowed to have differing views?


As another poster stated: Not all of us live in such lofty ivory towers as some here apparently do....we have very real worries in our lives that donating to calguns and voting for the "lessor of the two evils" won't solve. We're trying to think toward the future of this state (and our country). We have a responsibility to future generations. It is our legacy and our burden. When is it appropriate to turn to our conscience, if not now?

The above opinions are my own and no one elses.

You are welcome to your view and your vote, as am I and everyone else.

Frankly I don't know Ms. Nightengale or her background, I have not seen her name anywhere but here and to be honest I doubt she will be a factor in the Gubernatorial race. No offense intended but if her name isn't well known by now she's either going to have to come up with massive amounts of cash to change that in a very short time or she's simply not going to get enough votes to affect the race.
It may not be kind to say so but it IS the reality of politics today.
We'd like it to be different but it will not be by this election.

And that is where the concern lies.

I have been a registered voter since I turned 18 and have voted in every election since, I consider it my duty as a citizen.
In those decades I have learned that our political system is based on compromise. Rarely if ever has a candidate espoused everything I believe in and on those rare occasions the reality was that they stood no chance whatsoever of winning.
However the candidate I shared nothing with did and I was left with the choice of taking an active hand in preventing them from taking office or effectively sit it out.

The perfect can not become the downfall of the good or neither will be victorious.

Reality and the potential to lose very big or lose very small has to be taken in to account and acted on accordingly.
That is what many here are saying.

What is the future to be like if we let those who would subjugate our rights retain control while we gamble away slowing things in order to turn them around in favor of one longshot chance at a spontaneous U-turn?

The reality of our political system as it exists now is not something we like but it is what we have to work with right now and changing that will not happen in one election.

NightingaleforGovernor10'
01-05-2010, 5:44 PM
You are welcome to your view and your vote, as am I and everyone else.

Frankly I don't know Ms. Nightengale or her background, I have not seen her name anywhere but here and to be honest I doubt she will be a factor in the Gubernatorial race. No offense intended but if her name isn't well known by now she's either going to have to come up with massive amounts of cash to change that in a very short time or she's simply not going to get enough votes to affect the race.
It may not be kind to say so but it IS the reality of politics today.
We'd like it to be different but it will not be by this election.

And that is where the concern lies.

I have been a registered voter since I turned 18 and have voted in every election since, I consider it my duty as a citizen.
In those decades I have learned that our political system is based on compromise. Rarely if ever has a candidate espoused everything I believe in and on those rare occasions the reality was that they stood no chance whatsoever of winning.
However the candidate I shared nothing with did and I was left with the choice of taking an active hand in preventing them from taking office or effectively sit it out.

The perfect can not become the downfall of the good or neither will be victorious.

Reality and the potential to lose very big or lose very small has to be taken in to account and acted on accordingly.
That is what many here are saying.

What is the future to be like if we let those who would subjugate our rights retain control while we gamble away slowing things in order to turn them around in favor of one longshot chance at a spontaneous U-turn?

The reality of our political system as it exists now is not something we like but it is what we have to work with right now and changing that will not happen in one election.

Looks like we have a political consultant in here eh'? Apparently, you know everything about California politics..so might as well just give up and lie down and take it eh'? is that you opinion then?

This is John Baldwin by the way!

wildhawker
01-05-2010, 6:10 PM
Looks like we have a political consultant in here eh'? Apparently, you know everything about California politics..so might as well just give up and lie down and take it eh'? is that you opinion then?

This is John Baldwin by the way!

John, you're not helping your candidate. If you really like her you might wish to consider your comments before posting them on a public forum read by tens of thousands of prolific gunnie/activists.

Meplat
01-05-2010, 6:15 PM
You have to be kidding me!

My vote is for Jerry Brown, assuming he wins the nomination. Fiorina and Whitman are in my opinion not very well versed in anything other than running a business, and not well accomplished at that.

California is broken. We have terms limits which should go. We have an initiative system that should go. We have a taxation sytem that needs to be overhauled by restoing Legislative power to assess taxes and some type of reform to Prop 13. That will take a long time to do and will take someone who has the gravitas within government to get it done and the only person even remotely up to the task is Jerry Brown, in my opinion.

bwiese
01-05-2010, 6:17 PM
You have to be kidding me!

Agree, at least about idiocy of Prop 13 repeal.

And JB is against Prop 13 changes.

Kestryll
01-05-2010, 6:26 PM
Looks like we have a political consultant in here eh'? Apparently, you know everything about California politics..so might as well just give up and lie down and take it eh'? is that you opinion then?

This is John Baldwin by the way!

Way to really put a good face on your candidate's campaign!!
You do know that by representing yourself as her supporter and then acting like, well, this, you're doing far more harm than good right?


You can 'give up and lie down' if you want, that's your choice.
Me, I'm going to keep working in the realm of reality to make things better.

And no, I'm not a Political Consultant, I'm just the guy who's name is on the 'Deed' to Calguns.
Way to make friends and influence people... :rolleyes:

Meplat
01-05-2010, 6:34 PM
Frankly, I see no way out of this. .

Lock & load!:43:

GrizzlyGuy
01-05-2010, 6:34 PM
Frankly I don't know Ms. Nightengale or her background, I have not seen her name anywhere but here and to be honest I doubt she will be a factor in the Gubernatorial race. No offense intended but if her name isn't well known by now she's either going to have to come up with massive amounts of cash to change that in a very short time or she's simply not going to get enough votes to affect the race.
It may not be kind to say so but it IS the reality of politics today.
We'd like it to be different but it will not be by this election.


That's true Kestryll, but the 'times they are a-changin' as they say in a song that I am probably too young to remember. :o

In the past, it was difficult for citizens to hear the views of 3rd party candidates like Ms. Nightengale. The major media had a virtual monopoly on communications, and unless you were in one of the two major parties or had a large war chest of funds, you were effectively silenced.

The playing field has changed and continues to change at an ever-increasing rate thanks to the Internet. E-mail, Web sites, blogs, Facebook, Twitter, and especially... generous citizens like you who, without government coercion, choose to donate their private property to host discussion forums like this one. It's your house with your rules, but I think we all appreciate your willingness to support 1A in spirit, with common-sense rules (and an occasional well-deserved slap-down) that benefit your entire community.

As you say, it will be a tough uphill battle for Ms. Nightengale or any 3rd party candidate in this election cycle. New technology takes time to be truly effective and pervasive, contrary to what many of us geeks might claim in our marketing pitches over on the business-side of our lives (who, me?). ;)

But I sincerely hope that we get there someday and can truly have a free market of competing ideas, and an informed electorate that has the opportunity to vote for whoever they feel is best, without being overly biased by messages facilitated by the major media. If we don't, I fear for the future of our republic.

kcbrown
01-05-2010, 6:37 PM
The reality of our political system as it exists now is not something we like but it is what we have to work with right now and changing that will not happen in one election.

This is true. The problem is that this has been true for the past 50+ years. Nothing has improved in that period of time. If anything, it's gotten worse.

The bottom line is that the two major parties are effectively one and the same now, because they both answer to the same masters. And that's most definitely not the voters. That's because the politicians don't answer to those who elected them, they answer to those who made their election possible: those who influence and control the media. Without significant media exposure, a candidate is dead in the water. The media can choose who to give exposure to.

The single party system that pretends to be a two party system cannot function unless the voters are convinced that a vote for anyone outside of the system is a vote that's thrown away. But the fact of the matter is that a vote for one of the two parties is a vote for a single party, and that vote is the one that's thrown away.

The majority of voters throw their votes away right now because they vote for someone they don't actually believe in, and instead vote for someone they believe is "electable". This is a self-referencing and self-perpetuating system. Breaking it requires that people see the system for what it is and vote the way they should have been all along: for the candidate they truly believe in. When the system was set up, it was presumed that voters would vote that way, rather than for the second worst candidate.


If you vote for the second worst candidate, your vote may "count" for more in some statistical sense but it most definitely won't count for more in a real sense, because the candidate you'll be voting for will be a candidate who is most interested in keeping the system and the government the way it is. So in the end, what is the difference, really? I'll tell you: if you vote for the candidate you truly believe in, you'll be expressing your honest opinion. If you vote for the second worst candidate, you'll be expressing a falsehood.

Little wonder things are as bad as they are these days, with so many people telling lies through their votes.

Geo
01-05-2010, 6:44 PM
Well I was all set to vote for Nightengale for Gov, and I was all set to send in a $2,500 check to the Nightengale campaign, and I was all set to tell EVERYONE I know to vote for Nightengale, and I was going to personally purchase TV and radio ads for the Nightengale campaign...

...but then this guy John Baldwin and his remarks made me rethink the folly of my ways. I mean if a guy like John Baldwin is so pro-Nightengale, something is screwy.

Meplat
01-05-2010, 6:56 PM
I am tired of voting for the lesser of evils. The reality is that JB will be our next governor. Why not give a show of strength to a true Bill of Rights candidate? It may send a message.
:43:You are welcome to your view and your vote, as am I and everyone else.

Frankly I don't know Ms. Nightengale or her background, I have not seen her name anywhere but here and to be honest I doubt she will be a factor in the Gubernatorial race. No offense intended but if her name isn't well known by now she's either going to have to come up with massive amounts of cash to change that in a very short time or she's simply not going to get enough votes to affect the race.
It may not be kind to say so but it IS the reality of politics today.
We'd like it to be different but it will not be by this election.

And that is where the concern lies.

I have been a registered voter since I turned 18 and have voted in every election since, I consider it my duty as a citizen.
In those decades I have learned that our political system is based on compromise. Rarely if ever has a candidate espoused everything I believe in and on those rare occasions the reality was that they stood no chance whatsoever of winning.
However the candidate I shared nothing with did and I was left with the choice of taking an active hand in preventing them from taking office or effectively sit it out.

The perfect can not become the downfall of the good or neither will be victorious.

Reality and the potential to lose very big or lose very small has to be taken in to account and acted on accordingly.
That is what many here are saying.

What is the future to be like if we let those who would subjugate our rights retain control while we gamble away slowing things in order to turn them around in favor of one longshot chance at a spontaneous U-turn?

The reality of our political system as it exists now is not something we like but it is what we have to work with right now and changing that will not happen in one election.

GrizzlyGuy
01-05-2010, 7:07 PM
I am tired of voting for the lesser of evils. The reality is that JB will be our next governor. Why not give a show of strength to a true Bill of Rights candidate? It may send a message.
:43:

Hopefully it will, and for the folks here who believe that Jerry Brown will support 2A, it is a principled and riskless decision. Here's why:

The liberty-oriented 3rd party candidates will draw a higher percentage of votes from Republican candidates vs. Democrat candidates. So if a lot of people vote 3rd party, one of the following will happen:

1) The 3rd party candidate wins.
2) The Democrat candidate (presumably Jerry Brown) wins.

It's a win-win for those people who support 2A and think that Jerry Brown is truly pro-2A.

Only #1 is a win for the rest of us, but hey, we vote on principle so who cares, we might at least send a message, right? On our way out of the state to greener pastures, of course... :D

Meplat
01-05-2010, 7:08 PM
Bull ****!:43:
And I'm the ****ing tooth fery!
Well I was all set to vote for Nightengale for Gov, and I was all set to send in a $2,500 check to the Nightengale campaign, and I was all set to tell EVERYONE I know to vote for Nightengale, and I was going to personally purchase TV and radio ads for the Nightengale campaign...

...but then this guy John Baldwin and his remarks made me rethink the folly of my ways. I mean if a guy like John Baldwin is so pro-Nightengale, something is screwy.

steadyrock
01-05-2010, 7:20 PM
No this is John Baldwin. An avid supporter of Chelene Nightingale

Is this the same person who yesterday personally claimed to be Chelene Nightingale?

Steyr_223
01-05-2010, 7:23 PM
http://forums.sagetv.com/forums/images/smilies/popcorn.gif

guayuque
01-05-2010, 7:34 PM
You lost me there on taking down Prop 13.

JB has said he's against that or increased taxation.

I know, I know. Everyone thinking NIMBY, worried about their own pocketbook and not about the fact we are in this together. The simple fact of the matter is the reason other taxes and fees are so high is that we have an absurd land taxation formula. I don;t think land valuation for taxation purposes should be done annually, or even every few years. But keeping it at fixed to the purchase price when all other costs have gone up widly is absurd. I think a better way might to be key real estate tax increases or decreases to an index. Purchase price is a ridiculous index. Government (roads, parks, fire, schools, cops, etc.) do not run for free. We all have to pay for them.

Brown knows this but he alos knows it is political suicide to mention a repeal. Why do you think Schwarzeneggar jumped all over Warren Buffet when Buffet mentioned the absurdity of Prop 13.

Dirk Tungsten
01-05-2010, 7:42 PM
I know, I know. Everyone thinking NIMBY, worried about their own pocketbook and not about the fact we are in this together. The simple fact of the matter is the reason other taxes and fees are so high is that we have an absurd land taxation formula. I don;t think land valuation for taxation purposes should be done annually, or even every few years. But keeping it at fixed to the purchase price when all other costs have gone up widly is absurd. I think a better way might to be key real estate tax increases or decreases to an index. Purchase price is a ridiculous index. Government (roads, parks, fire, schools, cops, etc.) do not run for free. We all have to pay for them.

Brown knows this but he alos knows it is political suicide to mention a repeal. Why do you think Schwarzeneggar jumped all over Warren Buffet when Buffet mentioned the absurdity of Prop 13.

You know property taxes increase annually according to an inflation factor determined by the state BOE, right? You also know that prop 13 has actually benefited both the state and property owners simultaneously for the last 30 some odd years, right? The major problem here is out of control spending by the legislature and the willingness of the citizenry to vote themselves into the poorhouse via the initiative process. Prop 13 has actually been good for california no matter what angle it is approached from, that's a fact. end derail.

bwiese
01-05-2010, 7:45 PM
You know property taxes increase annually according to an inflation factor determined by the state BOE, right? You also know that prop 13 has actually benefited both the state and property owners simultaneously for the last 30 some odd years, right? The major problem here is out of control spending by the legislature and the willingness of the citizenry to vote themselves into the poorhouse via the initiative process. Prop 13 has actually been good for california no matter what angle it is approached from, that's a fact. end derail.

Bingo, we have a winner.

California's budget issues can be solved by reducing government size (even thru just growth limitation) and capping pension payouts, and putting all new employees on a 401K plan instead of a defined benefit plan - or capping pension payouts to 55% max salary and unindexed for inflation.

Sgt Raven
01-05-2010, 7:51 PM
Which is it, are you or are you not Chelene Nightingale? That is a very poor way to attract voters here when you lie to us about who you are.

Thank you! Yes, it is quite alarming to come to come to a community in which I support so adamently, only to be attacked. These are my views, and I am running for governor. I understood the title of forum correctly right? 2A. Politics and Laws..yes?

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.

GrizzlyGuy
01-05-2010, 8:24 PM
Brown knows this but he alos knows it is political suicide to mention a repeal. Why do you think Schwarzeneggar jumped all over Warren Buffet when Buffet mentioned the absurdity of Prop 13.

I agree, Brown is a master at not committing political suicide. Right after seeing the political winds shift and reversing his position on prop 13 (http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?p=3593082#post3593082), he made this "moving" speech back in 1978 where he points out how important it is to shrink government:

xCueOgnluDg

Jerry never lets a wind-shift or opportunity to pander go to waste. When denying civil rights to gays fit his political purpose, he did. Then when he realized that he might need the gays solidly behind him to win the governorship in 2010, he reversed himself again (http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?p=3595393#post3595393).

You'd think that positions related to fundamental principles like civil rights (e.g., 2A) would derive from core beliefs. But not for Jerry, he's the master of avoiding political suicide. Civil rights don't matter to Jerry. Only one thing matters to Jerry: Jerry.

8-Ball
01-05-2010, 8:27 PM
You puzzle me, because most folks here are gunrights advocates.

We suffer when we have fractionated non-single-issue voting. The union guys vote union, the gays for for gays, but the gunnies split their vote among half a dozen or more criteria.

And that support from JB has been more than quiet, esp when a key amicus brief has been sent to the Supremes, the DOJ FD was downsized to a Bureau, etc. etc.

As far as CA goes, my neighborhood and employer are certainly not burning down. I'm doing quite well. Hoffmang's doing great, so are a lot of other Calgunners. CA's still a good place to start a business if it's the right kind of business - smart people doing high-value things.

Life is what you make of it.

Yeah, a lot of things in CA suck but can be worked around, bypassed or compensated for. So I can deal with all that other crap just fine, and I focus on working for RKBA.

I'll vote for a bank-robbing, public-defecating transsexual pyromaniac who advocates animal sex - if he shows he's pro-gun.

Show me another viable candidate that's pro-gun - the rest of the fleet are certainly antis. Ms. Chalene Nightengale above, while having some agreeable similar outlooks in certain areas, doesn't have the funds or skills to come close to even making a dent. And don't tell me a Republican gov can do anything else, because at best he can vete and he can't run new legislation since the R's only have 1/3 seats. That even applies to St. McClintock.

Also, it's kinda funny seeing the Repub shills trot out anti-JB stuff not based on fact. When he was mayor of Oakland, he was damned near identical to a pro-biz anti-crime Republican fighting against the Berkeleyite left Oakland City Council.


I'll never understand the non-single-issue voter that's a gun owner and complains about gun laws.

You are way, way, way underestimating the fight. Incorporation is the end of the beginning, not beginning of the end. We will just have a means of response. We will indeed win, but it will require time/money/lawyers (lawyers, guns & money!)

We expect more bad law to be thrown up for some time and requiring hashing out in the courts. And remember that Kamala Harris will be AG (almost a given) so having counterbalance is important. CGF's recent fundraising will likely get burned on in part on "keeping Kamala tame". If Alison can hold out til Harris takes over, the gags come off and she may come out of the basement.


On the other hand, if JB turns into another Arnie with regard to 2A... all that remains is a liberal agenda... Can you or this state afford that...?

bwiese
01-05-2010, 8:37 PM
On the other hand, if JB turns into another Arnie with regard to 2A... all that remains is a liberal agenda... Can you or this state afford that...?

I'll manage somehow, and nicely.

6172crew
01-05-2010, 8:41 PM
. No more voting because of a "R" next to thier name.

Yep!, I remember when Hannity was raving about how great Arnie would be and how McKlitock should back out.

Thanks alot Hannity, what a blue falcon.:)

Like you said, voting "R" doesn't work in this state. If you ran as a "D" Id prolly vote for ya:D, seems most voters dont really knwo the issues but they see a "D" and they cast a vote...my ex-wife comes to mind.:43:

I said it once, but Welcome to CGs.net.:chris:

6172crew
01-05-2010, 8:44 PM
Bingo, we have a winner.

California's budget issues can be solved by reducing government size (even thru just growth limitation) and capping pension payouts, and putting all new employees on a 401K plan instead of a defined benefit plan - or capping pension payouts to 55% max salary and unindexed for inflation.

Or how about a part time .gov, NV meets 2-3 times a year and they are paid only for the hotels, food, etc while they are working that week.

Nothing changes, which is why NV looks good and bad.:cool:

8-Ball
01-05-2010, 8:45 PM
I'll manage somehow, and nicely.

Well, isn't that good for you...

ZEyKcXtjBQE

Kestryll
01-05-2010, 8:55 PM
On the other hand, if JB turns into another Arnie with regard to 2A... all that remains is a liberal agenda... Can you or this state afford that...?

With any politician this is a risk and one that needs to be factored in.

However I think we have enough info to give a pretty solid view of where JB's head is at regarding 2A and to be frank I'd be surprised if Gene, Bill and others were willing to be this vocal without having something more solid than just track record.

GrizzlyGuy
01-05-2010, 8:55 PM
On the other hand, if JB turns into another Arnie with regard to 2A... all that remains is a liberal agenda... Can you or this state afford that...?

The state is already having difficulties withstanding the onslaught of progressive, tax-and-spend, anti-business pro-entitlement policies that increase our unemployment rate (http://articles.sfgate.com/2009-12-18/news/17331659_1_bay-area-counties-western-states-counties-had-more-people):

Hans Johnson, a demographer at the Public Policy Institute of California, said he is not surprised by the data.

"Most people who move to or from California do so for economic reasons, specifically jobs. Our unemployment rate is significantly higher than the rest of the country and when that happens, California tends to send more migrants to other states than we receive," Johnson said.


That exodus of higher income taxpaying citizens, combined with the continuing growth in the low-income segment of its population (http://usgovinfo.about.com/od/immigrationnaturalizatio/a/caillegals.htm) will only worsen under Brown and push the state into bankruptcy. The civil unrest at that point will make us thankful that Brown fully supports 2A and our natural right to self-defense. :rolleyes:

AyatollahGondola
01-05-2010, 8:59 PM
Ah! Nightingale.......

Contrast in freedom. A dictator who doesn't want to take my guns away. What a concept.

Jerry Brown does know the state pretty well. Too well though. He's just the person we need to lead us right back to the wolves.
whitman is one of the wolves. Also lacks government experience
fiorina....not qualified for government service
I personally don't see a one of them a 2nd amendment proponent. Did any one of them support senator Don Rogers attempt to add the 2nd to California constitution? probably not huh?

383green
01-05-2010, 9:05 PM
Did any one of them support senator Don Rogers attempt to add the 2nd to California constitution? probably not huh?

Did any one of them support incorporation of the 2nd Amendment? One of them did.

I may or may not vote for that particular candidate, but it seems to me that we could hand-pick any one of the thousands of bills introduced over the last decade or so, and then ask the question "did any one of these people support|oppose this bill" in order to make whatever point we want to make.

wildhawker
01-05-2010, 9:41 PM
Or how about a part time .gov, NV meets 2-3 times a year and they are paid only for the hotels, food, etc while they are working that week.

Nothing changes, which is why NV looks good and bad.:cool:

In a state of ~37MM citizens and expansive infrastructure the part-time government concept would be far more damaging than beneficial. The consequence would not be anything less than a) a similar volume of legislation in less time (which part of the process is going to be reduced?) and b) increased special-interest involvement (who is going to tell the representatives what to vote for when they return to session? after all, the special-interests will continue to work year-round). Lastly, what competent person would would as a high-exposure public official when compensated at meager per diem rates?

Bad Voodoo
01-05-2010, 10:18 PM
I'll manage somehow, and nicely.

hu⋅mil⋅i⋅ty  [hyoo-mil-i-tee or, often, yoo-]
–noun
the quality or condition of being humble; modest opinion or estimate of one's own importance, rank, etc.

Try it on, Bill, or one day you'll very likely become one of the individuals CGF fights every day to enlighten/educate on our behalf. That's a dark, special interest place I'd rather CGF not visit anytime soon.

jdberger
01-05-2010, 10:22 PM
In a state of ~37MM citizens and expansive infrastructure the part-time government concept would be far more damaging than beneficial. The consequence would not be anything less than a) a similar volume of legislation in less time (which part of the process is going to be reduced?) and b) increased special-interest involvement (who is going to tell the representatives what to vote for when they return to session? after all, the special-interests will continue to work year-round). Lastly, what competent person would would as a high-exposure public official when compensated at meager per diem rates?

I dunno...

I kind of like the idea of those idiots having less time to dream up and pass ridiculous legislation.

As for them having less time to read and understand the bills they're promoting, that's like giving my kids less time to eat their brussel sprouts. Not likely either way.

Bad Voodoo
01-05-2010, 10:36 PM
In a state of ~37MM citizens and expansive infrastructure the part-time government concept would be far more damaging than beneficial. The consequence would not be anything less than a) a similar volume of legislation in less time (which part of the process is going to be reduced?) and b) increased special-interest involvement (who is going to tell the representatives what to vote for when they return to session? after all, the special-interests will continue to work year-round). Lastly, what competent person would would as a high-exposure public official when compensated at meager per diem rates?

Brandon, big government, especially CA big government, exists only to promote, profit from, and become empowered by special interests. It's a mutually equitable arrangement that people with ethics <gasp!> might even call corrupt. What more evidence does one need than our current predicament with this state government? Or is that 'the game' CGF board members want to participate in and profit from? No offense, but based on your collective unity re: certain politicians and related issues, most of which 'constitutionally aware' citizens find repulsive, I'm beginning to wonder.

It's time we reeled in our state government, to its roots. They have in fact, proven to be incompetent to do the job and they are entirely out of control. A part-time legislature, perhaps a constitutional rewrite, provisions for redacting a law for every new law introduced... all should be seriously examined. No sacred cows.

We've gone astray and it's time to follow the breadcrumbs back. If not now, I'm afraid there won't be a 'when.' I certainly won't put up with too much more, and I feel like I'm damned close to being one of the last out the door with so many already fleeing!

Meplat
01-05-2010, 10:49 PM
I used to have a lot of respect for your viewpoint.

In a state of ~37MM citizens and expansive infrastructure the part-time government concept would be far more damaging than beneficial. The consequence would not be anything less than a) a similar volume of legislation in less time (which part of the process is going to be reduced?) and b) increased special-interest involvement (who is going to tell the representatives what to vote for when they return to session? after all, the special-interests will continue to work year-round). Lastly, what competent person would would as a high-exposure public official when compensated at meager per diem rates?

wildhawker
01-05-2010, 10:58 PM
No offense taken; I don't expect everyone to have the capacity to accept a high-capacity understanding of practical application of politics and law against the issues.

On a personal level I find it amusing that the price of entry to "constitutional awareness" is offering up platitudes for consumption by others who elect impotent purity over the opportunity to affect more favorable outcomes by taking a pragmatic approach.

I'm as sickened by the disastrous and failed policies of California as anyone here; keep in mind that the people of California asked for much of what it has received.

Brandon, big government, especially CA big government, exists only to promote, profit from, and become empowered by special interests. It's a mutually equitable arrangement that people with ethics <gasp!> might even call corrupt. What more evidence does one need than our current predicament with this state government? Or is that 'the game' CGF board members want to participate in and profit from? No offense, but based on your collective unity re: certain politicians and related issues, most of which 'constitutionally aware' citizens find repulsive, I'm beginning to wonder.

It's time we reeled in our state government, to its roots. They have in fact, proven to be incompetent to do the job and they are entirely out of control. A part-time legislature, perhaps a constitutional rewrite, provisions for redacting a law for every new law introduced... all should be seriously examined. No sacred cows.

We've gone astray and it's time to follow the breadcrumbs back. If not now, I'm afraid there won't be a 'when.' I certainly won't put up with too much more, and I feel like I'm damned close to being one of the last out the door with so many already fleeing!

Bad Voodoo
01-05-2010, 11:10 PM
No offense taken; I don't expect everyone to have the capacity to accept a high-capacity understanding of practical application of politics and law against the issues.

On a personal level I find it amusing that the price of entry to "constitutional awareness" is offering up platitudes for consumption by others who elect impotent purity over the opportunity to affect more favorable outcomes by taking a pragmatic approach.

I'm as sickened by the disastrous and failed policies of California as anyone here; keep in mind that the people of California asked for much of what it has received.

Ah, I get it. If you can't beat 'em, join 'em. Got it. :thumbsup:

Thanks for the clarification. I think for a lot of people today, you and Bill provided much to consider.

jdberger
01-05-2010, 11:22 PM
Ah, I get it. If you can't beat 'em, join 'em. Got it. :thumbsup:

Thanks for the clarification. I think for a lot of people today, you and Bill provided much to consider.

I don't think you "got it" at all.

Brandon and Bill simply don't think it's time to transition from Ballot to Ammo box quite yet.

You can retain your lilly-white "integrity" and stand on the street corner and scream at traffic all you want to. You can even become a local fixture without sullying your values, coming to compromise or even working with the ones you despise.

http://laughingsquid.com/wp-content/uploads/2006/01/frank_chu.jpg

Or you can roll up your sleeves, get involved, get messy, change the system from within.

Finally, by trashing the current system, completely dismantling it, you're inviting unintended consequences.

Think of all the <gasp> liberal causes that would be amended as 'rights' to the California Constitution. Living wage. Fair trade. Universal Health Care. Right of Immigration....the list is endless. Remember the demographics of this State.

Kestryll
01-05-2010, 11:31 PM
Thanks for the clarification. I think for a lot of people today, you and Bill provided much to consider.

Actually, I'd say that for a lot of people over the last few years Bill, Brandon and many others have provided much to consider.

Like an impressive string of victories.

obeygiant
01-06-2010, 12:08 AM
Actually, I'd say that for a lot of people over the last few years Bill, Brandon and many others have provided much to consider.

Like an impressive string of victories.

:iagree:

hoffmang
01-06-2010, 12:11 AM
I'm just amused that people think there is going to be a third party in California anytime soon. Can someone please show me who the second party is first?

It looks like a one party state to me.

-Gene

Dr. Peter Venkman
01-06-2010, 2:14 AM
I'm just amused that people think there is going to be a third party in California anytime soon. Can someone please show me who the second party is first?

It looks like a one party state to me.

-Gene

Ha!

AyatollahGondola
01-06-2010, 7:34 AM
Did any one of them support incorporation of the 2nd Amendment? One of them did.

I may or may not vote for that particular candidate, but it seems to me that we could hand-pick any one of the thousands of bills introduced over the last decade or so, and then ask the question "did any one of these people support|oppose this bill" in order to make whatever point we want to make.

Well, I'm not sure how else we are to gauge the sincerity of a candidate. I guess we could just go by what they are saying prior to the election. Promises and committments are cast in stone, right?
Personally, I like to review historical patterns

GrizzlyGuy
01-06-2010, 8:18 AM
In a state of ~37MM citizens and expansive infrastructure the part-time government concept would be far more damaging than beneficial. The consequence would not be anything less than a) a similar volume of legislation in less time (which part of the process is going to be reduced?) and b) increased special-interest involvement (who is going to tell the representatives what to vote for when they return to session? after all, the special-interests will continue to work year-round). Lastly, what competent person would would as a high-exposure public official when compensated at meager per diem rates?

I think you may need to study how other states operate so as to gain some perspective on this issue.

New Hampshire (http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/senate/misc/fastfacts.html) has a part-time legislature and the legislators are only compensated $100/year. The state has a low population but large number of legislators: 400 in the House and 24 in the Senate, making it the largest legislature in the United States. There is approximately one state "assemblyman" for every 3000 citizens. Legislators tend to be ordinary citizens with other jobs, and the majority of the senate are women. New Hampshire is one of the most free of the free states (http://www.freestateproject.org/files/101-Reasons-to-Move-to-NH.pdf) with liberties we could only dream of in California.

New Mexico also has a part-time legislature and the legislators receive no compensation at all. Other states with very low compensation: AL ($10/day), NV ($138/day), UT ($130/day), WY ($150/day).

California and New York have the highest compensation: CA($113,098/yr), NY($79,500/yr).

Illinois, Massachusetts, Michigan, New Jersey, New York, Ohio, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin have the longest sessions. Their legislatures meet year-round.

Legislatures in Arkansas, Montana, Nevada, North Dakota, Oregon and Texas only meet every other year.

Virginia and Utah have the shortest sessions (about six weeks)

In terms of gun laws, notice the following: states with legislatures that meet less frequently, have less compensation for the legislators (http://www.empirecenter.org/html/legislative_salaries.cfm), have larger legislator/citizen ratios and/or shorter sessions tend to have the best gun laws and the most liberty overall.

Are you still happy with how California, controlled by progressive authoritarians, chooses to operate its legislature?

GrizzlyGuy
01-06-2010, 8:35 AM
I'm just amused that people think there is going to be a third party in California anytime soon. Can someone please show me who the second party is first?

It looks like a one party state to me.


Very true. To have a viable second party, the third parties and independents need to unite and then form a coalition with moderate and conservative elements of the current second party. Unless that happens (and it could happen if strong leaders emerge), the current first party may continue its dominance indefinitely.

boxbro
01-06-2010, 10:06 AM
No this is John Baldwin. An avid supporter of Chelene Nightingale

With all due respect sir, you are a liar.
If I was Chelene, I wouldn't want you anywhere near my campaign.
If I had it my way, you would be banned for coming here under false pretenses pretending to be someone you are not.
There is no valid excuse for this and you should be ashamed of yourself.

bwiese
01-06-2010, 10:18 AM
With all due respect sir, you are a liar.
If I was Chelene, I wouldn't want you anywhere near my campaign.
If I had it my way, you would be banned for coming here under false pretenses pretending to be someone you are not.
There is no valid excuse for this and you should be ashamed of yourself.

Yep, this has been pretty surreal...

nat
01-06-2010, 10:30 AM
Jerry Brown the Democrat Socialist? wow...I mean wow. California is most ceratinly in trouble if we believe Jerry Brown is our savior when it comes to our State Sovereignty and our Tenth Amendment Rights (which include our 2A rights).

Please provide facts supporting this statement. As a moderate, I am sure as hell tired of hearing people like you furthering this hate.

You would get more respect if you laid out facts and didn't bash other people or label people socialist.

steadyrock
01-06-2010, 10:31 AM
With all due respect sir, you are a liar.
If I was Chelene, I wouldn't want you anywhere near my campaign.
If I had it my way, you would be banned for coming here under false pretenses pretending to be someone you are not.
There is no valid excuse for this and you should be ashamed of yourself.

Yep, this has been pretty surreal...

I'm still waiting (but breathing) for an answer to my question from yesterday:

Is this the same person who yesterday personally claimed to be Chelene Nightingale?

doc1buc
01-06-2010, 10:35 AM
Now Now girls, You are both pretty.

OlderThanDirt
01-06-2010, 10:41 AM
Well, I'm not sure how else we are to gauge the sincerity of a candidate. I guess we could just go by what they are saying prior to the election. Promises and committments are cast in stone, right?
Personally, I like to review historical patterns

Greetings Ayatollah,

It funny you would show up on this thread, especially since Chelene banned you from SOS. There is already enough drama in this thread. Otherwise I would ask you about your perspective of this candidate's historical patterns.

wildhawker
01-06-2010, 11:59 AM
In a vacuum, such an argument has much appeal. Note that I don't disagree with you inasmuch that California legislators by and large are overcompensated officials and have little incentive to be efficient.

I believe we must consider, however, the affect of certain predominant interests and cultural tendencies upon state government. For example:

* California is modeled as a high tax/high benefit state; while it's clear this model has failed in nearly (if not every) respect, these institutions require (at the very least) a transition so as to avoid a substantial shock to the economic organism. Moving directly into a part-time state legislature only guarantees an opportunity for full-time bureaucrats to take on more responsibilities for the running of the state.

* For a PT Leg to practically support a state of this size and diversity would require a reduction in their scope or an increase to the body of legislators or both. California's social benefit behemoth is largely operated by union machines that are unquestionably the most powerful interests in Sacramento. When you take on the task of modifying the way we operate, you take on the task of modifying the benefactors of the operation concurrently. To say that such is a monumental task is an understatement.

* Californians are, by and large, acclimated to the offerings of the state. With the relative ease that the state constitution can be amended, I'd expect a push for the inclusion of new constitutionally-guaranteed positive rights by large, well-funded interest groups with broad public appeal. Sure, we've theoretically reduced the scope of the Leg but now many of these programs that were debatable budget items are now simply a virtually immovable component in the fabric of our state culture.

We didn't incrementally scald the frog by dropping him into boiling water and we surely won't bring him back by placing him into a bath of liquid nitrogen.

My lack of certainty for a positive outcome simply through the use of a part-time Leg should not be considered my tacit approval of the current system of government or a disinterest in seeing a fundamental restructuring of CA and associated paradigm shift in Sacto.

I think you may need to study how other states operate so as to gain some perspective on this issue.

New Hampshire (http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/senate/misc/fastfacts.html) has a part-time legislature and the legislators are only compensated $100/year. The state has a low population but large number of legislators: 400 in the House and 24 in the Senate, making it the largest legislature in the United States. There is approximately one state "assemblyman" for every 3000 citizens. Legislators tend to be ordinary citizens with other jobs, and the majority of the senate are women. New Hampshire is one of the most free of the free states (http://www.freestateproject.org/files/101-Reasons-to-Move-to-NH.pdf) with liberties we could only dream of in California.

New Mexico also has a part-time legislature and the legislators receive no compensation at all. Other states with very low compensation: AL ($10/day), NV ($138/day), UT ($130/day), WY ($150/day).

California and New York have the highest compensation: CA($113,098/yr), NY($79,500/yr).

Illinois, Massachusetts, Michigan, New Jersey, New York, Ohio, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin have the longest sessions. Their legislatures meet year-round.

Legislatures in Arkansas, Montana, Nevada, North Dakota, Oregon and Texas only meet every other year.

Virginia and Utah have the shortest sessions (about six weeks)

In terms of gun laws, notice the following: states with legislatures that meet less frequently, have less compensation for the legislators (http://www.empirecenter.org/html/legislative_salaries.cfm), have larger legislator/citizen ratios and/or shorter sessions tend to have the best gun laws and the most liberty overall.

Are you still happy with how California, controlled by progressive authoritarians, chooses to operate its legislature?

steadyrock
01-06-2010, 12:09 PM
In a vacuum, such an argument has much appeal. Note that I don't disagree with you inasmuch that California legislators by and large are overcompensated officials and have little incentive to be efficient.

I believe we must consider, however, the affect of certain predominant interests and cultural tendencies upon state government. For example:

* California is modeled as a high tax/high benefit state; while it's clear this model has failed in nearly (if not every) respect, these institutions require (at the very least) a transition so as to avoid a substantial shock to the economic organism. Moving directly into a part-time state legislature only guarantees an opportunity for full-time bureaucrats to take on more responsibilities for the running of the state.

* For a PT Leg to practically support a state of this size and diversity would require a reduction in their scope or an increase to the body of legislators or both. California's social benefit behemoth is largely operated by union machines that are unquestionably the most powerful interests in Sacramento. When you take on the task of modifying the way we operate, you take on the task of modifying the benefactors of the operation concurrently. To say that such is a monumental task is an understatement.

* Californians are, by and large, acclimated to the offerings of the state. With the relative ease that the state constitution can be amended, I'd expect a push for the inclusion of new constitutionally-guaranteed positive rights by large, well-funded interest groups with broad public appeal. Sure, we've theoretically reduced the scope of the Leg but now many of these programs that were debatable budget items are now simply a virtually immovable component in the fabric of our state culture.

We didn't incrementally scald the frog by dropping him into boiling water and we surely won't bring him back by placing him into a bath of liquid nitrogen.

My lack of certainty for a positive outcome simply through the use of a part-time Leg should not be considered my tacit approval of the current system of government or a disinterest in seeing a fundamental restructuring of CA and associated paradigm shift in Sacto.

Your position is well thought out and even as an advocate of a part-time legislature in theory, I find many of your arguments nicely reasoned, and frankly quite compelling.

That said, if a plan were to be crafted that would offer a stepwise reduction in legislative size and scope with the ultimate goal of returning to a part-time state legislature, while considering and specifically addressing many of your points (most notably the power of special interest lobbies, of which we are one), would you ultimately support such a goal?

Kestryll
01-06-2010, 12:32 PM
The discussions are great and one or two are very interesting.

The accusations and attacks are far less interesting however.

Throttle it back and keep things civil so we don't have to lock this or hand out any bans.

wildhawker
01-06-2010, 12:47 PM
Personally, I think any such plan would have at its core the realization by part of the constituency that large government and high tax/high benefit economics are antithetical to a vibrant economy and personally-invested community of citizens. This appeals to me on many levels and would represent a move towards what I envision as the proper amount of government: just enough.

I'll note that it's difficult to discuss limitations on interests without also considering the limitations on speech such would incur (ala BCRA).

That said, if a plan were to be crafted that would offer a stepwise reduction in legislative size and scope with the ultimate goal of returning to a part-time state legislature, while considering and specifically addressing many of your points (most notably the power of special interest lobbies, of which we are one), would you ultimately support such a goal?

NightingaleforGovernor10'
01-06-2010, 1:09 PM
Please provide facts supporting this statement. As a moderate, I am sure as hell tired of hearing people like you furthering this hate.

You would get more respect if you laid out facts and didn't bash other people or label people socialist.

Let us not forget the Acorn tapes yes?
http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/editorials/la-ed-brown18-2009nov18,0,7709260.story

NightingaleforGovernor10'
01-06-2010, 1:11 PM
Please provide facts supporting this statement. As a moderate, I am sure as hell tired of hearing people like you furthering this hate.

You would get more respect if you laid out facts and didn't bash other people or label people socialist.

Here is more on ole' Governor Brown
http://www.examiner.com/x-26553-LA-History-Examiner~y2009m10d31-Jerry-Brown--The-California-Democrats-Heir-Apparent

Please go back and read our rules on calling politicians names -6172

Sgt Raven
01-06-2010, 1:23 PM
Blah, blah, blah

Why should we listen to anything you have to say? You've proved in your own words you're a liar! :rolleyes:

NightingaleforGovernor10'
01-06-2010, 1:26 PM
Jerry Brown and ACRON
http://biggovernment.com/2009/11/10/exclusive-audio-from-acorn-claims-jerry-brown-will-whitewash-investigation/

Sgt Raven
01-06-2010, 1:39 PM
As Chelene the Person and as Chelene candidate, I believe I am most aware of who I am. Furthermore, there is no difference between the two. I am a homeschooling mother, a small business owner and patriot who is concerned for her family.


First, I appreciate the supporter who posted on my behalf, however I did not write the posts above.

No this is John Baldwin. An avid supporter of Chelene Nightingale


Again, why should we care what a LIAR thinks?

Dupe Troll Account
01-06-2010, 1:40 PM
I don't care who that is, she's got my vote. heaven help us if jerry brown gets elected.

Kestryll
01-06-2010, 1:54 PM
Again, why should we care what a LIAR thinks?

That will be the last one of those we need, I THINK the bolded yelling got your opinion across the first time.

slamfire
01-06-2010, 2:05 PM
I don't care who that is, she's got my vote. heaven help us if jerry brown gets elected.

Why?

Dupe Troll Account
01-06-2010, 2:14 PM
Why?

cuz, he is one of those career politicians. He didn't work in the 70's and he sure as hell wont wok now

Dupe Troll Account
01-06-2010, 2:15 PM
*work

nat
01-06-2010, 2:16 PM
Let us not forget the Acorn tapes yes?
http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/editorials/la-ed-brown18-2009nov18,0,7709260.story

Did you read the article? Where are the facts proving he is a "socialist" as you put it?

Dupe Troll Account
01-06-2010, 2:16 PM
plus i had enough of business peoel in government. thats why i aint voting for whitman and poizner is anti prop 13. leaves me no other choice. im voting independent this time. im changing my registration tomorrow.

bwiese
01-06-2010, 2:18 PM
cuz, he is one of those career politicians. He didn't work in the 70's and he sure as hell wont wok now

What does that have to do with gunrights?
This is a gun rights board/forum.

Dupe Troll Account
01-06-2010, 2:21 PM
no this is a politics forum.

bwiese
01-06-2010, 2:22 PM
no this is a politics forum.

It's a 2nd Amend. Politics forum.

Dupe Troll Account
01-06-2010, 2:23 PM
jerry brown aint no frined of the second amendment. he is just a flip flopper on issues. hes for guns today and not for them tomorrow. he will be just like the terminator governor. says he is for gun rights and then passes anti gun bills

Dupe Troll Account
01-06-2010, 2:23 PM
It's a 2nd Amend. Politics forum.

ya so whats your point?

Kestryll
01-06-2010, 2:24 PM
I don't care who that is, she's got my vote.

Of course she does, you have the same IP address as 'NightingaleforGovernor10''/James/Chelene!

I suspect that you would vote for her/yourself!

Now, since I'm not fond of people playing registration games with me, I get to play with you!

Kestryll
01-06-2010, 2:25 PM
no this is a politics forum.

No, this is a Second Amendment politics forum, that means the politics discussed MUST relate to the 2nd Amendment.

bwiese
01-06-2010, 2:25 PM
Of course she does, you have the same IP address as 'NightingaleforGovernor10''/James/Chelene!

I suspect that you would vote for her/yourself!

Now, since I'm not fond of people playing registration games with me, I get to play with you!

Red pony treatment? Or just permaban?

wildhawker
01-06-2010, 2:26 PM
ya so whats your point?

It's obviously lost on you here, so let me try a different tact.

This is not the place for non-2A related discussion and political campaigning. If that's not clear enough, I think some mods would be pleased to show you out of discussions in this forum.

Dupe Troll Account
01-06-2010, 2:27 PM
ip? im using a computer at the library

Kestryll
01-06-2010, 2:28 PM
ip? im using a computer at the library

Really??

I assume 'NightingaleforGovernor10' goes to the same library then eh?

Try not to call me stupid DIRECTLY to my face okay?
It doesn't make the hole any less deep.

Dirk Tungsten
01-06-2010, 2:28 PM
ip? im using a computer at the library

So there are 4 of you sharing a computer? :rofl2:

wildhawker
01-06-2010, 2:28 PM
ip? im using a computer at the library

Is that library "Chelene for Gov" headquarters? I wonder how they'd feel to know that their public computers were being used by and for political campaigns.

Rekrab
01-06-2010, 2:29 PM
Of course she does, you have the same IP address as 'NightingaleforGovernor10''/James/Chelene!

I suspect that you would vote for her/yourself!

Now, since I'm not fond of people playing registration games with me, I get to play with you!

I <3 Kestryll.

This has turned my boring afternoon into a lovely afternoon. Thank you everyone involved.

Dupe Troll Account
01-06-2010, 2:29 PM
hell if i know

Kestryll
01-06-2010, 2:30 PM
Red pony treatment? Or just permaban?

Hard call...

I think we're going to clean house and just leave the one account in her name, If she wants to post, fine but no more of this 'supporting ourselves with false accounts' crap.

Dupe Troll Account
01-06-2010, 2:30 PM
headquarters? no, public library fool

Kestryll
01-06-2010, 2:32 PM
headquarters? no, public library fool

Alright, that'll be enough of that.

You come here lying to us, calling people names and being completely fraudulent in how you present yourself.

I like games as much as the next person but you're getting on my bad side and that's not good.

Let's see how you like MY games...

oaklander
01-06-2010, 2:33 PM
LOL

Way to manage your campaign.

:p

Dirk Tungsten
01-06-2010, 2:33 PM
HAHAHAHHA....Kestryll, that's hilarious. This is easily the most entertaining thread on Calguns.

steadyrock
01-06-2010, 2:33 PM
:clap:

Rekrab
01-06-2010, 2:38 PM
This should be stickied and required reading for any "politician" that deems it appropriate to grace us with his presence.

bwiese
01-06-2010, 2:43 PM
This should be stickied and required reading for any "politician" that deems it appropriate to grace us with his presence.

Yeah, we already sent poor Tommy Campbell packing.

Kestryll
01-06-2010, 2:44 PM
ip? im using a computer at the library

By the way, most Libraries do not have IP addresses that resolve to a Roadrunner business account...


Just a heads up.

choprzrul
01-06-2010, 2:47 PM
I'm mightily confused. Has anyone been able to firmly ascertain whether or not the REAL Chelene is doing any of this? If not, can we firmly determine exactly who is?

Liberty Belle
01-06-2010, 2:48 PM
I just called Chelene and informed her of what was going on here. She was unaware of this activity and mortified that it was occurring (as am I). I'm sure this forum will be hearing from her soon. I agree with all the actions you are taking, Kestryll. I'm speaking only for myself. No doubt Chelene will take whatever actions she deems necessary with regards to campaign activities.

6172crew
01-06-2010, 2:53 PM
'Never mind the little man behind the curtain"

Can the real 'NightingaleforGovernor10'/James/Chelene/ dupe troll account please stand up.

choprzrul
01-06-2010, 2:55 PM
I went to Chelene's website/calander and see that she will be in LA for an event on the 9th. Perfect time for someone in the LA area to straighten this mess out face to face.

bwiese
01-06-2010, 2:58 PM
I went to Chelene's website/calander and see that she will be in LA for an event on the 9th. Perfect time for someone in the LA area to straighten this mess out face to face.

Sorry, why waste the time? She's not a Reality Candidate.

This brouhaha just crowned the situation.

Let's focus on some of the priorities (upcoming legislation, etc.) instead.

Kestryll
01-06-2010, 3:04 PM
It's very convoluted...

We have one account 'NightingaleforGovernor10'' which at first made comments identifying themselves as Ms. Nightengale.

Then another account 'Chelene' saying that it was her on her own account and that the 'NightingaleforGovernor10'' account was a staffer.

Then the 'NightingaleforGovernor10'' account said "No, my name is John Baldwin" which happens to be the name of Ms. Nightengale's Campaign Manager.

So as of yesterday it was unclear whether 'NightingaleforGovernor10'' was Ms. Nightengale or Mr. Baldwin.

Now today we have a third player, the member formerly known as 'navyj55' now known as 'Dupe Troll Account'.
This member has a singular IP address that matches the singular IP address of 'NightingaleforGovernor10''. When asked he/she claims that he/she is at a public library.

So somehow we are to believe that the public library has the identical static IP address as the campaign headquarters and that the public library uses Roadrunner business class ISP.


This is a long way of saying no we really don't know who is who and announcing your campaign on a forum with multiple layers of untruths is really really bad.

GrizzlyGuy
01-06-2010, 3:05 PM
In a vacuum, such an argument has much appeal. Note that I don't disagree with you inasmuch that California legislators by and large are overcompensated officials and have little incentive to be efficient.

I believe we must consider, however, the affect of certain predominant interests and cultural tendencies upon state government. For example:

* California is modeled as a high tax/high benefit state; while it's clear this model has failed in nearly (if not every) respect, these institutions require (at the very least) a transition so as to avoid a substantial shock to the economic organism. Moving directly into a part-time state legislature only guarantees an opportunity for full-time bureaucrats to take on more responsibilities for the running of the state.

* For a PT Leg to practically support a state of this size and diversity would require a reduction in their scope or an increase to the body of legislators or both. California's social benefit behemoth is largely operated by union machines that are unquestionably the most powerful interests in Sacramento. When you take on the task of modifying the way we operate, you take on the task of modifying the benefactors of the operation concurrently. To say that such is a monumental task is an understatement.

* Californians are, by and large, acclimated to the offerings of the state. With the relative ease that the state constitution can be amended, I'd expect a push for the inclusion of new constitutionally-guaranteed positive rights by large, well-funded interest groups with broad public appeal. Sure, we've theoretically reduced the scope of the Leg but now many of these programs that were debatable budget items are now simply a virtually immovable component in the fabric of our state culture.

We didn't incrementally scald the frog by dropping him into boiling water and we surely won't bring him back by placing him into a bath of liquid nitrogen.

My lack of certainty for a positive outcome simply through the use of a part-time Leg should not be considered my tacit approval of the current system of government or a disinterest in seeing a fundamental restructuring of CA and associated paradigm shift in Sacto.

I agree that we can't go cold turkey with the state's entitlement programs, but entitlement programs are administered by bureaucrats rather than legislators.

There is very little that legislators are actually required to do: they need to approve budgets and spending bills to fund the bureaucracy and entitlement programs, and that's about it for significant requirements. A part-time legislature, free of most special interest entanglements by its very nature, could easily handle the routine and mechanical task of managing those bills.

Virtually all of the legislature's activities beyond that are unnecessary things that they want (vs. need) to do. For example, we now have hundreds of new state laws for 2010, that took innumerable hours to author, debate, amend, etc. They run the gamut from A to Z (http://www.mercedsunstar.com/105/story/1251936.html?storylink=omni_popular), and I can't find a single one that was actually needed. Among their legislative "achievements" was redefining "honey", making it a misdemeanor to chop a cow's tail off, a toll increase for all bay area bridges (progressives always need more taxes), and allowing raffles to be advertised (but not operated) on the Internet. :rolleyes:

Oh, and they passed some critically needed new law that restricts the purchase of handgun ammunition... ;)

choprzrul
01-06-2010, 3:06 PM
Clearly the waters are muddy'd.

Kestryll
01-06-2010, 3:08 PM
I just called Chelene and informed her of what was going on here. She was unaware of this activity and mortified that it was occurring (as am I). I'm sure this forum will be hearing from her soon. I agree with all the actions you are taking, Kestryll. I'm speaking only for myself. No doubt Chelene will take whatever actions she deems necessary with regards to campaign activities.

She is welcome to post and to present her candidacy as is any other candidate and I really have no problem with it but the cloud of identity and the questions raised by it really hurt her.

I'll leave the accounts alone for now and she can send me a PM letting me know which one of the three is going to be her official and single account.

Once we've established that and things are back in line with the rules then a discussion can be had that doesn't have all the side drama and distractions.

choprzrul
01-06-2010, 3:28 PM
Just my lowly opinion, but I think that nothing but a face to face between Chelene and a moderator is going to make this right. Those three accounts and their postings should be permanently removed, that IP banned, and a new account created by Chelene personally while a moderator watches. I personally will never trust anything put out by any of those accounts ever again, so even if she does assume one of them. How can we differentiate between imposter's comments and the real deal? We can't even be sure that a political operative from some opposing champaign is behind all of this, or that Chelene isn't personally behind all of it.

steadyrock
01-06-2010, 3:45 PM
Just my lowly opinion, but I think that nothing but a face to face between Chelene and a moderator is going to make this right. Those three accounts and their postings should be permanently removed, that IP banned, and a new account created by Chelene personally while a moderator watches. I personally will never trust anything put out by any of those accounts ever again, so even if she does assume one of them. How can we differentiate between imposter's comments and the real deal? We can't even be sure that a political operative from some opposing champaign is behind all of this, or that Chelene isn't personally behind all of it.

Why should a moderator take time out of their day, to go meet with her? What stands to be gained by trading that time?

Bill is right: she has proven herself incapable of handling her own campaign, and so this has become little more than a distraction from the good work that CGN/F is doing.

If she honestly had a shot at winning, and if the mods honestly had concrete reason to believe there was massive fraud (for example, if an account named "JerryBrownForGov" posted "I am a donkey-sex maniac and a transsexual pyromaniac who advocates animal sex. I am Jerry Brown, and I approve this message.") I could see your point, but for an amateur, fifth-rung player it would just be a waste of time.

choprzrul
01-06-2010, 3:52 PM
Why should a moderator take time out of their day, to go meet with her? What stands to be gained by trading that time?

Bill is right: she has proven herself incapable of handling her own campaign, and so this has become little more than a distraction from the good work that CGN/F is doing.

If she honestly had a shot at winning, and if the mods honestly had concrete reason to believe there was massive fraud (for example, if an account named "JerryBrownForGov" posted "I am a donkey-sex maniac and a transsexual pyromaniac who advocates animal sex. I am Jerry Brown, and I approve this message.") I could see your point, but for an amateur, fifth-rung player it would just be a waste of time.

Point taken. She needs to get her house in order before pursuing the statehouse.

NightingaleforGovernor10'
01-06-2010, 4:17 PM
We have rectified the problem and want in no way to take away from the valuable resource your web forum provides. This forum has been used to campaign and for that, we here at the nightingale for governor campaign owe you our sincerest apologizes.

Further, this IP address and e-mail account have been locked from all other users other than myself. It will not be used to register for any forums in future use.
On behalf of the Nightingale for Governor campaign, I personally want to apologize for the behavior displayed on your site.

Again, we here at the Nightingale for Governor team realize the value of internet forums such as yours and in no way want to devalue their contribution.


John M. Baldwin
Campaign Manager
Chelene Nightingale for
Governor 2010

guayuque
01-06-2010, 5:53 PM
You know property taxes increase annually according to an inflation factor determined by the state BOE, right? You also know that prop 13 has actually benefited both the state and property owners simultaneously for the last 30 some odd years, right? The major problem here is out of control spending by the legislature and the willingness of the citizenry to vote themselves into the poorhouse via the initiative process. Prop 13 has actually been good for california no matter what angle it is approached from, that's a fact. end derail.

The increase is microscopic and simply not congruent. A person buying a home in 1985 pays nowhere near what a person buying that same home in 2005 does, even with increases over 20 years. Fact. Buffet pointed out this arcane heirarchy and I think I might take his analysis on finance over anyone here.

Sgt Raven
01-06-2010, 6:03 PM
The increase is microscopic and simply not congruent. A person buying a home in 1985 pays nowhere near what a person buying that same home in 2005 does, even with increases over 20 years. Fact. Buffet pointed out this arcane heirarchy and I think I might take his analysis on finance over anyone here.

How many people still own a house they bought 25 years ago? Most people move every 5-10 years or more. Do you even have a clue of an idea why Prop 13 was enacted? Do you know that before Prop 13 people were losing their homes because they couldn't keep up with the tax increases. :eek: :rolleyes:

6172crew
01-06-2010, 6:06 PM
The increase is microscopic and simply not congruent. A person buying a home in 1985 pays nowhere near what a person buying that same home in 2005 does, even with increases over 20 years. Fact. Buffet pointed out this arcane heirarchy and I think I might take his analysis on finance over anyone here.

Ahhh, so if I bought a car in 1985 I should pay a tax the same as 2005? Its always been 1% for a home. Every year you pay 1% plus the junk fees CA seems to vote on (I can think of the new tax on state parks that are now closed).

So if I bought my home for 100,000 in 1985 and a neighbors moves in down the road pays 300,000 they will both be paying 1% until they sell the home.

How is that fair? Seems most of everyone who votes for tax hikes on home owners have not owned a home and have to come up with $5400.00 a year (that was what I payed for a house that sold for 490,000).:cool:

bwiese
01-06-2010, 6:09 PM
How many people still own a house they bought 25 years ago? Most people move every 5-10 years or more. Do you even have a clue of an idea why Prop 13 was enacted? Do you know that before Prop 13 people were losing their homes because they couldn't keep up with the tax increases. :eek: :rolleyes:

Not only that, even their kid(s) couldn't afford to inherit the home because a nice home had high enough taxes that a young'un just starting out couldn't pay.

Everyone pays 1% (+ ~0.2%) of their home purchase price per year, indexed. That's equality.

nat
01-06-2010, 6:10 PM
People still lose their homes over property taxes. Property taxes are out of control. It isn't fair for one family to be paying 14k a year and have others in the neighborhood paying 400. It would be better to balance it somehow, but I am not sure in what fashion that could occur.

6172crew
01-06-2010, 6:23 PM
People still lose their homes over property taxes. Property taxes are out of control. It isn't fair for one family to be paying 14k a year and have others in the neighborhood paying 400. It would be better to balance it somehow, but I am not sure in what fashion that could occur.

That isnt true, the tax man can come by any day of the week and re-value your home, and they do. Put some new caulking or windows in your home and BAM, your taxes go up.

The only thing that goes away is Mellow roos (spelling?), new owners pay for X amount of years then you are done with it.

There is a deal that if you sold your home to your kid he or she will have the older 1% tax though. My taxes went up and had I stayed in the house I would be paying less than he $5400.00 because the houses in that area are only worth $400,000 not $520,000 when I put ne windows in the pile of bricks.

My-AK47
01-06-2010, 7:30 PM
They are scared of your guns and they are going to come and get ‘em.”

LOL!! I would like to see them try:43:

Chelene
01-07-2010, 12:21 AM
I just called Chelene and informed her of what was going on here. She was unaware of this activity and mortified that it was occurring (as am I). I'm sure this forum will be hearing from her soon. I agree with all the actions you are taking, Kestryll. I'm speaking only for myself. No doubt Chelene will take whatever actions she deems necessary with regards to campaign activities.

Thank you L.B.! I appreciate the phone call today.

I immediately took action today once my friend informed me of what was taking place in this forum.

First, I gave NO one permission to ever post or pose as me on any forum, blog, etc...My good friend L.B. invited me to post on this site which I did once last month (until the last couple of days). The matter has been dealt with in the appropriate manner.

Second, our campaign team is in order. This is the FIRST mistake someone from the team made and it was dealt with quickly. To err is human. I am sure there will be many other mistakes...it is life. I have observed the other campaigns/candidate making numerous mistakes. Whitman declaring she loves Van Jones; Brown caught taping phone calls without permission; and the list goes on.

I can not rectify a problem if I am not aware of the problem. I did NOT ask Mr. Baldwin to post on this site, although he was made aware of the site when I mentioned my friend L.B. informed me of this site. I am working on this campaign morning, noon, and night and since our campaign is doing far better than expected, I am much busier than anticipated, thus I do not have time to monitor every Internet action by other people.

The ONLY membership name by me here is this one. It is impossible that any of the other IPs would match my own. Having managed a forum I too am not fond of mulitple member names as it is deceptive in my opinion.

For those who would rather vote for Jerry Brown in hopes that he will keep your 2A safe..bear in mind his deception in his own office, former state management, and his current ACORN dealings.

For anyone who wants to "confront" me in person..be my guest! I invite any member here to attend any campaign event to meet me in person. Besides I did nothing wrong here..I was falsely accused here. In fact those who wanted me to PM them could have done the same. In addition I have posted my email address more than once here so feel free to contact me.

No, I am not a poltician, I am a frustrated American willing to do what others are not...I don't just talk, I do the walk! I did not accept the invitation to run for this office lightly, but in the end, I decided to accept the challenge as I am NOT going to ever support the "lesser of two evils" again! Thankfully per the polls, the majority feels the same and many are predicting many third party wins nationwide in 2010 and 2012.

For the person who wants to know my campaign strategy..sorry but like in football you don't let the other team know how you are going to play the game. I can tell you that I have some great consultants and upcoming endorsements. And if you have specific questions, please feel free to contact me directly.

Thank you again LB. And to the moderators, my sincere apologies for someone else's actions.

bigcalidave
01-07-2010, 12:38 AM
Thankfully per the polls, the majority feels the same and many are predicting many third party wins nationwide in 2010 and 2012.\

Which polls?? I'm not finding them.

IrishPirate
01-07-2010, 12:53 AM
What is your plan to get exposure? How do you plan on attending debates against the elite candidates? How can you win?

seriously...i've never heard of you. not that that's some extraordinary feat....but still, i do spend more than my fair share of time online and new Governor candidates are a recent google search favorite of mine. so aside from the whole did you or did you not create two accounts drama, my question/statement is this:

if you really did write that letter/speach and someone really did repost it...can't we just take it as your words not theirs reguardless of why they posted it here? It's all your words so it doesn't matter who posted it....YOU SAID IT. Honestly, i stopped reading it the first time because it felt like right wing extremist propaganda! the kinda stuff that makes us gun owners look like raving lunatics to the rest of the world! yeah i want to be able to carry my gun around, loaded, any time, any place i want.....but i don't want to run around yelling at people about it....a polite conversation has ALWAYS worked better to educate others about guns and gun ownership than screaming about how it's our right and we shouldn't have to defend it to anyone. that kind of wild west, shoot first, shoot again, shoot some more and then ask a question stuff just doesn't work.

If you want to reach the masses you have to appeal to them. Sorry, your letter/speach sucked at that. It would have been a great WWII rally speach, but to reach the simple minded people of today you need to get them to understand why this concearns them too. You have to relate it to EVERYONE. I'm sorry but i cannot support someone who is just going to fire off all angry like and have a "call to arms" over the littlest thing.....Now, I'm not saying 2A rights are a little thing.....but UOC? there are bigger fish to fry (though that one MOST CERTAINLY deserves its time in the pan!!!) and by simply telling everyone that has a gun to run outside and start UOC just to make a point....that's very bad politics. I'm glad you have passion and drive....but you need to have the vision and clarity to see past the passion of the moment and look at the big picture.

We all have our little rants, but as a political candidate....EVERYTHING you say will be held against you. So far, you haven't earned my vote, I'm not impressed. Also, there's far more than just our 2A rights that we need to consider. I would never vote for a candidate just because they "promised" to vote for our 2A rights....to many lyers, and too many other important issues. Good luck, and welcome to Calguns...hopefully we can help you become a more appealing candidate somehow, or at least wisen you to the wishes of the collective gun owning community.

wikidklown
01-07-2010, 12:54 AM
Not at all. I am busy defending yours and Kes's right to free speach, and his right to own this forum and do with it as he pleases. My skin is way to thick for anything he can come up with. I have been to combat 3 times now, with the 4th comming up. He can call me an internet commando all he wants. I KNOW WHAT I DO FOR FREEDOM. He can do it by running this forum and by sending money to lawyers. I will post, send what I can and then go FIGHT!

Stay safe and thank you for your services!

jtippins
01-07-2010, 12:56 AM
:) It's a start...

Chelene
01-07-2010, 2:48 AM
Which polls?? I'm not finding them.

I posted a couple on this site. I just quickly googled and there were plenty of results. Here is one: http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2009/12/16/wsjnbc-news-poll-tea-party-tops-democrats-and-republicans/

Tea Party is being equated as a third party. Rasmussen, CPPI...in addition to the messages our campaign receives alone. The sentiment even had Joe Trippi, Howard Dean's former campaign manager, stating on a political analysis program that third parties would begin to win major races in 2010. Even Dennis Miller,who was not joking, believed a third party candidate could win the White House bid in 2016.

6172crew
01-07-2010, 8:38 AM
Thank you L.B.! I appreciate the phone call today.

I immediately took action today once my friend informed me of what was taking place in this forum.

First, I gave NO one permission to ever post or pose as me on any forum, blog, etc...My good friend L.B. invited me to post on this site which I did once last month (until the last couple of days). The matter has been dealt with in the appropriate manner.

Second, our campaign team is in order. This is the FIRST mistake someone from the team made and it was dealt with quickly. To err is human. I am sure there will be many other mistakes...it is life. I have observed the other campaigns/candidate making numerous mistakes. Whitman declaring she loves Van Jones; Brown caught taping phone calls without permission; and the list goes on.

I can not rectify a problem if I am not aware of the problem. I did NOT ask Mr. Baldwin to post on this site, although he was made aware of the site when I mentioned my friend L.B. informed me of this site. I am working on this campaign morning, noon, and night and since our campaign is doing far better than expected, I am much busier than anticipated, thus I do not have time to monitor every Internet action by other people.

The ONLY membership name by me here is this one. It is impossible that any of the other IPs would match my own. Having managed a forum I too am not fond of mulitple member names as it is deceptive in my opinion.

For those who would rather vote for Jerry Brown in hopes that he will keep your 2A safe..bear in mind his deception in his own office, former state management, and his current ACORN dealings.

For anyone who wants to "confront" me in person..be my guest! I invite any member here to attend any campaign event to meet me in person. Besides I did nothing wrong here..I was falsely accused here. In fact those who wanted me to PM them could have done the same. In addition I have posted my email address more than once here so feel free to contact me.

No, I am not a poltician, I am a frustrated American willing to do what others are not...I don't just talk, I do the walk! I did not accept the invitation to run for this office lightly, but in the end, I decided to accept the challenge as I am NOT going to ever support the "lesser of two evils" again! Thankfully per the polls, the majority feels the same and many are predicting many third party wins nationwide in 2010 and 2012.

For the person who wants to know my campaign strategy..sorry but like in football you don't let the other team know how you are going to play the game. I can tell you that I have some great consultants and upcoming endorsements. And if you have specific questions, please feel free to contact me directly.

Thank you again LB. And to the moderators, my sincere apologies for someone else's actions.

Good luck with your campain! Even if you dont win it could send a message if your numbers are high enough at the end.:)

slamfire
01-07-2010, 8:46 AM
I think of it as more than a message it's a vote for a conservative where there was none before.

AyatollahGondola
01-07-2010, 8:47 AM
If you have a history with each other don't bring it here.

That's the short road to being deleted.

Steyr_223
01-07-2010, 9:55 AM
Which polls?? I'm not finding them.

The unofficial Calguns Poll has Nightingale running 2nd behind Brown..She is ahead of Whitman and Poizner..

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

Cr6IC
01-07-2010, 11:38 AM
This thread was the very first time I'd heard of Ms.Nightingale. It interested me enough to go look at her positions, although the bs drama with the multiple posters from the same IP is a serious detraction. I'll likely be voting 3rd party come November, but I need to do more research.

nat
01-07-2010, 11:40 AM
Brown still seems to be our best bet. I am unlikely to ever vote for anybody that continues the tired, "democrats are evil socialists" mantra.

choprzrul
01-07-2010, 12:32 PM
Brown still seems to be our best bet. I am unlikely to ever vote for anybody that continues the tired, "democrats are evil socialists" mantra.

I agree with your assertion regarding the "democrats are evil socialists" mantra opposition. However, we must recognize that those in this country with socialist ideologies are overwhelmingly Democrats.

OlderThanDirt
01-07-2010, 3:16 PM
By the way, most Libraries do not have IP addresses that resolve to a Roadrunner business account...


Just a heads up.

Don't these guys know that if they want to pull one over on Kes they need to jump onto their neighbor's wireless account or drive around until they find an open and unprotected network? Not that I would ever do something so devious.

I'll remain off topic. It beats getting banned for typing what I really think about this thread and politicians in general.

AndrewMendez
01-07-2010, 3:33 PM
Man this is a great read. Kestryll for Governor!

SVT_Fox
01-07-2010, 5:56 PM
she has my VOTE

SVT_Fox
01-07-2010, 6:03 PM
I just want to LOL at the people HATING in pages 1-3,


so you want her to PAY to use this forum, I dont pay or advertise, should I be doing this now??? what a shallow tactic, please PAY now, then post later, what DB award material this is LOL
Chelene,

You are frighteningly ignorant on these issues.

If you're going to continue leveraging this community for your political purposes you could at least have the decency to support them by advertising with CGN. I await your PM.

-Brandon


Wow, seriously, just wow... and not "wow, I'm impressed"... I'm suprised anyone would come here to push themself at people. It doesn't help get my vote, sorry.

PS-Write in Tom McClintock! He's the ONLY choice and sadly, he won't run!

btw-it's nothing personal, I just don't dig really pushy people when it comes to politics.


first of all how is making a thread being pushy??? did she force you to click on it? please you must be embarrassed calling her pushy, this is a FORUM, where MULTIPLE people POST things, to call someone pushy because they are doing what everyone else does on this forum ,is well RETARDED

weezil_boi
01-07-2010, 6:40 PM
No guarantee that jerry won't use any 2A issues as poker chips once he's in same as Arnie.He is a Democrat and more in line with that philosophy.I'm not convinced he wasn't simply pandering to a voting block with any 2A support he may have expressed in the passed.He is also a career politician, read my lips no new taxes.

after reading this entire thread...

this is probably the only intelligent commet made. very interesting reading though :)

I wasnt sure until reading this thread... but now I am--

We as a state are completely screwed when gun rights advocates and enthusiasts are supporting JB. Oh well, here we are. :(