PDA

View Full Version : Meg Whitman is ANti-gun!!


UnklFungus
01-25-2010, 10:41 PM
California Gubernatorial candidate is admittedly anti-gun!!!

In her own words!!!! http://articles.sfgate.com/2009-02-13/bay-area/17190174_1_sen-john-mccain-abortion-rights-budget-gap

Whitman said she supports abortion rights - including public funding for abortions - and believes tough gun laws like assault weapon bans and handgun control are appropriate for California.

wkd4496
01-25-2010, 10:48 PM
hmm.... : -/

bwiese
01-25-2010, 10:52 PM
California gunnies will be poorly served by either Republican gubernatorial candidate and have zero RKBA credibility, unlike current AG (and candidate apparent) Jerry Brown.

Lone_Gunman
01-25-2010, 10:52 PM
California Gubernatorial candidate is admittedly anti-gun!!!

In her own words!!!! http://articles.sfgate.com/2009-02-13/bay-area/17190174_1_sen-john-mccain-abortion-rights-budget-gap


Yeah, we knew that...

http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=226241

Noraku81
01-25-2010, 10:54 PM
California Gubernatorial candidate is admittedly anti-gun!!!

In her own words!!!! http://articles.sfgate.com/2009-02-13/bay-area/17190174_1_sen-john-mccain-abortion-rights-budget-gap

I wouldn't call her anti-gun as she's not calling for a complete ban, but her stance is cause for concern.

-- Guns: She said she supports Second Amendment rights, but that an assault weapon ban and handgun restrictions are "probably the right thing in California." She does not own a gun

However,

Most Californians I talk to are worried about job creation and economic growth and so far she seems like the candidate to get the job done. CA is too messed up for a governor to worry about a gun ban, but my vote is still uncertain I can figure out who is going to suck the least.

oaklander
01-25-2010, 10:56 PM
I was going to post the dupe smiley, since I was the first person to find that article about Meg Whitman being for gun control. Meg Whitman is a HUGE anti-gunner.

However, my original thread from last year thread went bye bye for some reason. . .

So let's discuss exactly how much Meg Whitman sucks in this thread instead.

:D

ETA: I'm voting for Jerry Brown. And I'm hoping that you can read between the lines, since there's some really good stuff about him that I can't share in public, but is known to the right people.

CnCFunFactory
01-25-2010, 11:01 PM
This is not new news, she ran e-Bay for Gods sake. Look at those policies if you want to see what she thinks.

forgiven
01-25-2010, 11:16 PM
:iagree:

five.five-six
01-25-2010, 11:17 PM
wow, I never knew

see my sig


http://img33.imageshack.us/img33/6954/megwhitman.jpg

CnCFunFactory
01-25-2010, 11:21 PM
"pictures of any firearms" that's the one that is completely over the top.

1JimMarch
01-25-2010, 11:27 PM
Brown was confronted some years back with how totally hosed the California CCW system is, on a very personal level. By me.

http://www.ninehundred.net/~equalccw/oaklandzen.html

Interestingly, he's now dumped all contact with new-age whackjob Jacques Barzaghi who was last seen in Morocco.

I don't know for certain that Brown has quietly had a come-to-Jesus moment (or just as likely, a "Satori experience") regarding CCW and/or the RKBA, but it wouldn't surprise me one bit.

tonelar
01-25-2010, 11:28 PM
wouldn't it be the utmost in irony that our best ally ends up being the demo?

Is Jerry Brown really our best choice for CA Governor?

five.five-six
01-25-2010, 11:31 PM
"pictures of any firearms" that's the one that is completely over the top.

"even if the firearm is just part of the picture"


great, a vote for meg is a vote for a ban on pictures of guns

randy
01-25-2010, 11:57 PM
Nothing new here but good on ya for reminding everybody that Meg isn't good for CGO.

I don't know if she knows how to run the govt. either. Look at the job that Arnie did and he made a bunch of money as a business person.

As painful as it is to say so far I'm voting for Jerry if he runs.

Lagduf
01-26-2010, 12:01 AM
Yet you can still buy all kinds of edged weapons on ebay. That's where I got my KABAR :chris:

dfletcher
01-26-2010, 9:00 AM
I wouldn't call her anti-gun as she's not calling for a complete ban, but her stance is cause for concern.

However,

Most Californians I talk to are worried about job creation and economic growth and so far she seems like the candidate to get the job done. CA is too messed up for a governor to worry about a gun ban, but my vote is still uncertain I can figure out who is going to suck the least.

The level a politician must reach before being labeled antigun is that they must support a ban on all guns? I don't know if that level is reached by any politician and perhaps by the Brady organization itself.

I'd even give her a pass regarding EBay. If she has a group of bean counters telling her gun stuff brings in X dollars and attorneys telling her there's some exposure - well, EBay isn't GunBroker so I'll allow benefit of the doubt making a business decision. Bbenefit of the doubt, not a "thank you".

Whitman supports the AW ban, high cap mag ban and I would presume the roster and AB 962 and the whole host of CA gun laws we suffer with each day. That's antigun enough for me.

I do agree the next Governor will have more to worry about than guns - so did this Governor & he stuck it to us on several occasions. The legislature has shown that whatever the pressing need, they will find time to pass antigun legislation even if it's with the intent of squeezing more money out of us and not for the specific purpose of gun control.

And we never know when another Stockton shooting or Oakland PD shooting will come up - that is not the time to find out just how antigun a politician may be.

Barney Gumble
01-26-2010, 9:17 AM
California Gubernatorial candidate is admittedly anti-gun!!!

In her own words!!!! http://articles.sfgate.com/2009-02-13/bay-area/17190174_1_sen-john-mccain-abortion-rights-budget-gap

I'm shocked, shocked to hear she is anti-gun.

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/-Gf8NK1WAOc&hl=en_US&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/-Gf8NK1WAOc&hl=en_US&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

davescz
01-26-2010, 10:12 AM
one more reason the republican party needs to drop this whitman, let her run independant. the republican party can go to hell, they support cannidates that do not support republican values, what teh hell kind of party is it anyway?? I bet the GOP would embrace a child eating cannibal if that cannibal had enough campaign cash that they thought he/she would win.

the GOP is full of sellouts, to hell with them I had been a life time republican, now I hate to even hear that traitors turn coat name, god i hate them.

GunNutz
01-26-2010, 10:21 AM
She's anti-intelligent. She lost me with her first AM radio ad "We need to fix schools, cut taxes, and create jobs!"

Okay, Clueso, how might we go about this?

But yeah, she is terrible, all around. In fact, all of them are terrible that I've seen. I may leave this state soon, and take my pesky libertarian ideals with me.

GunNutz
01-26-2010, 10:24 AM
one more reason the republican party needs to drop this whitman, let her run independant. the republican party can go to hell, they support cannidates that do not support republican values, what teh hell kind of party is it anyway?? I bet the GOP would embrace a child eating cannibal if that cannibal had enough campaign cash that they thought he/she would win.

the GOP is full of sellouts, to hell with them I had been a life time republican, now I hate to even hear that traitors turn coat name, god i hate them.
These days, the only reason to vote repiglican would be for gun laws, and we see how true Arnold has been to those values. The repiglican party has lost its way. Unfortunately, we are now left with a 2 party system, in which both parties are focused on growing government, increasing spending, and reducing overall freedom.

I was registered repiglican until after Bush's first term. Now I am unassociated with both major parties.

P.W.
01-26-2010, 10:37 AM
She also had on her website a while back that she wants to fire between 30-40K state employee's. So she wants to fire 40,000 State employee's to create Jobs and improve the unemployment rate:rolleyes:

Besides her Anti-Gun/2A stance and these types of plans, there is NO WAY IN HELL I'm going to give her my vote. At them moment Jerry Brown is our best option and that's who is getting my Vote for Governor.

Asmodai
01-26-2010, 10:42 AM
I especially like the way her web site is set up so you cannot send her feedback. You can email the webmasters, you can join a forum to chat with the koolaid drinkers or you can request her to speak at your event.

Perhaps Crossroads of the West could get her to come speak at the next Costa Mesa show?

dixieD
01-26-2010, 10:46 AM
She sounds like a democrat.

M1A Rifleman
01-26-2010, 11:42 AM
She advertises logging on to her site, "talk to Meg", and providing feedback.

I suggest those that vote Republican, do that, and let her know that voting for another left leaning, middle of the road, anti-gun republican is not possible.

nat
01-26-2010, 11:52 AM
She sounds like a democrat.


Why do you say that? Lots of democrats and liberals love guns. Jerry Brown will be the Democrat candidate, he is pro gun.

M1A Rifleman
01-26-2010, 12:04 PM
Why do you say that? Lots of democrats and liberals love guns. Jerry Brown will be the Democrat candidate, he is pro gun.


Brown is not :rolleyes:pro-gun.

sirgrumps
01-26-2010, 12:09 PM
All you need to know about Meg Whitman is one thing, she main political adviser is......................
...
.....
.......
.........
...........
.............
...............
..................
.....................
Former California Governor Pete Wilson.
Is that anti-gun enough for you?

nat
01-26-2010, 12:17 PM
Brown is not :rolleyes:pro-gun.

Sure he is.

Why isn't he, proof?

IGOTDIRT4U
01-26-2010, 12:37 PM
Sure he is.

Why isn't he, proof?

He isn't pro-gun; he is pro-rights, even if it means the 2A.

P.W.
01-26-2010, 1:42 PM
He isn't pro-gun; he is pro-rights, even if it means the 2A.

Well it is a known fact that before and after he entered the Catholic seminary he enjoyed Waterfowl/Upland bird hunting. Now anyone who enjoys hunting which involves the use of firearms and supports the 2A as a fundamental right is at least some what Pro-Gun. You all can judge for yourselves obviously but his recent work supporting our 2A rights need to be taken into consideration.

dfletcher
01-26-2010, 1:47 PM
Why do you say that? Lots of democrats and liberals love guns. Jerry Brown will be the Democrat candidate, he is pro gun.

I think Brown has with aged curbed some of his earlier positions. Heck, who among us hasn't done that to a certain extent.

Yes, lots of liberals and Democrats like guns. But I think it's safe to say that above the Mason-Dixon line most politicians who are anti gun are Democrats or liberal or both. Again, it's a generalization but when you look at states that have restrictive gun laws - CA, NJ, NY, MA, RI, IL, MD, DC for example - they are controlled by Democrats and mostly liberal. Again, a generalization and one that doesn't apply to the good old southern Democrats in general.

Put another way - is there a state controlled by conservatives or Republicans that pushes gun control? I can't think of any.

M1A Rifleman
01-26-2010, 1:49 PM
Well it is a known fact that before and after he entered the Catholic seminary he enjoyed Waterfowl/Upland bird hunting. Now anyone who enjoys hunting which involves the use of firearms and supports the 2A as a fundamental right is at least some what Pro-Gun. You all can judge for yourselves obviously but his recent work supporting our 2A rights need to be taken into consideration.

Not sure how long you have been following his history on this subject, but let me explain. Like typical anti-gun elitist types, they are pro gun for themselves, not for you and the other unwashed masses.

bwiese
01-26-2010, 1:52 PM
Not sure how long you have been following his history on this subject, but let me explain. Like typical anti-gun elitist types, they are pro gun for themselves, not for you and the other unwashed masses.

You are very uninformed.

Please see the other thread in this forum on JB & guns

M1A Rifleman
01-26-2010, 1:56 PM
You are very uninformed.

Please see the other thread in this forum on JB & guns

Your opinion.

nitrofc
01-26-2010, 1:58 PM
They both basically stink IMO.

This has always been a non-stop problem for California.....we can never find the right people with the right mind set to work for the Tax Payer's of this State.
It's always one extreme...or the other and it makes me want to puke.

As soon as they get voted in.....then stray off to some far away place like Mars never to be found again. You can see it in their eye's.....lost in space.

nat
01-26-2010, 1:59 PM
Your opinion.

Why don't you back up your opinion with facts.

Glock22Fan
01-26-2010, 2:03 PM
Put another way - is there a state controlled by conservatives or Republicans that pushes gun control? I can't think of any.

Can't think of one. But if you could find another state that was run by the likes of Arnie, Meg, Tom Campbell and a bunch of other California RINOs, then I think you would have it.

Hopi
01-26-2010, 2:05 PM
Why don't you back up your opinion with facts.

Partisan shills haven't the need for facts.

M1A Rifleman
01-26-2010, 2:07 PM
Why don't you back up your opinion with facts.

Why, Its an opinion.

nat
01-26-2010, 2:11 PM
Why, Its an opinion.

So you pulled your opinion out of thin air :rolleyes:

I try to form my opinion after analyzing some facts. An informed opinion is better than one you pull out of your ***.

M1A Rifleman
01-26-2010, 2:19 PM
So you pulled your opinion out of thin air :rolleyes:

I try to form my opinion after analyzing some facts. An informed opinion is better than one you pull out of your ***.

OK smart guy,
Brown's a lib, and beyond his recent actions, has done nothing progun or in supporting progun causes . Show me his non-support for the 1989 and 1992 AW bills, or his support of more liberal CCW laws. I think his recent progun actions are dubious and geared to his own election, however, next to Whitman, Arnie, or Cambel, I would vote for him.

qaz987
01-26-2010, 4:23 PM
If she wins I will go to AZ.

CnCFunFactory
01-26-2010, 4:41 PM
I especially like the way her web site is set up so you cannot send her feedback. You can email the webmasters, you can join a forum to chat with the koolaid drinkers or you can request her to speak at your event.

Perhaps Crossroads of the West could get her to come speak at the next Costa Mesa show?

hmmmm sounds like the same type of system as e-Bay and PayPal.:(

Centurion_D
01-26-2010, 4:50 PM
The bottom line is out of all the candidates looking to get the govs chair JB is our best hope for protecting our 2A rights.

Bud Fox
01-26-2010, 5:58 PM
Let me say this, all you have to do is look at Whiman. It's a complete birds of a feather deal. She's a commie dressed in want to be Libertarian clothes.

Sgt Raven
01-26-2010, 6:30 PM
Brown is more a little 'L' Libertarian and JFK was more conservative than many Republicans are today. :rolleyes:

OK smart guy,
Brown's a lib, and beyond his recent actions, has done nothing progun or in supporting progun causes . Show me his non-support for the 1989 and 1992 AW bills, or his support of more liberal CCW laws. I think his recent progun actions are dubious and geared to his own election, however, next to Whitman, Arnie, or Cambel, I would vote for him.

dixieD
01-26-2010, 6:57 PM
Why do you say that? Lots of democrats and liberals love guns. Jerry Brown will be the Democrat candidate, he is pro gun.

Well she sounds like a democrat because when she says she supports the 2A, but then says that bans are ok for California she reminds me of Hilary. I'll never forget the belly laugh I had when I heard Hilary say she supports the 2A. She also sounds like a democrat because in addition to her stance on guns she is a fan of abortion. Now I realize that there are pro-choice republicans, but she goes further and says she is a fan of having the state (read taxpayers) pay for them. Her position on offshore drilling is just the easy way for her to say it is off the table. There is no need for "another study." Modern platforms are already extremely clean, and fewer are needed because of improved drilling techniques.

Just-me
01-27-2010, 12:21 PM
Interesting... Interesting... Meg is for abortion of babies, even government funded, but says that we can't cut healthcare to illegals because it is "for the children" and "we have to protect the children". Tell me, how does her position on abortion match up with her protection of children?

That said, what can you believe her real position on gun ownership in California is?

She does NOT get my vote.

Uxi
01-27-2010, 12:30 PM
I detest too much of JB's social and economic policy, even if I'm more in sync with him on the Guns. Not a single issue voter

Corbin Dallas
01-27-2010, 12:34 PM
California Gubernatorial candidate is admittedly anti-gun!!!

In her own words!!!! http://articles.sfgate.com/2009-02-13/bay-area/17190174_1_sen-john-mccain-abortion-rights-budget-gap

I hate to say it but...


NO DUUUUHHHH!!!

You had to wait until it was printed to believe it? Just one look at eBay and you would have known.

abusalim81
01-28-2010, 9:49 AM
WOW, no wonder Californian's will ultimately loose their gun rights... People care about economy more than their freedoms.... WELL MAYBE SOME AMERICANS NEED TO BE SLAVES BECAUSE THEY ARE SHEEP TO BEGIN WITH!!!

GO AHEAD AND VOTE FOR WHITMAN, AFTER ALL SHE (just like most people campaigning) NEVER LIES... :wacko:

abusalim81
01-28-2010, 9:57 AM
UNITED STATES used to have strong people living inside its borders, now half the men out here are feminine, and the other half are brain-washed by the idiotic so called progressive society AKA LIBERALS & DEMOCRATS, especially in California!

PATHETIC...

I SAY THE SHEEP SHOULD VOTE FOR ECONOMIC REFRESHMENT...even though nobody can help the economy in united states because the government is hacking economies legs off daily.

Afterall, SHEEPLE need to believe in HIPE, sorry I meant to say HOPE!

BTW United States is doomed to fail as a country of freedoms.. WHY?
Because there are way to many different ethnicities living together, though peacefully, yet each one have their own ideas about what a country and a society should be.... Look at the facts... What might have been an idea of the forefathers may not mean anything to a foreigner who doesnt even consider themselves American because they still love their home country! WHICH MAKES PERFECT SENSE...

Im not saying that racially mixed countries are bad, but you cannot expect people to have the same ideas about our society!

Want to blame someone, blame a country thats most racially mixed, thats the problem... LOL and this is coming from an immigrant from middle east.... BLAME ME! HAHAHA

M1A Rifleman
01-28-2010, 10:05 AM
UNITED STATES used to have strong people living inside its borders, now half the men out here are feminine, and the other half are brain-washed by the idiotic so called progressive society AKA LIBERALS & DEMOCRATS, especially in California!

PATHETIC...

I SAY THE SHEEP SHOULD VOTE FOR ECONOMIC REFRESHMENT...even though nobody can help the economy in united states because the government is hacking economies legs off daily.

Afterall, SHEEPLE need to believe in HIPE, sorry I meant to say HOPE!

Are you trolling ?

abusalim81
01-28-2010, 10:20 AM
No not trolling, just upset about how this country is becoming... Im middle eastern but I grew up in a european sociolist country which my family fled... Fled to come to a beautiful country full of freedom, and now... WTF happend, its like im back in a communist country of Ukraine again. LOL

SORRY IF YOU CANT RELATE, BUT IM NOT TRYING TO START TROUBLE... JUST POSTING MY OPINION!

abusalim81
01-28-2010, 10:23 AM
Sometimes I wish that Americans didnt hate middle easterners, so that I can move to the country side and live with the country folk because it seems like they are the only real men left in United States with any common sense!

Syntax Error
01-28-2010, 11:16 AM
All of abusalim81's post made me lol.

Corbin Dallas
01-28-2010, 2:19 PM
Sometimes I wish that Americans didnt hate middle easterners, so that I can move to the country side and live with the country folk because it seems like they are the only real men left in United States with any common sense!

Americans don't hate middle easterner's, Americans hate terrorists and leaches.

Anyone who would cause harm to our country either by force or by economic means.

No one likes the family member who does not contribute positively to the family.

FeuerFrei
01-28-2010, 3:07 PM
MW is anti-gun?
DUH!
The "guv" seat in our beloved sate of Cali is a puppet position as is. Meaningless without a total flush of the legislative "azz clowns".
IMO.

abusalim81
01-28-2010, 3:54 PM
Just read my own post..... LOL That does sound like a rant to me :beatdeadhorse5:

hawk81
01-28-2010, 4:05 PM
I am sick and tired of having to pick the lesser of two evils.

Hopi
01-28-2010, 4:06 PM
I am sick and tired of having to pick the lesser of two evils.

Beside the perception, what exactly about JB's history or potential future policy is so 'evil'?

deebix
01-28-2010, 4:24 PM
He is a global warming fanatic. His support of certain policies have destroyed at least a million jobs in the manufacturing industry alone in california. Listen to John and Ken on KFI 640, they hate this guy.

Hopi
01-28-2010, 4:28 PM
He is a global warming fanatic. His support of certain policies have destroyed at least a million jobs in the manufacturing industry alone in california. Listen to John and Ken on KFI 640, they hate this guy.

I don't really do the AM thing, and i'm hesitant to take feedback from talking heads that, as you say, hate him.

Curiously, in what position of power did his support for MMGW destroy a million jobs? Is this under the umbrella of his tenure as AG?

chessknt
01-28-2010, 4:29 PM
IMO we need more businesspeople in politics since the current dbags have no clue on how to govern without turning on the tax faucet for more welfare programs. Meg gets my vote because CA's economy and pension crises are by far the most serious issues for me.

loudninja
01-28-2010, 7:03 PM
every time i hear meg witman's ad campaign on the radio, i just wanna facepalm. total nonsense

ErikTheRed
01-28-2010, 7:21 PM
I am the world's foremost supporter of the 2nd Amendment. However, in today's economic, social, and political climate, I will not vote for another liberal Democrat to add another beating to our already severely battered Union. The terms "Democrat" and "Republican" mean very little these days, but the titles "liberal" and "conservative" mean everything. Neither Whitman nor Brown are anywhere near conservative, which is precisely why I'll be voting for neither. I'll write in Spongebob Squarepants before casting my ballot for either of them.

Hunt
01-28-2010, 8:26 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iSn37TMXZO8

Hunt
01-28-2010, 8:28 PM
I am the world's foremost supporter of the 2nd Amendment. However, in today's economic, social, and political climate, I will not vote for another liberal Democrat to add another beating to our already severely battered Union. The terms "Democrat" and "Republican" mean very little these days, but the titles "liberal" and "conservative" mean everything. Neither Whitman nor Brown are anywhere near conservative, which is precisely why I'll be voting for neither. I'll write in Spongebob Squarepants before casting my ballot for either of them.

some of those democrats understand capitalism better than these republicans, Meg Whitman is more a socialist than JB
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iSn37TMXZO8

Davidk
01-28-2010, 8:29 PM
The woman was to lazy to even vote.
http://www.sacbee.com/capitolandcalifornia/story/2205364.html

Shes a Rino and will vote no different then Brown on other social and economic issues. Despite what she says in her campaign about fiscal responsibilities, Rinos cannot be trusted.

I will be holding my nose and voting Brown.

Colt-45
01-28-2010, 8:37 PM
Sometimes I wish that Americans didnt hate middle easterners, so that I can move to the country side and live with the country folk because it seems like they are the only real men left in United States with any common sense!


I live in Fresno County and there's a lot of Arabs/Hindu people here with farms hell just the other day I saw one buying an ar15. Your kind is welcome here. And You're right about the common sense :p I once too lived in the Bay Area and once I grew up I don't miss it at all;)

Colt-45
01-28-2010, 8:39 PM
I am the world's foremost supporter of the 2nd Amendment. However, in today's economic, social, and political climate, I will not vote for another liberal Democrat to add another beating to our already severely battered Union. The terms "Democrat" and "Republican" mean very little these days, but the titles "liberal" and "conservative" mean everything. Neither Whitman nor Brown are anywhere near conservative, which is precisely why I'll be voting for neither. I'll write in Spongebob Squarepants before casting my ballot for either of them.

We're screwed either way, only the judicial system of The United States Of America can save us gun owners in California.

yourotherleft
01-28-2010, 8:42 PM
Agree with LoudNinja. I gotta change channel... to any channel.

glockwise2000
01-28-2010, 8:46 PM
Meg Whitman is a RINO. (Republican In Name Only)

abusalim81
01-28-2010, 9:34 PM
Meg Whitman is a progressive republican, which is basically as bad as a liberal.

She supports Hobama's regime and donated lots of money to liberal agenda in the past...

Whiskey84
01-28-2010, 9:37 PM
UNITED STATES used to have strong people living inside its borders, now half the men out here are feminine, and the other half are brain-washed by the idiotic so called progressive society AKA LIBERALS & DEMOCRATS, especially in California!


I don't think I'm brainwashed, so does that make me feminine? I'm pretty sure I'd make an ugly chick... Lols

and Brown gets the Vote.

abusalim81
01-28-2010, 9:42 PM
IMO we need more businesspeople in politics since the current dbags have no clue on how to govern without turning on the tax faucet for more welfare programs. Meg gets my vote because CA's economy and pension crises are by far the most serious issues for me.

Yeah, just what we need... bussiness people like Meg Whitman, Ben Bernanke and couple of other deuchebags who help the government to step on us. LOL

Sorry brother but I hope you enjoy your pension and the economy when you are living in country that lost its freedoms because apparantly, money is more important.

The line from Brave Heart comes to mind:

"Aye, fight and you may die, run, and you'll live... at least a while. And dying in your beds, many years from now, would you be willin' to trade ALL the days, from this day to that, for one chance, just one chance, to come back here and tell our enemies that they may take our lives, but they'll never take... OUR FREEDOM!"

cbn620
01-28-2010, 9:53 PM
I love when people call our country communist... while people are still alive today who remember the horrors of Soviet Russia.

I love when people say there is no paradigm shift towards pro-gun or neutral in this country, that liberals still want all the guns. That Republicans will give us guns and Democrats never will. That there's no such thing as a blue state where guns rights aren't trounced on.

abusalim81
01-28-2010, 9:59 PM
I love when people call our country communist... while people are still alive today who remember the horrors of Soviet Russia.

I love when people say there is no paradigm shift towards pro-gun or neutral in this country, that liberals still want all the guns. That Republicans will give us guns and Democrats never will. That there's no such thing as a blue state where guns rights aren't trounced on.

Brother, I lived in soviet Union, Ukraine to be exact, and do remember how it was, and what scares me the most about everything that's going on right now in our country is that this is not too far away from how socialism started in Russia... Baby steps towards full socialism!

You are right about red and blue states and dems and repubs...

wjc
01-28-2010, 9:59 PM
Ye gods, that women scares me. Not as much as Carly Fiorina, but damn close.

Whitman is a POG IMHO.

Aegis
01-29-2010, 7:43 AM
Regardless of Whitman's business experience, it will not do any good to fix the state economy or create jobs. Any pro-business measures she puts forward, the extremely anti-business legislature will defeat.

chessknt
01-29-2010, 8:37 AM
Yeah, just what we need... bussiness people like Meg Whitman, Ben Bernanke and couple of other deuchebags who help the government to step on us. LOL

Sorry brother but I hope you enjoy your pension and the economy when you are living in country that lost its freedoms because apparantly, money is more important.

The line from Brave Heart comes to mind:

"Aye, fight and you may die, run, and you'll live... at least a while. And dying in your beds, many years from now, would you be willin' to trade ALL the days, from this day to that, for one chance, just one chance, to come back here and tell our enemies that they may take our lives, but they'll never take... OUR FREEDOM!"

You are goddamn right the economy is more important than having to fill out a form to buy a gun. All the ghetto rundown countries in Africa and the Middle East have dictators because poor people <3 strong leaders who promise them free stuff. Having a strong economy and employed people is a far more powerful check on radicalism than guns.

abusalim81
01-29-2010, 10:15 AM
You obviously missed the point about being a free citizen and exercising your constitutional liberties which are gives to us by God and not the government.

It's not about going to fill out some paper to purchase a firearm, it's about people trying to take that God given right away, and as far as your statement about radicalism.... HAHAHAH

People turn to radicalism due to anger and lack of hope, NOT POVERTY!

You really think that in middle east, Palestinians and Iraqi people become violent because they are poor?

Can it be that there is a more obvious reason...

You are starting to remind me of liberals who just last month said that the would be underwear bomber turn to radicalism because of poverty, than it turned out that his familiy is filthy rich!

Furthermore, as I remember correctly, United States had on of the strongest economies in the past and what'ya know... we were still loosing freedoms because the so called gov for the people by the people was still corrupt and a dictator in the shadow...

LIKE I SAID BEFORE, GO AHEAD BE A SHEEP AND GIVE UP YOUR FREEDOMS FOR MONETARY SUPPORT FROM THE GOVERNMENT WHO GOT US IN THIS MESS TO BEGIN WITH....

Hope you will like living in the future United States of United Nations/UK, where freedoms are just memories!

chessknt
01-29-2010, 10:29 AM
Ok im going to assume you are right and that radicalism arises out of lack of hope and anger.

Do you think being able to buy a gun without filling out a form or not having a job causes more anger/lack of hope?

Do you think the man who has been laid off for a year and lost his home would stay in vagrancy and instability just so he could be "free"?

Poverty is directly linked to anger and lack of hope because it imparts instability. Your freedoms dont mean much when your basic human needs like food, shelter, and a stable family are flushed down the toilet for them.

agent.5
01-29-2010, 1:43 PM
but the titles "liberal" and "conservative" mean everything.

LOL. You mean like the 5 conservatives on the Supreme Court who decided to turn "We the people" into second class person below "We the corporations"?

davescz
01-29-2010, 2:05 PM
You are goddamn right the economy is more important than having to fill out a form to buy a gun. All the ghetto rundown countries in Africa and the Middle East have dictators because poor people <3 strong leaders who promise them free stuff. Having a strong economy and employed people is a far more powerful check on radicalism than guns.

Sorry I think your dead wrong, the government can wreck the economy in swift fashion even a good economy can fall in months when a bad guy takes power. Guns helped win freedom many times for poor folks. Guns are the great equalizer no matter how bad the government makes the economy by tampering. the economy is no protection from anything. The USA did not turn into a violent mess during the horrible great depression, nor any of the other times our economy went bad. Nor did we become saints when times were good.

The Government has no power to improve the economy except to keep its hands off it and stop printing money which is destroying the citizen's economy and wealth.

I will keep my guns to maintain a free nation over free handouts from dictators any day.

This myth of a good economy creates folks that get along and such is not correct. Prosperity can still lead to war and bad rulers, loss of freedom. Some dirt poor places are peaceful, wealth is not a determination of charector of people.

Our new nation in 1776 was not rich by anymeans, yet we fought for freedom opposed too one the worlds richest empires at the time. The poor peasents overthrew the french monarchy during their revolution.

The poor need guns, as does any free person, less they be taken advantaged of by the more powerful who may buy and to turn an army on them, or allow them to be robbed.

The bad economic practice of the current leaders is socialistic, which has big issues with our Rights and private property.

I can not think of a socialist government that has ever taken root with out the use of GUN CONTROL.

This current leadership will eventually be voted out, and they will peacefully give their seats of power to the next batch of folks we elect, who hopefully will do the right thing and stop mucking up the economy.

The only reason I believe our leaders do have a 234 year history of going peacefully when elections are lost is becuase of our guns.

We can fix the economy by getting rid of leaders that think they can print money their way out of debt with out killing off the future. We need to fix this thinking at the voting booth this November.
Our voting Right is protected by our Gun Right. Without which we will be enslaved.

Ron-Solo
01-29-2010, 2:11 PM
Quote:

Whitman said she supports abortion rights - including public funding for abortions - and believes tough gun laws like assault weapon bans and handgun control are appropriate for California.

Has anyone contacted her campaign directly to even verify that this is an accurate quote. The only thing I trust less than a politician is the media.

Don't follow the media blindly.

Diabolus
01-29-2010, 2:23 PM
I always thought public office was about serving the people. I haven't heard if Meg Whitman is putting any of her money into her campaign, but I've heard of others spending millions of their own dollars to win an election.

How much money are these people making in these political positions?

MikeinnLA
01-30-2010, 5:59 PM
I like Brown on the 2A, but his support for the Global Warming agenda REALLY worries me. The Global Warming bill and CARB will finish bankrupting California, IMO.

Mike

Argonaut
01-30-2010, 6:09 PM
I always thought public office was about serving the people. I haven't heard if Meg Whitman is putting any of her money into her campaign, but I've heard of others spending millions of their own dollars to win an election.

How much money are these people making in these political positions?

I think 18 Million of her own money. Do you guys really think she will start a war with her base and support the Damn Democrats on gun control? It doesn't sound logical to me. Jerry Brown is and has always been a disaster. Anyone thinking of voting for him needs to take a evening drive through Oakland, If you have the guts.

agent.5
01-30-2010, 6:10 PM
Her base is big corporations and multi-millionaire CEOs. I am pretty sure this group cares more about $$$$ than anything else.

davescz
01-30-2010, 6:13 PM
jerry and meg are both bad bad bad choices, party lines mean nothing to me, both are so bad on so many fronts, i forgot about brown's global warming crap, I was leaning towards him till I heard that, wonder how meg stands on global warming fraud it is.????

abusalim81
01-31-2010, 10:51 AM
I think 18 Million of her own money. Do you guys really think she will start a war with her base and support the Damn Democrats on gun control? It doesn't sound logical to me. Jerry Brown is and has always been a disaster. Anyone thinking of voting for him needs to take a evening drive through Oakland, If you have the guts.

Im sorry to brake it you brother but "her base" is not political at all she is a bureaucrat, so she won't care about republicans or democrats, she will try to appeal to the majority in this state so she can be reelected, which is a disaster for us because the majority are liberal, anti-gun, anti-freedom, NANNY STATE NAZIS!!!

If we vote for the lesser of 2 evils, might as well vote for the person who will support some of our god given freedoms., and as far as her own statements go she doesn't believe that you should be able to own semi-auto rifles and even have more constrictions on handguns...

I know who I and all my family/friends are voting for... Plus I would not vote for a woman anyways,because IMHO they have no place in politics, part of the reason United States became what it is right now... Women need to be traditional mothers and home makers who take care ofand raise their children. This is exactly why the families in this country are broken so often and kids do what they want.

Furtheremore, the feminist movement open the door for the homosexuals, liberals and other brainless idiots.... ARGGGHHH

Ron-Solo
01-31-2010, 10:59 AM
and as far as her own statements go she doesn't believe that you should be able to own semi-auto rifles and even have more constrictions on handguns...



I've never seen anything from her on guns other than the previously quoted statement, which is vague and doesn't mention anything about "semi-auto rifles" so if you have more, please back up your statement. Hints, rumors, and inuendos don't hold water...........

abusalim81
01-31-2010, 11:10 AM
"Whitman said she...believes tough gun laws like assault weapon bans and handgun control are appropriate for California."

My friend, if you think that statement is vague then maybe you need a lesson in the English language, unless you just don't understand that Assault Weapons means "SEMI-AUTO" in these peoples minds.

I mean for gods sake are people really that dumbed down in our society that they can't understand simple english?

GO AHEAD VOTE FOR HER and others like her, but make sure not to promise any of your gun collection to your descendants.

Our society is dumbed down to the point of hopelessness!

Ron-Solo
01-31-2010, 11:31 AM
"Whitman said she...believes tough gun laws like assault weapon bans and handgun control are appropriate for California."

Like I said, This is the only quote anyone keeps offering up, and it is a paraphrase of a media statement.

My friend, if you think that statement is vague then maybe you need a lesson in the English language, unless you just don't understand that Assault Weapons means "SEMI-AUTO" in these peoples minds.

I think I have an excellent command of the English language, and you are adding things to the statement that weren't initially made in it. You are the one inserting your opinion into this statement

I mean for gods sake are people really that dumbed down in our society that they can't understand simple english?

Like my original post said, we need a more direct statement from her before we believe what the media is telling us is gospel. I trust the media less than I trust politicians.


GO AHEAD VOTE FOR HER and others like her, but make sure not to promise any of your gun collection to your descendants.

I never said I was voting for her, I just think we should have accurate information before making a decision. Some people think Jerry Brown is our savior, and I remember how screwed up things were when he was in office. His State Supreme Court nominees nearly ruined this state.

Our society is dumbed down to the point of hopelessness!

By your summation of my post, I might be inclined to agree with you on a limited basis.



Get all the facts before making a decision on who to vote for.

curt1950
01-31-2010, 4:06 PM
I've been looking at Chuck DeVore but it seems that nobody here has heard about him. Take a look , you might like him.

Saym14
01-31-2010, 4:23 PM
yeah and Arnold was supposed to be pro gun?

sorensen440
01-31-2010, 4:30 PM
wouldn't it be the utmost in irony that our best ally ends up being the demo?


You would poop yourself if you realized some of the better known Cgners who are and vote democrat

Its not a democrat republican thing
we have allies on both sides of the isle as well as members on both sides (as well as those like myself who are neither side)

Hunt
01-31-2010, 6:42 PM
is what we need in California is a Free State Movement like New Hampshire, if we can get a few million people to fight every ticket, starve the system financially and flat out refuse to obey their tryannical laws we will get some change this is the only way. Remember, to a hammer all things are a nail, so goes the politicians and judicial system. Check out what is happening in Keene NH and the Free State Project

7x57
01-31-2010, 8:39 PM
I've been looking at Chuck DeVore but it seems that nobody here has heard about him. Take a look , you might like him.

Plenty of people have. He's undoubtedly the best candidate in that race. The problem is the state party doesn't like him. He's running a grass-roots campaign very well by all accounts, but it's all uphill if the apparatchiks don't like you.

I believe his main chance to prevail in the primary is for some of the more respected voices decide to make it a national cause, as with NY-23, Mass, and so on. I can't assess the likelihood of that happening.

7x57

7x57
01-31-2010, 8:43 PM
is what we need in California is a Free State Movement like New Hampshire, if we can get a few million people to fight every ticket, starve the system financially and flat out refuse to obey their tryannical laws we will get some change this is the only way.

NH is fairly friendly territory. CA would declare martial law and pull a Kent State first. Just another friendly service free of charge in the happy People's Republic.

However, to cheer you up I offer, not for the first time on Calguns, a quote I think you will appreciate:


“…At what exact point then, should one resist the communists?”
“How we burned in the prison camps later thinking: What would things have been like if every Security operative, when he went out at night to make an arrest, had been uncertain whether he would return alive and had to say good-bye to his family...?”
“Or, if during periods of mass arrests people had not simply sat there in their lairs, paling with terror at every step on the staircase, but had understood they had nothing to lose and had boldly set up in the downstairs hall an ambush of half a dozen people with axes, hammers, pokers, or whatever else was at hand.
….The police…. would have quickly suffered a shortage of officers …and notwithstanding all of Stalin's thirst, the cursed machine would have ground to a halt."


7x57

dantodd
01-31-2010, 9:25 PM
Get all the facts before making a decision on who to vote for.

Unfortunately the method by which you choose to respond to posts makes it exceedingly difficult to respond concisely but I will respond to the statement you made regarding the "only quote" you've read on Meg's stance on 2A rights.

From Meg's website: http://www.megwhitman.com/on_the_record.php

Meg on Second Amendment Rights
“I am a strong supporter of the Second Amendment and our clear constitutional right to keep and bear arms. I believe current gun laws need to be enforced but we do not need any new restrictions on gun owners. Second Amendment rights must be rigorously protected.”


I'm not sure about you but "current gun laws need to be enforced" does not rise to the level of "the right to keep and bear arms is a fundamental right."

So; Ms. Whitman supports:
The Roster
May Issue CCW
California AWB
No mail order ammunition
Zero NFA ownership by regular citizens

Not the candidate I'm looking for thanks.

dixieD
02-01-2010, 7:08 AM
LOL. You mean like the 5 conservatives on the Supreme Court who decided to turn "We the people" into second class person below "We the corporations"?

False.

I suggest you read the opinions and the oral argument before you speak so that you know something about which you speak.

If I have a political opinion my reach is very limited. If there are a million like minded citizens individually our opinions carry no real arguing strength. Suppose I want to organize like minded citizens to put forward our political opinion? Why should the government silence that speech? Why should the Solicitor General for the Federal Government feel that if I write a political book that endorses a particular candidate, and that if I choose to publish my book through a corporate publishing house (is there really any other way) they have the authority to ban my book? Suppose a corporation like the SEIU or the NRA prints signs to be held by protestors why should that possibly be banned. The Solicitor General argued that it could, but the government has not prosecuted such cases. WTF? Why can't the protected corporate speech of newspapers who routinely endorse candidates be countered? Why can't the protected corporate union speech that routinely endorses candidates be countered with a similarly meaningful range and impact? The Citizens United vs. FEC decision is nothing short of protecting the 1A for everyone. Statists, like Obama, are opposed because they know that the organization of individual citizens for political speech with the power to raise funds and utilize them is the only way to effect a significant counter to State speech.

What is so remarkable about the specific case is that a small corporation consisting of an organizing individual and approximately 5-10 employees with approximately 18 million in donated moneys received notice of the banning of their film under penalty of jail even though they were not broadcasting their speech over the air but offering it over pay-per-view services. The government said that people could not choose to listen to what they had to say. Unbelievable!

In the words of Scalia, "The dissent says that when the Framers “constitutionalized the right to free speech in the First Amendment, it was the free speech of individual Americans that they had in mind.” That is no doubt true. All the provisions of the Bill of Rights set forth the rights of individual men and women not, for example, of trees or polar bears. But the individual person’s right to speak includes the right to speak in association with other individual persons. Surely the dissent does not believe that speech by the Republican Party or the Democratic Party can be censored because it is not the speech of “an individual American."

API
02-01-2010, 8:26 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iSn37TMXZO8

It's amazing how far off topic this thread has gotten. It must be the new world's record for rationalizing stupidity. The thread's issue is whether MW is ant-gun. The initial posts pretty well demonstrated that she is in fact anti-gun. The above quoted post demonstrates that (no matter how much she disavows her candid statements on Van Jones) she is likely a progressive and thus of grave danger to CA's future. How could any reasonable freedom loving person support her?

agent.5
02-01-2010, 10:14 PM
False.

I suggest you read the opinions and the oral argument before you speak so that you know something about which you speak.


I read the entire biased and wrong opinion. 162 pages, I think. How many pages did you read, or are you just parroting from a biased, political blog?



Citing Justice Stevens, "[i]n the context of election to public office, the distinction between corporate and human speakers is significant. Although they make enormous contributions to our society, corporations are not actually members of it. They cannot vote or run for office. Because they may be managed and controlled by nonresidents, their interests may conflict in fundamental respects with the interests of eligible voters. The financial resources, legal structure, and instrumental orientation of corporations raise legitimate concerns about their role in the electoral process."

Scalia and activist "conservative" judges rejected over a century tradition of making a distinction between corporate and individual campaign spending. Corporations can now spend unlimited money to buy as many politicians, crony contracts, and bailouts as they wish.

chessknt
02-01-2010, 10:17 PM
Here is her 2a stance direct from the source:

http://www.megwhitman.com/on_the_record.php

“I am a strong supporter of the Second Amendment and our clear constitutional right to keep and bear arms. I believe current gun laws need to be enforced but we do not need any new restrictions on gun owners. Second Amendment rights must be rigorously protected.”

That sounds like maintain the status quo, which isnt ideal but far from bad. Its a pretty extreme position to take if you think she is anti-gun for not wanting to repeal all of the current bans. Anti-gun=more control, anything else is just indifferent/lukewarm. I dont really see this as a deal-killing issue, especially when the alternative is the ****up Jerry Brown.

pitchbaby
02-01-2010, 10:19 PM
I'm not gonna' read all of this thread.... I'm just gonna' ask..... anyone here willing to run for governor?

sorensen440
02-01-2010, 10:26 PM
I'm not gonna' read all of this thread.... I'm just gonna' ask..... anyone here willing to run for governor?
I wont trust anyone who wants the job.

pitchbaby
02-01-2010, 10:41 PM
I wont trust anyone who wants the job.

I think that means you should run! You don't want it and you love guns!

dixieD
02-02-2010, 5:07 AM
I read the entire biased and wrong opinion. 162 pages, I think. How many pages did you read, or are you just parroting from a biased, political blog?



Citing Justice Stevens, "[i]n the context of election to public office, the distinction between corporate and human speakers is significant. Although they make enormous contributions to our society, corporations are not actually members of it. They cannot vote or run for office. Because they may be managed and controlled by nonresidents, their interests may conflict in fundamental respects with the interests of eligible voters. The financial resources, legal structure, and instrumental orientation of corporations raise legitimate concerns about their role in the electoral process."

Scalia and activist "conservative" judges rejected over a century tradition of making a distinction between corporate and individual campaign spending. Corporations can now spend unlimited money to buy as many politicians, crony contracts, and bailouts as they wish.

I've gone a step further and read the entire case, and the questions that I posed were from my own reading of the case. The admissions of the Solicitor General for the government were particularly illuminating. You of course chose to ignore those. Even when Ginsberg provided an opportunity for regress from the former position he essentially reiterated that position that the government has the right to ban books, political pamphlets, television commercials, feature films, protest signs, but has never prosecuted such cases except for the feature film that brought this case. That leaves a warm and fuzzy feeling from the government.

The opinion of Scalia directly addresses the dissent of Stevens, and is in my opinion a worthwhile read. This country has really been turned around when originalists are termed activist. I suppose Scalia is also an activist judge in terms of the Heller case, and what is likely to be the outcome of the McDonald case. I prefer to recognize that fact that his arguments and decisions use the constitution and bill of rights to define the limits on the federal government, as they were originally intended to do.

The 1A reads "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances." The relevant phrase is 'Congress shall make NO LAW abridging the freedom of speech.' There is no qualification with respect to who the speaker is whether individual or a organization of citizens.

In my opinion the century of tradition from the establishment of the Bill of Rights trumps the century of tradition stemming from unconstitutional laws abridging the freedom of speech.

Finally the decision does not address campaign spending - corporations are still limited to what they can do with respect to direct contributions. Foreign interests still cannot participate in campaign spending. There is a difference between campaign spending and speech.

What was decided is that organizations of citizens who may incorporate may participate in spending to voice opinion on issues and candidates. I.e. they may spend funds to document a voting record, other factual evidence, or other information that the individuals who make up the organized effort feel needs to be voiced. Some may argue that they are going to swift boat, and put information out that is not factual etc. I am of the opinion that more information and more speech is better, otherwise WHO makes the decision as to what speech censored and which speakers have their freedom of speech abridged?

I for one would not mind having a corporation like the NRA, to which I contribute, express my opinion on the 2A by airing commercials and feature films that document a candidates position on the 2A inside the 30-60 day period before an election.

socalfrank
02-26-2010, 2:35 PM
Her position on guns is probably the least offensive item on her resume. Anyone who has ever had a problem with eBay, buyer or seller, knows that eBay doesn't give a sh*t about buyers or sellers. They only care about covering their own asses. It's almost impossible to contact anyone at eBay if you have a problem, and their "rules" are designed to protect eBay from any kind of liability, and to provide little or no protection for buyers or sellers. Additionally, eBay has increased their fees drastically from the original fee of 25 cents per listing. Why would they do that? Because Meg Whitman is a greedy ruthless menopause b*tch. Her only redeeming value is that she has more money than the Pope, but you would be a condemned man if you married her, even with the money. She has already threatened Steve Poizner (her Republican challenger) with complete ruin if he didn't withdraw from the race for governor - and she has the money to do it.
She is a megalomaniac who is trying to buy a golden throne in California so that everyone can bow down and worship her. Soon we will all have to bow down and suck her toes. Have a nice day.

johnny_22
02-26-2010, 4:02 PM
In her own words:

""RIGHT TO CARRY" MOVEMENT: Says she doesn"t oppose the movement but understands why restaurants and other businesses might want to ban people from openly carrying guns."

http://www.mercurynews.com/search/ci_14473005

fred40
02-26-2010, 9:38 PM
I've seen her commercials and her only background is eBay. I can't even buy a freakin pellet gun on eBay. She also says that California needs to be ran like a business. She's fukn crazy, there is no possible way to do it. She has no experience in government politics, and doesn't know what she's talking about.

M. Sage
02-26-2010, 11:19 PM
ETA: I'm voting for Jerry Brown. And I'm hoping that you can read between the lines, since there's some really good stuff about him that I can't share in public, but is known to the right people.

Good on guns, bad on just about everything else.

I'm afraid your next gubernatorial election is going to be the proverbial choice between a turd sandwich and a giant douche.

Vote "other".

I read the entire biased and wrong opinion. 162 pages, I think. How many pages did you read, or are you just parroting from a biased, political blog?



Citing Justice Stevens, "[i]n the context of election to public office, the distinction between corporate and human speakers is significant. Although they make enormous contributions to our society, corporations are not actually members of it. They cannot vote or run for office. Because they may be managed and controlled by nonresidents, their interests may conflict in fundamental respects with the interests of eligible voters. The financial resources, legal structure, and instrumental orientation of corporations raise legitimate concerns about their role in the electoral process."

Scalia and activist "conservative" judges rejected over a century tradition of making a distinction between corporate and individual campaign spending. Corporations can now spend unlimited money to buy as many politicians, crony contracts, and bailouts as they wish.

Your post is so incorrect... where should I start? Oh yeah - the Constitution, which is where the Supreme Court, Congress and the President are supposed to begin.

What's the 1A say again? Something like "Congress shall make no law... abridging the freedom of speech or the press." Unfortunately (for you), it says nothing about whose speech. It simply says that if Congress tries making laws telling certain people or groups to STFU, then they themselves can STFU.

You do realize that this law also kept good groups like the NRA from presenting your voice, right? See, funny thing is that citizens in this country will form groups so that they can pool their money and power to help influence their government. This law interfered with that. You're supporting the government putting a gag on citizens who are trying to focus resources in an effective manner in an effort to steer the direction of government. Keep up the good (?) work.

8-Ball
02-27-2010, 4:30 AM
Interesting "letter to Meg Whitman" asking for her answers on many firearm questions.

It is on her website and awaiting her answers.

There is also a place to add comments... get busy...

http://www.megwhitman.com/california/story/902/californias-woes.html

Bad Voodoo
02-27-2010, 8:56 AM
Good on guns, bad on just about everything else.

I'm afraid your next gubernatorial election is going to be the proverbial choice between a turd sandwich and a giant douche.

Vote "other".

Yup. Business as usual in this state.

Jerry Brown may very be a lukewarm proponent of 2A and related issues, but how is one to know for sure? You can't nail the man down w/ any real substantive opinion about ANY of the issues this state faces, let alone an issue as divisive to Californians as gun control. And you can't research his political record or historical opinions because he had Governor records sealed for 50 years (http://articles.latimes.com/2009/nov/25/opinion/la-oe-mathews25-2009nov25). It appears obvious, to me at least, that he doesn't WANT voters to investigate his past.

The CGF board can schlep this guy all they want, but IMO Jerry Brown is on a level of potential nuttiness that could far surpass the level many here have identified w/ Ron Paul, only shall we say, 'slightly' more to the left of RP's overall constitutional opinions. Color me UNimpressed.

http://www.sfbg.com/politics/2010/02/18/rambling-jerry-brown-speech-raises-fear-among-dems

And I'll be taking my staunch principles, otherwise identified by our resident political special interests as "political naivety", w/ me to the ballot box this year to vote third party.

G60
02-27-2010, 9:38 AM
Plus I would not vote for a woman anyways,because IMHO they have no place in politics, part of the reason United States became what it is right now... Women need to be traditional mothers and home makers who take care ofand raise their children. This is exactly why the families in this country are broken so often and kids do what they want.

Furtheremore, the feminist movement open the door for the homosexuals, liberals and other brainless idiots.... ARGGGHHH

Ok, Borat.:rolleyes:

f33dback
02-27-2010, 4:58 PM
What's the source of your sig? All I see is a pic with some absurd statements on it.
"even if the firearm is just part of the picture"


great, a vote for meg is a vote for a ban on pictures of guns

adumbomb
02-27-2010, 5:24 PM
I have decided to vote on principal period. Liberty FIRST!!! Here is someone who probably doesn't stand a chance without "THE MACHINE" behind her but I don't care anymore. You never know, crazier things have happened. Barak Obama. I'll never vote for a Rhino Republican again, ever. Check her out.
http://nightingaleforgovernor.com/

chsk9
02-27-2010, 5:44 PM
California gunnies will be poorly served by either Republican gubernatorial candidate and have zero RKBA credibility, unlike current AG (and candidate apparent) Jerry Brown.

I would have bet my last 5 cents that I would never consider Jerry Brown... never say never!

A wise friend told me a long time ago that voting for candidates that would uphold the Constitution was the ONLY thing that mattered in a election.

Theseus
02-27-2010, 6:45 PM
Yet you can still buy all kinds of edged weapons on ebay. That's where I got my KABAR :chris:

Silly Lagduf, knives don't kill people, guns do!

Uxi
02-28-2010, 6:52 PM
I dunno. I think a longtime advocate of small government who can actually work with the Dem legislature instead of impotently bullying them might be just what California needs.

lol yeah good luck with that. Davis Part 2, if you're lucky.

M. Sage
02-28-2010, 7:29 PM
I dunno. I think a longtime advocate of small government who can actually work with the Dem legislature instead of impotently bullying them might be just what California needs.

He's a longtime advocate of what? The guy who's into cap and trade to stop evil global warming is small-government? The guy who's a fan of CARB - one of the most obtrusive and corrupt government agencies that I can actually name - is small-government?

Holy ****, I don't want to meet your definition of a Statist.

BadIndianSwamp
02-28-2010, 7:45 PM
A wise friend told me a long time ago that voting for candidates that would uphold the Constitution was the ONLY thing that mattered in a election.

chsk9...I change my sig file from time to time. I hope my new one is OK with you.

Ca Patriot
02-28-2010, 7:52 PM
California Gubernatorial candidate is admittedly anti-gun!!!

In her own words!!!! http://articles.sfgate.com/2009-02-13/bay-area/17190174_1_sen-john-mccain-abortion-rights-budget-gap

I have no doubt that Whitman is fairly anti-gun. However, your post is very misleading. You said "in her own words". Yet, if you noticed, the article included NONE of her own words on the gun issues. Its not out of question that the notoriously anti-gun and biased SF paper would distort her views.
They included no actual quotes of hers on gun issues.

sorensen440
02-28-2010, 8:00 PM
Good on guns, bad on just about everything else.

I'm afraid your next gubernatorial election is going to be the proverbial choice between a turd sandwich and a giant douche.

Vote "other".



I could not have said it better

chsk9
02-28-2010, 9:56 PM
chsk9...I change my sig file from time to time. I hope my new one is OK with you.

Thanks!