PDA

View Full Version : NRA Grades Whitman C+ and Brown D


Pages : [1] 2

SideWinder11
10-21-2010, 12:16 PM
Pro-Gunners NRA has graded Whitman higher than Brown.

http://www.nrapvf.org/upcoming-elections/California.aspx



According to the NRA this is what a D means

"D --- An anti-gun candidate who usually supports restrictive gun control legislation and opposes pro-gun reforms. Regardless of public statements, can usually be counted on to vote wrong on key issues."

chickenfried
10-21-2010, 12:22 PM
Latest issue of american rifleman has a ? for whitman, D for Brown. wonder what changed?

POLICESTATE
10-21-2010, 12:23 PM
Latest issue of american rifleman has a ? for whitman, D for Brown.

Maybe Whitman turned her questionnaire in at the last minute cause I got the same thing on the latest issue of America's First Freedom.

Glock22Fan
10-21-2010, 12:25 PM
Interesting. They say "We do not base our decisions on a candidate's party affiliation, but rather on his or her record on Second Amendment issues."

And yet, Whitman has no political record whatsoever and did not complete the questionnaire. Also, don't know about C+ but a C is:

"Not necessarily a passing grade. A candidate with a mixed record or positions on gun related issues, who may oppose some pro-gun positions or support some restrictive legislation."

I'm guessing that this is a fairly middle of the road position that doesn't mean much. Certainly doesn't indicate a strong desire to forward our agenda.

I'm guessing D for JB is based on a long term history. His recent actions have been much more favorable than that implies and do suggest some alignment with our agenda.

After all, CalGunners are always coming here to say that "The NRA are wrong again!" I think this may be a case where I agree with them.

Mstrty
10-21-2010, 12:39 PM
They both suck on 2a. I will be voteing for one on other issues

Honeydos
10-21-2010, 12:42 PM
C+? Really? :confused:

odysseus
10-21-2010, 12:43 PM
It is interesting. Wonder what the NRA is now using to grade her...

NightOwl
10-21-2010, 12:43 PM
Eh, they both suck, not just on 2a.

safewaysecurity
10-21-2010, 12:43 PM
Well I voted for Dale Ogden and sealed the envelope so I don't care.

bwiese
10-21-2010, 12:51 PM
There's been some issues in this particular rating. Something isn't right because the magazine printed yet something else. Some of our info may have not filtered back, or there's some factionalism.

The NRA's state affiliate, the CRPA, has rated both as "FTCQ" (Failed to Complete Questionnaire).

Important Gun People I Trust would not be displeased at a vote for Brown

Certainly the D Brown rating can be viewed as "let's not ruin his reputation by hanging with us".

SideWinder11
10-21-2010, 12:53 PM
Interesting. They say "We do not base our decisions on a candidate's party affiliation, but rather on his or her record on Second Amendment issues."

And yet, Whitman has no political record whatsoever and did not complete the questionnaire. Also, don't know about C+ but a C is:

"Not necessarily a passing grade. A candidate with a mixed record or positions on gun related issues, who may oppose some pro-gun positions or support some restrictive legislation."
I'm guessing that this is a fairly middle of the road position that doesn't mean much. Certainly doesn't indicate a strong desire to forward our agenda.

I'm guessing D for JB is based on a long term history. His recent actions have been much more favorable than that implies and do suggest some alignment with our agenda.

After all, CalGunners are always coming here to say that "The NRA are wrong again!" I think this may be a case where I agree with them.

better than a D

SideWinder11
10-21-2010, 12:55 PM
There's been some issues in this particular rating. Something isn't right because the magazine printed yet something else. Some of our info may have not filtered back, or there's some factionalism.

The NRA's state affiliate, the CRPA, has rated both as "FTCQ" (Failed to Complete Questionnaire).

Important Gun People I Trust would not be displeased at a vote for Brown

Certainly the D Brown rating can be viewed as "let's not ruin his reputation by hanging with us".

The magazine had old information. The NRA prior had a "?" on their website for her, as some others. However now the NRA has made their position and given her a higher rating by almost 2.

SideWinder11
10-21-2010, 1:00 PM
There's been some issues in this particular rating. Something isn't right because the magazine printed yet something else. Some of our info may have not filtered back, or there's some factionalism.

The NRA's state affiliate, the CRPA, has rated both as "FTCQ" (Failed to Complete Questionnaire).

Important Gun People I Trust would not be displeased at a vote for Brown

Certainly the D Brown rating can be viewed as "let's not ruin his reputation by hanging with us".

Or it can be viewed as this according to the NRA "D -- An anti-gun candidate who usually supports restrictive gun control legislation and opposes pro-gun reforms. Regardless of public statements, can usually be counted on to vote wrong on key issues."

wash
10-21-2010, 1:06 PM
Maybe you should try reading the ebay firearm policy...

SideWinder11
10-21-2010, 1:17 PM
Maybe you should try reading the ebay firearm policy...

I don't think Brownells, Midway USA, Cabelas, Amazon or any other reseller of firearm related merchandise isn't complaining. They get the business ebay lost and win, we still get the goods just from another source.

Did you know this:



"A private enterprise can decide to sell or not sell anything they want," said a spokesman for the National Rifle Association, an organization that fights for the right to own firearms. "This has no effect on the right to own guns."

Sales of firearms were miniscule, representing less than one quarter of 1 percent of sales, said an eBay spokeswoman.

wash
10-21-2010, 1:45 PM
I wish the NRA was truly a single issue organization because if it was, we wouldn't have to deal with this B.S. or the things they have been doing in Heller v. D.C. and McDonald v. Chicago.

No matter what the facts are you can't see beyond the D (as in democrat).

Gryff
10-21-2010, 1:47 PM
We're so screwed for the next four years...

Flopper
10-21-2010, 1:57 PM
I don't think Brownells, Midway USA, Cabelas, Amazon or any other reseller of firearm related merchandise is complaining. They get the business and win, we still get the goods just from another source.

Did you know this:



"A private enterprise can decide to sell or not sell anything they want," said a spokesman for the National Rifle Association, an organization that fights for the right to own firearms. "This has no effect on the right to own guns."

Sales of firearms were miniscule, representing less than one quarter of 1 percent of sales, said an eBay spokeswoman.

I love all you guys planning on voting for third party candidates. I consider it addition by subtraction.

Thanks for voting for Brown!

FirstFlight
10-21-2010, 2:00 PM
Latest issue of american rifleman has a ? for whitman, D for Brown. wonder what changed?

The American Rifleman cheat sheet indicates "Ratings are as of Sept. 15, 2010. For any updates go to www.NRAPVF.org". So I guess they continue to update as long as they get inputs right up until the election day.

SideWinder11
10-21-2010, 2:00 PM
I'm voting anti-Brown and will be showing it by voting for one of the other 4 candidates.

FullMetalJacket
10-21-2010, 2:03 PM
Since the legislature is the source of restrictive gun legislation and the governor often our last line of protection, I don't think it matters much between them. Brown will likely go along with anti-gun regulation and Whitman, like Arnold, won't stand against anything meaningful.

odysseus
10-21-2010, 2:07 PM
Another question maybe more pertinent, how is Kamala Harris doing against Cooley? I would hate for Harris to be running our AG office. A total tool and bad news for California gun owners (though Cooley is not a warm place in the heart either) - though of course as we know it is the courts that will set direction. It could be painful on that slow road.

Gryff
10-21-2010, 2:14 PM
Another question maybe more pertinent, how is Kamala Harris doing against Cooley? I would hate for Harris to be running our AG office.

Yeah, nothing like having that libtard making law enforcement decisions for the whole state.

HowardW56
10-21-2010, 2:15 PM
BROWN... I don't trust eMeg....

Cooley.... Ditto for Kamala Harris....

Flopper
10-21-2010, 2:24 PM
I'm voting anti-Brown and will be showing it by voting for one of the other 4 candidates.

Like I said, thanks for helping the only legit RKBA candidate into office!

Protest votes are pouting votes.

Stamp your feet and cross your arms all you want, but the US is a two-party system, which is the worst kind of political system in the world. . . except for all the others.

Hopefully all of you who wish for Italian parliaments will eventually grow up and understand this.

berto
10-21-2010, 2:39 PM
Like I said, thanks for helping the only legit RKBA candidate into office!

Protest votes are pouting votes.

Stamp your feet and cross your arms all you want, but the US is a two-party system, which is the worst kind of political system in the world. . . except for all the others.

Hopefully all of you who wish for Italian parliaments will eventually grow up and understand this.

Dang, you dropped Italian paliament on this discussion. Thanks for the chuckle. I agree.

johnny_22
10-21-2010, 2:40 PM
Sales of firearms were miniscule, representing less than one quarter of 1 percent of sales, said an eBay spokeswoman.

So, I assume their porn sales are much higher?

FirstFlight
10-21-2010, 2:42 PM
Like I said, thanks for helping the only legit RKBA candidate into office!

Protest votes are pouting votes.

Stamp your feet and cross your arms all you want, but the US is a two-party system, which is the worst kind of political system in the world. . . except for all the others.

Hopefully all of you who wish for Italian parliaments will eventually grow up and understand this.

right on...

bigstick61
10-21-2010, 2:46 PM
Like I said, thanks for helping the only legit RKBA candidate into office!

Protest votes are pouting votes.

Stamp your feet and cross your arms all you want, but the US is a two-party system, which is the worst kind of political system in the world. . . except for all the others.

Hopefully all of you who wish for Italian parliaments will eventually grow up and understand this.

Well some of us question his RKBA credentials and in any case the issues where his views are downright terrible are manifold.

chickenfried
10-21-2010, 2:59 PM
yes, how asinine voting for who you feel is the best candidate. You must vote for the D or the R!

Like I said, thanks for helping the only legit RKBA candidate into office!

Protest votes are pouting votes.

Stamp your feet and cross your arms all you want, but the US is a two-party system, which is the worst kind of political system in the world. . . except for all the others.

Hopefully all of you who wish for Italian parliaments will eventually grow up and understand this.

Flopper
10-21-2010, 3:00 PM
Well some of us question his RKBA credentials and in any case the issues where his views are downright terrible are manifold.

I understand that, and don't think I came to my decision to vote for Brown lightly.

But here's the deal:

1. Brown has proven himself pro-RKBA
2. Brown will be horrible on all other issues--but so will Whitless, so it's a wash
3. There is zero proof that Meg is an (R). She's (R) cuz she says she is. . .
4. The fact that the NRA updated the ratings is more proof that Brown is the way to go.

It's a false flag operation on the part of the NRA, and all I gotta say is:

"Nice job NRA! You finally get that CA really is the land of fruits and nuts, and the only way to get a win is by using passive demagoguery to our advantage."

Flopper
10-21-2010, 3:49 PM
yes, how asinine voting for who you feel is the best candidate. You must vote for the D or the R!

You have to be smart and pick your battles.

Analogy: WWII. Did we decide to fight the Axis and the Soviets at the same time? We were completely opposed to communism, so by your logic we should have. Thankfully we didn't and instead realized that the third reich was the greater threat at that time; communism would have to be handled at a later date.

You are doing the same thing by voting third party: ensuring failure. You won't get what you want, and neither will your old party.

If you want a party that more closely suits your principles, you have to pick one of the two parties and change it from within.

And don't fool yourself about "muli-party systems." They do the same thing as our system, but worse.

In so-called MPS's, simply replace the US term "party" with "coalition," and do likewise with the US term "caucus" with "party."

We fight within our own party and then duke it out with the other party, whereas the euros fight within their party AND fight with the other parties in their coalition AND fight with the other coalition.

Politics and international relations make strange bedfellows, that's reality.

chickenfried
10-21-2010, 4:13 PM
I'll admit your analogy is completely over my head. I don't see the correlation with WWII at all. I'm most likely voting for Brown. But I've got zero problem with people that choose to vote third party and don't see the need to put them down.

You have to be smart and pick your battles.

Analogy: WWII. Did we decide to fight the Axis and the Soviets at the same time? We were completely opposed to communism, so by your logic we should have. Thankfully we didn't and instead realized that the third reich was the greater threat at that time; communism would have to be handled at a later date.

You are doing the same thing by voting third party: ensuring failure. You won't get what you want, and neither will your old party.

If you want a party that more closely suits your principles, you have to pick one of the two parties and change it from within.

And don't fool yourself about "muli-party systems." They do the same thing as our system, but worse.

In so-called MPS's, simply replace the US term "party" with "coalition," and do likewise with the US term "caucus" with "party."

We fight within our own party and then duke it out with the other party, whereas the euros fight within their party AND fight with the other parties in their coalition AND fight with the other coalition.

Politics and international relations make strange bedfellows, that's reality.

Flopper
10-21-2010, 4:17 PM
I'll admit your analogy is completely over my head. I don't see the correlation with WWII at all.

All I can say is "YIKES!" and "God help us."

ZX-10R
10-21-2010, 4:54 PM
really?post almost the same thing a couple of posts away? And I think a lot of people here are actually crossing the voting lines, many for they first time ever, get the facts then talk
-bb

Believe me I do not vote for my gun rights like most here laughably do. I vote here for the betterment of me, my family, my paycheck, and honestly this state.

Some people here have not lived in multiple states like I have...You might want to take a gander outside one day and see that CA is F'd up. Just because you may have gotten used to CA being down does not mean I have to accept it.

Don't think I challenge the demos I work with to tell me why electing brown stain who is a life long politician help us...Unfortunately I have a majority of demos voting brown because they are not in the know and have not experienced anything else but mediocrity in this state.

I want someone who has really done something and building up a multimillion $$$ company is a lot better on a resume than saying you are a life long politician.

Hey I have no hate for you or any other demo...Not at all. I am just simply amazed at how every demo I meet adheres to the typical stereotypical democrap. I on the other hand am not the typical Republican who yes, was a democrap many years ago in NYC. However, time and seeing what the demos stood for made me realize they were more interested in themselves and BEING LIFE LONG POLITICIANS than serving me. Don't let me rattle off some of the demos I have seen in NYC...Just incredible. Dinkins is the worst memory.

I have nothing against you. You are a fellow gunner and gun rights advocate. I respect that and you. However, I only ask that we look beyond party lines and instead look at the issues at hand.

Heck I was going to vote for Hilary if she had to go up against McCain - That is all I ask that you look beyond the party and instead look at the issues at hand and what the candidates HAVE DONE. Meg is new with probably fresh ideas...Brown is an old politician with nothing new to offer. Meg was a successful business woman...Brown is an old politician. Meg can offer business acumen to CA...Brown is an old politician who will do the same thing he has done in the past.

We need change not THE PAST. This is not Obama vs McCain. This is better...WE actually have a very well qualified person in Meg who actually has some credibility compared to Obama who is really a mystery. We know everything about Brown already as some of you seem to repeat so the questions is do we want a repeat of it?

I want no ill will with a fellow shooter. Please accept in advance my apologies. I just want a better CA. :)

Scott Connors
10-21-2010, 5:25 PM
[snippage]
Certainly the D Brown rating can be viewed as "let's not ruin his reputation by hanging with us".

We're in a similar situation to Sheriff Bart (in Blazing Saddles). Remember when the old lady gave him an apple pie for taking down Mongo? "I'm becoming a big underground sensation around here.":D

safewaysecurity
10-21-2010, 5:43 PM
My edition of the Rifleman gave her a question mark.

chickenfried
10-21-2010, 5:45 PM
hey don't blame me for the lousy analogy:p.
All I can say is "YIKES!" and "God help us."

HowardW56
10-21-2010, 5:48 PM
My edition of the Rifleman gave her a question mark.


Same here....

ddestruel
10-21-2010, 6:25 PM
what kinds of judges did Good ole moonbeam appoint on his last go around. Elections have consequences.....

Sgt Raven
10-21-2010, 6:54 PM
I'm voting anti-Brown and will be showing it by voting for one of the other 4 candidates.

Your just one of those who thinks the 'R' in NRA should stand for Republician. :TFH:

mblat
10-21-2010, 7:05 PM
Certainly the D Brown rating can be viewed as "let's not ruin his reputation by hanging with us".

right
It can't be possibly be viewed as "he totally suck when it comes to 2A".

or put it other way:
how any D' will not vote for Jerry if he would get higher grade from NRA than Meg? Wouldn't that number be 0?
BTW: Doesn't he have Brady Bunch endorsement?

MolonLabe2008
10-21-2010, 7:10 PM
If you haven't heard by now, the NRA is staying non-partisan and rating candidates solely on their 2nd Amendment stance. That means the NRA is supporting both Democrats and Republicans in this election.

If Jerry Brown is such a friend of the 2nd Amendment, as expressed by some on this board, then why does the NRA only give him a "D?"

The NRA gives Carly Fiorina an "A."

And the NRA gives Bill Lockyer an "F."

So, Jerry Brown is only one grade above our worst enemy, Bill Lockyer.

jonni
10-21-2010, 7:13 PM
what did meg whitman get?

ScottB
10-21-2010, 7:19 PM
what did meg whitman get?

C+

http://www.nrapvf.org/upcoming-elections/California.aspx


Hmmmm...

bandook
10-21-2010, 7:26 PM
Latest issue of american rifleman has a ? for whitman, D for Brown. wonder what changed?

She probably sent a 'contribution' to the NRA.

She's already spent $150 Million while trying to buy the Governor's seat. I wouldn't put it past her to try and buy a grade from the NRA.

Bigtwin
10-21-2010, 7:37 PM
Don't get me wrong , but in a couple of years from now when I get to say "I told you so" about Brown...I won't be happy about that!
I would love to be wrong...really I would, but Brown has no love for RKBA!
If the later happens then I will be happy to be wrong!



I won't hold my breath though!

Bigtwin
10-21-2010, 7:40 PM
She probably sent a 'contribution' to the NRA.

She's already spent $150 Million while trying to buy the Governor's seat. I wouldn't put it past her to try and buy a grade from the NRA.

Really... buy a "?" from the NRA....how much for a "?"

?= unknown as far as I can tell!

rabagley
10-21-2010, 7:45 PM
That's bizarre. I'd like to learn more.

SideWinder11
10-21-2010, 7:46 PM
My edition of the Rifleman gave her a question mark.

Same here....

The magazine was printed a couple weeks ago When she has a ? because she had yet to answer the questionnaire. She recently answered the NRA questionnaire and was given a C+ by the NRA and Brown a D

http://www.nrapvf.org/upcoming-elect...alifornia.aspx

SideWinder11
10-21-2010, 7:47 PM
Don't get me wrong , but in a couple of years from now when I get to say "I told you so" about Brown...I won't be happy about that!
I would love to be wrong...really I would, but Brown has no love for RKBA!
If the later happens then I will be happy to be wrong!



I won't hold my breath though!

I'll be the first and will link this thread.

Colt-45
10-21-2010, 7:53 PM
Hmmmm, I wonder what they based their decisions on.

bwiese
10-21-2010, 7:54 PM
These ratings come out of Fairfax, VA. That's 3000 miles away.

Sometimes things get lost in translation.

Yeah, I don't think we wanna have NRA give JB an A, B, or C.

But there's no way Whitman can be a C if JB's a D.

SideWinder11
10-21-2010, 7:57 PM
Hmmmm, I wonder what they based their decisions on.

A "D" means An anti-gun candidate who usually supports restrictive gun control legislation and opposes pro-gun reforms. Regardless of public statements, can usually be counted on to vote wrong on key issues.

Stonewalker
10-21-2010, 8:05 PM
Bill do you have a quick cut & paste document you can just provide for these types of situations? I mean for all the reasons JB is pro-gun.

SideWinder11
10-21-2010, 8:10 PM
These ratings come out of Fairfax, VA. That's 3000 miles away.

Sometimes things get lost in translation.

Yeah, I don't think we wanna have NRA give JB an A, B, or C.

But there's no way Whitman can be a C if JB's a D.

Yeah right! If he deserved a higher rating than the NRA would have given it to him and maybe even endorsed him like below. Give up the conspiracy that they are rating him lower because they want him to win. You're dreaming!

District 43

Scott Folkens (R) Grade: AQ
Status: Candidate


*Joe Baca (D) Grade: A
Status: Incumbent
WHY WE ENDORSE THIS CANDIDATE

District 12

Anthony Cannella (R) Grade: D
Status: Candidate


Anna Caballero (D) Grade: C
Status: Candidate

District 34

Lucille Kring (R) Grade: B
Status: Candidate


*Lou Correa (D) Grade: B+
Status: Candidate

District 10

Jack Sieglock (R) Grade: AQ
Status: Candidate


*Alyson Huber (D) Grade: B
Status: Incumbent

District 17

Jack Mobley (R) Grade: AQ
Status: Candidate


*Cathleen Galgiani (D) Grade: B+
Status: Incumbent

District 30
SPACER

David Valadao (R) Grade: C-
Status: Candidate


Fran Florez (D) Grade: C
Status: Candidate

District 80
SPACER

Steve Sanchez (R) Grade: B
Status: Candidate


*V. Manuel Perez (D) Grade: C
Status: Incumbent


SO then why is the NRA endorsing or rating these Democrats higher than the Republicans they are running against???? Conspiracy right? LOL You got any good UFO conspiracy stories for us too?

SideWinder11
10-21-2010, 8:13 PM
Hmmmm, I wonder what they based their decisions on.

Straight from the NRA website.

What the Grades Mean:
The NRA-PVF is non-partisan in issuing its candidate grades and endorsements. We do not base our decisions on a candidate's party affiliation, but rather on his or her record on Second Amendment issues. The NRA is a single issue organization. The only issues on which we evaluate candidates seeking elected office are gun-related issues.

Window_Seat
10-21-2010, 8:16 PM
Yeah, NRA gets it wrong this time, and it makes me wonder who's doing their homework, and what they're turning in... :no:

BTW: :dupe: http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=354925

Erik.

SideWinder11
10-21-2010, 8:17 PM
Your just one of those who thinks the 'R' in NRA should stand for Republician. :TFH:

Not really. You ready for a dose of reality???

Why is the NRA endorsing or rating higher all these democrats then??? After reading below it's kinda hard to say to any educated person thinks the "R" in NRA stands for Republican. :D

I'm educated about what I'm saying are you?

District 43

Scott Folkens (R) Grade: AQ
Status: Candidate


*Joe Baca (D) Grade: A
Status: Incumbent
WHY WE ENDORSE THIS CANDIDATE

District 12

Anthony Cannella (R) Grade: D
Status: Candidate


Anna Caballero (D) Grade: C
Status: Candidate

District 34

Lucille Kring (R) Grade: B
Status: Candidate


*Lou Correa (D) Grade: B+
Status: Candidate

District 10

Jack Sieglock (R) Grade: AQ
Status: Candidate


*Alyson Huber (D) Grade: B
Status: Incumbent

District 17

Jack Mobley (R) Grade: AQ
Status: Candidate


*Cathleen Galgiani (D) Grade: B+
Status: Incumbent

District 30
SPACER

David Valadao (R) Grade: C-
Status: Candidate


Fran Florez (D) Grade: C
Status: Candidate

District 80
SPACER

Steve Sanchez (R) Grade: B
Status: Candidate


*V. Manuel Perez (D) Grade: C
Status: Incumbent


SO then why is the NRA endorsing or rating these Democrats higher than the Republicans they are running against????

OleCuss
10-21-2010, 8:21 PM
Bill do you have a quick cut & paste document you can just provide for these types of situations? I mean for all the reasons JB is pro-gun.

I'm no bwiese, but this may come close to what you want. Credit for the info should go to the likes of Hoffmang, bwiese, and artherd.

Some OleCussian reasons to consider Jerry Brown a friend to the RKBA:

1. Divison of Firearms was reduced to a bureau – meaning there is staffing to handle harassing bad guys but not normal law-abiding citizens.
2. Iggy Chin and Randy Rossi were sent packing.
3. Allison Merrilees found it better to work elsewhere.
4. The DOJ Bureau of Firearms has not lobbied for gun control.
5. Brown seems to have discouraged the legislature from passing more restrictions.
6. “Permanence” rule-making is gone.
7. Brown filed the amicus in support of McDonald.
8. Brown killed an anti-gun brief which was headed out the door for Heller.
9. He may have been instrumental in arranging for microstamping to die
10. New regulations seem to have been killed during his AG tenure. Note that OLL's and bullet buttons mean that “AW” style weaponry has proliferated despite the ban.
11. Tried to stop AB962 (quietly, though).
12. Effectively killed a lot of cases against individual citizens. The DA decides to prosecute and the DOJ simply didn't show up to provide the testimony the DA needed for a conviction.
13. Note that the net effect of certain individuals leaving the BOF has been that it is now not a very political organization and is simply people doing the processing of paperwork, requests and the like according to regulations rather than trying to re-interpret to our disadvantage.

OleCuss
10-21-2010, 8:28 PM
Yeah right! If he deserved a higher rating than the NRA would have given it to him and maybe even endorsed him like below. Give up the conspiracy that they are rating him lower because they want him to win. You're dreaming!
.
.
.[/B]

I think that in order to understand the NRA rating I would want to know how if JB got a questionnaire and if he did, how he answered it.

SideWinder11
10-21-2010, 8:28 PM
Yeah, NRA gets it wrong this time, and it makes me wonder who's doing their homework, and what they're turning in... :no:

BTW: :dupe: http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=354925

Erik.

I guess Jerry Brown just filled out the NRA-PVF Candidate Questionnaire wrong. I am sure it will be all cleared up by his "WHORE" calling staff. LOL

Maybe he was sitting next to Bill Lockyer in class an copied his NRA-PVF Candidate Questionnaire.

Really now guys. The writing is on the wall. Maybe some of you need glasses or a dose of reality.

OleCuss
10-21-2010, 8:38 PM
Another quick point? If you don't want Brown, you're gonna have to hold your nose and vote for Whitman.

A vote for anyone but Whitman is effectively at least 1/2 a vote for Brown.

Right now the odds are looking good for Brown to win. Tossing a vote to Ogden or one of the other hopeless/hapless candidates means that Whitman will be that much further from beating him.

If Whitman were likely to beat Brown by a comfortable margin I'd probably vote for Ogden myself (heck, we're the same party). As it is, it has to be either Whitman or Brown. Brown is rapidly alienating me on everything but the RKBA (and he's totally silent on that).

OleCuss
10-21-2010, 8:43 PM
Wow!!

For State Senate District 12 they gave Cannella a "D" when so far as I can tell, he is pro-RKBA as well as being a gun owner.

I don't know why his opponent gets a "C" but I'm pretty sure she should not get an "F".

SideWinder11
10-21-2010, 8:49 PM
Another quick point? If you don't want Brown, you're gonna have to hold your nose and vote for Whitman.

A vote for anyone but Whitman is effectively at least 1/2 a vote for Brown.

Right now the odds are looking good for Brown to win. Tossing a vote to Ogden or one of the other hopeless/hapless candidates means that Whitman will be that much further from beating him.

If Whitman were likely to beat Brown by a comfortable margin I'd probably vote for Ogden myself (heck, we're the same party). As it is, it has to be either Whitman or Brown. Brown is rapidly alienating me on everything but the RKBA (and he's totally silent on that).

:D :D

Codelphious
10-21-2010, 9:01 PM
Another quick point? If you don't want Brown, you're gonna have to hold your nose and vote for Whitman.

A vote for anyone but Whitman is effectively at least 1/2 a vote for Brown.

Right now the odds are looking good for Brown to win. Tossing a vote to Ogden or one of the other hopeless/hapless candidates means that Whitman will be that much further from beating him.

If Whitman were likely to beat Brown by a comfortable margin I'd probably vote for Ogden myself (heck, we're the same party). As it is, it has to be either Whitman or Brown. Brown is rapidly alienating me on everything but the RKBA (and he's totally silent on that).


If you actually believed in the libertarian cause, there's no way you'd vote for a progressive like Whitman or Brown.

Your misconception on vote tallying is exactly why we're in this predicament. If only half of the people voted their conscious over the lesser of two evils, California would make Texas look oppressive.

sfbadger
10-21-2010, 9:10 PM
Maybe you should try reading the ebay firearm policy...

That's all I need to know! As far as I'm concerned that IS her proven track record.

Uxi
10-21-2010, 9:15 PM
what kinds of judges did Good ole moonbeam appoint on his last go around. Elections have consequences.....

I know ALL of his Supreme Court nominees were against the death penalty and fairly extreme liberals, from Rose Bird on

OleCuss
10-21-2010, 9:43 PM
If you actually believed in the libertarian cause, there's no way you'd vote for a progressive like Whitman or Brown.

Your misconception on vote tallying is exactly why we're in this predicament. If only half of the people voted their conscious over the lesser of two evils, California would make Texas look oppressive.

Let's see. . .

If you were dying of cancer would you choose a treatment that would be totally painless and without any untoward side effects - and was guaranteed to fail? Or might you choose a treatment which was pretty unpleasant but at least had a chance? Unless you want to die you'll choose an unpleasantness which at least has a modicum of hope.

If you want military? Would your chosen COA (Course of Action) be the one which had a significant probability of success with much pain anticipated - or the one which is guaranteed to be an exercise in heroic futility?

To go with the military aspect a bit further. In Afghanistan the ANA (Afghan National Army) had plenty of individual courage and willingness to fight - but they were pretty ineffective. They had a warrior ethos which valued the individual heroism, they didn't pay enough attention to logistics, they didn't think tend to about the various contingencies, etc. Other than their elite forces they generally sucked as units, in part because of tribal loyalties. Frequently safest to be their target because they figured that if Allah willed it the bullet would hit its target rather than exercising disciplined marksmanship.

We can't afford to die heroically by choosing a course of action which has no chance of success. We can't afford the tribal action of voting for someone because they are a member of our party.

Let's get one thing very straight. If in battle you lose badly, you're dead! If you die for your principles, your principles have lost because there is now no one who can fight for those principles.

You vote for Ogden, Chelene, etc. and you will be a mere political cipher. No one will care what you have to say because you are choosing hopelessness. If you vote for Whitman or Brown you are at least relevant and your vote will be worth courting in the future.

Seriously, let's assume I'm Jerry Brown and you vote for Ogden. Why am I going to ever pay attention to what you have to say? You're certainly not going to vote for me or for anyone in my coalition under any circumstances. You're also utterly powerless since you vote for those who cannot win.

Same thing if I were Whitman.

If you want to be politically irrelevant, vote for the irrelevant.

SideWinder11
10-21-2010, 9:47 PM
That's all I need to know! As far as I'm concerned that IS her proven track record.

Publicly run company, you'd understand if you knew anything about business. I think all the vendors have benefited from thier policy. Wal-mart does not sell guns anymore how many of you have boycotted them?

I know ALL of his Supreme Court nominees were against the death penalty and fairly extreme liberals, from Rose Bird on

Not what I am looking for in a Governor. Sounds like something a guy called Moonbeam would do....

OleCuss
10-21-2010, 9:57 PM
I know ALL of his Supreme Court nominees were against the death penalty and fairly extreme liberals, from Rose Bird on

I consider this to be a pretty telling point. You put Brown back in a position to make very fascist appointments and you'll continue to have unfriendly courts in this state.

As time has gone on I've come to believe that Brown is personally friendly to our RKBA but that he'll do things which will be strategically harmful to the RKBA.

sfbadger
10-21-2010, 10:03 PM
Publicly run company, you'd understand if you knew anything about business. I think all the vendors have benefited from thier policy. Wal-mart does not sell guns anymore how many of you have boycotted them?

I've never shopped at Wal-Mart. Their treatment of their employees is horrible and their bottom dollar/only buy from the cheapest Chinese vendor's policies are harmful to the American economy. I strive to buy products that are labeled Made in America as much as humanly possible. Wal-Mart is a very poor example to use in making a point. And btw, please don't try to lecture me on the complexities of running a business? You don't strike me as being able to make many valid observation's.

SideWinder11
10-21-2010, 10:08 PM
well that's not because of their stance on selling firearms in regards to ebay. off topic

sfbadger
10-21-2010, 10:15 PM
well that's not because of their stance on selling firearms in regards to ebay. off topic

I believe Wal-Mart doesn't sell guns in CALIFORNIA anymore because some of their employees were selling guns to the wrong folks and not following the laws but you're right, we're off topic now and should end this.

berto
10-21-2010, 10:16 PM
Publicly run company, you'd understand if you knew anything about business. I think all the vendors have benefited from thier policy. Wal-mart does not sell guns anymore how many of you have boycotted them?

There are probably some vendors who would like to sell firearms related merchandise on ebay but aren't allowed.

I don't shop at WalMart. The stores in my county and the neighboring county don't even sell ammo. WalMart traded selling ammo for being allowed to open stores. I recognize their right to make such a decision but I won't shop at their store.

chuckdc
10-21-2010, 10:41 PM
2 things:

1:Last I heard, Cooley was way out ahead of Harris

2: If I recall correctly, Brown was supportive of Prop 15 (the handgun "freeze" of 1982) way back when. His "conversion" is fairly recent, and they might be taking that into account.

sfbadger
10-21-2010, 10:45 PM
1:Last I heard, Cooley was way out ahead of Harris.

Thank God! Lets hope it stays that way.

retired
10-21-2010, 11:16 PM
2 threads merged.

gorblimey
10-22-2010, 3:28 AM
You have to be smart and pick your battles.

Analogy: WWII. Did we decide to fight the Axis and the Soviets at the same time? We were completely opposed to communism, so by your logic we should have. Thankfully we didn't and instead realized that the third reich was the greater threat at that time; communism would have to be handled at a later date.
[]


We were nominally opposed to communism because we were enamored of its kissing cousin fascism.

http://www.amazon.com/Three-New-Deals-Reflections-Roosevelts/dp/080507452X

As for the remainder of your less than persuasive soliloquy, what use is the legality of arms to a person so brainwashed and defeated that they would fasten their own shackles of economic slavery?

A vote for the establishment is a vote for redistribution and totalitarianism.

Bhobbs
10-22-2010, 9:00 AM
Like I said, thanks for helping the only legit RKBA candidate into office!

Protest votes are pouting votes.

Stamp your feet and cross your arms all you want, but the US is a two-party system, which is the worst kind of political system in the world. . . except for all the others.

Hopefully all of you who wish for Italian parliaments will eventually grow up and understand this.

Why do you b*tch about the two party system but then tell everyone to vote R or D because thats how it is? How about standing up for what you actually believe in. People like you are why we are stuck with a sh*tty two party system because you want to pick the winner instead of the person that represents you.

wash
10-22-2010, 9:16 AM
It's an S-sandwitch and everyone has to take a bite.

Voting for someone with no chance is the same as not voting. That means you leave the decision up to the R only and D only voters and hope that the people who actually vote for the candidate they like best are making the right choice.

You seem to give the NRA a lot of credibility in their grading, the same NRA that tried to submarine Heller and almost managed to screw up McDonald.

When the NRA says anything I want outside confirmation.

You take it on face value even when shown evidence to the contrary.

Flopper
10-22-2010, 10:40 AM
Why do you b*tch about the two party system but then tell everyone to vote R or D because thats how it is? How about standing up for what you actually believe in. People like you are why we are stuck with a sh*tty two party system because you want to pick the winner instead of the person that represents you.

Apparently this went over a few people's heads, but my supposed b*tching about the two party system was a sarcastic parallel of a quote that was taken from my muse, Sir Winston Churchill, in a speech to Parliament:

"Indeed, it has been said that democracy is the worst form of government except all those other forms that have been tried from time to time."

Since a few of you will no doubt still not understand what the heck I'm saying: the two party system is the best kind around.

If you don't like the two parties, you need to PICK one and CHANGE it from within.

It's the same thing they do in a supposed multi-party system, but it works better in our two party system.

I'm sorry, if you can't understand that, I don't have the time to hold your hand to help you; I'm not a grade school teacher.

PS-to those of you who understood my Italian Parliament reference: thank you, because you make me feel that there is still hope in this ignorant land.

Flopper
10-22-2010, 10:54 AM
We were nominally opposed to communism because we were enamored of its kissing cousin fascism.

http://www.amazon.com/Three-New-Deals-Reflections-Roosevelts/dp/080507452X

As for the remainder of your less than persuasive soliloquy, what use is the legality of arms to a person so brainwashed and defeated that they would fasten their own shackles of economic slavery?

A vote for the establishment is a vote for redistribution and totalitarianism.

As a whole, no we were NOT enamored of fascism, but we could much more easily identify with the nationalistic part of fascism than we could the totalitarianism and international socialism of the USSR. The part of fascism the US didn't like was the centralization and authoritarianism.

But the above is beside the point to say the least, since it was an analogy.

What many of you don't seem to understand is that Whitman is no different from Brown EXCEPT when it comes to RKBA, and that third party candidates have no chance.

For once the misguided gunnies throwing their votes away to third parties will actually help us out, so I don't mind that you're taking votes away from Whitman.

THANK YOU.

PS-Was soliloquy the Word of the Day? Because you misused it http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soliloquy

doubledgarage
10-22-2010, 11:09 AM
Perhaps the CGF can make an official grading thingie for this election?

SideWinder11
10-22-2010, 11:25 AM
Perhaps the CGF can make an official grading thingie for this election?

If you need someone to tell you how to vote then you shouldn't be voting!

doubledgarage
10-22-2010, 11:27 AM
If you need someone to tell you how to vote then you shouldn't be voting!

It's not people telling you how to work. Just having people do your research. Then you just go over their research, validate their findings, and making a decision from there.

That's how I see it. :confused:

SideWinder11
10-22-2010, 11:32 AM
You should be up to date on the issues prior to 2 weeks before the election my friend.

cmaynes
10-22-2010, 11:32 AM
There's been some issues in this particular rating. Something isn't right because the magazine printed yet something else. Some of our info may have not filtered back, or there's some factionalism.

The NRA's state affiliate, the CRPA, has rated both as "FTCQ" (Failed to Complete Questionnaire).

Important Gun People I Trust would not be displeased at a vote for Brown

Certainly the D Brown rating can be viewed as "let's not ruin his reputation by hanging with us".


I have to agree- If the NRA rated Brown favorable it would be used against him- the key in this state is that the majority of voters are both city folk and Democrats. Both of whom tend to not like guns.

We know by her history that Meg fits right into that mindset.

doubledgarage
10-22-2010, 11:34 AM
You should be up to date on the issues prior to 2 weeks before the election my friend.

I'm the type that crams for midterms and finals. :D

cmaynes
10-22-2010, 11:36 AM
better than a D

if you can show ANY real comment from Meg WHitman showing her to support 2nd amendment rights and undo some of the egregious crap the legislature has passed I would love to see it- Brown has delivered as far as gun rights go- that is well documented- Meg has only her Ebay record to go on and Ebay has pretty crappy a pretty crappy policy regarding guns. So until that can be proven otherwise, She has to be judged by the company she keeps.

the NRA should have given her an F.

cmaynes
10-22-2010, 11:37 AM
I don't think Brownells, Midway USA, Cabelas, Amazon or any other reseller of firearm related merchandise is complaining. They get the business and win, we still get the goods just from another source.

Did you know this:



"A private enterprise can decide to sell or not sell anything they want," said a spokesman for the National Rifle Association, an organization that fights for the right to own firearms. "This has no effect on the right to own guns."

Sales of firearms were miniscule, representing less than one quarter of 1 percent of sales, said an eBay spokeswoman.


if that was the case why restrict the sales? This is not a justification.

HowardW56
10-22-2010, 11:40 AM
These ratings come out of Fairfax, VA. That's 3000 miles away.

Sometimes things get lost in translation.

Yeah, I don't think we wanna have NRA give JB an A, B, or C.

But there's no way Whitman can be a C if JB's a D.

:iagree:

I'm voting for Brown. I don't trust eMeg...

SideWinder11
10-22-2010, 11:50 AM
if that was the case why restrict the sales? This is not a justification.

I meant to say isn't complaining. Corrected it.

Wherryj
10-22-2010, 1:40 PM
We're so screwed for the next four years...

You know something is going to change in four years? That is the best news that I've heard all year.

Here I was thinking that we'd still be screwed in four years...

berto
10-22-2010, 1:52 PM
if you can show ANY real comment from Meg WHitman showing her to support 2nd amendment rights and undo some of the egregious crap the legislature has passed I would love to see it- Brown has delivered as far as gun rights go- that is well documented- Meg has only her Ebay record to go on and Ebay has pretty crappy a pretty crappy policy regarding guns. So until that can be proven otherwise, She has to be judged by the company she keeps.

the NRA should have given her an F.

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. Their current rights, as set forth in the Second Amendment, must be rigorously protected.”


I concur. The above deserves no gentlemans C.

Rekrab
10-22-2010, 1:58 PM
Based on her statements from the website, it's pretty clear that she doesn't understand RKBA and doesn't care. That's such a wishy-washy, generic answer it could have been written by a 1st year PoliSci student.

Legasat
10-22-2010, 2:58 PM
We are not going to get anything no matter who gets elected Gov.

badmonkey
10-22-2010, 3:12 PM
Based on her statements from the website, it's pretty clear that she doesn't understand RKBA and doesn't care. That's such a wishy-washy, generic answer it could have been written by a 1st year PoliSci student.

Frankly, her statement reads like she's ok with the current state of disenfranchisement for CA Gun owners.

"The laws we have are fine, just no new ones!!!!! Enjoy the Roster, 10rd mags, AW Bans, 10 day waits, virtually unattainable CCW's. I'm fine with that"

Meplat
10-22-2010, 3:35 PM
You don't have any young students in your family, do you Flopper? It's all I and their parents can do to give my grandchildren some meaningful sense of US history. Their history books have one paragraph on christianity, and less on Judaism (even if you are not a jew or a christian you must admit that our society is based on judaeo-christian philosophy). But has 7 chapters on Islam. To read it you would never believe that any one other than Arabs and Africans ever invented or discovered anything.:mad:

All I can say is "YIKES!" and "God help us."

Meplat
10-22-2010, 3:44 PM
Best anti-Brown point made yet. I'm wavering, that may push me over the edge.


what kinds of judges did Good ole moonbeam appoint on his last go around. Elections have consequences.....

Glock22Fan
10-22-2010, 4:20 PM
I'm still amused by the number of people who still use the nickname "Moonbeam" in a derogatory way when (although coined for that purpose) it simply highlights how far sighted he was back in those days. Even the newspaper reporter who coined it admits that (according to Wikipedia).

After all, who'da thunk that one day California might use communications satellites for communications?

lugar
10-22-2010, 4:55 PM
Well I learned something today. To a liberal a D is better than a C+. Explains why CA is so screwed up.

Meplat
10-22-2010, 5:05 PM
It's an S-sandwitch and everyone has to take a bite.

Voting for someone with no chance is the same as not voting.

Sometimes "none of the above" is an appropriate position.:43:

greasemonkey
10-22-2010, 5:08 PM
I wish the NRA was truly a single issue organization because if it was, we wouldn't have to deal with this B.S. or the things they have been doing in Heller v. D.C. and McDonald v. Chicago.

No matter what the facts are you can't see beyond the D (as in democrat).

But the emails they sent me said the NRA won those lawsuits :p:rolleyes::D

greasemonkey
10-22-2010, 5:10 PM
By the way, how many of you guys are paying as much attention to your Assembly/Congressional races...the Governor can only do so much if the entire Assembly is fubar.

Purple K
10-22-2010, 6:00 PM
I remember Jerry Browns first two terms as Governor. I'll be voting for Whitman

bandook
10-22-2010, 7:08 PM
By the way, how many of you guys are paying as much attention to your Assembly/Congressional races...the Governor can only do so much if the entire Assembly is fubar.

We have no republicans running. I mean there are on the ballot but couldn't even be bothered to write up a blurb about themselves for the voter guide.

THAT is lazy and irresponsible.

EL_NinO619
10-22-2010, 7:14 PM
Just make sure you don't check Boxer for senator

berto
10-22-2010, 7:43 PM
By the way, how many of you guys are paying as much attention to your Assembly/Congressional races...the Governor can only do so much if the entire Assembly is fubar.

My ballot looks like the enemies list. A carpetbagging hack in the House and a typical Berkeley machine whacko in the Assembly. Unfortunately neither is at risk.

mblat
10-22-2010, 8:36 PM
I have to agree- If the NRA rated Brown favorable it would be used against him- the key in this state is that the majority of voters are both city folk and Democrats. Both of whom tend to not like guns.

Really? Do you care to share with us how by by whom? You mean to tell us that Meg can win this election by trying to scare D's into thinking that Jerry Brown is NRA puppet?
You REALLY think that it could be an issue for Jerry? After he has been endoresed by Bredy Bunch over and over again?

joedogboy
10-22-2010, 9:24 PM
If Brown came out and said "You know, I was a crappy governor before, but I've learned something from my mistakes, and I honestly think I can do better this time", I'd probably vote for him.

Oh, and if he'd done more for us as AG.

joedogboy
10-22-2010, 9:28 PM
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. Their current rights, as set forth in the Second Amendment, must be rigorously protected.”

Which is it - should we enforce the current anti-gun laws, or protect 2nd Amendment rights?

Because many of California's current anti-gun laws violate the 2nd Amendment, we need some leadership to remove those laws instead of having to fight costly and lengthy court battles to overturn them.

bandook
10-22-2010, 9:36 PM
Just make sure you don't check Boxer for senator


Carly speaks from both sides of her mouth, (she's acknowledged she'll say anything to get votes), and Boxer is... well I think enough's been said on her.

I'm just trying to figure out whether a vote for a 3rd party candidate is really a vote for Boxer (or Carly).

berto
10-22-2010, 10:14 PM
Really? Do you care to share with us how by by whom? You mean to tell us that Meg can win this election by trying to scare D's into thinking that Jerry Brown is NRA puppet?
You REALLY think that it could be an issue for Jerry? After he has been endoresed by Bredy Bunch over and over again?

With a disillusioned electorate looking for something, anything, to base a decision on or even show up and vote for it's possible that otherwise reliable dem voters might sit out if Jerry received a positive rating from the NRA bogeyman. Might be one thing some dems couldn't hold their nose over.

Meg can't paint JB as an NRA tool without shooting herself in the foot.

berto
10-22-2010, 10:16 PM
Carly speaks from both sides of her mouth, (she's acknowledged she'll say anything to get votes), and Boxer is... well I think enough's been said on her.

I'm just trying to figure out whether a vote for a 3rd party candidate is really a vote for Boxer (or Carly).

It's a vote for Boxer unless you were going to vote for her otherwise. Carly needs one more vote than Boxer gets to win. You can add to her tally or not.

Mastersid
10-22-2010, 11:56 PM
Boxer's latest assault weapon ad is enough to make a gun owner vomit. If that isn't enough to make even a dedicated democratic gun owner flop over, nothing will.
Research public statements from Brown and Whitman before this final dash for the finish, and you will see Brown is the stronger RKBA candidate. A Brown victory and a Boxer defeat will shake the political world. It will show that firearm owners are a force to be considered.
We must not miss this opportunity.

cmaynes
10-22-2010, 11:59 PM
You don't have any young students in your family, do you Flopper? It's all I and their parents can do to give my grandchildren some meaningful sense of US history. Their history books have one paragraph on christianity, and less on Judaism (even if you are not a jew or a christian you must admit that our society is based on judaeo-christian philosophy). But has 7 chapters on Islam. To read it you would never believe that any one other than Arabs and Africans ever invented or discovered anything.:mad:

which books? I went through my 6th graders book and it had a lot of text on the Middle East, but no where near 7 chapters worth on Islam.

cmaynes
10-23-2010, 12:03 AM
If Brown came out and said "You know, I was a crappy governor before, but I've learned something from my mistakes, and I honestly think I can do better this time", I'd probably vote for him.

Oh, and if he'd done more for us as AG.

you should ask BWeise about what Brown did as AG-

things like Off-list lowers, and doing the Amicus brief for the Heller Decision. That case was NOT a slam dunk, and he went pretty far off the party lin in doing that.

Meg- (Arnie v3?) well she banned weapons from Paypal and Ebay.... that sounds like some real second amendment support....

cmaynes
10-23-2010, 12:06 AM
With a disillusioned electorate looking for something, anything, to base a decision on or even show up and vote for it's possible that otherwise reliable dem voters might sit out if Jerry received a positive rating from the NRA bogeyman. Might be one thing some dems couldn't hold their nose over.

Meg can't paint JB as an NRA tool without shooting herself in the foot.

in both directions because she needs those Democratic voters who will NOT vote for a gun rights candidate. If she pants herself as a gunrights supporter she loses.

Brown spoke loud and clear about where he stands- He gains nothing talking about to the un-interested average Californian.

chuckdc
10-23-2010, 12:34 AM
I'm still amused by the number of people who still use the nickname "Moonbeam" in a derogatory way when (although coined for that purpose) it simply highlights how far sighted he was back in those days. Even the newspaper reporter who coined it admits that (according to Wikipedia).

After all, who'da thunk that one day California might use communications satellites for communications?


Gimme a break. Sat comms were in use before Brown was governor. They got their start before I was even born, and I'm 45.

chuckdc
10-23-2010, 12:37 AM
By the way, how many of you guys are paying as much attention to your Assembly/Congressional races...the Governor can only do so much if the entire Assembly is fubar.


Fortunately for me, I'm in the district that will be Dr Halderman's. She's about as pro-gun as can be found these days.

gorblimey
10-23-2010, 12:42 AM
[]
THANK YOU.

PS-Was soliloquy the Word of the Day? Because you misused it http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soliloquy


You're welcome. As for that latter detail, consider it a bit of antiphrasis, though the sarcasm with which it dripped didn't quite make it across the wire.

SupportGeek
10-23-2010, 1:03 AM
If Brown came out and said "You know, I was a crappy governor before, but I've learned something from my mistakes, and I honestly think I can do better this time", I'd probably vote for him.

Oh, and if he'd done more for us as AG.

From earlier in the thread:

Some OleCussian reasons to consider Jerry Brown a friend to the RKBA:

1. Divison of Firearms was reduced to a bureau – meaning there is staffing to handle harassing bad guys but not normal law-abiding citizens.
2. Iggy Chin and Randy Rossi were sent packing.
3. Allison Merrilees found it better to work elsewhere.
4. The DOJ Bureau of Firearms has not lobbied for gun control.
5. Brown seems to have discouraged the legislature from passing more restrictions.
6. “Permanence” rule-making is gone.
7. Brown filed the amicus in support of McDonald.
8. Brown killed an anti-gun brief which was headed out the door for Heller.
9. He may have been instrumental in arranging for microstamping to die
10. New regulations seem to have been killed during his AG tenure. Note that OLL's and bullet buttons mean that “AW” style weaponry has proliferated despite the ban.
11. Tried to stop AB962 (quietly, though).
12. Effectively killed a lot of cases against individual citizens. The DA decides to prosecute and the DOJ simply didn't show up to provide the testimony the DA needed for a conviction.
13. Note that the net effect of certain individuals leaving the BOF has been that it is now not a very political organization and is simply people doing the processing of paperwork, requests and the like according to regulations rather than trying to re-interpret to our disadvantage.

I dont trust Meg, shes Arnold Pt II, makes the same claims and uses a lot of the same phrasings, thats probably because some of his PR staff joined her campaign. Economically shes not going to be able to save the state any more than Arnold did.
On Meg and 2a, I pulled these from a piece written by Sam Paredes, if you arent sure, he is the Executive Director of Gun Owners of California.

Early in her eBay tenure, Whitman made the decision to completely ban the sale of firearms on the site.

Sure private business have the right to make their own decisions, the problem I have with it is her attitude of hostility towards 2a when talking about making the decision to drop firearms sales

In her autobiography she describes her decision to ban guns as one of her "least difficult decisions," even though eBay users were largely opposed to the ban. She later rationalized her decision with her belief that gun owners would "cut corners" and let firearms fall into the hands of criminals.

Excuse me? Now ALL gun owners are at least irresponsible at least, and criminals at worst in her eyes. She doesn't seem like someone willing to defend my 2a rights at all.

Later in her autobiography:

Whitman compares guns to drugs, hate items including swastikas, and items connected with murders.

I think at this point it becomes completely clear what her stance on guns and RKBA is, can you say "outright hostile?"

While banning guns from ebay, she went about setting up a special "adults only" ebay, driving sales of hardcore porn and other paraphernalia. So in Meg's world, its ok to sell sex, but if you want to sell a gun on ebay you MUST be a criminal.

This one is a real gem:

In the 2004 California Senate election, Whitman endorsed extreme liberal Barbara Boxer and called her a "courageous leader."

Yup, thats a good friend to have if you support 2a isnt it?

Finally here;
In her campaign brochures, Whitman says that Second Amendment rights "can and should be balanced with responsible gun control laws." That may sound reasonable, but it's consultant-tested rhetoric gun owners have heard before, and we know it's code for new incursions on our rights. Governor Schwarzenegger campaigned on the same rhetoric, then brought on the new gun control laws like AB 962. Former Schwarzenegger handlers now populate Whitman's campaign, but they won't fool us into giving Schwarzenegger a third term under the name of Meg Whitman.

Its NOT voting for 2a first and putting other issues ahead of it that has our RKBA in the condition its in here in CA, JB may not pass laws that make things better for us, but all he has to do is stop things from getting worse for us while CGF knocks down the laws on the books in court.
Meg's attitude tells me she is going to rubber stamp every new gun control law that comes her way.

NRA made a big mistake in her grade, if its based on a questionnaire that she fills out herself, I can see how it can be fudged to reflect a more favorable stance rather easily.

Vote by whatever criteria you feel you need to, but I couldn't vote for Meg, 2a is important to me, all rights are. I dont see either the R or D offerings "fixing" California's budget issues, and if its a 2 horse race, JB is the 2a supporter by a landslide in this case.

joedogboy
10-23-2010, 7:47 AM
you should ask BWeise about what Brown did as AG-

things like Off-list lowers, and doing the Amicus brief for the Heller Decision. That case was NOT a slam dunk, and he went pretty far off the party lin in doing that.

Meg- (Arnie v3?) well she banned weapons from Paypal and Ebay.... that sounds like some real second amendment support....

I didn't say "If he'd done ANYTHING for us as AG". I just think he could (and should) have done a lot more - not only for gun owners, but for Californians in general.

SideWinder11
10-23-2010, 8:11 AM
From earlier in the thread:



I dont trust Meg, shes Arnold Pt II, makes the same claims and uses a lot of the same phrasings, thats probably because some of his PR staff joined her campaign. Economically shes not going to be able to save the state any more than Arnold did.
On Meg and 2a, I pulled these from a piece written by Sam Paredes, if you arent sure, he is the Executive Director of Gun Owners of California.



Sure private business have the right to make their own decisions, the problem I have with it is her attitude of hostility towards 2a when talking about making the decision to drop firearms sales



Excuse me? Now ALL gun owners are at least irresponsible at least, and criminals at worst in her eyes. She doesn't seem like someone willing to defend my 2a rights at all.

Later in her autobiography:



I think at this point it becomes completely clear what her stance on guns and RKBA is, can you say "outright hostile?"

While banning guns from ebay, she went about setting up a special "adults only" ebay, driving sales of hardcore porn and other paraphernalia. So in Meg's world, its ok to sell sex, but if you want to sell a gun on ebay you MUST be a criminal.

This one is a real gem:



Yup, thats a good friend to have if you support 2a isnt it?

Finally here;


Its NOT voting for 2a first and putting other issues ahead of it that has our RKBA in the condition its in here in CA, JB may not pass laws that make things better for us, but all he has to do is stop things from getting worse for us while CGF knocks down the laws on the books in court.
Meg's attitude tells me she is going to rubber stamp every new gun control law that comes her way.

NRA made a big mistake in her grade, if its based on a questionnaire that she fills out herself, I can see how it can be fudged to reflect a more favorable stance rather easily.

Vote by whatever criteria you feel you need to, but I couldn't vote for Meg, 2a is important to me, all rights are. I dont see either the R or D offerings "fixing" California's budget issues, and if its a 2 horse race, JB is the 2a supporter by a landslide in this case.

Why don't you site those last 5 quotes from the person who wrote them or the place you got them from....

curtisfong
10-23-2010, 8:21 AM
What on earth would make anybody here think the NRA at the national level knows more about any local politician than not only bweise (et al) but (most importantly) yourselves?

Yes, you, dear reader, are far more informed about local gun rights issues than any national organization, period. The NRA's ratings are for people too lazy to look into things themselves. There is nothing wrong with that, but if you know you have more information than the NRA does on any particular topic, why on earth would you give a crap what the NRA has to say about it?

mblat
10-23-2010, 9:07 AM
I think this thread can use some starting points. Here they are

1. BWise may very be correct that JB is better pro-gun candidate that Meg. Evidence in that respect far from conclusive, but they do exist.
2. NRA could very well be wrong on this, they had been wrong before on issues much more important than who to endorse Governor of hopeless state. Parker anybody?
3. If you need an endorsement to decide how to vote - you probably shouldn't vote.

That is all said - it is undeniable that it is HUGE egg in the face of CGF brass. They all but endorsed JB. That endorsement clearly at odds with NRA.
It means that (pick any combination):
1. They don't talk to NRA
2. NRA doesn't listen to them
3. NRA has no idea what they are doing
Please note that I left "CGF doesn't know what they are doing" option out - that generally not the case.... hehe

Except (3) none of of particular crime, but it is sure as hell funny.

And BTW: if anybody REALLY think that higher NRA rating could possibly cost JB governorship - they are crazy. I repeat - he always has had Brady endorsement. If nothing else it would paint him as "independent, capable of working with all parties".

gbp
10-23-2010, 9:21 AM
bloomberg's recent endorsement of meg just put a little more distance between her and me

Sgt Raven
10-23-2010, 10:01 AM
bloomberg's recent endorsement of meg just put a little more distance between her and me

Just one gun grabbing RINO supporting another RINO. :rolleyes:

J-cat
10-23-2010, 10:21 AM
you should ask BWeise about what Brown did as AG-

things like Off-list lowers, and doing the Amicus brief for the Heller Decision. That case was NOT a slam dunk, and he went pretty far off the party lin in doing that.

Meg- (Arnie v3?) well she banned weapons from Paypal and Ebay

She's a turd. Talks out of both sides of her mouth. Brown noses illegals. Gives money to libs. Doesn't give a crap about anything but herself.

Any way you look at it, JB is less likely to infringe on our 2nd Amendment rights.

SupportGeek
10-23-2010, 10:26 AM
Why don't you site those last 5 quotes from the person who wrote them or the place you got them from....

I did mention who said them:

From earlier in the thread:
On Meg and 2a, I pulled these from a piece written by Sam Paredes, if you arent sure, he is the Executive Director of Gun Owners of California.


But if you like, the original article is HERE (http://rightthinkingamerican.com/2010/07/meg-whitman-is-a-gun-control-liberal/)

dantodd
10-23-2010, 11:21 AM
We were nominally opposed to communism because we were enamored of its kissing cousin fascism.

To go completely off topic for a moment. While I am well aware that some of America's intelligentsia were quite enamored with fascism that had little or nothing to do with our stance of communism. You are suggesting that we didn't go after the Soviet Union at the end of World War II (or during the war) because it was too much like Fascism which we liked, yet the very people we WERE fighting in WWII were the fascists, Hitler and Mussolini. This is silly.

The fact is that there were many in the U.S. who felt disenfranchised and were economically devastated by the great depression. Many of these people turned toward communism, largely because of the social policies brought in by the progressive movement of the late 18th and early 20th centuries.

Wilson was elected in 1912 and was really the spearhead of the American progressive movement. This started social welfare systems, progressive income taxes, etc. Essentially, the government made promises to the poor and middle class that it thought it could keep on the backs of the wealthy. When the great depression hit and the government couldn't meet the expectations they had set in the minds of Americans the people turned their backs on the government and looked overseas to other models. Communism and fascism were natural places to look.

Of course in the aftermath of WWII and the process of rebuilding Europe and the economic boom in this nation the progressives came back with a vengeance because once again they had a population that was making enough money that the government could once again begin leeching money out of them. To combat the attractiveness of collectivist ideologies the progressives further increased the entitlement programs and that is, in essence where we are today. The few feeding the many once again. As the times get more difficult those few are getting less and less comfortable carrying the load.

dantodd
10-23-2010, 11:23 AM
Just one gun grabbing RINO supporting another RINO. :rolleyes:

Didn't he drop that facade?

RCSurf
10-23-2010, 12:24 PM
what kinds of judges did Good ole moonbeam appoint on his last go around. Elections have consequences.....


Great point!

Someone's opinion on the matter--------->http://www.foxandhoundsdaily.com/blog/tony-quinn/7522-judging-jerrys-judges

Part 2 (http://www.foxandhoundsdaily.com/blog/tony-quinn/7536-judging-jerrys-judges-part-2-2)

http://www.jerrybrownfactcheck.com/2010/09/21/edwardrjagelsweighsinonbookaboutjerrysjudges/#more-190

faterikcartman
10-23-2010, 1:43 PM
Meg says she'll support keeping Prop 13.

Brown says it is on the table to solve the state's budget problems [caused my members of his party].

Some of you may live in apartments and not care, but when you own you may find you just can't afford more property taxes.

Dems love to point out how the property tax rate is lower in CA than many other states, but leave out how our property values are much higher resulting in us paying more. A property tax increase could cause some people to lose their homes.

The more of our money they want to take the more they are going to want to take our guns away -- regardless of what they say or we infer today.

J-cat
10-23-2010, 1:46 PM
U thik the ugly woman's going to do better? She has proven herself ignorant and incompetent in regard to whatever issue at hand. If CA was Ebay, that's one thing. But CA is a State. We need a governor, not a loudmouth.

gbp
10-23-2010, 2:07 PM
Didn't he drop that facade?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mayors_Against_Illegal_Guns

SupportGeek
10-23-2010, 2:08 PM
The more of our money they want to take the more they are going to want to take our guns away -- regardless of what they say or we infer today.

that reasoning works just as well for the very first line in your post

Meg says she'll support keeping Prop 13

I dont think either of them can be trusted, Meg has zero experience in politics, has supported and donated to Democrats until running under the Repub flag. If she wins shes just as likely to dump 13 as Brown, both will be looking for new sources of income to the state, and shes just as Liberal as Brown, she just happens to be wearing a "R" pin for the moment.

Jonl
10-23-2010, 2:11 PM
A CEO of a private company will always be superior to any politician when it comes to efficiency, cutting cost and creating a climate for economic growth. Whitman will put into motion, things that she knows from first hand experience that will work. She will stop things that have prevented growth. We need a Governor who will generate revenue for this state. There will be more revenue with lower taxes and lower regulations than with more regulations and higher taxes. Jerry Brown is a life long politician who has a record of regulation and higher taxes. He wants to use tax dollars to pay for illegals to go to college as just one example. This is stealing and should be illegal. I know Whitman a former CEO will do better than a life long politician Jerry Brown as Governor. Something to think about, how would Obama do running Ebay?...

berto
10-23-2010, 2:20 PM
A CEO of a private company will always be superior to any politician when it comes to efficiency, cutting cost and creating a climate for economic growth. Whitman will put into motion, things that she knows from first hand experience that will work. She will stop things that have prevented growth. We need a Governor who will generate revenue for this state. There will be more revenue with lower taxes and lower regulations than with more regulations and higher taxes. Jerry Brown is a life long politician who has a record of regulation and higher taxes. He wants to use tax dollars to pay for illegals to go to college as just one example. This is stealing and should be illegal. I know Whitman a former CEO will do better than a life long politician Jerry Brown as Governor. Something to think about, how would Obama do running Ebay?...

I understand the fear that JB will rubber stamp whatever the legislature sends him but how will Meg be any different than Arnold? As CEO she could tell subordinates "do this" but as Gov she'll be unable to treat the legislature in the same manner. Lowering taxes, cutting spending, and limiting silly regulations are more complicated than the gov telling the legislature to do it.

Ed_in_Sac
10-23-2010, 3:15 PM
Pro-Gunners NRA has graded Whitman higher than Brown.

http://www.nrapvf.org/upcoming-elections/California.aspx



According to the NRA this is what a D means

"D --- An anti-gun candidate who usually supports restrictive gun control legislation and opposes pro-gun reforms. Regardless of public statements, can usually be counted on to vote wrong on key issues."

^So they know Jerry:p

mblat
10-23-2010, 3:26 PM
U thik the ugly woman's going to do better? She has proven herself ignorant and incompetent in regard to whatever issue at hand. If CA was Ebay, that's one thing. But CA is a State. We need a governor, not a loudmouth.

With all due respect...... it is one thing to argue that Jerry is better for 2A than Meg. However unorthodox, this point of view not without the merit.

But to argue that JB will make for better governor? Please, the man is religious fanatic and on a payroll of public unions that had ruined this State.

Jonl
10-23-2010, 3:32 PM
I understand the fear that JB will rubber stamp whatever the legislature sends him but how will Meg be any different than Arnold? As CEO she could tell subordinates "do this" but as Gov she'll be unable to treat the legislature in the same manner. Lowering taxes, cutting spending, and limiting silly regulations are more complicated than the gov telling the legislature to do it.

I agree that it is an uphill battle with such a heavily liberal state legislature. The first and foremost thing she could do is veto increased spending, veto increased regulations, which Brown would not. There needs to be strong checks and balances. Arnold has passed environmental regulatory bills that increase business costs etc. Whitman is for the suspension of Ab32, which postpones the regs until unemployment is down to 5% for a year. I hope she would stand up and protect California from the invasion of the Federal government, unlike Arnold who asked for a Federal bailout or Brown who may allow it. If Governor Chris Christy can do it in New Jersey, Meg Whitman can do it in California. On a side note, there are 20 states suing the federal government over the health care bill, California Attorney General Jerry Brown is not....

cmaynes
10-23-2010, 3:48 PM
I didn't say "If he'd done ANYTHING for us as AG". I just think he could (and should) have done a lot more - not only for gun owners, but for Californians in general.

not to be critical but that is moving the goal posts to your argument-

If you want to vote for Meg, or Charlene, please do- but please dont think that Meg is a supporter of gun rights- and that pretty much can be said for the Republican Party in general- THAT is a sad state of affairs.

cmaynes
10-23-2010, 3:50 PM
With all due respect...... it is one thing to argue that Jerry is better for 2A than Meg. However unorthodox, this point of view not without the merit.

But to argue that JB will make for better governor? Please, the man is religious fanatic and on a payroll of public unions that had ruined this State.

If we are going to travel the character assassination path, should we talk about Whitman's kids?

Swiss
10-23-2010, 3:51 PM
At the recent 25th Annual Gun Rights Policy Conference, which the CGF heads attended, it was hammered home that judges were the key to protecting our 2nd Amendment rights.

Does CGF really think that Brown will appoint a more conservative judge than Whitman?

Dirtbozz
10-23-2010, 3:59 PM
Brown as Governor will be the tipping point. The state has been circling the toilet bowl for years. If he is elected, you will soon hear that flushing sound. I don't care what he says his position is on the Second Amendment (more opportunism than reality, in my opinion), he is no good for the state. I am 67 years old. I remember the "Moonbeam" years.

Meg is the better of two evils. The only sensible choice (unfortunately).

cmaynes
10-23-2010, 4:02 PM
Really? Do you care to share with us how by by whom? You mean to tell us that Meg can win this election by trying to scare D's into thinking that Jerry Brown is NRA puppet?
You REALLY think that it could be an issue for Jerry? After he has been endoresed by Bredy Bunch over and over again?

Yes she totally could. How many "Dangerous Assault weapons" have been put on the streets due to Brown's "ineptitude" at enforcing "the spirit" of California's assault weapon ban.....

Why would Brown support expanding "dangerous" gun ownership by filing supportive paperwork in the MacDonald case?

Why would Brown "Endanger" the public by "radically" downsizing the firearms branch of DOJ?.....

All of these would have traction with Democrats- especially the ones with money-

Brown and gun rights is a freak of nature- but it is all we have- and a vote Brown doesnt get, is one to "fix" all those "failures" by Brown.

Brown surely cant use Meg's position against here because it would hurt both him, and any gun owners who give a **** about the issue.

mblat
10-23-2010, 4:02 PM
If we are going to travel the character assassination path, should we talk about Whitman's kids?

If talking about kids makes you happy <shrugs>. What I wrote, however, isn't about JB character, it is about his politics. And what his politics will bring to this State.

cmaynes
10-23-2010, 4:04 PM
Brown as Governor will be the tipping point. The state has been circling the toilet bowl for years. If he is elected, you will soon hear that flushing sound. I don't care what he says his position is on the Second Amendment (more opportunism than reality, in my opinion), he is no good for the state. I am 67 years old. I remember the "Moonbeam" years.

Meg is the better of two evils. The only sensible choice (unfortunately).

How is that really the case? We said the EXACT same thing about Arnold- and we saw what that got us having a bad *** gun weilding action movie hero in charge (who was best buddies with the Bush Family).

Republican to the core.

mblat
10-23-2010, 4:06 PM
Yes she totally could. How many "Dangerous Assault weapons" have been put on the streets due to Brown's "ineptitude" at enforcing "the spirit" of California's assault weapon ban.....

Why would Brown support expanding "dangerous" gun ownership by filing supportive paperwork in the MacDonald case?

Why would Brown "Endanger" the public by "radically" downsizing the firearms branch of DOJ?.....

All of these would have traction with Democrats- especially the ones with money-

Brown and gun rights is a freak of nature- but it is all we have- and a vote Brown doesnt get, is one to "fix" all those "failures" by Brown.

Brown surely cant use Meg's position against here because it would hurt both him, and any gun owners who give a **** about the issue.

<Deep breath> One more time. Brown has had Brady endorsement for ages. All he would need to do to counter such line of attack would be to point that out.
On contrary Meg would lose many R's votes if he pulls this.

Rule of thumb:
D can be pro-gun. R can be anti-abortion. That COULD hurt them in primaries. It doesn't hurt them in general elections.

cmaynes
10-23-2010, 4:07 PM
If talking about once kid makes you happy <shrugs>. What I wrote, however, isn't about JB character, it is about his politics. And what his politics will bring to this State.

hey, I dont think its germaine- but Brown's religion or Whitman's is not germaine as well.

I think we are talking about how gun rights will be effected by these two candidates- there is no contest in what each candidate has in the public record- If we want to discuss other things than the NRA's endorsement perhaps it should be in a different thread.

cmaynes
10-23-2010, 4:12 PM
<Deep breath> One more time. Brown has had Brady endorsement for ages. All he would need to do to counter such line of attack would be to point that out.
On contrary Meg would lose many R's votes if he pulls this.

Rule of thumb:
D can be pro-gun. R can be anti-abortion. That COULD hurt them in primaries. It doesn't hurt them in general elections.

California is not the rest of the country- the Anti-Abortion issue is a non starter here. Meg's stance on that wouldnt fly well outside of the sunshine state.

As to the Brady Endorsement, they are in the same jeopardy as the NRA- If they endorse Whitman it hurts her on the national stage (as the GOP national committee IS involved in the election). It is a highly unusual set of circumstances.

mblat
10-23-2010, 4:14 PM
hey, I dont think its germaine- but Brown's religion or Whitman's is not germaine as well.

I think we are talking about how gun rights will be effected by these two candidates- there is no contest in what each candidate has in the public record- If we want to discuss other things than the NRA's endorsement perhaps it should be in a different thread.

You are correct, Brown's religion ( Cult of Global Warming ) has very little relevance to 2A rights in this State. At least in immediate future.

I am pretty sure I have admitted that I allow for possibility of JB being better for 2A rights than Meg.

But based on history and his current positions he would be horrible governor when it comes to economy issues...... even worse than Arnold and Meg.


At the recent 25th Annual Gun Rights Policy Conference, which the CGF heads attended, it was hammered home that judges were the key to protecting our 2nd Amendment rights.

Does CGF really think that Brown will appoint a more conservative judge than Whitman?

VERY GOOD QUESTION.

Dirtbozz
10-23-2010, 4:19 PM
......But based on history and his current positions he would be horrible governor when it comes to economy issues...... even worth than Arnold and Meg.

"Horrible" is being kind. Our only hope would be that when the state burns down economicaly, something good will rise from the ashes.

Given the direction this state is headed, we will be lucky to be able to eat, much less buy guns or ammo.

cmaynes
10-23-2010, 4:25 PM
You are correct, Brown's religion ( Cult of Global Warming ) has very little relevance to 2A rights in this State. At least in immediate future.

I am pretty sure I have admitted that I allow for possibility of JB being better for 2A rights than Meg.

But based on history and his current positions he would be horrible governor when it comes to economy issues...... even worse than Arnold and Meg.



VERY GOOD QUESTION.

I am unaware of global warming being a religion- but if so, we know that the present <cough> conservative boss here is in that religion too.

In the end- it doesnt really matter what Brown or Whitman think about it- because unless 23 passes it goes into effect as scheduled because precious Arnold wanted to leave a legacy turd that would become a concrete necktie- so that is a BS point of argument- and again, has nothing to do with gun rights in CA.

cmaynes
10-23-2010, 4:28 PM
<Deep breath> One more time. Brown has had Brady endorsement for ages. All he would need to do to counter such line of attack would be to point that out.
On contrary Meg would lose many R's votes if he pulls this.

Rule of thumb:
D can be pro-gun. R can be anti-abortion. That COULD hurt them in primaries. It doesn't hurt them in general elections.

The problem is that Republicans are a minority- Whitman cannot win without Democrats voting for her- Brown CAN win with every Republican voting against him.

cmaynes
10-23-2010, 4:37 PM
If you want to really get an insight to where she stands - look here- this is the "Talk to Meg" page of Bill Weise's comments on the site- none of it looks very positive for Meg being a sincere supporter of gun rights.

http://talktomeg.ning.com/profile/BillWiese

ddestruel
10-23-2010, 6:37 PM
If Brown came out and said "You know, I was a crappy governor before, but I've learned something from my mistakes, and I honestly think I can do better this time", I'd probably vote for him.

Oh, and if he'd done more for us as AG.


history repeats itself and people dont change they get better at concealing their true colors

SupportGeek
10-23-2010, 7:38 PM
Its absolutely flabbergasting how many people are happy to sell their rights and freedoms down the river for a few extra dollars in their wallet. Admittedly there shouldnt BE a trade off, but the reality is there will be. Vote Brown in = good chance the economic situation in CA may get worse, but also a strong chance he wont pass more draconian legislation against 2a rights. This would allow us to dig ourselves out from under the other legislation that holds back 2a here. Vote Meg in = A chance she will be able to improve the business economy in CA, possibly providing an overall boost to the economy, the cost is your 2a and whatever other rights and freedoms she wants to get her hands on. Shes shown outright contempt for 2a, firearms and lawful owners in general. A mantra Ive seen is that if JB gets in you wont have the money to buy firearms eventually, I call bull, the only sure-fire way you will lose your firearms is when e-Meg takes them from you, and rubber stamps the laws that make you a criminal for owning them.

mblat
10-23-2010, 8:17 PM
Its absolutely flabbergasting how many people are happy to sell their rights and freedoms down the river for a few extra dollars in their wallet.

why is this so surprising? Contrary to popular belief, it isn't your 1911 that makes your free, it is size of you bank account.
To put it in more scientific terms free population is the population that has economic mobility, not the one that are armed to the teeth. Armed population without economic mobility brings anarchy, and not the freedom in way we used to it in this country.

We all want to keep all our guns...... but to do that we need to keep our jobs first.

Let me put it in yet another way. Today, I have donated $150 to SAF and $100 to CGF.
If every single person on this board who so worried about his gun rights that they are willing to elect fossil to governorship has done the same then we probably wouldn't care all that much who is the governor. Because we would have Alan Gura (or his equivalent ) on retainer......
See? $$$$ go further than bullets.... certainly when it comes to court battles.

berto
10-23-2010, 9:33 PM
history repeats itself and people dont change they get better at concealing their true colors

Does that apply to Meg hanging out with and lauding Van Jones? How about her previous support of Barbara Boxer?

SideWinder11
10-23-2010, 10:52 PM
Great point!

Someone's opinion on the matter--------->http://www.foxandhoundsdaily.com/blog/tony-quinn/7522-judging-jerrys-judges

Part 2 (http://www.foxandhoundsdaily.com/blog/tony-quinn/7536-judging-jerrys-judges-part-2-2)

http://www.jerrybrownfactcheck.com/2010/09/21/edwardrjagelsweighsinonbookaboutjerrysjudges/#more-190

Thank you for finding those and posting them. All good reasons not to vote for Jerry Brown.

SideWinder11
10-23-2010, 10:53 PM
Meg says she'll support keeping Prop 13.

Brown says it is on the table to solve the state's budget problems [caused my members of his party].

Some of you may live in apartments and not care, but when you own you may find you just can't afford more property taxes.

Dems love to point out how the property tax rate is lower in CA than many other states, but leave out how our property values are much higher resulting in us paying more. A property tax increase could cause some people to lose their homes.

The more of our money they want to take the more they are going to want to take our guns away -- regardless of what they say or we infer today.

As a homeowner I agree with you and this is a risk I am not willing to take. Just another reason to not vote for Jerry Brown.

SideWinder11
10-23-2010, 10:55 PM
A CEO of a private company will always be superior to any politician when it comes to efficiency, cutting cost and creating a climate for economic growth. Whitman will put into motion, things that she knows from first hand experience that will work. She will stop things that have prevented growth. We need a Governor who will generate revenue for this state. There will be more revenue with lower taxes and lower regulations than with more regulations and higher taxes. Jerry Brown is a life long politician who has a record of regulation and higher taxes. He wants to use tax dollars to pay for illegals to go to college as just one example. This is stealing and should be illegal. I know Whitman a former CEO will do better than a life long politician Jerry Brown as Governor. Something to think about, how would Obama do running Ebay?...

I agree with you. Just another reason to not Vote for Jerry Brown

SideWinder11
10-23-2010, 10:57 PM
With all due respect...... it is one thing to argue that Jerry is better for 2A than Meg. However unorthodox, this point of view not without the merit.

But to argue that JB will make for better governor? Please, the man is religious fanatic and on a payroll of public unions that had ruined this State.

I agree he is in bed with the unions and these have ruined our state. Another reason to not vote for Jerry Brown

SideWinder11
10-23-2010, 10:58 PM
I agree that it is an uphill battle with such a heavily liberal state legislature. The first and foremost thing she could do is veto increased spending, veto increased regulations, which Brown would not. There needs to be strong checks and balances. Arnold has passed environmental regulatory bills that increase business costs etc. Whitman is for the suspension of Ab32, which postpones the regs until unemployment is down to 5% for a year. I hope she would stand up and protect California from the invasion of the Federal government, unlike Arnold who asked for a Federal bailout or Brown who may allow it. If Governor Chris Christy can do it in New Jersey, Meg Whitman can do it in California. On a side note, there are 20 states suing the federal government over the health care bill, California Attorney General Jerry Brown is not....

All very good point and I really like the one you bring up about health care reform. Another reason to not vote for Jerry Brown

SideWinder11
10-23-2010, 11:00 PM
Brown as Governor will be the tipping point. The state has been circling the toilet bowl for years. If he is elected, you will soon hear that flushing sound. I don't care what he says his position is on the Second Amendment (more opportunism than reality, in my opinion), he is no good for the state. I am 67 years old. I remember the "Moonbeam" years.

Meg is the better of two evils. The only sensible choice (unfortunately).

We need to look at the bigger picture. We cannot afford JB as governor again. Another flushing reason to not vote for Jerry Brown

SideWinder11
10-23-2010, 11:04 PM
history repeats itself and people dont change they get better at concealing their true colors

Very true. Reminds me of a girl saying "but I can change him". True colors people we've seen them in the past. Another reason to not vote for Jerry Brown.

SideWinder11
10-23-2010, 11:06 PM
Its absolutely flabbergasting how many people are happy to sell their rights and freedoms down the river for a few extra dollars in their wallet. Admittedly there shouldnt BE a trade off, but the reality is there will be. Vote Brown in = good chance the economic situation in CA may get worse, but also a strong chance he wont pass more draconian legislation against 2a rights. This would allow us to dig ourselves out from under the other legislation that holds back 2a here. Vote Meg in = A chance she will be able to improve the business economy in CA, possibly providing an overall boost to the economy, the cost is your 2a and whatever other rights and freedoms she wants to get her hands on. Shes shown outright contempt for 2a, firearms and lawful owners in general. A mantra Ive seen is that if JB gets in you wont have the money to buy firearms eventually, I call bull, the only sure-fire way you will lose your firearms is when e-Meg takes them from you, and rubber stamps the laws that make you a criminal for owning them.

You said all I need to know right there. Another reason to not vote for Jerry Brown.

SideWinder11
10-23-2010, 11:08 PM
why is this so surprising? Contrary to popular belief, it isn't your 1911 that makes your free, it is size of you bank account.
To put it in more scientific terms free population is the population that has economic mobility, not the one that are armed to the teeth. Armed population without economic mobility brings anarchy, and not the freedom in way we used to it in this country.We all want to keep all our guns...... but to do that we need to keep our jobs first.

Let me put it in yet another way. Today, I have donated $150 to SAF and $100 to CGF.
If every single person on this board who so worried about his gun rights that they are willing to elect fossil to governorship has done the same then we probably wouldn't care all that much who is the governor. Because we would have Alan Gura (or his equivalent ) on retainer......
See? $$$$ go further than bullets.... certainly when it comes to court battles.

True that and we need to right mix of both worlds and unfortunately Jerry Brown does not offer that. Another reason to not vote for Jerry Brown.

gorblimey
10-24-2010, 12:54 AM
To go completely off topic for a moment. While I am well aware that some of America's intelligentsia were quite enamored with fascism that had little or nothing to do with our stance of communism. You are suggesting that we didn't go after the Soviet Union at the end of World War II (or during the war) because it was too much like Fascism which we liked, yet the very people we WERE fighting in WWII were the fascists, Hitler and Mussolini. This is silly.
[]



You're right.. I overreached to get that dramatic effect, and the statement didn't make much sense.

What I was trying to get at was that US governmental and corporate behavior prior to and during WW2 was driven by anything but some rah-rah moralistic imperative and Pearl Harbor revenge. That was just the tripe fed to the masses.

For instance, damning evidence abounds:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Day_of_Deceit

that Pearl Harbor was engineered and hoped for, and was gratefully allowed to take place (with ample and repeated forewarning). But never mind that.

War profiteering was the primary motivator underlying US behavior in WW2, and an immediately subsequent "hot" conflict with the USSR would have been neither profitable nor politically advantageous, especially with the scumbag FDR out of the picture.

This gets back to my original purpose in going on this off-topic tangent, which was to say that the US perspective on the war and its consequences was more financial than strategic. Besides, a lasting adversary was going to mean big business for the military-industrial complex in the years ahead, as Eisenhower later warned us:

http://www.h-net.org/~hst306/documents/indust.html

Folks who are just tuning in might be interested to learn of the not entirely politically correct relationship between the US corporate oligarchy and Nazi Germany's industrial engine I.G. Farben:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2004/sep/25/usa.secondworldwar

http://remember.org/Facts.aft.perp.ignazi.html

http://remember.org/Facts.aft.perp.igpact.html

Oh dear, how very inconvenient.

Google around on the matter of the Standard Oil sale, well after the winds of war had begun to blow in earnest, of tetraethyl lead to Germany and Japan, who were desperate for it, and without which their air forces would have been screwed.

Did this action greatly enhance Axis capabilities and enlarge the scope of the war? Heck yeah. Did we strip Britain of her gold, selling her war materiel to hold the Luftwaffe back? Heck yeah.

It was all very clever, and the right people made a whole lot of money, and tens of millions died horribly as an irrelevant consequence.

And now back the topic of choosing between a Goldman Sachs sponsored eWhore and a socialist panderer to the unwashed...

oni.dori
10-24-2010, 2:01 AM
1. Brown has proven himself pro-RKBA.[/B]
Proof? I have honestly yet to see any. And I'm sorry, don't come with that weak "Well, he said he was, so it HAS to be true".
Honestly, the day you believe everything that comes out of a POLITICIANS mouth during a CAMPAIGN, is the day you need to hang up your voters ballot. Sorry. I mean, how much "change" has Nobama brought, because the "hope" sure seems to be wearing off. I honestly think him "saying" he is "pro 2-A" is just that, him SAYING it for a few extra votes. Now, I'm not saying that Meg-a-tron has done much more to prove that she is; but honestly, let's face it, the NRA (a trusted pro-2A group that has proven themselves for well over 100 years) has given her a higher rating than Brown. That has to speak for something.

3. There is zero proof that Meg is an (R). She's (R) cu she says she is. . .[/B]
Well, that seems to be the same logic that you are using to support JB being pro-2A. So how is THAT any different? Failure there.

4. The fact that the NRA updated the ratings is more proof that Brown is the way to go. [/B]
Huh? How in the world is there any sense to that statement? It looks to me like you have completely fallen off the logic train there my friend.

It's a false flag operation on the part of the NRA, and all I gotta say is:

"Nice job NRA! You finally get that CA really is the land of fruits and nuts, and the only way to get a win is by using passive demagoguery to our advantage."
Seriously? Then aliens really assasinated JFK, the government created crack and AIDS to undermine and control African American culture, and contrails are the government (secretly controlled by the Bilderburgers and Masons, which are really modern day Templars) to sterilize the American people as a
means to control world population.

Sorry, that is just ludicrous conspiracy theory horse pucky.

oni.dori
10-24-2010, 2:09 AM
Since the legislature is the source of restrictive gun legislation and the governor often our last line of protection, I don't think it matters much between them. Brown will likely go along with anti-gun regulation and Whitman, like Arnold, won't stand against anything meaningful.

So then, how does the ledgistature in CA get appointed, and how do we begin changing who is in office? That seems to be the solution to our problems right there.

ErikTheRed
10-24-2010, 3:02 AM
The high-horse some of you ride is rather impressive. Your steed so high and mighty that just by perching upon its saddle, you are bestowed by equine deity the power to insult and degrade those who are unsatisfied with the status-quo and who refuse to continue supporting it.

I am not voting for Whitman, her leadership will fail just as past leadership has done under the same blanket of misguided agenda. I'm not voting for Brown for precisely the same reason. Therefore, I really couldn't care less which one of them wins, for the results will be identical. My vote for Nightengale will not be cast under a false illusion that she can win, but rather as a protest vote against the past, current, and future leadership of this state. Its quite obvious to even a snail at this point that either Meg Whitman or Jerry Brown is California's next governor, and yet even the snail should know that there wont be a split hair's worth of difference either way. So do I care if my protest vote ends up profiting one side or the other? No, I do not. And thats the point.

joedogboy
10-24-2010, 7:35 AM
not to be critical but that is moving the goal posts to your argument-

If you want to vote for Meg, or Charlene, please do- but please dont think that Meg is a supporter of gun rights- and that pretty much can be said for the Republican Party in general- THAT is a sad state of affairs.

I'm not excited about either candidate. I just don't see Brown as having come around fully on the 2A issues - certainly not enough to make me really want to vote for him when he has a proven track record of being wrong on so many other important issues.

Meg, on the other hand, is pretty much an unknown quantity - and seems to bend with the political winds.

There doesn't seem to be a clear "good" choice, or even a clear "lesser of two evils" here.

Jonl
10-24-2010, 7:40 AM
The high-horse some of you ride is rather impressive. Your steed so high and mighty that just by perching upon its saddle, you are bestowed by equine deity the power to insult and degrade those who are unsatisfied with the status-quo and who refuse to continue supporting it.

I am not voting for Whitman, her leadership will fail just as past leadership has done under the same blanket of misguided agenda. I'm not voting for Brown for precisely the same reason. Therefore, I really couldn't care less which one of them wins, for the results will be identical. My vote for Nightengale will not be cast under a false illusion that she can win, but rather as a protest vote against the past, current, and future leadership of this state. Its quite obvious to even a snail at this point that either Meg Whitman or Jerry Brown is California's next governor, and yet even the snail should know that there wont be a split hair's worth of difference either way. So do I care if my protest vote ends up profiting one side or the other? No, I do not. And thats the point.

Many said the same about Obama and McCain... Lesser of 2 evils. Brown and Whitman's career history are polar opposite which makes the same Governing impossible. I do understand and agree with the frustration, both parties have made it impossible to fully trust either one, 1st of all by shredding the Constitution, as well as everything else...fill in the blank.

cmaynes
10-24-2010, 12:20 PM
I'm not excited about either candidate. I just don't see Brown as having come around fully on the 2A issues - certainly not enough to make me really want to vote for him when he has a proven track record of being wrong on so many other important issues.

Meg, on the other hand, is pretty much an unknown quantity - and seems to bend with the political winds.

There doesn't seem to be a clear "good" choice, or even a clear "lesser of two evils" here.

when the response by Meg's board mod to Bill W's questioning Whitmans' 2a stance was calling into question the validity of CalGuns non-profit status- I would say that they see Calguns and gun owners in general as the enemy.

go over and check it yourself- and in Meg's own words she is good to go with porn, but considers gun-owners criminals. so just keep that in the back of your mind when going to the polls.....

oni.dori
10-24-2010, 1:57 PM
The high-horse some of you ride is rather impressive. Your steed so high and mighty that just by perching upon its saddle, you are bestowed by equine deity the power to insult and degrade those who are unsatisfied with the status-quo and who refuse to continue supporting it.

I am not voting for Whitman, her leadership will fail just as past leadership has done under the same blanket of misguided agenda. I'm not voting for Brown for precisely the same reason. Therefore, I really couldn't care less which one of them wins, for the results will be identical. My vote for Nightengale will not be cast under a false illusion that she can win, but rather as a protest vote against the past, current, and future leadership of this state. Its quite obvious to even a snail at this point that either Meg Whitman or Jerry Brown is California's next governor, and yet even the snail should know that there wont be a split hair's worth of difference either way. So do I care if my protest vote ends up profiting one side or the other? No, I do not. And thats the point.

From my point of view, I personally know that neither candidate is really "pro-gun". Brown has PROVEN that through his past actions in politics (including as GOVERNOR of he once great state of California [which he helped further its ruin, keep in mind]), Meg hasn't proven she IS pro-gun; but in the end, I think that most sensible and intelligent voters on this site just wan't to vote for the person that will do the least damage to their 2A rights. I would also hope that they are intelligent enough to understand that you RARELY every take at face value exactly what they say on the trail. IMHO, the only reason he is claiming to/trying appear to be pro 2A (and keep in mind, to many people, being pro 2A doesn't necissarily mean being fully "pro-gun"), because it is the popular side of the issue with the people, most especially after Heller and McDonald.

bwiese
10-24-2010, 2:01 PM
That is all said - it is undeniable that it is HUGE egg in the face of CGF brass. They all but endorsed JB. That endorsement clearly at odds with NRA.

There is no egg on my face sonny, but I'd eat some if you gave me back & English muffins.

And sorry, CGF doesn't and cannot endorse anyone. In fact CGF is suing Brown in his official capacity thru litigation against DOJ (Firearms). A couple of CGF board members, meeting Brown, told him "Nothing personal, just business" and there was laughter all around.

So that means I am a functional schizoid.


It may mean
1. They don't talk to NRA

Many CGF/CGNers indeed talk to California NRA folks. Some of us are even on the board of the CRPA which has extensive NRA contacts and is the state aflliliate org. If you don't think NRA & the new CRPA talk these days I have a bridge to sell you. Pre-CGF quite a few of us of us were talking to CA NRA boys very early in the OLL days to keep the momentum going.

Please note that the CRPA has not recommended EITHER candidate due to both failing to answer questionnaire ("FTAQ"). CRPA is NRA's sanctioned state organization.


2. NRA doesn't listen to them
3. NRA has no idea what they are doing
Please note that I left "CGF doesn't know what they are doing" option out - that generally not the case.... hehe

Except (3) none of of particular crime, but it is sure as hell funny.


I am not sure that Fairfax, VA knows what CGF does.

I am reasonably confident that there is communication with CGF and California NRA.

And BTW: if anybody REALLY think that higher NRA rating could possibly cost JB governorship - they are crazy. I repeat - he always has had Brady endorsement. If nothing else it would paint him as "independent, capable of working with all parties".


I am quite confident that Brown no longer has LCAV/ Brady endorsement.
Juliet Leftwich and Robyn Thomas have been PMSing for a long time to the press about how Brown has shifted 180 degrees from Lockyer. Google for "Jerry Brown NRA Leftwich".

Yeah, LCAV endorsed him by default last time (who were they gonna endorse, Poochigian?) Plus they wanted a chance to be with a winner.

Also, all politicians are risk-averse and do cost-benefits analyses on every subject. It does not behoove JB to march down the street with a musket and an NRA flag. I'm sure he enjoys the quiet, nuanced support many of us give him. This concept is further proved by Meg herself: she thinks she kinda-sorta wants the gun vote too.

The fact we have had access to Brown to write a Supreme Court amicus brief himself and stop a dangerous brief in Heller from emerging as well, should tell you there is access, and the fact that this lawyer who brought this about is of counsel to NRA's law firm in CA should let you read between the lines. That several gun lawyers in CA also believe in his integrity in these particular matters also should make its mark. You might see some interesting names on JBs Facebook friends list.

Also I will add that Fairfax, VA is 3000 miles away. I'm generally fond of the NRA, and Team CA NRA team is a key part of the CA gunrights coalition. These are people we trust. I have not heard of Brown complaints in any regard, and I have not heard any favorable commentary on Whitman. I have some reason to believe, but no details, that highly aggressive contact with Whitman's team was made earlier this year when her campaign staff was trying to steal perception of NRA recommendation by misusing placement of NRA logo'd paraphernalia with her campaign materials at gunshow booths, so the unknowledgable would make assumptions. That behavior stopped dead.

I unfortunately suspect this particular recommendation was out of Fairfax, may have been based on legend and the whole process may well not have been worked out fully in this instance - a branch office vs field office thing not uncommon in government or industry either.

Bizcuits
10-24-2010, 2:23 PM
We're screwed either way... I'd rather be screwed with Brown. At least then when we lose this state once and for all, it'll be a democrat at the helm.

oni.dori
10-24-2010, 4:32 PM
We're screwed either way... I'd rather be screwed with Brown. At least then when we lose this state once and for all, it'll be a democrat at the helm.

Not quite sure how that theory works...:confused:

Swiss
10-24-2010, 5:00 PM
I'll ask again...

At the recent 25th Annual Gun Rights Policy Conference, which the CGF heads attended, it was hammered home that judges were the key to protecting our 2nd Amendment rights.

Does CGF really think that Brown will appoint a more conservative judge than Whitman?

mblat
10-24-2010, 5:00 PM
We're screwed either way... I'd rather be screwed with Brown. At least then when we lose this state once and for all, it'll be a democrat at the helm.

Actually it kind of does.
Example:
If McCain would've won we would still ended up with health care, and quite possibly with amnesty and carbon tax.
In certain ways Obama was better choice for conservatives than McCain....

mblat
10-24-2010, 5:15 PM
There is no egg on my face sonny, but I'd eat some if you gave me back & English muffins.

And sorry, CGF doesn't and cannot endorse anyone. In fact CGF is suing Brown in his official capacity thru litigation against DOJ (Firearms). A couple of CGF board members, meeting Brown, told him "Nothing personal, just business" and there was laughter all around.

So that means I am a functional schizoid.




Many CGF/CGNers indeed talk to California NRA folks. Some of us are even on the board of the CRPA which has extensive NRA contacts and is the state aflliliate org. If you don't think NRA & the new CRPA talk these days I have a bridge to sell you. Pre-CGF quite a few of us of us were talking to CA NRA boys very early in the OLL days to keep the momentum going.

Please note that the CRPA has not recommended EITHER candidate due to both failing to answer questionnaire ("FTAQ"). CRPA is NRA's sanctioned state organization.



I am not sure that Fairfax, VA knows what CGF does.

I am reasonably confident that there is communication with CGF and California NRA.




I am quite confident that Brown no longer has LCAV/ Brady endorsement.
Juliet Leftwich and Robyn Thomas have been PMSing for a long time to the press about how Brown has shifted 180 degrees from Lockyer. Google for "Jerry Brown NRA Leftwich".

Yeah, LCAV endorsed him by default last time (who were they gonna endorse, Poochigian?) Plus they wanted a chance to be with a winner.

Also, all politicians are risk-averse and do cost-benefits analyses on every subject. It does not behoove JB to march down the street with a musket and an NRA flag. I'm sure he enjoys the quiet, nuanced support many of us give him. This concept is further proved by Meg herself: she thinks she kinda-sorta wants the gun vote too.

The fact we have had access to Brown to write a Supreme Court amicus brief himself and stop a dangerous brief in Heller from emerging as well, should tell you there is access, and the fact that this lawyer who brought this about is of counsel to NRA's law firm in CA should let you read between the lines. That several gun lawyers in CA also believe in his integrity in these particular matters also should make its mark. You might see some interesting names on JBs Facebook friends list.

Also I will add that Fairfax, VA is 3000 miles away. I'm generally fond of the NRA, and Team CA NRA team is a key part of the CA gunrights coalition. These are people we trust. I have not heard of Brown complaints in any regard, and I have not heard any favorable commentary on Whitman. I have some reason to believe, but no details, that highly aggressive contact with Whitman's team was made earlier this year when her campaign staff was trying to steal perception of NRA recommendation by misusing placement of NRA logo'd paraphernalia with her campaign materials at gunshow booths, so the unknowledgable would make assumptions. That behavior stopped dead.

I unfortunately suspect this particular recommendation was out of Fairfax, may have been based on legend and the whole process may well not have been worked out fully in this instance - a branch office vs field office thing not uncommon in government or industry either.

I don't think particular response is needed here. I know full well that CGF can't officially endorse anybody. Hence "all, but".
I also receptive to argument that on pure 2A JB is better candidate. I didn't see the need to regurgitate it for empties time, especially when nothing new was added and anybody who is interested in the subject have read your posts on the subject for six(?) or so month. But since it seems that some of us skip over them - I don't mind it at all.

I am not here to argue about it, really - I already mailed my ballot.... and I know better than trying to convince anybody on internet forum.
I simply find this situation highly amusing.

Just because I bored out of mind at the moment I would like to make and observation:
arguments "NRA 3000 miles away" and "NRA doesn't want to jeopardize JB chances by endorsing him" are contradictory. It can be one or the other.
I personally vote for "NRA is corporation and corporate politics made it impossible endorsing as anti-business candidate as JB is".

But this is as wild of speculation as the first two. :p

RandyF
10-24-2010, 5:42 PM
We know Brown will further destroy the economy (he did it last time).
Whitman is NOT pro-gun, and she is hanging with Bloomberg (what's that about). And who spends that much money without an agenda?
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. (sfgate.com)
Any flight attendants out there? I'm going to need a barf bag at the polls.

sevensix2x51
10-24-2010, 6:46 PM
all i can tell, is that meg has a lot of money. she has no credibility, no matter what her million dollar commercials say. she can promise whatever she wants, but the reality is, she has no experience in government to know whether or not she could deliver, even if she wanted to.

i am of the belief that being a career politician is not a bad thing, no matter how awful meg tries to make it sound in her commercials.

bwiese
10-24-2010, 8:04 PM
I'll ask again...

Judges in CA are appointed for a short period then they are "ratified" by actual election. So there's indeed a filter and it makes this situation less worrisome.

bwiese
10-24-2010, 8:05 PM
We know Brown will further destroy the economy (he did it last time).

Really? CA in late 70s was not too bad outside Jimmah Carter's Federal malaise.

Can we bring it back?

mblat
10-24-2010, 9:21 PM
Really? CA in late 70s was not too bad outside Jimmah Carter's Federal malaise.

Can we bring it back?

You really want to go back to the world with no internet and, freshly adapted GOA68 and Soviet nukes pointing to every American city?

Yes, Jerry is that old - he was governor before anybody even heard of Bill Gates.

berto
10-24-2010, 10:15 PM
I'll ask again...

Conservative judge and pro-2A don't always go hand in hand. See Bork and some of the conservative judges on the 7th Circuit out of Chicago.

Who's to say Meg would appoint conservatives or pro-2A judges at all? She's a republican only because she registered as one. She waited most of her adult life to declare and has a recent history of supporting folks like Van Jones and Barbara Boxer. 2A issues don't appear to be on her radar. Her website's statement is the same fluff put out by many antis. I have a feeling she chose the path of least resistance when deciding which primary to buy. The dem field was stacked with a long list of possible candidates while the republican field was unknown, uninspiring, and under financed.

Serpentine
10-25-2010, 12:00 PM
The high-horse some of you ride is rather impressive. Your steed so high and mighty that just by perching upon its saddle, you are bestowed by equine deity the power to insult and degrade those who are unsatisfied with the status-quo and who refuse to continue supporting it.

I am not voting for Whitman, her leadership will fail just as past leadership has done under the same blanket of misguided agenda. I'm not voting for Brown for precisely the same reason. Therefore, I really couldn't care less which one of them wins, for the results will be identical. My vote for Nightengale will not be cast under a false illusion that she can win, but rather as a protest vote against the past, current, and future leadership of this state. Its quite obvious to even a snail at this point that either Meg Whitman or Jerry Brown is California's next governor, and yet even the snail should know that there wont be a split hair's worth of difference either way. So do I care if my protest vote ends up profiting one side or the other? No, I do not. And thats the point.

Unfortunately, this is how we got stuck with Bill Clinton for eight years. Votes for Ross Perot (Who I really liked) split the conservative votes - handing over the win(s) to Clinton by default.


.

SideWinder11
10-25-2010, 8:34 PM
Unfortunately, this is how we got stuck with Bill Clinton for eight years. Votes for Ross Perot (Who I really liked) split the conservative votes - handing over the win(s) to Clinton by default.


.

I hear you but if we keep up this way of thinking we will never have a true 3 or 4 party system.

Serpentine
10-26-2010, 5:14 AM
I hear you but if we keep up this way of thinking we will never have a true 3 or 4 party system.

I know, and I wish it were different. But one has to weigh between the "ideal" and reality.

Look at what Bill and Hillary did to this country with NAFTA and the free trade agreements, and anti - 2A's like Feinstein, Schumer, Reno, etc. - unleashed.

I wanted change too - but what happened in '92 and '96 kind of opened my eyes between "wanted" and "got."


.

choprzrul
10-26-2010, 5:33 AM
Here is everything you need to know about Jerry Brown:

AIlzYD4tk78


This video had 500 or so hits last night when I found it through Brietbart. It is now up to 18,500 this morning. Meethinks this might get some traction. Emailed it to a Meg operative, so let's see if the liar's words get out to the public in time to make an informed decision. I wonder how the early voters for Brown will feel once they see this and realize they voted for this clown?

.

Serpentine
10-26-2010, 5:58 AM
Here is everything you need to know about Jerry Brown:

Meethinks this might get some traction.

.

Heavy traction!

.

domino
10-26-2010, 7:28 AM
I love all you guys planning on voting for third party candidates. I consider it addition by subtraction.

Thanks for voting for Brown!

This isnt the case this year, in fact voting for a 3rd candidate this year is actually helping the repulican party more than it is demon crats.

domino
10-26-2010, 7:31 AM
Judges in CA are appointed for a short period then they are "ratified" by actual election. So there's indeed a filter and it makes this situation less worrisome.

And it is very uncommon for someone to run against a judge in an election.

Serpentine
10-26-2010, 10:25 AM
This isnt the case this year, in fact voting for a 3rd candidate this year is actually helping the repulican party more than it is demon crats.

Not!

Serpentine
10-26-2010, 10:25 AM
And it is very uncommon for someone to run against a judge in an election.

Not!

johnny_22
10-26-2010, 10:44 AM
It's all over:

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/44/2010/10/ad-of-the-day-brown-gets-whitm.html

So, Meg loved California 30 years ago? Guess who was Governor then...

By, the way, why with all these Meg-loving gun owners are then not Meg bumper stickers in the parking lots at the ranges I go to? The only candidate's bumper sticker I see is "Brown" and that is on my Prius!

Serpentine
10-26-2010, 11:25 AM
It's all over:

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/44/2010/10/ad-of-the-day-brown-gets-whitm.html

So, Meg loved California 30 years ago? Guess who was Governor then...

By, the way, why with all these Meg-loving gun owners are then not Meg bumper stickers in the parking lots at the ranges I go to? The only candidate's bumper sticker I see is "Brown" and that is on my Prius!

Meg had a campaign booth at the SF Cow Palace gun show. Didn't see anything with JBrown's name on it there. Still I take the whole campaign thing with a grain of salt - mostly BS.

I see Obama and bedraggled old John Kerry bumper stickers at the range - on Toyota Prius'! How self-demoralizing, self-embarrassing is that! Kind of like driving around Oakland with a Denver Broncos bumper sticker....haha.

.

.


.

choprzrul
10-26-2010, 11:33 AM
AIlzYD4tk78

sevensix2x51
10-26-2010, 11:42 AM
Really getting some miles out of that video, eh? I figure you posting it one page back was enough...

RCSurf
10-26-2010, 12:26 PM
That video is great! I love career politicians.

oni.dori
10-26-2010, 12:51 PM
Actually it kind of does.
Example:
If McCain would've won we would still ended up with health care, and quite possibly with amnesty and carbon tax.
In certain ways Obama was better choice for conservatives than McCain....

Ok, I think I understand what you are saying now. Essentially, the state is nearly 100% definitely going to fall on its face and fail, so it's better that it happens under a Dem/Lib's "rule", rather than a Repub/Conserv's "rule", so that way the Dem's/Lib's (by default) inherit the blame. I guess that makes some kind of sense.

oni.dori
10-26-2010, 12:54 PM
It's all over:

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/44/2010/10/ad-of-the-day-brown-gets-whitm.html

The only candidate's bumper sticker I see is "Brown" and that is on my Prius!

Unfortunately, the only endorsement bumper sticker I have seen on any Prius was a Boxer bumper sticker, and I don't think I need to say much of anything about her on this site for people to understand what that means; not to mention the average person that simply drives a Prius is typically not for our cause to begin with.

johnny_22
10-26-2010, 1:45 PM
I don't mean anywhere. Why are there no "MEG" stickers on cars and pickups at the gun ranges? Meg is not that popular with shooters.

And, Prius owners are gun owners. The stealth mode applies to more than running on electric power. I doubt you'll see a "Boxer" bumper sticker on a car at the range.

Serpentine
10-26-2010, 2:00 PM
I don't mean anywhere. Why are there no "MEG" stickers on cars and pickups at the gun ranges? Meg is not that popular with shooters.

And, Prius owners are gun owners. The stealth mode applies to more than running on electric power. I doubt you'll see a "Boxer" bumper sticker on a car at the range.

I see a lot of Boxer stickers at the range. There's one on my truck, and there's one well trained one in my truck. He will ride in my Honda civic, but he prefers the truck.

I totally get the "covert," "green eco," and "car doesn't make the man" thing and am with you on that one.

http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/41YwRB6hz0L._SS400_.jpg


.

SideWinder11
10-26-2010, 2:46 PM
I don't mean anywhere. Why are there no "MEG" stickers on cars and pickups at the gun ranges? Meg is not that popular with shooters.

And, Prius owners are gun owners. The stealth mode applies to more than running on electric power. I doubt you'll see a "Boxer" bumper sticker on a car at the range.

A local gun shop near me has them in his case with the guns.

choprzrul
10-26-2010, 3:03 PM
Really getting some miles out of that video, eh? I figure you posting it one page back was enough...

Would you rather have that information remain hidden? Would you rather have the electorate remain uninformed? After all, it's just words, nobody needs to know what a candidate for CA governor says about telling lies in the past....

....and thank you for drawing additional notice to the video through your posting, keep up the good work!


.

JimWest
10-26-2010, 5:12 PM
....and thank you for drawing additional notice to the video through your posting, keep up the good work!
.

Gee, I hate to draw undo attention but I've been looking for that. Thanks!
Ought to have it playing on a monitor outside of every polling place.

Sgt Raven
10-26-2010, 5:17 PM
Meg had a campaign booth at the SF Cow Palace gun show.

She sure did with a NRA hat on it, there was a big stink about that, she didn't have permission to use it. :rolleyes:

SideWinder11
10-26-2010, 9:02 PM
At least she was there. Where was Jerry Brown..... hanging with Obama, Clinton, Boxer, Reid and Feinstein.

Birds of a feather flock together......

berto
10-26-2010, 9:43 PM
At least she was there. Where was Jerry Brown..... hanging with Obama, Clinton, Boxer, Reid and Feinstein.

Birds of a feather flock together......

Meg wasn't there, her people were. Those people placed NRA items in conspicuous areas to give the impression that NRA supported Meg. It was deceitful.

Meg supported Boxer's re-election last time out with money and an endorsement. Meg fawned over Van Jones. Birds of a feather flock together, right?

You don't like or trust JB, fine. At least be honest about Meg.

dfletcher
10-26-2010, 9:45 PM
At least she was there. Where was Jerry Brown..... hanging with Obama, Clinton, Boxer, Reid and Feinstein.

Birds of a feather flock together......



I attended the show and I saw that - her workers were using NRA hats as props and flyers to create an impression they had NRA endorsement when they did not, they made light of being questioned about it. This and her "the AW ban is right for CA" are a concern for me. I doubt she has any feel for the gun issue, we're just bargaining chip plain and simple.

SideWinder11
10-26-2010, 9:55 PM
Meg wasn't there, her people were. Those people placed NRA items in conspicuous areas to give the impression that NRA supported Meg. It was deceitful.

Meg supported Boxer's re-election last time out with money and an endorsement. Meg fawned over Van Jones. Birds of a feather flock together, right?

You don't like or trust JB, fine. At least be honest about Meg.

I attended the show and I saw that - her workers were using NRA hats as props and flyers to create an impression they had NRA endorsement when they did not, they made light of being questioned about it. This and her "the AW ban is right for CA" are a concern for me. I doubt she has any feel for the gun issue, we're just bargaining chip plain and simple.

I understand what you guys are saying and fine that I don't like Jerry Brown. I understand you don't like Meg... okay we agree on that. Perhaps you and others may vote for someone like Dale Ogden or Chelene Nightingale who is very pro-gun and strong on other issues.

Links are below in my sig.

bwiese
10-26-2010, 10:03 PM
I attended the show and I saw that - her workers were using NRA hats as props and flyers to create an impression they had NRA endorsement when they did not, they made light of being questioned about it. This and her "the AW ban is right for CA" are a concern for me. I doubt she has any feel for the gun issue, we're just bargaining chip plain and simple.

Yes, her shills were embarassed when I called 'em on it. They knew they were caught.

Her 'gun people' at theaw gun showa, btw, seem to be of the 'duck hunter' variant - without trying to offend the duck hunting contingent here. These dudes may have been well-intentioned, but I don't think they understand the CA gunrights issues at all and probably don't know even what an OLL is or why a Roster is a problem.

I - and a TON of others - let CA NRA staff immediately know about this, and I know the CA NRA guys were VERY, um, "unhappy". I cannot say for sure, but some 'riot act' was likely read. My mind is foggy but I think I recall the expression "POS" used.

Which makes the Fairfax, VA "remote control" decision about Meg ratings puzzling and indeed perhaps quite nonreflective of the actual situation on the ground here in California.

bwiese
10-26-2010, 10:05 PM
I understand what you guys are saying and fine that I don't like Jerry Brown. I understand you don't like Meg... okay we agree on that. Perhaps you and others may vote for someone like Dale Ogden or Chelene Nightingale who is very pro-gun and strong on other issues.


Why would I throw away a vote ,when I can reward someone that I KNOW (and have details of) who has repeatedly helped the progress of gunrights in CA?

Bottom line, people are outta jail and bogus cases dropped because of JB, let alone all the other amicus stuff and DOJ BoF restaffing.

bwiese
10-26-2010, 10:06 PM
At least she was there. Where was Jerry Brown.....

Fine if he's not there if he keeps the DOJ BoF in alignment.

As opposed to Meg trying to fake a recommendation? With incompetent staff?

Screw her.

berto
10-27-2010, 3:43 PM
I understand what you guys are saying and fine that I don't like Jerry Brown. I understand you don't like Meg... okay we agree on that. Perhaps you and others may vote for someone like Dale Ogden or Chelene Nightingale who is very pro-gun and strong on other issues.

Links are below in my sig.

Nope. Not throwing it away on some candidate who will be lucky to cross 3%.

Alexthewelder
10-27-2010, 4:08 PM
curious..... why would anyone go off of someone elses grading to determine who they would vote for? why does it matter what nra rates them or what other organization rates who?

Maybe we should think for ourselves in what we believe in, based on our own research, then come to our own grade and choose from there.

Me personally am voting for brown. They are both far from match grade but I prefer wolf over the corrosive stuff.

SideWinder11
10-27-2010, 8:16 PM
curious..... why would anyone go off of someone elses grading to determine who they would vote for? why does it matter what nra rates them or what other organization rates who?

Maybe we should think for ourselves in what we believe in, based on our own research, then come to our own grade and choose from there.

Me personally am voting for brown. They are both far from match grade but I prefer wolf over the corrosive stuff.

I feel too many people here are voting for JB just because Calguns told them too and not thinking for themselves. I would have never thought in a 1000 years gun owners would be voting democrap in CA and was shocked when I came on here and saw how many people were considering him. I posted in another thread that my local gun shop has Meg Whitman stickers in his gun case and when I told him about Calguns he was BLOWN AWAY!

Along with that wolf you're gonna be getting a lot more than you bit off for. Just watch whats gonna happen to this state if Brown becomes Gov., not gonna be pretty for us. I think if anyone look's at the candidates can clearly see who the better person for the job is and it is clearly not Brown.

You'd be surprized how many people have come on here and asked people who they should vote for.

Brown wants

*Education (free that is for illegals on your dime)
*Create Jobs for CA (even though he admitted to lying on the recent youtube video, he just says that for votes)
*Budget (you know what that means higher TAXES)
*Environment (oh no here comes that hippy crap, cut pollution more CA regs on cars and wait on companies, we all know thats good for jobs....not. Protect the coastline, not more building, can't improve PCH because we need more environmental impact studies you guys know this song and dance with demos. Increase parks, wow because we have tons of money for our current park system already oh and that Adventure Pass I have to buy how much of that goes to parks??? Protect drinking water.... didn't China just buy all of that?? how many of you or your kids drink from the tap anymore)
*Clean Jobs (o boy not again are these goning to be subsidized by us or are we going to let the market decide when these jobs come into play.
*Pension Reform ( wow from the guy who has is hands in the unions pockets. I can't wait to see this or wait is that JB just lying again.
*Water for the 21st Century (CA, politics and water always entertaining in CA)
*Protect Civil Rights (like the rights of illegals, the rights of illegals to get a college education I can only see Obama and his progressives now jumping on JB's coat tails with this one

Doheny
10-27-2010, 8:19 PM
As of now it's Brown's race to lose: http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2010/governor/ca/california_governor_whitman_vs_brown-1113.html

.

sfbadger
10-27-2010, 8:28 PM
I understand what you guys are saying and fine that I don't like Jerry Brown. I understand you don't like Meg... okay we agree on that. Perhaps you and others may vote for someone like Dale Ogden or Chelene Nightingale who is very pro-gun and strong on other issues.
.

Nice try but I don't think so. Relax, JB won't be so bad. :43:

HondaMasterTech
10-27-2010, 8:35 PM
As much as I believe Brown will support 2nd Amendment issues, I will never forget that he supports AB32. AB32 is going to cost Californian's so much money to implement it's scary.


Thankfully, I have the joy of watching this race from my new home. ;)

sfbadger
10-27-2010, 8:38 PM
Gun ownership doesn't equate to being a Republican. I happen to be a Democrat who likes guns, ... a lot, yet I'm also voting for Cooley and probably Fiorino, ... maybe? (at least NOT voting for Boxer)

chris
10-27-2010, 8:44 PM
As much as I believe Brown will support 2nd Amendment issues, I will never forget that he supports AB32. AB32 is going to cost Californian's so much money to implement it's scary.




i'm very affraid what that law will do jobs in this state. what jobs that are left. and gas will go way higher than it is allready with that law also.

Sgt Raven
10-27-2010, 8:57 PM
Nope you got it wrong we all lose. You'll be on here before long post whoring trying to get your post count up talking about how crappy things are in CA before long.

You come here complaining about your beloved eMeg Whitless having been called a WHORE, yet you say a member here will be a post whore. Pot meet Kettle. :TFH:

SideWinder11
10-27-2010, 9:16 PM
You come here complaining about your beloved eMeg Whitless having been called a WHORE, yet you say a member here will be a post whore. Pot meet Kettle. :TFH:

But he was called one 2 times in one of his threads.

http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=350362

I thought it was a term of endearment LOL :D

SideWinder11
10-27-2010, 9:26 PM
As much as I believe Brown will support 2nd Amendment issues, I will never forget that he supports AB32. AB32 is going to cost Californian's so much money to implement it's scary.


Thankfully, I have the joy of watching this race from my new home. ;)

I agree!

http://www.arb.ca.gov/cc/factsheets/ab32factsheet.pdf

SO then I can conculde that everyone who is voting for JB is also voting NO on Prop 23 right??

Who's the first to step up and be a hypocrite????

It's like a group buy. List your name below.

1.Doheny
2.Sgt. Raven
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.

bwiese
10-27-2010, 9:28 PM
I posted in another thread that my local gun shop has Meg Whitman stickers in his gun case and when I told him about Calguns he was BLOWN AWAY!

Which just further goes to prove gunshops are often founts of bad gun law information as well as bad gun politics information.

Perhaps your personal limitations necessitate you pandering to someone who you think can remotely affect your job. Me, I roll with whatever happens because I keep my skills up and am flexible.

Alexthewelder
10-28-2010, 9:28 AM
Which just further goes to prove gunshops are often founts of bad gun law information as well as bad gun politics information.

Perhaps your personal limitations necessitate you pandering to someone who you think can remotely affect your job. Me, I roll with whatever happens because I keep my skills up and am flexible.

exactly. Its always seems like gunshops really want you in fear so that you will just buy more. MEG HATES GUNS! I can see it now- meg gets elected then the gun shop tells you to buy more guns because a new law is in effect where if anything gun related is purchased after the day you visit his store it will be confiscated by federal agents....ooooooooo ssccaaarrrrrrryyyyy cash only credit card +5%.... Uhhhh ya ,... its cuz the democrats are charging more taxes!!! oooooooo ohhhhhhhh scarrrrrierrrrrr

Republican - democrat they all front , they all lie. Its all about what kind of art your into. they all paint a pretty picture but its just a picture. dont be a lolli pop :)

inbox485
10-28-2010, 1:01 PM
Ok, I think I understand what you are saying now. Essentially, the state is nearly 100% definitely going to fall on its face and fail, so it's better that it happens under a Dem/Lib's "rule", rather than a Repub/Conserv's "rule", so that way the Dem's/Lib's (by default) inherit the blame. I guess that makes some kind of sense.

The state fell on its face over a year ago. The sensation just hasn't set in yet. I've yet to even see a theory that could save CA from eventually filling bankruptcy. Any word on that from any of the candidates? ;)

bwiese
10-28-2010, 1:37 PM
The state fell on its face over a year ago. The sensation just hasn't set in yet. I've yet to even see a theory that could save CA from eventually filling bankruptcy. Any word on that from any of the candidates? ;)

California is a net output state. The value of goods & services it produces are far far more than any intake from the gov't - even accounting for illegals, etc.

In fact with all the Fed taxes paid and goods/services produced, California supports a tremendous number of 'loser' neighboring states (OR,ID,NV,UT, AZ, WY, etc.) These latter states have more Fed intake (fed gov't jobs, social security, farm/crop subsidies, retirements, Medicare/SSI) than any outgo or goods & services.

Paying less to the Feds would actually let us get back into reasonable shape even "the way we are", without fixing much.

inbox485
10-28-2010, 2:08 PM
California is a net output state. The value of goods & services it produces are far far more than any intake from the gov't - even accounting for illegals, etc.

In fact with all the Fed taxes paid and goods/services produced, California supports a tremendous number of 'loser' neighboring states (OR,ID,NV,UT, AZ, WY, etc.) These latter states have more Fed intake (fed gov't jobs, social security, farm/crop subsidies, retirements, Medicare/SSI) than any outgo or goods & services.

Paying less to the Feds would actually let us get back into reasonable shape even "the way we are", without fixing much.

That's all good and well, but CA's output in government spending also far outpaces it's intake. I'd say it went critical last year if not earlier.

mblat
10-28-2010, 3:37 PM
Paying less to the Feds would actually let us get back into reasonable shape even "the way we are", without fixing much.

Which is absolute impossibility. CA pays more to feds not because of some evil design or some injustice. It is actually quite a poetic justice in this case. CA has been voting for progressive politicians for ages and those progressive politicians instituted steeper and steeper tax curves. Californian makes more money than a person in almost any other state for the same job…… as the result he pays more in income tax.
Basically we are getting screwed by the feds because we VOTED for the system that designed to screw high earners…… and Californians are high earners.

patrick fox
10-28-2010, 4:26 PM
We're so screwed for the next four years...

Well maybe not !!! we could vote for chelne nightingal, she is very pro gun and 2nd ammendment along with constituitional beleiver and follower!!seems like she is a no excuse kinda lady, that won't take much b.s. from other politicians, check her out at her web site, she is endorsed by sheriff apario of arizona, who thinks all legal citizens should have guns ,, so i'm giving my vote to her, neither jerry or meg has earned my respect or confidience....

inbox485
10-28-2010, 8:42 PM
Well maybe not !!! we could vote for chelne nightingal, she is very pro gun and 2nd ammendment along with constituitional beleiver and follower!!seems like she is a no excuse kinda lady, that won't take much b.s. from other politicians, check her out at her web site, she is endorsed by sheriff apario of arizona, who thinks all legal citizens should have guns ,, so i'm giving my vote to her, neither jerry or meg has earned my respect or confidience....

Right.... Hate to break it to the "stick it to the man" types here, but her chances of winning the election died in March. And by dead, I mean still born. Her chances never had legs to walk on to begin with. Instead of throwing your vote away, vote between the best of the viables, look into what it takes to make it out of the primaries as a viable candidate and better luck in 4 years.

Excedrin
10-28-2010, 9:12 PM
I want someone who has really done something and building up a multimillion $$$ company is a lot better on a resume than saying you are a life long politician.

...

We need change not THE PAST. This is not Obama vs McCain. This is better...WE actually have a very well qualified person in Meg who actually has some credibility compared to Obama who is really a mystery. We know everything about Brown already as some of you seem to repeat so the questions is do we want a repeat of it?

I want no ill will with a fellow shooter. Please accept in advance my apologies. I just want a better CA. :)

This idea that Meg Whitman is a competent business leader is false. She has consistently failed at every business she's been CEO of (Stride Rite, FTD, Hasbro). Six months after joining eBay, they went public. The IPO process had begun long before she joined, she had zero positive impact.

Here's a good expose (http://www.alternet.org/story/148629/how_meg_whitman_failed_her_way_to_the_top_at_ebay, _collecting_billions_while_nearly_destroying_the_c ompany?page=entire) about her.

sfbadger
10-28-2010, 9:12 PM
And by dead, I mean still born. Her chances never had legs to walk on to begin with.

:rofl2:

SideWinder11
10-29-2010, 3:11 PM
D.R.E has formed a support group for you JB voters so you can hold hands and cry on each others shoulders.

sfbadger
10-29-2010, 3:49 PM
D.R.E has formed a support group for you JB voters so you can hold hands and cry on each others shoulders.

Well, maybe if he loses, though that doesn't seem likely. Thanks for the thought. ;)

rabagley
10-29-2010, 4:06 PM
Unfortunately, the only endorsement bumper sticker I have seen on any Prius was a Boxer bumper sticker, and I don't think I need to say much of anything about her on this site for people to understand what that means; not to mention the average person that simply drives a Prius is typically not for our cause to begin with.

I see plenty of Prius's at Angeles Shooting Range on the weekends.

inbox485
10-29-2010, 4:32 PM
I see plenty of Prius's at Angeles Shooting Range on the weekends.

Problem with the Pious, er Prius, is it's only marketing positions are based on perceived financial savings which are more than offset by the cost of the battery and a perceived reduction in environmental impact which is more than offset by the manufacturing of the battery. In the end it is a car for people who have been duped. The car is a false feel good fail on wheels.

bigfrank
10-29-2010, 8:00 PM
I love all you guys planning on voting for third party candidates. I consider it addition by subtraction.

Thanks for voting for Brown!

I have to wonder where this type of thinking is coming from. Really, throwing away your vote to either of the two parties just puts us in the same place we are now. Are you really helping out by voting for either one of them? I say YOU are throwing away your vote by voting for either Meg or the Brown one.

bigfrank
10-29-2010, 8:03 PM
Like I said, thanks for helping the only legit RKBA candidate into office!

Protest votes are pouting votes.

Stamp your feet and cross your arms all you want, but the US is a two-party system, which is the worst kind of political system in the world. . . except for all the others.

Hopefully all of you who wish for Italian parliaments will eventually grow up and understand this.

And your way of thinking/voting will keep us in the dark ages of oppression until the end.

inbox485
10-30-2010, 8:54 AM
I have to wonder where this type of thinking is coming from. Really, throwing away your vote to either of the two parties just puts us in the same place we are now. Are you really helping out by voting for either one of them? I say YOU are throwing away your vote by voting for either Meg or the Brown one.

I just think it is amazing that people have fallen for you line of reasoning. I just keep hoping one of these years you people will realize that an election starts about 18 months before the final vote. By march when this little thing called the primary happens, any candidate that has not showed viability has absolutely no chance whatsoever of going anywhere. There have been independents that have won governor and senate etc, but not because of some artsy fartsy pipe dream of everybody waking up on Nov 02 and in some miraculous shift of mentality vote in a nobody. It doesn't happen and isn't going to. You want to throw away a vote, go nuts, but don't BS yourself into thinking it is any better than not voting at all.

bigfrank
10-30-2010, 3:49 PM
I just think it is amazing that people have fallen for you line of reasoning. I just keep hoping one of these years you people will realize that an election starts about 18 months before the final vote. By march when this little thing called the primary happens, any candidate that has not showed viability has absolutely no chance whatsoever of going anywhere. There have been independents that have won governor and senate etc, but not because of some artsy fartsy pipe dream of everybody waking up on Nov 02 and in some miraculous shift of mentality vote in a nobody. It doesn't happen and isn't going to. You want to throw away a vote, go nuts, but don't BS yourself into thinking it is any better than not voting at all.

Really? Is it THAT amazing to you?

Seriously, no one said it had to happen at the eleventh hour. If people would actually sit down and assess what the two parties have done for us in the last 25 or 30 years, then they would see that voting for them ONCE AGAIN is a mistake. Unfortunately, people don't do that. it really isn't rocket science. Just go back and do a bit of research and you too will see what I'm talking about. People should have started doing this 18 months ago, then we wouldn't even be seeing these worthless candidates running.

cmaynes
10-30-2010, 10:25 PM
I have to wonder where this type of thinking is coming from. Really, throwing away your vote to either of the two parties just puts us in the same place we are now. Are you really helping out by voting for either one of them? I say YOU are throwing away your vote by voting for either Meg or the Brown one.

Its about winning for the cause- here the cause is 2A rights- in THIS election it will be either Brown or Whitman- all the others have no chance of winning whatsoever- so one has to choose the candidate who will cause the least amount of reversals to where we are today.