PDA

View Full Version : Just curious.. are most of us here in agreement with this presidential analysis? read


sakiguns
11-19-2007, 10:18 AM
Obviously we're all entitled to our own opinions, especially with politics. For the ones that have time, I'd like to hear your input on whether or not you agree with the following write-up.

http://www.gunblast.com/Greg_FredThompson.htm

tdo315
11-19-2007, 10:31 AM
I would say he is a little quick to dismiss Ron Paul as a contender and his thoughts on Obama are a bit alarming but all in all not a bad read.

MudCamper
11-19-2007, 10:33 AM
I really like his sight, and his gun reviews, but this particular article, I couldn't stand to read past this:

"For the liberals, those that detest the principles of religious freedom, family values, honor"

I read no more after that nonsense.

johnny_22
11-19-2007, 10:36 AM
Obama's name is not the reason to not vote for him. His stand on gun control is. Leaving off Richardson was a shock. He is a strong #4 in the primary polls.

I don't trust any Northeastern candidate with guns. Rudy Giuliani and Mitt Romney have flipped-flopped on gun control. Mike Huckabee comes off better than Fred Thompson in recent debates. Ron Paul is the purest candidate (and least likely to win).

Written in August and it shows in the analysis. He should update it.

Bizcuits
11-19-2007, 10:39 AM
I like Fred, but he lost my interested, when I got almost a dozen requests for money sent to my house, before he event decided to run for president.

If Ron Paul fails, then Fred is my next choice. It's interesting to see abortion as such a big issue, I actually support abortion.

SchooBaka
11-19-2007, 10:39 AM
I would say I agree on some points, but for obvious reasons, I chose disagree.

aileron
11-19-2007, 2:32 PM
I hate abortion being an issue. I don't believe the government should be involved with a persons body.

I disagree with abortion on principle, but its not my choice to make, and if this is a free country that its no one else's choice but the person or persons making it.

Granted teenagers run afoul of that last comment; until they are considered an adult its not their choice. But thats where I draw the line.

I am bothered by the fact that religious folks some how forget that we have a system that separates church and state. AND not everyone believes as they do, so it is not freedom if you imprison someone to your belief system.

I am neither conservative nor liberal. Neither party holds my interests. I cant stand the rhetoric on either side. I believe in the constitution, I believe in small government. I am conservative and liberal, is just depends on the issue.

Gays want to get married; go for it. Want to do drugs; your choice. Want an abortion; don't think its a good idea, but its your choice.

Want to believe in aliens are coming on the next comet to free us, okay dokay. Just don't force me to say prayers to the green star of uber-alien, while only the chosen few alpha uber-alien followers are allowed to impregnate the women, and the rest of us must be castrated.

If the uber-alien religion took over the majority of American thinking and their faith was allowed to influence politics so we had to follow it and get castrated, then our form of government failed. Thats why I dont like religions trying to influence government.

This is America, it comes with responsibilities, sometimes our choices cause great pain, but thats freedom. I do not believe the government can fix bad decisions nor should it.

berto
11-19-2007, 2:59 PM
Overly simplistic and sadly close to par as far as political discourse goes these days. The author's views are what scares away many would-be republican voters. And around we go on the litmus test all or nothing wheel of doom.

bwiese
11-19-2007, 3:05 PM
The most important thing for gunnies to remember is that what a particular presidential candidate's *direct* stance on guns is is less important than the type of Supreme Court appointments he'll make.

And remember, there is a fair chance that any Repub President could appoint Janice Rogers Brown to the Supremes.

dfletcher
11-19-2007, 5:25 PM
As mentioned, not voting for Obama based on his name is not a good reason at all and mentioning it - then affirming it is meaningless - well, what's the point? There are plenty of very good reasons to not vote for the fellow not the least of which are the other folks he'll put in power.

Last Saturday CNN ran a clip of the 1960 campaign, Senator Kennedy speaking in front of the Houston clergy regarding the religious issue. The level of intelligence demonstrated by the audience (and the demeanor and presentation of the candidate) stands in stark contrast to the You Tube and "town meeting" forums of recent years and during this election. The contrast of what we were and what we've become is alarming.

trashman
11-19-2007, 5:39 PM
As mentioned, not voting for Obama based on his name is not a good reason at all and mentioning it - then affirming it is meaningless - well, what's the point?

As someone who grew up in the South - I'll tell you what the point was: code language to other Southerners who just don't like the idea of a black President. And I think it's shameful.

I love the guys at Gunblast - but the idea that the author is an ordained Minister and compares a (whether or not you agree with his politics) remarkable and accomplished guy to the spiritual leader of the worldwide movement to crush democracy in the name of Islam...is ...well. Not very ministerial. :(

--Neill

phobos512
11-20-2007, 12:55 PM
I hate abortion being an issue. I don't believe the government should be involved with a persons body.

I disagree with abortion on principle, but its not my choice to make, and if this is a free country that its no one else's choice but the person or persons making it.

Granted teenagers run afoul of that last comment; until they are considered an adult its not their choice. But thats where I draw the line.

I am bothered by the fact that religious folks some how forget that we have a system that separates church and state. AND not everyone believes as they do, so it is not freedom if you imprison someone to your belief system.

I am neither conservative nor liberal. Neither party holds my interests. I cant stand the rhetoric on either side. I believe in the constitution, I believe in small government. I am conservative and liberal, is just depends on the issue.

Gays want to get married; go for it. Want to do drugs; your choice. Want an abortion; don't think its a good idea, but its your choice.

Want to believe in aliens are coming on the next comet to free us, okay dokay. Just don't force me to say prayers to the green star of uber-alien, while only the chosen few alpha uber-alien followers are allowed to impregnate the women, and the rest of us must be castrated.

If the uber-alien religion took over the majority of American thinking and their faith was allowed to influence politics so we had to follow it and get castrated, then our form of government failed. Thats why I dont like religions trying to influence government.

This is America, it comes with responsibilities, sometimes our choices cause great pain, but thats freedom. I do not believe the government can fix bad decisions nor should it.

Pretty much 100% agreement with you there.

What I thought was funny on the OP's link was how the writer stated that the elected need to represent the electors - THAT IS NOT TRUE. The POTUS is not the President of the Republicans or the President of the Catholics. The President is the President of the United States. That's all of us. People seem to like to ignore that fact.

Kestryll
11-20-2007, 12:57 PM
And remember, there is a fair chance that any Repub President could appoint Janice Rogers Brown to the Supremes.

I thought only Diana Ross could do that...

troyus
11-20-2007, 2:13 PM
Obviously we're all entitled to our own opinions, especially with politics. For the ones that have time, I'd like to hear your input on whether or not you agree with the following write-up.

http://www.gunblast.com/Greg_FredThompson.htm

No. That writeup sounds uneducated and biased. Not all democratic candidates want to take away gun rights. Bill Richardson comes to mind. Also, several point of the argument against Obama are naive. I don't care if the next president of the United States is named Saddam Osama if he does the job with intelligence, integrity, and leadership. Then the author complains about increasing sex education. Sex is a reality in our country just like gun ownership or anything else, so I don't understand the problem with discussing it at an earlier age. I just read a news article about some 8 year old boys raping a girl. Maybe a little sex edcuation could have prevented that.

It's a weird country where I can see adults get killed in daytime television -- but not have sex. Kind of reminds me of Islamic countries I've visited, actually.

If you vote for your typical Republican, you get gun rights, but lose religious freedom because they are embedded with the Christian coalition. They also want to outlaw abortion, which is hilarious, because people will do it either way. Strangely, though they feel people should have complete 2nd amendment freedom, they are also obsessed with federal laws controlling drugs. That's also hilarious - thanks to illegal drugs, powerful crime syndicates continue to prosper. Naive.

If you vote Democrat, women have the legal freedom to choose (which they will do anyway, if it's legal at least less women die in home abortions or out of country abortions), but the Democrats are weird too. Drugs are a personal choice (less regulation), but no guns! Obviously, when you have millions of guns out there, all that means is that bad guys will have guns, and good guys won't. Naive.

From what I have read, and seen, Fred Thompson seems comfortable, for the most part, continuing and building on GWBII policies. And Bush has done a terrible job, overall.

Anyway... none of these candidates are perfect and most of them attempt to go against some part of the constitution. The 2nd amendment is important, but it's not the only part of the constitution that counts.

If you haven't guessed... I'm still undecided. I like Ron Paul in some ways, but leaving the UN and NATO is kind of like saying "No" to drugs or "No" to abortion or "No" to gun rights in the US... Just because you put your head in the sand, doesn't mean everything still isn't happening around you. Pretending the problem doesn't exist, or thinking that it shouldn't exist doesn't justify putting on the blinders and fooling yourself.

Well whoever is picked, will probably be an improvement. Bush has shown an amazing skill at picking some of the most flat out incompetent subordinates of all time for important positions in the halls of government - I don't think any of the current candidates could manage such levels of gross ineptitude and cronyism, not even Guiliani or Hillary.

-T

tombinghamthegreat
11-20-2007, 2:25 PM
He was a bit quick to dismiss ron paul.

Army
11-22-2007, 3:46 AM
First of all, there is NO "seperation of church and state". The Govt. simply cannot ESTABLISH an offical religion. Nothing in the Constitution stops anyone from worshipping where, when, or the way they like, nor does it disallow any government person from publically practicing his/her religion. The ACLU does not dictate Constitutional authority.

As for Obama, his refusal to fully allow his background to be known, makes me highly disagree with any of his political stances. I don't know him, I can't trust him. Yes, it does matter. It especially matters in this age of advanced awareness of the world around us.

Ron Paul caters far too much to the kook brigades. My opinion. I do agree we need to leave the UN, or at least kick it out of the USA, then pay ONLY our fair share.

I vote taxes and guns. You want to raise my taxes, you lose my vote. You want to regulate or take away my guns, you lose my vote. All else means little to me.

bwiese
11-22-2007, 11:47 AM
I vote taxes and guns. You want to raise my taxes, you lose my vote. You want to regulate or take away my guns, you lose my vote. All else means little to me.

I love you.

RFNUT
11-22-2007, 11:00 PM
Love the comments by ISREAL and ARMY. My sentiments as well.

At this time the only real candidate that seems suitable to me is Huckaby. Don't think he will make to the finals, but I will still vote for him.

Soldier415
11-22-2007, 11:40 PM
He was a bit quick to dismiss ron paul.

For good reason

jumbopanda
11-22-2007, 11:56 PM
I vote taxes and guns. You want to raise my taxes, you lose my vote. You want to regulate or take away my guns, you lose my vote. All else means little to me.

We have a winner! I think I'd throw in illegal immigration though; if you won't enforce the borders, or worse yet, you pander to illegals (that Spanish debate comes to mind), you lose my vote.


The thing I can't stand about some conservatives is that they believe it's the government's job to inject family values and morality into people's lives. A government that does that is overstepping it's bounds in the same way that a far-left socialist would with universal healthcare, gun control, etc.

TheDM
11-23-2007, 7:02 PM
He was a bit quick to dismiss ron paul.

+1 on that.

As I've said before.

I'm not a Republican, I'm not a Democrat.

I AM AN AMERICAN. My vote is never wasted!

I wish people would vote American and not the BS party stuff. As long as we concentrate on your team, my team, and the two party crap; We are never going to get out of this defunct swill that we call our representative government. I'm not against representative government at all, don't misread me. I'm saying our current representatives don't! They represent their own corporate interests, and the money that put them there, not us.

The only vote wasted is the one you vote because you want to be on the winning team. If all of America would vote for the person they think can get the job done, we would have a better government. I'm also not a one issue voter. I have voted for other candidates who disagree with some of the issues I feel strongly about because the number one priority when you vote is what is best for the nation, not my single goals. Ron Paul for instance is one of them, I don't agree with his Pro-Life guise, and frankly his justification for this under the Bill or Rights is frightening, but, I'll take the rest of Bill of Rights back gladly. He also doesn't quite understand why we have troops in foreign places and how that affects our economy, but I',m pretty sure congress, and the diplomatic system will keep him from screwing that up too much, as well as Roe vs. Wade.

I'm leaning towards him because without the Bill or Rights we are powerless to fix our government. That would lead to, well it would be bad, let's just say that, (looking out window for the black van).

Our government is a mess, we are a nation divided, that was made very clear in the last presidential election. Our forefathers knew that when the nation was divided our representative government would represent that division, and that government would be less effective. It's not a flaw, it's meant to be that way. That way single goals and ideals can't get through. Some of those checks and balances have been eroded by executive privilege, like you know, not needing a Declaration of War. Or Guantanamo, we are supposed to be the guys in white hats, but in the face of danger we lower our standards, in education, we lower our standards, with products we buy we lower our standards. With the Bill of Rights when faced with an uncommon foe, we lower our standards.

It's time to make this country great again, and only you, the voter can fix it.

If you don't vote, you are willing to go along with the status quo, let other people make the decision for you, which screams fascism and communism. Ask anyone who doesn't vote, you will get two answers,

1.) It doesn't matter, which means they have already given up.

2.) I don't care about politics.

These are the sheep that our nation has created on purpose to beat us down.

This is what they want.

I'm not asking you to believe in what I believe.

I'm asking you to Vote for what YOU believe in, and encourage others to VOTE for what THEY believe in, nothing else.

That is the foundation of our government.

Wow, I was only going to type +1...

TheDM
11-23-2007, 7:05 PM
I hate abortion being an issue. I don't believe the government should be involved with a persons body.

I disagree with abortion on principle, but its not my choice to make, and if this is a free country that its no one else's choice but the person or persons making it.

Granted teenagers run afoul of that last comment; until they are considered an adult its not their choice. But thats where I draw the line.

I am bothered by the fact that religious folks some how forget that we have a system that separates church and state. AND not everyone believes as they do, so it is not freedom if you imprison someone to your belief system.

I am neither conservative nor liberal. Neither party holds my interests. I cant stand the rhetoric on either side. I believe in the constitution, I believe in small government. I am conservative and liberal, is just depends on the issue.

Gays want to get married; go for it. Want to do drugs; your choice. Want an abortion; don't think its a good idea, but its your choice.

Want to believe in aliens are coming on the next comet to free us, okay dokay. Just don't force me to say prayers to the green star of uber-alien, while only the chosen few alpha uber-alien followers are allowed to impregnate the women, and the rest of us must be castrated.

If the uber-alien religion took over the majority of American thinking and their faith was allowed to influence politics so we had to follow it and get castrated, then our form of government failed. Thats why I dont like religions trying to influence government.

This is America, it comes with responsibilities, sometimes our choices cause great pain, but thats freedom. I do not believe the government can fix bad decisions nor should it.

Wow. Of all the candidates running. I think I would like to nominate Aileron.

Seriously. with you 100%