PDA

View Full Version : John McCain and the 2A.


USMCM16A2
02-07-2008, 7:57 PM
Folks,


I heard McCain speak today at the CEPAC conference today right after Romney threw in the towel. And I am likely to draw fire for this but this is an open forum. I do believe that he meant what he said that he learned from his mistakes with Immigration Bill that he co-authored with that lard-encased fat_@$$ Kennedy.
How is this relevant to our 2A battles, I was angry like a lot of voters for some of his REPUBLIKRAT stances on certain issues. And I know that he has a checkered record on 2A issues. But the issue is bigger than just who is the most conservative, the issue is who will best likely serve our interests in the battle to preserve our 2A rights. Who is most likely to gain the widest acceptance when it comes to the Republican, Independent, or middle of the road voter. Our choices are pretty slim.
Again, we as a block of voters are faced with possibly voting for someone who is better than the alternative. Clinton/Obama would set us back decades, regardless of how SCOTUS rules. I as a voter, am just sick and tired of our 2A rights being pissed on, and interpreted completely out of context. Weary of politicians deciding what is good for us, an incompetent California DOJ that has agents that think they can just arrest whoever the please, putting peoples financial/emotional well-being at stake. Lawyers that call the citizens of this state "Idiots, and keyboard commandos". But if you think it is bad now, consider the previously mentioned, Obama/Clinton Presidency, and they would certainly approve HR1022, NO SEMI-AUTO ARMS OF ANY KIND. Allison and Mr. I Chinn will be heard laughing their @$$es off, and the California Legislature would not have to do thing,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, my .02 Let the FLAMES begin, USMCM16A2 :mad::mad::mad:

bwiese
02-07-2008, 8:16 PM
I think, for all the handwaving about him from folks calling themselves 'conservative', McCain can beat the Hilldog or Obama.

That's the endgame you have to look at. Romney's out, Huck will flounder.

He's also repeatedly promised to nominate originalists to the Supremes - and used Roberts & Alito as examples.

Since, for gunnies, the upcoming Prez election is all about the Supremes, let's roll with him.

Experimentalist
02-07-2008, 8:17 PM
You've made some good, honest points.

More importantly, you've started a dialogue regarding choices in whom to vote for, or worse whether to vote at all.

:rant:

Some folks are likely to go sit in the corner, hold their breath, and pout because the most conservative / better candidate / whatever won't be getting the nomination. Tough. Suck it up and deal.

Because if you don't show up in November, and pull for McCain or whoever wins the Republican nomination, you trully will suffer for 4 (or more) years under Clinton / Obama.

Now let the flames begin. :50:

ukdkbr
02-07-2008, 8:40 PM
Want to hear about how you can save your 2A rights and everyother right you have or have lost:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8l8AIuJJRZo&feature=PlayList&p=7C02EA0A81B668FD&index=0&playnext=1
Inspiring ...

Solidmch
02-07-2008, 8:43 PM
Bill we have no other choice for someone that can win. Sad but true. I never thought in a million years I could/would vote for McCain. I just do not want to loose ANY of my guns.

Bizcuits
02-07-2008, 8:48 PM
I have no problem giving the man my vote.

I'm tired of hearing about how Ron Paul is gonna save the time and pull an election win outta his ***.

Either we allie with McCain and pray / hope we have a better choice in four years. Or you support losing your guns, which are the things that give you freedom.

m24armorer
02-07-2008, 9:00 PM
I'm a one issue voter and it's all about guns.

Thats all, period. I really don't give a rats a** about anything else. What I do for a living revolves around guns. Especially black ones.

Without that, I might have to get a real job. Is a second language required at McDonalds?

DrjonesUSA
02-07-2008, 9:04 PM
Folks,


I heard McCain speak today at the CEPAC conference today right after Romney threw in the towel. And I am likely to draw fire for this but this is an open forum. I do believe that he meant what he said that he learned from his mistakes with Immigration Bill that he co-authored with that lard-encased fat_@$$ Kennedy.
How is this relevant to our 2A battles, I was angry like a lot of voters for some of his REPUBLIKRAT stances on certain issues. And I know that he has a checkered record on 2A issues. But the issue is bigger than just who is the most conservative, the issue is who will best likely serve our interests in the battle to preserve our 2A rights. Who is most likely to gain the widest acceptance when it comes to the Republican, Independent, or middle of the road voter. Our choices are pretty slim.
Again, we as a block of voters are faced with possibly voting for someone who is better than the alternative. Clinton/Obama would set us back decades, regardless of how SCOTUS rules. I as a voter, am just sick and tired of our 2A rights being pissed on, and interpreted completely out of context. Weary of politicians deciding what is good for us, an incompetent California DOJ that has agents that think they can just arrest whoever the please, putting peoples financial/emotional well-being at stake. Lawyers that call the citizens of this state "Idiots, and keyboard commandos". But if you think it is bad now, consider the previously mentioned, Obama/Clinton Presidency, and they would certainly approve HR1022, NO SEMI-AUTO ARMS OF ANY KIND. Allison and Mr. I Chinn will be heard laughing their @$$es off, and the California Legislature would not have to do thing,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, my .02 Let the FLAMES begin, USMCM16A2 :mad::mad::mad:



I'll say this loud and clear to anyone who will listen:

McCain is now going to be our nominee.

Anyone who even fantasizes about calling themselves conservative/Republican and cares at all about keeping their right to bear arms will vote for McCain in this election.

The alternative is going to be hilary or obama, and I don't need to state the obvious about what they are going to do to gunowners.

Any gunowner who does not vote for McCain DESERVES to lose all of their guns.

DrjonesUSA
02-07-2008, 9:06 PM
I have no problem giving the man my vote.

I'm tired of hearing about how Ron Paul is gonna save the time and pull an election win outta his ***.

Either we allie with McCain and pray / hope we have a better choice in four years. Or you support losing your guns, which are the things that give you freedom.


Yep.

I proudly voted for Paul in the primary, but its clear that he doesn't have a shot, unfortunately.

I would love NOTHING more than to have a man like him as our President.

Sadly, that is not an option.

Vote McCain.

Bad Voodoo
02-07-2008, 9:11 PM
We all better hope that he supports the 2A. We're going to need the protection when he opens the border.

Hoop
02-07-2008, 9:32 PM
Yep.

I proudly voted for Paul in the primary, but its clear that he doesn't have a shot, unfortunately.




Same here, however I knew from day one he didn't have a prayer. I'm surprised at McCain's wins too, I thought Romney would be the GOP candidate.

BigDogatPlay
02-07-2008, 9:34 PM
McCain has spent the past 20 years or so taking pleasure sticking his thumb in the eyes of most conservatives including, by derivation, me. But if he is willing to walk the talk, man up on the issues that mean the most to us and really do the right thing.

He can beat Hillary... if he will continue to walk the talk and she polarizes the voters as thoroughly as I know she can. If Obama wins the nomination, all bets are off as I think Obama would take it in a rout. The cultish culture that is building around Obama is going to be hard to beat, particularly when the 527 Media turns on McCain as you know they will about ten seconds after the fall campaign kicks off.

jamesob
02-07-2008, 9:43 PM
well i voted for mcain in the primaries, simply because i really didnt like romny and i have issues with huck. i respect a man that served our country and suffered as a pow. his issues on immigration i believe will change and he will come around on other stuff as well. i did love the fact today during his speech he did say basicly that the assault weapon ban was a joke and he doesnt support another one. and i also think romny might be a v.p for mcain.

LAK Supply
02-07-2008, 9:55 PM
McCain is a jackass that will say whatever he thinks he needs to for the power of a presidential office. He's just another lying politician, and he has no respect for the 2A or our borders.... I about shot my TV screen when he was up there in the debate lying about being a federalist. :mad:

Solidmch
02-07-2008, 10:05 PM
McCain is a jackass that will say whatever he thinks he needs to for the power of a presidential office. He's just another lying politician, and he has no respect for the 2A or our borders.... I about shot my TV screen when he was up there in the debate lying about being a federalist. :mad:

So I take it you have a better choice that could win?

blackberg
02-07-2008, 10:06 PM
I think McCain is the only Rep that can bring in Dems to vote for him....

-bb

Pryde
02-07-2008, 10:07 PM
McCain voted against the AWB in 94.

Here is an exact quote taken from his speech today
I have defended my position on protecting our Second Amendment rights, including my votes against waiting periods, bans on the so-called "assault weapons," and illegitimate lawsuits targeting gun manufacturers.

As a matter of fact the only anti-gun legislation he has supported (AFAIK, correct me if I am wrong) is background checks at gunshows.

Bear in mind that George W Bush has said before that if another AWB is passed, he would sign it into law. So compared to our current president McCain is a better choice for Pro 2A.

Wulf
02-07-2008, 10:08 PM
John's record on guns has been well to the left of his constituents while serving as a Senator. If he continues true to form, as POTUS, with a constituency on average more to the left of Arizonians, there's no reason to be optimistic. He's made his bones up to this point without conservatives and gun owners. Why do you think he'll change once elected? John has proven again and again and again and again, that he will sell out his party and conservative principals for a weekend of fawning attention from the weekend talker shows. Aside from blind hope, I dont see any reason to believe he wont roll on the 2nd to make what ever other deal he's working on at the moment....it pretty clear the 2nd isnt a priority for him personally. And as a practical matter, its a lot easier to rally opposition to an obvious enemy, than one that's unpredictably traitorous. As Don Vito said: Keep your friends close and your enemy's closer. At least with Hillary or Obama, you know its time to man up and stay on Defense for 4 or 8, focus on congress. With McCain, you'll be thinking you're safe because he'll be there with a backstop veto, then he'll sell you out for some nonsense deal he made with Kennedy.

Face fact's....unless lighting strikes down everybody but Paul, this election is over as far as gun rights go.

LAK Supply
02-07-2008, 10:20 PM
So I take it you have a better choice that could win?

Let me see.... candidate schmuck liar A or candidate schmuck liar B. Does it really matter?

dfletcher
02-07-2008, 11:04 PM
McCain voted against the AWB in 94.

Here is an exact quote taken from his speech today


As a matter of fact the only anti-gun legislation he has supported (AFAIK, correct me if I am wrong) is background checks at gunshows.

Bear in mind that George W Bush has said before that if another AWB is passed, he would sign it into law. So compared to our current president McCain is a better choice for Pro 2A.

I believe you are correct, and he did co-sponsor a bill greatly disliked by the NRA regarding campaign reform.

I'm not too thrilled with the way he explains it on his website - that he supports background checks as a way of having an easy and standard way of completing gun sales at shows. Present a negative as a positive bit.

Regarding Bush and the 1994 AW ban, when questioned I think his comments were politically astute. He stated in mid - 2004 that he "supported" the law. The law had a sunset provision so by stating he supported the law he was, I believe, stating he supported it ending as planned - while appearing to take middle ground with anti - gunners who wanted it renewed and only heard what they wanted. And this was done with a pro - gun Republican Congress that wasn't going to make a move to renew it. So I think his approach was very deliberate and pretty slick.

jumbopanda
02-07-2008, 11:29 PM
Yep.

I proudly voted for Paul in the primary, but its clear that he doesn't have a shot, unfortunately.

I would love NOTHING more than to have a man like him as our President.

Sadly, that is not an option.

Vote McCain.

Ditto. It's time we accept reality and rally behind McCain. He is our only hope now.

DedEye
02-07-2008, 11:56 PM
I think McCain is the only Rep that can bring in Dems to vote for him....

-bb

<-- Case in point (me).

ETD1010
02-08-2008, 12:04 AM
My only fear is that Ron Paul will run on the libertarian ticket or something and pull voters away form McCain allowing hillary or Obama to win... I voted for him in the primary, but I know my only hope to keep my rights is to vote McCain.. he is WAY better than the alternative....

FreedomIsNotFree
02-08-2008, 12:39 AM
McCain > Hillary.

That said, McCain has some serious problems when it comes to true conservatives. Many will stay home rather than vote for him. The best thing McCain has going for him is he is not Hillary...

There are quite a few people that are more anti-Hillary than they are pro-McCain. Lets just hope it more or less evens out in the general election.

What irks me most about McCain is his stance on illegal immigration. He says he "learned his lesson" and will make securing the borders the first step on the issue. What bothers me is what is step #2 and #3? He's said it himself, he wants a path to citizenship for illegals that are already here....this begs the question....

WHAT GOOD IS SECURING THE BORDERS AFTER YOU'VE ALLOWED COUNTLESS MILLIONS TO ENTER?

There must be a plan, other than citizenship, for dealing with those that have cut in line and entered illegally. It's tantamount to closing the barn door AFTER you let the wolf in.

AfricanHunter
02-08-2008, 5:34 AM
I think, for all the handwaving about him from folks calling themselves 'conservative', McCain can beat the Hilldog or Obama.

That's the endgame you have to look at. Romney's out, Huck will flounder.

He's also repeatedly promised to nominate originalists to the Supremes - and used Roberts & Alito as examples.

Since, for gunnies, the upcoming Prez election is all about the Supremes, let's roll with him.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/art...servative.html

January 31, 2008
Is McCain a Conservative?
By Robert Novak

WASHINGTON, D.C. -- As John McCain neared his momentous primary election victory in Florida after a ferocious campaign questioning his conservative credentials, right-wingers buzzed over word that he had privately suggested that Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito was too conservative. In response, Sen. McCain recalled saying no such thing and added Alito was a "magnificent" choice. In fact, multiple sources confirm his negative comments about Alito nine months ago.

McCain, as the "straight talk" candidate, says things off the cuff that he sometimes cannot remember exactly. Elements of the Republican Party's right wing, uncomfortable with McCain as their prospective presidential nominee, surfaced the Alito comments long after the fact for two contrasting motives. One was a desperate effort to keep McCain from winning in Florida. The other was to get the party's potential nominee on record about key issues before he is nominated.

The latter has no pretensions of changing McCain's firmly held non-conservative positions on such issues as campaign finance reform and global warming. Rather, they want two assurances: first, that McCain would veto any tax increase passed by a Democratic Congress; second, that he would not emulate Gerald R. Ford and George H.W. Bush in naming liberal justices John Paul Stevens and David Souter.

That is the background of conservative John Fund's Wall Street Journal online column the day before Florida voted. He wrote that McCain "has told conservatives he would be happy to appoint the likes of Chief Justice Roberts to the Supreme Court. But he indicated he might draw the line on a Samuel Alito because 'he wore his conservatism on his sleeve.'" In a conference call with bloggers that day, McCain said, "I don't recall a conversation where I would have said that." He was "astonished" by the Alito quote, he said, and repeatedly tells town meetings, "We're going to have justices like Roberts and Alito."

I found what he could not remember was a private, informal chat with conservative Republican lawyers shortly after McCain announced his candidacy in April 2007. I talked to two lawyers present whom I have known for years and who have never misled me. One is neutral for president, and the other recently endorsed Mitt Romney. Each said they were not Fund's source, and neither knew I was talking to the other. They gave me nearly identical accounts, as follows:

"Wouldn't it be great if you get a chance to name somebody like Roberts and Alito?" one lawyer commented. McCain replied, "Well, certainly Roberts." Jaws were described as dropping. My sources cannot remember exactly what McCain said next, but their recollection is that he described Alito as too conservative.

Meanwhile, anti-tax activist Grover Norquist is worried about a prominent journalist informing him that McCain a few years ago said to him, off the record, that as president he would have to raise taxes. McCain more recently has told me, on the record, he never would support a tax increase and, consequently, favors making permanent the Bush tax cuts.

Norquist and McCain have a stormy personal relationship. As Senate Indian Affairs Committee chairman, McCain in 2005 subpoenaed records of Norquist's dealings with imprisoned Republican lobbyist Jack Abramoff. Denying wrongdoing, Norquist said McCain held a grudge against him for campaigning against the senator's 2000 presidential bid. Norquist told me he has no personal animus and only wants assurance that McCain opposes higher taxes.

According to exit polls, voters calling themselves "very conservative" supported Romney in Florida by two to one, and McCain still won in a state described as a microcosm of America. McCain survived a scathing assault on conservative talk radio led by Rush Limbaugh. Romney's appeal to the right on immigration backfired, triggering Sen. Mel Martinez's endorsement of McCain and a five-to-one vote for him by the Cuban community.

McCain as the Republican nominee would need those "very conservative" voters. He will encounter some of them at the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC) in Washington Feb. 7-9. His campaign Wednesday asked for McCain to speak there after rejecting an invitation to last year's meeting. At CPAC, he might well consider providing "straight talk" about Samuel Alito and promising to veto any tax increase by a Democratic Congress.
__________________

LAK Supply
02-08-2008, 6:45 AM
<-- Case in point (me).

My point as well... if DedEye's willing to vote for him he must be a freedom-taking socialist! :p

Glock22Fan
02-08-2008, 7:47 AM
Let me see.... candidate schmuck liar A or candidate schmuck liar B. Does it really matter?

Yes, one might take some of our guns, but will probably propose conservative supremes, the other will definately try to take all our guns and propose commie supremes.

Lesser of two evils, unfortunately.

lazuris
02-08-2008, 7:58 AM
Better McCain than Hilderbeast or Osama

Liberty1
02-08-2008, 8:18 AM
McCain's speech was mostly good and very well delivered as a politician of his stature is accustomed to deliver. Lots of liberty and federalism talk. He'll still be going up hill on the war issue for a lot of voters in November however. If his record was at all reflective of what he was talking about I'd say vote for him.

For a lot of conservative voters, once again our back is to the wall. How many more times are we going to be suckers for speeches from RINOs when they vote like Dems when they are not addressing us from a podium?

And I hope Ron Paul stays in through the convention. Jabbing the Party at every opportunity to help remind them and us how far toward authoritarian they've drifted during the latter 20th century. I liked the party better when they were in the minority and could block and gridlock congressional actions or in the majority with a Dem POTUS where they suddenly found the constitutional backbone to oppose an undeclared war . No new laws seem to be better then then ones they've passed; No Child Left Behind, The Prescription Drug Plan, the unPatriot Act, passing the buck on declaring war, etc... I'd gladly give up the unconstitutional commerce clause invoking HR-218 Peace Officer National Concealed Carry and Commerce in Firearms Act to be free of those other bills.

Salty
02-08-2008, 8:21 AM
I can't believe that any American who's family went threw the trouble of coming here legally would support amnesty for a group of people who have been illegally jumping the border, evading taxes, lowering the standard for fair wages, and putting a strain on the job market in America for decades upon decades. These people have been abusing us for years and years and years, I just don't understand how anyone supports them. I call it, passive domestic terrorism. Why "terror" you might ask? Because they've done a great job making Americans to scarred to say anything... it's just not "PC" anymore.

Still though, McCain is no Paul, but he's %1000 times better than Obama or Clinton.... Especially Clinton

With that said, I have no problem with people who come here legally.

GenLee
02-08-2008, 8:32 AM
I see everyone's case and point, I obviously as well dreed the even possibility of Billary or Obama, But am still extremely leary as to a McCain victory as being much better, Am i the only one left with a small amount of hope that with the delegates as spread out as they are , Romney's, Huck's and yes even Paul's, That we have at least a possible, Independant/Libertarian cantidate with a last minute chance of pulling the Conservative Delegates votes together for an Upset win? i.e. Paul, Huck, on a different Independant/Libertarian ticket?

Guess my point is I'm not yet ready to give up on the "True Conservative" party as yet.

maxicon
02-08-2008, 8:55 AM
Indepent/Libertarian is a dream, with a rude awakening Nov 6th. The most it'll accomplish is drawing away votes from the side they're most closely aligned with.

Look at Nader and Gore in 2000. Gore would have won if not for Nader (he might have won if he had stayed in the center and not strayed to the left - he lost his home state that way).

So, ask yourself - if a Paul/Huck team ran independent, where would they siphon the votes from?

The biggest plus for McCain is that he's a centrist - the extremes of both parties hate him, and that means he's the best bet for getting the middle votes, which are the ones that will make the difference. Whoever the Dems nominate will get the lefties - there's no doubt about that, but McCain is far more centrist than Hillary or Obama.

If you run someone who siphons off the hard right votes, it'll only hurt the Republican candidate. There's no two ways around it. You can vote against the Democrats, or not.

SamIAm
02-08-2008, 9:07 AM
In 1992, you knew that Bush Sr. was a little waffly on the 2nd A. Did you pout and throw a temper tantrum by (a) voting for Clinton or (b) sitting out the election or (c) voting for the least offensive choice and hoping for the best.

Those who did (a) or (b) helped set the stage for the 1994 ban. (Thanks.) It would have been a much tougher fight if Bush Sr. had still been in office.

My only point. McCain might actually stop and consider his base before signing into law new legislation. Clinton and Obama? Probably not.

Liberty1
02-08-2008, 9:28 AM
In 1992, you knew that Bush Sr. was a little waffly on the 2nd A. Did you pout and throw a temper tantrum by (a) voting for Clinton or (b) sitting out the election or (c) voting for the least offensive choice and hoping for the best.

Those who did (a) or (b) helped set the stage for the 1994 ban. (Thanks.) It would have been a much tougher fight if Bush Sr. had still been in office.

My only point. McCain might actually stop and consider his base before signing into law new legislation. Clinton and Obama? Probably not.

And Bush Sr. and Jr. and a Republican held Congress would be wise to remember that when they vote Big Gov. they loose the base and loose elections. Its a two way street and not the voters fault. Its theirs for not having principles in the first place.

DrjonesUSA
02-08-2008, 10:09 AM
I see everyone's case and point, I obviously as well dreed the even possibility of Billary or Obama, But am still extremely leary as to a McCain victory as being much better, Am i the only one left with a small amount of hope that with the delegates as spread out as they are , Romney's, Huck's and yes even Paul's, That we have at least a possible, Independant/Libertarian cantidate with a last minute chance of pulling the Conservative Delegates votes together for an Upset win? i.e. Paul, Huck, on a different Independant/Libertarian ticket?

Guess my point is I'm not yet ready to give up on the "True Conservative" party as yet.


Look at our history - Perot cost Bush the 1992 election, and as pointed out, it is highly unlikely we would have had the 1994 AWB if Bush was in office.

Again, Paul is without a doubt the man who should have the job, the man that America and our Constitution needs, but unfortunately, the reality is that it just isn't going to happen.

If he starts making some huge miraculous comeback, great.

Barring that, McCain is our candidate, period.

I really don't understand how there can be ANY ambiguity about this at all - Hillary/Obama vs. ANY other republican.

With a Hillary/Obama vote, you are absolutely, without a doubt voting AGAINST gun rights.

With a McCain vote, it may be more of a crapshoot, and yes we run the risk of getting stabbed in the back, but with Hil/bama, we KNOW for a FACT they WILL BAN MORE GUNS.

PERIOD, end of story.

How is this difficult for people to see?

troyus
02-08-2008, 11:11 AM
Look at our history - Perot cost Bush the 1992 election, and as pointed out, it is highly unlikely we would have had the 1994 AWB if Bush was in office.

Again, Paul is without a doubt the man who should have the job, the man that America and our Constitution needs, but unfortunately, the reality is that it just isn't going to happen.

If he starts making some huge miraculous comeback, great.

Barring that, McCain is our candidate, period.

I really don't understand how there can be ANY ambiguity about this at all - Hillary/Obama vs. ANY other republican.

With a Hillary/Obama vote, you are absolutely, without a doubt voting AGAINST gun rights.

With a McCain vote, it may be more of a crapshoot, and yes we run the risk of getting stabbed in the back, but with Hil/bama, we KNOW for a FACT they WILL BAN MORE GUNS.

PERIOD, end of story.

How is this difficult for people to see?

It's not that simple is it? With McCain, we will do more war... Obama, we will I think be in a better place internationally.

But we will loose gun rights without a doubt. So what's more important? The economy and international affairs, or gun rights? That's a personal decision we all have to make.

Also, and this might not mean much to many people here, but I thought McCain (and Guiliani) were VERY RUDE towards Ron Paul when he outlined why it doesn't make SENSE to ever have invaded Iraq.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=fKsC_0fMjr0


I don't feel comfortable voting for someone like that. What kind of way is this to act when you want to be a leader? It's very disrespectful and shows willful ignorance of the facts. I don't see Obama or Huckabee acting that way towards another person in the debates, for example. Hillary, Romney, Guiliani and McCain all appear to be extremely pompous. It's the same kind of flippant attitude we got from Rummy and Cheney.

It's the kind of attitude that put us into Iraq.

DrjonesUSA
02-08-2008, 11:15 AM
It's not that simple is it? With McCain, we will do more war... Obama, we will I think be in a better place internationally.

But we will loose gun rights without a doubt. So what's more important? The economy and international affairs, or gun rights? That's a personal decision we all have to make.


We are not discussing international affairs here. The title of the thread is "John McCain and the 2A" in case you didn't notice. ;)



Also, and this might not mean much to many people here, but I thought McCain (and Guiliani) were VERY RUDE towards Ron Paul when he outlined why it doesn't make SENSE to ever have invaded Iraq.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=fKsC_0fMjr0


I don't feel good voting for someone like that. What kind of way is that to act? It's very disrespectful and shows wilfulness's ignorance of the facts. I don't see Obama or Huckabee acting that way towards another person in the debates, for example. Hillary, Romney, Guiliani and McCain all appear to be extremely pompous. It's the same kind of flippant attitude we got from Rummy and Cheney.

It's the kind of attitude that put us into Iraq.


I posted a thread about my thoughts on the CNN Republican debates, and I stated that I thought that both McCain & Romney came across as arrogant *****s.

I don't like McCain, and I won't say in public what I think of Hillary or Obama.

Sadly, we have again been reduced to choosing between the lesser of two evils. :mad:

CowboyShooter
02-08-2008, 12:15 PM
Is a second language required at McDonalds?

not really. as long as you habla espanol, you should be ok. having some english skills won't hurt. :D

Salty
02-08-2008, 12:35 PM
Sadly, we have again been reduced to choosing between the lesser of two evils. :mad:

I feel that way with just about every election. :(

Bad Voodoo
02-08-2008, 12:53 PM
...and yes we run the risk of getting stabbed in the back, but with Hil/bama, we KNOW for a FACT they WILL BAN MORE GUNS.

I'm with 'ya, man. Just don't know if I can take 4-8 more years of getting stabbed in the back. I'd rather see, identify, and attack the threat head-on.

See, McCain is the worst kind of liberal scum bag. He's the wolf in sheep's clothing just like Bush turned out to be. I keep saying it doesn't matter - McCain, Clinton(s), Obama... they're all the same. It's a NWO and they're all in on it together. Just look at Europe, hard, as an example of what "they" want us to become.

Bizcuits
02-08-2008, 12:54 PM
I can't believe that any American who's family went threw the trouble of coming here legally would support amnesty for a group of people who have been illegally jumping the border


Well either we pay millions and likely billions to track and deport them all. We imprison them all and pay for their food / bed / shelter or we accept them and get taxes from em.

Whine and cry all you want about them coming here illegaly, sad fact is since our country is already in debt, we don't really have another choice. Unless you want to raise taxes to deport them all..

SemiAutoSam
02-08-2008, 1:18 PM
Your right they all all the same

And yes that is what they want for US.

If they get their way and they most likely will we will fall into line with the NAU and be nothing more than a building block toward their NWO.

Why do you think all of the politicians like McCain and Hillary, Obama etc are all members of the CFR, TLC.

Here is McCains profile at the NWO Camp.
http://www.cfr.org/bios/662/john_mccain.html

YES its the NWO in the form of a One World Government.

Only the blind cannot see the writing on the wall.

I keep saying it doesn't matter - McCain, Clinton(s), Obama... they're all the same. It's a NWO and they're all in on it together. Just look at Europe, hard, as an example of what "they" want us to become.

STAGE 2
02-08-2008, 2:11 PM
Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't McCain vote against waiting periods, against the AWB the first time around and vote to repeal it once in effect?

DrjonesUSA
02-08-2008, 2:43 PM
I'm with 'ya, man. Just don't know if I can take 4-8 more years of getting stabbed in the back. I'd rather see, identify, and attack the threat head-on.

Ha! What are you gonna do, write letters? I think we've seen time and time again that left-wing politicians will do whatever they want, no matter how many letters they get.


See, McCain is the worst kind of liberal scum bag. He's the wolf in sheep's clothing just like Bush turned out to be. I keep saying it doesn't matter - McCain, Clinton(s), Obama... they're all the same. It's a NWO and they're all in on it together. Just look at Europe, hard, as an example of what "they" want us to become.

I absolutely agree, but if you don't think that a dem is worse, you are either ignorant or stupid.

Both parties suck, the republicans just suck less.

mikehaas
02-08-2008, 2:49 PM
McCain was NRA's nemisis in 1999, pushing "Gun Show Loophole" (sic) legislation that would have ended gun shows in America...
http://nrawinningteam.com/0102/gunshowbill.html

1999: McCain on Guns
http://nrawinningteam.com/mccain1.html

2000: McCain-Lautenberg?
http://nrawinningteam.com/0010/mccain.html

2001: Senator McCain On The Big Screen
http://nrawinningteam.com/0105/mccain.html

An inconvenient truth, eh?

Bad Voodoo
02-08-2008, 3:18 PM
An inconvenient truth, eh?

That's the phrase I was searching for!!!! Yeah, Mike. No doubt - that about sums it up and ties it with a bow.

Glock22Fan
02-08-2008, 3:24 PM
McCain was NRA's nemisis in 1999, pushing "Gun Show Loophole" (sic) legislation that would have ended gun shows in America...
http://nrawinningteam.com/0102/gunshowbill.html

1999: McCain on Guns
http://nrawinningteam.com/mccain1.html

2000: McCain-Lautenberg?
http://nrawinningteam.com/0010/mccain.html

2001: Senator McCain On The Big Screen
http://nrawinningteam.com/0105/mccain.html

An inconvenient truth, eh?


And Billabama would be better?

DrjonesUSA
02-08-2008, 3:49 PM
I'm seriously disturbed that this thread even exists.

So I guess you guys all voted for Feinstein & Boxer too, huh?

GenLee
02-08-2008, 3:49 PM
I'm with 'ya, man. Just don't know if I can take 4-8 more years of getting stabbed in the back. I'd rather see, identify, and attack the threat head-on.

See, McCain is the worst kind of liberal scum bag. He's the wolf in sheep's clothing just like Bush turned out to be. I keep saying it doesn't matter - McCain, Clinton(s), Obama... they're all the same. It's a NWO and they're all in on it together. Just look at Europe, hard, as an example of what "they" want us to become.

Exactly, next its the "Amero" as our currency, open borders, and the "North American Union"

USMCM16A2
02-08-2008, 3:58 PM
DrJonesUSA,


THE reason for this threads exsistance is that it is promoting discussion, allowing people to interact and share ideas. I started the thread not as a way of saying "it is all over, vote McCain" I started it to see what people thought about their candidates, and what could our future be if BILLary or Obama win. So if you want Ron Paul vote Ron Paul, or ___________ for President. It is your right, your vote. My .02, USMCM16A2.

Bad Voodoo
02-08-2008, 7:17 PM
Here's another fact - once he teamed up w/ his fellow liberals to push immigration and campaign finance reform, ALL his principles were compromised, as evidenced by his consideration to sign ANY kind of AW ban should he be stupidly lucky enough to become POTUS.

He may be only slightly better that the two opposing him for the big chair on the other side of the aisle, but that is a mighty slim margin for error. This is what happens when you begin voting the "lesser of two evils." The only choice you have is still evil.

Jared D
02-08-2008, 9:33 PM
This is what happens when you begin voting the "lesser of two evils." The only choice you have is still evil.
It seems like we have to choose the lesser of two evils more often than not anymore. I think conservatives are tired "holding their nose" and voting. Not that the alternative is even worth consideration.

SemiAutoSam
02-08-2008, 9:45 PM
One of the problems as I see it is Conservative voters don't have conservative politicians to vote for anymore.

The only Republicans I see that most people think have a chance to win aren't Conservative they are liberal or Moderate at best.

It seems like we have to choose the lesser of two evils more often than not anymore. I think conservatives are tired "holding their nose" and voting. Not that the alternative is even worth consideration.

bwiese
02-09-2008, 1:40 PM
Pryde has a very good post above - nicely written, and to the point.

Sure there are a-tad-better-than-McCain on guns and certainly better than other issues. But winning is everything, and McCain has enough positives that way override the Hilldog's (or Obama's) negatives and gives him fair possibility of win.

Politics is all about winning and McCain's "electability negatives" are far, far less than the Hilldog's or Obama's.

As I keep saying, this Prez election ain't about detailed gun stances of the R candidates, it's about who the Prez will nominate to the Supremes. PERIOD. McCain has accumulated enough diplomacy/traction in Congress that a nominee will likely not get Borked, and I have confidence that "orignalists" as opposed to "living document" types will be the nominees.

I dislike those artificially disparaging McCain for conduct in Vietnam. Even people politically differing with McCain said he was a 100% square dude. Some of this (along with temper attributions) was backwash from Bush campaign disseminations in 2000. Those asshats should serve a decade in a Hanoi prison before they f**kn' talk, most of 'em would squeal like cheerleaders.

krazz
02-09-2008, 3:23 PM
It's amazing to me how so many people actually BELIEVE what politicians say...especially when they are trying to get elected. They are professional liars, and Mr. McCain is one of the best. He is as crooked as the rest of them, WITHOUT EXCEPTION!! He is NOT liberty minded, which is what the majority of gun-owners and gun rights activists need.

In response to the inevitable "If not McCain, then who?" or the even better "At least he's better than HillBama.", one should never sell out a vote for the "lesser of two evils". Write in Ron Paul if you truly want a president that cares about your liberty. If you think Ron Paul is too wacky (which I do), and the only choice is HillBama or McCain....write in Spongebob, or Captain Kirk, or anyone else, because politically speaking, there is zero difference between the two.

The absolute last thing we as responsible gun owners should be doing right now is thinking that McCain is pro 2A. He is a socialist who hides under the flag of the so-called "Grand Old Party" - (which is a joke in itself). When he gets elected, and he slowly erodes the very few freedoms we still have in this country, blame not him, but the ones who voted for him.

WHAT HAPPENED
02-09-2008, 4:24 PM
I hope this is not a repost

Source: http://www.gunowners.org/pres08/huckabee.htm



Mike Huckabee: Standing Tall For The Second Amendment
by John Velleco
Director of Federal Affairs

To most Americans, Mike Huckabee is probably best known for shedding 110 pounds. But gun owners may remember the former Arkansas Governor as a man who stood firm for the Constitution, and in particular, the Second Amendment, in the face of unspeakable horror.

On March 24, 1998, Andrew Golden and Mitchell Johnson went to a Jonesboro, Arkansas middle school, pulled a fire alarm, and from a nearby wooded area shot and killed four students and a teacher.

The Jonesboro incident was the third in a string of school shootings, and the calls for gun control were deafening. President Bill Clinton, who had been Arkansas' Governor several years earlier, not surprisingly led the charge to restrict gun ownership.

People across the country also saw, most for the first time, Governor Huckabee. Would he join those exploiting the tragedy for political purposes and compromise on gun rights? Many people expected him to do just that, but even as the media, the president and anti-gun activists from around the country derided him, the Governor stood by his convictions to uphold the rule of law.

Instead of jumping on the bandwagon to add to the burgeoning list of gun laws on the books, Governor Huckabee talked about personal responsibility and the obsession with violence widespread among this country's youth.

On NBC’s Today Show, Governor Huckabee refused to allow host Katie Couric to blame law-abiding gun owners for the shooting:

Couric: Governor Huckabee, this is the third deadly shooting to take place in the South in the last five months. And some criminal experts have ventured a guess that southern society, which has a more permissive attitude towards guns and hunting, and perhaps in some circles even glamorizes those things, that that might have been a factor in some -- in this recent spade of shootings. What's your view of that?
Gov. Huckabee: I take strong exception to that kind of view. Southerners may have a very positive view toward the ownership of firearms and even hunting, but we don't have a positive view about murder, and we certainly don't have a positive view toward murder in a schoolyard.
Two years later, Governor Huckabee was involved in another widely publicized Second Amendment debate. In 2000, much of the firearms industry was involved in a series of bogus lawsuits brought by cities, states, and the federal government.

Gun maker Smith & Wesson relented to pressure from the Clinton Administration to settle out of court, and agree on nearly all of the outlandish charges brought in the lawsuits.

In return for this, the company would be rewarded with state and federal government contracts. New York's Attorney General (now Governor) Elliot Spitzer sent a letter to elected officials across the country urging them to support the deal.

Governor Huckabee responded less than enthusiastically.

"Gun manufacturers make the Second Amendment a viable right rather than some theoretical proposition. I will not abuse my authority as governor to pursue their demise or dictate their business practices through coercion," he wrote.

"I will not seek the capitulation of firearm manufacturers through the use of asinine lawsuits or the doling out of taxpayer-funded government contracts. I regret that you feel either of these tactics to be worthwhile endeavors."

Governor Huckabee also signed a law prohibiting frivolous lawsuits against gun makers and eased restrictions on concealed carry permit holders in Arkansas.

Mike Huckabee has been in the heat of battle over gun rights and has proven himself to be a steadfast friend to gun owners and the Second Amendment.


Huckabee On The Issues
Oppose reauthorization of of the 1994 semi-auto ban? Yes

Oppose background checks on private firearms transactions at gun shows?
Yes

Oppose expansion the unconstitutional Brady law, as found in HR 297, introduced in 2007?
Yes

Oppose legislation requiring firearms intended for self-protection to be locked up when they are not in use?
Yes

Oppose a ban or further restrictions on .50 caliber firearms?
Yes

Oppose a waiting period for the purchase of a firearm?
Yes

Oppose a ban on any type of ammunition?
Yes

Support a repeal of the Washington, D.C., gun ban?
Yes

Support a repeal of the requirement that trigger locks be sold with every retail firearm?
Yes

Support recognition among the states to allow a person who has the right to carry a concealed weapon in his or her home state to have the right to carry in other states?
Yes

Will you Repeal the Executive Order banning the importation of certain semi-automatic rifles?
Yes

Will you nominate judges who interpret the Constitution as the Founders intended, rather than as a "living document" that reflects current political fads and opinion?
Yes

Will you issue an Executive Order directing that carrying weapons in national forests and parks be governed by local laws?
Yes

bwiese
02-09-2008, 4:25 PM
Both Huckabee and GOA are irrelevant.

SemiAutoSam
02-09-2008, 4:28 PM
Any idea if old Huck is a CFR or TLC member ?

Ill do a little research for the Conservative membership that care about the answer to this question.

But thought You might be the person to ask since you found this information about him.




I hope this is not a re post

Source: http://www.gunowners.org/pres08/huckabee.htm



Mike Huckabee: Standing Tall For The Second Amendment
by John Velleco
Director of Federal Affairs






Not to all board members Bill.

irrelevant to you maybe but I'm sure not everyone here is a rubber stamp of your opinion.



Both Huckabee and GOA are irrelevant.

WHAT HAPPENED
02-09-2008, 4:30 PM
O and here is one or two more for you people

Source: http://www.gunowners.org/pres08/mccain.htm


John McCain's Gun Control Problem
by John Velleco
Director of Federal Affairs

In 2000, Andrew McKelvey, the billionaire founder of monster.com, threw a sizable chunk of his fortune into the gun control debate.

It was shortly after the Columbine school shooting. Bill Clinton was in the White House and gun control was daily front-page news. McKelvey wanted in.

He started out contributing to Handgun Control Inc., which had since been renamed the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence. But while he agreed with their gun banning goals, McKelvey thought the way they packaged their message was too polarizing.

"I told them that Handgun Control was the wrong name. I thought what they were doing was great but I thought it could be done differently," McKelvey said.

So McKelvey struck out on his own and formed Americans for Gun Safety. Although AGS shared almost identical public policy goals as other anti-gun groups, McKelvey portrayed the group as in the 'middle' on the issue and attempted to lure pro-gun advocates into his fold.

To pull it off, he needed a bipartisan coalition with credibility on both sides of the gun debate. On the anti-gun side, the task was easy. Most of the Democrats and a small but vocal minority of Republicans supported President Clinton's gun control agenda.

Finding someone who could stake a claim as a pro-gunner and yet be willing to join McKelvey was not so easy. Enter Senator John McCain.

McCain's star was already falling with conservatives. He had carved out a niche as a 'maverick' as the author of so-called Campaign Finance Reform (more aptly named the incumbent protection act), which was anathema to conservatives but made him a darling of the mainstream media.

Gun owners were outraged over CFR, but McCain still maintained some credibility on the gun issue.

Earlier in his career, McCain had voted against the Clinton crime bill (which contained a ban on so-called assault weapons), and he did not join the 16 Senate Republicans who voted for the Brady bill, which required a five-day waiting period for the purchase of a handgun.

But as he ramped up for his presidential run in 2000, McCain, expanding on the 'maverick' theme, staked out a position on guns far to the left of his primary opponent, George W. Bush.

McCain began speaking out against small, inexpensive handguns and he entertained the idea of supporting the 'assault weapons' ban. His flirtation with anti-Second Amendment legislation quickly led to a political marriage of convenience with McKelvey.

Within months of the formation of AGS, McCain was featured in radio and television ads in Colorado and Oregon supporting initiatives to severely regulate gun shows and register gun buyers. Anti-gunners were ecstatic to get McCain on board.

Political consultant Scott Reed, who managed Bob Dole's presidential campaign in 1996, hoped McCain would "bring a conservative perspective to the gun debate."

The ads not only pushed the anti-gun show measure in those two states, they also served to undermine the efforts of gun rights activists who were furiously lobbying against the same type of bill in Congress.

"I think that if the Congress won't act, the least I can do is support the initiative in states where it's on the ballot," McCain said in an interview.

At the time still a newcomer to the gun control debate, McCain said, "I do believe my view has evolved."

McCain continued to pursue his anti-gun agenda even after his presidential run ended, and the next year he and McKelvey made it to the big screen.

As moviegoers flocked to see Pearl Harbor, they were treated to an anti-gun trailer ad featuring McCain. This time the Senator was pushing legislation to force people to keep firearms locked up in the home.

"We owe it to our children to be responsible by keeping our guns locked up," McCain told viewers.

Economist and author John Lott, Jr., noted, "No mention was ever made by McCain about using guns for self-defense or that gunlocks might make it difficult to stop intruders who break into your home. And research indicates that McCain's push for gunlocks is far more likely to lead to more deaths than it saves."

Also in 2001, McCain went from being a supporter of anti-gun bills to being a lead sponsor.

Pro-gun allies in Congress who were holding off gun show legislation -- which would at best register gun owners and at worst close down the shows entirely -- were angered when McCain teamed up with Sen. Joe Lieberman (D-CT) and introduced a "compromise" bill to give the issue momentum.

"There is a lot of frustration. He has got his own agenda," one Republican Senator told Roll Call.

After September 11, 2001, McKelvey and McCain, now joined by Lieberman, had a new angle to push gun control.

"Terrorists are exploiting the gun show loophole," AGS ads hyped. McCain and Lieberman hit the airwaves again in a series of radio and TV spots, thanks to McKelvey's multi-million dollar investment.

A Cox News Service article noted that, "The ads first focused on gun safety but switched to terrorism after Sept. 11. Americans for Gun Safety said the switch is legitimate."

However, Second Amendment expert Dave Kopel pointed out that, "the McCain-Lieberman bill is loaded with poison pills which would allow a single appointed official to prevent any gun show, anywhere in the United States from operating."

Ultimately, the anti-gun legislation was killed in the Congress and AGS fizzled out and disappeared altogether. The issues for which McKelvey spent over $10 million are still in play, however, and John McCain remains a supporter of those causes. In fact, as recently as 2004, McCain was able to force a vote on a gun show amendment.

In the post-Columbine and post-9/11 environments, the Second Amendment was under attack as never before. Pro-gun patriotic Americans who stood as a bulwark to keep the Congress from eviscerating the Constitution were dismayed to look across the battle lines only to see Senator McCain working with the enemy.

John McCain tried running for president in 2000 as an anti-gunner. This year it appears he is seeking to "come home" to the pro-gun community, but the wounds are deep and memories long.

See also: GOA compendium of McCain's gun control record. look below

Here is that link... (See also) http://www.gunowners.org/mccaintb.htm

WHAT HAPPENED
02-09-2008, 4:37 PM
Any idea if old Huck is a CFR or TLC member ?

Ill do a little research for the Conservative membership that care about the answer to this question.

But thought You might be the person to ask since you found this information about him.

Not to all board members Bill.

irrelevant to you maybe but I'm sure not everyone here is a rubber stamp of your opinion.

Im just passing info on that i have came across... I'm in no way tell anyone who to vote for....

Bad Voodoo
02-09-2008, 4:38 PM
Both Huckabee and GOA are irrelevant.

I get it, Bill. McCain is E-L-E-C-T-A-B-L-E. And that's all that matters to the "new and improved" GOP.

In the end, I can only hope that those I perceive to be sheep, or mouthpieces, or political operatives towing the "company" line, are a whole lot smarter than I am, because from where I'm sitting you're all leading us straight to a socialist, highly controlled hell.

WHAT HAPPENED
02-09-2008, 5:21 PM
Source: http://www.saf.org/pub/rkba/gt-report/Report68.htm

GOVERNOR SUPPORTS GUN RIGHTS WITH PERSONALIZED SHELLS

• UNITED STATES - Arkansas Gov. MIKE HUCKABEE is giving out unusual gifts these days: 12-gauge shotgun shells personalized with the inscription, "Mike Huckabee, a governor who supports the 2nd Amendment."


Remington Arms Co., which operates an ammunition factory in Lonoke, Arkansas, sent the unique shells to the governor because he is such an outspoken supporter of gun rights.

HUCKABEE presented one of the personalized shells to Republican Gov. GEORGE W. BUSH, presidential nominee, during a recent BUSH visit to Little Rock. The gift was not live ammunition, but a prototype. Some 500 live shells are planned for delivery to HUCKABEE by PAUL CAHAN, general manager of Remington’s Arkansas plant.

Since the shells for HUCKABEE’s gun would have a retail value of about $120, the gift will have to be reported under Arkansas law that requires public servants to report on financial disclosure forms any gift valued over $100.

For what it is worth...

http://www.nraila.org/News/Read/Speeches.aspx?ID=46

http://thinkmikehuckabee.blogspot.com/2007/09/mike-huckabee-on-ccw-carry-concealed.html

arib
02-17-2008, 7:27 PM
McCain is by far the most conservative viable candidate left in the race. He has always been pro life (unlike Romney), doesn't tolerate BS spending, and has had a senate voting record that absolutely supports the 2nd amendment. Anyone who thinks Johnny Mac is a lib needs to look at his conservative record, and get past the three liberal misgivings in his 25 year career. Hillbama is the alternative, so lets get behind McCain!

bg
02-17-2008, 8:44 PM
I know Huck got at 1 vote..