Obama and Guns II

[PlayboyPenguin]

Now see that sounds exactly like myself, no wonder we butt heads. The only difference is I hold Dems in equal contempt as I do the GOP and I have no faith that the Dems will do the right things for the right reasons.

How can you hold the Dems in equal contempt? What did they do to equal the abuses inflicted upon the American people by the past administration?

 

[4Freedom]

Please cite your source for this information. I hope you are not using the widely disputed claim made during the Lott interview where a gun advocate claims Obama made this statement to him.

Heres Obama's own handwriting which explains his view about the rights of law abiding citizens to own guns in this country:

Obama was being misleading when he denied that his handwriting had been on a document endorsing a state ban on the sale and possession of handguns in Illinois. Obama responded, "No, my writing wasn't on that particular questionnaire. As I said, I have never favored an all-out ban on handguns."
Actually, Obama's writing was on the 1996 document, which was filed when Obama was running for the Illinois state Senate. A Chicago nonprofit, Independent Voters of Illinois, had this question, and Obama took hard line:

35. Do you support state legislation to:
a. ban the manufacture, sale and possession of handguns? Yes.
b. ban assault weapons? Yes.
c. mandatory waiting periods and background checks? Yes.

Obama spilling his guts in debate with ALan Keyes, before he had to adopt a pseudo conservative attitude to appease the naive pro-2A liberals who would elect him:

KEYES: [to Obama]: I am a strong believer in the second amendment. The gun control mentality is ruthlessly absurd. It suggests that we should pass a law that prevents law abiding citizens from carrying weapons. You end up with a situation where the crook have all the guns and the law abiding citizens cannot defend themselves. I guess that's good enough for Senator Obama who voted against the bill that would have allowed homeowners to defend themselves if their homes were broken into.
OBAMA: Let's be honest. Mr. Keyes does not believe in common gun control measures like the assault weapons bill. Mr. Keyes does not believe in any limits from what I can tell with respect to the possession of guns, including assault weapons that have only one purpose, to kill people. I think it is a scandal that this president did not authorize a renewal of the assault weapons ban.

I think Mr. Hussein Obama's record speaks for itself:

Barack Obama's gun control policy, or should I write anti-gun record is long and informative:

•1994 to 2001 - Obama was on the board of the anti-gun Joyce Foundation. This foundation is the largest funding source for radical anti-gun groups in the country.
•1996 - Obama supported a ban on the manufacture, sale and possession of handguns.
•1999 - Obama proposed a 500 percent increase in the excise taxes on firearms and ammunition. This tax would effectively punish gun owners for buying guns and ammunition.
•2003 - Obama voted in support of legislation that would have banned privately owned hunting shotguns, target rifles and black powder rifles in Illinois.
•2004 - Obama voted against legislation intended to protect homeowners from prosecution in cases where they used a firearm to halt a home invasion.

Are some of the liberals here actually trying to convince people here that Obama is pro-2A? I have respect for liberals who are bold enough to say that Hussein Obama will more than likely work to take away their gun ownership rights, but will help give them free health care, free schools, end all wars, etc, etc.. Of course, in my opinion, the only achievement they will likely see from him is the banning of guns, while all the things they hoped for, will be, well, fantasies. However, I have very little respect for liberals who will try to make this person who is blatantly one of the most radical anti-gun politicians in our history, as pro 2A. Please, be honest with yourselves...

 

[PlayboyPenguin]

I am still missing the part where you provide verification for your quote of Obama saying "People should not have guns."

I also do not see a source cited for the first part of you most recent post.

 

[4Freedom]

Do I really need sources? Just google and the sources are all over... Ok, if you are saying that Barack Obama did not fill out these questionnares and that he did not vote to restrict gun rights and promote gun restrictions, then I would ask you to prove it. His voting record is not inacessible, and can easily be verified. I suppose all these people are just trying to smear his good name and vilifiy the man. Well, if you go to the US Senate website, all the information is there and all the people who have published it on various websites have used official government documents as their source of information.


Here is one good source :
http://www.ontheissues.org/domestic/Barack_Obama_Gun_Control.htm


From Robert Novak at The Washington Post:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/04/06/AR2008040601652.html

That leaves Obama unrevealed on the D.C. law. In response to my inquiry about his specific position, Obama's campaign e-mailed me a one-paragraph answer: Obama believes that while the "Second Amendment creates an individual right, . . . he also believes that the Constitution permits federal, state and local government to adopt reasonable and common sense gun safety measures." Though the paragraph is titled "Obama on the D.C. Court case," that specific gun ban is never mentioned. I tried again last week, without success, to learn Obama's position before writing this column.

Obama's dance on gun rights is part of his evolution from the radical young Illinois state legislator he once was. He was recorded in a 1996 questionnaire as advocating a ban on the manufacture, sale and possession of handguns (a position he has since disavowed). He was on the board of the Chicago-based Joyce Foundation, which takes an aggressive gun control position, and in 2000 considered becoming its full-time president. In 2006, he voted with an 84 to 16 majority (and against Clinton) to prohibit confiscation of firearms during an emergency, but that is his only pro-gun vote in Springfield or Washington. The National Rifle Association grades his voting record (and Clinton's) an "F."

USA Today as a source talking about his belief on banning all handgun ownership:
http://www.usatoday.com/news/politics/2007-12-22-2414012588_x.htm

 

[PlayboyPenguin]

I still do not see any support for the quote you accredited to Obama in your first post...and a lot of what you just provided lists blogs as sources for some of that info.

 

[gunnoob75]

I am still missing the part where you provide verification for your quote of Obama saying "People should not have guns."

Look at Illinois.

He doesn't need to SAY anything.


You're off base here. I read this entire thread, and when you're not arguing on how to argue, it's "Show me where he said this." "Show me where it says that." And the other side is "Look at his voting record." "Look at the bills being passed." Etc, etc.

I personally believe that Obama was definitely anti-2nd when he got there. But I think the uproar and mass sellings may have put that away in his mind, at least for the time being.

No one, Obama supporter or not, can not say Obama is not a threat to our 2nd amendment rights. To do so would be ignorant.

 

[Jamie6.5]

How can you hold the Dems in equal contempt? What did they do to equal the abuses inflicted upon the American people by the past administration?

That one is easy PP. The "dems" have equaled Bushie and done worse in past admins.
Carter took this country down a road we still haven't recovered from in some arenas. Iran to be specific. His fiscal policies were horrible, resulting in inflation that couldn't be controlled by raising interest rates. A situation honest economists can't explain to this day. He threw out common sense, preferring feel-good policies on the environment, and the European model with regard to the metric system. Foreign policy that consisted of silent protest in the rose garden was pure genius. <-NOT
BHO appears to have the same naivete'. Ironically Carter was held up as being more of an intellectual as well, the press claiming he was a nuclear engineer.
The Clinton admin and the infamous Janet Reno used US active duty military and weapons against US citizens in Waco. Contrary to the Constitution. Madeline (half)Fullbright was so short sighted with regard to logistical support in Somalia we ended up with the "blackhawk down" incident. Allowing Nato to dictate our actions in the Chechen situation cost many lives needlessly. The lawyers meddling in the Osama assassination scenario falls on Clinton's shoulders as well.
Do I need to go back far enough to explain the Bay of Pigs or the bone headed moves of Johnson's "great society" and McNamara in Viet Nam?

The press has been rather kind to these people but if you would deny that the press is left leaning then we have a ways to go with regard to historical discussions.

Bushie did what he did during a "wartime" situation. Have a look at what has been done in the past as far as "suspended liberties" during wartime. Bush comes out looking rather tame when held up against the likes of FDR, Truman etc. McCarthyism's roots lie there as well.
Was Bush an idiot? No, but close! It certainly didn't help that the press hated his guts. For eight years we got to hear the left repeat the "stolen election" mantra.
Somewhere I have a list of all the people that publicly claimed Saddam had WMDs. Many made the claim before Bushie even made the WH. Hillary was one of them. So I have a problem going down that road.

Of course there is Nixon on the other side. I believe of all of these, BHO's personality is closest to Nixon's. He call it Audacity (of hope!). It translates into ego bordering on megalo-mania.

The scary part? I voted for all of the above at least once. (except BHO and those prior to Carter, I'm not that old ) Primarily because I believed the press coverage about them during the campaign.

Am I a Republican? Usually, but only because I am a conservative first. Practicality has dictated that stance, not ideology.
As for toeing the line? I find Dems to be the largest consumers of kool-aide these days. Spending 10 of the last 30 years in Eugene, OR demonstrated the lie of liberal policy to me. I never met so many deceitful people that championed feel-good policy in one place in my 50some years. The open mind mantra is only valid if you agree with them. Touting diversity only counts with them for the same reason.

Thankfully we now have the net to discuss, with like-minded and the opposition as well. Researching voting records of legislators is easier too. This past election cycle can give proof of just how deceitful the press can be when "they believe" in a candidate. But, one has to resurrect voting records and/or bills they signed as governors if they held that office to get the true picture of a candidate's leanings.

As others in this thread have said, look into the deeds (legislative voting records) accomplished by the candidates and you will see a very different person than the one in the press. I also submit that one's past associations need to be considered as well. Why? Because that is one of the criteria used in security clearances. We currently have a President that would have failed that test, using policy and criteria implemented before Bush.
If I had my way I would demand that personal libraries of all candidates be made public as well!.

As far as where I rate the 2ndA stance of a candidate, it is in the top 3, with the largest chance of being a deal breaker. Fiscal policy, followed by strong foreign policy are biggies. I am also a free-marketeer.
If a candidate is anti guns-for-citizens, I have to ask why/what else (s)he has in mind for us as citizens.
Why the need to disarm us?
What nefarious plot would require law abiding citizens to give up self defense?

If you think otherwise fine, but I encourage you to seek answers to these questions before you vote. Doing so should make it a deal breaker.

 

[PlayboyPenguin]

Look at Illinois.

He doesn't need to SAY anything.

Yes, if you are going to go around attributing quotes to someone they had better have said it. If not that makes you dishonest and anything you add to a conversation worthless.

 

[PlayboyPenguin]

Jamie6.5,

So you consider a failed fiscal policy to be a heinous as illegal wiretaps of citizens and carting people off to prison with no representation or charges being filed?

You consider a tactical misstep while involved in an existing conflict as heinous as attacking a country that had not attacked us and was not at war?

You consider a president that pushed for alternative energies and was fought by the big business of the day without the aid of the internet to expose the actions of the corporations as heinous as a president/party that wanted to hand even the most needed social programs over to for-profit cronies to rape?

I must say do not understand you system of evaluation at all.

 

[fromotoc]

Jamie6.5,

So you consider a failed fiscal policy to be a heinous as illegal wiretaps of citizens and carting people off to prison with no representation or charges being filed?

You consider a tactical misstep while involved in an existing conflict as heinous as attacking a country that had not attacked us and was not at war?

You consider a president that pushed for alternative energies and was fought by the big business of the day without the aid of the internet to expose the actions of the corporations as heinous as a president/party that wanted to hand even the most needed social programs over to for-profit cronies to rape?

I must say do not understand you system of evaluation at all.

Please quote sources for your accusations.

 

[PlayboyPenguin]

Please quote sources for your accusations.

What accusations? I was asking a question.

If you mean about the wiretaps, cooked intel, illegal detentions, etc...just drop me a PM and I will forward you a few hundred links to congressional reports and news stories. That is if you are really so sheltered to not have actually seen it all before and aren't just making a weak attempt at being clever and facetious.

 

[Jamie6.5]

Jamie6.5,
So you consider a failed fiscal policy to be a heinous as illegal wiretaps of citizens and carting people off to prison with no representation or charges being filed?

As far as the damage it did to the general populace of this country yes. Carter's scheming helped the rich get mega richer and left nothing for the common citizen. Double digit inflation and double digit unemployment HURT this country terribly. Putting many businesses out of business.
Carting enemy combatants and terrorists off to GITMO is a pay to play thing. They weren't exactly walking through downtown Salem minding their own business.
Tapping phone calls to the middle east during a conflict of this type is perfectly reasonable if done with discretion. Even BHO agrees with that one!

You consider a tactical misstep while involved in an existing conflict as heinous as attacking a country that had not attacked us and was not at war?

The Bay of Pigs a "tactical misstep?" Pulling the air support at the last minute and not informing the commanders was a tactical misstep? He was the commander in chief. He caused thousands under his orders to be slaughtered. There were many American Marine advisors among them, under guises created by the CIA.
A decision he made for purely political reasons.
Yeah, I consider that worse for the exiles we promised to support and the American Marines and their families.

Especially considering that GW had congressional approval to invade Iraq.

You consider a president that pushed for alternative energies and was fought by the big business of the day without the aid of the internet to expose the actions of the corporations as heinous as a president/party that wanted to hand even the most needed social programs over to for-profit cronies to rape?

Pushing for alternative energy is one thing. Heaping restrictive legislation on an already strapped economy was disastrous. He did the latter. WE paid the price.
If BHO isn't careful we're going to be in the same boat all over again. The only thing keeping inflation in check at the moment is the contraction in the economy. And when it starts to rise, interest rates will follow. SOP for the fed to check inflation.
When social programs put our children under massive loads of debt, it is often better to look for free market solutions. I know the marxist types (pundits) don't get this part, but I do consider it the preferred course.

I must say do not understand you system of evaluation at all.

And I will never understand your willingness to sacrifice American jobs, businesses and our way of life for what I consider to be questionable ideals.
I guess we'll have to disagree.

 

[PlayboyPenguin]

Tapping phone calls to the middle east during a conflict of this type is perfectly reasonable if done with discretion. Even BHO agrees with that one!

That is not what happened and I would hope you would know that. It has already been confirmed that unwarrated "domestic" wiretapping was in wide use by the Bush administration.

He caused thousands under his orders to be slaughtered.

Thousands to be slaughtered? At the Bay of Pigs" invasion?

Pushing for alternative energy is one thing. Heaping restrictive legislation on an already strapped economy was disastrous. He did the latter. WE paid the price.

And just what was that "price" and how did it actually come about?

 

[Jamie6.5]

That is not what happened and I would hope you would know that. It has already been confirmed that unwarrated "domestic" wiretapping was in wide use by the Bush administration.

And the NSA is still doing the same thing under BHO. I think reality slapped down his ideology.

Thousands to be slaughtered? At the Bay of Pigs" invasion?

You're right, over 100 were slaughtered. over 1,000 were imprisoned and tortured.

And just what was that "price" and how did it actually come about?

Apparently you aren't aware of the thousands of small businesses that went under in the late '70s-early '80s. As well as the jobs/employees that went with them. What do you think generated the 12+&#37; unemployment? People don't have houses built when interest rates are at 17%! They don't borrow much money. And if they do the rich that loan it to them get mega rich with ridiculous interest earned.

Apparently you don't understand what happens when the automotive industry is already reeling from skyrocketing fuel prices, tight money supply and high interest rates,... And then you force them to re-tool every process of their industry to the metric system. Every fastener in US cars of the day had to be changed. Every tapped hole in every casting/forging. Every wrench used previously had to be thrown out and new ones purchased. Entire inventories of fasteners became obsolete with the stroke of his pen.
Because he thought metrics were "better." Not just different.
Carter needed a clue about how business works, and the costs incurred by such mandates/madness. We paid the price.

 

[PlayboyPenguin]

And the NSA is still doing the same thing under BHO. I think reality slapped down his ideology.

Really? Where did you get that information from?

Apparently you aren't aware of the thousands of small businesses that went under in the late '70s-early '80s. As well as the jobs/employees that went with them. What do you think generated the 12+% unemployment?

I am very aware of it...and I have read more than one publication regarding the cause of the collapse. I have a small grasp of the facts. How about you? Do you actually understand it or are you just repeating something you have heard?

 

[Jamie6.5]

I don't need any revisionist publications to tell me what happened.

Don't go THERE penguin. I know precisely what happened and how it came about.

I lived it. Every miserable year of it. So did my friends and family.

And in Nov. of 1980, the landslide that defeated him demonstrated that the rest of the country had figured it out too!
Despite what the press has taught you of those days and Mr Carter. And I'll tell you now that I voted for the incompetent idiot.
Because I listened to the mainstream press.
As you obviously have about Mr Obama.