Post by: erik the bold on October 27, 2007, 10:05:45 AM
Quote
Well I just got my letter from my good buddy Mitt Romney, about his stance on the ATF's Back Door attack on the Second Amendment. I got my form letter but I was particularly concerned with what he defines as "extreme weapons, those which were not meant for hunting, sport, or self-defense, have no business being on the streets."
I think Mitt may have beat Josh Sugarman to the punch on his coining of a new phrase to demonize certain weapons. I wonder if you can take extreme weapons hunting?
Dear Ryan:
Thank you for contacting me about the important issue of gun ownership and the right to keep and bear arms. I appreciate your interest in my campaign for President and would like to extend my sincere gratitude for taking the time to share your views with me.
I strongly support the Second Amendment right of Americans to keep and bear arms. I am proud to be among the many decent, law-abiding men and women who safely use firearms.
I firmly believe in the importance of responsible gun ownership and sales. As a member of the National Rifle Association, I do not believe that we need any more federal gun control laws. I also recognize that some types of extreme weapons, those which were not meant for hunting, sport, or self-defense, have no business being on the streets.
An individuals right to keep and bear arms is a freedom guaranteed to all Americans by the United States Constitution. Together, we must ensure this freedom is protected. As Governor of one of the most liberal states in the country, I stood up for the rights of gun owners and sportsmen over burdensome bureaucratic regulation. I look forward to upholding these same ideals in Washington, D.C.
I am running for President because I fervently believe that I have the experience and vision to address the issues facing our country. Throughout my years in both the private and public sectors, I have been successful by pursuing innovation and transformation. If there ever was a time when innovation and transformation were needed in government, it is now.
Again, thank you for contacting me. Please feel free to visit my website at www.MittRomney.com for updated information on 2nd Amendment rights and other issues that may be of interest to you. I look forward to hearing from you in the future, and earning your support.
Sincerely,
Mitt Romney
I think Mitt may have beat Josh Sugarman to the punch on his coining of a new phrase to demonize certain weapons. I wonder if you can take extreme weapons hunting?
Dear Ryan:
Thank you for contacting me about the important issue of gun ownership and the right to keep and bear arms. I appreciate your interest in my campaign for President and would like to extend my sincere gratitude for taking the time to share your views with me.
I strongly support the Second Amendment right of Americans to keep and bear arms. I am proud to be among the many decent, law-abiding men and women who safely use firearms.
I firmly believe in the importance of responsible gun ownership and sales. As a member of the National Rifle Association, I do not believe that we need any more federal gun control laws. I also recognize that some types of extreme weapons, those which were not meant for hunting, sport, or self-defense, have no business being on the streets.
An individuals right to keep and bear arms is a freedom guaranteed to all Americans by the United States Constitution. Together, we must ensure this freedom is protected. As Governor of one of the most liberal states in the country, I stood up for the rights of gun owners and sportsmen over burdensome bureaucratic regulation. I look forward to upholding these same ideals in Washington, D.C.
I am running for President because I fervently believe that I have the experience and vision to address the issues facing our country. Throughout my years in both the private and public sectors, I have been successful by pursuing innovation and transformation. If there ever was a time when innovation and transformation were needed in government, it is now.
Again, thank you for contacting me. Please feel free to visit my website at www.MittRomney.com for updated information on 2nd Amendment rights and other issues that may be of interest to you. I look forward to hearing from you in the future, and earning your support.
Sincerely,
Mitt Romney
I too, wonder what an "extreme weapon" is.......
Post by: Perd Hapley on October 27, 2007, 11:05:40 AM
Post by: brer on October 27, 2007, 11:07:29 AM
Post by: Waitone on October 27, 2007, 11:10:16 AM
Post by: Perd Hapley on October 27, 2007, 11:12:56 AM
Post by: Manedwolf on October 27, 2007, 11:24:48 AM
Quote
I stood up for the rights of gun owners and sportsmen over burdensome bureaucratic regulation.
Like the 98 MA AWB?
Where's those hip waders?
Post by: Standing Wolf on October 27, 2007, 12:58:55 PM
Post by: Paddy on October 27, 2007, 03:26:33 PM
BTW, where are all these 'guns on the streets' I keep hearing about? I'm always on the lookout for them, never see 'em.
Post by: RevDisk on October 27, 2007, 04:21:31 PM
Some guy with a net worth north of $200 million doesn't represent me. And I suspect he doesn't represent 98% of the American people. He's only in it for his own self-aggrandizement.
BTW, where are all these 'guns on the streets' I keep hearing about? I'm always on the lookout for them, never see 'em.
BTW, where are all these 'guns on the streets' I keep hearing about? I'm always on the lookout for them, never see 'em.
Yea, I felt kinda foolish for believing the media when they said waves of blood and guns would flood the street when the AWB expired. I spent six hours with a snorkel and a net in front of my apartment!
Post by: Perd Hapley on October 27, 2007, 04:47:58 PM
Some guy with a net worth north of $200 million doesn't represent me. And I suspect he doesn't represent 98% of the American people. He's only in it for his own self-aggrandizement.
Yawn. It's called politics.
Post by: Paddy on October 27, 2007, 05:04:52 PM
Quote
Yawn. It's called politics.
Got it. BTW, when did we become an oligarchy? I was under the impression we were a constitutional republic. Silly me.
Post by: Perd Hapley on October 27, 2007, 06:15:58 PM
I thought the anarchists were the ones with the unbounded faith in human nature.
Post by: Paddy on October 27, 2007, 06:31:54 PM
Edited to add: "any of them" means gun rights, privacy rights, property rights, representative rights, don't let any of them go without one helluva fight.
Post by: Perd Hapley on October 27, 2007, 06:43:34 PM
I thank you for your exhortation to reclaim our rights. That is very important. Nonetheless, it is a fact that the people with power, especially in more egalitarian regimes like ours, tend to be those with more money and more ambition than you and I. It was true in 1800 and it's true today. So complaints about candidate X having too much money or too much interest in power are sorely lacking in perspective. But of course, you know so much more about these things than a whippersnapper like myself.
Post by: CAnnoneer on October 27, 2007, 06:44:08 PM
The younger generations are losing hold on the political steering wheel because they do not appreciate what they have been given as default or starting point. There is a problem that appears with every successful society towards its later days. Politicians and voters corrupt one another, whether they realize it or not. Inefficiency, idiocy, wastage, and embezzlement undermine the system until a sharp change of leadership, an external wake-up call, or eventual internal collapse.
By the way, fistful is right that the decay started much earlier. I'd say since the 1960s. The old generations should have shot up some commies, and isolated and crushed the leftists when they had the chance. Instead they chickened out and lost a couple of generations to pothead land, which then percolated through the educational system and infiltrated the gov and political structures. By now the disease is so badly spread out that any change of political authority at the very top does not affect the day-to-day operations, because the mid- and low-level administration is completely percolated, resistant, hostile, passive-aggressive, and outright saboteur. Case in study: the Bush presidency.
Post by: Perd Hapley on October 27, 2007, 06:46:03 PM
"The Greatest Generation" are to blame.
Post by: Paddy on October 27, 2007, 06:51:38 PM
Quote
"The Greatest Generation" are to blame.
You're really gonna have to explain that, fistful. My Dad, born 1917, served in WWII from La Havre, France to Raguhn, Germany and my Mom, born 1923, (both died 2005), 'Rose the Riveter', making warplanes, are to blame, how?
Post by: CAnnoneer on October 27, 2007, 06:51:59 PM
Post by: Paddy on October 27, 2007, 06:58:55 PM
"The Great Generation" won the shooting war with the nazis only to come back and lose the political war with the commies.
I'm not sure what you mean. Reagan brought down the Berlin Wall about 1988. The (former) USSR is no more. Children no longer practice 'drop drills'. What more do you want?
Post by: Perd Hapley on October 27, 2007, 07:02:45 PM
Quote
"The Greatest Generation" are to blame.
You're really gonna have to explain that, fistful.
Shocking, I know. First of all, don't make this personal. I'm talking about a generation, which is a generality. Your folks might well have been solidly on the good side of these issues. But when you think about it, who gave us the Baby Boomer, flower-power generation? Who raised them and taught them? Who is in charge right now?
Quote
Children no longer practice 'drop drills'. What more do you want?
He's talking about much of the same political discontent you're always talking about. Big government. Loss of liberties. That sort of thing. You can't tell me the Greatest Generation didn't have a lot to do with those things.
Post by: CAnnoneer on October 27, 2007, 07:10:52 PM
"The Great Generation" won the shooting war with the nazis only to come back and lose the political war with the commies.
I'm not sure what you mean. Reagan brought down the Berlin Wall about 1988. The (former) USSR is no more. Children no longer practice 'drop drills'. What more do you want?
Looking at Hillary & co., the sozies are live, well, and kicking.
What do I want? Many things, but for purposes of this discussion:
1) Shift the mean of political spectrum back to where it was in the 1950s.
2) Arrest, try, convict, and shoot all traitors.
3) Sweep the gov ranks of leftist saboteurs
4) Wipe the highschools and college campuses clean of commies
5) outlaw all communist organizations
Post by: Paddy on October 27, 2007, 07:18:01 PM
Post by: Balog on October 27, 2007, 08:14:03 PM
I think what fistful et al are saying is that while the "greatest generation" did well in terms of defeating the Nazis, they did a piss poor job raising their kids. Those born in the post-WWII baby boom are the most narcissistic, entitled, traitorous little pricks to ever disgrace this country. They were given freedom by their parents, sure. What they weren't given was a sense of duty and responsibility.
Post by: Paddy on October 27, 2007, 08:37:01 PM
Communism and socialism in various forms have been around in America a long time. They started edging their way in under the bad Roosevelt, but only took off under the baby boomers.
I think what fistful et al are saying is that while the "greatest generation" did well in terms of defeating the Nazis, they did a piss poor job raising their kids. Those born in the post-WWII baby boom are the most narcissistic, entitled, traitorous little pricks to ever disgrace this country. They were given freedom by their parents, sure. What they weren't given was a sense of duty and responsibility.
I think what fistful et al are saying is that while the "greatest generation" did well in terms of defeating the Nazis, they did a piss poor job raising their kids. Those born in the post-WWII baby boom are the most narcissistic, entitled, traitorous little pricks to ever disgrace this country. They were given freedom by their parents, sure. What they weren't given was a sense of duty and responsibility.
That is one helluva statement, Balog, and I believe it's sincere (although I don't know your age). I am 61. I grew up in the 1950's and '60's. Mom stayed home; Dad was self-employed. Worked his ass off as a roofing contractor in the San Fernando Valley, LA, CA. Dad immigrated from Nova Scotia, Canada about 1926 when he was nine years old. Mom was from Monmouth IL, born 1923. Have you ever heard of the Great Depression? Or the Dust Bowl days? If not, please look them up.
They went through ten years of poverty and soup lines and no money (can you even envision that?) before WWII. Dad was in the CCC's (Civilian Conservation Corps) who built roads, etc. Mom was a telephone operator.
It's interesting now, how you ideologues, talking from prosperity and abundance, condemn FDR's New Deal. You've never gone without, never worried about your next meal, always lived in abundance. Yet you're quite willing to condemn those who provided that to you.
I think you'd better wise up, lest you lose what has been given to you.
Post by: CAnnoneer on October 27, 2007, 08:57:19 PM
It's interesting now, how you ideologues, talking from prosperity and abundance, condemn FDR's New Deal. You've never gone without, never worried about your next meal, always lived in abundance. Yet you're quite willing to condemn those who provided that to you.
I think you'd better wise up, lest you lose what has been given to you.
I think you'd better wise up, lest you lose what has been given to you.
Non-responsive, unless it is your assertation that the New Deal inevitably led to the rise of leftist scum since 1950s. I don't see why that would be, so please explain.
Also, prosperity does not seem to go well with communism, as witnessed by known history. Yes, capitalism is susceptible to crises, but it does seem to work better overall, and allow far far more personal freedom than any other practicable system.
Post by: Balog on October 27, 2007, 09:13:00 PM
What's your point? Are you saying Baby Boomers, as a whole, aren't the way I've described them? Are you saying the pot smoking hippy pricks who spit on vets from Vietnam and burned their draft cards were as good as their parents?
I think you'd better wise up, lest you lose what has been given to you.
I enlisted in the Corps and did my time fighting overseas. I feel I've got a good start on maintaining the liberty I've been handed. But you're right, I should really lose my job and sit around all day drinking heavily and bitching on forums. That'll make the world a better place.
Post by: Paddy on October 27, 2007, 09:30:38 PM
Quote
Non-responsive, unless it is your assertation that the New Deal inevitably led to the rise of leftist scum since 1950s. I don't see why that would be, so please explain.
Todays leftist scum ( and they are on the wan) are so marginalized as not to be a factor. Yesterday's Abbie Hoffmans are no more. It seems to me you young people are so focused on Communism (whiich is long since dead, even in Communist China), that you are not aware of the new threat, which is Global Corporatism. You really do need to come up to speed, Please pull your collective heads out of your Blackberry/Ipods whatever ass and realize what has been handed to you, gratis.
Post by: Paddy on October 27, 2007, 09:34:08 PM
Quote
I enlisted in the Corps and did my time fighting overseas. I feel I've got a good start on maintaining the liberty I've been handed. But you're right, I should really lose my job and sit around all day drinking heavily and bitching on forums. That'll make the world a better place.
Yeah, well thanks a lot. Who did you fight, who did you defeat, who did you free, and how does that benefit America?
Post by: Balog on October 27, 2007, 09:34:17 PM
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fabian_Society
Post by: Balog on October 27, 2007, 09:36:58 PM
Post by: CAnnoneer on October 27, 2007, 09:46:17 PM
It seems to me you young people are so focused on Communism (whiich is long since dead, even in Communist China), that you are not aware of the new threat, which is Global Corporatism. You really do need to come up to speed, Please pull your collective heads out of your Blackberry/Ipods whatever ass and realize what has been handed to you, gratis.
What exactly is global corporatism in your definition?
Post by: Paddy on October 27, 2007, 09:47:18 PM
Post by: Balog on October 27, 2007, 09:55:20 PM
Sorry for derailing this with personal stuff everyone. I apologize.
Post by: Perd Hapley on October 28, 2007, 05:42:20 AM
fistful and CAnoneer, I'm trying to connect, really. I remember the 50's, 60's, etc. What the hell are you guys talking about?
Riley, you know all that stuff you don't like about our country right now? Corporate Globalism, or whatever you call it? Who is responsible for that? What age groups? You have to agree it is largely the Greatest Generation (WWII vets like George H.W. Bush, Bob Dole and Timothy Leary) as well as the people they raised (Boomers like Bill Clinton, G.W. Bush, and yourself). Young people, like Cannoneer and I, are just now reaching point where we could start to affect the political process. We can't be held responsible for everything that is going on.
Of course, these trends started prior to the twentieth century, but you old folks have carried through these projects into our present day.
Post by: ilbob on October 28, 2007, 06:08:00 AM
Post by: GigaBuist on October 28, 2007, 10:26:13 AM
Golly, I'm sold!
Post by: HankB on October 29, 2007, 04:04:30 AM
Sort of like saying "I believe in racial equality and separate drinking fountains for darkies."
As for The Greatest Generation . . . they defeated Imperial Japan, Nazi Germany, and Fascist Italy (Yay!) but they also gave away Eastern Europe to the USSR and China to Mao . . . they also saddled us with Korea, Vietnam, and Lyndon B. Johnson's "Great Society;" cumulative spending on the latter is eerily close to the present value of the national debt.
Post by: Manedwolf on October 29, 2007, 09:59:47 AM
I picked up Romney's fact sheet at the gun show the other day. The only examples he had with him reducing gun control was to make getting a target pistol license easier and clearing up the legal status of muzzle loaders.
Golly, I'm sold!
Golly, I'm sold!
Yeah, as governor, he made sure that MA citizens were able to shoot with the latest firearms circa 1776, things that were state of the art during the original battles at Concord and Lexington, but signed the 1998 AWB that banned just about everything else.
Some record.
Post by: Balog on October 29, 2007, 04:12:24 PM
Post by: richyoung on October 30, 2007, 06:03:02 AM
Communism and socialism in various forms have been around in America a long time. They started edging their way in under the bad Roosevelt, but only took off under the baby boomers.
I think what fistful et al are saying is that while the "greatest generation" did well in terms of defeating the Nazis, they did a piss poor job raising their kids. Those born in the post-WWII baby boom are the most narcissistic, entitled, traitorous little pricks to ever disgrace this country. They were given freedom by their parents, sure. What they weren't given was a sense of duty and responsibility.
I think what fistful et al are saying is that while the "greatest generation" did well in terms of defeating the Nazis, they did a piss poor job raising their kids. Those born in the post-WWII baby boom are the most narcissistic, entitled, traitorous little pricks to ever disgrace this country. They were given freedom by their parents, sure. What they weren't given was a sense of duty and responsibility.
That is one helluva statement, Balog, and I believe it's sincere (although I don't know your age). I am 61. I grew up in the 1950's and '60's. Mom stayed home; Dad was self-employed. Worked his ass off as a roofing contractor in the San Fernando Valley, LA, CA. Dad immigrated from Nova Scotia, Canada about 1926 when he was nine years old. Mom was from Monmouth IL, born 1923. Have you ever heard of the Great Depression? Or the Dust Bowl days? If not, please look them up.
They went through ten years of poverty and soup lines and no money (can you even envision that?) before WWII. Dad was in the CCC's (Civilian Conservation Corps) who built roads, etc. Mom was a telephone operator.
It's interesting now, how you ideologues, talking from prosperity and abundance, condemn FDR's New Deal. You've never gone without, never worried about your next meal, always lived in abundance. Yet you're quite willing to condemn those who provided that to you.
I think you'd better wise up, lest you lose what has been given to you.
FDR's "New" (raw) Deal didn't stop the Depression - in fact, it prolonged it and made it worse. What it * DID * do was allow the traitorous jerk to pay off political supporters with Federal dollars - all while he imported Socialism into our country, had a cabinet run through with Communist spies and fellow travelors, started ythe world's biggest (and quite unconstitutional) Ponzi scheme, Social "Security" (which will rob me of hundreds of thousands of dollars - hope all the rich retirees in their Winibagos enjoy my money....), and cram us into a war we didn't have to be in - (see: McCollem memo....).
Post by: RadioFreeSeaLab on October 30, 2007, 07:55:47 AM
Post by: CAnnoneer on October 30, 2007, 08:09:39 AM
Post by: Paddy on October 30, 2007, 09:09:01 AM
There is a revolving door between public officials, elected public servants, and lobbyists. Many lobbyists are former members of Congress. Former White House staffers and other public officials became lobbyists after their good and faithful service to their constituents. It's an inherently corrupt system.
In many cases, the legislation favoring the corporations is written by the lobbyists and corps themselves.
As a result, the U.S. has become a consumption economy stimulated only by record federal budget deficits and (formerly) a housing 'boom'. At the same time, we've got skyrocketing energy and health care costs, higher interest rates, lower real wages, job insecurity and a disappearing middle class.
Some of the most damaging results of this historic ripoff will be seen in the so-called 'free trade' policies. We don't make anything anymore. We import nearly everything and have a total trade debt of some $5 trillion. Our dependence on foreign oil is only exceeded by our dependence on products manufactured in other countries.
We're in debt. We're borrowing billions$ everyday to pay for all this imported stuff, AND, we'ver got a national debt of $10 trillion (and growing). 'Free trade' is a big lie. American industry can't compete with the cheapest labor in the world- workers making less than than $1 hour.
Th original sales pitch was that since we're a technology bases economy, we didn't have to worry about the loss of millions of manufacturing jobs. We should leave those to overseas workers and concentrate on our 'huge' technology lead. But that (somehow) hasn't worked out. We are not a world leader in the export of manufactured anything. Not automobile, not computers, nor electronics, no nada, except agricultural products, and that's about to change, too. So we'll soon be dependent on the rest of the world for everything, including food.
The U.S. Congress and every president in the last 30 years have sold us out. That's essentially what 'global corporatism' is about.
Post by: Perd Hapley on October 30, 2007, 01:52:08 PM
The U.S. Congress and every president in the last 30 years have sold us out. That's essentially what 'global corporatism' is about.
The last thirty years? There's your Greatest Generation at work. Glad we agree.
Post by: CAnnoneer on October 30, 2007, 01:59:02 PM
A large percentage of the voters in this country have decided that:
1) the gov is supposed to take care of them beyond national security, law enforcement, and infrastructure
2) the gov is supposed to take care of natural disasters
3) the gov is supposed to take care of foreign countries
4) the gov is supposed to maintain a world military
The above are the political reasons for what you observe economically, not the other way around. Get rid of entitlements and freebies, shrink the military from a global to a national force, stop thinking we owe something to other countries, and all of the above problems will disappear.
The root of most of our problems is political, not economic. The international companies can and will subsidize politicians that push policies which can be beneficial to companies; to do otherwise would be irresponsible before the shareholders. But they are not the evil ones. The evil is the political and spiritual rot of the fellow-citizen turned socialist parasyte that votes himself benefits at others' expense.
And that is the connection to the pre-balog section of this discussion. The great generation lost a cultural war and allowed the baby-boomers to slide towards statism and socialism as a culture. All we see now is the inevitable the negative dividend that was only postponed by the internet and computer boom of the 1990s.
Post by: Perd Hapley on October 30, 2007, 03:02:20 PM
Quote
shrink the military from a global to a national force,
Brilliant idea, Mr. Clinton. Or is that Mr. Rumsfeld?
Post by: CAnnoneer on October 30, 2007, 03:37:31 PM
Quote
shrink the military from a global to a national force,
Brilliant idea, Mr. Clinton. Or is that Mr. Rumsfeld? Less sarcasm, more substance.
Dealing with terrorists is the job of CIA, not the DoD. Having about 500 (yeah, five hundred) bases in foreign countries is the job of a maniacal imperial power, not a free nation-state. Providing security for foreign countries that compete with us economically is the job of a world policeman / benefactor, not a nation-state. Don't place grandiose missions on the military then bitch that they are underfunded. Of course they are, for the ridiculous tasks given to them. Shrink the tasks and the expense will shrink as well.
But how do we deal with dictators then? You help assassinate or depose them. That's CIA's job again. Much less expensive than invading every toilet in the world and then spending years in "nation building".
Post by: Matt King on October 30, 2007, 04:38:05 PM
They'll probably give it to Rudy for his " I was mayor of NY during 9/11" shtick. Either way, it's not gonna be good for the Second Amendment.
Post by: LAK on October 31, 2007, 12:33:27 AM
Here's a decisive RINO virus test; simply ask your candidate if he will kill the NAU stone dead if he/she gains office. If they say anything other than a clear yes, they are just another show wrestler wearing a different costume. If they genuinely do not know what you are talking about referring to the North American Union, forget them anyway.
-----------------------
http://searchronpaul.com
http://ussliberty.org
http://ssunitedstates.org