Posted on 09/12/2008 8:06:36 AM PDT by corbie
Okay, I agree, it’s an odious choice, and thanks to the media and our two-party system, we have to make a difficult decision. But your freedom and your right to bear arms are in the balance. If you stay home, or vote the way your union tells you to, or vote for “change,” you will get screwed in a place you will find very uncomfortable. Let me explain why.
The two contenders are Barack Obama and John McCain. McCain has not always, admittedly, been the best friend of American gun owners.
Obama, on the other hand, has a long, documented, and consistent record of being the legitimate gun owner’s worst enemy.
Let’s look at his record: Obama wants to bring back the failed Clinton Gun Ban; Obama has endorsed a complete ban on handgun ownership; Obama supports local gun bans, such as the one recently vacated by the Supreme Court; Obama supports owner licensing and gun registration, and opposes Right to Carry laws; Obama supported a proposal to ban gun stores within five miles of a school or park, and wants to ban the manufacture and sale of inexpensive handguns; Obama supports mandatory micro-stamping, mandatory waiting periods, and one-gun-a month sales restrictions. And that’s just a sample. When Obama was campaigning in the “fly-over states,” he posed as a friend of hunters, although he would not go so far as to put on hunting garb, a la Kerry. Then in front of wealthy California urbanites, he spoke of those same middle-American folk as “clinging to guns and religion” because they were embittered by the economy. Now, Obama’s supporters would probably say that he was simply tailoring his message to the specific audience. From a more jaundiced perspective, he’s a phony, elitist a$$hole.
McCain troubles me, but not as much as Obama does. John McCain has pushed through legislation that would make it illegal for an organization such as the NRA to air advertising critical of a candidate prior to an election. He has argued for legislation to “close-the-gun-show loophole,” whatever that is. On the positive side, McCain has supported gun owners on Emergency Powers (as in the New Orleans gun-seizure outrage) and on the firearms industry lawsuit preemption. He was against Ted Kennedy’s proposed ammunition ban, against the initial Clinton Gun Ban and subsequent attempts at its renewal, against government-funded “gun buybacks,” against the hi-cap magazine import ban, and against mandated waiting periods. McCain opposed the Brady Bill, and has spoken out in favor of hunting in the Mohave National Monument. McCain might not be your first choice as President of the NRA, but as President of the United States, he would be a far more acceptable choice for gun owners than Obama. How about a third-party candidate? Don’t even go there. Remember Ross Perot and Ralph Nader? They pulled enough votes to spoil the chances of Republican and Democrat candidates respectively.
One might well argue that a President does not have unlimited powers; that the House and the Senate and the Supreme Court will serve to protect us from a presidential gun grab. The House and Senate right now have a Democrat majority, with every indication that it will stay that way or even get more slanted toward the Democrats in the coming election. And with just a few exceptions, Democrat politicians are not friendly to gun owners.
How about the Supreme Court? On June 25, 2008, the Supreme Court, by a one-vote, five-four margin, allowed for a very limited interpretation of the Second Amendment as an individual right. If, God forbid, Barack Obama were President, and a vacancy came up on the Court, whom do you think he’d appoint? Hillary Clinton? Charles Schumer? Odds are, his appointee would make Ruth Bader Ginsburg look like a conservative! I don’t know about you, but I’d feel much more confident if it were John McCain making the choice. John McCain has made it quite clear that his choices for the Supreme Court would be strict constitutionalists.
We gun owners have mortal enemies not only in this country, but especially abroad. And representing gun-grabbers worldwide is the United Nations, a cancerous growth located in New York City. The U.N. has long sought to bring the United States into its campaign to restrict small arms sales and ownership worldwide. That scheme was quashed, for the time being, by President Bush and our erstwhile U.N. Ambassador, John Bolton. But all bets are off if Obama gets into the White House. He has stated his admiration for international law on many an occasion. And make no mistake about it, the U.N.’s brand of international law is in direct conflict with our Second Amendment rights. Would U.S. armed forces actually try, under U.N. direction, to take guns away from American citizens? They wouldn’t have to; the U.N. could and happily would send in foreign troops to accomplish that task.
Eight years ago, I wrote an article entitled “If you don’t vote like a gun owner…you suck!” It was harshly worded, and it got people’s attention. And perhaps it made a difference in keeping a liberal, anti-gun bloviator out of the White House. Today, we’re faced with an even more toxic threat to our First Freedom. Please, for the sake of all that’s holy, go to the polls and vote for John McCain. He’s not perfect by a long shot, but the alternative is a disarmed America under a socialist, one-world dictatorship.
Considering the court just supported the 2nd Amendment by only a 5-4 vote, it would be suicidal to our Constitution to put Obama in the White House with a Dem Senate. That said, with Palin on the ticket, I see no reason what so ever to hesitate to support McCain-Palin. Palin has given the conservative movement new life in the GOP.
Well, after Obama redistributes the wealth, and gives all the “Po” free college at the taxpayer’s expense, we won’t be able to afford to own guns, so it won’t matter.
“John McCain, encouraged by the 2 X 4 named Sarah Palin, will do just fine.”
Agree, McCain will do just fine - and will become the POTUS. Also, let’s keep in mind that we are not just voting for McCain, we are voting for the next twelve years of which eight of those years will be filled by Palin in the White House...
With McCain vesus Obama we have not so good versus HORRIBLE.
And at least McCain’s partner is on OURR side while Obama’s partner is as bad he is.
I don’t consider it an odious choice any longer. McCain-Palin may not be perfect in every way, but the choice is easy, now.
This thread is worthless without Dillon model pictures. 8^)
Burning the first to save the second really isn’t a good plan.
When they call for my arms I shall give them up freely, being the most free with my amunition, which I intend to surrender first.
“There are those in America today who have come to depend absolutely on government for their security. And when government fails they seek to rectify that failure in the form of granting government more power. So, as government has failed to control crime and violence with the means given it by the Constitution, they seek to give it more power at the expense of the Constitution. But in doing so, in their willingness to give up their arms in the name of safety, they are really giving up their protection from what has always been the chief source of despotism—government. Lord Acton said power corrupts. Surely then, if this is true, the more power we give the government the more corrupt it will become. And if we give it the power to confiscate our arms we also give up the ultimate means to combat that corrupt power. In doing so we can only assure that we will eventually be totally subject to it.”
—Ronald Reagan
Agree. I sent McC/Palin (the RNC) $100 this week.
I saw a photo of a gun store sign that said: “A gun owner voting for Obama was like a chicken voting for Colonel Sanders”. I’m sorry I didn’t get a copy,maybe somebody else has a copy.
I'm not looking down at the gun... I shoot a $400 Mossberg, but someone like Kerry would shoot a high end gun.
Even Dick Cheney shoots a Browning ...
A review of the members on the short side of that 5-4 Heller decision shows that those are the members most likely to retire soon. A one-for-one swap should BHO be elected is unlikely to have great effect on the “balance” of the SCOTUS.
As for my vote, while I certainly believe Palin has brought new life and interest to the ticket, I will not be voting at the top of the ballot. McCain’s participation in the Keating Five cost me and the company I worked for in a direct way. He will carry my state (OK) handily without my vote so I don’t feel compelled to vote for McCain, his VP selection notwithstanding.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.