Senate Bill Would Grant FBI Unlimited Access To Gun Sales Records

Gun Owners of America ^ | June 23, 2005 | NA

[Allosaurs_r_us]

So you'd prefer a Professional Politician instead of someone with a real interest in protecting your Rights.

Duly noted.

First of all I believe Larry Craig, who we elected here in Idaho, does just that. Is he battin a 1000? Of coarse not! But he comes closer than any friggin liberal or Repub I have run across in years!

Now to your question..............as rediculous as it sounds......

Absolutely not! When has there been such a candidate? I am 51, and have yet to find a politician who does not believe he/she is self appointed important after they get into office. Even when they appear that way before election, they turn into the same money grubbing, power hungry egotists we see every day. The main body of both arms of goobernment in DC have set the rules by which you must play and it is certainly not ehtical in any way, shape, or form. Until you can get enough of these power mad, self serving a$$h@les to agree, we will never have the government you envision.

Now, inform me how to stop human nature. Unfortunatlely it seems to go with the job to turn into an idiot most of time after one gets elected. If promises were nickels, our elected oficials could clear up the national debt!

[Savage_Nation]

"In the News/Activism forum, on a thread titled Senate Bill Would Grant FBI Unlimited Access To Gun Sales Records , Eagle Eye wrote:

We ended up with Slick Willy because of third party shenanigans
WRONG-O!!

We ended up with Clinton because the Republican Party ran a weak candidate that couldn't EARN enough votes.

If a party runs a strong candidate it won't matter how many 'third parties' there are."

"WRONG-O!!" Eagle Eye!!!
Perot got 18.9% of the vote in the 1992 election and 8.4% in 1996. Yes, the republicans could have done better. But it would have been a whole different ball game without Perot.

[AD from SpringBay]

But I thought all those background checks were to be destroyed after a certain time frame. You mean there really might be a master list somewhere?

[Eagle Eye]

Yes, the republicans could have done better. But it would have been a whole different ball game without Perot.

Perot did not 'steal' any votes. None. Zero.

All votes are up for grabs; some candidates just don't do a very good job of earning them.

That percentage for Perot also includes a number of votes that would have gone uncast before they went to either the Republicans or the Democrats.

The simple fact was that Perot was more attractive to some people than Dole.

If you want to win elections, run better candidates, don't blame your parties piss poor performance on some other candidate. That strategy is for losers....doh! I forgot to whom I was speaking!!

[Dead Corpse]

"Brady Bill" Dole didn't deserve the Votes he got.

[Eagle Eye]

It has gotten to the point that most votes a candidate receives are really votes against the other guy.

"Vote for me, I'm the lesser of two evils."

[Dead Corpse]

Vote for more Evil and dont be pissed off when you get it.

I'm done voting for Evil.

[blackie]

The Second Amendment...
America's Original Homeland Security!

Be Ever Vigilant!

[RetiredArmy]

10-4. Roger that. Well said. True.

[dljordan]

"Criminals and terrorists do not buy their weapons legally and try not to leave a paper-trail."

I hesitate to say anything negative about the government since so many Freepers seem to idolize it but what makes you think they're aiming all this legislation at criminals and terrorists? Do you ever question the fact that the "Patriot" Act was waiting in the wings and was passed by the ninnies in our congress without being read?

[Jersey Republican Biker Chick]

Anything is possible.

[Savage_Nation]

"Perot did not 'steal' any votes. None. Zero."
I NEVER said he did!!!!

"All votes are up for grabs; some candidates just don't do a very good job of earning them.

That percentage for Perot also includes a number of votes that would have gone uncast before they went to either the Republicans or the Democrats."

I don't thinks so. I would bet money that the average Perot voter would have been more likely to vote for a Republican.

"The simple fact was that Perot was more attractive to some people than Dole."

You forget 1992! The Election that put Klinton in. Klinton never got more than 50% in either 1992 or 1996.

"If you want to win elections, run better candidates, don't blame your parties piss poor performance on some other candidate. That strategy is for losers....doh! I forgot to whom I was speaking!!"

Listen JACkA$$!
To ignore Perot's influence on the 1992 election is simple stupidity and shows your ignorance.

Perot's campaign actually had an influence on a presidential election, the media would have you believe Nader did.

[Eagle Eye]

Thank you for your comments, you've pretty much proved every one of my points.

[ninenot]

WallyWorld is NOT your friend.

[Eagle Eye]

BTW, the low voter turn out only proves how weak the candidates were.

IMO, the Perot voters were actually excited about casting their votes while the rest of us were either holding our noses or voting against the other main candidate.

DOle may have lost teh electino but the real BIG TIME losers are those that still blame Perot for Dole's lackluster performance. Quite sad, really.

[Dead Corpse]

If a candidate can't draw more than 50% of the vote of the people who actually bothered to show up to vote, then maybe we just need to consider leaving that position unfilled for that election cycle.

Even, possibly ESPECIALLY, if that means going without a President like Slick Willie again...

[Extremely Extreme Extremist]

At issue is a provision in the Patriot Act reauthorization bill (S. 1266) authored by Sen. Pat Roberts (R-KS)

Remember GOP boot-lickers, this is a REPUBLICAN sponsoring this.

[billnaz]

"I trust the government to always do the right thing."

I'm sure that's what a lot of Jews in Germany said during the 1930's. Please tell me you forgot to include the sarcasm indicator.

[neverdem]

Where is the NRA on this?

My guess is that they don't want to waste any capital on what will be dead on arrival in the House. They want a clean Lawfull Commerce in Firearms Bill out of Senate.

[neverdem]

What's PTB?