Posted on 10/01/2016 5:12:19 PM PDT by rey
At the presidential debate, Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton made all kinds of attacks on each other. But on one notable issue, they were in complete agreement: they both think people on the federal government’s “no fly list” should be categorically denied their right to buy guns under the Second Amendment. Both candidates have repeatedly said so for months. Trump’s stance on this issue should be deeply troubling to those who care about gun rights – and also to people concerned about constitutional rights generally, even if they don’t care much about this one.
As both the ACLU and conservative commentators point out, the no fly list is notoriously inaccurate. It is also provides little or no due process protections. The process is secret, people are not told the reasons why they were placed on the list, and they are not given any advance opportunity to challenge the designation. And, once on the list, even a completely innocent person might find it difficult and time-consuming to get off it.
(Excerpt) Read more at fee.org ...
So you think Hillary has a better record?
So I think you're nuts!
/s
Baloney. Trump is megaparsecs ahead of Hillary on the Second Amendment. I thought the Cruzers and Paulistas had thrown in the towel and realized a successful, pro Second Amendment Businessman who follows the law was better than a gun grabbing, lying, treasonous snake and accessory to rape and possibly more.
Pure tripe.
Baloney. Trump is megaparsecs ahead of Hillary on the Second Amendment. I thought the Cruzers and Paulistas had thrown in the towel and realized a successful, pro Second Amendment Businessman who follows the law was better than a gun grabbing, lying, treasonous snake and accessory to rape and possibly more.
Pure tripe.
Saying that Trump and Hillary are equivalent on the 2nd amendment is pure nonsense.
You are dead wrong.
Read his policy papers
Trump is a conservative...you are confused as to what conservatism is
Even if true ... we know, we KNOW no candidate is perfect. No matter who would win, Trump or no Trump, it is up to the people to keep a close eye on him/them.
Seems we should know this already from some of the tea party candidates who got elected and then turned or partly turned against those who got them elected.
Always vigilant with politicians, even first time ones.
The difference with Trump vs everyone else is that he may not care if he has a second term, so he’ll need to be watched more closely. The pressure points are in Congress where the members care very much if they are re-elected. It is through them we keep the president, whoever it is, in check.
This is the whole point of divided government. If for some reason Trump is not aware of this, he will find out.
You’re too kind. Someone questions whether Trump is true to his word; correct that, shifting word, and they are nuts? Have you seen the pictures of the Clintons sitting in the front row at Trump’s wedding? And now they are mortal enemies? Excuse my skepticism.
I do not think Clinton has a better record. Her record is horrendous. May I remind you Trump has no record in the political arena.
Here is how nuts I am; I am NOT nuts enough to believe any politician anywhere at any time. They are ALL self serving. Their job is to seduce you; to lure you into the belief that they are for you. Fools believed in Obama spending over a billion dollars to secure a job that made $400K to do something for them. I think it is equally as delusional to believe a guy worth several billion dollars wishes to do anything for anyone other than himself. This does not mean I am for Clinton, those folks who are suffer severe cognizant disconnect. The reductionist thinking that if your not for one you must be for the other is part of what stagnates us.
A long time ago, someone on this site said that the presidential elections were simply about which form of nominal socialism we will have for the next four years. That is what I believe as well. Whether we slither into a totalitarian hell hole or take the express roller coaster ride into it matters little to me.
I simply post the article because it was interesting. I needn’t only read that with which I agree. Hearing what others think is enlightening; at a minimum it helps you understand how nuts they are. If you don’t like the article tell the mod to pull it.
This is a side issue. I think Trump’s statements on the 2nd amendment have been strong and consistent.
Is he a perfect conservative? No. Is he almost the opposite of Drooling Evil? Yes. Does he have the courage to stand up for his convictions? YES. Am I voting for him? YES.
Ted gave Superman a funny look, and why is Superman wearing his Clark Kent glasses? The little girl seems unhappy. These questions deserve answers.
BS
Troll
Really brilliant if one is a Never-Trumper or a disgruntled Cruz-bot.
If one realizes that Hillary might literally be the end of the Constitution, and that one likes the Constitution, then it ain't so smart.
Do you donate to a candidate? How about to FR?
I only ask because most folks who do what you just did are mainly mouth and don't actually invest in anything.
“No “libertarian” could possibly endorse Hillary. But they, “Republicans,” and “conservatives,” as we have seen, do.”
They can, and they do. FEE is just another organization running interference for the witch. They’re typically of the persuasion to say that you shouldn’t vote, a position I usually agree with by the way, but their spiel this year is that you REALLY shouldn’t vote for Trump because he’s EEEEEEVIL. While generally ignoring the witch.
They’re become useful idiots. Just like National Review.
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.