Not all of us liberals fit some of your conservatives stereotypes

[guzzijohn]

For those of you who do not think us liberal democrat pantywetters won't touch a firearm please refer to my posts in the predator and varmint section. Just a reminder that we are all individuals and do not always fit into nice little molds.
GuzziJohn

[quasne.inc]

Sometimes it is hard for me to remember that, not just democrats but other stereotypes as well, when so many people you meet live up to the stereotype.  I try very hard to give each and every individual a chance to show me who they are.  But when you are talking about any group of people as a whole it is easy to lump them all together.  All of us guntoting republicans arent out in the woods killing every animal we come upon, but some rednecks may make it seem that way.  In closing, hopefully we can all put our differences aside one day and enjoy what we have in common.

[BBF]

......................  In closing, hopefully we can all put our differences aside one day and enjoy what we have in common.

OK, however I fear that there will be nothing left by then.

[powderman]

guzzi. Big deal, so you say you shoot and own guns. Doesn't change the fact that you support and vote for people that think we should not own firearms and would gladly disarm every law abiding citizen in the world. Sounds like you have a guilty conscience and are trying to convince yourself that it doesn't matter, but It does. POWDERMAN. 

[quasne.inc]

Unfortunately scatterbrain you are probably right.

[Junior1942]

guzzi. Big deal, so you say you shoot and own guns. Doesn't change the fact that you support and vote for people that think we should not own firearms and would gladly disarm every law abiding citizen in the world. Sounds like you have a guilty conscience and are trying to convince yourself that it doesn't matter, but It does. POWDERMAN. 

Did you vote for Bush & Cheney?  Bush wanted an assault rifle ban, and Cheney recently said he wanted high capacity magazines banned.  Both support gun control.  I didn't vote for them.  We know where Obama stands on gun control.  Republican politicians say one thing to your face and another thing to your back.

[teamnelson]

Republican (P)oliticians say one thing to your face and another thing to your back.

Emphasis mine.

I believe if you strike the word "Republican" from that sentence, and you would have a universal truth. You are correct in your assessments of Bush & Cheney, just as anyone who pointed out the policies of Clinton or Obama would be correct in their assessments. One side of the political spectrum does not get off scot free because the other side is equally guilty. In the timeless words of Gunny Hartmann, "All are equally worthless in my eyes!"

Stereotyping is lazy, and pointless. Check. So is voting the party line. Check. What really are important are the issues; hence the creation of this forum by GBO. It might be enlightening and envigorating to discuss the merits of issues vs. parties for a change.

[bigbird09]

No offense to anyone, but I think that anyone that considers themselves affiliated with any party is a moron.  George Washington said that there would be 2 things that would bring this country down,  entangling foreign alliances, and the creation of political parties.  I tend to get made fun of for being a "republican" around my area because my gparents are "dems" and my girlfriends parents are "dems'. In all honesty I don't claim either party,  they both have things that I agree with, and both have things that I don't agree with, so I don't look at who is a repbilcan and who is a dem, but more on what each one stand for, and not just what they say, I go back and look what they have voted on if they where in the house or sentate.  Most politicians will tell you one thing to get them in offices, then they will go on their own agenda, or whoevers pay them the most.

[The Famous Grouse]

Republican (P)oliticians say one thing to your face and another thing to your back.

Emphasis mine.

I believe if you strike the word "Republican" from that sentence, and you would have a universal truth. You are correct in your assessments of Bush & Cheney, just as anyone who pointed out the policies of Clinton or Obama would be correct in their assessments. One side of the political spectrum does not get off scot free because the other side is equally guilty. In the timeless words of Gunny Hartmann, "All are equally worthless in my eyes!"

Stereotyping is lazy, and pointless. Check. So is voting the party line. Check. What really are important are the issues; hence the creation of this forum by GBO. It might be enlightening and envigorating to discuss the merits of issues vs. parties for a change.

Totally agree and thank you for making the point so well

Folks, as Americans we need to get off this party-line bandwagon.  No single issue belongs to either party.  

You think there aren't politicians out there who are self-identified Republicans / conservatives AND are at the same time anti-gun?  There are PLENTY of them!  Surprise!  They're just counting on people's blind belief that because they belong to a party, that they also believe and do everything the party tells them to do.  But they don't.  

Look at the NRA's rankings. There are PLENTY of Democrats who are have stronger gun rights records than many Republicans.  There are also plenty of Republicans mostly from rich urban districts that are outright anti-gun.

Wake up time.  Both the parties are fighting for the middle ad neither party "owns" a specific issue.

Grouse

[Dixie Dude]

I've always voted for the most conservative person regardless of party that I though had a chance to win.  Today it is Republicans or independents. Back in the 60's and 70's in Alabama, Republicans were non-existant so I voted the most conservative Democrat.  I am against gun control, abortion, and big government, in that order.  Alabama republicans are this way.  Nationally I have'nt voted for a Democrat ever for President.

[Junior1942]

A few years ago a fellow Democrat and I were at the bar in the local honkytonk.  Gun control came up.  He said, "I don't understand why people want those assault rifles.  People don't need a gun like that."

I said, "Don't you duck hunt with a Remington 1100?"

"Sure do."

"They want it banned as an assault weapon."

"What?!"

[Gary G]

In the thirty's and forties there was a group (the old right) that called themselves liberals (from liberty). They were the conservative group wanting to keep the ideas of our founders in opposition to the socialists who wanted to take from some and give to others.
There were many socialists in the day. After WWII the socialists took up the term liberal (after all, we had just fought a war with socialist Germany and Italy). They took over the democratic party. The neo-cons, took over the Republican party. They are the empire builders (policemen of the world). No politician, whether liberal or neo-con wants to give up power, so both promote what has been established. And the empire goes on until it don't. (bankrupts)

[ironglow]

  The lion's share of us I assume, believe in God, guns, freedom, limited government, minimum taxes, honesty and the right to life, liberty and the PURSUIT of happiness.  On the national scene, perhaps 2/3 of the Republicans believe in those same things, just as 2 or 3 Democrats do.  Voting for anyone because of their 'party affiliation' is a fool's game (pass the Kool-aid).
     Forget party and look at their voting record or find out what they REALLY stand for.  The candidate who comes closest to standing for pro-gun, pro-freedom, pro-life, pro-tax cuts, pro-traditional values, pro-military and pro-God  will get my vote.  
        If he/she also is smart enough to know that the CONSTITUTION NOWHERE GUARANTEES... a RIGHT to free healthcare, a RIGHT to one's own home, a RIGHT a lazy person in good health to off other taxpayers, a RIGHT to one's own Cadillac, a RIGHT to happiness, a Right to demand a large portion of what another has earned, a RIGHT not to be offended, a RIGHT to censor other's speech (e.g. political correctness), a RIGHT to demand that others pay for your food, clothing, shelter and an assortment of luxuries or a RIGHT to insist that all others respect your sexual perversion...  The candidate who understands that these are NOT guaranteed, makes a better candidate.
     Taking all these things into consideration, I can see where many would have a problem supporting about half the Republicans...but to support the Democrats in general...would be an incomprehensible position !
   Right now, only the Tea Party makes good, common sense...

[Cabin4]

Big deal. What about the true meaning of the 2nd amendment and the rest of the constitution?

[powderman]

Forget party and look at their voting record or find out what they REALLY stand for.  The candidate who comes closest to standing for pro-gun, pro-freedom, pro-life, pro-tax cuts, pro-traditional values, pro-military and pro-God  will get my vote. 



IRONGLOW. Agreed Sir, but guzzi will continue to support and vote for the candidate belonging to the anti gun, pro death, pro homosexual party. He can call himself a loyal gun owner if it makes him feel good, but the only one he fools is himself. POWDERMAN. 

[cole k]

I've always voted for the most conservative person regardless of party that I though had a chance to win.  Today it is Republicans or independents. Back in the 60's and 70's in Alabama, Republicans were non-existant so I voted the most conservative Democrat.  I am against gun control, abortion, and big government, in that order.  Alabama republicans are this way.  Nationally I have'nt voted for a Democrat ever for President.

Dixie Dude, in the '40's, '50's, and early '60's there were very very few Republicans or independents in Missippippi. But, that started to change in the '60's. Heck, in '64 I pedeling Goldwater in a can at the county fair. I thought that the Ol' Man was going to disown me over that, but in '68 he voted for Nixon.

I, too, am against gun control, abortion, and big government, in that order. 

I personaly have no use for high capacity pistol magazines but I will defend your right to own them.  The reason I have no use for high capacity pistol magazines, I'm a revoler and 1911 type guy.

I do find high capacity rifle magazines very usefull.

[RaySendero]

For those of you who do not think us liberal democrat pantywetters won't touch a firearm please refer to my posts in the predator and varmint section. Just a reminder that we are all individuals and do not always fit into nice little molds.
GuzziJohn

OK.
So John how do you defend and explain the 2a to your liberal friends?

[powderman]

So John how do you defend and explain the 2a to your liberal friends?




HEH, this should be interesting. POWDERMAN. 

[ironglow]

  So John; how DO you explain the 2nd article to your libbie buddies ?

[guzzijohn]

Except for a couple of female friends the rest are either neutral or pro second 2nd and gun owners. In the rural area I live in almost all have at least a "working" or farm gun and most hunt and have from a few to many firearms. Just for your information I have both conservative and liberal friends. I do not choose friends according to political beliefs.
GuzziJohn

[powderman]

Except for a couple of female friends the rest are either neutral or pro second 2nd and gun owners. In the rural area I live in almost all have at least a "working" or farm gun and most hunt and have from a few to many firearms



And you, and they support the obaminations anti gun policies? Are you going to buy firearm insurance like the obamination wants??? How about turning in anything the obamination calls an assault weapon???Maybe turn in your pistol that you keep for defense??? YEP, you picked a real weener, your friends too. POWDERMAN. 

[guzzijohn]

Quote from Powderman:

Are you going to buy firearm insurance like the obamination wants??? How about turning in anything the obamination calls an assault weapon???

Show me the actual bill that has passed or the executive order please.
GuzziJohn

[teamnelson]

John, thank you for reminding us that our President is ready, willing and unfortunately able to declare by fiat (executive order) anything he doesnt want ran through the constitutional check and balance system of congress. It is true he has not moved against the 2A since taking office, but he did run on a platform that included the AWB. His voting record, slim though it is, indicates support for handgun bans, even banning gun stores within 5 miles of a school.

His opinions are clear; his willingness to push his agenda without bipartisanship is clear, as is his willingness to use the executive order to circumvent due process. That would be called motive & means. We should not be surprised then if he acts at some point to fulfill his campaign promise. He has a high capacity assault pen and he's not afraid to use it. Should we not be concerned?

[guzzijohn]

I am not saying that Obama would not probably like to impose more gun control, just saying that he has not done anything and I would be surprised if he would, at least not until he is elected to a second term and he has less to lose. It just seems that many folk get all worked up over what may happen, not what has or is happening. If the republicans can come up with a candidate that will not just blow smoke and and is not extremely to the right I may just vote republican next time, but they are going to have to do better that Sarah!
GuzziJohn

[powderman]

Quote from Powderman:

Are you going to buy firearm insurance like the obamination wants??? How about turning in anything the obamination calls an assault weapon???

Show me the actual bill that has passed or the executive order please.
GuzziJohn

I already posted the article on that, it hasn't passed yet as you well know. Just part of the obaminations wish list. POWDERMAN. 

[jimster]

In the thirty's and forties there was a group (the old right) that called themselves liberals (from liberty). They were the conservative group wanting to keep the ideas of our founders in opposition to the socialists who wanted to take from some and give to others.

Yes, good point on the liberal and conservative thing, I have found out over the years a lot of people have no idea what they are because the "rules" changed on what that stuff means.  

speaking without all the politics...conservative is good for me, regarless if it's liberal or...?....Socialism of course is pretty stupid and and wrecked entire countries and leads to lack of personal freedoms eventually.  It is our main problem here in the states.  Basically...these people think government has money and create jobs...pretty weird, have no idea where they got this idea...or even how the government could spend 8 times more than it takes in...but it's stupid really. The more they try it the bigger government gets, and the more they spend...it's a disaster every time in the end.

Might as well just forget the liberal thing...it's either conservative or stupid in most cases. There are not many true conservative liberals around anymore, and the socialists stole that name because what they are not only sounds bad, it IS bad...so things get kind of messed up over the years with the words game.  Conservative is a good word...of course the socialists make up things about that word too...but basically, every normal American that raises children and works hard is conservative, and lives their lives that way because there is no other way to survive without someone else picking up the tab. I'm not sure there is a way to make conservative a bad word unless you flat out make things up about that word. I have had people tell me they are liberal and not conservative, and they live their lives VERY conservative in every way, but somewhere they heard conservative is bad....so they picked liberal for their handle.

I guess you either believe that governent is key to your survival and owes you stuff, and makes jobs, and has to grow using other people money....or you don't believe that.  That's the bottom line, and there is no in between on spending more than you have no matter what, simple math is never wrong.

Far as Obama passing gun laws...he's president, he can't....Congress does this....Obama would sign anything they put in front of him...he has so far, and he has always been anti gun...and has said so in earlier years. For anyone to think he would VETO a gun bill....they must be insane.  He was a Senator in Chicago...a place where the second amendment did not count and handguns were totally outlawed.

 

[Gary G]

Jimster, your post is spot on, but I thought I would just add a little for what it is worth.


There is one way in which "conservative" may be bad.
 
John T. Flynn, who lived during the days of "Mussolini worship" in the elite colleges of America, wrote that fascism (a form of socialism) requires four characteristics:
1. a large centralized government that spends large sums on "planned consumption" (welfare) financed by huge budget deficits.
2. "the planned economy", which involves systematic government interference  with prices, rents, and interest rates within a capitalist system. (think regulations and the FED)
3. Militarism as a permanent economic institution.
4. Imperialism (policing the world)

Now the neo-conservatives, who have taken over the conservative party, support 3 and 4, and don't realize that it is socialism.

[guzzijohn]

As someone has pointed out in the past I may actually be more of a libertarian than anything else. Overall I am a fiscal conservative in my personal life. The only loans I have taken have been for homes, farm land and in my 20s I borrowed $1,000 from my parents for a car purchase which I paid them back in less than six months. At 55 years old I now own my five year old home free and clear, 560 acres of farm land which I still owe a bit on but will be paid in full next month. I have one charge card and pay any balances in full each month. Outside of the car loan above I have always paid vehicles in full with cash at time of purchase and currently own two cars, a pick up, a motorcycle, an ATV and a tractor. At this time I am worth somewhere around 1.1 to 1.3 million depending on land prices and the stock market of which about 20% was inherited. At the same time I do not have much of a problem with my tax money going to education and higher education needs to be better funded so more can afford to go to college, health care, welfare (for truly disabled or toward the care of children), infrastructure both local and at a national level and defense. No one in this country should have to risk going hungry or lack medical care.
I do not think there should be laws against drug use, prostitution, abortion (didn't say I was for it), homosexual life styles (that is ones own business), alcohol, cigarettes, what language to speak, what one watches on TV or does in general in their own home, what religion is good or bad, and I support open immigration except for those with hardcore criminal records. Firearm ownership is a right, not a privilege and should be treated as such.
I almost always vote. (my presidential vote history has been, Ford, Reagan, George H Bush, George W, wished for Bob Dole and Oboma) I have served on non-profits boards and have been and am in service clubs.
I do think that without federal oversight of business and finance that many more people would be hurt and killed in the workplace, we would have dangerously dirty air and water and the abuses that we saw the last few years in the financial world would be much worse than it was and is. Our cars would be much dirtier and much less fuel efficient. Persons with significant disabilities would not be educated to the extent possible and this group would have much more unemployment. We would have much worse racism than we currently have.
So....plug me in wherever you want but this is my own little world as I see it and live it. It works for me most of the time, your milage may vary. Some of you will probably want to pick this apart and attack me but don't expect me to answer every little pick directly, the post here is to try and convey where I am coming from and once again that probably none of us fit any exact keyhole.
GuzziJohn
 

[ironglow]

Guzzi;
   You do sound more like a libertarian, but still I disagree with the libertarians, in this sense.  You said "I do not think there should be laws against drug use, prostitution, abortion (didn't say I was for it), honosexual lifestyles (that is their business) "  ...etc

  Let's look a bit closer for instance..with abortion..little boys & girls are dying to the tune of thousands per week.  You say you are not for it, but you won't speak out against it..  Let me remind you of a few words of wisdom ofte quoted by the left and the right..

   " The only thing necessary for evil to prevail, is that good men do nothing."     (Edmund Burke)  

            That does make sense doesn't it ?

[jimster]

I certainly won't pick you apart Guzzi, you sound conservative enough for me and more than a lot of people who call themselves conservatives.

I got no beef against not wanting laws....I never cared much for too many laws of any kind, makes things too complicated. Let the druggies kill themselves far as i'm concerned, it's not my deal.  Far as abortion goes...if the feds would have stayed out of it altogether, would have suited me fine, it's just another law, and if we followed the constitution, the states could handle that, and since there is all kinds of people in this country I'm sure they could find a place to have an abortion same as finding a place where your not allowed to have a handgun.  People tend to flock together that think alike, a few states are bound to be this place. Better than ALL of them. The more laws passed at the federal level the worse off we all are, especially after some idiot with the name judge gets to legislate what he thinks it means from his bench. The less laws we have the less of that you would see as well. As far as looking at socialism with a frown, even us conservatives realize there needs to be a certain amount of socialism, it's just they get carried away on this big time, which keeps conservatives from being able to GIVE to the needy...like we used to.  Forced charity is never a good thing, it takes away another right of an individual.  Individual is what it's all about...in this country anyway.  We are born equal...after that, the end results vary and should not be tampered with too much, or we'll all go broke trying to make everyone the same, when nobody is the same.