Twin Cities Carry Forum Archive
http://www.ellegon.com/forum/

Taken from "Americas 1st Freedom" NRA journal,
http://www.ellegon.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=36&t=9817
Page 1 of 2

Author:  Five Seven [ Mon Aug 18, 2008 3:52 pm ]
Post subject:  Taken from "Americas 1st Freedom" NRA journal,

Talking about our gun rights, "HANGING BY A THREAD!" And this election season. And some politicians to watch.....................


Minnesota

Since his election six years ago, Norm Coleman, R, has been a marked man. His political opponents hope to end his tenure in the Senate and have chosen the controversial comedian turned radio talk show host Al Franken, D, as his challenger. With his Hollywood politics and New York state of mind, Franken is certainly a foe of gun owners. His radical viewpoints and his outspoken personality would make him a bigger foe if he were allowed to take a seat in the U.S. Senate.

Norm Coleman has an excellent pro-gun voting record and is a friend gun owners can count on because he believes in the fundamental Right to Keep and Bear Arms. Minnesota gun owners must take action now to preserve a valuable pro-gun voice in the Senate.

There are about 12 other politicians discussed in the article too!
Link:
http://www.nraila.org/Issues/Articles/R ... &issue=047

Author:  Andrew Rothman [ Mon Aug 18, 2008 5:05 pm ]
Post subject: 

The NRA noticed Minnesota? Must be a fluke.

Author:  VikesFan [ Mon Aug 18, 2008 6:40 pm ]
Post subject: 

They focus their energy on elections they can influence. Hard to fault them for that.

Author:  mitchx3 [ Mon Aug 18, 2008 11:00 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Taken from "Americas 1st Freedom" NRA journal,

Five Seven wrote:
and is a friend gun owners can count on because he believes in the fundamental Right to Keep and Bear Arms.


I thought all politicians believed what the polls tell them to believe?

Author:  TeamSpringFieldXD [ Tue Aug 19, 2008 10:36 am ]
Post subject: 

VikesFan wrote:
They focus their energy on elections they can influence. Hard to fault them for that.


You would think they wouldn't need to influence anyone NOT to vote for the bad comedian-turned elitist Al Franken. Its nice there at least paying attention.

Author:  VikesFan [ Tue Aug 19, 2008 12:06 pm ]
Post subject: 

TeamSpringFieldXD wrote:
You would think they wouldn't need to influence anyone NOT to vote for the bad comedian-turned elitist Al Franken. Its nice there at least paying attention.


I love the new Franken ad running on the radio. "Keep working for us, keep fighting..."

Uh huh, you've done so much work for us already. Oh wait, you don't hold public office now? Well, let that not stand in the way of making claims on the radio.

I can't imagine that ANYONE thinks that clown holding an important public office is a good idea, but I guess the same 45% of the people that will be voting for Obama can vote for a liberal elitist at the state level.

Author:  havegunjoe [ Tue Aug 19, 2008 1:14 pm ]
Post subject: 

VikesFan wrote:
TeamSpringFieldXD wrote:
You would think they wouldn't need to influence anyone NOT to vote for the bad comedian-turned elitist Al Franken. Its nice there at least paying attention.


I love the new Franken ad running on the radio. "Keep working for us, keep fighting..."

Uh huh, you've done so much work for us already. Oh wait, you don't hold public office now? Well, let that not stand in the way of making claims on the radio.

I can't imagine that ANYONE thinks that clown holding an important public office is a good idea, but I guess the same 45% of the people that will be voting for Obama can vote for a liberal elitist at the state level.


You forget you’re in Minnesota. Anything is possible in politics here. I love his other add where he claims Norm is renting a home from a “Washington Insider”. What the hell is a “Washington Insider” and why are they saying it like it’s a dirty word? What crap! But hey, stay tuned for more.

Author:  Five Seven [ Tue Aug 19, 2008 2:04 pm ]
Post subject: 

KSTP's political anylist said Franken can't be counted out. And with Barkley takin votes from Coleman, he could actually pull this out of his arse..........

God I hope not!

Author:  Dick Unger [ Tue Aug 19, 2008 9:19 pm ]
Post subject: 

One of Frankin's folks say he's up 6 pts., as of today it's 45-45.

There is no reason to believe he wants our guns; they just say that because he's generally a liberal Dem. Actually, he plans to stay a mile away from the subject. And so does Norm, unfortunaterly. Neither will do anything positive for gunnies.

Anyway, I wouldn't vote for Norm on the difference in guns. He's too supportive of the Bush administration, who accepted gunnie support and did nothing. The NRA is overloaded with Republicans, instead of gunnies, I think.

If we want to win we have to recruit Dems, this kind of non-think stuff from the NRA just hurts the cause.

Author:  JonnyB [ Wed Aug 20, 2008 7:29 am ]
Post subject: 

One problem with electing Democrats - even strong pro-gun Democrats - is that the majority party gets leadership of the important committees. This is where legislation begins and ends. Without committee "ownership" you, as a party, are screwed.

Just because an individual is pro-gun, you still have to consider his party as a whole. Look, for example, at Collin Peterson; he's a damn good guy but still gives leverage to the Democrats as a whole. He doesn't vote along party lines, even, but still adds weight to the party.

jb

Author:  Dick Unger [ Wed Aug 20, 2008 7:54 am ]
Post subject: 

JonnyB wrote:
One problem with electing Democrats - even strong pro-gun Democrats - is that the majority party gets leadership of the important committees. This is where legislation begins and ends. Without committee "ownership" you, as a party, are screwed.

Just because an individual is pro-gun, you still have to consider his party as a whole. Look, for example, at Collin Peterson; he's a damn good guy but still gives leverage to the Democrats as a whole. He doesn't vote along party lines, even, but still adds weight to the party.

jb


Well, sure. but the Dems are going to be the majority for awhile, and we've got to learn to work with them. The BEST we can hope for is that Congress soes not "do" guns for awhile.

But having the NRA act like a Republican Party puppet just invites Democratic attack. IMHO

Of course, on most other current non-gun issues, I don't agree with the Republicans, so I'm biased too. But I wouldn't try to misrepresent the Reps, as the NRA does with Dems.

Author:  Andrew Rothman [ Wed Aug 20, 2008 8:07 am ]
Post subject: 

Dick Unger wrote:
There is no reason to believe he wants our guns; they just say that because he's generally a liberal Dem. Actually, he plans to stay a mile away from the subject. And so does Norm, unfortunaterly. Neither will do anything positive for gunnies.


Yippee. So taking away our gun rights is not his top priority. When Pelosi proposes it, though, will he vote against it? Norm will. That's the difference.

Author:  Dick Unger [ Wed Aug 20, 2008 1:53 pm ]
Post subject: 

No question, Norm would better better for guns than Al. But, the NRA does not say that. Instead, it says (basically) that Al is scheming to take our guns. That's probably not true, and the NRA knows it.

But, Al might be elected. If not, it will still be a good year for the Democrats. So, if Nancy does propose gun legislation, (I think they will do an "assault weapon" "assault) it will be easy to marginalize the NRA as just more typical Republican fear mongering. I wonder if the NRA even writes their own stuff anymore.

If our gun rights depend on a Republican majority, we are going to be screwed. The Dems will do gun control just to get even with the Reps.

We're going to send the NRA to lobby Frankin? After they intentionally lied about him? The NRA is not a professional organization anymore IMAO.

Author:  Five Seven [ Wed Aug 20, 2008 5:44 pm ]
Post subject: 

Well, I'll vote for Dean Barkley before Frankin any day. I hear most of Hollyweird is waiting to see if Minnesota will be the laughing stock of America by electing that clown.............

Author:  Scott A [ Wed Aug 20, 2008 6:26 pm ]
Post subject: 

Dick Unger wrote:
Well, sure. but the Dems are going to be the majority for awhile, and we've got to learn to work with them. The BEST we can hope for is that Congress soes not "do" guns for awhile.

But having the NRA act like a Republican Party puppet just invites Democratic attack. IMHO

Of course, on most other current non-gun issues, I don't agree with the Republicans, so I'm biased too. But I wouldn't try to misrepresent the Reps, as the NRA does with Dems.


Did you actually read the entire article posted at the link? Here are a few excerpts that make me believe you didn't.

Quote:
Montana

Sen. Max Baucus, D, has become a valuable ally in the U.S. Senate, providing a pro-gun bridge to the Senate’s majority party. Senator Baucus has voted to support gun owners’ rights on key issues, such as emergency powers legislation, the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act, opposition to the Clinton gun ban and ammunition bans and protection of gun shows from excessive federal regulation. The re-election of Senator Max Baucus will greatly help to protect the pro-gun majority in the Senate.


Quote:
Virginia

With the retirement of anti-gun Senator John Warner, R, there is another opportunity for gun owners to increase their support in the Senate.

Not only was former Governor Jim Gilmore, R, a strong supporter of gun owners’ rights while in office, he has continued his support by becoming a member of the NRA Board of Directors. As governor from 1998 to 2002, Gilmore supported NRA efforts to establish Project Exile and was a strong advocate in Richmond.

Also in the race is former Governor Mark Warner, D. As governor, Mark Warner signed over 20 pro-gun bills, and was a valuable ally for gun owners and sportsmen. However this race turns out, the good news is that Virginia gun owners will have a stronger voice in the U.S. Senate after John Warner retires.


Quote:
The Remaining Races Many pro-gun incumbents are running for re-election in other states, and although their races are not considered tight now, they have earned our strong support: Jeff Sessions, R-Ala., Saxby Chambliss, R-Ga., Pat Roberts, R-Kans., Thad Cochran, R-Miss., James Inhofe, R-Okla., Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., Tim Johnson, D-S.D., Lamar Alexander, R-Tenn., John Cornyn, R-Texas, Mike Enzi, R-Wyo. and John Barrasso, R-Wyo.

There are also two races for open seats where pro-gun candidates are expected to prevail, but gun-owner support is crucial. In Idaho, both Lt. Gov. Jim Risch, R, and former Congressman Larry LaRocco, D, have strong pro-gun credentials. And in Nebraska, former Governor Mike Johanns, R, is a strong advocate of Second Amendment rights and will be a valuable ally in the Senate.


Hmmm, what's up with the Democrats listed in there as being supported by the NRA? Maybe they aren't as in lock-step with the Republican party as you think.

Page 1 of 2 All times are UTC - 6 hours
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group
http://www.phpbb.com/