Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Posted: 1/21/2002 5:26:34 PM EDT
We could have a long Republican run on our hands. Bush will surely win in 2004. If Powell runs in 2008 he will win sooo easy w/ all the minority votes. I know all Republicans are not as right as us, but at least we can count on no NEW gun laws. What do you think? Anyone know Powell's gun-control stance/record?
Link Posted: 1/21/2002 5:34:03 PM EDT
Originally Posted By MP906: We could have a long Republican run on our hands. Bush will surely win in 2004. If Powell runs in 2008 he will win sooo easy w/ all the minority votes. I know all Republicans are not as right as us, but at least we can count on no NEW gun laws. What do you think? Anyone know Powell's gun-control stance/record?
View Quote
Unfortunately, generally anti. More like a Democrat on several issues, including firearms ownership. Does not like assault weapons, concealed carry, wants licensing of buyers and registration, pretty much what you would expect someone born and raised in NYC without firearms in the home to believe.
Link Posted: 1/21/2002 5:36:25 PM EDT
I will never vote for him. Sheep in wolfs clothing.
Link Posted: 1/21/2002 5:39:35 PM EDT
Way too liberal for me too.
Link Posted: 1/21/2002 5:44:35 PM EDT
That sucks. He seems so conservative. What about Rumsfield, I love that guy! Of coarse, he would'nt be a sure thing like Powell.
Link Posted: 1/21/2002 5:48:14 PM EDT
Powell is an NWO gun grabber. I could never vote for him, even as the lesser of two evils.
Link Posted: 1/21/2002 5:48:47 PM EDT
Bush/Keyes 2004. Keyes/Largent 2008. Keyes/Largent 2012. Largent/[i]un-named female candidate[/i] 2016. Female/Male un-named candidates 2020. Hey. We could run the show for a helluva long time, huh? [;D] The names might change, but, the idea is to introduce the Black and Female ingredients soon. Eventually, we'll have a Black Female President. Condi Rice is a great choice, just not yet. If the Republicans don't choke, they could conceivably be in office for 20 years. We can only hope. [;)]
Link Posted: 1/21/2002 5:52:00 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 1/21/2002 6:07:31 PM EDT by MP906]
Excuse my ignorance, but who are Keyes and Largent and why do we want them?
Link Posted: 1/21/2002 6:04:34 PM EDT
Link Posted: 1/21/2002 6:08:55 PM EDT
Link Posted: 1/21/2002 6:13:10 PM EDT
Originally Posted By Glock918: “Unfortunately, generally anti. More like a Democrat on several issues, including firearms ownership.” Oh, man, really? Crap. Well, there goes my theory. Off topic, but you know how the NRA posts how pro-gun everyone is or is not who is running? I like that. I like the pre-printed cards that you mail off to your appropriate elected officials as well. When we get close, I’m sure we will post our opinions, or so I hope. Art in KY I am not responsible for misspelled words until the spell check feature is operational again.[;)]
View Quote
Hey Art: NRA scoring and mass mailings would be illegal under McCain-Feingold Campaign Finance Reform. Pre-printed cards are better than noting, but just barely. Get a generic letter of concern formatted professionally and use it to cut and paste personal letters to Congress. Short of sending them money, or dropping by in person, that gets more attention in Congress than anything else. Get active or get ready to turn them in. Good luck!
Link Posted: 1/21/2002 6:21:17 PM EDT
Originally Posted By MP906: Excuse my ignorance, but who are Keyes and Largent and why do we want them?
View Quote
Alan Keyes: Extremely intelligent, articulate and conservative black gentleman who ran for President in 2000. Steve Largent: Former Seattle Seahawk wide receiver and current member of the Oklahoma Legislature. Good, conservative family man. Well spoken, for a Southern white guy... [:D] I mentioned these men because I think they are a possible good combination to snag the vote for the Republican Party. Yes, Black & White is an inevitable and foregone conclusion, in my book. If you want to play the game of politics, it's a future rule change. Who knows what the actual tickets will be? I'm just throwing this out for discussions' sake. Win the elections--- Stop the Anti-American, Anti-Constitutional, Anti-what-have-you's from getting control and destroying what We the People are all about. I don't think Powell is the premier choice at this moment.
Link Posted: 1/21/2002 6:25:29 PM EDT
Originally Posted By mejames: Powell is an NWO gun grabber. I could never vote for him, even as the lesser of two evils.
View Quote
what he said. his 'diplomatic' stance on the terrorist war will lead us into another predictable loss with more lost lives in the bargain. he seems to be from the neville chamberlain school of diplomacy that believes that you can negotiate with terrorists and buy/talk your way out of fighting. check out his willingness to abandon a total gulf war victory, because the death and destruction looked bad on tv, that we will have to revisit or eventually our children will face an iraq nuclear/biological attack. just my .02 worth.
Link Posted: 1/21/2002 6:29:18 PM EDT
Off topic, but you know how the NRA posts how pro-gun everyone is or is not who is running? I like that. I like the pre-printed cards that you mail off to your appropriate elected officials as well. When we get close, I’m sure we will post our opinions, or so I hope. Art in KY
View Quote
i would not bet the farm, or my gun safe, on those ratings.
Link Posted: 1/21/2002 6:36:26 PM EDT
Originally Posted By mejames: Powell is an NWO gun grabber. I could never vote for him, even as the lesser of two evils.
View Quote
I agree. Consider that Clinton passed welfare reform and the capital gaines tax cut. These were Republican issues, but a Republican pres would likely never have the chance to sign them. Powell would likely have a Democratic congress & senate, and he would pass a lot of their anit-2nd and 10nth amendment bills.
Link Posted: 1/21/2002 6:44:57 PM EDT
[b]Prez Ron Paul[/b] and [b]V.P. Alan keyes[/b]
Link Posted: 1/21/2002 7:35:13 PM EDT
Originally Posted By 9divdoc: [b]Prez Ron Paul[/b] and [b]V.P. Alan keyes[/b]
View Quote
Holy Smokes! I thought that said [b]Rue[/b] Paul!!! Freaked me OUT! [shock]
Link Posted: 1/21/2002 7:49:12 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 1/21/2002 7:51:33 PM EDT by SF]
Busmaster007: Concur about Powell, and ten years ago, about needing a black candidate in the future. Now, I'm not so sure. Politics in the US today is all about leverage and turnout. The political capital that the Republican Party would have to spend to get a small portion of the black population (15% of the US pop, fewer % of registered voters) to even consider voting for them is probably a net loss. A few thousand voters, out of a turnout of less than 50% of the eligible voter population, determined the last presidential election. The party that does a better job of turning its voters out will likely win the next election. The largest minority and fastest growing segment of the American population is Hispanics. I believe (as a generalization) that most of the black populace will always vote Democratic (until they get to the middle class when they may be succeptible to change). This is similar to the feeling of the Republican Party that they are going to get most of the gun owner's votes, regardless. I think that the Mexican population swing votes, depending on the position of the candidates on issues of concern to them, and that is where the future lies. If we reach out to the recent Mexican immigrants who are new voters, they are interested in owning firearms and can be convinced to vote for Republican candidates, if their basic concerns are addressed. They are not going to be single issue voters on gun issues anytime soon, but we can cultivate a tradition of the Republican Party representing Hispanics. Bush's efforts to reach out to Mexico, discussions with Vincente Fox, and his attempts to address Hispanic crowds in Spanish will get him some support from the Mexican Hispanic community in the next election, if he/the Republican Party does not alienate them first. A few votes in key states can make a difference. The key is to gain new voters without losing your old ones. I am afraid that in order to pander to the media, the Republicans would throw a bone to the antis (like the .50 ban), as they have in the past, feeling mistakenly that firearms voters have no where else to go. Do they really believe that a hardcore Democrat is going to change to Republican in an epiphany over a gun law? This would be a mistake, as the past few elections have shown that the party that gets its voters to the polling places, despite opinion polls and registration counts, gets elected. If a spate of new firearms legislation passes, courtesy of the Republicans, hard core gun owners will likely stay home in droves on election day, figuring why vote for any of the above? Conversely, the Democrats have publicly acknowledged that gun legislation cost them heavily in 94 (!!), 96, 98 and the Presidential election of 2000. Yet they keep introducing it, albeit in a lower profile. Yet the Dems turn out minority voters on election day at a prodigious rate, using public schools, churches, civic orgs, etc. to get the word out and provide transportation to the polling places. If gun owners turned out (and voted for pro gun candidates) at the rate of blacks, there would be a landslide in the next election. Several members have suggested taking females and minorities out and let them enjoy learning to shoot. This is a great idea, helping them get registered and taking them to the election booth is another. We can get busy and elect pro gun candidates, or we can start waiting for the end of private firearms ownership in this nation. [soapbox]
Link Posted: 1/21/2002 7:57:32 PM EDT
If Powell doesnt mesh, then why the fuck is he Secstate?
Link Posted: 1/21/2002 8:04:38 PM EDT
Originally Posted By toaster: If Powell doesnt mesh, then why the fuck is he Secstate?
View Quote
1) Former General. 2) Appeals to liberal/centrist arm of the Party and shows outreach to Dems 3) Because he IS at State, not Defense. He has friends in the middle East, appeals to the Third World, and is/appears more flexible and tolerant than most other candidates. The REAL question is, why is he a Republican? His positions are almost all closer to the DNC line than the RNC. I think that the answer is that he was part of the military establishment and that he has a better shot at the top from the Republican side, where he stands out. If Bush had picked Powell as his VP candidate, and he had run, I think that all of those bad memories of Nov and Dec 00 would be a dream. On the other hand, as a firearms owner, I would really be concerned for my future.
Link Posted: 1/21/2002 8:31:31 PM EDT
He is NWO, and a beholdin to them for the rank he recieved in the military. The NWO brings these possibles along just in case plan (A) doesn't work. If Powell got lucky, and made it to the presidency. Some Billy Bob from Mississippi would cap him, and screw things up for the NWO. Then again, that may be the plan, Powell/Jeb Bush ticket, hmmm an interesting possibilty. Powell gets popped and ole Jeb becomes prez. You never know what the hell is going to happen, but you can bet, it has been written. Waterdog
Link Posted: 1/21/2002 8:40:36 PM EDT
Originally Posted By BusMaster007: Bush/Keyes 2004. Keyes/Largent 2008. Keyes/Largent 2012. Largent/[i]un-named female candidate[/i] 2016. Female/Male un-named candidates 2020. Hey. We could run the show for a helluva long time, huh? [;D] The names might change, but, the idea is to introduce the Black and Female ingredients soon. Eventually, we'll have a Black Female President. Condi Rice is a great choice, just not yet. If the Republicans don't choke, they could conceivably be in office for 20 years. We can only hope. [;)]
View Quote
So the Republicans have to resort to stunts to get votes? How about a militant Black lesbian from CA for Prez and a gun-banning ex-POW AZ senator for Veep? Who cares what their politics are as long as they claim to be Republican, after all!
Link Posted: 1/21/2002 8:43:23 PM EDT
Powell has already stated publicaly he has no interest in running for president, so it is probably a moot point. Despite his alleged gun control stance, I think he is a good man, and has certainly served his country well. I'd like to offer another option-- I would be interested in serving for an unlimited term as U. S. Dictator, if you guys will elect me. [;)]
Link Posted: 1/21/2002 9:34:04 PM EDT
Condi Rice. Outspoken 2nd Amendment advocate, self-made woman, experience with foreign policy, quite possibly the smartest person in the entire Bush cabinet (although Cheny could probably give her a run for her money!).
Link Posted: 1/21/2002 9:59:19 PM EDT
Unless I'm mistaken Powell was part of the Mai Lai mess. Too liberal besides. Condi Rice has my vote if she runs. Bush/Cheney in 2004, Cheney/Rice in 2008, Rice/? in 2016 or maybe sooner if Cheney has to step down because of health reasons. I like a lot of what Keyes says also. Walter Williams would be my dream candidate, much more libertarian (lower case l) than conservative.
Link Posted: 1/21/2002 10:15:23 PM EDT
Damn it Bushmaster ! You had me choking and cough for 5 minutes with that Rue Paul crack . As for Mr Keyes , he is a man that Rush admires , I wish Bush would had nominated him for the Sec of Education . He sure would have whip them liberal educrats in line . As a minority I would NOT vote for Powell , sorry he is just way too liberal for me .
Link Posted: 1/21/2002 10:36:25 PM EDT
Originally Posted By Skibane: Condi Rice.
View Quote
Condi Rice..... Skibane that's brilliant !! (Course I'm going to delete this response in five minutes.) Mrs. Powell does not want the General to run. So Sec. Powell is probably out anyway.
Link Posted: 1/21/2002 10:48:14 PM EDT
maybe my history is not correct, but wasnt collin powell part of the clinton administration? And was he not one of the people involved with making sure the task force rangers in somalia did not get the equiptment that they requested spectar ac-130 gun ships and armor protected vehicles? I also saw a documetary on PBS awhile ago and i thought that Collin Powell was also part of the Reagon administration. And I thought that he was one of the biggest influencial people who strongly advised to not strike back against all of the terrorist attacks that were being done to american soldiers around the world? If my history is wrong then I gladdly stand corrected to brush up on my history, but I am not impressed with collin powell's performance. I believe that he is one of those people in the bush administration that is there to try to prove to the liberals in america that bush can be bi-partisan. My prediction is that if collinn powell were to ever be elected president that you would see just about the same, if not worse, freedoms in america comprimised just like when clinton was president. collin powell in my opinion is a liberal scum sucking pig, and he would sell america down the road for a one world government. to me he is anti-america and just as stupid as clinton.
Link Posted: 1/22/2002 12:17:37 AM EDT
Originally Posted By Mortech: Damn it Bushmaster ! You had me choking and cough for 5 minutes with that Rue Paul crack.
View Quote
By Jove, that's got it: [red]Ron & Rue in 2004![/red] But will they run as Republicrats, or will Ron run as a Libertarian again? [:p]
Link Posted: 1/22/2002 11:30:12 PM EDT
does anyone REALLY think that bush is dumb enough to dump cheney in 2004? NO prez that i know of has ever dumped their VP for someone else during a re-election, i think he would look really bad. now if cheney dies out of office that is a different scenario if bush sr. had dumped quayle then maybe he would of got re-elected, but it really gives a lot of fuel for the liberal media fire to throw back. and theres no way in hell gore will even try again.
Link Posted: 1/23/2002 2:19:49 AM EDT
Our luck we'll end up with a; Jesse Jackson/Dianna Feinstein ticket.[puke] [puke] [puke] [puke] [puke] [puke]
Link Posted: 1/23/2002 8:40:46 AM EDT
Originally Posted By LAgunman2K: does anyone REALLY think that bush is dumb enough to dump cheney in 2004? NO prez that i know of has ever dumped their VP for someone else during a re-election, i think he would look really bad. now if cheney dies out of office that is a different scenario if bush sr. had dumped quayle then maybe he would of got re-elected, but it really gives a lot of fuel for the liberal media fire to throw back. and theres no way in hell gore will even try again.
View Quote
I would have liked to have seen Bush, Sr. try it without Quayle, it would have made for a more sporting contest, and one less thing for the media to attack. I respectfully disagree about the capacity for Gore to make a stupid move. There is no end to that boy's idiocy AND ego.
Link Posted: 1/23/2002 8:58:11 AM EDT
If anyone's interested, a good read that gives a slightly different view of Powell from the popular media is "The Generals War" by Mike Gordon and Bernard Trainor. It's about the gulf war. I have no idea if the book is correct in the details, but it is very readable and gives a good account of the backroom war going on among generals.
Top Top