This is too important not to post here.  It's time we all stand together.  We're working on getting ISRA behind this guy as well.

http://www.icarry.org/images/brady.gif
Bill Brady for Gov 2006

The primaries are rapidly approaching. Will gun owners come together to stand behind a Republican candidate? If we do not, be prepared for another 4 years of Rod. What does that mean? We can expect more infringements on our rights and zero ground gained. We had the best opportunity to override his vetos this year, and we failed. If we don't get Blago out, we're done.

I personally believe our best chance is Senator Bill Brady. The race will be between Oberweis and Brady. The other Republicans are moderates, and won't pull the vote from true conservatives. Brady is a proven ally with a great voting record. He supports Concealed Carry, pledges to work to pass it, and seems to genuinely believe in the Second Amendment.

Oberweis on the other hand has flip-flopped onthe gun issue. In 2004 he stated, in a TV interview, that he supported the Clinton "Assault Weapon" ban. This is a serious infraction. Now he claims to have repositioned himself. He has flip-flopped on abortion as well. Recently, he reached out to Kathy Salvi (wife of anti-gun turncoat/traitor Al Salvi) to be Lt. Gov. The choice is clear -- we've gotta back Brady.

The concensus seems to be that most of us here at ICarry.org give Bill Brady our support. I think he is the best chance we have at a republican candidate making it to the governor's chair. I hope that gun owners across the state will see this and give him their support as well. We need a victory in the primaries coming up.

Will gun owners stand together? How long will we wait to stand behind ONE candidate? Will we just watch as the election passes us by and we're stuck with a RINO or a BLAGO? Let's win this one -- no one wants to wait another 4 years.

One step at a time.  We've gotta start out with realistic goals ;)

I am NOT a Republican OR a Democrat.  I'm independent, and plan on staying that way.  I like what the Lib party stands for though, besides all the silly pot-smoking stuff.  Not saying I disagree, but they ought to focus less on that -- hurts their credibility a bit.

Quoted: I like what the Lib party stands for though, besides all the silly pot-smoking stuff.  Not saying I disagree, but they ought to focus less on that -- hurts their credibility a bit.

Agreed, but voting Republican is never going to help our problem.

To those that think that no Libertarian could ever win an election, please see Pennslyvania for the results of what happens when people vote for their liberty.

If you are for small government, the Republican party is not for you.

Enough is enough.  Vote Libertarian.

Quoted: Quoted: I like what the Lib party stands for though, besides all the silly pot-smoking stuff.  Not saying I disagree, but they ought to focus less on that -- hurts their credibility a bit. Agreed, but voting Republican is never going to help our problem. To those that think that no Libertarian could ever win an election, please see Pennslyvania for the results of what happens when people vote for their liberty. If you are for small government, the Republican party is not for you. Enough is enough.  Vote Libertarian.

Tim,
Your goals for this upcoming election are unrealistic. As a strong Libertarian you should know in the few elections that you have been able to vote that no one from the Libertarian party has ever come close to winning an election for a major state office in Illinois. If you take SAK's advice there is a chance that some of the gun rights you hold dear might be saved from being stripped away. Make your own decision but don't waste your vote on someone that has no chance of getting elected. You might as well have a write in campaign for Scooby Doo.

You might as well have a write in campaign for Scooby Doo

Scooby snacks in every pot

Vote libertarian if you like having democrats in office.

We should support the Republican Liberty Caucus, it is the only hope of saving the republicans.

Quoted: " Vote libertarian if you like having democrats in office.

+1

You can vote Republican too if you like having dems in office.  Take your pick.

Quoted: You can vote Republican too if you like having dems in office.  Take your pick.

Quoted: Quoted: You can vote Republican too if you like having dems in office.  Take your pick.

It has worked for chicago for 50 years.

What i'd like to know is...Where the "F" is the national RNC? This state has been abandoned like a gay son to a homophobe father. The RNC seems to want nothing to do with this state. By their inaction they created an enviroment where the Dems get to run unapposed. What ever happened to the doctrine of turning blue states into red ones?

<rant off>

Quoted: i26.photobucket.com/albums/c114/twodownzero/libertarian.gif

Republican vote stealers.

Quoted: Republican vote stealers.

Anyone that actually thinks that is very misinformed.  Libertarians are not republicans and never will be even close.  Attacks on the liberty of Americans like the Patriot Act (which came from a Republican-dominated Congress and Presidential Administration) could have NEVER happened under a libertarian government.

The amount of liberty and property (in the form of money) that has been stolen from the American people by the Republican party is equal to that of the Democratic party.

Go ahead and keep voting for the party that is supporting the religious right, moral statism, and losses of liberty such as the Patriot Act all while spending more money than any President in history.

Don't get me wrong...I'm not going to just sit here and tell you how terrible Bush is, because they're all messed up, both of the major parties, however, endorsing some Republican who is not even going to get the nomination from his own party for Governor in this state isn't going to solve our problems.

I suggest ANYONE who thinks that libertarianism shares much of anything with either of the major parties do some research on the Libertarian platform and get back to me.

Quoted: Quoted: Republican vote stealers. Anyone that actually thinks that is very misinformed.  Libertarians are not republicans and never will be even close.  Attacks on the liberty of Americans like the Patriot Act (which came from a Republican-dominated Congress and Presidential Administration) could have NEVER happened under a libertarian government. The amount of liberty and property (in the form of money) that has been stolen from the American people by the Republican party is equal to that of the Democratic party. Go ahead and keep voting for the party that is supporting the religious right, moral statism, and losses of liberty such as the Patriot Act all while spending more money than any President in history. I ABSOLULTELY WILL DO THIS!! Don't get me wrong...I'm not going to just sit here and tell you how terrible Bush is, because they're all messed up, both of the major parties, however, endorsing some Republican who is not even going to get the nomination from his own party for Governor in this state isn't going to solve our problems. I suggest ANYONE who thinks that libertarianism shares much of anything with either of the major parties do some research on the Libertarian platform and get back to me.

Gidwitz/Rauschenberger are probably the best chance the Republicans have of getting someone in the Governor's office who knows how to run a state government. A candidate running solely on a platform of enacting concealed carry won't get much support from the general public. There are more important things to most citizens than whether they can carry a gun or not.

Of the things important to me as a private citizen, concealed carry is not one of the top three things I'm concerned about with regard to state government.

I have problems with the state judiciary not properly sentencing violent offenders. I have a problem with extremely wasteful spending habits. Blago recently pledged that the state would contribute $1,000,000 to rebuild a church that burnt down in Chicago recently. Isn't that what insurance is for? I have a problem with the state pouring more and more money into Chicago's educational system that just doesn't seem to figure out how to properly manage it.

These are things that are more serious to keeping our state's economy alive while CCW is important, it really has nothing to do with economy. Someone who will run the state gov't the right way is the same sort of person who would likely support CCW. I guarantee it will never happen in this state unless the LEGISLATURE has the right people in it. It's got to get to the governor's desk first.

Quoted: Gidwitz/Rauschenberger are probably the best chance the Republicans have of getting someone in the Governor's office who knows how to run a state government. A candidate running solely on a platform of enacting concealed carry won't get much support from the general public. There are more important things to most citizens than whether they can carry a gun or not. Of the things important to me as a private citizen, concealed carry is not one of the top three things I'm concerned about with regard to state government. I have problems with the state judiciary not properly sentencing violent offenders. I have a problem with extremely wasteful spending habits. Blago recently pledged that the state would contribute $1,000,000 to rebuild a church that burnt down in Chicago recently. Isn't that what insurance is for? I have a problem with the state pouring more and more money into Chicago's educational system that just doesn't seem to figure out how to properly manage it. These are things that are more serious to keeping our state's economy alive while CCW is important, it really has nothing to do with economy. Someone who will run the state gov't the right way is the same sort of person who would likely support CCW. I guarantee it will never happen in this state unless the LEGISLATURE has the right people in it. It's got to get to the governor's desk first.

Of course concealed carry doesn't matter to you.  Despite the fact that the lack of concealed carry is one of the most digusting losses of liberty in this state, it doesn't apply to you because you're an LEO, so of course you don't give a rat's if Joe Schmoe gets to carry.

Me personally, my right to protect myself from loss of life is one of the most important important things to me as an individual.  The words, "Life, liberty, and property" are in that order for a reason.  All the economic issues in the world are about property--specifically, money.  While my property is important to me--nothing is more important to me than my life, and as a result, CCW is one of the most important issues as far as I'm concerned.

I have a problem with the wasteful spending habits as well.  The federal goverment is far worse than the state, but both are bad about wasting money.  Church rebuild?  Give me a break.  Public schools?  The libertarian party has a solution for that--abolish the public school system.  Money isn't going to help our public education system anyway.  The free market sure would end the "monopoly" on our children's education and sure would open up a lot of doors for folks if it was accompanied by a tax break.

Forget the legislature for now.  It's quite difficult to get enough legislators in the GA to push their agenda without help from the executive branch.  Only way that can happen is with veto override which you can never count on.

That said, I'd just like to restate that my life is much more important than any economic issue ever will be, and I hope that yours is as well.

Anyone that actually thinks that is very misinformed.  Libertarians are not republicans and never will be even close.  Attacks on the liberty of Americans like the Patriot Act (which came from a Republican-dominated Congress and Presidential Administration) could have NEVER happened under a libertarian government.

Nothing can happen under a libertarian government because it is all they can do to mount a succesful campaign for dog catcher. They are utterly inept. They don't get elected to anything and don't have influence over anything.

Don't preach to me about libertarians. When I was young dumb and full of ... I voted for Ron Paul to be President (1988). I won't point out how old you were when I was in the voting booth.  

Look into the Republican Liberty Caucus,  we stand a better chance of turning a ship that is sailing already than going anywhere in one that is still in drydock.

Quoted: Quoted: You can vote Republican too if you like having dems in office.  Take your pick.

+1.

I posted here in the HTF asking about Brady.  If he's a good guy like I heard then I would vote for him.

I've never voted Libertarian.  I've always voted straight Republican.  

Quoted: Nothing can happen under a libertarian government because it is all they can do to mount a succesful campaign for dog catcher. They are utterly inept. They don't get elected to anything and don't have influence over anything.

That is simply not true.

There are many, many libertarians in office all over the country.

And Ron Paul, the man you speak of, is one of them.

There are many, many libertarians in office all over the country. And Ron Paul, the man you speak of, is one of them.

As a Republican.

I too subscribe to the ideals of Libertarianism.

But I also understand voting Libertarian in the upcoming Governor's race will re-elect Blagojevich.

Here's a big clue fellas, unless Chicago decides differently, Blagobitch WILL be re-elected. The buying the ghetto church is the most disgusting and blatant indicator.

Think if a church in Barrington burnt down he'd be there throwing money around like Daddy Warbucks? Hell no because people who live in the areas of IL that actually make a dime for this pathetic state do not like him. Minus the Soccer Mom minivan crowd. I may add however that the bullshit Liberalism of the Babyboomers is starting to die down in the suburbs. More people in their 20's and 30's are becoming more conservative and more pro-gun much to their parent's dismay, and thank god.

Libertarian ideology is excellent in theory and really sorta makes me wonder how Americans can think any other way, especially gun owners. Hell, I see union members at local gunshows who voted for KERRY because their unions tell them to vote Democrat and they do it because the thought of having to work for a living without a union protecting them terrifies them. As I was told in my youth, unions do nothing more than penalize good managers and protect bad and lazy employees. If you are a union worker, please don't try and convince me about the good they do for the American worker. The reason cars are $30,000 and the reason homes are all unaffordable is due to union labor. The exporting of almost all manufacturing is due to paying uneducated mooks $18 per hour to assemble televisions.

My point being is that no matter how "conservative" Illinois folks think they are, unless the powers that be in IL (i.e. Chicago, Unions, etc) decide otherwise, Rod will be your ruler. Chicago is the labor union capitol of the world. There is so much more to these issues than concealed carry.

I'm voting Republican, but to just brush off the Libertarian party is the wrong direction to head. The Republican Party and the Democratic Party are two nuts upon the same sundae. The Republicans of nowadays are pussy whipped Liberals if you ask me. Take Judy Barr Topika for instance, riding on floats in the Gay Pride parades and pro-gun control. What kind of Republican is that?

From what I understand, Gidwitz is a scumbag. Any one I have spoken to in the know has had nothing but bad comments on him, I am not going to repeat them as they could be rumors. Let's just say, from what I have heard, he is big on lip service, slow to deliver and the first to lie right to your face. Like I said though, just what I have heard.

If Judy Bar Topika were to be my Republican option, I'd buck the system and vote Libertarian. Sometimes we have to put anti gun Liberals in office to show liberal Republicans we will not vote them in and be sold out. Politicians ONLY respond to their being elected or not.

Quoted: Quoted: Gidwitz/Rauschenberger are probably the best chance the Republicans have of getting someone in the Governor's office who knows how to run a state government. A candidate running solely on a platform of enacting concealed carry won't get much support from the general public. There are more important things to most citizens than whether they can carry a gun or not. Of the things important to me as a private citizen, concealed carry is not one of the top three things I'm concerned about with regard to state government. I have problems with the state judiciary not properly sentencing violent offenders. I have a problem with extremely wasteful spending habits. Blago recently pledged that the state would contribute $1,000,000 to rebuild a church that burnt down in Chicago recently. Isn't that what insurance is for? I have a problem with the state pouring more and more money into Chicago's educational system that just doesn't seem to figure out how to properly manage it. These are things that are more serious to keeping our state's economy alive while CCW is important, it really has nothing to do with economy. Someone who will run the state gov't the right way is the same sort of person who would likely support CCW. I guarantee it will never happen in this state unless the LEGISLATURE has the right people in it. It's got to get to the governor's desk first. Of course concealed carry doesn't matter to you.  Despite the fact that the lack of concealed carry is one of the most digusting losses of liberty in this state, it doesn't apply to you because you're an LEO, so of course you don't give a rat's if Joe Schmoe gets to carry. Me personally, my right to protect myself from loss of life is one of the most important important things to me as an individual.  The words, "Life, liberty, and property" are in that order for a reason.  All the economic issues in the world are about property--specifically, money.  While my property is important to me--nothing is more important to me than my life, and as a result, CCW is one of the most important issues as far as I'm concerned. I have a problem with the wasteful spending habits as well.  The federal goverment is far worse than the state, but both are bad about wasting money.  Church rebuild?  Give me a break.  Public schools?  The libertarian party has a solution for that--abolish the public school system.  Money isn't going to help our public education system anyway.  The free market sure would end the "monopoly" on our children's education and sure would open up a lot of doors for folks if it was accompanied by a tax break. Forget the legislature for now.  It's quite difficult to get enough legislators in the GA to push their agenda without help from the executive branch.  Only way that can happen is with veto override which you can never count on. That said, I'd just like to restate that my life is much more important than any economic issue ever will be, and I hope that yours is as well.

Don't tell me what matters to me or what I am concerned about. I do care about Concealed Carry, and I think it's important that our state passes a law to allow it. However there are other things I care more about, and would still care more about even if I was not in LE.

Abolish the public schools? Get real.

Quoted: Gidwitz/Rauschenberger are probably the best chance the Republicans have of getting someone in the Governor's office who knows how to run a state government. A candidate running solely on a platform of enacting concealed carry won't get much support from the general public. There are more important things to most citizens than whether they can carry a gun or not. Of the things important to me as a private citizen, concealed carry is not one of the top three things I'm concerned about with regard to state government. I have problems with the state judiciary not properly sentencing violent offenders. I have a problem with extremely wasteful spending habits. Blago recently pledged that the state would contribute $1,000,000 to rebuild a church that burnt down in Chicago recently. Isn't that what insurance is for? I have a problem with the state pouring more and more money into Chicago's educational system that just doesn't seem to figure out how to properly manage it. These are things that are more serious to keeping our state's economy alive while CCW is important, it really has nothing to do with economy. Someone who will run the state gov't the right way is the same sort of person who would likely support CCW. I guarantee it will never happen in this state unless the LEGISLATURE has the right people in it. It's got to get to the governor's desk first.

One thing I'm concerned about is whether the governor will let union jobs as opposed to Governor Ferretface who won't let jobs.  He let less jobs than last year.
(My dad's a union worker FWIW.)

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Gidwitz/Rauschenberger are probably the best chance the Republicans have of getting someone in the Governor's office who knows how to run a state government. A candidate running solely on a platform of enacting concealed carry won't get much support from the general public. There are more important things to most citizens than whether they can carry a gun or not. Of the things important to me as a private citizen, concealed carry is not one of the top three things I'm concerned about with regard to state government. I have problems with the state judiciary not properly sentencing violent offenders. I have a problem with extremely wasteful spending habits. Blago recently pledged that the state would contribute $1,000,000 to rebuild a church that burnt down in Chicago recently. Isn't that what insurance is for? I have a problem with the state pouring more and more money into Chicago's educational system that just doesn't seem to figure out how to properly manage it. These are things that are more serious to keeping our state's economy alive while CCW is important, it really has nothing to do with economy. Someone who will run the state gov't the right way is the same sort of person who would likely support CCW. I guarantee it will never happen in this state unless the LEGISLATURE has the right people in it. It's got to get to the governor's desk first. Of course concealed carry doesn't matter to you.  Despite the fact that the lack of concealed carry is one of the most digusting losses of liberty in this state, it doesn't apply to you because you're an LEO, so of course you don't give a rat's if Joe Schmoe gets to carry. Me personally, my right to protect myself from loss of life is one of the most important important things to me as an individual.  The words, "Life, liberty, and property" are in that order for a reason.  All the economic issues in the world are about property--specifically, money.  While my property is important to me--nothing is more important to me than my life, and as a result, CCW is one of the most important issues as far as I'm concerned. I have a problem with the wasteful spending habits as well.  The federal goverment is far worse than the state, but both are bad about wasting money.  Church rebuild?  Give me a break.  Public schools?  The libertarian party has a solution for that--abolish the public school system.  Money isn't going to help our public education system anyway.  The free market sure would end the "monopoly" on our children's education and sure would open up a lot of doors for folks if it was accompanied by a tax break. Forget the legislature for now.  It's quite difficult to get enough legislators in the GA to push their agenda without help from the executive branch.  Only way that can happen is with veto override which you can never count on. That said, I'd just like to restate that my life is much more important than any economic issue ever will be, and I hope that yours is as well. Don't tell me what matters to me or what I am concerned about. I do care about Concealed Carry, and I think it's important that our state passes a law to allow it. However there are other things I care more about, and would still care more about even if I was not in LE. Abolish the public schools? Get real.

How are public schools any less socialistic than any other government program?

I guess in a way, they're worse, as they're even less sucessful.

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: [snippage] Abolish the public schools? Get real. How are public schools any less socialistic than any other government program? I guess in a way, they're worse, as they're even less sucessful.

You can't abolish the public schools.  Not every parent can afford the cost of home schooling or private schools, but truth be told they're pretty bad.  Where else are you going to send your kids?

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: [snippage] Abolish the public schools? Get real. How are public schools any less socialistic than any other government program? I guess in a way, they're worse, as they're even less sucessful. You can't abolish the public schools.  Not every parent can afford the cost of home schooling or private schools, but truth be told they're pretty bad.  Where else are you going to send your kids?

Everyone would have a lot more money if not for the horrendous taxes we all pay.  Maybe even then, not ALL parents would be able to afford to send their children to school, but nearly all would.  Whether or not a poor family can afford to send their children to school is not my problem.  It is wrong for you to say that I should bear the cost to educate YOUR children because you can't afford it.  Much like welfare, that is theft of my property by the government to give it to you...AKA, socialism.

Abolishing the public school system would breed competition, and all of our children would benefit from a much better education.

I can't hardly afford to go to community college and I don't see you guys all lining up to pay my tuition, and I wouldn't expect you to.  It's an expense that I have to bear as an individual.  It's not YOUR problem if I can't afford to go to school.

Quoted: I can't hardly afford to go to community college and I don't see you guys all lining up to pay my tuition, and I wouldn't expect you to.  It's an expense that I have to bear as an individual.  It's not YOUR problem if I can't afford to go to school.

You could sell some of your assets to raise funds for necessary expenditures such as education.

Quoted: [I can hardly afford to go to community college and I don't see you guys all lining up to pay my tuition, and I wouldn't expect you to.  It's an expense that I have to bear as an individual.  It's not YOUR problem if I can't afford to go to school.

Same here.  I pay out of my pocket to go to school.  


Edited for grammar.  Can't Hardly is a double negative.  

Quoted: Quoted: I can't hardly afford to go to community college and I don't see you guys all lining up to pay my tuition, and I wouldn't expect you to.  It's an expense that I have to bear as an individual.  It's not YOUR problem if I can't afford to go to school. You could sell some of your assets to raise funds for necessary expenditures such as education.

As could you if there was no public school and your children needed an education.