I think almost everyone has that "litmus test" issue when deciding who to vote for.

The same questions could be asked "Why is reproductive choice so important to libs?" or "Why is keeping prayer out of schools so important to libs?".

Everyone has an issue which, to them, is a little more important than other issues...

Ooops, belay that. Obama recently added this, buried in "Sportsmen" under "Additional Issues" on his site:

This is, of course, not really true. Barack supports the "Assault Weapons Ban".

In point of fact, the AR-15 platform (specifically banned in the law Obama supports) is widely used in one of the largest organized marksmanship programs in the nation, the Camp Perry national championships.

A Camp Perry contestant (one of those target shooters Omaba allegedly supports):

In an Obama world, he has to point his finger and say "bang bang", since that rifle is one Obama supports banning.

Another one:

(Yes, Obama's desired semi-auto ban even covers the WWII era Garand)

A junior marksmanship team at Camp Perry:

Omaba wants every rifle you see in that picture banned.

You see, at Camp Perry, around 90% of the rifles used in centerfire matches are AR-15 derivatives. Another 9% are M-14 derivatives.

Obama, who claims he supports target shooters, is on record calling for a ban on the rifles used by 99% of the top competitors in the US.

In other words, the man is a liar. He supports bans, but tries to cover it up with pretty language to fool sporting shooters into supporting him.

Matt

__________________
De duobus malis, minus est semper eligendum

__________________


I'll put this down to a balloon popping rant, as you have now been given more than enough proof that Obama is nothing more than the same old same old.

No one can help it if Obama is exposing himself as the same everyday venal, blustering hapless (especially economically, socially and diplomatically) intellectually bankrupt politician it appears he is.

It appears some are now pissed that having jumped on the bandwagon, they have allowed themselves to be chained to it, and are reduced to shooting the messenger, and will rant at anything smacking of criticism.

Clue for you- no one made him promise to take public campaign financing, no one made him take those Muslims off the stage, no one made him write in,
“audacity of hope” that he lives and breathes town hall meetings only to then to back out of town halls with the other candidate, no one made him attempt to try a slight of hand regards Wright, then throwing him under a buys when the pressure became harmful to his political future ( or the comparison wherein he threw his grandmother under the bus too), no one made him sign that campaign form where in he agrees to a total handgun ban......need I go on?

These are his actions and he wasn’t coerced into making any of these pledges etc. Mccain is probably no different. BUT, he has been vetted, if you cannot gain traction by keelhauling him over his past transgressions don’t take it out on those that can re: Obama....they both own it.

A little insight re; your early choice in choosing Obama before you knew much about him might be in order. Try cutting that.

Oh and final clue- Bush/Cheney aren’t running......

__________________
Obama-e fungis nati homines....

I think a few people probably will. I didn't view Bush's appeal as particularly ideological. I think many people voted for him because they felt he was best suited to protect the country, and they felt he would handle the war better than his counterpart. I also think a lot of people really disliked John Kerry. He was defined as an indecisive flip-flopper who lied about his war record. And people bought it. Obama has been much harder to define and many people, who I think bought Kerry's definition, aren't buying the one's attributed to Obama. Many people have heard the labels before. They're calling Obama a flip-flopper on issues like Iran and gun control. They're calling Obama "the most liberal Senator in Congress." They applied both of these labels to John Kerry. At the beginning of Obama's campaign, he shrewdly proclaimed that his opponents would use smears to derail his candidacy. Now, people have become more reluctant to swallow what they're told (on both sides).

Plus, I think many people underestimate the desire of white folks to vote for a black president that they can stomach.

__________________
"The nice part about being a pessimist is that you are constantly being either proven right or pleasantly surprised.”
- George Will

There are several other sources, as well. But that should establish it pretty well.

Matt

__________________
De duobus malis, minus est semper eligendum

So you think people who voted for Kerry and Gore won't vote for McCain, but people who voted for Bush will vote for Obama?

And, at the time, he was. Obama didn't get there until 2005...

How is that "shrewd"??

How is "predicting" what's gone on in every general election in recent memory "shrewd"? Trying to derail a candidacy is what happens...

This from someone who believes Obama's prediction about his opponents try to derail his candidacy was "shrewd". My four year old nephew could predict that.

But Obama said it, so you view him as some maverick visionary...



Why is it that the only people who keep bringing "race" to the forefront are libs?

See, conservatives tend to look at how a candidate positions himself on an issue. Libs want to vote for Obama because he's black.

For me, it's an absolute non-factor. For most conservatives I know, it's a non-issue. It will continue to be a non-issue, regardless of how often or how loudly libs point out that Obama's black...

Those are interesting quotes...

First, you make two assumptions. You assume that Obama's disapproval of concealed weapons amounts to a desire to create a federal ban on concealed weapons. Not only do I think it is virtually impossible to disprove Obama's assertion that "more innocent people could (get shot during) altercations," but I'm not sure that arguing against concealed weapons really qualifies as having a cavalier attitude toward state's rights. If he was morally against capital punishment, would you say he possesses a cavalier attitude toward the death penalty because 34 states permit executions?

This was a quote from Obama regarding the safety of Illinois residents. It's four years old and, without any context, could easily be suggesting that national legislation is needed to prevent people from states where concealed weapons are permitted from coming in to Illinois with their concealed weapons.

The complaints about Obama's opinions regarding the assault weapons ban are perfectly justified, in my opinion. The guy doesn't think assault weapons should be protected by the 2nd Amendment. That's more of an ideological debate. Furthermore, Obama says he wants to protect the rights of hunters, but that's not a blanketed, unrestricted statement. If hunters wanted to use grenades to blow up their game, I'm not sure Obama's opposition to it would qualify him as a liar.

Furthermore, Obama seems to at least have moderated many of his positions with regard to gun control. God forbid anyone moderate their positions, right? What many people don't seem to realize, is that public officials are accountable for their actions. If he gets into office, and starts radically altering gun ownership laws, he'd be thrown out onto his ass.

The old argument of "Those crazy Democrats are gonna take away our guns!" is exactly now what it always has been: Bullshit.

__________________
"The nice part about being a pessimist is that you are constantly being either proven right or pleasantly surprised.”
- George Will

yes, and come labels are well deserved and cannot be obfuscated despite rhetoric etc. Obama is deeply liberal, we both know it and he’s attempting to distance himself form that, if folks investigate and take issue with that, then power to them. McCain is distancing himself from immigration reforms he pushed and a gun platform as well, tough not as egregious as Obama flip flop. Its all to be had, if one looks. I never bought McCain, still have not, those that bought Obama on his primary rhetoric deserve what they get when they find out all that glitters is not gold.

Kerry had a number fo tings that turned people off on a whole different level, yelling at his personal asst. for forgetting his hair brush, the “talk with European allies" remark in the debate, his look, how he sounded, he sounded exactly like a caricature of the N.E. effete snob, you cannot get past some of that no matter how hard you try. They own it.


Anyone that bases their vote on race, creed etc. deserves exactly what they get.
Rice as the highest serving black woman has in fact a poor record as Sec state. Tough luck.......why bush would anoint a person whose specialty was Russian cold war era diplomacy is anyone’s guess, I think we both know, but in any event, another flop.

__________________
Obama-e fungis nati homines....

... or just pandering/strategising as per usual for politicians.

Obama has had that almost obligatory position on CC permits since his Chicago state Senate days when to oppose it for his district meant losing the election or seat.

Yet, on this campaign trail after he and his wife started touring the American countryside and noticing the whole scene is different (even his wife got caught in Iowa saying now she can see why rural people would want a gun), he's gone quiet. If he backs off, he'll offend his urban/suburban bases. If he maintains it, he'll offend any of his rural bases that support CC licensing. So, he just keeps quiet or minimalist (low priority voice tone).

Why McCain hasn't played this issue up is somewhat guesswork by me. Swing state PA, for example, is a 'shall issue' CC licence state and has, I believe, the second biggest pro-gun laws/ownership/culture with only TX exceeding it. Maybe he's likewise concerned about not alienating anti-gun suburban supporters that he likewise needs and/or Obama bringing out that McCain doesn't have a 'good record' NRA-wise.

But what's even more pandering about it is that on a federal level it's apparently just a moot point due to divides between federal and state powers and additionally that such a measure, even if it could be lawfully enacted that it just wouldn't pass through Congress. Way too many Dems would oppose it, never mind GOPers, due to local culture positions on the subject. If he officially reversed himself, he'd be accused of flip-flopping for political expediency, irritate his urban/suburban and/or gun control supporters, and not likely get credibility with rural/pro-gun ones anyway on the issue. So, he just goes minimalist on the issue importance with it.

__________________
Around 200,000 Irish immigrants served in the Union and Confederate armies in the American Civil War, often forming their own regiments and, at times, fought each other. At Fredericksburg, the Union’s Irish Brigade faced the Irish McMillan's Guards of Cobb's 24th Georgia entrenched in a sunken road behind a stone wall. Ordered to make a suicidal charge, it became one of the most famous events of the Civil War. The re-enactment portrayed in the movie Gods and Generals:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7qVCxEupPag

George Bush disapproves of gay marriage and abortion. Do you think he would not have thrown his weight behind movements to Constitutionaly ban those?

Well, there's no reason to think Obama wouldn't do the same here...

Instead of saying that it would be virtually impossible to disprove it, I prefer to take his comment and say that it's virtually impossible to prove it. The onus is on him to show us that what he says is true, not on us to show that what he says is not true...

Actually, any thorough investigation of Kerry's record showed that the standards used to measure his "liberalism" were total BS.

Maybe "shrewd" wasn't the best word. I suppose "competently" would have been better. Kerry didn't do it and it may have cost him the election.

Conservatives tend to look at how a candidate positions himself on an issue? That's an absolute joke. Rather than debate the issues, prominent conservatives have been trying to characterize Obama using things like his preacher, his wife, his family, his religion, etc. Those aren't the issues. Abortion rights, same-sex marriage, taxing/spending, affirmative action, gun control, the environment, drug control, capital punishment, national security. Those are the issues. If conservatives would just focus on those, they'd have a much better opportunity to characterize Obama in whatever way they want. Ask the Average Joe how he feels about those issues. I'd be willing to be bet he qualifies as conservative at least 75% of the time.

Furthermore, this hysterical reluctance to discuss issues that involve race is absolutely pathetic. Any time anyone brings up race, people go "Why are liberals so obsessed with race?" We're not. Most of us try to talk about it rationally, as I did in my comment about how some conservative white people might take Obama's race into account when voting for him. What used to be called "playing the race card" has now become "discarding the race deck." People are so reluctant to talk about race in a practical sense and I can't figure out why. Are they afraid of being called a racist?

__________________
"The nice part about being a pessimist is that you are constantly being either proven right or pleasantly surprised.”
- George Will

Actually, I didn't say I didn't think Gore and Kerry voters wouldn't vote for McCain, I just asked if you knew what the reasoning was behind such a mentality.

__________________
"The nice part about being a pessimist is that you are constantly being either proven right or pleasantly surprised.”
- George Will

You are doing it again; we are right back to square one in this circular debate. I was told, quite unequivocally, here by many, judgment and character were important factors and ow bush failed on these fronts etc.

So, now judgment and /or character has no place here now? I see.


And one more time, if the last 2 months have not put a point on this, its not about race, its about, Judgment as applied to Wright, Pfleger, Emil Jones, Meeks, Rezko, Johsnon et al. Race is a strawman.


dude, you are kidding right? identity politics is part and parcel of the left, you know it, I know it. if obama were white, hillary would be the nominee right now, we both know that too.

__________________
Obama-e fungis nati homines....

Nonsense.

Each state decides whether or not to grant reciprocity to another state's CCW license.

Illinois does not honor CCW licenses from any other state.

But nice try spinning that to favor Obama as much as possible.