martymankinss last blog post..Scooter Sunday #8

I see your concern, especially with previous documents and what not that has been discovered, but I still say any changes he may make still have to go through the entire process. It’s not just him, even with veto power or not. A lot can change once someone gets into office, regardless of their previous support for issues.

martymankinss last blog post..I’m A Liberal

“swift boating” implies an attack that is unfair or untrue - I still see nothing untrue in what I’m saying. I’m not putting words in Obama’s mouth. As far as I know, I’m only speaking the truth here.

From his mouth:

As a general principle, I believe that the Constitution confers an individual right to bear arms

We get from this that he believes the Constitution confers an individual right. We do not get from this that he supports the right. See the wording?

then this:

Obama was being misleading when he denied that his handwriting had been on a document endorsing a state ban on the sale and possession of handguns in Illinois. Obama responded, “No, my writing wasn’t on that particular questionnaire. As I said, I have never favored an all-out ban on handguns.”
Actually, Obama’s writing was on the 1996 document, which was filed when Obama was running for the Illinois state Senate. A Chicago nonprofit, Independent Voters of Illinois, had this question, and Obama took hard line:

35. Do you support state legislation to:
a. ban the manufacture, sale and possession of handguns? Yes.
b. ban assault weapons? Yes.
c. mandatory waiting periods and background checks? Yes.

Obama’s campaign said, “Sen. Obama didn’t fill out these state Senate questionnaires–a staffer did–and there are several answers that didn’t reflect his views then or now. He may have jotted some notes on the front page of the questionnaire, but some answers didn’t reflect his views.”

Notice how the answer says “there are several answers that didn’t reflect his views” but DOES NOT MENTION AT ALL that any of the incorrectly answered questions have to do with guns.

Take this other quote:

Q: When you were in the state senate, you talked about licensing and registering gun owners. Would you do that as president?
A: I don’t think that we can get that done.

He’s stating that he doesn’t think he can get it done - the act of licensing and registering gun owners. He does NOT say that he would not do it or that he’s against it.

We got our stimulus check deposited before we got the letter. I hope they see the impact made by new gun purchases. That is, before Obama pushes through the “1 gun per month” bill he co-sponsored in 2000.

I’ve taken the liberty of doing some research based on the links you posted above. While I can see how the various links paint Obama as someone who is attacking the 2nd Amendment, the only way to override an amendment is to get more than 2/3 support from each state. That would be 37 states. I seriously doubt that a single elected person can dictate to 37 states to repeal a constitutional amendment.

I can see, from the following link: http://www.boston.com/news/politics/politicalintelligence/2008/05/republicans_att.html
that Obama is more interested in trying to curb violence than take away guns from law-abiding citizens. The YouTube video you linked to is part of the above linked article.

I know we agree to disagree on this, but this smells a bit like “swift boating” to me.

Still waiting for my stimulus check. Promised on May 16th (per IRS letter I received) and all calls to the IRS to find out where it’s at all end with “We are experiencing high call volume at this time. Please try your call again later.” I’ve got an economy to save!

martymankinss last blog post..I’m A Liberal

Cissa Fireheart, I appreciate the note!

Robin, not so sound alarmist, but RUN! RUN! RUN! HE *WILL* RAISE TAXES HE PROMISED HE WOULD.

martymankins, Glad to hear your opinion. Re “direness”, the NRA has made plenty of cases why this should be seen as a dire situation. And it’s not that I posted links about his lack of support - they are links about his attacks on the 2nd amendment. He is proactive in his gunning down of our rights (pun intended).

Avi, you know, I’m also very eager and supportive of the fresh look/blank slate piece. I didn’t mean to imply that his newness did not have advantages, and I agree with those advantages. His support for the Oath of Presidential Transparency, for example, is quite refreshing and I’m standing up and yelling HELLS YEAH! I know I heard somewhere that he was discussing backing out of the oath, but I can find no evidence of that article. I do hope (yes, I have hope!) that if he gets elected he at least stays true to that Oath he signed. (btw, part of his small record includes sponsoring a bill similar to this oath, another good thing in his favor).

Dave2, I like how you combined a statement AND a question with your comment. Thank goodness for CommentLuv!

Amanda, so you’re another American with ABB Syndrome - ABBA - Anyone But Bush American. Well, that’s the name of the game, Chiquitita.

ajooja, you know, my living room could use some painting. It’s a really large room. Maybe I could borrow some of your broad brushes? You make a good point (although veiled in sarcastic pessimism) that you have one big bunch of reds, a big bunch of blues, and then this 20% in the middle that might go one way or the other - and who does the party choose to try to sway? Like Perot’s influence for example.

sue, hey, that’s what I made the blog for! yay!

amanda, let me guess - you’re Republican, right? I’m also against the gov’t stepping into corporate policies such that they instruct rather than incent.

martymankins#2, I guess we’ll have to respectfully disagree on whether America has been run into the ground, or that a President single-handedly can be responsible for it.

amanda#2, I promise to check it out

BlondeBlogger, thanx. both for the daughter and for the comments!

martymankins#3, I know you were directing your response to Amanda, but speaking for myself, I do not have deaf ears and I do encourage the voicing of opinions you have. All I ask is for civil discourse. and a stimulus check. And more of the paycheck I earn.

ajooja, I really don’t think I’m biased. bias implies unfairness or preventing an objecting point of view from being considered. What have I said that shows I’m being unfair? Disagreement should not automatically equal bias.

amanda#3, amen to the pro-Bush comment. and also good point about debating but still I think the both of you are misunderstanding the meaning of bias. Just like many people misunderstand (and are subsequently afraid of) the term “discriminating.” It’s *good* to be discriminating or to discriminate. It’s *bad* to unfairly discriminate.

Ren, while I can easily agree with the word “quality” as used in the sentence, it might be more fair (ie, less biased0 if you used “strategy” For the pro-Bush people, I mean strategery.

Rens last blog post..Lunch at Gumbo’s

ajooja- Being biased does not mean one cannot debate well. You are certainly biased, however, I know you would be debate worthy.