'Hunters & Shooters' Endorse Obama, Group Says He Supports Gun Rights

[Purveyor]

Less than a week after coming under fire for saying small-town Pennsylvanians "cling to" gun rights, Barack Obama picked up the endorsement of a pro-gun association that has backed Democratic candidates in the past.

The American Hunters & Shooters Association said Obama's views of the 2nd Amendment have been unfairly criticized and its endorsement comes as Obama's opponents are characterizing him as an "elitist" and condescending towards gun-owners.

The group sets itself apart from the "more extreme" elements of the pro-gun lobby like the National Rifle Association and Gun Owners of America. Unlike them, AHSA favors some gun-control measures like background checks and required safety courses for concealed weapons permits. (The NRA has accused the group of being a front for the anti-gun lobby.)

Ray Schoenke, the hunters association's president, cited Obama's support of an amendment to a Department of Homeland Security funding bill that would prevent the government from confiscating citizens' guns during an emergency. Sen. Hillary Clinton (D-NY), Obama's opponent in the Democratic primary, and 16 other senators voted against the amendment.

"She turned her back on America's gun owners," Schoenke said during a conference call organized by the Obama campaign Wednesday.

Schoenke said the group reached out to the Obama campaign several weeks ago, before the recent controversy surrounding his comments about small-town voters. In announcing their support in the midst of the controversy, though, the group hoped to "set the record straight," about Obama's support of an individual's right to gun ownership, he said.

---EOE---

http://rawstory.com/news/2008/Hunters_group_endorses_Obama_says_he_0416.html

[anonymous171]

1. But Hillary learned to handle guns as a young girl!

[Mz Pip]

2. Guess all that

shooting behind the cottage wasn't all that helpful in the long run. :eyes:

[Connie_Corleone]

3. And she shot a duck too! That's gotta count for something!

[ShortnFiery]

22. A *Banded* Duck Even! "QUACK! QUACK!"

:crazy:

[Cha]

49. It's Dispicable all right!

[BlooInBloo]

12. Ooohh!!! Let's relive the Hilarity Clinton Show!`

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/04/13/watch-obama-on-annie-oakl_n_96459.html

hahahaha

:rofl:

C'mon! She knows better than that!

:rofl:

[jody]

4. Facts are BO has a long association with ban-handguns groups and he called for bans on semiautomatic

firearms.

On the other hand, after attending Wright's hate filled sermons for 20 years, BO CHANGED and rejected Wright's message HOPING people will believe him.

Now after long association with gun-grabbers, BO supposedly has CHANGED and he now supports RKBA and HOPES people will believe him.

Given BO's CHANGE ans HOPE chant, one can only wonder how long before he CHANGES positions on more divisive, polarizing issues HOPING people will believe him.

[anonymous171]

5. Remember 2000, when Hillary gave a speech in support of the "Million Mom March" against guns?

[jody]

13. Yes, do you know that BO was board member of the Joyce Foundation and was offered its presidency?

Joyce finances the Violence Policy Center and its major goal is to ban all handguns.

[Major Hogwash]

40. His name is Barack Obama, and he has a much better record than John McCain.

"Was" a board member. That's the operative word in your sentence.

He was probably offered the presidency of that outfit due to his natural ability to lead.

[jody]

65. My you really do have problems accepting facts.n/t

[Major Hogwash]

67. Obama won in the state of Alabama, Jody. Get over yourself.

Seriously.

You're not hugh!

LoL

[jody]

71. Exit polls show whites(44%) 72% for HC & 25% for BO ------ AA (51%) 15% for HC & 84% for BO

EXIT POLLS: Alabama, page 4

[krispos42]

180. 10% of Joyce funding went to the VPC

Most of it went to things like job training.

[Connie_Corleone]

6. Hillary voted FOR the confiscation of guns during a national emergency.

Obama voted AGAINST it.

Put that in your pipe and smoke it.

[ej510]

7. Yeah they were on Ed Shultz today defending Barack.

I cannot wait until Clinton is gone.

[jody]

10. I assume you know HC voted "yea" for the bill that became law saying LEO could not confiscate guns

during emergencies.

[tammywammy]

62. Hillary voted so that LEOs could confiscate legally owned guns during an emergency

Obama voted against it

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/jan/22/hillaryclinton.barackobama
http://www.philly.com/inquirer/opinion/20080416_The_American_Debate___Elitist__is_as__elitist__does.html

[jody]

66. HC voted against Amdt. 4616, then for the bill that became law prohibiting confiscation. Links below

24. Senate votes for Amdt. 4615 and its parent bill H.R. 5441 below. HC voted for the bill as amended.

[tammywammy]

74. Thanks for the links

[sandnsea]

63. Homeland Security funding??

Yes, she voted to pass the overall DHS funding which the gun confiscation law was amended to. But she voted against the amendment, against the protection from confiscating guns.

[Cha]

52. Wow! I did not know that...I wouldn't

be surprised if that's one good reason why they did it!

That's sounds kinda fascist to me and believe me I've never had a gun or wanted one but for the people who use them responsibly I wouldn't be voting to take them away.

[cali]

17. Fact: Hillary The Hypocrite voted to confiscate lawfully owned guns

in some "national emergency". He voted against it. You can't spin that in a million years. And if Obama's smart he'll skewer her with an add on this. She's such a phony.

[TankLV]

106. helping to spread BULLSHIT again...

see post 10 above - she did NOT - in fact she voted AGAINST such a thing...

typical post from you...LIES

[apocalypsehow]

23. *Delete*

Somehow got a double post.

[apocalypsehow]

24. Who are you voting for, Obama or McCain?

And I'm not looking for a rambling, 2,000 word essay on how important the Second Amendment is - it's a straightforward question: Obama or McCain?

[jody]

25. I'm a Yellow Dog Democrat, are you? n/t

[apocalypsehow]

26. I guess you didn't understand the question. I'll try again:

Who. Will. You. Be. Voting. For. In. November. Obama. Or. McCain?

There; that better? I'll be awaiting your answer with eager anticipation...

[jody]

27. You really do need to read more closely. Do you know what Yellow Dog Democrat means? n/t

[apocalypsehow]

28. No, you need to answer the straightforward question:

Who will you be voting for in November, Senator McCain or Senator Obama?

This isn't rocket science or calculus: which of those two candidates are you voting for in the fall? Give me a name.

[jody]

29. Have a good day and goodbye. n/t

[apocalypsehow]

30. That's pretty much what I figured - another one of our "gun-loving Democrats" refusing to go on the

record that he will be voting for the Democratic nominee in November.

Yellow dog "Democrat," indeed.

:eyes:

[derby378]

34. That's because your question is - well, gee! - IRRELEVANT

Is it somehow not kosher for a Democrat to have a wish list that differs a little from that of the Democratic frontrunner? Wow.

[apocalypsehow]

37. That's the silliest thing I've seen from a "pro-gun Democrat" so far: who a so-called "Democrat"

posting on a progressive discussion board plans to vote for between the Republican and Democratic candidates this fall is "IRRELEVANT"?

It sure is - if one isn't planning to vote for the Democratic nominee. Which is why your buddy there refuses to answer the straightforward question.

By the bye, who are you voting for this November, Obama or McCain? Or are you going to skulk and hide behind that "I'm a yellow Dawg Democrat" nonsense, too?

[derby378]

39. Those who know me on DU know how I'm voting in November

And that should be sufficient.

[apocalypsehow]

44. So, you, too, refuse to answer the straightforward question. Let's get this straight:

On a progressive discussion board, dedicated in part to electing the Democratic nominee for president of the United States, you refuse to openly state that you are voting for said nominee? Is that the line you're peddling?

Uh-huh.

[derby378]

50. That's because, once again, the question is IRRELEVANT

Movin' right along...

[apocalypsehow]

53. That's because, one again, the question of whether you're going to vote for the Democratic nominee

is quite RELEVANT. But I'll take your refusal to answer the straightforward question as an answer in and of itself - and a very telling one at that.

Movin' right along, indeed...

[derby378]

57. You know what they say happens when you assume something...

Movin' right along
In search of good times and good news
With good friends, you can't lose
This could become a habit
Opportunity knocked once
Let's reach out and grab it
Together we'll nab it
We'll hitch-hike, bus, or yellow cab it

Movin' right along
Footloose and fancy free
Gettin' there is half the fun
Come share it with me
Movin' right along
We'll learn to share the load
We don't need a map
To keep this show on the road

Movin' right alooooooong...
Movin' right alooooooong...

[apocalypsehow]

58. So, who are you voting for this November? Senator Obama or McCain?

[Paladin]

64. When 47% Of Your Fellow DU Gun Nuts Will Vote Republican...

...to protect their guns, according to a poll that's open down in the Gun Dungeon, such questions are most certainly NOT irrelevant. (Helpful Hint to real-world DU folks: The Gungeon residents have just started another poll with carefully designed questions resulting in a 93% pro-Democratic result. Be not deceived---it's a vain attempt to deflect attention from the earlier, more damaging survey.)

I personally think that 47% figure is way low, myself; I'd guess the figure is closer to 75%. Way to keep your eyes on the big picture, Gunboys......

[krispos42]

181. Well, look at it this way...

NOT knowing who gun people will vote for puts pressure on Democratic candidates to be pro-gun. Or at least not anti-gun.

If they get the impression that "hey, I can be as anti-gun as I want and the pro-gun Dems will invariably fall in line", then that's not really changing the party at all, it is?

[damonm]

35. My friend, a "Yellow Dog Democrat" is someone who...

Will vote for the Democrat, even if it's a yellow dog, over ANY Republican. Your question was answered.

[apocalypsehow]

36. No, the question wasn't answered, "friend."

The poster consistently refuses to plainly state who he will vote for - all the while running around DU criticizing both Democratic candidates stances on gun control. The poster is simply playing semantics games - as are you.

[DrCory]

38. Secret Ballot...

You don't need to know, simple as that.

[apocalypsehow]

41. LOL! It doesn't get any riper - and sillier - than that.

:rofl:

[DrCory]

43. Why is that so humerous?

:shrug:

[apocalypsehow]

46. I'll give you two "humerous" guess as to why it's so humorous.

The first one doesn't count.

:rofl:

[DrCory]

47. Can you answer the question directly...

Rather than focus on the typo? Or, are you perhaps excused from answering questions posed.

[apocalypsehow]

51. What question? The question as to why a "pro-gun Democrat" would refuse to disclose who they intend

to vote for in November on a progressive discussion board dedicated to electing a Democratic president?

You mean that question? Well now, I believe that question has fairly well been asked and not answered, just in case you haven't been keeping up. And that non-answer from our "pro-gun Democrats" is very telling.

[DrCory]

60. Yes, that question...

Which galls me no matter what, or whom, the subject may be. As for me, refuse to answer that question simply because I can, because I've been in places where refusal has not been an option. Just because you ask doesn't mean anyone is obligated to respond. It's really not your business, regardless of the venue.

[apocalypsehow]

61. Uh-huh. "Which galls me no matter what."

On a progressive discussion board dedicated to electing Democrats a question about who you intend to vote for - which wasn't originally addressed to you in any event - for the most important office in the land just gives you the vapors, does it?

Rigggghhhhttt.... (:eyes:)

[DrCory]

69. Care to elaborate?

Perhaps you might be more clear as to the implication of your post. I think I know, but don't be shy, say it.

You're certainly enamored with the word "progressive", aren't you? Odd, coming from an Obama supporter.

BTW, if it (the question) exists on a public discussion board, of which I am a member, I may address it.

[apocalypsehow]

72. Still won't answer the question, eh? Still won't go on the record supporting the Dem nominee, huh?

Count me *not* surprised.

"BTW, if it (the question) exists on a public discussion board, of which I am a member, I may address it."

No shit, Sherlock. Do you think this is some kind of profound original thought you just chimed in with there?

And while we're on the subject, why don't you go ahead and "address" this simple question: who are you voting for this November, the Democratic nominee or McCain? I think we know the answer already, but (as someone was telling me just recently) don't be shy, say it.

[DrCory]

76. Interesting...

Assumptive and judgmental, aren't you. It seems you believe someone who has the audacity not to play by your rules cannot possibly be a legitimate Democrat. Pardon me for not realizing you're the arbiter of who and who is not a Democrat.

Oh, and nice diversionary tactic. Now, why don't you answer my question as to the inference of your earlier post. You already know how I will respond to your demands.

[apocalypsehow]

80. It's "interesting," alright. "nice diversionary tactic" - projection at its finest.

Here we have a savant posting on a progressive discussion board dedicated to electing Democratic candidates, and our "Dr." here won't even state whether he's willing to vote for the Democratic nominee in November! :rofl:

:eyes:

"Now, why don't you answer my question"

That's not how it works, sport. Your continued dodging of what should be a straightforward question says volumes, and not a bit of it points in any kind of direction I'd want to find myself heading in.

[DrCory]

81. You knew...

my position on this "question" prior to even asking. Asking is pointless, so there must be another reason why you would do so. Why don't you share it? Better yet, clarify your inference.

Your continued dodging of my question, which was asked first by the way, leaves me to believe that you aren't so sure of yourself after all. I understand, it is a peculiar position to hold that someone who doesn't respond as you wish cannot possibly be a "progressive". One might say it's narcissitic.

[apocalypsehow]

82. The only one "dodging" anything is the "Dr." here who refuses to answer the straightforward question

Who are you voting for in November for President, the Democratic nominee or Senator McCain?"

It really shouldn't be that hard for a genuine Democrat posting on a progressive discussion board to answer, should it?

"One might say it's narcissitic." (Sic)

One might say you need to consult a dictionary and look up the definition of that word - right after you learn to spell it. And that one would be right.

[DrCory]

83. In your world...

Everything not forbidden is compulsory? I don't answer that question because as a citizen of the United States I am not required to do so by any authority, not even you. In other times and places, and maybe in this one again some day, the answer could very well cost a person his/her life. You may also refuse to answer mine as well, and I won't think the worse of you either. Hell, you might even remain a progressive in my mind.

Otherwise, try actually addressing my question, rather than engaging in the transparent tactic of criticizing the spelling of words typed in haste. My spelling is not so bad that you cannot understand my meaning.

[apocalypsehow]

84. So, you still refuse to answer the straightforward question, preferring instead to babble some

silliness about "another day and time" and blah, blah, blah.

"I am not required to do so by any authority, not even you"

Hey, no one said you were. But the way most folks usually handle that is a straightforward "No," especially when the question was never put to you in the first place. Not, that is, till you stuck your snout into a conversation of which you were not an initial participant.

Now, you're free to answer the question or not, as you wish. But it is very, very telling that a poster on a progressive discussion board dedicated to electing Democrats refuses to answer such a straightforward question - sorta like a stamp enthusiast on a discussion board dedicated to stamp collecting refusing to answer whether stamp collecting was a favorite hobby.

"Otherwise, try actually addressing my question"

You first, since I asked first. Otherwise, buzz off.

[DrCory]

86. Not quite...

It was I who asked a question of you first. That question being a request to clarify what seems to be an inference about my political credentials.

I ask you once again, what did you mean by that?

You are aware that this is a PUBLIC discussion board, correct? I have the right "stick my snout" into this discussion, and it is not your authority to slap it away.

[apocalypsehow]

89. Wrong.

You butted into a conversation you were not originally a party to with: "Secret Ballot...You don't need to know, simple as that."

After some further dippy double-talk from you in a post or two, I then said: "What question? The question as to why a "pro-gun Democrat" would refuse to disclose who they intend to vote for in November on a progressive discussion board dedicated to electing a Democratic president?

You mean that question? Well now, I believe that question has fairly well been asked and not answered, just in case you haven't been keeping up. And that non-answer from our "pro-gun Democrats" is very telling."

You then said, and I quote precisely: "Yes, that question"

Now, if you don't want to go on record on a progressive discussion board dedicated to electing Democrats who you intend to vote for in the fall between the Democratic nominee vs. McCain, fine. But don't be surprised if folks start to wonder why, and come to their own conclusions.

Now, as I said previously, if you don't want to answer that straightforward question, don't. Buzz off, and we'll be done here.

[DrCory]

92. Not done, not just yet...

And that non-answer from our "pro-gun Democrats" is very telling."

Expound upon "telling". Remember, I asked first.

[apocalypsehow]

94. Yeah, we're done here. Unless you want to answer this straightforward question:

Who are you voting for this November in the presidential election, the Democratic nominee or Senator McCain?

It really is curious, this little charade by the "Dr." here. Curious, but not all that surprising at the end of the day.

[DrCory]

127. Care to explain this statement?

"It really is curious, this little charade by the "Dr." here. Curious, but not all that surprising at the end of the day."

The word "charade" suggests something dishonest. Well?

[apocalypsehow]

95. Expound upon who you intend to vote for in November, "Dr." Will it be the Dem nominee? Or will it be

McCain?

Remember, I asked first

:cry:

Quit getting all weepy on us and just answer the question, "Dr." - it really shouldn't be all that difficult a matter for a genuine Democrat to put to rest.

[DrCory]

130. It should...

not be difficult for a "genuine Democrat" to respect the privacy of others. It should also not be difficult for same to not automatically denounce someone who dares to criticize you as not being a "genuine Democrat".

Quit getting all weepy on us and just answer the question, "Dr." - it really shouldn't be all that difficult a matter for a genuine Democrat to put to rest.

Why don't you just say it in plain language?

[apocalypsehow]

91. Yeah, cry me a river. The "Dr." here refuses to answer whether he will vote for the Dem nominee

in November, but gets all weepy and indignant when called on it.

:cry:

:eyes:

[apocalypsehow]

85. Check out the "Dr." here, who thinks getting asked on a progressive discussion board whether he's

going to support the Democratic nominee in the fall election is the equivalent of an interrogation in the Lubyanka.

:eyes:

[DrCory]

88. Answer my question. What was/is your inference? N/T

[apocalypsehow]

90. Answer my question: who are you voting for in Nov.? The Dem nominee or McCain?

:shrug:

[apocalypsehow]

93. Still can't bring yourself to endorse the Democratic nominee against the GOP in November, huh?

What is so difficult about answering the question?

I think we know what is difficult alrighty, but it's still fascinating to see the squirming and whining.

[DrCory]

98. What's fascinating for me...

Is to witness the exasperation of an obvious elitist when it can't have it's way. You honestly do believe you have a right to that precious information, don't you? Well, it really isn't very "progressive" of you not to respect the right of privacy. More authoritarian I'd say. Perhaps your into the Marxian "transparency" thing, I don't know. But, you make repeated oblique accusations towards those who don't bow before your authority. I simply asked you to clarify.

[apocalypsehow]

100. Yeah, a poster posting on a progressive discussion board dedicated to electing Democrats who won't

answer a straightforward question as to whether they are going to support the Democratic nominee for President in November with their vote is a fascinating spectacle to behold.

You said: "You honestly do believe you have a right to that precious information, don't you? Well, it really isn't very "progressive" of you not to respect the right of privacy."

Hey, I'm not the one who's making such a big deal out of a question I don't want to answer - that would be the good "Dr." here. If you don't want to answer it, don't. Buzz off, and we'll be done here.

You said: "But, you make repeated oblique accusations towards (Sic) those who don't bow before your authority. I simply asked you to clarify."

:cry:

:rofl:

[DrCory]

102. Ummm...

Hey, I'm not the one who's making such a big deal out of a question I don't want to answer - that would be the good "Dr." here. If you don't want to answer it, don't. Buzz off, and we'll be done here.


No, but you are the one who is saying that someone who doesn't answer the question must not be a legitimate Democrat. Surely you can admit that, right?

[apocalypsehow]

104. Ummmm...Are you going to answer the straightforward question, or not? Here it is again, in case

you've forgotten what it was:

Who are you going to vote for this November in the presidential election, the Democratic nominee or McCain?

You said: "No, but you are the one who is saying that someone who doesn't answer the question must not be a legitimate Democrat."

Wrong - what I say is that someone who doesn't vote for the Democratic nominee in November is not a legitimate Democrat, and might want to look into changing their registration. They're called "Democrats In Name Only."

What I point out is that it is quite a curious thing for a poster on a progressive discussion board dedicated to electing Democrats refusing to answer my straightforward question above.

:shrug:

[TankLV]

111. OK children - GO TO YOUR ROOMS!!!!

Hint: if you don't want to play - STOP PLAYING with them...!!!

[DrCory]

112. Nice Try...

"What I point out is that it is quite a curious thing for a poster on a progressive discussion board dedicated to electing Democrats refusing to answer my straightforward question above."

You must not back-pedal very often, as the following reply that you authored seems well beyond simply pointing something out. You attached a condition to it.


"And while we're on the subject, why don't you go ahead and "address" this simple question: who are you voting for this November, the Democratic nominee or McCain? I think we know the answer already, but (as someone was telling me just recently) don't be shy, say it."

[apocalypsehow]

114. Uh-huh. There wasn't a spot of "back-pedaling" to be found, except in your dizzy imagination.

Now, are you prepared to answer the question yet? Here goes:

Who are you going to vote for in November for President, the Democratic nominee or McCain?

Give that simple inquiry a "try," why don't you?

[DrCory]

171. Not a spot, are you certain?

Uh-huh. There wasn't a spot of "back-pedaling" to be found, except in your dizzy imagination.
Posted by apocalypsehow

This is an observation:

"What I point out is that it is quite a curious thing for a poster on a progressive discussion board dedicated to electing Democrats refusing to answer my straightforward question above."

This (the underlined) is something else:

"And while we're on the subject, why don't you go ahead and "address" this simple question: who are you voting for this November, the Democratic nominee or McCain? I think we know the answer already, but (as someone was telling me just recently) don't be shy, say it."

Now, why don't you tell me what you think the answer is?

[apocalypsehow]

116. Now, how about an answer to that oh-so-simple question? McCain or the Democratic nominee?

:shrug:

[apocalypsehow]

103. How about an answer to that question now, "Dr."? Going to support McCain, or the Democratic nominee?

Is it really that difficult a question for you to answer? I wonder why....

[DrCory]

99. Clarify Please...

"I think we know what is difficult alrighty"

[apocalypsehow]

101. Clarify please: Who are you going to vote for in November, the Democratic nominee or McCain?

Simple question: why won't the good "Dr." answer, I wonder?

:eyes:

[apocalypsehow]

96. Still waiting on that answer, "Dr." How about it? The Democrat or the GOP?

Who are you going with in the November election?

:shrug:

[TankLV]

109. I thought it was "Lublyanka"...

it's probably something completely different from both of us...

[apocalypsehow]

110. You thought wrong.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lubyanka_(KGB)

[DrCory]

115. You don't know...

what other people's experiences have been. Maybe you should try to have some of the respect and compassion that WE progressives value.

[apocalypsehow]

117. I don't care what your "experiences" have been: if you can't or won't say who you prefer between the

Democratic nominee or McCain on a progressive discussion board dedicated to electing Democrats, then perhaps you should reconsider your participation here.

Now, ready to answer that question? Or are you just going to weep and moan some more?

:cry:

[DrCory]

122. My, but you are self-important!

Weep and moan? I'm simply making the same request that you have, which I have fulfilled. Now. it's your turn.

[DrCory]

172. Perhaps you should reconsider...

That I don't have to tell you. You however, seem to accuse anyone who does not answer the question not to be a "genuine Democrat". If not a Democrat, than what? I think a one-word answer from you will suffice. Or, you can just refuse to answer.

[apocalypsehow]

118. How about it, "Dr."? Is your tender soul to wounded to answer who you plan to vote for in Nov.?

Or can you tell us your choice: the Democratic nominee or McCain?

[DrCory]

123. Is your ego...

so inflated that you cannot accept refusal based on personal choice?

[apocalypsehow]

125. Hey, it's not any skin off my nose if you won't answer a simple question like

Who are you voting for in November for President, the Democratic nominee or McCain?" on a progressive discussion board dedicated to electing Democrats.

Have at it.

[apocalypsehow]

131. Hey, "Doc": are you going to give a straight answer or not? It really is not complicated:

Who are you going to vote for in November for President, the Democratic nominee or McCain?

Or do the Commies have you strapped down in a confession booth threatening to use the "tough stuff" if you "give it up"?

:rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

:eyes:

[apocalypsehow]

119. "Dr."? "Dr."? Are you having Rambo-style flashbacks to some horrid interrogation room due to being

asked such a cruel, mean, tough old question on a discussion board dedicated to discussing politics as: Who are you voting for in November?

Is that a real trauma?

(:eyes:)

[DrCory]

121. I answered your question...

Answer mine.

[apocalypsehow]

124. You didn't answer jack. Now buzz off, "Dr."

:eyes:

[DrCory]

126. Do you not understand...

That my refusal to participate in your inquisition is an answer in of itself? "I will not tell you" is my answer. Now, please explain your earlier inference.

[apocalypsehow]

128. And more semantics games from our "Dr." friend here, who refuses to answer a simple question, then

says he "did" answer it, then admits he didn't, actually, but we're supposed to pretend his non-answer "answer" is supposed to suffice.

Nice.

:eyes:

[DrCory]

132. Yes....

That is the answer you will receive. Now, answer my question.

[apocalypsehow]

135. No. That "answer" is unsatisfactory. Try again.

:thumbsdown:

[DrCory]

152. Because it's not...

what you think you deserve. Correct?

[apocalypsehow]

155. Why won't you answer the question, "Dr."? Or are you under duress in the bowels of the Lubyanka?

:rofl:

[apocalypsehow]

129. No, "Dr.": Grown-ups don't play mealy-mouthed games like that.

Someone needs to get off Daddy's computer and wash up for dinner.

[DrCory]

134. Really?

Reading your postings would suggest otherwise. You infer I am not a "genuine Demcrat", yet refuse to verify this. Who is mealy-mouthed?

[apocalypsehow]

136. Yes, really. Saying you did a thing then admitting you did not, all the while playing

semantics games with the truth, is the very definition of "mealy-mouthed." Dishonest, too.

Answer the question, "Dr."

[DrCory]

141. I have...

you are the one playing a dishonest game. Now, answer mine.

[apocalypsehow]

148. Answer the question, "Dr."

[apocalypsehow]

159. You haven't. And no amount of squealing otherwise can hide the plain facts.

[apocalypsehow]

157. How about an answer to that question now, "Dr."? Going to support McCain, or the Democratic nominee?

:shrug:

[apocalypsehow]

161. "Dr." are we ever going to get an answer from you? Or are you just going to keep on playing games?

:shrug:

[apocalypsehow]

133. So, the "Dr." here tells this big honking fib, and then admits in his very next post that it WAS a

falsehood.

That's some pretty brazen dishonesty, there.

[DrCory]

137. I responded to you question...

by refusing to answer. It's really that simple. You however, seem only able to evade.

[apocalypsehow]

140. You responded to nothing - it really is that simple. But keep pretending,

if it makes you feel better.

[DrCory]

143. I think...

you are the one pretending...that you are the arbiter of all things Democrat and progressive.

[apocalypsehow]

145. And I think you won't answer a simple question, one any participant here should be easily able to.

Who are you voting for in November for President, the Democratic nominee or McCain?

[DrCory]

149. Responded to...

although not with the answer you want, which I think is the crux of the debate here. You can end this by refusing to answer my question.

[apocalypsehow]

151. No, it hasn't been "responded to" - you simply refuse to answer the question.

[DrCory]

164. Which is itself a response...

Just not the one your ego demands.

My this is fun!


"No, it hasn't been "responded to" - you simply refuse to answer the question."

[apocalypsehow]

167. It sure is. Now that you refuse to answer who you will vote for in Nov. (and for a good reason,

I'd wager), you can go back to pretending you're a "gun-loving Democrat."

[DrCory]

173. You're getting closer...

To answering my question:

It sure is. Now that you refuse to answer who you will vote for in Nov. (and for a good reason,
I'd wager), you can go back to pretending you're a "gun-loving Democrat."

Only another word or two, and we'll be done. Otherwise, I have plenty of time. How about you?

Edit-Spelling

[DrCory]

175. Only you can end this...

With the following options:

1. Clarifying your inference that my (and others) refusal to answer your question means we must not be genuine Democrats. I'll leave the wording up to you.

2. Refuse to answer my question, which I remind you was posed to you first. As you might recall, I responded to your observation with a request for clarification. After which, you asked my choice of candidate. The widely accepted rules of conversation suggest that you respond first.

Then this will end.

[DrCory]

179. I'm waiting...

For an explaination of your use of the word "pretending"

"you can go back to pretending you're a "gun-loving Democrat""

[apocalypsehow]

168. Speaking of tender widdle egos:

"You don't know...what other people's experiences have been. Maybe you should try to have some of the respect and compassion"

That's you crying about how mean the poor "Dr." was being treated because someone on a progressive discussion board dedicated to electing Democrats bruised his widdle feelings by asking him *gasp!* who he intended to vote for in November for President.

:cry:

:rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

[DrCory]

170. More like astonished....

that I would find such arrogance on a "progressive" discussion board. Not everyone here has lived a life insulated from genuine politically motivated violence and abuse. I not talking about the conspiracy fantasies and G-men hiding behind every corner paranoia that some here seem to see, but genuine physical harm caused by thugs with weapons who demand answers to such questions. Questions which have no "right" answer. No matter how he responded, someone was going to suffer.

His experiences, has left an indellible impression on me and how I relate to others in a political venue. Is this something you can grasp?

I wonder what your answer would have been?

[apocalypsehow]

153. Why won't you answer the question, "Dr."?

:shrug:

[apocalypsehow]

158. Sure would like an answer to that question you refuse to answer, yet pretend you did, then admit you

didn't, then on and on and on and on.

How about it? :shrug:

[DrCory]

165. Refusal is an answer...

Yet, you have not anwsered mine nor refused to do so. Why not?

[apocalypsehow]

166. "Refusal is an answer" - so is this a flat-out refusal to answer this question:

Who are you voting for in November for President, the Democratic nominee or McCain?

Can't say I'm surprised: I probably wouldn't answer the question, either, were I you and valued my posting privileges.

Now that we're done here, go have fun pretending you're Rambo somewhere and buzz off.

[DrCory]

169. Not quite...

Who are you voting for in November for President, the Democratic nominee or McCain?

"Can't say I'm surprised: I probably wouldn't answer the question, either, were I you and valued my posting privileges.

Now that we're done here, go have fun pretending you're Rambo somewhere and buzz off. "

What is your inference in the underlined sentence?

I Rambo? Where ever did you get such an idea? Talk about projection! Actually, the experiences of a relative who lost his livelihood, a few years of freedom in the Laogai, and nearly his sanity for being forced to answer a similar question compell me to invoke the right of silence as he wished he once had. But, I suppose I shouldn't be surprised by your reaction if my assumption that you are an American is correct, and if so, one who posesses the embarrasingly common American arrogance to ridicule something you don't understand.

Now, why don't you answer my question? Actually, maybe you shouldn't, it is rather amusing to see the "progressive" mask slip from your face.

Edited to add content

[DrCory]

190. The only way...

that I will agree to "buzz off" (getting a bit redundant, surely a man of your education can think of something else) is if you retract your obvious if not stated accusation.

[apocalypsehow]

160. How about an answer to that question now, "Dr."? Going to support McCain, or the Democratic nominee?

:shrug:

[apocalypsehow]

147. Answer my question: who are you voting for in Nov.? The Dem nominee or McCain?

[apocalypsehow]

162. The "Dr." can't or won't answer the straightforward question:

Who are you voting for in November for President, the Democratic nominee or McCain?

I wonder why? :shrug:

[apocalypsehow]

138. Lookee here at this: "I answered your question" - then admits with the very next post he did not.

All too easy....

:rofl:

[DrCory]

146. Ummm....

according to you, a non-answer is an answer right? Isn't that what you have been saying along? That because I refuse to legitimize your bullying that I am somehow not a Democrat?

Sadly for you, the answer you perceive is not the correct one.

[apocalypsehow]

150. Ummm...why don't you quit playing games, "Dr." and answer the simple question?

according to you, a non-answer is an answer right?

That's your own silly habit, of course. But keep having fun making more shit up.

[DrCory]

154. You have infered...

that anyone who doesn't answer you question is not a "genuine Democrat". I didn't start this absurd tangent, you did, with other posters.

according to you, a non-answer is an answer right?

That's your own silly habit, of course. But keep having fun making more shit up.

[apocalypsehow]

156. No, "Dr.": that's more fiction. You are the one who claims to have "answered" a question you didn't,

and when called on it stated that your non-answer was an "answer."

Please try again.

[apocalypsehow]

120. "WE progressives"...

Uh-huh. Weep me an Amazon.

:cry:

[DrCory]

139. Meaning what? N/T

[apocalypsehow]

142. Cry me a big sopping river, "Dr."

:cry: :cry: :cry: :cry:

:rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

[apocalypsehow]

144. Want that question you refuse to answer again? Here it is:

Who are you voting for in November for President, the Democratic nominee or McCain?

Now why won't the "Dr." answer, I wonder?

:eyes:

[TankLV]

107. and you are refusing to comprehend...the poster DID answer the question...

you cannot comprehend...

go back and learn what they posted MEANS...

You are a prime example of a typical obamabot...and that's a BAD thing...

[apocalypsehow]

108. Wrong, sport. You need to read a little better. Or slower. Or something.

The poster refused to answer the straightforward question, choosing instead to respond with cryptic babble.

"typical obamabot"

Typical "pro-gun Democrat": quick with the silly one-liners, slow with the facts.

[DrCory]

174. LOL!!

"This isn't rocket science or calculus: which of those two candidates are you voting for in the fall? Give me a name."

Haha! Such self-importance! Give me a name or I'll accuse you of not being a Democrat!

Or maybe you'll launch on some other loathsome attack tangent should that name not be the same DEMOCRAT as you support.

I digress. If not a Democrat, than what?

[TankLV]

105. I guess they want to forget that pesky MEMO with his SIGNATURE on it...

[Quixote1818]

8. Obama needs to get a commercial with these guys going in PA, pronto. nt

[Cha]

54. Xacto! And OT

but Springsteen should set up a way to get his endorsement message out before the April 22nd Primary in PA..it's killer.

[slackmaster]

9. American Hunters & Shooters Association is seen as "Fudds" by many gun owners

Only a minority of gun owners hunt.

[Leopolds Ghost]

14. So WTF do these people collect firearms for? To shoot people?

[slackmaster]

15. Speaking for myself, I collect firearms as a hobby

See my profile. I just renewed my Federal Firearms License for another three years. At $30, it's absolutely one of the best-priced privileges the federal government has to offer.

They provide me with an outlet for my need to do something creative that doesn't involve staring at a computer screen. They are useful as tools for teaching inexperienced people gun safety and how to shoot. They are also valuable objects that, when properly stored and cared for, appreciate over time.

To shoot people?

Unfortunately, sometimes people need to be shot. So that is a perfectly valid reason to own a gun.

[Major Hogwash]

42. Obama is much more friendly to gun owners than McCain ever was!

McCain gets a rating of F- from the NRA.

[Hoof Hearted]

68. ***BZZZZZ**** McCain currently holds a C rating from the NRA. Hardly stellar, but

Obama, he gets the F.

http://campaignspot.nationalreview.com/post/?q=NTNiZWFmNDc3ZGNlOTQ5ZTA2Yzg0ZDczZGQ0ZTY5YzA=

http://civilliberty.about.com/od/historyprofiles/tp/John-McCain-Civil-Liberties.htm

[slackmaster]

79. I don't put much weight on NRA ratings

They can be just as two-faced about it as anyone.

[Major Hogwash]

87. From their own web site, McCain received an F- rating on guns from the NRA.

And a lot of people used the NRA's ratings to bash Kerry in 2004.

[slackmaster]

97. At the end of the day, Congress makes laws, not the President

I think we are going to see the dynamics of gun control politics play out as they often do in national elections. Obama (or Clinton) may well win the Presidency, but some people in rural states and "fly-over country" who feel remorse about voting for a Democrat, maybe for the first time in their lives, will tend to vote GOP for the Senate and House seats as a form of atonement.

If we win the Presidency, we will end up with a very evenly divided Congress.

[Major Hogwash]

163. Wrong - the President either signs or vetoes the BILLS that Congress passes.

Gee, I learned that clear back in the 5th grade!!

[slackmaster]

178. The President can't sign something that never reaches his or her desk

That's what I'm talking about.

[Major Hogwash]

184. Yeah, I knew that already.

Who told you?

[slackmaster]

78. None of the top 3 have positions on gun control that are acceptable to me

So my decision to vote for the Democratic candidate is based on other issues that I care about - Environment, education, reproductive rights, etc.

ETA I supported Bill Richardson early in the race.

[TankLV]

113. You do know it is an interesting machine and a "beautiful" object in its own right?!

While I prefer to collect and build model train structures and stuff - I did have my father's German Lugar and Rifle from WWII and spent many hours admiring it's workings and construction - but I gave it all to my sister for various reasons, one of which was I cared to collect other things and did not have space/room for ALL things I might wish to keep...

Sometimes, even shooting or hunting is not a reason to collect guns...

[benEzra]

186. Recreational target shooting, personal protection, and historical interest. (n/t)

[Major Hogwash]

45. To be fair, that's only your perspective about those people who think that about the AHSA

So, it's kind of a muddied up perspective since you yourself don't belong.

[Pisces]

11. THis has to chap Annie Oakely's ass

[Cha]

55. Oh I hope so..

[malik flavors]

16. Awesome!

[Sinistrous]

18. Obama: Respect 2nd Amendment, but local gun bans ok

Here is a recent statement of Obama's position on gun ownership and on local ordinances:

http://www.ontheissues.org/2008/Barack_Obama_Gun_Control.htm

Q: You said recently, "I have no intention of taking away folks' guns." But you support the D.C. handgun ban, and you've said that it's constitutional. How do you reconcile those two positions?

A: Because I think we have two conflicting traditions in this country. I think it's important for us to recognize that we've got a tradition of handgun ownership and gun ownership generally. And a lot of law-abiding citizens use it for hunting, for sportsmanship, and for protecting their families. We also have a violence on the streets that is the result of illegal handgun usage. And so I think there is nothing wrong with a community saying we are going to take those illegal handguns off the streets. And cracking down on the various loopholes that exist in terms of background checks for children, the mentally ill. We can have reasonable, thoughtful gun control measure that I think respect the Second Amendment and people's traditions.
Source: 2008 Politico pre-Potomac Primary interview Feb 11, 2008

Sinistrous

[malik flavors]

20. I don't see the contradiction.

[Sinistrous]

33. That is because I was not defending one side or the other.

I merely thought it was relevant to have a statement of Mr. Obama's that gave his position on gun control.

Sorry for disrupting the grenade fight.

[krispos42]

182. His viewpoint seems to be "local control"

I believe that he, personally, is largely anti-gun. Spending most of his live in urban Chicago, that's not surprising. It's in the water there, or something.

And I would assume that, in his duties as a representative to the Illinois legislature, he would have represented his constituants in that fashion.

However, once you're in federal office, you have to think on a federal level. I believe that he believes that the federal laws should be looser than the state laws, and if the states wants to clamp down harder, that is their perrogotive.

As a federal official, he could support things like background checks, while leaving other things like banning so-called "assault weapons" or handguns to state law.

[ORDem]

19. kick

:kick:

[sunonmars]

21. Look at its directors, pro gun, no way they are.

Pro gun my ass, anti gun more like it, this group donates to anti gun politicians and squarely in the pocket of Kennedy and Kerry, they also helped elect Claire McCaskill, they are so in Obama's tank always have been.

Look at it, its a trojan horse, look at its directors.

Robert Ricker (Executive Director, AHSA)
• Paid witness against the firearms industry for cases where plaintiffs attempted to hold gun manufacturers liable for the criminal misuse of their products by third parties.
• Monthly salary of $3000; AHSA claims no more than 150 members who pay $25 dues. The rest of the money comes from “individual contributions” with the largest contributors on the AHSA board of directors.
• Paid an hourly fee of $225 to $250 dollars for testimony, depositions, and meetings with the Brady Campaign.
• Consults for the Educational Fund to End Handgun Violence (the “educational” arm of the Coalition to Stop Gun Violence).

(lobbying for additional restrictions on law abiding gun owners).

Ray Schoenke (President, AHSA)
• Mr. Schoenke, his wife, his daughter and son have been generous donors of anti-gun candidates including: Al Gore, Barbara Boxer, Dianne Feinstein, Ted Kennedy, Carolyn McCarthy and John Kerry.
• Mr. Schoenke and his wife donated $10,000 to Handgun Control, Inc. (HCI) in 2000.
• Mr. Schoenke’s daughter and son each contributed $5000 to HCI in 2000.

John Rosenthal (President, AHSA Foundation)
• Rosenthal is the leader of Stop Handgun Violence, the principal anti-gun group in the state of Massachusetts (credited with being the “political force behind the strict gun control laws of Massachusetts”)
• Rosenthal is a former member of the HCI board of directors, now known as the Brady Campaign.
• Rosenthal has most recently focused his energy on voicing opposition to firearms’ advertisements during sporting events

Jody Powell (Co-Chairman, AHSA Advisory Board)
• Press Secretary for one of the most anti-gun U.S. administrations, President Jimmy Carter.

Joe Vince (Board Member, AHSA)
• Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF)
• His company Crime Gun Solutions (CGS) employs a number of other ex-ATF officials including Gerard Nunziato, who told the Houston Chronicle that “If it wasn’t for criminals, there wouldn’t be a gun industry in this country.”
• Crime Gun Solutions provides consulting services for the lawyers at the Brady Campaign, frequently appearing as paid expert witnesses in lawsuits against the firearms industry.

[Major Hogwash]

70. " . . one of the most anti-gun U.S. administrations, President Jimmy Carter." Are you insane?

Carter didn't pass any anti-gun laws while he was President.

"they also helped elect Claire McCaskill" - OMG! Call the cops!

[madrchsod]

31. he was on big ed`s show today

he thinks the nra sucks!

[sniffa]

32. But who are the whiskey shooters endorsing?

:shrug:

[Cha]

56. This little lady..

[Cha]

48. What!? Even though miss

Quack Quack got in a duck blind and told some sniper story about shootin' a DUCK?

[Doctor_J]

59. Welcome on to the bandwagon, folks

it's really big

[PatGund]

73. As a gun owner...

...this is GREAT news! Good choice AHSA

[olkaz]

75. We need a progressive second-amendment group.

Seriously, we could make GREAT inroads with rural voters.

There has to be more people like us.

[krispos42]

183. We need a multi-party system

And that means instant-runoff voting on a federal level.


I vaguely remember an article from "Time", probably back in '96, that said that nearly the entire population of the country could be divided up into 7 parties that would cover most viewpoint combinations.

Then we could finally have variations on the two main parties. Like a pro-business party and a separate pro-God party, instead of the unholy mashing together of God and Gold. Or a progressive-economy party that's socially conservative.

There could be several parties that are pro-gun, and several that are anti-gun.


It should would make politics more interesting!

[smiley_glad_hands]

77. I support the 2nd Amendment and Obama.

I also support states and localities rights to regulate guns too. Wanna own a handgun? Don't live in DC.

[benEzra]

177. I'm OK with that, as long as it cuts both ways.

I also support states and localities rights to regulate guns too. Wanna own a handgun? Don't live in DC.

I'm OK with that on pragmatic grounds, as long as it cuts both ways. My state of NC has repeatedly considered and rejected bans on rifles with modern styling (as have most states), so don't try to pass a Federal rifle ban in order to force California-style laws on us.

FWIW, I'm an "AK-47" owner (non-automatic civilian lookalike, like all civilian-market "AK's") and I'm supporting Obama, because I think he's smart enough to reign the party in on gun bans, and HRC has long demonstrated her contempt for gun owners (just last week she reiterated her promise to make banning the most popular civilian rifles a top legislative priority).

I hope my trust is not misplaced, but IMHO he's the best choice still in the race. I would love to see him select Richardson as VP, though.

[benEzra]

176. Actually, AHSA is not a pro-gun organization...

they are a pro-gun-control organization, founded by several members of the gun-control lobby, and the original intent was to provide political cover for the DLC's ill-fated gun-ban efforts that cost us the Congress in '94 (they were in the same building as the DLC for a while). AHSA campaigns for bans on the most popular civilian target and defensive guns, ostensibly in hopes of protecting their $5,000 skeet guns that they shoot at their local country-club ranges, I suppose.

They had seemed to be pretty much defunct for a while, so this "endorsement" may be as much about getting publicity for themselves as anything.

And FWIW, I'm an Obama supporter, but I see the AHSA as more of a parasite than a benefactor.

[Major Hogwash]

185. ASHA is a pro-gun organization.

Actually.

[benEzra]

187. Given that their positions are almost indistinguishable from those of the Brady Campaign...

...and given the backgrounds of their founders, I would have to question that statement. They were founded to provide political cover for the DLC's ban-more-guns agenda that was such a disaster until finally dropped after '04, and originally shared the same office building as the DLC, as I recall.

The fact that their primary message is "outlaw the most popular target and defensive guns in America" shows where they are coming from. As well as their support for the Bush administration's attempts to deny gun ownership rights to anyone on the administration's secret blacklists.

Having said that, I would LOVE to see AHSA evolve into a progressive alternative to the NRA, and the fact that they canned John Rosenthal last year was a step in the right direction. If they'd drop their support for new bans and Bush's no-fly lists, I'd join.

[Major Hogwash]

188. ASHA is a pro-gun organization.

Too bad for you. You're not a hunter.

[benEzra]

191. AHSA wants to be the American Hunters *and Shooters* Association, though.

Problem is, around 4 out of 5 gun owners are nonhunters, and of those who do hunt, many (arguably most) also own nonhunting guns.

ASHA is indeed pro-hunting. So is the Brady Campaign. They do not, however, represent the interests of most American shooters who are not hunters, and presently actively oppose those interests.

If they truly want to be the American Hunters and Shooters Association, they need to stop trying to ban the most popular civilian target and defense guns. They give lip service to target shooting and self-defense, but they need to reconcile that with their positions.

Hopefully their canning of John Rosenthal (the primary drive behind their prior support of gun bans, I think) is a firm step in that direction.

[Texas Hill Country]

189. Hillary has challenged them to a discussion about BOs questionaire & they have refused to answer lol