Posted on 07/25/2007 5:37:50 PM PDT by pissant
How many of you have a basic litmus test for your political candidates? That is, are there certain positions of political policy for which you will not compromise or compromise slightly based on other factors? I don’t mean is the candidate breathing and a member of a particular political party. In my opinion, that is no way to vote. Okay, I will go along with the breathing test but forget party. Know the candidates and their positions on what you deem most important. For some of us it is the abortion issue, for others affirmative action, others gay rights, for myself it is the candidate’s position on the Second Amendment, firearms, and their consistency.
Before your eyes glaze over and you just write me off, consider:
1. the Founding Fathers thought that a citizen’s right to own firearms was important enough to place it second in our Bill of Rights,
2. a candidate’s position on firearms is an extension of their belief whether the ultimate power of force should reside with the citizens or with government,
3. a candidate’s belief that citizens should have the ultimate right to provide for their own self-defense,
4. a candidates belief that ultimately, the citizens will not use force unnecessarily and that people are basically good and can be trusted,
5. the candidate is aware that in every instance where despotism has been instituted, one of the first rights taken from the citizens is their ability to defend themselves, and
6. that the use of firearms constitute good clean fun, an interesting and challenging hobby, a means of providing for one’s family, and a tool for the bonding of parent and child.
So you see, a candidate’s position on the Second Amendment and firearms tells a lot about that person. I am unabashedly pro-gun and thus would want to vote for a candidate with similar beliefs. Of course, there are many other positions on policies that are also important and should be considered, but I’ve found that a candidate’s position on firearms is also an indication on how they would represent me on other positions.
Thus, the Second Amendment, firearms, and consistency are not the only positions determining my vote but it is a quick way to weed out those candidates that oppose my right of self-defense. That said, if a candidate was graded a ‘B’ or maybe ‘C’ on firearms yet was the stand out best candidate in all other positions of interest, then I would be hard pressed not to support them against an ‘A’ graded firearms candidate whose positions were juxtaposition to mine on most everything else. Yet as I said above, an ‘A’ candidate regarding firearms is unlikely to be a despot. That being said, the exception that proves the rule, is George Bush. Proving it is foolish to base one’s voting on a single issue.
So let’s take a look at how the potential and actual 2008 presidential candidates stack up regarding the Second Amendment and firearms. No, it is not too early to be considering this. Yes, the presidential election is some 16-months away but as I opined in a previous post, if you really want a choice in national politics, then you must start supporting your candidate ASAP. Even if you wait for the primaries, it is often way too late to help your candidate. Now is the time to be supporting and promoting your presidential choice.
As a life member of The Gun Owners of America (GOA) and the National Rifle Association (NRA), I often consult their web sites, in addition to other web sources of course, for updates regarding the presidential candidates and their positions on the Second Amendment and firearms. I have found I agree with GOA’s opinions more than I do the NRAs. I have also found the NRA-ILA to be in bed with the establishment. That said, my grading of the candidates below is not scientific but based on my current understanding of the candidates’ positions and is somewhat subjective.
Sam Brownback (A-) GOA: not compiled / NRA-ILA: strong pro-gun. Gave him an A- as GOA info not compiled
Jim Gilmore (C) GOA: as Attorney General and then Governor of Virginia, he compiled an up-and-down record on the Second Amendment / NRA-ILA: Gilmore was RNC Chairman Gave Gilmore a C due to mixed GOA review and being RNC Chair (probably pick party over principle).
Newt Gingrich (D+) GOA: often acted as a blocking force standing in the way of pro-gun reform. He has been rated as low as “D” by GOA. / NRA-ILA: no real information found. Gave Gingrich a D+ based on GOA but + due to his hob knobbing with NRA.
Rudy Giuliani (F) GOA: supported many anti-gun initiatives in NYC, wanted national gun permit, now says he’s for states rights re: guns. / NRA-ILA: nothing of substance. Gave Giuliani an F because of his past positions on firearms (irrespective of what he says today), he’s a liar, and he is inconsistent.
Mike Huckabee (A+) GOA: been in the heat of battle over gun rights and has proven himself to be a steadfast friend to gun owners and the Second Amendment. / NRA-ILA: signed Arkansas concealed carry legislation, against gun manufacturer lawsuits, signed SB 1080 no net loss of public hunting lands. Gave Huckabee A+ because he has been tried under fire and has been consistently pro-gun.
Duncan Hunter (A) GOA: H.L. Richardson (founded GOA and Gun Owners of CA) recommended, is a hunter, but little of legislative substance. / NRA-ILA: opposed bullet serialization and co-sponsor of HR 2037. Gave Hunter an A based on Richardson’s recommendation and the few substantive articles re: his record. He could be an A+.
John McCain (F) GOA: Joined McKelvey in gun control, tried running for president in 2000 as an anti-gunner. This year it appears he is seeking to “come home” to the pro-gun community. / NRA-ILA: Supported McCain/Feingold legislation and promoted attacks on gun shows, Gave McCain a F as he is inconsistent at best and has supported far too many anti-gun schemes.
George Pataki (D-) GOA: at best a left-leaning moderate. He is fully capable of supporting any gun control proposal if it is politically expedient to do so. / NRA-ILA: vetoed S 2735A but is inconsistent. Gave Pataki a D- as he has done a few pro-gun/hunting things but he is inconsistent.
Ron Paul (A+) GOA: a constitutionalist in every sense of the word. Strong Second Amendment support based on principle. Recommended by Larry Pratt, Exec. Dir. GOA / NRA-ILA: couldn’t find much of substance which is one reason, knowing Ron Paul’s record, that I trust the GOA more than the NRA-ILA. The NRA-ILA is much too much in bed with the establishment. Gave Paul an A+ because I know his record which is based on unwavering constitutionality.
Mitt Romney (D-) GOA: ran for Senate in 1994, told the Boston Herald that he supported the Brady gun-control law and a ban on scores of semi-automatic firearms, did not back off his support for gun control during his run for governor in 2002, as governor he supported legislation to ease restrictions on gun licensing in the state, but he only did so at the expense of gun rights, as he signed a draconian ban on common, household firearms. Tried to pose as pro-gun and hunter for 2008 but when caught on the particulars he stumbled his way through it. Romney is the politician architype. / NRA-ILA: signed H 4552 which is pro-gun, signed S 2367 which is pro-gun, signed S 2255 which is pro-gun. Do you see a pattern with the NRA-ILA. Way too much support of the establishment. Reading NRA-ILA articles you would think Romney pro-gun! Gave Romney an D- because of his inconsistency, this ability to blithely go from one side of an issue to another. Only reason I didn’t give him an F is because of his great hair.
Tom Tancredo (A-) GOA: repeatedly supported congressional measures to exercise Congress’ constitutional authority to overturn the D.C. gun ban, his votes also included helping to defeat measures to ban .50 caliber rifles, and to enact legislation allowing the suing of any federal official who confiscates a gun during a time of emergency. He only wavered during the Columbine High tragedy. / NRA-ILA: these jokers returned nothing on a Trancredo search. I’ll redouble what I said about them in the Romney evaluation. Gave Tancredo an A- only because of his wavering during the Columbine High tragedy, otherwise an A or A+.
Tommy Thompson (D) GOA: no information / NRA-ILA: Headed Health and Human Services which put out and supported anti-gun ‘reports’. Gave Thompson a D due to his heading HHS, his establishment views, and the lack of information on him via GOA and NRA-ILA. He may actually be an F.
Fred Thompson (C-) GOA: GOA tracked 33 votes in the U.S. Senate while Thompson was there. He voted pro-gun 19 times. / NRA-ILA: Very interesting…here’s what the NRA-ILA has to say re: Fred: “U.S. Senator Fred Thompson (R-Tenn.), a staunch supporter of the Second Amendment, announced he will not seek re-election this year. His support of our Right to Keep and Bear Arms will certainly be missed.” This after voting pro-gun in only 19 of 33 votes. Who is the NRA kidding? Us? Gave Thompson a C- based on his Senate votes and inconsistency.
After the NRA-ILA report on Fred Thompson, their only publicizing Romney’s pro-gun votes, and their lack of any meaningful information regarding Ron Paul, I have decided not to seek their input into the Democrat candidates unless the GOA has no information on them. NRA-ILA reports are misleading!
Joe Biden (F) GOA: has built up an impressive anti-gun record in direct support of an overall socialist agenda. Gave Biden an F for obvious reasons.
Hillary Clinton (F) GOA: has truly earned her F- rating. Her record of cosponsoring anti-gun initiatives reads like a Sarah Brady wish list. Gave Clinton an F for obvious reasons.
Chris Dodd (F) GOA: Anti-gun, and dependably so. GOA rating: F. Gave Dodd an F for obvious reasons.
John Edwards (F) GOA: Information being compiled. / NRA-ILA: John Edwards…has cast the same anti-gun, anti-hunting votes as Dianne Feinstein, Chuck Schumer and Ted Kennedy. Gave Edwards an F for obvious reasons.
Al Gore (F) GOA: While the liberal wing of the Democrat Party has not departed from its anti-gun agenda, it has toned down its rhetoric. That’s why if you look at Al Gore’s website today, you won’t see any mention of his views on gun control. In fact, you’ll even read posts that acknowledge the point above — that gun control was one of the key issues that cost Gore the presidency in 2000. But lest we forget where Gore really stands on the issue, remember that this man is quite proud of his gun control record. Talking about his vote to shut down gun shows, he boasted, “I cast the tie-breaking vote to close the gun show loophole.” Indeed, Gore may be repackaging himself this year, but his anti-gun record is forever ingrained in indelible ink. Consider his publicly stated views and votes on gun control over the last decade and a half. Gave Gore an F for obvious reasons.
John Kerry (F) GOA: Kerry’s anti-gun record has certainly not gone unnoticed by his friends. The Coalition to Stop Gun Violence (formerly known as the Coalition to Ban Handguns) stated on its website that Kerry “has voted with the National Coalition to Stop Gun Violence 100% of the time… [and] received an ‘F’ from the National Rifle Association and had a 0% rating with Gun Owners of America.” Over and over again, Senator John Kerry has voted against the Second Amendment. A friend of gun owners, Kerry is not. Gave Kerry an F for obvious reasons.
Dennis Kucinch (F) GOA: Congressman from Ohio, has earned his GOA rating of F-. Gave Kucinch an F for obvious reasons.
Barack Obama (F) GOA: no information. / NRA-ILA: With a combination of RICO in firearm law and Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama in the White House, you can bet the farm the “bad old days” would quickly return. Every peaceable individual who owns a firearm will be in jeopardy. Neither had much else on Obama. From ontheissues.org I found the following statements made by Obama: Keep guns out of inner cities–but also problem of morality. (Oct 2006) Ban semi-automatics, and more possession restrictions. (Jul 1998) Voted NO on prohibiting lawsuits against gun manufacturers. (Jul 2005) Gave Obama an F for obvious reasons.
Bill Richardson (D+) GOA: His love for guns aside, his greater love for his party allies might prove to greatly disappoint those pro-gun voters who want to see him in the Oval Office. Gave Richardson a D+ since he has supported some pro-gun initiatives and sad to say, is the most pro-gun candidate among the Democrats.
In summary, none of the Democrat candidates can be thought of as pro-gun. Additionally, the ‘first-tier’ Republican candidates are all lacking in consistency and Second Amendment support. Is it not interesting that only the second-tier Republican candidates are really pro-gun? Based on my litmus test of supporting the Second Amendment, being pro-gun, and consistency, I rank the ‘A’ candidates, Huckabee, Paul, Hunter, Brownback, and Tancredo. Now let’s see what their positions are on other issues…
PING
New link to add:
03-01-2007 The Right Balance hosted by Greg Allen
http://www.therightbalance.org/best/TRB20070301(as4,bp2).mp3
What is it? An interview?
03-01-2007 The Right Balance hosted by Greg Allen
10:00 a.m. to Noon ET each weekday, reboadcast from 10:00 p.m. to midnight ET
Congressman/Presidential candidate Duncan Hunter discusses geopolitics, NPR’s Krista Tippett talks about her book and show “Speaking of Faith.”
The Right Balance is designed to give the listener in-depth interviews and commentaries from many of today’s top political voices. Lifestyle, food, travel, entertainment and health issues will also be discussed. The Right Balance will not become a shouting match. With firm conservative roots, the show will feature many points of view, placing the emphasis on ideas rather than decibels. Those who love their country will want to tune in to a program designed to bring out the best in the guest....Or better yet, listen online.
http://www.accentradionetwork.com/arn.asx
Thank you, I shall.
So this means that the most pro-gun candidate with a chance of winning is Fred Thompson
“after voting pro-gun in only 19 of 33 votes”
I guess being pro-gun half the time is okay with you, or to quote Fred on his amnesty deal..”as long as it’s not easy”.
Excellent work!
Too early to be counting them chickens, my friend.
the 2A is ONE of my litmus tests, and a very important one.
Only one candidate passes my “litmus tests”...yes PLURAL. However, none of the issues matter much if you cannot DEFEND them.
Good point.
So let's get the word from the man himself.
March 11, 2007, edition of "FOX News Sunday With Chris Wallace":
"WALLACE: Gun control.
THOMPSON: Well, I'm against gun control generally. You know, you check my record. You'll find I'm pretty consistent on that issue.
WALLACE: So this federal court — appeals court ruling this last week, I guess Friday, in the case of D.C. — you'd be perfectly happy to have people have handguns in their homes?
THOMPSON: Yes. Absolutely. The court basically said the Constitution means what it says, and I agree with that."
Pissant, every time you post some little tidbit about trashing Fred you have to KNOW we are going to just make you look foolish....again.....and again.....and again. Notice there is no skirting the issue here, no half baked answer, no political BS. Just a straight forward answer.
If ever Duncan can climb out of the 1% arena, he would make a viable candidate, but right now...at this time....he hasn't a hope in hell of winning. Sad as that is what is even sadder is you continue to insist he is the savior of the GOP and it ain't happening.
Sorry to burst your bubble.
Everyone needs to take the ‘Choose Your Candidate’ Quiz
http://www.dehp.net/candidate/
This was my “score”
Hunter 44
(you have no disagreements with this candidate)
“So this means that the most pro-gun candidate with a chance of winning is Fred Thompson.”
Sorry, no. What this means is that Fred Thompson may not be all he’s bragged up to be. Thompson may be useful in defeating the other top three but as more is learned about him, Hunter will continue to pickup support. Thompson’s appeal is mostly that he isn’t Rudy McRomney. I say he is closer to that mold than the Reagan/Hunter/Huckabee/etc. mold. At least as far as the 2nd amendment is concerned as this article states.
How is a post about EVERY candidate’s grade on gun issues a specific “trash Fred” thread?
The only things Pissant posts are these.....articles that support Duncan.....articles that trash Fred. In this case he got both.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.