Obama '08?

Foxfyre wrote:

Obama is on record as wanting to ban the manufacture, sale, and use of all handguns as recently as 1996. But as a presidential candidate, his staff now says that he filled out a questionnaire wrong back then and didn't really mean that. So you decide.

http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2008/02/obama-romney-mi.html

http://blogs.abcnews.com/legalities/2008/02/obama-and-guns.html

My link is in reference to the "Source: 1998 IL State Legislative National Political Awareness Test Jul 2, 1998".

I googled this to see if he's denounced it, and from what I could find, he hasn't.

0 Replies

Foxfyre wrote:

Obama is on record as wanting to ban the manufacture, sale, and use of all handguns as recently as 1996. But as a presidential candidate, his staff now says that he filled out a questionnaire wrong back then and didn't really mean that. So you decide.

http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2008/02/obama-romney-mi.html

http://blogs.abcnews.com/legalities/2008/02/obama-and-guns.html

Another 'rookie' mistake. He's had a few.

0 Replies

Here's Obama's stance on gun as of jan. 2008

Quote:

Provide some common-sense enforcement on gun licensing
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. But what we can do is to provide just some common-sense enforcement. The efforts by law enforcement to obtain the information required to trace back guns that have been used in crimes to unscrupulous gun dealers. As president, I intend to make it happen. We essentially have two realities, when it comes to guns, in this country. You've got the tradition of lawful gun ownership. It is very important for many Americans to be able to hunt, fish, take their kids out, teach them how to shoot. Then you've got the reality of 34 Chicago public school students who get shot down on the streets of Chicago. We can reconcile those two realities by making sure the Second Amendment is respected and that people are able to lawfully own guns, but that we also start cracking down on the kinds of abuses of firearms that we see on the streets.

Source: 2008 Democratic debate in Las Vegas Jan 15, 2008

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

Obama's position on the ban of semi-automatics was ten years ago.

Quote:

Ban semi-automatics, and more possession restrictions
Principles that Obama supports on gun issues:
Ban the sale or transfer of all forms of semi-automatic weapons.
Increase state restrictions on the purchase and possession of firearms.
Require manufacturers to provide child-safety locks with firearms.
Source: 1998 IL State Legislative National Political Awareness Test Jul 2, 1998

I think what his position is now is what is revelent. His, like most everyone elses views, change with time. Also he is now thinking nationally, not locally.

0 Replies

Xingu.....where in his 2008 stance does he say that he no longer supports a ban on the sale of all semi-automatic weapons?

0 Replies

I dont know if its good or bad for his campaign, but Obama has frustrated another group...

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-feminists2mar02,1,598262.story?ctrack=1&cset=true

Apparently, the feminists are frustrated that women are supporting Obama instead of Hillary.

Quote:

They're running to the rock star, to the momentum, to the excitement," said Ewing, a family law attorney who chairs the Dallas County Democratic Party. "And I am worried that if Hillary doesn't get elected, I am never going to see a woman president in my lifetime. I do think her chances are slipping away, and it [ticks] me off."

Quote:

Old-school feminists have lined up against each other. Some chapters of the National Organization for Women are supporting Clinton; others are for Obama. There have been arguments about which candidate is more pro-choice. For some women, the rise of Obama rips open a persistent wound: an older, more experienced woman is pushed aside for a younger male colleague.

There is more to the article.
But I find the whole thing sort of funny and I wonder if Obama should be more worried or amused by this.

0 Replies

maporsche wrote:

My link is in reference to the "Source: 1998 IL State Legislative National Political Awareness Test Jul 2, 1998".

I googled this to see if he's denounced it, and from what I could find, he hasn't.

For good reason. Would you leave this on your website if you were running for president?

From the Chicago Defender, Dec. 13, 1999:

Sweeping federal gun control legislation proposed by Sen. Barack Obama (D-13th) would increase the penalties on gun runners who are flooding Chicago's streets with illegal weapons.

At an anti-gun rally held at the Park Manor Christian Church, 600 E. 73rd St., headed by the Rev. James Demus, Obama also said he's backing a resolution being introduced into the City Council by Alds. Toni Preckwinkle (4th), Ted Thomas (15th), Leslie Hairston (5th) to call for a "shot-free" millennium celebration.

Obama outlined his anti-gun plan that includes increased penalties for the interstate transportation of firearms. The maximum penalty now for bringing a gun across the border is 10 years in prison. Obama is proposing to make it a felony for a gun owner whose firearm was stolen from his residence which causes harm to another person if that weapon was not securely stored in that home. [!!!]

He's proposing restricting gun purchases to one weapon a month and banning the sale of firearms at gun shows except for "antique" weapons. Obama is also proposing increasing the licensing fee to obtain a federal firearms license.

He's also seeking a ban on police agencies from reselling their used weapons even if those funds are used to buy more state-of-the-art weapons for their agencies. Obama wants only those over 21 who've passed a basic course to be able to buy or own a firearm.

He's proposing that all federally licensed gun dealers sell firearms in a storefront and not from their homes while banning their business from being within five miles of a school or a park. He's also banning the sale of 'junk" handguns like the popular Saturday Night Specials.

Obama is requiring that all people working at a gun dealer undergo a criminal background check. He's also asking that gun manufacturers be required to develop safety measures that permit only the original owner of the firearm to operate the weapon purchased.

Additionally, he wants an increase of the funds for schools to teach anger management skills for youth between the ages of 5-13. Obama is also seeking to increase the federal taxes by 500 percent on the sale of firearm, ammunition [sic] -- weapons he says are most commonly used in firearm deaths.

0 Replies

How exactly does a state senator propose federal legislation?

0 Replies

nappyheadedhohoho wrote:

Foxfyre wrote:
Obama is on record as wanting to ban the manufacture, sale, and use of all handguns as recently as 1996. But as a presidential candidate, his staff now says that he filled out a questionnaire wrong back then and didn't really mean that. So you decide.

http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2008/02/obama-romney-mi.html

http://blogs.abcnews.com/legalities/2008/02/obama-and-guns.html

Another 'rookie' mistake. He's had a few.

"Rookie mistake"? or flipflop for political expediency? You could take it either way but political expediency seems most likely when we look at what he has supported and how he has voted. In no case has he come down on the side of gun owners, but rather has taken the side that produced more regulation and/or restriction:

His positions/votes on record:

- Respect 2nd Amendment, but local gun bans ok. (Feb 2008)
- Provide some common-sense enforcement on gun licensing. (Jan 2008)
- 2000: cosponsored bill to limit purchases to 1 gun per month. (Oct 2007)
- Stop unscrupulous gun dealers dumping guns in cities. (Jul 2007)
- 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)
Expanded information HERE

0 Replies

In the scheme of things about this election, I don't think "gun control" has that much importance to most voters.

Clinton Is Urged to Drop Out if She Loses on Tuesday

0 Replies

But he voted against gun confiscation during a state of emergency, so it's not like he doesn't understand that people have a need to defend themselves.

0 Replies

Foxfyre wrote:

nappyheadedhohoho wrote:
Foxfyre wrote:
Obama is on record as wanting to ban the manufacture, sale, and use of all handguns as recently as 1996. But as a presidential candidate, his staff now says that he filled out a questionnaire wrong back then and didn't really mean that. So you decide.

http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2008/02/obama-romney-mi.html

http://blogs.abcnews.com/legalities/2008/02/obama-and-guns.html

Another 'rookie' mistake. He's had a few.

"Rookie mistake"? or flipflop for political expediency? You could take it either way but political expediency seems most likely when we look at what he has supported and how he has voted. In no case has he come down on the side of gun owners, but rather has taken the side that produced more regulation and/or restriction:

His positions/votes on record:

- Respect 2nd Amendment, but local gun bans ok. (Feb 2008)
- Provide some common-sense enforcement on gun licensing. (Jan 2008)
- 2000: cosponsored bill to limit purchases to 1 gun per month. (Oct 2007)
- Stop unscrupulous gun dealers dumping guns in cities. (Jul 2007)
- 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)
Expanded information HERE

Rookie in the sense that his record wouldn't be checked, or facts wouldn't be searched for confirmation of some of his statements or 'stories'. And yes to the political expediency thing. I have no doubt, despite what he now says, as to his real policy on guns. His version of 'change', I guess.

Rookie Mistakes Plague Obama

0 Replies

I doubt this election will turn on the issue of gun control, but we can be sure that the candidates (which ever ones are left) will be given a very clear opportunity to make their positions known when the Supreme Court rules, later this year, and before the general election) on whether the 2nd Amendment provides an individual or collective right to bear arms.

The notion of a collective right based on the militia wording in the Constitution has always seemed to me to be an interpretation of convenience for jurists who have been inclined to impose restrictions on private gun ownership.

It's difficult to understand how a hastily formed militia required to resist a government gone bad,will be able to obtain the weapons it needs, if the individuals forming the militia did not already have them. I doubt a future dictatorship that motivates the people to take up arms against it is going to recognize their collective right to go out and obtain an arsenal. If the people are not armed in advance of the need to take up arms, it is hardly likely that they will be able arm themselves when the need for a militia arises.

I'm not keen on the notion that individuals might create their own personal arsenal of military style weapons, but we can't, as it seems many liberals would wish, always cover all the bases.

It always amuses me that liberals tend to be pro gun control, when they are the ones who, with some consistency, are warning that Republican presidents want to establish dictatorships.

It would be unpleasently ironic indeed if Bush or his ideological progeny truly established a dictatorship but we the people could not hope to overthrow it because it's harshest critics insisted that there is no individual right to bear arms.

0 Replies

I doubt this election will turn on the issue of gun control, but we can be sure that the candidates (which ever ones are left) will be given a very clear opportunity to make their positions known when the Supreme Court rules, later this year, and before the general election) on whether the 2nd Amendment provides an individual or collective right to bear arms.

The notion of a collective right based on the militia wording in the Constitution has always seemed to me to be an interpretation of convenience for jurists who have been inclined to impose restrictions on private gun ownership.

It's difficult to understand how a hastily formed militia required to resist a government gone bad,will be able to obtain the weapons it needs, if the individuals forming the militia did not already have them. I doubt a future dictatorship that motivates the people to take up arms against it is going to recognize their collective right to go out and obtain an arsenal. If the people are not armed in advance of the need to take up arms, it is hardly likely that they will be able arm themselves when the need for a militia arises.

I'm not keen on the notion that individuals might create their own personal arsenal of military style weapons, but we can't, as it seems many liberals would wish, always cover all the bases.

It always amuses me that liberals tend to be pro gun control, when they are the ones who, with some consistency, are warning that Republican presidents want to establish dictatorships.

It would be unpleasently ironic indeed if Bush or his ideological progeny truly established a dictatorship but we the people could not hope to overthrow it because it's harshest critics insisted that there is no individual right to bear arms.

0 Replies

I dont know if this is true, but I sure hope its not.
It presents a mental picture I really didnt want.

http://www.metafilter.com/69536/1000000-For-Hillary-Clinton-To-Pose-Nude

And no, I havent read any of the attached comments.

0 Replies

Looks like the polls for Tuesday's primary runs all over the map; no real winner, but I think the momentum for Obama will bring him victories.

0 Replies

Finn dAbuzz wrote:

I doubt this election will turn on the issue of gun control, but we can be sure that the candidates (which ever ones are left) will be given a very clear opportunity to make their positions known when the Supreme Court rules, later this year, and before the general election) on whether the 2nd Amendment provides an individual or collective right to bear arms.

I doubt it too, but it's an interesting primary issue, and would be nice to know (for sure) where all the candidates stand. Some say Al Gore's changing his mind on the issue cost him the election in 2000. I don't know if that's true or not but according to the exit polls, Bush got gun-owners' votes by a wide margin in both 2000 and 2004.

0 Replies

snood wrote:

real life wrote:
Roxxxanne wrote:
Overhead on the San Francisco Muni yeserday.

An older black man beaming with pride. "I am sixty-eight years old and I never thought I would live to see a black man even have a (remote) chance to become President...to think that he might get in there..."

At Safeway,

"I don't care (Hillary or Obama) it's all good after George Bush."

Well, if it was said at Safeway, it's got to be right.

I'll have to re-evaluate my objection to Barack 'Present' Obama.

I thought that we should choose a candidate with the spine to stand up and be counted for what he believes.

I could be wrong about that though.

Maybe all we need is a 'rockstar' and 'Present' Obama would fill the bill nicely.

I'll consider it. Thanks.

Well, if you were in line to vote for George Bush and stand by that "decision", then I'm not sure why anyone should care what you you think about how or why "we should choose a candidate", since he was as bumbling as he seemed to be, and his core of support neither sees, nor cares about that.

You're showing about as much level-headedness with all your prejorative nicknaming and endless snottiness as someone scrawling nasty graffitti in a urinal, and you get about as much respect.

I could name you a couple dozen things I don't like about George Bush.

And he's still far superior to what we would've gotten if we had elected Al Gore in 2000.

During the Clinton/Gore administration , the US was attacked by terrorists at least 4 times, and we did virtually nothing about it.

Delusional Gore, the inventor of the internet, would've continued the same policy.

Jamie Gorelick , a Clinton/Gore appointee had erected barriers between the intelligence services to prevent them from sharing info which could have prevented terrorist attacks.

If it doesn't bother you that Obama has a habit of avoiding tough choices , as evidenced by his 'Present' votes in the Illinois legislature, then I guess you see the Presidency as requiring far less than I do.

If you don't like the Republican candidates, the best thing you can do is offer better Democratic candidates. Without stiff competition, mediocrity will reign.

George Bush was elected because he was the lesser of two poor choices. Far less, but still not a great choice.

I think he's done a good job in some areas and a poor job in others.

Does that answer your question?

0 Replies

See your sticking your foot in your mouth again RL.

0 Replies

xingu wrote:

See your sticking your foot in your mouth again RL.

And lying.

0 Replies

From c.i.'s article:

Quote:

Mr. Richardson, saying that it was vital to Democrats' hopes in the general election in November to mount a positive, unifying campaign, said on the CBS News program "Face the Nation" that "whoever has the most delegates after Tuesday, a clear lead, should be, in my judgment, the nominee."

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/02/us/politics/02cnd-campaign.html

That's big! I am not counting Hillary out, by a long shot. I'm annoyed at how the goal posts seem to have been moved -- first it was assumed that she'd win in both Ohio and Texas, the question was how big the margin would be and how many delegates she'd pick up. Now there seems to be an expectation that Obama should win both. I don't know how wide-spread it is.

But it seems pretty likely that Obama will have the lead in delegates after March 4th. So Richardson came really close to endorsing Obama, there.

We'll see.

0 Replies

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know