2008 Primaries Thread 3: The Rejecting and Denouncening

http://www.addamsfamily.com/addams/fester01.jpg

now less likely to fester for this week's news cycles

lol @ google ads on halperin's page linking to countrywide home loans

Hitch and Sully on Russert's show. Hitch: "I think an Obama-McCain election would be a wonderful thing to watch. Both are highly intelligent, both principled, and both would change their positions on Iraq, because they're willing to accept responsibility."

hitch will fucking back mccain.

I read that wrong.

Chuck Norris would fucking anyone (FACTS)

Obama on guns

Has he updated this 10-year old "ban the sale of semiautomatics" position of his?

golden oldie

http://politicalwire.com/archives/2008/04/07/obamas_first_date.html

Doing the right thing:

http://media.gallup.com/poll/graphs/040708DailyUpdateGraph1llssddpp.gif

kudos

that block of o's flat 49 to hrc's fluctuations is interesting

gutter politix i know, and yet...

http://rawstory.com/news/2008/McCain_temper_boiled_over_in_92_0407.html

^^ sorta nsfw actually

Spike Lee says some completely predictable things

Schweitzer

So not gonna happen?

http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/2008/04/08/us/08kids01-600.jpg

http://bp0.blogger.com/_Y3Ml4jkQaQY/R-gHGhmQKWI/AAAAAAAAAYw/akqp2DkqFok/s1600-h/03-20-08-nachoz.jpg

what is up with those Obama shirts, they're all missing one or two colors.

I've never understood why gun control is such a difficult issue. Why can't Democrats say yes, guns are totally legal and everyone has the right to purchase, keep and use one. But just as everyone has the right to purchase, keep and use a car, there are conditions placed upon that right, such as mandatory tests and licenses, and your license can be suspended or revoked if you break the rules. The federal govt. sets a framework of minimum guidelines and the states can tack onto those whatever they want. What would be controversial about that??

There's plenty out there that would see any kind of regulation as an infringement, but you are right. the Dems are particularly poor at arguing high minded principles against strongly help right wing principles. they's rather brush it under the carpet it seems.

Why can't Democrats say yes, guns are totally legal and everyone has the right to purchase, keep and use one

because lots of activists don't think this is the case

tracer, the citizen's right to arms is, in many opinions, the last check against the tyranny of the gov't -- increasing regulation and gov't control flies in the face of that core instinct. i'm not going to recapitulate a pro-gun argument and derail the thread because the case is pretty well known -- besides, you ought to remember that this is a crazy frontier nation that loves guns despite your stated incredulity.

the constitution is remarkably silent on cars

Because the NRA is funded by the gun industry and the gun industry wants you to buy lots and lots of guns and doesn't want to have to put any fancy cost-increasing lock-a-ma-jigs on them.

"A WELL-REGULATED MILITIA"

because lots of "activists" constitutional scholars don't think this is the case understand the 2nd amendment to guarantee merely the right of state and local authorities, especially in Don's neck of the woods, to retain a cache of weapons to suppress slave rebellions

Joe Klein and Hugh Hewitt shitting in each other's mouths talking about Obama's "problems."

I don't think constitutional scholars are the ones Dems would be trying to convince with that argument.

the short answer to Tracer's question is: the NRA

Because the NRA is funded by the gun industry and the gun industry wants you to buy lots and lots of guns and doesn't want to have to put any fancy cost-increasing lock-a-ma-jigs on them.

-- Hurting 2, Tuesday, April 8, 2008 9:37 AM (1 hour ago) Bookmark Link

I think that it is more like a line the sand; this is where the gun lobby will stand and not compromise past.

Look, in my ideal world, handguns would be illegal, semiautos would be illegal, etc. But the US is not that world.

I think elmo is right that many people see any regulation of firearms as creeping Big-Brotherism -- and the subtext of that is that people need the option of attacking their government with guns. I will refrain from detailing the incompatibility of this desire with national sovereignty, or the juvenile paranoia that accompanies it. But it's hard to imagine these people hold the majority view.

Regardless, I just wonder how these "last defense against tyranny" folks are going to drive to the frontlines, once the government arbitrarily revokes their state-controlled drivers' licenses.

lulz

I grew up around guns, have no interest in them, but I don't see why my dad's responsible recreational gun use should bother anyone. To me "gun control" has always been a dead issue.

the idea that the government can be effectively opposed with guns in this day and age is beyond ludicrous

Taking sides: gun control vs revolution

It's beyond ludicrous -- so how come it REMAINS the undiscussed cornerstone of the -- *tremble in fear* -- mighty gun lobby?

I mean it is literally seditionist, actually.

The sedition aspect doesn't bother me at all, its more the logical fallacy of the argument that I find irritating. Your shotgun is not gonna protect you from the federal government, keep you from paying taxes, etc.

x-post

Another reason for the fetishization of the 2nd amendment is that if you argue for a federal individual right to own a gun on another basis you sound like one of those commies who love abortions and condoms and teh gays.

classic, gabbneb. I miss you baby.

anyway, I guess we can all gear up for later this summer (?) when SCOTUS will bring gun control to the forefront again and the nutball activists from both sides rear their beautiful heads.

oops, I mean constitutional scholars.

the decision will be out in june at the latest

not to mention the right of black people to protect themselves from Klan members

I'm with Shakey. We need bigger guns.

I wonder if the inevitability of Hillary will be decided by June.

and hey why can't I own a nuclear bomb? those count as "arms", right?

(^^^sarcasm)

Ever notice how nobody on earth dares fight the big guns of the US Gov't? It ineffective.