Virginia Gun Owners Forum - VGOF

Tonight is the CNN Republican Presidential Debate. Usually when you run for President you lock up your home state; however, maybe that's inapplicable this year since all but one are viewed unfavorable by their home State. It could be as several candidates announced that they don't need favorable Home State Polls. They were quick to say that God took the time out of a busy schedule to convince them to run for President. Silly me for thinking as President Lincoln thought that God doesn't take sides in our national affairs. Below, here they are with their State favorability/unfavorabilty ratings.

Candidate State Fav/UnFavorability State Polling

Gary Johnson (New Mexico) 44/32
AKA: Mr. Joint since he favors legalization of Marijuana

Newt Gingrich (Georgia) 39/47
AKA: The Blingster since he has only a half million frugal no interest bearing bling account. He's the idea man too, any idea good, or bad as long as it sells a book, or one of his many awards.

Herman Cain (Georgia) 28/36
AKA: Mr I don't know nuttin about the Constitution, since he thinks he can require Muslim Presidential Appointees to renounce Sharia Law, and not require any loyalty oaths from Catholics, or Protestants. Wrong on all counts, but hey free pizzas for everyone on a Cain inauguration day.

Rick Perry (Texas)* 42/50
AKA: Mr. Secession, Let's do it again. 600,000 plus deaths were not enough the first time, so Mr. Secession wants to do it again. Think we can top 600,000 this time? I can see the headlines the day after Perry's inauguration: UNITED STATES NOW ONE STATE, TEXAS, 49 STATES SECEDE FROM UNION.


Rick Santorum (Pennsylvania) 37/47
AKA: The American Pope.He wants to turn America into a Theocratic State ruled by Catholic Canonical Law. His first act will be taking control of opposite sexes wombs. First, all abortions and artificial birth control are hence forth illegal from the point of conception, no exceptions. Second It's highly recommended that women return to the home maker role that best suits them. Come to think of it, maybe he should be known as the American Taliban for his strict no exceptions radical religious beliefs that he would impose on a secular country.

Mitt Romney (Massachusetts) 40/52
AKA: I Know How To Create Jobs, or Mr Front Runner, or Mr Rowney Care: Indeed he knows how to create jobs, as a key guy in a leveraged buy out hedge fund, he created thousands of jobs, for which the Chinese government was very appreciative for bringing all those American jobs to China.

Tim Pawlenty (Minnesota) 40/53
AKA: Mr ZZzzzzzzz. Mr I'm trying so hard to be hip had better give short answers because he's so boring he would put an angry bear to sleep in a couple of minutes. Can anyone restraint this guy's hands when he speaks? He could also be Paris Hilton's new main squeeze since his new tax plan insures that she, and people like her will pay ZERO taxes for the rest of their lives, in return for nothing.

Sarah Palin (Alaska)* 33/58
AKA: The Quitter in Chief (QIC): Mrs It's All About Me is waiting in the wings. It's too bad she didn't take a few minutes out of her I'm so important and send me more money tour to learn anything about American History, or foreign policy. Why seek to be CIC when she is already a chief, The QIC. Has anyone penned a QIC Theme for when she arrives on stage?

Michele Bachmann (Minnesota) 33/59
AKA: Mrs American Conspiracy Theorist, a reformed "Birther" (I think she attended the 12 step program to come down from "Birtherism". I hear that the completion certificate is a Tee-Shirt with the President's long form Birth Certificate imprinted on the back). Btw is this the new requirement for all Presidential candidates? She also fancies herself as a Palin with brains. If elected she promises to bring back the House and Senate Select Committees on UnAmerican activities before which every Democratic voter will be called upon to testify. If you lie about being the Socialist we know you are, you'll be stripped of your citizenship and deported. Tell the truth and we'll let you stay after you successfully from the new reeducation camps. Senator McCarthy has nothing on her.

*Still undecided (I always thought if you desired to be President you just said you were running, had no idea it was Kabuki Theater)
There they are folks you pick em, or add to them.

Gat6

None of them strike my fancy...the only potential contender I see (honest, abides by Constitution, decent morals, God fearing, etc) is Palin but she carries too much baggage and the left hates her cause they are afraid....here entering the race would cause the nastiest campaign on the left ever conceived....the current front runners are all part of the good ole boy network and are RINOs at best...

zephyp wrote:None of them strike my fancy...the only potential contender I see (honest, abides by Constitution, decent morals, God fearing, etc) is Palin but she carries too much baggage and the left hates her cause they are afraid....here entering the race would cause the nastiest campaign on the left ever conceived....the current front runners are all part of the good ole boy network and are RINOs at best...

*********************************************************************************************************************
Mr Z. surely you don't think that Michele Bachmann, Hermain Caine, and Ron Paul are part of a good ole boy network. As for Palin since she has yet to show that she has even read, or understand the constitution. I don't know anything that she has said or done that show any special constitutional understanding. Politicians who wear God on their sleeves worry me because I don't look to any politician for spiritual guidance. I want Presidents to stick to matters of state, and leave God's business to the clergy, and the individual.

I don't hate Palin but I do think she is a phony. Her life shows that when things really get tough she does one or both, she quits or dons the victim hood cloak. I would never vote anyone to a higher job when they have repeatedly shown a lack of guts, persistence and determination to complete, indeed excel at a lessor position.

Finally I don't trust people who don't listen. Apparently she only listens to herself and Todd. That's a part of my take on Palin.
Gat6

Yup and lets look at the current alternative;;;;OBAMA= One big alternative mistake America..!!!.Hmmmmmmm.....maybe they can find a dancing horse for this dog and pony show.Some good candidates have not decided to to enter the race yet and that is too bad,.The current line up is a Snooze fest

@Gat6 - Palin a phony? I think the leftists and commies at the NY Times disproved that when they spent a ton of time sifting a couple thousand of her e-mails for dirt and found only a genuine, hard working, honest, God fearing, country and family centered woman.

My picks for 2012...

Republican = Bachman / Palin
Democrat = anyone but obummer

I think Sarah Palin is a good person and has the best for our country at heart, but I don't think she needs to be on the Republican ticket this time around. She has a weird way of speaking that throws me off a bit - and if it throws me off, I'm sure it does the same to many others as well.

I know she's a smart woman - she wouldn't be where she is today if she were an idiot. However, I just don't think her communication skills are up to par.

I would literally beg the Republican Party to NOT put Ms. Palin on the ticket!

I can honestly say the only one that epitomizes what I think of as an "honest" right-winger (ie actually believes in his cause sincerely) is Ron Paul, who I have alot of respect for.

Palin and Bachmann are greedy self-promoters (like the idiot-woman Tea partier than got smashed in Delawares senate race, what was her name?) and the rest are the usual career politicians not worth crap.

You know none of them are Jesus Christ (as in perfect) they all have their spots some more distinctive than others. But all of them IMO would be a sight better than the golfer-in-chief (and perhaps it is better that he is keeping busy doing that) we have now. Let us not eat our own and thus give our current president another 4 years to enact every statist agenda he can. So my pick for the time being is Perry (because the secession of TX is not going to happen anytime soon, other than that he is ok), then perhaps Santorum (I would rather my president hold life sacred and precious than cheap and easy to set aside), then Cain (study Islam a little--sharia law and US law are not compatible, if someone really believes that sharia is best they don't have a place making policy of any kind here), Bachmann would do just fine for a VP slot--she is funny, would make people laugh and is sufficiently qualified that she could step in if the worst happened.

"Every banana has it's spot, so go ahead and eat around it" that was what my mom used to say anyway. If we are looking for a perfect conservative candidate we are all dreaming, one that could beat Obama and be president--well there are a few there that could do the job credibly.

Mammabear has got it right, I think. I'm for whichever one of them can beat that abomination that currently sits in the oval office. What I'd LIKE is a rock-ribbed fiscal conservative with strong free-market tendencies but an overall pragmatism who embraces the tenants of social conservatism without being a zealot; but who is an ABSOLUTE ZEALOT ON THE SECOND AMENDMENT.
Paul's right about a lot of stuff, but too much of an ideologue. Palin, as it has already correctly been observed, has quirky communication skills and has let the hostile elements of the press tarnish her in the last election. Michelle Bachman, in my opinion, is still viable. I like Herman Cain. He’s no constitutional lawyer, it’s true. But on the other hand, Obama is supposed to be a constitutional lawyer, and he’s absolutely contemptuous of the constitutional rights of anybody but his constituency. What Cain is a plain-talking, no-nonsense guy with practical, real-world experience who could probably figure out how to fix stuff and may actually have the guts to at least try to do it. Romney scares me a little. He ought to know what to do and has maybe more major-league and broader management experience than Cain, but in my eyes, Romney’s got this fairly conspicuous brown stain on the seat of his pants from O-Romney-care and I also am not sure he’s really committed to the defense of the common man’s gun rights.
Time will tell, but Rick Perry may be the guy. Texas has a good economic story to tell, and is a God-rearing, liberty-loving place. (Texas doesn’t have the federal government to make it depression-if-not-recession-proof like Virginia does, which makes Texas look much better then Virginia on this count).. But then there’s that “succession” thing that bothers most people. Doesn’t bother me at all. If the liberals and nanny-state regulators keep carving away at our personal liberties, I think all states ought to threaten to dissolve the union and just make a new deal. Maybe those of us who were raised with and still retain some horse sense and basic values will leave out certain coastal bastions of culture when we make our new deal. It was a round-robin bargaining session to begin with – a contract, if you will. In fact, people who write about political science and such things talk a lot about governments in general and ours in particular as a “social contract”. Certain things were negotiated back and forth to secure the unanimous agreement of all 13 colonies. Now certain elements constantly seek to unilaterally change the deal by “interpreting a living constitution”. Contracts may not be unilaterally changed in their terms. They can only be changed by the same unanimous agreement that formed them. And these things they seek to change are absolutely earthshaking in their significance. There couldn’t be a more bedrock issue than redistribution of wealth and income, for instance. The adverse financial impact and damage to personal property interests that the current government is currently attempting would be just as severe as the abolition of slavery would have been in 1861. And there is no noble cause to champion on this occasion – they just want to “spread the wealth around”. That’s the same damn thing ALL pirates want to do. If the founding fathers hadn’t contemplated that succession was possible, why would they have guaranteed our ability to engage in armed rebellion? Heck, the Constitution wasn’t THEIR first attempt; they were junking the failed Articles of Confederation when they negotiated the Constitution. They were 0 for 1 at that point. They may have figured it at least as likely as not that they’d have to re-do it again. So to argue that succession is not permitted under the constitution is pretty bogus in my opinion. One attempt was unsuccessful. (And even then, West Virginia was permitted to succeed from Virginia) Now, I’ll be honest. The very thought of taking up arms against the USA scares the Bejesus out of me. I don’t condone that, and I don’t want that. But at the same time, I’m beginning to wonder if the dollar-sucking, liberty-destroying monster that lives on the banks of the Potomac in DC has (or will shortly) morphed into something that no longer IS the USA we grew up loving. God forbid that day should come. If it does, I hope I don’t live to see it.

But in the meantime, any port in a storm. I'm for the republican that can beat Obama - whoever that may turn out to be.

Barring some kind of meltdown, it's going to be Romney. He's "earned" it, by Republican party logic. He's the most senior and corporate. (Ron Paul, for example, is older and has more campaigns under his belt, but he's not part of the machine, so he's as much of an outsider as a Democrat, with as much of a chance of winning.)

Being involved in the party has taught me that Republicans - and by that I mean the people who actually run the party - place extreme value on seniority, on place, on having "paid one's dues" (translation: been a functionary/operative/etc. long enough), in terms of getting support from the party machinery and stalwarts. If you're some fresh twenty-five-year-old, or even a fresh fifty-year-old, coming in and looking to get elected as a Republican, you've got a huge, almost insurmountable hill to climb to even get a nomination, because everyone in the party will be working for the party functionary whose turn it is. They're really rather nasty about it. (They make exceptions for celebrities: they're still human, after all, and get starstruck like most people. Plus they do like to win, and stars have a hell of an advantage.)

Think about it: why do we see the same rotation of state-wide candidates? It's very easy to predict who's going to run for governor because it's their turn.

The Democrats appear to be less susceptible to this, in that they'll support any freak off the street who spouts the extremes of the party line enough to get the activists to support them. They're more factionalized compared to the more regimented Republicans.

I agree in that seniority thing being the way they do things and twice as of late it has hurt them,,, Bob Dole, and John McCain..... it needs to end this election and put a person in there that can do the job and someone the voters actually want ,not have to settle for///

That is one thing I WILL give the Dem's credit!

They don't play that "dues paid" system! I was a member of GOP for a hot minute to see how they played the game, and if there was any way I could influence the actions.

NOPE! They had a STAUNCH, ENTRENCHED, HARD LINE that I couldn't chisel through to get to the decisioning process.

(Shrugs) I gave up. I walked away from it.

With the LOCAL Dems, if someone has a desire, and some party line ideas, he/she gets the nod.

Bob McDonnell - It's high time a Virginian took the helm again...

I can't see the religious right backing a Mormon.

Even though I think a trained seal could beat Obama,,And would be better than most candidates,the Repubs had better not screw this up for a lot of reasons.. If people are as PO'd as they appear to be their new position would be short lived indeed.4 more years of NumNuts and the US will be circling the bowl possibly for good,We cannot let that happen

VBshooter wrote:Even though I think a trained seal could beat Obama,,And would be better than most candidates,the Repubs had better not screw this up for a lot of reasons.. If people are as PO'd as they appear to be their new position would be short lived indeed.4 more years of NumNuts and the US will be circling the bowl possibly for good,We cannot let that happen

Why do you think a Prez with an (R) instead of a (D) will be able to save the country form its crushing debt, entrenched special interests, and foreign entanglements?

VBshooter wrote:Yup and lets look at the current alternative;;;;OBAMA= One big alternative mistake America..!!!.Hmmmmmmm.....maybe they can find a dancing horse for this dog and pony show.Some good candidates have not decided to to enter the race yet and that is too bad,.The current line up is a Snooze fest

***********************************************************************************************************
You mean you don't have your own unnamed personal favorite for President?
Gat6

zephyp wrote:@Gat6 - Palin a phony? I think the leftists and commies at the NY Times disproved that when they spent a ton of time sifting a couple thousand of her e-mails for dirt and found only a genuine, hard working, honest, God fearing, country and family centered woman.

My picks for 2012...

Republican = Bachman / Palin
Democrat = anyone but obummer

********************************************************************************************
Wow luv your choice, they would guarantee the President's reelection. Has Michele Bachmann ever earned a dollar that did not come from government? It's great that the major part of her families income comes from government. I just wonder why she so opposes others who live off the same programs?

Gat6

VBshooter wrote:Even though I think a trained seal could beat Obama,,And would be better than most candidates,the Repubs had better not screw this up for a lot of reasons.. If people are as PO'd as they appear to be their new position would be short lived indeed.4 more years of NumNuts and the US will be circling the bowl possibly for good,We cannot let that happen

****************************************************************************************
Hear, hear so you're saying a trained seal is a better candidate than the current crowd of Republicans. What a stunning indictment how some citizens view this current crop. Good luck with finding your seal.
Gat6

mamabearCali wrote:You know none of them are Jesus Christ (as in perfect) they all have their spots some more distinctive than others. But all of them IMO would be a sight better than the golfer-in-chief (and perhaps it is better that he is keeping busy doing that) we have now. Let us not eat our own and thus give our current president another 4 years to enact every statist agenda he can. So my pick for the time being is Perry (because the secession of TX is not going to happen anytime soon, other than that he is ok), then perhaps Santorum (I would rather my president hold life sacred and precious than cheap and easy to set aside), then Cain (study Islam a little--sharia law and US law are not compatible, if someone really believes that sharia is best they don't have a place making policy of any kind here), Bachmann would do just fine for a VP slot--she is funny, would make people laugh and is sufficiently qualified that she could step in if the worst happened.

"Every banana has it's spot, so go ahead and eat around it" that was what my mom used to say anyway. If we are looking for a perfect conservative candidate we are all dreaming, one that could beat Obama and be president--well there are a few there that could do the job credibly.

**********************************************************************************************************************
Perhaps you can clarify your statement. Is your problem with golf? Or just this President playing golf? Of course none of the candidates are Jesus Christ, however, that has not stopped a couple of them from claiming that his Farther, God spoke to them, and told them to run for President. Hurrah, while it didn't fit you get one point for getting that talking point word "statist" into your post, not that it's particularly relevant.[code][/code]

Ah it's Governor Rick Perry the new flavor of the month among Republicans who do not like the current nominee crop. I hope he has enough jet black dye for his hair to make it through a Presidential campaign. Anyway why should we consider Perry? He's another social Big Government guy. He wants the Christian God to rule our social life. Economically I'm not sure, altho his actions seem to indicate that God has no interest in economic issues. I for one regardless of party label would never vote for any politician who continually spouts off about God, or who is God fearing", the latter is much too Old Testament for me. My vote goes to the person who I believe is best able to lead our SECULAR nation. The President's other title is Commander in Chief (CIC), not Pastor in Chief (PIC), or Pope. If I'm confused religiously, I turn to my pastor, not a Perry, a Palin, an Obama or a Bachmann.

Your second choice is Santorum, a guy who was roundly rejected by his own State. If a politician can't be elected in his State, that's good enough for me. Admittedly, if one wanted religion and government intertwined and wanted federal officials controlling my daughter's womb based on religious views, Santorum is your guy. History suggests that mixing religion and government is toxic to both. I could see Santorum adding an Office of Womb Control (OWC) to hunt down the poor and women of less means who have a back alley abortion. Women of means of course will do what they always did, go somewhere else for abortion services.

I'm curious about the latest talking point, Sharia law. Since no religious law takes precedence over the Constitution why is Sharia law an issue? Can you name the politician advocating adoption of Sharia law? Is he or she proposing a constitutional amendment to permit Sharia law?

As for a VP Bachman I'm not worried about her intelligence. I'm worried about her far right wing views, and her incessant attempts to rewrite history to justify those views.

I would cite a recent poll that says 73% of Republicans are not enthusiastic about any Republican for President; however, since early Presidential polls are meaningless I won't.

Gat6

Gat6
'