We believe recent attacks on Senator Obama's stand on the 2nd Amendment and his commitment to our hunting and shooting heritage are unfair and American Hunters and Shooters Association is stepping up to set the record straight.
Senator Obama has clearly demonstrated his commitment to the 2nd Amendment by his vote in support of the Vitter amendment to HR 5441, the Department of Homeland Security Appropriations bill of 2007. This amendment prevents the Government from confiscating guns in a time of crisis or emergency.
Imagine how the citizens felt during Hurricane Katrina when government agents kicked in doors to confiscate law abiding citizens' guns at a time when they needed them the most. We know Senator Obama "gets it." To say that he is an elitist is patently ridiculous. [emphasis mine; words from Ray Schoenke, President, American Hunters and Shooters Association, press release, 2008.04.16]
And in a move sure to change minds over at The Jackrabbit's Den, Bruce Springsteen is endorsing Obama (hat tip to Mount Blgomore!). Says the Boss in a very thoughtful statement on his website:
[Obama] has the depth, the reflectiveness, and the resilience to be our next President. He speaks to the America I've envisioned in my music for the past 35 years, a generous nation with a citizenry willing to tackle nuanced and complex problems, a country that's interested in its collective destiny and in the potential of its gathered spirit. A place where "...nobody crowds you, and nobody goes it alone.
At the moment, critics have tried to diminish Senator Obama through the exaggeration of certain of his comments and relationships. While these matters are worthy of some discussion, they have been ripped out of the context and fabric of the man's life and vision, so well described in his excellent book, Dreams From My Father, often in order to distract us from discussing the real issues: war and peace, the fight for economic and racial justice, reaffirming our Constitution, and the protection and enhancement of our environment.
After the terrible damage done over the past eight years, a great American reclamation project needs to be undertaken. I believe that Senator Obama is the best candidate to lead that project and to lead us into the 21st Century with a renewed sense of moral purpose and of ourselves as Americans.
That's Springsteen for you, just another bitter elitist who doesn't believe in small-town America...
...and dang! Need more small-town endorsements for Obama? How about 25 Democratic South Dakota legislators? (Thanks for the list, Hog House!) And don't tell me Heidepriem and Turbak Berry are big city folks -- in the eyes of America, all of South Dakota, even Watertown and Sioux Falls, is small town.
Fellow small-towners, if the Republican Party thinks we Dems have to explain whether we stand by Obama's comments on "values voters," fine. The only answer we need to give is our vote. How about only a single-digit win for Clinton in Pennsylvania (she used to lead there by as much as 28-33 points), a 20-point June win for Obama in South Dakota, and a grassroots campaign that will give McCain a run for his money in November?
Sorry, Cory... still sticking with John McCain. Granted he's paying lip service to the hard core conservatives, but I think he's about the most centrist candidate that we have in the race. He's one that's not above reaching "across the aisle", as has been demonstrated in the McCain-Feingold bill.
ReplyDeleteI hope that IF Obama get's elected, he will at least do some of that "aisle reaching" that McCain seems to do so well.
But even though I like Bruce Springsteen, REM, and several other left-leaning groups, I'm sticking with Mac.
Barack Obama's erudition, directness, charm, outlook, open-mindedness, and wit are unprecedented in my memory.
ReplyDeleteEven one of my closest relatives, a real rock-ribbed Republican, is intrigued by this guy.
These are precisely the things that make me wary of him.
Call me jaded, but I was taught that if something seems too good to be true, then it probably is. I'm sticking with the Mac, too -- just the beef -- for now.
Obama is a charmer and a gifted orator. But we don't really know him. He has only been in Congress two years. His voting record has more "present" votes than yes or no. Why? So no one can come back and get him to admit a stance on a difficult issue?
ReplyDeleteAnd he won't confiscate guns during an emergency? What about not during an emergency? Got to read the fine print. He is a typical politician and will say what he thinks people want to here.
And last night's statement that he wants to refund taxpayer's payroll taxes??? Those payroll taxes are the payee's contribution to their SS and Medicare future needs. Are these same people then going to forgo their claims to SS and Medicare later if they essentially will have paid nothing in to those funds? This is ridiculous, but you are right, it sounds good coming from Obama's lips and will undoubtedly garner a lot of votes. Please explain this one to me, and how this will be fair to those of us who DO pay payroll taxes.
So Stan, when you buy a new car, do you try out three models and buy the one that you like second-best? ;-)
ReplyDeleteIf the model that looked the best and sounded the best actually didn't perform the best, had questionable construction, got bad mileage, etc, you can bet your boots I'd buy the one that appeared second best but actually was FIRST BEST!
ReplyDeleteNonnie
Nonnie gotcha, Cory.
ReplyDeleteMaybe I should try to ask the question a different way: in any other realm, do you deliberately seek out the products or services that appear to be of inferior quality? It's not an Obama question, just a question about decision-making processes. Your position suggests that if I'm running for something and want your vote, I should not try to portray myself in the best light possible or show off the full extent of my abilities.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteOops. I tried to edit my comment and it vanished into the nether regions of cyberspace.
ReplyDeleteThe gist of my (now deleted) post was this: The astute will suspect that the last two words in my original post were not put there by accident. And they would be right. I may yet switch over and actually vote for Barack Obama in November -- if he is nominated. (I, for one, am not certain of that yet.)
Obama's rocket fuel is (in my opinion) supplied largely by public frustration over the current state of affairs. People want a change, almost to the point where they're willing to accept any sort of change, even if they're not sure what it will turn out to be.
I was also being a little facetious about myself. Almost as if to say, "If I like something too much, I had better avoid it, because it must be bad for me." That is, of course, ridiculous -- but it sticks in my brain anyway, like a software bug that won't go away.
Sorry if I mountainized your molehill, Stan -- sometimes I can't resist responding to an alleged "gotcha".
ReplyDeleteI share your suspicion of the desire for change, including my own. I was (and deep down still am) a Kucinich supporter because he laid out very clearly the radically different approach he would bring to the Presidency. With Dennis out to focus on keeping his seat in Congress, I've had to shift my allegiance elsewhere, and of the big three, Obama is the best choice. I know he won't bring all the change I'm hoping for (he still hasn't said the magic words: "universal single-payer not-for-profit health care"), but he's the least insider, the least bought and paid for. We tried eight years of the guy who'd be more fun to have a beer with; now how about four years of the guy who has the most inspirational power and shows the most grassroots, community-level political experience to boot?
Keep thinking, Stan (and America) -- we have a good six weeks until the primary, and a long stretch to November.
After Obama and McCain have slugged it out in the debates, I'll make up my mind. Until then it is open. (Honestly, though, I was hoping to see Giuliani vs. Clinton. It would have been like mud wrestling.)
ReplyDeleteI'm sure glad you keep pushing for government controlled health care.
ReplyDeleteApparently Corry hasn't heard of the long waits in Canada for care even in emergencies. One instance is a fellow who came to the US for immediate brain cancer surgery rather than wait for months to get it done in Canada. My second point is what has he federal government ever done right? It's only good at making a federal bureacracy. Have you ever heard of any federal program being discontinued?
I've been to Canada, didn't see any waits; neither did a friend who injured his thumb. He walked in, got patched up, walked out, no paperwork, no bill. Pretty smooth. Show me a private hospital that would take care of me that easily.
ReplyDeleteThings the federal government does right? Medicare, mail, Apollo, US Marines, Social Security checks, the Cold War, national parks, and all those other things the free market can't or won't do.
Things the federal government does wrong: No Child Left Behind, tax subsidies to oil companies, farm subsidies to corporate farmers, and lots of other things that just benefit the rich.
Government can't solve everything; but the blanket assertion that it can't solve anything is just silly.
Oh, oops -- sorry! I let myself get off topic. Go Obama!
ReplyDelete