cjcj
New member
Doesn`t the NRA offer you your choice of 1 of 2 magazines? Hunter or Shooter?
John Kerry on Hunting
- Thread starter Muledeer4me
- Start date
MarlandS
New member
Buzz all they've ever done is scare tactics for fund raisers, no question there. But this new outfit will grow strong and powerful because most hunters won't get 100 yards from the road.
It could be the best thing for habitat yet, but people will have to get involved and elect the right people to the board.
But I'll ask you this, how much of their budgets do FNAWS, RMEF, Pheasants Forever , Quail unlimited, etc give for gun rights? Those guys ain't all bow hunters... Those guys cover habitats it's their job the one they set up.
The NRA HAS to protect AR15s and 30 round clips as long as the anti's foucus on those they don't have much time to chase hunting equipment and the NRA needs the budget money from gun nuts, there's a lot more shooters than hunters anymore it seems.
It could be the best thing for habitat yet, but people will have to get involved and elect the right people to the board.
But I'll ask you this, how much of their budgets do FNAWS, RMEF, Pheasants Forever , Quail unlimited, etc give for gun rights? Those guys ain't all bow hunters... Those guys cover habitats it's their job the one they set up.
The NRA HAS to protect AR15s and 30 round clips as long as the anti's foucus on those they don't have much time to chase hunting equipment and the NRA needs the budget money from gun nuts, there's a lot more shooters than hunters anymore it seems.
Muledeer4me
New member
"What's going to sink us all is people like you who don't understand the issues but go around making simpleton remarks and stirring up trouble with other idiots. Why don't you ride your ATV back to California instead of trying to Californicate Idaho?"
Ithaca,Get over it .
As I remember you were not born in Idaho either.
Simpleton remarks ? LOL Stirring up trouble with other idiots? OH you mean all those posters that wont give you the boost you seem to need by shoving there nose up your butt and follow you to the nearest animals rights-convention.
I am the transplant that moved from a liberal state (where is it your from Ithaca?)to one I KNEW was a republican led state .
Im not the one Ithaca that is backing the most liberal canadate for pres.,Im not the one that supports org. that are linked to animal right group's,and I sure as heck dont support one of the most Liberal Anti-Rancher Transplant in Idaho Your buddy (Jon Marvel).
Now go ahead and tell me to ride back to california ,that Im trying to change Idaho!!!!
This post was not about where I was born ( I was born and raised in So. Calif. in a family of transplanted hunters on one side and liberal to the core democrat's on the other ,I thank God I had that to help me see the difference between the two ) this post is about the difference in the people running for the most important office in this counrty and how it will effect the thing's I love and the value's I have.
If you think that by calling me names and telling people how stupid I am that I will stop posting , you dont know squat about me.
Nemont,I understand how people feel when someone moves into a new state then wants to change it .
But in all fairness don't you think it's better to get to know that person before we start the name calling and all ?
Like I said I dont believe Ithaca is a native of Idaho either so what makes him think he has more right to his view's then anyother transplant.
By the way most of us are
It's the same in every state I have lived in ,the one's making the biggest fuss over some transplant either has the elitest syndrome or is a transplant themself.
Ithaca,Get over it .
As I remember you were not born in Idaho either.
Simpleton remarks ? LOL Stirring up trouble with other idiots? OH you mean all those posters that wont give you the boost you seem to need by shoving there nose up your butt and follow you to the nearest animals rights-convention.
I am the transplant that moved from a liberal state (where is it your from Ithaca?)to one I KNEW was a republican led state .
Im not the one Ithaca that is backing the most liberal canadate for pres.,Im not the one that supports org. that are linked to animal right group's,and I sure as heck dont support one of the most Liberal Anti-Rancher Transplant in Idaho Your buddy (Jon Marvel).
Now go ahead and tell me to ride back to california ,that Im trying to change Idaho!!!!
This post was not about where I was born ( I was born and raised in So. Calif. in a family of transplanted hunters on one side and liberal to the core democrat's on the other ,I thank God I had that to help me see the difference between the two ) this post is about the difference in the people running for the most important office in this counrty and how it will effect the thing's I love and the value's I have.
If you think that by calling me names and telling people how stupid I am that I will stop posting , you dont know squat about me.
Nemont,I understand how people feel when someone moves into a new state then wants to change it .
But in all fairness don't you think it's better to get to know that person before we start the name calling and all ?
Like I said I dont believe Ithaca is a native of Idaho either so what makes him think he has more right to his view's then anyother transplant.
By the way most of us are
It's the same in every state I have lived in ,the one's making the biggest fuss over some transplant either has the elitest syndrome or is a transplant themself.
dgibson
New member
How much does RMEF donate to NWTF? How much does Pheasants Forever donate to DU? You DO (if you donated) get something for your money; you get protection for your hunting arms, as Marland so laboriously explained. That's the NRA's purpose. When they solicit hunters they don't say "join us and we'll help protect your habitat," they say "join us and we'll help you keep your guns." I don't think they're trying to snooker hunters into helping them, I think they're trying to convince hunters that the NRA's cause is important to hunters, too (be that right or wrong).
Muledeer4me
New member
It all goes hand in hand,owning firearm's (not only for hunting) we need org. like the NRA that are doing that .
Just as much as we need the org. that support hunting ,and those that support conservation , habitat protection ,national security and job's .
It all related.
We keep posting about John Kerry lets not forget John Edwards.
["In the early years of his Senate career, Edwards voted to "commend" the Million Mom March, to end private sales at gun shows, and to maintain long-term federal registration of gun buyer records. He voted for national registration of all gun show vendors, and voted to ban importation of ammunition magazines. There wasn`t much in the way of gun control legislation that Edwards didn`t support.
What`s he against? He voted against increasing penalties for illegal firearms transfers. He opposed funding to hire additional prosecutors to prosecute drug cases, and opposed federal prosecution of juvenile offenders aged 14 or older.
He voted against the nomination of Attorney General John Ashcroft, who went on to establish new government policy confirming the Second Amendment as an individual right. But he voted for so-called campaign finance "reform," which established unprecedented censorship on the NRA`s right to political free speech.
In all, Edwards voted against gun owners--or didn`t show up to vote at all--83% of the time. This is an anti-gun record by any estimation, but let`s see if Edwards` Southern charade continued on hunting issues.
"The Humane Scorecard," a joint project of the vehemently anti-hunting groups Humane Society of the United States (HSUS) and the Fund for Animals, gives Edwards high marks on the overwhelming majority of "pro-animal" issues it tracks. Edwards is repeatedly cited for taking "pro-animal position through co-sponsorship of a bill, signing a letter, or a vote for the animals."
But this endorsement pales in comparison to the fawning personal assessment of Edwards made by Wayne Pacelle, the head of HSUS. Pacelle wrote that his admiration for Edwards began the moment he won election, saying: "Edwards immediately became a much-admired figure within the animal protection community by defeating incumbent Senator Lauch Faircloth, who was the chamber`s only operator of an industrial hog factory. Still in his first term in the Senate, Edwards has been a consistently reliable supporter of animal protection and regularly co-sponsors animal protection legislation or supports our positions on key votes. . . . His general support for our positions is noteworthy because North Carolina`s agriculture, hunting and animal fighting industries are larger and more vocal than those in Massachusetts, Connecticut, and Florida--the states represented by the other senators vying for the Democratic nomination."
There you have it, folks. The Two John Edwards have been fighting it out since his very first day in office. The John Edwards elected by North Carolina voters has now all but disappeared, replaced by the John Edwards who wants to be in a Democratic White House, even if it`s in the second seat. That John Edwards has cast the same anti-gun, anti-hunting votes as Dianne Feinstein, Chuck Schumer and Ted Kennedy. But along the way, he`s developed the ability to gloss over his voting record by saying and doing anything necessary to win the next election in which he chooses to compete."]
Just as much as we need the org. that support hunting ,and those that support conservation , habitat protection ,national security and job's .
It all related.
We keep posting about John Kerry lets not forget John Edwards.
["In the early years of his Senate career, Edwards voted to "commend" the Million Mom March, to end private sales at gun shows, and to maintain long-term federal registration of gun buyer records. He voted for national registration of all gun show vendors, and voted to ban importation of ammunition magazines. There wasn`t much in the way of gun control legislation that Edwards didn`t support.
What`s he against? He voted against increasing penalties for illegal firearms transfers. He opposed funding to hire additional prosecutors to prosecute drug cases, and opposed federal prosecution of juvenile offenders aged 14 or older.
He voted against the nomination of Attorney General John Ashcroft, who went on to establish new government policy confirming the Second Amendment as an individual right. But he voted for so-called campaign finance "reform," which established unprecedented censorship on the NRA`s right to political free speech.
In all, Edwards voted against gun owners--or didn`t show up to vote at all--83% of the time. This is an anti-gun record by any estimation, but let`s see if Edwards` Southern charade continued on hunting issues.
"The Humane Scorecard," a joint project of the vehemently anti-hunting groups Humane Society of the United States (HSUS) and the Fund for Animals, gives Edwards high marks on the overwhelming majority of "pro-animal" issues it tracks. Edwards is repeatedly cited for taking "pro-animal position through co-sponsorship of a bill, signing a letter, or a vote for the animals."
But this endorsement pales in comparison to the fawning personal assessment of Edwards made by Wayne Pacelle, the head of HSUS. Pacelle wrote that his admiration for Edwards began the moment he won election, saying: "Edwards immediately became a much-admired figure within the animal protection community by defeating incumbent Senator Lauch Faircloth, who was the chamber`s only operator of an industrial hog factory. Still in his first term in the Senate, Edwards has been a consistently reliable supporter of animal protection and regularly co-sponsors animal protection legislation or supports our positions on key votes. . . . His general support for our positions is noteworthy because North Carolina`s agriculture, hunting and animal fighting industries are larger and more vocal than those in Massachusetts, Connecticut, and Florida--the states represented by the other senators vying for the Democratic nomination."
There you have it, folks. The Two John Edwards have been fighting it out since his very first day in office. The John Edwards elected by North Carolina voters has now all but disappeared, replaced by the John Edwards who wants to be in a Democratic White House, even if it`s in the second seat. That John Edwards has cast the same anti-gun, anti-hunting votes as Dianne Feinstein, Chuck Schumer and Ted Kennedy. But along the way, he`s developed the ability to gloss over his voting record by saying and doing anything necessary to win the next election in which he chooses to compete."]
Ithaca 37
New member
MD, "Ithaca that is backing the most liberal canadate for pres.,"
Another lie! Can you quote me on who I'm supporting? I've made it clear in quite a few posts in many topics which "canadate" I'm voting for. Even within the last two days!
Another lie! Can you quote me on who I'm supporting? I've made it clear in quite a few posts in many topics which "canadate" I'm voting for. Even within the last two days!
Muledeer4me
New member
Yes Ithaca we all know your a Ralph Nader supporter.
We also have seen your post's making it clear that you think all sportsman should vote for John Kerry.
Oh Yeah , What State where you born it???????????
We also have seen your post's making it clear that you think all sportsman should vote for John Kerry.
Oh Yeah , What State where you born it???????????
MarlandS
New member
Yes Ithaca you made it clear that you were voting for Nader, a third party candidate who has no chance of winning .
You also made it clear that in Idaho Bush will win.
You have also supported Kerry's positions over Bush'sencouraging others to vote for Kerry IF THEY ARE REAL SPORTSMEN (paraphrased of course).
So, I can only come to the conclusion that either you are confused by saying you are voting for Nader and endorsing Kerry, or you are goingto vote for Kerry but wont admit it. Either way you go you are supporting Kerry a man whose record speaks more loudly against Sportsmen than Bush's record does.
You also made it clear that in Idaho Bush will win.
You have also supported Kerry's positions over Bush'sencouraging others to vote for Kerry IF THEY ARE REAL SPORTSMEN (paraphrased of course).
So, I can only come to the conclusion that either you are confused by saying you are voting for Nader and endorsing Kerry, or you are goingto vote for Kerry but wont admit it. Either way you go you are supporting Kerry a man whose record speaks more loudly against Sportsmen than Bush's record does.
chas031
New member
Mars,
Here's a few of Dubya's appointments that speak to his clarity of position!!
http://www.truthaboutgeorge.com/appointments/
Chas
Here's a few of Dubya's appointments that speak to his clarity of position!!
http://www.truthaboutgeorge.com/appointments/
Chas
whitedeer
New member
chas031.....it's refreshing to see you supporting our president when so many others of your state are head over heels in love with queers and other liberals of the Kennedy/Kerry tribes!
Tom
New member
Well, doesn't 11% of all firearm purchases go to wildlife support, the Pittman-Robertson bill. 11% of lots of purchases, bows, ammo, etc. They had clip self loading hunting guns on the last version of the gun bann continuation bill that I saw a few months ago, not just AR-15s. I own one of those self loaders and know several people who hunt with them.
see http://www.nraila.org/Issues/FactSheets/Read.aspx?ID=107 for example, on gun/ammo taxes going to wildlife support.
see http://www.nraila.org/Issues/FactSheets/Read.aspx?ID=107 for example, on gun/ammo taxes going to wildlife support.
chas031
New member
Whitedeer,
You can pretty much throw them both in a bag, shake well, and the first one out gets the job!!
Fact is, without the balance of power extending to the house and senate WHICHEVER'S party get the seat determines which lobbys line up at the trough.
Chas
You can pretty much throw them both in a bag, shake well, and the first one out gets the job!!
Fact is, without the balance of power extending to the house and senate WHICHEVER'S party get the seat determines which lobbys line up at the trough.
Chas
Nemont
Well-known member
Chas,
Read an article about that very thing the other day.
Read an article about that very thing the other day.
Nemont
Ithaca 37
New member
Mars, Yup, I'm voting for Nader in hopes of encouraging future third party candidates. Bush will win in ID unless lots of others here vote for Nader, too. Actually, I think everyone should vote for Ralph. That would be a great way to shake up the political system in the US and get us on the right track. Imagine the terrific people who would work in a Nader administration, realizing they really had a chance to make some changes!
Vote for Bush or Kerry and it will be 4 more years of business as usual.
Vote for Bush or Kerry and it will be 4 more years of business as usual.
MarlandS
New member
And if all of us here vote for Nader or don't vote it will still be business as usual.
Did Nader get everything in order to be on the ballot in every state? Has any third party candidate? The short answer is probably not.
I too believe there needs to be a viable third party candidate if for no other reason than to make the Dems and Repubs field REAL candiates. Both parties know theycan throw Superman and Batman out there and the party faithful will still vote party line there will be cross-overs and defectors but it'll still boil down to how hard they incite their base.
Unfortunately, who hears of third parties when we need to be hearing about them , right after the election? You don't. High profile third partiers like Nader show up about a year before but really the only thing you hear is "he'sgoing to run".
Did Nader get everything in order to be on the ballot in every state? Has any third party candidate? The short answer is probably not.
I too believe there needs to be a viable third party candidate if for no other reason than to make the Dems and Repubs field REAL candiates. Both parties know theycan throw Superman and Batman out there and the party faithful will still vote party line there will be cross-overs and defectors but it'll still boil down to how hard they incite their base.
Unfortunately, who hears of third parties when we need to be hearing about them , right after the election? You don't. High profile third partiers like Nader show up about a year before but really the only thing you hear is "he'sgoing to run".
Ithaca 37
New member
"Has any third party candidate? The short answer is probably not."
Didn't Ross Perot?
"Unfortunately, who hears of third parties when we need to be hearing about them , right after the election? You don't. High profile third partiers like Nader show up about a year before but really the only thing you hear is "he'sgoing to run"."
Well, if somebody's gotta get the third party movement started again I guess it will have to be me, so I'm telling everyone to vote for Nader. I'm tired of the Republicans and the Dems. giving us two lousy choices and I'm not gonna vote for either of them. Now, if everybody else will do the same maybe we can straighten this mess out. That's the only solution and you all know it. I think from now on I'll vote for every third party candidate from dogcatcher on up. I don't care if it's a Libertarian, Socialist or a baboon. We gotta encourage third party candidates.
Didn't Ross Perot?
"Unfortunately, who hears of third parties when we need to be hearing about them , right after the election? You don't. High profile third partiers like Nader show up about a year before but really the only thing you hear is "he'sgoing to run"."
Well, if somebody's gotta get the third party movement started again I guess it will have to be me, so I'm telling everyone to vote for Nader. I'm tired of the Republicans and the Dems. giving us two lousy choices and I'm not gonna vote for either of them.
Now, if everybody else will do the same maybe we can straighten this mess out. That's the only solution and you all know it. I think from now on I'll vote for every third party candidate from dogcatcher on up. I don't care if it's a Libertarian, Socialist or a baboon. We gotta encourage third party candidates.MarlandS
New member
I was speaking of in this election cycle...
I wish you well on getting it started, so is Nader running in 2008? He's already going to be a distant third in this one. That's what i mean, ofcourse I know you knew that but it wouldn't make for a good debate otherwise.
Ithaca, I'm serious on this, if you can come up with a ANY way to get a third party candidate viable in 2008, I'll help you work on getting them the attention they need, but ,we have to work 4 years in advance, otherwise they will continue to be 5% or less . Oh and it would help if SOME of the third parties that could appeal to more of the populace didn't run flakes. Not a comment on Nader bu I believe you know where I'm going with that.
I wish you well on getting it started, so is Nader running in 2008? He's already going to be a distant third in this one. That's what i mean, ofcourse I know you knew that but it wouldn't make for a good debate otherwise.
Ithaca, I'm serious on this, if you can come up with a ANY way to get a third party candidate viable in 2008, I'll help you work on getting them the attention they need, but ,we have to work 4 years in advance, otherwise they will continue to be 5% or less . Oh and it would help if SOME of the third parties that could appeal to more of the populace didn't run flakes. Not a comment on Nader bu I believe you know where I'm going with that.
Similar threads
