sprots,
Sorry, my string of 'not getting it continues.
No problem! I'm happy to go over it again with a fellow Obama supporter.
' Why the Obama references for hunting/fishing?
Because that's what you referenced in your Obama-supportive post, and the Obama for America website talks about saving wildlife habitat, just as all of us hunters and fishers support.
I am not voting for that ticket based on much more than that one issue (I also would love to see Obama pull a Kerry-like hunting pose. That would make a great SNL skit! Oh, but they wouldn't dare do that, only on the woman from Alaska who actually does hunt. But I digress.)
The post I replied to did reference hunter/fisher support. The other issues you mentioned support our candidate as well: "common sense," "strong work ethic," "loyal to his friends," "mean to his enemies," "salutes the flag" (and wore a flag pin on both debates), "and thinks America is the best place on earth." "Sure, he's a little rough around the edges, more at home in jeans than a suit. He cooks hamburgers rather than ordering cordon bleu." This last, I don't know. I assume that our candidate does the burger cookout with the family since he still has two small children at home, and I assume that the other candidate does the cordon bleu, owning seven houses and all. But this last sentence, starting with "I assume" and all, really is only an assumption.
"He hunts, fishes, and appreciates nature. I may not always agree with him on all issues, but he's generally a good guy.
"I can vote for that.
"And will."
Me too!
As for your digression, again no problem! Since you're so interested in a hunting pose, I'll digress also and mention that I would be delighted to E-mail you a copy of the photo that will be used in our upcoming "Vote for Obama" ad, since it showcases his support for wildlife habitat and hunting preservation and all.
Why would you ban individual ownership of an automatic weapon?
Thank you for this most excellent question! This is in the 8% area where I agreed with LameDuckPresidentBush: "President Bush supports the renewal of the 10-year-old ban on the sale of certain assault weapons. So does Sen. John F. Kerry, Bush's Democratic presidential opponent. Most police organizations support it, too, as do major medical groups and religious organizations. Most polls consistently show a majority of Americans, including those who own guns, also want Congress to renew the ban on the sale of 19 kinds of military-style semiautomatic assault rifles." My objection to privately-owned assault weapons, and I'm guessing this concern was shared by LameDuckPresidentBush as well when he had anything to say about it, is that in most cases, the ones which are actually intended to be used are in the hands of criminals who intend to use them against law enforcement officials or other criminals. The use against other criminals does not distress me, except for the fact that these weapons are so non-discriminatory and kill innocent bystanders with distressing regularity.
As an example, my departed dad, upon getting us kids out of the house, finally had the disposable income to increase his firearm collection. Among them were a Thompson, an M-14, and a MAC-10 (piece of crap, that it is). The regulations covering ownership were/are very burdensome and the ATF was pretty strict in enforcing/checking.
I regret being the youngest and receiving the MAC-10 in my inheritance. I sold it because it wasn't worth the above ATF hassle. If I'd have gotten the Thompson or M-14, it would have (stupid older brothers). My point of this is why shouldn't he be allowed to legally own them? He never used them for illegal purposes, so why should the government have the authority to do away with them? (No, I don't plan to get into a 2d Amendment argument, just putting it out there. I'm fine if you disagree. Simply don't buy one, but please don't infringe upon my right to do so.)
No need to ask me not to infringe, fellow Obama supporter! I can't infringe on your right to do so, partly because our LameDuckPresidentBush caved in and said it was a congressional issue in allowing the most excellent assault weapons ban to expire. And I have no problem with my fellow Obama supporter owning one, or your father, since for you it is a collector's item never intended to be used, similarly to how I will never use 1,000 salt and pepper shakers which I inherited from my esteemed and sainted grandmother. Salt and pepper shakers in the wrong hands, however, are not lethal, where assault weapons, as we have discussed previously, kill innocent people, including children, with distressing regularity.
edited to add: Re-reading the excerpt from Obama's site, it certainly seems at odds with the near-visceral contempt that he in his "bitter, God, guns" remark and many bored members here hold good ol' Joe.
I wonder why that is?
Normally I would not attempt an explanation for such a complex issue and one fraught with emotion, but anything for my fellow Obama supporter! The problem isn't that he was out of touch on this. The problem is that he was in touch. Many Pennsylvanians are exactly as Senator Clinton described in the days following the remark's posting. But many are exactly as our candidate mentioned, and some of them are demonstrating it to me in forceful terms right now with bitter E-mails extolling the virtues of candidates and an administration which have harmed them economically and many other ways, and the party now has as its flag bearer someone who refuses to believe it and insists that all is well if we only believe in his hero's credo of spend and spend and take out mortgages you can't afford and ignore the national debt our children and grandchildren will have to live with. The remark wasn't near-visceral, it was sad, and those E-mails are sad. Bill Clinton should be their hero, but somehow he is their demon.
Overall, and his website demonstrates this, our candidate's message is one of hope: "Yes, we can." We can, and my Pennsylvania cousins can, as long as they're not saddled with an administration bent on continuing the policies which have harmed them for eight years now and created harm for the next dozen or 20 or however long it takes to get the economy back on its feet and clear the national debt.
Thank you again for joining us in ths quest.
