Sign In
Register
Help
Edwards can't even win an election in his home state, and this guy thinks he's going to be president?
Quote
Edwards's Bid for Favor Of Hunters Draws Fire
By JOSH GERSTEIN
Staff Reporter of the Sun
October 25, 2007
A new attempt by a Democratic presidential hopeful, John Edwards, to cozy up to hunters is coming under fire from the National Rifle Association and conservation groups.
Traveling in Iowa yesterday, Mr. Edwards unveiled a "Hunting and Fishing Bill of Rights and Responsibilities" that calls for giving hunters more access to federal lands, including, in some cases, national parks.
"This is part of who I am and part of what I will stand for as president," Mr. Edwards told voters in Glenwood, Iowa, according to the Associated Press. He said he hunted while growing up in rural North Carolina and still fishes occasionally.
In a conference call with reporters, the former senator said the federal government could save millions of dollars by having private citizens thin wild herds instead of government-paid sharpshooters. "When national parks need to cull their game species because of overpopulation, I think they should look into having local hunters do the job," Mr. Edwards said, according to Radio Iowa. He also called for limits on oil drilling and logging on federal land, as well as a new national program to pay private landowners to open their property to sportsmen.
Asked for his opinion of the former senator's plan, the NRA's chief lobbyist, Chris Cox, replied: "Pathetic."
Mr. Cox said Mr. Edwards voted during his single Senate term for a measure to impose background checks at gun shows, for a ban on so-called assault weapons, and against a bill to protect gun makers from lawsuits. "Words on the campaign trail don't erase votes on the Senate floor. ... He's been on the wrong side at every opportunity," the lobbyist told The New York Sun.
Environmental groups said they supported parts of Mr. Edwards's plan but were concerned about language that seemed intended to give more weight to hunting interests in debates over land use.
"There are certainly some alarming aspects," the president of the Humane Society Legislative Fund, Michael Markarian, said. "National parks have historically been closed to sport hunting, and we believe that's a policy that should remain in place. … These are not national playgrounds. They're national parks."
The executive director of Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility, Jeff Ruch, called Mr. Edwards's plan "light years away" from the Bush administration's policies on some of the issues, but he said he was concerned that Mr. Edwards's plan would promote more use of snowmobiles and other off-road vehicles. "That's troublesome for a whole variety of reasons, including impact on wildlife," Mr. Ruch said. Mr. Ruch said there were similarities between Mr. Edwards's plan and an executive order Mr. Bush issued in August to promote hunting on federal lands. "What's similar … is the assumption that wildlife is there to provide hunting opportunities," Mr. Ruch said. "You're basically encouraging the propagation of trophy breeds at the expense of breeds that don't look as good on the wall."
While Republican presidential candidates have been actively jockeying for the votes of gun owners, the Democratic field has been all but silent on the issue, heeding the advice of political strategists who contend that persistent talk of gun control has hurt Democrats in recent elections. Until yesterday, only one Democrat, Governor Richardson of New Mexico, had sought to publicize his views on gun issues. Mr. Richardson has released photographs of trophies from his own hunts and has boasted about expanding hunting opportunities in New Mexico.
Candidates have been weighing in, deliberately or not, on a looming legal battle over the meaning of the constitutional right to bear arms. In March, a federal appeals court panel struck down a District of Columbia ban on handguns. The conservative court panel ruled, 2–1, that the Second Amendment creates an individual right to firearms, not merely the right to organize a militia.
The District of Columbia government has asked the Supreme Court to overturn that ruling.
As expected, all the major Republican candidates have backed the appeals court's decision. However, top Democrats also seem to share the individual-rights view. "It's important to me to show respect for the Second Amendment, to protect hunters' Second Amendment rights," Mr. Edwards said yesterday, according to Radio Iowa.
"I'm a strong believer in the rights of hunters and sportsmen to have firearms," Senator Obama of Illinois told the same outlet in April.
A statement Senator Clinton released recently stopped just short of endorsing a constitutionally guaranteed, individual right to a firearm. "I support the Second Amendment. Law-abiding citizens should be able to own guns," she told the Des Moines Register.
By JOSH GERSTEIN
Staff Reporter of the Sun
October 25, 2007
A new attempt by a Democratic presidential hopeful, John Edwards, to cozy up to hunters is coming under fire from the National Rifle Association and conservation groups.
Traveling in Iowa yesterday, Mr. Edwards unveiled a "Hunting and Fishing Bill of Rights and Responsibilities" that calls for giving hunters more access to federal lands, including, in some cases, national parks.
"This is part of who I am and part of what I will stand for as president," Mr. Edwards told voters in Glenwood, Iowa, according to the Associated Press. He said he hunted while growing up in rural North Carolina and still fishes occasionally.
In a conference call with reporters, the former senator said the federal government could save millions of dollars by having private citizens thin wild herds instead of government-paid sharpshooters. "When national parks need to cull their game species because of overpopulation, I think they should look into having local hunters do the job," Mr. Edwards said, according to Radio Iowa. He also called for limits on oil drilling and logging on federal land, as well as a new national program to pay private landowners to open their property to sportsmen.
Asked for his opinion of the former senator's plan, the NRA's chief lobbyist, Chris Cox, replied: "Pathetic."
Mr. Cox said Mr. Edwards voted during his single Senate term for a measure to impose background checks at gun shows, for a ban on so-called assault weapons, and against a bill to protect gun makers from lawsuits. "Words on the campaign trail don't erase votes on the Senate floor. ... He's been on the wrong side at every opportunity," the lobbyist told The New York Sun.
Environmental groups said they supported parts of Mr. Edwards's plan but were concerned about language that seemed intended to give more weight to hunting interests in debates over land use.
"There are certainly some alarming aspects," the president of the Humane Society Legislative Fund, Michael Markarian, said. "National parks have historically been closed to sport hunting, and we believe that's a policy that should remain in place. … These are not national playgrounds. They're national parks."
The executive director of Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility, Jeff Ruch, called Mr. Edwards's plan "light years away" from the Bush administration's policies on some of the issues, but he said he was concerned that Mr. Edwards's plan would promote more use of snowmobiles and other off-road vehicles. "That's troublesome for a whole variety of reasons, including impact on wildlife," Mr. Ruch said. Mr. Ruch said there were similarities between Mr. Edwards's plan and an executive order Mr. Bush issued in August to promote hunting on federal lands. "What's similar … is the assumption that wildlife is there to provide hunting opportunities," Mr. Ruch said. "You're basically encouraging the propagation of trophy breeds at the expense of breeds that don't look as good on the wall."
While Republican presidential candidates have been actively jockeying for the votes of gun owners, the Democratic field has been all but silent on the issue, heeding the advice of political strategists who contend that persistent talk of gun control has hurt Democrats in recent elections. Until yesterday, only one Democrat, Governor Richardson of New Mexico, had sought to publicize his views on gun issues. Mr. Richardson has released photographs of trophies from his own hunts and has boasted about expanding hunting opportunities in New Mexico.
Candidates have been weighing in, deliberately or not, on a looming legal battle over the meaning of the constitutional right to bear arms. In March, a federal appeals court panel struck down a District of Columbia ban on handguns. The conservative court panel ruled, 2–1, that the Second Amendment creates an individual right to firearms, not merely the right to organize a militia.
The District of Columbia government has asked the Supreme Court to overturn that ruling.
As expected, all the major Republican candidates have backed the appeals court's decision. However, top Democrats also seem to share the individual-rights view. "It's important to me to show respect for the Second Amendment, to protect hunters' Second Amendment rights," Mr. Edwards said yesterday, according to Radio Iowa.
"I'm a strong believer in the rights of hunters and sportsmen to have firearms," Senator Obama of Illinois told the same outlet in April.
A statement Senator Clinton released recently stopped just short of endorsing a constitutionally guaranteed, individual right to a firearm. "I support the Second Amendment. Law-abiding citizens should be able to own guns," she told the Des Moines Register.
Link to article
But wait, the Republicrats are at it too! Y HALLO THAR RUDY GiULIANI!!!
Quote
Giuliani: Blind Should Be Able to Carry Guns
LEBANON, N.H. — Republican presidential front-runner Rudy Giuliani is leaving the door open to allowing the blind and physically disabled to carry guns.
During a town hall meeting in northwestern New Hampshire Tuesday night, Giuliani told a former police officer blinded in the line of duty and concerned about the former New York City mayor's stance on guns, "You don't have to worry."
"You have a constitutional right, that is protected, to bear and carry arms. It is the Second Amendment," Giuliani told about 200 attendees in a high school gymnasium in Lebanon. "If someone disagrees with that, you have to get the Constitution changed."
He added that he believes in only three restrictions for those wishing to exercise their Second Amendment right — a previous criminal record, a history of mental instability and an age requirement.
Kenyon Tuthill, 61, who served as a Suffolk County, N.H., police officer until his injury, told FOX News that he was satisfied with Giuliani's answer.
During his two terms as mayor, Giuliani supported strict gun laws at both the local and national level and advocated the federal assault weapons ban that expired in 2004. But as a presidential candidate, he vows to protect Second Amendment rights at the federal level allowing state and local authorities to determine their own "reasonable" restrictions.
New Hampshire, the Live Free Or Die State, is known for its limited gun-control laws, including no waiting period for purchases, no background checks for buyers of rifles and shotguns and no restrictions on children under 18 possessing firearms, according to the Brady Campaign, a gun-control advocacy group.
But the rural state with lots of sportsmen and a high rate of gun ownership annually has fewer than 100 total murders, including non-gun crimes, and Second Amendment rights are hugely important to constituents of both parties.
New Hampshire allows the blind to possess firearms, Tuthill said.
LEBANON, N.H. — Republican presidential front-runner Rudy Giuliani is leaving the door open to allowing the blind and physically disabled to carry guns.
During a town hall meeting in northwestern New Hampshire Tuesday night, Giuliani told a former police officer blinded in the line of duty and concerned about the former New York City mayor's stance on guns, "You don't have to worry."
"You have a constitutional right, that is protected, to bear and carry arms. It is the Second Amendment," Giuliani told about 200 attendees in a high school gymnasium in Lebanon. "If someone disagrees with that, you have to get the Constitution changed."
He added that he believes in only three restrictions for those wishing to exercise their Second Amendment right — a previous criminal record, a history of mental instability and an age requirement.
Kenyon Tuthill, 61, who served as a Suffolk County, N.H., police officer until his injury, told FOX News that he was satisfied with Giuliani's answer.
During his two terms as mayor, Giuliani supported strict gun laws at both the local and national level and advocated the federal assault weapons ban that expired in 2004. But as a presidential candidate, he vows to protect Second Amendment rights at the federal level allowing state and local authorities to determine their own "reasonable" restrictions.
New Hampshire, the Live Free Or Die State, is known for its limited gun-control laws, including no waiting period for purchases, no background checks for buyers of rifles and shotguns and no restrictions on children under 18 possessing firearms, according to the Brady Campaign, a gun-control advocacy group.
But the rural state with lots of sportsmen and a high rate of gun ownership annually has fewer than 100 total murders, including non-gun crimes, and Second Amendment rights are hugely important to constituents of both parties.
New Hampshire allows the blind to possess firearms, Tuthill said.
If you will excuse me, I need to go clean up. I feel like my ass has just been french kissed by a greasy old whop slumlord fascist. For those of you who don't know, Giuliani was one of the biggest supporters of gun control during the Clinton years, pushing his city's regulations far above and beyond the federal laws.
I saved the best for last.... Rudy Giuliani then and now.
In closing, a letter:
Dear Politicians.
While I realize that gun owners are one of the most powerful political demographics, and that we are much more likely to vote than other citizens and you feel the need to pander. However, we are, in fact, more intelligent than you give us credit for. Gun owners are not your stereotypical Jimbo and Cletus, barefoot and wearing overalls while driving our '52 Chevy pickup.
We are capable of looking at your voting record, and comparing that record to the current rhetoric spewing from your fat pie-holes. If there is a signifigant difference between the two, you will forgive us for being skeptical of your latest shameless pandering. Nobody was fooled when Kerry went duck hunting with a shotgun he voted to ban, and nobody was fooled when Rudy Giuliani got an "unexpected call" from his wife while addressing the NRA, an organization he labled as extremist in the past.
In closing, I will state this: If you "talk the talk," you had damn well better have a history of "walking the walk" if you expect to be taken seriously. Rudy, just give it up now. No NRA member will vote for a ticket with Giuliani on it. You are a big city Republicrat, who's interests directly conflict with the interests of gun owners. Unless, that is, you realize suddenly that you need our votes to get elected..... Your act is shallow and transparent. Stop it. Now.
Edwards, you too. Nobody is fooled.
Signed,
Kevin Coughlin, NRA Member.
Top
