Posted: 6/14/2010 7:58:34 AM EDT
| i spoke with one of his campaign advisors over the weekend he supports the new gun laws and plans to keep them. he is also an nra member so i guess he will get my vote. http://www.johnsonforgeorgians.com/ |
|
Quoted:
Isn't John Oxendine a huge supporter of the gun laws and a NRA member as well? He is.. so is Deal. I saw all except McBerry at a debate not too long ago. Oxendine had a bit of a "slimy" presence about him. On paper he seemed great but in person he seemed the most dishonest followed by Deal. ETA- Johnson was whom I was most impressed with. Handel and Scott handled themselves very well and seemed like good honest people, although I disagree with some of their positions. |
|
Quoted:
I would put more stock in the candidates who are GCO and GOA members than those who align themselves with the NRA. Just my .02 Lifetime GCO memberships are just as easily bought at the beginning of the campaign trail as those for the NRA. But still, GCO > NRA |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Isn't John Oxendine a huge supporter of the gun laws and a NRA member as well? He is.. so is Deal. I saw all except McBerry at a debate not too long ago. Oxendine had a bit of a "slimy" presence about him. On paper he seemed great but in person he seemed the most dishonest followed by Deal. ETA- Johnson was whom I was most impressed with. Handel and Scott handled themselves very well and seemed like good honest people, although I disagree with some of their positions. very well put i thought the same about oxendine as well he seems like a snake in the grass ! |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Isn't John Oxendine a huge supporter of the gun laws and a NRA member as well? He is.. so is Deal. I saw all except McBerry at a debate not too long ago. Oxendine had a bit of a "slimy" presence about him. On paper he seemed great but in person he seemed the most dishonest followed by Deal. ETA- Johnson was whom I was most impressed with. Handel and Scott handled themselves very well and seemed like good honest people, although I disagree with some of their positions. very well put i thought the same about oxendine as well he seems like a snake in the grass ! It is interesting that a LOT of people get this vibe from Oxendine. I want to like him. He may be the greatest person in the world. But he comes off fake and slimey. If he is the greatest person in the world it is ashame that he put off that vibe. |
| Johnson was on the FOX news the other morning talking about some interesting immigration issues. He is proposing that anyone going through emergency rooms have to show their citizenship - they will be treated any way but the goal is to quantify the COST of illegal immigration. |
|
Quoted:
Johnson was on the FOX news the other morning talking about some interesting immigration issues. He is proposing that anyone going through emergency rooms have to show their citizenship - they will be treated any way but the goal is to quantify the COST of illegal immigration. Which hospitals will have to foot the bill for (the ID/status check) and then the costs will be passed on to us, again. Sounds swell. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Isn't John Oxendine a huge supporter of the gun laws and a NRA member as well? He is.. so is Deal. I saw all except McBerry at a debate not too long ago. Oxendine had a bit of a "slimy" presence about him. On paper he seemed great but in person he seemed the most dishonest followed by Deal. ETA- Johnson was whom I was most impressed with. Handel and Scott handled themselves very well and seemed like good honest people, although I disagree with some of their positions. very well put i thought the same about oxendine as well he seems like a snake in the grass ! It is interesting that a LOT of people get this vibe from Oxendine. I want to like him. He may be the greatest person in the world. But he comes off fake and slimey. If he is the greatest person in the world it is ashame that he put off that vibe. It was a good debate. The only issue that I felt Oxendine was being forthcoming on was insurance in the state of GA. There was a question about whether or not he supported a GA Co-op for "high risk" patients. He gave a good NO-BS answer saying that while it sounds nice, no one has ever, anywhere, at anytime successfully put together a "high risk" co-op that didn't go over budget and he didn't want any part of it in GA. The rest of his answers seemed like he was fishing for the right thing to say at that moment and wouldn't reflect his actions in office. As I said before Scott and Handel were impressive. I give props to politicians who openly speak their mind even when they know it won't be the "right" answer. Scott and Handel didn't try to dance around any questions and flat out said Yes or No to where they stand. Unfortunately both of them oppose(d) SB308. Johnson won the straw poll at the debate. The debate was held at Ga Tech and was hosted by the College Republicans. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Isn't John Oxendine a huge supporter of the gun laws and a NRA member as well? He is.. so is Deal. I saw all except McBerry at a debate not too long ago. Oxendine had a bit of a "slimy" presence about him. On paper he seemed great but in person he seemed the most dishonest followed by Deal. ETA- Johnson was whom I was most impressed with. Handel and Scott handled themselves very well and seemed like good honest people, although I disagree with some of their positions. very well put i thought the same about oxendine as well he seems like a snake in the grass ! It is interesting that a LOT of people get this vibe from Oxendine. I want to like him. He may be the greatest person in the world. But he comes off fake and slimey. If he is the greatest person in the world it is ashame that he put off that vibe. It was a good debate. The only issue that I felt Oxendine was being forthcoming on was insurance in the state of GA. There was a question about whether or not he supported a GA Co-op for "high risk" patients. He gave a good NO-BS answer saying that while it sounds nice, no one has ever, anywhere, at anytime successfully put together a "high risk" co-op that didn't go over budget and he didn't want any part of it in GA. The rest of his answers seemed like he was fishing for the right thing to say at that moment and wouldn't reflect his actions in office. As I said before Scott and Handel were impressive. I give props to politicians who openly speak their mind even when they know it won't be the "right" answer. Scott and Handel didn't try to dance around any questions and flat out said Yes or No to where they stand. Unfortunately both of them oppose(d) SB308. Johnson won the straw poll at the debate. The debate was held at Ga Tech and was hosted by the College Republicans. Link? |
|
Where is Karen Handel on all this?
She has a reception at a neigbhors house in a couple weeks. I was thinking of attending but the price tag is a little steep. ETA Here from here web site: "Karen is a strong supporter of individual citizens’ right to keep and bear arms. She was born into a family of sportsmen and first fired a gun when she was eight years old. Karen opposes the re-imposition of the so-called “assault weapons ban,” which essentially seeks to ban rifles used for hunting and sport shooting as well as handguns used recreationally or for legitimate self defense. Karen understands that actual assault weapons are already banned by the 1968 Gun Control Act and that new bans are an attempt to deceive voters into believing that automatic weapons are currently legal. She supports the right of law abiding citizens to carry a concealed weapon and believes that obtaining a carry permit should not be made so onerous as to become a de facto ban on such permits." Pretty much a CTRL+C, CTRL+V from the NRA. I expect better from out GA politicians... she has no control over a Fed AWB as governor. ETA2 she didn't support SB308? Was that in the debate? Kick her to the curb, if that's true... THIS... IS... GEORGIA!!!!! 
|
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Isn't John Oxendine a huge supporter of the gun laws and a NRA member as well? He is.. so is Deal. I saw all except McBerry at a debate not too long ago. Oxendine had a bit of a "slimy" presence about him. On paper he seemed great but in person he seemed the most dishonest followed by Deal. ETA- Johnson was whom I was most impressed with. Handel and Scott handled themselves very well and seemed like good honest people, although I disagree with some of their positions. very well put i thought the same about oxendine as well he seems like a snake in the grass ! It is interesting that a LOT of people get this vibe from Oxendine. I want to like him. He may be the greatest person in the world. But he comes off fake and slimey. If he is the greatest person in the world it is ashame that he put off that vibe. It was a good debate. The only issue that I felt Oxendine was being forthcoming on was insurance in the state of GA. There was a question about whether or not he supported a GA Co-op for "high risk" patients. He gave a good NO-BS answer saying that while it sounds nice, no one has ever, anywhere, at anytime successfully put together a "high risk" co-op that didn't go over budget and he didn't want any part of it in GA. The rest of his answers seemed like he was fishing for the right thing to say at that moment and wouldn't reflect his actions in office. As I said before Scott and Handel were impressive. I give props to politicians who openly speak their mind even when they know it won't be the "right" answer. Scott and Handel didn't try to dance around any questions and flat out said Yes or No to where they stand. Unfortunately both of them oppose(d) SB308. Johnson won the straw poll at the debate. The debate was held at Ga Tech and was hosted by the College Republicans. Link? I have no link to a specific quote. They both stated in no uncertain terms at the debate that any legislation which allowed students to have weapons on campus, or removed the 1000 ft "buffer" zone, they would not support. SB308 allows students with licenses to have weapons in their vehicles and the 1000 ft safety zone around campus was removed. Other issues(and there are many) affected by 308 were not discussed. I believe it was Scott who also said something along the lines of being very proud of our existing firearm rights in GA and he saw no need to expand them... but that is a vague memory so don't take it as gospel. My take away from the debate was what I said before. Johnson gets my support as a well rounded candidate. Scott and Handel have my utmost respect for being genuine people, but are weak on 2A rights. Scott was especially impressive on fiscal matters. He was extremely candid about the budget crisis facing GA next year. He did not pander to anyone was blunt about the urgent need to cut every program to the fullest extent possible(and this was in front of a bunch of college students who were all pissed about their rising tuition costs). If Scott had been stronger on 2A rights he would have received my vote. Fiscal responsibility is the most urgent problem that both our state and nation are facing. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I would put more stock in the candidates who are GCO and GOA members than those who align themselves with the NRA. Just my .02 Got that list of GOA accomplishments? I do know there's no compromise in their modus operandi. Let's see the list of their accomplishments. It's easy to be "no compromise" when you never get shit done. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I would put more stock in the candidates who are GCO and GOA members than those who align themselves with the NRA. Just my .02 Got that list of GOA accomplishments? I do know there's no compromise in their modus operandi. Let's see the list of their accomplishments. It's easy to be "no compromise" when you never get shit done. Are you serious? They are both lobbying organizations. They don't accomplish anything. "Lobbying is a form of advocacy with the intention of influencing decisions made by legislators and officials in the government by individuals, other legislators, constituents, or advocacy groups. A lobbyist is a person who tries to influence legislation on behalf of a special interest or a member of a lobby." They differ in that the NRA only operates and exists for the purpose of its own power and self-perpetuation. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I would put more stock in the candidates who are GCO and GOA members than those who align themselves with the NRA. Just my .02 Got that list of GOA accomplishments? I do know there's no compromise in their modus operandi. Let's see the list of their accomplishments. It's easy to be "no compromise" when you never get shit done. Are you serious? They are both lobbying organizations. They don't accomplish anything. "Lobbying is a form of advocacy with the intention of influencing decisions made by legislators and officials in the government by individuals, other legislators, constituents, or advocacy groups. A lobbyist is a person who tries to influence legislation on behalf of a special interest or a member of a lobby." They differ in that the NRA only operates and exists for the purpose of its own power and self-perpetuation. In other words, you can't show where they have ever accomplished a damned thing. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I would put more stock in the candidates who are GCO and GOA members than those who align themselves with the NRA. Just my .02 Got that list of GOA accomplishments? I do know there's no compromise in their modus operandi. Let's see the list of their accomplishments. It's easy to be "no compromise" when you never get shit done. Are you serious? They are both lobbying organizations. They don't accomplish anything. "Lobbying is a form of advocacy with the intention of influencing decisions made by legislators and officials in the government by individuals, other legislators, constituents, or advocacy groups. A lobbyist is a person who tries to influence legislation on behalf of a special interest or a member of a lobby." They differ in that the NRA only operates and exists for the purpose of its own power and self-perpetuation. In other words, you can't show where they have ever accomplished a damned thing. Reading is fundamental, LarryG. By definition, lobbyists try to persuade legislators to "accomplish" things (i.e. legislation). If you would like to reframe the question into who is the more effective persuader, then I would be happy to concede that, indeed, the NRA is more effective. This is because they have more money, which they in turn donate to politicians to get them to vote the way the NRA wishes. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I would put more stock in the candidates who are GCO and GOA members than those who align themselves with the NRA. Just my .02 Got that list of GOA accomplishments? I do know there's no compromise in their modus operandi. Let's see the list of their accomplishments. It's easy to be "no compromise" when you never get shit done. Are you serious? They are both lobbying organizations. They don't accomplish anything. "Lobbying is a form of advocacy with the intention of influencing decisions made by legislators and officials in the government by individuals, other legislators, constituents, or advocacy groups. A lobbyist is a person who tries to influence legislation on behalf of a special interest or a member of a lobby." They differ in that the NRA only operates and exists for the purpose of its own power and self-perpetuation. In other words, you can't show where they have ever accomplished a damned thing. Reading is fundamental, LarryG. By definition, lobbyists try to persuade legislators to "accomplish" things (i.e. legislation). If you would like to reframe the question into who is the more effective persuader, then I would be happy to concede that, indeed, the NRA is more effective. This is because they have more money, which they in turn donate to politicians to get them to vote the way the NRA wishes. On other words, you can't show anything that GOA has ever accomplished. Keep on dancing. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I would put more stock in the candidates who are GCO and GOA members than those who align themselves with the NRA. Just my .02 Got that list of GOA accomplishments? I do know there's no compromise in their modus operandi. Let's see the list of their accomplishments. It's easy to be "no compromise" when you never get shit done. Are you serious? They are both lobbying organizations. They don't accomplish anything. "Lobbying is a form of advocacy with the intention of influencing decisions made by legislators and officials in the government by individuals, other legislators, constituents, or advocacy groups. A lobbyist is a person who tries to influence legislation on behalf of a special interest or a member of a lobby." They differ in that the NRA only operates and exists for the purpose of its own power and self-perpetuation. In other words, you can't show where they have ever accomplished a damned thing. Reading is fundamental, LarryG. By definition, lobbyists try to persuade legislators to "accomplish" things (i.e. legislation). If you would like to reframe the question into who is the more effective persuader, then I would be happy to concede that, indeed, the NRA is more effective. This is because they have more money, which they in turn donate to politicians to get them to vote the way the NRA wishes. On other words, you can't show anything that GOA has ever accomplished. Keep on dancing. 
I know you're not that obtuse, Larry. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I would put more stock in the candidates who are GCO and GOA members than those who align themselves with the NRA. Just my .02 Got that list of GOA accomplishments? I do know there's no compromise in their modus operandi. Let's see the list of their accomplishments. It's easy to be "no compromise" when you never get shit done. Are you serious? They are both lobbying organizations. They don't accomplish anything. "Lobbying is a form of advocacy with the intention of influencing decisions made by legislators and officials in the government by individuals, other legislators, constituents, or advocacy groups. A lobbyist is a person who tries to influence legislation on behalf of a special interest or a member of a lobby." They differ in that the NRA only operates and exists for the purpose of its own power and self-perpetuation. In other words, you can't show where they have ever accomplished a damned thing. Reading is fundamental, LarryG. By definition, lobbyists try to persuade legislators to "accomplish" things (i.e. legislation). If you would like to reframe the question into who is the more effective persuader, then I would be happy to concede that, indeed, the NRA is more effective. This is because they have more money, which they in turn donate to politicians to get them to vote the way the NRA wishes. On other words, you can't show anything that GOA has ever accomplished. Keep on dancing.
I know you're not that obtuse, Larry. Still no list, huh. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I would put more stock in the candidates who are GCO and GOA members than those who align themselves with the NRA. Just my .02 Got that list of GOA accomplishments? I do know there's no compromise in their modus operandi. Let's see the list of their accomplishments. It's easy to be "no compromise" when you never get shit done. Are you serious? They are both lobbying organizations. They don't accomplish anything. "Lobbying is a form of advocacy with the intention of influencing decisions made by legislators and officials in the government by individuals, other legislators, constituents, or advocacy groups. A lobbyist is a person who tries to influence legislation on behalf of a special interest or a member of a lobby." They differ in that the NRA only operates and exists for the purpose of its own power and self-perpetuation. In other words, you can't show where they have ever accomplished a damned thing. Reading is fundamental, LarryG. By definition, lobbyists try to persuade legislators to "accomplish" things (i.e. legislation). If you would like to reframe the question into who is the more effective persuader, then I would be happy to concede that, indeed, the NRA is more effective. This is because they have more money, which they in turn donate to politicians to get them to vote the way the NRA wishes. On other words, you can't show anything that GOA has ever accomplished. Keep on dancing.
I know you're not that obtuse, Larry. Still no list, huh. No, Larry, because as I already explained: Both the NRA and the GOA are lobbying orgs. Please reference my above posts to discover how this works. |
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.