[PAFOA Blog] Gubernatorial Candidates Go on the Record

Gubernatorial Candidates Go on the Record

Several of the gubernatorial candidates are political unknowns on the issue of gun control because they have not served in a capacity to be tested through votes or policy matters which are typically only handled at the state level. Last night, four candidates went on the record.

Most voters don’t spend Friday night tuned into PCN – Pennsylvania’s version of C-SPAN – to watch coverage of small political events. Perhaps that’s what the Democratic gubernatorial candidates were counting on when they debated at the Pennsylvania Progressive Summit. Hoping gun owners, especially those registered with their party, wouldn’t find out, each of the candidates pledged to support various gun control policies.

Allegheny County Executive Dan Onorato launched his slate of new gun control policies with a statewide lost and stolen law, followed by ending preemption (particularly if he can’t get the lost and stolen legislation passed), and mandatory “child safety locks.” Onorato did not specify whether his mandatory lock policy would apply to only sales of firearms or whether it would also apply to gun storage.

Auditor General Jack Wagner dodged most state policy issues on gun rights, describing his agenda as keeping guns out of the hands of “bad people.” The one specific policy Wagner highlighted was his support of a ban on semi-automatic rifles.

Scranton Mayor Chris Doherty made ending preemption the priority gun control agenda item in his response at the debate. The second policy he would push if elected governor is to institute one gun-a-month restrictions for all gun sales in Pennsylvania. He did not expand on whether this included a formal registry of gun owners and their purchasers, so we’re left with little information on how such sales would be tracked and restricted.

Montgomery County Commissioner Joe Hoeffel ended the round of answers with little more than a political version of “all of the above.” Specifically, he named these priorities: gun sales limits, lost and stolen legislation, mandatory locks, and the end of state preemption. In addition to the previously discussed issues, Hoeffel also supports a ban on private sales of firearms in Pennsylvania.

No Republican candidates took part in the debate, though organizers indicated that invitations were extended.

This article, Gubernatorial Candidates Go on the Record, is from the Pennsylvania Firearm Owners Association Blog & Online Magazine.

http://feedads.g.doubleclick.net/~a/...0bolNEJvE/0/di
http://feedads.g.doubleclick.net/~a/...0bolNEJvE/1/di

http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/pafoablog/~4/fIjBNKVx70s

Read the full article...

OH MY GOODNESS!

Not surprising I guess but HOLY CRAP!!!

Thanks for posting this.

Thanks for the headsup about these clowns.

Thanks for posting this. My wife and I vote for the candidate, not the party, but this rules out the Democrats for us. I'll be sure to tell everyone at work because I work in a UAW shop, and a lot of the guys normally vote for Dems unless they hear about something like this.

Good work on this post RSS. Im wondering if I should switch to republican. Seems like a lose-lose situation doesnt it. But Republicans seem to be more pro 2nd I think.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by das

Good work on this post RSS. Im wondering if I should switch to republican. Seems like a lose-lose situation doesnt it. But Republicans seem to be more pro 2nd I think.

---

I think you are more likely to make a positive difference voting in the Republican primary this time around since all of the Democrats have taken positions that make them unsuitable for governor. You can still vote for whomever you want in the general election, and you can always switch parties again if there is a good Democrat in a primary in a few years. Regardless of how you identify yourself, the only thing your registered party determines is which primary you get to vote in. I have switched parties twice to vote for someone I liked. Just a thought.

Some Democrats, like Brian Schweitzer (Governor of Montana) are pretty solid on guns, but overall Republicans are better. If Schweitzer ran for president I would make sure I was registered as a Democrat so I could vote for him in the primary, and it would not change my choices later on during the general election. If he lost the primary to say, Nancy Pelosi, I could just vote for the Republican running against her.

Well, based on this, unless other Dems show up, you can absolutely guarantee I'll vote Republican.

I'm glad I'm registered Republican because NONE of the Democratic candidates listed here are worth anything.

I'll be interested in seeing who the Republican candidates are.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RSS

Gubernatorial Candidates Go on the Record

Several of the gubernatorial candidates are political unknowns on the issue of gun control because they have not served in a capacity to be tested through votes or policy matters which are typically only handled at the state level. Last night, four candidates went on the record.

Most voters don’t spend Friday night tuned into PCN – Pennsylvania’s version of C-SPAN – to watch coverage of small political events. Perhaps that’s what the Democratic gubernatorial candidates were counting on when they debated at the Pennsylvania Progressive Summit. Hoping gun owners, especially those registered with their party, wouldn’t find out, each of the candidates pledged to support various gun control policies.

Allegheny County Executive Dan Onorato launched his slate of new gun control policies with a statewide lost and stolen law, followed by ending preemption (particularly if he can’t get the lost and stolen legislation passed), and mandatory “child safety locks.” Onorato did not specify whether his mandatory lock policy would apply to only sales of firearms or whether it would also apply to gun storage.

Auditor General Jack Wagner dodged most state policy issues on gun rights, describing his agenda as keeping guns out of the hands of “bad people.” The one specific policy Wagner highlighted was his support of a ban on semi-automatic rifles.

Scranton Mayor Chris Doherty made ending preemption the priority gun control agenda item in his response at the debate. The second policy he would push if elected governor is to institute one gun-a-month restrictions for all gun sales in Pennsylvania. He did not expand on whether this included a formal registry of gun owners and their purchasers, so we’re left with little information on how such sales would be tracked and restricted.

Montgomery County Commissioner Joe Hoeffel ended the round of answers with little more than a political version of “all of the above.” Specifically, he named these priorities: gun sales limits, lost and stolen legislation, mandatory locks, and the end of state preemption. In addition to the previously discussed issues, Hoeffel also supports a ban on private sales of firearms in Pennsylvania.

No Republican candidates took part in the debate, though organizers indicated that invitations were extended.

This article, Gubernatorial Candidates Go on the Record, is from the Pennsylvania Firearm Owners Association Blog & Online Magazine.

http://feedads.g.doubleclick.net/~a/...0bolNEJvE/0/di
http://feedads.g.doubleclick.net/~a/...0bolNEJvE/1/di

http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/pafoablog/~4/fIjBNKVx70s

Read the full article...

---

I've been keepin' my fingers crossed that Lou Barletta, Mayor of Hazelton, would soon have a new title ... Governor Lou Barletta



.... seems I won't get my wish, as he's making a run for the Congressional Seat ... but he gets my vote, no matter what he runs for !

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nullifidian

Well, based on this, unless other Dems show up, you can absolutely guarantee I'll vote Republican.

I'm glad I'm registered Republican because NONE of the Democratic candidates listed here are worth anything.

I'll be interested in seeing who the Republican candidates are.

---

you have Tom Corbett, current attorney general for PA

and (my Choice) Rep Sam Rohrer

Roher doesn't have a chance.

This is unfortunately another case of having to pick the candidate that has the clout to beat the Democrats rather than picking the candidate I like best.

So I'll probably vote for Corbett. He has solid footing in the polls for all PA citizens, and not just Republicans.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nullifidian

Roher doesn't have a chance.

This is unfortunately another case of having to pick the candidate that has the clout to beat the Democrats rather than picking the candidate I like best.

So I'll probably vote for Corbett. He has solid footing in the polls for all PA citizens, and not just Republicans.

---

thats the type of thinking we need to change!

VOTE FOR THE CANDIDATE THAT YOU SUPPORT THE MOST!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! not the candidate that has the best chance of winning. most of the TEA PARTYS AND 912 Groups are throwing thier weight behind ROHRER!

i'ne known for some time that Doherty was an anti, but ending state preemption? i guess i should have expected that from someone who idolizes Herr Bloomberg. now i feel that voting for Gary DiBileo for mayor was the right thing to do.

The capital city of Harrisburg in PA spending the tax payers money they don’t have and considering filing Bankruptcy to address $68 million in debt service payments due this year or having to potentially taxing every single person living in the city of 47,000 another about 1,500 buck each to cover the cost of the debt.

PA state government is now facing two billion short fall this year with over spending incoming revenue and possibly having to go into bankruptcy protection in the future or tax the hell out of everyone in PA.

Current (PRO GUN) state Rep Sam Rohrer and Republican governor candidate is talking about this as a major budget / tax short fall issue facing the next PA governor as a big looming problem as part of his platform.

All these political clowns listed in original news story running for governor are worried about firearm laws as a priority of their administrations,

Are they kidding?


http://news.yahoo.com/s/bloomberg/20...agkxad449x_c_1

Quote:

---

Pennsylvania Capital Harrisburg Considers Bankruptcy

Feb. 4 (Bloomberg) -- Harrisburg, the capital of Pennsylvania, will consider Chapter 9 bankruptcy protection along with tax increases and asset sales as options to address $68 million in debt service payments due this year, the chairwoman of a City Council committee said last night.

Every option, including tax and fee increases, bankruptcy and a state takeover through Pennsylvania’s Act 47 municipal oversight program will be considered, said Susan Brown-Wilson, chairwoman of the Budget and Finance Committee, which began a week of hearings last night to consider a 2010 spending plan.

The $68 million in debt service payments that Harrisburg faces in connection with the construction of a waste incinerator this year is four times what the city of 47,000 expects to raise through property taxes, and $4 million more than the city’s entire proposed operating budget.

“We need to see, what does Act 47 do for us; what does bankruptcy do,” Wilson said in an interview during a break in the opening budget hearing at Harrisburg City Hall. “You have to have all of them on the table.”

Harrisburg skipped more than $3.5 million in debt-service and swap payments last year, prompting draws on reserves and back-up payments by Dauphin County, where Harrisburg is located. The county has sued the city to recover its payments.

Budget Proposal

Wilson was among five Council members who voted last year to reject a 2010 budget proposal by former mayor Stephen Reed, who left office last month after 28 years. The proposal would have attempted to cover the debt service costs by selling assets such as an historic downtown market, an island in the Susquehanna River that includes the city’s minor-league baseball stadium, and the city’s parking, sewer and water systems.

The plan to raise $69 million by selling downtown features was reinstated last month by Linda Thompson, the newly elected mayor, in a substitute budget. The seven-member council has until Feb. 15 to approve a final 2010 budget.

Brown-Wilson said she would support leasing only city assets that don’t generate revenue, as the parking and water systems do.

Carol Cocheres, bond counsel for the incinerator’s operator, the Harrisburg Authority, told the city council at a Dec. 14 hearing that the city is already in danger of legal action for payments that were missed last year on $288 million in debt it has guaranteed with its full faith and credit.

“There’s never been a default like this in Pennsylvania municipal history,” she said. “This is all new territory.”

Risking Suit

Cocheres told council members that by skipping payments that are made on behalf of the authority, the city risks being sued and ordered to raise taxes or fees by Assured Guaranty Municipal Corp., formerly FSA Insurance, which has insured the bonds, or by the deal’s trustee, TD Bank.

City Controller Dan Miller, who was vice president of the council until January, has advocated bankruptcy as an alternative to selling assets.

Harrisburg’s credit rating was lowered two levels below investment grade to Ba2 by Moody’s Investors Service in October. The city faces a $164 million deficit over the next five years, mostly because of debt created by the incinerator, according to Management Partners Inc. of Cincinnati, a consulting firm hired to study the city’s finances as part of a state review.

---

BTW Harrisburg city government had the time to Illegally enact L&S preemption ordinance last year instead of figuring out how to pay for their over spending.

Maybe if all these elected officials would do what they are supposed to doing in office, rather than making more firearm laws that won't be enforced, government wouldn't be in debt everywhere from spending our tax money they don't got.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jahwarrior72

i'ne known for some time that Doherty was an anti, but ending state preemption? i guess i should have expected that from someone who idolizes Herr Bloomberg. now i feel that voting for Gary DiBileo for mayor was the right thing to do.

---

It only makes sense that Preemption would be their biggest target, that is generally the only thing that holds them back.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by renegadephoenix

most of the TEA PARTYS AND 912 Groups are throwing thier weight behind ROHRER!

---

Yeah, that right there says I'm voting for Corbett.

My view of "Tea Party" folks is not a positive one. My view of 912 is ... extremely negative at best. Their endorsement of a candidate essentially ensures I'll vote against him/her. Glenn Beck is a poisoned well as far as I'm concerned.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nullifidian

Yeah, that right there says I'm voting for Corbett.

My view of "Tea Party" folks is not a positive one. My view of 912 is ... extremely negative at best. Their endorsement of a candidate essentially ensures I'll vote against him/her. Glenn Beck is a poisoned well as far as I'm concerned.

---

why is that, exactly? i'm not familiar with 912, and i'm not too involved in the Tea Party thing, either.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jahwarrior72

why is that, exactly? i'm not familiar with 912, and i'm not too involved in the Tea Party thing, either.

---

Their claim of being against "Big Government" is frequently completely contrary to what they actually espouse. The 912 "movement" is just Glenn Beck's little group of mindless neo-cons with a new name.

By association, Tea Party has been filled with pretty much the same folks. People who don't actually stop to think about what they are shouting for. They are just there to be angry at "those damn liberals." They don't stop to think logically about their views, they just rage against anything that isn't labelled right wing, and anything Republican that doesn't actively rage against the Democrats like they are. These people are frequently afflicted by Obama Derangement Syndrome; a condition which causes people to blame anything and everything on Obama whether or not it is even possible for Obama to be responsible.

They are an extremist group, and like all extremist groups, they are guided by emotional nonsense, dogma, fear, and rage.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nullifidian

Their claim of being against "Big Government" is frequently completely contrary to what they actually espouse. The 912 "movement" is just Glenn Beck's little group of mindless neo-cons with a new name.

By association, Tea Party has been filled with pretty much the same folks. People who don't actually stop to think about what they are shouting for. They are just there to be angry at "those damn liberals." They don't stop to think logically about their views, they just rage against anything that isn't labelled right wing, and anything Republican that doesn't actively rage against the Democrats like they are. These people are frequently afflicted by Obama Derangement Syndrome; a condition which causes people to blame anything and everything on Obama whether or not it is even possible for Obama to be responsible.

They are an extremist group, and like all extremist groups, they are guided by emotional nonsense, dogma, fear, and rage.

---

oh, i thought the Tea Party thing referred to that thing i like to do with hookers.....un, i mean, my masseuse. as a consenting adult.


with no money exchanging hands.






out of state.

[QUOTE=WhiteFeather;1084933]Are they kidding?[/SIZE][/B]

Nope. Once they have the guns out of the hands of the subjects then can tax the hell out of you. Without guns you cannot overthrow them. You just need to see it form their stand point.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nullifidian

Their claim of being against "Big Government" is frequently completely contrary to what they actually espouse. The 912 "movement" is just Glenn Beck's little group of mindless neo-cons with a new name.

By association, Tea Party has been filled with pretty much the same folks. People who don't actually stop to think about what they are shouting for. They are just there to be angry at "those damn liberals." They don't stop to think logically about their views, they just rage against anything that isn't labelled right wing, and anything Republican that doesn't actively rage against the Democrats like they are. These people are frequently afflicted by Obama Derangement Syndrome; a condition which causes people to blame anything and everything on Obama whether or not it is even possible for Obama to be responsible.

They are an extremist group, and like all extremist groups, they are guided by emotional nonsense, dogma, fear, and rage.

---

Seriously, tell us how you really feel.......

so basicly i'm a right wing nut job because i'm one of the Organizers for the Southwest PA Tea Party whos values are for smaller government, tax cuts, no socialized government health care..............

so by your statement, anyone who the TEA Party supports for the above reasons means you will vote for the opposite, even though you stated yourself you would love to see ROHRER elected.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by renegadephoenix

Seriously, tell us how you really feel.......

so basicly i'm a right wing nut job because i'm one of the Organizers for the Southwest PA Tea Party whos values are for smaller government, tax cuts, no socialized government health care..............

so by your statement, anyone who the TEA Party supports for the above reasons means you will vote for the opposite, even though you stated yourself you would love to see ROHRER elected.

---

No. I never said I'd love to see Rohrer elected. I said it didn't matter if I liked him or not. There's a HUGE difference. Rohrer is a nobody with zero chance of getting elected no matter his views and principles. He doesn't have the press coverage and doesn't have the public support. He could be the most brilliant and ethical politician that has ever lived, but it doesn't mean squat because he doesn't have a chance.

Nearly every group has reasonable people with reasonable views. tea Party included. However the Tea Party has become filled with mindless "they took 'r' jerbs!" ODS sufferers. Doesn't mean all of them are, but it certainly does guide who the Tea Party supports. Especially with the likes of Glen Beck at the helm.

How many votes can PAFOA throw behind a candidate? There seems to be quite a few of us. Maybe a little debating and some info on our best choice wouldnt hurt, Just MO. All I know is our rights are being chipped away an it doesnt seem like theres a dam thing we can do to stop it.

You can make a big difference if you vote in every election and drag your spouse to the polls. You can also tell the people you see during the day what you learned and remind them to vote. In find a very high proportion of coworkers are glad when you warn them about a candidate who is an anti. A lot of people who don't even read magazines or forums will still take your advice about a candidate, and it seems like a political topic where most people are on our side of the issue if they are even aware of it, so it is easy to talk to people about.