FOAC revokes some endorsements

[HKusp 45]

Just how much German porn have you watched?

technically if you've seen one I think you've seen them all.

[Mike_Golf]

That's the way reality works; if we held out for perfection in all things, we'd never eat, we'd never own cars or clothing or houses, we'd live alone and die alone.

Elections are about picking the best choice of the real available choices, not about every voter selecting his own mental clone. It would be great if I could vote for a straight white Christian male who likes SciFi and hates broccoli and thinks that most German porn is disgusting and strongly supports gun rights while finding the LGBT demands to be unreasonable these days but who wants a strong border without ignoring the optics of enforcement and thinks that Roseanne got a raw deal but likes a bigger engine under the hood of his car. And is a fiscal conservative. And reserves the "F-word" for when he needs it. And prefers Chuck Norris to most spectator sports. And likes dogs more than cats. And would happily hire a qualified minority but detests group entitlements.

Instead, I mostly just vote for the Republicans, because they try to keep taxes lower and they don't brag about banning everything that men enjoy, like guns and meat and working toilets and fast cars.

We don't get to vote for a menu, it's an A/B binary choice in the general election, so I encourage the purists to fight like hell in the primaries and then rally behind the party that believes Heller was correctly decided in the general election.

The perfect is the enemy of the best available. We can each contribute to an attainable result, or we can make ourselves irrelevant while other people choose who leads us.

Well said. I applaud FOAC for holding candidates feet to the fire. We should call out legislators who work against us.

[Wilderness 1864]

Well said. I applaud FOAC for holding candidates feet to the fire. We should call out legislators who work against us.

Agreed. I wrote my GOP State Senator an email prior to the vote on HB2060. The Senator voted for it. I wrote a letter expressing my disappointment in that vote detailing my reasons for believing it to be flawed, unworkable and dangerous to our Constitutional rights respecting due process. I wrote that I was even more disappointed in her vote to not consider amendments that might have improved it. I wrote that absent a response offering a compelling reason for her vote, I would not be voting for her in the general election.

I did get a written response via email. It was polite and not quite so canned as in the Toomey/Casey style, but still disquieting. She claimed that HB2060 was a "public safety" measure not a "gun control" bill. Every gun control bill, every single one ever, is offered as a "public safety" measure. By her own standard, there is no "gun control" bill that she might disapprove of. She acknowledged that the law might be abused but the inconvenience and cost suffered by the victimized gun owner was offset by the possibility of preventing women from being killed or injured. Obama could not have said it better. The fact that "inconvenient" was her description of the result attending a taking without due process tells me that this Senator has lost touch with her constituents. Perhaps she is a woman of means. Complying with, let alone, fighting this system will be so expensive that few will be able to afford the fight.

This candidate is running virtually unopposed and will likely be reelected. It will be without my vote, and most likely, the vote of Mrs. Wilderness as well.

[ExFlyinguy]

Agreed. I wrote my GOP State Senator an email prior to the vote on HB2060. The Senator voted for it. I wrote a letter expressing my disappointment in that vote detailing my reasons for believing it to be flawed, unworkable and dangerous to our Constitutional rights respecting due process. I wrote that I was even more disappointed in her vote to not consider amendments that might have improved it. I wrote that absent a response offering a compelling reason for her vote, I would not be voting for her in the general election.

I did get a written response via email. It was polite and not quite so canned as in the Toomey/Casey style, but still disquieting. She claimed that HB2060 was a "public safety" measure not a "gun control" bill. Every gun control bill, every single one ever, is offered as a "public safety" measure. By her own standard, there is no "gun control" bill that she might disapprove of. She acknowledged that the law might be abused but the inconvenience and cost suffered by the victimized gun owner was offset by the possibility of preventing women from being killed or injured. Obama could not have said it better. The fact that "inconvenient" was her description of the result attending a taking without due process tells me that this Senator has lost touch with her constituents. Perhaps she is a woman of means. Complying with, let alone, fighting this system will be so expensive that few will be able to afford the fight.

This candidate is running virtually unopposed and will likely be reelected. It will be without my vote, and most likely, the vote of Mrs. Wilderness as well.

Is that from Sen. Baker because it sounds exactly like the one I got from her

[Wilderness 1864]

Is that from Sen. Baker because it sounds exactly like the one I got from her

Yes. She is running against a Green Party candidate, a virtual unknown. I will not vote for her based on her vote for HB2060 and her response, which causes me concern that she will soon be going full RINO as it pertains to the Second Amendment and the Commonwealth Constitution. I will not cast a protest vote for the Green Party candidate because I cannot vote for a globalist communist no matter how the Greens style themselves.

[eagleclaw]

Agreed. I wrote my GOP State Senator an email prior to the vote on HB2060. The Senator voted for it. I wrote a letter expressing my disappointment in that vote detailing my reasons for believing it to be flawed, unworkable and dangerous to our Constitutional rights respecting due process. I wrote that I was even more disappointed in her vote to not consider amendments that might have improved it. I wrote that absent a response offering a compelling reason for her vote, I would not be voting for her in the general election.

I did get a written response via email. It was polite and not quite so canned as in the Toomey/Casey style, but still disquieting. She claimed that HB2060 was a "public safety" measure not a "gun control" bill. Every gun control bill, every single one ever, is offered as a "public safety" measure. By her own standard, there is no "gun control" bill that she might disapprove of. She acknowledged that the law might be abused but the inconvenience and cost suffered by the victimized gun owner was offset by the possibility of preventing women from being killed or injured. Obama could not have said it better. The fact that "inconvenient" was her description of the result attending a taking without due process tells me that this Senator has lost touch with her constituents. Perhaps she is a woman of means. Complying with, let alone, fighting this system will be so expensive that few will be able to afford the fight.

This candidate is running virtually unopposed and will likely be reelected. It will be without my vote, and most likely, the vote of Mrs. Wilderness as well.

This is one of the tricks the gun banners do and rinos play along. That trick is to encapsulate the gun control/ban legislation into another issue that overshadows the gun issue. Back in the 90s it work for the Clinton "assault weapons ban". It was not a stand alone legislation. Its was a part of a crime package at the time. I recall when it passed the republicans were quick to cite all the good things that was in the law such as $100,000 for communities to hire more police, three strikes and you re out, and mandatory penalties for drug crimes. Apparently they are still using this tactic today. Recently they were trying to tack semi auto bans, over ten round magazines bans and other gun legislation using the banner of gun safety. Now they are using Mental health reform and school safety legislation to conceal gun bans.

[GeneCC]

She claimed that HB2060 was a "public safety" measure not a "gun control" bill. Every gun control bill, every single one ever, is offered as a "public safety" measure.

I think Alcohol Prohibition was labeled the same way, as a "public safety" measure.

Under Bloomberg the gun control lobby changed to "common sense", "gun safety", and "reasonable limits".

The PFA change has nothing to do with safety. Has to do with making gun ownership more difficult. A little infringement here, a little infringement there.

Before long to own a firearm, one approved by the Consumer Product Safety Commission as safe, you'll need liability insurance. Have an attorney on retainer just in case.

[LTCcarrier]

The problem is that here in Florida many people also have the attitude of voting for a RINO is better than a Democrat but now Rick Scott our RINO Governor who raised the age of all firearms to 21 and banned bump stocks is most likely headed to US Senate and Brian Mast to US Congress again even though he wants to ban AR15s. More and more Republicans feel they can give into pressure and not support the US Constitution and now their vote has spread to affect all of the US including your state.

[RockIsland]

The problem is that here in Florida many people also have the attitude of voting for a RINO is better than a Democrat but now Rick Scott our RINO Governor who raised the age of all firearms to 21 and banned bump stocks is most likely headed to US Senate and Brian Mast to US Congress again even though he wants to ban AR15s. More and more Republicans feel they can give into pressure and not support the US Constitution and now their vote has spread to affect all of the US including your state.

We have that problem here too.

[GunLawyer001]

The problem is that here in Florida many people also have the attitude of voting for a RINO is better than a Democrat but now Rick Scott our RINO Governor who raised the age of all firearms to 21 and banned bump stocks is most likely headed to US Senate and Brian Mast to US Congress again even though he wants to ban AR15s. More and more Republicans feel they can give into pressure and not support the US Constitution and now their vote has spread to affect all of the US including your state.

It's like having cancer in your arm, and your choices are letting it kill you or losing the arm. Sure, you could choose to get your ears pierced instead, but that's not going to change your real options.

Power is like that cancer, it's going to grow one way or another, and reality today is to choose whether we want the ship of state to go to a decent port that is not our first choice (vote R), or to crash it onto the rocks and we all die (vote D). Voting "G" or "I" or "L" when every other passenger is voting D or R is ineffectual.