Is the republican party a cult?

[Sisyphus]

That my guess about Obama on gun control was right...that the statistical truth was proven in Obama by what he says and his voting record. That my bet paid off, and that the bet wasn't just me blithely spouting off about Obama, and that I was basing my opinion on what I know about him and liberals in general.

 

That's what it is supposed to show you.

 

No, it wasn't right. He's not a generic and indiscriminate gun control zealot. But the content of the guess wasn't the point, the point was the fact that you were guessing about something you could easily look up, and defensive about it. "How dare you ask me to base my opinion on fact" and whatnot. As they say, you're entitled to your own opinion, not your own facts.

Edited September 23, 2009 by Sisyphus

[SH3RL0CK]

This is the problem with using voting records to reach conclusions like SH3RLOCK's "he's more extreme than the NRA". A deeper look is required.

 

I agree, which is why I asked

I think the problem is his rhetoric isn't matching his voting. So should we accept what he says today or how he voted 5 years ago?

 

This wasn't meant to be a rhetorical question, but rather to point out the uncertainty that at least I have on Obamas position regarding guns. Neither previous voting records nor his rhetoric are entirely consistent, nor do I think they are extensive enough to completely determine his actual views on gun control. Unfortunately, I don't think there is enough information to get a deeper look (and this is probably intentional on the part of Obama - he is, after all, a politician).

[bascule]

I consider myself to be more libertarian than conservative, so I'd have to say that liberals and libertarians aren't really in the same boat on a lot of matters...a whole lot actually. Unless I have the fundamentals of libertarianism confused.

 

Which is likely the case... totalitarianism/libertarianism and conservatism/liberalism are orthogonal.

[gre]

SH3RLOCK, I think you're just trying to play devil's advocate here...

 

Show me the specifics on Obama's anti firearm legislation/voting...

 

 

Obama is CLEARLY for common sense firearm laws, and I'm not sure why you would believe otherwise...

[SH3RL0CK]

SH3RLOCK, I think you're just trying to play devil's advocate here...

 

Show me the specifics on Obama's anti firearm legislation/voting...

 

 

Obama is CLEARLY for common sense firearm laws, and I'm not sure why you would believe otherwise...

 

 

Specifics? Look at my link in post # 31. It is NOT CLEAR what Obama stands for. Much of what he says appears contradictory to itself and to how he has voted.

 

You have made the claim that he is for common sense firearms laws.

Look at Obama's voting history on gun related issues... Almost everything he has supported is "common sense".

You need to back up your statements here. Perhaps you should explain what is "common sense" to Obama as I can't tell? You should also try determine if Obama's "common sense" is the same as the nation overall.

 

You have made other claims you have not supported, and when I asked for this all I got was a wiki article which seemed to support my view and the original link you provided which does not provide the full picture (and which, to be fair, I can't view).

 

see for example you stated

there's much more ignorance surrounding the republican party...

 

The majority of the republican voters (fanatics) seem to be either.. A.) Gun owners who think Obama will take away their guns (which going by his voting record is a myth or conspiracy theory). Or B.) just political fanatics, who will overlook reality on all the issues just to maintain faith in their party.

 

Maybe republicans are more likely (compared to democrates) to be manipulated by propaganda and the powers that be

 

The gun fanatics (and NRA, cheerleader) honestly believe that Obama will take away their gun rights, like it's his secret agenda or something. Yet, there is no proof that Obama wants to do this, and his voting record shows he's for "common sense" gun laws (which he admits) .. (the NRA are anti - common sense guns laws)

I think my links show the above is simply not the whole picture

 

the N.R.A ...are absolutely anti-any_type_of_gun_regulations_what_so_ever ... This is a fact, not an opinion..

I've demonstrated that you haven't proven this...In fact, I have provided evidence to the contrary.

 

I still feel the NRA takes an extreme stance for gun rights

Based on what? What is their stance (perhaps its on their website -- http://home.nra.org/) and why is it extreme?

 

All I have done is try to demonstrate that neither Obama nor the NRA are especially evil here (and neither are being exactly honest either), they are simply both playing politics. What, really, would you expect from a politican and a lobbyist group (though I think its clear the NRA is much more than just a lobby group)? You on the other hand are painting the NRA, Republicans, and others in a very bad light without any supporting documentation.

 

Gun control and the NRA are separate from the Republican party; the NRA routinely backs Democrats as well as Republicans and there are many Democrats in favor of gun rights just as there are Republicans in favor of gun control. This particular issue doesn't divide cleanly along party lines.

 

In fact, your original question in this thread was asking if the Republican party was a cult. It seems to me the consensus answer has been a resounding no, unless you have some point or example which has not yet been brought up. If not, consider your original question answered.

Edited September 23, 2009 by SH3RL0CK

[The Bear's Key]

Again, this is called politics, something all political parties and action groups engage in.

No, it's called the illusion of voting preference. Because a lot of the votes follow the best lie, rather than the actual candidate.

 

Or just say what it really is: lying.

 

I'd also say Obama is much more extremist here than the NRA actually...

Not quite. If Obama were to say that citizens stocking firearms vs government were to be treated as enemy combatants (or perhaps a terrorist organization?) and so not entitled to habeas corpus, I'd then say it qualifies your claim.

 

I consider myself to be more libertarian than conservative, so I'd have to say that liberals and libertarians aren't really in the same boat on a lot of matters...a whole lot actually. Unless I have the fundamentals of libertarianism confused.

You probably didn't notice the spelling bascule used. Liberal-tarian.

 

I've had this feeling since before the 2008 election that key leaders in the Republican Party were self-destructing it so everyone could both move into and quickly swell an existing Party with more seemingly relevant issues. I've already heard a few overly right-winged politicians claim themselves (on video/news) as being a Libertarian. And in my book, repeat coincidences are few.

 

So I'll just predict now that the Republican Party is set to become the Libertarian Party soon enough. And when they do, I'll have the same distrust for them.

 

...left-crazies bombarding you with literature about the New World Order and how the government is taking control of the world.

Funny, a lot of the people around I hear mentioning such things are right-winged. You know, the crowd who (supposedly) don't ever trust government?

[SH3RL0CK]

Not quite. If Obama were to say that citizens stocking firearms vs government were to be treated as enemy combatants (or perhaps a terrorist organization?) and so not entitled to habeas corpus, I'd then say it qualifies your claim.

 

 

Well, the big red flag, to me, on what may be Obama's extremism is his following belief:

http://www.ontheissues.org/Domestic/...un_Control.htm

 

Respect 2nd Amendment, but local gun bans ok ...

 

Unless I misunderstand Obama's position, a local gun ban is where a city declares no guns by citizens permitted under any circumstances within the boundaries of the city. Local gun bans are, to me, an extremist belief (however reasonable restrictions such as a "shall issue" licenses are ok with me). The rights of citizens should not depend on where that citizen happens to live or work. You cannot say you respect the 2nd amendment, then immediately state something absolutely contrary as being acceptable.

Would Obama feel the same way about the 13th amendment not being applicable in Birmigham Alabama?

 

I accept that he views more gun restrictions as the proper course of action and I respect this viewpoint. But to do as he suggests, a local gun ban, without trampling on the constitution would, in my opinion, require no less than an amendment to the Constitution repealing or modifying the 2nd amendment. It should not be attempted by local, state, or even federal laws.

[Sisyphus]

Sherlock, that link doesn't work for me. (I'm behind a workplace filter.) But Obama doesn't support blanket local bans. Here's a quote from a speech he gave when the Supreme Court overturned the District of Columbia handgun ban:

 

I have always believed that the Second Amendment protects the right of individuals to bear arms' date=' but I also identify with the need for crime-ravaged communities to save their children from the violence that plagues our streets through common-sense, effective safety measures. The Supreme Court has now endorsed that view, and while it ruled that the D.C. gun ban went too far, Justice Scalia himself acknowledged that this right is not absolute and subject to reasonable regulations enacted by local communities to keep their streets safe. Today’s ruling, the first clear statement on this issue in 127 years, will provide much-needed guidance to local jurisdictions across the country.

 

As President, I will uphold the constitutional rights of law-abiding gun-owners, hunters, and sportsmen. I know that what works in Chicago may not work in Cheyenne. We can work together to enact common-sense laws, like closing the gun show loophole and improving our background check system, so that guns do not fall into the hands of terrorists or criminals. Today’s decision reinforces that if we act responsibly, we can both protect the constitutional right to bear arms and keep our communities and our children safe.[/quote']

 

Clearly he doesn't believe in a local complete ban if he doesn't even believe in a handgun ban. He does often say that it makes sense that local laws in different places might be different, and he has supported banning certain types of weapons. Maybe that's all that was meant?

[The Bear's Key]

...what is Obamas voting record?, see http://www.ontheissues.org/Domestic/Barack_Obama_Gun_Control.htm

 

A quick summary is as follows, I'll bold some items of interest:

 

Opposed bill okaying illegal gun use in home invasions ...

Ok for states & cities to determine local gun laws ...

FactCheck: Yes, Obama endorsed Illinois handgun ban...

 

an explanation Obama gave at a private fundraiser in San Francisco of the challenges he faced with working-class voters in Pennsylvania and Indiana. "It's not surprising they get bitter," he said, referring to decades of constrained economic opportunities. "They cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren't like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations."...

Yeah, a poor choice of labels by Obama.

 

Although I think he mentions something comparable to that phrase yet used a better choice of wording, in a Charlie Rose interview. I'll have to check the vid later as I'm heading out for work.

 

 

So people who maybe disagree with him are "frustrated" and "cling" to guns or religion or bigotry? Is this what Obama really thinks?

I'd say no, going by the expanded context (on his words)...

 

 

http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/nra_targets_obama.html

You go into some of these small towns in Pennsylvania, and like a lot of small towns in the Midwest, the jobs have been gone now for 25 years and nothing's replaced them. And they fell through the Clinton Administration, and the Bush Administration, and each successive administration has said that somehow these communities are gonna regenerate and they have not. And it's not surprising then they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren't like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations.

Plus immediately (bare seconds later) Obama added on a qualifier: now these are in some communities.

 

Or go to the source. Hear Obama's words at the fundraiser that night on direct audio. Slide the toggle to 35:50 and begin there.

 

You can also examine the full transcript of it.

 

I'm curious that it appears he views his oponents in terms of guns, religion, and bigots ... and belittles people who disagree. But I'm not here to bash Obama, who B.T.W. I think has done a decent job as president so far.

See above.

[JohnB]

Is it just me, or would the debate on guns be entirely different if the word "responsibly" had been inserted into the 2nd Amendment somewhere?