Quote Originally Posted by Psycho4Bud
Yeah he was "trying" to be funny but to make that sort of statement once again demonstrates how much he really knows about the mind set of hunters and middle class america. This guy has a record of being anti-gun. He'll protect the 2nd ammendment untill elected.

Have him make a joke about NASCAR and how Clinton would be racing with her hopped up 4 cyl.. I'm sure racing fans would find that VERY amusing.

Have a good one!:s4:
I love racing European cars but I'm not going to get bent out of shape if someone makes a joke about me driving a Yugo.

Perhaps a poor example but the point is that alot of these groups are a bit hyper sensitive to a joke that was made in his speech that had absolutely nothing to do with gun rights. This speech was in regards to how people say he's out of touch.

The problem here is not with the politicians. Your post is actually a perfect example of how we feed politicians to cater to us in the way we do.

You're obviously for the 2nd amendment. As well as I; however the 2nd amendment is not going to be a deal breaker for me. It's signifigance is small in comparison to the number of things we do need in this country.

Enviormentalists; I agree we need to do something to be pro-active in taking care of our planet. However if the new president only throws the occasional look towards how we will reach enviormental goals then it's not going to be a deal breaker for me. It's signifigance is small in comparison to the number of things we do need in this country.

If a candidate says he/she is going to legalize marijuana. That will make no difference to me whether I vote for them or not. It's signifigance is small in comparison to the number of things we do need in this country.

Do you see where I'm going with this.

People get riled up and in arms when someone doesn't have their same view. Here's a surprise, with over 6 billion people on the planet there's a good chance people will not share your views (please note I am not specifically talking about you, I am using you/your in a general population context).

Why do people cling so hard to issues that pale in importance compared to other pressing matters at hand. Iraq war, local economy, US Export, foreign policies... etc etc. These are things I'm far more interested in than gun control and other smaller causes I support/dont support.

If a candidate has a string of issues I just don't side with then of course I am not going to vote that way, but no single issue alone is going to sway me on any candidate.

I don't know why people blame politicians for tripping over their words or telling us what we want to hear. People tend to be so gung ho for a cause (PETA, a number of enviormentalists, Hardcore Members of the NRA, Some members of the NAACP; etc etc...) that they forget to look at the picture as a whole. Once they hear what they want they will either like or dislike a candidate when in all actuality there should be more to it than that. When they decide they dislike someone they will pick any phrase and try to put it out of context or make it seem more out of touch or obtuse or insensitive as possible.

It's fine to not like a person or candidate or politician; however people need to be realistic when trying to analyze what a politician is saying.

Despite what his stance is on gun control it would not sway me one way or another on how I would vote for him. Besides it would have to pass through congress... and I doubt any legislation nullifying the 2nd amendment would pass.

bleh I just woke up.. I hope that made sense.. It wasn't an attack. It was meant as a general statement how people are way too serious on some things and not serious enough about what we should care about and how we shouldn't be so quick to attack pull select phrases from candidate speeches in attempts to twist them around OUR own special interests. We should be looking at the interests of the country as a whole not specifically on an individual/individual basis.