News flash! Newt opposes billionaires buying elections!

Writing in Human Events, Newt Gingrich condemns a plan by Karl Rove to raise a lot of money from billionaires and intervene in GOP primaries on behalf of more mainstream, supposedly more electable candidates:

“I am unalterably opposed to a bunch of billionaires financing a boss to pick candidates in 50 states. This is the opposite of the Republican tradition of freedom and grassroots small-town conservatism.

No one person is smart enough nor do they have the moral right to buy nominations across the country.

That is the system of Tammany Hall and the Chicago machine. It should be repugnant to every conservative and every Republican.”

Newt, have you met this man?

SHeldon-Adelson

His name is Sheldon Adelson. I would have thought that you two knew each other, but apparently not. (Look again … is it the sunglasses throwing you off?)

However, as a man who is “unalterably opposed” to the notion of billionaires buying elections, you should know that Adelson — a casino owner with an estimated net worth of more than $20 billion — gave you and your associated SuperPACS some $30 million in an effort to buy you, Newt Gingrich, the 2012 GOP nomination.

And after you imploded — who saw that one coming, right? — Adelson reportedly went on to give an additional $100 million to other SuperPACs, including up to $40 million to those run by Rove.

Knowing how you feel about such things, I’m sure you’re deeply embarrassed that you let such a thing happen. Say hi to Callista!

Your friend,

– Jay Bookman

714 comments Add your comment

Brosephus™

February 20th, 2013
6:37 pm

NoCom

Thanks, and round IS a shape. :)

—————

Yes, you actually did make it up, Brocephus. I never said I had all the answers. I do have an idea of the problem. It’s voter fraud. I do have an idea of a partial solution. It’s voter ID. Obviously ID won’t solve the absentee voter problem, but it sure will solve most of the fraud that goes on on election day.

Well, given that the fraud in Ohio happened by way of absentee ballot, your partial solution does not address the issue you brought up. Maybe you should research things a bit more before shooting off at the hip. It will make you seem a bit more informed and less a feces flinger. Those who seem informed get informed dialogue. Snark is fed to those who fling fecal matter.

Just a bit of advice for you.

As to ID laws, if someone registers a bogus name and presents an ID in that name, how does the ID law stop fraud? You’ve been sold a lemon in the idea that ID’s are even going to solve 10% of the fraud. Check the link I posted earlier. The extensive research done on voter fraud showed that ID laws would have stopped fraud in 1 out of 15 million votes cast. 10 cases of in person fraud were found out of 146 million votes cast. THere were significantly many more cases of absentee and registration fraud, neither of which are addressed by ID laws.

stevie ray

February 20th, 2013
6:38 pm

!Hey same as drugs being legal, lets legalize vote purchase….the election process is a multi billion dollar market. Then the money would wind up in our coffers instead of politicians..after all, it is an auction not an election.

josef

February 20th, 2013
6:38 pm

Stevie…

“…are wasted on anyone not capable to take time to study him..”

Oh, habe ich Nietzsche im Original.gelesen und studiert Nitzsche. Nietzsche ist der klassische europäische Antisemit des 19. Jahrhunderts

td

February 20th, 2013
6:38 pm

Georgia does not even have a Republican member in the top 10 most conservative. We need some more primary challenges.

Top Ten Most Conservative Representatives

Tied for 1st – (from left to right) Reps. Randy Neugebauer, R-Texas; Sam Johnson, R-Texas; Jim Jordan, R-Ohio; Doug Lamborn, R-Colo.; Trent Franks, R-Ariz.

6th – Rep. Jean Schmidt, R-Ohio; 7th – Rep. Pete Olson, R-Texas; 8th – Rep. John Boehner, R-Ohio; 9th – Rep. Bob Latta, R-Ohio; 10th – Rep. John Culberson, R-Texas.

http://www.nationaljournal.com/magazine/most-conservative-members-of-congress-20110224

Soothsayer

February 20th, 2013
6:39 pm

stevie ray

February 20th, 2013
6:41 pm

It could work just like the failing cap and trade deal. We can have an active market for buying and selling votes. I think i’m on to something here.

The whole process is so queered by big money that it will remain dysfunctional for our lifetimes.

Redneck Convert (R--and proud of it)

February 20th, 2013
6:41 pm

Corpse found in LA hotel’s water tank. CNN.com

Well, I guess that’s why the guests said the water had a strange taste and run black for the first couple of seconds of a shower.

Just remember before you sneer that they fish corpses out of the sources of our water all the time.

td

February 20th, 2013
6:41 pm

Kamchak ~ Thug from the Steppes

February 20th, 2013
6:36 pm

Yes and according to the SCOTUS we should stop paying that welfare benefit and make everyone buy their own damn ids or do not freaking vote. Choices and paying consequences for ones actions.

JamVet

February 20th, 2013
6:42 pm

Kamchak ~ Thug from the Steppes

February 20th, 2013
6:45 pm

Yes and according to the SCOTUS we should stop paying that welfare benefit and make everyone buy their own damn ids…

SCOTUS said that state govts. should make everyone buy an ID?

That’s a crock of sh*t.

Lies make the baby Jesus cry.

stevie ray

February 20th, 2013
6:45 pm

Josef

Clearly, you as well as the majority of german speakers, have not and will not get to separate talking points ie nazi protocol bs, from the great work this guy did..

Look before I leap...

February 20th, 2013
6:46 pm

“Yes and according to the SCOTUS we should stop paying that welfare benefit and make everyone buy their own damn ids or do not freaking vote. Choices and paying consequences for ones actions.”

Where exactly did SCOTUS say that?

Stevens in his majority opinion wrote that:

” Because Indiana’s cards are free, the inconvenience of going to the Bureau of Motor Vehicles, gathering required documents, and posing for a photograph does not qualify as a substantial burden on most voters’ right to vote, or represent a significant increase over the usual burdens of voting”

You are trippin td.

LUCIFER

February 20th, 2013
6:48 pm

SLAP!! Whammy!! ZONKS! Pow!!! Way to de-Newt the Newster Jay!

td

February 20th, 2013
6:50 pm

Kamchak ~ Thug from the Steppes

February 20th, 2013
6:45 pm

Yes and according to the SCOTUS we should stop paying that welfare benefit and make everyone buy their own damn ids…

SCOTUS said that state govts. should make everyone buy an ID?

That’s a crock of sh*t.

Lies make the baby Jesus cry.

Jeez you are one dense person my friend. The SCOTUS in a decision written by one of the most progressive judges to ever sit on the court stated in clear and concise terms that it was a “VALID STATE INTEREST” to REQUIRE a person to have a photo id to vote. They did NOT mention one single word about purchasing it by the individual or by the state so therefore the question was not addressed and can still be litigated. Until such time as that litigation comes before the SCOTUS then any state can REQUIRE a person to purchase a valid identification card and IT NOT CONSIDERED a POLL TAX.

Got it!!!!!!

stevie ray

February 20th, 2013
6:50 pm

Sooth

Why would we expect iraq, afghanistan or any of them to not return to cultural roots. None of themneed democracy or christianity as we know It. Things could be much better for us globally if we check our arrogance at the door remembering that until they ask, they are not interested in our democracy…clearly the state of our union is nothing any of them strive fwor…

Brosephus™

February 20th, 2013
6:50 pm

Double and triple down if you like, but your post to Bro doesn’t back up your claim

TBS

How often does he complete that exercise correctly anyway?

:)

—————

Marty: So you are going on record as one who feels it is a good policy to fire a firearm into the air?

I’m sure you understand the difference between a general statement vs a specific one, right? You keep talking about firearm in general, while I am talking about shotgun, in specific. The two are not interchangable.

Unless Delaware doesn’t have a “Castle Doctrine” or “Stand your ground” law in effect, shooting in the air could get you into trouble. If either of those laws exist in Delaware, how can one prove she shot into the air and not at the intruder without eyewitness testimony?

So, if you’re looking for a statement from me, I have no problem with Jill Biden shooting a shotgun in the air if it’s going to scare off an intruder. Personally, I would hate to see her have to deal with the emotional baggage of killing a person. If shooting in the air is going to get her killed, I’d tell her to point the shotgun at the center of mass and pull the trigger. As I stated earlier, Dr. Biden’s situation does not fit everyone else’s. As I recall, Biden said that was the advice he gave to his wife.

Is that good enough for you, or do I need to draw a chart or picture?

Thomas

February 20th, 2013
6:50 pm

Adelson= Soros
Far left= far right
the world is round not linear.

the world needs another wannabe national blogger like it needs an asteroid landing on it

josef

February 20th, 2013
6:51 pm

Aus Chaos kommt Ordnung und hier müssen wir Ordnung haben!

Stevie…

One of my academic specializations has been the study of the perversion of the German language to cloak the realities of the regime. Goebbels was quite the student of Nietzsche in his machinations.

Soothsayer

February 20th, 2013
6:51 pm

JamVet

February 20th, 2013
6:53 pm

I think this voter fraud stuff is serious business.

And that is why I’m calling for a special prosecutor and grand jury investigation into this reprehensible td absentee ballot fraud situation!

Nobody, not even td, is above the law!

LOL.

I just love this guy’s stuff. One of the most socially conscious, gutsy, cool cats out there…

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=68zccrskOqQ

TBS

February 20th, 2013
6:53 pm

Bro

Since you are putting it in those terms………… But I bet it sure sounded great when he typed it.

:-)

hahahaha

Corey

February 20th, 2013
6:54 pm

@Morality?

February 20th, 2013
3:18 pm

“… tax cuts for people like me who do not need them”, President Obama. Only an individual who suffers from ODS (Obama Derangement Syndrome would translate the above quote by Mr. Obama while pressing to let the Bush tax cuts expire on the upper 2% as “evil rich.” Do you guys actually listen to yourselves, Morality? Or are you hoping somehow Mr. Obama will by happenstance read your silly comments here on this forum and have light bulb moment?

indigo

February 20th, 2013
6:55 pm

Soothsayer – 6:39 “thank goodness we saved them”

Like we saved Iraq and are saving Afghanistan.

godless heathen - owner of many things he does not need

February 20th, 2013
6:56 pm

Birdshot doesn’t fall at the same velocity as a lead round. I’ve had birdshot rain down on me before. While it doesn’t hurt, it’s scary as hell to realize how close to an active shotgun you are.

Common occurrence on the dove field. The individual shotgun pellets have low mass so the friction of the air slows them considerable over a short distance. And because they have low mass, they do very little damage.

So as much as I hate to admit it, Clueless Joe stumbled into the truth. If you want to scare someone away, a couple of shotgun blasts into the air is perfectly safe and isn’t going to hurt anyone. But be sure to use steel shot so that you don’t ruin the environment and make kids any dumber.

Kamchak ~ Thug from the Steppes

February 20th, 2013
6:56 pm

They did NOT mention one single word about purchasing it by the individual or by the state so therefore the question was not addressed and can still be litigated.

If you will read the majority opinion “written by one of the most progressive judges” cited in this post right here, you will notice the phrase, “Because Indiana’s cards are free….”

Lies make the baby Jesus cry.

td

February 20th, 2013
6:57 pm

Look before I leap…

February 20th, 2013
6:46 pm

“The application of the statute to the vast majority of Indiana voters is amply justified by the valid interest in protecting the integrity and reliability of the electoral process.”

Where does the decision state that “if” the state did not pay for the id then it would be considered a poll tax and not allowed? I think my quote of Stevens opinion is way more applicable to the point that it is a Valid state interest to require a id to vote. The poll tax question is unresolved and had not been litigated.

Look before I leap...

February 20th, 2013
6:57 pm

“They did NOT mention one single word about purchasing it by the individual or by the state”

Not intended to be a factual statement.

josef

February 20th, 2013
6:59 pm

Barry Rubin? Yeah, sure… :-)

godless heathen - owner of many things he does not need

February 20th, 2013
7:00 pm

And because they have low mass they do very little damage.

No damage, I meant to say. Unless you are looking up into the sky, One pellet could put your eye out, kid.

Marty Huggins'

February 20th, 2013
7:00 pm

Brosephus™
February 20th, 2013
6:50 pm

Awe getting all tissy are we?

I would recommend shooting center mass or not shooting at all.

Again read the link I provided you.

What he is advocating for her is reckless and even illegal a felony to be exact.

And it is based on the scenario given by Biden not some universal situation.

You obviously have not taken part in too many gun safety classes or self defense with firearms classes.

Based on your stated opinion it sounds as if you are absent of any firearm training at all.

With nuts like you and Biden around I am starting to rethink my positions on gun control if this is how reckless people use them.

moonbat betty

February 20th, 2013
7:00 pm

Sounds like Bookman has a personal ax to grind with the Newt.

Look before I leap...

February 20th, 2013
7:01 pm

@td

See Kamchek’s comment @6:56

Stevens wrote that undue burden was (at least in part) mitigated by the fact that IN provided the IDs for free.

Your house of cards has fallen.

moonbat betty

February 20th, 2013
7:02 pm

News flash!

Newt is irrelevant.

indigo

February 20th, 2013
7:04 pm

Few, if any, of the regular posters here have the intellect to fully understand Nietzsche.

And, calling him a Nazi makes as much sense as calling Aristotle a Christian.

josef

February 20th, 2013
7:04 pm

moonbat

Newt…the gift that just keeps on giving! :-)

Marty Huggins'

February 20th, 2013
7:05 pm

Again for the record!

It is illegal to do what Joe Biden proposes in his scenario.

Odd how some claim to be for gun control yet then support a scenario involving guns that is both illegal and irresponsible.

JamVet

February 20th, 2013
7:06 pm

Here, with another guy who also sang about Reagan’s death squads…

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WnY4fkTyGA8

Soothsayer

February 20th, 2013
7:06 pm

Stevie Ray: the object is to turn non-sectarian, stable countries into countries where sectarian turmoil occupies the populace and, therefore, keeps their minds off Israel.

josef

February 20th, 2013
7:06 pm

indigo

Who called Nietzsche a nazi?

godless heathen - owner of many things he does not need

February 20th, 2013
7:06 pm

You obviously have not taken part in too many gun safety classes or self defense with firearms classes.

If you think that firing a shotgun into the air (say above a 45^ angle) is going to hurt anyone, then you obviously have no practical experience with firearms or physics.

moonbat betty

February 20th, 2013
7:07 pm

josef, Jay will make sure of it.

Did Newt kick his puppy or something in the past?

Soothsayer

February 20th, 2013
7:08 pm

“Few, if any, of the regular posters here have the intellect to fully understand Nietzsche.

And, calling him a Nazi makes as much sense as calling Aristotle a Christian.”

Hey! Someone just turn on the lights!

td

February 20th, 2013
7:09 pm

” Both evidence in the record and facts of which we may take judicial notice, however, indicate that a somewhat heavier burden may be placed on a limited number of persons. They include elderly persons born out-of-state, who may have difficulty obtaining a birth certificate; persons who because of economic or other personal limitations may find it difficult either to secure a copy of their birth certificate or to assemble the other required documentation to obtain a state-issued identification; homeless persons; and persons with a religious objection to being photographed. If we assume, as the evidence suggests, that some members of these classes were registered voters when SEA 483 was enacted, the new identification requirement may have imposed a special burden on their right to vote.

The severity of that burden is, of course, mitigated by the fact that, if eligible, voters without photo identification may cast provisional ballots that will ultimately be counted. To do so, however, they must travel to the circuit court clerk’s office within 10 days to execute the required affidavit. It is unlikely that such a requirement would pose a constitutional problem unless it is wholly unjustified. And even assuming that the burden may not be justified as to a few voters, that conclusion is by no means sufficient to establish petitioners’ right to the relief they seek in this litigation.

+++

Petitioners ask this Court, in effect, to perform a unique balancing analysis that looks specifically at a small number of voters who may experience a special burden under the statute and weighs their burdens against the State’s broad interests in protecting election integrity….But on the basis of the evidence in the record it is not possible to quantify either the magnitude of the burden on this narrow class of voters or the portion of the burden imposed on them that is fully justified.

+++

Finally we note that petitioners have not demonstrated that the proper remedy—even assuming an unjustified burden on some voters—would be to invalidate the entire statute. When evaluating a neutral, nondiscriminatory regulation of voting procedure, we must keep in mind that a ruling of unconstitutionality frustrates the intent of the elected representatives of the people.”

Marty Huggins'

February 20th, 2013
7:09 pm

godless heathen – owner of many things he does not need
February 20th, 2013
6:56 pm

If one is trying to scare away raccoons or possum a shot gun blast may work.

An intruder there with the purpose of causing bodily harm not so much.

But it will give them a good heads up to where you are at so they don’t have to waste time looking for you.

josef

February 20th, 2013
7:10 pm

moonbat

Well, as you know, I don’t hold the Dog T*rd in the highest esteem…I just can’t quite grasp why anybody is still giving him the time of day and column inches except for comic relief, and this one is not particularly funny…

godless heathen - owner of many things he does not need

February 20th, 2013
7:10 pm

It is illegal to do what Joe Biden proposes in his scenario.

If I am threatened by an intruder and decide to shoot a couple of rounds into the air to scare them off, be it with a shotgun, a .357 or a .458 Winchester Magnum, I take my chances with the Judge.

TaxPayer

February 20th, 2013
7:11 pm

I’ve heard that a person firing a shotgun at a 45 degree angle can actually hit someone that happens to be located in that particular line of fire although some would argue that I’m sure.

td

February 20th, 2013
7:12 pm

Look before I leap…

February 20th, 2013
7:01 pm

@td

See Kamchek’s comment @6:56

Stevens wrote that undue burden was (at least in part) mitigated by the fact that IN provided the IDs for free.

Your house of cards has fallen.

And then Stevens wrote:

“Finally we note that petitioners have not demonstrated that the proper remedy—even assuming an unjustified burden on some voters—would be to invalidate the entire statute. When evaluating a neutral, nondiscriminatory regulation of voting procedure, we must keep in mind that a ruling of unconstitutionality frustrates the intent of the elected representatives of the people.”

Again Valid state interest and applying a law equally to everyone trumps the burdens to a very small minority of the voters.

Marty Huggins'

February 20th, 2013
7:12 pm

godless heathen – owner of many things he does not need
February 20th, 2013
7:06 pm

Never claimed it did.

My only concern as far as damage is property damage. But damage is not the main reason for not firing useless warning shots.

Show me an agency or firearm expert or defense expert that advocates warning shots into the air.

But I’ll bet you site felt cleaver before hitting the send icon huh?

Recon 0311 2533

February 20th, 2013
7:13 pm

Oh my…lets forget about Obama and the Democrats feeding at the trough of ultra wealthy Democrats and instead focus on Newt Gingrich and Sheldon Adelson. Hypocrisy is a far-left hallmark.

Rightwing troll

February 20th, 2013
7:13 pm

“harvey
February 20th, 2013
3:00 pm

Well, anyone with the money to do it will buy elections. Even those elected buy elections by favoring those who support them. As example, Obama buys Mexicans, gays, dependents, unions, academics, simply by supporting them. So one hand washes the other”

And you and your ilks hate and lies drive them all right into his waiting arms…

Soothsayer

February 20th, 2013
7:14 pm

If you got hit with a shotgun blast at short range — even with birdshot — it’s unlikely that you would survive unless you got immediate medical (within 3 minutes) attention. You will bleed to death. The wound would be so large that your odds of survival are minimal.

Marty Huggins'

February 20th, 2013
7:16 pm

godless heathen – owner of many things he does not need
February 20th, 2013
7:10 pm

You better prepare for the intruded if you go firing off shots to let them know your location.

The best advantage you have is its your house and you have the element of surprise or knowledge of hiding spots.

But if it makes you feel safer go ahead maybe it will be reported and people can learn from your mistakes.

Kamchak ~ Thug from the Steppes

February 20th, 2013
7:17 pm

Again Valid state interest and applying a law equally to everyone trumps the burdens to a very small minority of the voters.

What part of “Because Indiana’s cards are free” seems to be giving you the most trouble?

Five words, all of them English.

Is English a second language for you?

godless heathen - owner of many things he does not need

February 20th, 2013
7:19 pm

Marty: There are many things wrong with Clueless Joe’s advice, I’ll admit. He seems to be on a mission to say something stupid every day of the week, and I doubt he ever told his wife any such thing. He’s just trying to appease his gun-grabber constituency. I see it like Obama’s skeet shooting pic: Urban liberals trying to be one of the guys and discuss an issue they know nothing about.

moonbat betty

February 20th, 2013
7:19 pm

josef, Bookman obviously has some personal issues with the Newster.

I could care less, just find it funny.

Surely, Bookman could find a ton more comedic relief in Rush or Hannity?

Doggone/GA

February 20th, 2013
7:20 pm

“If you got hit with a shotgun blast at short range — even with birdshot — it’s unlikely that you would survive unless you got immediate medical (within 3 minutes) attention. You will bleed to death”

You could always load it with salt instead of bird shot. Hurts like hell but it won’t kill you unless maybe you take a point blank shot right in the eyes.

Marty Huggins'

February 20th, 2013
7:22 pm

Soothsayer
February 20th, 2013
7:14 pm

Buckshot maybe birdshot they would survive. Unless the gun is pressed up against the person body.

I know digs who have been shot with birdshot and hunt til this day.

Also there was a burgled shot in the face with birdshot.
Was taken to the hospital and was expected to live.

http://blogs.seattletimes.com/today/2012/06/would-be-burglar-shot-in-the-face/

josef

February 20th, 2013
7:23 pm

moonbat

Well, gotta remember, Newt IS a Pennsylvania Carpetbagger… :-)

Brosephus™

February 20th, 2013
7:24 pm

godless @ 6:56

Even a blinking vcr clock is right twice a day.

:lol:

——————

Marty @ 7:00

You have the right to believe whatever you choose to. You can believe that I know so little about guns that I can’t even spell gun right without using spellcheck. However, that statement at 7:00 does more to hurt your credibility than you could ever think to do to mine. I’ll let you steep in your ignorance and let the blog give you the rundown on my gun safety and ownership experience if they choose to. I don’t want to put egg on your face tonight as I’m still happy about my healthy newborn daughter, and I refuse to allow ignorance like yours to spoil my mood.

Have a great evening.

Marty Huggins'

February 20th, 2013
7:25 pm

That’s dogs with an o not digs.

Fanged iPhone and my fingers

godless heathen - owner of many things he does not need

February 20th, 2013
7:28 pm

The best advantage you have is its your house and you have the element of surprise or knowledge of hiding spots.

You got those hiding spots and ambush points all mapped out in your house, I bet.

I don’t live that way. I live in the country and if someone is prowling around in the yard, it’s highly unlikely that they are there intent on doing me bodily harm. It is also highly likely that the sound of a shotgun blast is going to send them scurrying off to change their underwear. Now if a gang of cranking maniacs has come to do me harm, I’ll deal with that differently, but the odds of that are highly unlikely. About the same odds as a mass shooting at a school.

Doggone/GA

February 20th, 2013
7:29 pm

“Fanged iPhone”

Is that an anti-theft feature?

moonbat betty

February 20th, 2013
7:29 pm

LOL @ josef, you could be on to something.

You better quit while you are ahead!

Marty Huggins'

February 20th, 2013
7:31 pm

Brosephus™
February 20th, 2013
7:24 pm

If you have revived gun training it does not show or you are willfully ignoring it.

Again show where any group or expert has advocated firing warning shots and how well of a self defense decision doing so is?

There is no egg on my face.

I know nothing about you I am making my opinion of your idea of gun safety soley based upon your comments and by your comments you are advocating a position that few if any experts advocate.

But hey from your bluster you apparently are more knowledgable than the experts who advocate against doing so.

Mr Right

February 20th, 2013
7:31 pm

Does anyone believe if Jessie Jackson Jr had a R by his name we would have total silence from Jay ?

josef

February 20th, 2013
7:31 pm

BROSEPHUS

“Even a blinking vcr clock is right twice a day.”

Not if it’s set on military time… now who’s presence would have brought THAT to mind? :-)

Marty Huggins'

February 20th, 2013
7:32 pm

Doggone/GA
February 20th, 2013
7:29 pm

Nah it was a bad joke I saw the f by the d an thought it was funny. Guess not

Recon 0311 2533

February 20th, 2013
7:33 pm

Of far more worthy topics is what appears to be the inevitable sequester that Obama first proposed and signed into law. Now the narcissistic campaigner-n-chief whose convinced that the greater majority of Americans savor his every word thinks he can scare Americans into believing that Republicans by not bowing to his wishes will throw this country into complete chaos Friday of next week. The paltry 2.4% across the board spending cuts in a 3.6 trillion dollar federal government spending appetite would be nothing if it wasn’t for congress disallowing transfer authority for the administration. All the Republicans need to do is propose a bill that gives Obama the ability to prioritize and transfer funds across the thousands of accounts in the DOD and non-DOD accounts. In other words force this pathetic president to actually be a president and govern. Will Obama request that authority from congress, probably not and will Republicans in congress propose it, probably not. If either had the courage to propose it sequestration would be a benefit instead of a pending curse.

josef

February 20th, 2013
7:35 pm

moonbat

Yeah, that’s a sensitive topic in some quarters! :-)

Doggone/GA

February 20th, 2013
7:35 pm

“Nah it was a bad joke I saw the f by the d an thought it was funny. Guess not”

Well, I thought it was hilarious…until you said it was deliberate

Kamchak ~ Thug from the Steppes

February 20th, 2013
7:36 pm

Marty Huggins’

February 20th, 2013
7:31 pm

If you have revived gun training it does not show or you are willfully ignoring it.

You should quit while you’re not too far behind.

He works for the federal government in an enforcement capacity and has to qualify with a weapon on a regular basis.

godless heathen - owner of many things he does not need

February 20th, 2013
7:37 pm

Marty, I know from an ill-fated late night watermelon picking adventure that the sound of gun fire will put a group of kids on the road.

No, I’m not trained in home self-defense by firearms experts. Like I said, I don’t live that way and I don’t think it’s healthy.

Soothsayer

February 20th, 2013
7:40 pm

This is an unprecedented time to buy gold. Watch for the bottom and jump in to make some serious money!

The Wall St Banksters are naked shorting the shyte out of it. The price was driven into the $1,500s today.

TaxPayer

February 20th, 2013
7:40 pm

Is that Newt’s head down near the floor licking Sheldon’s shoes!

Marty Huggins'

February 20th, 2013
7:43 pm

Kamchak ~ Thug from the Steppes
February 20th, 2013
7:36 pm

Then he should know better than to advocate a warning shot as a defense mechanism.

I got friends who are required to do the same.

Doesn’t mean I’m going hunting with them.

Again I am solely basing my comments off of those he has posted.

If he has had the type of training you say he has then he should know that is not a reccome station for self defense and is in fact even a risk to ones survival at times.

I’ll ask you as we’ll to provide any source of a personal defense or gun safety expert who would agree with firing warning shots.

iBS Aplenty

February 20th, 2013
7:45 pm

Let he who is without sin cast the first stone (and aim it at Bookman) – OK, OK, just kidding…. so the Big Guy didn’t say that last part but the sentiment’s still accurate. Adelson can give money to whomever he wishes, within the law, and Newt was a happy to have the funds. Now, what seems abundantly clear is the contribution(s) by Adelson CLEARLY didn’t influence Gingrich’s political philosophy.

Kamchak ~ Thug from the Steppes

February 20th, 2013
7:45 pm

I’ll ask you as we’ll[sic] to provide any source of a personal defense or gun safety expert who would agree with firing warning shots.

You can ask, but I never made any claims one way or the other, sport.

Marty Huggins'

February 20th, 2013
7:46 pm

godless heathen – owner of many things he does not need
February 20th, 2013
7:37 pm

Granted but I don’t think kids in fields are the ones to worry about.

I too have ran from the sound of a shotgun by an old man but I have never invaded someone’s home either so don’t know if I’m the target audience

Marty Huggins'

February 20th, 2013
7:48 pm

Kamchak ~ Thug from the Steppes
February 20th, 2013
7:45 pm

Didn’t claim you had made a declaration either way.

Just thought since you wanted to weigh in you may be able add something to the discussion.

Doggone/GA

February 20th, 2013
7:49 pm

“Then he should know better than to advocate a warning shot as a defense mechanism”

You should let the navy know about that. THEY call it “a shot across the bow”

bman.

February 20th, 2013
7:50 pm

guns? That is so 2012

Kamchak ~ Thug from the Steppes

February 20th, 2013
7:50 pm

Just thought since you wanted to weigh in you may be able add something to the discussion.

I did add something to the discussion, sport.

You are making some pretty damn fool assumptions.

josef

February 20th, 2013
7:50 pm

josef

February 20th, 2013
7:57 pm

bman
@ 7:50

Really? Learn the truth, my friend…

http://www.trueorthodox.com/pictures/jewswantgun.jpg

Recon 0311 2533

February 20th, 2013
7:58 pm

If you got hit with a shotgun blast at short range

Soothsayer, technically you’re correct, however, keep in mind that most self defense encounters occur within about 25 yards. At that range a 12 gauge with say 2 3/4 inch 00 buck will only shoot a pattern about the size of a half dollar. It won’t fully expand a pattern to approximately the size of a pizza pan until about 45 yards. That means in a confrontation at close range you still will need to aim. Of course at point blank range it would obviously be no brainer literaly speaking. Joe Biden on the advantage of a double barreled scatter gun really displayed his ignorance. That said a shotgun pump action with an extended magazine is ideal for in home protection but you better understand its limitation and more importantly, your own.

Kamchak ~ Thug from the Steppes

February 20th, 2013
8:03 pm

… but you better understand its limitation and more importantly, your own.

That’s why they invented gun ranges.

bman.

February 20th, 2013
8:03 pm

Josef.. .. thanks haha

The Real Jew News — I like that

JamVet

February 20th, 2013
8:04 pm

Alas, the poor imploding GOP.

One day the faketriots will finally grok that all their billions of dirty dollars and dark money cannot go to the polling place and vote for them.

And the loser dufus that said “Corporations are people, my friend” is living proof of how ONLY the most gullible and trickled upon are willing to simply give up our sovereignty to “the monied interests” (Thomas Jefferson) and support such nonsense.

No sale.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lmlQUc9hQLI

Soothsayer

February 20th, 2013
8:05 pm

Del, I’m talking about close range, i.e., <10 ft.

Soothsayer

February 20th, 2013
8:06 pm

“The Real Jew News”

Why is it that I envision (God rest her soul) Gilda Radner doing that on SNL?

josef

February 20th, 2013
8:08 pm

IMAM

While we’re at it, can I use this one for my picture in the new format? :-)

http://www.haaretz.com/polopoly_fs/1.299688.1278061539!/image/2395949582.jpg_gen/derivatives/landscape_640/2395949582.jpg

Marty Huggins'

February 20th, 2013
8:09 pm

Doggone/GA
February 20th, 2013
7:49 pm

Are you really comparing personal security of ones home to that of a naval ship?

Seriously you see that as apples to apples?

Do you advocate defending ones home in the same manor the military defends its property and our country?

josef

February 20th, 2013
8:10 pm

bman

I thought you’d like that!

Doggone/GA

February 20th, 2013
8:13 pm

“Are you really comparing personal security of ones home to that of a naval ship?”

A shot across the bow is a non-lethal warning shot. Doesn’t matter the size of the weapon. It’s NON-LETHAL. So yes, I AM comparing them

josef

February 20th, 2013
8:14 pm

IMAM
ooops…this is it, I hope

http://www.haaretz.com/polopoly_fs/1.299688.1278061539!/image/2395949582.jpg_gen/derivatives/landscape_640/2395949582.jpg

bman.

February 20th, 2013
8:15 pm

Josef.. .. I’m looking fwd to seeing the pictures the users here will use when the switch is made. I sort of imagine Kamchak with a picture of the Holiday Inn Express. Maybe Aquagirl in a bikini top. Doggone with her 10 indoor dogs (it’s true) and so on…

Brosephus™

February 20th, 2013
8:16 pm

Marty: Again show where any group or expert has advocated firing warning shots and how well of a self defense decision doing so is?

Is English not your first language? Why are you adamant about me defending YOUR assertion? You’re the one talking about experts, not me. I am not one to try to play the game of “debate my points for me” because I don’t defend things that I don’t say.

Once again so you can understand., Biden’s advice was something he gave to HIS wife. I don’t ever recall him claiming to be an expert nor did I make that claim. What Joe advises his wife to do isn’t some cut and paste advice that works for everyone. If Dr. Biden can run off an intruder with a warning shot, then that’s less psychological issues she will have to deal with later.

Is that advice I would give to my wife, no. I have handguns in the house, and they are much easier for her to target and shoot with. If you wish to ask me to prove/disprove something, at least make it something that I actually said, ok?

bman.

February 20th, 2013
8:16 pm

http://www.haaretz.com/polopoly_fs/1.299688.1278061539!/image/2395949582.jpg_gen/derivatives/landscape_640/2395949582.jpg

Soothsayer

February 20th, 2013
8:16 pm