JohnTheGreek,

Kerry might not go as far as put the Nation at risk? But he and his cronies would go as far as making sure this Nations citizens could not defend our families at home.

Doug

Stonecreek, start out with what 476NE posted, then go to The Hunting Report, specifically the Conservation Force insert. This man is and has always been very anti hunting. The evidence abounds and can be easily drug up. I feel that it really is beyond my position to force feed any more of it; a man should research it himself, to some degree. I think it means more then. But, if you don't find it, post such problem and I'll give you more. As said, HSUS considers him their #1 man in congress. They have openly stated so.

Greek, either you are short a few bricks, or you aren't one of us. The man, regardless of what BS he has claimed, is very anti hunting and anti gun. His record proves it beyond question. A vote for Kerry is a vote against hunting (of any kind) and a vote against firearms ownership.

In case anyone here is even contemplating voting for Kerry, are you aware that he is extreemly anti hunting? He has quite an anti hunting record in the past, something that is being kept under wraps. He is always on the side against any hunting. The HSUS has openly recognized him as one of their strongest alies in congress. I suspect that most here subscribe and read The Hunting Report where it has been well documented, but for any that don't, if you have the slightest positive inclination toward Kerry, you had best study up on his anti hunting stands in the past. Very major.

He sure as hell is and anti gun too!

Hey, Art, you're talkin' to me! I've got some inclinations toward Kerry and I damn well want to know before making up my mind for sure if he has any anti-hunting bias. Give us some sources! In the meantime, despite pressure from the animal-nut-cases, Kerry isn't denying that he is a hunter. What gives here?

Isn't it a little short-sighted and narrowly focused to damn a candidate for being "anti-hunting"? I mean, I hunt a whole lot all over the world and would like to continue doing so but not at the cost of placing the US and US citizens on every other country's and terrorist organization's shit list. One cannot hunt if he/she is blown up. Sure, Bush hasn't gone after assault weapons or hunting but Kerry will not, most likely, put Americans in harms way due simply to a bad case of little man syndrome.

JMHO,

JohnTheGreek

Although this post is beginning to look as though it needs to go the political forum I just have to say, Aside from the gun issue I have an entire list of reasons why I would never vote for Kerry.

Doug

I only need one reason to not vote for Kerry........He's a democrat.

IM FROM ARGENTINA EVERY BODY HAS GUNS AND HUTS HERE UNTIL NOW THE LEF WING GOVERMENT PUT LIMITS IN GUNS ,SHELLS,CONCEALED CARRY PRISON TERMS FOR NOT REGISTERED GUNS ETC BE CAREFUL OF ANTIHUNTING THEY ARE ANTIGUN AND ANTI OUR WAY OF LIFE.JUAN

short-sighted? The reason we are on their shitlist is because we are not their preferred religion and we do not live in the stone age. How about those Bush tax cuts. Putting more money in our pockets for a couple extra hunts a year! All I can say is........You sir are a couple of bubbles off level.



Check this out. http://www.swiftvets.com./

JTG, the terrs hated us before Bush was president & will continue to hate us long after the next Dem. pres. (god forbid). The only way to stop them is KILL EVERYONE OF THEM. You can not negotiate w/ a fanatic, nor a rabid dog, you have to remove it from society to be safe.

BTW, you are right of course, Dems. will not put US soldiers in harms way, neither would the French put soldiers in harms way. Cowards don't fight, they run.

For those attacking or questioning John the Greek, save your time. He's an admitted liberal, and doesn't give two craps what anyone here thinks. He's "smarter" than us, ya know, "more enlightened"...

Egads, since I left the political section I'd plumb forgot you existed JTG. Guess you didn't die at the DNC while screaming your support for that brainless turd.

You think trading off your rights and heritage will keep you from being a target huh? You're afraid of the Jihad Jerks huh? Please, where did you find those rose colored glasses Neville?

Blue, you sound like you're a bit pissed that Al Gore wasn't pres. The elec. college is a good idea. It keeps LA, NYC, Miami & CHicago from determining the election. If you live in Montana, Wyoming, Idaho, etc. your vote would mean squat w/o the elec. college.
There are many good reasons not to vote for either candidate but it has alwyas been the lesser of two evils & Mr. Heinz, sorry I mean Kerry, offers too many negatives for me to even concider, party offiliation aside.

A little off-topic, but the electoral college system makes me feel like my vote doesn't really count that much - just like I don't think it is right when a jury sits on a panel for month hearing a case, makes a decision, and then a judge throws out their verdict because his opinion is better - why did they bother to show up? Just let the judge decide it to begin with. Same goes for the electoral college. Just let them elect the president. Don't get me wrong, I'll still show up for jury duty and I'll still vote. I just wish I felt a little better about what those things mean these days.

As one who will cast an absentee ballot in Utah this year, let me also express my disgust for the electoral college. My vote is a waste of time in Utah since the conservative Mormon population will always elect a republicant. One citizen - one vote.

JMHO,

JohnTheGreek

I wouldn't spit on the best part of any person that gets support from the HSUS . They are anti-hunting , anti-gun , anti-rural , and anti-livestock industry .

And to my idea , anyone who would support any part of the HSUS agenda is a fruitloop that is far removed from the mainstream in the heartland of this nation .


Also , I say thank god for the electorial college , due to that institution at least our government is not complelely dominated by the fruits and nuts on the coasts . I think the framers of the constituion were extremely far-sighted in including that provision in the Constitution , and I would fight tooth and nail to keep it intact......

SD,

Well said!

Yes , I am aware of those provisions in the electorial system .

It's probably not perfect , but it's a hell of alot better than having NYC and LA pick every one of our presidents....

Blue, you have it exactly right. Democrats think different than Republicans. How else do you explain Bill Clinton. The most despicable man to EVER inhabit the white house, and he never thought he did anything wrong. What is really sad is that our society tolerated the dirt bag.

For those who desire proof that Kerry is anti-gun, check the sites which reflect the various bills before the Senate and who the sponsors are. It might interest you to know that Kerry, along with Hillary, Teddy boy, Dianne Feinstein, and Charles Schumer are CO-SPONSORS of Senate Bll S.1431. If passed, this bill would: 1) ban ALL semi-auto shotguns (your rem 11-87 and 1100), 2) ban ALL centerfire and rim-fire semi-auto rifles (your rem 7600 and 7400 and BAR) that use a detachable magazine, and 3) ban many other guns NEWLY determined to be assault weapons.
If you are a hunter, shooter, or gun enthusiast, and vote for Kerry (and he wins), don't get on here in a few years and cry about your rights being taken away.

I would NOT vote for Kerry if he payed me! however I know this will shound bad, but what is the HSUS? I am missing somthing. thanks

Hauptager,

I am going to assume that you meant you wouldn't vote for him if he paid you.

HSUS-Humane Society of the United States

Doug

IMHO of course...

Just because Kerry might hunt, DOES NOT MEAN HE SUPPORTS YOUR (the common person) RIGHT TO HUNT!

Typical elitist...he lives (and I expect would govern) by very differnet rules than he governs by. Not something I can live with in a leader! And there is a huge laundry list of additional reasons to jusge his (un)worthiness for my vote, but this is typical!

IMHO of course...

A bit off topic--just wanted to say how impressive it is to read a discussion that involves disagreement without the profanity and name-calling! On topic--Mr. Kerry (in my view of his record and his statements) is as anti-American as one can get without being charged with treason. The only thing he would do as president would be to weaken this nation. Hunting is a rich American tradition and is a large part of our culture. It keeps us close to nature and is a great rite of passage for our sons into a part of manhood. The left doesn't want men to be men and women to be women. BTW--I am for anyone who wants to hunt regardless of gender. Regarding hunting being a one-issue reason for voting for/against someone.....anytime someone wants to force me to change my way of life to fit their ideas I will vote against them. The heart of the hunting issue is an attack on the 2nd amendment---but the 2nd amendment isn't about hunting. It's about having an army of civilians who won't allow the government to step into tyranny. Sooooo, it looks like we are failing in that regard.

The founding fathers had it 100% on the money when they devised the Electoral College. It is BY DESIGN, to keep the population centers from controlling the nation. Kerry is most definetly anti-hunting and anti-gun. The NRA gives him an "F" for his voting record on guns AND Hunting as so does SCI. Further, he's voted to increase taxes THREE HUNDRED FIFTY TIMES, not to mention the emasculation of our intelligence services during the Clinton years and just about every Weapon System that came down the pike.



Virtually ONE HUNDRED percent of the Officer Corps of the US Military is against him. He is a closet socialist, hell-bent in buying votes with OUR MONEY and pay off the almost half of the population that pays little or no Fed Income Tax. Do yourself a favor, read the new book called "Unfit For Command," that will give you an excellent perspective on Kerry. His "war her" status notwithstanding, when the draft-dodgin-dope-smoking-felon-rapist-liar Clinton was president, all the democrats whined about including Kerry was that Clinton and Vietnam were in the past, now Kerry and the dems can't say two words without bringing his SHORT Vietnam Service into question, funny how they forget about his post service with the Fonda crowd .



Look at it another way, Benedict Arnold was a War hero too. So, if you want to turn your lives over to the goverment, more taxes more gun control, more inmorality by, all means vote for Kerry, you'll be in good company:



Ted Kennedy ( accomplished coward, cheater, drunk)

Barnie Frank

Michael Moore

Al Sharpton

Whoopie Goldberg

The Clintons

Al-Quaeda ( yes they are on record they would perfer Kerry)

The French





That ought to hold you for a while. jorge



POSTSRIPT: The word "DEMOCRACY" does not appear in our Constitution, Declaration Of independence or inany of our FIFTY States' Constitutions. The foounding fathers were SPECIFIC in eschewing the concept of "democracy" when they crafted our form of goverment, but thanks to our liberal-democratc infested school and academia, soemhow just about every dolt out there seems to think that we are one when we are not. J

Thank heaven for the electoral college. Your vote is an indication of your preferences and the electors do pay attention, though not required by law to do so. Lose the electoral college and minorities be they ethnic or political are under COMPLETE subjugation to the majority. Then instead of the judicial system being the LAST resort for protection of individual rights it is the ONLY protection. That should scare the hell out of anyone, regardless of political persuasion.



I agree it is a shame the media controls the elective process to the extent that even with requisite enrollment and on the ballot of every state if a party's candidate do not garner 6% in a media poll they do not get face-time with the American people in the televised debate.



I believe these debates are crucial to a campaign and it should be federal law that all who qualify with sufficient party membership in all states get this opportunity.



The Republican party should have to share its platform with the Libertarians and the Democrats should have to share theirs with the Communist and Socialist parties. I've written my representatives about it and I suggest you do too.





JohntheGreek,



It's called being a single-issue voter.



Many homosexuals, welfare recipients, teachers, gunowners, etc. are single issue voters.



Of course there are people like me who will vote morality as their single issue, taking comfort in knowledge of presidents not being able to control the business cycle despite their bold promises of prosperity. Comfort in knowing there is a Congress and general elections to check the power (not so much comfort in its ability to check the Courts ) of the President.



So my single issue is with the person's character. I'm a Second Amendment voter. Not wanting one's ownself or countrymen to be free to pursue healthy pastimes is a character issue.

DW Your are right. I WOULD NOT vote for him. and thanks for the hsus... Now I realy feel out of it.

-Bob F.

HotCore, as far as I'm concered, they oftena re one in the same. Same agenda, socialism, do things their way or not at all, just different methods.

Just some food for thought. Take it as you will. This article/editorial is more about gun control than hunting rights, but the two topics are closely linked.



-Bob F.





Hidden Agenda

The truth behind John Kerry`s

record on your firearms rights.

by Wayne LaPierre



http://www.nraila.org/issues/Articles/Read.aspx?ID=136



If you thought the eight long years of the Clinton/Gore administration`s war on firearms owners` rights were oppressive, they would pale in comparison to what John Kerry would have in store for us if he captures the White House and evicts President George W. Bush in November.



John Kerry--whose record of words and misdeeds on firearms rights has earned him a key place among the most solid "F" candidates ever rated by the National Rifle Association--is now posing as a self-styled"lifelong hunter and gun owner," a faux good old boy who says, "I believe in the Second Amendment."



But as someone who has hunted, he`s not one of us. He`s a silver-spoon Boston Brahman--an ideological blood brother to his mentor, Teddy Kennedy.



He`s married to a multi-millionaire heiress whose "favorite charity," the Tides Foundation, has pumped a small fortune into anti-gun rights schemes.



Kerry, during his 20-year stint in the U.S. Senate, has been an always reliable vote for the anti-gunners and has routinely voted with the gun-ban movement since he was elected as the junior member from Massachusetts. At the heart of the real John Kerry is an unthinking zealot who has never missed an opportunity to work to diminish our rights.



For his long history of anti-gun rights votes and positions, he consistently receives a 100-percent rating from the Brady Campaign (Handgun Control Inc.), the American Bar Association`s Special Committee on Gun Violence and from the Coalition to Stop Gun Violence (formerly the National Coalition to Ban Handguns). All of these groups deny the existence of an individual right to keep and bear arms, and some are actively using the courts in an attempt to destroy Americans` Second Amendment freedoms.



On issues directly affecting Second Amendment rights, Kerry has voted 51 of 55 times against you on the floor of the Senate. For all we`ve read lately about how enemies of the Second Amendment are shying away from the "gun control" issue in this election year, a series of votes in the U.S. Senate in March changed all that, with Kerry eagerly taking center stage.



In working to sabotage S.1805--the NRA-backed legislation to stop the endless series of predatory lawsuits aimed at strangling the law-abiding firearms industry--Kerry voted to extend the Clinton gun ban on semi-autos, to make now-legal private gun sales at gun shows criminal acts, and voted to support Ted Kennedy`s ammunition ban, which would have prohibited most centerfire hunting rounds.Where Kerry says he "will defend hunting rights," the accolades of "animal rights" activists tell a different story.



The Humane Society of the United States and Fund for Animals--both rabidly anti-hunting--gave John Kerry a 100 percent mark for the first session of the current Congress. They cited John Kerry as among Senators who have "compiled consistently excellent voting records on animal issues . . ." and who "have emerged as animal protection leaders . . . Kerry has cosponsored almost every piece of animal protection legislation . . . introduced on behalf of animals."



Kerry is the poster boy for a secret scheme hatched by billionaire Andrew McKelvey`s Americans for Gun Safety, (AGS) whereby anti-gun rights Democratic candidates cloak themselves in rhetorical camouflage, falsely claiming to embrace the Second Amendment and trying to con hunters into believing that their rights are somehow separate from those of other American gun owners.



Don`t take my word for it. Here`s what AGS wrote in its blueprint for "Taking Back the Second Amendment," prepared last year for the Democratic Leadership Council (DLC). Kerry is following all the dots.



It is a battle plan for deceit that counsels anti-gun rights candidates: "The problem that Democrats have on the gun issue has far less to do with the typical policies they espouse than the rhetoric they employ." (Emphasis added.) In other words, it`s not how you vote, but what you say.



So, now confiscatory firearms prohibition is called "sensible gun safety," although the abhorrent concept of the knock-in-the-middle-of-the night is just the same as it always has been.



That theme of dissembling is amplified by an accompanying DLC cover memo announcing, "The DLC and Americans for Gun Safety (AGS) believe that progressives need not change their positions in order to dramatically reduce, and in some cases reverse, conservative advantages with these groups." (Emphasis added.) Groups? Try NRA.



They are talking about lying, about sleight of hand, trickery--basically outright fraud.



"Taking Back the Second Amendment" means recreating the Second Amendment; twisting its clear meaning to the same dark purpose expressed by then-President Clinton`s Solicitor General Seth Waxman who wrote in an August 2000 letter to an NRA member: "In light of the constitutional history, it must be considered as settled that there is no personal constitutional right, under the Second Amendment, to own or to use a gun."



Kerry is right in step with the AGS-DLC war-plan: "progressives need not change their positions." Simply change the "rhetoric they employ." In working to sabotage the NRA-backed legislation to stop the endless series of lawsuits aimed at strangling the law-abiding firearms industry, Kerry read the AGS wolf-in-sheep`s-clothing script to a tee when the issue was debated on March 4.



He told the Senate, "I believe strongly in the Second Amendment. I believe in the right to bear arms as it has been interpreted in our country" (emphasis added). This is a vital "qualifier" coming from a man who, if elected president, would be nominating federal judges and Supreme Court justices to interpret our rights.



Kerry and also-ran presidential candidate and trial lawyer John Edwards were among those who cast the deciding votes on what proved to be "poison pill" amendments to the lawsuit tort reform bill: Dianne Feinstein`s 10-year extension of the Clinton semi-auto ban and a new version of John McCain`s so-called "gun show loophole" law, which would criminalize now-legal private commerce between peaceable individuals at gun shows.



Kerry--during his national media performance on the Senate floor --broke a missing-in-action streak that saw him absent from the Senate for 65 percent of all votes in 2003 and every single vote up to that date this year. It`s stunning: Out of 20 roll-call votes in 2004, these gun ban votes were the first he cast in the Senate all year.



But he was back--flying from his "super-Tuesday" primary campaigning. Goring gun owners was apparently just too important to miss--this month`s cover says it all.



During his Senate appearance, Kerry also went out of his way to directly attack NRA members, saying, "Let`s be honest about what we are facing today." Referring to the Clinton gun ban, he said, "The opposition to this common-sense gun safety law is being driven by the powerful NRA special interest leadership and by lobbyists in Washington. I don`t believe this is the voice of responsible gun owners across America."



Kerry`s attack on the NRA is part of a massive vilification effort led by the Brady Campaign in which he and his surrogates will try to discredit the good works and good reputation of our organization and of those who belong to it, and those who support our goals. It will be part of a race for the White House that will be a campaign of demonization on one hand, deception on the other.



That effort now includes a series of Brady Campaign ads that try to paint NRA as a hate group and try to besmirch the character of leaders like U.S. Senator Larry Craig, who superbly led the March floor fight on behalf of gun owners.



When candidate Kerry talks about his undying support for the Second Amendment, there are two words he never utters. In announcing what he says he recognizes as a "right," Kerry never utters the word "individual." And more importantly, he never repeats the all-important word of the framers--"keep." As we all know, the Second Amendment says in part, " . . . The right of people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."



Keeping arms: That means ordinary men and women owning guns; possessing guns; keeping firearms for whatever peaceable reasons we might have.



You won`t find the full phrase--"the right to keep and bear arms"--anywhere on his Web site, or in Kerry`s speeches, his floor statement, his media interviews or press releases.



Kerry`s version of the Second Amendment is that Americans only have the right to bear arms. That verbal sleight of hand fits right in with what the ban-the-gun crowd wants--a future declaration by a Kerry-packed U.S. Supreme Court that the Second Amendment was never intended as an individual right, but that it merely allows the states to muster forces to serve in the National Guard.



Proof of that trickery came during Kerry`s Senate speech supporting the Clinton gun ban on semi-automatic firearms. Kerry told the Senate and the nation, "For those who want to wield those weapons, we have a place for them. It is the U.S. military. And we welcome them."



When Kerry talks about the Second Amendment, it is with crossed fingers. And when he talks about the law-abiding men and women of the National Rifle Association, it`s easy to hear the disdain in his voice. In fact, his comparison of our organization with the vilest of criminals is shocking.



"I`ve had the courage to stand up to those who would let our communities be taken over by violence, whether it is organized crime in Boston or standing up to the extremists in the NRA who preach safety and enforcement, but practice extremism and block common sense reform."



That`s U.S. Senator John Kerry`s opener on the Americans for Gun Safety`s Web site. He is actually comparing the 4 million peaceable, law-abiding members of the National Rifle Association to a handful of Boston mobsters, drug lords and a criminal underclass. Clearly the biggest targets of Kerry`s wrath are the NRA and NRA members.



If anyone is responsible for criminal violence, however, it is those who coddle criminals. In truth, Kerry`s record on tough federal measures to deal harshly with violent criminals speaks volumes concerning his part in allowing "communities to be taken over by violence."



He has steadfastly opposed the death penalty for murderers and rapists, and traitors. In 1996, he voted "No" to legislation that would have limited death penalty appeals--appeals which mock justice for victims by stretching out death sentences into de facto life sentences for the most heartless and vicious criminals.



In 1994, he voted "No" to mandatory prison terms for criminals using firearms in the commission of crimes of violence or drug trafficking.



He voted against international drug control funds; and against increasing penalties for drug offenses.



His wimpy "give peace a chance" attitude on supporting the U.S. military seems to spill over into his support for real law enforcement.



From soft-on-criminals to hard-on-honest gun owners, Kerry continues to try to hide his real record showing where he stands on important issues. And if he thinks he`s fooling gun owners on the Second Amendment, Kerry`s attempt to pass himself off as "a lifetime hunter" is a bold play at getting the hunter vote, despite his proven record of opposition to gun owners` rights.



And the response to this "I`m a Hunter" ploy in some quarters shows just how much work NRA members have to do in the coming months. Kerry`s Iowa pheasant hunt, staged as a photo-op for willing media, brought accolades from some outdoor writers and sportsmen, despite Kerry`s longstanding gun-ban tendencies.



"Some hunters also felt an instant kinship with Kerry," wrote James A. Swan on National Review Online. "As Ryan McKinney, the Iowa farmer on whose property Kerry hunted, said, `It feels a little safer if your presidential hopeful isn`t going to go after your typical normal shotgun.`" (Emphasis added.)



But in reality, "your typical normal shotgun" is exactly what Kerry is going after. It is exactly what he is on record as wanting to ban.



He is a prime co-sponsor of S.1431, which would give a future U.S. attorney general power to ban any semi-automatic rifle or shotgun based on a design "procured for use by the United States military or any federal law enforcement agency"--arms which are presumed to be "not particularly suitable for sporting purposes."



The legislation specifically instructs the attorney general that "a firearm shall not be determined to be particularly suitable for sporting purposes solely because the firearm is suitable for use in a sporting event."



So, if the Remington 1100, or 11-87 has ever been procured by the U.S. military or by a federal law enforcement agency, it is automatically presumed to be "not particularly suitable for sporting purposes." This discounts the purposes for which honest men and women might own those arms, including hunting, as not recognized by the federal government as a "legitimate sporting purpose."



So truth is, Kerry would ban "your typical normal shotgun." But there is even more to it than that.



The precedent of what "sporting purpose" really means, in practice, was covered by the 1989 U.S. Treasury Department import ban that covered firearms the agency said, "although popular among some gun owners for collection, self-defense, combat competitions, or plinking, simply cannot be fairly characterized as sporting rifles." In the same breath, the Treasury Department said its purpose was to "preserve the sportsman`s right to sporting firearms."



There is nothing in the Second Amendment that limits the purposes for which peaceable individual Americans "keep" any arms.



Kerry`s Web site lays out several quotes from floor statements on gun control. Remarkably, the citations are not from any official journal of the United States Senate--not from the Congressional Record. Instead, it says "Floor Statements: (Via Coalition to Stop Gun Violence Web site)." Yes, Kerry`s own campaign Web site links his supporters straight to the site of a gun-ban organization to get to the meat of his beliefs on firearms rights.



The Kerry campaign wants Web surfers to go there. It wants gun-ban supporters to see his real positions on gun control--the positions that earned him the highest marks for supporting the most radical gun control schemes over the years.



On the pages of the Coalition to Stop Gun Violence (CSGV), firearms owners can also see what Kerry`s friends would do to our Second Amendment rights if he takes the White House.



The Kerry puffery begins:



"John Kerry has voted with the Coalition to Stop Gun Violence 100 percent of the time." And it brags:



"John Kerry, in 2002 received an `F` from the National Rifle Association and has a zero percent rating with Gun Owners of America."



Among the lengthy floor statements reproduced on those pages are Kerry`s remarks promising to vote for the Brady waiting period bill and taking a swipe at private firearms ownership:



". . . it is not a big deal in terms of fighting crime. It is a first step. I do not even know what kind of step, because it will not change the fact that there are more privately owned weapons in America than there are by the police, Army, Navy, Air Force, Marines, National Guard and Coast Guard altogether."



While John Kerry holds his nose, crosses his fingers and claims support for his version of the Second Amendment, there is no such transparent pretension on the part of the CSGV. The bio of Executive Director Josh Horwitz tells us where Kerry will go:



" . . . Horwitz had focused the organization`s efforts on closing illegal firearms markets by eliminating unregulated transfers of firearms, pursuing litigation against the gun industry . . . The illegal market strategy included implementation of firearms policies such as universal background checks, licensing, and registration."



Eliminating all unregulated transfers means criminalizing all now-legal firearms commerce between innocent, peaceable private citizens. Give a gun to a friend, go to jail.



The so-called "gun-show" loophole Kerry voted for as a killer amendment to the NRA-backed lawsuit reform bill is a step toward making criminals of any peaceable person transferring a firearm without government permission. As for lawsuits that the legislation was intended to curb, the csgv has vindictively pursued the law-abiding firearms industry in the courts, with Horwitz bluntly telling the Tampa Tribune, "There`s not a pot of gold at the end of this. There might be a bunch of bankrupt companies."



The csgv and Horwitz were deeply involved in the worst of a long series of legal actions including the most outrageous--the NAACP New York lawsuit. The suit--which ultimately lost--cost tens of millions of dollars to defend, and was bankrolled by billionaire George Soros. Soros also largely funded the Million Mom March and has funded the Brady Campaign in its efforts to demonize the NRA, and has a bigger goal--a global civil disarmament agenda.



So when Kerry broke his 100 percent streak of missing Senate votes to join his allies Kennedy, Schumer and Feinstein in adding poisonous amendments designed to bring down firearm tort reform, he was saving the bleed-out-the firearms-industry agenda of his pr benefactor, the csgv, and of its billionaire sugar daddy George Soros.



In turn, Soros is pouring tens of millions of dollars into radical leftist "progressive" groups that claim to be outside the new Federal Campaign Finance Law and who are running massive sleight-of-hand stealth campaigns to defeat President George W. Bush and elect Kerry. Among the activities those Soros groups are undertaking are unrestricted broadcast attack advertising intended to defeat Bush. Of course, for groups like NRA, such advertising during pre-election blackout periods would constitute criminal acts. Ironically, this campaign finance law was enacted largely through Soros` massive funding of special interest "reform" groups pushing the anti-free speech legislation.



It is an evil circle.



Soros--whose Open Society Institute proclaimed that it had worked "to reduce the corrupting influence of very large donors to political parties and candidates"--is spending all he wants to buy the White House for John Kerry. And if he succeeds, he will attempt to buy the destruction of the Second Amendment, and to buy influence over Senate consent to Kerry nominees to the U.S. Supreme Court.



Of course, that Supreme Court holds freedom`s very future. At stake is the control of government by zealots who have little regard for the real rights of individual Americans, and who see this next four years as an opportunity to change our system from a government of the people, by the people and for the people to a system where the people are merely servants of government.



And at the heart of that threatened change is who will fill upcoming vacancies in the United States Supreme Court. In the last year, we saw a slim 5-to-4 majority of that court deal a terrible blow to the First Amendment, declaring an obviously unconstitutional ban on political free speech to be constitutional. It was unthinkable.



Imagine if the enemies of the Second Amendment were able, through a Kerry presidency, to install their puppets on that court in the near future. That`s what we are all facing in this election. If Kerry can pack the court with people like Chuck Schumer, the Second Amendment as an individual right will be rendered null and void.

OK. I really don�t like to force info on people, just make its presence known so they can look at it themselves, but the risk of your vote compels me.
1. John Kerry is not a member of the Congressional Sportsmen�s Caucus.
2. He was the anti�s champion and led the opposition against polar bear trophy imports during the amendment of the Marine Mammal Protection Act. I realize the polar bear thing, per se, may not effect you personally, but the whole move was very anti-hunting. Kerry was the voice of the anti-hunters. Even though the act was amended, the Kerry additions were so restricting that the anti organizations actually touted the passage as their victory. His language is an obstacle to this day. It is all recorded in the Congressional Record of March 24, 1994. Check it out.
3. The HSUS scored him as one of their �heroes of the 107th Congress� for co-sponsoring bills and even initiating letters to prohibit interstate commerce of captive exotic animals for hunting (basically that is in Texas, but other states as well, and does NOT mean fenced, canned hunts), the bear viscera bill, and new record funding of the Animal Welfare Act.
4. During the last CITES meeting, COP 12, he circulated a letter to fellow senators that was sent to the US CITES delegation to oppose the one-time ivory trade proposals that were nevertheless approved. The proposals he opposed were one-time sales of stock-piled ivory from countries with abundant elephant populations, even though the revenue was to be used exclusively for elephant conservation.
5. Kerry frequently appears in HSUS literature and on their web sight�they are the leading anti-hunting advocacy organization. The HSUS along with The Fund for Animals jointly produce The Humane Scorecard of their �work in progress� within Congress. Their latest scorecard on the 107th Congress represents Kerry as one of their �heroes�. You can read it yourself at www.hsus.org and www.fund.org.
6. Kerry didn�t just circulate a letter for them (HSUS) to other senators to increase the funding to record breaking levels for the Animal Welfare Act and vote for it; he campaigned it for them.
7. Kerry voted for or sponsored 8 of 9 animal issue bills scored by HSUS and Fund for Animals. In the Scorecard, he is rated with a star and a plus sign, meaning that he was a �[p]rime sponsor of animal legislation� and �spoke on behalf of pro-animal legislation during floor debate.�
8. On the Scorecard for the 106th and 108th Congresses Kerry scored 100% in both in voting and letter-writing on HSUS issues. For example, in the 106th, he voted in favor of eliminating all recreational and commercial trapping on National Wildlife refuges.

If you look more, you can find much more. If you notice, he is careful not to speak out directly against hunting, but a look at his associations shows the truth.

Well Stonecreek? You wanted facts, there they are in La Pierr's narrative. The ball's in your court. Something tells me that no matter what you read, you aren't going to let the facts get in the way of what you really think and are. BTW, George W. Bush and his dad have been hunters since they were little kids. I can't really say it any better than La Pierre's piece, but if you are the hunter shooter you claim to be and you still vote for Kerry, might I add one more literary piece to read: UNFIT FOR COMMAND a book recently released by the Swift boat veterans and Kerry's former Commanding Officers who kenw the real Kerry. Incidentally, that picture that he shows of him with 23 of his so-called shipmates, only ONE that's ONE support his candidacy. "That ain't me talking" That's BS and you know it. One more thing, there have been quite a few presidents that have "chased down and killed a man with a gun," Andrew Jackson, U.S. Grant, Teddy Roosevelt, Dwight D. Eisenhower and I forgot Bush 41 was an attack pilot during WWII and won the DFC. jorge

[quote
One of my friends, a dedicated hunter and gun owner, insists on pointing out that Kerry is the only guy he knows of ever to run for President who has ever hunted down and killed another man with a gun. And he puts a lot more stock, rightg or wrong, in that than anything else.

---

A strange choice of criteria. Also forgets Theodore Roosevelt and Andrew Jackson, among others.