But they rarely to never propose the other Amendments need “balancing”. If one was to propose for example a tracking device put on all computers that would send an instant alert to law enforcement the second someone searched site for bomb making instructions to “balance” the safety of the nation vs individual rights, people would freak out.
And the usual problem, who gets to decide what “balance” is? You have to take the Const. at face value and work from there, not the reverse.
People today forget a key (the key) aspect of the US: It’s not, nor has it ever, been intended as the safest country on earth, but the freest. And we all know what the man said about those willing to give up Liberty for safety…
IMHO, his " right balance" statement means, bye bye for AR’s or any other semi auto rifle that accept hi-cap mags, all hi-cap pistols and all hi-cap mags. I do not trust him, I think he is dead in the water, and doesn’t have a snowballs chance in hell of going anywhere.
Bush is good on guns, but that is not the only right that could be lost. Every time Gov. grows we loose some economic and personal freedoms. Property rights are being stripped away, there is an attack on privacy, and first amendment rights. The laws are being turned upside down and taxation and regulation are killing jobs. The deficit will be 20 trillion when Obama leaves office.
Who do you trust to turn this around? Jeb Bush from the NEOCON Bush family, or someone like Ted Cruz, Rand Paul, Scott Walker, or even Marco Rubio.
I see the difference between Hillary and Jeb, but is it enough to get people to vote for Jeb?
I like hearing someone from NJ chime in. Let’s hope Christie doesn’t have a chance.
I actually would prefer Paul. I stated several issues I have with Jeb as the Presidential candidate this time. To beat Hillary, we need a clear contrast and it can’t be somebody that can be easily marginalized as a “bible thumper who wants to outlaw abortion.”
And that is why we can’t do “Clinton vs. Bush: Part Deux” even if Jeb was actually a fantastic candidate all the way around (he isn’t) the name brings too much luggage along with it.
Republicans need to stop screwing around and DEFEAT Hillary. Hillary is going to try and make her campaign about the economy and of course the “first woman President” milestone. The Republicans better have a serious campaign that is about the economy, the economy and the economy and the first time they get started talking about something like gay marriage, abortion or similar stupid shit they might as well just endorse Hillary.
My concern is that ultimately they don’t really seem to care about winning. They sure don’t seem enthusiastic about repealing bad laws to the point of actually getting it done. They get paid too much with no accountability for results
I know it’s a joke, but we need to be really specific in our rejection of Christie. We don’t want anyone to get the impression that we are in the least bit concerned with “image.” He can actually look for sympathy if he can promote the idea that his “appearance” is costing him the nomination.
And if we are going to elect somebody based upon appearance, I’m voting for Christy Canyon before I’m voting for Chris Christie.
Agree 110%. Gay Marriage and Abortion (right or wrong) are sideshows in elections. The 'pubs need a clear plan on the economy and they need the energy to deliver that plan along with a candidate who hasn’t screwed him or herself. Hillary has miles of skidmarks on record that the PACs can take advantage of.
I will go even farther. Jeb, like his father, and brother are patrician PROGRESSIVES. They mean well, but like Dems want to use government for social engineering because it is “good for us”. We don’t need another Bush.
Christie is another RINO who wants to continue the use of “Sporting Purpose” as the reason for the 2A when it has absolutely nothing to do with it.
No they don’t mean well, and at their core they are all FABIAN SOCIALISTS that have taken over the GOP and DNC. They even pander and play to both sides of the conservative/liberal aisle.
“The argument that the two parties should represent opposed ideals and policies, one, perhaps, of the Right and the other of the Left, is a foolish idea acceptable only to doctrinaire and academic thinkers. Instead, the two parties should be almost identical, so that the American people can ‘throw the rascals out’ at any election without leading to any profound or extensive shifts in policy” Georgetown University Professor Carroll Quigley, Tragedy and Hope, 1966.
I am a single issue voter. Whoever is the most pro-2A gets my vote in the primary, and whoever is the most pro-2A gets my vote in the general election.
That’s why I voted for Obama in 2012. He was the guy on the ballot who hadn’t signed an assault weapons ban.
Agreed. I am also a single issue voter. But hold on, tell me you didn’t vote for Obama? Hillary also never signed the AW ban, I still wouldn’t vote for her.
Back to good 'ole North Cackalackey. Only had a one year stint in NorCal. And that was plenty.
The idea that some in the party “wait their turn” is what kills the Republicans.
You can’t continue to put up Romney’s and McCain’s and expect to win ever again. It just kills me that they stand their with pie on their faces and do the same stupid stuff again and again.
I would hate to think the Republicans think Jeb Bush can win, he can’t, he wont and he sure shouldn’t even be considered. How many times do you burn your hand on a hot stove before you learn not to touch it?
There are some hot up and comming Republicans that can win, but the party continues to go back to the same formula to lose again. I’m sure if Jeb wins you will be able to hear tin foil hats being tightened down all over America as it will insure a Democrat will win.
