Posted by earlhofert (anonymous) on October 29, 2008 at 12:38 p.m. (Suggest removal)

That's nice - almost verbatum from the NRA mass e-mailing a few weeks back.

I, however, am an informed voter, and I am well aware that this propaganda is simply more fear mongering.

Posted by jafo (anonymous) on October 29, 2008 at 2:52 p.m. (Suggest removal)

What a load that is. Typical scare tactics. Besides, gun laws, like all laws, are written by the legislative branch, not the President. Hahaha.... "these facts"... whatever.

Posted by bobcab (anonymous) on October 29, 2008 at 3:10 p.m. (Suggest removal)

well i too have looked a these "facts" and like earlhofert said these are overblown misstatements and of context quotes.
that said i hope he does most of those things because they need to be done. and if poor dean johnson thinks that he can have a gun anytime he wants just look what happened during hurricane katrina. where the local police with the help of the national guard went door to door and took all the guns they found away from licensed gun owners,breaking many laws protecting gun ownership and citizenship in the united states. so live in your republican bubble if you want but they will take away your guns too

Posted by walleye29 (anonymous) on October 29, 2008 at 3:41 p.m. (Suggest removal)

I know Obama a little better than most, I live in Chicago but was raised on Ottertail Lake. Even though I lean republican I am voting for him because he is the most sincere, up front national politician I have ever met. I have met about 10 others. As far as some of the disinformation being repeated by the author, I know the history on some of his claims. He is not against gun ownership however he did support several common sence retrictions for the people he served as a state rep. for a high crime Chicago district. He is for banning assualt rifles and large ammo magizines. He is also against bullet proof vest peircing ammo. As a retired police office I applaude him for these common sense positions. He is not for banning the sale of handguns or hunting rifles, orincreasing taxes on handguns by 500%. I don't know his position on some these other claims, perhaps they have not been addressed because they are so silly. I would recommend you read his interview in Field and Stream this month. Alot of his positions on guns are discussed, as well as McCains. If you are a die hard NRA person like MCCAin then you should vote for him. But if want want someone who looks at the issues instead of yielding to special interest groups without reservation then I would suggest you consider Obama. The bottom line is that neither men will interfer with your hunting but one is trying to make it a little safer for the police and others. Thank You

Posted by pilsnerurquel (anonymous) on October 29, 2008 at 4:51 p.m. (Suggest removal)

YAWN! You Republicans are so boring with your old taglines...higher taxes and more control. It's time to get a new schtick.

Posted by waxwing069 (anonymous) on October 29, 2008 at 6:07 p.m. (Suggest removal)

And if people vote in McCain and Palin, they can expect to use thier firearms expertise to fight in foreign wars and shoot people. Mark my words, McCain will bring back the Draftsend our future into and invade other countries. And where do you think the money is going to come from to take care of returning war vets who have been maimed and lost a limb or two? These wars are so very expensive, and we the tax payers will be taxed to pay for the medical bills, or the government will abandon the war vets after they are no longer able to defend this country, and we will have thousands more homeless living under bridges.

Posted by betterworld (anonymous) on October 29, 2008 at 7:28 p.m. (Suggest removal)

This nonsense is right out of the maildrop. What blather.....what misconstrued blather.....

Posted by theweasel (anonymous) on October 29, 2008 at 8:17 p.m.

(This comment was removed by the site staff.)

Posted by retiredteacher (anonymous) on October 29, 2008 at 8:38 p.m. (Suggest removal)

weasel. Nice one, a sense of humor. I like it. Sometimes these posts, like the totally absurd letter, get too serious and, frankly, dishonest. I really like the post from walleye29. It's restrained, objective and right on the nail. In fact, the arch-CONSERVATIVE newspaper in the country has endorsed Obama, the Chicago Tribune. Founded in 1847, the Tribune has NEVER endorsed a Democrat for president until now. In its reasons, it puts to rest all of the absurd smears about Obama. To get this endorsement, either McCain has to be absolutely worthless, or Obama has to be a very special leader. I think it's the latter that decided the Tribune. Go to their web site and see for yourselves. Their most important argument for not endorsing McCain is the ridiculous argument he makes about socialism and "redistributing the wealth." The Chicago Tribune makes the HUGE point that the wealth has been redistributed under Bush and company so that there are 200 more billionaires (one hundred thousand million redistributed here according to the Tribune) and nearly 6 million middle class Americans sliding under the poverty line between 2000-2007. "Socialism" my fat aunt's butt; more like THEFT.

Posted by ahma (anonymous) on October 29, 2008 at 8:41 p.m. (Suggest removal)

This article was written by another victim of NRA propaganda nonsense and maybe a little brain damage to go along with it. You'd have to be a complete idiot to even think that any honest American would want to relinquish the rights of hunters. Does this feller think that this issue is even remotely at the top of the list of concerns for Obama if he were elected? C'mon, I think the world situation is a scant more important than banning rifle ammunition and increasing taxes on guns and ammunition. There's just to many out there that are brainwashed by the NRA. Wake up from your dream!

Posted by lifterpuller (anonymous) on October 30, 2008 at 10:07 a.m. (Suggest removal)

I wish the people that are actually informed, like the bulk of you on the web, would take the time to write a letter to the editor and sign your names to them... the bulk of the readership never gets a chance to see your well thought out responses because they are only available on the web... heck, maybe jerry and capitalist would send some letters in too, just to make it fun... It'd be really cool if you included screen names, but I seriously doubt many people are that brave.

Posted by votedem (anonymous) on October 30, 2008 at 10:24 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Typical republicans. The President can't just take away your guns. Your scare tactics aren't working in this election. Informed voters know that Barack Obama isn't going to do anything remotely close to what you're proposing in this letter.

You can thank all of us democrats a couple years from now when we are no longer spending 10 billion dollars a month in Iraq.....when our economy has come back and your 401k is flurishing....when your health insurance premiums are cut in half....and when religion no longer runs the white house, but rather common sense and logic.

Peace and rationality,

Votedem

Posted by 89Heritage (anonymous) on October 31, 2008 at 5:15 p.m. (Suggest removal)

I think the last dem super majority (Witch can take your guns away votedem) Was the Carter years. Oh yeah. That worked. Does anybody on here remember those years?