The HUGE Issue that Fox News Ignored During the GOP Debate

[The Legion]

Out of all the issues in the FOX GOP Debate (Can we even call it a debate? They have one minute for goodness’ sake) this week, there were a couple of Constitutional issues that came up. Rand Paul and Chris Christie got into it over the Fourth Amendment. Other candidates spoke about immigration, which is a Constitutional issue for Congress. They even spoke about spending, which is also Constitutional in limited spending, not balanced budgets. No one pointed to that though. The one thing interestingly missing from the debate was the Second Amendment and the right of the people to keep and bear arms.

So, why was there no talk about the Second Amendment? After all, we know the current Marxist administration is anti-gun ownership and we know that those in the Democrat Party are for some level of gun control. But what about those who were debating and asking you for your vote for the highest office in the land?

For starters, we know Chris Christie is clearly not to be trusted with the rights of the people concerning guns. Christie has signed into law all sorts of infringements upon his people in New Jersey and when called out on it at a town hall meeting earlier this year, he said, “Send me a Republican legislature. And with a Republican legislature you’ll have a governor who will respect, appropriately, the rights of law-abiding citizens to be able to protect ourselves.” At least one woman is dead in his state because of infringement upon the people’s rights and Brian Aitken was imprisoned in New Jersey for having legally purchased guns. Then there was Christie’s appointment of anti-gun Jeffrey Chisea to fill the seat in the US Senate.

Ben Carson has said he believes citizens have gun rights, but then has broken that up when it comes to whether or not you live in the city or the country.

Governor Mike Huckabee is pro-Second Amendment supporter without restrictions.

Senator Rand Paul has been in his words and votes a pro-Second Amendment supporter without restrictions.

Senator Marco Rubio opposed the UN’s Arms Trade Treaty. He opposes restrictions on the right to bear arms and was given a B+ rating by the National Rifle Association. He also claimed that the Second Amendment is the cornerstone of our democracy (It’s a republic Marco).

Senator Ted Cruz has also been a pro-Second Amendment supporter in his voting, except for the claim that arms “such as Machine guns, and weapons especially attractive to criminals, such as short-barreled shotguns, are not” to be considered as protected under the Second Amendment.

Governor Scott Walker opposes restrictions on the right to bear arms, has said the Second Amendment is not optional and desires to see concealed carry recognized under the Second Amendment.

Donald Trump has said he is against gun control, claims Republicans and Democrats are wrong on guns, but he is for an assault weapon ban, wants a waiting period and background checks, none of which are in the Second Amendment nor a part of the federal government’s authority. He recently stated that he also supports the arming of all military personnel and repealing “gun free zones” there.

Governor John Kasich opposes restrictions on the right to bear arms and believes more parenting is better than more gun laws.

Florida Governor Jeb Bush advanced stand-your-ground and concealed carry during his time as governor.

Matthew Speiser also deals with a few other candidates’ positions on the Second Amendment, who were not allowed to participate in the prime time event.

I want to hear from presidential candidates that there is no authority given to government to restrict any arms to its citizens in any fashion. That is the law. On top of that, as I stated on Friday on the Sons of Liberty radio show, I want them to be asked to enumerate the first Ten Amendments to the Constitution and their enumerated powers should they be elected to the White House. After all, that is what they job consists of, knowing their limitations and understanding the people’s freedom that is to be preserved. If they can’t answer those few things, they have no business anywhere near the White House.

[E4 No More]

No Carly position?

[bersaguy]

I think you can bet that the question came up many many times in the Facebook questions but were ignored so they could asked the questions that they could target at Trump. Lets face it. Fox did go after Trump and a ton or more of viewers have made their feelings know pertaining to that to FOX Networks............ :2cents:

[Oh Shoot]

No Carly position?

 

http://www.tngunowners.com/forums/topic/89905-carly-fiorina-on-guns/

[bersaguy]

No Carly position?

My guess is she will be asked that question in next debate because she will be in top ten next round as she is gathering a much larger base following since the first debate...........jm.. :2cents: worth

[E4 No More]

http://www.tngunowners.com/forums/topic/89905-carly-fiorina-on-guns/

I was commenting on the lack of her position in the OP; not lack of her position on the subject. :)

[bersaguy]

I was commenting on the lack of her position in the OP; not lack of her position on the subject. :)

It appeared that the Fox Commentators really wanted to avoid the 2nd Amendment issues if at all possible and seemed to be for the most part successful. With that said if it had come up 1 minute is a very short time to make any serious replies to the question except for or against it and little more........jmho

[battleop]

No Carly position?

I have a problem with someone that lays off 30k employees and turns around and buys a new jet at the same time.

[gregintenn]

I have a problem with someone that lays off 30k employees and turns around and buys a new jet at the same time.

Why?

[Oh Shoot]

I have a problem with someone that lays off 30k employees and turns around and buys a new jet at the same time.

 

Guess he should have redistributed his income?

And what's that got to do with 2A?

 

- OS

Edited August 11, 2015 by Oh Shoot

[bersaguy]

He needed a new jet for the campaign trail. Couldn't be flying around in a year old Jet on campaign trail!!! What would people think and say??......................... :shrug: :shrug:

[monkeylizard]

Guess he should have redistributed his income?

And what's that got to do with 2A?

 

- OS

 

she, not he.

 

battleop was referring to Carly Fiorina's time at HP, and is repeating an attack made by our dear friend Barbara Boxer.

 

The 5 (not 1) private jets were purchased by HP, not Fiorina personally. They replaced 4 aging jets that could not keep up with the new demands of HP, including international distances to Asia. Kind of an important route for a tech company.

Edited August 11, 2015 by monkeylizard

[E4 No More]

I have a problem with someone that lays off 30k employees and turns around and buys a new jet at the same time.

So you have a problem with someone doing their job? Ok.

[monkeylizard]

In context, the HP layoffs of 30K people was during the dot-com bubble bust. It was about 20% of the total HP/Compaq workforce.

 

HP had 84,400 employees worldwide in 2001, the year before the merger with Compaq. Compaq had 63,700 full-time employees. A total of 148,100 workers. During the merger was when the 30K workers got their pink slips. When Fiorina left HP in 2005, their worldwide employment was 150,000.

Edited August 11, 2015 by monkeylizard

[E4 No More]

In context, the HP layoffs of 30K people was during the dot-com bubble bust. It was about 20% of the total HP/Compaq workforce.

 

HP had 84,400 employees worldwide in 2001, the year before the merger with Compaq. Compaq had 63,700 full-time employees. A total of 148,100 workers. During the merger was when the 30K workers got their pink slips. When Fiorina left HP in 2005, their worldwide employment was 150,000.

Hey now...don't let facts get in the way of half-truths. :)

[monkeylizard]

To be comlpetely fair, many of those recovered jobs were offshore. Fiorina has always said that the jobs will go to whoever competes for them, and California didn't compete for them. Some went to other states, but primarily Asia. She's a staunch anti-protectionist. You can agree or disagree with her on that, but she has been consistent across the years and what she says lines up with what she does.

Edited August 11, 2015 by monkeylizard

[kieefer]

I don't think we've seen an actual debate since the seventies. It's all about got'ya comments and discrediting those that aren't in the ruling class. Clearly Trump was targeted and each candidate was asked to defend a position, nothing about what makes one person's ideas better than another to hold the presidency.

 

A lot of good links in the OP's post and your own research is the best way to sort out what you can live with and what you can't.

 

https://www.conservativereview.com/2016-Presidential-Candidates

 

http://www.ontheissues.org/default.htm

[tnhawk]

I have a problem with someone that lays off 30k employees and turns around and buys a new jet at the same time.

 

Did you have a problem when Jack Welch laid off thousands of workers at GE? Those that have the money make the rules.

Edited August 11, 2015 by tnhawk

[K191145]

I think you can bet that the question came up many many times in the Facebook questions but were ignored so they could asked the questions that they could target at Trump. Lets face it. Fox did go after Trump and a ton or more of viewers have made their feelings know pertaining to that to FOX Networks............ :2cents:

 

Well a good question to have asked Trump would have been, why do you 'claim" to support the 2nd. Amendment now when in the not too distant past you supported an outright assault weapons ban and a 3 day waiting period for any firearm purchase. Ask him if he believes now that American citizens should be able to buy AR and AK type rifles and no round limit magazines and drums for the rifles. Ask him if an instant criminal background check and no waiting periods are fine now. Ask him what made him change his mind from a gun control advocate to a pro gun advocate.  Also ask the Don what he thinks the 2nd. Amendment is actually about. Ask him if his motivation to change his opinion is based on the fact that he is running on the GOP ticket and there's a large number of gun owners and 2nd. Amendment supporters who vote for republican candidates, or, did he have some magical revelation that his support for gun control was wrong. That would have been a few good questions to have asked him. Of course he would have accused the moderators of picking on him and implied that the female ones were on their period like he already did.

[m16ty]

A lot people throwing such a fuss over Carly Fiorina laying off 30K employees think that corporations are only in business to employ people. No, they are in business to make money. If they do make money, employment will follow.

 

I don't know of a single person that goes into business for the purpose of giving people jobs. People go into business to make money. Most can't make money without employees. The more money they make, the more they hire. 

[JohnC]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6P3NhTZ-ckg