Republican CA Gov. Candidate to Gun Owners: FOAD

(courtesy Twitter.com)

“[CaliforniaRepublican gubernatorial candidate] Neel Kashkari said Wednesday that he owns four guns and supports gun rights but -” Stop! I’ve said it before, I’ll say it again: there are not ifs, ands or buts when it comes to the Second Amendment. “Shall not be infringed” does not have an asterisk indicating conditions where the right to keep and bear arms can be infringed by the government (e.g. in the interests of public safety). Putting the word “but” after expressing support for the law of the land regarding firearms freedom is like saying “I support the right to drink sugar drinks but not if they’re a danger to the consumer’s health.” OK, so, blogs.sacbee.com reports that Kashkari told a group of college Republicans at California State University, Sacramento that . . .

he’s “not running on an agenda of the Second Amendment.” In fact, “If you’re a single issue voter, and you just want someone to give you a full capacity assault rifle magazine, God bless you, you can go vote for somebody else. I’m not your guy.”

No. No he’s not. Check this:

“I do know philosophically that I deeply believe in protecting my own gun rights, and that means protecting your gun rights,” Kashkari said. “But I also believe that, you know, we need to be reasonable about things.”

Kashkari spoke broadly against “layering more gun rules on me, on responsible gun owners,” saying additional restrictions will not prevent gun violence or make people safer. But the former U.S. Treasury Department official said he does not oppose waiting periods or background checks, which he said “didn’t inconvenience me in the slightest” when he has purchased guns.

Kashkari also said, “I’m not fearful of the Army coming and marching on my home, so I don’t have guns to try to defend myself against the Army. I have guns for my own sport, for my own personal protection, etcetera.”

Kashkari said after the event that he owns two 9mm Glock 17 pistols, one Weatherby rifle and one shotgun, a Remington 870 Express.

When a student suggested the purpose of the Second Amendment is to ensure citizens can overthrow a tyrannical government, if necessary, Kashkari said, “I understand that, and I hear you on that, but if the Army decides to come in with an M1 tank, good luck.”

No matter how much backpedaling and prevarication Kashkari posts on his 2A supporter-besieged Twitter account, the guy is not a friend of ours. “I’m a gun owner and believe in responsible gun ownership. Thanks,” Kashkari Tweets. To be fair, Neel did give us a heads-up. “Jobs and education,” his Twitter account proclaims. “That’s it!” I guess liberty doesn’t get a look in. I hope this isn’t the best that California voters can get.

comments

  1. avatar NJDevil says:

    Maybe part of his education agenda will be educating people about the Constitution, the Bill of Rights, the need for sel….nah who am I kidding?

    1. avatar Stilicho says:

      Good ol’ Neal wasn’t satisfied with his efforts to screw America with bailouts, so he had to double down. Typical lefty.

  2. avatar -Peter says:

    Why can’t he just say, “i support the 2nd amendment, and am a gun owner myself, but I’ve chosen not to make gun rights the major focus of my campaign.” This guy just opened his mouth a bit too wide.

    1. avatar Erin says:

      Neutral on gun rights is against gun rights.

      1. avatar Nigil says:

        I’d take “not the major focus of my campaign” over “Mr. and Mrs. America, turn ’em all in” any day of the week. If all we had were neutrals and pro-rights politicians, we’d be good to go.

  3. avatar ST says:

    Unfortunately, California gun owners don’t have the luxury of a good vs bad vote.
    It’s bad vs worse for them, because a Rep who says “I proudly support the Second Amendment” in California has just said FOAD to millions of leftist voters in LA and San Fransisco. Thus, such a person will never get elected. While most Americans want the status quo or fewer gun restrictions,60% of Californians surveyed in 2012 want more restrictions.

    The cultural norm in California is clear .If you want support of the populous constituents, you have to back gun control. Otherwise , one may as well run for office in Texas supporting an Assault Weapons ban.

    Before pointing fingers at California’s gun owners, do note that Kevin “Mr Ghost” De Leon was elected by a majority of constituents, as they believe guns are a social ill rather then a constitutional right. We need to fix the disease of social ignorance, which will treat the symptom of political ignorance.

    1. avatar Roscoe says:

      That “fix” had best be attempted in something other than english; I’d suggest stick figures as a starting point. That might keep the attention of the sheeple he represents long enough to make some kind of impression, but what that might be; who knows.

      1. avatar Accur81 says:

        Low information voters.

        1. avatar Big E says:

          I prefer ‘low-intelligence’ or ‘low character’.

  4. avatar Timbo says:

    it is spelled R-I-N-O

    1. avatar Ross says:

      No it’s spelt a-s-s-h-o-l-e

      1. avatar Timbo says:

        Different word, same meaning

        1. avatar Avid Reader says:

          True dat.

    2. avatar AngryAZ says:

      Here in Arizona we spell it with a capitol M as in dirty Mccain

  5. avatar Toasty says:

    As I’ve stated before saying “I’m a gun owner” before saying something to either demean us or trample our rights is like saying “I have black friends” before saying something horrible racist about black people.

    1. avatar Maineuh says:

      Wow. That is exactly right.

    2. avatar Kyle says:

      Good point!

    3. avatar Daniel S. says:

      It’s like saying “I’ve never killed an entire race and I am all for preventing genocide and torture, BUT…” sounds a lot worse now doesn’t it.

  6. avatar darkstar says:

    It’s California, what do you expect from a “Republican” running for Governor there? That’s some conservative shit for that state.

    1. avatar Old Ben turning in grave says:

      Indeed. He is at least opposed to new gun laws (he said he is). Assuming he’d veto any new gun bills, then he’s probably better than any Democratic candidate. But he didn’t say that he would veto any new gun laws. Doesn’t matter. At least for this next election, I don’t see anyone but a Dem getting that office.

      1. avatar Jus Bill says:

        This will be sort of like the elections in North Korea. Only less transparent.

    2. avatar Gene says:

      Kinda like that anti named Schwarzenegger who owns his own tank and makes movies that just drip with guns (well,flip floped between huge action, scenimatic failures, then back to huge action)?

    3. avatar Gecko 44 says:

      You’re right. I live in California. The political reality is that waiting periods and 10 round mags are here and probably will remain for my lifetime. It sucks but that’s the way it is. Why blow the election by taking an extreme position? 2a’ers are not going to carry an election. As far arming against our own armed forces, I agree with the guy. I think he was courageous to discuss the issue, admit he had 4 firearms and not be an apologist for it. That will advance 2a rights than anything else.

  7. avatar Daniel Silverman says:

    Vote Tim Donnelly. He would repeal the AWB, go shall issue or constitutional carry if presented, and we would have NFA items again. Anyone else is a shill.
    I am sure Neel is a nice guy, but we looked at his campaign funds. 90% + of his money came from his old big banker buddies. I will let that sink in for a bit.

    1. avatar Russ Bixby says:

      He would, but he couldn’t – not without “repealing” the legislature as well.

    2. avatar Other Don says:

      Tim is definitely pro gun!

      1. avatar Roscoe says:

        And in CA, likely unelectable at this point in time.

        That said, I would surely like to be made to eat crow on that statement. If he runs, I’ll vote for him, stubborn die hard that I am!

    3. avatar Accur81 says:

      10-4.

  8. avatar GSRpositive says:

    Great. Another election with the potential for no good candidates from whom to choose.

    1. avatar Maineuh says:

      Hee. That IS entertaining.

  9. avatar anonymous says:

    Goldman Sachs.

    Just saying.

    1. avatar ropingdown says:

      And point man for Treasury during the bank bailout….

      1. avatar Anon in CT says:

        Mr. TARP.

  10. avatar Rokurota says:

    ‘Sokay. He has a smaller chance of winning than Gary Coleman.

    1. avatar Vhyrus says:

      It just got smaller now that he pissed off half the conservative population in Cali.

  11. avatar Randy Drescher says:

    Yeah neel, if the reno/justice dept decides to burn women & children alive what can a poor citizen do? I guess somebody forgot to tell McVie he was powerless in the face of government tyrany.

    1. avatar Rokurota says:

      David Koresh. Not exactly the poster boy for armed defense we want.

  12. This article didn’t need to be any longer than, “I’m not your guy.”

  13. avatar Matt in WI says:

    Ah… The M1 Abrams defense.

    I hear this one all the time: Because the weapons owned by civilians are no match for the weapons used by the military, we can just dismiss the main purpose of the 2nd Amendment out of hand.

    There are two problems here:

    1. Determined populations, armed with less than Americans currently possess, cause all sorts of problems for standing armies all over the world, all throughout history.
    2. A populace with the weapons makes a much more effective deterrent to tyranny than the same populace without.

    1. avatar DJ says:

      The Taliban seems to be doing just fine against our military. All of that firepower is worthless if you can’t bring it to bear, and there are a lot of ways to prevent bringing it to bear.

      There are also a lot of ways to deal with armored vehicles.

      The biggest threat to the population from the government has less to do with military force and more to do with their ability to create a database of everything you do, your political affiliation, everything you buy, etc. For the secret police to be useful in a tyrannical state, you have to know whose door to kick in. Stalin would have loved to have our ability to identify opponents of the regime through technology today. And we know the government is conducting surveillance on 100% of the population. We live in interesting times, friends.

      1. avatar Jeff the Griz says:

        As you stated your file with NSA just got an update…oh darn by posting this mine did too!

    2. avatar Timbo says:

      Apparently he has not heard of the Posse Comitatus Act. And hasn’t read the clear meaning of the Constitution.

      1. avatar Gene says:

        Huh, I thought POTUS declared them inconvenient so they are ignored, Congress is impotent and too busy wimpimg out, and SCOTUS just stares at their docket.

    3. avatar Jeff S says:

      Exactly. Even a basic familiarity with history destroys the idea that the most powerful military always wins the war. Of course to be against the idea of the 2nd Amendment PRESUPPOSES an unfamiliarity with history.

  14. avatar George says:

    “If you’re a single issue voter, and you just want someone to give you a full capacity assault rifle magazine…..”

    At least he didn’t call them “clips”, but clearly there are firearms that are ugly and, therefore, more likely to take themselves somewhere and kill people in his mind.

    Wonder what other things he doesn’t like based on what they look like…….

    1. avatar Totenglocke says:

      I’d guess that, like most Californians, he thinks white people are inherently evil because they happen to make up most of the US population and thus there are more white people with lots of money.

  15. avatar Tommy Knocker says:

    Looks like skippy is going to be a great leader in the tradition of Arnold.

    1. avatar Vhyrus says:

      Not quite. Arnold got elected.

  16. avatar Jus Bill says:

    “But the former U.S. Treasury Department official said he does not oppose waiting periods or background checks, which he said “didn’t inconvenience me in the slightest” when he has purchased guns.”

    Yeah, like being a former U.S. Treasury Department official didn’t help Kash-n-kari sail through the process with the help of his friends at all…

  17. avatar PeterC says:

    Right. With our modern, hi-tech weapons, we totally annihilated all those poorly armed Viet Cong.

    1. avatar Al says:

      Actually, we kind of did, except war is not about destroying the enemy, it’s about destroying his will. They knew what they were doing.

  18. avatar Russ Bixby says:

    “I hope this isn’t the best that California voters can get.”

    Nope, he’s not. Brown is in fact better.

    Kash [and] kari, bought and paid for by the CDIC.

  19. avatar AznMike says:

    Has anyone heard of the news that some guys wants to split California into 6 separate states? If that means better gun rights for those areas, I’m all for it. Might actually get me to look for jobs there if I can actually own guns out there.

    1. avatar Roscoe says:

      Groovie man, like I can totally see that ever happening.

      /end sarc/

      1. avatar AznMike says:

        Oh yeah, I’m sure this will never have a shot in hell of passing but one can only hope.

        1. avatar Roscoe says:

          Now THAT I can agree with. The initiative does have merit, but from a practical standpoint doesnt really stand a chance. One can still dream – “California Dreamin'” I guess.

          http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation-now/2014/02/21/california-six-states-plan-tim-draper/5673283/

    2. avatar DerryM says:

      Ok, this Kashkari guy can DIAF. Nuff said. Someone said Tim Donnelly, so I will check him out.

      Splitting California into six States would be the best thing, and I support the idea (but realize it is unlikely to happen). The proposed split would put me in Southern California, which is probably the most Conservative part of the State. We’d have a real chance of restoring Conservative Sanity to Business Regulation, Individual Rights, especially Gun Rights and establishing a friendly rapport with Central California (the food producer). Best of all San Francisco and Hollywood/LA would be in “other States”. We’d have the second largest population and a good share of Congressional Representation and Electoral College Votes. It could be a real good thing…

  20. avatar Totenglocke says:

    ““I understand that, and I hear you on that, but if the Army decides to come in with an M1 tank, good luck.””

    Well that’s amusing, seeing how almost every war the US military has been in (for what…50 years? 60 years?), they’ve been soundly trounced by people with less training and inferior weapons.

    1. avatar michael nieto says:

      and we have a volunteer military who is going to sign up to kill us civilians. how will they maintain logistics when the battlefield is in the us. how many states national guards would join the ‘rebels’. how many units of federal troops would defect to the ‘rebels’. what percent of our military could even be deployed in the continental us. what about all opposition in the senate and house over killing us civilians trying to keep their constitutional rights. how many sheriffs departments and Leos would go along with a war against ‘rebels’. where would the govt keep POWs, in our current prison system ha. how would the economy support a civil war when certain states would absolutely support the ‘rebels’. simply put the us federal govt could not win a civil war in today’s age the is no federal govt without the states and the consent of the governed especially when you have 80 million armed Americans with enough guns for every man woman and child in the country and a volunteer military

  21. avatar A samurai says:

    “When a student suggested the purpose of the Second Amendment is to ensure citizens can overthrow a tyrannical government, if necessary, Kashkari said, ‘I understand that, and I hear you on that, but if the Army decides to come in with an M1 tank, good luck.'”

    I always find it REALLY disturbing when (usually) anti-gun people say,”Its stupid to own a gun to resist your government because your government’s power is beyond all measure.” Like this above quote, for 3 reasons.

    Frist: The whole point of our system is that unlike everywhere else in the world, the government (any level) can’t just wake up one day and say, “I hate that guy, drive tanks to his house and kill him.” There is something about protected rights, due process, and delegated powers to prevent that. Which no one ever seems to be aware of when they make this analogy.

    Second: The Army, and The M1 Abrams Tank, that he (and others) spoke so highly of has had a hell of a time fighting Taliban resistance fighters in Iraq and Afghanistan for years. The most advanced Army in the world has repeatedly been stymied by men with 50 year old AKs and cell phones. To put it another way, “Never underestimate the power of a small group of committed individuals to change the world, in history they are the only thing that ever has.” You know like 200 years ago when some land owners and farmers took up muskets against the most powerful military in the world and won independence for their one nation, with stolen cannons and untrained troops, who carried their personal rifles…. Guerilla forces win wars because they have no other choice.

    Third: Where the hell are all these anti-american troops going to come from who will follow the orders to drive tanks to civilian homes to quash Constitutional Rights? I want to meet the men and women of the U.S. Army that would follow those orders. I hear this argument more and more everyday from different sources and it scares the hell out of me that no one seems to realize: That hypothetical guy driving the hypothetical tank to your house that you have no defense against with your hypothetical gun, IS AN AMERICA TOO. And would never be part of such a deplorable act, because how could he know if the next house he was ordered to wasn’t his own? or his brother’s?

    I really think there is a huge issue here not being addressed. People keep using this mythical ultra powerful government analogy to say, “hey gun people just give it up because you can’t fight the government.” No, you are wrong, Our Government can’t fight us American Citizens. That’s the whole propose of this country. To finally have a country that doesn’t have its boot on the necks of the people. Unique in the whole world! And the fact that people keep using this analogy to justify their arguments just show that our population is forgetting that! People are really starting to think unconsciously that you really “can’t fight the government.” It will only be true when people believe it. And if people are, then that is THE scariest thing happing in America today. The domestication of the American mind.

    1. avatar Russ Bixby says:

      “I want to meet the men and women of the U.S. Army that would follow those orders.”

      It has happened, usually against “undesirables” like Mormons, “wards of the State,” rebelling slaves (I am Spartacus Brown!), communal types and protesting students.

      Fortunately, though, you are still largely correct. The military shares far more ideologically common ground with JQP than do many police forces.

      1. avatar MD says:

        “It has happened, usually against “undesirables” like Mormons, “wards of the State,” rebelling slaves (I am Spartacus Brown!), communal types and protesting students”.

        Don’t forget striking miners. The latest issue of American Rifleman had an interesting article about the Battle of Blair Mountain.

        http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Blair_Mountain

        And there’s also the little matter of internment of Japanese Americans in WWII:

        http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japanese_American_internment

      2. avatar Ing says:

        http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Utah_War A fascinating episode in history.

        Brigham Young is rumored to have said: “I love the government and the Constitution of the United States, but I do not love the damned rascals that administer the government.”

        The more things change, the more they stay the same.

      3. avatar DJ says:

        Waco. New Orleans after Katrina. The LA Riots. The last was a legitimate use of force, but it goes to show that US troops will fire on civilians.

        1. avatar racer88 says:

          The police are not “U.S. Troops.”

  22. avatar uncommon_sense says:

    I think this candidate is just going through the motions so he can pay huge sums of campaign money to his close friends campaign agents/advertisers.

    There is no way a republican candidate can win a gubernatorial election in California right now. If he was serious, he would run as a democrat and try to beat Brown in the primaries.

  23. avatar T says:

    Whoever voted this guy in needs to vote him the hell back out!

  24. avatar Brian says:

    If you follow the original meaning of the Constitution, does this line of thought meet and originalist test? The Framers, before the Constitution was written, exercised the right to keep and bear arms in certain, traditional ways; they framed the 2A so those rights and traditions would not be infringed. If, at the time, it was not thought of as traditional to keep certain types of arms and bear them in certain, traditional ways, does that mean there would be untraditional methods which they did not mean to protect as non-infringable? In other words, are certain regulations permissible because the Framers meant to protect from infringement what they thought of as traditional notions of keeping and bearing arms? For example, would the Framers have recognized the ability to deny mentally deficient people the right to keep and bear arms at the time before the drafting of the Constitution? If so, the “shall not be infringed” argument seems to be somewhat dubious. If traditional restrictions were accepted by the Framers, then what were these restrictions, if any? I am not advocating this line of thought, but merely presenting it as a mental exercise. What say you?

  25. avatar Jonathan - Houston says:

    At this point, the game is too heavily rigged to win. The bulk of the,nation will be like California before long. There will be pockets of Texas-type free states here and there for a bit longer, but nationally we’ve already passed the tipping point. There are simply too damn many stupid, weak, larcenous, lazy, corrupt people who want nothing more out of this life than to live comfortably and easily on about $40K per year in welfare beneifits, provided at others’ expense. They’re equally eager to trade away all of their rights and yours and vote for villainous politicians who will expropriate wealth from you and transfer it to their co-conspirators, er, I mean constituents.

    Instead of fighting over these particular tactical objectives, we really should be focused on strategic goals like keeping additional automatic Dem voters out of the country and on rolling back the welfare dependency state.

  26. avatar Ralph says:

    And the California RINOs wonder why they can’t elect anyone to statewide office. Hey, you Cali pseudo-Republicans, if you can’t energize your own base, you have nothing. Nothing.

    Just ask former Playgirl model and Massachusetts RINO-in-Chief Scott Brown. You’ll find him in New Hampshire. Fully clothed.

  27. avatar El Bearsidente says:

    “but if the Army decides to come in with an M1 tank”

    Lure it into the streets. Molotov to the engine. Worked in Stalingrad. Works today. 60 ton roadblock.

    Also, from what I’ve heard in A-stan the wheeled tanks the French use were pretty good against the Taliwhackers. Fast, more silent than an MBT like the M1 and just as deadly.

    Anyway.

    Personally I think the meaning of the 2A is very clear.

    You have to consider the time it was written in. In those days the “militia” was made of farmers, smiths, lawyers, etc. Normal townsfolk. They all had firearms at home, for self defense and of course for hunting. In times of need the militia would assemble. The leader would be a person of note in the community or he would be elected by the militia members.

    In American history what were such times of need?

    Fighting off enemies who’d mean harm to the people. The militia assembled to defend their families, their homes, their property and their own lives. Which is essentially what today’s law abiding firearm owners in the US are doing already.

    If the 2A was to be followed properly, then all these firearm owners would have to form militia companies for large scale self defense.

    1. avatar Jeff says:

      I just watched it happen on the Kiev broadcasts the other day. They rolled in a BMP-3 – which has full NBC capability similar to the M1 – and the protestors dumped 5+ molotovs on it, stopping it almost immediately.

      1. avatar DJ says:

        The situation in the Ukraine is fascinating. I really hope those brave SOBs are able to take their country back from Putin’s puppets.

      2. avatar int19h says:

        For your viewing pleasure:

        https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SoMUxGkBlf0

        Different angle, closer up:

        https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?v=620704324668475

        The crew did survive this, but they were hospitalized with severe burns. The BTR itself burned down completely.

        1. avatar Jeff says:

          so it was a BTR, OK. I only caught a short glimpse of it.

          most people who throw out the “hurr, a wild tank appears” comments don’t realize how susceptible these vehicles are to simple incendiary attack.

        2. avatar DJ says:

          BTRs are monumental pieces of junk. I got a chance to check them out in Bosnia, and we did some joint patrols with Russian units with BTRs. A .50 will go through one lengthwise (see Desert Storm and OIF).

  28. avatar LC Judas says:

    If by his own admission the laws would do nothing to stop bloodshed why does he support them?

    If he says they don’t inconvenience him as his justification then he purports that those it does inconvenience are law breakers. After all, mandating it slows things down uniformly and it is implied if you need a gun faster you are committing wrongdoing.

    A right is not measured or justified by how convenient it is to exercise it or how effective it is while being curtailed. It is measured by the amount of freedom it conveys towards the pursuit of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

  29. avatar DBPolice says:

    The M1 Abrams argument….. what a dickhead. This shows that he is a coward who wouldn’t stand up to an oppressor if he had to. It also shows he doesn’t know much military history or current events. The rebels in Ukraine aren’t armed with nearly the type of firepower most of us have but they are winning because THEY MEAN BUSINESS!! Anyway, this will make sense to the drones in my state. He still wont win, the drones would rather go full Stalin instead of just maybe a Chamberlain type.

  30. avatar Marcus Aurelius says:

    I’d be interested in hearing his strategy to bring jobs back to CA and what, in his mind, constitutes “education.” If CA becomes economically viable again free-staters may move here and bring their voting habits. Though if that happens it could imperil those free states.

    But if his strategy for bringing jobs back is increasing stimulus spending, then CA is doomed.

  31. avatar Daniel Carmona says:

    ” I support the second amendment but…” is exacty like “I’m not a racist but…”. You can disregard anything the person has said before “but” because the next statement out of their mouth will certantly contradict the first.

  32. avatar mirgc says:

    Look at where he is trying to get elected in. He could be a huge 2A supporter, but if he comes out and says it, he might just loose 2 votes for every one gained. Remember, he cannot affect the laws until AFTER he is elected and in office.

  33. avatar Jared says:

    This is nothing new. Remember the bigot republican governor from CA in the 1960’s who gladly signed the bill to ban statewide open carry and require “may-issue” permits for “loaded and exposed” carry for incorporated areas of the state?

    This governor was uneasy that a bunch of black people open carried at the Sacramento palace where this bigot once ruled.

    1. avatar Ralph says:

      The 60s? You’re talking about the 60s? You were still crapping your diapers in the 60s.

      1. avatar Jared says:

        So, is any part of my statement incorrect, are you insinuating that you are from a parallel universe where unlicensed open carry was legal in California until Grey Davis banned it in 2000?

        The world I live and everyone else lives in is a world where a bigoted republican gladly banned the right to open carry in CA because God forbid a bunch of brown people exercised their human rights.

        BTW, I wasn’t born in the 1960’s…. Not that any of my life is any of your business.

  34. avatar jjKayd says:

    So it just takes one tank to make people roll over and give up? Interesting that the countries we invade seem to be populated by much sterner individuals. Did they not get the memo?

  35. avatar Rick says:

    Just your basic Mark I Mod 0 “Second Amendment but…” Monkey with the optional “F.U., I got mine!” attachment.

  36. avatar Mediocrates says:

    Even more reason to give California back to Mexico.

  37. avatar GS650G says:

    Splitting the state into several is gaining ground and represents the only solution for the problem. Let the liberals have little smaller enclaves that prevent them from using the states enormous size to dictate who the president is, swing legislation in the house, and control large swaths of the country where they don’t agree.

  38. avatar Grumpy in Kali says:

    He’s the former assistant secretary for the TARP program…..essh.

    R’s, D’s, and every other letter is going to have problems with him right from the start.

  39. avatar steve frank says:

    The Kashkari campaign is being run by those that ran the Schwarzenegger campaigns. Just saying.

  40. avatar John Quinn says:

    The slave owners probably feared slave revolts, so black men with guns would have been restricted. Women and children probably as well. I suspect your argument has some merit, and I’d like to find evidence supporting it.

  41. avatar Jeff says:

    First of all, Neel Kashkari is irrelevant. He has about as much chance of unseating Gov. Jerry Brown as I do. Even so, to deliberately, unilaterally and unnecessarily annoy voters who would tend to want to vote for you is politically immature. Come back after you’ve grown up.

  42. avatar cubby123 says:

    Ya ,you ever hear of armor piercing, takes out troops and tanks,I’m just sayin if they have it we have it.Your student was right and you are not right.Citizens do not require universal background checks. AAAHHHH CHECK THE CONSTITUTION,it’s in there.And militia’s would form and the M1 would be dusted in gorilla warfare .So do your homework Mr. Politician.

  43. avatar Nelson says:

    Yes, IF you want another bankster lackey kunt responsible for directing TARP (along with the biggest wealth transfer, aka THEFT, in the history of the world to the tune of $24.7 TRILLION+ as revealed in the one time Fed Audit of FOMC? Yes, please, more please!) to run your life, like the GoldmanSUX fuckers now running EU, particularly Italy?

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neel_Kashkari#TARP

    Go ahead Commufornia!

    Show us how utterly fucking retarded you really are, ’cause decades of that AIPAC whore pro-NSA govt terrorist senile hag Dianne Feinskunt wasn’t Exhibit A) in an illustrative electoral fucktardery, enough:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neel_Kashkari#TARP

  44. avatar rlc2 says:

    FAIL. Another rich guy who cant speak to the blue collar base, and cant stay on message. We arent going to win the Govenors office with another “try to be all things to all people” Republican in a left leaning state,

    nor are we going to educate the big bloc of potential swing voters – the traditionally Hispanic blue collar who know they need jobs but dont understand how it works.

    This was a perfect opportunity to point out how that works, and why the Democratic Liberal Plantation uses the blue collar families for their votes, but doesnt really look after their interests, including their right to self defense to protect their families.

    Gun control hurts blue collar families in particular, in high crime areas where they live in LA, Central Valley- and they know it- they all have relatives back home just like the ones in the pickup trucks in Roberts stories on the citizens arming themselves in Michoacan. You think that father who paid $10,000 to the coyotes to get him here, and sent money home for ten years, while he worked stooped over in the fields, and lived in a spider hole to save money WONT defend his kids? The GOP needs to make the point that the Democratic Party is like the corrupt oligarchs running Mexico- PAN, PRI- they are both the same, and every first generation hispanic here knows that in their bones- thats WHY THEY ARE HERE!!!

    The rich old farts running the CA GOP cant totter out of the country club to see whats going on, or their consultants cant find the stones to tell the truth for fear they wont get hired again.

    In the meantime all the voters who CAN do math, and already see the writing on the wall, the retirees, mobile high earners, and small and big businesses both, along with the mobile blue collar Hispanics who need jobs, are moving out of state- to AZ, TX, etc.

    Tim Donnelly would be a good choice-as he is a good communicator, but unfortunately he has some history- and the StateRunMedia is already after him, and scored a big blow against the Latina who dared to help in that commercial. But a little integrity and planning ahead and that could have been a setup and a WIN for the GOP.

    Instead of letting her give into the HollyWeird threat “you will never work in this town again” she should have been set up in advance working for some business as a PR person with a guaranteed income-thats what the Dems do, and imagine if she had stood up like a proud Latina (watch the movie “end of watch” to understand the loyalty and love for this part of the latino family dynamic) she would have captured hearts and minds for the GOP…

    Just dumb, old dinosaurs in the CA GOP.
    Wake me in 4 years when we have another shot and more of them are extinct.

    PS: Gov Brown knows it too, but he is stuck with the nitwits in Sacramento until the voters throw them out, while they waste time preening and looking in the mirror and writing ever more irrelevant gun control laws, like De Leon. And thats probably best in the end, as then there will be no one to blame but the Dems when the whole house of cards comes crashing down. Its a slow motion crash already started, but its got to get much worse before its obvious to all the LIVs.

Write a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

button to share on facebook
button to tweet
button to share via email