100% PRO GUN for US SENATE REBECCA SINK-BURIS ANSWERS GOA QUESTIONNAIRE

[SavageEagle]

With respect .. YOU have to help do that with your time your money and your vote ... The Libertarians can do no more than the R & D's .. but what do they have the L's don't ... manpower and money
thanks
Duncan

You don't have to have money to get the word out. There is the internet. Just as Rebecca has done here and many other ways. I do talk to people about the Libertarians. I've had many discussions about them with people because at the time I was still trying to make up my own mind about them. But seriously, I don't ever hear or read about the Libertarians anywhere except on here and the various Tea Party Forums. Apparently word isn't getting around very well.

 

[Duncan]

I appreciate the response from Rebecca. Like Scutter, I've contended staying home on election day or casting an empty ballot. However, after researching a lot of Libertarian stances and votes, I'm fairly convinced that they, for the most part, stick to their stances and vote how they promised or vote the way of the Constitutional authority. I know that there will be almost no "D" or "R"'s getting my vote this year.

I'm of the mindset that I will not vote for any career politicians, but that is based on those, like Dick Lugar and Evan Bayh, who consistently break their oath's. Reading that you have been in politics for a couple decades does give me pause, especially since there's not much in the way of a voting record for you. However, I'm more willing to cast my vote for you because, well, what have I got to lose? With the alternative, well, everything. With anyone with an "L" behind/in front of their name, to me, it's a crap shoot at this point. But I'm more inclined to give Libertarians a chance than anyone else.

What I don't like is Libertarians that would rather try to get on the D or R ticket instead of running under their own party's ticket. I understand the need to become recognized, but that's a marketing problem. It's like with Richard Behney. When I learned he chose to run as a "R", I was very, VERY disappointed and made that known. I continue to hope that no one else makes that mistake. To me, it's almost like lying.

With respect ... Your ballot is an extension of you ... it's your property .
You own it ... you've earned it and men before you and I died for it .
You have the right to withhold your property from gift to anyone.

If you don't cast your ballot you have decided NOT to participate in your government in the election of our employees .

If the choices presented don't meet your standards .. then you should .. I don't cast a ballot for every office either .

But that also says , to me , that the Libertarians don't meet your standards either .. that's fine you're your own man .

I think I would be fairer of you to state this in your posts than implying it with your statement of propsed inaction on election day .

Or have you just given up ?

If the R D & L's don't meet your standards ... get involved .. with your time or your money ... and help get someone on the ballot that is to your standards .

Thanks
Duncan

 

[Duncan]

You are right with that question, unless someone that runs for office has guns, involved in shooting sports or is a member of the NRA. What makes anyone think you can trust them? People will say anything or write anything for a little power.

With respect ..
My wife does not carry a weapon .. to my disagreement .. she has a CCW owns guns and is for the abolition of gun laws ...

Also I don't own a newspaper ... but I still am very much in favor of the 1st Amendment .

YOu don't have to own something to cherish the freedom of it .

Thanks
Duncan

 

[Truckerman79]

What I don't like is Libertarians that would rather try to get on the D or R ticket instead of running under their own party's ticket.

I cannot believe that this still has to be repeated, but hasn't it become fairly obvious that running on the Libertarian ticket will result in failure? How many Libertarians have won national office in the last 40 years? Quite frankly, I admire libertarians that run as R's because it show that they are serious about winning and actually getting things done.

 

[downzero]

You can't see how preventing people from defending themselves places a burden on that travel and trade?

Hell no. I have a degree in economics and I don't recall talking about guns at all in the entire four years except in law and economics to debunk the usual gun myths.

You're just making the same sort of hair-brained arguments that have been made for the last 70 years to justify the unprecedented expansion of government.

National reciprocity interferes with state sovereignty. I'd have to read the GOA's actual proposed statute to be absolutely certain, but if Congress has the power to enact such a statute, doing so under the commerce clause is illegitimate as far as I'm concerned.

Considering, however, that Congress basically has no current bounds on the commerce clause, i can see how some would think this is acceptable. I'm sure I'll have more on this later.

 

[Duncan]

I cannot believe that this still has to be repeated, but hasn't it become fairly obvious that running on the Libertarian ticket will result in failure? How many Libertarians have won national office in the last 40 years? Quite frankly, I admire libertarians that run as R's because it show that they are serious about winning and actually getting things done.

I am confused ... If a Libertarian can run as a republican .. then can a democrat
run as a republican ? If so then can a republican run as a libertarian ? Or can
National Socialist run as a democrat or republican ?

I guess you just have to vote them in and see how they act .. oh we've done that already ...
Thanks
Duncan

 

[photoshooter]

I cannot believe that this still has to be repeated, but hasn't it become fairly obvious that running on the Libertarian ticket will result in failure? How many Libertarians have won national office in the last 40 years? Quite frankly, I admire libertarians that run as R's because it show that they are serious about winning and actually getting things done.

First, we have to get out of an all or nothing game plan for what the Libertarian party is doing.

If you're a competitive shooter, do you only show up at matches where you can definitely win? Or do you go to compete to get better and improve your skills to have a better chance of winning next time.

Right now, the system is set up to favor a two party system.

I saw from the inside during the GOP Primary, that if the Party wants the seat, the Party will put their candidate in and win the seat... eg: Coats. The party maintains power. Our US House Dist 4 was the closest thing to an open race: Rokita vs Herschmann. Two different factions in the GOP fighting for that seat.

So, the corollary to your rule of: running on the Libertarian ticket will result in failure? is:

Running under D or R without paying your dues and kissing party butt will mean that you won't win your primary.

Now you've got a catch-22. When running for federal office, you can't win as a libertarian. And you can win as an R or a D unless you give up your soul to the party.

 

[CarmelHP]

Hell no. I have a degree in economics and I don't recall talking about guns at all in the entire four years except in law and economics to debunk the usual gun myths.

You're just making the same sort of hair-brained arguments that have been made for the last 70 years to justify the unprecedented expansion of government.

National reciprocity interferes with state sovereignty. I'd have to read the GOA's actual proposed statute to be absolutely certain, but if Congress has the power to enact such a statute, doing so under the commerce clause is illegitimate as far as I'm concerned.

Considering, however, that Congress basically has no current bounds on the commerce clause, i can see how some would think this is acceptable. I'm sure I'll have more on this later.

By the way, it's hare-brained, just saying.

It does not interfere with state sovereignty to make regular laws for the movement of goods and people, that's what the commerce clause was meant for, and it's not "reciprocity" in any fashion, it's setting a standard law for carry regardless of whether any particular state has a licensing regime or not.

And whether you talked about something in your economics class is not determinative of public policy, whether you like it or not. It's not about guns, it's about freedom to travel in all states with the ability to defend yourself just as you can in 80% of the states. Florida changed their carry laws to allow non-residents to obtain licenses and carry after several high-profile murders of tourists threatened the tourist trade in the '90's. That sure sounds like commerce to me. Did you talk about tourism and travel in your economics class or is that not commerce either? How exactly was your economics class appointed as arbiter of all things commerce, inquiring minds would like to know?

 

[Tactical Dave]

I'd like to see a voting record or a detailed plan for pushing through specific legislation rather than a yes/no questionnaire. I mean no disrespect to Ms. Sink-Buris when I say this, but I've heard all of these claims before and I'm a little (ok, a LOT) cynical when I hear candidates make promises. A bid for the US Senate warrants at least essay questions and not true/false.

Agreed, what people say they would do and what people end up doing are two different things. Often things are said just to make people happy to get votes.

I also feel that you can not get much from or take much from a yes or now answer question...... like allready said she said she would reign in the BATFE but how much? Just a hair so that she could say she did what she would and reigned them in?

In short I would like to see detailed answers but as a politician you can't really do that and keep enough people happy to get elected sadly......

 

[dross]

Yes, to keep commerce regular, like providing for free travel with one's guns throughout the country. It's a free trade and travel agreement among the states. You can't see how preventing people from defending themselves places a burden on that travel and trade? How travelers should not have to contend with a confusing patchwork of state laws in order to protect themselves while traveling or be put in legal jeopardy? If that is not making making commerce regular, then the term simply has no meaning whatsoever. Again, it would be one of the few legitimate uses of the power. My suggestion is that you give some more consideration to it than merely dismissing it out of hand with no careful analysis to what is actually at issue.

This is so obvious as to be self-evident.

I drove across country last year. I had to research the laws of every state I traveled through. Some required me to have my weapon concealed, others required it to be in the open, and in one, every town I traveled through was allowed to have it's own regulations. And what if I had been detoured and forced to travel a different route taking me through a state whose laws I hadn't researched? I would have no idea how I could legally carry my weapon.

I happened to be traveling on personal business, but I could have been a diamond broker with hundreds of thousands of dollars of samples traveling with me.

Perhaps downzero could use the outstanding education he refers to, and specifically his economic degree to explain his view of what the commerce clause is supposed to be for.

 

[CarmelHP]

LOL You mean you don't want him to live to 100 and die in office as Senator Byrd just did? But seriously I wold have to think on your suggestion.

Rebecca, on a more practical basis, you live in Monroe Co. and spend a good deal of time in Bloomington. As was often discussed in the Friday lunches you used to attend, Monroe Co., and Bloomington in particular, has one of the most corrupt bunch of crooks running it as anywhere in the state. What have you done to help improve the government where you live and what success have you met?

 

[Rebecca Sink-Burris]

So Rebecca, what do you carry?

In typical political speak; thanks for the question. But seriously, our home is well armed, currently I am carrying a small Ruger revolver. As we live a mile from neighbors and are visible from the road, I like to carry it in a "belly band" over clothing in the summer while I work outside as well as in the car. Our home seems to be a way station for anyone who is lost, deer hunters in the fall, mushroom hunters in the spring, delivery drivers anytime. And then there are those who get stuck while attempting to drive through the creek as it crosses our road. Even with a large dog to greet visitors, I feel safer having a firearm at hand.

 

[SavageEagle]

With respect ... Your ballot is an extension of you ... it's your property .
You own it ... you've earned it and men before you and I died for it .
You have the right to withhold your property from gift to anyone.

If you don't cast your ballot you have decided NOT to participate in your government in the election of our employees .

If the choices presented don't meet your standards .. then you should .. I don't cast a ballot for every office either .

But that also says , to me , that the Libertarians don't meet your standards either .. that's fine you're your own man .

I think I would be fairer of you to state this in your posts than implying it with your statement of propsed inaction on election day .

Or have you just given up ?

If the R D & L's don't meet your standards ... get involved .. with your time or your money ... and help get someone on the ballot that is to your standards .

Thanks
Duncan

Well. I do appreciate the education on what not casting a vote means and what I should or should not do. Really. Thanks. I'm pretty sure I wasn't aware of ANY of that. Oh, and I'm pretty sure I did exactly ZERO () to help get Richard Behney elected. Lot of good it did.

I guess I will tell you that almost every election my ballot usually only has a few "check marks" on it with an occasional "write-in".

I cannot believe that this still has to be repeated, but hasn't it become fairly obvious that running on the Libertarian ticket will result in failure? How many Libertarians have won national office in the last 40 years? Quite frankly, I admire libertarians that run as R's because it show that they are serious about winning and actually getting things done.

Really? Actually a few, except they have cowered under the "R" banner. Take the two Paul's, Ron and Rand, for example. However, doing so they lose a little of my respect. Why? Because they start off their political career with a lie. Oh, but you're proud of them for lying??? Anything to win the election, right?

That makes them no better than the system they say their trying to change. Period.

 

[henktermaat]

In typical political speak; thanks for the question. But seriously, our home is well armed, currently I am carrying a small Ruger revolver. As we live a mile from neighbors and are visible from the road, I like to carry it in a "belly band" over clothing in the summer while I work outside as well as in the car. Our home seems to be a way station for anyone who is lost, deer hunters in the fall, mushroom hunters in the spring, delivery drivers anytime. And then there are those who get stuck while attempting to drive through the creek as it crosses our road. Even with a large dog to greet visitors, I feel safer having a firearm at hand.

Practicing what you preach. I like that a lot.

 

[Scutter01]

Practicing what you preach. I like that a lot.

Anti-gun senators carry guns, too.

 

[tnek]

I wont support her as she believes in open borders. I wish I could and if she will support closing the border I will vote for her.

 

[rambone]

In typical political speak; thanks for the question. But seriously, our home is well armed, currently I am carrying a small Ruger revolver. As we live a mile from neighbors and are visible from the road, I like to carry it in a "belly band" over clothing in the summer while I work outside as well as in the car. Our home seems to be a way station for anyone who is lost, deer hunters in the fall, mushroom hunters in the spring, delivery drivers anytime. And then there are those who get stuck while attempting to drive through the creek as it crosses our road. Even with a large dog to greet visitors, I feel safer having a firearm at hand.

Thanks for the response Rebecca. You seem like a down to earth person. I'm glad you are posting on INGO.

Really? Actually a few, except they have cowered under the "R" banner. Take the two Paul's, Ron and Rand, for example. However, doing so they lose a little of my respect. Why? Because they start off their political career with a lie. Oh, but you're proud of them for lying??? Anything to win the election, right?

That makes them no better than the system they say their trying to change. Period.

You know, 50 years ago, Ron Paul's positions were pretty mainstream "Republican." I don't think he's a liar for trying to steer the party back to its traditional platform.

 

[Truckerman79]

I am confused ... If a Libertarian can run as a republican .. then can a democrat
run as a republican ? If so then can a republican run as a libertarian ? Or can
National Socialist run as a democrat or republican ?

I guess you just have to vote them in and see how they act .. oh we've done that already ...
Thanks
Duncan

Yes, yes and yes. Look at Tim Crawford in the 5th district congressional race running as a democrat. He describes himself as a conservative who is active in the tea party movement. Dick Lugar is a democrat who keeps winning as a republican. There are plenty of "National Socialists" in the democrat party. What is your point?

First, we have to get out of an all or nothing game plan for what the Libertarian party is doing. Agreed

If you're a competitive shooter, do you only show up at matches where you can definitely win? Or do you go to compete to get better and improve your skills to have a better chance of winning next time.

Right now, the system is set up to favor a two party system. Exactly

I saw from the inside during the GOP Primary, that if the Party wants the seat, the Party will put their candidate in and win the seat... eg: Coats. The party maintains power.**Disagree Our US House Dist 4 was the closest thing to an open race: Rokita vs Herschmann. Two different factions in the GOP fighting for that seat.

So, the corollary to your rule of: running on the Libertarian ticket will result in failure? is:

Running under D or R without paying your dues and kissing party butt will mean that you won't win your primary.

Now you've got a catch-22. When running for federal office, you can't win as a libertarian. And you can win as an R or a D unless you give up your soul to the party.

I disagree with your analysis that good, liberty loving candidates can't make it. Look at Sharon Angle (sp?) in Nevada. She was definitely not the party choice. The tea party movement is starting to turn the tide of establish candidate dominance. The problem with the IN GOP Senate primary is that the votes were split between too many candidates. In the end if Marlin Stutzman were to have the support of the other 3, he would have defeated Coats handily. In the end, the voters choose who advances.

Really? Actually a few, except they have cowered under the "R" banner. Take the two Paul's, Ron and Rand, for example. However, doing so they lose a little of my respect. Why? Because they start off their political career with a lie. Oh, but you're proud of them for lying??? Anything to win the election, right?

That makes them no better than the system they say their trying to change. Period.

Again, no one seems to recognize that the Libertarian Party has not won an election for national office in the 40 years of it's existence. It seems to be a losing strategy running on the L ticket.

That being said, I have voted Libertarian in the past, and I will most likely do so in this election cycle. When the candidates from the two major parties don't meet my standards I will vote L. The D, R, L or whatever label a candidate chooses means nothing to me. I evaluate each candidate on his/her individual merits.

And that also explains why I would rather see good candidates run under a ticket that they can actually have a chance of success.

 

[Duncan]

Originally Posted by Duncan
I am confused ... If a Libertarian can run as a republican .. then can a democrat
run as a republican ? If so then can a republican run as a libertarian ? Or can
National Socialist run as a democrat or republican ?

I guess you just have to vote them in and see how they act .. oh we've done that already ...
Thanks
Duncan

Yes, yes and yes. Look at Tim Crawford in the 5th district congressional race running as a democrat. He describes himself as a conservative who is active in the tea party movement. Dick Lugar is a democrat who keeps winning as a republican. There are plenty of "National Socialists" in the democrat party. What is your point?

I agree that people run as something else .. and R runs as a D or a National Socialist as a D .. that is my point . They are running with a party and accepting THEIR platform as theirs in name only so they can WIN an election ... not because they believe in what the Party as a whole stands for ...if that is the case then where does their heart truly lie .
Thanks
Duncan

 

[Rebecca Sink-Burris]

Agreed, what people say they would do and what people end up doing are two different things. Often things are said just to make people happy to get votes.

I also feel that you can not get much from or take much from a yes or now answer question...... like allready said she said she would reign in the BATFE but how much? Just a hair so that she could say she did what she would and reigned them in?

In short I would like to see detailed answers but as a politician you can't really do that and keep enough people happy to get elected sadly......

Very true, being too specific is not a good strategy while trying to get elected, however I can let you know what some of my priorities are.

JOBS JOBS JOBS
​

Get economy moving and creating jobs again, nothing is more critical at this time. To than end we must:

• Repealing Obamacare and replacing it with free market reforms that will work to lower costs and increase accessibility.
• Stop enormous January tax hike by renewing most of the Bush tax cuts.
• Work to pass the Fair Tax, which will be the biggest and most effective "jobs bill" ever enacted.
• Work to stop the runaway spending and debt that is going to ruin our economic future.
• Remove or repeal policies and regulations that hurt small business.
• Work to bring country back to sound currency.