General Categories > Laws and Legislation

NFOA-PAF looks at the 2014 election

<< < (2/3) > >>

AAllen:
For our candidates I want to add one more note.  We only can consider ourselves winners because of you, it was you that ran the races, placed yourselves out there to take the criticism and lies and knocked on the doors, made the stump speaches, and asked for people's support.  We were fortunate to be able to encourage some people to volunteer to help you out, raised a couple dollars to assist your campaigns and public ally announce our support.  We are winners because you are, we truly are just following your coat tails.

For the NFOA members that stepped up and volunteered I want to add my personal thanks to that of the candidates you helped.  I have run for office and completely understand how much work it is and how important volunteers really are.  You have also out a face on the NFOA and our support for candidates that support our rights.

To or donors again our thanks, we have done more this year than before.  What we consider successful postcards, and donations to campaigns and sponsoring fundraising events for candidates; none of these things would be possible without your help.

Now for those that have Ben on the PAC committee, thanks for your help your being ther to advise and be a sounding board helps me personally stay true to the mission.  Thanks for all you have done.

Lmbass14:
Thanks Andy and the rest of the crew.  Job well done.

And Congrats to all the winners.

thirtydaZe:
I-594, two thumbs down.

AWick:
I-594 is the definition of a  "substantive due process" type violation.

SDP aims to protect individuals against majoritarian policy enactments that exceed the limits of governmental authority—that is, courts may find that a majority's enactment is not law, and cannot be enforced as such, regardless of how fair the processes of enactment and enforcement actually are.

AAllen:

--- Quote from: AWick on November 05, 2014, 09:22:06 PM ---I-594 is the definition of a  "substantive due process" type violation.

SDP aims to protect individuals against majoritarian policy enactments that exceed the limits of governmental authority—that is, courts may find that a majority's enactment is not law, and cannot be enforced as such, regardless of how fair the processes of enactment and enforcement actually are.

--- End quote ---

My understanding is the SAF is already preparing the lawsuits....

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page