Schwarzenegger's Smart Move

http://www.ccrkba.org/pub/rkba/press-releases/CC-RELEASE_ca_schw_veto.html

http://www.triggerfinger.org/weblog/entry/5756  (Describes some of the vetoed legislation.)

While Schwarzenegger deserves reprimand for *not* vetoing a bit of anti-gun legislation involving .50 caliber rifles, he recently vetoed some rather ridiculous anti-gun legislation that the democrats were trying to road test in California. 

Anyhow, I guess we gotta remember that Schwarzenegger *IS* governor of one of the most vehemently anti-gun states in the Union, and definitely better than his predecessor.  By the standards of the rest of the country, he seems anti-gun, but in Californistan his stand on this issue is almost as refreshing as ice water on a swelteringly hot day.

>>3 Bush isn't a tyrant, he is better on the Bill of Rights than the democrats.  The Bill of Rights is our safeguard from tyranny - it is precisely this fact which makes it such an offense to violate it (any of the amendments, but most especially 1 & 2, which are arguably the most important of them), and of such great importance that it supercedes other issues for so many americans.  Violating the Bill of Rights regularly will almost inevitably lead to tyranny somewhere down the road.  When the founders wrote the constitution initially, they were frightened that THAT was too tyranny-approaching, so they wrote the 10 amendments (also known as the Bill of Rights) as a safeguard against tyranny (http://your10rights.com/).  Clearly, with the constitution in place, voting for the candidate who will best uphold it ranks very high in voting priority for one who wishes to avoid a tyrannical government, especially in this modern day and age, where the danger would seem ever greater due to the various infringements and encroachments on this we have had.