Wrong. You should learn how to read:
Seems like 'Dubyah' declared that he would sign a renewal of the Clinton/Feinstein 'assault weapons' ban if it were offered to him. Of course, he may not get the chance - if the Republicans in Congress have any balls ( a debatable notion ;>). Or he could (properly, for a REAL "conservative" ;>) change his mind.
117 posted on 12/30/2003 12:37:38 PM PST by Who is John Galt?
Time will tell. Many of the real conservatives who were elected in '94 promised to limit their time in office - and are therefore no longer present to influence the matter. Let's see what the left-over political pragmatists actually pass into 'law'...
It will be even tougher if the President signs a bill banning those same firearms, don't you think?
…And how will this situation be improved if Mr. Bush signs, as he has promised to do, a reimplementation of the 'assault weapons' ban?
240 posted on 12/30/2003 2:11:26 PM PST by Who is John Galt?
I deal in facts: in 1994, 1 out of every 5 voters was a gun owner voting Republican. If the frigging Republican Party refuses to recognize that almost 20% of the actual get-out-of-the-house-and-drive-to-the-polling-place-to-wait-in-line vote are gun owners, then the Party truly is the 'Stupid Party.'
307 posted on 12/30/2003 3:24:15 PM PST by Who is John Galt?
We'll see if Mr. Bush signs an extension of the 'assault weapons' ban. If it's as bad as (or worse than ;>) the original 1994 "libs version," what precisely would be the difference?
398 posted on 12/30/2003 5:42:18 PM PST by Who is John Galt?
You do know what the words “if,” “may,” and “could” mean? And you do understand what the phrases “time will tell,” “let’s see,” and “we’ll see” mean? Or don’t you?
“You now know that you are ignorant” - and I didn’t have to quote “a liberal website” in the course of your education.
'It is too easy to refute the left fringe party hacks'…
;>)
I did and you welcome.