Posted on 08/07/2005 3:53:22 PM PDT by RightDemocrat
A few years ago, the strategy of gun-control advocates was obvious: File frivolous liability lawsuits against gun-makers and distributors, knowing that, whatever the ultimate merits of the cases, the manufacturers would be hard- pressed to keep fighting. Many would go out of business, profits would decline for others, and the high costs imposed by endless litigation would drive up the costs of guns and make it more difficult for many people to afford to buy them.
It was a cynical strategy, but one that is about to end. A shift in political winds has changed the dynamic. A gain of four seats in the U.S. Senate by Republicans, and the realization by Democrats that their incessant anti-Second Amendment viewpoints have a political cost, resulted in a 65-31 vote last week in favor of a National Rifle Association-backed bill that would largely forbid lawsuits against gun-makers and dealers when guns they produce or sell are used illegally.
Fourteen Democrats, including Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid, joined the majority. The House of Representatives is expected to pass similar legislation next month and the president has already indicated his support for this type of legislation
(Excerpt) Read more at ocregister.com ...
How many of there are you? Most working class folks that I know that still define themselves as Democrats today are usually clueless about the actual state and goals of the Democratic party. With a little honesty, trust and discussion, they usually come to see themselves as conservatives.
Interesting - I guess even Hillary has figured out there's a limit to how far she can push her "conservative" makeover.
So how many in the dems in a leadership role voted for this Bill? One? Is that a significant number? Is fourteen out of the total amount of dem Senators a significant number?
Yeah, right.
Guess what? The gun owners already know which party is the enemy of the Bill of Rights and it isn't the Republican Party.
Regardless of how many dems start to vote for Gun Rights, the gun owners of this country are voting straight Republican Ballots. If you can't keep yourself safe in your own home behind locked doors, all of the other political positions don't mean a thing.
You forgot one.
Chafee (R-RI)
Sorry about that, but no surprise there.
Unless one of the major parties wakes up and acknowledges the voters who are angry about so-called "free trade" and illegal immigration there will be a strong third party movement.
Welcome to FR.
Were/Are the majority of democrats really that anti-gun, or is that just the media cooperating with high-profile democrat extremist?
I am sometimes startled to learn that many of my customers, who buy lots of "AW" firearms, and even machine guns, hold CCW permits, etc. are registered democrats.
Seems there may be a distinct disconnect between the Dem. party "leadership" and it's mainstream members.
Did he try to get re-elected or did decide not to run like our POS senator Wendell Ford.
From your page: "RightDemocrat...promotes economic populism and traditional social values within the Democratic Party."
Seriously now, what does "economic populism" mean and where are these "traditional social values within the Democratic Party"?
I'm not trying to rip you, but for the life of me I haven't seen anything remotely close to traditional values or anything that would advance economic freedom in the Democrat party for decades.
THIS is tort reform
Tort reform, perhaps, but that's still an awful big genie they need to sqeeze back into the bottle.
I have a friend who's a Christian but a union Democrat here in NY state. His parents had a picture of JFK on their mantle.I hold conservative views on most social issues but populist on economic issues. Republicans are a little too pro-big business and anti-labor for my taste.
The irony is that, the Republican Party has the most contributors. and it is the Democratic Party has the biggest contributors. Essentially the Democratic Party is the patronizing rich and the patronizable poor, setting themselves against the nonpatronizing and unpatronizable middle class. Republicans don't want to patronize people on economic grounds, and they don't want to be patronized by rich people, either.
Yep. I wrote it.
I guess I should be giving you credit for it then.
That's cool...don't sweat it. I'm just glad it's getting good use. As Ronald Reagan once observed, we Conservatives can do truly great things when we don't worry about getting personal credit. :o)
I hope so.
I hope you're right, but I will believe Democrat support for the Second Amendment when I see it. All the Draconian gun control legislation has been passed when the Democrats had a majority in the Congress.
IMHO, Harry Reid and the other Democrats who supported S.397 knew that if they voted No on the bill they would pay for it at the polls. Unless I'm wrong, all the Democrat votes for S.397 came from Western (excluding Kalifornia) and Southern states, where vocal heartfelt support for the Second Amendment is a requirement for getting elected. Even RINO John McCain, no friend of gun owners, knew what side his bread was buttered on when he voted Yes on this bill.
And you're a democrat why?
There is a definite gap between many registered Democrats and the party leadership on social issues like gun control, abortion and gay marriage. A lot of rank and file Democrats are pro-life, pro-traditional family values and pro-gun rights.
And you sir, sound like a small "l" libertarian. I'm sure that you are in favor of open borders, "free trade" even it means destroying the middle and working classes and probably legalizing all drugs too.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.