Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Dog Gone
Neither of you would disagree with that, and that is consistent with both your positions.

It is not consistent with his position, which was, and this is again a direct quote, "I see no need to nominate a gun-grabber to be president. Otherwise, the threshhold for a gun law is 51 percent".

The foodfight ain't accomplishing anything.

He erred, I pointed out his error, and for my troubles I was accused of ignorance. I demand satisfaction. As long as he wants to continue to pretend that I was wrong and he was right, I'll continue to rub his nose in it, for the benefit of onlookers if not for him.

538 posted on 02/07/2007 5:35:57 PM PST by Politicalities (http://www.politicalities.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 518 | View Replies ]


To: Politicalities

Yes, you are right, Politicalities. It does not matter if the President wants to seize all weapons unless 60 Senators agree with him or her, and it survives the legal challenges.

dirtboy would only be right if a non gun-grabber President wanted to veto a bill by a gun-grabbing Congress.

Neither is going to happen no matter who we elect President, so it seems moot to me.


559 posted on 02/07/2007 5:43:45 PM PST by Dog Gone
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 538 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson