Skip to comments.
Bush Supports New Extension Of Assault-Weapons Ban
Salt Lake Tribune ^
| 4-12-03
| Shannon McCaffrey
Posted on 04/12/2003 12:34:04 PM PDT by Unwavering Conservative
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 81-100, 101-120, 121-140, 141-159 next last
To: jammer
I have to admit, it worked in 1992. Instead of that wimpy liberal Republican Bush we ended up with eight years of Bill Clinton.
Oh, happy days!
To: Unwavering Conservative
Maybe the rumor about GWB being a moron is true.
This is a good way to lose tough states like Michigan, Ohio, Penn, New Hampshire, Tennesee, Missouri, Arkansas, Louisiana, Florida, Arizona, Colorado, and New Mexico.
It's time to Freep Bush into backing down on this. Any extension of the gun grab will be unacceptable and will be treated accordingly.
WHITE HOUSE COMMENT LINE - 202-456-1111
122
posted on
04/12/2003 8:36:39 PM PDT
by
Dan from Michigan
("I have two guns. One for each of ya." - Doc Holliday)
To: ccmay
You are watching a skilled politician at work. No, what I see is WEASELING.
123
posted on
04/12/2003 8:39:36 PM PDT
by
Dan from Michigan
("I have two guns. One for each of ya." - Doc Holliday)
To: ACAC
LISTEN, THIS AW BAN IS NOT GOING TO BE RENEWED. IT WILL DIE IN THE HOUSE. I HAD THOUGHT PEOPLE HERE WERE SMARTER THAN THIS. Assumption is the mother of all f'ups.
124
posted on
04/12/2003 8:40:50 PM PDT
by
Dan from Michigan
("I have two guns. One for each of ya." - Doc Holliday)
To: The Hon. Galahad Threepwood
Yes, and we were much better off. Without Clinton, we would never have had a Republican House or Senate. Had Clinton been elected in 1988, we probably wouldn't have had the ADA or some other monstrosity--and we wouldn't have had Waco--remember, that was a Bush operation, planned in October 1992.
RINOs, as George I was, in concert with a liberal Congress, are much more dangerous than up-front liberals.
But it doesn't really matter. As I said above, this sort of crap will make the whiners of "he's better than [blank]" irrelevant.
125
posted on
04/12/2003 8:41:28 PM PDT
by
jammer
To: All
I understand that some won't vote for GWB because of this, and I can understand that. There always neeeds to be a line in the sand.
However, STAYING HOME is the WORST DECISION possible.
Whatever happens, PLEASE go to the polls and vote. If you must, leave the president spot blank or vote for someone besides W, but please do not punish the rest of the candidates there who ARE pro-2a, and had nothing to do with this.
The Congress, Senate, State Rep, State Senate, and County and local seats are just as important as the other seats and is the basis of the farm club. If we do not have a solid farm club, we will NOT have a pool of talent to choose from.
126
posted on
04/12/2003 8:49:17 PM PDT
by
Dan from Michigan
("I have two guns. One for each of ya." - Doc Holliday)
To: Unwavering Conservative
If the ban is extended, then my block of five votes will support a 3rd Party...
127
posted on
04/12/2003 8:56:21 PM PDT
by
alphadog
(die commie scum)
To: Dan from Michigan; Beelzebubba; tpaine; Unwavering Conservative
You guys just don't get how the game is played. Don't you see Bush is actually applying pressure to the Congress to kill this bill off before it ever gets to his desk?
This forces wavering Republicans to toe the party line. There are some Congressmen who might be tempted to cast a meaningless vote for the AW ban, thinking that Bush would be highly likely to veto it. The Congressman picks up votes from the soccer moms, but loses little ground with his true blue gun owner constituency, since the law sunsets and everything is fine.
Bush says to them "Oh yes I'll go ahead and sign it." Now the Congresspukes know that this is a major gun-rights vote and that they can expect us gun owners to be plenty riled up if they don't vote it down.
Bush is saying, in effect, I need those soccer mom votes more than you guys do. Individual Congressional races are less important than a Presidential election. Bush does not want to have to run next year on an AW-ban veto even though he does not approve of it, I am sure.
The Republican congressmen need to take a hit for the team, although it isn;t even that much of a hit. They can even benefit from this as it will help energize their base. Bush on the other hand has nothing to gain by having this bill come to his desk.
-ccm
128
posted on
04/12/2003 9:27:50 PM PDT
by
ccmay
To: ccmay
You guys just don't get how the game is played. I'm involved in politics myself. I know exactly how the game is played. It's Klintonian as well. It's the same game he did with McStain/Feingold and it can EASILY backfire. It's also called taking a democrat issue away from the dem opponent in case another Columbine happens.
In his Klintonian stance to try and 'moderate' himself, this statement is going out to gun activists all across the country, and including swing states.
Bush does not want to have to run next year on an AW-ban veto even though he does not approve of it, I am sure.
Well, he also doesn't want to be shown out to be for freedom control either after the gunowners went to bat for him. There are a LOT more gun owners that vote single issue than gun grabbers. If he wants the soccer mom vote, go on education issues where Bush is more liberal.
If I was in his position, I would not want a shadow of a doubt on two issues. Guns and Abortion. Republicans can not win nationwide with Right to Life and Gun Rights Groups covering their flanks. Besides the money, those are the activists. Those are the people that are the ground troops.
And with states with high union and high gun populations that overlap, any doubt can swing independent union voters to the dems.
Bush should have either kept his trap shut here, or said no deals.
129
posted on
04/12/2003 9:41:44 PM PDT
by
Dan from Michigan
("I have two guns. One for each of ya." - Doc Holliday)
To: ccmay
You think we're stupid , but we're not.
Dubya is anti-gun, but since he has is a so-called Conservative, he has to be sneaky with his anti-gun leanings.
To: Travis McGee
"Assault Weapon" Ping.
To: Unwavering Conservative
I made an error. I said "has is". I should have just typed is. I am sorry for the typo.
To: Dan from Michigan
Dubya is a moron if he alienates the RKBA voters.
To: alphadog
I don't blame ya for feeling that way.
To: RLK
Keep repeating to yourself: "We've finally got a conservative in the White House...We've finally got a conservative in the White House...We've finally got a conservative in the White House...We've finally got a conservative in the White House."
Repeating certain words over and over makes them true, dont'cha know.
135
posted on
04/12/2003 11:52:39 PM PDT
by
Mortimer Snavely
(More Power to the Troops! More Bang for the Buck!)
To: ConservativeLawyer
Thanks! I'm too late to the party, I've only been speed freeping a little lately.
136
posted on
04/13/2003 1:18:33 AM PDT
by
Travis McGee
(----- www.EnemiesForeignAndDomestic.com -----)
Comment #137 Removed by Moderator
Comment #138 Removed by Moderator
To: Rulling Lord
The thing that bothers me about the Libertarians is their open border policy. A policy that has gotten us into this economic mess we have now (not to mention 911).
139
posted on
04/14/2003 7:23:59 AM PDT
by
Blood of Tyrants
(Even if the government took all your earnings, you wouldn’t be, in its eyes, a slave.)
To: demosthenes the elder
Well, by all means write your Congresscritters and exercise your First Amendment rights while they take a big leak on your Second Amendment rights. Don't hold out much hope, though, because the Pubbie majority in Congress collectively has even less testosterone than Bush. Hope for the best, but plan for the worst. The PubbieRats will continue to chip a little here, grind a little there, to the point we may have to use our RKBA for the exact purpose it was put in the Constitution. A nightmare scenario, indeed, but the laziness, apathy, and dumbing down of the American of the last several decades have led us to this reality today.
Scouts Out! Cavalry Ho!
140
posted on
04/14/2003 7:39:51 AM PDT
by
wku man
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 81-100, 101-120, 121-140, 141-159 next last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson