As I Predicted, George W. Bush Is Backing Bill Clinton's Gun Ban

Toogood Reports ^ | April 15, 2003 | By Chuck Baldwin

[Uncle Bill]

If you can't name all these BIG conservative positions and values, why would you vote for George?

[Zack Nguyen]

Wow, that is a really good way to put it. Excellent reasoning.

[diamond6]

Next freeper care to answer my question? Bill doesn't have an answer.

[tpaine]

diamond6
Mine is not an emotional response at all. I don't pretend to be an arms' expert. As I stated before, I would take each arm on a case by case basis.
801 -d6-



Excellent. As a lawyer then, you should know that these prohibitive assault weapons 'laws' violate due process, on a "case by case basis".
Fiat bans are not due process. The only 'crime' supposedly commited is possession of the newly declared 'criminal' object.
Can you agree?



>>>>>>>>>>>CRICKETS<<<<<<<<<

Or do you "rest your case", unable to reply?

[Uncle Bill]

LOL. You made the statement. I asked the easy question of stating all those BIG conservative positions and values that Bush stood for. Good grief. What are you afraid of. I guess someone here will have to help you out. Surely, there must be one.

[diamond6]

I don't think you have a clue what due process is. The Congress can make laws that are constitutional. Whether they are constitutional laws are for the judiciary to determine. I disagree that the AWB law is unconstitutional, but we will find out if it is approved and later challenged, won't we?

[diamond6]

Now, do you have an answer to MY question? Or are you like Bill and muted on the subject?

[diamond6]

Now, do you have an answer to MY question? Or are you like Bill and muted on the subject?

[Uncle Bill]

LOL. I asked a simple question. You couldn't, or wouldn't answer it. The reason you're pinned down, is Bush IS NO CONSERVATIVE. Thus, he can't be a big defender of conservative positions and values, as you stated. You've proven me right. Thanks.

White House Seeks to Expand DNA DATABASE

[k2blader]

I believe that the people on this thread who would use the AWB law as a litmus test on whether or not to vote for Bush are on the fringe.

I tend to agree with you.

From what little I've read on this thread, the issue is one with many facets. I think some of the arguments against reauthorizing the AWB are sound, and I respect some of the FReepers who have shared them.

But this one issue is simply not reason enough for me to say I will not vote for President Bush again. Perhaps because of this another person will come along and label me a “leftist” or “Bush-bot” or something to that effect, but it won’t matter. I’ll still vote for whom I’d like.

I'd like anybody to name for me a potential candidate who is a bigger defender of conservative positions and values than President Bush.

The term “conservative” is fairly subjective one, but I can say I wish President Bush were *more* conservative. However, it seems best to deal with realities rather than ideals. If I were to insist on voting only for a candidate with whom I agreed 100%, I’d either never vote or vote for one who’d never win.

[diamond6]

As they say, silence is golden.

[Technogeeb]

but I fear Rice is more anti-gun than Bush

Ironically, Rice is more pro-gun than anyone else in the administration, even Ashcroft. She has described herself as a "Second Amendment Absolutist".

[tpaine]

Excellent. As a lawyer then, you should know that these prohibitive assault weapons 'laws' violate due process, on a "case by case basis". Fiat bans are not due process. The only 'crime' supposedly commited is possession of the newly declared 'criminal' object.
Can you agree?
924 tpaine

I don't think you have a clue what due process is.

Nor I, - you. -- You have very odd ideas about constitutional law.

The Congress can make laws that are constitutional. Whether they are constitutional laws are for the judiciary to determine.

Not so, in that ultimately it is up to the people, through the amendment process, as per alcohol prohibition.

I disagree that the AWB law is unconstitutional, but we will find out if it is approved and later challenged, won't we?

We are all aware you disagree.
I'm asking why[?], seeing that the only 'crime' supposedly commited in the AWB 'law' is possession of the newly declared so-called 'criminal' object.
Can't you formulate an answer?

[diamond6]

I answered your question. Can you answer mine? As they say in attorney parlance, "Non-responsive"

[tpaine]

Your 'guestion' is inane to my argument with your position on constitutional law.
-- You are asking it in at attempt to avoid answering mine.

[tpaine]

No, you have not addressed my question. -- Obviously, you are in denial on the issue.

[heckler]

It's all quite simple.

The AWB is a battle WE can win without G.W.

A vote against G.W. in 2004 gains you......what?..a warm fuzzy while some Demo takes away ALL youre guns?

All else is just mental wankering.

[diamond6]

Can any other freeper come up with ONE viable candidate for president that is more conservative than Bush?

[Uncle Bill]

Indeed it was claimed by former President Bill Clinton that the lobbying efforts of the NRA and other pro-gun groups were directly responsible for the Democratic loss of the House of Representatives in the 2000 election and partially responsible for Al Gore's loss of the Presidency to George W. Bush.

In an interview with CBS News on December 18th 2001, "You've got to give it to them, they've done a good job. They've probably had more to do than anyone else in the fact that we didn't win the house this time. And they hurt Al Gore."

USA Today quipped, "Guns played a key role in Gore's loss of Arkansas, Tennessee, and West Virginia, any one of which could have delivered him the presidency."
SOURCE: Armed Females of America - Pro-Gun Women On Full Auto

[tpaine]

"--- some Demo takes away ALL youre guns?
All else is just mental wankering"



I've been hearing that same mental wankering from the Rinos who passed the 68 GCA for far to long.
How long before the Rino/Demo coalition takes away ALL your guns? -- You tell me.