Democrats....Bush Key on Assault Weapons

Associated Press - Las Vegas Sun.com ^ | May 14, 2003 | Jim Abrams

[Godebert]

By JIM ABRAMS

ASSOCIATED PRESS

WASHINGTON (AP) -

President Bush should take the lead in overcoming resistance within his own party to extending an assault weapons ban due to expire next year, Democrats said Wednesday.

"If the bill dies we will lay it at the president's doorstep," Sen. Charles Schumer, D-N.Y., said a day after House Majority Leader Tom DeLay told reporters that the 1994 law banning the manufacture of 19 types of common military-style assault weapons would not be renewed.

Schumer said the gun bill would be an issue in the 2004 election, a development that could pose problems for Democrats who represent districts with strong gun rights sentiment. The assault ban vote was also a campaign topic in 1994, the year Republicans recaptured the House after spending 40 years in the minority.

Bush, taking a position at odds with the National Rifle Association, has voiced support for extending the ban, and White House spokesman Ari Fleischer on Wednesday said that support would carry weight in Congress.

"This is a matter that the House has to work out, of course, by listening to the will of its members, but the president's position is clear on it," Fleischer said. "When the president states his position like that, it helps get the message to the Congress."

Fleischer would not say whether Bush would pressure DeLay to bring such a bill up for a vote. DeLay, R-Texas, on Tuesday indicated that there would be no effort to renew the current law before it expires on Sept. 13, 2004. "The votes in the House are not there to reauthorize it," he said.

"The real question is will the president weigh in and ask the leaders to schedule a vote," said Rep. Rahm Emanuel, D-Ill., who as a senior adviser to President Clinton played a key role in guiding the 1994 legislation through Congress.

[dd5339]

Hey I tried that in '92. Look what it got me, 8 years of Bill & Hillary.

No way will this bill reach his desk. He's telling the house and senate to kill it quickly and quietly.

Change comes from within the party. Not by going third party.

Semper Fi

[longtermmemmory]

this is bush playing both sides of the fence. This way he can satify the liberal soccer moms because he will not lift a finger to make it reach his desk.

Democrats are a joke anyways, why listen let alone respect that political party?

[xdem]

Ronald Reagan accomplished a great deal while being honest about his views. There is no reason why Bush v1.0 and Bush v2.0 can't do the same.

"W" either believes what he says on guns, or isn't courageous enough to say what he really thinks. Either way, it's not very recommending.

After Clinton, I've had more than enough of politicians who care more about poll numbers than truth.

[Sender]

If Bush takes a passive role, pays lip service to this abominable law while letting it die in Congress, I will understand and can accept this weaselly behavior if it does indeed result in the death of the hideous, ineffective and unconstitutional AW ban. Strategery and politics require strange tactics sometimes, the proof is in the outcome.

However, if Bush caves and actively campaigns for the AW ban, and pressures the House to pass it, I will lose most of my respect for the man even though he's been a great President.

Firestorm issue indeed. President Bush, take my advice as one of your loyal supporters: you DO NOT want your name or your support associated with the renewal or strengthening of this law! You'll lose your base, and even if you do get reelected you'll have a Presidency built on the sand. Be a man and reject this bill! You'll be all the stronger for it! Who cares if Feinstein and Schumer pitch a fit? They will anyway! For Christ sake, they pitched a fit because you visited the aircraft carrier! They will pitch a fit if you have eggs for breakfast! Let the AW ban die!

[Lazamataz]

It ain't over till it's over.

[SunStar]

Unless Bush reverses his un-Constitutional and un-American position on this issue, he will not receive my vote. I'll vote Constitution Party again.

Good for you. That Constitution Party is gaining a few votes each election cycle. By 2050, they may even reach 100,000 nationwide!

[discostu]

Reagan didn't have friendly majorities to work with and the Dems weren't nearly so intransigent back then. He was in a situation that was less conducive to bluffing and required a lot more negotiation. Different times require different tactics.

[montag813]

I'll vote Constitution Party again.

VOMIT

[Howlin]

Even the new president of the NRA says this is a tempest in a teapot, egged on by extremist.

The NRA is not the LEAST bit worried about this "bill."

[thepitts]

This is a firestorm issue, and one Bush needs to consider carefully before he commits. It can't hurt him politically to support it; he can't be trusted on gun issues as it is. But a White House rally behind Charles Schumer & Co. will end his appeal to the gun-owning Right. And it will force gun owners to choose their "conservatives" much more cautiously in the future.

He has already done all of that.

[taxcontrol]

When the president states his position like that, it helps get the message to the Congress."

---

And it sends a message to the millions of members of the NRA. Good way to LOOSE an election.

[thepitts]

The assualt weapons ban is popular amongst the mainstream.

Maybe mainstream liberals but, not the people who put him there.

[taxcontrol]

Perhaps you like cutting off your nose to spite your face. In your case it might even be an improvement.

---

Or perhaps we are people of concience and will not support what we think is an illegal action by the government. The conservative party "base" is made up of several issue driven groups. NRA and gun owners are just one and one of the largest of this group.

Piss off enough groups and you LOOSE the base. No politician can expect to win an election without the support of their base. Simple fact of politics.

[Dan from Michigan]

The assualt weapons ban is popular amongst the mainstream

1994 ring any bells?

[wjcsux]

What an idiot.
I agree 100%. Whenever conservatives make a "vote of conscience", we all get screwed. Look at what votes for Perot got us.

[coloradan]

It requires that you accept the fact that political dialogue is structured to meet an end and is used to mislead the public for its own benefit. Either you understand how the game is played or you don't.

"... That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed ..."

[Dan from Michigan]

Jim Abrams lost his credibility right here.

Opponents of gun control legislation, like the Americans for Gun Safety Foundation,

AGS is a gun grabbing group founded by Andrew McKelvey, who used to be on HCI's board of directors. McKelvey backed the McSTAIN/LIEberman gun show ban.

[Howlin]

You gotta see this bump!

[tet68]

One would certainly think that GW would have learned from
the experience of his father, NOT to aquiess to the demorats on any issue. they will use him then toss him out like a used condom even ridiculing him for being "bi-partisan".

Beware GW!

[Southflanknorthpawsis]

We are dealing with a very, very sick mind here, Howlin. Soon they will take away his computer privileges and keep him in the crayon and stuffed animal room where he can't hurt himself or anyone else.