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

Skip to comments.

Democrats....Bush Key on Assault Weapons
Associated Press - Las Vegas Sun.com ^ | May 14, 2003 | Jim Abrams

Posted on 05/14/2003 2:32:06 PM PDT by 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.

(Excerpt) Read more at lasvegassun.com ...


TOPICS: News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: 2ndamendment; antigun; assaultweaponsban; awb; bang; banglist; billofrights; bush; constitution; gungrabbers; oathofoffice
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 881-900901-920921-940 ... 961-969 next last
To: Godebert
Nice try democrats but you won't draw the President into this one. He has out-clintoned clinton on this one with his triangulation strategery.
901 posted on 05/16/2003 6:25:35 PM PDT by Contra
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GingisK
Well, about all I can say is that if you really believe that most people in this country don't even want to comply with the Constitution, how could you possibly hold out any hope that we ever will? Do you really think that any of our Founding Fathers were of the opinion that the Constitution would or even should survive a decision by a majority of the people in this country that they no longer wish to be governed by its terms?

You know, there does exist an alternative explanation for your current displeasure. Perhaps you should just briefly entertain the possibility that most people in this country, including your President, do support the Constitution, but that there exists legitimate differences of opinion concerning exactly what does and does not constitute compliance with its terms. And, BTW, we do have constitutional mechanisms that we can use to resolve such differences of opinion as they may arise. How effectively do you make use of those mechanisms?

You claim that you have "watched those Principles errode rather rapidly since the 1960s." Well, I can assure you that there were some important constitutional disputes in this country long before 1960. In fact, since it is obvious that civil liberties are important to you (as they are to me), I suggest that you Google up the Sedition Act that was enacted by the U.S. Congress less than ten years after our Constitution was ratified. If you read the terms of that statute, you will find that it threatened criminal penalties against anyone who as much as publicly criticized the President of the United States. In short, from your posts on this thread, it seems obvious to me that you feel more free today than Americans did under John Adams, our second president.

So, please understand that preserving civil liberties in this country has been one long, continuous struggle. There was nothing particularly special about the 1960's or the time that has passed between then and now. Whenever our national security is threatened (as most people think it is now), the struggle to preserve civil liberties just gets a little harder.

902 posted on 05/16/2003 6:27:35 PM PDT by Scenic Sounds
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 897 | View Replies]

To: Howlin
"Please. It doesn't say that some jerkwad living next door to me can own lethal weapons. I have plenty of friends who are IN the NRA and have a lot of guns; none of them want or need an assault weapon. "

Thanks again Howlin'...for finding this quote of yours for me. It really is a classic example of the liberal mindset. I intend to use it frequently whenever I see you on any of the gun-grabber threads.

903 posted on 05/16/2003 6:44:15 PM PDT by Godebert
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 326 | View Replies]

To: Godebert
I intend to use it frequently whenever I see you on any of the gun-grabber threads.

Have you nothing better to do than to follow Howlin from thread to thread and lie about her? What's that all about?

You know what your are saying is an absolute lie, but you keep pounding away.

Just like other good causes, you maniacal gun people ruin it for more sane, but avid 2A supporters.

Thank the Lord they are not ALL like you or we would probably lose all gun rights.

You're scary when I imagine you wielding a weapon. Very unbalanced fella !!!!

904 posted on 05/16/2003 6:51:01 PM PDT by Southflanknorthpawsis
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 903 | View Replies]

To: Southflanknorthpawsis
Thanks for your thoughts. I'm aware of your "special" relationship with Howlin'....but if she isn't capable of debating the issues on her own, maybe this forum is the right place for her.
905 posted on 05/16/2003 6:57:57 PM PDT by Godebert
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 904 | View Replies]

To: Godebert
maybe this forum is the right place for her.

Well, now that you've acknowledged it "is the right place for her", what does that say about you?

906 posted on 05/16/2003 6:59:31 PM PDT by Southflanknorthpawsis
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 905 | View Replies]

To: Southflanknorthpawsis
I thought of correcting that typo.....but I knew you'd help me out there. Thanks.....I appreciate it.
907 posted on 05/16/2003 7:01:13 PM PDT by Godebert
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 906 | View Replies]

To: Godebert
What typo?
908 posted on 05/16/2003 7:02:07 PM PDT by Southflanknorthpawsis
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 907 | View Replies]

To: Contra
> He has out-clintoned clinton on this one with his
> triangulation strategery.

Is that what we have now: A president who is more Clinton than Clinton? If so, that's nothing to be proud of.
909 posted on 05/16/2003 7:25:23 PM PDT by xdem
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 901 | View Replies]

To: Howlin
Do you have a problem with comprehension of the English language, or do you consistently misconstrue what people say to try to win arguments? I said: Please. It doesn't say that some jerkwad living next door to me can own lethal weapons. , "it" being the Constitution. And you say I said: I forgot that part about gun owners being "jerkwads". You are quite the liar.

Fair enough. From now on when I quote you I'll do it like so:

"It (the Constitution) doesn't say that some jerkwad living next door to me can own lethal weapons."

Does that meet with your approval??

910 posted on 05/16/2003 7:40:59 PM PDT by Godebert
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 903 | View Replies]

To: Scenic Sounds
Do you really think that any of our Founding Fathers were of the opinion that the Constitution would or even should survive a decision by a majority of the people in this country that they no longer wish to be governed by its terms?

Absolutely!! They set up a Republic, not a Democracy. You can find mountains of specific discussion on this very topic! The comparison, "A democracy is two wolves and one sheep discussing what they will have for dinner" is the jist of their arguments. You have demonstrated profound ignorance of the Principles on which this Nation was founded. You have proved the point I was trying to make. You haven't even the slightest clue about what made this Nation become what it is today. Go read. Hurry!

And, BTW, we do have constitutional mechanisms that we can use to resolve such differences of opinion as they may arise. How effectively do you make use of those mechanisms?

I vote in every election. I write and call congresscritters quite frequently. Excercising my First Ammendment Rights, I even discuss the issues with folks that don't have a clue how this Nation was formed or how it works.

Well, I can assure you that there were some important constitutional disputes in this country long before 1960.

Had you been reading my posts with some care, you would have noticed that I already admitted that I know this. On the other hand, I have watched significant erosion of the Bill of Rights in my own lifetime. It is getting worse now that there are so many like you who don't have a clue.

So, please understand that preserving civil liberties in this country has been one long, continuous struggle.

For someone who hasn't read the Founding documents, you sure are ready to be the history teacher. Go read them. You'd be surprised how pumped up you can become. Your jaw would drop over the remarkable wisdom of those old farts.

Whenever our national security is threatened (as most people think it is now)...

So, why does everyone tolerate such lame security measures, measures that do very little to secure the Nation but much to erode Liberty? What of substance has been done to secure this Nation? Taking the Medal of Honor from a retired four star general? Making old ladies disrobe while the "stereotypes" board the planes without notice? This seem like security to you? I can only chuckle and shake my head in wonder at yet another member of "The Thundering Herd".

911 posted on 05/16/2003 8:05:06 PM PDT by GingisK
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 902 | View Replies]

To: Joe Hadenuf; sigarms
I'm dissapointed in Bush for not standing up for principle.

Exactly what I've been fussing about. They have to play games. If they told the truth, nobody would vote for any of them. Both parties seem to be reading from the same script. Perhaps they just phase the issues differntly to make people belive there is a difference between the two parties.

912 posted on 05/16/2003 8:26:31 PM PDT by GingisK
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 857 | View Replies]

To: Southflanknorthpawsis
I am "guessing" that a few would-be antagonists have had second thoughts after what happened to Saddam.

In light of the increased "religion of peace" bombings around the world in the past few days, it appears that your guess was wrong.

913 posted on 05/16/2003 8:28:52 PM PDT by GingisK
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 858 | View Replies]

To: justshe
...that had NO impact the last time they were tried...

It did have impact ... the Clinton years! I think it would be good tactics on the part of you Pubs to foster better relations with those of us who will vote Principles just to prove a point. If you want "your boy" to win, at least encourage your folks and congresscritters to attempt to take our views under consideration. We will vote our Priciples once again, just to get your attention. It doesn't really matter if the Dems take a turn; for, the Pubs look very similar in most respects. Just about evey promise Al Gore made has been fulfilled. What was the point, again, regarding voting for the Pubs?

914 posted on 05/16/2003 8:34:42 PM PDT by GingisK
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 869 | View Replies]

To: Amelia
All you get is a.... Yawn....
915 posted on 05/16/2003 8:34:46 PM PDT by Joe Hadenuf
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 888 | View Replies]

To: GingisK
Weak........

First of all, I said a few and never even hinted that all terrorism would end.

Secondly, it changes nothing about what Bush has done and is doing. We are still enjoying victories against terrorists.

I suppose you know a great would-be president out there that would do better, huh? Pretty pathetic, Gingass.

Tell me, what exactly would you do in answer to 9/11? No doubt you have a superior game plan. What is it?

916 posted on 05/16/2003 8:46:07 PM PDT by Southflanknorthpawsis
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 913 | View Replies]

To: GingisK
Yawn......

I'm sure you believe every deluded word you post.

And I refuse to delineate the things that GWB has accomplished that gives Gore and the Dems heartburn. I, and others, have done it often of late. You prefer to ignore facts. You prefer to steep your soul in bile until you poison all you come in contact with.

And oh yeah.....take your pathetically small, blackmailing percentage and vote for the Democrats. It will serve you right. You will THEN have a righteous platform from which to spew your hate---because God know, you will NEVER be satisfied or happy.
917 posted on 05/16/2003 9:12:57 PM PDT by justshe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 914 | View Replies]

To: Godebert
Please. It doesn't say that some jerkwad living next door to me can own lethal weapons.

Is a lethal weapon something like an ugly witch? You know, it's from the department of redundancy department.

918 posted on 05/16/2003 9:19:52 PM PDT by Fred Mertz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 903 | View Replies]

Comment #919 Removed by Moderator

To: xbar
Guns aren't lethal if the owner doesn't know how to use them.
920 posted on 05/16/2003 9:28:22 PM PDT by Fred Mertz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 919 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 881-900901-920921-940 ... 961-969 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.

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