I'm sure it's not the Love Boat, but what the heck, they'll be together.
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 ...
What's a matter, Fweddie.....couldn't find anyone else to tag along after, so you had to come back here?
I don't believe I have ever seen you put more than about 20 words together and it's always a post script to someone else's comments.
You really could just save your effort and say, "Yeah !!!" after the posts of your idols.
Hey.....here's an idea. They could just make it their tagline. It could say (P.S.- Fred says, "So there !!!")
I'm sure it's not the Love Boat, but what the heck, they'll be together.
This excerpt from a recent article posted on the forum is something you and your small group of anti-gun friends should keep in mind.
The message clearly states that if they, the Republicans in the House, "aren't with us, they are against us!"
I am not worried about this. The Bush-bashers are just eagerly jumping at the lure.
Whatever.
I'll give you 1 Creativity Point for your efforts to tie this story - about the Democrats crying over the imminent death of their assault weapons ban - to illegal Mexican immigrants.
Since when? Maybe you mean they aren't as likely to be intentionally lethal? Most accidental gun deaths happen because someone doesn't know what he's doing.
Well, I can say one thing. They are a couple very deserving of one another; a match made in Heaven.
LOL !!! I do gnat know.
Yes, we are. Sort of. I give Bush good marks on most everything, except where American citizens are adversely impacted. The Iraqi invasion was necessary, even if just from a humanitarian aspect. The Islamic fanatics will, on the other hand, flock to our shores to precipitate what you observe in other Nations. The US will prevail in all cases, but it will eventually cost many lives. I expect the Islamic hordes are something we were destined to fight all along ... that "good verses evil" thing. The problem will outlive GWB.
I suppose you know a great would-be president out there that would do better, huh?
Sure. Fred Thompson would be great, and there are others. GWB is a good man, and I'm perfectly happy that he is in office. He is a fairly ordinary man who apears to be honest and has assembled a magnificent staff. He is certainly better than the Dem alternatives. You have overlooked one highly significant train of thought in my posts: I am concerned primarily about the congresscritters. But since you don't really read my posts before you turn to attack me personaly, you don't know what I am saying. I'm on your side, shrew, but my eyes arn't glazed over with blind love for "the man".
Tell me, what exactly would you do in answer to 9/11? No doubt you have a superior game plan. What is it?
Much of what has been enacted since 911 has been the proper thing to do. It simply was not necessary to curtail American Freedoms to accomplish the job. The US suffered much more in WWI, WWII, Koeran War, and Vietnam and never needed to place such Draconian measures into place. Political correctness guides this country rather than prudence. Prudunce dictates that profiling be used to catch thugs who are members of an easily identifiable set of people. Political correctness dictates that we give them a "racial pass" and harass our own grandparents. You presume this to be helpful? The Mexican border is still porous, and GWB has spoken clearly that this suits him just fine. People on the Mexican border report Middled-Eastern types are mixed in with the Mexicans. Of course, if GWB thinks that is OK, so do you because you won't think for yourself.
The problem is, you only have 3 congresscritters: 2 senators and one representative. Hopefully, yours are representing you and your neighbors. If they aren't, there's nothing I can do about that, because I can't vote for or against them.
Presumably, the rest of the congresscritters are also doing what the people in their districts want them to do; otherwise they won't be in D.C. for very long -- but there are people in other districts (think Red Zones) who expect things we don't necessarily agree with from their congresscritters. Here is where Southflank is particularly correct - we have to be able to change hearts and minds of citizens before we can expect a big difference in Congress.
We saw a change in the last election - no, not a big enough change yet, but it's a hopeful sign, and one that we need to be able to continue.
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.