Skip to comments.
Bush in Tight Spot With N.R.A. Over Gun Legislation
The New York Times ^
| 05/08/03
| ERIC LICHTBLAU
Posted on 05/07/2003 7:41:18 PM PDT by Pokey78
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 121-140, 141-160, 161-180 ... 401 next last
To: Mulder
Answer it and I won't ask it again.
I don't believe you've thought your position through. That's why you're having trouble articulating it. It is one thing to thump your chest and declare you're ready to take on your own country mano a mano. It's quite another to actually do it. I don't brlievr you would actually do it.
To: Long Cut
"The same COULD happen to the AW ban, if some mutant shoots up a school or church a few weeks prior to the law's scheduled expiration."If history is any indication, that is exactly what will happen. It is uncanny how such an event precedes almost all major gun legislation.
I'm holding my breath.
142
posted on
05/07/2003 9:13:01 PM PDT
by
wcbtinman
(Metus improbos compescit, non clementia. (Fear, not kindness, restrains the wicked.))
To: Long Cut
Nice to see a voice of reason among the many knee jerk reactionaries
143
posted on
05/07/2003 9:13:30 PM PDT
by
MJY1288
(Freedom is Ringing)
To: Mulder
So what you you do? Gather a posse together and attack a National Guard armory like some latter day John Brown? Is that what you'd do?
To: All
OK, I've had it. Can someone besides me ask 'Kevin Curry' if he is able to do a post answer without asking another dumba$$ question? Is it just me????? My response is: "Where will you drink a cup of STFU today?". Yeah, I'm ranting.
To: dogbyte12
All christian gun owners will be rounded up and placed there while Mike Farrell re-educates them about the truth.
Shucks they may even bring in the "9 of the Collision in Columbia" to let them campaign and tell them how it will be when one of them gets into power......... Yep give them a good education.
146
posted on
05/07/2003 9:14:26 PM PDT
by
deport
(Beware of Idiots bearing gifts.... One maybe the FR Joke)
To: Joe Hadenuf
If I genuinely believed that Bush and Ashcroft were going to eliminate the RKBA, I would be out in the streets protesting. I am sorry, I am just not an extremist on this issue.
I fall between the a bazooka in every house, and let's all chant kumbaya people. You can't yell fire in a crowded theater in this country, but we still have free speech. Ya can't buy certain classes of weapons, but we still have the right to bear arms.
There are more guns in this country than people. We are going to be just fine.
Comment #148 Removed by Moderator
To: Sabertooth; All
"It isn't always a good political idea to pretend to seem like the Democrats, even if the RNC whiz kids think it is. Gun control cut against the Democrats in 2000, and Bush is more popular now than three years ago. There is no reason to believe that shafting the GOP's 2nd Amendment constituency would result in a net electoral gain for President Bush." This is EXACTLY why we need to stick together, Saber! That way, WE CAN LET THE WHIZ KIDS KNOW THE REAL SCORE!!!
If too many of us make crazy, useless threats, or if too many of us dismiss those who truly care about this issue, we WILL lose it.
Both BushBots AND BushBashers here need to do some THINKING for a change! Put the EMOTIONS away, for all of our sakes, okay?
149
posted on
05/07/2003 9:14:57 PM PDT
by
Long Cut
(ORION Naval Aircrewman!)
To: FairOpinion
Can you imagine the attack ads about how Bush is killing children, and thwarts the will of the people, by vetoing this legislation?! Is Bush so weak politically that he is unable to stand up to these attacks? Virtual every Republican candidate at the national level is subjected to these media attacks and most are able to win nonetheless.
What good would it do, if Bush vetoes it, then loses the election and Kerry or Hillary reinstates it?
So Bush has to promise to sign it, so a RAT won't win and sign it? Unbelievable.
Anyway, if the RATS want to push more gun control, let them, based on how the 1994 elections turned out.
150
posted on
05/07/2003 9:15:00 PM PDT
by
Mulder
(Fight the future)
To: Mulder
"Or is he making a decision based solely on 'political' calculations, without regard to the Constitution?"
Career first, Constitution second?
151
posted on
05/07/2003 9:15:48 PM PDT
by
Atlas Sneezed
(NEO-COMmunistS should be identified as such.)
To: Dane
Who would you'd rather have as President between 92-96, Bush 41 or the tag team duo called the Clintons?I would have preferred Bush 41, and I would have gotten Bush 41 if he didn't sign gun control legislation and tax increases.
Wouldn't that have been nice?
152
posted on
05/07/2003 9:16:31 PM PDT
by
dead
To: ysoitanly
So you despise Bush. What is your workable plan? Take the stage and enlighten us. The mic is yours.
To: Parley Baer
"From reading the above posts it sounds like the liberal NY Times has done the job it set out to do. Divide and Conquer."
Don't blame the Times. And don't blame those who understand the importance of the Constitution.
BLAME BUSH.
154
posted on
05/07/2003 9:17:22 PM PDT
by
Atlas Sneezed
(NEO-COMmunistS should be identified as such.)
To: Dan from Michigan
Maybe if Bush I didn't break his promise and also enact his own gun grab, we wouldn't have had 8 years of Klintler.
Oh, putting the onus on the politician for losing his constituency, are we?
How dare Republican voters not recognize the political savvy of compromising on principle?
To: dead
"Where else are we gonna go?"
Stay home.
156
posted on
05/07/2003 9:17:58 PM PDT
by
Atlas Sneezed
(NEO-COMmunistS should be identified as such.)
To: Mulder
If Bush is willing to sacrifice a strong stand on the 2nd amendment when he has a 70% approval rating, what makes you think he'll make a strong stand if he is re-elected at 52%? The "hurry up and wait" bulls!it from the RINOS is getting real old. The excuse in 1993 was "we can't do anything until we win Congress". So we gave them control of Congress. Then the excuse was "we can't do anything until after the 1996 election". So we waited while they ran Bob "it's my turn" Dole. Next, the excuse was "wait until we win the White House". So we gave them the White House. In 2002, it was "wait until we win back the Senate". So we gave them the Senate. It's time to put up or shut upAm I ever with you. However, this is bigger than a president. This whole Congress & the departments are full of toadies bought & paid for by the elites & they NEVER will allow conservativism to flourish. The nation will be bankrupt before that happens. (It seems that you can fool most of the voters all of the time)
157
posted on
05/07/2003 9:18:20 PM PDT
by
Digger
To: wcbtinman; All
"If history is any indication, that is exactly what will happen. It is uncanny how such an event precedes almost all major gun legislation." Make no mistake, the legislation was ALREADY written...it only awaited the catalyst. As soon as it occurred, the socialists pounced like the vultures they are.
They are quite adept at such PR planning. We would do well to anticipate this, and do some planning and groundwork of our own. TOGETHER.
Sadly, some of the posts indicate that we may have lost the chance, here.
158
posted on
05/07/2003 9:18:41 PM PDT
by
Long Cut
(ORION Naval Aircrewman!)
To: Beelzebubba
What's your plan? Tell us, genius.
To: dead
I would have preferred Bush 41, and I would have gotten Bush 41 if he didn't sign gun control legislation and tax increases. Wouldn't that have been nice?
It would have been even nicer if the Clintons hadn't been able to run amuck after 92, IMHO.
160
posted on
05/07/2003 9:18:59 PM PDT
by
Dane
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 121-140, 141-160, 161-180 ... 401 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