Actually, the longer republicans vote for RINOs, "the longer it will take us to get them back."
Check where the RINO's are TURBO. Congress is your problem, not the President. Did you hear the President call for renewal of the AWB? No. When COngress brought it up he said if they pass it he'll sign sign it. TIme for Congress to do their freaking job for once.
"Reality?" I deal in facts: in 1994, 1 out of every 5 voters was a gun owner voting Republican. If the frigging Republican Party refuses to recognize that almost 20% of the actual get-out-of-the-house-and-drive-to-the-polling-place-to-wait-in-line vote are gun owners, then the Party truly is the 'Stupid Party.' Which party held the Presidency - according to you it's the most important part of the Government. That one in 4 sure helped there didn't it?
Review the current membership of the high court, and tell us how many of the 'justices' were appointed by Republican presidents...
So you would rather just hand the nominations over to libs?
Again, I deal in facts. Are you honestly suggesting that vetoing the AWB would "get a lib elected?" Upon what basis do you jump to that ridiculous conclusion? Even many D@mocrats are jumping off the 'gun control' band wagon. Why? Because it is a losing issue.
No, I don't, necesarily. But if every one issue voter gets their way then the chances go up. Actually, both examples were given as just that. THis is law - the problem is how that law is being interpreted as constitutional in the courts.
The point I was trying (in vain I guess) to make was that AWB is not the end all be all of issues, just a symptom of the larger problem you would rather ignore.
Another assumption on your part. Care to tell us how many D@mocrats since FDR have been reelected to the presidency? Clinton was enough for me. If another 8 years of Clinton is what you want, just say so.
Are you suggesting that a Republican President signing, rather than vetoing, an AWB extension is some how more desireable than a Republican Congress unable to override a D@mocrat veto on an AWB repeal? Feel free to explain your point in detail. No, remember what I said about the salt in the wounds. Certainly not fun, but better than more cuts.
Why didn't the glorious revolution at least make a symbolic attempt to restore our God given rights? Huh? Why not at least make a point out of it, why not at a minimum get it on the news, why not motivate us gun owners to beat Clinton in 1998. Because Congress failed us and you put too much stock in a revolution that never figured out what really needed to be done to win.
And if you want to live in a fantasy land, where a Republican signing gun control legislation is somehow better than a D@mocrat signing IDENTICAL gun control legislation, then "that is your choice, I'm just dissapointed that it could effect my rights in the long term."
If you think you'll get a better deal out the RATS, go ahead, you'll be wrong, but go ahead. I'd much rather try to fix the problems within the party of greatest opportunity than fight from the outside against a party in power that wants to crush my rights.
The winner of this election will be a reblican or a democrat. If you don't vote for a republican - your giving the democrat a free vote.
Congratufreakinglations on your choice.
I'm sure RKBA will be much better off under a party with banning as part of it's freaking platform.
Gosh, I thought the President could veto a bill that crossed his desk. I didn't know he was magically bound to appove everything Congress sent his way.
Which party held the Presidency - according to you it's the most important part of the Government. That one in 4 sure helped there didn't it?
And which party took over control of both houses of Congress? "According to you it's the most important part of the Government." That "one in 4" helped just a little bit, didn't it, sport?
So you would rather just hand the nominations over to libs?
I am simply pointing out an indisputable fact - the appointment of high court justices by Republican Presidents is not the panacea you suggest. It is certainly no substitute for a President and a Congress that honor the Constitution...
...the problem is how that law is being interpreted as constitutional in the courts.
That is NOT a problem at all, if a President honors the Constitution and vetos the 'law' in the first place.
The point I was trying (in vain I guess) to make was that AWB is not the end all be all of issues, just a symptom of the larger problem you would rather ignore.
Not at all - we simply disagree on the nature of the problem. I see Republicans passing and signing liberal legislation as part of the problem. You apparently consider Republicans passing and signing liberal legislation to be part of the solution.
...Congress failed us and you put too much stock in a revolution that never figured out what really needed to be done to win.
And you ignore the President's constitutional power to veto legislation. The veto of bills like the AWB is precisely what needs "to be done to win."
I'd much rather try to fix the problems within the party of greatest opportunity than fight from the outside against a party in power that wants to crush my rights.
Oh, I'm sure that your unconditional support of RINO policies will help "fix the problems within the party." You betcha...
The winner of this election will be a reblican or a democrat. If you don't vote for a republican - your giving the democrat a free vote.
And if you automatically support everything the 'Stupid Party' offers up, you're giving the liberal a free vote. "Congratufreakinglations on your choice."
I'm sure RKBA will be much better off under a party with banning as part of it's freaking platform.
LOL! I repeat: if you want to live in a fantasy land, where a Republican signing gun control legislation is somehow better than a D@mocrat signing IDENTICAL gun control legislation, then "that is your choice, I'm just dissapointed that it could effect my rights in the long term."
;>)