1 posted on
03/27/2002 7:10:33 AM PST by
PeteF
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-46 next last
To: PeteF
Good on the NRA. It's about time somebody took this piece of cr*p to court. ;^)
2 posted on
03/27/2002 7:12:13 AM PST by
eureka!
To: PeteF
I lost a bet, I was sure the Libertarians would be first in line.
To: PeteF
The liberal controled courts will quickly throw this out, while seriously considering the slave reparations lawsuits.
5 posted on
03/27/2002 7:13:35 AM PST by
aomagrat
To: PeteF
No politician who would put me in jail for criticising them will ever get my vote. Ever.
To: PeteF
OK JJ Baker do your $#!t. It's what I'm paying you for. Obviously were not getting what we bargained for in W.
![](http://us.f1.yahoofs.com/users/1ef45b64/bc/images/VA_P8RIOT.jpg?bciQe28AptCcjege)
12 posted on
03/27/2002 7:16:41 AM PST by
P8riot
To: PeteF
OK, for those loyalists who are saying this legislations is a good thing for Republicans, please explain something to me.
Please explain how this will help in the fall elections. If this will gain us seats, please help me by indicating what the windfall is expected to be.
Next, please help me to understand how these newly acquired seats will help the conservative cause. Please, be specific!
I would offer one tidbit for your digestion: when Bush took control, "we" held both houses and yet we're still the ones that have to compromise our principles in the interest of maintaining power.
I'm sorry, but I don't see how this helps conservatism one iota, even if the phantom gains in the House and Senate come to fruition. Please illuminate me.
14 posted on
03/27/2002 7:19:21 AM PST by
BigTime
To: PeteF
Why did Bush sign this when he no-doubt knew it would be quickly challenged? What happened to principled leadership?
I understand dealing with the dems on some issues, but this is way off what he presented himself to be. GWB seems to be falling away and that is not good.
To: PeteF
Well now, I will just go and sign up for the NRA then (at least for a year). Am GOA right now, usually consider the NRA too left wing and squishy on the issue, but hey, they need the money for the good fight, for once.
Plus, I get one of those neat ball caps that scare my co-workers. :)
To: PeteF
Perhaps the President actually views this as an economic stimulus, for lawyers until it's overturned.
18 posted on
03/27/2002 7:21:42 AM PST by
onedoug
To: PeteF
Glad to see my NRA dues going to good use.
To: PeteF
The NRA defending the constitution again. Good for us.
22 posted on
03/27/2002 7:23:23 AM PST by
1Old Pro
To: PeteF
25 posted on
03/27/2002 7:24:07 AM PST by
Redcloak
To: PeteF
Bush then embarked on a two-day swing to South Carolina and Georgia, where he planned to raise more than $3 million for GOP candidates for Congress. I suspect he's gonna get an earful.
29 posted on
03/27/2002 7:26:24 AM PST by
Illbay
To: PeteF
Now when, no,
IF The Supremes rule this un-Constitutional,
we'll see how easy it will be for Bush to get another Conservative on the bench after they kill the medias pet project.
Seems it would have been easier to take a leadership role against this earlier in the process.
To: PeteF
Bush signed the measure in the Oval Office without the public signing ceremony often staged for major legislation. I'm glad the NRA has filed suit. And if he had to sign it to bury it, I'm glad he did it in the Oval office to rob McCain and Feingold and Shays and Meehan of their glory! Now the Democrats can't use it as a club in the next election.
And for all of those who are threatening NOT to vote for Bush because of this, why don't you give it some time to see what happens BEFORE you do anything rash. It was obvious that the shift in power in the Senate helped this along. Work hard to get some more Repubs. in Congress, and if it has to be a RINO, try to get the least egregious RINO you can find; at least the Repubs. would be in charge of the committees again. Do you really want Bush to have to battle against the Democrat controlled Senate Judiciary Committee for the next few years in order to get his judicial nominees? If you want to see some REAL change, we HAVE to get some more conservative Supremes, and where Dem Senators will not be affected by pressure from the White House, a Repub. might!
Others may prefer philosophical purity, I just want the Repubs. in charge of the committees again because Bush's agenda has no chance otherwise!
37 posted on
03/27/2002 7:29:21 AM PST by
SuziQ
To: PeteF
Go NRA, Go. You just guaranteed my continued membership. Makes up for backing that land-grab legislation out west.
To: PeteF
Everybody should be happy.....lawyers are already making money on this issue.....gotta love the spineless jellyfish called politcians.
48 posted on
03/27/2002 7:34:24 AM PST by
Rowdee
To: PeteF
Bush just lost my vote!
58 posted on
03/27/2002 7:38:08 AM PST by
arly
To: PeteF
GO NRA. Kick McCain's, Bush's, Carl LEnin's, Debbie Stabusall's, and Feingold's asses.
To: PeteF
THANK YOU NRA!!! This makes up for that stupid damn video you sent me (an ABC production, no less) trying to con me out of nine bucks.
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-46 next last
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson