Posted on 01/14/2008 3:32:05 PM PST by neverdem
And they came after the Catholics and I didn't resist because I wasn't a Catholic so by the time that they came after me...there was nobody left to resist...!"
Same with the guns. It may be a bit past 1984 but we are still on track for a despotic state.
Better start reading up on what happened during Prohibition ... same thing again is coming if it’s not stopped ......
Yes. The only question is whether this merely represents a broken Justice Department, or whether they are also speaking for President Bush. The first possibility is still Bush’s fault, but at least it would be a matter of neglect and incompetence rather than a deliberate attack on the Constitution.
Let’s Roll!
This whole brief shows what a back stabbing liberal jorge is. Has he are anyone in his “Jimmy Carter Light” administration said one word about this? Are they going to? Has the GOP said one word about this? Are they going to?
Can somebody tell me when, precisely, the Justices will be hearing the arguments. Thanks.
We already know that the Bush DOJ represents Mexico. Does this mean it also represents the EU?
OK, I’m still glad I voted for Dubya — Gore and Kerry would have been disasters — and I am going to push hard for whatever CINO the GOP nominates for November, but I find myself starting to hate Republicans.
Burn up those phone lines, folks. Melt them, like we melted the lines going into Congress on the immigration issue.
NRA - it'd help if you send out an email and letters to this effect. Getting a couple of hundred thousand people calling
202-456-1414
over a few day period might cause Bush to withdraw this travesty, just to make us go away.
RP used to mean republican party. Now it means rest in peace, republican party.
I am not a Bush basher. You can’t find a single post from me doing so. I have mentioned that he’s let me down on border issues, without bashing him. But, I gotta tell you, if he causes me to lose my 2A rights, I’ll be pretty pissed and very unforgiving.
“et tu Brutus?”
So much for those supreme court appointments and the idea that Bush would become a conservative in his last term....
But then Sutton nailed Ramos and Campeon with firearms violations meant for the criminal use o g guns, not cops doing their jobs. Go figure...
If you read the brief of the D of C to the SCOTUS you see that there is the potential for serious mischief in this being messed with for this case.
Wow, Bush betrayed Israel and now gun owners this week.
He’s on a roll.
NO RINOS!
I find it not credible that Bush's own Solicitor General would act against the President's wishes. Bush is certainly aware of it now, and he's not stopping it.
This Administration has a track record of trampling on the Bill of Rights. The McCain-Feingold bill and Raich v Gonzalez, for example, walked right over the First and Tenth Amendments respectively.
More than once the White House urged the oil companies in the Middle East to join together to work out a deal for the oil while the DOJ prosecuted them for the same thing. Might ask if we actually have a Gov’t.
Which explains, to some degree, why the gov is supporting this ban.
They know that once this travesty is struck down, the door is wide open to striking down other clearly unconstitutional bans.
It does explain a lot. The operating principle here is that a bad law is better than no law. It isn't.
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.