Enemies Foreign AND Domestic... on sale now.
Posted on 04/21/2009 5:23:46 PM PDT by neverdem
WASHINGTON — The last time a Democratic president and a Democratic Congress banned civilian sales of military-style assault weapons, it took American voters just seven weeks to rebel.
They handed Republicans control of the House and the Senate for the first time in 40 years.
One of the casualties in the backlash was Rep. Jack Brooks, D-Beaumont, who sponsored the ban and then promptly lost his seat in Congress in 1994 after 42 years of service.
The lesson wasn’t lost on President Obama when Mexican President Felipe Calderon suggested reviving the defunct weapons’ ban to help combat drug cartel violence along the U.S.-Mexico border.
Obama insisted he had “not backed off” his campaign promise to make the expired ban permanent.
But he bowed to political reality, nonetheless.
“None of us are under any illusion that reinstating that ban would be easy,” Obama said. “And so, what we’ve focused on is how we can improve our enforcement of existing laws.”
Any hint that the ban might be resurrected alarmed some Texas Republicans, largely elected by voters who ardently support the Second Amendment of the U.S. Constitution and a Texas constitutional right “to bear arms in defense of himself and the Republic” that dates back to 1836
Few willing to take risk Fresh restrictions on weapons are “not the solution to the problems occurring in Mexico,” declared Sen. John Cornyn, R-San Antonio.
In fact, some assert the White House would be capitalizing on border violence simply to push a gun control agenda.
“It is not our responsibility to keep guns out of Mexico — and reviving the ban will not affect the way Mexico protects its border,” said Rep. Ted Poe, R-Humble, a former criminal court judge.
Said Rep. Kevin Brady, R-The Woodlands: The issue remains ending bloodshed by lawless drug cartels...
(Excerpt) Read more at chron.com ...
From the article: “None of us are under any illusion that reinstating that ban would be easy,” Obama said. “And so, what we’ve focused on is how we can improve our enforcement of existing laws.”
A perfect example of 0bama’s arrogance. It won’t be easy? It won’t be easy to, once again, legislate in direct opposition to the wishes of the American people? It damn well better NOT be easy. In fact, it should be nigh on to impossible.
This guy has got to go. Back to Chicago is fine with me...as a private, illegal alien...to await his deportation to the land of his birth...wherever that is.
No, they are that dumb. HR 219 proves it.
“This guy has got to go. Back to Chicago is fine with me...as a private, illegal alien...to await his deportation to the land of his birth...wherever that is.”
**********
*******************
Whatever happened to that Eligibility Issue—ya just don’t hear much about it anymore, do ya???
Must be all that T’Party/Veterans Talk, huh?
Maybe they really know how to take advantage of a diversion!
If enough conservatives sit out or try to “teach a lesson to Republicans” in Nov. 2010 and NOT repeat 1994, the Dems will have their “mandate” and will get going on the bans. That’s what they are waiting for. Feinstein practically spelled it out in an interview I saw last week.
They are not dumb. They are controlling. They cannot help themselves. Lying is so natural to sociopaths and our system is biased toward electing them.
One of the golden memories of 94'.
He ran this awful commercial with a flag in the background and the space shuttle rising in the sky with him craning up his turkey neck to follow the flight once he realized he was down in the polls.
Steve Stockman, his republican opponent, literally ran his campaign out of his garage at his home
What does that non-sequitur have to do with anything? I am sick and tired of this lame-ass argument being tossed around, as if any politician with an R next to him/her is automatically a saint. If the GOP can't take back Congress in 2010, that won't be the fault of conservatives, it'll be the fault of the party supporting RINOs like Specter.
H.R.219
Title: To amend title II of the Social Security Act to ensure the integrity of the Social Security trust funds by requiring the Managing Trustee to invest the annual surplus of such trust funds in marketable interest-bearing obligations of the United States and certificates of deposit in depository institutions insured by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, and to protect such trust funds from the public debt limit. Sponsor: Rep Paul, Ron [TX-14] (introduced 1/6/2009)
I'm talking about rats and the Second Amendment. Only the extreme moonbats like Carolyn McCarthy and Bobby Rush don't know it's a loser.
Feinstein has just been outed for pushing $25 billion to the FDIC just in time to enrich her husband, Richard Bloom, who was poised to make lots of money on distressed real estate that would benefit from the legislation. Both are pleading ignorance of the other's activities. BS. It is criminal fraud. Will both of them be criminally prosecuted?
One can only hope that this criminal socialist Senator can be removed before she does more damage.
It’s my state’s HR 219 then. Calling for micro-stamping of ammo w/ unique identifiers when fired.
The only thing that might stand in the way is one and one swing vote on the SCOTUS.
When our fate is tied to the whims of Anthony Kennedy, I get nervous.
Enemies Foreign AND Domestic... on sale now.
But they are inflated with hubris and insatiably power hungry, and always will be. They do have the votes to ratify a treaty, especially if our claque of RINOs somehow fails to show up one day.
Conservatives didn't stay home in 2006 & 2008. They lost the vote from moderates & independents each time. Staying home makes no sense. Why empower the left? The time to take care of RINOs is the primary.
Do you really think moderate dems in the Senate who swore their Second Amendment bona fides to knock out a pubbie like Webb in VA and Tester in MT are going to commit political suicide?
Government by non sequitur.
If the golden parachute is adequate, absolutely yes.
However it’s going to be done, they’re going to do it SOON. Just like the rest of the agenda they’re rammed thru in 100 days flat, they MUST get it done ASAP so they can redirect/calm the outrage before the next big election (and that’s less than 2 years now).
What they learned from the ‘94 AWB is that doing it 7 weeks before a congressional election is dumb. Sure, doing an AWB is dumb period, but if you’re going to be stupid at least be smart about it (a basic tenent of Leftism).
Expect AWB II (or equivalent by whatever means) soon, by some means other than regular Congressional vote, and followed by enough other crap to obfuscate the issue come November 2010.
NOTE: The 2nd Amendment is SELF-incorporated to all government entities at every level. It is MORE ABSOLUTE than the 1st Amendment, or any of the others, because the wording forbids not only CONGRESS, but ANYONE from infringing on it. The 1st says “Congress shall make no law...”. The 2nd say “shall NOT be infringed!” Period! End of debate!
Expect AWB II (or equivalent by whatever means) soon, by some means other than regular Congressional vote, and followed by enough other crap to obfuscate the issue come November 2010.
They wouldn't take the chance with any Senate seat. Ried is up for re-election in 2010. He does not want an AWB! Harry and Nancy have said in effect to each member of Congress do whatever you have to do to save your seat. They want to keep their majorities. So, they gave up gun control starting in 2006.
The internationalists think a little longer term than, "period," which is why they've done everything possible to put us in hock up to our eyeballs. Meltdown IS their goal, and they've been at this longer than there has been a United States. Read the article.
Correct. If he wants to keep borrowing money however, our creditors might have something else in mind. Remember: a treaty can be ratified by voice vote with no record of a quorum.
True that. I've seen a treaty ratified with two senators in the chamber, and one of the two was the presiding officer. BUT, that sort of crap means the vote was cleared beforehand, and it's fair to assign AYE votes to every Senator on voice vote passage.
Yup. You might want to read that article anyway, because the way this Trojan Horse got into the Constitution is indicative of things to come, unless the people put a stop to it.
That doesn't mean that no one will be held accountable for a treaty that abrogates the right of self defense. Treaties have force of law until they are abrogated such as the Anti-Missile Defense Treaty with the Russkies. The Kyoto Treaty for global warming has been more honored in the breach.
Yay CIFTA!!
A treaty can indeed be rescinded, but I remind you of what happened when Mao took over China or Hitler over Germany. Our enemies are far more organized than they. So there is a degree of irreversibility in such matters, particularly as regards armed self defense. As of now, my guess is that the government (illegally) knows where most of the guns are and (also illegally) who are the owners.
The point is:
Yes.
Is it physically possible to swipe most of the weapons from the people?
New Orleans.
Can they get LEOs and NG units to do it?
New Orleans.
Do they have a way to provide cover for those Democrats who ran on the basis of pro-2A?
Sure.
Is there a way to compensate those few who will lose their seats sufficiently?
Absolutely.
With 20 million illegals, voting machines from Hugo Chavez, and the Chicago mob in charge of the census and the election, will that many really lose?
I doubt it.
Hence, a gun control treaty is indeed conceivable, conventional political wisdom notwithstanding. I HOPE YOU ARE RIGHT, but I wouldn't let my guard down for a second. Property rights groups have vigilant lobbyists in Washington and had Jesse Helms, and they still got blindsided with a package of 34 treaties approved by voice vote that included some pretty potent provisions, especially the Desertification Treaty. With the stakes as high as they are with the Second Amendment, I wouldn't discount the possibility.
New Orleans.
Maybe not, have you heard of oathkeepers?
Do they have a way to provide cover for those Democrats who ran on the basis of pro-2A?
Sure.
The NRA will demand a roll call vote by threatening their voting records if they don't demand one.
With 20 million illegals, voting machines from Hugo Chavez, and the Chicago mob in charge of the census and the election, will that many really lose?
We have the 10th Amendment movement and the tea party movement. Have you heard of the Battle of Athens, TN, 1946?
Sure have. I think it's one of the best things I've ever seen. I've forwarded it too.
The NRA will demand a roll call vote by threatening their voting records if they don't demand one.
If I know my Slave Party they'll never see it coming.
Have you heard of the Battle of Athens, TN, 1946?
Nope. Looks like a good read. Thanks.
However it’s going to be done, they’re going to do it SOON. Just like the rest of the agenda they’re rammed thru in 100 days flat, they MUST get it done ASAP so they can redirect/calm the outrage before the next big election (and that’s less than 2 years now).
_________________________________
While that is a very likely scenario another tactic they may take is to wait a bit on the gun ban. National Health care and the corruption that will come from it is far more important (and profitable) to the Dem’s than a gun ban that will only serve to rally Republicans.
Instead I think they will wait until after the midterm elections. If they hold on to their majorities (or God forbid gain a few seats) it will signal a major/fatal weakness in our party and the risk will be far less. Also Obama is not going to loose in 2012 one way or another they will not let it happen. They can rely on his huge popularity with the government dependent classes to carry another “historic” election and hope to water down the backlash.
If they pull all that off, then we will see some serious gun banning, and even gun confiscation. I so hope I am wrong but I am quickly loosing faith in my countrymen and women. There just seems so few that understand what naturally happens when governments take this much power. At the end of the day I fear we are fighting a rear guard action.
That's why they will want to do it sooner rather than later, or if they must wait, they'll wait until November or December of 2010. They'll count on US voters' notoriously short memories.
If he keeps talking like that, people will begin to think that he might have availed himself of the NRA's offer of a free year's membership.
Then I suggest that the GOP nominates a real candidate, Another RINO = Another loss, because right now voting GOP is still voting Dem Lite.
First time I've heard that of this group, so I'll be doing some research, and joing my brothers in arms.
And if any Non-Vet/LEO wants to become an honorary "Oathkeeper" just join...
National Rifle Association (NRA)
Second Amendment Foundation (SAF)
Jews for the Preservation of Firearms Ownership (JPFO)
Then raise your right hand and state; "I, _____, do solemnly swear that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same"
Congratulations, now get in the fight!
Yeah, what you said......but add McCain to your list.
We are not signatories to the Kyoto Treaty. If memory serves it was defeated 96 - 0 in the Senate.
While that may have been a factor in elections past, especially 2008, somehow I don't think it's going to repeat itself in 2010. It's going to be bloody with far more Dems losing their jobs than Republicans. But all will fall according to their votes on a number of key issues which will vary in fervor by region. But you can count on these issues running the table: Bail Out, Immigration/amnesty, gun control, Healthcare reform that leads to rationing and did I mention Bail outs? If this results in wholesale election of neophyte politicians like the guy running against McCain (Simmcox?) then maybe we have a real shot at retaking the country. Even if the ultra liberal northeastern states are left under Democrat control, if the rest of the nation goes back to red and especially if those are brand new Senators and Congressmen, then we're in a much better position. The only certain way to defeat the money men like Soros is to VOTE!!!
I didn't imply we were. It was your inference. I only regret not being more explicit about treaties in general. The depression and paranoia on these threads gets me frustrated. Pelosi told the administration that he has more than enough on his plate already.
There's no mandate for radical change!
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.