UPSET GUN OWNERS SET TO DUMP BUSH

Worldnetdaily ^ | April 17, 2003 | By Jon Dougherty

[NMC EXP]

Nope a response from a person who understands politics in modern America and doesn't wish to follow you over a cliff towards another demo Presidency.

If I go over the cliff with a dem, I go splat when I hit the bottom.

If I go over the cliff with a pub, I go splat when I hit the bottom.

If I reward the republicans with my vote for their big govt statist actions I will get more of it.

You can be sure of it.

Regards

J.R.

[error99]

amen

[Dane]

If I reward the republicans with my vote for their big govt statist actions I will get more of it.

You can be sure of it <p. IMO, you never "rewarded" them with your vote anyway. The only people you "reward" are the demo's with your incessant, simplistic, malcontent rants.

[NMC EXP]

Bush makes it progressively harder for you folks to maintain the illusion doesn't he Dane?.

I could tell you to keep your chin up as well since your side must really be getting your collective daubers down.

But I won't.

Nothing personal.

I got to go earn a buck so I can donate half of it to the govt and the other half to Wal Mart for some chi-com made trinkets.

Regards

J.R.

[NMC EXP]

IMO, you never "rewarded" them with your vote anyway

I voted for "It's my turn" Dole then went home a took a long shower to wash off the stink.

Never again.

Regards

J.R.

[THEUPMAN]

I am going to use the broad authority granted me as a federally licensed gun dealer to prevent straw purchases by denying sales to African-Americans. To insure fairness, there will be no exceptions," said John Birch, president of Concealed Carry Inc. He said he'll continue to ban sales to African-Americans "until the NAACP asks us to, at which point we will be pleased to resume sales."

now thats just funny stuff......

[philman_36]

...also Uncle Bill get's to show off all his pretty html.
Mia T has the pretty HTML.
UB's HTML just gives, to use a favorite cajun colloquialism...

..."the red ass" to dissenters like you Dane.

[Dane]

Bush makes it progressively harder for you folks to maintain the illusion doesn't he Dane?

What illusion? He's had this position since the 2000 election campaign.

JMO, but it seems that your camp( the forever malcontent) are the ones down in the dumps that people are looking at the Bush presidency as a whole(proposing tax cuts, kiboshing Kyoto, signing a PBA ban etc.etc.) and the political machinations of the process instead of your incessant doom and gloom one issue malcontentism.

[apillar]

I think the best thing the Republicans in the house could do is make sure this thing gets bottled up in committee untill after the 2004 elections, which isn't that difficult to do.

My opinion, considering President Bush's record on guns in Texas, is that he opposes this, but is trying to play "good cop" for the sake of the "sucker-moms".

This coming up in September 2004, 2 months before the election, is really a no-win situation for the president. If it makes it to his desk and he signs it he knows he probably just wrote off his chances in states he carried last time such as West Virginia, Tennessee, and Arkansas where he won due to pro-gun democrat crossover votes. On the other hand if he vetos it, he will be painted by his democrat opponent and the media as a "gun extremist" who is furthur right than even the republican congress, which will hurt him in the "toss-up" states and with the "sucker-mom" voters.

The best situation is for the renewel to get bottled up in congress on some procedural motion until after the election. Then the congress can kill it, or the president can veto it without any repercussions.

The only problem with this scenario is that the congress is up for reelection too and many of the RINO's won't want the "blame" for holding this up on their shoulder.

But the fact is this legislation was approved by the thinnest majority in 1994, and the congress is more pro-gun and republican today so if I had to put odds on this thing being renewed, I would have to say 70-30 against. Of course a year and a half is a long time, anything could happen, another "columbine tragedy" anything...

[Dick Bachert]

While I deeply regret Dunya's support for continuing the stupid, cosmetics based ban, comes the day we really need such weapons due to a substantive threat to our freedoms and way of life, they will be readily available to us in large numbers.

And so far at least, we have numerous capable substitutes available to us now. If there is an effort to take those substitutes out of our hands, we go to the mat.

And studies prove that a marksman armed with a decent SEMI-auto weapon (who picks his shots carefully) is FAR more effective than one with a cheap Chinese or Russian full auto weapon who will probably run out of ammo before hitting his target.

[merak]

Upset Gun Owners Set To Dump Bush...

They'd prefer Hillary Klinton for president?????

[Eaker]

Lets face the facts; the ban did almost nothing in anyway

Okay, then go find me about a dozen 30 round mags for my AR-15 for $1.50 each. This is how much they cost before the ban.

I could certainly add more but I too must go make a few more bucks to send the Guv.

[Right_in_Virginia]

...banned the manufacture and importation of certain military-style semi-automatic rifles, dubbed "assault weapons" by bill supporters,...

Why would anyone need a semi-automatic rifle?

[Wilhelm Tell]

That's it. Bush is a one-term president. Every time the Republicans have had an advantage (the very few times it has been) they have managed to squander the opportunity. I am tired of what was once far-left legislation being defended by "conservative" Republicans ten years later. They are little yapping dogs, eager to please their masters (the socialists). I did not vote for a "Clinton Lite" (Most of the same leftist policies but without the lurid entertainment of sex scandals). When the Republicans barely win, they are timid and go to the left. When Republicans win big, they become over-confident and do everything they can think of to alienate their own power-base in a futile attempt to appease the far left. Pathetic.

[RogueIsland]

Lets face the facts; the ban did almost nothing in anyway.

Wrong. It and similar laws set a lot of people up to be unwitting felons because they don't know the vagaries of what constitutes a postban upper vs pre-ban lower, or don't know that there is a difference between upppers and lowers under the law, or what % of parts of a semi auto can be imported before the rifle violates an arbitrary import ban, or that a standard capacity magazine manufactured after some arbitrary date is illegal whether or not it has a date stamped on it. Basically, it's another unConstitutional law designed to make felons out of people who the day before were operating perfectly in accordance with the law. It has nothing to do with crime and everything to do with pandering to those who are intent on flushing the Constitution down the toilet (not that there's much left to flush).

The fact that on Free Republic there are so many people unwilling to demand that a supposedly "conservative" Republican President, who I happen to like BTW, stand up for the Constitution of the United States says nothing good about the direction of this country.

[RogueIsland]

Why would anyone need a semi-automatic rifle?

I can only assume that was sarcasm. If not, I refer you to the Bill of Rights, which is specifically not called the Bill of Needs.

[Spandau]

Why would anyone need a semi-automatic rifle?

Why would anyone need an explanation?

[Brices Crossroads]

"Kerry would sign the reauthorization ban just as Bush would do."

And.....what else would Kerry do? Maybe a handgun ban. How about Supreme Court Justices who would eviscerate the Second Amendment altogether. To punish the current President, who is basically friendly to Second Amendment interests, you will cast a vote that will help elect someone who is unremittingly hostile to them.

I remember all the Perot voters who did not like Bush 41. They showed him. What did we get? Clinton and The Assault weapons ban that you are so incensed about. (If there had been no Clinton, there would not have been the ban in the first place.) Follow the same presciption here and you know what you are going to get.

Remember what the great and wise Ronald Reagan said. A man who agrees with you on 80% of the issues is not a 20% traitor. He's your friend. This President IMHO gets a much higher score than 80%. If he is dumped over an issue like this, it will represent political stupidity of epic proportions.

[monafelice]

bump ping ping ping

[RogueIsland]

what constitutes a postban upper vs pre-ban lower

Oops. Sould have read "postban upper vs pre-ban upper