Posted on 04/19/2003 7:02:08 AM PDT by TLBSHOW
Let's just say that in some cases, Occam's Razor has been disposable, and that some of these "defenses" border on the absurd. But blind faith in one's god often calls for such denial of reality.
I hope George Bush does the right thing and stands by the Constitution. This country is a Republic, not a Democracy. If it were a democracy, slavery would have lasted another 50 years or more.
Polticians who don't stand by the Constitution will one day push the American people too far. First, there will be attempts at the ballot box. Hopefully, these will be successful, but with people like you who trust politicians more than their fellow citizens that possibility is becoming remote. Then, it will be time for the bullet box.
I'm sorry if the thought of armed Americans scares you. You're hoplophobia is something you will have to learn to deal with. For many people gun ownership is the final line in the sand. We have put up with the disparaging of ouor values in relation to religion, abortion, preferences, education, etc. This is the final straw for many people.
You may prefer the slavery of yourself or your children, but I, and millions like me bon't. May your chains rest lightly upon you.
And the anthem of the AK-47 drama queens whines on.
Yeah, I know that strategy. But I've never seen it work well. there always seems to be some more pressing issue that arises that makes a vote for the "lesser of evils" imperative no matter what has been done in previous terms. Read back on this thread and see how many posts are already saying we should support Bush even if he does support and sign an AW ban and other leftist stuff because the overall conservative issues are more important and make it O.K. for him to have pushed a liberal and anti-constitutional agenda, created a bigger governmnet, more government regulations of our lives, bigger pending and greater deficits, more globalism, etc. (i.e. watch the probable flames for this statement, or similar statements by other posters)
Maybe I'm just becoming jaded from age, but I haven't sen any genuine conservative gains in my lifetime; all I've seen is the gradual shift of what is called conservativism (in politics) toward the left so that what we now consider conservative would have been considered liberal, even communistic, when I was young. Still ... I will vote for those who represent what I believe in, not the ones who try to convince me they are the lesser of evils. I know I am probably the only voter who feels and votes this way, but I have a clean concience and I feel no obligation to support those who go against my beliefs simply because I voted for them in spite of my beliefs.
I don't expect this. To be truthful, I don't expect the United States , as we know it now, to exist twenty years from now.
This is not the country I grew up in. It is not the country I went of to VietNam to fight for. It is the country that gives me less freedom as a middle aged and responsible adult than it gave to to me as a ten year old boy 45 years ago.
This has been done, to me and to my country, by the Republicans and the Democrats. But, of course, we MUST keep electing them since the alternative is unspeakably horrible. Or so I am constantly told, both here and elsewhere.
BTW, flame away, but I haven't voted for a Democrat or Republican since Dole gave us the Brady Bill.
Information exchange is what it's all about.
I am sympathetic to the case of honest citizens being armed for protection, although I personally do not own a "piece".
Just as it's my right to own one, it's your right to go without, if that's your choice. To each his own.
If we restrict the supply of arms to an enemy are we then weakening the U.S.?
I'd need more information, and maybe an example, to answer intelligently.
I'm fully aware of the way the real lworld currently works, but I thought we were discussing how the world is supposed to work, according the Constitution. We have a written Constitution, we should follow it or change it.
Carolyn
It's simple. In it's most basic comncept Freedom is self control, Liberty is lack of restraint.
You could also look it up in a Black's. The definitions are similar, but not the same.
It's probably pretty good for the hilly terrain of the Golan Heights too. That's Israel's primary threat axis now, although the Western front is resurgent these days.
If it remains only words, you are correct, but if he actually signs such a renewal, that's a much different thing than some campaign retoric. Besides, we were told the same thing in 2000, namely that it was political move, not something he would actually do. Now that he's President, he's painted himself into a corner. If the bill comes to his desk, he'll catch hell no matter what he does, but he'll lose more if he signs it that if he doesn't.
My Congressman is hopeless. Writing him is a waste of time on this issue. One Senator would probably vote for the ban, given that Bush has said he'd sign it, but probably could have been convinced to vote against if he had not done so. The other Senator is new, but I think he will vote against renewal and would despite what Bush says about signing the bill.
That would be nice, but it would be nicer to know that they would have to get a supermajority of both houses to renew or extend this law.
I agree with you on this completely, and I think the White House is smart enough to know it's true, as well. I think they are taking a calculated risk, but it's not that much of a risk -- i.e., that the bill will never make it out of the House. If it does get to he President's desk, of course, they are going to have a very tough choice to make -- essentially a no-win position, because they will make somebody very angry no matter what they do. Which is why we need to focus our attention on Hastert, Sensenbrenner and the GOP House members generally. That's where the battle will be won or lost.
That's the "tough guy" attitude I've been seeing in these discussions on the AW ban... Like they want it to become a self-fulfilling prophecy or something. I see the same thing when the NRA does something they don't approve of - they leave, leaving the NRA one member weaker instead of staying a member and having their voice mean something to the organization in an attempt to change it from within.
I for one am not that principled I guess??? I'm gonna keep up the good fight from the within the right side of the aisle & not just take my ball & go home in dusgust!
In point of historical fact you are more likely to get offed by some environmental wacko than a member of a self annointed militia. McVeigh was not a member of any such group, BTW. You mention the Will of the People, well the founding fathers put the second amendment in the Constitution so that the people would always be able to work their will on the government, if the government stopped listening on their own. This sort of thing has never happened, it's not likely to happen, but as Hubert Humphrey once said "The right of citizens to bear arms is just one guarantee against arbitrary government, one more safeguard against the tyranny which now appears remote in America, but which historically has proved to be always possible." (from "Know Your Lawmakers", Guns, Feb. 1960, p. 4 (1960) )
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.