Maybe it's a sign that the political climate is turning more overall anti-gun, Repub and Democrat. If so, heck yeah, I'd like another 8-yr Clinton-type presidency. With the great economy and strong dollar we had with Bill, think of all the cool (albeit "regulated") guns you could buy! These days we can barely afford ammo for all those 30-round mags.
The Bush Administration's Support for Gun Control
- Thread starter green-grizzly
- Start date
- Status
Deavis
Member
I'll play along with that ridiculous statement. I know... Reagan! Oh wait, Reagan didn't make the law, he simply signed it. Oh crap, there it is again, reality rearing its ugly head! The POTUS doesn't make laws, ahhh, man what the heck? The sky is falling, what am I to do? I want to blame one man when for everything but I can't because this nation is run by 3 branches of government. Oh me oh my!
The 86 FOPA was a big step forward for gun owners, don't let one point blind you like it does so many others. Compromise is the way things get done in the real world, I know it doesn't apply to this fake little world on the THR, but it is true. Would it be nice if 922o didn't exist, sure, but the FOPA was a big step. Wars are won with battles, sometimes you give ground in one area to gain more in others. Short term thinking is what dooms most people to mediocrity.
Limeyfellow
Member
Yes, Reagan only signed the law. Now if you talked about his time as Governer in California pushing most of the Californian gunlaws that we so detest sure. His lobbying of the Brady law and strong support of it. Thats fine. Though he supported many of the things in the 86 ban his role in bringing it through the congress and senate was only partly blamed on his influence.
bogie
Member
Uh, Jim... You _can_ buy another subgun...
fearless leader
Member
Quote: I'm a conservative and voted for Bush twice...
This would not be the first time Bush has betrayed us all...
I know what you mean, but I couldn't vote for Scarey Kerry.
Allen Keys is Pro Gun, but the media ignores him. I wanted him to get the nomination a long time ago.
This would not be the first time Bush has betrayed us all...
I know what you mean, but I couldn't vote for Scarey Kerry.
Allen Keys is Pro Gun, but the media ignores him. I wanted him to get the nomination a long time ago.
Triphammer
Member
What if 20 Million Illegal Aliens Vacated America
Tina Griego, journalist for the Denver Rocky Mountain News wrote a column titled, "Mexican Visitor's Lament" -- 10/25/07.
She interviewed Mexican journalist Evangelina Hernandez while visiting Denver last week. Hernandez said, "They (illegal aliens) pay rent, buy groceries, buy clothes...What Happens to your country's economy if 20 million people go away?" That's a good question - it deserves an answer. Over 80 percent of Americans demand secured borders and illegal migration stopped. But what would happen if all 20 million or more vacated America ?
The answers may surprise you!
In California , if 3.5 million illegal aliens moved back to Mexico , it would leave an extra $10.2 billion to spend on overloaded school systems, bankrupt hospitals and overru n prisons. It would leave highways cleaner, safer and less congested. Everyone could understand one another as English became the dominant language again.
In Colorado , 500,000 illegal migrants, plus their 300,000 kids and grand-kids - would move back 'home', mostly to Mexico . That would save Coloradans an estimated $2 billion (other experts say $7 billion) annually in taxes that pay for schooling, medical, social-services and incarceration costs. It means 12,000 gang members would vanish out of Denver alone.
Colorado would save more than $20 million in prison costs, and the terror that those 7,300 alien criminals set upon local citizens. Denver Officer Don Young and hundreds of Colorado victims would not have suffered death, accidents, rapes and other crimes by illegals.
Denver Public Schools would not suffer a 67 percent drop-out/flunk-out rate because of thousands of illegal alien students speaking 41 different languages. At least 200,000 vehicles would vanish from our gridlocked cities in Colorado .
Denver 's four percent unemployment rate would vanish as our working poor would gain jobs at a living wage.
In Florida , 1.5 million illegals would return the Sunshine State back to America , the rule of law, and English.
In Chicago , Illinois , 2.1 million illegals would free up hospitals, schools, prisons and highways for a safer, cleaner and more crime-free
experience.
& nbsp;
If 20 million illegal aliens returned 'home' --
If 20 million illegal aliens returned 'home', the U.S. Economy would return to the rule of law. Employers would hire legal American citizens at a living wage. Everyone would pay their fair share of taxes because they wouldn't be working off the books. That would result in an additional $401 Billion in IRS income taxes collected annually, and an equal amount for local, state and city coffers
No more push '1' for Spanish or '2' for English. No more confusion in American schools that now must contend with over 100 languages that degrade the educational system for American kids. Our overcrowded schools would lose more than two million illegal alien kids at a cost of billions in ESL and free breakfasts and lunches.
We would lose 500,000 illegal criminal alien inmates at a cost of more than $1.6 billion annually. That includes 15,000 MS-13 gang members who distribute $130 billion in drugs annually would vacate our country.
In cities like L.A. , 20,000 members of the ' 18th Street Gang' would vanish from our nation. No more Mexican forgery gangs for ID theft from Americans! No more foreign rapists and child molesters!
Losing more than 20 million people would clear up our crowded highways and gridlock. Cleaner air and less drinking and driving American deaths by illegal aliens!
America 's economy is drained. Taxpayers are harmed. Employers get rich . Over $80 billion annually wouldn't return to the aliens' home countries by cash transfers. Illegal migrants earned half that money untaxed, which further drains America 's economy - which currently suffers an $8.7 trillion debt.
At least 400,000 anchor babies would not be born in our country, costing us $109 billion per year per cycle. At least 86 hospitals in
California , Georgia and Florida would still be operating instead of being bankrupt out of existence because illegals pay nothing via the EMTOLA Act
Americans wouldn't suffer thousands of TB and hepatitis cases rampant in our country-brought in by illegals unscreened at our borders.
Our cities would see 20 million less people driving, polluting and grid locking our cities. It would also put the 'progressives' on the horns of a dilemma; illegal aliens and their families cause 11 percent of our greenhouse gases.
Over one million of Mexico 's poorest citizens now live ins ide and along our border from Brownsville , Texas to San Diego , California in what the New York Times called, "colonias" or new neighborhoods. Trouble is, those living areas resemble Bombay and Calcutta where grinding poverty, filth, diseases, dru gs, crimes, no sanitation and worse. They live without sewage, clean water, streets, electricity, roads or any kind of sanitation.
The New York Times reported them to be America 's new " Third World " inside our own country. Within 20 years, at their current growth rate, they expect 20 million residents of those colonias. By enforcing our laws, we could repatriate them back to Mexico .
We sh ould invite 20 million aliens to go home, fix their own countries and/or make a better life in Mexico . We already invite a million
people into our country legally more than all other countries combined annually. We cannot and must not allow anarchy at our borders, more anarchy within our borders and growing law lessness at every level in our nation. It's time to stand up for our country, our culture, our civilization and our way of life.
Interesting Statistics. Here are 14 reasons illegal aliens should vacate America, and I hope they are forwarded over and over again until they are read so many times that the reader gets sic k of reading them:
1. $11 billion to $22 billion dollars are spent each year on welfare to illegal aliens.
http://tinyurl.com/zob77
2. $2.2 billion dollars are spent each year on food assistance programs such as food stamps, WIC, and free school lunches for illegal
aliens.
http://www.cis.org/articles/2004/fiscale xec.html
3. $2.5 billion dollars are spent each year on Medicaid for illegal aliens.
http://www.cis.org/articles/2004/fiscalexec.html
4. $12 billion dollars are spent each year on primary and secondary school education for children here illegally and they cannot speak a word of English!
http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0604/01/ldt.01.html
5. $17 billion dollars are spent each year for education for the American-born children of illegal aliens, known as anchor babies.
http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0604/01/ldt.01.html
6. $3 Million Dollars PER DAY is spent to incarcerate illegal aliens.
ttp://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0604/01/ldt.01.html
7. 30% percent of all federal prison inmates are illegal aliens.
http:/ /transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0604/01/ldt.01.html
8. $90 billion dollars are spent each year on illegal aliens for welfare & social services by the American taxpayers.
http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0610/29/ldt.01.html
9. $200 billion dollars per year in suppressed American wages are caused by the illegal aliens.
http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0604/01/ldt.01.html
10. The illegal aliens in the United States have a crime rate that's two and a half times that of white non-illegal aliens. In particular, their children, are going to make a huge additional crime problem in the US .
http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0606/12/ldt.01.html
11. D uring the year 2005, there were 4 to 10 MILLION illegal aliens that crossed our southern border with as many as 19,500 illegal aliens from terrorist countries. Millions of pounds of drugs, cocaine, meth, heroine, and marijuana crossed into the U.S. from the southern border.
http://tinyurl.com/t9sht
12. The National Policy Institute, estimates that the total cost of mass deportation would be between $206 and $230 billion, or an average cost of between $41 and $46 billion annually over a five year period.
http://www.nationalpolicyinstitute.org/publications.php?b=deportation
13. In 2006, illegal aliens sen t home $45 BILLION in remittances back to their countries of origin. http://www.rense.com/general75/niht.htm
14. The dark side of illegal immigration: Nearly one million sex crimes are committed by illegal immigrants in the United States !"
http://www.drdsk.com/articleshtml
The total cost is a whopping $338.3 BILLION DOLLARS A YEAR!!!
Tina Griego, journalist for the Denver Rocky Mountain News wrote a column titled, "Mexican Visitor's Lament" -- 10/25/07.
She interviewed Mexican journalist Evangelina Hernandez while visiting Denver last week. Hernandez said, "They (illegal aliens) pay rent, buy groceries, buy clothes...What Happens to your country's economy if 20 million people go away?" That's a good question - it deserves an answer. Over 80 percent of Americans demand secured borders and illegal migration stopped. But what would happen if all 20 million or more vacated America ?
The answers may surprise you!
In California , if 3.5 million illegal aliens moved back to Mexico , it would leave an extra $10.2 billion to spend on overloaded school systems, bankrupt hospitals and overru n prisons. It would leave highways cleaner, safer and less congested. Everyone could understand one another as English became the dominant language again.
In Colorado , 500,000 illegal migrants, plus their 300,000 kids and grand-kids - would move back 'home', mostly to Mexico . That would save Coloradans an estimated $2 billion (other experts say $7 billion) annually in taxes that pay for schooling, medical, social-services and incarceration costs. It means 12,000 gang members would vanish out of Denver alone.
Colorado would save more than $20 million in prison costs, and the terror that those 7,300 alien criminals set upon local citizens. Denver Officer Don Young and hundreds of Colorado victims would not have suffered death, accidents, rapes and other crimes by illegals.
Denver Public Schools would not suffer a 67 percent drop-out/flunk-out rate because of thousands of illegal alien students speaking 41 different languages. At least 200,000 vehicles would vanish from our gridlocked cities in Colorado .
Denver 's four percent unemployment rate would vanish as our working poor would gain jobs at a living wage.
In Florida , 1.5 million illegals would return the Sunshine State back to America , the rule of law, and English.
In Chicago , Illinois , 2.1 million illegals would free up hospitals, schools, prisons and highways for a safer, cleaner and more crime-free
experience.
& nbsp;
If 20 million illegal aliens returned 'home' --
If 20 million illegal aliens returned 'home', the U.S. Economy would return to the rule of law. Employers would hire legal American citizens at a living wage. Everyone would pay their fair share of taxes because they wouldn't be working off the books. That would result in an additional $401 Billion in IRS income taxes collected annually, and an equal amount for local, state and city coffers
No more push '1' for Spanish or '2' for English. No more confusion in American schools that now must contend with over 100 languages that degrade the educational system for American kids. Our overcrowded schools would lose more than two million illegal alien kids at a cost of billions in ESL and free breakfasts and lunches.
We would lose 500,000 illegal criminal alien inmates at a cost of more than $1.6 billion annually. That includes 15,000 MS-13 gang members who distribute $130 billion in drugs annually would vacate our country.
In cities like L.A. , 20,000 members of the ' 18th Street Gang' would vanish from our nation. No more Mexican forgery gangs for ID theft from Americans! No more foreign rapists and child molesters!
Losing more than 20 million people would clear up our crowded highways and gridlock. Cleaner air and less drinking and driving American deaths by illegal aliens!
America 's economy is drained. Taxpayers are harmed. Employers get rich . Over $80 billion annually wouldn't return to the aliens' home countries by cash transfers. Illegal migrants earned half that money untaxed, which further drains America 's economy - which currently suffers an $8.7 trillion debt.
At least 400,000 anchor babies would not be born in our country, costing us $109 billion per year per cycle. At least 86 hospitals in
California , Georgia and Florida would still be operating instead of being bankrupt out of existence because illegals pay nothing via the EMTOLA Act
Americans wouldn't suffer thousands of TB and hepatitis cases rampant in our country-brought in by illegals unscreened at our borders.
Our cities would see 20 million less people driving, polluting and grid locking our cities. It would also put the 'progressives' on the horns of a dilemma; illegal aliens and their families cause 11 percent of our greenhouse gases.
Over one million of Mexico 's poorest citizens now live ins ide and along our border from Brownsville , Texas to San Diego , California in what the New York Times called, "colonias" or new neighborhoods. Trouble is, those living areas resemble Bombay and Calcutta where grinding poverty, filth, diseases, dru gs, crimes, no sanitation and worse. They live without sewage, clean water, streets, electricity, roads or any kind of sanitation.
The New York Times reported them to be America 's new " Third World " inside our own country. Within 20 years, at their current growth rate, they expect 20 million residents of those colonias. By enforcing our laws, we could repatriate them back to Mexico .
We sh ould invite 20 million aliens to go home, fix their own countries and/or make a better life in Mexico . We already invite a million
people into our country legally more than all other countries combined annually. We cannot and must not allow anarchy at our borders, more anarchy within our borders and growing law lessness at every level in our nation. It's time to stand up for our country, our culture, our civilization and our way of life.
Interesting Statistics. Here are 14 reasons illegal aliens should vacate America, and I hope they are forwarded over and over again until they are read so many times that the reader gets sic k of reading them:
1. $11 billion to $22 billion dollars are spent each year on welfare to illegal aliens.
http://tinyurl.com/zob77
2. $2.2 billion dollars are spent each year on food assistance programs such as food stamps, WIC, and free school lunches for illegal
aliens.
http://www.cis.org/articles/2004/fiscale xec.html
3. $2.5 billion dollars are spent each year on Medicaid for illegal aliens.
http://www.cis.org/articles/2004/fiscalexec.html
4. $12 billion dollars are spent each year on primary and secondary school education for children here illegally and they cannot speak a word of English!
http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0604/01/ldt.01.html
5. $17 billion dollars are spent each year for education for the American-born children of illegal aliens, known as anchor babies.
http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0604/01/ldt.01.html
6. $3 Million Dollars PER DAY is spent to incarcerate illegal aliens.
ttp://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0604/01/ldt.01.html
7. 30% percent of all federal prison inmates are illegal aliens.
http:/ /transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0604/01/ldt.01.html
8. $90 billion dollars are spent each year on illegal aliens for welfare & social services by the American taxpayers.
http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0610/29/ldt.01.html
9. $200 billion dollars per year in suppressed American wages are caused by the illegal aliens.
http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0604/01/ldt.01.html
10. The illegal aliens in the United States have a crime rate that's two and a half times that of white non-illegal aliens. In particular, their children, are going to make a huge additional crime problem in the US .
http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0606/12/ldt.01.html
11. D uring the year 2005, there were 4 to 10 MILLION illegal aliens that crossed our southern border with as many as 19,500 illegal aliens from terrorist countries. Millions of pounds of drugs, cocaine, meth, heroine, and marijuana crossed into the U.S. from the southern border.
http://tinyurl.com/t9sht
12. The National Policy Institute, estimates that the total cost of mass deportation would be between $206 and $230 billion, or an average cost of between $41 and $46 billion annually over a five year period.
http://www.nationalpolicyinstitute.org/publications.php?b=deportation
13. In 2006, illegal aliens sen t home $45 BILLION in remittances back to their countries of origin. http://www.rense.com/general75/niht.htm
14. The dark side of illegal immigration: Nearly one million sex crimes are committed by illegal immigrants in the United States !"
http://www.drdsk.com/articleshtml
The total cost is a whopping $338.3 BILLION DOLLARS A YEAR!!!
fearless leader
Member
Quote:In the end, I would have picked Al Gore, sure maybe there wouldn't be tax cuts, but there wouldn't have been a war from lies, or guantanamo, or rendition, or torture, or US citizens being held without right of Habeus Corpus. After 8 years, if it isn't clear the lesser of two evils was Al Gore, you have blinders on. Ooh he blathers about global warming, that's so scary.... right. At least that doesn't affect the BOR.
No terrorist attacks since 9/11.<that's a period. Algore would have crawled under a desk and hid.
No terrorist attacks since 9/11.<that's a period. Algore would have crawled under a desk and hid.
Last edited:
HK G3
Member
Okay, I'm probably going to get flamed for this, but I feel it has to be said, mainly because it gets irritating to read such factually inaccurate viewpoints being voiced so often, especially when I feel it is ultimately detrimental to our common cause.
Al Gore would not have hid under his desk and cried for his mommy after 9/11. It's very possible 9/11 may not even have happened in the first place, and all of us would be whining about how Al Gore was trying to push for more fuel efficient vehicles right now, instead of worrying about the myriad of problems we have today. Look at what Sandy Berger and other former Clinton officials were saying about the threat that Al Qaeda posed to the country to Condeleezza "no one thought they'd fly planes into buildings" Rice, who chose at best to de-emphasize the legitimacy and importance of those intel reports, and at worst, to flat out ignore them. And who remembers Richard Clarke? Former Reagan official, again, ignored by this administration, not only on 9/11 but also for the Iraq war.
Then let's not forget this:
Bush sat around reading to kids after he had been told the country was under attack. Was it Russian ultranationalists launching a tactical strike? Terrorists? No rush to go find out the nature of the threat - he'd rather keep reading and hope that others were up to the task. I find it hard to believe that Al Gore could have done any worse.
After 9/11, for the first time since FDR addressed a shocked and grieving nation after Pearl Harbor, Bush was handed a golden opportunity to do something BIG for us as a nation. We all stood together, liberals, conservatives, greens, libertarians, everyone, united as Americans brought closer to eachother as a society thanks to the tragedy that befell our country men in NYC. He chose to squander this opportunity, calling for us to go out and SHOP. Go buy crap. That was his great contribution.
The push to the Iraq war was a joke. Sure, he was using faulty intel that was given to him. However, recalling the Vallerie(sp?) Plame fiasco, it was clear that they intentionally embellished certain aspects of their information. It was also clear, that prior to the war, Saddam Hussein was complying with Hans Blix and the UN inspectors to an increasing degree. The region was stable back then with Hussein in power. He was a bad guy for sure, but there are a lot of bad guys in the world, and if you want to take one of them out, hopefully, we could do better than this...
Now, we have Iran flaunting the US, because they realize that we have our hands tied with this Iraq fiasco, the budget is in the toilet, the dollar has been outshined by the Canadian dollar, Bush's Blackwater boys sure didn't help anyone out during hurricane Katrina, but they were more than happy to go and take other people's guns illegally, by the barrel of automatic rifles that law-abiding citizens can't legally own... The government spy programs have grown ever more powerful, the 4th amendment rendered practically irrelevant, people debating whether or not TORTURE is appropriate... Not to mention vetoing SCHIP multiple times, letting poor kids die of Staph infections, and letting the insurance industry continue to ream its clientèle...
But yes, Gore is bad because Sean Hannity says that Gore would not have invaded Afghanistan and routed the Taliban, and therefore it must be true. He also would have made the grave mistake of not have invading Iraq after 9/11 despite its having no ties to Al Qaeda or 9/11. Clearly, only a true visionary like George Bush could see through this lack of connection, and execute this wonderfully well-thought out excursion into the desert, which was clearly in America's best interests, both economically, and safety.
Let's all keep espousing blatant misrepresentations of fact, perpetuating this notion that Republicans = security, Democrats = fiery death + rapists roaming free across the countryside. It does our country a great favor to polarize things to this degree.
Now because I know that criticism as a general rule on these forums is discouraged sans constructive feedback, what do I propose we do? I think you can't just sit around and rule out either party. You have to vote for the best individual for the job.
The best thing we could do, as pro-Bill of Rights individuals (at least I hope everyone who defends the 2A would defend the other 9 amendments of the BoR) is to try and change opinion and policy on both sides of the aisle. Don't just mock the "other" side and outright ignore them. If I were an on-the-fence voter and I saw this thread, and the general disdain that most have for the Democrats, it may just reinforce the stereotype that gun-owners are single issue voters, who care more about their guns than the state of the country, and will try and rationalize even the worst foreign/domestic policy provided the candidate was pro-gun. Maybe if the Democrats were inundated with letters from people indicating that they like their ideas, but are very hesitant to vote for their candidates due to their hostile view of the 2A (regardless of whether or not they actually did intend to vote for them), it would produce some change within their party? Even on that Democratic Underground site, there is a lot of debate over gun control, with a lot of people voicing a viewpoint very similar to ours.
Ultimately, we'll be better off if both parties were to drop their gun control stance, and if the calls from Brady Bunch fell upon deaf ears. That should be our long-term goal. Championing one party over the other merely leads to the situation we are currently facing - a very real possibility of the primaries producing two staunchly anti-gun candidates. Frankly, I have a hard time understanding why the likely-to-win candidates from both sides are so bad this year. On the Democrats side there was real promise (w/ respect to 2A) with Bill Richardson. Edwards is interesting as he seems to completely avoid the subject of gun control - either he's afraid of angering Southerners by saying he supports gun control, or he's worried about angering the DNC by saying he's against it. On the Republicans' side, you had Thompson and Ron Paul. Huckabee is a friend of the 2A, but he's far too interested in having the government regulate other personal aspects of our lives. He also seems to be all for continuing along Bush's path...
We really need to work on changing public opinion, and trying to make people understand why the Bill of Rights, including the 2A are so important. As others have said, ultimately changing the opinion of the guy next door is probably more important than writing letters to your local elected officials and their headquarters.
And it looks like I've written a short novel here...
Al Gore would not have hid under his desk and cried for his mommy after 9/11. It's very possible 9/11 may not even have happened in the first place, and all of us would be whining about how Al Gore was trying to push for more fuel efficient vehicles right now, instead of worrying about the myriad of problems we have today. Look at what Sandy Berger and other former Clinton officials were saying about the threat that Al Qaeda posed to the country to Condeleezza "no one thought they'd fly planes into buildings" Rice, who chose at best to de-emphasize the legitimacy and importance of those intel reports, and at worst, to flat out ignore them. And who remembers Richard Clarke? Former Reagan official, again, ignored by this administration, not only on 9/11 but also for the Iraq war.
Then let's not forget this:
Bush sat around reading to kids after he had been told the country was under attack. Was it Russian ultranationalists launching a tactical strike? Terrorists? No rush to go find out the nature of the threat - he'd rather keep reading and hope that others were up to the task. I find it hard to believe that Al Gore could have done any worse.
After 9/11, for the first time since FDR addressed a shocked and grieving nation after Pearl Harbor, Bush was handed a golden opportunity to do something BIG for us as a nation. We all stood together, liberals, conservatives, greens, libertarians, everyone, united as Americans brought closer to eachother as a society thanks to the tragedy that befell our country men in NYC. He chose to squander this opportunity, calling for us to go out and SHOP. Go buy crap. That was his great contribution.
The push to the Iraq war was a joke. Sure, he was using faulty intel that was given to him. However, recalling the Vallerie(sp?) Plame fiasco, it was clear that they intentionally embellished certain aspects of their information. It was also clear, that prior to the war, Saddam Hussein was complying with Hans Blix and the UN inspectors to an increasing degree. The region was stable back then with Hussein in power. He was a bad guy for sure, but there are a lot of bad guys in the world, and if you want to take one of them out, hopefully, we could do better than this...
Now, we have Iran flaunting the US, because they realize that we have our hands tied with this Iraq fiasco, the budget is in the toilet, the dollar has been outshined by the Canadian dollar, Bush's Blackwater boys sure didn't help anyone out during hurricane Katrina, but they were more than happy to go and take other people's guns illegally, by the barrel of automatic rifles that law-abiding citizens can't legally own... The government spy programs have grown ever more powerful, the 4th amendment rendered practically irrelevant, people debating whether or not TORTURE is appropriate... Not to mention vetoing SCHIP multiple times, letting poor kids die of Staph infections, and letting the insurance industry continue to ream its clientèle...
But yes, Gore is bad because Sean Hannity says that Gore would not have invaded Afghanistan and routed the Taliban, and therefore it must be true. He also would have made the grave mistake of not have invading Iraq after 9/11 despite its having no ties to Al Qaeda or 9/11. Clearly, only a true visionary like George Bush could see through this lack of connection, and execute this wonderfully well-thought out excursion into the desert, which was clearly in America's best interests, both economically, and safety.
Let's all keep espousing blatant misrepresentations of fact, perpetuating this notion that Republicans = security, Democrats = fiery death + rapists roaming free across the countryside. It does our country a great favor to polarize things to this degree.
Now because I know that criticism as a general rule on these forums is discouraged sans constructive feedback, what do I propose we do? I think you can't just sit around and rule out either party. You have to vote for the best individual for the job.
The best thing we could do, as pro-Bill of Rights individuals (at least I hope everyone who defends the 2A would defend the other 9 amendments of the BoR) is to try and change opinion and policy on both sides of the aisle. Don't just mock the "other" side and outright ignore them. If I were an on-the-fence voter and I saw this thread, and the general disdain that most have for the Democrats, it may just reinforce the stereotype that gun-owners are single issue voters, who care more about their guns than the state of the country, and will try and rationalize even the worst foreign/domestic policy provided the candidate was pro-gun. Maybe if the Democrats were inundated with letters from people indicating that they like their ideas, but are very hesitant to vote for their candidates due to their hostile view of the 2A (regardless of whether or not they actually did intend to vote for them), it would produce some change within their party? Even on that Democratic Underground site, there is a lot of debate over gun control, with a lot of people voicing a viewpoint very similar to ours.
Ultimately, we'll be better off if both parties were to drop their gun control stance, and if the calls from Brady Bunch fell upon deaf ears. That should be our long-term goal. Championing one party over the other merely leads to the situation we are currently facing - a very real possibility of the primaries producing two staunchly anti-gun candidates. Frankly, I have a hard time understanding why the likely-to-win candidates from both sides are so bad this year. On the Democrats side there was real promise (w/ respect to 2A) with Bill Richardson. Edwards is interesting as he seems to completely avoid the subject of gun control - either he's afraid of angering Southerners by saying he supports gun control, or he's worried about angering the DNC by saying he's against it. On the Republicans' side, you had Thompson and Ron Paul. Huckabee is a friend of the 2A, but he's far too interested in having the government regulate other personal aspects of our lives. He also seems to be all for continuing along Bush's path...
We really need to work on changing public opinion, and trying to make people understand why the Bill of Rights, including the 2A are so important. As others have said, ultimately changing the opinion of the guy next door is probably more important than writing letters to your local elected officials and their headquarters.
And it looks like I've written a short novel here...
jfh
Member.
Clearly, if we are back to reporting DU Underground propaganda on GWB as truth, it is time to either move this thread to The Round Table at APS or close it.
HK G3, may I suggest you review the rules for posting here, and consider alternatives to your current facts and style.
Jim H.
HK G3, may I suggest you review the rules for posting here, and consider alternatives to your current facts and style.
Jim H.
-terry
Member
Very Nice HK G3. Unfortunately, reason is not as respected as it probably should be. Get your asbestos suit out and be ready. 
-terry
-terry
I dont want to hear about how Bush is not as bad as Clinton. If you believe that, then you really dont pay enough attention, or dont have very good critical thinking skills. There are a whole lot of people who are staunch defenders because of what they want him to be, not what he really is.
For those of you who think the lesser of two evils is a viable scenario, that is only true if the lesser of two evils is acceptable. If the lesser of the two evils is still intolerable, it is time to jump in the fray and make some new choices.
Here is a scenario illustrating this point. Let's say that a thug has broken into your house and taken your daughter hostage. He offers you two options. One, he is going to rape her and then shoot her in the head where she will die a painless death. The second option, he rapes her and then tortures her to death. Will you choose the lesser of two evils? NO! If you are any kind of man you will try to make something else happen, even if your chances of success are small. Why? Because the lesser of the two evils is still unacceptable.
Even if you assume that Al GOre would have been able to do more evil with a congress that would have been hostile to him, Bush's actions is supporting the AWB, refusing to secure the border, pushing the SPP and NAU, etc... are too evil to be acceptable!
I know that some of you think that the lesser of two evils is better because it slows our descent into the fire. The Democrats may push us 100MPH into the fire, liberal Repubs like Bush, Guliani, McCain, Huckabee, and Romney may only push us at 80MPH. Both are a problem. Eventually we better vote for someone who will take us away from the fire, or we will be burned by whoever gets us there.
Those of believe in the "lesser of two evils" are incredibly short-sighted.
For those of you who think the lesser of two evils is a viable scenario, that is only true if the lesser of two evils is acceptable. If the lesser of the two evils is still intolerable, it is time to jump in the fray and make some new choices.
Here is a scenario illustrating this point. Let's say that a thug has broken into your house and taken your daughter hostage. He offers you two options. One, he is going to rape her and then shoot her in the head where she will die a painless death. The second option, he rapes her and then tortures her to death. Will you choose the lesser of two evils? NO! If you are any kind of man you will try to make something else happen, even if your chances of success are small. Why? Because the lesser of the two evils is still unacceptable.
Even if you assume that Al GOre would have been able to do more evil with a congress that would have been hostile to him, Bush's actions is supporting the AWB, refusing to secure the border, pushing the SPP and NAU, etc... are too evil to be acceptable!
I know that some of you think that the lesser of two evils is better because it slows our descent into the fire. The Democrats may push us 100MPH into the fire, liberal Repubs like Bush, Guliani, McCain, Huckabee, and Romney may only push us at 80MPH. Both are a problem. Eventually we better vote for someone who will take us away from the fire, or we will be burned by whoever gets us there.
Those of believe in the "lesser of two evils" are incredibly short-sighted.
doc2rn
Member
This is why I wanted Perot to win. The one person I thought would be able to fix things.
SSN Vet
Member
I guess I'm stupid enough to think...
1. the guy who let the AWB expire and didn't push for renewal is good for RKBA.
2. all those with bright shiny new PG/HC AKs and ARs owe the guy a thank you.
3. all I read from that article is that the guy thinks that the NFA bans are constitutional.
wrt. to Iraq....
Bush has killed more Islamic Jihadist than all of his predecessors combined and imho, that's a good thing.
Ya he's far from a conservative......but it's the libs cursing him the loudest, and that should tell ya something.
and finally.....
voting for Bush twice has guaranteed my R2KBA for two reasons....
1. Roberts
2. Alito
if we had a crystal ball to truly know the devil that was Al Gore, John Kerry or any of the Dim wits lined up to day, we'd be singing President (lesser of two evils) Bush's praises for a thousand years.
My only regret is that I can't vote him in for a third term.
1. the guy who let the AWB expire and didn't push for renewal is good for RKBA.
2. all those with bright shiny new PG/HC AKs and ARs owe the guy a thank you.
3. all I read from that article is that the guy thinks that the NFA bans are constitutional.
wrt. to Iraq....
Bush has killed more Islamic Jihadist than all of his predecessors combined and imho, that's a good thing.
Ya he's far from a conservative......but it's the libs cursing him the loudest, and that should tell ya something.
and finally.....
voting for Bush twice has guaranteed my R2KBA for two reasons....
1. Roberts
2. Alito
if we had a crystal ball to truly know the devil that was Al Gore, John Kerry or any of the Dim wits lined up to day, we'd be singing President (lesser of two evils) Bush's praises for a thousand years.
My only regret is that I can't vote him in for a third term.
He said he would sign it if it came to his desk. He would too.
Not even close. He didnt do ONE thing for us on that. That bill sunset on it's own. I own a Daewoo K1A1. Less than 2000 of them in the country I believe. You can thank his father for that, they have been banned from import since 91. If he were interested in preserving the 2A he would have done something about that, among other things.
Then your reading comprehension isnt that good, or you have a very narrow scope of study. Did you read ANYTHING about the brief that the Bush administration DOJ filed requesting that the Supreme Court reverse the lower court decision in DC vs. Heller. The Bush administration has specifically asked the Supreme Court to ban American citizens in this city from owning handguns .
That is a LONG way from just thinking NFA bans are constitutional. And by the way, NFA bans are NOT Constitutional.
I wont pretend that I am at all bothered about killing jiahdis, but they dont scare me a bit. The power that Bush has created for the Executive Branch though has me very troubled. Even if you 100% trust George Bush, there are going to be others assuming that power after he leaves, and it will continue to grow. Study the Patriot Act and then tell me what you think about Hillary Clinton having the powers it defines to combat "domestic terrorism".
And dont for a minute pretend that Bush is doing this to fight Islamic terrorists. If so, he wouldnt have proclaimed many times that the Muslim religion is a great religion, and that we are not at war with them. If it were, we would have chosen some other country besides the ONE non-muslim government in the Middle East (Israel aside) to overthrow.
I wonder if people even think sometimes. Do you realize that Iraq was the only non-muslim government over there? Do you realize that NOW, because of us, it is a Muslim government? Do you realize that 2/3 of the 9/11 hijackers came from Saudi Arabia? Yet we continue to provide them with billions in funding.
Finally, dont pretend that Bush is a bit concerned about terrorism when he doesnt do one thing to secure our border, but instead he encourages illegal immigration, and is pushing a North American Union. Clearly Bush is not interested in fighting terrorism, and he has all the money that he needs. I challenge you to ask yourself, if all this hoopla is not about fighting terrorism, what is it about?
For the record, this is coming from someone who voted for Bush, and was a huge supporter of his for several years. I finally realized I was being extremely stubborn, and that I defended him because of what I WANTED him to be, not what he is.
Many of us defended him mostly because of how hard the press attacked him. We also defended him because we are (for lack of a better term) manly men. We are red-blooded Americans and we perceived the Iraqis as the enemy. We are not bleeding hearts, we wanted to crush them, go to war with them, heck most of us even wanted to bomb them back into the stone age. But folks, we were being led by the nose, we were easily manipulated we were so naive we didnt even realize it.
There is no doubt the Muslims want to take over this country, just like they are doing in France and other parts of Europe. They want to take over the whole world. But there is also no doubt that they are not able to harm us in a substantial way if America is properly governed. The assault upon our liberties and freedoms is a much more grave threat than what comes from the Islamic jihadist's, and George Bush is no friend of our liberties.
I hope some people will read this and actually think and study the facts, not just respond with emotion. WE NEED TO THINK!
Archie
Member
And of course, there was never an Attorney General John Ashcroft who publicly stated the Second Amendment applied to individuals, was there? And of course, President Bush had nothing to do with that, did he?
No, President Bush has not been a gunowner's dream. However, every Democrat since Lyndon Johnson has been a gunowner's nightmare.
Campeon and Ramos: Sorry guys, but those two punks shot the illegal (and that's all he was at the time) out of spite for looking stupid and not being able to catch him. Once they shot him, he fell down and neither Campeon or Ramos attempted to arrest him. He couldn't be prosecuted for drug smuggling in any event because Campeon and Ramos destroyed all evidence of the smuggler driving the vehicle. For those with intellectual honesty, check out "Texasmonthly.com", September 2007.
I spent six years as a Border Patrol Agent and those guys are a disgrace.
Sorry to inform all the tinfoilhat crowd, but no individual rights have been violated by the Bush Administration. The detainees at Guantanamo Bay are not criminals awaiting trial and therefore deserving of U. S. Constitutional rights of speedy trial. They enemy soldiers at best, being detained to insure they do not resume hostilities toward our nation and people. At worst, they fall under the heading of 'brigands and bandits' and rate summary execution in the field.
This is amazing. I always thought fellow gun owners were thinkers and self-educators. I didn't realize so many simply swallow whatever line the liberal media is spouting this week.
So, all you Bush hating gun owners go ahead and cut your throats and vote for Hillary. Go ahead and prove how much you really don't like President Bush because the 'media' told you to.
The only problem is, you're cutting my throat and all other gun owner's throats as well.
No, President Bush has not been a gunowner's dream. However, every Democrat since Lyndon Johnson has been a gunowner's nightmare.
Campeon and Ramos: Sorry guys, but those two punks shot the illegal (and that's all he was at the time) out of spite for looking stupid and not being able to catch him. Once they shot him, he fell down and neither Campeon or Ramos attempted to arrest him. He couldn't be prosecuted for drug smuggling in any event because Campeon and Ramos destroyed all evidence of the smuggler driving the vehicle. For those with intellectual honesty, check out "Texasmonthly.com", September 2007.
I spent six years as a Border Patrol Agent and those guys are a disgrace.
Sorry to inform all the tinfoilhat crowd, but no individual rights have been violated by the Bush Administration. The detainees at Guantanamo Bay are not criminals awaiting trial and therefore deserving of U. S. Constitutional rights of speedy trial. They enemy soldiers at best, being detained to insure they do not resume hostilities toward our nation and people. At worst, they fall under the heading of 'brigands and bandits' and rate summary execution in the field.
This is amazing. I always thought fellow gun owners were thinkers and self-educators. I didn't realize so many simply swallow whatever line the liberal media is spouting this week.
So, all you Bush hating gun owners go ahead and cut your throats and vote for Hillary. Go ahead and prove how much you really don't like President Bush because the 'media' told you to.
The only problem is, you're cutting my throat and all other gun owner's throats as well.
The Bush administration has gone from bad to worse in a hurry. I honestly do not know how his advisors meet with him every week and still look him in the eye.
I mean seriously, everyone on his staff have failed him and the American public so miserably I dont know how they can even in all good conciousness accept that paycheck every 2 weeks. So sad.
I mean seriously, everyone on his staff have failed him and the American public so miserably I dont know how they can even in all good conciousness accept that paycheck every 2 weeks. So sad.
bogie
Member
I still haven't heard anyone tell me about how the Clintons will be better.
As for Bush and the schoolchildren - Could he actually have DONE anything? I'd have stayed there, while my people went out and figured out just what was going on. Then, I'd be getting one heckuva report the instant my butt hit that nice leather limo seat.
WHY will the Clintons be better? WHY? I _really_ want to know!
As for Bush and the schoolchildren - Could he actually have DONE anything? I'd have stayed there, while my people went out and figured out just what was going on. Then, I'd be getting one heckuva report the instant my butt hit that nice leather limo seat.
WHY will the Clintons be better? WHY? I _really_ want to know!
SSN Vet
Member
in all honesty....this likely describes me....
and yes, I'm not as well studied as I could be....thanks for explaining where the "Bush is no friend to 2A" attitude comes from.
But.....
at least I'm not drinking the media's blue Koolaid and spitting it back up on the high road as so many others are...
SO...
what about my strongest assertion...
Roberts and Alito!!!!!!
those were the two most important 2A related decisions Bush could possibly have made...
and it's looking very much like he got it right.
AND....
as far as the 9/11 school kid thing....
what was he supposed to do?
wet his pants and hide under a desk and scare all the kiddies.
he handled himself with dignity and thought of other people by keeping calm and composed.
fyi...that's what leaders are supposed to do in a time of crisis.
Stevie-Ray
Member
I often think about the 2 times I voted for Bush. Then I remember what total morons Gore and Kerry have remained.................
I certainly don't agree with Bush all the time. But the alternative..............
I certainly don't agree with Bush all the time. But the alternative..............
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked