I'm reminded of democratic vice-presidential front runner Lloyd Bentsen and how he remarked in public that he couldn't vote for an anti-gunner and how it would interfere with his "Quayle" hunting.
Dukakis was rabidly anti-gun. Nobody was fooled then either.
I was in the 9th grade that year. Once I found out Dukakis was anti, that was the end of any use I had for the Democrat party. Before that, I only thought Republican were for the rich while Democrats were the for poor and the working class. At one time, that may have been true and while I still here some say it religiously, it's all just wishful thinking.
I recall that my poli-sci professor said people are either Democrat or Republican because people love labels, but take and Dem. from New England and a Dem. from south Texas and they have nothing in common besides that Dem. label. So then, you get a Dem. from Mass. running for Pres. with a Dem. from Texas as his V.P. and one may be a hunter and the other clearly isn't from a hunting background. The non-hunter will more obviously want to ban every kind of gun out there whereas the hunter may mask the anti streak by only talking about banning some.
What gets me is Texas politicians who are hunters... they seem to be more likely to talk about banning military arms and keep hunting arms. Bentsen alluded to hunting. Ann Richards was shown shooting clays at her ranch. George W. Bush talked about his Weatherby Athena O/U shotgun he hunts quail with. Yet most Texas politicians have proven to be against guns in some form or other.
Then we saw John Kerry
try to act like he was all into the hunter's rights while talking about some off-the-wall need for banning guns. He didn't fool too many either.
And now we get McCain vs. Klinton and/or Obama... all three are against guns and they don't make any
real effort to hide it. Any way they spin it, it all comes back down to
people control. I see where any of several things could be setting up here. Here's just the ones that immediately come to mind.
1- The Dems have been beaten in the last two Presidential elections and they know if they let We the People decide, they'll lose again.
2- The Dems want Hillary in there. But if the people decide Obama, it'll disenfranchise a good many black voters.
3- If the people choose McCain (or, now less likely, Huckabee) and they put in Hillary anyway, it won't just disenfranchise the black voters who sided for Obama. It'll also disenfranchise so many Republicans of any ethnicity and/or Right/Left leaning.
4- Regardless of who gets elected or selected, they want an anti-gun commie for POTUS. I think they hope, if Congress won't pass gun ban legislation, the Pres. will issue executive orders to ban guns and Congress will sit by and do nothing. Which is why it's so important for We the People to be sure, regardless of who's Pres., that we have a Conservative majority in Congress.
Do I think I'm turning any votes? No; not at all. Just my observations.
