USA: "In surprise move, Bush backs renewal of assault weapons ban "

[Zander]

We just need to make sure that an AWB renewal never leaves the House.

Precisely!

The battle will be fought in the House of Commons; if it doesn't make it out of the House, it can't possibly be signed into law.

No one in The Swamp is laboring under any misconception to the contrary. They know the score...they've known it since 1994, and Al "no controlling legal authority" Gore's defeat in key states was accompanied by the blare of a klaxon in the citizen-disarmament camp.

It's up to us...we must make sure that our federal representatives vote to deny the renewal of this "ban".

Ignore the politics, especially from those who insist that only a thundering denunciation from Dubya is acceptable, and apply pressure in the proper places. The tide has truly turned, and a significant victory is within our reach.

Let's make it happen...

 

[Zander]

No new AW ban: The GOP gets mah vote for the fust time since '88. -- Tamara

Geez, intel is a wonderful thing.

Thank you for helping siphon off votes from Algore; you did vote as a Tennessee resident in the last presidential election, didn't you?

I won't bother asking for whom you cast that vote...if you did.

Boats...

Exceptional analysis...keep it up!

 

[Diesle]

Ummmm, this thing (when written...) wont even make it through house commitee. Its silly to even consider having this jump through the hundreds of burning rings it would have to to make it to Bush's desk.


Diesle

 

[BogBabe]

But if you don't vote for the Republican, a Democrat will win!

And the difference to us as gun owners would be ....?

 

[Marko Kloos]

Thank you for helping siphon off votes from Algore;

You know, I am just about sick of being told to vote for guy A because he sucks just a little less than guy B. In retrospect, I don't think Algore could have incinerated the Constitution any faster than GWB, although he would have held the Zippo to a different part of the parchment first. After the USA PATRIOT act, it's a bitter irony to read faded pro-Dubyah bumperstickers that read "Vote Freedom First".

When exactly are we going to get pro-gun legislation out of the Republicans? It didn't happen during the "Republican Revolution" of 1994-1996, and it's not happening now, with a Republican-controlled Congress *and* Oval Office. What mythical constellation do the stars have to take for the Republicans to take an unabashed pro-gun stance and actually pass some pro-gun legislation?

If I am presented with two piles of dung, and asked which one I'd prefer for lunch, don't complain when I decline to pick either one. Don't delude yourself into thinking that you're striking a blow for freedom just because you pick the right-wing Statist instead of the left-wing Statist. Granted, the right-wing Statist will leave you your guns a little longer, but that's a small consolation. With so many people thinking that a vote for a third party is "thrown away", or active assistance for That Other Guy, it's no wonder that the Bill of Rights is losing more and more meaning every day.

Don't ask me for a strategy to fix it; I don't have one. All I can do is vote my conscience. Nobody who sets fire to the Constitution is worthy of my vote. The majority of "pro-freedom" folks in this country really mean "pro-freedom as long as I support that particular freedom". Nobody, except for a small minority of "idealistic" and "utopian" Libertarians and Constitutionalists, can bear the thought that in a truly free society they don't get to tell others what to do. The system is thoroughly screwed up, and every election is "an advance auction of stolen goods", as H.L. Mencken puts it. It's a big bribery racket, and the only winners are government Statists from both sides of the aisle. The natural tendency of government is to expand, and as it expands, our remaining freedom contracts.

There will be a time in our lifetimes where massive social unrest will come: when the Dolists outnumber the productive class, and the bribes paid out to the Dolists and subsidy recipients tally up to more than the remaining revenue from the worker bees.

 

[BogBabe]

Ignore the politics, especially from those who insist that only a thundering denunciation from Dubya is acceptable, and apply pressure in the proper places.

I hope we do manage to apply the necessary pressure and that the ban doesn't make it to W's desk for signature.

However .... I think we do need for political leaders, including W, who supposedly support our 2A rights, to stand up and say the AWB is wrong and should not be renewed.

Having Bush say he supports it and will sign it if it's renewed does nothing but provide encouragement to the gun-grabbers to continue their evil ways, and encourage the attitude among too many gun owners that the AWB is a "reasonable" restriction and that gun-grabbing is perfectly okey-dokey so long as they're still allowed to go duck hunting.

 

[Lebe]

lendsringer,.. as a relative "newbie" here, it's a great relief to see that there's at least one other member of this forum who has cast off his rose colored glasses and taken a good look at where we are.

I strongly agree with your perpsective.

 

[Boats]

Saint Rand, we invoke thee!!! Saint Rand! Saint Rand??? Sain. . . ."

That's right she was an atheist. She ain't coming back.

Yep. Those genius Founders didn't set up a parliamentary system so that we could have a Green Party and a Beer Party or the Silly Party. This country has always been two party because that is what the system foments. It is possible for one of the two major parties to go Tango Uniform, just as the Whigs did following the Mexican-American War. Looking at the two parties today, the Democrats are closer to implosion than are the Republicans. After all, when the free pie is finite in size and your gluttonous faction members all want the biggest slice, the bakers get disgusted and cut them off. It has happened, and is happening.

Then again, maybe the "consumptive class" is really a Marxist proletariat revolution in disguise.

If my analysis proves incorrect, I will come eat as large a helping of crow as you all may wish. I do agree with several of the posters here that if this strategy backfires I will join them in destroying the careers of as many of those responsible as possible, including the President.

Another thing occurred to me this morning. By saying he supported the current law all along, Bush has given himself an out to veto any legislation that expands the AWB if that somehow hits his desk. "This is NOT the ban I agreed to support and I cannot in good conscience sign it." Or he could give it a pocket veto when Congress isn't in session.

 

[Ian]

This country has always been two party because that is what the system foments.

At least when they were the Federalists and anti-Federalists they were honest about what they wanted to do. Now we just have Federalist A and Federalist B.

Don't delude yourself into thinking that you're striking a blow for freedom just because you pick the right-wing Statist instead of the left-wing Statist.

Amen, Lendringser.

 

[Lebe]

.

Nothing wrong with a two party system, as long as the two dominant parties (and their lackey media) doesn't use their power to exclude challengers.

Until the people are allowed to hear debates which include candidates from all viable parties, the people aren't being given freedom of choice,.. period.

What we have now is a plutocracy. Except for a few, insignificant pet issues, there's really no difference in how the country is ran by either the Democrats *or* the Republicans. Every 4 years Tweedle Dumb and Tweedle Dumber is paraded out in front of the American people and we're "allowed" to select the one whom we visualize as being the least damaging to our way of life. In 2000 it was Bush and Gore. Do you honestly believe that our fine country can produce no one more capable than those two clowns to lead our government?!

Fact is, our government is closed to anyone who refuses to "play the game". Men of real ethics and conviction refuse to consider national political office because of this fact. Consequently, we get to choose between a few "made men" who are all bought and paid for before you ever hear their name mentioned.

In summary,.. a vote for either a Democrat or a Republican will do NOTHING to enhance your life. You're not a part of those governments,.. you simply feed them.

Libertarians,.. for significant change,.. for true liberty and freedom for the future generations.

 

[Boats]

Yep, one is definitely "striking a blow for freedom" by voting for an irrelevant candidate.

I could respect the Libertarian Party if they could win some elections and begin building from the ground up instead of just qualifying for the ballot.

Run for dog catcher. Run for the soil conservation district. Run for the school board. Run for something that can be won and then run for something big. But that is not what the LP is all about. Instead they try to run as nothing but spoilers. Talk about liars. In Oregon, we are not strangers to Libertarian campaigns for every avaialable office. Not once have I read or heard an LP candidate give a speech that acknowledges their real agenda. They give speeches about what they will do if they win. Capital B Capital S!

Were they the vaunted purveyors of the truth that they fancy themselves, they'd be giving speeches on which planks of their outlandish platform they wish the Republican Party give consideration to adopting into their platform. There could scarcely be a bigger lie than talking about one's policies in the event of a win, when one's party has never even visited the lofty heights of 15% of the popular vote in 99.99999% of all elections the LP has ever entered.

 

[Tamara]

So, it's a party's chances of winning that determine whether we should vote for them, and not their stance on freedom and the Constitution? Interesting...

 

[Boats]

Well you can read that in from what I wrote, though I was commenting on lying being somewhat a matter of perspective.

It is an unfortunate fact of political life that one has to muster more votes than the alternatives. Libertarians do nothing that I can discern to broaden their appeal. It is as if they are a bunch of self-flagellating hairshirts who think their remonstrances over the good old days will compel mothers to support privatizing education piecemeal and concerned parents to simply wheel and legalize drugs and other such things that people have been long conditioned to expect as the role of government.

So I do not share the belief that the LP will ever amount to anything more than fringe status. At least in my direct experience, they do nothing that convinces anyone that they will change anything. Rather than running for an attainable office, demonstrating the interface between rhetoric and reality, they'd rather get the same +/- 5,000 votes in a congressional district. Big deal.

 

[Lebe]

.

Boats,... expressing a statist mindset is the same as giving tacit approval to anything that your party of choice decides to do. By doing so, you're essentially giving them the ability to behave in a totalitarian manner.

8 years of the Clinton administration demonstrated just how apathetic the people are concerning the behavior of our heads of state,.. and federal politicians from sea to shining sea took note of that fact. A precedent was established. (most politicians are lawyers,... lawyers are real big on precedent!)

Our economy is trashed,.. we're in a war with no specifically declared enemy and no forseeable end, the administration and Congress are shredding the BOR in an attempt to "fight terrorism",.. and Bushes approval rating is said to be in the high 60% range.

All because of a statist mindset. People simply can't envision an alternative social and political reality,... in part, because they never get exposed to such,.. thanks to the power of the status quo.

 

[ambidextrous1]

Let's be vigilant; let's think until it hurts; let's be very careful.

I believe Wayne LaPierre is correct in his prediction that the issue will die in Congress; we can help this happen by writing our elected representatives (and senators) - you do write them once in a while, don't you?

In the event that the bill does head toward the Oval Office, we can encourage GWB to make the right decision by writing to him on the issue.

If none of this works, we are forced to do what we all too often do: We go to the polls, we hold our nose, and we vote for the re-election of GWB.

The election of a Democrat president in 2004 is not acceptable ; we do not want a Democrat packing the Supreme Court with liberal-socialists!

The options aren't as good as we would like, but our best options are clear.

:banghead:

 

[Boats]

All because of a statist mindset. People simply can't envision an alternative social and political reality,... in part, because they never get exposed to such,.. thanks to the power of the status quo.

I was going to say something about this, but I remembered that this is the High Road and my comments were scathingly patronizing.

Suffice it to say that many people have been exposed to libertarian thought and Libertarian politics and they aren't nearly as infectious as you think they are and leave it at that.

 

[Lebe]

.

Or we could say that many people are afraid of true freedom and leave it at *that*.

Some people need the government to be their mommy and daddy,... some don't.

 

[Boats]

Many of the proponents of "true freedom" wouldn't do so well in the system they advocate. Failure is as failure does. Beware what you wish for or you might be living next to someone who has seventeen junked cars on his property, loudly beats his kids, and burns trash regularly with you downwind and doesn't raise enough chickens to pay for a decent dentist.

 

[Tamara]

...and you'd find confiscatory taxes and onerous regulations preferable to that? I'll take my chances with the neighbours, thanks. Neighbours you can reason with; rulers you can't.

 

[Guntalk]

THERE IS NO BILL

Here's the deal.

If it doesn't get out of committee, the House will never hear it.

Unless the House passes a bill, there is nothing left to do.

Nothing can go to the Senate.

Nothing gets sent to the President.

Who controls the House? Did you count the votes on the pre-emption bill in the House last week?

Interesting politics, to be sure, but pretty easy to figure out.

 

[Boats]

But you don't get it Tom! GWB isn't out front raving about taking the Second Amendment back to its glory days of 1783!

 

[Wildalaska]

and you'd find confiscatory taxes and onerous regulations preferable to that? I'll take my chances with the neighbours, thanks Neighbours you can reason with; rulers you can't.

Sorry Ill take my chances with taxes and regulations...them you can at least try to kill, neighbors you cant.

As long as the world has nitwits, laws are required. Libertarians sometimes as irrationally silly as the kumbaya crowd, jest dressed nicer and less smelly.

Irie, jah

WildcombinmahdreadloscksAlaska

 

[Tamara]

Boats,

GWB isn't out front raving about taking the Second Amendment back to its glory days of 1783!

...or he could just say nothing...

 

[Guntalk]

"he could say nothing"

But ... If he knows the bill will never reach him, he can make the statement he did, and help his re-election chances.

No harm, no foul.

There is much going on behind the scenes, and nothing is what it seems.

Taking this on face value would be a mistake, I think.

 

[BogBabe]

If he knows the bill will never reach him, he can make the statement he did, and help his re-election chances.

IOW, he can side with the gun grabbers and philosophically sell out our 2A rights in order to increase his chances of re-election.

I get it now. Our "allies" in the 2A fight have to side with our "enemies" and sell out our rights in order to maintain power so that they can help us fight for our rights.

It's all crystal clear now.

<sarcasm>I don't understand why anyone would object to this approach. </sarcasm>