Republicans=Democrats

[thaddeus]

Here is an interesting commentary I got on an email list:

"There may not be much difference between Democrats and Republicans
anymore."
-- Senate Democratic leader Tom Daschle (SD)

(Thursday, May 20, 1999)-- Senator Daschle made the above statement
last night while commenting on all the Republican "concessions and
reversals on guns in the past week," reported the Associated Press.

Indeed, while Democrats have actively pushed for gun control
amendments to Hatch's juvenile crime bill, it is the Republican
leadership that has crafted most of the gun control legislation that
has passed. It all began last week with an amendment introduced by
Republican Senator John Ashcroft (MO) which further criminalized the
possession of certain firearms by young adults. (Keep in mind, that
as late as the 1950s, kids were taking guns to school as part of
organized school training activities or ROTC. But with the Ashcroft
amendment, the mere possession of certain firearms could, under most
circumstances, land a young adult in jail-- even if there is a
parent in the near vicinity and there is no harmful activity
attempted with the firearm.)

Then there was the Hatch/Craig amendment, named after Senators Orrin
Hatch (R-UT) and Larry Craig (R-ID). This anti-gun amendment passed
and required that gun buyers go through background "registration"
checks at gun shows, even if a person is buying from a PRIVATE
individual. The Hatch/Craig amendment also included massive
increases in funding for the BATF, in addition to a vast array of
other gun control.

Finally, Tuesday brought about another interesting set of
"bedfellows." Orrin Hatch and Herb Kohl-- the anti-gun zealot from
Wisconsin-- co-authored an amendment forcing gun sellers to include
"lock up your safety" devices with every handgun sold. [Kohl (D) is
best remembered for his unconstitutional Gun Free Zones Ban in
1996.] Although failure to use a trigger lock would not be
negligence, per se, such failure could be used as evidence in
court-- thus encouraging people to refrain from keeping firearms for
self-defense. At day's end, the Hatch-Kohl amendment passed 78-20.

TALKING POINTS: Grassroots activists have reported two objections
arising from Republicans who wish to justify their votes for Gun
Control "Lite" these past two weeks:

1. Senators have argued they had to vote for "some gun control"
restrictions in order to stem the tide against even greater gun
controls. Of course, this is like someone saying they gave an
alligator their right arm to keep it from eating the rest of their
body-- a ridiculous notion. But this is the situation Republicans
now find themselves in. Having given up their "right arm" by
supporting Gun Control "Lite," they are now in a weaker position to
oppose further encroachments. Once they concede the principle that
prior restraints can be placed upon the Second Amendment, where will
the encroachments end?

Moreover, this notion of voting for "some" gun control to evade
"more" gun control HAS NOT worked. Every Republican concession has
been met with further demands from the Democrats for MORE gun
control. Feinstein, Lautenberg, Schumer, Boxer-- they all want a
piece of the action. None of them have been satisfied by preemptive
concessions made by the Republicans. As stated by the Associated
Press this morning: "Despite the concessions, [White House]
officials prepared a long list of additional issues that the
Republicans didn't address, saying the GOP hadn't gone far enough to
stop some criminals from obtaining weapons."

2. A couple of you have told us some Senate staffers are claiming
GOA is only opposing these Gun Control "Lite" amendments in order to
raise funds. The staffers making these specious claims can go to
http://www.gunowners.org and read all of GOA's alerts at the top of
its Web page-- and see that GOA has asked for a whopping total of
$0.00.

 

[DC]

Thats it in a nutshell.

The Democrats ALWAYS start from zero sum....that this is the first time they have ever asked for anything, so of course, using that operating principle, they can re-define "compromise".

For a yuck I watched Rosie today to see if she'd say anything about Tom Selleck....she did, a profuse apology to Tom personally...then launched into a tirade against the NRA, "the most powerful lobby ever in Washington" and "their history of never ever compromising". Interestingly enough she came perilously close in advocating denial of 1st amendment rights for the NRA. Of course, once she has the audience whipped into an emotional frenzy she gives a news brief for the studio audience's benefit (having been in line)...the Georgia highschool shooting. She made it all look impromptu, except that she was beeing prodded by her capon(castrated young rooster) sidekick.

Bottomline: I am sick to death of all the excuses, the specious rationale and gutless capitulations the Republicans do on a daily basis. Daschle has it on the button....Republicans are Democrats and the lot of them are treacherous noblesse riche or pezzonovante infido

------------------
"Quis custodiet ipsos custodes"

 

[DHH]

Unfortunately, we seem to have no one left to speak for us. The major media seems intent on showing one side of the issue and the other side is dismissed as "crackpots".
Concerning Tom Selleck on Rosie's show, the following is from their exchange:

Tom: Do you really think the Second Amendment to the Constitution is to guarantee hunting and target shooting? Do you really think that’s what the Founding Fathers meant?

Rosie: I think the Second Amendment is in the Constitution so that we can have muskets when the British people come over in 1800. I don’t think it’s in the Constitution to have assault weapons in the year 2000. But I’m wrong? I guess...

I would have liked to see the following:

Tom: I agree that the Bill of Rights is probably obsolete. I think the First Amendment only applies to the methods used in the 18th century. Therefore, television, the Internet, telephone, telegraph, radio and other forms of destructive communication should be heavily regulated or outlawed. For our children, of course.

Sigh, I guess that could never happen.


------------------
Dave

 

[Brett Bellmore]

Remember, there hasn't really been a difference between Republicans and Democrats on this issue for a long time. Look at the Brady bill, for instance: Defeated by a filibuster, and revived BY THE REPUBLICAN LEADERSHIP. The "assault weapons" ban? Our only hope of defeating it was another filibuster, so weeks before the debate, the Republican leadership agreed to rules barring a filibuster of gun control provisions. The Lautenberg amendment that stripped anyone ever convicted of a "domestic violence" misdemeanor of their rights? The Kohl amendment which re-enacted the guns free school zone bill in worse form? Slipped into appropriations bills in conference committee, and passed by Republicans who'd been told by their leaders there was no gun control in those bills. (The same leaders who made sure they never had a chance to READ the bills before voting.) Face it, they've been betraying us for years; The only thing new is that they're now doing it OPENLY.