Post by Armed Citizen on Mar 6, 2004 20:42:39 GMT -5
Democrats and Gun Control
By Lowell Branham
Sometimes people you think are your best friends may actually be your worst enemies, but it can take a while to figure that out.
Some folks, in fact, require an amazing length of time to arrive at what ought to be a fairly obvious conclusion, but few can match the Democratic Party for being slow on the uptake.
more .. .. .
What finally got their attention was Al Gore's failure to carry his home state of Tennessee. Had Gore won Tennessee, he could've skipped all the legal wrangling over Florida's votes and still taken the White House.
Gore also lost two other states that were expected to go Democratic - Arkansas and West Virginia. Winning any one of those three states would've sealed a Democratic victory in the 2000 presidential race.
I can't definitively say why Gore lost Arkansas and West Virginia because I don't live in those states. But I do live in Tennessee, and I can definitively tell you why Gore lost here. It was because of his outspoken pronouncements favoring more stringent gun control. I strongly suspect that's also the reason he lost Arkansas and West Virginia.
more .. .. .
The current Democratic primary struggles are unlike any others within my memory in that none of the candidates is breathing a word about gun control. In fact, they're taking the opposite tack. Despite their past votes for gun control measures, John Kerry and John Edwards are now casting themselves as true believers in the Second Amendment.
more .. .. .
But just let the Democrats regain control of the White House and the Congress and you'll quickly see how long their new-found convictions last. They're about as trustworthy as Al Gore's claim of having invented the Internet.
By Lowell Branham
Sometimes people you think are your best friends may actually be your worst enemies, but it can take a while to figure that out.
Some folks, in fact, require an amazing length of time to arrive at what ought to be a fairly obvious conclusion, but few can match the Democratic Party for being slow on the uptake.
more .. .. .
What finally got their attention was Al Gore's failure to carry his home state of Tennessee. Had Gore won Tennessee, he could've skipped all the legal wrangling over Florida's votes and still taken the White House.
Gore also lost two other states that were expected to go Democratic - Arkansas and West Virginia. Winning any one of those three states would've sealed a Democratic victory in the 2000 presidential race.
I can't definitively say why Gore lost Arkansas and West Virginia because I don't live in those states. But I do live in Tennessee, and I can definitively tell you why Gore lost here. It was because of his outspoken pronouncements favoring more stringent gun control. I strongly suspect that's also the reason he lost Arkansas and West Virginia.
more .. .. .
The current Democratic primary struggles are unlike any others within my memory in that none of the candidates is breathing a word about gun control. In fact, they're taking the opposite tack. Despite their past votes for gun control measures, John Kerry and John Edwards are now casting themselves as true believers in the Second Amendment.
more .. .. .
But just let the Democrats regain control of the White House and the Congress and you'll quickly see how long their new-found convictions last. They're about as trustworthy as Al Gore's claim of having invented the Internet.
Oh, it does get better,
more .. .. .
At the present time, the NAACP has a lawsuit against a number of firearms manufacturers, claiming that they've flooded black communities with firearms. (Fact of the matter is the manufacturers have no control over where the firearms go -- that's determined by the dealers who order the firearms.) Revealing the historical facts concerning how gun control laws were racist in their beginnings would be counterproductive at this time, I'm told.
more .. .. .
The need for blacks to carry arms for self-defense included not only the problem of Indian attack, and the normal criminal attacks that anyone might worry about, but he additional hazard that free blacks were in danger of being kidnapped and sold into slavery. [26] A number of states, including Ohio, Indiana, Illinois, Michigan, and Wisconsin, passed laws specifically to prohibit kidnapping of free blacks, out of concern that the federal Fugitive Slave Laws would be used as cover for re-enslavement. [27]
The end of slavery in 1865 did not eliminate the problems of racist gun control laws; the various Black Codes adopted after the Civil War required blacks to obtain a license before carrying or possessing firearms or Bowie knives; these are sufficiently well-known that any reasonably complete history of the Reconstruction period mentions them. These restrictive gun laws played a part in the efforts of the Republicans to get the Fourteenth Amendment ratified, because it was difficult for night riders to generate the correct level of terror in a victim who was returning fire. [28]
more .. .. .
Gun control advocates today are not so foolish as to openly promote racist laws, and so the question might be asked what relevance the racist past of gun control laws has. One concern is that the motivations for disarming blacks in the past are really not so different from the motivations for disarming law-abiding citizens today. In the last century, the official rhetoric in support of such laws was that "they" were too violent, too untrustworthy, to be allowed weapons. Today, the same elitist rhetoric regards law-abiding Americans in the same way, as child-like creatures in need of guidance from the government.
more .. .. .
So far I received a number of out-of-state (Virginia, Louisiana, Georgia and New York) phone calls telling me to "back off." One evening the phone rang while I was watching TV. My daughter in another room answered. When she came out of her room a few minutes later and I asked who was on the phone. She said some guy named "Sharpton." "Sharpton who," I asked. "Al Sharpton," she said. She told me that he asked for someone named "Leon" Whitley, Sharpton got my first name wrong and my daughter figured it was a wrong number and hung-up the phone.
more .. .. .
I was expecting phone calls from the Klan, Skin Heads, White Supremacists groups, etc. No, they were mostly from representatives of the NAACP! To be honest, I haven’t received a single phone call from a White person or group opposing my efforts.
more .. .. .
Again, the rep pleaded with me to back off and to stop making copies. He then invites me to come down to Virginia to "...work things out." Telling me, "There are some things I can’t discuss over the phone." I declined the invitation.
more .. .. .
"With this lawsuit, the NAACP is not only attacking the civil rights of African-Americans, but is also continuing the legacy of the KKK and other racist organizations that have historically tried to keep guns out of the hands of blacks. Politics makes strange bedfellows - and what could be stranger than the NAACP climbing into bed with the grand wizards of the KKK by supporting their racist agenda?" said Steve Dasbach, national director of the Libertarian Party.
By remaining silent the NAACP is guilty of the "Sin of Omission" and have chosen to play the harlot on this one.
more .. .. .
The Federal Observer has chosen to make each of the following comments a permanent part of the record. We thank all of you who have made a statement and a stand regarding Mr. Whitley's comments, and in fact the entire issue of CONTROL.
[/quote]Any disagreement ? Comments ? I didn't think so.
[/ul][glow=red,2,300]It has been rumored that the NRA can no longer bring up issues about candidates. Their deadline is 90 days before a General Election. No other organization has such a 'gag order'. Could this mean 'free speech' is now limited to the media ? Only Gun Control, Inc can issue statements about candidates!!?
