HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Topics » Justice & Public Safety » Gun Control & RKBA (Group) » So for the anti-gunners, ...
Introducing Discussionist: A new forum by the creators of DU

Sun Sep 2, 2012, 06:41 PM

 

So for the anti-gunners, what is wrong with Bill Clinton's analysis? [View all]

In his book "My Life," in which he analyzed the loss of Congress to the Republicans in 1994, he wrote:
"Just before the House vote (on the crime bill), Speaker Tom Foley and majority leader Dick Gephardt had made a last-ditch appeal to me to remove the assault weapons ban from the bill. They argued that many Democrats who represented closely divided districts had already...defied the NRA once on the Brady bill vote. They said that if we made them walk the plank again on the assault weapons ban, the overall bill might not pass, and that if it did, many Democrats who voted for it would not survive the election in November. Jack Brooks, the House Judiciary Committee chairman from Texas, told me the same thing...Jack was convinced that if we didn't drop the ban, the NRA would beat a lot of Democrats by terrifying gun owners....Foley, Gephardt, and Brooks were right and I was wrong. The price...would be heavy casualties among its defenders." (Pages 611-612)

"On November 8, we got the living daylights beat out of us, losing eight Senate races and fifty-four House seats, the largest defeat for our party since 1946....The NRA had a great night. They beat both Speaker Tom Foley and Jack Brooks, two of the ablest members of Congress, who had warned me this would happen. Foley was the first Speaker to be defeated in more than a century. Jack Brooks had supported the NRA for years and had led the fight against the assault weapons ban in the House, but as chairman of the Judiciary Committee he had voted for the overall crime bill even after the ban was put into it. The NRA was an unforgiving master: one strike and you're out. The gun lobby claimed to have defeated nineteen of the twenty-four members on its hit list. They did at least that much damage...." (Pages 629-630)

http://www.gunshopfinder.com/legislativenews/clinton8_1_04.html

Why, exactly, are you crusading for a revival of the 1993 issue?

59 replies, 5425 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 59 replies Author Time Post
Reply So for the anti-gunners, what is wrong with Bill Clinton's analysis? [View all]
AnotherMcIntosh Sep 2012 OP
Loudly Sep 2012 #1
Reasonable_Argument Sep 2012 #2
DrDan Sep 2012 #3
gejohnston Sep 2012 #6
Reasonable_Argument Sep 2012 #7
ileus Sep 2012 #21
glacierbay Sep 2012 #4
Deep13 Sep 2012 #5
1GirlieGirl Sep 2012 #8
Reasonable_Argument Sep 2012 #9
1GirlieGirl Sep 2012 #15
Tuesday Afternoon Sep 2012 #17
MercutioATC Sep 2012 #19
1GirlieGirl Sep 2012 #20
RegieRocker Sep 2012 #42
1GirlieGirl Sep 2012 #43
TPaine7 Sep 2012 #44
Marengo Sep 2012 #25
PavePusher Sep 2012 #28
gejohnston Sep 2012 #12
oneshooter Sep 2012 #22
Deep13 Sep 2012 #23
oneshooter Sep 2012 #24
Deep13 Sep 2012 #35
oneshooter Sep 2012 #48
Deep13 Sep 2012 #50
PavePusher Sep 2012 #52
Deep13 Sep 2012 #55
GreenStormCloud Sep 2012 #53
gejohnston Sep 2012 #26
Deep13 Sep 2012 #34
gejohnston Sep 2012 #36
Deep13 Sep 2012 #40
krispos42 Sep 2012 #45
MercutioATC Sep 2012 #57
rDigital Sep 2012 #27
Deep13 Sep 2012 #30
gejohnston Sep 2012 #32
Deep13 Sep 2012 #41
rDigital Sep 2012 #37
PavePusher Sep 2012 #29
Deep13 Sep 2012 #31
gejohnston Sep 2012 #33
PavePusher Sep 2012 #39
PavePusher Sep 2012 #38
MercutioATC Sep 2012 #58
safeinOhio Sep 2012 #10
Reasonable_Argument Sep 2012 #11
safeinOhio Sep 2012 #14
spin Sep 2012 #54
gejohnston Sep 2012 #13
Yavapai Sep 2012 #16
gejohnston Sep 2012 #18
SecularMotion Sep 2012 #46
Reasonable_Argument Sep 2012 #47
AnotherMcIntosh Sep 2012 #49
MotherPetrie Sep 2012 #51
MercutioATC Sep 2012 #56
spin Sep 2012 #59