General Discussion

Scuba

(53,475 posts)

49. I know nothing about Keillor's politics. I do know that if Democrats are afraid to stand up ...

Reply to AnotherMcIntosh (Reply #47)

Mon Jan 7, 2013, 03:36 PM

Jan 2013

... to the gun lobby, they will lose a lot of support.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

89 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Some common sense gun control. [View all] MadHound Jan 2013 OP

If a goal for DU is to elect more Democrats, repeating the events leading to the 1994 losses is AnotherMcIntosh Jan 2013 #1

1994 loses were due to the health care debate samsingh Jan 2013 #2

In Bill Clinton's autobiography, he attributes the 1994 losses to the AWB. AnotherMcIntosh Jan 2013 #4

i'll look that up samsingh Jan 2013 #7

Here's some of Clinton's words. For any anti-gunners, what is wrong with Bill Clinton's analysis? AnotherMcIntosh Jan 2013 #9

I don't get it either Mojorabbit Jan 2013 #13

in light of this, we might need to reconsider samsingh Jan 2013 #17

People have been calling that an "NRA Talking Point" Xithras Jan 2013 #45

Yeah, but that was BEFORE 20 6-year-olds were massacred. BlueCaliDem Jan 2013 #76

Yeah, and if Clinton says that again we can just say that he's an NRA lobbyist repeating AnotherMcIntosh Jan 2013 #79

Yeah, well, I don't do hyperbolic predictions. BlueCaliDem Jan 2013 #87

You say that you are opposed to hyperbole, yet you dishonor the memories of the children who were AnotherMcIntosh Jan 2013 #88

Check your calendar. It is 2013. morningfog Jan 2013 #19

What's wrong with Bill Clinton's analysis? #9 AnotherMcIntosh Jan 2013 #22

Check the calendar. morningfog Jan 2013 #23

GARRISON KEILLOR also expressed his views on more than one occasion. See, e.g., #47. AnotherMcIntosh Jan 2013 #48

You should be aware of what has happened since 1994. GreenStormCloud Jan 2013 #59

The purchase of a gun does not necessarily mean a vote against anyone who morningfog Jan 2013 #60

Wedge politics don't need huge numbers. GreenStormCloud Jan 2013 #62

A risk we must take. morningfog Jan 2013 #63

that was a generation ago. the NRA is not what it used to be, people dislike them now.... bettyellen Jan 2013 #27

Maybe most voters make decisions without relying upon the "NRA" boogeyman. AnotherMcIntosh Jan 2013 #30

Boogey boogey boo! The NRA fear tactics will not stop us this time. morningfog Jan 2013 #55

Really??? overthehillvet Jan 2013 #53

Really. Your fantasies are based on 20- 30 years ago, LOL. Grow up- it's not the 80's anymore! bettyellen Jan 2013 #64

Then why is NRA membership growing if people don't like them? N/T GreenStormCloud Jan 2013 #71

You trust the NRA to give us real #s, and I do not, LOL. It's because of a lot of racist paranoia bettyellen Jan 2013 #75

"Those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it." TheMightyFavog Jan 2013 #77

So true. Next time it could be 40 babies killed. morningfog Jan 2013 #81

Nor will ignoring the massive national outcry for ending the gun violence. Scuba Jan 2013 #39

I know of no one who is ignoring violence. And if you are an expert on "NRA" strategy, then you AnotherMcIntosh Jan 2013 #40

Oh, I know I won't persuade you. I just want to see you gone. You don't represent ... Scuba Jan 2013 #42

Ad hominem attacks are juvenile. AnotherMcIntosh Jan 2013 #44

Do you consider GARRISON KEILLOR to be someone who doesn't represent Democratic values? AnotherMcIntosh Jan 2013 #47

I know nothing about Keillor's politics. I do know that if Democrats are afraid to stand up ... Scuba Jan 2013 #49

Garrison Keillor is a well-known liberal. AnotherMcIntosh Jan 2013 #50

"no TRUE Scotsman"... friendly_iconoclast Jan 2013 #70

Your position sucks, so you choose to hijack the thread Kolesar Jan 2013 #51

Your ad hominem attacks are juvenile. AnotherMcIntosh Jan 2013 #54

Common sense, no doubt. Tommy_Carcetti Jan 2013 #3

What specific changes do you propose Congress make to 18 USC Chapter 44 and 26 USC Chapter 53 jody Jan 2013 #5

Making concessions before the... 99Forever Jan 2013 #6

They should be banned or limit one per family Dkc05 Jan 2013 #8

And you're not going to get guns limited to one per family. MadHound Jan 2013 #10

We have insanity by not banning all guns Dkc05 Jan 2013 #11

Wait, you're contradicting yourself. Which is it, ban all guns, MadHound Jan 2013 #12

Common sense gun control discussion in GD former-republican Jan 2013 #14

Prefer to ban all weapons. Dkc05 Jan 2013 #26

That's not going to happen, MadHound Jan 2013 #28

Post removed Post removed Jan 2013 #29

I'll do one better, and give another example you may not have thought about. c1kabar Jan 2013 #21

Closing the gun show loophole (I really hate that term) is easier than an AWB Recursion Jan 2013 #15

chest pounding former173rd Jan 2013 #16

You volunteering to have your blood spilled? nt jmg257 Jan 2013 #43

?? former173rd Jan 2013 #67

Shit no. I like my blood right where it is. nt jmg257 Jan 2013 #68

Marketing reteachinwi Jan 2013 #18

That's a perfect solution - c1kabar Jan 2013 #25

Limit federally-licensed firearms dealers Jeff In Milwaukee Jan 2013 #20

That's all good, except... c1kabar Jan 2013 #24

It won't limit the volume of legal transactions Jeff In Milwaukee Jan 2013 #32

Look at what happened with cigarettes. RC Jan 2013 #38

I just don't think it will work. rrneck Jan 2013 #31

Semi-automatic Definition Jeff In Milwaukee Jan 2013 #33

That's pretty much it. rrneck Jan 2013 #35

That's true... Jeff In Milwaukee Jan 2013 #37

Yes, that would do what you're trying to do Recursion Jan 2013 #52

I agree, and before going any further then your OP in gun control, I'd rather diminish the NRA first KittyWampus Jan 2013 #34

How, exactly, would you "diminish the NRA first". The NRA is a boogeyman needed by anti-gunners. AnotherMcIntosh Jan 2013 #41

Maybe we should focus on what could prevent another school shooting derby378 Jan 2013 #36

Michael Moore seems to think that Big Pharma and their pharmaceuticals should be investigated. AnotherMcIntosh Jan 2013 #46

Some common sense gun control. Rebelgeneral Jan 2013 #56

Umm, over two hundred years of various Supreme Court decisions and interpretations, MadHound Jan 2013 #58

In your short stay here, at least try to get your 'man card' jmg257 Jan 2013 #65

1994 AWB was determined to be useless BWC Jan 2013 #57

Aahhh..you're saying it needs to be greatly expanded to be effective? jmg257 Jan 2013 #66

Derp derp derp derp derp derp derp derby378 Jan 2013 #72

See that little thing at the end? ? That is a question mark. jmg257 Jan 2013 #74

You might want to take another look at that post derby378 Jan 2013 #83

Ha - Now THAT's a VERY good point! Hmm..now I may never know... jmg257 Jan 2013 #85

The 94 ban was ineffective and had tons of loopholes madville Jan 2013 #80

Agreed. Is there really that much of a resistance in the Congress jmg257 Jan 2013 #82

Congress will be thinking about the 2014 midterms madville Jan 2013 #86

I actually agree with MadHound. NutmegYankee Jan 2013 #61

Mexico has an even stronger semi-auto ban derby378 Jan 2013 #73

Well of course they have plenty of guns theHandpuppet Jan 2013 #84

We need to determine a real and quantifiable problem, and then pass legislation against it. OneTenthofOnePercent Jan 2013 #69

"We need to determine a real and quantifiable problem, and then ..." That will slow things down. AnotherMcIntosh Jan 2013 #89

Those proposed change are mostly ineffective and will be costly madville Jan 2013 #78