NRA Lobbyist: Despite New Rhetoric, Clinton's "Name is Synonymous With Gun Control, Like Rosie O'Donnell"

George Bush as Mo of the Three Stooges
fame.More money for the rich and famous. Bush's family favorite TV show of Crawford,Texas.Viewed on the one and only station GBS,George Bush Sr.View the comparison for yourself.
It really shows on the little tap dance sequence displayed at the
White House eariler this summer. And thatis a Closer Look, Good Night. MH

MM wrote:
"Bill's primary focus was to get the automatic assault weapons off the streets."

--------------------------------------

The so-called "assault weapons" ban only banned semi-auto rilfes, it did NOT ban fully automatic rifles. The two types of rifles are very different. The ban was a bait and switch tactic that fooled you and others who are ignorant about firearms. They pretended the law was about machine guns with the scary labels "assault weapons" and "AK-47" and "Uzi", when the law only applied to semi-auto rifles.

The only two federal laws regarding fully automatic weapons are NFA(1934), and FOPA(1986).

Amazing! Hillary wants to paint Obama as an elitist and out of touch. This, after her husband made a fortune off "public service" and after treating the White House as his own personal playground and leaving in disgrace. Oh, I forgot Bill is not running and this is not a "two for one" like Bill promised in 1992....Right! America does not need Clinton Act II. Wake up Democrats! It was the Clintons who begat GWB and it will be the Clintons that hand the presidency back to the Republicans once again...

Kenny from CT, Obama is "no uniter". Oh, and Hillary is? I have never seen anyone more divisive in public life than the Clintons. Even Nixon wasn't as divisive...

Hillary is against the second amendment.

Hillary is against allowing DC residents to have concealed handguns.

Hillary is taking the side of district of columbia against heller.

On every issue Hillary takes the liberal side on gun control. For her to portray herself as a friend of the second amendment is a disgrace. The Clintons lie about everything.

Hillary against allowing guns in parks.

Hillary against dc residents having concealed handguns.

Hillary for the assault weapons ban.

Hillary for americans having to pass a test to own a gun.

Hillary for americans having to be put in a database to own a gun.

Hillary against gun shows.

Hillary for suing gun manufacturers.

Hillary on every issue takes the side of the left on gun control.

Fine but then don't come out before pennsylvania and make it like you are a sportsman.

The media isn't hitting her on her lies. You notice she didn't say this before the new york primary.

How can someone like Hillary who lies about EVERYTHING even be considered for president.

Why is it that people associate Hillary with Bill when they think something he did was bad... but dis-associate the 2 when something he did was good? You can't have it both ways!

I will not speak about her record on gun control since she became a senator because I don't know. But I will say that Bill's primary focus was to get the automatic assault weapons off the streets. And I'm sorry NRA, but I think that was a good thing. We don't need criminals, thugs and murderers walking around carrying automatic weapons fire. These weapons were created for military use for 1 thing... to kill people. To gun entheusists, they may be cool to own, but you don't need an automatic weapon to go deer hunting.

And you DEFINATELY do NOT want to put one of these assault weapons in the hands of Cheney. Bullets are alot bigger and more deadly than bird shot.

We know Clinton suck, but the country is wealthy under Clinton. Certainly Hillay can be better President than Obama.

Diana said:

"I'm just trying to figure out why a supporter of Obama would call him a "public servant" in contrast to Hillary. They hold the same job. Why is he a public servant, and she is not? And he's plenty wealthy."

Maybe because he's serving a state with which he has a long association, while Clinton is a carpetbagger who chose New York because she felt it presented the best opportunity to advance her career?

Just one possible reason!

Obama 2008 -- Yes, WE CAN!!!!

Wow, "theda" has been busy today. I've seen that same comment posted several times today. I do enjoy seeing people who claim "privvy" information like sitting in on meetings. Very special.

I'm just trying to figure out why a supporter of Obama would call him a "public servant" in contrast to Hillary. They hold the same job. Why is he a public servant, and she is not? And he's plenty wealthy.

Now that I've read some of the comments here, and read statements from the NRA, I'm off to take a shower. I feel dirty.

Jack51,

I am not a Clinton surrpogate, whatever that is. I am a Clinton supporter. I am 4th generation Cambridge. I am a townie, working class person who "clings to my religion, while toting a gun to Mass every Sunday morning, out of despair." LOL. I am from the other side of the tracks, not Harvard.

Theda,

I am amazed that as a noted sociologist you would rest on the discrepancy between the incomes of the Obamas and the Clintons to somehow support your assertion that it is unconscionable that Hillary would call Obama elitist.

Elitism has no annual income requirement. I am 4th generation Cambridge. Cambridge is replete with town/gown friction. It matters not whether it is a Harvard grad student making 15K annually or a full professor. The snobbery and elitism and condescension toward the townies are well documented.

And, by the way, as you well know, the Clintons certainly did not always enjoy the mega incomes. They, too, sought public service early on in their careers.

Wow, Countallthevotes, are you a Clinton surrogate? Googling the few "real" names that show up on these pages?

Wow!

And who are you, prey tell, and what are your own biases???

Obama 2008 -- Yes, WE CAN!!!

I was once an admirer of the Clinton's but the blinders are off. They will clearly say anything--no matter how manipulative or hypocritical or just plain untrue--to get back in the White House. And why not? Selling power and influence has made them very wealthy.

I have been in meetings with the Clintons and their advisors where very clinical things were said in a very-detached tone about unwillingness of working class voters to trust government -- and Bill Clinton -- and about their unfortunate (from a Clinton perspective) proclivity to vote on life-style rather than economic issues. To see Hillary going absolutely over the top to smash Obama for making clearly more humanly sympathetic observations in this vein, is just amazing. Even more so to see her pretending to be a gun-toting non-elite. Give us a break!

I wonder if she realizes that gaining a few days of lurid publicity that might reach a slice of voters is going to cost her a great deal in the regard of many Democrats, whose strong support she will need if she somehow claws her way to the nomination -- and even more so if she does not clinch the nomination. The distribution of "we're not bitter" stickers to her campaign rallies is the height of over-the-top crudity, and the reports are that very few audience members seem to have much enthusiasm for this nonsense. Not surprisingly, people cannot see the reasons for so much fuss.

Yes, she wants a big break, she desperately wants the nomination she and Bill believe is hers by right. We all know that. But where is her authenticity and her dignity and her sense of any proportion?

This has to be one of the few times in U.S. political history when a multi-millionaire has accused a much less wealthy fellow public servant, a person of the same party and views who made much less lucrative career choices, of "elitism"! (I won't say the only time, because U.S. political history is full of absurdities of this sort.) In a way, it is funny -- and it may not be long before the jokes start.

Obama made similar comments on Charlie Rose in Nov. of 2004. Nothing like be consistent. And then he hadn't even been sworn into the Senate yet.

Gun toting republicans are not going to vote democrat anyway.

I can't even believe that bush is going to go against all advice and go to the opening ceremony of the China Olympic Games. He'll do just what he pleases----he always has. He just wants the notoriety of becoming the first American President to attend an Olympic Games in a foreign country----he doesn't care about anything but himself.

Where's the REAL Democratic Party?

Two things, one: I agree with you. two: I didn't vote for Bush...

So, are you saying that the Clinton's are Racist?

Where's the REAL Democratic Party?

Bush didn't cheat on his wife, then said to the whole world that it didn't happen...