Posted on 11/13/2003 12:45:22 PM PST by 45Auto
George W. Bush and his neoconservative advisers have decided that their best strategy for the 2004 campaign is to focus on the "doctrine of preemption." The obvious goal is to portray the president as a hero in the war on terror, conveying the notion that he is the one who is able to keep America safe. Unfortunately for Bush, his position on the assault weapons ban may cause his reelection plans to unravel.
Many conservatives currently feel comfortable backing Bush for a second term. For one thing, he cut taxes, and the economy is on the rebound. He has shown courage by taking on global terrorism. He appointed as Attorney General a man who believes that the Second Amendment supports an individual's right to keep and bear arms. Bush is every conservative's dream, right? Think again.
During his 2000 campaign, candidate Bush voiced his support of the assault weapons ban that was passed during the Clinton administration. The federal law is scheduled to expire on Sept. 13, 2004, and Bush, speaking as president, has already stated that he supports its reauthorization.
Some have tried to excuse the president's position by arguing that he is merely telling people what they want to hear, stating publicly that the ban is a good thing while remaining confident that renewal of the ban will never even make it through the House of Representatives. That may offer some comfort to disgruntled conservatives, but it is important to remember that 38 Republicans voted for the ban in 1994 and 42 voted against its repeal in 1996. That doesn't bode well for freedom-loving Americans.
Don't be surprised in the coming months to see the Bush administration pushing for a renewal of the assault weapons ban by promoting it as an effective tool in our fight against terrorism. After all, such a ban would make it easier for law enforcement officers to break up terrorist organizations here in the United States. In 1993, for example, a raid on a Muslim commune in central Colorado turned up bombs, automatic weapons, ammunition and plans for terrorist attacks.
On Dec. 6, 2001, Attorney General John Ashcroft, testifying before Congress, revealed an al-Qaida training manual that had been discovered in Afghanistan. The manual, he claimed, told terrorists "how to use America's freedom as a weapon against us." The fear was that terrorists in the U.S. would exploit loopholes in our gun laws in an effort to arm themselves – and with radical groups like Muslims of America already purchasing guns, we can't be too careful.
Like most federal laws, the assault weapons ban was originally passed with the assumption that Americans are willing to sacrifice liberty for safety. This, of course, has been historically a safe assumption on the part of our elected officials in Washington. But Bush's position on the assault weapons ban may very well come back to haunt him when he seeks to reconnect with his conservative base in 2004.
The hypocrisy of the president has already been revealed. He spoke out in favor of the government's prerogative to trample on the Second Amendment – under the guise of "reasonable" gun legislation – at the same time he was sending troops armed with fully automatic weapons to Iraq. This may seem like a stupid question, but if soldiers are allowed to carry assault weapons in order to provide for the common defense, why can't that same right be extended to civilians who want nothing more than to defend their homes and families?
John Ashcroft once said during his confirmation hearing, "I don't believe the Second Amendment to be one that forbids any regulation of guns." Far be it from me to contradict the highest-ranking law enforcement officer in the country, but the Constitution forbids exactly that. The federal government is barred from passing any law that may infringe upon the right of Americans to keep and bear arms. Period. It can't be explained in simpler terms than that.
President Bush would be wise to reconsider his position on the assault weapons ban. If he isn't careful, he and other members of his administration may end up alienating the few true conservatives left in the Republican Party – and that would be a mistake this close to election time.
President Bush and his advisers have to downplay the "doctrine of preemption" because of public fears that it will mean more wars of dubious necessity or justification. After reading something like Shelton's first sentence, what's the point of going on?
Yeah, yeah ... "irrelevant, third party loser can't get elected yadayadayada..." Why should I care? The Publicans need to earn my vote.
I've long since stopped expecting politicians to tell the truth.
I care about what he does and what he's done. He's done enough on the gun-rights front in the past for me to support him, and I will continue to support him until he's done something - not just said that he would do something, but actually done something - to justify removing that support.
I can't tell what's in his heart. I don't know whether he truly supports the AWB, or whether he's trying to finesse the issue. And I don't care.
If the AWB renewal fails, I'll continue to support him, regardless of what he's said, and no matter who it is that was the apparent front-runner in defeating that renewal.
If the AWB renewal passes, I will not. As I will not support any member of Congress who voted for it, regardless of party.
This seems, to me at least, to be the consensus among politically active gun owners in my community. And it's a consensus that I've done my best to bring to the attention of the politicians who represent me.
Meanwhile, I will not get wrapped around the axle over what Bush has said.
Boy, I can't wait for the ban to expire so I can get my hands on some bombs, machine guns, and terrorist plans!
I presume I'll be able to buy these items "on the streets", on the proverbial "every street corner", right?
Boy, I hope so. I hate having to go all the way to the next county where they have a gun show so I can exploit that "Gun Show Loophole" when I need bombs or Class III weaponry.
Of course, if we really wanted to take a lesson from this little anecdote, wouldn't it be to keep a closer eye on "Muslim Compounds?" Or do we only do that when it's a bunch of Christian fundie kooks living on the prairie in Texas?
Inquiring minds want to know.
Maybe. Maybe not.
If Bush loses because he signed it, will the dem, KNOWING this, push for more gun grabs.
1. The dem will get hit for it by the GOP, even by those that aren't really pro, but see a partisan wedge.
2. The dem will gun grab himself into a one termer.
3. If Bush signs a gun grab and wins election, Rove will say "You signed a gun grab...and they voted for you anyway. Time for more triangulation to take the dem issues away from them"
Perhaps. The way I see it, if Bush totally abandons his core support, then he is not much better than the RAT-bastards who are running against him (and against America). If the AW ban is renewed or strenghthened, then I fear that it will only be a matter of time before the Republic is truly destroyed from within. Its about half way there now. The only difference between the two main parties will be the speed at which they are taking the Republic over the cliff and down into the pit of total socialism. No longer will the Repubos be able to fool the conservative core into believing that they are really different than the socialist-RATs; the facade will have been removed. The sunsetting (or not) of the ban will be a watershed moment for me. The President and the Repubos will have to make a choice.
While Bush may be re-elected by a wide margin and therefore will not need to rely on the conservative core, the question he has to ask himself is, "Do I feel Lucky?" I wonder what kind of a poker player the Pres. is?
Absolutely. We should all be hammering our congress critters on this.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.