You're a fool, plain and simple. You know damn well AWB won't make it out of Congress.
Bush said he'll sign it - but he said it because it took an issue out of the hands of the gun grabbers and left them totally naked and defenseless. If Bush knew that the bill had a chance to pass both bodies of Congress he would have said he'd veto it. Now the gun-grabbers can't piss and moan at Bush, and Bush is not obligated to tell Congress to pass AWB - he said he'll sign it - IF IT REACHES HIS DESK. He didn't say he was going to move heaven and earth to get it to his desk.
Again, people continue to underestimate Bush.
.
In that case, Bush has my vote. How hard is that calculus Einstein? Careful who you run around calling "fool". Did you bother to read what I wrote? Or did you just see "Badnarik" and decide to jump in with both boots?
NEVER trust a politician. Even if they are supposedly on your side. Always have a back-up plan. Michael is mine. Bush EARNS my vote the day after the AWB sunsets.
I would just like to point out that his daddy is no bud to the NRA, and I am beginning to wonder to just what point GW is his own man.
So he's just being a cheap political hack, instead of screwing up some actual courage and principles and telling the gun-grabbers to shove it up their McGreeveys because it's an irretrievably bad idea.
I think that Bush has pulled off a real masterful piece of strategery here. I think that he's a LOT smarter than most folks, on either side, give him credit for, and this is one that proves it. Politicians as a group may be foolish, crooked, etc., but one thing that they can do is count. Any fool, let alone someone whose ticket into and for maintaining power is dependant on votes, knows that gun control was a LOSING issue for its proponents in the 1990's (Carolyn McCarthy may be the only exception). The Dems lost 54 seats in '94, and even Clinton admitted that the AWB cost them at least 20 seats. The sitting Speaker of the House, once a loyal pro-gunner, lost in his bid for re-election after having voted for the AWB. Gore lost in 2000 because he couldn't even convince the folks in his OWN state that he wasn't going to register and collect guns.
Whether Bush is as pro-gun as "Machine Gun" Cheney or Thomas Jefferson is not the issue...as long as he knows that he will lose hundreds of thousands of votes, and the next election, by signing a reauthorization of the AWB, we can all be assured that it won't get signed. Given that gun owners have been very solid supporters of the GOP for decades, that it is political suicide to pi$$ off your base, and that Bush hasn't lifted a finger to get any successor to the AWB out of committee (let alone to his desk), I'd say that he gets it - and has since before the 2000 election.
Let's look back at what he said then...words to the effect that he favored the law "as it stands." Well, folks, "as it stands" included the sunset - a point lost on most people, both pro- and anti-gun.
Another point to consider: how many votes does anyone think that Bush will gain by signing a new AWB, vs. votes that would be lost be doing so? I'll bet that anyone opposed to him wouldn't change their mind if he became an all-out gun grabber, simply because there are 50 other issues out there about which they strenously disagree with Bush. The possibility of gaining a handful of blissninnie soccer mom votes, vs. the certainty of hundreds of thousands or more lost votes to certified "gun nuts" will prevent the law from seeing the light of day (because Bush has probably already told DeLay and Hastert that he damned well better NOT ever get an AWB renewal on his desk).
However, for the record, if any of the provisions of the AWB are reenacted, or if harsher provisions are enacted (obviously with a GWB signature), then I WILL NOT vote to re-elect the President - PERIOD!!! Are you listening, Karl?