Replies

Well get used to the timing aspect of it. With the victory in Iraq, the liberals (and their media delivery system( are going to do everything in their power to make the President look like the bad guy here at home. This is why, even though I may feel strongly about something, I always wait until I hear it from the man himself.

I agree wholeheartedly. That's why I said that the timing is (or should be) incredibly suspicious. One other thing I forgot to mention, and maybe the other posters have already pointed this out (sorry I didn't read a lot of them), is that for the first time EVER since the 1930's, the attorney for the office of the President, the soliciter-general, Ted Olson, has argued in two briefs before the SCOTUS that the 2nd Amendment is a personal, not a state right. Pretty awesomely Constitutional, if you ask me. Ted Olson wouldn't go out on a limb like that without STRONG support from the White House, or without the President's clear and specific approval. This article is a hack job intended to undermine the President's popularity with his own party. "They" can't undermine him with the general public, so they try to turn his own supporters against him. How sleazy (and unfortunately, judging from these posts, effective)!

This article is a hack job intended to undermine the President's popularity with his own party.

I hope you are correct.

Life and Guns are two issues that many conservatives (myself included) are fanatical about.

These things are worth fighting for and any attemt to treat them as "throw away" issues to appease soccer mom's and other fair weather friends won't be easily forgotten, imo.

WP: "The president supports the current law, and he supports reauthorization of the current law," White House spokesman Scott McClellan told Knight Ridder.

alwaysconservative:This article is a hack job intended to undermine the President's popularity with his own party. "They" can't undermine him with the general public, so they try to turn his own supporters against him. How sleazy (and unfortunately, judging from these posts, effective)!

I've seen plenty of liberal media hack jobs but I must ask how this article is a hack job? This article contains a direct quote from WH spokeman Scott McClellan.

This article is a hack job intended to undermine the President's popularity with his own party

Wrongaroony, the WP got the story right for once. Sorry to say, during the presidential primary Bush said he would sign a renewal of the AW ban, and added that he would also support adding a ban on importation of grandfathered foreign made hi-cap magazines. Apparently he plans on being true to his word, something I usually regard as admirable.

But in this case I'm afraid it will cost him re-election unless congress bails him out by not voting to renew the ban. If GOP congresspeople can be made to understand that this ban could very well mean Bush loses in '04, (cards and letters time) maybe they will work a little harder to see that it never makes it to his desk.