Exactly right.
But don't expect the petulant reactionaries to see passed their noses. They never do.
Posted on 01/18/2005 12:33:16 PM PST by snowsislander
WASHINGTON -- Attorney General nominee Alberto Gonzales told the Senate on Tuesday that he supports extending the expired federal assault weapons ban.
Gonzales also said he wants Congress to get rid of a requirement that would eliminate part of the Patriot Act this year, despite complaints that it is too intrusive.
"I believe the USA PATRIOT Act has greatly improved our nation's ability to detect and prevent terrorist attacks," Gonzales told the Senate Judiciary Committee in written answers to questions left over from his confirmation hearing.
Gonzales, who served as President Bush's lawyer during his first term, is expected to be confirmed when the Senate returns after Bush's inauguration on Jan. 20. He would be the nation's first Hispanic attorney general and replace John Ashcroft.
Democrats, including Sen. Charles Schumer, D-N.Y., pressed Gonzales for written answers to several of their questions during his daylong confirmation hearing. Those answers were delivered on Tuesday to the committee, which planned a Wednesday meeting to consider nominations.
Congress let the 10-year-old assault weapons ban expire in September. The measure outlawed 19 types of military-style assault weapons, banned certain features on firearms such as bayonet mounts, and limited ammunition magazines to 10 rounds.
Gonzales pointed out that his brother Tony is a SWAT officer in Houston.
"I worry about his safety and the types of weapons he will confront on the street," Gonzales said. "The president has made it clear that he stands ready to sign a reauthorization of the federal assault weapons ban if it is sent to him by Congress. I, of course, support the president on this issue."
Antigun groups criticized Bush during the presidential campaign for failing to press for an extension of the ban.
Gonzales also said he supports the reauthorization of the Patriot Act, the post-Sept. 11 law that expanded the government's surveillance and prosecutorial powers against suspected terrorists, their associates and financiers.
More than a dozen provisions of the law are set to expire by late October 2005 unless renewed by Congress. These include authority for judges to issue search warrants that apply nationwide, authority for FBI and criminal investigators to share information about terrorism cases, and the FBI's power to obtain records in terrorism-related cases from businesses and other entities, including libraries.
"I believe the sunsets that apply to several provisions of the USA PATRIOT Act should be repealed," Gonzales said.
Opponents have called the law intrusive and contend that letting the FBI get library records undermines civil liberties and threatens to let the government snoop into the reading habits of innocent Americans.
Gonzales says people have misunderstood what parts of the Patriot Act does. "I am unaware of abuses under the USA PATRIOT Act," he said. "For this reason, I welcome an honest and real debate."
Gonzales said he is willing to consider tempering that part of the law.
The statute says business and library records must be "sought for" a terrorism investigation. Opponents have claimed that means the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act court - the secret court that approves surveillance and wiretaps for espionage and terrorism cases - had no choice about whether to grant the subpoena.
"I would be happy for the statute to be amended to state the investigators may ask the FISA court for an order requesting the production of documents 'relevant to' an ongoing foreign intelligence investigation," Gonzales said.
---
Gonzales is unfit for office.
Yes, that's what we need, for Gonzales to take a "principled stand" on the AWB, propounding upon watering the tree of liberty with the blood of tyrants.
That would make you feel mighty proud.
The fact that it would get Alberto drummed out of Washington in a minute and a half by the MSM is not your concern.
So what if we win the battle but lose the war, as long as you get to feel good?
Yeah, yeah, brilliant strategy. Instead of advocating the correct position, advocate the INCORRECT one, and trust that Congress won't send it up. Worked so well with CFR.
It is the Presidents job to make it clear that he would veto any bill that infringed on our RKBA's..
That's precisely what Gonzales should have done -- stated that it was not his place to take sides on a purely political question.
He absolutely should not have sabotaged the GOP side by offering red-mean anti-gun-rights quotes, but that's exactly what he gratuitously chose to do.
Yes, that's what we need, for Gonzales to take a "principled stand" on the AWB, propounding upon watering the tree of liberty with the blood of tyrants.
That would make you feel mighty proud, wouldn't it?
The fact that it would get Alberto drummed out of Washington in a minute and a half by the MSM is not your concern.
So what if we win the battle but lose the war, as long as you get to feel good?
"Have you ever been in a job interview and told the man what he wanted to hear?"
There is a little more at stake here then some ambitious applicant fluffing up a resume.
Exactly right.
But don't expect the petulant reactionaries to see passed their noses. They never do.
Good to know prior to any judicial opening: we don't need another Dave Souter.
That's because they have their noses so high in the air.
More fear mongering from the politically expedient. Gonzales made himself clear, he is a "symbolic" gun grabber.
There is no stomach for gun control legislation in Congress, nobody's even talking about gun control legislation, yet you continue to bait with one statement that Gonzales made in a throw-away line.
Why? You think the kool aid drinkers won't support him anyway? Haven't you heard? GWB is infallible. Bow to his will.
With a keyword search and a few minutes you could probably find out for sure.
You think Tom Delay controls Congress? Keep whistling, -- & dreaming.
Actually, Tom DeLay DOES control the House of Representatives. Surely you know that.
You're bordering on paranoia.
How is it paranoid to claim that one man does not control Congress?
-- Or, - to want ALL Congressmen & Executive officials to honor their oaths to our Constitution?
Not a wise arguement. Sidetracking your true convictions to please the MSM is not the way to go. Which I'll wager is not what Mr. Gonzales is doing.
No, it sunset. Big difference. It required the Congress to do NOTHING, something they excel at. A repeal would have required fortitude and purposeful action, in other words it would never have happened.
What a joke. When in your lifetime have you seen ANYTHING prevent the left from demagoguing. The notion is divorced from reality. Now that he and the president are on the record as supporting the ban, they are totally at the whim of the Congress. Which, considering GW's veto pen is still in the wrapper, is nothing new.
An attitude like that will get you a real gun grabber come next election.
We just witnessed it with the sunset of the AWB.
Ari Fleischer (not Bush) said the President would sign it if it hit his desk, but it didn't because the press had no easy target to attack over the issue.
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.