[Hugin]

My guess is the renewal will never make it out of the House in the first place. In fact this may be intended to see to it that it doesn't happen so Bush doesn't have to sign or veto it.

[Kenno]

Actually, I have a theory on this.

Bush originally endorsed the ban in order to get the support of wealthy "moderate" Republicans in the primaries against John McCain. Now, he doesn't want to make an issue out of it when he's trying to concentrate on getting his tax cuts passed. If he loses on this vote, the economy could go south and screw up his reelection chances. Nevertheless, his ultimate gain comes from opposing the ban, not renewing it.

[Mr. Mojo]

My guess is the renewal will never make it out of the House in the first place

That's my hope. And considering the conservative dominance of the House, it's not an unreasonable one. The only thing that bugs me is why he had to say anything at all in the first place. Unless, as nopardons has been saying, this story is a complete fabrication.

[wardaddy]

I hope you are right but this has given the Dems(and RINOs) ammo to use and declare: "Mr DeLay, YOUR president wants this bill"

....not to mention major propaganda for the gun-grabbers to use on Congress too....why couldn't they have just been ambivalent sounding about it?

Are we all here acknowledging that W plays parse and subterfuge on a level with Clinton?...to actually say he'll sign a bill he never wants to see on his desk just to maybe appeal to more voters possibly according to polls he's reading or so the media will applaud him?

NO....I may disagree with W on this but I don't think he plays that crap like Clinton...no way. I think he means it. He will sign it knowing full well it might hit his desk, not playing footsie with the middle. I don't believe that.

You know...Ashcroft indicated they were against the bill just last month. The Times blasted him over that.