Dead on arrival (AWB Renewal)

SFGate.com ^ | Tuesday, May 20, 2003 | Debra J. Saunders

[E. Pluribus Unum]

THE FIRST thing you have to understand about proposed gun legislation in Washington is that it isn't necessarily proposed to get passed. Not when it can be used as voter bait during a presidential election.

Republicans, on the other hand, have been known to give lip service to modest gun-control measures, while secretly rooting against them.

[E. Pluribus Unum]

"The real theater of action will be Congress."

It doesn't matter if the AWB is sunsetted if Bush doesn't take "a principled stand" on it so the liberal press can paint him as a John Birch wannabe. </sarcasm>

[dirtboy]

THE FIRST thing you have to understand about proposed gun legislation in Washington is that it isn't necessarily proposed to get passed. Not when it can be used as voter bait during a presidential election.

Anti-gun Democrats have been known to sabotage anti-gun bills so that they can blame Republicans as a means of wooing soccer moms

Ping to the point I made on the other thread...

[jjm2111]

"Dead on arrival."

Whaaaa... Poor baby.

[Fred Mertz]

I see your point of view. Thanks.

p.s. I'll be out of pocket from now until Monday evening; I'm traveling w/o a laptop. Please continue to ping me as I hope to catch up when I return.

[Trust but Verify]

I personally don't have any problem with a President sidestepping an issue in order to save political capital. Why must he do all the heavy lifting? Congress is in the hands of Republicans, let them earn their pay.

[E. Pluribus Unum]

Congress is in the hands of Republicans, let them earn their pay.

Not only that, legislation is Congress's job, not the Presidents.