[Cold Heat]

It 's a tough political decision, but not the toughest Bush has faced. he has taken a stand on many hot issues for the conservative electorate.

I see no reason to trash him if he signs a renewal on that particular bill. Most folks just are not interested in it, and that includes gun owners. feds have a right, (according to the nine) to regulate commerce. This bill falls into that niche and most people accept it.

Those are the facts, not necessarily my opinion but I just cannot seen to get excited enough about it to make it an issue for re-election.

There are too many other issues that are more pressing now.

[Tolerance Sucks Rocks]

This time, the ban could be permanent (subject to repeal by a future congress and presidency, of course) and more comprehensive in scope.

[El Gato]

I see no reason to trash him if he signs a renewal on that particular bill. Most folks just are not interested in it, and that includes gun owners. feds have a right, (according to the nine) to regulate commerce. This bill falls into that niche and most people accept it.

Well I do. It's my litmus test issue. The feds have no rights, only powers. There power to regulate interstate commerce is restricted by the command not to infringe on the right of the people to keep and bear arms. Amendments are like that, they change the original document. Besides, most of what they do under "regulation" of interstate commerce is really restriction of interstate commerce, and that they have no power to do. "Regulate", in this context, meant and still means, to make function properly and the power was included to keep the states from restricting commerce, not to allow the federal government to do so. I don't really give a flip what the 9 say about something I can read and understand for myself. It's not as if the Constitution is full of legalize, although there is a bit, not much but some, of language that is not in common useage today.

[c-b 1]

I see no reason to trash him if he signs a renewal on that particular bill.

If he can not trust you with the firearm of your choice, how can you trust him with your freedom?

[Richard-SIA]

You need to understand how the Fed. has twisted the meaning of the interstate commerce clause beyond all recognition from it's original intent!

In reality the ICC has nothing to do with the AW ban, it's just a pretext for the necessary power grab.

Since Swinestien & crew have put in bills that greatly expand the scope of the ban MANY more gun owners than before are now VERY interested in seeing it die.