Bang, bang, Bush got me!

May 20, 2003 10:14 AM

A Republican straw man helps terrorists. Thanks charlie! Then again, was it not Bush who failed to implement a Clinton plan to prevent terrorism? (Hear & Now - Real Adieo)
posted by Bag Man (17 comments total)

An FPP leading to a 2-paragraph article? You could have dug deeper than that, or alternatively waited until a more in-depth discussion shows up.

Sometimes I think MeFi posts should have a 24-hour delay to them, to eliminate the misconception that because your post shows up instantly, that it is a good forum for dissemination of news.
posted by Space Coyote at 10:25 AM on May 20, 2003

And Clinton succeeded in implelemting the Clinton "plan"?? Right.
posted by MrAnonymous at 10:28 AM on May 20, 2003

As long as US borders remain virtually open and unguarded America will never truly be safe from Islamic terrorism.

If terrorist can't illegally buy or steal guns, they'll simply sneak them over our border, probably along with far worse weapons, such as surface to air missiles.
posted by Beholder at 10:29 AM on May 20, 2003

An FPP leading to a 2-paragraph article?

Kindly depress the "listen" icon, it shall lead thee to the promised land.
posted by Bag Man at 10:30 AM on May 20, 2003

[the republican straw man in the oval office begins to sing and dance]

I could while away the hours
Conferring with the flowers
Consulting with the rain.
And my head I'd be a-scratchin'
While my thoughts were busy hatchin'
If I only had a brain.
posted by quonsar at 10:33 AM on May 20, 2003

I'm firmly convinced George W. is much more concerned with getting reelected than with fighting terrorism.
posted by The Jesse Helms at 10:34 AM on May 20, 2003

Bag Man: Thanks, much better. I suspect I need more practice operating my computation machine.
posted by Space Coyote at 10:42 AM on May 20, 2003

The Jesse Helms, W is extremely interested in fighting terrorism: a good enemy is always good for votes, but a shadow, faceless enemy that can be anyone you say it is? That's gold, pure gold. Fighting terrorism is something you can do forever. The thing to avoid is winning.
posted by George_Spiggott at 11:17 AM on May 20, 2003

but a shadow, faceless enemy that can be anyone you say it is? That's gold, pure gold.

How the GOP struck gold with its permanent "war on terrorism"
posted by homunculus at 11:37 AM on May 20, 2003

Use this argument in a real debate with real NRA goons and watch as your ass is handed to you. Terrorists are equivalent to criminals for purposes of the old "punishes the law-abiding" argument: If you outlaw guns, terrorists can still get them, but law-abiding citizens can't - therefore they'll be unable to defend themselves when the terrorists attack. You don't want our citizens to be defenseless against terrorism, do you? Why do you hate America so much? etc., etc.
posted by RylandDotNet at 11:47 AM on May 20, 2003

Fighting socialism is something you can do forever. The thing to avoid is winning.

Fighting poverty is something you can do forever. The thing to avoid is winning.

Fighting for freedom is something you can do forever. The thing to avoid is winning.

insert pious platitude, or worthy thought, here
posted by dash_slot- at 12:08 PM on May 20, 2003

I see no useful purpose served in posting to show how clever we are or to smirk in prose, and I also see little value in blaming Bush or Clinton--that is the two parties. Guns are easy to get hold of. We have in most states little or no constraints and you can get stuff an gun shows with ease. We have had the example of some 15 or so illegals suffocating in a tractor trailer, crossing into our country...if they can cross over so too then can terrorists. And we have massive tax breaks and have subsequently fallen into hard times economically so that the big batch of airport screeners have had to be cut back: that is our all out war agains terror threats. Then to add to this: Bush will not release the massive report on 9/11, and the folks in charge of security agencies then are still in charge now. Not the way I would run a business. As Harry Truman said:the buck stops here (with him, the leader)...now we have the surreal idea that we don't know (we aren't allowed to know) who is responsible, and in addition we have all sorts of inroads on freedoms via Patriot Act, but guns, entries into country, and airports are in no better shape nor more secured now than they were. But we do have a color code system for alerts...and that is about as coordinated as we are likely to get.
posted by Postroad at 1:22 PM on May 20, 2003

If the Halleluia choir can get off the self-contratulatory partisan bandwagon for a moment, a cursory review of the kinked WP article seems to indicate the problem lies with lack of NCIC link to terrorist databases & lackluster Justice Dept. enforcement of existing laws re: "crooked" gun shops who market weapons to suspect characters. So, do a little deficit spending to fix the NCIC problem, tell Justice to do their job (since they know who the suspect dealers are anyway) or lean on the gun makers to ensure that the small percentage of questionable dealers feel the heat &/or are put out of business, and there you go. Or does the poster have another agenda in mind other than addressing the expressed problem?
posted by Pressed Rat at 1:44 PM on May 20, 2003

or you can read about it here
posted by whirlwind29 at 2:07 PM on May 20, 2003

Kindly depress the "listen" icon

What's the difference between "press" and "depress"?
posted by oissubke at 9:51 PM on May 20, 2003

"crooked" gun shops who market weapons to suspect characters.

Phew! For a moment, I thought that certain attitude and laws were responsible.
posted by magullo at 8:24 AM on May 21, 2003

Welcome to bureaucratic inanity
posted by Pressed Rat at 12:37 PM on May 21, 2003