There was a time, not too long ago, when a bunch of twelve year old boys could stroll through town with shotguns over their shoulders. If it happened today, there'd be a SWAT team there in minutes. These things are done very gradually for a reason.
I'm sure that's true with many of us. But get real, that has to do with many more things than this discussion.
Population growth
City growth
Rural shrinkage
Crime growth
etc.
The more of this we have, the more restricted we will likely become by default. So, it don't look purdy does it?
Besides, I'm getting sick of this bash Bush crap, the scapegoat for everything. If I remember correctly, after 9/11 everyone was hollering, "whew, glad Bush won, not Gore. He's the man we need, glad he won." Guess you all would rather have Gore or Kerry? (sigh). After 9/11 you wouldn't be able to hold a damn gun if a Dem had been elected.
What in the world does everyone think should have been done? The Democrats were all over the Administration to come up with a "plan" for security in the USA. So, Bush comes up with Homeland security, to try to get all of the agencies to communicate and work together better. Remember the uproar of the FBI agents when in front of Congress testifying about reporting of some of the terrorist but their memo's were basically trashed or missed all together by the right people? Remember the CIA and FBI fighting, no cooperation between the two? Everyone wanted answers and a plan.
Well, your President gave you one. A very specific plan. Not only did he give us a plan, the Dems supported it. We haven't had a successful terrorist strike in the USA since.
We attack the Taliban in Afghanistan, we make it to where they had free elections and they no longer live under Taliban Rule. We have started them on their way to a democracy. Pretty good feat!
We had an insane dictator in Iraq that had attacked it's neighbors, launched rockets at Israel, gassed his own people to death and was paying terrorist and their families $25,000.00 per suicide bomber, a frigging terrorist recruiter! Al Qaeda had camps in Northern Iraq. There were terrorist fleeing to Iraq from Afghanistan. Their insane dictator was supporting terrorism.
We get reports, though false, maybe, that Iraq was developing WMD. (I still think they were and had too much time to get rid of them) Even Ex President Clinton said that was true. The vast opinion by Dems and Republicans was, "we can't let that happen." Saddam had years and years to comply, he wouldn't. He was warned, let the inspectors back in, he wouldn't. It became a joke, he was winning the game and making the UN and the USA look like flunkies. The UN and other nations, as we know now, were being bought off. Bush gave Saddam every chance in the world to operate in peace and comply with the UN, Saddam chose not to do so, we did not make that decision for him. What good are sanctions if they are not backed up? What good are repeated warnings if they are not backed up. The UN wimps, along with the countries "doing business with Saddam", were trying to block any military measure, now we know why and now we know why Saddam figured he had us taken care of.
Now, Iraq as well as Afghanistan are working on democracys. If that is the only thing that gets acheived, it's worth it for us to have two more friends and democratic countries in that part of the world, especially in this day and time.
We have a leader, a President, whose job is to protect this nation from threats and future threats. Everyone agreed, Saddam was a threat. Again, Clinton, when in office, stated the same, as well as later, he supported military measures in Iraq. The President did what was not only expected of him but, demanded as well.
Backseat driving is easy for 4th graders. It's easy for those that are still fuming that Bush was elected to begin with, to find blame and use anything they can to try to be able to tell themselves, "ha, I was right." "Here is a man that wants to rule the world, the big evil US President Bush, King George." Well, I'm here to tell you, considering what this President was dealt, I think he's done a hell of a job. I know of no man that we had to choose from that could have gone into that office and done half as good a job at handling what he has was given.
Do I disagree with the way some things were and are carried out, sure. Are the boarders a problem that I think he's missing, absolutely. But some of you would blame Bush if you were denied a CCL.
...
!
