The Government Accountability Office is an office chartered by Congress, which makes their study on the Mexican gun canard rather interesting.Â Who directed GAO to study this?Â Nancy Pelosi?Â Are you home?Â Don’t think for a minute gun owners aren’t going to punish your party over things like this.Â There’s a lot of mistrust of Democratic politicians on guns, even though Pennsylvania has a rather pro-gun contingent of Democrats.Â I can think of no more valuable organizing tool than telling gun owners they are going to lose their rights because the Mexican Government doesn’t have its shit together, and the US government can’t control its border.Â You couldn’t really ask for a better issue.Â So keep pushing it Nancy!Â You only make my job easier come November of 2010!
The LA Times has already jumped on it:
In the meantime, illegally obtained U.S. weapons — including an increasing number of automatic rifles — are being used to kill thousands of Mexican police, soldiers, elected officials and civilians, the report said.
If they are finding increasing numbers of automatic weapons being traced back to the US, it’s through legal sales by the US Government to the Mexican Government.Â Those aren’t coming from civilian stock.Â There’s no way they could be.
But the GAO criticisms go beyond operational concerns. Some findings cited laws and policies in the U.S. and Mexico that could make it difficult to institute lasting reforms such as lax U.S. laws for collecting and reporting information on firearms purchases, and a lack of required background checks for private firearms sales.
I have to wonder if this was engineered by the anti-gun leadership in Congress to embarrass the White House into helping them corral the pro-gun Democrats into towing the leadership line.Â That must be why the anti-gun politicians and anti-gun groups were ready to pounce on it as soon as it came out.
6 thoughts on “GAO Study on 90% Canard”
The dems ran a lot of pro gun “moderates” in 2006 and 2008 for spots in the house and senate. I am hoping that these are the ones that will derail what they are trying.
But, that said, my representative here in OK is Dan Boren. He sits on the Board of the NRA. But I would be willing to bet, that if Saran Wrap face Pelosi calls him on it, he will toe the party line. Just like he did when he voiced suppport for the One who can’t be named. I just don’t trust Democrats that are supposedly pro gun. That usually means, they are pro 22 rifle, pro shotgun and pro game rifle. Nothing else outside the standard box.
Kiss the semi autos goodbye in that case.
BTW, I just started reading your blog a month or so ago, and I like it!!!
Andrew, explain your reasoning on Dan Boren for me, please. And no, just because he’s a Democrat doesn’t work. I don’t understand why you think he’ll bend over for Pelosi on guns considering a) that would get him booted from office in a heartbeat, and b) they don’t get along, especially when it comes to policy. Tell me what incentive is there for him to go along with her if a) he loses his seat at such a young age, and b) he doesn’t get any reward in exchange for the vote because she doesn’t like that he’s so moderate. If you have knowledge or evidence to the contrary, I’d love to know.
In addition, do you have a link for where Boren endorsed Obama? Because throughout most of the election Boren was very vocally and specifically not endorsing Obama while noting that he’s far too liberal for Oklahoma values and he doesn’t have a record of playing well with Republicans. Did he rescind that claim at some point, and can you show me where?
Wow, a democrat lying to get elected. Qeul surprise, bitter, NOT.
‘Course, it’s not like repubs don’t do the same thing. But for the most part they don’t have to do it as often.
What evidence do you have that Dan Boren has ever lied about his stance on this issue? That’s an awfully big charge to make, emdfl. Provide evidence that he has lied about his support of gun rights. Please, I look forward to this. I’m REALLY looking forward to this.
Comments are closed.