Anton on April 19, 2007 at 8:10 PM

Hell, I’d feel pretty good about the future of this country’s chances if the current Dem party looked anything like JFK. At least he knew who the enemy was.

THANK YOU!!!!

Whatever you do, don’t tell them about absentee ballots. Shhhh! ;-)

Pablo on April 19, 2007 at 8:17 PM

I will :) The expatriate info came from a leftie source – so, I figured they knew already. Regards,

There is much more evidence that the Al Gore mindset of blameshifting caused this horrible crime but you know the left will never admit that.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

Does anyone blame the shooter?

Don’t you know nuthin?

The criminal is never, ever responsible for their own actions.

At least thats what the Democrats tell me, and they’re the experts at avoiding responsibility.

Unsafe at any keyboard.

It’s not the fault of (the) Eskimos Nader. It’s the fault of expatriates, thus of the Jews – they’ll write next.

Whatever you do, don’t tell them about absentee ballots. Shhhh! ;-)

Look at their obsession with President Kennedy. To hear them tell it, if Kennedy had not been shot, then there would have been no Vietnam and America would now be a golden liberal paradise. They ignore the fact that, at the time of his death, Kennedy was already a man in serious physical and political decline (though it was masked by his golden-boy persona). It’s easy to play “what-if” with history, but I seriously doubt whether the man who got us into the Bay of Pigs would have kept us out of Vietnam.

And now…. The “stolen” election of 2000. Did Katherine Harris steal it? Did the Supreme Court steal it? Did Ralph Nader himself steal it? As if a Gore Presidency would have magically prevented 9/11 and ushered in a new golden age. Again, “what-ifs” are tricky, but anyone who thinks that an American President wouldn’t have ordered a serious military response to 9/11 is deluding themselves. In addition, Gore was part of the administration that first declared the overthrow of Saddam Hussein to be settled US policy (look it up under the major legislation enacted under Clinton).

In the case of the Virginia Tech shooting, the “assault weapon” ban that Boosh is vilified for allowing to expire would likely not have changed the outcome. A 10-round magazine was legal under those rules. From what I’ve read, the Virginia Tech shooter didn’t use much more capacity than that. Besides, changing magazines is quick. And it sounds like this guy had plenty of time to reload.

But no — according to the “reality-based-community” on the left, the Virginia Tech shooting would never have happened if only Al Gore had been President in 2001.

Eh. Call it Camelot Derangement Syndrome. I want credit if the name sticks!

Anybody ever think … If the suicide bent killer couldn’t get a gun a homemade bomb would do. It likely would be as easy to do as it was for the the London bus bombers. Just walk in the class and …

You’re not the first person I’ve heard present that theory. But the murderer was far less like the bus bombers and far more like the Littleton killers of Columbine High School. And, if you will recall, their bombs were duds.

What this probably means is that #3 and #4 weren’t options presented to those being polled, but were surmised responses for those who refused to submit to the binary logic of the poll. I’d guess that this is why these answers are in parentheses. Generally polling firms try to limit these moderate or indecisive responses by encouraging people to pick one of the extremes, skewing the results away from true public opinion.

Also, the 19%, though it may include some of the people who might have answered #3 or #4, also include some who might have answered #2 were the question phrased differently. After all, “people will always find guns” is a pretty categorical statement, whereas “tougher laws can help” is pretty weak. And it doesn’t even address the issue of whether looser laws might have meant that someone had the means to cut down the murderer while his body count was still low (or, possibly, zero). So all this skewing, and still only 19% of respondents said that guns could help (and only 29% of Democrats). That’s a shockingly low number. No wonder Harry Reid wants to wait on talk of gun control.

Because if Nader hadn’t run, the Goracle would have won Florida and….etc,etc,etc…..

Dog and cats living together, total chaos!

amerpundit on April 19, 2007 at 6:16 PM

i think the gop should do what the dems do. even before hiliarty or obama declared, they were spamming me with messaging and talking points, each tied to a “take action” sort of feature. the gop sits backwith their thunbs up their buts simpering, “gee, i hope someone blogs about us.”

jummy on April 19, 2007 at 6:25 PM

I, personally, haven’t gotten anything from Presidential candidates, but if that’s the case, I agree.

amerpundit on April 19, 2007 at 6:16 PM

i think the gop should do what the dems do. even before hiliarty or obama declared, they were spamming me with messaging and talking points, each tied to a “take action” sort of feature. the gop sits backwith their thunbs up their buts simpering, “gee, i hope someone blogs about us.”