It seems strange, after all the names Obama and company called President George W. Bush over Iraq. When the intelligence community reported Iraq likely had, or was getting, weapons of mass destruction (WMD), and would likely use them on the US or our allies (duh!), the main stream media (MSM) and the government jumped on it. I doubt the President knew, or cared, whether Iraq had WMD. But I think the most likely scenario is that just before or after the fall of Iraq - international organized crime made off with much of the infrastructure of Iraq, including lots of weapons - and likely any WMDs. That is just my opinion. Today the consensus seems to be that, when we got close enough to check - finally! - there weren't any, so we call Bush a liar and claim we now know that there never (?) were any WMD in Iraq. And we know he made it up.
And we feel smug, as we ignore the year delay that the weapons could have been moved or destroyed, and we ignore the problem of being certain, at the time, whether or not there were WMD in Iraq - or whether other factors justified our actions. Smug. Smug and guilt free. Isn't it good to have Democrats to wave their hands and solve our problems?
Except we have this little problem. Americans are using drugs. Mexicans are supplying a lot of the drugs. And the Mexicans are armed. Heavily armed. With US-made automatic weapons, heavy battlefield type weapons and grenades.
And we now have, demonstrably, two presidents, our secretary of state (Hilary sure learned a lot about lying from her husband Bill! - or did she teach him?), and others in the government. The Brady Group is all over this story - American guns are being used by Mexicans to kill each other and Americans! Horrors!
Which brings me to the Mexican Canard. Hat/tip to the Armed School Teacher for coigning the phrase Mexican Gun Canard. A canard is a false rumor.
And that is what is going on. Hilary and the Brady Group want to renew the assault weapon ban (it didn't affect shootings or murders, only infringed rights of citizens and increased the cost of government) and House Speaker Pelosi wants to register all guns. As if the government hasn't managed to misuse every database they every had, and breached every confidential piece of data. Remember our Secretary of State with the felony mishandling of FBI files - that she let the statute of limitations run out before turning the files back in, with her fingerprints on them and no explanation? So we have to take this posturing seriously.
Even when the stand Obama and others take is based on a lie.
The American arms that the Mexican drug cartels are uniformly heavy, battlefield weapons - none of which are available to gun-owning civilians in the US.
These are Department of Defense weapons, retired, and provided to Mexico to arm their army and police. When said army and police people desert, as many do, they manage to take the automatic weapons, grenades, etc. with them. And sell them to the drug cartels.
Obama is deliberately floating this canard, this false rumor, for his own purposes. And the main stream media keeps pretending Obama is a young President, not the product of Chicago inner city and corrupt politics.
Besides, all Obama would have to do to stop arming the drug cartels - would be to end drug abuse in the US - no market, no sellers, no one buying Mexico's deserter-market weapons. Change, indeed. Instead we have to watch for truckloads of guns sold to drug cartels at gun shows. Hint: Gun shows are well regulated, and don't have access to the type of weapons the drug cartels want and use. Nor do licensed gun dealers.
I ask myself - why does the President of the United States want to take away guns that the Constitution protects, and not the drugs that violate the law? I haven't figured that out, yet, but I imagine it has to do with campaign contributions (few gun owners contribute to Obama, I don't know about drug dealers) and other money streams.