Why do you keep cutting my screen name out of your quotes? You don't do that with anyone else. Do you not want me to get notification that you quoted me?
When, also, did I say that "the buck stops with Obama?" I said what happens in his Administration is a reflection on his Administration.
I don't even know how that's debatable.
And in fact, I even said, explicitly, with these exact words: "No one said Obama was personally involved in it."
Why do you have to continually twist what I say?
"Other view"? When did I say anything which contradicts this?Of course I take the other view...that Obama and Bush are both dealing with a massive government structure in which there's no way on earth they can know everything that's going on at everytime. In fact they depend on that structure to inform them of situations.
Again, speaking to points you wish I made rather than what I actually said.Sure...to some degree. To conservatives it's a major scandal. To most Americans it seems to be an unfortunate situation that should be prevented from ever happening again.
I grow tired of your need to accuse me of saying things I didn't say.Of course not...I blame the field office and individuals that made the mistake of using the same tactics they used under Wide Receiver. How on earth can you say the two aren't connected?
It doesn't matter if they were "connected." Fast and Furious was initiated in 2009 and didn't have to be. Nor did it have to be conducted in the way it was. This was a choice made by the Holder Justice Dept and no one else.
Even if they were identical -- which they weren't -- it wouldn't matter. If they were both wrong, Wide Receiver does not absolve Fast and Furious. I don't know why that is so difficult to grasp.Wide Receiver was inititiated to stop gun trafficking. It was initiated in the same Arizona ATF field office. When Department of Justice officials stated they needed to do something about gun traffiking the field office decides to re-implement the same policy they had used previously to stop gun trafficking.
No, actually, want you want to do is try to take some of the heat off the Obama Administration by impugning the Bush Administration. I already responded to this:No...I don't think Wide Receiver should receive the same attention. In fact I think it's come to light how dumb both operations were and they should never be reimplemented. Holder has insured that takes place.
It doesn't absolve the lunacy of Fast and Furious...which isn't my point of mentioning operation WR. My point in mentioning Wide Receiver from the get go is to point out it's not some new fangled policy created by Holder. It's a field office reimplementing an previous policy they had used to go after gun traffickers. It's bad policy period. No matter who orders it. In the new form...under the new name Fast and Furious it resulted in the death of an American. The bad policy was brought to light and the individuals that were shown to be involved are getting fired or resigning. To me that's what you would expect. It's conservatives that think it's some cudgel with which to beat up on the Obama administration..
Or, in the alternative, you're vindicating the Bush Administration and saying they were doing the right things all along after all. You pick, I guess.