The Difference Between Bush’s Wide Receiver and Obama’s Fast and Furious: The Short Version

[via Doug Ross]

“Wide Receiver [the Bush-era operation] was a gun smuggling interdiction effort that involved Phoenix-based ATF agents working in conjunction with Mexican law enforcement. It was a Phoenix border operation only. They were trying to build a case against a violent group of Mexican drug smugglers and the Mexican drug cartel to discover who they were and where they could be found. Wide Receiver began in 2005, involved 400 weapons, and all the weapons had RFID trackers installed in them. The Mexican government was informed and actively involved. The program was ended in 2007 when the drug dealers discovered the trackers that had been installed. No lives were lost.

Fast and Furious was begun in 2009 by the Obama administration and was an unconstitutional effort to build a case against American gun dealers, American private gun owners, and the Second Amendment. The Mexican government wasn’t involved in Fast and Furious. Over 300 people were killed, including two Americans. Wide Receiver no longer existed; it had been shut down for two years. Fast and Furious involved over 2,000 guns. The Obama regime didn’t care where the weapons ended up. There were no tracking devices and no effort was made to track them. No helicopters. There was no on-the-ground surveillance of the straw purchasers. The guns were sold and then walked across the border, and that was it. Four federal agencies were involved in maybe as many as 10 cities in five states. Fast and Furious was Obama’s effort to gain false information so he could use the information to introduce his gun control bill.”

Although I’m very happy that SOMEONE figured out how to make the “Gun Running for Dummies” statement that the average civilian needs to get a layman’s understanding of what’s going on, it pisses me off to no end that not a single “journalist” thought to do this over the many, many month’s that Holder’s scandal was brewing.

Two paragraphs. Two lousy stinking paragraphs. Is that REALLY too high to set the bar for minimal journalistic integrity?

Media tools, please either do your jobs or get different ones.

Send to Kindle
1 Star (Hated it)2 Stars3 Stars4 Stars5 Stars (Awesome) (9 votes, average: 5.00 out of 5)


  1. Thanks for posting this information Harvey. I have been consistently fooled by the Obama spokespeople into thinking that FnF was a continuation of the Bush program. Even though I watch Fox News and had a strong gut feeling that FnF wasn’t a straight up descendant of Wide Receiver, I have never seen/heard such a straight forward presentation of the differences.

    There are probably hundreds of government/law enforcement officials that could provide such a concise synopsis of the 2 programs; however, it appears to be beyond the journalistic skills of most of the media (yet somehow the WaPo can find people that witnessed Mitt Romney bully someone in 1965, and WaPo decides to dedicate 5000 words to the story). Perhaps with such a shallow pool of talent the Pulitzer Prizes should be cancelled for 2011/2012 (unless, of course, they award it to the author of “Mitt Romney Bullied teh Ghey Kid”).


  2. SOB

    Maybe they make the world a bette place by being GOOD journalist? Which is the only kind of journalist we should accept, othwewise they should just be opinionist and get a job on Fox.



Leave a Reply