As I Predicted, George W. Bush Is Backing Bill Clinton's Gun Ban

Toogood Reports ^ | April 15, 2003 | By Chuck Baldwin

[Uncle Bill]

As I Predicted, George W. Bush
Is Backing Bill Clinton's Gun Ban

TooGood Reports
By Chuck Baldwin
Chuck Baldwin Website
April 15, 2003

In this column dated December 17, 2002, I predicted that President G.W. Bush would support the so-called assault weapons ban first promoted by former President Bill Clinton and Sen. Diane Feinstein back in 1994. Interestingly enough, the gun ban became law on the strength of a tie-breaking vote by then Vice President Al Gore. The ban is scheduled to sunset next year, but Bush is joining Clinton and Gore in supporting an extension.

Presidential spokesman Scott McClellan said, "The president supports the current law (the Clinton gun ban), and he supports reauthorization of the current law."

This must come as quite a blow to people such as the leaders of the National Rifle Association who campaigned heavily for Bush touting him as a "pro-gun" candidate. Since his election, the NRA and others have repeatedly reaffirmed their support for Bush, because he is "pro-gun." Well, now the mask is off!

I have tried to warn my readers that Bush is not a true conservative. He is not pro-life; he is not pro-family; he is not pro-Constitution. And now we know he is not pro-gun.

Instead of reversing the miserable policies of Clinton/Gore, Bush is helping to harden the cement around those policies. The gun issue is no exception.

The so-called assault weapons ban was the benchmark piece of legislation reflecting the anti-gun policies of people such as Clinton, Gore, Feinstein, and New York Senator Charles Schumer. It was also the number one target of the NRA. In fact, the NRA all but promised their supporters that a Bush presidency would help reverse this Draconian gun ban. Instead, Bush is pushing Congress to extend the ban.

A bill to reauthorize the gun ban will be introduced by Senator Feinstein in the coming weeks. It must pass both chambers of Congress to reach the President's desk. The best chance of stopping it will be in the House of Representatives. However, in order to defeat this bill, it must resist the power and influence of the White House. This will be no small task.

Not only is Bush betraying the pro-gun voters who helped elect him, he is breathing new life into a nearly dead anti-gun movement. Most political analysts credit Bush's pro-gun image as the chief reason he defeated Al Gore in the 2000 election. They also credit the pro-gun image of the Republican Party for helping them to achieve impressive wins in the 2002 congressional elections.

Now, Bush is giving new credibility to anti-gun zealots such as Schumer and Feinstein and is helping to reinvigorate the anti-gun momentum that had all but been put on ice.

However, the real question will be, "Will pro-gun conservatives continue to support Bush?" Bush is every bit the "Teflon President" that Clinton was. Conservatives seem willing to overlook anything he does, no matter how liberal or unconstitutional it may be. Will they overlook this, also?

If you truly believe in the Second Amendment and are willing to do something about it, I suggest you go to the Gun Owners of America website. They have a quick link set up which allows people an opportunity to conveniently send email to the White House about this issue. Go to the gun ban "alert" button. From there you can voice your disapproval with the President's decision to betray his constituents by supporting this new round of gun control.

Once again, the ball of freedom and constitutional government is in the court of the American people. Will they keep the ball and do something with it, or will they hand it off to the neo-conservatives at the White House? We'll see.

---

PLEASE Don't Sit out 2004, EVEN IF Bush signs the AW ban extention

Bush Supports New Extension Of Assault-Weapons Ban

Bush Backs Renewing Assault Weapons Ban

---

"That’s why I’m for instant background checks at gun shows. I’m for trigger locks."
George W. Bush - Source: St. Louis debate Oct 17,2000.

MORE INJUSTICE ON THE WAY - Bush GUN CONTROL
"Gene Healy, a Cato Institute scholar, recently provided a thorough exploration of the unintended consequences of one law, the new Bush-Ashcroft plan to federalize gun crimes, known as the Project Safe Neighborhoods program. The unintended consequences of this law are frightening."
NOTE: Same Article in Washington Times.

There Goes the Neighborhood: The Bush-Ashcroft Plan to "Help" Localities Fight Gun Crime, by Gene Healy

"W. Wimps Out on Guns"
The Bush package includes several pet causes of the gun-control lobby, including $75 million for gun locks; $15.3 million for 113 new federal attorneys to serve as full-time gun prosecutors; and $19.1 million to expand a program by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms aimed at preventing youths from obtaining guns. Although Bush stressed that he simply wants to "enforce existing laws," the fine print of Project Safe echoes the gun-grabbing Left's call to ban the importation of high-capacity ammunition clips."

Project Safe Neighborhoods, A Closer Look

LAURA BUSH:
"During her San Diego speech, for instance, she said nothing about the school shooting that occurred 20 miles away in El Cajon the day before, although in a television interview she condemned it, adding that she thinks more gun control laws are needed.

"I think that's very important," she said when asked by CNN whether stronger gun laws are needed."
Source.

EMERSON & THE SECOND AMENDMENT

A Gutless Supreme Court Decision - Gun Control

Republican Leadership Help Push Gun Control

Bush's Assault On Second Amendment

NEA Resource Text Guide In Regards To The Extreme Right - Where Do Your Kids Go To School?
"The radical right says it is pro-life but it bitterly opposes gun control legislation"

or

A Problem With Guns?

Thanks for that Patriot Act George

[gtech]

Perfect. That will get us President Hitlery. Great.

Frankly, I can live with that if Republicans x 3 can't stop gun control anyway.

But this is why you and other "conservatives" need to work as hard as I will to make sure this ban is not renewed. Your core issues may suffer this loss too. Instead of trying to convince us we're wrong for voting our core issues, let's work together so all of our conservative issues are defended.

Here is a fact, if an AWB bill gets to the presidents desk and he signs it, I am going to donate time and money to an opposition candidate, and will vote for an opposition candidate. If it never reaches his desk, even if it's because the House was the legislative body responsible, then I will donate time and money to GWB's campaign and vote for him. If you want to help get GWB reelected, and because there are a significant number of people like me out there, then you can help by insisting that your president not betray us, or that your representatives in congress don't let it get that far. And interestingly, you'd be defending the constition while you were at it. A nice side benefit for a conservative.

[diamond6]

My core issues/values will not suffer, because Bush supports my core issues/values. However, I'm interested in who your nameless "Mr. Wonderful" candidate will be in 2004. Go ahead, I'm waiting for ONE name.

[gtech]

My core issues/values will not suffer, because Bush supports my core issues/values. However, I'm interested in who your nameless "Mr. Wonderful" candidate will be in 2004. Go ahead, I'm waiting for ONE name.

Not if he's not reelected. And that's why you should care about this issue too.

President Bush can be my "Mr Wonderful". All he has to do is kill gun control. I don't have another name to offer, for what that's worth. But I'd rather see Hillary in office than a turncoat.

[Nucluside]

"I vote in every election. I always vote against incumbents. I vote for any alternative to screw the two party system whenever possible."

That pretty much guarantees you'll always have something to whine about.

I generally save the term for fuzzy-thinking anarchists, socialists, and liberals, whether in the meat world or not. I leave the handwringing wimps alone, except to laugh at and ridicule them. I leave the communists alone except to put on a uniform to fight them, when needed; at least they have some principle, albeit warped.

Cheers, R.J.M.

[diamond6]

You don't know the first thing about my core values or principles. Who are you to question that? You might try a real faith in God, though. It might help with your judgmental constipation.

[diamond6]

BUMP! OUCH!

[diamond6]

Say, did anyone notice that Uncle Bill got his fraudulent photo removed by the moderator. Anything else we should know that you've been feeding us Bill?

[FSPress]

Just curious, what kind of church do you to. Is it part of the world council of churches?

[k2blader]

I have some friends who'd agree with you but will still likely vote for him come 2004.

[diamond6]

I'm Catholic and proud of it. I'm sure you're anti-Catholic, aren't you?

[k2blader]

By [some folks] definition of what the Constitution says, there wouldn't be a single candidate left in the Senate or House, let alone the presidency, due to them all being in violation of the Constitution.

Agreed.

I'm interested in what makes this AWB issue more important than the other violations of the Constitution carried out over the years.

[k2blader]

Your deliberate twisting of the Word is vomitous.

[FSPress]

I'm sure you're anti-Catholic, aren't you?
---
Why do you say that I am anti-Catholic?

[diamond6]

Just a feeling. Somehow I think you're getting ready to attack my religion. I have a feeling you're against all organized religions. I could be wrong. You tell me. What religion are you?

[dcwusmc]

Doesn't seem twisted to me... What's twisted is someone who can read the Word, see what God requires and then tolerate someone who does the OPPOSITE while PROFESSING to believe. BTW, Clowntoon was ALSO a hearty church-goer... same church, it wouldn't surprise me, as Dubya. What does THAT say?

[k2blader]

I maintain that post was a heinous twisting of Scripture.

But it is a heavy charge and not to be taken lightly.

So prove it without doubt.

Tell me exactly how diamond or I have done "the OPPOSITE while PROFESSING to believe."

And keep in mind Matthew 7:1 and Luke 6:37 as you lay out your "evidence."

[diamond6]

I'd like to know what commandment in the bible says, "Thou shalt not limit an individual's right to own ANY arms of his choosing"?

[k2blader]

diamond,

This is amazing, to say the least, but not surprising.

Nothing angers me more than the perversion of God's Word for one's personal purposes.

I hold them to it.

[diamond6]

So do I.

[Technogeeb]

You don't know the first thing about my core values or principles

On the contrary, I do. I know you are an apologist for oath-breaking; which is what you and your candidate are supporting.

Who are you to question that?

You are the one who brought God in the the subject; falsely claiming that he would support your sinful position.

You might try a real faith in God, though. It might help with your judgmental constipation

Once more, you try to use God, the same God who finds your position so sinful that it makes him want to vomit, as justification for your cause. You are the one who brought up God;