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

[nopardons]

Far and away too damned many. All of them filled, to the brim, by posts, mostly from the same people, who don't do a thing, in REAL life, to forward their agenda, but spend hour upon hour, day after day, pissing in the wind.

[Consort]

Good one.

[nopardons]

Just the factual truth. :-)

[bonfire]

crackin' up here. Tell it, girl!

[Mo1]

but spend hour upon hour, day after day, pissing in the wind.

Well it might explain why they want another Dims in the WH .. so they can piss and moan some more

[diamond6]

Jim, I just want to say how much I have appreciated your posts. You are a voice of reason among an avalanche of foolish, phoney disruptors on this post. As the Freeper founder, I value your opinion and your time. After days of dealing with the fools myself, I respectfully think you would be better served to find a post with real, honest to goodness conservatives that want the vision that you outlined. We all would be better off if that vision is achieved. As for the fools, don't bother flaming me, I won't be responding.

[nopardons]

Always happy to delight you ! :-)

Oh, you bet I shall and shall and shall and SHALL continue to spell out the facts.

[nopardons]

That IS correct. It would seem that they can't handle anything going even a wee bit well; their ONLY " happiness " is when they are miserable and so is EVERYONE here as well. You know what people like that are called, don't you ? It begins with an M. ;^)

[Vets_Husband_and_Wife]

No wonder conservatives can't make any real headway in government. As soon as the momentum starts building, out come the hand-wringing doom and gloom naysayers, for whom no conservative is good enough, to smear and destroy any and all progress made todate by the Republicans, and by doing so, reinstalling the leftist liberals to their socialist government command posts.

Agree totally with that statement Jim. This type of thing gripes us to no end. What PLANET are these people living on?? This is one of the most destructive things people do to a party they mostly agree with.

There will NEVER be a President we agree with 100 percent on all things. Thats just humanly impossible, especially in light of the fact that NONE Of us are alike/identitcal either physically or mentally.

It is so sickening to watch Repubs and conservatives eat their own. We have often said, thats why the Dems kept winning. They stood beside their man or woman no matter what.

I think Republicans are more principled than that. If one of ours really screws up.. he is toast.

But continueing this particular gun ban, and in light I might add under a sense of hightened security, won't stop a vote for President Bush by us.

We have the house.. we have the Senate.. We have the presidency..but we will not keep them if we think of our candidates as only ONE issue candidates. That is just plain STUPID!!

Sheesh... We have an awesome President. He is decent, has put together a wonderful experienced team... the dream team.

Then we come here today to see this kind of hyperbole and hysteria.

Get real folks. PLEASE...THINK FOR A WHILE BEFORE COMMENTING! Think of the ramifications of what some of you suggest. (shaking my head here in disbelief) The timing of this, when we just did an awesome job in Iraq and Afghanistan, the Phillipines and other places, all since this man took office,.. and after all he has accomplished, a petition or plan like the one in this article is just the epitomy of shooting yourself in your own foot. I honestly have to question the motives of the people collecting the signatures.

We both respectfully and vehemently disagree with this group who professes to speak for all of us, and the opinion of many in this thread. You all need to know when you have a good thing,.. WHILE YOU HAVE IT.. before you LOOSE IT!!

FRegards, Vet

[Byron_the_Aussie]

..I would love to be one of them regularly and will if we can find a means of BINDING candidates to support of the Constitution. However, we do need to get this LEFT support out of here...

You'll never do it, champ. All that ever ends up happening is thread after thread with blood all over the floor.

It happened with the Libertarians and the Buchanan fraternity, and we lost a hell of a lot of good people. And while everyone was at each others' throats on FR, the libs were marching on. Compare that to the effectiveness of the last month, when the place became a war room for information exchange on the support the troops campaign. Can you *imagine* the impact we could have, if Freepers are all pulling together that way, in Nov 2004?

But the only way that impact can be optimised is if everyone suborns their primary issue to the common good- within reason. We'll never get to where we want to go when all the wheels are pulling in different directions. What I've seen a zillion times is good people coming to FR who are justifiably passionate about a single issue- maybe guns, or abortion, or Mexican immigration. They get all wound up that others don't share their passion to the same degree. The flames start, then the factions, then (worst of all) the bitterness. Then- the departure, one way or the other. And that departure was too often FR's loss. So please forget any idea about hammering the Bush-no-matter-what camp, off the forum. On the issue of the AWB, I think the President is making a big mistake, by sending Scott McLellan out with the bad news. But it's not too late to change his intent, if we pull together. Specifically, by urging gunowners to write to their congressman, by getting on talk radio, by providing links to online polls and the like. This website always punches above its weight and there's no telling what might transpire with the AWB extension if gunowners raise an almighty stink about it- now. All the best, Byron

[Vets_Husband_and_Wife]

"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

Here is where some folks get really silly. Where does the above quote say you have the right to own an army tank with loaded shells?? Just answer me, if you feel you have the RIGHT to do so.

I'll look to see if you took the bait tomorrow.

G'nite

[Byron_the_Aussie]

..you know what people like that are called, don't you ? It begins with an M. ;^)....

Magnanimous? :)

[Mo1]

Specifically, by urging gunowners to write to their congressman

If I recall, wasn't it the congresscritters that started this mess in the first place?

[Trailerpark Badass]

Here is where some folks get really silly. Where does the above quote say you have the right to own an army tank with loaded shells?? Just answer me, if you feel you have the RIGHT to do so.

Well, dear, tracked military vehicles are not restricted in any way, other than DOD surplusing regulations. Tank main guns would come under the Fedgov classification "destructive device" and, as such, would be transferable (heck, even makeable) after the appropriate paperwork has been approved and a $200 transfer tax has been paid. Tank rounds (solid, non-HE projectiles) are unrestricted. HE rounds would require a $200 transfer tax per round for a non-licensee to possess, plus appropriate (and expensive) transportation and (magazine) storage requirements. Ain't America great?

[justshe]

Geez .. how many of the same threads are out there

---

Glad you asked that question. I'm posting on two, as are you, and I just realized they are both posted by the same person.

Perhaps there won't be a 'new' article about the same subject tomorrow, as I can think of NOTHING new that could be posted on this topic.

This reminds me of a certain topic in recent history. An organization, that shall go unnamed, issued daily 'statements' by the head of the organization. Within hours of the statement, the same organization would issue a press release, basically making the same statement AGAIN. Well....you guessed it. We were treated to basically the same article, with two different "release times" daily on the forum. This went on for over a week, IIRC.

Just goes to show you how those with a pet peeve (agenda) can beat a dead horse until it is reduced to glue.

[Vets_Husband_and_Wife]

Oh Sheesh. You missed my ENTIRE point. I give up for the night. I'll come back and see if you were just joking, and I'm really tired and missed the joke, or if I need to do some whoop *ss on your views with logic and proof.

:o)

NITE.. Vets

[diamond6]

Yes, and did you notice that his fraudulent picture was pulled by the Admin Moderator? Something's rotten in Denmark.

[Trailerpark Badass]

Oh Sheesh. You missed my ENTIRE point. I give up for the night. I'll come back and see if you were just joking, and I'm really tired and missed the joke, or if I need to do some whoop *ss on your views with logic and proof.

If so, I be sorry. And I'll wait patiently for my a$$ whoopin' :0)

Hit me when you can, I'm made steel by fire!

[justshe]

Please ignore my FRmail. I just checked 'history' and I see the picture, now.

[Mo1]

Glad you asked that question. I'm posting on two, as are you, and I just realized they are both posted by the same person.

Yep I've noticed ..