Smart. Sharp. Funny. Fearless.
Tuesday, March 26, 2019

Republicans Outraged At Obama For Supporting Reagan And Bush’s Gun Policies

Republicans are in a fury as President Obama outlandishly lurches toward gun reforms supported by presidents Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush.

Rep. Trey Radel (R-FL) joined Steve Stockman (R-TX) as the second member of Congress to suggest he might be willing to impeach the president for a series of executive orders he’s issuing to fight gun violence.

“We have completely lost our checks and balances in this country, the Congress needs to hold the president accountable for the decisions that he’s making right now,” Radel said, “and that is why again, I would say that all options should be on the table.”

What kind of power grab is President Obama engaged in after the massacre at Sandy Hook Elementary, which left 20 children dead?

His list of 23 executive orders includes radical actions such as, “Issue a Presidential Memorandum to require federal agencies to make relevant data available to the federal background check system.” He calls for guns recovered in criminal investigations to be tracked and even calls for Congress to approve his nominee to head up the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms.

You know who else issued executive orders?

No. These guys.

Ronald Reagan, George H.W. Bush and every president since Washington — except William Henry Harrison, who died a month after taking office. G.H.W. Bush and Bill Clinton both used executive orders to ban the importation of certain semi-automatic weapons. Neither was impeached. Well, not for that, anyway.

So would Republicans really impeach the president for launching “a national safe and responsible gun ownership campaign”? As usual, the Republican freakout meter is at 11.

“Rolling back responsible citizens’ rights is not the proper response to tragedies committed by criminals and the mentally ill,” Senator Marco Rubio (R-FL) said.

Texas governor Rick Perry (R) echoed Rubio. “Guns require a finger to pull the trigger,” he said. “The sad young man who did that in Newtown was clearly haunted by demons and no gun law could have saved the children in Sandy Hook Elementary from his terror.”

The argument that no law can stop evil was once made by Ronald Reagan in the pages of Guns and Ammo magazine. “Criminals are not dissuaded by soft words, soft judges or easy laws. They are dissuaded by fear and they are prevented from repeating their crimes by death or by incarceration,” he wrote.

More than a decade later, after a gun had almost taken his life, Reagan came out in support of both background checks and later an assault weapons ban, providing the crucial support to get both written into law.

And now as President Obama seeks to renew that ban and expand background checks for all gun sales, Republicans are even saying that Reagan was senile when he supported responsible gun laws.

That’s how much Republicans hate President Obama; to fight him, they’re even willing to commit blasphemy against St. Ronnie.

  • Share this on Google+0
  • Share this on Linkedin0
  • Share this on Reddit195
  • Print this page
  • 3501

87 responses to “Republicans Outraged At Obama For Supporting Reagan And Bush’s Gun Policies”

  1. TonyinMO says:

    The problem is the psychotropic drugs and the nutcases that take them.

    • Sand_Cat says:

      Oh, you take drugs? That explains a lot.

      • TonyinMO says:

        Keep denying the reality, I’m sure it makes it that much easier for you to cope in your little world of unicorns and rainbows, wealth redistribution and free handouts. Call me on your 0bama phone!

        • TZToronto says:

          The Obama phone is actually a Bush phone. Check your dates.

          • TonyinMO says:

            It actually started out as a Reagan phone. Of course since Bush and Reagan are no longer in office and 0bama was the last one to approve the program it is in fact considered an 0bama phone today.

          • What does a cell phone to help people look for work and be a part of society have to do with curbing assault weapons? I’m a little confused here.

          • TonyinMO says:

            Try following the thread, it’s possibly it will keep you from asking stupid questions. If after following the thread you still have questions move along to another discussion more suited for your limited mental capacity.

          • english_teacher says:

            The trolls will be insulting again but it’s typical of their tactics. The story is about gun policies and they introduce items that have nothing to do with the discussion. Best advice is to ignore them.

    • sigrid28 says:

      It is a fool’s errand to teach rabid gun enthusiasts to use any big words like “psychotropic,” because they will only insert them where they don’t belong to try to spice up one of their tired talking points. Alex Jones, during his rants about tyranny and the Second Amendment on the Piers Morgan show, punctuated every other sentence with the words “serotonin uptake.” Another crude device used to change the subject while losing an argument is to quibble over what kind of firearm constitutes an assault weapon, as if being able to describe guns, rifles, and magazines adequately explains why anyone would ever need a weapon firing 100 bullets a minute, outside of a combat situation. Rachel Maddow argued persuasively tonight that the leadership of the NRA and its lobbyists adopt this troll-like behavior to excite the lunatic fringe, making them buy more guns, and rake in donations from the NRA’s benefactors, gun and ammo manufacturers. Trolls don’t have any expectation of being taken seriously and have little motivation beyond exhibitionism. Many apologists for gun violence are making themselves look silly.

      • TonyinMO says:

        LMAO. So you’re one of the 13 people that watch that rabid troll Rachael Madcow .

        Thanks for the laugh, a reply to your nonsense would give it validity and we both know that you don’t deserve one.

      • Jim Myers says:

        Replying to sigrid28 –


        After all, most people just sit around and never end up in their crosshairs.

  2. Diogenes67 says:


  3. The party that waves Reagan’s memory and uses it as a distraction will not support actions in line with Reagan’s own policies.


    • Sand_Cat says:

      Let’s not be too eager to congratulate Reagan for his wisdom, foresight, and wise policies.

    • They claim to wave Reagan’s memory, but what they are calling for and doing are diametrically opposed to anything Reagan actually stood for. What they are promoting is Dick Cheney’s and Donald Rumsfeld’s vision of what they would like Reagan to have stood for.

      • That’s kind of what I was saying. These fools are like a matador.. waving symbols and provocative ideas before the body politic so it charges this way and that, getting stuck and backstabbed by these heartless, artistic monsters until it collapses and dies.

  4. Reagan championed gun control in 1986, supported a ban on assault rifles, and stringent background checks. He also signed the Brady bill, and wrote an op-ed on either the Boston Globe or the Time supporting gun control. Republican gun advocated remained silent and did not challenge their Messiah.
    Now that President Obama is proposing identical legislation the GOP, the arms industry, and the NRA are calling for impeachment and engaged in the usual immature name calling. I wonder why.
    President Obama proposed banning assault rifles, banning high capacity magazines (exceeding 10 bullets), called for strict background checks to ensure criminals and people suffering from mental illnesses or who have made threats against others or against institutions are not able to buy or own a gun. He also proposed improvements in mental care. What is wrong with this, and how does it differ from what former Republican Presidents proposed and signed?
    Insisting that guns don’t kill people, ignores the fact that a person wielding a knife or a bat may be able to kill one or two people before he is taken down or before people run away, it is not easy to run away from a person shooting a Remington .223 caliber rifle with a high capacity magazine.
    The worst massacres our country has endured were not carried out by men with knives, they were carried out by men with guns.
    The only problem I have with the proposed changes is the implementation of legislation that will infringe on patients privacy rights and, especially, because it relies on patients telling physicians that they plan to harm other people. Most deranged individuals will not do that. Are we going to tell drug addicts, people that depend on strong behavioral medication to function, bipolar, dual personality individuals, and others that they cannot buy guns? If the extent of the proposal is to deny people that are mentally insane, to the point of being in mental institutions, this part of the proposed changes is going to be very difficult to implement and enforce.

    • Actually it was GHW Bush who signed the Brady Bill. Remember GHW Bush? He is the one who first articulated the term “New World Order” as a statement of pride in his and Reagan’s accomplishments. Strange how today’s Republicans are also opposed to that which was pronounced by their old standard bearers.

    • We have to start somewhere, to throw up our hands & say it’s impossible to put into action is irresponsible. We must at least try our best to protect our children. We must see the issue as clearly as the school children who wrote President Obama. To quote one of the kids, we know it will be hard, but anything worth doing always is.

    • Nomoresmoke says:

      Remember August 1, 1966, The Charles Whitmore Austin Texas Tower shooting?
      Additionally, he packed guns—a 35 caliber Remington rifle, a 6mm Remington rifle with a scope, a 357 Magnum Smith & Wesson revolver, a 9mm Luger pistol, and a Galesi-Brescia pistol. Later that morning he would buy two more weapons, a 30 caliber M-1 carbine and a 12-gauge shotgun.
      Reagan and Brady were shot with a 22 caliber handgun. FYI

    • onedonewong says:

      I love reading your posts since other than your name your so called “facts” aren’t backed up by any research. The Brady bill was signed by CLINTON

      • Linda Ku says:

        I believe you misunderstood Mr. Vila’s comment…. he said ‘Reagan CHAMPIONED the Brady bill, not that President Reagan SIGNED the bill. Big difference.

    • Ed says:

      Yes, difficult, but not impossible. Unfortunately the NRA owns the house of representatives so stringent laws that might be effective will never happen. Nor can we have a reasoned national discussion. Funny how the right always empasises the phrase “shall not be infringed”and ignores the phrase “a well regulated”……

  5. Sand_Cat says:

    Hey, we all know that gun laws have failed repeatedly. And while we’re consigning them to the scrap heap of history, what about all those other failed laws: you know, the ones against murder, robbery, rape, fraud, torture, kidnapping, extortion, and all those other things these impotent infringements on all our liberty have since their inception failed to stop criminals from doing?

    People don’t kill, rape, rob, etc., people: criminals do! An added benefit of removing all these wasted efforts from the books should be obvious: criminals by definition break the law, so if there are no laws, there can be no criminals, and no crime. Just think what a paradise our country could be!

    We could solve that desperate problem, the deficit: savings from laying off all those failed “enforcers” in the police, FBI, etc., would save billions, even trillions!

    But – best of all – with no laws saying one has to pay debts, the DEBT goes away even faster than the deficit.

    I can’t understand why all the politicians of both parties have overlooked this simple and completely effective solution to all our problems. We owe a tremendous debt of gratitude to the gun lobby for pointing out what we all missed, even though it was right before our noses: if a law doesn’t stop criminals, it obviously needs to be repealed.

    • Michael Kollmorgen says:

      You have to remember too a crime isn’t a crime until it becomes known.

      We’ve also passed a lot of laws that shouldn’t have been passed, which otherwise these people wouldn’t be criminals and fill our Prison Industrial Complex – courtesy of the Justice Industrial Complex.

      So, actually, passing more laws will only fill our prisons up even more than they already are. Then, we got people on the streets who can’t find jobs because of the stigma of being an ex-con after they get out of prison.

      AND, I haven’t even touched on the subject of the Mentally Ill.

    • Hey, we do NOT all know that gun laws have failed repeatedly – only that the gun lobby would like us to believe that. It’s kind of like Dubya, after gutting, and refusing to enforce, any environmental laws, saying that they didn’t work anyway. And communities do not have high crime rates because of strict laws – it’s the other way around.

      And Cat, get off of the holier-than-thou, criminals are not people ivory tower. Any of us might, under the right (not necessarily conservative) circumstances, go astray. We have seen what can happen when good people (especially in a bad economy) lose their jobs or homes or get divorced. “There, but for the grace” – you know the rest. Even children, influenced by the slightest perceived offense, can kill dozens with rapid- fire weapons and magazines – that they would not be able to kill, or to even try to kill – without them.

      It sounds also, that you would like to do away with our military and police. Who then, will protect our interests – you, the NRA? We all needed a good laugh, thanks!

  6. bpai99 says:

    “An ounce of hypocrisy is worth a pound of ambition.” – Oscar Wilde

  7. Maryann says:

    What can I say? he’s damned if he does, damned if he don’t, this guy can’t win no matter what. 🙁

  8. Maryann says:

    Funny how the GOP throws the word impeach around like I drop the F- bomb.

    • onedonewong says:

      Funny how Democratic?socialist presidents think the constitution doesn’t apply to them

      • srgm says:

        I take it you didn’t read the article.

      • Ed says:

        Or perhaps they understand it differently.

      • Gr8ivan says:

        The last President and VP certainly didn’t mind shredding the Constitutional right to privacy and wjatever else that got in their way of making huge profits for Haliburton all under the guise of fighting terrorism and killing Bin Laden. And, they failed to even do that.

      • Vigilarus says:

        What part of “well-regulated militia” don’t you understand?

        • onedonewong says:

          which part of inalienable rights don’t you understand, and what part of only the powers not enumerated in the constitution are the responsibility of the states

          • 324516 says:

            guest: If you would be so kind as to enlighten us liberals as to those inalienable rights as i remember the consitution those right included life ,liberty and the purist of happiness nowhere does it say the right to own a gun oh yes when you use a quote it generaly good to know where the quote comes from what you quoted is part of what is called the preamble and is not part of the document as a whole but it does give an idea as to what this document should entail now have you got that again the consitution does not give you the right to own a gun what the consitution does do is give an outline as to how this gov,t. is to be sat up what you any many of the n.r.a state as the consitution isn,t but are in fact the bill of rights that where added on to said paper and as they where added they by def. the can be subtracted from (as in you as a private citizen are not allow to have t.n.t gerade nitro primicord these are outlawed from the general poplace as is a knife that blade is over 6inchs long ) so it is possible to required background checks and outlaw assult rifle and30 round clips of ammo one last note i a hunter i cannot picture a deer or turkey ribbit or longhorn sheep needing more then one kill shot hey guess what man only needs onen bullet to kill him to

        • Eleanore Whitaker says:

          Actually, that militia down there in Florida is as “unregulated” as the militias in MT, WY and ID….they are not paid for by taxpayers as the Constitution states clearly. So…they can be disbanded for being illegal militant factions operating with military weapons inside the US for militant purposes.

      • george daghlian says:

        Another revisionist Neo Con man raised on the legacy rights of the rich and connected makes a comment that has the logic of flatulence!

        • onedonewong says:

          Don’t live in a place that gets a newspaper huh???

          • Eleanore Whitaker says:

            Try to stay current onedone…most people don’t read the neocon ultra conservative papers. We all prefer unbiased journalism…not the kind injected with Murdochian, Turnerist or Krauthammerist vitriol and reeking of right wing extremism.

          • onedonewong says:

            You mean the State Run Media that meets every morning with the WH to discuss what stories to cover and the spin

          • onedumbwongs smalldingdong says:

            I have a Rush Limbaugh blowup doll! Sorry, you can use it.

  9. Mem says:

    I do think the gun issue needs to be addsessed, semi-automatic weapons and high capacity magazines along with background checks for everyone who buys a gun anywhere should be the law. However these laws need to be passed by legislators. The Supreme Court needs to determine once and for all what the 2nd. ammendment means. If in fact the Constitution does allow anyone the right to carry and or own a gun of any type, then so be it. The odus of responsibility for safety will then fall on law enforcement. If not then Congress needs to pass laws that will help solve the crime of mass murder by gun. The president [whom I voted] for has no right to usurp the Constitution by Executive order for any reason.

  10. Thomas Michael Thompson says:

    I still stand by what I have written before . No gun law will stop the crazy people out there from
    trying to kill ! Reagan was loved by me and millions like me ! He was right the first time and although a crazy man tried to kill him with a .22 cal. gun , not a machine gun of ANY kind !
    The guy who shot President was mentaly ill and is , as far as I know, being treated for that .
    That guy was trying to impress an actress ! Where did you read that men with knives killed anyone in any of these schools Dominick Vila ? No where ! Noone at all would be nuts enough to go up against armed guards as preposed by the NRA ! Why are the Presidents kids lives worth more than for example mine ? Is that what you are saying Dominic ? On man with 2 nine millimeter simi-automatic guns killed 32 men !
    What is it that you want for the U.S. Maryann ? A King ? It is written in the U.S. Constition that a president may not , by lay , can not bypass Congress ! Do you want a King ? Well do you ? Maybe you should know something about Congressional laws before you shoot your mouth off ?!

  11. Thomas Michael Thompson says:

    No Maryann it is only Damned if he does !

  12. Thomas Michael Thompson says:

    Guns in the U.S.S.R. Germany, China , and others were band and taken away from their citizens !
    So try getting something right dude !

  13. don’t you see they don’t want no gun control laws that is how they get paid by not passing any laws if they pass a law they lost money that goes in 2 their hands with very president that has been in office it comes down 2 gun control laws they don’t care about our childern at all i wonder what will happen if it was their childern or child was shot or kill at school what would they do then[ uh ] that is a good question 2 ask them

  14. Plznnn says:

    I believe Americans have seen that the knee-jerk gun bans after Brady got shot didn’t work and now gun-control zealots are at it again. The problem is that when you give into a few more gun grabs, these zealots want more and then more. Most of us can see background checks, but this opens the door to more control & slipping in wording to gain more control. The gun-ban in Connecticut did not stop the psyco that killed those children, liberal policies that allows psycos to roam our streets allowed him to be our there.

  15. Eddy Cheek says:

    I am a hard core democrat who rarely agrees with the GOP but they are right on this issue. If you listen to any of the gun control advocates this is only a start. They are going after a type of gun that is used in less than 1 percent of crimes. It will make no difference and they know it. When it does not work do you think they will admit it or just go after more.

  16. wesley rasmussen says:

    ““We have completely lost our checks and balances in this country…’ Radel said…

    Well, a Republican spoke the truth for once. You cannot check an imbalanced Congress. The majority of House Reprehensibles are about as unbalanced a bunch as will ever be found not wearing their I love me jackets.

  17. jnsgraphic says:

    Republicans oppose everything the President does, the NRA and gun lobbyists have been dictating policies, financing these politicians and pouring money into these candidates coffers for decades. As long as our Senators and House can be bought, its all about MONEY, POWER & GREED! Just like no other right is absolute, these are responsible measures that no law abiding citizen (gun owner or not) should feel their “the right to bear arms” to be threatened by. STOP THE OBSTRUCTION AND DO YOUR JOBS!

  18. TonyinMO says:

    How quickly you tools forget it was 0bama that whined incessantly as a candidate about his predecessor using executive orders. All presidents have used them it’s just hypocritical that once elected it was just fine and dandy for 0bama to use them.

  19. charleo1 says:

    President Obama is right when he says, he can sign some directives, that require better
    enforcement of existing gun laws. But the real changes, must come from Congress.
    And that means nothing will happen without the public putting enough pressure
    on lawmakers, to out weigh the considerable clout, and cash of the gun lobby . It will not be
    an easy lift. Even common sense changes that effect no law abiding citizen’s Right to own
    a gun, hunt with a gun, or protect oneself, and family, if necessary, with a gun, will not be
    possible, without very strong public support. But, as the President also said, just because it’s
    difficult, doesn’t mean we shouldn’t try. They keep demanding the President to lead. Well, he’s
    leading on this one, more from his heart, than his head. He needs us to have his back.
    But, we shouldn’t kid ourselves. Facts, and statistics will not budge the entrenched gun lobby.
    Reason will not win out over the, NRA, or these loudmouths, with their intentionally, ridiculous hyperbole. Responsible gun owners, and non gun owners alike, must realize, and be prepared for,
    the onslaught of insults, and outrageous conclusions, by those who believe any restrictions
    that limits their ability to arm themselves with whatever weapon they choose is an infringement.
    So, they insist we all must live in their world. In a Nation bristling with high power weaponry,
    within the reach of psychotics, drug dealers, and on far too many occasions, the children who
    find them tucked away in a closet, often with tragic results. Before anything changes, we
    must decide it’s time to stand up to the bullies, and say enough! We owe common sense
    regulation to not only our children, but to our Police, and other law enforcement, who face
    these deadly weapons on our streets everyday. Some will say, and have said, regulations are
    useless, and only criminalize the law abiding. That, we can’t stop the Columbines, and Sandy
    Hooks. That more guns in more places is the answer. We need to stand, and tell them they are wrong.

  20. fidel says:

    The FBI has to take note and Investigate this People(Darrel) something black has behind him,Probably Corrupt from the Manufactures of GUN. Now is More Money behind this Legislation ,Importing Assault Rifles from China,The Chinese are Smart,we send Rifles to USA for kill themselves and we Get the Real Estate Market.Do you see how many Neighbor are the Chinese Buying? with help of NRA and some Legislator from the GOP.

  21. ShroudedSciuridae says:

    “Rolling back responsible citizens’ rights is not the proper response to tragedies committed by criminals and the mentally ill,” Senator Marco Rubio (R-FL) said.
    As I read this quote, I’m waiting in line for a TSA agent to wand me, irradiate me, inspect my shoes, my luggage, and admire the computer image of my genitals. The irony is not lost on me.

  22. Mental health is only a lame excuse by those who support the gun ownership. The boy who massacred children at sandy hook elementary school was not a gun owner, therefore no mental health checks would have been carried on him or even detected him as he had not applied to buy any guns. Those who own guns for self protection such as Nancy, will or may at some point fall victim to gun violence from those close to them and most trusted as it happened with Nancy. Their own relatives or children may access those guns and committ atrocities using those same guns. It doesn’t have to be those who are mentally ill who will committ mass murder, it may not be those who apply to buy guns and are denied because of their mental health conditions. It is usually a member of the family who is trusted and shown how to use guns who end up killing innocent and unsuspecting people. Americans preach democracy and all sorts of virtues to the rest of the world, we can not stand tall and tell the rest of the world that, the way to go is to allow citizens of every country to freely buy and own guns! The hypocracy that using the second amendmen, Americans can buy and bear arms is an old and archaic law which should be amended to reflect the realities of the present day in the light of the many killings that take place every month of every year. As many people as three thousand are killed by gun violence every month in the United States, the same number as those who died in 9/11 attacks of the twin towers. Why do we moan so much about those who died in the 9/11 attacks and don’t moan those who die in fellow American hands through gun related murders? Those who do not support a ban on high velocity guns with high calibre magazines are those who kiss Wayne Lapierre’s ass on second amendment and gun ownership. they warship a man who represents the interests of gun manufacturers and gun dealers for profit at the expense of human lives. To them lossing human life through gun violence is inconsequential as long as guns are sold to generate huge incomes and bigger profits. the GOP republican members of congress both men and women who support gun lobby groups are scums and the scourge of the earth. These republican congress men and women who support gun lobby groups should be ashamed of themselves for being so insensitive to the pain and agony caused by guns to many American families for many years.

  23. S-3 says:

    Wusses. Wusses, the whole lot of them! The GOP, of course.

  24. onedonewong says:

    The Brady bill and weapons control have shown that they it ABSOLUTELY nothing to stem gun violence. What’s needs is a law that forces doctors , hospitals and psychologists to place their patients into the federal data base to stop them from buying, owning or having a gun in their house for any reason

  25. Happy2bback says:

    Republicans can’t win the elections by either buying or lying so impeachment is their last resort. We all have computers let us vote and have it count I’m betting we would win the gun issue overwhelming

  26. toptwome says:

    Gun safety is smart. Being able to make sure background checks are mandatory is good for everyone. We really must make sure that weapons for war are not getting into the hands of children, the mentally ill or the hatemongers of the GOP.

    • option31 says:

      you are right, but let’s do that with the 1st Amendment also. Before anybody is allowed to write, post or otherwise communicate en mass they should have a background check to determine their mental stability. After all the pen is mightier than the sword. Did you submit to a background check before posting the above?

  27. Mr says:

    And the rabid shall devour their young!

  28. The First Amendment was written before the second. At least one of the founding fathers considered it to be more important.

    There are many cases under which the First Amendment is suspended because absolute enforcement would cause a greater harm. This is the “Shouting fire in a crowded theater” exception. The First Amendment is also suspended in national security cases.

    If common sense trumps the First Amendment, it can also trump the Second Amendment without violating the constitution.

    The constitution also grants the President in his role as Commander in Chief the power to decide what constitutes national security. He could declare some or all private guns as threats to national security. Anyone who disagrees may not merely wave the Constitution like a talisman but must make a rational argument in a court and undertake the obligatory appeals.

    Some argue that the Second Amendment must trump the power of the Presidency because it was intended to promote violent overthrow of the Republic by those who disagreed with it. If they do not believe that this argument was crushed along with those who made it between 1861 and 1865 then they relinquish any claim to patriotism and become mere anarchists. Does onedonewong claim that title?

  29. judgeglenda says:

    bushes should be questioned about a lot of things and who they were involved in business with along with chaney it is coming out little by little now.question bush not rice

  30. george daghlian says:

    What a propaganda pitch to the TeaParty Terrorists written by an author who uses logic of legacy and good connections to endanger our election choice. He tries to blow we progressives with the NeoCon Man logic of flatulence on a captive readership via Yahoo, whom is famous for outsourcing its work to third world nations writers.

  31. Eleanore Whitaker says:

    The Republicans are outraged? Are they ever NOT? All you hear from the GOP is militant use of words against a twice elected president they cannot control like they did Reagan, Bush ’41 and Bush ’43….ergo their inflammatory militant verbiage spouted at any opportune moment. Anyone else fed up with the GOP War machine yet?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.