Dana Loesch has harsh words for some DeSantis critics


Dana Loesch is definitely one of the big names in political commentary, and there’s no doubt she’s a pro-Second Amendment type. Her past work with NRATV illustrates that. After all, that’s the same network that had the wisdom to hire a current Bearing Arms personality, one not named something boring like Tom or John or Ryan.


Anyway, Loesch’s Second Amendment credentials aren’t in question.

She’s got an issue, though, in the brewing Republican primary. You see, while Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis hasn’t announced his candidacy, he’s considered a strong possibility for becoming the Republican nominee. Yes, over former President Donald Trump.

And Trump and his supporters have been on the attack pretty much from the get-go.

Some argue that DeSantis as a Second Amendment problem, though. Namely that while the state seems poised to pass constitutional carry, they also have a red flag law. That law was passed in the wake of Parkland and predated DeSantis, who Loesch notes said he would have vetoed it.

Yet there are still attacks, and Loesch has some pretty hard words regarding this line of attack.

Over the past few days a number of known operatives, who have previously worked with the former president, have argued that the existence of red flag law in Florida is evidence that DeSantis is anti-Second Amendment, or at least, weak on gun rights. This means, they argue implicitly, DeSantis is the weaker (and undeclared) candidate. Their gripe is literally that DeSantis didn’t remove the law that Trump demanded passed.

It’s a dumb argument.

It’s a dumb argument because it’s the same as arguing that Trump is pro-Obamacare because he didn’t repeal it. Trump isn’t Congress. DeSantis isn’t the legislature. Trump didn’t repeal Obamacare all by himself for the same reason DeSantis didn’t repeal Florida’s red flag law all by himself: other lawmakers.



Look, I’m not going to say DeSantis is undeserving of any criticism. I’ve criticized him.

But he doesn’t deserve any criticism over stupid stuff like this. He didn’t pass the law, and while that’s a law that needs to be repealed, Loesch notes in her piece that there’s some resistance to that in the legislature. As the above-quote points out, DeSantis can’t will laws into being.

And, frankly, we shouldn’t want him to.

The people taking aim at DeSantis over this are essentially upset that he hasn’t become a dictator or something, which makes no sense in a constitutional republic designed to prevent tyrants from taking power.

At the heart of things, claiming the executive branch of government–either state or federal, it doesn’t matter–is pro- or anti-something simply because the legislature won’t pass or repeal something is downright crazy.

To put this argument in a different perspective, that’s like trying to say that Barack Obama was pretty pro-gun because he didn’t sign gun control into law. Some argue his signature only expanded gun rights, even.


We all know that he would have if he had the chance. He even said as much. He did all he could think to do to get gun control legislation to cross his desk for his signature. Yet it didn’t really happen.

So I agree with Loesch. This is a dumb argument and really has no place being bandied about by people who should, in theory, know better.

Join the conversation as a VIP Member