Sure, he's pro gun; but he's also a pragmatic man. And Bush is a moderate on gun issues, e.g., he's in favor of AW bans. The short answer to your question is if the US SC rules correctly on the 2nd, and concurs with the excellent dicta of the 5thCircuit in Emerson, then it MUST analyze the last four words of the the 2nd: shall not be infringed. The bastards in both parties are really afraid of this. The SC (except for maybe Thomas and Scalia) is also very, very afraid to "do the right thing" because it would mean that about 99% of the federal gun laws (including the 1934 NFA which outlawed full auto) would not only be null and void, those state laws which infringe would be subject to suits to overturn them from every corner of the nation. In my opinion, this would be a good thing. However, the Repubos and Ashcroft really do not want the SC to rule on the 2nd since they would much rather simply maintain the status quo until the next administration can take over and screw up the 2nd again. Its one thing to say that an administration thinks that the 2nd is about an individual right, and its quite another to actually take steps to repeal unconstitutional gun laws. What the Bush administration recommends to Congress about the soon to be sunsetted 1994 AW ban will speak volumes about just how much they revere the Constitution and the RKBA.
It's pretty clear to me that the leadership for more decades than that, repub and demo, have been and are invested in our present social and economic direction. And if I can figure this necessity out, so can they.
They have a problem, though. A change of this mass can't hold on the cusp too long. The natives notice the shadow of impending doom and get restless. I think a grasp for power from lust, instead of a rightful purpose, is weak until fully formed and it has to form fast past a certain stage. I believe we're in that stage now.
Trouble ahead.