Question of the Day: Is Obama Coming for Your Guns?

I completely misread the President’s position on civilian disarmament. I thought gun control was the “third rail” of American politics. Hoo-boy was I wrong. I hope TTAG’s coverage of the ongoing fight to defend and extend Americans’ Constitutionally-protected right to keep and bear arms has made up for my myopia. In any case, lesson learned. But is it lesson learned for President Obama? Click here to check out the pro-gun control events promoted by barackobama.com scheduled for this very day. Is this just face saving anti-gun agitprop? Or is the President serious when he called the Senate defeat “round one”? Is Obama coming for your guns?

avatar

About Robert Farago

Robert Farago is the Publisher of The Truth About Guns (TTAG). He started the site to explore the ethics, morality, business, politics, culture, technology, practice, strategy, dangers and fun of guns.

101 Responses to Question of the Day: Is Obama Coming for Your Guns?

  1. avatargloomhound says:

    Yes, yes he is.

    • avatarEvan says:

      There is no need to say any more.

      • avatarRoscoe says:

        Actually, when he stated in in 2008 “I’m not going to take your guns away.” Obama was being absolutely truthful.

        That statement still stands. He’s a lawyer and he knows how to make a statement of fact and stand by it.

        But what he IS going to do is set the stage for someone in the future to do the dirty work.

        • avatarBen says:

          *cough* Hillary *cough*

        • avatarTomy Ironmane says:

          Obama and Hillary aren’t going to come for your guns. That’s why they’ve been kitting out the DHS like a paramilitary strike force, armed and trained with rounds that are banned to the U.S. Military by international treaty and illegal to use against the most vicious and sociopathic terrorist. They’re not coming for your guns, they’re gonna stay snug in Washington surrounded by snipers, automatic weapons, air support, heavy fortifications and thousands of federal paramilitary shock troops whose unquestioning loyalty is to them alone, while the DHS and DoJ do the dirty work FOR them.

    • avatarDaniel Silverman says:

      Yup, positive, roger dodger, that is an affirmative!
      We forgive you Robert, but you can go back and check.

      I told you so…

      Ok moving on, now what?

    • avatarRick says:

      “Yes he is”

      …at a full goddamn tilt.

    • avatarWR2A says:

      Yep. No brainer.

    • avatarIng says:

      I didn’t think he would, either. Gave him way too much credit for common sense and respect for the Constitution. (Yes, I should have known better.)

      I think in a lot of ways, gun control really is the third rail. Even the party that believes in gun control by default couldn’t pull itself together enough to do anything at a national level. They blitzkrieged a couple of states that were ripe for conquest, but their prohibitionist nonsense went down in flames almost everywhere else.

      All their emotional pandering and waving the bloody shirt only succeeded in polarizing the debate even more than it already was — and I’m pretty sure it also drove away a fair number of people who might once have supported them. Their behavior has been sickening.

      And yes, Obama still is coming for our guns. He’ll keep trying to chip away at it, and when the White House is finally rid of him, he’ll keep right on rolling with his presidentially capitalized superPAC.

      I can’t speak for anyone else, but I’m one liberal (yes, still a liberal, but in the classic sense, not the insane progressive sense) who will never vote for a Democrat again. Thanks for helping me make up my mind, Obama (no, really). I would never have said this before, but I mean it now: MOLON LABE.

      • avatarPat says:

        Hearing statements like this gives me hope for 14′ midterms.
        Just hope another mass shooting dont happen before then.

  2. avatarRalph says:

    Of course he is. Barack is convinced of his omniscience. He is a true believer in himself. He won’t let go of our guns, ever. If you watched his dramatic portrayal of “King Lear” after the decisive Senate votes, you already know that.

    The jug-eared punk won’t take no for an answer, and he’s willing to kill thousands to impose his will on America. Keep your powder dry, my brothers. You’re gonna need it.

    • avatarDurf says:

      Come on, ralph. Making fun of his ears detracts from your (often valid and well spoken) arguments.
      Lets be better than that.

      • avatarRob Drummond says:

        How can you take him seriously with Earrrrrrrrrrs like that!

      • avatarRalph says:

        You’re right, Durf. Instead of saying that he has big ears, I should have said that he has a massive ego and a small, uh, mind.

        • avatarPol says:

          The conversation is about guns and the constitution, not the way people look. It makes you sound juvenile and shallow, even bigoted. And as has been said, it detracts from your point, not to mention the reputation of TTAG.

          It’s like you being an OFWG. Sure, it’s true. But it’s irrelevant.

        • avatarPat says:

          Remember when all the political cartoons showed W with huge ears (huh?) while they made him look and called him a retarded ape.
          I cant do that without being called a racist because of the genetic contribution by his Kenyan Commie father.
          But really, who looks more like an ape, W or Barry?
          And those effing ears on that SOB (Barry)….wow.
          No mercy.

      • avatarDr. Kenneth Noisewater says:

        His ears are goofy, and his wookiee beard is terrifying.

      • avatarRob Eide says:

        Why? Reply was meant for Durf.

    • avatarPascal says:

      The correct term is: Self-Righteous Solipsism

  3. You can schedule as many events as you want. Getting people to actually show up or participate is an entirely different story.

    • avatarSammy says:

      Hence the reason for open boarders. And he’s just the point of the spear. I think there is no length, no matter how tragic the outcome, to which he/they will not go to disarm the American citizen. In their mind their self preservation is at stake. Being a member of a 2nd amendment group has already been declared an indication of being a possible terrorist. How much farther a leap is it to the NRA,SAF,et al being considered terrorist organizations? Some (Bloomberg, DF, Cuomo, etc.) already do. Trouble brews.

  4. avatarAccur81 says:

    Him? No. Liberal progressive police chiefs, the ATF, and various other cronies? Yes. BHO has made gun violence and civilian disarmament to be cornerstones of his administration.

  5. avatarCrazed Java says:

    Anyone who was paying attention to where he came from and what little we knew of his background in 2008 should have seen this coming. It was very clear to me that he was biding his time until his second term. I think he acted more hastily than he planned due to Newtown being a great opportunity for him, but I think this push was inevitable.

    Now that he has been soundly defeated, I’m not sure what more he can do, but I expect him to keep pushing for SOMETHING ANYTHING that he can pass so he can claim “victory”. Such is his way.

    However, make no mistake. If another opportunity arises, and Obama has the Devil’s luck, he will renew this fight and take any opportunity he can to go for your guns.

    Before anyone mentions Romney, I still have to point out that I just don’t see Romney having the same zeal and vigor if it was something that applied to all Americans. While Romney is no friend to the 2A, grabbing guns was not his personal crusade. I think there is a world of difference between what Obama wants and what Romney wants. Gun rights advocates did themselves no favor that sat home on election day.

    • avatarMike in CA says:

      I think Romney was definitely the better choice from a 2A perspective and I am dismayed at those who voted for Obama anyway stating that it wouldn’t matter regarding their stance on the 2A. I do have to wonder, however, if Romney would have been more flexible and less polarizing on that issue were he elected. Obama helped us win federally by seeking primarily to defeat the NRA. He was sincerely trying to win but that is a big part of why he lost. I wonder if Romney would have made the issue less polarizing and therefore the anti-gunners would have been able to accomplish more.

      • avatarBruce B. says:

        Romney and the GOP in general are not possessed by the absolute zealotry that inflames and motivates the true believers of the left. Yes, they might want to make changes that you find repugnant, but they do not have that at-any-cost, by-any-method, dogmatic determination.

        Osama Obama and his crowd KNOW that their way is the only true way, and if you weren’t blind and stupid you would know it too. They are politicians with a very specific, driven, agenda. It is the same fervor that drives the terrorist. I don’t know what the progressive equivalent of 7 virgins is, but they are absolutely committed to their agenda. And they are willing to break ANYTHING that stands in their way.

        I lived through Nixon, that pathetic little man. Clinton was an embarrassing fool who did this country no good. W. Bush who squandered the good will and political capital he had dumped in his lap after 9/11. I could go on. Lots of disappointing pols. But this dude, and his running buddies are the first I have ever branded EVIL! They will be satisfied with nothing less than ending the great American experiment, and turning us into Venezuela.

    • avatarDr. Kenneth Noisewater says:

      I think Romney would have caved under MSM pressure, and pinko hubris would have been restrained enough to have gotten at least part of the grabber legislation passed, definitely gun show carveout abolishment and probably mag limits. I doubt NRA et al. would have been as energized in defiance against Romney.

      Lame duck Barry let his true face show, and thankfully enough patriots recoiled and fought back. But if the DeLay period during the Bush admin taught us anything, it’s that none of those figpuckers are to be trusted.

      • avatarCrazed Java says:

        One pretty key difference though, Romney would be serving his first term and would also have to face a lot of nervous Republican congresscritters.

        A lot of shoulda coulda wouldas about a guy who never demonstrated a willingness to shove an agenda down people’s throats they don’t want.

        Obama, on the other hand, already had Obamacare behind him. We knew exactly how far he would go.

  6. avatarPeter says:

    Here’s Obama’s game plan: take people’s guns, money, and private property — anything to keep them from being self-reliant. Substitute this with government subsistence. Break their businesses & family and shame them out of their beliefs & convictions — anything to keep them from thinking differently than the ruling class. Substitute this with “common sense” and “fairness”.

  7. avatarBlake says:

    Three words: Long gun Registry

    Blatantly illegal, did it anyway.

    The current White House can and will do whatever it damn well pleases.

  8. avatarLemming says:

    What have we learned:

    1) He is a “true believer” rather than merely a “politician.” True believers are dangerous because practical concerns don’t matter.

    2) He has been hurt, and a wounded true believer is a dangerous true believer. We saw his tantrum after the vote. It’s personal to him now.

    • avatarJim says:

      So. He can believe all he wants. So can Bloomberg. They weren’t just defeated, they lost the wind in their sails. Newton was their best shot and they knew it. Sure, they will keep coming for more (the will never stop), and we will have to be very vigilant to make sure none of the atrocious bills get tacked on to important things like budget or defense proposals, but we should commend ourselves on winning this incredible round after being beaten back to the ropes.

      Not only did they lose, but they caused millions of folks on the fence to go out and purchase their first handgun or black rifles. Both he and Bloomberg pushed millions of people into our camp by asking for the moon first. Megan McCardle wrote a fantastic article on their basic negotiation tactic blunder:

      http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2013/04/18/why-the-president-lost-on-gun-control.html

      By thinking that Newton was a game changer and asking for everything they could think of, they torpedoed their own efforts. If they were really interested in getting things done, they would involve us in the drafting of these laws. Then they might get something passed. However, most of us know that they really are not interested in making things safer. What they seek is the elimination of our culture.

      Their tactics (elitist NYC/MAIG money) and the use of the bully pulpit exposed them for the frauds they are. The One(tm) exposed himself and his true feelings. He won’t be able to get anything accomplished in a bipartisan manner now. It does not mean that they won’t try to sneak things through or use crises to push his agenda, but think about what just happened for a second. The entire MSM spend the last 4 months beating us over the head with bogus stats and emotional blackmail. And they got absolutely NOTHING in return for all of their efforts.

      Have you ever seen the photos of people who actually show up at gun control rallies? Cricket sounds abound. It just does not engender the equivalent kind of passion that we possess for the protection of our rights, and it sounds like our Senators saw how the scales were tipping. I don’t think Bloomberg is going to be able to turn this into a winning issue for 2014. If anything, I think it will become a badge of honor to resist MAIG’s crap.

      • avatarPascal says:

        The lost at the federal level but not before doing damage at the state level: NY, CT, MD & CO

        • avatarMike in NC says:

          I think the overreach at the state level was necessary to convince many people what the antis true goals are and how they are using incrementalism to get there.

        • avatarBruce B. says:

          I think (hope?) there will be a rollback in the next election cycle. The pols were not voting the will of the people, or why pass an “emergency” bill at 3 am within 20 minutes? Think some will pay a price for their arrogance next election.

          Please, please, let me be right!

        • avatarDr. Kenneth Noisewater says:

          As long as statists of ALL parties get flushed for people like Cruz, hen OK. But new statist lamps for old is bullshit.

  9. avatardwb says:

    i admit, i was complacent too.

    but, Yes.

  10. avatarfoxmuldar says:

    Shouldn’t Muslim Obama be giving a statement about his Muslim friends killing innocent Americans in Boston? Have you noticed how quiet Obama has been today once it was clear the killers are Muslim. How is Obama going to spin this one? The Liberal media was hoping and praying for the killers to be white so they could claim they were T Party members or members of the NRA. Instead we know now the truth. Both brothers and any accomplices are all Muslims. Can’t blame this one on a video.

    • avatarAccur81 says:

      How is this possible?! Isn’t Islam about peace? We need to solve these issues with tolerance, people. Oh, almost forgot: let’s spend millions of dollars for signs that say “bomb free zone,” and commission a bi-partisan committee to study violence.

      /sarc

  11. avatarKookaidgizzler says:

    No. Obama had never been nor ever will go after your guns. That’s silly ininformed paranoia.

  12. avatarBuzzlefutt says:

    In his mind, he sees absolutely no reason not to.

    There isn’t a single behavior he has exhibited to demonstrate that he respects the 2nd Amendment.
    His speeches after the vote were absolutely deplorable. He marginalized and dehumanized the pro-2A community. His civil disarmament campaign has been resorting to lies and emotional manipulation while ignoring the data and facts.

    He has been a monster.

    • avatarCrazed Java says:

      Why call out his disrespect for the 2A. He hasn’t exactly been an ardent supporter of the 1st Amendment either.

      He really sees our Constitution and BOA as obstacles in his path. Nothing more.

  13. avatarEnsitue says:

    I’ve heard Talking Heads Refering to the Perps as Caucasions because their Homeland is near the Caucas Mtns (while still calling them Home Grown Terrorists
    So much for blatant Propaganda
    Again I STRONGLY urge the readership to study what is commonly called The Spanish Civil War using material generated prior to 1964.
    When the Communists, whose salute was a raised clenched fist captured an area they first confiscated all arms. Next money, then food was confiscated and then clothes and shoes were taken. After all had been stolen the population was executed. The Communist Manifesto and the CPUS Manifesto (1922, Chicago) are also excelent referances as a guide to what is befalling America. The Jihad and The Caliphate are also important conciderations but they are not the Ultimate Goal of TPTB of course only total war will eliminate the threat posed by Jihad and that will follow soon enough, IF America falls to Obama.

  14. avatarMr aNINNYmouse says:

    Is Jerry Sandusky a serial pedophile?

  15. avatarSGC says:

    YES. This is going to be a LONG four years folks, time to dig in and prepare for seige.

  16. avatarTRUTHY says:

    It is very telling that the most anti-liberal in the White House can be called all these names. I voted for him twice, and he still won’t do anything liberal. He’s more conservative than Reagan ever was.

    • avatarMoonshine says:

      Obama is a statist. That is not always the same as being a liberal. For the record, Romney’s a statist, too.

      • avatarTR says:

        If by ‘statist’ you mean he supports individual states’ rights, and believes things like healthcare and welfare should be left to the states, then yes, Romney is a statist. Check his platform and past statements. Yes, he did something similar to obamacare in MA; yes, he did some entitlement reforms, etc. in MA, but he acknowledged multiple times during the campaign that those things could work at a state level, but not at a federal level. Romney repeatedly asserted that the federal government was bloated and needed re-structuring and thinning, with a lot of the fat cut out and redundant powers being consolidated and turned over to the states. While I agree that, in general, the GOP are as bad as the DNC, Romney is the polar opposite of obama in every way that matters. And in quite a few that don’t.

        • avatarCrazed Java says:

          For one thing, Romney didn’t think turning a profit automatically made you evil.

          Obama seems to think anyone who makes money must be bad. He is confused as to where taxes come from.

        • avatarPeter says:

          No, a statist is one who believes in the infallible, omnipotent, omnipresent State, as in Government.

        • avatarMoonshine says:

          Peter has it right. A statist believes that the State (at whatever level) knows better than the individual, and needs to save/protect the individual from himself/herself.

    • avatarEnsitue says:

      Once again you’ve unintentionaly proventhat the average Liberal is a victim of a pathalogical mental illness

  17. avatarmacgearailt says:

    Time to consolidate our gains,identify our weaknesses and shortcomings and address same.We must put aside what divides us. The national,state and local pro 2A organizations need to gather in every freedom loving gun owner, old,young,male ,female without regard to color ,creed and status. This fight is about so much more than just guns,our way of life is under attack and we need to repel and vanquish the attackers. Remember, progressives are just good Marxists without Marx. Political power does indeed come out of the barrel of a gun.

    • avatarRalph says:

      Political power does indeed come out of the barrel of a gun.

      No truer words were ever spoken. Mao was a snake, but on this matter he was completely correct.

  18. avatarJim R says:

    Is he coming right now? No.
    Will he? Sure as the sun rises in the East. The events on Capitol Hill are nothing more than a minor setback.

  19. avatarsagebrushracer says:

    He would if he could, but he cant….. yet.

  20. avatarRandy Drescher says:

    He can’t stop, he is hooked by his ego with his desire to impress his sheep. His unspoken promise “we just want a vote”, yeah & hitler just wanted a few admirerers. I fear the man is not mentally right, I don’t see someone who has control over his emotions, I do see a man who wants to “finish” what MLK started & save every black 2 bit criminal & gangbanger, Randy

    • avatarBruce B. says:

      The death of MLK was one of this nations greatest tragedies. The racist leadership that replaced him with their constant victimhood and entitlement led to the gangbanger culture, not MLK.

      • avatarRalph says:

        +1. MLK was cool.

        • avatarGotta Love the South says:

          I’m black so I’m going to ignore Randy Drescher’s questionable sentiment because it’s a little ugly really.

          That being said MLK Jr. certainly flirted with communism and was truly a collectivist at heart… Definitely Not Cool.

          Agreed that the charlatans who followed him were even worse though.

          It ain’t about race folks, the collectivists want to make slaves of us all – black & white. And you can only make slaves of men who are unarmed. My ancestors have been there and done that, and I (for one) ain’t going back!

        • avatarBruce B. says:

          And I’ll call you brother if you’ll let me. It ain’t about race. It’s about respect for our individual rights. I’m against all those who would steal mine. On the street, or from the White House. Being an armed citizen lets me make that claim. I’ll stand with anyone willing to fight for those truths.

  21. avatarMister Fleas says:

    Yes, Obama is coming for your guns. He is not doing this because of political expediency; he is doing because that is his idealogy. Obama was a board member of the JOYCE FOUNDATION. From Wikipedia:

    “Since 2003, the Joyce Foundation has paid grants totaling over $12 million to gun control organizations.[1][13] The largest single grantee has been the Violence Policy Center, which received $4,154,970[13] between 1996 and 2006, and calls for an outright ban on handguns, semi-automatic and other firearms, and substantial restrictions on gun owners.[16] The Joyce Foundation’s position on gun control has led to frequent opposition and criticism from gun rights groups, particularly the National Rifle Association, which calls the Joyce Foundation an activist foundation whose “shadowy web of huge donations” leads “straight to puppet strings that control the agenda of gun ban groups”.

    Obama served on the board from 1994 through 2002.

    From when he was in the Illinois Senate:

    “Opposed bill okaying illegal gun use in home invasions ”
    “Ok for states & cities to determine local gun laws “(as long as they passed pro-gun control measures”
    “Obama endorsed Illinois handgun ban ”
    “2000: cosponsored bill to limit purchases to 1 gun per month ”
    “Voted NO on prohibiting lawsuits against gun manufacturers”

    http://www.ontheissues.org/2012/Barack_Obama_Gun_Control.htm

  22. avatarSilver says:

    Yes, he is, and now that his omniscience has been denied by we the peons, he’s more dangerous than ever.

    There WILL be a false flag mass shooting planned and executed by his administration in the near future, no question about it. What does he care about dead peons so long as his will is imposed upon his subjects?

    Call me paranoid all you want. Look at yesteryear’s America, then look at today, and tell me honestly if you don’t believe the phrase “yesterday’s extreme is today’s normal.”

  23. avatarHuman Being says:

    His lesson from Obamacare was that if he just kept pushing and kept pushing and kept talking and kept talking, magically “something” would happen and he’d get what he wanted and people would tell him he was a genius. That’s what he’s tried ever since.

    Of course he’s going to keep civilian disarmament going as an issue. He’s going to keep it going until 2014.

  24. avatarJason says:

    Currently? No, because I don’t own anything currently on the anti’s ban lists.
    However, given the chance, I’m sure he’d take them all away.

    • avatarDr. Kenneth Noisewater says:

      LOL, EVERYTHING I own is on someone’s ban list.

      OK, maybe not the K9, but it fits nicely in the glovebox and as anyone could tell Barry, swapping mags is quick..

  25. avatarMark N. says:

    I don’t worry about Obama. My immediate concern is the California legislature, which is moving that way as fast as it can, trying to catch up with New York and Connecticut. Massachusetts, New Jersey, Rhode Island and Maryland are bringing up the rear, passing laws that will take years and millions of dollars to challenge in the courts. California’s long gun registry goes into effect January 1, 2014, and if the Legislature has its way, there will be universal registration for all guns beginning June 1, 2014.
    No need for the Feds to do anything when the state governments are doing all the heavy lifting, . Executive orders can go only so far; without Congressional approval, Obama’s hands are tied. Not that it won’t stop him from trying again, but we are safe on that score until the midterm elections.

    I despair.

    • avatarJay says:

      “California’s long gun registry goes into effect January 1, 2014″

      I will bet that:

      When CA was debating handgun registration, gunowner advocates said that long guns would be next.

      And

      Gun control advocates replied that the gunowner advocates were paranoid liars.

  26. avatarS.CROCK says:

    new favorite player in baseball. not really, but i will be rooting for the phills when he is closing.

  27. avatarRoadrunner says:

    No doubt. He cares about it far more than he cares about any real issue that actually concerns America, and plenty of obamatons will fall into line, even if they go off the cliff too.

    Enough Democrats remember 1994 and the thrashing they took for the first semi-auto/magazine ban, and that’s why we won this round. That said, this battle will not end in the near future, because there is a small, but powerful group of people who would love nothing more than to rule against the will of most American people.

  28. avatarkb says:

    “I don’t believe people should be able to own guns.”

    –Barack Obama

  29. avatarBobiojimbo says:

    I don’t know if anyone else has mentioned this, and sure someone has, but we, the Pro-2A crowd, could go to these events and either protest them, or subvert them (IE turn them into Pro-2A rallies). That’d show the president that we aren’t out of this fight either and we’re in fact taking it to him. Just a thought.

  30. avatarEnsitue says:

    Who says that there will be a 2014 election, besides Obama?

    • avatarBruce B. says:

      Part of me would find this a relief. One big, giant step across my line in the sand, instead of all these sneaky, slippery baby steps in the dark. “Did he just move? Did I really see what I thought I saw?”

      At what point do we do more than talk, organize and vote? The cop from Temple, Tx still haunts me with his, “We’re exempt from the law.” Chills my spine, folks. Not sure what hearing those words from an armed civil “servant” would have done to me in person.

      Sorry for the multitude of posts, people. I’m scared s******s. I’m an old fart who has NEVER seen his country in such dire straits. Anyone else grow up in the 60s? Riots in the streets. National Guard killing college students. Chicago PD whaling away on protesters. Underground Weathermen, SDS, and the Black Panthers all setting bombs. Scary stuff, but at least Nixon was trying to preserve an America I could recognize. Might not have loved all of it. But the leadership was trying to preserve it. Now the leadership is playing the part of the bomb throwers. This is much, much worse. I have kids, for Chrissakes. So I do get overly passionate sometimes. Thanks for not telling me to shut up. (Yet.)

  31. avatarPulatso says:

    As I was explaining to a friend, I worry not so much about this admin, but by some future admin building on the weakening of gun rights to disarm civilians. After recent events, who knows.

  32. avatargloomhound says:

    Blaming the republican for any of this is hiding your head in the sand at best. A vote for a democrat is a vote for gun control. Even if individual dems are not anti gun putting them in office tilts the legislative bodies in their favor and allows them to bring crap like this to a vote. Your freedoms depend on the health of the Republican party.

    The sooner you realize that the better for you and and for this country.

  33. avatarOkieRim says:

    I started wrtiting, texting, emailing & posting that BHO was going to try to take guns (confiscation) at some point, by 2008-2011 most people just laughed at me…well, the cats out of the bag now, this is a generational shift into the future to take away gun rights and maybe try to vote away the 2nd Amd…I put nothing past the progs, that inlcudes 5th column, false flags, etc.

  34. avatarIronGiants1973 says:

    You ain’t gotta go home Obama, but you do have to get the f*ck outta here.

  35. avatarMina says:

    Wikipedia: “A demagogue (/ˈdɛməɡɒɡ/) … is a political leader in a democracy who appeals to the emotions, prejudices, and ignorance of the less-educated people of a population in order to gain power. Demagogues usually oppose deliberation and advocate immediate, violent action to address a national crisis; they accuse moderate and thoughtful opponents of weakness. Demagogues have appeared in democracies since ancient Athens. They exploit a fundamental weakness in democracy: because ultimate power is held by the people, nothing stops the people from giving that power to someone who appeals to the lowest common denominator of a large segment of the population.”

    http://www.barackobama.com/news?source=take-action

    You be the judge.

  36. avatarjwm says:

    Yes he’s after our guns. To steal and twist a line from an old movie”He’s wearing out horses trying to get here and take our guns. But we can arrange to give him a limp on his way home.”

  37. avatarChris Dumm says:

    Yes, he is. Like Farago, I was completely wrong about the man, and I stand corrected. But gun control *still is* the electrified third rail of American politics, and the President just peed on it.

    As Matthew Continetti wrote in the Washington Free Beacon yesterday,

    “His ego never has been what one could call petite. “Phil, what’s my name,” the president is said to have asked his legislative director one day in the first term. “President Obama,” the aide replied. And Obama said, “Of course I’m feeling lucky.”

    Such words are usually delivered at the moment in the play when Nemesis appears onstage, ready to correct the hubris of a tragic hero. And though Obama is neither a tragic figure nor a heroic one, he definitely suffers from a case of misplaced confidence. He clearly assumed that the power of his oratory, his charisma, and national shock at the horror in Newtown, Conn., would allow him to sign the first significant gun legislation in a quarter of a century. He was wrong.”

  38. avatarRonald Pottol says:

    Well, I’m thinking it’s life support for the Republican party. It is the one thing that will keep the Reagan democrats voting Republican. Change is the one thing Washington fears, and the national Republican party falling apart could bring real change. The Tea party started out being about Wall Street bailouts, add was Occupy, but the media sure worked to keep anyone from thinking about that.

    Not enjoying Bush’s 4 term.

  39. avatarSoccerchainsaw says:

    Ah young Skywalker, the question isn’t whether Obama is coming for our guns. The question is whether Obama was ever not coming for our guns.

  40. avatarshawmutt says:

    Yep. I was wrong about Obama and regret my vote. I’ve been a registered Dem for nearly 20 years now. I’m filling out the voter registration, going unaffiliated, and voting third party as long as the Dems and Republicans stay in their current state. I’m a proud citizen, and will still vote, but won’t be a part of their shenanigans, I don’t care how many votes I “waste”.

    • avatarGotta Love the South says:

      While not perfect, a former registered Dem committing to vote 3rd party henceforth definitely helps!

      Please convince as many of your former Dem associates to do the same as you possibly can.

  41. avatarRuss Bixby says:

    Why and how would you have our rights extended? They’re already unlimited – “shall not be infringed,” y’know.

    Now as to getting the fu<king retards in D.O.C. and about forty statehouses to actually HONOUR those rights, I'm with you on that one.

    Just sayin'.

Leave a Reply

Please use your real name instead of you company name or keyword spam.