|On the left side of the page: totalitarian brotherhood.|
The United States is unique in it's Constitutional protection of the right to bear arms. It is also the one country in the world that, despite claims both the left and the right raise when the other side is in charge, is least likely to devolve into a dictatorship.
The two points are highly correlated - a well-armed, and well-informed populace cannot be cajoled or bullied into submission to a dictatorial power. While the left has seen to it for decades that the people of the United States have not been well-informed (or indeed, have been deliberately misinformed), the holy grail has remained a non-armed society. An unarmed society is or can be made, a compliant society. Take away people's information and take away their arms, and they are easy prey to a dictatorial regime. If the left realizes this they are deliberately seeking to undermine the primary notion of the nation - liberty. Just as bad, if they don't realize it, they are paving the path for a future dictator wherein it will be too late for them to realize the folly of their ways.
(Reuters) - President Barack Obama said on Monday that mass killings like the shooting rampage at a Sikh temple in Wisconsin were occurring with "too much regularity" and should prompt soul searching by all Americans, but he stopped short of calling for new gun-control laws."All of us are heart-broken by what happened," Obama told reporters at the White House a day after a gunman opened fire on Sikh worshippers preparing for religious services, killing six before he was shot dead by a police officer.But when asked whether he would push for further gun-control measures in the wake of the shootings, Obama said only that he wanted to bring together leaders at all levels of American society to examine ways to curb gun violence.
That sounds quite reasonable of the president and not reactionary in the face of a horrible incident. But remember, one of many liberal holy grail accomplishments is gun control. The president is no different and the cart is before the horse here. He says he wants discussion, but in his mind the outcome has to be more gun control and an erosion of 2nd Amendment rights. Discussion is window dressing, it is diversion and it is a way to stall.
As recently as the Aurora Colorado shooting, the president was pushing for restrictions that seem to make sense from a gut reaction standpoint, but make no sense whatsoever when you drill down into the details.
Via the Guardian;
Speaking to a civil rights conference in New Orleans, Barack Obama pledges to work with leaders of both parties on how to reduce gun violence. The US president says he believes in the second amendment, which guarantees Americans the right to bear arms, but the sale of guns to criminals and mentally unbalanced people should be prevented...
Of course nobody wants to see guns sold to criminals or mentally unbalanced people. And of course that type of gun buyer always walks into a gun shop and identifies themselves as such, so it's a no-brainer, right? No, he knows he wants waiting periods, fewer gun options for sales and ultimately no guns. Saying he believes in the 2nd Amendment is lip service, like saying he's pro-business, or saying nobody will lose their current insurance coverage under Obamacare. He may indeed carry on gun violence discussions but they will be window dressing only. The only acceptable outcome for progressives and the president will be an anti Second Amendment solution.
The uber-liberal, Cenk Uygur of The Young Turks points out where Obama really stands even though he doesn't see it. The reason he doesn't see it is because president Obama is playing possum on gun control as much as he can until after the election in the hopes of not losing a crucial voting block.
The real Obama is hiding until after the election. Vladamir Putin knows this. We know it, but a lot of people don't. I said it after the Aurora shootings - a tragedy is a tragedy. It is not and should not be political. Yet there is an agenda behind the president's obfuscation, be it related to gun violence, health care, or energy policy. It's about re-making America in his vision, shared by so many progressives, into an America that is not capable of past success, but one that conforms to liberal notions of social justice until it finally goes bankrupt.
Why this man's popularity is anywhere above 20% nationally is both astounding and sad.