Archive for September 11th, 2012
[Chris] Matthews was saying … “If Obama wins, it’s the end of conservatism.” Nope. If Obama wins, let me tell you what it’s the end of: The Republican Party. There’s gonna be a third party that’s gonna be oriented toward conservatism. …
How long do we have? I know people who think 18 months — 18 months before a real United States economic collapse that the Fed cannot do anything about, that the ChiComs can’t do anything about. Two years, four years, whatever. The point is, that’s what’s on the other side of Obama winning, ’cause he’s not gonna change anything. …
We’re spending a trillion dollars we don’t have on welfare. It’s not that we’re taxing producers and redistributing the money. We’re borrowing it; we’re printing it. We don’t have it! Over a trillion dollars a year. There’s been $5.5 trillion added to the national debt in 3-1/2 years by this president. There just isn’t the money for this. At some point (and it’s sooner rather than later) there will be a collapse, and the Republican Party may end up being on the wrong side of it.
You didn’t hear it from DNC speakers last week on stage during prime-time or any other time for that matter, but the Democrats don’t like your guns and want to restrict both your access to them and ownership of them as much as possible. Their adopted platform says it all:
“Firearms. We recognize that the individual right to bear arms is an important part of the American tradition, and we will preserve Americans’ Second Amendment right to own and use firearms. We believe that the right to own firearms is subject to reasonable regulation. We understand the terrible consequences of gun violence; it serves as a reminder that life is fragile, and our time here is limited and precious. We believe in an honest, open national conversation about firearms. We can focus on effective enforcement of existing laws, especially strengthening our background check system, and we can work together to enact commonsense improvements – like reinstating the assault weapons ban and closing the gun show loophole – so that guns do not fall into the hands of those irresponsible, law-breaking few.”
“We recognize that individual right to bear arms is an important part of the American tradition.” They start by using the words “we recognize” instead of, “the Constitution guarantees.” BIG difference.
Next, they leave out “keep and bear” as found in the Second Amendment and water it down to only say “bear” which denies a gun owner the basic right of storing firearms. Liberals prefer guns be locked up in common storage areas only to be checked out like library books from time to time when we crazies need to get our fix.
Finally, they use the words “American tradition” which implies that gun ownership is not a fundamental right and can be changed like other traditions such as prayer or reciting the Pledge of Allegiance through a generation or two of educational indoctrination and brainwashing in our public schools.
“We will preserve Americans’ Second Amendment right to own and use firearms.” Quick, can you name any legislation ever that restricted gun ownership and usage that was promoted by and supported by a majority of Republicans? Jesus said, “By their fruits you shall know them.” Believing this line from Democrats is akin to believing a criminal when he says, “Do what I say and you won’t get hurt.” The next sentence in the plank negates the previous one anyway.
“We believe that the right to own firearms is subject to reasonable regulation.” The Founders chose their words wisely. “The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed,” does not say, “the right of the people to keep and bear arms subject to reasonable regulation.”
Here’s my translation of the first two sentences of the plank: The old outdated Constitution says that you can have your guns and those crazy Supreme Court justices recently affirmed your individual right to own a gun, but we don’t like it and we’re going to do everything within our power to negate those so-called rights in the name of being reasonable.
“We understand the terrible consequences of gun violence; it serves as a reminder that life is fragile, and our time here is limited and precious.” It’s a plain and simple truth: gun violence most often is halted only by additional gun violence. We live in a fallen world and evil people do evil things. The two best ways to stop criminals engaged in gun violence is to shoot them while they are committing the act and to lock them up for a very long time if they survive or are caught later (Both of which liberals are against). Not all gun violence produces terrible consequences, just ask any hunter. Venison anyone?
Violence is violence whether it is committed by a gun, knife, baseball bat, vehicle, chemical, or explosive. Assuming that one can eliminate violence by restricting an inanimate object is sheer foolishness. If safety is the issue, then we should start with automobiles, fires, prescription medications, swimming pools, ropes, and then deal with guns sometime after five gallon buckets and plastic bags.
I would be remiss if I didn’t note that life is fragile to liberals except when it is a baby growing inside of its mother’s womb. I personally think we should restrict saline solution and forceps violence, but I digress.
“We believe in an honest, open national conversation about firearms.” INTERPRETATION: Can’t we just hold hands, light candles, and sing, “We are the World”? Don’t bother us with the undeniable facts about more guns resulting in less crime and how areas with the strictest of gun control laws have the highest violent crime rates.
“We can focus on effective enforcement of existing laws, especially strengthening our background check system, and we can work together to enact commonsense improvements – like reinstating the assault weapons ban and closing the gun show loophole – so that guns do not fall into the hands of those irresponsible, law-breaking few.” Ahhh. Finally, here it is: the crown jewel of the gun control crowd. Tell us again how restricting the Constitutional rights of law-abiding citizens stops “those irresponsible, law-breaking few”? Do I have to state the obvious that criminals by definition do not abide by the law?
One last thought: For the crowd who wants, through “reasonable regulation”, to limit magazine capacity, caliber size, cosmetic features, type of action or so called “assault weapons” because they were not around during the writing of the 2nd Amendment, I say bull crap.
Freedom of the press is not limited to antique printing presses or quill pen and parchment, freedom of speech is not limited to talking in the public square, and protection of personal effects is not limited to horse carriages and couriers. If Ben Franklin, George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, or James Madison could have foreseen the invention of the M-4, Mark 19, M-203, Barrett .50 cal, M-240, M-2, Glock 19, and the like, I can assure you that they would not only have had them in their personal armories but would have considered them absolutely protected under the 2nd Amendment.
Trusting Democrats to promote gun rights is like entrusting Teddy Kennedy or Bill Clinton with your teenage daughter.