Give them their damn vote

Loading

queen michelle 1

Well, that’s that. We’ve got to have a vote. Michelle wants a vote. The queen has spoken.

“These reforms deserve a vote in Congress,” she said, drawing loud applause from hundreds of Chicago’s business executives and civic leaders who were gathered at a luncheon to raise money for a new anti-violence initiative.

Obama spoke emotionally about attending the funeral in February of Hadiya Pendleton, a 15-year-old majorette who was shot in a city park not far from the Obamas’ Chicago house and just days after visiting Washington for President Obama’s inauguration ceremonies.

“As I visited with the Pendleton family at Hadiya’s funeral, I couldn’t get over how familiar they felt to me, because what I realized was Hadiya’s family was just like my family,” the first lady said. “Hadiya Pendleton was me, and I was her. But I got to grow up and go to Princeton and Harvard Law School and have a career and a family, and the most blessed life I could ever imagine. And Hadiya — well, we know that story.”

Hadiya Pendleton was “allegedly” killed by a guy on probation for a weapons charge and who could not legally possess a weapon. In Chicago. Home of the formerly strictest gun laws in the country. But at least these remarks came after the big taxpayer funded soul party at the White House.

Obama is politicking on the graves of dead children not really having any idea of what he speaks:

During several speeches, Obama has said 40 percent of all gun purchases were made without a background check.

But that number is nearly two decades old and comes from a poll with a relatively tiny sample size. Gun rights groups like the National Rifle Association, as well as The Washington Post’s “Fact Checker,” are calling out the president’s stat, saying his numbers on background checks need a background check of their own.

During a speech last week, Obama asked, “Why wouldn’t we want to make it more difficult for a dangerous person to get his or her hand on a gun? Why wouldn’t we want to close the loophole that allows as many as 40 percent of all gun purchases to take place without a background check? Why wouldn’t we do that?”

The oft-cited figure, it turns out, was pulled from a 1997 study done by the National Institute of Justice. In the study, researchers estimated about 40 percent of all firearm sales took place through people other than licensed gun dealers. The conclusion was based on data from a 1994 survey of 2,568 households. Of those, only 251 people answered the question about where they got their guns.

PolitiFact tracked down the co-author of the study, Duke University professor Philip Cook, and asked him if he thought the 40 percent estimate is accurate.

“The answer is I have no idea,” Cook reportedly told PolitiFact. “This survey was done almost 20 years ago.”

And here’s a little known nugget:

I just came from Denver, where the issue of gun violence is something that has haunted families for way too long, and it is possible for us to create common-sense gun safety measures that respect the traditions of gun ownership in this country and hunters and sportsmen, but also make sure that we don’t have another 20 children in a classroom gunned down by a semiautomatic weapon — by a fully automatic weapon in that case, sadly.

Episodes like this have cause Jake Tapper to reflect:

“The gun debate is worth having,” Tapper noted, “but it might help the advocates of gun control if, in their advocacy for stricter measures, they seemed more familiar with what exactly they’re trying to ban.”

They don’t know what they’re talking about. What they’re proposing won’t help. It would not prevent another Newtown.

Their new laws won’t do squat but they do foment mistrust:

He conflates a failed background check with stopping a criminal from obtaining a gun. “Over the past 20 years,” Obama says, “background checks have kept more than 2 million dangerous people from buying a gun.” That claim is based on two faulty assumptions: 1) that everyone who fails a background check is dangerous, which plainly is not true, given the ridiculously broad categories of people who are legally barred from buying firearms, and 2) that a criminal intent on obtaining a weapon will give up if he cannot get it over the counter at a gun store, rather than enlisting a straw buyer or turning to the gray or black market.

He falsely equates “assault weapons” with military guns. Obama inaccurately calls one of the guns used in the 2012 Aurora, Colorado, massacre an “assault rifle,” which is a military weapon capable of firing automatically. He calls the guns he wants to ban “weapons of war,” again implying that they fire continuously, when in fact they fire once per trigger pull, like any other semi-automatic firearm.

He says there is no logical connection between “universal background checks” and gun registration. “We’re not proposing a gun registration system,” Obama insists. “We’re proposing background checks for criminals.” But there is no way to enforce a background-check requirement for every gun transfer unless the government knows where the guns are. Federally licensed gun dealers are readily identified and can be required to keep sale records. Individual gun owners who might dare to sell their property without clearance from the government cannot be identified unless the government compiles a list of them. Hence Obama’s assurances amount to saying, “Don’t worry. We will make a big show of passing this new background-check mandate, but we won’t really enforce it.”

He pooh-poohs the idea that there could ever be anything adversarial about the relationship between Americans and their government:

You hear some of these quotes: “I need a gun to protect myself from the government.” “We can’t do background checks because the government is going to come take my guns away.”

Well, the government is us. These officials are elected by you. (Applause.) They are elected by you. I am elected by you. I am constrained, as they are constrained, by a system that our Founders put in place. It’s a government of and by and for the people.

One of the constraints on the federal government is the doctrine of enmuerated powers, which says every act of Congress must be justified by a specific constitutional grant of authority. Where is the clause that empowers Congress to say how many rounds you can put in a magazine or whether your rifle can have a barrel shroud? Furthermore, as Obama surely has heard by now, there is this thing called the Second Amendment, and it is hardly frivolous to argue than an arbitrary and capricious piece of legislation like the “assault weapon” ban Obama supports would violate the constitutional right to keep and bear arms. Yet to Obama’s mind, anyone who makes such an argument is one of those “people who take absolute positions” and therefore can be safely ignored. After all, the government is us.

Sen. Mike Lee observes that background checks could lead to a national gun registry in the hands of the loathsome Eric Holder:

“Some of the proposals, like for example- universal background checks- would allow the federal government to surveil law-abiding citizens who exercise their Constitutional rights. One of the provisions we expect to see in the bill based on what we saw in the Judiciary Committee- on which I sit- would allow the Attorney General of the United States (Eric Holder) to promulgate regulations that could lead to a national registry system for guns. Something my constituents in Utah are very concerned about, and understandably so,”

So give them the damn vote. Put democrats on the line. Let them out their necks on the line. 2014 is coming

Voting for the assault weapons ban poses the bigger immediate threat to vulnerable Democrats such as Sens. Mark Begich (Alaska), Tim Johnson (S.D.) and Mark Pryor (Ark.). The NRA would rip any centrist Democrats — or Republicans — who support the assault weapons ban.

“There will be ramifications for elected officials who support gun bans. Our position is unequivocal. We do not support gun bans as a matter of policy or effective way of controlling guns,” said Chris Cox, executive director of the National Rifle Association Institute for Legislative Action.

Universal background checks won’t do a damn thing. They didn’t stop Jared Loughner, James Holmes or Seung Hui-Cho. They wouldn’t have stopped Adam Lanza.

Clarence Dupnik could have stopped Jared Loughner but he was friends with Loughner’s mom. The State of Virginia could have stopped Hui-Cho but it was too much of a hassle. James Holems’ shrink warned the cops to no avail.

Gang bangers are not going to register their weapons. They are not going to procure their ammunition certificates.

Crazies like Nancy Lanza won’t stop handing lethal weapons to their insane progeny.

So bring on the vote.

And every time there is another gun death, shove it up their asses. And come November 2014, remind voters how surrendering your Constitutional Rights accomplished nothing.

Fifteen people were stabbed at a Texas college the other day. No one demanded that knives be banned.

In 2010 more than 10,000 people lost their lives in alcohol-related driving accidents but no one demands that cars be banned.

It seems that guns are the only inanimate objects which are capable of being dangerous on their own.

Give them their damn vote. How sweet would it be to see Obama having to deal with an entire GOP Congress for the remainder of his regime?

0 0 votes
Article Rating
Subscribe
Notify of
206 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

@Richard Wheeler: The videos have been posted here about people wanting “Obama’s stash”. Are you denying that the bulk of the welfare recipients in this country don’t vote for the Dems? Are you denying that there are no special interest groups who support the Dems? Are you denying that Obama saying they would look at individual immigration cases as opposed to enforcing the laws as written wasn’t an effort to pander to the Hispanic vote? Most Americans support enforcing our immigration laws.

http://cis.org/legalization-vs-enforcement-what-the-american-people-think

@Greg: Wow, Greg, that’s increases my support of them tremendously, that’s the first good thing this year, I think.

@MataHarley: I am very opposed to the sharing medical records bit. As for background checks, I have no problem with checks made in retail stores and gun shops, but when it gets to personal sales to family or friends, I’m opposed. Criminals will always get weapons, whether there is a check or not, but at least with checks in retail stores, they at least have to make an effort to circumvent the law.

Redteam: I am very opposed to the sharing medical records bit. As for background checks, I have no problem with checks made in retail stores and gun shops, but when it gets to personal sales to family or friends, I’m opposed.

If the bill that was voted on was the same bill text I read, family transfers were exempted. Otherwise I have no objection that private sales are run thru a federally licensed dealer in order to run a background check on the purchase. I have no desire to see someone transfer a firearm to one no able to legally possess one. However most private sellers do not have access to the NICS database. Hence why they say run the sale thru a federal licensed dealer. I purchased my action pistol competition Colt Series Mk IV .45 via private party in California, and we did that. No biggie.

@Richard Wheeler:

Did Rand Paul really say Newtown parents were being used as props?

Do you really not know the answer to that question? Then why is it published in your name?

@another vet:

Are you denying that Obama saying they would look at individual immigration cases as opposed to enforcing the laws as written

AV, don’t you think it’s interesting that Dims have no problem with the welfare state? Don’t you also think it is strange that the Fed Gov has said sheriff’s would have to enforce Federal Gun laws, but can NOT enforce Fed Immigration laws? The old ‘cake and eat it’ scenario.

@Redteam: It is way past getting old. They also don’t seem to like it when called out on it either. This is where the main battlefield will be the next 3 years- gun control, abortion rights, and gay rights. Dealing with the ballooning debt which is a HUGE threat to this nation’s stability, will take a back seat because that requires too much effort. We have a bunch of little people running the show who can’t seem to focus on the real big issues and that applies to both parties.

@MataHarley:I’m the same way with private sales. I will not sell a gun to someone I don’t know or to someone who I know but have doubts about their character. The ones I do sell to have to meet the legal requirements in my state as well. No FOID card, no sale. The bulk of my firearms sales are now done on consignment through one of my FFL’s. It’s the safe way to go and I don’t have a problem doing it.

@MataHarley: Mata, how do you feel about ‘registration’ of firearms? My thoughts go like this: I have no problem with there being a record of when a gun is bought and sold, but I don’t think there should be a registration required. We have seen what can happen when the lefties get a hold of gun registrations with that big publication of owners in New York. So, while I have no problem with doing the paperwork when I buy or sell a gun, I have a problem when someone can access public records and publish a list of the weapons that I own. Registration is only the first step of confiscation. Another question: should the paperwork for gun sales be required by the selling party or purchasing party?

@Richard Wheeler: Some in Cleveland didn’t get your message.

@another vet: Vote you ref is 2011. Majority of Americans want borders secured and a long arduous path to citizenship for those who are here—takes upwards of 10 years and involves going home and getting in line, Majority also support stricter controls on employers.
Predict there will be a comprehensive immigration reform bill passed in next 12 months.
Of course there are special interest groups who support the Dems as well as Repubs. You and I just agree with different ones, though I know we can agree on strong support of the military

RT Rand Paul at a Christian Science breakfast Wed. morn. “When I see the fathers and mothers testifying and I know they are coming voluntarily and they want to come and be part of the debate,but it saddens me to see them and I think that in some cases the President has used them as props and that saddens me.”

@Richard Wheeler: I agree whole heartedly with what he said. Obama used them for props, plain and simple. Obama deserves your castigation.

@Richard Wheeler:
Why do we need a ‘comprehensive’ immigration bill? Obey and enforce the laws we have. Secure the borders, deport lawbreakers, let the others get in line legitimately. Don’t deport persons that are not criminals (and I’m not talking about entering the US illegally) If I were a Mexican I would enter the US any way I could.

@Redteam: You agree—That’s one of the reasons you’re gonna lose again if Paul is your nominee. You make it so damn easy

Good night Semper Fi

@Redteam: CONCUR

@Richard Wheeler: Just for the record, RW, I’m not a Ryan Paul supporter. But a toad frog would be superior to what we have now.

@Richard Wheeler: Take your joy where we can find it, I’m sure we don’t agree on much.

@another vet: #158
Illegals around the Mexican border are special.

…this subsection may be used to purchase satellite telephone communications systems and service…

I’m not sure what he means by “satellite.” Are the illegals getting satellite telephones that use satellites to communicate, or is that just a term for setting up a cell phone satellite station? I don’t know.

Rubio wants us to pay for setting up such a system for the illegals so they can call 911. Why would they call 911? Do they want to report Border Patrol agents keeping them from getting the amnesty they have a right to?

The politicians want to do more for illegals than they do for Americans.

There is authorized to be appropriated such sums as may be necessary to carry out the grant program established under this subsection.

Re-read the statement above. No limit is set on the amount to spend to set up such a system. Our government is shutting down things, and cutting the military, but we will always have money for the illegals as long as we have republicans and democrats in congress. Please remind me how we can tell the difference between the two. I forget.

The story is at:

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2013/04/17/Immigration-bill-contains-free-cell-phone-handouts-dubbed-MarcoPhones?utm_source=e_breitbart_com&utm_medium=email&utm_content=Breitbart+News+Roundup%2C+April+17%2C+2013&utm_campaign=20130417_m115790312_Breitbart+News+Roundup+April+17%2C+2013&utm_term=rubio-mic_jpg_3Fw_3D369

Anyone who votes democrat or republican in any federal election from now on is voting for the same thing we have now.

@Richard Wheeler: In my opinion part of the problem with our southern border is that our country’s foreign policy has been backwards for a long time. Our priorities should be in this order: N. America, Western Hemisphere, and then the rest of the world. We have never had a war with Canada. Our only war with Mexico was almost 170 years ago. Since then we had the Pancho Villa issue but that was what, almost 90 years ago? Look at Europe since the Mexican War ended. Crimean War, Franco-Prussia War, the Ottoman Empire vs. the Balkans, WWI, WWII, Bosnia, Kosovo, Russia vs. Georgia, and numerous other conflicts. We have lived quite peacefully with our neighbors compared to that continent. It would behoove us to help Mexico get its shit together so they can become more productive and take care of their own. That will do more than immigration reform when it comes to dealing with our southern border problem which is also a national security issue because terrorists can enter just as easy as those who are coming here looking for work.

@Richard Wheeler: #170

…takes upwards of 10 years and involves going home and getting in line….

Are we going to be sending someone home with them to make sure they actually go home and stay there?

@another vet: #178
As long as we have an election system where politicians have to use other people’s money to get elected, those who donate enough money will get what they want, and they are running the affairs of our country, not the marionette politicians. The puppeteers are pulling the strings on their marionettes, and the puppeteers aren’t putting America first. We The People get to sit in the audience and watch the show.

@Smorgasbord: There are phones that utilize satellites. We used them in Iraq and elsewhere to communicate. In many cases it was the only way a service member could call back to the states to talk to family. Service is sporadic because of satellite positioning.

@Smorgasbord: We have elitists running the country. Their exemption from the healthcare bill monstrosity is living proof of that. Their health care plan should be Obamacare. If they are against the 2nd Amendment they should waive all taxpayer funded armed protection they receive. Their kids should attend public schools. They should be made to obey all laws just like the rest of us. If they pass a bill, they should put in there where in the Constitution it grants those powers to the federal government. The latter would go a long way to solving our deficit problems.

@Redteam: Don’t confuse Rand Paul and Paul Ryan. Throw in Rubio and that’s probably the choice against HRC.

@Richard Wheeler:

Don’t confuse Rand Paul and Paul Ryan.

What, you mean they aren’t the same person, darn RW, you’ve busted my bubble and here I’ve been thinking all along they were the same person. Rubio won’t be in my mix.

@Redteam, I don’t support federal databases/registries of any kind. I’m not much thrilled even with SS#s. LOL Always, when there is a “list” of some kind, government abuse generally follows.

But yes, I do think that records of the transactions of firearms should be kept by dealers, and even individuals via any private sale. This is just prudent accounting. Much like you’d keep a record of the purchase of a furnace, a new roof, a car, a home, etc. However those records should not be turned over to the feds for a permanent database.

@MataHarley: We are in complete agreement on those issues.

Smorg: you said:

Anyone who votes democrat or republican in any federal election from now on is voting for the same thing we have now.

I share your sympathy on this issue. Unfortunately libs are gonna remain a solid block for the Dims, and it will do no good for conservatives to split their vote and always have to bow to the will of the Dims. When and if a third party arrives that actually has a chance, then it will be worth voting for them. At a local level, of course, there are viable candidates, especially Tea Party and we should get them into positions to take over the Repubs or establish a legitimate 3rd party.

@MataHarley: I believe it’s federal law that the seller has to keep a copy of the transaction for 10 years, at least it’s the law in the People’s Republic of Illinois. I’ve kept receipts of all the transactions I’ve done going way beyond the 10 years and also recommend that the buyer keep a copy as well for CYA purposes.

BTW, nice choice of a firearm!

@another vet, yup… I like my Series 80, MK IV. I was just getting started in the action pistol competition world, and didn’t want a super 38 since I was sure that .45 would knock down those metal popups easier. Also, I purchased it from a private gunsmith, retiring from the action pistol world. So it was rigged for a race gun.

Makes for a lousy concealed carry tho…

Added: My big bro has also entered the competition world. In a big way. He’s got a lot of race guns now, and I’ve tried a few out at the range. What I was really cautious about was those with the laser sighting. Seems like you could get pretty lazy and dependent on that during siting a target. So you’d have to keep that laser calibrated carefully. Think I’d rather avoid that crutch and added burden of maintenance.

@another vet, I can remember back in the days when people were accusing Aye and myself as being sock puppets.. sure we were really the same person but using a different name. What with the way your comments, and my few contributions lately, are going, you might be accused of the same. Careful… that won’t score you any points here. LOL

@MataHarley: Colts are my favorites. I have quite a collection. As a matter of fact I just got done shooting one of my Series 80 Combat Elites, one of my Series 70 Lightweight Commanders, and a 1st Issue Colt Agent .38 spcl. All awesome firearms. Now it’s time to clean. Don’t sell the .38 Super too short. They pack quite a wallop and have little recoil. If you are looking for a good .45 for CC, try the Colt LW Commanders or Officer’s Models. With the right load they really don’t kick as much as you’d think. They also work the same way as your full size so you’d be used to the action which is a plus. They would be my first choice if we had CC in my state.

@another vet:

People’s Republic of Illinois

Sounds like a socialist state. wonder why?

@Redteam: As blue as you can get. We used to have some decent dems but now they are all lefties from up north. The southern part of the state used to have some really decent dems like Glenn Poshard, whom I voted for governor over George Ryan, but they didn’t have much clout because they weren’t part of the “machine”.

@another vet: Don’t the gov’s from Ill usually spend their 2nd term in the big house?

@Redteam: Let’s see- Convicted: Kerner (D), Walker (D), Ryan (R), and Blago (D). Not convicted: Ogilvie (R), Thompson (R), Edgar (R), and so far Quinn (D). It wouldn’t be surprising if some of the others belonged on the convicted list as well.

@another vet: #181
I know there are satellite phones that can be used anywhere in the world if they can reach a satellite. I find it hard to believe that Rubio meant these kinds of phones, but why did he call them “satellite phones”? I’m prone to believe he intends us to set up a cell phone system of towers and phones for the illegals. He said it is so they can call 911.

Why would he want them to be able to call 911? It sounds to me that he wants them to be able to communicate with each other and be able to tell each other where the Border Patrol is. Again, why would an illegal crossing the border need to be able to call 911? There has to be another reason Rubio and other politicians want them to have access to a phone.

As I mentioned before, we are going broke, and cutting things in our government, even the military, but not one welfare recipient has seen there payments cut. They come before our military. Even Rubio puts the illegals ahead of our troops.

@another vet: #182

Their health care plan should be Obamacare.

I agree.

If they are against the 2nd Amendment they should waive all taxpayer funded armed protection they receive.

Let’s let each state decide if they allow their citizens to be armed.

Their kids should attend public schools.

I disagree. Every parent should have the right to pick the school their child attends. The politicians don’t want us to have free choice. It would make it harder to brainwash our kids into what the politicians want. Let’s also let each state set up their own curriculum.

They should be made to obey all laws just like the rest of us.

I agree. There is a movement going on to make it mandatory that any law they pass for us, applies to them.

If they pass a bill, they should put in there where in the Constitution it grants those powers to the federal government.

This is in the works too. I suggest this for the Supreme Court. I wrote to my federal reps that such a law should apply them. If you or others agree, pass it on to your federal reps. I have always wondered if the SCOTUS has to say yes or no to each issue, or could they say that there is no law covering it, and congress will have to take it from there?

Try getting ANY of the above passed with the ones we have in congress now. We need to get rid of ALL incumbents, and put in new blood.

@Redteam: #186

At a local level, of course, there are viable candidates, especially Tea Party and we should get them into positions to take over the Repubs or establish a legitimate 3rd party.

Toomey was a Tea Party candidate. I mentioned before that the Tea Party Patriots should have a candidate sign a contract telling what the candidate will and won’t do, otherwise we will still have candidates use the Tea Party to get elected, then vote the way they were originally intending.

@another vet: #190
Do you guys realize that the feds are monitoring all email, and looking for certain words, like “gun”? They are probably compiling a list of gun owners and the guns they have just by the emails and comments they make on web sites and social sites.

@Smorgasbord:

use the Tea Party to get elected, then vote the way they were originally intending.

True, but that doesn’t just include the Tea Party, for example Obama is not a Dimocrat, he only used that party to get elected so he could exercise his socialist tendencies. We will always have persons using the parties just to get elected. Another example, John McCain.

@Smorgasbord: I agree that people should be able to pick what schools their kids should go to. It’s freedom of choice. There are a number of pols who don’t agree with this. If that is what they desire, then their kids should go to public schools just like they wish for the rest. Funding the Dept. of Education wouldn’t cut it if they had to justify their spending according to what the powers of federal government are supposed to be according to the Constitution.

@Smorgasbord: Don’t worry, if they weren’t monitoring the web for words like ‘gun’ we would still be reported to attackwatch.com by the sheep. The Gestapho was able to keep tabs on those “undesirables” who disagreed with the regime well before Gore invented the internet.

@Redteam: #199
This is why term limits are a must. A perfect example of a person using the system is Arlen Specter. He was a democrat, then a republican, then a democrat.

@another vet: #200
In my opinion, the best solution is to get rid of the Department of Education and let each state have their own school systems. I wouldn’t have a problem with the feds overseeing the testing of the kids so that the states who aren’t educating their kids properly can be identified.

@another vet: #201
Just for the record, Gore was on the committee that created the Internet for the military, and he never said he invented it. Someone else did. In the movie Casablanca, the words, “Play it again Sam”, were never said. All kinds of things are being attributed to people who never said them.

@Smorgasbord: JFK got credit for saying, “Where there’s smoke, there’s a smoke making machine” I believe he actually did say it.

@Redteam: #205

JFK got credit for saying, “Where there’s smoke, there’s a smoke making machine” I believe he actually did say it.

I don’t know what you mean by this.