Subscribe to Outdoor Life
Get 1 Year for Only $10
The Gun Shots Recent Posts
Categories
Recent Comments
Archives
The Gun Shots |
March 08, 2010
Silence of the Bam - 8
by John Haughey
On Tuesday, the Supreme Court heard a historic constitutional gun rights case in McDonald v. City of Chicago. But, as Ken Klukowski notes in his FOXNews.com blog, the White House is not taking a position. "Instead, President Obama is hiding under his desk in the Oval Office," he writes. "What a profile in courage." Not surprising. In June 2008, when the Supreme Court handed down its landmark Heller decision, Obama, a liberal Illinois Senator, "decided to play some politics," Klukowski writes. "Despite his longstanding record of denying gun rights, Obama said that he supported the Heller decision." It made sense—sense, that is, if you're running for President. "Obama knew that he couldn’t win the presidency without getting a good number of votes from America’s 90 million gun owners," Klukowksi writes. "So he did a 180 on his long-held beliefs, and announced that the Court made the right decision in Heller." Obama's silence on gun-control has been a shocking reversal for liberals, and especially zealot gun-grabbers. "It seems to be shaping up to be the lefty complaint du jour this week," writes Warner Todd Huston in biggovernment.com. “We expected a very different picture at this stage,” whined Paul Helmke, president of the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, which last month issued a report card failing the administration in all seven of the group’s major indicators. Still, gun rights groups remain skeptical. “The watchword for gun owners is stay ready,” said Wayne LaPierre, head of the NRA. “We have had some successes, but we know that the first chance Obama gets, he will pounce on us.” Make that very skeptical. As Huston warns in his biggovernment.com blog, don't mistake Obama's inaction on gun-control initiatives as a statement of support for gun rights. A reader concurred, adding this footnote: "Obama may sign 'pro gun' legislation; but he is appointing 'anti-gun' judges and regulators. He knows that it is the regulators, and the judges, that will interpret and apply these laws. Do not be fooled; this fellow makes KY jelly jealous." For more, go to: http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2010/03/02/ken-klukowski-obama-chicago-gun-ban-supreme-court-hiding-desk/ Also: *Obama The Pro-Gun President?; http://biggovernment.com/wthuston/2010/02/15/obama-the-pro-gun-president... <http://biggovernment.com/wthuston/2010/02/15/obama-the-pro-gun-president/> *Gun Rights Expand under Obama *Gun-Crazy in Obama's America; *Obama Perhaps Not as Anti-Gun as Feared;
|
Outdoorlife.com is part of the Field & Stream Network, a division of Bonnier Corporation.
Copyright © 2012 Bonnier Corp. All Rights Reserved. Reproduction in whole or in part without permission is prohibited.
Comments (8)
I think that at this point in Obama's term of office, he is to busy ignoring the public and trying to get his socialistic health care passed. So far he has figured out that he cannot get away with buying votes behind closed doors and he is about to figure out that he cannot bully the American people into agreeing to sell their childrens futures. Obama is more about socialism, which means he needs to control our financial system by controlling our banking system (done). Then control our largest capitalistic business, government motors was first, now and probably the next largest is the insurance/phameceutical companies (Obama care). Again, he is to busy pushing his agenda but don't think for a minute that gun control is not part of this agenda. I'm sure gun control is only one or two line items below health care on his road to total domination of "his" people.
Obamas stance on gun control is suspicious at best. As an Illinios Senator he was also absent during the vote for important gun control measures.
I think he was smart enough to know he needed the gun owners vote to obtain office.
If Obama gets a second term and has nothing to lose expect a huge fight in the gun control arena.
"'It seems to be shaping up to be the lefty complaint du jour this week,' writes Warner Todd Huston in biggovernment.com." "[C]omplaint du jour this week?" Awww, geez, how is a pro-gun blogger going to have any credibility with such a construction? And to summarize Haughey's blog post: Obama isn't supporting the Chicago gun ban or making any effort to limit gun ownership, but that just shows how bad he is. Sorry, but I don't follow that logic. Furthermore, Kody's right: the polarization evident in the Gun Shots blog indicates that there can be no hope of resolution.
hey john haughey why do you like to stir the pot when theres nothing to stir.you must not have read the artical in newsweek about the liberals and conservatives working together on the chicago gun ban.sir if you want to stir something make some chili!
Kody, those characterizations were not from John Haughey. Those were quotes from other people, trying to point out the political moves that have characterized the political career of our president. The people quoted were Ken Klukowski and Warner Todd Huston. John was just reporting their comments in an effort to convey a political thought that will not be broadcast by the Lamestream Media here in the US.
The Lamestream Media will do their best to not tell how the political maneuvering of the man in the White House shows a disingenuous, calculating individual who cannot be trusted by anyone who values the heritage we have in this country.
The day I start listening to John Haughey for factual and objective news stories I will be switching to Star or Inquirer. His inflammatory and insulting style of reporting is fit for the mob as in appealing to the lowest common denominator. In this brief article he chooses to portray the leader of a country as cowardly and slippery as KY jelly. I may come to have strong opinions regarding the leader of my country or the leader of the opposition for that matter, in either case my remarks lose credibility by resorting to ugly characterizations. I am frequently startled by the level of anger revolving around issues raised on this forum. Views seem polarized to such a degree that conflict without any hope of resolution seems inevitable. It is a damn ugly situation that seems to be brewing.
We need to get rid of most of the Senate and Congress this next election. Anyone who voted for the government to take over health care will also vote against the Second Amendment. The ObamaCare package is the biggest attempt of the government to intrude into the lives of the American people. There are problems in the health care system in the US. All of them are tied to governmental interference and regulations which hamper the system, create inefficiencies that they then want to fix. It wasn't broke before they started.
These are the people who are going to help us by giving us gun control, another governmental intrusion that has failed to live up to its promises.
All the more reason to throw out the trash in 2010 and haul it off in 2012. You can bet strict gun control is on this admiistration's agenda. The healthcare debate is hindering the advance of the greater agenda as I'm sure they had no idea that they would fail so miserably right out of the gate. He's a year behind and counting...
Post a Comment (200 characters or less)
All the more reason to throw out the trash in 2010 and haul it off in 2012. You can bet strict gun control is on this admiistration's agenda. The healthcare debate is hindering the advance of the greater agenda as I'm sure they had no idea that they would fail so miserably right out of the gate. He's a year behind and counting...
We need to get rid of most of the Senate and Congress this next election. Anyone who voted for the government to take over health care will also vote against the Second Amendment. The ObamaCare package is the biggest attempt of the government to intrude into the lives of the American people. There are problems in the health care system in the US. All of them are tied to governmental interference and regulations which hamper the system, create inefficiencies that they then want to fix. It wasn't broke before they started.
These are the people who are going to help us by giving us gun control, another governmental intrusion that has failed to live up to its promises.
Kody, those characterizations were not from John Haughey. Those were quotes from other people, trying to point out the political moves that have characterized the political career of our president. The people quoted were Ken Klukowski and Warner Todd Huston. John was just reporting their comments in an effort to convey a political thought that will not be broadcast by the Lamestream Media here in the US.
The Lamestream Media will do their best to not tell how the political maneuvering of the man in the White House shows a disingenuous, calculating individual who cannot be trusted by anyone who values the heritage we have in this country.
The day I start listening to John Haughey for factual and objective news stories I will be switching to Star or Inquirer. His inflammatory and insulting style of reporting is fit for the mob as in appealing to the lowest common denominator. In this brief article he chooses to portray the leader of a country as cowardly and slippery as KY jelly. I may come to have strong opinions regarding the leader of my country or the leader of the opposition for that matter, in either case my remarks lose credibility by resorting to ugly characterizations. I am frequently startled by the level of anger revolving around issues raised on this forum. Views seem polarized to such a degree that conflict without any hope of resolution seems inevitable. It is a damn ugly situation that seems to be brewing.
Obamas stance on gun control is suspicious at best. As an Illinios Senator he was also absent during the vote for important gun control measures.
I think he was smart enough to know he needed the gun owners vote to obtain office.
If Obama gets a second term and has nothing to lose expect a huge fight in the gun control arena.
I think that at this point in Obama's term of office, he is to busy ignoring the public and trying to get his socialistic health care passed. So far he has figured out that he cannot get away with buying votes behind closed doors and he is about to figure out that he cannot bully the American people into agreeing to sell their childrens futures. Obama is more about socialism, which means he needs to control our financial system by controlling our banking system (done). Then control our largest capitalistic business, government motors was first, now and probably the next largest is the insurance/phameceutical companies (Obama care). Again, he is to busy pushing his agenda but don't think for a minute that gun control is not part of this agenda. I'm sure gun control is only one or two line items below health care on his road to total domination of "his" people.
"'It seems to be shaping up to be the lefty complaint du jour this week,' writes Warner Todd Huston in biggovernment.com." "[C]omplaint du jour this week?" Awww, geez, how is a pro-gun blogger going to have any credibility with such a construction? And to summarize Haughey's blog post: Obama isn't supporting the Chicago gun ban or making any effort to limit gun ownership, but that just shows how bad he is. Sorry, but I don't follow that logic. Furthermore, Kody's right: the polarization evident in the Gun Shots blog indicates that there can be no hope of resolution.
hey john haughey why do you like to stir the pot when theres nothing to stir.you must not have read the artical in newsweek about the liberals and conservatives working together on the chicago gun ban.sir if you want to stir something make some chili!
Post a Comment (200 characters or less)