Obama Promotes Constitutional Fallacies In Gun Control Push http://www.openmarket.org/2013/01/17/obama-promotes-constitutional-fallacies-in-gun-control-push/ RRD: Openmarket quotes the Washington Post before rebutting Obama's argument,the whole piece is worth reading but I wish to add my own comments.
....” In making his case Wednesday for tighter controls on gun ownership, President Obama turned to the document most often cited by firearms advocates in defense of gun rights — the Constitution. By doing so, Obama sought to turn a perceived political weakness — his image as an aloof intellectual — into a strength, and, at the same time, to turn a perceived strength of gun advocates — the constitutional right to bear arms — into a potential weakness. Citing a series of mass shootings, Obama listed several amendments, as well as the defining phrase of the Declaration of Independence, to argue that the right to bear arms should not compromise other rights. “We have the right to worship freely and safely — that right was denied to Sikhs in Oak Creek, Wisconsin,” Obama said at a midday event. “The right to assemble peacefully — that right was denied shoppers in Clackamas, Oregon, and moviegoers in Aurora, Colorado.” Obama added that “that most fundamental set of rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness” were “denied to college students at Virginia Techand high school students at Columbine and elementary school students in Newtown, and kids on street corners in Chicago on too frequent a basis to tolerate.” “All the families who never imagined they’d lose a loved one to a bullet, those rights are at stake,” he said. “We’re responsible.” ”...... ......” The Court noted in its Morrison decision that Constitutional rights only apply against the government, not other private individuals, so the federal government cannot rely on constitutional rights as a basis for regulating private — as opposed to governmental — conduct. It has to rely on a federal power specifically listed in the Constitution instead. ”.......
RRD: According to at least two of his teachers Obama is a very bright man, but one unwilling to apply himself to the task of actually...well ...learning. ( fn1 )
Increasingly though, I wonder if even that is true,as he keeps making arguments that aren't particularly clever,even for a ignorant demagogue.
For example it does not take a genius to note that if one were to apply this ”right to life” standard mentioned above ,in general ( rather than simply to the Second Amendment) that it would disembowel the Fourth & Fifth Amendments (& incidentally it is the same argument Bush used to deflect criticism of his counterterrorism policies) . Of course Obama doesn't apply it to those other Amendments because to do so would incur the wrath of his base.
Further evidence of Obama's hypocrisy on this issue may be seen in the fact that the right to life standard does not apply to keeping our soldiers in Afghanistan to prevent a terrorist attack.
” During an interview with Woodward in July, the president said, "We can absorb a terrorist attack. We'll do everything we can to prevent it, but even a 9/11, even the biggest attack ever . . . we absorbed it and we are stronger ”..... Obama overrode Generals on Afghanistan so that America could "absorb" a terrorist attack. #tcot #gwot #jcot - fightingstatism http://fightingstatism.posterous.com/obama-overrode-generals-on-afghanistan-so-tha RRD: So the ”right to life” standard does not apply to the victims of Al-Qaeda's terrorist attacks ( unless those attacks are carried out with guns of course,then they would provide us with a crisis too good to let waste).
Given that Obama's counter-terrorism adviser John Brennan thinks that terrorism must not be allowed to ”define” or ”distort” our foreign policy this is hardly surprising. (fn2)
Nor did this standard apply to the ”workplace violence” of Ft.Hood (fn3),which as horrific as it was must not be allowed to compromise our ”diversity ” (fn4)
Nor of course did it apply to the victims of Fast And Furious.(fn5) Nor did it apply to Jane Sturm's mother since she should take a pill & die (fn6). Nor did it apply to those who need Avastin (fn7). It applies only to disarming the innocent,(which of course would also cause deaths,but as Obama cares only about power, that does not concern him)
Again I remain convinced that we are losing due to a inability to get our message out,not due to the invincibility of our enemies.
Footnotes: See Mendell Obama from Promise to Power pages 46 & 60 Obama - David Mendell - Google Books http://books.google.com/books?id=rtBru4Nrpj8C&lpg=PP1&dq=david%20mendell&pg=PA61#v=snippet&q=teacher%20apply&f=false
fn2
White House: 'War on terrorism' is over - Washington Times http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/aug/6/white-house-war-terrorism-over/print/
fn3
Video: Fort Hood massacre not considered a terrorist attack? « Hot Air http://hotair.com/archives/2012/10/19/video-fort-hood-massacre-not-considered-a-terrorist-attack/ fn4
General Casey: diversity shouldn’t be casualty of Fort Hood | Tales from the Trail http://blogs.reuters.com/talesfromthetrail/2009/11/08/general-casey-diversity-shouldnt-be-casualty-of-fort-hood/
” Our diversity, not only in our Army, but in our country, is a strength. And as horrific as this tragedy was, if our diversity becomes a casualty, I think that’s worse”
fn5. Fast and Furious: Barack Obama's Bloodiest Scandal and the Shameless Cover-Up: Katie Pavlich: 9781596983212: Amazon.com: Books http://www.amazon.com/Fast-Furious-Bloodiest-Shameless-Cover-Up/dp/1596983213/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1358184634&sr=8-1&keywords=katie+pavlich Katie Pavlich - Obama Smirks, Laughs Off Fast and Furious During Debate
http://m.townhall.com/tipsheet/katiepavlich/2012/10/16/obama_smirks_laughs_off_fast_and_furious_during_debate
fn6
Obama:Take a pill instead of pacemaker /RE: Obama's ”letters praising #Obamacare” #tcot #teaparty #tlot - fightingstatism
http://fightingstatism.posterous.com/obamatake-a-pill-instead-of-pacemaker-re-obam
fn7. FDA's #Avastin decision is a #breastcancer patient's worst nightmare Washington Examiner #obamacare #repealit #tcot #tlot - fightingstatism http://fightingstatism.posterous.com/fdas-avastin-decision-is-a-breastcancer-patie
....” In making his case Wednesday for tighter controls on gun ownership, President Obama turned to the document most often cited by firearms advocates in defense of gun rights — the Constitution. By doing so, Obama sought to turn a perceived political weakness — his image as an aloof intellectual — into a strength, and, at the same time, to turn a perceived strength of gun advocates — the constitutional right to bear arms — into a potential weakness. Citing a series of mass shootings, Obama listed several amendments, as well as the defining phrase of the Declaration of Independence, to argue that the right to bear arms should not compromise other rights. “We have the right to worship freely and safely — that right was denied to Sikhs in Oak Creek, Wisconsin,” Obama said at a midday event. “The right to assemble peacefully — that right was denied shoppers in Clackamas, Oregon, and moviegoers in Aurora, Colorado.” Obama added that “that most fundamental set of rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness” were “denied to college students at Virginia Techand high school students at Columbine and elementary school students in Newtown, and kids on street corners in Chicago on too frequent a basis to tolerate.” “All the families who never imagined they’d lose a loved one to a bullet, those rights are at stake,” he said. “We’re responsible.” ”...... ......” The Court noted in its Morrison decision that Constitutional rights only apply against the government, not other private individuals, so the federal government cannot rely on constitutional rights as a basis for regulating private — as opposed to governmental — conduct. It has to rely on a federal power specifically listed in the Constitution instead. ”.......
RRD: According to at least two of his teachers Obama is a very bright man, but one unwilling to apply himself to the task of actually...well ...learning. ( fn1 )
Increasingly though, I wonder if even that is true,as he keeps making arguments that aren't particularly clever,even for a ignorant demagogue.
For example it does not take a genius to note that if one were to apply this ”right to life” standard mentioned above ,in general ( rather than simply to the Second Amendment) that it would disembowel the Fourth & Fifth Amendments (& incidentally it is the same argument Bush used to deflect criticism of his counterterrorism policies) . Of course Obama doesn't apply it to those other Amendments because to do so would incur the wrath of his base.
Further evidence of Obama's hypocrisy on this issue may be seen in the fact that the right to life standard does not apply to keeping our soldiers in Afghanistan to prevent a terrorist attack.
” During an interview with Woodward in July, the president said, "We can absorb a terrorist attack. We'll do everything we can to prevent it, but even a 9/11, even the biggest attack ever . . . we absorbed it and we are stronger ”..... Obama overrode Generals on Afghanistan so that America could "absorb" a terrorist attack. #tcot #gwot #jcot - fightingstatism http://fightingstatism.posterous.com/obama-overrode-generals-on-afghanistan-so-tha RRD: So the ”right to life” standard does not apply to the victims of Al-Qaeda's terrorist attacks ( unless those attacks are carried out with guns of course,then they would provide us with a crisis too good to let waste).
Given that Obama's counter-terrorism adviser John Brennan thinks that terrorism must not be allowed to ”define” or ”distort” our foreign policy this is hardly surprising. (fn2)
Nor did this standard apply to the ”workplace violence” of Ft.Hood (fn3),which as horrific as it was must not be allowed to compromise our ”diversity ” (fn4)
Nor of course did it apply to the victims of Fast And Furious.(fn5) Nor did it apply to Jane Sturm's mother since she should take a pill & die (fn6). Nor did it apply to those who need Avastin (fn7). It applies only to disarming the innocent,(which of course would also cause deaths,but as Obama cares only about power, that does not concern him)
Again I remain convinced that we are losing due to a inability to get our message out,not due to the invincibility of our enemies.
Footnotes: See Mendell Obama from Promise to Power pages 46 & 60 Obama - David Mendell - Google Books http://books.google.com/books?id=rtBru4Nrpj8C&lpg=PP1&dq=david%20mendell&pg=PA61#v=snippet&q=teacher%20apply&f=false
fn2
White House: 'War on terrorism' is over - Washington Times http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/aug/6/white-house-war-terrorism-over/print/
fn3
Video: Fort Hood massacre not considered a terrorist attack? « Hot Air http://hotair.com/archives/2012/10/19/video-fort-hood-massacre-not-considered-a-terrorist-attack/ fn4
General Casey: diversity shouldn’t be casualty of Fort Hood | Tales from the Trail http://blogs.reuters.com/talesfromthetrail/2009/11/08/general-casey-diversity-shouldnt-be-casualty-of-fort-hood/
” Our diversity, not only in our Army, but in our country, is a strength. And as horrific as this tragedy was, if our diversity becomes a casualty, I think that’s worse”
fn5. Fast and Furious: Barack Obama's Bloodiest Scandal and the Shameless Cover-Up: Katie Pavlich: 9781596983212: Amazon.com: Books http://www.amazon.com/Fast-Furious-Bloodiest-Shameless-Cover-Up/dp/1596983213/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1358184634&sr=8-1&keywords=katie+pavlich Katie Pavlich - Obama Smirks, Laughs Off Fast and Furious During Debate
http://m.townhall.com/tipsheet/katiepavlich/2012/10/16/obama_smirks_laughs_off_fast_and_furious_during_debate
fn6
Obama:Take a pill instead of pacemaker /RE: Obama's ”letters praising #Obamacare” #tcot #teaparty #tlot - fightingstatism
http://fightingstatism.posterous.com/obamatake-a-pill-instead-of-pacemaker-re-obam
fn7. FDA's #Avastin decision is a #breastcancer patient's worst nightmare Washington Examiner #obamacare #repealit #tcot #tlot - fightingstatism http://fightingstatism.posterous.com/fdas-avastin-decision-is-a-breastcancer-patie
No comments:
Post a Comment