|

Raving kooks of the political right wildly distort Obama’s simple statement of fact

AnnAlthouseTomTomorrow

Charles Johnson NAILS IT:

The deranged right wing blogosphere is at it again, going bat[bleep] crazy over a completely uncontroversial statement by President Obama.

Speaking in Denver, the President made the following statement about gun control, pointing out that the US government is prevented from confiscating guns by our Constitution…

“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,’ Obama said. “Well, the government is us. These officials are elected by you. 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.”

Just a simple statement of fact, right? What could possibly be bad about this? Leave it to the raving kooks of the right wing blogs to find a way to distort Obama’s words and read things into them that he never said — in lockstep unison, because that’s how they do everything.

Ann Althouse [above] thinks Obama actually was saying he’s not constrained (even though it’s the opposite of his actual words)…

The moron at Weasel Zippers thinks Obama was “lamenting” that he was constrained by the Constitution…

And the Internet’s Dumbest Man helpfully provides a lame photoshop of Obama and says he was “taunting” gun owners…

It’s like this at every single right wing blog today. The hatred is rotting their brains.

Share:

36 Comments

  1. Another slow day in Loonietown, USA.

  2. Neftali

    In other words, Obama isn’t against grabbing guns, as long as he’s elected by the majority mob, and he can do whatever he wants. To hell with protecting the Constitutional liberties of the minority. No wonder the ACLU is side with the NRA.

    Unfortunately, the right wing anger is improperly targeted. (pun somewhat intended) The liberal anti-2nd amendment stuff isn’t a huge threat at the Federal level, its coming at the State level. Connecticut and Colorado have already passed new highly restrictive gun bans, with other states sure to follow.

  3. Brian Opsahl

    Yea Nef, it’s only ok if Alabama,North Dakota go against that Constitution you love to only use in your favor…hhhmm oh the Hypocracy

  4. Neftali

    How have Alabama or North Dakota gone against the Constitution?

  5. Neftali: The first sentence of your comment is perhaps the dumbest you’ve ever submitted here.

    Where in the hell do you get this nonsense about Obama “grabbing guns”? You sound like the worst kind of right-wing kook.

    The president said he and other government officials are “constrained” by the Constitution. But you seem not to understand his use of the English language.

  6. Brian Opsahl

    By banning abortion that in 1972 Roe vs Wade gave our lady’s a choice …then they make rules to put them out of business forever….That..!! oh yea i leftout Mississippi

  7. Craig Knauss

    Nef,

    Why don’t you take a look at the Colorado and Connecticut gun laws. Find where it says they will confiscate all legitimate sporting weapons and give us a good link. We want to see it.

    There are a lot of hunters in those two states, including some of the legislators that passed those laws, and those states are NOT going to screw with them. I don’t care what you say, an M-4 with a 30 shot clip is not a legitimate sporting weapon. And it’s not worth crap for home defense either!

  8. Brian Opsahl

    Craig, I own multi round clips 30,50 I own alot of the weapons they are talking about and I couldn’t agree more with what Connecticut and Colorado are doing. This gun owner want’s change in the laws that will stop some mental patient or Felon to easely get their hands on guns from swap meets or gun shows…there is so much more to this.

    So far it doesn’t look like anything the American people voted for will be even considered thanks to the Teaparty…im sorry Republicans…

  9. Neftali

    Brian Opsahl – Those clips you own are now illegal in Connecticut and Colorado. So I guess you are okay with your own ability to defend yourself, but could care less about other people’s Constitutional rights.

    I suppose you are also okay with a big registry saying who does and who does not have guns. That way criminals know who to target, and liberal newspapers can publish who are the “evil gun owners.”

  10. Brian Opsahl

    That’s is not true at all, read it again…Nef…it says you will be required to register those clips with the State…they are not taking them.

    If that registry stops mental patents or violent felons or wife beaters from getting them …then yes im all for it and you should be to. More than 90 % of all of America wants this change..

  11. Brian Opsahl

    What Constitutional Rights are you talking about ….you can’t own a bozooka can you.
    The 2nd amendment doesn’t say what kind of guns doe’s it …of course it doesn’t because they had no idea we would have these kinds of weapons in the future did they…

  12. Neftali

    A national registry concerns me. Knowing who does and does not possess weapons does not reduce crime, and I still believe that such information actually encourages crime. Felons already know that its illegal to possess weapons, and it doesn’t stop them from acquiring them. A registry isn’t going to deter that. I’m also concerned about the potential affects of continued restrictions on what type of weapons you can own. We’re not talking about bazookas here. We’re talking about common pieces that are used for self defense.

    I also find it interesting that you, as the possessor of several arms, want to have their availability limited. I grew up in a rural environment, yet I do not, nor do I have any plans to, own any kind of firearms. But I don’t want to reduce anyone’s availability to protect their Constitutional rights.

    “If I could have gotten 51 votes in the Senate of the United States for an out-right ban, picking up every one of them… ‘Mr. and Mrs. America, turn ‘em all in,’ I would have done it.” — Senator Dianne Feinstein

  13. Craig Knauss

    Nef,

    The VIN number for your car is in a “national registry”. You knew that right? Your Social Security number is a “national registry”. You knew that right? There are lots of things that are a “national registry”. And what makes you think every punk out there can access it? Or are you really afraid of law enforcement?

    And why on earth would someone need 30, 50, 100 shot magazines for “self protection”? From who or what? ATF? FBI? Taliban? Only a police agency would be able to hang around long enough for you to discharge that many rounds in or from your home. And here’s a hot flash – if you shoot someone OUTSIDE your dwelling, and they don’t have a firearm in their hands, YOU will be prosecuted for (attempted) homicide. Ask a state’s attorney. That’s even true out here in the Wild, Wild West.

  14. Neftali

    Craig – When a liberal newspaper decided to violate the privacy of law abiding gun owners last year, you can be sure that similar crazed liberal heroes would think nothing of making the entire database made available if possible. Remember its your side that thinks Julian Assange is a role model. Why are you so willing to remove basic civil liberties?

    As far as why you need high capacity magazines, I could care less. But if you want them, and are a law abiding citizen, you should be able to have them. If you want to kill a bunch of people, there are mixtures of common house hold chemicals that can do the same thing. I don’t see a liberal cry for banning them.

  15. Brian Opsahl

    If your a law abiding citizen what are you worried about. Some data base with your name in it means nothing a big so what..!! Giving that kind of fire power to some mental nut case or felon is a very big deal…fact

    The bozooka comparison is exactly what everybody is talking about because we dont allow those kinds of weapons why whould we allow a nut case to go un-checked…same argument

    The NRA in it’s own idea for school saftey is requring background checks for these special guards and specialized training….hhhmmm why is it ok for the NRA to demand background checks but NOT the rest of America…is that not the biggest hypocitical BS i have ever seen on this subject…Nef..? explain that sir…!!

  16. Robert

    I think this may be why Neftali makes note of a database being made available. We’ve seen how data has been used in the past and how big business collaborated with national movements to create list of who is where (and has what).

    http://www.ibmandtheholocaust.com/

    People should be careful what they ask for. Once we start placing armed guards in schools, and the creeps who do mass shooting then target other venues, how long before we have armed guards in our supermarkets, theaters, bars and restaurants, department stores, hotels, malls, public parks and eventually street corners? That is very possible if placing armed guards at every location a mass shooting has or will occur is the answer. What do we call that kind of state? Is this the future we want? Seems like the NRA is acting as a willing accomplice to bringing about the police state to the USA. Do NRA supporters realize that?

  17. Brian Opsahl

    There was an armed guard at Columbine and look what happened there despite him

  18. Robert

    This is just an afterthought to my previous post on this thread. If people don’t think we are well on our way to becoming a police state, look up how many private protection services have sprung up over the last 10+ years. Many are being used in the wars in the Middle East, but there are plenty here. For example, about 10 years ago, I was at a Plaid Pantry. My car was parked in their lot. When I came back to my car it wouldn’t start. So I lifted up the hood to check things out. In the mean time, a private security service car came and parked 2 cars away from me and the guy just stared at me. I called a tow truck and it eventually arrived. When the private security guy saw that, he left as it was apparent I wasn’t planning a heist. I just wanted to show you protective services are already in place. If the goal is to eventually become a police state (many believe we’re there already), how difficult would it be to convert these private services into govt contracted services. That would also coincide with the Republican goal of privatizing just about everything the govt used to provide (i.e., public schools to charter school is another example of privatization). When you need a job, and being a private security officer is one of just a few out there that doesn’t require a degree, how many people would willingly apply and become your neighborhood protector? People need to look long term at the short term solutions being considered.

    PS – I am not anti-govt. Nor am I an advocate for or against gun ownership. I’m just looking out further down the line at what could happen should certain directions continue. Isn’t that what a good manager does? I like the way govt has provided for the people in the past. I like streets and hwys and stop signs and sidewalks and clean water and air, social security, medicare, disability, etc. etc. etc. I actually am not a fan of this privatization movement that’s going on. It will become just as corrupted as many of our govt agencies have.

  19. Neftali

    Brian – That armed guard likely saved lives. Details here:

    http://www.cnn.com/SPECIALS/2000/columbine.cd/Pages/DEPUTIES_TEXT.htm

    As far as the gun owners national database goes, it would be safer for everyone to not know who does and who does not possess a firearm, than to know exactly who those nasty evil gun owners are, and where they live. Further any savvy crook will surely target the houses of known non-gun owning folks first.

  20. Robert

    Neftali, so you’re advocating for the eventual police state that placing guard in schools would eventually grow into? You know as well as I do, that schools would just be the beginning. It wouldn’t be that much of a leap to get there once the arming of guards nationwide begins. So what are you advocating for and do you think NRA members realize they would be legitimizing the very direction in our government they are so much in fear of?

  21. Robert

    Corrected statement to my last post.

    It wouldn’t be that much of a leap to get there once the arming of guards at schools nationwide begins.

  22. Brian Opsahl

    You guys are over playing this whole thing …first of all the Republicans have made it cristal clear they will not advance a bill through Congress. So your freeking out about nothing but speculations….right..!!

    We have many data basis already with way more information than what they are TALKING about…Right..!!

  23. Robert

    Who are you referring to “you guys”…

  24. Neftali: Your ignorance of this subject is spectacular, as evidenced by your contention that “any savvy crook will surely target the houses of known non-gun owning folks first.”

    The fact is that guns are an attraction, not a deterrent, to burglars. If you put some stupid sticker on your door or window advertising the fact that you own guns, you’re only inviting burglars. An estimated 600,000 guns are stolen each year from private homes. Burglars consider guns especially easy to fence on the black market.

    Moreover, ATF reports that over a quarter of its criminal gun trafficking investigations involve stolen guns.

    The NRA opposes background checks for one simple reason: They fear that such checks will reduce the sale of firearms. The NRA is first and foremost a shill for the firearms industry, and anything that might reduce firearms sales is bad for the NRA.

    But, of course, you buy into to all of the NRA’s foolish rhetoric, don’t you, Neftali?

  25. Brian Opsahl

    I mean rightys or Nef to be specific…
    Correct Pat, do you rememeber the kids who tried to steal a bunch of guns from the guy down in Stillman Valley a couple of years ago 1 is dead the others are in prison. for some reason people beleive that this master list will be on a billboard somewhere…or printed in the paper…are you all out of your minds

  26. Craig Knauss

    Nef,

    I didn’t agree with the gun owners names being released. It was reckless at best. However, based on your logic, potential criminals would know which houses NOT to rob, wouldn’t they? After all, it’s only people who do not own guns that are crime victims. Right?

    Second, I do not know a single person who thinks Julian Assange is a hero. Where’d you get that crap?

    Third, I notice you totally ignored the rest of my comment about VIN numbers, etc. Do you know of anyone who had his car stolen because of the VIN number database? But there’s a good chance you know of someone who got his stolen car returned because of the VIN number.

    BTW, I just read about a couple of North Carolina Republican state legislators wanting to establish an official state religion because “the First Amendment doesn’t apply to states”. Now whose trampling on the Constitution?

  27. Neftali

    Craig –

    Google “Julian Assange Hero” All the links are from your left wing buddies. The “Julian Assange is a HERO” facebook page is peppered with conspiracy links to left wing rags like alternet and even has a interview with him by Cenk Uygur. You remember Cenk? He was the freak who was ousted by MSNBC for being too much a left wing nut.

    That bill in North Carolina was thrown out by House Speaker Thom Tillis. I agree that the very premise of the bill was Unconstitutional. Also very troubling was that the bill had 14 Republican co-sponsors. Must be something in the water there. But it never had a real chance to become law anyway. The ACLU would have contested, and it would have been thrown out by every circuit court in the country, even the right wing ones.

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/04/04/state-religion-bill-north-carolina_n_3016154.html

    As far as the gun registration national database goes, Brain Opsahl is correct. Such a thing has no chance of being created anyway. Its pointless to worry about it.

  28. Neftali

    Since the left wing is hellbent on banning assault rifles, here is a list of things you guys should also considering banning, since they kill people and stuff like that.

    In 2011, all rifles combined accounted for 323 murders, while shotguns were used in 356 murders; this in a country of 300 million people. So it only stands to reason that if banning rifles and shotguns are an effective way to fight crime, then handguns need to go too: they were used in 6,220 murders.

    Here a list of the number of annual deaths by various means to help you determine what to ban next:

    Doctors/Hospitals through medical error or hospital related infection: 90,000
    Motor Vehicles: 32,3210
    Alcohol (Drunk Driving): 10,288
    Handguns: 6220
    Knives: 1694
    Hand & Feet: 728
    Bats, Hammers, Clubs: 496
    Fire (arson): 375
    Shotguns: 356
    Rifles: 323
    Crossbow & Bows: Very few people die from them, but they’re scary, so they should be banned.

    http://www.ijreview.com/2013/04/45425-19-things-to-ban-in-addition-to-guns/

  29. They’re all scary Neftali.

  30. Craig Knauss

    Nef,

    I’ve never heard of Cenk Uygur. And I don’t watch MSNBC or Oprah or anything like that. I also don’t waste my time with Fox Noise. And like I said, I don’t know anyone who thinks Assage was a hero. Contrary to what the rightwing likes to fanaticize, there are a whole lot of lefties involved in national defense and Assage put them in danger as well.

    I wonder what you’d get if you Goggled “Adolf Hitler Hero”. I bet you get some hits and they won’t be left wing sites, will they?

    RE: North Carolina – just because something is unconstitutional doesn’t mean some creep won’t try it. For example: I assume you heard of the bill they’re pushing in Kansas – life begins at fertilization. That would ban “morning after” pills and maybe birth control in general, depending on how the halfwits interpret it.

  31. Robert

    Neftali, do you know if there is more detail available on those categories of annual deaths you provided? I’m specifically looking for location, type of criminal charge (murder, suicide, manslaughter) race of the victim, race of the perpetrator, circumstances, basically everything that the police report would provide. What was your source. I’d look to compile further information on those categories you noted (in my spare time). I’ve read that suicide by handgun makes up much of the death rates in that category. I think it would be interesting to see the breakdown. Thanks in advance.

  32. Neftali

    Robert – Start by looking at the link I provided to the Independent Journal Review. (a very good site). They show where they got there sources for each category. For example, on the first slide they provide the number of murders by knife. (which is 3 times higher than murders by assault rifles, but for some reason liberals want to ban assault rifles but not knives.) Anyway, they got their data from the FBI. A quick google search provides this informative link:

    http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2011/crime-in-the-u.s.-2011/tables/table-20

    Unfortunately, I don’t think it goes into the detail you are looking for. You may have to call the feds directly for such information. Its public data, they may have it readily available.

  33. Robert

    Fascinating statistics from the FBI link

    Murder Victims by Race, Sex and Age
    http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2011/crime-in-the-u.s.-2011
    /tables/expanded-homicide-data-table-2

  34. Robert

    This was one of the links I was trying to post. Apparently it doesn’t provide link services to the various tables.. or at least I couldn’t get the ones I selected to post. What I would like to see further broke out is how this data reflects to percentages of the population based on the categories.

    http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2011/crime-in-the-u.s.-2011/offenses-known-to-law-enforcement/expanded/expanded-homicide-data

    Pat the comment that I have waiting for moderation because of more than one link can be deleted. This one provides lots of relevant info (assuming the link provides the data as I viewed it).

  35. Brian Opsahl

    What I dont understand is before the election most of the Republican posters on this blog kept saying let the election decide…and now it’s back to the same old BS from before that electio as if it never happened. This I know for sure is that if the other guy had won that’s all we would be hearing about. Do what the American peolpe have asked for. for once put the special interest asside give them back the money you took and do the will of the peolpe.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

CAPTCHA Image

*

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>