Obama openly mocks the 2A in inaugural speech

[netsecurity]

It started off with Obama praising our great Constitution, which I thought was very odd coming from a liberal. He even went so far as to condemn "mob rule", which is what the Democratic party espouses. So I knew it was double speak, and a big "But..." was coming. And it did. I paraphrase, but he said something to this effect:

"The times have changed and so must we adapt... We did not win WW2 with muskets and militias."

I knew it was coming. It was indirect, but not subtle. Liberals claim the best of both worlds, that they can believe in and swear by the Constitution and yet not be bound by it.

EDIT- Actual quote:

BUT we have always understood that when times change, so must we; that fidelity to our founding principles requires new responses to new challenges; that preserving our individual freedoms ultimately requires collective action. For the American people can no more meet the demands of today's world by acting alone than American soldiers could have met the forces of fascism or communism with muskets and militias.

 

[cobber]

It started off with Obama praising our great Constitution, which I thought was very odd coming from a liberal. He even went so far as to condemn "mob rule", which is what the Democratic party espouses. So I knew it was double speak, and a big "But..." was coming. And it did. I paraphrase, but he said something to this effect:

"The times have changed and so must we adapt... We did not win WW2 with muskets and militias."

I knew it was coming. It was indirect, but not subtle.

I think what he was saying was the 2d A wasn't only about muskets, and that citizens SHOULD have the right to bear military small arms.

Or maybe not...

 

[printcraft]

........
Or maybe not...

 

[netsecurity]

I think what he was saying was the 2d A wasn't only about muskets, and that citizens SHOULD have the right to bear military small arms.

Or maybe not...

I wish!

He was clearly inferring that the 2A was for muskets and militias, and is outdated, which is the liberal argument used in the SCOTUS during the Heller case, and pretty much everywhere else. It is the official Democrat position, and if you disagree with that then i'd argue that you wouldn't be considered a true Democrat (at least not allowed to run for office as a D).

 

[Kutnupe14]

I wish!

He was clearly inferring that the 2A was for muskets and militias, and is outdated, which is the liberal argument used in the SCOTUS during the Heller case, and pretty much everywhere else. It is the official Democrat position, and if you disagree with that then i'd argue that you wouldn't be considered a true Democrat (at least not allowed to run for office as a D).

Wha.... What?

 

[Liberty1911]

I wish!

He was clearly inferring that the 2A was for muskets and militias, and is outdated, which is the liberal argument used in the SCOTUS during the Heller case, and pretty much everywhere else. It is the official Democrat position, and if you disagree with that then i'd argue that you wouldn't be considered a true Democrat (at least not allowed to run for office as a D).

Yeah, and what's scary about Heller was that we were just a Roberts-changed-his-mind-hair-breadths away from the government openly confiscating arms.

 

[netsecurity]

Wha.... What?

Do you think that is funny? Have you read the Heller vs. DC dissent? Do you know how many Democrats have used false interpretations like this to subvert the Constitution?

 

[Kutnupe14]

Do you think that is funny? Have you read the Heller vs. DC dissent? Do you know how many Democrats have used false interpretations like this to subvert the Constitution?

Ok, I fully agree Obama wants to ban guns, but geez, that part you picked is a pretty huge stretch on literary interpretation.

 

[Expat]

He wants to ban our guns... period.

Yet his apologists insisted before the election that he was the most gun friendly president we had ever had... weird.

 

[IndyDave1776]

He wants to ban our guns... period.

Yet his apologists insisted before the election that he was the most gun friendly president we had ever had... weird.

They are still stuck in 2008 when Obama succeeded at presenting himself as a blank canvas on which one could paint whatever he wished to see. These people failed to receive the memo that Obama does in fact have a record, none of it good.

 

[netsecurity]

Here is the actual quote I was referring to BTW:

BUT we have always understood that when times change, so must we; that fidelity to our founding principles requires new responses to new challenges; that preserving our individual freedoms ultimately requires collective action. For the American people can no more meet the demands of today's world by acting alone than American soldiers could have met the forces of fascism or communism with muskets and militias.

 

[Sylvain]

Actually during WW2 many resistance movements in Europe were militias as they were not part of the regular military, and many of them used bolt action rifles (who were like muskets compared to the modern machine guns the german military was using).

 

[Kutnupe14]

He wants to ban our guns... period.

Yet his apologists insisted before the election that he was the most gun friendly president we had ever had... weird.

I actually think Obama is the greatest firearm president of all time.

Though that may not be by his choosing.

 

[netsecurity]

Make no mistake, this comment was one of the first after his false "I believe in the Constitutional Republic" BS, showing his priority is still gun control. Of course this is during the context of his proposed AWB and magazine ban.

How a sitting president can belittle the Constitution immediately after swearing to protect it boggles the mind.

 

[femurphy77]

I have a 35' flagpole laying in my backyard because I didn't have time to get the base done before crapola weather set in but be assured it would have been at half staff yesterday and today.

 

[cobber]

BUT we have always understood that when times change, so must we; that fidelity to our founding principles requires new responses to new challenges; that preserving our individual freedoms ultimately requires collective action. For the American people can no more meet the demands of today's world by acting alone than American soldiers could have met the forces of fascism or communism with muskets and militias.

I took that to mean we shouldn't individually go off to do battle with Al Qaeda on our own, with mere semi-auto weapons.

 

[GodFearinGunTotin]

BUT we have always understood that when times change, so must we; that fidelity to our founding principles requires new responses to new challenges; that preserving our individual freedoms ultimately requires collective action. For the American people can no more meet the demands of today's world by acting alone than American soldiers could have met the forces of fascism or communism with muskets and militias.

Sounds like he's going to propose amending the 2A...

What he fails to understand (or at least try his damnedest to steer the debate) is that the 2A is there to protect against enemies: foreign and domestic.

 

[jmiller676]

I took that to mean we shouldn't individually go off to do battle with Al Qaeda on our own, with mere semi-auto weapons.

Therefore, the military will take care of AQ and we as citizens don't need those weapons.

 

[cobber]

Therefore, the military will take care of AQ and we as citizens don't need those weapons.

Or that if we're planning to go off to fight Al Qaeda individually or severally he will provide a suitable modern weapon.


I wish the man would just get to the point once and for all, rather than speaking in code. Even Piers Morgan can form a thought (albeit not a rational one) without a teleprompter!

 

[jmiller676]

Or that if we're planning to go off fight Al Qaeda individually or severally he will provide a suitable modern weapon.


I wish the man would just get to the point once and for all, rather than speaking in code. Even Piers Morgan can form a thought (albeit not a rational one) without a teleprompter!

After everything the man has done, I will not give him the benefit of the doubt.