Skip to comments.Krauthammer: The Problem For Democrats Is The Gun Lobby Is The Majority Of Americans
Posted on 07/24/2012 11:53:48 AM PDT by marktwain
CHARLES KRAUTHAMMER: The problem for [Joe] Lieberman is the gun lobby is the majority of the American people. It's not a lobby that is stopping all of this. The reason that the lobby is strong is because it represents overwhelming opinion in the United States. How do we know that? The president of the United States, who had this tremendous opening if he wanted to push the use of guns after a tragedy of this magnitude could easily have done it and he has assiduously stayed away because he knows it's a losing political proposition.
Liberals in the country want gun control, Democrats don't. They normally overlap, but not on this. Democrats will not go near it because of the experience as we heard earlier about 1994, and they don't want to repeat that again. We're at the height of an election and they won't go near it. You're going to have discussion on talk shows and none in Congress and nothing will happen in terms of legislation.
(Excerpt) Read more at realclearpolitics.com ...
Video at the link.
You are right, but I might add that our whole elite is on a sinking boat with holes in every quarter.
The headline is hard to understand at first because “A is B is C” is not a standard sentence structure. But inserting “that” after the first “is” fixes it.
Even on “Democratic Underground”, the majority seems to support the Second Amendment.
The problem with Democrats is that they long ago tossed out the constitution or - worse - eliminated all meaning by coming to refer to it as a “living document.”
It is NOT a “living document” - it means just exactly what it says, and if they want to eliminate private ownership of firearms then they can observe the prescribed process and rescind the Second Amendment; otherwise, they can go pound sand.
‘Even on Democratic Underground, the majority seems to support the Second Amendment.’
Only those here who kiss up to the UK want gun control here in the US.
If FUBO is re-elected, then all bets are off. BLOAT!
Yes, and it’s the majority of Americans whose hackles are raised by “you didn’t build that”. Even though the majority of Americans are not business owners, there are plenty that are, and there are plenty of people who are thankful for their employment in this environment and know very, very well that their livelihoods are dependent upon WITH MORE MONEY THAN THEY HAVE hiring them. I believe 0bama has coined his own 0bumpersticker of defeat with that phrase.
A lib freind was going on about how we need more gun control after the Aurora Colorado massacre. So I asked him how come Obama doesn’t campaign on this massacre and campaign for gun control? Answer is obvious, Obama will lose the election if he tries
I thought Obama wanted to take our guns away?
I wonder if Krauthammer still feels this way-
“Ultimately, a civilized society must disarm its citizenry if it is to have a modicum of domestic tranquility of the kind enjoyed by sister democracies such as Canada and Britain. Given the frontier history and individualist ideology of the United States, however, this will not come easily. It certainly cannot be done radically. It will probably take one, maybe two generations. It might be 50 years before the United States gets to where Britain is today. Passing a law like the assault weapons ban is a symbolic - purely symbolic - move in that direction. Its only real justification is not to reduce crime but to desensitize the public to the regulation of weapons in preparation for their ultimate confiscation.” - Charles Krauthammer (from: ‘Disarm the Citizenry’, The Washington Post, Friday, April 5, 1996, page A19) Do you really need to know anything else about Krauthammer?
posted on Saturday, April 23, 2011 10:11:41 PM by Lancey Howard
His position has evolved, right?
His latest comments are not his position on gun control, they are his analysis of political reality.
I’m sure many well-meaning ahem conservatives believe less guns will equal less violent deaths. I don’t believe it..in fact, if more women were armed, there’d be less of them murdered. And if one person had stood up and started firing back at Holmes, I’ll bet that piece of filth would have messed his pants trying to get away.
I'll share a little secret with you- if wierdos even slightly suspect that a woman might be armed, they will depart very quickly. My wife has put the fear of S&W into more than one just by putting her right hand in her purse. Didn't have to show anything.
I believe that there are a few actual conversions out there- David Horowitz for one, and I think Norm Podhoretz for another. I haven’t decided about Krauthammer.
The two men that I mentioned in post 19 (Horowitz and Podhoretz) have earned my respect, and they are clear on their loyalties. I have respect for Krauthammer’s intelligence, but he is not exactly forthcoming about his loyalties, so I have to judge him by his words of 1996 (on gun confiscation, in my original post).
Oh, believe me he does. He just doesn't want to suffer the consequences which will result from an attempt to do so.
Your right Charles and Thats why he had to do Fast and Furious”Under The Radar”, as He Told Sarah Brady when she asked him In the White House what he was doing about Gun Control. He could Not do it in Public for exactly that reason! Had to create a Chaos senario which Fast and Furious was.
I would ask him why he wants "gun control" administered by the same government that illegally supplied military grade weapons to Mexican drug cartels, killing over 200 people.
Krauthammer: an intellectual stopped clock gets it right twice a day, but years too late.
“I thought Obama wanted to take our guns away?”
You’re thinking he doesn’t?
The Kraut man has been off my Christmas list for awhile now.
No matter what he says to the contrary, you can bet your ass he would love nothing better than to ban all guns. PERIOD!
The halfrican is a MARXIST through and through, hell bent on as much control as he thinks he can get.
I should do that. I'm sure he not aware of its dimensions. Just today I read a July 7th article about 40 or so fast and furious guns being seized in Arizona drug raid. Cannot find it now
I almost envy you the pleasure, but you should probably wear a spit shield for all the spluttering and wailing you'll get. You're right to have the documentation in hand when you do.
Gun control is the admission by the left that human life is worthless. As long as their agenda moves ahead, any number of lives, rights etc are fine to lose. 1+1=2. The numbers are there to back it up. More guns = fewer innocent deaths... and so that would take away a talking point. In fact, the left has reduced innocent life itself to a talking point.
That is the point that name conservatives with mics and podiums need to get out and harp on. That they will not is their own admission in complicity. Bottom line, they know this and still refuse to say it out of PC fear. Period.
Please allow me to re-phrase that for you:
"and if they want to eliminate the prohibition on Congress infringing the right of the people to keep and bear arms then they can observe the prescribed process and rescind the Second Amendment"
Repealing the Second Amendment will not in any way eliminate the unalienable right of the people to defend themselves, their families, and their communities. What such a repeal WOULD do is trigger a second U.S. Civil War.
Repealing the Second Amendment would no more eliminate the right to keep and bear arms than repealing the Thirteenth Amendment would re-instate the evil of slavery.
Excellent clarification and good point.
Besides, the Sixteenth Amendment reinstated slavery already.
Thankfully, I really haven’t seen any evidence that he does.
Aurora is just preparing the battlefield, so to speak. The Dems intend to push thru the UN Small Arms Treaty during the lame duck session, forcing registration and confiscation.