Posted on 04/06/2013 11:47:52 AM PDT by EXCH54FE
Syndicated columnist Charles Krauthammer brought momentarily silence, and not the kind that is out of respect, to a Fox News panel on “Special Report” after National Review columnist Jonah Goldberg said that Obama will not get a vote on the majority of new gun control legislation that he wants. “All he wants now is the money,” Krauthammer responded.
Several seconds of silence followed Krauthammer’s, “all he wants now is the money” comment. It was as if everyone at the table had been caught off guard, including host Chris Wallace.
Wallace finally recovered stating, “You don’t really mean that.”
“He’s lost on gun control,” Krauthammer responded.
When opposed by stating that he would get expanded background checks, Krauthammer indicated that it is “not going to make any difference.” He also went on to state that background checks were the “last item standing, the smallest item standing.” He said it’s the only one that Obama could possibly get, which I point out would be a huge blow to gun owners and the Second Amendment. Remember, Gun Owners of America and the National Rifle Association openly oppose expansion of background checks. However, as I wrote about here, West Virginia Democrat Joe Manchin and the NRA have been engaged in private talks on a proposal to broaden background checks on purchasers of firearms.
(Excerpt) Read more at freedomoutpost.com ...
Whenever I think of Obama’s voters and their ability to understand the issues, I think of the woman in the video who got her Obama phone. Not till the end of time will people like her ever understand, or even make the effort. Obama phone, food stamps, EBT cards. That is their world.
Figures... cash - the root of all evil.
I don’t understand this at all- Obama has always been in everything for the money.
What is the surprise?
the irony is that Krauthammer agrees with Obama on guns and supports all the measures he does, maybe even more. Krauthammer was written in favor of confiscation and disarmament, I don’t think Obama has ever gone that far.
...after National Review columnist Jonah Goldberg said that Obama will not get a vote on the majority of new gun control legislation that he wants. “All he wants now is the money,” Krauthammer responded... Wallace finally recovered stating, “You don’t really mean that.” "He’s lost on gun control,” Krauthammer responded.When opposed by stating that he would get expanded background checks, Krauthammer indicated that it is "not going to make any difference."He won't even get that.
The surprise is they weren’t prepared for his response.
Agreed. For starters, take a look at the Second Amendment.
It is NOT the statement of a Right:
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State...
That is a Constitutional mandate for an armed citizenry, a requirement, a duty, not a right.
Obamagoober hisse'f wouldn't qualify, nor would Biden, nor any of the various screwballs, losers, criminals and wierdos he's dragged into government.
3/4 the Democrat officeholders in the country wouldn't qualify.
We need an amendment on whatever Obamagoober's running dog lackeys have barfed up so that it applies to those who CONTROL publicly owned weaponry!
I didn’t watch this but assuming Krauthammer meant Obama knows it is a lost agenda but wants to collect money from his gun grabbing nazi supporters. So Obama stiffs taxpayers and flies around saying stuff Soros types want to hear for mega donations. Then if all that money works and they take the house, after 2014 there will be total annihilation of the 2nd amendment by Obama and dems.
Krauthammer is a very dangerous man in the eyes of proles like Wallace. He’s been known to utter the same inanities as Wallace, but he often tells it like it is and that scares the crap outta the “go along to get along” crowd.
When do you suppose we will we hear of his “planned retirement”?
Who are you and why are you writing such illiterate gibberish?
I’m with you. Somebody explain to me what was stunning.
My guess is that he was stating the obvious, the elephant in the room that nobody thought anyone would actually point to.
Is that correct?
Obummer wants time killers. He's a ghetto thug/con man who stumbled onto the ultimate con. He wakes up between nine and ten and spends, on average, of three to four hours a day in the office.
He's stupid. He knows nothing about anything, but has discovered he can make people think he's involved by hammering on guns. Any fool, and a lot of fools, can do that.
He's just trying to kill time until retirement in a few years.
He’s on the Breitbart retirement track, could be any second...
THE PROBLEM WITH EXPANDING BACKGTROUND CHECKS IS THAT THAT THEY WILL LEAD TO A NATIONAL REGISTRY, WHICH WILL FACILITATE GUN SEIZURE WHEN A DEMOCTAT PRESIDENT AND CONGRESS MOVE TO DISARM US AND A POLITICIZED SUPREME COURT DECIDES THE SECOND AMENDMENT NO LONGER APPLIES.
The post wasn’t “perfect” in terms of spelling and grammar, but he is on our side. I understood what his point was. I would ask that you not be so harsh.
Don’t doubt the Krauth! He has remote viewing capabilities. And as a previous freeper said, Obama learned from the race pimps who want to keep things on a simmer or a boil. They don’t want solutions. Their soltions all fail when they get put into practice.
Obama is the same. He pimps the “issues” such as amnesty and gun control to bring in donations to his permanent campaign organization. The people under him share in the spoils, useless eaters who never done any real work.
So now every sale requires a background check. I see nothing that requires a background check for a one-time payment, thousand year lease. Maybe I need to read it more closely.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.