"Michelle Obama's warning to gun owners"

[LAGC]

At a recent fundraiser for President Obama’s re-election campaign in Providence, Rhode Island, the first lady told her audience:

“We stand at a fundamental crossroads for our country. You’re here because you know that in just 13 months, we’re going to make a choice that will impact our lives for decades to come … let’s not forget what it meant when my husband appointed those two brilliant Supreme Court justices … let’s not forget the impact that their decisions will have on our lives for decades to come.”

This was music to the ears of the small, affluent crowd of admirers who cheered and applauded. But to gun owners, Michelle Obama’s remarks should sound like a warning bell, alerting us to the danger ahead should Barack Obama win re-election and get the opportunity to alter the current make-up of the Supreme Court.
..
..
NRA members, gun owners and all freedom-loving Americans should heed Michelle Obama’s warning. We must spend the next 13 months working to make sure her husband doesn’t get four more years to destroy American freedom for generations to come.

--Chris W. Cox is the Executive Director of the National Rifle Association Institute for Legislative Action (NRA-ILA) and serves as the organization’s chief lobbyist.

http://dailycaller.com/2011/10/11/michelle-obamas-warning-to-gun-owners/

Hmm... I see the NRA-ILA is at it again with their fearmongering doomsday bullshit. What's funny is, both of the leading Republican primary contenders (Romney and Cain) aren't exactly strong Second Amendment advocates (Romney supporting the AWB, and Cain saying gun control should be left "up to the states"), so it will be interesting to see what kinds of mental gymnastics the NRA-ILA jumps through if either of those two candidates win the primary. I'm not so sure "anyone but Obama" is going to fly with many gun-owners, could see a bunch of defections to the Libertarian Party come November 2012.

[Name removed]

1. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Kennah]

2. I agree that he's done nothing, and in fact has given some wins.

However, the worry is that in a second term, with nothing to lose on the issue, he might try to do something.

Congress took a beating in 1994 for the AWB, but two years later the gun issue didn't even touch Clinton and he won re-election with an even larger margin than in 1992--albeit against Bob Dole who ran on the "I'm not Bill Clinton" platform.

[Skittles]

3. he ain't gonna do SHIT

[SteveM]

6. If Obama wins re-election, 2A folks should make their views known...

about the constitutionality of the Second, and encourage Obama not to appoint a gun-controller/banner. This must be done by pro-2A folks within the Democratic Party; in fact, the day after his re-election, I would favor formation of a task force to see to it that strong pro-2A views are made clear to the President before he appoints a justice(s).

It's the Constitution and ALL of its guaranteed rights that must be protected.

[TheCowsCameHome]

13. As if they haven't already......

Do you think he isn't aware of the 2A?

[TheCowsCameHome]

4. More paranoia, but Cox /NRA sure knows how to sell it.

Fucking jerks.

[spin]

7. The same goes for organizations such as the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence ...

who have consistently claimed that loosening gun laws to allow "shall issue" concealed carry would result into a return to the Wild West with shootouts at every intersection and on Main Street at high noon.

Both sides of the gun control issue peddle bullshit in order to get contributions. Unfortunately it makes any rational discussion of the issue almost impossible.

[Katya Mullethov]

8. Are they still around ?

I was certain we would be hearing a great deal of squawking about the diverted 50 caliber terror rifles and especially that 50 cal terror BELT FUCKING FED . But no . Not a word . So , I assumed they were out of business. Was I mistaken ?

[spin]

10. Yup. They are still there...

http://www.bradycampaign.org/

http://www.vpc.org/ccwkillers.htm

[TheCowsCameHome]

12. Evidently.

They still get the gunnies all stirred up.

[Katya Mullethov]

14. Any theories on their conspicuous absence ?

[TheCowsCameHome]

15. Nope. Couldn't care less.

[Euromutt]

5. That's the problem with being focused on one issue

As a consequence, one tends to interpret everything within the frame of reference of that one issue. Yes, one may be skeptical with regard to Sotomayor and Kagan's statements to the Senate regarding their deference to judicial precedence concerning the Second Amendment, but the RKBA is not the be-all and end-all of American politics. If nothing else, there are nine other amendments in the Bill of Rights and I for one don't want any (let alone any more) Supreme Court justices who are happy enough to sign away our First, Fourth and Fifth Amendment rights as long as they pay lip service to the Second.

I may be an NRA member, but I'm also an ACLU member and for me, the litmus test of a political candidate (or judicial appointee) is his or her position on abortion rights. I'll vote for the pro-choice candidate over the pro-gun candidate any and every day, if the two are (unfortunately) mutually exclusive.

ETA the point I meant to make: we don't know that the First Lady was specifically referring to Sotomayor and Kagan's positions on the RKBA. But if you're the chairman of the political lobbying wing of a gun rights organization, it follows that you'd only perceive that aspect, even if it wasn't necessarily what the First Lady was referring to.

[rl6214]

9. I saw this posted on a gun forum I frequent about a week ago

I didn't pay it any attention then either.

[SteveM]

11. Over-the-top NRA-ILA crap -- they are indeed ILLIN' nt

[aikoaiko]

16. This is why I'm a paid up member of the NRA -- so that I can vote in more reasonable board members

and stop the hyperbole.

[Tuesday Afternoon]

17. good for you. keep up the good fight for us.

I just don't have the stomach for that particular theater.

[Callisto32]

18. This is just the opposite of the original Obama effect.

When he was running, it seems like a lot of dems saw exactly what they wanted to see in him. Now that he is prez. the Repubs do the same thing. Only difference is where Dems saw a guy with compassion for medical marijuana and a peace bent that doesn't actually exist; Repubs see a gunbanner that doesn't seem to actually exist.


Edit: Used a superlative that was presumptuous, it has been removed.