PDA

View Full Version : Rahm Emmanuel: If its between that Terrorist list and the NRA...


moga
May 19, 2009, 01:50 PM
VIDEO (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uJBZZKlvrP4). Filmed 5/2007. The Brady's have had tacit support from Emmanuel for their backdoor run on the Amendment II for years. And although he didn't say Obama's name specifically, he seems to be speaking in certain terms about what federal policies will come into their own under the right democratic president. He also prominently uses the slogan that would eventually become the cornerstone of Obama's campaign.

If this ever becomes policy, one only has to be accused of being a sympathizer to be stripped of your right to bear arms. The prospect is dizzying. And what other rights will people be cursorily stripped of in the future should that door be cracked by this policy? My confidence in the American people to resist gun control measures has been buoyed by the data that shows the number of guns that have been purchased since Nov 08. Yet I am not at all relaxed enough to think that we're out of the woods. All that it will take is one catalyzing event to cause the full court press on gun rights. All the key pieces are in place and the chess board is setup for a checkmate. The only thing that stands in the way are the people. Hopefully we'll be united in our efforts to combat the this unprecedented threat by the current administration to resist the trampling of our rights.

I'm curious. Has any president since Roosevelt ever openly championed the position of the NRA? What do you all think the reaction would be if such a thing as this video were ever made public showing a GOP CinC chief of staff advocating for the NRA? I think corporate media would turn it into an apocalyptic event, for sure.

hogdogs
May 19, 2009, 02:30 PM
From the first moment I heard of this, I thought of that day when the Hitler folks decided they needed to prevent certain miscreants from owning guns.
So how long will it be before you take a quiz to verify your political alliance to a certain group before you are in the minority of gun owners. Then with that out of the way it will be proven that you will never "need" a gun as hunting will be banned for all but a few high ranking folks and your food will be bought by foodstamps as part of your government signed check (cheque)!:mad:
Brent

cjw3cma
May 19, 2009, 03:09 PM
While I am a firm supporter of the 2nd Amendment and do believe that groups like the Brady Camp are out to literally take our guns away, I do not abide by the fear tactics carried out by those who feel like I do but use the "Cheney" approach to realization (get them scared to death and then move on their rights - my thoughts only).

I personally would like to see more affirmative positive action regarding our Constitutional rights than the fear tactics that seem to be so prevalent in the Right Wing media and specially on these forums. We have the right to bear arms so instead of subjecting fear into the minds of those who are as concerned as many of us are, push the facts and voice these facts - for a positive attitude (as we are in the right) seems to me to go further than propagating fear of losing a right that I truly believe will never be taken away unless our form of government is changed. If that ever happens I know I will go down hard.

Political figures will say whatever they think their audience wants to hear at the time and later when confronted by their prior statements will "wiggle" around to avoiding answering and pushing what they want you to hear today.

pnac
May 19, 2009, 04:16 PM
Rep Caroline McCarthy introduced HR 2401 on 5/13/09 the "No Fly, No Buy Act".
Bill was referred to committee and it probably will go nowhere, but who knows.

http://www.opencongress.org/bill/111-h2401/show

moga
May 19, 2009, 05:00 PM
I personally would like to see more affirmative positive action regarding our Constitutional rights than the fear tactics that seem to be so prevalent in the Right Wing media and specially on these forums. We have the right to bear arms so instead of subjecting fear into the minds of those who are as concerned as many of us are, push the facts and voice these facts - for a positive attitude (as we are in the right) seems to me to go further than propagating fear of losing a right that I truly believe will never be taken away unless our form of government is changed. If that ever happens I know I will go down hard.

I don't think your comments were pointed at anyone in general but I would like to reply to your thoughts on the matter.

GOP has certainly used fear tactics in the past to push for their agenda. 9/11 -- Patriot Act, WMD -- WOT, 9/11 -- Gitmo/indefinite detention. But the threat to Amendment II is not cut of the same cloth. The people that are key players in the Obama White House have established themselves as anti gunners long before joining the administration in their respective positions. I will assume that there need not be any reason to name them or to provide anecdotal accounts to support this position.

You've said that for a positive attitude that the facts should be promoted. The fact is that many gun owners are and have been ambivalent about the vigilance that is required to keep those rights untarnished. For decades. A case in point is why there are eighty million gun owners in this country but only four million of them are members of the NRA. If there was ever a time for pro gun people to wake up and take a stand against the avalanche of gun control initiatives that are coming our way, it is NOW. Which explains why people that frequent gun boards are always sharing the latest developments on this front. It isn't fear mongering. It's a urgent wake up call. It can happen in America, especially given the apathy and hubris that some people have on the subject. We need look no further than to our friends across the Atlantic for proof. They didn't think it could happen to them either. Click on the link in my sig line for the words spoken from their mouth.

You know, we've always been right but morality and legality don't always walk hand in hand, especially on the subject of Amendment II. Look at DC v Heller. The vote was 5-4, five to four! Yet the state was dead wrong and Dick Heller was right to take up the fight. We just barely squeaked that one out and in the end, we may have more troubles for our efforts. What about the activist federal judge out of...wait for it....D.C. that overturned the Interior Departments decision to allow firearm carry by licensed individuals. Once again, it was the right decision by DOI and the right policy direction but little did that matter. The anti gunners couldn't wait for BHO to take office so that it could be overturned. Now we have the Chief of Staff of the President of the United States on record advocating for a new, permanent AWB and the creation of a policy that could strip citizens of their rights for no more than the accusation of being a terrorist sympathizer. This is not a shock but is still a grave concern. We have gone far beyond the calls of Sarah Brady et al in Rahm Emmanuel. This is a powerful and influential man. If that isn't bad enough, it seems that he is a long time horse in the stable of the Brady Campaign people. Deadly combination.

Our gun rights have always been in the aim of this or that group but never like this. They now have a dream team of actors within the Federal government that share their vision and motivation to severely curtail the rights of the people of the United States to bear arms under the banner of reasonable restrictions. We need be wary.

Al Norris
May 19, 2009, 06:59 PM
Partisan politics.

Closed.