nChrist
|
 |
« on: February 21, 2018, 05:34:51 PM » |
|
________________________________________ The Patriot Post - Alexander's Column 2-21-2018 From The Federalist Patriot Free Email Subscription ________________________________________
The Patriot Post® · Democrat Common Sense — A Non-Sequitur By Mark Alexander · Feb. 21, 2018 · https://patriotpost.us/alexander/54302-democrat-common-sense-a-non-sequitur
“The ultimate authority … resides in the people alone. … The advantage of being armed, which the Americans possess over the people of almost every other nation … forms a barrier against the enterprises of ambition, more insurmountable than any…” —James Madison (1788.)
There’s a lot of Democrat chatter this week about “common-sense gun control,” their ubiquitous terminology for undermining what our Founders understood1 to be the First Civil Right2 of all people.
“To Keep and Bear Arms” is the unalienable right3 enumerated in the Second Amendment4 to our Constitution. It is thus second only to the First, but make no mistake: It guarantees the First and all others.
Frankly, whenever the words “common sense” come out of a Democrat’s pie hole, caveat emptor — all critical thinkers should vigorously challenge with prejudicial skepticism whatever follows thereafter.
In the wake of the Parkland, Florida, high school murders by a sociopathic assailant using a firearm5, we cannot overlook the abject failure of federal, state and local agencies to intervene despite having been warned of the risk posed by this individual6.
But it’s the response from Donald Trump7 versus that from Barack Obama8 which demonstrates the great divide between Republicans and Democrats9 on the causation for such violent acts.
Republicans, rightly and consistently, call attention to the cultural factors that result in violence10 — the statist policies that have propagated that culture, and the fact that young minds are inculcated with a saturation of media violence. On the other hand, Democrats predictably focus on the inanimate objects used to commit violence (in this case a semi-automatic rifle), the latter being a much easier target, as well as a tactic within a larger leftist objective — constriction of the Second Amendment and, ultimately, gun confiscation.
When I contemplate the words “common sense,” it first invokes the notion of an understanding of something which is universally shared.
Second, I think of the 1776 pamphlet, “Common Sense11,” published by Thomas Paine, which framed the cause and call for undertaking the fatigues necessary to defend American Liberty12 thusly: “The cause of America is in a great measure the cause of all mankind.”
Clearly, the Democrat Party13 long ago abandoned Paine’s understanding of “common sense” as it related then and now to supporting and sustaining Liberty for this and future generations. That understanding is in direct conflict with the statist policies they advocate.
So, to consider what should be inferred from their use of “common sense” in regard to the Second Amendment, here are a few examples from the past week.
House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-CA): “Congress has a moral responsibility to take common sense action to prevent the daily tragedy of gun violence in communities across America.” (In other words, anyone who doesn’t comply with the Democrats’ political agenda is immoral.)
New York Governor Andrew Cuomo: “The president should follow our lead and advance common sense gun safety legislation.” (Make no mistake, by “gun safety” Cuomo means “gun confiscation.”)
Speaking for leftist celebrity hypocrites, Jimmy Kimmel14: “This is the perfect example of common sense. … This is a mental illness issue, because if you don’t think we need to do something about it, you are mentally ill.” (That’s right, forget the mentally ill perpetrator. If you don’t agree with Kimmel, you’re mentally ill.)
Of course, leftist editorial pages and advocacy groups across the nation, funded by the billionaire archenemies of Liberty who support them15, are insisting on “common sense” gun control measures.
The socialist Daily Kos: “Are we ever going to have common sense gun laws?”
MoveOn.org: “Let’s talk common sense. The National Rifle Association [is] one of the main reasons we remain unable to pass common sense gun laws.”
Most notably, within hours of the latest tragedy in Florida, the two most prominent Democrats in the nation were leading the “common sense” bandwagon, including the Orwellian BIG lie16 that “most Americans agree” with them.
Hillary Clinton17: “The majority of Americans support common sense gun reform.” (Fortunately the majority of Electoral College votes did not support Clinton.)
Barack Obama8: “Caring for our kids is our first job, and until we can honestly say that we’re doing enough to keep them safe from harm, including long overdue, commonsense gun safety laws that most Americans want, then we have to change.” (That’s right, according to Obama, if you’re a defender of Liberty and the Second Amendment, you don’t “care for our kids,” and when he says “gun safety laws” he means “gun confiscation.”)
(Keep in mind, all of these politicos have taxpayer-funded armed security with them 24/7, and they reside in high-security, walled domiciles.)
So, what is it that Clinton and Obama, and their legions of socialist useful idiots18, mean when they refer to “common sense” gun control measures?
Both Clinton and Obama have advocated for the Australian gun confiscation model, and implementation of that model in the future would be the Democrats’ greatest legislative prize.
Obama declared in 201419: “The one area where I have been most frustrated … is the fact that the United States of America is the one advanced nation on earth in which we do not have sufficient common sense gun safety laws. … A couple decades ago, Australia … basically imposed very severe, tough gun laws. … This is something we should politicize. … I would ask the American people to think about how they can get our government to change [our gun] laws.”
During her 2016 campaign, Clinton likewise declared20: “The Australian government … offered a good price for buying hundreds of thousands of guns and then they basically clamped down on guns going forward. … By offering to buy back those guns, they were able to curtail the supply. … Several communities have done gun buy-back programs, but I think it would be worth doing on the national level.”
Now, to be clear, when Obama says “imposed very severe, tough gun laws,” he’s referring to gun confiscation.
And when Clinton says “offering to buy back those guns,” she’s referring to gun confiscation, which she then says “would be worth doing on the national level.”
As a resource for dealing with gun-grabbing leftists, earlier this week I posted a detailed transcript of a debate with a suburban lefty21 on the Australian gun confiscation issue22 — and much more regarding the Second Amendment.
|