Posts Tagged ‘children’

Obama to Use Kids in His Plea for Gun Control

Posted by Troy on 15th January 2013 in Current Events, Political

From the mouth of babes.

Obama is going to use kids that wrote him letters regarding gun violence as a backdrop for his push for gun control.  Gee, I wonder if these kids were put up to this by their parents.  Just a hunch there, but from the mouth of babes, as they say.

Actually, no.  How about this: lets let children be children, and we adults will talk about stuff and come up with solutions.  How does that sound?  Obama is trying to manipulate people to get his way.  These kids are just a prop, and it is disgusting to see him use children this way.  I still maintain that the Left’s first thought after Newtown was, “Alright!  Now we can get gun control…finally!  Oh…yeah, and those poor kids, you know…”

The thought that banning assault rifles or large clips will stop this is asinine.  If the shooter couldn’t get an AR-15, he would have used a shotgun, or two pistols, or a .22 rifle (also comes with large capacity magazines), order large magazines online from overseas, or any other number of solutions.  This is why the end result of all gun control must be the banning (including confiscation) of all guns (except for possibly single shot muzzle loaders or something) because to do otherwise is absolutely meaningless.

Long Live the Constitution!

More Thoughts on Dream Act Lite

Posted by Troy on 19th June 2012 in Current Events, Political

I originally said that Executive nullification is a viable way to get around a “bad law.”  That is to say, if there is a bad law on the books, the President can choose not to enforce it.  Conservatives may rail about it, but Romney is talking about doing the same thing by offering waivers to all 50 states on the Health Care Act.  However, what Obama is doing is slightly different.  What he is advocating is exempting specific groups of people (young illegals).  This is different.  Imagine if Obama declared that he would not enforce insider trading laws against middle-aged white men?  let me explain it this way.  Sickened by the way cocaine convictions are treated differently between blacks and whites, Obama declares that he is not going to enforce the drug laws.  Well, that’ll probably cost him his job, but you know what would be infinitely worse?  If he were to say that he wasn’t going to enforce drug laws only when they are committed by blacks.  Everyone would call foul and should call foul.  The same is being applied here.

Another problem I have against this law (past reasons I’ve already pointed out) is that it is benefiting the citizens of other countries at the detriment of Americans.  What the hell is that?!

There’s another problem with this issue.  Okay, so we’re not going to enforce these laws against children that were brought over with their parents.  So, if we deport the parents, are we going to separate them from their families then?

That and these are UNDOCUMENTED people.  So, how the hell do we know when and how they came over here?  What is to stop a 23 year old Mexican citizen from hopping the boarder and saying, “Yeah, my parents brought me over here when I was eight?”  Are we doing to do exhaustive investigations on all 800,000 claims?  I think not.  This sucker’s gonna be full of fraud for sure.

I think Democrats lack a sense of cause and effect.  ”There are poor people?  Oh, well, give them some money.  That’ll solve the problem.  Surely there won’t be unforeseen consequences for this.”  Likewise, “We feel bad for the kids that illegals bring over.  Let’s not deport them.  Surely this won’t give parents of children the incentive to come over here illegally and create a claim for their kids to remain in this country.  Surely that won’t happen!”

Finally, this is a sick thing Obama and the Democrats are doing to secure votes.  This is like welfare/benefits.  ”If you want your benefits to stay, you had best keep electing us in.  If you want your young to stay in this country, you had best keep electing us.”  It’s a path of enslavement.  This is why it’s a two year time limit.  That way, he can tell Hispanics that, if they want this preferential treatment to continue, they had best re-elect him.

God, why can’t we impeach this man?  He has gone outside the Constitution more times than any President since FDR.

Long Live the Constitution!