Administration counting on "legitimate media" to further gun control agenda

Status
Not open for further replies.
G

goon

Member
Joined
Jan 20, 2003
Messages
7,382
...“To be very blunt with you, we’re counting on all of you, the legitimate news media to cover these discussions because the truth is that times have changed,” Biden added, warning that people would continue to “misrepresent” the White House's plans for gun control.

Nobody is misrepresenting what you're trying to do Joe. You want to place further infringements on a Constitutionally protected right. I don't care if you want to confiscate anything today or not - your plan is still unconstitutional and I'm not going to go along with it. You're wrong and you're off your rocker if you think I'm not going to oppose this.

"The social media that exists out there, the tragedies that have occurred, the Supreme Court decision affirming that its an individual right to bear arms - all give a lie to the argument that what we're trying to do is somehow unconstitutional, or somehow goes after the legitimate right to own and bear arms and to hunt and protect yourselves," Biden added.


A lie?
So let me get this straight... the Supreme Court lied. And the Founders, those guys who were smart enough and persistent enough to get us independence from King George, they didn't have a good enough command of the English language to clearly state what they meant.
So we're supposed to trust you now? Just go along with what you say... so we don't get taken in by the "lie?"
Listen closely Joe. The Second Amendment isn't about hunting. Even self-defense is secondary to its original intent. If you don't like that or feel it's not relevant, fine. Start a movement to have an Amendment passed to repeal the RKBA and be done with it. But stop trying to tap-dance around it with pointless legislation that even you admit won't do any good.
Lets just get this out in the open, since we're all being so honest about it.


http://washingtonexaminer.com/biden...successful-gun-control-effort/article/2521184
 
I suppose banning some guns isn't taking guns away any more than banning some religions or means of speech? :scrutiny:

I suppose denying my right tomorrow isn't somehow denying my rights protected under the constitution?
 
The worst part is, to make it all the way to VP of the country, you KNOW he is smart enough to not actually believe the words coming out of his own mouth.
 
When I hear the words “legitimate” or “common sense” coming out of the mouths of Biden or Obama, the words mean that others should be in lockstep with their thinking and agenda.

After watching Leno’s “Jaywalking” or Stossel’s or Jesse Water’s man in the street interviews, it is frightening to see how dumbed-down the American public has become. Most have no concept of the Bills of Rights or the Constitution, the political process, or history in general. Their reality is what they read or hear on TV or the Internet.

When their leader says “it is so”, the all agree in adulation. Obama and Biden are protected by the shields of the media who deflect any negative information from ever entering the minds of the sheeple. George Orwell’s 1945 book “Animal Farm” and Paul Harvey’s 1965 broadcast “If I were the devil” is becoming a reality.

Obama is on a full frontal assault against the 2A. He is using his bully pulpit, Biden, young children, celebrities, attack survivors, his political campaign machine, and the mass media to win his agenda.

The one thing he cannot do is to buy off all the votes he will need to get his vision of gun control through Congress. Let keep the letters to our representatives going. Make contributions to the NRA when you can.

Time is on our side; the sheeple will eventually lose interest.
 
Last edited:
The news has become extremely one-sided in the recent years. They all seem to have a very liberal viewpoint and spin on stories. It is getting ridiculous.
 
2ifbyC said:
After watching Leno’s “Jaywalking” or Stossel’s or Jesse Water’s man in the street interviews, it is frightening to see how dumbed-down the American public has become. Most have no concept of the Bills of Rights or the Constitution, the political process, or history in general.
Click to expand...

And if they did, then they'd be potential "terrorists" according to the FBI:

http://www.keepandbeararms.com/images/FBI-MCSOTerroristFlyer-Back.jpg

Note that several of the criteria cover pretty much every active member of this forum. Of course, it makes sense that a federal agency's mission would be to defend the federal government even against those who defend the Constitution from it, but labeling us "terrorists" allows for targeting with missiles from drones and such because "terrorists" supposedly do not have civil rights. And who exactly is a "terrorist?" Anybody the feds say is one, that's who. But controlling tens of millions of armed people is practically impossible, so they'll need us to turn in our guns first.
 
what we need is common sense religion control.

legitimate measures to control religions is not deny the right to worship, just nobody needs Tanakh/Bible/Quran to worship the way the media and the government feel you need to.

national registration of memebers who transfer from one church to another is whats needed to keep track of the radicals who would use religion against others.

see how that works when you apply the Democrat's liberal way of thinking to other constitutional rights?
 
Well said. What licensing, training requirements, and restrictions are common sense for the rest of the Bill of Rights?
 
What we need is a registry of journalists. License them just like we do with cars. How else will we know if they are members of the "legitimate media?":rolleyes:
 
What we need is a registry of journalists. License them just like we do with cars. How else will we know if they are members of the "legitimate media?"
Click to expand...

turn about is fair game but they wouldnt see it that way....
 
Legitimate news media? Is this coming from a Presidential candidate who was touted as being the most progressive in using social media and the internet to expand his reach to the American voter?

The Commander in Chief of the Armed Forces - who's soldiers invented the internet to be able to use secure communications for operational control?

He's literally dissing what he's done, and complaining about the taxpayer using what his country gave away to the world.

Do you need any better example of this concept: If the Democrats complain, it's because they did it first.

Wait for it: when their is one too many demonstrations in civil disobedience, the President will repeat something Richard Nixon said.
 
“To be very blunt with you, we’re counting on all of you, the legitimate news media to cover these discussions because the truth is that times have changed,” Biden added, warning that people would continue to “misrepresent” the White House's plans for gun control.
Click to expand...

Of course, what the people want isn't legitimate. Only what the government wants and the media parrots for them.
This is hardly surprising. For an administration that doesn't respect the 2nd Amendment. It wasn't long before they showed their lack of respect for the 1st. If your version of the news doesn't jive with them, it's not "legitimate"
 
Biden's job is to keep this hornet's nest stirred up enough to keep the media lackeys interested. Public support for the issue of gun control is waneing and only by keeping gun deaths in the public spotlight can the antis hope to succeed. Meanwhile, the president can get on with other issues he'd rather deal with anyway.
 
It's clear we need Universal Background Checks before exercising free speech.

Or 'sensible limitations' on the 6th, 7th, 13th, 14th, amendments, say?

Perhaps a Religious Believer's ID card?

Perhaps we should ask Joe if he'd approve of similar "common sense" limitations on the 12th Amendment--probably not, that would have made Mitt VP . . .
 
I'd like a definition of that term. WHO is the "legitimate media". For that matter, I'd like him to list a few members of the "illegitimate media".

We like to joke about placing background checks and equipment restrictions on the first amendment -- but when the POTUS starts using terms like "legitimate media", perhaps he's thinking exactly the same thing.

I try to stay optimistic though. No matter how intense the assault on the bill of rights gets, our Third Amendment rights remain sacred. No one from either party has dared to even suggest that we give that one up.
 
So freedom of the press is 1A, but you're only "legitimate media" if you help attack 2A? First we have "reasonable" and "common sense" proposals, now it's "legitimate media". Wasn't there a polititian a while back that was pretty well crusified for saying "legitimate rape"? Somthing tells me the "legitimate media" won't be nearly as up in arms over this one as they should be.
 
Tirod said:
Legitimate news media? Is this coming from a Presidential candidate who was touted as being the most progressive in using social media and the internet to expand his reach to the American voter?
Click to expand...

I guess that makes Obama, by his administration's own admission, an illegitimate president after all. Good old Joe, always finding common ground with his big mouth.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top