Scolder in Chief Uses the Common Sense Assault

The chief neo-liberal is scolding like a mother hen again. I'm not going to go into much of what he actually said (you can see the whole speech below), but I will make some general comments.

First off, Obama likes to throw around the now infamous "90% of Americans approve of increased background checks" like its the ultimate showstopper. But even if we overlook the dubious statistics polls that he is using (an excellent response from Colion Noir here), we must remember that what a majority thinks  on this subject does not matter. If a majority of Americans believed women should not vote, we would have to repeal the 19th Amendment, instead of ignoring it with unlawful legislation. If the majority of Americans wanted the US government to discriminate based upon religion, the 1st Amendment would need to be repealed first, instead of ignoring it with unlawful legislation. Now these things are obviously not popular, but the principle holds true. The Bill of Rights exists to oppose the whimsy and social waves of the masses. It exists, including the 2A, to recognize and protect rights we possess as humans. So even if the numbers Obama likes to throw around ad nauseam are true, which I personally doubt, it wouldn't matter. The opinion of the populace do not remove natural rights from the minority. That is a slippery slope to oppression.

I've heard folks say that having the families of victims lobby for this legislation was somehow misplaced.  "A prop," somebody called them.  “Emotional blackmail,” some outlet said.  Are they serious?  Do we really think that thousands of families whose lives have been shattered by gun violence don’t have a right to weigh in on this issue?  Do we think their emotions, their loss is not relevant to this debate?

To answer the questions posed: Yes, they have a right to weigh in, like all other Americans with 1st Amendment rights. They have a right to speak about their opinion and their emotion and their pain. But you do not have the right to use that pain for your own and your party's agenda. Nor is their loss irrelevant. It just has no place on a podium next to you, Mr. President, when your party is attempting to circumvent the Constitution. You cannot equate their presence beside you to their right to speak out.

This tragedy and the parents' grief has been used to pull the heartstrings of America. This is an attempt to use emotion as the catalyst for politics. When we dally in the business of regulating rights, no one needs cloudy eyes. We should be clear headed and logical when writing off rights. This use of emotionally charged images is dirty politics and very dishonest and disrespectful way to address the American people.

While we are talking about disrespecting the people he is supposed to serve, let us talk about Obama's righteous indignation and scolding.

So all in all, this was a pretty shameful day for Washington. 

 I'd say it was quite a good day in DC, Mr. President. A large minority of Senators, including four Democrats decided to listen to their constituency and regard the Bill of Rights by voting down onerous regulations of arms. Nor do you, Mr. President, have any superiority to scold those people that are defending the Constitution you are supposed to defend.

 But if action by Congress could have saved one person, one child, a few hundred, a few thousand -- if it could have prevented those people from losing their lives to gun violence in the future while preserving our Second Amendment rights, we had an obligation to try. 

Denying millions of Americans the right to their chosen method of  defense and resistance to Statist oppression is not worth it. We could also save lives by denying alcohol to the general populace (didn't work out to well in the 20s), restricting motorcycle use , or requiring everyone to drive 30 mph everywhere. But we don't. Those types of legislation are asinine and arbitrary. They are also restrictive and overreaching, and would create a massive political backlash, just like this attempt of gun control did. You and your party's attempt at control failed for a reason, Mr. President.

The point is those who care deeply about preventing more and more gun violence will have to be as passionate, and as organized, and as vocal as those who blocked these common-sense steps to help keep our kids safe. 

This is one of the examples of what I call the "common sense assault". The common sense assault is an Orwellian thought manipulation technique. It implies guilt upon anyone who disagrees with what the speaker deems common sense. After all, sane people have common sense right? Adding the adjective common sense before an objective apparently adds a halo around the objective. Opponents now oppose "common sense" instead of opposing un-Constitutional and ineffective legislation. Don't fall for it. Here is where knowing some data comes in handy. This handy link demonstrates that rifles account for a tiny minority of murders committed with firearms. Also, a universal background check would not have stopped Lanza, Holmes, or many other mass murderers from acquiring their weapons. Now Obama's common sense doesn't make any sense anymore.

I believe we’re going to be able to get this done.  Sooner or later, we are going to get this right.  The memories of these children demand it.  And so do the American people. 

This is a threat and it serves as a warning to everyone who wishes to protect our natural rights. All the Statists need is another excuse to try. This will come sooner or later when another coward, pumped up by the attention given to Holmes and Lanza, wishes to write his name in history. Then there will new stern words from Obama and more families and token un-elected police chiefs paraded before the MSM cameras. This fight is not over, nor will it ever be.

Stay alert America.

The transcript to this speech can be found here:
 http://www.whitehouse.gov/photos-and-video/video/2013/04/17/president-obama-speaks-common-sense-measures-reduce-gun-violence#transcript