NRA ad is right: Obama IS a hypocrite

-by Geoff Caldwell-

It’s always “for the children”

The political left wing and the minion media arm of it are all aghast and outraged over the latest NRA ad exposing the hypocrisy of Obama and his elites on the issue of school safety.

The ad, highlights the fact that while Obama and the left are doing everything they can to “never let the Sandy Hook crisis go to waste” and ridiculing the National Rifle Association’s position that armed guards in public schools is one way to protect our children, the private schools that educate the children of the elites of this nation DO have armed guards.

A portion of the ad’s transcript below:

“…Are the President’s kids more important than yours? Then why is he skeptical about putting armed security in our schools, when his kids are protected by armed guards at their schools. Mr. Obama demands the wealthy pay their fair share of taxes, but, he’s just another elitist hypocrite when it comes to a fair share of security. Protection for their kids, and gun free zones for ours.”

Now of course the left went nuts over the NRA daring to call out their Dear Leader.

On MSNBC’s “Morning Joe”, panelist Mike Barnicle lambasted it as “political pornography”, pretty boy Donny Deutsch puked out “that’s one of the grossest things I’ve ever seen in my life” and devout Obama worshipers Mika Brzezinski and Joe Scarborough chimed in on que for six minutes of dutiful “outrage” over how “extreme” the NRA has become. (Watch the YouTube upload here.)

Rather than deal with the facts of the hypocrisy of Obama’s positions, the media response has been to attack the messenger.

But don’t blame them, they HAVE to. They sure as hell can’t tell the truth:

Obama IS a hypocrite.

But his hypocrisy didn’t start with gun control. Within 6 months of his first inauguration Obama signed legislation killing the Washington D.C. school voucher system that let low income “our kids” trapped in D.C. public schools use a $7500 voucher to attend Sidwell Friends and other private schools.

When faced with the the decision to stand “with the children” or “back his union contributors”, Obama chose the unions.

This isn’t about “using” the President’s kids because they can’t attend a public school as the “first kids”. Even before Washington, Obama’s little tykes attended the over $25 grand a year tuition, security controlled, Chicago Laboratory Schools.

Nowhere in that NRA ad does it say that the children of our President’s should not have armed security. It does however speak the truth that the President and the political elite impose one set of rules for “us” while enjoying a different set for them and theirs.

So enough with the crocodile tears over Obama’s kids. He himself has used them constantly when it was to his advantage.

From none other than Michael Shear writing in the Caucus blog for the New York Times:

“….Mr. Obama rarely passes up an opportunity to mention his girls in public, often using them as object lessons in explaining his reasoning behind important policy positions…..

….He talks about them constantly in policy speeches, at fund-raisers and in interviews…..

And here’s the money quote:

“A review of transcripts released by the White House shows that Mr. Obama has mentioned his daughters in public remarks more than 100 times over the last three years.”

Did all you lefties “outraged” at the NRA notice that?  Joe, Mika, Mike, Donny, any of you?  The President himself has USED his daughters over a 100 times?  “Gross pornography” or necessary manipulation?  Guess it’s all in who’s doing it right?

Yep, you read it right.  In the first 3 years alone, oh so “protective papa” Barack Hussein Obama has used his own daughters over 100 times when it was to his political advantage to do so. (And that 100 times number was in May of last year, who knows how many more have occurred since.)

Now THAT is hypocrisy every good lefty can be proud of.

If the anti-gun zealots and their media handmaidens were truly interested in “the children” and their safety, the attention and the stories would be on the mayors and politicians of those cities where all the gun control in the world is doing nothing to stop “the children” from dying on a daily basis.

For all the whining and hand wringing over what type of gun Americans “need” (defined by liberals as what type they are going to let you have), and for all the using of children as props for their political agenda, the facts remain that:

1. More guns means LESS crime not MORE. The number of guns in America have almost doubled since 1994 yet in that same time period gun violence has DROPPED by almost 50 percent.
2. The assault weapons ban was not effective then (Columbine anyone? And don’t even bother to bring up the “guard”, he was under rules of engagement that were ineffective at best.) and it would not be effective now.
3. The most violent and deadly areas in America are all in the most heavily gun regulated and Democratically controlled cities, Chicago, L.A., New York, Detroit yet the gun control myth is perpetuated ad nauseam.

But for all the truth backing up all the facts, the attacks on the NRA and pro-2^nd amendment individuals and groups will not only continue, they will get louder, they will become more prevalent, and they will get very, very nasty. It is the Alinksy way, it is the Chicago way, and it is the Obama way.

Obama and crowd may not like the fact that the Constitution is a collection of “negative liberties” that restrains their beloved government power, but like it or not it is the ONE thing that has kept America as intended for over two centuries now.

The very reason the 2^nd amendment is there in the first place is to ensure that the “beliefs” of a few do not become the tyranny of the many.

And the left can delude itself into believing they are “reasonable” all day long, the sun will never rise on the day that their “reasoning” will be allowed to “infringe” upon the 2^nd amendment, Constitutional rights of responsible, law abiding citizens.

History is littered with the graves of the victims of oppression and dictatorial power. Powers that had but one common theme: it was all done for the “sake of the children”.

Neither an absolute ban on all guns nor an army of guards in every school can protect all the children all the time.

No policy, no law, can protect our children from every threat, nor guarantee their absolute safety.

But we can ensure that the rights guaranteed them under their Constitution be not infringed for the sake of one man’s political ideology.