OBAMA ATTACKS SECOND AMENDMENT WITH EXECUTIVE ORDER


Inch by inch, piece by piece, executive order after executive order Obama takes away, strips us down a little further. Takes away slowly so most don’t notice but very methodically, according to the blueprint he has learned so well. Obama is not a leader……he is a follower, executing a well designed destructive plan, that he did not create himself. The Manchurian President is the key player in the war against the United States. Many once would have called me a nut case, an extremist, wacky. With the fast track Obama is on, because he has only a little over 2 years…..it should be quite obvious what he is doing and doesn’t worry about ramifications. He knows Congress has no testicles to stop him. Hell most apparently favor him.

Christian Patriots

image

Obama exploited the conflict in Ukraine to target the importation of the popular AK line of firearms manufactured by Kalashnikov Concern in Izhmash, Russia. The unconstitutional ban includes the Saiga line of rifles and shotguns.

The Treasury Department’s  Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) attempted to soften the blow by stating the executive order does not outlaw Kalashnikov firearms legally purchased in the United States prior to the ban.

The OFAC, according to its website, “administers and enforces economic and trade sanctions based on US foreign policy and national security goals against targeted foreign countries and regimes, terrorists, international narcotics traffickers, those engaged in activities related to the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, and other threats to the national security, foreign policy or economy of the United States.”

The criminalization of an entire line of foreign manufactured firearms is possible under “national emergency powers” and there is no…

View original post 6 more words

13 thoughts on “OBAMA ATTACKS SECOND AMENDMENT WITH EXECUTIVE ORDER”

  1. ‘frank’ (the irony of your name does not escape me, you are anything BUT frank!)
    yes, i posted a comment on your hit piece against steve scalise- trying to pretend that a speech he made 12 years ago somehow disqualifies him as a candidate for office. instead of debating the topic- you deleted my post, i posted another comment- again deleted- this time with name-calling by you! again, instead of debate, we get name-calling from ‘frank’. name-calling , once again, is proof positive that you run from debate! good to know that my pursuit of truth strikes fear in your cowardly widdle heart! that is all we need to know about you, ‘frank’; you used censorship and resorted to name-calling to run from debate. then yo pretended that was the ‘high road’, because somehow i must be dangerous because i dared to disagree with your now proven hypocrisy! truth is, you are afraid to debate me- your actions have proven it. really, nothing more needs to be said- i called you out on your erroneous attack- and you ran like the coward you are. i exposed your hypocrisy only by replaying to someone else’s blog, since yours is CENSORED. if you run from debate- attempting to debate you is pointless, other than pointing out your hypocrisy, which i have successfully done. the english language has a word that accurately describes your pretense: pseudointellectual.

    Like

    1. Ed, at least here you don’t risk being deleted by me. Not my blog, not my choice. So I’ll spell it out for you. Some people make it abundantly clear that debating with them is a waste of time. When you refer to “Zio-media” and link directly to David Duke’s website to make your case, you instantly fall into the same class of non-debate worthy people as Neo-nazis, outright KKK members, and Phelps-family funeral protesters. So there you have it. You are part of an elect, an elite, that rare breed of zealots against whom I don’t mind resorting to ad hominem. Quite simply, in my opinion any argument you come up with is dismissed, not based on validity or soundness but because of who you choose to be. It’s wrong because YOU say it. So don’t keep spraining your fingers on my account. This last response is the closest to a courtesy you’ll get from me as I have no desire to even grant you the facade of consideration when your positions are grounded in overt anti-Semitism and racism.

      Like

  2. I certainly understand concerns about encroaching infringements on the Second Amendment. At the same time, I don’t see how blocking a potential enemy’s sale of weapons here counts as the same thing. I can imagine an alternate universe where he doesn’t do this and the same exact people would complain that he’s being too soft on Putin and throwing American gun manufacturers under the bus by allowing the continued funding of an enemy enterprise, or some such.

    Like

    1. The ban on AK 47 I have no problem with, but it was an opportunity to write on executive orders and Obama in particular. It wasn’t so much about the 2nd amendment I was speaking on.

      Like

      1. Can’t fault ya there. Everything is always a way to amplify the points we want to make. Blogger’s occupational hazard 🙂

        Like

    2. i guess hypocrisy and self-appointed dictatorship are acceptable to you, apparently. 1. the second amendment of the bill of rights- the right to bear arms shall NOT be infringed upon? yet, here he is – infinging! 2. an executive order is NOT a law. it is ‘color of law’, which means fake law to me- and to the constitution, and the supreme court has upheld that any ‘law’ contrary to the constitution is ‘null and void’- see marbury vs madison. 3. the US manufactures and sells arms- that is about the only industry we have left, other than the entertainment industry, so this is really about punishing putin for opposing the zionist puppet that the US placed in Ukraine so he could murder civilians and shoot down a passenger plane. so what part do you support- the US military coup in Ukraine, or the punishing of putin for speaking out against it? inquiring minds would like to know!

      Like

      1. I think he was going after me with that point Anyone who’s read you for even a week knows YOU don’t 🙂 Since I’m that weird anti-Obama, anti-Bush, pro-gun mostly leftie that supports the Tea Party over the center, I tend to get folks confused 😉

        Like

      2. Yeah, looks like I was a bit quick to the draw. Thanks for pointing that out to me. Aside from that I believe your response was very well done. Having the discussions we have had, I wouldn’t think of you as being an Obama supporter (far from it), other than when on the rarist occassion he does the right thing, even then it is only the act you would support.

        Liked by 1 person

      3. Just btw, Arlin. Our buddy Ed here apparently likes following me around online, which is fine. Clicks are good. But he seems to think I’m also part of the “Zio-media,” which is another ignorant assumption on his part given my ongoing support of Palestine (not Hamas) over Israel (not Israelis or Jews). To make his “case,” which would be laughable if it weren’t so hateful, he linked to an article at David Duke’s website. Personally, I make allowances for prejudice of various types at the personal level, it’s human nature, but I draw the line at outright racism. I was still in New Orleans when Duke’s flash in the pan political career took off before crashing and burning and got to face the kind of ugliness his campaign generated. Once a Klansman, always a Klansman.

        I’m not suggesting you kick the guy or anything. Just a heads-up about what you can expect of him.

        Like

      4. Hey, Ed. Pleased to meet you. Where I come from, we usually tend to be civil when first encountering someone. Starting out with suggestions that I support hypocrisy and “self-appointed dictatorship?” All that tells me is that you don’t seek to persuade, which is usually the point of rational discourse. Since I don’t personally enjoy irrational discussions where I just get to listen to someone tell me how wrong I am when they don’t even demonstrate an ability to reason through an argument that makes their own case, much less one against mine, I tend to just skim right past.

        As to the one thing you said that addressed my point, I think you might be getting some issues confused. First, I don’t support Obama. Second, I fully support the Second Amendment and especially oppose irrational attempts to limit it by methods that usually involve infringing instead on the Fourth Amendment rights of law-abiding Americans. Third, nothing about blocking importation of foreign made anything infringes on one’s right to bear that type of thing, unless you’d care to point to me the language in the Second Amendment that stipulates you have a right to bear [insert particular brand name here]. Don’t worry, you still all your rights to bear arms, and there’s still AK’s available.

        So what’s the real issue? Could it be that you’re upset because you can’t trade with an enemy? Or at least a hostile power? Anyone else out there you’d like to send money to that would use it against American interests? Maybe you’d like to send Kim Jong Un and ISIS a check, maybe some flowers? See how that game of pointed and useless questions works?

        See, I’ve said this before here and elsewhere. There’s so, so much to dislike about Obama that sometimes it’s easy to miss something. Even stopped clocks are right twice a day. If I see him on TV with his mouth moving, I expect lies to fall out. But everyone once in a while, he turns around and at least tries to do the right thing. Sticking a finger in Putin’s eye was a good thing for someone who opposes Putin, a bad thing for someone who supports Putin. Simple, isn’t it? Think of it like football. O is quarterbacking for the team you bet against. 99% of the time, whatever play he calls, whatever he does, we get to yell and scream and root on the team we want to win. But every now and then, that opposing QB, from luck or whatever, does something that worked. Maybe not a TD, but a helluva play anyway. We yell, “oh, dayum!” But whatcha gonna do? It was a helluva play. Recognizing that is just good sportsmanship.

        The big picture I think Arlin pointed out is that we need more people to pay attention to the hazard O poses with his executive orders in general. I think that’s something we can agree on just about 100%. Now we just need a Congress and SCOTUS that can figure out a way to reign that power in, because it sure won’t come from the White House under this or any president.

        Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.