Video: Obama Struggles to Explain the Second Amendment to Mexican Reporter After Aski

Discussion in 'Legal and Activism' started by Sushihunter, Mar 7, 2011.

  1. Sushihunter

    Sushihunter New Member

    44
    0
    0
    Video: Obama Struggles to Explain the Second Amendment to Mexican Reporter After Asking Why He Doesn’t Veto it…

    Weasel Zippers » Blog Archive » Video: Obama Struggles to Explain the Second Amendment to Mexican Reporter After Asking Why He Doesn’t Veto it…


    According to the constitutionally clueless Obama the Second Amendment was put in place so we can go hunting. No, not making this up.


    http://www.eyeblast.tv/public/checker.aspx?v=hdqG2G2GqG


    “Well, the Second Amendment in this country is part of our Constitution, and the president of the United States is bound by our Constitution,” Obama said. “So I believe in the Second Amendment. It does provide for Americans the right to bear arms for their protection, for their safety, for hunting, for a wide range of uses.”

    Posted by ZIP on Saturday, March 5, 2011, at 12:58 pm |
     
  2. kyleytxrialover

    kyleytxrialover New Member

    318
    0
    0
    first why does he need to know read the thing and second a lot of stupid people voted for him just to make history (well i guess they did)
     

  3. falseharmonix

    falseharmonix New Member

    1,728
    0
    0
    I'm going to go against the grain a bit here....

    I didn't find anything particularly wrong with what he said. Yes, the hunting excuse is a little played out. We all know it isn't a hunting right. Its a right to defend yourself against the tyrannies of government. But he did say that there aren't any particular bills that he has veto power over, and that includes the 2A. He also said that as POTUS he is bound by the Constitution. (whether or not he follows it, that's another story)

    "for their protection, for their safety, for hunting, for a wide range of uses". He's absolutely right. It is for a wide range of uses. He didn't say "to keep Big Brother in check" specifically, but I believe that is blanketed in the wide range.

    He mentioned wanting to keep checks on straw purchasers, those who buy large sums of weapons and ship them down to Mexico. Again, I don't find anything wrong with that. Someone does need to keep track of those kinds of purchases to see that they don't end up in the wrong hands, and illegally.
     
  4. falseharmonix

    falseharmonix New Member

    1,728
    0
    0
    Just thought of a couple other things. Obama is the POTUS. IMO, that is about the most important elected position in the world. When you talk to the global community, you want to portray power and some intelligence. The 2A is in place to check and balance that power. Therefore, as the POTUS, you wouldn't want to portray weakness by saying "well, I can't veto it because it is there to make sure I don't get too big for my britches".

    And the second thought, the reporter asked, in essence, "why don't you veto the 2A?". The short and skinny answer to that question is "I can't". He blabbed for a couple of minutes to get at that point, but basically, "I can't" is the answer.
     
  5. anm2_man

    anm2_man Member

    504
    2
    18
    The POTUS in this situation, did not answer the question correctly. Why - there was NO teleprompter ! As an educated man, he struggles with every one of his press conferences where he has to answer questions. There are always so many "AH's" and "AND's", that he ends up sounding like he doesn't know what he is talking about.

    I really think its the case where he is afraid to say the WRONG thing, because he would have to then face the uproar. He did a fairly good gob of explaining the constitution, but he never did get the point across that the only veto of any item in our constitution is by the people.

    Personally, every time he doesn't have his teleprompter, he is in the same class as Bush 43.
     
  6. Dillinger

    Dillinger New Member

    23,972
    1
    0
    I'm with you on this one False. I don't like the guy, but he was being asked a question by a foreign national, about a subject they don't understand ( Constitutional Law versus Right to Veto ) and he laid out the top 3 or 4 things that came to what limited mind he has in that regard.

    He should have said more of the things as you have indicated, but I am not personally offended by his saying that it's there for our protection and our right to bear arms.

    Hunting has been played out. No question. But let me ask you this about that.

    How many registered hunters drew game tags last year to legally hunt in the US??

    I saw a comment from someone that said the tag holding populace of Wisconsin, Michigan and Montana, last year, comprised the 8th largest "army" on planet Earth. :eek:

    Just sayin - Them hunters be important to the defense of 2A every bit as much as the Mall Ninja, the 1,000 yard benchrest guys and the "casual" shooter.

    JD
     
  7. PSmitty1

    PSmitty1 New Member

    49
    0
    0
    There is no doubt in my mind that he lied through his teeth when he said, " I believe in the second amendment".
     
  8. wmille01

    wmille01 New Member

    508
    0
    0
    the guy was unprepared if your going to ask a question like that why note study up on the subject first. As for the question in general it would be nice if we stationed soldiers there at the border, I mean hell if I was planning on crossing the border and saw an M1 main battle tank sitting on the other side it would make me rethink.
     
  9. pandamonium

    pandamonium New Member

    1,601
    0
    0
    I have come to the conclusion that he truly believes that he upholds the Constitution. His interpretation of it anyway...:eek:
     
  10. User Name

    User Name New Member

    219
    0
    0
    I dont like the guy so im not trying to take his side, but in the video he didnt say anyting wrong. I think he did a good job at answering the question actually...
     
  11. Benning Boy

    Benning Boy New Member

    9,624
    1
    0
    Okay, I think I'm gonna be sick, but here goes.

    The first reason for the 2A he listed was for protection, the second for safety. Then he got to hunting.

    If I close my eyes and alter his voice in my head, he said nothing wrong.

    Sorry, but nothing came across as disagreeable.:(

    What do I have a problem with? The azzhat reporter. This is why I'm not POTUS. My answer would have been something along the lines of...

    "Well, I can't veto the 2A. And if I could, I wouldn't do it because an azzhat reporter suggested it. In fact, I'm working on legislation to extend Castle Doctrine to every inch of the border, and if I see you sneaking across, I will require that every American take immediate corrective action.

    Americans are sick of explaining themselves to Mexico. So, Mr. Reporter, I'm extending the 2A to cover Bouncing Betty landmines, which will be issued to every rancher along the border. The funding from this will come from the savings we gain from no longer providing illegals free everything in my country.

    So suck it. Next question"
     
  12. Dillinger

    Dillinger New Member

    23,972
    1
    0
    LMFAO! *spitting water*

    That is how I am answering every question I get asked today...... Well, in my mind anyways. :eek:
     
  13. USEBOTHHANDS

    USEBOTHHANDS New Member

    1,319
    2
    0
    i'd be willing to bet that the reporter was a plant; a setup between owhampy and cull-der-own.
     
  14. 10millyMan

    10millyMan New Member

    15
    0
    0
    we have been lied to for so many years and on every aspect of life liberty and the pursuit of happiness it is ridiculous the goverment is in place just to tear down this beautiful and wonderful country america and us the americans who make this machine run
     
  15. the_hustleman

    the_hustleman New Member

    10
    0
    0
    I'm pretty sure that this post will be unpopular, but I'm not going to bite my tongue.


    Why are so many people upset with president Obama? He's already a step above Bush, but then again it's almost impossible to be WORSE than him, but I seriously think he has a great respect for the 2nd Amendment.

    Reason I say is he said he will not take away guns - he hasn't.

    He even signed a bill that allowed carry in national parks - an anti-2nd amendment president WOULD NOT have signed a bill like that.

    He's said guns do have their place in society, and he didn't say hunting was the only use for guns.

    Then on top of that, he's offered to have a sit-down with the NRA president, and the NRA refused to talk to him.

    Who knows? He may have made it legal to carry in more places, he may have been trying to work with them to open up New York, IL, DC and CA, he may have been trying to work with them to discuss goals and how they can be accomplished.

    Seems to me like his ACTIONS have shown a respect to the 2A.


    Not gonna say he's a perfect president, he has his flaws, but I'm still glad I voted for him over Mccain and that he's there in place of Bush.


    And no, it's not because of political party. I honesty feel like anyone that votes for someone based solely on political party is an idiot that made up their mind before hearing the issues. I don't classify myself as either DEM or REP because I agree with the reps on some things and with the dems on others, I pick based on their response to questions.



    plus keep in mind in that video, OBAMA was w/o a teleprompter, he didn't have his own prepared statement, he was answering questions off the top of the head while at the same time trying not to offend ANYONE!

    He can't say "I believe in the 2nd amendment and feel that most americans should carry guns!" Then idiots across the country would wrongfully label him as a violent man, and he'd lose votes in re-election. Instead what does he do? makes very vague statements, but doesn't cut gun rights - in fact he's opened them up a little.

    So keep in mind he may have stammered and stuttered a little here and there, but he was probably thinking a million miles per minute to be careful not to offend the majority of his voters.

    If anything, we should be mad at the NRA for REFUSING to meet with the president and at least HEARING him out! If he says "more gun control" you walk away with a big SCREW OBAMA, he isn't talking MORE gun control, then you continue the meeting until/if he does. What's so hard about that?

    NRA actually was doing more of a disservice to it's members by refusing to meet with and hearing out the president
     
  16. falseharmonix

    falseharmonix New Member

    1,728
    0
    0
    I'll do my best to respond to this....

    Upset with Obama? Well, he bailed out the banks (with our money), rammed healthcare down our throats (despite a VERY large majority of Americans telling him exactly where he can stick that thermometer), apologized for the American way, and hasn't done much of what he campaigned to do. Shall I continue?

    No man is ever a perfect president. And I agree that it is foolish to vote strictly along party lines. But voting for Obama isn't something I would admit to in this forum. Sure, your choice. Stick around long enough, and you will see that there isn't a large following of Obama fans.

    I don't find much of what he said in the video to be offensive or incorrect. He did do a fairly decent and truthful job of answering the question to a foreign national who simply doesn't understand the laws of the US. And all of that without a teleprompter :D

    Labeling him as violent? I think the only label Obama will ever receive is one of inaction or pacifism. Vague statements are all he makes. He has yet to really show that he has backbone.
     
  17. Dillinger

    Dillinger New Member

    23,972
    1
    0
    I'm sorry - but saying that he fumbled his words trying to explain a perfectly reasonable concept for the common man like 2A without a teleprompter does not add any cred to his ability to be a "leader" or even hold office in this country.

    He has a LAW DEGREE!! Allegedly. :rolleyes: I am PRETTY sure they must have discussed the Amendments to the Constitution at SOME point during 8 years in pursuing that degree. No?

    As for why people are upset with him, I can't argue with False's list. But how about the overall disdain he has for the Office of the Presidency?!

    You claim he is better than Bush. Well, at least both Bush Presidents had the decency to return a salute, make sure that they, as well as their family, were dressed in a professional and serious manner when appearing in public and not looking like rag-a-muffins from Goodwill. Then there is the whole "Feet on OUR desk" thing.

    If you are POTUS, I would like to think you would have the god damn common sense to NOT put your feet on the desk of the highest office in the land. :mad: Really?!

    Oh yeah - and at least when Bush 1 and 2 were in charge we didn't go around the world apologizing and bowing to foreign "nationals".

    Be a man for Christ's sake - You are SUPPOSED to be head of the greatest country on the planet!!
     

    Attached Files: