According to President Obama, you “willfully lied” this week
It’s right there in his tantrum speech yesterday afternoon:
But instead of supporting this compromise, the gun lobby and its allies willfully lied about the bill.
That’s right. When you stood up for transparency and the Constitution, you weren’t defending your principles. You were being dishonest. And your “dishonest[y]” helped the Senate stand against a possibly unconstitutional, rushed bill that would have done little to stop the kinds of shootings seen in Aurora and at Sandy Hook.
Of course, the politics didn’t end with calling you liars. Apparently, you ignored “the murder of 20 innocent schoolchildren and their teachers.” Never mind that FBI data indicates most homicides (the majority of which are committed with guns) don’t occur in white, suburban America. In reality, the majority are linked to drug-related crime and gangs in major metropolises. By skewing these numbers, the President and other anti-gun politicians only look interested in violence that agrees with their narrative.
Of course, the President says he stands with those who die from gun violence, as well as their loved ones.
One common argument I heard was that this legislation wouldn’t prevent all future massacres. And that’s true. As I said from the start, no single piece of legislation can stop every act of violence and evil. We learned that tragically just two days ago. But if action by Congress could have saved one person, one child, a few hundred, a few thousand; if it could’ve 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. And this legislation met that test. And too many senators failed theirs.
In that case, why doesn’t the President tell the public that “the number of defensive gun uses far exceeds the number of violent crimes committed with guns?” Is he not looking at the data, or is he cherry-picking what he shares with the American people?
Lastly, if the President were truly intent on “action by Congress” that “could have saved one person, one child,” why did he have no comment when asked about the Gosnell trial in Pennsylvania – a trial where a doctor is accused of killing at least eight people, including one woman and seven children?
The President’s comments yesterday are those of a man who, as Allahpundit noted, is a lame duck President only months into his second term. He lost the trust of the American people when he decided to support the Beltway status quo of constitutional violations and a lack of transparency. If anybody’s honesty is in question, it’s his.