President Obama: The Gun Lobby and Its Allies Willfully Lied

“This bill represented moderation and compromise,” President Obama said after his gun registry bill went down to defeat yesterday. The President appeared angry at the press conference discussing the bill. He vowed, “This effort is not over … so long as the American people don’t give up” on the effort.

What this means in terms of real politics remains to be seen. The President used political blackmail against Democratic senators to force them to support the Affordable Health Care Act. He also lied to Democratic Congressmen, saying that he would support religious and conscience exemptions to the bill. He then signed and has stood by the HHS Mandate.

I think this led to mistrust of the president in some quarters. I would guess that this played a part in why gun owners were “upset” about this bill and why they did not trust the president’s statements in support of it.

There is a large segment of the population that believes the president absolutely. Unfortunately for him, those were not the citizens whose support he needed to push this bill over. In order to pass gun control, the president needed the votes of Senators and Representatives who are from areas in the country who do not trust the president and who are also strongly in favor of the right to keep and bear arms.

Blaming the “gun control lobby” for “willful lying” seems disingenuous, considering the attitudes of the people in those states. I doubt very much that they needed to lie, willfully or otherwise to get people in those areas to let their elected officials know how they felt about these pieces of legislation.

This is a clip from President Obama’s statement on the gun control vote yesterday.

YouTube Preview Image

  • http://ashesfromburntroses.blogspot.com/ Manny

    Oh how precious. He has the audacity to claim someone lied? This the man who calls Obamacare “the affordable healthcare act,” this the man who claims Republicans want to throw old women over a cliff and want to pollute the air and water? This the man who bald faced lied to Cardinal Dolan’s face that he would respect the Catholic position on contraception? This the man who continues to claim he’s not stepping on religious freedom? This the man who put out that Mitt Romney actually killed a woman? KILLED A WOMAN!!! Oh how precious. I have never despised this man more than after that statement.

  • Joshua

    Are you *kidding*?

    You can play the “he lied” card as much as you want, and I’ll never buy it unless you can manufacture some firm proof to your statements, because I’ll always take it as overt political denigration.

    But even if we agree to disagree on that issue … you’re defending the NRA? You’re defending the Republicans (and the few Democrats) for voting against background checks for gun sales at shows and the internet by saying we just don’t trust the president? You’re defending the Republicans (and the few Democrats) for voting against something that most American citizens agreed needed to be done?

    @ Manny, you’re defending Romney, who almost lied *daily* during his campaign?

    I do not know what world you guys are in, nor the mental gymnastics that are being employed to support this way of thinking. But it’s wrong.

    • Rebecca Hamilton

      Joshua I’m going to allow this because it somewhat balances other comments, but everyone needs to talk about issues instead of one another. If you want to shout and wave your arms around (in a virtual fashion) and condemn everyone whose ideas differ from yours, there are plenty of other blogs where you can do that.

      As for the president, let’s keep it on his policies and official actions.

    • jdens

      Well said, Joshua. When a bill had as much popular support as this one did, it’s not the people’s mistrust of the president at play. And I don’t think there was any personal attack in your comment. This isn’t shouting and waving of any kind. It’s incredulity that even this, someone can somehow blame Obama for while defending the gun lobbyists. The only shouting and waving I see in the comments is done by Manny, whose accusations against our President are not complete without all caps and multiple exclamation marks, but I don’t see Manny being chided by the host.

      • Joshua

        @ jdens
        Thank you immensely for your words. I was going to respond, but my sentiments are completely echoed by your comments.

        Ms. Hamilton, thank you for allowing my comments. However, I do think rebuking me and not the previous commenter for a virtual tantrum and “non-issues” based comments is impartial.

        • Rebecca Hamilton

          I wasn’t as even-handed as I should have been. I apologize.

  • J. Bob

    “By their works you shall know them”.

    Amen Manny

  • rumitoid

    This piece is strange.
    “There is a large segment of the population that believes the president absolutely. Unfortunately for him, those were not the citizens whose support he needed to push this bill over.”
    According to the polls, not only a vast majority of Americans but a good majority of NRA members want reasonable gun control.

    “In order to pass gun control, the president needed the votes of Senators and Representatives who are from areas in the country who do not trust the president and who are also strongly in favor of the right to keep and bear arms.”
    The bill was not about taking away the right to keep and bear arms; it was about reasonable gun control. What does trusting or not trusting the president have to do with the Bill? “…from areas in the country who do not trust the president”? What do you base this on? Or do you simply mean red areas reflecting a lockstep parrty line?

    “I doubt very much that they needed to lie, willfully or otherwise to get people in those areas to let their elected officials know how they felt about these pieces of legislation.”
    The NRA and leading Republican legislators did willfully lie about what was in the Bill, whether or not they needed to or if you doubted a need for it.

    Again, very strange piece.

    • Rebecca Hamilton

      rumitold, I don’t think there’s anything “strange” about it. What I described was real-life politics in our federalist system of government.

      1. The president needed enough votes to pass the bill through the Senate.
      2. To get these votes, he had to persuade Senators who came from regions that were vehemently opposed to the bill to vote for it.
      3. National polls have nothing to do with the fact that he had to get their votes or that they come from regions that oppose the bill.
      4. People in those regions do not, by and large, trust or like this president. He has many supporters in key areas, which is why he won the electoral college so handily. He also has many opposers in other areas, which is why he just barely eked out a win in the popular vote.
      5. In order to pass this bill, the president had the persuade senators to vote from the bill who were from areas that opposed the legislation and whose constituents do not like the president and do not trust him. This would, most likely, have been political suicide for these senators.
      6. I have not seen the literature the NRA put out about this legislation, so I can not say whether or not they lied, willfully or otherwise. They have never lied to me. I can say that for sure. I do know that President Obama has lied rather boldly on important issues in the past.
      7. Whether they lied or not is pretty much a moot point, considering the feelings of the people in the districts these senators are from. Nothing short of parting the Atlantic Ocean would persuade them to change their minds on gun control. (And maybe not even that.)

      This is the point of a federalist system, btw. It protects the minority from the tyranny of the majority and makes sure that everyone has a voice, including people from “small” states that don’t amount to much in the electoral college.

      Does that help you understand it better?

    • Theodore Seeber

      It is more that the vast majority of Americans no longer trust this President and this Congress to be reasonable. On anything.

  • http://gravatar.com/rumitoid rumitoid

    Rebecca, your piece suggested this bill was an attempt to do away with the Second Amendment, which is what the NRA stated, as you put forth in these words: “…and who are also strongly in favor of the right to keep and bear arms.” The vast majority of Americans, NRA members and gun-owners everywhere, are in favor of some reasonable controls. Isn’t a democracy where the majority rules? It seems plain that many of the senators and congressmen were more concerned about an “A” rating from the NRA than the will of the people they are supposed to represent.

    Trusting the president had nothing to do with carefully reading what the bill was saying and making an informed decision based on its merits and the voices of constituents, which, again, were in the majority for the articles proposed in the bill.

    If we are going to say “I do know that President Obama has lied rather boldly on important issues in the past” such a charge needs to be well-cited and documented or it becomes just nasty backyard fence gossip. The president’s favorability rating, people who like and trust him (those who you probably think, like Romney, he bought with “gifts”) is well over 50%.

    The piece is strange because it lacks cohesiveness, a thoughtful and actual look at the bill, supporting cites for your comments, a misplaced blame for the failure of the bill, and facts not in evidence (your guess as to why gunowners were “upset” and your “doubt” about possible lies of the “gun lobby” without investigating.) It made your blog just an excuse to attack the president. That isn’t strange; that appears all that Republicans are willing to do, other than filabustering in the Senate and sitting on their hands in Congress. Most do-nothing and unfavorable Congress in history. That is a fact you can look up.

    • Rebecca Hamilton

      rumitold, I’ll be happy to write a whole post on how the president has boldly lied on important issues in the past. This is well-substantiated.

      I did not say that the bill was an attempt to do away with the second amendment. This is a red herring.

      American citizens are not required to read legislation carefully. They can form their opinions about elected officials and legislation on any basis they choose.

      If this piece confuses you (and it must since you are attempting to answer things I did not say) then you might look at a prior post I wrote here. This particular post that has caught your interest is actually a supplement to that one.

      I am an active member of the Democratic party, btw


CLOSE | X

HIDE | X