Obama: Hey, forget what I said about Australia (twice) — no one’s looking to take away your guns!

posted at 1:21 pm on January 5, 2016 by Ed Morrissey

Says the man who promised, “If you like your [health insurance] plan, you can keep your plan,” and who promised to lead a new era of post-partisan comity in his presidency — and then decided to spend years rehashing the gun-control debate that Democrats lost years ago. But Barack Obama insists that gun owners can trust him now when he says if you like your guns, you can keep your guns!  Oh, and stop impugning his motives, all you murder-cheering gun-rights activists, or something:

If it’s not a “plot to take away everybody’s guns,” then why does Obama keep bringing up Australia as a model for gun control? It’s not an accident; Obama has mentioned Australia (and the UK, which had a confiscatory policy as well) on several occasions, including last October:

We know that other countries, in response to one mass shooting, have been able to craft laws that almost eliminate mass shootings.  Friends of ours, allies of ours — Great Britain, Australia, countries like ours.  So we know there are ways to prevent it.

And there was this more explicit reference to Australia in the summer of 2014. Charles C. W. Cooke gives the context:

“Couple of decades ago, Australia had a mass shooting, similar to Columbine or Newtown. And Australia just said, well, that’s it, we’re not doing, we’re not seeing that again, and basically imposed very severe, tough gun laws, and they haven’t had a mass shooting since. Our levels of gun violence are off the charts. There’s no advanced, developed country that would put up with this.” …

In other words, the president of the United States just praised a government for forcefully removing all semi-automatic firearms (i.e. a remarkable number of the guns in America and the majority of those sold today) from its citizenry.

Let me be clear, as Obama likes to say: You simply cannot praise Australia’s gun-laws without praising the country’s mass confiscation program. That is Australia’s law. When the Left says that we should respond to shootings as Australia did, they don’t mean that we should institute background checks on private sales; they mean that they we should ban and confiscate guns. No amount of wooly words can change this. Again, one doesn’t bring up countries that have confiscated firearms as a shining example unless one wishes to push the conversation toward confiscation.

This is the kind of disingenuous double-speak in which Obama routinely traffics. In the wake of the Newtown shooting, the mention of which caused Obama to tear up today, he demanded a renewal of the so-called “assault weapons” ban, provoking a furious reaction before retreating to a background-check proposal instead. The well had already been poisoned, however, and the effort failed. He’s made repeated references (Dan McLaughlin counts four times) to confiscatory policies elsewhere as a model for modern nations, and then expresses surprise and indignation when people dare to assume he means it.

If you like your Glock, you can … eh, you get the point.

Today’s tearful, yelling tantrum in front of the cameras proves a point I had written earlier in my column for The Week today. This showy exercise of executive action and the wide disparity between its build-up and delivery showcases Obama’s weakness and petulance, not his authority and credibility:

At the heart of the problem is Obama’s refusal to acknowledge the verdict of voters in two midterm landslide losses. When Obama took office seven years ago, his Democratic Party controlled both chambers of Congress and a fair number of state legislatures. Obama now has a Congress controlled by the GOP and a record number of state legislatures in Republican control. The country, while giving Obama a second term, made it clear that they want the GOP to curb his agenda. When Bill Clinton found himself in a similar position, he famously “triangulated” on key issues to pre-empt Republican efforts. He found ways to work with his opposition on issues that mattered to both — welfare reform comes immediately to mind — and effectively outboxed them on budgetary issues while still getting important agenda items accomplished through the normal political process.

Obama, on the other hand, has become even more determined to take his political ball and stomp off to the White House alone. That necessarily limits his range of action, while giving Obama an excuse for failure. “It is my strong belief that for us to get our complete arms around the problem Congress needs to act,” Obama insisted on Monday. But that goal requires a president who understands how to work with Congress. Pushing rhetoric about Australia’s solution and then demanding that Republicans budge on gun regulation is a symptom of weakness and failure, not power and accomplishment.

If Obama wants to build a lasting and positive impact in his final year in office, he’ll need to climb down from his high horse and work with the Congress that people elected in 2014. Legacies are built on legislation, which gives permanence and legitimacy. Temper tantrums have almost no impact at all in the long run. That will become even more obvious in 2017 if a Republican succeeds Obama as president. As easily as Obama changed regulatory definitions and processes, a GOP president can erase his work and eliminate Obama’s legacy — and almost certainly will do so.

In this sense, today was classic Barack Obama. And that’s no compliment.

Update: Video added.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

. . . the mention of which caused Obama to tear up today

Actors and politicians train to cry on queue, and actual tears can be faked via special effect. There is no reason to believe our dear (in the headlights) lying a** President, ever.

exdeadhead on January 5, 2016 at 3:26 PM

As easily as Obama changed regulatory definitions and processes, a GOP president can erase his work and eliminate Obama’s legacy — and almost certainly will do so.

Yes, indeed, provided that said GOP president isn’t a wuss who would be afraid of the press for calling him “racist” for reversing all the damage Obama has done.

lineholder on January 5, 2016 at 3:30 PM

Obama refers to himself 76 times in speech…

https://grabien.com/story.php?id=44989

Jason58 on January 5, 2016 at 3:32 PM

He only referred to himself 76 times in that speech. Maybe his narcissism is starting to abate slightly!

My “favorite” part of his little tantrum is when he says (paraphrased), “Until the American people get a Congress that represents them…” Huh? Oh. I geddit. GERRYMANDERING!!1!

Serious Drivel on January 5, 2016 at 3:34 PM

It’s very telling that the local trolls can’t even be bothered to address the substance of the issue and instead of focused like a laser on carping on Ed and other commenters.

clowns

gwelf on January 5, 2016 at 3:41 PM

What is the legal definition of a
“assault weapon”?

Scary looking, black, shooty thingys…I must go buy one this weekend. Hope they aren’t all sold out. Thinking I need an AR-10 this time.

Wyznowski on January 5, 2016 at 3:48 PM

hillery said she would expand on. which means her executive order would go even further.

VOTE REPUBLICAN OR LOOSE YOUR 2 AMENDMENT RIGHTS

telephone2 on January 5, 2016 at 3:53 PM

The only thing missing in this farce was the church choir humming along and changing pitch with every inflection from the obamalinsky…

tanked59 on January 5, 2016 at 3:59 PM

Some wonder – Did the petulant Dear Leader flip the nation off during his teary and hypocritical pep rally for gun control?

Wouldn’t be the first time he used one of those gestures to demonstrate his contempt.

How long before we can add… ‘This is not a slippery slope to gun confiscation…’ to the other lies of Barack Obama callously tossed towards the little people and bitter clingers?

Like – ‘If you like your Dr / Health Plan, you can keep your Dr / Health Plan…’

or ‘the most open and transparent Administration ever…’

etc…

Athos on January 5, 2016 at 4:02 PM

Scary looking, black, shooty thingys…I must go buy one this weekend. Hope they aren’t all sold out. Thinking I need an AR-10 this time.

Wyznowski on January 5, 2016 at 3:48 PM

I don’t have enough money available for an AR-10 type, but still considering a cute Russian blonde we saw at the range a few weeks ago…..
But $700 is awfully high for an AK – even one made in the US (Century Arms) – but still half the price of any AR-10 I’ve seen.

dentarthurdent on January 5, 2016 at 4:02 PM

Two things are going to result from Obama’s actions. 1.) Gun sales will sky rocket. 2.) He has enhanced the re-election chances of any number of GOPe squishes.

bluesdoc70 on January 5, 2016 at 4:04 PM

“Every time I think about those kids, it gets me mad,” Obama said.

PappyD61 on January 5, 2016 at 1:29 PM

Me too.
I can’t help thinking how many kids died because of that gun free zone. One teacher with a gun could have stopped the slaughter.

dentarthurdent on January 5, 2016 at 4:07 PM

you guys are so mean. you are gutting me to my core. not sure i’m gonna recover from this verbal assault. please pray for me.

everdiso on January 5, 2016 at 2:49 PM

Self inflicted wound, you should take a class on the proper handling stupidity.

antipc on January 5, 2016 at 4:08 PM

Self inflicted wound, you should take a class on the proper handling stupidity.

antipc on January 5, 2016 at 4:08 PM

+1

Neitherleftorright on January 5, 2016 at 4:14 PM

you guys are so mean. you are gutting me to my core. not sure i’m gonna recover from this verbal assault. please pray for me.

everdiso on January 5, 2016 at 2:49 PM

Yeah, you’ve made it plain the value you place on the prayerful thoughts of others.

When you pass over questions of substance to focus on posts that grant you victim status, I can’t say I have a lot of sympathy for your plight.

The Schaef on January 5, 2016 at 4:16 PM

If you like your guns you can keep your guns.

bgibbs1000 on January 5, 2016 at 4:36 PM

Keith_Indy on January 5, 2016 at 3:17 PM

Everyone has a legal duty to make sure their sale is lawful, NICS check or not. Failing in that duty can lead to prosecution for a federal felony and/or civil liability if the illegal sale results in harm.

An FFL dealer in Wisconsin was just found liable for over $5 MILLION in damages after a transaction that CLEARED the NICS because the seller SHOULD HAVE KNOWN it was a straw transaction from the circumstances and the real purchaser used the gun to shoot two cops.

I’m from Indiana and I can tell you for a fact that some of those guys in the parking lot with a wad of cash are BATFE agents, because I know them. Often there are more cops observing the parking lot than there are inside the show, for example, at the Indy 1500 shows. Sometimes they use informants who tell the seller they aren’t allowed to buy guns from a dealer and couldn’t pass the NICS check. NO ONE with a lick of sense makes those parking lot transactions with unknown persons.

When selling a gun, unless I know the buyer or they have Indiana ID and a valid handgun license or a dealer who will vouch for them, I insist the sale go through an FFL and split the cost.

novaculus on January 5, 2016 at 4:54 PM

NO ONE with a lick of sense makes those parking lot transactions with unknown persons.

novaculus on January 5, 2016 at 4:54 PM

I wonder how many people take the cash, buy a gun for themselves, then leave through a separate door? I admit I would be sorely tempted.

GWB on January 5, 2016 at 5:20 PM

GWB on January 5, 2016 at 5:20 PM

For your sake I hope common sense prevails. In any case it’s well-established fact that very, very few criminals buy guns at gun shows. It’s far too risky for them compared to buying a gun from another criminal.

novaculus on January 5, 2016 at 5:48 PM

A tiny drop of glycerin on a fingertip…

Fortyback on January 5, 2016 at 6:02 PM

For your sake I hope common sense prevails.

novaculus on January 5, 2016 at 5:48 PM

Yeah, I said “tempted”. Just because making them look stupid (making sure to avoid the pitfall of agreeing to commit a crime) would be so much fun.

GWB on January 5, 2016 at 6:23 PM

Mark Levin had a guy on a few minutes ago that knew 0bama when he (0) was a Guest Lecturer at the Chicago University.

He said that 0bama told him then that he did not support the Second Amendment, and believed that government must disarm the peasantry.

Now, we all know this, but once again it puts the lie to something that 0bama directly said today.

LegendHasIt on January 5, 2016 at 7:45 PM

Teaching a class doesn’t mean “competent” at teaching it. And let’s remember…he was just an adjunct, not a tenured faculty member. Probably for good reason. And how many times did he actually teach that course?

And by the way, can we see Obama’s transcripts on the classes he took relating to Law and the Constitution so we can see what grades he earned in the subject? Oh Wait…..

I feel sad for the students that “took” his class. They clearly didn’t learn anything that was valid and true about the Constitution other than perhaps, just perhaps, the date it was signed.

But that’s up for debate, in my opinion as well.

ProfShadow on January 5, 2016 at 7:58 PM

Truth to be told (it won’t) and their crime and murders have increased after the gun grab. Don’t want this here, and won’t happen.

Amazingoly on January 5, 2016 at 8:51 PM

Obama: Hey, forget what I said about Australia (twice) — no one’s looking to take away your guns!

If you like your gun, you can keep your gun.

farsighted on January 5, 2016 at 9:08 PM

If Obama wants to build a lasting and positive impact in his final year in office, he’ll need to climb down from his high horse

Narcissists don’t climb down for anyone.

GarandFan on January 6, 2016 at 12:20 AM

Yeah well, once upon a time he opposed same-sex marriage too. Right up until he had political cover not to.

damage done on January 6, 2016 at 1:15 AM

“This is not a plot to take away everybody’s guns.”

Prime Minister John Howard would have said the same. It’s never a plot! That’s just fearmongering!

Then he took away everybody’s guns. (With minor and specific exceptions, not including any right to self-defense.)

David Blue on January 6, 2016 at 4:52 AM

When the liberals start off a proposal with “All we want is. . . ‘, hang on to your gun and your wallet.

TimBuk3 on January 6, 2016 at 8:01 AM

So, we can’t keep our insurance or doctor like you promised, but now you say we can keep our guns? We want that pledge in writing this time.

Amazingoly on January 6, 2016 at 1:32 PM

I prefer Sig Sauer, but to each his own, Ruger, Beretta, S&W, Winchester, Remington, Heckler & Koch, etc.

Neitherleftorright on January 5, 2016 at 1:48 PM

.
I’ll see your little 9 mike-mike pistols and raise you! How about an 8″ M110 out on the 465 outerbelt? A couple of pallets of HE, a nice assortment of fuzes (fuze CP in particular) and a good crew would certainly light up a good stretch of Pennsylvania Avenue, maybe starting withe the west end of it.
.
Just a thought, of course …

meerbock on January 6, 2016 at 2:22 PM

Except me.

MSGTAS on January 7, 2016 at 9:05 AM