665.) We all know how thin skinned President Obama is. He is doesn’t handle critisim very well. When met with a tough question he either chooses to belittle the person who asked it, behind their back of course, or to change the subject, ignore what the question was about, and go off on an tangent. Well we had a great example of the thin skinned President Obama when he gave a press conference calling for more gun control.
President Obama announced a special task force to look into “real reforms” to reduce gun control. A reporter from that radical right wing news organization ABC, a man by the name of Jake Tapper asked President Obama “This is not the first issue, the first incident of horrific gun violence of your four years.Where have you been?”
President Obama responded in traditional form, he dodged it and then went back to bragging about his failed record. “Here’s where I’ve been Jake. I’ve been president of the United States dealing with the worst economic crisis since the Great Depression, an auto industry on the verge of collapse, two wars, I don’t think I’ve been on vacation. I think all of us have to do some reflection on how we prioritize what we do here in Washington.”
This brings up a good point, why has he not called for gun control measures after other mass shootings? Five of the top 12 worst shootings.Why didn’t he call for real reforms after Congress Woman Giffords was shot? Why didn’t he call for real reforms after the Binghamton Immigration Center Shooting. Why didn’t he call for real reforms after the shooting in Geneva County in 2009 that left 10 people dead. Why didn’t he call for real reforms after the Portland Mall Shooting? What about the shooting in the Sikh Temple that left six dead?
There have been many shootings in his 1,425 days in office that President Obama could have used as a starting point to work on “real reforms” to end gun violence. The problem with using them as a starting point to work on “real reforms” is that all of those past attacks took place during his five year presidential campaign. In the attacks listed above 56 people died, their deaths were not worthy of discussing real reforms, because they could hurt President Obama politically. He remained all but silent during his first term about gun control, the question is why? The reason is that there are many people out there who own guns, who understand that guns are important to the safety of American Citizens, and that do not want the government to take more from them then they already have. Bascially President Obama didn’t feel that the death of 56 people was worth losing a political race. However, now that he has been re-elected he is free to exploit any tragedy, regaurdless of how it makes him look to the public. As I said, President Obama is a radical left wing progressive, he has kept the majority of his radical views well hidden in the first four years of his term, but now that he is not up for re-election he is free to be as radical as he wants.
So sense President Obama won’t answer Mr. Tapper’s question, I will. President Obama did nothing after any of the mass shootings in his first term because it was not convenient for him. His job was more important than doing something to stem gun violence. I truely beleive he did not ban guns for much the same reason he didn’t raise taxes. He knows that both of these actions would only do harm to the nation, and as such hurt his chances of being re-elected. He did nothing after the previous attacks because he knew that gun control would not help, and he is only pushing for it now because he doesn’t think the people should have the right to defend themselves. Why else would he have ignored the violence before?