search
top

Second Amendment Solutions

A lot of hay is being made out of Trump’s statement on Hillary’s nominees to the Supreme Court:

“Hillary wants to abolish, essentially abolish the 2nd Amendment,” Trump told the crowd in Wilmington, N.C. “By the way, and if she gets to pick if she gets to pick her judges, nothing you can do folks. Although the 2nd Amendment people, maybe there is. I don’t know.”

I didn’t take this as an invitation for people to off Hillary or her nominees, but as an indication that we had the political power to block her nominees. That the left, and many people in our issue, are taking his statement this way is a form of self-immolation. The implication is that we would do such a thing, and are inarticulate enough to announce it publicly. And maybe Trump really believes that. Who knows? But I don’t think we should help them out by jumping on it ourselves.

It should be apparent by now that Trump doesn’t stop for two seconds to consider whether and/or how he should say the shit that moves to the tip of his tongue. I’m not going to engage in hand wringing over this one. This is what we’ve come to expect.

12 Responses to “Second Amendment Solutions”

  1. Jacob says:

    The problem is that his idiocy makes everybody who really believes in gun rights look like kooks.

  2. Archer says:

    Expanding on what Jacob said, Trump is not a statesman. That should have been clear a LONG time ago. He has no filter between his baser instincts and his mouth. As such, he says whatever is on his mind, as soon as it’s on his mind, with no consideration over whether it’s factual, appropriate, or tactful.

    Some people find that refreshing, a man who will always say exactly what he’s thinking. I personally don’t, but some people do.

    But the fact he has no filter means that NOTHING that comes out of his mouth should be taken seriously the first time. This was an off-the-cuff remark concerning 2A supporters (and made in the context of 2A, so completely appropriate). It lacks the necessary calculation to be a legitimate threat.

    I’m honestly more surprised that the Left, who wrote Trump off as “non-serious” early on, are taking anything he says seriously. Which is it? Is he serious or non-serious? You can’t have it both ways.

  3. Jim Jones says:

    It should also be CLEARLY apparent that the media and its lackeys are full blown destroyer mode. All the talking heads coalesce on the same buzz words (racists, un-american, “dark” nomination speech, and this latest one), and run a coordinate attack campaign. You won’t see wide-lens shot of the Clinton rallies (that are basically empty), nor the Trump rallies (arenas filled). I don’t like Trump, but there is NO WAY IN HELL that I’m ever voting for that witch, or the fake libertarian ticket. You also aren’t seeing ANYONE calling her campaign out for hosting the Orlando massacre father at her rally (imagine if Dylan Roof’s father showed up to support Trump). I can’t believe her team vetted that (no one gets close to the former first lady without being vetted).

    It should be crystal clear to anyone with half a brain cell that there is a coordinated take down of the Republican candidate. That happens during every presidential election, but the force and vigor of this one makes me believe that they are truly scared. The debates will make or break him. Right now, he is not looking good. I have a feeling that he will make her look bad during those debates. If he doesn’t, it’s over for him.

    • Archer says:

      It should be crystal clear to anyone with half a brain cell that there is a coordinated take down of the Republican candidate.

      Yep. We predicted it. The MSM was giving Trump hours upon hours of free advertisement when every talk show in the nation was hosting him and snubbing all the other candidates. We predicted that the SECOND he became the official GOP nominee, they’d turn on him and go into full attack mode. The free ad space would stop, and be replaced by ridicule, mockery, hand-wringing, and fear-mongering.

      And so it has. Just like it did with Romney in 2012 and McCain in 2008.

      The MSM colluded to get the least-appropriate and least-qualified joke candidate to win the GOP nomination, and now they’re pulling out all the stops to try and make sure he loses the election.

      Surprise, surprise: the MSM is the propaganda wing of the Democrat Party. This is just more proof of that.

      • Jim Jones says:

        Except this time, it might just blow up in their faces in spectacular fashion. Trump’s rallies are legitimately well attended, and some of Hillary’s events had to be cancelled due to low attendance. She can’t even fill a high-school gym, while he is selling out arenas.

        I don’t like Trump because I don’t believe for a second that he is a fiscal conservative, nor do I think his support for our RKBA is very strong. Nonetheless, I will vote for him. He is pulling a weird populist hybrid campaign, and I think that he is being very successful in bringing blue-collar union workers (a typical D demographic) to his side of the fence. Hillary’s blunder on putting those coal miners out of work was a preview of that. On top of that, she sounds like the shrieking harpy wife/mother.

        I think the key will come down to the debates. He made his other adversaries look like fools during the R debates. This time he will have to face very strong opposition from the moderators, as well as Clinton, but I think those will make or break his weird campaign.

        Just like the Brexit vote, the pundits and elites are missing the mark with the proles. Time will tell.

      • Patrick Henry, the 2nd says:

        Bingo. This was all knowable months ago. The MSM favored Trump because they were salivated over how they would be able to cover him against Clinton. They let things slide, they didn’t highlight his his mistakes, and they propped him up.

        Of course, we all know how biased the media is. The point is to have someone that doesn’t serve up great morsels everyday. Its to have someone who can play their game. The Trumpalos thought it was Trump, but they ignored the plain facts that the media was playing him.

        If this is surprising or angering, you’re not paying attention.

  4. Zundfolge says:

    The simple truth that many on our side keep ignoring is that it frankly doesn’t matter what someone on our side says, what they plainly meant or not nor how eloquently or inarticulately they say it, the leftist run media WILL twist those words against us. For that matter they’ll twist things we never said against us.

    Too many on our side will use this as an opportunity to turn on and attack whomever the target the leftist MSM has chosen and run them out of our movement.

    Eventually they will silence ALL of us this way. And that is the plan.

  5. Whetherman says:

    Maybe Trump wasn’t suggesting “offing” Hillary, et al, but to my ears he was very clearly alluding to armed resistance to government policy, a.k.a. armed revolution. I’ve been hearing that stuff since the days of “Company F, Bucks County Militia,” c. 1994.

    Frankly, anyone on the right who didn’t hear that, is illustrating only the selective hearing they are accusing the left of. Are you guys really serious, or am I supposed to be pretending that I didn’t hear it, either? Am I not supposed to be saying this in a public forum?

    I’m reminded of a famous George Orwell quote, that would require only a tad of paraphrasing to describe such a situation:

    “The nationalist not only does not disapprove of atrocities committed by his own side, but he has a remarkable capacity for not even hearing about them.” — George Orwell, 1945

    • Sebastian says:

      I don’t think Trump’s honestly given the topic even 5 minutes of thought.

      • Alpheus says:

        I think that’s right. I suspect that Trump doesn’t fully understand what “Second Amendment Solutions” entail.

        At the same time, I’d have liked to have seen him say something like “If Hillary guts the Second Amendment, the Federal Government will no longer be legitimate, and States will secede, and gun owners will refuse to comply. Some of them will refuse to give up their guns, even if it means shooting at the police who come to collect them. Heck, some of the police will join forces with those who resist the confiscators! If you want an America like that, vote for Hillary.”

        It would have been interesting to see how the Press would have addressed a claim that Civil War would result from Hillary’s policies…

    • Brad says:

      The full unedited quote. I think the Media is making a mountain out of a molehill, just like they always try to do. Remember what they did after the Giffords shooting? How many times are they going to cry wolf?

      “So here, I just wrote this down today. Hillary wants to raise taxes — it’s a comparison. I want to lower them. Hillary wants to expand regulations, which she does bigly. Can you believe that? I will reduce them very, very substantially, could be as much as 70 to 75 percent. Hillary wants to shut down energy production. I want to expand it. Lower electric bills, folks! Hillary wants to abolish, essentially abolish, the Second Amendment. By the way, and if she gets to pick — if she gets to pick her judges, nothing you can do, folks. Although the Second Amendment people, maybe there is, I don’t know. But I’ll tell you what, that will be a horrible day, if — if — Hillary gets to put her judges in.”

  6. Patrick says:

    Trump’s mouth is a fragment grenade when it needs to be a sword. This isn’t the primary.

    He needs sharp focus and discipline. Two things I think he might lack on a fundamental level.

    On the other hand, he hates being a loser and watches polls. If he loses enough he might change his ways, if only to stop becoming a loser. But that brings us back to the question of whether he can even be focused and disciplined.

    Marco was (apparently) the one the DNC feared most. Too bad he loves open borders. He’s gotta be kicking his own ass every day now.

top