Obama’s Platform For The Democrats: Wobbly On Gun Rights And Taxpayer-Funded Abortions
You can read the whole thing here.
I haven’t read it all yet, but the bit about the second amendment jumped out at me:
We recognize that the right to bear arms is an important part of the American tradition, and we will preserve Americans’ continued Second Amendment right to own and use firearms. We believe that the right to own firearms is subject to reasonable regulation, but we know that what works in Chicago may not work in Cheyenne.
As Marc Ambinder notes, that’s quite a change from the 2004 platform which read simply: “…we will protect Americas’ Second Amendment rights to own firearms.”
In the wake of the Heller decision is it really a good thing for Democrats to go wobbly on gun rights?
And what’s this “what’s right for Chicago may not be right for Cheyenne” business? Are citizens in Chicago somehow less endowed with a right to keep and bear arms than the people of Cheyenne?
This smacks of policy set by political expedience and not, you know, what’s actually in the Constitution.
This bit on abortion jumped out at me too:
The Democratic Party strongly and unequivocally supports…Roe v. Wade and a woman’s right to choose a safe and legal abortion, regardless of ability to pay, and we oppose any and all efforts to weaken or undermine that right.
If I’m reading that right, Obama is proposing that women don’t just have a right to murder their unborn children (which is disputable in and of itself) but also a right to demand that other people pay for it.
I’d note that my right to keep and bear arms is actually in the Constitution (unlike abortion), but I’m not expecting my fellow taxpayers to subsidize my ammo purchases.
I was thrilled to see the 22 week old fetus survive this last year.
It should reduce the age of viability.
And I had hoped that seeing Scott Peterson charged & convicted for the murder of an unborne child in California would outlaw abortions.
Must be another of the double standards
Being that he is from Chicago I seriously doubt Obama will support gun rights.
Who’s “Wobby” and what does he have to do with guns and abortion?
I’ve run out of FMJ .45 auto for my 1911. Where do I apply for my government funded ammo resupply?*
*Note to criminals: I still have a box of jacketed hollow points for defense of family and home. The FMJ is for practice at the range. So, if you desire an injection of lead, then you go ahead and try to enter my home or jack my car.
I don’t know that he’s wobbly on either. He fully supports gun control and prenatal infanticide, and has actually stated that the starting point for “dialogue” with evangelical Christians and conservatives is that they must leave their 2nd Amendment rights and pro-life stance at the door.
Nothing wobbly about that, though he’d desperately like it to be forgotten.
Unborn children should have the right to keep and bear arms – and legs and ears and eyes etc.! Marge
You’re right.
It’s a baby.
THere had been discussions as to the viability threshold.
that actually sounds a lot like what giuliani was saying about his gun control stance. although in his case, i think he was just less worried about people in cheyenne going crazy and shooting everyone.
It’s a statement of subsidiarity.
Obama and the Dems are no friend of the 2nd amendment. Actually they aren’t friendly toward the 1st amendment either. In fact they really don’t like the constitution at all as written, that’s why they try to make it a ‘living’ document whose meanings can be changed by their whims.
Not to quibble, Reb, but it’s a baby. Not a fetus.