Hillary Clinton Supports 2nd Amendment
And I’ve got a bridge for sale in Brooklyn. From the Des Moines Register:
“I think as far as the gun issue is concerned, there has been movement on it, but I also think the silence is deafening,” said Andrew Arulanandam, director of public affairs for the National Rifle Association. “What you have is some of the Democratic candidates who know this issue will be a liability. Their support of gun control in the past could prove to be a loser for them in the general election, and that is why they would rather not make it an issue.”
Despite the stereotypes, some Democratic candidates say neither they nor their party is anti-gun.
“I support the Second Amendment. Law-abiding citizens should be able to own guns,” Democratic presidential front-runner Hillary Clinton, a New York senator, said in response to questions from The Des Moines Register. “But I also believe strongly in smart laws that keep guns out of the hands of criminals and terrorists.”
Yes, you bitch, laws that punish the law abiding and (in the case of your carpet-bagged state) make it nearly impossible for them to obtain the legal permit necessary to conceal carry and protect themselves on the streets. How many people live in NYC? Millions? And only a few millionaires, politicians, and movie stars are granted “permission” there to exercise their constitutional rights?
I tell you this, folks: Hell will freeze over 100 times before I vote for Hillary Bitch for President.
[So, Jeff, how do you really feel about Hillary? –ed.]
20 Responses to “Hillary Clinton Supports 2nd Amendment”
on 23 Oct 2007 at 8:00 am # Greg Morris
“I support the Second Amendment…”
The second amendment doesn’t need your “support” for it to be the absolute law of the land.
Besides, I’ll believe it when I see her actively campaigning to repeal the Hughes Amendment, or to enact nationwide CCW.
on 23 Oct 2007 at 9:47 am # Bruce
“I support the Second Amendment. Law-abiding citizens should be able to own guns,”…
She forgot to add, “I also believe the federal government has the authority to forcefully seize those weapons whenever it deems it necessary. You know…for the ‘common good’.”
Two words: Vitter Amendment
Lying piece of slug shit fungus.
on 23 Oct 2007 at 9:49 am # Bruce
Also note: “Law-abiding citizens should be able to own guns.”
And, if she has her way, the “law” will say something quite different than it does today.
on 23 Oct 2007 at 10:20 am # jack
“Should be able to own guns” is quite different from “Are able to own guns”. We “should” be able to own and do a lot of things. She is the worst of the lot. Jack.
on 23 Oct 2007 at 11:57 am # threecollie
Taint easy for NYers to own a handgun outside the big apple either
on 23 Oct 2007 at 12:18 pm # Kawika maka kapu kaua
Whenever mainstream Democrat politicians say that they are not anti-gun, what they really mean is that they acknowledge the existence of guns, but neglect to support an individual’s basic right to own, possess, bear and use them whenever said individual deems necessary.
Liberals never say that they are pro-choice when referring to U.S. Constitutionally protected INDIVIDUAL gun RIGHTS, even when they’ve painted themselves into a corner.
on 23 Oct 2007 at 12:36 pm # Mike Knepley
Hillary Clinton is first and foremost a liar. Never forget.
on 23 Oct 2007 at 12:46 pm # Keith
…and pigs fly…
Yeah, right.
I’m just glad that the Roddams left their native Northumberland and emigrated.
Keith
on 23 Oct 2007 at 3:57 pm # Drew458
I guess it all depends where you live in NY outside NYC, threecollie. I lived 30 miles NW of NYC and was easily able to get the application. The fees weren’t unreasonable, and the background check only took a couple weeks. (this was pre-Brady) Once I had the permit I bought 4 pistols inside a year or two. No problems.
DO NOT TRUST THE HILDABEAST. She will lie, lie, LIE to get your vote, then do whatever she feels like once elected. The woman is a fascist. She and her husband are the biggest con ever foisted off on the USA. They are criminals and can get away with anything. And she’s right back to playing the dirty Chicom money game again, just like BJ did … but she’s smarter. With the untracable ChinaTown donations thing now she’s breaking the law and laughing in your face!
on 23 Oct 2007 at 4:40 pm # Chris
Yeah, and she has a bridge for sale also.
on 23 Oct 2007 at 4:51 pm # Daniel in Brookline
Yes, but there’s entertainment on the way…
I have no doubt that John Kerry loves gun control as much as Hillary does. Yet in 2004, in order not to tick off Southern Democrats (and other gun-owning potential supporters), he made sure to be seen hunting. (Badly, of course.)
We all know that Hillary’s savvy enough to do anything she thinks will get her more votes. (Remember that fake southern-accent nonsense?) So, sooner or later, Bill’s going to have to take her hunting. This could be highly entertaining, in more ways than one. (Watch your back, Bill.)
In fact, it would be fun to pre-empt the whole thing now. Let Vice-President Cheney invite her to go hunting. It’ll be a blast.
respectfully,
Daniel in Brookline
on 23 Oct 2007 at 6:00 pm # theirritablearchitect
“Hell will freeze over 100 times before I vote for Hillary Bitch for President.”
Warms my heart to hear people other than me say the exact same thing. Thanks Jeff.
on 23 Oct 2007 at 6:48 pm # Cepik
“Hell will freeze over 100 times before I vote for Hillary Bitch for President.”
It’d have to freeze over more than 100 times before I would vote for her. Like everyone has said above, she is not to be trusted.
on 23 Oct 2007 at 7:35 pm # DirtCrashr
It’s the Lawyer in Her that tells me should in the sentence remains undefined and doesn’t mean anything in the context. Law abiding people should be able to own guns in DC but they can’t - not yet anyhow and not thanks to her “support” (another word that means exactly nothing unless she suddenly became an Engineer) for the Second Amendment.
on 23 Oct 2007 at 8:10 pm # Daniel
Shrillary Rotten Clinton is never to be trusted.
(What am I saying? It’s the choir here.)
At any rate, she will never get my vote and I’d rather see any other candidate beat her out for the Dimm nomination.
on 24 Oct 2007 at 9:22 am # Nimrod45
It’s the subsequent sentence that says everything:
“But I also believe strongly in smart laws that keep guns out of the hands of criminals and terrorists.”
They’re moving from “common sense” and “reasonable” gun control laws to “smart” gun control laws…anything to make it seem like they are accommodating our rights.
on 24 Oct 2007 at 11:49 am # Mark
I’ve gone on record as saying I’d gnaw off my own arm before I vote for the Socialist Bitch.
The only democrat running for President who isn’t 100% anti-2nd Amendment Civil Rights is Bill Richardson. Of course, he doesn’t stand a snowballs chance in Hell to get through their primaries.
on 24 Oct 2007 at 2:02 pm # Wai
Hillary Clinton supports the 2nd Amendment? What side of her mouth is she talking out of now? The backside? No wonder there’s been a stink in the air these past few days. :::where’s my gas mask:::
on 26 Oct 2007 at 8:00 pm # Gregory Koster
Dear Mr. Soyer: You have a nice echo chamber here. It’s true, none of the regulars even notices the echoes, doubtless because they’ve spent a lot of time at the practice range without wearing earmuffs. Earmuffs, ewww. Effeminate.
I yield to no one in detesting Hillary Clinton. Her election would be a serious error for this nation. But calling her a “bitch” or HILDABEAST, or Shrillary or “Lying piece of slug shit fungus.”
does nothing to stop her from being elected. It may heat up the echo chamber, but to the uncommitted, it just seems fanatical and is decidedly off putting. I wonder if any of your commenters have thought what HC’s reaction would be if she was told that she would not get their (the commenters) votes? Here it is:
“Hell, you weren’t going to vote for me anyway. Get outta here.”
Cruise on by Intrade.com and look at the contracts you can buy for the Democratic Presidential nominee. Want to buy a $1 Hillary contract as of today? Cost you just shy of 71 cents. The runner up is Obama, whose $1 contract will cost you one bit. The gang at Intrade think that Hillary is going to be the next Democratic nominee by a huge margin, a judgment I agree with. Roar and bellow against her, call her your juvenile names, do your worst. She’s coming right at all of you. What are you going to do about it? Willing to get in the mud and work for Obama, on the theory that he will be an easy mark for the Republican nominee and win? Then you better get going: Intrade’s $1 contract on Hillary winning costs you 47 cents. Giuliani’s? 17.6. Obama’s? 6.5
There’s a very good chance that HC is going to be the next President. Serious supporters of gun rights are not going to bluff and bluster the way this echo chamber is. This echo chamber has even less sense than the hippies of 1968, who at least realized that to win their goal of defeating Lyndon Johnson, they had to get “clean for Gene” (Eugene McCarthy.) They were successful at stopping Johnson. This echo chamber will not be successful at stopping Hillary Clinton. But the bluff, bluster, and childishness, will continue at 200 proof. It’s so much easier than actually doing something serious to stop her.
Sincerely yours,
Gregory Koster
on 30 Oct 2007 at 3:15 pm # Mark Knapp
Your site has some good information especially on Hillary Clinton. Probably not good to call her a “bitch”? She is a U.S. Senator, after all, so let’s give respect where respect where respect is due. Nevertheless, I think she is a definite threat to our rights as gun owners. I am a lawyer and have a blog at www.firearmslawyer.net.
I think Mr. Koster has made some very important points.
Please consider linking me to your site and posting a comment on the blog pages at my site.
Mark Knapp, Attorney
Federal Way, WA