Will Obama’s defenders admit they were wrong?

Obama’s supporters repeatedly mocked those who said that he would pursue a gun-control agenda in his second term, because he “had not taken any action” on gun control in his first term.

Looks like the critics were right. Will those who were mocking the predictions of a gun control agenda in the second term – specifically Rachel Maddow – now admit they were wrong?

6 thoughts on “Will Obama’s defenders admit they were wrong?

  1. There have been school shootings before Sandy Hook. Columbine, Jonesboro, Paducah and Nickel Mines, Pa.

    Sandy Hook isn't a reason to change the debate. It's the excuse Obama needed to push for the agenda he was afraid to articulate before he was re-elected.


  2. But you phrase it in such a way as if Obama planned on the shooting to happen. The dialog had always been, “Obama's not changing gun control now, but he plans on changing it during his second term.” For you to carry that dialog forward, in this context, seems to suggest Obama made plans that depend on a school shooting — that Obama WANTED a school shooting.

    Wouldn't you be offended if I suggested to you George W. Bush WANTED a school shooting? Do you see how that idea might be offensive to others?


  3. Right. But in order for you have been right all along, and for me to have been wrong all along, you would have needed those 20 kids to die. If those 20 kids didn't die, I'd be right and you'd be wrong, for now.

    Am I illustrating why this wasn't a constructive avenue of public discussion for you to pursue?


  4. No, the 20 kids didn't need to die. Obama would have pushed his gun control agenda with or without the Sandy Hook massacre. But the Newtown mass shooting gave him the opportunity to push it sooner and harder.

    As Rahm Emanuel said: “You never want a serious crisis to go to waste.”


Comments are closed.