What A Shock: Democrats Use Aurora Shooting To Justify ObamaCare


It began almost immediately – with ABC’s Brian Ross erroneously suggesting that alleged shooter James Holmes just might be “Jim Holmes” – a member of the Denver area Tea Party. (ABC and Ross were forced to issue one of those liberal non-apologies within hours.) Then it quickly moved on to  gun control. It’s as if Democrats are simply working their way through the “Things we need to exploit in the aftermath of the Aurora shooting” checklist: the Tea Party, gun control, racism (yeah, racism), and, of course – wait for it – the “need” for ObamaCare.

Democratic Rep. Ed Perlmutter of Colorado, no stranger to political exploitation, was one of the first politicians to jump on the gun control bandwagon following the shooting. During a Facebook town hall and teleconference Monday, he continued to work his way down the checklist:

“The Affordable Care Act is in place – the Supreme Court approved its terms…and it will do some things, in my opinion that needed to be done. It will stop the discrimination against people with prior illnesses or injuries – or, say, some of the folks who were shot in the theater. They would be uninsurable now that they’ve had that wound, [sic] but under the Affordable Care Act they can’t be discriminated against starting in 2014.”

While it’s perfectly reasonable to support the portion of ObamaCare that prohibits discrimination against those with prior illnesses or injuries – which I support as well – it’s a whole nother matter to exploit a tragedy with emotional wounds as fresh and deep as are those in the immediately aftermath of the Aurora shooting.

Maybe if Democrats hadn’t immediately tried to  link the shooter to the Tea Party. Maybe if they hadn’t immediately exploited the shooting to reignite the call for stricter gun control laws. Maybe if they hadn’t suggested that had the shooter been black or Hispanic, he might have been racially profiled and stopped before the shooting occurred.

Maybe, if every time Democrats exploit a terrible crisis, we didn’t hear Rahm Emanuel in the back of our minds saying: “You never want a crisis to go to waste.” The Godfather must be pretty damn proud of his fellow-Democrats these days.

About these ads

Categories: Liberal Immorality, Politics and Prostitution, The Shady Side of Liberalism

4 replies

  1. After the trial and punishment and after the healing in Aurora, Colorado ceases, who will pay for the damage and the healing costs? Some of those hospitalized will not have insurance or enough insurance and may lose their jobs if recovery takes too long. Who is going to compensate the victims for their losses?

    I would favor compelling the gun lobby, the manufacturers and the NRA, to pay. However, as always they will deny any responsibility. Guns don’t kill, people do. That will leave those affected and the taxpayers to pick up the costs. Unfair. I propose an alternative in the form of an insurance mandate.

    Before being allowed to purchase a gun, a potential gun owner must purchase insurance to cover property damage and liability for personal injury. The dollar amount of the insurance required would increase with every gun and ammunition magazine purchased. The greater the capacity of the ammunition magazine and the faster the rate of fire of the gun, the higher the insurance premium. I have no idea how much the insurance would cost, but it would act as a deterrent to some potential gun owners. Owning a gun without the proper insurance would be a crime, punished more severely than driving a car without insurance.

    I suppose some insurers would offer good gun owners discounts and possibly discounts for multiple gun ownership. Let those who insist on their second amendment rights pay for the damage done by some of their number, even if that number is very small. The rest of us should be free from paying for the damage done by irresponsible gun owners.

    • These are excellent questions that must be answered. The political exploitation of Aurora is an entirely different matter.

    • I own the exact same types of weapons that were used in the shooting in CO, but there is one thing different mine have never been used to murder a single person. One was used once when a person decided to point their finger in my back at a store and yelled it was a stick up. The person changed their mine real quick once that Glock .40 barrel was in their face. Under your type of thinking we should charge all the car makers and alcohol producers because of all the deaths and injuries that are suffered from the wrecks that are caused by drunk or reckless drivers. You need to stop blaming an object that can not do a thing till a person picks that object up and uses it the way that they chose to use it. To punish people for the actions of one is not only illegal it is also unconstitutional. So if you want me to pay for the illegal use of a firearm I want you to pay for the illegal use of a car or how about pay for an underage drinker that got alcohol and died of alcohol poisoning.

    • That is stupid. Why should responsible gun owners be liable for any damage caused by the irresponsible ones? I am responsible for only MY actions and no one else’s. Take your collectivist BS and shared responsibility crap elsewhere.

What's Your Take?

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s


Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 2,571 other followers

%d bloggers like this: