Another terror attack overnight in Mali, a couple of very critical columns yesterday by Pat Buchanan and Peggy Noonan and new polls released Thursday by Quinnipiac University and Rasmussen; it’s a bad news week for President Barack Obama and one wonders if there will be collateral damage to Hillary Rodham Clinton’s campaign to succeed him.
The Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms yesterday posted a pictorial jab at the president and Clinton on its Facebook page that has gun rights activists chortling. Clinton, as this column noted yesterday, was in New York last night collecting an award from the Brady Center for her work on gun control, and nobody in the firearms community is forgetting Obama’s remarks about putting gun control front and center during his final year in office, in that GQ interview published earlier this week.
One Quinnipiac poll revealed yesterday that Colorado voters support, by a 51-44 percent margin, allowing teachers and school officials to carry guns on campus. It also further cemented the image of Democrats as the party of gun control, noting that support for armed school staff runs 81-16 percent among Republicans, while Democrats oppose the idea 75-22 percent. School shootings are bad, but protecting kids with guns is worse, the Democrats seem to be saying.
“Pistol-packing public school teachers are just fine with Coloradoans, and the more guns in the hands of law abiding citizens, the safer the citizenry will be,” Tim Malloy, assistant director of the Quinnipiac University Poll said in a press release about the survey.
Another Quinnipiac poll released Wednesday showed all the Republican candidates beating Clinton by wide margins in Colorado, a state dominated by liberal politics in Denver, much like Seattle voters tilt Washington State into the blue realm. But outside of those enclaves, both states remain purple if not brilliant red, and the fear of terrorism here after last Friday’s attack in Paris may even be leading some people on the margins to lean toward guns and away from the self-appointed “progressives” who seem to have gotten the country into this mess.
As Noonan wrote about the president’s reaction to the Paris attack, “After the attacks Mr. Obama went on TV, apparently to comfort us and remind us it’s OK, he’s in charge…He proceeded as if unaware that there are no actually universal values, that right now the values of the West and radical Islam are clashing, violently, and we have to face it.
“The mainstream press saw right through him,” she continued. “At the news conference, CNN’s Jim Acosta referred to the ‘frustration’ of ‘a lot of Americans,’ who wonder: ‘Why can’t we take out these bastards?’ The president sighed and talked down to him—to us. He has a strategy and it’s the right one and it’s sad you can’t see it.”
Buchanan, meanwhile, seemed to suggest that the president may be suffering from delusional arrogance, observing, “He grossly, transparently underestimated the ability of ISIS, the JV team, to strike outside the caliphate into the heart of the West, and has egg all over his face. More critically, the liberal world order he has been preaching and predicting is receding before our eyes.”
With all of this coming down around them, President Obama and Clinton, his first Secretary of State who many believe bungled Benghazi and then admitted before Congress to telling two different stories about it – one to her family and the other to the American people – are still zeroing in on gun control. Many critics are wondering if two supposed “smartest-people-in-the-room” liberals could possibly be more out of touch with reality.
It doesn’t reassure anybody when, as the Washington Times reported yesterday, the president says Syrian refugees are no more dangerous to the U.S. than tourists. Evidently, he’s closed his ears to the governors of a majority of states who have pulled up the welcome mat for the refugees Obama wants to bring into this country.
Indeed, yesterday’s Rasmussen Reports revealed that the president’s argument doesn’t sell with the majority of likely U.S. voters, something to which Clinton better pay attention. According to Rasmussen, “Sixty percent (60%) of Likely U.S. Voters oppose the settling of Syrian refugees in the state where they live.”
“The president,” Rasmussen noted, “is still planning to admit 10,000 Syrian refugees into this country next year with more to follow, but only 23% favor allowing those refugees to come here at all. Sixty-three percent (63%) oppose Obama’s plan, while 14% are undecided.”
Of course, almost a year remains between now and the 2016 election. A year in politics is an eternity. That’s a long time to wait.
Got an opinion about this column? Share your thoughts in the “Comments” section below.