Have Americans gotten used to being yelled at by our presidents? President Joe Biden seems to believe it’s normal to scream at his audience and the population generally as if he were an angry father.
The tone of some of his statements during the “pandemic” shocked many observers. In September of 2021, a year and a few months into the “pandemic” that turned into an excuse to abrogate the constitutional rights of Americans, Biden made an address that would have sounded at home in a public service ad about domestic violence.
“We’ve been patient, but our patience is wearing thin,” he said. To whom? The portion of the population that had not taken or refused to take the Covid vaccines. It left many of us asking, “Who does this man think he is?”
Trump's Sovereign Wealth Fund: What Could It Mean For Your Money?
In our modern era, we’re undergoing a reversal. Politicians and public servants now assume that they’re in a parental or power-over relationship with the citizens. Somehow in recent years, it has become normal for elected representatives or plain old government workers to issue orders to citizens, rather than the other way around.
Nowhere was this more evident than in Biden’s infamous “red speech,” also in September of 2021. Standing in front of Independence Hall that was bathed in blood-red light, Biden yelled and harangued the American people, insulting regular citizens who had voted for Donald Trump in the 2020 presidential election.
About ordinary Americans, Biden said, “MAGA Republicans do not respect the constitution,” and that they were “empowering election deniers.”
But it is Biden who does not respect the constitution. Indeed, it is an open question whether he actually understands it. It is unclear which group of people he was addressing on Thursday, September 27, but his message could not have been easier to interpret. Raising his voice like an exasperated dad, Biden told a familiar lie: he claimed that the Second Amendment did not give Americans the right to own a cannon.
This Could Be the Most Important Video Gun Owners Watch All Year
With what has become his characteristic slurring, Biden said, “I taught constitutional law for years. NEVER was the second amendment meant to be absolute. Back when it was passed you could not own a cannon.”
You really need to listen to the audio to get the full, disturbing “vibe” from the angry way Biden spits out his words.
Check out this video clip:
But his tone is not the only problem. He’s just factually wrong. The Second Amendment has never been interpreted to mean that you can’t own a cannon. Biden has repeated this lie many times before; it is simply not credible to believe he is honestly mistaken. Three years ago, the notoriously Biden-friendly Washington Post even conceded that he was telling a lie.
Here’s the truth. You’re allowed to own a cannon under the Second Amendment. And also; Biden never taught constitutional law… To check out the rest of this story, visit WokeSpy.
Join the Discussion
COMMENTS POLICY: We have no tolerance for messages of violence, racism, vulgarity, obscenity or other such discourteous behavior. Thank you for contributing to a respectful and useful online dialogue.
Maryland Renaissance Fair owns a cannon, and fires it off at least 4 times every weekend that it is open. Just the facts!
America was sold down the river when the 18th-century founding fathers replaced Biblical responsibilities (based upon the moral law of God) for Enlightenment rights, and nothing demonstrates it better than the Second Amendment.
Think about it: The Amendment WITH the wording “shall not be infringed” is the MOST infringed, licensed, and limited Amendment of the entire twenty seven. Furthermore, a future generation of our posterity is likely to see the Second Amendment whittled away entirely or repealed altogether. This is inherent nature and danger of optional Enlightenment rights versus non-optional Biblical responsibilities, such as the following:
“Let the high praises of God be in their mouth, and a two-edged sword [or today’s equivalent] in their hand … this honor have all his saints. Praise ye Yah.” (Psalm 149:6-9)
“But if any provide not for his own, and especially for those of his own house [beginning with spiritual and physical protection], he hath denied the faith, and is worse than an infidel.” (1 Timothy 5:8)
Which is more potent: 1) An optional right, or 2) A non-optional responsibility?
Which is more likely to be infringed, licensed, and ultimately abolished altogether?
Which did the pre-Second Amendment Americans look to for their authority to bear arms, with little or nor infringement?