What is the difference from Hitler, Stalin, Mao (which 0bammunists all seem to love), Pol Pot, Castro, Chavez, etc?
Actually, none.
<> In thinking more about F&F I've come up with another person he's eerily similar to--Charles Manson. On its face that may seem unlikely; however, if one compares Obama's role in the F&F murders with Manson's role in the Tate/LaBianca murders the remarkable similarity becomes obvious.
Manson really didn't care much one way or the other about Sharon Tate and the LaBiancas. To him their deaths were simply going to be essential stepping stones on the way to provoking a race war and the "helter skelter" he thought would inevitably follow, enabling him and his flowers to achieve power. He was properly convicted of murder because he masterminded those killings, regardless of whether they were done for the pure pleasure of doing them or to achieve the higher movie of "helter skelter."
It's the same way with Obama. He, Holder, and their accomplices concocted F&F to create irresistible political pressure to destroy the 2d Amendment, just as Manson planed his killing spree to achieve "helter skelter." Much like Manson, as large a number of murders and as much mayhem as possible were necessary for F&F to achieve its illicit objective. After all, if those weapons were walked to gun clubs and private citizens for legitimate self-defense, there would have been no mayhem and none of the political pressure for gun confiscation that Obama, Holder and their accomplices wanted. Obama, Holder, and their accomplices needed, intended, and wanted those murders for the same basic kind of reason Manson needed, intended, and wanted his murders, in each case to achieve a higher political objective. Thus, Obama, Holder, and their accomplices are no better than Manson and his were and should suffer the same fate as the Manson family because they've done the same kind of thing.