Let's assume liberals are smart, or at the least liberal leaders are smart...
Could it be possible that all of this is intentional?
Could a leader, any leader, be capable of sacrificing children, OUR children, to further their agenda?
Or at the least manipulating a tragedy, and their followers emotions to further their agenda? Smart as my liberal friends are, they can still be manipulated, as we all can be.
And let's not forget, all these people making our schools gun free zones, all their kids go to schools with a lot of guns in them and around them.... I'm sure they, and their kids, feel safe and secure every day.
Of course they are smart and of course this is intentional. That should NOT be news to anyone. Machiavelli was not a fictional character. The question is one of intent, the agenda, and THAT is where the issue lies.
If you, or I believe, honestly, that X policy is better for the society over time, it's worth something. Is saving 100 kids worth 99 dead ones? One dead one? Modern liberals believe in the power of government. I have NO doubt that Obama believes that there WILL be less kids killed in school by guns if we have less, not more, guns. He is, of course, correct but, is that the point, how they get murdered?
George Bush believed however many dead GI's and Marines was worth it to do whatever it is he thought would happen in Iraq. Save millions of US citizens? 10's of millions? We, on the right, don't doubt his motives and intentions. Many still don't doubt his methods. A thinking mind easily comes to the recognition that there was probably better, much better, ways to accomplish the goal. Whatever it was. Is it possible that Bush wanted the war knowing he had no intentions of winning it and very simply wanted a war? Did he really believe all that stood between Iraq and Jeffersonian democracy was Saddam? Any rationale thought about how he went about it, meant the rise of Iran in power and influence. Did Bush mean for the Middle East to become an even worse mess? We don't even allow debate over what Bush's motives were on our side.
We can just sit here and question everything about Obama, his motive, his intentions but, that takes us one of three places; A, he, the left, are simply, as you are suggesting, doing the math, trading some dead kids for what they think will save more over time or, B, using dead kids to form a more totalitarian government that controls for controls sake with no regard for the body count, the Stalin method for lack of a better term, or, C, he, they, really don't give a crap and it's all about personal gain.
What do we even want in our government??? I mean, Obama did get re-elected. He hasn't changed.