Page 1 of 4 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 76

Thread: obama's Atrocious Record AGAINST Our Second Amendment

  1. #1
    TWG2A
    Guest

    obama's Atrocious Record AGAINST Our Second Amendment

    Lately we're hearing far too many glassy eyeds saying things like "obama is pro Second Amendment!" and "obama hasn't done anything to indicate he wants to ban guns!"

    RUBBISH.

    There are certain people who are actually watching what he DOES, instead of what he SAYS with regard to this most critical issue.

    That “certain kind of person” would be anyone with an I.Q. above room temperature who had been paying the slightest bit of attention, because Obama’s actions as a legislator spoke volumes about his feelings on the gun issue. Senator Obama’s statements on the campaign trail weren’t any more reassuring. For example:
    ▪ Obama opposed a bill in the Illinois legislature which would have protected homeowners from weapons charges if they used an “illegal” gun in self-defense.
    ▪ In a primary debate in 2008, Obama the candidate stated that the second amendment confers an individual right, BUT (there’s always but where the second amendment is concerned) the fact that it is an individual right “does not mean that the state or local government can’t constrain the exercise of that right”. In addition, for a supposed constitutional scholar to state that the Bill of Rights confers rights, rather than protects pre-existing rights is also worrisome.
    ▪ When running for the Illinois senate in 1996, Obama most assuredly did fill out a questionnaire (despite his later claims that a staffer did it) in which he unequivocally supported a ban on the manufacture, sale and possession of handguns, a ban on the possession of ‘assault weapons’ and waiting periods before purchasing a firearm.
    ▪ Need I mention the whole “bitter clingers” episode?
    ▪ Although he claimed to respect the second amendment, he also said that the D.C. gun ban (banning all handguns and operable long guns) was constitutional. When pressed for his rationale, he said there was nothing wrong with a community establishing their own “reasonable, thoughtful gun control measures” while still respecting the second amendment. Did you catch that? A complete ban is his idea of a reasonable gun control measure.
    ▪ In the Illinois legislature, he supported licensing and registering gun owners as a measure to keep unlawful guns off the street. This purported constitutional scholar was apparently unaware that the supreme court has ruled that criminals don’t need to register (and can’t be punished for failing to register) their guns because it would be a violation of their right against self-incrimination.
    ▪ In 2000 Obama cosponsored a bill to limit gun purchases to one per month and in 2003 he voted in favor of HB 2579 which had the same one gun per month provision.
    ▪ According to a Chicago Defender article in December of 1999, “Obama is proposing to make it a felony for a gun owner whose firearm was stolen from his residence which causes harm to another person if that weapon was not securely stored in that home.”
    ▪ At an NAACP forum in 2007 Obama stated “We’ve got to make sure that unscrupulous gun dealers aren’t loading up vans and dumping guns in our communities, because we know they’re not made in our communities.” What?!? Is that what he really thinks? That federally licensed gun dealers are loading up vehicles and selling guns out of the back in inner cities?
    ▪ In the Illinois senate he supported a confiscatory ‘assault weapons’ ban which would have included semi-auto shotguns and even some pump, double and single barrel shotguns.
    ▪ As a Presidential candidate he called for passage of H.R. 6257, deceptively titled “Assault Weapons Ban Reauthorization Act of 2008″ which would have explicitly banned far more weapons than the Clinton AWB.
    ▪ As a Senator, Obama voted against prohibiting lawsuits against gun manufacturers and voted in favor of an amendment to that bill which would have banned most rifle ammunition, under the guise of banning ‘armor-piercing’ ammunition.
    ▪ As a Senator Obama did not sign the amicus brief supporting the individual rights view in Heller v. DC.
    ▪ Obama voted to ban gun stores within five miles of a school or park, which would have eliminated most gun stores in America.
    ▪ He supported legislation to “close the gun show loophole” which would have imprisoned show organizers if a single person at a show offered a gun for sale privately.
    ▪ As a Senator, Obama stated he supported a federal ban on concealed carry laws and as a Presidential candidate he told the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review “‘I am not in favor of concealed weapons,’ Obama said. ‘I think that creates a potential atmosphere where more innocent people could (get shot during) altercations.’”
    Barack Obama’s actions as President have done nothing to change our perceptions, either. On his first day in office, on the White House website, under “Urban Policy” we found this gem posted:
    Obama and Biden would repeal the Tiahrt Amendment, which restricts the ability of local law enforcement to access important gun trace information, and give police officers across the nation the tools they need to solve gun crimes and fight the illegal arms trade. Obama and Biden also favor commonsense measures that respect the Second Amendment rights of gun owners, while keeping guns away from children and from criminals. They support closing the gun show loophole and making guns in this country childproof. They also support making the expired federal Assault Weapons Ban permanent.
    See above regarding how little the Obama AWB resembed the Clinton-era AWB. When he talks about keeping guns away from children, what he’s really talking about are various blue-sky proposals to make guns “childproof.”
    And who can forget the Obama Administration’s employment questionnaire Question 59: “Do you or any members of your immediate family own a gun? If so, provide complete ownership and registration information. Has the registration ever lapsed? Please also describe how and by whom it is used and whether it has been the cause of any personal injuries or property damage.”
    Once Obama had settled into power, there were more ‘indicators’ of his anti-gun feelings:
    ▪ In March, 2009 the DoD ‘revised’ its policy on the disposal of once-fired brass. Instead of selling it to consumers and domestic agencies for reloading, all once-fired brass from the military would be shredded and sold as scrap. This policy was reversed fairly quickly after outraged shooters contacted their legislators and Senators Tester and Baucus (both D-MT) faxed a letter to the DoD asking them to change the policy. The fact that Senator Tester was Chairman of the Senate Finance Committee might have had something to do with the quick volte-face.
    ▪ The DHS report, Rightwing Extremism: Current Economic and Political Climate Fueling Resurgence in Radicalization and Recruitment [.pdf] which cited as a key finding: “The possible passage of new restrictions on firearms and the return of military veterans facing significant challenges reintegrating into their communities could lead to the potential emergence of terrorist groups or lone wolf extremists capable of carrying out violent attacks.”
    ▪ In April of 2009, President Obama announced he wanted the Senate to ratify the Inter-American Convention Against The Illicit Manufacturing Of And Trafficking In Firearms, Ammunition, Explosives, And Other Related Materials (called by its Spanish acronym of CIFTA for obvious reasons). A close look at the Definitions section of the treaty reveals that it would require a government license for “the manufacture or assembly of firearms, ammunition, explosives, and other related materials”. That doesn’t sound too bad, right? I mean we sort of have that now, don’t we? But the devil, as they say, is in the details. Or, in this case, the definitions, because the way they’re written, you could be required to get a government license to reload ammo, add or change out a scope on a rifle, replace a factory trigger with an upgraded one, or even so much as load a weapon. Preposterous you say? Look at how they define “other related materials.” Go ahead, I’ll wait. Back? Okay, when they say “any component, part, or replacement part of a firearm, or an accessory which can be attached to a firearm” you think an anti-gun administration wouldn’t say that applies to magazines and ammo? So – technically – putting rounds in a mag or a mag in a weapon would constitute “assembly” which would require a license. So how much will the license cost? What will the application process be? Will it be “shall-issue” or “may-issue”? How long will it be good for? How much will it cost to renew? All of these details could be used to drastically reduce gun ownership.
    ▪ The Obama administration reversed a decision to import over 800,000 surplus M-1 rifles and carbines from South Korea. Not only are these weapons of some historical significance, but their arrival on the market would reduce prices on these sorts of weapons, at least in the relatively short term. The rationale (or perhaps rationalization would be a better term) given to the South Korean government for the decision was that the administration “was also worried the weapons could be smuggled to terrorists, gangs or other people with bad intentions.” Well that tells us something interesting. Since all of these rifles would have been sold through FFLs, the Obama administration is saying they believe every firearm sale in the country could put guns in the hands of “terrorists, gangs or other people with bad intentions.” And they call us paranoid.
    ▪ Under the Obama administration, the CDC did an end-run around the decade-old prohibition on performing research on gun control issues by maintaining they were not researching the gun issue, “rather they deal with the surrounding web of circumstances.” When Republicans in Congress questioned why money was being spent on these sorts of studies, an NIH spokesman replied “Gun-related violence is a public health problem – it diverts considerable health care resources away from other problems and, therefore, is of interest to NIH.” But wait, aren’t you supposed to do the studies before you come to the conclusion that guns have a net negative impact on public health? See, coming to conclusions and then ginning up research to support them is what got Congress to implement the ban in the first place.
    ▪ Fast & Furious and the whole “90% of illegal weapons in Mexico come from the U.S.” with the subsequent unlawful and unconstitutional long gun sales reporting requirement implemented by the ATF via bureaucratic fiat. And please, don’t even try to say “But Bush did it first!” Under oath, Attorney General Holder stated that he would not equate F&F with Operation Wide Receiver. Among other things, under OWR the ATF informed the Mexicans when, where and in what kind of car guns were crossing the border while under F&F not only were the Mexicans kept in the dark, the ATF liaison officers in Mexico were kept in the dark.
    ▪ Under the Obama administration the ATF suddenly reversed a forty-two year old ruling, stating that “[t]he temporary assignment of a firearm by an FFL to its unlicensed agents, contractors, volunteers, or any other person who is not an employee of the FFL, even for bona fide business purposes, is a transfer or disposition for purposes of the Gun Control Act” which then requires that the transfer be processed by an FFL, complete with NICS check and a 4473, lengthening the transfer process considerably.
    ▪ In an op-ed for the Arizona Star, Obama capitalized on the Tucson shooting, calling for more gun control. Except he didn’t call it ‘gun control’, he called it “sound and effective steps that will actually keep those irresponsible, law-breaking few from getting their hands on a gun in the first place”.
    ▪ Then there was this piece in the Huffington Post in which Obama admitted that he could not achieve gun control through legislation, so “only executive orders or administrative actions — and not an actual bill — are expected to be handed to Congress.” What was it Bill Clinton’s aide said? “Stroke of the pen. Law of the land. Kinda cool.” Yeah, who needs that whole “work within constitutional limits” stuff anyway, right?
    So the next time some ignorant anti says “But Obama hasn’t done anything on gun control . . . why are you so paranoid?” give them chapter and verse. Not that facts ever make much of an impression on hoplophobes.


    Here is a list of the anti gun legislation sponsored so far this year (2012)

    Care to review who supplied funds to sponsor these bills eh? Funny how George Soros and the Joyce Foundation are never mentioned by stinkyredfish.

    H.R. 227 (Jackson Lee):
    H.R. 263 (Ackerman):
    H.R. 308 (McCarthy and 48 others):
    H.R. 367 (Richardson):
    H.R. 420 (Rehberg, Boswell):
    H.R. 496 (King of New York, Bishop, Engel, Rangel, Chu):
    H.R. 505 (Nadler):
    H.R. 591 (McCarthy):
    H.R. 645 (Ross, Jordan):
    H.R. 770 (Cuellar):
    H.R. 808 (Kucinich et al.):
    H.R. 973 (Mrs. Adams & 50 others):
    H.R. 1093 (King, Altmire):
    H.R. 1506 (King of New York, Rangel, Ackerman, Rush, Waxman, Deutch, Holt, Norton, Engel, Doyle, Chu, Lance):
    H.R. 1552 (Israel):
    H.R. 1642 (Quigley, Chu, Norton, Jackson, Moran):
    H.R. 1781 (McCarthy and 35 others):
    H.R. 2252 (Bartlett and 18 other original cosponsors):
    H.R. 2554 (Maloney & 15 other original cosponsors):
    H.R. 2618 (Quigley):
    S. 32 (Lautenberg, Feinstein, Menendez, Boxer, Kerry, Reed, Levin, Franken, Schumer, Durbin):
    S. 34 (Lautenberg, Menendez, Feinstein, Whitehouse, Reed, Levin, Schumer, Durbin, Boxer):
    S. 35 (Lautenberg, Reed, Menendez, Kerry, Feinstein, Whitehouse, Levin, Schumer, Durbin, Boxer, Wyden):
    S. 176 (Boxer):
    S. 332 (Hatch, Roberts):
    S. 436 (Schumer, Gillibrand):
    S. 570 (Tester, Ensign, Begich, Baucus, Burr, Chambliss, Inhofe, Paul, Barrasso, Coburn):
    S. 835 (Crapo, Leahy):
    S. 1305 (Feinstein)
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails Click image for larger version. 

Name:	billofrightsandbullets.jpg 
Views:	74 
Size:	55.4 KB 
ID:	8076  

  2. #2
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    , , Kernersville NC
    Posts
    783
    Agree!! If anyone still thinks he will stand up to the 2A, hell, he doesnt stand up for ANY part of the Constitution. Have another sip of that Koolaid.

  3. #3
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    SW Idaho
    Posts
    1,552
    Lately we're hearing far too many glassy eyeds saying things like "obama is pro Second Amendment!" and "obama hasn't done anything to indicate he wants to ban guns!"
    Who in the hell have you been hearing that from lately? Anyone with half a brain has known for years that Obama is an ardent enemy of the individual right to keep and bear arms. However, at least he's honest and consistent about it, unlike Romney, Gingrich, et. al.

    RON PAUL 2012

  4. #4
    Regular Member Jack House's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    I80, USA
    Posts
    2,661
    Quote Originally Posted by ManInBlack View Post
    Who in the hell have you been hearing that from lately?
    You obviously don't read the forums very much.

    BrettaFS92Lady and one other guy, can't remember exactly, pop into mind immediately. I'm sure there's others. A lot of people say that.

  5. #5
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    SW Idaho
    Posts
    1,552
    Quote Originally Posted by Jack House View Post
    You obviously don't read the forums very much.

    BrettaFS92Lady and one other guy, can't remember exactly, pop into mind immediately. I'm sure there's others. A lot of people say that.
    Anything Beretta, Tawnos, Drake, etc. say goes in one ear, gives me a quick laugh, and then is immediately ejected out of the other.

    I suppose I was thinking of the real world outside of the trolls that inhabit OCDO. You know, people other than committed Obamatons.
    Last edited by ManInBlack; 03-07-2012 at 12:21 PM.

  6. #6
    TWG2A
    Guest
    I get that crap all the time. There's a LOT of obamacommiezombies here on OCDO, on most of the hunting sites and they swarm my blog with this crap on a regular basis.

    Facts are stubborn things. All they can do when I shove these facts in their snouts is deflect and dismiss it. That's how those idiots roll. Just ignore it and it will be "untrue" in their beady little glassy eyes.

    I don't even bother trying to convince those fools anymore. I only state the facts if there's someone else listening or reading the posts in hopes THEY will actually do their own homework. The glassy eyeds are a lost cause.

  7. #7
    TWG2A
    Guest
    Oh, I forgot to add.....

    They dismiss, deflect, then they call me a racist hater, or some idiotic label they've been coached to spew.

  8. #8
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    1,011
    I have more guns, ammo and rights under this administration than I did under the last. All of us do. Gun ownership is up, ammo is plentiful (finally) and more folks have their CCWs than under the previous administration. Say what you will, you can't deny these concrete facts by stating what he did , or said, in previously held positions.

  9. #9
    TWG2A
    Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by beebobby View Post
    I have more guns, ammo and rights under this administration than I did under the last. All of us do. Gun ownership is up, ammo is plentiful (finally) and more folks have their CCWs than under the previous administration. Say what you will, you can't deny these concrete facts by stating what he did , or said, in previously held positions.
    Oh yes, indeed we do. That is because anyone with half a brain knows obama hates our Constitution and our Bill of Rights, so we're stocking up for the INEVITABLE fight.
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails Click image for larger version. 

Name:	nrabo.JPG 
Views:	54 
Size:	16.8 KB 
ID:	8080  
    Last edited by TWG2A; 03-07-2012 at 01:44 PM.

  10. #10
    TWG2A
    Guest
    One more thing.... you do NOT have more "rights" under this marxist regime.

  11. #11
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    SW Idaho
    Posts
    1,552
    Quote Originally Posted by beebobby View Post
    ammo is plentiful (finally)
    Ammo prices are still way up, effectively negating any increase in supply except for the wealthy. $17.99 for a brick of Federal bulk .22LR at Cabela's is just plain wrong. Of course, inflation has dramatically increased under Obama (not that Bush did anything to stop it, either) and wages have decreased or remained stagnant, so that could be part of the reason why ammo is so expensive.

    and more folks have their CCWs than under the previous administration.
    It is an ongoing process. As more states liberalize their laws, more people will take advantage of that. Obama has certainly done nothing to increase the number of people with concealed permits, and, in fact, his Justice Department is actively trying to make things more difficult for legal gun buyers and sellers.

  12. #12
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    , , Kernersville NC
    Posts
    783
    Quote Originally Posted by TWG2A View Post
    One more thing.... you do NOT have more "rights" under this marxist regime.
    That is SOOOOOOOOOO true!!!!! Just to remind people. The Gov. does NOT give any of us our rights.

  13. #13
    TWG2A
    Guest
    The ONLY "people" with more rights under this marxist regime are islamic terrorists and other criminals. In their case, this regime has "given" them rights they would not have under our Constitution and Bill Of Rights.

  14. #14
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    1,011
    Quote Originally Posted by TWG2A View Post
    The ONLY "people" with more rights under this marxist regime are islamic terrorists and other criminals. In their case, this regime has "given" them rights they would not have under our Constitution and Bill Of Rights.
    Your statement is nothing but hyperbole, but you did hit many of the TP talking points. Sorry, not buying the "scary mooslims" tactic.

  15. #15
    TWG2A
    Guest
    Indeed...
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails Click image for larger version. 

Name:	liberalbrain0.jpg 
Views:	95 
Size:	92.0 KB 
ID:	8084   Click image for larger version. 

Name:	liberalargument.jpg 
Views:	83 
Size:	52.2 KB 
ID:	8083  

  16. #16
    Regular Member sudden valley gunner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Whatcom County
    Posts
    17,338
    Let's not forget Bush was a fan of gun control too he publicly stated he would resign the AWB and sign a bill to limit "high capacity" magazines. Congress just didn't give him the legislation to sign.

    I have no doubt Obama is anti gun but neocons are not the answer either. Obama would sign anti gun legislation congress hasn't given him much to sign.
    I am not anti Cop I am just pro Citizen.

    U.S. v. Minker, 350 US 179, at page 187
    "Because of what appears to be a lawful command on the surface, many citizens, because
    of their respect for what only appears to be a law, are cunningly coerced into waiving their
    rights, due to ignorance." (Paraphrased)

  17. #17
    TWG2A
    Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by sudden valley gunner View Post
    Let's not forget Bush was a fan of gun control too he publicly stated he would resign the AWB and sign a bill to limit "high capacity" magazines. Congress just didn't give him the legislation to sign.

    I have no doubt Obama is anti gun but neocons are not the answer either. Obama would sign anti gun legislation congress hasn't given him much to sign.
    HAHAHA!

    Yep. Deflect and dismiss. Point the finger elsewhere and hope everyone follows. And when you have no valid response, Blame Bush!

    NEWS FLASH! BUSH IS NOT THE CURRENT PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES! Marxist obama is! Stick to the point, sudden valley. We must deal with what is happening TODAY. The point is that OBAMA has an atrocious record with regard to gun control and infringing on our rights.

    Thanks for making my point. You're all the same, and your stupid blame-game is becoming a bore.
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails Click image for larger version. 

Name:	BlameBush.jpg 
Views:	82 
Size:	54.0 KB 
ID:	8086  

  18. #18
    TWG2A
    Guest
    yawn...

    To be continued..... for ever and ever and ever and ever and for everything.
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails Click image for larger version. 

Name:	blamebush2.jpg 
Views:	73 
Size:	7.6 KB 
ID:	8087   Click image for larger version. 

Name:	blamebush3.jpg 
Views:	74 
Size:	13.1 KB 
ID:	8088   Click image for larger version. 

Name:	blamebush4.jpg 
Views:	80 
Size:	17.7 KB 
ID:	8089  

  19. #19
    Founder's Club Member Jim675's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Bellevue, Washington, USA
    Posts
    1,037
    Quote Originally Posted by TWG2A View Post
    HAHAHA!

    Yep. Deflect and dismiss. ...SNIP
    You may want to let up a little on your trigger finger on this one. SVG was agreeing with you while pointing out that while Obama = bad, Not Obama might also = bad, and we must remain alert. Although Obama has set a high mark (in debt terms) for his first term, I doubt not he'll eclipse his record if re-elected.

    No politician should get a free ride where our rights (or taxes) are involved.

  20. #20
    TWG2A
    Guest
    There are many things President Bush did that I don't like.

    This perpetual blame game is beyond boring. It's downright insanity at this point.

    Better we should stick to what is happening TODAY. The original post is about OBAMA and his record. Let's not try to deflect and dilute the point.

    Not one person here can {honestly} deny the facts abotu obama. He IS a marxist. He HAS committed these atrocious infringements.

    That is the point.

  21. #21
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    SW Idaho
    Posts
    1,552

    Question

    Quote Originally Posted by TWG2A View Post
    Not one person here can {honestly} deny the facts abotu obama. He IS a marxist. He HAS committed these atrocious infringements.

    That is the point.
    Ok, so what? Aside from his dedicated sycophants, everyone will admit that. However, if you want to talk about TODAY, neither Mitt Romney or Newt Gingrich is trustworthy on the 2A. Santorum may be a tad bit better, but even if he had all the angels and saints praying for him, he still wouldn't have snowball's chance in hell of beating Obama. The only candidate who is a reliable defender of the 2A is Ron Paul. But, everyone with a brain already knows that.

    Again, what is the point to your Limbaugh-ish screeds?

  22. #22
    TWG2A
    Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by ManInBlack View Post
    Ok, so what? Aside from his dedicated sycophants, everyone will admit that. However, if you want to talk about TODAY, neither Mitt Romney or Newt Gingrich is trustworthy on the 2A. Santorum may be a tad bit better, but even if he had all the angels and saints praying for him, he still wouldn't have snowball's chance in hell of beating Obama. The only candidate who is a reliable defender of the 2A is Ron Paul. But, everyone with a brain already knows that.

    Again, what is the point to your Limbaugh-ish screeds?
    Why is this so difficult for you to follow?

    I don't like gingrich and romney, either. But THEY are not the subject of the original post. Start a thread about gingrich and romney if you want to discuss them.

    One more time.... this thread is about OBAMA and his record. Please stop deflecting.

  23. #23
    Regular Member sudden valley gunner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Whatcom County
    Posts
    17,338
    Quote Originally Posted by TWG2A View Post
    Why is this so difficult for you to follow?

    I don't like gingrich and romney, either. But THEY are not the subject of the original post. Start a thread about gingrich and romney if you want to discuss them.


    One more time.... this thread is about OBAMA and his record. Please stop deflecting.

    No one is deflecting, just using their brains to show you that not one person is the problem. Obama a Marxist I agree but so are most "conservatives". They are all bad, yet the one true conservative who happens to believe in our liberal rights as well is demonized by other "conservatives". Just voting Obama out is not the solution, so I must ask why are you hung up so much on this one Marxist and not so willing to point out or even want the Marxist/fascism of the other candidates pointed out?

    If you are not open for "discussion" than why start a thread on an open forum about it? Do I wanna see another 4 years of Obama, nope, but I fear having a socialist/neocon/fascist like Romney/Gingrich or Santorum in the house with 2 years of neocon/socialist/fascist congress and senate may be worse....

    So who are you supporting we all have been honest and open about who we support?
    I am not anti Cop I am just pro Citizen.

    U.S. v. Minker, 350 US 179, at page 187
    "Because of what appears to be a lawful command on the surface, many citizens, because
    of their respect for what only appears to be a law, are cunningly coerced into waiving their
    rights, due to ignorance." (Paraphrased)

  24. #24
    Regular Member Contrarian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Seattle,WA, , USA
    Posts
    266

    Question Obama and 2A

    I agree with SVG - if you're not willing to allow discourse on your comment then the exercise is merely a rant or blog entry to make you feel better.

    The main topic of your entry is Obama and his anti-gun attitude, but then you complain that everyone looks at history and not what's going on NOW.

    But most of your writing is history-based.

    If we agree with you and include ''...and this guy was no better..." where's the beef?

  25. #25
    TWG2A
    Guest
    Once again,...... The post is about OBAMA's RECORD.

    AS I have stated, we're hearing a lot of glassy eyeds saying things like "obama is pro second amendment" and "obama hasn't done anything to take our Second Amendment rights away".

    Those statements are totally untrue. My post is about proving they are untrue. It is NOT about who I support in the 2012 so-called "elections", and the history of infringements against our rights. One could write an entire trilogy about those issues. That is not what the original post is about. IT IS ABOUT OBAMA.

    The post is about OBAMA and his record, and how untrue it is to say that he hasn't done anything to infringe on our second amendment rights. It's purpose is to give those who CARE about it some factual information so that they can show others that he HAS, in FACT, infringed on our rights. It is simply a compilation of his record.

    There are plenty of campaign threads here and elsewhere in the ether. That's not the purpose of this post. THE POST IS ABOUT OBAMA'S RECORD. I'll scream about other people on other threads and in other forums.

    This post is intened to provide information for those who need it when some glassy eyed fool tries to say obama hasn't done these things.

Page 1 of 4 123 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •