• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

Obama: No stance on gun control

DoomGoober

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 1, 2010
Messages
63
http://www.npr.org/2011/07/08/137687203/gun-control-advocates-chide-obama-for-inaction

The NRA hates and fears Obama. Yet, gun control advocates also dislike Obama... Really? How is it both sides can have it both ways? As far as gun control goes, Obama could have jumped on the Gifford's situation -- but he didn't. Good for him (literally good for him, cause now he's not losing gun owner's votes.) He's not exactly a pro-gun president, but he's certainly not anti-gun.
 

RetiredOC

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Dec 21, 2009
Messages
1,561
I think he lost gun owner votes when he supported an all out ban on handguns...you know, a move that directly shows recklessness toward the U.S. constitution he has sworn to support.
 

thebigsd

Founder's Club Member
Joined
Mar 23, 2010
Messages
3,535
Location
Quarryville, PA
He's anti-gun, he just doesn't have enough courage to show it. He's trying to appoint Andrew Traver to the ATF. I don't need any more evidence than that.
 

randian

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 10, 2011
Messages
380
Location
Phoenix, AZ
No stance? That's a lie. From the Huffington Post: "The president directed the Attorney General to form working groups with key stakeholders to identify common sense measures that would improve American safety and security while fully respecting Second Amendment rights". That bit of Orwellian doublespeak should scare you.
 

Dreamer

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 23, 2009
Messages
5,360
Location
Grennsboro NC
Saying the current administration is not anti-gun-control is like saying the CIA is not anti-communism...

Just because their actions are not out in the open and freely acknowledged as "official policy" doesn't mean there aren't well-organized and funded covert programs to accomplish their agenda...
 
Last edited:

Beretta92FSLady

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 14, 2009
Messages
5,264
Location
In My Coffee
Saying the current administration is not anti-gun-control is like saying the CIA is not anti-communism...

Just because their actions are not out in the open and freely acknowledged as "official policy" doesn't mean there aren't well-organized and funded covert programs to accomplish their agenda...

I am just saying that His Act is Moderate. Ideology does not always make it to the Act. Sometimes it behooves a politician to not Act on certain ideological stances; how politician of Him.
 

Dreamer

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 23, 2009
Messages
5,360
Location
Grennsboro NC
I am just saying that His Act is Moderate. Ideology does not always make it to the Act. Sometimes it behooves a politician to not Act on certain ideological stances; how politician of Him.


Especially when a politician isn't actually making ANY policy decisions based on his own beliefs or conscience, but rather at the behest of his puppet masters, just like nearly everyone who has sat in the Oval Office for the last century.

The ones who don't play along, learn very quickly who is REALLY running the show...
 
Last edited:

Beretta92FSLady

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 14, 2009
Messages
5,264
Location
In My Coffee
Especially when a politician isn't actually making ANY policy decisions based on his own beliefs or conscience, but rather at the behest of his puppet masters, just like nearly everyone who has sat in the Oval Office for the last century.

The ones who don't play along, learn very quickly who is REALLY running the show...

Presidents are voted in by a certain group of individuals who happen to turn out that election season. Nothing unusual about that. People act as if President Obama is acting in an unusual manner, and He is not.

The base, that is who's running the Show.
 

JoeSparky

Centurion
Joined
Jun 20, 2008
Messages
3,621
Location
Pleasant Grove, Utah, USA
http://www.npr.org/2011/07/08/137687203/gun-control-advocates-chide-obama-for-inaction

The NRA hates and fears Obama. Yet, gun control advocates also dislike Obama... Really? How is it both sides can have it both ways? As far as gun control goes, Obama could have jumped on the Gifford's situation -- but he didn't. Good for him (literally good for him, cause now he's not losing gun owner's votes.) He's not exactly a pro-gun president, but he's certainly not anti-gun.

You can believe this IF you choose too but once you've reviewed his voting record on this subject as an elected represenative of Illinios OR even his many anti-gun nominees for various political appointed positions that need the approval of Congress.

IF after reviewing the suggested material if you choose to still believe as you've stated all I have to say is that "you can lead a horse to water but you can't make him drink!"
 

dogsandhogs

Regular Member
Joined
Apr 21, 2011
Messages
75
Location
Missouri
http://www.npr.org/2011/07/08/137687203/gun-control-advocates-chide-obama-for-inaction

The NRA hates and fears Obama. Yet, gun control advocates also dislike Obama... Really? How is it both sides can have it both ways? As far as gun control goes, Obama could have jumped on the Gifford's situation -- but he didn't. Good for him (literally good for him, cause now he's not losing gun owner's votes.) He's not exactly a pro-gun president, but he's certainly not anti-gun.

Well, he waited two months. Here is the link to the president's own op-ed published in the Arizona Daily Star in March.

http://azstarnet.com/article_011e7118-8951-5206-a878-39bfbc9dc89d.html
 

PrayingForWar

Founder's Club Member
Joined
Sep 9, 2007
Messages
1,701
Location
The Real World.
I am just saying that His Act is Moderate. Ideology does not always make it to the Act. Sometimes it behooves a politician to not Act on certain ideological stances; how politician of Him.

From what I understand the potus has allegedly signed off on a plan called "Fast and Furious", that directed ATF agents to not just allow suspected arms smuglers to obtain "assault weapons", but actually funneled money to assist them, rejected FFL dealers tips, and actually had undercover agents tail smuglers all the way to the border.

It is suspected by many that this was done intentionally to give truth to the lie that %90 of cartel guns come from US FFL Dealers. I have no illusions this will ever be traced to the desk of the potus, but I don't doubt for a minute he didn't know about it. Obozo is a common thug morally, he just has more brains than the typical ones. His actions openly regarding gun control have been moderate, I'm waiting to see what sort of executve orders the next president has to revoke.

Your continued support of this parasite is befuddling, since you're not a complete idiot.
 

OldCurlyWolf

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 8, 2010
Messages
907
Location
Oklahoma
http://www.npr.org/2011/07/08/137687203/gun-control-advocates-chide-obama-for-inaction

The NRA hates and fears Obama. Yet, gun control advocates also dislike Obama... Really? How is it both sides can have it both ways? As far as gun control goes, Obama could have jumped on the Gifford's situation -- but he didn't. Good for him (literally good for him, cause now he's not losing gun owner's votes.) He's not exactly a pro-gun president, but he's certainly not anti-gun.

just because he hasn't done anything while president YET, does not make him not anti firearms. Check his voting record, state and federal. You will see the fallacy of your statement.
 

Daylen

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 29, 2010
Messages
2,223
Location
America
Presidents are voted in by a certain group of individuals who happen to turn out that election season. Nothing unusual about that. People act as if President Obama is acting in an unusual manner, and He is not.

The base, that is who's running the Show.

Unusual for a president or a god? I notice now twice you have capitalised a pronoun when refering to Obama; capitalised pronouns not located at the front of a sentence are reserved for referances to the divine.
 

Beretta92FSLady

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 14, 2009
Messages
5,264
Location
In My Coffee
Unusual for a president or a god? I notice now twice you have capitalised a pronoun when refering to Obama; capitalised pronouns not located at the front of a sentence are reserved for referances to the divine.

Just merely capitalizing for the purposes of flinging a little crap in the faces of individuals who refer to Him as "Obuma," "potus," etc.

I know exactly what I am doing, and so do others on here that are keen about little details such as referring to President Obama as "Him,' instead of "him." Considering I have not witnessed a Divine Being, 'divinity' has nothing to do with my reference to President Obama. I should point out that He is the President of our Nation.

It's Hannity that continues to refer to President Obama as the "anointed one." Really, we all know the implication of Hannity's backhanded references to the President.
 
Last edited:

Alexcabbie

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 21, 2008
Messages
2,288
Location
Alexandria, Virginia, United States
Ever talk face-to-face with one of tese Ubamanistas who say he's "not anti-gun" and cite all the measures he has been forced to accept as evidence that he does not want to ban firearms (despite his lifelong record of saying he does)? This is like saying some dude pays his bills and citing multiple wage garnishments as evidence.

When these Ubamanistas say this stuff, they say it not reassuringly in a "let's get along" tone, but snarkily, with their lip curled in a sneer that says "we will win the propaganda war, and then we'll take your weapons"

There are a lot of Democrats who are grasping at straws to save Obama, believing that this is for the good of their party. This belief is akin to treading water holding an anvil and believing that the anvil is essential to staying afloat. The sooner the Dems jettison this nincompoop, the better off they will be. Of all the Americans who made a HUGE mistake in putting Obama in the White House, the rank-and-file Dems have been burned worst of all.
 

Dreamer

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 23, 2009
Messages
5,360
Location
Grennsboro NC
Just merely capitalizing for the purposes of flinging a little crap in the faces of individuals who refer to Him as "Obuma," "potus," etc.


"POTUS" is an acronym that is commonly used by "inside the beltway" types to refer to the President. It has been used by the Secret Service for decades, and is commonly used in DC blogs, and by both the Washington Post and Times. It is in NO way a derogatory term--it stands for President Of The United States...

Just like SCOTUS stands for Supreme Court Of The United States.

"Inside the Beltway" types have a propensity for "Alphabet Soup" acronyms, and such abbreviations are commonly used by DC locals. When I first moved to the DC metro area in 1987, it took me several months to be able to understand the news on TV and radio, and to be able to understand what people on the train and in the local "watering holes" were talking about...

I lived and worked in NoVa/DC Metro area for nearly 15 years. It is a VERY odd culture of secrecy, "insiders clubs" and acronyms. Everyone seems to think they are part of some sort of super-secret handshake club--from contractors for the EPA to local municipal governments, and if you don't know the "codes" you are immediately dismissed on a sociopolitical level.

I understand you are not a "Washington insider" so I'll take your comment about the use of "POTUS" with a grain of salt--but you need to know that if you think that is a derogatory term, that such an attitude will IMMEDIATELY brand you as "politically clueless" to "Washington Insiders"...
 

Dreamer

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 23, 2009
Messages
5,360
Location
Grennsboro NC
There are a lot of Democrats who are grasping at straws to save Obama, believing that this is for the good of their party. This belief is akin to treading water holding an anvil and believing that the anvil is essential to staying afloat.


Yes, and the sooner we can get a "Republican" anvil in the pool the better off America will be, because "Republican" anvils are made of RINO hide, baksheesh money and shredded documents--all of which float... :rolleyes:


The sooner the Dems jettison this nincompoop, the better off they will be. Of all the Americans who made a HUGE mistake in putting Obama in the White House, the rank-and-file Dems have been burned worst of all.

Yes, because the puppets on the "right" are SOOOO much more honest, honorable, and Constitutional. Even though their strings are connected to the SAME hands that control the puppets on the "left", they will somehow, magically, behave differently, and steer America back to it's true Constitutional destiny Liberty and Freedom. Yeah, I believe that... :uhoh:

Just like under Nixon, Reagan and the Bushes, when we got such Constitution-supporting programs like trade normalization with China, the creation of the EPA and DoEd, the breakup of the Bell Telephone systems, the Patriot Act, two wars in Iraq (both based on complete and total lies and fraudulent "intelligence"), warrantless wiretaps, the universal surveillance of domestic email and telephone traffic by the NSA, Guantanamo Bay, the repeal of Glass-Steagall (the bill was introduced by two Republicans), and the creation of the TSA and DHS.

Just sayin'...

The slice of "2-Party" baloney is ROTTEN on BOTH sides.

What we need is a different sandwich altogether...
 
Last edited:
Top