And so it begins..."Obama calls for measures against gun violence".

[PA_Sasquatch]

Posted in The Washington Times, Wednesday, July 25th 2012:

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/...utm_medium=RSS

[G19]

If he’s as effective on his mission to do this as he is with running the country and fixing the economy, we’ve got no worries.

[PocketProtector]

If he’s as effective on his mission to do this as he is with running the country and fixing the economy, we’ve got no worries.

He's not running the country, he's on a mission of ruining the country. And clearly, he is more competent at that than any.

IT"S INTENTIONAL. The List of the things he has done to achieve this is monumental.

Read David Limbaugh's new book...The Great Destroyer, IT WILL BLOW YOUR MIND.

In irrefutable detail, David Limbaugh, like a prosecuting attorney, makes his case that the Obama administration is a real and present danger to America’s future. There is no more comprehensive indictment of the Obama administration as it seeks re-election than The Great Destroyer. It is a book that every American worried about the future of our country must read.

[bac0nfat]

Good luck getting that through the house.

[TheWolff]

“I, like most Americans, believe that the Second Amendment guarantees an individual the right to bear arms,” Mr. Obama said. “But I also believe that the majority of gun owners would agree that we should do everything possible to prevent criminals and fugitives from purchasing weapons, that we should check someone’s criminal record before they can [purchase a gun], that a mentally unbalanced individual should not be able to get his hands on a gun so easily. These steps shouldn’t be controversial, they should be common sense..."

[PocketProtector]

Good luck getting that through the house.

Dictatorial Order is how it will go down. The whole 1st term was to establish EO's to legislate. Not opposed, it has worked.

Re-election is suicide for gun owners and the country as a whole.

[rmagill]

What is so insidious about this is that on the surface it seems innocent. For instance:

“A lot of gun owners would agree that AK-47s belong in the hands of soldiers, not in the hands of criminals,

This seems well and good, until one scrutinizes what he is saying. He is actually saying that ak-47 type firearms only belong to governments, not to private citizens. However, his statement is very subtle and by saying that "a lot of gun owners" agree with this statement, he marginalizes anyone who would disagree with him.

Even talking about preventing criminals from purchasing firearms is insidious because, as far as I can tell, he is describing the current system (except for the part about making it tougher for people with mental health issues... is he going to propose that anyone under the care of a mental health professional - even if it is to work out family dysfunction or incidents from one's past - they shouldn't have a firearm) but in a way that implies that the current system does less than it really does.

*Interesting point, my wife - who has a degree in communication and who studied Hitler's propaganda - made the point that Obama's speech fits the pattern used by those with no basis for their arguments (which we knew) and also fits the same propaganda pattern that Hitler used... Our president is an insidious snake.

[Metz]

*Interesting point, my wife - who has a degree in communication and who studied Hitler's propaganda - made the point that Obama's speech fits the pattern used by those with no basis for their arguments (which we knew) and also fits the same propaganda pattern that Hitler used... Our president is an insidious snake.

Well, it's kinda common for all the politicians, liberal, or conservative. Their speech writers also have degree in propaganda, and know, that sheeple need to be in agreement with certain point, then make another point, that has nothing to do with the previous one (regardless of the words "because of that") and sheeple' reflex will make them to agree with that too.

- Sky is blue!
- YEAAAH!!!!
- Water is wet!
- YEAAAH!!!!
- That's why guns should be banned!
- YEAAAH!!!!!

What sad is the fact, that we are kind of fighting for individual rights and for lifting the stupid sheeple label, while sheeple do their best to keep it. Over and over again

[Datkid]

If he’s as effective on his mission to do this as he is with running the country and fixing the economy, we’ve got no worries.

if this was facebook, i would like that post

[TheWolff]

What is so insidious about this is that on the surface it seems innocent. For instance:


This seems well and good, until one scrutinizes what he is saying. He is actually saying that ak-47 type firearms only belong to governments, not to private citizens. However, his statement is very subtle and by saying that "a lot of gun owners" agree with this statement, he marginalizes anyone who would disagree with him.

If by "scrutinize" you mean "replacing entire words with words of a different meaning", then yes, "he" could be saying that, or anything you want.

I don't think "a lot" of gun owners marginalizes anyone. Saying "most" would, but that's not what he said. If he said "a lot" of gun owners like sausage pizza, I (being a pepperoni guy) wouldn't feel marginalized.

I don't like the guy, and I think he is a criminal and an enemy of our freedoms, but it really feels like you're trying hard to be offended here.