Obama Climbs Back On His Anti-Gun Horse

[Deadcenter]

This man is scary!

Friday, April 04, 2008 With the Democratic Presidential nomination process turning into what would have been an unthinkably close race only a few months ago, we continue to see the political contenders pulling out all of the rhetorical stops to distinguish themselves as the “candidate of choice” for their constituency. We also continue to see the candidates test the limits of credibility in the process.
Last month, we reported on the hypocrisy of Democratic presidential hopeful Barack Obama. We detailed his advocacy of a law to forbid federally licensed gun dealers from legally selling constitutionally-protected products (firearms) in huge geographical areas, without holding purveyors of pornography to the same standard. Apparently, Obama is in the habit of saying and doing whatever he feels is politically expedient at the time, and for his particular audience. Well, he’s at it again, and changing horses in the middle of the campaign stream.
While on the campaign trail earlier this year, Obama tried to reassure pro-gun voters by telling them, “I have no intention of taking away folks’ guns.” But an April 3 article in Townhall.com reports that Obama in now embracing his well-documented anti-gun leanings. “I am not in favor of concealed weapons,” he told the Pittsburgh Tribune. “I think that creates a potential atmosphere where more innocent people could [get shot during] altercations.” Obama went on to discuss, “…cracking down on the various loopholes that exist in terms of background checks…,” and, “…reasonable, thoughtful gun control measure[s]….”
It obviously comes as no surprise that Obama is anti-gun. In fact, as with Hillary, we are so well aware of Obama’s hostility toward the Second Amendment that in the 2004 elections, NRA’s Political Victory Fund (NRA-PVF) issued Obama a well-deserved “F” grade. What’s surprising is that he thinks he can slowly change his message and we won’t notice. Incidentally, in taking his latest position, Obama is opposing the law in 48 of our 50 states, which afford law-abiding citizens a means to carry a concealed firearm for personal protection.
In truth, both candidates’ records are well documented and show, unquestionably, that they’re both anti-gun. (Neither joined more than 300 of their congressional colleagues in signing a brief in the Heller case in support of the Second Amendment.) For either to now try to convince us otherwise is ridiculous.
NRA-ILA :: Legislation

Operation Chaos: Because Somebody has to do it.

[trik396]

He is the most liberal senator, by far.

If he successfully fools the sheep into electing him into office, this country is in for the WORST 4 years of presidency. BY FAR....

[eric_t12]

well its either him and hillary, or the most liberal republican in years (next to romney and ghouliani, i suppose) -

the choices are grand.

[FrankRizzoXD40]

All of the sheeple who attend (and faint at) the Obama rallies really make me sick.

They cheer someone who seeks to take away our constitutional freedoms and our defense against tyranny, simply because he speaks really well. How can people be so easily fooled into listening to how good someone says something instead of to what he is actually saying.

I hate to say this, but his ability to use communication to seduce people reminds me of how Hitler started and eventually influenced thousands of people to support his crazy ideas.

I don't think my faith in my fellow man could get any lower.

Frank

[DanTheEldest]

Originally Posted by FrankRizzoXD40

All of the sheeple who attend (and faint at) the Obama rallies really make me sick.

They cheer someone who seeks to take away our constitutional freedoms and our defense against tyranny, simply because he speaks really well. How can people be so easily fooled into listening to how good someone says something instead of to what he is actually saying.

Frank

I've been thinking about this man, and like you said, the vast majority of people who find themselves drawn to him I don't think have actually looked into his voting record. He's an emptiness--a man-shaped void into which they pour all their individual hopes and dreams while ignoring (consciously or unconsciously) what it is he actually stands for. It really is closer to a cult than a political following, at least IMO.

[jdavionic]

Originally Posted by DanTheEldest

I've been thinking about this man, and like you said, the vast majority of people who find themselves drawn to him I don't think have actually looked into his voting record. He's an emptiness--a man-shaped void into which they pour all their individual hopes and dreams while ignoring (consciously or unconsciously) what it is he actually stands for. It really is closer to a cult than a political following, at least IMO.

That's just it. He seems intentionally evasive on providing details to lure them into supporting him. Add in his charismatic speaking skills and you do have a cult-like following. For example, 'I want common sense legislation' with respect to gun control. But dig a little and you find that his idea of "common sense" lacks common sense.

[FrankRizzoXD40]

Originally Posted by DanTheEldest

I've been thinking about this man, and like you said, the vast majority of people who find themselves drawn to him I don't think have actually looked into his voting record. He's an emptiness--a man-shaped void into which they pour all their individual hopes and dreams while ignoring (consciously or unconsciously) what it is he actually stands for. It really is closer to a cult than a political following, at least IMO.

My feelings exactly.

Like you said, they either don't care about his record or don't want to bother looking at it....

He is the etch-a-sketch candidate. He takes the shape of whatever is favorable to whoever he is talking to. Like the opening article of this thread--He shows up at one place and says he doesn't want to take guns away from anyone and then he shakes himself up and redraws a different position at another event.

Like you said, people also impress their own hopes upon him and to them he is saying exactly what they want. They want change and he wants change. Yet there is little to no discussion of what the change is. Is it change for good? Change for bad? These sheeple don't seem to care...

They are either willingly or unwillingly ignorant of his record. For those who know it, they don't care because they agree. For those who don't, it seems they have no intention of learning about it. They would rather be fainting from his rhetoric at campaign events.

I stand by my comparison to Hitler. He was able to do a similar thing with people. He obviously pushed it a lot farther, but his promises and rhetoric had a similar effect on those who listened to him.

Frank

[Etta Place]

Originally Posted by FrankRizzoXD40

My feelings exactly.

Like you said, they either don't care about his record or don't want to bother looking at it....

He is the etch-a-sketch candidate. He takes the shape of whatever is favorable to whoever he is talking to. Like the opening article of this thread--He shows up at one place and says he doesn't want to take guns away from anyone and then he shakes himself up and redraws a different position at another event.

Like you said, people also impress their own hopes upon him and to them he is saying exactly what they want. They want change and he wants change. Yet there is little to no discussion of what the change is. Is it change for good? Change for bad? These sheeple don't seem to care...

They are either willingly or unwillingly ignorant of his record. For those who know it, they don't care because they agree. For those who don't, it seems they have no intention of learning about it. They would rather be fainting from his rhetoric at campaign events.

I stand by my comparison to Hitler. He was able to do a similar thing with people. He obviously pushed it a lot farther, but his promises and rhetoric had a similar effect on those who listened to him.

Frank

Women fainted at Frank Sinatra and Beatles concerts too.

[one-eyed-fatman]

Originally Posted by jdavionic

That's just it. He seems intentionally evasive on providing details to lure them into supporting him. Add in his charismatic speaking skills and you do have a cult-like following. For example, 'I want common sense legislation' with respect to gun control. But dig a little and you find that his idea of "common sense" lacks common sense.

Are you and DanTheEldest not speaking of the way both party's are now? I think so. After all it's both party's that refuse to let anyone in D.C own a gun.

[jdavionic]

Originally Posted by one-eyed-fatman

Are you and DanTheEldest not speaking of the way both party's are now? I think so. After all it's both party's that refuse to let anyone in D.C own a gun.

Hey, I've said it many times...anyone who thinks GWB supports the 2A needs to think again. We're just fortunate another AWB didn't come across his desk. He already said that he would sign it.