NRA Releases Anti-Obama Ads

Reply Tue 23 Sep, 2008 06:47 pm
Thank you foxy, I'll get them in this week.
0 Replies
Reply Wed 24 Sep, 2008 12:59 pm
You are either a racist, or you have been intentionally using racist terminology
in order to rile people up.
Either way, it's despicable and you ought to quit it.

You have no evidence to back up your accusations,
but I suppose that's never stopped you in the past,
so why should it now?


I will admit that u stimulated my curiousity, as to WHAT brought on
your semi-hysterical outburst.
U ignored my question qua WHAT was "despicable" that u want me to "quit" ?
Did I say something false ?

Explain: "in order to rile people up" ?

I am at a loss to understand your reasoning.

0 Replies
Reply Wed 24 Sep, 2008 02:23 pm
@Robert Gentel,
I 'd like to point something out
that is obvious to people who have been
members of the National Rifle Association for a while
( I 've been a Life Member for about 50 years )
but which is unknown to non-NRA members:

very frequently,
politicians who are aversive to us,
and who ofen vote against the right to freely defend oneself
from violent attack, PRETEND and counterfeit being on the side
of defensive freedom, in order to seduce and entice the votes
of citizens whose philosophy thay actively OPPOSE.
In other words, thay try to be sneaky enuf to avoid the effects
of their anti-freedom votes in Congress (or other legislative bodies),
by swindling pro-freedom citizens out of their votes.
Thay use hypocrisy and dissembling to defeat justice
coming back to haunt them at election time.

This happens all the time,
year in and year out, with MANY politicians,
of BOTH parties.
Now, it is true of Obama.
He is treated the same way as all other politicians
who employed a " wolf-in-sheep 's-clothing " defense from the voters
whose constitutional rights thay tried to violate and degrade.
Even Charles Schumer himself pretends to favor the 2nd Amendment.

We are not unfamiliar with these hypocrisies and frauds,
because we have seen so much of them. In other words,
we did not invent SKEPTICISM beginning with Obama.

Our rejection of Obama 's dissembling is the same as our rejection
of the frauds of other politicians for years n decades of attempted deception.

We did not single out Obama 's hoax
and treat him differently than other fakers.

0 Replies
A Lone Voice
Reply Sat 27 Sep, 2008 07:15 pm
Obama says he will not take away out guns.

But will he will stand up to a liberal dem congress and veto the bill they pass that does so?

Or will he simply stand aside and say it is "the will of the people."

I haven't seen anything in his record where he challenges the power base in own party over a major issue like this.

Anyone want to point me in the direction of such an issue?

Reply Sat 27 Sep, 2008 07:47 pm
@A Lone Voice,
The issue is much more complex than your simplistic scare tactic, ALV. No Congress, dem or repub is going to take away our guns. But there are certain issues that need to be addressed. Thinking people will do so.
Reply Sat 27 Sep, 2008 07:54 pm
Don’t Blame Liberals for Gun Control

by Richard Poe

NEWSMAX.COM - Anti-gun crusaders seem worried about the advent of a Republican administration. Heaven knows why. Republicans, in recent years, have managed to do nearly as much damage to the Second Amendment as Democrats.

In 1969, journalist William Safire asked Richard Nixon what he thought about gun control. "Guns are an abomination," Nixon replied. According to Safire, Nixon went on to confess that, "Free from fear of gun owners' retaliation at the polls, he favored making handguns illegal and requiring licenses for hunting rifles."

It was President George Bush, Sr. who banned the import of "assault weapons" in 1989, and promoted the view that Americans should only be allowed to own weapons suitable for "sporting purposes."

It was Governor Ronald Reagan of California who signed the Mulford Act in 1967, "prohibiting the carrying of firearms on one's person or in a vehicle, in any public place or on any public street." The law was aimed at stopping the Black Panthers, but affected all gun owners.

Twenty-four years later, Reagan was still pushing gun control. "I support the Brady Bill," he said in a March 28, 1991 speech, "and I urge the Congress to enact it without further delay."

One of the most aggressive gun control advocates today is Republican mayor Rudolph Giuliani of New York City, whose administration sued 26 gun manufacturers in June 2000, and whose police commissioner, Howard Safir, proposed a nationwide plan for gun licensing, complete with yearly "safety" inspections.

Another Republican, New York State Governor George Pataki, on August 10, 2000, signed into law what The New York Times called "the nation’s strictest gun controls," a radical program mandating trigger locks, background checks at gun shows and "ballistic fingerprinting" of guns sold in the state. It also raised the legal age to buy a handgun to 21 and banned "assault weapons," the sale or possession of which would now be punishable by seven years in prison.

Gun control crusaders argue that the Republicans are simply yielding to grassroots pressure, to gain political advantage. But polls show little evidence of such pressure.


0 Replies
Finn dAbuzz
Reply Sun 28 Sep, 2008 09:31 pm
I love this.

Obama supporters who are very much in favor of gun control are trying to convince us that Obama is not, as if such a position on his part is actually virtuous.

Irrespective of what statements Obama has made in the course of his political campaign, the NRA has, reasonably, assessed:

1) The body of his positions are liberal
2) He has, over the course of his campaign, moved to the right so as to attract those he perceives to be in the "middle."
3) He has admitted that sometimes he has said things during the campaign that he doesn't really mean because overheated rhetoric, in such times, is normal.
4) Gun control is a passionately held position of many, if not most, of the people who will be voting for him.
5) He will have no problem signing into law greater gun restrictions passed by a congress controlled by Democrats.
6) Their signature position stands a better chance of support with McCain as president.

Now, if Obama was actually a gun enthusiast and someone who argued strenuously against gun control, the NRA's opposition would be similar to that of Feminst groups as respects Sarah Palin.

0 Replies
A Lone Voice
Reply Sun 28 Sep, 2008 09:43 pm
OK, you can mitigate what I say by calling it a simple scare tatic, but now kindly answer the question:

Show me where Obama has stood up to his party.

In CA, where libs rule supreme, they are well on their way to "taking away" our guns, as much as they can at the state level. An out of control leftist congress run by the left wing of the dem party will do the same on the federal level.

I agree it is not only dems; there are plenty of repubs who will pander to the left on this issue.

But again, tell me how Obama will veto a dem congress. Show me an example where he has stood up to the power structure of his party.

McCain, much as I dislike him, has...

Reply Sun 28 Sep, 2008 09:59 pm
@A Lone Voice,
Come on, ALV, let's dispense with that old canard about McCain the maverick. It's nonsense and false to boot. You should be much more worried about McFlip.

Elected representatives have the right to introduce any legislation they feel is necessary. It's a bit ironic that conservatives feel that they have to run to the courts to protect them from legislators.

Finn dAbuzz
Reply Sun 28 Sep, 2008 10:05 pm
@A Lone Voice,
Now ALV, don't you know that Obama never stood up to his party because they were never wrong?

He's the most liberal senator in Washington only because he has been the most committed to opposing GW Bush. Bush is such a right-wing reactionary, he makes Genghis Khan look liberal.

And he has also 'reached across the aisle.'

How do we know this?

Because he and all of his supporters tell us at every opportunity.

You may not realize this, but Obama took the highly contraversial issue of nuclear proliferation head on, and bucked both the Democrat and Republican support for widespread sloopy control of nukes; working with Sen Lugar (R) to visit Khasakistan.

If not for him, Lugar might never have visited Khasakistan, and the Dems and Repubs would have had their way and flooded the world's markets with nukes.

How's that for political courage and 'reaching across the aisle?'
0 Replies
Reply Sun 28 Sep, 2008 11:51 pm
Nimh doesn't know it because he lives in Budapest,but in the inner city of Chicago where I live, hundreds of innocent black and Hispanic children are killed each year because of the stupid stance of the NRA on guns. When Senator Obama becomes president and appoints two or three clear thinking Supreme Court Justices, we will see a review of the Second Amendment which will clip the NRA"s feathers!!
0 Replies
Reply Sun 28 Sep, 2008 11:58 pm
Why wouldn't Senator Obama be against hand guns. Do you know how many innocent black and Hispanic children have been caught in the crossfire between gangs in Chicago. And, please don't blame the young men in the gamgs. Do you know what the unemployment rate is among young black men in Chicago? Close to 25%. But President Obama will solve that problem, after he appoints some clear thinking people to the Supreme Court.
0 Replies
Reply Mon 29 Sep, 2008 09:53 am
FACT: Barack Obama opposes four of the five Supreme Court
justices who affirmed an individual right to keep and bear arms.
He voted against the confirmation of Alito and Roberts and he has
stated he would not have appointed Thomas or Scalia.17

FACT: Barack Obama voted for an Illinois State Senate bill to ban
and confiscate “assault weapons,” but the bill was so poorly crafted,
it would have also banned most semi-auto and single and double
barrel shotguns commonly used by sportsmen.18

FACT: Barack Obama voted to allow reckless lawsuits
designed to bankrupt the firearms industry.1

FACT: Barack Obama wants to re-impose the failed and
discredited Clinton Gun Ban.15

FACT: Barack Obama voted to ban almost all rifle ammunition
commonly used for hunting and sport shooting.3

FACT: Barack Obama has endorsed a 500% increase in the federal
excise tax on firearms and ammunition.9

FACT: Barack Obama has endorsed a complete ban on handgun ownership.2

FACT: Barack Obama supports local gun bans in Chicago,
Washington, D.C., and other cities.4

FACT: Barack Obama voted to uphold local gun bans and the
criminal prosecution of people who use firearms in self-defense.5

FACT: Barack Obama supports gun owner licensing and gun registration.6

FACT: Barack Obama refused to sign a friend-of-the-court Brief
in support of individual Second Amendment rights in the Heller case.

FACT: Barack Obama opposes Right to Carry laws.7

FACT: Barack Obama was a member of the Board of Directors
of the Joyce Foundation, the leading source of funds for
anti-gun organizations and “research.”8

FACT: Barack Obama supported a proposal to ban gun stores
within 5 miles of a school or park, which would eliminate almost
every gun store in America.9

FACT: Barack Obama voted not to notify gun owners when the
state of Illinois did records searches on them.10

FACT: Barack Obama voted against a measure to lower the
Firearms Owners Identification card age minimum from 21 to 18,
a measure designed to assist young people in the military.11

FACT: Barack Obama favors a ban on standard capacity magazines.12

FACT: Barack Obama supports mandatory micro-stamping.13

FACT: Barack Obama supports mandatory waiting periods.2

FACT: Barack Obama supports repeal of the Tiahrt Amendment,
which prohibits information on gun traces collected by the BATFE
from being used in reckless lawsuits against firearm dealers and manufacturers.14

FACT: Barack Obama supports one-gun-a-month handgun purchase restrictions.16

FACT: Barack Obama supports a ban on inexpensive handguns.9

FACT: Barack Obama supports a ban on the resale of police issued
firearms, even if the money is going to police departments for replacement equipment.9

FACT: Barack Obama supports mandatory firearm training
requirements for all gun owners and a ban on gun ownership
for persons under the age of 21.9

1. United States Senate, S. 397, vote number 219, July 29, 2005.

2. Independent Voters of Illinois/Independent Precinct Organization
general candidate questionnaire, Sept. 9, 1996. The responses on
this survey were described in “Obama had greater role on
liberal survey,” Politico, March 31, 2008.

3. United States Senate, S. 397, vote number 217, Kennedy
amendment July 29, 2005.

4. David Wright, Ursula Fahy and Sunlen Miller, "Obama: 'Common
Sense Regulation' On Gun Owners' Rights," ABC News' "Political
Radar" Blog, http://blogs.abcnews.com, 2/15/08.

5. Illinois Senate, SB 2165, March 25, 2004, vote 20 and May 25,
2004, vote 3.

6. “Fact Check: No News In Obama's Consistent Record.”
Obama ’08, December 11, 2007.

7. “Candidates' gun control positions may figure in Pa. vote,”
Pittsburgh Tribune-Review, Wednesday, April 2, 2008, and "Keyes,
Obama Are Far Apart On Guns," Chicago Tribune, 9/15/04.

8. 1998 Joyce Foundation Annual Report, p. 7.

9. “Obama and Gun Control,” The Volokh Conspiracy, taken from
the Chicago Defender, Dec. 13, 1999.

10. Illinois Senate, May 5, 2002, SB 1936 Con., vote 26.

11. Illinois Senate, March 25, 2003, SB 2163, vote 18.

12. “Clinton, Edwards, Obama on gun control,” Radio Iowa,
Sunday, April 22, 2007.

13. Chicago Tribune blogs, “Barack Obama: NIU Shootings call for
action,” February 15, 2008,

14. Barack Obama campaign website: “As president, Barack
Obama would repeal the Tiahrt Amendment . . .”

15. Illinois Senate Debate #3: Barack Obama vs. Alan Keyes
m and http://www.ontheissues.org/IL_2004_Senate_3rd.htm) Oct
21, 2004.

16. Illinois Senate, May 16, 2003, HB 2579, vote 34.

17. United States Senate vote 245, September 29, 2005 and vote
2, January 31, 2006 and Saddleback Forum, August 16, 2008.

18. Illinois Senate Judiciary Committee, March 13, 2003. To see
the vote tally go to:

Reply Mon 29 Sep, 2008 10:31 am
I really get sick of these long recitations that upon examination of the listed "facts" shows many of them to be untrue..

FACT: Barack Obama was a member of the Board of Directors
of the Joyce Foundation, the leading source of funds for
anti-gun organizations and “research.”8

8. 1998 Joyce Foundation Annual Report, p. 7.

The Joyce Foundation Annual Report can be found here

It's interesting how the Joyce Foundation doesn't say it is the leading source on page 7 or anywhere in it's report. I can find nothing about the Joyce Foundation providing funds to anti-gun organizations other than at the NRA website.

The NRA website doesn't even claim it is "the leading source". It states this..
The Joyce Foundation is one of the leading sources of funding for anti-gun groups and individuals

The Joyce Foundation states it does not provide any funding outside the Midwest which makes me wonder how it can provide more funding than some of the big names like the Brady Center against Guns.
Since 2004 the Foundation has never provided $1 million in any given year for research on guns.

It seems that "facts" are nothing more than "truthiness" to the NRA and David.

Then of course many of the "source links" no longer work so the "facts" can't be checked.

This is nothing but the same old ridiculous crap that if you throw enough you hope some of it sticks.
0 Replies
A Lone Voice
Reply Mon 29 Sep, 2008 10:43 am

Come on, ALV, let's dispense with that old canard about McCain the maverick. It's nonsense and false to boot. You should be much more worried about McFlip.

Elected representatives have the right to introduce any legislation they feel is necessary. It's a bit ironic that conservatives feel that they have to run to the courts to protect them from legislators.

JTT, you've twice deflected my question with 'canards' yourself. Nothing was said about running to the courts. I'm simply asking you to assure me Obama will veto a leftist gun control bill by the dems.

BTW, I am worried about Mcflip. The repubs could have done much better.

I do appreciate you even addressing this; most of the lib/progressive robots here at A2K seem to run from the tough questions. At least you're taking a stab at it.

I've seen what a dem party controlled by their left wing can do here in sunny CA. One of my worries about Obama is how he will deal with the wing nuts in his own party.

Assuage my worries. Show me something where Obama has done this before. Is it really that tough to do?
0 Replies
Reply Mon 29 Sep, 2008 10:54 am
Most of those listed (without bothering to check them out) I don't see a problem with Obama supporting but then again I am not a crazed gun freak. (no offense Wink) I don't see anything wrong with having a gun to either hunt or protect yourself or just to target practice or whatever, but like driving a car there should be some safety rules and common sense precautions to follow. I mean what is wrong with have mandatory waiting days to get a gun. Obama is from Chicago and they have a lot of problems with guns and violence in that area so you can see why it would be important to him. Someone living in a rural area would probably look at it differently. And then a school shooting happens and then everybody wants to crack down until he we hear that insane argument where somebody says, "if only the students were allowed to carry guns to schools they would be able to protect themselves." In effect advocating high noon shoot outs in the middle of halls at schools.

All in all other than just wanting some common sense laws which can be debated which are common sense laws and which are not, I don't' have a big issue with people wanting to own guns. I do wish there was less violence in big cities and kids at schools and I am not sure what the answer there would be; but I do know arming kids and teachers and having every citizens walk into public places prepared to shoot it out with armed criminals is an insane idea.
Reply Mon 29 Sep, 2008 10:05 pm
You got it right, revel. Anyone who watches Chicago TVNews knows that almost every night there is a story about innocent black and Hispanic children being killed by gang crossfire.

Those who are worried about President Obama's thrust in this direction should check out his statement:--I am not going to take away your guns. President Obama would allow the Supreme Court to come up with rulings on Gun Control in the future.l I don't think he would spend political capital to become a personal foe of gun ownership even though he has always decried the useless murders of black and Hispanic children in his city of Chicago.
0 Replies
Reply Sun 5 Oct, 2008 01:01 am
September 9, 2008

Senator Barak Obama is arguably the most anti-gun major party
presidential candidate in history.

His running mate, Senator Joe Biden of Delaware, is no better.

On the Republican side, Senator John McCain has a checkered history
regarding the Second Amendment. He supported gun rights before actually
becoming an anti-gun activist when he ran for president in 2000. More
recently, McCain has seemingly taken a timeout on the gun issue altogether.

Gun owners have had very little to get excited about in this presidential
election until Alaska Governor Sarah Palin stepped onto the stage as John
McCain's running mate.

Sarah Palin is a lifelong hunter and outdoors enthusiast. As Sen. Fred Thompson
put it in his speech at the Republican National Convention, Gov. Palin
"is the only nominee in the history of either party who knows how to properly
field dress a moose -- with the possible exception of Teddy Roosevelt."

Although it is not uncommon for politicians to hide behind hunting in an
attempt to win over gun owners -- even former president Bill Clinton, who
signed into law some of the most sweeping gun control measures in history,
made a big deal over the fact that he hunted -- Gov. Palin's support of the
Second Amendment is not first and foremost about hunting or sport shooting.

Under Gov. Palin's administration, Alaska signed on to a multi-state amicus
brief in support of the Second Amendment in the Supreme Court case regarding
the Washington, D.C. gun ban. "We need to send a strong message that
law-abiding citizens have a right to own firearms, for personal protection,
for hunting and for any other lawful purpose," she said in a statement.

The Court ruled, in D.C. v. Heller, that the Second Amendment protects an
individual right. Gov. Palin praised the Supreme Court decision as "a
victory for ... individual Americans."

Palin campaigned on a pro-gun platform when she ran for mayor of the town of
Wasilla. Palin defeated an entrenched incumbent, who grumbled that residents
were unduly influenced by the gun issue. The Wasilla police chief complained
that Palin fired him in 1997 because he opposed Alaska's law recognizing
the right of Alaskans to carry concealed firearms.

It seems you can take the mayor out of the small town, but you can't take
the small town out of the mayor. Palin's job in Wasilla has become more of a
campaign issue than her more recent role as governor. Barak Obama compared
Palin's mayoral position to his own campaign operation.

"My understanding is that Governor Palin's town of Wasilla has, I think, 50
employees. We've got 2,500 in this campaign. I think their budget is maybe
$12 million a year. You know, we have a budget of about three times that
just for the month," Sen. Obama said in an interview.

Interestingly, the same arguments about experience were leveled against
Palin when she first ran for mayor of that small town, and again when she
ran for governor. For her part, Gov. Palin embraces the small town,
bitter-gun-clinger image. In her speech at the Republican convention, she
responded to Obama by saying that, "I guess a small-town mayor is sort of
like a 'community organizer,' except that you have actual responsibilities.
I might add that in small towns, we don't quite know what to make of a
candidate who lavishes praise on working people when they are listening,
and then talks about how bitterly they cling to their religion and guns
when those people aren't listening."

Gun owners have much to fear if the Obama/Biden ticket makes it to the
White House, and John McCain has gone back and forth on the gun issue
so many times that it is hard to determine exactly where he stands.

Of the four candidates, only Sarah Palin has a record that is consistently
supportive of the Second Amendment. Pro-gun voters have good reason to be
excited about the selection of the vice-presidential candidate, but Sen.
McCain has dug a deep hole for himself on the gun issue and he has yet to
come out against any of the anti-gun positions he has taken in the past.
That makes it all the more important for gun owners to know that Sarah Palin
will advocate forcefully for the right to keep and bear arms, even if it
goes against the President's position.

If Joe Biden has an office in the West Wing, we can expect that he will use
that position to launch attacks on the Second Amendment, and to be a
cheerleader for the Obama gun control agenda. That much is certain. If Sarah
Palin occupies that same office, gun owners may be looking to the tough
Alaskan hockey mom to pull John McCain in the other direction.

0 Replies
Reply Thu 9 Oct, 2008 06:52 am
roger wrote:

And if he's not strongly anti-gun, why is the NRA wasting its money on these ads? Certainly, McCain is not what you would call pro-gun.

An NRA supporter asks the same question

NRA's exorbitantly paid senior staff and consultant corps need to have a dragon to slay in order to feed their incessant money machine. Obama is their latest dragon. But, it's without merit. Obama supports the Second Amendment and he's unabashed about saying so.

If Obama wins the Presidency NRA leaders will have a new enemy to fight (even if he doesn't want to be our enemy). If McCain wins, their lobbyist buddies and former senior staffers will have access and high-level appointments in a McCain administration. So, NRA executives win either way. There is, however, a double standard at play. Let me provide one example: If Barack Obama announced he was bringing Andrew Cuomo, the former Secretary of HUD who fancied himself the point-man of Bill Clinton's "anti-gun crusade" into his administration, the NRA's leadership would come unglued. Yet, when John McCain suggested he'd appoint that same Andrew Cuomo to a senior position in his administration, not a peep!

Why aren't the leaders of the "gun rights" movement in America pleased with the fact that the Democratic nominee for President has reached out to gun owners in re-assuring them that he supports gun ownership? True, his past votes from ten years ago were not encouraging, but he's made great strides. I was very impressed by the Obama campaign's TV ad featuring an NRA life member. Also, not too many years ago, in July of 2001, Wayne LaPierre, the NRA's Chief Executive, was allowing the NRA's magazine, America's First Freedom (no link), to state that John McCain was "one of the premier flag carriers for the enemies of the Second Amendment." But, now McCain is their guy. It seems to me that NRA leaders are more concerned about what's good for NRA leaders than they are about what's good for American gun owners.
0 Replies
Reply Thu 9 Oct, 2008 09:18 am
McCain loves his pet projects (like campaign finance reform).
My gut feeling, from incidental statements that he 's made,
when it was not necessarily in his interest to say so,
lead me to believe that he rather LIKES the 2nd Amendment,
tho with some limits.
He 's not a purist, like I am.

The point is that he 's no where near as bad as Obama,
who hates guns from his gut and woud do anything that he can
to subvert any citizen 's right to possess guns for self defense.
He is against that, and he said so.

0 Replies

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
So....Will Biden Be VP? - Question by blueveinedthrobber
My view on Obama - Discussion by McGentrix
Obama/ Love Him or Hate Him, We've Got Him - Discussion by Phoenix32890
Obama fumbles at Faith Forum - Discussion by slkshock7
Expert: Obama is not the antichrist - Discussion by joefromchicago
Obama's State of the Union - Discussion by maxdancona
Obama 2012? - Discussion by snood
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 02/21/2024 at 11:32:56