• If you are having problems logging in please use the Contact Us in the lower right hand corner of the forum page for assistance.

Dancing Obama

Sandhusker

Well-known member
Obama's Switcheroo on the DC Gun Ban
Rick Moran

Pardon Senator Obama but last year, he says he made an "inartful" statement on the DC gun ban. What exactly did our artfully challenged Obama have to say about it?


With the Supreme Court poised to rule on Washington, D.C.'s, gun ban, the Obama campaign is disavowing what it calls an "inartful" statement to the Chicago Tribune last year in which an unnamed aide characterized Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., as believing that the DC ban was constitutional.

"That statement was obviously an inartful attempt to explain the Senator's consistent position," Obama spokesman Bill Burton tells ABC News.

Oh, yes. Obviously inartful.


The statement which Burton describes as an inaccurate representation of the senator's views was made to the Chicago Tribune on Nov. 20, 2007.


In a story entitled, "Court to Hear Gun Case," the Chicago Tribune's James Oliphant and Michael J. Higgins wrote ". . . the campaign of Democratic presidential hopeful Barack Obama said that he '...believes that we can recognize and respect the rights of law-abiding gun owners and the right of local communities to enact common sense laws to combat violence and save lives. Obama believes the D.C. handgun law is constitutional.'"


For Obama to say that the DC gun ban - a law that went farther than any other gun control measure in history in encroaching on second amendment rights - was "Constitutional" no doubt reflects his view that people shouldn't be clinging to their guns and should just give them up.

So what does our inartful senator believe now - now that the Surpreme Court is going to make him a liar today and rule that the DC ban is unconstitutional?


When Obama has been asked on multiple occasions to weigh in on the D.C. gun case he has regularly maintained that the Second Amendment provides an individual right while at the same time saying that right is not absolute and that the Constitution does not prevent local governments from enacting what Obama calls "common sense laws."


Although he has been willing to describe his general views on this topic, Obama has sidestepped the question of whether the ban in the nation's capital runs afoul of the Second Amendment.


Asked by ABC News' Charlie Gibson if he considers the D.C. law to be consistent with an individual's right to bear arms at ABC's April 16, 2008, debate in Philadelphia, Obama said, "Well, Charlie, I confess I obviously haven't listened to the briefs and looked at all the evidence."


Now that's what I call "artful." Indeed, Obama so much resembles the Dickens character in Oliver Twist the "Artful Dodger" with that response he should win some kind of award.

All politicians straddle issues to some extent. But on something as fundamental to the constitutional rights of citizens, the voter would like to know exactly where a candidate stands. Apparently, Obama stands in about 3 places at once.
 

Sandhusker

Well-known member
OK, libs, can you explain to me exactly what your candidate's position on the Second Amendment is? From what I'm reading, he is saying the Second Amendment gives us the right to have guns, but any local jurisdiction can take away those rights via "common sense laws" Am I mistaken, or is this guy who claims to be a teacher on Constitutional Law saying that local law can trump the Constitution?

Also, I don't have a lib. dictionary. What does "inartful" mean? Maybe that word is the key to understanding Obama's position.
 

fff

Well-known member
GOTCHA Politics. We’re probably all going to have plenty of chances to play “GOTCHA” during the next three months or so. Obama said “57 states”. McCain said “the Soviet Union”. People get tired, they misspeak, and they make mistakes, maybe even lie. They’re not perfect, they’re human. They’re ambitious and for some crazy reason want to be president very badly. Obama’s momma and daddy didn’t meet at Selma. McCain doesn’t know the difference between Sunnis and Shiites. Gotcha.

As far as I’m concerned, McCain has much bigger problems than misspeaking or mistakes or even telling a few lies. Once upon a time, I saw him as a different kind of Republican, but he’s switched on too many issues important to me. He's switched on so many, I think someone should be asking "does John McCain stand for anything"?

He used to support a woman’s right to choose. He even supported a plank in the Republican platform for abortions for rape and incest. No more. To refuse a single mom working to support her kids the morning after pill when she’s been raped is simply not right.

McCain has a special standing on torture. First, the fact that this country has been taken to the point of discussing whether torture is right or wrong is indefensible. But we’re there and people listened as McCain stood strong against torture for several years after the Iraqi invasion. But no more. Third world dictators torture. Not the United States of America that I grew up in.

He supported the invasion of Iraq and he’s been wrong from the beginning. Somewhere along the line, he started complaining that there weren’t enough troops in Iraq. IMO, the problem has always been that we had no business going there at all. He has no problem with staying there for 100 years and seems almost cheery when he discusses possibly bombing Iran.

McCain’s signature legislation has been campaign finance reform. It put him in the doghouse with some prominent conservative groups. But he stood firm. No more. If he hasn’t broken the letter of the law, he’s certainly wiggled through the loopholes and around the edges of HIS own law. This is not a simple mistake or misquote or slip of the tongue. This is HIS law. One he worked hard for. One he stood up to many of his own party to get passed. And how he’s turning his back on it for political purposes. Obama was right to opt out of public financing. McCain will cheat. Republicans always do.

He and I simply have different visions of what the government should do. I think the government should protect me and mine from dangerous imported toys, from cheating and lying bankers, from people who illegally misrepresent their product, as well as criminals and terrorists. I think FEMA should be there to help out EVERYONE touched by a natural disaster, not just the Republicans in Florida. One of McCain’s top spokesmen, Lindsey Graham, has said McCain’s foreign and domestic policies will closely resemble George W. Bush’s. No one will be able to convince me that Bush’s foreign OR domestic policies have been good for this country. I will not vote to continue them.

I think McCain is too old to be elected president. He sufferered many years in a POW camp. I think that's taken a toll on his body and, yeah, it bothers me that he doesn't "do" a computer or the internet. It's a demanding job. The president should be able to understand, think analyze, react and make decisions quickly, put in long hours in an emergency situation. I don't have confidence that John McCain can do that. And I can't think of anyone he can pick as VP that will change my attitude.

Obama wasn’t my first choice. I was/am a Hillary Clinton supporter and think it's going to be a tough campaign. I'm not at all sure this country is ready to elect a black man as president. But there’s no way on God’s green earth that I’ll vote for John McCain.
 

Sandhusker

Well-known member
No answer from the libs....typical. Considering your leader can't answer a simple question either, I guess birds of a feather will indeed flock together.

The llama's answers to the questions are more troubling than they first appear. His "first position" on the DC gun issue was probably the last time he was honest. He said he thought it was constitutional, and with a solid anti-gun voting record in the Illinois State House, that position would be consistent with his voting record. However, the red flags pop up when he says he supports the Supreme Court's decision to declare the ban unconstitutional that he said WAS constitutional.

What is REALLY troubling is that he now won't give a straight answer on the Second Amendment - and he claims to of even taught constitutional law! Shouldn't a former teacher of constitutional law be able to give a straight answer to a question on a part of the Constitution? Did his former students leave his classrooms scratching their heads in bewilderment as anybody who reads his "answers" are today? WHY IS THIS GUY NOT ANSWERING QUESTIONS PERTAINING TO HIS VIEWS ON THE CONSTITUTION - A DOCUMENT THAT, AS PRESIDENT, HE WILL HAVE TO SWEAR TO UPHOLD? And why do you libs not give a rat's patoot that this clown is avoiding honesty?

I guess honesty from politicians isn't part of the "change" he talks about.
 

backhoeboogie

Well-known member
Sandhusker said:
OK, libs, can you explain to me exactly what your candidate's position on the Second Amendment is? From what I'm reading, he is saying the Second Amendment gives us the right to have guns, but any local jurisdiction can take away those rights via "common sense laws" Am I mistaken, or is this guy who claims to be a teacher on Constitutional Law saying that local law can trump the Constitution?

Second Amendment? Sandhusker, you are too light on the libs and their communist choice for pres. What does the second amendment have to do with this ISSUE. If he can allow our rights to be over ridden, all Amendments and the Constitution are in jeopardy. "common sense laws" can supercede any of our constitutional rights. Reread this part below carefully:

When Obama has been asked on multiple occasions to weigh in on the D.C. gun case he has regularly maintained that the Second Amendment provides an individual right while at the same time saying that right is not absolute and that the Constitution does not prevent local governments from enacting what Obama calls "common sense laws."
 

nonothing

Well-known member
Your right Sandhusker....Now what was the question.?.Funny how you claim to not like McCain yet you only go after Obama...at least be fair in your attacks........lets see some McCain bashing too....
 

backhoeboogie

Well-known member
nonothing said:
Your right Sandhusker....Now what was the question.?.Funny how you claim to not like McCain yet you only go after Obama...at least be fair in your attacks........lets see some McCain bashing too....

Is McCain bashing the constitution or waiving our rights?

There is tremendous McCain bashing throughout this forum, if you haven't noticed.
 

Sandhusker

Well-known member
backhoeboogie said:
Sandhusker said:
OK, libs, can you explain to me exactly what your candidate's position on the Second Amendment is? From what I'm reading, he is saying the Second Amendment gives us the right to have guns, but any local jurisdiction can take away those rights via "common sense laws" Am I mistaken, or is this guy who claims to be a teacher on Constitutional Law saying that local law can trump the Constitution?

Second Amendment? Sandhusker, you are too light on the libs and their communist choice for pres. What does the second amendment have to do with this ISSUE. If he can allow our rights to be over ridden, all Amendments and the Constitution are in jeopardy. "common sense laws" can supercede any of our constitutional rights. Reread this part below carefully:

When Obama has been asked on multiple occasions to weigh in on the D.C. gun case he has regularly maintained that the Second Amendment provides an individual right while at the same time saying that right is not absolute and that the Constitution does not prevent local governments from enacting what Obama calls "common sense laws."

Excellent point, backhoe. You're getting a glimpse at Obama's soul with those comments. How can there be any doubt that Obama is a marxist? Nice catch.

Now I see what "change" he's talking about.....
 

Sandhusker

Well-known member
nonothing said:
Your right Sandhusker....Now what was the question.?.Funny how you claim to not like McCain yet you only go after Obama...at least be fair in your attacks........lets see some McCain bashing too....

What was the question? I guess I should of written it down for you - no, wait, I did....

I've called McCain a liberal. Those are fighting words where I live. I don't like McCain - I have no use for liberals. But, I loathe socialists and marxists and liars.
 

nonothing

Well-known member
Sandhusker said:
nonothing said:
Your right Sandhusker....Now what was the question.?.Funny how you claim to not like McCain yet you only go after Obama...at least be fair in your attacks........lets see some McCain bashing too....

What was the question? I guess I should of written it down for you - no, wait, I did....

I've called McCain a liberal. Those are fighting words where I live. I don't like McCain - I have no use for liberals. But, I loathe socialists and marxists and liars.

Then lets see some anti McCain posts...and I guess you missed my sarcasim..

Funny thing is ,bush has told many lies yet I cannot recall you calling him a liar or even posting his lies on here....I will agree with you that not all is perfect,but if you are gonna sling mud at one guy you should of had the integridy to sling that same mud at the guy who was and still is running your country...Your just to overly one-sided to be taken seriously ....
 

aplusmnt

Well-known member
nonothing said:
Then lets see some anti McCain posts....

OT done went and used them all up! He spoiled all the fun for the rest of us!

He is the fastest Copy and paster of the West, you might call him the Wyatt Earp of the Internet.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
aplusmnt said:
nonothing said:
Then lets see some anti McCain posts....

OT done went and used them all up! He spoiled all the fun for the rest of us!

He is the fastest Copy and paster of the West, you might call him the Wyatt Earp of the Internet.

I'm like FOX News- Just trying to keep this board Fair and Impartial :wink: :lol: :p
 

aplusmnt

Well-known member
nonothing said:
Sandhusker said:
nonothing said:
Your right Sandhusker....Now what was the question.?.Funny how you claim to not like McCain yet you only go after Obama...at least be fair in your attacks........lets see some McCain bashing too....

What was the question? I guess I should of written it down for you - no, wait, I did....

I've called McCain a liberal. Those are fighting words where I live. I don't like McCain - I have no use for liberals. But, I loathe socialists and marxists and liars.

Then lets see some anti McCain posts...and I guess you missed my sarcasim..

Funny thing is ,bush has told many lies yet I cannot recall you calling him a liar or even posting his lies on here....I will agree with you that not all is perfect,but if you are gonna sling mud at one guy you should of had the integridy to sling that same mud at the guy who was and still is running your country...Your just to overly one-sided to be taken seriously ....

I am not sure I agree with your theory here, Sandhusker seems to have made his self pretty clear as to his political beliefs. He has expressed he is not happy with McCain but he is less happy with Obama. My take is that he is rooting for McCain over Obama in this election.

So if by default McCain is the one he wishes to win the election, why would he be obligated to post negative remarks about McCain? I do think he has the integrity to not agree with McCain on subjects he does not approve of, but he has no obligation to try to help Obama win supporters by posting McCain negatives online. That seems to be a contradiction of what I perceive is his wishes.

If Sandhusker or any of us were to post some negatives on McCain it just may push CattleArmy over the edge to vote for Obama, and why would we wish to do that?

Now you want Sandhusker and the rest of us to do the job of the Liberals on here, Silly Liberals always wanting someone to do their work for them :wink: :lol:
 

aplusmnt

Well-known member
Oldtimer said:
aplusmnt said:
nonothing said:
Then lets see some anti McCain posts....

OT done went and used them all up! He spoiled all the fun for the rest of us!

He is the fastest Copy and paster of the West, you might call him the Wyatt Earp of the Internet.

I'm like FOX News- Just trying to keep this board Fair and Impartial :wink: :lol: :p

I think you forgot to throw in a few nice remarks towards Bush or McCain to keep up the perception of fair and balanced. :lol:
 

nonothing

Well-known member
aplusmnt said:
nonothing said:
Sandhusker said:
What was the question? I guess I should of written it down for you - no, wait, I did....

I've called McCain a liberal. Those are fighting words where I live. I don't like McCain - I have no use for liberals. But, I loathe socialists and marxists and liars.

Then lets see some anti McCain posts...and I guess you missed my sarcasim..

Funny thing is ,bush has told many lies yet I cannot recall you calling him a liar or even posting his lies on here....I will agree with you that not all is perfect,but if you are gonna sling mud at one guy you should of had the integridy to sling that same mud at the guy who was and still is running your country...Your just to overly one-sided to be taken seriously ....

I am not sure I agree with your theory here, Sandhusker seems to have made his self pretty clear as to his political beliefs. He has expressed he is not happy with McCain but he is less happy with Obama. My take is that he is rooting for McCain over Obama in this election.

So if by default McCain is the one he wishes to win the election, why would he be obligated to post negative remarks about McCain? I do think he has the integrity to not agree with McCain on subjects he does not approve of, but he has no obligation to try to help Obama win supporters by posting McCain negatives online. That seems to be a contradiction of what I perceive is his wishes.

If Sandhusker or any of us were to post some negatives on McCain it just may push CattleArmy over the edge to vote for Obama, and why would we wish to do that?

Now you want Sandhusker and the rest of us to do the job of the Liberals on here, Silly Liberals always wanting someone to do their work for them :wink: :lol:

Nice to see Sandhusker has hired an attorney to speak on his behalf...Had I know He had hired You Aplus,I could of just directed all my questions towards you and not involve him at all... :wink: .....lol
 

Sandhusker

Well-known member
nonothing said:
Sandhusker said:
nonothing said:
Your right Sandhusker....Now what was the question.?.Funny how you claim to not like McCain yet you only go after Obama...at least be fair in your attacks........lets see some McCain bashing too....

What was the question? I guess I should of written it down for you - no, wait, I did....

I've called McCain a liberal. Those are fighting words where I live. I don't like McCain - I have no use for liberals. But, I loathe socialists and marxists and liars.

Then lets see some anti McCain posts...and I guess you missed my sarcasim..

Funny thing is ,bush has told many lies yet I cannot recall you calling him a liar or even posting his lies on here....I will agree with you that not all is perfect,but if you are gonna sling mud at one guy you should of had the integridy to sling that same mud at the guy who was and still is running your country...Your just to overly one-sided to be taken seriously ....

You're calling me one-sided? Puhleeeeze! I've called Bush an idiot, moron, one of the worst presidents, etc.... I haven't pulled punch one. I don't talk much about him anymore because he's a short-timer and not up for re-election.

I've called McCain a liberal and proclaimed many times that I don't vote for liberals. I don't like the guy's politics, but I respect him for what he's done for this country.

I lay on Obama because, quite frankly, he scares the crap out of me. McCain will be a bad president, but Obama will be the worst disaster that we've ever had. The guy is nothing but bad news.

Now, speaking of one-sided, where is your favorable posts for anybody other than libs?
 

nonothing

Well-known member
Sandhusker said:
nonothing said:
Sandhusker said:
What was the question? I guess I should of written it down for you - no, wait, I did....

I've called McCain a liberal. Those are fighting words where I live. I don't like McCain - I have no use for liberals. But, I loathe socialists and marxists and liars.

Then lets see some anti McCain posts...and I guess you missed my sarcasim..

Funny thing is ,bush has told many lies yet I cannot recall you calling him a liar or even posting his lies on here....I will agree with you that not all is perfect,but if you are gonna sling mud at one guy you should of had the integridy to sling that same mud at the guy who was and still is running your country...Your just to overly one-sided to be taken seriously ....

You're calling me one-sided? Puhleeeeze! I've called Bush an idiot, moron, one of the worst presidents, etc.... I haven't pulled punch one. I don't talk much about him anymore because he's a short-timer and not up for re-election.

I've called McCain a liberal and proclaimed many times that I don't vote for liberals. I don't like the guy's politics, but I respect him for what he's done for this country.

I lay on Obama because, quite frankly, he scares the crap out of me. McCain will be a bad president, but Obama will be the worst disaster that we've ever had. The guy is nothing but bad news.

Now, speaking of one-sided, where is your favorable posts for anybody other than libs?

I gotta say sandhusker,you finailly stated the why....I respect your last post more than you know....I think it best now for me to let you say what you feel you need to say,without interuption...My opinion was mostly based on your dislike for obama,because of what his preacher says...I shall respect your right to fear him and let it go at that...I have had my say and my vote does not count either way,I have enjoyed the back and fourth conversation,and you have provided me excellent fodder for understanding future debates.......
 

Sandhusker

Well-known member
nonothing said:
Sandhusker said:
nonothing said:
Then lets see some anti McCain posts...and I guess you missed my sarcasim..

Funny thing is ,bush has told many lies yet I cannot recall you calling him a liar or even posting his lies on here....I will agree with you that not all is perfect,but if you are gonna sling mud at one guy you should of had the integridy to sling that same mud at the guy who was and still is running your country...Your just to overly one-sided to be taken seriously ....

You're calling me one-sided? Puhleeeeze! I've called Bush an idiot, moron, one of the worst presidents, etc.... I haven't pulled punch one. I don't talk much about him anymore because he's a short-timer and not up for re-election.

I've called McCain a liberal and proclaimed many times that I don't vote for liberals. I don't like the guy's politics, but I respect him for what he's done for this country.

I lay on Obama because, quite frankly, he scares the crap out of me. McCain will be a bad president, but Obama will be the worst disaster that we've ever had. The guy is nothing but bad news.

Now, speaking of one-sided, where is your favorable posts for anybody other than libs?

I gotta say sandhusker,you finailly stated the why....I respect your last post more than you know....I think it best now for me to let you say what you feel you need to say,without interuption...My opinion was mostly based on your dislike for obama,because of what his preacher says...I shall respect your right to fear him and let it go at that...I have had my say and my vote does not count either way,I have enjoyed the back and fourth conversation,and you have provided me excellent fodder for understanding future debates.......

Cool! I'm glad we're friends!
 
Top