- Joined
- Apr 28, 2007
- Messages
- 17,108
- Reaction score
- 5,786
- Location
- Nationwide...
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Slightly Liberal
I never said he was a gun rights advocate. I said I doubt his citation of that figure was a bold plot to snatch guns from Americans. He said it one time in one speech. That doesn't really rise to the standard of evidence.You keep on doubting. His track record on gun rights is out there for all to see.
In 2006, he voted with an 84 to 16 majority (and against Clinton) to prohibit confiscation of firearms during an emergency, but that is his only pro-gun vote in Springfield or Washington. The National Rifle Association grades his voting record (and Clinton's) an "F."
Robert D. Novak - Obama's Second-Amendment Dance - washingtonpost.com
'Nobody Knows Obama's Record on Guns Better Than I Do,' Says Illinois State Rifle... | Reuters
Barack Obama on Gun Control
It's absolutely relevant when you are making a case that he is using the statement as a tool to build support for a gun grab. The comment is inaccurate, and if he in fact used it in a deliberately misleading way, then it was a lie. If he used it out of context, such as his proclamation of the 57 states, he was mistaken. I think it falls somewhere in between the two. Not quite a nefarious plot, not quite an innocent misstatement. Your "spin" reference might in fact be a good word to describe what happened.Irrelevant are the number of times they made the comment. The comment itself is a lie.
What do you think a mischaracterization is? An accident? Would it not be abuse if it was spun? Would not spinning this statistic in order to use it to your advantage be taking advantage of the situation?Nice. A mischaracterization turned into abuse and has now made it's way to taking advantage of the situation.
You are building your case on some belief that those terms are mutually exclusive. You have been shown the error of your ways yet once more.
Of course it is. When you call Obama a liar you need to prove it. He made a statement out of context, for reasons that we all have our own opinions about. However your claim that a lack of information on U.S. gun dealer raids somehow proves the statement if false is where this all started. And you claim is hollow, illogical, and plain dumb. The ATF made the statement Obama referenced, that statement has been posted here and backed up with research into the cases that helped contribute to the findings. So you now have been provided with the basis for the actual ATF statement and the operations contributing to the findings in that statement have been referenced. It's very safe to say that the ATF was not lying when they said guns originating from U.S. arms dealers have made their way to Mexico. And it's safe to say your failed argument about a lack of U.S. gun dealer raids equating to an Obama or ATF lie is now officially dead.No, the onus is not on me. Me calling into question a lack of raids does not mean I'm insinuating that treacery is afoot. It's a legitimate question.
You shouldn't be laughing at anything. You should be embarrassed, and more importantly, you should be reading a book or doing some research. If you were to actually do that, you might not humiliate yourself so frequently.I laugh in your face at your assertion here. The only move lacking smarts is the above quote from you.
And now you are trying to divert. I can understand why. You made a stupid argument in order to criticize Obama. When that failed you reverted to the "90%" argument. Fine. That doesn't change the fact that you stepped on your dick once again and got called on it.The point here, is you don't have one. You've tried repeatedly to spin the fact that Obama blatantly lied about the numbers.
See, here you go again. Duck, dodge, duck....You then morph it from a mischaracterization, to an abuse, to deliberately taking advantage of a situation.
Which logically supported my debunking of your sputtering argument.You then "band camp" with anecdotal drivel, make ridiculous assertions and copy/paste the facts in regard to the 90% from my link.
And we all know how the rest of the forum feels about you now don't we.When I say you're the Barney Frank of DP, it means just that, long winded, filled with spin, and containing nothing of substance.
In the end you have no choice to back off of your original claim and settle on "Obama lied about the 90%." Which is fine, you have fun with that. Maybe he did deliberately lie about it, maybe he misstated. Who knows? Wait...you know don't you? Just like you knew the facts when you said this...
You might wish to retract that. :roflGottaHurt said:I then pointed out the real rhetoric, which is the Obama administration claiming that these guns can be traced back to the United States.
Yet, we've seen no proof of it.
The point here is that Obama has now backed off the AWB. And that is a good thing.
Last edited: