The conservative Daily Calleris promoting a White House petition to end armed guards at the White House. Its purpose? To point up the alleged irony in Obama's refusal to allow armed guards in schools when he himself depends on armed guards.
If gun-free zones keep people safe, then I can't think of a person whose safety is more important than the President of the United States. If having a gun in your home increases your risk of getting shot, how can we allow our president and his family to be surrounded by dozens of them? Think of the children. Sign the petition. Do it now. Every second you wait puts the leader of the free world at risk.
The petition already has the requisite 25,000 signatures required for an official White House response. (On Wednesday the White House announced that the threshold for an official response would rise to 100,000 signatures - but existing petitions still need only 25,000.)
@fr3aknasty-- You mistakenly think that I ever took any of the petitions seriously. It's like the Youtube debates... they already knew what they wanted to ask the candidates... all they had to do was sift through the youtube questions to find the ones that asked the questions they wanted to ask.
also the fact is that the Secular Progressive Agenda Responsible for Virginia Tech Tragedy, and all others.the Secular Progressive Agenda is thrashing the young people of our country. Turning them into Moral less value less honor less God less induviduals.
It really shows the real wrong direction the nation is going. Once these commie SOS have the guns it'll be a free for all for them. The Communists won't be able to set up their re-education camps to make people like Obamacare and hate white people without first taking the guns.
@Denizen_Kate One of the items that the press and Obama has stated is that a magazine can be no more than 10 rounds. The average non gun owning American would think that they are talking about magazines for assult weapons, however we have seen this trick before and it's all in the wording. If they limit 10 rounds to any weapon, then a large majority of tube fed .22 rifles would be illegal along with numerous handguns. So that does more than the ban on assult weapons and magazines of assult weapons. They did make the statement that people who own those guns now would be grandfathered in, however do not be caught with more than 10 rounds. Also there will be limits on the amount and type of ammo you can buy. Now let's fast forward a couple years, and if these restrictions haven't worked what will they do next? They will not repeal anything, so that's when more reductions will be ordered. No more than one gun and one bullet. Washington DC has a zero gun law, yet they have one of the highest gun crime cities in America. I believe the government does want our guns. If they were serious about stopping these murders they would study the safer cities and states, and follow what they are doing rather than depleting the 2nd amendment. Obama's actions on every issue that he has sponsored is nothing but socialism and control. He forced a health care system on us, refuses to work with congress, is very confrontational, and will not do an interview unless he scripts it. I saw today that he is having 10 people that he has helped at his inauguration. Just like the kids yesterday-bad move. I just watch what he does and how many elected officials do not have the balls to impeach him. No other president has desicrated the constitution and embarrassed this country more than him. If you think that he doesn't want your guns just wait a couple years.
Can anyone really be dim enough not to be able to distinguish between the President of the United States and school children? One is the leader of one of the most powerful nation on earth, the others are, well, school children. Armed security for the nation's executive is warranted, armed guards in schools cannot be proven to accomplish its goal and is economically unsustainable. Why is it that Republicans are constantly screaming about wasteful spending, but they are first in line to cry for new wasteful spending for armed guards in schools?
@Denizen_Kate Don't you think it'd be huge, unreasonable leap for the president to multiply the number of signatures needed by 200 times over his presidency? When he was running for office, he promised to read and respond to petitions with 5,000 signatures...I can understand increasing it a little, but not exponentially! That's another campaign promise broken.
@Politicskid - First, I don't think he campaigned on the issue of online petitions. Second, consider the possibility that the required number of signatures is rising in direct proportion to the number of nutbags who think their issue is of the utmost importance.
Instead of finding ways to put down the president, why don't you all spend that time searching for cures to illnesses, helping the poor get a job/home, Donate a dollar towards the country's debt etc etc etc. Anything at all! You're wasting time and looking foolish!
We can do both. Pointing out Obama's failure and the problems with liberalism is not, "putting down the president".
Have you forgot the malicious hatred and personal attacks on Bush. Personal attacks that had nothing to do with his policies. Even today liberals and the media perpetuate the lie that the 2008 recession was Bush's fault.
Through out the 20th Century, the world over, liberal policies have enslaved and murdered hundreds of millions, so when America's president embraces those same policies that have a historical basis for comparison it is fair to comment on them.
Doing so is not a personal attack much like the liberal's attacks on Bush.
@PuroChorizo361 I think you've been lied to so much you can't admit the truth about who the greedy are.
Democrats have the majority of the richest politicians. Democrats give less to charities than do republicans and where republicans want tax breaks for all Americsns, democrats demand tax breaks for just some Americans. Democrats can never have enough of other people's money and you dare mention greed when talking about republicans?
You liberals never have enough money and just keep taking more and more. It's never enough for you.
@Enslaved I think you've been lied to you believe Republicans give to charities with the kindness of their hearts? HA!!!!! Conservatives want to save the ppls money so they have more to put in their pocket! "The sooner you can match what's in your head with what's goin' on in the real world, the better you're gonna feel." Training day
Not mention the lifetime armed protection he will enjoy for he and his family. His safety is certainly not more important than my families safety to me. I certainly don't want anyone telling me with what, or type, or how many rounds I feel is needed to protect my family in our home. That really is not Obama's damn business, or any of these readers either. Don't try to harm, or break in my home and you will never have anything to fear.
I'd sign it....I mean come the point is either it is safe without guns....which means the president should be safe too without guns OR it is safe with guns as the president and officials and many progressive liberal actors have guns protecting them....which is it? Can't have both....
@stepped_in_it Well, put yourself in his shoes. What would YOU be willing to sacrifice for your children? Your life? Your country? It's an extortion point that shouldn't be taken lightly. It's one of those "necessary evil" type things.