Best
157 Comments
Post
  • #36
    !
    Wait a minute! It is not OK for the NRA to bring up children but it is OK for POTUS to put them on stage behind him and quote them and have them raise their hands?
  • #38
    !
    You got it. The ad is classy and spot on. The use of children as a backdrop for Obama's tyranical push for gun control is revolting. I would love to put up a video from years ago of my father teaching my 6 year old how to aim and shoot a high powered rifle with a scope to kill a rabbit from a prone position, but we didn't take a video. Why show that? To make the Liberals go absolutely nuts.
  • R Load more replies

  • #141
    !
    @marine1 There are a lot of us, just too bad we are outnumbered by liberals who like getting their free money and services. Heck, 34% of the entire country's welfare recipients are in California... so it could be worse I guess!
  • R Load more replies

  • #4
    !
    there was no attack on the President's daughters and to claim such is the same type of distortions and smoke screens that the right uses. Shame on you Mr. Obama.
  • #68
    !
    @jessejaymes
    Can I get a government bailout to pay you? I keep buying things I can't pay for!!
    Found out this week I'm in the top 2% of wealthy Americans!! My bring homepage dropped $19.00 a week from more taxes 98% of Americans don't have to pay!! I didn't realize how bad things are across the country!! Lol
  • #5
    !
    This is a monument to poor taste. The Press has historically treated the past president's children as "hands off,". When the press has violated the children's privacy in the past the offending member of the press has been soundly rebuked
  • Comment removed for Engagement Etiquette violation. Replies may also be deleted.
  • #15
    !
    @bsking When the Bush girls college drinking issues were publicized comes to mind I can do a search if need be, same with Reagan's kids
  • #17
    !
    There was no mention of the President's daughter by name and that was not the issue. the protection of those daughters was the issue and this was not an attack on the President's daughters. And I do remember the press having a field day with Jenna Bush.
  • R Load more replies

  • Comment removed for Engagement Etiquette violation. Replies may also be deleted.
  • #70
    !
    The Presidents' children are obviously a much higher profile target than your children. If nothing else, it's a matter of national security. What happens if the President's children are kidnapped by a foreign enemy? It isn't a matter of someone's children being more or less important, it's a matter between a high profile target and unlikely target.
  • #90
    !
    You're aware, aren't you, that the kids at today's order signing asked to be there? Whereas neither of the Obama kids volunteered to be mentioned in an ad attacking their father.
  • #84
    !
    What is repugnant is the children being his backdrop today during his gun control fiasco. Truth hurts and we all know democrats don't like the truth.
  • #80
    !
    Oh no! The leftists are all a Twitter about the Preezys rent- a- family being used to drive home a point. It' s not like the Marxist in Chief would EVER resort to those tactics. Only at every photo ops since 2007. What goes around....
  • #56
    !
    This was Obama's newest staged press conference in which he once again blames the republicans. I think it's fair play to use his children because he is allowing them protection but messing with parents being able to protect their kids. He's such a hypocrit!
  • #35
    !
    It is a great ad. Even better because Obama hates it. We need more ads like this one. It will expose the true hateful, spiteful character that is Obama.
  • #60
    !
    The ad is great if you want people who are undecided to start being more sympathetic to obamas position. Modt people will just think its horrible to use his kids, they don't care if he usrd kids first. Most people do not think like political junkies who think only of one side or the other. Watch how this gets spun and see what happens.
  • #39
    !
    @woodtick57 He is using what happened at Sandy Hill, to take away our second amendment's right's. When Obama's done with his anti gun campaign, only criminals will have have guns.
    The NRA was right!
    The only way to stop a bad person with a gun,.....is a good person with a gun.
  • #50
    !
    @Jim49418 hardly...the logical end to that thinking is everysingle person in the Us carrying a gun at all times...ridiculous
  • R Load more replies

  • #6
    !
    Oh please. The ad mentions his kids, not daughters. Nor their names, nor does it show their faces or any image of them at all. Dragging the welfare of kids into political debates is a long-standing feature of American politics used to morally one-up your opponents.
  • #103
    !
    @martydotcom I have kids. Two boys 11 & 8. Why are the presidents more important than mine? Because he is the president? He voluntarily made the decision to run for the office of President of the United States. No one forced him to. He doesn't like the gig now because it is personal? Perhaps he should quit.
  • #119
    !
    @Republican5001 kids are equally.important. His children are a national.security hostage concern. Should your children be kidnapped its s personal, but not a national tragedy
  • #122
    !
    @Republican5001 You're against background check and registration. As a parent and legit gun owner I can't understand why you wouldn't want that
  • R Load more replies

  • #157
    !
    No more repugnant than when the White House and other anti-gun political hacks imply that if you are not in favor of stupid, ineffective new laws gun owners and the NRA must not care about children. One good turn deserves another. It's the anti-gun lobby that's launching death threats and impersonating NRA officials on social web sites to post the most inflammatory crap. One poster impersonating LaPierre tweeted that he hadn't shot a woman in the heart in a long time. It's the left that is tremendously vulgar, repugnant and cowardly. Nothing is as repugnant and cowardly, not to mention DICTATORIAL, EMPEROR NERO OBAMA, as BANNING FIREARMS RESEARCH because it doesn't support the aims of the anti-gun lobby, and then trying to make your case on the backs of dead innocents.
  • #155
    !
    Frankly, it makes a legitimate point. Not only what the ad says, but are Federal Bureaucrats, and the US Mint, Ft Knox, even the common, ordinary neighborhood bank , etc. any less valuable than our school children?
  • #154
    !
    Name calling is childish and just what we should expect from Obama. The ad was about the hypocracy of the left. What I see as repugnant and cowardly is a Pres. and Party who will not reveal their true intentions and what they hope to do. America is being torn asunder with malicious intent, that's what should be our concern, not semantics.
  • #144
    !
    the white house response is the typical asinine rethoric they are famous for. Call someone else more evil than themselves to try and throw the American public off the governments scent. Call it projection, gaslighting, psych-warfare, or plain old subterfuge-point is it is bogus crap! Is it not repugnant for Obama to surround himself with children-like some trophy sporting pedifile? Isn't it also repugnant, cowardly, disingenuous to pretend to cry over the Sandy Hook victims-when he is responsible for THOUSANDS of dead innocents-including children-via his drone strikes, that the Nobel peace prize winner claims and is praised for as being "peace strikes"? Watch this video and then decide if this is the direction you want our country headed in (Obama's leadership, that is)
    http://www.yoism.org/...
  • R Load more comments...
Post