Do you have adblock enabled?
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Talking Points Memo)   NRA ad: "Obama is an elitist hypocrite" whose kids are more important than ours because, "his kids are protected by armed guards at their school". No, this is NOT the Onion   ( livewire.talkingpointsmemo.com) divider line
    More: Asinine, NRA, President Obama, elitists, hypocrites, cable network, Meet the Press, armed police  
•       •       •

1822 clicks; posted to Politics » on 16 Jan 2013 at 3:23 AM (4 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



342 Comments     (+0 »)
 
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | » | Newest | Show all

 
2013-01-15 10:27:41 PM  
There's crossing the line...and then there's this.

I mean seriously, you outright call the President a hypocrite - AND you do it for taking advantage of a service that every single President in modern times has enjoyed??

AND if that wasn't enough, you blatantly accuse him of being willing to sacrifice other children to save his own?!

WTF IS WRONG WITH YOU?!

You know what, this is the ultimate right-wing shill test.  If you even TRY to defend the NRA here, then you're a shill.  Period.
 
jbc [TotalFark]
2013-01-15 10:28:46 PM  
Done in one.
 
2013-01-15 10:33:06 PM  

Grand_Moff_Joseph: If you even TRY to defend the NRA here, then you're a shill. Period


Glad to see that you have an open mind for discussion of the issue. That will certainly help in furthering future discussion.

Just sayin
 
2013-01-15 10:33:47 PM  

Grand_Moff_Joseph: There's crossing the line...and then there's this.

I mean seriously, you outright call the President a hypocrite - AND you do it for taking advantage of a service that every single President in modern times has enjoyed??

AND if that wasn't enough, you blatantly accuse him of being willing to sacrifice other children to save his own?!

WTF IS WRONG WITH YOU?!

You know what, this is the ultimate right-wing shill test.  If you even TRY to defend the NRA here, then you're a shill.  Period.


Not to mention that this is more than just Obama looking out for his family. The first family represents a security risk for our nation, if they were to be kidnapped or held hostage that is a risk for all of us.
 
2013-01-15 10:36:17 PM  
thatswhatshesaidboston.com
 
2013-01-15 10:39:36 PM  

Wanebo: Grand_Moff_Joseph: If you even TRY to defend the NRA here, then you're a shill. Period

Glad to see that you have an open mind for discussion of the issue. That will certainly help in furthering future discussion.

Just sayin


I really don't think there's anything to discuss, re: this specific ad.  I'm 100% ok with having a discussion over ways to enhance gun and mental health rules as a way to avoid more Sandy Hooks, and respects the non-tinfoil covered aspects of the 2nd amendment.  Such discussions could have made progress years ago if not for the NRAs and Brady Campaigns of the world farking it up for everyone.

Still, that is wholly separate from this ad, which warrants no discussion, only disdain and scorn from the 99.9% of the public that has a shred of humanity left in them.
 
2013-01-15 10:40:50 PM  

Grand_Moff_Joseph: Wanebo: Grand_Moff_Joseph: If you even TRY to defend the NRA here, then you're a shill. Period

Glad to see that you have an open mind for discussion of the issue. That will certainly help in furthering future discussion.

Just sayin

I really don't think there's anything to discuss, re: this specific ad.  I'm 100% ok with having a discussion over ways to enhance gun and mental health rules as a way to avoid more Sandy Hooks, and respects the non-tinfoil covered aspects of the 2nd amendment.  Such discussions could have made progress years ago if not for the NRAs and Brady Campaigns of the world farking it up for everyone.

Still, that is wholly separate from this ad, which warrants no discussion, only disdain and scorn from the 99.9% of the public that has a shred of humanity left in them.


Since I hit Enter to early - my response wasn't a personal barb on you, Wanebo.  Just responding to the comment in general.
 
2013-01-15 10:40:55 PM  
Fark the NRA and the pathetic wastes of skin who call themselves members.  These gun-addicted imbeciles are one step away from becoming a terrorist organization, and they really should be disarmed.

Do your country a huge favor and find or start a real group if you own a gun and feel like you need to belong to a club of shooters.  The NRA does not seem like the kind of outfit decent human beings should belong to.
 
2013-01-15 10:41:15 PM  
So who doesn't want to take pot shots at the President's children? I mean, Rush would have loved to have taken some shots at the 'white house dog'. And Bush's kids? Pretty hot. I'm sure people should have had free shots on them and as it would have been legitimate rape, no harm, no foul, right? And when Bush Sr was in office? Everyone should have had free shots on Jeb, George and the rest of the gang. And Reagan? Nobody cared if the ol' Gipper's son was targeted now and again.
 
2013-01-15 10:51:16 PM  

Grand_Moff_Joseph: There's crossing the line...and then there's this.

I mean seriously, you outright call the President a hypocrite - AND you do it for taking advantage of a service that every single President in modern times has enjoyed??

AND if that wasn't enough, you blatantly accuse him of being willing to sacrifice other children to save his own?!

WTF IS WRONG WITH YOU?!

You know what, this is the ultimate right-wing shill test.  If you even TRY to defend the NRA here, then you're a shill.  Period.


This has nothing to do with the NRA.

/sorry, had to do it.
 
2013-01-15 10:55:21 PM  

Grand_Moff_Joseph: warrants no discussion, only disdain and scorn from the 99.9% of the public that has a shred of humanity left in them.


Well? How can I argue with your statement? Plaster statistics like that and you must be right. Right? RIGHT?

/Wait. That's only about 14.7% of voting age adults in the US. Right?
 
2013-01-15 11:07:30 PM  

Wanebo: Grand_Moff_Joseph: warrants no discussion, only disdain and scorn from the 99.9% of the public that has a shred of humanity left in them.

Well? How can I argue with your statement? Plaster statistics like that and you must be right. Right? RIGHT?

/Wait. That's only about 14.7% of voting age adults in the US. Right?


Well, you certainly can, seeing as I made up the 99.9 number.  ;)

Hyperbole aside, my point is that no matter how much any of us love or hate the gun debate, this ad is just absurd on its face, and is indefensible, imo.
 
2013-01-15 11:22:32 PM  

Grand_Moff_Joseph: I mean seriously, you outright call the President a hypocrite - AND you do it for taking advantage of a service that every single President in modern times has enjoyed??


Well, I don't want to defend the NRA, but in this case I have to because you have the argument wrong.  They aren't referring to the Secret Service detail - Sidwell Friends has armed guards (and has for years) that work for the school.  Sidwell Friends has armed guards because famous and wealthy kids attend the school.  This is a relatively moot point because quite a few DC schools have either armed guards or outright police officers that work in the schools, but for entirely different reasons.

Grand_Moff_Joseph: If you even TRY to defend the NRA here, then you're a shill.  Period.


If you can't properly represent their argument and shout down other people because of your own lack of research, maybe that "shill" tag is a little bit of projection.  It's a stupid and cheap argument, but you aren't even getting it right.
 
2013-01-15 11:24:51 PM  
Also, for what's it worth, this isn't the first time the NRA has used this argument against a wealthy gun-control advocate.  In 2000 or so when Rosie O'Donnell shouted down Tom Selleck the NRA had a field day with her because she had an armed bodyguard take her kid to school.

Same argument, different target.
 
2013-01-15 11:38:51 PM  
NRA: Not Rational Anymore
 
2013-01-15 11:40:07 PM  
They're just trolling us now, right?  There's no way they could be this blind to the implications of what they're saying.
 
2013-01-15 11:41:40 PM  
The NRA might have had a point underneath all that whargarbl back in the day, but not anymore.
 
2013-01-15 11:44:11 PM  

Lsherm: It's a stupid and cheap argument,


I meant the NRA's argument.  It's stupid, because the girls would have security no matter where they went, and it's cheap, because the wealthy in the country can afford to pay for extra protection for their kids and frequently do so.  Either way, Obama isn't doing anything unusual, and the Secret Service likes Sidwell Friends because they have a history of working with them, which just adds to the pressure of sending his kids there.  I'm sure he got grief from some of his Chicago friends for isolating his kids from the dismal wasteland of the DC public school system because it probably would have helped improve the public schools with Presidential support.  But that's unrealistic.
 
2013-01-15 11:49:11 PM  

Lsherm: Grand_Moff_Joseph: I mean seriously, you outright call the President a hypocrite - AND you do it for taking advantage of a service that every single President in modern times has enjoyed??

Well, I don't want to defend the NRA, but in this case I have to because you have the argument wrong.  They aren't referring to the Secret Service detail - Sidwell Friends has armed guards (and has for years) that work for the school.  Sidwell Friends has armed guards because famous and wealthy kids attend the school.  This is a relatively moot point because quite a few DC schools have either armed guards or outright police officers that work in the schools, but for entirely different reasons.

Grand_Moff_Joseph: If you even TRY to defend the NRA here, then you're a shill.  Period.

If you can't properly represent their argument and shout down other people because of your own lack of research, maybe that "shill" tag is a little bit of projection.  It's a stupid and cheap argument, but you aren't even getting it right.


1.  Based on viewing the ad, I did legitimately think they were referring to the SS detail that his kids get.  I did not know that a lot of high end DC schools have armed guards (which I'm sure are privately paid for), and frankly, had no reason to think that they did.  So, on that point, I do stand corrected.

2.  I did muck up my argument, though I'd never had thought to research the armed guards thing, based on my stated assumption from the ad.  But, I still stand by my general point.  whether it's private guards or the SService, the ad is grossly over the line, and the implications of what they're saying in the ad are insane.

/carry on
 
2013-01-15 11:49:57 PM  

Lsherm: Lsherm: It's a stupid and cheap argument,

I meant the NRA's argument.


I figured that was what you were referring to.
 
2013-01-16 12:09:35 AM  

Wanebo: Grand_Moff_Joseph: warrants no discussion, only disdain and scorn from the 99.9% of the public that has a shred of humanity left in them.

Well? How can I argue with your statement? Plaster statistics like that and you must be right. Right? RIGHT?

/Wait. That's only about 14.7% of voting age adults in the US. Right?


I'm waiting for you to stop arguing about the argument against an argument and actually present an argument relevant to the article.
 
2013-01-16 12:11:14 AM  

kingoomieiii: Wanebo: Grand_Moff_Joseph: warrants no discussion, only disdain and scorn from the 99.9% of the public that has a shred of humanity left in them.

Well? How can I argue with your statement? Plaster statistics like that and you must be right. Right? RIGHT?

/Wait. That's only about 14.7% of voting age adults in the US. Right?

I'm waiting for you to stop arguing about the argument against an argument and actually present an argument relevant to the article.


That's arguable at best.  XD
 
2013-01-16 12:12:08 AM  
I'm so old I remember when Carter got shiat for sending Amy to public school.

/EABOD NRA, the rich and powerful get to send their kids to fancy schools. And I'm pretty sure the armed guards are not the reason they go there.
 
2013-01-16 12:13:22 AM  

Grand_Moff_Joseph: But, I still stand by my general point.  whether it's private guards or the SService, the ad is grossly over the line, and the implications of what they're saying in the ad are insane.


Realistically, if they wanted their commercial to make sense they'd just choose a few DC talking heads who are gun-control advocates who send their kids to Sidwell Friends and don't have their own protection.  They're already doing it to David Gregory.  They could probably come up with a list of ten people with some choice quotes and point out that these people are rich, so that's why they get extra protection.

biatching about Obama's kids is like saying Obama is pro gun-control but he wants the Secret Service to have weapons, ERMAGERD!.  It's a stupid farking argument.  They had plenty of valid targets to go after, but probably not with the same name recognition.

Grand_Moff_Joseph: (which I'm sure are privately paid for)


Well, I think tuition at Sidwell is in the $50K range, so yeah, paid for.  And the public officers at some DC schools are also paid for, but for entirely different reasons.

I'd also like to point out that the NRA released a shooting video game two weeks after biatching about violence in video games, so their publicity department is clearly farking retarded.  I'm wondering if they're looking for people.  Even though I'm not a publicist nor a marketer, I'm fairly certain I could make bank doing at least as crappy a job as their current staff.
 
2013-01-16 12:16:05 AM  
That...that was a...OK, OK, OK...not the Onion, but that other one - what's it called - you known the one I mean...oh, whatever, but the important thing to remember is that something this F*CKING PSYCHOTIC isn't real...right...?

right?
 
2013-01-16 12:17:07 AM  

whither_apophis: And I'm pretty sure the armed guards are not the reason they go there.


The armed guards are there  because the rich and powerful go there.
 
2013-01-16 12:20:12 AM  
Seriously, though, this is a joke, right?
 
2013-01-16 12:23:53 AM  
I wish the NRA would shut the fark up and just spend the money on lawyers.
 
2013-01-16 12:25:42 AM  
Pardon the pun, but I think the NRA may have shot themselves in the foot with this one.

Tone-deaf, much?
 
2013-01-16 12:30:28 AM  
I think it's an effective ad.
 
2013-01-16 12:31:30 AM  

SkinnyHead: I think it's an effective ad.


I think you used to be an effective troll.
 
2013-01-16 12:36:12 AM  
Once again, something that would have seemed to be over the top satire not that long ago is now reality.
At this point, The Onion might as well give up.
 
2013-01-16 12:36:47 AM  

SkinnyHead: I think it's an effective ad.


Shill count so far: 1*

*this was a known entity already, but extra confirmation never hurts.
 
2013-01-16 12:37:44 AM  

SilentStrider: Once again, something that would have seemed to be over the top satire not that long ago is now reality.
At this point, The Onion might as well give up.


or, just repost all of these items with slightly funnier headlines.  Nah, forget it!  not like that would ever work on the internet.


/snark  ;)
 
2013-01-16 12:45:03 AM  

Lsherm: whither_apophis: And I'm pretty sure the armed guards are not the reason they go there.

The armed guards are there  because the rich and powerful go there.


Right, but that wasn't the selling point for the Obamas, probably every private school in DC has guards. The kids could've gone anywhere.
 
2013-01-16 12:45:05 AM  

SkinnyHead: I think it's an effective ad that shows that the NRA is stupid.


FTFY
 
2013-01-16 12:54:24 AM  

themindiswatching: SkinnyHead: I think it's an effective ad that shows that the NRA is stupid.

FTFY



NRA will win this fight.  And it won't be because they're stupid.
 
2013-01-16 12:56:47 AM  

Wanebo: Grand_Moff_Joseph: If you even TRY to defend the NRA here, then you're a shill. Period

Glad to see that you have an open mind for discussion of the issue. That will certainly help in furthering future discussion.

Just sayin


Why have an open mind toward something objectively misleading? Sometimes the correct viewpoint is clearly the rational viewpoint - not somewhere between the rational viewpoint and the batshiat one.
 
2013-01-16 12:58:19 AM  

Grand_Moff_Joseph: SkinnyHead: I think it's an effective ad.

Shill count so far: 1*

*this was a known entity already, but extra confirmation never hurts.


He's probably right.  For the people who they are targeting, it will be effective.  My father-in-law is an extremely conservative rich WASP from old Pennsylvania money.  Here's a basic description:

Religion:  Army
Preferred Spouse:  Army (Will pay attention to wife after Army, for a duration lasting no longer than 52 minutes per day)
Clothes manufacturer 15 years after retirement:  Army
Disciplinary method:  Army
Food:  You better goddamn believe Army
Sex:  Historical Army documentaries
Guns:  Yes
Obama:  NO.

The man has never been to church except when he was baptized in 1940.  He holds two PhDs, I think in chemistry and biology.  He was on the project that developed the anti-toxin for botulism and on the panel that recommended stopping vaccinations for smallpox in the 70's because the risk finally outweighed the benefits.  He's an extremely smart man.  He is not religious.  There are photos all over the house of him with every US President since Eisenhower.

When whatever NY paper published the home addresses of gun permit holders right before Christmas, we were up at the in-law's farm.  He took all the "men" in the house outside (I use the term loosely because he does not consider me a man, I've never been in the military, and I shoot for shiat) and we took turns shooting a printout of the story from the local newspaper with a .22 rifle.  Then he put the remains of the paper on his bulletin board.

At no point did he explain what the fark we were doing, or why.  We didn't speak of it for the next four days, and my wife and I went home.

I imagine if that ad plays on my FIL's television, he's mentally shouting to himself "fark YEAH!" while showing no emotion whatsoever.  I also imagine there are 40 million people in this country who would shout "fark YEAH!" out loud.
 
FNG [TotalFark] [BareFark]
2013-01-16 12:59:22 AM  
The NRA has clearly gone full-panic and entered desperation mode.
 
2013-01-16 01:00:31 AM  

whither_apophis: Right, but that wasn't the selling point for the Obamas, probably every private school in DC has guards. The kids could've gone anywhere.


HAH!  Not the Catholic ones!

Actually, quite a few of the private schools in DC don't cater to the wealthy.  Sidwell Friends is the upper-upper echelon of private schools, and arguably the top one in the country not counting colleges.  It's the Harvard of K-12.
 
2013-01-16 01:03:28 AM  

Lsherm: Grand_Moff_Joseph: SkinnyHead: I think it's an effective ad.

Shill count so far: 1*

*this was a known entity already, but extra confirmation never hurts.

He's probably right.  For the people who they are targeting, it will be effective.  My father-in-law is an extremely conservative rich WASP from old Pennsylvania money.  Here's a basic description:

Religion:  Army
Preferred Spouse:  Army (Will pay attention to wife after Army, for a duration lasting no longer than 52 minutes per day)
Clothes manufacturer 15 years after retirement:  Army
Disciplinary method:  Army
Food:  You better goddamn believe Army
Sex:  Historical Army documentaries
Guns:  Yes
Obama:  NO.

The man has never been to church except when he was baptized in 1940.  He holds two PhDs, I think in chemistry and biology.  He was on the project that developed the anti-toxin for botulism and on the panel that recommended stopping vaccinations for smallpox in the 70's because the risk finally outweighed the benefits.  He's an extremely smart man.  He is not religious.  There are photos all over the house of him with every US President since Eisenhower.

When whatever NY paper published the home addresses of gun permit holders right before Christmas, we were up at the in-law's farm.  He took all the "men" in the house outside (I use the term loosely because he does not consider me a man, I've never been in the military, and I shoot for shiat) and we took turns shooting a printout of the story from the local newspaper with a .22 rifle.  Then he put the remains of the paper on his bulletin board.

At no point did he explain what the fark we were doing, or why.  We didn't speak of it for the next four days, and my wife and I went home.

I imagine if that ad plays on my FIL's television, he's mentally shouting to himself "fark YEAH!" while showing no emotion whatsoever.  I also imagine there are 40 million people in this country who would shout "fark YEAH!" out loud.


*puts tongue in cheek*  you must really love your wife then, because I could never put up with that level of crazy in the family.  ;)
 
2013-01-16 01:04:04 AM  
Still, he's obviously a smart man, for his many accomplishments.
 
2013-01-16 01:08:21 AM  

Grand_Moff_Joseph: There's crossing the line...and then there's this.

I mean seriously, you outright call the President a hypocrite - AND you do it for taking advantage of a service that every single President in modern times has enjoyed??

AND if that wasn't enough, you blatantly accuse him of being willing to sacrifice other children to save his own?!

WTF IS WRONG WITH YOU?!

You know what, this is the ultimate right-wing shill test.  If you even TRY to defend the NRA here, then you're a shill.  Period.


I completely agree with you, Grand_Moff_Joseph. Not because I'm a Democrat and support the President, but because I understand why the President's children have Secret Service protection. Just like President George W. Bush's daughter, President Clinton's daughter, and so on, the First Family is protected because of their high profile and susceptibility to being targeted by extremists, terrorists, and your regular nut-jobs.

The NRA has no basis to release this ad on their website except to appeal to white gun owners and white Obama haters. To say this ad is beyond common sense is an understandment, at best. I find it absolutely insane and out of touch with responsible gun owners like myself.

The NRA can just kiss my hairy, white butt, IMHO.
 
2013-01-16 01:08:51 AM  
SkinnyHead: NRA will win this fight.

Yep, they'll win the fight for additional profits for gun manufacturers.
 
2013-01-16 01:11:09 AM  

Lsherm: whither_apophis: Right, but that wasn't the selling point for the Obamas, probably every private school in DC has guards. The kids could've gone anywhere.

HAH!  Not the Catholic ones!


true, Catholics don't use protection
 
2013-01-16 01:12:05 AM  
My takeaway from this thread so far:

The protection of Rosie O'Donnell's children by armed guards is a matter of national security.
 
2013-01-16 01:19:07 AM  

themindiswatching: SkinnyHead: NRA will win this fight.

Yep, they'll win the fight for additional profits for gun manufacturers.


But we do enjoy shooting those trickle-down firearms.
 
2013-01-16 01:20:02 AM  

Chariset: They're just trolling us now, right?  There's no way they could be this blind to the implications of what they're saying.


Oh, I think they know exactly what they're saying. Local dealers are reporting that slow-selling AR-15 knockoffs that were gathering dust on the shelves six months ago are now being snatched up at twice retail price the instant they are in stock. One gun store I drove past to give my daughter a ride to work, they have people parking across the street because the lot is full - idiots running across an unlit, rainy, six-lane highway moving at 55mph to see if there are any more Bushmasters in stock.

The public is starting to get a little numb from violence. Hell, Fox has been trying frantically to twist the poutrage to 11 over Benghazi, and the public just doesn't give a f**k. After being told they weren't allowed to be outraged over the Scottsdale massacre, the first phrase that popped into a lot of minds was "it's not appropriate to politicize this tragedy". Poor whatshisname, who was posting benghazi links every ten minutes, has given up and is probably sulking in the corner.

So the NRA needs to act like the town drunk, throw some dinner plates around, keep the scared people lined up paying whatever the price tag says. I don't think they actually *want* the Obama family to come to harm - but the response of the baggers to every horrific event involving guns? Buy more guns. And don't haggle over price!
 
2013-01-16 01:25:07 AM  
So, if I understand the "Sandy Hook" truthers, the attack was a false flag operation to allow Obama to seize/ban guns. But really taking it to the next level seems closer to the "truth." It was a false false flag designed to lure Obama into making a grab. Facts: Obama reelected handily, gay rights advancing nationwide, women, minorities elected nationwide, the media began to call them on their bs and veiled racism. There was only one thing left that would rally the troops: guns. If they could get Obama to make a move, then they would have something to beat on for the next two years for the mid-terms. Get used to hearing about it; unless the China/Japan, India/Pakistan, anybody/Israel starts shooting at each other, the GOP has their talking point.

/too bad Jesus didn't shoot the woman caught in adultery, that'd be the icing on the cake.
 
Displayed 50 of 342 comments


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | » | Newest | Show all


View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking

On Twitter





Top Commented
Javascript is required to view headlines in widget.
  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report