The 2008 Weblog Awards
Vote for NoQuarter, finalists for "Best Political Coverage"!
You can vote every day.
No registration required!


RSS Feed for This PostCurrent Article

Sean Hannity on Gun FlipFlop FlimFlam Obama DingDong

All in all, an excellent review of Obama’s various, audience-dependent positioning on gun control — including an interview of a reporter for Politico — posted by V for NoQuarter’s YouTube channel:

Here are more NoQuarter reports on Obama’s inconsistent stands on gun control during the primaries as well as the SCOTUS ruling:

* “Two-Faced: Obama Tries to Straddle Both Sides of Gun Rights,” by SusanUnPC

* “SCOTUS Ruling on Gun Rights Highlights Obama Electability Issues,” by SusanUnPC

* “Obama’s Gangster Mentality,” by SusanUnPC

* “Coattails & Rural Districts,” by Truthteller

* “Kentucky Poll: Wright, Bitterness, Bosnia, Electability,” by Truthteller

* “Obama on Board That Funded Handgun Bans,” by SusanUnPC

* “Handwriting’s on the Wall … Err, the Questionnaire,” by Alegre

* “Obama the Magician,” by Bud White

Trackback URL

RSS Feed for This Post152 Comments »

Comment by Disgusted | 2008-07-01 23:53:16

Of course Obama is anti gun.

An “outraged” Mayor Daley this morning denounced a U.S. Supreme Court ruling overturning Washington D.C.’s handgun ban as a “frightening decision” and a “return to the days of the Wild West.”

Daley predicted that Chicago’s 1982 handgun freeze would be next in the crosshairs of the powerful gun lobby and that gun violence will surge if they’e successful.

[...]

“This is a very frightening decision for America. …Does this lead to everyone having a gun in our society? If they think that’s the answer, then they’re greatly mistaken. Then, why don’t we do away with the court system and go back to the Old West? You have a gun and I have a gun and we’ll settle in the streets,” Daley told reporters at Navy Pier

Comment by Disgusted | 2008-07-01 23:59:56

I hurried to get the first post in. Chicago is very anti-gun. So am I for that matter, but that’s another story entirely. Any digging whatso-ever will quickly learn Obamas stance on guns. Let me also add that the honorable ( I use this term in jest ) is also a big fan of arming Chicago policeman with machine guns.

Comment by Disgusted | 2008-07-02 00:00:49

Mayor Daley should come after honorable.

 

Comment by Zeke | 2008-07-02 01:31:57

Did any of you out there truly think the Second Amendment was created just for the National Guard?
Police with machine guns and citizens without even handguns kinda un-maintains that militia thingy. One doesn’t cede ones right to defend ones rights.
We’re all sitting here thinking what was really meant by Blood in the Streets Brazille or the real t-shirts telling us Obama or die. Who knows? But can I depend on a government which could believe what Obama believes and let them take away my right to defend myself?
To quote Gary Cooper,
“Nope”
I don’t even own a handgun but if you’d like to see my new collection, just tell me I can’t have any.

Comment by elise | 2008-07-02 02:27:43

Zeke, the Supreme Court ruling also said states have the right to impose regulations.

Comment by Billy Beane | 2008-07-02 02:32:47

But the regulations can not ban the private possession and use for self defense in one homes. That was the express ruling of Heller. Regulations relating to age, criminal record, mental capacity, etc, are fine according to the Court, but outright bans are unconstitutional.

Comment by elise | 2008-07-02 03:28:21

I agree, but background checks don’t seem unreasonable to me.

Comment by beebop | 2008-07-02 06:50:29

Last summer a woman was killed by her boyfriend who just happened to be a Canton, Ohio cop. If she had had a gun in her house, would she be alive? I don’t know. What I do know is that a blue uniform is no guarantee that you are necessarily the only person who is mentally credible to carry a weapon.

No one votes for a Democrat for their NRA creds. What is laughable is that in his 57 state theory, he looked at a map of the US and sliced and diced it looking for what previous candidates hadn’t offered the citizenry. Out West he thinks its guns. Down south he thinks its God. The laughable part is that the NRA will dispell the first fiction and all someone from Georgia needs to do is get a good look at Rev Wright and Father Phlegm and that pretty much takes care of the faith folks. The carnie barker forgets that trail he has left …..

Comment by John | 2008-07-02 07:28:26

Oh brother. You know, I really loathe that “what if” argument. How many kids are ALIVE today because their parents DON’T have a gun in the house? How many adults are ALIVE today because they WEREN’T gunned down by some pissed-off driver on the beltway who had had one two many cups of coffee and felt they had been cut off?

Give the “what if” shit a rest already, will you? When you resort to asking people to prove a negative, you just admit you don’t have enough solid material to back up your argument.

Comment by joe | 2008-07-02 09:25:42

And how may familes are alive today becuase a law a biding parent fended off an intruder with a handgun? The argument goes both ways.

Guns in the hands of law abiding persons lowers the rate of crime rather tha increase it. Gun bans assure that only criminals have guns.

Does anyone know who instituted Chicago’s handgun ban? It was former 1st Ward Ald. and convicted felon Fred Roti, a made-member of the Chicago Outfit. How nice: the criminals banning the guns so the regular US citizen can’t protect him/herself. How Chicago!

Comment by sjc-tx | 2008-07-02 11:06:23

Fewer than the number of dead from handguns. Entire countries in Euorpe survive just fine without handguns. The police don;t even carry them. Guess how many of their citizens have died from gunshot????

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 

Comment by John | 2008-07-02 11:25:06

The vast majority of people killed with handguns are killed by a family friend or member.

People who carry guns are more likely to be killed by their own gun than they are to successfully defend themselves using it.

The vast majority of kids killed by handguns are killed in their own homes, NOT INTRUDERS.

Guns in the home do not make ANYBODY safer.

Spare us the NRA talking points, please. They don’t match up with the facts at all.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
 
 

Comment by sjc-tx | 2008-07-02 09:46:57

I think they need to “Reintroduce” the videos of the ‘faith’ and church that oblassole attended and was “inspired” by for 22 years. Bring back wright and farrakhan… REMIND the voters just exactly WHAT BHO TRULY IS!

 
 
 
 
 

Comment by JozefAL | 2008-07-02 02:41:16

Um, I’m sorry, but the reality is that YES, the Constitution’s “right to bear arms” IS RESTRICTED TO “a well-regulated militia”. When the Constitution was written there was NO STANDING ARMY (or any standing military). Each state was largely responsible for providing its own men (and arms) for the defense of the state. When the Constitution was ratified, this didn’t completely change. The United States was dependent upon the militias of each state (and each state’s militia was ultimately considered under the auspices of the Department of War).
Once the United States formally established a “professional” army, the individual state militias (still with the “right to bear arms”) were largely reorganized into the National Guard units we know now.
Basically, what the Supreme Court decision did was no more than Judicial Activism–in essence, rewriting the Second Amendment by stripping it of the “well-regulated militia” clause, and doing so WITHOUT Congressional approval OR by using the Amendment process. (Oddly, the same people screaming about courts “rewriting” marriage laws without allowing the people to vote on the matter are pretty silent when the Conservative members of the Supreme Court do that very same thing.)

Comment by Billy Beane | 2008-07-02 02:52:42

you obviously did not read the 67 pages of majority opinion or the approximately 100 pages of dissent to understand the history and rational of the decision. There was a clear intent for the individual right established at the time of drafting the second amendment.

 

Comment by Billy Beane | 2008-07-02 03:00:29

BTW, the Supreme Court is the final arbiter of the Constitution, not Congress. See Marbury v. Madison. The Supreme Court does not seek Congressional approval for its decisions. Congressional legislation is subject to Supreme Court review upon a case in controversy arising challenging the constitutionality, scope or application of the legislation.

 

Comment by Hope Floats | 2008-07-02 06:31:14

The Constitution said blacks couldn’t have guns, too. No restrictions. Every American should be allowed to own a gun.

 

Comment by LilRod | 2008-07-02 06:48:18

I agree completely.
The ammendment clearly has a qualifier.
Understanding the events at the time clearly defines the right to bear arms to the militia.

Comment by joe | 2008-07-02 09:29:33

See, that’s where you are wrong. The amendment does not have a qaulifier, as was reasoned by the SCOTUS.

Sorry anti-gun folks, but the SCOTUS is the final arbiter, so if they say it is so, it is so. And, there now IS an individual right in the 2nd amendment.

 
 

Comment by joe | 2008-07-02 09:36:11

–Once the United States formally established a “professional” army, the individual state militias (still with the “right to bear arms”) were largely reorganized into the National Guard units we know now.–

If the original intent of the framers was to igve the states a right to ar themselves for the purpose of denfese against the federal government, once the federal government “nationalized” those militias, wouldn’t that make the NG system unconstitutional. Nationalizing the guard and making it subject to POTUS control neutralizes the “collective” right of the people to arm against the government. Therefore, even if that was the original intent, the SC would either have to outlaw the current NG system or guarantee an individual right in order to protect the original intent of the amendment.

“Guns don’t kill people - People kill people.”

 
 
 
 
 

Comment by Dakinikat | 2008-07-01 23:56:22

Barack Obama is selling out so many constitutional amendments at this point I beginning to wonder if women will be able to vote by November.

This guy changes his positions more frequently than a mother of newborn changes diapers.

 

Comment by LilRod | 2008-07-02 06:51:45

Well as recently reported if you are a woman working for Obama you get paid less than the men

 

Comment by fran | 2008-07-02 08:38:21

This constant shifting also confirms what we suspect about his poor judgment–even his political judgment. Hillary has developed her positions over time, and knows what Americans [ALL Americans, not just the ones she needed for the Primary] care about, and would not have needed to change every policy position she had for the GE. How does BO possibly think this will not be used against him by the Republicans or that anyone will believe his brand spankin’ new positions, since he’s only advocated for them since yesterday?!

I can’t wait to see how many foreign policy changes he makes after his summer internship abroad.

 
 

Comment by Uña de Gato | 2008-07-01 23:56:53

Nice fear mongering, Daley. I’m sure everyone is going out to get a gun right at this minute! Won’t someone think of the children!

Comment by Zeke | 2008-07-02 01:36:05

Some would recommend the lighter, small caliber weapons for youngsters. But for true knockdown power…

Geez, just kidding….

 
 

Comment by Seattle Moss | 2008-07-01 23:59:58

Back in 2000 I was amazed at how short sighted my bitter friends in Ohio were on the gun issue.
Everyone of them was voting for Bush because they were worried about Gore taking their Gun rights away.
I tried to warn them that Bush was an empty suit and not experienced but they didn’t listen.

I doubt very much that these same people will be voting for Obama in light of his flops on guns,his anti-American associations and those bitter comments.

Comment by beebop | 2008-07-02 06:54:25

how short sighted my bitter friends in Ohio were on the gun issue.

I know at least 150 non bitter Ohioians who would only know how to hold a gun coutesy of television …. but thanks for the over generalization ….

 
 

Comment by makes me want to take up chain smokin | 2008-07-02 00:00:09

He is the flim flam man. Thank you for the post.

 

Comment by Obama is a bum | 2008-07-02 00:00:15

Obama flips around like a fish out of water.

It is not too late for people to get riled up and come together, for the common good, in an effort to prevent Obama from becoming president.

Comment by fran | 2008-07-02 08:40:53

That’s what JUST SAY NO DEAL is doing!

Get involved, donate–we have the power!

 
 

Comment by rwc | 2008-07-02 00:05:05

Its Barky the gun grabber.

He can count out the south-west, mid-west and south being a gun grabber.

 

Comment by Uña de Gato | 2008-07-02 00:07:08

Barky will grab your guns and let you think you still have them. He’s flexible that way. Hope you are, too.

Comment by Obama is a bum | 2008-07-02 00:11:51

Obama will grab your guns and shoot you in the back. I hope you are smart enough to figure that out.

 
 

Comment by imustprotest | 2008-07-02 00:09:38

I thought he liked guns, didn’t Barry say recently that “if they bring a knife to a fight, we’ll bring a gun”?

Comment by Zeke | 2008-07-02 01:37:57

Yeah, he got the gun from the dude that was clinging to it in Pennsylvania! :)

 

Comment by Lucinda | 2008-07-02 07:32:51

Actually, Sean Connery said it in The Untouchables. But we all know how Obama likes to borrow stuff for his speeches.

 

Comment by JoseyJ | 2008-07-02 09:00:53

>>>>didn’t Barry say recently that “if they bring a knife to a fight, we’ll bring a gun”?

Yes Obama did - and no one suggested he wanted McCain assassinated!
But when Hillary merely mentioned that RFK was assassinated in June - oh my!! Obama’s blogger boyz and media pundits went wild with faux outrage - claiming Hillary wanted Obama assassinated.

NObama!

 
 

Comment by timepassages | 2008-07-02 00:11:11

Comment by Lucinda | 2008-07-02 07:34:42

He’s going to say whatever he has to say to get elected. By the time this is over, no one will know where he actually stands on any issue. As one poster said yesterday, he’ll be pro-life next week.

 
 

Comment by JAY in Los Angeles | 2008-07-02 00:17:59

I’m less concerned about Obama’s changing positions than the appearance that he seems to have been purchased. I want to know who bought him — because if he wins, we’re part of the deal.

 

Comment by imustprotest | 2008-07-02 00:20:10

Keeping up with Barry’s flip flops is turning into a full time job, I think I need a secretary to help me!

Comment by Zeke | 2008-07-02 12:50:06

kinda like watching a tennis match.

 
 

Comment by AA4HILL | 2008-07-02 00:20:23

Breaking: Group to air Sinclair Obama gay sex radio ad in key states VA, CO, FL, and NV

America’s Hope Foundation will Air this Radio Ad.
Obama - Sinclair Radio Ad #0127
hear ad here
http://countusout.wordpress.com/

Comment by Undercover Black Man | 2008-07-02 01:38:18

If that ad airs on any commercial radio station in America, I’ll blow you in the back of a limousine. It’ll never happen.

Remember I said so.

Comment by Obama is a bum | 2008-07-02 03:12:51

You must be jealous of Larry Sinclair.

Comment by Undercover Black Man | 2008-07-02 10:55:01

Actually, I’m jealous of Monica Lewinsky.

 
 

Comment by Hope Floats | 2008-07-02 06:35:43

The gauntlet has been thrown down, gentlemen. In FL, it is customary to ask for $20, too, UBM. Heads up.

 

Comment by sjc-tx | 2008-07-02 09:50:41

Dream on asshole

Comment by sjc-tx | 2008-07-02 09:51:40

comment to black idiot undercover (YOUR name not mine)

 
 
 
 

Comment by Uña de Gato | 2008-07-02 00:31:22

In the end we will all vote for Obama, because he will have reached out and healed our broken souls (after he grabs our guns, takes our votes, and throws us under the bus). Halle Barry saw the future: After Obama, we’ll all just be around to pick up paper cups off the streets.

 

Comment by caligirl | 2008-07-02 00:31:27

a wonderful piece by Marc Rubin

Tuesday, July 1, 2008
HOW OBAMA LOSES THE ELECTION IN 30 SECONDS.

In the Obama campaign’s most recent bizarre moment, Barack Obama, exercising the judgement he has become famous for, decided it was a good idea to send Wesley Clark onto the Sunday talk show circuit to criticize John McCain’s war record and military service saying it was not sufficient for him to be commander-in-chief. This is something like a colander accusing a pot of having holes. It is also crosses the line into incompetence considering that Ret.Major General Barack Obama’s war record consists entirely of a successful attack on Alice Palmer to get his start in Chicago politics.

Now we can add another Obama “what were they thinking moment” to go along with his other famous moments including his recent seal of disapproval which doesn’t just call his judgement into question, it shows he simply doesn’t have any. And while being a Navy fighter pilot and a POW for 4 years certainly doesn’t qualify someone to be Commander-in- Chief, being mentored for 17 years by Jeremiah Wright doesn’t exactly move you to the top of the list either.

Nancy Pelosi said not too long ago that she supported Obama because he has the judgment to be President. This is of course, like a homeless person giving advice on how to fix the housing crisis. We’ve been seeing Obama’s judgement on display for the past two weeks and it hasn’t been pretty. Breaking his pledge on public campaign financing, embracing the telecom immunity bill, reversing himself on Jerusalem within 24 hours which managed to unite both Israelis and Palestinians in their contempt for him, the Johnson episode before that, flip flopping on the recent Supreme Court gun decision while trying to pretend his reversal was because of “inartful” phrasing a year ago, and that obnoxious seal. And now an attack on McCain’s military service as being insufficient to be Commander-in-chief in support of a Presidental candidate that doesn’t have any of his own.

This is another extension of the judgment Obama showed in his 17 year relationship with Wright and his insufficient and evasive explanations about it during the primary.

After being caught in a series of lies about what he actually knew and heard, he finally admitted what he knew and heard said he disagreed with every inflammatory anti-American statement Wright ever made and found them all reprehensible and despicable. But he never gave a credible explanation as to why it took him 17 years to leave the room.

He has shown a propensity for saying anything to anyone at anytime to get what he wants right at the moment or to try and make a favorable impression and worry about the consequences later and he’s been able to get away with it with the terminally gullible.Especially the journalists covering his campaign. But that’s how you get reversals and broken pledges and flip flops on Supreme Court decisions and Jerusalem and how the person who claimed he had the judgement to be Commander-in-Chief from day one didn’t leave Wright and his church until day 6,205.

Chicago journalists speculate he stayed at Trinity Church for 17 years for political reasons because it was in the district he represented and he did it to continue to get re-elected. Whatever Obama’s reasons 17 years is a long time. And his actions and what he had to say about its says everything there needs to be said about his judgement and his credibility and who and what he is as a politician. How he could even think that attacking McCain’s military service and war record as making him unfit to be the Commander-in-Chief could have any credibility in boosting his own standing to be Commander-in-Chief should be enough for the super delegates who declared for him on June 5 to undo the damage when they get to the convention and cast their votes when it really counts.

I used to be in advertising. I did print ads and TV commercials and ad campaigns for a living. I won a lot of awards doing it. Everything I did was successful. Everything. I worked for some of the top agencies in the business. And I’m still good at it

It took me less than 5 minutes to write a commercial for John McCain using this one issue, that he could run against Barack Obama from now until election day and John McCain could go fishing from now until November and win an election that would make Reagan - Mondale look like a squeaker.

I’m not bragging. I’m just trying to make a point. I didn’t do the commercial as a gift to John McCain. I did it as a gift to the Democratic Party and any superdelegates who still wants to win in November. They have seven weeks to take it. I hope they do.

OPEN ON BLACK AND WHITE STILL OF McCAIN LYING PRONE IN A NORTH VIETNAMESE PRISON CAMP.

VO: For 4 years John McCain stood up for America as a POW in a North Vietnamese prison camp refusing under torture to make anti- American statements to be used as propaganda, never knowing when any given day might be his last.

INTERCUT VARIOUS SHOTS OF OBAMA AND JEREMIAH WRIGHT EMBRACING AND SMILING, THEN WRIGHT ON HIS PULPIT RAILING WITH ONE OF HIS SERMONS.

V.O: For 17 years Barack Obama wouldn’t stand up for America against the anti-American statements made by his own pastor in a black church on the south side of Chicago until his political ambitions made it neccessary.

TWO STILLS SIDE BY SIDE - A B&W STILL OF McCAIN AS POW - OBAMA AND WRIGHT SMILING FOR THE CAMERA.

V.O.: Years before asking anyone for a single vote each made a choice. On November 4th it will be time to make yours.

FREEZE FRAME: McCAIN IN HIS DRESS WHITE NAVY UNIFORM ON CRUTCHES GETTING A MEDAL.

SUPER: John McCain For President.

SFX: Wright(V.O):”On September 11th the chickens came home to roost..”

See you in Denver.

.

-

Comment by socalannie | 2008-07-02 00:46:53

thanks for sharing this callgirl!

 

Comment by wodiej | 2008-07-02 04:52:14

you sound like you are very good at what you do. and that commercial you described is definitely a gift for all of us. There are an awful lot of patriotic people in this country. Look at Bush’s rating right after 9/11. You show this commercial and watch Obama’s ratings drop in the polls LIKE A LEAD BALLOON.

I really wish some of this stuff would come out before August but I don’t think that’s going to happen. My guess is the DNC is bought and paid for by Soros. I hope the Republicans nail all their stupid asses to the wall soon. It will be a joy to watch them and Obama supporters throwing tantrums. Calling people racist won’t work either.

Comment by sjc-tx | 2008-07-02 10:02:12

There is an AWSOME 12 minute video on the McCain website… If it doesn’t move you to think then you aren’t worth much as an American OR moral human being!

 

Comment by Zeke | 2008-07-02 12:54:43

There does seem to be a twinkle in the eyes of my Rep friends. Its sorta like the old Monthy Python show where the huge weight drops on somebody and crushes them.
Knowing its going to fall is half the fun.

 
 

Comment by hank48188 | 2008-07-02 07:21:21

Great Job! I sure hope I start seeing stuff like this to prevent Obama and his wife from getting anywhere NEAR the White House. I think a nice ad about Rezko and the Obama house deal and another with Obama and Bill Ayers too.

 

Comment by Denise | 2008-07-02 08:28:44

Why didn’t you show the commercial?

 

Comment by chris | 2008-07-02 08:38:43

Caligirl: Is this a for real ad that is going to run? Wow, I sure hope so because the creator is exactly right. This is really all that the American voter needs to see and understand all that is BO vs. McCain. I keep wondering why people hashing over this Clark deal don’t keep asking the same question, if McCain supposedly isn’t qualified, WHAT MAKES OBAMA QUALIFIED TO BE PRESIDENT? A big fat NOTHING. Next to McCain’s service record, his courage, honesty, his proven love for America and his government experience, it’s no contest. Great post and thanks!

 

Comment by JoseyJ | 2008-07-02 09:05:43

Excellent campaign ad idea. Hope McCain gets a copy.

NObama!

 

Comment by sjc-tx | 2008-07-02 09:59:25

This is good. Have you sent it to McCains group??? Can I also suggest doing a version in Spanish???

 
 

Comment by HARP | 2008-07-02 00:32:35

I hope the safety is on, if those guns are getting thrown under the bus.

 

Comment by typical.white.person | 2008-07-02 00:34:31

I used to think Obama’s theme of “change” was just rhetoric. But, the more I think about it I am beginning to actually agree with his theme of “change.”

Obama “changes” his position from one day to the next (NAFTA, FISA, gun control, equal pay, et al.).

That way, when he lies to his followers the next time (and there will be a next time), he can always tell the Obamatrons he wasn’t lying, he merely “changed” his position. You know, we “hoped” it would work the other way but it didn’t, so we “changed” 180 degrees in the opposite direction. Obama’s flexible like that.

In fact, he changes his position so often, I have faith Obama will change it many more times during the campaign.

Comment by HARP | 2008-07-02 00:37:26

I`m willing to bet that after his trip to Iraq, staying there will be his idea.

Comment by Coster | 2008-07-02 01:15:45

LOL! I was just going to say the same thing. We need a betting pool for which new flip-flop BO will entertain us with next.

Are any of the obots starting to figure out they have been played?

Comment by Seattle Moss | 2008-07-02 01:35:00

Sure they know there being played. They have been promised anything and everything and have their hands out for whatever crumbs Obama throws at them.

 
 

Comment by Seattle Moss | 2008-07-02 01:26:16

Exactly Harp!
Obama is going there to survey the situation and then use his superior judgment to tell everyone about his great plan to stay.
I guess it will be called The Obama Doctrine

Comment by Billy Beane | 2008-07-02 01:29:51

Imagine if he ever wore a uniform, even if it was ROTC or even Boy Scouts. He would be wearing that while giving a speech to the Kiwanis to burnish his credentials to be Commander in Chief.

 

Comment by Zeke | 2008-07-02 01:47:30

Moss,
Quick! copyright that phrase tomorrow. Perfect.

The Obama Doctrine

Since you coined it, perhaps you would choose the first Doctrinal point of the Great, The Wise, oh you know who… something which epitomizes his steadfastishness

Wonderful line, Obama Doctrine
thanks :)

 

Comment by JoseyJ | 2008-07-02 09:11:06

Now that Obama has Obamabots cornered, he’s been slowly reneging on his “out of Iraq” proposal.
NOW he’s taking Hillary’s position that the U.S. should leave responsibly - and his bots that believed his Iraq schtick are having a hissy fit.
LOL

 
 
 

Comment by NoObamislamists | 2008-07-02 00:46:15

“inartful” is now the adjective du jour among the Obamatangs over at dailykooks

Comment by beebop | 2008-07-02 07:02:17

“Inartful” is what you used to excuse your comments when you didn’t know that the feed was on or that the microphone was live. God. What a fall from greatness …. Bush to Obama …. snark …. but …. really …. it is just starting to look like a football hand off, isn’t it? Pat? New cartoon theme?

 
 
 

Comment by caligirl | 2008-07-02 00:36:47

maybe Obamba’s a Transformer and can change into anything

Comment by Zeke | 2008-07-02 01:50:49

If he could change into something, I wish it would be into an all night grocery on the corner. Its two miles from here to the nearest beer or Merlot.

 
 

Comment by HARP | 2008-07-02 01:00:13

Over at stop puma

signature
goal: 10,000

drum roll please

125
signatures

Comment by tampagurl | 2008-07-02 01:41:14

Hi HARP, Even if they were able to get the 10,000 signatures, what makes them think that could stop PUMA? And who would they present the signatures to? A lame idea if you ask me.

Comment by karen for Clinton | 2008-07-02 05:11:17

Right. Are they going to suppress our freedoms?

Nope. This is STILL a free country, less and less everyday since he decided to become Dubya’s evil twin brother in thought and action.

He is such a control freak, his minions use tactics that are deplorable to American society.

Rev. Al ran down to Florida after the primary to get the signitures of people who didn’t vote.

They did NOT bother to vote so their non-votes were votes for ob because they signed a petition?

It doesn’t work that way AL. There was an ELECTION process, they chose to stay home.

And the ones who did give their full votes were declared half votes anyway.

Florida got a better deal than Michigan, but it was still a back room deal. Donna’s mama smiled.

Comment by JoseyJ | 2008-07-02 09:14:53

Exactly!! and the reason this Dem family won’t stay home on election day or waste a vote by writing in Hillary.
We will NOT reward the Dem Party’s bad behavior and corrupt tactics.

Dems for McCain!

 
 
 

Comment by flyarm | 2008-07-02 02:18:54

oh gee wiz..how many petitions have i signed in the past eight years..ohhh more than i can remember..

and how many things did they stop..

oh nothing..

i hope they keep signing those petitions..they will surely get me to stop being PUMA..( note sarcasm..)

orrrr…nottttttttttttt!!
lol

thanks for letting us know Harp!!

fly

 

Comment by beebop | 2008-07-02 07:03:41

And most of them are PUMA paw prints ….

 
 

Comment by Ann | 2008-07-02 01:21:42

If Democrats want to put a president in the White House they will write their super delegates and demand they vote for Sen Clinton in Denver. Any pledged delegates should vote for her as well. The firestorm in Iraq is about to jump the firewall to Iran and there is no way America will entrust a radical, inexperienced, anti-Semitic and anti-American candidate to be President — nor should we. Let’s nominate HRC, so Americans will elect a progressive in November and we will have an improved economy, UHC and national security.

Comment by Seattle Moss | 2008-07-02 01:29:11

Obama is the choice of dictators world wide. Maybe because he’s just like them and wants to be friends.

Comment by NY still loves Hillary | 2008-07-02 07:13:14

“Stupid is as stupid does.”

And he does…

 
 

Comment by sjc-tx | 2008-07-02 10:10:19

This is what is REALLY frightening… These are radical extremists. They DON’T do ‘diplomacy’ and ‘talk’. If those fuckers get a nuc they WILL USE IT! And for all you nonscientific folks… One yes JUST ONE nuc will be the END of life as we know it.

 
 

Comment by Ugo | 2008-07-02 01:36:08

You can not afford to stay home come election day, you have to use your vote otherwise the wrong Candidate will win by default.

We are not going to stay home, we will be voting. Not for Sen. Obama.

If Sen. Clinton name is not the DNC Presidential candidate, we will be voting for Sen. John MacCain.

You have to vote, do not seat it out vote for the candidate that you trust. Do not waste your vote.

 

Comment by DJ | 2008-07-02 01:38:40

BREAKING NEWS AT AOL………..OBAMA DENIES REBUKING CLARKE STATEMENTS ABOUT MCCAIN WAR RECORD

http://news.aol.com/political-machine/2008/07/01/obama-denies-rebuking-clark/

Comment by Zeke | 2008-07-02 01:58:55

So, we learn the benefits of wearing a real tie.
Obama was able to reach down, grab ol’ Wes’s tie and yank him, screaming, “there is no god but Barack!” right back onto the Bus.
Give the good general a little koolaid there, sweetie. That’s a good girl.

 

Comment by flyarm | 2008-07-02 02:23:26

oh yeah and i trust aol news..ahahahahahaha

or Obama for that matter…..lol

Comment by NY still loves Hillary | 2008-07-02 07:15:51

At this point, they’re more reliable than CNN or MSNBC

 
 

Comment by pasmalltowngirl | 2008-07-02 09:43:10

OMG Obama is a joke.

Everyday when I get on the net, as that is the only place that you can go to, to actually find out what is REALLY going on and who Obama REALLY is. Everyday I sit here with disbelief, just shaking my head.

This man is a chameleon, with many shady colors. And the fact that he is were he is, so very close to being our commander in chief, the most powerful position in the entire world, is mindboggling.
He changes his color of the day, to suit whatever group he is talking to, to get them to endorse him.

I don’t really so much blame the DNC, we all know what to expect from power hungry politicians.

But, the media? This is their country also, not just ours. Don’t they care about the future of our great country. The future of their children. As journalists and reporters, they have a responsibility to the American people.

This is not American idol or the male version of “Miss America”

This is a nomination of the President of the United States of America. Our fate, our future is in the hands of whom ever is elected.

The media has to be held accountable. The majority of the people don’t even have a clue as to Obama really is. They only hear what the opinionated biased media wants them to hear. They only know what they are being told, what they are brainwashed into believing, by our so called news media.

The news media, along with the DNC and Obama, will go down in history as being the cause of the great divide. They will be blamed for, once again, lighting the match, and igniting racial tension.

The American people have to stand up and make them accountable. They have a responsibility to inform the citizens the FACTS. Not the spin. Not their biased opinions.

STAND UP AMERICA

JUST SAY NO DEAL

PUMA

NOOBAMA

 
 

Comment by Ugo | 2008-07-02 02:33:59

I am a democrat. My vote is mine to use as I