Most Read
    Image 01 Image 02 Image 03

    Repugnant and cowardly

    Repugnant and cowardly

    One of the things I missed today during my long drive was the White House calling the ad embedded below “repugnant and cowardly.”

    I’ll tell you what else is regugnant and cowardly, a Presidential statement made by exploiting children on stage as a sympathy ploy meant to suggest that those who disagree with him don’t care about children. Obama routinely converts policy arguments into attacks on the character of those who disagree.

    This President routinely insults us, plays straw man games meant to demonize us, and enjoys spiking the football. At this point he has so divided the nation that the ad below is a natural consequence.

    I would prefer that children not be used by either side, but if Obama is going to exploit children for policy goals, then he has no business complaining when others play that same game.

    DONATE

    Donations tax deductible
    to the full extent allowed by law.

    Comments



     
     0 
     
     0
    jimposter | January 16, 2013 at 11:31 pm

    I didn’t think it was particularly hard hitting.

    Not once did I spot the use of the phrase “rat bast___” so I considered it quite genteel and rather soft in its presentation of the truth.


     
     0 
     
     0
    Midwest Rhino | January 17, 2013 at 6:24 am

    Rubio was with O’Reilly last night … agreed with him on registering all guns. High per gun tax might be next, or refusing to allow transfer of guns. Registration should be a no go.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tAjeplC6zAI


       
       0 
       
       0
      Midwest Rhino in reply to Midwest Rhino. | January 17, 2013 at 6:31 am

      Rob a Seven Eleven with a gun, 10 years in the Federal pen. Illegally possess a gun, same deal, 10 years!”

      “Limiting heavy weapons like assault rifles should be considered by the individual states. Background checks on gun buyers should be mandatory and so should gun registration.”

      “The situation will not get any better in Chicago, or anywhere else, until gun crimes are federalized.”

      Register all your weapons, or ten year mandatory. O’Reilly is pretty hard core gun control. Rubio agreed.


       
       0 
       
       0
      JerryB in reply to Midwest Rhino. | January 17, 2013 at 7:51 am

      I’m glad I don’t have cable TV. O’Reilly drives me nuts.

      None of these solutions will prevent the next Adam Lanza. Actually, it’s his mom who dropped the ball. If Hussein turns every doctor into a DHS agent, it might catch the next nut, but that’s a Stalin-esque solution.

      If dad was at home, might things have turned out differently? Not that the Feds can solve this.


       
       0 
       
       0
      lichau in reply to Midwest Rhino. | January 17, 2013 at 8:37 am

      O’Reilly is a pretty conventional media liberal, he plays a conservative on TV.

      If Rubio is for any additional gun control, he is off my list. The list is pretty short, as is.


     
     0 
     
     0
    Radegunda | January 17, 2013 at 11:19 am

    They could do an ad about all of Obama’s soft-on-crime votes. E.g., he did not vote for a law to strengthen legal penalties against school shooters. (The law passed overwhelmingly.)

    They could also give the stats on this admin’s lax prosecution of gun crimes.

    It shouldn’t be hard to demonstrate that Obama is not very concerned about reducing crime, violent or otherwise. He simply wants a disarmed citizenry.


     
     0 
     
     0
    2nd Ammendment Mother | January 17, 2013 at 12:08 pm

    Just a thought –

    Isn’t this the type of brutally honest challenges against Obama that many of us were disappointed that Romney failed to use in the campaign? Maybe if we’d been a bit more brutally honest about Obama’s record in office, Obama’s last press conference of his first term – really would have been his last press conference?????


       
       0 
       
       0
      Henry Hawkins in reply to 2nd Ammendment Mother. | January 17, 2013 at 1:28 pm

      Let’s not go crazy. If a Republican spoke the unvarnished truth about Obama, somebody might be offended and might not vote for the Republican who spoke the truth about Obama. We’ll set aside the point that unless that Republican speaks the truth about Obama, the lies prevail and there is no reason to vote for the Republican. It’s about civility in political discourse and about losing elections gracefully, you see.

      /sarc

    Oh, gracious! Gracious me!

    What a HORRIBLE ad! Our enemies might think we’re…well, you know…uncivil! Boo-hoo!

    And that means…well, that means that we won’t be able to feel morally superior to them anymore. Which makes our constant, semi-intentional political lossess…meaningless! [weeping]

    /sarc off

    What a great ad. If only more people on our side had the stones to go toe-to-toe with the scumbag in the White House about this stuff.

    P.S. Idle thought: how is it that the Dems never seem to lose? No matter what they do, they win; at worst, a convenient betrayal by “our” side gets it done for them in the end. It seems as though it can’t continue — laws of probability or nature — and yet, despite our energy and determination we keep losing, THEY KEEP WINNING AND NEVER LOSE.


    Leave a Comment

    Leave a Reply

    You must be logged in to post a comment.

    Notify me of followup comments via e-mail (or subscribe without commenting.)

    Font Resize
    Contrast Mode
    Send this to a friend