Despite gun control industry lobbying, firearms didn’t come-up during last night’s presidential debate. Jim Lehrer didn’t go there because the issue isn’t on the national agenda. At the risk of repeating myself, President Obama’s position on gun control has been pragmatic: he’s no more likely to touch it than I am to brush a lock of hair away from Estelle Yves‘ bushy brows. If Jimbo had asked the CIC about the Second Amendment the Prez would have said something pro-2A, talked about his heart going out to victims and how he looked forward to “starting a conversation” about disarming psycho killers. Romney would have pledged his allegiance to the People of the Gun. In fact, gun rights would have been another area of agreement between the two pols—which makes Obama look bad. So it’s a shame it didn’t come up. Media Matters is pissed. Good.
Lehrer didn’t bring it up also, because the left know its a looser for them.
But… but… he was the “moderator” he doesn’t have an agenda.
I would say gun issues didn’t come up because it is so far down the list of what most Americans are concerned with currently that it doesn’t even make the list.
Some of the single-issue guys among us may find that idea difficult to fathom.
Yes. This.
It was well known that the focus was to be the economy before the debate even happened. Why would they have brought up gun control?
interstate commerce clause?
Estelle is a French gal with measurements of 32 x 23 x 34.5
Which platform do you think she prefers: an AK or an AR?
I’m thinking AK but she’s probably open to trying new things. God i hope so.
I hope so too. Having once lived in the San Francisco Bay Area I could introduce her to many new things.
Estelle is indeed lovely, but she has the body of a 12 year old girl, I kinda like a little more curves on a lady. As to the debate, The President couldn’t hold his own on stuff he allegedly is strong in, I’m sure had the topic of the second amendment had come up, he would have suffered even worse on that. With the Constitution printed right on the wall behind them, it would have been easy for Gov. Romney to point at the Second Amendment and read it aloud.
Hmmm….Estelle Yves does look like a 12-year-old. well, you young guys have fun with those fantasies….reminds me too much of my nieces…just not happenin’ for me.
The President got spanked last night on his anniversary …………
and it wasn’t by his wife!
She spanked him later. I throw up in my mouth thinking about that visual.
If it ain’t broke don’t fix it. Keeping guns out of the national debate means we win by default since the tide is shifting towards people tooling up. Look at gun sales in CO after the Holmes shooting.
I’d still keep my eye on the U.N.
This.
How many times have we heard from the liberals that the economy is more important than gun issues?
I’m not seeing the problem here.
If there was one person in the debate studio who didn’t want to talk about guns, it was POTUS. He’d much rather proceed with gun control “under he radar.” And no, he would not have merely mouthed platitudes. He would have supported his party’s platform, which calls for renewal of the AWB. Or do you think that there was a single detail of the party platform that he didn’t control?
To my great amazement, Barry got his a$$ whipped last night. Maybe he had a bad night, but whatever, he has two more bites at Mitt’s apple. We’ll see what happens.
I’m slightly surprised definitely not shocked. Pundits and other political observers have noted that Barry’s strengths are in reading from a teleprompter in a controlled setting that favors himself. While Mitt is no Regan or JFK, neither is Mitt a common mass media journalist asking a question of the president or a common Joe at a town hall meeting. Mitt and Barry are on a more common power level. Whatever happened to those TH meetings? Did the politicos lose too much face at them? Anyways, as a far-left liberal fascist Barry’s ideology is academic feel-good theory that doesn’t flow in the real world. Note: I’m no supporter of Mitt who I find to be a conservative-fascist and a super-rich blue-blood loyalist.
Romney has never been a great debater, or even a good one. But I guess that POTUS found it hard to defend a track record that is completely indefensible and a “plan” that makes as much sense as “Plan 9 From Outer Space.”
Another day, another pro-Obama post by Rob. Seriously, I despise Mitt Obama and Barack Romney equally (because they’re basically the same person with a different haircut), but the utter denial involved in claiming that Obama isn’t anti-gun when you have all the evidence of him in Chicago, as a Senator, and running for President last time, it takes some seriously will power to try and claim that an Obama unleashed won’t go straight for the guns.
Yes, Rob, you’re right – he was pragmatic about them for four years because he knew he can’t get re-elected on an anti-gun platform. However, you’re refusing to realize that if he gets re-elected as you want, he’ll have no reason to hold back because he can never run again.
Both agents of the central banks.
First, Estelle good, gun control bad. Second, I recorded the debate on msnbc and as expected an anti-gun ad ran with a Colorado shooting victim blaming the guns. They just don’t get that the govt cannot legislate away criminal acts of violence. But if only one ccw had been there it would have changed the equation from open kill zone to “oops these sheep are shooting back, my mistake”
Four years later it’s hard for barry to get any traction with the “It’s Bush’s fault party line”. This economy and the state of the union is all barry’s right now.
As for gun control here I go with the mantra I’m sure you’re tired of hearing. If barry get’s reelected difi already has a nationwide and permanent AWB waiting to bring forward. Hillary is going to bring in a U.N. arms treaty without those pesky 2a loopholes. There’s also Kagan and Sotomayer.
I could go on, but really you should be getting the message by now.
The “mantra” is good because you’re right. If No-BAM!-a gets re-elected, one or the other, and possibly both, will surely be infringed on our RKBA.
I don’t have a political affiliation (though the Democratic party platform is pushing me away from voting that way) so I feel comfortable in saying this. If you want to ensure our rights aren’t infringed upon, vote for pro-gun senators and representatives. If the house and the senate have a majority that is pro gun, it’s damn near impossible to implement anti second amendment legislation. In fact, it is possible that a national reciprocity carry act could be passed with Barry in the white house if enough of congress would vote to override the veto.
If any Canucks here recall the last Federal Leaders’ Debate, what happened to Obama resembled when Michael Ignatieff was flattened by Jack Layton: same deer-in-the-headlights look. Obama’s performance was a train wreck.
Some of these comments make me laugh. Democrats BAD! Republicans GOOD! Really??? Is there anyone that looks at the facts, and not the lies that come out of EVERY politicians mouth??
Here are some facts: Reagan used two executive orders to ban the sales of “assault style weapons”. Out of office he joined Carter, Ford, and Clinton to campaign against this category of firearm.
Guess what? Bush banned the importation of two semi-automatic shotguns for the same reason.
What has the evil Obama done? Signed two bills in LAW that support and expand gun owner rights. Also last year, issued an executive order that strengthen the punishments for certain already on the books laws. Specifically aimed at those who buy firearms and sell them to the drug cartels. (Remember the Fast & Furious mess?? Our government at work) The same executive order also required additional reporting to help identify those that are purchasing firearms for sale to the criminals.
Do some homework people. Executive orders by a president cannot “make law”, on ly Congress can do that. Nor can a president “bypass” the Constitution with one. By definition, executive orders may only be narrow in focus and not violate standing law in this country.
So, let’s see, in 3 1/2 years has improved gun rights for law abiding citizens. At the same time, increasing the penalties for some of the bad guys. I thought that all of us that are “pro gun” would appreciate those actions.
For 42 years I have voted for Republican candidates. FINALLY, I have woken up. NONE of these guys are for real. EVERYONE of them says what they THINK we want to hear.
IGNORE WHAT THEY SAY!! PAY ATTENTION TO WHAT THEY DO!!!!!!!
Now for Mitt. Became lifetime member of NRA in 2006. Supported a ban on “assault weapons” as Governor of Massachusetts in 2007.
Builds an elevator in his California home for his CAR!!!! That opens up in his 3rd story bedroom???? Now this is a man who understands the middle class………yeah, right.
Refuses to release any tax returns except for one, that being 2011. Even his father, George, running for office in 1968, released 12 years worth of returns.
Lastly, most of us would fall under his definition of the 47% of Americans he doesn’t give a rats ass for.
Here is some homework for everyone. Compare the restrictions on your freedoms by the PATRIOT ACT, signed into law by a Republican Congress and Republican President. To the laws put into place in Germany, in the early 1930’s, under Hitler. Now THAT is a wake up call.
Don’t EVEN get me started on the Democrats.
Let’s throw them all out. An out of work ditch digger would make a hell of a better President than EITHER of these BOZOS. Infinitely more honest, and a hell of lot smarter.
I watched the debate, well part of it at least.
The gun debate was left out, so MIA yes, DOA no. The GOP platform speaks for itself. The DNC platform is more illusive in that yes we have heard about the AWB and other things, but nothing defined on paper.
I was hoping to see a lively debate. What we got was a school boy being bent over and spanked on national television. He looked disinterested in Romney and seemed like he would rather be somewhere else. Romney added more details to his message, while Obama seemed to simply repeat himself. There were a couple of moments where Obama seemed to jab at Romney. Romney would explain his plan as best he could in 2 minutes, call the statement by Obama a fib, then Obama simply repeated the jab, like a small child saying it isn’t my fault, or my brother made me do it! He didn’t provide substance to his track record, or while he felt it is or was a failure, or how he will move forward.
If we pull back from the trees and look at the forest, this is really about two things. Free market capitalism, and socialism / Marxism. Put aside the lefts anti 2A agenda for a moment. In reality this could have been a great debate, and I mean that. Instead even main stream media was shocked at how dominating Romney was.
What’s the point of bringing up gun control when both Romney and Obama support it? Sure Romney has conveniently flipped on the issue but I’m sure he will flop back if political expediency requires it.