Skip to main content
  • CNSNews.com
  • MRC TV
  • Biz & Media
  • Culture & Media
  • TimesWatch
  • Take Action!

Join Us @:
Facebook
Twitter
Amazon Kindle

Free email alerts!

NewsBusters logo
May 20, 2013
  • Home
  • Blogs
  • About
  • Forum
  • Take Action
  • Contact
  • Donate
  • Search
  • RSS

Hot Topics

  • IRS Targets Tea Party
  • Benghazi Fiasco
  • Gosnell Trial
  • Censoring the News
Home » Blogs » Tom Blumer's blog
  • BREAKING: WashPost Reports Obama DOJ Also Spied on James Rosen of Fox News
  • Crowley to Obama Advisor: 'Why Didn't the President Just Say, Yeah, Benghazi Was a Terrorist Attack?'
  • CBS's Sharyl Attkisson Says Team Obama 'Perfected' Delaying Info Release And Has 'Quit Talking to Me Altogether'
  • Fareed Zakaria Howler: 'Obama’s World View is Rooted in American Exceptionalism'
  • Video: Brent Bozell Cautions Media Will Quickly Revert to Defending Obama, Attacking GOP Over Scandals
  • Bozell Column: 'Progress' Gets Canceled
  • CNN's Banfield: 'Take Me Off the Ledge' and Tell Me IRS Audits Weren't Political
  • NBC's Williams Ready to Move On: 'It's Tough to Know the Staying Power of Any Given Scandal'

AP's Babington Can't Understand Why Anyone Would Think Obama Doesn't Support 'Backburner Issue' of 2nd Amendment Rights

By Tom Blumer | April 14, 2012 | 22:33

A  A
Tom Blumer's picture

In covering GOP presidential candidate Mitt Romney's appearance at the annual National Rifle Association convention in St. Louis yesterday, Associated Press aka Adminstration's Press reporter Charles Babington pretended to know nothing about President Barack Obama's opposition to basic Second Amendment rights. At least I hope he was pretending, because Obama's hostility to the right to keep and bear arms is longstanding, well-known, and did not stop when he swore an oath to "protect and defend the Constitution" on January 20, 2009.

I have excerpted Babington's first four paragraphs plus three others. I will follow that with a rundown of Obama's pre-2008 gun-hostile record, his meeting with the Brady group in May 2011, and this "little" thing called Operation Fast and Furious Babington and his establishment media colleagues have mostly deliberately ignored for well over a year (bolds are mine throughout this post; HT to a frequent emailer):

Story Continues Below Ad ↓

Romney: Obama will erode the rights of gun owners

The presidential campaign briefly veered from the emotional Mommy Wars on Friday to the back-burner issue of gun rights, with Mitt Romney telling the National Rifle Association that President Barack Obama is not protecting gun owners - even though the topic has rarely arisen during his time in office.

Without offering details, Romney said that Obama would like to erode gun owners' rights.

"We need a president who will enforce current laws, not create new ones that only serve to burden lawful gun owners," Romney told thousands of NRA members in St. Louis for their annual convention. "President Obama has not. I will."

Obama has said relatively little about firearms, deeply disappointing gun-control groups. Obama campaign spokesman Ben LaBolt said the president's record "makes clear the he supports and respects the Second Amendment, and we'll fight back against any attempts to mislead voters."

... Asked for details to support the claims, Romney's campaign said Obama has appointed judges, including Supreme Court Justices Elena Kagan and Sonia Sotomayor, who have supported moves such as placing temporary limits on importing semiautomatic assault weapons. The campaign said Attorney General Eric Holder has not adequately backed people's rights to own and use firearms.

But gun-control groups such as the Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence have expressed dismay over the lack of attention to their concerns. In its most recent assessment, in 2010, the group flunked on Obama on all seven issues it deemed important.

Campaigning in 2008, Obama said: "I believe in people's lawful right to bear arms. ... There are some commonsense gun safety laws that I believe in. But I am not going to take your guns away."

Well, Charles, if it's "details" you want, details you'll get.

Here is a rundown of Obama's gun-hostile history which I posted in late October 2008 by reference to a more complete rundown prepared by the NRA's Institute for Legislative Action:

  • Obama voted to allow reckless lawsuits designed to bankrupt the firearms industry.
  • Barack Obama wants to re-impose the failed and discredited Clinton Gun Ban.
  • He voted to ban almost all rifle ammunition commonly used for hunting and sport shooting.
  • He has endorsed a complete ban on handgun ownership.
  • Obama also supports local gun bans in Chicago and other cities.
  • Obama voted to uphold local gun bans and the criminal prosecution of people who use firearms in self-defense.
  • Obama opposes Right to Carry laws.
  • Obama supported a proposal to ban gun stores within 5 miles of a school or park, which would eliminate almost every gun store in America.
  • Obama favors a ban on standard capacity magazines.
  • Obama supports mandatory micro-stamping, one-gun-a-month sales restrictions, a ban on inexpensive handguns, gun owner licensing and gun registration, and mandatory waiting periods.
  • Obama supports a ban on the resale of police issued firearms, even if the money is going to police departments for replacement equipment.

My post also notes that Babington's then-colleague Nedra Pickler wrote in February 2008, with no sense of irony, that Obama "said he does not intend to take away people’s guns," but "voiced support for the District of Columbia’s ban on handguns." But after the Supreme Court's Heller ruling overturning the DC ban in late June, Obama said "he supports the decision."

My post goes reference another very important and less-known matter, namely that Obama worked with a group which conspired to create the artificial appearance of legal scholar-based opposition to Second Amendment rights, and almost succeeded:

During Obama’s tenure, the Joyce Foundation board planned and implemented a program targeting the Supreme Court. The work began five years into Obama’s directorship, when the Foundation had experience in turning its millions into anti-gun “grassroots” organizations, but none at converting cash into legal scholarship.

The plan’s objective was bold: the judicial obliteration of the Second Amendment.

Joyce’s directors found a vulnerable point. When judges cannot rely upon past decisions, they sometimes turn to law review articles. Law reviews are impartial, and famed for meticulous cite-checking. They are also produced on a shoestring. Authors of articles receive no compensation; editors are law students who work for a tiny stipend.

In 1999, midway through Obama’s tenure, the Joyce board voted to grant the Chicago-Kent Law Review $84,000, a staggering sum by law review standards. The Review promptly published an issue in which all articles attacked the individual right view of the Second Amendment.

(The Review) solicited only articles hostile to the individual right view of the Second Amendment. ….. Joyce had bought a veto power over the review’s content.

….. The plan worked smoothly. One court, in the course of ruling that there was no individual right to arms, cited the Chicago-Kent articles eight times.

….. The Joyce Foundation board (which still included Obama) ….. expand(ed) its attack on the Second Amendment. Its next move came when Ohio State University announced it was establishing the “Second Amendment Research Center” as a thinktank headed by anti-individual-right historian Saul Cornell. Joyce put up no less than $400,000 to bankroll its creation.

….. The Center proceeded to generate articles denying the individual right to arms.

….. The Joyce directorate’s plan almost succeeded. The individual rights view won out in the Heller Supreme Court appeal, but only by 5-4. The four dissenters were persuaded in part by Joyce-funded writings, down to relying on an article which misled them on critical historical documents.

If that's not enough for Mr. Babington, let's look at a May 2011 example of Obama stealth (HT Hot Air) which seems to run in the same vein as his promise to Russia's Medvedev that he'll have more flexibility" after winning reelection (internal links were in original):

While the Obama administration said it is committed to gun rights, a gun control advocate has spilled the beans, saying Obama is using stealth to work on firearms restrictions.

The Washington Post did a story on Steve Croley, the White House gun control czar. Croley is considered to be an expert on regulation and tort law. His approach to gun control appears to be a regulatory one.

According to the article, Jim and Sarah Brady visited Capital Hill on March 30, the 30th anniversary of the assassination attempt on Ronald Reagan; to push for a ban on "large magazines."

The couple reportedly were meeting with press secretary, Jay Carney, when, according to Sarah Brady, the President came in. She said the President told her he wanted to talk about gun control and "fill us in that it was very much on his agenda."

She went on to say Obama told her, "I just want you to know that we are working on it. We have to go through a few processes, but under the radar."

The statement reinforces an article in the Huffington Post describing how the administration is exploring ways to bypass Congress and enact gun control through executive action.

The Department of Justice reportedly is holding meetings discussing the White House's options for enacting regulations on its own or through adjoining agencies and departments. "Administration officials said talk of executive orders or agency action are among a host of options that President Barack Obama and his advisers are considering. "

I guess Mr. Babington might be able to claim that he wasn't really lying when he wrote that the topic of gun control "has rarely arisen," and that "Obama has said relatively little." But, as just seen, at least one time when the topic arose and Obama said something, it was to make the point that he is "working on" gun control.

Finally, a bit on Fast and Furious from Darrell Issa, who also spoke at the NRA convention, as relayed by Katie Pavlich at Townhall, including its relationship to the administration's just-described gun control goals:

Entering the Edward Jones arena to an applauding audience at the NRA Annual Convention in downtown St. Louis Friday, Congressman Darrell Issa made it clear his congressional investigation into the Operation Fast and Furious scandal isn’t going away until the Obama Justice Department comes clean.

 

“The investigation of Operation Fast and Furious will not end until the full truth is exposed to every American,” Issa said, adding senior officials at the Department of Justice will be held accountable for the lethal program, including Attorney General Eric Holder.

“Eric Holder’s contempt for Congress and his failure to comply will not go unanswered, and you can count on me,” Issa said as a woman yelled, “Thank you!”

... Issa also touched on the motivations behind Operation Fast and Furious and how liberal Democrats in Congress have reacted to revelations in the scandal.

“Fast and Furious can be seen as nothing else but a needless attack on our right to keep and bear arms,“ Issa said. “When the facts began to come out about Fast and Furious, no surprise, Democrats in Washington, immediately seized on the opportunity to talk about the need for additional gun control laws.”

For months, I have been stressing the importance of understanding Operation Fast and Furious was not a “botched” program or an accident. Instead, DOJ officials made calculated decisions to allow some of the most ruthless criminals in the world to help themselves to American guns, while throwing law abiding gun dealers under the bus.

The bottom line for Charles Babington is that Mitt Romney is right. He either should know this and doesn't, making him extraordinarily ignorant, or he does know it and won't acknowledge it. All in all, it's just another typical Obama-supportive report from the Adminstration's Press.

Cross-posted at BizzyBlog.com.

  • Bias by Omission
  • Campaigns & Elections
  • Double Standards
  • Labeling
  • 2012 Presidential
  • Crime
  • Government Agencies
  • Guns
  • Media Bias Debate
  • Political Groups
  • Political Scandals
  • Charles Babington
  • Darrell Issa
  • Sarah Brady
  • Online Media
  • Wire Services/Media Companies
  • Associated Press
  • Blogs
  • Colorado
  • Regional Media
  • Tom Blumer's blog
  • Login to post comments
  • Printer-friendly version
Stop Censoring The Gosnell Trial!

Comments

Well, Tom, who are you going

Submitted by motherbelt on Sat, 04/14/2012 - 11:06pm.

Well, Tom, who are you going to believe, Babington or the lying facts?

Liberals know the truth.  The facts are a conspiracy.

  • Login to post comments

So, Mitt is talking to the NRA

Submitted by RESTLESS 1 on Sat, 04/14/2012 - 11:17pm.

What subject did babington expect Mitt to bring up, his favorite cupcake recipe?

The 0 may be ignorant of many things, but he's not stupid. His numbers suck. He wouldn't dare go after the second amendment, at least not in a first term, but he certainly is no fan of it.

"I don't like repeat offenders, I like dead offenders". - Ted Nugent
  • Login to post comments

Walter Mitty's Second Amendment

Submitted by GregE on Sat, 04/14/2012 - 11:32pm.

No real need to go after it directly.
http://www.federalobserver.com/archive.php?aid=1874

  • Login to post comments

Gee - maybe it's because he

Submitted by Slyrr on Sat, 04/14/2012 - 11:54pm.

Gee - maybe it's because he ORDERED his stooge in the Dept. of Justice (Eric 'gun runner' Holder) to deliberately sell deadly weapons to drug lords in Mexico as part of a scheme to cause deaths that would let them destroy the 2nd Amendment?

As tragic as their screw up was, the fact that they were caught (literally red-handed) was a blessing in disguise. It exposed the criminality and lawlessness of the Obama presidency. Only their corruption and the total enslavement of the liberal media has prevented them from being hung at noon in town square.

If a Liberal/Democrat politician/media figure wants to put their arms around you, or pat you on the back, all they're doing is looking for a good place to stick a knife.
  • Login to post comments

Following Orders

Submitted by Huapakechi on Sun, 04/15/2012 - 10:56am.

You do realize that "o"boy had announcement that "90% of the weapons found at gang crime scenes in Mexico were traceable to gun shops in the United States".  (U.S. President Barack Obama, in a joint press conference with Mexican president Felipe Calderon, Los Pinos, Mexico City, Mexico, April 16, 2009, echoed or stated previous to obama by clinton, durban, and feinstein)

This statement was then discredited by evidence presented that the 'authorities' had sorted the weapons seized and then ran the serial numbers of those weapons obviously of American manufacture to identify those that had been originally sold in American gun shops.

(Reference:  According to Guy Smith’s latest update to his firearm reference book Gun Facts:

The original 90% number was derived from the number of firearms successfully traced, not the total number of firearms criminally used. For 2007-2008, Mexican officials recovered approximately 29,000 firearms from crime scenes and asked for BATFE traces of 11,000. Of those, the BATFE could trace roughly 6,000 of which 5,114 were confirmed to have come from the United States. Thus, 83% of the crime guns recovered in Mexico have not been or cannot be traced to America and the real number is most likely 17%).

Those same authorities carefully ignored the inconvenient fact that the grenades, machine guns, and rocket launchers are never a common item for sale in American weapon stores, and many of the American weapons came from Mexican Army deserters or stolen from the Mexican Army.

The quick and easy method to render the propaganda a veil of 'truth' was to channel weapons from American gun shops to Mexican drug gangs.  That is apparently what this administration and its' (in)justice department had set out to do.  This resulted in hundreds of Mexicans murdered, at least two government agents killed in the line of duty, and more than a few 'whistleblowers' in the agency charged with the dual role of enforcing the America's byzantine gun laws and facilitating the transfer of weapons to Mexican drug gangs.

 

Do not think it worth while to proceed by concealing evidence,

for the evidence is sure to come to light.

Bertrand Russsell

  • Login to post comments

Ha

Submitted by dliston on Sun, 04/15/2012 - 12:13am.

I love when media people and journalist admit how dumb and out of touch they are.

  • Login to post comments

This is the standard obama

Submitted by LAM SON 719 on Sun, 04/15/2012 - 12:42am.

This is the standard obama refrain
1. It is ____________fault.
2. I wasn't aware of______________.
3. I misspoke________________.
4. The racists keep blocking my efforts.

Non, je ne regrette rien. "You aren't angry because I might be a racist, you're angry because you know I'm right".
  • Login to post comments

Great article Tom. You need

Submitted by d1carter on Sun, 04/15/2012 - 12:45am.

Great article Tom. You need to send email a copy to Mr. Babington. Of course, he will never acknowledge it. This information does not fit the narrative for the Associated Press. I fear they have become a subversive organization.

  • Login to post comments

Oh my...hide your guns!!!

Submitted by Jer on Sun, 04/15/2012 - 1:02am.

The discussions [within the Justice Department relating to possible action via Executive Order] were meant to build a broad coalition around the elements of reform Obama had outlined a day earlier in an op-ed for the Arizona Daily Star, including stronger state-to-state coordination, expedited background checks and greater enforcement of the laws already on the books, especially with regard to the National Instant Criminal Background Check System.

Now that's some serious gutting of the Second Amendment.  (sarc off)

Jer

  • Login to post comments

Hmmm

Submitted by RESTLESS 1 on Sun, 04/15/2012 - 1:38am.

"...greater enforcement of the laws already on the books,..."

If only he applied that attitude toward immigration laws.

Are you really saying that the 0 is a protector of the second amendment?

"I don't like repeat offenders, I like dead offenders". - Ted Nugent
  • Login to post comments

RESTLESS...

Submitted by Jer on Sun, 04/15/2012 - 1:57am.

If only he applied that attitude toward immigration laws.

The last time I checked he seemed to be doing a pretty good job on that front. I have a Latino friend (US citizen) who, because of his fluency in both Spanish and English, occasionally advises Hispanics/Latinos caught up in the judicial system, and he expresses amazement at the numbers of illegals/undocumented who have either been deported or have left the States voluntarily due to the more aggressive enforcement of immigration law since Obama took office. [The economy has also been a factor.]

Are you really saying that the 0 is a protector of the second amendment?

Yep. At the very least, as President, he hasn't shown any hostility toward it.

Jer

  • Login to post comments

As President, no

Submitted by RESTLESS 1 on Sun, 04/15/2012 - 1:57am.

Before that, yes. As I said elsewhere, (don't remember where), he'd be a fool to visit limitations on the second amendment now, but in a second term, what does he have to lose.

On deportations, as the election season closes in, the drop in deportations is at least, notable.

"I don't like repeat offenders, I like dead offenders". - Ted Nugent
  • Login to post comments

What does he have to lose?

Submitted by Jer on Sun, 04/15/2012 - 2:11am.

Political capital for starters. Look, he is limited in what he can do by Executive Order. And, as far as legislation, there isn't the political will on the part of congressional Democrats to introduce any significant gun control measures, nor the numbers to pass any bills that might be introduced anyway. And that reality is not likely to change in a second Obama administration, assuming there is one.

Jer

  • Login to post comments

Limited on what he can do by EO's?!

Submitted by Radical1979 on Sun, 04/15/2012 - 9:16am.

I haven't seen any limitation yet. When has Congress or the Judiciary halted an EO, by any president? Citizens. An be detained without trial by EO (I know he wasn't the first, just pointing out what's done by EO).

Proud member of the 53%!
  • Login to post comments

Excuse me

Submitted by DontFeedTheTrolls on Sun, 04/15/2012 - 6:10am.

Well the President sure showed some hostility towards the sale of these weapons.

Americans keeping their own earnings is a Civil Right! Demand your Civil Rights!
  • Login to post comments

The last time I checked he

Submitted by Tugboat Phil on Sun, 04/15/2012 - 8:32am.

The last time I checked he seemed to be doing a pretty good job on that front.

Then why are his own Aunt and Uncle openly and flagrantly living out in the open, even though both have been  here illegally for years?  Why is the Aunt living off the public dole and the Uncle has a provisional driver's license because of his drunk driving charge?  Oh yeah, the DL would be a state issue, but they are both examples of how nothing is really changing on enforcement of illegals.

I have a Latino friend (US citizen).....advises Hispanics/Latinos.... 

You might want to find out if your friend would prefer to be called an American.  The people he advises might also want to be addressed with more respect too.  Apparently those terms are not as welcomed as the federal gubmint thought when they pigeonholed everyone that speaks Spanish into a voting bloc.

 

President Obama is a Muslim (from his own lips), Kenyan (read it from his publicist) a homosexual (read it on a news magazine cover) and a Socialist (I'm alive and can see it for myself)
  • Login to post comments

Deportations

Submitted by Huapakechi on Sun, 04/15/2012 - 11:07am.

This unnamed 'latino friend' has not remarked on the 'sanctuary cities' or the ins 'catch and release' programs? Where does he live, by the way? Since the ins is supposedly concentrating on deporting criminals, I would be most careful about associating with this 'friend'. His friends could be hazardous to your health.

  • Login to post comments

Ah, Jer regularly, and automatically, pooh-poohs any ---

Submitted by matthewdean on Sun, 04/15/2012 - 2:21am.

talk of an armed rebellion or possible civil war down the line.

He's a lefty, a lawyer, he likes Obama, and, he thinks if things aren't quite peachy-keen right now, it will all work out just fine in the end because:

  1. It always has.
  2. The "threats" (armed rebellion) by conservatives - why, that's all just a bunch of prattle, anyway.
  3. A liberal Democrat is in the White House - what could possibly go wrong with government.
  4. Obama may not be a "protector" of the 2nd Amendment, but he certainly has done nothing thus far in his presidency to indicate he won't adhere strictly to the lines laid out  the U.S. Constitution, for the betterment of ALL of us citizens.
  5. There is absolutely NO possibility of a civil war anything like that of 1861-1865 because Obama has brought race consciousness to a level in this country that even the most hopeful liberals, or jaded conservatives, would have, or could have, imagined.

'Nome sayin' ?

MD

"The credibility of the story is undermined by the selection of sources." - (h/t Jer)
  • Login to post comments

Great...just as I'm leaving, Dean shows up to pick apart

Submitted by Jer on Sun, 04/15/2012 - 2:27am.

everything I've posted since yesterday.

It's slim pickings, Matthew, but please proceed.

G'night.

Jer

  • Login to post comments

Just jerkin' your chain a bit, Jer, ---

Submitted by matthewdean on Sun, 04/15/2012 - 2:44am.

keeps me out of the bars.   :o)

MD

"The credibility of the story is undermined by the selection of sources." - (h/t Jer)
  • Login to post comments

Remember .......

Submitted by Herbster on Sun, 04/15/2012 - 3:31am.

Remember that without the Second Amendment there will be no First Amendment.

  • Login to post comments

From my cold dead fingers, I

Submitted by Rowane on Sun, 04/15/2012 - 4:16am.

From my cold dead fingers, I don't miss.

*******************************

You've got to stand for something, or you'll fall for anything. (Aaron Tippin)

  • Login to post comments

Must be because we're not as

Submitted by motherbelt on Sun, 04/15/2012 - 8:10am.

Must be because we're not as smart as he is; he's talking in that high-falutin' "shorthand" of his and we're too dumb to get the "nuance."

  • Login to post comments

It's worse than that

Submitted by Savonarola on Sun, 04/15/2012 - 8:12am.

Pharoah supports a right to kill babies, which is not mentioned in the Constitution, while opposing the right to bear arms, which is expressly mentioned in that same document.

  • Login to post comments

I read this yesterday in the liberal Daily Record

Submitted by Jnoble on Sun, 04/15/2012 - 9:30am.

the line that stood out to me as odd was "Obama has said relatively little about firearms, deeply disappointing gun-control groups".
Really? Gun control groups like the NRA are that cynical that they WANT Obama to propose more laws just so they can scream about it? I doubt that very much.

  • Login to post comments

Obama saying relatively little

Submitted by NVRAT on Sun, 04/15/2012 - 10:39am.

about firearms. Sounds like a good ploy to me. While the public and politicians are fighting or worrying about the other things Obama has or is doing what a better time to work in the backroom. Hillary Clinton has quietly signed the US up to the United Nations directive of banning firearms worldwide, Obama has banned the selling of surplus and outdated military weapons in the US and now sells to China the military spent brass that used to be sold to American ammunition manufacturers for resale as reloaded ammunition to consumers, you bet there are questions. I don`t think the NRA wants him to come-up with any new laws so they can complain they just want him to say where he stands on the second amendment and, he has been abnormally quite about the issue. Given his propensity for using "Presidential Executive Order" and congress has been unable to do anything about it, his past voting record and hate of the Constitution, it stands to reason the deception of not making the second amendment an issue as every anti-gun nut politician in the US has for the last 60 years "IS" cause to worry. This alone is enough to to be weary of Obama and his Administration. A lame Duck president can cause havoc and do much damage in his second term. With everything else in turmoil and the lies and deceptions that he continually puts forth means "Do Not Trust This President".

NVRAT
  • Login to post comments

Obama`s Second Amendement Record

Submitted by NVRAT on Sun, 04/15/2012 - 9:51am.

I don`t know who Babington is but, he or she is obviously a Obama Pecker Puffer. Mr.Blumer has told it as it is in terms of Obama`s firearm voting record prior to his becoming POTUS. The only thing that I can add is Obama also banned the selling of Military Surplus M1 rifles and 1911 Colt hand guns to the public that the military has stored over seas. He also stopped the selling of military spent brass (shell casings) from all military services to local cartridge manufacturers that re used the brass and sell back to firearm users as reloaded ammunition. That brass is now sold to the Chinese at below market prices. In addition he and Hillary Clinton has signed on to the United Nations order to ban firearms world wide. So, the statement was "Obama is coming for your Gun`s" is an accurate assessment by Romney and, definitely backed up by Obama's past record of playing with our second amendment rights. Every body knows what a lame duck president can do when on his second term in office, those things that he promised or did not deal with during his first term can now be put to order and make changes as he sees fit providing that congress does not fight back. We all know Obama`s propensity for by passing congress using "Presidential Executive Order" and so far our illustrious congress has been helpless or does not try to do anything about it. So, I think it is definitely in line to say "Obama is coming for our guns" in one form or another.

Beware America...we live or die on November 6, 2012.

NVRAT
  • Login to post comments

Oh my...hide your guns! Part II

Submitted by Jer on Sun, 04/15/2012 - 3:45pm.

In addition he and Hillary Clinton has signed on to the United Nations order to ban firearms world wide.

Nonsense.

Jer

  • Login to post comments

~You should know better than to link to a far-left source

Submitted by Wrathful Brunette on Sun, 04/15/2012 - 3:51pm.

as if it means more than a spitball in Hades. The APPC gets it's funding through the Annenberg Foundation.
'Nuff said.

Obama's WTF 2012 campaign slogan: "A dog in every pot"
  • Login to post comments

Sure, and here's a random sample of its far-left

Submitted by Jer on Sun, 04/15/2012 - 4:12pm.

offerings.

Why not address the issue substantively instead of deflecting with the tedious 'snopes is lefty, politifact is lefty, factcheck is lefty' trope?

Jer

  • Login to post comments

~Perhaps you should look up the meaning of 'trope'

Submitted by Wrathful Brunette on Sun, 04/15/2012 - 4:23pm.

trope 
noun
1.Rhetoric
a.any literary or rhetorical device, as metaphor, metonymy, synecdoche, and irony, that consists in the use of words in other than their literal sense.

What I said about the APPC was strictly literal; they are funded by the Annenberg Foundation.

Obama's WTF 2012 campaign slogan: "A dog in every pot"
  • Login to post comments

Jer jumps in, once again, to pooh-pooh, ---

Submitted by matthewdean on Sun, 04/15/2012 - 5:49pm.

and gets poo'd on.

Sin-ek-duh-kee.

Ah luz dat woid.

MD

"The credibility of the story is undermined by the selection of sources." - (h/t Jer)
  • Login to post comments

Check your shoes, Matthew...

Submitted by Jer on Sun, 04/15/2012 - 6:07pm.

You're standing in it.

Jer

  • Login to post comments

Perhaps you should look it up.

Submitted by Jer on Sun, 04/15/2012 - 6:03pm.

b : a common or overused theme or device : cliché <the usual horror movie tropes>

But if you prefer, I'll go with "tripe".  It was that, too.

Look, I've been reading about the Annenbergs for years.  Walter was a conservative and very prominent in Republican circles for his entire adult life.  His wife was likewise a generous benefactor for Republican politicians.  He or they established, funded, and headed the Annenberg Foundation until their deaths.  Their daughter, who now runs it, is more liberal, gives more to Democrats, but also supports Republicans.  The notion that she and the Foundation--and, correlatively, Factcheck--are "far left" is ludicrous.

Jer

  • Login to post comments

Ah, a "fact check" from a lefty, who, while noting that ---

Submitted by matthewdean on Sun, 04/15/2012 - 6:16pm.

the Annenbergs are dead and their Foundation is now run by their daughter, who is "more" liberal, gives more to Democrats; somehow manages to consider the playing field leveled because the daughter also  'supports' Republicans.

Lord, you are a funny, funny guy.

Partisan to the max despite your avowed liberal bashing -  when convenient to your argument - but funny, nonetheless.

MD

"The credibility of the story is undermined by the selection of sources." - (h/t Jer)
  • Login to post comments

Brace yourself, Matthew...

Submitted by Jer on Sun, 04/15/2012 - 6:25pm.

This may shock you:

"Far leftists" as a rule do not donate thousands of dollars to John Boehner and the RNC.

Jer

  • Login to post comments

What, Jer, you gonna parse this down to ---

Submitted by matthewdean on Sun, 04/15/2012 - 6:45pm.

"far leftists"?

Emphasis on far.

"--thousands of dollars"?

Emphasis on thousands.

Day-um.

I am just blown away by the strength of your argument.

If I could spell Pfffffft properly, I would use it in response, as it has about as much substance as your reply.

MD

"The credibility of the story is undermined by the selection of sources." - (h/t Jer)
  • Login to post comments

Textbook case of thread derailment...

Submitted by Jer on Sun, 04/15/2012 - 6:55pm.

NVRAT asserts that Obama has signed on to a UN order banning firearms. I challenged that assertion. And you and Bru have taken it completely off the tracks.

Jer

  • Login to post comments

Well, it doesn't exist yet

Submitted by Boudin on Sun, 04/15/2012 - 7:08pm.

But he does support it. Problem is it would require amending our Constitution to enforce it here.

Seek Truth, Defend Liberty
  • Login to post comments

Obama is a lying, liberal pos, Jer, so any shots at ---

Submitted by matthewdean on Sun, 04/15/2012 - 7:25pm.

him on ANY conservative NB thread, are valid.

Kwitcher whinin'.

MD

"The credibility of the story is undermined by the selection of sources." - (h/t Jer)
  • Login to post comments

True, Boudin...

Submitted by Jer on Sun, 04/15/2012 - 10:29pm.

(about Obama supporting it). But note that it involves international arms trafficking--not domestic gun rights.

Jer

  • Login to post comments

➚ 450 million hollow-points

Submitted by Cool Arrow on Sun, 04/15/2012 - 10:35pm.

I'm just sayin'

  • Login to post comments

What exactly are you sayin' about them?

Submitted by Jer on Sun, 04/15/2012 - 11:03pm.

Jer

  • Login to post comments

Cool is saying they purchased hollow bullets; ---

Submitted by matthewdean on Mon, 04/16/2012 - 1:48am.

the current administration can't get anything right.   :o)

MD

"The credibility of the story is undermined by the selection of sources." - (h/t Jer)
  • Login to post comments

Right, Jer

Submitted by Cool Arrow on Mon, 04/16/2012 - 2:01am.

And please don't tell me they need such expensive bullets for target practice.

Their efficacy is tearing flesh, nothing else.

  • Login to post comments

Zackly, Cool, and both round nose ammo and ---

Submitted by matthewdean on Mon, 04/16/2012 - 2:13am.

wad cutters are far cheaper than hollow points.

MD

"The credibility of the story is undermined by the selection of sources." - (h/t Jer)
  • Login to post comments

I see, Cool. Well, maybe not.

Submitted by Jer on Mon, 04/16/2012 - 2:23am.

So the company which has been supplying DHS and ICE with .40 caliber hp ammo has been awarded a contract to continue to supply the same ammo to those same agencies.

And this is significant in relation to the discussions of the UN international arms trafficking treaty and Obama's view of the second amendment in exactly what way?

Jer

  • Login to post comments

➚ That's absolutely rich, Jer

Submitted by Cool Arrow on Mon, 04/16/2012 - 3:09am.

Not even a blip on the screen, huh?

"We cannot continue to rely on our military in order to achieve the national security objectives that we've set. We've got to have a civilian national security force that's just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded." - President Obama

This guy has a way of getting his way, and it is those things we ignore that he's most effective in achieving.

Checked the price of gas lately?  Checked out his never-ending sermon of envy against those who build wealth?

  • Login to post comments

You're not resurrecting that old debunked claim

Submitted by Jer on Mon, 04/16/2012 - 3:18am.

that Obama intended to raise and equip his own private civilian army, are you?  Why, yes, I believe you are.

For heaven's sake, Cool...you're so damn smart and yet you buy into crap like this.  It's mystifying.

Jer

  • Login to post comments

Jer, did, or did not, Baraka

Submitted by killa37 on Mon, 04/16/2012 - 3:28am.

Jer, did, or did not, Baraka SAY that he wanted a civilian corps (did he pronouce it correctly???) that was as well-funded and trained as the US military?? Did he............or did he not??? Was I having one of those acid-flashbacks that they told us about back in the 60's????

And given the direction of Homeland Security - I'm thinkin' (Obamasapeak) that is his avenue towards tryin' to do it, since he never really got it together (yet) to put together his own Brown (ohhhhhhhhhhhhh!!! the RACISM!!!) Shirt brigade.

Yeah, Jer.............call me paranoid - go ahead. But I know that I AM the enemy of the Baraka REGIME!!!

  • Login to post comments

Something like that, killa...

Submitted by Jer on Mon, 04/16/2012 - 3:47am.

but it was NEVER contemplated to be an armed paramilitary force.

That was just a wildly exaggerated interpretation and misconstruction of his words.  Maybe his words could have been strung together differently and better, but the notion that he was proposing a private army is utterly ridiculous.  Heck, if he had really wanted one I doubt he would announce it publicly.

Jer

 

PS..gotta run..Aloha

  • Login to post comments

Not one whit more mystifying, Jer, than an ---

Submitted by matthewdean on Mon, 04/16/2012 - 4:11am.

intelligent, retired lawyer who loves and defends Wiliam Clinton; and feels compelled to overlook the absolute liberal disaster that is Obama and his administration.

Now THAT is mystifying.

MD

"The credibility of the story is undermined by the selection of sources." - (h/t Jer)
  • Login to post comments

Jer

Submitted by MrShy on Sun, 04/15/2012 - 7:42pm.

"And you and Bru have taken it completely off the tracks."

Hyperbole from Jer? That's a first.

No, no one took anything off the tracks. Bru rightfully called you out on sourcing FactCheck.org, an affiliate of the Annenberg Foundation, and MD slammed you on your attempted spin that AF is essentially not all that left-leaning, focusing on the late Annenbergs and not the living ones. Oh, and this wiki tidbit to get you up to speed (although you likely already were, but you shill for the left around here):

The Annenberg Foundation continues its historic programming focus, but is expanding to include environmental stewardship, social justice, and animal welfare.

Jer earlier:

"The notion that she and the Foundation--and, correlatively, Factcheck--are "far left" is ludicrous."

Those three bolded items -- and especially when looked at cumulatively -- are far / extreme / very / pick-your-adjective left.

- Moroccan Shy

Join Mr. Shy and The 1* Percent

 
  • Login to post comments

Next thing you know, Shy, ol' Jer will be insisting that ---

Submitted by matthewdean on Sun, 04/15/2012 - 7:48pm.

Joe Scarborough is a conservative Republican.   :o)

MD

"The credibility of the story is undermined by the selection of sources." - (h/t Jer)
  • Login to post comments

For the millionth time, Shy...

Submitted by Jer on Sun, 04/15/2012 - 9:55pm.

I NEVER use hyperbole!

Jer

  • Login to post comments

And furthermore, Shy

Submitted by Jer on Sun, 04/15/2012 - 10:04pm.

Animals are people too.

Okay, y'all win. The Annenberg Foundation is obviously run by a bunch of Bolsheviks and Factcheck is just a front for peddling commie propaganda.

Jer

  • Login to post comments

McDonald vs Chicago

Submitted by Kingfish17 on Sun, 04/15/2012 - 9:57am.

All that we need to understand, is that the Right to Bear Arms was upheld in this recent Supreme Court Case by just one vote. It's my firm belief that if Obama gets to nominate any more SC justices, our right to bear arms could easily be overturned.  The judges that Obama nominates to the federal judiciary will not uphold the 2nd amendment.. 

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"You can’t go take a trip to Las Vegas...on the taxpayer’s dime." Barack Obama

  • Login to post comments

When Obama said he was

Submitted by ricklail on Sun, 04/15/2012 - 12:10pm.

When Obama said he was working under the radar on gun control did that mean he was looking for another Supreme court justice like Kagan and Sotomajor?

A well regulated militia being necessary to a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.
  • Login to post comments

Yes....

Submitted by Kingfish17 on Sun, 04/15/2012 - 2:11pm.

Yes, but not as conservative as either of the two.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"You can’t go take a trip to Las Vegas...on the taxpayer’s dime." Barack Obama

  • Login to post comments

Leftists Whipping A Dead Horse

Submitted by HardRightTurn on Sun, 04/15/2012 - 11:39am.

We will never let you Leftists disarm us. So forget about it.

To more fully comprehend the Left, one must read “Leftism As Psychopathy” by John Ray, M.A., Ph.D. Caution, it might scare you a little bit.
http://jonjayray.tripod.com/psycho.html

  • Login to post comments

Outstanding

Submitted by Samaritan01 on Sun, 04/15/2012 - 7:27pm.

Well said, no matter what the vote the right to keep and bear arms belongs to us and not the government.

  • Login to post comments

Backburner Issue??

Submitted by Samaritan01 on Sun, 04/15/2012 - 7:13pm.

Only a weak-kneed, slack jawed city dweller would think that the Second Amendment is, or could ever be, a back burner issue. Better to be thought a fool than to open your mouth and remove all doubt......

  • Login to post comments

➚ Definitely simmering

Submitted by Cool Arrow on Sun, 04/15/2012 - 7:25pm.

Give him 4 more years and we will see the unveiling of that "National Security Force" the President let slip early. Homeland Security just bought 450,000,000 hollow-point rounds (for close-range killing).

Empty the prisons of those poor misunderstood drug offenders, and you've got exactly what Bill Ayers longed for - millions of incorrigible patriotic hayseeds wiped out.

  • Login to post comments

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Stop Censoring The Gosnell Trial!

Editors' Picks

  • WashPost vs. WashPost on IRS probe (Ed Morrissey)
  • Media too prone to fall sway to Obama's referrent power (Salena Zito)
  • Five reasons to keep government out of Internet governance (Eli Dourado)
  • Is asking about what you pray for inappropriate for IRS? IRS commish not sure (Say Anything)
  • Another fed court invalidates Obama's NRLB recess appointments (Politico)
  • Former SecState Hillary Clinton's record leaves much to be desired (Kondracke)
  • Sen. Boxer is lying about impact of budget cuts on Benghazi security (WashPost)
  • Left-wing actor Cusack attacks Obama, Holder over AP scandal (Twitchy)
  • Dopey Chicago gun laws prevent museum from displaying unloaded WW2 relic (Fox News)
Walter E. Williams's picture
Walter E. Williams
Walter E. Williams Column: Hating America
Michelle Malkin's picture
Michelle Malkin
Malkin Column: Obama's Emptiest Benghazi Talking Point
Ann Coulter's picture
Ann Coulter
Coulter Column: Sorry, Sen. Rubio, But Your Immigration Plan Is Still Problematic
David Limbaugh's picture
David Limbaugh
David Limbaugh Column: Partisan Obama Culture Spawned a More Abusive IRS
Walter E. Williams's picture
Walter E. Williams
Walter E. Williams Column: An Honest Examination of Race
More >

RSS FeedAmazon KindleFacebookTwitter

Stop Censoring The News!

ObamaCare's a Real Pain in the Neck
more cartoons
  • Morning Joe Meteorologist: Tornado Averted 'By The Grace of Whatever'
  • Bowling for Dollars....to Pay for Baby Deaths
  • Leno: It’s Gotten So Bad for Obama Fox News Changed Its Slogan to ‘See, I Told You So!’
  • Romney: ‘I’m Not a Fan of the President’
  • The Guardian Glamorizes New ‘Assault on Wall Street’ Movie as Justice
More >
NewsBusters

Executive Editor
Matthew Sheffield

Editor at Large
Brent Baker

Senior Editors
Tim Graham
Rich Noyes

Managing Editor
Ken Shepherd

Associate Editor
Noel Sheppard

Contributing Editors
Tom Blumer
Geoffrey Dickens
Dan Gainor
David Limbaugh
Mithridate Ombud
Clay Waters
Scott Whitlock

Senior Contributor
Mark Finkelstein

Contributing Writers
Matthew Balan
Michael M. Bates
Erin R. Brown
Jack Coleman
Kyle Drennen
Douglas Ernst
P. J. Gladnick
Stephen Gutowski
Matt Hadro
D. S. Hube
Kathleen McKinley
Dave Pierre
Amy Ridenour
Julia A. Seymour
Terry Trippany
Rusty Weiss
Brad Wilmouth

Publisher
Brent Bozell

Site Design
Dialog New Media

 

  • Home
  • Blogs
  • About
  • Forum
  • Contact
  • Donate
  • Search
  • Account
  • rss
  • CNSNews
  • MRC TV
  • Biz & Media
  • Culture & Media
  • Take Action!
  • Twitter
  • Facebook
  • Amazon Kindle
  • Advertise
  • Jobs

Copyright © 2005-2013 NewsBusters.
Privacy Policy | Terms of Use