Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Obama seeks to take down NRA ad
Politico ^ | Sept 25 | Ben Smith

Posted on 09/25/2008 1:58:33 PM PDT by bahblahbah

The Obama campaign has written radio stations in Pennsylvania and Ohio, pressing them to refuse to air an ad from the National Rifle Association.

"This advertisement knowingly misleads your viewing audience about Senator Obama's position on the Second Amendment," says the letter from Obama general counsel Bob Bauer. "For the sake of both FCC licensing requirements and the public interest, your station should refuse to continue to air this advertisement."

The ad, "Hunter," conflates Obama's anti-gun stances of the 1990s with his current, more pro-gun, stand, and was chided for inaccuracy in The Washington Post, an item to which Bauer's letter refers.

NRA spokesman Andrew Arulanandam, who provided the letter, said it shows clear evidence that the ads are "hurting him," and stood by their substance. He also provided a copy of the NRA's own letter to the stations and memo disputing the Post story, after the jump. He also said the ad is running only in Pennsylvania at the moment.

MEMORANDUM

CLIENT-MATTER NUMBER
999100-0130
TO: Station Managers

FROM: Cleta Mitchell, Esq.
Counsel to National Rifle Association

DATE: September 25, 2008

RE: Documentation for Advertising by National Rifle Association Political Victory Fund ("NRA-PVF")



This firm serves as counsel to the National Rifle Association (“NRA”) and the National Rifle Association Political Victory Fund ("NRA-PVF"), which is the federal political action committee of the NRA and the sponsor of certain advertising purchased and soon-to-be purchased on your station. It has come to my clients’ attention that the Obama for President campaign is engaging in an effort to prevent or stop the airing of certain ads by NRA-PVF, falsely alleging that the ads are ‘inaccurate’. The Obama presidential campaign apparently relies on an article appearing in the Washington Post on September 23, 2008 to support its contention hat the NRA-PVF ads should not be aired.
The Washington Post is hardly an objective news source on any subject related to the issues to which the NRA is dedicated, having spent decades attacking not only the NRA but also fighting against the legislation and policies NRA supports to protect the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution, as well as supporting every conceivable government proposal or policy any officeholder or candidate suggests to weaken and disrupt the guarantees of the Second Amendment. It is therefore no surprise that the Washington Post would now attack the NRA for advertisements which truthfully disclose the anti-gun, anti-Second Amendment record of Barack Obama, the candidate supported by the Washington Post.
Attached please find the point-by-point refutation of the Washington Post’s article about the NRA-PVF ads regarding Obama’s record on the Second Amendment, as well as an article disclosing the bias of the decidedly not neutral “FactChecker” on which the Washington Post article is ostensibly based.
The NRA devotes 100% of its time and resources to protecting the Second Amendment and fighting for government policies and legislation furtherance of the rights of the American people to keep and bear arms.
The legislative and policy record of candidates and officeholders such as Barack Obama are well known and documented by the NRA on an ongoing basis. NRA-PVF’s advertising during the 2008 election cycle is based on that extensive research and documentation, which is being furnished to you with this Memorandum.
Accordingly, we respectfully request that your station disregard the shamefully false assertions from the Obama campaign and its attorneys regarding the NRA-PVF ads and that the ads run in accordance with the purchase(s) made by NRA-PVF in the media buy.
Please feel free to contact me at (202) 295-xxxx if you have any questions. Thank you.

-----

Factual Response to Washington Post False Statements on NRA Anti-Obama Ads
Washington Post Claim—500% Tax on Guns
It is unclear from the article exactly what weapons would have been covered by the proposed tax. … Even if Obama did support a big tax increase on the sale of certain types of assault weapons back in 1999, that is hardly evidence that he will move as president to tax the “guns and ammo” most commonly used by hunters.
Facts:
The Post quotes Obama out of context, claiming that he only wanted to tax “certain types” of guns in 1999. But the full sentence in the 1999 article reads, “Obama is also seeking to increase the federal taxes by 500 percent on the sale of firearm, ammunition [sic] -- weapons he says are most commonly used in firearm deaths.” Chinta Strausberg, Obama unveils federal gun bill, Chicago Defender, Dec. 13, 1999, at 3. (emphasis added). Contrary to the Post’s assertion, the statement makes no distinction as to what type of guns Obama proposed to tax.
The Post is far too eager to let Obama off the hook just because he hasn’t mentioned the idea lately. Obama has supported the idea and has never repudiated that support. Therefore it is fair to say that the statement reflects his views on the issue.

Washington Post Claim—Ammunition Ban
Contrary to [NRA’s] claim, the Kennedy proposal of July 2005, SA 1615, was not aimed at “virtually all deer-hunting ammunition.” Instead, it would have authorized the attorney general to define types of illegal ammunition capable of penetrating body armor commonly used by law enforcement officials. During the Senate debate, Kennedy said that his amendment would “not apply to ammunition that is now routinely used in hunting rifles,” a point contested by the NRA.


Facts:
NRA contested the point for a simple reason: The Post is wrong.
The Kennedy Amendment would have expanded the current ban on manufacturing “armor piercing ammunition” other than for sale to the government, 18 U.S.C. ? 922(a)(7), by banning any “projectile [i.e., bullet] that may be used in a handgun and that the Attorney General determines … to be capable of penetrating body armor.” The amendment called for testing of projectiles against “body armor that … meets minimum standards for the protection of law enforcement officers.” S. Amdt. 1615 to S. 397, July 29, 2005.
Body armor is rated in different classes based on the level of protection it provides. The “minimum” level of body armor under Department of Justice standards that were in effect in 2005, Type I armor, only protects against the least powerful handgun cartridges; only Type III and higher armor protects against high-powered rifle cartridges. U.S. Dept. of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Ballistic Resistance of PersonalBody Armor: NIJ Standard-0101.04 2-3 (June 2001).
However, there are many “projectiles that may be used in a handgun” that can also be used in a rifle. Handgun hunting is increasingly popular, and handgun hunters often use handguns that fire common hunting rifle cartridges such as the .30-30 Winchester. See, e.g., http://www.tcarms.com/firearms/g2ContenderPistols.php#spec_charts. A ban on “projectile[s] that may be used” in these handguns would have the effect of banning the same cartridges for rifle hunters. It would even ban rifle cartridges not commonly used in handguns, because any bullet may be fired in a barrel of the correct diameter, regardless of whether the barrel is installed on a handgun or on a rifle.
Finally, it is true that Sen. Kennedy denied his 2005 amendment would ban hunting ammunition. However, in a floor debate on a substantially identical amendment the previous year, Kennedy specifically denounced a hunting rifle cartridge:
Another rifle caliber, the 30.30 [sic] caliber, was responsible for penetrating three officers' armor and killing them in 1993, 1996, and 2002. This ammunition is also capable of puncturing light-armored vehicles, ballistic or armored glass, armored limousines, even a 600-pound safe with 600 pounds of safe armor plating.
It is outrageous and unconscionable that such ammunition continues to be sold in the United States of America.

Cong. Rec. S1634 (daily ed. Feb. 26, 2004). The relatively low-powered .30-30 Winchester was introduced in 1895 and “has long been the standard American deer cartridge.” Frank C. Barnes, Cartridges of the World 52 (8th ed. 1997). As noted above, the .30-30 may be fired in a handgun.
Even apart from the Kennedy Amendment, Obama also said, on his 2003 questionnaire for the Independent Voters of Illinois-Independent Precinct Organization, that he would “support banning the sale of ammunition for assault weapons.” See Lynn Sweet, Obama’s 2003 IVI-IPO questionnaire may be getting closer scrutiny, Chicago Sun-Times, Dec. 11, 2007 (available at http://blogs.suntimes.com/sweet/2007/12/sweet_column_obamas_2003_iviip.html). The rifles that were banned as “assault weapons” under the 1994 Clinton gun ban fire cartridges such as the .223 Remington and .308 Winchester—the same ammunition used in common hunting rifles. See 18 U.S.C. § 921(a)(30) (repealed Sept. 13, 2004). Therefore, this statement also supports a ban on hunting rifle ammunition.

Washington Post Claim—Gun Ban
The … claim refers to semiautomatic rifles and pistols covered by the assault weapons ban, which expired in March 2004.


Facts:
While Obama does support the ban (which actually expired in September, not March, of 2004), the statement in the advertisement is based on Sen. Obama’s vote for much broader legislation and his public statement in favor of banning all semi-automatic firearms.
On March 13, 2003, Obama voted in the Illinois Senate Judiciary Committee for a bill that would have enacted a much broader gun ban. (The vote tally sheet is available at http://www.nrapvf.org/Media/pdf/sb1195_obama.pdf).

The bill under debate that day, SB 1195 (available at http://www.ilga.gov/legislation/93/SB/PDF/09300SB1195lv.pdf), would have made it illegal to “knowingly manufacture, deliver, or possess” a “semiautomatic assault weapon.”
The bill defined a “semiautomatic assault weapon” to include “any firearm having a caliber of 50 [sic] or greater.” See SB 1195, page 2, line 10 (emphasis added). Under this bill, a firearm did not actually have to be semi-automatic to be a “semiautomatic assault weapon.”
Shotguns 28-gauge or larger (by far the majority of shotguns owned in the United States) are all “.50-caliber or greater.” See National Rifle Ass’n, Firearms Fact Book 183 (3d ed. 1989). SB 1195 did exclude any firearm that “is manually operated by bolt, pump, lever or slide action” and “any semiautomatic shotgun that cannot hold more than 5 rounds of ammunition in a fixed or detachable magazine.” SB 1195 p.3, lines 12-23. However, the bill did not exclude firearms with hinge or similar actions, such as single-shot or double-barreled shotguns used by millions of hunters.
Anyone who possessed one of these firearms in Illinois 90 days after the effective date would have had to “destroy the weapon or device, render it permanently inoperable, relinquish it to a law enforcement agency, or remove it from the state.” SB 1195, p. 5, line 33. Anyone who still possessed a banned gun would have been subject to a felony sentence. SB 1195, p. 5, line 15. This “seizure and surrender” provision was much more severe than the former federal “assault weapons” ban, which had a “grandfather clause” to allow current lawful owners to keep their guns. See 18 U.S.C. 922(v)(2) (repealed).
Obama also supported banning a large class of popular hunting firearms on a 1998 Project VoteSmart survey. One of the questions, and the relevant part of Obama’s responses, were as follows:
Indicate which principles you support (if any) concerning gun issues.
X a) Ban the sale or transfer of all forms of semi-automatic weapons.
X b) Increase state restrictions on the purchase and possession of firearms.
See Illinois State Legislative Election 1998 National Political Awareness Test (available at http://www.votesmart.org/npat.php?can_id=9490#826:) (emphasis added). Millions of American hunters have used semi-automatic rifles and shotguns for over a century.


Finally, of course, a ban on hunting rifle ammunition (such as the Kennedy amendment Obama supported) would have been a very effective ban on the use of hunting rifles.


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Extended News; Front Page News; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections; US: Michigan; US: Ohio; US: Pennsylvania
KEYWORDS: 2008; 2008election; ads; alinsky; banglist; barackobama; bitter; bobbauer; brownshirts; censorship; crushobama; democratparty; democrats; election; electionads; electionpresident; elections; guncontrol; guns; gunvote; liberals; lp; nobama08; nra; nrapvf; obama; obamabrownshirts; obamadinejad; obamatruthfile; obamessiah; oh2008; pa2008; rulesforradicals; secondamendment; shallnotbeinfringed; thugbama; unfitforcommand; wwwgunbanobamacom
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-125 next last

1 posted on 09/25/2008 1:58:33 PM PDT by bahblahbah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: bahblahbah

what about the 1st amendm....fizzle....


2 posted on 09/25/2008 1:59:40 PM PDT by ari-freedom (We never hide from history. We make history!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: bahblahbah

Right - if you can’t debate them in the arena of ideas the next best thing is to deny them .... typical ....


3 posted on 09/25/2008 2:00:28 PM PDT by SkyDancer ("Political correctness is tyranny with manners")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: bahblahbah
Obambi's thugs are panicked. They know the NRA ads pack a powerful punch. What are they afraid of? The truth?

"Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached." - Manuel II Palelologus

4 posted on 09/25/2008 2:00:51 PM PDT by goldstategop (In Memory Of A Dearly Beloved Friend Who Lives In My Heart Forever)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: bahblahbah

OMG, anything that the MESSIAH doesn’t like, he thinks he can just order it to be taken down! He is already showing his true colors as a SOCIALIST DICTATOR!


5 posted on 09/25/2008 2:00:51 PM PDT by blondee123 (Vote for the HERO, not the ZERO! Is PRESENT a vote???)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: bahblahbah

Obama is running a radio ad stating McCain is against stem stell research and will prevent cures for etc. etc...even if you disagree with McCain his position is for reasonable stem cell research and this ad is a complete lie..I can’t believe it is running like that..West Palm Beach, Florida


6 posted on 09/25/2008 2:01:06 PM PDT by GoMonster (GO)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: bahblahbah
"For the sake of both FCC licensing requirements...

Oooooooh. Threatening to use his power to censor the opposition! I smell FEAR!!!

7 posted on 09/25/2008 2:01:22 PM PDT by Kenton (All vices in moderation. I don't want to overdo any but I don't want to skip any either.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: bahblahbah

Another example of the left throwing free speech down the tubes. He cannot face reality and doesn’t want the people of these states to understand his record.


8 posted on 09/25/2008 2:01:31 PM PDT by nobamanada
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: bahblahbah

Time to double the media buy.


9 posted on 09/25/2008 2:01:32 PM PDT by wilco200 (Typical White Person)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GoMonster

“cell” I meant..typo:)


10 posted on 09/25/2008 2:01:34 PM PDT by GoMonster (GO)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: ari-freedom

Ahh...the Ads of the NRA...nice....

As for Obama and his pledge to “run on issues” at least he has dropped the pretenses..


11 posted on 09/25/2008 2:01:35 PM PDT by padre35 (Sarah Palin is the one we've been waiting for..Rom 10.10..)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: bahblahbah
Hey Obama - Here's your typical NRA American Lady ..... Photobucket
12 posted on 09/25/2008 2:02:00 PM PDT by SkyDancer ("Political correctness is tyranny with manners")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ari-freedom

The ads must have the Obama campaign very worried or they
would not have restorted to such threats.
There must be a great deal of truth in them as well or there would have been little response from the Obama campaign.


13 posted on 09/25/2008 2:02:04 PM PDT by Maine Mariner
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: bahblahbah

let ‘em have it with both barrels!


14 posted on 09/25/2008 2:02:07 PM PDT by bigbob
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SkyDancer

Obama’s only using the only campaign tactics he’s ever had to use, in Chicago machine politics. It’s the only he knows, it’s all he’s ever had to do before. He’s never had to fight on his stance on an issue, and doesn’t know how.


15 posted on 09/25/2008 2:02:20 PM PDT by mrsmel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: bahblahbah

Take Bambi to court! Bring him in the same day MURTHA goes!!!!

Hahahahahahahahahahaha.


16 posted on 09/25/2008 2:03:38 PM PDT by jessduntno (.Well King, This case is CLOSED.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Maine Mariner

That’s why he wants them taken down, he can’t dispute them factually.


17 posted on 09/25/2008 2:03:40 PM PDT by mrsmel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: bahblahbah

We need a list of all the stations and media he is contacting and contact them also and let them know if they bow to his pressure we will boycott their advertisers.


18 posted on 09/25/2008 2:03:53 PM PDT by Jazz1968
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: bahblahbah

With all the outright lies contained in the Obama ads they have the gall to make this protest - no, make that threat given the FCC references???


19 posted on 09/25/2008 2:04:01 PM PDT by NonValueAdded (don't worry, they only want to take water out of the other guy's side of the bucket.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: bahblahbah

Once a gun grabber always a gun grabber and liar.


20 posted on 09/25/2008 2:04:19 PM PDT by boomop1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: goldstategop
What are they afraid of? The truth?

"They can't handle the truth!" (apologies to Jack...and George Castanza)

21 posted on 09/25/2008 2:04:34 PM PDT by newfreep ("Liberalism is just Communism sold by the drink." - P.J. O'Rourke)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: bahblahbah

Ouch! This ad must be devastating to his campaign!


22 posted on 09/25/2008 2:04:36 PM PDT by DRey
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: bahblahbah
Sorry, but in this picture today, he sure doesn't look very presidential, his jaw jutted out, looks like all this is totally over his head (which it is) and he looks so totally out of place at that table.
23 posted on 09/25/2008 2:04:45 PM PDT by blondee123 (Vote for the HERO, not the ZERO! Is PRESENT a vote???)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: bahblahbah
Obama.. there is little thing called the First Amendment - Freedom of Speech. your thuggery is out of bounds. go back to school learn the true meaning of the U.S. Constitution you fool. I was going to post the first one but you need ot read and learn the entire document. United States Constitution "We the People..." Bill of Rights Amendment I Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances. Amendment II A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed. Amendment III No soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law. Amendment IV The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized. Amendment V No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the militia, when in actual service in time of war or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation. Amendment VI In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the state and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the assistance of counsel for his defense. Amendment VII In suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury, shall be otherwise reexamined in any court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law. Amendment VIII Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted. Amendment IX The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people. Amendment X The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.
24 posted on 09/25/2008 2:04:51 PM PDT by Ancient Drive
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: bahblahbah
Outrageous really.

What kind of person is this Barry Obama?

25 posted on 09/25/2008 2:05:14 PM PDT by BenLurkin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mrsmel

Right - this guy is way out of his league ....... he’s in the minors while every one else is in the majors ....


26 posted on 09/25/2008 2:05:27 PM PDT by SkyDancer ("Political correctness is tyranny with manners")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: bahblahbah

His luck on Chicago-style strong-arm tactics may have run out.


27 posted on 09/25/2008 2:05:33 PM PDT by anniegetyourgun
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Maine Mariner

“There must be a great deal of truth in them as well or there would have been little response from the Obama campaign.”

But the Washington Post and Obambi campaign (I honestly can’t tell the difference these days) says the ad is full of lies. (sarc)


28 posted on 09/25/2008 2:05:50 PM PDT by moose2004 (Drill, Drill, Drill, Drill, Drill, Drill And Then Drill Some More)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: NonValueAdded

Especially the rubbish spouted by the so called “American Hunters and Shooters Association,” which endorses BO, but is really a front for Brady Gun Control & Co.


29 posted on 09/25/2008 2:06:27 PM PDT by Eric in the Ozarks
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: bahblahbah

ATTENTION NRA!!!

Please run an ad related to this, i.e. how despot regimes don’t want it’s citizens to have guns and freedom of the press for messages THEY DON’T LIKE.


30 posted on 09/25/2008 2:07:23 PM PDT by AmericaUnited
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BenLurkin

A Muslim-sympathizer Marxist.


31 posted on 09/25/2008 2:07:47 PM PDT by bethtopaz (Check out Obamafraud: http://wewillnotbesilenced2008.com/video/index.htm)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Maine Mariner

Conservatives counter “untrue” free speech with more free speech, putting out their side of the issue.

Leftists’ reflex position is to use force and intimidation to silence the opposition.


32 posted on 09/25/2008 2:07:55 PM PDT by MrB (0bama supporters: What's the attraction? The Marxism or the Infanticide?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: bahblahbah
Saul Alinsky tactics all the way.

Get in the face of the "adversary".

It's not working and people are waking up to what these communist agitprop activists are up to. The polls are swinging away from Obamacommie.

33 posted on 09/25/2008 2:08:30 PM PDT by Nachum (Obama: Liar for hire)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SkyDancer

A good deer hunting round is one that delivers a lot of foot lbs of energy at 200 to 300 yards. Because of this it will also penetrate light armored vests. Obama would ban the best deer hunting rounds!


34 posted on 09/25/2008 2:09:08 PM PDT by cpdiii (roughneck, oilfield trash and proud of it, geologist, pilot, pharmacist, iconoclast.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: bahblahbah
If Obama thinks he had a headache with the Clinton crime family, wait until he discovers what the NRA is prepared to do. Wrong group to F* with, Barack.
35 posted on 09/25/2008 2:10:05 PM PDT by hinckley buzzard
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: bahblahbah

Obama always seems to be trying to get rid of some ad ...


36 posted on 09/25/2008 2:10:27 PM PDT by F15Eagle (1 John 5:4-5, 4:15, John 11:25, 14:6, 1 Tim 2:5, John 3:17-18, John 20:31, 1 John 5:13, John 6:69)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: bahblahbah

LOL!

And Obama sure wasn’t “misleading” folks suggesting McCain was “out of touch” about computers?
Oh no!
We had to find out later it was due to his injuries.

Obama can mislead - but McCain cannot tell the truth.


37 posted on 09/25/2008 2:11:11 PM PDT by Scotswife
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NonValueAdded

God help us if this marxist wins, the introduction of the “Fairness Doctrine” will be just the beginning.


38 posted on 09/25/2008 2:11:35 PM PDT by mrsmel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Scotswife

Just goes to show you,

to anger a conservative, lie about him,

to anger a liberal, tell the truth about him.


39 posted on 09/25/2008 2:12:17 PM PDT by MrB (0bama supporters: What's the attraction? The Marxism or the Infanticide?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: bahblahbah

[The ad, “Hunter,” conflates Obama’s anti-gun stances of the 1990s with his current, more pro-gun, stand, and was chided for inaccuracy in The Washington Post, an item to which Bauer’s letter refers.]

Are you going to believe my record or what I say now that I want your vote? Do the Obama people really think voters are this dumb?


40 posted on 09/25/2008 2:12:27 PM PDT by KansasGirl (READ MY LIPSTICK!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: blondee123
OMG, anything that the MESSIAH doesn’t like, he thinks he can just order it to be taken down! He is already showing his true colors as a SOCIALIST DICTATOR!

Eggsackly. Glad you noticed. President Ronald Reagan reminded us that freedom is one generation away from extinction. Today, the totalitarian thug-ocracy is one election away. Tell your friends.

41 posted on 09/25/2008 2:13:24 PM PDT by hinckley buzzard
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: blondee123
Sorry, but in this picture today, he sure doesn't look very presidential, his jaw jutted out, looks like all this is totally over his head (which it is) and he looks so totally out of place at that table.

He's pissed off because he thinks George is sitting in his chair.

42 posted on 09/25/2008 2:13:36 PM PDT by tx_eggman (Privatizing profits and socializing losses is no way to run an economy)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: ari-freedom

If they think the ad is wrong, they should put their own rebutting it. That is all.


43 posted on 09/25/2008 2:13:42 PM PDT by fightinJAG (Fly the flag!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: bahblahbah

Here is the ad on YouTube:

NRA Ad: Obama Wants To Steal Your Guns


44 posted on 09/25/2008 2:14:02 PM PDT by truthandlife ("Some trust in chariots and some in horses, but we trust in the name of the LORD our God." (Ps 20:7))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: bahblahbah

I haven’t seen the ad, but from what I read here it should be a pretty easy fix: Just point out his shifting position:
Here’s Obama’s stance in the 1990’s
Here’s Obama’s stance now that he’s running for President
How do we know ‘which’ Obama to believe?
He will say anything you want to hear now:
then play the sound/video clip of hime saying “Just Words, Just Speeches


45 posted on 09/25/2008 2:14:46 PM PDT by Bush_Democrat (Ex-Dem since 2001 *Folding@Home for the Gipper - Join the FReeper Folders*)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: bahblahbah

They have GOT to be kidding. Obama is running at least 5 ads in Philadelphia that are completely full of lies. I wish the McCain campaign would ask the TV stations not to run them too. One of them talks about a Corning plant that closed, and Corning has asked them to take it down because it is false.


46 posted on 09/25/2008 2:15:44 PM PDT by Dems_R_Losers (NEVER FORGET -- it all started with Fannie Mae and the Democrats!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ancient Drive

Silly, silly conservatives.

Free speech only applies to elephant dung flung at Christian icons, crucifixes immersed in urine, potty talk, pornography for all ages, hate speech directed at Christians and practicing Jews, and communist sloganeering.

Free speech does not apply to any conservative or Judeo-Christian expression.


47 posted on 09/25/2008 2:15:57 PM PDT by Westbrook (Having more children does not divide your love, it multiplies it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: cpdiii

According to Lib’s you can have a gun but nothing in the Constitution says you can have bullets .... but then what does “arms” mean?

If Obama gets in we’re f*&^#d ......


48 posted on 09/25/2008 2:16:51 PM PDT by SkyDancer ("Political correctness is tyranny with manners")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: bahblahbah

Fascism is alive and well and it lives on the left. Screw Obama. Which is exactly what the NRA has said but in nicer terms.


49 posted on 09/25/2008 2:17:25 PM PDT by jwalsh07 (MSM Lied, Journalism Died. RIP 2008)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: bahblahbah

Good to see my donations to the NRA having an effect. Yay!


50 posted on 09/25/2008 2:18:19 PM PDT by PeterFinn (NObama in NOvember.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-125 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson