[Guest post by DRJ]
See-Dubya posting at Michelle Malkin’s blog has a post on Barack Obama’s recent statement against concealed carry:
“I am not in favor of concealed weapons,” Obama said. “I think that creates a potential atmosphere where more innocent people could (get shot during) altercations.”
That may be music to liberal ears but it’s a sour note to most Americans.
— DRJ
Pronounced "Patter-EE-koh"
E-mail: Just use my moniker Patterico, followed by the @ symbol, followed by gmail.com
Disclaimer: Simpsons avatar may resemble a younger Patterico...
The statements made on this web site reflect the personal opinions of the author. They are not made in any official capacity, and do not represent the opinions of the author's employer.
| M | T | W | T | F | S | S |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | |
| 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 |
| 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 |
| 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 |
| 28 | 29 | 30 | ||||
Powered by WordPress.
Well, Obama is an Elder. Elders do not take up arms.
nk (34c5da) — 4/3/2008 @ 8:36 pmfortunately, this will be a state-by-state issue (particularly after the upcoming scotus ruling on the d.c. ban).
while i don’t click on the ann coulter column very often, i just had to look at “dimestore mein kampf” referring to one of obama’s earlier books. i don’t think i can vote for this guy. i don’t think i can vote for hillary or mccain either. i want a whole new set of candidates.
assistant devil's advocate (43b818) — 4/3/2008 @ 8:36 pm“i want a whole new set of candidates”
Why is that never a poll question?
Apogee (366e8b) — 4/3/2008 @ 9:04 pmAre we allowed to call a mulligan??
Scott Jacobs (d3a6ec) — 4/3/2008 @ 9:06 pmJAN-22-DETROIT, MI – Even deceased, presidential candidate Pat Paulsen managed to garner more votes than Democratic candidate Kucinich in several precincts of Michigan’s January 15th primary.
Apogee (366e8b) — 4/3/2008 @ 9:25 pmPatterico Readers knew about this last month.
capitano (03e5ec) — 4/4/2008 @ 3:57 amBarack Hussein Obama said:
So, only the guilty people would be armed in Obamaworld. Yeah, that makes sense: allow the thugs to carry concealed weapons — since they don’t care about getting permits anyway — while disarming people who are not criminals.
Dana (3e4784) — 4/4/2008 @ 5:36 amHe is on the same side as the NAACP but the opposite from CORE. Which is to be expected. He is a nanny-state *progressive*. Actually, he’s a nanny-raised brat. He might have a different view of guns had he gone to Chicago’s Crane High School instead of private prep schools.
nk (34c5da) — 4/4/2008 @ 5:50 amIt will sure sound a sour note here in Pennsylvania, just before our 4/22 primary. We like our guns here.
driver (faae10) — 4/4/2008 @ 8:54 amObama on the issues. This is from Ed Morrissey at Hot Air.
Barack Obama’s adviser on Iraq has written a confidential paper arguing that the US needs to remain robustly engaged in Iraq in order to build on the successes of the past year. The New York Sun’s Eli Lake reports on the confidential paper by Colin Kahl, the coordinator for Obama’s advisory group on Iraq, which foresees the same kind of long-term presence that John McCain has advocated
Mr. Kahl is the day-to-day coordinator of the Obama campaign’s working group on Iraq. A shorter and less detailed version of this paper appeared on the center’s Web site as a policy brief.
This has some difficult implications for Obama. He has made a point of distorting McCain’s remarks about maintaining a strong presence in a post-war Iraq for regional stability. Now — for the second time — a close adviser offers the exact same policy.
Obama has two choices. He can either get rid of Kahl and apologize to the anti-war activists that form his base, or he has to explain why Kahl isn’t calling for “100 years of war”. In doing so, he will have to acknowledge that he has lied about McCain’s position for weeks and exposed his own ignorance of war, peace, and strategic long-term military planning. I suspect Kahl will find other work in the days ahead.
http://hotair.com/archives/2008/04/04/obama-adviser-keep-80000-troops-in-iraq/
cfbleachers (4040c7) — 4/4/2008 @ 9:03 amAnd this, from Ace of Spades on the same topic:
Aside from putting the lie to Obama’s misrepresentation of McCain’s “100 years” comment, I think the title of the paper it self is remarkable, “Stay on Success: A Policy of Conditional Engagement.” Success? In Iraq? Can the Obamassiah himself commit such heresy?
I think it’s pretty clear that no serious minded person honestly thinks we can pull out of Iraq in they way Clinton and Obama say they will. Not even Clinton and Obama.
Naturally, that won’t stop either one of them from lying to their lunatic base about it. Quite the profiles in courage these Democrats cut.
cfbleachers (4040c7) — 4/4/2008 @ 9:05 am…back to Gun Control…
Another Drew (f9dd2c) — 4/4/2008 @ 10:05 amObama has only to point to DC to demonstrate the proven excellence of his position on CCW.
Isn’t that “gun rage” argument stilled by 40 states experience over a decade or two? Or maybe he’s thinking of all those drive-bys that happen, oh, wait…
Kevin Murphy (0b2493) — 4/5/2008 @ 12:21 amADA, you are so very correct in your feelings!
I can’t imagine that out of 300 million persons, what is being offered could be considered for the position of POTUS!
A half breed, a vagina, and an antique.
None actually worth a 50 cent message that we the people do NOT accept the choices!
Even if Hillarious conceded and supported the half breed, he has not a chance in hades of actually winning.
EOL
TC (d16524) — 4/5/2008 @ 1:48 am