Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

"We'll bring a gun..." -Another Example of Obama's Poor Leadership

page: 6
4
<< 3  4  5    7 >>

log in

join

posted on Jun, 17 2008 @ 08:35 PM
link   
reply to post by jamie83
 

contact Semperfortis for access. he will help us set everything up.

The purpose in AP limitation is that ALL legitimate news organizations feed AP articles, which allows you to use ALL LEGITIMATE news organizations...

Definitely no faux news please.



Coven




posted on Jun, 17 2008 @ 11:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by jamie83

Originally posted by JohnnyElohim

So, one might clarify your proposal to state: "Because Obama uses a choice of words which I find personally distasteful and would argue send the wrong message to certain elements of our society, he is a poor leader."


Here's another interesting pattern. Instead of addressing my direct statements, Obama backers need to re-word the statement into form that they can try shoot down, totally ignoring that the premise of the topic is Obama's statement, not how I phrased my argument.


But I did address your statement. I stated that the problem was your unequivocal statement of subjective opinion as fact and then distilled your actual argument to what remained once the statement was appropriately qualified. Unfortunately, you snipped that portion when you replied and dealt only with the conclusion. If you want to show that my analysis wasn't legitimate, you'll need to tackle the analysis and not the conclusion alone.



Here's a distinction:

Using a violent metaphor like "we'll bring a gun" when referring to your political opponent is different than veiled threats against foreign countries that are sworn enemies.


Well, I would hardly call those veiled threats. Setting that aside, however, veiled threats in an arena of actual intent (i.e., McCain may seriously consider bombing Iran while Obama would not seriously consider going to a debate with lethal weaponry) are quite arguably a more serious matter.



"If you don't comply with U.N. sanctions re nuclear production we will bomb you." -Ok

"If I'm running for office and you say things against me, I will bring a gun." -not so good judgment


I'm sure you realize the irony in your liberal quotation of others after having accused me of doing the same thing. Obviously, Obama didn't say he would bring a gun with him anywhere in a literal sense. They both said something that was obviously clumsy from a political standpoint. Whether you think that makes them bad leaders veers strongly into the realm of the subjective. What is clear is that a clumsy diplomatic mistake in talking about bombing a foreign country is most certainly more frightening than a clumsy metaphor used largely amongst speakers of the same language in a context where it's clear violence won't be done. You do agree that context is important, yes?



See the difference? The first statement is about *foreign* policy. The second statement touches on *domestic* issues, one of which is a pledge to stop the "cycle of violence."

You mean you seriously can't see the incongruity here?


I think you've misunderstood me. I see incongruity, just not what you're focusing on. See above in addition to my prior post where I think I've explained this clearly.



McCain isn't campaigning on the promise that he won't bomb Iran. Obama is campaigning on the promise that he'll stop the "cycle of violence."

Get the difference?


That wasn't really your original argument, but no worries. My initial point still serves as a rebuttal to this. That's to say that you haven't substantiated your claim that Obama's clumsy metaphor seriously undermines his goal to "stop the cycle of violence".



posted on Jun, 18 2008 @ 05:14 AM
link   
Another Obamaphobic thread...

In response to the OP's point. I think its obvious it was a metaphor but by the reaction of some of the people in here you would think he put a gun to an innocent's head.

If he used a metaphor that showed guns in a bad light, im sure this thread would have the same people on it complaining about his use of words. Saying things like "hes trying to take away our right to bear arms" or something along those lines.

At the end of the day, a gun is a legal right in the states, it is an item a lot of people own. And what does the word gun have to do with gun crime? I say this because most of you gun fans will be saying the famous lines "guns don't kill people".

There is no pleasing the Obamaphobics on ATS.

Also, the sheer level of in your face racism, coupled with the fact that someone actually used the famous american "hate" word for black people and was allowed to keep his membership or not face any kind of punishment shows the selective way in which the T&C's are enforced here at ATS. Hell, the guy even got to keep his post with just the N word taken out.

I think the admins, the mods and the owners need to have a meeting and go through there T&C's because there are a lot of public message boards out there that have less strict T&C's but still tackle the issue of racism with a zero tolerance approach.



posted on Jun, 18 2008 @ 05:50 AM
link   
reply to post by jamie83
 


In reply to your original post, how is this any different then any of the rhetoric spewed by Bush, Cheney or Rumsfeld on 9/11 and post 9/11 in the run up to the invasion of Iraq. His choice of words then were an example of poor leadership. The worst part is they then acted out those statements!

It amazes me how somehow those in government need to be perfect human beings. Even though their supposed to be of the people (i.e, like you and me), they're not supposed to have any personality traits or flaws or act like a normal human being. Has anyone on this board never said anything that others didn't like, never offended someone else, never gone against the status quo, never acted for themselves? Has anyone ever met someone who has been liked by absolutely everyone and has only said something that absolutely everyone has agreed with? NO - so why do we suddenly expect holier than thou people to be in our government?



posted on Jun, 18 2008 @ 06:17 AM
link   
I've never trusted nor liked ANY of the presidential candidates, but there is something about Obama that is seriously bothering me. Something does not feel right at all. I do not like where any of this is headed.



posted on Jun, 18 2008 @ 07:23 AM
link   

Originally posted by grover
Oh please spare me will you... I swear I sometimes think some of you are just plain retarded... he was referring to not caving in like John Kerry did to dirty Rovian smear tactics but to fight back... as he should.


I swear get a frickin life.



Grover, this is exactly why I have issues with liberals (not saying you are)
Your response perfectly fits how they do business.


1. Do not address the issue brought up at hand.
2. Redirect the issue brought up and twist it into something unrelated
3. Express dismay/outrage/dissapointment at the unreleated meaning.
4. Repeat and have followers repeat over and over.


The OP had the correct context, he was not talking about how Obama was defending his plan to thwart republican attacks, he was talking about his specific use of THAT metaphor regardless of context.

The a presidential hopefull should not use that kind of language.
(sort of like bush using "dead or alive" it just isn't appropriate)

This is where you lose people who actually think, but I know why you all do it.. the idiots eat it up like candy and repeat it like parrots. Then you can make up a nice catch phrase and use it to wrap all opponents in a nice dismissive bow (ala "swiftboat")

Personally I don't think anything about his comment, it falls in line with what republicans do all the time, but your "defense" tactic shows us who YOU are.

Note: I am assuming you are intelligent and purposefully did this, otherwise.. damn.



posted on Jun, 18 2008 @ 07:24 AM
link   
reply to post by jamie83
 


YOU'RE SO WRONG!

He's actually talking about civil crime and violence and hwo he would tackle it.

Tell me how is it you can log onto this site, peddle your (lets face it, racist) bull# YET YOU CANNOT TAKE A QUOTE FROM THE CONTEXT WITHIN WHICH IT WAS USED?????

[Mod Edit: Do not insult your fellow members - and refrain from profanity while you're at it please.]

Obama haters are racist. End of.

[edit on 18-6-2008 by WyrdeOne]



posted on Jun, 18 2008 @ 08:01 AM
link   
reply to post by bingmat
 


Your panties are in a bunch man. With the language you just used and the intimidation tactics you are displaying I can only come to one conclusion... You lost this debate big time!...


And I do dislike Obamas gansta mentality as well so I guess that makes me a racist too?



posted on Jun, 18 2008 @ 09:30 AM
link   
You know, I have also been assuming that the metaphor used was fully understood in it's nuance but I'm beginning to think that's not the case. Just to be clear, it's a play off of a more common metaphor "Don't bring a knife to a gun fight." That metaphor means, you might imagine, to be appropriately equipped for an occasion. So indeed Obama's metaphor "If they bring a knife, I'll bring a gun" is a statement that his campaign will be over-equipped, if anything. Further, "violent" metaphors aren't exactly unusual. The media refers to a "debate" as a "fight" on a regular basis. Obama hardly invented this mode of talk, he's just working with the same vernacular the entire political spectrum is fond of. It's dramatic and some people like their politics to sound like an action movie. Spend ten minutes watching mainstream media coverage and I imagine you'll see what I'm talking about. So far the great umbrage I've witnessed here really does seem to be applying a double standard at best and deliberately trimming out important context at worst.



posted on Jun, 18 2008 @ 09:36 AM
link   
So is this statement of Obama's saying that he does not want to play fair? It sure sounds like it to me. This is almost like the old saying "don't bring a knife to a gunfight". Except he wants to bring a gun to a knife fight. These are statements that a US president or candidate should not be saying.



posted on Jun, 18 2008 @ 10:14 AM
link   
reply to post by eric52081
 


What do you mean, Obama doesn't want to play fair? Do you think Bush plays fair?

Invading countries that have very little means of military protection, is that fair? Stopping other countries having nuclear arms so you can dominate, is that fair? Do you really think Americas political actions are all based on fairness? That it got to where it was by playing fair?

If/when you've ever had a fight, have you always looked to fight fairly, or did/would you want to do what was necessary to win? Again, where does your "government should act holier than thou" attitude come from? If they did play fair and lose out you'd complain about that too.

Now if your saying we should live in a just and fair society, and our governmental candidates should act in a way that convey's that, I'd agree with you, but McCain doesn't exactly say anything that makes it seem like he's for that too, so your focus on one comment from Obama is just derisory, it can be one rule for one and a different rule for another. The Republicans haven't exactly acted fairly in the past 8 years!



posted on Jun, 18 2008 @ 01:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by Perplexed
Bush didn't take the guns away from the Katrina victims and you know it. It was New Orleans Deputy Police Chief Warren Riley "the black establishment" and they were found at fault in a court of law for doing it


Yeah that BLACK POWER bastard!!!!!

Too bad thats why all I saw where WHITE guys doing the Black Mans Bidding...

Yeah thats why I see National Guard...Regular Army.. and Black Water Mercenary's kicking doors in and seizing weapons...

The Governor did nothing wrong...The President.. Head of Fema...

Noo they all were working sooo hard to secure our liberties that they just missed what was happening.

Ok well Bush I will give you.. as he does not pay attention to anything.


Originally posted by Perplexed
Here is what really happened during Katrina.
Here is another article.
Here is another chilling article

The feds gave no such order. Further the Governor of the state gave no such order. It was all a local power grab and those that started taking the guns are lucky they didn't get shot in the process. Deputy Police Chief Warren Riley and his thug gang are lucky to be alive if you ask me...


IS that what those "Articles" say to you?

It reads more like opinion then it does journalism..... and It also sounds like theres a bunch of scapegoating going down.

Fact of the matter is the "Chief" ... is not going to be telling Army, National Guard, Black Water.. to violate the constitution and waste energy seizing firearms.



Originally posted by Perplexed
SavageHenry you are an open liar and have no credibility here and you are not to be believed.


So says the guy with -991 ATS points...

Why don't you try to break even before you start slinging your mud around.

I am not a liar... I just do not believe that Bush gives a pig fart about any of the issues you hold so near to your heart.. God, Guns, and Gays.

It happened under his watch... it happened with the wrong types of agencies to just be the work of some "power mad NEGRO Police chief"

I don't buy that "white washing" of the story.. which is murky to begin with...

It does not make me a liar..


Originally posted by Perplexed
It is in fact the liberal left like you that would love to take every gun in America away but allow Obama to get away with his gun quip and not take him to task on it.

Again, you are a liar unless you can prove your statement you made about Bush and "private mercenaries" taking the guns..... If you can't prove it then anything further you say in these forums will be taken with a grain of salt.


The Liberal Left .. like me Owns FN FAL .308, M4, VEPR AK-47...

And no one is taking them... I need em. I want them.. and thats how it is.

Sure there are softies on my side that dont want anyone to have any weapons... they feel like mommy ... and only do it because they care about the pain humanity suffers when there is an accident or violent event.

I do not totally agree with them as I feel that we must and have the right to protect ourselves from the radical right wing extremists who would like nothing more but to racially, religiously and politically .. CLEANSE the country ...



Anyway.. Your very own "Articles" talk about the National Gaurd.. and I recall seing the Army used.. and I have seen the footage of Black Water operations in NO...

You do not call the shots on credibility...



posted on Jun, 18 2008 @ 03:55 PM
link   
THIS WAS NOTHING MORE THAN A BAD METAPHOR! Do you really think he meant he was going to bring a gun? What about your boy, who wants to give people guns and send them to the other side of the world for the next hundred years? You have got to be kidding me.

McCain has KILLED.
Obama used a bad metaphor.

Who has done the people on this planet more harm?



posted on Jun, 18 2008 @ 04:23 PM
link   
Greetings.....Mr Obama is no babe in the woods when it comes to street life,it is my feeling that violence is not something he is unfamiliar with,having said that I will give the benefit of doubt with respect to his slight of tongue...
I fail to see why we should empower this man because he is talking about change...CHANGE WHAT !!!...This guys liberal voting record is dismal and the only change we can expect is one for the worse...One cannot ignore his associates and contributers...for the most part none of them have any idea what made this country great....they are an embittered bunch of radical liberals hungry for power...If the Black man is looking for a role model they should look to people like Armstrong Williams,Bill Cosby and an entire entourage of genuine God Fearing Ministers in the Black church who are being shouted out by windbags like Sharpten,Jackson and Wright GOD Help this nation if they get power...Any body who doesnot exercise his or her right to vote this election will be a traitor...



posted on Jun, 18 2008 @ 05:49 PM
link   
reply to post by theodorej
 


I don't understand. You clearly don't like Obama, but anyone who doesn't vote either way is a traitor? So it's not who you vote for but not voting that is going to cause this country problems? How does that work?



posted on Jun, 18 2008 @ 07:20 PM
link   
reply to post by SavageHenry
 


Ok, so bottom line... Where did FEMA, Bush or any other Fed give the order to take the guns? The courts didn't admonsih the Feds and those that did give the order should be shot on sight... In the end you lose and you are a very poor liar here in this thread...



posted on Jun, 18 2008 @ 10:49 PM
link   
reply to post by Perplexed
 



In any order they gave to hand over authority to the one that did it.

Shat rolls downhill.... not up...

Never been in the military...???

Orders for a Gun Confiscation from the president.. lol yeah thats a good one... Asking for Orders.. lmao .. you are funny...in a sad way.

You should be as shocked that a court in Louisiana blames a black man before anyone else... as you would be from one of those Librul Commie Pinko Aktivissst Uhmericuh Haters in the 9th Circuit ruling in favor of HUMAN rights and allow gays to suffer the same hell that straights have been allowed to have ...




[edit on 18-6-2008 by SavageHenry]



posted on Jun, 18 2008 @ 11:13 PM
link   
I apologize to anybody who posted a message to me that didn't receive a reply. I've been very busy.

This is very simple.

Obama pledges to end the inner city cycle of violence.
Obama uses metaphor that exemplifies cycle of violence.

Obama's use of said metaphor indicates to me a level of insincerity re his commitment to ending the inner city cycle of violence.

Some people agree. Some disagree. To each his own.



posted on Jun, 19 2008 @ 06:05 AM
link   



posted on Jun, 19 2008 @ 09:23 AM
link   
Script for Obama Video Opting Out of Public Financing

thepage.time.com...




His broken promise: “I will aggressively pursue an agreement with the Republican nominee to preserve a publicly financed general election.”





I have an important announcement and I wanted all of you – the people who built this movement from the bottom-up – to hear it first. We’ve made the decision not to participate in the public-financing system for the general election.


Alrighty then waffle out of a promise, by blaming the system.
This man has no integrity what so ever,

Public funding under the bus,

wake up

thepage.time.com...

Obama’s Lobbyist Line
www.cjr.org...




It's no secret that Barack Obama is one of the top recipients of corporate campaign contributions in this election -- in fact, he's number two in the U.S. Senate behind Hillary Clinton for payoff money from the health insurance and pharmaceutical industries (which explains his successful gutting of health care reform while "serving" in the Illinois state senate).

Obama's Lobbyist Money
www.boomantribune.com...

He is a BOLD face LIAR!

How can he keep a straight FACE?

Are people really this stupid?

Apparently Obama thinks so.

COME ON! deny ignorance, he is making a fool out of you AMERICA.




Despite Obama's claim that outside groups allied with McCain will spend millions of dollars against him, few Republican-leaning groups have weighed into the presidential contest so far. In fact, Obama allies such as MoveOn.org are the ones have been spending money on advertising against McCain.


news.yahoo.com...

How does blaming it on a broken system, Make it RIGHT?



[edit on 093030p://bThursday2008 by Stormdancer777]





new topics

top topics



 
4
<< 3  4  5    7 >>

log in

join