It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Sarah Palin Tells NRA Convention Obama Would Ban Guns if He Could

page: 2
19
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 15 2010 @ 06:56 AM
link   
We should be destroying every firearm on the planet, not talking about whether they should be legal or not - because that wont get us anywhere.




posted on May, 15 2010 @ 07:12 AM
link   
reply to post by Romantic_Rebel
 


Oh to be a fly on the wall. I lol when I read you post.

Must have been funny to watch. Did you look like Palin-at all?

At least Palin isn't afraid to speak out/up. They didn't beat her back into a corner, fearful of every being seen again.

She is right back at ya attitude and doing tremdously politically and financially.

Ironic that the media that has exhausted tremendous amount of resources/capital on trying to destroy this woman (& her family!) HAS thrust her into the limelight and has kept her a player in the political arena-even so much to keep her being considered a Pres contender. And have made her rich. Not bad-from Palin's POV. Keep up the good work MSM. LOL

I have said it before but it says it best: I hope Sarah and Todd Palin are laughing their butts off as they go over their increased bank accounts, eating Moose meat and having a beer, saying -and they call us the dumb ones!

IMO she's earned every penny she's making-with the MSM help for what they put her and her family trough. Disgusting-and they know it.

One thing for sure, she is a crowd gatherer ( A voter getter): Nevada 2010:




Go ahead, keep messing with her.
)



posted on May, 15 2010 @ 07:14 AM
link   

Originally posted by Liamoville
Sorry if i seem to be in the minority amongst gun-craving Americans here, but whats so bad about banning guns?

Is the world not a better place minus guns, knives and other weapons used to kill people.


Sure, but this would never happen on earth amongst humans would it?
To not have guns would be to not need them in the first place which will never ever happen on this planet, because humans will never evolve above the state of tribal warfare on their own.



posted on May, 15 2010 @ 07:15 AM
link   
The pure thought of people actually believing what that dumb sellout brabbles is scary. Her own book is packed full of (DOCUMENTED!!) lies, she didn't even finish her term in Alaska, and she'll tell the people whatever they wanna hear...and it doesn't matter in the least if what she says is based on any truth, at least not as far as she's concerned.

I'd be ashamed to cheer on that woman, it would make me just as stupid as her.



posted on May, 15 2010 @ 07:16 AM
link   
What's really scary were her lame redneck jokes that totally brought down the house.
BTW...You know you're a redneck if your life was changed by an episode of "Walker, Texas Ranger".



posted on May, 15 2010 @ 07:17 AM
link   
Well Obama can...and he's doing so.. by nominating anti-second amendment judges to the supreme court.

Kagan and Sotomayor are against the second amendment.

And at the end of the year or early 2011, another judge is supposed to retire... Anthony Kennedy, which is pro-second amendment as proven in the Heller case and he will put another second amendment judge in there.

So once this happens, any gun case before the supreme court will end up like this:
Supporting second amendment : 4 votes : Antonin Scalia, John G. Roberts, Jr., Clarence Thomas and Samuel A. Alito Jr..
Against 5 votes : Sonia M. Sotomayor, Anthony M. Kennedy's replacement, Elena Kagan, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, and Stephen Breyer.

Anyway, the NRA are shills and support gun control, and Sarah Palin is a dumb shill too.

It's bad all around. NRA, Palin and Obama... all disgusting constitution hating shills.

[edit on 15-5-2010 by Vitchilo]



posted on May, 15 2010 @ 07:17 AM
link   
reply to post by -Blackout-
 


Although I disagree with most of her statements, she's dead on with those remarks. Just look at his most recent pick, Kagan, and her thoughts on gun rights. Obama is a wolf in sheep's clothing; a socialist playing the part of a progressive. He's putting staunch progressive's (i.e. socialists) into every position he can. It's an agenda to absolutely destroy..not capitalism, but the foundations of this country. Wish I were that it weren't true, but it is.

[edit on 15-5-2010 by Freenrgy2]



posted on May, 15 2010 @ 07:25 AM
link   

Originally posted by -Blackout-
I know that Obama has been going around saying that he supports the Second Amendment right to arms. But keep in mind that Barrack Obama is a lawyer and politician-expert in tricky wordplay. Obama supports the Second Amendment only as he personally interprets it, and supports the right to arms only as he would personally regulate, restrict and control it. It would not take very long for the Obama administration to regulate the Second Amendment right out of existence, if he knew they could get away with it.


All these politcals are essentially the same.

Obama, Palin, Beck, Rush and all the rest are in the "business" of saying what they believe their audience wants to hear in order to get more money in their pocket. It would likely kill them all if they had to do any real productive work.

I enjoy watching them on TV because they make me laugh so much.

As for what any of them would do "if they could get away with it". There are lots of things we all would do if we could get away with it. For me Sandra Bullock is among the first which comes to mind. But, that may be another subject.

I think anything a political says should be taken with a grain of salt and a lot of skepticisum. Keep in mind that they are really only one cog in a very large set of wheels. Their individual powers are very limited and their egos are way out of proportian with reality.

Of course, this is just my opinion and is subject to change.



posted on May, 15 2010 @ 07:36 AM
link   
Or the reason they haven't tried to take them away is possibly

BECAUSE THEY DON'T WANT TO!

Sheesh. Stop looking for a fire when there isn't even any smoke... Palin is an idiot who will say anything to get ink.



posted on May, 15 2010 @ 07:53 AM
link   

Originally posted by atlguy
Or the reason they haven't tried to take them away is possibly

BECAUSE THEY DON'T WANT TO!

Sheesh. Stop looking for a fire when there isn't even any smoke... Palin is an idiot who will say anything to get ink.


Yeah, that's it. Most people in government are our friends.

Thank you of reminding the rest of us just how much we should trust our government. The next crazy thing would be all of us thinking they're trying to shove government-run healthcare down our throats.



posted on May, 15 2010 @ 07:56 AM
link   
I have no doubt that she's right about that one. There's little in Obama's history to suggest that he's in favor of gun rights to any great degree. He voted the anti-gun position the few times it came up in the Illinois state senate and spoke of strengthened gun laws during the presidential campaign. His vice presidential choice, Joe Biden, was one of the most anti-gun members of the US senate and one of the key players in the '94 AWB. His attorney general, Eric Holder, indicated their interest in passing another AWB shortly after they took office last year as well. A number of his other close advisors are also hostile to gun rights and gun owners.

So yes, I think she's absolutely right about this one. Granted, its nothing that I didn't know two years ago. Its among the major reasons why I opposed his election.



posted on May, 15 2010 @ 08:23 AM
link   
What's the big deal? Of course Obama wants to ban guns. He would if he could. Actually he will when he thinks he can get away with it. The idea that he is worrying about a backlash is great. I doubt it. He doesn't care what the people think. He is trampling the Constitution deliberately just to see if he gets any reaction. The Constitution means nothing to him. Sarah Palin is only saying the obvious. Sarah Palin is part of the establishment and wants to capture the anti-Obama crowd to help her puppet handlers' agenda along. They always want to control both sides. That's why we have a two party system. They are only waiting to either get total lockdown control or to get a big enough civil war going to smokescreen their murderous agenda. The agenda is population reduction. They need more control to put that into effect. If we go into total chaos they can unlease their murderers. If we allow total lockdown government, they can use their fema death camps. But the agenda is depopulation and Palin is their puppet.



posted on May, 15 2010 @ 08:29 AM
link   
www.ontheissues.org...

This shows Barrack Obama is VERY FOR gun control. Though he isnt going after guns currently and i dont believe he'd try to he is stillv ery against it



FactCheck: Yes, Obama endorsed Illinois handgun ban
Obama was being misleading when he denied that his handwriting had been on a document endorsing a state ban on the sale and possession of handguns in Illinois. Obama responded, “No, my writing wasn’t on that particular questionnaire. As I said, I have never favored an all-out ban on handguns.”
Actually, Obama’s writing was on the 1996 document, which was filed when Obama was running for the Illinois state Senate. A Chicago nonprofit, Independent Voters of Illinois, had this question, and Obama took hard line:

35. Do you support state legislation to:
a. ban the manufacture, sale and possession of handguns? Yes.
b. ban assault weapons? Yes.
c. mandatory waiting periods and background checks? Yes.

Obama’s campaign said, “Sen. Obama didn’t fill out these state Senate questionnaires--a staffer did--and there are several answers that didn’t reflect his views then or now. He may have jotted some notes on the front page of the questionnaire, but some answers didn’t reflect his views.”






Ban semi-automatics, and more possession restrictions
Principles that Obama supports on gun issues:
Ban the sale or transfer of all forms of semi-automatic weapons.
Increase state restrictions on the purchase and possession of firearms.
Require manufacturers to provide child-safety locks with firearms.



posted on May, 15 2010 @ 08:31 AM
link   
reply to post by -Blackout-
 


There's not a chance this government would ever consider doing that. If they did there would be a lot of shot federal employees.



posted on May, 15 2010 @ 08:34 AM
link   
Its funny because im nto anti-Obama at all. i think hes been a great president and the only thing i worried about when i voted for him WAS gun control. But thus far hes stayed away from the gun control issue. I wasnt one of those stupid red necks running out to pay all sorts of guns and ammo the day he was elected.



posted on May, 15 2010 @ 08:48 AM
link   
So because one of his biggest opponents says it, it must be true? Tell you what, once he actually puts in legislation to ban it, then kick up a fuss and say 'yes he is against guns' until then, or some definitive statement by him, I dont think you should take what conservatives say on him to heart.



posted on May, 15 2010 @ 08:57 AM
link   
reply to post by -Blackout-
 


It wont happen. Stop getting all riled up. They (the gov) is not out to "get" you, or harm you, or make your life worse. Support your rights and never let them go, but the vast majority support the 2nd A.



posted on May, 15 2010 @ 09:00 AM
link   
The only thing that is certain is how mindless a lot of Americans are. We never learn do we? Even as we have one of the most lying potus's we have ever had in office, we continue to put faith in media backed politicians.

If they are all over the media, they are being sold to us. Time and time again we experience the sweeping changes in stance and policy once they get in office.

These scumbags will say ANYthing to get into office, "I wont resign the patriot act, I wont put lobbyist into the white house, I will pull out the troops, etc. etc.". You will know the more honest politicians by one simple trade mark... they are NOT backed by the mass media! Ron Paul had tons of media blackout during this last run, proving he does not work for their system, and their system does not want him in office.

To summarize... Does the media like you?
Yes=Works with corporate america and has their interests in mind.
No=Works for the people, and has their interests in mind.



posted on May, 15 2010 @ 09:12 AM
link   

Originally posted by -Blackout-
reply to post by Flatfish
 


That'll probably be the day that Texas tries to become its own country.


May that day be soon in the approach!



posted on May, 15 2010 @ 09:14 AM
link   

Originally posted by -Blackout-
reply to post by Flatfish
 


That'll probably be the day that Texas tries to become its own country.


Hey, I never said that we didn't have our fair share of crazies in Texas. As a matter of fact, IMO we have more than our fair share and I would be personally willing to give some of them to Arizona free of charge. I'm a native Texan and I love this state but I have to admit, this is "redneck" territory and Rick Perry doesn't help matters at all.

All you have to do to keep Texas from seceding is to make clear that if they do, Texas will be required to pay for the new fence. Starting at the Mexican border next to New Mexico going north to Oklahoma then west to Arkansas and south along the Louisiana border to the Gulf of Mexico. Even the "rednecks" will be scratching their heads over that one.



new topics

top topics



 
19
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join