Oh God, It's happening. Obama Already Talkin

reply to post by Willtell

For God sake - did you even read the subject line. Was it a robbery now? At least attack me with something that makes sense please.

Secondly - governments rob countries - you are wasting your time here.

reply to post by Dukesy


No my friend don’t take it personally. Look at the higher message.

so a security guard doing his job defends himself from an assailant. no america will never give up our guns for even that. also why does dhs get to buy a shart ton of guns and ammo but they want to restrict everybody from buying guns and ammo? i think this is a shoddy attempt at a centuries old divide and conquer tactic.

Why would we honor a criminal who assaulted someone to the point they needed to defend their life from grievous bodily harm or death by using deadly force? Furthermore why would we honor an assaulter by moving to take away that which saved his victim's life?

reply to post by cry93


Obama has proven himself to be a liar and not doing anything in the best interests of the majority of his constituency. His approval rating since taking his second term ,is totally in the toilet .
They finally shut up about alleged gun violence ,and now he's blathering on again . His agenda has nothing to do with gun violence ,and everything to do with disarming the public,so they cannot finally riot against a tyrannical government .
We are now being FORCED ,to eat what they want,take the medicines they want ,and think ,what they want.
The thinking public is not interested ,so they must be culled .
This admin just wants to make us all eat horse meat and bugs ,sit at home being monitored by our own tv sets ,and our calls listened in on ,while being forced to take medicines pushed by big pharm ,while two wars we never needed,are still going on .

I personally ,believe nothing that comes out of his mouth anymore. His the biggest disappointment of the 21 st century ,to date .
So,people are gonna take swipes. If the shoe fits ...
*shrugs*

reply to post by cry93

1. He is the president.

your point is? you never made one, you just stated something that might sound plausible to those who won't think about it.

2. This was a high profile case with national implications.

the ONLY national implications in this case are ones that are created. it's a rather circular argument, don't you think? make it a national issue by commenting, THEN saying that because it's a "national" issue that he must weigh in (read: conveniently pushing his agenda).

Originally posted by cry93
1. He is the president.
2. This was a high profile case with national implications.

Had he said nothing at all would have garnered more attention. Some people can never miss an opportunity to take swipes at Obama.

You apparently haven't a clue as to what the job of the President entails. I'll give you a hint: Mucking about in the private sector, commenting negatively towards the Unites States Judicial Systems verdicts, and pushing personal agendas are NOT in his job description.

reply to post by shell69


I respect your stance. That said these conflicts were started under a different administration. Even the events that foreshadowed the economic downturn were the results of the same former administration.

At least we are out of Iraq and pulling out of Afghanistan.

Originally posted by rockoperawriter
so a security guard doing his job defends himself from an assailant. no america will never give up our guns for even that. also why does dhs get to buy a shart ton of guns and ammo but they want to restrict everybody from buying guns and ammo? i think this is a shoddy attempt at a centuries old divide and conquer tactic.

Security guard?

2nd

reply to post by 0001391


Who created this situation? TM was simply walking home to his father and brother.

2nd

reply to post by introV


Just yesterday, I heard someone representing the WH stating that he wasn't making any statements. So, they lied. Plus, he tries making this about GUNS?!?!? Gee, no agenda here.....

All those that claimed he wasn't trying to take the guns, what say you now?

reply to post by cry93


Except there are similar cases going on that are not covered nationally; why isn't he mentioning them? He stuck his nose in this and he is at least understanding that it was a mistake a year ago to make the comments he did and is now trying to take this "arms length" approach.

People are calling him out on that. He waded into it with his "if I had a son" comment and now he is speaking from the other side of his mouth.

I give him credit for realizing his misstep, but he should have never interjected the way he did.

Originally posted by cry93
reply to post by 0001391

 

Who created this situation? TM was simply walking home to his father and brother.

2nd

Please, get a clue. That other kid wasn't his brother, but the child of his dad's fiance. His dad wasn't there that night. He WAS back there, according to his friend on the phone, and went BACK to confront Mr. Zimmerman. Comments based in reality are more effective.

Originally posted by cry93
reply to post by 0001391

 

Who created this situation? TM was simply walking home to his father and brother.

2nd

And Zimmerman was simply patrolling the neighborhood; keeping an eye on someone isn't a crime. The jury found him innocent; will you accept that or do you think only your view is what Justice should be?

reply to post by ownbestenemy


And then he thought himself greater than he was, approached someone unneccessarily, and got his arse kicked. So he shot him.

Can I follow you without reason? And you are like okay, cry is following me and I have to be okay with this? Let me allow cry to follow me because I am innocent? BS.

I live in a reality based community and many of you screaming not illegal would feel threatened. Hell, your obesssion with Obama taking away gun rights without evidence is proof to me.

Originally posted by cry93
And then he thought himself greater than he was, approached someone unneccessarily, and got his arse kicked. So he shot him.

All assumptions really. Neither of us can prove otherwise.

Can I follow you without reason?

Yes; walking down the street is not a crime....

And you are like okay, cry is following me and I have to be okay with this? Let me allow cry to follow me because I am innocent? BS.

Who is 'cry'? Regardless, walking down the street, 'following' someone, isn't a crime.

I live in a reality based community and many of you screaming not illegal would feel threatened. Hell, your obesssion with Obama taking away gun rights without evidence is proof to me.

What?! Where did I ever show such 'obsession'? Can you refrain from the straw-men to prove your point; or is that how you discuss topics?

Can I follow you on the streets, at night, and for no reason?

Please answer. Thanks.

How exactly would that make you feel? Safe? Protected?

Originally posted by cry93
1. He is the president.
2. This was a high profile case with national implications.

Had he said nothing at all would have garnered more attention. Some people can never miss an opportunity to take swipes at Obama.

Never let a tragedy go to waste.

Politicians are slime and make me wanna puke.

reply to post by bbracken677

This is not a political choice. It is reality.

This is not the Sudan. You do not need an assault rifles.

Originally posted by cry93
Can I follow you on the streets, at night, and for no reason?

Please answer. Thanks.

How exactly would that make you feel? Safe? Protected?

edit on 16-7-2013 by cry93 because: (no reason given)

Yes you can. Safe? Maybe, maybe not; context matters. Protected? Depends again; context (and that is what the case tried to present; context.)