Defend Roseburg - Deny Barack Obama Protest in Oregon

Okay, once again, listen up!!!

Bickering, name-calling and off topic banter ain't gonna fly....You are responsible for your own posts.
This thread is about the Obama visit to Oregon....not another thread about gun rights/2nd Amendment!!!!

*** ALL MEMBERS *** Ending Rudeness, Hate, Bigotry: Getting Back to Basics

There will be consequences for ignoring this message and the T&C



and, as always:

Do NOT reply to this post!!

I was already typing, didn't see he above.

Posting here on ATS is an example of a privilege, what is being discussed here, the legal ownership of a firearm is a legal right according the the supreme law of the United States. Anyone that says otherwise is either misinformed or outright lying. The fact that the president publicly broadcast his intention to politicize this tragedy and the victims for the ongoing agenda to further restrict and infringe upon the rights of the citizenry is, IMO, abominable behavior. Behavior not fitting a head of state, any state.

The local politicos in that town are welcoming him BECAUSE they too look to politicize his visit for their own political advancements I am sure. However, from everything I have read and interviews I have seen of the citizens affected, they do not want him to appear. To me, their wishes override ANYONE in the political sphere.

a reply to: burdman30ott6

...and people wonder exactly why we have a political divide in this country.

It couldn't possibly have anything to do with the fact that somehow guns have gone from being tools to objects of worship among conservatives? Do people on the right imagine the FF had the same obsession with firearms I wonder?

just smile, nod, and eat that big bowl of horsecrap Hollywood and DC keep feeding you, ensuring America gets more and more scared of the evil gun.

You think Hollywood makes people afraid of guns? LOL. What movies and TV have you been watching? Guns are glamorized throughout our popular culture and in many cases, outright fetishized. As a matter of fact, I bet if you were to tally up all the inanimate objects appearing on movie posters, guns are #1 by a mile.

Have you never seen a crime drama, war movie, revenge flick, western, espionage, horror or sci-fi movie?

Guns are the great equalizer, they solve problems, protect the innocent, kill zombies, kill aliens, kill terrorists, settle scores, vanquish enemies, avenge the wronged, enforce the law and dispatch immediate judgment and instant karma.

There's lots of centrists and (particularly the more liberal) progressives who aren't anti-gun despite what media distortions might lead you to believe. The funny thing is I don't support bans on automatic weapons, high capacity clips or bans on guns for aesthetic features. The average member of my family probably owns half a dozen firearms. Both of my brothers have concealed carry permits. I grew up in rural Georgia where everyone hunts and everyone owns guns. In practical terms, I'm sure we agree more than we disagree on the subject of gun law and with all this in common, there's nothing I find more divisive than the extremist rhetoric all too common among "pro-gun" folks.

I say this in all honesty, and with the best of intent:

I don't think you realize just how divisive even your own post is. Could you have made it more about projecting tribal affiliation if you tried? You managed to bring up immigration, profiling and inner city crime (trotted out by right-wingers most often to disparage black people if we're being completely honest) and even RACISM. How can you with a straight face say that you're not being divisive?

Conservatives actually concerned with SUCCESSFULLY preserving gun ownership should figure out how to be less divisive and frankly — tone down the nuttiness — or face losing ground with moderates.

a reply to: theantediluvian

It couldn't possibly have anything to do with the fact that somehow guns have gone from being tools to objects of worship among conservatives? Do people on the right imagine the FF had the same obsession with firearms I wonder?

There's 'nothing' divisive about that is there?

If guns are so bad why does the president hide behind so many guys with guns?

originally posted by: neo96
a reply to: theantediluvian

It couldn't possibly have anything to do with the fact that somehow guns have gone from being tools to objects of worship among conservatives? Do people on the right imagine the FF had the same obsession with firearms I wonder?

There's 'nothing' divisive about that is there?

If guns are so bad why does the president hide behind so many guys with guns?

Well for one, you can't pillow fight a would be assassin...

Secondly, the POTUS doesn't get a say in whether or not he has armed secret service surrounding him.
But I won't go into why because illogically you'll just come back with something about Hitler or some other trivial enigma.

a reply to: CharlieSpeirs

So the presidents life is more important than the peoples.

Unfortunately the American people don't have that luxury.

Between the cops and criminals shooting at them.

a reply to: neo96

There's 'nothing' divisive about that is there?

If guns are so bad why does the president hide behind so many guys with guns?

What does this have to do with reasoned thinking and rational discourse? You're only proving my point. Imagine I were to respond in kind:

If guns are so great, why don't we give them to babies!?

Would that contribute anything to or in any way advance the conversation? Nope. That would be a silly, meaningless one-liner. Furthermore, what did I say that your remark was a response to? I didn't say guns are bad.

As for the first part of your comment; if characterizing divisive speech is divisive speech than wouldn't it therefore be fundamentally impossible to address divisive speech without being a hypocrite? If that's what you truly believe, then you must shudder at the hypocrisy of anyone who calls anyone's speech divisive?

a reply to: theantediluvian

What does this have to do with reasoned thinking and rational discourse? You're only proving my point. Imagine I were to respond in kind:

So just exactly what was 'rational' about saying conservatives worship guns?

a reply to: theantediluvian

Here's the problem, the definition of "reasoned" is highly variable based on both the individual and the topic. For example, I may feel that it is reasonable to require women have a 3 day waiting period prior to receiving an abortion, others find that extremely unreasonable. You may consider the 3 day waiting period for a handgun to be reasonable, I do not. Still others may consider a law declaring voicing criticisms of the POTUS to be sedition a reasonable law, I feel safe in saying neither of us would consider such a law to be reasonable.

As far as your earlier comment regarding me being "devisive" I can only respond with: "And?" Everyone has issues they will no longer compromise on and this is one of mine. I stand on the side of existing, established laws, rights, and traditions... I stand to gain absolutely NOTHING from further compromise. Compromise where one side gains nothing is not compromise, it's capitulation. That's not a winning proposal.

a reply to: Blaine91555
I wonder what the "I, me" count in Obama's remarks will be?

It all about him, his legacy, his agenda. How disrespectful of the dead and of their loved ones. Shameful and petty come to mind too as the C-I-C pretty much dances upon the newly dug graves.

originally posted by: misskat1
Apparently the city officials are welcoming his visit, www.facebook.com...

Oh of course they would. They are all poloticians arent they? ID liek the rest fo the town to give Him the cold shoulder when he arrives. Business open. sees him walking in turns the sign to closed and locks the door. SOrry were closed.
IF it wa s me id block off the roads and refuse them entry until after the funeral. Citing them as disrupting the public order showing up.

a reply to: theantediluvian

Not even close to the same. The president has armed detail for the same reason we carry

Because bad people with ill intent have guns

a reply to: burdman30ott6

And rightfully so

There should be no compromise w the constitution. That was the point of drawing it up in the first place

a reply to: introvert

They would say things like "Well, if the people were all black and Rev. Al was there, Obama would go". There is no pleasing the nutters.

So now you are giving us another example of him politicizing a issue as an example for your argument? Seems before you attack the posters on this thread for comprehension you may want to make sure your comprehension is up to par. Sorry if it causes pain in your hindquarters if there are people who don't want to become a photo-op for Obama's next grandstanding moment. The more you respond with "nutter" as the designation of anybody who dares think in a opposing way to you, you may want to work on your own comprehension. Because man you are sounding like a nutter by the manner in which you respond. I am a rather intelligent person, but this forum has a number of people who are more intelligent than I am. I try not to take it personally that I am not the biggest brain in the bunch maybe you need to accept that as well in your own case.

originally posted by: IAMTAT
No...we all have to be respectful towards the President of the United states and not politicize his visit...blah..blah...blah blah blah.....

Respect is earned...Obama has earned nothing but disdain. There hasn't been a worse president during my lifetime and when he goes, I will be a much happier person. This "man" has done nothing for America.

originally posted by: introvert
Sounds to me like these people are a bunch of Right-Wing nutters.

The anointed one his majesty king 0bama and the White House have announced a Friday arrival in Roseburg, Oregon in the wake of Oct 1st's horrific tragedy at UCC.

Polarizing as usual, Mr 0bama has insisted on politicizing the event as a conduit for increased executive orders on gun control via means of his pen, and his phone.

They call-out Obama's polarizing tactics by being polarizing.

Idiots.

Also, I didn't see anything about raising money for the families. They are raising money for port-o-potties.

We are working on finding portapotties for the event. In order to do that we'll need donations (something we hadn't planned on needing!) We are opening an account for the funds and will post that account number so that people can donate if they so choose to help offset the expenses for the toilets.

Anyway, this is not surprising. Nutters getting together with other nutters to protest a man that simply wants to pay his respects.

Hmmm...how do I say this. Think of an animal with two horns that is sometimes "fought" with a red cloth. Then add to that what comes out of this animal's rear end.

That's real grown up of Roseburg. Real intelligent. Let's protest someone that had nothing to do with this tragedy because we're morons. Got it.