To Obama's dismay, America not outraged by gun control fail, poll suggests

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 26, 2013 8:20 PM GMT
    http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Politics/2013/0424/To-Obama-s-dismay-America-not-outraged-by-gun-control-fail-poll-suggests?nav=87-frontpage-entryInsideMonitor

    A new poll finds that less than half of America is upset by the Senate's failure to pass expanded background checks. That was supposed to be the gun control issue with the broadest support.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 26, 2013 8:42 PM GMT
    I wonder when Obama will get the memo that he is hopelessly out of touch with the majority of Americans...?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 26, 2013 8:54 PM GMT
    RIDDLER,
    You endorsed background checks THEN RAN AWAY FROM YOUR OWN WORDS and now you return to this topic. It's hard to take you seriously.
  • musclmed

    Posts: 3280

    Apr 26, 2013 9:01 PM GMT
    background checks are a good idea.

    The only way Obama knows how to push an item is to go into campaign demagogue mode.

    I think he hurt the effort. He has almost no political capital at this point.
    There is no evidence he knows how to compromise or build bridges.

    Better let the issue come up in a terrorism security bill.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 26, 2013 9:01 PM GMT
    blazerblue saidRIDDLER,
    You endorsed background checks THEN RAN AWAY FROM YOUR OWN WORDS and now you return to this topic. It's hard to take you seriously.


    I think they're sensible but the evidence suggests that they don't actually work - nor is the issue of gun purchases without background checks as widespread as politicians have suggested.

    It's also not helpful that those like Obama have lied on the issue:

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/fact-checker/post/obamas-continued-use-of-the-claim-that-40-percent-of-gun-sales-lack-background-checks/2013/04/01/002e06ce-9b0f-11e2-a941-a19bce7af755_blog.html

    Incidentally, when did I "run away" from my own words?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 26, 2013 10:11 PM GMT
    musclmed saidbackground checks are a good idea. .



    It's good to see some sanity on this from RJ's conservative members.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 27, 2013 9:45 AM GMT
    riddler78 said

    It's also not helpful that those like Obama have lied on the issue:

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/fact-checker/post/obamas-continued-use-of-the-claim-that-40-percent-of-gun-sales-lack-background-checks/2013/04/01/002e06ce-9b0f-11e2-a941-a19bce7af755_blog.html


    "When we first looked at this issue, we noted that congressional foes of gun control had made it difficult for the federal government to conduct research on guns."

    Surprise, surprise. The gun lobby's lapdogs in congress have spent years preventing the government from gathering accurate statistics about gun ownership and use.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 27, 2013 7:09 PM GMT
    Ex_Mil8 said
    riddler78 said

    It's also not helpful that those like Obama have lied on the issue:

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/fact-checker/post/obamas-continued-use-of-the-claim-that-40-percent-of-gun-sales-lack-background-checks/2013/04/01/002e06ce-9b0f-11e2-a941-a19bce7af755_blog.html


    "When we first looked at this issue, we noted that congressional foes of gun control had made it difficult for the federal government to conduct research on guns."

    Surprise, surprise. The gun lobby's lapdogs in congress have spent years preventing the government from gathering accurate statistics about gun ownership and use.


    Er, alternative view is that these stats have often been designed to attack gun rights and therefore there's a natural suspicion of them. And yet, despite this, Obama still chooses to lie outright about the issue.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 27, 2013 7:29 PM GMT
    riddler78 said
    Er, alternative view is that these stats have often been designed to attack gun rights and therefore there's a natural suspicion of them. And yet, despite this, Obama still chooses to lie outright about the issue.

    And in other news from Canada...
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 27, 2013 7:45 PM GMT
    riddler78 said
    Er, alternative view is that these stats have often been designed to attack gun rights and therefore there's a natural suspicion of them. And yet, despite this, Obama still chooses to lie outright about the issue.


    It was a direct quote from the Fact Checker link you posted. I take it you only like their facts when they suit your argument.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 27, 2013 7:54 PM GMT
    Ex_Mil8 said
    riddler78 said
    Er, alternative view is that these stats have often been designed to attack gun rights and therefore there's a natural suspicion of them. And yet, despite this, Obama still chooses to lie outright about the issue.


    It was a direct quote from the Fact Checker link you posted. I take it you only like their facts when they suit your argument.


    I've pointed out previously how the fact checker tends left on issues - so yes, and no. You're right that there was a direct quote there - but your comment that "Surprise, surprise. The gun lobby's lapdogs in congress have spent years preventing the government from gathering accurate statistics about gun ownership and use" was not a direct quote - unless you missed that.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 27, 2013 8:02 PM GMT
    riddler78 said
    Ex_Mil8 said
    riddler78 said
    Er, alternative view is that these stats have often been designed to attack gun rights and therefore there's a natural suspicion of them. And yet, despite this, Obama still chooses to lie outright about the issue.


    It was a direct quote from the Fact Checker link you posted. I take it you only like their facts when they suit your argument.


    I've pointed out previously how the fact checker tends left on issues - so yes, and no. You're right that there was a direct quote there - but your comment that "Surprise, surprise. The gun lobby's lapdogs in congress have spent years preventing the government from gathering accurate statistics about gun ownership and use" was not a direct quote - unless you missed that.


    'These stats', to which you refer, do not exist, because congress has hindered their collection. There cannot therefore be any 'suspicion of them'.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 27, 2013 8:24 PM GMT
    Ex_Mil8 said
    'These stats', to which you refer, do not exist, because congress has hindered their collection. There cannot therefore be any 'suspicion of them'.

    Would this be the first time Republicans have "cooked the books" and gone "cherry picking" to support their assertions, or to suppress opposing information? The War in Iraq comes to mind.

    Gun control is another area where Republicans put the lid on free & open discussion & debate, and feed the public on controlled propaganda. They and their conservative media mouthpieces like Fox News, Limbaugh, Beck, Hannity, et al.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 27, 2013 8:50 PM GMT
    Ex_Mil8 said
    riddler78 said
    Ex_Mil8 said
    riddler78 said
    Er, alternative view is that these stats have often been designed to attack gun rights and therefore there's a natural suspicion of them. And yet, despite this, Obama still chooses to lie outright about the issue.


    It was a direct quote from the Fact Checker link you posted. I take it you only like their facts when they suit your argument.


    I've pointed out previously how the fact checker tends left on issues - so yes, and no. You're right that there was a direct quote there - but your comment that "Surprise, surprise. The gun lobby's lapdogs in congress have spent years preventing the government from gathering accurate statistics about gun ownership and use" was not a direct quote - unless you missed that.


    'These stats', to which you refer, do not exist, because congress has hindered their collection. There cannot therefore be any 'suspicion of them'.


    Er some do do. Just because some were hindered in recent memory that doesn't mean they were prevented from being collected. Further, you do realize that in order for a fact to be checked and for claims to be made, the stats came from somewhere. icon_rolleyes.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 27, 2013 9:47 PM GMT
    riddler78 saidJust because some were hindered in recent memory that doesn't mean they were prevented from being collected. Further, you do realize that in order for a fact to be checked and for claims to be made, the stats came from somewhere. icon_rolleyes.gif


    Yes, the stats came from almost two decades ago, which is hardly 'recent memory'. Fact Checkers (i.e. the source you are relying on) make it clear there is a paucity of government information on the matter, owing to congressional obstruction.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 28, 2013 1:44 AM GMT
    Ex_Mil8 said
    riddler78 saidJust because some were hindered in recent memory that doesn't mean they were prevented from being collected. Further, you do realize that in order for a fact to be checked and for claims to be made, the stats came from somewhere. icon_rolleyes.gif


    Yes, the stats came from almost two decades ago, which is hardly 'recent memory'. Fact Checkers (i.e. the source you are relying on) make it clear there is a paucity of government information on the matter, owing to congressional obstruction.


    And that's justification for Obama to lie on the data that exists? And let's look at what the Washington Post actually said instead of your misleading interpretation:

    When we first looked at this issue, we noted that congressional foes of gun control had made it difficult for the federal government to conduct research on guns. But, as shown by the Washington Post survey of Maryland gun buyers, there is nothing stopping private pollsters from producing a more up-to-date survey.

    In the meantime, we have documented that (a) the survey numbers are about two decades old, so they include purchases that predate any background checks; (b) the survey sample is rather small; and (c) the results are significantly different when adjusted for “purchases” or “sales” — the phrasing used by the president.

    Two months ago, we were willing to cut the White House some slack, given the paucity of recent data. But the president’s failure to acknowledge the significant questions about these old data, or his slippery phrasing, leaves us little choice but to downgrade this claim to Three Pinocchios.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 28, 2013 4:37 AM GMT
    blazerblue saidRIDDLER,
    You endorsed background checks THEN RAN AWAY FROM YOUR OWN WORDS and now you return to this topic. It's hard to take you seriously.


    Welcome to my world.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 28, 2013 4:46 AM GMT
    meninlove said
    blazerblue saidRIDDLER,
    You endorsed background checks THEN RAN AWAY FROM YOUR OWN WORDS and now you return to this topic. It's hard to take you seriously.


    Welcome to my world.


    Heh - why would anyone ever run away from your drivel? Ignore perhaps, but run away? Oh you stupid old man icon_wink.gif

    Obviously you didn't see the end of that conversation between blazerblue and I. icon_rolleyes.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 28, 2013 4:52 AM GMT
    riddler78 said
    meninlove said
    blazerblue saidRIDDLER,
    You endorsed background checks THEN RAN AWAY FROM YOUR OWN WORDS and now you return to this topic. It's hard to take you seriously.


    Welcome to my world.


    Heh - why would anyone ever run away from your drivel? Ignore perhaps, but run away? Oh you stupid old man icon_wink.gif

    Obviously you didn't see the end of that conversation between blazerblue and I. icon_rolleyes.gif


    It's all good , Riddler. You just keep on what you do.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 28, 2013 5:07 AM GMT
    meninlove said
    riddler78 said
    meninlove said
    blazerblue saidRIDDLER,
    You endorsed background checks THEN RAN AWAY FROM YOUR OWN WORDS and now you return to this topic. It's hard to take you seriously.


    Welcome to my world.


    Heh - why would anyone ever run away from your drivel? Ignore perhaps, but run away? Oh you stupid old man icon_wink.gif

    Obviously you didn't see the end of that conversation between blazerblue and I. icon_rolleyes.gif


    It's all good , Riddler. You just keep on what you do.


    Thank you, I think I will - and may you always possess the wit and intellect that is so evident in your postings. icon_wink.gif
  • TroyAthlete

    Posts: 4269

    Apr 28, 2013 5:31 AM GMT
    Incendiary saidI wonder when Obama will get the memo that he is hopelessly out of touch with the majority of Americans...?


    Maybe when they don't re-elect him President of the United States of America less than six months ago. Oh wait. I guess it's nutbag Republican Internet fake-profiled trolls who are out of touch with the majority of Americans: these shit-for-brains couldn't get elected to be the town toilet washer. #skewedpolls4skewedbrains
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 28, 2013 9:10 AM GMT
    TroyAthlete said
    Incendiary saidI wonder when Obama will get the memo that he is hopelessly out of touch with the majority of Americans...?


    Maybe when they don't re-elect him President of the United States of America less than six months ago. Oh wait. I guess it's nutbag Republican Internet fake-profiled trolls who are out of touch with the majority of Americans: these shit-for-brains couldn't get elected to be the town toilet washer. #skewedpolls4skewedbrains


    Exactly. Just look at the handful of conservatives on this site: mostly soulless, witless or uber-dysfunctional (and still hurting after their party's drubbing last November).
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 28, 2013 4:22 PM GMT
    Ex_Mil8 said
    TroyAthlete said
    Incendiary saidI wonder when Obama will get the memo that he is hopelessly out of touch with the majority of Americans...?


    Maybe when they don't re-elect him President of the United States of America less than six months ago. Oh wait. I guess it's nutbag Republican Internet fake-profiled trolls who are out of touch with the majority of Americans: these shit-for-brains couldn't get elected to be the town toilet washer. #skewedpolls4skewedbrains


    Exactly. Just look at the handful of conservatives on this site: mostly soulless, witless or uber-dysfunctional (and still hurting after their party's drubbing last November).


    Heh - says the soulless, witless and uber dysfunctional liberal icon_wink.gif