I Am Bored

Loads of viral videos, games, memes, lists and social networking for when you're bored. Updated every day, so visit often.
LatestPopularMost BookmarkedMost EmailedTop RatedMy FavoritesRandomChat
AllGamesFunnyEntertainmentQuizzesWeirdTechLifestyle, Arts & Lit.News & PoliticsScienceSportsMisc
Submit Content  





rss

friendsmore friends | add your site
Asylum

Holy Taco

Funny Videos

BuzzFeed

NothingToxic

Oddee

Mousebreaker

Online Games

Eat Liver

Online Games

Gorilla Mask

Full Downloads

Norway Games

Damn Cool Pics

Kontraband

Extreme Humor

X Hollywood

I Dont Like You

123 Games

Hollywoodtuna

Funny Games

Cool Stuff

Viva La Games

X - Vids

Smit Happens

Funny Videos

Funny Stuff

ebaumsworld



Back to Listing

Obama Says Gun Lobby Willfully Lied After Senate

Hits: 4476 | Rating: (2.3) | Category: News & Politics | Added by: fancylad
Page: 13 4 Next >   Jump to: Bottom    Last Post
CoyoteKing
Male, 18-29, Southern US
 2994 Posts
Thursday, April 18, 2013 12:58:28 PM
~shakes paw~

Squrlz4Sale
Male, 40-49, Eastern US
 5976 Posts
Thursday, April 18, 2013 12:52:55 PM
@CoyoteKing: We're cool. I appreciate the civil response. =^.^= ~shakes paw~

CoyoteKing
Male, 18-29, Southern US
 2994 Posts
Thursday, April 18, 2013 12:48:13 PM
fair enough. no hard feelings. it just appeared you jumped the gun (no pun intended) in your assumption. and sorry for the uncalled for remark.

when i read CJ's call for impeachment i believed it not to be about having background checks at gun shows but rather because the pres "wants to take your guns if you happen to take anxiety meds or ever been diagnosed with depression" which is "an attempt at gun grabbing and usurping our rights, while parading victims around for emotional effect"

his words, not mine. but we interpreted them differently.

Squrlz4Sale
Male, 40-49, Eastern US
 5976 Posts
Thursday, April 18, 2013 12:39:07 PM
@CoyoteKing: We're going to have to agree to disagree here.

My original statement was that someone on here was "calling for the *impeachment* of a president because he supported legislation that required background checks for gun purchases." That's a true statement that I stand by. You responded that I should "hold [my] tongue" because (as best as I can understand you) the issue wasn't background checks.

No ill will towards you, friend. But my position is that I made a valid statement and your response that I should "hold [my] tongue" was uncalled for.

CoyoteKing
Male, 18-29, Southern US
 2994 Posts
Thursday, April 18, 2013 12:30:03 PM
@Squrlz4Sale because you started making unfounded claims of what CJ had written because I assume you missread or didnt read all of what he had said.

CoyoteKing
Male, 18-29, Southern US
 2994 Posts
Thursday, April 18, 2013 12:28:14 PM
see his claim was not impeachment because of background checks but rather what CJ sees as an attack on the Constitution which he took an oath to uphold. and using victims to push his point in stricter laws that wouldnt have prevented the tragedies of said victims.

MeGrendel
Male, 40-49, Southern US
 3642 Posts
Thursday, April 18, 2013 12:24:00 PM
chalket-"Great argument, MeGrendel."

So you get upset that a guy you called 'idiotic' responds with 'idiot'?

chalket-"Sorry you're so butt-hurt"

Why would I be butt-hurt when Obama gets pissy because he didn't get his new toy? (Any time Obama fails to forward his agend of course lifts my spirits.)

Squrlz4Sale
Male, 40-49, Eastern US
 5976 Posts
Thursday, April 18, 2013 12:23:16 PM
@CoyoteKing: My apologies if I misunderstood you.

For clarity's sake, why were you telling me to "hold my tongue"?

CoyoteKing
Male, 18-29, Southern US
 2994 Posts
Thursday, April 18, 2013 12:20:02 PM
@Squrlz4Sale: "So far today, I've been told:

(1) that I should "hold my tongue" because the defeated bill had nothing to do with background checks."

Read again what I said and try not to be so forgetful: "hold your tongue before you start making claims like that because no one is saying background checks in general are bad."

said claim you made was: "(People are) Calling for the *impeachment* of a president because he supported legislation that required background checks for gun purchases?"

You seem to be quite forgetful. I'll forgive it.

And the "call for impeachment" was via CrakrJak: "an attempt at gun grabbing and usurping our rights, while parading victims around for emotional effect is outrageous.

His oath says, "..preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States." He's failed that oath and failed us all. He should be impeached."

Squrlz4Sale
Male, 40-49, Eastern US
 5976 Posts
Thursday, April 18, 2013 12:13:56 PM
It's amusing to be given stern lectures by the clueless.

So far today, I've been told:

(1) that I should "hold my tongue" because the defeated bill had nothing to do with background checks.
REALITY: S.649's main focus was to close the loophole allowing for private sales of firearms at gun shows to occur without background checks.

(2) that the bill states that it "will be referred to as the 'Assault Weapons ban of 2013.'"
REALITY: The short title of the bill is the "Safe Communities, Safe Schools Act of 2013." Nowhere in the bill do the phrases "assault weapon" or "assault weapons" appear. The person providing the misinformation helpfully points out "it is on the Library of Congress, you and everyone else can read it"--when, clearly, he himself hasn't even looked at S.649's text, much less read it.

Any other low-information voters out there want to play?

DromEd
Male, 40-49, Eastern US
 1394 Posts
Thursday, April 18, 2013 12:06:28 PM
Don't know why PBO's so mad. He knew damn well this wasn't getting past the House anyway.


CoyoteKing
Male, 18-29, Southern US
 2994 Posts
Thursday, April 18, 2013 12:05:21 PM
@chalket: at the time i was not talking about gun shows but buying a gun in general. so yes, with this supposed gun show loophole that in some states allows people to possibly be able to get a gun without a background check, then yes I can see 90% in favor. the president did not address it in that manner but rather that 90% were in favor of the whole bill. at least thats what it sounded like when i heard him talk, he may have meant different

chalket
Male, 50-59, Southern US
 2391 Posts
Thursday, April 18, 2013 11:53:23 AM
Great argument, MeGrendel. lol!
Sorry you're so butt-hurt, you poor thing, but I guess it's to be expected when you overwork that tiny little brain so much. Take a break, go play with your Hot Wheels and you'll feel better.

Squrlz4Sale
Male, 40-49, Eastern US
 5976 Posts
Thursday, April 18, 2013 11:34:18 AM
@Lovinitmtboy: "It states in the text that it will be referred to as 'Assault Weapons ban of 2013' and is many pages long covering many things."

HERE is the exact text of the S.649, the defeated bill.

On PAGE 1, for crying out loud, it states that it will be referred to as the "Safe Communities, Safe Schools Act of 2013."

NOT ONCE in the entire text of the bill do the phrases "assault weapon" or "assault weapons" appear.

whodat6484
Male, 30-39, Eastern US
 3344 Posts
Thursday, April 18, 2013 11:19:55 AM
@lovinitmtboy - Thank you for the making the point I was about to make, I'm surprised no one brought that up yet. When I heard him and everyone else last night I couldn't help but notice the ONLY thing they talked about was the expanded background checks part of the legislation. They failed to mention that there's more to it.

Take this article titled "Senate Rejects Explanded Gun Background Checks" for example. The HEADLINE only mentions background checks to get your attention but in the first paragraph it says a "proposal to ban some semi-automatic weapons modeled after military assault weapons" was included in the vote.

That's why you should always read the fine print.

MeGrendel
Male, 40-49, Southern US
 3642 Posts
Thursday, April 18, 2013 10:29:43 AM
chalket-"How about you try addressing reality for a change"

In reality, you're an idiot.

Everyone is sure about that.

chalket
Male, 50-59, Southern US
 2391 Posts
Thursday, April 18, 2013 10:05:39 AM
"I'm sure he did throw a tantrum in private"

The things you are so sure of, that are actually true, might just fill a thimble. How about you try addressing reality for a change, and not just baseless conjecture that you are so sure of? Just because that's how YOU'D react doesn't mean sane people would.

MeGrendel
Male, 40-49, Southern US
 3642 Posts
Thursday, April 18, 2013 10:00:18 AM
lauriloo-"It was particularly racist when the GOP tried to enact it a month before the 2012 election hoping poor and elderly people "

Actually, different states have been trying for years, so it was not 'a month before the election'.

And how does 'poor and elderly' equate to 'racist'?

chalket-"You call that a tantrum?"

I'm sure he did throw a tantrum in private, complaining about the meanies that wont do what he wants.


McGovern1981
Male, 30-39, Eastern US
 12719 Posts
Thursday, April 18, 2013 9:58:42 AM
@McGovern1981
The truth? I seriously doubt even one tiny shred of truth can get through that sealed-off concrete bunker y



I think the bunker cut this text off early.

lovinitmtboy
Male, 18-29, Western US
 16 Posts
Thursday, April 18, 2013 9:50:42 AM
I must address this. The bill was not "an increase on background checks." To claim it boils down to a one liner is condescending, lieing and manipulative. Squrlz4sale, it is on the library of congress, you and everyone else can read it, It states in the text that it will be reffered to as "Assault Weapons ban of 2013" and is many pages long covering many things. He lied to the public by saying "the only thing this bill was about is background checks." Because the majority does not read. I no longer trust or respect our commander in chief in any capacity.

gymcoach29
Male, 30-39, Western US
 234 Posts
Thursday, April 18, 2013 9:45:11 AM
To all you LIberals, please remove your head from Obama's crotch for a few minutes and listen. The man lies about everything to promote his own agenda. This agenda may appear to appeal to you, but in the end it will be the destruction of America as we know it.

richanddead
Male, 18-29, Eastern US
 1551 Posts
Thursday, April 18, 2013 9:34:35 AM
This legislation had many flaws in it, one I know was that if in a disaster situation like Katrina where people were told to evacuate, if they brought their guns along with them, they would legally become arms traffickers and could become felons and fugitives. Another flaw was that it had no stipulations with regards to mental illness. If the bill had been perfected more it very well might have got the extra votes.

DromEd
Male, 40-49, Eastern US
 1394 Posts
Thursday, April 18, 2013 9:33:47 AM
Markust...I doubt anyone would be apposed to getting rid of the whole lot and starting over with term limits for all and the removal of benefits. Serving your country should not be a career it should be an honor.


I was actually going to tack the exact thought onto my previous post. I knew we could agree on something! :)


chalket
Male, 50-59, Southern US
 2391 Posts
Thursday, April 18, 2013 9:24:08 AM
@spanz
Yeah, we all know the Prez can just "twist the words" of a bill passed by Congress. Do you even read what you write? Sheesh, go back to school, will ya?

@MeGrendel
You call that a tantrum? You reaffirm your idiocy on a daily basis, at least you're consistent.

@gymcoach29
Might be taking lessons from Boehner and Cantor? But the real secret to it is... he wasn't lying!

@DromEd
Gallop Poll, Dec 19-22, 2012 Near the middle: Do you favor or oppose "A law which would require background checks before people - including gun dealers - could buy guns at gun shows" 92% IN FAVOR, 7% OPPOSED. So YOU'RE the liar.

@CoyoteKing
See above, and admit that you're wrong.

@McGovern1981
The truth? I seriously doubt even one tiny shred of truth can get through that sealed-off concrete bunker y

Link_Hiei
Male, 18-29, Eastern US
 5188 Posts
Thursday, April 18, 2013 8:51:40 AM
"I LOVE you passionate zealots...you really, really, intrigue me. I wish that I could be so viscerally inflamed about my opinions. It's not as if I'm apathetic, I just never seem to manage to accumulate enough resolve to be persuaded from my neutral stances. I swear, it's not cowardice, 'cause I'm certainly not afraid to take on an unpopular perception...but you guys, your identities are so well formed, it's incredible. (No sarcasm here, I'm being genuine.)"

Geogypsy, well said. It is sad how they all fit so easily into a mold. Nothing spills. So...predictable they are. It's sad really. I bet if they were all the same grey blobs they'd argue who was more grey.

Take notes IAB

Page: 13 4 Next > 

You Must be Signed in to Add a Comment

If you've already got an I-Am-Bored.com account,
click here to sign in.

If you don't have an account yet,
Click Here to Create a Free Account
 

Back to Listing ^top


Bored | Suggest a Link | Advertise | Contact I Am Bored | About I Am Bored | Link to I Am Bored | Live Submission | Privacy | TOS | Ad Choices | Copyright Policy |
© 2014 Demand Media, Inc. All rights reserved.