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: 4486 | Rating: (2.3) | Category: News & Politics | Added by: fancylad
Page: 1 24 Next >   Jump to: Bottom    Last Post
MelCervini
Female, 40-49, Eastern US
 1255 Posts
Thursday, April 18, 2013 8:50:36 AM
what lie did the nra tell??? I can't find it

HumanAction
Male, 18-29, Midwest US
 2353 Posts
Thursday, April 18, 2013 8:47:06 AM
@lauriloo

It was particularly racist when the GOP tried to enact it a month before the 2012 election hoping poor and elderly people wouldn't be able to get an id in time to vote because they know these people tend to vote democratic.

I get this argument; I don't necessarily agree that it was a racist intention, but, the argument is reasonable. That being said, if the legislation was proposed again today, would you consider it racist?

Well, one person's vote won't kill people. That's why.

OK - there are tons of other examples we can use that satisfy your requirement. Alcohol, tobacco, movie tickets all require an ID. Are these laws racist?

CoyoteKing
Male, 18-29, Southern US
 2994 Posts
Thursday, April 18, 2013 8:37:11 AM
@lauriloo: i get the argument for the poor not being able to get IDs and that hurts the Dems and not Reps, but rural and elderly? am I mistaken in thinking that a lot of rural country folk and a lot of elderly are conservative and often vote Rep?

lauriloo
Female, 40-49, Midwest US
 1805 Posts
Thursday, April 18, 2013 8:33:58 AM
"Anyone have a reasonable argument for why Voter ID is racist"

It was particularly racist when the GOP tried to enact it a month before the 2012 election hoping poor and elderly people wouldn't be able to get an id in time to vote because they know these people tend to vote democratic. If the IDs are convenient to get and free or low cost so the poor, rural, elderly (especially in retirement homes) are able to get them, I don't have a problem with voter ID requirements.

vs. requiring gun id? Well, one person's vote won't kill people. That's why.

MeGrendel
Male, 40-49, Southern US
 4652 Posts
Thursday, April 18, 2013 8:26:51 AM
markust123-"Serving your country should not be a career it should be an honor."

Now THAT I can agree with.

markust123
Male, 40-49, Western US
 3784 Posts
Thursday, April 18, 2013 8:18:46 AM
"Markust, you seem to be laboring with the notion that we IAB conservatives actually agree with what most of those imbeciles in DC with an R next to their name are doing."

Now I'm really procrastinating. Same can be said about what most of those imbeciles in DC with an D next to their name are doing. 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.

markust123
Male, 40-49, Western US
 3784 Posts
Thursday, April 18, 2013 8:11:02 AM
"I think the 90% stat is probably accurate in that 90% of Americans want some level of background checks."

Yet many people on here are screaming liar at the president for quoting this number. From everything I have read this was a reasonable bill it's just the stigma from all the other crap made it fail. It will be back and get through. Speaking of reasonable, thanks for the reasonable responses. That is refreshing here on IAB. Now I really have to get started working.

Geogypsy
Male, 18-29, Canada
 2412 Posts
Thursday, April 18, 2013 8:10:25 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.)

HumanAction
Male, 18-29, Midwest US
 2353 Posts
Thursday, April 18, 2013 8:07:35 AM
@MeGrendel

And yet the latter has been declared 'racist' by democrats.

Ha - that is a very good point. Anyone have a reasonable argument for why Voter ID is racist and Gun-Purchase ID is not?

HumanAction
Male, 18-29, Midwest US
 2353 Posts
Thursday, April 18, 2013 8:00:58 AM
@markust

Looking around the net at different polls it looks like 90% isn't that far off - I've found between 86% and 92%.

Thanks for the link - definitely an interesting read.

I think the 90% stat is probably accurate in that 90% of Americans want some level of background checks. The issue I take with it is that it doesn't do much to distinguish the level or type of background check desired. For example, a "Yes" response may be given from a person who simply wants a photo ID to be presented as well as a person who wants all the stops - FBI check, medical record check, full blown registry, etc.

I haven't had a chance to read the actual proposal to see exactly what it says, but I'm interested in knowing the extent of background checks suggested in it.

MeGrendel
Male, 40-49, Southern US
 4652 Posts
Thursday, April 18, 2013 7:59:59 AM
markust123-"Expanding background checks for would-be gun owners is a commonsense proposal much like requiring a photo ID before someone is allowed to vote"

And yet the latter has been declared 'racist' by democrats.

DromEd
Male, 40-49, Eastern US
 1581 Posts
Thursday, April 18, 2013 7:57:03 AM
Markust, you seem to be laboring with the notion that we IAB conservatives actually agree with what most of those imbeciles in DC with an R next to their name are doing.

Squrlz4Sale
Male, 40-49, Eastern US
 6018 Posts
Thursday, April 18, 2013 7:52:42 AM
@CoyoteKing: There are no background checks for the sale of guns at gun shows. The main purpose of the Manchin-Toomey bill was to address that loophole--while at the same time PREVENTING the creation of a federal gun registry.

My original comment stands: The President supported legislation that required background checks for gun purchases. Period.

markust123
Male, 40-49, Western US
 3784 Posts
Thursday, April 18, 2013 7:52:01 AM
"Actually - that begs a question: if 90% of Americans are "for" this law, why would anyone need to vote against it to protect their reelection chances? Food for thought."

Actually the article I linked to goes into why. And this is not some "liberal" like some of the people on here like to scream it is Scott Rasmussen.

papajon0s1
Male, 40-49, Midwest US
 579 Posts
Thursday, April 18, 2013 7:51:19 AM
So, what is BO, Reid, et al, really trying to accomplish here? I wonder if they would vote for legislation that clearly stated it was for the purposes of keeping guns out of the hands of felons and the people who are unstable mentally. Then, made it clear it was not making a national gun registry, not going after trained legal owners, not taking away their rights to handle weaponry in a legal and safe manner. Would the lefties vote for that? Or are they trying to take away guns? "Ooooh!! We're not trying to take anyone's guns away!", they all claim. Well, your actions continue to eat away at constitutional rights, nibble by nibble. That speaks way louder than your words.

Oh, and I also wonder where was Obama's passion and emotion at the Boston Bombing speech? Again, actions speak way louder than words.

markust123
Male, 40-49, Western US
 3784 Posts
Thursday, April 18, 2013 7:47:23 AM
Here's a quote from the article below, "Expanding background checks for would-be gun owners is a commonsense proposal much like requiring a photo ID before someone is allowed to vote. Both have overwhelming support" Scott Rasmussen

markust123
Male, 40-49, Western US
 3784 Posts
Thursday, April 18, 2013 7:45:58 AM
"Actually - that begs a question: if 90% of Americans are "for" this law, why would anyone need to vote against it to protect their reelection chances? Food for thought."

I've got to jump off here but I wanted to throw out something interesting. I found an article by Scott Rasmussen where he mentions the poll that people are quoting the 90% support for more background checks from yet nowhere in this pollster's article does he try to disprove that number. Looking around the net at different polls it looks like 90% isn't that far off - I've found between 86% and 92%.

CoyoteKing
Male, 18-29, Southern US
 2994 Posts
Thursday, April 18, 2013 7:36:48 AM
@Squrlz4Sale: "he supported legislation that required background checks for gun purchases?"

there is already legislation that requires background checks. they are just trying to make it more difficult for people to get guns. be it good or bad, its already there. NO ONE is trying to amend getting rid of the background checks. some think it goes too far, some not far enough. but hold your tongue before you start making claims like that because no one is saying background checks in general are bad.

HumanAction
Male, 18-29, Midwest US
 2353 Posts
Thursday, April 18, 2013 7:26:40 AM
You know one of those 5 votes was Reid's so he could bring the amendment up again.

I do, but 5 sounds so much better than 4. Reid actually voted for it originally but then changed his vote for that exact reason.

My point was if this bill was as horrific as some of the people on here are screaming why would any GOP Senator vote for it?

I need to look into it (who all voted), but, probably the same reason as the Democrats who voted "Nay": reelection. All of the Democrats who voted against represent "conservative leaning" constituencies.

Actually - that begs a question: if 90% of Americans are "for" this law, why would anyone need to vote against it to protect their reelection chances? Food for thought.

Crakrjak wants him impeached over this

Crakrjak always wants Obama impeached - nothing new here

markust123
Male, 40-49, Western US
 3784 Posts
Thursday, April 18, 2013 7:21:34 AM
"What some others on here may forget to tell you is that 5 Democratic Senators voted "Nay". As in, more Democratic Senators voted against the bill than GOP Senators voted for it."

Come on man. You are a smart guy. You know one of those 5 votes was Reid's so he could bring the amendment up again. My point was if this bill was as horrific as some of the people on here are screaming why would any GOP Senator vote for it? Crakrjak wants him impeached over this, yet 4 GOP senators voted for it? There's something seriously wrong with this picture.

HumanAction
Male, 18-29, Midwest US
 2353 Posts
Thursday, April 18, 2013 7:13:52 AM
What none of the nutters on her will tell you is that 4 GOP Senators voted for the bill.

What some others on here may forget to tell you is that 5 Democratic Senators voted "Nay". As in, more Democratic Senators voted against the bill than GOP Senators voted for it.

Additionally, what seems to have also been neglected is the fact that the Senate blocked (52-48) a GOP-sponsored bill that would have: funded school safety programs; enhance prosecution of existing gun laws; and improve mental health records for gun owners.

Evil_Eye
Male, 18-29, Europe
 1451 Posts
Thursday, April 18, 2013 7:01:33 AM
@CrakrJak: I know whatever other right wing people tell you is carved into your heart like the stubborn patriotic republican you are, but when you compare the head of the country to a schizophrenic office worker... anything else said is lost in how bad that statement is.

Like taking a dump on a cake, it no longer matters if the bottom of the cake still tastes fine. The big turd on the top of it has ruined any possible goodness.

Squrlz4Sale
Male, 40-49, Eastern US
 6018 Posts
Thursday, April 18, 2013 6:57:00 AM
Wow. This is a new low on here. Calling for the *impeachment* of a president because he supported legislation that required background checks for gun purchases?

Sometimes when I read through I-A-B political comments, I wind up feeling like I need to take a shower to get the stupid off. This is one of those times.

Honest to God, I think some of you ought to build a compound called "Whacko," stock it full of guns, and set it on fire. Everyone's out to get you, apparently--but you're your own worst enemy.

gymcoach29
Male, 30-39, Western US
 324 Posts
Thursday, April 18, 2013 6:54:02 AM
Markurst, seriously you are such a dumb liberal twit how do you manage to keep breathing?

markust123
Male, 40-49, Western US
 3784 Posts
Thursday, April 18, 2013 6:45:55 AM
"and he wants to talk about lies... 90% of americans can't agree on the color of sh.it much LESS whether or not they want to increase gun registry..."

Now who is lying. This bipartisan compromise included language to bar the creation of such a federal registry.

Page: 1 24 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.