Ugly Hedgehog - Photography Forum
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
General Chit-Chat (non-photography talk)
Another Obama flipflop
Page 1 of 12 next> last>>
Jul 25, 2013 07:43:09   #
nimbushopper Loc: Tampa, FL
 
"Same-sex marriage isn't the only subject on which President Obama's views have evolved. In his remarks last Friday on George Zimmerman's acquittal, the President said it would be wise to 'examine' state and local laws governing the use of firearms in self-defense. He suggested that 'stand your ground' provisions are 'sending a message' that 'someone who is armed potentially has the right to use those firearms even if there's a way for them to exit from a situation.' He asked: 'Is that really going to be contributing to the kind of peace and security and order that we'd like to see?' It turns out that Mr. Obama participated in such an examination almost a decade ago and emerged as a stand-your-ground proponent. Illinois Review, a conservative blog, recently unearthed Illinois Senate records showing that then-state Senator Obama voted for and even co-sponsored a 2004 bill that expanded the protection of the state's 1961 stand-your-ground law to include immunity from civil liability for people who use deadly force to defend themselves or their property. The bill wasn't controversial in the liberal legislature, passing the Senate without dissent and the state House with only two nays before then-Governor Rod Blagojevich, also a Democrat, signed it. ... U.S. Senator Dick Durbin of Illinois, a member of the Judiciary Committee, says he'll hold a subcommittee hearing on the topic this fall. Maybe he should call his former junior colleague as a witness and ask him to explain what message he was seeking to send in 2004." --The Wall Street Journal

Reply
Jul 25, 2013 07:59:03   #
charlie Loc: Minneapolis, Minnesota
 
nimbushopper wrote:
"Same-sex marriage isn't the only subject on which President Obama's views have evolved. In his remarks last Friday on George Zimmerman's acquittal, the President said it would be wise to 'examine' state and local laws governing the use of firearms in self-defense. He suggested that 'stand your ground' provisions are 'sending a message' that 'someone who is armed potentially has the right to use those firearms even if there's a way for them to exit from a situation.' He asked: 'Is that really going to be contributing to the kind of peace and security and order that we'd like to see?' It turns out that Mr. Obama participated in such an examination almost a decade ago and emerged as a stand-your-ground proponent. Illinois Review, a conservative blog, recently unearthed Illinois Senate records showing that then-state Senator Obama voted for and even co-sponsored a 2004 bill that expanded the protection of the state's 1961 stand-your-ground law to include immunity from civil liability for people who use deadly force to defend themselves or their property. The bill wasn't controversial in the liberal legislature, passing the Senate without dissent and the state House with only two nays before then-Governor Rod Blagojevich, also a Democrat, signed it. ... U.S. Senator Dick Durbin of Illinois, a member of the Judiciary Committee, says he'll hold a subcommittee hearing on the topic this fall. Maybe he should call his former junior colleague as a witness and ask him to explain what message he was seeking to send in 2004." --The Wall Street Journal
"Same-sex marriage isn't the only subject on ... (show quote)


A very interesting and informative post. Thanx!

Reply
Jul 25, 2013 08:00:01   #
sueyeisert Loc: New Jersey
 
Do you expect views on topics to stay stagnant for decades. I think not. As you grow as a person and society views change. there are segments of society that want to go back 100 years and keep women barefoot,pregnant and in the kitchen.

Reply
 
 
Jul 25, 2013 08:15:23   #
Gitchigumi Loc: Wake Forest, NC
 
sueyeisert wrote:
Do you expect views on topics to stay stagnant for decades. I think not. As you grow as a person and society views change. there are segments of society that want to go back 100 years and keep women barefoot,pregnant and in the kitchen.

Excellent points... :thumbup:

Reply
Jul 25, 2013 08:19:07   #
Mercer Loc: Houston, TX, USA
 
sueyeisert wrote:
Do you expect views on topics to stay stagnant for decades. I think not. As you grow as a person and society views change. there are segments of society that want to go back 100 years and keep women barefoot,pregnant and in the kitchen.


Step two of liberal argument 101... get the opponent off the topic. Next, we can probably expect an ad-hominem comment, since it it difficult to shout down an opponent in print.

Reply
Jul 25, 2013 08:23:46   #
Curtis_Lowe Loc: Georgia
 
Gitchigumi wrote:
Excellent points... :thumbup:


Self Defense, yeah it is so out of date, RIGHT!

When you try to flee you {particularly if not young and agile} you put yourself in a less defensible posture.

Now you want to tell us we should just let the perpetrator do what they want or take what they want, that will never turn out good.

Reply
Jul 25, 2013 08:28:23   #
Mercer Loc: Houston, TX, USA
 
sueyeisert wrote:
Do you expect views on topics to stay stagnant for decades. I think not. As you grow as a person and society views change. there are segments of society that want to go back 100 years and keep women barefoot,pregnant and in the kitchen.


Step two of liberal argument 101... get the opponent off the topic. Next, we can probably expect a jump directly to step four, going ad-hominem, since step three, shout down the opponent, is not available print.

Reply
 
 
Jul 25, 2013 08:38:19   #
Gitchigumi Loc: Wake Forest, NC
 
Mercer wrote:
Step two of liberal argument 101... get the opponent off the topic. Next, we can probably expect a jump directly to step four, going ad-hominem, since step three, shout down the opponent, is not available print.

I guess critical thinking and logic aren't considered, then.

Reply
Jul 25, 2013 08:50:01   #
Mercer Loc: Houston, TX, USA
 
Gitchigumi wrote:
I guess critical thinking and logic aren't considered, then.


To see this style of argument in process, watch a master; James Carville.

Reply
Jul 25, 2013 09:54:45   #
Raider Fan Loc: Lake County, IL.
 
nimbushopper wrote:
"Same-sex marriage isn't the only subject on which President Obama's views have evolved. In his remarks last Friday on George Zimmerman's acquittal, the President said it would be wise to 'examine' state and local laws governing the use of firearms in self-defense. He suggested that 'stand your ground' provisions are 'sending a message' that 'someone who is armed potentially has the right to use those firearms even if there's a way for them to exit from a situation.' He asked: 'Is that really going to be contributing to the kind of peace and security and order that we'd like to see?' It turns out that Mr. Obama participated in such an examination almost a decade ago and emerged as a stand-your-ground proponent. Illinois Review, a conservative blog, recently unearthed Illinois Senate records showing that then-state Senator Obama voted for and even co-sponsored a 2004 bill that expanded the protection of the state's 1961 stand-your-ground law to include immunity from civil liability for people who use deadly force to defend themselves or their property. The bill wasn't controversial in the liberal legislature, passing the Senate without dissent and the state House with only two nays before then-Governor Rod Blagojevich, also a Democrat, signed it. ... U.S. Senator Dick Durbin of Illinois, a member of the Judiciary Committee, says he'll hold a subcommittee hearing on the topic this fall. Maybe he should call his former junior colleague as a witness and ask him to explain what message he was seeking to send in 2004." --The Wall Street Journal
"Same-sex marriage isn't the only subject on ... (show quote)


I am surprised that Obama even voted, let alone show up for a session of the Illlinois House. His track record in the House was woeful at best. He consistently voted "present" on most legislation on those rare occasions when he was present. He is a disgrace to the office and an embarrassment to me as an American!!

Reply
Jul 25, 2013 10:04:56   #
nimbushopper Loc: Tampa, FL
 
sueyeisert wrote:
Do you expect views on topics to stay stagnant for decades. I think not. As you grow as a person and society views change. there are segments of society that want to go back 100 years and keep women barefoot,pregnant and in the kitchen.


This was less than a decade ago. If I remember correctly, Obama constantly criticized Romney for changing his stance on issues.

Reply
 
 
Jul 25, 2013 10:33:42   #
PinOakEO Loc: NA
 
nimbushopper wrote:
This was less than a decade ago. If I remember correctly, Obama constantly criticized Romney for changing his stance on issues.


That's because Romney never took stance lessons. :shock:

Reply
Jul 25, 2013 10:37:17   #
sueyeisert Loc: New Jersey
 
Romney changed his stance to ingratiate himself with the extreme right wing. The Ma. healthcare program is successful why did he repudiate universal healthcare.
I would like to see the republicans offer us something better. All they are capable of saying is no and lower taxes for the rich and no meaningful increase in minimum wage. 72% of the country can't make ends meet or just barely make ends meet.

Reply
Jul 25, 2013 10:38:25   #
charlie Loc: Minneapolis, Minnesota
 
I have recently changed from a conservative to become a liberal. I feel it will increase my chance to get a free ObamaPhone.
I have some confusion. As a liberal when I change my views on a topic, it is because the topic/concept became stagnant.
I like this.
When I was a conservative and changed my views, I was flip-flopping. (It's convenient being a liberal. It's much more simpler.)

Reply
Jul 25, 2013 10:43:33   #
nimbushopper Loc: Tampa, FL
 
sueyeisert wrote:
Romney changed his stance to ingratiate himself with the extreme right wing. The Ma. healthcare program is successful why did he repudiate universal healthcare.
I would like to see the republicans offer us something better. All they are capable of saying is no and lower taxes for the rich and no meaningful increase in minimum wage. 72% of the country can't make ends meet or just barely make ends meet.


Define rich!

Reply
Page 1 of 12 next> last>>
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
General Chit-Chat (non-photography talk)
UglyHedgehog.com - Forum
Copyright 2011-2024 Ugly Hedgehog, Inc.