or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Other Discussion › AppleOutsider › PoliticalOutsider › New Tone: Obama Says GOP "Holding Gun to the American People's Head"
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

New Tone: Obama Says GOP "Holding Gun to the American People's Head"

post #1 of 25
Thread Starter 

In his recent press conference, Obama covered topics such as executive orders relating to guns, as well as the coming debt ceiling fight.  At one point, Obama said: 

 

 

 

Quote:
He likened tying the debt limit debate and budget talks to holding "a gun to the head of the American people."

 

What happened to avoiding violent rhetoric?  Funny, neither Obama nor Stenny Hoyer seem to be too concerned about that.   Hoyer recently said that the GOP's actions on the debt ceiling amounted to threatening to shoot your own child

 

 

Quote:
"It's somewhat like taking your child hostage and saying to somebody else, 'I'm going to shoot my child if you don't do what I want done.' You don't want to shoot your child. There's no Republican leader that wants to default on our debt, that I've talked to," Hoyer said at a Capitol Hill press conference.

 

Of course, Pelosi made reference to taking people hostage when discussing the fiscal cliff:  

 

 

Quote:
NANCY PELOSI: The Republicans are saying that rather than passing that, they want to hold it hostage to giving an additional tax cut to people making over $250,000 a year. That’s not negotiating, that’s hostage taking. 

 

So, somehow this is all OK...but Sarah Palin can't use a map with targets on it representing congressional districts they want to focus on?   Obama can talk about holding a gun to people's heads, but the GOP is using "code words" such as "incompetent."    Got it.  

 

President Hypocrite strikes again. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #2 of 25

Don't worry. The NYT will call them out for sure on this "eliminationist rhetoric"

post #3 of 25
We went through this two years ago, and you ignored it then and you'll ignore it now.

On the one hand you have Pelosi and Obama using imagery to imply that holding guns to people's heads and taking hostages are BAD things to do. On the other hand, you had Palin saying putting targets on people is a GOOD thing to do.

Like it or not, that's a huge difference.

Got it? Of course not.
post #4 of 25
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by tonton View Post

We went through this two years ago, and you ignored it then and you'll ignore it now.

On the one hand you have Pelosi and Obama using imagery to imply that holding guns to people's heads and taking hostages are BAD things to do. On the other hand, you had Palin saying putting targets on people is a GOOD thing to do.

Like it or not, that's a huge difference.

Got it? Of course not.

 

You're so full of it, it's laughable.  Sarah Palin used this map:  

 

 

 

This map is clearly talking about targeting Democrats for defeat in ELECTIONS.  It makes no mention of guns, holding guns to their heads, holding them hostage, or anything else.  It simple uses targets to illustrate where they are geographically.   And, in context it's an ad for a Political Action Committee.  Get real.  

 

Now to be honest, I'm fine with someone saying they'd rather see her use something other than sights...maybe color coded dots or squares.  But I'm not fine with people claiming she's using "violent rhetoric," and then turning around and defending the likes of Pelosi and Hoyer, which directly compared  GOP actions to violent acts and threats.   

 

Really tonton, I can't even believe you're trying to defend this.  And now we have the Exploiter-in-Chief releasing the letters of children to support his gun control argument.  He has no shame.  

I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #5 of 25

Except people are dying and will continue to die due to Republican policies that deprive people in need of food, shelter, and/or medical care.

 

“The nitrogen in our DNA, the calcium in our teeth, the iron in our blood, the carbon in our apple pies were made in the interiors of collapsing stars. We are made of starstuff.” 
-Sagan
Reply

 

“The nitrogen in our DNA, the calcium in our teeth, the iron in our blood, the carbon in our apple pies were made in the interiors of collapsing stars. We are made of starstuff.” 
-Sagan
Reply
post #6 of 25
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by BR View Post

Except people are dying and will continue to die due to Republican policies that deprive people in need of food, shelter, and/or medical care.

 

Which Republican polices deprive people of food, shelter and/or medical care?  

I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #7 of 25
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

 

Which Republican polices deprive people of food, shelter and/or medical care?  

 

The ones that don't give them away for "free".

post #8 of 25
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by FloorJack View Post

 

The ones that don't give them away for "free".

 

Oh right...my mistake. Yup..same thing as holding a gun to people's heads.   Got it.  

I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #9 of 25

Oh noes!  The foreign born usurper who needs to be impeached because he's taking away our freedoms with his autocratic, fascist attacks on normal Americans and his implacable hatred of democracy that derives from an unholy mix of Chicago style thuggery and black liberation theology, to the point that THE FUTURE OF THE COUNTRY LITERALLY HANGS IN THE BALANCE AND ALL FREE MEN WOULD BE WELL ADVISED TO STOCK UP ON GUNS, AGAINST THE DAY OF RECKONING is using slightly sharper language to describe a particular congressional Republican stance on a particular issue!  What a maniac!

 

Oh, and it's entirely accurate sharper language- demanding that the Administration enact spending cuts or they'll destroy the American economy can only be termed hostage taking.

 

So, yeah, just terrible.  And yeah, "incompetent" is certainly the very mild term that Republicans have been applying to Obama, so Obama's wildly disproportionate response is indeed horrifying.

 

Have you ever considered that the Republican cause would be better served by calling them out when they do self-defeating, deeply unpopular stuff, instead of finding ever lamer equivalencies to prove that they're not the craziest people in the room?


Edited by signal1 - 1/17/13 at 12:40pm
post #10 of 25
Quote:
Originally Posted by FloorJack View Post

Don't worry. The NYT will call them out for sure on this "eliminationist rhetoric"

 

So you have no idea what "eliminationist rhetoric" means.

 

Again, lame and increasingly desperate equivalencies don't help your cause.  Have you looked at any polls lately?  

post #11 of 25
Quote:
Originally Posted by signal1 View Post

 

So you have no idea what "eliminationist rhetoric" means.

 

Again, lame and increasingly desperate equivalencies don't help your cause.  Have you looked at any polls lately?  

I could go with the Krugman definition but by definition that would be incorrect. Polls? Is there an election near?

post #12 of 25
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by signal1 View Post

Oh noes!  The foreign born usurper who needs to be impeached because he's taking away our freedoms with his autocratic, fascist attacks on normal Americans and his implacable hatred of democracy that derives from an unholy mix of Chicago style thuggery and black liberation theology, to the point that THE FUTURE OF THE COUNTRY LITERALLY HANGS IN THE BALANCE AND ALL FREE MEN WOULD BE WELL ADVISED TO STOCK UP ON GUNS, AGAINST THE DAY OF RECKONING is using slightly sharper language to describe a particular congressional Republican stance on a particular issue!  What a maniac!

 

That's not far off.  Maybe with less screaming, and without the foreign-born part.  

 

 

Quote:
Oh, and it's entirely accurate sharper language- demanding that the Administration enact spending cuts or they'll destroy the American economy can only be termed hostage taking.

 

Thanks for making my point.  IOKIYAD
 
 

 

Quote:
So, yeah, just terrible.  And yeah, "incompetent" is certainly the very mild term that Republicans have been applying to Obama, so Obama's wildly disproportionate response is indeed horrifying.

 

What has he done competently?  Can you name one thing?  

 

 

Quote:
Have you ever considered that the Republican cause would be better served by calling them out when they do self-defeating, deeply unpopular stuff, instead of finding ever lamer equivalencies to prove that they're not the craziest people in the room?

 

Who cares about the "Republican cause?"  I care about the American cause.  

I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #13 of 25

lol.gif

 

So you start a thread claiming outrage at the terrible hyperbole of Democrats and immediately affirm your belief that Obama is a tyrant who is destroying America and seizing all our liberties.  

 

I know, you think it's all objectively true and you think your version of "our country" is the only true faith.  You're wrong.  People like you will die bitter and enraged, as the country slips further and further from your grasp,  and the rest of us will be just fine.

 

Just maybe, if the Republicans could figure out how to stop being such obvious lunatics, they could inflect the progress of that future.  Have something to contribute to fiscal policy, or foreign policy, or social issues.  But it's all "The Heritage Foundation's scheme for free market health care is the end of freedom!"  "Allowing tax rates to revert to where they were during a time of unprecedented prosperity is fascism!  Gun control that Ronald Reagan would have endorsed is tyranny!"

 

Can you not see how alienating this all is?  You can't, I know.  And so the Republican Party becomes increasingly irrelevant, cheered on by people like you.   You are utterly, relentlessly, reactionary, which means you are not in charge.  All you can do is fulminate, wildly and disproportionately, against anything and everything that Obama does.  Doesn't matter how recently you might have endorsed something materially the same, doesn't matter how far out of the mainstream it puts you, doesn't matter how damaging to the country it is, your protestations notwithstanding.  If Obama and the Democrats are for it, your'e against it.  And not just against, but insanely, bug-eyed crazy against it.  The end of all that's good and decent against.  

 

And that's a losing proposition, electorally, philosophically, and morally.  People can actually tell, you know.  People outside of the Fox epistemological closure, I mean.  Coming up with cute ways to claim "they do it to" doesn't help.  Invoking some kind of Red Dawn freedom fighter lunacy doesn't help.  Huddling with the like minded and deciding, yet again, that everyone else is wrong doesn't help.

 

You guys really, really need to come back to reality, if you want to participate.  I mean it.  Obama is, by recent historical standards, a moderate at best.  It's just merely true, as any level-headed comparison of actual policy initiatives will show.  Insisting that he is a dangerous radical makes you look like fools at best.  Get over it. 

post #14 of 25

And the compliant frogs cheer and agree that turning up the temperature another small notch is just fine. We're all comfortable in here. Come on in, the water's fine!

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply
post #15 of 25
Quote:
Originally Posted by MJ1970 View Post

And the compliant frogs cheer and agree that turning up the temperature another small notch is just fine. We're all comfortable in here. Come on in, the water's fine!

 

Excellent.  Continue to explain to the American people that we face existential doom, on account of the socialism or whatever.  Maybe it's time to go all in on the Sandy Hook is a plot to take away our guns "theory."  Make it clear that the electorate are stupid, lazy sheep that are hastening their destruction by failing to, I dunno, eliminate Social Security and slash taxes and suspend most regulations?  

 

It's persuasive.  

post #16 of 25
Quote:
Originally Posted by MJ1970 View Post

 

What's even more persuasive is your incoherent babbling.

 

1rolleyes.gif

 

lol.gif  

 

Well played.  Another top notch rebuttal.  

 

Here, let me make it clearer, since I guess anything more than angry barking noises doesn't register:  On the one hand we've got Republicans that sound like they're speaking in tongues, busily losing the trust of the electorate.  Then we've got libertarians that can't contain their contempt for the American people, and want to preach the fire and brimstone of total collapse.

 

Both of these "ideologies" are marked by their intransigent fundamentalism. And fundamentalism doesn't really want to work with the process, or effect gradual change, or accept compromise, or settle for anything.  It only wants what it wants, or it stamps its foot and wails, or it takes its toys and goes homes, or it bitterly denounces the fools that thwart it and darkly predicts their comeuppance. 

 

And that behavior, the behavior that is becoming so familiar from the right, is going over like a lead balloon.  The American people tend toward pragmatism, so hysterical displays of all sorts are sort of a turn-off.

 

Of course, the fundamentalist response to all this is better to keep the faith than tarnish ones clear vision with this messy idea of compromise.  Which, for a person of my persuasion, is great, because it means a lot of ideological nonsense is voluntarily benching itself.  For you, it means you wait impatiently for terrible things to happen so you can be proven right, about the slack, mindless drones that you're forced to share your steely, squinty eyed world with.

 

Which, you know, and again:  lol.gif

post #17 of 25
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by signal1 View Post

 

lol.gif  

 

Well played.  Another top notch rebuttal.  

 

Here, let me make it clearer, since I guess anything more than angry barking noises doesn't register: 

 

Mocking MJ and insinuating he is stupid simply shows that you really don't read most of what he posts.  

 

 

 

Quote:
On the one hand we've got Republicans that sound like they're speaking in tongues, busily losing the trust of the electorate.

 

I don't know who you mean.  Office holders?  

 

Quote:
Then we've got libertarians that can't contain their contempt for the American people, and want to preach the fire and brimstone of total collapse.

 

What could possibly give you the idea that libertarians have contempt for the American people?  Oh, and newsflash:  If we don't get our house in order, total collapse is exactly what will happen.  

 

 

 

Quote:

Both of these "ideologies" are marked by their intransigent fundamentalism. And fundamentalism doesn't really want to work with the process, or effect gradual change, or accept compromise, or settle for anything.  It only wants what it wants, or it stamps its foot and wails, or it takes its toys and goes homes, or it bitterly denounces the fools that thwart it and darkly predicts their comeuppance. 

 

And that behavior, the behavior that is becoming so familiar from the right, is going over like a lead balloon.  The American people tend toward pragmatism, so hysterical displays of all sorts are sort of a turn-off.

 

Of course, the fundamentalist response to all this is better to keep the faith than tarnish ones clear vision with this messy idea of compromise.  Which, for a person of my persuasion, is great, because it means a lot of ideological nonsense is voluntarily benching itself.  For you, it means you wait impatiently for terrible things to happen so you can be proven right, about the slack, mindless drones that you're forced to share your steely, squinty eyed world with.

 

Which, you know, and again:  lol.gif

 

LOL!  Compromise?  Let me ask you...what has the Left compromised on?  What has Obama compromised on?  The GOP has caved on practically EVERYTHING.  I mean, you must be FKM.  

I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #18 of 25
Are you blind? Let's start with extending the Bush tax cuts, and finally making them permanent. If that's not a compromise, then you're the King of England.
post #19 of 25
Quote:
Originally Posted by tonton View Post

Are you blind? Let's start with extending the Bush tax cuts, and finally making them permanent. If that's not a compromise, then you're the King of England.

 

Yet everyone's taxes went up this year, didn't they?

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

Reply

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

Reply
post #20 of 25
Quote:
Originally Posted by jazzguru View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by tonton View Post

Are you blind? Let's start with extending the Bush tax cuts, and finally making them permanent. If that's not a compromise, then you're the King of England.

Yet everyone's taxes went up this year, didn't they?
No, they didn't. Not everyone. The retired billionaire living off of Capital Gains didn't see a cent of increase. The pan handler without any reported income didn't see a cent of increase. So no, not everyone.

But even if you are just talking about the traditional labor force, you're ignoring the fact that the expiration of the payroll tax exemption was something the Republicans wanted and the Democrats opposed. Again, compromise.

SDW moronically claimed that Obama didn't make a single compromise. I proved him wrong, and you countered by saying the Republicans didn't get every single thing they wanted? I know you have a better understanding of logic than that... so... Why do you lie?
post #21 of 25
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by tonton View Post

Are you blind? Let's start with extending the Bush tax cuts, and finally making them permanent. If that's not a compromise, then you're the King of England.

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by tonton View Post


No, they didn't. Not everyone. The retired billionaire living off of Capital Gains didn't see a cent of increase. The pan handler without any reported income didn't see a cent of increase. So no, not everyone.

But even if you are just talking about the traditional labor force, you're ignoring the fact that the expiration of the payroll tax exemption was something the Republicans wanted and the Democrats opposed. Again, compromise.

SDW moronically claimed that Obama didn't make a single compromise. I proved him wrong, and you countered by saying the Republicans didn't get every single thing they wanted? I know you have a better understanding of logic than that... so... Why do you lie?

 

Obama never opposed extending the Bush cuts for people making less than $250,000 a year.  I've never heard the Democrats make a push for keeping the payroll tax cut.  Did Obama even mention this over the last few months of negotiations?  Really, I can't think of a single thing he compromised on.  Can you name some others?  

I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #22 of 25

Wait... you are so intellectually dishonest it's insane.

 

Your own words... "Obama never opposed extending the Bush cuts for people making less than $250,000 a year."

 

What was the income level that the Bush tax cuts were extended to in 2010, and what was the income level that the Bush tax cuts were made permanent to in 2013?

 

Thanks.

post #23 of 25
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by tonton View Post

Wait... you are so intellectually dishonest it's insane.

 

Your own words... "Obama never opposed extending the Bush cuts for people making less than $250,000 a year."

 

What was the income level that the Bush tax cuts were extended to in 2010, and what was the income level that the Bush tax cuts were made permanent to in 2013?

 

Thanks.

 

So he compromised on the income level....fair enough.  Anything else?  Let me ask...why did he insist on rate increases when the same amount of revenue would have been raised through eliminating loopholes and exemptions?  

I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #24 of 25

There is much speculation about what Obama's initial proposals were.

 

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2013/01/04/fact-check-obama-fiscal-cliff/1809179/

 

"Many politicians do not view [expiration of the payroll tax holiday] as a tax hike, but rather as simply the expiration of a two-year tax cut that was always designed to be temporary. Extending the payroll tax cut was not part of Obama's 2013 budget. But whether it was part of the Obama administration's initial fiscal cliff proposal is a bit fuzzy. As we reported on Dec. 5, the president's opening offer in the fiscal cliff negotiations included $200 billion in new stimulus spending. At that time, Treasury declined to give us a detailed list of proposals for new spending, but it did confirm published reports that some of the elements of the stimulus plan might include an extension of the Social Security payroll tax holiday, as well as infrastructure spending. Those were not part of the law that passed."

 

That looks like a compromise to me.

 

But the fact that the Bush tax cuts were temporarily extended for all incomes for two years... and then for all incomes up to $400k, NOT $250k as Obama pledged... that can under no circumstances be denied as a compromise.

post #25 of 25
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by tonton View Post

Wait... you are so intellectually dishonest it's insane.

 

Your own words... "Obama never opposed extending the Bush cuts for people making less than $250,000 a year."

 

What was the income level that the Bush tax cuts were extended to in 2010, and what was the income level that the Bush tax cuts were made permanent to in 2013?

 

Thanks.

 

So he compromised on the income level....fair enough.  Anything else?  Let me ask...why did he insist on rate increases when the same amount of revenue would have been raised through eliminating loopholes and exemptions?  

As far as I know, he did both.

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: PoliticalOutsider
AppleInsider › Forums › Other Discussion › AppleOutsider › PoliticalOutsider › New Tone: Obama Says GOP "Holding Gun to the American People's Head"