RSSBiden Tells Obama, Hands Off His Guns … Biden Clinging to his Guns but not During the Primaries
Suddenly Joe Biden is a defender of the Second Amendment? The drag of the VP 
Democratic ticket is telling Obama what to do and hands off his guns. Joe Biden being a proponent of the Second Amendment is almost laughable or as Red State comments, “Joe Biden’s risible claims to be a defender of the Second Amendment.” So Biden is sent to the Virginia coal mine country, the people who cling to their guns and bibles, to tell them that Obama is not the gun owners worst enemy … HAHAHA!!! Biden states, “if he tries to fool with my Beretta …”, what does Biden know about Obama’s gun control that Obama is not telling us?
I guarantee you, Barack Obama ain’t taking my shotguns. So don’t buy that malarkey,” Mr. Biden said. “They’re going to start peddling that to you.”
Mr. Biden told the crowd, referring to his arms and then to Mr. Obama. “If he tries to fool with my Beretta, he’s got a problem. I like that little over and under, you know? I’m not bad with it.”
And then on to one of his standard lines: “So give me a break. Give me a break.”
Even the Political Machine at AOL notices the words “ain’t” and “malarkey” as Democratic code words to talk to the peasants and little people. Why is the Democrat Second Amendment, NRA crowd important … maybe because Republican VP pick Sarah Palin is a pistol packing, Moose hunting, lifetime member of the NRA. The gun issue may become a very important swing topic and decide the outcome in states like Ohio, Michigan, Pennsylvania and Virginia.
Joe Biden has received an “F” with the NRA and it would seem that Joe Biden is out of touch as Obama claims about Biden when it comes to the internet and the comprehension of internet search engines or You Tube. How soon Biden has forgot his recent comments when he was running for the Democratic nomination.
However, during the Democratic Primary Debates Joe Biden’s answer was quite different when it came to the Second Amendment and a right to bear arms. Watch Biden’s response to a gun owner during the debates.
Michelle Malkin reminds us of another Democrat that tried to falsely be pro-gun and failed miserably at it. The pictures of John Kerry with a gun are comical.
Posted September 21, 2008 by Scared Monkeys Barack Obama, Gaffe, Government, John McCain, Joseph Biden, Politics, Presidential Election 2008, Sarah Palin, You Tube - VIDEO | 17 comments |
If you liked this post, you may also like these:
Comments
17 Responses to “Biden Tells Obama, Hands Off His Guns … Biden Clinging to his Guns but not During the Primaries”
Leave a Reply
It’s called whoring for votes. Plain and simple. And this is the example of personal integrity that we would expect (well, maybe in days gone by…)?
Do anything, say anything … just get elected.
This opinion piece, in The Washington Post today, is pretty good, I think. I read a comment this weekend that one senator, called in by the White House, was told that our economic system was within days of self-imploding … that, yes, we are facing a national and international crisis.
So, let’s everyone take a deep breath … and ask our politicians to work together. And to be HONEST with us, the American people, whom they are SUPPOSED to be serving. (I know, the very notion makes me laugh too.)
Here’s what it says to me:
Let’s start by agreeing that we can’t propose new spending programs, new tax cuts, etc. We have to deal with the situation that we are in.
How to do it? Let’s set a goal, a program, and then have all candidates propose how to reach it.
No pie-in-the-sky promises. Should we cut the national debt by $1 trillion within ten years, for example? If so, how? Get specifics.
Cut out the BS … and let’s work together.
Back to Square One
By Bruce Bartlett
Sunday, September 21, 2008; Page B07
If the events of recent days prove anything, it is that we cannot believe a word that John McCain or Barack Obama has said about what he will do as president. It’s not that they have lied. Simply put, the underlying premise of everything the candidates have proposed — that the economy is fundamentally sound — is no longer operational.
The candidates know that the economy needs help. Obama in particular has made clear that he believes that average people are hurting and need additional government assistance. McCain has been less willing to say so lest it reflect badly on the policies of George W. Bush, whose party he represents.
Nevertheless, it is extremely unlikely that either man envisioned the magnitude of the economic problems that are becoming more obvious by the hour.
Now, federal officials are crafting an entity akin to the Resolution Trust Corporation to buy up bad debts and get them off bank balance sheets. That’s how the RTC cleaned up the savings and loan mess in the early 1990s — to the tune of about $125 billion. Today’s problems will cost a lot more.
What this means is that WE CANNOT AFFORD EITHER CANDIDATE’S TAX AND SPENDING PLANS. (Emphasis supplied by Richard) The money that Obama would like to spend on the poor will have to be used to clean up the financial mess. Similarly, the tax cuts that McCain would like to hand out are off the table.
The federal government is going to need new revenue and fast. We cannot continue to cut taxes as if the budget deficit doesn’t matter. The fundamental problem of the U.S. economy is too much debt. FIXING THAT WILL REQUIRE BELT-TIGHTENING FROM EVERYONE, INCLUDING THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT — which must get its fiscal house in order to help the financial sector heal.
Voters should insist that McCain and Obama throw out their tax and spending plans and offer something that reflects current economic realities. THESE NEW PLANS SHOULD BE MORE THAN VAGUE GENERALITIES and should commit the next president to a course of action that involves real spending cuts and real tax increases.
Of course, the idea of a candidate telling voters that they will suffer if he is elected runs counter to every political instinct. But it is not necessarily politically fatal. In 1992, Bill Clinton put forward a fairly detailed list of spending cuts and tax increases and was, nevertheless, elected.
The trick will be getting both Obama and McCain to put forward budget restructuring packages so one isn’t unfairly penalized for his honesty. People deserve to know whether the next president thinks we only need to raise taxes on the rich or only need to eliminate earmarks in the budget to solve our fiscal problems. This will tell them whether the next president is a serious person or intellectually dishonest about the nature of the nation’s fiscal problem.
It would be useful for both candidates to work from the same benchmark, such as reducing the projected deficit by $1 trillion over 10 years. That would pretty much eliminate the use of “smoke and mirrors” and unserious proposals.
If one candidate wants to raise taxes by, say, $1 trillion, then he should say so and spell out how. If he thinks we can get $1 trillion out of the income tax without burdening middle- and lower-income workers, let’s hear how. If he thinks we can cut spending by that much, he should explain how. If he thinks it can be done without significantly cutting popular programs such as Medicare, I for one would like to know how. Perhaps a consortium of think tanks would agree to jointly score the plans for honesty and accuracy.
Realistically, a deficit reduction package of the magnitude that I suggest would require a variety of tax increases and spending cuts, including cuts in entitlements and appropriated funds. It’s probably realistic to assume that the balance would be roughly 50-50 between taxes and spending, though each candidate could offer a different balance. But if the proposed package is so one-sided as to make enactment by Congress impossible, this is also useful information for voters.
The time for free lunches is past. We must get McCain and Obama to put forward new economic plans. THE PEOPLE DESERVE TO KNOW WHAT IS REALLY GOING TO HAPPEN IN JANUARY, and our next president should know whether voters support his vision. With an electoral mandate, quick action in Congress may be possible. And right now we need quick and decisive action if we are to right the economy.
(The writer was deputy assistant Treasury secretary for economic policy from 1988 to 1993. Before that, he was a senior policy analyst in the White House Office of Policy Development and worked as an economist on Capitol Hill.)
nice try, but this angle isn’t going to work either.
it’s the economy stupid.
I give both OSAMA Barack SADDAM HUSSEIN Obama and Joe Biden a “F” for their failed attempt to try to look like presidential/vice presidential nominees of a major political party in the United States of America. Jimmy Carter, among others, also come to mind! John Kerry has taught them both well, how to flip flop like a fish out of water
I dare anyone try to take away my “second amendment” rights to bear arms…
Off topic, but for anyone who missed the A&E special on Natalee Holloway, below is the link to watch the commercial free segments.
My blood still boils when I’m reminded of or think about the intentional cover up by the incompetent “Key Stone Koppers”. No one could ever convince me in a million years that the evidence isn’t out there somewhere and/or the case can not be solved, no matter how much time has gone by. I still can’t believe Hans Mos discredited the new witness who recently came forward with new information. May Aruban tourism die an agonizing death, never to recover!!
http://www.blogsfornatalee.com/
BOYCOTT ARUBA AND THE NETHERLANDS TIL HELL FREEZES OVER!!
JUSTICE FOR NATALEE
Still not one single story about the economy yet.
Scared shitless obviously.
McCain looked like a complete idiot this week…and just got his ass handed too him on the Sunday morning shows by everyone.
Said this morning: “A bag of Fruit loops has more information on it than Senator McCain’s Economic Plan”.
This last week shows what a great ticket the Republicans have put forth:
One who panders and flounders around changing positions daily and the other who isn’t even allowed to speak to the press for fear of her being unable to answer a simple question.
But, as we all know, if there’s an “(R)” behind the name it’s an automatic vote.
Here’s you a story about the economy YOYO
Many blame the Greenspan Fed for this mess. They are right, but not for the reason often cited. It is unfair to say low interest rates are to blame. In the past decade, there is no evidence the US suffered from excessive growth leading to inflation. The economy needed low interest rates and a fiscal stimulus to avoid a severe recession. The Fed was right to do its bit.
Where Mr Greenspan bears responsibility is his role in ensuring that the era of cheap interest rates created a speculative bubble. He cannot claim he was not warned of the risks. Take two incidents from the 1990s. The first came before he made his 1996 speech referring to “irrational exuberance”. In a Federal Open Market Committee meeting, he conceded there was an equity bubble but declined to do anything about it. He admitted that proposals for tightening the margin requirement, which people need to hold against equity positions, would be effective: “I guarantee that if you want to get rid of the bubble, whatever it is, that will do it.” It seems odd that since then, in defending the Fed’s inaction, he has claimed in three speeches that tightening margins would not have worked.
The second incident stems from spring 1998 when the head of the Commodity Futures Trading Commission expressed concern about the massive increase in over-the-counter derivatives. These have been at the heart of the counter-party risk in the crisis. Mr Greenspan suggested new regulation risked disrupting the capital markets.
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/32b85c72-859b-11dd-a1ac-0000779fd18c.html
“Greenspan was considered a master,” Tremonti declared. “Now we must ask ourselves whether he is not, after [Osama] bin Laden, the man who hurt America the most. . . . It is clear that what is happening is a disease. It is not the failure of a bank, but the failure of a system. Until a few days ago, very few were willing to realize the intensity and the dramatic nature of the crisis.”
In an interview Thursday in the Italian newspaper Corriere della Sera, Tremonti drew a comparison to corruption-ridden Albania in 1997, when a nationwide pyramid scheme cost hundreds of thousands of people their savings and ignited anarchic civil conflict.
“The system is collapsing, exactly like the Albanian pyramids collapsed,” Tremonti said. “The idea is gaining ground that the way out of the crisis is mainly with large public investments. . . . The return of rules is accompanied by a return of the public sector.”
http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-euromood20-2008sep20,0,7535469.story
This is the people to get us out of this? They sound more like part of the problem
Obama’s 3 economic advisors..per Wikipedia
Robert Rubin…. one of Obama’s advisors.. part of the mortgage mess..
In 1999, affirming his career-long interest in markets, Mr. Rubin joined Citigroup. Of note, the supermerger between Travelers Group and Citicorp was facilitated by the repeal of the Glass Steagall Act (Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act). This legislation was passed under the Clinton administration, days before Rubin’s resignation. Consolidation of investment, commercial banking, and insurance services as practiced by Citigroup under the direction of Rubin, has been implicated in the subprime mortage crisis. Despite criticism for his role in this debacle, Rubin serves as a Director and Chairman of the Executive Committee, and remains there to this day.[
He sparked controversy in 2001 when he contacted an acquaintance at the Treasury Department and asked if the department could convince bond-rating agencies not to downgrade the corporate debt of Enron, a debtor of Citigroup. Rubin wanted Enron creditors to lend money to the troubled company for a restructuring of its debt; a collapse of the energy giant might have serious consequences for financial markets and energy distribution. The Treasury official refused.
Rubin has been touted as a potential vice presidential running mate or possible appointee to a cabinet post for Senator Obama. Rubin, alongside Lawrence Summers and Paul Volcker, is one of Obama's economic advisers.
Paul Volcker... worst unemployment since the depression
Volcker's Fed is widely credited with ending the United States' stagflation crisis of the 1970s by limiting the growth of the money supply, abandoning the previous policy of targeting interest rates. Inflation, which peaked at 13.5% in 1981, was successfully lowered to 3.2% by 1983. [1]
However, the change in policy contributed to the significant recession the U.S. economy experienced in the early 1980s, which included the highest unemployment levels since the Great Depression, and Volcker’s Fed also elicited the strongest political attacks and most wide-spread protests in the history of the Federal Reserve (unlike any protests experienced since 1922), due to the effects of the high interest rates on the construction and farming sectors, culminating in indebted farmers driving their tractors onto C Street NW and blockading the Eccles Building.[5]
Lawrence Summers..
In three instances during his time as Harvard president, Summers made remarks that touched on political “hot-button” controversies. Environmentalists, affirmative action advocates, and many women and those concerned with women’s issues took offense and brought increasing pressure on Harvard, contributing to his resignation.
Besides the aforementioned controversies, which undoubtedly provided the proximate cause for Summers’ resignation, other factors have been proposed as contributing to his critical loss of support among the majority of faculty members. The first is Summers’ reputed leadership style, described by many as arrogant, blunt, and intolerant of dissenting opinions. Many faculty members claimed they felt intimidated into remaining silent when they disagreed with Summers. The Aids Drugs Scandal..
Richard,
Obama was making comments about McCain saying the economy is fundamentally sound.. Know who said that after the stock market crashed years ago.. Obama’s advisor.. Robert Rubins.. I watched a guy on PBS last night.. He said Obama has no plan at all that he has seen.. and is tied by money to some of these people.. He said two worked for him, one picking his VP.. He didn’t think much of Rubinomics.. He said the biggest recipients of the money is Democrats.. (John McCain took much less and took no pork barrel spending.. He even had a bill trying to reform Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae… in 2005, but Dems turned it down and what he said would happen has.). He didn’t see anything yet that would show they(either) could fix it. He also said Democratic Labor Unions are very nervous about Obama.. John McCain he said , had Phil Gramm on a project.. Gramm was mixed up Enron..
Basically they were all in the pockets of these big companies and lobbyists galore.. and no regulations, might lose their big bucks,, so we are the one’s who get screwed.. I heard John Kerry whining..about losing money.. (PUKE) He is in the top 4 of getting money.. I don’t think he will be without a home tonight like some.
Greed is what caused it.. plain and simple and noone watching while, leaving the middle class to pay for it all. Democrats had Congress for years now and have done nothing except behave like 2 year olds.. Leaving the majority of these people in charge of taxpayers money, was like leaving the wolves to guard the henhouse.
Check out the last name FULD.. in 5 years from one of these failing companies as CEO, he made $354 that is million..dollars.. another one in 5 months made 15 million..guy from Bears Sterns made 60 million..and the list goes on..
As we can see they weren’t doing the people’s business..they were doing backdoor business and lining their pockets..
Well, what I liked about that article that I posted was the premise that we just have to act as though what has happened so far in this election is irrelevant.
If we do face a crisis … and it seems that we do … what is the single most important goal to work for?
Can we agree on that?
And then, if we can, each candidate should show how he would reach it were he elected.
Where can we cut spending? Where can we raise taxes? What do we have to do, and how can we work together to get it done?
Reminds me of a story from my high school Latin class … the Romans had no navy. They decided they needed one. So they built one.
Can we eschew partisanship? Can we even agree on what must be done? I just read a story that the Democrats are demanding that the package include more money for those threatened with foreclosure and for the poor … where does it stop?
Meanwhile, I read one article by someone saying that the most urgent thing to do is to repeal the Basel II capital rules. Well, okay ….
as usual, obama’s advertising/public relations firms, namely abc, cbs, nbc, msnbc, and most of the liberal newspapers, have made the repubs responsible for this and named obama the only way out of this financial fiasco. not a one of them have mentioned the fact that obama and the chairman of the ways and means committee are the largest recipients of money from the firms involved here. with the exception of fox news, not one of the supposedly news organizations has mentioned that mccain warned several years ago that regulations were outdated and needed revision and that the congress of the united states, which supposedly had oversight duties for the firms, has been controlled by the democrats for the last 2 years.
dennisintn
Caesu and YoYo must be to two dumbest people God ever let breath and you both are relentless in letting us all know that fact with all the stupid crap you both both post.
Just go away…you two are as stupid as Obama who is not in touch with the rest of America.
Richard , I agree .. no time for division.. This has made me so angry.. Still they aren’t doing the people’s business..just more bs.. If they were, they would be working together to HELP the USA ..not more bs for themselves.. guess that is why I am so frustrated watching them..
Saw this..looks like another one left Obama..
As Barack Obama and John McCain battle for the Hispanic vote, a leading Latino backer of Hillary Clinton is crossing party lines to support the Republican presidential nominee.
In an interview Thursday, Miguel D. Lausell, a Puerto Rican businessman and longtime Democratic activist and fund-raiser, came out for Sen. McCain. While he said he doesn’t agree with all the policy positions of the Republican candidate and his running mate, Sarah Palin, Mr. Lausell added: “I find McCain to be a sound person and a man with a track record. I know where he is coming from.” Mr. Lausell had been a major backer of Bill Clinton and served as a senior political adviser to Sen. Clinton’s unsuccessful bid this year for the Democratic presidential nomination.
Mr. Lausell said he feels Sen. Obama “doesn’t really regard the Hispanic community as important.” Sen. Clinton won a large majority of the Hispanic vote in most primaries, and Latino voters are an important bloc in swing states such as Florida, Nevada and New Mexico. Most polls show Sen. Obama leads Sen. McCain among Latinos.
Mr. Lausell said that as a “lifelong Democrat,” this is the first time he has supported a Republican presidential candidate. A Harvard Law School graduate, Mr. Lausell’s business career has included a stint as chief executive of the Puerto Rico Telephone Co. and chairman of PonceBank, a large Puerto Rican financial institution. Mr. Lausell once had a position with the Democratic National Committee and served on a national finance board for Al Gore’s unsuccessful 2000 presidential run. In 2004, he helped start a nonprofit aimed at boosting Latino turnout for Democrats.
Sen. Clinton, for her part, has firmly come out for Sen. Obama and asked her supporters to do the same. While many of her biggest backers have gotten on the Obama bandwagon, numerous others have held back and some have been looking to support Sen. Obama’s general-election opponent. Earlier this week, another prominent Clinton supporter, Lynn Forester de Rothschild, declared for the Republican nominee. Other former Clinton backers may be declaring for Sen. McCain in the days ahead, according to someone familiar with the situation.
Public-opinion polls in recent weeks also show that a potentially significant minority of Clinton voters from the primaries still haven’t decided whether to vote for Sen. Obama. If the Democratic nominee loses a large number of Clinton voters, it could prove crucial in a close presidential race.
A spokesman for Sen. Obama declined to comment on the move of some Clinton backers to the McCain camp. In recent weeks, the Obama campaign has touted the endorsements of current and former Republican officeholders, including Rep. Wayne Gilchrest of Maryland, former Iowa Rep. Jim Leach and former Rhode Island Sen. Lincoln Chafee.
Mr. Lausell cited several objections he has with Sen. Obama. “The U.S. is in a very difficult situation these days and I don’t want someone without experience at the helm,” he said. Mr. Lausell said he likes Delaware Sen. Joe Biden, but felt that if Sen. Obama was going to reach inside of Washington for a vice presidential running mate, he should have chosen Sen. Clinton, “who received 18 million votes” during the presidential primaries.
Write to John R. Emshwiller at john.emshwiller@wsj.com
hands off my guns too barry !
By the way … are we all aware that the U.S. is borrowing $2 billion a day from overseas?
So what happens if our foreign cash flow folds?
Don’t ask me ….
By the way, today (Monday) oil took the biggest one-day price jump EVER since electronic trading began.
What do you think that says about what is going to happen to our inflation rate?
And if the dollar plunges in value … when do the Japanese, Chinese, etc., say enough is enough … and cut the plug?
[...] ad lib comments. Biden is a sound bite waiting to happen. First Joe told Barack Obama, “hands off my guns.” Now it appears that Biden during an interview with Katie Couric has commented on Obama’s [...]