ONTD Political

NRA Ad Targets Obama Daughters

12:49 am - 01/17/2013
Stay classy, National Rifle Association. The gun-lobbying group released a video on Tuesday that calls President Obama an “elitist hypocrite” for using Secret Service protection for his daughters.

“Are the president’s kids more important than yours?” the video asks. “Then why is he skeptical about putting armed security in our schools when his kids are protected by armed guards at their schools?”

The NRA denied that the ad is about Malia and Sasha Obama, with spokesman Andrew Arulanandam saying that "misses the point entirely." Arulanadam said the ad is about "keeping our children safe," and about the president's skepticism about schools having armed security guards when he and his family have them.

The White House called the ad "repugnant and cowardly" and spokesman Jay Carney said that the president's children should not be used as "pawns in a political fight."

Source has the original video. (I don't know how to embed, sorry.)

I wish we had a "don't pee on my foot and tell me it's raining" tag, because that's exactly how I felt when I read the NRA's claims that this ad is not about the Obama girls. (Yeah, RIGHT *massive eye rol*)
chaya ...17th-Jan-2013 06:59 am (UTC)

Edited at 2013-01-17 06:59 am (UTC)
astridmyrna Re: ...17th-Jan-2013 07:13 am (UTC)
Best first comment.
thatdamnninja Re: ...17th-Jan-2013 08:00 am (UTC)

Fucking epic.
zinnia_rose Re: ...17th-Jan-2013 08:00 am (UTC)
I was waiting on tenterhooks for "deal with it" to appear on the bottom of the screen, but this way is SO MUCH BETTER.
shishmish Re: ...17th-Jan-2013 05:53 pm (UTC)

fauxparadiso Re: ...17th-Jan-2013 07:09 pm (UTC)
lmaoooooooooo I was so expecting the "deal with it" that this actually made me laugh irl. Saved.
angelofdeath275 Re: ...17th-Jan-2013 08:17 pm (UTC)
LOL I was expecting 'deal with it'
shadwrayvn 17th-Jan-2013 07:03 am (UTC)
Oh fuck you NRA! So sick of them
veracity 17th-Jan-2013 07:10 am (UTC)
I love my World Lit teacher because we were talking about the NRA and his contempt for the organization made me love the man a little more.
astridmyrna 17th-Jan-2013 07:13 am (UTC)

effervescent 17th-Jan-2013 07:16 am (UTC)
Oh, ffs. It's only because of idiots with guns that they even need people protecting them with guns, do they not see the failure in their logic? Ugh. Their solution to guns as a problem is always more guns. :|
alryssa 17th-Jan-2013 07:35 am (UTC)

corbyinoz 17th-Jan-2013 07:44 am (UTC)
No, but the President's kids are more visible and politically positioned than yours. The President's kids are infinitely more likely to be targets of extortionists, terrorists or everyday cranks. The President's kids have always been protected because he/she's one of the most powerful human beings on the planet and that makes his/her family vulnerable.

I would expect this level of reasoning from an eight year old, and I don't mean that in a derogatory sense towards eight year olds. Eight year old children, generally speaking, have not progressed in moral reasoning beyond a certain, very self-centred level, defined by an inability to extrapolate their logic to incorporate others in an abstract sense. So, moral decisions are made based on how they affect people they know. I would expect this kind of argument from them... and then I would gently direct them to consider other points of view.
keestone 17th-Jan-2013 10:22 am (UTC)
I have to say though, the eight year olds I've known have better senses of logic and proportion than the NRA displays.
corbyinoz 17th-Jan-2013 11:13 am (UTC)
Well... yeah. Cela va sans dire.
shellazure 17th-Jan-2013 01:26 pm (UTC)
Just posted something similar to this on FB. I've seen the "oh, the PRESIDENT gets to be surrounded by guns and so do his kids, but not US?!?!?!" meme all over the GD place on my friend's feed (mostly from my family). We'll see how this progresses. Conveniently forgetting known truths when it helps to get people riled up? Par for the course for the NRA, it seems.
zinnia_rose 17th-Jan-2013 08:02 am (UTC)
I guess they've run out of actual arguments so they've resorted to pathetic ad hominem attacks...on children. Classy.
masakochan 17th-Jan-2013 09:16 am (UTC)
Arulanadam said the ad is about "keeping our children safe,"

...If it doesn't have anything to do with the President's kids- why in the hell did y'all bring 'em up in the first place? Ugh- these fuckers.

Edited for html fail.

Edited at 2013-01-17 09:16 am (UTC)
the_gabih 17th-Jan-2013 09:29 pm (UTC)
Perfect gif.
ginger_maya 17th-Jan-2013 11:07 am (UTC)
They're getting hysterical, aren't they? Like any rat that feels its ship is sinking.
ragnor144 17th-Jan-2013 11:48 am (UTC)
ahzuri 17th-Jan-2013 03:54 pm (UTC)
I saw this the other day posted by a friend and under it someone else had posted the story about the Youtuber who ran FPSRussia getting shot in the head in his home surrounded by all his custom and military grade guns.
the_gabih 17th-Jan-2013 09:33 pm (UTC)
Well hey, Adam Lanza's mother was a gun enthusiast. In fact, I'm fairly sure Adam's weapon was one which originally belonged to her. Look how well that turned out.
moonshaz 18th-Jan-2013 12:47 am (UTC)
Yeah, that's what I heard on the news--that they were HER guns.

Such bitter, tragic irony. :(
ahzuri 18th-Jan-2013 02:40 am (UTC)
I think most of the school shootings if not all have been with other folks guns. Its a shame we don't have more mental health care and gun control because it would help and I'm sure change the frequency that this shit happens. The shit over the President announcing his want to ban the military grade guns has already started to spill out everywhere I am not looking forward to the coming months though I sincerely hope to god he manages it because come the fuck on people why do you need military grade weaponry when you aren't in the military?!
poetic_pixie_13 17th-Jan-2013 01:33 pm (UTC)
How dare those black children be protected when our little white angel babies aren't?
girly123 17th-Jan-2013 04:34 pm (UTC)
Yup, basically

Because they'd be freaking the fuck out if a bunch of black parents got guns to protect their children from, say, police officers.
aviv_b Sarcasm alert17th-Jan-2013 03:11 pm (UTC)
Yes, the President's family gets protection even if they are black.

Seriously, if wasn't for fuckwads like the NRA stirring up their supporters to threaten armed violence, maybe the Obama kids wouldn't be in so much danger in the first place.
ahzuri 17th-Jan-2013 03:56 pm (UTC)
I had two facebooks one for family and one for sane people(created after the whole kerfuffle with guns started). I had to deactivate the family one yesterday because they went off the deep end and I'm pregnant. Just can't deal with this shit.
ahzuri 18th-Jan-2013 02:30 am (UTC)
Some of it was people I knew from high school but a majority was family and oh my god it was ridiculous. I couldn't take it I almost blew up at my mom when she posted the stupid god isn't in school so kids got shot cartoon. I was a mess that entire time before I separated the sane folks from the insane and stopped checking the family one so I deleted it because they ALL post things like that.
ahzuri 18th-Jan-2013 01:58 pm (UTC)
I have a small plastic table I flip when I am about to lose my shit at work lol Most recently I could have used it at home when someone made the comment (on my stepsisters posting) that we need to stop going after gun sellers and go after gun using criminals and my only response was "Bitch you do realize how many guns are purchased threw gun shows and the internet with no background checks right? You do realize that a lot of those could be to potential criminals right? STFU"

Military people are such a mixed bag in my life, the ones I work with are like "Yeah this is a good idea" and the one I knew from school was all "They can pry it out of my dead cold hands" I totes get guns for the purpose of protection or hunting. I have no problem with folks owning them but unless you have roving gangs of hooligans rampaging your town I seriously doubt you need military grade guns to protect yourself. I like how many of them don't realize that those guns used to be illegal not that awful long ago (or at least for the sake my not feeling old 1994 - 2004 wasn't that long ago right? D:)
girly123 17th-Jan-2013 04:41 pm (UTC)
Oh gosh. :c Take care of the bb.

Do you think there's something about facebook that makes those opinions seem...worse? I have family members that believe some pretty whacked out shit, and I always knew that, but somehow being bombarded with it daily on facebook makes it so much more angering and I have no idea why.
ahzuri 18th-Jan-2013 02:34 am (UTC)
I think its defiantly the ease of how they can post their opinions. I knew and have known for many years my family is the way they are but the topics are avoided by me like the plague so I didn't have to hear it often. With Facebook they see something they agree with they click share and there it is in my feed and it got so hard for me to hold my tongue on the bullshit. It was at a point that I'd go off on one of them and go back and delete what I said because I knew it would start WW3 in my family though it appears I'm legit the black sheep for realz now for other reasons. Whatever crazy folks is crazy.
moonshaz 18th-Jan-2013 12:54 am (UTC)
This kind of thing is exactly why I'm 90%+ inactive at FB. I keep an account because it's my only link with a few people, and a channel of communication with certain others. But I hardly EVER go there, much less post anything controversial.

I know for a fact that certain people on my FB list would not be in agreement with my views on politics, including (especially!) reproductive rights, marriage equality, gun control, etc. I hear too many horror stories about the kind of crap that goes on over there, and I don't have the time or energy to go over there and stir shit up. So I practically never post anything pertaining to my views OR respond to anyone else's.

It's like, people can track me down there, if anyone's really interested. But if they want to talk to me, they can send me a private message or something.

That place literally scares me!

Edited at 2013-01-18 12:55 am (UTC)
ahzuri 18th-Jan-2013 02:36 am (UTC)
This is exactly why I almost NEVER posted on my old FB. WW3 would have started and I wasn't down for that I feel less drama the better.
nitasee 17th-Jan-2013 04:15 pm (UTC)
Arulanadam said the ad is about "keeping our children safe," and about the president's skepticism about schools having armed security guards when he and his family have them.

No, sir it's not about keeping kids safe. You do not give a fuck about keeping kids safe. That's been patently obvious from the moment the words "more guns" came out of the NRA's mouthpiece LaPierre or any other member of the NRA. What you care about is who will protect the poor abused gun industry from the potential loss of profits and nursing your deeply held fantasy of an armed insurrection against the "tyrannical" government of the United States....you know, the very government we currently have, the one that was elected by the people (but, clearly not the right people). And that last part, that fantasy of armed insurrection? I believe that is what they call "treasonous".
moonshaz What Wayne Lapierre REALLY cares about18th-Jan-2013 12:58 am (UTC)
noneko 17th-Jan-2013 05:01 pm (UTC)
“Are the president’s kids more important than yours?” the video asks.

In the grand scheme of things, yes.
teacoat 17th-Jan-2013 09:13 pm (UTC)
All other ridiculousness aside, didn't Obama support a bill last year before the Sandy Hook shooting that would've given more funding for armed guards in schools but the House blocked it?
kitchen_poet 17th-Jan-2013 11:07 pm (UTC)
I saw this ad yesterday and it just pissed me off. Not only is targeting the President's children just really, really low, they somehow made "Gun Free School Zones" sound like the most irresponsible and unsafe option ever. WTF?
lizzy_someone 17th-Jan-2013 11:09 pm (UTC)
Uh, the Secret Service agents' job is to protect two individual children from people who would specifically target them. They're not there to protect the whole school from someone spraying bullets indiscriminately. Unless you give each individual child their own personal team of armed guards to follow them everywhere, you're comparing apples to oranges.

Even if we assumed, for the sake of argument, that schools had the money to hire armed guards for every single student (which obviously is not remotely true), you would need so many armed guards that you couldn't afford to be choosy. The Secret Service agents who protect the President's children? Are undoubtedly vetted and background-checked to within an inch of their lives. But if you were hiring a guard for every schoolkid in the country, there are just so damn many that some unsavory characters would inevitably slip through the cracks. Which means, surprise! Your child is followed around every day by a bad guy with a gun. Congratulations. Forget apples and oranges -- you're comparing kangaroos and zucchini.
This page was loaded Apr 30th 2017, 3:22 am GMT.