Misleading facts and/or falsehoods.

wouldn't that just be a "untruth"?

I am disappointed. I always look forward to war's posts but this one....

War you could not tell it was garbage from first read?

funny how when you tell em what they wanna hear it's "insightful"

and when you tell em what they don't wanna hear it's "garbage"

It's simple - anything that's not the truth.

hmmmm so if it's a truth and they don't approve it becomes an untruth?

The truth is the truth. The untruth are lies.

Like messing with me, huh?

I'm going to have to get more information. I am uncomfortable with law enforcement being on any of these 'truth committees'..... they should step down.

Both sides do try to hold the other's feet to the fire as far as what they consider 'truth'.. which is, of course, often a matter of perspective. And it's not uncommon for either side to try to initimidate the media if they feel that the other side is being unfair in their ads.

However having law enforcement on the committees does have a certain 'storm trooper' kind of feel to it.

neener neener neener

Obama wants a lot.

The real question is: Would Obama really take action?

He probably wanted them arrested until it was uncool to have them arrested and now he never wanted them arrested.

the way i see it the NRA are concerned about a Democratic administration clamping down on gun owners and have scoured the literature, speeches and legislation to show that Obama could be a threat.

then, the NRA and others, make ads suggesting that Obama may be supportive of more gun control - which he obviously will relative to the GOP candidates...

then, the Obama campaign tries to intimidate and discredit the ads by countering with many claims that Obama has made that he will stand up for gun ownership rights although there is no way to know how vigorously he would go against his own party in this respect.

then, people point out the intimidation and try to get them to stfu.



"la di da di da di da and nobody learned a thing"

Blunt is an a$$ that couldn't get elected again if he sold his soul (which he did).
He screwed the people in Missouri without any lubrication from the first day he was in office. He's not running because he knows he would lose pure and simple.

It shows you shouldn't let a small minded person get a hold of ANY power.

Check your facts, don't believe everything you read or see.

So basically, when he took office, the people of Missouri just assumed the position?

Isn't that the norm pretty much anywhere?

Yeah, everybody is getting booty rooted these days!

it seems that way.
I didn't vote for him
one of those butter won't melt in your mouth types
too darn slick of a character to get my vote

From one Missouri gal to another, I can't wait until the door kicks him in the a$$ on his way out!!

He screwed the people of Missouri every which away and that includes the children.

We had no choice.

Seems to me, that if this was all false, then Obama's campaign needs to go after the NRA, who is paying for the ad, not after people who repeat the line, which is what it sure seems like from where I'm sitting.

All I've seen to dispute this is partisan lines. I've since went to independant sources, that have to be careful about what they repeat and this is on their sites as well.

My favorite site, Alex Jones, has to be extremely careful, because he has no issue saying some very inflammatory things, when they're the truth. If he's saying this now too, then there at the very least, is a vein of truth to it, else he'd be risking law suits himself.

So now I have at the 2 places that have backed this up, that don't give a crap about Reps or Dems. Mr.Jones and Reason, both places that couldn't afford a lawsuit for slander or libel.


I'm still looking, but it sure seems odd, that Obamas people aren't seeking a cease and desist on the NRA, but the news organizations repeating any of it or running the ad are the ones getting the "legal" brief.

Leave good ol' Missouri and the politics start getting interesting.