Widgetized Section

Go to Admin » Appearance » Widgets » and move Gabfire Widget: Social into that MastheadOverlay zone

Palin spouts lies at NRA gathering

By DOUG THOMPSON
May 15, 2010

Sister Sarah: Damn the facts, full propaganda ahead (AP)

Look out America. Sister Sarah Palin took her traveling road show to the National Rifle Association and warned the NRA gullibles that President Barack Obama and his Democratic cronies want to take away their guns, bullets, rocket launchers and anything else they can get their hands on.

Of course, Palin had not facts to back up her claims but facts don’t matter to members of the NRA fantasy world.

“Don’t doubt for a minute that, if they thought they could get away with it, they would ban guns and ban ammunition and gut the Second Amendment,” Palin declared in her high-octave, Betty Boop voice.

Of course, Palin failed to mention that with a majority in both Houses of Congress and Obama in the White House, the Democrats probably could ban guns if that’s what they really wanted.

The NRA has played the fear card that Obama would take away guns since he first announced his run for President while ignoring the fact that Obama has done nothing to restore the ban on assault-weapon style weapons or strenghten background checks.

Obama even signed a law allowing guns to be carried in national parks in states that have concealed carry laws — another fact overlooked by the NRA propaganda machine.

Palin also read some redneck jokes off her cell phone and said “these are me.”

She’s a joke all right but no one is laughing.

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

27 Responses to Palin spouts lies at NRA gathering

  1. Jim

    May 15, 2010 at 9:40 am

    “no one is laughing”——Just the opposite, I am crying that there are so many in this country that are so gullible. We are supposed to be living in an “informed” world, but as reality shows, there are those who would rather believe a lie than the truth. “Although they claimed to be wise, they became fools”, from the Apostle Paul.

  2. Larry Linn

    May 15, 2010 at 9:48 am

    “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”
    What “well regulated Militia does palin belong to?

    • DDS -- NRA Life Member

      May 15, 2010 at 10:32 am

      Given today’s acceptance of women into the combat arms of US armed forces, she may well belong to this one. And you probably do as well.

      United States Code, Title 10, Subtitle A, Part 1, Chapter 13, Paragraph 311. Militia: composition and classes
      (a) The militia of the United States consists of all able-bodied males at least 17 years of age and, except as provided in section 313 of title 32, under 45 years of age who are, or who have made a declaration of intention to become, citizens of the United States and of female citizens of the United States who are members of the National Guard.
      (b) The classes of the militia are—
      (1) the organized militia, which consists of the National Guard and the Naval Militia; and
      (2) the unorganized militia, which consists of the members of the militia who are not members of the National Guard or the Naval Militia.

    • Guardhouse lawyer

      May 15, 2010 at 1:46 pm

      Does well regulated have something to do with Ex-Lax?

  3. Rob R.

    May 15, 2010 at 10:24 am

    Wow Doug, how many years of freaking college did you do, just to write this pathetic excuse for journalism?

    “Hey, Palin, Obama hasn’t yet officially said in an official announcment of officialness that he wants to ban guns, so theeeeeeere! You’re like totally WRONG girlfriend!” Yeah, let’s just ignore the whole history of banning guns wherever they can that the Democrat party has…. let’s just forget Obama’s own record in Illinois…

    Truly pathetic.

    • Doug Thompson

      May 15, 2010 at 4:22 pm

      No, what’s pathetic are NRA cowards like you to pull drive-by posts without the guts to use their full names. You’re so brave, aren’t you, with you desire to wave guns in everyone faces but you don’t have the guts to use your name.

      That’s pathetic buster. Go back and hide in your well-armed bunker.

  4. Carl Nemo

    May 15, 2010 at 11:49 am

    Hey guys this woman ‘knows’ what she’s talkin’ about when it comes to guns . I hear tell she shoots wolves from choppers back home. Of course we’z in the lower 48 all knows things are just “Harder in Alaska”…! : |

    Carl Nemo **==

  5. AL G.

    May 15, 2010 at 1:41 pm

    I remember well when Carter took all our guns away and Reagan had to fight to get them back for us. And who could forget when the night skies over D.C. glowed red from Clinton’s confiscated arms and ammo bonfire! Every election year some pandering moron like Palin resurrects the “guns” propaganda and every time it gets all the village idiots barking at the moon. So predictable, so ignorant, so republican.

  6. Sean

    May 15, 2010 at 2:32 pm

    It’s funny that you accuse Palin of lying, evidenced only by the fact that she made a claim without providing supporting evidence, without yourself providing any supporting evidence. The fact that the Democrats have control of Congress is no evidence; what she said is that they’d use their majority to ban guns if they weren’t afraid of backlash – losing their seats – as a result. Even the signing of the credit card bill you mentioned is no evidence of what Obama would do sans the fear of backlash.

    Obama made it clear in the Audacity of Hope that he would at least ban guns from all our inner cities; he signed a 1996 questionaire answering that he’d ban handguns entirely and in 1998 told votesmart.org he’d ban all single-fire clip-fed (AKA semi-automatic) firearms of any kind; and he supported the DC total gun ban before the Heller decision. We’re talking about a guy who still today states on his agenda website his intent to ban single-fire clip-fed (AKA semi-automatic or “assault”) rifles like the civilian AR-15, but still has done nothing about it, and you say his lack of action proves a lack of will? Please!

    • Doug Thompson

      May 15, 2010 at 4:23 pm

      Another NRA coward who doesn’t have guts enough to use his full name.

      • Sean

        May 16, 2010 at 12:56 pm

        Do you really think a single person is going to read these completely and easily verifiable facts that show that Palin is right about Obama’s desire to take away guns, then read your brilliant ad hominem and discount them?

        • Robert J

          May 17, 2010 at 8:25 pm

          I don’t suppose there’s any chance you NRA idiots will just grow penises and shut up, is there?

    • larry

      May 25, 2010 at 1:12 am

      Like, why do you NEED an AK-47 or an AR-15 or any clip fed firearm? I suppose you think you NEED a SAW too?

  7. BillR

    May 15, 2010 at 2:34 pm

    SARAH PALIN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! WHEN, IF EVER, ARE YOU GOING TO STOP MAKING THINGS UP!!!!! ARE YOU TRYING TO GET THE “LIAR OF THE YEAR AWARD” AGAIN??????????????
    AT LEAST IN THAT CATEGORY, YOU ARE THE LEADER FOR THIS AWARD….
    JUST KEEP ON FLEECING THE STUPID ALL THE WAY TO YOUR BANK ACCOUNT..

    • ra

      May 15, 2010 at 4:39 pm

      She’s not going to stop as long as there are people who believe her. I have a friend, an NRA activist, who is convinced that an increase in the cost of ammo is rooted in a government plot to take way his guns. I happened to read an NRA newsletter he showed me, and it was full, cover to cover, of paranoid spoutings how the government was out to take their guns away, and how blue helmeted UN troops would be patrolling the US to enforce the anti gun laws.

  8. oldgriz

    May 15, 2010 at 3:18 pm

    Fact; Obama did agree to the US to join world control of firearms, bypassing our rights. Fact Up until DC vs Heller the Supreme Court had not ruled what a malitia was. Fact: DCvs Heller SCOUS ruled “the 2nd amendment has nothing to do with the national guard” Fact: The National Guard was not in existence when Title 1 USC was drafted and passed into law. Fact:: there are those that make up rulings about laws that they didn’t read.Fact: Those who make these comments should have their brain engaged before running their mouth.. Then there is the view, No comment ! Common Criminals seem to be the trend for liberals Martha Stewart Convicted felon, Micheal Boombox (nyc mayor) straw purchase of firearms. sends people to other states to commit crimes of buying firearms. (a Felony under 18 USC 921-930 & 27 CFR part 178) punishable by 10 year prison term 7 $250,000 fine.

    • Guardhouse lawyer

      May 16, 2010 at 5:14 pm

      “Fact; Obama did agree to the US to join world control of firearms”

      I do not believe that is correct. You state it is a fact, so please provide documentation to support the assertion. Defend or retract.

      “Fact: DCvs Heller SCOUS ruled “the 2nd amendment has nothing to do with the national guard””

      Show me. Defend or retract.

    • Robert J

      May 17, 2010 at 8:30 pm

      Earth to Oldgriz – you really need to check your “facts”. And your spelling.

  9. oldgriz

    May 15, 2010 at 3:36 pm

    One must be quite jealous toattack some one whom is in order with facts. Hunting wolves from Choppers in AK is illegal only the DOW can do this with cause (spreading lies already). Obama has a history of anti gun legislation. And lets not forget AZ Immigration law IT IS LEGAL Sec 10 Art 3 any state has the right to repel an invation if nhelp is delayed…(supporting criminals so if you try to enforce the law we will boycot you) Any state that creates an emborgo against any other state is illegal ! So when these oil slicks hit the shore of those states I hope AZ refuses to send help. A final Quote “Remember the Alamo” the troops never came and the Alamo fell.. No retreat no quarter enforce our laws.

    • Carl Nemo

      May 16, 2010 at 7:15 pm

      Hi oldgriz…

      My post was to be somewhat of a spoof concerning Sarah Palin’s airborne wolf hunts, but just to set the record straight I’m not too far from the truth concerning her sentiments.

      She’s no longer governor of course, but being an avid outdoorsman myself, I find shooting wolves in such a manner a gross affront to their majesty in nature as an apex predator. Wolves have earned their stripes as a species whereas our current humankind only about 70,000 years old since the last great close extinction of our species have not earned theirs.

      All we as a species are good for is fouling our nest; ie, the planet at large while doing grave harm to our fellow beings and creatures. Truly, we’re a sorry lot indeed. : |

      http://www.slate.com/id/2199140

      Carl Nemo **==

  10. b mcclellan

    May 15, 2010 at 7:36 pm

    I have a 66 elcamino , with a breaker bar Left handy at my disposal. I say arm yourself.

    Take my guns , kick out my teeth, sell your tongue to the highest bidder. How well does it extract, the price of mindful defenselessness?

    We do not drive in your neighborhood as it’s entirely impossible gnat to get buzzed buy fundies ubetchas we know as, the pledge too,” you parasites”
    too readily waiting to bill me later for nothing.

    Here’s a clue, I made my own bow forhwith to loft an arrow.

    Patriots pushed needn’t salt peter to defend themselves…Kcah.

  11. Thomas Bonsell

    May 16, 2010 at 3:31 pm

    Sarah and her NRA lackeys have the disgusting habit of claiming the US Constitution and the Second Amendment solely for themselves.

    But they know nothing. The Fifth Amendment says no one can be deprived of life liberty or property without “due process of law.” Due process involves indictment, trial, conviction and punishment. A firearm is property, so it can’t be taken from anyone without a criminal conviction.

    The Second Amendment was created so an armed militia would always be ready for national defense. It indicates national defense right up front in the Second. James Madison, who proposed the Second to Congress, also said arming the citizenry was for national defense.

    The Militia Act of 1903 organized the various state militias into the present National Guard system, so the old state militias are the present national guards. Oldgriz doesn’t know what he’s talking about.

    And it sure as hell aint liberals who are killing physicians who perform legal procedures on pregnant women. Them be good ole-boy right-wing freaks.

    • Guardhouse lawyer

      May 16, 2010 at 5:07 pm

      “The Fifth Amendment says no one can be deprived of life liberty or property without “due process of law.” Due process involves indictment, trial, conviction and punishment. A firearm is property, so it can’t be taken from anyone without a criminal conviction.”

      This is just plain flat incorrect. Due process is not restricted solely to criminal law. Frinstance: eminent domain.

      We recently went through all the happy horse puckies of the case in Connecticut where eminent domain was used to take real property for a quasi-public use. The Supreme Court ruled, quite properly, that the law was there and if people didn’t like the law they should change it.

      Taxes are another example. Money is property yet governments state, local, and Federal all have laws that require you to pay taxes, whether you like it or not. Due process was achieved by the enactment of statutes that allowed collection of taxes. There is no criminal process involved.

  12. Bill Cravener

    May 18, 2010 at 6:35 am

    I’ve been a deer, grouse and turkey hunter my entire adult life and no NRA lover am I. To me the NRA is nothing more then a fanatic organization full of gun nuts, so Palin fits right in with that bunch.

  13. griff

    May 18, 2010 at 7:09 am

    Disclaimer: I am not an NRA member (although it must be fund-raising time, they’re calling me every day – coincidence?) nor am I a fan. I don’t like Sarah Palin either.

    The Democrats have a long history of anti-firearm rhetoric and yes, even actions. There have been no less than twelve bills introduced during this session of Congress by Democrats dealing with restriction of firearm ownership. While these bills have little chance of moving through the Congress, it does exemplify the Democrats’ long-standing fear of gun owners.

    Obama’s own voting record in Illinois and his own words show a desire to do away with private firearm ownership. And yes he does publicly support a UN treaty that would ban private firearm ownership.

    I believe Palin is correct in her assessment, although I would question her motives.

    I would invite every one to read this article.

    A few excerpts…

    “While taking groceries to her car, a man approached an 82-year-old woman and said something horrible to her: “This is your day. You are too old to be alive anyway.” According to police, he then grabbed the woman’s cane and beat her. Despite the savage assault, the elderly woman managed to reach into her purse, draw her gun and fire a shot. The man fled and, upon hearing the shot, store employees quickly came to the woman’s aid. The self-proclaimed “stubborn, old broad” is badly bruised but will fully recover. “If I go naturally or to a sickness or something, fine,” she said. “I’m ready to go, but I’m not ready to let some idiot like that take me out.” (KVOA-TV, Tucson, AZ, 03/15/10)”

    “A crazed, knife-wielding man attempted to stab people at random in a convenience store parking lot. Police said he’d already chased a delivery driver and others when he ran down a car leaving the lot. He lunged at the car’s driver with the knife, wounding him. That’s when the driver, whose two young stepdaughters were in the vehicle, produced a handgun and fired about six shots, killing the attacker. The driver will recover from his injuries.“You’ve got to protect yourself,” said witness Byron Cook.“He had his two kids in the car and they were terrified.” (WREG-TV, Memphis, TN, 03/05/10)”

    As Americans, Democrats have every right to be helpless victims; that would be a personal choice. On the flip-side, government has no right to restrict a citizen’s right to defend his home, family and property.

  14. Stephen

    May 18, 2010 at 12:41 pm

    The NRA really isn’t serious about gun ownership. They are really only interested in money & political power. If they were serious about protecting the rights of law abiding citizens to own guns. They would actual sit down with local & federal law enforcement officials & talk to them about how we can keep guns out of the hands of criminals & the mentally ill (the VA Tech shooter). But they don’t. They actually have the nerve to claim they know what the democrats are actually thanking. A democrat or democrats say “We need to keep guns out of the hands of criminals & children”. The NRA claims that means Obama (you know that muslim fellow that was born in Kenya) & Nancy Pelosi (Satan’s wife) want to ban all guns. The democrats don’t even mention gun control & the stupid woman “Carbou Barbie” (speaking for the NRA) claims she knows what they are really thanking. What is really scary about this country is that there are such a large number of people who actually that Sarah Palin is actually smart.

  15. Gobbler

    May 19, 2010 at 7:26 am

    I’ve been an avid outdoorsman most of my adult life and I find Palin repugnant.