Shameful: Obama using children as props for gun grab; WH releases letters from kids

https://twitter.com/karentravers/status/291506292751728640

Causing a stir is one way to put it.

https://twitter.com/sdoocy/status/291562803255451648

Calling out the president for his shameful use of children as political props is another.

https://twitter.com/LilMissRightie/status/291349839399251970

As reported yesterday, President Obama will announce his plans for gun control measures flanked by children. But, there’s more: They are using letters from children as props as well.

https://twitter.com/stevebruskCNN/status/291243282099482624
https://twitter.com/markknoller/status/291347453976920064

Twitter was buzzing with that disgraceful news last night. It continues today as American citizens await the president’s spectacle planned for later today.

https://twitter.com/NinaFromLI/status/291368263580016640

The White House has released the letters.

https://twitter.com/jamiedupree/status/291562156447653888

Share photos on twitter with Twitpic
https://twitter.com/jamiedupree/status/291565075205083137

Share photos on twitter with Twitpic
Share photos on twitter with Twitpic

Those with a moral compass are disgusted.

https://twitter.com/MelissaTweets/statuses/291526331462725633

https://twitter.com/krempasky/status/291309628006998016

https://twitter.com/MelissaTweets/status/291544202049904640

https://twitter.com/StuOnTheBlaze/status/291371731233427457

The end justifies the means, you see, even if the means are innocent children.

Besides being utterly shameless and shameful, many point out some other problems with these letters from children.

https://twitter.com/Shannonmason1/status/291534083660587008

https://twitter.com/EricaRN4USA/status/291537949747728384
https://twitter.com/jms02050/status/291538212193697794
https://twitter.com/MingBlueTeaCup/status/291530408699514882
https://twitter.com/ProudoftheUSA/status/291528107976974337

Yep. More drinking of the Skool-Aid. Perhaps they watched “The Obama Effect” first, then joined in a resounding chorus of “Mmm, mmm, mmm. Barack Hussein Obama.
https://twitter.com/katebochte/status/291531148545372162
https://twitter.com/NewsNinja2012/status/291367399528226818
https://twitter.com/shakes2011/status/291363024474877952

https://twitter.com/RileyRebel129/status/291331867104391174

https://twitter.com/jtLOL/status/291285222501261312

https://twitter.com/Mortal_Weight/status/291308440175902721
https://twitter.com/BAMAPERRY/status/291540220527128576

Huh. We won’t hold our breath. For the Children ™? Only when convenient. Like, you know, being exploited in order to prey on emotions and gin up fear.

https://twitter.com/smheath11/status/291545967768002560

https://twitter.com/DrMartyFox/status/291362919223029760

https://twitter.com/rightscifi/status/291570148224143360

https://twitter.com/Gre8Scott/status/291557090193977344

https://twitter.com/kelseyj11/status/291554957172297729

Sadly, it’s not surprising: It’s despicable.

  • SFerggie

    The pres is a pig.

  • tripledotter

    Can Obama discuss the portion of the National Debt shouldered by these kids as he spends the country into Bankruptcy? He’s a Tragedy Troll and the Parents should be ashamed for permitting their kids to be exploited in this manner.

    • grais

      I would guess the debt they shoulder will have a worse and longer term effect on the vast majority of them than any gun violence ever will.

  • Purple State

    How dare children be included in a conversation that was incited by a massacre at an elementary school.

    • carla5731

      There’s a reason you have to be 18 to vote.

      • Purple State

        The president is suggesting that the children be in charge of the legislation?! That the children replace members of Congress in passing any new law?! Do you have a sound bite?

        • carla5731

          You used the phrase ” included in a conversation” which implies that they are influencing policy.

          • Purple State

            No, it doesn’t. It only means that they’re allowed a voice and are being heard. If I meant that they were being allowed to “influence policy” I might have used a phrase like, “influence policy.”

          • carla5731

            Those phrases are all euphemisms for the same thing. If they are “allowed a voice” then they are influencing policy by giving their opinion on the topic. The problem is that they lack experience and perspective, and have less knowledge on the topic than our hopeless “magazine clips” president.

          • TocksNedlog

            Children ARE citizens, and they ARE allowed to petition the Government for a redress of grievances. This does not make it okay to use them as props, with no other purpose than to prey upon emotions.

          • http://pennyrobinsonfanclub.net/ PennyRobinsonFanClub

            O get stuffed and find a new hair to split. Douchebag.

        • grais

          In charge? No. But why do you think Obama has invited them to stand with him?

          • Purple State

            Because this announcement is a direct result of a massacre at an elementary school?

          • carla5731

            That means that everyone who ever attended a movie should get a voice in the James Holmes trial.

          • Purple State

            Not quite comparable. You can choose to go to the movies. Children are required by law to go to school. Also, these kids aren’t members of a jury, so there’s another reach.

          • carla5731

            They can be homeschooled.

          • Purple State

            But you have to provide proof of that to be excused from the law. Children are required to go to some school. No one is required to go to the movies. Your comparison still doesn’t work.

          • carla5731

            It doesn’t matter what proof they have to provide. They are not required by law to spend one second in a public school building.

          • Purple State

            They’re required to be educated, and the default for most children is public school. There’s no requirement to view movies, whether at home or in theaters, so the comparison still doesn’t work.

          • carla5731

            Regardless of what the “default” is, there is no law requiring any American child to be forced to attend a public school. In addition to homeschooling, it’s estimated that more than 5 million children attend private school in the United States.

          • http://pennyrobinsonfanclub.net/ PennyRobinsonFanClub

            It’s not “excused” from the law. It is fulfilling the law requiring the child be educated.

          • Purple State

            “Excused” was the wrong verb, you’re right. The point is, if you’re going to homeschool your child, there are legal documents to file to prove your child is being educated.

          • grais

            But what benefit is it to the “national dialogue?”

          • http://pennyrobinsonfanclub.net/ PennyRobinsonFanClub

            How many guns do you think were surrounding those children this morning? Do you think they were more safe, or less safe because of those guns?

    • NachoCheese (D)

      The children are not being included in the conversation, they are being used as props (much like the “doctors” in the Obama(doesn’t)CareTax lecture).

      Further, how exactly is using children, who are largely ignorant of the Constitution, as props for the Pres. lecture going to advance the national dialogue regarding the massacre in Connecticut?

      Appeal to Emotion is not a valid debate strategy, but rather a simplistic demagogic tactic to stifle serious discussion.

      • grais

        Appeal to Emotion is the left’s MO. It doesn’t have to make any sense.

      • Purple State

        “How does including children stall the national dialogue?” might be a better question. Put another way, what’s inspiring all this outrage about a couple of kids standing around at a press conference? Don’t you trust the actual lawmakers to be knowledgable enough of the Constitution to be able to find some middle ground? Or is there simply no acceptable middle ground to some gun owners? And if so, who is really keeping the national dialogue from advancing?

        • grais

          The kids are saying, essentially, “don’t let bad things happen.” That’s dialogue??

        • NachoCheese (D)

          How does exploiting the children by using them as props stall the national dialogue?

          By painting those that dare dissent from Dear Leader’s dictates as being opposed to protecting children from monsters.

          It’s a logical fallacy known as Appeal to Emotion, hence the responses of “For the Children™”. Use of this tactic stifles any dissent and hampers an adult discussion of the issues, as exemplified by your reaction to peoples responses here. You are attempting to claim the moral high ground by portraying those who disagree with you as “unreasonable” simply for acknowledging the use of the logical fallacy.

        • http://pennyrobinsonfanclub.net/ PennyRobinsonFanClub

          “what’s inspiring all this outrage about a couple of kids standing around”
          Because they are not just “standing around,” they are being used as human props to cast an emotional pall over the scene in order to advance a highly unpopular and possibly un-Constitutional (e.g. “illegal”) political maneuver.

        • GaryTheBrave

          This “event” is to introduce his Executive Orders to ban guns. No, it won’t ban guns directly but it starts the process. There is NO legislative input or public comment allowed. So, yes, the legislative branch does know the Constitution. Your hero is purposefully shutting them out of the process.

          Who was it during the Clinton administration who said of EO’s, “Stroke of the pen, law of the land.”

          • carla5731

            Thanks, Gary. If there is one hallmark to the Obama presidency it’s that he refuses all input from us little people.

    • TocksNedlog

      Sure, why not?

      It’s about time to raise the level of maturity at the White House.

    • http://pennyrobinsonfanclub.net/ PennyRobinsonFanClub

      Ooh, the leftist is dazzling us with his incisive reasoning and rationality!

    • WisconsinPatriot

      Using children as human shields is an unacceptable exploitation of youth. Terrorists use human shields. Are we(liberal democrats) reverting back to KKK tactics? By being an apologist for reprobate tactics, one becomes reprobate. Bless your heart :)

  • carla5731

    Since the kids seem to have a wealth of information and experience to draw upon, why stop at gun control? They also give us their recommendations for dealing with Syria and help Congress develop a sensible approach to deficit reduction.

    • grais

      This should be a reply to Purple State.
      lol

      • Purple State

        I had no idea that children were such an insidious threat to freedom.

        • grais

          No one said they are…except you.

          • Purple State

            It’s only what I’m surmising from all this outrage. Why else are we so upset?

          • NachoCheese (D)

            “Why else are we so upset?”

            As stated numerous times previously, the use of logical fallacies by the Pres. is in fact “stalling the national discussion”.

          • Purple State

            How so?

          • carla5731

            NachoCheese (D):

            Note the reductio ad absurdum your curt reply is saturated in…

            That is a prime example of how the Pres. use of Appeal to Emotion is “stalling the national discussion”.

            You asked me how…this is an example.

          • NachoCheese (D)

            Your responses to others here are a case study in that stalling effect.

            You are attempting to portray those that note the Pres. use of logical fallacy as “unreasonable”.

          • carla5731

            Exactly. Purple State couldn’t care less about infringing on the rights of law-abiding citizens, or parsing crime data to find potential solutions, it’s all about the cherubic props by the president’s side.

          • Purple State

            I’m not accusing anyone of being unreasonable about gun policy. I do think it’s a little irrational to be so outraged about children being included at a press conference, and that’s what I’m trying to understand better. I worry it’s an excuse to dismiss any and all policy suggestions out of hand, rather than think in a complex way about the difficult choices this issue requires.

          • carla5731

            If the president’s argument could stand on its own, he wouldn’t need any props.

          • Purple State

            That’s my point. Argument has already been dismissed because children were included at press conference — what policies were suggested? Who knows? KIDS AT PRESS CONFERENCE.

          • grais

            It’s not a press conference. It’s an announcement featuring letters he got from kids asking him to do the impossible.

          • Purple State

            I stand corrected. “Announcement.”

          • TocksNedlog

            Perhaps they are all junior reporters.

          • lainer51

            not perhaps, indeed.

          • carla5731

            Kids or no kids, nothing I know about Barack Obama suggests that he’s going to craft policies that reduce violence.

          • NachoCheese (D)

            “I’m not accusing anyone of being unreasonable about gun policy. ”

            Oh really…

            —-
            Purple State • 16
            minutes ago
            “How does including children stall the national dialogue?” might be a better question. Put another way, what’s inspiring all this outrage about a couple of kids standing around at a press conference? Don’t you trust the actual lawmakers to be knowledgable enough of the Constitution to be able to find some middle ground? Or is there simply no acceptable middle ground to some gun owners? And if so, who is really keeping the national dialogue from advancing?
            —–

            Try again.

          • Purple State

            Point to the accusation.

          • NachoCheese (D)

            Are you cognitively impaired? You imply it here:

            “Don’t you trust the actual lawmakers to be knowledgable enough of the Constitution to be able to find some middle ground? Or is there simply no acceptable middle ground to some gun owners? And if so, who is really keeping the national dialogue from advancing?”

            So anyone who calls out the Pres. for his use of Appeal to Emotion fallacies (he’s doing it now in the presser), as not “trusting lawmakers to be knowledgeable enough…”?

          • Purple State

            Now the accusation is implied? I’m simply asking a series of questions there — genuinely desiring answers. I don’t see any of them as a charge of blame, and certainly didn’t intend them to be so.

          • NachoCheese (D)

            You don’t genuinely desire answers, and you certainly do intend to imply (as does the Demagogue in Chief) that all those who denounce the (ab)use of children as political props and disagree with the demagogue’s desire for gun bans, as not being “for the children”.

            Case in point:
            http://twitchy.com/2013/01/16/markos-moulitsas-rnc-is-officially-on-the-side-of-more-dead-children/

          • mdtljt

            Would you mind if, say, a Conservative president surrounded him/herself with children while pushing…oh, I don’t know…restrictive abortion control??? How about using them while touting the benefits of porn??? There are a great number of US citizens who find the destruction of the Constitution of the United States of America and the Bill of Rights highly offensive….and it’s not a “moral” choice…these documents set forth our RIGHTS which are not to be rescinded. As many others before me have said….the 2nd Amendment guarantees all the other Rights as set forth will be upheld. Would Dear Leader surround himself with Mexican or Mexican American children while speaking about Fast & Furious?? Would he surround himself with Libyan children while explaining why the Massacre in Benghazi happened?? 3 guesses….2 don’t count…

          • NachoCheese (D)

            One point…

            “these documents set forth our RIGHTS”

            The Constitution does not grant you any rights, it simply restrains the government from interfering with your Natural Rights.

          • mdtljt

            …point taken…my bad…doesn’t make what this skid did any more palatable…

          • lainer51

            seriously? I remember when Pres. Bush used the term “Mission Accomplished,” (by all means, a photo op) and the libs went NUTS.
            That is much more benign than dragging kids to your “gun speech” to be used as a backdrop.

          • Ronald

            If you are really trying to understand better, that is a noble quest. Some folks on this site can be a bit on edge and get upset if someone disagrees with them, while others are open to discussion and debate so long as you keep it civil and respectful.

            My feeling is that liberals have recognized that this tragedy is watershed moment, and they see it as a chance to push through new prohibitions on guns. Because children were the primary victims, they think it advantageous to surround themselves with children in an attempt to appeal to the public’s sympathy. It’s a smart tactic, and whether right or wrong, it’s at least worth thinking critically about. That’s the cynic in me I guess.

          • http://pennyrobinsonfanclub.net/ PennyRobinsonFanClub

            See above.

          • grais

            Because the President is pimping children to further the left’s gun-grabbing agenda, which will do nothing to bring the little kids’ dreams of ‘no more gun violence ever’ to fruition.

          • grais

            Maybe you should stop all that “surmising.” You’re not very good at it.

          • http://pennyrobinsonfanclub.net/ PennyRobinsonFanClub

            A number of us said it already in a few different ways. If you can’t understand what is being told you, you are not bright enough to be involved in this dialogue to begin with. No go re-read what you have been told, and frame your subsequent comments in the light thereof.

        • NachoCheese (D)

          Note the reductio ad absurdum your curt reply is saturated in…

          That is a prime example of how the Pres. use of Appeal to Emotion is “stalling the national discussion”.

          You asked me how…this is an example.

          • http://pennyrobinsonfanclub.net/ PennyRobinsonFanClub

            You see what else he is doing, he just keeps asking the same thing over and over, pretending he either doesn’t understand or hasn’t been responded to. Classic trolling, and looky, I should know!

            How do they etc.
            They’re emotional props to stifle critical thinking.
            Yeah but how does…
            They’re emotional props . .

            But how does that …

            etc etc.

            CS Lewis wrote of the same phenomenon in “Out Of The Silent Planet,” how evil spirits will try to engage you in what seems to be debate, while their actual intent is to get you to STOP thinking and start “feeling.”

        • TocksNedlog

          Apparently, over a million children per year become an insidious threat to the freedom of their mothers . . . something about “taking up space inside their mothers’ bodies without paying rent” or something.

        • http://pennyrobinsonfanclub.net/ PennyRobinsonFanClub

          Only when they are being used as props in a grotesque danse macabre.

        • Junie3

          You think you’re still free after today?

        • Ardell Simon

          “The state must declare the child to be the most precious treasure of the people. As long as the government is perceived as working for the benefit of the children, the people will happily endure almost any curtailment of liberty and almost any deprivation.” ~ Mein Kampf, Adolph Hitler

      • GaryTheBrave

        Purple State is like the little kid that keeps asking ,”Why?”

    • http://pennyrobinsonfanclub.net/ PennyRobinsonFanClub

      Sure! Hey, remember when Jimmy Carter asked little Amy for her advice on a nuclear weapons ban?

      • Ronald

        Out of the mouths of babes huh?

    • Kevin Krom

      That might actually be an improvement, you know.

  • grais

    So, some little kids who don’t understand the US Constitution want no guns for anyone and some little kids who don’t understand the US Constitution want Obama to “stop gun violence.”
    Did they get these silly ideas from the adults, or did the adults get these silly ideas from them?
    Shameful and pointless exploitation

    • http://pennyrobinsonfanclub.net/ PennyRobinsonFanClub

      Well, I think this perfectly displays what a lot of have been saying forever, is that on an emotional level, Dems and libs are basically children themselves, reacting emotionally rather than rationally, particularly so when their ideas or tenets are challenged. Offer the most reasoned, restrained, articulate, point-by-point criticism of this president, and you don’t even have to guess what their response is going to be, do you?!? The “RAAACIST” tantrum. It’s as predictable (and meaningful) of the ten year old screaming “I hate you Mommy!”

      Not to belabor the obvious, but it’s also evident in their whole approach to government — it’s there to take care of us, to hold our hand as we cross the street and pack our lunch and tuck us in at night and make sure we have enough blankets. But volumes have been written about this….

    • itzyaboi95

      This really pisses me off.

  • NachoCheese (D)

    “For the Children™”?

    A demagogue’s (and a rising dictator’s) standard tactic. Nothing quite like Appeal to Emotion fallacies to convince the sheep to disarm themselves.

  • WingedBishop

    The kids were probably just convinced that Obama is the new Santa Claus and were writing their Christmas lists.

  • WingedBishop

    At least he’s using real kids, unlike the fake doctors when he touted ObamaCare.

    • TocksNedlog

      Hey, those were REAL doctors!

      You can tell because they wore lab coats — even though most of them don’t work in a lab . . . and they were in a tv studio, and not a medical facility.

      Anyway, stop being so nosey! Just eat your bread and watch the circus. Oh look! A dog and a pony are doing an act together. Let’s watch!

  • Peyton

    Let’s also get the kids thoughts on Abortion. Luckily, Steven Crowder already did a video on what the kids thought about redistribution of wealth, but I didn’t see Obama including that in his tax arguments.

  • EastValleyConservative

    Typical Obama move. What this really says to the people who voted for him is “we think you are stupid enough to fall for this”. And sadly, they ARE!

  • NachoCheese (D)

    And here comes the Demagogue In Chief…

  • jinx70

    Those letters don’t sound “worded” in a way a child would write. Shame on those who exploited these kids for their own agenda.

  • Perry

    Have your kids write letters to Obama to ask him to sign Executive Orders to stop killing unborn kids. “If it will just save one life…” Oh, they say they have a Constitutional RIGHT to an abortion? Pfffft! No problem!

  • Jack Deth

    Jeebus!

    Obama’s position is so indefensible that he has to hide behind a Human Shield of kids?!!!

    Get ready for every returning Iraq and Afghanistan vet to be classified as suffering from PTSD and denied their Constitutional rights.

    • mdtljt

      Well, he’s already denied many of them their right to vote, what’s one more violation of their rights?? What an epic load this guy is…

  • bonnieblue2A

    Obama is betting that the American people and legislators alike are not smarter than an 11 yr. old. The real-election of the petulant imperial leader may be proof positive that they are not.

    What part of “Shall Not Be Infringed” is unclear? Not to the low informed gun grabbers: The US Constitution was a compromise on how much the government could limit the liberties of ourselves and future generations. Gun grabbers seek more infringement upon the basic human right of self-defense.

    Today the lambs say behind the biggest wolf in the room. Sickening public display.

    The first responsibility of the federal government is to uphold and defend the US Constitution. It is not to further prompt the surrendering of liberty for the false promises of security.

    Odd how the POTUS calls for harsher punishment for those who lie on the BATFE form 4473 when the agents for gun grabbing are among the worst offenders. Why have no criminal charges been brought against AG-Holder, Lanny Breuer, Ken Melson or others for their role in straw purchases for known felons and illegal ineyernational traffiking to Mexican drug cartels ?

    How many straw purchases took place at the directive of NYC Mayor Bloomberg outside if his jurisdiction without a single criminal charge?

    The criminal elite want us all under armed as the near the final stages if collapsing our currency. Vultures all!’

    • http://pennyrobinsonfanclub.net/ PennyRobinsonFanClub

      “If the federal government should overpass the just bounds
      of its authority and make a tyrannical use of its powers, the people,
      whose creature it is, must appeal to the standard they have formed, and
      take such measures to redress the injury done to the Constitution as the
      exigency may suggest and prudence justify. ”

      Alexander Hamilton: Federalist No. 33, January 3, 1788

    • http://pennyrobinsonfanclub.net/ PennyRobinsonFanClub

      The Constitution is not an instrument for the government
      to restrain the people, it is a instrument for the people to restrain
      the government…Patrick Henry:

  • Junie3

    Is the debt clock running above their heads as the scam thug reads his owner, George Soros gun laws.

  • itzyaboi95

    It’s sick how people take advantage of the young and unaware to push their stupid agenda.

  • RightThinking1

    Yes, yes. All spontaneously written, I’m sure…

  • QuadGMoto

    I can think of another group that hides behind women and children. Their initials are M. T. and they end with _uslim _errorists.

  • QuadGMoto

    Children a great, but there’s a reason why important decisions are restricted to adults.

  • Right Wired

    Why doesn’t he pose with the tens of millions of people he has enslaved with social welfare?

  • Paula Noakes

    It’s disgusting. Those letters were dictated to the children. There’s no way young children are writing to the president in such complete and thought-out terms. Young children would be saying things like “Please, Santa, bring me a dolly,” not “I am not afraid for my safety …” Bunches of crapola, as usual from this man.

  • rant stocks

    It never seems to amaze me how morally low this obama wiil stoop to gutter tactic’s to win favour for something,this needs to come out of congress…..Stop acting like a King Obama orTyrannt.

  • sb36695

    Children running the government. Sounds about right.

  • Stephen L. Hall

    Never discount the value of human shields.

  • http://extremesplash.wordpress.com/ Ben Bollman

    Am I the only one thinking “Hitler Youth” right now?

    • Ardell Simon

      “The state must declare the child to be the most precious treasure of the people. As long as the government is perceived as working for the benefit of the children, the people will happily endure almost any curtailment of liberty and almost any deprivation.” ~ Mein Kampf, Adolph Hitler

  • lainer51

    he seems to have a special place in his heart for these children, who were lucky enough to be born; the same doesn’t hold true for those he allows to be aborted.

  • ratizbad

    Mr.Hussein either hides behind a skirt or follows up and resting behind a young kids to help his way of Tranny. Then make Americans feel sorry for him,I cannot laugh to much more for this Idiot and his way of playing The American people..What a fool always a fool,When you are a fool!

  • http://twitter.com/Pay_it_FW Pay it FW

    OH, I see, it is wrong for d NRA to use Obama’s children to oppose gun
    control, but it is OK for obama to use children to push gun control!