Using the Pres. kids is going too far

[Gib's Son]

So the consensus in the HVAC field is that it is OK to use the Presidents kids as an example of why there shouldn't be any gun control.
I'm sure that will really help the cause.

His children in that NRA add were far less exploited then all the children Obama has been parading around to support HIS cause. IMO his children should, and do, get more protection than children that are less of a target (no pun intended) for a terrorist act or that of the run of the mill wacko. But the point of the add is still valid, his children are no more important or precious than anyone yours or mine. All lives are of equal value......remember all men are created equal? Sorry gals.

[Gib's Son]

So who is going to train the people guarding the kids and who is going to insure that these people are properly trained ???

The government ???

I think it should be left to the State or Local Government. If left to the Feds we are likely to end up with sex perverts, pedophiles and thieves. Just look towards TSA for how well of a job they do in hiring.

[ga-hvac-tech]

I think we need to learn to NOT TRUST politicians when they have their mouths open... NO exceptions.

Perhaps them we will start to think clearly. Until then... you are gonna get lied to and used.

[mcjo tech]

So the consensus in the HVAC field is that it is OK to use the Presidents kids as an example of why there shouldn't be any gun control.
I'm sure that will really help the cause.

Nothing is going to help their cause.

Their party is split.

In fighting galore.

Tea against Moderate.

They are Toast

And so stupid they can't even figure that one out.

[printer2]

President's kids have secret service. The school has independent guards. Pay attention please.

Just replying to what was given to me by the OP.

[DeltaT]

Just replying to what was given to me by the OP.

I'm lost in the purpose of this discussion cept what's his face used kids to promote himself, doesn't make any difference the reason or situation, he's going to use whatever he can to promote himself.

BTW, the kids school is private and locked down from the public cause a lot of very important folks send their kids there. The guards are low keyed pretty much. But the Secret Service had even them checked out before the girls were allowed to go there. And where the girls are so are the Secret Service. They never relinquish their control over who they are charged with guarding. And they never trust anybody even if a person in a police uniform approaches.

It's all necessary.

[Tool-Slinger]

I'm lost in the purpose of this discussion cept what's his face used kids to promote himself, doesn't make any difference the reason or situation, he's going to use whatever he can to promote himself.

BTW, the kids school is private and locked down from the public cause a lot of very important folks send their kids there. The guards are low keyed pretty much. But the Secret Service had even them checked out before the girls were allowed to go there. And where the girls are so are the Secret Service. They never relinquish their control over who they are charged with guarding. And they never trust anybody even if a person in a police uniform approaches.

It's all necessary.

I understand obamakids need more protection than the average kid. But why guns on location? Why not super-Duper GUN FREE ZONES?

If you think about it for a moment or two, you can see the intellectual dishonesty any hypocrisy here very easily.

Obama's kids need protection,... answer is bring in more guns.

Our kids need protection,.. answer is to remove guns as much as possible.

It is hypocritical in the worst kind.

Obviously a math teacher with a CCW permit is not as good a defender as a secret service agent, but we all already knew that obamaspawn requires special protection. We do not need you to explain to us why Obamakids require extra security. We know that. You are missing the bigger intellectual point. It might have been the thing that made your ear-drum feel cold when it sailed right through your head.

[ga-hvac-tech]

I understand obamakids need more protection than the average kid. But why guns on location? Why not super-Duper GUN FREE ZONES?

If you think about it for a moment or two, you can see the intellectual dishonesty any hypocrisy here very easily.

Obama's kids need protection,... answer is bring in more guns.

Our kids need protection,.. answer is to remove guns as much as possible.

It is hypocritical in the worst kind.

Obviously a math teacher with a CCW permit is not as good a defender as a secret service agent, but we all already knew that obamaspawn requires special protection. We do not need you to explain to us why Obamakids require extra security. We know that. You are missing the bigger intellectual point. It might have been the thing that made your ear-drum feel cold when it sailed right through your head.

IMO if a person looks at the double standard above, and does not see both elitism (dangerous to liberty), and dishonesty (dangerous to freedom)... They are either naive or intentionally looking the other way.
There is IMO no excuse for allowing this stupidy... unless there is another agenda not being discussed... which is nothing short of conspiratory.

Grow a set America... or you may have the little ones you do have removed for the greater good (by exec order of the very govt you refuse to deal with... because playing intellectual games is more important than being free).

[garyed]

IMO if a person looks at the double standard above, and does not see both elitism (dangerous to liberty), and dishonesty (dangerous to freedom)... They are either naive or intentionally looking the other way.
There is IMO no excuse for allowing this stupidy... unless there is another agenda not being discussed... which is nothing short of conspiratory.

Grow a set America... or you may have the little ones you do have removed for the greater good (by exec order of the very govt you refuse to deal with... because playing intellectual games is more important than being free).

I still don't buy it. Politics has nothing to do with how the President protects his kids. Every President that I'm aware of since Eisenhower has had armed protection for their families & it never made a difference on their policies on guns if they had one.
When you become president whether you're an elitist or not you still put your family in harms way & they have to be protected.
I think Obama is 100% wrong on whatever his proposed gun restrictions are & just about every other thing he's done as president but I see absolutely no double standard in protecting his family & still believing in gun restriction.

[geerair]

I understand obamakids need more protection than the average kid. But why guns on location? Why not super-Duper GUN FREE ZONES?

I would suggest you pose this question to the Secret Service. I'm certain they would be more than happy to correct your confusion.

If you think about it for a moment or two, you can see the intellectual dishonesty any hypocrisy here very easily.

Yes, given a set of biases, ideological leanings, personal feelings and a relentless stream of partisan political media, one cannot help but find intellectual dishonesty and hypocrisy behind every woodpile.

Obama's kids need protection,... answer is bring in more guns.

Armed Secret Service protection is mandatory. not only at schools but everywhere, all the time. Obama has no choice in this matter.

Our kids need protection,.. answer is to remove guns as much as possible.

This is not up to Obama. You can have as many armed guards, teachers, janitors, administrators, as you want, with as many guns as you want. Talk to your local school board; protection is their responsibility.

It is hypocritical in the worst kind.

Yes, if you ignore the facts.

[DeltaT]

Actually, I fully agree with you but I don't know how that message got turned around in this posting. obama doesn't care about us or or kids, neighborhood, jobs, savings, family, dog, cat, etc, etc. He doesn't even know we exist except for his service and amusement.

He sees himself as a king. And the last two elections have proven to him that he is correct. So him mode of operation after the last election is full steam ahead into the rocks of the ship he is commanding keeping in mind he is not on that ship.

BTW, DC where his kids school, use to be a gun free zone for many years up until lately. It was illegal to have a gun in your possession even if you were just driving through from another state.

An old DC friend just sent me a map of our old DC neighborhood which is about 20 blocks away from the Capitol. This map shows the amount of killings, mainly by guns, in our old neighborhood. But it's been this way since the 60's. The criminals are armed to the teeth but the law abiding citizens are defenseless. BTW, most of the killings are drug related and black to black.

I just switched over to Mozilla Firefox and can't find my Favorites so I'll get back to you and the map of gun murders in DC.

I understand obamakids need more protection than the average kid. But why guns on location? Why not super-Duper GUN FREE ZONES?

If you think about it for a moment or two, you can see the intellectual dishonesty any hypocrisy here very easily.

Obama's kids need protection,... answer is bring in more guns.

Our kids need protection,.. answer is to remove guns as much as possible.

It is hypocritical in the worst kind.

Obviously a math teacher with a CCW permit is not as good a defender as a secret service agent, but we all already knew that obamaspawn requires special protection. We do not need you to explain to us why Obamakids require extra security. We know that. You are missing the bigger intellectual point. It might have been the thing that made your ear-drum feel cold when it sailed right through your head.

[geerair]

IMO if a person looks at the double standard above, and does not see both elitism (dangerous to liberty), and dishonesty (dangerous to freedom)... They are either naive or intentionally looking the other way.
There is IMO no excuse for allowing this stupidy... unless there is another agenda not being discussed... which is nothing short of conspiratory.

Grow a set America... or you may have the little ones you do have removed for the greater good (by exec order of the very govt you refuse to deal with... because playing intellectual games is more important than being free).

Very stirring. A noble patriotic call to arms. We are always enthused with your incessant demands that we storm the gates.

But we lack a leader, someone willing to set an example, to sacrifice himself for the greater good. I can think of no one more fitting for this role than you. You are obviously motivated. Your repetitive insistence that somebody do something inspires us but the time for talk is over. Lead us oh great one.

We eagerly await reports of your personal actions.

[DeltaT]

http://apps.washingtonpost.com/inves...ll:all:all:all