NRA ad attacked for including President Obama's daughters - Polidicks

NRA ad attacked for including President Obama's daughters Politico 1/16/13 12:46 PM EST [quote]The National Rifle Association on Tuesday released a controversial new ad that makes reference to President Barack Obama’s daughters - sparking outrage from critics who charged that the spot is over the line. “Most Americans agree that a president’s children should not be used as pawns in a political fight,” White House Press Secretary Jay Carney said. “But to go so far as to make the safety of the President’s children the subject of an attack ad is repugnant and cowardly.” The video calls Obama an “elitist hypocrite” for not embracing armed guards in schools even as his daughters enjoy armed protection at their schools. “Are the president’s kids more important than yours?” the ad’s narrator asks. “Then why is he skeptical about putting armed security in our schools when his kids are protected by armed guards at their schools? Mr. Obama demands the wealthy pay their fair share of taxes, but he’s just another elitist hypocrite when it comes to a fair share of security.” The gun group’s spot came under immediate attack. Former White House Press Secretary and Obama advisor Robert Gibbs slammed the ad on MSNBC’s “Morning Joe” Wednesday morning. “I mean, it is disgusting on many levels,” Gibbs said. “It’s also just stupid.” He added, “This reminds me of an ad that somebody made about 2:00 in the morning after one too many drinks, and no one stopped it in the morning.” “What’s wrong with these people, Mika? What’s wrong with these people?” Joe Scarborough, host of “Morning Joe,” asked co-host Mika Brzezinksi in disbelief. “They are out of step, out of the mainstream, totally out of sync with what’s going on in our society, and quite frankly after seeing that, I think some of the people who run that thing are sick,” Brzezinski said. “I really do. I think they are sick in the head. “And I’m serious,” she continued. “I am embarrassed right now.” Later, replaying the ad, Brzezinski added, “It may disgust you. It terrifies me.” According to MSNBC, the NRA swung back in a statement provided to the network. “Whoever thinks the ad is about President Obama’s daughters are missing the point completely or they’re trying to change the subject. This ad is about keeping our children safe,” said NRA spokesman Andrew Arulanandam. The NRA did not immediately respond to POLITICO’s request for comment. Larry Pratt, the executive director of Gun Owners of America, defended the ad Wednesday in an appearance on Fox’s “America’s Newsroom.” ”I think the ad is spot-on,” Pratt said. “It points to the hypocrisy that we see so much from our ruling class, and it underscores the need that we’ve been pointing to that if we’re going to get serious about protecting our children, we’re going to do away with the ‘gun-free zone’ requirements in federal law, which have created a magnet for these mass murders.” When asked about discussing the president’s children, Pratt added, “This is a democracy. This is a country where we are all equal before the law, and to have special privileges for others that wouldn’t necessarily extend to us common people goes down a little hard.” Melody Barnes, the former director of the White House Domestic Policy Council, said the country should brace for more ads like the NRA spot. “And that’s what’s going to infiltrate the debate,” Barnes said. “Those are the kinds of visits members of Congress are going to get, and that’s why people have been scared to take on this issue even after tragedy after tragedy in our communities around the country, and the American people have to be prepared for that and make a decision what kind of country do we want to live in and the message that they want to convey to their policymakers about the kinds of laws and the kinds of policies that we’re going to have.” Sasha and Malia Obama attend Washington’s posh private Sidwell Friends School. ”Their whole goal is to ratchet up the rhetoric,” Rep. Tammy Duckworth (D-Ill.) said on CNN’s “Starting Point” about the NRA ad. She added, “Let’s stay calm. Let’s look at the function of these weapons… we need to ban those weapons that have the functionality that can kill a whole bunch of folks in just a few seconds.” David Frum blasted the ad in a blog [URL="http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2013/01/16/the-nra-guns-for-sasha-and-malia.html"]post[/URL]. “…the NRA’s sneering references to the president’s family are beyond the pale,” Frum wrote. “As the makers of the NRA ad should know, and probably do know, the First Family has come under years of racially coded attack for their ‘uppityism,’ as Rush Limbaugh phrased it. This latest attack ad looks to many like only one more attempt to enflame an ancient American wound.” Frum, a former speechwriter for President George W. Bush, added, “Generally speaking, a president’s family should not be subject to political criticism. That rule was honorably upheld in the case of the Bush daughters, who grew into fine young people, and the rule should be same for the Obama daughters - especially if it’s true, as has been widely reported, that this first family has faced a unique degree of threat.” Twitter reaction also took off after the video dropped. CNN’s Piers Morgan, who has taken heat from gun advocates for his position on gun control, ripped the video in a tweet. “This new @NRA ad is just disgusting,” he tweeted, linking to the clip. Kathleen McKinley, a conservative blogger for places including the Houston Chronicle, bashed the use of Obama’s children in the ad. “Here’s an idea. How about the NRA and Obama NOT use children at all to promote their agenda?” she tweeted. “This is not an SNL skit. This is a real NRA Ad,” tweeted actor Zach Braff, linking to the clip. “Trying to figure out what NRA is thinking with web ad targeting Obama girls. Who thinks that’s appropriate? #mitchellreports,” offered MSNBC’s Andrea Mitchell. Ron Fournier of National Journal group called the ad “low” in a tweet. In a follow-up tweet, he added, “”Has the NRA Finally Gone Too Far?” My take: Hell, yes.” Fournier included a link to a post that further took the NRA to task. “The ad is indisputably misleading, and is arguably a dangerous appeal to the base instincts of gun-rights activists,” he wrote. “@thedailybeast: NRA Ad Targets Obama Daughters [url]http://thebea.st/U0y119[/url] . Tasteless, mean spirited and totally out of bounds. Agree?” tweeted Democratic strategist and commentator Donna Brazile. John Dickerson of CBS News said on “CBS This Morning” that the video “makes a larger argument. It’s not just about guns,” he said. “It’s going into… negative views about the president. It uses all the emotional — presses all the emotional buttons for those people who don’t like the president and the NRA is making this about hypocrisy, not about safety.” [/quote] Source: [url]http://www.politico.com/story/2013/01/new-nra-ad-comes-under-attack-86268.html[/url] [url]http://www.politico.com/story/2013/01/new-nra-ad-comes-under-attack-86268_Page2.html[/url] the ad in question: [video=youtube;2bKw7ZsQgtc]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2bKw7ZsQgtc&feature[/video]

as an American and a Firearms owner, the NRA can go fuck itself, thanks.

eh, I didn't think it was that bad. I came here expecting much worse.

[QUOTE=Lamar;39244464]eh, I didn't think it was that bad. I came here expecting much worse.[/QUOTE] Its bad when you bring someone's family into it. You just dont do that.

Yeah right, the president and his family need the same amount of protection as the average joe right? After all, not like anyone would want to target the president of the united states of america or anything right? Gun owner or not, you've got to find the NRA retarded.

Did they not consider that it's because, i dunno, they're the presidents daughters.

This is almost as bad as that Rick Perry ad that attacked gay people.

NRA overlooks that if the President's daughters get kidnapped or killed he's gonna have a really hard time doing the most important job a single person can do in the country.

[QUOTE=-Get_A_Life-;39244512]Yeah right, the president and his family need the same amount of protection as the average joe right? After all, not like anyone would want to target the president of the united states of america or anything right? Gun owner or not, you've got to find the NRA retarded.[/QUOTE] 100% agree with this, dumb ad

[QUOTE=areolop;39244472]Its bad when you bring someone's family into it. You just dont do that.[/QUOTE] I seem to recall quite a lot of family bashing when the story of Rick Santorum's stillbirth daughter came out.

[QUOTE=areolop;39244472]Its bad when you bring someone's family into it. You just dont do that.[/QUOTE] You should tell that to all those anti-gun people who are pushing their agenda over peoples dead children.

[QUOTE=SPESSMEHREN;39244689]I seem to recall quite a lot of family bashing when the story of Rick Santorum's stillbirth daughter came out.[/QUOTE] Thats because Santorum was being a creepy and hypocritical idiot with the situation

[QUOTE=InsanePyro;39244998]Thats because Santorum was being a creepy and hypocritical idiot with the situation[/QUOTE] oh, so when you guys say "family is off limits," it just depends on WHOSE family it is. I get it.

[QUOTE=Sir_takeslot;39244735]You should tell that to all those anti-gun people who are pushing their agenda over peoples dead children.[/QUOTE] Because the pro-gun people aren't pushing their own agenda (i.e. armed guards in schools) over peoples dead children too?

That was laughable

[QUOTE=Drakehawke;39245140]Because the pro-gun people aren't pushing their own agenda (i.e. armed guards in schools) over peoples dead children too?[/QUOTE] I don't recall saying they weren't.

[QUOTE=Drakehawke;39245140]Because the pro-gun people aren't pushing their own agenda (i.e. armed guards in schools) over peoples dead children too?[/QUOTE] Nope they aren't. Typically anti-gun people leach off of a massacre then the pro-gun people defend it. [editline]16th January 2013[/editline] I personally see NOTHING wrong with having a police officer in every school.

[QUOTE=areolop;39244472]Its bad when you bring someone's family into it. You just dont do that.[/QUOTE] Just like the Obama attack ads that attacked Romney's wife's medical condition?

[QUOTE=SPESSMEHREN;39245015]oh, so when you guys say "family is off limits," it just depends on WHOSE family it is. I get it.[/QUOTE] Theres a difference between bringing someones family into a political ad and asking "what the fuck?" when a guy brings home a dead baby

I equate the NRA to a gun activist like I do PETA to an animal right's supporter, they just don't represent the majority of their constituents anymore.

Why the fuck are they questioning why the PRESIDENT'S daughters have armed guards? There are plenty of people, hundreds I bet you at least, that have threatened to kill him and/or his family. I highly doubt the average American has any fucking thing to worry about.

[QUOTE=ForgottenKane;39245381]I highly doubt the average American has any fucking thing to worry about.[/QUOTE] Which is why all of the gun control laws that are being proposed and pushed in the name of the shooting are not needed.

[QUOTE=laserguided;39245269] I personally see NOTHING wrong with having a police officer in every school.[/QUOTE] $$$$ is the issue.

[QUOTE=areolop;39245575]$$$$ is the issue.[/QUOTE] Wouldn't gun control[of any form] cost massive dosh as well?

I see where they are going with this but the presidents kids go to a PRIVATE school, not a public one. Each have their own rules.

It's still really funny to me that one of the reasons the NRA supports gun rights is to prevent government tyranny but their alternative to gun control, which is to keep the peace by having armed police officers everywhere, is literally a police state. [editline]16th January 2013[/editline] [QUOTE=JoeSkylynx;39245629]Wouldn't gun control[of any form] cost massive dosh as well?[/QUOTE] probably not since gun violence costs money both in the form of healthcare for the victims and legal proceedings for the accused it's not even a money issue the issue is that the NRA's mentality that we'll be safer if we just 'shoot all the bad guys' is fucking stupid, palliative care

As crude as the ad is, it is very true. Kudos to the NRA for growing some balls for once.

[QUOTE=UziXxX;39246277]As crude as the ad is, it is very true. Kudos to the NRA for growing some balls for once.[/QUOTE] Too bad they've shot themselves in the foot with it. [QUOTE=SigmaLambda;39246230]It's still really funny to me that one of the reasons the NRA supports gun rights is to prevent government tyranny but their alternative to gun control, which is to keep the peace by having armed police officers everywhere, is literally a police state. probably not since gun violence costs money both in the form of healthcare for the victims and legal proceedings for the accused it's not even a money issue the issue is that the NRA's mentality that we'll be safer if we just 'shoot all the bad guys' is fucking stupid, palliative care[/QUOTE] [I]"'Dey took mah guns."[/I]

It's funny because the White House is appalled that the NRA used their kids in the ad and Obama used kids to pull the sympathy vote with what he did today Fucking hypocrite

[QUOTE=Van-man;39246580][I]"'Dey took mah guns."[/I][/QUOTE] [video=youtube;0CcIkuxBYkg]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0CcIkuxBYkg[/video] [QUOTE=Barack Obama]I will not take your rifle away[/QUOTE]