Hey Republicans...You can't have it both ways...

[FourScore]

You can't claim that the Democrats want to take away your guns (which we don't)

AND

claim that we use violent gun rhetoric in politics to gin up our base the same way you do (which we also don't).

No -- you can't have it both ways. NEITHER of those accusations are correct on their own merits, but together...Really, you can't have both because they are diametrically opposing. Just sayin'.

[Proud Liberal Dem]

1. Good call

:thumbsup:

The crazy thing is that to the people so obsessed about Democrats grabbing their guns won't even accept the evidence that President Obama hasn't ever proposed any new gun control legislation nor made any overt moves on guns at all actually. Of course, to them, absence of evidence IS "evidence" of something going on. :banghead:

[FourScore]

3. Nor could he do it on his own.

It would have to be an act of congress -- and that would never happen.

[Proud Liberal Dem]

4. While that is certainly true (and most rational people know this)

anybody whom honestly believes that President Obama is a would-be gun grabber (probably) already believes that he is an evil out-of-control socialist tyrant who can and will do whatever he wants despite Congress and/or the rule of law.

[sadbear]

2. But having it both ways is the foundation of their entire party

[mzmolly]

5. You also can't claim that violent rhetoric doesn't have a consequence, while using blood libel

as a metaphor.

[cilla4progress]

6. I thought you were going to say:

Republicans can't say the inflammatory rhetoric doesn't lead to acts of violence, and then whine that "journalists and pundits should not manufacture a blood libel that serves only to incite the very hatred and violence that they purport to condemn.”

Either words have an impact or they don't, Sarah and friends.

Such hypocrites.

I predict that when the dust settles, and the pendulum swings back, on the whole we will see this for what it is: a veiled but coherent plan on the right to rile people up, without concern for the consequences.

[patrice]

7. You also can't claim that there is too much government/too many laws AND say "Yeah but, there's no

law against cross-hair graphics, so it's okay."