A new ad campaign by the National Rifle Association falsely accuses Obama of wanting to "ban use of firearms for home defense, ban possession and manufacture of handguns, close 90 per cent of gun shops and ban hunting ammunition," reports FactCheck.org, a watchdog linked to neither party that exposes false statements made by both campaigns.
Here's the ad:
This can only damage Obama's standing among rural Americans. They are already sore at being called "bitter" by the candidate. According to FactCheck much of the ad, "is actually contrary to what he has said throughout his campaign: that he 'respects the constitutional rights of Americans to bear arms' and 'will protect the rights of hunters and other law-abiding Americans to purchase, own, transport, and use guns'"
"We find the NRA has cherry-picked, twisted and misrepresented Obama's record," FactCheck concluded.
I bet that guy has never been hunting!
Why are these ads so cheesy?
FOCUS ON YOUR OWN POLICIES MCCAIN!
Posted by: Hayley :) | 27 October 2008 at 01:55 PM
The Brady Campaign as long be disgraced as a deceitful and misleading source of any information on the rights of Americans and firearms. The fact that Pennington includes his affiliation with such an awful group negates his points.
Pennington is wrong on the facts. Nobama is wrong for America.
McCain-Palin 2008.
Posted by: Guns Save Lives | 29 September 2008 at 09:32 PM
Fact check didn't check the facts. They are funded by the Annenberg Foundation. They provide funding to gun control groups like the Brady Center.
Here are the true facts.
http://www.gunbanobama.com/Default.aspx?NavGuid=530ecfa4-ae4e-4819-97e6-892463d99f08
http://www.nraila.org/media/PDFs/wp_response_obamaads.pdf
http://www.nraila.org/Legislation/Read.aspx?ID=4191
http://volokh.com/posts/1222201928.shtml
Posted by: Willbill | 27 September 2008 at 11:34 PM
"Not clear to me why you Brits are spending significant time covering the US elections"
Probably the same reason we in the US stick our nose in every political issue on a global basis.
As far as disarming American Sportsman...not a chance in hell is that ever going to happen. I've been an avid sportsman for over 30 years. Even with the power of the 2nd Amendment, the sale and activity of sportsmen in the US bring in one factor that can't ever be ignored..and that is financial. In Michigan alone, the annual financial benefit to the State economy is in excess of 2Billion Dollars. To impose any threat to that sort of financial element would result in nothing more than a taxable compensation on the US economy. So to disarm or to restrict is essentially saying we will provide a financial bailout to the states that suffer a lose. And to provide this bail out, we'll simply raise your taxes.
Posted by: TrekJeff | 27 September 2008 at 05:46 PM
No one has shown any evidence that the NRA is actually behind this ad ? I question it`s authenticity.
Posted by: Stuart Andrews | 26 September 2008 at 09:55 AM
"Not clear to me why you Brits are spending significant time covering the US elections." Comments like this reveal what many Americans don't understand about life outside America. There is almost no country in the world that isn't in some way shaped by American foreign or trade policies. If it chooses America can invade or bomb a country, organise coups, promote and support brutal dictators, impose trade sanctions and the list goes on and on and on. The fact of the matter is that who the president of the US is has a direct bearing on the rest of the world, probably to a greater extent than he does on Americans. This is why non-Americans are interested in this election and wish they could vote.
Gun control in the US? My opinions are largely irrelevant as that is an issue affecting Americans. Who they choose as president, well that is something that affects the rest of the world.
It would be great if we did not have to concern ourselves with who the leader of the most powerful country in the world is or what he does.
Posted by: Gemena | 26 September 2008 at 09:20 AM
I suggest you turkeys look up the facts that willbill put on the screen so you can check for yourself. Obama is not who we want to be president. McCain either but mostly Obama.
Posted by: turkey | 26 September 2008 at 12:30 AM
If Newt Gingrich were running for president, and he stated that he supported women’s right to choose an abortion with reasonable common sense restrictions, would anyone believe that he is now pro-choice? Considering his record, why should anyone believe Barack Hussein Obama when he states he supports an individual’s right to keep and bear arms?
If fact check really checked into Obama’s record they would have found that he:
Voted to ban almost all rifle ammunition commonly used for hunting and sport shooting.
Endorsed a 500% increase in the federal excise tax on firearms and ammunition.
Endorsed a complete ban on handgun ownership in Illinois.
Voiced Support for local gun bans in Chicago, Washington, D.C., and other cities.
Voted to uphold local gun bans and the criminal prosecution of people
who use firearms in self-defense.
Refused to sign a friend-of-the-court Brief in support of individual Second Amendment rights in the Heller case.
Favors a ban on standard capacity magazines.
Supports a ban on inexpensive handguns.
Get the true facts on Barack Hussein Obama’s record on firearms rights.
http://www.nraila.org/Issues/FactSheets/Read.aspx?id=234&issue=047
And no FactCheck’s deception.
http://www.gunbanobama.com/Default.aspx?NavGuid=c3d25dd2-7abd-4f24-8efd-d62bd977d7c2&ID=11574&Type=1
Posted by: Willbill | 25 September 2008 at 09:38 PM
Maybe I'm being unkind but rural Americans may well be the very last Americans to vote for a black Harvard law professor. Fortunately they are few in number and this blatant distortion probably merits forgetting asap before it develops its own momentum. My tip for Obama would be to suggest that hunting is OK, but perhaps moose need a little protection.
Posted by: Krayzeekat | 25 September 2008 at 05:20 PM
@RKV
"Not clear to me why you Brits are spending significant time covering the US elections."
Probably because the USA are currently the most powerful country in the world and has a great influence on the rest of the world (especially western countries).
I know the rest of the world does not have a vote, but can Americans please save their "stay out of our business" attitude in regard to the election.
Posted by: VinnyR | 25 September 2008 at 06:14 AM
Not clear to me why you Brits are spending significant time covering the US elections. You've got plenty to deal with at home, but that's your call. As to the specifics, the NRA is correct and Obama's campaign (and their willing enablers in Fact Check) is wrong. You have never seen a politician flip-flop before have you? Well, Sen. Obama's voting record is quite clear on the matter. Here's some specifics http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ifEg1aq6Emo Fact Check is false in this matter, and it's not even close.
Whether you approve of the 2nd Amendment to the US Constitution is irrelevant, most of you aren't Americans. It's quite clear that the individual right to own arms is plainly protected, like it or not. BTW the US 2nd Amendment has nothing to do with hunting animals, hunting politicians maybe, animals no.
Posted by: RKV | 24 September 2008 at 09:05 PM
The Brady Campaign released an analysis of this same NRA ad yesterday, which folks can read here:
http://www.prweb.com/releases/2008/9/prweb1376974.htm
Remember, it was the NRA who also called John McCain "one of the premier flag carriers for the enemies of the Second Amendment" in 2002.
In this election season, their credibility is - pardon the pun - completely shot.
Doug Pennington
Bradycampaign.org
Posted by: Doug Pennington | 24 September 2008 at 02:09 PM