Skip to main content

View Diary: NRA responds to ad outrage: Obama children ad not about Obama children (124 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  inserting more sense than the ad has (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    SilentBrook, Joieau, RockyMtnLib

    "Are the president’s kids more important than yours?"

    In other words: Why should the President's kids have more security than everyone else?

    The question they might have asked if they were going with the "everyone deserves protection" angle you suggest is "Shouldn't all children have the same protection that the President's children have?"

    Both questions are mind-numbingly stupid, but the first carries the added implication that the President's kids shouldn't have that protection at all.

    •  Which is what makes it a dog-whistle. (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Joieau, RockyMtnLib

      A racist dog-whistle, intended to prick up the ears of those who think Acorn stole the election, so who does this uppity (n-word) think he is to propose new laws?!?

      That's why they phrase it this way. And they may even get a stochastic terrorist to target Sasha & Malia in the bargain. In their thinking, this kind of threat is leverage, when really, if so much as a hair on Sasha or Malia's heads were actually harmed, there might be a national willingness to consider full repeal of the 2nd Amendment.

      A winning campaign? You didn't build that...

      by SilentBrook on Wed Jan 16, 2013 at 01:00:02 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site