Every day that Obama's kids walk this country... anywhere, they are targets, and you know it. Just like G Worst Bush's kids, just like Chelsea Clinton, Just like Ronald Reagan's Press Secretary, a cop and a securty agent who were shot along with Reagan. Just like Jimmy Carter, Gerald Ford, or Richard Nixon's family... Even before Obama was elected there were threats against Michelle Obama... You know this FACT yet your agenda forces you to PRETEND that you don't.
Sorry I don't put their safety above others, going by the school shooting it seems the regulars are at higher risk. By the way there are threats made to thousands of schools every year, a threat against Michelle Obama should be taken more serious to you?
"In the beginning of a change, the Patriot is a scarce man, brave, hated and scorned. When his cause succeeds, however, the timid join him, for then it costs nothing to be a Patriot."
Every day that Obama's kids walk this country... anywhere, they are targets, and you know it. Just like G Worst Bush's kids, just like Chelsea Clinton, Just like Ronald Reagan's Press Secretary, a cop and a securty agent who were shot along with Reagan. Just like Jimmy Carter, Gerald Ford, or Richard Nixon's family... Even before Obama was elected there were threats against Michelle Obama... You know this FACT yet your agenda forces you to PRETEND that you don't.
Box, you've been arguing for 2 weeks that EVERYBODY is a potential target of gun violence. That is why EVERYBODY needs to have their guns controlled. NOW, suddenly, it is unrealistic that citizens ask for armed protection for our children in school after you've been ginning up this FEAR for the past two weeks. Which is it box, is EVERYBODY a potential target of gun violence and should be protected from it, or are only "public figures" afforded that right to protect their children from the gun violence that you proclaimed was a threat to EVERYBODY?
Other kids at Sidwell are at a greater threat of attack just because they attend school with Obama's kids. They aren't safer there, they are more at risk of an attack.
There were armed guards there before Obama's kids started to attend, so your explanation is bullshit. And really, since Obama's kids have SS detail and since any attack would be directed at them, anyone in the vicinity would be covered by the SS.
Saying that those kids aren't safer at an expensive private school with armed guards compared to say, Albany HS flies in the face of common sense....I can't believe you are clinging to that notion.
"Arguing with liberals is like playing chess with a pigeon; no matter how good I am at chess, the pigeon is just going to knock out the pieces, crap on the board, and strut around like it is victorious." - Author Unknown
Sorry I don't put their safety above others, going by the school shooting it seems the regulars are at higher risk. By the way there are threats made to thousands of schools every year, a threat against Michelle Obama should be taken more serious to you?
See... Now I'm back to "REALLY HENRY?... REALLY?" Are you that out of touch to actually consider the average kid in school at the same risk for a planned attack as that of the Presidents daughters???
Do you REALLY believe that??? Maybe I give you way too much credit... maybe you can't figure it out.
The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness. John Kenneth Galbraith
Box, you've been arguing for 2 weeks that EVERYBODY is a potential target of gun violence. That is why EVERYBODY needs to have their guns controlled.
Nope!
The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness. John Kenneth Galbraith
There were armed guards there before Obama's kids started to attend, so your explanation is bullshit. And really, since Obama's kids have SS detail and since any attack would be directed at them, anyone in the vicinity would be covered by the SS.
Saying that those kids aren't safer at an expensive private with armed guards compared to say, Albany HS flies in the face of common sense....I can't believe you are clinging to that notion.
I don't know this for certain, but I would guess that the SS guarding the Obama kids have as their primary mission to protect those two girls. I'm sure they would protect other children as well, but their first priority would be to protect the Obama girls. A threat against the Obama girls would endanger all the kids... not just the Obama kids.
The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness. John Kenneth Galbraith
Saying that those kids aren't safer at an expensive private with armed guards compared to say, Albany HS flies in the face of common sense....I can't believe you are clinging to that notion.
Oh, he will cling! These people in government are GODS to Box. You have to remember, he risked his life in a war sold on lies for the people that hold these government offices. He can't believed these people were mere mortals no different than you and I. They are ROYALTY. They make sense out of life for him. Without their existance box would be rudderless in life. And if you and I don't realize how much more important the safety of presidents and governors children are than our children, we are not showing the proper respect for our "leaders".
See... Now I'm back to "REALLY HENRY?... REALLY?" Are you that out of touch to actually consider the average kid in school at the same risk for a planned attack as that of the Presidents daughters???
Do you REALLY believe that??? Maybe I give you way too much credit... maybe you can't figure it out.
When is the last time an attempt was made on any Presidents children? How many attempts have been against ordinary American children?
Why hasn't an attempt been made on Presidential children? Armed security Why have successful massacres been perpetrated against ordinary American children? Gun free zones or lack of sufficient armed security.
"Arguing with liberals is like playing chess with a pigeon; no matter how good I am at chess, the pigeon is just going to knock out the pieces, crap on the board, and strut around like it is victorious." - Author Unknown
When is the last time an attempt was made on any Presidents children? How many attempts have been against ordinary American children?
Why hasn't an attempt been made on Presidential children? Armed security Why have successful massacres been perpetrated against ordinary American children? Gun free zones or lack of sufficient armed security.
OK...I give up. You guys are just bustin my balls. None of you are that dumb... (I hope). If you don't see the difference in the risk between the average US kid, and the Presidents kids then nothing I can say will convince you.
The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness. John Kenneth Galbraith
Aw come on box...You posted all the pictures of the victims of Sandy Hook - ya remember that? You don't remember standing on those graves preaching to everybody how if you don't support restrictions on guns that we don't care about children? You don't remember that do you? Now, when faced with the reality that Obama and our political "leaders" have armed security to protect THEIR children for a Sandy Hook incident, you begin to draw a blank. Amazing!!!
I don't know this for certain, but I would guess that the SS guarding the Obama kids have as their primary mission to protect those two girls. I'm sure they would protect other children as well, but their first priority would be to protect the Obama girls. A threat against the Obama girls would endanger all the kids... not just the Obama kids.
Box, you're using circular logic, or are a flat out Hypocrite...
On one hand you say armed security shouldn't be used and doesn't make a difference in public school but It's OK to use on public figures children because the risk is there...
But the reality doesn't support your premise... based on the number of attacks, the PUBLIC schools are at more risk. Either armed security makes a difference or it doesn't...what is it?
"Arguing with liberals is like playing chess with a pigeon; no matter how good I am at chess, the pigeon is just going to knock out the pieces, crap on the board, and strut around like it is victorious." - Author Unknown
Aw come on box...You posted all the pictures of the victims of Sandy Hook - ya remember that? You don't remember standing on those graves preaching to everybody how if you don't support restrictions on guns that we don't care about children? You don't remember that do you? Now, when faced with the reality that Obama and our political "leaders" have armed security to protect THEIR children for a Sandy Hook incident, you begin to draw a blank. Amazing!!!
You must be confused Cic... you always seem to get it wrong... and this is no exception.
The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness. John Kenneth Galbraith
OK...I give up. You guys are just bustin my balls. None of you are that dumb... (I hope). If you don't see the difference in the risk between the average US kid, and the Presidents kids then nothing I can say will convince you.
two questions Box...how many public school kids WITHOUT armed security have died in attacks the last 10 years? How many public figures kids have died with armed security in attacks the last 10 years?
The best targets are the least secure ones.. always have been, always will be...
"Arguing with liberals is like playing chess with a pigeon; no matter how good I am at chess, the pigeon is just going to knock out the pieces, crap on the board, and strut around like it is victorious." - Author Unknown
Box, you're using circular logic, or are a flat out Hypocrite...
On one hand you say armed security shouldn't be used and doesn't make a difference in public school but It's OK to use on public figures children because the risk is there...
But the reality doesn't support your premise... based on the number of attacks, the PUBLIC schools are at more risk. Either armed security makes a difference or it doesn't...what is it?
Reality??? I don't see a lot of "REALITY" on this board.
Is a billionaires kids at a greater risk of kidnapping than an average student in the USA??? Unfortunately for the billionaire... that IS the REALITY.
People like Cicero, who is practically an Al Qaeda agent, would love to kill an Obama child to make a political statement in retaliation for drone strikes that have resulted in other children s deaths. Like drones or hate them... that IS the REALITY!
The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness. John Kenneth Galbraith
two questions Box...how many public school kids WITHOUT armed security have died in attacks the last 10 years? How many public figures kids have died with armed security in attacks the last 10 years?
The best targets are the least secure ones.. always have been, always will be...
LMAO!!! OK.. YA GOTTA GET A "REALLY?" HERE!
Read your question and this time THINK about your question before you embarrass yourself.
HINT: Q. How many Americans were killed in the last 10 years compared to how many of AlQaeda's top agents were killed??? A. Lots more Americans were killed of course... See? Being an Alqaeda top commander is safer than being a typical American citizen! Jezzzzzzzzzz
Really tbird... think before you post.
The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness. John Kenneth Galbraith
Logged
