Nov 2023 Mod notice:
There may be other, more specific, threads about some aspects of US politics, but this one tends to act as a hub for all sorts of related news and information, so it's usually one of the busiest OTC threads.
If you're new to OTC, it's worth reading the Introduction to On-Topic Conversations
and the On-Topic Conversations debate guidelines
before posting here.
Rumor-based, fear-mongering and/or inflammatory statements that damage the quality of the thread will be thumped. Off-topic posts will also be thumped. Repeat offenders may be suspended.
If time spent moderating this thread remains a distraction from moderation of the wiki itself, the thread will need to be locked. We want to avoid that, so please follow the forum rules
when posting here.
In line with the general forum rules, 'gravedancing' is prohibited here. If you're celebrating someone's death or hoping that they die, your post will get thumped. This rule applies regardless of what the person you're discussing has said or done.
Edited by Mrph1 on Nov 30th 2023 at 11:03:59 AM
Meme Base has been having a blast with the photo. With how net-savvy Obama is, the "Please do not manipulate this photo to show endorsement of the President" statement might be intentionally encouraging people to do so.
edited 3rd Feb '13 10:22:59 AM by RTaco
As Jon Stewart pointed out, the whole thing is an exercise in futility. The Right will never allow the President to look good, no matter what he does. They have staked their entire political agenda on rabid opposition of everything Obama does, and it is utterly naive of him to even try to reach across the aisle.
To the Right it makes him look weak, to the Left it makes him look like a sell-out, and to the center it makes no difference at all, as they will continue to attempt to sell a false equivalence between the two sides no matter what.
edited 3rd Feb '13 10:52:38 AM by Fighteer
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"![]()
Better skeet than quail
, amirite?
Anyway, what the President does with his down time is his business, so long as its legal, right? It's a pretty silly thing to bring up at all, so politicizing it is going to happen simply because he's a public figure involved in a political debate.
On either side, it might seem like he's reaching out to gun owners in spite of historical support of gun bans and gun control. It's not unreasonable to be critical, or expected to be criticized, for releasing such photos while the gun control debate is raging. That's just politics as usual.
Whether he uses this past-time to base his opinion on guns and gun control is what many are questioning. For a very long time, Obama has said he supports the 2nd amendment because of the long history Americans have with hunting and sport, but almost never mentioned anything about the purpose of guns for self-defense until after Sandy Hook.
This sort of scrutiny is more or less what drives the criticism.
On a broader scale, the question is whether hunting and shooting sports (like Skeet) is the primary perspective that is only being regarded by those in favor of gun bans. "You don't need an AR-15 to hunt!" is a popular sentiment among those who favor such limitations.
Glove and Boots is good for Blog!But he only released the photos because the right demanded evidence that wasn't making up the fact that he shot.
“And the Bunny nails it!” ~ Gabrael “If the UN can get through a day without everyone strangling everyone else so can we.” ~ Cyran![]()
Should one photograph silence all criticism about a statement that he "shoots skeet all the time at Camp David"? Nah, it only increases the criticism based on its timing. There's still people questioning his birth records, after all the arguments regarding his birth.
There are people who want all levels of government to be completely transparent, including into the private lives of Presidents, etc. It's a common reaction to public figures to want to dig deeper and deeper into someone's background and question them on their integrity.
Hell, at least one person challenged him to a round of skeet shooting to see if he's the real deal.
Again, it's not hard to be critical or skeptical based on a single photograph.
Wouldn't that just be awkward, that in the context of the Fiscal cliff, and the recession, to find out that the President is the guy who has been pirating movies in the Capitol Building?
edited 3rd Feb '13 1:42:20 PM by DevilTakeMe
Glove and Boots is good for Blog!
Obama's stance is much more uncertain since there isn't a clear-cut answer that people are looking for, except that he's leaning towards some type of gun control, and without knowing what that would actually be, people will be reading into it as much as possible. So here, there will be more intense scrutiny, since it is part of the on-going political debate outside of Obama himself.
There's certainly lots of questions that I would ask, now that the picture is out there. Did he start skeet shooting before or after he became president? Does he own the shotgun used in the photograph?
Glove and Boots is good for Blog!Not really. The birth certificate was a legal document that's a) rather difficult to falsify, b) has likely been used for all kinds of other bookkeeping purposes before, and c) whose existence wasn't doubted by anyone particularly sane.
He may or may not have a history of skeet shooting (I'd actually be interested if he took up the one guy's challenge — not because of proof, but because skeet shooting with the President would be awesome), but if he doesn't it's an incredibly easy photo op for cheap immediate support.
edited 3rd Feb '13 3:06:56 PM by Pykrete
![]()
Then again, Conservatives were mostly for this part of the NDAA, which is sort of why they're not questioning it. Even the Democrats who were against the detention clause have been muted out for the most part.
Exactly, one photo op as an adult in the middle of an actual political debate is not necessarily proof that he regularly engages, as he so says he does. It's a show of faith, sure, but it's hard to tell how deep the interest in skeet shooting actually runs.
edited 3rd Feb '13 3:12:26 PM by DevilTakeMe
Glove and Boots is good for Blog!Does it matter? I mean, seriously, your question boils down to 'did you start shooting before you obtained regular access to your own private skeet shooting range, free guns, ammunition and (probably) instructors?'
He may possibly have target shot air rifles beforehand; Hawaii's pretty strict with firearms, but the school he went to fields air rifle and precision air rifle teams.
edited 3rd Feb '13 3:15:50 PM by Bluesqueak
It ain't over 'till the ring hits the lava.![]()
It's a question I would ask. It's as useless a question as whether Clinton inhaled when he smoked marijuana or that GW Bush snorted coke. It helps to get a better perspective on what his perspective is on the subject of guns, again, since his position is completely nebulous as he's basically passing the buck to his vice president and the democratic party in Congress.
You make it sound like it's a bad thing to ask questions.
Glove and Boots is good for Blog!
It's a useless question, that's why I don't like it. Tells you nothing whatsoever about his perspective on guns.
Because: he could have never picked up a gun until Camp David, and still have decided that skeet shooting is a fun sport. And that he now 'gets' the 'hunting and shooting' side of gun ownership.
It ain't over 'till the ring hits the lava.
Which is why I would be asking for a clarification on his views. Prior to his election, he was for gun control, but if he's now only "discovering" the value of recreational usage of firearms because of his time at Camp David, and is now less clear about his position, does that not raise questions on what he actually does know or feel about them?
If he simply said he has a limited knowledge or use of firearms because of his recreational use earlier, there would probably be far less doubt since people, as you say, had to pester him about it.
edited 3rd Feb '13 5:31:56 PM by DevilTakeMe
Glove and Boots is good for Blog!You can be for gun control while still being for the recreational uses for guns. You just can't be in favor of banning all guns while being for the recreational uses for guns, and the particular gun he is using in the photo is one that would not be banned under any circumstances. Obama's stance on the gun issue is still relatively consistent.
I mean, I myself had only been at a shooting range once in my life and I was a relative natural, but that does not mean I can go there every so often.
edited 3rd Feb '13 6:05:31 PM by GameGuruGG
Wizard Needs Food Badly
So, simply put, it doesn't hurt to ask, now does it?
One can be personally against owning a gun, but also have zero support for gun control. The lawyer who put together the lawsuit that overturned DC's gun laws owned no guns himself. It just helps to be certain what they are for.
Glove and Boots is good for Blog!Not really, but one should accept the answer given instead of letting paranoia cloud their judgement, which extremists on both sides have problems with. I mean... I myself don't particularly care enough for guns to know one model from another without looking up Wikipedia save for really well known ones, but yet I still respect the particular right to own one. I do think there should be more regulations on guns, but I would never support an outright ban. I think New York and California occasionally go too far. I mean, nunchaku are banned in California, and that's not a particularly effective weapon.
edited 3rd Feb '13 6:14:24 PM by GameGuruGG
Wizard Needs Food Badly

I'm curious, what do you guys think of this photo?
It seems like a strange thing to care about.