Obama's hypocrisy on rape: His indirect war on women

[1still_waters]

Obama gave a big speech today concerning sexual violence toward women, and specifically rape of women on college campuses.

“No one is more at risk of being raped or sexually assaulted than women at our nation’s colleges and universities,” said the report by the White House Council on Women and Girls.

Link

He says if a woman who is assaulted feels like she doesn’t have recourse, quote, “Shame on us.”

President Barack Obama is launching an initiative to combat sexual assault on college campuses, turning the spotlight on a problem that has devastated millions of Americans yet rarely receives such White House attention.

Link

Like everything else, he gives a nice sounding speech, but his actual policies and ideals contradict his passionate rhetoric. Obama's policies are more like an indirect war on women.

He cites the high risk of rape on our college campuses, and mentions the right for recourse. Yet when it comes to enabling women not to be raped on campus, he gives more enabling to the rapist, than he does the victim of rape.

Obama's Vice President, Joe Biden, lobbied legislators in Colorado to repeal a law that allowed conceal carry on college campuses.

Mr. Biden, vacationing in Aspen, called undecided Democrats to say, “He’s watching us and if we had a chance to move these bills forward what an important signal it would send to the rest of the country if a Western conservative state passes such legislation,” said Democratic state Rep. Tony Exum Sr. of Colorado Springs.

Obligingly, the Democrat-dominated Colorado House passed four measures on Feb. 18. The bills limit magazines to 15 rounds, require background checks for private transfer of firearms, impose a tax on gun buyers and repeal current law allowing concealed carry on college campuses.

Link

So although his administration gives good rhetoric about protecting women from rape on college campuses, they are actively lobbying to remove options for women to protect themselves from rape on college campuses.

Obama seems to indicate he's against the sexualization of women, yet his own campaign ad linked voting for him to a woman having sex for the first time.

The Obama campaign has released an ad in which HBO actress Lena Dunham compares her first time vote for Obama to losing her virginity.

Link

So Obama lobbies to remove options for self defense for women. He campaigns using the sexuality of women.

This man's actions do not match his rhetoric. He's an enemy of women, and almost an indirect champion of men who want to assault and sexualize women.

 

[AgeofKnowledge]

I completely agree with your point 1still_Waters. I'd also add that he's set himself against the moral traditional nuclear Christian families of the entire world not just the United States even going so far as to classify well respected Christian family organizations as domestic hate groups because they advocate traditional family values and moral absolutes. I've never seen anything like it from a president in my lifetime.

As Pastor Robert Jeffress recently noted:

"For the first time in history a president of our country has openly proposed altering one of society's (not to mention God's) most fundamental laws: that marriage should be between a man and a woman. While I am not suggesting that President Obama is the Antichrist, the fact that he was able to propose such a sweeping change in God's law and still win reelection by a comfortable margin illustrates how a future world leader will be able to oppose God's laws without any repercussions."

Robert Jeffress Claims Obama's Policies Are Paving the Way for a Future World Dictator in His New Book, Perfect Ending - PR Newswire - The Sacramento Bee

 

[AgeofKnowledge]

I'm don't think I'm off topic in pointing out that in addition to allowing students to ensure an adequate self-defense for themselves, raising them in a Christian household with both a mother and a father who help them internalize moral principles that are both ultimately meaningful and absolutely moral (two factors secular humanism lacks) prevents rapes from occurring IN THE FIRST PLACE.

 

[Nautilus]

yes because denying guns to a bunch of young immature kids on a campus full of other equally immature kids is clearly an attack on women? I mean purdue and virginia were not good examples of immature young adults with guns.

 

[Misty77]

Armed people are safe people. Where do most shootings or other acts of violence take place? In locations where people are not allowed to be armed.

Honestly, the idea of the average student carrying a gun is scary. But these same "kids" are old enough to be soldiers. If they are old enough and can demonstrate that they can safely use a firearm, then I see no reason why they shouldn't be allowed to conceal-carry.

 

[1still_waters]

yes because denying guns to a bunch of young immature kids on a campus full of other equally immature kids is clearly an attack on women? I mean purdue and virginia were not good examples of immature young adults with guns.

But denying a capable woman on a college campus the option to use a defensive weapon against an immature sexually assaulting college age man twice her size, is surely not an attack on women?

 

[Nautilus]

there are plenty of weapons you can carry that arent firearms that are fairly effective. You dont need to be able to kill someone to make them stop. Give them tasers for all i care. Tasers are pretty effective, you know with the whole electricity jolting through their body thing. And its a lot safer than letting someone carry a gun.

 

[1still_waters]

there are plenty of weapons you can carry that arent firearms that are fairly effective. You dont need to be able to kill someone to make them stop. Give them tasers for all i care. Tasers are pretty effective, you know with the whole electricity jolting through their body thing. And its a lot safer than letting someone carry a gun.

WE CAN HAZ BIPARTISAN COMPROMISE!!!!

A model for all the libbies...

 

[SonInMe]

You forgot our presidents most effective weapon against women, abortion.

His policies literally kill millions of girls. With that in mind do you really think this president, or any liberal, cares about people?

For heaven's sake, they kill babies so they do not have to deal with the consequences of their actions!!

This is just another attempt to further the ideal that liberals care for women.

Unless they get an abortion and die...let alone the baby girl who just got thrown in the trash.

Wake up, college students. Stop believing the indoctrination you are receiving. Whatever happened to the free thinking college student ready to take down the establishment?

Bought and paid for I guess.

 

[1still_waters]

You forgot our presidents most effective weapon against women, abortion.

His policies literally kill millions of girls. With that in mind do you really think this president, or any liberal, cares about people?

For heaven's sake, they kill babies so they do not have to deal with the consequences of their actions!!

This is just another attempt to further the ideal that liberals care for women.

Unless they get an abortion and die...let alone the baby girl who just got thrown in the trash.

Wake up, college students. Stop believing the indoctrination you are receiving. Whatever happened to the free thinking college student ready to take down the establishment?

Bought and paid for I guess.

Just when I thought we can haz did compromise......Captain red head shows up.

 

[shrimp]

there are plenty of weapons you can carry that arent firearms that are fairly effective. You dont need to be able to kill someone to make them stop. Give them tasers for all i care. Tasers are pretty effective, you know with the whole electricity jolting through their body thing. And its a lot safer than letting someone carry a gun.

Who says women would kill them I'd shoot them anywhere in a rape situation, whether it kills them or not is up to God. However, I tend to like to shoot the knees, that way I can make a quick escape.

 

[shrimp]

You forgot our presidents most effective weapon against women, abortion.

His policies literally kill millions of girls. With that in mind do you really think this president, or any liberal, cares about people?

For heaven's sake, they kill babies so they do not have to deal with the consequences of their actions!!

This is just another attempt to further the ideal that liberals care for women.

Unless they get an abortion and die...let alone the baby girl who just got thrown in the trash.

Wake up, college students. Stop believing the indoctrination you are receiving. Whatever happened to the free thinking college student ready to take down the establishment?

Bought and paid for I guess.

PREACH IT, BRUTHA!

 

[TheAristocat]

there are plenty of weapons you can carry that arent firearms that are fairly effective. You dont need to be able to kill someone to make them stop. Give them tasers for all i care. Tasers are pretty effective, you know with the whole electricity jolting through their body thing. And its a lot safer than letting someone carry a gun.

Adrenaline, emotion, distraction, fear... It often takes trained cops multiple rounds to hit someone at semi-close range. How many rounds in a taser? What if you miss? Maybe they should come out with automated taser guns.

 

[TheAristocat]

Why one cop carries 145 rounds of ammo on the job

I've heard of people shrugging off the tasers because of adrenaline too. If bullets are no guarantee, tasers certainly aren't. Especially if you have one shot and it hits a leg or an arm. Where do you even aim a taser to knock a person out? Do people know this? They're going to have to get educated about the weapons they use whether they buy a pistol or a taser. So why not buy an effective weapon and educate yourself about it? Personally, I'd buy both. A taser for sites that have gun buster signs and anti-gun laws. And a 9mm for everywhere else. Packs a punch but still manageable.

 

[Nautilus]

a 9mm what a joke. If you going to own a gun...own a real gun...

 

[Elizabeth619]

a 9mm what a joke. If you going to own a gun...own a real gun...

i want one of those in pink

 

[doulos]

there are plenty of weapons you can carry that arent firearms that are fairly effective. You dont need to be able to kill someone to make them stop. Give them tasers for all i care. Tasers are pretty effective, you know with the whole electricity jolting through their body thing. And its a lot safer than letting someone carry a gun.

Tasers are not always effective.

“There are a number of reasons for the TASER’s failure – the most common is that both probes do not make it directly into the subject’s skin.

This was the case in the Jan. 1, 2013, incident, where Farmington resident Mark Chavez was hit by one TASER probe when he was coming at Sgt. Shawn Scott with a metal pipe. The TASER did not stop Chavez.

Both probes did not make it into Chavez’s skin, according to Tracy. “He received a partial effect from the TASER but not a full effect.” Chavez was not subdued and deadly force, or firing a gun, was the only option.

In an April 4 case, drunken driver Ladell Light, 35, was struck by a TASER after he got out of his vehicle to pump gas in it. The TASER did not work.

“The officer then deployed his TASER in an attempt stop Light. However, the TASER was ineffective. Light was able to fight his way back into the driver seat of the vehicle and fled the scene west bound on Broadway,” a press release from the Farmington Police Department stated.

“The probe placement appeared too close and too high on the body,” Tracy said, adding

That the officer tried to follow up with a “drive stun,” where the electric connection on the TASER is applied directly to the skin instead of through wired probes. This also did not work.

Light drove away and caused a crash at the intersection of West Main Street and La Plata Highway. He died from injuries he received in the crash.”

Read the entire article @ TASERs not always 100 percent effective � Tri City Tribune

 

[doulos]

a 9mm what a joke. If you going to own a gun...own a real gun...

A 9mm with the right ammunition can be quite effective. A firearm that is too heavy or has to much recoil can be difficult for those with smaller builds to handle. A person is far better off with a weapon they can use proficiently then a weapon that is to heavy for them to hold steady (required for accuracy) or one that has so much recoil it bounces out of their grip. Most women I know (not all) are not physically capable of handing some of the high powered or heavier weight pistols on today's market. Just my opinion take it or leave it.

 

[Misty77]

I like a Glock 9mm for concealed carry, but I definitely need something with more heft for home defense.

 

[doulos]

i want one of those in pink

Do you think you could handle the recoil of a 50 caliber handgun? Here is a vid of a young lady shooting a 50 cal desrt eagle. While not the same brand as the one pictured in Nautilus's post it does show the recoil of a 50 cal.


Girl shoots 50 cal Desert Eagle - YouTube