January 15th, 2013
09:28 PM ET
5 years ago

NRA airs new TV ad criticizing Obama on eve of White House gun announcement

Washington (CNN) - The National Rifle Association released a new television commercial Tuesday night charging President Barack Obama of hypocrisy for being "skeptical" about placing armed guards at schools, while his own two daughters are protected by the U.S. Secret Service.

"Are the president's kids more important than yours?" a narrator says in the 30 second ad. "Then why is he skeptical about putting armed security in our schools, when his kids are protected by armed guards at their school."

The commercial is running on the Sportsman Channel, a cable network focused on outdoors programming such as hunting and fishing. It is also posted on a dedicated web site "Stand and Fight."

On Wednesday, Obama is set to unveil a new set of proposals that would place very tough restrictions on the ownership and sale of firearms.

In the ad, the narrator only mentions Obama by name, but it also features images of Vice President Joe Biden, Sen. Dianne Feinstein, New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg and NBC anchor David Gregory. Bloomberg is an influential voice in favor of stricter gun laws and has dipped into his personal fortune to help fund a lobby campaign, and Feinstein, a California Democrat, is helping spearhead a congressional effort to enforce tougher gun laws.

Gregory questioned NRA CEO Wayne LaPierre in a December interview about the effectiveness of the organization's proposal to put armed guards in schools. After the interview, the NRA and conservative media outlets noted that Gregory's children attended the same school as Obama's daughters and the school has a security department.

"Mr. Obama demands the wealthy pay their fair share of taxes," the narrator says. "But he is just another elitist hypocrite when it comes to a fair share of security. Protection for their kids and gun-free zones for ours."

The introduction of Obama's children into the gun debate further demonstrates the high stakes in this very complicated and emotional issue about how to weigh Second Amendment rights with the safety of citizens following several high profile killings, including the recent massacre of 20 children and six educators at a Newtown, Connecticut elementary school.

As advocates for new gun restrictions pledge to pressure Congress to pass new laws, the NRA and other like-minded gun rights groups and conservative organizations have said they will fight any changes to the current gun laws.

"Stand and fight sums up what Americans need to do to preserve our Second Amendment freedom," NRA spokesman Andrew Arulanandam told CNN.

The NRA is not ruling out expanding the buy to air the commercial elsewhere.

The group, which had an existing partnership with the Sportsman Channel, has added an NRA hosted daily weekday program to the network's lineup.

Filed under: Ads • Gun rights • NRA • President Obama
soundoff (583 Responses)
  1. Proud father

    NRA – No Reasonable Argument
    The NRA is obviously stooping to same level of Republicans, which is to demonize your opponent and strike fear into people in order to defend an unreasonable position.
    IF the NRA really wants to protect American rights, then they should work with legislators to draft a FAIR and REASONABLE law, which protects the public as much as possible while allowing reasonable freedoms for gun owners.
    I think most hunters, collectors, and hobbyists are probably reasonable people, and if they are trained sane people, I don't have an issue. But to try to protect EVERYONES right to carry ANY TYPE and AMOUNT of arms is utterly ridiculous.
    If these people are really that afraid of gov't and widespread violent public uprising, then they are already mentally unstable, and should be denied such "rights".

    January 16, 2013 02:02 pm at 2:02 pm |
  2. April

    I have an NRA membership, but when they say/do poorly thought out things like this I cringe. I may not agree with everything the President I voted for is doing right now but stooping to name calling demonstrates a lack of maturity, finesse and skill. This is NOT a simple problem that we can legislatively fix with just a few MORE laws, but resorting to name calling certainly isn't going to impress anyone or fix the problem either.

    January 16, 2013 02:02 pm at 2:02 pm |
  3. Mike

    So according to the NRA, the appropriate action is to provide every school with the level of armed security afforded the President and his family. What a boon for the gun manufacturers!
    That they think there is some equivalence between security that is required for a president and his family, who by default become walking targets as soon as he takes office, and the average family is absurd. Yes, we need to protect ourselves from the crazy, gun-toting, card carrying NRA members, but arming every schoolteacher and every establishment will bankrupt this nation. We need policies that move us toward DE-Militarization of our society, not a civil arms race.

    January 16, 2013 02:02 pm at 2:02 pm |
  4. scooter

    This ad, I guess, is supposed to appeal to who? Well if they wanted to preach to their people then fine. However if they think this is going to work on the majority of people they are very very wrong. This is sort of a 90's type ad written by people with little talent and who obviously have not ability to take the pulse of America. What a joke

    January 16, 2013 02:03 pm at 2:03 pm |
  5. Rock Singer

    I'm so proud of my President regarding the speech he gave today on Gun Control.

    Call your congressman tell 'em if you don't help the President that you'll do everything you can to see he/she doesn't get re-elected

    We are not living in the same times as when the 2 amendment was written, if having an automatic weapon in your hand makes you fell secure you need to move to a country like Syria where it will come into good use in America we use the vote to change things not the gun.

    If you have children teach them love not hate or how to use an automatic weapon.

    January 16, 2013 02:03 pm at 2:03 pm |
  6. Seriously?!

    It's pathetic that they are resorting to involving his children.

    January 16, 2013 02:03 pm at 2:03 pm |
  7. Ellen

    Talk about hypocrites....pro life, pro-guns, pro-war, pro etc. etc. etc.

    January 16, 2013 02:03 pm at 2:03 pm |
  8. OKJ

    hahahahaha, this is hilarious. Is every terror organization in the world targeting your children? I don't think so...

    January 16, 2013 02:03 pm at 2:03 pm |
  9. JJ10

    Silly point. Simple fact is any president's kids are targets.

    January 16, 2013 02:03 pm at 2:03 pm |
  10. douglas hyde

    The NRA will stoop to anything to keep there assault weapons and large magazines. Are they also saying that Ronald Regan, and every President was hypocritical, since they all have had special protection for themselves and there families?
    This is ridiculous...do these people speak for all NRA members....I seriously doubt it.

    January 16, 2013 02:03 pm at 2:03 pm |
  11. Some guy

    I don't think 95% of the ppl commenting on this subject even know what makes a rifle an "assault rifle"

    January 16, 2013 02:03 pm at 2:03 pm |
  12. JC

    Murders by handguns by far outweigh and exceed by number of murders by rifles. So why don't you do a blanket ban on handguns Mr. Obama? I suppose it only matters how many deaths occur within a short amount of time? I guess you don't care about those individuals. Obama is a wanna be elitist and definitely a hypocrite. You can't take the guns from the American people, and most states won't allow any federal official in to try and enforce those "rules." Obama is a waste of time. Mr. Obama why don't you focus your time on the meth problem, or create some jobs for once? You are one lazy President who will do anything to skirt by. Bottom of the barrel.

    January 16, 2013 02:04 pm at 2:04 pm |
  13. Victor

    People talking about Secret Service protection while blasting the NRA may want to get their facts straight before sounding off.

    We all understand the Secret Service is there to protect important members of state and their families. What about the 11 other non-Secret Service armed personnel at the school? Exactly.....

    January 16, 2013 02:04 pm at 2:04 pm |
  14. Jon

    I support the 2nd amendment but I don't support an organization driven by greed and "lobby" Congressmen with their bribery, undermining legislation and the wishes of the majority of Americans. America first.
    Party and special interest groups should not be the priority.

    January 16, 2013 02:04 pm at 2:04 pm |
  15. rs1201

    I never thought of it that way...but the NRA is a little right about this. The President's daughters are not more important or more valuable than anyone else's children. The 26 children who were massacred in Newtown, CT deserved our protection and we failed them. How would Obama explain to the parents of these Newtown kids that his kids can have armed protection paid for by the American taxpayers and their children can't...All children are precious and deserve protection not just Obama's kids. I think having armed guards at every school sounds pretty good to me. Let the guards be either police officers, national guard, or soldiers. American children need to be protected and Obama had better not say that they don't!!!

    January 16, 2013 02:04 pm at 2:04 pm |
  16. unknown11

    seems pretty dead on to me. A dead kid is a dead kid. Apparently Obama feels that his are more important than mine.

    January 16, 2013 02:04 pm at 2:04 pm |
  17. Doug

    So, ummmm, is the NRA essentially saying we should eliminate the secret service?
    I'm not seeing how this relates to gun control at all. And can someone please explain to me how this violates the 2nd amendment, like the NRA and other gun lobbyists like to scream about. Where has it been mentioned that we were going to enact a law that eliminates owning a gun? Where has anyone said that our government was going to come take away all your guns that you may now own? All that's being discussed is methods to have stricter gun control for to protect us from guns falling into the wrong hands. And possibly restricting assault rifles and high capacity rounds that are intended for only one thing, to kill as many people as possible. That's not violating the 2nd amendment.

    January 16, 2013 02:05 pm at 2:05 pm |
  18. Tater Salad

    Andrea, clearly the Presidents children are greater risk then most children. His children go to a school with ARMED GUARDS because that makes them SAFER. The fact that he refuses to even entertain the idea of putting police in schools for everyone else's children is what makes him an elitist hypocrite.

    January 16, 2013 02:05 pm at 2:05 pm |
  19. LL Cool Jim

    NRA is so funny. Lincoln, Garfield, Kennedy – what does all these Presidents have in common? They were all assassinated. Terrorist or enemies of the US would like nothing more than to take the President or his family out. They are of high value targets to say they don't need protection is ridiculous. Please NRA, try again.

    January 16, 2013 02:05 pm at 2:05 pm |
  20. Rob

    Jay Carney says it's despicable for the NRA to use Obama's children in ad..but it's OK for Obama to use children to push agenda. I think we can just replace the work hypocrite in the dictionary with leftist. Oh, and last I checked we don't have a King or royal family in this country, so yeah, my children are just as important as King Obama's. Obama doesn't have to worry about someone going to his kids school and shooting the place up, they are protected.

    January 16, 2013 02:05 pm at 2:05 pm |
  21. bobc1000

    This type of "pornographic political hyperbole" is disgusting to me. I am a proud veteran, former hunter and firm believer in the 2nd Ammendment, but my God, to drag innocent children into a debate that simply boils down to the bottom line is moronic. The NRA has embarrased itself, its members and our entire nation. People should be appalled that this organization has such a stranglehold on our lawmakers. Please call your legislators and tell them you suppport the Vice president and president's plan!!!

    January 16, 2013 02:05 pm at 2:05 pm |
  22. Oh well...

    The NRA is an obscene organization that does not belong in civilization, period.

    January 16, 2013 02:05 pm at 2:05 pm |
  23. steve

    I also believ int he right to own a gun. These ads are DISGUSTING. Shame on the NRA. This is common sense. Let us have a gun if you pass a background check and are responsible. Common sense! About time thank you Mr president!

    January 16, 2013 02:05 pm at 2:05 pm |
  24. KE6522

    The point here is that Obama would NOT want to give up the security of his children, but the rest of us will just have to give up our rights for no good reason. Let's not take it out of context folks! It is NOT good for ANY rights to be taken away. This is AMERCA.

    January 16, 2013 02:05 pm at 2:05 pm |
  25. TKO

    OBAMA is a hypocrite? What about the NRA that led the charge for more gun control when urban blacks sought to arm themselves against the depredations of the government (and before people get all ballistic, those same political radicals were espousing very similar rhetoric as the Far Right in terms of government conspiracy)? This isn't about the Constitution, it's about money and profit.

    January 16, 2013 02:06 pm at 2:06 pm |
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24