In response to:

Is Chris Christie Overreacting Over the NRA’s “Reprehensible” Ad?

helioquois Wrote: Jan 18, 2013 12:30 PM
I think Gov. Christie's anger is misplaced. If gun control measures are for all American children, why is it that the one standard that works...the security details for our President's children...can not be applied for all of our children. With our elected and appointed leaders routinely shielding themselves from laws and policies they apply to the rest of America (like Obamacare), this is a valid point to raise. There is no attack on the appearance, character, actions or paternity of President Obama's children as there have been on other political figures such as Sarah Palin. The women on the View can't say this is despicable...really, they can't...anymore than the LBJ "Daisy" TV commercials used against Barry Goldwater were despicable.

New Jersey Governor Chris Christie is apparently up in arms because the National Rifle Association released an ad asking simple yet important question: If President Obama’s kids are protected by professional armed guards -- why can’t yours be, too?

I agree with the governor on a number of substantive points, but here are two things to consider:

1. The NRA -- at no point during their advertisement -- explicitly attacked Sasha and Malia Obama by name. Yes, they imply that the “president’s children” -- because of who they are -- have certain...

Tuesday, May 21 | 11:17 PM ET
Tuesday, May 21 | 11:17 PM ET
Tuesday, May 21 | 11:17 PM ET
Tuesday, May 21 | 11:17 PM ET