Biden claims almost half of USA population has been killed implied due to gun violence since 2007!

.

Absolutely outlandish claim by Joe Biden at the SC Democrat debate.

Biden claims almost half of USA population has been killed & he implied due to gun violence since 2007!

And Biden blames Bernie for this (fabricated claim of his) too!

As of 2018, US population = 328 million.
150 million people dead = about HALF of all Americans now dead (since 2007) due to gun violence in Biden-world!

.

And below, Biden’s . . .

"A hundred and fifty million people have been killed since 2007 when Bernie voted to exempt the gun manufacturers from liability. More than ALL the wars! Including Vietnam from that point on. Carnage on our streets!"

. . . comment with Biden attempting to pretend an absolute bizarre number-inflation of gun deaths that Biden invented, is not only gun-related, but by implication was Sanders fault too!

It was quite the bit of non-sense by Joe here.

Here is a video segment of Biden’s cringe-worthy statement . . .

‘Ingraham Angle’ panel breaks down latest Dem debate

697,389 views

Feb. 26, 2020 - 9:01 - Pollster Frank Luntz, Fox News contributor Ari Fleischer, and former Schumer aide Chris Hahn weigh in on the democratic debate.

Or see starting at about 6:40 here . . .

2020 Democrats: Sanders will lose to Trump

Feb. 26, 2020 - 9:01 - Pollster Frank Luntz, Fox News contributor Ari Fleischer, and former Schumer aide Chris Hahn weigh in on the democratic debate.

https://video.foxnews.com/v/6135972173001?playlist_id=5622526903001#sp=show-clips

.

Also this:

Biden claims 150 million Americans have been killed by gun violence since 2007

Feb. 27, 2020 - 4:44 - Biden claims guns have recently killed nearly half of all Americans; gun rights advocate Colion Noir reacts.

https://video.foxnews.com/v/6136326262001?playlist_id=5198073478001#sp=show-clips

1 Like

As long as this is the only thread on the debate…

Did anyone catch Elizabeth Warren accuse Mike Bloomberg of telling an employee to kill her baby?

3 Likes

That would have required me watching these buffoons, so no. But I am unsurprised. Warren has no issue bringing up irrelevant, or, making up false, sexist stories when pushed into a corner.

3 Likes

Well, I made myself a cocktail and watched the entertainment. I have to keep up for my uber liberal relatives.

3 Likes

qui_est_ce . . .

Did anyone catch Elizabeth Warren accuse Mike Bloomberg of telling an employee to kill her baby?

Wow!

Bloomberg needs to be vetted better than this.
The Second Amendment people have him thoroughly vetted in their gun-right sphere, but
there are many other aspects from this guy that need to be looked at in much more depth.

Thanks for posting that information.

1 Like

She said “alleged” (and rightly so).

1 Like

I think you missed the point. She is radically pro-abortion, yet she used the word “kill.” She (and Bloomberg) are pro-abortion for any reason until birth. Why is this even an issue for either of them?

2 Likes

I missed it too.

Thanks for bringing out that dimension.

My respect for Warren just went down even further. She KNOWS it is killing (she hasn’t rationalized the fact that these are living human beings completely away), and yet favors the killing anyway.

1 Like

She used the word “kill” because that is the word that was allegedly said (and I stress allegedly). Why is it is an issue for Warren? Although Warren is for abortion rights she is not for anyone being coerced into having an abortion, and that is what was alleged. Also it is part of the circular firing squad behavior in which all the candidates are engaging.

2 Likes

LeafByNiggle . . . .

Although Warren is for abortion rights she is not for anyone being coerced into having an abortion . .

Well THAT’S a relief.

Hey Leaf. People are inevitably going to think you have been fooled by Warren into thinking that.

Would you mind posting three of Warren’s statements condemning China’s forced abortion?

Then if anyone tries to say Warren favors forced abortion or at least is too timid to forcefully speak out against it, you and I can admonish them here.

2 Likes

This is an interesting question that, I think, reflects a false assumption about what people like Warren think about abortion.

I don’t think that there is any question by anyone that abortion is killing. I think, moreover, that there is considerable agreement that this killing is not something to be taken lightly. The question is what should the government impose on women faced with a unwanted and possibly threatening pregnancy. In that regard it is worth noting that the state allows the taking of human life under a variety of circumstances - a number of these are welcomed by individuals who consider themselves pro-life.

I think that conflating pro-choice thinking as pro-abortion is a mistake that retards progress on this issue. The mistaken idea should be readily be dispelled by noting the opposition of pro-choice individual to state-coerced abortions.

Faulty logic that has been seen here many times. Just because someone does not publicly object to something does not mean that person is not opposed to it. On a more practical matter, Warren has little control over internal policy in China.

LeafByNiggle . . .

Faulty logic that has been seen here many times.

The logic of my expectations to state her positions is right on.

The logic of me expecting you, not to say something about Warren
that you, I and all the readers here KNOW
you cannot support . . .
. . . is also right on.

.

Just because someone does not publicly object to something does not mean that person is not opposed to it.

I didn’t draw my conclusion from what she has said. I drew my conclusions from her unfettered pro-abortion actions.

.

On a more practical matter, Warren has little control over internal policy in China.

So the U.S. Senate should not have a say at least in opinion, on foreign policy?

Do you think she was silent on the Paris Accords too?
Are you going to give her a pass on murder because she has no “control” but ignore the fact that she was out pom-pom waving including regarding other countries (we ALL have to be on board) when the global warming game is concerned?

Very disappointing from you here Leaf.

1 Like

Shouldn’t you point that out? Unless you intend to make the case she has a pro life position?
By the way the law has always been inconsistent. When the baby is wanted vs not wanted.

What is that? That she is opposed to Bloomberg ordering a woman to get an abortion? To assume the opposite would be crazy.

She has never said or implied she favored abortions. What she favored was the right for a woman to choose and abortion if she want it. I do not agree with her on that point, but that is the correct representation of her point. Anyway, we are getting a little far from the OP of Biden and gun violence.

Not speaking up against Chinese forced abortions is hardly the same thing committing a murder.

And no, I don’t give her a pass - not even on her pro-choice position. But I don’t call it something different from what it is.

LeafbyNiggle . . .

That she is opposed to Bloomberg ordering a woman to get an abortion?

Political opportunism is not the same as opposition.

If you think this is her “principled” opposition to abortion show me where she says that in principle.

Show me the bills she has authored against executives pushing their employees into abortion.

She should extend this to all women. Not just Bloomberg’s NDA women-victims for political hay.
(And when did she find out about this, and why wait until now in this venue to speak up and only against Bloomberg? Or is she lying again? Bloomberg did not confirm it or deny it.)

I stand by everything I have said.

LeafByNiggle . . . .

Not speaking up against Chinese forced abortions is hardly the same thing committing a murder.

.

In one sense you are correct, and in another sense you are wrong.

.

Nine Ways of Being Accessory to Another’s Sin
accessory to another’s sin

  1. By counsel.
  2. By command.
  3. By consent.
  4. By provocation.
  5. By praise or flattery.
  6. By concealment.
  7. By partaking.
  8. By silence.
  9. By defense of the ill done.
1 Like

It can be both opportunism and opposition.

The only principle she is respecting the so-called right to choose abortion. Not abortion itself. Again, I don’t agree with her principle, but that is what it is.

That’s not a thing that happens often enough to warrant a bill.

#8 is not always being an accessory. It can be, but not necessarily.

“Vetted” in the gun-right sphere? Bloomberg?
Noooooo, not so. He is one of the biggest anti-2A guys in America. Definitely not ok with what I think you meant to be the “gun rightS sphere,” that being those of us who believe in an individual’s right to keep and bear arms, as American’s have since before we became a free nation.
Honestly think this is possibly one of the most ludicrous claims I’ve seen online regarding Bloomberg and guns.

We hunters, shooters, and right to self-defense people, do NOT support Bloomberg and have certainly not “vetted” him. <— thought that needed pointed out…

It can be both opportunism and opposition.

That’s exactly why I have looked for other aspects from her in this sphere.

There is nothing pro-life about Warren’s action here other than it happens to be attacking Bloomberg for a false or true claim from Warren.

The only principle she is respecting the so-called right to choose abortion. Not abortion itself.

First of all there is no “right” to choose abortion except in a perverted legal sense.

Second of all, you just made my point.

The only principle she is respecting the so-called right to choose abortion. Not abortion itself.

You don’t believe that and either do I.
If you did, when Obama was forcing more gun-control down the throats of the country saying:

“if it saves just one life, it will be worth it”

. . . you should have spoken out then if you really think that.

One forced or coerced abortion is one too many.

#8 is not always being an accessory. It can be, but not necessarily.

In Warren’s position of authority, her pro-abort career has been unconscionable.

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.