Much Ado About Not Much

[jackstar7]

Please find me blaming Obama for trying to enact EO regarding guns. I'll be waiting...

Why would I do that? I said you were ready to blame him for something he isn't doing and has shown no intention of doing.

I got that from this:

"If the Dems had fillibuster proof majorities in Congress, Obama would have been able to take a far different track. He wouldn't have come out with some type of moderate proposal like this, he'd have went whole hog for "assult weapons" being banned, ala NY style." -chucky2

Which is just speculation on your part. And I saw that, I believe fairly, as you ready to blame Obama for something he hasn't done, just in case he somehow can do it... you know... maybe after 2014.

So I guess you can keep waiting...

 

[jackstar7]

So you're giving him points for not doing something he couldn't legally do but would have if it were possible? While some may have gotten angry over it, without knowing he couldn't do what was threatened, what was the harm in speaking up against it?

As has been said before, if Cheney had said Bush was looking at restricting abortion via EO with no details the libs would have been pissing themselves with rage over it saying the same shit. Both sides have people who get up in arms by threats made from the other side that turn out to be hyperbole and likely done in order to get a rise out of them...

Obama isn't being graded in this examination. The people critical of him and ready to pounce before anything even happens are the ones being judged.

Several people flew off every handle they could find as soon as Biden hinted at EOs coming down. It was based on irrational paranoia and for that, they should just be honestly looked at with regards to the future, so people do not mistake their responses for anything useful.

It's a parallel of the guy who was "fixing" the polls so they'd show what he believed they should be showing for Romney. Turned out he was pretty darn wrong and hopefully people don't forget his 0-1 standing when he surely parades his made up numbers next time.


Fear-mongering and disinformation should be carefully criticized when they are exposed. I'm not saying they should be lambasted or shamed or anything else. But people should note who will just make things up. And that certainly goes for all sides of a given issue, or whathaveyou.

 

[chucky2]

Why would I do that? I said you were ready to blame him for something he isn't doing and has shown no intention of doing.

I got that from this:

"If the Dems had fillibuster proof majorities in Congress, Obama would have been able to take a far different track. He wouldn't have come out with some type of moderate proposal like this, he'd have went whole hog for "assult weapons" being banned, ala NY style." -chucky2

Which is just speculation on your part. And I saw that, I believe fairly, as you ready to blame Obama for something he hasn't done, just in case he somehow can do it... you know... maybe after 2014.

So I guess you can keep waiting...

It's speculation, but it's certainly not wild. It wouldn't be unexpected, it'd be expected given that political climate Obama would be free to work in. If Bush was president still and something along these same lines came up, Bush would be expected to heavily favor the Rep cause. It's Politics - It's Expected.

But pretending that Obama by his own virtue is being moderate - so far - on this is...stretching more than a little.

Chuck

 

[Charles Kozierok]

But would he have done so if he had 68 votes in the Senate, and a House that was stacked in his favor?

That would impact his ability to work towards gun control legislation. It wouldn't have anything to do with his executive authority.

Which, again, is the point here.

 

[Fern]

-snip-

18. Provide incentives for schools to hire school resource officers.

What does that even mean?

Sounds to me like Obama is following the NRA's (Wayne Lapierre or whatever) suggestion to put armed guards (police) at schools.

Fern

 

[chucky2]

That would impact his ability to work towards gun control legislation. It wouldn't have anything to do with his executive authority.

Which, again, is the point here.

Yes, I realize this. I'm not saying, nor have ever said, he overstepped his EA. I'm saying if he was in that political climate, he could have come up with a much harsher list pushing far harder to what would have been in that political climates "assult weapons" ban than the (very) moderate approach he's taken here. Who knows WTF Biden was talking about and why...Obama has some good/OK/useless stuff here, but nothing too out of line.

 

[Charles Kozierok]

I'm saying if he was in that political climate, he could have come up with a much harsher list pushing far harder to what would have been in that political climates "assult weapons" ban than the (very) moderate approach he's taken here.

Okay, but what's the reasoning here?

Couldn't one just as easily say that it is the opposition by the gun rights crowd that spurred him into action via the executive route, as opposed to working on legislation?

 

[chucky2]

Okay, but what's the reasoning here?

Couldn't one just as easily say that it is the opposition by the gun rights crowd that spurred him into action via the executive route, as opposed to working on legislation?

I really don't know what opposition We're facing. The gun rights crowd simply doesn't want to be more limited than they are now procuring or owning firearms of their choosing. Other than mandatory background checks for non-FFL to non-FFL sales, I'd hardly call the 'opposition' a problem requiring EOs.

I'd much rather have had Obama spend his time figuring out budget sh1t than spending anymore time than, 'Congress, send me a bill to sign please, thx'. Congress is there for a reason, let them figure it out and send that result to the POTUS...that's their job.

Chuck