STRAP YOURSELVES IN...TIME TO GET BACK ON THE CLOCK!

[Doc Safari]

http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/patrick-goodenough/obama-pledges-use-last-18-months-office-pushing-gun-control


Obama Pledges to Use Last 18 Months in Office Pushing Gun Control


President Obama on Thursday pledged to use his last 18 months in office to work on gun control, calling it “the one area where I feel that I’ve been most frustrated and most stymied.”

“If you ask me where has been the one area where I feel that I’ve been most frustrated and most stymied, it is the fact that the United States of America is the one advanced nation on earth in which we do not have sufficient, common-sense gun safety laws – even in the face of repeated mass killings,” he told the BBC in an interview.

[Eurodriver]

"Sufficient, common-sense gun safety laws"

See what he did there?

"Sufficient" = Obama determines what is sufficient. Not the amount of dead people. Not the number of shootings. These are irrelevant. It's Obama's discretionary term.

"Common sense" = Come on people! I'm not asking to ban your grandfather's revolver he brought back from Vietnam! Just make some common sense laws that restrict firearms which are those used most rarely in crimes such as assault weapons.

"Safety" = Regardless of Lott's objective analysis that proved "more guns = less crime", no one opposes making things more safe, right? We all want safety as a #1 priority. So who wouldn't get behind that?

I suppose "Tyrannical, irrelevant gun restriction laws" doesn't have the same ring to it...

Fortunately for us, the House of Republicans knows that they are all going to be standing in bread lines if they so much as bring a gun bill up for a vote and this will remain so at least until Zero is out of office. Be prepared for some ridiculous import restrictions on ammo and weapons, however.

[Doc Safari]

I'm prepared for the TPP to somehow allow some draconian import bans. I'm also waiting for Obama to attempt some "dare Congress to stop him" executive orders. At worst, I really do believe SCOTUS has been compromised by blackmailing one or more members with NSA meta-data or something, and I expect the possibility of bringing a fast-track case to the Supreme Court to overturn Heller. I think this one is the least likely scenario.

What I think is most likely is for Obama to get BATFE, DOJ, and other agencies to find ways to twist their laws and regulations to suddenly outlaw imported ammo, firearms, parts, and accessories.

[KalashniKEV]

I'm not worried at all.

I do think a Hillary win in 2016 is inevitable, but the best gift Obama could give the Republicans right now is to start getting wild in there.

People are finally starting to pay attention, and any EO activity will get HOT fast- like the M855 ban did.

[7.62NATO]

I'm not worried at all.

I do think a Hillary win in 2016 is inevitable, but the best gift Obama could give the Republicans right now is to start getting wild in there.

People are finally starting to pay attention, and any EO activity will get HOT fast- like the M855 ban did.

A Hillary win is not inevitable. Obama will, however, try to push through EOs or new regs. Look for imported pistols with detachable mags to be eliminated, such as MKE, Sig, and PAP pistols.

[Digital_Damage]

Some reason the title is in all caps?

[Doc Safari]

Some reason the title is in all caps?

My subtlety broke first thing this morning.

[BoringGuy45]

I'm not worried. Most of this country has had it up to here with the radical left. Unless he can raise a Republican Guard/SS/Revolutionary Guard type of army that answers only to him, he's going to be continued to be frustrated by a Congress that won't pass anything. If he couldn't get a ban passed while bathing in the blood of Sandy Hook victims, none of these shootings are going to change anyone's mind. Hell, one of the loudest calls right now is for servicemen to be able to carry weapons for personal defense, which is pretty much the opposite effect Obama was hoping for.


At worst, I really do believe SCOTUS has been compromised by blackmailing one or more members with NSA meta-data or something, and I expect the possibility of bringing a fast-track case to the Supreme Court to overturn Heller. I think this one is the least likely scenario.

Next to impossible. With the exception of the Obamacare ruling, none of the liberal rulings lately came as a surprise to anyone. Even if such a scenario was attempted, there is pretty much a 0% chance that any of the justices who ruling in favor of Heller would change their minds. Obama would have to pull a Pelican Brief and bump off two members of the conservative side to get a bench that would overturn Heller. Also, it's extremely difficult to get Supreme Court cases overturned, even when they do it themselves. There would have to be a circumstance that was so close to the story behind Heller that the Court could equate the laws to that of Heller and change its mind. For example, McDonald v. Chicago was their biggest chance to get Heller overturned. The Court could have decided at that point that not only did McDonald have no right to bear arms in the states, but that DC v. Heller was wrong and nobody has the right to bear arms anywhere. With both Heller and McDonald setting precedent, it would be extremely hard to come up with a decision in less than a year that would overturn both those cases.

[Heavy Metal]

I do think a Hillary win in 2016 is inevitable

Not hardly. She will be lucky if she gets the nomination at this rate, she is not a likable candidate.

http://pjmedia.com/tatler/2015/07/25/as-hillary-craters-democrats-search-for-panic-button/

http://pjmedia.com/tatler/2015/07/27/dowager-empress-of-chappaquas-campaign-gets-more-bad-polling-news/

[SteyrAUG]

"Sufficient, common-sense gun safety laws"

See what he did there?

"Sufficient" = Obama determines what is sufficient. Not the amount of dead people. Not the number of shootings. These are irrelevant. It's Obama's discretionary term.

"Common sense" = Come on people! I'm not asking to ban your grandfather's revolver he brought back from Vietnam! Just make some common sense laws that restrict firearms which are those used most rarely in crimes such as assault weapons.

"Safety" = Regardless of Lott's objective analysis that proved "more guns = less crime", no one opposes making things more safe, right? We all want safety as a #1 priority. So who wouldn't get behind that?

I suppose "Tyrannical, irrelevant gun restriction laws" doesn't have the same ring to it...

Fortunately for us, the House of Republicans knows that they are all going to be standing in bread lines if they so much as bring a gun bill up for a vote and this will remain so at least until Zero is out of office. Be prepared for some ridiculous import restrictions on ammo and weapons, however.

Are you kidding? That's advanced rocket science compared to the "Hope" and "Change" platform he was elected on. He basically hijacked an Eddie Murphy skit and everyone completely bought it.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C5nu5GRDzog

"People," he begins, "we ran a positive campaign.

"We campaigned on the issues.

"And the issue, is change.

"Change for the future." (The crowd erupts in cheers.)

[SteyrAUG]

Not hardly. She will be lucky if she gets the nomination at this rate, she is not a likable candidate.

http://pjmedia.com/tatler/2015/07/25/as-hillary-craters-democrats-search-for-panic-button/

http://pjmedia.com/tatler/2015/07/27/dowager-empress-of-chappaquas-campaign-gets-more-bad-polling-news/

I remember when people said McCain would NEVER get the nomination. And then he did, and he all but elected his opponent.

[Heavy Metal]

I remember when people said McCain would NEVER get the nomination. And then he did, and he all but elected his opponent.

If the market had crashed a couple months later, grouchy guy might have squeaked-by anyways.

[KalashniKEV]

...With both Heller and McDonald setting precedent, it would be extremely hard to come up with a decision in less than a year that would overturn both those cases.

Way to ruin the Fear Fest... party pooper.

What am I supposed to piss my bed on tonight now?

Please someone post that Sharia Courts are going to overtake the judicial branch...


Not hardly. She will be lucky if she gets the nomination at this rate, she is not a likable candidate.

If not her as President, then who?

There are like 45 Republican contenders and they're all duds.

Who are you saying will get the Democratic nomination?

Get serious.

[Heavy Metal]

She is in big legal trouble over this email server business. Enough that it could end up costing her the primary.

Remember, she was a shoe-in in 2008.

Her problem is she is not a likable person and unlikable people tend not to be elected President.

[Singlestack Wonder]

She is in big legal trouble over this email server business. Enough that it could end up costing her the primary.

Remember, she was a shoe-in in 2008.

Her problem is she is not a likable person and unlikable people tend not to be elected President.

Of course her husband was caught committing perjury while lying to Congress. His punishment? Nothing.....

With no viable republicans currently running, I fear Hilliary will be the next POTUS.

[Heavy Metal]

With no viable republicans currently running

Nonsense. The problem is there are too many, not too few. Walker for example, is an excellent candidate.

[KalashniKEV]

Nonsense. The problem is there are too many, not too few. Walker for example, is an excellent candidate.

I liked Walker for what I knew about him- that he took on the unions and won, and that he survived a recall.

Then when you look at his actual positions- Anti-Choice, Anti-Marriage Equality, Pro-Affirmative Action, Keep Social Security, Pro War-on-Drugs... I just don't see who it is that's supposed to vote for him?

Right now we are seeing a tremendous expansion of FREEDOM on all fronts. If you're going to run on what rights you would restrict or take away, well that's just a losing position...

There are no electable Republicans at all... Zero. Rand Paul has the best platform in terms of mass appeal, and even he doesn't stand a chance.

[SteyrAUG]

Nonsense. The problem is there are too many, not too few. Walker for example, is an excellent candidate.

While there is no "perfect candidate" I have some problems with Walker.

http://www.ontheissues.org/Scott_Walker.htm

Supports Personhood Amendment prohibiting all abortions. (Feb 2015)
My relationship with God drives every major decision. (Apr 2015)
Run for governor & president are determined by God's will. (Mar 2015)


I'm with him on about 95% of the issues, but the above are basically a "no go" for me and will prevent him from winning any general election. If Walker got the nomination, his position on abortion would absolutely guarantee a win for Hillary. She would make the entire election about abortion.

[FromMyColdDeadHand]

Let them run the 'War on Women" and I'll give you Sen. Cory Gardner as the answer. They ran that issue into the ground and it crashed and burned. It doesn't play the way that it used to.

All it takes is one of these GOPers to grow a set and his line to become "I agree with former President Clinton that abortion should be "Safe, legal and rare". Admitting rights to hospitals for abortionists and an end to the modern wire-hanger abortion clinics. SCOTUS has ruled. Who wants more abortions- do you want more abortions? The number of abortions is trending down.

On the Personhood amendments, all you have to do is bring out the woman who recently went to trial for cutting a 35 week baby out of a woman. The baby died, but because the attacker was inept, the baby never drew a breath, so that death was not a murder. Abortion rights people protect these crazed women who cut babies out of their mothers wombs- and we aren't talking about fetus's here- we are talking about babies that would survive easily if they were born with little to no special care- I know. This case hit me hard because my daughter was born at 36 weeks and went home the next day. My wife saves babies down to 24 weeks of gestational age in the NICU. These are lives, and any other position is just cognitive dissonance to protect selfish decisions.

Put that mother on TV and ask he if her child was murdered. Ask Hillary how she can be 'pro-women' and 'pro-choice' when it wasn't this woman's choice to have her baby taken from her. All to protect abortion rights the Progressives will not stand any common sense restrictions on killing pre-born babies.

You want to kill you own babies- fine, run with it all you want. But when your sickness can't give protection to literally defenseless babies that would be walking this earth if it weren't for drunk drivers and psychotic women who cut babies out of strangers- all to protect the right for people have a menstrual mulligan- may God, the big spaghetti monster in the sky or some cow in India have more mercy on your soul than you had for these babies.

Not that I'm passionate about it or anything.

But yep, I'm looking to do some stock ups on 5.56 and 9mm. I bought some LPKs that I'll sell next panic, or just keep them. Lowers, 3-4 more wouldn't be a bad choice.

[BoringGuy45]

I liked Walker for what I knew about him- that he took on the unions and won, and that he survived a recall.

Then when you look at his actual positions- Anti-Choice, Anti-Marriage Equality, Pro-Affirmative Action, Keep Social Security, Pro War-on-Drugs... I just don't see who it is that's supposed to vote for him?

Right now we are seeing a tremendous expansion of FREEDOM on all fronts. If you're going to run on what rights you would restrict or take away, well that's just a losing position...

There are no electable Republicans at all... Zero. Rand Paul has the best platform in terms of mass appeal, and even he doesn't stand a chance.

Despite what we're seeing in the media and from academic circles, there's a LOT of Americans, up to half, who support moderate to right-of-center views. People are sick of the ridiculousness, the attempt at mind control, and the general irrational behavior and believes thrust upon us by the left. Obama won in 2008 not because the country swung super-leftist, but because the economy had just tanked, we were involved in two increasingly unpopular wars, and he was a great speaker who promised vague improvements to the country. He had more baggage and skeletons in his closet than any of the GOP candidates. He is way further left than most of the voters who actually voted for him, yet they voted for him nonetheless because they wanted one thing: Something new.

The right is more charged for this election than the left. The Democrats aren't particularly excited about any of their candidates, Hillary included. The only one who has ANYBODY charged is Bernie Sanders, but he's too old and further left than even Obama, so he doesn't stand a chance. Unless Christie, Jeb, or by some cursed miracle The Donald, wins the nomination, most of them stand a good chance of at least being seen as the lesser of two evils for what the Democrats are putting out. Rand Paul stands more than a good chance: He's new, he's likable, and he can appeal to the common person with his platform of shrinking the government. God knows if he'll do it or not, but that does resonate with a base that is getting sick of our bloated bureaucracy.

[KalashniKEV]

Obama won in 2008 not because the country swung super-leftist, but because the economy... blah... blah...

To win, you have to beat the other guy.

RNC has been running duds.

Immigration, in my mind, has been overblown and folks have been pandering to that segment.

What is not overblown, and rather can not be understated, is that the next President of the United States must be Pro-Choice and Pro-Equality.

Proposing to roll back individual liberty is just a non-starter... even if you believe that it is the will of God communicated to you from a cloud, and that you are the Chosen messenger warrior to turn back the clock to an earlier time in the history of man.

[26 Inf]

Let them run the 'War on Women" and I'll give you Sen. Cory Gardner as the answer. They ran that issue into the ground and it crashed and burned. It doesn't play the way that it used to.

All it takes is one of these GOPers to grow a set and his line to become "I agree with former President Clinton that abortion should be "Safe, legal and rare". Admitting rights to hospitals for abortionists and an end to the modern wire-hanger abortion clinics. SCOTUS has ruled. Who wants more abortions- do you want more abortions? The number of abortions is trending down.

On the Personhood amendments, all you have to do is bring out the woman who recently went to trial for cutting a 35 week baby out of a woman. The baby died, but because the attacker was inept, the baby never drew a breath, so that death was not a murder. Abortion rights people protect these crazed women who cut babies out of their mothers wombs- and we aren't talking about fetus's here- we are talking about babies that would survive easily if they were born with little to no special care- I know. This case hit me hard because my daughter was born at 36 weeks and went home the next day. My wife saves babies down to 24 weeks of gestational age in the NICU. These are lives, and any other position is just cognitive dissonance to protect selfish decisions.

Put that mother on TV and ask he if her child was murdered. Ask Hillary how she can be 'pro-women' and 'pro-choice' when it wasn't this woman's choice to have her baby taken from her. All to protect abortion rights the Progressives will not stand any common sense restrictions on killing pre-born babies.

You want to kill you own babies- fine, run with it all you want. But when your sickness can't give protection to literally defenseless babies that would be walking this earth if it weren't for drunk drivers and psychotic women who cut babies out of strangers- all to protect the right for people have a menstrual mulligan- may God, the big spaghetti monster in the sky or some cow in India have more mercy on your soul than you had for these babies.

Not that I'm passionate about it or anything.

But yep, I'm looking to do some stock ups on 5.56 and 9mm. I bought some LPKs that I'll sell next panic, or just keep them. Lowers, 3-4 more wouldn't be a bad choice.

It's not often I agree with FromMyColdDeadHand, but when I agree, I agree.

[26 Inf]

To win, you have to beat the other guy.

RNC has been running duds.

Immigration, in my mind, has been overblown and folks have been pandering to that segment.

What is not overblown, and rather can not be understated, is that the next President of the United States must be Pro-Choice and Pro-Equality.

Proposing to roll back individual liberty is just a non-starter... even if you believe that it is the will of God communicated to you from a cloud, and that you are the Chosen messenger warrior to turn back the clock to an earlier time in the history of man.

I agree about pro-equality, but for pro-choice I'd substitute pro-responsibility.

There is too much noise from the extreme ends of the pro-life and pro-choice spectrum's, what BoringGuy posted earlier is accurate: Despite what we're seeing in the media and from academic circles, there's a LOT of Americans, up to half, who support moderate to right-of-center views.

If you consider 0-15th percentile as vehemently pro-choice and the 85-99th percentile as vehemently pro-life, the 16-84th percentile could carry the vote, if they vote.

But first they have to believe it will make a difference and then they have to have a candidate that excites them enough to get out and vote.

BTW Kev, most of the time I'm pretty much with you, but mocking my deeply held religious beliefs is not going to be conducive to winning me to your side on other issues.

[KalashniKEV]

Despite what we're seeing in the media and from academic circles... If you consider 0-15th percentile as vehemently pro-choice and the 85-99th percentile as vehemently pro-life, the 16-84th percentile could carry the vote, if they vote.

Where are you getting these numbers???

Well if you dismiss the academic research and what you seen on TV, the Internet, and sources of news... ughhh... if you consider 5% of Americans are in favor of the Reagan Ban, 5% are unsure, and 90% are chomping at the bit to de-regulate Machine Guns...


BTW Kev, most of the time I'm pretty much with you, but mocking my deeply held religious beliefs is not going to be conducive to winning me to your side on other issues.

I don't even know what your beliefs are, it's Scott Walker who, by his own admission, is guided by the hand of God to create a, "Constitutional amendment to prevent federal gay marriage. (Apr 2015)."

[BoringGuy45]

To win, you have to beat the other guy.

RNC has been running duds.

Immigration, in my mind, has been overblown and folks have been pandering to that segment.

What is not overblown, and rather can not be understated, is that the next President of the United States must be Pro-Choice and Pro-Equality.

Proposing to roll back individual liberty is just a non-starter... even if you believe that it is the will of God communicated to you from a cloud, and that you are the Chosen messenger warrior to turn back the clock to an earlier time in the history of man.

Abortion is not a make or break issue right now, and as long as a candidate doesn't campaign on the grounds that he'll push for a Constitutional ban on gay marriage, people are going to be looking at bigger issues. Namely, their jobs or lack thereof, taxes, healthcare, and national defense. Obama got elected despite his declaration of support for traditional marriage. Bush was elected and reelected despite his opposition to abortion. Despite what the media makes it look like, the nation is not made up entirely of hipsters, college professors, and welfare recipients. I don't think a Peter Singer/Caitlin Jenner ticket is the only hope for the GOP.

[KalashniKEV]

Despite what the media makes it look like, the nation is not made up entirely of hipsters, college professors, and welfare recipients.

This is what many Republicans are always stumbling over- support for marriage equality is nearly 100% universal, across the entire country.

The abortion debate is more equal, but Pro Choice people still outnumber Anti Choice.

All a Democrat candidate needs to do is keep pulling the string and getting ignorant sound bites from their opponent.

As Steyr said in post #18, they could make the entire election about those positions, then on the economy the both say "I'll do really good," then say something about immigration and healthcare that appeals to the Entitlement Class, and BOOM- landslide.

[26 Inf]

Where are you getting these numbers???

'if you consider' - aka - 'as an example'

I don't even know what your beliefs are, it's Scott Walker who, by his own admission, is guided by the hand of God to create a, "Constitutional amendment to prevent federal gay marriage. (Apr 2015)."

Re-reading I can see how I missed the context, mea culpa.

Debating this statement: The abortion debate is more equal, but Pro Choice people still outnumber Anti Choice

You have to consider by whose metrics - who did the instrument used and what were they measuring? I'm not quite a 'once the sperm hits the egg guy' but I'm not far off; if you ask me the right question I would give you a pro-choice answer.

In discussing this matter, in depth, with disparate groups of people, I find that most do not favor abortion as a form of birth control past the first trimester and that the vast majority think partial birth abortions should be illegal. However, I have not done any research at a gay parade, although I have discussed the issue, in depth with a fair number of NOW members.

The number of folks wholeheartedly endorsing late term abortions is a minority.

It is how you frame the issue.

Once again Boring Guy for the win: Abortion is not a make or break issue right now, and as long as a candidate doesn't campaign on the grounds that he'll push for a Constitutional ban on gay marriage, people are going to be looking at bigger issues. Namely, their jobs or lack thereof, taxes, healthcare, and national defense.

[Doc Safari]

AHEM: Obama, gun control, executive orders, last 18 months in office, subject of thread.

Just sayin'. :D

[KalashniKEV]

AHEM: Obama, gun control, executive orders, last 18 months in office, subject of thread.

Just sayin'. :D

Yeah... not gonna happen.

[JBecker 72]

Yeah... not gonna happen.

I tend to agree.

[BoringGuy45]

AHEM: Obama, gun control, executive orders, last 18 months in office, subject of thread.

Just sayin'.

I think the pro-gun and anti-gun sides are both pretty much set that nothing is going to happen unless Obama declares himself dictator.

[FromMyColdDeadHand]

It's not often I agree with FromMyColdDeadHand, but when I agree, I agree.


Crap, I reconsider my position...

;)

[Honu]

I do think these days left and right politicians have to much over lap and the left often gets the vote more because of illegals and illegal things like voting twice
they also seem to not have any guilt about doing so and most important is they are brainless mindless masses that follow the great leader and whatever that leader is saying ?
and that leader can be whoever is giving orders from the news to the current pres to the huffpo article and all other input is screamed down and cut short


sadly its just the people of our country are becoming brainless followers who believe what they are told and I do sadly feel because of this the ability to destroy the constitution is coming close