Obama’s “executive actions”: tyranny or impotence?

posted at 11:41 am on January 17, 2013 by Ed Morrissey

Maybe Barack Obama’s attempt to bypass Congress with nearly two dozen “executive actions” is both — a kind of “tyrannical impotence,” or “impotent tyranny,” but I see a lot more impotence than tyranny or even an abuse of power.  Either way, it’s hardly impressive.  My column today at The Fiscal Times points out the anti-climactic essence of Barack Obama’s little list of 23 orders that purport to take action about the kind of gun violence we have seen in mass shootings like Aurora, Tucson, and Newtown.  Some of them actually just show how little attention Obama has paid to his regular job in the first four years:

The first six EOs relate to background checks – even though the Newtown shooter was already blocked from buying his own weapons and stole his mother’s guns instead. The second EO proposes to undo problems that the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) created in sharing issues about medical problems with state and federal agencies that has created a barrier to identifying the mentally ill on background checks.

Most of the rest of these executive actions are practically non-sequiturs or examples of Obama administration indifference to gun violence until Newtown. Number 13 pledges to “Maximize enforcement efforts to prevent gun violence and prosecute gun crime,” even though prosecutions for gun crime have fallen more than 40 percent during the Obama administration.

The eleventh executive action commits to “nominate an ATF director,” a post that has remained unfilled with a regular appointment since 2006, and for which Obama had not nominated anyone for Senate confirmation. (The White House announced the nomination of current acting ATF Director Todd Jones after Obama’s speech.)

Another executive action listed promises to “provide incentives for schools to hire school resource officers,” a proposal that the NRA made a week after the Newtown shooting, and which the Obama administration ridiculed until others pointed out that Bill Clinton had done the same thing in his COPS program. The rest of the pledged actions promise nothing but studies on health and gun safety, which could have been proposed and undertaken at any time, and have little connection to the issue of mass murders and multiple-victim shootings.

Politico noted last night the same kind of “huh?” reaction from gun rights advocates:

Instead of a firestorm, President Barack Obama’s gun policy executive orders little more than a fizzle among gun advocates.

For days leading up to the announcement, conservative websites and media outlets stoked fears of what Obama was planning to do unilaterally. But when he unveiled his proposal Wednesday — even though the list of executive actions had grown from 19 to 23 — he’d stayed so modest that they didn’t do much but shrug.

Instead of a mass gun round-up or even finding ways to extend existing gun restrictions through clever legal maneuvering, Obama didn’t even sign a single paper with the dreaded “executive order” label. The closest he got were three “presidential memoranda.”

But most weren’t even that: the remaining 20 were nothing more than less formal instructions he gave to aides or administration officials.

And don’t forget ordering himself to fill a position he’d left open for four years.  That’s certainly getting tough on, er … something.

Not everyone agrees, though, that the decrees were all non-events.  David Harsanyi writes today that they’re still an abuse of power:

Now, the 23 executive orders Barack Obama signed that are aimed at “reducing gun violence” could be considered, at worst, cynically political or, at best, completely useless. But the way Obama treats the process, children, the debate, the Constitution and the American people is another story. Sen. Rand Paul recently remarked that “someone who wants to bypass the Constitution, bypass Congress — that’s someone who wants to act like a king or a monarch.” That may be a bit hyperbolic, but it is also a bit true.

“There are millions of responsible, law-abiding gun owners in America,” lectured Obama, “who cherish their right to bear arms for hunting or sport or protection or collection.” (Or — as it must have slipped the president’s mind — the right to put a gun in a case labeled “open in case of tyranny.”) The president went on to profess that he believes that the Second Amendment guarantees an individual the right to bear arms. If this were true for Obama, who was once a constitutional law lecturer at the University of Chicago, why would he attempt to restrict a right that is explicitly laid out in the Bill of Rights (even if it were eminently sensible) without putting it through the republican wringer — the deliberation, the checks and balances, all of it?

I agree with David that these are an abuse of the normal process, in spirit and rhetoric.  In practice, though, none of these “actions” are outside of executive authority already, and the questions Obama’s gun-controlling allies should be asking are why so late, and why so useless?

The Wall Street Journal is unimpressed with the legislative effort, too:

The government is empowered to ban “dangerous and unusual weapons,” like machine guns and surface-to-air missiles, but it also needs to explain how any of this will prevent the next Newtown. Are the feds going to round up weapons and melt them down? The 1994 ban applied only to new rifles, and if this one does as well, how will it make a difference?

Mr. Obama also endorsed universal background checks, including for the 40% of gun sales between private parties. Here too there is a practical problem. Often this exemption is called the “gun show loophole” but most of this activity takes place in homes, over the phone, or via online classified ads. Would the feds impose new data collection and regulations on all gun buyers and sellers? Supposedly Washington can’t be trusted to surveil Americans suspected of terrorism, but now it will do so for all gun buyers?

Mr. Obama told Americans to ask “hard questions” about gun violence in the immediate aftermath of the Newtown shootings, but on the evidence Wednesday he didn’t spend a lot of time asking any of himself. Above all he seems to relish a political showdown with the National Rifle Association no matter the policy consequences, much as New York Governor Andrew Cuomo rushed his own gun ban through Albany this week.

Like the list of “executive actions,” it’s all for show … and all it shows is even more impotence, as it doesn’t have a prayer of advancing even in the Congressional chamber controlled by Obama’s own party.  And that’s good news on the tyranny front, too.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2

24. The federal government can stop handing out guns to Mexican drug criminals.

Cicero43 on January 17, 2013 at 11:44 AM

Obama’s “executive actions”: tyranny or impotence?

…both!…he can’t get it up either!

KOOLAID2 on January 17, 2013 at 11:44 AM

Single acts of tyranny may be ascribed to the accidental opinion of a day; but a series of oppressions, begun at a distinguished period and pursued unalterably through every change of ministers, too plainly prove a deliberate, systematic plan of reducing [a people] to slavery.

- Thomas Jefferson

kingsjester on January 17, 2013 at 11:45 AM

Speakup on January 17, 2013 at 11:44 AM

does that include his wife’s big fat @$$?

GhoulAid on January 17, 2013 at 11:46 AM

fa·cade
/fəˈsäd/

Noun

1. The front of a building that looks onto a street or open space.

2. An outward appearance that is maintained to conceal a less pleasant or creditable reality.

BobMbx on January 17, 2013 at 11:47 AM

Well Ed, impotence seems to running rampant in D.C. — see the The Spelunker of the House and his majority…

Gohawgs on January 17, 2013 at 11:49 AM

Show pony in chief

cmsinaz on January 17, 2013 at 11:49 AM

The president gets marks for consistency, he’s going at his farce of gun violence the same way he has every other issue, he stabs American’s in the back with his liberal ideology.

Speakup on January 17, 2013 at 11:49 AM

Answer: An impotent attempt at tyranny.

Tater Salad on January 17, 2013 at 11:49 AM

Here’s how this will play out…House will not do anything until the Senate gives them a bill to vote on. Reid won’t bring a bill to vote citing the NRA lobby as just too big to do anything meaningful. Something else will inevitbly happen and at that point Obama will point to the 23 actions he signed were all he could do but it wasn’t enough and since Congress won’t act he will need to step in. Referfences to Lincoln doing the same thing with suspending habeus corpus will be where he derives this authority for the President to suspend other parts of the Bill of Rights.

cadams on January 17, 2013 at 11:49 AM

Posted elsewhere:

A truly hideous aspect about the Dear Liar’s push to deprive everyone of their right of self-defense is that it wouldn’t have done anything to stop the CT Massacre – and he knows it.

He also knows that depriving the people of their right of self-defense won’t protect them.

But the most hideous thing is HE DOESN’T CARE whether or not it will solve the problem – all he cares about is destroying the 2nd amendment and the Constitution.

His calls for the eventual confiscation of arbitrary defined guns is a thinly veiled attack on the people’s right of self-defense.

His calls for the for another incremental destruction of that right through arbitrarily defined magazine sizes will only empower Criminals and the Government.

Is it FAIR to punish the innocent and empower the guilty?

Colbyjack on January 17, 2013 at 11:49 AM

+1′bobmbx

cmsinaz on January 17, 2013 at 11:50 AM

Obama’s “executive actions”: tyranny or impotence?

Both, but hopefully the latter negates the former.

22044 on January 17, 2013 at 11:50 AM

Ammo/Mag caps. Is this a grandfathered EO? Are 20 round standard mags for ARs legal or illegal? Does it just limit the number of rounds you can put in, or the design itself? Will it require round ‘blocks’ to be installed in the older mags or are the older mags now a ticket to lock up?

Limerick on January 17, 2013 at 11:52 AM

Obama’s “executive actions”: tyranny or impotence?

How about Extreme Douchebaggery for $200 Alex?

ICanSeeNovFromMyHouse on January 17, 2013 at 11:53 AM

Mr. Obama also endorsed universal background checks, including for the 40% of gun sales between private parties. Here too there is a practical problem. Often this exemption is called the “gun show loophole” but most of this activity takes place in homes, over the phone, or via online classified ads. Would the feds impose new data collection and regulations on all gun buyers and sellers?

And how are Grandpa’s guns treated after he passes away and the will is executed, distributing firearms amongst his heirs? Will the police have to be called to confiscate these weapons at the moment of death to ensure federal law is complied with?

Is it now implied that borrowing a weapon from a friend is illegal?

Unintended consequences…the trademark of emotional legislation.

BobMbx on January 17, 2013 at 11:53 AM

It’s tyranny.

Obama’s impotence is due to seeing Michelle in a bikini.

sentinelrules on January 17, 2013 at 11:54 AM

Yesterday was simply a show to appease the left wing base. As many have noted the next “crisis” that comes up will embolden the left wing to rally for more action. So, where are our collective “conservative” leaders announcing that they won’t allow the 2nd ammendment to be trampled? There are some conservative leader one-offs out there decrying the attempt to trample the second ammendment but where are the others? That to me, makes me more nervous, than these shows of what ulitmately are “much ado about nothing”.

rsherwd65 on January 17, 2013 at 11:54 AM

But the way Obama treats the process, children, the debate, the Constitution and the American people is another story. Sen. Rand Paul recently remarked that “someone who wants to bypass the Constitution, bypass Congress — that’s someone who wants to act like a king or a monarch.”

There is no question that Obama’s behavior is disgusting and disgraces his office. Makes one sick just looking at the scene.

dogsoldier on January 17, 2013 at 11:55 AM

Obama was not raised like an average American.

Before you start arguing with the monitor, think about this: Would you have used innocent children as props to further a political agenda?

kingsjester on January 17, 2013 at 11:57 AM

Obama’s “executive actions”: tyranny or impotence?

A bit of both perhaps. Either way he is not a man I would want our young men emulating.

Bmore on January 17, 2013 at 11:57 AM

I’m just wondering…how much did yesterday’s propagandafest cost the taxpayer?

workingclass artist on January 17, 2013 at 11:57 AM

Obama’s “executive actions”: tyranny or impotence?

That isn’t the point of his actions – the Dear Liar knows there will be future attacks.

His tactic is to mollify his fellow gun grabbers and try to Rahm through the Foundations of a Registration scheme and get people used to the idea that certain guns and magazines can be banned.

The Oppressives know that they are doing the exact opposite to keep the children’s safe – and with the next Good thing of the next So Horrific attack, he can implement registration and make the right of self-defense so odious that it pares down the political force of 2nd amendment folks.

THEN when those new rules ALSO fail to keep the children safe, he can take the final step – CONFISCATION.

Galt2009 on January 17, 2013 at 12:01 PM

All of Joe’s hard work didn’t produce much.
But then, the work was already done.

Jabberwock on January 17, 2013 at 12:02 PM

I have learned to never underestimate him.

He may look impotent but his little plan is still working behind the curtain and we haven’t seen the tip of the tyrannical iceberg coming.

katy on January 17, 2013 at 12:02 PM

If Oblamer had a son he would look (and act) like Saint Trayvon.

Much of Zimmerman’s railroading by Junk Justice, the sleazy Angela Corey, and a judge or two of easy virtue stems directly from a core resentment of Zimmerman having had the right to defend himself against hoodlum attack and having utilized the 2nd Amendment to preserve his own life against Saint Trayvon’s attempts to kill him.

viking01 on January 17, 2013 at 12:04 PM

Are those the only choices?

The Rogue Tomato on January 17, 2013 at 12:04 PM

Well Ed, impotence seems to running rampant in D.C. — see the The Spelunker of the House and his majority…

Gohawgs on January 17, 2013 at 11:49 AM

Ding, ding, ding! We have a winner! Best comment of the day on the Speaker who caves…

Steve Z on January 17, 2013 at 12:05 PM

So how long before the docs do GSR tests to determine if you are truthful about your gun ownership answer? The slope ain’t just steep, it is greased.

Limerick on January 17, 2013 at 12:05 PM

..for a matter that is the primary concern of only 5% of the population (see recent Gallup poll), President Limp-Member and his slavering sycophantic media butt-boys have successfully ginned up a controversy and pumped more than three million new guns into the system over the past two-and-one-half months.

Keep it up, dickheads, you’re only making it harder on yourself.

The War Planner on January 17, 2013 at 12:05 PM

..for a matter that is the primary concern of only 5% of the population (see recent Gallup poll), President Limp-Member and his slavering sycophantic media butt-boys have successfully ginned up a controversy and pumped more than three million new guns into the system over the past two-and-one-half months.

Keep it up, d|ckheads, you’re only making it harder on yourself.

The War Planner on January 17, 2013 at 12:06 PM

Both.

Obama’s EO’s don’t even carry the weight of paper.

Trying to enforce them is far more criminal than violating them.

It does show you though where Obamacare is going to lead: total government control of our lives. What business does a doctor have in asking anyone about firearms?

wildcat72 on January 17, 2013 at 12:06 PM

I agree with David that these are an abuse of the normal process, in spirit and rhetoric. In practice, though, none of these “actions” are outside of executive authority already, and the questions Obama’s gun-controlling allies should be asking are why so late, and why so useless?

Because it is as much a part of the show as surrounding yourself Hilter-like with the right mix of children, carefully arranged so that every race, gender, and species is on display for the camera. The real intent, from before Operation Fast and Furious, is getting the guns out of law-abiding citizens’ hands.

The only thing new for 2013 is the opportunity to exploit the deaths of 20 children. Obama’s only regret is that more children were not killed at Sandy Hook. Of course, his own mini-moochers are completely safe in their elite private school surrounded by guards and Secret Service.

Happy Nomad on January 17, 2013 at 12:06 PM

As Rubio said, “The Pres. just needs to come out and be honest and state he is against the 2nd amend”…remember, Pres. Pretends, when asked in 1996, said he supported banning all handguns…the evidence is clear….

hillsoftx on January 17, 2013 at 12:07 PM

Don’t be too quick to write off Obama’s EO’s as eye-wash. Mostly they are worthless… BUT …

Obama and the Left are playing a long game here. The “health care” things are particularly dangerous.

The Left has played the “scientific study” game for years. It goes like this. Some berkenstock wearing lefty academic creates a “study” which justifies some Progressive goal. The Progressive “journalist” reprints the press release as news. The Progressive politician says “See, we have to fix this” and legislation is created. He’s not “pushing his agenda” he’s just “responding to problems and fixing them.” Finally, the academic gets a “grant” for further studies .. And the circle begins again.

The Anti-Gun guys LOVE this trick. Wintemute jumps to mind. but there are a host of others. And think about your last trip to the Doctor or Hospital, were your rights or preferences even considered? Or were you subjected to whatever they wanted to do because “it was good for you”.. (And remember, “medical errors” are one of the largest causes of death in the U.S. if not the world.)

CrazyGene on January 17, 2013 at 12:07 PM

What business does a doctor have in asking anyone about firearms?

wildcat72 on January 17, 2013 at 12:06 PM

Schools are next. Johnny and Jane will be questioned by Mrs Ratchett. Then your employer. They’ll need to let your insurance provider know to cover their butts.

Limerick on January 17, 2013 at 12:09 PM

The only thing new for 2013 is the opportunity to exploit the deaths of 20 children. Obama’s only regret is that more children were not killed at Sandy Hook. Of course, his own mini-moochers are completely safe in their elite private school surrounded by guards and Secret Service.

Happy Nomad on January 17, 2013 at 12:06 PM

And the GOP enables this by cowering instead of getting back in the faces of democrats for standing on the caskets of children for political gain.

Our side will never win any PR war if our first move is to accept the premise the left offers.

wildcat72 on January 17, 2013 at 12:10 PM

Both, but hopefully the latter negates the former.

22044 on January 17, 2013 at 11:50 AM

Unfortunately, the latter is negating the former.

Steve Eggleston on January 17, 2013 at 12:11 PM

Schools are next. Johnny and Jane will be questioned by Mrs Ratchett. Then your employer. They’ll need to let your insurance provider know to cover their butts.

Limerick on January 17, 2013 at 12:09 PM

Yep.

Sending your children to government schools is a form of child abuse.

wildcat72 on January 17, 2013 at 12:12 PM

All hail the dronemaster aka usurper-in-chief

can_con on January 17, 2013 at 12:15 PM

I’m glad I decided to melt all my firearms in 1958. They are a Toyota someplace now.

Limerick on January 17, 2013 at 12:15 PM

Virtually everyone of these items amount to something that could have been accomplished with a telephone call.

pat on January 17, 2013 at 12:16 PM

Unfortunately, the latter is negating the former.

Steve Eggleston on January 17, 2013 at 12:11 PM

I’m confused. Isn’t that a good thing?

latter – impotence
former – tyranny

22044 on January 17, 2013 at 12:17 PM

Ed, correct me if I’m wrong, but these are Executive Actions, not Executive Orders, or EOs. From what I heard, its a recommendation to the legislative branch. EA’s have zero value, unless the legislature takes it up. If I’m wrong, please do correct me.

tommy71 on January 17, 2013 at 12:18 PM

What business does a doctor have in asking anyone about firearms?

wildcat72 on January 17, 2013 at 12:06 PM

The same business stern men wearing leather trenchcoats had walking around asking people for their papers.

“Papers please……Yah…Juden

BobMbx on January 17, 2013 at 12:19 PM

Maybe Barack Obama’s attempt to bypass Congress with nearly two dozen “executive actions” is both — a kind of “tyrannical impotence,” or “impotent tyranny,” but I see a lot more impotence than tyranny or even an abuse of power.

Of course you don’t. You’re an establishment, statist apologist.

The Limits of Presidential Power

Dante on January 17, 2013 at 12:19 PM

Tyrants usually are impotent. That’s part of the reason they’re tyrants.

CurtZHP on January 17, 2013 at 12:19 PM

Mark Levin: Obama’s Executive Orders ‘Un-American,’ ‘Fascistic’

Doctors are private citizens. Do we really want doctors reporting to the federal government if they think somebody might have violent tendencies? Do we really want to discourage people who have mental health issues, or people bringing them in to see their doctor, because they may become part of a national law enforcement database? How is that going to stop any crime?

Obama would make Obamacare into part of his gun control program.

Once gun ownership is entered into the medical records, it will be assessed as an extra health risk, like smoking, for which a surcharge will be added to the insurance premium. Then gun ownership will become unaffordably expense.

I’m not going to take away your guns. If you want your guns, you can keep your guns. But keeping them will bankrupt you.

petefrt on January 17, 2013 at 12:19 PM

petefrt on January 17, 2013 at 12:19 PM

Yep. Wouldn’t surprise me if gun ranges will require ‘proof of insurance’ just like the DMVs.

Limerick on January 17, 2013 at 12:22 PM

I see a lot more impotence than tyranny or even an abuse of power.

I would add Benghazi and now Algeria to Obama’s impotence. He’s not discussed or been held to account for Benghazi with MSM complicity. 4 American’s died in Benghazi, we’ll soon find out how many in Algeria. Al Qaeda is now emboldened more than they were in 2001. Maybe we can get Obama to step away from the presidency and let Bubba finish out his term. We can sweeten the deal by letting Obama go on permanent vacation in Hawaii where he can golf to his hearts content.

TulsAmerican on January 17, 2013 at 12:22 PM

Obama’s impotence is due to seeing Michelle in a bikini.

sentinelrules on January 17, 2013 at 11:54 AM

Obama’s impotence is due to seeing Michelle in a bikini Moo-Chelle.

FIFY!

belad on January 17, 2013 at 12:22 PM

The same business stern men wearing leather trenchcoats had walking around asking people for their papers.

“Papers please……Yah…Juden“

BobMbx on January 17, 2013 at 12:19 PM

Which is why we have the inalienable right to keep and bear arms. Trench coats are poor body armor.

wildcat72 on January 17, 2013 at 12:23 PM

Under Obama, the Affordable Healthcare Act is the Borg of legislation.

Its purpose is to assimilate all power into one law, which gives itself an exemption to judicial review.

Do you see it now? What is the law of the US? Its whatever the President says it is. Its right there, in black and white, in ObamaCare.

BobMbx on January 17, 2013 at 12:23 PM

Tyrants usually are impotent. That’s part of the reason they’re tyrants.

CurtZHP on January 17, 2013 at 12:19 PM

Two guys named Adolf and Uncle Joe have reported you to the president’s new Tyranny czar.

viking01 on January 17, 2013 at 12:24 PM

It is an expression of BOTH. Obama started his Presidential campaign in Berlin for a reason. He WANTS to be a dictator. As do his puppetmasters. But they know in their bones that we’ll shoot their asses off if they go too far over the line. So they waffle back and forth trying to find the sweet spot where they can do maximal damage and still survive their treasons.

rayra on January 17, 2013 at 12:25 PM

Tyrants usually are impotent. That’s part of the reason they’re tyrants.

CurtZHP on January 17, 2013 at 12:19 PM

Can’t we just give him a really big truck, like Bigfoot? Thats usually all thats needed. Oh, I’ll even kick in some cash for the lifetime supply of the little blue pill if it’ll make him go away.

BobMbx on January 17, 2013 at 12:26 PM

How can you become king of the other 50% without taking away their guns? These executive orders don’t do a thing, but the posturing is intended to get his 50% on the rampage.

Christian Conservative on January 17, 2013 at 12:26 PM

nice work Ed.

ted c on January 17, 2013 at 12:27 PM

Dante the moocher is here again.

22044 on January 17, 2013 at 12:30 PM

Which reminds me of how things can go when Jive and English collide.

Years ago a newspaper ran a Happy Birthday ad which read:

Happy Birthday Dad! from your wife and kids. Dad! The most impotent one in the family.”

viking01 on January 17, 2013 at 12:31 PM

It does show you though where Obamacare is going to lead: total government control of our lives. What business does a doctor have in asking anyone about firearms?

[wildcat72 on January 17, 2013 at 12:06 PM]

It depends on what you believe is the responsibility of the doctor in the doctor-patient relationship.

Theoretically speaking, I have no problem with a doctor asking, and giving advice on the subject, even if partisanly biased. But the government has breached the doctor-patient relationship, creating a doctor-government-patient relationship, so the whole gamut of ‘what are the doctor’s responsibilities’ has to be re-evaluated based on the knowledge that the government interest is in infringing on the rights held by the patient.

Dusty on January 17, 2013 at 12:32 PM

it’s all for show

That’s all the ‘Con-artist-in-chief’ is good for.

But HEY! He did have a DIVERSE group of kids up there with him.

GarandFan on January 17, 2013 at 12:32 PM

stopping gun violence with strongly worded memos.

glad that’s all that happened. :)

yokumo on January 17, 2013 at 12:34 PM

How can you become king of the other 50% without taking away their guns? These executive orders don’t do a thing, but the posturing is intended to get his 50% on the rampage.

Christian Conservative on January 17, 2013 at 12:26 PM

Mission accomplished. Come and get it!

VegasRick on January 17, 2013 at 12:36 PM

Tyrants usually are impotent. That’s part of the reason they’re tyrants.

CurtZHP on January 17, 2013 at 12:19 PM

Ha. It took me a few seconds.

Dusty on January 17, 2013 at 12:36 PM

glad that’s all that happened. :)

yokumo on January 17, 2013 at 12:34 PM

Yeah. Letting him drill a tiny hole in the dam can’t hurt a thing.

Limerick on January 17, 2013 at 12:37 PM

The tiniest man on Earth

Schadenfreude on January 17, 2013 at 12:41 PM

Did Hitler have syphilis?

Schadenfreude on January 17, 2013 at 12:44 PM

Yep. Wouldn’t surprise me if gun ranges will require ‘proof of insurance’ just like the DMVs.

Limerick on January 17, 2013 at 12:22 PM

And some leftist judge will rule that gun manufacturers are liable for the death of someone who was shot to death.

petefrt on January 17, 2013 at 12:46 PM

Schools are next. Johnny and Jane will be questioned by Mrs Ratchett.

Time to re-read “The Children’s Story” by James Clavell

Dexter_Alarius on January 17, 2013 at 12:53 PM

Did Hitler have syphilis?

Schadenfreude on January 17, 2013 at 12:44 PM

It’s rumored that he was one marble short in the shorts. So to speak.

viking01 on January 17, 2013 at 12:53 PM

And the GOP enables this by cowering instead of getting back in the faces of democrats for standing on the caskets of children for political gain.

Our side will never win any PR war if our first move is to accept the premise the left offers.

wildcat72 on January 17, 2013 at 12:10 PM

I agree completely. Starting with letting them get by with calling this gun violence prevention. Who stands for more gun violence? The fact of the matter is this is gun-banning pure and simple. Gun violence would include all those dead black on black victims in places like Chicago that were not even mentioned at the rat-eared wonder’s photo-op yesterday.

Many of those victims were children too that look just like our “President.” The only problem is that they didn’t have the opportunity to die in a way that the left could exploit.

Happy Nomad on January 17, 2013 at 12:54 PM

Obama’s “executive actions”: tyranny or impotence?

Both Ed, he`s an impotent tyrant. That said it would be a sigh of relief if his impotence were centered around his tyrannical tendencies but instead we get a POTUS who is actually pretty good at stoking the flames of tyranny yet… an utterly impotent leader of our Nation….a lose/lose if you will.

NY Conservative on January 17, 2013 at 12:55 PM

Dante the moocher is here again.

22044 on January 17, 2013 at 12:30 PM

Yeah, we all heard the trumpet fanfare.

CurtZHP on January 17, 2013 at 12:55 PM

It’s rumored that he was one marble short in the shorts. So to speak.

viking01 on January 17, 2013 at 12:53 PM

Yeah, Goebbels and the boys really busted his ball about that.

CurtZHP on January 17, 2013 at 12:56 PM

Vigilance. Uncle Sugar can’t afford us that any longer. It holds him back too much.

Limerick on January 17, 2013 at 12:57 PM

It was all a big fat show from the Chucklehead in Chief, tweeting letters from the adoring kids, surrounding himself with children while he ceremoniously signed his “executive acts” as if they would magically become law at the stroke of his mighty pen. The man is insane.

scalleywag on January 17, 2013 at 1:00 PM

Don’t uderestimate their actual use. Who would have ever guess Obamacare would allow one hatefillwed wench to attaxck the catholic Church and all our religious conscience. Unless fully attacked, and thwarted, the EOs are what ever they say they are–silent approval by the cowering GOP and a silent Mr. Etch-a-sketch, notwithstanding.

Don L on January 17, 2013 at 1:00 PM

TulsAmerican on January 17, 2013 at 12:22 PM

Four dead Americans in Benghazi is so October 2012. The administration wants you to concentrate on the 20 dead (mostly white) children of Sandy Hook. They want you to be appalled about that and ignore the many more dead (mostly black) children killed by weapons on the streets of inner-city America. Yesterday’s show did nothing to take illegal weapons off the street. The target here, clearly, are the bitter clingers. That is- honest citizens who do not agree with the rat-eared tyrant or the left when it comes to private gun ownership.

Happy Nomad on January 17, 2013 at 1:01 PM

It was all a big fat show from the Chucklehead in Chief, tweeting letters from the adoring kids, surrounding himself with children while he ceremoniously signed his “executive acts” as if they would magically become law at the stroke of his mighty pen. The man is insane.

scalleywag on January 17, 2013 at 1:00 PM

He actually read portions of the letters from three of them, but not the fourth. I wonder how she feels today.

As to the rat-eared wonder’s sanity. I certainly hope the White House doctor will grill him at length if he has access to firearms.

Happy Nomad on January 17, 2013 at 1:03 PM

Tyrannical impotence.

Ward Cleaver on January 17, 2013 at 1:07 PM

CurtZHP on January 17, 2013 at 12:56 PM

The Brit’s used to sing a song in WWII that went:

Hitler has only got one ball
Goering has two but very small
Himmler is somewhat similar
But poor old Goebbels has no balls at all

TulsAmerican on January 17, 2013 at 1:07 PM

He actually read portions of the letters from three of them, but not the fourth. I wonder how she feels today.

Happy Nomad on January 17, 2013 at 1:03 PM

He couldn’t care less. Everything is about him. Just ask him hahaha.

scalleywag on January 17, 2013 at 1:07 PM

Ammo update – went to my local sporting goods store:

They are out of all pistol ammo except .45.

People were lined up at the counter buying remaining guns at 10pm closing time!

cane_loader on January 17, 2013 at 1:12 PM

What matters is the reinstatement of an “assault weapon” ban and it matters because government can define an assault weapon however they like. So you better take it seriously because if you don’t you just might wake up surprised to find out that .22 you’ve had since a kid is suddenly a banned assault weapon.

clearbluesky on January 17, 2013 at 1:17 PM

It’s disturbing that we have a president whose actions have run red-state sporting-goods stores out of ammo.

That, in itself, speaks volumes.

Even under Clinton, the stores never ran out of ammo.

Funny… I had meant to stock up in the last few years under the tyrant, but part of me kept saying that no, thias was overreaction.

So it’s jarring actually not be able to buy ammo at all.

It is here.

cane_loader on January 17, 2013 at 1:17 PM

Obama’s “executive actions”: tyranny or impotence?

.
…both!…he can’t get it up either!

KOOLAID2 on January 17, 2013 at 11:44 AM

.
A simple “yes” wouldd have sufficed … : )

listens2glenn on January 17, 2013 at 1:27 PM

Like the list of “executive actions,” it’s all for show … and all it shows is even more impotence, as it doesn’t have a prayer of advancing even in the Congressional chamber controlled by Obama’s own party.

Because, at the end of the day, the Right is winning this issue.

I can only hope 0 spends his capital on this one. It will blow up in his face…

JohnGalt23 on January 17, 2013 at 1:28 PM

pretty much sums up this clown’s career…all style, no substance. Impotent indeed…

RedInMD on January 17, 2013 at 1:49 PM

My understanding is that one of his actions is clearly illegal, because it goes against a law passed by Congress. Here is Obama’s action:

Section 1. Research. The Secretary of Health and Human Services (Secretary), through the Director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and other scientific agencies within the Department of Health and Human Services, shall conduct or sponsor research into the causes of gun violence and the ways to prevent it. The Secretary shall begin by identifying the most pressing research questions with the greatest potential public health impact, and by assessing existing public health interventions being implemented across the Nation to prevent gun violence.

I had thought we past a ban on this in the Budget. Am I wrong on this? If not, it is important to stop a President from spending money in ways which our laws forbid.

thuja on January 17, 2013 at 1:52 PM

I had thought we past a ban on this in the Budget. Am I wrong on this? If not, it is important to stop a President from spending money in ways which our laws forbid.

thuja on January 17, 2013 at 1:52 PM

Fisrt, what budget. Last one was 2009.

The Secretary shall begin by identifying the most pressing research questions with the greatest potential public health impact, and by assessing existing public health interventions being implemented across the Nation to prevent gun violence.

Second, any idea what the above really means ?

Jabberwock on January 17, 2013 at 2:01 PM

First.
Sorry

Jabberwock on January 17, 2013 at 2:03 PM

Here’s what I found in a Leftist source:

GW: I’ll let the agencies discuss whether they’ve been intimidated or simply prevented or prohibited. The statutory language, which remains in appropriations legislation for the Department of Health and Human Services to this day, is that “none of the funds made available in this title may be used, in whole or in part, to advocate or promote gun control.” I think it’s fair to say that this language has been interpreted at times to mean that none of the funds could be used to support research that, depending on its findings, might be used in support of efforts to alter current firearm policy.

It’s worth noting that when signing the budget for 2012, President Obama said of this provision that “I have advised the Congress that I will not construe these provisions as preventing me from fulfilling my constitutional responsibility to recommend to the Congress’s consideration such measures as I shall judge necessary and expedient.”

I suppose I can see how Obama could argue that he isn’t doing anything forbidden.

thuja on January 17, 2013 at 2:12 PM

Yeah, we all heard the trumpet fanfare.

CurtZHP on January 17, 2013 at 12:55 PM

Did he get banned? His posts are gone!

22044 on January 17, 2013 at 2:23 PM

Schools are next. Johnny and Jane will be questioned by Mrs Ratchett.

Some already are. The Left has always been real good in turning children into snitches on their family, friends and neighbors. Just wait until schools start offering the helpful kiddies gift cards,video games and media recognition for being model citizens to entice them to do their dirty work.

hawkeye54 on January 17, 2013 at 2:24 PM

It’s worth noting that when signing the budget for 2012, President Obama said of this

thuja on January 17, 2013 at 2:12 PM

What budget ? None since 2009.

But then, as you said “Leftist source”

Jabberwock on January 17, 2013 at 2:40 PM

Did he get banned? His posts are gone!

22044 on January 17, 2013 at 2:23 PM

Hope not. Dude could take a punch.

Jabberwock on January 17, 2013 at 2:42 PM

Hope not. Dude could take a punch.

Jabberwock on January 17, 2013 at 2:42 PM

Heh – good metaphor.

22044 on January 17, 2013 at 2:44 PM

Excremental Orders? Impotent tyranny and tyrannical impotence–a whole lotta both.

stukinIL4now on January 17, 2013 at 2:52 PM

Comment pages: 1 2