Thread: Rule by Fiat

Should the White House control what your kids learn?
Published September 07, 2012

What if President Obama’s most ambitious attempt to transform American society was also his quietest plan? You wouldn’t vote against the president on account of a program you’d never heard about, of course. That, I’d wager, is why President Obama has told the American public next-to-nothing about his plans to undercut the political and financial independence of America’s suburban school districts.

Obama is quietly busy making an end-run around our constitutional system, which forbids federal control of what your children learn in school. Step one, already well under way, is a dumbed-down national curriculum designed to artificially suppress achievement gaps between urban and suburban students. The right way to help poorly performing students is not to gut standards but to raise achievement, yet Obama is committed to defining performance down. That’s why the president’s ultimate goal is to erase the differences between local school districts with a massive redistribution of suburban education spending to the cities.




The right to educate your children as you see fit has traditionally stood at the very center of the American vision of self-government and personal liberty.

-


The 2008 controversy over Obama’s years of education work with that famously unrepentant Weather Underground terrorist Bill Ayers has faded from view. For a moment, it seemed as though Ayers’ radical education legacy would carry forward into Obama’s presidency. That’s because Linda Darling-Hammond, Ayers’ favorite education expert and head of Obama’s education transition team, was on a fast track to appointment as secretary of education until her leftism alienated even many Democrats.

When Arne Duncan, who ostensibly backs demanding standards and tests, became education secretary instead, it looked as though Obama had tacked center. He hadn’t, and appearances to the contrary, neither had Darling-Hammond left the scene.

The core of the hard-left’s education agenda – a program shared by Obama, Ayers, and Darling-Hammond alike – has three parts: 1) a politicized curriculum that promotes leftist notions of “social justice,” 2) reducing “disparate outcomes” between students in different districts by undercutting standards, and 3) a redistribution of suburban education funding to less-well-off urban schools. Achieving these goals on a broad scale requires the federal government to usurp local control of K-12 schooling.

Obama is half-way there.

How did he do it? Instead of submitting his controversial education proposals to Congress and kicking off a vigorous national debate, Obama quietly marked $4.35 billion of federal stimulus spending for his Race to the Top education initiative. Since the stimulus bill was rushed through Congress with barely any debate on economic policy, much less education, Obama never had to go public with his plans.

By coordinating with outside groups not accountable to the voters, like the deep-pocketed Gates Foundation, the White House then orchestrated the creation of a national Common Core of education standards, with an accompanying curriculum and tests.

Supposedly, these standards have been voluntarily adopted by more than 40 states. In fact, by effectively conditioning eligibility for Race to the Top grants on participation in the Common Core, the Obama administration has forced economically pinched states to surrender control of their school curricula to the federal government. Cleverly, states have been pressed to sign on to the Common Core before the actual standards, curricula, and tests are revealed in a second Obama term. The entire scheme is arguably both illegal and unconstitutional. Yet it is moving forward, and the public knows virtually nothing about it.

A few conservatives have been fooled by the seemingly traditionalist call for national “standards.” Yet most conservative education experts understand that the new national standards will be low, not high. With so many pressing economic issues on the table, however, nobody’s listening. Too bad, because the ultimate outcome of Obama’s education scheme will actually be economic: a sweeping redistribution of suburban education funding to the cities.

Far from having departing the scene, Obama’s former adviser, Linda Darling-Hammond, is at the center of this plan. She works with the Smarter-Balanced Assessment Consortium, selected by the administration to create the testing system for the new Common Core. Darling-Hammond has gone out of her way to downplay her role with the Smarter-Balanced Consortium, but the group’s own publications make it clear that she is effectively running the show. So, although Darling-Hammond is the top national opponent of standardized tests, she is now effectively in charge of designing a new K-12 testing system for much of the nation. The result will be politically correct questions, and standards that aren’t really standards at all.

That’s only part one of the plan. President Obama’s Department of Education has established an Equity and Excellence Commission, charged with finding “ways to restructure school finance systems to achieve equity in the distribution of educational resources and further student achievement and attainment.” Conveniently, the commission’s recommendations will emerge only during a possible second Obama term. Darling-Hammond is a member of that commission, and if past experience is a guide will have outsize influence on its recommendations.

Darling-Hammond has already made her intentions clear. She is pushing a plan to add common “resource standards” to the new Common Core’s curricular standards. That is, Darling-Hammond hopes to condition federal education aid on the equalization of school funding across municipal lines. She has also proposed allowing students to transfer across school district lines, with transportation provided at government expense.

The target here is the suburbs. Obama and Darling-Hammond are both longtime supporters of the little-known “regional equity” movement, which aims to undercut the political independence of America’s suburbs so as to redistribute suburban wealth to the cities. Obama is too sharp politically to advertise this part of his program, yet he is aggressively pressing it forward.

The right to educate your children as you see fit has traditionally stood at the very center of the American vision of self-government and personal liberty. When young couples work and save so that they can move to a home in the suburbs with just the sort of schools they want, we say that they are pursuing the American dream. Shut off that dream with a misguided effort to equalize the funding of every American school district, and you destroy the engine that drives our prosperity, removing a core motive to work.

Agree or disagree, shouldn’t President Obama clearly explain his ambitious redistributive plans for K-12 education – and America’s suburbs – so that they can be discussed and debated during this epochal national election?


Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2012/...#ixzz2GIY43CHO

Folks - this is getting weird!! "Biden’s group has expanded its focus to include measures that would not need congressional approval and could be quickly implemented by executive action."

http://maddowblog.msnbc.com/_news/20...control-agenda

White House eyes 'far broader' gun-control agenda
By Steve Benen - Mon Jan 7, 2013 8:55 AM EST

Just five days after the massacre at Sandy Hook Elementary in Newtown, Conn., President Obama launched a new task force, given a mission to develop comprehensive proposals to address gun violence. Vice President Biden is leading the panel, which is set to report later this month on the administration's agenda.

Though we don't yet know exactly what Obama and his team have in mind, the latest trial balloon suggests they're thinking big. http://www.washingtonpost.com/politi...46f_story.html

The White House is weighing a far broader and more comprehensive approach to curbing the nation's gun violence than simply reinstating an expired ban on assault weapons and high-capacity ammunition, according to multiple people involved in the administration's discussions.

A working group led by Vice President Biden is seriously considering measures backed by key law enforcement leaders that would require universal background checks for firearm buyers, track the movement and sale of weapons through a national database, strengthen mental health checks, and stiffen penalties for carrying guns near schools or giving them to minors, the sources said.

Dan Gross, president of the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, told the Washington Post he's been involved in the internal discussions and administration officials "are very clearly committed to looking at this issue comprehensively." He added that White House plans are "a deeper exploration than just the assault-weapons ban."

We can evaluate the details of the proposals on their merits once more substantive details are available, but in the meantime, it's hard not to wonder how the administration intends to overcome fierce political opposition.

The concerns are not lost on the White House.

To sell such changes, the White House is developing strategies to work around the National Rifle Association that one source said could include rallying support from Wal-Mart and other gun retailers for measures that would benefit their businesses. White House aides have also been in regular contact with advisers to New York Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg (I), an outspoken gun-control advocate who could emerge as a powerful surrogate for the Obama administration's agenda. [...]

Once Obama's proposals are set, he plans to lead a public-relations offensive to generate popular support.... The White House is also developing strategies to navigate the rocky and emotionally fraught terrain of gun politics once final policy decisions are made. The administration is quietly talking with a diverse array of interest groups, including religious leaders, mental-health professionals and hunters, to build as broad a coalition as possible, those involved in the discussions said.

Part of this strategy appears to be based on the belief that a delayed push would drastically reduce the chances of success.

But there can be little doubt that this will be a very heavy lift in Congress, no matter what measures the task force recommends. The House is still led by an extremely conservative Republican majority; Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) said yesterday that his focus in the coming months will be demanding steep cuts to public investments, not gun violence; and red-state Democrats will also need convincing -- Sen. Heidi Heitkamp (D-N.D.) said yesterday the White House's gun agenda appears to be "way in extreme of what I think is necessary or even should be talked about."

Regardless, as the task force continues its work, it's worth noting that there were fears from the left that the president would shift his attention away from gun violence once the immediate shock of Newtown faded. At least for now, that does not appear to be the case.

http://maddowblog.msnbc.com/_news/20...control-agenda

comments

I buy through a licensed dealer. There is a back ground check each time I purchase a gun. The "gun show loop hole" exists to allow personal sales by individuals to friends and family. The loop hole is abused by unlicensed dealers who show up at gun shows selling dozens or hundreds of guns. Let the ATF enforce the law against the unlicensed professional dealers. But the ATF is underfunded.

...

do you know the "hit rate" for police officers in gun fights? It's somewhere between 25 and 40 percent. And that's their JOB. Adrenaline spikes reduce accuracy. The average gun owner who practices when he can will probably do significantly worse than that...so a sub 25% hit rate. At 7 rounds, that's maybe 1 hit, or 2 at the most.

That's all you need!!!...you say, anyway.

1. What if they don't go down with that 1 hit? 1 hit stops are not as common as you think. Large, angry, potentially high men can take a lot to put them down. These are undisputed facts. Sometimes, you have to put more than 1, or 2, or even 3 rounds into someone to STOP them.

2. What if there's more than one attacker? Gang violence is rising in this country. There is no rule that you can only be attacked by one person at a time. Bad guys don't play fair.

In both the above situations, the law abiding citizen is raped/killed/mugged because YOU think they shouldn't have more than 7 rounds. Why are you willing to make that call for them? Seems pretty high handed.

Finally, I leave you with this---speed reloading even a 7 shot magazine, or EVEN A REVOLVER can be accomplished within a couple of seconds, if someone is truly skilled. And the small amount of time it takes to do such a speed reload is far more precious when you're being actively attacked by thugs than it would be when you're casually killing a room full of milling children. The mass shooters can certainly take the 0.5 to 2 seconds it might take to reload....the 80 year old grandma facing two meth addicts running down the hallway might not...so reducing magazine capacity will do very little to inconvenience mass shooters, while potentially killing law abiding systems who need more rounds.

..

Hobo, why stop there? A pump action shotgun filled with birdshot, backed up by a couple of revolvers, and I could slaughter a room full of people too, with little trouble. Or you could just build a bomb out of common household supplies if you wanted to kill 30 people, or 100. Or drop poison in the water supply.

Forget pump action, the kid in columbine stalked the halls with a break open double barrel shotgun, and reloaded it dozens of times. Why didn't the 2 round capacity stop him? Because children aren't going to rush an active shooter. There was no one in the gun free zone that could have stopped him, so he had all the time in the world to reload, and reload, and reload, reload reload, reload.


The 2nd amendment has nothing to do with hunting. People don't need an Ar-15 for hunting. They potentially need it for defense.

...

Why do you want these changes, Haddie? Why focus on banning these weapons, instead of say...Baseball bats, which kill far more people every year in the U.S. than assault weapons. Obviously, you need them for the game of baseball..but should people really be allowed to have these kinds of killing clubs readily at hand away from the baseball diamond? Why do you want the children to die? Until we address baseball bat control, there's no point in even fooling with the relative handful of deaths each year which occur as the result of extended magazines or "assault weapons." I'm sick and tired of pro-bat fanatics ignoring this deadly issue in favor of chasing after a minor issue like assault weapons.

STOP THE MADDNESS !

“Biden: Obama Considering ‘Executive Order’ to Deal With Guns”

MSNBC : http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature...&v=aNjxzFgKcHY


The Weekly Standard: http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/...ns_694984.html

“The president is going to act,” said Biden, giving some comments to the press before a meeting with victims of gun violence. “There are executives orders, there’s executive action that can be taken. We haven’t decided what that is yet. But we’re compiling it all with the help of the attorney general and the rest of the cabinet members as well as legislative action that we believe is required.”

Biden said that this is a moral issue and that “it’s critically important that we act.”

Biden talked also about taking responsible action. “As the president said, if you’re actions result in only saving one life, they’re worth taking. But I’m convinced we can affect the well-being of millions of Americans and take thousands of people out of harm’s way if we act responsibly.”

Biden, as he himself noted, helped write the Brady bill.

Bill Ayers figured he’d have to kill about 25 million of us to usher in Utopia. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HWMIwziGrAQ

Obama, it increasingly seems, believes the same. And to precipitate the culling of the herd, he’s looking to start a civil war. Or rather, hoping that the bitterclingers will start it, so that he can rationalize the use of government force to protect us from ourselves.

Ironically, it’s the useful idiots that should be most afraid. Because it turns out Obama and his cabal never really cared about any of them. The little lefty ankle biters and Obama fanbois are all just pawns. This has always been about power, control, and the fundamental transformation necessary to secure and institutionalize that authoritarian infrastructure that is required to run a Marxist state.

That it’s come clothed in suits with flag lapel pins rather than adorned with thick mustaches and military fatigues is merely a matter of aesthetics.

Kind of like the definition of “assault rifle,” come to think about it.

When the Cambrian measures were forming,
They promised perpetual peace.
They swore, if we gave them our weapons,
that the wars of the tribes would cease.
But when we disarmed They sold us
and delivered us bound to our foe,
And the Gods of the Copybook Headings said:
“Stick to the Devil you know.”

http://proteinwisdom.com/?p=46522

comments

As the president said, if you’re actions result in only saving one life, they’re worth taking.”

Like a mother hunkered down in an attic with her children, who shoots her trespassing would be assailant/murderer?

...

Vice President Biden perfectly captures the ludicrousness of zero tolerance policies where the perfect remains the mortal enemy of the good. Presumably after the dictatorial overreach of Executive Orders banning guns, they will move on to cars, baseball bats, eyeglass frames, pointed sticks, and anything else that the peasants could use to threaten their lordships. Hey, while they are it, why not ban lightning and floods by Executive Order? Move over Knut.

I seriously hope this was just Joe being crazy Uncle Joe and not providing insight into potential actions under consideration by the Obama Administration.

...

As soon as a gun control organization jumps up and says: “Wait a minute, with all due respect, Mr. Biden, that’s going to far” then, yes, VP Biden was having a Biden moment.

Until then, this is how the White House views the situation and is using “Crazy Uncle Joe” as cover.

Biden: W.H. readies 19 executive actions on guns
By REID J. EPSTEIN | 1/14/13 6:49 PM

The White House has identified 19 executive actions for President Barack Obama to move unilaterally on gun control, Vice President Joe Biden told a group of House Democrats on Monday, the administration’s first definitive statements about its response to last month’s mass shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School.

Later this week, Obama will formally announce his proposals to reduce gun violence, which are expected to include renewal of the assault weapons ban, universal background checks and prohibition of high-capacity magazine clips. But Biden, who has been leading Obama’s task force on the response, spent two hours briefing a small group of sympathetic House Democrats on the road ahead in the latest White House outreach to invested groups.

The focus on executive orders is the result of the White House and other Democrats acknowledging the political difficulty of enacting any new gun legislation, a topic Biden did not address in Monday’s meeting.

The executive actions could include giving the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention authority to conduct national research on guns, more aggressive enforcement of existing gun laws and pushing for wider sharing of existing gun databases among federal and state agencies, members of Congress in the meeting said.

(Also on POLITICO: NRA releases shooting game for ages 4+)

“It was all focusing on enforcing existing law, administering things like improving the background database, things like that that do not involve a change in the law but enforcing and making sure that the present law is administered as well as possible,” said Rep. Bobby Scott (D-Va.).

The White House declined to comment on the details of what Obama will propose.

(Also on POLITICO: Poll: Gun background checks wanted)

But Biden did indicate that the remains of the Obama campaign apparatus may be activated in the effort.

“He said that this has been a real focus on the policy and that the politics of this issue, that a strategy on the politics of the issue hasn’t been undertaken yet,” Rep. Jackie Speier (D-Calif.) told POLITICO. “He did remind us that the campaign infrastructure is still accessible.”

Biden did not address two of the more significant issues in the gun debate: the appointment of a permanent director of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, and the role violent images in the entertainment industry play in the nation’s gun violence.

Obama touched on his expected legislative guns agenda at his own news conference in the East Room on Monday, while stressing the power he has via executive order.

“How we are gathering data, for example, on guns that fall into the hands of criminals, and how we track that more effectively — there may be some steps that we can take administratively as opposed through legislation,” Obama said.

Even Democrats who back gun control concede that reinstating an assault weapons ban — the 1994 law expired in 2004 — will be a heavy lift for the White House. During his meeting with gun-rights groups last week, Biden mentioned only an assault weapons ban when telling the NRA and other organizations that Obama has “made up his mind” to support it.

“I think everybody acknowledges that the assault weapons ban is a challenge, but other things — like the size of the magazines, the background checks, straw purchases — are all things that have a good chance of passing,” Scott said.

Speier said she told Biden the White House should do as much as it can on its own.

“I urged him to do as much by executive order as possible,” she said. “Frankly, I don’t have a lot of confidence that this Congress is going to do anything significant.”

And Rep. Mike Thompson (D-Calif.), the chairman of the House Democrats’ Gun Violence Prevention Task Force, said the magazine ban and universal background checks would be far more effective than an assault weapons ban without the political cost.

“Probably the most recognizable thing you can say in this debate is ban assault weapons,” Thompson said. “But the other two issues” — forbidding high-capacity ammunition magazines and requiring universal background checks for gun purchases — “those two things have more impact on making our neighborhoods safe than everything else combined. Anytime you try and prohibit what kind of gun people has it generates some concern.”

Biden’s personal gun violence outreach now includes the families of the 26 victims of the Dec. 14 school massacre in Newtown, Conn. Biden told the Monday meeting that he’s been reaching out to the families. A White House official confirmed the vice president has been in touch directly with some of the families.

“The vice president mentioned that he has called every one of the families that has lost children in Connecticut, and that the conversations have lasted no less than 45 minutes,” Speier said.


Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2013/0...#ixzz2I1AuHZZu

“The vice president mentioned that he has called every one of the families that has lost children in Connecticut, and that the conversations have lasted no less than 45 minutes,” Speier said.

I'm not sure how I feel about this. These families are grieving and are being pulled into someone's political agenda? I seriously doubt their sincerity.

Obama to gun-control foes: Examine your conscience
Olivier Knox, Yahoo! News | The Ticket – Mon, Jan 14, 2013.


Bringing the curtain down on his first term with a combative press conference, President Barack Obama vowed on Monday to push "vigorously" for measures to curb deadly gun violence and pressed foes of new restrictions in the aftermath of the Newtown tragedy to "examine their own conscience." Obama also admitted he faced stiff opposition from gun-rights advocates in Congress and vowed executive action when possible.

The president, due to be sworn in on Sunday and make his inaugural address from the Capitol steps a day later, also warned Republicans against refusing to raise the nation's debt limit in order to wring spending cuts from the White House. "We are not a deadbeat nation," Obama said.

And he defended himself from criticisms that his nominees to serve in his second-term Cabinet have mostly been older white men, urging Americans not to "rush to judgment" based on his picks to lead the departments of State, Defense and Treasury and the CIA.

"Until you’ve seen what my overall team looks like, it’s premature to assume that somehow we’re going backwards," he said. "We’re not going backwards."

One month to the day after the elementary school slaughter in Connecticut, the president said he had received recommendations from Vice President Joe Biden's task force for curbing a national epidemic of gun violence. Those proposals are expected to face opposition from gun-rights groups like the NRA and its allies in Congress.

The Biden task force has "presented me now with a list of sensible, common-sense steps that can be taken to make sure that the kinds of violence we saw in Newtown doesn’t happen again," he told reporters. “I’ll present the details later in the week.”

He added, “My starting point is not to worry about the politics. My starting point is to focus on what makes sense, what works, what should we be doing to make sure that our children are safe and that we’re reducing the incidence of gun violence. I think we can do that in a sensible way that comports with the Second Amendment.”

But will Congress adopt proposals like renewing the assault weapons ban? “I don’t know,” Obama acknowledged. Lawmakers opposed to such steps must "examine their own conscience." In some cases, Congress won't act but he will, the president said.

“I’m confident that there are some steps that we can take that don’t require legislation and are within my authority as president," he said. "How we are gathering data, for example, on guns that fall into the hands of criminals and how we track that more effectively.”

Asked about the surge in gun and ammunition sales, Obama blamed "a fear that's been fanned" by opponents of gun control.

“We’ve seen—for some time now—that those who oppose any common-sense gun-control or gun-safety measures have a pretty effective way of ginning up fear on the part of gun owners that somehow the federal government’s about to take all your guns away," he said. "There’s probably an economic element to that—it obviously is good for business."

He added that "responsible gun owners—people who have a gun for protection, for hunting, for sportsmanship—they don’t have anything to worry about."

Obama also warned congressional Republicans that he will not trade spending cuts for their votes to raise the country’s debt ceiling.

Obama called Republican talk of not raising the limit—of, in effect, not paying the country’s bills—“irresponsible” and “absurd.” He said the GOP will “not collect a ransom in return for not crashing the economy."

“You don’t go out to dinner and then eat all you want and then leave without paying the check—and if you do you’re breaking the law," he said. “If Congress wants to have a debate about maybe we shouldn’t go out to dinner next time, maybe we should go to a more modest restaurant, that’s fine. That’s a debate that we should have. But you don’t say, 'In order for me to control my appetites, I’m going to not pay.'"

Even as Obama spoke, Republican Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell said in a statement that "the president and his allies need to get serious about spending, and the debt-limit debate is the perfect time for it."

And Republican House Speaker John Boehner warned that "the consequences of failing to increase the debt ceiling are real, but so, too, are the consequences of allowing our spending problem to go unresolved." He added: "The House will do its job and pass responsible legislation that controls spending, meets our nation’s obligations and keeps the government running."

At issue is the congressionally established debt limit, which the country is set to reach shortly. Without additional borrowing, the government will not be able to pay all of its bills, raising the prospect of a default on national debt payments or Washington being forced to stop issuing Social Security checks, pay to troops overseas and other legally required outlays, according to Obama. Either option would likely send shock waves through the fragile global economy.

Raising the debt limit was mostly a matter of routine in Washington under presidents of both parties for decades. The opposition would make a big show of wringing its hands over the nation’s finances (as a senator in 2006, Obama himself called it “a sign of leadership failure" and voted against raising it), and the majority would find a way to pass it.

Republicans broke sharply from that script in August 2011, when they demanded spending cuts equal to the amount that the limit would be raised. The ensuing standoff brought the nation to the brink of default and led to the first-ever downgrade of the country’s credit rating—but also to historic spending cuts, signed into law by Obama. Top Republican lawmakers have said publicly that this time they may be willing to partially shut down the government to secure more reductions.

“Our economy is growing and our businesses are creating new jobs, so we are poised for a good year if we make smart decisions and sound investments” and so long as Washington politics “don’t get in the way,” the president said.

http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/ticket/o...-politics.html

Barry looking at 19 – count ‘em, 19 – executive orders on guns

How lazy is the president? He is looking at 19 unilateral actions the executive can take because it’s just too damn hard to pass gun control any other way. Those darn citizens always get in the way of Obama doing the real fun stuff. Why can’t they just sit down, shut up, and let the president rule?

The focus on executive orders is the result of the White House and other Democrats acknowledging the political difficulty of enacting any new gun legislation, a topic Biden did not address in Monday’s meeting.

By taking a short cut around congress, the president is admitting he is an incompetent leader. Besides, doing all the spade work and sausage making in order to pass his gun control agenda in Congress would cut into his golf game and shoot arounds with NBA stars.

Once again the president is seeking to expand executive power at the expense of the legislature. And congress, liked cowed dogs, roll over and let it happen.

Read more: http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/...#ixzz2I5j3lYTM

***

Harry Reid says assault weapons ban is doomed


The Democratically-controlled U.S. Senate will not be a free-for-all of new gun regulations following the shooting at Sandy Hook, according to Majority Leader Harry Reid. Instead, Senators will focus on passing legislation that can move through the Republican-controlled House, Reid said.

Forty nine states now allow concealed/carry. And it appears that the worst the gun control lobby can do is urge background checks on everyone who buys a gun.

http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/...is_doomed.html

Tomorrow morning, President Obama is set to reveal his strategy to combat gun violence. We still don’t know exactly what sorts of measures Obama will propose, but at today’s briefing, White House Press Secretary Jay Carney reiterated the president’s commitment to taking “meaningful action” — for the children:

Mark Knoller✔
@markknoller

Carney says if even 1 child's life can be saved by actions taken in Washington, we must take these actions.

What’s wrong with this picture?

Brad Dayspring@BDayspring

So POTUS is now Pro-Life? Good 2 know. MT @markknoller: Carney says if even 1 child's life can be saved by Washington, we must take actions

15 Jan 13

Timothy P Carney@TPCarney

So dumb. RT @markknoller: Carney says if even 1 child's life can be saved by actions taken in Washington, we must take these actions.

15 Jan 13

If what Carney says is true, couldn’t — and shouldn’t — this logic be extended to, well, everything?

Charles C. W. Cooke@charlescwcooke

Given that we're about to enact any law that would save one child's life, expect Carney to announce abolition of the drone program today.

15 Jan 13

Redness@maryclimer

BAN PLAYGROUNDS! RT @GayPatriot: BAN CARS!!!! MT @markknoller: Carney says if even 1 child's life can be saved, we must take these actions

15 Jan 13

David Freddoso@freddoso

5 mph speed limit, here we come! MT @markknoller: Carney says if even 1 child's life can be saved by actions taken in DC, we must take them

15 Jan 13

Steven Ertelt@StevenErtelt

Ban abortion! RT @markknoller: Carney says if even 1 child's life can be saved by actions taken in Washington, we must take these actions.

15 Jan 13

David Freddoso@freddoso

In 2001, 11 children drowned in 5 gallon buckets. #evenonechild

15 Jan 13

@leahblizz

BAN FOOD! (more people die from choking on food than guns) #SavingOneChildsLife—
Leah Blair (@leahblizz) January 15, 2013

15 Jan 13

Sassy Pants@nicoleb977

#SavingOneChildsLife Ban pageant moms

15 Jan 13

Or, just take care of business in one fell swoop:

Jenny@Jenny_IDLYITW


#SavingOneChildsLife Ban kids. Problem solved.

15 Jan 13

That’s the ticket!


http://twitchy.com/2013/01/15/obama-...red-his-logic/

comments

Obama has the most extreme position imaginable on abortion. The most extreme position of probably any politician in WA

Carney is just spewing propaganda from an evil narcissist that pushed for babies to be left to die in a closet after being born after a botched abortion. The Obama Administration is vile and disgusting.

....

I guess conservatives have got to stop being so darn decent. Because the left jumped in front and immediately, with some media help, the narrative was that gun control would've kept the weapons out of the shooter's hands. Gun control is what we need to prevent this. If you oppose gun control, you oppose saving little children. And this was the official line instantly, long before the victims were even identified. As all this happened, prominent conservatives were quietly respectful, staying out of the conversation entirely for days. By the time we felt it appropriate to respond, the narrative was set and we were in a deep hole.

So I'm through being nice on this issue. This is a president who approves of killing millions of unborn and, in some cases, partially born children. And this is a president who is going to surround himself with children for political exploitation or even personal protection tomorrow, as he antagonizes his bitterest enemies with radical gun control measures. Truly shameful.

...

He's sponsored legislation that gave legal cover to allowing newborns to be abandoned in linen rooms.

Ban: knives, forks, spoons, bathrooms, buttons, bottles, glass, scissors, marbles, baby bottle nipples, infant formula, stoves, water, diaper pins (are my grandchildren the only ones still using cloth diapers?), eggs, carrots, kittens, methane, gasoline, pebbles (both the breakfast and the stones), cake, ice cream, alcohol, all medication, bandages, electricity, DumperCrats, Socialists, Red China, Planned Parenthood, Unions, Doctors, Nurses...

And still this list lists only a grain of sand on a beach of things that kill atleast one child every year!

D@mn fools.

..

10 million annual abortions is absolutely fine by me .... but I will overturn the second amendment if I can save just one child.

~ BO

..

Alcohol causes 100,000 annual fatalities including children but I will give it a pass because I like it. But I don't like guns so I will ban them just as soon as I can pin all of the onus on white people instead of my fellow black dem supporters who do 90% of all the killings. I will vigorously and earnestly, if not entirely disingenuously and dishonestly, politicize all and only white murderers until the cows come home, in the name of fairness.

... Barack Hussein Obama

..

And how many children have died or will die because a "good guy" with a gun wasn't there?

Atlanta mother uses gun to defend children, home, shoots intruder 5 times. If owning a gun saves one child, it's worth it.


Here's another - an article from Chattanooga, TN of homeowners defending themselves http://www.wrcbtv.com/story/20574246...rmed-residents

..

"Think of the children!" the battle cry of the liberal fascist.
http://youtu.be/Qh2sWSVRrmo

President Barack Obama has unveiled the most sweeping proposals for curbing gun violence in two decades, pressing a reluctant Congress to pass universal background checks and bans on military-style assault weapons and high-capacity ammunition magazines like the ones used in the Newtown, CT school shooting. http://bit.ly/11zGBs7

Obama unveils $500 million gun violence package
Jan 16, 2013 12:14 PM CST
By JULIE PACE and ERICA WERNER
Associated Press

WASHINGTON (AP) - Braced for a fight, President Barack Obama on Wednesday unveiled the most sweeping proposals for curbing gun violence in two decades, pressing a reluctant Congress to pass universal background checks and bans on military-style assault weapons and high-capacity ammunition magazines like the ones used in the Newtown, Conn., school shooting.

A month after that horrific massacre, Obama also used his presidential powers to enact 23 measures that don't require the backing of lawmakers. The president's executive actions include ordering federal agencies to make more data available for background checks, appointing a director of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, and directing the Centers for Disease Control to research gun violence.

But the president, speaking at White House ceremony, focused his attention on the divided Congress, saying only lawmakers could enact the most effective measures for preventing more mass shootings.

"To make a real and lasting difference, Congress must act," Obama said. "And Congress must act soon."

The president vowed to use "whatever weight this office holds" to press lawmakers into action on his $500 million plan. He is also calling for improvements in school safety, including putting 1,000 police officers in schools and bolstering mental health care by training more health professionals to deal with young people who may be at risk.

Even supportive lawmakers say the president's gun control proposals - most of which are opposed by the powerful National Rifle Association - face long odds on Capitol Hill.

House Speaker John Boehner's office was non-committal to the president's package of proposed legislation, but signaled no urgency to act. "House committees of jurisdiction will review these recommendations," Boehner spokesman Michael Steel said. "And if the Senate passes a bill, we will also take a look at that."

Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Patrick Leahy said ahead of Obama's presentation that he didn't know whether an assault weapons ban could pass the Senate, but said there are some measures that can, such as improved background checks.

"There are some who say nothing will pass. I disagree with that," Leahy, D-Vt., told students at Georgetown University Law Center. "What I'm interested in is what we can get."

Acknowledging the tough fight ahead, Obama said there will be pundits, politicians and special interest groups that will seek to "gin up fear" that the White House wants to take away the right to own a gun.

"Behind the scenes, they'll do everything they can to block any commonsense reform and make sure nothing changes whatsoever," he said. "The only way we will be able to change is if their audience, their constituents, their membership says this time must be different, that this time we must do something to protect our communities and our kids."

The president was flanked by children who wrote him letters about gun violence in the weeks following the Newtown shooting. Families of those killed in the massacre, as well as survivors of the shooting, were also in the audience, along with law enforcement officers and congressional lawmakers.

"This is our first task as a society, keeping our children safe," Obama said. "This is how we will be judged."

Seeking to expand the impetus for addressing gun violence beyond the Newtown shooting, the president said more than 900 Americans have been killed by guns in the month since the elementary school massacre.

"Every day we wait, the number will keep growing," he said.

The White House has signaled that Obama could launch a campaign to boost public support for his proposals. Nearly six in 10 Americans want stricter gun laws in the aftermath of the Newtown shooting, with majorities favoring a nationwide ban on military-style, rapid-fire weapons and limits on gun violence depicted in video games, movies and TV shows, according to a new Associated Press-GfK poll.

A lopsided 84% of adults would like to see the establishment of a federal standard for background checks for people buying guns at gun shows, the poll showed.

The president based his proposals on recommendations from an administration-wide task force led by Vice President Joe Biden. His plan marks the most comprehensive effort to address gun violence since Congress passed the 1994 ban on high-grade, military-style assault weapons. The ban expired in 2004, and Obama wants lawmakers to renew and expand it.

Other measures Obama wants Congress to take up include limiting high-capacity ammunition magazines and requiring background checks for all gun buyers in an attempt to close the so-called "gun-show loophole" that allows people to buy guns at trade shows and over the Internet without submitting to background checks.

Obama also intends to seek confirmation for B. Todd Jones, who has served as acting director of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives since 2011.

The president's plan does little to address violent images in video games, movies and entertainment, beyond asking the CDC to study their impact on gun crimes. Some pro-gun lawmakers who are open to addressing stricter arms legislation have insisted they would do so only in tandem with recommendations for addressing violence in entertainment.

The president's long list of executive orders also include:

Ordering tougher penalties for people who lie on background checks and requiring federal agencies to make relevant data available to the federal background check system.

Ending limits that make it more difficult for the government to research gun violence, such as gathering data on guns that fall into criminal hands.

Requiring federal law enforcement to trace guns recovered in criminal investigations.

Giving schools flexibility to use federal grant money to improve school safety, such as by hiring school resource officers.

Giving communities grants to institute programs to keep guns away from people who shouldn't have them.

http://www.wafb.com/story/20598566/o...clipId=8196817

comments

The ones used In Sandy Hook? But they only found hand guns in the school and the AR-15 was found in the trunk. Smh

..

I WANT EVERYONE TO THINK ABOUT THIS : Obama said over 900 people were killed by Guns since the all those innocent children was Murdered at Sandy Hook. How many innocent children have been Murdered by Abortion since then? One child every 94 seconds ... you do the math for yourself...

"I ask, Sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people.
To disarm the people is the best and most effectual way to enslave them."

~ George Mason
Co-author of the Second Amendment