Obama to hide behind children as he plays King on gun control

[petegz28]

http://washingtonexaminer.com/article/2518621

White House Press Secretary Jay Carney announced this afternoon that President Obama will unveil a “concrete package” of gun control proposals including assault weapons bans, high capacity ammunition magazine bans, and closing loopholes on background checks.

Carney said that the president will be joined by Vice President Joe Biden as well as children who wrote to the president after the Newtown shootings.

“They will be joined by children around the country expressing their concerns about gun violence and school safety, along with their parents,” Carney confirmed. (See video of Carney's remarks here.)

President Obama specifically mentioned children during his December speech in response to the shooting.

“Can we say that we’re truly doing enough to give all the children of this country the chance they deserve to live out their lives in happiness and with purpose?” he asked. “I’ve been reflecting on this the last few days, and if we’re honest with ourselves, the answer is no. We’re not doing enough. And we will have to change.”

The press conference will take place Wednesday at 11:45 a.m.

[petegz28]

Originally Posted by Iowanian

Rep

[cosmo20002]

Originally Posted by Comrade Crapski

The moonbats are in a mouthfoaming frenzy defending Herr Barry!

Delusional. Defending him against what? Against claims of the imagined things he's going to do?

[petegz28]

Originally Posted by cosmo20002

Delusional. Defending him against what? Against claims of the imagined things he's going to do?

when you have people on his side using comments like "you don't need 10 bullets to kill a deer" to justify limits on magazines it is legitimate to question what the real motives are of these people and point out just how stupid they are

[cosmo20002]

Originally Posted by dirk digler

I agree. With abortion and gun control there is always one side that wants to ban it and the other wants free reign.

Really? I think "the side" that wants to "ban" guns is pretty microscopic.

[CoMoChief]

Originally Posted by blaise

At the end of the speech the children will join Obama in the singing of, "We Are the World."

We are Obama's children!!!

[petegz28]

I still want to know why Obama doesn't have these kids on stage when he talks about saddling them with decades worth of debt?

[mlyonsd]

I wonder if Obama will invite these kids back to the WH after the next nut goes crazy in a school to apologize and explain to them why the executive orders he just signed didn't do shit.

[BucEyedPea]

Originally Posted by cosmo20002

Delusional. Defending him against what? Against claims of the imagined things he's going to do?

Someone in his administration claiming to be able to use EOs is imagining things?
I think that's you.

[BucEyedPea]

Speaking of Obama and children. I must digress for a moment. My brother lives in Maine and he told me his Kindergardener came home before the election saying—"I don't want that white guy." Another time, she came home saying in a sing-songing voice —"Obama. Obama. Obama."

Why people still put their kids in public schools is beyond me. They're indoctrinating them younger and younger.

[Prison Bitch]

Originally Posted by dirk digler

I agree. With abortion and gun control there is always one side that wants to ban it and the other wants free reign.

Suppose instead the President proposed this: a full on ban on assault weapons (and those that even replicate them such as anything capable of firing more than 1 bullet per min, for example) in exchange for 10,000 cops placed in rotating duties guarding schools. Just enough to let people know that there might, might, be a cop in there to take action if some nutball tries to pull this nonsense.


That is an example of a negotiation. You can think of many other things that can and would work in something like this. The hardcore folks won't be happy with such an arrangement but the mainstream probably would. At the very least, you don't create "winner take all" policies that enrage one side.

[stonedstooge]

23 Executive Actions

[stonedstooge]

Punish those who buy guns and sell them to criminals. Isn't that what Holder and his merry men did?

[Comrade Crapski]

I was just thinking, when did he stop "focusing like a laser-beam on jobs"?

Or maybe the better question, did he even start?

[Cave Johnson]

Originally Posted by cosmo20002

Note to all of the "He's going to repeal the 2nd Am with an Executive Order!" nutjobs--proposals

Get that fancy reading comprehension sh*t out of here.

[Fish]

Originally Posted by Prison Bitch

Suppose instead the President proposed this: a full on ban on assault weapons (and those that even replicate them such as anything capable of firing more than 1 bullet per min, for example) in exchange for 10,000 cops placed in rotating duties guarding schools. Just enough to let people know that there might, might, be a cop in there to take action if some nutball tries to pull this nonsense.


That is an example of a negotiation. You can think of many other things that can and would work in something like this. The hardcore folks won't be happy with such an arrangement but the mainstream probably would. At the very least, you don't create "winner take all" policies that enrage one side.

Reality is overrated......