E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSS“President Barack Obama’s broad effort to reduce gun violence will include proposed bans on military-style assault weapons and high-capacity ammunition magazines as well as more than a dozen executive orders aimed at circumventing congressional opposition to stricter gun control,” AP writes. “Obama was to announce the measures Wednesday at a White House event that will bring together law enforcement officials, lawmakers and children who wrote the president about gun violence following last month’s shooting of 20 young students and six adults at an elementary school in Newtown, Conn.”
The Washington Post calls what he will announce “the most aggressive and expansive national gun-control agenda in generations.”
The Post says Obama’s executive orders, even if more narrow than what Congress could pass, could doom a congressional bill because of the perception that “Obama is trying to run our democracy like a dictatorship.”
Politico: Before President Barack Obama can even launch his campaign-style blitz for new gun control measures, there are strong indications that any comprehensive legislation restricting weapons and ammunition won’t even see a vote on the House floor. Interviews with multiple House Republicans from the Midwest and Northeast reveal almost zero appetite to vote on any sort of sweeping gun bill.
Politico: “President Barack Obama’s wide-ranging gun control proposals to be unveiled Wednesday will include a new federal gun trafficking law — long sought by big-city mayors as a way to keep out-of-state guns off their streets.”
National Journal also notes the difficult path for gun-control measures.
The NRA is bringing Obama’s kids into it. The gun rights advocacy group, a day after launching a “Practice Range” app, is up with a new website and video hitting Obama called, “NRA Stand and Fight.”
Here’s the script: Are the president’s kids more important than yours? Then why is he skeptical about putting armed security in our schools when his kids are protected by armed guards at their school? Mr. Obama demands the wealthy pay their fair share of taxes. But he’s just another elitist hypocrite when it comes to a fair share of security. Protection for their kids. And gun-free zones for ours.”
“Senator John F. Kerry and his wife hold an array of international investments that could pose conflicts of interest for him as secretary of state, and an ethics review is already underway to determine whether he needs to divest holdings, put them in a blind trust, or recuse himself from some discussions, according to Obama administration officials,” the Boston Globe reports. “Kerry’s 2012 financial disclosure statement details some of the investments that could be seen as problematic if, as expected, he is confirmed as secretary of state. Among them: shares in a Canadian oil company that is lobbying for the Keystone XL pipeline; a stake in Brazil’s energy giant, which was recently accused by Congress of flouting UN sanctions against Iran; and a large investment in a private equity firm seeking deals across Asia.”
Flashback: “Stake in Keystone Pipeline Is Potential Conflict for Susan Rice."
Bloomberg: “President Barack Obama is close to naming Denis McDonough as his fifth chief of staff, with an announcement coming as soon as this week, according to a person familiar with the matter.”
Interior Secretary Ken Salazar is leaving his post in March.
Politico looks at his legacy.
“President Barack Obama had fewer press conferences during his first term than George W. Bush, Bill Clinton or George H.W. Bush,” Politico writes. “Presidential scholar Martha Joynt Kumar did the math and found that with Monday's conference, Obama has done a total of 79 over four years. That's 10 fewer than George W. Bush, 54 fewer than Clinton and 63 fewer than George H.W. Bush. He did manage to beat out former President Ronald Reagan, who had only 27 press conferences during his first term, although many of those were evening conferences carried live during prime time across the nation.”
Leave a Comment:
The NRA has crossed a line. That they would bring the President's children into a debate on guns demonstrates yet again that they do not care about children, or safety as long as they can pretend to play cops and robbers.
Right thinking Americans need to reject this group of thugs.
While a stretch granted, it does make a point. I know, they need to be protected blah blah blah kidnap blah harm blah. But, while not probably a threat to national security, any one of a number of children could be subject to the same dangers. The point they are making is that every child is just as important to his/her parents and Obama's are to him.
remember there are armed guards in addition to the assigned secret service dudes and dudettes
"The point they are making is that every child is just as important to his/her parents and Obama's are to him."
Exactly, why don't the NRA get that. The problem is more guns does not make our kids safer and that includes those of the president.
So then why doesn't the school get rid of them and just let the Secret Service be responsible if more guns don't make them safer? Why the need for the armed guards if it serves no purpose. I don't get your pretzel logic? It's okay if it's the POTUS's kids but is isn't okay because it serves no purpose?
why do you say this? the president's children are paraded out whenever the president believes it to be to an advantage.
the fact that the school his kids go to have armed guards suggests that maybe he believe his children are more precious than yours or mine.
will he ask the school to remove the armed guards? of course the secret service should remain on duty
So you want the President to dictate the policy of a private school? Doesn't that fly in the face of the conservative mantra to get the federal government off the backs of industry?
Would you please list for me the times the President has paraded his children to his advantage. Seems to me one rarely sees them.
i think a bigger statement would be for him to withdraw his children from a school with armed guards.
anytime the president has his kids waving to crowds
When has that happened billybob? I have not seen the President's children out waving at the crowds. Christmas with the tree lighting? When their father was sworn in? When he won? Those seem reasonable to me.
No. It is not reasonable to withdraw a President's young children from a protected school. Or do you believe that they don't have special risks?
There are public schools with armed guards. Think Columbine. Should they not be allowed in those schools either?
Why don't the gun crazies rail against their inability to carry weapons into Congress. Guards everywhere! NO weapons allowed!
The NRA is way out of bounds with the ad!
they wave whenever he parades them out for a photo op. dont be naive.
i said they could go to a school without armed guards but keep their secret service.
are you in favor of armed guards in all schools? or should that be reserved for the political elite and the rich -- or the ghetto schools?
the nra is spot on pointing out the hypocrisy of this president. no armed guards in your kid's school but it is ok for mine.
is the real reason you are objecting to the nra is because they have exposed this president as a liar once again?
Which brings me back to the original question: what photo op? I simply haven't seen much of them.
There are schools with armed guards, and I don't think ANY school should have to have them. Maybe they wouldn't if we quit letting the NRA thugs dictate gun policy.
The NRA has not exposed the President as a liar. They have exposed themselves as mentally ill thugs who care about nothing but selling guns to people who shouldn't have them.
billy bob, your just showing your hate for the man. Call it racial, I would.
the nra does not dictate gun policy at all. they may influence legislators like all lobbyists do.
is every member of the nra a thug or is this just another gross generalization from the left?
well we can agree to disagree on the ad.
Johntho
Your the racial one here.
Some one said judged not by the color of his skin but by the content of his character. If you judged Obama by this he is a failure. If not then you judge by race.
New day
Obama has been exposed as a liar so many times it is only news worthy if they catch him not in a lie. Good grief people. Wake up.
Only in the minds of the right wing zealots. No president will ever exceed this from Bush.
"Weapons of mass destruction" Tell me, how many of our young people died in a war based on a lie from the most incompetent president of the modern age?
But that's okey dokey in the minds of the zealots! Bush was the right party and right color.
WOW!!!!!!!!! The republicans are really going loony toons this morning.
Yep, and it isn't a pretty sight.
bush, again?? are you still infected with bds?
so bush lied about that??? did the brits also lie when they shared information? were democrats that read the same intel and voted to proceed liars as well? nope -- does not hold water.
and again with the identity politics? what does race have to do with any of this?
Truer words have never been written.
Dubya never met a spending bill he didn't like. Dubya never met a proposal to invade a sovereign country he didn't like.........Dubya liked deficits and destruction. Cowboy attitude.
and barry is putting bush spending to shame by putting us farther in the hole in 4 years than bush in 8. do you think barry will be #1 when history is written how the United States fell into bankruptcy?
obama has kept afghan going, contributed to libya, ignored syria, and is aiding the french in mali.
is obama really just bush III? the way folks keep comparing them it seems to be so
who is barry and who is dubya, if you're going to get petty, let's go for instead of bush, it's vagina, or pu$$y, not only does that fit his name but it fits his character.
Newday, here is one I ran across yesterday that you might enjoy.
"I do not believe in the general promiscuous toting of guns. I think it should be sharply restricted and only under licenses". Karl Frederick 1934 NRA president.
Kind of eye opening to me on how much this organization has changed to lobby for the arms manufactures which is the only real function it has these days.
Ahhh 1934. So you libs DO live in the past even though it is not what you preach. You think his opinion may have had something to do with the mafia in the era of "The Untouchables"?
Thanks, Johntho. There was a time when the NRA served a need and was an exemplary organization. That time is long past.
My children aren't the children of the most powrful person on the planet and shouldn't need armed guards to protect them. Once he is out of office Malia and Sasha shouldn't have armed guards protecting them either as their father would, once again, be a private citizen.
How much lower will those scum bags at the NRA stoop. I used to have at least a little respect for that organization but with recent events, the little respect I had is long gone and not likely to come back.
Obama Blinked --These are EXECUTIVE ACTIONS --- NOT---EXECUTIVE ORDERS - WAKE-Up America !!! Praise 'God Amen Because ;
I Thought the SHOOTING WAR WAS Going to start today, in America if the Bans ect went forward with UN-'Constitutional EXECUTIVE ORDERS against are right to Fight against tyranny , with which would cause WAR ! and I mean with all intent and purposes of the meaning of the word WAR.! But they Don't seam to be ready for that yet at least Publicly.
UN-'God-ly-ness =NO Love=NO'God=Evil= Lawlessness= Illegal laws made against the Highest Law of the Land='Constitution & Bill of Rights !=Crime=by Usurpers =Rebels. (Illegal laws ) Thus aren't Laws = So They are Nullified by the People. *** This is the LAW., with the 2nd if need be.Wake-Up U.S.A. Lolove for you STAND ! & We STAND ! FIRM ! You- We SHALL NOT Waver ! NO FEAR HERE or Where You are !!! STAND !!! ~♥♥ † ♥♥~ American Christians & Christians in the World & Nations. May the FAITH be with you Always. Amen.♥♥♥ in life or death you are the 'Lords.----Amen