Obama suggests Republicans unwilling to compromise in gun control debate

Status
Not open for further replies.
On a hypocritical note, Obama has converted his political campaign to a non-profit organization. By doing so, he will be bypassing Congress and using his massive data base of supporters to foster his political agenda.

“Campaign finance experts said the creation of a nonprofit group with close ties to the president could raise questions on how donations from corporations might influence federal policy. Craig Holman, who lobbies on ethics and campaign finance for the watchdog group Public Citizen, said if the group receives corporate and special interest money, it could "pose some very serious problems."

He is showing his true character as a despot, and not the "compromising” leader he would have us believe.
 
Republicans not compromising?

What about the president threatening to veto legislation that does not fit with his plan. (My way or the highway!)

There was no compromise with the fiscal cliff crisis, just fears of the economy going in the tank again and messing up the administration's second term plans.
 
cfullgraf said:
Republicans not compromising?

What about the president threatening to veto legislation that does not fit with his plan. (My way or the highway!)

There was no compromise with the fiscal cliff crisis, just fears of the economy going in the tank again and messing up the administration's second term plans.
Click to expand...

I am glad to see a president veto legislation. It forces both branches to be smarter about what they try to pass. Certainly preferable to the Bush years where he signed damn near everything that hit his desk. Sign sign sign SPEND SPEND SPEND!!
 
if i might suggest something though. Perhaps compromising on the background check issue would give republicans a bargaining chip for another issue they want to work on.
 
Can you think of one "social" issue the left has ever compromised on???? Did not think so.
 
Ending on a sour note; no compromise. His method of forming a non-profit organization to amass funds for his misguided agendas, reeks of despotism, I agree.

It would be helpful to have an ally who is well-versed in political law, who could find a law Obama would break from using these ill-gotten gains to further erode the Constitution.

Imagine what we are in for the next 4 years. This is only the tip of the iceberg, and a very small tip, at that.

A crown on his head will be the next order of business of his agendas, I believe.

KingObama_zps6b54ba7c.jpg
 
Last edited:
I am not a Republican and I still think he is off his rocker on this.

Actually, the Republicans in New York would probably fall right in step with Obama's desires.
 
I am not a Republican and I still think he is off his rocker on this.

Actually, the Republicans in New York would probably fall right in step with Obama's desires.
Click to expand...

they already have. the new york state senate is republican controlled and they could have stopped the new restrictions on the 2nd amendment rights of new yorkers, but they didnt.
 
On the topic of compromise...

Once upon a time this president promised a national dialogue on guns.
He set his Vice President to work forming a group to make recommendations about the issue. This group included a bunch of inner city politicians who favor harsh gun control and Walmart. But it didn't include any representatives with an opposing point of view. It didn't even include any pro-gun members of the House or the Senate. The panel made its recommendations, but all they had really done was to get a bunch of "yes men" to tell them what they wanted to hear.
Opposition was fierce.

Moral of the story - you don't get to bully the other side, then act all surprised when they don't just bow to your will.
I will be sending two more letters to senators, with accompanying emails, tomorrow.
 
His method of forming a non-profit organization to amass funds for his misguided agendas, reeks of despotism, I agree.
Click to expand...

I wonder if this, politically speaking, isn't the emergence of a Wehrmacht/Waffen-SS sort of division between the party loyal and the storm troopers . . .
 
Those damn Republicans keep slowing down progress by talking about rights and the constitution.

Democrat's idea of the second amendment:

"A well regulated militia, being necessary for hunting and target shooting, the right of the people to bear well regulated arms shall not be infringed."
 
He said that moving forward on the topic means understanding that the realities of guns in urban areas are very different from the realities of guns in rural areas.
Click to expand...

he's exactly right. i'm much more likely to need a gun for personal defense in urban areas.
 
ToraBoraBlues said:
Just to throw this out there, how would you guys feel if there was an honest compromise and dialogue? I.e., reducing class 2 or class 3 restrictions, relaxing import restrictions, or doing something to ensure the carry and ownership rights of people traveling through restrictive areas in exchange for requiring a background check for all non-family exchanges?
Click to expand...
I'd accept it. The only part of this fiasco I don't disagree with is background checks. I have one caveat. Any requirement for background checks has to be accompanied by free public access to NICS, with an understanding that if the check doesn't go through in a certain amount of time, it's a documented approval.
 
Gee, maybe because some people remember what happened after the '94 AWB was passed. The costs to the supporters of any new law restricting magazines, firearms, or ammunition will be higher than the '96, '98, and 2000 elections.

Clinton and Feinstein gave too much credit to the NRA at the time of the backlash to AWB '94 for the losses in Congress and that the same mistakes are being made now.

The number of voters who own these firearms and magazines that use this ammunition out number NRA members and far far outnumber hunters and are a growing group in the country even as the debate rages and the media vilifies and tried to demonize us and these new owners of the firearms on the ban list.

Some politicians recognize that we're better connected and organized through internet forums and social media now more than when we overturned Congress.

Some of them recognize that the facts and actual data on crime showing that murder rates have fallen ever since AWB '94 expired are readily available and easily shared demonstrating the fact that AWB '13 supporters are lying to the American voters.

Some of them recognize we know that replacing politician supporting an AWB is possible and we'll spend our time and money to see that takes place. AND that even if one is passed the backlash will see it reversed

They know there are far more of us, we have access to better information and can distribute it quicker, we're far better organized on our own, and we'll be far more active in removing any politician from office that wants to restrict firearms, magazines or ammunition we might want to own.

Wonder why a politician might not want to risk throwing future away on Senator Feinstein's and President Obama's and VP Biden's out of date and out of touch ideology on firearms owners.:rolleyes:
 
Obama's blaming the other side (while he compromises on nothing) on this topic is no different than his blaming them on everything else. It's his style.

We can only hope if something gets passed voters will make them pay dearly, but it would be hard to get enough new pro gun politicians elected to undo the loss, so we really need to focus on defeating this in its entirety.
 
bhesler said:
While reading an article on Newark, NJ Mayor Cory Booker's softening stance on gun control, I came across a great quote from Sen Frank Lautenberg.

"The only way to effectively take on the gun lobby is to stand firm, not waver, and make no apologies," said Sen. Frank Lautenberg.

http://www.nj.com/news/index.ssf/2013/01/cory_bookers_position_on_guns.html

Seems the other side is also unwilling to compromise.
Click to expand...
And he left out his most effective tactic.... make sure it's stuck on the back of an truely important bill and pass it in the dark of night!
 
Is this joker just trying to fool people or is he really as delusional as he appears? As others have pointed out already, we live in a republic--NOT a democracy, which is effectively a euphemism for mob rule (the kind he likes when it favors his agenda). Sadly, most Americans seem to believe that we live in a democracy, too--I don't know where and when that propaganda ever started, but the belief is pervasive today. Not that this matters much, however, as few people even know the difference anyway. :rolleyes:

Listen to Obama whine and cry about not immediately getting his way--nothing short of dictatorial powers would satisfy him. It's a good thing that we do live in a still semi-functioning republic, or else we wouldn't be able to defend the Constitution and this nation against their enemies, such as the current president.
 
A matter of definitions:

Merriam-Webster says:

Definition of COMPROMISE

1
a : settlement of differences by arbitration or by consent reached by mutual concessions.

Democrats say:

Definition of COMPROMISE

1
a : settlement of differences by coercion, humiliation, bribery or threat resulting in mutual agreement with the Democratic point of view.


Of course we won't compromise... on their terms. How'd that be a compromise? That's called conceding.
 
This business has permanently blurred my perception of party lines. Yes, it seems MOST Ds are antis (or apathetic enough to go along), but not all of them. Harry Reid has become one of my favorite Dems ... how weird is that? And being Republican is CERTAINLY no guarantee of 2a conservatism any longer.

Nobody compromises anymore. If they do, how can you trust them? If they don't, nothing gets done. We're so polarized. I'm NOT a Texas secessionist, but I can see this presidential administration pushing us to- or past -that point, and it worries me.

I worry that there seems to be a strong push to make America "European"- not just gun laws, but anti-capitalist, highly regulated, and with "rights" that serve the will of the state or not at all.
I worry that these people will not compromise, but will accept concession and submission.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

G
  • Locked
Has the uproar from pro-gun citizens already thwarted Obama? This guy says so.
Replies
2
Views
482
Pointshoot
P
S
  • Locked
Obama/Biden won the endorsement of the Brady Campaign
Replies
7
Views
619
Larry Ashcraft
Larry Ashcraft
B
  • Locked
Obama Gun Control Likely To Be Broken Into Pieces By Senate
Replies
6
Views
880
Trent
Trent
C
  • Locked
Obama's Gun Dance
2
Replies
25
Views
1K
Larry Ashcraft
Larry Ashcraft
T
  • Locked
The hidden danger to gun owners behind Obama's executive orders
Replies
6
Views
845
beatledog7
B
Back
Top