Lion in Winter

The Republicans do, however.

The actual ones running for office I mean. You know, a position of power.

Giantaxe

I know you don't. However, you made a general point about Republicans and taxes. So in the light of your point, I'll ask you again. Why are Republicans who profess to be resistant to "waste, bloat, inefficiency or largesse" at the same time resistant to cuts in the military? It couldn't be that that their true agenda isn't that per se?

CelticRover

Your family get togethers must be a real intellectual riot.

Octang Frye

G1antaxe, the perfect time is when you can implement what you believe ideologically without the care of being reelected. If he made a move in his first term, it would be political folly, as the Dems learned with the ridiculous "Assault Weapons Ban". That cost them the house and the senate in the 90s.

And if you don't think he - and Kagan et al - don't have this on their agenda, you're blind.

Recounting a March 30 meeting between gun-control nut Sarah Brady, her husband Jim and White House Press secretary Jay Carney, The Post reports:

During the meeting, President Obama dropped in and, according to Sarah Brady, brought up the issue of gun control, “to fill us in that it was very much on his agenda,” she said.

“I just want you to know that we are working on it,” Brady recalled the president telling them. “We have to go through a few processes, but under the radar.”

Look at the Fast and Furious scandal, whereby the government/ATF were illegally arming the Mexican drug cartels. Emails from inside the Department of Justice appear to indicate Obama administration officials were plotting to use the consequences of Operation Fast and Furious to further a gun-control agenda.

The only possible brakes this time will be from Democrats who don't want to pay the political price for course of action. I am not very optimistic.

Lion in Winter

"Plotting"? Are you suggesting that he is planning something illegal?

And what sort of a "move" are you expecting him to make? Unless something has drastically changed with the power of the executive branch, the President can't just wake up one morning and put new laws into effect.

He has to go through Congress and stuff. You know, democracy. And it hasn't exactly been the case that senators and congressmen have been falling over themselves to take people's guns away. Of course if for some reason there were ever enough political capital in Washington to change the gun laws, ie it were voted on and won, then that would be, well, democracy.

Octang Frye

No, I am not suggesting the administration is plotting something. I am telling you they plotted and carried out something illegal. Simple. Cold. Hard. Facts.
How Holder is still in place, even after egregiously lying about F&F just beggars belief.

You seem to be ignorant of the workings of the government, notably this administration, of late. End-runs around congress for appointments. Read it. "I am acting alone."

As for the democracy thing, ****ing piffle. We're aren't a democracy. It's not mob rule. This a representative Republic. You don't get to vote away *any* part of the Bill of Rights or the Constitution. These things are inviolate.

BTW, I wonder if two of the heads of the Democrats are representative of their party? I mean, I know they like to take and spend other people's money. Let's see. Obama, 1% of income given to charity. Biden gave $369... Romney gave 15% to charity. I don't like Romney, but damn. $369? I give more than that.

Lion in Winter

The US (and presumably all) governments have always done illegal things. The history of this country's actions from the Rio Bravo to Tierra Del Fuego would be enough to be going on with. But how do you get from that to Obama coming and taking people's guns away?

You aren't being very clear here, but never mind. How is this going to translate into guns going away?

Um, ok. There is more than one definition of democracy you know. The US is not a direct democracy, but I think the people who gave me my citizenship exam would have been very distressed had I told them the country was not democratic.

Yes, that was rather my point about Obama not being able to get up in the morning and take away your guns.

Sally Redux

Oh give it a rest.

Lion in Winter

You appear to be mistaking me for a staunch Democrat. I'm not much of a party politician at all. Pretty much everyone who comes to power in this country is stinking rich, Republican or Democrat. Republican wealth is made in the same way as Democrat wealth, in the same country where the "free" market is anything but, and government and vested interests are well cozied up together. I'm willing to bet that a quick Google would turn up all sorts of connections between the industry that creates your sacred weapons and government, Republican or Democrat.

Lion in Winter

Hey - I'm stuck in bed with pneumonia, I have to amuse myself somehow.

Michael

Calm down, you starting to sound paranoid. The Brady bill was supported by democrats as well as republicans. Even if there was a landslide victory, the democrats would need to get 60 votes in the senate. For them to get 60 votes, they would need to pick up the swing states and then have them all vote for the bill. They had to do a lot of arm twisting for Obamacare and that is a core principle of the democratic party where as gun control is not worth the risk especially amoung swing states. For a bill to pass, the democrats would need probably 70 democrats of more in the senate and that would probably be one of the last things on the agenda since there are so many more important issues to resolve.

Lion in Winter

I see you've only just met our friend.

Brit3964

Funny thing about OF is not long ago, he proposed a vote for the most likely person on BE to go into meltdown. According to him, I came a close second. I don't know how he came to that conclusion. The above outburst puts him well into The Grinch category in my mind. People are strange to quote an old song.

dakota44

You need to check your numbers. The Obama's gave 14% to charity. Gingrich was the cheapskate of the group.

The Obamas, meanwhile, gave 14% of their income to a total of 36 different charities in 2010. Much of that went to the Fisher House Foundation, a charity that works with veterans, and smaller amounts went to the Clinton Bush Haiti Fund and the Boys and Girls Club of America.

Read more: http://swampland.time.com/2012/01/24...#ixzz1kQtHTBcI

Captain Cheesestick

I'm watching the SOTU.

There's nothing quite like watching the most privileged, wealthy, buggers in the country - with the most ludicrously overblown benefits anyone in this country could imagine - all clapping about how they want to bring fairness and equality between rich and poor.