Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

NRA News: Obama Released Statement Saying He Can Use Taxpayer Money For Gun Control Ads
Breitbart ^

Posted on 12/29/2011 6:11:29 PM PST by Red in Blue PA

President Obama released a signing statement with the omnibus spending bill that was passed late last week. In that bill, a provision stated that taxpayer money cannot be used to promote or advocate gun control. President Obama released a statement concerning those provisions.

(Excerpt) Read more at breitbart.tv ...


TOPICS: Front Page News; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: backoffbarry; banglist; bhofascism; bhotreason; bhotyranny; bloat; bloodoftyrants; corruption; criminalpresident; cwii; democratcorruption; democrats; donttreadonme; elections; fubo; govtabuse; guncontrol; gunrunner; liberalfascism; lping; newt1996laudenberg; nobama2012; nodemocrats2012; obama; socialistdemocrats; taxes; tyranny; undertheradar; youwillnotdisarmus

1 posted on 12/29/2011 6:11:37 PM PST by Red in Blue PA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Red in Blue PA

Here’s a line Zero dares not cross…


2 posted on 12/29/2011 6:16:14 PM PST by bksanders (Spewing Forth Vitriol at the Speed of Spit)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Red in Blue PA

Hussein has already established a precedent by using taxpayer money to traffic guns.


3 posted on 12/29/2011 6:20:30 PM PST by Deaf Smith
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Red in Blue PA

An NRA legislative researcher summed it up this way: “So, in other words, Congress says, ‘You can’t spend money to advocate or promote gun control.’ President Obama says, ‘I’m going to use this to promote gun control if that’s necessary and expedient.’”

Bring it on Poindexter.


4 posted on 12/29/2011 6:22:23 PM PST by tumblindice
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Red in Blue PA

Presidential “Signing Statements” are just one example of many demonstrating why politicians rank lower than both whale poop and lawyers.

If there is a slimy, scuzzy way to avoid the proper, ethical way to represent the people and to do an honest job they have honed it to a fine art.


5 posted on 12/29/2011 6:32:10 PM PST by Iron Munro ("Don't pick a fight with an old man. If he is too old to fight he'll just kill you." John Steinbeck)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Red in Blue PA

More and more.

The lawless arrogance grows daily.

The more his ant-American actions are held to the law, the less he obeys it.

The crap he was spouting the other day was chilling... “we can’t wait for Congress to act.”

Therefor he will simply dictate his will be done.

.

And when he is cornered with azz-whipping election poll numbers this coming October?

What will the boy-king decree then?

.


6 posted on 12/29/2011 6:32:26 PM PST by TLI ( ITINERIS IMPENDEO VALHALLA)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Red in Blue PA

WTF is wrong with this man? Hardly a week goes by lately that he doesn’t issue some sort of in-your-face edict for no other purpose than provocation. Is he deliberately looking for a confrontation with the citizenry?

If he wants to be another Mussolini, he’d do well to consider how that fascist pig ended up.


7 posted on 12/29/2011 6:35:36 PM PST by beelzepug ("Blind obedience to arbitrary rules is a sign of mental illness")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Red in Blue PA

What Good Can a Handgun Do Against An Army?
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-backroom/2312894/posts


8 posted on 12/29/2011 6:36:13 PM PST by 2ndDivisionVet (You can't invade the US. There'd be a rifle behind every blade of grass.~Admiral Yamamoto)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Red in Blue PA

That jives with his use of debt to destroy the Country; ruin the lives of young Americans.

Bastard.


9 posted on 12/29/2011 6:37:34 PM PST by Gene Eric (C'mon, Virginia -- are you with us or against us?!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: beelzepug

Yes he is. The Government has been poking the hornets nest for a long time. They keep ignoring the buzzing. Soon, they’ll find that it’s not just hornets in that nest but one big, mean, nasty, hungry, fire breathing dragon.

And remember folks, don’t screw with dragons... “Because you are crunchy and taste good with ketchup.”


10 posted on 12/29/2011 6:39:48 PM PST by BCR #226 (02/07 SOT www.extremefirepower.com...The BS stops when the hammer drops.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: bksanders

Here’s a line Zero dares not cross

Wanna bet?

laws don’t mean any more to this guy that it does when his bro’s go after a pair of Nike shoes.


11 posted on 12/29/2011 6:43:05 PM PST by Venturer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: tumblindice

To bad there isn’t someone that would stand up and just kick this POS out , and put him and his crew in JAIL , where they belong ,to bad we don’t have a supreme court instead of bunch of complicit cowards.


12 posted on 12/29/2011 6:43:49 PM PST by Billk
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: beelzepug

Remember, his base wants him to *go gangsta* and act as a *benign* dictator. He is doing this for votes and contributions.


13 posted on 12/29/2011 6:44:47 PM PST by reformedliberal
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Red in Blue PA

Greatest gun and ammo salesman of ALL TIME!


14 posted on 12/29/2011 6:53:03 PM PST by TigersEye (Life is about choices. Your choices. Make good ones.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TLI

The hutster will not leave voluntarily....oh damn.


15 posted on 12/29/2011 7:06:59 PM PST by mcshot (Neither handsome nor handy but took an oath and will vote to save our Country.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: tumblindice

“President Obama says, ‘I’m going to use this to promote gun control if that’s necessary and expedient.”

Better get that ‘Army’ of yours together real soon Mr. Zer0 because it’ll take all them and more to “control” our 300+ MILLION guns and the estimated 175+ MILLION gun owners!

He’s itching to enact Martial Law in America.


16 posted on 12/29/2011 7:08:06 PM PST by panaxanax (0bama >>WORST PRESIDENT EVER.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: bksanders
"Here’s a line Zero dares not cross… "

What universe are you living in? Has the magnificent one seen a line he didn't cross in the past 3-years?

17 posted on 12/29/2011 7:23:51 PM PST by SuperLuminal (Where is another agitator for republicanism like Sam Adams when we need him?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: panaxanax; Billk

Come New Years day, eleven long months and then he joins Carter and Clinton in the `Worst Head-Governor Ever’ pantheon, and begins participating in the `Worst Ex-Mistake’ contest.


18 posted on 12/29/2011 7:30:28 PM PST by tumblindice (Sic Semper Tyrannis)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: beelzepug
WTF is wrong with this man? Hardly a week goes by lately that he doesn’t issue some sort of in-your-face edict for no other purpose than provocation. Is he deliberately looking for a confrontation with the citizenry?

I started saying he was getting worse about 18 months ago. Back then it was one FU 2 America per month or two.

Now? One or two a week.

I observed he was getting worse because of the layers of isolation due to being President. There is no negative feedback to his Narcissistic personality disorder, therefor he will spiral down the toilet until there is nothing left to his delusional construct of his perceived "reality."

He will believe all are cheering as he declares the election process defective and states "he can't wait for Congress to act" as he suspends it and "that he was ordering a review of alternate electoral processes in the interest of fairness to historically oppressed minority voters."

For those that doubt the possibility of such actions by The Won, consider this...

Definition
By Mayo Clinic staff

Narcissistic personality disorder is a mental disorder in which people have an inflated sense of their own importance and a deep need for admiration. Those with narcissistic personality disorder believe that they're superior to others and have little regard for other people's feelings. But behind this mask of ultra-confidence lies a fragile self-esteem, vulnerable to the slightest criticism.

Narcissistic personality disorder is one of several types of personality disorders. Personality disorders are conditions in which people have traits that cause them to feel and behave in socially distressing ways, limiting their ability to function in relationships and in other areas of their life, such as work or school.



Symptoms
By Mayo Clinic staff


Narcissistic personality disorder is characterized by dramatic, emotional behavior, which is in the same category as antisocial and borderline personality disorders.

Narcissistic personality disorder symptoms may include:

Believing that you're better than others
Fantasizing about power, success and attractiveness
Exaggerating your achievements or talents
Expecting constant praise and admiration
Believing that you're special and acting accordingly
Failing to recognize other people's emotions and feelings
Expecting others to go along with your ideas and plans
Taking advantage of others
Expressing disdain for those you feel are inferior
Being jealous of others
Believing that others are jealous of you
Trouble keeping healthy relationships
Setting unrealistic goals
Being easily hurt and rejected
Having a fragile self-esteem
Appearing as tough-minded or unemotional


Although some features of narcissistic personality disorder may seem like having confidence or strong self-esteem, it's not the same. Narcissistic personality disorder crosses the border of healthy confidence and self-esteem into thinking so highly of yourself that you put yourself on a pedestal. In contrast, people who have healthy confidence and self-esteem don't value themselves more than they value others.

Definition

Symptoms

And this visibly mentally ill poofter is sitting in the WH, finger on the button, looking at total humiliation in the upcoming election with THAT diagnosis... N.P.D.

Kinda chilling, huh?

.

19 posted on 12/29/2011 7:31:10 PM PST by TLI ( ITINERIS IMPENDEO VALHALLA)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: panaxanax
He’s itching to enact Martial Law in America.

I'm itching for him to try.

20 posted on 12/29/2011 7:46:23 PM PST by Charles Martel (Endeavor to persevere...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: beelzepug

Yup, ‘ol Mussolini ended up up ended....


21 posted on 12/29/2011 7:50:16 PM PST by Quickgun (Second Amendment. The only one you can put your hands on.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: beelzepug

he wants to keep being the nations number one gun salesman


22 posted on 12/29/2011 8:04:33 PM PST by mamelukesabre
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Red in Blue PA

And the libtards bashed GWB for his signing statements and the promotion of the “unitary executive”. Hussein puts GWB to shame.


23 posted on 12/29/2011 8:10:16 PM PST by Cheerio (Barry Hussein Soetoro-0bama=The Complete Destruction of American Capitalism)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Red in Blue PA

We gotta start running ads about Fast and Furious. Calling for Holder’s impeachment and Obama’s impeachment over trying to cripple the 2nd Amendment.

Just do it, Repubs. Of course you won’t because you have no balls.


24 posted on 12/29/2011 8:24:02 PM PST by Secret Agent Man (I'd like to tell you, but then I'd have to kill you.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Quickgun

Good one!


25 posted on 12/29/2011 8:54:42 PM PST by Ax
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: SuperLuminal

Yeah, Zero, go ahead and piss us “Clingers” off…


26 posted on 12/29/2011 10:39:08 PM PST by bksanders (Spewing Forth Vitriol at the Speed of Spit)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: beelzepug

Oh but we Americans are more “civilized” than those foreigners. We would Never parade past the cold lifeless body of a deposed despot— Heck we can’t even IMPEACH a President who was selected —not properly elected.


27 posted on 12/30/2011 4:24:12 AM PST by StonyBurk (ring)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: tumblindice

Yeah bring it on in the swing state of PA loser. They are planning an all out gun control campaign. Starting with the anniversary rally in Arizona starring none other than Tabby Giffords herself.


28 posted on 12/30/2011 4:30:00 AM PST by jersey117 (.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: jersey117

Starting with the anniversary rally in Arizona starring none other than Tabby Giffords herself.
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
I am definitely sorry she was shot.
However, it seems to be forgotten a Fed Judge was killed.
Maybe he was the target?
But lets just stick with the ‘nut job’ theory.

I heard a blurb on the news (NPR - just because the only place on the radio-in my area- I can get Classical Music is on an NPR station).
They were ‘reporting’ a vigil complete with ‘moment of silence’ coming up and I didn’t hear the Judges name mentioned or even cited (not saying they didn’t, I just didn’t hear it) with the crux of the story being whether she will a/attend or b/speak, then they repeated the generic line about her being shot etc.

She is the ‘best thing’ that happened FOR the libs, they will be able to use her and that ‘tool’ of a husband for the undetermined future or so and be able to drag her out ‘when needed’.

Since she didn’t ‘resign’ her seat I guess the next thing will be to either ‘appoint’ her husband or just drop the charade and have her run for Senate - which the sympathy vote should make her a shoo-in and she will be able to continue her rehabilitation as a Senator...and still give the libs a photo op as needed.


29 posted on 12/30/2011 5:20:45 AM PST by xrmusn ((6/98) EGOIST - A person of low taste, more interested in himself than me. A. Bierce)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: bksanders
Here’s a line Zero dares not cross,

Don't kid yourself. What do you think Fast and Furious was all about if it wasn't to justify the UN Small Arms Treaty?

30 posted on 01/02/2012 8:35:49 AM PST by Carry_Okie (The RNC would prefer Obama to a conservative nominee.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: beelzepug

>>Is he deliberately looking for a confrontation with the citizenry?

He is doing just that. He can’t justify the actions he wants to take against the majority of Americans (i.e. white, heterosexual, Christian) unless we rise up against him. He’s got all of his pet constituencies rising up in an attempt to show us what we “need” to do to be heard. Then, he’ll come down on us like a ton of bricks if we try an “occupy” type of movement.


31 posted on 01/02/2012 8:36:35 AM PST by Bryanw92 (The solution to fix Congress: Nuke em from orbit. It's the only way to be sure!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Red in Blue PA

Full text of signing statement at http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2011/12/31/statement-president-hr-1540

The White House

Office of the Press Secretary

For Immediate Release December 31, 2011
Statement by the President on H.R. 1540

Today I have signed into law H.R. 1540, the “National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012.” I have signed the Act chiefly because it authorizes funding for the defense of the United States and its interests abroad, crucial services for service members and their families, and vital national security programs that must be renewed. In hundreds of separate sections totaling over 500 pages, the Act also contains critical Administration initiatives to control the spiraling health care costs of the Department of Defense (DoD), to develop counterterrorism initiatives abroad, to build the security capacity of key partners, to modernize the force, and to boost the efficiency and effectiveness of military operations worldwide.

The fact that I support this bill as a whole does not mean I agree with everything in it. In particular, I have signed this bill despite having serious reservations with certain provisions that regulate the detention, interrogation, and prosecution of suspected terrorists. Over the last several years, my Administration has developed an effective, sustainable framework for the detention, interrogation and trial of suspected terrorists that allows us to maximize both our ability to collect intelligence and to incapacitate dangerous individuals in rapidly developing situations, and the results we have achieved are undeniable. Our success against al-Qa’ida and its affiliates and adherents has derived in significant measure from providing our counterterrorism professionals with the clarity and flexibility they need to adapt to changing circumstances and to utilize whichever authorities best protect the American people, and our accomplishments have respected the values that make our country an example for the world.

Against that record of success, some in Congress continue to insist upon restricting the options available to our counterterrorism professionals and interfering with the very operations that have kept us safe. My Administration has consistently opposed such measures. Ultimately, I decided to sign this bill not only because of the critically important services it provides for our forces and their families and the national security programs it authorizes, but also because the Congress revised provisions that otherwise would have jeopardized the safety, security, and liberty of the American people. Moving forward, my Administration will interpret and implement the provisions described below in a manner that best preserves the flexibility on which our safety depends and upholds the values on which this country was founded.

Section 1021 affirms the executive branch’s authority to detain persons covered by the 2001 Authorization for Use of Military Force (AUMF) (Public Law 107-40; 50 U.S.C. 1541 note). This section breaks no new ground and is unnecessary. The authority it describes was included in the 2001 AUMF, as recognized by the Supreme Court and confirmed through lower court decisions since then. Two critical limitations in section 1021 confirm that it solely codifies established authorities. First, under section 1021(d), the bill does not “limit or expand the authority of the President or the scope of the Authorization for Use of Military Force.” Second, under section 1021(e), the bill may not be construed to affect any “existing law or authorities relating to the detention of United States citizens, lawful resident aliens of the United States, or any other persons who are captured or arrested in the United States.” My Administration strongly supported the inclusion of these limitations in order to make clear beyond doubt that the legislation does nothing more than confirm authorities that the Federal courts have recognized as lawful under the 2001 AUMF. Moreover, I want to clarify that my Administration will not authorize the indefinite military detention without trial of American citizens. Indeed, I believe that doing so would break with our most important traditions and values as a Nation. My Administration will interpret section 1021 in a manner that ensures that any detention it authorizes complies with the Constitution, the laws of war, and all other applicable law.

Section 1022 seeks to require military custody for a narrow category of non-citizen detainees who are “captured in the course of hostilities authorized by the Authorization for Use of Military Force.” This section is ill-conceived and will do nothing to improve the security of the United States. The executive branch already has the authority to detain in military custody those members of al-Qa’ida who are captured in the course of hostilities authorized by the AUMF, and as Commander in Chief I have directed the military to do so where appropriate. I reject any approach that would mandate military custody where law enforcement provides the best method of incapacitating a terrorist threat. While section 1022 is unnecessary and has the potential to create uncertainty, I have signed the bill because I believe that this section can be interpreted and applied in a manner that avoids undue harm to our current operations.

I have concluded that section 1022 provides the minimally acceptable amount of flexibility to protect national security. Specifically, I have signed this bill on the understanding that section 1022 provides the executive branch with broad authority to determine how best to implement it, and with the full and unencumbered ability to waive any military custody requirement, including the option of waiving appropriate categories of cases when doing so is in the national security interests of the United States. As my Administration has made clear, the only responsible way to combat the threat al-Qa’ida poses is to remain relentlessly practical, guided by the factual and legal complexities of each case and the relative strengths and weaknesses of each system. Otherwise, investigations could be compromised, our authorities to hold dangerous individuals could be jeopardized, and intelligence could be lost. I will not tolerate that result, and under no circumstances will my Administration accept or adhere to a rigid across-the-board requirement for military detention. I will therefore interpret and implement section 1022 in the manner that best preserves the same flexible approach that has served us so well for the past 3 years and that protects the ability of law enforcement professionals to obtain the evidence and cooperation they need to protect the Nation.

My Administration will design the implementation procedures authorized by section 1022(c) to provide the maximum measure of flexibility and clarity to our counterterrorism professionals permissible under law. And I will exercise all of my constitutional authorities as Chief Executive and Commander in Chief if those procedures fall short, including but not limited to seeking the revision or repeal of provisions should they prove to be unworkable.

Sections 1023-1025 needlessly interfere with the executive branch’s processes for reviewing the status of detainees. Going forward, consistent with congressional intent as detailed in the Conference Report, my Administration will interpret section 1024 as granting the Secretary of Defense broad discretion to determine what detainee status determinations in Afghanistan are subject to the requirements of this section.

Sections 1026-1028 continue unwise funding restrictions that curtail options available to the executive branch. Section 1027 renews the bar against using appropriated funds for fiscal year 2012 to transfer Guantanamo detainees into the United States for any purpose. I continue to oppose this provision, which intrudes upon critical executive branch authority to determine when and where to prosecute Guantanamo detainees, based on the facts and the circumstances of each case and our national security interests. For decades, Republican and Democratic administrations have successfully prosecuted hundreds of terrorists in Federal court. Those prosecutions are a legitimate, effective, and powerful tool in our efforts to protect the Nation. Removing that tool from the executive branch does not serve our national security. Moreover, this intrusion would, under certain circumstances, violate constitutional separation of powers principles.

Section 1028 modifies but fundamentally maintains unwarranted restrictions on the executive branch’s authority to transfer detainees to a foreign country. This hinders the executive’s ability to carry out its military, national security, and foreign relations activities and like section 1027, would, under certain circumstances, violate constitutional separation of powers principles. The executive branch must have the flexibility to act swiftly in conducting negotiations with foreign countries regarding the circumstances of detainee transfers. In the event that the statutory restrictions in sections 1027 and 1028 operate in a manner that violates constitutional separation of powers principles, my Administration will interpret them to avoid the constitutional conflict.

Section 1029 requires that the Attorney General consult with the Director of National Intelligence and Secretary of Defense prior to filing criminal charges against or seeking an indictment of certain individuals. I sign this based on the understanding that apart from detainees held by the military outside of the United States under the 2001 Authorization for Use of Military Force, the provision applies only to those individuals who have been determined to be covered persons under section 1022 before the Justice Department files charges or seeks an indictment. Notwithstanding that limitation, this provision represents an intrusion into the functions and prerogatives of the Department of Justice and offends the longstanding legal tradition that decisions regarding criminal prosecutions should be vested with the Attorney General free from outside interference. Moreover, section 1029 could impede flexibility and hinder exigent operational judgments in a manner that damages our security. My Administration will interpret and implement section 1029 in a manner that preserves the operational flexibility of our counterterrorism and law enforcement professionals, limits delays in the investigative process, ensures that critical executive branch functions are not inhibited, and preserves the integrity and independence of the Department of Justice.

Other provisions in this bill above could interfere with my constitutional foreign affairs powers. Section 1244 requires the President to submit a report to the Congress 60 days prior to sharing any U.S. classified ballistic missile defense information with Russia. Section 1244 further specifies that this report include a detailed description of the classified information to be provided. While my Administration intends to keep the Congress fully informed of the status of U.S. efforts to cooperate with the Russian Federation on ballistic missile defense, my Administration will also interpret and implement section 1244 in a manner that does not interfere with the President’s constitutional authority to conduct foreign affairs and avoids the undue disclosure of sensitive diplomatic communications. Other sections pose similar problems. Sections 1231, 1240, 1241, and 1242 could be read to require the disclosure of sensitive diplomatic communications and national security secrets; and sections 1235, 1242, and 1245 would interfere with my constitutional authority to conduct foreign relations by directing the Executive to take certain positions in negotiations or discussions with foreign governments. Like section 1244, should any application of these provisions conflict with my constitutional authorities, I will treat the provisions as non-binding.

My Administration has worked tirelessly to reform or remove the provisions described above in order to facilitate the enactment of this vital legislation, but certain provisions remain concerning. My Administration will aggressively seek to mitigate those concerns through the design of implementation procedures and other authorities available to me as Chief Executive and Commander in Chief, will oppose any attempt to extend or expand them in the future, and will seek the repeal of any provisions that undermine the policies and values that have guided my Administration throughout my time in office.

BARACK OBAMA

THE WHITE HOUSE,
December 31, 2011.


32 posted on 01/02/2012 8:56:27 AM PST by An American! (Proud To Be An American!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Red in Blue PA

Two words:

“Heller” and “McDonald”


33 posted on 01/02/2012 8:57:04 AM PST by reagandemocrat (Happy New Year)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: tumblindice

Somebody impeach this turd, please.


34 posted on 01/02/2012 9:01:50 AM PST by Magnum44 (Terrorism is a disease, precise application of superior firepower is the cure)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: lonevoice

ping!


35 posted on 01/02/2012 9:24:27 AM PST by Pride in the USA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Red in Blue PA; 2ndDivisionVet; panaxanax; tumblindice; TLI; Charles Martel; Quickgun; Cheerio; ...

This video is inflammatory and I am trying to validate the message it is trying to convey. I have no doubts that Obama will do as much as he can get away with, but this video is using his verbal comments and generalized summary of some analyst and not pointing to specifics in the bill or signing statement.

Can someone point me to the section in H.R. 1540 that limits spending on gun control?
The final enrolled and signed bill at http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/BILLS-112hr1540enr/pdf/BILLS-112hr1540enr.pdf
And I listed Obama’s signing statement above. None of the provisions he takes exception to, mention gun control. For that matter I cannot find the words “gun control” in the bill or anything similar.
The video clip the NRA is using is disingenuous because they use his verbal statement about the signing statement, they do not use the text of the signing statement as their basis for saying he is going to ignore the provisions.
Just seeking the facts...


36 posted on 01/02/2012 9:45:09 AM PST by An American! (Proud To Be An American!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Red in Blue PA

When are they going to perp walk this anti American pointed eared jackass from the Whitehouse?


37 posted on 01/02/2012 9:54:59 AM PST by Mouton (Voting is an opiate of the electorate. Nothing changes no matter who wins..)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Pride in the USA; Stillwaters
Thanks for the ping, or I would have missed this one.

An NRA legislative researcher summed it up this way: "So, in other words, Congress says, 'You can't spend money to advocate or promote gun control.' President Obama says, 'I'm going to use this to promote gun control if that's necessary and expedient.'"

38 posted on 01/02/2012 10:06:53 AM PST by lonevoice (Klepto Baracka Marxo, impeach we much. We will much about that be committed.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: An American!

“they use his verbal statement about the signing statement”

0bama ‘talks right’ but ‘acts Left’ Michael Moore talked of that and how he thought it was cool for 0bama to do that.

And that IS what he does. “You can keep your doctor” comes to mind, along with the “blue pill” comment about Granny, given that Sibelius and 0bama Deathcare are now defining people over 70 as units.


39 posted on 01/02/2012 10:07:46 AM PST by combat_boots (The Lion of Judah cometh. Hallelujah. Gloria Patri, Filio et Spiritui Sancto.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: panaxanax

I can imagine that if he tries to enact Martial Law then the bullets will really start flying, as for myself its not something I would obey.


40 posted on 01/02/2012 12:14:24 PM PST by eak3
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Carry_Okie

Carry - I kid you not my friend! I have followed F&F from the get go and am thoroughly versed in the matter. My point is that talk is cheap and these fools are full of it. Let’em cross the line of actually attempting the enforcement of any legislation “with teeth” in violation of my 2nd amendment rights. Their silly ease the agenda upon us is childish. We are an armed citizenry for a purpose. The Repubs cry “we can’t touch Obammie for fear of starting a race war”. So they became accomplices in the illegal occupation of the White House. The Socialist are fully aware that pissing off a few million marksmen ain’t too damn bright. Yeah, fire up your Boy Scouts Civilian Militia Obozo. If they step on these toes they’ve steps on a few million others that are locked and loaded. We know how to take care of our own. Listening DOJ? I’m full of piss and vinegar today anyway…


41 posted on 01/02/2012 1:24:00 PM PST by bksanders (Spewing Forth Vitriol at the Speed of Spit)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: Red in Blue PA

So obammie has now named himself judge and jury…FUBO!


42 posted on 01/02/2012 1:39:27 PM PST by bksanders (Spewing Forth Vitriol at the Speed of Spit)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: bksanders
Yeah, fire up your Boy Scouts Civilian Militia Obozo. If they step on these toes they’ve steps on a few million others that are locked and loaded. We know how to take care of our own. Listening DOJ? I’m full of piss and vinegar today anyway…

Man doth not live on piss and vinegar alone, nor is ammo terribly nutritious. Try going to war against the US government without logistical support. In most urban areas today, all they would have to do to wreck mass havoc is cut the power and blow a half dozen roads. Within days there would be no food, water, sewerage, or gasoline. What good are your guns at that point? The few who are prepared would be so dispersed as to be mopped up easily.

Believe it or not, the logistical counter-strategy was invented 3,500 years ago, published in the most popular book in the world, and we still don't get it.

43 posted on 01/02/2012 3:00:06 PM PST by Carry_Okie (The RNC would prefer Obama to a conservative nominee.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: Iron Munro
f there is a slimy, scuzzy way to avoid the proper, ethical way to represent the people and to do an honest job they have honed it to a fine art.

"I owe the People my judgment, not my vote [compliance]" = "What-everrrr, I'll do what I want!!" </Eric Cartman>

44 posted on 01/02/2012 3:43:22 PM PST by lentulusgracchus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Red in Blue PA
I believe King Charles I used this rationale to tax communities with access to the sea, to fund a navy Parliament would not.

Didn't work out.

45 posted on 01/02/2012 3:46:18 PM PST by Jim Noble ("The Germans: At your feet, or at your throat" - Winston Churchill)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: beelzepug

“Is he deliberately looking for a confrontation with the citizenry?”
//////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////

I’ll take the liberty of answering that with another question. I don’t know you or know anything about you, if I saw you on the street, walked up to you and spit in your face, kicked you in the shin and called you everything I could think of other than a child of God would you think I was trying to start a fight with you?


46 posted on 01/02/2012 6:21:13 PM PST by RipSawyer (This does not end well!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Carry_Okie
Or something along these lines
Do you grossly underestimate me/us my friend?
I can't survive in harsh conditions, I can thrive.
The "gun" issue is merely a catalyst, symbolic.
But then we don't plan on allowing the situation that level of escalation, now do we?
My diet today consist of the tender love (and chaos) of three of my seven grandkids.
Is your counter-strategy a reference to Megiddo or Jericho? Educate me!
Thx
47 posted on 01/03/2012 9:03:29 AM PST by bksanders (Taglines - BOGO@www.tagme.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: RipSawyer
I would assume you were either three years old or had a death wish…
The narcissist-in-chief doesn't have a clue.
His empire is crumbling, his subjects cowering, his enemies gathering, his day coming.
Keep your powder dry Rip.
48 posted on 01/03/2012 9:11:14 AM PST by bksanders (Taglines - BOGO@www.tagme.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: bksanders
Do you grossly underestimate me/us my friend?

No, I think you underestimate them. Indians were pretty well adapted to the land too and would have driven the white man off the continent easily, without smallpox and influenza.

Is your counter-strategy a reference to Megiddo or Jericho?

To quote Patton, "Fixed fortifications are a monument to the stupidity of man." So my answer would be "neither," although the central principles of the examples you cited are absolutely pertinent.

The core of G_d's strategy is Shemitta. It was an integrated social, economic, environmental, and military plan, with the key being but one verse. The problem is that, although the system is politically aggressive, it is defensive in nature militarily in that one must be sovereign over the territory in order to execute it. During the First Temple period it was never even tried. Once they'd been exiled (with the term ironically set by the number of Sabbaths for the land they'd ignored), and after the return from Babylon when Ezra and Nehemiah found the Torah, had the Jewish people even discussed executing the system, their Persian, Greek, and then Roman suzerains would have killed every rabbi in Israel. The historic translation of the key verse was (in my judgment) hidden then and has been mistranslated ever since. Translate the Hebrew for Ex. 23:11 literally, and then apply it rigorously onto the rest of the Torah, and said key verse acts like a catalyst in a chemical reaction. It's amazing.

49 posted on 01/03/2012 2:42:32 PM PST by Carry_Okie (The RNC would prefer Obama to a conservative nominee.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson