LOL, maybe Obama NEEDS to be reigned in. Remember when FDR tried to expand the Supreme Court and pack it with his guys because he felt like he couldnt get anything done? A spoiled brat with the football is about as scary as it gets, and after that Healthcare POS bill he didnt include the GOP in, the continuing spending resolutions in place of real budgets, the additional troops in the middle east, the continued erosion of civil liberties......you cant say theyre obstructionist totally....he knows where in the road he needs to meet them to deal. He chooses not to so he can place BLAME, which is all his base cares about.....not like both sides are culpable is it?
Fat, drunk and stupid is no way to go through life
1) Win the next game.
2) See goal #1
"The problem with internet quotes lies in verifying their authenticity."
Regardless, all indications are he is planning on implementing mandatory background checks. He is not looking to sieze guns, so I really don't know why everyone is panicking. If people are upset about background checks, then we are a country full of selfish *******s...
The gulf between "planning to" and what is actually done with this administration is bigger than average, imo. Sometimes I don't know whether they're just winking at the left and then running to the middle or actually being pushed there as part of negotiations. There's been talk Obama's going to stop pre-compromising in his second term but it's too early to see whether that was talk, too. The fiscal cliff deal was a step in the right direction in terms of tactics, but I still think they gave too much. And I don't know why Obama seems willing to mix it up over the debt ceiling when it seems like to me he has the legal power to just declare it null and void.
I'm not fluent on the limits placed on executive orders, so I don't know how much he's allowed to do with guns. Some people in this thread are talking as if they know, so maybe they chould share. But what's coming out now is that the goal is to target more than just background checks. Private gun sales and gun shows are also in the mix. This story from the NYT has the details:
http://money.cnn.com/2013/01/01/news...id=SF_BN_RiverThe fiscal cliff deal approved by Congress will increase deficits over the next decade by close to $4 trillion, according to the Congressional Budget Office
As a result, the CBO estimates that the bill will reduce revenues over 10 years by $3.64 trillion and increase spending by $332 billion.
Just the fiscal cliff bills spending increases by themselves eat up most of the half trillion in defense cuts from 2011. Or a better analysis, half rich tax non-extensions as part of the fiscal deal which is why I wasn't in favor any revenue increases until significant non-discretionary and mandatory spending cuts had been completed.
Actually, here is a blog that references the article...
http://blog.seattlepi.com/seattlepol...hows-al-qaeda/The Associated Press reported in April that 247 people on the federal government’s terror watch list were able to legally purchase weapons in the U.S. last year after going through background checks.
Did you read it, though? I've just read it over carefully and I don't think that those stating such an Executive Order on this matter would be obviously beyond the powers of the President. Congress could challenge, but with the Senate in control of the Democrats that would be difficult.