[Vision2020] NRA's New Ad: "Obama is an Elitist Hypocrite"

[Art Deco]

January 15, 2013
Republicans Accuse Obama of Using Position as President to Lead Country
Posted by Andy Borowitz<http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/bios/andy_borowitz/search?contributorName=Andy%20Borowitz>

   -
   -
   -

 [image: obama-desk-465.jpg]

WASHINGTON (The Borowitz Report <http://bit.ly/NhEEu0>)—Responding to
reports that President Obama is considering signing as many as nineteen
executive orders on gun control, Republicans in Congress unleashed a
blistering attack on him today, accusing Mr. Obama of “cynically and
systematically using his position as President to lead the country.”

Spearheading the offensive was Rep. Steve Stockman (R-Texas), who charged
the President with the “wanton exploitation of powers that are legally
granted to him under the U.S. Constitution.”

Calling him the “Law Professor-in-Chief,” Rep. Stockman accused Mr. Obama
of “manipulating a little-known section of the Constitution,” Article II,
which outlines the power of the President.

“President Obama looks down the list of all of the powers that are legally
his and he’s like a kid in a candy store,” Rep. Stockman said. “It’s
nauseating.”

The Texas congressman said that if Mr. Obama persists in executing the
office of the Presidency as defined by the Constitution, he could face
“impeachment and/or deportation.”

Noting that the President has not yet signed the executive orders on gun
control, Rep. Stockman said that he hoped his stern words would serve as a
wake-up call to Mr. Obama: “Mr. President, there’s still time for you to
get in line. But if you continue to fulfill the duties of President of the
United States that are expressly permitted in the Constitution, you are
playing with fire.”


On Wed, Jan 16, 2013 at 2:08 PM, Gary Crabtree <moscowlocksmith at gmail.com>wrote:

> Thank you for the honesty. The problem isn't the tools, it's the
> probability. But that said, it's the tools that the liberal elite are going
> to try and move heaven and earth to reduce.
>
> Lets just face up to the facts. The current scramble for gun regulation
> has little to do with the most recent disaster and everything to do with
> the promotion of an agenda.
>
> Never let a perfectly good crisis go to waste they are heard to say.
>
> g
>
> On Wed, Jan 16, 2013 at 9:58 AM, Kenneth Marcy <kmmos1 at frontier.com>wrote:
>
>>  On 1/16/2013 9:06 AM, Gary Crabtree wrote:
>>
>> So why are  these "fashion accessories" effective and necessary tools
>> when dealing with chief exec. kiddies and not those of the great unwashed?
>> Why is a tool useful in one application and not the other?
>>
>>
>> Probability.  Weapons are useful tools for law enforcement officers
>> (Secret Service and others) because the probability of a law enforcement
>> officer finding himself or herself in a deadly force situation is
>> significantly higher than it is for the, for example, civilian
>> administrative leadership of an elementary school in most locations of the
>> United States.  The children of the President are unique because the
>> incumbent President is unique in the powers his position possesses, and the
>> range of individuals the use of those powers might affect negatively.
>> Misguided individuals under the strong impression they can favorably (from
>> their vantage point) affect the actions of the President by kidnapping or
>> physically harming his children may act with unexpected, sudden, random
>> forcefulness in an attempt to effect their wishes.  Secret Service
>> personnel are expected to be watchful and prepared to act against such
>> actions with little or no notice.
>>
>> However small may be the actual probability of an attack against the
>> President's kids, the probability of an attack against almost any other
>> American school kid is orders of magnitude smaller.  Because such attacks
>> are almost non-existent in their frequency, going to the significant
>> efforts and expenses of hiring and arming educational institution security
>> personnel is very likely counterproductive not only budgetary terms, but
>> also in kid-scary psychological terms, too.  An extremely small number of
>> bad incidents should not be allowed to create bogeymen brigades in our
>> imaginations, and thus causing more unnecessary reactionary expenses and
>> fears against evils found only in our imaginations.
>>
>>
>> Ken
>>
>>
>>  On Wed, Jan 16, 2013 at 8:55 AM, Kenneth Marcy <kmmos1 at frontier.com>wrote:
>>
>>> On 1/16/2013 8:16 AM, Gary Crabtree wrote:
>>>
>>>> So, please explain why if guns are so totally ineffective in protecting
>>>> children in schools across the country they suddenly become mandatory for
>>>> protecting the children of the democrat elite?
>>>>
>>>
>>> A little more precision would be useful here.  In this case "children of
>>> the democrat elite" does not refer to children of millions of families
>>> across the country who might fit that description, but rather the children
>>> of the President of the United States, the incumbent of which office
>>> happens to be one of the more hated individuals among various peoples
>>> around the world (not to mention in this country).  It matters not what the
>>> President's political affiliations may be; his children still receive
>>> Secret Service protection. Considering the variety and range of the efforts
>>> to protect the President and his family, one might consider that firearms
>>> are closer to being fashion accessories for the officers rather than the
>>> actual power that they assert.
>>>
>>>
>>> Ken
>>>
>>> =======================================================
>>> List services made available by First Step Internet,
>>> serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
>>>               http://www.fsr.net
>>>          mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
>>> =======================================================
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>
> =======================================================
>  List services made available by First Step Internet,
>  serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
>                http://www.fsr.net
>           mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
> =======================================================
>



-- 
Art Deco (Wayne A. Fox)
art.deco.studios at gmail.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/vision2020/attachments/20130116/ef06359e/attachment-0001.html>