Getty Images
Reince Priebus, chairman of the Republican National Committee, is not pleased with President Obama's new agenda on preventing gun violence, but Priebus' statement raises some follow-up questions the RNC may want to consider.
"President Obama's series of gun control measures amount to an executive power grab that may please his political base but will not solve the problems at hand. He paid lip service to our fundamental constitutional rights, but took actions that disregard the 2nd Amendment and the legislative process. Representative government is meant to give voice to the people; President Obama's unilateral executive action ignores this principle."
I suspect we'll hear quite a bit of this kind of talk today and as the larger policy debate continues, but it's worth pausing to consider what actually happened this morning.
The bulk of the president's agenda, not surprisingly, requires legal changes, which necessarily means it will be dependent on congressional action. At the same time, Obama also went as far as he could go in areas that don't need congressional approval, taking steps like nominating a new AFT director and informing state health officials about the scope of mental health services that Medicaid plans must cover.
These "amount to an executive power grab" because ... well, actually I haven't the foggiest idea why they amount to an executive power grab. Here's a question for Priebus: name one of the executive orders that seems offensive and/or legally excessive. Just one.
If, however, the argument is that any executive order that touches on gun policy at all must be considered outrageous, there's a separate question: why is it fine when Republican presidents can take executive actions on guns but Democratic presidents can't? Why would the former be acceptable and the latter worthy of condemnation?
If the president's detractors want to critique his proposals on gun violence, fine. If they want to offer alternatives, great. If they want to offer a spirited defense of the status quo, no problem. But to argue that executive orders are themselves legally dubious -- and possibly even grounds for impeachment -- is silly and kind of pathetic.
Let's have a real debate; let's not define "power grabs" down.
Leave a Comment:
AFT typo/power grab!
Reince Priebus doesn't have his constitution and declaration of independence in proper perspective. He says that a qualified right (a well qualified militia) that is the second amendment ranks higher than an inalienable right, the right to LIFE. Tell the 26 who had their lives, an inalienable right, taken from them in Newtown and the 900 who have lost their lives since the Newtown massacre that the qualified second amendment ranks higher.
As the paid spokeman for the Republican Party that is controlled by the Koch Brothers, Priebus is mouthing the party line about gun control. With all the emphasis on secession and the need for assault rifles, you would think that the Kochs are planning a second amendment remedy if they don't get what they want from Congress and the 2014 elections.
What role does the NRA and the Koch Brothers have in the gun running to the Mexican drug cartels? And the human trafficking that accompanies it? Many of the "illegals" pay to get across the border only to be abandoned in the desert. Many are inticed by "good paying" jobs in the United States only to become enslaved to the company that brings them to the U.S. Corruption upon corruption --- all to make more money for the .1%ers. Sad!
We must engage in trench warfare if the Kochs and the gun makers are going to be defeated. Trench warfare is contacting as many people as you can to bring them the facts. Most Americans do not realize that 80% of all media is owned by a handful of .1%ers. In many markets, there are NO outlets other than the radical right, like Fox News and right wing extremist talk shows like Limbaugh and Hannity. Some cable channels do not carry even MSNBC as an alternative to the extremists. The censorship in many markets is astounding and unabashed. There is no fair and balanced media in massive parts of the country. Walk into a fast food restaurant in the South and you will likely see FoxNews on the large screen television. So, if you have friends in the South and Midwest, inform them of what is happening and urge them to take back the constitution and the declaration of independence and that LIFE is more important then GUNS.
By his presence and his rhetoric, Reince Priebus is now proving himself to be ignorant of Constitutional powers and relationships, hostile to the will of public opinion measured daily regarding gun safety issues, and asinine as to just what the current national debate actually is!
Obfuscation and convolution - NRA strategy run through the echo chamber of Tea Partying Republicans and their conduit known as FOXNEWS!
We, American citizens, want change that will bring us more safe and sane laws regarding gun safety while preserving our 2nd amendment - this desire is not mutually exclusive! -Kevo
"A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed." - 2nd Amendment of the Constitution.
Nowhere in there is written the right to assault rifles, 30 clip magazines, rocket launchers. You might think that the GOTP have actually never read that amendment (or Constitution) they keep quoting....
Not only that but a group of citizens can not band together and call themselves militia, the only persons who could form militias were the Governors of the states where militias were formed. But you know our uneducated friends on the wrong side of the fence, if it doesn't fit their wishes then ignore it.
Notice that the quote that Zora used starts with "A well REGULATED militia". Anyone that argues that regulations are against the amendment clearly did not read the damned thing.
Actually Zora Renee, the second amendment does talk about assault rifles, 30 round clips, and rocket launchers. It is in the paragraph just after it talks about limiting the militia to Muskets, revolvers and cannons.
I think the Amish wrote that part.
I've been seeing posts from some gun nuts that say "well regulated" is defined as "in working order". Not only does that not make sense, but it also doesn't do a damn thing to defend their position.
Let's not forget, there are also plenty of whackjobs out there who hear that Obama is making a power grab -- according to so-called "sane" Republicans like Priebus -- and figure it's their patriotic duty to go water the tree of liberty, etc. At some point, this kind of overheated rhetoric becomes an incitement to assassination. Somebody should tell him to put a sock in it.
Remember, that tree accepts "patriot" blood too... and I'm sure the FBI, Secret Service, and National Guard will be happy to accept donations, should these loons "volunteer".
He's just operating on Republican Rule #1: IOKIYAR
They just love to "quote" their part of the 2nd Amendment, but not once have I heard them "quote" the entire Amendment. Not once have I heard them talk about what the Supreme Court decisions on the 2nd Amendment. I doubt they even know what the Supreme Court said. More than once.
Here's a question for Priebus: name one of the executive orders that seems offensive and/or legally excessive. Just one.
Doesn't NBC have, you know, people paid to ask such questions. You know people that used to be called reporters.
Yep, why don't you have one of those high powered reporters ask the question. I know we would all love the answer.
We already know the answer: anything that Obama does that ole RP and the GOP don't like is a power grab... and anything short of hanging himself by his own tie, they don't like. That's if RP would bother to answer the question and not wander off into his prepared talking points.
Now, say someone created a whole new security apparatus in the US, with ill-defined limits/oversight and widespread powers to arrest and investigate; you'd think these freedom-loving souls in the GOP would object, yes? Well, not if it's named something properly nationalistic like the Department of Homeland Security and put in place by a "proper" white President, second of his family to hold the office. Because (say it with me now) It's Okay If You're A Republican.
My thinking was that if they had a reporter actually ask the question in front of a camera, the sound of his sputtering response would be very amusing as well as being very enlightening. It might even be good for ratings. Back in the day they used to call that journalism.
There is every chance that Priebus didn't even read the 23 proposed executive actions before popping off. I have read them and apparently so has Benen. There just isn't anytiing in the executive action list that should be the least bit contraversial, unless you are in favor of the mass murder of 1st graders.
It looks to me as though the only thing the President did was sign orders that will enforce laws already on the books. He is just doing his job -- executing the will of the Congress.
In Karl Frederick statement to congress in 1934 (page 59) on A National Firearms, he made this statement...... His whole deposition is interesting and enlightening.... http://www.keepandbeararms.com/nra/nfa.asp
Mr. FREDERICK. I have never believed in the general practice of carrying weapons. I seldom carry one. I have when I felt it was desirable to do so for my own protection. I know that applies in most of the instances where guns are used effectively in self-defense or in places of business and in the home. I do not believe in the general promiscuous toting of guns. I think it should be sharply restricted and only under licenses.
It is notable that the screeds from the right, and from the NRA in particular, are factually wrong. For example, the NRA is not being blamed for the deaths in Newtown. Rather, policies they have promoted have increased the access to guns that make such tragedies more likely. It would help if they could discern such distinctions. Then it would be possible to have a conversation. But they do not want a conversation, apparently. Rather, they want to use as inflamatory rhetoric as possible in order to marshall the crazies.
The question for the Administration is how to pursue a strategy for success in light of this. Note that most Americans do not share the vitriol of the extreme right. To expose the vitriol systematically and saliently might well go a long way to weakening the right fringe. This is one way to do so.
Maybe the NRA just feels guilty...
Coincidentally, this is exactly the gun policy that Republicans (including Mitt Romney) have been SAYING for years that a president should adopt towards guns. Their classic BS line is that "We already heave a lot of gun laws, and we need to better enforce existing laws instead of writing new ones." For years, the have been saying that gun control is an issue for the executive branch, not the legislative branch.
Now we know for certain that they never meant what they were saying.
Here's an anti-democratic power grab: Swing states which vote Democratic at the national level but currently under Congressional rule attempting to make electoral vote assignment proportional or according to Congressional assignment.
There's your power grab.
Well conservatives have been saying that we were entering an age of dystopian tyranny and government ignoring the will of the people and trampling on their rights...welcome to the wonderful world of self-fulfilling prophesy
Joe Scarborough is right Boehner and the republicans can work with democrats on sensible, common sense legislation that the majority of the public wants. Or, they can continue to lie and whine and stand in the way and Nancy Pelosi can do it in 2 years.
For years, the NRA has been saying we don't need new laws, we just need to enforce the laws we have on the books. Now that Obama is planning to do precisely that, they call it tyranny.
You are right "kk in Seattle" whatever the president proposes,either it favors NRA or not is wrong.I do not see any statement indicating that the president is urging people to turn in their guns.
Accusations of "lip service" from Republicans who have done nothing but give "knee service" to the rich for the past 5, 10, 15 years?
They can't even try to save kids lives? Excuse me, OTHER people's kids lives?
Preibus is a far right loon who considers anyone 'slightly' to the Left of him a bleeding heart liberal. To be head of the RNC is instructive on where that party wants to go. It is easy to laugh at him but we should take his words seriously. They aren't factual but it's where the OTHER looney sheep get their talking points.
I love how people keep waving their 2nd Amendment right when talking about gun control. Nobody bothers to remember the first paragraph of the Constitution that state why the constitution were there to begin with (among other things...."insure domestic Tranquility..." and then go further into the constitution and find the 9th Amendment:
The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.
It is the right of the people in this country to live in peace and I believe in this case majority of the people in this country has spoken?
Conservatives use the Constitution and it's amendments the way they use the Bible, in sactimonious application of carefully selected passages to the agenda they wish to promote (while leaving out the inconvenient context and conflicts of the surrounding material).
They may not be true to the word, but they're darn true to their wording of the word.
I propose that any assault weapon made and sold in the US to private citizens use only very odd caliber ammunition. This ammunition can be sin-taxed several thousand percent. It would still be available to anyone willing to spend exorbitant amounts of money and would have a ready-made paper trail with the tax collection at each point of sale. It also will create a decreasing amount of revenue over time. This can be considered a luxury tax.
If even one GOP congresscritter is talking about impeaching Obama over gun safety -- and one of the crazier ones from Texas actually is, I've got only three words:
Make. My. Day.
You Republicans thought the '98 midterms were bad? You go after Obama's job on this, 2014 will make you pine for the aftermath of 1998.
Reince Priebus or (Rnc Prbs without the vowels) Believes that 2nd Amendment overrides the Constitution, or rather overthrows the Constitution, or enables revolution to supersede the Constitution. When it was the Constitution then ended the Revolution by forming a government.
He hasn’t got the brains he was born with or the window to throw out the one he's using.
How can we listen to this stupidity, … … … … … … … …. ?
Rachel, First lower the temperature if you want to accomplish anything. I was just listening to Cory Booker talk about gun show loopholes. What does he know about gun shows? There are no gun shows in New Jersey. Period. There are no sales in New York or Connecticut gun shows without background checks. And now I am going to give you a freebee. One of the reasons I support magazine limitations is that mags larger than 10 rounds don't have much utility. Why you may ask. If any of you geniuses had checked you would have found that in most states which allow big game hunting there is a six round max--one in the chamber and five in the magazine. if you like picking shot out of your dinner and like ducks or geese the limit is three rounds. This has been law for years. And this is why you don't need a thirty shot mag to kill imaginary zombies in the local shopping mall. But now that I have given you this freebee will you please answer a question. A day or so ago Governor Andy Cuomo with almost no public debate shoved through the legislature an absurdly punitive, gun bill. We don't need to rehash the details unless you want me to. The tactics he used were straight out of the Walker-Kasich play book. Where were you that night, my dear liberal friend and defender of democracy? AWOL, I guess and shame on you. So the governor's "victory" was not only no victory at all it validated a good bit of the position of the NRA. You see there is more than grabbing some guys faux military fantasy. There is such a thing as legitimacy and that legitimacy means adhering to democratic process which I admit can be difficult at times. In the meantime as Ricky put it so well "You got a lot 'a 'splaining to do" to those of us who have long admired you for your intellect and courage. Sometimes the toughest thing to do is to say "slow up, this isn't right." Remember what the road to perdition is paved with.
Just for the record I do not own a so called "Assault Weapon" and do not have a handgun either. I have been a clay target shooter for many years because you don't have to eat clay targets. I do not hunt but I respect those who do.
Is there any way to do a comparison between previously district lines and votes to the Rep drawn new districts and show how the before and after by district votes... and how the election would have turned out if we did not let the Republicans draw their "fair" district lines?