BloggeRhythms

In his continuing quest to pursue issues the public either has no real interest in, or significantly disagrees with, the POTUS is planning to press ahead with a set of executive actions on gun control next week. His efforts also buck growing concerns among citizens regarding terrorism that have dampened Americans’ enthusiasm for tighter firearms restrictions. 

Meeting on Monday with Attorney General Loretta E. Lynch to finalize a series of new gun control measures, he’ll announce his package of proposals soon after, according to several individuals who spoke on the condition of anonymity because the plan is not yet public. 

What’s amazing, however, is that despite all the publicity and promotion the POTUS has made about his goal of controlling weapons, the actions he’s seeking are far more like political noise than they are serious efforts on the subject. 

According to Juliet Eilperin at the Washington Post, “One of the main proposals Obama is poised to adopt would require some unlicensed gun dealers to get licenses and conduct background checks on potential buyers. The change is aimed at occasional dealers, including some who sell online frequently or rent tables at gun shows but do not have a storefront. 

“Obama began examining how he could tighten the nation’s gun rules after October’s mass shooting at Umpqua Community College in Roseburg, Ore. Administration lawyers have spent months reviewing various proposals to make sure they can withstand legal challenges. 

“The idea of requiring informal gun dealers to obtain a license from the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives and of conducting background checks came up two years ago when White House officials drafted a proposal for dealers who sell at least 50 guns annually.” 

After reading about the POTUS pursuing “occasional dealers, including some who sell online frequently or rent tables at gun shows but do not have a storefront,” some additional research divulged the actual size of the gun market. 

 

The most recent statistic found is from 2012, when according to National Shooting Sports Foundation, $31.8 billion in gun related sales were made, as reported by the Christian Science Monitor. Which means that the table-top dealers the POTUS is chasing aren’t likely even significant in a massive market. 

 

As far as gun sales themselves are concerned, two major factors have been sending then soaring. First is the reaction to events such as the mass shootings at San Bernardino, California, Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut, Fort Hood, Texas and Aurora, Colorado, spurring the public’s wishes to arm themselves for protection.

The second factor is politics, which includes causes that the POTUS himself is directly responsible for. Sales spiked in anticipation of both of his elections, in 2008 and 2012, and stock in firearms manufacturers like Smith & Wesson soared, as buyers feared legislation that would clamp down on Second Amendment rights or restrict their ability to purchase a gun.

So, not only isn’t the POTUS’s feeble gun control effort going to have much, if any, real impact on gun ownership in the U.S., as it turns out, he himself is a major reason for the problem's growth to begin with.

On another issue, Fox News.com reports that: “Leading lawmakers, including supporters of President Obama’s nuclear deal with Iran, rapped the White House for delaying fresh sanctions on Tehran over its missile program, warning that the move would embolden it to further destabilize the Middle East. 

“The abrupt reversal by the administration came as Iranian President Hassan Rouhani publicly ordered his military to dramatically scale up the country’s missile program if the sanctions went ahead.” 

In explanation: “Senior U.S. officials have told lawmakers the sanctions were delayed because of “evolving diplomatic work” between the White House and the Iranian government.” 

Although the administration had notified Congress on Wednesday that it would impose new financial penalties on nearly a dozen companies and individuals for their alleged role in developing Iran’s ballistic missile program, it pulled back later that day. 

While critical as an individual issue, it also underlines far deeper problems consistently exposed by the administration’s continual mishandling of foreign policy matters. “Critics of the White House accused President Obama of backing down on his promises to take action in the face of Iranian provocations such as missile launches. They drew parallels to Obama’s failure to follow through on threats to launch military strikes on Syrian President Bashar al-Assad’s regime in 2013 in response to its alleged use of chemical weapons against civilians.” 

And what this circumstance defines again, is the POTUS’s continual performance as if he were still a presidential candidate who’d not yet been elected to office. Because most often, he acts as if presidential responsibilities go no further than frequent speeches, without any need for fulfillment of what’s been promised. And then, if on rare occasion something does actually get done and fails, another speech is made to explain how the mistakes have all been “W” Bush’s fault.  

Which brings us to today’s update on Bill Clinton’s wife. 

While today’s update's quite short, a reader’s comment makes a loudly resounding and likely very true point. 

FoxNews.com reports: “The campaign for Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton announced Friday it raised $37 million over the past three months to support her bid for the Democratic nomination. The campaign said that puts her total raised in 2015 to spend on the presidential primary campaign at $112 million. 

Reader, JoeSnow, wrote: “Lets see,  $110 million taken in, after Bills cut, her election fund should have about $20,000 left ........."

Leading up to the ongoing question: Joe Biden, Mayor Bloomberg, Jerry Brown, and Starbuck’s chairman and CEO, Howard Schultz, are you guys reading this? 

 

That’s it for today folks. 

Adios