|
|
| |
Topic: Obama to Take 23 ´Executive Actions´ on Guns |
Obama to Take 23 ´Executive Actions´ on Guns
Weekly Standard, by Daniel Halper
|
|
Original Article
|
|
Posted By:StormCnter, 1/16/2013 1:22:04 PM
|
| The White House announced today that President Barack Obama will take 23 "executive actions" to deal with guns. The "executive actions," as introduced and written by the White House, are: 1. Issue a Presidential Memorandum to require federal agencies to make relevant data available to the federal background check system. 2. Address unnecessary legal barriers, particularly relating to the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act, that may prevent states from making information available to the background check system. 3. Improve incentives for states to share information with the background check system. 4. Direct the Attorney General to review categories of individuals
|
Reply 1 - Posted by:
glcinpdx, 1/16/2013 1:25:58 PM (No. 9120286)
It is a tale Told by an idiot, full of sound and fury Signifying nothing.
|
Reply 2 - Posted by:
Muncsdad, 1/16/2013 1:27:49 PM (No. 9120290)
There has to be more to this than this list, which (at first reading) seems pretty benign.
Some of these suggestions actually make sense--so is this a parody?
|
| |
|
Reply 3 - Posted by:
spit the bit, 1/16/2013 1:30:05 PM (No. 9120295)
Of course, the devil is in the details...
|
Reply 4 - Posted by:
LadyHen, 1/16/2013 1:30:17 PM (No. 9120296)
Maybe I am missing something here but that sounds like a whole lot of NOTHING.
I get the sneaky feeling "the power of political self preservation" kicked in despite the perpetual deafening whine of the George Soros funded gun grabbing mob.
|
Reply 5 - Posted by:
horacer, 1/16/2013 1:31:33 PM (No. 9120299)
These are executive actions not orders. Like hire an ATF director. Wow. Tell agencies to do their job. Double wow.
|
Reply 6 - Posted by:
heartsurgeon, 1/16/2013 1:32:19 PM (No. 9120302)
Obama is setting doctors up for lawsuits based upon some crazy shooting up a crowd, and the doctor not having identified and reported the crazy for having guns...or conversely reporting someone they feel is bonkers (who has guns), and getting sued for breach of confidentiality.
Obama can now blame doctors for gun violence...who saw that coming eh?
|
Reply 7 - Posted by:
Dixie, 1/16/2013 1:33:36 PM (No. 9120305)
I agree that most of this stuff sounds reasonable enough...so it is just to calm people down and get people to accept that the federal government can set up regulations regarding guns.
Then, they will require that certain types of guns be turned in... Or, they will require that everyone provide the federal government with a full list of guns he/she possesses.
Of course people won´t comply with turning in their guns or submitting a list of same.
This will make those people (mostly conservatives) into automatic criminals, subject to federal prosecution. And once they begin cracking down on that, it will spread fear among the population. This is following the Nazi pattern prior to WWII.
|
| |
|
Reply 8 - Posted by:
woodsman, 1/16/2013 1:36:21 PM (No. 9120313)
He just threw HIPPA out the window.....call you crazy...collect your guns - easy!
|
Reply 9 - Posted by:
krause, 1/16/2013 1:39:06 PM (No. 9120320)
These are the vanilla steps to make it sound reasonable. The details, to be determined, will grow this ´law´ into a hugely expensive monstrosity with little or no results. What government program hasn´t? The positive in this is that the lefties will feel real satisfied with themselves and the ´good´ their doing.
|
Reply 10 - Posted by:
Bobn.T, 1/16/2013 1:54:21 PM (No. 9120347)
Evil now controls the country.
|
Reply 11 - Posted by:
curious1, 1/16/2013 1:59:27 PM (No. 9120360)
#7, "This will make those people (mostly conservatives) into automatic criminals, subject to federal prosecution. And once they begin cracking down on that, it will spread fear among the population." At the point where they begin ´cracking down´, the crackees should do unto the federal crackers first, spreading fear and alarm among those would-be federal ´masters´ so they remember their ´place´.
|
Reply 12 - Posted by:
antiquegolf, 1/16/2013 2:02:51 PM (No. 9120370)
Universal background checks is a terrible idea. Does obama mean that if you buy a shotgun and give it to your 12 year old son, he has to background checked? If you sell or give a shotgun to your brother in law on a private sale, does he have to be background checked? What a load. Such a requirement would transform millions of Americans into criminals.
|
| |
|
Reply 13 - Posted by:
Blackeagle, 1/16/2013 2:03:05 PM (No. 9120371)
No mention of gun shows, magazines, etc. Looks like a punt to me.
Reminds me of the build up by the Donald just before the election - where he promised huge news about Obama but instead served up a nothing-burger.
|
Reply 14 - Posted by:
Jonr, 1/16/2013 2:06:28 PM (No. 9120376)
Unless this Marxist is stopped now you can kiss your Constitution and butt goodbye! There are no half measures with this anti-American president! He IS out to destroy all that we God/gun/country lovers hold dear!
|
Reply 15 - Posted by:
RCFlyer98, 1/16/2013 2:07:17 PM (No. 9120378)
The amount that we´re paying this POS and his spending frenzy, he comes up with this? The joke is on us! Tragic joke that it is.
|
Reply 16 - Posted by:
Michaelus, 1/16/2013 2:10:34 PM (No. 9120384)
What #1 said. Remember that the Virginia Tech shooter, the guy who shot Rep. Giffords and the Batman Movie shooter were all obviously insane yet they all passed their Federal background checks when they bought their Glocks. The Feds really ought to fix this....
|
Reply 17 - Posted by:
whyyeseyec, 1/16/2013 2:14:24 PM (No. 9120394)
I am sure the GOP is drawing up Articles of Impeachment just now......./s
|
| |
|
Reply 18 - Posted by:
lakerman1, 1/16/2013 2:17:21 PM (No. 9120398)
#16, in each case you cited, there was a blocking of information about each of those killers, in the interests of ´personal privacy.´ Either HIPPA or the Buckley education privacy act blocked the information. During my teaching career, from time to time, I have watched a student emerge as mentally ill, taken each of them to the counseling center, and the counseling center refused to tell me anything. (feedback is incredibly important for future use.)
|
Reply 19 - Posted by:
drkillj0y, 1/16/2013 2:19:15 PM (No. 9120403)
Technically, Directive #4 allows the AG to declare anyone ´prohibited individual´, this means YOU.
Directive #8,14,&15 paves the way for future restrictions.
#16 overrides the Reid amendment in the HellCare bill.
#17 is going to get tested in court.
#18, what the heck is a ´school resource officer´
AND, they still hasn´t address hammer violence.
|
Reply 20 - Posted by:
judy, 1/16/2013 2:21:20 PM (No. 9120406)
It makes the dems feel all warm & fuzzy when they use the pen & do a presser with the non media swooning...
|
Reply 21 - Posted by:
enuf8, 1/16/2013 2:23:04 PM (No. 9120412)
He didn´t want to go too far right now--guess the spinal infusion of ´impeachment´ made him leave out a lot he wanted, like a total ban on "assault" weapons. But, isn´t any weapon used to fire at a victim an "assault" weapon?
|
Reply 22 - Posted by:
Kurto, 1/16/2013 2:24:21 PM (No. 9120415)
Once the pot cloud clears at the DU, they will start to realize that 0 did not take away the evil guns...
0´s gun control reforms are a waste of more money that we will have to borrow from the Chinese.
|
| |
|
Reply 23 - Posted by:
mean Gene, 1/16/2013 2:31:14 PM (No. 9120431)
Quite often, after Obama USES a human shield, the alternate press (net) finds them and shows them to be on the payroll, so to speak. In this case Grant Fritz (of Maryland) and Taejah Goode (of Georgia) and Julia Stokes and Hinna Zeejah are not ID´ed by hometown even. That might slow the web press down a day or two. But my money is on them being in union or government families.
|
Reply 24 - Posted by:
antiquegolf, 1/16/2013 2:35:08 PM (No. 9120440)
#19, you didn´t ask me, but a school resource officer (SRO) is code for school cop. From my experience, most school cops are worthless.
|
Reply 25 - Posted by:
LadyHen, 1/16/2013 2:40:16 PM (No. 9120449)
#16.. How? Read minds? Confiscate all American´s health records?
You want to put the government, yes THIS government, in charge of determining and identifying the exceptionally arbitrary nature of "potentially violent" mental illness and regulating those people they classify as possibly dangerous? Not actual acts of violent mental illness mind you, just the potential for violent mental illness. Don´t simply prosecute those rare cases where violence occurs but predict the "future" and thus disenfranchise millions of Americans from their right of self protection with what actual proof.. a whim, a rumor, a medical history that millions of other people who never commit any crime share? Do you have any idea the slippery slope you are opening yourself up to?
To these folks like Obama and his brand of progressives the simple act of owning a firearm is an indicator of potentially violently mental illness that they would happily use to confiscate every firearm in this nation. Don´t believe me, read up.
#18 because someone else´s health information is none of your business just as your history of illness whether physical or mental is none of mine. I protect the rights of others for the selfish motivation of protecting my own rights.
|
Reply 26 - Posted by:
trapper, 1/16/2013 2:45:12 PM (No. 9120462)
Let´s see here:
1 - every piece of information the feds have about you, scattered throughout the IRS, HHS, Social Security, and everywhere else, will be centralized in the "background check system."
2 - Any barriers to this centralization, e.g. HIPPA, will be eliminated.
3 - "Incentives" to bludgeon states to send every scrap of info THEY have on you into the federal "background check system."
4 - Bingo! Here it is! This is the big one! Eric Holder will make a list of the "categories of individuals prohibited from having a gun." Anyone who has EVER had a prescription for [fill in the blank] will be banned, and it´s going to be a big, all-inclusinve list. EVERYONE will qualify for the ban somehow. For example, everyone who has EVER been diagnosed with ADD, depression, alcoholism, heart disease, diabetes, insomnia, or any other medical condition the medication for which is OR COULD HAVE mood altering side effects will be permanently banned from owning a gun.
16 - Refute the plain language of Obamacare protecting gun rights.
The rest - No healthcare for you unless you disclose whether you own a gun, and if you own one, no healthcare for you until you turn it in.
These are not nothing.
|
Reply 27 - Posted by:
trapper, 1/16/2013 2:51:25 PM (No. 9120478)
Visualize it:
You stagger into the emergency room clutching your chest, the pain drops you to your knees, you mutter "heart attack," and the ER nurse asks you "do you own a gun?"
|
Reply 28 - Posted by:
janjan, 1/16/2013 3:01:38 PM (No. 9120513)
This is a gun grab pure and simple. Obama decided that the Feds will now decide if you are qualified to own a gun or not. Guess which side most of us will fall? Republicans will probably automatically go on the list. The most chilling (but predictible) outcome of this is using the Obamacare to control your behavior. This cannot be allowed to stand.
|
Reply 29 - Posted by:
LanieLou, 1/16/2013 3:05:40 PM (No. 9120521)
ty 26! Also, Big Sis announced last year an initiative to label any returning military personnel with combat experience as unstable... and unable to own a gun.
Also, the merged database on all Americans already exists & a copy is in the hands of DNC election miscreants... We had so many districts with over 100% voting because not all stolen voters were registered.... ergo, new push to automatically register all Americans of voting age, by Holder.
|
Reply 30 - Posted by:
LadyHen, 1/16/2013 3:06:42 PM (No. 9120523)
By nothing I mean no outright "gun/magazine/etc ban" which I didn´t anticipate anyway. There was nothing that the average Joe would sit back and say.. "Ahha!! he is grabbing guns."
Obviously there is more to this but without Congress and funding, this was just a performance for his base and to make him look "reasonable" to average Joe. The devil is in the details and the details will be determined by Congress. This was a punt to the people who own Obama and actually run this country, the WH staff and Dem Congress critters. They are already quite busy I am sure formulating some massive bloated bill that we will need to "pass to find out whats in it." Funding for all these measures, healthcare privacy reform, pressure put on the states, background check expansion, actual gun/magazine/whatever banning etc etc. Keeping loins girded... the real fight is yet to come.
|
Reply 31 - Posted by:
peasantnumberthree, 1/16/2013 3:12:36 PM (No. 9120531)
Let´s see. The Federal government wants to take guns away from law-abiding citizens and the same time buys millions of rounds of heavy-caliber hollow-point ammo for themselves. Hmmm...
I smell a ´Rat...
|
Reply 32 - Posted by:
Davids918, 1/16/2013 3:30:30 PM (No. 9120571)
Isn´t #4 actually a form of PROFILING?
|
Reply 33 - Posted by:
Penney, 1/16/2013 3:45:47 PM (No. 9120597)
The recent past tragic mass murders which 0bama is using to propel his radical statist agenda, were ALL committed by mentally disturbed people. Most obtained guns illegally. Their targets were those most defenseless & vulnerable to the barbaric acts of mentally ill citizens who were not receiving proper medication & care. This same pattern & personal story of the murders repeats & repeats. Many become homeless or end up in prison when their own family can no longer handle them. This is tragic for all concerned, and for all of our civil society.
There are ALWAYS people around who, for whatever reason, prey on those most vulnerable for obvious reasons: ...because they are defenseless against attack. It is a reality everywhere on the planet and a neverending challenge to freedom. ´´Evil triumphs when good men do nothing.´´
Instead of addressing the heart of the matter, 0bama chooses to politicize EVERYTHING, regardless the stretch, as in this instance, he targets law abiding American citizens who own guns and who, if any had been present could have prevented these tragedies.
Is it possible, -desirable, to respect any elected official who so cavalierly is willing to twist & use any tragedy in order to deem his radical statist agenda by evading & marginalizing the U.S. Constitution and the will of the American people who expect those elected to remain faithful to their oaths of office?
Shun dem pols!
|
Reply 34 - Posted by:
Charactercounts, 1/16/2013 4:36:40 PM (No. 9120678)
#30, could the effort to mark returning military vets as unstable (and thus would be unsuitable gun owners) have anything to do with the fact that veterans are probably some of our most patriotic folks, know how to handle weapons, understand military tactics, and have taken an oath to defend our Constitution?
|
Reply 35 - Posted by:
Veritas2009, 1/16/2013 5:12:28 PM (No. 9120756)
every time some one prefaces gun control with common sense we need to ask "AS OPPOSED TO SILLY ASS"
|
Reply 36 - Posted by:
kenecarroll, 1/16/2013 5:30:24 PM (No. 9120800)
To ALL armed Americans...don´t forget to read the small print on this. Once the foot is in the door they will chip away at the fabric until its over. 2nd Amendment states the right to hold and bear arms SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED UPON(period). This guy and all that are attacking this amendment have already infringed upoin YOUR RIGHT. Given to you not by them (the commies of the USA) but by our fore fathers. MOLON LABE!!!!!!
|
Reply 37 - Posted by:
LanieLou, 1/16/2013 7:16:58 PM (No. 9121021)
Someone played games with nominclature... probably Obama´s atty´s, to try & nullify any impeachment actions. An EA is the same as an EO... depending on what the meaning of Action is. (Clintonesque)
Changing Gun Control to Gun Violence is just symantics to allow Reid to vote for it.
|
Reply 38 - Posted by:
Pinchem, 1/16/2013 8:07:12 PM (No. 9121132)
Folks, this was a watered down version of what he really wanted to say. The Backlash hit him square in the eyes.
"Obama Livid Over Gun Rights Backlash" Then the backlash came and it forced Obama to back off. That´s why he stumbled through his speech because it was a last minute rewrite.
Read the whole story here of how the People won and Obama lost.
http://tinyurl.com/a5suvcv
|
Below, you will find ...
Most Recent Articles posted by "StormCnter"
and
Most Active Articles (last 48 hours)
|
Most Recent Articles posted by "StormCnter"
|
Despite the WaPost, Benghazi Is a Major Scandal
|
|
American Spectator, by Quin Hillyer
Original Article
|
|
Posted By: StormCnter- 5/21/2013 6:16:56 AM
Post Reply
|
|
There’s a huge red flag in the Benghazi mess, but conservatives are letting the media get away with using a red herring to avoid it. Give the establishment media credit for obstinacy: Once it settles on a standard narrative or explanation for a particular subject, it shows remarkable discipline in explaining away any evidence that contradicts its own approved spin. So it has been with the media’s 250-day old determination to downplay the scandalous nature of the Obama administration’s treatment of its outpost in Benghazi before, during, and after the terrorist attack there that took four American lives.
|
Role of Health-Law ´Navigators´ Under Fire
|
|
Wall Street Journal, by Louise Radnofsky
Original Article
|
|
Posted By: StormCnter- 5/21/2013 6:14:03 AM
Post Reply
|
|
Lawmakers across the country are tussling over the Obama administration´s plans to create a small army of assistants to guide millions of Americans as they sign up for new health-insurance options available this fall. Backers of the health-care overhaul face an uphill battle to spread the word about the law, in the face of consumer research that suggests most uninsured people know little about it and are skeptical about the value of health insurance generally. Some Democrats have openly worried that the administration is doing too little to make sure the enrollment process goes smoothly. That is where the "patient navigators"
|
Labor unions break ranks with White House on ObamaCare
|
|
The Hill [DC], by Kevin Bogardus
Original Article
|
|
Posted By: StormCnter- 5/21/2013 6:04:54 AM
Post Reply
|
|
Labor unions are breaking with President Obama on ObamaCare. Months after the president’s reelection, a variety of unions are publicly balking at how the administration plans to implement the landmark law. They warn that unless there are changes, the results could be catastrophic. The United Food and Commercial Workers International Union (UFCW) — a 1.3 million-member labor group that twice endorsed Obama for president — is very worried about how the reform law will affect its members’ healthcare plans. Last month, the president of the United Union of Roofers, Waterproofers and Allied Workers released a statement calling “for repeal
|
|
Issa Warns Hillary
|
|
National Review Online, by Jonathan Strong
Original Article
|
|
Posted By: StormCnter- 5/21/2013 5:36:12 AM
Post Reply
|
|
Since Hillary Clinton last came up to Capitol Hill, we’ve learned senior State Department officials sought to scrub references to terrorism from the infamous Benghazi talking points to insulate Foggy Bottom from political criticism — citing concerns of their “building’s leadership” to justify the demands. The rising temperature of the scandal means it’s possible that Hillary could be asked to return and testify again. If she comes back, she had better be prepared, says House Oversight and Government Reform chairman Darrell Issa. “We are interviewing lots of people, most of them under oath,” Issa says, describing the “methodical” approach his committee
|
|
Billy Sol: Now That Was a Scandal
|
|
Weekly Standard, by Geoffrey Norman
Original Article
|
|
Posted By: StormCnter- 5/21/2013 5:32:49 AM
Post Reply
|
|
We hear a lot, these days, about how President Obama is not like Lyndon Johnson and thanks be to heaven for that small mercy. The point seems to be that the president doesn´t know how to arm twist, sweet talk, bribe, and emasculate both friend and enemy (of which he truly had neither) in order to further his agenda. Since many among the chattering class believe, still, in that agenda, his is generally regarded as an excellent presidency. Never mind that more than half a century after Johnson declared war on poverty ...
|
How Hope and Change Gave Way To Spying on the Press
|
|
Daily Beast, by Kirsten Powers
Original Article
|
|
Posted By: StormCnter- 5/21/2013 5:11:50 AM
Post Reply
|
|
First they came for Fox News, and they did not speak out – because they were not Fox News. Then they came for government whistleblowers, and they did not speak out – because they were not government whistleblowers. Then they came for the maker of a You Tube video, and – okay, we know how this story ends. But how did we get here?Turns out, it’s a fairly swift sojourn from a president pushing to “delegitimize” a news organization, to threatening criminal prosecution for journalistic activity by a Fox News reporter, James Rosen,
|
Ex-Diplomats Report New Benghazi Whistleblowers with Info Devastating to Clinton and Obama
|
|
PJ Media, by Roger L. Simon
Original Article
|
|
Posted By: StormCnter- 5/21/2013 5:02:13 AM
Post Reply
|
|
More whistleblowers will emerge shortly in the escalating Benghazi scandal, according to two former U.S. diplomats who spoke with PJ Media Monday afternoon. These whistleblowers, colleagues of the former diplomats, are currently securing legal counsel because they work in areas not fully protected by the Whistleblower law. According to the diplomats, what these whistleblowers will say will be at least as explosive as what we have already learned about the scandal, including details about what really transpired in Benghazi that are potentially devastating to both Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton.
|
Most Active Articles (last 48 hours)
|
Analyze this
|
|
Power Line, by Scott Johnson
Original Article
|
|
Posted By: MissMolly- 5/19/2013 11:33:33 AM
Post Reply
|
|
What did President Obama do on the evening of 9/11/12 when our men were under attack in Benghazi? The invaluable Andrew McCarthy reminds us that Obama and Secretary Clinton had a 10:00 p.m. phone call of which many (including, I think, Chris Wallace) have lost sight. This morning when Wallace asked Obama aide Dan Pfeiffer what Obama was up to that evening, Pfeiffer declared the line of inquiry “offensive.” Translation: Obama and his minions would prefer to “move on” and are warning the likes of FNC off:(Snip for video)The Weekly Standard’s Daniel Halper has posted the rush transcript
|
Obama: "As An African American You Have To Work Twice As Hard As Anyone Else If You Want To Get By"
|
|
Real Clear Politics, by Staff
Original Article
|
|
Posted By: Desert Fox- 5/19/2013 6:55:47 PM
Post Reply
|
|
PRESIDENT OBAMA: You are the mantle of Frederick Douglass and Booker T. Washington and Ralph Bunche and Langston Hughes and George Washington Carver and Ralph Abernathy and Thurgood Marshall and, yes, Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. These men were many things to many people and they knew full well the role that racism played in their life. But when it came to their own accomplishments and sense of purpose, they had no time for excuses. Every one of you has a grandma or an uncle or a parent whose told you at some point in life
|
White House Chief of Staff knew about damaging IRS audit, kept Obama in the dark
|
|
New York Post, by S.A. MILLER
Original Article
|
|
Posted By: FlyRight- 5/20/2013 4:15:03 PM
Post Reply
|
|
WASHINGTON – The Internal Revenue Serviced scandal today spread further within the White House and closer to President Obama. White House spokesman Jay Carney today disclosed that Obama’s chief of staff, Dennis McDonough, and other top White House officials had advance warning that the IRS was targeting conservative groups. But he insisted McDonough and the other White House officials purposely kept Obama out of the loop.McDonough “rightly chose not to take action” to inform Obama, Carney told reporters at the daily White House briefing.
|
BREAKING: WashPost Reports Obama DOJ Also Spied on James Rosen of Fox News
|
|
Newsbusters, by Tim Graham
Original Article
|
|
Posted By: drive- 5/20/2013 7:29:20 AM
Post Reply
|
|
The Washington Post on Monday reported that Obama’s Department of Justice was investigating journalists before they started wiretapping the Associated Press – for one, Fox News correspondent James Rosen in 2010. Their headline wasn´t "Obama Team Also Spied on Fox News." Fox wasn´t in the headline, on A-1 or on A-12, where the story continued. Newly obtained court documents “reveal how deeply investigators explored the private communications of a working journalist — and raise the question of how often journalists have been investigated as closely as Rosen was in 2010.” Reporter Ann Marimow began:
|
Candy Crowley: Is it Possible This Isn´t Political and IRS Didn´t Intend to Harass the Tea Party?
|
|
Newsbusters, by Noel Sheppard
Original Article
|
|
Posted By: JoniTx- 5/19/2013 3:54:02 PM
Post Reply
|
|
"Can you see in your mind´s eye a way that this might not have been political, that this was a misguided stupid way to sort, but that they didn´t intend it to be some kind of political attempt to harass the Tea Party?" So actually asked CNN´s Candy Crowley of her guest Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) concerning the Internal Revenue Service scandal Sunday (video follows with transcript and commentary):CANDY CROWLEY, HOST: Moving on to the IRS problem at this moment, which is really sort of in its infancy. There will be lots more hearings coming up this week
|
White House Aide calls Criticism of Obama ´Offensive´
|
|
New York Times, by Brian Knowlton
Original Article
|
|
Posted By: FlyRight- 5/20/2013 7:01:33 AM
Post Reply
|
|
A senior adviser to President Obama mounted a combative defense of the administration on Sunday, saying the controversies enveloping the White House were the result of Republican lawmakers’ trying to “drag Washington into a swamp of partisan fishing expeditions, trumped-up hearings and false allegations.”The remarks came from Dan Pfeiffer, a member of the president’s inner circle, as he appeared on all five major Sunday morning talk shows in an effort to move the administration past what commentators have described as a “hell week” of controversy and missteps.
|
If Your Doctor Asks You About Guns, Do You Have to Answer?
|
|
Fox News, by Staff
Original Article
|
|
Posted By: KarenJ1- 5/20/2013 1:12:07 PM
Post Reply
|
|
Stuart Varney said this morning on "Varney & Co." that one of his producers was given a questionnaire with some surprisingly intrusive questions on it when he switched doctors. One of the questions was whether he/she was concerned about unsecured weapons in the home. Another asked whether he/she was "in a relationship in which you have been physically hurt or are you afraid of your partner?" Judge Andrew Napolitano explained that the question about guns comes out of a post-Sandy Hook executive order by President Obama, but it will be required under Obamacare. Varney expressed amazement
|
|
|

Home Page | Latest Posts | Links | Must Reads | Update Profile | Register | Rules & FAQs | Search | Post | Contact | RSS | Contribute | Logout | Forgot Password
© 2013 Lucianne.com Media Inc.
~~~c~~~
|