Sunday, November 28, 2010

From the Department of Glaringly Obvious Headlines

"Andrew Traver:  Is Obama's choice for ATF chief an 'antigun zealot'?"

Based on the above article from the Christian Science Monitor, the answer would have to be an emphatic yes.

"But the idea of an ATF director who hails from Chicago, a city without gun shops, and who has conflated black market automatic weapons with legal semi-automatic "assault-style" rifles is causing Second Amendment defenders to worry that President Obama intends to blast away at gun rights by force of bureaucracy, if not law."

Who wouldn't think that Dear Leader would naturally pick a Chicago insider with an apparent hatred for the very items he's supposed to be overseeing the regulation of?

The current buzz is that Obama is going to make Mr. Traver a recess appointment, once again bypassing the Congressional oversight and approval process without even giving the legislative branch a chance to schedule a hearing on the fitness of Traver for the job. 

Just more of that "Stroke of the pen.  Law of the land.  Kinda cool" mentality that we've come to expect from such socialist-leaning liberals. 

We'll keep a watch on this story, and let everyone know if and when another end-run around the Constitution is attempted.


Anonymous said...

Just more of that "Stroke of the pen. Law of the land. Kinda cool" mentality that we've come to expect from such socialist-leaning liberals.

Are you referring to that socialist, liberal George Bush who used signing statements 750 times?

Douglas Hester said...

You're comparing apples to oranges to some extent, Anon, but I'll bite.

You mean the Bush practice of using unconstitutional signing statements I criticized on July 21, 2009?:

"the exact same action that the Obama (correctly, in our opinion) harshly criticized President Bush for repeatedly doing while he was on the campaign trail"

Bush was completely in the wrong for making those signing statements, and the courts slapped him down numerous times for doing so. Unfortunately for you, he is no longer in office and now we have Obama performing the exact same acts that he slammed Chimpy McHitler for unapologetically doing, making Dear Leader a complete hypocrite at best.

Anonymous said...

You may have missed my point...I think we agree that they both suck. However, when you write that these acts come from "socialist-leaning liberals" it sounds like you only care when a democrat does it. Kind of like how the Tea Party only cares about out of control spending when a Democrat is in office.

Glad you wrote about the signing statements previously though...I enjoy your site.

Anonymous said...

Even though it is poor practice unless absolutely necessary (like a Republican Senate flatly refusing to do anything, in the case of Clinton), it is not unconstitutional.