Joe Biden is taking part in the discussions with gun control groups:
[T]hose in attendance were pleased to see Biden emissaries at the table, interpreting it as a sign of seriousness on the administration’s behalf.
“We have had other meetings with folks at justice and meetings with other people in the administration,†said one attendee. “This was the most thorough engagement we have had to date.â€
They might be serious about doing something. Biden’s presence would suggest the Administration is serious, and the President wants to distance himself from it.
“It struck me that they were looking for a broad range of ideas,†said Helmke. “That they hadn’t decided on any proposals or written anything off.â€
We need to be ready, and if Obama pulls the trigger, we need to fight like hell to get him replaced in 2012.
Uh, I think I’m going to be fighting like hell to get him replaced regardless.
Who’s this guy Sam Stein? He seems all over the latest Huffpo gun stories and gets thousands of comments in the time it takes Helmke to garner hundreds.
There a hundreds of reason why he needs to be unemployed in 2012.
Well – Joe Biden’s in charge!!
I’m worried already . . . . . . . .
Biden’s anti-gun resume is much longer than Obama’s; his presence at any gun policy meeting is unlikely a good thing.
And by 2012, it would probably be too late.
I figured that Obama was smart enough to keep quiet on gun control until after re-election, and every indication pointed toward this conclusion. Maybe this is a sign that he’s not so confident in getting a second term, and he feels like it’s now or never.
Gun control is definitely something you do in a lame duck situation, as it never gets you more votes than it loses. Democratic voters will all vote for Obama anyway. There are plenty of pro-gun union members who will vote against him because of this, but might otherwise have voted for his re-election.
It’s quite possible he’s going to send Biden in to hear what they have to say, toss some ideas around, make them feel like they are still important, and then proceed to do absolutely nothing. Of course, it’s possible Obama also wants to push this for real.
Say Uncle posted a disturbing union exemption in the bill for IL CCW that could be interpreted to mean businesses cannot bar Union employees from carrying… so then we have a vision where armed and exempt SEIU thugs are roaming the streets, enforcing Obama’s wishes?
Maybe they’re starting to think about gun-control as a means/measure of HE gets to control WHO has guns, and what they can do with them.
I have to agree with some of the posts here, the time to organize for 2012 is well here. The D’s platform -last- time included an anti crime plank with sections on renewing the AWB permanently and generally support gun control. We missed the boat on that sailing, we really have to make it count for the next one. If you’re not active you’ll end up with the government that everyone else deserves. -Boyd wa-08 EVC
http://www.nraila.org/ActionCenter/GetInvolvedLocally/
Dirtcrasher,
That’s a case of poor wording, not an “exemption”. The intent is that if a business engages in collective bargaining it must include a carry restriction as part of that bargaining, it can’t put one in place unilaterally without employee input.
The Illinois bill is pretty good for a shall-issue (note it makes businesses that prohibit lawful carry civilly liable for injuries due to such banning, is there any other carry law in any state that has that?).
We need to stick to real threats from the administration not phantom fears.
Thank-you Matthew, this administration’s demonstrated lack of faith is not the least bit inspiring.
dirtcrashr,
Can’t agree with you more on that.
We’ll see if I’m right if they fix the language.
What Robb said.
Could be as much a tactic to sideline the busybodies in a useless subcommittee (See the Flag subcommittee in Moon is a Harsh Mistress, among other Heinlein examples).
And, what Robb said :)
Hahahaha Flag subcommittee! Perfect Ian.
I thought the same thing when I read that. Where’s the best place to put a bunch of self-important nobodies? In a room together.
Obama gets points for political manipulation here. Pretty slick move.
It won’t work in the long run, but it took the spotlight off of him for a moment.
Someone gets points. The president doesn’t strike me as that slick a political operator.
Sebastian:
“It’s quite possible he’s going to send Biden in to hear what they have to say, toss some ideas around, make them feel like they are still important, and then proceed to do absolutely nothing. Of course, it’s possible Obama also wants to push this for real.”
My take on this & most other issues is that Obama doesn’t have an agenda, but he does allow policy to be led by his cabinet appointees, or members of Congress, who then decide where & when to “lead.” If a move works, Obama takes credit; if they fail, well, they fail alone, don’t they? My guess is that Biden has been given the gun rights/control brief & told to run with it. If he falls on his face too hard, he’ll get bumped for 2012 (unlikely without a huge gaff, but still.)
Joe “gaffe-a-minute” Biden….
I thought Biden’s presence meant Obama isn’t serious about it. Biden isn’t someone you delegate serious work to.
Can we send Sarah Palin and Suzanna Hupp ?
Obama sends Biden to things he doesn’t take seriously. Look at the current budget battle. He puts Biden in charge of negotiations and Biden promptly leaves the country. If he can make these guys into a “blue ribbon” panel that will submit a report, even better. The deficit panel he created spent months working on a report, that was flatly ignored.
He is with the anti’s, but I think he is more concerned about re-election. He is using them to distract from Operation Fast and Furious.