Possible underlying reason for Executive Actions

[abajaj11]

I see 3 facts:
1. The EOs themselves seem to skirt on the edge of redefining and extending what is already law, and folks on forums like this are reading those literally, and concluding that not much has been done with the new EOs. Au Contraire.

Consider these two additional facts:
2. The MSM including ALL US cable news stations and international press , is "erroneously" reporting that all guns in the USA will be registered and all sales will require a background check. Bill O' Reilly, the liberal on Fox, today had an opening monologue where he pretty much assumed that the EOs meant gun registration. Is this deliberate?

3. The administration including POTUS are making statements like "If you sell a gun you must perform a background check". This is clearly not in the EOs, so why are they making crazy statements like this at the highest level?

I conclude that the EOs were a means to open a discussion on gun ownership where outrageous statements can be made (like firearm registration, all sellers must be licensed, etc). these statements can be repeated till the non-gun owning public gets conditioned that this is the new "common sense" norm. After a year or so, people can be told, "Look, nothing bad happened. Why not pass universal background check laws?" This will pave the way for future gun laws that will indeed require universal background checks, leading to registration and eventually confiscation.

So, the EOs may just be an excuse to float and test outrageous statements and conjure up a reality that doesn't exist yet, but will in the future.


What can we do?

I would suggest we contact NRA, GOA etc and make sure that the general public understands that UBC and gun registration is NOT the staus quo in America. In fact, it is inherently inimical to firearm ownership. The current EOs do nothing. We should DIMINISH the importance of these EOs, not paint them out to portray a false reality.

 

[tntrex]

If you like your current healthcare provider coverage you can keep it...

 

[lee1000]

I see 3 facts:
1. The EOs themselves seem to skirt on the edge of redefining and extending what is already law, and folks on forums like this are reading those literally, and concluding that not much has been done with the new EOs. Au Contraire.

Consider these two additional facts:
2. The MSM including ALL US cable news stations and international press , is "erroneously" reporting that all guns in the USA will be registered and all sales will require a background check. Bill O' Reilly, the liberal on Fox, today had an opening monologue where he pretty much assumed that the EOs meant gun registration. Is this deliberate?

3. The administration including POTUS are making statements like "If you sell a gun you must perform a background check". This is clearly not in the EOs, so why are they making crazy statements like this at the highest level?

I conclude that the EOs were a means to open a discussion on gun ownership where outrageous statements can be made (like firearm registration, all sellers must be licensed, etc). these statements can be repeated till the non-gun owning public gets conditioned that this is the new "common sense" norm. After a year or so, people can be told, "Look, nothing bad happened. Why not pass universal background check laws?" This will pave the way for future gun laws that will indeed require universal background checks, leading to registration and eventually confiscation.

So, the EOs may just be an excuse to float and test outrageous statements and conjure up a reality that doesn't exist yet, but will in the future.


What can we do?

I would suggest we contact NRA, GOA etc and make sure that the general public understands that UBC and gun registration is NOT the staus quo in America. In fact, it is inherently inimical to firearm ownership. The current EOs do nothing. We should DIMINISH the importance of these EOs, not paint them out to portray a false reality.

You got it, your concerns are well founded.

 

[rhart]

Very advanced propaganda technique. Sometimes referred to as "future pacing" where you condition the subject to accept that changes have already occurred or will inevitably occur. Used a lot in sales and personal coaching by NLP practioners. Kind of like a post hypnotic suggestion. Our enemy is very sophisticated, well organized and controls most of the conduits of communication that make this kind of programming or brain washing effective.

It can work both ways. It has also been used by our side when we let people know that the statists intend to confiscate all our guns at some future date and that future pacing is confirmed every time liberals attempt an over reach on gun laws. The problem is that we usually lack the means to communicate our "future pace" on the same scale. Fortunately the election campaign activities right now give us an excellent and rare mass communication opportunity and the large GOP field is working to our advantage by providing multiple opportunities to spread our future pace via the main stream media.

In negotiation some call this "name the game" which is where you let the opponent and interested parties know what is happening so that their tactics are exposed for all to see and can effectively nullify the tactic significantly.

I personally think the president messed up by doing this when he did - poor timing. I think his massive ego got the better of him and he cares more about his "legacy" than his side's eventual goal. His crocodile tears was a bit of theater that makes him look weak IMHO - although he and his ilk probably think it makes him look "passionate" and caring about his cause. I wonder if he sheds the same tears when he directs a drone to blow up a terrorist's entire family to get the terrorist? Hypocrite.

 

[Commander Keen]

 

[Fredkrueger100]

Pretty much sums it up. And to think this dirt bag was AG. Anti constitution people serving in the highest positions in our government. Sad times we live in.

 

[ConstitutionCowboy]

What they are up to is employing the means toward their goal of subjugating We the People by priming the pump. Desensitizing the general public. Crafting the lies they need to be repeated until they becomes the truth. Swaying public opinion. Formulating buzz words and phrases. Crafting pretense. Inducing emotion. Misconstruing the law. Dissing the Constitution. Inciting unrest. Fomenting racial strife. Class warfare. Etc., etc., etc.

Woody

 

[Biggsly]

Every time I see all of the people that Obama surrounded himself with I am reminded of what a pro 2nd Amend, pro America president he was going to be......

 

[dennishoddy]

One inch at a time, until you reach the end of the ruler..........

 

[cue_ball]

Very advanced propaganda technique. Sometimes referred to as "future pacing" where you condition the subject to accept that changes have already occurred or will inevitably occur. Used a lot in sales and personal coaching by NLP practioners. Kind of like a post hypnotic suggestion. Our enemy is very sophisticated, well organized and controls most of the conduits of communication that make this kind of programming or brain washing effective.

It can work both ways. It has also been used by our side when we let people know that the statists intend to confiscate all our guns at some future date and that future pacing is confirmed every time liberals attempt an over reach on gun laws. The problem is that we usually lack the means to communicate our "future pace" on the same scale. Fortunately the election campaign activities right now give us an excellent and rare mass communication opportunity and the large GOP field is working to our advantage by providing multiple opportunities to spread our future pace via the main stream media.

In negotiation some call this "name the game" which is where you let the opponent and interested parties know what is happening so that their tactics are exposed for all to see and can effectively nullify the tactic significantly.

I personally think the president messed up by doing this when he did - poor timing. I think his massive ego got the better of him and he cares more about his "legacy" than his side's eventual goal. His crocodile tears was a bit of theater that makes him look weak IMHO - although he and his ilk probably think it makes him look "passionate" and caring about his cause. I wonder if he sheds the same tears when he directs a drone to blow up a terrorist's entire family to get the terrorist? Hypocrite.

Agree with everything you said. In looking at coverage of this from a variety of media sources, "common-sense" has appeared with them all. As in, you must be an idiot if you disagree. Straight out of the Alinsky playbook.