Wednesday, January 16, 2013

Today's Alarming Obama Executive Actions

Earlier today, I published the list of 23 "anti-gun" executive actions the President just issued. Here are 7 from the list that are most alarming (my bold):

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

4. Direct the Attorney General to review categories of individuals prohibited from
having a gun to make sure dangerous people are not slipping through the cracks.

5. Propose rulemaking to give law enforcement the ability to run a full background
check on an individual before returning a seized gun. 
22. Commit to finalizing mental health parity regulations.

23. Launch a national dialogue led by Secretaries Sebelius and Duncan on mental
You have two very disconcerting themes going on here with these actions:

1. The goal is to make it much easier for government to gather and share between agencies information about individuals.

2. It is a further step in the direction of government involvement in determining the "mental health" of individuals.

Anyone familiar with the case of Brandon Raub knows how far the government has already gone in attempting to use the cover of mental illness to harass those with alternative political views.

As Thomas Szasz warned:
 “Although we may not know it, we have, in our day, witnessed the birth of the Therapeutic State. This is perhaps the major implication of psychiatry as an institution of social control.”
“Coercion masquerading as medical treatment is the bedrock of political medicine. Long before the Nazies rose to power, physician-eugenicists advocated killing certain ill or disabled persons as a form of treatment for both patient and society. What transforms coercion into therapy? Physicians diagnosing the subject’s conditon as a ‘disease,’ declaring the intervention they impose on the victim a ‘treatment,’ and legislators and judges ratifying these categorizations as ‘diseases’ and ‘treatments.’”

“It’s not science. It’s politics and economics. That’s what psychiatry is: politics and economics. Behavior control, it is not science, it is not medicine.”
“It’s an epidemic of psychiatry that we are dealing with. We don’t have an epidemic of mental illness, we have an epidemic of psychiatry.”

“Psychiatry is probably the single most destructive force that has affected the society within the last sixty years.”
“The task we set ourselves — to combat psychiatric coercion — is important. It is a noble task in the pursuit of which we must, regardless of obstacles, persevere. Our conscience commands that we do no less.”


  1. If this is the worst of it then The Dear Leader has fired off a squib shot. Most of these items will either be ignored by states that don't set up Obamacare insurance exchanges, are a violation of the Firearms Owners Protection Act or can be litigated to death by 2nd Amendment activists. The feeble nature of these policies is an open admission by the current regime that it can't make good on it's alarming rhetoric.

    In theory anyway, Congress could simply defund any of this. If you want to see what if anything Republicans are good for then demand that they defund all of these initiatives and see if they follow through. Hold their feet to the fire and let them know you expect them to protect your inalienable rights from these kinds of assaults. Don't let the bastards off the hook.

    1. Have you been asleep the last 200 years. Congress rubberstamps, Supreme Court rubberstamps, President rubberstamps. Do you honestly believe they would stop the gaining of more power. Didn't you hear the opinion of the supposedly "conservative" Justice Scalia: Reasonable restriction! Let's see: reasonable restriction vs. "Shall not be infringed." I'd call that a total annihilation of the 2nd amendment as intended by the framers, and in lock step with and agenda to disarm the militia as defined in constitution and all codes. You need to wake up if you think there has not been the total destruction of the once United States!

    2. I think, Anonymous, you are missing the point. There are 2 ways to discredit someone: Label them "crazy" or a "terrorist". Once you do that, they are forever shunned, cut off, and not listened to. Anything they say is labeled the rantings of a crazy person or terrorist. What better way to eliminate your political enemies than to have a nice doctor in a white coat patiently explain to the media that now He/She is getting the "help they need"? Everyone sighs a collective breath of relief as the "danger" is avoided. This tactic has been used by nations and individuals forever...Frances Farmer, anyone?

  2. Shrinks and lawsuits is the way Singapore(the nation state loser libertarians worship)keeps the rebellious under control .
    If it's good enough for them, it's good enough for us !

  3. direct the AG to determine catagories of people that will not be allowed to own a gun.

    i wonder what type of catagories? i dont want an AG that in the future can determine libertarians or any other rival political parties or groups cant own guns

  4. Some of the other orders are nefarious as well:

  5. I believe that Obama and the rest of the fascists were seriously thinking of trying to do far, far more with the EO just a couple weeks ago. I think the massive backlash with 250,000 people joining the NRA, guns selling out, gunshow lines around the block, congress being bombarded with emails and calls, etc forced Obama to back down. I sincerely believe that.

  6. Replies
    1. You can't buy a smorter, just like you can't buy smachineguns, and stanks. I didn't say I agree with that. I think if the government has smorters, we should be able to have smorters.

  7. Having Kathleen Sibelius and (whatever) Duncan leading a national discussion on this issue is...hilariously stupid. Sibelius deserves the same respect that is granted to a rodent.

    Two other observations from the whole spectacle, in which Dear Ruler posed with human shields on stage:

    1. Janet Incompetano's statement to support utilizing the massive bureaucracy of the Department of Human Stupidity to share the massive databases that those related agencies have accrued against Americans;

    2. Take note that Dear Ruler's pronouncements about doctor-patient privilege compares with his (unstated) opinions about lawyer-client privilege: One should now be subject to government review, while the other should still remain secret.

    In this scenario, if a person goes to a doctor's office, the doctor is required to ask about firearms that the patient may own and store at his home. Yet if a thug kills someone with a gun, and immediately talks to his lawyer about it, that communication is protected.

    What a country!

  8. Bob,

    As Ellis Wyatt said in the last post #16 is THE most important. If Obamacare creates a national database for health documents, and doctors start asking questions about guns, Doctors become spies. It is de facto gun registration, but far more sinister. How could it have a purpose in preventing crimes? It doesn't tell anyone what guns they own, just that they own one. Its only purpose is to have a list in preparation for confiscation.

  9. Next up on the menu: DSM-VI includes definition for the newly recognized disorder called "sub-clinical schizophrenia" (vyalotyakush'aya shizofreniya for those of you who know Russian) and the only treatment for that is an involuntary confinement with regular heavy medication with benzodiazepines and ECT.

    The main diagnostic criteria is being unhappy with the government and the Party.

    How's that for deja vu?

  10. Today marks the day it is crystal clear a tyranical dictator,
    rapidly creating a dictator ship is in full bloom.

    So, 'Americans' what do you plan to do about it, complain, laugh it off, believe it will not bother you?

    When is enough, enough?

    1. When is enough, enough?

      When it interferes with the welfare payments.

  11. Yes, thank you everyone who noticed.

    The list is not 23 individual actions. It is a network of overlapping webs, specifically shuffled and worded to appear innocuous and discontinuous. Read the sequence, in order, 16, 20, 3, 2, 21, 22, 17, 4. Maybe that can come to represent the concept.

    That's the formula for banning people, instead of banning guns.

  12. This is directed squarely at the veteran community. As the Brandon Raub incident indicates, the government knows that its former employees are the most suited to be successful rebels. I experienced it myself after publishing an article on Lew Rockwell in late 2006 when I was in the USMC. They have sucked us in to talking to [their] doctors in order to get diagnosed with PTSD, which then requires them to pay us $x/month disability pension. Now they increase the communication between federal bureaucracies and ask mental health doctors to inquire about guns in the home. For doctors, shrinks and therapists in the VA system, this is not a request but an order from the boss's desk.

    In the early 1930s the Bonus Army became a major threat to the federal government. It culminated with the events that Gen. Smedley Butler spoke of. The feds have learned from the past and know that the veterans (of which there are many because of the protracted wars) are a powerful group. The first ones they have to take the guns from are the disgruntled ex-employees that they taught how to use the gun in the most proficient manner.

    1. Very provocative info and something I am having my veteran husband read. Thank you.

    2. Butler's book is a must read for us.

  13. Obama's list of bureaucratic mush will be forgotten within half a year. Some people haven't yet figured out that we won. The ruling class got our message (long lines for guns and ammo, and a lot of "molon labe" talk).