Marco Rubio: Obama shouldn’t hide behind children when it comes to #guncontrol debate

FacebookTwitterPrintFriendly

And that’s not all Florida’s yummiest Senator had to say about Obama’s rhetoric on guns:

Rubio’s comments on the Laura Ingraham show came shortly before Obama unveiled the specifics of his new efforts to reduce gun violence.

Rubio, often mentioned as a likely 2016 presidential candidate, said it would have been better if Obama had decided to announce his proposals without being accompanied by children. Obama was joined at the press conference by children who wrote to the president in response to the December shooting massacre at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Conn., that resulted in 26 dead.

“I think ultimately he has a right to do that, and I understand he has a right to do that,” Rubio said. “I think most of us would have preferred if it just had been a straightforward address to the country because it implies that somehow those of us who do not agree with his public policy prescriptions don’t equally care about children.”

[…]

Rubio called Democrats’ interest in pushing a new assault-weapons ban “misplaced.”

“I think it’s completely misplaced. Because here’s the issue in this public policy debate that’s different from others: There is a constitutional right to bear arms,” Rubio said. “I did not create that and he cannot erase that. It is in the Constitution. If they want to change the Constitution, if they want to believe the Second Amendment should not be in there or if they believe it should be rewritten in the 21st century then let them have the guts to stand up and propose that.”

But until they do that, Rubio continued, “then they’ve got to abide by it. And if you’re going to pass a bunch of laws that are not going to work but are going to infringe on the Second Amendment right of law abiding citizens you’re going to have a problem with that.”

Yeah, a big problem.

As to the President’s 23 executive actions signed today in an effort to look like he’s Doing Something (TM) to curb gun violence, Rubio had this to say in a statement:

“Making matters worse is that President Obama is again abusing his power by imposing his policies via executive fiat instead of allowing them to be debated in Congress,” he said. “President Obama’s frustration with our republic and the way it works doesn’t give him license to ignore the Constitution.”

Rubio added that Obama’s proposals would not have actually prevented the school shooting in Newtown, Connecticut and were threatening the Second Amendment rights of legal gun owners.

“President Obama is targeting the 2nd Amendment rights of law-abiding citizens instead of seriously addressing the real underlying causes of such violence,” Rubio said.

Is it  just me or is Rubio sounding very Presidential as of late?  First, his recent proposals on illegal immigration and now his strong stance against President Obama on the issue of gun control.   Don’t be surprised if he’s not already mulling a 2016 run.

Update – 5:40 PM: North Carolina Congressional District 2 Rep. Renee Ellmers also responded strongly to Obama’s executive actions via this statement:

“President Obama is once again exploiting a tragedy for political gain and eroding our constitutional rights for the sake of an extreme liberal agenda. We need to have a serious discussion on how we can prevent troubled individuals from carrying out their insane intentions. But attacking our legal rights and liberties through abusive executive orders destroys the very principles that have protected our citizens from oppressive government power for over 236 years.”

Let the battle begin.

Hospital stops infant deliveries, citing Obamacare

FacebookTwitterPrintFriendly

**Posted by Phineas

Wait, wasn’t the PPACA supposed to lower medical costs? Why yes, yes it was:

Congress and the President have enacted a historic health care reform law that will help ensure that all families are able to get the care they need, as well as financial security and relief from rising premiums. The legislation is a significant first step toward bending the health care cost curve for the federal government and families, and it will yield real economic benefits.

Apparently, one Pennsylvania hospital didn’t get the memo, citing rising costs due to Obamacare as the reason to stop delivering babies:

A southwestern Pennsylvania hospital will stop delivering babies after March 31 because its obstetricians are either leaving or refocusing their practices, and because hospital officials believe they can’t afford it based on projected reimbursements under looming federal health care reforms.

Two are leaving obstetrics altogether, it seems, while two others are focusing more on gynecology. No word on how much further mothers ready to deliver will have to travel, or what this will do to the load on other hospitals.

Expect it to get much worse, much more annoying as the years go on, folks.

Elections, consequences, and all that.

via Liberty Unyielding

(Crossposted at Public Secrets)