BENNETT: How is Your Ammo Supply?
by Jack Bennett
“A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”
Friends, hear me loud and clear! President Obama, thru the ATF, is coming after your guns!
More specifically the M855 (Green Tip) AR-15 Ammunition. It is being declared a danger to policemen because it is supposed to be “armor piercing” and, therefore, it will penetrate the body armor the police use.
A misrepresentation of the facts. First. this round is a full metal jacket bullet with a steel core. It had been on the exempted list until February when the ATF quietly removed the exemption, making it subject to new guidelines. The reason given was that it will penetrate the “soft armor” that the police use. True, but misleading. The ammunition (5.56mm) is rifle ammunition and, like most any rifle ammunition, will penetrate soft armor (the regulation only applied to handgun ammunition from which this ammo was exempted). The body armor that the police use is only designed to stop hand-gun rounds.
Second, not one single shooting/death of a policeman has been recorded utilizing this ammunition. If the ATF is permitted to “outlaw” the “green tip” ammunition, then all 5.56/223 ammo will be subject to the same criteria and outlawed as well.
Now you say, I don’t care about the AR-15, I don’t have one. Well it’s only a small step to your 30-06 or .308 being declared a sniper rifle. Or, wait till “OO Buck” is declared a danger to the police and all shotguns are declared illegal.
This action is a slippery slope that can and will lead to all ammo being outlawed.
What part of “shall not be infringed” doesn’t this administration understand ? President Obama has stated that his failure to advance gun control is his greatest shortfall. He has stated he wants Australian style gun control. First, registration and then confiscation.
The time has come to stand and fight - do something. Call, write, email your Representatives and Senators. Express your dissatisfaction with the administration’s “End run” around the Constitution.
This flagrant, arrogant, underhanded action by the President thru the ATF goes against all government reports and the overwhelming will of the American people. March 15th is the last day before the ATF starts to enforce the new guidelines. Do something now before it’s too late.
All that is necessary for evil to succeed is for good men and women to stand by and do nothing.
IN DEFENSE OF FREEDOM
The opinion expressed is that of the author.
BENNETT: Commentary | Jack Bennett March 11, 2015
By jerry6, March 11, 2015 @ 7:47 AM
I saw people talking about this bullet on tv yesterday. They said the law about this bullet went into effect when Ronald Reagan signed it into effect. I think they said it was in the 80’s. Quit scarring people with this gun taking away thing. I have at least two handguns and six rifles and Obama has a year and a half left in office and I haven’t had one gun taken away from me. Come on Jack.
By mad-2010, March 11, 2015 @ 9:26 AM
Jack, Jack, Jack… OD’D on Fox News again!!!!
If you really want to worry about something try The GOP Congress!! LOL
By mad-2010, March 11, 2015 @ 12:44 PM
How about that GOP letter to Tehran, Jack!
Just a bunch of Biscuit Eaten Traitors! In defense of freedom, Yeah Right!
By blutoblutarsky, March 12, 2015 @ 9:28 AM
mad- It’s funny how some people are experts on the U.S. constitution only up until the 2nd amendment but the finer points of it along with international law must be taught to them by the leader of Iran!!
This was ridiculous and it made the US look idiotic worldwide.
By cartman, March 12, 2015 @ 7:04 PM
Look, Obama is a stated anti gunner. I don’t see how a letter to Tehran figures into this discussion. The fact is that he is trying to disarm us through executive action. I cannot believe that people like mad don’t see this. They are simply Obama allies trying to cover for him in hopes of achieving his goals.
By jerry6, March 13, 2015 @ 8:02 AM
I always wondered about NRA members. Correct me if I am wrong but do you pay $25 to join the NRA. What do you get for this money? Has anyone out there had a gun or ammo taken away since Obama has been in office? Like I said I still have my eight guns. All people have done is make more money for the people selling guns and ammo with there scaring people into thinking that they are loosing their guns and ammo. Look up Ronald Reagan and see what he did with the gun laws.
By mad-2010, March 13, 2015 @ 9:04 AM
Look, Jack Bennett articles over the last year or so Range from Fear-mongering to Flat out Fabrications. Let us not forget the article about Home Land Security and the billions of bullets possibly meant to harm Americans. Let us not forget the Bennett articles about the Concentration Camps, again Home Land Security!
The fact is that the President of The United States of America is not try to disarm American Citizens. The possibility of a President of the U.S. with little more than a year left in his Presidency disarming All Americans is Ludicrous!
Delusional people like Cartman don’t see this! The letter from the GOP Congress may not figure into this discussion, however it is and should be more relevant to the American People than the Same Old Fear-mongering Junk about taking all our guns!! There will always be Delusional people like Cartman who will try to tell you what’s in the mind of others or who their allies are to support their on agendas.
By mad-2010, March 13, 2015 @ 10:07 AM
The Real Reason cartman does not what to discuss the GOP letter to Tehran is he’s a Repub and has no real defense for the obstructionist actions of these Biscuit Eaten Traitors called the GOP Congress!
By blutoblutarsky, March 13, 2015 @ 10:26 AM
cartman- The letter was an embarrassment to our country. I’m sure Jack would write a very angry editorial here if it had been the Democrats that pulled a stunt like that.
What’s amazing is that the Republicans who wrote it are saying they wrote it as a joke. Really? Idiots.
By MaryPoppins, March 17, 2015 @ 2:01 PM
In 1986, the notorious gun grabber Ronald Reagan signed the “Law Enforcement Officers Protection Act of 1985”. This law banned armor piercing bullets, but did have some exemptions for sporting purposes. The M855 (Green Tip) AR-15 Ammunition was exempt because at the time the law was written there was no commercially available handguns that could fire the bullet. Times have changed and now AR-15 style handguns are available. The action was proposed by the ATF and is NOT a slippery slope that will lead to an outright ammo ban. In fact, President Obama had nothing to do with it. What the ATF was doing was simply attempting to update regulations based off new products entering the market.
It’s shameful that we can’t have a common sense discussion about guns in America without people going off the deep end into complete confiscation. You want to know what the biggest threat to gun ownership actually is? It’s not Obama, Democrats or the ATF, it is perpetual, increasing, unchecked gun deaths. Eventually the public will demand change and the restrictions will probably be far more stringent than a simple armor piercing bullet ban. If you want to continued access to guns, then you had better come up with a way to keep guns out the hands of dangerous people and dangerous weapons off the streets.
By Rat_Smeller, March 18, 2015 @ 10:40 AM
@MaryPoppins - restricting gun and ammo ownership to the law-abiding public will get guns and ammo out of the hands of the bad-guys because we all know that criminals get their guns and ammo legally. We all know that criminals all have their class III FFL, that’s how they got their fully automatic “machine guns” that they use in the commission of their crimes. Sarcasm laid on with a trowel - in case you missed.
By worthingtonman, March 18, 2015 @ 8:45 PM
@marypoppins
With close to 60% of the gun deaths in the United States being suicide, do you think maybe our efforts would be better suited to reducing suicides. It is like the old thought people have of putting nets under bridges to stop jumpers. If they can’t jump there,?they are going to jump somewhere else. mental Health is by far the biggest problem. You take away suicide/ death of criminals by cops/ and death of criminals in self defense shootings the numbers are quite low. Make all the gun laws you want, criminals will get guns no matter the law. People can make their own specialized ammo. There are so many guns already, we should focus on the cause. mental health and criminal activity.
By Jack Bennett, March 19, 2015 @ 6:40 AM
A follow-on note to the commentary “How is Your Ammo Supply”
Thanks to so many people contacting the ATF, the sale of the #:855 – green-tip 5.56 ammunition will continue. Additionally 40 US Senators have signed a letter notifying the ATF of their concerns over this type of unilateral actions that are against public law and that they intend to have the Bureau disbanded with their duties shifted to other departments. Together we stand.
IN DEFENSE OF LIBERTY
By blutoblutarsky, March 19, 2015 @ 1:11 PM
Jack- Why are the “ATF actions” against public law and they must be disbanded, but you have no concerns about the 47 senators who committed an act of treason?
I read that Tom Cotton warned everyone that Iran already has control of Tehran without a nuclear weapon. It’s completely shocking that someone would control their own capital lol
By jorn jensen, March 19, 2015 @ 11:37 PM
So, bluto, you’re not a liberal, huh?
We have the weakest president in history and these 47 senators have to tell the bad guys that they’ll get their asses kicked if they don’t get in-line. These 47 senators are true heroes, true patriots.
Jack is correct in this presentation. Jerry6 says that Obama hasn’t taken any of his 6 guns, yet. Some German citizens thought the same thing before they were dis-armed and loaded into railcars.
We all have choices - do nothing, be reactive, or be pro-active. If one presents a pro-active stance, the naysayers will say fear-mongering.
I stand with Jack - I’m pro-active.
By jorn jensen, March 19, 2015 @ 11:42 PM
Sorry, correction - that’s 8 guns, not 6 guns. If there hadn’t been an NRA, jerry6, your 8 guns would be long gone. How simple can people be?
By scott_starr, March 20, 2015 @ 4:00 PM
Bluto
The Senators who wrote the letter to Iran, did not commit treason.
Every fact check organization,said that the letter was correct in terms of the law. It may have been contrary to protocol, but there was nothing illegal or treasonous about the letter.
By jorn jensen, March 20, 2015 @ 10:53 PM
Denny, what do you have to say about the letter that the 47 senators wrote to Iran?
By mad-2010, March 21, 2015 @ 12:48 AM
The Logan Act prohibits any “Private correspondence with foreign governments” and reads; “Any citizen of the United States, wherever he may be, who, without authority of the United States, directly or indirectly commences or carries on any correspondence or intercourse with any foreign government or any officer or agent thereof, with intent to influence the measures or conduct of any foreign government or of any officer or agent thereof, in relation to any disputes or controversies with the United States, or to defeat the measures of the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both.” The Supreme Court ruled that Congress cannot and should not conduct foreign affairs; that power rests in the Executive Branch exclusively.
By mad-2010, March 21, 2015 @ 10:13 AM
“Jerry6 says that Obama hasn’t taken any of his 6 guns, yet. Some German citizens thought the same thing before they were dis-armed and loaded into railcars.” What a Statement Jensen!! Come-on.. LOL
By mad-2010, March 21, 2015 @ 4:28 PM
Jensen… If you right-wing guys think the same old stuff this Obstructionist Congress puts out is going to carry the Day, you are Flat-Out wrong. With a GOP approval rate of 16% or less going into the 4th month of 2015 you better get it together quick! Add to all the GOP Fun and Games the Fact that the Repubs still don’t have the Demographics to pull off the win in the 2016 Presidential Election. LOL
By scott_starr, March 22, 2015 @ 6:14 PM
Mad:
Obvious that you know nothing of the Logan Act.
1. It was not a private correspondance, it was a letter to the editor. ( hence not covered under the Logan Act)
2. Logan Act prohibits Private Citizens from negotiating with foreign governments.
The letter was not a “negotiation”, unless that is you consider a negotatiion to be a promise to recind another negotiation.
So, if what they did was treason, the so was John Kerry meeting with Daniel Ortega or Nacny Pelosi going to Syria to negotiate with Assad. I can name several more where Democrats actually negotiated with foreign leaders.
Please stop spouting Rachel Maddow and actually read and research something.
Keep slinging stuff and something will eventually stick…
By scott_starr, March 22, 2015 @ 6:27 PM
Here is the Department of State’s 1975 interpretation of the “intent” of the Logan Act. McGovern and Sparkman tried to negotiate with Cuba.
The clear intent of this provision [Logan Act] is to prohibit unauthorized persons from intervening in disputes between the United States and foreign governments. Nothing in section 953 [Logan Act], however, would appear to restrict members of the Congress from engaging in discussions with foreign officials in pursuance of their legislative duties under the Constitution. In the case of Senators McGovern and Sparkman the executive branch, although it did not in any way encourage the Senators to go to Cuba, was fully informed of the nature and purpose of their visit, and had validated their passports for travel to that country.
By worthingtonman, March 22, 2015 @ 10:05 PM
Where was the Liberal outrage when Nancy Pelosi, John Kerry and others violated the Logan Act? Oh that is right, these things only matter when Republicans do it. Also, the republicans did not seem to have trouble taking over the Senate and increasing their numbers even more in the house. And if all the Dems have to offer is The scandalous Clintons, then I say game on.
By mad-2010, March 23, 2015 @ 5:55 AM
I don’t know who Rachel Maddow is? I will say this again: If you right-wing guys think the same old stuff this Obstructionist Congress puts out is going to carry the Day, you are Flat-Out wrong. With a GOP approval rate of 16% or less going into the 4th month of 2015 you better get it together quick! Add to all the GOP Fun and Games the Fact that the Repubs still don’t have the Demographics to pull off the win in the 2016 Presidential Election. LOL
By mad-2010, March 23, 2015 @ 6:34 AM
Flip-Flop it any way you want, it all comes down to dirty politics meant to under-mind the President of the United States. There Will Be No Game On! You just don’t have the Demographics, how hard is that to understand? LOL By the time the GOP get done making the wrong people mad, they probably will not have the base to win in 2016. So, Just Face it! You got most of the minorities mad at you Repubs! Latino’s, Blacks, Gays ect. Come-On Guys it Does Not Look Good! And no one to blame but yourselves! LOL
By mad-2010, March 23, 2015 @ 6:47 AM
“Also, the republicans did not seem to have trouble taking over the Senate and increasing their numbers even more in the house.” Guess what: That doesn’t mean Jack when it comes to the Presidential Election, try again! LOL
By jorn jensen, March 23, 2015 @ 7:32 AM
Good job Scott_Starr and worthingtonman. Historical fact is difficult for liberals to debate, therefore, they’d rather re-write history and then whine about it.
By blutoblutarsky, March 23, 2015 @ 12:37 PM
Scott- Iran addressed it as if it were sent directly to them. That is a problem.
When you have a group that does something like that in a situation this serious and then claims it was a joke or the letter was never physically mailed (editorial), that is a problem. Most folks don’t sign editorials.
I agree, it toes the line of what is legal or illegal, but neverless… it is a problem.
Are you personally ok with what they did or do you think it was wrong? Essentially, this has given Iran more of an edge in the nuclear talks.
By blutoblutarsky, March 23, 2015 @ 1:02 PM
My comment from a few days ago directed towards Jack was questioning why he thought the ATF actions were against public law and I was using the Iran letter as a comparison (I’m assuming Jack is ok with the fact they sent it).
By mad-2010, March 23, 2015 @ 3:09 PM
I have looked and looked really hard and read & researched. I just can’t find anything of Real Substance for you Repubs to hang your hats on!! LOL Maybe you can get up another Government Shut-Down!! LOL
By mad-2010, March 23, 2015 @ 6:15 PM
The US has five equal partners in the negotiations,if the other governments approve the treaty it doesn’t much matter what happens in the Senate. Yes or No?
By scott_starr, March 23, 2015 @ 7:22 PM
Bluto:
A negotiation is a discussion with the goal of reaching an agreement.
The letter sent by the Senators had NO intention of reaching an agreement. rather it was a letter saying you can make an agreement, but it’s possible that it will not be in force in 2 years.
As far as I know most people sign editorials. ( look at any letter to the editor).
As far as the letter giving Iran an edge in the Nuclear talks, I disagree. The Republicans handed Obama a great opportunity to actually do something and make a deal with Iran. ( deal with me now or deal with them later), a classic tactic to get Iran to give up something, unfortunately Obama and Kerry gave Iran everything.
Finally no one who signed the letter said it was a “joke”, the Democrat blogs and news casts said there were allegedly “unnamed Republican sources” who said the letter was “light hearted”, not what I consider unbiased sources.
By mad-2010, March 24, 2015 @ 6:26 AM
The GOP has offered some Canadian Bacon for breakfast. LOL Don’t worry Guys I’m still hunting for something to hang your hats on!! LOL
Look on the bright side guys at least the GOP Congress still has their 1,000.00 a month car allowance, what a perk! LOL
By blutoblutarsky, March 25, 2015 @ 12:54 PM
Scott- I missed the part where you answered my question whether you thought this was right or wrong to break protocol?
Why show how partisan we are by sending a letter that has no real purpose or value other than trying to undermine another potential agreement?
People don’t typically hand sign editorials (especially group editorials). Sorry, I’ll be more clear next time.
The sources I saw didn’t use the term unnamed. They said the sources were GOP aides. Regardless, the majority of the people on this planet outside of the US had a good laugh at our expense over the whole thing.
By mad-2010, March 26, 2015 @ 8:11 AM
JJ…. “Historical fact is difficult for liberals to debate, therefore, they’d rather re-write history” Jensen, try this Historical Fact: The Repubs Lost The Last 2 Presidential Election and we aren’t crying about it, are we?
By scott_starr, March 26, 2015 @ 8:21 PM
Bluto
First, it doesn’t matter what I think, if I’m for it then I will be called a partisan, if I’m against it then it will be twisted in some way that I agree with the agreement.
I don’t know anyone with the name GOP Aide. Unless their names is given it is an unnamed source.( unless the person can be identified by their title, which GOP aide is fairly broad).
You are really splitting hairs with the hand signing comment.
So, how can Anyone express displeasure at an agreement, which some may find disagreeable when terms of said agreement are not being debated? Are you saying that an agreement among the USA and nations can be unilaterally negotiated and must be considered law without approval of the Senate?
I thought perhaps you were reasonable, I guess I was wrong.
I will say that as a general rule I am against sanctions, and am agreeable to negotiate with any nation that will follow the agreement and is willing to engage in a serious manner.
By jorn jensen, March 27, 2015 @ 8:31 AM
mad - You should be crying about winning the last two elections. One example - the Bergdahl ‘deal’. Are you proud of your president for pulling off that deal? Those 5 bad guys would thank you and slit your throat in a second. No news here - just move along…..
By blutoblutarsky, March 27, 2015 @ 3:37 PM
Scott- You had no problem telling me your thoughts on every other aspect of this conversation. Why hold back on just that?
You’re missing my point entirely. In these types of negotiations there should be one message being sent. I don’t care who sends it, but we can’t have multiple channels relaying different plans, showing the whole world how divided we are.
Think of it this way. You’re a sales manager and two of your salesman are both engaging the same large account without speaking to one another. Could they be telling the customer two different things? Sure. Is this good for the company? Probably not. You want one unified message being conveyed, correct?
-You have to admit; getting everyone to physically sign an “editorial” and calling it an open letter is meant to garner more attention than one person sending an editorial to the local paper.
By mad-2010, March 28, 2015 @ 3:26 PM
jj… “You should be crying about winning the last two elections.” How Absurd Can You Be! Your statement makes NO Sense….
I’m Proud of the President of the United States of America for putting up with most Obstructionist GOP Congress in the History of this Great and Proud Nation…..
JJ… You can be Proud of the GOP Congress 16% approval rate. Smoke That! LOL
By mad-2010, March 28, 2015 @ 3:51 PM
jj… The House Intelligence Committee: “The report did find that the State Department was unable to protect the facility in eastern Libya where Ambassador Chris Stevens and three others were killed, but also contradicts many of the charges leveled at the Obama administration in the days and years following the attacks.” Here’s some more for you to Smoke Jensen…. LOL
Still not crying, Jensen… LOL
By scott_starr, March 28, 2015 @ 4:14 PM
Bluto:
I clearly explained why I won’t answer your question.
Second, I guess you don’t get the point that before a negotiation begins there has to be some consensus as to why it is being done, especially among the parties who must approve of the negotiation. Obama and Kerry are moving not only unilaterally, but with no direction. Heck even the French don’t want any part of this deal.
Here is the funniest part of this alleged agreement, is that it is not binding under international law. ( specifically so that Obama does not need to get Senate approval).
So we are negotiating a deal, which has no repercussions if violated, and does not achieve the goal of stopping a Nuclear Iran ( it delays it by about 1 year).
By mad-2010, March 28, 2015 @ 7:49 PM
JJ…. Reagan, who violated the Constitution to sell arms to Iran in exchange for hostages. Repubs always forget… Still not crying, Jensen…..
By cartman, March 29, 2015 @ 10:39 AM
Mad,
You are so far out in left field that you are up in the bleachers. In case you didn’t know it, Reagan is no longer in the White House. Sadly, Obama now is. This is today, not the eighties. As far as the Republican congress as obstructionist, where do you get that? What have they obstructed? They seem to be letting Dear Leader do as he pleases. By the way, what is with all the lol’s?
By mad-2010, March 29, 2015 @ 5:35 PM
cartman… Jensen’s post: “Historical fact is difficult for liberals to debate, therefore, they’d rather re-write history and then whine about it.” It’s too bad you can’t keep-up! But then, I understand when it’s you, cartman… LOL
By mad-2010, March 29, 2015 @ 6:10 PM
Cartman… You must have missed the GOP Congress rating of 16%. You do know what that means, right? LOL: means I think you guys are funny most of the time…. Cartman: question what is the President of the United States of America’s approval rating, do you know? Hint: It’s more than 16%.. LOL
By worthingtonman, March 29, 2015 @ 7:43 PM
Reagan was never proven guilty nor charged with any crimes against the constitution. He was not impeached. He was, in the opinion of most historians, one of the three best presidents in U.S History. If you want to talk about one that has violated the law, lets talk about one that has been impeached….The darling of the democrats, Mr. Blue Dress himself…Bill Clinton.
By mad-2010, March 30, 2015 @ 4:45 AM
“In 1998 the Republican-controlled House voted to impeach Clinton. The next year, the Senate voted to acquit Clinton, and he remained in office.” Wman, Do you know what impeached means?
LOL
By mad-2010, March 30, 2015 @ 5:22 AM
Morally Bill Clinton had faults. However, I had no problem with how he ran this Country….
Do you know what acquit means?
By jorn jensen, March 30, 2015 @ 8:17 AM
cartman - mad fell off the bleachers. That’s why all of the laughter. lol
By jerry6, March 30, 2015 @ 8:24 AM
One day on the radio, they were asking people who were the worst presidents we have had. Someone called and said Cheney and Reagan. We all know Cheney ran Bush’s white house. Look to see what the U.S. was like when Bush left office. This country was in an awful mess with two wars that should never have happened and all the money we spent on that mess. If I had a kid killed in one of those wars I would be outraged. If we wouldn’t have taken out Sadam, Isis wouldn’t be fighting because he kept them under control over there. He was a tyrant but at least we wouldn’t be dealing with this now. I don’t agree with everything that Obama has done but the economy is doing good no matter what the conservatives say and the Congress has fought everything the democrats have tried to do. The night he was inaugurated, the top republicans went into a room and decided how they were going to destroy Obama. They don’t care about the people only their party.
By jerry6, March 30, 2015 @ 8:28 AM
I am glad Harry Reid retired and now it is time for John McKain and Nancy Pelosi to retire also. I think when you reach 65, it is time to get out of office and living off the tax payers.
By mad-2010, March 30, 2015 @ 10:28 AM
Wman… “Reagan was never proven guilty nor charged with any crimes against the constitution.” One Big Reason for this was all the documents had been destroyed, by who? You tell me… LOL
By blutoblutarsky, March 30, 2015 @ 1:13 PM
Ok Scott- You can tell me, I promise I’ll be nice.
You do realize you’re request of a consensus prior to the negotation and then support of the “non-consensual” actions of those senators makes zero sense.
By mad-2010, March 30, 2015 @ 7:39 PM
JJ.. Your Mudder pushed me because I won’t vote for her Clown son… LOL
By mad-2010, March 30, 2015 @ 7:42 PM
Amen, Jerry6, you got that right….
By jorn jensen, March 30, 2015 @ 9:53 PM
bluto - You’re promising to be nice? Who cares?
By worthingtonman, March 31, 2015 @ 5:09 AM
@mad
I sure do understand what acquittal meant during the Clinton trial. it meant not one democrat was going to vote him guilty even though the evidence was there to find him guilty.
By cartman, March 31, 2015 @ 8:07 AM
The main reason for the low rating of Congress is their willingness to cave to Obama. While Obama’s rating may be good among the “Free Stuff Army,” those of us who have to pay the bills are fed up. Also, while Cheney is not an idiot like Biden, he did not run the Bush administration. The person who answered Cheney was probably just stupid. I wonder if they called into the station on their Obamaphone.
By blutoblutarsky, March 31, 2015 @ 11:14 AM
jorn- “What an ugly thing to say… does this mean we’re not friends anymore? You know jorn if I thought you weren’t my friend, I just don’t think I could bear it.”
FYI- You cared enough to respond to a post not directed towards you. lol
By MaryPoppins, April 1, 2015 @ 1:30 PM
@cartman
There is one big problem with your Obamaphone comment, the Obamaphone doesn’t exist. There is subsidized phone service for the poor, but the program was created under conservative hero Ronald Reagan and further expanded to cell phones under George W. Bush. The program is paid for by telephone companies not through tax revenue. President Obama had nothing to do with it.