It's the Filibuster Rule Stupid

Picture credit: TPMDC

I'm honestly not sure what the big deal is about four Democratic Senators not voting for the Manchin-Toomey amendment to extend some background checks. Or rather I have no clue why Democrats are so upset about at their own when the real culprit here is the filibuster rule.

Dems had plenty of votes to pass the bill.  Plenty.  Per the Constitution it only requires a simple majority to pass and send bills out of the Senate.  There is no mention of a 60-vote threshold in the entire document.  The 60-vote rule is a relic left over to protect the minority.  It's useless and it's the real reason Dems didn't pass the bill.

Besides, even if the four Democrats pictured above had voted with their Party and not sided with the GOP, the bill would have went no where.  There isn't a chance in the world the House would have picked it up.  In other words, it was never ever going to become law.  So why the frustration with four senators who were clearly voting exactly how the majority of their state wanted them to vote?

Senate Gun Bill Gets Filibustered

Actually two senate gun safety bills go down to filibuster today.  One was  heavily backed by Democrats and the other by Republicans.  Neither could overcome the 60 vote rule.  However, the Democratic bill did get 54 votes, a solid majority.

Reinventing Reagan No. 1832

This is how you deal with your Sainted Leader of all things American when reality doesn't fit your narrative.

Asked about Reagan’s position during an appearance on MSNBC shortly after Obama’s remarks, Erich Pratt of Gun Owners of America, suggested that Reagan only supported greater restrictions because he was senile:

ANDREA MITCHELL (HOST): What’s the problem with registering a gun? If you have a bushmaster, first of all, why would you have one?
PRATT: President Reagan owned an AR-15.
MITCHELL: And he supported gun control. He advocated…
PRATT: In his later years. We have to keep that in account.MITCHELL: In his later years he was almost killed by John Hinckley.
PRATT: But all through his presidency he opposed gun control, that’s my point.

If only supporting gun legislation "in his later years" constitutes 1986 and the prime of his presidency Pratt would be right.  Since it doesn't, Pratt is wrong as anyone has ever been.

As Think Progress noted, Reagan in 1986 signed a law prohibiting the ownership of automatic rifles that were not already subsequently registered prior to that year. Also, as governor, Reagan routinely supported gun legislation including one that mandated a 15-day waiting period before purchasing a handgun.  Both of those pieces of legislation are way more stringent to gun owners than anything President Obama signed today.  And none of it happened "in his later years."  To state, "all through his presidency he opposed gun control," is insanely stupid and completely inaccurate.

Quickies

• Notre Dame's famed linebacker Manti Te'o looks like he has a lot of explaining to do.

• “People did not change their mind much in this election after February, March and April. That’s when those ads went on and we had to define Mitt Romney as what he was, a cold, robotic tax cheat from a polygamy cult."-- Bill Maher.  I'd have to say I do agree with him.  

• Crazy college professor who said it's legitimate to think the Obama administration was behind the Newtown Massacre just might be getting fired.  Not sure why it has taken them this long actually.

• Oh no, Reagan's SG says Obama has used his Executive Orders in a standard way and have been issued in a "benign" mode.  It's a good thing Reagan never supported gun control legislation.  Wait, never mind.  Makes you realize once again there's no way Reagan would win a Republican Primary today.  Not with the idiots controlling his party, no way.

• Didn't Dennis Hastert say that if a Speaker doesn't follow the "Hastert Rule" then they really don't have control over their caucus?  Well, once again John Boehner passes a bill through his chamber without majority GOP support.  It's clear he probably doesn't have control over his caucus.  I'm not saying that's a bad thing. It actually might be the best thing to happen to America this year.  Think about it.

23

President Obama signed 23 Executive Orders today meant to curb gun violence in America.  For reference, here are the Orders and the proposals issued by the administration.

Even with today's 23 EO's, President Obama still has fewer than former President Bush at the same point in his first term.  Bush II = 173, Obama = 167.

But remember, President Obama is the only president since Ike to win more than 51% of the vote two times.  He also currently enjoys a steady 54% approval rating. So this can only mean one thing in the Republican Fantasy World: Obama is the only black president to ever issue an Executive Order and he must be stopped!!

Deep Thought

Got a feeling that I'm not going to agree with any of the Obama administration's new gun proposals.

Not that I'm against gun-control.  I'm not.  I just think gun laws almost always fall into the category of the 'law of unintended consequences.'  Meaning, they have the opposite effect of their intentions.

I find the only reasonable proposal that would work is a buy-back program for all assault rifles and accessories.  Here's why: we can outlaw assault weapons all day long and that will do nothing to get the guns off the streets.  Plus, there is no way the federal government can go collect people's guns at their doorsteps.  We would have a million Waco's all over the country if we tried that.  The only way to get people to get rid of their assault weapons and keep them from getting on the streets and in the hands of people who intend to do harm is to compel them to turn them in for cash payment.

Other than that I have no clue about making effective gun laws.  There are millions of legal assault weapons all across America today.  We can't make people who own them felons.  We can't go take them away from them.  We can't just outlaw them and expect criminals won't eventually get them, and use them.  It's a really bad situation this country finds itself in.