The Manchin-Toomey amendment failed in the U.S. Senate on April 17th, 2013, with a vote of 54 yeas and 46 nays. The Commander in Chief subsequently gathered the bill’s supporters and summoned the media to the Rose Garden for a vicious tongue-lashing. With a crying Vice President in tow, President Obama blasted the bill’s opponents as anti-democratic obstructionists and excoriated the 60-vote rule as ‘an abuse of procedure’ which must be abolished for the sake of all that we hold sacred. But you probably didn’t hear that a pro-gun bill failed in the U.S. Senate yesterday, drawing 56 yeas and 43 nays. Where is the President’s wrath now? Whither Joe Biden’s bitter tears? . . .
Senator Tom Coburn’s bill would have eliminated restrictions on firearms possession and use on the 12 million acres of land administered by the U.S. Army Corps Of Engineers. It got more support than any of the gun control bills that died so spectacularly on April 17th. Eleven Democrats crossed the aisle to vote for it. Joe Manchin and Pat Toomey both voted for it. But it didn’t get 60 votes it needed, so it failed. Them’s the rules.
The United States Senate is a mysterious place, where decorum and tradition (not just partisanship) are engineered to prevent hasty action and restrain the tyranny of the majority. Sometimes the 60-vote rule is a Godsend and sometimes it’s a pain in the ass, depending on what you think of the bills under consideration.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fl5Z-x_K72Q
But after President Obama’s unseemly Rose Garden foot-stomping, any semblance of intellectual honesty would require that he speak up in favor of this bill also. After all, it was only blocked by “Senate obstructionists” who “abused Senate procedures” to thwart the will of the people.
But he only gets pissed when it’s his will that’s thwarted, and his agenda derailed. Did anyone expect otherwise?
No surprise.
To be fair, Ted Cruz did the EXACT same thing in his speech at the NRA meetings. He talked/bragged about using a filibuster to prevent this legislation from passing, and then like five minutes later spoke negatively about the Dems doing the same thing to his bill(s). Cheers for the first one and boos from the audience for the second.
What do you expect? Both sides play the same games and, at the same time, lambaste the other side for doing it.
I’m guessing that Cruz disagreed with the Democrats on substance.
Obama didn’t say anything about substance; he blasted Congress for using procedural tricks – e.g., requiring 60 votes. He spoke as if he were against doing such a thing in any situation. He always wants to present himself as noble and objective and above it all while at the same time being more partisan than anyone. I’m not against being partisan, but I object to his posing as if he’s non-partisan. It’s a crock, and a lie, and completely condescending.
To be fair, Ted Cruz cares about the 2A and BHO doesn’t.
Ha! Yes, that sums it up perfectly.
One can be right, and still be a hypocrite at the same time.
Where does this 90% TRASH come from..
How many “Children” of parents were KILLED in Bengazy..Mr Pres
Erick Holder (Fast & Furious) How many did those Guns Kill…
The President himself can’t pass a Background check for the Job He holds.
i demand a simple up or down vote on national concealed carry!
for the children(TM)
maybe in 2014…
CCW reciprocity received 57 votes in favor, which is more than any “common sense” gun law received.
The gungrabbers have one thing going for them that we do not, namely the deification of that lying b@stard in the WH by the media. If we had any media support to speak of, gungrabbing would be dead and buried.
Absolutely correct on all counts!
This will continue as long as that viper can convince Americans that no matter what he does, he has the moral high ground,
How long is that? Benghazi may hold some answers. They will need a distraction. A really horrible school shooting will fit very nicely into their plans.
But there’s already a dividend from the hearings: the good ship Hillary is no long fit to sail into presidential waters. And THAT’S a happy thing.
WB, we’re not there yet. If there’s anyone that the MSM loves as much as the Magic Man, it’s that old battleaxe, Hillary. And women love her because she has two X chromosomes and no pen1s.
Are you sure about the penis? No one has ever seen her naked, not even Bill. Wait, especially Bill.
Hahahaha watching biden in the background frowning I realized he looks like jeff dunhams dummy walter. If only he was sitting on jeff’s lap with jeff’s hand up his ass would we hear something intelligent or atleast funny come out of his mouth.
Haha, I just noticed that too wow.
Good post, thanks. Obama is like most politicians though possibly even less intellectually honest which is already an oxymoron concept to consider. I’d prefer keeping the 60-40 voting rule to help prevent hasty rule by a mob which has the momentary majority.
Abolish the 60 vote rule in the name of the sacred? Sounds like the Chicago messiah is preaching his new Progressive Religion to the masses of sheeple. All we need to hear is for Obummer to start warning us about the chickens coming home to roost.
By all means abolish it. Then replace it with a 70-30 rule to make sure it even less crap passes through that place.
I love it. Heinlein proposed adding a fourth branch of government, whose entire job would be to repeal laws. The only problem would likely be burnout; they’d have hundreds of years’ work ahead of them.
Great post.
This is the sort of obvious point that every journalist in the country should be writing about to show the administration’s hypocrisy. But, of course, they all consider it their duty to conceal the facts rather than report them.
Journalist? What’s that?
It’s short for “paid leftist propagandist.”
Quoth Chris Dumm: “Where’s OUR Rose Garden Sob-Fest?”
Quoth every ex in the world: “If you don’t know, I’m certainly not going to tell you!”
I’m not really into attaching legislation of any sort to other bills on completely unrelated subjects. it’s a major systemic dysfunction in our legislature.
Agreed Gabba. Proposed bill will reduce taxes and improve quality of life for all Americans equally. But an attached bill makes it legal to eat babies. Anyone who votes against this bill is accosted for not wanting to reduce taxes. Silly, unrealistic example, but that’s how it feels sometimes.
Joe Biden was all set to have his happy face on and tell the president “this is a big fvcking deal” when this happened. No ice cream for you Joe.
What hurts the gun grabbers more than anything is that they cannot control the narrative like they could in the 20th Century. The next generation of voters do not pay attention to CNN, MSNBC, Fox, New York Times, Time Magazine and other “old media” voices. YouTube, Facebook and blogs are the “new media” where no one is in control of the narrative and everyone’s voice is heard.
After the Internet achieved critical mass in the late 1990s, no federal gun control legislation has been passed since then. Whether or not you consider that fact coincidence or evidence of the role the Internet and new media plays in preserving our constitutional rights, it’s nevertheless interesting. The historical trends of the public opinion of gun control corresponds to the Internet achieving critical mass in the late 1990s. According to Gallup, in the early 1990s, over 70 percent of Americans believed laws covering the sales of firearms should be made “more strict.” In 2000, that number dropped below 60 percent. In 2008, that number dropped to below 50 percent. 2012 marked the lowest percentage of public opinion for “more strict” laws with public opinion in the low 40s. The only reason public opinion jumped back over 50 percent was because of the Newtown tragedy and it’s very likely that public opinion will again drop below 50 percent before 2014.
It’s hard being a gun grabber in these days of information freedom.
Very interesting point. Never made that connection. I’m not sure whether I agree about the cause and effect you suggest, but it is a thought-provoking coincidence.
Comments are closed.