Monday News Dump

It’s just another Manic Monday. Wish it were Sunday. That’s my fun day. But since it’s Monday, a news dump:

Governor Cuomo’s numbers continue to be disappointing. But I thought gun control was popular?

The bomb suspects did not have a gun permit. This is a shock to no one, except the AP, apparently. The media has been using the Boston situation to push gun control.

The Washington Post has an excellent rehashing of NRA’s supposed support for expanded background checks in the 1990s. Apparently the NRA floated an alternate proposal from the one the Clinton Administration wanted, which was unacceptable to the Administration. That effectively killed the bill.

Chris Christie seems to be floating his own gun control package. I guess he doesn’t want to be President.

Schumer says that they have foot soldiers everywhere, even though his rally was astroturf.

Bloomberg and OFA organized protests as well, like this one at Richard Burr’s offices in North Carolina, where 20 people showed up. Three times that number showed up to protest Burr’s cloture vote. A protest against Rubio didn’t look much better. A protest against Eric Canter was even more pathetic.

Some Illinois Lawmakers want to carve out a Chicago exception on concealed carry. I’m sure the courts will be fine with constitutional rights changing with geography.

Philadelphia Mayor Nutter accuses us of dancing on the graves of gun violence victims. Somehow I don’t think our nutty mayor has been paying attention to what each side in this debate are saying and doing.

Some guy in New Jersey goes to buy a BB gun and finds out it’s difficult, but yet fails to become educated.

Kathleen Kane says we need more leaders like Pat Toomey. I think we need fewer leaders like Kathleen Kane, myself.

Weapons of war do not belong on America’s streets!

The wannabe illegal Mayor in Florida seems to have lost his race.

Shotgun steaks. I hope they are using lead free primers. I wouldn’t eat that otherwise.

Gun-toting locavores! In Canada!

How Joe Manchin blew it.

Feinstein’s meltdown. She complains NRA money defeats her gun control bills, but doesn’t recognize that Bloomberg alone is keeping parity with the NRA on spending. Where would the gun control movement be without rich busybodies? She’s also attended the Joe Biden School of Self-Defense.

You’ve probably all seen or heard about NBC’s Lawrence O’Donnell blaming the NRA for the Boston bombers being on the loose.

On the Second Amendment and Presidential Anger.

We Can’t Go Back to Sleep

CBS News: 2014 The Next Frontier in the Gun Control Battle:

As Democratic legislators search for a path forward, however, gun advocacy groups are zeroing in on the next phase of their campaign: Getting the gun bill “no” votes voted out of office in 2014.

“You wait until the next November,” warned New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg in remarks on Thursday, of the lawmakers who voted against the Senate legislation. “How are they going to, a year from November when they’re running for election, answer, ‘Why didn’t you do something to stop that, senator? You had it in your power to do it, and you voted to keep the killing going.’ That can’t be good politics. It just can’t be.”

It is unfortunate, but we will need every warm body to act as a counterweight to Bloomberg’s deep pockets. They do have some things going against them. For one, most of the “no” votes on Manchin-Toomey come from states where Bloomberg’s ads will probably help the incumbent more than hurt them. Secondly, for the Democrat “no” votes, there are no good choices for Bloomberg. If you primary Mark Pryor with a gun control supporter, you’ll likely throw the election to the Republican, who will be just as pro-gun as Pryor. In many of these states, there really is no solution set that results in a gun control supporter winning a statewide election. The dynamic will be different in Congressional races, but Congress is not likely to have a vote, and the leadership isn’t vulnerable. Boehner’s district is R+14, and hasn’t elected a Democrat to Congress since 1936. Cantor’s district in Virginia hasn’t sent a Democrat to Congress since 1968, and Cook rates it R+11. This is not to say Bloomberg is not a factor, there will be plenty of politicians who will be tempted to run from us because of the money Bloomberg can pump into a race. Whether they do or not is going to depend on all of us.

More Reactions from the Senate Vote

Politico: How the NRA won.

When the Senate voted down a bipartisan bill to expand background checks Wednesday, it was a stark reminder that big money groups are still no match for the NRA’s ability to get what it wants by playing retail politics — or delivering payback.

The big money, at this point in the gun control debate, is largely one billionaire mogul. Looks like Toomey got his 30 pieces of silver, in the form of backing from Bloomberg. Unfortunately, without our votes, he’s toast.

Wall Street Journal: Gabby Giffords Poisons the Well. “Giffords’s 900-word jeremiad should be included in every textbook of logic and political rhetoric, so rife is it with examples of fallacious reasoning and demagogic appeals.”

Tom Maguire: “So, does Obama’s common sense tell him we need a national pressure cooker registry with background checks required prior to purchase?” No one needs a pressure cooker. There are plenty of other ways to cook your food.

The Wall Street Journal again: The Gun Rights Consensus. “Mr. Obama was routed this week because he tried to govern from the left and thus played into the hands of the NRA. If the Newtown families want someone to blame, they can start with the President.”

Adolphus Busch IV resigns from the NRA. Well, don’t let the door hit you in the ass on the way out. The NRA is better off without this guy as a member. [UPDATE: Apparently the wrong Busch].

h/t to Instapundit for some of these links.

More Opinions on the Gun Control Failure

Professor Adam Winkler has a pretty good analysis. Let me quote a bit:

Focusing on assault weapons played right into the hands of the NRA, which has for years been saying that Obama wanted to ban guns. Gun control advocates ridiculed that idea—then proposed to ban the most popular rifle in America.

Gun control advocates have told me the assault weapons ban was intended to be a bargaining chip. Ask for the moon, settle for less—in this case, universal background checks. If that was the strategy, it backfired.

This is all stuff I didn’t want to talk about before a vote, because you don’t interrupt your enemy when he is in the middle of making a mistake. This was a ridiculous strategy, because by putting gun and magazine bans on the table, it made it possible to wake up millions of gun owners and getting them to paying attention. Traffic on this blog has been at record levels the past several months, even on search traffic for specific bills.

The Democrats then poisoned their own well even when it came to things like expanded background checks, by putting forth Schumer’s ridiculous language that moved to cover even temporary transfers, making handing a gun to someone in the wrong circumstances a 5 year federal felony. Now the meme is out there in the heads of a lot of gun owners “When they talk about background checks, that’s not what the bill is really about.” Those of you who are regulars, and not new to these parts, have known that for some time. But now we’ve educated a lot of people. The next time they come at us, we’ll have more allies than we did before.

Megan McArdle has more on Winkler’s piece, including why the “asking for the moon” strategy was never going to work:

In fact, by demanding too much, you can often worsen the chances for a deal.  That’s why negotiators typically start off with a price that’s outside the [Zone of Possible Agreement], but not so far outside that you shut down negotiations.

Imagine our car dealer posted a price of $40,000 on the car.  Would that get him closer to the full $18,000 he’d ideally like to collect from you?  Hardly.  You’d take one look at that absurd pricetag, decide he was an idiot, and take your business elsewhere.  Similarly, if you kept insisting that you only wanted to pay $2,000 for the car, the salesman would probably quickly decide that you weren’t serious, so it wasn’t worth wasting his time on a negotiation.

Arguably, that’s what happened to gun control…

Read the whole thing. In truth, if they had started off with something like Manchin-Toomey, then fallen back to something like the Coburn proposal, with some of our preferred agenda items thrown in to sweeten the deal, I’m not sure we would have been able to rally enough opposition to defeat it. The problem is, they’ve always approached negotiation from the standpoint of the negotiation being how much they will take away from us. That’s no longer political reality. The question is whether the gun control movement accepts it.

Manchin on Failed Gun Control Effort

The Senator from West Virginia notes:

“If people want to blame, I guess you blame me,” Manchin told reporters at a Wall Street Journal breakfast. “I just never knew how hard it was to get the facts out. I think there is a lot more I can do to get the facts out.”

Getting the facts out isn’t the part that’s hard. It’s writing a bill that actually does what you say it does that’s hard. Every I must be dotted and every T must be crossed. Gun owners have zero faith in “just trust us,” or how certain statutory language is going to be interpreted by those who enforce the laws, or how it’s going to be interpreted by the Courts. Manchin-Toomey was a sloppy bill, no matter how you look at it. The unfortunate thing for us is that Manchin-Toomey will be the basis of the next attack as soon as they have a pretext.

“His universal base bill is gone. That bill’s gone,” Manchin said. He said that if Manchin-Toomey had appeared shortly after the Newtown shooting, it would have passed easily.

The President and his allies completely poisoned the well on this issue, by coming at us with everything and the kitchen sink. They insulted us, dismissed our concerns, and tried to screw us in every way their warped minds could dream up. Gun owners woke up like I haven’t seen since I’ve been involved in this issue. I think he’s right. If they had been politically saavy and understood where the center of this issue had really moved to, I’m not sure we could have beat a Toomey-Manchin like bill out of the gate. What we have to be cognizant of is that they will not make that mistake again.

Pelosi on Gun Control

It’s inevitable, according to her:

“It’s a matter of time,” Pelosi said Thursday during a press briefing in the Capitol. “It might be inconceivable to the NRA that this might happen; it’s inevitable to us.”

As soon as they have the next pretext, they will be back standing on the graves of the dead. You can count on that. And next time, they might not make the same mistakes. We have to be vigilant.

Roundup of Reactions

I’ll start off with Joe, who reflects pretty much how I feel:

Yes. It was shameful that so many people put so much effort into attempting to infringe upon a specific enumerated right. This forced millions of other people to put their own effort into stopping that attempt. The entire country, especially the politicians, had important other things to do and we had to take time out to fight the statist scum.

I’ve wasted a lot of time outside the blog fighting this. I’ll keep up the fight for as long as necessary, but I honestly have better things to do with my time. Thanks, Mr. President, you asshole.

Jacob notes the anti-gun meltdown. Their tears are sweet.

Investors Business Daily: Exploiting the Families of Sandy Hook Victims Backfires.

Instapundit: Anger has always been their hallmark. Also: “This sort of politics may be emotionally satisfying to Obama’s base, but Obama’s base wasn’t big enough to pass the bill.”

Robb: A brief respite. They will be back, you can count on it.

Tam: “Team Gun Control is positively frothing on Facebook. If I had a car that ran on hippie tears, I’d be set for years.”

SayUncle points to another sad clown.

Dave Hardy has some headlines, notes an amusing Christian Science Monitor headline from three days ago. Also, “But no, the antigunners couldn’t win, even going for a very small victory and paying a very big price, and with the media cheering section in full play and the Executive applying every tool it had. (For those not experienced in DC, that includes private offers of big grants and pork to legislators, and denial of favors to those who oppose).

Krauthammer thinks the emotional blackmail didn’t help their case.

Miguel is feeling the love, and notes Obama is a sore loser.

The responses of the increasingly irrelevant old-line gun prohibitionists.

Obama and OFA already planning for round two. One thing we can all be proud of is that we’ve shown we can beat Obama’s machine.

Senate Votes Today

We’ll cover the one amendment vote. Blumenthal is up on the stage emotionally blackmailing the Senate and American public by standing on the graves of dead children. He’s also saying they won’t give up. They will keep pushing for gun control laws that would have done nothing to prevent Newtown. He’s thanking a lot of people for their efforts, but he pretty clearly is acting like he’s been beaten. We have to keep beating these people. Now is not the time to go back to sleep.

Vote on the Barrasso Amendment

This is the amendment that would make information private. Looks like a carrot and stick approach with federal funding. From Thomas.gov: “To withhold 5 percent of Community Oriented Policing Services program Federal funding from States and local governments that release sensitive and confidential information on law-abiding gun owners and victims of domestic violence.”

Wow, Pat Leahy is suddenly a federalist.

Barrassoo Amendment, by 67-30, is Agreed To

Vote on the Harkin Amendment

Tom Harkin (D-IA) is speaking for his amendment, noting it would reauthorize certain Department of Education programs in regards to mental health services, intervention, and suicide prevention.

Lamar Alexander (R-TN) notes that this bill was unanimous in committee, and urges a yes vote.

Harkin Amendment, by 95-2, is Agreed To

The Senate is now in recess. This concludes our coverage. I should note that I don’t think either of these amendments were replacement amendments, meaning they are still attached to a gun control bill that doesn’t really have a chance of passing.

Some of the Interesting Votes of the Day

After a shared bottle of sparkling wine, a nice dinner of salmon with lime butter, and another shared bottle of white wine just for giggles, I’m ready to look at the votes in the roll call records. I said earlier that I found the 6 vote disparity on the gun ban and the magazine ban to be the most interesting. Those had pretty much the same universal opposition on the ground, so why would they not have nearly the same vote tallies?

These Senators voted against the gun ban, but voted to ban the magazines that are commonly used with those guns and so many more models:

Mike Bennet (D-CO)
Martin Heinrich (D-NM)
Tim Johnson (D-SD)
Angus King (I-ME)
Mark Udall (D-CO)
Tom Udall (D-NM)

Johnson has already announced his retirement, so this was a giant “screw you” to South Dakota gun owners. In my opinion, South Dakota gun owners need to punish his party for his vote severely in 2014. I realize that the party could put up a person with a pretty pro-gun record. But, unless the Republicans put up a nominee with an anti-gun record, I would still suggest punishing the party in order to remind them not to screw with the gun vote. In fact, I would suggest that if the Dems do put up a pro-gun candidate, gun owners should go out of the their way to contact that person and the local party officials to let them know that you’re really sorry, but you can’t support their guy/gal after the betrayal by Johnson. Ruin his political brand and the association with gun control, even if he never plans on running again. It will show that not only will you punish those who vote against your rights, you’ll hold the state party accountable for the votes.

In Colorado, Bennett isn’t up until 2016. However, the degree to which gun owners have been screwed should motivate them to stay active until then. It would be quite nice to send him back home. His 2010 election was less than a 2 point race, and he couldn’t break 50% as the winner. However, the his colleague Mark Udall is up first in 2014. Unfortunately, he had much bigger numbers on the board during his last race, winning a 10 point victory. It’s clear that one goal of passing a magazine ban in Colorado was to give political cover to both of the senators to vote for federal bans. They simply proved what we warned gun owners about – they’ll tell you they are only after the magazines that hold more than 15 rounds, then they’ll say 10 rounds, and next it will be 7 before it drops again. So, Colorado gun owners, get to work to send a message to Udall. If you can do it through a direct election loss, awesome. If not, focus your efforts on the state-level Democrats you can target.

For New Mexico gun owners, you have your own Udall on the ballot in 2014. Tom Udall is up, but I’m not sure how likely he is to beat. I don’t really know what to suggest to local gun owners there based on the 2008 results. On one hand, there’s a much better chance of sending him packing from DC in an off-year. On the other, he won by nearly 23 points. That was a better performance than Obama in the same year. Local folks are free to give their thoughts on any potential electoral punishment on that front. Unfortunately, his colleague, Heinrich was just elected and won’t be up again until 2018.

King from Maine isn’t up until 2018, so I’m not sure there’s much that can be done on that front for the state’s gun owners. I guess the best advice would be to start “investing” in pro-gun potential challengers. Give money when you can and help out with elections between now and then. The best long-term strategy in that situation is to make sure there are plenty of viable pro-2A candidates to choose from by the time it someone needs to declare. Not even Susan Collins felt the need to vote for a ban, and she’s actually on the ballot in a blue state in the next election.

Thanks to All Who Did Something

Many thanks to all of you who called, wrote, or otherwise got involved in this fight. If you had told me back at the beginning of the year we’d be where we are right now, I’m not sure I would have believed you. I thought we were going to have to bend over and take something. Also, a big thanks to Bitter, for taking over covering the Senate when I was unable to. That coverage was a joint effort, even if I started the post, and I could not have done all that on my own.

While we are not out of the woods yes, I think we can all give ourselves a big pat on the back for winning round one. They will be back for more, and there will be 2014, which will be critical. We cannot allow the gun community to return to their slumber. The gun rights machine is fired up and engaged, and it’s important to keep everyone involved so that we can not only push our opponents back, as we have done today, but drive them to political extinction. We came very close, once again, to achieving National Reciprocity in the Senate. We won today because millions of gun owners woke up and did something. Let’s hope we can keep that up.

No vote on either gun bans or magazine bans cracked a bare majority of a Democratically controlled Senate, with the full weight of the White House and Bloomberg driving the anti-gun effort. We have succeeded in moving the center of this issue to the point where gun bans are practically a third rail. That is a great victory.

Now if you’ll excuse me, I need to go get a nice bottle of champagne to celebrate with over dinner. I think that’s worth celebrating.