search
top

McCain Sleight on Assault Weapons

Apparently McCain voted for the eventual passage of the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act after it had the assault weapons language attached to it.  I hadn’t seen that one before.  I knew he voted against the assault weapons ban amendment, but because he managed to get his gun show language on the bill, he voted for its eventual passage.  I guess his gun show bill was important enough to him to overcome his principles on assault weapons.

This is another reason to not be excited about McCain, but as I said in the comments, I have to play the cards that came out of the deck, and it’s a crap hand.  I’ll take the guy who’s with me half the time to the guy who will never be with me.  Sure, there is a point where even I’m going to stay home, or vote third party, but McCain doesn’t quite get there for me (though, he’s precipitously close — his veep choice is important)

Remember folks, we got 5-4 on a .38 revolver.  If we want that to be the extent of the right recognized by the courts, letting Obama remake the federal courts is a great way to get there.  McCain might nominate bad judges too, but he might get some good ones.  His selection committee has a lot of quality conservative legal minds on it, and I have a lot more faith that we’ll get better judges out of McCain than Obama, and to me, that’s the most important thing this time around on the domestic front.

9 Responses to “McCain Sleight on Assault Weapons”

  1. Mad Saint Jack says:

    If Obama replaces a liberal judge with a liberal judge not much will change. If McCain replaces a liberal judge with a halfway decent conservative that could change a great deal.

  2. Sebastian says:

    Stevens and Ginsburg are likely stepping down during the next presidency. It would be very beneficial for us if there’s at least half a chance of getting someone reasonably conservative. Hell, I’ll even take a little liberal, as long as they are at least grounded in some kind of fealty to the actual law and constitution.

    The disaster would be if Obama wins, and Kennedy or Scalia die or step down. Neither of which is out of the question, as they will be eighty by the time the next president comes to office.

  3. Robert says:

    Every year I go to the National Matches at Camp Perry I think it might be the last time they allow them to happen.

  4. Harold says:

    Again, only a “moderate” squish would uphold McCain-Fiengold and any further freedom of speech restrictions McCain would like to enact, and to believe that such a person would likely uphold Heller is fatuous. Maybe yes, Kennedy did join the majority, but how many compromises did he force on the rest???

    Republicans are about 50-50 on good judges, but I don’t expect John “Alito is too conservative” McCain to be as good. Anyone want to bet that O’Conner (who Alito replaced) would have joined Heller? Maybe yes, maybe no, but something she did previously fairly strongly suggests no.

    – Harold

  5. Sebastian says:

    My money is on O’Conner not voting with us. That’s more than just a gut instinct, as I have some good information on that count. But Obama has a roughly 0% chance of nominating a decent justice who will follow the constitution. McCain I think has a half chance. His nominating committee is filled with people who will find the kind of legal minds we’ll like. McCain is quirky. It’s going to be unlikely he’ll find federal judges similar to his views, so he’ll have to make trade offs. The politics of the situation means his trade offs are more likely to be in our favor.

  6. the one who knew says:

    I hate to break the news, but the president does not have the power to dictate who will be a supreme court judge. The president may suggest who the administration would like to be judge, but it is still up to congress to give the up or down vote. Remember how the dems were kicking and screaming during the entire process for Alito and Co? And that was when the dems were in the minority. As it looks now, the dems will enjoy a sizable majority coming this November and ANYTHING that McCain would want to do, should he become president, would be stonewalled. Unless, of course, it fits the dems agenda. The only difference would be that Republicans would get blamed for all the screw-ups. People in America don’t understand how our Republic is set up to function. People think that the president in the US has ultimate power. Gas price too high, its Bush’s fault, Katrina response too slow, Bush’s fault, mortgage crisis- Bush’s fault. IF McCain becomes president, the Republican party might as well pack up. The dem controlled congress will screw up this country like never before, and the Republicans are going to get blamed, because all Jo Blow on the street knows about is who is president. To make matters worse, McCain has a track record of “working” with dems. He will through us under the bus in the blink of an eye. On the other hand, if BHO becomes president, the dems in congress will be much more conscience on what kind of policies they pursue. They will no longer be able to hide the fact that they ARE controlling things. Half of the house is up for re-election every 2 years, there are a lot of blue dog democrats who do not want to be bothered with a gun bill. If they do, there is always 2010, only that time the republicans would have some ammo to use, just like in 1994. With McCain, well, we would not have that chance…

  7. Sebastian says:

    So you’re suggesting that we put Obama in office so when the country goes to shit, the Democrats get blamed for it? Sounds like a great strategy to me! And how well did the Republican Revolution work after 1994?

  8. Harold says:

    Sebastian: I take your points, and you are clearly looking at this more closely than I. I’d guess less than a half chance, but e.g. it doesn’t sound like McCain would be able to apply an overt “McCain-Feingold” litmus test to a nominee (who would put up with that?). Although as noted by “the one who knew” he’ll have to get them past a Democratic Senate, although Reagan got us Scalia and GHW Bush Thomas through as I remember Democratic Senates.

    Hmmm, the current Democratic Congress is significantly less popular than Bush (single digits, lowest ever recorded), although there’s always the paradox that people dislike the whole but like their own Congresscritters.

    We’ll have to see; I have a very strong reason to vote “anyone but Obama” (he wants to prosecute members of the Bush administration, which is a sure path to civil war), so I’ll take whatever else I can get from McCain. Especially since I can remember Jimmy Carter and the fallout we’re still living with from his one term.

  9. Mikee says:

    During the Texas primary, McCain produced a recorded phone message in which he promised (not indicated, but “promised”) to nominate to the Supreme Court judges like Alito and Scalia (named in that order).

    For what it is worth, we here in Texas plan to insist he keep that promise.

Trackbacks/Pingbacks

  1. SayUncle » McCain and gun bans - [...] like he wanted his gun bill enough to vote to renew the ban on weapons that look like assault…
top