2014 is Here Now

If you’re like me, you may be seeing Gabby Giffords’s face on nearly advertising-supported website asking for money to fund her PAC. We can also find Joe Scarborough calling on the president to covertly work with a billionaire to buy local elections where the little people don’t vote the way the elites think they should. Then there’s the Brady Campaign telling a political outlet that they will start using their PAC to get involved in elections.

One of these sentences is not like the other.

If you guessed it was the Brady Campaign turning into a campaign operation, give yourself a pat on the back and maybe a Snickers bar for good measure.

On the senators who voted against the bill, Brady Campaign President Dan Gross told PI: “We’re watching them and we’re holding them accountable.” He added, “We’re flooding calls from the American public into their offices.” Brady said the group would look at using its PAC against members of Congress who voted against yesterday’s pro-gun-control amendment. “We are definitely going to be looking at what we can do on an electoral level,” Gross said.

Well, Dan, let’s help you look at what you can do on an electoral level based on the most recent data you filed with the .gov.

BradyPACDonations

Even after Newtown and knowing they would likely need to launch an electoral fight, the Brady Campaign raised a big fat nothing for their PAC in all of 2012. Either Dan Gross is lying to the media about his intentions or he’s grossly incompetent in understanding that their current cash on hand in the PAC isn’t even enough to make one maxed out donation and pay all of the fees they appear to have in maintaining the account annually.

Now, I realize that they may be able to raise money for the PAC this year, so we’ll keep an eye on it. Regardless, I feel like Politico left out key context to the story of their potential involvement by deliberately ignoring the fact that they have raised less than $37k since 2006 (when Paul Helmke took over) and raised absolutely no PAC dollars under the current leadership.

Restrictions on Powder Already Proposed

Joe notes that it didn’t take long. Never let a crisis to go waste and all that. Chris notes that this sounds familiar. Explosives regulations are even dumber than gun control, as an idea, since explosives can be manufactured easily from household items. I made black powder in my basement as a kid. The idea that you can restrict this kind of thing is laughable, but I’m sure control freaks like Lautenberg are serious about it.

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.

Terrorists for Gun Control

Bob Owens has an interesting find about one of the Boston Bombers. Dan Riehl had the Tweet of the night last night:

And Massachusetts, in particular, has been particularly successful at ensuring the only people with firearms were the cops and terrorists. And they want to bring that idea to the rest of America? No thanks.

UPDATE: Bob updated with more information that would appear to indicate the Twitter account is fake.

Russians!

Who would have thunk it? Stayed up last night until 3:30AM, enthralled by the running gun battle with police in Boston.

Well one good thing, I suppose, is that the left were desperate for the bombers to be extremist white guys, and the right were desperate for them to be Muslims. Everybody wins!

OFA’s Post-Vote Call to Action

OFA sponsored a broadcast conference call to supporters of gun control today, and they focused on trying to rally the troops into not admitting defeat. Their strategy really is best summed up as a never-ending campaign for office instead of policy campaigns.

Whereas there was quite a bit of commentary yesterday about the tone of Obama’s speech perhaps being a bit too over-the-top emotionally, OFA was damn proud of the speech that they bragged was “anger and frustration” of a community organizer who will organize us all into doing what he wants. The message was very much framed as action is a personal challenge from Obama and that activists are doing this to serve Obama. It makes me wonder if that is partially in response to the negative feedback OFA initially got when they started using the campaign lists to push for policy & ask for constant donations.*

As for the actual action part, right now their focus is on thanking those who voted for Toomey-Manchin and to start chastising those who did not. They made absolutely no mention whatsoever about any of the other amendment votes, including those that Obama has repeatedly said were on his agenda (the gun ban & magazine ban). They suggested the supporters focus their praise & chastisement on Twitter (mentioned most often), via phone calls (second most frequently mentioned), and through Facebook messages (mentioned only a couple of times).

OFA also said that supporters in states with pro-gun senators “will be given tools” to help them fight for more gun control immediately, but no real mention was made about what those tools will look like. They also indicated that supporters in states where both senators voted for gun control will be asked to shift their focus to those other states. That may work in a campaign strategy when it’s about knocking on doors and making phone calls to show up on one key day, but every time I have contacted a lawmaker’s office, they have asked for at least my zip code before indicating they are remotely concerned about comments.

A key message of the call was to attack NRA for “outright lies” and the supposedly mistaken perception that the gun vote will hold lawmakers accountable while the anti-gun vote will have moved on to different issues. They swear it won’t be like that, and OFA is going to prove the NRA wrong. Well, just to be clear, I’m not getting emails from NRA trying to shift my focus onto immigration reform. I am from OFA. Just sayin’…

They are also promoting some kind of National Day(s) of Action on Friday and Saturday, but they gave no indication what those days of action will look like. There was mention of the importance of the “tone” of these events, but then they promptly followed that with an expectation that messages “scream” over the recent votes. OFA is seeking “swift” and “aggressive” action for the supposed round 2 of this fight. It’s rather funny since they are being warned by their own party not to do this right now.

*For those who complain about NRA requests for donations, you haven’t seen anything compared to OFA. Seriously, imagine if every single call to action to call your lawmakers had a call for money. Every. single. alert. Plus, the standard fundraising pitches that are stand-alone pitches. You think that Obama trying to shame the American people for not voting his way is annoying? Try reading his blatant attempts to shame those who don’t give his favorite policy group more money.

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.