Author: Sebastian

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.