General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsEd Schulz says the Reid capitulation is about guns.
He says Reid bargained with McConnell from a position of weakness due to Reid's need to collect GOP support for gun control laws.
If I understand this, it means that DiFi and Boxer etc. traded their votes on filibuster for some GOP support for DiFi's weapons bill.
Dirty sausage making.
BainsBane
(53,012 posts)and how would Schultz know?
grasswire
(50,130 posts)grasswire
(50,130 posts)people are asking who got to Reid, who threatened him or paid him off.
BainsBane
(53,012 posts)and I don't know why. A DUer from Cali called her office and they assured the voter she was on board.
Seems to me folding on the filibuster makes it less likely gun control will pass.
grasswire
(50,130 posts)Could be a trick. Not the first time Harry has been suckered.
MurrayDelph
(5,292 posts)When I lived in California, I wrote many letters asking her to explain actions she had taken, or asking her to take particular actions that would have benefitted the country, and when I did get an answer it could be summed up as
"Back off, sonny. I'm a Senator. I know more than you do."
truebluegreen
(9,033 posts)Imagine Harvey Milk in that seat....
EastKYLiberal
(429 posts)libtodeath
(2,888 posts)if a bargain of such was made it was to let a worthless bill pass,Reid is not anti gun.
elleng
(130,732 posts)graham4anything
(11,464 posts)and LBJ would have been praising the great one-upmanship Harry Reid did yesterday.
too bad all can't see it, but, well, they will down the road.
President Obama roped the dopes again.It's that 9 step ahead program that gets those that only see in front of their nose every single time.
and btw, I don't care what Ed says either way, since the night of the first debate. He and Rachel lost me forever with their astute acute blindness that night bloviating away. That night, couldn't tell if they were Rush and Sean or Ed and Rachel. Being that they sure sounded like Rush and Sean even if they didn't look like them.
KharmaTrain
(31,706 posts)...if they made a deal with the rushpublicans to waive the talking filibuster for votes on some type of gun control measures? Considering how little people are expecting out of the legislature, I'd say that's not a bad deal...or one that will/can save lives. If this means getting some votes on gun control in the upcoming session, is that a bad thing? As it stood, surely some yokel rushpublican would put a hold on any gun control legislation and it'd fade into the darkness. Here there may actually be some light. I'm disappointed that the talking filibuster fell short and don't trust Turtleman...but the real log jam remains the House that is unlikely to pass any Democratic proposed or sponsored legislation.
libtodeath
(2,888 posts)awoke_in_2003
(34,582 posts)It about Harry's total lack of spine. Maybe he should get rid of his magic underwear.
rucky
(35,211 posts)MadHound
(34,179 posts)Then they've simply proven, once again, how ineffective they are in their respective leadership roles.
jeff47
(26,549 posts)This theory falls apart when you note Reid already has a majority, and could pass such laws if there was no filibuster, or if it was weaker.
ProgressiveProfessor
(22,144 posts)jeff47
(26,549 posts)And if a Democrat isn't going to vote for a gun control bill, what makes you think a Republican would?
Response to grasswire (Original post)
jeff47 This message was self-deleted by its author.
bullwinkle428
(20,628 posts)Ed thought that Reid knew that most of the gun-control measures being discussed could not possibly pass due to some of the Democratic senators from more "rural"-type states refusing to back them. This would ultimately result in a vote total of less than 50 once people like Baucus, Manchin, etc. voted "no". Ed said it was essentially about giving Blue Dogs political cover.
kenny blankenship
(15,689 posts)and obliging ol' Harry gave him five quarters, a buffalo nickel, and a 1965 40% silver JFK 50 cent piece.
Fucking dumbass.
duffyduff
(3,251 posts)Like others have said, this is kabuki theater. Congress has no intention of rocking the boat of their rich supporters by doing what is right for everybody else.
The "filibuster fight" is all show, no substance.
A Simple Game
(9,214 posts)derby378
(30,252 posts)...since there are still a few Democratic Senators who will vote against Feinstein's bill. Six of one and half a dozen of the other?
regjoe
(206 posts)If the Republicans fold on the 2nd Amendment, they are done.
Purveyor
(29,876 posts)through the House.
grahamhgreen
(15,741 posts)JustABozoOnThisBus
(23,321 posts)I'm guessing that Reid didn't want to change the filibuster, and is trying to divert blame.
hack89
(39,171 posts)the republicans are not going to go on record on gun control unless they absolutely have to. They will sit back and see what Senate democrats can pass first. Since an AWB is opposed by a dozen or so Dems from pro-gun conservative states, Boehner is betting the AWB will die in the Senate.