Skip to main content

People can moan about the NRA killing gun control, but we need to be clear about what just happened here:

The background check amendment failed 54-46.  Other failed gun control amendments gathered over 50 votes as well.  In other words, we had a comfortable majority, and they were filibustered. Harry Reid and other red state Democratic senators gutted real filibuster reform EXACTLY to produce this result. This was their doing, end of story.

I for one am tired of this game.  Hand wringing and saying "Gee whiz, we just didn't have 60 votes" no longer flies.  It's time to shove Harry Reid out the door.  He's the lynchpin for Democratic Senate dysfunction, and he's got to go.

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  So you're saying (7+ / 0-)

    It would have passed the House.

    http://callatimeout.blogspot.com/ Jesus Loves You.

    by DAISHI on Wed Apr 17, 2013 at 02:58:56 PM PDT

    •  What difference does that make? (12+ / 0-)

      It probably wouldn't have, but with a Senate bill and public pressure who knows...  background checks have a lot of public support. But with no Senate bill it's 100% guaranteed not to pass the House.  

      A Republic House is no excuse for a dysfunctional Democratic Senate...  this is why when they're in charge they win, and when we're in charge they still win.

    •  don't try to talk logic to those that have none. (7+ / 0-)

      this is going to be a "let's blame harry reid" day - and next, it will all be all OBAMA'S fault - while the real obstructionists in the government sit laughing their asses off at all the circular firing squads that are racing to reload!

      i am SOOOOOOO sick of people who want to try to blame everything on reid/obama/emanuel/dlc/democrats/etc while giving republicans a free pass in an attempt to install some lame-brained anarchist scheme of no government unless it is doing exactly what the current complaining party thinks should be done in the exact manner that the complaining party would do it.

      if those who are so quick to blame reid and the democrats feel so strongly, let them run for office and try to change things themselves!

      [end of rant now... - not directed at you - just suggesting we both might have lower blood pressure by visiting a pootie diary - more gets accomplished there than will be in this one!]

      EdriesShop Is it kind? is it true? is it necessary?

      by edrie on Wed Apr 17, 2013 at 03:07:36 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Please use your superhuman logic to help me... (4+ / 0-)

        Why did Harry Reid prevent the filibuster from being reformed?  Please explain that.

        We had many Dem senators that wanted real reform, finally removing the ability of Repubs to demand 60 votes for everything...  Harry Reid and a couple others squashed it. Why do you suppose that is?

        •  two points. doing away with the filibuster would (4+ / 0-)

          be catastrophic in 2014 IF the republicans take over the senate (which they might very well do if progressives continue to beat up the democrats and give the republicans a pass).

          have you bothered to take a look at the states where everything is controlled by the republicans?  look at michigan.  look at north carolina.  look at arizona.  look at the disastrous consequences that exist when runamok republicans cannot be stopped.

          hints:  
          personhood begins at conception
          everyone must carry a weapon
          emergency managers usurp elections
          papers please

          we stand the very real risk of losing the senate because of the conflict within the democratic and progressive side of the aisle.  look at what happened to the house in 2010.  the tea party was organized AND well funded.  progressive (foolishly) are screaming "i'm not gonna give money to any democrat... blah blah blah) - while the right is funded by koch and citizens united.  disenchantment will be the undoing of our chance to make this nation better.  if the republicans get in control of the senate and maintain control of the house, ANY hope for pushing this nation back off it's current course is done.  fini.  kaput.  over with.

          the ONLY goal republicans have had and have openly stated from the start is to block anything this democratic president has proposed.  i don't think it is as much about obama as it is about democratic issues.  the republicans and tea party want to take this country back to the very early 19th century and this is their opportunity to do so - why are we helping them?

          for EVERY diary, EVERY comment, EVERY vocalized statement that focuses the blame for what is happening in this nation, the republicans not only get a free pass, they are aided and abetted by those actions.

          if you want to campaign to put republicans in office, that's your choice.  it isn't mine.  and don't hand me the b.s. that all current democrats are REALLY the same as republicans anyway...

          harry reid did NOT "squash" filibuster reform.  there are greater issues at play here that you do not seem to grasp.  unfortunately, if you get your way, you might get to feel those ramifications in the not so distant future if folks keep telling the rest of the nation that all this is the democrats' fault.

          EdriesShop Is it kind? is it true? is it necessary?

          by edrie on Wed Apr 17, 2013 at 03:41:22 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  yeah. so this is the deal... (0+ / 0-)

            replace. those. republicans. if harry reid would stop throwing them life preservers, i think that this current crew of morons has about run their course.

            and i also think the republicans will change the rules in a heartbeat as soon as Reid gives them the keys to the senate. if you remember, that's how this whole thing started.
            by your logic, we should hold back on every item in the people's legislative agenda for fear that the republicans will do what they have already done.

            you know how to stop that from happening? the 50 state solution, my friend. beat them back into the minority they already represent in our culture.

            and all of the current democrats aren't like republicans.  there were a simple majority of them who voted for this bill, which would have passed 20 years ago with that number.

            and as for those larger issues at play here?

            tell it to the parent of a newtown child.
            there are no larger issues at play than preventing the weekly slaughter of innocent people.

            or at least trying to prevent it.

            how come all of you folks defending Reid are using sweeping generalizations to defend him- generalizations that not only don't hold up, but really obscure the issue.

            this isn't all of the democrats fault.
            just. harry. reid's.

            "When you're skating on thin ice, you might as well dance." Jesse Winchester

            by The Poet Deploreate on Wed Apr 17, 2013 at 03:50:37 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  Really? (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              virginwoolf, AnnieR
              just. harry. reid's.
              What is this need for singular blame?

              What about the 7 democratic senators that went on the record opposing filibuster reform?  If you're set on blaming our side on this, I find it odd that you aren't even looking at them.

              Красота спасет мир --F. Dostoevsky

              by Wisper on Wed Apr 17, 2013 at 04:14:39 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

          •  We stopped the estate tax repeal (0+ / 0-)

            with 41 votes.  It was close.

            Красота спасет мир --F. Dostoevsky

            by Wisper on Wed Apr 17, 2013 at 04:13:29 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

          •  A GOP controlled Senate can also reform the (0+ / 0-)

            filibuster.

            Why would you even raise that issue?

            .................expect us......................... FDR 9-23-33, "If we cannot do this one way, we will do it another way. But do it we will.

            by Roger Fox on Wed Apr 17, 2013 at 05:43:18 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

          •  BEENGO!!! (3+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            grothenberger, jedennis, brasilaaron

            Sometimes the truth does come out:

            ... doing away with the filibuster would be catastrophic in 2014 IF the republicans take over the senate (which they might very well do if progressives continue to beat up the democrats and give the republicans a pass).
            Sooo.. I'm supposed to be dumb enough to believe the "democrats" in congress must be able to filibuster evil, bad legislation put forth by the evil, bad GOP?

            HAH HAH HAHH! that's a good one!

            I wonder just how often the democrats do this? did they filibuster against AUMF I and II regarding the invasion of Iraq?

            did they filibuster the bush tax cuts?

            the other obvious baloney in the paragraph above is the notion "progressives are hurting the democrats"... because you know, we actually want something progressive accomplished once every ten years or so.

            Because waiting for the GOP wing of the democratic party to act has been soooo effective thus far.

            Gimme a break, please

            "The 1% don't want SOLUTIONS; they've worked very hard the last four decades to get conditions the way they are now".

            by Superpole on Wed Apr 17, 2013 at 05:50:01 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

      •  Don't like the heat... (4+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Bisbonian, ssgbryan, corvo, grothenberger

        you can head back to the playroom.  why don't you just let the rest of the adults argue this one out.

        i have no problem with people disagreeing- but torching a whole thread, and everyone on it who shares their opinion because it offends your sensibility... well, that's painting with a mighty broad brush, Van Gogh.

        Reid had 57 votes to pass a legislative measure that 85% of the country was in favor of.  Exactly where do the Republicans even become part of that equation, except for the four who crossed over and voted aye?

        sorry. rant on, my friend, but I disagree.  your logic has holes big enough to shoot an assault weapon thru.

        This blood's on Reid.   By my metrics, the Republicans were actually irrelevant to this vote. A majority of the senate, 56 votes wanted this.

        And by the way- if Reid hadn't cow-towed to the old warhorses, 57 votes- hell, 51 votes would have rendered the Republicans irrelevant on a lot of votes this year.

        And to your point, the Republicans will always be Republicans. So what.  They don't know how to govern.  That's news?

        It's about time that some Democrats started to be democrats.

        I'm talking to Senator Reid, my friend.

        "When you're skating on thin ice, you might as well dance." Jesse Winchester

        by The Poet Deploreate on Wed Apr 17, 2013 at 03:25:36 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  read my above post. i will not engage in your (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          virginislandsguy

          ad homs or in further conversation with you.  if this is the way you address others, you would never have gotten my vote in your five runs for office.  that you won is immaterial - your tone is offensive.  i called no one "children", nor did i make personal insults.  

          and, fyi, YOU are, imho, wrong about reid.  history will prove one of us right - and, so far, history has been on my side these last 52 years of political engagement on my part.  i don't count the first 15 years, even though i was politically active then, too.

          EdriesShop Is it kind? is it true? is it necessary?

          by edrie on Wed Apr 17, 2013 at 03:44:12 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

      •  oh and by the way, edrie... (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        corvo

        i've run for public office city-wide five times. and won five times. one of those wins was the charter review commission; where i helped successfully rewrite the city charter to push for more transparency and stronger ethics. Oh, and I've never taken a cent in campaign donations, not even from my family.

        and you know- I ran for office 12 years ago, before Reid was even elected Majority Leader.  So I guess that elevates me a little on your horizon, no?

        Any other prescriptions you'd like to offer to help make our government a little more functional and, um, democratic?

        And just to lay it all out, and be fair, here's a little heads up as to why I'm so hot on gun control.

        I've had a gun pointed at me.  And fired. It missed. And the person holding the gun would have been screened out even under the tepid, diluted Toomey Manchin bill. Getting shot at changes your point of view a little.

        This seems maybe a little abstract to you, this issue of gun control.  Not for me. You might say it's life or death, as far as I'm concerned.

        "When you're skating on thin ice, you might as well dance." Jesse Winchester

        by The Poet Deploreate on Wed Apr 17, 2013 at 03:40:55 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  one point: do not assume anything. would you l (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          The Poet Deploreate

          like the breakdown of the number of colleagues, friends, acquaintences, neighbors, classmates of mine who were murdered?  the number is in the double digits.

          would you like the number of fights i've broken up?  the number of dead or dying from gunshots i've encountered?  

          don't assume.  it is personal for many of us.  arrogance is in assumption.  DON'T assume!

          EdriesShop Is it kind? is it true? is it necessary?

          by edrie on Wed Apr 17, 2013 at 03:46:45 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  i make no assumptions, my friend. (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            corvo

            my apologies if you are offended, because you think I have made assumptions about you.
            aside from suggesting this is a little abstract for you, there is nothing about my response that suggests anything about you.

            and while i truly grieve that you have lived long enough to see all of the horror that guns can bring, it doesn't actually obscure the fact that you didn't respond to a single thing i said, other than to take offense at something i never intended, and don't believe was there.

            in fact neither of your two responses addressed a single relevant fact I asserted.

            if assumption is arrogance, than perhaps evasion is an acknowledgement that you got nothing to respond with.

            and whether you would have voted for me or not is irrelevant. and if you think that you bring change about without speaking forcefully and passionately about something you deeply believe in, i'm not so sure you've gotten inside of the political process.

            i suggested that trashing a whole,thread and everyone whose opinion differs from yours was, um, childish. you did that.

            still, in  reviewing both of your responses, i do note that you challenged nothing i said, just how i said it.

            where's the fun i that?

            "When you're skating on thin ice, you might as well dance." Jesse Winchester

            by The Poet Deploreate on Wed Apr 17, 2013 at 03:58:09 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

    •  the issue isn't whether it would pass the House (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      ssgbryan, corvo

      the issue is that it would have passed the Senate if Reid had invoked the nuclear option.

      what more does that misguided, spineless old fool need- he had 56 votes set to vote for it (57, because his no vote was procedural) and 85% of the country supporting the measure in polls.  

      In my book, that's a win for the country and for the Dems.

      And had it passed the Senate, it would have gone in to reconciliation with whatever crap the House passed- and background checks would have been on the table, and given the Republican House more rope to hang themselves with.

      Gutless, appalling. Truly appalling and shameful.

      20 kids dead. 85% of the country saying do it.
      Exactly what is that fool keeping his powder dry for?

      Reid was the only one in the country who had the power to pass this bill.  

      He's dipped his own hands in blood. I don't care who primaries that SOB, I'm donating to them.

      Disgusting. By allowing this legislative travesty, Reid has demonstrated that he's no better than McConnell.

      And if this comes down to saving Reid's own sorry ass from getting booted out of the Senate, all the more pathetic.

      "When you're skating on thin ice, you might as well dance." Jesse Winchester

      by The Poet Deploreate on Wed Apr 17, 2013 at 03:17:06 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  STOP! go away! I'M tired of this (6+ / 0-)

    "it's all harry REID'S fault!" crap!

    clue for ya....

    REPUBLICANS killed gun control - REPUBLICANS are the issue in congress - REPUBLICANS are the problem!

    do you get it yet?

    EdriesShop Is it kind? is it true? is it necessary?

    by edrie on Wed Apr 17, 2013 at 03:03:25 PM PDT

  •  yeah, odd that (6+ / 0-)

    anything over 50 is supposed to pass, like in any real reading of the rules.

    The Senate is basically nullifying itself.

  •  Blame blame blame blame blame. (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    TheKF1, FG, virginwoolf, virginislandsguy

    We must blame someone, at all times, for all things. And always someone on our side, because putting the blame where the blame really lies is oh so boring.

    •  sorry, but i blame leaders (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      ssgbryan, corvo

      for failing to lead.

      this was not a republican triumph.  they didn't have enough votes to win on this one.

      this was a failure of leadership.

      who's the leader.
      Oh. Harry Reid.

      i blame the leaders who fail to lead.

      "When you're skating on thin ice, you might as well dance." Jesse Winchester

      by The Poet Deploreate on Wed Apr 17, 2013 at 03:32:40 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  He lead. He was defeated by (5+ / 0-)

        people whose constituents love their guns. For a rural state senator such as Reid to lead at all on this issue shows that he is an honorable man. Your problem is that you are ready to replace any leader for any failure to succeed in an endeavor. That is extraordinarily counterproductive. If we replaced our leaders every time they did not succeed, who the heck would even want to be the next leader?

        If you want to replace the guy who aggravated Mitt Romney more than any other Washington politician, you'll have to do better than this.

        •  no. i have no interest in replacing any leader. (3+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          ssgbryan, BettytheBoop, corvo

          just those who don't lead.

          i actually don't care about his constituents.
          please, doc, humor me, and respond to the simple reality of the math. whether his constituents love guns, he had well over a simple majority of senators willing to vote for this bill. a strong majority.

          and reid had the power to return majority rule to the senate. i'm still waiting for one of you to respond simply on the math.
          he had a majority.  and he had the nuclear option to restore functionality to the senate.

          this isn't a matter of not succeeding, as i see it. i've spent the last two days working in Boston, watching national guard and assault-weapon bearing cops walk everywhere. i can live with failure, even a steady diet of it.  

          but some things count more than others, in my opinion as an activist and an elected official. this was one of those times. what was right was very clear; the path was clear. the leadership failed.

          75 years ago, we might have talked about constituents who hated people of color- is there a point when you have to step away and vote for the good of the country, and not the people you represent?

          as an elected official, i have done that. taken the hard votes i felt were in the best interest of the community. i'm no hero; i'm not even a nice guy.  i just care about my community, about keeping kids safe.

          "When you're skating on thin ice, you might as well dance." Jesse Winchester

          by The Poet Deploreate on Wed Apr 17, 2013 at 04:06:07 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  and pissing off mitt romney isn't exactly (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          BettytheBoop

          a boffo recommendation in my book.  i'm from massachusetts. i know he has thin skin. everything pissed off the bastard. not getting his way pissed him off. so reid hasn't accomplished that much, if you think his most sanguine quality is pissing off the second most thin skinned republican in the marketplace of no ideas.

          if lyndon johnson hadn't been willing to take a stand for civil rights, and use every skill he had to badger the senate into voting for landmark legislation, where would we be.

          at some point, history calls you to look beyond the moment, beyond the constituents, and take a vote for the future. a vote that is right.

          that was lincoln's skill; he had a moral compass that was probably the steadiest of his time. his skill was in moving everybody to the position he needed them to be in to make things happen.

          the future extends beyond reid's next campaign for senator, in mine 'umble opinion.

          "When you're skating on thin ice, you might as well dance." Jesse Winchester

          by The Poet Deploreate on Wed Apr 17, 2013 at 04:32:04 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

  •  I'm no big fan of Reid... (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Matt Z

    and his gutless-wonder handling of filibuster reform was vomit-inducing, but this was never going to pass the House even if it had gotten through the Senate comfortably.  I'm sorry, but no magic fairy dust was suddenly going to make Boehner and crew allow this to go any further than the Senate.

    •  reid would have sent a bill to the house (4+ / 0-)

      that had background checks in it. that had an assault weapon ban in it. that ditched heavy ammo.

      it would have gone to reconciliation. maybe nothing would have passed.

      but what do you have now?

      i think sometimes you have to go through the motions, so you can make your point. whether you win or lose.

      what point has reid made with this gutless, appalling paucity of leadership, and political ham-handedness?

      nothing good comes of reid's way here.

      if reid couldn't pass a bill that 85% of the people wanted, and he had a majority of 56 senators supporting (a bi-partisan support, as well)...

      we might as well give up on democracy, no?  

      i don't need fairy dust. democracy that functions will do nicely.

      "When you're skating on thin ice, you might as well dance." Jesse Winchester

      by The Poet Deploreate on Wed Apr 17, 2013 at 04:10:20 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  But if it had gotten through the Senate (6+ / 0-)

      The members of the House would have felt some heat, at least, and would have been on record, perhaps making some of them vulnerable on this issue.

      Now, they can just coast along while the DEMOCRATIC SENATE takes the heat.

      Sorry, but when filibuster reform was not enacted, the Democrats tipped their hand. The love being able to whine that the big bad meanie Republicans simply won't let them.

      Screw that.

  •  This is total nonsense (6+ / 0-)

    NO filibuster reform short of abolishing it could have saved this, and there was not even close to a caucus majority for that.

    •  nonsense? (3+ / 0-)

      up until the weekend before the filibuster vote, the dems had 51 votes in favor. shumer was quoted in slate magazine as saying reid didn't want to go nuclear, he wanted to cut a deal with mcconnell.

      how's that working out for the nation?

      and whether reform passed or not, reid has always had the ability to throw all the cards in the air and reshuffle the deck.
      always had that ability.  

      this bill was the one he should have done that for, in my opinion. this bill, given the daily horror of gun proliferation, was the bill of bills to pass. we've had what, 3,400 deaths by gunshot since newtown, according to slate tonight?  there is already nearly one gun for every person in the united states available and out there. any tightening of the loophole would have helped. any.

      i counted 56 votes in favor of this bill.  four republicans, which makes it probably one of the few bills in 3 years that had bi-partisan support.  every major poll showed massive support background checks- 85% and more.

      sorry, if there was no caucus majority for filibuster reform, than reid has a responsibility to give us something that really works. if he can't do that, i say blow it up, pass a lot of good bills by simple majority (yeah, i'm old-fashioned), and then duke it out with house.

      what will his excuse be next year, when we take the house back, and he still won't deliver a decent bill because of his affection for the filibuster?

      "When you're skating on thin ice, you might as well dance." Jesse Winchester

      by The Poet Deploreate on Wed Apr 17, 2013 at 04:25:32 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  What you discuss has NO relevance to today (0+ / 0-)

        and there was no filibuster under way today and these were not cloture votes.

        What do you think happens if cloture is reduced to 50 votes?

        Too late for the simple life, too early for android love slaves - Savio

        by Clem Yeobright on Wed Apr 17, 2013 at 06:17:26 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  These were NOT cloture votes (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      sewaneepat

      60 votes for amendments was set by a particular rule for this bill, and it could have been set at 50 or 70 - it's not a filibuster and rule XXII is not involved.

      But of course you already knew that ...

      Too late for the simple life, too early for android love slaves - Savio

      by Clem Yeobright on Wed Apr 17, 2013 at 06:14:59 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Because I am a pragmatic strategist when it comes (0+ / 0-)

    to politics (if not most everything), I can appreciate the argument that it is often necessary to give so you can get---and that in order to stay in government so that you can accomplish anything, compromises are often required. But there are certain bottom lines---when leadership is central and there are no excuses. There are those times when bright lines have to be drawn and when the right thing to do is not obscured by shades of grey--when it's so obvious that it is the only thing to do--that doing what is right trumps everything else. Life and death--gun control is one of those issues. It was the right time to do the right thing.  

  •  It's "linchpin". (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Clem Yeobright

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site