Jump to content

Mitch McConnell Ignores Reciprocity


mauserme

Recommended Posts

http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2018/01/16/mitch-mcconnell-ignores-national-reciprocity-45th-consecutive-week/

 

 

 

Mitch McConnell Ignores National Reciprocity for 45th Consecutive Week

 

by AWR Hawkins16 Jan 2018

 

We are mid-way through January 2018 which means Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) has ignored national reciprocity for 45 consecutive weeks.

 

National reciprocity for concealed carry was introduced in the Senate on March 1, 2017 and McConnell has yet to say a word in support of it. His silence is ironic, given the fact that he cloaked himself in the Second Amendment in order to sway pro-gun Kentuckians into re-electing him in 2014.

 

On November 7, 2013, the Lexington Herald-Leader quoted NRA-ILA’s Chris Cox, who helped swat Democrat criticism of McConnell, saying, “It’s safe to say that law-abiding gun owners in Kentucky represent not only a loyal group of voters but a savvy group of voters. And they know the difference between campaign rhetoric and someone who has fought in the trenches for years for their issues.”

 

But McConnell seems to be a long way from the trenches now. ...

 

Do Americans from Idaho lose their First Amendment freedoms when they travel to California? ...

 

Do Americans from Kentucky lose their Fourth Amendment freedoms when they travel to Illinois? ...

 

But law-abiding Americans from any state other than California lose their Second Amendment freedoms the moment they drive into California. The same thing happens to law-abiding Americans who drive into Illinois.

 

National reciprocity would correct this travesty and that should be important Mitch McConnell.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here we go again, the RINOpublican party doing what it always does.

They know if we get national reciprocity, the party's necessity for gun owners will decline. Who will now attempt to lobby them for better gun laws? All those bribes, ahem, campaign contributions will slow to a trickle from gun owners and NRA.

 

This is why we can't have nice things.

 

They could easily do things that their base wants. But if that happens, their base won't need them anymore.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Any chance he's holding off, waiting till September or so before bringing it to the floor? Making a big stir, allowing the Dems to fight, yell, scream and anger the 2nd Amendment base into a voting froth for the November elections?

The same thought had occurred to me. He might also recognize the political reality that the numbers don’t weigh in favor of passage at the moment.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Any chance he's holding off, waiting till September or so before bringing it to the floor? Making a big stir, allowing the Dems to fight, yell, scream and anger the 2nd Amendment base into a voting froth for the November elections?

 

Possibly. But only to cause a rukus to get votes, not to get it to pass. It is just red meat to the gun community to get out the vote.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When will you realize that you are just being played by the GOP? They care not about gun rights, they only care that YOU think that they are the only ones for gun rights and will vote for them.

 

Exactly like they do the other single issue anti abortion voters.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Any chance he's holding off, waiting till September or so before bringing it to the floor? Making a big stir, allowing the Dems to fight, yell, scream and anger the 2nd Amendment base into a voting froth for the November elections?

 

Possibly. But only to cause a rukus to get votes, not to get it to pass. It is just red meat to the gun community to get out the vote.

 

 

Or...the Senate needs 60 votes to get past a filibuster and since we have only 51 ® and the (D)s will not be cooperating on anything this year (to show that the Republicans can't govern), there just aren't the votes to get it passed. The only (D) that I thought might be willing to vote for this bill (Manchin) has really shown he's a (D) 1st, and for the 2A last! What other (D)s are going to support this bill? Even the 51 ® senators have a few flakes (pun intended) that we can't count on either. If you can say how we can get to 60, then you've got a point about McConnell and the ®s taking gun owners for granted. Maybe you'd like to bribe them with earmarks?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

Any chance he's holding off, waiting till September or so before bringing it to the floor? Making a big stir, allowing the Dems to fight, yell, scream and anger the 2nd Amendment base into a voting froth for the November elections?

 

Possibly. But only to cause a rukus to get votes, not to get it to pass. It is just red meat to the gun community to get out the vote.

 

 

Or...the Senate needs 60 votes to get past a filibuster and since we have only 51 ® and the (D)s will not be cooperating on anything this year (to show that the Republicans can't govern), there just aren't the votes to get it passed. The only (D) that I thought might be willing to vote for this bill (Manchin) has really shown he's a (D) 1st, and for the 2A last! What other (D)s are going to support this bill? Even the 51 ® senators have a few flakes (pun intended) that we can't count on either. If you can say how we can get to 60, then you've got a point about McConnell and the ®s taking gun owners for granted. Maybe you'd like to bribe them with earmarks?

 

Yep, 60 votes for cloture. That ain't gonna happen.

 

This bill was nothing more than political theater, and stood zero chance of passing from the get go.

 

I agree with Hipshot in that they'll probably bring the bill up close to election time, make a big spectacle of the democrats going crazy, just to show the pro 2A people that they need to get out and vote for the GOP candidate.

 

The only reason the GOP supports gun rights is to get reelected. If the dems suddenly started supporting gun rights, watch how fast the GOP become the anti gun rights party lol. This same type of thing happened during the industrial revolution....the republicans were big government because they controlled the centers of the industrial revolution, and then the dems began supporting big government, so the republicans went the other way and leaned on the limited government platform.

 

We need to remove the stranglehold that the two party system has on our elections. Unfortunately we do have other choices but people have been so brainwashed that they don't see anything other than voting democrat or republican. Until that changes, we'll continue getting bent over the barrel by both parties.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Any chance he's holding off, waiting till September or so before bringing it to the floor? Making a big stir, allowing the Dems to fight, yell, scream and anger the 2nd Amendment base into a voting froth for the November elections?

The same thought had occurred to me. He might also recognize the political reality that the numbers don’t weigh in favor of passage at the moment.

 

 

Yes. Right now, I very much doubt the bill would pass the Senate. He may be waiting for the midterm elections, to see if they go in our favor...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

60 votes are not needed anymore thanks to Harry Reid. McConnell and the Republicans in the Senate passed the tax bill in December with 51 votes and confirmed Neil Gorsuch to the supreme court with 54 votes so why not this bill? If McConnell wants to he can make it happen.

Budget related bills do not require sixty votes. So far the nuclear option has only been used for judicial appointments.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Here we go again, the RINOpublican party doing what it always does.

 

When will you realize that you are just being played by the GOP? They care not about gun rights, they only care that YOU think that they are the only ones for gun rights and will vote for them.

 

 

You know my political beliefs, I'm neither a Leftocrat or a RINOpublican. I know what the R half of the one party system does when it comes to gun owners. String them along forever and ever collecting tons of bribes campaign contributions from gun lobbies.

 

Our entire political system is a racket - too bad the people can't file a RICO suit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

60 votes are not needed anymore thanks to Harry Reid. McConnell and the Republicans in the Senate passed the tax bill in December with 51 votes and confirmed Neil Gorsuch to the supreme court with 54 votes so why not this bill? If McConnell wants to he can make it happen.

Budget related bills do not require sixty votes. So far the nuclear option has only been used for judicial appointments.

 

You need to define terms, though.

 

The "nuclear option" is simply changing the Senate rule requiring 60 votes to bring a bill to a final vote. The final vote still only requires a majority of those voting - typically 51.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

60 votes are not needed anymore thanks to Harry Reid. McConnell and the Republicans in the Senate passed the tax bill in December with 51 votes and confirmed Neil Gorsuch to the supreme court with 54 votes so why not this bill? If McConnell wants to he can make it happen.

Budget related bills do not require sixty votes. So far the nuclear option has only been used for judicial appointments.

 

You need to define terms, though.

 

The "nuclear option" is simply changing the Senate rule requiring 60 votes to bring a bill to a final vote. The final vote still only requires a majority of those voting - typically 51.

 

Bring a bill to vote by end debate or stop a filibuster.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

60 votes are not needed anymore thanks to Harry Reid. McConnell and the Republicans in the Senate passed the tax bill in December with 51 votes and confirmed Neil Gorsuch to the supreme court with 54 votes so why not this bill? If McConnell wants to he can make it happen.
Budget related bills do not require sixty votes. So far the nuclear option has only been used for judicial appointments.
You need to define terms, though.The "nuclear option" is simply changing the Senate rule requiring 60 votes to bring a bill to a final vote. The final vote still only requires a majority of those voting - typically 51.

 

 

 

 

60 votes are not needed anymore thanks to Harry Reid. McConnell and the Republicans in the Senate passed the tax bill in December with 51 votes and confirmed Neil Gorsuch to the supreme court with 54 votes so why not this bill? If McConnell wants to he can make it happen.
Budget related bills do not require sixty votes. So far the nuclear option has only been used for judicial appointments.
You need to define terms, though.The "nuclear option" is simply changing the Senate rule requiring 60 votes to bring a bill to a final vote. The final vote still only requires a majority of those voting - typically 51.

 

Define it thoroughly then. It has NEVER been used to pass legislation. By either party.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

 

 

 

60 votes are not needed anymore thanks to Harry Reid. McConnell and the Republicans in the Senate passed the tax bill in December with 51 votes and confirmed Neil Gorsuch to the supreme court with 54 votes so why not this bill? If McConnell wants to he can make it happen.
Budget related bills do not require sixty votes. So far the nuclear option has only been used for judicial appointments.
You need to define terms, though.The "nuclear option" is simply changing the Senate rule requiring 60 votes to bring a bill to a final vote. The final vote still only requires a majority of those voting - typically 51.

 

Define it thoroughly then. It has NEVER been used to pass legislation. By either party.

 

 

Trump's tax bill is legislation and passed and became law with 51 votes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Trump's tax bill is legislation and passed and became law with 51 votes.

 

...but only because it took advantage of the Senate’s budget reconciliation mechanism, which required only a simple majority if the cost was less than $1.5T.

 

The 60-vote cloture requirement still exists for other types of legislation—even the stopgap funding measure that may get a vote any time now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...