Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

grasswire

(50,130 posts)
Fri Jan 25, 2013, 02:45 AM Jan 2013

Ed 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.

30 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Ed Schulz says the Reid capitulation is about guns. (Original Post) grasswire Jan 2013 OP
I don't believe it BainsBane Jan 2013 #1
how else do we explain Boxer voting against the talking filibuster? nt grasswire Jan 2013 #2
and how else do we explain Reid's total reversal of position on filibuster? grasswire Jan 2013 #3
reports were she was against it earlier this month BainsBane Jan 2013 #4
I can see that likelihood, too. grasswire Jan 2013 #6
Feinstein is not a public servant MurrayDelph Jan 2013 #8
DiFi has always been a DINO truebluegreen Jan 2013 #10
If true, it'd be one hell of a bargain. nt EastKYLiberal Jan 2013 #5
Don`t bet on it libtodeath Jan 2013 #20
Jeeze I hate this shit. elleng Jan 2013 #7
LBJ said-Any jackass can kick down a barn but it takes a good carpenter to build one graham4anything Jan 2013 #9
So... KharmaTrain Jan 2013 #11
What if it a wink to let a terrible an inneffective bill through? libtodeath Jan 2013 #21
It isn't about guns... awoke_in_2003 Jan 2013 #12
Now we're sure to accomplish between 1 and Zero things this session. rucky Jan 2013 #13
Well, if Reid and Obama can't muster the support within their own party for gun control, MadHound Jan 2013 #14
Why would they need Republican votes? jeff47 Jan 2013 #15
Because not every senator from the party is on board ProgressiveProfessor Jan 2013 #19
He's got 5 free votes - he only needs 50 + VP. jeff47 Jan 2013 #30
This message was self-deleted by its author jeff47 Jan 2013 #16
I think you're misinterpreting what Ed was trying to say. It sounded to me like bullwinkle428 Jan 2013 #17
McConnell asked Reid to change a dollar kenny blankenship Jan 2013 #18
I am such a cynic, I don't believe a word they say anymore. duffyduff Jan 2013 #22
Yup, what you said. n/t A Simple Game Jan 2013 #25
That doesn't seem likely... derby378 Jan 2013 #23
Doesn't make sense at all regjoe Jan 2013 #24
Doesn't matter on damn wit what the Senate wants to do on gun control as NOTHING will get Purveyor Jan 2013 #26
NO, it's about anything the Dems manage to squeak through the house. grahamhgreen Jan 2013 #27
DiFi's bill will die in the House, so why would Reid make this deal? JustABozoOnThisBus Jan 2013 #28
It will not see a vote in the House until the Senate votes, hack89 Jan 2013 #29

grasswire

(50,130 posts)
3. and how else do we explain Reid's total reversal of position on filibuster?
Fri Jan 25, 2013, 02:52 AM
Jan 2013

people are asking who got to Reid, who threatened him or paid him off.

BainsBane

(53,012 posts)
4. reports were she was against it earlier this month
Fri Jan 25, 2013, 02:52 AM
Jan 2013

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.

MurrayDelph

(5,292 posts)
8. Feinstein is not a public servant
Fri Jan 25, 2013, 03:23 AM
Jan 2013

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."

libtodeath

(2,888 posts)
20. Don`t bet on it
Fri Jan 25, 2013, 11:10 AM
Jan 2013

if a bargain of such was made it was to let a worthless bill pass,Reid is not anti gun.

 

graham4anything

(11,464 posts)
9. LBJ said-Any jackass can kick down a barn but it takes a good carpenter to build one
Fri Jan 25, 2013, 04:01 AM
Jan 2013

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)
11. So...
Fri Jan 25, 2013, 05:14 AM
Jan 2013

...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.

 

awoke_in_2003

(34,582 posts)
12. It isn't about guns...
Fri Jan 25, 2013, 05:26 AM
Jan 2013

It about Harry's total lack of spine. Maybe he should get rid of his magic underwear.

 

MadHound

(34,179 posts)
14. Well, if Reid and Obama can't muster the support within their own party for gun control,
Fri Jan 25, 2013, 08:04 AM
Jan 2013

Then they've simply proven, once again, how ineffective they are in their respective leadership roles.

jeff47

(26,549 posts)
15. Why would they need Republican votes?
Fri Jan 25, 2013, 10:39 AM
Jan 2013

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.

jeff47

(26,549 posts)
30. He's got 5 free votes - he only needs 50 + VP.
Fri Jan 25, 2013, 08:52 PM
Jan 2013

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)

bullwinkle428

(20,628 posts)
17. I think you're misinterpreting what Ed was trying to say. It sounded to me like
Fri Jan 25, 2013, 10:45 AM
Jan 2013

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)
18. McConnell asked Reid to change a dollar
Fri Jan 25, 2013, 10:47 AM
Jan 2013

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)
22. I am such a cynic, I don't believe a word they say anymore.
Fri Jan 25, 2013, 11:23 AM
Jan 2013

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.

derby378

(30,252 posts)
23. That doesn't seem likely...
Fri Jan 25, 2013, 12:01 PM
Jan 2013

...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?

 

Purveyor

(29,876 posts)
26. Doesn't matter on damn wit what the Senate wants to do on gun control as NOTHING will get
Fri Jan 25, 2013, 01:20 PM
Jan 2013

through the House.

JustABozoOnThisBus

(23,321 posts)
28. DiFi's bill will die in the House, so why would Reid make this deal?
Fri Jan 25, 2013, 01:46 PM
Jan 2013

I'm guessing that Reid didn't want to change the filibuster, and is trying to divert blame.

hack89

(39,171 posts)
29. It will not see a vote in the House until the Senate votes,
Fri Jan 25, 2013, 01:56 PM
Jan 2013

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.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Ed Schulz says the Reid c...