The White House is fuming after Democratic Senator Joe Manchin announced on Fox News Sunday he has no plans to vote for President Joe Biden’s multi-trillion dollar spending plan and will not vote to continue working on the legislation.
BLOW TO JOE: Democratic Sen. Joe Manchin says he can't vote for a $2 trillion social safety net bill, dealing a potentially fatal blow to President Joe Biden’s signature legislation – @APpic.twitter.com/FWSeVNOFDu
In response, White House Press Secretary Jen Psaki issued a seething statement and essentially called Manchin a liar.
“Senator Manchin’s comments this morning on FOX are at odds with his discussions this week with the President, with White House staff, and with his own public utterances. Weeks ago, Senator Manchin committed to the President, at his home in Wilmington, to support the Build Back Better framework that the President then subsequently announced. Senator Manchin pledged repeatedly to negotiate on finalizing that framework “in good faith,” Psaki said.
“On Tuesday of this week, Senator Manchin came to the White House and submitted—to the President, in person, directly—a written outline for a Build Back Better bill that was the same size and scope as the President’s framework, and covered many of the same priorities. While that framework was missing key priorities, we believed it could lead to a compromise acceptable to all. Senator Manchin promised to continue conversations in the days ahead, and to work with us to reach that common ground,” she continued. “If his comments on FOX and written statement indicate an end to that effort, they represent a sudden and inexplicable reversal in his position, and a breach of his commitments to the President and the Senator’s colleagues in the House and Senate.”
Psaki also vowed to keep pushing Manchin to change his mind.
“Just as Senator Manchin reversed his position on Build Back Better this morning, we will continue to press him to see if he will reverse his position yet again, to honor his prior commitments and be true to his word,” she said.
But the truth is, Manchin has been saying for months Biden’s Build Back Better agenda was too big, would cause inflation to worsen and that he didn’t support the IRS snooping on Americans. Since he took office with a 50-50 split in the Senate, Biden has been governing as if he has a super majority and a mandate. He doesn’t.
Psaki is really hoping nobody has actually paid attention to Manchin’s “public utterances” all year about wanting to pause, inflation, bad climate spending, etc.
This falls SQUARELY on the White House ignoring reality and lying to their base about what was possible. https://t.co/IFWG97eA1t
HOUSTON, Texas (KTRK) — A homeowner shot and killed a 31-year-old woman who was intruding into his house early Saturday morning on Houston’s East End, police say. The shooting was called in to police at about 1:30 a.m. from the 7000 block of Avenue F near 70th.
According to HPD, the homeowner was in the kitchen when he saw a couple of suspicious people outside of his fence, so he grabbed his gun. When he returned, one of the individuals was trying to push in the door. Police say that’s when the homeowner shot the woman multiple times, hitting her in the head. The woman died at the scene. The second individual, a man in his 20s or 30s, is on the run.
Officials say the homeowner called police and is cooperating with the investigation. The man’s girlfriend and his parents were in the home, but were not hurt.
The case will be referred to the Harris County grand jury, but HPD Sgt. Josh Horne told ABC13 at the scene there are no charges at this time.
BLUF:
Millions are still moving along the path from reflexive support for gun control to passionate support for the right to bear arms. These voyagers are rapidly changing our culture. Last month’s public opinion polls are already out of date. The shift away from supporting gun-control is accelerating. The shift toward passionate and committed defense of citizen self-defense will be deep and lasting.
Most of us have fired a gun at least once. Many of us have a gun in our home today. Gun ownership has increased steadily over the decades and is now common. Running counter to that trend, Democrat politicians became increasingly hostile towards gun owners in the last ten years. The Democrat party took that position while public opposition to gun-control grew. Today, democrat voters want gun-control as much as ever, but we saw the undecided middle and political independents step off the gun-control bandwagon. Here is why they abandoned the idea of gun-control.
The Seattle Police Department staffing emergency continues. The city is one emergency event away from a serious catastrophe. But leaders and the media remain mostly silent.
The so-called “HR Unavailable” list has grown considerably as of Dec. 10. This list features officers who are on extended leave and cannot be deployed. Officers only appear on the list after being absent for a minimum of 14 days.
Concurrently, the department continues to struggle to fill vacant patrol slots to meet minimum staffing numbers. Every single precinct, in every single watch, has open slots for nearly every single day in December.
Add ships being dragged along by giant kites to the list of things the industry is exploring in its quest to decarbonize.
At the start of next year, the Ville de Bordeaux, a 154-meter-long ship that moves aircraft components for Airbus SE, will unfurl a 500 square meter kite on journeys across the Atlantic Ocean. It will undergo six months of trials and tests before full deployment.
BLUF:
The Chronicle of Higher Education today is out with an article bemoaning J.D. Vance for saying “professors are the enemy.” I wonder where he could possibly have gotten such an outlandish idea?
One reason the left hates the American Constitution, and wishes to replace it, is that its embedded principles along with much of its explicit text is foursquare against the two main purposes of the left: class struggle and race struggle. Never mind the drive to abolish the electoral college, or the Senate, or admit new states to increase the odds of Democratic election victories. Just take in how the left wants to rewrite—which means abolish—the Bill of Rights.
The Boston Globe is currently running a feature series about how to “edit” the Constitution, which of course means replacing it in practice with an egalitarian Constitution that would place much more power to control people and resources in elites like the kind of people you find in the editorial suites of the Boston Globe. How convenient.
Dr. Anthony Fauci has been an advocate of forced vaccinations, arguing the only way to get the pandemic under control is through “many, many more mandates.”
But suddenly, he’s beginning to talk about vaccine mandates differently.
During an interview with CNBC’s “Squawk Box,” the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases director was asked about comments former FDA commissioner Dr. Scott Gottlieb made regarding vaccine mandates.
“I want to ask you about vaccine mandates, in part because it continues to be a national debate,” said host Andrew Ross Sorkin. “Dr. Scott Gottlieb comes on this program regularly and one of the things that he has said repeatedly is that he believes it’s possible that those mandates have become counterproductive not just towards getting people to take the vaccine today but what it does to the psyche of Americans around taking other vaccines in the future. Do you agree with him?”
While Fauci called Gottlieb a friend, he said he didn’t agree and didn’t know what he was referring to. He also changed his tune on calling vaccine mandates, mandates.
“Mandates—that’s a radioactive word. Requirements—people seem to respond better to that. They work,” Fauci responded. “We are never going to get out of this outbreak if we still have 50 million people who for reasons that are still very, very difficult to understand refuse to get vaccinated when you have a virus that’s killed 800,000 Americans and caused 50 million infections so if people still do not want to get vaccinated sometimes you have to for the common good make requirements.”
the corporate media is going to drop the word “mandates” now and start using “requirements” instead, like they call forced masking “universal mask policies”. Leftists think if you control language, you control people. Notice it. https://t.co/TKLwd4Nx68
Should we rewrite the First and Second Amendments? In a contribution to a Boston Globeseries on “editing the Constitution,” law professor Mary Anne Franks of the University of Miami proposes replacing the first two items in the Bill of Rights with more qualified versions. You can catch Franks’ drift from the subtitle of her book: The Cult of the Constitution: Our Deadly Devotion to Guns and Free Speech.
“As legal texts go, neither of the two amendments is a model of clarity or precision,” Franks wrote at the Globe. But her rewrites don’t improve the situation. The core idea is to make the amendments more consistent with promoting the general welfare, as promised in the Constitution’s preamble. But Americans have traditionally — and rightly — believed strong protections for individual rights themselves promote the general welfare. Franks’ versions offer much too little in that regard.
Her edit of the First Amendment would on its face sharply curtail freedom of speech, affirming “the right to freedom of expression, association, peaceful assembly, and petition of the government for redress of grievance” but making them “subject to responsibility for abuses.” All “conflicts of such rights shall be resolved in accordance with the principle of equality and dignity of all person,” she says.
Who will determine the nature of these abuses, enforce that responsibility, and resolve the conflicts? What does “the principle of equality and dignity” mean in practice? After complaining of imprecision, Franks doesn’t say. Her proposal sounds rife for abuse by a government that won’t always be run by people who share her political preferences.
Her Second Amendment is tweaked to get rid of all the icky stuff about guns and militias. Instead, self-defense is rooted in bodily autonomy, which is fair enough. But Franks would also give the government the right to take “reasonable measures to protect the health and safety of the public as a whole.” More than a year into the pandemic, we can safely say there is no real consensus on what that means. And adding abortion to the Second Amendment, as she also does, may be the only possible way to make our most controversial amendment even more contentious.
Nobody would ratify these complex reboots of the first two amendments. Yet liberals are increasingly openly hostile to the limitations the basic structure of the Constitution imposes on their political agenda, as Franks’ piece and most of the Globe‘s other articles in this section demonstrate anew. Conservatives had better answer.
To the editor: This is in response to a letter to the editor from GunSense Vermont than ran in the Nov. 30 edition of the Montpelier-Barre Times Argus.
I have to wonder why “thoughtful people” and GunSense Vermont (GSVT) are appalled by the Rittenhouse verdict. Kyle Rittenhouse, who defended himself from a violent and life threatening attack, was charged, tried and acquitted by a jury of his peers. This is a clear example of self defense against known criminals.
Thoughtful people should wonder who GSVT is trying to protect — pedophiles, domestic abusers, or repeat offenders who illegally possess firearms? Rittenhouse’s attackers were all of the above, and GSVT takes the side of such criminal entities in their commentary.
Were the activities on that day a peaceful march like GSVT would have you believe? No, these law breakers were involved in a violent riot complete with looting and vandalism. The Rittenhouse verdict sends the right message, upholding the rule of law. Every citizen has the right to defend himself and herself.
Speaking of shooting defenseless victims, have you heard what Alec Baldwin has been up to recently? Where is your outrage, GSVT?
Randy Gray
N. Springfield, Vermont, Dec. 14
Welcome to Sioux Falls, South Dakota where – at the airport – you can find a guy advertising a gun auction between your gate and baggage claim
LAKELAND, Fla. – Detectives with the Polk County Sheriff’s Office responded to the shooting of a man who they said broke into a Lakeland home Tuesday afternoon.
The homeowner told deputies that the man, later identified as 42-year-old Steven Stillwell, forced his way into the residence by throwing a flower pot through a glass door at around 12:50 p.m., according to a news release.
Deputies said Stillwell was shot three times by the homeowner. Stillwell was later taken to a hospital where he was last reported in critical, stable condition, according to the release.
Detectives said they found a shotgun belonging to Stillwell in the backyard of the home, as well as video evidence showing Stillwell approaching the home through the backyard.
Polk County Sheriff Grady Judd said the evidence in the case indicated that Stillwell illegally entered the home, and that the homeowner did the right thing by shooting him.
“The castle doctrine is very clear in Florida law. A person’s home is his refuge,” Judd said in a statement. “The homeowner did exactly what he had a right to do. I commend him for protecting himself and defending his home.”
Polk County deputies said the shooting is still under investigation.
A teenager was shot in Lawrence [Indiana] on Tuesday afternoon while he and two other people attempted to rob an employee of a pawnshop, according to the Lawrence Police Department.
The shooting occurred near the intersection of Pendleton Pike and Franklin Road after the pawnshop employee left the business to run an errand, said Deputy Chief Gary Woodruff of the Lawrence Police Department.
At least one of the alleged robbers had a gun. Gunfire was exchanged between the pawnshop employee and the alleged robbers, Woodruff said.
One of the alleged robbers was shot and fled with the other two, Woodruff said.
More people have died from COVID on Biden’s watch than did on Trump’s watch. When a reporter finally asked Biden a question about that on Wednesday, Biden’s sole response was to give one of his patented “aw, gosh” fecal matter–eating grins, laugh, and walk away. The media seemed just fine with that.
FLASHBACK to Biden on October 5, 2020:
“200,000 plus have died. 50,000 a day are getting the virus. 1,000 thereabouts are dying…The president should take responsibility.”pic.twitter.com/JTVEDCYotf
Antigun think tanks and politicians push narratives that private citizens don’t “need” firearms for self-defense so they shouldn’t have them. That narrative has fallen apart over the past two years of rampant rioting and civil unrest as the same groups called to defund police.
The same antigun collectives are pushing a new narrative to dehumanize new gun owners with the tactic of shaming Americans into not exercising their Second Amendment. New gun owners have their own thoughts.
New Antigun ‘Science’
Researchers from Rutgers University, as reported by The Philadelphia Inquirer, saw the historic surge of firearm sales over the past two years and had to do something. They slapped together a behavioral study on 2020 – 2021 first-time gun buyers.
This is the kind of academic we should always be on guard to watch for.
This is a real, actual ‘enemy domestic’ of the Constitution and Bill of Rights.
And, they infest the schools and universities, filling our children’s mind with this collectivist, authoritarian statist, mush.
Read – carefully- what she wants. Her revisions are what’s called ‘positive rights‘. What she wants the governmentto do, in effect granting rights from goobermint power.
Her definition of how the 1st and 2nd amendment were written are defined by her and her ilk as ‘negative rights‘. Rights already possessed by the people, that the goobermint is restricted from abridging or infringing.
Remember, when more than one politician down through history has said: ‘Any government that’s large enough to give you everything is powerful enough to take it all away.‘ One should believe them.
BY MARY ANNE FRANKS
Speech and guns: two of the most contentious issues in America today, with controversies fueled not only by personal passions and identity politics but by competing interpretations of the Constitution. Perhaps more than any other parts of the Constitution, the First and Second Amendments inspire religious-like fervor in many Americans, with accordingly irrational results.
As legal texts go, neither of the two amendments is a model of clarity or precision. More important, both are deeply flawed in their respective conceptualizations of some of the most important rights of a democratic society: the freedom of expression and religion and the right of self-defense. These two amendments are highly susceptible to being read in isolation from the Constitution as a whole and from its commitments to equality and the collective good.
The First and Second Amendments tend to be interpreted in aggressively individualistic ways that ignore the reality of conflict among competing rights. This in turn allows the most powerful members of society to reap the benefits of these constitutional rights at the expense of vulnerable groups. Both amendments would be improved by explicitly situating individual rights within the framework of “domestic tranquility” and the “general welfare” set out in the Constitution’s Preamble.
Making such an edit to the First Amendment would provide stronger and fairer protections for the right of expression, including by acknowledging, as many state constitutions do, that every person remains responsible for abuses of that right. (Such a modification would, for example, help undo the damage caused by the Supreme Court’s decision in Citizens United and remove constitutional barriers to reasonable campaign-finance laws that promote democratic legitimacy.) In addition, the implicit principle of the separation of church and state should be made explicit:
Every person has the right to freedom of expression, association, peaceful assembly, and petition of the government for redress of grievances, consistent with the rights of others to the same and subject to responsibility for abuses. All conflicts of such rights shall be resolved in accordance with the principle of equality and dignity of all persons.
Both the freedom of religion and the freedom from religion shall be respected by the government. The government may not single out any religion for interference or endorsement, nor may it force any person to accept or adhere to any religious belief or practice.
Both amendments would be improved by explicitly situating individual rights within the framework of “domestic tranquility” and the “general welfare” set out in the Constitution’s Preamble.
The Second Amendment’s idiosyncratic and anachronistic focus on militias and “arms” degrades the concept of self-defense. The right to safeguard one’s life should not be conflated with or reduced to the right to use a weapon, especially a weapon that is so much more likely to inflict injury and death than to avoid it. Far better would be an amendment that guarantees a meaningful right to bodily autonomy and obligates the government to implement reasonable measures to protect public health and safety:
All people have the right to bodily autonomy consistent with the right of other people to the same, including the right to defend themselves against unlawful force and the right of self-determination in reproductive matters. The government shall take reasonable measures to protect the health and safety of the public as a whole.
Mary Anne Franks is the Michael R. Klein Distinguished Scholar Chair at the University of Miami School of Law and the author of “The Cult of the Constitution: Our Deadly Devotion to Guns and Free Speech.”
The Ohio Senate passed legislation Wednesday that will allow any Ohioans 21 and older to carry a concealed weapon, so long as they’re allowed to possess it under state and federal law.
Currently, Ohioans must pass a background check and demonstrate proof of eight hours of training to obtain a concealed carry license. Senate Bill 215 nixes these guardrails, along with a requirement that armed people “promptly” inform police officers that they’re carrying a concealed weapon during a stop.
All Senate Republicans, minus Sen. Jerry Cirino, R-Kirtland, voted for the legislation. Democrats opposed the bill.
Both the House and Senate have now passed separate but similar versions of “constitutional carry” or “permitless carry” legislation, as it’s commonly known. Lawmakers will have to agree on a final version to send to Gov. Mike DeWine.
A DeWine spokesman said Wednesday the governor is reviewing the bill and noted he has “long supported the Second Amendment rights of law-abiding citizens to keep and bear arms.”
CLEVELAND — The number of women who own a gun is on the rise. A recent study from Harvard University shows that 42% of gun owners in the country are women. That’s a 14% rise over the last five years. The same study found nearly 3.5 million women became gun owners between January 2019 and April 2021.
“It’s a responsibility. It’s a huge responsibility,” said Amanda Suffecool.
Suffecool calls herself an “accidental activist.” A firearms instructor and radio host, Suffecool is also an advocate for gun rights in America.
“Unfortunately, the world is not the warm, fuzzy place it used to be,” said Candy Petticord.
Petticord is also a firearms instructor and a mom of 12. She started shooting five years ago.
“I woke up,” she said when asked why she decided to buy her first gun. “I realized yes, I’m the mom. I’m the caregiver but I’m also the protector when my husband is away. So the kitchen knives, forks and spoons weren’t going to do the job.”
In the Harvard study, a quarter of the woman who own a firearm said self-defense was the reason they wanted to buy a gun. In another study from the female gun ownership group A Girl and A Gun, the women they surveyed gave many reasons. The top included the cultural upheaval in the Summer of 2020, the 2020 elections, lack of law enforcement resources, and uncertainty because of the pandemic.
HOUSTON, Texas (KTRK) — Police say a man was shot by his ex-girlfriend three times overnight in southeast Houston, but he is the one who will likely face charges.
Just before 10 p.m. Tuesday, Houston police said the man used a concrete paver to break a glass patio door of his ex’s apartment in the 11600 block of Gulf Pointe Drive.
Police said his ex-girlfriend was inside with her new boyfriend.
“He decided today, I guess out of jealousy, he took a concrete paver, he bashed in the back door patio window,” Lt. R. Willkens said. It was a door with a lot of glass on it. He busted it and went into the apartment.”
Investigators said once inside, he chased after his ex-girlfriend, and that’s when she grabbed a pistol and opened fire.
He was shot twice in the legs and once in the stomach, according to police.
The man ran back through the door he broke and was later found collapsed nearby, police said. He was taken to the hospital and is expected to survive.
Investigators say he will likely face charges for the break-in. Meanwhile, the ex-girlfriend is not likely to be charged, police said.
It has not been a good couple of days for Democrats. Two days ago, the 5th Circuit delivered a stunning rebuke of the Biden administration, denying their appeal of Trump’s “Remain in Mexico” policy. Yesterday, Adam Schiff got caught doctoring text messages during a January 6th committee hearing. Then today, the thermonuclear bomb went off.
Joe Biden’s “Build Back Better” agenda was officially shelved after an agreement with Joe Manchin couldn’t be reached. On that note, my prediction that Manchin would stall things out into next year proved correct, and I still believe his ultimate goal is to kill it entirely in the softest way possible.
Of course, the Democrats needed an excuse for why they were punting on the president’s chief policy priority, and some overpaid consultants settled on “voting rights.” Sure, everyone who is legally entitled to voting rights already has them, but when you’ve got nothing else, you’ve got nothing else.
Well, that great hope lasted for all of a few hours. Kyrsten Sinema has now come flying in off the top rope, destroying any hope that Democrats can pass a federal takeover of the country’s elections.
Dems shelved the Build Back Better bill – the cornerstone of the Biden agenda — to shift to election reform bills.
Honestly, none of this made sense in the first place. Why would you move off a signature policy goal in order to focus on another bill that you have nowhere near the votes needed to pass it? At least with the “Build Back Better” bill you only needed to negotiate with Sinema and Manchin because it can be passed via reconciliation. But on this “voting rights” farce, you need 60 votes, and there’s no chance Sinema is going to suddenly change her mind on the filibuster. So, what exactly was the strategy here?
The answer here is that there isn’t one — except a lame attempt to save face.
I’m afraid it’s going to take a serious war with a ‘peer opponent’ (read that as Russia and/or China) with massive amounts of American blood spilled, to get these morons, and their idiotic ‘woke’ mentality excised from the military, along with the politicians who thought up this BS.
The top brass of the United States Military are all genuinely committed to never winning another war, ever again. This will not surprise those of us who have been alive long enough to remember the incompetent and deadly Afghanistan withdrawal last August. Still, it is jarring to hear a Navy Flag Officer, nominated to be the Vice Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, say that “gender advisers” for combat troops are critical to mission success.
“Gender advisers” come from the 2017 Women, Peace and Security Act passed by the House and Senate and signed by President Donald Trump (I am weeping openly just typing that).
This bill expresses the sense of Congress that: (1) the United States should be a global leader in promoting the participation of women in conflict prevention, management, and resolution and post-conflict relief and recovery efforts; (2) the political participation and leadership of women in fragile environments, particularly during democratic transitions, is critical to sustaining democratic institutions; and (3) the participation of women in conflict prevention and conflict resolution helps promote more inclusive and democratic societies and is critical to country and regional stability.
(Sec. 5) The President, within one year after enactment of this bill and again four years later, shall submit to the appropriate congressional committees and make public a Women, Peace, and Security Strategy, which shall:
be aligned with other nations’ plans to improve the participation of women in peace and security processes, conflict prevention, peace building, and decision-making institutions; and
include goals and evaluation plans to ensure strategy effectiveness.
Such a strategy shall include a specific implementation plan from each relevant federal agency.
The President is urged to promote women’s participation in conflict prevention.
In addition to breaking my heart that Donald Trump signed this Bill into law, then Representative, now Governor, Kristi Noem sponsored the bill in the House. We have long suspected Kristi was a squish. Now, most of think qualified women should be included in all endeavors where they are needed, but why, in the name of homemade sin, does the military need gender advisers? We have women at every level of the U.S. Military. Are they not capable of advising? Are there not men in the U.S. military who value the perspective of women and can advise on the value of that perspective? This excrement is crazy making.
When I want to know whether military excrement is real, I search the Army War College website. Here is the description for the Gender Adviser course at the Army WAR College:
The military is committed to never winning another war, ever again. Can you see Admirals David Farrugut or Chester Nimitz being down with a Gender Adviser? Admiral Christopher Grady is down with the Gender Advisers. He’ll be out there bleating, “Damn the guided missiles. Get me the Gender Advisers.”. Joe Biden’s nominee to be Vice Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff said as much in his Senate Armed Services Committee Confirmation hearing. From the Washington Free Beacon:
President Joe Biden’s nominee for the vice chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff told the Senate “gender advisers” for combat troops are critical to the United States’ success, a position some veterans say is nothing more than a left-wing initiative that distracts from the military’s core duties.
The revelation came during a Dec. 8 exchange with Sen. Jeanne Shaheen (D., N.H.), who asked how Adm. Christopher Grady intends to implement “women, peace, and security” legislation within the Joint Chiefs of Staff.
“The role of a gender adviser is a way to attack a very significant issue, and if confirmed, I look forward to leveraging those advisers who can make me think better and smarter about the issues that you raise,” Grady said. “So I look forward to, if confirmed, understanding that ecosystem and helping advance that cause going forward again.”
Do you think Admiral Grady was always this much of a pussy-footing, tea drinker, or is he saying whatever he has to say to get a job? Whatevs! He will fit right in General Mark “White Rage” Milley. Watch and despair as Grady sucks up openly to Senator Jean Shaheen, Senator sponsor of the Women, Peace and Security Act:
Intercede for us, General Patton. This is exactly what President/General Eisenhower meant by the Military Industrial Complex. Let’s get troops killed. Let’s leave $80 million in equipment for our enemy to use against us, but our gender advisers will put gold stars on our daily reports to the Pentagon. My favorite Twitter response regarding Admiral Grady:
This response from a Purple Heart recipient is where I stand:
“When someone nominated to be the vice chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff says something like this, it tells me top brass is aligned with radical political elements in the country,” he said. “You have people’s lives on the line. These positions aren’t about how to communicate with Afghan women, we have a diplomatic corps for that.”
As for Gender Advisers help with domestic issues, I can handle that in less than a 40 hour course:
1. Do your job.
2. Be respectful to everyone
3. Keep your hands to yourself.
4. Don’t defecate where you eat.
5. Kill the enemy and have your battle buddy’s back.
Please let me know if I missed anything. I really want a job as a Gender Adviser. Sounds like a sweet gig. And, I would love to see our military win, every time.
Not one thing SloJoe wants would have stropped that
Joe Biden put gun control back on the front burner, using the ninth anniversary of the Sandy Hook mass shooting to call for stricter gun control laws, according to CNN.
Calling the shooting—committed by a disturbed young man who murdered his mother and took her legally-purchased firearms to the school in Newtown, Conn.—an “unconscionable act of violence,” Biden said he wants the U.S. Senate to pass three pieces of legislation. One expands background checks, another would prohibit gun ownership by “abusers,” and the third would reportedly create “community violence intervention” programs under the “Build Back Better” program.
CNN’s report portrayed Biden’s wish list as “limited scope” measures. But the president’s gun control agenda is hardly that. It includes a ban on so-called “assault weapons” and original capacity magazines. There would be waiting periods and other hoops through which law-abiding gun owners would have to jump while criminals would continue ignoring the laws and remain fairly well-armed.
This comes as Rasmussen Reports a new daily presidential tracking poll showing Biden’s popularity remains at a low, with only 21 percent of likely voters strongly approving of his job performance. On the other side, 47 percent of likely voters “strongly disapprove” of his job performance.
An unidentified “senior White House official” admitted to reporters that none of the president’s agenda items are enough “to fully solve this problem.” So Biden wants Congress to act.
That may not be likely with the midterm elections on the horizon in 2022. There is lots of speculation Republicans may capture at least one house of Congress, and possibly both the House and Senate, effectively slamming a door on Biden’s agenda.
For the present, CNN noted anti-gun Connecticut Sen. Chris Murphy is hopeful “negotiations could resume in the coming weeks to produce some bipartisan reform.” But what does that mean? When CNN talks about “gun reform” and “gun safety,” they’re talking about gun control. Grassroots gun rights activists call that “camo-speak,” because it camouflages what gun control advocates are actually seeking.
The White House “official” said Biden is still looking for a nominee to head the federal Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives. Earlier this year, Biden had to embarrassingly withdraw the nomination of former ATF agent David Chipman because of his advocacy of gun bans and tighter gun regulation. Gun rights activists from across the country flooded Capitol Hill with opposition to Chipman.
Meanwhile, Biden is under fire for being unable to handle the current crime crisis in major cities, with violent crime and homicides on the rise. According to Fox News, “At least 12 major cities, including New York, have already set historical murder records in 2021. Robberies and assaults are also on the rise, and retailers in major cities across the country are reporting an uptick in organized smash-and-grab crimes during the busy holiday shopping season.”
