View Full Version : Biden on the Assault Weapons Ban Re-Authorization
From a snip'it of the Capitol Hill News Letter
Biden plans to include certain Military and Law Enforcement Only Equipment amendments to the bill.
Which would most likely include such items as body armor and possibly mil spec night vision gear.
He was one of the prominent authors of the original AWB and he has championed legislation in his home state for similar prohibitions of the same items.
:mad:
Night vision caused deaths are on the rise you know.
Yep so is zombie attributed body armor deaths!
:D:D:D
Robb Jensen
11-25-08, 20:04
I'll bet Biden will want to ban milk when he finds out that all serial killers drank milk when they were babies! ;)
"The result of protecting the world from the effects of folly is an earth full of fools...."
Or something like that...
Gutshot John
11-25-08, 20:41
Biden plans to include certain Military and Law Enforcement Only Equipment amendments to the bill.
As VP Biden has no power to write or introduce legislation.
He has ZERO control over any amendments.
Source please.
WOuldnt suprise me, they have to stop all those drive buy bayonettings perpetrated at night whilst criminals are wearing NODs you know! For the Children who play at night and all!:rolleyes:
As VP Biden has no power to write or introduce legislation.
He has ZERO control over any amendments.
Source please.
this.
As VP Biden has no power to write or introduce legislation.
He has ZERO control over any amendments.
Source please.
Ummm, the Vice President is the head of the Senate I'm sure he has a considerable say so over bills and amendments.
Not to mention that Biden is a long term Senator with a majority RAT hold on Congress and Senate I would bet you he has a sizable say so on what happens in the Senate...
:rolleyes:
Gutshot John
11-25-08, 21:29
Ummm, the Vice President is the head of the Senate I'm sure he has a considerable say so over bills and amendments.
President of the Senate has ONE legislative power. To cast the deciding vote in a tie. Nothing else, nada, zip.
Not to mention that Biden is a long term Senator with a majority RAT hold on Congress and Senate I would bet you he has a sizable say so on what happens in the Senate...
:rolleyes:
That wasn't the implication of your original statement. You said he "planned to include amendments to the bill." This is constitutionally different.
Yes he may "lobby" his former colleagues on the Hill, and they may introduce that language, but he himself has ZERO legislative ability. He certainly wouldn't be lobbying on his own, he'd be doing it as part of the Obama administration.
The Constitution is very clear about "separation of powers".
Still no source for the original claim that might allow some elucidation.
FromMyColdDeadHand
11-25-08, 21:30
I guess the body armour thing is because of things like the North Hollywood incident, but it does smack of elitism at least.
I'll give up my bodyarmour when Obama does.
Gutshot John
11-25-08, 21:33
Seriously for as many people that complain about the Constitution and jump up and down about potential violations, there doesn't seem to be many here that actually understand how the government functions, what powers and doctrines apply to what situation.
John, you're right that Biden has no real legislative power as VP, but the fact that the Executive branch including both the Prez and VPrez, and their cabinet appointees have an long history of being outspoken proponents of extremely restrictive gun control measures, and seem to be actively campaigning for further legislation to be introduced, should be enough to concern us all.
Obama-Biden seem to have an open invite for the House and Senate to introduce more legislation -- and there are plenty of loonies in either that live to introduce this crap.
Man I'm just citing a story from a source on Free Republic don't shoot the messengers. I believe we (hopefully) feel the same about the "future" AWB
Seriously for as many people that complain about the Constitution and jump up and down about potential violations, there doesn't seem to be many here that actually understand how the government functions, what powers and doctrines apply to what situation.
hmmmm pot... kettle.... hmmmmm I'm staying out of this one.
Gutshot John
11-25-08, 22:06
John, you're right that Biden has no real legislative power as VP, but the fact that the Executive branch including both the Prez and VPrez, and their cabinet appointees have an long history of being outspoken proponents of extremely restrictive gun control measures, and seem to be actively campaigning for further legislation to be introduced, should be enough to concern us all.
Obama-Biden seem to have an open invite for the House and Senate to introduce more legislation -- and there are plenty of loonies in either that live to introduce this crap.
Any amendment "included" in any potential AWB legislation, are voted on by the entire Congress.
No one Senator, not the President, not the VP have any power to "include" any language in final legislation.
The "legislature" operates so that no one man "dictates" what the law is.
The Obama Administration may indeed request certain language, but it has ZERO control over what the actual language will be.
Gutshot John
11-25-08, 22:08
Man I'm just citing a story from a source on Free Republic don't shoot the messengers. I believe we (hopefully) feel the same about the "future" AWB
Link to the story please, it may help in determining what was actually said and may explain how you might have misunderstood.
Likewise it may inform those of us concerned about the 2a and educate those that don't understand the process.
Any amendment "included" in any potential AWB legislation, are voted on by the entire Congress.
No one Senator, not the President, not the VP have any power to "include" any language in final legislation.
The "legislature" operates so that no one man "dictates" what the law is.
The Obama Administration may indeed request certain language, but it has ZERO control over what the actual language will be.
No argument from me on any of those points. Biden's statements are just an example of your last point, that the Obama admin. can encourage legislation or specific language in legislation. And they're making it obvious that they welcome any restrictive gun control legislation that happens to make it to Obama's desk. That's all.
President of the Senate has ONE legislative power. To cast the deciding vote in a tie. Nothing else, nada, zip.
That wasn't the implication of your original statement. You said he "planned to include amendments to the bill." This is constitutionally different.
Yes he may "lobby" his former colleagues on the Hill, and they may introduce that language, but he himself has ZERO legislative ability. He certainly wouldn't be lobbying on his own, he'd be doing it as part of the Obama administration.
The Constitution is very clear about "separation of powers".
Still no source for the original claim that might allow some elucidation.
Right. No worries. It;s not like a new AWB is part of the Democratic Platform or mentioned in EVERY one of their press releases. Or a stated goal of the prez.
Keep you head in the sand.
It'll make it easier for them to f us in the A.
variablebinary
11-26-08, 03:08
Biden can creep around stirring shit with other dems behind the scenes, but really, as a VP he has no real power
Biden talks................ a lot.........................even for a politician. Just something to keep in mind.
Gutshot John
11-26-08, 07:07
Right. No worries. It;s not like a new AWB is part of the Democratic Platform or mentioned in EVERY one of their press releases. Or a stated goal of the prez.
Keep you head in the sand.
It'll make it easier for them to f us in the A.
Either you can't read, or (more likely) you didn't even bother to read what I wrote.
Try again.
CarlosDJackal
11-26-08, 10:00
Night vision caused deaths are on the rise you know.
You're right. the number of night-vision-drive-by deaths have steadily increased with the availability of 3rd generation devices!! :rolleyes:
But they won't take our guns away... :rolleyes:
But they won't take our guns away... :rolleyes:
Not all of them, just the ones we're not qualified to handle. It's for our own good.:p
I wouldn't joke about the night vision thing. Little did I know that possession of an AN/PVS-14 is a misdemeanor in the State of California;
A sniperscope is defined as a device made or adapted for use on a firearm that enables the operator to detect objects during nighttime through the use of a projected infrared light source and an electronic telescope. (Penal Code § 468.)
Any person who buys, sells, receives, disposes of, conceals, or possesses a sniperscope is guilty of a misdemeanor. This prohibition does not apply to authorized use or possession of sniperscopes by members of the armed forces or peace officers, and does not prohibit use or possession solely for scientific research or educational purposes. (Penal Code § 468.)
Thank you, Gutshot John, for continuing to argue that the recent election means NOTHING to gun owners, that the new president is POWERLESS, and that we might as well discontinue donating to the NRA as NOTHING will be done to infringe on the rights of gun owners under Obama and the majorities in both houses.
I apologize to you in advance if you actually are a gun-owning supporter of our 2nd Amendment rights, but after reading all your recent posts on the matter, you come across more like a supporter of another AWB, or at least someone who is very very naive about the next administration's intentions and capabilities. There were many like you, who, in 1993, belittled the idea that the 1994 AWB would pass - and yet it did pass, and many of us remember it vividly. We underestimate our opponents at our own peril.
Either you can't read, or (more likely) you didn't even bother to read what I wrote.
Try again.
Believe me, if Saxby loses his seat in Georgia and Norm coleman loses his seat in Minnesota the libs will have a fillabuster prof senate and every anti-gun bill they want will pass. The real power lies in the senate, not the white house. joe"commie" biden talks a big game but remember he wrote the first AWB and you can bet if those two seats in congress are lost change is coming. Just the wrong kind of change!
Believe me, if Saxby loses his seat in Georgia and Norm coleman loses his seat in Minnesota the libs will have a fillabuster prof senate and every anti-gun bill they want will pass. The real power lies in the senate, not the white house. joe"commie" biden talks a big game but remember he wrote the first AWB and you can bet if those two seats in congress are lost change is coming. Just the wrong kind of change!
And then we'll water Jefferson's Tree of Liberty.
Actions have consequences.
Gutshot John
11-26-08, 15:42
Thank you, Gutshot John, for continuing to argue that the recent election means NOTHING to gun owners, that the new president is POWERLESS, and that we might as well discontinue donating to the NRA as NOTHING will be done to infringe on the rights of gun owners under Obama and the majorities in both houses.
Nonono...Thank YOU for putting words in my mouth and otherwise missing the point. The Executive Branch ENFORCES the law, the Legislative Branch MAKES the law. The Executive has ZERO, NADA, ZIP, NONE power to write law. For those like you that pride themselves on supporting the 2a of the BoR, understanding the rest of the Constitution seems to be lacking.
I apologize to you in advance if you actually are a gun-owning supporter of our 2nd Amendment rights, but after reading all your recent posts on the matter, you come across more like a supporter of another AWB, or at least someone who is very very naive about the next administration's intentions and capabilities. There were many like you, who, in 1993, belittled the idea that the 1994 AWB would pass - and yet it did pass, and many of us remember it vividly. We underestimate our opponents at our own peril.
Seriously did you even bother to read what I said? or do you just make stuff up as you go along?
Your entire premise above is fatally flawed. Because I said NOTHING about whether such a ban is likely or unlikely, ONLY that Biden has ZERO control over the language per the original post.
Read the Constitution and learn how government works. The Vice Presidency has no power to control the language of legislation or any amendments to an AWB. That's ALL I was saying and yet somehow a slew of you missed it entirely.
You want to talk about the Constitution and yet you have no basic understanding of how the government works or even what I was talking about. RE-READ the Constitution and then what I ACTUALLY wrote and then try to offer relevant commentary.
No need to apologize, you know nothing about me, nor the subject, so any opinion was therefore uneducated.
The Executive has ZERO, NADA, ZIP, NONE power to write law.
I'm not as educated on these workings as i would like but...
Did Clinton not need to sign the AWB into law?
Does the POTUS not have "the carrot and the stick" of sign/veto?Seems to have been used to great effect on many an occasion no?
The Executive branch may not write law,but it sure seems to have a great deal of control(when it chooses) over what does and doesnt get written.
Seems like alot of arguing over semantics and technicalities...just for arguments sake.
Gutshot John
11-26-08, 16:28
I'm not as educated on these workings as i would like but...
Did Clinton not need to sign the AWB into law?
He signed a Bill APPROVED/WRITTEN/CREATED by Congress. He had no control over what that language would be.
Does the POTUS not have "the carrot and the stick" of sign/veto?Seems to have been used to great effect on many an occasion no?
Carrot and Stick? Wrong metaphor. Moreover irrelevant to Biden as the VP has no veto power.
The Executive branch may not write law,but it sure seems to have a great deal of control(when it chooses) over what does and doesnt get written.
NO, once again, and please read this thread. Any amendment or language in the law, has to make it through committee, and then is VOTED on by the ENTIRE congress.
The President can ASK for certain language, but he has ZERO control over whether it is included.
Seems like alot of arguing over semantics and technicalities...just for arguments sake.
The Legislative Process is a technical process, full of semantics and argument. But what I'm talking about is Separation of Powers, which is a FUNDAMENTAL aspect of our form of government. I'm not talking some esoteric phenomena, I'm talking about how the government actually works.
Carrot and Stick? Wrong metaphor.
Very possible...carrot = i'll sign,stick = veto?
Moreover irrelevant to Biden as the VP has no veto power.
You've specifically mentioned the executive branch.I doubt Biden would be pushing for anything not ok'd by the POTUS.
The President can ASK for certain language, but he has ZERO control over whether it is included.
No power to decide whether it gets signed into law?...If so i would say that provides a great deal of power over the language(even if in an indirect way).
The Legislative Process is a technical process, full of semantics and argument. But what I'm talking about is Separation of Powers, which is a FUNDAMENTAL aspect of our form of government. I'm not talking some esoteric phenomena, I'm talking about how the government actually works.
Wasnt aware the pull the executive branch had in these areas was a secret.I was under the impression it was on display fairly regularly...often with much fanfare.
typically-"i'll veto/sign the bill if this is/isnt included"...
"the executive branch doesnt write law"-true.
"the executive branch has zero control over what is written into law"?-yeah,ok.
Gutshot John
11-26-08, 16:59
Very possible...carrot = i'll sign,stick = veto?
How does a veto equate to a stick? There is no punishment there, Congress passes bills regularly that they know will be vetoed, in doing so they often try to make a political point.
You've specifically mentioned the executive branch.I doubt Biden would be pushing for anything not ok'd by the POTUS.
Which if you read my earlier posts, was exactly my point. Now then what does the title of the thread, and the original post say that I responded to?
No power to decide whether it gets signed unto law?...If so i would say that provides a great deal of power over the language.
Ugh for the last time, this isn't how the system works, things like pocket vetos etc make any claim that Biden (or Obama for that matter) can wave their hand and make laws by decree. A President either endorses or rejects language APPROVED by Congress. Congress writes the law including any amendments. Again please see the original post
Wasnt aware the pull the executive branch had in these areas was a secret.I was under the impression it was on display fairly regularly...often with much fanfare.
No secret, simply put the Executive Branch has NO power or authority to write law. Lobbying for language is different than writing the law.
typically-"i'll veto/sign the bill if this is/isnt included"...
Again, this is is different than writing the bill or including any amendments. Amendments to legislation are approved/discarded by up or down vote, and with 2/3rds vote, makes any veto threat irrelevant
"the executive branch doesnt write law"-true.
Yes I know
"the executive branch has zero control over what is written into law"?-yeah,ok.
The President/Executive can lobby Congress, but he can't force it to do what he wants.
As VP Biden has no power to write or introduce legislation.
He has ZERO control over any amendments.
Source please.
but he has power to convene blue ribbon investigation panels, task force, etc.
look at what Hillary was about to do with health care in Bill's first term and she wasn't even elected...
Gutshot John
11-26-08, 17:04
but he has power to convene blue ribbon investigation panels, task force, etc.
VP has no power to do so, except under the President's aegis. Even if he could so what? Blue ribbon panels and task forces have ZERO legislative power.
look at what Hillary was about to do with health care in Bill's first term and she wasn't even elected...
First, she may have offered language, but she had no control over what the final version would be. Second the Bill didn't even make it out of Congress. Third, we all know how well that worked.
Congress writes the law including any amendments. Again please see the original post
Not arguing that.
Just that in practical terms the executive branch does indeed have the ability to shape such things...Especially with such a favorable audience.
Gutshot John
11-26-08, 17:19
Just that in practical terms the executive branch does indeed have the ability to shape such things...Especially with such a favorable audience.
I never said, argued or implied otherwise.
But that is not what the original post said.
bigshooter
11-26-08, 17:23
this thread is full of lose.
I never said, argued or implied otherwise.
If you say so.;)
Gutshot John
11-26-08, 17:32
If you say so.;)
Yep I sure did. :D
From Post #10:
Yes he may "lobby" his former colleagues on the Hill, and they may introduce that language, but he himself has ZERO legislative ability. He certainly wouldn't be lobbying on his own, he'd be doing it as part of the Obama administration.
From Post #16:
The Obama Administration may indeed request certain language, but it has ZERO control over what the actual language will be.
Just so its clear.
I trust Biden about as far as I can throw him.
Maybe Biden will be the fall guy for the gun issues. Can be proclaimed by The president as his 'pet issue'. The president looks squeaky clean, and Biden will take the heat. And it won't matter if he takes the heat. Who Cares?
Maybe Biden will be the fall guy for the gun issues. Can be proclaimed by The president as his 'pet issue'. The president looks squeaky clean, and Biden will take the heat. And it won't matter if he takes the heat. Who Cares?
Not really, sadly to many Americans just blame the President for everything/anything now.
As VP Biden has no power to write or introduce legislation.
He has ZERO control over any amendments.
Source please.
While you are technically correct John, behind the scenes, he can bring great pressure to bear. Sadly, with Peloshit and Harry the Red involved, he won't have to twist too many arms. I only base this on working 12 years in and around the Hill and 1600. Ripley's...
Its coming.
Imagine how much leverage Obama will have over legislators when it comes to agreeing to help campaign for them. Since Obama is the official stamp of approval of the mainstream media, democratic senators and reps would do best to have him support their future campaigns, make appearances, endorsements. Then there's Obama's campaign money-making machine that can be used to raise money for them as well.
The ironic thing in all of this is that despite the separation of powers and the intent of the Constitution, most senators and reps don't actaully write the legistlation. Hell, most of them don't even bother to READ the legislation before voting on it. They have staff that "advise" them on issues so they don't have to do the real work.
In many cases, large sections of legislation are actually written by lobbyists and special interests, then more or less rubber stamped by the sponsoring legislator. Then you have the committee debate and amendment, and floor debate and amendment, etc, but a lot of that is symbolic. So there are usually a lot of changes, but many just tack on unrelated pork provisions for the purpose of "compromise". And at the end of the day, many if not most of the legislators really have no idea what they are voting on. They've just read the highlights of the executive summary - well, not exactly READ, but one of their aides briefed them on it during lunch...
How many interviews with pro-AWB legislators have proven they have no idea what the provisions of the previous law meant, or even what the banned features on AWB's actually were?
But getting back to the main point of this thread:
If Obama is as smart as people say he is, he will steer clear of gun bans until after the economic crisis is passed and the 2010/2012 elections are in the bag. Anything else would show deliberate ignorance of what happened after the 1994 ban.
The ironic thing in all of this is that despite the separation of powers and the intent of the Constitution, most senators and reps don't actaully write the legistlation. Hell, most of them don't even bother to READ the legislation before voting on it. They have staff that "advise" them on issues so they don't have to do the real work.
In many cases, large sections of legislation are actually written by lobbyists and special interests, then more or less rubber stamped by the sponsoring legislator. Then you have the committee debate and amendment, and floor debate and amendment, etc, but a lot of that is symbolic. So there are usually a lot of changes, but many just tack on unrelated pork provisions for the purpose of "compromise". And at the end of the day, many if not most of the legislators really have no idea what they are voting on. They've just read the highlights of the executive summary - well, not exactly READ, but one of their aides briefed them on it during lunch...
So I see you have spent a little time "amongst 'em" as well. You are 100% correct on all accounts.
If Obama is as smart as people say he is, he will steer clear of gun bans until after the economic crisis is passed and the 2010/2012 elections are in the bag. Anything else would show deliberate ignorance of what happened after the 1994 ban.
Only time will tell this. Regardless if its '09 or '10, it IS coming.
Gutshot John
11-30-08, 06:02
While you are technically correct John, behind the scenes, he can bring great pressure to bear. Sadly, with Peloshit and Harry the Red involved, he won't have to twist too many arms. I only base this on working 12 years in and around the Hill and 1600. Ripley's...
Its coming.
Sigh, I really wish people would read my posts rather than shooting from the hip. If you read my posts you will find that I said EXACTLY what you did above.
The OP said that Biden "plans to include amendments", Biden has NO power to include or not include an amendment. AGAIN, Amendments are voted up or down by the Congress. Someone who worked on the Hill would understand that.
No the VP has very little pressure to bear, outside of representing the PRESIDENT'S agenda. I've never seen a VP lobby the hill for his own agenda.
Whether it's coming or not is academic, the point is that the VP has no control, real or Constitutional, over the legislative process.
PS. I used to work (and live) on the Hill as well.
The OP said that Biden "plans to include amendments", Biden has NO power to include or not include an amendment. AGAIN, Amendments are voted up or down by the Congress. Someone who worked on the Hill would understand that.
Correct. Thats the "book" answer. The one they teach you in Constitutional Law Class.
No the VP has very little pressure to bear, outside of representing the PRESIDENT'S agenda. I've never seen a VP lobby the hill for his own agenda.
"...outside of representing POTUS's agenda..." This is HUGE and although it "by the book" in the classroom may not have any "power", on the street it has a nuke load of power. It is real and it is palpable.
PS. I used to work (and live) on the Hill as well.
My condolences. If so, you know what I say to be truth unless you were parking cars at the Hinckley Hilton ( - which I highly doubt.)
Gutshot John
11-30-08, 07:55
Correct. Thats the "book" answer. The one they teach you in Constitutional Law Class.
Yes it's the Constitution, it's also how the government functions. You may remember "Separation of Powers".
"...outside of representing POTUS's agenda..." This is HUGE and although it "by the book" in the classroom may not have any "power", on the street it has a nuke load of power. It is real and it is palpable.
Please read the OP, it claimed that BIDEN planned to include amendments. He didn't say Obama, Obama Administration. VP has ZERO power to affect any legislation. He may lobby the hill, but he does so representing the Administration, not his own, agenda. Funny that you don't see members of the Executive Branch introducing, sponsoring or otherwise pushing legislation through the legislative process. They ask for what they want...then the Legislature works it out.
And having worked on the Hill, you would know how many times Congressmen/Senators often go their own way.
Simply put the implication that Biden can wave his hand and get these amendments included is absurd. There are a lot of other people with far more Constitutional power to do so. Like say Senate or Congressional Leadership.
All of which ignores that the OP still has refused to post a link to the article in question.
My condolences. If so, you know what I say to be truth unless you were parking cars at the Hinckley Hilton ( - which I highly doubt.)
What that members of the Executive Branch lobby congress? I don't know how many times I can say the exact thing.
John,
You really need to get your mind out of the academic side of this debate. I'm talking reality, street cred stuff.
I never said Biden could wave his hand and make it happen. Far from it. Apply loads of pressure ~ yes. Court and wine and dine ~ yes. Threaten ~ yes. Plead ~ yes. The dude has 35 + years of swine time. He knows how to make it work and how to apply what is needed.
As for someone from the Ex Branch doing the dirty work - of course you won't see that. Its not for public viewing. Does it happen? Please brother. And if the man himself doesn't feel like stooping, he has plenty of lackey's to do the dirty work.
The Constitution never got in the way of DC politics before. It is something to work around and its done EVERYDAY.
Gutshot John
11-30-08, 08:16
John,
You really need to get your mind out of the academic side of this debate. I'm talking reality, street cred stuff.
Ugh...seriously, I am talking about how the Congress ACTUALLY works. NO EXECUTIVE DECIDES WHAT LEGISLATION IS. HE ONLY SIGNS IT.
So what you're saying is that Amendments AREN'T voted on by the legislature? That's EXACTLY what happens on the street.
Constitutionally, realistically, congressionally, only the Congress decides what Amendments are included/rejected and what their language actually is.
I never said Biden could wave his hand and make it happen. ]
YOU didn't, the OP DID.
The dude has 35 + years of swine time. He knows how to make it work and how to apply what is needed.
Sorry, but in that 35+ years he's lost plenty of legislative battles, and will do so again, lobbying Congress on behalf of the President.
He knows people and things, that help him in this role, but it's not a "done deal" and many Congressmen/Senators, especially in traditionally red states, are going to tell him to get bent.
As for someone from the Ex Branch doing the dirty work - of course you won't see that. Its not for public viewing. Does it happen? Please brother. And if the man himself doesn't feel like stooping, he has plenty of lackey's to do the dirty work.
The Constitution never got in the way of DC politics before. It is something to work around and its done EVERYDAY.
You're saying I'm oversimplifying, but then you engage in exactly the same sort of nonsense.
Dirty work? What are you talking about? Lobbying Congress for the Administration isn't dirty work...it is how the system works.
As for the Constitution never getting "in the way of politics", I've yet to see any Executive or Administration, author legislation then send it up to the Hill to be read into the record without going through a bunch of legislators (usually being changed in the process).
There is no subversion of the Constitution in this. I'm sorry but the Executive doesn't "dictate" (please look up that word) the law.
My 179 Fils,
I think many of us understand how government works and the various branches, etc....However, since most of us are not lawyers or politicians the terminology and that we use is probably not correct. Having said that we all know that the President and Vice-President will absolutely have influence within their party and to think that they don't sit behind closed doors and deal is naive at best. I may be wrong but I seem to remember when the assault weapons ban passed, it was Al Gore that cast the tie breaking vote in Congress.
Gutshot John,
You can pick nits till the cows come home. You can chomp cheese and backpedal too. But you can't escape facts. Like Iraqgunz said and I said before that, Ex Branch will have a huge huge influence from both POTUS/V-POTUS, DOJ and perhaps DHS and likely from other departments I have failed to mention. The influence they have is enormous. Sure, some red staters (wrongly labeled I hasten to add) will fight it. So what? That doesn't change the fact that backdoor deals will be made. Ex Branch lobbies all the time. That is fact not fiction. And Biden will be in the thick of it. And the turds in charge of the Congress just make it all the easier. They are all singing from the same page of music.
The AWB will be back. And it will pass. What it looks like it its final edition is anyone's guess.
Fides supra omnes nisi honestas indeed. Too bad for us the oligarchy doesn't feel that way about the Constitution.
Gutshot John,
You can pick nits till the cows come home. You can chomp cheese and backpedal too. But you can't escape facts. Like Iraqgunz said and I said before that, Ex Branch will have a huge huge influence from both POTUS/V-POTUS, DOJ and perhaps DHS and likely from other departments I have failed to mention. The influence they have is enormous. Sure, some red staters (wrongly labeled I hasten to add) will fight it. So what? That doesn't change the fact that backdoor deals will be made. Ex Branch lobbies all the time. That is fact not fiction. And Biden will be in the thick of it. And the turds in charge of the Congress just make it all the easier. They are all singing from the same page of music.
The AWB will be back. And it will pass. What it looks like it its final edition is anyone's guess.
Fides supra omnes nisi honestas indeed. Too bad for us the oligarchy doesn't feel that way about the Constitution.
THIS is the point. There WILL be a new AWB, regardless of Joe Bdien's technical status. It is a GOAL of Dems in Senate, House and White house to make it happen. The energy on this and other sites devoted to trying to make it seem like we will dodge this bullet is infuriating. Sticking our head in the sand only makes our asses better targets.
Better to know it is coming, and prepare. Write your congressman. Stockpile Ammo.
Gutshot John
11-30-08, 12:39
Gutshot John,
You can pick nits till the cows come home. You can chomp cheese and backpedal too. But you can't escape facts.
So far as I can see, you're the only one that can't escape the basic fact that the VP per the OP cannot include or reject amendments to any piece of legislation.
Like Iraqgunz said and I said before that, Ex Branch will have a huge huge influence from both POTUS/V-POTUS, DOJ and perhaps DHS and likely from other departments I have failed to mention. The influence they have is enormous.
And if you had actually bothered to read what I wrote, you will see that I said EXACTLY that multiple times.
Influence is not control.
NO President EVER, has been able to wave his hand to create law through legislative sock puppets.
ALL PRESIDENT'S, VP's (even former senators) get handed legislative setbacks as a daily matter of course. We do NOT live in a dictatorship.
You want to claim I'm backpedaling, but you've refused to acknowledge that basic fact, and if you had worked on the hill you would certainly know that no president gets whatever he/she wants.
In all candor, you need to slow down and actually read what was said. You have no way of knowing what will happen until it actually does.
All in all the claims in the original post were not only misinformed, but have yet to be backed up by any documented fact.
Yeah I nitpick...especially when basic facts, which underlie an absurd premise are fatally flawed.
Gutshot John
11-30-08, 12:43
The energy on this and other sites devoted to trying to make it seem like we will dodge this bullet is infuriating. Sticking our head in the sand only makes our asses better targets.
The inanity of the above statement is telling.
No one is spending energy to make you stick your head in the sand, no one is claiming that there won't be an AWB.
The ONLY thing I've claimed is that Joe Biden as VP has ZERO power to include or reject amendments to any potential AWB.
People here get all piss and vinegar and whine about the Constitution and how they believe in the BoR, and yet the overwhelming majority hasn't even taken the time to read and/or understand how government works and so make idiotic claims as above.
The technical and functional status of Joe Biden is a "warm bag of spit".
Idiotic. Nice.
JOhn -- I get it -- you live in DC. You work on the Hill -- so how can you be so blind -- you're technically right about Biden's status, but what have we heard for the last 8 years about the influence that Cheney exerted on the Congressional Republicans?
A strict reading of the constitution in 2009 is worthless. It's a "living document now"
I don't remember seeing any "Office of the President elect" in there, but our new POTUS to be appears every day in front of a dais bearing his own seal.
Biden is not a warm bag of SPIT. he touted all through the campaign season how he proudly wrote the original AWB. he (and every Dem in power) wants a new one. To say that the Vice PResident who was a 30 year Senator would have NO INFLUENCE on his friends still there is what is inane -- and you keep repeating it.
Please stop. Stop impugning my intelligence, as well. You are not the only person here who has read t he Constitution. Some of us also understand political REALITY.
Will you get on here after they pass the new AWB and tell us it's unconstitutional while they drive steam rollers over guns in front of the White house?
Both would ignore REALITY.
Gutshot John
11-30-08, 12:52
JOhn -- I get it -- you live in DC. You work on the Hill -- so how can you be so blind -- you're technically right about Biden's status, but what have we heard for the last 8 years about the influence that Cheney exerted on the Congressional Republicans?
Yes I'm sure Dick Cheney (Prince of Darkness) waved his hand and everyone just did his bidding. No one dared tell the VP "No".
Please.
A strict reading of the constitution in 2009 is worthless.
No need for a strict reading, there is no functional power that says a VP can write, create or otherwise amend the law.
I don't remember seeing any "Office of the President elect" in there, but our new POTUS to be appears every day in front of a dais bearing his own seal.
Entirely irrelevant.
Biden proudly wrote the original AWB. he (and every Dem in power) wants a new one. To say that the Vice PResident who was a 30 year Senator would have NO INFLUENCE on his friends still there is inane -- and you keep repeating it.
I want a million dollars, doesn't mean I'm going to get it. Moreover you keep putting words in my mouth. I never said he had no INFLUENCE. I said he had no LEGISLATIVE power. Even you can't be that dense that you can't see the difference.
Please stop.
Please stop what? Correcting your mistakes. Ok, please stop making them and spouting inanities.
Will you get on here after they pass the new AWB and tell us it's unconstitutional while they drive steam rollers over guns in front of the White house?
Both would ignore REALITY.
This is either willfully dishonest or pathologically stupid. I never said anything about whether an AWB is likely or unlikely. I never said he wasn't going to push for it. What I did say was that he can't just wave his hand and bring another AWB into being by the force of his will. It doesn't work like that.
Please actually read my comments and try to offer something relevant and cogent to say.
Gutshot John
11-30-08, 12:56
Idiotic. Nice.
When you willfully twist words, and otherwise put them in my mouth I'm afraid that's idiotic.
When you question motivations of those that point out Constitutional realities as somehow trying to convince you that nothing is going to happen, now that's dishonest.
Jay Cunningham
11-30-08, 13:05
Gutshot John and Gunrider
I am sure that everyone has enjoyed your ongoing (and going, and going) argument, but this has turned into a two person pissing match.
Please take your impassioned desire to convince each other to PM or email.
This thread is done. Yippee!!!!
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.