How Did Your Senator Vote On Holder?


February 5, 2009, 11:10 PM
On Monday last Eric Holder was confirmed in the U.S. Senate by a roll call vote of 75 to 21 with 3 "not voting" (no, I don't know how that works). Since there are fewer than 75 Democrats in the Senate self-evidently more than a couple of Republicans plus the lone independent voted in favor of the confirmation. In fact no Democrats voted AGAINST Holder.

Here is a link to the results of the confirmation vote:

If you are represented by someone who voted to confirm arguably the most anti-RKBA AGUS in history I would respectfully suggest you write your Senator(s) to express your satisfaction/dissatisfaction with their vote. BTW, my two Senators, Cornyn and Hutchinson both voted against him. Cornyn was one of only two in the judiciary committee who voted against him there.

Remind these folks that people who take the time to write are also people who take time to vote in off-year elections. As they say in the Spainish-speaking community "su voto es su voz" - "your vote is your voice".

We need to hold these people accountable. We need to let them know where we stand. If it truely is the squeaky wheel that gets greased then we need to squeak loudly indeed.


If you enjoyed reading about "How Did Your Senator Vote On Holder?" here in archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join today for the full version!
February 5, 2009, 11:18 PM
Kansas both votes were a no. Thank you Senators Brownback and Roberts

February 5, 2009, 11:40 PM
Mine performed as expected. What a shame. Arkansas' own Lincoln and Pryor.

Too bad the senior Senator from Arizona forgot to pack his gumption for the vote, too.

February 6, 2009, 01:41 AM
Tennessee's two Republicans (Alexander and Corker) both let me down.

I am especially disappointed in Lamar. :(

Frightener 88
February 6, 2009, 02:05 AM
Reid(D) Yea Not much of a shocker

Ensign(R) Nay

Yosemite Sam
February 6, 2009, 02:28 AM
Missouri (one R, one D) both voted yea to confirm. :rolleyes:

February 6, 2009, 08:00 AM
Both here are democrats, guess.

February 6, 2009, 01:21 PM
Both Issakson and Casey of Georgia voted to confirm.

I'm sending a VERY strong letter to each, and advertising the facts on our 735-member gun club bulletin board...

February 6, 2009, 01:36 PM
Both of my senators voted nay. Of course I live in KY so I was not surprised.

February 6, 2009, 02:47 PM
Yeah. I'll shoot a letter off right away to Dick Durbin and Roland Burris.

February 7, 2009, 02:19 AM
Both Democrats voted for him! No surprise there. I wish someone with good legaleze writing skills would draft a formal letter template that we could all forward to these spineless wimps!

February 7, 2009, 09:00 AM
Both Virginia senators, Mark Warner and Jim Webb, voted yea. I wrote to both asking for their support. Never got a reply from Webb but Warner did send me a rather sarcastic reply which I have since deleted.

February 7, 2009, 10:59 AM
I live in the PRK. Bet you can't guess how our two voted:rolleyes:

February 7, 2009, 06:27 PM
it's a tough call.

Barry will keep on tossing anti-gun Attorney Generals at us, no matter how many we get our congresscritters to vote down.

I think we are better off to hold their feet to the fire on ACTUAL LAWS. These may be laws aimed at curtailing the power of the AG, or directly related to RKBA.

February 7, 2009, 06:31 PM
of course both levin and stabenow voted for him. think they both have perfect brady ratings.

February 7, 2009, 06:53 PM
I'm happy to say that both of my senators voted no. They heard from me also.

tasco 74
February 8, 2009, 05:35 PM
both harkin and grassly voted yea here in iowa:fire::fire:... again what do these politicians have against the american citizens????????????????????????

February 8, 2009, 05:51 PM
Both Issakson and Chambliss of Georgia voted to confirm.
Makes me glad neither one received my vote in November.

February 8, 2009, 05:57 PM
I'm not going to base whether or not they get my vote on this.

If you are represented by someone who voted to confirm arguably the most anti-RKBA AGUS in history
Do you really think Obama would pick someone who's pro-gun even if he couldn't get this idiot? He's the most anti-gun president in history.

February 8, 2009, 06:27 PM

Here is what bothers me as much as the Democrats anti-gun stand. Billions to Acorn. Folks we have been had by a mulatto and it can and will get worse.

February 8, 2009, 11:22 PM
My senator, A Specter, is apparantly a RINO. And what's worse, his site is now disabled to make it harder for people to complain. Say...isn't he up for election seen?

February 9, 2009, 12:13 AM
Our Senators from SD split, Thune voted no and Johnson voted yes. Of course I voted against Johnson in the last election and I personally don't believe he was re-elected. The man had a stroke during his last term and spent a long time in the hospital, there is nothing wrong with that and I am in no way saying one way or the other rather his brain recovered completely or not but his comunication skills are terrible now. His speech is slow and broken and I guess I fail to see how he can be an effective representitive of this state comunicating our veiws and needs to congress when he can barely hold a legible conversation.

February 14, 2009, 05:34 PM
Not surprised Virginia's Webb and Warner voted,"yea". They still will never get my Vote. Warner was suppose to be a fiscal whiz and voted for the Porkulus Bill too. I have no faith in 1st and 2nd Amendment Rights from either of these two. I will continue to Call,write and e-mail the stuffings out of them.

February 14, 2009, 06:02 PM
Two yeas from Ohio:confused:

Voinivich is on his way out. He has already announced his retirment.

Brown has no excuse:fire:

February 14, 2009, 07:28 PM
Two Nays from Texas, no surprise there.

But, he's in so now the job is to minimize the damage he can cause.

February 14, 2009, 07:32 PM
Both of mine voted no. Kentucky!

February 14, 2009, 08:02 PM
Levin D, Michigan yea
Debbie Stabenow D, Michigan yea
But I didn't vote for either of them so don't blame it on me.

February 14, 2009, 08:37 PM
I wrote individual strong letters to Georgia's Isakson and Chamblis, both Republicans, who both voted for confirmation. I received a response only from Isakson, who explained that he did question Holder about his stand on the 2nd Amendment, and was assured that Holder would follow the Supreme Court decision, and that otherwise his credentials were excellent.

I responded that Holder's statement did not mean he would not severely limit specific guns the people would be able to have. I told him of the discussion I had had with a local member of the Georgia Democratic Committee, who admitted they would go along with the individual right to own guns...and then said, "You realize, of course, that when the 2nd Amendment was written, it referred to single-shot muzzle-loaders!":banghead:

February 14, 2009, 10:02 PM
Both of mine voted no. Kentucky!Go KY!

February 15, 2009, 01:37 AM
Very dissapointed in Arkansas' vote, but they are a couple of dimocrats. Oh sorry, I didn't spell that right. I meant dumbocrats.

February 15, 2009, 12:16 PM
Both of the Dempublican Senatorial bitches here in Maine slithered into their secret Democrat robes for this vote and for the Unstimulating Package. I haven't cared for either one since they voted out of party NOT to impeach Klinton. They don't deserve the Republican name I call them Dempublicans.

February 15, 2009, 07:25 PM
Can someone point me to what makes Holder anti-RKBA? I'm just curious what his record is on this.

February 15, 2009, 08:13 PM
Can someone point me to what makes Holder anti-RKBA? I'm just curious what his record is on this.
Glad you asked. Hope others here will chime in.

Probably the biggest beef we all have with our new AGUS is that he joined in an amici curiae brief in District of Columbia v. Heller arguing that the Second Amendment does not guarantee individual rights and supporting the D.C. handgun ban. Here is the Wiki article on DC v Heller:

Everything I can find about Mr. Holder indicates a career-long track record opposing RKBA. IMO he is easily the most anti-2A AGUS in history.

Does that help?


February 15, 2009, 08:40 PM
South Dakota, Johnson let us down yet again :(

February 16, 2009, 12:23 PM
Thanks for filling in the gaps in my awareness on Holder. I hadn't heard about his brief in that case. I will expect that he's being honest when he says what he said in his confirmation hearing:

Holder said the Obama administration would only look at relatively minor gun laws, such as closeing the gun-show loophole, or banning "cop killer" bullets that penetrate bulletproof vests. Otherwise, Holder indicated, the new administration is unlikely to pursue new initiatives on this front.

Holder had been among those arguing that the Second Amendment provided for a "collective," not individual right to bear arms. The Supreme Court found otherwise, though, and Holder said that debate has now been resolved.

"We now know that is not the case," said Holder of his position on the collective right to bear arms. "It is a major difference."

I'll also expect that Obama stays true to his words when he said that he believes the Second Amendment gives individuals the right to bear arms. Not just militias.

And I'll challenge if either does otherwise. For me, my strategy is to continue to remind them, especially the ELECTED official, of their constitutional obligations. Sometimes when I call or lobby a congress person or elected official I forget to remind them of their constitutional mandate and instead get mired in the weeds of a specific issue.

So, when I look at how my senators voted (both yea - one R and one D) I guess that reflects some careful deliberation, reflection of their constituents, their duty to the constitution, and good old fashioned politics. And that's what I expect of them.

Ragnar Danneskjold
February 16, 2009, 12:50 PM
Michigan's illustrious senators did what I expected them to do.

February 16, 2009, 01:08 PM
I wrote our two MT senators , in which they Ignored.

I'm Beginning to realize that writing our Reps is useless. Of the Calls to Washington on the Stimulus was 9to1 Against the plan. yet it still past!

February 16, 2009, 05:27 PM
such as closeing the gun-show loophole, or banning "cop killer" bullets
The anti-gun people are very good at making items sound intimidating. Here's what those really mean.

Gun show loophole: The fact that private sales do not require a NICS background check. If they ened this, you would not be able to sell a gun to another individual, even you own grandma, without going through a NICS background check. You can't preform this check, only an authorized firearms dealer can, and you will usually have to pay said dealer a fee.

"Cop Killer" bullets. This one varies. Sometimes it means hollowpoints or other expanding ammunition. These bullets are often legally required for hunting, and for self-defense they help prvent inocent bystanders from getting hurt. They also are more effective for self defense than FMJ, perhaps the only caliber effective for self-defense with FMJ is .45 ACP.

The other definition of "cop killer" is those that will go through a certain level of armor. One bill proposed banning anything that could go through a a level II vest. This include a lot of 9mm rounds, a lot of .357 magnum rounds, and most .44 magnum rounds. This also bans the 30-30, the .308, and even 12 gauge slugs. This could also possibly include the .17 HMR and non-toxic shotgun loads, like those used in duck hunting. Some .22 ammo might even be outlawed under that bill. (Thankfully, this bill didn't make it)

If you enjoyed reading about "How Did Your Senator Vote On Holder?" here in archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join today for the full version!