Tennessee Senators Corker and Alexander Join Gun Control Efforts In Senate

[PRM]

Tennessee Republican (RINO) Senators Corker and Alexander joined the gun control push in the Senate. So much for their emails to constituents about supporting the 2nd Amendment.


http://politics.blogs.foxnews.com/2...-democratic-defections-senate-gun-legislation


How can you tell if a politician is lying - His lips are moving.

 

[MErl]

they voted to allow talk about it, nothing more. (yet)

 

[morcey2]

I know that there are some procedural moves that can only be made by someone who voted a certain way on cloture/passage/etc and I think some of the Yea votes were to preserve those options. At least that's what I'm hoping.

Matt

 

[PRM]

They voted to advance the gun control legislation. Failing to hold the line puts it in a place where amendments are debated and voted on. If there is a silver lining, it is almost guaranteed not to get past the house.

2014 is the critical crossroads.

These two clowns have turned their backs on their fellow Tennesseans - not to mention the Constitution. The sad part of it all, a handful of politicians whose only concern is their own political future are now making decisions that affect not only every American today, but also future generations.

 

[Tinker]

If there is a silver lining, it is almost guaranteed not to get past the house.

I believe they also said that about Obamacare, too.

 

[morcey2]

I believe they also said that about Obamacare, too.

Um. No.

The house was easy. It was controlled by the wannabe tyrant, Pelosi.

The senate was where everyone thought it would be stopped, but Reid was able to bypass the filibuster and force it through. That's much less likely in the house. Hopefully.

Matt

 

[PRM]

Different time... With Obamacare, the Democrats controlled both the House and Senate.

That's why Obama and Bloomberg are so desperate to win it back in 2014. If they get both again - they will force whatever liberal progressive socialist agenda they can conceive down the rest of the countrie's throat.

Sitting it out and not voting because you don't like either sides candidate can be devastating. The Democrats have already shown they have a good ground game. If we hope to keep our gun rights for the next generation of Americans we cannot let them gain control like that again.

 

[TCB in TN]

Both LA and BC are C rated politicians for a reason. That said both have had their office send out responses stating they would vote no on further restrictions (at least I have gotten those responses in the last week). I will be very surprised if either vote for UBCs. The majority of the state of Tn has not historically been very kind politicians who mess with the 2A.

 

[shaggy430]

Just sent this to Alexander:

Senator Alexander,
I just read that you voted to advance the gun control legislation to discussion. I must tell you that I am highly disappointed in this. If you vote to pass this into law you will not be receiving my vote in the next election. I have voted for you since 2002, but rest assured, you will not receive my vote in 2014 if you vote to limit my Second Amendment rights.

Sincerely,
XXXXXXXXX

 

[shaggy430]

Just sent this to Corker:

Senator Corker,
I just read that you voted to advance the gun control legislation to discussion. I must tell you that I am highly disappointed in this. If you vote to pass this into law you will not be receiving my vote in the next election. I have even voted for you for as Mayor of Chattanooga, but rest assured, you will not receive my vote in 2018 if you vote to limit my Second Amendment rights.

Sincerely,
XXXXXXXX


I've emailed them both in the past, right after the Newtown incident and both of their responses were fairly concrete on the 2nd Amendment. Now, I'm not so sure.....

 

[X-Rap]

they voted to allow talk about it, nothing more. (yet)

What's to talk about?

 

[baz]

they voted to allow talk about it, nothing more. (yet)

And I have a huge problem with that. We send our representatives to Congress to represent us, not to play around in some ideal debate society, or worse, kowtow to the whims of the party elites. This is serious stuff, and most of them begin to turn their back on their constituents as soon as they get there. On any important issue like this, they should be "playing for keeps," and that means using every procedural trick or possibility to stop bad legislation from going forward. Obamacare became law because my then-Senator, Blanche Lincoln, voted to move it out of committee -- "so that everybody has a chance to debate it" (or words to that effect) -- when 70 percent of her constituents (my rough recollection of the poll numbers at the time) opposed it. In other words, she ignored the will of her constituents rather than buck the will of her party. Well, she no longer deserved to be our Senator, and we voted her out in 2010 largely because of that one vote.

In my opinion, every one of the following Republicans should be voted out office:

Alexander (R-TN), Yea
Ayotte (R-NH), Yea
Burr (R-NC), Yea
Chambliss (R-GA), Yea
Coburn (R-OK), Yea
Collins (R-ME), Yea
Corker (R-TN), Yea
Flake (R-AZ), Yea
Graham (R-SC), Yea
Heller (R-NV), Yea
Hoeven (R-ND), Yea
Isakson (R-GA), Yea
Kirk (R-IL), Yea
McCain (R-AZ), Yea
Toomey (R-PA), Yea
Wicker (R-MS), Yea

There is no excuse for what they did. In most of those states, I am quite certain that their constituents want nothing to do with the bill that is now being debated. That they voted to let it be debated, rather than vote according to their constituent's wishes, renders them unfit to represent their constituents. I am sick and tired of making excuses for this kind of reprehensible behavior. You better believe that if the roles were reversed, and the Democrats had the votes to stop something the Republicans wanted from going forward, they would do it. While there are a few men of good courage in the Republican party in the Senate, they are hamstrung by these latter day Quislings. :banghead: :banghead: :banghead:

 

[22-rimfire]

I'll have to wait and see how they vote on the final bill and what the details are. Gun control is the only issue that will turn my vote elsewhere. Corker was just re-elected for a 2nd term in November. Alexamder has always had a more liberal side to him on certain issues. He is up for re-election in two years.

 

[Tinker]

A Senate filibuster, IMO, is a better firewall to protect the 2nd than laying faith in what they might throw Boehner in the House. Listening to him now on the tube as a matter of fact. He just said: "In the light of the Newtown victims it would be totally irresponsible for us to not review (Senate version) and take some action."

Sounds like he's getting ready to roll over to me. I remember the 94 Ban. They "miraculously" found enough votes to bring us that turkey. Luckily, that one had a time release self destruction mechanism built in. They won't make that mistake again.

 

[Bartholomew Roberts]

Here is the reasoning of Republican Senators who voted against the filibuster as explained by Sen. Graham:

I welcome a debate on the Second Amendment in the United States Senate. I want to proceed to this bill. I want to debate it. I am not afraid.

Some have asked why I opposed filibustering a procedural motion to move forward. Here’s my reasoning.

• Many Senators have refused to even take a position on some of these issues for fear of angering one side or the other. There’s only one way to see where Senators actually stand – make them vote.

• Filibustering right now means Senators get a free pass. Some politicians’ dream scenario is one where they don’t actually have to vote For or Against a proposal but can tell each side they were with them all along. Again, let’s make Senators vote.

• Nothing the Democrats are proposing would have prevented the Sandy Hook massacre. We need Senators on record. Do you support these proposals?

• The legislation can still be filibustered after today in the United States Senate. And even if gun control legislation passes the Democratic-controlled U.S. Senate it is unlikely to pass the Republican-controlled House of Representatives.

• Finally, I have my own legislation, supported by the NRA, which I want to bring forward in the Senate. My legislation would make a real difference in keeping guns out of the wrong hands.

It’s designed to prevent individuals like Alice Boland, a mentally disturbed individual who once pled ‘Not Guilty By Reason of Insanity’ in federal court for threatening to kill the President of the United States from legally buying a firearm. Under current law, she was able to pass a background check, buy a pistol, and go to Ashley Hall School in Charleston where she tried to shoot several school officials. One bullet in her hands is one too many.

Again, I welcome a debate on gun control and you should too. The American people deserve to see where their elected representatives stand on the Second Amendment.

Let’s vote.

 

[MErl]

I agree with him 80%. Not so sure about the last point & the new law it would entail but will have to see it.

I want people on record with votes.

 

[X-Rap]

Is there a bill written yet on which they can debate? Or is this going to be another one that we have to approve before we can see what it says?

 

[commygun]

Pretty sure the idea is to force Red State Democrats to go on the record as for or against further gun control measures. If they vote against it, they lose some support from their liberal base. If they vote for it, that energizes the conservative majorities in their home states to throw them out. It's a political game of chicken and it's all about control of the Senate in 2014.

 

[InkEd]

I tried to use the contact template online and it kept saying that an email address was required. I would type it into the field and kept getting the same error message. Both of them have forsaken their supporters.

 

[baz]

"Again, I welcome a debate on gun control and you should too. The American people deserve to see where their elected representatives stand on the Second Amendment."

This is just crock. We know already who stands for what, and who doesn't stand for anything. I challenge anyone to name a Senator from their state that they need to hear from on the floor of the Senate to have a good idea of where they stand (or not) on this issue. Crock, just crock.

I want people on record with votes.

And if, because of it, some bill finally passes? Is that what you want, to?

Is there a bill written yet on which they can debate? Or is this going to be another one that we have to approve before we can see what it says?

This moving bills to floor debate that have not been put in writing and in that form voted on in committee before getting to the floor is utterly reprehensible. I think it is just adding to "a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce [us] under absolute Despotism." We need a "3 day amendment" that requires bills being voted on to be put online, for the public to read, so we can voice our support or opposition to our representatives before voting on bills begins.

 

[22-rimfire]

I have to agree with Graham. Let's bring this legislation to the floor of the Senate, document what the various positions are, and vote. I don't think the legislation will pass the House. If the bill makes it to the House, let them debate it. Let them do what we pay them to do.

Let's have something in writing that they are actually debating also. None of this.... debate and then write the bill and vote. I want it in writing to I know exactly where these legislators stand and why.

 

[fightforfreedom]

This just illustrates the value of not jumping to conclusions.

I understand why folks were concerned when Alexander/Corker voted against the filibuster.

However they ultimately honored the people of Tennessee by voting NAY on the "expanded background checks" (i.e. gun registration) and the other proposed bans.

It's good to know we have some elected officials who actually carry the will of their constituents.

 

[JVaughn]

Yeah, I agree. I'm glad they remained true to us.

 

[Deltaboy1984]

Good for them following the will of their people.

 

[TCB in TN]

This just illustrates the value of not jumping to conclusions.

I understand why folks were concerned when Alexander/Corker voted against the filibuster.

However they ultimately honored the people of Tennessee by voting NAY on the "expanded background checks" (i.e. gun registration) and the other proposed bans.

It's good to know we have some elected officials who actually carry the will of their constituents.

I never thought they would vote for this. That said there were a lot of other Senators who we really didn't know what they would have done. Letting this go to a vote may have been a calculated ploy, but it is one that could have back fired on us their constituents. I am glad it didn't, but am not real happy with them over it. Give me a better option next go around and I will vote that way!