Pelosi pulls DISCLOSE Act

posted at 9:30 am on June 18, 2010 by Ed Morrissey

Congress’ attempt to repair their attack on the First Amendment, overturned in the Citizens United decision earlier this year, has run off the rails thanks to the machination of its Democratic backers.  Nancy Pelosi pulled the DISCLOSE Act from the House floor last night after the news of sleazy deals to exempt powerful organizations from the law started leaking to the media.  Ironically, it was a rare partnership between the NRA and the Democrats that sealed the bill’s fate:

Following a rebellion by two important factions of rank-and-file House Democrats, Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) has pulled a campaign-finance bill opposed by a broad coalition of special interest groups, including the U.S. Chamber of Commerce.

Pelosi and other Democratic leaders had scheduled a Friday vote on the DISCLOSE Act, a bill requiring special-interest groups to disclose their top donors if they choose to run TV ads or send out mass mailings in the final months of an election. The legislation is designed to roll back the controversial Supreme Court decision in the Citizens United case, which overturned restrictions on corporate campaign activities.

But after complaints from the conservative Blue Dogs and the Congressional Black Caucus, Pelosi was forced to pull the bill on Thursday night.

Even the opponents of this bill operate more or less in opposition to each other.  The CBC took offense to the exception carved out for the NRA, which had objected to the bill’s ability to block their advertising capability.  The NRA threatened to launch a full-scale fight against the bill until Pelosi and her lieutenant Chris Van Hollen inserted language that would exempt the NRA from compliance.

That deal had conservatives seeing red, but Democrats never had the chance to exploit the split on the Right.  As soon as that deal became known, the CBC erupted in anger.  Many of them will have to face off against the NRA in their districts, and they’re not inclined to let the NRA off the hook.  Pelosi attempted to extend the exemptions to more groups, but the DISCLOSE Act will almost certainly limit the NAACP’s options in advertising, which takes one of their most powerful allies out of the game.

What does this say about leadership in the House?  Pelosi should have already known how this would have played with her various factions.  Cutting a deal with the NRA, who will spend millions fighting progressives in the midterms, is like deliberately winning a battle in order to lose a war from their perspective.  It’s a caucus in disarray, although unfortunately, Pelosi will probably have the DISCLOSE Act back in some form soon enough.  The Supreme Court will eventually have to remind Pelosi of the same exact problem it found in the BCRA and explained in detail in its Citizens United ruling.

The DISCLOSE Act is a disaster for free speech, as I wrote a month ago, especially for bloggers:

If the Democrats in Congress wanted to ensure that the FEC would not investigate political speech by bloggers, they would have written their exemptions to include bloggers instead of just traditional media outlets.  The purposeful lack of exemption for bloggers looks ominous indeed — and could be used to harass smaller, unfunded bloggers out of the realm of political debate.

Even if bloggers were included in the exemption, why should the law discriminate between two similar corporations producing similar intellectual property simply on the basis of product when it comes to free speech?   As Reason points out, the Supreme Court stated that such discrimination violates the First Amendment, and probably the 14th as well. What about NBC, owned (at the moment) by GE, which produces a myriad of products and services unrelated to speech.  Should their media subsidiaries get that exemption, and if so, why?  Surely NBC has a much more obvious incentive to bolster GE and avoid reporting on its problems, and the politics that impact them, than a blog has in backing a candidate or a bill in Congress.

Better yet, Congress should just read the First Amendment and get someone to explain the big words, emphases mine:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

Make no law.  Pulling the DISCLOSE Act may be the most Constitutional action Pelosi has committed in her entire term as Speaker … and mainly by accident.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2

Obama – 41% Approve / 58% Disapprove – Rasmussen

Chomsky Dance Recital on June 18, 2010 at 9:33 AM

I can’t wait to watch that commie Sea Hag give up the gavel in 2011!

csdeven on June 18, 2010 at 9:35 AM

Cutting a deal with the NRA, who will spend millions fighting progressives in the midterms, is like deliberately winning a battle in order to lose a war from their perspective.

How I wish this were true. I honestly think the NRA has lost it. They actually endorsed Strickland over Kasich in Ohio.

MobileVideoEngineer on June 18, 2010 at 9:35 AM

Make no law. Pulling the DISCLOSE Act may be the most Constitutional action Pelosi has committed in her entire term as Speaker … and mainly by accident.

Indeed, the entirety of the matter can be summed up in that one sentence. The constitution is quite specific on that matter.

KinleyArdal on June 18, 2010 at 9:35 AM

Pulling the DISCLOSE Act may be the most Constitutional action Pelosi has committed in her entire term as Speaker … and mainly by accident.
//
Yes Ed,she could only do something worthwhile BY ACCIDENT :)

ohiobabe on June 18, 2010 at 9:36 AM

Ironically, it was a rare partnership between the NRA and the Democrats that sealed the bill’s fate:

To hell with the half-assed NRA.

Give your time money and effort to an organization that will stand up for your gun rights, even in the face of Armageddon.

Give to the Gun Owner’s of America.

JohnGalt23 on June 18, 2010 at 9:38 AM

Obama – 41% Approve / 58% Disapprove – Rasmussen

Chomsky Dance Recital on June 18, 2010 at 9:33 AM

Damn! That includes 2 days of polling since the now infamous speech. I guess for the only time in recorded history, MSNBC’s anchors actually did reflect public sentiment.

Doughboy on June 18, 2010 at 9:38 AM

How I wish this were true. I honestly think the NRA has lost it. They actually endorsed Strickland over Kasich in Ohio.

MobileVideoEngineer on June 18, 2010 at 9:35 AM
//
I had not seen that little bit of news! That settles it,not renewing our membership.

ohiobabe on June 18, 2010 at 9:38 AM

Chomsky Dance Recital on June 18, 2010 at 9:33 AM

Obama’s Presidential Approval Index has steadily gone down since the very first day he took office. He went into negative territory just before July 4th 2009 and hasn’t been out of it since.

csdeven on June 18, 2010 at 9:38 AM

Good news.

visions on June 18, 2010 at 9:39 AM

I think the NRA got a bad rap on this. They are a one-issue organization, and they spend their capital on that one issue. They were against it altogether, but barring stopping it outright, they wanted to protect themselves and their members. If the NRA spends too much time on issues not related to the 2nd Amendment, it will cause their efforts to become too spread out and watered down.

In the end, though, their “selling out” proved to be the nail needed to kill the thing.

JamesLee on June 18, 2010 at 9:39 AM

Damn! That includes 2 days of polling since the now infamous speech. I guess for the only time in recorded history, MSNBC’s anchors actually did reflect public sentiment.

Doughboy on June 18, 2010 at 9:38 AM

I blame Bush.

Chomsky Dance Recital on June 18, 2010 at 9:40 AM

Very disapointed that the NRA would align themselves with a Democratic plot to limit free speech. As much as a second amendment supporter the NRA claims to be they showed how politically stupid they are.

fourdeucer on June 18, 2010 at 9:40 AM

She pulled it because she knew she didn’t have the votes and didn’t want a loser on her record. On the other hand, maybe she read the bill first and knew it wouldn’t get past the SC.

Kissmygrits on June 18, 2010 at 9:41 AM

I can’t stand that dumb witch. I hope when she loses her position and has to hand the gavel over that it is televised in prime time. I really think she will resign/retire when that happens. She won’t be able to step down and hold her head up. I hate her.

NJ Red on June 18, 2010 at 9:41 AM

Obama – 41% Approve / 58% Disapprove – Rasmussen

Chomsky Dance Recital on June 18, 2010 at 9:33 AM

They must have only polled those wacky tea partiers on the Chris Matthews show.

angryed on June 18, 2010 at 9:42 AM

Would the unions have to DISCLOSE also?

rogerb on June 18, 2010 at 9:44 AM

Hoist on her own petard. They can only get something like this through by exempting the most powerful objectors, and they can’t exempt enough of them without upsetting the others exempted.

If you have to can’t pass a law without exempting certain people or groups, that just might be a clue that it’s a bad law!

There Goes The Neighborhood on June 18, 2010 at 9:44 AM

They actually endorsed Strickland over Kasich in Ohio.
//
Do you know when this happened? I want to make sure my facts are straight before I let them have it:)

ohiobabe on June 18, 2010 at 9:44 AM

***

In the end, though, their “selling out” proved to be the nail needed to kill the thing.

JamesLee on June 18, 2010 at 9:39 AM

Conspiracy!

BuckeyeSam on June 18, 2010 at 9:44 AM

When do the American people finally realize that we truly have mentally unbalanced people in positions of power who can severely damage our country for years to come? Peloser is deranged. No sane person could even suggest otherwise.

volsense on June 18, 2010 at 9:45 AM

MobileVideoEngineer on June 18, 2010 at 9:35 AM

I don’t know anything about the Ohio thing, but as I said, they focus ONLY on one issue. That’s why they are for Harry Reid in NV.

The Dems will likely still have the majority after November. The NRA decided they would rather have Reid, who has always been good on gun rights, running the show in the Senate rather than Durbin or some other wingnut who is a gungrabber.

Me, I’m not a one-issue guy, and don’t think Reid will win, nor do I want him to. But if there was one issue that would turn me, all other things being equal, it’s gun rights.

JamesLee on June 18, 2010 at 9:45 AM

Not enough people seem to realize that police states don’t just spring up overnight. Destroying freedom is a slow steady process, kind of like what happened to Detroit over the last sixty years. If you left Detroit sixty years ago, as a teenager, and you just came back today, you’d wonder if there was a nuclear war in the meantime, and it slipped your mind because you’re old.

RBMN on June 18, 2010 at 9:45 AM

Doh! AKOTUS is down to -21 and only 41% approval, the “lowest level ever recorded”. Rasmussen.

I think he needs to make another speech.

Key West Reader on June 18, 2010 at 9:45 AM

Pelosi, Obama, Reid and the rest of their ilk are a cancer in the heart of this once great Nation. It’s a sad time for the Republic.

rplat on June 18, 2010 at 9:46 AM

Obama – 41% Approve / 58% Disapprove – Rasmussen

Chomsky Dance Recital on June 18, 2010 at 9:33 AM

It’s said that once a President goes under 42%, the only way for them to get back above 42% is a war. So now that he’s officially under 42% Obama may get even more dangerous.

If he hits below 40% I say it’s time for us to look out.

MobileVideoEngineer on June 18, 2010 at 9:46 AM

I don’t know anything about the Ohio thing
//
If you don’t know then why say it?:)

ohiobabe on June 18, 2010 at 9:49 AM

Do you know when this happened? I want to make sure my facts are straight before I let them have it:)

ohiobabe on June 18, 2010 at 9:44 AM

From their own site…

NRA-PVF Endorses Governor Ted Strickland for Re-election in Ohio Gubernatorial Race

MobileVideoEngineer on June 18, 2010 at 9:50 AM

Full-on panic mode in the Dem camp, and July is right around the corner.

Me likey.

Grace_is_sufficient on June 18, 2010 at 9:50 AM

This is what Beck Refers to as the Overton Window.

What part of… Congress shall make NO law….
The free speech issue is being eaten away piece by piece. Attempts made in civil ways, little by little to designate free speech to certain groups at certain times of the year…

They will push the subject farther and farther to the left and in the end restrict or void the 1st Amendment.

This should NOT even be debated…. It says what it says!

CONGRESS SHALL MAKE NO LAW…

katy on June 18, 2010 at 9:51 AM

To hell with the half-assed NRA.

The NRA has battled for gun rights for decades. Battled when there was no one else. I won’t throw them under the bus for this, but I want to know the details.

Give to the Gun Owner’s of America.

JohnGalt23 on June 18, 2010 at 9:38 AM

You can belong to both.

donh525 on June 18, 2010 at 9:51 AM

Ohiobabe, just saying I didn’t know the race that was referred to. Just pointing out the thinking the NRA puts into its endorsements.

Yikes, I need MORE COFFEE!!! I can’t type clearly

JamesLee on June 18, 2010 at 9:51 AM

I honestly think the NRA has lost it.

MobileVideoEngineer on June 18, 2010 at 9:35 AM

I think you said you live in Missouri, there is a company, Midway USA, that has donated over $5 million dollars to the NRA through their round-up program. I have always used Midway for everything related to firearms and always contributed with the round-up program but not anymore.

fourdeucer on June 18, 2010 at 9:52 AM

Either the law is bad or it’s not. I am sure both sides do it but “exceptions” seem, dare I say it, un-American.

Cindy Munford on June 18, 2010 at 9:52 AM

It’s said that once a President goes under 42%, the only way for them to get back above 42% is a war. So now that he’s officially under 42% Obama may get even more dangerous.

If he hits below 40% I say it’s time for us to look out.

MobileVideoEngineer on June 18, 2010 at 9:46 AM

Well he did already declare war on the oil spill.

Doughboy on June 18, 2010 at 9:54 AM

Part of the distraction in pushing the Overton window is causing chaos within the writing, and roll out of the law. That way they insure that the idea of such a law is not even brought up!

CONGRESS SHALL MAKE NO LAW!!!!!!!!!!!!

katy on June 18, 2010 at 9:54 AM

And another source, if you need it.

Strickland Lands NRA Endorsement In Campaign

MobileVideoEngineer on June 18, 2010 at 9:54 AM

JamesLee on June 18, 2010 at 9:51 AM
//
Sorry,I just like facts before I spout off to some company about why I now don’t want anything to do with them.If it’s true,ENDORSEMENTS HAVE CONSEQUENCES!

ohiobabe on June 18, 2010 at 9:55 AM

Strickland Lands NRA Endorsement In Campaign

MobileVideoEngineer on June 18, 2010 at 9:54 AM
//
Got it! Thanks much:)

ohiobabe on June 18, 2010 at 9:56 AM

I can’t wait to watch that commie Sea Hag give up the gavel in 2011!

csdeven on June 18, 2010 at 9:35 AM

I don’t know why she ever got that gavel in the first place. She’s one of the main reasons we’re trillions of $$s in debt.

scalleywag on June 18, 2010 at 9:58 AM

I think the NRA got a bad rap on this…

JamesLee on June 18, 2010 at 9:39 AM

No, they want to protect their members’ 2nd Amendment rights but not their 1st Amendment rights except as it concerns the NRA? Bullstuff! The NRA is too used to being political kingmakers playing the corrupt Washington game just like unions do.

cartooner on June 18, 2010 at 9:59 AM

Very disapointed that the NRA would align themselves with a Democratic plot to limit free speech. As much as a second amendment supporter the NRA claims to be they showed how politically stupid they are.

fourdeucer on June 18, 2010 at 9:40 AM

There is some history of bad blood between the NRA and Gun Owners of America (GOA) and the Jews for the Preservation of Firearms Ownership (JPFO). They are all pretty much after the same limited pool of donation money from gun owners. The NRA right now is the largest and they make deals with Congress and States that help only themselves and leave the other groups out in the cold. The NRA has morphed in the last few years into something vastly different that was it was chartered for.

Johnnyreb on June 18, 2010 at 9:59 AM

GOA’s enrollment just went WAAY up!!

katy on June 18, 2010 at 10:00 AM

As a congressman, Kasich sometimes diverged from the NRA position, however. He voted in favor of the Clinton assault weapons ban in 1994 and has supported bills containing restrictions on gun shows and handgun sales. He also voted against bills that diverted tax dollars to hunting development. The NRA once gave him its F grade for his congressional voting record on gun laws.

Look before you leap!

donh525 on June 18, 2010 at 10:01 AM

It’s said that once a President goes under 42%, the only way for them to get back above 42% is a war. So now that he’s officially under 42% Obama may get even more dangerous.

If he hits below 40% I say it’s time for us to look out.

MobileVideoEngineer on June 18, 2010 at 9:46 AM

Oblabla has been at war with America since 1/20/2009

angryed on June 18, 2010 at 10:01 AM

Me, I’m not a one-issue guy, and don’t think Reid will win, nor do I want him to. But if there was one issue that would turn me, all other things being equal, it’s gun rights.

JamesLee on June 18, 2010 at 9:45 AM

Gun rights are a second priority for me, but definitely on my list of “do not screw with this” items.

>.> MadCon said once “if you live in a state where open carry is permitted, open carry.

If you live in a state where open carry is not permitted, concealed carry.

If you live in a state where open and concealed carry are not permitted, concealed carry.”

I would tack on “if you live in a place where firearms are not allowed under any circumstances, concealed carry.” I think the list to be complete now.

KinleyArdal on June 18, 2010 at 10:02 AM

KinleyArdal on June 18, 2010 at 10:02 AM

+1

The largest local grocery chain as of yesterday allows firearms to be carried in store. w007!

Inanemergencydial on June 18, 2010 at 10:04 AM

Ed, I want to hear the NRA’s side of this story. Have you contacted them for their comments?

Keemo on June 18, 2010 at 10:04 AM

As a congressman, Kasich sometimes diverged from the NRA position, however. He voted in favor of the Clinton assault weapons ban in 1994 and has supported bills containing restrictions on gun shows and handgun sales. He also voted against bills that diverted tax dollars to hunting development. The NRA once gave him its F grade for his congressional voting record on gun laws.

Look before you leap!

donh525 on June 18, 2010 at 10:01 AM

Um… you don’t think Strickland will go along with anything that the Obama Marxists want? Strickland is one of the most liberal politicians out there. The only reason he may have a decent record on guns is because Ohio is a very large gun state and there is a lot of hunting in the south and east parts of the state.

MobileVideoEngineer on June 18, 2010 at 10:05 AM

ohiobabe on June 18, 2010 at 9:55 AM

totally understand! Facts are important.

And while I understand the desire to write off the NRA over this, I say again, they became the powerhouse they are by focusing only on what they are there for, and carefully choosing the hills to die on. Does not mean that I go lockstep with them or agree with all the endorsements. You just have to understand their point of view.

JamesLee on June 18, 2010 at 10:07 AM

Peloser is deranged. No sane person could even suggest otherwise.

volsense on June 18, 2010 at 9:45 AM

Couldn’t agree more. She is terrifying. Worst Speaker ever.

Cody1991 on June 18, 2010 at 10:07 AM

GOA’s enrollment just went WAAY up!!

katy on June 18, 2010 at 10:00 AM
//
Okay,I know I’m from Ohio:) but what is GOA?

ohiobabe on June 18, 2010 at 10:09 AM

How I wish this were true. I honestly think the NRA has lost it. They actually endorsed Strickland over Kasich in Ohio.

MobileVideoEngineer on June 18, 2010 at 9:35 AM

I’m in Wisconsin, and in 2008 I was totally p*ssed that the NRA endorsed ultra-lib Obamacare supporting Steve Kagen over the GOP candidate for Congress. Ever since I keep getting calls from the NRA and I tell them they don’t get another dime until they start supporting people who care about all of my Constitutional rights, not just one of them.

VelvetElvis on June 18, 2010 at 10:09 AM

Obama – 41% Approve / 58% Disapprove – Rasmussen

Chomsky Dance Recital on June 18, 2010 at 9:33 AM

He got a dead elephant dropped from the top of the Empire State Building bounce.

Daggett on June 18, 2010 at 10:10 AM

I think the NRA got a bad rap on this…

JamesLee on June 18, 2010 at 9:39 AM

I heartily agree. If they had sat on the sidelines, what then?

You could say “Oh yes, they were so principled”, and now they would be hamstrung.

Washington politics isn’t pretty, but right now, you better be able to play the game to change it.

donh525 on June 18, 2010 at 10:10 AM

And while I understand the desire to write off the NRA over this, I say again, they became the powerhouse they are by focusing only on what they are there for, and carefully choosing the hills to die on. Does not mean that I go lockstep with them or agree with all the endorsements. You just have to understand their point of view.

JamesLee on June 18, 2010 at 10:07 AM

I agree. Unfortunately, there are still a lot of gun owners / hunters who are dems. If the NRA wrote off all dems – even the ones who are good on gun rights issues, they would lose a bloc of members / donors because they would be seen as a tool of the republican party. It does not make me happy when they endorse a dem, but I understand their strategy.

Monkeytoe on June 18, 2010 at 10:11 AM

AKOTUS

Key West Reader on June 18, 2010 at 9:45 AM

o/t – guess I missed this acronym – whatzit?

tru2tx on June 18, 2010 at 10:12 AM

I can’t wait to watch that commie Sea Hag give up the gavel in 2011!

csdeven on June 18, 2010 at 9:35 AM

Your making an assumption, that is wishful thinking and very dangerous. Rasmussen has already stated that it is unlikely that Republicans will win back the House in November. That’s the rational side. The other side says that the amount of corruption and voter fraud will not allow a Republican majority, ever again. Here’s to hoping I’m way off base, but if history is any indicator…

paratisi on June 18, 2010 at 10:15 AM

Well the wicked witch of the Capitol had a very good 2009, just like George Soros. Her net worth nearly doubled to $21.7 million.

http://sroblog.com/2010/06/16/pelosi%E2%80%99s-net-worth-shows-a-sharp-uptick-roll-call/

Hopefully you don’t mind if I DISCLOSE that, sea hag.

GnuBreed on June 18, 2010 at 10:17 AM

Um… you don’t think Strickland will go along with anything that the Obama Marxists want? Strickland is one of the most liberal politicians out there.
MobileVideoEngineer on June 18, 2010 at 10:05 AM

Sorry, guess I should have took my own advice. Wouldn’t vote for a Dem if he was holding a gun to my head!

donh525 on June 18, 2010 at 10:17 AM

JamesLee on June 18, 2010 at 9:39 AM

Amen James! The fact that the NRA made the deal allows them to run ads against the liberals that want to take away our gun rights. That’s why I give my money to the NRA and I have always found them responsive to my questions.

Before you take someone’s word on a blog and withhold your money from the NRA, go to the source to see if what you are being told is correct!

Vince on June 18, 2010 at 10:18 AM

Your making an assumption, that is wishful thinking and very dangerous. Rasmussen has already stated that it is unlikely that Republicans will win back the House in November. That’s the rational side. The other side says that the amount of corruption and voter fraud will not allow a Republican majority, ever again. Here’s to hoping I’m way off base, but if history is any indicator…

paratisi on June 18, 2010 at 10:15 AM

I find myself thinking worst-case scenario, really.

KinleyArdal on June 18, 2010 at 10:18 AM

The other side says that the amount of corruption and voter fraud will not allow a Republican majority, ever again. Here’s to hoping I’m way off base, but if history is any indicator…

paratisi on June 18, 2010 at 10:15 AM

Don’t forget the unspent Porkulus funds just sitting around bidding their time. Upwards of nearly $300 billion has yet to be passed out. Heard one of those Putting America Back to Work commercials this AM on the way to work. They are starting to ramp up again and expect to create/save another couple of million jobs by the end of summer.

Johnnyreb on June 18, 2010 at 10:18 AM

Obama – 41% Approve / 58% Disapprove – Rasmussen

Chomsky Dance Recital on June 18, 2010 at 9:33 AM

With 2/3 of those interviews AFTER Obama’s speech, his “bounce” is more like a THUD. In the crosstabs, Rasmussen also has 72% disapproval among Independent voters.

We don’t have a chance to throw Obama out of office this year, but could 72% of those Independents be persuaded to vote for a Republican Congress to STOP Obama?

Steve Z on June 18, 2010 at 10:19 AM

…who will spend millions fighting progressives in the midterms…

This is part of the reason I rely on Ace and others more than this site. Why must you adopt the language of the left, Ed?

Lenin believed if you change the nature of the language, you change the nature of the debate.

Man up and call them what they are. A bunch of statists.

Blarg the Destroyer on June 18, 2010 at 10:20 AM

AKOTUS

Key West Reader on June 18, 2010 at 9:45 AM
//
:):) Great!,someone else heard Rush say that Tuesday :)

ohiobabe on June 18, 2010 at 10:21 AM

I find myself thinking worst-case scenario, really.

KinleyArdal on June 18, 2010 at 10:18 AM

I thought we were there right after the election!

donh525 on June 18, 2010 at 10:21 AM

I’m glad of the outcome, but I’m so gosh-darn tired of hearing about sleazy back room deals. I’m not naive enough to believe that this is all new behavior, but I have to believe that the frequency and ferocity of the deals is more than ever. Some days the anger energizes me…other days it wears me out. How many days of this regime are left? I’ve never wanted a summer to speed by so quickly in my life.

MainelyRight on June 18, 2010 at 10:21 AM

paratisi on June 18, 2010 at 10:15 AM

Sadly you are right. Obama just got himself a $20B slush fund from BP. That’s $20B for non-stop ads in 2010 and 2012. No way the GOP will compete.

A Republican may win the presidency again because eventually people will get tired of a Dem president enough that even ACORN won’t be able to manufacture that many votes. But as far as congress and senate goes, I think we’re looking at at least 50 years of straight Dem rule.

angryed on June 18, 2010 at 10:22 AM

I think we’re looking at at least 50 years of straight Dem rule.

angryed on June 18, 2010 at 10:22 AM

I truly hope you are wrong. This may well backfire as so many of their antics do.

MainelyRight on June 18, 2010 at 10:24 AM

I thought we were there right after the election!

donh525 on June 18, 2010 at 10:21 AM

Me, too. :( Then the shoes just kept dropping…

KinleyArdal on June 18, 2010 at 10:24 AM

ohiobabe on June 18, 2010 at 10:09 AM

Gun Owners of America.

http://gunowners.org/

katy on June 18, 2010 at 10:26 AM

Okay,I know I’m from Ohio:) but what is GOA?

ohiobabe on June 18, 2010 at 10:09 AM

GOA= Gun Owners of America = the gun rights group that is more concerned with your Second amendment rights than they are of the welfare of the firearms manufacturing industry.

GOA is unflinchingly pro-gun rights. NRA is the lobby for gun manufacturers. GOA is nobody’s whore. NRA… well, they got caught in bed with Nancy Pelosi. I’ll let you be the judge of their purity.

JohnGalt23 on June 18, 2010 at 10:27 AM

Sadly you are right. Obama just got himself a $20B slush fund from BP. That’s $20B for non-stop ads in 2010 and 2012. No way the GOP will compete.

A Republican may win the presidency again because eventually people will get tired of a Dem president enough that even ACORN won’t be able to manufacture that many votes. But as far as congress and senate goes, I think we’re looking at at least 50 years of straight Dem rule.

angryed on June 18, 2010 at 10:22 AM

If the country even lasts that long. I say we become part of the “new world order” if we have Dem rule for even another 4 years.

MobileVideoEngineer on June 18, 2010 at 10:27 AM

GOA has been covering this outrage. check it out!
http://gunowners.org/

katy on June 18, 2010 at 10:30 AM

Well he did already declare war on the oil spill.

Doughboy on June 18, 2010 at 9:54 AM

So far the oil spill is winning.

It’s probably not helping Obama’s image (the only thing that matters to him) when the Coast Guard, which is supposed to answer to the President, is preventing barges from sucking oil from the Gulf, which were ordered out there by Louisiana Governor Bobby Jindal.

A little deja vu from Katrina. Then, a LA Governor dithered, the media blamed the President, and the Coast Guard leader said both of them were “stuck on stupid”.

Now, the President dithers, a LA Governor does everything he can, and the Coast Guard IS “stuck on stupid”. And the public blames the President.

Steve Z on June 18, 2010 at 10:31 AM

Pelosi and other Democratic leaders had scheduled a Friday vote on the DISCLOSE Act, a bill requiring special-interest groups to disclose their top donors if they choose to run TV ads or send out mass mailings in the final months of an election.

Clearly this bill would have hurt Democrats worst of all. Can you imagine if ACORN and Organizing for America had to disclose their top donors?

That’s really why she pulled the bill.

UltimateBob on June 18, 2010 at 10:39 AM

Don’t get down on the NRA too much. I suspect they used the ol’ ‘Poison Pill’ tactic. You don’t want a bill, try and do something to make it so distasteful that it will gain oposition. That may even involve forcing your involvement in it, which causes that distaste. Very smart.

kurtzz3 on June 18, 2010 at 10:45 AM

Clearly this bill would have hurt Democrats worst of all. Can you imagine if ACORN and Organizing for America had to disclose their top donors?

That’s really why she pulled the bill.

UltimateBob on June 18, 2010 at 10:39 AM

Nope, they were exempt. them and quite a few others were specifically exempt in the original bill.

Johnnyreb on June 18, 2010 at 10:45 AM

GOA is unflinchingly pro-gun rights. NRA is the lobby for gun manufacturers. GOA is nobody’s whore. NRA… well, they got caught in bed with Nancy Pelosi. I’ll let you be the judge of their purity.

JohnGalt23 on June 18, 2010 at 10:27 AM
//
Thanks for the info:)

ohiobabe on June 18, 2010 at 10:45 AM

We need to get the sleaze spread out on the sidewalk in the sun … This crap is working against America.

I resigned my NRA life membership … jettison one part of the Constitution to get a deal on another part is just not right.

Obama and his stooges sure don’t like the first amendment, seems it’s also driving them to takeover the Internet.

tarpon on June 18, 2010 at 10:47 AM

NRA crossed the line…

JohnGalt23 on June 18, 2010 at 10:27 AM

Thanks for the info, you have posted about them before…time to make a move.

right2bright on June 18, 2010 at 11:01 AM

Don’t get down on the NRA too much. I suspect they used the ol’ ‘Poison Pill’ tactic. You don’t want a bill, try and do something to make it so distasteful that it will gain oposition. That may even involve forcing your involvement in it, which causes that distaste. Very smart.

kurtzz3 on June 18, 2010 at 10:45 AM

Don’t be naive…

right2bright on June 18, 2010 at 11:01 AM

Backroom dealing by the NRA only further diminishes the value of that organization, at least in my eyes. There may be pro gun Dems out there, but laying in bed with Harry Reid leaves a stench with those of us that pay dues and keep the NRA afloat.

southsideironworks on June 18, 2010 at 11:04 AM

Yeah. What would you do without the NRA? I suppose we could all quit the NRA just like many wouldn’t vote for McCain. Idiots!

Vince on June 18, 2010 at 11:14 AM

Most transparent and stuff…

reaganaut on June 18, 2010 at 11:16 AM

I think he needs to make another speech.

Key West Reader on June 18, 2010 at 9:45 AM

Nooooo! Let the man play golf.

Cindy Munford on June 18, 2010 at 11:22 AM

The NRA’s side of the story, at least the part for “public” display is on their web site. NRAILA.org.

Being a long time NRA activist let me share two observations, one reiterating policy and the other being my own personal opinion.

First, NRA is a SINGLE ISSUE lobby. It is not the NATIONAL REPUBLICAN ASSOCIATION. Gun owners have been screwed as badly or worse by Republicans and “conservatives” as by Democrats. (Reagan signed gun-control when he was Governor of California. Deukmejian signed an “assault weapons” ban that he later told us that he “knew” was “unconstitutional”. It’s still on the books and was the template for the national ban.

NRA will support and endorse Democrats, Republicans and anyone else who a) is good on the 2nd Amendment and b) has a chance of winning.

Now my opinion, and this is only my opinion. The reason this piece of garbage went down was because of Chris Cox and the NRA guys. They knew that they had the muscle to beat Pelosi in a head to head match up. They also knew if they were “exempted” that it would be a poison pill and destroy the bill. You or I won’t find and verification of that, other than my gut feeling.

CrazyGene on June 18, 2010 at 11:26 AM

Pelousy will just have a monster lame-duck session… That’s when the ugly stuff is gonna happen

phreshone on June 18, 2010 at 11:33 AM

CrazyGene on June 18, 2010 at 11:26 AM

JohnGalt23 on June 18, 2010 at 10:27 AM

Yeah, many other 2A groups were up in arms yesterday about the NRA “cutting their own deal” on the bill. Many conservatives saw this as very self-serving. I don’t think anyone thought the deal would deep six the entire bill.

I also think GOA is a better “rights” group while NRA has become more of an “industry” advocate.

riverrat10k on June 18, 2010 at 11:39 AM

Here’s a portion of the NRA’s statement on the matter:

There are those who say the NRA should put the Second Amendment at risk over a First Amendment principle. That’s easy to say unless you have a sworn duty to protect the Second Amendment above all else, as we do.

The NRA is a bipartisan, single-issue organization made up of millions of individual members dedicated to the protection of the Second Amendment. We do not represent the interests of other organizations. That’s their responsibility. Our responsibility is to protect and defend the interests of our members. And that we do without apology.

Those who are saying that just happen to be the members who keep the whole place running. The NRA apparently no longer believes that the main purpose of the Second Amendment is to protect the First Amendment.

The NRA provides critical firearms training for our Armed Forces and law enforcement throughout the country. This bill would force us to choose between training our men and women in uniform and exercising our right to free political speech. We refuse to let this Congress force us to make that choice.

Oh, I get it. The NRA just wants to make sure both sides are armed when the government comes to shut down your blog.

RadClown on June 18, 2010 at 11:40 AM

Congress should be ashamed to even propose the DISCLOSE act.
When they start putting thresholds on membership and corporate sponsorship on when you can and can’t exercise the 1st Amendment, you know it’s unconstitutional.

J_Crater on June 18, 2010 at 11:55 AM

I also think GOA is a better “rights” group while NRA has become more of an “industry” advocate.

riverrat10k on June 18, 2010

Media Mutters claims that GOA came out in public support of “Net Neutrality” but couldn’t find anything on the GOA website about it. I am a member, so I wrote a note to them asking them to state their position. I got no response.

Anyone know where they stand on Net Neutrality?

UltimateBob on June 18, 2010 at 11:56 AM

I forgot a little item..

The reason for the “Campaign Reform Act” was to stop the NRA. Exempting it from the replacement puts the writers in a logical bind.

And the GOA vs NRA stuff is sillyness. NRA is the 800lb gorilla in that space. GOA is intermittently nice and does some good things.

ALL are important!!! (Including JPFO !! )

CrazyGene on June 18, 2010 at 12:08 PM

GOA is unflinchingly pro-gun rights. NRA is the lobby for gun manufacturers. GOA is nobody’s whore. NRA… well, they got caught in bed with Nancy Pelosi. I’ll let you be the judge of their purity.

Every once in awhile you have to take one for the team . . . nothing that a shower and a shot of penicillin won’t cure.

And as for Naaaaaancy losing that gavel, it’d be sweet seeing the next Speaker trying to take it from her claws, with that frozen grin on her puss, struggling to hold onto it for just a few more seconds. Her ascension was historical and unprecedented, just like Barry’s, don’t you know?

tpitman on June 18, 2010 at 12:14 PM

The NRA apparently no longer believes that the main purpose of the Second Amendment is to protect the First Amendment

Yeah? So I guess they did the right thing huh?

Vince on June 18, 2010 at 12:23 PM

I am in complete disagreement with laws like the DISCLOSE Act, but I can’t help but pointing out that the Supreme Court long ago abandoned the First Amendment.

Congress SHALL make NO LAW . . . abridging the freedom of speech . . .

Those very clear words have been ignored and that portion of the First Amendment has been re-written to read:

Congress may make all the laws it wants abridging free speech, as long as the Supreme Court agrees that the abridgement is a proper “Time, Place, Manner” restriction.

Sadly, anyone who truly believes our nation is run according to the actual U.S. Constitution is living in a fantasy world. Our nation is run according to what the U.S. Supreme Court says, not what the U.S. Constitution says, and this has been the situation since 1803.

We live NOT in a representative democracy (a republic), but in a (mostly) benign oligarchy. Study, read history, educate yourselves and I have no doubt you will come to agree with me.

Fatal on June 18, 2010 at 1:02 PM

Sometimes you have to be happy that Democrats generally have Alvin Greene level IQs.

MNHawk on June 18, 2010 at 6:04 PM

Comment pages: 1 2