U.S. liberals ask how they lost gun rights, Guantanamo votes

Monday 25th May, 07:10 AM JST

WASHINGTON —

Frustrated liberals are asking why a Democratic-controlled Congress and White House cannot manage to close the Guantanamo prison or keep new gun-rights laws from passing.

After all, President Barack Obama pledged to shut down the military detention center on Cuba for suspected terrorists. And Democratic control of the government would suggest that any gun legislation leads to tighter controls on weapons, not expanded use.

Even as they grouse, however, liberal lawmakers acknowledge that no one factor explains last week’s disappointing back-to-back votes in Congress.

The Obama administration is focused on other priorities, they say. Party leaders don’t want to endanger Democratic lawmakers from conservative districts by stressing divisive issues such as gun control.

On Guantanamo, many say, Obama and his allies were caught napping as Republicans stirred public fears about relocating suspected terrorists.

“I think it’s one of the few times that he didn’t think it all the way out,” said Democratic Rep Elijah Cummings of Maryland, an unabashed admirer of the president.

As for trying to keep loaded guns out of national parks, Cummings said, “I don’t think he put a lot of energy into it.” Issues such as national security and the distressed economy deserve greater attention, at least for now, he said, adding that the president “picks his fights very carefully.”

Such explanations provide small comfort to left-leaning Democrats after eight years of George W. Bush’s presidency and nearly a dozen years of Republican control of Congress.

“We’ll probably end up passing more gun bills” that expand owners’ rights “than we did during the Republican administration,” said Rep Carolyn McCarthy of New York, a leading gun control advocate. “That is what surprises me.”

She placed less blame on the White House than on ordinary Americans and advocacy groups that are consistently outflanked by gun owners’ groups, especially the National Rifle Association.

“Until the American people say enough is enough, and get active in it,” Democratic control of Congress and the White House will not be enough to turn the tide, said McCarthy, whose husband was among six people shot to death by a gunman on a commuter train in 1993.

Two votes in Congress last Wednesday dismayed many liberals and exposed the limits of their influence even with Obama as president and Democrats holding solid majorities in both houses of Congress.

The Senate voted 90-6 to join the House in blocking the transfer of any prisoners from Guantanamo. Harsh treatment and indefinite detention of suspects there have sparked worldwide criticisms of the U.S. government and helped al-Qaida recruit volunteers, said Obama, who pledges to close the prison early next year. Lawmakers say they want more details on where detainees will be sent.

Also Wednesday, the House voted overwhelmingly to join the Senate in letting people carry loaded guns in national parks and wildlife refuges. More than 100 House Democrats and 174 Republicans voted for the gun measure, which was attached to an Obama-backed bill imposing new restrictions on credit card companies.

Earlier this year, gun-rights supporters derailed a bill to give the District of Columbia voting rights in Congress by adding a provision that would repeal the city’s strict gun regulations.

The gun votes were less surprising to many Democrats than were the Guantanamo developments. The NRA remains among the most powerful lobbying groups, and many lawmakers take care to stay off its political enemies list.

“People do not want to be on the wrong side of this particular cultural divide,” said Democratic Rep. David Price of North Carolina, who supports tougher gun controls. “It’s too bad there’s not a more responsible national organization” to counteract the NRA, he said.

In some ways, the gun-control lobby is choking on Democratic success in congressional races. “The seats we’re picking up come disproportionately from those more conservative areas,” Price said, where linking the Democratic Party to gun control can be dangerous at re-election time.

Rep. Lynn Woolsey of California is another Democrat frustrated by the gun debate. When she asks colleagues why they don’t support tougher restrictions, she said, they reply, “You just don’t get it, Woolsey. You don’t have our districts.”

“It has to do with being afraid they’ll lose their election if they stand up against guns,” she said.

Guantananamo is a more pressing issue for the administration.

For months, congressional Republicans and conservative commentators said Obama’s plan to close the prison would place terrorists on U.S. soil, even though the locations presumably would be prisons. By the time the administration offered more details and reassurances, congressional Democrats were backpedalling, voting to block funds to relocate detainees.

“I’m not sure they realized the opposition they were going to come up against,” Woolsey said.

Many Democratic lawmakers predicted that Obama will resolve the Guantanamo problem and eventually turn to gun issues, where he has advocated ownership rights with “common sense” regulations.

“I do believe that down the road the president will start working on some of the gun violence issues,” said McCarthy, the New York Democrat. “But let’s face it,” she said. “We’ve got an awful lot of issues on our plate right now.”

› Login to comment

Latest 15 of 66 Total Comments Show All

Helter_Skelter at 03:23 AM JST - 26th May

people are buying guns and ammunition at records in fear that a Democratic led Congress and president will take them away.

Yeah, I wish I had invested in Smith and Wesson. Year-to-date up 132%.
Molenir at 03:42 AM JST - 26th May

Getting back to the subject of the article. Being Democrat, doesn't neccesarily make you liberal. Particularly if you're from a western state that has a long history of hunting and using guns. Colorado, the Dakotas, Montana. Lot of these places have Democratic senators and congressmen who desperately want to be reelected in areas that if they vote wrongly, will boot their butts out of office. Thats really all there is to it. The guantanamo is good for a soundbyte, but when it comes down to it, its NIMBY.
pathat at 04:00 AM JST - 26th May

Obama made a lot of campaign promises he can't keep, and sensible people-albeit the few that are in the U.S. Congress-realize that to close the special prisons at Guantanamo Bay requires a plan detailing what to do with the inmates.

To take away gun rights requires something more than certain liberals have in Washington, regardless of their majority in the U.S. Congress for now.

Come to think of it, I'm not sure there are very many big differences between supposed liberals and conservatives anymore. They've all failed the United States of America this decade.
Suzu1 at 04:28 AM JST - 26th May

The idea of putting the worst Guantanamo detainees in "Supermax" prison sounds good until reality strikes - there is only one Supermax prison in the federal Bureau of Prison system - ADX Florence in Colorado and it has only 4 spaces left. And the reality of moving the prisoners in and out for court appearances would be impossible to do without huge cost - I was in Seattle during the initial court appearances of the Millenium Bomber, Ahmed Ressam. Everytime he moved in and out of the federal courthouse it shut down the downtown area for security reasons.
The concealed guns bill in National Parks didn't face opposition because there is not a crime problem in the parks now and there is no reason to anticipate that lawfully carried firearms will create one. It is funny how defensive the Democrat strategists got to support Obama's signing of the bill. Paul Begala rushed onto CNN to announce that he's a hunter - why he was even going hunting this weekend - and how supportive Obama is of gun rights.
zurcronium at 05:37 AM JST - 26th May

This is simply amazing and explains much about the Iraq invasion, the lies created to justify it, and the blind zealotry of the bush losers who supported the failed invasion. This is why the GOP phants will be out of power for a long, long time.

In 2003 while lobbying leaders to put together the Coalition of the Willing, President Bush spoke to France's President Jacques Chirac. Bush wove a story about how the Biblical creatures Gog and Magog were at work in the Middle East and how they must be defeated.

In Genesis and Ezekiel Gog and Magog are forces of the Apocalypse who are prophesied to come out of the north and destroy Israel unless stopped. The Book of Revelation took up the Old Testament prophesy:

"And when the thousand years are expired, Satan shall be loosed out of his prison, And shall go out to deceive the nations which are in the four quarters of the earth, Gog and Magog, to gather them together to battle and fire came down from God out of heaven, and devoured them."

Bush believed the time had now come for that battle, telling Chirac:

"This confrontation is willed by God, who wants to use this conflict to erase his people's enemies before a New Age begins".

The story of the conversation emerged only because the Elyse Palace, baffled by Bush's words, sought advice from Thomas Romer, a professor of theology at the University of Lausanne. Four years later, Romer gave an account in the September 2007 issue of the university's review, Allez savoir. The article apparently went unnoticed, although it was referred to in a French newspaper.

The story has now been confirmed by Chirac himself in a new book, published in France in March, by journalist Jean Claude Maurice. Chirac is said to have been stupefied and disturbed by Bush's invocation of Biblical prophesy to justify the war in Iraq and "wondered how someone could be so superficial and fanatical in their beliefs".
bushlover at 05:57 AM JST - 26th May

How many here can mention a previous administration to cover up the shortcomings of the present one? Let me guess... 1 especially. The US may need to ask for help from Canada now to see how it's all to be done. After all there is a utopia up there in the great white north.
Farmboy at 07:41 AM JST - 26th May

dzimmerm,

"...Those weapons can not be legally bought by or sold to civilians in the U.S.A. due to the existing law that was passed in 1968."

Nice diatribe, but the earlier ban expired in 2004. A proposed revival of the assault weapons ban was proposed, but "This bill never became law, as it was still in Subcommittee when Congress ended the 110th Session on January 3, 2009." (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AssaultWeaponsBan)
Badsey at 08:07 AM JST - 26th May

Those automatics are classified as "NFA class 3" firearms. I am unsure if an antique (100yrs+) machine gun is NFA class 3 also -but I assume it is.

The NFA class 3 firearms are typically 5k-10k$+ =most people don't buy them. +the licensing is more stringent.

What is doable: you can buy the parts kits (minus the receiver or it is cut-up) or an AK can go full auto with just a paper clip (??that's what they say??)

And who needs full auto when you can buy an SKS, Cetme, M1 Garand, M16 etc anyway?
Suzu1 at 09:34 AM JST - 26th May

Farmboy - You are confusing the assault weapons ban which expired with ongoing restriction under the National Firearms Act (NFA)on machine guns.
Badsey - The terms Class 2 and Class 3 refer to the type of tax payment made by either firearms dealers or manufactures to work with NFA firearms. The firearms themselves don't have that classification. Antiqure firearms are those manufactured before 1898. If you want to have a full auto firearm, then you better make the proper application and pay the tax - otherwise you are looking at a 10-year prison sentence.
teleprompter at 10:37 AM JST - 26th May

zurcronium - your 5:37 post is lifted entirely from a Counterpunch article currently appearing on Lefty sites like alternet and informationclearinghouse.com

You really ought to provide sources for your conspiracy theorizing.
Farmboy at 04:37 PM JST - 26th May

Suzu,

That's true. My bad.
TheQuestion at 10:51 PM JST - 26th May

Yeah, I wish I had invested in Smith and Wesson. Year-to-date up 132%.

That and General Dynamics, I threw my lot in with them in 03 and sold it all off in 08 right when Obama started to take the lead in the polls and made a tidy profit. In times of conflict invest in conflict.

“You just don’t get it, Woolsey. You don’t have our districts.”

Politicians that understands what pisses off their people and modifies their voting habits to accomodate the voters wants in order to remain in her position. Democracy I love it.
Badsey at 02:34 AM JST - 27th May

So it is perfectly legal for me to own (and make!) a pre-1898 Gatling gun (with no license at all !!) -and I always wanted to make a copy of a French cannon =We must think of the positives!

American gun laws are fairly good -You can thank the Liberals for that. And soon my house will be fortified with Gatling guns and French style cannons.
adaydream at 04:49 AM JST - 27th May

I was listening to my brother-in-laws last week talking about how hard it is to get ammo now.

Then I was also listening to guys at a gun store debating it.

The NRA and the republicans are scaring gun enthusist to buying more and more rounds and guns. < :-)
Obot2008 at 04:49 PM JST - 27th May

Wolfpack at 09:39 AM JST - 25th May

As with so many issues, Democrat's have that pesky Constitution getting in the way

Yea good old GWB never let that pesky thing bother him. He used it for toilet paper and called it a "Patriot Act"...what a guy