Sen. Arlen Specter probably used to dream about being on the front page of the New York Times. But now it’s part of his ongoing nightmare. The Gray Lady rubs in what many are saying privately:
Under intense analysis of his every move and utterance, Mr. Specter canceled a scheduled appearance on Wednesday night on “Larry King Live” on CNN.
Behind the scenes, he was scrambling to find money to save the jobs of several aides after losing the payroll authority that came with his committee and subcommittee chairmanships as a Republican.
Mr. Specter also issued a statement on Wednesday insisting that he would ultimately regain his seniority on Senate committees, which Democrats for now have stripped away. But there are no guarantees.
So it goes for Mr. Specter, a political chameleon who started out as a Democrat, spent 43 years as a Republican and abruptly switched parties last week in a naked bid to save his political career.
Mr. Specter, who is up for re-election next year, concluded that he could not win a Republican primary.
But he is having trouble fitting in. He voted against the Democrats in his first two big votes since the switch, opposing the Democratic budget and helping defeat a measure to allow bankruptcy judges to modify mortgages for troubled homeowners.
Gosh, it’s almost like the Times doesn’t like the new Democratic senator from Pennsylvania. Well, some of his colleagues sure don’t. The ever cheerful Sen. Claire McCaskill pipes up: “He’s kind of a man without a country now.”
Perhaps falling into the “pity” category, McCaskill then adds that it will only be rocky “for a little while as people get used to him.” She should talk to her Republican colleagues about how long it takes to get used to Specter. Really, how does one get used to a non-stop gaffe machine and wildly unpredictable colleague who made known his sole concern is getting re-elected?
Seems like a no-brainer for many of Obama’s supporters. They WANT ammo to be more expensive, and remanufacturers to be put out of business. Just like they want to make it too expensive for you to heat your home — which is too big for you anyway, and why do you have so many kids, after all? To justify driving your gas-eating SUV monster?
Bitter clinging gun and faith people, polluting the planet with their very existence.
One thing that occurs to me is that the biggest users of ammo are sportsmen and target shooters. Thugs and criminals do not need that many bullets.
I have no doubt this is all about gun control. It’s not back door, either. It is a direct attack on the sporting goods market sector.
So what if the price of ammunition paid by police goes through the roof (it already has). It’s only taxpayers that will be hit by THAT cost. The Obama administration could care less.
It will, of course, dramatically affect hunters and target shooters that do not reload their own brass in the short run, and all shooters in the long run. States like Michigan, already reeling economically, will be hit in their primary tourist industry.
Criminals, who obtain weapons and ammunition, illegally, will continue to do so.
Obama has also taken steps to terminate the armed pilot program started after 9/11.
It’s all about the guns, don’t you see? And control.
Given Obama’s philosophy — in favor of gun-control, opposed to private ownership of firearms — this makes perfect sense, and it is an administratively legitimate use of executive power.
For those of us who are anti-gun-control, and who support private ownership of firearms: something to remember for 2012. And 2010, too.
Bravo Obama!
J.G.,
Has the Obama administration advanced an alternative explanation? It just seems to me like the facts as you present them make it seem as if the only POSSIBLE explanation for the new policy is as indirect gun-control. I’ve looked at all of the different links that “The Shootist” provides and I can’t seem to find any information on how the Obama administration itself justifies this move, which will put a dent in government revenues at a time when it needs all the money it can get its hands on.
I guess I just feel like there HAS TO BE some other explanation. Maybe that’s just wishful thinking, but could you do some digging?
Has the Obama administration advanced an alternative explanation?
Well no, of course not: one of our wonderful, unbiased, man of the people, jouranlists would actually have to ask the question in order to get even the most cursory of explanations.
He’s anti-gun but guns are okay for His bodyguards.
Wow. Talk about a lack of due diligence. This was a low-level decision by the DOD’s Defense Reutilization and Marketing Service that involves changes in policies on munitions disposal implemented by George W. Bush to enhance national security. It’s a lot of hyperventilating and requires a simple waiver for small-caliber brass, which will take a couple of weeks to complete.
Otherwise, good reporting.
Now, please defend this statement: “The Obama administration is changing the rules on re-selling used bullet casings.”
You know, I have never owned or shot a gun, just not my thing, and I support those for whom the 2nd amendment is their main issue, but it isn’t mine. HOWEVER this is a shot across the bow. it’s egregious, it’s brazen, and it should be challenged NOW with the same kind of increasing and soon to be overwhelming drumbeat as the anti-tax tea parties.
This should not wait until 2010. There is NO justifiable reason for this EXCEPT to make it hard for individual citizens to be able to defend themselves and their property. This is not about gun control in service to bigotry about hunters or rednecks, or misconceptions about the efficacy of police to be at your door within 3 sec of some criminal breaking it down, or sympathy for said criminals, or any other bleeding heart squeamishness about firearms. You don’t deliberately change an established uncontroversial policy to take an 80% cut in a huge amount of revenue because you think hunters are cruel or children will get into their parents’ firearms cabinet. You only do that if you deliberately want to keep your fellow citizens from being able to defend themselves against whoever might want to take them or their property away by force.
I’m not a conspiracy theorist or a militia mountain man. I am an urban mostly liberal middle class Jew. But It is obvious to me that the purpose of this act is to make it easier for the government to do what it will with you. There is no other explanation. This has to be opposed loudly, immediately, and persistently.
Is there some way for Congress to nullify this? Will the vaunted clout of the NRA have any effect? Or is this just the latest example of the Obama unilateral imperial presidency? It would be a good idea to loudly, immediately, and persistently point that out too.
Abe, people who have been in the firearms business their entire lives say that it’s ruining their businesses. If this was about some niggling little rule which is easy to circumvent, they would not be laying off half their employees. Read the link.
However, if firearms users will indeed be able to buy ammunition as they could before, then Obama (or his factotum Gibbs) can face a White House Press Briefing and explain it. And if the outcry is intense enough, Obama will know that, if indeed he was trying to do what we suspected, we have put him on notice. As far as I can see there is no downside to being outraged about the implications of this policy.
Excellent post from J. G. Thayer about a lesser-known issue. Thank you.
Unless Abe has some evidence for his claims, I think we’ve got another compelling piece of evidence that the Obama administration is really not concerned about helping the private sector but about transforming our society into their dream of a beloved community.
Obama has his thugs working back channel on many many issues. This is but one.
Expect soon to see something you have come to expect trashed by the goon squad.
#8 Ed says: “He’s anti-gun but guns are okay for His bodyguards.”
Duh.
At this point, the rumor is flying around like mad, but I have yet to actually see the proof of the pudding. (AKA provenance) If true, I will be very upset, as I buy a large amount of National match Brass for my 7.62×52 (308) and 5.56×45 (223) rifles.
But in the mean time, I want to see the DOD directive specifically authorizing this change in detail and have not been able to find, period. Nor have I been able to find where the NRA has weighed in on this subject, and normally they don’t miss a beat when it comes to such crap.
are we proud to have such a stupid government?
teleprompter jesus has a big carbon footprint
Well, actually, this should affect primarily 223 and 9mm casings, which should see an increase in price. On the other hand, increased brass scrap metal may bring down the prices on bullets themselves (lead and copper). Remember that we get much of our 7.63 and 30-06 remanufactured ammo from foreign dealers, such as Wolf (Russian, I think).
This will cause a price increase in 223 and 9mm, especially in the short term, but shouldn’t have any long term affect. If anything, the increased prices for ammo may attract new suppliers.
AND, by pissing off so many “sportsmen” Obama helps insure that his administration will be as Hobbs said, “poor, nasty, brutish, and short”.
Biblio44,
It is my sincere hope that smug socialists like you all experience the terror of having their home broken into or watching themselves or their loved ones get beaten sensless while uterly defensless to stop it in a dark parking lot. For those of you who think those scenarios are just for poorly produced TV melodramas, there are a lot of low lives out there just waiting for Mr. Obama to complete the work you are cheering on. By the way, please share your sentiments with the 48% of seniors and single women who enjoyed the drop in violent assaults against them since the concealed carry laws have gone in effect nation wide. Idiot…
So let me get this straight:
- DoD was selling empty brass casings at (say) 5 cents each to reloaders.
- now they’re selling them for 1 cent each to scrappers.
What is the actual cost to recycle brass casings if you melt them down and recast? If it’s more than 4 cents each, ammo will cost more. But if it turns out to be LESS…
…plus there’s the cost to crush the casings.
Orion, isn’t the point that this is being done IN SPITE of the fact that it loses the government money–about 4 cents per casing? The intention seems to be to make it harder citizens to buy ammunition, and the immediate effect is to cost the government money. A twofer!
Per Georgia Arms, DOD rescinded the ban at 4:30 PM today (St. Paddy’s Day):
Dear Loyal Customers,
Thanks to your voice, DOD has rescinded the order to mutilate all spent cases as of 4:30 pm on 3/17/09. We appreciate the time and effort that you expended, together we all made a difference. We will be posting the email we received from DOD as well as any additional information within the next 12-16 hours. Thanks so much and lets get to work!!! Georgia Arms
http://www.georgia-arms.com/
History101, Thank you!!!! As a woman with three children who woke up in the middle of the night to a robber in her daughter’s room, I can say that I wish I had a fire-arm of some sort in the house. I am only 5’2″ and I would not have been able to fight the man who was over 6′. I am not a “sportsman” but I am prior military and do believe in our rights to own a gun. I also believe in defending myself and my children at all costs. We were lucky that the man left without harming any of us, but he was never charged because I couldn’t hold him at gun-point until police arrived, which is what I would have done because shooting him was obviously not necessary. Obama is trying to remove my rights, as a mother, to defend my children. I am outraged!
As for Biblio44, ignorance must be bliss. You should really be quite ashamed! Is Obama’s safety really more important than all other’s safety in this nation? Including yours and/or your family’s. Just think about that one.
Obama’s teleprompter tells him what he believes, regardless of what it previously told him he believes, and irrespective of any facts. The teleprompter, unelected, unaccountable.
What was that book title, ‘One shot, One kill’?
Biblio44…wasn’t that term tried and later rejected in favor of “The Eloi” in HG Wells’ book ‘The Time Machine’? When they want your throat Eloi, will you “give them what they want and you won’t get hurt”?
Coming from the Chicago political machine, it’s no surprise that Obama is doing this. He’s perfectly fine with HIS family being protected, but not yours or mine. This arrogant ass thinks he has the right to trample the Constitution on anything where he doesn’t agree. One Big Ass Mistake Americe = OBAMA.
This fool in the White House is going to keep this up and he is going to have a full scale revolt on his hands.
At the very begining everyone knew Obama was for gun control.. This should not surprise anyone! It is time for the people to get together and empeach the man. The only problem with that is we are still stock with his cabinit who has all his same selfness. And I don’t care what anyone else believes he is a dictator! I am a middle class white american and I am proud of it.