« Obama statement on gun control | Main | One shot, two kills »
Followup to Obama statement
Several media outlets have picked it up, including WashPo, which noted: "His chosen avenue to highlight the issue, an op-ed in the Sunday edition of a small newspaper instead of a major speech, could suggest a more limited approach." That struck me as a bit strange, too. "Sending up a trial balloon" is a familiar legislative tactic, but the standard approach is to have a subordinate make a clear statement, as AG Holder did earlier with AW bans. Its clarity ensures would get real reactions and can gauge what type of reception the idea will get, and its origin in a subordinate ensures that if the reaction is bad you can disavow it, or just let it die off. A vague hint from the top guy has neither benefit.
In the meantime, Paul Helmke of Brady Campaign calls the hint "the most significant statement any president has made on gun violence in over a decade," with no apparent awareness of just pitiful that sounds.
Comments
Also done on a Sunday while all news-reading eyes were on 10's of thousands of tsunami and earthquake casualties and a nuclear melt down in Japan.
But the editorial is so unspecific it's hard to really get motivated by it, as it's not clear what he is arguing for.
Posted by: stephen at March 14, 2011 11:14 AM
>>A vague hint from the top guy has neither benefit.
Occam sez: It's an amateur's maneuver.
Posted by: gwa.45 at March 14, 2011 11:29 AM
Brady is doing his best to make lemonade out of lemons.
Posted by: rspock at March 14, 2011 11:57 AM
Excuse me, I meant Helmke
Posted by: rspock at March 14, 2011 11:58 AM
Take this with salt ... but Sam Stein over at HuffPo is suggesting they are discussing going after private sales of firearms.
Sorry ... won't take my link.
Posted by: Carl from Chicago at March 14, 2011 12:47 PM
Helmke clearly wishes he had lemons.
It is not every day that real world evidence translates into political victory. For that reason, it's quite remarkable that, between 1994 and 2011, the evidence in favor of an armed citizenry has resulted in a changed political consensus in favor of an armed citizenry.
Posted by: John at March 14, 2011 03:02 PM
My personal belief is that Obama doesn't have strong opinions on gun control and that what you have seen in the past is the reflection of those about him. Never forget that a politician's publicly expressed opinions are a combination of what the political pros in his area want, and what it takes to get elected.
In Obama, you see the opposite of what you saw with Scott Brown and Kirsten Gillibrand who were both pro-gun until they had to satisfy a state-wide audience in an anti-gun state.
There has been a clamor on the liberal side for Obama to speak up, and now he has done so in a way the tells the left that he's got enough on his plate, and his re-election campaign is going to be tough enough, that he's not going to make any enemies with a useless push for some gun control legislation that won't get past Congress anyway.
Posted by: SeaDrive at March 15, 2011 09:06 AM