Democratic senator Chris Murphy of Connecticut admitted this morning that "It took me a while to figure out" that belief in gun rights is based on a philosophy:
Host Joe Scarborough said, "Right, exactly. It doesn’t mean we shut down, would the senator suggests we shut down all screening at airports tomorrow because criminals are still going to smuggle things through there?"
"I think what has happened here is you can’t explain the opposition of background checks because the NRA is powerful," Murphy said, according to the Washington Free Beacon. "Essentially what you have here today is a bunch of gun control darwinists, right who just believe natural selection is going to take care of this problem, that if you put guns in the hands good guys and bad guys, then let’s just hope the good guys shoot the bad guys. And they sort of say this, they say 'the only way to stop a bad guy is a good guy with a gun.' You can’t explain opposition to background checks any longer by saying the NRA is powerful. I think a lot of folks who will vote against this on the Senate floor really believe the best way to solve this is throw a mess of guns out and there let the folks shoot it out. It took me a while to figure out there is a philosophy underlying this that allow people to justify being against background checks. It’s not just that the NRA are telling these guys to vote the wrong way but they believe the streets will be safer if criminals have guns and it’s ridiculous."
In a memo sent to fellow Republicans, Senator Jeff Sessions of Alabama outlines how he plans to change the terms of the budget debate with Democrats. The memo outlines how the ranking Republican on the Senate Budget Committee plans to bring the fight directly to Democrats.
Senate majority leader Harry Reid reiterated on Tuesday his plan to reform the rules of the Senate to weaken the filibuster and strengthen the majority party's power to move legislative debate forward. The Huffington Post reports:
Mitt Romney’s campaign can effectively be boiled down into two parts. One was his first debate appearance, during which he aggressively attacked President Obama’s abysmal record and vigorously explained and defended his own policy proposals.
Rasmussen Reports, the first polling outfit to release a survey from Ohio taken after the third and final presidential debate, shows that Mitt Romney has now pulled even with President Obama among the state’s likely voters — at 48 percent support apiece. This is the
During last night's debate, President Obama once again repeated the false claim that Governor Romney "wants to spend another $2 trillion on military spending that our military's not asking for." And he's likely to repeat it in the days ahead.
Mitt Romney’s aim was to present himself with the demeanor and grasp of foreign and national security issues of a president of the United States. He succeeded. President Obama sought to make Romney appear unqualified to be president and commander in chief. He failed. And that was the story of the third and final presidential debate.
Mitt Romney is more than holding his own with Barack Obama tonight. Only two other challengers have done as well debating foreign policy with an incumbent president—Ronald Reagan against Jimmy Carter in 1980 and, to a lesser degree, Bill Clinton against George H.W. Bush in 1992. Reagan and Clinton won. Romney is now on track to becoming the third challenger to win in the last 32 years—and the first in 80 years to defeat an incumbent who didn't have a primary challenge. Tonight, Romney seems as fully capable as—probably more capable than—Barack Obama of being the next president.
"President Obama suggested that Mr. Romney was mistaken in seeking to keep 10,000 American troops in Iraq. But the Obama administration initially sought to do just that — and ultimately never managed to negotiate an agreement to allow any American troops in Iraq.