Still a lot of work to do

The Hill:

Senate votes 53-46 to stop US from joining UN Arms Trade Treaty

And why only 53 votes?

UPDATE:

Posted by: Old Grouch in In Passing at 18:59:38 GMT | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 32 words, total size 1 kb.

Watch what they do, and act accordingly.

Glenn Reynolds:

If I were a Republican in Congress, I’d introduce a bill — tomorrow! — banning, and, in fact, criminalizing, such seizures in the United States.  That would be popular, and if the Democrats were dumb enough to oppose it, it would make people wonder what they were up to.

Bill Quick:

Neither Boehner nor McConnell would ever permit such a bill to reach the floor.

It might be too embarrassing to their Democrat friends.  And we certainly wouldn’t want anything to interrupt the ongoing GOP cave to the Democrats.

Concern over ‘‘embarrassing Democrats’’ is only a small part of it.  Such a bill will go unintroduced, let alone unconsidered, for the same reason that Rand Paul couldn’t get a straight answer out of Eric Holder about using drones to kill American citizens on American soil.

It’s called ‘‘keeping options open.’’  Because always remember, if the choice is between doing what’s right for the country and doing what’s necessary to maintain privilege, establishment Republicans and progressive Democrats are as alike as peas in a pod.

Tyler Durden:

This should leave any individual in Europe under no illusion that the political elite will enact whatever it deems fit to protect their positions in the name of the euro and their own positions of power.

MORE:
Sheila Bair^[1] whistles past the graveyard- loudly:

This would never happen in the U.S. because we respect the rule of law and we have a very strong agency called the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation that stands up for insured depositors and protects them.  And so having not just a single deposit insurance that’s in place, but a strong agency handling that program and standing up for insured depositors -- I think that is really crucial and this really underscores why they need that in the eurozone.

‘‘Rule of law,’’ huh?  Like this...?
Inverstors Business Daily:

Already Congressional Democrats are plotting the expropriation of Americans’ private 401(k) and IRA retirement savings accounts in favor of ‘‘a guaranteed income.’’  If bank accounts can be casually expropriated in Cyprus to pay for big-spending governments and bailouts, there is no reason a nice slice of the $19 trillion in retirement accounts [held by Americans] can’t get the same treatment.

If it happens, it will signal the end of individual freedom and the return of feudalism.

Another UPDATE (130322 16:50):
Instapundit reader Mark Jones:

Rep. Billy Long’s introduced resolution against a Cyprus-like raid on bank deposits is nice–certainly a lot better than no resolution on the point at all.  But it’s only a resolution.  Which means exactly nothing, legally speaking.  Congress passes resolutions all the time, on matters both profound and frivolous.  We need legislation, not resolutions...

Related:

-----

Posted by: Old Grouch in In Passing at 18:00:43 GMT | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 492 words, total size 7 kb.

Here we go again...

(via Insty ‘‘It would be better P.R. to schedule these only in July’’, via Washington Examiner)

Posted by: Old Grouch in In Passing at 17:14:02 GMT | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 33 words, total size 1 kb.

Playing the ‘‘supervision’’ game

Gem of an idea, found in the discussion of Jazz Shaw’s Hot Air post on the Voting Rights Act litigation:

At one time there was a need for the Voting Rights Act, but it’s an antiquated law now, rendered irrelevant by the advance of time, demographics, attitudes, and communications.

I tell you what we do need... A ‘‘Second Amendment Rights Act.’’  And I can think of a bunch of states that ought to come under a greater than standard scrutiny when passing laws that relate to this right.

Dusty on March 3, 2013 at 1:18 PM

I agree with Dusty.

We also need a ‘‘Voter ID Act’’...

Lourdes on March 3, 2013 at 1:24 PM

How about a ‘‘Freedom of Speech Act?’’  That one could apply federal monitoring to any state entity (I’m looking at YOU, universities, but also the Indiana Court of Appeals (More on the latter here.)) that attempt or have attempted to limit First Amendment rights on spurious grounds such as ‘‘hatred’’ or ‘‘unfairness.’’^{[1 UPDATE]}

Hey, this could get to be fun!

-----

Posted by: Old Grouch in In Passing at 23:26:37 GMT | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 195 words, total size 4 kb.

When you can’t do your job, then...

Pair o’headlines from the UK:


Seems to me that ‘‘broad coalition of UK health organizations’’ who uttered the alcohol proposal could better spend their time straightening out the NHS.  But then calling on the government to limit other people’s liberty has always given the ruling class more jollies than getting their own houses in order.

Related:

Posted by: Old Grouch in In Passing at 20:03:33 GMT | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 153 words, total size 3 kb.