Many Americans saw it as a temper tantrum by liberals who lost a battle on a very solid constitutional argument. Over the past 20 years, the National Rifle Association and others have revived respect for the Second Amendment.
The graphics were wrong. Check out the lead from NBC:
Civil rights icon and Georgia Rep. John Lewis declared victory Thursday as he and the other Democrats who staged a revolt in the House of Representatives over gun policy reform suspended their nearly 26-hour sit-in in the Capitol.
While they failed to get the Republicans to vote on two controversial gun control bills, Lewis said they got the point across to the American people.
"By sitting in, we're really standing up for the rest of America," Lewis said a little after 1 p.m. "It's not a struggle that lasts for one day, one week, one month, one year."Many Americans scratched their heads wondering how losing a vote in the Senate rises to the level of black America ending lynching and white only restaurants. This is a sit-in by people who at the time were not allowed to sit there.
This is a bunch of fat-cat congressmen acting like they are in kindergarten class. They are allowed to sit there. In fact, they were elected to sit in Congress.
It does not help that Congressman Lewis looks like a frog in that pose.
The implication once again is that if you oppose any Democratic Party proposal you are a racist. We have reached the point where people no longer are bothered by that. It is like being called a Nazi or a fascist. Overuse by Democrats have rendered the words utterly meaningless.
Many pundits called the sit-in childish, including Ross Baker of USA Today:
Express moral indignation in floor speeches. Use social media to vent your frustration. Hold vigils on the Capitol grounds, use the legal process to file suits. All of those are legitimate forms of dissent for both members of Congress and citizens.
A sit-in by members of the House that prevents the chamber from operating more nearly resembles the hi-jinks of undergraduates invading a college dean's office than it does mature men and women who ought to know better.
No cause, however worthy, warrants such childish and destructive behavior. The long-term health of democratic institutions matter more than the political impulses of the moment.The legislation they back is particularly bad. None of the proposals would have prevented the massacre by a Muslim in Orlando -- or the previous one in San Bernardino.
Even Rolling Stone hates it:
Even someone with as much lifetime moral credit as Lewis can't efface what a mess the Democrats' ultimate aim was here. One of the bills they chanted for contained increased background checks, but the other is the so-called "no fly, no buy" bill that seeks to ban suspected terrorists from buying guns. The proposed bill overwhelmingly dominated the rhetoric of the sit-in members, long and loud enough that you could forget that it wasn't the only one being suggested.
As has been noted for years and was brought up again Wednesday, no-fly lists are a civil rights and administrative nightmare. The criteria for appearing on them seem amorphous and lax to the point of uselessness. Nearly 650,000 people already appear on them — including, at one point, a baby, Ted Kennedy and John Lewis himself. Many of the people listed have zero relationship to terror groups. Once on the list, there is no mechanism for having yourself removed from it.
In case no fly, no buy's accuracy were ever in doubt, even to members of the sit-in, there was Hoyer again, talking to MSNBC. When MSNBC's Chris Hayes asked him if he believed all 650,000 people on the no-fly lists really want to kill people, Steny Hoyer replied, "Of course not. Absolutely not."
The obverse poses just as much of a problem for the bill's supporters. Banning terror suspects from obtaining guns does nothing to deter the overwhelming majority of mass shooters, because they don't appear on the list. Members of the sit-in and their supporters have no answer for this other than the hope that this demonstration is the one that turns the tide, that this piece of legislation would be the first in the slow process of enacting meaningful gun control.Even Paul Ryan gets it.
In this country, we do not take away people’s constitutional rights without due process. https://t.co/MXuxFd8RMmhttps://t.co/zOnMHGA3lZ— Paul Ryan (@SpeakerRyan) June 23, 2016
Of course we do have gun control with background checks for each purchase from a licensed dealer.
That has been the law for 48 years.
Most Americans know this. I suggest the Democratic Party find another dead horse to flog because this one has maggots, which is why I would not sit so close to it.