Chef Jim Posted April 18, 2013 Posted April 18, 2013 So this was only a vote on universal background checks??
IDBillzFan Posted April 18, 2013 Posted April 18, 2013 So this was only a vote on universal background checks?? But it was going to be a gateway to more. It was just the vehicle to get in the door where more liberal goodness could be attached so it wouldn't get out of the GOP-led House. Mid-terms headline: Republicans led down Newtown families. Anyone paying attention knows why it failed. The president and his team, somehow, decided to believed their own press clippings...that it was certain to get through the Senate. A leader gets it through.
TakeYouToTasker Posted April 18, 2013 Posted April 18, 2013 But it was going to be a gateway to more. It was just the vehicle to get in the door where more liberal goodness could be attached so it wouldn't get out of the GOP-led House. Mid-terms headline: Republicans led down Newtown families. Anyone paying attention knows why it failed. The president and his team, somehow, decided to believed their own press clippings...that it was certain to get through the Senate. A leader gets it through. No. Nobody gets it through.
B-Man Posted April 18, 2013 Posted April 18, 2013 Perhaps it wasn't just the senate ruining his "demonize the House & raise more cash" plan that Had Barry so upset in the Rose Garden today. IT’S A BAD DAY FOR OBAMA: “CBS News has learned that previously unknown whistleblowers on #Benghazi are now speaking to Congressional investigators.” IT’S A BAD DAY FOR OBAMA (CONT’D): Alleged McConnell Bugger Visited White House. “The head of a group accused of illegally taping private meetings of Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell’s campaign visited the White House days before the group’s twitter account began actively attacking the Kentucky Republican, according to White House visitors logs.” Could this explain why McConnell turned more hostile over the White House’s gun control effort? OUCH: “Well, at least now Obama can pivot to the economy.” TWEET OF THE DAY: 90% of Americans want lower unemployment too but Obama couldn’t manage that one either. Runner up: Obama showed the passion and anger at his personal defeat that he wasn’t able to manage after the Benghazi slaughter. With the defeat today of even a modest gun control measure, I’m starting to think of Obama’s 2nd term and the election differently… Winning by getting out low-information voters that wouldn’t otherwise vote is kind of like all the various SEO practices designed to game the Google algorithm and get a site on page one of the results – it might work, but it doesn’t make you relevant. Relevance takes hard work and authenticity, neither of which comes readily to this President. http://pjmedia.com/instapundit/
IDBillzFan Posted April 18, 2013 Posted April 18, 2013 Perhaps it wasn't just the senate ruining his "demonize the House & raise more cash" plan that Had Barry so upset in the Rose Garden today. I'm waiting for liberals to explain how confirmation that the McConnell bugger culprit visited the WH two days before their assault only proves that Obama has the most transparent presidency ever.
B-Large Posted April 18, 2013 Posted April 18, 2013 To be honest with you, I'm not in favor of restricting much of anything. That's not to say that I'm opposed to some sort of Universal Background checks, just that the emphasis by liberal gun control advocates has been just about exclusively about guns, and very little to do with what I just brought up. If the president or liberals for that matter was truly serious about accomplishing anything worthwhile, then he and liberals would of taken on his base and spoke out forcefully about violence in the gaming and movie industries, while speaking about universal background checks. Now that he and liberals have taken the route of demagoguing gun owners, what they have done is two things. One, show that they aren't serious about helping solve this issue, or else they would of done what I just suggested. And two, accomplish jack ****. If he would of taken on his own base (Hollywood), he would of shown that he was serious about this issue, and it would of given him more capital to deal with the NRA. Now everyone has entrenched themselves to their old partisan habits. It was a complete missed opportunity by the president on this issue. Ok, so he makes it clear that video games and movies are violent, then what? Other than making people "feel good" about him ragging on Hollywood, what would you suggest to curb that influence? Goverment approval of movie content? Banning violent content? We already have a regulatory body that rates the movies and their content, give them even more power over creative expression? Then it onto CSI Miami, Criminal Minds, Bones? Does the government implode a successful video game industry in the effort of keeping reponsible citizens from entertainment in their homes? Frankly, I find some of the content, especially the the shows like Criminal Minds abhorrent, but do honestly believe playing violent video games and violent movies incline people to go kill a bunch of school kids? Roughing up hollywood, locking up everybody with Depression and banning all Guns is not going to curb the determined... we saw that in Boston last week. Maybe instead of whidespread action and more laws, perhaps we just come to the realization that in a lands of guns and free people, there will be collateral damage..... just hope its not you, or your kids in that next school.... or Chef's wife on her scooter... or the People who were shot in the neighborhood near my house as part of gang intiation...
B-Man Posted April 18, 2013 Posted April 18, 2013 Why was it a shameful day in Washington DC yesterday Barry ? We finally have bipartisanship.................. Liberals Lash Out at Gun-Rights Democrats. “On every defeated gun amendment today, more Democrats voted on the gun-rights side than Republicans crossed to the gun-control side. Fifteen Dems voted against Sen. Dianne Feinstein’s (D-Calif.) assault weapons ban. Ten voted against an amendment to limit the size of ammunition magazines to 10 rounds. Liberal ire was particularly strong against the four Democrats who voted against the Toomey-Manchin background check compromise: Max Baucus (Mont.), Mark Begich (Alaska), Heidi Heitkamp (N.D.), and Mark Pryor (Ark.).” .
section122 Posted April 18, 2013 Posted April 18, 2013 No. Nobody gets it through. Why was it a shameful day in Washington DC yesterday Barry ? We finally have bipartisanship.................. Liberals Lash Out at Gun-Rights Democrats. “On every defeated gun amendment today, more Democrats voted on the gun-rights side than Republicans crossed to the gun-control side. Fifteen Dems voted against Sen. Dianne Feinstein’s (D-Calif.) assault weapons ban. Ten voted against an amendment to limit the size of ammunition magazines to 10 rounds. Liberal ire was particularly strong against the four Democrats who voted against the Toomey-Manchin background check compromise: Max Baucus (Mont.), Mark Begich (Alaska), Heidi Heitkamp (N.D.), and Mark Pryor (Ark.).” Which is what I have been saying all along. Guns will never ever be made illegal in this country. It is simply impossible. There are not enough people that would be crazy (and stupid) enough to push it through the various levels. The funniest thing about all of this is that Obama has become the president that has done the most for gun and ammo sales. By scaring all of these people into thinking their guns will be taken away he has sparked a craze. (nice economy booster) see here: Gun sales have surged in recent months in the wake of the elementary school shooting in Newtown, Conn. Owners of gun stores have told several media outlets that they’re running out of ammunition and weapons as gun enthusiasts nervous about a potential crackdown on gun ownership are stocking up. Eight of the top 10 days for gun background checks since 1998 have occurred since the Dec. 14 massacre, according to FBI data. or here: Four years ago the gun lobby predicted Obama would be the “most anti-gun president in American history.” Yet it is hard to find a single aspect of the gun world that isn’t thriving. “The driver is President Obama. He is the best thing that ever happened to the firearm industry,” said Jim Barrett, an industry analyst at C.L. King & Associates Inc. in New York. I have to give the guy credit. He has fooled (almost) everyone!
birdog1960 Posted April 18, 2013 Posted April 18, 2013 Why was it a shameful day in Washington DC yesterday Barry ? We finally have bipartisanship.................. Liberals Lash Out at Gun-Rights Democrats. “On every defeated gun amendment today, more Democrats voted on the gun-rights side than Republicans crossed to the gun-control side. Fifteen Dems voted against Sen. Dianne Feinstein’s (D-Calif.) assault weapons ban. Ten voted against an amendment to limit the size of ammunition magazines to 10 rounds. Liberal ire was particularly strong against the four Democrats who voted against the Toomey-Manchin background check compromise: Max Baucus (Mont.), Mark Begich (Alaska), Heidi Heitkamp (N.D.), and Mark Pryor (Ark.).” . friggin wimps...i know we have a big blue tent but i'm just not sure it's big enough for these 4. shame indeed.
TakeYouToTasker Posted April 18, 2013 Posted April 18, 2013 friggin wimps...i know we have a big blue tent but i'm just not sure it's big enough for these 4. shame indeed. It's like you're a cartoon character.
birdog1960 Posted April 18, 2013 Posted April 18, 2013 It's like you're a cartoon character. it's like you're a jerk. manchant had as much or more to lose in wv as these losers did in their gun states but he did the correct, moral thing. you think those 4 voted their conscience? never mind, i'm pretty sure you don't know what that is.
DC Tom Posted April 18, 2013 Posted April 18, 2013 it's like you're a jerk. manchant had as much or more to lose in wv as these losers did in their gun states but he did the correct, moral thing. you think those 4 voted their conscience? never mind, i'm pretty sure you don't know what that is. The "you're a jerk" defense is a winning one. Run with it.
TakeYouToTasker Posted April 18, 2013 Posted April 18, 2013 (edited) it's like you're a jerk. manchant had as much or more to lose in wv as these losers did in their gun states but he did the correct, moral thing. you think those 4 voted their conscience? never mind, i'm pretty sure you don't know what that is. I love it when you disregard facts, and bloviate from the untenable position that if someone doesn't hold to your narrow ideology, they must be both immoral and acting against their conscience. #seethingliberalrage #badpolicyisbad #partyofimpotence Edited April 18, 2013 by TakeYouToTasker
IDBillzFan Posted April 18, 2013 Posted April 18, 2013 friggin wimps...i know we have a big blue tent but i'm just not sure it's big enough for these 4. shame indeed. Or maybe, y'know, all the legislation was worthless and they knew it. But hey...maybe everyone will focus like a laser one more time on that little three-letter word: J-O-B-S.
DC Tom Posted April 18, 2013 Posted April 18, 2013 Or maybe, y'know, all the legislation was worthless and they knew it. But hey...maybe everyone will focus like a laser one more time on that little three-letter word: J-O-B-S. It's Summer of Recovery VI: Recover Harder.
birdog1960 Posted April 18, 2013 Posted April 18, 2013 I love it when you disregard facts, and bloviate from the untenable position that if someone doesn't hold to your narrow ideology, they must be both immoral and acting against their conscience. #seethingliberalrage #badpolicyisbad #partyofimpotence what is untenable is any reasonable, defensible argument against backround checks http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/wp/2013/04/12/conservative-pro-gun-senator-demolishes-arguments-against-background-checks/ that i've heard including the "slippery slope" arguments made here. a vote against this bill was a vote to maintain gun votes and special interest money. simple as that.
Joe Miner Posted April 18, 2013 Posted April 18, 2013 http://www.policymic.com/articles/27309/6-biggest-problems-with-mandatory-gun-background-checks If we are currently funding our background check system at 5.3%, how do we think that adding tons of additional responsibility to that same system is going to work any better? If background checks are part of the answer, why don't we try funding and enforcing the current system? We have no idea if the current system works, because we're only using 5.3% of it.
IDBillzFan Posted April 18, 2013 Posted April 18, 2013 what is untenable is any reasonable, defensible argument against backround checks http://www.washingto...kground-checks/ that i've heard including the "slippery slope" arguments made here. a vote against this bill was a vote to maintain gun votes and special interest money. simple as that. A vote against this bill was a vote against this bill. If you, like every other progressive, needs to pin blame somewhere, you know where to look. The freaking thing was written by a guy with a A1 NRA rating, for crying out loud. You'd have to be a bumbling, stumbling, leaderless, gutless tool of a president to not get this passed. And there's your answer. Leaders lead. All others point and blame while throwing a hissy fit.
birdog1960 Posted April 18, 2013 Posted April 18, 2013 (edited) A vote against this bill was a vote against this bill. If you, like every other progressive, needs to pin blame somewhere, you know where to look. The freaking thing was written by a guy with a A1 NRA rating, for crying out loud. You'd have to be a bumbling, stumbling, leaderless, gutless tool of a president to not get this passed. And there's your answer. Leaders lead. All others point and blame while throwing a hissy fit. no one, absolutely no one has touched gun control in years. was barely mentioned in the campaigns. conventional wisdom was that the nra and gun lobby were too strong. unfortunately, conventional wisdom was correct and that's a sad fact that the country must now accept. at least he tried. few others would have had the courage just like in health care reform. the fact that the bill was written by someone highly rated by the nra just shows that the negative vote wasn't about substance but rather politics. the message was loud and clear: "don't try this again". Edited April 18, 2013 by birdog1960
TakeYouToTasker Posted April 18, 2013 Posted April 18, 2013 no one, absolutely no one has touched gun control in years. was barely mentioned in the campaigns. conventional wisdom was that the nra and gun lobby were too strong. unfortunately, conventional wisdom was correct and that's a sad fact that the country must now accept. at least he tried. few others would have had the courage just like in health care reform. Idiots like you are fortunate that the gun lobby, who receives tons of money from second amendment guys like many on this board, is as strong as it is. If it was weaker, you'd not only be exposed to a totalitarian regime, but you'd also have to live with the incredible loss of life that would occur when ideologes like yourself came for the guns.
Recommended Posts