PDA

View Full Version : Where are all the Blue Dog Democrats?


MolonLabe2008
02-06-2009, 8:32 AM
Where are all those Blue Dog Democrats that I was told would defend the 2nd Amendment?

Are there any so called Blue Dog Democrats in the Senate?

If so, they failed to deliver during Eric Holders confirmation.

These are the only Senators who voted AGAINST Eric Holder...

Barrasso (R-WY)
Brownback (R-KS)
Bunning (R-KY)
Burr (R-NC)
Coburn (R-OK)
Cochran (R-MS)
Cornyn (R-TX)
Crapo (R-ID)
DeMint (R-SC)
Ensign (R-NV)
Enzi (R-WY)
Hutchison (R-TX)
Inhofe (R-OK)
Johanns (R-NE)
McConnell (R-KY)
Risch (R-ID)
Roberts (R-KS)
Shelby (R-AL)
Thune (R-SD)
Vitter (R-LA)
Wicker (R-MS)

bwiese
02-06-2009, 8:36 AM
You're not gonna get a RKBA-only vote on Holder from them.

I'm puzzled as to why you'd be so naive to think that.

If a bad gun bill comes up, that's where they'll be able to make a statement.

WokMaster1
02-06-2009, 8:42 AM
Eric Holder got the confirmation to be AG not BATF chief. The later would have been a totally different ball of wax.

hawk1
02-06-2009, 11:24 AM
My thinking is you will not get a solid pro-2 vote from any of them as they would be taken out to woodshed by Pelosi for doing it, ie, no money, small office, bad committees, etc...

They will be allowed to flex when the dems have enough votes in the bag to cover that vote.

Then they can let their constituents back home know they are representing...

yellowfin
02-06-2009, 11:26 AM
My thinking is you will not get a solid pro-2 vote from any of them as they would be taken out to woodshed by Pelosi for doing it, ie, no money, small office, bad committees, etc...

They will be allowed to flex when the dems have enough votes in the bag to cover that vote.

Then they can let their constituents back home know they are representing...In short, they're worthless. They really need to get some stones and overthrow Pelosi.

hawk1
02-06-2009, 11:26 AM
Eric Holder got the confirmation to be AG not BATF chief. The later would have been a totally different ball of wax.


Not really, the BATF is now under Justice Dept and not the Treasury anymore...

He is not going to do us any favors at all.

Gator Monroe
02-06-2009, 11:30 AM
iF A fIREARMS RESTRICTION BILL IS VOTED ON 2 or 3 Bluedogs will think long & hard about voting 2A and if one or two does I would be shocked (In the senate) 15 would think about it in the House with less than 10 voting Pro 2A

DarkHorse
02-06-2009, 12:04 PM
My thinking is you will not get a solid pro-2 vote from any of them as they would be taken out to woodshed by Pelosi for doing it, ie, no money, small office, bad committees, etc...

They will be allowed to flex when the dems have enough votes in the bag to cover that vote.

Then they can let their constituents back home know they are representing...

Pelosi is Speaker of the House, and the OP asked about the Senate. In theory, she has no power/sway over happenings in the Senate. It would be Harry Reid, D-NV, who is the Senate Majority Leader, to do any such nonsense.

EDIT: To the OP - in short, NO, there are no Blue Dog Senators, apparently. Except for Kirsten Gillibrand, the woman who is supposed to replace Clinton in NY. I don't know if she's been sworn in yet. It just appears that this BD Coalition doesn't extend into the Senate; it only exists in the House.

http://www.house.gov/ross/BlueDogs/

bwiese
02-06-2009, 12:11 PM
In short, they're worthless. They really need to get some stones and overthrow Pelosi.

Naive.

Why would Blue Dog dems overthrow Pelosi if they don't differ that much on things besides guns?

They want to get reeelected, and Pelosi knows they have to do what they have to do to get reelected.
Many of these guys are in seats formerly occupied by R's.

berto
02-06-2009, 12:12 PM
The Blue Dogs in the Senate didn't nix Holder because it wouldn't have mattered and would have been a bad play. The new prez generally gets a pass on cabinet appointees so he can assemble his team. Keeping anti-2A bills from passing is where they will hopefully get the job done. The Blue Dog senators responsible for voting on cabinet appointees don't care what Pelosi thinks because she's in the House.

edwardm
02-06-2009, 1:40 PM
I can name that tune in three words:

Limited. Political. Capital.

;)

Naive.

Why would Blue Dog dems overthrow Pelosi if they don't differ that much on things besides guns?

They want to get reeelected, and Pelosi knows they have to do what they have to do to get reelected.
Many of these guys are in seats formerly occupied by R's.

mecam
02-06-2009, 1:46 PM
In short, they're worthless. They really need to get some stones and overthrow Pelosi.

I feel like Pelosi is the actual POTUS right now.

hawk1
02-06-2009, 2:05 PM
Pelosi is Speaker of the House, and the OP asked about the Senate. In theory, she has no power/sway over happenings in the Senate. It would be Harry Reid, D-NV, who is the Senate Majority Leader, to do any such nonsense.

EDIT: To the OP - in short, NO, there are no Blue Dog Senators, apparently. Except for Kirsten Gillibrand, the woman who is supposed to replace Clinton in NY. I don't know if she's been sworn in yet. It just appears that this BD Coalition doesn't extend into the Senate; it only exists in the House.

http://www.house.gov/ross/BlueDogs/

My mistake totally.
I was thinking House when I read 'blue dog democrats'. I didn't know any exisited in the Senate.

sb_pete
02-06-2009, 2:52 PM
lol, you realize even the NRA decided that was a losing battle and didn't waste time on it right?

berto
02-06-2009, 2:56 PM
EDIT: To the OP - in short, NO, there are no Blue Dog Senators, apparently. Except for Kirsten Gillibrand, the woman who is supposed to replace Clinton in NY. I don't know if she's been sworn in yet. It just appears that this BD Coalition doesn't extend into the Senate; it only exists in the House.

http://www.house.gov/ross/BlueDogs/

There are pro-2A dems in the Senate and our fate rests with them.

Gator Monroe
02-06-2009, 3:03 PM
There are pro-2A dems in the Senate and our fate rests with them.

all 8 of them ?

Gator Monroe
02-06-2009, 3:23 PM
Get real, some kind of bad legislation is going to come down the pipe, and they will be brow beaten into voting for it. It's just a matter of time before some kind of ban comes down the pipe, and I see no reason why it won't pass.

Getting Real would be for 2A Democrat voters to vote for pro 2A candidates from another party if the Democrat Candidate inb their District is an Anti-

DarkHorse
02-06-2009, 3:34 PM
There are pro-2A dems in the Senate and our fate rests with them.

Pro-2A Dems and Blue Dog Dems are not the same thing. While many Blue Dogs happen to be Pro-2A, that is not the stance of their group. They first formed as a response to the fiscally irresponsible Dems. Their only stated stance is that of fiscal conservatism. Since the group started in the South, many of them "happen" to support individual gun rights. Don't expect Blue Dogs, as a united group, to stand up for 2A rights of individual citizens.

Charliegone
02-06-2009, 4:46 PM
Harry Reid isn't really anti-gun either. In fact I think he's somewhat pro-gun.

* Voted YES on prohibiting foreign & UN aid that restricts US gun ownership. (Sep 2007)
* Voted YES on prohibiting lawsuits against gun manufacturers. (Jul 2005)
* Voted NO on banning lawsuits against gun manufacturers for gun violence. (Mar 2004)
* Voted YES on background checks at gun shows. (May 1999)
* Voted NO on more penalties for gun & drug violations. (May 1999)
* Voted NO on loosening license & background checks at gun shows. (May 1999)
* Voted YES on maintaining current law: guns sold without trigger locks. (Jul 1998)

http://www.ontheissues.org/senate/harry_reid.htm

I think we have his constituents (Nevada) to thank for a change in his views.

Gator Monroe
02-06-2009, 4:49 PM
Harry Reid isn't really anti-gun either. In fact I think he's somewhat pro-gun.

* Voted YES on prohibiting foreign & UN aid that restricts US gun ownership. (Sep 2007)
* Voted YES on prohibiting lawsuits against gun manufacturers. (Jul 2005)
* Voted NO on banning lawsuits against gun manufacturers for gun violence. (Mar 2004)
* Voted YES on background checks at gun shows. (May 1999)
* Voted NO on more penalties for gun & drug violations. (May 1999)
* Voted NO on loosening license & background checks at gun shows. (May 1999)
* Voted YES on maintaining current law: guns sold without trigger locks. (Jul 1998)

http://www.ontheissues.org/senate/harry_reid.htm

I think we have his constituents (Nevada) to thank for a change in his views.

LOL we suddenly changed our minds about him ?:thumbsup:

lioneaglegriffin
02-06-2009, 4:53 PM
EDIT: To the OP - in short, NO, there are no Blue Dog Senators, apparently. Except for Kirsten Gillibrand, the woman who is supposed to replace Clinton in NY. I don't know if she's been sworn in yet. It just appears that this BD Coalition doesn't extend into the Senate; it only exists in the House.

http://www.house.gov/ross/BlueDogs/

remember the guy that beat uncle ted?

Senator Mark Begich, do you think he can vote against for a ban an still be senator from alaska? Alaska is as red as they come so there is no room for shenanigans

Aegis
02-06-2009, 7:29 PM
Didn't Senator Webb's assistant get arrested for trying to bring a pistol into the Senate offices?

Charliegone
02-06-2009, 8:19 PM
Didn't Senator Webb's assistant get arrested for trying to bring a pistol into the Senate offices?

Yup. I can't remember if it was Webb's gun or something of that nature.

Annie Oakley
02-06-2009, 11:13 PM
In short, they're worthless. They really need to get some stones and overthrow Pelosi.

What part of California does Pelosi represent ? Maybe we can do something to get rid of her.

berto
02-07-2009, 12:52 AM
What part of California does Pelosi represent ? Maybe we can do something to get rid of her.

SF. Good luck.

Gator Monroe
02-07-2009, 7:49 AM
What part of California does Pelosi represent ? Maybe we can do something to get rid of her.

Why just her (There are plenty of other Dem Anti's- to vote against):thumbsup: Slowly the correct responses to posts & threads about our Dem reps & senators start to come out ...:thumbsup:

DParker
02-07-2009, 8:39 AM
Didn't Senator Webb's assistant get arrested for trying to bring a pistol into the Senate offices?

Yes, he did. It turned out to be one of Sen. Webb's CCW guns. Webb is a pro gun Democrat.

Remember too, that there are also anti gun Republicans.

TRICKSTER
02-07-2009, 8:53 AM
Harry Reid isn't really anti-gun either. In fact I think he's somewhat pro-gun.

* Voted YES on prohibiting foreign & UN aid that restricts US gun ownership. (Sep 2007)
* Voted YES on prohibiting lawsuits against gun manufacturers. (Jul 2005)
* Voted NO on banning lawsuits against gun manufacturers for gun violence. (Mar 2004)
* Voted YES on background checks at gun shows. (May 1999)
* Voted NO on more penalties for gun & drug violations. (May 1999)
* Voted NO on loosening license & background checks at gun shows. (May 1999)
* Voted YES on maintaining current law: guns sold without trigger locks. (Jul 1998)

http://www.ontheissues.org/senate/harry_reid.htm

I think we have his constituents (Nevada) to thank for a change in his views.

Pro gun??? Only when he's up for re-election.