Calguns.net

Calguns.net (https://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/index.php)
-   National 2nd Amend. Political & Legal Discussion (https://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/forumdisplay.php?f=331)
-   -   Why Isnít the GOP Acting on Pro-Gun Bills? (https://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=1392518)

DonaldBabbett 10-27-2017 9:47 AM

Why Isnít the GOP Acting on Pro-Gun Bills?
 
GOA spoke with pro-gun Senator Ted Cruz over the weekend.

Cruz told GOA that he and other pro-gun Senators, like Mike Lee of Utah, were expecting Democrats to offer anti-gun amendments to the budget bill.

But they were flabbergasted when the gun grabbers in the Senate refrained from doing so.

GOA told Sen. Cruz that this wasn't surprising at all. Because Senator Chuck Schumer does NOT want to bring up gun control legislation since he knows that itís a losing issue for Democrats and that it will hurt them in next yearís Senate elections.

Then, media reports independently confirmed what we had told Senator Cruz.

According to press reports, Democratic leader Chuck Schumer has ordered his gun control lapdogs to back off from adding any gun control to large bills, for now.

Schumerís retreat confirms something that is painfully obvious -- gun control is a political loser and Democrats know it.

They prefer to bring up gun restrictions shortly after an election -- just like they did after the Sandy Hook tragedy.

That way, they hope, voters will forget by the next election.

But now that weíre about a year out from a very important election cycle, they canít risk staying in the minority.

Campaigning on gun control isnít a winning platform, just ask Hillary Clinton.

But while gun owners are breathing a sigh of relief, it raises a puzzling question ...

Why isnít Senate Leader Mitch McConnell using the Democrats retreat to push pro-gun bills?

Gun owners need to remind the GOP leadership to grow a Second Amendment backbone and move pro-gun bills like concealed carry reciprocity and suppressor deregulation immediately.

These bills have been used to tease gun owners, only to languish in subcommittees in the Senate.

Now is the time to move pro-gun bills!

So please tell your Senators to urge Senator McConnell to put the pro-gun bills on the offense!

We need to encourage McConnell to take up concealed carry reciprocity -- a bill that also protects Constitutional Carry states (S. 446) -- and to also pass suppressor deregulation (S. 59 and S. 1505).

Again, each letter is specially tailored to fit whether your Senators are Republican or Democrat.

So please take action today!

Thank you.

https://cqrcengage.com/gunowners/app...7QxC9HoKw&lp=0

bababoris 10-27-2017 9:49 AM

Too Many RINOs. #draintheswamp


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

DonaldBabbett 10-27-2017 10:06 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bababoris (Post 20827535)
Too Many RINOs. #draintheswamp


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Yes, too many RINOs and even too many Progs to boot!

America ought to vote for more CONSERVATIVES.

Have a Conservative Party as alternative to GOP.

ronlglock 10-27-2017 10:45 AM

Carrots (pro gun bills) bring in $$. If they were passed, the $$ would stop. Same with cancer. If it was cured, how many tens of thousands of people would be out of work?

Cuda440 10-27-2017 10:53 AM

Just like the democrats know that gun control is a political loser, the republicans know that gun rights are a political winner. If they end the fight now, what will they have to campaign on next year?

Look at the dems preaching amnesty every election cycle, yet even with full control they didnt push for it. The want the same votes in 2-4-8 years every cycle.

Term limits would be the best way to end this grandstanding without action. Drain the swamp

TruOil 10-27-2017 2:22 PM

Write to MY senators? That's a joke, right? We could send DIFi and Harris a couple million letters and it would not change their "no" votes if these bills ever hit the floor.

pacrat 10-27-2017 2:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TruOil (Post 20828698)
Write to MY senators? That's a joke, right? We could send DIFi and Harris a couple million letters and it would not change their "no" votes if these bills ever hit the floor.


^^^^Ditto^^^^

lowimpactuser 10-27-2017 6:12 PM

Conservatives are losers.

I want reactionaries.

press1280 10-28-2017 4:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ronlglock (Post 20827794)
Carrots (pro gun bills) bring in $$. If they were passed, the $$ would stop. Same with cancer. If it was cured, how many tens of thousands of people would be out of work?

May have a point here. They need to come clean and tell us exactly WHY they won't move these bills and tell us WHO needs to be voted out to make it happen. Instead, we keep hearing the same talking points even though everyone knows the bill will easily pass the House RIGHT NOW.
The NRA should be putting more pressure on as well.

Jimi Jah 10-28-2017 7:52 AM

They lie to get into office and then lie about their excuses.

Bannon will take care of them.

bob7122 10-28-2017 7:54 AM

Because they are not pro 2a. Both dems and rep are 2 sides of the same turd.

rplaw 10-28-2017 8:37 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bob7122 (Post 20831613)
Because they are not pro 2a. Both dems and rep are the same end of the same turd.

FIFY

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jimi Jah (Post 20831603)
They lie to get into office and then lie about their excuses.

Bannon will take care of them.

Bannon will continue to alienate those of the GOP who realize that conservative extremism is the same as progressive extremism - it only helps those who want to help themselves to your stuff. For ultra-progressive D's it's your money, your guns, and your freedom. For ultra-conservative R's it's your money, your choices in how you live your life, and your freedom.

My recommendation is to just stop listening to those who do not truly have our interests at heart.

lowimpactuser 10-28-2017 9:23 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rplaw (Post 20831825)
FIFY



Bannon will continue to alienate those of the GOP who realize that conservative extremism is the same as progressive extremism - it only helps those who want to help themselves to your stuff. For ultra-progressive D's it's your money, your guns, and your freedom. For ultra-conservative R's it's your money, your choices in how you live your life, and your freedom.

My recommendation is to just stop listening to those who do not truly have our interests at heart.

I'm going to have to disagree with you here. I could quote Goldwater about extremism in defense of liberty; but I'm not here for soundbites.

I'm actually curious where you think we have any cihoice but to fight the war as dirty and extreme as the other side to reclaim our rights; and where Bannon is wrong on his economic nationalism.

As for the rest of the GOP, they are liars who won't stand for what they said they would; and really do have an ulterior agenda. I will happily take the carpet matching the drapes I voted for; and while I'm not that sanguine about many things he social warriors want; at a certain point you pick your poison; and I think spiking the football on several things makes it more likely the Dems have to spend years to make ground up in other areas they care more about, and have to leave gun rights alone.

rplaw 10-28-2017 10:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by lowimpactuser (Post 20831967)
I'm going to have to disagree with you here. I could quote Goldwater about extremism in defense of liberty; but I'm not here for soundbites.

I'm actually curious where you think we have any cihoice but to fight the war as dirty and extreme as the other side to reclaim our rights; and where Bannon is wrong on his economic nationalism.

As for the rest of the GOP, they are liars who won't stand for what they said they would; and really do have an ulterior agenda. I will happily take the carpet matching the drapes I voted for; and while I'm not that sanguine about many things he social warriors want; at a certain point you pick your poison; and I think spiking the football on several things makes it more likely the Dems have to spend years to make ground up in other areas they care more about, and have to leave gun rights alone.

It comes down to personal choices I guess.

I'm not one for conservatism as a cover for religious extremism. I don't go to church on Sunday's, don't espouse the religious dogma that most who profess to be "conservative" do, and I don't like it when people try to tell me my faith isn't real because it doesn't match theirs. MY FAITH isn't worn on my sleeve, isn't expressed in quaint mostly meaningless quotations from ancient text, and doesn't try to supplant reality with demagoguery. Nor do I need someone telling me how to believe or where to worship upon pain of suffering eternal whatever.

Unfortunately, most of those who label themselves as "conservatives" these days think that unless they see me in their church, hear me spouting the same dogma they cherish, and go witness with them on Saturday's, I'm not a true conservative. Instead I'm someone who either needs regaled as a liberal progressive, or needs to be taught "the one true way". This viewpoint seems to extend to their political convictions as well which is why they continue to vote for representatives who espouse the dogma while engaging in affairs with interns and co-workers, not advancing an agenda which protects EVERY American, and seizing every opportunity to line their already overstuffed pockets at my (and your) expense.

When you put religion above all else in politics, you lose and so does everyone else. Bannon is of this stripe and is willing to use his power-of-the-press and other people's money to advance that narrative. His policy is to exclude the voices of those who disagree.

True conservatives aren't necessarily religious. What we are, are individuals who believe that our government should represent EVERYONE in a responsible manner. To me that means not writing laws which promote one thing while excluding all other viewpoints. Not writing laws which advance special interests in the name of crony capitalism. Or self absorption (like building Presidential libraries at the public expense - THAT'S what the Library of Congress is for.) Or writing laws which attempt to overturn or erase our heritage no matter how messy and socially unacceptable. Gun Rights are part of this as well as the current PC collective insanity of statue toppling.

AMERICA was created as the "great experiment" and people like Bannon, and Schummer, don't understand that we aren't like other nations. We are unique, and restrictive viewpoints such as theirs don't go along with our national credo. Which is something like:

Get out of my face and my wallet and go peddle your tribalistic nonsense elsewhere. Preferably Canada. ( :D )

One need only to listen to the current PC narrative that women are being abused and demeaned by everyone to realize how easily the political narrative gets distorted. This is because the only people who have the microphone are those with an agenda. Take the above for example; if you were to walk down the street in just about any city/town/village in the USA and ask random persons their views on "how women are being treated by society" the responses wouldn't even come close to the national narrative that women are horribly oppressed in both the workplace as well as at home.

It would be the same if you changed the question to "how are blacks being treated by society today". Or any other generic question on any of the hot topics which invite the respondent to actually express a viewpoint rather than ask a carefully crafted quiz designed so the statistical outcome is what the pollsters want to see.

Bannon is attempting to do what others have done by sculpting the question to match the intended outcome. And he will fail because most American's, as well as most GOP members or actual Conservatives don't believe as he does. The problem with what he is doing is that he will make important members of our society disengage because of the undesirable appeal of his message and efforts.

As for fighting, I actually like Congressional gridlock. I believe the Framers created our government in a way that this was the intended result. Gridlock keeps the political noise and nonsense from screwing "the people" out of our Rights and heritage on an ad hoc or whimsical basis. When Congress acts in a bi-partisan fashion, good things happen. Such as the Civil Rights Act of 1964. When Congress acts through political power bad things happen. Such as ObamaCare. I'm all for the former while abhoring the latter. Thus, I won't vote for someone who espouses the latter as a way to "make change".

Give me a likeable candidate who will stand by his word to work on behalf of everyone without excluding anyone, is strong enough to not buckle under the pressure that will be brought to force him to betray himself and those who believe in him, and who is ultimately acceptable by ALL of our society and I will show you the next elected official to whatever office they run for regardless of political party affiliation. Because they will be a conservative even if they are Muslim, or Sheik, or Mormon, or Christian, or even Donald J. Trump.

lowimpactuser 10-28-2017 7:01 PM

Breaking response to you into two posts, along where I saw a split in what the topic was, to make it easier to understand, and so my pithy dismissive tone on one post isn't taken to represent a global condition or one towards the author but to specific ideas. Medicine before the dessert, of course.
Quote:

Originally Posted by rplaw (Post 20832398)
It comes down to personal choices I guess.

I'm not one for conservatism as a cover for religious extremism. I don't go to church on Sunday's, don't espouse the religious dogma that most who profess to be "conservative" do, and I don't like it when people try to tell me my faith isn't real because it doesn't match theirs. MY FAITH isn't worn on my sleeve, isn't expressed in quaint mostly meaningless quotations from ancient text, and doesn't try to supplant reality with demagoguery. Nor do I need someone telling me how to believe or where to worship upon pain of suffering eternal whatever.

Unfortunately, most of those who label themselves as "conservatives" these days think that unless they see me in their church, hear me spouting the same dogma they cherish, and go witness with them on Saturday's, I'm not a true conservative. Instead I'm someone who either needs regaled as a liberal progressive, or needs to be taught "the one true way". This viewpoint seems to extend to their political convictions as well which is why they continue to vote for representatives who espouse the dogma while engaging in affairs with interns and co-workers, not advancing an agenda which protects EVERY American, and seizing every opportunity to line their already overstuffed pockets at my (and your) expense.

When you put religion above all else in politics, you lose and so does everyone else. Bannon is of this stripe and is willing to use his power-of-the-press and other people's money to advance that narrative. His policy is to exclude the voices of those who disagree.

True conservatives aren't necessarily religious. What we are, are individuals who believe that our government should represent EVERYONE in a responsible manner. To me that means not writing laws which promote one thing while excluding all other viewpoints. Not writing laws which advance special interests in the name of crony capitalism. Or self absorption (like building Presidential libraries at the public expense - THAT'S what the Library of Congress is for.) Or writing laws which attempt to overturn or erase our heritage no matter how messy and socially unacceptable. Gun Rights are part of this as well as the current PC collective insanity of statue toppling.

AMERICA was created as the "great experiment" and people like Bannon, and Schummer, don't understand that we aren't like other nations. We are unique, and restrictive viewpoints such as theirs don't go along with our national credo. Which is something like:

Get out of my face and my wallet and go peddle your tribalistic nonsense elsewhere. Preferably Canada. ( :D )

One need only to listen to the current PC narrative that women are being abused and demeaned by everyone to realize how easily the political narrative gets distorted. This is because the only people who have the microphone are those with an agenda. Take the above for example; if you were to walk down the street in just about any city/town/village in the USA and ask random persons their views on "how women are being treated by society" the responses wouldn't even come close to the national narrative that women are horribly oppressed in both the workplace as well as at home.

It would be the same if you changed the question to "how are blacks being treated by society today". Or any other generic question on any of the hot topics which invite the respondent to actually express a viewpoint rather than ask a carefully crafted quiz designed so the statistical outcome is what the pollsters want to see.

Bannon is attempting to do what others have done by sculpting the question to match the intended outcome. And he will fail because most American's, as well as most GOP members or actual Conservatives don't believe as he does. The problem with what he is doing is that he will make important members of our society disengage because of the undesirable appeal of his message and efforts.

I really have no idea who you're taking issue with. You name Bannon, and then describe religious extremism, of an ilk of religion or GTFO.

Bannon is a catholic, and catholics have never had the pleasure of enough people they could ever say Popery or phuck off. Further, Bannon has launched absolutely scorching attacks on the church leadership: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...-the-churches/

So one, the religious extremism you reference cannot refer to Bannon's actual religion, nor to his slavish adherence to church leaders. Chuck Schumer is Jewish, and while he may follow what reform Rabbis teach to a letter, not only are there more problems with his adherence to conservative, orthodox, or ultraorthodox policies... Jews are like 2% of the US population, and have never even come close to getting a president elected. So unless you're advancing a crypto-jewish agenda- and I assume you're not- your accusation seems to lack specificity.

Second, as I've turned from a liberal or radical, I've realized one of my default positions I've had to examine is nail-biting over "the religious right". The left constantly beats the drum of how we're only an election away from "A Handmaid's tale" becoming the new reality, Christian Sharia taking over, etc.

First, credit where credit is due: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...=.a4a41cfdb408

These people gave us the god emperor. This fact makes up for a LOT of deficiencies in my cosmic calculations. Also, let's see their prevalence/power:

Quote:

As a group, white evangelicals make up one-fifth of all registered voters and about one-third of all voters who identify with or lean toward the GOP.
Ok, so they are 33% of the GOP basically. That's a STRONG constituency- and given their early support and number running in key states, they are kingmakers. That's brass tacks. And, given how they've been failed repeatedly by politicians promising them goodies or reversal of a war on their culture, and how they got shafted, they were angry and ready to bet on a wildman...

hmm, that sounds JUST LIKE THE GUN RIGHTS CROWD, EXCEPT THEY ARE MORE THAN A ROUNDING ERROR IN VOTES.

Guess what- if we get to say that we deserve XY for being ignored by lying politicians for decades- a much, MUCH, MUUUUUCH HUGELY BIG LEAGUE component rightly can use the same logic to say they deserve their XYZA1A2A3.

That's just politics/quid pro quo.

Again though: I'm not seeing where you're pulling this "OMG IT'S SO RELIGIOUS BIGOTED WITH THE BANNON CHALLENGES" stuff from.

Bannon has targeted Jeff Flake, John McCain, Lindsey Graham, Dean Heller, Bob Corker, Susan Collins, and EVERY SENATOR BUT TED CRUZ.

So if your support for this statement is because he's not attacking Ted Cruz well... I suggest you get a massage, some vodka, and a good edible and feel better in the morning, because you're just being crabby.

The above targeted by Bannon have many who claim faith; but more importantly get weak-kneed on ANY culture war issues- like immigration, like gun rights, and christian issues are something they MIGHT do.

Again, support your argument, as it just sounds like a random simulacrum of the typical liberal primal scream everytime Republicans start to succeed:

"MY PLANNED PARENTHOOD IS GOING TO DISAPPEAR AND I'M GOING TO BE MADE A SLAVE IN A THEOCRACY WHERE WE TORTURE GAYS AND PUT NON-CHRISTIANS IN DEATH CAMPS"

I suppose there might be some bannon-backed candidates who are religious? And... what exactly are you afraid they're going to DO?

The entire "tone" or "rhetoric" thing to me is irrelevant and stupid. I don't need a politician to be my hero, he can cheat on his wife and make her cry every night while double-dipping his chips at the congressional lunchroom and abuse his staffers while trying to seduce guys in the Minneapolis airport.

I care about votes, policy, and power. All else is stupid distractions.

Please elaborate with links or citations because I'm restraining from tearing into this as a total strawman emotional spergout, as I saw no real content here.

Ford8N 10-28-2017 7:05 PM

https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-...bill/2620/text


Here is a simple strait forward bill that the NRA and every pro-gun politician should pass...YESTERDAY.

Yet our so called friends...DO.....NOTHING!


Republicans b**t f**K gun owners and they don't even know it.

lowimpactuser 10-28-2017 7:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rplaw (Post 20832398)
As for fighting, I actually like Congressional gridlock. I believe the Framers created our government in a way that this was the intended result. Gridlock keeps the political noise and nonsense from screwing "the people" out of our Rights and heritage on an ad hoc or whimsical basis. When Congress acts in a bi-partisan fashion, good things happen. Such as the Civil Rights Act of 1964. When Congress acts through political power bad things happen. Such as ObamaCare. I'm all for the former while abhoring the latter. Thus, I won't vote for someone who espouses the latter as a way to "make change".

Why the hell should I care about procedure over winning? That's what republicans have argued the entire time I've been alive, and nothing has been "conserved" as their moniker "conservative" implies. As right-wing activists say, they couldn't even "conserve" bathrooms to be used by a single biological gender. It's all well and good to say bipartisan things are good, but lets be clear here: the civil rights act eviscerates personal choice and privacy; and creates a giant intrusive government bureaucracy. The civil rights act gave us the entire platform the obama adminstration turned into the entire Title IX debacle on college campuses that I can't get into here because not 2nd amendment related. Congress voted bipartisanly to get us into Iraq (I opposed that) and yet now that we could actually support The kurds leave them to die as Iran takes over and grows in power and defacto territorial control.

I REFUSE to support the gun control act of 1968, which was passed by 39 democrats and 31 republicans: https://www.govtrack.us/congress/votes/90-1968/s558

I REFUSE to support the Comprehensive Drug Abuse Prevention and Control act of 1970, which launched the modern war on drugs (6 opposed in the house, massive absence in senate but ZERO opposition)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compre...ol_Act_of_1970

I REFUSE to support the PATRIOT act, which was passed along similar margins.

Bipartisan is not a cure-all, and gridlock is not either. Conservatives vastly overestimate how many americans care for gridlock, and continually put themselves in front of a bus that runs them over everytime people rally for congress to DO SOMETHING BECAUSE WE'RE PAYING YOU.

Further, arguing for congress doing nothing while there are disgusting abuses of our liberties going on is the definition of reprehensible. It is the credo of a coward, of a man content with his chains, and loses the moral argument that progressives have continually used to win, whether immediately or within 20 years.

My question is how we WIN, not how we stop our losses.

If being content with current abuses of liberty is fine with you, then i suppose you are a conservative. I am a reactionary, and find conservatives to be slightly better than useless on their good days, and utterly naive everyday.

Quote:

Originally Posted by rplaw (Post 20832398)
Give me a likeable candidate who will stand by his word to work on behalf of everyone without excluding anyone, is strong enough to not buckle under the pressure that will be brought to force him to betray himself and those who believe in him, and who is ultimately acceptable by ALL of our society and I will show you the next elected official to whatever office they run for regardless of political party affiliation. Because they will be a conservative even if they are Muslim, or Sheik, or Mormon, or Christian, or even Donald J. Trump.

Give me a cannibal who smells terribly and doesn't floss and thinks preserving his own pee in jars gives him magical powers, but can get elected and will vote the way I want him to and I don't care.

The entire procedural focus by republicans is a failure, and I don't get what it will take for people to understand this. Winning is all that matters; winning largely enough to affect institutions that have tried to destroy our rights like courts; and THEN, only AFTER we've clawed back our rights does it make sense to worry about procedure.

Losing with honor is what the Republicans that Bannon has targeted seem to believe in, I believe there is no honor in losing to the enemies- not opponents, but enemies- of our way of life. That is the heart of evil; putting oneself and one's values over WHAT YOU WERE ELECTED TO DO, THAT DESTROYS THE PEOPLE WHO TRUSTED YOU.

ja308 10-28-2017 11:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DonaldBabbett (Post 20827605)
Yes, too many RINOs and even too many Progs to boot!

America ought to vote for more CONSERVATIVES.

Have a Conservative Party as alternative to GOP.

Conservatives do not have a large appeal! Further it's foolish to split our vote and get democrats who are against every liberty which would be the result of a conservative 3 rd party .

Primary out RINOS where possible and support the GOP even if we don't get everything we want yesterday!

lowimpactuser 10-28-2017 11:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ja308 (Post 20835045)
Conservatives do not have a large appeal! Further it's foolish to split our vote and get democrats who are against every liberty which would be the result of a conservative 3 rd party .

Primary out RINOS where possible and support the GOP even if we don't get everything we want yesterday!

Exactly.

There's still plenty of things I dislike and even actively loathe in the Republican Party; but it's like the simpsons cartoon with the two aliens running as democrat and republican- when people say they won't vote for aliens; aliens say no one votes third party and they win.

Far better to take a decent boat with a few holes and plug them rather than trying to swim to your destination.

Trump won as a Republican, not as Reform party in 1999. Republicans rhetorically are what we want; just not actually. Turning someone from a 7 into a 9 is far easier than turning nobody into a 9.

rplaw 10-29-2017 8:00 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by lowimpactuser (Post 20834457)
Why the hell should I care about procedure over winning? That's what republicans have argued the entire time I've been alive, and nothing has been "conserved" as their moniker "conservative" implies. As right-wing activists say, they couldn't even "conserve" bathrooms to be used by a single biological gender. It's all well and good to say bipartisan things are good, but lets be clear here: the civil rights act eviscerates personal choice and privacy; and creates a giant intrusive government bureaucracy. The civil rights act gave us the entire platform the obama adminstration turned into the entire Title IX debacle on college campuses that I can't get into here because not 2nd amendment related. Congress voted bipartisanly to get us into Iraq (I opposed that) and yet now that we could actually support The kurds leave them to die as Iran takes over and grows in power and defacto territorial control.

I REFUSE to support the gun control act of 1968, which was passed by 39 democrats and 31 republicans: https://www.govtrack.us/congress/votes/90-1968/s558

I REFUSE to support the Comprehensive Drug Abuse Prevention and Control act of 1970, which launched the modern war on drugs (6 opposed in the house, massive absence in senate but ZERO opposition)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compre...ol_Act_of_1970

I REFUSE to support the PATRIOT act, which was passed along similar margins.

Bipartisan is not a cure-all, and gridlock is not either. Conservatives vastly overestimate how many americans care for gridlock, and continually put themselves in front of a bus that runs them over everytime people rally for congress to DO SOMETHING BECAUSE WE'RE PAYING YOU.

Further, arguing for congress doing nothing while there are disgusting abuses of our liberties going on is the definition of reprehensible. It is the credo of a coward, of a man content with his chains, and loses the moral argument that progressives have continually used to win, whether immediately or within 20 years.

My question is how we WIN, not how we stop our losses.

If being content with current abuses of liberty is fine with you, then i suppose you are a conservative. I am a reactionary, and find conservatives to be slightly better than useless on their good days, and utterly naive everyday.


Give me a cannibal who smells terribly and doesn't floss and thinks preserving his own pee in jars gives him magical powers, but can get elected and will vote the way I want him to and I don't care.

The entire procedural focus by republicans is a failure, and I don't get what it will take for people to understand this. Winning is all that matters; winning largely enough to affect institutions that have tried to destroy our rights like courts; and THEN, only AFTER we've clawed back our rights does it make sense to worry about procedure.

Losing with honor is what the Republicans that Bannon has targeted seem to believe in, I believe there is no honor in losing to the enemies- not opponents, but enemies- of our way of life. That is the heart of evil; putting oneself and one's values over WHAT YOU WERE ELECTED TO DO, THAT DESTROYS THE PEOPLE WHO TRUSTED YOU.

This is what I see as the problem - too many people are concerned with forcing their opinions and beliefs onto others. You blame the D's for this, yet this is what you espouse as the solution.

My argument with Bannon (which you dismiss) is the exact same issue. He wants to force change.

Force is a complete failure unless you can guarantee that your opponent cannot and will not EVER rise against you. In politics that guarantee cannot be given because there is always the other party (unless, like in California, you only have 1 party is power, then you CAN force everyone to do what you want. You know the results of that.)

Your version of politics is to use force to beget power in the name of taking back our Rights. That won't work because the pendulum swings both ways.

What we need isn't a Republican majority who will offer senseless bills on a 52-48 split. What we NEED is a congress that can understand their purpose and function and will work to further that end.

Congress isn't there to pass bills to put bandaids on non-existant problems like gun violence when the REAL problem is unchecked immigration, terrorist gangs, and uncontrolled importation/abuse of narcotics and crime. But that's what they do AND, when they do try to do something for those "heritage voters" (my term), what they offer is the "restore the second amendment act" or the "hearing suppression act" or some other useless POS bill that does nothing except galvanize the hopes of those who should know better.

I disagree completely with your characterization of the laws which promote equal rights. The REASON we have those laws is because people won't do what's right and the government had to step in. Yes, it's force. What you don't see is that your belief is the opposite side of the same coin. And, like Title IX, is just as easily abused when 1 side or the other gets power.

But all of that has gotten entirely too political and has veered away from guns. To yank this back on topic, the GOP isn't acting on gun bills because the bills being offered aren't worth acting on.

CALL YOUR REPRESENTATIVE (or just call Issa or McClintock if you live in an anti-gun district) and insist that they offer a bill which ONLY Congress can do. INSIST on a bill titled "The Second Amendment Clarification Act". That bill should merely state that: The Second Amendment is a Right held by the individual and, by it's very wording, the Right is beyond the power or scope of the Government to regulate, or restrict, or limit, in either scope or free exercise thereof. ANY Statute, Regulation, Ordinance or Restriction upon the free exercise of the Right shall henceforth be without force of law.

Congress amended the Constitution and ONLY CONGRESS can clarify what the meaning of that Amendment is. This bill would do that.

Get it onto the floor for a vote and see who votes yea and who doesn't. THEN boot the useless out because they do not understand their function in our society or government.

Jimi Jah 10-29-2017 8:45 AM

If congress does nothing but approve Trumps judicial selections I'm good with that. Anytime congress passes a law it picks your pocket and steals a little more freedom.

Relief will not come from congress, their record is clear. They take rights away, they don't grant them.

Battosai1 10-29-2017 9:16 AM

The only justice you will ever see is from a civil war, government only knows how to take, not to give, it's in their nature. The sooner people understand that no one up on the 'high castle' will help us, the sooner we can burn it down and start over. When the termites infest the whole house, burn it and start a new.

lowimpactuser 10-29-2017 1:00 PM

I'll conclude this Rplaw by saying our differences are far too vast to be bridged here in this forum. The sheer ahistorical thesis you posit is stunning to me; and I think I saw several factual and logic errors, but to not seem like I'm engaged in cavil or in character assassination I'll let it rest in this public forum. We've had some good discussion in the past; and I'd welcome the continuance of the conversation; but in alternative medium.

The only thing I will say is that's a... rather novel theory. Congress isn't passing bills because there's none worth passing... wow. Especially because congress WRITES the bills they do or don't pass, that would still make it congress' problem.

But enough; I'll leave off this topic unless further circumstances call for an exhumation.

alexisjohnson 10-29-2017 4:10 PM

because both parties are scum and could care less about any real issues we're facing.

its not that complicated :)

wchutt 10-29-2017 4:25 PM

Wouldn't it be great if we could get together a few million gun owners, say 5 million of them, and as a group pay for lobbyist who would speak for the group and let the leadership in both the House and Senate know that they will lose the support of every member of such a group unless they pass basic pro-gun bills such as HR38 (which has been sitting for almost a year now going nowhere.)

But as ronlglock pointed out, it seems to be about the money, and fear mongering to get it, not about productivity.

_Midian 11-05-2017 3:30 PM

The GOP are, like the rest of government, leftists.
They just pretend not to be.

Pharmboy 11-05-2017 5:26 PM

I develop anti-cancer drugs and be rest assured, I would be happy to give up my job for a cure.
And yes, we live in a capitalistic society.

Quote:

Originally Posted by ronlglock (Post 20827794)
Carrots (pro gun bills) bring in $$. If they were passed, the $$ would stop. Same with cancer. If it was cured, how many tens of thousands of people would be out of work?


lowimpactuser 11-05-2017 9:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pharmboy (Post 20868782)
I develop anti-cancer drugs and be rest assured, I would be happy to give up my job for a cure.
And yes, we live in a capitalistic society.

Weirdo.

Jimi Jah 11-06-2017 7:08 AM

Governments are based on control of the people. It doesn't much matter what letter they identify with, in the end they all believe in the "C" word over a R or D.

The degree of control is the small difference folks discuss. Republicans have a horrible track record on guns. So do the democrats. Both are dangerous.

splithoof 11-06-2017 7:24 AM

We sit here and go back and fourth about the various political parties and their actions, etc. on the topic of gun rights, but we can't even keep our own house in order. After yesterday's incident in Texas, and a month prior in Vegas, does anyone wonder why we keep loosing ground on this issue?

Lifeisgood 11-08-2017 11:30 PM

McConnell will not act - gun owners are taken for granted by the GOP establishment.

ja308 12-09-2017 7:49 AM

http://www.breitbart.com/big-governm...-heads-senate/


On December 6 the House of Representatives passed national reciprocity for concealed carry after well over an hour of debate, including a 15 minute vote resulting from a last-ditch effort to recommit national reciprocity to committee.
The effort to recommit to committee was a Democrat effort to derail the vote on national reciprocity. The vote to recommit failed by a margin of 236 to 190.

The House then passed Rep. Richard Hudson’s (R-NC) national reciprocity legislation via a voice vote. Democrats then requested a recorded vote and the final tabulation on the recorded vote was 231 to 198.




I thought some swamp dwelling forum members said the REPUBLICAN house would not take up national CCW reciprocity !

Blade Gunner 12-09-2017 8:01 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lifeisgood (Post 20883091)
McConnell will not act - gun owners are taken for granted by the GOP establishment.



The GOP looks at gun owners having no other viable choices to vote for. They will oppose more control, but otherwise will only support the status quo. The GOP is too busy with other grand plans, like their screwed up ďtax reformĒ ( aka the tax cut that is really a tax increase on the middle class). The best we can hope for is the GOP Still controls the Senate when the next one or two appointments to SCOTUS occur.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

ja308 12-09-2017 8:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by splithoof (Post 20870510)
We sit here and go back and fourth about the various political parties and their actions, etc. on the topic of gun rights, but we can't even keep our own house in order. After yesterday's incident in Texas, and a month prior in Vegas, does anyone wonder why we keep loosing ground on this issue?

Our house ?
You can identify with these democrat murderers. I have no part or responsibility for the actions of those vile,filthy murdering pukes !

BTW we are winning more gun rights in sane (republican states) and nationally by the GOP house GOP senate .
President Trump will sign national reciprocity which will make the democrats goal of murdering more republicans even more risky !
Yeah I'm talking about the liberal sanders supporter who opened fire on GOP congressmen practicing for a softball game.

In case Calgunners forgot Steve Scalise nearly died from his wounds and many others sustained gunshot wounds .Many speculate it was the swamp media that so demonized the GOP with fake news that this Illinois liberal who opened fire on republicans felt justified .

ja308 12-09-2017 8:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Blade Gunner (Post 21006945)
The GOP looks at gun owners having no other viable choices to vote for. They will oppose more control, but otherwise will only support the status quo. The GOP is too busy with other grand plans, like their screwed up “tax reform” ( aka the tax cut that is really a tax increase on the middle class). The best we can hope for is the GOP Still controls the Senate when the next one or two appointments to SCOTUS occur.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Did you miss the link ? House passed national CCW .

The best we can hope for is that real gun owners pony up a few bucks to make sure WE (not you) keep the house !

How about a link proving the GOP tax bill will raise taxes on the middle class. Or is that something you made up ?

Blade Gunner 12-09-2017 9:23 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ja308 (Post 21007002)
Did you miss the link ? House passed national CCW .

The best we can hope for is that real gun owners pony up a few bucks to make sure WE (not you) keep the house !

How about a link proving the GOP tax bill will raise taxes on the middle class. Or is that something you made up ?



The House passed the CCW reciprocity bill. It has not been passed by the Senate. Did you miss that fact.

The House does not confirm SCOTUS nominations, the Senate does.

No I did not make up the hundreds of articles (written by tax professionals) on the hidden tax increases especially in CA where high state payroll and sales taxes are no longer deductible and property tax deductions are capped at $10k. Now the house wants to put back in the Alt Min Tax on individuals which could increase taxes on people that just take the standard deduction. Try using google. Iím not your personal search engine.

BTW Iím a CPA. Many of my client are going to be negatively impacted by tax reform.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

ja308 12-09-2017 2:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Blade Gunner (Post 21007280)
The House passed the CCW reciprocity bill. It has not been passed by the Senate. Did you miss that fact.

The House does not confirm SCOTUS nominations, the Senate does.

No I did not make up the hundreds of articles (written by tax professionals) on the hidden tax increases especially in CA where high state payroll and sales taxes are no longer deductible and property tax deductions are capped at $10k. Now the house wants to put back in the Alt Min Tax on individuals which could increase taxes on people that just take the standard deduction. Try using google. I’m not your personal search engine.

BTW I’m a CPA. Many of my client are going to be negatively impacted by tax reform.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Frequently when a person makes a claim they provide links to offer proof or at least discussion points.

http://www.breitbart.com/big-governm.../gop-tax-bill/

"The House bill reportedly will permanently and immediately cut the corporate tax rate from 35 percent to 20 percent. Lawmakers dropped earlier plans to phase-in the tax cut over a number of years or have the cut sunset in the future, both measures aimed at reducing–on paper, at least–their impact on long-term budget deficits.

The pass-through rate will be 25 percent, a huge cut for many small-businesses organized as sole-proprietorships and partnerships.

As first reported by Breitbart in August, the bill will impose a one-time tax on corporate profits that have been accumulated and held abroad. By taxing these profits at 12 percent on a one-time basis, the bill eliminates the incentive for corporations to continue to avoid repatriating the funds and investing them in America or distributing them to shareholders. Illiquid corporate assets will be taxed at a lower rate of 5 percent.

The risky plan to change the way Americans save for retirement, and possibly raise taxes on middle-income Americans, has been dropped. The bill will not change 401(k)s, according to talking points distributed by the House GOP leadership.
The bill is named the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, breaking with recent Washington precedent of giving bills titles with acronyms that indicate the goals of the legislation.

The bill cuts the current seven individual tax brackets down to four: 12 percent, 25 percent, 35 percent, and 39.6%. Originally, the GOP framework planned to drop the 39.6 percent rate. It was preserved in an effort to prevent tax burden from shifting to lower income taxpayers.

A big question has been where the new brackets would break. Now we know. For individuals, the 25 percent rate starts at $45,000, the 35 percent rate at $200,000, and the 39.6 percent rate at $500,000. For married couples filing together, the 25 percent rate will start at $90,000, the 35 percent rate at $260,000, and the 39.6 percent rate at $1 million.
Standard deduction rises to $12,000 from $6,350 for individuals, and from $12,700 to $24,000 for married couples.

The House bill expands the child tax credit from $1,000 to $1,600, which is a smaller expansion than conservative lawmakers in the Senate had pushed for.
The threshold for the death tax will double from its current $5.6 million per person and $11.2 million per married couple. It would be ended altogether in 2024.

Corporate interest deductions get capped at 30 percent of earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation, and amortization. Small businesses and real estate firms, which are often highly leveraged, are exempt from the cap."

I too have read that deducting state and property tax will be eliminated for amounts over $ 10,000 . Those paying property tax over $10,000 are not by most accounts middle class taxpayers ! As for state income tax,are not wealthy democrats always saying the rich do not pay their fair share !
Besides why should wealthy people in high tax democrat states get huge deductions when folks in frugal,well, run low tax republican states in effect foot the bill for these wasteful,sanctuary type states ?

It's now obvious why you refused to provide links to prove your statement that the middle class will be hurt by the GOP
tax bill !
It's a fact all but the wealthy in high tax democrat led states will do much better! BTW this is NOT punitive. It's a way to help slow inflation and balance the budget. Another issue democrats complain about when the GOP IS IN POWER!

More on the topic the REPUBLICAN HOUSE PASSED nationwide CCW . Now it goes to the senate and then president Trump.
So those saying the GOP is doing nothing for gun rights are at best mistaken,at worse flat out liars !

Blade Gunner 12-09-2017 7:12 PM

Why Isnít the GOP Acting on Pro-Gun Bills?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by ja308 (Post 21008359)
Frequently when a person makes a claim they provide links to offer proof or at least discussion points.

http://www.breitbart.com/big-governm.../gop-tax-bill/

"The House bill reportedly will permanently and immediately cut the corporate tax rate from 35 percent to 20 percent. Lawmakers dropped earlier plans to phase-in the tax cut over a number of years or have the cut sunset in the future, both measures aimed at reducingĖon paper, at leastĖtheir impact on long-term budget deficits.

The pass-through rate will be 25 percent, a huge cut for many small-businesses organized as sole-proprietorships and partnerships.

As first reported by Breitbart in August, the bill will impose a one-time tax on corporate profits that have been accumulated and held abroad. By taxing these profits at 12 percent on a one-time basis, the bill eliminates the incentive for corporations to continue to avoid repatriating the funds and investing them in America or distributing them to shareholders. Illiquid corporate assets will be taxed at a lower rate of 5 percent.

The risky plan to change the way Americans save for retirement, and possibly raise taxes on middle-income Americans, has been dropped. The bill will not change 401(k)s, according to talking points distributed by the House GOP leadership.
The bill is named the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, breaking with recent Washington precedent of giving bills titles with acronyms that indicate the goals of the legislation.

The bill cuts the current seven individual tax brackets down to four: 12 percent, 25 percent, 35 percent, and 39.6%. Originally, the GOP framework planned to drop the 39.6 percent rate. It was preserved in an effort to prevent tax burden from shifting to lower income taxpayers.

A big question has been where the new brackets would break. Now we know. For individuals, the 25 percent rate starts at $45,000, the 35 percent rate at $200,000, and the 39.6 percent rate at $500,000. For married couples filing together, the 25 percent rate will start at $90,000, the 35 percent rate at $260,000, and the 39.6 percent rate at $1 million.
Standard deduction rises to $12,000 from $6,350 for individuals, and from $12,700 to $24,000 for married couples.

The House bill expands the child tax credit from $1,000 to $1,600, which is a smaller expansion than conservative lawmakers in the Senate had pushed for.
The threshold for the death tax will double from its current $5.6 million per person and $11.2 million per married couple. It would be ended altogether in 2024.

Corporate interest deductions get capped at 30 percent of earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation, and amortization. Small businesses and real estate firms, which are often highly leveraged, are exempt from the cap."

I too have read that deducting state and property tax will be eliminated for amounts over $ 10,000 . Those paying property tax over $10,000 are not by most accounts middle class taxpayers ! As for state income tax,are not wealthy democrats always saying the rich do not pay their fair share !
Besides why should wealthy people in high tax democrat states get huge deductions when folks in frugal,well, run low tax republican states in effect foot the bill for these wasteful,sanctuary type states ?

It's now obvious why you refused to provide links to prove your statement that the middle class will be hurt by the GOP
tax bill !
It's a fact all but the wealthy in high tax democrat led states will do much better! BTW this is NOT punitive. It's a way to help slow inflation and balance the budget. Another issue democrats complain about when the GOP IS IN POWER!

More on the topic the REPUBLICAN HOUSE PASSED nationwide CCW . Now it goes to the senate and then president Trump.
So those saying the GOP is doing nothing for gun rights are at best mistaken,at worse flat out liars !



Obviously you do not have a license to practice accounting or have a background in economics. Anyone who relies on Breitbart for tax and financial advice might as well be reading CNN. (Nice cut and paste job at least). Balancing a Federal Budget does not involve adding 1 trillion dollars to the national debt (the GOP openly admits this amount). Youíre right on one point, the wealthy will do better, but the middle class is going to pay for it. Those are the issues. Is that what youíre advocating?
I could give you a line by line analysis of a hypothetical tax return but why bother citing articles and hypothesis when the proposals change every day.
If you want my professional analysis, send me your 2016 tax return. It $500 an hour.
Bottom line is I have a license to practice accounting and file tax returns in the US and CA. You donít. Now go get your shine box.

ja308 12-10-2017 7:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Blade Gunner (Post 21009493)
Obviously you do not have a license to practice accounting or have a background in economics. Anyone who relies on Breitbart for tax and financial advice might as well be reading CNN. (Nice cut and paste job at least). Balancing a Federal Budget does not involve adding 1 trillion dollars to the national debt (the GOP openly admits this amount). Youíre right on one point, the wealthy will do better, but the middle class is going to pay for it. Those are the issues. Is that what youíre advocating?
I could give you a line by line analysis of a hypothetical tax return but why bother citing articles and hypothesis when the proposals change every day.
If you want my professional analysis, send me your 2016 tax return. It $500 an hour.
Bottom line is I have a license to practice accounting and file tax returns in the US and CA. You donít. Now go get your shine box.


At least I posted a link and copy and paste for you to refute line by line which you neglected to do !

Everyone who read the Breightbart analysis knows that is the essence of what the tax bill does. It has been covered by other news outlets too. One tactic that could help you find sources other than swamp media is to use search engines duck duck go or the PROGUN dogpile. The Google people are proven swamp dwellers and have been caught faking algorithms to show a democrat bias !

Cal gunners will notice you are NOT addressing any issue with regard to who gets a tax break and who pays more .

BTW if the best argument you have is how much you charge and to denigrate me because I polish my dress shoes. Well it's not convincing and others see it too !

CAL.BAR 12-10-2017 9:16 AM

They are way too busy trying to SHOVEL money to the super wealthy who paid for their campaigns. They won't get down to actual conservative issue for years.


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 2:58 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.