Colorado Democrats lose recall elections over gun-control votes

[Spider-Dan]

Hell, the democrats in senate ran from from this shit back in April and it was only expanded background checks.

And of course, when you say the Democrats "ran from" the bill, you mean that it had the support of only 92.5%  (50/54) of the Democratic caucus.  Meanwhile, 4 of the 46 Republicans (8.5%) supported the bill.

If 7.5% of Democrats voting against the bill means "the Democrats ran from it," I guess 8.5% of Republicans voting for it must mean it had broad bipartisan support, right?

[Sunstroke]

And of course, when you say the Democrats "ran from" the bill, you mean that it had the support of only 92.5%  (50/54) of the Democratic caucus.  Meanwhile, 4 of the 46 Republicans (8.5%) supported the bill.

If 7.5% of Democrats voting against the bill means "the Democrats ran from it," I guess 8.5% of Republicans voting for it must mean it had broad bipartisan support, right?

Truth: It's what's for dinner.

[bsmooth]

You will see more of this if politicians keep ramming legislation down the throats of people who don't want it. Maybe in general elections or maybe in recalls. Hell, the democrats in senate ran from from this shit back in April and it was only expanded background checks. I think they remember what happened back in the 90s when they pulled this shit with their made up term of "assault weapons". Plenty of them were voted out. They may talk tough, but they don't want to lose their jobs anymore than anyone else does. If the dems ain't even going to vote it in, it must be shit legislation.
If you say so. Go ask all the other countries that have gone through civil wars in the last 50 years. Oh, I forgot. It can't ever happen here because the left says it can't. Keep pushing and eventually you'll get pushed back.

Ramming? Just curious, but why is it ramming legislation down the throat of people, when the Dems do it and not the GOP. Both parties, upon gaining a majority in Congress, proceed to use their numbers advantage to pass bills they like over the objections of the Dems and the people who do not like it. Yet for the last few years, all I have heard is conservative politicians, pundits, and Fox News claiming it is wrong for the Dems, who have been voted into a majority, to use their majority to pass bills. We have things called elections, and if a party overreaches, the people can vote them out.
What you are really doing is whining. Your chosen party does not have the numbers to pass what it wants to pass, and you are throwing a tizzy. Quick question...when and if the GOP regains majority in Congress, and decides to pass bills based on its majority alone, will you still think it is ramming legislation down the throat of people? Based on your history here, I doubt it.

[CF DolFan]

Sorry, when I said "outlawed," I meant in the sense that cocaine, bazookas, napalm, etc. are "outlawed," which is to say that they are tightly regulated by the government.

How is it outlawed if I can legally purchase it for my sod farm?

[Spider-Dan]

Was my quote unclear?  When I said "outlawed," I meant "tightly regulated."

http://americancityandcounty.com/security/ammonium-law-passes

More than 12 years after Timothy J. McVeigh used ammonium nitrate fertilizer to blow up the Oklahoma City federal building, Congress quietly passed legislation this month to regulate sales of the explosive, reports The Los Angeles Times.

[pondwater]

And of course, when you say the Democrats "ran from" the bill, you mean that it had the support of only 92.5%  (50/54) of the Democratic caucus.  Meanwhile, 4 of the 46 Republicans (8.5%) supported the bill.

If 7.5% of Democrats voting against the bill means "the Democrats ran from it," I guess 8.5% of Republicans voting for it must mean it had broad bipartisan support, right?

Here is this better for you? Just one of many similar headlines on the topic.

Obama enraged gun control couldn’t pass Democrat-led Senate

No matter how you spin it, your anti-American legislation failed because the democrats who voted against it want to keep their jobs.

[pondwater]

Truth: It's what's for dinner.

The proposed legislation failed and will continue to in the future. Is that truth enough for you? I bet that burns, lol.

[pondwater]

I would absolutely take that bet.  And I'd win.

You absolutely don't know that you would win. You can take the bet all you want.  However, there is absolutely no way for you to know what would happen in the future.

I don't need to eliminate EVERY gun .. i'll settle for an Australian style gun control system.

There are better odds of you packing up all of your shit and going down under than the repeal of the 2nd amendment.

this is bullshit .. pure and simple .. you know what stops a bad guy with a gun .. the bad guy not having a gun

And passing more laws is going to help that? By definition "bad guys" don't follow laws. Do you think that by passing more laws that the "bad guys" are going to the local police department and turn in their firearms? If you think that restricting the activity of law abiding citizens is in any way going to affect the behavior of criminals then you are delusional. But then again you are the one organizing for the repeal of the 2nd amendment, like I said delusional.

[Sunstroke]

No matter how you spin it, your anti-American legislation ...

The moment you use the term "anti-American" to refer to what you believe in, but other Americans don't...that's the moment you lose any credibility to speak reasonably on that topic. It's a term used by intolerant people to try to sway idiots who can't think for themselves.

[pondwater]

The moment you use the term "anti-American" to refer to what you believe in, but other Americans don't...that's the moment you lose any credibility to speak reasonably on that topic. It's a term used by intolerant people to try to sway idiots who can't think for themselves.

"BLA BLA BLA" says the anti American Communist. Your gun control legislation lost and will continue to.

[Fau Teixeira]

"BLA BLA BLA" says the anti American Communist. Your gun control legislation lost and will continue to.

the irony of this statement being applied to sunstroke is fantastic

[Spider-Dan]

No matter how you spin it, your anti-American legislation failed because the democrats who voted against it want to keep their jobs.

Are you this bad at math?  50+4 is not 60, and 54+4 is still not 60.

Even if every Democrat had voted for it, the result would have been the same: they didn't have enough votes to overcome the Republican filibuster.

[pondwater]

Are you this bad at math?  50+4 is not 60, and 54+4 is still not 60.

Even if every Democrat had voted for it, the result would have been the same: they didn't have enough votes to overcome the Republican filibuster.

Topic has nothing to do with my bad math skills. It has everything to do with the left's failed gun control legislation. It failed to pass the Senate and had no chance in hell of passing the house. Some of you guys might as well pack up and move to a "gun ban" country, because nothing significant regarding gun control going to change anytime soon around here, ha ha.

[Spider-Dan]

Actually, the topic has everything to do with your bad math skills.

You post a media article (I guess The Media is only bad when they are reporting about Zimmerman) claiming retribution via recall election for a successfully passed gun control law in the pinko leftist stronghold known as Colorado, ignoring the facts that 1) half of those recall attempts failed miserably and 2) the "successful" recall attempts did absolutely nothing to change the balance of power in that legislature.  This is a math issue.

Then you make a post claiming that Democrats ran from a bill that had just as many Republican "yes" votes as Democratic "no" votes, while ignoring the fact that had every Democrat voted for the bill, the result would have been exactly the same.  Again, a simple math issue.

Your decision to change your signature to the headline of a Washington Times article (complete with late '90s text formatting) is, if nothing else, expedient.  Now I won't have to waste time looking up your past hypocritical cries of media bias... there's one baked right in to every post you make.

It would be great if you could link the article in your signature, though (just in case anyone was confused and thought you were referencing a reputable source).  I did all the heavy lifting for you... you can just quote this post and copypaste the following into your signature:

Headline-Obama enraged gun control couldn’t pass Democrat-led Senate-Gotta love seeing a grown man pout like a child

[Landshark]

Truth: It's what's for dinner.

The proposed legislation failed and will continue to in the future. Is that truth enough for you? I bet that burns, lol.

The moment you use the term "anti-American" to refer to what you believe in, but other Americans don't...that's the moment you lose any credibility to speak reasonably on that topic. It's a term used by intolerant people to try to sway idiots who can't think for themselves.

"BLA BLA BLA" says the anti American Communist. Your gun control legislation lost and will continue to.

the irony of this statement being applied to sunstroke is fantastic