And just like that, the last few elections that were "too important" for principle bears fruit......

"A group of Democratic lawmakers asked Ryan to remove the silencer bill from the House calendar indefinitely."

And of course, he quickly agreed with and acted on the request...but is any one of us truly surprised?
 
It may come back up once the dust settles, but, right now then passing it is political suicide they think with the moderates. This is likely why they tabled it, I don't know if we will ever see it voted on, but now it would be bad for Trump and the R's or so they think. It would certainly give the left ammo to use against them come election time.

It is not time to politicize the issues now as Trump said. That's what Ryan will claim at least.
 
Last edited:
IMG_3202.JPG

Look, folks...

Don't believe ANY of the slimebags in D.C. None of them give two sh*ts about you or your liberty....none of em.

Guarandamntee you if they thought they could "nullify" the BOR overnight and still retain their office, they do it faster than Rosie O' Donnel rushing an all you can eat buffet.
 
Last edited:
smithnwesley said:
What an ass.....

Already caving in before the fight begins.
Click to expand...

No, Ryan did not "cave in" on the bill.

To "cave in" is to give up on something you otherwise want. Ryan never wanted the pro-2A bills in the first place, so throwing them under the bus was a relief for him.
 
NCLivingBrit said:
How do we tell the Republicans from the Demonrats again? I'm having issues with it....
Click to expand...
Say the right things, but act in self interest = Republican
Say the wrong things, and act in self interest = Democrat
Say anything and nobody listens = Independant
 
HMP said:
As it should be.
We've given them all they need and we're not seeing a return on it.
Click to expand...
Who is "we" exactly? Cuckservatives? Neocons? The religious right? Tea Party? Anti-establishment conservatives?

The GOP is fractured, which is a good thing because the anti-establishment wing is growing. When the entire GOP was cucks and neocons, this bill wouldn't have been introduced and discussed. We are making progress.

The way to make more progress is to primary out establishment Republicons, not by whining (as so many on this forum do ENDLESSLY) and sitting out an election (or equivalently voting for the Libertarian ticket, which I have demonstrated previously has ZERO chance - and not one of you came back with a reasoned/evidenced point to the contrary) and handing it to the Dems. What do you think will happen when the Dems have control of the House, Senate and White House? The only divisions the Dems have on gun rights is whether to take them all now, later or merely impose all of the following:
  • gun registration
  • all private firearms transactions on a 4473
  • permanent AWB ban
  • 10-rd mag capacity limit
  • bullet tax
  • background check for ammo purchases
  • etc.
These have all been implemented in various Dem controlled states and localities, so I'm not making up what is in store for us when the Dems have national control.

Not having suppressors removed from NFA will the very least of your firearms-related concerns after you smugly sit out an election to punish the GOP.
 
Last edited:
Just a thought...is it not better to "table it" than push it forward in this new environment? The way I see it playing out had they pushed it was that any Dem support that was needed would vanish and the bill would die. So is it not better to delay it rather than kill it?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
B00ger said:
Just a thought...is it not better to "table it" than push it forward in this new environment? The way I see it playing out had they pushed it was that any Dem support that was needed would vanish and the bill would die. So is it not better to delay it rather than kill it?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Maybe you are right, Boog. I hope you are right.
 
I don't think they had any choice, frankly. It would be gross insensitive and suicide by media to push forward right now. Best to table it, make the Dems forget about it, and bring it back up in 6mo. IIRC, they need like 3 Dem votes to pass it.

Am I disappointed? Of course. But I'm not surprised and certainly wasn't counting on it passing anyway.
 
B00ger said:
Just a thought...is it not better to "table it" than push it forward in this new environment? The way I see it playing out had they pushed it was that any Dem support that was needed would vanish and the bill would die. So is it not better to delay it rather than kill it?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

At this point I'd push it forward and use every legal means to shove it down their throats. Can you say reconciliation? And on the press conference when the Commies in the press pool started in I'd just say remember Obamacare? Then I'd walk out laughing my arse off.

Then the radical wackos would go off and commit violent acts. I'd have their butts arrested and use the power of the Fed to start locking up violent left wing terrorists.

It is well past time to fight the Communists. Based on everything since election day they have started fighting already. If you don't believe me ask Scalise and all the people assualted by Antifa.

Things are starting to roll. I'd prefer to be going downhill aggressively.
 
Jerzsubbie said:
I don't think they had any choice, frankly. It would be gross insensitive and suicide by media to push forward right now. Best to table it, make the Dems forget about it, and bring it back up in 6mo. IIRC, they need like 3 Dem votes to pass it.
Click to expand...
No, they need 8 Dem votes, assuming they get ALL 52 Republican votes.

That's nearly 20% of the Democrats + "Independents" (in name only, they vote Dem). NOT. A. CHANCE.
 
Last edited:
Reconciliation can only be used for budget items, not new criminal law. In 2018 the Senate has quite a few D's up for re-election in states that Trump won, in one case by 20 points. Those D's know they need to go back home and campaign with a record of voting for gun freedoms to prove they aren't the Nancy Pelosi type of Democrat.

Leadership doesn't often put something up for a vote to see how the vote will go, they count beforehand. (In case you ever wondered what the majority or minority "whip" does, that's his job). If Ryan and McConnell don't have the votes to pass it, they can put it on the floor for a vote, knowing it will fail. But it will force the D's from pro-gun states to vote anti-gun, and give their Republican challenger some ammo. Better to do that next year after things have calmed down, and just as the electorate starts paying attention next Fall.

Maybe somebody up there can work out a deal that will buy enough votes to get it passed. Maybe they outlaw bump stocks in exchange for suppressors and national CC reciprocity. Or agree to send a lot of federal money to the states where those vulnerable D's live. The Democrat then gets to stand beside a police chief in (for example) Alabama, and say he worked to get this local police department the tools they need to fight "gun violence".

And maybe it wasn't just the D's, maybe the RINOS like Burr and Tillis were telling leadership that they were going limp as well. If leadership knew they didn't have the votes, it's best to fall back, wait it out, and throw it out there at the right time.

Notice here I'm not defending the R's on principle; no one in politics works on principle. But there is nothing wrong with using a little strategy in any negotiation. You probably do it at work, or with the spouse all the time.
 
Last edited:
In some ways, the answer looks so obvious and simple. Break the country up. That way the Dims can have everything they want and they have no influence on anyone else. Forget negotiating, forget cramming anything down their throats. Let's just go our own way, seoerate from them. They're happy, we're happy,
 
drypowder said:
No, they need 8 Dem votes, assuming they get ALL 52 Republican votes.

That's nearly 20% of the Democrats + "Independents" (in name only, they vote Dem). NOT. A. CHANCE.
Click to expand...
Look at it this way. The socialist-democrats plus the socialist-communist-independents need only twelve socialist-republican votes to get a measure passed. There's a good chance that our socialist-populist-republican president will sign the measure. Incidentally, he fooled a lot of people.
 
noway2 said:
In some ways, the answer looks so obvious and simple. Break the country up. That way the Dims can have everything they want and they have no influence on anyone else. Forget negotiating, forget cramming anything down their throats. Let's just go our own way, seoerate from them. They're happy, we're happy,
Click to expand...

Except they would not be happy to simply do their own thing. They want the satisfaction of making everyone do things their way.
 
gc70 said:
Except they would not be happy to simply do their own thing. They want the satisfaction of making everyone do things their way.
Click to expand...
That's the exact problem we face today, coupled with the fact that some are willing to allow them to get away with it.
 
I'm still not understanding what being principled would have done to benefit us. - I don't even personally believe that you have to throw principle out the window to vote the lesser of two evils. I was on the fence about voting for Trump in the primary...ultimately, I did, because I knew he had the best chance of beating HRC.

I guess you could argue that had we all been so principled as to not vote for Trump that you would have had a catalyst to a civil war and in someway the possibility or recapturing the liberty movement...but that's speculation and I highly doubt that would have been the outcome.

I have absolutely no faith in the GOP, and I don't believe for one second he shelved this to protect the bill. Chances are it's gone forever.

That said...IDK what the hell everyone expects us to do at this point. IDK what we have left. We've seen some liberty-driven types stand up for their rights and it just sinks into the bottom of the newspapers and people stop talking about it. There is no rally of patriotism. The patriots will get pissed off and frustated at about 6am to 730am, return at 6pm for a few hours, and then maybe spend a few hours on a Saturday to march....that's about the extent of it.
 
Last edited:
BHO did a lot of damage to this country. Just imagine how it would be if Hillary had been elected. Just think of where we would be if Kerry and Gore had served two terms each. Do you think we would even be discussing this piece of legislation? I hate the lesser of two evils argument, but the lesser of two evils is still the lesser of two evils, and it is the height of folly to choose the greater of two evils because the lesser evil is a little bit more evil than you had hoped.

Third party or not voting? That, as has been shown several times, is a vote for the greater evil. Principles are great until they cause you to do things that are self destructive.

Do I like Ryan? Not really, but I really detest Pilosi, Schumer, and the other alternatives that will come back into power if the GOP is ousted because it is not conservative enough.

If you want to get rid of these Rinos, don't vote in the liberal commie Democrat maggots but rather find GOP candidates that will do the right things. The solution is not in Washington but rather in the states.
 
Charlie said:
Third party or not voting? That, as has been shown several times, is a vote for the greater evil. Principles are great until they cause you to do things that are self destructive.
Click to expand...

That is the most assinine thing I've heard on the internet since the last time someone said it.

A person voting for who they support is not "really a vote for" whichever petty tyrant you don't like.

No more, no less.

All your what ifs and just think abouts don't amount to anything because none of them happened.
 
It has been my experience that principles are for getting you in trouble one day. Not for getting you out of it.
 
SPM said:
That is the most assinine thing I've heard on the internet since the last time someone said it.

A person voting for who they support is not "really a vote for" whichever petty tyrant you don't like.

No more, no less.

All your what ifs and just think abouts don't amount to anything because none of them happened.
Click to expand...


Well, I suppose you will be real happy when Pilosi and Schumer get back into power. I hope you enjoyed Bill Clinton and his group that was put in because a lot of people voted for that little fellow with the funny haircut or BHO and his group because Romney was not quite conservative enough and lots of people stayed home. Bad history often repeats itself because many people think reminders of past mistakes are asinine and continue to make the same mistakes over and over again. No more, no less.
 
Charlie said:
Well, I suppose you will be real happy when Pilosi and Schumer get back into power. I hope you enjoyed Bill Clinton and his group that was put in because a lot of people voted for that little fellow with the funny haircut or BHO and his group because Romney was not quite conservative enough and lots of people stayed home. Bad history often repeats itself because many people think reminders of past mistakes are asinine and continue to make the same mistakes over and over again. No more, no less.
Click to expand...

Translation. Only vote for who will win, long as they are on your side. Policy doesn't matter, history, character of the individual. None of it is as important as keeping the status quo.

It's funny democrats blamed the Trump victory on third party. Meanwhile the nc republicans blamed third party for their loss. Somehow we stole all the votes from Clinton and then on the same night took all the votes from mccorey. We have done the impossible and that makes us mighty.

Neither you nor anyone else has the right to demand my support, based off of the dichotomy that has been created completely to serve those in power. Not doing what you say is the greater of two evils? Please spare me the drama.

What good is victory if you sacrifice ideals to get it?

Well, let's check the slate for a second.

You guys got your wish. Full Republican control of the government. Both houses, a president and a supreme court judge to boot. CNN has become alaughing stock and your oldest nemesis has turned into a whiney brat cause she lost
And yet here we are right now being sold down the river en masse by people who frankly in my opinion are left of John Kennedy, but claim to be the right. At the VERY FIRST OPPORTUNITY . Without so much as a wiper of complaint.

How exactly is this worse than a Clinton victory? Least then the majority of you are all bluster and "Not one step back" not this whole "Well this is a decent strategy to give them this stupid toy instead of anything else" nonsense.

Good thing people keep voting to maintain the status quo. Otherwise there might be a real risk in our future.

You want to vote Republican? Fine by me. You want to vote Democrat? Fine by me, libertarian? Green? Richard Pryor none of the above? All good.

But do not dare to say that I am the greater evil cause I won't compromise my values enough to stomach such piss poor options.

We are living the fruits of your capitulation and frankly all sophistic ramblings about how much worse it would be had it gone the other way is hogwash. It was Reagan who closed the full auto registry, it was bush 1 who did the import ban of 89. And it is Trump now who is taking us down the new rabbit hole. 8 years of Obama and what? Russian imported guns banned yeah. But, Trump expanded it just a few months ago. Didn't see the outrage then either.

So yeah. I will keep voting third party when it suits me. Or "hardliners that can't win"in a general election " on the Republican primarys.

You keep giving ground if that is your prerogative. Long as it is your guy doing it it should be ok with you. Least I can look my kids in they eye and honestly say that the man I voted for did not take away their rights.
 
Last edited:
shadowsbane said:
Least I can look my kids in they eye and honestly say that the man I voted for did not take away their rights.
Click to expand...
.

Will you be able to look them in the eye and tell them how you did not help keep the communists from taking over when you had the chance?

The main victory this past election cycle was in getting someone who will appoint people to the SC who may actually want to uphold the Constitution. That makes most of the other stuff that is going on seem somewhat trivial in the long run.
 
The "vote against the other guy" idea is probably the worst concept in American politics. It does not promote better candidates, but encourages us to accept anything but the very worst. And it keeps us locked into a two-party system in which the parties have become nearly indistinguishable except in their hollow rhetoric. We need more and better choices between candidates rather than the often-false "choices" that we now have.
 
gc70 said:
The "vote against the other guy" idea is probably the worst concept in American politics. It does not promote better candidates, but encourages us to accept anything but the very worst. And it keeps us locked into a two-party system in which the parties have become nearly indistinguishable except in their hollow rhetoric. We need more and better choices between candidates rather than the often-false "choices" that we now have.
Click to expand...
Sounds great, but in practice in general elections, leads to socialists gaining huge ground. Obama gave us Kagan and Sotomayor; Hillary would have given us another moonbat to fill Scalia's seat, and possibly more before all was said and done, not to mention many judges on the federal appellate courts. That's enough for them to reimagine the Constitution in Karl Marx's view, and eviscerate 2A.

Now if we're talking primaries, I am 100% on board with that. And the ground anti-establishment conservatives have made in Congress in the last few election cycles have ALL been via the GOP ticket. NOT ONE SINGLE third party conservative has won so much as a Congressional seat. Even Trump with all his money, fame and uncanny ability to dominate the spotlight, opted to run on a GOP ticket.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom