BHP FAN
Member
Well,we should all hang together.
...and so it begins: Day One of the 111th Congress.
- Thread starter Airman193SOS
- Start date
- Status
nutter said:
There was an easy retort - the antis aren't going to pass anything, because it will cost the Democrats control of Congress. Even the antis understand that. And BHO wouldn't sign it, because it would cost the Democrats control of Congress.
Mike
Mike
Flyboy
Member
Read The FairTax Book by Neal Boortz and Congressman John Linder; it'll tell you all about it, straight from the horse's mouth.
doc2rn
Member
Universal Healthcare is long overdue! Medicare and Medicaid where good for the hospitals to rip off the people and the gov. now its time to fix that mess. Sorry just telling it like it is!
BrandonBowers
Member
Thanks for the heads up
zombienerd
Member
Heh... Another government program to be mis-led, mis-appropriated, and mis-guided. Think about this, we're talking about the federal government here... Do you really, honestly believe that they could get it right?
I personally think the Fed. Government should only be responsible for Infrastructure, Education, and the Military... Everything else should be left to the states. This country is too large and too diverse for such a centralized government.
Gunnerpalace
Member
Maybe Murtha I Think he was a marine.
TexasRifleman
Moderator Emeritus
You people DO understand that about 3% of bills introduced actually go anywhere right?
About 7,000 bills are introduced each year in the House.
(found these numbers on a couple of House websites)
Not time to panic yet OK?
Vigilance, not paranoia.
About 7,000 bills are introduced each year in the House.
(found these numbers on a couple of House websites)
Not time to panic yet OK?
Vigilance, not paranoia.
Nope -- what one Congress giveth another may taketh away.Zundfolge said:
jerkface11
Member
I'll believe that in 4 years.
MachIVshooter
Member
You think healthcare is expensive now, wait 'til it's free.
moooose102
Member
you know, you really do not have to worry about any of the anti gun bills passing. someone will find a REALLY GOOD bill that just will not fail, and tack some anti-gun resoloution to it (if not several) and of course, it will be hush-hush. so that when the "good for america" bill comes to a vote, all of the nasty stuff will be hooked to it. so either we get shanghiaied, or nothing at all. isnt our political system wonderful!? who in the he77 decided that this type of thing would be appropriate?!
Mike2
Member
I know one thing, we better get lean and mean financially because TSHTF scenarios that are thrown around are going to be dinky compared to the financial problems that are on the horizon. They can say that they are not going to raise taxes, but.............read my lips. Government is as government does. Omnipotence!!!!!
Wise words that we all should heed. Hyperbole and hysteria are the core of the antis' propaganda campaigns. Let's stick to facts instead.
It is inevitable that gun prohibitionists in this Congress will propose bills to erode our 2A rights. It is no surprise that out of all the bills introduced on the first day of this session of Congress that some of them would be pro and anti 2A. What we have to do is identify these threats to our rights, track them and work to stop them as early as possible in their course through Congress.
Vigilance allows us to take action before we find ourselves in the shadow of the threat.
Sav .250
Member
Make sure your NRA dues are PAID UP.
As gun owners we need all the help we can get.
As gun owners we need all the help we can get.
Eightball
Member
Didn't take 'em too long.
TexasRifleman
Moderator Emeritus
Never does. Many of the same characters introduced the same bills when Congress and the White House were Republican controlled.
Lots of this stuff is just to pay back their lobbyists and contributors.
"See, I told you I'd introduce legislation to outlaw the 7th inning stretch and I did, it's not my fault it didn't pass"
Mike2
Member
Agreed, they will slip it in where and when they can, rest assured it will be there.
JImbothefiveth
Member
Sure they won't. That's why they didn't pass the '94 ban. Oh, wait.
Besides, at this point, I'm not so sure they would lose control even if they did pass a ban like that. They would still have your vote.If it makes it to his desk, do you seriously think that he will veto it? I don't. Besides, what's the point of them controlling congress if they can't use it to further their agenda?
I remember the days leading up ito the 1994 AWB - Clinton had to do some very serious arm-twisting on members of his own party to get it through...and lets not forget the bill failed on the first floor vote and went back for a re-vote after even more pressure was put on the blue dogs and the CBC to pass it.
And yes, they did eventually pass it, but it is what happened less than two months later thats important to remember. You may have forgotten, but the democratic party was handed the largest defeat they'd ever seen in an election and put them in the minority for more than a decade. A sitting speaker of the House (Tom Foley) was even defeated in his own state (the first time that has happened in more than a century). No doubt the dems want more gun control, but I think they like their jobs more than gun control, and they well know its a dangerous issue that can easily cost them their jobs and control of Congress.
Dr. Tad Hussein Winslow
member
- Joined
- Nov 14, 2007
- Messages
- 13,146
Yes
No. The later only simply amends and overrides/trumps the old one. If it doesn't specifically amend the old, the courts will interpret the more recent one in time to implicitly trump the older one anyway. Unlike a constitutional provision, it is very very easy to amend old statutory law.
Funderb
Member
we should get the beavers to help persuade congress to protect RKBA because guns save beaver lives. After all, who shoots a beaver? Makes the coat worthless.
- Status
Similar threads
