I was just reading that the GOP staged a similar protest on the House floor in 2008. What was their "we won't take it anymore" issue, you ask? DRILL BABY DRILL!
USCHO Fan Forum
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
-
The USCHO Fan Forum has migrated to a new plaform, xenForo. Most of the function of the forum should work in familiar ways. Please note that you can switch between light and dark modes by clicking on the gear icon in the upper right of the main menu bar. We are hoping that this new platform will prove to be faster and more reliable. Please feel free to explore its features.
The 114th Congress: Two More Years!
- Thread starter dxmnkd316
- Start date
I was just reading that the GOP staged a similar protest on the House floor in 2008. What was their "we won't take it anymore" issue, you ask? DRILL BABY DRILL!
CNN showed pictures via Periscope.
So Occupy tactics are now being used by our legislators. Sad day. I can't believe that I will witness the destruction of the Constitutional USA in my lifetime. Now it will be government by Mob.
Our Mel Brooks jokes from.a few days ago look prophetic.
ScoobyDoo
NPC
Re: The 114th Congress: Two More Years!
Saw the most entertaining segment on Morning Joe ever. Let's see if I can get this right.
So, we have two lists. A no fly list and a terror watch list. Both of these lists came from the Patriot Act originally I believe. A radio program that I admire very much was ripping the Democrats for the no fly no buy rule they want to pass because the Democrats voted against these lists in the first place. But, here's the problem with that.
We have the lists. The lists are law. And apparently they're not going away. So, the question is WHY would the Republicans care about extending the lists to Gun Control? Well. Due process. They think that the lists are flawed and take away law abiding citizens right to buy a gun under the 2nd Amendment.
Here comes Joe this morning on Morning Joe interviewing Tom Cole from Oklahoma. He sets it up by reminding everyone that the Republicans are going against 80% of Americans on the no fly no buy and extended background check legislation. Tom Cole gives the usual argument how those laws would have done nothing to prevent Orlando, etc.
Joe changes the argument. Asked Cole about the Lists and why we wouldn't want to prevent people from buying guns who are on the list. As Joe put it, "we're trying to prevent the next terrorist attack on American soil" (I paraphrased a bit). Tom Cole says, "The list is flawed". Joe grabs the sledgehammer and drives Cole into the ground.
"Then why don't you fix the list?" "Isn't that your job?"
And so again here is where government is screwed up and large and small are NEVER part of the equation. Small government would be NO LIST or an EFFECTIVE LIST. Instead we have two lists and the lists are flawed and (apparently) there is no way to get off the list (thus the due process) argument. So, what the discussion should be at this point isn't guns, cause sorry but if your on the list you shouldn't be buying them, but the discussion should be what are the lists, how do we manage the lists effectively, and should we have the lists in the first place. That's the smaller government argument.
So, the big question is WHY is the large government party closer (not buy much but still closer) to the small government answer than the small government party?
And here's the segment on Youtube.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=09sV4tSFEuA
Saw the most entertaining segment on Morning Joe ever. Let's see if I can get this right.
So, we have two lists. A no fly list and a terror watch list. Both of these lists came from the Patriot Act originally I believe. A radio program that I admire very much was ripping the Democrats for the no fly no buy rule they want to pass because the Democrats voted against these lists in the first place. But, here's the problem with that.
We have the lists. The lists are law. And apparently they're not going away. So, the question is WHY would the Republicans care about extending the lists to Gun Control? Well. Due process. They think that the lists are flawed and take away law abiding citizens right to buy a gun under the 2nd Amendment.
Here comes Joe this morning on Morning Joe interviewing Tom Cole from Oklahoma. He sets it up by reminding everyone that the Republicans are going against 80% of Americans on the no fly no buy and extended background check legislation. Tom Cole gives the usual argument how those laws would have done nothing to prevent Orlando, etc.
Joe changes the argument. Asked Cole about the Lists and why we wouldn't want to prevent people from buying guns who are on the list. As Joe put it, "we're trying to prevent the next terrorist attack on American soil" (I paraphrased a bit). Tom Cole says, "The list is flawed". Joe grabs the sledgehammer and drives Cole into the ground.
"Then why don't you fix the list?" "Isn't that your job?"
And so again here is where government is screwed up and large and small are NEVER part of the equation. Small government would be NO LIST or an EFFECTIVE LIST. Instead we have two lists and the lists are flawed and (apparently) there is no way to get off the list (thus the due process) argument. So, what the discussion should be at this point isn't guns, cause sorry but if your on the list you shouldn't be buying them, but the discussion should be what are the lists, how do we manage the lists effectively, and should we have the lists in the first place. That's the smaller government argument.
So, the big question is WHY is the large government party closer (not buy much but still closer) to the small government answer than the small government party?
And here's the segment on Youtube.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=09sV4tSFEuA
dxmnkd316
Lucia Apologist
Re: The 114th Congress: Two More Years!
There was a comment on gawker's article bashing the Dems on this.
Something along the lines of, "Let's get this prohibition in place for those on the lists, however, if someone wants to buy a gun and they're on the list, the government has 30 days to charge them with a crime."
I'd be ok with that if they extended it to 60 or even 90 days.
There was a comment on gawker's article bashing the Dems on this.
Something along the lines of, "Let's get this prohibition in place for those on the lists, however, if someone wants to buy a gun and they're on the list, the government has 30 days to charge them with a crime."
I'd be ok with that if they extended it to 60 or even 90 days.
ScoobyDoo
NPC
Re: The 114th Congress: Two More Years!
Be careful about hammering the Democrats too much on this. Courts are backed up all over the place and ever since Obama took office the Congress hasn't been filling the vacancies.
Be careful about hammering the Democrats too much on this. Courts are backed up all over the place and ever since Obama took office the Congress hasn't been filling the vacancies.
ScoobyDoo
NPC
Re: The 114th Congress: Two More Years!
Then fix the list or get rid of it.
EDIT: it's also interesting that this has Constitutional issues but Guantanomo Bay doesn't.
Then fix the list or get rid of it.
EDIT: it's also interesting that this has Constitutional issues but Guantanomo Bay doesn't.
Last edited:
The Congress could abolish the Patriot Act.
Put the word."patriot" or "child(ren)" in a bill's title and it's guaranteed to pass and be impossible to kill.
unofan
Well-known member
It already does that to an extent. You have the right to travel freely among the states, even if it's not explicitly enumerated. The no fly list at least tangentially curbs that right (the only reason it's not a direct impact is there's no right to fly between states).
While the second amendment is explicit (if you ignore the militia clause, as the present interpretation does) , it is not unlimited no matter what its most ardent defenders tell you.
So while there may be constitutional questions, they're not inherently insurmountable.
ScoobyDoo
NPC
Re: The 114th Congress: Two More Years!
I'm just saying if were going to give everyone due process then give everyone due process. We haven't even declared War. It's just beyond fascinating how we spend all our time in Congress skirting the laws we do have that we can't pass anything that applies common sense to the laws we already have.
I'm just saying if were going to give everyone due process then give everyone due process. We haven't even declared War. It's just beyond fascinating how we spend all our time in Congress skirting the laws we do have that we can't pass anything that applies common sense to the laws we already have.
dxmnkd316
Lucia Apologist
Re: The 114th Congress: Two More Years!
I don't disagree with any of that. So like I said, add in a due process fix and I'm more ok with it based on what I've seen so far.
I don't disagree with any of that. So like I said, add in a due process fix and I'm more ok with it based on what I've seen so far.
ScoobyDoo
NPC
Re: The 114th Congress: Two More Years!
Only when it circles around number two. Any other number they have room to move.
I'm just amused that the GOP finally discovered civil liberties.
Only when it circles around number two. Any other number they have room to move.
FlagDUDE08
Banned
Re: The 114th Congress: Two More Years!
They're always known about it. Just very selectively. About as selective as the ACLU.
I'm just amused that the GOP finally discovered civil liberties.
They're always known about it. Just very selectively. About as selective as the ACLU.
Kepler
Si certus es dubita
Re: The 114th Congress: Two More Years!
I love the pearl-clutching about process the House Republicans are doing about the sit in. Maybe you guys should look over at the Senate where your party is refusing to consider a SCOTUS nominee for naked partisan reasons. Well that plus you a-holes shut down the government and threatened to default on the debt because your feewies were hurt that the president was black.
But more important than the right's poutrage is what this says about the Democratic party. Remember when we lost all those blue dogs and everybody said it was terrible? Turns out it's not terrible. The Democratic caucus is getting more liberal because the party voters are more liberal. Flushing the Dixiecrats down the toilet did cost us the presidency in the 80s and the Congress in the 90s and 00s, but now that the price is paid we have a much better party, united behind much better policy preferences.
The orcs suck, but they sucked worse when they were the enemy within.
I love the pearl-clutching about process the House Republicans are doing about the sit in. Maybe you guys should look over at the Senate where your party is refusing to consider a SCOTUS nominee for naked partisan reasons. Well that plus you a-holes shut down the government and threatened to default on the debt because your feewies were hurt that the president was black.
But more important than the right's poutrage is what this says about the Democratic party. Remember when we lost all those blue dogs and everybody said it was terrible? Turns out it's not terrible. The Democratic caucus is getting more liberal because the party voters are more liberal. Flushing the Dixiecrats down the toilet did cost us the presidency in the 80s and the Congress in the 90s and 00s, but now that the price is paid we have a much better party, united behind much better policy preferences.
The orcs suck, but they sucked worse when they were the enemy within.
The Sicatoka
Kicizapi Cetan
Re: The 114th Congress: Two More Years!
So we have a list (or two) of people that we don't want getting onto airplanes because they might blow up the plane.
Forget all the other stuff; we are letting those folks walk around?
How about we find a charge (if there's one really there) and go all Sixth Amendment on the person.
Doesn't that solve all the problems?
So we have a list (or two) of people that we don't want getting onto airplanes because they might blow up the plane.
Forget all the other stuff; we are letting those folks walk around?
How about we find a charge (if there's one really there) and go all Sixth Amendment on the person.
Doesn't that solve all the problems?
ScoobyDoo
NPC
Re: The 114th Congress: Two More Years!
How about no list at all? Oh, ****ing wait, that's what the Democrats wanted in the first place. Never mind.
How about no list at all? Oh, ****ing wait, that's what the Democrats wanted in the first place. Never mind.
The Sicatoka
Kicizapi Cetan
Re: The 114th Congress: Two More Years!
I'm not a big fan of lists, especially those that may not fare so well if the Sixth Amendment was to be pressed against them.
I'm not a big fan of lists, especially those that may not fare so well if the Sixth Amendment was to be pressed against them.