Eric Holder's confirmation hearing today..."cop killer bullets"!

Manedwolf · January 16, 2009, 15:23

Oh, god. Not this sh__ again.

Quote:

COBURN: Since we only have five minutes, I want to go back to guns just for a minute. Do you have any plans to issue regulations or seek a change in the concealed carry laws of the states or have a federal regulation that might impact those?

HOLDER: That has not been something that I have discussed with anybody in the administration. It's nothing that I've contemplated.

COBURN: It's nothing you're contemplating.

And I understand President-elect Obama does have an opinion on "assault weapons," quote, "assault weapons." Can you tell me what your plans are and how you view that and whether or not you think that may or not be reinstituted?

HOLDER: Yes.

I think you had asked me earlier about the regulations that I thought might still exist, post-Heller. And I had mentioned, I think, closing the gun show loophole, the banning of cop-killer bullets and I also think that making the assault weapons ban permanent would be something that would be permitted under Heller, and I also think would be good for my law enforcement perspective.

COBURN: OK. Thank you.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/16/us...pagewanted=all

And a bit of squirming on right to carry.

Quote:

COBURN: Thank you.

And then my last question about guns. Promise, I'll never ask you another one in the committee hearing. And all I want is a yes or no, because I think people need to hear where you're going on this. There's some uneasiness among the second amendment crowd in this country, and what I'm trying to do is clarify that.

Will you commit to protect and preserve the rights of those 40 states that have a -right-to-carry law by opposing legislation that would encroach upon those rights?

HOLDER: In the opposing state legislation? I'm not...

COBURN: No, opposing federal legislation that would encroach upon those rights.

Let me say it again.

HOLDER: Yes, I understand the question. I'm just not sure how -- what the appropriate role would be for the federal government in the situation that you described. I don't...

COBURN: Well, if we're passing a law, that's obviously going to do that as the supreme enforcer of the law in this land. As the head law enforcer, it should be upon you to challenge that and accord when it, obviously, is going to violate the Heller decision.

So, what I'm asking you is to specifically state that if we pass something that violates these state laws, in other words, are going to limit these state laws, take away second amendment rights as being defined by the Heller decision, will you in fact intercede on the basis of that Heller decision to defend the rights of the state to have carry laws?

HOLDER: Well, I wouldn't support any law that violated the dictates of Heller.

Now, I don't know -- the question you asked is hypothetical. It's hard to answer hypotheticals without having all of the facts. But I will state, as I said, I think earlier, Heller is the law of the land. It has to be taken into account with regard to any legislation that might be considered.

COBURN: Well, let me just pin you down just a little bit closer so I can get comfortable.

HOLDER: OK.

COBURN: Do you believe the states presently have the right to establish carry laws in the states?

HOLDER: I think...

COBURN: Either concealed carry, or not concealed carry law.

HOLDER: Without agreeing or disagreeing with them, I think states do have those rights.

COBURN: Yes, the states do have. Will you work to protect that the states will continue to have that right?

HOLDER: Senator, yes, I guess -- I mean, in favor...

COBURN: You're making my second amendment crowd really nervous. They want to hear you say, "Yes, they have that right and they ought to be able to maintain that right." That's what they want to hear you say.

HOLDER: And I guess what I'm saying to that same crowd is that I have no intention -- this administration has no intention of doing anything that would affect a states regulation of firearms, who can carry a firearm, under what circumstances. There is nothing that we have discussed, nothing that is in planning, nothing that I can imagine that we're going to be doing in that regard, so.

LEAHY: Well, if the Senator yields to me.

COBURN: I'd be happy to.

LEAHY: Just to ask for a clarification. The State of Vermont has very simple laws on guns. During hunting season, deer hunting season, and your semi-automatic are restricted to a certain number of rounds to give the deer a chance.

We post signs outside the limits, city limits of Montpelier, our state capital, saying that if you're going to hunt deer inside the city limits of Montpelier like for example, crossing the Statehouse Lawn or something, you are limited to shotguns. That's the only place you are.

Anybody, unless they are a felon are allowed to carry a loaded concealed weapon above the certain age without a permit. Nobody does. We like the fact that we can. The vast majority of us in Vermont like myself, own numerous firearms.

Do I understand you to say you're not going to be on a crusade to have the federal government come in and override the laws of the State of Vermont?

HOLDER: That would be true. I've made and I express...

LEAHY: They are a lot less restricted than laws of Senator Coburn's state.

HOLDER: Maybe I've not expressed this well, but this is not an agenda item. It's not a focus. It's not an expectation that I have for this administration. I'm not sure how I can say it any plainer than that.

There are things that we want to do with regard to crime prevention and to reduce crime. But the concern that you have raised is not on any of the menu items that I have seen or could imagine.

COBURN: Thank you for your answers. It's not the one I wanted to hear, but thank you for the answer.

And more on "cop-killer bullets." He's obsessed with that term.

Quote:

Coburn: Heller. I believe SCOTUS got it right. Tell me where you sit today and with that thought what you would do with that.

Holder: Post-Heller the options we have in terms of regulating firearms has been narrowed. It has not been eliminated, but reasonable restrictions are still possible. The Heller decision has to be factored in now. I don't think we should turn away from discussions about who has guns and how they should be used. I think that we're in a different world.

Coburn: Do you agree that outside of sporting use there's a right to own a gun?

Holder: [a little surprised by the question] Post-Heller definitely. I agree with Obama closing gun show loophole, banning sale of cop-killer bullets. Those are the things we need to focus on.

Coburn: As AG will you make a commitment to defending Heller?

Holder: Sure.

Coburn: Would you also do so if SCOTUS granted Cert for a case revisiting Heller.

So what does that mean? No more military ammo? Hollowpoints? What?

**1gewehr** · January 16, 2009, 15:45

Quote:

Originally posted by Manedwolf

And more on "cop-killer bullets." He's obsessed with that term.

So what does that mean? No more military ammo? Hollowpoints? What?

It means that he will do whatever Obama wants him to do. AW ban, no sales without going through a dealer, limits on types of ammo, etc. the sky is the limit. He is just affirming that they will have to try to get past Heller to try to impose new gun control.

**tuck0411** · January 16, 2009, 15:48

Too bad Coburn didn't take him to task over "assault weapons".

**bykerhd** · January 16, 2009, 16:03

I think it's a safe bet that this guy will do exactly as Obama wants him to do. Whatever Obama wants him to do.
Within HIS and Obama's interpretation of the law as THEY believe the Supreme Court has defined it.

And, if they are found to have erred, it will be an "honest" mistake, misinterpretation of Heller ?, and too bad for those who got in the way.

Part of what bothers me here in the quotes from the hearings is that the Heller Decision is apparently now interpreted to be interchangeable with, or perhaps maybe to be THE definition of the Second Amendment.

bakerjw · January 16, 2009, 16:09

I wish Coburn was my senator.

Gun Dr. · January 16, 2009, 17:00

If you care to watch & listen to BS, from yesterday's hearing...

AWB 2.0 is coming real soon.

cpd109 · January 17, 2009, 10:33

Quote:

Originally posted by Manedwolf
[
And more on "cop-killer bullets." He's obsessed with that term.

[/B]

Can someone define what (they are thinking) this it?

Manedwolf · January 17, 2009, 10:47

Quote:

Originally posted by cpd109

Can someone define what (they are thinking) this it?

It's a pure Hollywood term that shows how clueless he is. It dates back to the old Black Talon scares, when the liberals swore that the teflon coating meant to increase feed reliability would make it slide right through a bulletproof vest. In the Lethal Weapon movies, someone fires "cop killer" bullets right through a bulldozer's steel blade, from a snubbie revolver, even.

This was taken by the liberals to be real.

ANY bullet can kill a cop...if a criminal fires it. They should worry about banning cop-killing gangsters, illegals, thugs, and petty criminals, but...

...in terms of what this might mean?

It could mean a ban on hollowpoints, like New Jersey has.

It could mean a ban on any military ball rifle ammo, which means no surplus.

According to Kennedy, 30-30 is a "cop killer", and should be banned.

So, basically? Any ammo.

**bykerhd** · January 17, 2009, 12:58

What a "Cop Killer" bullet would be is anything that penetrates a "bulletproof" vest.

That is the problem.
Which vest ?

There have been, and are, all kinds of variations in the level of protection offered by "bulletproof" vests since they first began being marketed maybe 70 years ago ?
If the "standard" vest the government selects happens ? to be on the lower end of the protection scale, we are likely to be totally screwed.
Most vests will defeat most handgun cartridges. Rifle is a different story altogether. Kennedy was probably correct about the .30-30.
In some cases anyway.

**tuck0411** · January 17, 2009, 13:23

Anyone know if the hearings for Holder are done or do they have more planned this next week?

Manedwolf · January 18, 2009, 01:47

Quote:

Originally posted by bykerhd
What a "Cop Killer" bullet would be is anything that penetrates a "bulletproof" vest.

That is the problem.
Which vest ?

There have been, and are, all kinds of variations in the level of protection offered by "bulletproof" vests since they first began being marketed maybe 70 years ago ?
If the "standard" vest the government selects happens ? to be on the lower end of the protection scale, we are likely to be totally screwed.
Most vests will defeat most handgun cartridges. Rifle is a different story altogether. Kennedy was probably correct about the .30-30.
In some cases anyway.

7.62x25 ball will go right through Level II, and through a k-pot as well.

cpd109 · January 18, 2009, 19:50

Quote:

Originally posted by Manedwolf

It's a pure Hollywood term that shows how clueless he is. It dates back to the old Black Talon scares, when the liberals swore that the teflon coating meant to increase feed reliability would make it slide right through a bulletproof vest. In the Lethal Weapon movies, someone fires "cop killer" bullets right through a bulldozer's steel blade, from a snubbie revolver, even.

This was taken by the liberals to be real.

ANY bullet can kill a cop...if a criminal fires it. They should worry about banning cop-killing gangsters, illegals, thugs, and petty criminals, but...

...in terms of what this might mean?

It could mean a ban on hollowpoints, like New Jersey has.

It could mean a ban on any military ball rifle ammo, which means no surplus.

According to Kennedy, 30-30 is a "cop killer", and should be banned.

So, basically? Any ammo.

That's what I thought, but I couldn't believe anyone was really that stupid. I guess I need to be more open minded. Thanks.

keiser · January 19, 2009, 17:11

Quote:

Originally posted by bykerhd
What a "Cop Killer" bullet would be is anything that penetrates a "bulletproof" vest.

A cop killer bullet is any bullet that has ever killed a cop (read that to mean any bullet ever made). A bullet that kills civilians is ok as a cop is worth about 10 times what a civilian is worth.

Bangz · January 19, 2009, 19:49

If an AWB is passed, we need to start litigation in the states asserting that the federal AWB conflicts with, and infringes on, your 2A right, as set forth in your state's constitution and that this power is outside the grant of power given to the federal gov't. It needs to be a grassroots effort, executed with the same passion and extremism that the ACLU demonstrates in its continuing effort to remove the word "God' from everything. If we could only get them focused on the 2A! We really have alot in common when you drill down into it.

Manedwolf · January 19, 2009, 23:55

Quote:

Originally posted by Bangz
If an AWB is passed, we need to start litigation in the states asserting that the federal AWB conflicts with, and infringes on, your 2A right, as set forth in your state's constitution and that this power is outside the grant of power given to the federal gov't. It needs to be a grassroots effort, executed with the same passion and extremism that the ACLU demonstrates in its continuing effort to remove the word "God' from everything. If we could only get them focused on the 2A! We really have alot in common when you drill down into it.

I have nothing in common with a liberal organization that ignores firearms rights while actively defending groups that should be broken up and imprisoned like NAMBLA.

Carolina Slim · January 22, 2009, 19:23

How many of you have taken the time to call or write your Senator to stop the confirmation of this guy? If you have not done so already please do so now! I would also recommend contacting the National Republican Senatorial Committee and letting them know they won't see dollar one unless the Pubbies in the Senate show some steel and derail this guy's nomination.

202-675-6000

**tuck0411** · January 22, 2009, 20:12

I've written both of mine twice about Holder, once before the hearings and once after. Got a response from one of them to the first missive, but have not heard back from either after the second attempt. The one that responded was one of the few Dems who voted against the big bailout, so I know she's capable of not drinking the koolaid on a given issue.

Think I'm going to write them on Geithner tonight.

republic · January 23, 2009, 15:58

Senator Voinovich,

I am writing to urge you to vote against confirmation and use every political tool at your disposal to prevent the confirmation of Eric Holder to the position of attorney general. Mr Holder has proven by his actions and his words that he is contemptuous of the rights of Americans. An attorney general who does not understand the purpose of the Bill of Rights is a plague upon the freedoms of Americans. Those senators who prefer expediency over the rights of the citizens of their states are guilty of the worst form of cowardice. I am sure that had Dante been alive to see the way that many Senators, including yourself, have acted, he would no doubt have elucidated the particular damnation fitting to this treachery in his "Inferno."

It is impermissible for you to confirm an individual who can not and will not uphold the Constitution. Eric Holder is a man who will not uphold the Constitution, but will treat it and the American citizenry with contempt. Confirming Mr. Holden or failing to defend Ohioans to your utmost is a profound insult to your constituency, a dishonorable action shameful in the eyes of this country's founders and defenders, and manifestly a violation of your own oath of office. Unfortunately, your past record has proven that you do not care for such things as truthfulness, upright behavior, and honoring your commitments. Please prove my previous assessment of your character as premature.

republic

**tuck0411** · January 23, 2009, 21:40

You may be right, Lewis, but I think one still has to try. If enough of us tried, it could have an effect on some congressmen (emphasis on "some"). The fact that one of my own senators voted against the bailout, and her being a Dem, encourages me. I like this quote:

"No one could make a greater mistake than he who did nothing
because he could do only a little." -- Edmund Burke

What does it cost you to email your senator? Five minutes?

**tuck0411** · January 23, 2009, 22:26

It's only unstoppable if no one does anything to stop it. I don't care if I'm the last man in America who gives a shit, I'm still going to let 'em know how I feel on issues I care about. At the very least, I'll go to my grave with a clean conscience.

**johnny.308** · January 27, 2009, 12:50

The squeeky wheel gets the grease is a truism for a reason. I have been contacting my Senators and Representative on issues since the Clintonistas first took office. If they get enough mail, e-mail, FAXs and telephone calls it will influence many of their votes. I also write letters to the editor and have had a number published. They can't ignore a s**t landslide. Squeek, squeek squeek, squeek! And don't forget that it was a Republican that cast the deciding vote for the last AWB.

cowbilly · January 27, 2009, 15:52

I thought ALGORE cast the deciding vote on the AWB because it was a tie?

billyreed1 · January 27, 2009, 16:32

We as a free people cannot let this happen. I do not like this see-sawing of WE THE PEOPLE's RIGHTS! What the heck is wrong with these guys wanting to "INFRINGE " on LAW-ABIDING CITIZENS ??

RG Coburn · January 27, 2009, 18:25

On any issue these days,concering democrats and gun control,you should not only write your senators and reps,but also nail your local democrats,like county and state guys,even township level.Them them know,if this crap passes,it will be THEM that pays.Like private Pyle eating his doughnut.Their paying for it,you eat it. Collectively,the lower ranks of the democrat party will roll up their bars of soap,and hold down Senator Jaegernanjensen,and take out their wrath.Make it too politcally expensive to say "I'm a democrat". There is scant little sense in trying to swerve the thinking of a democrat senator or entrenched representative. You're not likely to really change their vote.It doesn't hurt to just let them know your positions.But aim your fire where it will do the most impact.Tomorrows senator or rep is todays county commisioner,or DA,or state rep.

Manedwolf · February 03, 2009, 09:10

Holder has been confirmed and is being sworn in as Attorney General. Apparently, some RINOs voted for him too.

The junta of socialism continues to build.

Heat · February 03, 2009, 10:55

Quote:

Originally posted by Manedwolf
Holder has been confirmed and is being sworn in as Attorney General. Apparently, some RINOs voted for him too.

The junta of socialism continues to build.

And we Patriots and Sons of Liberty take note..keep your powder dry..'Something evil this way cometh'

Manedwolf · February 03, 2009, 14:55

At his confirmation today:

Quote:

"There shall be no place for political favoritism, no reason to be timid in enforcing the laws that protect our rights, our environment and our principles, as long as I have the opportunity to lead this great department," he said.

No reason to be timid? Learned that from Janet, did you?

January 16, 2009, 15:48	#3
tuck0411 Curio & Relic Bronze Contributor Silver Contributor FALaholic #: 29165 Join Date: May 2007 Location: WA Posts: 2,003	Too bad Coburn didn't take him to task over "assault weapons". __________________ "Posterity! You will never know, how much it cost the present Generation, to preserve your Freedom! I hope you will make a good Use of it. If you do not, I shall repent in Heaven, that I ever took half the Pains to preserve it." -- John Adams "Guard with jealous attention the public liberty. Suspect every one who approaches that jewel. Unfortunately, nothing will preserve it but downright force. Whenever you give up that force, you are ruined." - Patrick Henry "It does not require a majority to prevail, but rather an irate, tireless minority keen to set brush fires in people's minds." -- Samuel Adams "Of all tyrannies, a tyranny exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end, for they do so with the approval of their consciences." -- C.S. Lewis

January 16, 2009, 17:00	#6
Gun Dr. Registered FALaholic #: 40099 Join Date: Nov 2008 Location: The Leftist Coast Posts: 244	If you care to watch & listen to BS, from yesterday's hearing... AWB 2.0 is coming real soon. __________________ Si Vis Pacem Para Bellum

January 17, 2009, 13:23	#10
tuck0411 Curio & Relic Bronze Contributor Silver Contributor FALaholic #: 29165 Join Date: May 2007 Location: WA Posts: 2,003	Anyone know if the hearings for Holder are done or do they have more planned this next week? __________________ "Posterity! You will never know, how much it cost the present Generation, to preserve your Freedom! I hope you will make a good Use of it. If you do not, I shall repent in Heaven, that I ever took half the Pains to preserve it." -- John Adams "Guard with jealous attention the public liberty. Suspect every one who approaches that jewel. Unfortunately, nothing will preserve it but downright force. Whenever you give up that force, you are ruined." - Patrick Henry "It does not require a majority to prevail, but rather an irate, tireless minority keen to set brush fires in people's minds." -- Samuel Adams "Of all tyrannies, a tyranny exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end, for they do so with the approval of their consciences." -- C.S. Lewis

January 22, 2009, 20:12	#17
tuck0411 Curio & Relic Bronze Contributor Silver Contributor FALaholic #: 29165 Join Date: May 2007 Location: WA Posts: 2,003	I've written both of mine twice about Holder, once before the hearings and once after. Got a response from one of them to the first missive, but have not heard back from either after the second attempt. The one that responded was one of the few Dems who voted against the big bailout, so I know she's capable of not drinking the koolaid on a given issue. Think I'm going to write them on Geithner tonight. __________________ "Posterity! You will never know, how much it cost the present Generation, to preserve your Freedom! I hope you will make a good Use of it. If you do not, I shall repent in Heaven, that I ever took half the Pains to preserve it." -- John Adams "Guard with jealous attention the public liberty. Suspect every one who approaches that jewel. Unfortunately, nothing will preserve it but downright force. Whenever you give up that force, you are ruined." - Patrick Henry "It does not require a majority to prevail, but rather an irate, tireless minority keen to set brush fires in people's minds." -- Samuel Adams "Of all tyrannies, a tyranny exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end, for they do so with the approval of their consciences." -- C.S. Lewis

January 23, 2009, 21:40	#19
tuck0411 Curio & Relic Bronze Contributor Silver Contributor FALaholic #: 29165 Join Date: May 2007 Location: WA Posts: 2,003	You may be right, Lewis, but I think one still has to try. If enough of us tried, it could have an effect on some congressmen (emphasis on "some"). The fact that one of my own senators voted against the bailout, and her being a Dem, encourages me. I like this quote: "No one could make a greater mistake than he who did nothing because he could do only a little." -- Edmund Burke What does it cost you to email your senator? Five minutes? __________________ "Posterity! You will never know, how much it cost the present Generation, to preserve your Freedom! I hope you will make a good Use of it. If you do not, I shall repent in Heaven, that I ever took half the Pains to preserve it." -- John Adams "Guard with jealous attention the public liberty. Suspect every one who approaches that jewel. Unfortunately, nothing will preserve it but downright force. Whenever you give up that force, you are ruined." - Patrick Henry "It does not require a majority to prevail, but rather an irate, tireless minority keen to set brush fires in people's minds." -- Samuel Adams "Of all tyrannies, a tyranny exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end, for they do so with the approval of their consciences." -- C.S. Lewis

January 16, 2009, 16:03	#4
bykerhd Dinosaur Bronze Contributor FALaholic #: 2798 Join Date: Mar 2001 Location: Burlington Vermont area Posts: 13,262	I think it's a safe bet that this guy will do exactly as Obama wants him to do. Whatever Obama wants him to do. Within HIS and Obama's interpretation of the law as THEY believe the Supreme Court has defined it. And, if they are found to have erred, it will be an "honest" mistake, misinterpretation of Heller ?, and too bad for those who got in the way. Part of what bothers me here in the quotes from the hearings is that the Heller Decision is apparently now interpreted to be interchangeable with, or perhaps maybe to be THE definition of the Second Amendment.

January 16, 2009, 16:09	#5
bakerjw Registered FALaholic #: 22547 Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: Eastern Tennessee Posts: 1,449	I wish Coburn was my senator.

January 17, 2009, 12:58	#9
bykerhd Dinosaur Bronze Contributor FALaholic #: 2798 Join Date: Mar 2001 Location: Burlington Vermont area Posts: 13,262	What a "Cop Killer" bullet would be is anything that penetrates a "bulletproof" vest. That is the problem. Which vest ? There have been, and are, all kinds of variations in the level of protection offered by "bulletproof" vests since they first began being marketed maybe 70 years ago ? If the "standard" vest the government selects happens ? to be on the lower end of the protection scale, we are likely to be totally screwed. Most vests will defeat most handgun cartridges. Rifle is a different story altogether. Kennedy was probably correct about the .30-30. In some cases anyway.

January 19, 2009, 19:49	#14
Bangz Registered FALaholic #: 11591 Join Date: Aug 2003 Location: Sarasota, FL Posts: 124	If an AWB is passed, we need to start litigation in the states asserting that the federal AWB conflicts with, and infringes on, your 2A right, as set forth in your state's constitution and that this power is outside the grant of power given to the federal gov't. It needs to be a grassroots effort, executed with the same passion and extremism that the ACLU demonstrates in its continuing effort to remove the word "God' from everything. If we could only get them focused on the 2A! We really have alot in common when you drill down into it.

January 22, 2009, 19:23	#16
Carolina Slim Registered FALaholic #: 20932 Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: Phoenix, AZ Posts: 435	How many of you have taken the time to call or write your Senator to stop the confirmation of this guy? If you have not done so already please do so now! I would also recommend contacting the National Republican Senatorial Committee and letting them know they won't see dollar one unless the Pubbies in the Senate show some steel and derail this guy's nomination. 202-675-6000

January 23, 2009, 15:58	#18
republic Registered FALaholic #: 35369 Join Date: Apr 2008 Posts: 215	Senator Voinovich, I am writing to urge you to vote against confirmation and use every political tool at your disposal to prevent the confirmation of Eric Holder to the position of attorney general. Mr Holder has proven by his actions and his words that he is contemptuous of the rights of Americans. An attorney general who does not understand the purpose of the Bill of Rights is a plague upon the freedoms of Americans. Those senators who prefer expediency over the rights of the citizens of their states are guilty of the worst form of cowardice. I am sure that had Dante been alive to see the way that many Senators, including yourself, have acted, he would no doubt have elucidated the particular damnation fitting to this treachery in his "Inferno." It is impermissible for you to confirm an individual who can not and will not uphold the Constitution. Eric Holder is a man who will not uphold the Constitution, but will treat it and the American citizenry with contempt. Confirming Mr. Holden or failing to defend Ohioans to your utmost is a profound insult to your constituency, a dishonorable action shameful in the eyes of this country's founders and defenders, and manifestly a violation of your own oath of office. Unfortunately, your past record has proven that you do not care for such things as truthfulness, upright behavior, and honoring your commitments. Please prove my previous assessment of your character as premature. republic

January 23, 2009, 22:26	#20
tuck0411 Curio & Relic Bronze Contributor Silver Contributor FALaholic #: 29165 Join Date: May 2007 Location: WA Posts: 2,003	It's only unstoppable if no one does anything to stop it. I don't care if I'm the last man in America who gives a shit, I'm still going to let 'em know how I feel on issues I care about. At the very least, I'll go to my grave with a clean conscience. __________________ "Posterity! You will never know, how much it cost the present Generation, to preserve your Freedom! I hope you will make a good Use of it. If you do not, I shall repent in Heaven, that I ever took half the Pains to preserve it." -- John Adams "Guard with jealous attention the public liberty. Suspect every one who approaches that jewel. Unfortunately, nothing will preserve it but downright force. Whenever you give up that force, you are ruined." - Patrick Henry "It does not require a majority to prevail, but rather an irate, tireless minority keen to set brush fires in people's minds." -- Samuel Adams "Of all tyrannies, a tyranny exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end, for they do so with the approval of their consciences." -- C.S. Lewis

January 27, 2009, 12:50	#21
johnny.308 Veteran Member Bronze Contributor FALaholic #: 32261 Join Date: Oct 2007 Location: Der Hafen, Midgard Posts: 1,171	The squeeky wheel gets the grease is a truism for a reason. I have been contacting my Senators and Representative on issues since the Clintonistas first took office. If they get enough mail, e-mail, FAXs and telephone calls it will influence many of their votes. I also write letters to the editor and have had a number published. They can't ignore a s**t landslide. Squeek, squeek squeek, squeek! And don't forget that it was a Republican that cast the deciding vote for the last AWB. __________________ God bless the American people and keep your powder dry. "Cry "havoc," let slip the dogs of war." Marc Anthony, Shakespear's Julius Caesar "Ignorance can be cured, but stupid is forever and often fatal." Unknown

January 27, 2009, 15:52	#22
cowbilly Registered Bronze Contributor FALaholic #: 2908 Join Date: Mar 2001 Location: MS, USA Posts: 1,003	I thought ALGORE cast the deciding vote on the AWB because it was a tie?

January 27, 2009, 16:32	#23
billyreed1 Registered FALaholic #: 28810 Join Date: May 2007 Location: CONSTITUTIONAL REPUBLIC RULED BY DEMOCRATIC LAW Posts: 354	We as a free people cannot let this happen. I do not like this see-sawing of WE THE PEOPLE's RIGHTS! What the heck is wrong with these guys wanting to "INFRINGE " on LAW-ABIDING CITIZENS ??

January 27, 2009, 18:25	#24
RG Coburn Registered FALaholic #: 27406 Join Date: Mar 2007 Posts: 10,857	On any issue these days,concering democrats and gun control,you should not only write your senators and reps,but also nail your local democrats,like county and state guys,even township level.Them them know,if this crap passes,it will be THEM that pays.Like private Pyle eating his doughnut.Their paying for it,you eat it. Collectively,the lower ranks of the democrat party will roll up their bars of soap,and hold down Senator Jaegernanjensen,and take out their wrath.Make it too politcally expensive to say "I'm a democrat". There is scant little sense in trying to swerve the thinking of a democrat senator or entrenched representative. You're not likely to really change their vote.It doesn't hurt to just let them know your positions.But aim your fire where it will do the most impact.Tomorrows senator or rep is todays county commisioner,or DA,or state rep.

February 03, 2009, 09:10	#25
Manedwolf Registered FALaholic #: 35047 Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: NH Posts: 4,850	Holder has been confirmed and is being sworn in as Attorney General. Apparently, some RINOs voted for him too. The junta of socialism continues to build. __________________ "Stay in school, work hard, stay out of trouble and when you grow up, you can pay for those who didn't."

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Switch to Linear Mode Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode