I have seen a lot of Giron on the tube lately. She keeps talking about voter suppression being the reason for her ouster. Apparently, it has not registered with her that many who support the Bill of Rights do NOT subscribe to her views. . .and did something about it. Way to go Colorado!
Anti-gun politicians recalled in Colorado!
- Thread starter Hiker 1
- Start date
Brian Pfleuger
Moderator Emeritus
No, we don't have any recall provision but we can vote the snakes out of office.
It's sort of self-fulfilling though. They were already known as anti-gun before they were elected and we either didn't care or the vote from the city overwhelms our vote anyway. When the next vote comes around we might suddenly decide to care but it won't matter because we'll be overwhelmed by the city vote anyway.
The people in the city (the vast majority of them, there are friends there but not many) most certainly not only don't care about gun rights but are openly hostile.
From a state-wide voting perspective, rural and suburban upstate is irrelevant.
Aguila Blanca
Staff
And this is why the Founding Fathers originally set up the Constitution so that Representatives to Congress were elected by popular vote, but Senators were elected by their respective state legislatures.Brian Pfleuger said:
I have never understood why "we" (our forbears) thought it was a good idea to change that so that Senators are also elected by popular vote.
IMHO, it was changed to remove the states' input in the federal system. Repealing the 17th amendment gave more power to the federal government thus bypassing the "several states" and the power they had completely. Also IMHO, that's when we started down the slippery slope we find ourselves on now. A central federal government running a show the people and the states we supposed to run.
It's impossible for me to use the term "gun control" in the context of laws.
There is no such thing. The hand that is on the gun, on the trigger controls the gun.
And if that guy just got out of prison, or is a serious drug user, or dealer, etc., no rational person can believe a law will affect his behavior.
So what they are up to is not "gun control" but "legal citizen control".
Anyway, it's some minor good news from Colorado.
dc
There is no such thing. The hand that is on the gun, on the trigger controls the gun.
And if that guy just got out of prison, or is a serious drug user, or dealer, etc., no rational person can believe a law will affect his behavior.
So what they are up to is not "gun control" but "legal citizen control".
Anyway, it's some minor good news from Colorado.
dc
scrubcedar
New member
These are my folks (Pueblo Colorado). I am a proud graduate/survivor of Pueblo East High School.
This is where my family has been since before Colorado was a state. They are at their core moderate, even conservative people who have a strong dislike for over the top political behavior of ANY type .
We didn't need MLK's "I have a dream" speech, we had the steel mill closing to teach us tolerance of each other. We learned to hang together so we didn't hang separately out of need when 60% of the wealth in the community disappeared overnight in the late 70's early 80's.
Just because Pueblo people tend to vote for people with a D next to their name don't be fooled, these are NOT anti-gun people. They may be one of the better examples for the don't get hung up on Republican vs Democrat argument.
When you are elected in Pueblo you are elected to be a moderating common sense influence at the capitol. If you act contrary to that mandate it tends to make your constituency pretty unhappy with you. As Angela Giron has now found out the hard way.
I'm rather proud of my home town, and I'm feeling a little homesick right now.
If you'll excuse me, I have a strong desire to log on to Career Builder and see if there are any openings in my field down there as we speak.
This is where my family has been since before Colorado was a state. They are at their core moderate, even conservative people who have a strong dislike for over the top political behavior of ANY type .
We didn't need MLK's "I have a dream" speech, we had the steel mill closing to teach us tolerance of each other. We learned to hang together so we didn't hang separately out of need when 60% of the wealth in the community disappeared overnight in the late 70's early 80's.
Just because Pueblo people tend to vote for people with a D next to their name don't be fooled, these are NOT anti-gun people. They may be one of the better examples for the don't get hung up on Republican vs Democrat argument.
When you are elected in Pueblo you are elected to be a moderating common sense influence at the capitol. If you act contrary to that mandate it tends to make your constituency pretty unhappy with you. As Angela Giron has now found out the hard way.
I'm rather proud of my home town, and I'm feeling a little homesick right now.
If you'll excuse me, I have a strong desire to log on to Career Builder and see if there are any openings in my field down there as we speak.
Brian Pfleuger wrote, also quoting my response:
Staff
Originally Posted by alan View Post
Brian:
It's been a very long time since I lived in New York (NYC actually). That having been said, correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think New York State has provision for the recall of elected officials. The same would apply to New Jersey, mentioned by another poster.
No, we don't have any recall provision but we can vote the snakes out of office.
It's sort of self-fulfilling though. They were already known as anti-gun before they were elected and we either didn't care or the vote from the city overwhelms our vote anyway. When the next vote comes around we might suddenly decide to care but it won't matter because we'll be overwhelmed by the city vote anyway.
The people in the city (the vast majority of them, there are friends there but not many) most certainly not only don't care about gun rights but are openly hostile.
From a state-wide voting perspective, rural and suburban upstate is irrelevant.
Brian Pfleuger is offline
Brian:
The "city" vote, respecting state-wide elections, for instance governor, might be over be overwhelming, but members of the state house, aka state assembly run from much smaller districts, correct me if I'm wrong. As to people from rural areas, known to be anti-gun who were elected anyhow, possibly people who should have been paying attention weren't, a fault that brings pain to many others. Maybe next time, as you noted, things might be different..
Staff
Originally Posted by alan View Post
Brian:
It's been a very long time since I lived in New York (NYC actually). That having been said, correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think New York State has provision for the recall of elected officials. The same would apply to New Jersey, mentioned by another poster.
No, we don't have any recall provision but we can vote the snakes out of office.
It's sort of self-fulfilling though. They were already known as anti-gun before they were elected and we either didn't care or the vote from the city overwhelms our vote anyway. When the next vote comes around we might suddenly decide to care but it won't matter because we'll be overwhelmed by the city vote anyway.
The people in the city (the vast majority of them, there are friends there but not many) most certainly not only don't care about gun rights but are openly hostile.
From a state-wide voting perspective, rural and suburban upstate is irrelevant.
Brian Pfleuger is offline
Brian:
The "city" vote, respecting state-wide elections, for instance governor, might be over be overwhelming, but members of the state house, aka state assembly run from much smaller districts, correct me if I'm wrong. As to people from rural areas, known to be anti-gun who were elected anyhow, possibly people who should have been paying attention weren't, a fault that brings pain to many others. Maybe next time, as you noted, things might be different..
Last edited:
Governor Hickenloper tried to play down the importance of the vote today, claiming "outside money coming in is generally not welcome." Does he mean the ~$350,000 from the NRA to support the recalls or the ~$350,00 coming from Michael Bloomberg to oppose them? I guess the $2 million in other contributions to Morse and Giron doesn't count as "outside money" either.
In the weeks immediately following the Newtown shooting, politicians felt unprecedented pressure to get on the Guilt and Shame Bandwagon. They were assured that Bloomberg's money would keep them safe. They were coerced into believing that a vote for gun safety was the only safe vote.
That is emphatically no longer the case, and here's hoping they're smart enough to see that.
In the weeks immediately following the Newtown shooting, politicians felt unprecedented pressure to get on the Guilt and Shame Bandwagon. They were assured that Bloomberg's money would keep them safe. They were coerced into believing that a vote for gun safety was the only safe vote.
That is emphatically no longer the case, and here's hoping they're smart enough to see that.
Arguments from the antis on this topic show denial or delusion in many cases.
This Op-Ed appeared on CNN yesterday (and I am shocked! Shocked! to see a hyperbolic and dishonest anti-gun Op-Ed on CNN!): http://www.cnn.com/2013/09/13/opinion/donohue-gun-control/index.html?hpt=op_t1
The truly appalling thing is that Donohue is a professor at Stanford Law (according to the bio blurb that accompanies the article).
This Op-Ed appeared on CNN yesterday (and I am shocked! Shocked! to see a hyperbolic and dishonest anti-gun Op-Ed on CNN!): http://www.cnn.com/2013/09/13/opinion/donohue-gun-control/index.html?hpt=op_t1
The truly appalling thing is that Donohue is a professor at Stanford Law (according to the bio blurb that accompanies the article).
Glenn E. Meyer
New member
Fairly neutral analysis of the current situation:
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/16/u...-as-both-sides-dig-in-for-battle.html?hp&_r=0
Research suggests that the best predictor of gun attitudes is geographic. East Coast (NY, MA, CT, RI), CA and urban vs. not urban. It is stronger than other political variables.
We shall see how this all plays out. It may be that folks will make rational decisions and extreme polemics of either side won't work. I am amused by Bloomberg being seen as a flop - as I mocked him to the TX House.
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/16/u...-as-both-sides-dig-in-for-battle.html?hp&_r=0
Research suggests that the best predictor of gun attitudes is geographic. East Coast (NY, MA, CT, RI), CA and urban vs. not urban. It is stronger than other political variables.
We shall see how this all plays out. It may be that folks will make rational decisions and extreme polemics of either side won't work. I am amused by Bloomberg being seen as a flop - as I mocked him to the TX House.
2ndsojourn
New member
From the CNN article:
"First, it undermines our democracy when voters act based on false and misleading views..."
You gotta laugh at the irony in that statement.
"First, it undermines our democracy when voters act based on false and misleading views..."
You gotta laugh at the irony in that statement.
Not really. The Joyce Foundation has been pumping money into Stanford's law school to fund gun-control "studies" for two decades. Donohue is one of their biggest allies. He has a particular grudge with John Lott and his work.
That he's coming out of the woodwork now doesn't surprise me. That he's using such intemperate and inflammatory language does. The guy's usually smarter than that.
MLeake wrote:
Arguments from the antis on this topic show denial or delusion in many cases.
This Op-Ed appeared on CNN yesterday (and I am shocked! Shocked! to see a hyperbolic and dishonest anti-gun Op-Ed on CNN!): http://www.cnn.com/2013/09/13/opinion/donohue-gun-control/index.html?hpt=op_t1
The truly appalling thing is that Donohue is a professor at Stanford Law (according to the bio blurb that accompanies the article).
I'm given to wonder, tongue in cheek, MLeake's tongue might be so situated also, as to the following respecting the above comments:
1. It it really "shocking" to find anti gun drivel on television, particularly on CNN?
2. Is it really "shocking" to find anti gun diatribes authored by an acacdemic, who might well have spent to many years in cloistered Ivory Towers, to few years out in the wind, the rain the snow of the real world.
3. Clicking on the link brings forth Page Not Found.
Arguments from the antis on this topic show denial or delusion in many cases.
This Op-Ed appeared on CNN yesterday (and I am shocked! Shocked! to see a hyperbolic and dishonest anti-gun Op-Ed on CNN!): http://www.cnn.com/2013/09/13/opinion/donohue-gun-control/index.html?hpt=op_t1
The truly appalling thing is that Donohue is a professor at Stanford Law (according to the bio blurb that accompanies the article).
I'm given to wonder, tongue in cheek, MLeake's tongue might be so situated also, as to the following respecting the above comments:
1. It it really "shocking" to find anti gun drivel on television, particularly on CNN?
2. Is it really "shocking" to find anti gun diatribes authored by an acacdemic, who might well have spent to many years in cloistered Ivory Towers, to few years out in the wind, the rain the snow of the real world.
3. Clicking on the link brings forth Page Not Found.