B-Man Posted June 22, 2016 Share Posted June 22, 2016 (edited) RECREATE ’68! Breaking: Dumb hippy congress-members stage lame ‘SIT-IN’ to take away your gun rights. You remember John Lewis (D-GA), he the one who lied about hearing n-word shouted by Tea Party protestors on the day that Obamacare was rammed through. He was thoroughly busted by the late Andrew Breitbart and his $100,000 challenge. This is one of the funniest things I've ever seen in government. Democrats are literally acting like toddlers Edited June 22, 2016 by B-Man Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted June 22, 2016 Share Posted June 22, 2016 RECREATE ’68! Breaking: Dumb hippy congress-members stage lame ‘SIT-IN’ to take away your gun rights. You remember John Lewis (D-GA), he the one who lied about hearing n-word shouted by Tea Party protestors on the day that Obamacare was rammed through. He was thoroughly busted by the late Andrew Breitbart and his $100,000 challenge. These nuts are getting mercilessly mocked on Twitter right now. User Actions Following Ben ShapiroVerified account@benshapiro OMG NO WE HAVE TO GIVE UP OUR RIGHT TO DUE PROCESS YOU GUYS OR DEMOCRATS WILL SIT THERE!!!1!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted June 22, 2016 Share Posted June 22, 2016 More ridicule.................. I'm looking forward to the "DEMOCRATS SHUT DOWN THE GOVERNMENT" headlines..............yeah right. They should at least play Twister. "WHAT DO WE WANT!?" "CENTRUM SILVER!" "WHEN DO WE WANT IT!?" "WHAT WAS THE QUESTION?" Ben Shapiro @benshapiro 2h2 hours ago "I will not stand until you allow me to take your guns without due process." That's a weird argument. U.S. congressman, or Game of Thrones dialog writer? You make the call Joel GehrkeVerified account @Joelmentum 3h3 hours ago Rep. Jerry Nadler, D-N.Y.: "This House is drenched in blood, and we must cleanse it" Todays TrumpSpeech: "Hillary's taken $25m from Saudis who execute gays" Democrats: "Quick, we need news!" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted June 23, 2016 Share Posted June 23, 2016 Justin Amash ✔@justinamash Democrats are staging a sit-in on the House floor. They refuse to leave until our Constitution replaces due process with secret lists. 2:06 PM - 22 Jun 2016 Fauxahontas showed up for publicity support Liz Warren in her drum circle. . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted June 23, 2016 Share Posted June 23, 2016 DOESN’T FIT THE NARRATIVE, AND FOR THE DNC-MSM, THE NARRATIVE IS ALL: America Is Awash In Guns, And Crime Is At Record Lows. Charles C. W. Cooke ✔ @charlescwcooke I’m honestly not being coy: What is “epic” about sitting on the floor of a room that you are legally entitled to be in? 7:45 AM - 23 Jun 2016 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
unbillievable Posted June 23, 2016 Share Posted June 23, 2016 They get to sit on the floor and eat catered food. I wish I could do that at my job. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted June 23, 2016 Share Posted June 23, 2016 CNN has just reported on air that senior Democrat aides tell them House dems are preparing to end the gun control sit-in: Ram RamgopalVerified account @RamCNN 31m31 minutes ago Democrats will end their sit-in protest over gun control vote, senior leadership aide tells @mkraju @deirdrewalshcnn. Headed to floor now As Brandon Morse reveals, this whole thing wasn't necessary in the first place in order for them to get the debate and vote that they wanted. They merely chose to do this for, as the MSM likes to say, "optics." So it seems that enough optics have been garnered and enough fundraising emails sent and enough election year credentials burnished, so they can put away their blankies and pillows and go home. This story is developing, so no word on when or how it will end exactly, but rest assured there will be a bum's rush of posturing and sound bite jockeying before all is said and done. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deranged Rhino Posted June 23, 2016 Share Posted June 23, 2016 They get to sit on the floor and eat catered food. I wish I could do that at my job. Well, to be fair, you probably could do that at your job. How long it'd remain your job I couldn't tell you, but you could... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted June 23, 2016 Share Posted June 23, 2016 USA TODAY: Democrats launch a toddler-ocracy: Moral outrage is fine, but Democrats are being childish. I agree with Sarah Hoyt that Paul Ryan should have sent down juice boxes and stuffed animals. But do remember: The point wasn’t to pass a bill. The point was to distract people from the reality that Obama’s FBI let a Muslim registered Democrat kill 49 people, and then let his accomplice-wife escape. And the press played along, as per usual. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted June 23, 2016 Share Posted June 23, 2016 ... and then let his accomplice-wife escape. I don't see a lot of people discussing this. You would think the question of motive could be easily addressed by talking to the wife, but they lost her. Lynch said she has no idea where the wife is. The incompetence is simply embarrassing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted June 24, 2016 Share Posted June 24, 2016 26 of the Democrats Who Participated in the Gun Control Sit-In Own Guns Congressional Democrats ended their 25-hour sit-in on the House floor this afternoon, failing to force a vote on two pieces of gun legislation. The controversial sit-in included 26 Democratic lawmakers who themselves own guns, Heat Streetlearned after examining 2013 USA Today data on congressional firearms ownership. The participants also included 12 more Democrats in Congress who either didn’t respond to USA Today’s gun survey or declined to say whether or not they possessed a firearm. The sit-in, launched by civil-rights leader Rep. John Lewis, centered on two pieces of proposed gun legislation. One would expand background checks to cover all commercial gun sales; the other seeks tougher prohibitions against gun purchases for terror suspects. The participation of Democratic gun owners can be viewed as the pursuit of reasonable compromise by left-wing firearm fans—or, potentially, as hypocrisy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted June 24, 2016 Share Posted June 24, 2016 The one question reporters failed to ask any of the Democrats about their sit-in protest by Larry O'Conner The media orgy over the Democrats’ temper tantrum in the House of Representatives has been well documented over the past 24 hours. But with all the fawning tributes and comparisons to civil rights era protests on the 1960s, one fundamental, logical question seems to have escaped the minds of the hive-mentality media gaggle covering the Pelosi-run publicity stunt. Let’s first point out the so-called “common sense gun safety legislation” these Democrats claim was the impetus behind their fund-raising escapade disguised as a protest. The crux of their agenda had to do with legislation designed to prevent individuals on the terrorist watch list from buying weapons. This would deny the right to bear arms to up to a million people because someone in a government office in Washington put their name on a list. A fundamental, constitutionally protected right would be denied without due process. It’s pretty serious stuff, right? So, how did the media address the protesters? CBS News found time to glorify Rep. John Lewis (D-GA) even though, as Newsbusters points out, they somehow didn’t challenge him on the fact that he, himself, was erroneously placed on the terror watch list. Joe Concha at Mediaite points out the double standard the media applied when covering this protest in the House versus a very similar protest staged by the GOP under very similar conditions when Nancy Pelosi and the Democrats ran the House. Earlier today I pointed out how in all the fawning post-protest interviews, Democrats were allowed to say out of one side of their mouths that their protest was a huge success because it raised awareness to their cause and at the very same time, out of the other side of their mouths, they accused Paul Ryan of insulting them for calling the effort to raise awareness a “publicity stunt.” Yes, when it comes to embarrassing lapdog media tactics, the Democrats’ sit-in protest offered way too many examples of how the mainstream media just can’t think in critically when it comes to challenging their favorite politicians when they’re spear-heading one of their favorite issues like so-called “gun control.” But, there is one obvious and logical question that if posed, would put the Democrats on their heels in this debate. And I haven’t heard anyone pose it yet “Mr. Democrat Congressman, can you please tell me which other constitutional rights the government can suspend without the benefit of a day in court?” I’ll even provide a follow-up: "Could you give me the name of the person who was killed by someone who purchased a firearm while they were on the terrorist watch list?” These questions can only be asked by a person who is critical of the proposed legislation and the lack of deep thinking behind it. They can only be asked by someone who actually values our freedom and liberties, even when protecting them might mean bad people can do bad things to innocent people. These questions can only be asked by someone who does not wholeheartedly agree with the anti-2nd amendment agenda of the Democrats staging the sit-in in the first place. In other words, these questions will not be asked by anyone in the mainstream media. http://hotair.com/archives/2016/06/24/the-one-question-reporters-failed-to-ask-any-of-the-democrats-about-their-sit-in-protest/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ALF Posted June 24, 2016 Share Posted June 24, 2016 The voters will decide in Nov how they vote , Democrat more gun regulation or Republican Congress stay the same. Just like voters in Britain made their voice heard on EU. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
/dev/null Posted June 24, 2016 Share Posted June 24, 2016 The voters will decide in Nov how they vote , Democrat more gun regulation or Republican Congress stay the same. Just like voters in Britain made their voice heard on EU. And what does a Democratic President, Republican House, and divided Senate tell you? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ALF Posted June 24, 2016 Share Posted June 24, 2016 And what does a Democratic President, Republican House, and divided Senate tell you? It tells me stalemate, very little gets done. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted June 24, 2016 Share Posted June 24, 2016 It tells me stalemate, very little gets done. It tells me everything gets done by royal proclamation for four or eight more years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deranged Rhino Posted June 24, 2016 Share Posted June 24, 2016 It tells me everything gets done by royal proclamation for four or eight more years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted June 25, 2016 Share Posted June 25, 2016 Every time I see that poster I think "Kim Jong Makes-Me-Ill." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Juror#8 Posted June 25, 2016 Share Posted June 25, 2016 (edited) More guns, not less guns. This country needs more guns in the hands of law abiding, responsible, citizens. Guns should be responsibly kept and maintained in schools by certified administrators, in hospitals, and more freely able to be carried concealed in more public commercial places. Also the federal government needs to standardize interstate travel requirements with respect to handguns so one doesn't have to stop at every state border to figure out how their gun is permissibly able to be transported within the cabin of their car. Also, I firmly believe that "may issue" states should carry the burden to provide articulable reasons why they are not issuing a ccp. And I think that individuals who have had a ccp for 10 years with no issue and no change to their carry status (e.g., no violent issues or offenses, arrests, etc), should not be required to continue to apply for recertification of their permit. And there should be more "unrestricted" states so long as an initial finding of competency to carry is established. More guns. More guns. More guns. Edited June 25, 2016 by Juror#8 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azalin Posted June 25, 2016 Share Posted June 25, 2016 More guns, not less guns. This country needs more guns in the hands of law abiding, responsible, citizens. Guns should be responsibly kept and maintained in schools by certified administrators, in hospitals, and more freely able to be carried concealed in more public commercial places. Also the federal government needs to standardize interstate travel requirements with respect to handguns so one doesn't have to stop at every state border to figure out how their gun is permissibly able to be transported within the cabin of their car. Also, I firmly believe that "may issue" states should carry the burden to provide articulable reasons why they are not issuing a ccp. And I think that individuals who have had a ccp for 10 years with no issue and no change to their carry status (e.g., no violent issues or offenses, arrests, etc), should not be required to continue to apply for recertification of their permit. And there should be more "unrestricted" states so long as an initial finding of competency to carry is established. More guns. More guns. More guns. My thoughts exactly, but better worded than if I had said it. Cheers! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts