Dems stage sit-in on House floor to push for gun vote

a reply to: neo96

If you believe in the constitution and the 2nd amendment, why wont you openly state that Muslims have the same rights?

For quite some time you have avoided that question every time I bring it up because you believe rights only apply to those that you agree with politically.

I wonder if anyone sitting on the floor needed help getting back up?

a reply to: introvert

If you believe in the constitution and the 2nd amendment, why wont you openly state that Muslims have the same rights?

They why do you support NO FLY, NO BUY ?

Lists that MUSLIMS where primarily put on.

a reply to: neo96

Nope. Most of them there until Friday. Once you leave the room, it's hard to get back in. Stop being an ass. We are a democracy. We vote on things. Of course they won't pass anything, but they are standing up for what they believe in, and what many Americans also believe in.

Including me.

a reply to: angeldoll

We are a democracy. We vote on things.

We had a VOTE on it Monday.

And the 'asses' lost.

How bout they stop being them.

a reply to: neo96

Are they going to pass laws all by their lonesomes?

a reply to: neo96

Yes I do I actually studied this stuff not just on Alex Jones website.


Any article in the bill of rights can be changed using the amendment process. Look it up.

The bill of rights itself doesn't get changed the new amendment will however supercede the old one it addresses.

Just like alcohol and prohibition with 18-21

originally posted by: neo96
a reply to: introvert

If you believe in the constitution and the 2nd amendment, why wont you openly state that Muslims have the same rights?

They why do you support NO FLY, NO BUY ?

Lists that MUSLIMS where primarily put on.

I did not say that I support that. Don't try to deflect.

If you support the constitution and the 2nd amendment, do you support Muslims having the same right to bear arms?

a reply to: burdman30ott6

I have no problem listening to people that know what they're talking about.

originally posted by: Kali74
a reply to: neo96

Are they going to pass laws all by their lonesomes?

White House Threatens to Veto Bill to Shut Down Operation Choke Point

President Barack Obama would likely veto a bill shutting down the controversial Operation Choke Point and similar tactics used by federal regulators to financially target disfavored industries such as gun stores and payday lenders.

They have proven themselves time, and time AGAIN to not give a crap about the rule of LAW.

a reply to: neo96

Neo that's again real dumb logic.
Apply that to the Jim Crow laws.

Maybe they should have given up too?

Now these are not the same situation but the same logic apllies. They can do what ever they want and any act to stop protesting should be strongly discouraged.

For the same exact reason there is a 2nd

a reply to: introvert

Right such a 'deflection'.

Remind me AGAIN who is pushing NO fly lists, and terrorist watch lists,and pushing 'no fly,no buy' ?

a reply to: neo96

Donald Trump?

originally posted by: neo96
a reply to: introvert

Right such a 'deflection'.

Remind me AGAIN who is pushing NO fly lists, and terrorist watch lists,and pushing 'no fly,no buy' ?

Answer the question Neo.

If you support the 2nd, do you support Muslims having the right to bear arms?

a reply to: burdman30ott6

Let me correct you a little bit. Under the Articles of Confederation all Federal actions required a unanimous vote of the member states. The Bill of Rights was a concession to win over four states to vote to end The Articles and ratify The Constitution.

The Constitution itself (without the Bill of Rights) was give and take bartering in order for the Federal Government to have the power of taxation over the States. Under the Articles, contribution by the States to the Feds was voluntary at best description.

And while any part of the Constitution can be altered by the amendment process. The original agreement holds the first ten as being rather protected but not immune. I, however, would urge extreme caution to anyone seriously making a play for them. The understood unwritten portion of the Second, pretty much states that the People can remove by force of arms anything they perceive as a threat to freedom without a vote, judgement or quorum stating they can do so. Hence the term militia is used.

originally posted by: luthier
a reply to: neo96

Donald Trump?

Feinstein,Obama and other DEMOCRATS.

Nice try though.

Trump actually has to get elected.

a reply to: Kali74

On that we completely agree.

a reply to: introvert

1. I am not a dog.

2. There is no IF I support the second.

That's a fact.

Any person.

Black,white,man or woman, rich or poor.

So how about stop TROLLING.

a reply to: neo96

How about Muslims? You have never been able to directly answer that simple question.

In fact, you avoid it like the plague.

originally posted by: Arizonaguy

originally posted by: pirhanna

originally posted by: Arizonaguy
So they get paid for protesting? They must work for George Soros then.

This is theater. This is virtue signaling. Virtue signaling occurs in the absence of real virtue to change the basis of an argument from reason to morality, thus triggering emotional reaponses which are much more easily manipulated.

The fact still remains that they are on the job. Their job doesn't entail sit-ins and protesting. Get back to work and make fools of yourselves on your own time.

I would rather pay them for this. They say they will sit there until something gets done. About time. Nothing was getting done in the business as usual way. Tired that our taxes go to pay these people for stalemates and watered down bills. Doing the same thing over and over and making no progress is the definition of insanity.

I hope they don't back down.