Quote of the Day: Congressional Calculus Edition

“…The centerpiece of the gun legislation on the Senate floor is a background check bill, not an attempt to ban assault weapons or regulate high-capacity magazines. That means GOP election-season ads painting Democrats as gun snatchers will be tougher to craft. And Democrats believe Republicans will have a hard time explaining why they voted against legislation that secures more money for school safety and closes the so-called gun show loophole.” – Lauren Fox, Guns May Give Democrats a Shot at 2014 [via usnews.com]

comments

  1. avatar Dirk Diggler says:

    She’s cute, but none too bright. . . . .

    1. avatar Totenglocke says:

      Well, simple fact of life is that good looks and high intelligence rarely go together.

      1. avatar Bruce says:

        Sorry Totenglocke, good looks and high intelligence usually go together.

    2. avatar Rambeast says:

      I’ve seen kinder smiles on a shark…

      1. avatar Joke & Dagger says:

        Way too much Maxillary gingiva. But I wouldn’t kick her out of bed…

        1. avatar William Burke says:

          I believe the term for her “smile” is “rictus”.

  2. avatar Troy says:

    Ladies and Gentleman, a special kind of stupid! Wow, there really grasping for straws aren’t they?!

  3. avatar beanfield says:

    There’s plenty of video footage of Democrats on the morning show circuit endorsing DiFi’s AWB and other similar legislation. Not to mention frequent speeches from Obama originally saying he wasn’t going to take your guns and then later reversing course. Whether their widely televised positions make it through the Senate is somewhat irrelevant at this point. They’ve made their beds.

  4. avatar Simon says:

    You can find a woman who’s: young, attractive, intelligent (pick two)

    1. avatar Dirk Diggler says:

      you must not watch Fox much? I say you can get all 3

      1. avatar Totenglocke says:

        As a former Republican (Libertarian now) who used to watch Fox news and now cannot stand it, I’m going to have to call into question your definition of “intelligent”.

        1. avatar Joke & Dagger says:

          The ladies on Fox are very intelligent. Intelligent enough to cash in on their good looks via toeing the Fox line daily.

        2. avatar The Blue Angel says:

          Moron, you obviously never watched Meygan Kelley tear a Leftard to shreds.

        3. avatar parthenon says:

          Arguing with fools does not require intelligence.

      2. avatar Simon says:

        No, I don’t. Don’t even have a television and haven’t for about 5 years now. You’d be surprised how much crap you can filter without one. The internet can give you a far better idea as to what’s going on in the world.

    2. avatar Data McBits says:

      I’m pretty sure the saying goes:
      Pretty, sane, available — pick two.

      Makes a little more sense that way. 😉

      1. avatar 16V says:

        I’ve always found the matrix to be ‘attractive, intelligent, sane’.

        But that’s just me.

  5. avatar tdiinva says:

    Gun control never helps Democrats because only voters inclined to support it will vote Democratic anyway. There maybe a few gun control favoring Republicans but they are far out numbered by Democratic voters who will crossover in an off year election to support a Second Amendment protecting candidate.

    1. avatar Alex Peters says:

      Gun control creates single issue voters who vote overwhelmingly Republican. Those who support gun control still vote based on a variety of issues. As much as Dems wish the ’14 elections were tomorrow, they’re still a long way off. Obama and his crew won’t be able to carry the gun control issue through the ’14 elections. The more important issues will eventually come to the forefront. You know, those issues that Obama doesn’t want to talk about like the economy, lack of job growth, skyrocketing debt, failed foreign policy, etc. These are all long-term issues that won’t be resolved before the next election. Further, ’14 is a mid-term election. Pro-2A people will show up in droves, while the less motivated, low-information voter won’t turnout in the same numbers as the ’08 or ’12 presidential election. Typically, 40% of eligible voters turnout for mid-term elections. Compare that with 57%+ turning out in both the ’08 and ’12 presidential elections. A couple of per cent swing can change an election, so it all comes down to who shows up to pull the lever.

      That being said, I see no scenario where gun control helps the Dems in the ’14 election.

  6. avatar Pulatso says:

    Yes Progressives, this is your chance! Take to the media, loudly and proudly, and tell everyone how you feel that guns are bad! In fact, have your surrogates spend money to make sure everyone knows you support Reid’s anti-gun bill! This is your chance!!!!1!eleven!!!

  7. avatar Big C says:

    Actually, I think what she is saying is pretty close to the truth. The centerpiece IS background checks, but the Dems will try to slip in an AWB and Hi-cap mag ban under the table as an amendment. So, on the surface, those rejecting it will look like they are rejecting background checks, even if it is the amendments that really draw their ire.

    Her assertion that, “Democrats believe Republicans will have a hard time explaining why they voted against legislation that secures more money for school safety and closes the so-called gun show loophole.” is certainly true. It is nothing new that pro-gun people always have an uphill battle trying to explain their views to people who refuse to listen.

    1. avatar William Burke says:

      Sorry… must have dozed off. What’s this stuff about “school safety” again?

  8. avatar Stacy says:

    “Democrats believe Republicans will have a hard time explaining why they voted against legislation that secures more money for school safety and closes the so-called gun show loophole.”

    This is where the “stupid party” becomes a real liability. The Dems have figured out the public still doesn’t want gun bans or confiscation, and the above will be the spin for the 2014 campaign. The GOP better be ready to buy a lot of ads quoting Schumer, Feinstein et al saying they really want to ban guns, or the school safety/”gun show loophole” line of BS will work and we might have bigger, badder, Bloomberg-ier gun control in 2015.

  9. avatar SD3 says:

    “…painting Democrats as gun snatchers will be tougher to craft”

    No it won’t. Everyone knows what the truth is. Liberal progressives openly advocate gun confiscation; conservatives abhor the idea. But everyone recognizes the true objective.

    Democrats (and many Republicans) ‘need’ to politically support this background check bill, but nearly all of them are also counting on it failing. Once it does, it’ll be “good riddance to bad rubish”.

    1. avatar Lemming says:

      Surely it’s obvious what the Republicans need only say: “New York, Colorado, Connecticut, Maryland…. Look how close the Dems came in DC to these States…”

      1. avatar Brian says:

        1. I don’t think Colorado is going to move the needle for people who aren’t already pretty pro-2A to begin with.

        2. That is her point. All the states you mentioned banned things, the harm of which is easy to see. A background check may be a bad idea or set up trouble down the line, but there isn’t a direct tangible ban to point to.

    2. avatar k4R-15 says:

      Isn’t it a little naive to assume that the current legislation is the only kick at the cat Gun Grabbers will take between now and 2014 midterms?

      What happens the next time a mass shooting occurs? Or any other tragedy that can be leveraged into an opportunity to continue the 2A debate?

      I don’t expect the Antis to give up based on one bill in Congress.

      1. avatar SD3 says:

        “What happens the next time a mass shooting occurs? Or any other tragedy that can be leveraged into an opportunity to continue the 2A debate?”

        Like Boston? Frankly, I’d say it draws attention away from anti-gun legislation efforts. It reminds people that “guns” are not the issue; evil will find away.

  10. avatar Soccerchainsaw says:

    Pretty smile, vacuous eyes.

    Explain? Easy. The rights of the people should never be compromised.

    1. avatar William Burke says:

      “Pretty smile”??? That there is the grimace of a MONGOOSE.

  11. avatar Buzzlefutt says:

    One thing that is not mentioned is how organized and focused gun-rights voters can be.
    We don’t fall for political tricks as gun-control advocates do. We are better informed, more vigilant, and we vote accordingly.

  12. avatar plizkin says:

    “And Democrats believe Republicans will have a hard time explaining why they voted against legislation that secures more money for school safety and…”,

    Not really, Miss Political Science major, you’re logic is all wrong here. Believe whatever ya want for the press.

    IF, and when, our Senators and Reps vote the way that ‘we the people’ demand that they do… much “explaining” isn’t required.

    Who made who?

  13. avatar Aharon says:

    Lauren Fox is in the wrong profession.

    1. avatar Ralph says:

      Well, it’s almost as old.

      1. avatar 16V says:

        Distinction without difference.

  14. avatar Pascal says:

    Actually, the democrats need a background check bill more than the Republicans. This is where Alan Gottlieb strategy can work. If he can help dictate the language, the democrats will vote for it and make light of their victory without knowing what they have given gun owners. If they do not like the bill and the language, then Republicans can say the democrats voted down background checks when they had a chance.

    1. avatar Brian says:

      Agreed, though for this to work the M-T language would need to be cleaned up a good bit, which is risky.

  15. avatar Brian says:

    Contrary to a lot of the wishful thinking here, there are quite a few congressional districts where a Republican might have a hard time justifying a vote against a background check bill. While voter intensity is obviously key there is a risk that the marginal voter in those districts may hold the vote against the incumbent as a tie breaker.

    The fact of the matter is that the views of TTAG posters do not reflect the majority of potential voters. Need proof? Look at our current gun laws. This isn’t to say elected officials should vote for bad legislation, just that there is a risk to doing the right thing.

  16. avatar DisThunder says:

    It’s gonna be close, but I think there’s a good chance the Senate’s not gonna pass it. New polls came out this week proving what we all know- people don’t really like the gun control package agenda, and more than half disapprove of Obama’s efforts to politicize it.
    While maybe only half of Americans own guns, I think it’s safe to say there’ still a fair majority who don’t like being told what they can and can’t own.

  17. avatar Gov. William J. Le Petomane says:

    “Guns May Give Democrats a Shot at 2014” – You just keep believing that, darling.

    The problem is that she’s ignoring the fact that Democrats passed ridiculously draconian gun restrictions in numerous states and pushed hard for it on the national level. And in the process became Youtube fodder spouting out their ignorance and misogyny. Now they’re desperately trying to push what they consider the least offensive aspect of their assault on gun owners just to get something out of what they thought was a golden opportunity – the Newtown shooting.

    Democrats have become so used to looking straight into the camera and telling the most outrageous lies, I guess because the liberal media won’t call them out. They actually expect us to believe the economy is doing great, BO cut the deficit in half and by 2014 they’ll be claiming it was Republicans trying to take your guns away!

  18. avatar DaveL says:

    The centerpiece of the gun legislation on the Senate floor is a background check bill, not an attempt to ban assault weapons or regulate high-capacity magazines. That means GOP election-season ads painting Democrats as gun snatchers will be tougher to craft.

    Well, yes, in the sense it’s harder to justify sending back a moldy crust of bread than it is a plate of manure. Of course, that’s assuming the moldy bread isn’t being served with a side of merde à la diarrhée.

  19. avatar SGC says:

    Sorry hunny…the cats already out of the bag: The Dems ARE gun grabbers…we figured that out already all on our own. Now get back in the kitchen and make me some pie…

  20. avatar Pat says:

    This is going to HURT the libtards (democrats) in 14′. No effing way it wont.

Write a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

button to share on facebook
button to tweet
button to share via email