Colorado Constituents Recalling (2) State Senators for Gun Control Vote

[BigSkyBob]

Anyone want to take bets on how these new Republican Senators fair in 2014? Turnout will be different, so the recall numbers are not guaranteed to be repeated.

And there's a bit of hypocrisy on this board, when Wisconsin Democrats launched recalls, most Republicans here called that unfair. Double standards run amok.

Are you suggesting there is no "hypocrisy on this board" concerning Democrats who denounced the recalls as "unfair" after being silent concerning Wisconsin?

Nor, can I let pass without comment the basic premise of your alleged empirical observation.  There simply is no "hypocrisy" in supporting the Colorado recalls after denouncing the Wisconsin recalls as "unfair." The "unfairness" argument failed to carry the day in three districts in Wisconsin. In the world as we would like it to be after pointing out the problems of promoting political recalls, as opposed to recalling discovered scumbags and crooks, the voters in Wisconsin would have rejected every recall by both parties. In the world in which we do live political recalls are now part of the process. Adjusting to changing realities is not "hypocrisy."

[BigSkyBob]

The NRA must go.

You seem to have a problem with both democracy and the Constitution. In a democracy, folks can vote with whomever they want for whatever reasons they choose, or no reasons at all. In the Constitution are provisions about the rights of the people to petition their elected representatives, and to speak freely and publicly about the political issues of the day.  The NRA is merely the expression of voters whom you don't respect exercising their Constitutional rights in a manner that frustrates your political interests.

[BigSkyBob]

Anyone want to take bets on how these new Republican Senators fair in 2014? Turnout will be different, so the recall numbers are not guaranteed to be repeated.

And there's a bit of hypocrisy on this board, when Wisconsin Democrats launched recalls, most Republicans here called that unfair. Double standards run amok.

Are you suggesting there is no "hypocrisy on this board" concerning Democrats who denounced the recalls as "unfair" after being silent concerning Wisconsin?

Nor, can I let pass without comment the basic premise of your alleged empirical observation.  There simply is no "hypocrisy" in supporting the Colorado recalls after denouncing the Wisconsin recalls as "unfair." The "unfairness" argument failed to carry the day in three districts in Wisconsin. In the world as we would like it to be after pointing out the problems of promoting political recalls, as opposed to recalling discovered scumbags and crooks, the voters in Wisconsin would have rejected every recall by both parties. In the world in which we do live political recalls are now part of the process. Adjusting to changing realities is not "hypocrisy."

I'm a little confused as to why exactly you're claiming it's not hypocritical to have different views of the fairness of these recalls and the ones in Wisconsin.

Apperently, you are. My position is clear enough.

[BigSkyBob]

You seem to have a problem with both democracy and the Constitution.

Nope. Just a problem with partisan rackets like the NRA.

The NRA is simply not "partisan." In a race between an advocate for gun rights and an advocate for gun restrictions the party of the two candidates won't matter.  Nor, is the NRA a "racket," whatever that means.

[BigSkyBob]

I support common sense gun laws but this issue can't be the Dems top priority. Gun control and gay marriage are just not issues where national majorities are made. It's about breaking the GOP's interest groups stranglehold on politics and I would start with their business interests long before taking on the NRA.

Like the Dems don't have their interest groups as well? Funny. The Environmental groups, the Unions, and the NEA.

Since they believe invariably supporting Democrats is "non-partisan," while predominately supporting Republicans is "partisan."

[BigSkyBob]

The NRA must go.

You seem to have a problem with both democracy and the Constitution. In a democracy, folks can vote with whomever they want for whatever reasons they choose, or no reasons at all. In the Constitution are provisions about the rights of the people to petition their elected representatives, and to speak freely and publicly about the political issues of the day.  The NRA is merely the expression of voters whom you don't respect exercising their Constitutional rights in a manner that frustrates your political interests.

Why are you attacking his constitutional right to express his opinion?

Surely, you see the irony implicit in your remarks.  Where in your universe lies my Constitutional right to express my opinion that his attitude is both anti-democratic and shows a lack of proper respect for the Constitution?