Hooray! Oh, is that too harsh? Are you some kind of child who thinks mass shootings aren't going to happen again and again and again, unless our country drastically makes a change? OK, you do you, and the rest of us will look at the results of Senate Republicans' latest shot at pretending to look like they're doing something in the wake of a mass shooting.
I know, we're so silly, using the wrong name totally invalidates the need for gun safety reform. Btw, I have taken to responding to those who spew that out with "that's like saying, because you don't know what e. coli stands for, we shouldn't do anything about Chipotle."
And some of that is thanks to Sen. Sanders, who was bankrolled by them and paid them back with many a pro-NRA vote in his career. Including the horrendous NRA-written legislation that gives blanket immunity even to bad-apple gun dealers.
"whispering bizarre religious rants that justify violence into the ears of mentally disconnected American wing nuts who have easy access to firearms" has certainly worked for Christianist bigots for decades. Islamist bigots have watched and learned.
There's a whole generation of citizens who probably think that 60 votes are necessary to pass legislation in the Senate. This is incorrect. All that's required is a majority-- the GOP has made the threat of what used to be the rare use of a filibuster into a routine procedure. You can no longer name a federal building without a filibuster-proof majority. The historically Do-Nothing Congress. Both sides DO NOT do it.
We really don't need the No Fly/No Buy amendment. The form you fill out when you buy a gun has the question: Are you a member of a terrorist organization with checkboxes for yes or no. The person wishing to buy the gun is required by law to answer every question on the form truthfully, so no guns for terrorists.
"It basically would have let the attorney general refuse to sell guns to somebody they have a “reasonable belief” might do terrorism with them.""Reasonable belief" sounds like the kind of standard George Bush would have used to do whatever the hell he wanted. I realize that emotions are high, but the same kind of high emotions led to considerable abuses of power after 9/11, and look where that got us.
But if we force them to fix it, they have to: 1. Admit the program exists2. Admit they've made mistakes3. Do workThey might do number 1, but 2 will always be out of the question.
They are so craven, they let preschoolers and innocent partygoers stand up to the gunmen they're too cowardly to face.
I know, we're so silly, using the wrong name totally invalidates the need for gun safety reform. Btw, I have taken to responding to those who spew that out with "that's like saying, because you don't know what e. coli stands for, we shouldn't do anything about Chipotle."
And some of that is thanks to Sen. Sanders, who was bankrolled by them and paid them back with many a pro-NRA vote in his career. Including the horrendous NRA-written legislation that gives blanket immunity even to bad-apple gun dealers.
That was the result of Billo's last Colbert appearance. Says a lot dontit?
And no, Colbert is nowhere near assholeish.
"whispering bizarre religious rants that justify violence into the ears of mentally disconnected American wing nuts who have easy access to firearms" has certainly worked for Christianist bigots for decades. Islamist bigots have watched and learned.
There's a whole generation of citizens who probably think that 60 votes are necessary to pass legislation in the Senate. This is incorrect. All that's required is a majority-- the GOP has made the threat of what used to be the rare use of a filibuster into a routine procedure. You can no longer name a federal building without a filibuster-proof majority. The historically Do-Nothing Congress. Both sides DO NOT do it.
Republican = monads without gonads. Utah's undies so tight, IT'S A MIRACLE they can breed! That's mean, but they're the meanest.
Yeah, now that's a load out!
We really don't need the No Fly/No Buy amendment. The form you fill out when you buy a gun has the question: Are you a member of a terrorist organization with checkboxes for yes or no. The person wishing to buy the gun is required by law to answer every question on the form truthfully, so no guns for terrorists.
Worse. She's ambitious.
Not much use for one person, really. But if you had enough of them, you could use them like sandbags to make a barricade.
"It basically would have let the attorney general refuse to sell guns to somebody they have a “reasonable belief” might do terrorism with them.""Reasonable belief" sounds like the kind of standard George Bush would have used to do whatever the hell he wanted. I realize that emotions are high, but the same kind of high emotions led to considerable abuses of power after 9/11, and look where that got us.
Or Werefuckedistan.
Because he likes guns more than he likes saving lives. Fuck him.
It will be useful in the November campaigns - which was the whole point of the exercise.
But if we force them to fix it, they have to: 1. Admit the program exists2. Admit they've made mistakes3. Do workThey might do number 1, but 2 will always be out of the question.