How realistic is it for them to pass another ban?

[Stupid]

Does anybody have any insights? Any political analysis?

[sjfcontrol]

Does anybody have any insights? Any political analysis?

Now that's the $64,000 question, isn't it.

[Oldgringo]

Does anybody have any insights? Any political analysis?

Now that's the $64,000 question, isn't it.

Here it is: Once the current POTUS and his entourage return from their all expenses paid, but brief, 'Winter Festival' vacation in Hawaii and the legislators return from their Christmas holiday break and the current POTUS' coronation is over, great cries will go up across the land for "justice" as seen by the legislators' constituency. Sometime around the middle of February or first of March, the self-serving legislators will count constituent votes, beat their chests and rend their garments both for and against.

After the 'music stops and the smoke clears', the side with the most constituent votes will win.

[Stupid]

Are we basically screwed or do we have a fighting chance?

[Dave2]

Are we basically screwed or do we have a fighting chance?

Depends on what they try.

[Oldgringo]

Are we basically screwed or do we have a fighting chance?

Yes.

[eureka40]

[The Annoyed Man]

Are we basically screwed or do we have a fighting chance?

Yes.

Yes what?

I think we have a fighting chance, but it is going to be a tough fight, and we could lose. On the other hand, IF we lose, I would look for a congressional route in 2014, with a goodly chunk of the quislings who voted for it getting tossed out of office, just like the last time democrats passed this kind of treason. And whatever gets passed CAN get repealed. There just wasn't enough republican political will during Slick Willy's 2nd term to try and repeal the AWB, knowing that he would never sign a repeal and that they couldn't get enough votes to override his veto. And they only had to wait for the bill to sunset in 2004, so waiting for that to happen during Bush's presidency was the easiest way to accomplish it.

I am fairly certain that it will be a cold day in hades before a bill is passed without a sunset clause. The House simply won't approve such a bill. So democrats won't be able to accomplish their dream legislation unless they gain a majority in the House. Now, if republicans don't retain a House majority in 2014, then yes, we are well and truly screwed.

[Dave2]

Now, if republicans don't retain a House majority in 2014, then yes, we are well and truly screwed.

I think that'd fall under the Chinese heading of "interesting times", and not just in the area of gun control.

[Stupid]

I really don't foresee the Republicans have enough political power to wage this one.

[Jumping Frog]

I really don't foresee the Republicans have enough political power to wage this one.

If the House does not stand firm against the barbarians at the gates, then it will be the end of the Republican Party as we know it.

There are too many conservatives already disgusted with the RINO's infecting the party. If there is a mass exodus to any third party alternative, if will mean an interim period when the Dems get handed control.

[jmra]

I believe we will not see a ban in next two years. Why? Because the Dems want control of the house in two years. I believe you will see proposals from the Dems that are so dramatic that they know they can not pass. This keeps gun control in the forefront but also gives Republicans a false sense of security.
Mean while, the Dems are keeping their fingers crossed for another 20 dead kids close to the elections that they can then blame on the Republicans for not passing a bill handing them the house in '14 and sweeping gun control bills in '15.

[57Coastie]

...the Dems are keeping their fingers crossed for another 20 dead kids close to the elections....

This comment would be unbelievable if I saw it anywhere but here or perhaps on Fox News.

How to start off a Christmas morning -- reading this.

Jim

[jmra]

...the Dems are keeping their fingers crossed for another 20 dead kids close to the elections....

This comment would be unbelievable if I saw it anywhere but here or perhaps on Fox News.

Jim

Jim,

I believe this is the way the extreme left thinks. I thought about using the word "praying" instead of "keeping their fingers crossed" but I just couldn't bring myself to do it.
In no way am I suggesting that they would plan such an event, just that they would consider it convenient to their cause.

Jim (also)

[57Coastie]

...the Dems are keeping their fingers crossed for another 20 dead kids close to the elections....

This comment would be unbelievable if I saw it anywhere but here or perhaps on Fox News.

Jim

Jim,

I believe this is the way the extreme left thinks. I thought about using the word "praying" instead of "keeping their fingers crossed" but I just couldn't bring myself to do it.
In no way am I suggesting that they would plan such an event, just that they would consider it convenient to their cause.

Jim (also)

Tks, Jim.

However, you did not say "the extreme left." You said "the Dems."

I see myself, for example, as one of those, but not the other. I can assure you that this particular "Dem" is neither keeping his fingers crossed for more deaths of children, nor would he consider it convenient to any of his causes. One of this Dem's many causes is keeping the 2nd Amendment to our Constitution alive and well, as it is currently construed by the Supreme Court of the US, and in my opinion such an attack as yours harms that cause. Quite arguably kneejerk all-encompassing attacks on Dems like yours, even if written in haste and not intended, is liable to convert them into members of "the extreme left," which I will assume is not your intent.

You have made a respectable start at explaining what you meant, rather than what you said, but in my opinion it is just a start.

Respectfully,

Jim