TexasCHLforum.com

hirundo82 wrote:

katiethompson wrote:Found the list of nays to suspend the rules: Davis, Ellis, Gallegos, Hinojosa, Lucio, Rodriguez, Uresti, Van de Putte, Watson, West, Zaffirini. Carona absent. No big surprises there...

I see that Ogden finally switched his vote to "Aye" now that it no longer matters. I imagine he's been getting a significant amount of heat from his district about his nay votes earlier on.

Now he'll technically be able to say he voted to suspend the rule; deceiving people all the way.

Chas.

Charles L. Cotton wrote:

hirundo82 wrote:

katiethompson wrote:Found the list of nays to suspend the rules: Davis, Ellis, Gallegos, Hinojosa, Lucio, Rodriguez, Uresti, Van de Putte, Watson, West, Zaffirini. Carona absent. No big surprises there...

I see that Ogden finally switched his vote to "Aye" now that it no longer matters. I imagine he's been getting a significant amount of heat from his district about his nay votes earlier on.

Now he'll technically be able to say he voted to suspend the rule; deceiving people all the way.

Chas.

Politics 101 .


Sad, but true.

I'm in Sen Ogden district. I'll be sure to ask about why he felt the need to vote nay then aye when it no longer mattered.

Ivan244 wrote:I'm in Sen Ogden district. I'll be sure to ask about why he felt the need to vote nay then aye when it no longer mattered.

Emulating OBAMA..

Ivan244 wrote:I'm in Sen Ogden district. I'll be sure to ask about why he felt the need to vote nay then aye when it no longer mattered.

Just in case you didn't realize, the esteemed Senator's district includes Texas A&M at College Station...I'd guess he had a few phone calls and meetings (that included talk of contributions and campaign support) with certain "academic" types who opposed the bill...remember, some of those "academic" folks may be all kinds of book smart...they may have a knowledge level that far surpasses you or I, but they lack common sense when it comes to citizens being able to defend themselves...anyway, that's my take on the subject; anyone who cares to disagree is free to, of course.

A Nay vote on campus safety at any point in 2011 should equate to a Nay vote on them in every election in 2012.

If you live in the College Station area (and aren't a criminal ) then don't let Ogden get away with it. The voters have a right to know that he voted repeatedly to deny faculty, staff and students the most effective tool to protect themselves from criminals. We also need to remember that EMOTION beat logic to kill campus safety, so we shouldn't be shy about using emotion to fight the Senators who chose the criminals' side.

Being reasonable in 2011 didn't change their minds. Perhaps being unreasonable in 2012 will change their careers before they help criminals hurt more students.

Rest assured Davis will not be getting my vote.

Right2Carry wrote:Rest assured Davis will not be getting my vote.

Nor Watson mine...assuming he survives the redistricting.

Heartland Patriot wrote:Just in case you didn't realize, the esteemed Senator's district includes Texas A&M at College Station...I'd guess he had a few phone calls and meetings (that included talk of contributions and campaign support) with certain "academic" types who opposed the bill...remember, some of those "academic" folks may be all kinds of book smart...they may have a knowledge level that far surpasses you or I, but they lack common sense when it comes to citizens being able to defend themselves...anyway, that's my take on the subject; anyone who cares to disagree is free to, of course.

Just so long as you continue to realize that not all "academic types" fall in this same category. I'm a professor at a state university, and I've writen my representatives and senators several times in support of campus carry, all of whom happen to be on the side of the 2nd amendment rights. Of course, I did have a career in the "real world" prior to joining the faculty, so maybe that does make a difference.

Odgen has to go. I hope they TCR follows through in 2012.
http://www.texastribune.org/texas-educa ... get-ogden/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Good! I emailed Sen Ogden and I got canned response about not being able to respond please write me yada yada.

Looks like both Straus and Ogden need to be reined in. In Ogden's case if re-elected busted in the ranks to the most jr position. And no Cal committee:)

If anyone happens to be watching the Senate right now, I just turned it on trying to track down a bill I was interested in. I was tracking HB 242 which changes the definition of retired peace officers specifically to allow them to carry guns.

It was originally passed on the local and uncontested calendar, then pulled down and debated on the floor. I don't know what the first two amendments to it do, but Amendment 3 was by Zaffirini to add her bill against texting while driving. This was ruled germane to the bill on peace officers carrying guns, even when questioned.

If this is true, we should get SB 354 added real quick also. If texting is germane, certainly adding more people carrying is also germane. Unfortunately, there is probably no way to get to Hegar and Wentworth to suggest it. This is the last two hours before the bill will die if not passed. I bet it is passed tonight no matter what amendments are offered and accepted.

srothstein wrote:If anyone happens to be watching the Senate right now, I just turned it on trying to track down a bill I was interested in. I was tracking HB 242 which changes the definition of retired peace officers specifically to allow them to carry guns.

It was originally passed on the local and uncontested calendar, then pulled down and debated on the floor. I don't know what the first two amendments to it do, but Amendment 3 was by Zaffirini to add her bill against texting while driving. This was ruled germane to the bill on peace officers carrying guns, even when questioned.

If this is true, we should get SB 354 added real quick also. If texting is germane, certainly adding more people carrying is also germane. Unfortunately, there is probably no way to get to Hegar and Wentworth to suggest it. This is the last two hours before the bill will die if not passed. I bet it is passed tonight no matter what amendments are offered and accepted.

Ah, double standards... Good catch. I have a feeling it's a moot point at this stage in the game, though.

Yep, moot point on the double standard except that I will email Zaffarini about it. Just to rub her nose in things and point out her hypocrisy.

And moot point on amending it. Bill was just passed and will be sent to conference committee. Now I have to find out how to find out what the amendments were.

srothstein wrote:If anyone happens to be watching the Senate right now, I just turned it on trying to track down a bill I was interested in. I was tracking HB 242 which changes the definition of retired peace officers specifically to allow them to carry guns.

It was originally passed on the local and uncontested calendar, then pulled down and debated on the floor. I don't know what the first two amendments to it do, but Amendment 3 was by Zaffirini to add her bill against texting while driving. This was ruled germane to the bill on peace officers carrying guns, even when questioned.

If this is true, we should get SB 354 added real quick also. If texting is germane, certainly adding more people carrying is also germane. Unfortunately, there is probably no way to get to Hegar and Wentworth to suggest it. This is the last two hours before the bill will die if not passed. I bet it is passed tonight no matter what amendments are offered and accepted.

Absolutely infuriating.

Civil correspondence from me to many members of the legislature are on their way. Sometimes I can't tell if I'm watching my government at work, or a circus.