Liberals Introduce Plan for Gun Safety - Similar to Safe Sex

[Cow Poke]

Infrequently.

You might try less frequently. It really sounds dumb.

Do you equivocate between proposal/plan/program in real life?

I already explained that.

[Sam]

The amendments were opposed because the base bill was so bad that many people didn't want the possibility of even a 'watered down' version passing. The obvious political strategy in that instance was to force a vote on the bill as is, because it manifestly didn't have the votes to pass without amendment.

What was the base bill and how was it so bad? I don't think the above post makes any sense, given the context of the bill, the amendment, and passage.

[Cow Poke]

The amendments were opposed because the base bill was so bad that many people didn't want the possibility of even a 'watered down' version passing. The obvious political strategy in that instance was to force a vote on the bill as is, because it manifestly didn't have the votes to pass without amendment.

Gee, that sounds a lot like "politics".

[Sam]

Gee, that sounds a lot like "politics".

So what was the base bill OBP mentioned and why was it so toxic that the amendment wouldn't fix it?

[Cow Poke]

So what was the base bill OBP mentioned and why was it so toxic that the amendment wouldn't fix it?

I don't know, and I don't care, Sam. I'll leave that to the political hacks. I just know that's something that happens all too often.

[One Bad Pig]

What was the base bill and how was it so bad?

I figured you'd know all about the bill, given your ability to link to discussions regarding rejected amendments of the same.

I don't think the above post makes any sense, given the context of the bill, the amendment, and passage.

[Darth Xena]

Statists arguing with other statists about the extent of the State.

Love it.

[Sam]

I figured you'd know all about the bill, given your ability to link to discussions regarding rejected amendments of the same.

I know about the bill. From your post, I'm wondering if you do. Thus, the question asked.

[Sam]

I don't know, and I don't care, Sam. I'll leave that to the political hacks. I just know that's something that happens all too often.

You don't even know what the bill was, how the amendment(s) interacted with it, and what was happening in the first place. How can you and say, "Well, that's politics as usual!" if you don't know what happened?

[Cow Poke]

You don't even know what the bill was, how the amendment(s) interacted with it, and what was happening in the first place. How can you and say, "Well, that's politics as usual!" if you don't know what happened?

Because I trust OBP far more than I trust you.

[Sam]

Because I trust OBP far more than I trust you.

Well, at least you're admitting that you're making opinions in complete ignorance. Now we'll just have to wait for OBP to explain his nonsensical post regarding the supposedly toxic "base bill."

[Cow Poke]

Well, at least you're admitting that you're making opinions in complete ignorance.

Why are you being such a bitter old fart, Sam? Trusting OPB is FAR from "making opinions in complete ignorance". Besides, I was commenting on what OBP said, and observed that it "sounded like politics".

Here ya go....

The amendments were opposed because the base bill was so bad that many people didn't want the possibility of even a 'watered down' version passing. The obvious political strategy in that instance was to force a vote on the bill as is, because it manifestly didn't have the votes to pass without amendment.

Gee, that sounds a lot like "politics".

Now we'll just have to wait for OBP to explain his nonsensical post regarding the supposedly toxic "base bill."

It would not surprise me if he didn't want to waste his time on you, but we'll see.

[Sam]

Why are you being such a bitter old fart, Sam? Trusting OPB is FAR from "making opinions in complete ignorance". Besides, I was commenting on what OBP said, and observed that it "sounded like politics".

Here ya go....

You were pretty clearly playing off your response to my post about Republicans blocking gun research in the other thread, where you responded:

Politics. I'm SHOCKED!

And you tied that into OBP's response to my post about Republicans killing the Manchin-Toomley amendment where he claimed that the amendment was voted down because the base bill was so bad.

On the merits, Trusting OBP to be right is most certainly not far from making your opinion in complete ignorance, since you don't have a clue as to the "base bill", the amendments or really anything about that legislative effort. You couldn't even say what OBP is right about, let alone even start to defend the claim.

That's ignorant. And if you want to own that and say that you don't actually need to know anything about this stuff because you assume this or that person is steering you right, that's fine. But own it and understand that your opinion is ignorant and isn't worth much to people who believe, rightly or wrongly, that people should actually know something about the things they form opinions about.

It would not surprise me if he didn't want to waste his time on you, but we'll see.

Much easier to throw out a claim and not bother defending it, I agree. But I've got to believe there are still more than a couple of folks on "your side" of this debate forum who can actually be bothered to perform basic due diligence.

[Cow Poke]

You were pretty clearly playing off your response to my post about Republicans blocking gun research in the other thread, where you responded:

I know what I was doing, Sam - and it's right there in the response I posted.

[Cow Poke]

YMuch easier to throw out a claim and not bother defending it, I agree.

Calm yourself, Sam - he may still reply, I don't know.