Will you miss Barbara Boxer??? (Brea, Jackson: 2014, living in, vs.)

[mateo45]

Originally Posted by 1AngryTaxPayer

Oh, there are plenty more.
Wanted to put unarmed National guard in schools.
Voted YES on continuing federal funds for declared "sanctuary cities".
Pushed for carbon taxes.

But the stupid gun ban was just that, stupid. The ban didn't ban assault weapons. It banned semi-auto carbines and handguns. Right before it expired she pushed to have it renewed even though the data was overwhelming it did little to curb gun violence.

BTW, this is what gun "enthusiasts" are calling a "carbine" these days (you know, like for 'hunting' purposes…)?!
And YouTube even offers tips on how to easily convert it into fully automatic "assault" mode!

[shooting4life]

Originally Posted by Tulemutt

It's always curious how people go to this "balanced" politics thing. A balance of parties is meaningless - as can be observed in recent national congresses where there is a constant flux of dominant parties, but always substantial representation of both, and where little intelligent progress takes place regardless.

What is meaningful is intelligent, logical analysis, decisions, and actions. And none of that requires one party or the other - or balance of the two. Such merely calls for simple, clear integrity, intellect, and backbone without prejudice or corruption.

Let me know when you find it.

The best government is usually the ones that cannot further erode freedom by passing more and more laws.

Every time one party controls both branches of government bad things happen.

I pray for gridlock.

[mysticaltyger]

Originally Posted by Ruth4Truth

Could you give some examples of "too far left"? I haven't followed her career. I did a quick check on the internet. She voted to eliminate the tax incentive companies get for sending jobs overseas. That sounds pretty good. She opposed the Iraq war. (Why were we there, again??)

The SF Chronicle agreed she's a liberal sentator but also a lousy one. They failed to endorse her the last time she was up for election in 2010:

For some Californians, Boxer's reliably liberal voting record may be reason enough to give her another six years in office. But we believe Californians deserve more than a usually correct vote on issues they care about. They deserve a senator who is accessible, effective and willing and able to reach across party lines to achieve progress on the great issues of our times. Boxer falls short on those counts.

No endorsement in U.S. Senate race - SFGate

[Tulemutt]

Originally Posted by shooting4life

The best government is usually the ones that cannot further erode freedom by passing more and more laws.

Every time one party controls both branches of government bad things happen.

I pray for gridlock.

"Both branches of government?" There are three, not two, of course. Not that it helps any.

Nevertheless, I suggest you all note that even when power is split nothing much intelligent happens. Bad things happen regardless.

As for "eroding freedom" - heh, nature of human nature being what it is, as soon as you get more than a small tight knit group of humans within shouting distance of each other you better have some serious rules / laws and some way to back em up. The notion that Everyman has the slightest likelihood of behaving sensibly and knowing what to do productively with his "freedom" is hogwash. Bunch of lunatic monkeys that can read and shout and wreak havoc on one another is all we are.

[Tulemutt]

Originally Posted by toryturner

I will find it in approximately 5 months when I leave this state. If one is expecting intelligence, logic, or integrity in the California legislature; good luck.

Please do write us all wherever you find this political nirvana. Send pictures if possible. My bet is ...........

[shooting4life]

Originally Posted by Tulemutt

"Both branches of government?" There are three, not two, of course. Not that it helps any.

Nevertheless, I suggest you all note that even when power is split nothing much intelligent happens. Bad things happen regardless.

As for "eroding freedom" - heh, nature of human nature being what it is, as soon as you get more than a small tight knit group of humans within shouting distance of each other you better have some serious rules / laws and some way to back em up. The notion that Everyman has the slightest likelihood of behaving sensibly and knowing what to do productively with his "freedom" is hogwash. Bunch of lunatic monkeys that can read and shout and wreak havoc on one another is all we are.

The third branch of government doesn't pass laws

And which of the almost 1000 new state laws a year accomplishes those goals? Everyman would not know .1% of the laws they are relegated to follow. Here are a few examples

18 U.S.C. §1793 makes it a federal crime to go to a federal prison without permission.
18 U.S.C. §879(a)(3) & (b)(1)(B)(i) makes it a federal crime to threaten to harm a presidential candidate's mother in law.
18 U.S.C. §484 makes it a federal crime to connect part of one dollar bill to part of another dollar bill and pass it off as a single bill.
18 U.S.C. §1728 makes it a federal crime to intentionally send heavy things in the mail so that the mail carrier gets paid more.
18 U.S.C. §2278 makes it a federal crime to have a dangerous amount of dynamite on a steamship carrying passengers.
7 U.S.C. §282 & 7 C.F.R. §322.8 make it a crime to import a package of honeybees if the package contains honey (but it may contain candy).

And this one is for you
18 U.S.C. §2274 makes it a federal crime to let someone stay on your boat if he's preparing to commit a federal crime himself.

[Tulemutt]

Originally Posted by shooting4life

The third branch of government doesn't pass laws

Theoretically.

And in any case the third branch passes judgement on whether laws / which laws are allowable. Which has a similar effect.

[shooting4life]

Originally Posted by Tulemutt

Theoretically.

And in any case the third branch passes judgement on whether laws / which laws are allowable. Which has a similar effect.

Technically, it is which laws are constitutional.

[Ruth4Truth]

Originally Posted by mysticaltyger

The SF Chronicle agreed she's a liberal sentator but also a lousy one. They failed to endorse her the last time she was up for election in 2010:

For some Californians, Boxer's reliably liberal voting record may be reason enough to give her another six years in office. But we believe Californians deserve more than a usually correct vote on issues they care about. They deserve a senator who is accessible, effective and willing and able to reach across party lines to achieve progress on the great issues of our times. Boxer falls short on those counts.

No endorsement in U.S. Senate race - SFGate

Thank you. Finally, a serious and informative response.

[Ruth4Truth]

Originally Posted by shooting4life

The third branch of government doesn't pass laws

Woah, woah, what? The 3rd branch of gov't doesn't pass laws? The branch of gov't that doesn't consist of elected officials, that branch of gov't? It doesn't pass laws?? It exists to make laws! It's' all about laws.

WTF??