Jim Cooper this morning on Background Checks

[Peace]

"Well it's a controversial issue, but as I understand it, even a majority of NRA members think that more background checks make sense, 'cause we wanna know who's got these weapons."

 

oh boy.  I wish he and his family well.  I'm sure he is a great person, but he is evidencing that he does not represent the America I have known and want my children to know.  Come voting time, he has got to be defeated!  I am progressive in nature, and could very well be a democrat - except for all of the democrats that seem to run their party.  (mostly what I think of the republicans too. :) )

 

If someone is a law abiding citizen, the government doesn't need to know what firearms they own.  We should all be screening "Gattica" and "Minority Report" at our independant and republican recruiting rallies.....  and yes, they need to be happening!  - remember our POTUS has already started one grass roots campaign that is publicly attached to him....  I seriously doubt that is his only effort.  He is smarter than that.  

 

Listening and understanding - working together can still get it done, but we had better get busy with the politics.  This is for real.

 

Time to "lawyer up" as they say, and start farming the voting population.  We will need a heck of a harvest to stave off this seige on freedom.

Edited February 13, 2013 by Peace

[Guest 6.8 AR]

He's like every other liberal. He can lie like the rest of them. I wish we could get someone to take his place so he could move

to some other state. He is tiring and boring, to me.

[Guest PapaB]

Please list the source so we can see it too.

[RobertNashville]

"...he is evidencing that he does not represent the America I have known and want my children to know"

 

That's about like saying fire burns.

 

His "America" has never been the America of the Constitution.

[Peace]

Please list the source so we can see it too.

 

 

http://www.wsmv.com/video?clipId=8367273&autostart=true

 

I had to play it back several times to get the quote.  details matter - and no one deserves to be mis-quoted.

[Guest PapaB]

Thanks for the link. I didn't think you mis-quoted him, it's just that idiots like Cooper seldom say only one stupid thing and I like to see it all. After watching the clip I can say he certainly didn't disappoint in that regard.

 

"Most elected officials reflect the voters back home." He can't possibly be stupid enough to believe that dribble.

[hipower]

Perhaps it's just me that wonders this. Or perhaps I'm mis-informed and sadly out of touch with reality. But I must ask.

 

Where are these " 50% or more of the NRA that want (more) sensible background checks"?

 

And Cooper didn't say this, but related to it, where are the 50-75% of gun owners the media talks about that want regulated sales, more b/c, mag restrictions, and gun bans?

 

I just don't see it. I vote in all the pools I see, and check the results where possible. I continually see 75-80% against these issues.

 

And yes, I know targeted audiences will skew poll results. But just seems very unlikely to me that gun owners and NRA members could be polled and get results like that.

 

And his "sensible moderates and No Labels.org" comments. What are and who are "sensible moderates"?  "No Labels.org"? Sounds like another Obama group cheerleading session to me.

 

And if you get the suble hint that I'm not a fan of Jim Cooper, you might be right.

[peejman]

I misread the headline and had Jeff Cooper in my mind....    I was very confused for a minute.

[Guest PapaB]

Perhaps it's just me that wonders this. Or perhaps I'm mis-informed and sadly out of touch with reality. But I must ask.

 

Where are these " 50% or more of the NRA that want (more) sensible background checks"?

 

You missed the key words "but as I understand it" which means he got it from the talking points handed out by the democratic leadership. He doesn't care that it's a steaming pile, it's his duty, as a good progressive, to misinform the public.

[Peace]

hipower, it may well be marketing rule #2 - everyone wants to be with a winner - so, if you say "Ben is the best" every time you are in front of the camera - even though 80% of people watching may think that Carlisle is the best....  over time, you can actually skew and shift those numbers, and eventually, a lot of people will be convinced that Ben is the best (because they are convinced that most people feel that way, and they subconsciously want to identify with the majority, once they do indetify with the "Ben group", then self-preservation instincts cause them to passionately desire for Ben to be the best - regardless of the facts).  Buying and selling peoples' minds is an ugly business, and I have wanted no part of  it for the longest time.

 

I believe it is a brilliant strategy to win the fence-sitters (and it requires no actual basis to be effective - just practice!) - and most everyone in the Democratic party (and in left-leaning media) is towing that line extremely well.

 

just my opinion.

Edited February 13, 2013 by Peace

[Bigiron]

Cooper needs to be retired.

[Jonnin]

I am progressive in nature, and could very well be a democrat -
except for all of the democrats that seem to run their party.  (mostly
what I think of the republicans too. :) )

 

If someone is a law abiding citizen, the government doesn't need to know what firearms they own.

 

Those are at odds.  It is very difficult to be a "progressive" (whatever that even means to anyone) and follow that with an anti-big-government proclamation.   The entire progressive platform is that government should be in charge of everything and fix all problems.   If the person is law abiding, govt should have no say in who they can or cannot marry, what healthcare they use, or any of thousands of other things that govt has managed to grab control of.  

 

People say everyone is polarized, but at the end of the day, its binary problem.  Either govt is in charge of everything you do, or it isnt.   Its hard to be a moderate here.... what is a "moderate" going to say, that its ok for govt to say what healthcare we use but not who owns a gun?   I agree that the leadership for both parties is horrible and conservative, small government leadership is nonexistant for sure.   But I am unsure of how you can claim to be liberal leaning with such a bold conservative message :)

[Peace]

Those are at odds. ....  But I am unsure of how you can claim to be liberal leaning with such a bold conservative message :)

thank you for seeking clarity.

 

:)  I said I was progressive in nature, I did not say I was "a progressive" in nature.  The difference being the universal, technical meaning of the word progressive vs. the hijacked political use of the word to describe socialists.

 

 

 

But I am unsure of how you can claim to be liberal leaning with such a bold conservative message :)

 

I doubt very seriously that I'm a liberal, but if I somehow traveled back in time in the US, I hope I would not be for: burning "witches", keeping slaves, forced child labor, keeping women as a subclass of society - without full rights, allowing elected officials and law enforcement officeers to turn a blind eye to targeted, racial violence against moms, dads, elderly men and women, teenagers, and children,...etc.  So, if anything like that is what we would be "conserving", then I'm not a conservative either.  That's why I would say that I'm progressive in nature.

 

I appreciate your points and your voice.  In my minute opinion, the conservative "blanket" practice of binary or "everything is black and white - there can be no grey" is what has gotten the Republican party trounced - and will continue to be its demise if they don't adapt.  The emerging demographics don't think that way - and even rebel against it.  What we often forget in our small slice of time in the US is that the best leaders in the history of the world have known that compromise is the art of leadership - If you want to lead, you either have tryanny, compromise, or some intentional melding of the two.  It's your choice what you want, I know which one I want.   :)

Edited February 13, 2013 by Peace

[krunchnik]

I am now and have been an NRA member for several years,and without a doubt I don't endorse any further gun control laws including steroid driven backround checks,or should I say GUN REGISTRATION ATTEMPTS.Thats the only reason in my opinion they want to change the system already in place.Read my lips(NO MORE GUN LAWS),Why dont they try to enforce the ones already on the books.I highly doubt that 50% of the NRA members think this would be OK.

[Jonnin]

thank you for seeking clarity.

 

:)  I said I was progressive in nature, I did not say I was "a progressive" in nature.  The difference being the universal, technical meaning of the word progressive vs. the hijacked political use of the word to describe socialists.

 

 

 

 

I doubt very seriously that I'm a liberal, but if I somehow traveled back in time in the US, I hope I would not be for: burning "witches", keeping slaves, forced child labor, keeping women as a subclass of society - without full rights, allowing elected officials and law enforcement officeers to turn a blind eye to targeted, racial violence against moms, dads, elderly mena dn women, teenagers, and children,...etc.  So, if anything like that is what we would be "conserving", then I'm not a conservative either.  That's why I would say that I'm progressive in nature.

 

I appreciate your points and your voice.  In my minute opinion, the conservative "blanket" practice of binary or "everything is black and white - there can be no grey" is what has gotten the Republican party trounced - and will continue to be its demise if they don't adapt.  The emerging demographics don't think that way - and even rebel against it.  What we often forget in our small slice of time in the US is that the best leaders in the history of the world have known that compromise is the art of leadership - If you want to lead, you either have tryanny, compromise, or some intentional melding of the two.  It's your choice what you want, I know which one I want.   :)

 

I do not think any modern conservative stands for the bigotry or violence against groups.  The last few mass shootings were left leaning psychopaths, but much as I dislike most leftists, I cannot say the shooters represent the typical lefty.  The right has a few neo-nazis that hate everyone, but those are pretty rare and do not represent the typical righty.

 

Compromise does not mean changing what you think, it just means working with someone you disagree with to hammer out the best solution you can.  I am very willing to compromise so long as I GET SOMETHING from it.   All to often, compromise at the federal govt level to me ends up meaning "you take it in the #$^% and we get all the perks".   The 2 world views remain pretty much binary and polarized -- which is fine --- but we DO need leadership that can work around that.   We do not have such leadership, and have not had it in many, many decades, if not over a centurary.

 

Leftist gun control compromise is a great example of this: "you get to keep a shotgun, we take away all the ars, that is compromise and working together!"

Edited February 13, 2013 by Jonnin

[Peace]

Jonnin, we agree on much, very much.  I didn't mean to get into a "discussion" about us and hijack the thread.  It's easy to get distracted sorting things out among ourselves.  If we need further understanding, I'm sure we can PM it.

 

Thanks again.

 

 

Meanwhile, Rep. Cooper and his teammates are spending all day saying that "as they understand it" 80% of us are for ......

[mcurrier]

Cooper needs to be retired.

 

That's putting it VERY politely.

[LagerHead]

Jim Cooper is a smelly pooper. That is all. 

[KaNuckles]

I live in Dickson and I was raped by the TN Republicans. We had us a Repub. rep and everything was fine until the redistricting. I was all for it until I realized Jim Cooper was my new rep. Being in the same district as Davidson County now I fear we are stuck with this  :poop: for brain. He has already won a reelection since redistricting so I don't hold much hope of ever getting rid of him. 

[Volzfan]

The issue with removing Cooper is that he has Davidson County and that is why he won't be beat. There are too many here that are living off of the government and have been convinced that the only way to keep the FREE money flowing their way is to keep voting Dem.

Even with the odds stacked against anyone else taking his seat I'll work very hard for anyone running against him every time he comes up for re-election.