Kathy Szeliga on Guns Today 12/19

The #1 community for Gun Owners of the Northeast

Member Benefits:

  • No ad networks!
  • Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership
  • Discuss anti-gun legislation
  • Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section
  • Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses
  • Discover free outdoor shooting areas
  • View up to date on firearm-related events
  • Share photos & video with other members
  • ...and so much more!
  • 44man

    Ultimate Member
    MDS Supporter
    Feb 19, 2013
    10,129
    southern md
    Never ever trust someone, especially a politician, who already sold us out

    What did she and the other traitors get for lying to us and selling us out?

    Y’all think they did it for free?
     

    rbird7282

    Ultimate Member
    MDS Supporter
    Dec 6, 2012
    18,537
    Columbia
    This is absolutely true about Asians. In particular Chinese Americans. They are also afraid that if there is a war between the US and China that they will be rounded up.


    Well there is a historical precedent of that thanks to a Democrat


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
     

    Tomcat

    Formerly Known As HITWTOM
    May 7, 2012
    5,568
    St.Mary's County
    She actually is, she was one of the leadership that defended the Republicans voting for Red Flag laws in Maryland.
    Yes i remember the sell-out , i believe Kipke and a few others pretended they got blindsided .
    Not to argue the point, but has she ever attempted to justify, or has anyone ever asked her to explain, her support for MD's Red Flag law when it so obviously violate the due process clauses of the 5th and 14th Amendments to the Constitution? JoeR
    She was asked, by several people on this board, and she defended her, and the rest of the Rs voting for it, by saying they were lied to. When in point of fact we pointed that if they had read the actual bill, what they were saying was BS, her and others' replies were, we had no idea what we were talking about.

    I used to follow and support most of her actions until this happened. Is she trying to become relevant again?
     

    daNattyFatty

    Ultimate Member
    Aug 27, 2009
    3,908
    Bel Air, MD
    I used to follow and support most of her actions until this happened. Is she trying to become relevant again?



    She probably thinks she’s always been relevant. Cause, you know, they lied about what was in the red flag bill and stuff, or they were blindsided, or something.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
     

    welder516

    Deplorable Welder
    MDS Supporter
    Jun 8, 2013
    27,307
    Underground Bunker
    I even think the Democrats understand the reason to keep a few Republicans around in office as long as the balance of power is not threatened . They give the GOP a small bone to throw to us every so often , Dems may let a law be watered down so the GOP can say they got it lessened .
    Useful idiots i guess .
     

    Dingo3

    Ultimate Member
    Apr 4, 2013
    2,777
    Fredneck
    Anyone who has been in their current office for more than 2 terms before moving up or on, I will not vote for in the primary. If they make it to the general, I will leave it blank. Our Founders did not intend this, our country and inheritance, to be run by career politicians. Civic representation was meant to be an obligation and not a career.
     

    Occam

    Not Even ONE Indictment
    MDS Supporter
    Feb 24, 2018
    20,239
    Montgomery County
    Anyone who has been in their current office for more than 2 terms before moving up or on, I will not vote for in the primary. If they make it to the general, I will leave it blank. Our Founders did not intend this, our country and inheritance, to be run by career politicians. Civic representation was meant to be an obligation and not a career.

    And yet those same guys, who foresaw SO much of what typical human behavior means to governance, and put in place elaborate and very effective checks and balances throughout the constitution ... chose not to prevent you from voting for the same legislator more than a couple of times. Because they trusted YOU to be smart enough to know if someone is a good enough person to keep in that job should they want it, and they trusted YOU to be persuasive enough with your fellow voters if you could make the case that person should go.

    The Founders put a lot of their trust in you, your personal liberty, and your willingness to assemble and speak (you know, that First Amendment stuff) if someone's needing to be shown the door. The problem isn't career politicians, it's lazy, non-critical-thinking, uninquisitive, complacent, too-comfortable citizens... only a portion of which actually vote, and only a portion of THOSE which can be bothered to inform themselves about a politician's ongoing fitness for office.

    Blaming the government for career politicians overstaying their welcome is the other side of the same coin that has people looking to the government to solve all of their problems for them. I'd rather have the liberty to name my representative - even three or more times if I think it's right - than to have the Nanny State tell me that someone I prefer isn't allowed, because that might hurt someone else's feelings.
     

    Dingo3

    Ultimate Member
    Apr 4, 2013
    2,777
    Fredneck
    And yet those same guys, who foresaw SO much of what typical human behavior means to governance, and put in place elaborate and very effective checks and balances throughout the constitution ... chose not to prevent you from voting for the same legislator more than a couple of times. Because they trusted YOU to be smart enough to know if someone is a good enough person to keep in that job should they want it, and they trusted YOU to be persuasive enough with your fellow voters if you could make the case that person should go.

    The Founders put a lot of their trust in you, your personal liberty, and your willingness to assemble and speak (you know, that First Amendment stuff) if someone's needing to be shown the door. The problem isn't career politicians, it's lazy, non-critical-thinking, uninquisitive, complacent, too-comfortable citizens... only a portion of which actually vote, and only a portion of THOSE which can be bothered to inform themselves about a politician's ongoing fitness for office.

    Blaming the government for career politicians overstaying their welcome is the other side of the same coin that has people looking to the government to solve all of their problems for them. I'd rather have the liberty to name my representative - even three or more times if I think it's right - than to have the Nanny State tell me that someone I prefer isn't allowed, because that might hurt someone else's feelings.

    Thank you for the great post! Gives me more to think on. I just hate that we have limited options when it comes to elections and most of those options are career politicians. The voting box gives us term limits as we can vote for someone else, yet the majority of the population votes for the incumbent. Sorry, just voicing my frustration.

    Have you ever considered running for an office? Your posts make me think you’d be a great representative at any level
     

    Oh3

    Member
    Jan 2, 2016
    90
    Carroll Co
    And yet those same guys, who foresaw SO much of what typical human behavior means to governance, and put in place elaborate and very effective checks and balances throughout the constitution ... chose not to prevent you from voting for the same legislator more than a couple of times. Because they trusted YOU to be smart enough to know if someone is a good enough person to keep in that job should they want it, and they trusted YOU to be persuasive enough with your fellow voters if you could make the case that person should go.

    The Founders put a lot of their trust in you, your personal liberty, and your willingness to assemble and speak (you know, that First Amendment stuff) if someone's needing to be shown the door. The problem isn't career politicians, it's lazy, non-critical-thinking, uninquisitive, complacent, too-comfortable citizens... only a portion of which actually vote, and only a portion of THOSE which can be bothered to inform themselves about a politician's ongoing fitness for office.

    Blaming the government for career politicians overstaying their welcome is the other side of the same coin that has people looking to the government to solve all of their problems for them. I'd rather have the liberty to name my representative - even three or more times if I think it's right - than to have the Nanny State tell me that someone I prefer isn't allowed, because that might hurt someone else's feelings.

    Well said. I've always said that there are term limits already in place if voters would actually just educate themselves. Sadly, I think most voters vote soley on name recognition.
     

    rwbow1969

    Get Wiffit
    Dec 10, 2011
    4,154
    Clearspring
    Yeah, Deb Rey was another "Red Flag" supporter....
     

    Attachments

    • Red Flag sellout.jpg
      Red Flag sellout.jpg
      10.8 KB · Views: 178

    dblas

    Past President, MSI
    MDS Supporter
    Apr 6, 2011
    13,087
    I can put the word out but it’s no use until it gets closer to election time, folks have short memories

    Thanks Dan

    Grab a copy of that letter for use in 2022, and remind me to report as 2022 starts.
     

    Biggfoot44

    Ultimate Member
    Aug 2, 2009
    32,881
    I don't want to be prohibited from voting for whom I wish to vote , even if they are long time in office .

    That said , with my personal calculus , I'm predisposed against incumbents, so they have to be clearly better to overcome that .

    In the abstract , I'd like to see challengers on a more even footing against the built in percs of current officeholders selfpromotion under the guise of regular business . But I don't know what would be suitable mechanisms .

    The fly in the ointment is percentage of the voters having some knowledge of political science . They know enough to realize that an elected representative with seniority and important Committee positions will have more juice to advance the interests of their Districts ( either advocacy generally in the positive sense, or Pork in the cynical sense ). So if they consider two candidates fairly equivalent in their merits , the incumbent gets bonus points .

    Just like when asked in the abstract , lots of voters will favor some degree of increased turnover , either explicit term limits , or more generally have more equal races where its not uncommon for incumbents to loose .

    But it's a different thing unilaterally remove your powerful high seniority representative , but leave neighboring districts and/ or other regions of the state with theirs .
     

    Users who are viewing this thread

    Latest posts

    Forum statistics

    Threads
    274,928
    Messages
    7,259,419
    Members
    33,350
    Latest member
    Rotorboater

    Latest threads

    Top Bottom