King Bloomberg and his media mob!

[Big Fin]

This article is a sad state of the world of politics. From the Washington Times.


http://www.washingtontimes.com/news...=buffer&utm_medium=twitter&buffer_share=b7f01


I provide this quote from the article.

The anti-gun group protest went after only one Democrat, Sen. Max Baucus of Montana, who announced Tuesday that he will not seek reelection in 2014.

Too bad that a guy cannot vote according to how his state wants, without the Bloomberg "Save us from ourselves" media machine going after him. If you are a moderate in the Democratic party and you stand up for the rights of gun owners, Bloomberg and his mob are coming after you.

If you are a Republican from a state where one or two big urban areas drive the state politics, you are going down, if Bloomberg has anything to say about it. But he will grant you a pardon if you agree to be extorted when it comes to gun control issues.

The Republican targets were Sens. Richard Burr of North Carolina, Saxby Chambliss of Georgia, Dan Coats of Indiana, Jeff Flake of Arizona, Dean Heller of Nevada, Johnny Isakson of Georgia and Rob Portman of Ohio.

We truly need political spending reform in this country to keep the Bloomberg-types on both sides of the fringe from having such huge influence over the debate. Public policy debates become nothing more than an argument between those fringe operators who have the most money, rather than what most Americans feel.

Whether you like or hate Max Baucus, the activities of Bloomberg and their well-funded efforts for "reasonable" (laugh out loud here) measures should be worrisome to any gun owner and any person who believes we are a country of rights and freedoms. And the ability for a fringe element to hijack Congress and have a lapdog media licking the face of the Bloombergs of the world is not good for the future of any Constitutional Rights, unless it is the right hand picked by that fringe element.

 

[putm2sleep]

What are they going to do when this happens?

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/03/26/3d-printed-gun-movement_n_2957695.html

 

[RobG]

Did you see the big ad from the NRA defending Baucus in today's chronicle?

 

[noharleyyet]

What are they going to do when this happens?

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/03/26/3d-printed-gun-movement_n_2957695.html

Hmmm...may need to upgrade the fax machine putm.

 

[noharleyyet]

Did you see the big ad from the NRA defending Baucus in today's chronicle?

What did those evil bastridges do now?

 

[Ben Lamb]

What did those evil bastridges do now?

Besides eating babies?

They defended Max, good for them. Max has done a ton of good for hunters and anglers.

 

[Big Fin]

Did you see the big ad from the NRA defending Baucus in today's chronicle?

No, I didn't. I don't get that anymore, rather read it online.

I wonder if it ever occurred to Bloomberg and the mob squad, that Baucus did more for public lands and public access than any Senator of the last twenty years.

Let's see, just to name a few of the projects where Baucus got Land and Water Conservation Funds (LWCF) since I live in Montana to improve and protect public access.

• Gallatin I Land Exchange
• Gallatin II Land Exchange
• Royal Teton Acquisions
• Dome Mountain/OTO Acquisition
• Taylor's Fork Acquisition
• Swan Valley - Plumb Creek Acquisition

And those are just the ones I have my fingers in to some degree. Many other in western Montana that I am not very familiar with.

Just those alone are many hundred thousand acres of prime elk hunting ground. Evidently Bloomberg couldn't give a crap about that. Duh, Randy, obviously Bloomberg doesn't care about that; no money, glory, or power in that kind of effort.

 

[noharleyyet]

Besides eating babies?

They defended Max, good for them. Max has done a ton of good for hunters and anglers.

I was rhetorically mocking RobGeewhiz...I know you know but he has been feigning dumb quite a bit lately, hence the patronization.

 

[RobG]

I was rhetorically mocking RobGeewhiz...I know you know but he has been feigning dumb quite a bit lately, hence the patronization.

The NRA ad was in response to an ad by Bloomberg's group that Big Fin mentioned a few days ago. The NRA ad headlined "Your freedom is under attack, but Senator Max Baucus is fighting back." Max voted for the original AWB so he isn't that popular with the gun crowd. I was certain he voted against the UBC because he was up for re-election so I'm surprised the NRA stuck their neck out for him. Some times they get it right .

 

[noharleyyet]

The NRA ad was in response to an ad by Bloomberg's group that Big Fin mentioned a few days ago. The NRA ad headlined "Your freedom is under attack, but Senator Max Baucus is fighting back." Max voted for the original AWB so he isn't that popular with the gun crowd. I was certain he voted against the UBC because he was up for re-election so I'm surprised the NRA stuck their neck out for him. Some times they get it right .

See, that wasn't so hard was it....

No admonition for the rich NuYawk city folks moneymandering your Montana rights?

 

[sreekers]

Rather ridiculous isn't it. There is also speculation that he is taking some heat for publicly saying Obamacare is going to be exactly what we were sold.

 

[belly-deep]

Rather ridiculous isn't it. There is also speculation that he is taking some heat for publicly saying Obamacare is going to be exactly what we were sold.

He no longer has to toe the party line.

 

[BigHornRam]

Rather ridiculous isn't it. There is also speculation that he is taking some heat for publicly saying Obamacare is going to be exactly what we were sold.

Max disrespected Obama on both his gun control push and Obamacare so the left wing of the Democrat party is purging him. Not much more to it then that.

Anyone catch the u tube video of "Max Baucus drunk"? A
30 second ad of that and Champ Edmonds dog would beat him. Time for Max to hang it up. On the bright side Max still has almost 5 million in his campaign fund that he can use to find a suitable replacement. That should give Bloomberg a little bit of heartburn.

 

[ringer]

Bloomberg just said he thinks we must change the Constitution to create a safer nation. He is a threat to our democracy and an idiot. I bet Flake is easily re-elected here.

 

[BigHornRam]

We truly need political spending reform in this country to keep the Bloomberg-types on both sides of the fringe from having such huge influence over the debate. Public policy debates become nothing more than an argument between those fringe operators who have the most money, rather than what most Americans feel.

Disagree. Montanan's are independent thinkers. Bloomberg can spend every last dime he owns, and we can still tell him to shove it. :hump:

 

[shoots-straight]

Disagree. Montanan's are independent thinkers. Bloomberg can spend every last dime he owns, and we can still tell him to shove it. :hump:

Then you weren't paying attention to the last primary races in Montana. Casual moderate Repubs were attacked by dark money across the state, making all sorts of unsubstantiated claims. Many of those moderate Repubs lost those primary races.

No one is accountable for the BS they spew.

Montana was way ahead of the times when they banned this sort of thing, and it needs to happen again.

Where's my beer?

 

[BigHornRam]

So you want to limit Bloomberg's 1st amendment rights, because you don't like what he is saying about limiting your 2nd amendment rights? That's some confused logic. I thought McCain-Feingold was supposed to fix all this? Made it worse.......didn't it. I'm all for transparency in campaign contributions. Lots of games get played when no one knows who's playing them and both parties and their zealous supporters are equally guilty. I want to know what Bloomberg is thinking.........don't limit it.

 

[shoots-straight]

So you want to limit Bloomberg's 1st amendment rights, because you don't like what he is saying about limiting your 2nd amendment rights? That's some confused logic. I thought McCain-Feingold was supposed to fix all this? Made it worse.......didn't it. I'm all for transparency in campaign contributions. Lots of games get played when no one knows who's playing them and both parties and their zealous supporters are equally guilty. I want to know what Bloomberg is thinking.........don't limit it.

You see BHR, that's where you and have had problems in the past. You say one thing, peple give an answer to your comment, then you try a twist what was said into something entirely different.

Montana voters have shown to be easily swayed by political BS.

I don't want to limit any right what so ever. I want those that donate money to PAC's to be counted. I want all groups that are involved in any politics to report who they are, and where the money came from. Legitimate organizations, not just ones that hold a P O Box number. There has to be someone held accountable for the lies that were spread around in the last election.

If not how does anyone know what's true or not? Snopes?

Bloombergs of the world are not the biggest problem as I see it. The dark money people are the worst.

 

[BigHornRam]

Shoots'

Do you think this is an example of "dark money people", or hardball politics in the last election?

http://billingsgazette.com/news/sta...cle_44197da9-b6d2-5e8a-ae05-7442aef0a45d.html

I think it's some of both.

Sounds like you do not favor spending limits on individuals. What about corporations? What about unions?

Ellie Hill (know her?) was on the radio last week. She strongly supports spending limits on individuals and corporations.

My position is full disclosure of who is contributing the money, but no limits on what they can spend. And yes corporations are people. Agree?

 

[BigHornRam]

Good read for Ellie, and anyone else who thinks corporations are not people.........

http://www.montanapolicy.org/2013/03/rob-natelson-the-misplaced-philosophy-of-i-166/