Oh yeah, SHE knows what she's talking about?

Aren't we glad that our elected representatives have such a keen understanding of the issues involved?



Well .. perhaps not so much so.

U. S. Representative (D-CO) Diane DeGette ... what do we know about her?

(1) ... she's a nutter
(2) ... fifteen rounds, seven rounds, eight round, ten rounds ... it's all arbitrary.  These people have NO idea at all concerning which is the 'right magazine capacity'.  If you think that they don't know what the heck they're talking about, and/or the consequences of their arbitrarily designated "rightness" of "High-Capacity" magazines, you're right.
(3) Infringes upon the Second Amendment.  Arbitrarily?  Can there be a more pertinent argument AGAINST the proposed amendments?
(4) and only incidentally .. this elected legislator seems to believe that "after they ... " presumably the "bad guys", which means we law-abiding citizens, "... shoot them ... " (one can only assume the "bullets" ensconced in the evil "High-Capacity Magazines, then "... there will be no more available...".

(5)  I am so weary.  This .. person .. obviously has assumed that ammunition comes pre-loaded in "magazines".   Is she so  invested in a disposable society that she honestly believes that once all the high-capacity magazines have been used, they cannot be reloaded?

I'm sorry.  The answer is, apparently, "YES!"

We are  at the mercy of people who are so without-a-clue that they honestly believe that "ammunition" is indistinguishable from "magazines".  No wonder that they mindlessly vote based upon what they THOUGHT they heard from the last person they talked to .. they are intellectually incapable of critical thought.

This is Colorado (democrat, of course!) Chief Minority Whip (she is obviously so PROUD of this!) Diane DeGrette speaking at the "Public Forum on Guns in America".

She is self-described as the "House Co-sponsor on the ban of high-capacity magazines". One would automatically assume that, as such, she has performed the necessary research to qualify as an expert on the issue.


Or perhaps not.

She is one of the people intrinsically deciding how the Second Amendment should be arbitrated in the American Congress.  And you wonder why it is so difficult for Second Amendment Supporters to find a voice in Congress?

SHE thinks that "bullets" and "magazines" are interchangeable; and if you ban "high capacity magazines", the the people will  eventually shoot them all up.  Problem solved!

Or, to quote her literally:

"These are ammunition .. they're bullets.  So, the people who have these now ... are going to shoot them. So if you ban them in the future, the number of   these high-capacity magazines is going to decrease dramatically over time, because the bullets will have been shot, and there won't be any more available."

...

The video ends with laughter, and we are deprived of the comments of Larimer County Sheriff  Justin Smith, who wanted the audience to know more about the issues.  Unfortunately, Sheriff Smith's comments have been so overwhelmed by the ceaselessness of Representative DelGette, nobody knows what he might have said to rescue the (entirely political) situation.  One assumes that it was a moot point.

I leave you with only this one, perhaps insignificant question:


Who elected this IDIOT!
____________________________________

Oh, yeah!

Well, the Denver POST, for one:

In an article entitled:

Inaccurate remarks on gun magazines put Rep. Diana DeGette under scrutiny

(I kid you not ... this is the fourteen-point headline which the DP has determined appropriate) ..

WASHINGTON — In confusing whether an ammunition magazine can be reloaded and the difference between that and a clip, Rep. Diana DeGette didn't do gun-control champions — including President Barack Obama — any favors last week.
DeGette, a Democrat from Denver, has been a pivotal leader at the federal level to strengthen the nation's gun laws since she entered Congress in the mid-1990s.
She has, at least three times, introduced legislation to ban high-capacity ammunition magazines, and she has signed on to a handful of other gun-control bills that have been introduced in the past year in the wake of the shootings at an Aurora movie theater and a Connecticut elementary school.
Yet last week at a public forum hosted by The Denver Post's editorial board, DeGette made one of the largest gaffes of her career on the very issue she purports to be so passionate about, and the comments came at one of the most politically inopportune times for her party.
Asked why banning ammunition magazines that hold more than 15 rounds would be effective in reducing gun violence, DeGette responded:
"These are ammunition, they're bullets, so the people who have those now, they're going to shoot them, so if you ban them in the future, the number of these high-capacity magazines is going to decrease dramatically over time because the bullets will have been shot and there won't be any more available."

I DO try to limit the length of my blogposts .. really I do.  But sometimes, it's impossible to follow t he entire thread without compromising my self-imposed limits.

This is one of those times  (okay, this is ALL of those times) . but it's just too RICH to ignore the squirming of the Liberal Press as they attempt to protect one of their own.

 _____________________________

Wait, it gets better:

Magazines, in almost every kind of weapon, can be reloaded.
Then, later in the day, in explaining the mistake, DeGette spokeswoman Juliet Johnson made another one.
"She simply misspoke in referring to 'magazines' when she should have referred to 'clips,' which cannot be reused because they don't have a feeding mechanism," Johnson said.
Clips, too, can be reloaded in almost every instance.
DeGette's comments went viral in social media, and her remarks were replayed on cable television and talk radio and posted on countless blogs throughout the country.

Please .. allow me to interpret:

Not only does the congresscritter have absolutely NO clue, but her staff, as well is entirely clueless.  Their attempt to ameliorate their boss's gaffe (I'm too nice to use the term "STUPIDITY" .. or perhaps not) did not 'make it better'; it only served to demonstrate once again that the Democratic Representative for Colorado is not only entirely clueless about the subject upon which she has spent years supporting .. but her staff, too, doesn't understand the issues.

Why, then, should we-the-people accept the administration of Democrats who don't understand the issues, but are still determined to impose their clueless ignorant unsupported-by-the facts VIEWS upon us?

Is it because there are so many granola-crunching clueless Liberal Democrats in Colorado that they will automatically gravitate around the "graboid" Representative only because she represents their own cluelessness?

Apparently .. yes!


People of Colorado, please pay attention:

(Michael Bane .. I know you understand this; ignore, because it obviously doesn't apply to you:)

This woman does NOT represent you.  She represents the repressive forces of Democratic America .. those who would grab your rights and dash them in the mud, or chew them up and spit them out .. not because the think it is the "right thing to do" but because they know now what they do.

This woman represents those clueless people who mindlessly deprive you of your rights, because they love their titles and the only way they know to protect their high office is to make laws .. they don't care what the laws are, they just know that they muse mindlessly make new laws so you think they are serving a purpose ... even if it is to your detriment.

To say that they are morons is a disservice to morons.  This lady is a low-value moron, who not only knows not what she does .. but she doesn't care.

Get RID of her!  She votes for the Moron element of the House of Representatives, and as such she not only undermines your freedoms, but she helps to undermine the freedoms of us all.

"If it only saves one voter" ....

x
x
x