search
top

Joe Manchin: Lying Sack of Shit on Guns

From WVCDL:

Ladies and gentlemen of the WVCDL and West Virginia. Today, around 3PM I met with Senator Manchin. In any conversation with a person of that level of power, there are two conversations that occur at once. The first is the obvious and direct meaning of what is spoken. The second conversation is the meaning between the lines. In this case, neither is good. West Virginia, in my opinion, you have been sold out.

First, let’s talk about the direct conversation. It’s very simple. Senator Manchin supports a three-pronged approach that includes universal background checks, including private sales. He supports mental health-care reform. And he supports magazine capacity limits, and possibly other restrictions.

Further, he stated to me directly, that he believes 75% of West Virginians, like him, believe that the only purposes behind gun ownership and the second amendment are hunting and recreational shooting. He told me that defense is not an angle he considers or believes in, and that is specifically in the context of defense of self, and defense from tyranny. Perhaps now you understand why I’ve been too angry to update you on the results of the meeting. In case you’re thinking of stopping here, it gets worse.

Senator Manchin told me what the media will do if Congress (including the US House of Representatives) fails to pass an AWB and/or mag restrictions. “They will one, by one, put up pictures of dead children. They will show the carnage.” Considering that tomorrow, President Obama will be exploiting children by dragging them on stage with him while he outlays his plan, this is not a huge leap. And these are the words of a United States senator. We, and I don’t mean just West Virginians, I mean Americans, must prepare for this. That is a direct quote. Verbatim. We need every talking head in the conservative media out in front of this. Make it happen. Share this post far and wide.

When it became clear that we were not going to find common ground, and that Senator Manchin intends to support magazine capacity limits and other pointless gun-control laws doomed to failure, I told the senator that we would be there. We would be at every single event. We would be at every fund-raiser. We would be there, and the content of our signs would not be pleasant.

And now we get to the second conversation. The one between the lines. When I said we would be there, he said, “there won’t be any events.”

This confused me. No politician runs for office without fund-raisers and events. And I have to admit, it wasn’t I that grasped the meaning of this. I want to be clear, that the following was not stated. This was deduced by a confidant of mine, and I think she is correct. Manchin was honest. There will be no events. Why would a US Senator not need funds? This is because there will be no campaign. Joe Manchin is too young to retire from a position of such power. What does that mean?

West Virginia, this means that Joe Manchin has sold you out. It means that he has accepted some position, likely promised by Barack Obama, to place his boot in your neck in exchange for power.

Now you know. Now you know why for four hours, I was too angry to update you.

I’ve been a big booster of pro-gun Democrats in the past, and I’ll still stand by true friends of either party, but the Democrats are going to do have do a lot to rebuild trust on this issue. And that’s not to say I really trust Republicans either.

75 Responses to “Joe Manchin: Lying Sack of Shit on Guns”

  1. Trevor Shepherd says:

    Tried to follow the link. It takes the reader to Facespace and the reader has to “sign in” to see anything more. Sorry, but there are MANY of us who are unwilling to compromise our privacy or our self-respect by joining “Facebook”.

    • Sebastian says:

      I have fixed that. I copied it. I hope they won’t mind. I normally don’t like to do that, but this is important.

    • Dave says:

      Create a bogus account and your problem is solved. For now, there is no law saying you have to be truthful when you create a user account.

  2. J. Dock says:

    I was particularly nauseated by the “pics of dead kids ’till we get our way” part. I sincerely hope that’s a misunderstanding or maybe hyperbole. If not, that’s one of the worst things I’ve ever, ever heard.

    • The Jack says:

      Who’s gonna call ‘em on it?

      They’re swinging for the bleachers and even if they don’t get their full dream list it’ll still be a win.

      But if they do get their list it’ll be worth it. Well, at least to the pols that get special deals or are in safe districts.

    • Rob Crawford says:

      It ticks them off when Right to Life people do it, but it’s OK for their Right to Tyranny movement.

    • Awelowynt says:

      Our side should hold up pictures of the kids that guns have saved

  3. Rydak says:

    Considering that before this horrible incident, gun control groups were by and large irrelevant. They didn’t even warrant a media interview. This is something to behold. WV neighbors, you have been sold out, I see no other way to read this.

  4. Honestly, I think the NRA should build a site that is dedicated to EVERY person killed by a criminal on parole, early release or a felon not prosecuted for possession charges.

    Then post that, and ask why the hell the government is not doing their job. Point to that as the problem. And realy focus on failure to punish violent criminals.

    • Heather from AK says:

      And all of the defensive gun uses.

    • Rob Crawford says:

      In Chicago, only 16% of their record homicides are prosecuted. Another 9% — 45 — were closed as “solved but not prosecutable”, apparently because witnesses refuse to testify. The remaining 75% couldn’t even get enough information — physical or witnesses — to reach that point.

      THAT is a failure of government.

  5. Jeremiah says:

    I think this is worse- there is a plan already in place for those who will take the heat. I can’t imagine that plan doesn’t include every politician selling gun control as a panacea. Spread this out far and wide.

  6. Patrick H says:

    Wow, I thought I couldn’t be more shocked after the NY fiasco, but this takes the cake.

    I don’t have any more words. Wow.

    • Rydak says:

      All of this for a proven and failed ideological stance… dear god.

      • Bill says:

        Oh, no, we’re smarter than the others ones. which is why we’re in debt past our heads, have a foreign policy that can best be described as assisting those that attacked us come into power, and a civil rights movement that is in essence: “Gimme free stuff”.

        The fix is in.

        Maybe the conspiracy theorists aren’t so far off base.

        • Arnie says:

          Of course I’m not off base. ;-)

          Seriously though, could Obama’s new E.O. to enforce stricter gun standards on the “mentally ill” arbitrarily declare me mentally unfit to have a gun simply because of some of my strong (“paranoid”) anti-tyranny comments on this blog? Think about it!

  7. Maybe it is time for “First Amendment” remedies. If Senator Manchin violates the trust of West Virginia voters, the name and home address and personal information for him, his immediate family members, his campaign manager, and his senior office staff should be published so that the people can provide feedback to their elected representative and his staff.

    They want to register us like child molesters. Maybe we need to register politicians.

    • Arnie says:

      Love this idea!

    • Dave says:

      It would be more effective to protest at his home in WV and the one he keeps in the D.C. area. Keep the heat on him where ever he goes.

    • J says:

      Listen to yourself. His family members? Really?

      I am all in when it comes to acts of civil disobedience in protest of unconstitutional infringements upon my rights. However, dragging an elected official’s family into this mess isn’t going to do anything beneficial and will provide further proof that we are all just a bunch of bitter clingers foaming at the mouth a la Yeager.

  8. JD Rush says:

    I hope Manchin has been bought off with some position. Otherwise, I need to invest in tinfoil, because the alternative makes me very nervous.

  9. Scotty says:

    I just don’t get it. Every time I read something here, I just don’t get it. When the founding fathers wrote the second amendment, the use of guns for self defense and hunting were part of common law. As in common sense. As in, so obviously ok you’d be an idiot to think otherwise. The purpose of the second amendment is to establish the (rare, at the time) right to defense of the people from the government. When anti gunners and lefty politicians say, they only meant muskets or whatever, no! The founding fathers didn’t mean for us to fight against a tyrannical government merely symbolically and get our ass handed to us, they meant for us to be able to fight, and to win! By saying ten rounds only, or technology outdated by ten years time, they are, basically, saying we get muskets. Against the military’s M4s and SAWs and M2s. Tell me how that’s not an infringement of our rights to defend ourselves against the government.

    • Arnie says:

      Beautifully put, Scotty. You can find outstanding support for your argument from James Madison in the latter half of his Federalist essay #46. Every point you made is confirmed by Madison in this treatise on the Constitution and the citizen militia. Your point about needing high-capacity magazines is powerful; I intend to use it. Thanks! – Arnie

    • Chip says:

      I love the “musket” thing. The muzzle loading musket was the premier weapon of its day, every army in the world used some version of it. It was the 18th century assault weapon. What the founding fathers meant was the people should be armed in the same manner as the government to protect against the possible tyranny of that government.

    • Harold says:

      The other reply to Scotty’s good points is simply expressed by Orwell:

      WAR IS PEACE
      FREEDOM IS SLAVERY
      IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH

      Or more specifically, Scotty’s points are irrelevant, they’re old fashioned, out-modeled bourgeoisie truth. What really counts is revolutionary truth, which is anything that advances the cause of the revolution.

  10. Peter O says:

    You would think a coal, miner’s son would have taken longer to adopt the Pinkerington Agent’s position. Or maybe he just needs a reminder of the anti-union labor strife that took place in his 8 state.

    Lying Fuck.

  11. Chas says:

    A pro-gun Democrat is like a pro-Jew Nazi in Nazi Germany. Membership in the Democratic Party should be enough to make a freedom-loving, Second Amendment supporter nauseated. The Democratic Party murders schoolchildren as it clings to “gun-free school zones” and refuses to allow “guns in schools” armed security to protect the children. Who could be party to that effort at mass murder for the sake of advancing their gun ban agenda? The Democratic Party has blood on its hands and is eager for more. Dead children and dead constitutional rights are where it wants to go for the sake of its own power. The Democratic Party is communistic, totalitarian and evil. Its reign needs to end.

    • Harold says:

      Hmmm; the original Gun Free School Zone Act is from 1990, meaning even more openly by then anti-RKBA G. H. W. Bush signed it. After it was struck down because it didn’t even claim to have a fig leaf of Constitutional authorization, the Republican Congress in 1996 passed one with Commerce Clause hand waving (and of course Clinton signed it).

      This is a lessor example of the maxim that “Child p 0 r n is the root password to the Constitution” and why so many of us are worried about the Newtown shooting fallout, justifiably so as NY State has so far demonstrated.

  12. Mike123 says:

    The NRA needs to immediately revise its rating system. Clearly it has failed if an A rated politician can swing so far toward Tyranny in such a short time. The Gun Owners of American rated him a D. Who was right and who was wrong?

    • Sebastian says:

      GOA will not rate any Democrat well. They are hacks. The guy answered a good questionnaire. Sometimes you don’t find out who your friends really are until the shit gets real. This isn’t a Democrat or Republican thing, it’s a politician thing.

      • Rob Crawford says:

        They are “hacks”, yet they called it right.

        • Harold says:

          That time they called it right … or did they? It’s not like he had a chance to vote for Obamacare.

          The problem with the GOA’s ratings for Democrats is that they are almost entirely useless, you cannot distinguish a pro-RKBA but yet to betray us Democrat from pretty much any other but the worst, and they slag reformed for now Democrats like Harry Reid when we need his support the most (I haven’t found anyone who’s willing to bet that Boehner is going to be a better ally our current fight than Reid, for obvious reasons).

          Extending Sebastian’s point, it’s not even a politician thing, it’s a ruling class thing. Our current ruling class hates us with a passion.

    • m11_9 says:

      NRA endorsed a gun banner for president when it should have sat out that race too. Why did they feel Romney was worth that?

      Romney signed a state AWB ten years after Clinton’s. There is no excuse for that. NRA ratings have failed.

      • Sebastian says:

        Because his name wasn’t Barack Obama. Given the screwing we’re about to get, it’s hard to argue.

        And no, Rmoney did not sign any AWB extension.

        • m11_9 says:

          I will keep reading on that, but I know from my own ears that Romney endorsed a AWB in debate mere days after his NRA endorsement.

          Thanks.

          • Harold says:

            Again, like his Massachusetts signing comments, those were just words, I would even point out they were Republican Presidential policy since the retired Reagan turned on us WRT to AWs as G. H. W. Bush was screwing us.

            Sebastian (I gather) and I judge actions more strongly than words, although of course the words of a politician are often actions. Like Reid’s recent pouring cold water on the prospects of a new AW ban.

            • Arnie says:

              Oh, but would Reid agree to a “compromise” on private sales background checks and/or a magazine ban, which I fear the House may consider. An “A-rated” Senator should be shouting “Absolutely no more infringements!” from the Capitol Dome, not quibbling about possible compromises with the House! Blast these traitorous Dems!

        • Patrick H says:

          We’d actually be worse off with Obama in this case. Romney would have jumped on the gun control bus, and just like the Republicans in NY, they would have followed.

          Yes it sucks that we have a President pushing for it, but we would have had that either way.

          • Harold says:

            Errr, don’t you mean “worse off with Romney”? And, yep, I wouldn’t be at all surprised if that would have happened, although I’m pretty sure you’re overestimating the likely Republican response.

          • Alpheus says:

            I’m not sure if this is true. One of the reasons the Democrats and the Media are so emboldened right now, is that Obama won, and it has given them a (hopefully) false sense of empowerment.

            Had Romney won the Presidency, there’s a chance that the usual suspects would hold their tongues, and continue to wait for the right moment. Indeed, who knows how long they have waited for this day to occur?

            Here’s to hoping that we defeat them on this issue once and for all!

            • Alpheus says:

              Having said this, I have to add a caveat: I’m not entirely sure if it’s false, either. After all, we’re discussing the Stupid Party here, and it’s difficult to tell the difference between incompetence and malice. (It’s clear to me, though, that the Evil Party is acting in pure malice.)

  13. Jeremiah says:

    Let’s all keep a cool head. This might be an attempt to goad us into actions that will be used against us. We cannot let fear or anxiety drive us, only determination to keep our rights. Manchin is a lying politician. That always comes back to haunt. Let’s make sure he never runs for office, and whatever office he was promised never materializes through bad publicity.

    • countertop says:

      This.

      I need more proof than a random email on Facebook from someone I don’t know at all. I do lot with VCDL, and there’s some there who’s political instincts I trust. But there’s lots who I don’t. And who have some real comprehension issues. Or ability to understand why someone is saying. Or the ability to effectively develop pressure to keep someone on our side, without repeling him to the other side and doing lasting damage to our cause.

  14. Ish says:

    “[Senator Manchin] believe[s] that the only purposes behind gun ownership and the second amendment are hunting and recreational shooting[.]”

    Senator Manchin also believe the United States Supreme Court to be a concert venue for Diana Ross and her Motown group…

  15. jerry says:

    “pro-gun democrats”? Really? Until some of u realize there really is no such thing, our rights will be in jeopardy. If people who claim to be on the side of the second amendment cannot realize that the democrats are anti-gun, period end of sentence, we are in trouble. Manchin and Rockefeller, what about Heitkamp? Casey? Not up for 6 more years. We have got to understand that there is a such thing as lesser of two evils. Some of u people had better learn that lesson, and fast

  16. Arnie says:

    Speaking of “pro-gun Democrats,” this morning’s news programs showed Harry Reid quibbling about formulating Senate gun control laws that would also pass the House. I realize that could actually be read as positive for our side, but you’d think an NRA A-rated Senator would be raving against any new gun-control legislation af all, not coyly speaking of passing some compromise bill that even slowly erode our rights. I will NOT trust ANY Democrat on this issue. Party pressure is too powerful for them to resist (remember Ben Nelson of Nebraska on Obamacare?). SOME Republicans I can trust. But NO Democrats – not anymore!
    For what it’s worth. – Arnie

    • Harold says:

      The example you should cite is John Dingle, who voted for Clinton’s AW ban and then resigned from his NRA Board seat the next day.

      His only act of apostasy than I can remember, but it was a big one and probably was viewed as giving cover to other Democrats, many of whom of course found themselves spending more time with their families in 1995.

      Ben Nelson, well, did he break any pledges vs. simply voting against the will of his constituents, which is frequently described an act of courage?

      • Arnie says:

        Yes, he was an opponent of national health care all of his political career until Reid and Obama got to him. That’s why he was so demonized afterward, not just because he betrayed his constituents’ interests (which you are correct in describing as courageous), but his long-standing moderate-conservative principles which he held as both Governor and young Senator. His fall was a personal disgrace as well as a professional failure.

  17. Andy B. says:

    I’m seldom known for finding silver linings in anything, but I’m hoping the early bullshit going down in other states like NY and WV will inspire Pennsylvanians to quadruple their efforts so it won’t happen here. Then we can use the saved resources to help our brothers and sisters in other states to fight their way back.

  18. Sterling Archer says:

    This may sound extreme….but I am connvinced that someday future historians will mention the Democrat party in the same breath as the Nazi party and Soviet Communist party.

    I no longer associate with Democrats nor do I try to engage them in discussion. Every election I work like crazy to ensure that none of them are elected to ANY office. Not even dog catcher.

    They have chosen their side and I have chosen mine. I choose liberty …they choose tyranny.

    • Andy B. says:

      I half agree.

      I have been saying Americans are in a position like the Germans in the early ’30s; caught between the communists and the fascists; whichever one they picked was going to be a mistake.

      If an honest history is ever written in the future, I think that’s how the early 21st century United States will be remembered. But of course histories are always written by its winners, and if either the communists or the fascists win, the losing faction will be excoriated.

  19. Richard says:

    No offense, but, some of you are mistaken to trust Republicans on this issue any more than the Dems. Did anybody get the form letter back from our Republican Sen. Toomey yet? The one I got makes me think he is going to waffle like Manchin, only more low key.

    • Sterling Archer says:

      I agree that we need to lean on Republicans to keep them honest but this “We can’t trust Republicans anymore than Democrats” line is getting old.

      When you think of Gun Control/confiscation the first word that comes to mind is “DEMOCRATS”. I can’t think of any gun control proposals in recent memory that have been initiated or championed by Republicans. Compare that to the Democrat Party where disarmament is their answer to any and every problem.

      I feel the same way when I hear people bad-mouth the NRA. If it weren’t for the NRA we WOULDN’T have a 2A anymore! We need to stop cannibalizing our allies because they aren’t perfect.

      • Richard says:

        Hi Sterling, all I am saying is we need to not assume a supposed A rated Republican will stand firm without some leaning on them.
        In my response from our supposed conservative Senator, I got no indication of his support for gun owners’ rights:

        “Dear richard,
        Thank you for contacting me about the killings in Newtown, CT. I appreciate hearing from you.
        Like all Americans, I was horrified and sickened to learn about the mass murder in Newtown, CT on December 14, 2012. As you know, Adam Lanza murdered 26 people that day, including educators and young children at Sandy Hook Elementary School and his mother at her house, before committing suicide. My thoughts and prayers are with the victims and the families who were affected.
        In response, we need to come together as a nation, carefully reflect on what happened, and have a thoughtful dialogue on how we can improve public safety and protect our children. Of note, this atrocity in Newtown was the direct result of serious mental illness – something we have consistently observed in other mass killings over the years. We therefore need to better protect ourselves from mentally ill individuals who seek to carry out such atrocities. We also need to review and improve how we take care of the mentally ill. I therefore value your input on this issue and look forward to Congress debating which policies should be implemented to improve public safety” Thank you again for your correspondence. Please do not hesitate to contact me in the future if I can be of assistance.
        Sincerely,
        Pat Toomey
        US Senator Pennsylvania”

        I am really concerned in that this is not my first dance on this issue, and for the first time it seems there are too many Republicans leaders testing the wind instead of standing on principle.

        • Sterling Archer says:

          Richard, I hear you. We sometimes need to stay on top of Republicans to keep them true.

          I just got off the phone with Toomey’s office. His staff made it clear to me that He is a strong 2A supporter and not considering any weapons bans. The letter he sent you makes no mention of guns at all….he focuses instead on Mental illnes.

          I feel good with Toomey(R). On the other hand, I think that Bob Casey(D) is going to SCREW us royally.

    • Arnie says:

      Richard, I agree SOME Republicans are untrustworthy, but SOME are quite dependable. And after hearing “A-rated” Democrat Reid waffle this morning, I am convinced NO Democrat is trustworthy on the issue.

      An example from Nebraska: “war hero ” Democrat Bob Kerry ran for Senator against Republican Deb Fischer last Fall. He campaigned as a “moderate” Democrat who would support “Nebraska” values. Well, he was Nebraska’s Senator once before and made the same claims to get into office. Once there, he became an immediate shill for the socialist Democratic majority. Ben Nelson took longer to fold, but even he caved to the “Cornhusker kickback” and single-handedly gave us Obama’s Commie-care!

      On the other hand, Republican Deb Fischer, I believe, will stand solid for the Constitution on militia arms and limited federal government, at least as well as anyone else up on that hill. I will be the first to repent if she folds,

      Bottom line, I don’t think it’s just the politician, dear Sebastian. Party pressure is immense in Washington. Something happens to even well-meaning people once they arrive inside that Belt-way. Nelson was actually a pretty conservative Democrat for awhile, but caved and betrayed his principles and his constituents when the pressure from Reid and Obama became too great. A Republican won’t cave to Democratic leadership on the gun issue. They may cave to their constituents on it (which is more understandable), but not to Harry or Nancy. Nelson betrayed his constituents to placate Reid and Obama.

      And that, I think, is the difference.

      If my Republican guy betrays me, it’s because I have been out-voiced or out-voted by my neighbors. That could be MY fault. But when my Democratic guy betrays me, it’s because he has defected TO HIS PARTY LEADERSHIP. That is HIS fault! And it disgusts me, and I am sick of it continuing to happen! And in my State, it’s ALWAYS the Democrats who do this to me! I loathe them!

      Does any of this makes sense?

      – Arnie

      • Andy B. says:

        What makes sense about your analysis is, that in either example, i.e., selling out to your neighbors, or selling out to party leadership, in either case the legislator in question had no fundamental principles he or she would stand by, regardless of the cost. Clinging to the office and hopes of future rewards were more powerful motivators than claimed principles.

        In either case, I fail to see a difference.

        • Arnie says:

          I see your point, Andy B., and it’s a good one. Both betray their principles (and campaign platforms/promises). But, I will concede to the politician that among his principles is the duty to represent his constituents, and when their objectives change, his duty to represent them will motivate either a similar change in his objectives, or a change in representatives. Honor would bid him suffer the latter; self-preservation usually impels him to the former. Your are right in that he should do the honorable thing, but I understand his motivation to keep his job.

          But there is still a difference, if only in degree. The one betrays his principles for his constituents. The other betrays BOTH his principles AND his constituents.

          And in my State, the latter is always, ALWAYS the “conservative” Democrat!

          Respectfully, Arnie

          • Andy B. says:

            We have restarted the classic discussion; how, in a “representative” government, the representative should balance the desires of his constituents against his own principles, judgment, and special knowledge of an issue. A legislator who merely obeys the desires of his voting constituents may as well be a computer server that records incoming electronic votes and then reports the summary in the way it casts its own vote in the legislature; i.e., a virtual direct democracy. (BTW, I would have no problem with a direct democracy if it could be constrained by a constitution; but since we have seen that a representative democracy can’t/won’t be constrained by a constitution, neither would be a direct democracy.)

            I fear in our current crisis, we are going to have a lot of legislators voting for things they know will accomplish nothing good, and may be counterproductive, but they will do it because the ideas are popular with constituents, or worse yet, the media will say are “what everyone wants.”

            • Arnie says:

              Again, good points! I especially agree with your phrase “balance their desires with his principles.” Indeed, that would be ideal. It reminds me of a line by a Southern delegate to the Continental Congress in the play “1776” quoting Edmund Burke: “A representative owes his constituents not only his industry, but his judgment; and he betrays their interests were he to sacrifice it to their opinions.” Love that quote!
              And I still think Democrats sacrifice BOTH for the crumbs from their Party Leadership’s table. The Tea Party seems to keep the Republican leadership from running so roughshod. I guess we’ll find out soon.
              – Arnie

  20. Mike123 says:

    The protests at the state capitols should be redirected toward the media offices, since clearly they are the ones pushing this.

  21. Clay says:

    He’s just like Jennifer Granholm, in that while governor of the state he signed pro gun legislation and then once he no longer had to worry about the common man’s vote, he showed his true colors. Bill Clinton was the same.

  22. Steve says:

    Joe Manchin need to reintroduce himself with the West Virginia state Constitution:

    3-22. Right to keep and bear arms.
    A person has the right to keep and bear arms for the defense of self, family, home and state, and for lawful hunting and recreational use.

    • Trevor Shepherd says:

      Manchin is going to be next Interior Dept Secretary. Current guy announced this AM that he is leaving post in March.

      • HappyWarrior6 says:

        If this is true about Manchin leaving the Senate to take the Interior post then this would be good news to an emboldened GOP that could seize on his turncoat behavior on gun rights. Even though the governor, who will be nominating his replacement, is a Democrat, hopefully he knows what’s best for the WV Democrat party as well. This and Rockefeller leaving could be a game changer by 2014 if the GOP actually wants to seize on opportunity. Manchin showing his true colors at this point in the game could actually be a win for gun rights in a sadistic kind of way.

  23. Divemedic says:

    What scares me is anytime a politician that obviously cares not for the Constitution makes any sort of reference to there not being a next election to worry about.

  24. Steve says:

    P.S. Joe in case you forgot this too: Montani Semper Liberi

  25. Bram says:

    Democrat, Lying Sack of Shit. You are being redundant.

    I have left the Republican Party because there are too many of them willing to sell us out. I never considered the DNC – they will ALL sell us out.

    They have no respect for the Constitution, the Bill of Rights, my privacy, or my property. What would make you think any of them can be trusted on guns?

  26. Clay says:

    If Joe Manchin is getting a cabinet position then it will be up to the governor of West Virginia to appoint a temporary replacement. I will be intrigued to see what kind of a person might be appointed by a governor with a name like Earl Ray Tomblin.

    • HappyWarrior6 says:

      “What’s in a name?”

      Yes, Clay, I actually had the same thought about that as well.

Trackbacks/Pingbacks

  1. Joe Manchin: Gun Grabbing Liar First, Patriot Last | Daily Pundit - [...] Joe Manchin: Lying Sack of Shit on Guns | Shall Not Be Questioned I’ve been a big booster of …
  2. SayUncle » Flip flop and you don’t stop - [...] Historically pro-gun Senator Joe Manchin caved on the gun issue just after Sandy Hook. Then, he sort of uncaved. …
  3. A Dollop of Gun News « Lawrence Person's BattleSwarm Blog - [...] The title pretty much says it all: Joe Manchin: Lying Sack of Shit on Guns. [...]
  4. Random notes: January 24, 2013. « Whipped Cream Difficulties - [...] look! The lying sack of shit Joe Manchin is starting to feel the [...]
top