Are you actually denying you said a bill couldn't pass without 51 votes, *******?
I absolutely said that 51 votes were needed if all senators er present and voting. Are you denying the fact that you said, "YES *******, FIFTY VOTES ARE ALL THAT IS NEEDED TO PASS A BILL WHEN ALL SENATORS ARE PRESENT AND VOTIING?" Y/N?golfboy » 08 May 2023, 9:29 pm » wrote: ↑ Are you actually denying you said a bill couldn't pass without 51 votes, *******?
There was no "when all senators are present and voting", and you know it.maineman » 08 May 2023, 9:34 pm » wrote: ↑ I absolutely said that 51 votes were needed if all senators er present and voting. Are you denying the fact that you said, "YES *******, FIFTY VOTES ARE ALL THAT IS NEEDED TO PASS A BILL WHEN ALL SENATORS ARE PRESENT AND VOTIING?" Y/N?
His lie IDENTIFIES as truthy.ConsRule » 08 May 2023, 4:56 pm » wrote: ↑ It will never become law in Texas. It was only voted out of committee. The House hasn't passed it...even if they pass it, it probably won't even make it to the floor in the Texas Senate. Then there is the certain veto waiting in the Governor's Mansion. Which is a good thing as it avoids the cost and time of having it overturned.
Why did you lie in the thread title?
The only reason we lowered the age of majority was to mollifiy draftees. We should have gotten rid of the draft, instead.Z09 » 08 May 2023, 5:58 pm » wrote: ↑ Question....
Would it really hurt to get these AR 15s out of the hands of teenagers?
Sadly, this is 100% accurate. It's like the left with live birth abortion.DeplorablePatriot » 08 May 2023, 6:02 pm » wrote: ↑ Don't let this fool you. Heard of give an inch, take a mile? Yeah, like Governor Pigslee in WA state. Starts out banning and restricting on a small scale. Then gets to the point where the state has the most anti-gun laws in the nation. That's how they do things. They set precedence, then set it again, then again and again. Soon enough, the "good guys" can't protect themselves at all. And the bad guys will always have the upper hand.
It's always about the kiddies with you diddlers.maineman » 08 May 2023, 7:22 pm » wrote: ↑ exactly...let's let kindergarteners carry assault weapons. It's their 2nd amendment right, and everyone knows, the only thing that can stop a bad kindergartener with an assault weapon is a good kindergartener with an assault weapon.
Nothing unConstitutional about protecting children from you, piece of ****.
Z09 » 08 May 2023, 5:58 pm » wrote: ↑ Question....
Would it really hurt to get these AR 15s out of the hands of teenagers?
I didn't. If some people chose to more read into it, that's on them, not me. I provided the link. I am all about full disclosure.
Z09 » 08 May 2023, 5:58 pm » wrote: ↑ Question....
Would it really hurt to get these AR 15s out of the hands of teenagers?
Yes...you did lie. The bill has NOT passed. It was voted out of a committee. FYI...it still has to go through another committee. If that committee votes to advance it, it would go to the full House for debate and possible vote. If it passes the House, it would go to the Senate for possible consideration. If they vote to approve it, THEN you can correctly say it "passes in Texas". Keep in mind, any bill that hasn't cleared ALL COMMITTEES by the end of the day on Thursday are dead for this legislative session. The legislature will be meeting in regular session for another 20 days. After that, for the next two years, any meeting of the full legislature must be called by the governor...and he controls the agenda of what can be considered during a called session.Punch » 09 May 2023, 12:32 am » wrote: ↑ I didn't. If some people chose to more read into it, that's on them, not me. I provided the link. I am all about full disclosure.
No, but I've always said, "give 'em an inch and they'll take the ruler"...
JuCo 5 percenter...72
“Show me the man and I’ll find you the crime” ~ LAVRENTIY BERIA
"Try to get past your passionate ignorance and learn to accept what actually happened." ~ brown's unheeded words of wisdom I am. I ALWAYS said that a bill could not pass the Senate with less than 51 votes if all senators were present and voting. You claimed that number was 50. And we both know why... you were thinking the word "senators" but when it swirled around in your brain to get typed on your keyboard it came out "votes". And then you never had the strength of character to simply admit that you had erred. A bill CAN pass the Senate with all senators present and voting with only 50 senators voting for it, but only if the Vice President is present and deigns to cast a vote in favor of the bill's passage. And given the rules of the Senate, a bill COULD pass in there with as few as 26 votes.golfboy » 08 May 2023, 9:29 pm » wrote: ↑ Are you actually denying you said a bill couldn't pass without 51 votes, *******?
maineman » 08 May 2023, 8:27 pm » wrote: ↑ I stole nothing. I earned my rank and my retirement. You were a mess cook.
NWP = Naval Warfare Publications.DeplorablePatriot » 09 May 2023, 2:58 pm » wrote: ↑ Maybe I missed it, but did you answer my question on another thread... "In the Navy, what does NWP stand for?" If you don't know, you were never an officer in the Navy. C'mon, let's do this.
I answered it. I am sorry you missed it.DeplorablePatriot » 09 May 2023, 2:58 pm » wrote: ↑ Maybe I missed it, but did you answer my question on another thread... "In the Navy, what does NWP stand for?" If you don't know, you were never an officer in the Navy. C'mon, let's do this.
Poor mainbitch, still touting his revised statement after getting embarrassed by his lack of knowlege about the Senate.maineman » 09 May 2023, 8:08 am » wrote: ↑ I am. I ALWAYS said that a bill could not pass the Senate with less than 51 votes if all senators were present and voting.