Maria Cantwells relply to my scathing letter

squeezeplae · Feb 27, 2013

:cuss: i tried to reply to the "Form Letter" and point out some of the flaws in her thinking. I was told that this e-mail account is not monitored. Really then why did I get that response. This tells me doesn't care what her constituants think as long as she has a cushy seat to put her fanny in.:cuss:

squeezeplae · Feb 28, 2013

Here is the reply from Sen Patty Murray for the same letter;

Thank you for contacting my office. Your thoughtful comments are greatly appreciated.

The views of Washingtonians are very important to my work. I will keep your thoughts in mind, and I encourage you to stay in touch. If you would like to know more about my work in the Senate, please feel free to sign up for my weekly updates at http://murray.senate.gov/ u pdates . Again, thank you for taking the time to share your thoughts with me.

Sincerely,
Patty Murray
United States Senator

amlevin · Mar 1, 2013

Only thing these letters accomplish is to get you on their "e-mail list" and if you used their office website, and gave an address like many ask for, you'll then be deluged with requests for campaign donations.

Nothing will change until the players in WA DC are changed. They don't represent you and I, they represent the interests that spend all the money on their election, re-election campaigns.

LkWd_Don · Mar 2, 2013

sudden valley gunner said:
I support second amendment....but......

Means she does not support the 2A.

If she said otherwise, she would be admitting to NOT honoring her Oath of Office.

What she and many others do not understand is that any bill that could be considered as an infringement, that they openly support in this manner is technically a Violation of their Oaths, and I wish there were a way that we could go after them for Breach of Contract - Giving False Official Statements - or something along those lines.

Reasoning:

From, US Constitution, Article 6, Clause 3.

The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution;

http://www.usconstitution.net/xconst_A6.html

From, Washington State Constitution, Article 1, Section 6.

SECTION 6 OATHS - MODE OF ADMINISTERING. The mode of administering an oath, or affirmation, shall be such as may be most consistent with and binding upon the conscience of the person to whom such oath, or affirmation, may be administered.

http://www.leg.wa.gov/LawsAndAgencyRules/Pages/constitution.aspx

The problem as I see it is that the Washington State Constitution tries to bind their oath of Office to their personal Conscience.
When someone clearly has no conscience, there is no way to bind them to their oath.

sudden valley gunner · Mar 3, 2013

LkWd_Don;1906410 When someone clearly has no conscience said:
True words!

davidmcbeth · Mar 3, 2013

Beretta92FSLady said:
Heller stated nothing about regulation, and banning certain firearms; they can't have an outright ban on all firearms.

Heller did make statements about what guns are and are not covered under the 2nd amendment -- maybe another read is in order?

LarryM · Mar 4, 2013

An Idea: Just send any anti gun activist a letter with a picture of a gallows and the following phrase: "Nuremberg"...where the last gaggle of "National Socialists" ended up......

I'm not kidding.....Awful Adolf and his band of Leftists were defeated by the righteous - Libtards think they can trample over our rights and get away with it?

They really need to think again.......

Maria Cantwells relply to my scathing letter

squeezeplae

Regular Member

squeezeplae

Regular Member

amlevin

Regular Member

LkWd_Don

Regular Member

sudden valley gunner

Regular Member

davidmcbeth

Banned

LarryM

Regular Member