Federal judge orders AG Healey to appear for deposition Dec 13th

To remind everyone again, Baker just didn't turn a blind eye to what Healy did, she already outed him as a co-conspirator in the planning of it.
So trying to justify voting for him again because he's "Not as bad as her ." Is pissing up a rope.
Yes if she runs against him and we have to make that choice it's going to suck , but rewarding him for boning us would suck worst.
All we're doing is encouraging the R's to keep dumping RINO pos characters like him on us.
That's the reason we never gain any ground here.
I never won a fight in my life that I didn't take a few hits as well.
The guy will NEVER and I mean NEVER do one damn thing for the gun owners in this state and will green light anything anyone else does.
So tell me how voting for him somehow benefits us in any way.
I'm also not sold on the defeatist rhetoric that we can't effect the election.
The guy squeaked it by 20k over Martha.
There's 400 thousand of us.
My math may suck but not that bad.
 
Dadstoys said:
To remind everyone again, Baker just didn't turn a blind eye to what Healy did, she already outed him as a co-conspirator in the planning of it.
Click to expand...

OK, let's look at this with a different set of lenses.

Healey's credibility and honesty is so well regarded . . . [rolleyes]

What makes you think that she told him in detail what she was up to and he agreed to that?

I'm willing to bet that the "co-conspirator" was merely told "I'm going to enforce the AWB (as it already existed) against those dealers who are not abiding by it" and of course Baker would go along. Until one understands that her mis-interpretation flies in the face of the old Fed Ban and BATFE rulings on it, what she did sounds sensible to a non-gun person.

In other words I do NOT believe Healey is telling the truth here, that she laid out all of what she planned and the fact that it went well beyond the Fed Ban (which is the MA Ban) for Baker and that is what he agreed to.
 
There may be 400,000 gun owners in MA, but they don't vote as a bloc. What is GOAL's membership? 20,000?

Baker did throw us under the bus, but Healey was the one who came up with the idea for her "clarification" and implemented it. She was active. He was passive.

It seems to me that the choice is between bad and worse. I'm not sure that having worse as a governor is worth it to teach bad a lesson.

ETA: I understand those who disagree with me. I just think it isn't any easy question for many of us.
 
Last edited:
Are people here actively arguing that they would vote for and rather have Healy as Gov over Baker because they think he was complicit in her tyranny?

Stupidity knows no bounds.

The Republican Party MUST run Rino's in MA or they wouldn't get past 15% of the vote. Not even the moderate Dbags in MA would vote for a conservative. Seriously, it's like you guys just arrived in this state and have no idea how the politics work.
 
Len-2A Training said:
OK, let's look at this with a different set of lenses.

Healey's credibility and honesty is so well regarded . . . [rolleyes]

What makes you think that she told him in detail what she was up to and he agreed to that?

I'm willing to bet that the "co-conspirator" was merely told "I'm going to enforce the AWB (as it already existed) against those dealers who are not abiding by it" and of course Baker would go along. Until one understands that her mis-interpretation flies in the face of the old Fed Ban and BATFE rulings on it, what she did sounds sensible to a non-gun person.

In other words I do NOT believe Healey is telling the truth here, that she laid out all of what she planned and the fact that it went well beyond the Fed Ban (which is the MA Ban) for Baker and that is what he agreed to.
Click to expand...

You would have thought he would have said "Hey wait a minute , I didn't agree to this. " if that was the case.
His original comment on the matter was "She has the authority. "
I don't know why people can't wrap their heads around him being a two faced RINO, that's not one bit better than her.
 
bigblue said:
Are people here actively arguing that they would vote for and rather have Healy as Gov over Baker because they think he was complicit in her tyranny?

Stupidity knows no bounds.

The Republican Party MUST run Rino's in MA or they wouldn't get past 15% of the vote. Not even the moderate Dbags in MA would vote for a conservative. Seriously, it's like you guys just arrived in this state and have no idea how the politics work.
Click to expand...

Ok , then what's the point then ?
We have to elect someone who will ram us just as hard, but has a different letter after their name on the ballot ?
Even gun hating Devalue didn't manage to stick it to us this bad.
Do you agree or disagree with that ?
Romney stuck it to us hard and dry.
Scotty boy was humping Obama's leg like a dog.
Charlie drove it home the rest of the way without so much as a kiss.
But dammit they where Republicans .
Thank you sir , may I have another ?
 
M1911 said:
There may be 400,000 gun owners in MA, but they don't vote as a bloc. What is GOAL's membership? 20,000?

Baker did throw us under the bus, but Healey was the one who came up with the idea for her "clarification" and implemented it. She was active. He was passive.

It seems to me that the choice is between bad and worse. I'm not sure that having worse as a governor is worth it to teach bad a lesson.

ETA: I understand those who disagree with me. I just think it isn't any easy question for many of us.
Click to expand...

It's not an easy question at all.
My Grandfathers expression of "Never reward stupidity. It only encourages it. " applies.
 
Dadstoys said:
You would have thought he would have said "Hey wait a minute , I didn't agree to this. " if that was the case.
His original comment on the matter was "She has the authority. "
I don't know why people can't wrap their heads around him being a two faced RINO, that's not one bit better than her.
Click to expand...

He doesn't want to "offend" anybody. That's why he did not disagree with her. I also agree he likely didn't get the whole story from Healey

He also is reluctant to offend any voters, so he will steer clear of any hot-button legislation, such as gun control. Healey will not be so reluctant. Sure, it sucks, but being from MA, you should be used to voting to save the status quo. The Devil you know...
 
It is important to remember that it is 10 times harder to get a right back than to protect it while you have it.

Look at CO - two legislators were recalled due to the 15 round mag limit, and a third resigned so that a D could be appointed as her replacement, rather than face a recall then a special election where a R would probably win.

Despite all this, the CO mag ban remains in effect.

So, consider what new policies Baker will champion and enact vs what ones would come from a Healy administration.
 
Last edited:
Billsail said:
He doesn't want to "offend" anybody. That's why he did not disagree with her. I also agree he likely didn't get the whole story from Healey

He also is reluctant to offend any voters, so he will steer clear of any hot-button legislation, such as gun control. Healey will not be so reluctant. Sure, it sucks, but being from MA, you should be used to voting to save the status quo. The Devil you know...
Click to expand...

It was an evil you lived with till we started loosing ground , not maintaining.
Mark my words, Maura isn't done , and our Republican "Lesser of two evils" will hold her jacket and maybe go fetch her a cold drink while she does it.
 
Rob Boudrie said:
It is important to remember that it is 10 times harder to get a right back than to protect it while you have it.

Look at CO - two legislators were recalled due to the 15 round mag limit, and a third resigned so that a D could be appointed as her replacement, rather than face a recall then a special election where a R would probably win.

Despite all this, the CO mag ban remains in effect.

So, consider what new policies Baker will champion and enact vs what ones would come from a Healy administration.
Click to expand...

Remember all that when the word compromise comes up !
 
My point was that you can't get a conservative elected in this state so you often up with Rino's who are worse than the Dbags they "oppose". They're ALL politicians so they ALL suck.

What does a good politician even look like?
 
Dadstoys said:
It was an evil you lived with till we started loosing ground , not maintaining.
Mark my words, Maura isn't done , and our Republican "Lesser of two evils" will hold her jacket and maybe go fetch her a cold drink while she does it.
Click to expand...

I have no doubt, and I will do everything I can to keep her out of the Governors seat. That said, I will do nothing to support Baker, short of my vote, if it comes to that. If a republican (or other party) challenger steps forward in the primary, I will give them 100% of my support!
 
So I am neither a D or an R when it comes to voter registration. I am a so called Independant who can vote in either primary ( but not both). So can we avoid having to choose between Maura and Baker by defeating either one or both in the primary?
 
Rob Boudrie said:
It is important to remember that it is 10 times harder to get a right back than to protect it while you have it.

Look at CO - two legislators were recalled due to the 15 round mag limit, and a third resigned so that a D could be appointed as her replacement, rather than face a recall then a special election where a R would probably win.

Despite all this, the CO mag ban remains in effect.

So, consider what new policies Baker will champion and enact vs what ones would come from a Healy administration.
Click to expand...

This is, of course, very true. Still, I don't think I can vote for the guy. In my mind he's a traitor and a sell-out. Our only hope is the courts anyway :(
 
northny said:
So I am neither a D or an R when it comes to voter registration. I am a so called Independant who can vote in either primary ( but not both). So can we avoid having to choose between Maura and Baker by defeating either one or both in the primary?
Click to expand...

On the Republican side, I don't see anyone with the stature to beat Baker.

I think the Democratic side likely has a deeper bench.
 
M1911 said:
On the Republican side, I don't see anyone with the stature to beat Baker.

I think the Democratic side likely has a deeper bench.
Click to expand...

They definitely have a deeper bench, but I could get behind Shaunna O'Connell, Geoff Diehl, or Jim Lyons. To name a few.
 
Dadstoys said:
You would have thought he would have said "Hey wait a minute , I didn't agree to this. " if that was the case.
His original comment on the matter was "She has the authority. "
I don't know why people can't wrap their heads around him being a two faced RINO, that's not one bit better than her.
Click to expand...

As I stated, if you know nothing about guns or the history of the Fed Ban, nothing she stated (on the surface) looks like she is inventing new law (which she is). Also the AG does indeed have the legal authority to interpret MGLs, that is indeed part of her job. So that statement you attribute to Baker is indeed correct . . . whether we like it or not. She does NOT have the authority to create new laws, but to the ignorant (and that includes Baker) they wouldn't know the ramifications of her pronouncement.


Billsail said:
He doesn't want to "offend" anybody. That's why he did not disagree with her. I also agree he likely didn't get the whole story from Healey

He also is reluctant to offend any voters, so he will steer clear of any hot-button legislation, such as gun control. Healey will not be so reluctant. Sure, it sucks, but being from MA, you should be used to voting to save the status quo. The Devil you know...
Click to expand...

I agree with you.
 
I know I'll get flamed for this, but one person who"might" have enough recognition and appeal is... no, not Curt Shilling... our pal Scott Brown. Yes, he absolutely was a major douche bag when he betrayed us. However, he still has a big fan base in MA. There are enough Republicans who have lost faith in Faker who would vote for Brown and there are likely a number of Dems who would vote for him as well in a general election.

With enough GOP support, money, backing by the right groups... he might have an outside shot. I don't trust him to do whats right on his own any more than Baker, but I do believe he will toe the line for his pal Trump and the party leadership more than good ol' Chuckie. I can't think of anyone else but we'd need someone with broad appeal and recognition.
 
If Healy becomes Gov - she can't do anything in regards to MGL's, just sign new ones that have to go through the House & Senate (that can override vetos easily).

Baker was elected to be at least somewhat different than the Dems - other than the R and the fact that he gets protested by the usual suspects, I see no real difference.

I'll vote third party, for the third election in a row, but I will also go an actively work against Baker and heckle him at any standouts near me.

Scotty? Seriously? We need to run a someone different than a D-lite.

We may not win, but it will get the true 'brand' out there and not guarantee a loss the next time around when the base abandons the Rino. Perhaps with time, a victory could be had - but playing the Rino games gets you the same thing as a D-lite. If the Dems are given full run in moonbat world, let it burn.
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

Nashville School Shooting: Federal Judge Orders Release of Transgender Shooter’s Journals
Replies
7
Views
361
bejay
B
Federal Judge Finds Pennsylvania Law Barring 18-20 Year-Olds from Concealed Carry Unconstitutional
Replies
1
Views
164
Dennis in MA
Dennis in MA
Finally decided to apply for my FFL
Replies
13
Views
617
dcmdon
dcmdon
Federal Judge Rules Millions Of NRA Members Exempt From ATF Pistol Brace Rule
Replies
12
Views
652
1919FAN
1919FAN
Defensive Shooting Leads to Murder Charges, But Not for the Shooter
Replies
0
Views
163
Toast
Toast
Back
Top Bottom