Obama-Backed Gun Bills a Long Shot in Congress

Washington (CNN) —┬áDespite supporters’ hopes that this time it’s different, President Barack Obama’s new call for restricting some semi-automatic rifles and high-capacity magazines will face deeply entrenched resistance in the Republican-controlled House of Representatives and could be a long shot even in the Democratic-led Senate.

Any gun legislation sent to the House “is going to have to pass with most Democrats and a few Republicans,” said Nathan Gonzales, deputy editor of the Rothenberg Political Report. “This would be an even more high-profile bill.”

And Obama’s call for Congress to robama-signs-piceinstate the federal ban on military-style rifles that expired in 2004 “is a further reach than some of the other proposals that are being tossed around,” Gonzales said.

“There is no way that it is going to pass with a majority of Republican support,” he said. “That is just the reality of the situation. It is going to take virtually all the Democrats, and all the Democrats won’t vote for that.”

Obama and Vice President Joe Biden laid out a package of measures aimed at reducing gun violence Wednesday, just over a month after the December massacre at a Connecticut elementary school.

The killings of 26 people there followed a July rampage in a movie theater in Aurora, Colorado, that left 12 dead and the August attack on a Sikh temple in Wisconsin that killed another six.

“The world has changed, and it’s demanding action,” said Biden, who led a White House task force on gun violence after the Connecticut slayings.

But before the announcement, local officials in at least three states vowed to resist any new gun controls.

And Second Amendment fans have poured out their vituperation online, some floridly warning of a power grab by the Obama administration.

Texas state Rep. Steve Toth told CNN on Wednesday that he’ll introduce legislation that would make it illegal to enforce a federal gun ban.

“We’re going to do everything we can to call people back to the belief and the understanding that we’re a constitutional republic and that our rights do not come from Congress,” he said. “Our rights come from God and are enumerated in the Constitution.”

And in a video that spread virally across the Internet, the head of a Tennessee gun training and accessory company warned “all you patriots” to “get ready to fight” if the Obama administration took steps to restrict firearms.

“I am not letting my country be ruled by a dictator. I’m not letting anybody take my guns. If it goes one inch further, I’m gonna start killing people,” Tactical Response CEO James Yeager vowed.

In a later video, in which he’s accompanied by his attorney, Yeager apologized “for letting my anger get the better of me” and cautioned viewers, “It’s not time for any type of violent action.”

Obama on Wednesday signed 23 orders that don’t require congressional approval that he said would stiffen background checks on gun buyers and expand safety programs in schools.

And he called on Congress to restrict ammunition magazines to no more than 10 rounds and to require a background check for anyone buying a gun, whether at a store or in a private sale or gun show.

The steps that require legislative action are likely to bump up against the often-visceral opposition of lawmakers from conservative districts — and some of their more outspoken constituents.

Most Republicans in the House of Representatives have top rankings from the National Rifle Association, the powerful gun-rights lobby, which quickly criticized the White House plans.

But it’s not just Republicans: Many Democrats, particularly in the conservative South and rural West, are vocal gun-rights supporters as well.

“Guns have been one of the key issues that more moderate Democrats have used to express their independence from the Democratic Party, and this gun talk is putting a strain on that independence,” Gonzales said.

Though they might be willing to support proposals such as a ban on large-capacity magazines, they’re unlikely to vote to ban “an actual gun,” he said.

“You can just see the ads — ‘They are taking guns away’ — where with these other items it is different,” Gonzales said.

Even in the Senate, where Democrats control the chamber, Democratic leadership sources told CNN that passing any new legislation will be extremely difficult.

More than a dozen vulnerable Democrats from conservative states will likely resist much of what the president is pushing, the sources said.

Those sources say they have no intention of putting their members in politically vulnerable position on a gun measure unless they are sure it can reach the president’s desk.

That means not only getting enough red-state Democrats on board, but getting enough Republicans to break a possible GOP filibuster.

But Rep. Carolyn McCarthy, D-New York, said the tide appears to have shifted in favor of gun control after the Connecticut killings.

A CNN/Time magazine/ORC International poll released Wednesday found 55% of Americans generally favor stricter gun control laws, with 56% saying that it’s currently too easy to buy guns in this country — but only 39% say that stricter gun controls would reduce gun violence all by themselves.

McCarthy said Senate approval “might even give some members of Congress the spine to do the right thing.”

“You know, the NRA is not in line with an awful lot of their members, and that is something we’re counting on to go forward,” said McCarthy, whose husband was among the six killed when a deranged gunman opened fire on a Long Island commuter train in 1993

December’s killings have “gone to the heart of every mother, father, grandparent thinking about their children, grandchildren. We have to do something,” she added.

148 comments

  • WTE

    HEre we go. Lets make it harder for law abiding people to get weapons. Banning HCM's will do nothing.
    How stupid can this man get?

    • patriothere

      All this stupid debate does is expose where you stand politically. Are you a country boy who lives in a wood cabin clutching his whiskey his bible and his guns, or are you a city boy who pays taxes, supports democracy and doesn't want to live in the wild west. That's the debate. Are you to the extreme right where you stockpile weapons and live a paranoid life or are you moderate like these proposals are.

      holmes would not have killed all those theater patrons with a knife. That's the difference. Preventing mass shootings.

      Personally I think the government should do nothing because the US government is too incompetent to do anything and violent crime is low compared to countries like england and mexico.

      These things happen, they are tragic, no need to blow it out of proportion.

  • Javi

    Wait if they are limiting the sell on ammunition Can a criminal just come back every month and buy more and have alot ammunition for his/hers next crime? i mean its not like they keep track on every bullet you use!

      • BINMAN

        Which validates the point that gun control has no affect on the criminals, it just disarms the law abiding so we are unable to protect ourselves.

          • JohnJacob_JS

            yeah, i get it, the 2nd amendment. i wholly support it as well as the other 26 amendments. gun control, assault weapons ban, etc etc… whatever term the media is using, where in that are you getting where the government will be disarming law abiding citizens and essentially, abolishing the 2nd?

          • izzy

            Do you really except them to suddenly wipe out our rights all at once?

            The government is just testing waters with this, if they manage to do this they'll know how far they can push us over without causing mayhem. Then slowly and surely with time it'll extend into other amendments for other stupid reasons.

          • JohnJacob_JS

            "they" haven't really done much. it's alot of enforcement issues with current laws.

            these arguments about losing your 2nd Amendment rights (by the way, there are 26 other Amendments to the Constitution, not just the 2nd) are old. the Clinton administration had the same battles back in 1994 with http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assault_Weapons_Ban …. during and after that ban, the 2nd amendment stood strong. the Government is NOT trying to abolish your 2nd amendment rights. the only thing that has been generated by all this gun control debate is FEAR. and when the people are afraid that is when they are vulnerable to propaganda and influence by those speaking the loudest on the soap box.

            ask yourself, who has benefitted the most from all this debate? who is making a lot of money from people being scared of having their guns or types of guns taken away? it sure isn't the Government.

          • WTE

            wiki huh? You must be new at this. Here is the deal. all your handler obama has done is make it harder for law abiding citizens. He has does nothing to stop the criminal element.

          • Roger

            Quote me.
            In the public arena challenging someone is not the same as a vigilante style lynching, which you have advocate for in the past.

          • JohnJacob_JS

            well, roger beat me to it. but, yep, as an american in the united states, i am innocent of any and all crimes until proven guilty.

            so… how is this harder on me again?

            (that's what she said)

          • JohnJacob_JS

            reverse psychology only works on the weak. but, nonetheless, nice try.

            listen dude, in america… we have what is called… Presumption of Innocence… i included a link… if you didn't like that one… here's another… http://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/criminal-p… … if you don't like the american judicial system, that's ok… however they do things where you're from, i'm sure it works for you. good luck.

          • JohnJacob_JS

            you don't seem to be a big a fan of common sense, even though you claim to "understand".

            until you prove me guilty of anything, i'm innocent of everything. and since my innocence has not been compromised, that would make me a law abiding citizen.

            i don't have to prove myself as being lawful. you have to prove me to be unlawful. give it a shot.

          • WTE

            You don't seem to understand how a debate works. I challenged you to prove something and you could not do that. Oh and in case you missed it this is not the court of law

          • Roger

            He understands perfectly.
            He's debating and you're trying to browbeat him as the hack troll you are. Sitting at your work terminal hiding behind a rotating ISP and other precautions so you can post during work hours and attack people who value our justice system.

            Why not come out and demand sharia courts? Just too much a coward?

          • JohnJacob_JS

            it must be great to simply ignore FACTS of LAW during a debate when it doesn't coincide with your arguments.

            ok, i'll tell you what, you post your real name, real address and i'll mail you copies of my W2 and Social Security card. then, you can look me up and confirm my status as a law-abiding citizen.

          • Roger

            He posted a comment about an arrest, and he wanted that presumption of innocence.

            It's amazing how a conversion someplace along the lines to a more 'muslim friendly' view of things changed him.
            67 weeks ago @ KOMO – Seattle, WA – Ind. teen pleads guilt… · 0 replies · +2 points
            I normally agree with what you say but not this time. I went to party when I was 18 many, many years ago. I pulled up in the driveway grabbed a beer out of my cooler and walked up to the house. As I got close to the house cops came out of the house. I told them I was not old enough to drink and the cop grabbed me "wall stunned" and took me to jail. I was charged with disorderly conduct, contributing, possession of marijuana. The pot was in the house, the underage kids were in the house and I was never "disorderly" , and I had never been in the house but since I was the oldest I got charged. I took it to a jury trial where the cops said I threw the pot in the house down the hallway the bag of pot then turned right and landed in the bathroom. Good thing I was lucky enough to hire a "criminal defense layer" to sort out all the lies the cops told. I was found "Not Guilty"

          • di_da_is_alpha

            Are you trying to purchase a firearm? If not, your argument is moot. It's like a tea-totaler claiming that prohibition had no effect on their ability to buy a drink, But if you did want to purchase a firearm, as a (presumed) law abiding citizen, gun control measures do make it more difficult for you to purchase a firearm. However, those same measures have absolutely no effect on the ability of criminals to get their hands on firearms.

          • JohnJacob_JS

            let's presume (as difficult as it is some for some) i'm a law abiding citizen. i want to buy 1 firearm to protect my family and my property. explain the challenges that i would encounter in purchasing 1 firearm.

          • di_da_is_alpha

            "(by the way, there are 26 other Amendments to the Constitution, not just the 2nd)"

            You can thank the 2nd for keeping the other 25 safe and sound. And who's suffering from irrational fear? That would be people like you, people willing to give up their rights (or the rights of others) for the government's promise of increased security.

          • JohnJacob_JS

            please quote my statement where i indicated my willingness to relinquish MINE or ANY other American's 2nd Amendment rights.

          • BINMAN

            Why don't you watch that documentary I mentioned and then ask me?
            You are apparently oblivious to the tyranny you are already under.
            Patriot Act, NDAA, NSA, DHS, TSA…

          • JohnJacob_JS

            i didn't watch it. but, i did google reviews on it. lots of people loved it. and by people, i mean, those that were already biased against the government and gun control anyway.

            and yes, i guess the Federal agencies/programs you've mentioned could be considered tyrannical, if you are paranoid or are a terrorist.

          • WTE

            Are you here to discuss issues or just troll?
            All I see is trolling comments from you attacking me.
            The issue is gun control, please stay on topic

          • Roger

            I made a calm and polite observation.
            You are the one that jumps to insults. Don't blame me if you're just mean spirited and want to run roughshod over people here to debate.

            Disagreeing is fine, if you have facts on your side you shouldnt' need to be such a jerk about saying why you're right.

          • WTE

            People who obey gun-control laws are less able to defend themselves against those who don’t obey those same laws. Moreover, there is no reason to believe that a war on guns will rid American society of guns any more than the war on drugs has eradicated drugs from our society. Those who wish to purchase illegal guns will be able to do so on the black market as easily as they purchase drugs.

          • Roger

            If a paid hack troll agreed with me, I'd be worried.

            6 minutes ago @ Breitbart.com – Protests to greet Ahma… · 1 reply · 0 points
            I'm like jesus, I'm gonna chase you money changers out of the temple and out of town and of course out of this forum. Me and ohsoquiet and a few other REAL AMERICANS who are being PAID to be here like you Israeli PR men. I'm here to chase you filth out.

          • patriothere

            I am against your shared values of murder and genocide and hate and barbarism.

            Thus you shall do to all the cities which are very far
            from you, which are not cities of the nations here. But in the cities of these peoples that the
            LORD your God gives you for an inheritance, you shall save nothing that breathes . . . Deuteronomy 20:10-16

          • JohnJacob_JS

            the only argument i would have is to what extent shall one be a law abider before one is not? if you do not believe in the laws set forth (and obviously there are copius reasons why), does that allow for individual non-compliance?

  • krw

    This president has betrayed everything the bill of rights and the constitution has fought to preserve! He will not be satisfied until every working american is supporting every non-working slacker!

    • KathyS

      krw – such BS. I am a gun owner and go out shooting for recreation. I firmly belive in the Second Amendment. Did you even read the article? Sorry you gun fanatics. I agree with this. He is not taking guns away from us – people get a grip. And WTH and WTF does gun control have to do with people on welfare? Seriously dude – give up the kool aid switch to whiskey or tequila before you lose it.

    • JohnJacob_JS

      what Amendment(s) are you referring to that the president is betraying that will allow working americans to support non-working slackers?

  • Robert

    Let the gun lovers have their toys, just ban assault weapons, ammunition and clips.
    A great idea would be to tax the hell out of ammunition rounds the way they tax cigarette sales….

  • No one

    What about those cops who shot those that didn't even have a weapon? They are still working with their GUN!!!, Nobody considers them, because they didn't kill kids.

  • notsurprised

    Okay. I agree with the background checks and the stuff for the mentally ill. But the assault weapons ban and ten round max is questionable. Also why do they keep neglecting bullies? The Columbine shooters were victims of bullying. The Bakersfield shooter was bullied. So what? Bully victims that are suffering from anxiety, depression, low self esteem, are treated as monsters when it was bullies who are the true monsters, that created these people? Why id the victim of bullying treated as the bad guy? Why can't they do something about bullying?

    • BINMAN

      Did you know that they are already classifying people such as Christians, conservatives, veterans and constitutionalists as potential terrorist threats?
      Don't be duped by their agenda, as it is an evil one. Agenda 21.

    • toast is good

      Bullies have been around for a long time. Why don't they focus on mental health and the drugs we are feeding kids and adults. We have no idea what giving drugs that alters brain chemistry does to people in the long run. However, there have been numerous links to the shooters being on these 'mental health drugs.' Also, the mental health laws are such that we cannot do anything to these people until they actually shoot someone.

      Also, banning guns is not going to stop or solve this. It is using a tragedy to force an agenda.

    • rational thinker

      guns, rifles & shotguns are all a citizen should have access to, and half can't be trusted with those. there is no real reason or purpose to allow any type of assault or sem-assault weapons to be used by any citizen, unless they feel the need to ber able shred another human to death is their Constitutional right.

  • Charli

    Thank you Mr. President. It is a start, but we still have far to go to be a civilzed nation. Way too many crazies running around waving flags to hide who they really are.

    • Kev

      Umm…the President didn't do anything…background checks and getting rid of high capacity magazines….the background checks will be a joke…people will start buying guns for others..for example..if I had a shady background, but say my wife had a clean background, I would just have her buy the weapon I wanted. Everyone does realize that the shooter in Newtown was not shooting his own registered gun, right? Also, a ten round magazine versus a 15 round magazine really makes no difference. If a killer wants to get off 20 shots he still has to do one reload. A speed reload with a semi-automatic pistol takes less than a second. If Obama really wants to stop gun crime he will start sending people to prison for long terms that use a gun in a crime. And make them complete their sentences! We are headed to using flintlock long rifles to protect ourselves and our homes.

  • BINMAN

    A quote from Hitler's Mein Kampf
    "The state must declare the child to be the most precious treasure of the people. As long as the government is perceived as working for the benefit of the children, the people will happily endure almost any curtailment of liberty and almost any deprivation."
    You would have to be blind not to see this for what it is.
    Anyone supporting this will certainly enjoy their 200'x200' Agenda 21 living quarters and their new gov't assignment, if they survive the initial culling.

    • rational thinker

      Binman, repeating fake "quotes" still does not make them real. So it's fake; end of story

      October 11, 2012
      By michaelsuede

      I recently wrote an article where I cited a quote from Adolf Hilter, turns out it was actually a manufactured quote derived from a passage in a fictional letter written by Rabbi Daniel Lapin in 2004.
      The state must declare the child to be the most precious treasure of the people. As long as the government is perceived as working for the benefit of the children, the people will happily endure almost any curtailment of liberty and almost any deprivation.

      My apologies.

  • MIMI

    AT LEAST HE IS TRYING TO DO SOMETHING TO KEEP OUR CHILDREN SAFE SOME OF YOU ARE COMPLAINING BUT IF IT WAS ONE OF YOUR CHILDREN YOU WOULD NOT BE SAYING ANYTHING! SO GOOD JOB OBAMA OUR KIDS COME FIRST!

  • admin

    Obama's just making things worse by giving the Sheeple & kool aid drinkers a false sense of security Now they think the laws will protect them.Laws don't work on outlaws / crazies bent on taking someone with them.You don't bring a Cellphone to a gunfight unless you want to tell the cops where to come to identify the body's,.at the next shooting.Get those kids some of that real Obama security he has at the white house, might keep the body count down.

    • JohnJacob_JS

      well, it's not "Obama" security, it's Secret Service. besides counterfeiting, their profession is to protect the President and his family.

      although not ALL schools have security, there are a lot that already do. then again, VA Tech had armed security patrols and 32 students still got killed.

      • PublicNME

        If the teachers were armed the body count would have been less.if none at all. The training of the individuals involved has a lot to do with the outcome.If the security guards are armed but are busy texting or talking not paying attention(like most Security guard you see around town) that's no good .they have to be in the right place and alert to be effective.

  • chrys

    so now it is going to raise the crime in every place in America because instead of gold and silver people are going to break in to homes and steal guns and ammo. Not only that but that is against our constitutional right!!! keep our kids safe my ass!!!! MY KIDS were raised around guns in fact they own their own guns…so let this be known only people who are afraid to put hand to ass when their kids were growing up…are the kids that also didn't get thieir parents attention…who kill kids!!!! not guns!!!!!!

    • JohnJacob_JS

      easy there bubba. turn your NRA hat back around and relax. no one wants to take your guns. well, maybe your kids' guns, depending how old they are.

  • Jana

    Obama the commie. He CANNOT change The Second Ammendment. He and his fuzzbutt, stupid shit Biden don't have enought brains to come out of the cold.

    LAWBREAKING WHACKJOBS DO NOT ABIDE BY LAWS OF ANY KIND IN THIS COUNTRY. LAW ABIDING CITIZENS IN THIS COUNTRY, TO WHICH THEY ARE THE MAJORITY, HAVE THE RIGHT TO BEAR ARMS. THE RIGHT TO DEFEND OURSELVES IF AND WHEN THE NEED ARISES. TAKE THAT AWAY FROM THE AMERICAN PEOPLE, WHICH HE WILL NOT BE ABLE TO DO, AND YOU WILL SEE MAAAAJOR UPHEAVEL IN THIS COUNTRY. EVER SINCE BERRRRRACK HAS BEEN IN OFFICE, THERE HAS BEEN NOTHING BUT CORRUPTION AND SEVERE DIVISION IN THIS COUNTRY. MORE PEOPLE HAVE KILLED THEMSELVES AND OTHERS THAT EVER BEFORE. THIS COUNTRY IS GOING DOWN THE TOILET IN LARGE PART BECAUSE OF BERRRRRACK, AND THE ABSOLUTE FACT THAT HE IS NOT, WILL NOT, AND WILL NEVER BE A LEADER. HE COMPLETELY SUCKS AS A LEADER AND AS A PRESIDENT.

    GUNS WILL CONTINUE TO GET INTO THE WRONG HANDS. IT'S UNFORTUNATELY COMMONPLACE IN THIS COUNTRY. OBAMA "LAWS" DON'T MEAN SHIT TO CRIMINALS, BUT BERRRRRRACK IS TOO FUCKING STUUUUUUUPID TO REALIZE THAT FACT. THERE ARE NOOOO LAWS IN THE MINDS OF CRIMINALS, BECAUSE THEY DO NOT THINK RATIONALLY AND AREN'T CAPABLE TO THINK RATIONALLY.

  • mark

    i noticed obama's missing a chink kid in his staged phony photo-op!……..what a complete joke this country has turned into!………what a buncha zombies in this country…in the last 4 years…..obama's been in 3 wars,is still in 1,,,,where the f**k are the democratic hippie war protestors?………THE YOUNG KIDS TODAY,WILL BE SPEAKING CHINEESE OR FARSIE IN THE NEXT 50 YEARS!………

  • Rational Individual

    This is complete bullshit, I think we should write a new law that allows children to bring guns to school so they can protect themselves from each other. And people in jail should be given assault rifles to protect themselves from being shanked. Our pets should be allowed to carry guns so they can protect themselves from other pets. Our houses should be mounted with automatic turrets that shoot anyone that comes within 50 meters. There should be weapons mounted on cars so we can shoot people who cut us off in traffic. People should be allowed to carry guns into planes because you never know when a terrorist will get you. People should be allowed to shoot police on sight because you never know if they are just faking being an officer. /end_sarcasm
    When does it end. Why cant people see that they are just trying to make it harder for people to take guns out of the hands of deranged individuals. At no point will an officer show up at your house and attempt to steal your firearms.

  • ScottyBoy

    Look at this jackass signing the orders with all of the children standing behind him. He's amazing at marketing bullshit. If there gays massacred in a shooting, he'd have a bunch of flamers standing there with him too.

  • Roger

    True, but I prefer the founding fathers, since they cited the rights granted us by our creator. Even if the judge got it right, he's not the authority that hands out our rights.

  • Roger

    What sharia friendly system has ever made any country great? It's the kind that stones rape victims.And our wester style of justice has left a trail of great nations, from Rome down through time. Ours most recently can be traced to the plains where King John signed the Magna carta.

  • patriothere

    At least you don't deny the fact that you shrae values with a bunch of theives liars and murderers that advocate genocide and murder against anyone who is not a part of that value system.

    Thus you shall do to all the cities which are very far
    from you, which are not cities of the nations here. But in the cities of these peoples that the
    LORD your God gives you for an inheritance, you shall save nothing that breathes . . .

    Deuteronomy 20:10-16

    • WTE

      That is the whole quote. If it's not prove it. Otherwise again you show yourself as a liar <DIV style=”FONT-FAMILY: times new roman, new york, times, serif; FONT-SIZE: 12pt”> <DIV style=”FONT-FAMILY: times new roman, new york, times, serif; FONT-SIZE: 12pt”> <DIV dir=ltr> <DIV style=”BORDER-BOTTOM: #ccc 1px solid; BORDER-LEFT: #ccc 1px solid; PADDING-BOTTOM: 0px; LINE-HEIGHT: 0; MARGIN: 5px 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 0px; PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; HEIGHT: 0px; FONT-SIZE: 0px; BORDER-TOP: #ccc 1px solid; BORDER-RIGHT: #ccc 1px solid; PADDING-TOP: 0px”></DIV>

  • Roger

    Prove you didn't. And it was your writing style.Wee, you may enjoy talking about man/boy sex since you have muslim friendly values. But this isn't the kind of site that does that.

    • WTE

      I don't use “work terminal” those are words you use. Here is the proof I didn't: http://intensedebate.com/people/WeeToddEdwards <DIV style=”FONT-FAMILY: times new roman, new york, times, serif; FONT-SIZE: 12pt”> <DIV style=”FONT-FAMILY: times new roman, new york, times, serif; FONT-SIZE: 12pt”> <DIV dir=ltr> <DIV style=”BORDER-BOTTOM: #ccc 1px solid; BORDER-LEFT: #ccc 1px solid; PADDING-BOTTOM: 0px; LINE-HEIGHT: 0; MARGIN: 5px 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 0px; PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; HEIGHT: 0px; FONT-SIZE: 0px; BORDER-TOP: #ccc 1px solid; BORDER-RIGHT: #ccc 1px solid; PADDING-TOP: 0px”></DIV>

      • Roger

        Poor little wee thing. Did the cleric up your quota of comments or something? Or have you fallen off the wagon and started hitting that mtn dew again?

        There are meetings that can help with that.

        • WTE

          What are you talking about? This is a discussion on gun control quit trolling <DIV style=”FONT-FAMILY: times new roman, new york, times, serif; FONT-SIZE: 12pt”> <DIV style=”FONT-FAMILY: times new roman, new york, times, serif; FONT-SIZE: 12pt”> <DIV dir=ltr> <DIV style=”BORDER-BOTTOM: #ccc 1px solid; BORDER-LEFT: #ccc 1px solid; PADDING-BOTTOM: 0px; LINE-HEIGHT: 0; MARGIN: 5px 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 0px; PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; HEIGHT: 0px; FONT-SIZE: 0px; BORDER-TOP: #ccc 1px solid; BORDER-RIGHT: #ccc 1px solid; PADDING-TOP: 0px”></DIV>

          • Roger

            I'm talking about your last comment and how it didn't make sense.

            Even ignoring all those headers you can't control. Is that part of the server you hide behind?

          • WTE

            It would help if your comments made sense <DIV style=”FONT-FAMILY: times new roman, new york, times, serif; FONT-SIZE: 12pt”> <DIV style=”FONT-FAMILY: times new roman, new york, times, serif; FONT-SIZE: 12pt”> <DIV dir=ltr> <DIV style=”BORDER-BOTTOM: #ccc 1px solid; BORDER-LEFT: #ccc 1px solid; PADDING-BOTTOM: 0px; LINE-HEIGHT: 0; MARGIN: 5px 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 0px; PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; HEIGHT: 0px; FONT-SIZE: 0px; BORDER-TOP: #ccc 1px solid; BORDER-RIGHT: #ccc 1px solid; PADDING-TOP: 0px”></DIV>

          • WTE

            . <DIV style=”FONT-FAMILY: times new roman, new york, times, serif; FONT-SIZE: 12pt”> <DIV style=”FONT-FAMILY: times new roman, new york, times, serif; FONT-SIZE: 12pt”> <DIV dir=ltr> <DIV style=”BORDER-BOTTOM: #ccc 1px solid; BORDER-LEFT: #ccc 1px solid; PADDING-BOTTOM: 0px; LINE-HEIGHT: 0; MARGIN: 5px 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 0px; PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; HEIGHT: 0px; FONT-SIZE: 0px; BORDER-TOP: #ccc 1px solid; BORDER-RIGHT: #ccc 1px solid; PADDING-TOP: 0px”></DIV>

          • WTE

            . <DIV style=”FONT-FAMILY: times new roman, new york, times, serif; FONT-SIZE: 12pt”> <DIV style=”FONT-FAMILY: times new roman, new york, times, serif; FONT-SIZE: 12pt”> <DIV dir=ltr> <DIV style=”BORDER-BOTTOM: #ccc 1px solid; BORDER-LEFT: #ccc 1px solid; PADDING-BOTTOM: 0px; LINE-HEIGHT: 0; MARGIN: 5px 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 0px; PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; HEIGHT: 0px; FONT-SIZE: 0px; BORDER-TOP: #ccc 1px solid; BORDER-RIGHT: #ccc 1px solid; PADDING-TOP: 0px”></DIV>

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s