Poll: Why did Eric Cantor vote against the fiscal cliff deal?

January 2, 2013
By
Sorry, there are no polls available at the moment.

24 Responses to Poll: Why did Eric Cantor vote against the fiscal cliff deal?

  1. Destroy the liberal media on January 2, 2013 at 9:08 am

    On Sunday, 2 days after the CT shooting, a man went to a restaurant in San Antonio to kill his X-girlfriend. After he shot her, most of the people in the restaurant fled next door to a theater. The gunman followed them and entered the theater so he could shoot more people. He started shooting and people in the theater started running and screaming. It’s like the Aurora, CO theater story plus a restaurant! Now aren’t you wondering why this isn’t a lead story in the national media along with the school shooting?

    There was an off duty county deputy at the theater.
    SHE pulled out her gun and shot the man 4 times before he had a chance to kill anyone. So since this story makes the point that the best thing to stop a bad person with a gun is a good person with a gun, the media is treating it like it never happened. Only the local media covered it. The city is giving her a medal next week. Just thought you’d like to know.

    http://www.mysanantonio.com/news/local_news/article/Two-wounded-in-theater-shooting-4122668.php

    • RedStateGal on January 2, 2013 at 9:24 am

      This is good to know. I’m spreading the word. Also, we need to remind people over and over that Stalin and Hitler first removed guns from private citizens, then started coercing and abusing the people. Standard Dictator behaviour.

    • Stuart P on January 2, 2013 at 2:33 pm

      I guess it just doesn’t make sense if it wasn’t so easy to get guns the shooting wouldn’t have happened at all and no one would have been shot or died.

      Part of why this sort of story doesn’t make big headlines is because a single shooting is probably less rare than a dog bites a man story today in America. If you want to make the front page you need to go all out rampage.

      Also note the person was shot by a police officer. Most people use to shooting at targets just don’t have what it takes to shoot at people. That usually takes special training.

      Some kid got shot a few weeks ago in a dispute with his neighbor over playing music too loud. Gun ownership didn’t protect his freedom. That story didn’t get wide spread coverage either.

      If one of the arguments is that owning handguns and SMG’s is that it is protecting you from the government then you’re a fool. Only a fool would believe your 4 or 5 guns is somehow going to keep a gunship from blowing the crap of your home. To believe otherwise you have to be deluded.

      • Evan3457 on January 2, 2013 at 2:55 pm

        I wonder how police train to “shoot at people”?

        I’d be very surprised if they train police to “shoot at people” by….shooting at people. It seems much more likely to me that they train police to “shoot at people” by actually…”shooting at targets” in tactical simulations.

        Oh, and what about the relative numbers of people using handguns in their defense, vs. people getting shot in moronic circumstances. I’d be very surprised if it wasn’t 10-to-1 (at least) in favor of defending themselves.

      • Setnaffa on January 2, 2013 at 4:36 pm

        In Stuart P’s world, no one is supposed to get uppity and defend themselves.

        In our world, when seconds count, the police are minutes away.

        • Stuart on January 2, 2013 at 4:56 pm

          Sort of funny the sites holly roller so ready to gun people down. So very christian of you..

          • ip727 on January 2, 2013 at 6:04 pm

            Those people who beat their swords into plow shares will be ruled by those who did the reverse process.

            The availability of firearms isn’t the problem, it’s the surplus of criminals that’s the problem.
            The idea of blaming an inanimate object is an exercise in stupidity.

          • Stuart Pope on January 2, 2013 at 7:14 pm

            If anyone knows stupidity it is certainly you.

            Guns just walk into places on their own and start shooting at people right?

            Forget trigger locks and gun lockers. What should obviously be done is people with low IQ’s shouldn’t be allowed to own firearms. That would disqualify you of course.

      • Ben Dover on January 2, 2013 at 10:37 pm

        SP, you are clueless and deluded. Thanks for sharing, now
        GFYS

        • The Trolls on January 3, 2013 at 4:46 am

          Right wing nutters love false equivalences, they are vitamins for their delusions. In their world the actions of an off duty cop supports an NRA slogan about good guys. In their world Americans’ valid concerns about assault rifles and high capacity magazines evokes images of Hitler and Stalin totalitarian actions.

          Just put your NRA slogans down, bury them in the ground, they have taken possession of you.

          • KevPB on January 3, 2013 at 8:39 am

            If big gov’t outlaws guns, then ONLY criminals will have them.

            That’s not a slogan — That’s a fact proven throughout the world

            A fact that the leftist nitwits will continue to ignore
            A fact that the libturds cannot dispute, which is why they lie and live in their delusional little fantasylands.

            The delusional liberals will never graps the facts or truth. The lefty libturds are self-deluded and unhinged; they lash-out at anyone who confronts them with actual reality.

            Another fact, which ‘the trolls’ prove in virtually every thread.

          • SP on January 3, 2013 at 2:37 pm

            The truth is that every civilized nation that has gun control laws has fractional gun rate crimes compared to that of the USA. Something wing nuts will never admit.

            Waiting periods, safety courses, 5 round clips, gun lockers and trigger locks plus spot checks. Simple the murder rate goes down.

            More guns, less laws the murder rate looks like what you see here. Another fact republicans will never admit to.

          • The Trolls on January 3, 2013 at 5:49 pm

            KevPB lashes out at anyone who confronts him with reality. Truths that he cannot dispute, from his delusional fantasy world. Fact is that I have guns, and I have had them for decades, and I am not worried one bit about this big government that has KevPB frothing. Assault rifles with high capacity magazines are another story, that is what sober Americans are concerned about. Nobody needs to own them, and they aren’t mentioned in the Constitution any more than an LPG, because they didn’t exist in 1770s America.

          • KevPB on January 4, 2013 at 10:48 am

            Owning a gun in the Philippines, for example, is almost impossible since they have no constitutional rights and Philippine government STRICTLY regulates any firearms, with penalties of imprisonment between 4 to 6 years for possession of low power firearms and 8 years for high powered firearms.

            So, who has the guns??

            DUH!! The murdering criminals do, of course.

            And what do the criminals do with their guns??

            They MURDER lots of people who don’t have guns, of course

            And what do the gun-grabber morons do next??

            President Benigno Aquino III, said the killings “will certainly fuel the efforts of the Philippine National Police in its drive against loose firearms.”

            They try to take away even more guns from even people, which only results in more innocent people being killed by criminals who will ALWAYS have guns.

            But no doubt the left will continue to live in willful ignorance.

            That’s what the self-deluded left does best.

          • hPOPE on January 4, 2013 at 1:28 pm

            Where you conceived anally? That is the only reason I can think of that someone would compare crime in a nation with a 4 billion dollar economy to crime in a nation that has 15 trillion dollar economy.

            You are obviously kind of dumb otherwise you might have been able to absorb through that thick skull after having read it a few times that introducing laws to bring down the murder rate and taking guns away are different things. I guess not though Moron needs to read that a few more times. It’s like trying to teach a 6 year old.

            Stop being so paranoid about the scary BIG Government coming to take your guns that isn’t going to happen. The Supreme Court has recently ruled, twice (in 2008 and 2010) that banning handguns would be unconstitutional.

          • The Trolls still sucking mommy's tit on January 4, 2013 at 9:19 pm

            Hey dumbass,

            Chicago has extremely tough gun laws but Chicago LEADS the nation in gun VIOLENCE!

            Next time, try to brush up on the fact before you post your stupidity.

            Idiot.

          • Maddoggie on January 5, 2013 at 5:47 am

            Fox News, still giving Poli posters their talking points.

          • STOP THE DERP on January 5, 2013 at 7:42 am

            DERP

  2. ip727 on January 2, 2013 at 9:41 am

    If he had any principles, he would have voted against bringing the issue up for a vote, but he voted yes on that issue.

  3. Hera on January 2, 2013 at 11:08 am

    I read Cantor voted against only after there were enough votes for the measure to pass.

  4. WhiteOut on January 2, 2013 at 11:51 am

    I’ll bet the real answer re Cantor is neither. Many of the squish ‘Pubs who come from conservative districts need to be able to vote the conservative position in order to have a record to produce later. They whipped up the votes long before 11:45 last night, and then they knew who has to be able to vote which way…

    if Cantor were going to challenge Boner it would have happened already, and he would not have been part of the leadership washing out the conservatives form their committee chairs…

  5. hotair on January 2, 2013 at 12:49 pm

    Neither is the real answer. Cantor voted against in case Boehner gets voted out as speaker. The “establishment” leadership needs to keep one of their own as speaker. Cantor is that fall back guy. He gets to make the conservative vote to be an acceptable alternative to Boehner.

  6. ip727 on January 2, 2013 at 1:43 pm

    A parliament of whores.

  7. Evan3457 on January 2, 2013 at 2:57 pm

    Why did Eric Cantor vote against the fiscal cliff deal?

    Because it’s a shit sandwich?

    Nahhhh; too obvious.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *