Paymar's last Whine of this legislative session

View · by **minnhawk** on Sat May 25, 2013 7:46 am

"The legislative session concluded, sadly, with very little progress on preventing gun violence. I'm disappointed that legislators didn't have an opportunity to vote, or even debate, sensible gun control measures like background checks."

http://www.twincities.com/opinion/ci_23 ... und-checks

What a silly little man. First he co-sponsors completely radical gun control fascism created to make law-abiding Minnesotans felons by August 1st if we didn't either register or turn in our "ASSAULT RIFLES" as well as limiting magazine sizes and so on. Like the loyal apparatchik he is, he fell in line with his progressive anti-gun masters and introduced nearly identical gun control language that appeared in Colorado, New York and several other states.

So you scare the crap out of gun owners across the state regardless of their political affiliation and are surprised that we showed up en masse to fight you? Then you come back and whine about the fact you didn't have the opportunity to vote, or even debate, sensible gun control measures like background checks? Why didn't you want to even discuss the consensus background check proposal supported by gun owners and fellow democrats?

You really are as stupid as you sound, aren't you?

View · by **MXGreg** on Sat May 25, 2013 8:27 am

In all the comments after the article, there is only one that's on Paymar's side and it's from Heather Martens. :roll:

View · by **xd ED** on Sat May 25, 2013 10:32 am

Some excellent comments from some familiar names. :bravo:

View · by **minnhawk** on Sat May 25, 2013 5:47 pm

you know, maybe it is time that the 2nd amendment rights community start up a PAC to defeat Paymar in his next run for office. No one is invincible, and it would send a strong message to anti-gun politicians who initiate gun control legislation and waste a lot of time and money. I'll throw in a $100 to beat this clown.......

View · by **gunsmith** on Sat May 25, 2013 10:38 pm

Paymar was elected democratically, there's no reason to treat him like a diseased weasel just because he looks like one.

View · by **jshuberg** on Sat May 25, 2013 11:20 pm

Except that he also acts like one as well.

View · by **xd ED** on Sun May 26, 2013 2:25 am

Paymar seems to beat his election opponents better than 2:1 without spending much money.

Minnesota House of Representatives, District 64B (2010)
Candidate..................... Votes...............Percent
Michael Paymar (DFL) ........12,209..............69.39%
Andrew Smith (R)..............5,369...............30.52%
Write-In.............................16................0.09%

Paymar's campaign in 2010
Public Funds....................... $9,403
Kayser, Marlene B................... $375
Afscme Minnesota Council 5........$300
Kayser, Thomas .....................$250
Education Minnesota................$250

Total Raised in 2010...............$22,941

To remove him from office the hearts and minds of the electorate have to be changed.

And personally, I've always thought pocket gopher.

View · by **Lights** on Sun May 26, 2013 8:38 am

Yep beady eyes and chubby cheeks. :lol:

View · by **harryset** on Sun May 26, 2013 9:40 am

How long will it be before we can bust that 40% myth???

View · by **Heffay** on Sun May 26, 2013 11:22 am

You need to replace him with a gun friendly democrat. It can be done.

View · by **gunsmith** on Sun May 26, 2013 11:36 am

Paymar needs to be called out for his role in sinking the bi-partisan bill approved by Sheriff Stanek. That would have passed.

Paymar has an "Issue" now he can campaign on instead of a bill sponsored by DEMOCRAT Julia Ortman and others that would have helped.

Paymar needs to be labeled as some type of 'Molester' for lying to that 17 year old kid Sami Rami whose father was shot....The Schmuck is LYING. Paymar, stop lying to the children.

Paymar is lying in claiming he did everything possible to prevent gun thug violence when he refused to process a popular bi-partisan bill.

If Paymar is to be diminished politically he should be hammered over the head with that fact.

View · by **bstrawse** on Sun May 26, 2013 11:39 am

Heffay wrote:You need to replace him with a gun friendly democrat. It can be done.

^^ Heffay speaks the truth. A republican will not beat Paymar.
b

View · by **xd ED** on Sun May 26, 2013 11:50 am

bstrawse wrote:
Heffay wrote:You need to replace him with a gun friendly democrat. It can be done.

^^ Heffay speaks the truth. A republican will not beat Paymar.
b

Nope, not in St Paul.
And given his status/ seniority, no potent, team-playing democrat will likely run against him.

View · by **Heffay** on Sun May 26, 2013 11:56 am

xd ED wrote:And given his status/ seniority, no potent, team-playing democrat will likely run against him.

It would have to be a self-funded campaign. And it would have to focus on issues other than his gun record, as his constituents probably support his efforts.

What else has Paymar done over the past 2 years? Did he vote for the Vikings stadium?

View · by **xd ED** on Sun May 26, 2013 12:02 pm

Heffay wrote:
xd ED wrote:And given his status/ seniority, no potent, team-playing democrat will likely run against him.

It would have to be a self-funded campaign. And it would have to focus on issues other than his gun record, as his constituents probably support his efforts.

What else has Paymar done over the past 2 years? Did he vote for the Vikings stadium?

Agreed. You make a good point about a self-funded campaign, given the amount previously spent by him. However the price of that seat would get more expensive in a genuinely contested race. Still, it could be a manageable amount. But I wonder of those in the know would find the money better spent elsewhere?

According to MinnPost, NO on stadium....