Got this auto reply from the recent GOA contact emails about RKBA issues. Third paragraph shows how he side-steps real 2A support when it's convenient:

Dear Mr. xxxxxxxxxxxxx,

          Thank you for contacting me regarding gun sales and ownership in America. I appreciate the opportunity to respond.

          I am a proud supporter of the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution and the right of law-abiding citizens to possess firearms. The Framers enshrined this right in our Constitution for a reason, and I remain committed to protecting that important liberty.

          At the same time, the safety and security of our families is one of my top priorities. As a U.S. Senator, I am committed to ensuring any legislative proposal that Congress considers carefully balances the preservation of every individual liberty enshrined in the U.S. Constitution with the promotion of public safety.

          Again, thank you for your correspondence. I am proud to represent every citizen in Florida and I appreciate the time you took to provide your position on this matter. Should you have any additional questions, please feel free to contact me.

Sincerely,

Rick Scott
United States Senator

The same shit he use to justify signing the last gun bill as Governor.  

I did not vote for him to be a senator and won't ever vote for him.

He needs to be primary out.

I got the same auto reply.  Didn't vote for the RINO for senate, and won't ever vote for RINO's again.  He's definently in the RINO camp.

He is no friend of ours.

Typical RINO bull shit.
The 2A doesn't need his support, and it's doesn't say anything about self righteous people balancing anything.

We're constantly told, by the Republican Establishment: "Well, this whimp is better than the Democrat.  And he makes a majority in the Senate, and votes for conservative judges."

True.  But to what benefit?  The Republicans had a majority in the Senate from 2015 -2021.  Here is a complete list of all the pro-gun bills they even got a floor vote on:





That is all.

With judges, we've been told about the 305 or whatever the number of judges that Trump nominated and had confirmed.   Nice.  Now here is the the complete list of all pro-gun rulings by judges since then that haven't been overturned:





That is all.


If you get Democrats running things, you get Democrat polices signed into law.  If you have Republicans running things, well, you get slightly fewer Democrat polices signed into law.  That's not a long term winning strategy for a party - "Vote for us, you'll get slightly less of what you don't want".

So we're left with Scott.  Slightly better then Skeletor Bill Nelson.  Votes for slightly fewer gun grabbing bills than Nelson would.  Hard to get fired up about that.

The bottom line is while voting RINO may have some short term benefit, long term it is a terrible strategy.  Don't think short term!  The only way the GOP embraces conservative principles are if they pay a price for selling us out.

Wrong. He has done a great job as Senator.  Not perfect, but he voted with Trump 99% of the time.

Actually, it does.  If you Bill Nelson clowns had gotten your way, the Dems would have a 51-49 majority, and the filibuster would be gone.

And Senator Scott is now in charge of recruiting Senate candidates in 2022.  His contacts from when his was governor, and his skills in winning 3 statewide elections in a purple state will be a strong asset in helping the Republicans retake the Senate next year.

You are wrong.  Period.

There is a good reason they never got any pro-gun bills to the floor.  They never had 60 votes for anything pro-gun.  The only thing holding a vote would do is allow Dems in red states to cast a meaningless pro-RKBA vote, which would help them get re-elected.  And it would waste time from confirming Trump nominees.

As for the "pro-RKBA" rulings, you are wrong again.  The 6th circuit overturned the bumpstock ban.  Uncle Joe's regime hasn't appealed the decision since they would likely lose at the USSC.  The ruling by the 6th is probably an effective "checkmate" against a ban on braces or similar executive orders.

As for pro-gun laws in the last 20 years: the Republicans got protection from frivolous lawsuits.  The Democrats got...... nothing.

But they never even got Milk Carton Cornyn's (my worthless, disappearing Senator for 5-1/2 of every 6 years) out of Committee.  It, like all pro-gun bills, is just a bone to throw our way to pretend they care about guns.

Would it have gotten 60 votes to proceed - we'll never know, as they didn't even try.  I've seen this over and over again from Republicans.  They claim they are pro-gun/anti-abortion/small government/ balance budget / strong borders while running, then about 36 seconds after they've been declared the winner they say they can't possibly actually do any of those things.

The classic "we're too imponent to do anything" was when the drunk John Bonner threw up his hands with his "we're only 1/2 of 1/3 of the government, so don't expect us to do anything we ran on".

Put the reciprocity bill to the floor, and make Tester / Manchin / dude from Indiana, dingbats from Missouri and ND, etc. have to either vote no on it and show how anti-carry they are, or vote yes and incur the wrath of the crazy-anti gunners who'd call them a sell out.  

Instead, we got nothing.  

As for bump stocks - the Appeals Court didn't overturn the ban itself, at least that's my reading - they said the the courts should not just rubber stamp via the Chevron case a ruling from a Federal agency, where the penalty was a criminal offense.  The Supreme Court had said the same thing many years ago, but as usually happens in the court system, lower courts ignore the higher rulings they don't like, and keep doing so, unless the SC slaps them down again and again till they get the message.  

So that bumpstock case just goes back to the District Judge, who most likely will again rubber stamp the ATF ban, for some other reason they will make up. Then that rulling will need to be appealed again.  An remember, this is only in the 6th Circuit - anywhere else it doesn't apply.  So hardly a wonderous result so far.  

The 9th said that the "bear arms" part of the 2nd Amendment doesn't actually exist, and has decided to hear the mag possession case again, which means with 100% certainty they will overrule the 2-1 ruling in place now about standard cap mags.

Meanwhile this week, the SC turned down several pro-gun cases on ownership after minor non-violet crimes, again refused to hear the NY carry case, and is generally hiding under a table to avoid anything that would make leftists mad enough to pack the court.  Some profile in courage.

Oh, and the SC also in effect allowed the gutting of the Lawful Commerce Act via refusing to hear Remington's appeal to them about being sued in Conn, after their state Supreme Court said that they had meanie ads in magazines and so the Federal law didn't apply (not kidding, they hung their hat on some ad in a gun mag from Bushmaster / Remington talking about defensive use of their firearms, which they rounded up to an unlawful threat, and so Remington was not acting legally thus could be sued).  SC on this - zzzzzz.

Look, I don't want to sound defeatist, but you need to know the situation you're in before you can plan out a path forward.  Fact is, we're in a left turning ratchet, that never gets moved to the right, regardless of how many Republicans get elected.  

Good reply, better than most in GD.  Here is my response.

1) Those "dingbats" from Indiana, ND, and MO lost in 2018 to GOP challengers.  If there was a floor vote on reciprocity, they probably would have voted "yes", but there would not have been 60 votes.  And there is a good chance their "yes" vote might have gotten them re-elected.  So it seems like a "all risk, no reward" to our side

2) We will see what happens now that the 6th has put the brakes on the bumpstock ban, but the 10th and DC circuits upheld it.  Typically, the USSC rules when different courts have different decisions.  The 6th circuit ruling was very good for us, however, and it was a TRUMP judge that made the difference.

3) Trump nearly flipped the 9th circuit.  He would have with another 4 years.  I agree they will "probably" rule against us.  60% chance.  90% chance before Trump.

4) Agree with your analysis on the Supreme Court.  This is why winning those 2 GA Senate seats (and others) was so important.  If the USSC makes a strong conservative ruling on anything, the Dems are likely to break the filibuster and pack the court.  The other consideration is when the USSC takes a case, you have to look at the composition of the court in the future.  A year from now, there could very likely be 2 new DEM judges on the court if Breyer retires and if one of the conservatives has to retire.  Then we are back to Roberts as the swing vote.  I don't trust him on a major RKBA case.  It sucks, but that is where we are at.  The only thing worse than the USSC not taking a case, is them taking a case and us losing.

5) I haven't followed the Remington case, but some of the folks here have the opinion they went too far.  I don't know.

6) Agree on knowing the situation.  The bottom line is with 53 GOP Senators, we can block Biden from anything.  With 47 GOP Senators, Biden can do anything.  Conversely, with 53 GOP Senators, a conservative President will be able to accomplish a lot.  With 47 GOP Senators, the dems will block him from anything.  Any number between that narrow margin, leaves it up to Machin, Sinema, Collins, Murkoski, and Romney.  We need more GOP Senators.  Period.  Conservatives in solid MAGA states.  Moderates in blue states.  Scott is pretty solid from a swing/purple state.  

I must say this is well articulated response...

For Scott purposes I would just submit that he has been like Jekyl and Hyde most days. He's the guy who opposed government spending on multiple wasteful infrastructure projects but then supported Medicaid expansion (no doubt because of the senior voting bloc in FL). He supported (and signed) the reactionary Bill after Parkland to allow for stronger red flag laws, raised Purchasing age, and put a waiting period in place but at the same time allowed teachers in the state to be armed.

In Scotts case he has been one of the most pro life Senators in recent years (which could again also have to do with the large Christian voting block in FL)

So sufficed to say: I can't figure him out. I know he's a former CEO and having rubbed elbows with a few in midsize and even large companies, I find that they are generally fiscally conservative while socially moderate as the norm.



I think he fits this mold which means he's probably not trustworthy on many of the "extreme right-wing" positions I take (aside from Right to Life issues it would seem).

As far as guns (and yes I know full well where I am posting) it would just appear that it's just not a sacred issue to him which means that he will gain a whole lot of hate here and in the community. But I would also say that without him, your alternative will no doubt be significantly worse....

The lesser of two evils is never fun but it's a reality in life. I also just want to put this out there: I believe he is going to be the next Senate Majority leader for the Republicans as Mcconnell seems to be wearing out his welcome and since Trump has put crosshairs on his back.

Scott is better than Nelson, no doubt about that.

The problem as I see it for the future viable of the Republican party is that it never, never actually accomplishes anything it runs on.  As I said, 38 seconds after they have been declared the winner on election night, a Republican will say how impossible it's going to be to pass anything they ran on, but if we elected ___ more Republicans next election, well maybe.

Then once in office, you still get Democrat policies, just fewer of them.  Bonner and Ryan were Speaker of the House for 8 years, and never actually passed a budget, much less one with Republican priorities.  They mastered the art of doing nothing for 11-1/2 months of the budget cycle, then frantically passing a Continuing Resolution, then stumbling around for a few months, one deadline after another coming and going with more CR's, then all of a sudden, out of thin air, they produce a 2000 page spending package, giving those who weren't working on it behinds the scenes 45 minutes to read it, then pass it with Democrat support to push it over the line.  

Do you see the Democrats doing any of that now?  No, they spend money on exactly what they want, to benefit their backers and supporters, with zero Republican support needed.

With Republican running things, you can't even get a Republican budget, much less any of the school choice / small government / balanced budget / pro-life / pro-gun rights that they claim to support.

When Democrats run the government, you get Democrat polices.  When Republicans run the government, you get slightly fewer Democrat polices.  Republicans controlled all three sections of the non-judicial government from 2017 -2019.  Here is a complete list of all the bills passed related to school choice / small government / balanced budget / pro-life / pro-gun rights:




That is all.  We did get bumpstocks banned by Administrative Rule, funded Planned Parenthood, huge deficits, expansion of government, and more H-1 visas.  But the Republican's did pass the single most important thing on their list - tax cut for companies.  There is no more holy grain for the Republican party than corporate tax rates.  For companies such as Nike, Coke, Apple, Goggle, and Amazon, who then fund the Democrat party.  The Republican party is so phony that it helps fund its opponents.  

To be a viable party, at some point you actually have to deliver on what you are voted in to do.  Saying "vote for us, you'll get slightly fewer of the polices you don't like" is not a path for success.  It's like choosing between a plane or a bus both going to the place you don't want to go.  One just gets you there slower.  Hard to get all fired up about voting, donating, attending rallies, talking to your friends and neighbors about who they should vote for, when the winning prize on election night is just a bus ticket to the place you still don't want to go.

I'd much rather see Scott as majority leader instead of Coynyn.  McConnell has done good overall, given his razor-thin majorities, but there was definitely a major FAIL late last year.  And honestly, I don't think that was 100% McConnell's fault

Scott is in an important position as he is in charge of recruiting new candidates to run for the Senate.  The last couple of cycles have been lackluster in terms of recruiting, and I think Scott will be a big improvement.

I call Cornyn Milk Carton Cornyn, as he disappears for 5-1/2 of every 6 years.  In the months before an election, he puts on these radio ads that go “Washington is broken, everyone knows that”.   Since he’s the #2 Republican, that doesn’t say much about him.  

He’d be a great Senator - if he represented Virginia.  Inoffensive and ineffective.

Dribble from Lord Voldemort.

Fuck him

As a state employee, he stuck it to us every chance he got. But, he seemed a better choice than Skeletor Nelson. So, I held my nose and cast my vote for him.

Here's to hoping he gets primaried out.

So to you people who say you didn’t vote for Scott then just who did you vote for ?

Thanks for nothing.  Trump stated repeatedly "we need more Republican Senators".  Your response?  Pound sand.

"Our Republican legislature" just passed a bill recognizing the right to carry in schools when they are used for church services. Yes, it would be great to have constitutional carry or open carry, but one step at a time is still progress.  Incrementalism has, in general, been a winning strategy for the RKBA.

"Our Republican legislature" has also passed voter integrity laws, laws expanding the right of self-defense during riots, and increasing the number of school vouchers.  Arguably, those are more important to the RKBA than actually passing pro-RKBA bills, since there is a good chance the USSC is about to overturn many of those gun laws.

Fortunately, enough of us did vote for Rick Scott for Senate, and he won that seat.  If he failed to win that seat, Mitt Romney would have been the deciding vote on Barrett.  And there is a really good chance he would have used that opportunity to screw Trump.  With Scott in that Senate seat, we didn't need Romney's vote.  With Kavanaugh now the swing vote, the USSC is poised to deliver a major RKBA victory next year.

Hopefully.  But when I look at Kaguangh, I see the same type of guy the Joker saw in the Chinaman in the Dark Night.  

"I know a squealer when I see one, and he's a squealer".

After a lifetime of working his way into the good graces of the DC Ruling Class, only to have them all turn on him at his hearing, but since then probably trying to work back into being liked by them, can Kau now deliver a ruling that goes against their wishes?

Yeah he's done this, and that, on minor stuff like not shutting down all churches from the Wuhan Virus - big deal to them.  Sure they'd like to see them all shut permanently, but it's not a huge issue for them.  But saying that the 2nd Amendment actually means something, and that some gun laws are unconstitutional - whoa!  That's going to put him back in their 2 Minute hate sessions.  And not just him, but his wife and children, who were drawn in a cartoon as preying to God and apologizing for their sexual predator father.

You'd hope so.  You'd hope he wake up each and every day wanting to take a dump in the open mouth of the DC Ruling Class, and then wash it in with a bladder full of hot, stinky piss.  But real men like that are few and far between.  Most are like John McShitStain who was called a crazy little dwarf of a war criminals in 2008, yet came crawling back to them for any scraps of praise, via hating the Tea Party movement, and trying to hobble Trump with the Russia Russia Russia fake story.  

Same with Mittens, who we were told gave a woman cancer, was mean to his dog, and bullied and shaved the head of a gay dude in high school.  Made him mad - only at those who voted for him.  He can't suck enough DC Ruling Class asshole.

There are few men like C Thomas, who can withstand the full might and fury of the DC Ruling Class, and not only beat it, but are willing to keep being their enemy for life, and fight against them every day.  Most come crawling back to stop the abuse hurled their way.  We'll see next year what type of man Kavuah is.  

Trump was half wrong.  We need more CONSERVATIVE Senators, not necessarily Republicans.

Look, we'd all like 60 Ted Cruz types in the Senate.  But you have to look at who can win in various races.

Scott was the only guy who was going to beat Nelson in 2018, and so it was either him, or Skeltor holding that seat.

What I dislike though is the "we've won, but now we surrender" aspect of the Republican party, where they run on a bunch of issue that they then suddenly say, after being elected, they can't possibly do.  Or they go half-way to whatever the Democrats want, while the Democrats would never meet halfway on school choice, abortion, voter fraud, etc.

Who was going to beat Nelson if not Scott?  Know another Florida politician with statewide name recognition, funding, and electoral success across the state?

Scott is OK for a swing state like Florida.  He votes the right way, and doesn't try to kiss up to the media like say Mittens does.  And has forged his own success, unlike the carpet bagger Lisa Multaztocksysdd (her dad was Alaska governor and she'd been trust -funding it so to speak) or however you spell that traitor's last name.

It's the back stabbers I hate - those two, or McShitStain, who never met a media asshole he didn't suck clean.  Those cunts should certainly be primaryed.  Even those like Scott need a blast of cold water in the primary to keep them from going native and being sucked in by the DC Ruling Class.

Until we have 51 CONSERVATIVE Senators, we need enough REPUBLICANS to make up the difference so we can have a majority.

Agreed.  Nelson would have beaten anyone else by 10 points, ACB probably would not have been confirmed, and we'd have a 51-49 D Senate.  Not good.

Scott has done a great job as Senator.  Rock solid, and with Trump 99% of the time.  Perhaps just as important, he is in charge of recruiting new candidates to run for the Senate in 2022.   His connections as a former governor might be enough to convince Ducey to run in AZ and Sununu in NH.  Maybe even Walker in Wisconsin in 2024.

I never said that there was anyone else that could beat Nelson.  That's why I said we're fucked either way.

So ethics and morals don't matter as long as they have the correct consonant after their name?  Their party affiliation doesn't mean anything if they don't act accordingly (such as Mitt Romney)..

I guess you are right.  We'd be in much better shape with Bill Nelson as Senator.  And a Democrat instead of Lindsey Graham, and so on.  Just think what the Dems could do with 80 Senators!  At least we would have 20 "ethical and moral" Conservative Senators who would be able to stop any legislation give nice speeches.

Seriously, what is wrong with you??? Rick Scott voted with Trump 99% of the time.  What do you want?  100 percent?

As for Romney, sure he is a turd, but better him in that seat than a Dem.  Utah is conservative enough where someone could and should primary him in 2024.  

Yeah, let's just give up.  Vote out ALL Republicans to "teach them a lesson".  Unless they are better than Thomas Jefferson, vote them out.  

It is not like Republicans in Florida just passed two pro-RKBA bills, or we just got constitutional carry in 4 states this year.  Wait a minute.......

There's the problem.  People like you can't see the forest for the trees.  You'll pack sunshine up Rick Scott's ass because he's not Bill Nelson, despite the fact that he's a liar that isn't a true conservative or supporter of the 2A.  He's a political whore, at best.

You're singing that asshole's praises, and you think something is wrong with me?  Lol

How many RINOs do we have in the state legislature?  How much more could we get done if we replaced them with true conservatives.

God forbid we try to actually make anything better.  We have a GOPe majority to protect.

Yeah, something is wrong with you.  Your BS purity test is a recipe for failure, unless you are Chuckie Schumer.

Because Rick Scott was able to vote to confirm Trump's judges, we will probably get the best pro-RKBA ruling in a generation, and achieve many lower court victories as well, such as the win in the 9th circuit yesterday.

I'm not arguing against that.  I'm just suggesting to not be an idiot about it.  Consider the following examples:

1) "Primarying" Susan Collins. Stupid.  She is from a blue state that hasn't voted GOP in 30 years.  Yeah, you could primary her to "prove a point", but we will lose in the general election

2) "Primarying" Liz Cheney.  Smart.  Wyoming is a +30R state, and there is essentially no chance of losing that seat in the general, and even if we did, we would win it  back next time

3) "Primarying" Rick Scott.  Epic stupid.  He votes with us 99% of the time, and you turn that 2024 election into a "toss-up", and waste resources defending that seat that are better spent trying to flip seats in Montana, Ohio, West Virginia, Wisconsin, Arizona, etc.