Peaceful John
Active Member
- May 31, 2011
- 239
Friends,
My wife and I had dinner with some old friends yesterday evening, and during the adult beverage period the conversation got around to gun control and the Republican nomination. Someone pointed out that both Newt and Mitt have a history of supporting gun controls, and it would be really, really hard for him, a gun rights enthusiast, to support either of them. That's the part of the conversation that I want to take into this forum.
To him I say, "Well, Buttercup, that was then and now is now".
Can any of us remember an unalterable position taken by a political candidate that was not subject to change? What about, "Read my lips: New new taxes"? "Remember how long that lasted? And most of us consequently swore not to support Bush 41's second term. We didn't, and that Clinton fellow won. So how did that work out for us? That is just one example. The field is littered with discarded political promises. If you need more examples to establish the point, Google is your friend. Make some popcorn.
A politician's purpose, whatever it takes, is to petrify in office. Honesty and commitment to others has never been a part of the job description. You want integrity? Why are you looking in government offices?
But our side is on an upswing and things are changing. We might be well served by making sure the incipient tectonic shift towards gun rights (see multiple recent stories in the vulgar press) is recognized. If nothing else, link to favorable articles and pass them on to your email list. Eventually your links will make it to campaign offices. Help insure that whoever runs for office recognizes gun rights are alive and growing.
Now, about Newt or Mitt . . . it would be nearly impossible to find a viable (i.e., able to win the nomination and subsequently having a reasonable chance to defeat Mr. Obama) candidate who has not a checkered past. Have we forgotten how very favorably the electorate viewed ever-stricter gun controls in the two generations between President Kennedy's assassination in late 1963 until the Heller decision in June, 2008? Pretty much a candidate had to favor "reasonable" (and pretty much every anti-gun proposal was deemed "reasonable" at birth) restrictions to have a chance of being elected. It was so bad that even the NRA gave up on pro-gun legislation until the Cincinatti Revolt in 1977. Almost anybody who held elected office prior to Heller would now be viewed as an opponent whom my pure friend "will never vote for!" His attitude concedes the field to our opponents. Let's try not do that.
Our power is not only to inform whoever the nominee is about Heller and McDonald and whatever subsequent favorable SCOTUS decision(s) might materialize by the 2012 election, but also to keep his feet to the fire during his first term, thus to reduce the possibility of unfavorable actions during his second term -- when he has nothing to lose.
So to those who stand ankle deep in their dignity and exclaim "I won't vote for him because he once voted for a bill I didn't support!", I say getting pissy and refusing to kiss the girl because she once kissed another won't get us into anyone's bed.
Cordially,
John
Cross-posted CalGuns / Maryland Shooters
My wife and I had dinner with some old friends yesterday evening, and during the adult beverage period the conversation got around to gun control and the Republican nomination. Someone pointed out that both Newt and Mitt have a history of supporting gun controls, and it would be really, really hard for him, a gun rights enthusiast, to support either of them. That's the part of the conversation that I want to take into this forum.
To him I say, "Well, Buttercup, that was then and now is now".
Can any of us remember an unalterable position taken by a political candidate that was not subject to change? What about, "Read my lips: New new taxes"? "Remember how long that lasted? And most of us consequently swore not to support Bush 41's second term. We didn't, and that Clinton fellow won. So how did that work out for us? That is just one example. The field is littered with discarded political promises. If you need more examples to establish the point, Google is your friend. Make some popcorn.
A politician's purpose, whatever it takes, is to petrify in office. Honesty and commitment to others has never been a part of the job description. You want integrity? Why are you looking in government offices?
But our side is on an upswing and things are changing. We might be well served by making sure the incipient tectonic shift towards gun rights (see multiple recent stories in the vulgar press) is recognized. If nothing else, link to favorable articles and pass them on to your email list. Eventually your links will make it to campaign offices. Help insure that whoever runs for office recognizes gun rights are alive and growing.
Now, about Newt or Mitt . . . it would be nearly impossible to find a viable (i.e., able to win the nomination and subsequently having a reasonable chance to defeat Mr. Obama) candidate who has not a checkered past. Have we forgotten how very favorably the electorate viewed ever-stricter gun controls in the two generations between President Kennedy's assassination in late 1963 until the Heller decision in June, 2008? Pretty much a candidate had to favor "reasonable" (and pretty much every anti-gun proposal was deemed "reasonable" at birth) restrictions to have a chance of being elected. It was so bad that even the NRA gave up on pro-gun legislation until the Cincinatti Revolt in 1977. Almost anybody who held elected office prior to Heller would now be viewed as an opponent whom my pure friend "will never vote for!" His attitude concedes the field to our opponents. Let's try not do that.
Our power is not only to inform whoever the nominee is about Heller and McDonald and whatever subsequent favorable SCOTUS decision(s) might materialize by the 2012 election, but also to keep his feet to the fire during his first term, thus to reduce the possibility of unfavorable actions during his second term -- when he has nothing to lose.
So to those who stand ankle deep in their dignity and exclaim "I won't vote for him because he once voted for a bill I didn't support!", I say getting pissy and refusing to kiss the girl because she once kissed another won't get us into anyone's bed.
Cordially,
John
Cross-posted CalGuns / Maryland Shooters
