Your humble Webmaster for Amendment II Democrats is planning a Save the Second Amendment Rally to be held on Tuesday, August 28, 2007, 12:00 noon CDT in Dallas, Texas. We will be gathering outside the Warren United Methodist Church at 3028 Malcolm X Boulevard, where the North Texas Brady Campaign and Rainbow PUSH members are scheduled to hold their own anti-gun rally. It's time for Democrats who support the Second Amendment to take a stand against those who seek to undermine our Constitutional rights.I agree. I support and applaud this effort. But one thing troubles me greatly:
Do you actively oppose Democrats who support sensible gun measures if they run for public office?
We are Democrats, and as such we will support our party's nominees for local, state, and federal office. During the primaries, however, if any Democratic candidate supports gun control measures that Amendment II Democrats oppose (such as reauthorizing the national ban on semi-automatics), that primary candidate is fair game, and we will encourage voters to support Democratic candidates who are in greater harmony with our outlook on Second Amendment rights. But once the primaries are over and the candidates for the general election have been chosen, it is important that all Democrats pull together and support our party's candidates as best as we are able. Under no circumstances will Amendment II Democrats support Republican candidates who run against anti-RKBA Democrats. We are, after all, Democrats.
Nu-uh, guys. It doesn't work that way, and don't think that bit about "sensible gun measures" went unnoticed--what the hell are those?
I like your strategy for the primaries, but the general election is where power over lives is awarded. If you would pick an "F" over an "A" simply because of blind party loyalty, you have made yourselves part of the problem.
What this indicates is, ultimately, the Second Amendment is expendable to you, not as much of a priority as re-electing Carolyn McCarthy or Chuck Schumer, or electing Hillary Clinton. It means you consider other social and economic issues more important than my elemental right to defend my life and freedom, and will aid and abet those trying to strip me of the means to do so.
I take that personally. A friend wouldn't do that to me.
If an authorized representative from your group would like to respond on this blog and entertain questions and comments from WarOnGuns readers, I'll give you the space.
[Via A Keyboard and a .45]
UPDATE: See response here.
6 comments:
To be honest this is a by partisan problem. The member of my party who disagrees with me is better than the member of the opposing party that agrees with me.
I concede your point that it happens on a bipartisan basis, Vinnie, but my point is, it shouldn't. I think it's simply a matter of making a choice based on what is most important to a person. In this case, voting for party candidates trumps liberty. They flat out admitted it.
And I walk the walk by the way. I never expect standards from anyone I don't adhere to myself.
They are also spewing misinformation in the best tradition of the Bradys and their ilk.
Quote: "During the primaries, however, if any Democratic candidate supports gun control measures that Amendment II Democrats oppose (such as reauthorizing the national ban on semi-automatics)..."
There was never a national ban on semi-automatic firearms.
David,
AWESOME letter you wrote to Hastert!! Three cheers for you!!
Remember the "Reagan Democrats."
Only one person knows what happens in a voting booth.
I am registered as a Republican, and I have always voted that way. I was a member of the College Republicans once.
I am a Republican as a matter of ideology; the Republicans come closer to my way of seeing the world than the Dems. I would not hesitate to vote for a Democrat if he was better on the issues (and I am close to a one issue voter, on gun rights), but he might have a hard time convincing me that he was actually pro-gun (like Romney and Giuliani would).
Post a Comment