Your choice, but let me disabuse you of your statements. Look at the voting records of democrats on gun control. Then look at the republicans'. Look at the rating given by the NRA to candidates. Name a republican who is in the same class as clinton, schumer, Hanoi john kerry, lautenberg, obama when a senator, ad infinitum. My comments are not inclusive of rank and file citizens who vote for the (few) principled democrats, but rather the elected officials. Don't delude yourself into thinking the democrat party is the one of Truman and John Kennedy. It is not. It is the crypto- marxist party of pelosi, clinton and obama. Rather than being 'insulted' by my comments, challenge them with citations showing where I am mistaken in this post. You seem to miss the point that this is a pro-2nd Amendment forum and that is the singular issue of the instant discussion, not your fantasy world view that you can change a marxist platform into a centrist when you are in the extreme minority of members who claim your party. The heritage of the democrat party is dead. Their real politik is exteme leftwing statism.
I deleted comments on those who serve, democrat or republican, as I don't believe that you act with anything other than conviction--incorrect in my opinion, but sincere. I think you will learn a lot on this forum and may well find your views changing.
Howdy Again!
Thank you for recognizing my sincerity and conviction. I appreciate your response and tone in this reply.
That being said, I do take exception to certain particulars. One example being that those with such sincerity and conviction do not have the ability to change the basic platform of a political party. We have seen that happen in our times already, and I don't believe I need to illustrate that point with examples. However, I will indicate that the Republican party platform changed considerably with the arrival of Ronald Reagan. Current plaform changes can be expected with the influence of the Tea Party efforts. Whether I agree with those changes is of little consequence here. I might also cite the "Contract with America" that brought Republican candidates success during the Newt Gingrich era (1994, if I am not mistaken). The point being, essential platform elements shifted to the right.
My hope is that, in relation to the 2nd Amendment to the Constitution, I can have positive impact on the Democratic platform for the better.
I am curious how many of us take the time, make the effort, to contact their state representative and senator to speak their mind. Regardless of which political party of their affiliation (or mine), they have a vested interest in keeping their jobs in the General Assembly of Colorado. For nothing better than pure, self interest, they tend to react to polls indicating the general sentiment of their constituents. When they hear from one particular constituent, such as myself yesterday, they might consider my position or dismiss it as they will. When they hear from dozens, they might begin to question whether this is something that might affect their chances of relection. When they hear from hundreds, they sit up and take notice, for they know that to ignore them is at their peril. It takes a bit of effort, and I spent several days playing phone tag with various staffers trying to get my perspective heard. But it got heard!
The same is true at the caucus and precinct level. Again I am curious how many of us attend precinct meetings or show up for their local caucus? That's where changes can be made to party platform most readily, and that holds true of both major political parties.
This entire thread started with the status of HB 1205. It passed the House with evident bipartisan support, but died in senate committee. It never had a fair shot at an up/down vote on the senate floor. Why? Because of one individual in particular. That shows what influence one man can make, and it is unfortunate that (in my humble opinion) his stance was wrong. Regardless, the bill died without reaching the floor. So I agree that particular individual needs to be removed from office. You betcha. Git 'er done!
As I said earlier, there were Democrats who supported 1205 just as there were Republicans. Many Democrats own guns and support our 2nd Amendment rights as vigorously as Republicans. Someone else pointed out that it is about the Constitution, not specific political party. I agree with that position.
In the past week, I've talked with my state representative and state senator in the Colorado General Assembly. I've also talked with the man behind the bill from RMGO. I've discussed with him the possibility (and/or wisdom) of bypassing the General Assembly and petitioning for a Constitutional ballot initiative to ensure our rights as stipulated in 1205. He explained the reasons why he felt that was not a viable course. This brings us right back to our state elected officals. And redundantly, they react to pressure from their constituents. On a side matter, I've also expressed opinions with my county commissioners as well.
When trying to influence local politicians, regardless of party, they are likely to take seriously those who articulate their position respectfully and thoughtfully. In order to have impact, civility in such contacts must (perforce) be respectful. Employ of derrogatory adjectives will ultimately cloud the basic issue and be rejected by the representative. Heated rhetoric won't be helpful either.
Regardless of whether some/all/none of folks on this forum agree with my political affiliation, or the specific planks in party platform, I will continue to work quietly to make such changes as I am able. The more who involve themselves within the process, the more likely change will come. The more likely the next attempt at a bill like HB 1205 will enjoy success.
Thank you for your thoughts, and I believe we have more in common but disagree on some points and that's fine. That's what makes America great. We can disagree respectfully.
Blessings,
M-Taliesin
