The myth of the contemporary “blue dog” Democrat
A note to the LA Times: you can own a gun, be a “lifelong hunter,” hail from California’s “rugged North Coast and the premier Napa-Sonoma wine country,” and still be a would-be fascist looking to use your temporary power as an elected official in a likely gerrymandered district to steal away the natural rights of millions of others. This is not, as you put it, the “voice of sense.” It is the voice of tyranny. It is the voice of presumptuousness. And it is a voice that at one time — at the birth of a nation, no less! — led to a Declaration of Independence and revolution.
It’s true. I’ve seen paintings!
And honestly: this attempt to pretend that those fighting for our 2nd Amendment rights are fringe paranoiac crazies — at a time when we’ve listened to people talk openly about confiscation? It’s not remotely “journalism.” It’s statist, liberal-fascist propaganda. And it’s hamfisted propaganda at that. Like, for instance, this piece on “blue dog” Democrat Mike Thompson:
It’s not about government agents swooping down in black helicopters to seize the guns of innocent, law-abiding citizens.
“As a hunter and gun owner, I will not give up my guns and I will not ask other law-abiding Americans to give up theirs,” says Thompson, 62, a former state legislator and eight-term congressman. “But as a father and grandfather, I also know we have a responsibility to keep our kids, communities and country safe from gun violence.”
He resists the term “gun control.”
“My philosophy is it’s not gun control, but gun violence prevention,” he asserts. “We ought to have reasonable laws that protect the 2nd Amendment and keep our communities safe, and I think we can do both.”
Now, doesn’t that sound “sensible”? Except for one thing: the absurdity of needing “reasonable laws” to protect an unalienable right. The right is the right is the right. It shall not be infringed. So the only “reasonable laws” to protect that right are ones that prohibit lawmakers from trying to lay claim to it.
Thompson, who the LA Times reminds us again and again, in numerous iterations, each attempt a new appeal to the same “authority,” has “been a shooter practically all his life.” Therefore, when he tells us that the NRA’s concern that gun owners need to protect themselves from would-be gun grabbers is “ridiculous,” it’s only sensible to listen. After all, Thompson “has been a shooter practically all his life” and, as a “lifelong hunter” (have me mentioned this yet?) who he hails from the “rugged North Coast and the premier Napa-Sonoma wine country,” if anybody knows about guns, it’s him.
Whereas the NRA? Or other gun-rights groups? Are evidently made up of the wrong kinds of lifelong hunters and shooters, the proof being their failure to see how “ridiculous” is their fear that anyone would try to take their guns. To Thompson, a lifelong hunter — who’s been shooting practically his entire, rugged life! — the argument that gun-owners need to fear government aims at restricting their second amendment protections is “an argument ginned up as a means to generate more members for the organization.” That is, it comes from base motives — ginning up paranoia and hysteria to enrich the organization, not out of any genuine concern that, say, some party-line leftist vote would hurry through laws to ban all semi-automatic weapons, or pass bans on magazines that make obsolete nearly every single firearm not already owned — against the will of their constituencies. And we know this because the motives in question are attached not to progressives, whose motives are always pure and whose intentions are always admirable, but rather to the more conservative element of society, whose ranks are notorious for their racism, sexism, homophobia, xenophobia, misogyny, hatred of the elderly and the earth, and desire to see its ideological ends reached, no matter the means.
So lying comes as easy to those kind as breathing.
“I know a lot of NRA members and I don’t know of any who think they should have the same weapons as the police or military — or should be able to buy a gun without a background check. What we’re hearing from is the real extreme.”
Ooh! Let me introduce myself, Rep Thompson. I’m Jeff, an NRA member, and I do think we should have the same weapons as the police — who, amazingly, I don’t conflate with the military, law enforcement being a civilian peace-keeping force, not soldiers. Whereas you seem to think the two interchangeable, which is frightening for a number of reasons I need not go into, save to say there’s a reason we in the NRA and other gun-rights organizations are perfectly correct in fearing dissembling legislators such as you, who think they can casually conflate the police and the military, suggest that the weapons they use are the same, and sneak that kind of baldfaced lie by us.
So now you know at least one. And I suspect there are millions more like me.
Of course, the LA Times knows this. Thompson knows this. And most of the Democrats pushing this line of bullshit know this — “blue dog” or no. They just think we’re stupid. Or rather, that in a post-constitutional America, enough of us are stupid or disinterested to allow our rights to be taken thanks to a temporary crisis ginned up by — wait for it — the government!
So Thompson’s right in one respect. This has nothing to do with “government agents swooping down in black helicopters to seize the guns of innocent, law-abiding citizens.” At least not yet. Instead, it has to do with self-satisfied, cynical, tyrannical elected officials in suits “never letting a crisis go to waste” in their attempt to control us, manage us, and remold society into one in which they get to control the blueprint, rather than allowing an organic society to form around the aims of free people with certain unalienable rights.
Which of necessity requires of me this response: we see who you are, Representative Thompson. And your having slapped on a camo lid and shot at pheasant on occasion doesn’t change that fact. The same goes for you, LA Times.
Consequently, go fuck yourselves — sideways, with a Halibut. You are liars and propagandists and would-be tyrants. And know that no matter how hard you push this “gun violence prevention” agenda aimed not at criminals but at lawful gun owners, there are a large number of us out here prepared to resist — even if that means “sensible” people like Mr Thompson or the LA Times of Joe Scarborough, et al., will try to demonize us, marginalize us, and create out of erstwhile law abiding citizens a new criminal class to be hated by all who hope to be seen as sober, rational, and most certainly not filthy filthy extremists.
Because the truth is, in a world gone mad, it is the “crazies” who are the “voice of reason.”
Molon Labe. And outlaw.