Washington ‘rights’ rally to headline supporter of ‘gun control’ politicians

Posted: January 15, 2015 by gamegetterII in anti-gun asshattery
Tags: , , , , , ,

  It will be interesting to note differences in tone and attendance between  Thursday's group-supported "Rally for Your Rights" and last month's "I Will Not Comply" rally.

Taking a different approach than December’s “I Will Not Comply” rally, in which participants defiantly flouted I-594 prohibitions against “unapproved” firearm transfers, the Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms (CCRKBA) and the Washington Firearms Leadership Advocacy Group (WFLAG), which did not participate in last month’s protest, will instead be driving forces behind this Thursday’s “Rally for Your Rights” in Olympia. The event is deemed moderate enough that even the National Rifle Association is sending a speaker — not that “progressive” media critics won’t still assail them for being “uncompromising” and “extreme,” regardless if that’s true or not.

Among those scheduled to address gun owners will be Democrat Rep. Brian Blake. Unfortunately, that’s part of the “bipartisan” strategy that doesn’t pay off as much as we might believe when examining what else such politicians enable. But Blake looks good on paper.

After all, he supported I-591 (which not everyone agrees was the optimum use of resources) and he’s been given a 100 percent A+ rating by NRA.

He’s also been endorsed by “Washington State Labor Council, SEIU Healthcare 1199NW, Planned Parenthood Votes Northwest” and Progressive Voter Guide. That means he lives in one of those areas where union-first members hunt and sport shoot, and want to have their cake and make the rest of us swallow it too, so the party can give him a pass on guns as long as the rest of its agenda is advanced.

Still, where’s the beef?

Just this: If the guy is that great a pal to gun owners, why did he enthusiastically help a committed anti-gunner get elected to Congress?

Why did he endorse Denny Heck?

That guy’s rated “F” by Gun Owners of America, meaning he’s an “Anti-Gun Voter: a philosophically committed anti-gunner.” Heck voted against prohibiting Washington DC from implementing “gun control,” and has been rated 50 percent by NRA. Heck also supports Obama’s immigration plan to create millions of new anti-gun Democrat voters (as does Blake), and anti-gun Obamacare (as does Blake).

But wait, as the late pitchman Billy Mays used to say, there’s more. Blake also endorsed Bob Dingethal for Congress. That a guy who used the “I’m a gun owner with a big BUT” oxymoron to tell voters how he supports the Second Amendment AND Michael Bloomberg’s registration/confiscation precursor plan, and a mental health blanket dragnet.

In other words, “Who’s infringin’? We’re usin’ common sense.” We’ve heard that type of transparent equivocation before, but this time, it’s not entertaining.

I could highlight more, but the point has been made. Blake is going to stand up there and tell everyone how he supported federally-licensed, registered and taxed sport shooters using suppressors, and go heavy on the rah-rah about how the Second Amendment is a right and he’s a leader in protecting it. What he won’t address is why he values that behind putting party über alles and enabling Democrat allies to legislate against the rights to keep and bear arms. He’ll present himself as a gun rights leader, but he won’t be able to point to one act of leadership where he has worked to expose, condemn and unseat any from his side of the aisle who betrayed their oath of office to advocate disarmament of the very people Blake will be eliciting cheers and applause from.

But don’t take my word for it. Ask him.

Anyone who helps citizen disarmament advocates gain power is no true friend to gun owners and has no business being presented as one. And anyone who politically supports someone playing to both sides of the street likewise relegates gun rights to a lower priority than doctrinaire political and economic special interests. To them, the Second Amendment comes second, or third, or even lower. No amount of pointing out what bills have been advanced or voted on “the right way,” and no amount of “dinner dates” can alter that fundamental reality.

No matter. There will be no shortage of “pragmatic” apologists who will make excuses for the inconvenient truths that apply to all so-called “pro-gun Democrats.” After all, we’re constantly told, politics is the art of the possible, and the perfect is the enemy of the good.

Let them keep enabling enemies of the right to keep and bear arms and we may just find out what really is possible, along with just how “good” those who place party loyalty above the Bill of Rights really are.



Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s