[jmbg29]

On a (now locked) thread, an assertion was made that in a well known radical Demorat internet forum (DU) the majority of the posters were pro-gun.

If we stipulate that assertion as true, then a question is begged. Where are the pro-gun Demorat leaders that would (presumably) be supported by that pro-gun constituency?

Another question that comes to mind is this: if the radical denizens of DU are mostly pro-gun, does that mean that moderate/conservative Demorats are the source of the almost monolithically anti-gun Demorat party?

What sort of nonsense is that?

I'm told that I am supposed to seek out Demorats that are pro-gun in an effort to build a coalition. :rolleyes:

My viewpoint is that a pro-gun Demorat is of zero use to me and mine. What matters first and foremost is majority control of bicameral legislatures.

Comments?

[Oleg Volk]

Given the terms you use (demorat), I doubt that many Democrats would want to ally with you.

[Russ]

I think jmbg did use a capital D in DemocRAT most of the time. I frankly think RAT should also be in caps. Unless the leadership of Democratic Party is going to do a 180 and become pro-gun then there is no point in voting for a "pro-gun" Democrat at the local level. The people in control of the legistlatures control the agenda and since 99% of DemocRATS (at least at the national level are anti gun) then how does it help the cause to ever vote for one? Better to waste your vote on a Libertarian.

[jmbg29]

Given the terms you use (demorat), I doubt that many Democrats would want to ally with you.I wouldn't want them to. Just as I wouldn't want to ally with Al-Qaeda, or Kim Jong Il, or Castro.

Why would I ally myself with someone that wants to enslave me? Even if it is in the form of "friendly" extorsion?

[treeprof]

Re pro-gun Dems of use to us, do you know of Rep. John Dingell (D-MI)? Dingell has historically been a big help to us in the House, and thru his service on NRA's Board. Among other things, he vote against the AWB, voted to repeal it in '96, and had a whole website dedicated to him by the Brady/MMM bunch as one of their "Dangerous Dozen" actively impeding gun control/safety.

Or, how about Sen. Zell Miller (D-GA)? Miller gave the keynote at last year's NRA convention, and is responsible for Georgia's current favorable CCW laws. Closer to home, our AG Thurbert Baker, has actively pursued CW reciprocity agreements with other states and is quite pro-RKBA.

And, control of the legislative or other branches means nothing in itself. What signed pieces of legislation recognizing/strengthening/restoring our RKBA have the Republican House, Senate and President put in place since January 2001?

[rock jock]

My local US Rep is a pro-gun dem. If you ask him, he will tell you that he takes his stand because he is for RKBA. However, I have to believe that he is only on our side because his Democrat predecessor was voted out of office after serving 42 years in Congress when he voted for the '94 AWB. Gun rights to him are a necessary evil that he puts up with to stay in office. I base this on a meeting I had with him on gun issues and his complete lack of interest in guns or willingness to promote RKBA within his party. Even though he is pro-gun in his voting record, I do not vote for him. Why? Among other, non-gun related issues, voting for a Democrat is a vote for the Democratic Party. And if the Dems control Congress, it doesn't matter how pro-gun my local rep is. He is still going to support Democrats that are representative of the party as a whole in leadership positions in the House, which will in turn mean anti-gun legislation down the line. He will still support Democratic Party blockages of pro-gun nominees for the federal judgeships, including the USSC. He will, in effect, tow the party line. Happily so, I might add, and then complain that he really fought for us but, because of his lack of influence, there was little he could do. Don't give your enemies an inch.

[treeprof]

The key to someone in any party being pro-your issue is whether or not they'll buck the partyline in their votes. Both of the examples I named will on RKBA arms stuff, and Miller will on military matters, but they're inconsistent on others that're important to me. I've never voted for Zell, but have been at least moderately pleased with him both as Gov and U.S. Senator. I disagree with Dingell on almost every other issue, but never lived in his district when I was in MI and so never had to make the hard choice in a vote.

[rock jock]

The key to someone in any party being pro-your issue is whether or not they'll buck the partyline in their votes.
This is an easy out for pro-gun dems. They will vote against anti-gun legislation and then say they bucked the line on individual bills, but by voting for them you add to a Democratic Party majority and you are also in effect voting for the House and Senate leadership positions. The latter decide who will chair the various committees and which bills will be considered. You will also be voting for the federal and Supreme Court judge nominees that will hand-picked by a Democratic Party majority to be as anti-gun as possible. I can promise you one thing: your pro-gun dem WILL vote the party line on these people.

[treeprof]

Yeah, when your party's majority is slim (assuming one has a preferred party), party affiliation may trump other things. The flip side is that party affiliation is no guarantee either - the 94 AWB passed the House with significant Repub support and Democrat opposition, and there's likely more than enough votes to pass a new one in the Senate.

[BigG]

JMBG, the term is demonrat, not demorat! :uhoh:

[CZ-75]

I always thought it was demonkrap. ;)

[MicroBalrog]

Well, I post on the Democratic Underground. How may I help you?

[cordex]

Well, I post on the Democratic Underground. How may I help you?
Would you consider the majority (>50%) of regular posters to be pro-gun?

[MicroBalrog]

On the Justice/Public Safety forums, I think (haven't counted), there's a small (51%, maybe 60%) pro-gun majority. Seems to me that every anti-gun dig has 3-4 pro-gun responses to it. I didn't post on any of the other forums yet.

[Shooter 2.5]

There's DINO's and RINO's and it's important to remember when the individual cheers his party's accomplishments.

I just heard a rumor two U.S. Supreme Court Justices may retire next month.

Which party do you want in power to confirm new justices?

[MicroBalrog]

Why, after we kick out the Clintonistas ?:D

[Bonker]

My ongressman, Ralph Hall (D-TX) is a pro-gun Dem. Of course he votes with the republicans most of the time on everything else too.

He's one of those old guys like Ronald Reagan who got left behind when the Dem party went far to the left back in the 1960's.

[HBK]

Bush should appoint a couple, maybe three Supreme Court justices. Here's hoping he makes some good conservative choices.

[jmbg29]

Well, I post on the Democratic Underground. How may I help you? On the Justice/Public Safety forums, I think (haven't counted), there's a small (51%, maybe 60%) pro-gun majority. Seems to me that every anti-gun dig has 3-4 pro-gun responses to it.Where then are the political leaders that they voted for?????????????????????? :rolleyes:

[jmbg29]

Tell you what, I'll take a wild guess at my own rhetorical question.

You guys figure that Chuckie Schumer is pro, since he has an armed bodyguard.

Feinswine is pro, because she packs heat.

And ******* Klinton is pro, because she always looks and sounds like she has a Model 29 shoved up her butt sideways.


How'd I do? :barf:

[Joe Demko]

Clearly, you don't want to learn anything or engage in a dialogue. I'll be willing to discuss the issues you brought up and answer your questions about the time you indicate you're interested in more than spouting insults and vulgarity. Until then...

[jmbg29]

Speak up then.

[Joe Demko]

The short answer to your OP, is that the pro-gun Democrat leaders do not exist at the federal level because of the way that our whole system works. As you, no doubt, already know, the longer that an person holds a particular legislative office, the more powerful s/he becomes by holding positions on important committees or subcommittees. Unfortunately for the Democrats (of whom I am not one), these key people are all very anti-gun. Ted Kennedy, for example. Kennedy, Schumer, and the others get elected over and over again because they are from areas where anti-gun messages play well to the populace at large. Even the Republicans in those places are often not pro-2A. Look at Rudy Giulani, late of NYC, for a case in point.
In other states, like Pennsyvania, which have a heavily pro-2A population, even the Democrats tend to be pro-2A. John Murtha has a good record on gun rights for example.
Kennedy et. al. by virtue of the power their seniority lends them, are largely able to set the agenda for the whole party at the federal level. This has become an item of increasing concern to Democratic politicians and activists who are concerned about the future of their party. They have recognized for some time that gun-control is costing their party enormously at the polls. Until the people who keep voting Kennedy and the others into office change their minds, however, it will be kind of a lost cause. It's sad for the Dems that a handful of people at the top, for whom gun control is a personal issue, are demolishing the party credibility with a lot of middle Americans for whom voting Democratic used to be a way of life. FWIW, I think the Republicans have been getting by for too long on the "We're the only game in town for gunowners" platform.

[TheLastBoyScout]

The real reason that there is a disparity between the DemonRats at DU and the DemonRats at DC is because DU has become a joke here and at other gun boards.

DU probably has enough THR, TFL and AR15.com infilitrators that they are actually making an impact on this issue.

Now if only it was that easy to make an impact on congress...:evil:

[jmbg29]

It's sad for the Dems that a handful of people at the top, for whom gun control is a personal issue, are demolishing the party credibility with a lot of middle Americans for whom voting Democratic used to be a way of life.You may find it sad, but it causes me to want to do back handsprings.

I guess you think that it is only a handful of Dems that are involved, and that may be so in PA. Here in WA, I have found only one pro-gun Dem leader in the State Assembly. All others, from Seattle city government, through the State Assembly, and on to the Governorship are rabidly anti-gun. Well, anti-my-guns anyway. I'm sure that their own firearms aren't evil like mine.

Here's to further demolition of party credibilty!

[Joe Demko]

You may find it sad, but it causes me to want to do back handsprings.

The m ain difference between us is that I find it sad that both major parties lack credibility and stand for nothing more than statism. You did note that I very clearly stated I am not a Democrat, I take it?