Here we have CNN doing a "conversion story" for a local person in Tucson based on the Giffords shooting that is a couple of years old.
Growing up in a Baptist Church, the "testimony" was a major part of religion, and especially good if you were formerly extra bad in your former life -- drunk, drug addict, jail would be excellent. Extra points for having a tattoo.
So why would a political party be like that? Especially in the US, a country that was to be as close to freedom FROM politics as was possible? At most, parties should be like products, or maybe even closer, "brands". ANY US poltical party should have total support for the Constitution -- especially the 1st Amendment and the 2nd Amendment which makes the first real. The "conversion" would be like going from "Miller to Bud".
This post is from 2013 -- I just never hit "publish" until I ran into it today, 4 years later. In 2013 CNN and the author of the peice were convinced that pro-gun was becoming "irrelevant". Today? I'd guess not so much.
I was a Republican at the time, but less than one week after the buyback, I chose to switch parties. I believe there is a centrist element among the rank and file in the GOP, but the leadership is led by the far right and openly beholden to the NRA and the gun lobby. It is that rigid ideology that is driving the party into irrelevancy.
If EITHER party wants to change the 2nd Amendment (or other parts), there is a known procedure called Constitutional Amendment. In America, if you wanted the Constitution amended, but knew that your amendment would not pass, then you kept SELLING -- looking for an actual "reasonable compromise". Not so in BOistan -- you seek to bypass the clear text with all manner of infringements and then seek to overturn it using the SCOTUS as an extra-Constititional power. That is what lawlessness looks like.
Hopefully the column author is still smugly enjoying his "conversion" to the party with no rule of law.
'via Blog this'