I’ve been thinking about this a lot lately: anger about electeds not tackling gun violence, and the 2014 midterm elections.
We saw what happened in November after some politicians waged a perceived “war on women” with some outlandish comments. Women turned out in large numbers to help re-elect President Obama (and defeat Mitt Romney, much to the chagrin of the “hard right”). More women were elected to the Senate too.
Will gun violence be the “sleeping giant of 2014″?
•In our community, our highly conservative Sheriff has upset some residents with outspoken views on “gun rights” after the Newtown, Conn., shooting.
•”Arm the teachers!” cries came from the local hard-right blogging community after Newtown.
•Then our conservative local newspaper published what some people considered insensitive imagery and headlines to illustrate articles about guns — twice in the past few weeks. In one case, it ran a “two-source story,” interviewing only the Sheriff and local gun-range owner.
“A free gun should come with every paper, every day,” responded one reader on The Union’s Facebook page. “Surely the Sheriff will support that.”
After all, we are a politically “purple” county now: Romney got 24,986 votes in our county (48.35 percent), while Obama got 24,663 (47.73 percent). That’s a scant 323 votes between the two.
Are the “old guard” powers that be (including the Sheriff and Union newspaper) in our community listening? I have no “inside” information, but what if somebody such as Nick Wilcox of Penn Valley (experienced on the NID board) ran for Supervisor in that longtime conservative district? It would shake things up.
You have to wonder if our community’s old guard is holed up inside their own “echo chamber.”
Here’s an article about gun violence and 2014:
“Women think about the gun violence issue differently from men. To many women, say analysts and pollsters, the gun debate now roiling the country is less about preserving gun rights and more about preserving safety in their neighborhoods,” according to the S.F. Chronicle
“Those differences could have a future political impact, depending on what happens after Congress considers gun legislation, perhaps in the next month. How women feel about any ensuing legislation may affect the 2014 midterm elections – from Washington, D.C., to California.
“After the December mass shootings at a Newtown, Conn., elementary school, the gun issue is engaging more female swing voters who ordinarily vote only in presidential years, analysts said.
“Women want to see action.
‘”It is the sleeping giant of 2014,’ said Bob Carpenter, a longtime California Republican pollster and strategist now based in Maryland, who just completed a bipartisan survey on women and gun violence with Democratic pollster Diane Feldman. ‘It could make 2014 a completely different election.’
Eyes on Congress
“Republicans dominated the 2010 midterm elections, taking the House from Democrats and many key state races across the country.
“If women get to the point where they are staying engaged on this issue, they could turn out and affect the election,’ Carpenter said. ‘They’re going to wait and see what Congress – and, even more, local politicians – come up with.
“Gun violence is the kind of issue, said Debbie Walsh, director of the Center for American Women and Politics at Rutgers University, “that has real potential to mobilize waves of women voters and waves of officeholders.”
The rest of the article is here.
Filed under: Uncategorized
This morning’s Rumination is a stark reminder that the batshit crazy is still a potent force in our County.
I think that group could use a shot of Viagra. Despite the extremist rhetoric, it’s losing steam, as each election shows. Obama lost by a very narrow margin in our county. The broader community does need to pay attention to what’s happening here, however.
BTW, here’s the blog post Steve was referring to, the leader of “Oathkeepers” speaking in our community at a CABPRO function:
http://rebaneruminations.typepad.com/rebanes_ruminations/2013/02/when-laws-become-lawless.html#more
Here’s the invitation to the event:
http://nctpp.org/ai1ec_event/oath-keepers/?instance_id=
Steve,
I don’t read Mr. Rebane’s blog regularly so I checked out the link you provided and looked at some of his other postings.
Here is what I see. Mr. Rebane is frightened. A lot of little children were murdered with their teachers just before Christmas and he in concerned that this tragedy will cause some changes in our gun laws that may affect him. It does no good to argue with that kind of fear. “A man convinced against his will, is of the same opinion still”. Still, if he had had to encounter what those first responders to Sandy Hook did, he might see things differently.
Mr. Rebane appears to be an articulate and educated person, so when he cites a biased news source like the Fox Network surveys in his arguments, he must know it affects his credibility. Besides, you know what they say about statistics.
What I do take issue with is the notion that our military could turn against our citizenry and proclaim Martial Law or some such thing and confiscate all of our weapons. That will not happen.
Let’s pull ourselves together here, and not behave like a bunch of Chicken Littles. The sky is not going to fall on our heads. Are we talking about the same breed of soldiers who are currently enduring all kinds of Hell and being maimed, tortured or killed for us? I grew up in the Military and I do not care to have the purpose of our United States Armed Forces, conflated with that of the Nazi regime or any other. My father was a man of honor, an officer and a gentleman who shed copious blood for our country and bore the physical and emotional scars for the rest of his life. He would never had turned on our own citizens or allowed anyone else to. He fought in WWII, Korea and was G-3 in the 1960′s during the Cold War, and though he was never able to discuss his work with Mom or us kids at the time, I learned a lot from him in his elder years when he began to talk about it.
Mr. Rebane will be able to keep and bear his arms for the rest of his comfortable life, because soldiers like my father and the many men lost under his command in places like Papua and Chip-Yong have assured that right. To suggest that our own Military would threaten our freedom and subjugate our populace after all the sacrifices of all the soldiers who have ever fought and/or died for our country, is nothing more than hysteria and the activities of a cult faction like the “Oath Keepers”, only perpetrates treason, IMHO.
So, have some compassion, let this terrified old gentleman shake his spindly fist from his palette, we don’t have to listen.
Judith you present a very articulate and well stated argument that I believe is grounded in reason and experience. I too agree that are military well never use their weapons on the common citizen and their family. There is a lack or credibility that permeates some of our conservative blogs. Too often those in disagreement are ridiculed for their beliefs. Our country/county is changing as we evolve and our demographics change. We can either embrace the change in a proactive approach or scream loudly as the country changes reduced to divisive tactics as a failed method to try and keep their world from imploding.
And here’s more on the “Oathkeepers,” whose leader spoke at the Vets Hall in our community. Even Bill O’Reilly calls it an “extreme position”:
Stand Your Ground while I get my insurance policy out. Sheriff Royal could make a good start with a gun buy back like other cities have done.
“Groups representing gun owners oppose efforts to make insurance mandatory, arguing that law-abiding people should not be forced to buy insurance to exercise their constitutional right to bear arms. But some groups, including the National Rifle Association, endorse voluntary liability policies for their members. And as several states pass laws making it easier for people to carry concealed weapons and use them for self-defense, some gun groups are now selling policies to cover some of the legal costs stemming from so called self-defense shootings.
The United States Concealed Carry Association recently began selling what it calls “Self-Defense Shield.” “If you’re forced to justifiably use your gun in self-defense,” its Web site says, “Self-Defense SHIELD will help pay for your expert pro-2nd Amendment lawyer by reimbursing your legal-defense expenses following your acquittal − an ingenious system critical to the arsenal of any responsibly armed citizen.” Following your acquital? YIKES NYT 2/21/13