[Vision2020] 'Obama Tags' Called a Joke

[g. crabtree]

"Seriously, was that really that hard? All you had to say was "Rex Rammell represents the 'I Hate Jim Risch' party, not me."

Slow down there, sonny buttons! From the beginning of this topic I agreed that Rammell's remarks were "ill advised," I just didn't think that they rose to the level of anything very serious. Certainly nothing adequate to generate the outrage that was pouring in from the left. I fervently believe that he has a right to run for Risch's office and whether or not he'll receive any support from me remains to be seen.

By the way, thanks for clearing up the "cruise o" thing. I was guessing you were shooting for Oldsmobile and I was ready to denounce you with my last dying breath. I firmly believe in the right to keep and bear clunkers.

g
  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Andreas Schou 
  To: g. crabtree 
  Cc: Moscow Vision 2020 
  Sent: Wednesday, September 02, 2009 2:15 AM
  Subject: Re: [Vision2020] 'Obama Tags' Called a Joke


  On Tue, Sep 1, 2009 at 7:45 PM, g. crabtree <jampot at roadrunner.com> wrote:

    Puppeteer? I would never have thought THAT ill of you. However I might have had you pegged as sympathetic to Code Pink. 

  Of course I am, for some minimal value of "sympathetic." As are a lot of politicians. But there's a difference between some vague sympathy in ideological outlook and believing they're doing more good than harm.

  I was in favor of the Afghan war. I think the Iraq war was a bad policy decision which killed a lot of Americans and Iraqis. However, I don't think the war was "for Israel" or whatever, or that the Bush administration misled the relevant stakeholders out of anything other than blind faith that the relevant intelligence actually existed. Even insofar as I share some policy goals (end the war cleanly and quickly) I don't think shouting at wounded soldiers even vaguely traces a line from point A to point B. Instead, I put shoe leather to pavement and tried to elect someone less prone to bad decisions. 

  In the same vein, I expect that you're sympathetic with the militia movement to some extent, in that you believe that our government should keep taxes low and not prevent citizens from owning whatever piece of woodchuck-vaporizing ordnance they please. This minimal coordination of interests does not mean that I think you're a foaming birther who thinks that Venezuelan communists stole our last election. There's a difference, 


    I also might have imagined that you were down with HCI, the Brady campaign, and the so called assault weapons ban. I'm pleasantly surprised to be wrong.

  Guns are not my problem. I think people can reasonably differ on the subject, but especially here in Idaho, there's no reason to hyperventilate about citizens owning anything short of a cruise o.

  I think the 2nd Amendment is prickly because it contemplates a United States that didn't end up happening, but that the founders probably meant it to contain an individual (though not absolutely unconditional) right to bear arms. Whether it does or not isn't a particular personal concern, as pointy forks (much less guns) are a problem at my level of coordination. However, since no one appears to believe that the 2nd Amendment creates a right for citizens to form private armies and shoot at cops and soldiers, the weapons people choose to spend their money on seems like a matter of conscience and good sense rather than a matter of pressing national concern.
   
    You are correct that your testosterone pumped presence comes through loud and clear in your every post but, it seems a mite presumptuous to expect one group of crazies (gun toters) to accede to the desires for comfort of another group of crazies (puppeteers and anti-corporate window breakers and stone throwers).

  I think "please don't bring your gun when you meet the President" is an unexpressed rule of etiquette and good sense similar to "please don't wear your buttless leather chaps to meet the Pope." It is baffling to me that anyone needs to be told to do so, especially as doing so is likely to result in being on the business end of a stranger's firearm. I am uncomfortable around people who are happy being on the business end of such a firearm.


    Since neither your presence nor mine is required at any of these soirees why don't we compromise, boycott the events, and meet me at the nearest bar where I will attempt to do grievous damage to your liver. The crazies deserve one another and the philosophy department can tell us all about any excitement we may have missed.

  Seriously, was that really that hard? All you had to say was "Rex Rammell represents the 'I Hate Jim Risch' party, not me." The guy got sued last campaign for using the Republican party's logo on his campaign materials.  He only runs for public office because Risch done kilt his elk. Consequently, he's the only one responsible for his escalating bizarre behavior, and Idaho's Republican establishment has surprisingly done the right thing by kicking him while he's down.

  Unless, of course, Jim Risch is as bad as Rex says.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/vision2020/attachments/20090902/b65dd858/attachment-0001.html