Well, that is a wonderfully progressive/liberal thing to say. "Everything is just points on a spectrum" "Speak your truth" "Break the binary" But actually, there is a lot of binary out there, and it all breaks down into right or wrong. Despite attempts by intellectuals and their weak-minded followers who want to see this country turned upside down.
And, we do get to decide what's wrong, it's called results. Take for example, the senator your pro-gun democrat buddies sent to Washington, Tammy Baldwin. Do you know what her voting record on the Second Amendment is? I'll give you a hint, it's not good, at all. If your idea of defending the Second Amendment is sending a gun hating Senator to Washington, you're wrong, it's really just that simple.
But you still haven't answered my question. How do you staunchly defend the Second Amendment when you send staunchly anti-gun congressmen and Senators to Washington? How do you see it as a win, when the people you elect are actively trying to legislate the Second Amendment out of existence? I'm trying to understand this, explain it, if you will.
Tim
In order:
No, it's not.
I didn't say any of those things.
There's very little binary.
I'm uninterested in "intellectuals and their weak-minded followers."
Nope.
My "...pro-gun democrat buddies..." didn't send Tammy Baldwin to Washington.
I'm well aware of Baldwin's record on 2A.
Why would you suggest I'd vote for Baldwin.
The people who vote for Balwin for other reasons - even if I disagree with them - are not wrong.
Of course I did.
I've never sent "...staunchly anti-gun congressmen and Senators to Washington."
Where did I say it was a win?
It's not my job to explain it to you, and honestly, I feel like it'd be a wasted effort if I tried. The great thing about our country is that it's full of people with different opinions, and we we all get to act on them to the best of our abilities. It's messy, but it tends to work.
