“There are an awful lot of things in [Connecticut’s post-Newtown gun control package] that inconvenience law abiding citizens who believe they have a right under the second amendment to own and use firearms,” Constitution State gubernatorial candidate Tom Foley told wnpr.org, “and what I said when this tragedy happened was that the government should address any solutions they can to make sure some of this doesn’t happen again, but there’s an awful lot in that bill that had nothing to do with what happened at Newtown and wouldn’t prevent another Newtown from happening.” So he was for it before he was against it? It gets worse . . .
DANKOSKY: I was just asking you for specificity. Is there something you can point to that says “that’s in there that I wouldn’t have put in that bill.”
FOLEY: Well, anything that is inconveniencing to law-abiding citizens who believe they have a right under the second amendment to bear firearms…
DNAKOSKY: . . . Would you repeal the current law if you were governor?
FOLEY: I think that’s fixed law right now. People have asked me if the legislature came to me with some modifications to the law. But yeah most laws are corrections and modifications over time it was a pretty comprehensive bill. If the legislature came to me with some changes that made it less inconvenient for law-abiding citizens who owned farms, I would sign that. But a full repeal of the bill seems very unlikely.
Translation: for those voters who think the post-Newtown civilian disarmament package was a bad, bad thing, I kinda agree with you. But I’m not going to say the word “infringe” or “right” or which bits are unconstitutional or promise to repeal any of it – ’cause then I won’t get elected. And it won’t happen anyway.
Fair enough? Seriously, would a solidly pro-gun Republican have a chance in hell of being elected governor in Connecticut if he explained the pro-gun position with force, clarity and determination? Already the antis have seized on Foley’s use of the word “inconvenient.” nhregister.com:
Nancy DiNardo, chairwoman of the Democratic Party, said Foley “once again, has shown why he is completely unfit to be governor. Recklessly claiming our smart, strict gun law was too ‘inconvenient’ for residents, he showed why he is wrong for Connecticut. … He lacks even the most basic understanding of public policy. … Connecticut voters simply can’t trust him.”
We’ve said it before: culture eats strategy for lunch. Alternatively, whether it’s Baghdad or Bridgeport, people get the government they deserve.
In this case he is being a realist, this is Connecticut not South Carolina.
exactly right.
I’m glad I left the State
Sometimes you have to vote with your feet.
While in CT I had a carry permit, the only places you could not carry were Basically Government buildings and schools.
When I moved south and obtained my Carry permit I was amazed at the places that I could not carry which included Parks, and restaurants that served alcohol. CT did not have stores with no gun signs on the door. Most of the Hospitals were associated with schools, so they were no carry places.
Nowadays CT is restricting gun rights while the South is expanding gun rights.
I am still glad I moved south with my now expanded collection of high capacity magazines and evil assault rifles, many of which were made in CT.
I can’t wait to get out.
It is unrealistic to be a pure on 2a in CT and expect to win. The quote from the democrat you posted is a perfect example. It would be no different in the brain washed states of NY, NJ, MA, RI, MD, CA and others states. This no different than a pro-abortion or pro-gay rights democrat trying to run in a heavy republican conservative state.
Politics and logic do not mix and culture trumps all. The way we are now, we will always have a heavily divided nation. The more diverse our country becomes, the worse it will be.
We have been in a culture war for a long time with no end.
Hey Pascal, I totally agree. Those of us stuck in anti-liberty states have to vote for the candidate who will harm us least. Yo need to defend what little you have because there is no end in sight to the assault. I tremble at post-Christie NJ. The Republicans have no one popular enough to overcome the “free stuff” candidates on the Left who will also push through more draconian gun laws. I just hope I can make it to retirement age so I can get out.
Has a actual Conservative RUN in Ct or is this all theory?
Might note VA thru out the Cantor last week because he was a “pragmatic” sellout RINO.
“threw”
And there is always that possibility that Cantor was “Cootered” http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/2014/06/11/320964904/the-cooter-effect-did-ben-jones-help-unseat-eric-cantor
Obama didn’t run in 2008 on a far left platform. He actually called for a balanced budget and increased transparency and accountability in government. I figured he was full of sh!t when he said that. Foley could be more 2A than he lets on, but clearly cannot be too much pro-freedom language in a campaign speech in a state that is largely populated by Communist voters.
Commecticut.
And this is why democrats have been winning; the republicans haven’t offered a truly opposing ideology. Republicans are now more interested in gaining access to the 5-10% moderate/undecided vote than rallying their core 40% conservative vote.
Many would argue that the core 40% (or less) is bat crap crazy. You do the math. If 40% offends the remaining 60% of the nation how do Republicans (who lately don’t like liberals, black folks, Latins folks, or women) expect to get anyone voted into office except in fringe districts?
That majority in the House of Representatives is all a result of crazy fringe voters then, eh? Imagine that.
And there are no female, black or Hispanic Republicans?
Republicans “like” women, blacks and Hispanics just fine. But they’re not so keen on idiots. Which is unfortunate, since at least 20% of US voters are idiots, and they all vote Democrat.
GO back to political reality 101.
Turnout trumps attracting the wishwashy spineless moderates every time.
You need an advanced course. Let’s call it Political Reality 103.
Ultra conservative and T-bagger Republicans can’t even get past their own primaries. Witness The Newt and Patrick Buchanan.
And if the GOP nominates a loon this time around, such as Ted Cruz, there will be a huge turnout. That’s what it takes to motivate those in the middle. A threat. And right wing loons are a threat to everyone in the nation.
Of course, the GOP answer is to pass more laws to keep the unwashed minorities (women, black people and brown people) from voting. It’s not going to work much longer. Either the Supremes will throw those voter suppression laws out or the sheer numbers of minorities will overwhelm the states where old white folks think they have a monopoly.
Actually, I don’t think you could call either Newt or Buchanan “tea party”–and Cantor might dispute your conclusion, too. And your diatribe about Republicans keeping the “unwashed’ from voting is horsecrap. Try “keeping the unregistered, non-citizens, the dead, and the fictitious from voting”. But otherwise, a nice post to show folks how Dems really are the open-minded types who will surely come around on the 2A if we just keep electing them.
If he is running in CT, and he is Republican, and he stands a chance at being elected, then odds are very high that he is in fact a RINO.
Pure RINO. He dodging and dancing so as not to offend anyone. He knows that he would be Governor right now if only CT republicans had turned out in numbers for him in 2010 anywhere near as they did for Romney in 2012. So he has to pay lip service to the firearms freedom demographic.
That said, it’s still essentially a liberal state, so he needs to avoid sounding conservative. With his phrasing of “inconvenience”, as opposed to infringement, and what owners “believe”, as opposed to what is a violation of the 2A, he’s obviously not serious about the issue and just wants the job.
Be careful not to judge what he REALLY thinks from what he is saying. He is after all a politician.
Put it to you this way: If you could get elected POTUS and then be in a position to repeal EVERYTHING that bugs us POTG, but in order to win the election in the first place, you had to sound like a moderate, would you do it, or would you insist on saying “cold dead hands” and “shall not be infringed” (and the like) even at the cost of not being put in a position to actually do something about all these craptastic laws?
IE Romney, McCain, Dole, Your theory doesn’t really work does it? When Romney has 4million less votes than the moron McCain against a weak spineless incumbent he is not going to get elected. The “base” + the independent/no party would have put a conservative in the White House in 2012. But the Big Time RINO GOP doesn’t intend for their good times to end. Thus Romney. They STILL have not learned. If you need a picture play that POS Karl Rove.
Oh I get the dog whistle and code words concepts. They are real and do allow a politician to signal his base his true intentions, without arousing fierce opposition from the other side, nor turning off the middle.
Still, it’s more likely to be used to cover up something bad, like “gun reform” meaning confiscation, than it is to soft sell something good, like “second amendment rights” meaning repeal of unconscionable civil rights abuses. Going by what a politician says, whether explicitly or implicitly, is dangerous without a firm record of commitment justifying our trust in his words.
Where is this man’s record of achievement on firearms issues?
“…that inconvenience law abiding citizens who BELIEVE they have a right under the second amendment…”
Well,, we actually do have a right, not just think we do.
“…law abiding citizens ***who believe*** they have a right under the second amendment …” – telling choice of words…
For those of us in occupied states where the far left has gone crazy with gun control laws we either have to vote in general or vote with our feet and leave. Stop dancing around the issue of gun violence. Lets face it we have a generation of kids who have gone nuts and we are afraid to say it so as not to loose their vote. Our party is full of RINO’s we need to get some DINO’s elected so we can quietly stem the gun control tide. Lets face most sheeple have no clue who they are voting for. They only know what letter is after their name and if they are promising more free stuff.
Yes, Foley is a RINO. But the current governor is nothing more than a thug in a nice suit. He’s not so much a Democrat as he is a gangster.
I lived in CT for over a decade, but I don’t live there now. If I did, I’d gladly vote for the RINO. Malloy is the worst of the worst and has to go, or nobody in CT will be safe.
When you’re drowning, you don’t ask about the political philosophy of the guy who’s tossing you the life preserver. You just grab it.
Exactly! What people outside the state do not understand is Malloy believes to be above the law much like Obama.
One more thing, you cannot change the rules unless you first rule.
For Foley to win the election, he needs to hammer on Malloy’s record of economic incompetence. If gets dragged into the gun issue, he’ll lose – it’s CT. And even if he were 1000% 2A, it wouldn’t really matter unless both houses of the legislature were to flip, which is quite unlikely.
Best case scenario, the USSC strikes down the current law and a Governor Foley helps prevent or block a replacement.
I think that SCOTUS will remain out of the Second Amendment business for the next few years, so don’t look there for more help. SCOTUS already gave us a HUGE blessing. Now it’s up to us.
Hmmm….so says conventional wisdom, but that’s the same conventional wisdom that reasonably envisaged Speaker of the House Cantor in 2015 or 2017. Sooo….
It’s amazing what can be accomplished, once people get past the impossibility of it and just go do it.
That’s just it, though. RINOs can always come back with “Well, at least we’re not as bad as the Democrats, so you might as well vote for us. Besides, what other choice do you have?”
As frustrating as that stance is, it’s even more so for being accurate. What other choice do you have? Well, if slave staters continue to refuse to turn out for primary elections (CT GOP primary voter turnout in 2010 was approximately 16%….), then none. They will continue not to have much of a choice because they’ve taken no action to build-in a serious choice from the start. If slave staters continue to default to whatever milquetoast managed to rock the boat the least in the GOP primary, instead of of supporting the one standing proud, making a case and leading the electorate with vision, then they’ll continue this quadrennial a posteriori apologia.
I assume by “inconvenience” he means trampled on a natural right?
I think you’re right. At least, that’s how it came back when I checked it Weasel- to-English on google translate.
RINO…That being said we face the same BS choice in Illinois. Ultra lefttard Quinn( truly developmentally disabled) & millionaire/ billionaire Bruce Rauner. I don’t think anyone knows what the hell he stands for-except power for himself. That said-I sympathize with the people of Connecticut.
Remember Christine Todd Whitman. She ran strongly on repealing the Florio gun control bill, then changed her mind the very day after she was elected. I don’t know what this dude is running on, probably the same old crap, but if he where elected, the chance of repealing the Connecticut bill is zero. There’s no need to nuance this. It won’t happen.
Two America’s continue. Face it folks, CT and CA are on the other side.
Hell, even us living in IL are more free than them.
I think this is an avant-garde position. Most politicians are for it before against it, or vice-versa. He’s for it, while against it.
Ah, here is a fine example of a solid RINO do shah.
Comments are closed.