I guess it’s not just violent too. Recently a Brady Board member opined “Angry white men are losing their influence,” and then proceeds to go on a racist and sexist diatribe the likes of which is hard to be believed. Is Tam an “angry white man?” Is Jennifer? Is my co-blogger? The cornered cat? Are the large percentage of my fellow NRA Election Volunteer Coordinators who are women? Is Pastor Ken? On the academic side of the Second Amendment, is Professor Johnson? Professor Cottrol? And let’s not forget about our women who toiled tireless on behalf of the outcome in the Heller decision.
I am sure some on the gun control side will be shocked and offended at my suggestion that Joan Peterson’s epic tome on the racial aspects of this issue are, in fact, racist and sexist. If someone said that Free Speech is an issue of angry males, how are you not implying free speech isn’t important to blacks or women? If this election had gone the other way, and one of us had said that this result was an indication that, to turn it around, angry black women were losing their influence, would you not decry such a response as racism and sexism? What if someone said the 4th Amendment, which protects from unreasonable search and seizure, was among these “angry white male” rights Joan speaks of. Oh wait.
The fact of the matter is that President Obama won re-election based on traditional political metrics that have long been at play in this country. What does the election say? It says when you run a challenger against an incumbent President, unless you really have your act together as a candidate, and fortune and circumstance smile upon you, you’re likely to lose. President Obama won the election because he did a better job of holding his base together, and his turnout machine was better than Mitt Romney’s. Period. It doesn’t speak of the rise or ascendancy, or descendancy of race or gender, and I think to suggest otherwise is to attempt to throw poison back into the well of racial animosity we’ve spent many decades trying to clean up. And which side is doing that here? Which side is dragging race into this, and constantly trying to paint 1/10th (1/5th if you’re Bloomberg) of the Bill of Rights as only being important to white males? They ought to be ashamed of themselves. Is this what living up to progressive ideals means?