Hillary, Bernie, and Guns

gunsOne of the more absurd political dramas is unfolding as Hillary Clinton attempts to paint herself as further to the left than is Bernie Sanders.

The issue? Guns!

It would be laughable except for the fact that she advances her arguments with a straight face.

What is Hillary’s position on guns? That we should close gun show loopholes on background checks, ban assault weapons, etc.

While that might reduce human gun deaths a little, what would it do to reduce the millions of animals murdered by hunters each year? Absoluely nothing.

No candidate adequately addresses gun control, for the simple reason that it is not politically possible to do so and remain a viable candidate. Americans want to be able to kill things with guns.

The Second Amendment was crafted at a time when the government and the people had access to the exact same weapons technology. At the time, it seemed a good idea to level the playing field.

The logic for such a policy today would require private citizens to have possession of nuclear devices, missiles, heavy artillary, tanks, bazookas, mortars, and grenades.

No sane person can make such a case.


The Second Amendment is an outmoded anachronism, and should be swept into the dustbin of history.


I am not impressed with any scheme that would leave guns in the hands of hunters. The murder of a school child is no more horrific than the murder of any sentient being.

Were it up to me, all guns would be banned. That Clinton is more strident about background checks than Sanders is a ridiculous distinction. Both would allow the unbridled, continuous murder of innocent wildlife to satisfy the urges of psychopathic animal serial killers.

Absent banning all guns, I would ban all guns EXCEPT assault weapons. Assault weapons could be used against the state and its thugs. They could tip the odds in favor of successful revolution.

On actually substantive issues, the differences between Clinton and Sanders are easily identified, although Clinton has been adopting a number of Sanders’ talking points in her effort to co-opt the left wing base of the party.

I adored Hillary during Bill’s first run and his first term. Her book “It Takes A Village” was brilliant. She fought for single-payer health care, she kept Bill from being a full-on Republican.

Bill signed the Defense of Marriage Act, built more prisons than any president in history, supported federal minimum sentences, incarcerated an entire generation of Black Americans, sucked up to Wall Street, and moved the Democratic Party to the right.

As a Senator, Hillary pandered to NY Jewish voters in the wake of 9/11. She voted to invade Iraq and she voted for the fascist Patriot Act. She was a hawk as Secretary of State.


It doesn’t take a clairvoyant to know the Democrats cannot win the House. Without control of both the House and Senate, a Democratic president will be stymied, just as Obama has been.


I was pleased when Hillary came out against Keystone, and then the Trans Pacific Partnership. I had predicted she would based solely upon political expediency. Sanders is forcing her to the left.

It may well be that she is sincere in these new postures.

The real test of her commitment to progressive values will be to see if she uses her weight and political influence to defeat TPP in Congress. My guess is that she will not, and that she will be pleased if it passes on Obama’s watch.

Neither Clinton nor Sanders will get anything at all accomplished in the first term, as the Republicans have a lock on the House until 2020.

So let’s consider what the affect of a Democratic presidency would be: The opportunity to appoint to the courts!

Whom would you rather be making appointments to the US Supreme Court? To the federal bench?

A president who favors a tax on Wall Street transactions or one who takes money from Monsanto and the Big Banks?

That’s our choice! Sanders or Clinton.

 

 

Author’s Notes:

I am unaware of any other blog with the Armory’s mission of radicalizing the animal movement. I certainly hope I am not alone, and that there are similar sentiments being expressed by comrades unknown to me.

If you know of other blogs dedicated to animal rights and the defeat of capitalism, please comment with a link.

• Be sure to follow the Armory and share it with your Facebook friends and email contacts, as well as on Twitter, Google, and all other social media platforms. Our influence and effectiveness is dependent upon you!

Natasha Sainsbury, of Good Karma Graphic Design, has joined Armory of the Revolution as Editor, and is responsible for the transformation of the blog’s appearance. Visit and follow her blog V Kind.

If you are not already subscribed to the Armory, please do so before you leave. There’s a button to Follow us in the upper right sidebar.

• Be sure to visit Armory of the Revolution’s new commissary and bookstore: The Supply Depot

You will find recommended reading on Animal Rights, revolutionary theory, politics, economics, religion, science, and atheism. There is also a section of supplies for animal liberationists, hunt saboteurs, and social revolutionaries. This is all brand new, and we will be adding lots more merchandise in the near future!

Feel free to comment. I encourage open discussion and welcome other opinions. I moderate comments because this blog has been attacked by hunters and right wing trolls. I approve comments that are critical as well as those which agree with me. Comments that I will not tolerate are those that are spam, threatening, disrespectful, or which promote animal abuse and cruelty.

Advertisements

7 thoughts on “Hillary, Bernie, and Guns

  1. When I learned that Bernie Sanders fully supports hunting, and makes no apologies for stating that Vermont is a big hunting state, I realized that whatever a politician calls him/her self, whether “Socialist or Democrat or Republican, it’s pretty much all the same: the worst of Humanism, which is why Homo sapiens is actively destroying this planet’s life support systems, and all other species. Human ideologies rule, and are dominant in every facet of society, whether economics, sociology, science, conservation, education and politics. Humans have become “Gods” in their own right, and have had the capability to utterly destroy all life. Yes, there are suffering humans, because of humans, & certainly we can feel their pain, but we now owe it to this planet to concentrate our efforts to save whatever natural, wild systems we can, for whatever time they may have, within the limits of increased Climate change and disruption. Humans need to go. Then, this planet will have some peace, albeit a very changed planet.
    There isn’t much time. Too many so-called “wildlife groups” have forgotten what they originally stood for, ( If anything) & have compromised, genuflected to the enemies of Nature. Many groups now have trappers, hunters and livestock ranchers on their staff and boards. I, for one, will not be part of any group that is doing this.

    http://www.foranimals.org

    Like

  2. I think you are missing the point. The gun issue says more about Sanders than about Clinton. Someone who claims to be on the side of the “little people”, the economically disadvantaged, the underprivileged — in short, society’s underdogs — but who defends sport hunting, supports legislation murderously antithetical to the interests of wildlife, and panders to the gun nuts in his state is either a blatant hypocrite or else has a moral blind spot as big as the Green Mountains. Either way, who chooses such a man as a leader?

    Like

  3. The whole thing is a farce. The Democrats have tested the winds and decided that it would be politically safe to advocate some incremental restrictions in the gun laws, always adding the assurance that their minor changes would not interfere with anyone’s ability to hunt.

    I worry most about the Supreme Court and hope the Democrats will be appointing the next member rather than the Republicans.

    I doubt if much will change otherwise. The gridlock will continue, and members of Congress will continue looking after their own interests, which means listening to all the lobbyists advocating for their corporations, and seeking funds for their reelections. The welfare, much less the rights, of animals will be under the radar.

    Like

  4. “I am not impressed with any scheme that would leave guns in the hands of hunters. The murder of a school child is no more horrific than the murder of any sentient being.” Until one of these opportunistic politicians addresses this “hunting” issue, I have reservations about all of them…even Hillary and Bernie…all of them give an obligatory nod to the “necessity” and sheer “sportsmanship” of murdering animals…phooey! Thanks for a great piece of writing, Roland!

    Like

  5. I am glad to see a discussion of the NRA, which I think is a more useful discussion than whether Sanders is a “socialist” in any meaningful sense of the word. Of course, neither Sanders nor Clinton will actually do anything to significantly reduce the power of the NRA, but at least the issue is now getting a public hearing.

    Liked by 1 person

    • At the federal level. the only way to reduce the power of the NRA (or any special interest) is to ban lobbyists and private financing of campaigns. In states that have the initiative process available to their citizens, as in California, the bribed members of the legislatures can be circumvented by public vote. Just such an effort is underway for the 2016 ballot, where California Lt Gov Gavin Newsome is leading an effort to regulate ammunition through a ballot measure.

      Liked by 1 person

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s