LOL .... yeah ... that must be it. If I have one of the firearms not on his tiny "approved" list, then I must be a monosyllabic, morbidly obese, hairy-backed automaton of the NRA. He and all his other NPR buds can keep telling themselves that.
“I think gun control is an issue that we can no longer afford to be seen as standing in favor of,” Keillor says. “Gun control means something so different in Manhattan than it means in the country. There’s no way for the Party to take just one stance. It’s way down the list of important issues, and I think that we Democrats are too emotional about this. We get all dizzy at the thought of people buying assault weapons for example. I don't think assault weapons should be legal, but I don't think it's anything to lose sleep over. There are a few thousand gun fetishists who like to put on camo (XXXL) and stand around holding guns and get their pictures taken, and they're fairly harmless for the most part, and in our revulsion at them we piss off twenty million hunters. Gun control laws tend to reflect an urban point of view — in the big city, somebody with a gun is weird and dangerous — and as liberals we ought to be reluctant to let city people lord it over rural people. If Uncle Elmer wants to keep a machine gun on his farm west of Yankton, let him keep it. There are bigger problems.”
When bank robbers roamed the streets of my old neighborhood of North Hollywood with semi-automatic weapons, gun control seemed like a gigantic problem. But given a choice between gun control and a living wage, I think I’d opt for economic justice over passing laws to deprive Uncle Elmer of his firearms fetish — especially if losing Uncle Elmer’s vote meant losing another election to a GOP/Halliburton conglomerate.
Anyone else incensed? Buck up or stop reading, leave the room, and sulk about the election while I ask Keillor if there any other positions Democrats should jettison.