Protestor protesting a pro-gun protest (courtesy Facebook)

Here we have a protestor protesting a pro-gun protest. That would be one Jason Paul, a self-proclaimed progressive Democrat running for State Representative in Connecticut’s 48th District. Mr. Paul posted the pic on Facebook, proclaiming “Braving the gun rally and standing up for the overwhelming majority of Connecticut residents.” To which Steve Williams Jr. replied “The only brave thing you did was leaving the house in that sweater. There were thousands there shoulder-to-shoulder in support of their rights and it looks like the only other person supporting your absurd views was behind the camera.” Well, not exactly . . .

As we’ve pointed out before, Connecticut’s civilian disarmament legislation enjoys popular support in the Constitution State (ironically enough). If it didn’t, it wouldn’t exist. So while Mr. Paul may have been a singular voice at the gun rally (interviewed by the media of course) his views on gun control are supported by a large number of his potential constituents. Sartorially challenged yes, but hardly out-numbered.

What’s interesting here: Paul’s belief that the pro and anti-gun confrontation is a conflict of “values.”

Setting aside the philosophical questions raised by the term (summarized on wikipedia), I presume Mr. Paul presumes that the NRA’s values have something to do with supporting greedy gun makers (at the expense of innocent life), racism (OFWGs uber alles) and paranoia (the government is evil). That’s the antis’ usual characterization of America’s oldest civil rights organization.

On the other side of the equation, we have the values of Mr. Paul’s “progressive Democrats.” Just for fun, let’s assume that Paul uses the term to trumpet his support for the “values” of progressive taxation (a.k.a., income equality), affirmative action (for oppressed minorities) and government intervention (in, well, everything). That’s the common understanding of the Progressives’ platform.

IF that’s the clash that’s in Mr. Paul’s head, he’s more right than he knows. As far as I can make out, the NRA’s real values are self-reliance, equality of opportunity and limited government. These values do not square with Progressive principles. Which makes the fight for gun rights a lot more “global” than a simple squabble over “assault rifles” and “high-capacity magazines.”

So it’s both sad and true that the NRA’s values are not Connecticut’s values. If they were, state residents would have never pursued civilian disarmament. Because you can’t have any of the NRA values listed above without respecting residents’ natural and civil right to keep and bear arms. Our Founding Fathers knew that. Which is why they enshrined guns rights in the Bill of Rights – right after protecting Mr. Paul’s right to wear that sweater and carry that sign. [h/t DrVino]

Recommended For You

68 Responses to Incendiary Image of the Day: Let’s Not Forget the Constitution Edition

    • LOL. I know an emigre from Tadjikistan (well, his parents were) who wears pajamas everywhere, maybe even to work. He’s sorta OK, though….

  1. So, Mr. Paul is anti-Constitution. Yet, he’s running for public office, and if he wins, will have to take an oath upholding the Constitution. Hypocrisy-yes. Plus he needs to do little exercise with that quad chin of his…

  2. The typical anti doesn’t take time off work to stand in a crowd for their cause.

    Rather, theyre like camouflaged lizards. You don’t see or hear antis unless a chance discussion gives them a voice to their opinions . They simply vote anti at the polls, which is really the only place their opinions have meaning.

    • Not true, thankfully. Yes, it’s true for who gets into power and who doesn’t. But the people still have a lot of say in what gets passed, and that’s a function of how much noise one side can make rather than a sheer numbers game. Just look at every federal post-Newtown gun control legislation. It all failed due to the incredibly vocal POTG (even if the majority did support the measures, which is debatable). Or, look at my home state of Colorado, and the incredibly successful recalls we had of representatives who went back on their words.

  3. I will suggest a few corrections:

    1.) Replace any and all instances of so-called “Progressive/s” with Regressive/s. This, and only this, is exactly what they are, have always been, and shall always be.

    2.) Replace “income equality” with income inequality. The only “equality” that these Regressives want is equity in being dirt poor and living in squalor.

    3.) Replace “affirmative action” with racial favoritism even of wholly unqualified applicants. Yes, people totally unsuited for jobs still get hired only because of the color of their skin, and that is racism whether the Regressives admit to it or not.

    4.) Replace “government intervention” with.. well, actually, you can leave that right where it is. You can build on that, if you like, and insert hypocritical corporate cronyism and the deliberate destruction of natural, fundamental, civil, Constitutionally protected and affirmed rights — ALL of them.

    But, hey. It’s your show, Robert.

    • “Pro-regressive(s)” (kinda just rolls off the tongue)

      ” . . . . there, fixed it for ya.”

  4. Such a shame that Jason Paul doesn’t believe in peoples civil right to keep and bare arms is a value that should be protected in his state. The picture tells me that there are many in Connecticut that do believe that it should be protected.

  5. Kind of reminds me of Rahm Emanuel proclaiming that Chick Fil-A doesn’t represent “Chicago values”. Well, they cheerfully serve whoever walks in the door, they put principle ahead of profits (closing on Sunday, giving away free food to snow-stranded Georgians), they love their enemies(going out to give water to people standing in the sun to protest against them)–yep, I would say Rahm is right. And as the original Robert pointed out, this clown may be right, too–sadly.

    • While I don’t agree with the CEOs/Owner’s beliefs in denying gay marriage, it’s helpful to point out that they never said they hated gay people or wished them harm.

      And the chicken is delicious.

  6. I’ve come to the conclusion that politicians and wanna-be politicians (of either inclination) appear to have deeply flawed or totally lacking knowledge of US and world history. Time and again the same ideas are trotted out with a different name, and time and again they fail, in the process often killing millions through war, famine, or oppression. One can only hope that the US maintains the ideas enshrined in the Constitution; they are timeless.

    • Those ideas are trotted out again and again because they work for their intended purpose, viz. gaining power. A sucker born every minute? Gross underestimate.

  7. The guy must not be much in character and he must be a liberal he certainly is not a democrat, the last democrat I seen was JFK. He looks a lot like that Moore character, the director, what a bum!

  8. If you are for equal opportunity you should be able to understand how affirmative action has helped provide equal opportunity. There were and still are many companies and schools that would rather not hire/accept minorities simply because of their race/skin color. Affirmative action forced these companies to meet a minimum number to give equal income opportunity.

    I am not saying that less qualified individuals should be hired over more qualified. I am saying race/ethnicity shouldn’t disqualify anyone from a job or education.

    In quite a few impoverished areas people want to lower the crime rate but you have business owners that refuse to give the people in the area jobs. How do you lower crime without equal job and education opportunities for all?

    • And that’s why Title VII exists, to prohibit discrimination in the workplace. Affirmative action is an affirmative obligation to evaluate the diversity of the workplace in hiring workers that applies to government contractors, and it can result in lesser candidates being hired. Btw, it goes beyond race and applies to veterans and the disabled, as well.

    • Affirmative action as implemented surely does mean hiring the less qualified in place of the more qualified, though it is specified with different words. As implemented it requires that the hiring requirements not specify skills or abilities in excess of the actual requirements being filled. The applicants are sorted on that basis, at the minimum required level of skills needed to do a job. In that frame the applicants are considered equally qualified and quotas are filled. The quotas, of course, are not included in the rules.

      As for veterans and affirmative action, most OPM-administered federal AA programs only provide veterans with diversity protection if they do not have a college degree. The rule used to be “having less than two years of higher education.” I haven’t checked the rule lately.

    • You prevent people from discriminating on the basis of race, etc by telling them they can’t do it. You don’t prevent it by telling them they have to hire a certain percentage/quota/number of a particular race/ethnicity/whatever (ie by MAKING them discriminate–choose–on the basis of race, etc). In the latter case, you are just changing the target of the race (or whatever) based discrimination, not eliminating the discrimination.

      • We know that a simple law on paper doesn’t stop crimes from happening. We state that about gun free zones all the time. Without setting minimums for companies and educational institutions there is no reason for them to follow it.

        I got into one of the best universities in the country because of affirmative action. I had a high GPA. My SAT scores were soso. But, because of affirmative action I got in. Once I was in the school, I was ranked #1 or #2 in ~90% of my classes(as a computer science and engineering major). I grew up in the hood. Without going to that university, I wouldn’t be where I am in life, paying ~38% of my salary in taxes because of progressive taxation. Some may think racism is gone in America; any poor or successful minority, such as myself, can tell you differently.

        • I got into one of the best universities in the country because of affirmative action. …I grew up in the hood. Without going to that university, I wouldn’t be where I am in life, paying ~38% of my salary in taxes because of progressive taxation. Some may think racism is gone in America; any poor or successful minority, such as myself, can tell you differently.

          Sorry, internally self-contradictory.

        • Problem with “affirmative action” is that you can not possibly know if you would or would have not been accepted to that/any college due to your earned MERIT. You check the box.

          After 40yrs of this nonsense one can not know/assume that the guy in the doctors office etc didn’t get in to school due ability or due to skin color. Quota bunny or ability. Good bet that down at the gov’t office got there BECAUSE of quote driven skin color.

          Can be sure thought that the “person of color” playing the kiddy game for the college/pro team got there due to ability or merit.

    • “Affirmative action” quickly morphed into hiring quotas, especially in government hiring. You can deny it ’til Hell freezes over, bit it’s a fact.

      • In one of my HR classes we went over the ratios you have to meet. If so many people apply you have to keep accepting applications until you can interview a % of non white compared to the number of white. After interviews you also have to determine if your company has hired enough non white people, if not then you pretty much have to hire from the non-white pile even if there are only 1-2 people.

  9. Yes yes… this massive ground swell of supports around this neck-less man/woman really illustrates how much CT supports the anti-2A movement.

  10. All those mean awful crazed gun nuts right there in close proximity, and yet nobody went postal and took out the dissenter? I wonder if he is upset that he was not physically assaulted. Those darn nuts weren’t as nutso as he expected them to be. Spoiled his chance to score a huge photo op.

  11. What is ironic here is he is challeging the state representative who was one of the few democrats that voted against the gun measures that were passed last year. He seems to be better at getting publicity than he will be in getting votes. The district is mostly pro-gun.

  12. Whats brave about going to a rally where the participants support the constitution, and thus your rights (all of them), and will show you respect even though they disagree with you.

  13. They need to believe that they are fighting the NRA and not the people. It’s less scary for them that way.

  14. And when someone doesn’t share your values, you enact legislation to force them to live by those values, is that it? I seem to remember there being amendments against that in the constitution, and I don’t just mean the second.

  15. I’d like to see him prove that the “overwhelming majority of CT citizens” support the new gun laws.

  16. So, the NRA values of Freedom, Equality, true anti-racism (by training free and freed Black men during the Civil War), and the Constitution, are not the values of “The Constitution State”? The Cognitive Dissonance on the Left is just insane…

  17. NRA VALUES ARE NOT CONNECTICUT VALUES!

    Meanwhile, behind the guy is a bunch of Connecticut residents who are NRA members and are at a pro-freedom rally. Reminds me of Cuomo saying that New York is no place for those who are pro-life and “pro-assault-weapon” – “because that’s not who New Yorkers are” yet many are pro-freedom and pro-life and he knows it.

    OR

    Obama and his ” that’s not who we are” w/ regards to Syrian intervention.

    Well yes it is jerk wads. Connecticut and New York residents differ on a lot of things just like America does. It is only the immature that do not even recognize that the other side exists.

  18. “On the other hand, it does not seems as though he was willing/brave enough to enter the crowd and engage in any sort of dialogue.”

    No, that’s usually the tactic. Don’t let the opposition say a word. Just do a drive by message and hope it sticks.

  19. The saddest thing is that this creature could actually get elected. It must be terrible living in a blue state.

    • Paul is truly a progressive Democrat lamb in sheep’s clothing; probably representative of most of his potential constituents who are sheeple Democrats – just because.

  20. “Braving the gun rally and standing up for the overwhelming majority of Connecticut residents.”

    Ah, anyone here feel overwhelmed by this Lebanon Levi wannabe?

  21. As we’ve pointed out before, Connecticut’s civilian disarmament legislation enjoys popular support in the Constitution State (ironically enough).

    Does it? Does it really have popular support or is it that you have people in office who simply follow the party line and don’t give a damn about the citizens they represent? if it was popular, the laws did not need an emergency vote. If it was popular, then pro-gun rights citizens would not be present in 5 to 1 or larger margins at various legislative events or other gun rights events.

    Most people do not care nor do they speak up. CT has a government who really does not care about its people but cares about being liked by the larger DNC collective. That is truth. It is DNC 1st and CT 2nd in all cases. If it meant screwing the state versus making DNC happy, many in the state legislature would support DNC ideas and values versus what is happening locally.

  22. Say what you may about this guy but that has to be one of the best looking sweaters ever to worn by a man.

  23. The present 48th District Rep is a D and she will be re-elected if no R candidate is viable, she had the good sense to vote NO when it came to violating the Constitution… unlike my Rep. Roberta Willis who assured me she would not violate the Constitution….LIAR!

  24. Thanks for posting a picture of the enemy of my Liberty. Now I know the anti-gun goof. And NRA’s values are not mine either, but I am a Life Member and believe the Constitution is my line in the sand, and most politicians have stepped all over it trying to rub it out.

  25. Anyone having ever wondered exactly what total cluelessness looks like making a fashion statement — your search has now ended.

  26. This whole post manages to be depressing, infuriating and knee-slapping hilarious all at once. I keep trying to despise this guy but it’s tempered by pity and bewilderment. Pat indeed.

  27. Gun control isn’t about guns, it’s about taking away everything from men that makes them masculine.

    I couldn’t find a better photo than this one to illustrate that fact. Just look at him.

    Remember that once feminism succeeds in turning all men into this, then all women will eventually become PS3 girl … just what the feminists want. Note that currently feminism is working Very Hard to convince men that they should prefer PS3 girl over Wii girl. Just another way they take the “man” out of men – train them to ignore and rewire their basic instincts. It’s insidious.

  28. Well the sign is right about one thing. At least the NRA HAS values. The “Constitution State” sold theirs out a long time ago.

  29. I know TTAG doesn’t like comments about people on a personal level but the guy’s image SCREAMS “I’m scared of guns”

  30. I was there and saw this guy. It was him and two of his buddies. They were the only antis I saw there and they basically took the picture and left.

    That was it.. They were outta there by 12:15. Just to give prospective, yes they were behind the rally where no one could see them.

  31. Well I was there. I didn’t see this guy but he doesn’t look so brave standing on the outskirts of the crowd 20ft from everyone holding his sign up. So to me his gesture has about the same effect as making a face at your mother once she turns her back after she finishes scolding you for something.

  32. Always those brown “radical” glasses. As a camo hat designates the hunter, the Carhartt bibs epitomize the laborer and the Alligator the Yuppie, these glasses characterize the liberal psycho. Can’t we just “Move ON” with that style. If you are not a radical left wing crazee and wear this style, sorry to offend. I am still caffeine deficient and libtard overwhelmed this AM.

  33. I note is he far enough away from the protesters so he can get a running start if needed. And his back & sign is turned from the crowd also. Bold move , right.

  34. Since Jason’s mom picks out his clothes in the morning there is little chance he will ever get married, or even laid in his lifetime. Mr. Paul seems to effectively educated by the best liberal minds money can hire and while that might make him qualified to do a lot of things, telling us we can’t be armed isn’t one of them.

    “Jason has spent every summer at his family’s cottage on Amston Lake.”
    Wow, Jason, that sounds so awe inspiring and worldly. I spend my summers working and paying taxes since I can’t be a professional student. Jeez, I’ve got boots older than this guy.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *