Gabriel Gomez ran for Senate in Massachusetts, a state so blue Smurfs can hide in plain sight. For some reason—whether to realize future political aspirations or simple to make his wife more comfortable at dinner parties—the former Navy SEAL has decided he was wrong to oppose an assault weapons ban in the Bay State. His Boston Globe mea culpa is a sickening a piece of pusillanimous politically correctness. Startling in it own way. Chew some Tums and tune in . . .
Earlier this year, I ran for the US Senate under the belief that our country is better than our politics. Like most Massachusetts voters, I was frustrated with the partisan bickering and failure in Washington. Entrenched politicians want us to believe we must falsely choose between right vs. left and liberal vs. conservative — with both sides unwilling to listen and blindly convinced that they are justified in their opinion.
How is a country better than politics? Isn’t that like saying beer is better than alcohol? And what makes Gomez think he can play the “why can’t we all just get along” card when Barack Obama has spent six years proving that bi-partisanship means never having to say let’s make a deal.
What do we have to show for it? Sequestration, filibusters, economic stagnation, and an unwillingness to listen and learn from each other.
Americans don’t trust their leaders to stand up against conventional wisdom. Politicians have lost the respect of a vast majority of Americans, in part, because they lack the courage to admit when they are wrong.
Anytime the government is prevented from doing something, anything, about something, I’m a happy camper. Gridlock stopped the federal assault weapons ban. Gridlock prevented federa; gun registration (a.k.a., universal background checks). Greed may be good. Gridlock is great!
Politicians like Gomez—and they’re all like Gomez—would have you believe gridlock is like a traffic jam, preventing pols from getting where the American people want them to go—when you and i know our elected pols’ true destination is a private party with free hookers and blow. Roughly speaking.
I remain a private citizen, but feel I owe it to Massachusetts’ voters to admit that I was wrong in one of my earlier positions.
Throughout my campaign, I relentlessly traveled the Commonwealth listening to thousands of mothers, fathers, first responders, and to victims of crime on the issue of gun control. I heard from policy experts and law enforcement officials to broaden my knowledge, and to prepare me to best represent you as your United States Senator.
Uh-oh. No mention of chin wags with gun owners, who [still] form a significant proportion of Massive Taxes’ population. Or Bay State Constitutionalists, who draw inspiration from the former British colony’s revolutionary history. Or the thousands of military personnel stationed in Taxachusetts, who’ve sworn an oath to defend the United States Constitution. Like a certain RINO we know . . .
The overwhelming number of citizens and experts throughout Massachusetts supported banning these weapons and high capacity magazines. At the time, given my Navy SEAL experience, I felt they were wrong.
A lot of people, including my wife Sarah, disagreed with me.
Is Gomez seriously suggesting a Republican Senatorial candidate for Massachusetts encountered more gun control advocates than gun rights supporters? Or is he saying that his supporters’ support for the Second Amendment was inconsequential in the face of an “overwhelming” majority of Massachusetts residents and [unnamed] experts?
What led Gomez’s Navy SEAL to believe he was wrong to oppose legislation that would infringe on Americans’ Constitutionally protected right to keep and bear arms—other than hectoring from his better half (a type of torture for which even SEAL training can’t forfend)?
Since the campaign, free from the burdens of a grueling spotlight, I have spent much time reflecting on these exchanges. I asked myself whether my position against banning assault weapons and high capacity magazines represented what is best for the people of our Commonwealth and our Country.
In short: on this issue Massachusetts is right, my wife Sarah is right, and I was wrong.
Based on everything I have learned, seen and heard from the citizens of this Commonwealth, I can no longer support legislation that would allow the continued sale of assault weapons and high capacity magazines, and here is why:
My opposition to banning assault weapons and high capacity magazines was based on my experience as a platoon commander and as a member of the US Navy SEALs. My fellow SEAL team members are the most highly trained, professional warriors in the world.
Wait for it . . .
Navy SEALs can handle assault weapons and high capacity magazines with complete competency and safety. Others cannot. I can show virtually anybody how to change a high capacity magazine clip in five seconds. But that does not mean virtually anybody should have one.
Despite the political risks my decision may pose, the risks to schoolchildren and to other innocent victims caused by assault weapons are simply unacceptable.
So we get two reasons why Gomez abandoned his oath to uphold the United States Constitution.
First, you suck. SEALs can handle AR-15s and standard capacity magazines. You can’t. Even though you can change a “clip” in five seconds (wow that’s slow), even though millions of Americans shoot AR-15s with standard capacity magazines every day of the week (and twice on Sundays) without incident, it’s just too much deadliness! For you. Not Gomez and his homies.
Second, AR-15s pose a risk to schoolchildren. You know; like obesity. And car accidents. And medical malpractice. Which is why Gomez supports banning french fries, Chevy Cobalts and doctors. Oh wait . . .
I remain a strong, proud proponent of the Second Amendment. I will continue to speak out when politicians play politics and fear monger on guns. However, I will also continue to listen, learn and consider new evidence and arguments from the other side.
Many people of good will may honestly disagree with my decision. Some will be tempted to say my support for banning assault weapons and high capacity magazines runs contrary to the Constitution and to the Second Amendment.
To the professional political critics, I simply offer this: volunteer for the Navy or for the other armed services, successfully go through SEAL or other special forces training. Then you will be fully qualified and prepared to fire as many assault weapons with unlimited high capacity magazines as you desire.
Ah, another example of “I support the Second Amendment but I don’t.” From a Republican, no less. And yes, Gabby, I was tempted to say you betrayed your oath to the United States Constitution. In fact, I did. ‘Cause you have.
As for allowing special forces guys to fire as many assault weapons with unlimited high capacity magazines as they desire, what are you meshugah? Those guys are wrapped way too tight. Then again, they do have the right to do so.
One more thing: anyone who wants to fire as many assault weapons with unlimited high capacity magazines as they desire are welcome in Texas. And that’s the truth.