A former and expected future Massachusetts candidate for the United States Senate has enraged gun owners with an editorial published Tuesday in The Boston Globe. Gabriel Gomez, who ran in a special election to replace John Kerry, and who National Republican Committee Chairman Jerry Moran has said would run again in the regular election in 2014, blindsided his gun owner supporters by declaring “I was wrong to oppose assault weapons ban.”
Why any would have supported him in the first place is best explained by the fact that he was running in Massachusetts, where gun owners are accustomed to a false hope formula that establishment Republicans are continually permitted to count on, that the lesser of two evils is the best they ever need offer in “blue” states. Besides, Gomez has heroic credentials and at the time made some hopeful, albeit conflicting noises.
“As a former U.S. Navy SEAL, I am a strong Second Amendment supporter,” Gomez declared on his campaign website. “Our freedoms make America the most unique and prosperous country in the world.”
He then proceeded to reveal a remarkably huge “but” for someone apparently otherwise so fit, endorsing the forced termination of private sales and mental health blanket dragnets.
“We must not, however, take away freedom for law-abiding citizens in the process,” he proclaimed, counting on most not noticing he’d just endorsed doing precisely that. And besides, didn’t his well-publicized position on “assault weapons” — back when it would have been damaging to his chances against Michael Sullivan in the primary to admit he wanted them banned — prove he was “offering voters a stark choice on the question of gun control”?
Not that Gomez ever offered them a consistent choice, as opposed to a calculated one.
“Republican Senate candidate Gabriel Gomez said Thursday that he ‘fully supported’ the candidacies of the Republican presidential nominees in 2008 and 2012 – even though Gomez donated to Democratic President Barack Obama in 2008, told Democratic Gov. Deval Patrick that he supported Obama that year, and did not actually vote in the presidential primary in either year,” MassLive.com reported last March.
He played both sides. He’s doing it now.
Still declaring “I remain a strong, proud proponent of the Second Amendment,” he then proposes to eviscerate it. Citing “a good portion of my life protecting and defending the Constitution,” he then proposes shredding it.
“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,” he offers. “Then you will be fully qualified and prepared to fire as many assault weapons with unlimited high capacity magazines as you desire.”
What, like at the Navy Yard?
And to make his case he invokes the spirit of Lee Paige? How many more times must the ridiculous lie that the police and military are the “only ones” with the requisite legitimacy to be trusted with guns be documented?
There is a disputed quote attributed to genocidal Nazi monster Heinrich Himmler that nonetheless reflects an identical philosophy to what Gomez just endorsed.
“Germans who wish to use firearms should join the SS or the SA — ordinary citizens don’t need guns, as their having guns doesn’t serve the State,” the quote declares. Who actually said it is unimportant, as the sentiment is a hackneyed domestic gungrabber talking point, reflecting an arrogance and tyrannical premise serious gun owners who understand the clear intent of the Founders utterly reject. Any politician who embraces it will not only be likewise utterly rejected, but actively defied, and ultimately resisted.
Some of us, Mr. Spent Your Life Defending the Constitution, will not disarm. Spend 10 minutes reading that link, Gomez, and think about what it means. If you want us to give up the guns you wish to ban, you will need to send other men, who also falsely swore an oath to the Constitution, to take them from us. Excuse me, to try to take them from us. You’re not one of those insulated dumba**es who think this is all about deer hunting, are you?
Any gun owner who supports this candidate in 2014 will be proving another adage, a cynical quote attributed to the late Lee Atwater, a political consultant, Reagan and Bush I adviser, and former chairman of the Republican National Committee. As with the Himmler quote, I can’t document he ever actually said it, but it does convey an attitude and arrogance the party clearly and continually exploits: “Who else are they going to vote for?”
But if Gomez runs in 2014 and loses, the timid and unimaginative among use will no doubt cry, a Democrat gunbrabber will get elected!
So what? There’s a much larger and more encompassing principle than an election in a state that is going to vote leftist anyway: What incentive do we give squishy “moderates” to ever pay us anything but lip service if we continually allow them to get away with treating us like political hostages and reward them with power anyway? Let the political charlatans feel our pain until they get smart and vote the right way — if not out of principle then out of naked self-interest.
“But we’ll lose our gun rights!” some might cry, meaning they’re personally willing to surrender theirs. Not to put to fine a point on it, but some of us will not disarm.
“Very much appreciate all the thoughtful comments,” Gomez writes on his Facebook page to angry responders to his hit piece. “This is obviously a very contentious issue with good passionate people on both sides. I respect those that disagree with me. In the end, I will always try to do what is best for the country and the people and not the political parties. For those that disagree with me, I hope we can be civil and agree to disagree. Thank you.”
How very civil. The thing is, if his gun ban edict gets passed, we won’t be allowed to just agree to disagree. If any defy it, those shock troops he says are the only ones who should have semi-automatics will deploy with real military weaponry to compel compliance and obedience from “We the People.”
That’s hardly a sign of the “respect” Gomez says he has for us, but after looking at the weasel-words this character throws out about supporting the Second Amendment, why would anyone be surprised that he’s insincere about that, too? People who respect you trust you with freedom, and don’t presume to dictate what rights they will allow you to have. All subject to changing minds, of course.
Why would any free and rational adult respect anyone who believes differently, or trust them with political power? The thoughts come unbidden that at one time, one of our most respected military men and genuine battlefield heroes was Benedict Arnold, and that people who say one thing for personal gain while meaning something entirely different need to be shunned, not enabled.
UPDATE: See important follow-up “Former SEAL schools Gabriel Gomez on guns and freedom.”
If you’re a regular Gun Rights Examiner reader and believe it provides news and perspectives you won’t find in the mainstream media, please subscribe to this column and help spread the word by sharing links, promoting it on social media like Facebook (Dan) and Twitter (@dcodrea), and telling your like-minded friends about it. And for more commentary, be sure to visit “The War on Guns: Notes from the Resistance.”
What the Obama administration can’t get through legislation they’re determined to get just by issuing orders. The latest GUNS Magazine “Rights Watch” column is online, and you can read it before the magazine hits the stands. Click here to read “Executive Actions.”