politics and politicians
See other politics and politicians Articles
Title: Secret Identity of ‘Guns at RNC’ Petitioner Revealed
Source:
Observer News and Politics
URL Source: http://observer.com/2016/03/secret- ... ns-at-rnc-petitioner-revealed/
Published: Mar 30, 2016
Author: Ken Kurson
Post Date: 2016-03-30 12:28:11 by cranky
Keywords: None
Views: 1963
Comments: 26
Hillary backing gun control supporter is the brains behind 'satire' movement that's garnered 50,000 signatures Republican presidential candidate Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) and his wife Kelley Ashby pose for a photograph outside The Quicken Loans Arena August 6, 2015 in Cleveland. Home to the NBA’s Cavaliers, the arena hosted the first debate of the 2016 Republican presidential campaign and will be home to the RNC convention in July. A petition that’s been circulating for a week on Change.org is asking the Quicken Loans Arena to “Allow Open Carry of Firearms at the Quicken Loans Arena during the RNC Convention in July.” Posted by an anonymous petitioner who calls himself The Hyperationalist, the petition caught fire when it became a darling of talk radio and right wing blogging. The petition, which calls the arena’s ban on weapons “a direct affront to the second amendment” that “puts all attendees at risk” has surpassed 51,000 signatures and is racing toward its goal of 75,000. But the identity of its anonymous progenitor has not been fully cracked. Until now. The petition is the brainchild of a Democratic activist and blogger named James P. Ryan, who claims to be satirizing rather than supporting the idea that Republicans should bring weapons into their nominating convention. Guessing his identity has become a bit of a parlor game among right-wing chatters and the success of the petition has stimulated Mr. Ryan, who is guarded about his identity, to call several New York City PR firms to inquire about representing him. In an interview with Newsweek, in which he went only by “Jim” and declined to reveal his full identity, Mr. Ryan claimed to be a Democrat who is not a gun owner and is “absolutely” in favor of gun control. He claims to be “overwhelmed” by the attention the petition has received. He told the magazine that he started the petition as “satire.” The magazine reported that he is “based on the West Coast,” but the Observer reached him on a Philadelphia cel number. “I am passionate about gun control and discouraging gun violence,” Mr. Ryan told the Observer. “When talk of a contested convention started brewing, I started thinking. On March 3rd, I threw a joke up on Facebook and Twitter and said, ‘hey guys, you really want guns at your contested convention?'” The petition itself is well-written and researched if predictably strident, and cites many arguments that will be familiar to those who are familiar with the point of view of those in the gun rights movement. For example, the petition takes aim at the idea that “gun free zones” increase safety, saying “The NRA, our leading defender of gun rights, has also correctly pointed out that “gun free zones… tell every insane killer in America… (the) safest place to inflict maximum mayhem with minimum risk.” It even raises the prospect of an “ISIS terrorist attack on the arena during the convention: in which those in the arena “will be sitting ducks, utterly helpless against evil-doers.” All three remaining Republican presidential candidates are quoted opposing gun-free zones and signatories are urged to “take a stand” in refusing ” to be hijacked by weakness and political correctness.” Part of the petition’s success lies in how authentic the language is—it doesn’t read like a left-wing satire of “right-wing gun nuts.” Asked how he got the language so right, Mr. Ryan said, “It was an attempt to be aware of the language, taking the gun rights people at their word and not caricature them. We talk past each other in American politics. I’m seeing a lot of ‘oh, it’s a Hillary troll who started this thing.’ Who cares who started it? Take a look at the words and see if you support it or not.” Mr. Ryan is, in fact, a Hillary supporter. He told the Observer, “I’m a liberal Democrat. I like Bernie a lot. I’ve donated to Bernie, I’ve donated to Hillary. I’m supporting Hillary, but I’m not a Hillary supporter in the sense that I’m carrying petitions.” 
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 14.
#3. To: cranky (#0)
(Edited)
We won't need to worry about this sort of thing anymore after next year, because it looks as though the Republicans are pulling out all of the stops to defeat Trump, which means they will nominate some nebbish who will be destroyed by Clinton (or Sanders, if Clinton is indicted and drops out). And that means that next year there will be five liberal Democrats on the Supreme Court. And that means that there will be gun registration, a ban on semi-automatic weapons, upholding city bans on guns, etc. The defeat of Trump and election of a Democrat is the sunset of the Second Amendment, for it means that the for the first time since 1969 the Democrats will control the Supreme Court. So, we won't need to worry about these gun debates much longer. If the Republicans succeed in stopping Trump, they will have sacrificed the Second Amendment to do it.
There's nothing to be done about it. It's their game and their rules. Hildebeest won't even need a pardon to run, either.
Yes there is. Republicans need to pull their heads out of their asses and stop fighting Trump. He's a whole lot better than Hillary. With Hillary, in particular, in the White House and in full command of the Federal judiciary (something that Democrats have not had since LBJ) the entire Democrat agenda can be enacted and enforced by Executive Order. Congress cannot stop that. They haven't been able to stop Obama, and right now they have thrown cases into the courts claiming overreach. With a firmly Democratic Supreme Court, we can expect the Federal judiciary to side with the Administration 100% of the time, and to very, very rapidly impose the whole Democrat agenda. Trump will appoint a Republican judge, and maintain Republican control. TWO Democrat Supreme Court justices are over 80 and will probably be replaced by the next President. One Republican, Kennedy, is over 80. That means that the next President will probably appoint FOUR young people of his or her party to the Supreme Court. In the Republican case, it would swing the court to a 7-2 Republican court. In the Democrat case, it would make the court 6-3. A Republican court can be expected to do as the court has done since Nixon, gradually yield on social issues over time. But with the Democrats in time, you can expect a swift judicial revolution. Heller will be gone. Unions will compel everybody in the industry to pay dues, which will go to political contributions, but businesses will be banned from making political contributions. Executive amnesty will expedite the turnover of population. Voter ID laws will be found unconstitutional. Semi-automatic weapons, private sales of guns, and urban gun ownership will be banned, while guns will be fully registered, and people will have to have a license to have them. There will be no religious exceptions to anything. Churches will lose their tax-exempt status and be prosecuted for civil rights violations if they refuse to marry gays. Look at the totality of European and Canadian social law, and look to see that very, very rapidly become the law of the United States. We stand at the fork in the road. Republicans are so stupid. They are going to sacrifice everything they stand for to defeat Trump, who stands for most of what they stand for. I hear the argument from Vichy Republicans that Hillary will be better for them. Wanna bet?
The rnc has a different vision of America's future than many of the Trump devotees. And that future doesn't include borders (secure or otherwise) or the US Constitution. Just as the rnc backed harry reid in his fight against Sharron Angle, rnc candidates can work with hildebeest but not with Trump. Members of the Republican wing of the Republicrat Party don't have any say in he matter.
There are no replies to Comment # 14. End Trace Mode for Comment # 14.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#4. To: Vicomte13 (#3)
(Edited)
If the Republicans succeed in stopping Trump, they will have sacrificed the Second Amendment to do it.
#6. To: cranky (#4)
There's nothing to be done about it. It's their game and their rules.
#14. To: Vicomte13 (#6)
Yes there is. Republicans need to pull their heads out of their asses and stop fighting Trump.
Replies to Comment # 14.
[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]