[coloradan]

He's saying the Dems are perceived as having all the wrong answers and can't just SAY things differently or shoot a couple of geese. They have to start changing. I completely disagree with his position and his answers, but this is the one Dem I've read recently who is saying "We have to change or our party will die."

Don't be fooled by his rhetoric. This is more of the same old, same old. Loaded chamber indicators, magazine diconnects, "smart" guns etc,. Those are gun control too, and they have been part of the 'rat platform of incrementalist gun control for years. Just because the FBI told the Branch Davidians "This is not an attack" doesn't mean it wasn't one. Just because some NYT moron claims "this is an entirely new approach, one that isn't gun control at all, and one that the red staters can or will accept" doesn't make it true either.

[Darkwolf377]

"Don't be fooled by his rhetoric. This is more of the same old, same old. Loaded chamber indicators, magazine diconnects, "smart" guns etc,. Those are gun control too, and they have been part of the 'rat platform of incrementalist gun control for years. Just because the FBI told the Branch Davidians "This is not an attack" doesn't mean it wasn't one. Just because some NYT moron claims "this is an entirely new approach, one that isn't gun control at all, and one that the red staters can or will accept" doesn't make it true either."

That's my whole point.

Once again, I'm NOT agreeing with him or buying his argument.

I'm saying, again, his answers are all wrong, and I don't agree with his point of view.

BUT he is one of the few Dems who is actually thinking "We have to change or we're doomed." I don't think any of his changes are ones that would make me agree with him, but my point is that he is at least not blaming the Dems plight on "not getting the message out" but on the message itself.