Hick

Some folks are a bit surprised at Hickenlooper's signing of the anti gun owner bills yesterday. Let's start with a look at what he's said in the past:

Here's Hickenlooper about 8 months ago:

Here's Hickenlooper 4 months ago:

Here's Hickenlooper 3 months ago:

Here's Hickenlooper last week (the 7:49 mark is where the gun woner control discussion begins):

You can hear, if you listen carefully that he always hedged a bit, but the further in the past you look the more he seems unconvinced that any new gun owner control laws would be effective. Now we have this:

"In certain circumstances someone bent on destruction, even if they're slowed just for a number of seconds, that allows others to escape,' [Hickenlooper] said."

And this:

"Background checks have great benefits,' [Hickenlooper] said, which is why he supported the bill expanding them."

He also rattled off a bunch of stats to justify his signing of these anti gun owner bills.

So what happened?

According to Michael Bane, Obama promised Hickenlooper a job if the 2014 election does not work out.

Hickenlooper has never been an adamant hoplophobe, at least not politically. It's clear he's not part of the gun culture, but he hasn't shown any animosity towards us. Even now I don't sense any deep hatred of us or our culture.

What I do think is that he doesn't understand us. So if stepping on us furthers his national ambitions it's not a big deal. I don't see him as ruthless, rather he's someone who acted on behalf of his own best interest and regrettably stepped on our toes in the process. And to some degree I do not think he realizes how bad these laws are, or how much they hurt us (thanks in part to gun owners who've told him that background checks were okay).

That does not make his actions one bit less evil.

I've written before about the foreign influence that shaped these laws. Despite denials I cannot see a more plausible explanation for the way this whole campaign to establish gun owner control in Colorado was conducted.

Firehand linked to an article wherein a Colorado sheriff complained of the irregularities in the hearing process for these bills. Not just the outcome, but the process itself.

Hickenlooper claims that the anti gun owner bills aren't a big deal to businesses planning on moving here. He didn't mention anything about the businesses planning to leave though. It could be that he thinks new businesses coming in will make up for MagPul and its associated suppliers leaving the state. Or it could be that he is simply unconcerned.

Here's a video showing part of the press conference Hickenlooper held after signing the bills.

Note how Hickenlooper tries to pass off the anti gun owner rhetoric, but then watch as Fields gets handed the ball.

Now look, Fields is not too bright. I say this not because I disagree with her about my culture needing to be eliminated (though there is that), but because I've seen her speak unscripted. Her mental faculties aren't up to masterminding anything. Putting it simply, she's a useful idiot - but she believes. Hickenlooper doesn't exhibit the same zeal.

From this article about the political perils of gun owner control in Colorado comes this quote:

"If he signs these bills, I have to come to the conclusion that he's more interested in his national prospects than he is his legacy here in Colorado,' said Republican Sen. Greg Brophy, who represents a rural part of the state's eastern plains. 'These are not moderate. These are extreme, and just really unpopular."

How unpopular? His staff has been fielding over 1,000 phone calls a day since last week sometime. 1 call every 18 seconds is what was claimed for Monday. Hell, a fellow I know was complaining about having to call 3 times before getting through last Wednesday. With his stating that he'd sign those bills I'm pretty confident few of those calls were trying to congratulate or encourage him.

Colorado Senator Nicholson was so frustrated with the unpopularity of the anti gun owner bills that she yelled at her constituents to "sit down" at a meeting:

(She's in for a rough election by the way.)

If you kept up with the governor's Facebook or Twitter pages you'll probably have noticed the majority of the comments left were opposed to the gun owner control bills. Yet Hickenlooper still claims there was "widespread support" for these bills.

I think he's correct in a sense. After all, New York City, California and Washington D.C. are a pretty good distance apart - geographically at least.

The Senate republicans doctored a New York state flag to reflect who really is governing in Colorado. "Thanks for turning us into New York" was their message.

Ultimately, I think what happened was this: Obama gear up his campaign machine to push for an issue, not a candidate. They did a full court press on the legislators as well as the governor. Biden had a simple message: support these bills and we'll help you either with a re-election fight or job placement within the administration. Opposed us and we'll use Bloomberg's credit card to primary you. That worked on the power hungry useful idiots like Fields (who was their poster child because she ranked highly in the progressive pantheon since she was a victim. That worked well on the legislators.

With the governor I think they used more carrot and less stick so to speak. The lure of a job offer in D.C. likely caught his ear and playing ball on this gun owner control thing was not a big deal. I do not think Hickenlooper would have pursued it on his own, but since he's signed on to the program he's trying to do his part.

Meanwhile the local press has been as supportive as they could be without coming right out and declaring a side.

But given what I've seen of Hickenlooper he wouldn't toss away his "moderate" street cred unless he had a path to follow where it wouldn't be necessary.

I also think that the gun owner control bills here are part of a national strategy; Colorado was just the first step. In particular they (Obama, Biden, Bloomberg, etc) wanted a universal background check bill passed, to shore up support for such a measure in the federal senate. However that does not mean they lack any intention of pushing for gun owner control in other states. Word is Biden is already making phone calls in Minnesota.

I bring you this overly long and heavily video laden post for a few reasons: the first being to show you how a little nudge towards power can be enough to corrupt a politician you thought was on your side, or at least not hostile to you. It's not just endemic to democrats, though they are the prominent examples. Remember that Bloomberg and Sarah Brady were republicans. It's rumored that McCain still is. And Boehner is as punkish a bully as they come. You have to watch them all, very carefully. And don't ever let them get farther than pitchfork distance (or closer for that matter).

But just as importantly I'm hoping out-of-staters will be on their guard. Don't think that what happened in Colorado can't happen wherever you live; it can. Colorado was one of the most gun friendly states before all this started this year. Not perfect by any means, but I'd say that they ranked behind Wyoming, Montana, Alaska, Arizona and Vermont. My home state of NC and the proverbial gun mecca of Texas had more restrictive laws than Colorado did.

Again, I'm not making an apology for Hick or any of the others. Their actions are evil and they should be regarded so; they deserve contempt. Doubly so for their masters in D.C. and NYC. But it helps to understand how this happened, why this happened, or maybe even that it happened, so hopefully y'all can prevent this from happening where y'all live.

For us here, it's now fight or flight, and neither will be an easy path.

One more quote from this article:

“Is this shattering your national image as a quirky, loveable governor?' Hickenlooper was asked.

'I’m still quirky,' he said. 'I’m not sure I was that loveable..."

He damn sure ain't loveable now.

Posted by Publicola at March 21, 2013 07:47 AM | TrackBack