when obama came out against gay marriage in 2007 i thought it was cowardly and i said so, although i wasn't on either this board or wotmania at the time. i could probably link you to statements i've made to that effect without using the word coward but i don't want to bring up stuff that is unrelated to this forum just to prove a point. and i will also fully admit that now that it's politically expedient, the dems all line up to be in favor of gay marriage. just like when the dems lined up in lockstep with the republicans to refuse to oppose the iraq invasion because it was politically expedient, i called that cowardly as well. i even participated in a protest at herb kohl's offices in wisconsin because instead of listening to his constituents -- 75% of whom did not want an invasion -- his response was "i'm going to see what the mood is in washington". coward.

when republicans would rather think about themselves and their lobbyist campaign donors than the constituents they represent, and then create lies about the legislation so they can justify opposition to it, yes i consider that cowardly. i don't doubt that many republicans come from states where their constituents don't want certain specific aspects of the legislation on guns, but it was pretty overwhelmingly obvious that, even by conservative estimates, 85% of people are in favor of expanded background checks and to say that 85% of the country is wrong because the NRA gives them a check i find to be cowardly. there is no cognitive dissonance here, and there is no inconsistency either. i've upset you by calling out your party, but if you wait long enough i'm sure i'll call out the dems for their role in something soon enough.

i know it's easy to sit and say "this person opposes most of what i believe so he must be of the opposition party" but the truth is i am an activist, not a partisan. the only reason i agree with dems on a lot of issues is because the republicans are so far off the deep end to my world view that i have no choice. again, i know you're probably going to take that personally so i apologize directly to you for that, but you have to understand that it's not your party's delivery, it's the actual message that turns the majority of the country against them.

the fresh anger comment was a joke, received poorly because of the textual communication limitations of the internet. calm and polite reasoning has gotten us nowhere, with the pro gun side seemingly more paranoid and unhinged than 20 years ago when it came up last. here is a calm and reasoned response to the whole issue: there is no such thing as a federal gun registry, and opposing legislation which specifically includes language re-affirming this is counter-productive for your side as well. if you are going to oppose a law, oppose it for what it actually contains, not the straw men that can be erected in order to generate fake outrage for justifications to filibuster it out of hand.

using the language of the NRA: our goal should be in keeping the guns out of the "bad guys'" hands. but blocking any and all attempts to do so then telling us "hey, it won't work and we won't even give it a try" is demeaning to everyone involved on both sides of this issue.