Say what you will about Greg Pruet but we wouldn't have a 2nd Amendment in this state but for him. That you insinuate he had anything to do with your proposal being defeated/withdrawn only highlights your lack of attention to speaking with Greg about the proposed change. I agree with your change but will subvert any opinion or support in Greg's favor. I've been with him since the beginning and know the huge amount of work he's done. He's sacrificed more than any of you in my opinion and should always be consulted on any iteration of the 2nd Amendment issue. My personal opinion is you owe him an apology for not consulting him.
I have always given Pruett all the credit in the world for getting constitutional carry. The truth of the matter is he used his voice to attack me personally in a mendacious way. He could easily have reached out personally but he chose not to do that. I believe this was less about the substance of the proposal and more about going after me and as well as Dorothy Moon by proxy.
While I was one that was not ready for a complete overhaul of the platform, I believe part of the reason is there was very little time for people to read and digest what was being proposed. A lot of history, passion and beliefs were removed. The proposal of forming a committee and reviewing, revising and proposing changes would be a good thing in my humble opinion. Make sure that there is plenty of time to get it out there for people to digest the changes, and propose what they do or don't like about the changes.
Thank you, Brian, for a clear explanation of what you were trying to do. I sat in on the platform committee and observed the respectful debate. It takes time and energy to read, discern, and assimilate information.
Some knee-jerk pundits grabbed a headline, planted their stake, and rather than discuss the pros and cons of an issue, resorted to personal insults, name calling, and purity tests. And if you don't vote with them, you're labeled a RINO, sell out, or extremist.
If only we were limited to face-to-face deliberation rather than using social media posts, hyperbole, and memes to persuade and propagandize. Some of the things that were said about you, I wonder if they'd repeat it to your face.
Sometimes it feels like we're back in middle school.
Say what you will about Greg Pruet but we wouldn't have a 2nd Amendment in this state but for him. That you insinuate he had anything to do with your proposal being defeated/withdrawn only highlights your lack of attention to speaking with Greg about the proposed change. I agree with your change but will subvert any opinion or support in Greg's favor. I've been with him since the beginning and know the huge amount of work he's done. He's sacrificed more than any of you in my opinion and should always be consulted on any iteration of the 2nd Amendment issue. My personal opinion is you owe him an apology for not consulting him.
Steve,
I have always given Pruett all the credit in the world for getting constitutional carry. The truth of the matter is he used his voice to attack me personally in a mendacious way. He could easily have reached out personally but he chose not to do that. I believe this was less about the substance of the proposal and more about going after me and as well as Dorothy Moon by proxy.
While I was one that was not ready for a complete overhaul of the platform, I believe part of the reason is there was very little time for people to read and digest what was being proposed. A lot of history, passion and beliefs were removed. The proposal of forming a committee and reviewing, revising and proposing changes would be a good thing in my humble opinion. Make sure that there is plenty of time to get it out there for people to digest the changes, and propose what they do or don't like about the changes.
That's why I think the way things turned out was best for everybody.
Thank you, Brian, for a clear explanation of what you were trying to do. I sat in on the platform committee and observed the respectful debate. It takes time and energy to read, discern, and assimilate information.
Some knee-jerk pundits grabbed a headline, planted their stake, and rather than discuss the pros and cons of an issue, resorted to personal insults, name calling, and purity tests. And if you don't vote with them, you're labeled a RINO, sell out, or extremist.
If only we were limited to face-to-face deliberation rather than using social media posts, hyperbole, and memes to persuade and propagandize. Some of the things that were said about you, I wonder if they'd repeat it to your face.
Sometimes it feels like we're back in middle school.