Why the parties ARE different and elections DO matter

Cam Edwards writes this on Townhall.com:

A remarkable thing happened at the United Nations yesterday. We, the United States, told the world "no". The messenger was Robert Joseph, the Undersecretary of State for Arms Control and International Security. Speaking before the dozens of nations that have gathered for the review conference on Small Arms and Light Weapons, Joseph told the world in no uncertain terms where the United States stood.

"The U.S. Constitution guarantees the rights of our citizens to keep and bear arms, and there will be no infringement of those rights," he proclaimed to the dignitaries and functionaries. "The United States will not agree to any provisions restricting civilian possession, use or legal trade of firearms inconsistent with our laws and practices."

Now, if this sounds familiar, it should be. It was five years ago that UN Ambassador John Bolton said something similar during the first conference on small arms. Then, as now, many countries wanted the conference to discuss and implement controls on the civilian possession of firearms. . .

Is there anyone out there who believes the UN representatives appointed by President Hillary Clinton or President Al Gore or President John Kerry would have delivered those remarks to a conference whose true purpose was to get the UN behind global civilian disarmament?

Most UN member states are unfree nations ruled by dictators of one stripe or another. They under no circumstances want their subjects to be armed because armed subjects tend to make themselves citizens by standing dictators up against walls and filling them full of holes.

That the Left in America is willing to move heaven and earth to disarm the American citizen makes me deeply suspicious of their true motives.

It also makes me realise once again how vitally important it is that we keep the Jackass Party as far away from the levers of power as humanly possible.