A couple of years ago a video]video made the rounds via e-mail, which showed an Israeli female shopper trying to pull a topper out of a bottle in a busy shop. When the woman made a loud noise by finally popping the top all of the other shoppers simultaneously dropped to one knee and then quickly came back up holding a gun. Despite Obama calling for a more even handed rhetoric in what was supposed to be a memorial service that shamefully turned into a campaign rally in Tucson, complete with T-shirts hyping an old campaign slogan, this gun slinging scenario is what most on the Left would have us believe happens every time we Arizonians hear a car backfire or child pop his bubble gum.
The Left was sure to tell us how elegantly Obama delivered his speech, as always, but on his comments about toning down the hateful rhetoric they seem to have come away with the certainty that he was surely not pointing a finger at them! After all, those on the Left know nothing about hate speech except for what they hear coming from the Right. Just ask them. Limbaugh, Hannity, Palin, O’Reilly, Ingraham, Beck and those racist Tea Partiers are the real hate mongers! Not to mention those gun crazed racist Zonies who want to stop illegal immigration, now that’s hateful!
The Left doesn’t understand why Zonies just can’t be more like their nice Progressive, pot smoking, Big Mac hating, anything goes but Common Sense and Patriotism neighbors in the sanctuary city of San Francisco?
The Left tells us that it is not hate speech that they are spewing forth at every instance, but rather what they are saying is merely the truth and that they are only trying to lead us down the right path, or perhaps I should say, the correct path. They feel that in order to get us to fall in line they must use some pretty rough language and tell it like it is because time is fleeting and we’re all too dumb to understand what we really are unless they point out all of our shortcomings.
So for the Left it is not hate speech when they call us racists, the great-unwashed masses, or bible clutching, gun clinging morons and homophobes. They just have to talk straight so that we will get the message. Its all our fault not theirs because we just won’t listen. They don’t really think it’s clever when we on the Right make them resort to insults like calling Tea Party members the disgusting homosexual term, tea baggers. So when they are forced to denigrate us with such a vulgar term that malicious smirk on their faces is only holding back their pain.
And why shouldn’t the Left think that Obama wasn’t talking to them when he called for some civility? The Left has every right to think that Obama was casting a sly ‘wink, wink’ in their direction since he himself has been advocating hatred for anyone on the other side since he first stepped onto the campaign platform. Obama may now be trying to act more like a Centralist but he is still who he is and he always will be. Just wait until things cool down and he’ll once again be telling us to, “ride in the back.”
After Obama’s “splendid speech” the Left hardly missed a beat in their attacks. Sarah Palin went from “having blood on her hands” to being anti-Semitic for her all too accurate “blood libel” comment and from there to being accused of being too stupid to know what a blood libel is.
Since that terrible morning in Tucson Arizona has been repeatedly referred to as “The Wild West” and our citizens have been described as being gun crazy. The Left would have you believe that Zonies are all stuck in the 19th Century like wannabe Wyatt Earp gunslingers that are more then ready to fire off a few rounds in any direction at the slightest provocation in the hope that we can all take part in our own little bloodthirsty version of the OK Corral.
Driving home this bloodlust fantasy and while smiling before his adoring cameras, Tom Brokaw smirked that the people in Arizona have so many guns that if he were in Arizona he would “be afraid to go into a bar or a restaurant on a Saturday night.”
I don’t know if Brokaw is just plain stupid or a coward, or both. What I do know is that Brokaw is the typical leftwing elitist who believes that us “common folks” are far less sophisticated and intelligent than he is and because we are nothing more than gun toting Neanderthals that we willingly place ourselves and our loved ones in harms way.
One should note that in Brokaw’s malicious remarks he does not call anyone a vile name but instead uses negative innuendoes to slander those of us he is referring to. While the Left are never shy in coming right out and calling us racists, homophobes, morons and so on, they do love to smear people with what they feel are these haughtily clever little left handed implications that slanders a persons character, behavior, economic standing and intelligence.
One such little quip was a recent opening statement on MSNBC’s ‘The Last Word’ with Lawrence (don’t call him Larry!) O’Donnell. Larry always seems way too serious and so upset that one gets the impression that he could go off his nut at the mere drop of a name, like say, George W. Bush?
Actually, if you will allow me to humor my inner child for a moment, I would love to be able to one day sneak up behind Larry while he is so seriously telling us all what we should think and holler, “REAGAN!” Yeah, he’d come after me. But if that day is to ever come I better hurry as I hear that show hosts are dropping like flies on MSNBC.
Anyway, O’Donnell opened his program by telling us about all of the many righteous Democrats who flew on the taxpayers’ dime to attended the Tucson memorial turned campaign rally and then asked, “But were was Republican Speaker of the House John Boehner? Well,” he added, “Mr. Boehner couldn’t attend because he was busy…(pause for dramatic effect)… at a Republican cocktail party… Tom DeLay will join us tonight. We'll get his reaction to Boehner skipping out on the Arizona memorial service for a cocktail party.”
What? That was the leading headline? Certainly something more important had to have happened that day.
Only on MSNBC would they first imply that a Republican was morally lax in his duties for not attending a memorial service that was really a Democratic rally, then imply that said Republican was a drunk and finally ask a recently convicted felon, Republican Tom Delay to comment on the other man’s character! Wow, now that’s a creditable source.
Delay was apparently just stopping by on his way to prison as he has been sentenced to three years for money laundering. He got off easy, but then don’t they all. Personally I would have given him five years just for wearing those red trousers on ‘Dancing With The Stars’ and another five for being such an idiotic boob. Seriously, Delay’s facial expressions, dancing and overall behavior on that show was enough to scare small children. I wonder, how do people like Delay ever get elected in the first place and if his dancing skills will come in handy while he’s “away?”
Meanwhile back at The Wild West Ranch, or in this case ‘The Rachel Maddow Show’, the young, imperious Ms Maddow was once again talking down to her audience in a rather awkward attempt to explain why American citizens don’t need guns. (Video and transcript can be found here, or at least until MSNBC comes to their senses and cans Maddow too.)
Maddow started off this segment by praising Rep. Trent Franks (R) AZ, for responding to a reporter’s question about arming Congress, in that he was not going to use this tragedy as a political platform. Why Maddow actually said that she thought Franks had “reflected good judgment” and “some class”!
However, she could not leave her comments on Franks with that positive note because on MSNBC when that rare occasion pops up where someone praises a Republican or a Conservative it always has to be followed by something negative, otherwise they wouldn’t even bring it up.
In this case Maddow continued that Franks had also said, “You know, I wish there had been one more gun there that day in the hands of a responsible person.”
Now Maddow’s style has a very annoyingly overbearing tone and manner when she goes off on one of her little Marxist lessons for the masses, it as if she is talking to a classroom of very slow learning six year olds. So first she wistfully repeated Franks’ statement about a responsible person with a gun on the scene and then begins to tell her slow witted class about how many guns there are in Arizona and how easy it is to get one here. At this point she springs her surprise by telling us that there was in fact a responsible gun owner on the scene, just like Mr. Franks had wished!
Maddow then introduces this responsible gun owner with a clip from MSNBC’s ‘The Ed Show’ hosted by the always angrier than thou Ed Schultz. According to the Schultz show’s almost nonexistent ratings the fact that there actually is a guy named Ed Schultz and that he has a show on MSNBC may have surprised the viewers even more than there was a responsible gun owner at the scene.
The clip shows a young unidentified white male being interviewed off camera by Schultz. This may also be the only time a video clip has ever been used from his show, probably making Schultz just absolutely giddy, which may explain why Old Angry Ed never bothered to ask the man his name! But then competent journalism is a dying profession.
As the gun owner tells it, he was in a nearby Walgreens when he heard the shots outside and went running for the door. As he left Walgreens he said he had his hand on his gun, which was still in his holster but he had slipped off the safety. Reaching the scene of the shooting he states that he saw a man on the ground being held down and another man nearby holding a gun. I remind you here that by now the shooting has stopped.
When Schultz asked him if he was ready to kill that man with the gun the responsible gun owner states that he grabbed the arm of the man with the gun and although his gun was still holstered, he states that he was ready to shoot him until someone told him that he was not the shooter.
Maddow follows up the clip by making a big deal of this testimony by again saying that there was a responsible gun owner at the scene and that he almost shot one of the heroes who had subdued the real gunman. She explains that she understands the Right’s hero fantasy about how armed people can stop crime. She even drags John Wayne into the discussion. Isn’t dragging the long ago deceased Duke into this lie some sort of sacrilege, or something?
Maddow then points to a study that shows that the five states with the highest gun ownership also have the highest death rate by guns per capita while the five states with the lowest gun ownership has the lowest death rates by guns. While she does not mention if these gun related deaths are from criminal acts, suicides, hunting or other types of gun related accidents she concludes that this data proves without question that individual citizens owning guns does not prevent crime.
After a few more ramblings she closes this segment in an annoyingly sympathetic manner and tone as if she actually has pity for the rest of us simple minded folks for not seeing this obvious truth, and again she insists that while she understands the hero/gun owner fantasy, the fact is that guns in the hands of law biding citizens do not prevent crime.
So… okay… where to begin?
Despite all of the recent talk about Arizona being the Wild West, where we’re all gun crazy, at a large gathering of our citizens on that terrible Saturday morning unlike that Israeli shop video with all of the citizens dropping down and coming up with guns, the simple fact is that the Left could only find one “responsible gun owner” at the scene of the crime. Under such circumstances this wild west, gun crazed citizenry libel just doesn’t hold up. But then the Left has never let the facts stand in their way.
Furthermore, the truth is that this lone “responsible gun owner” that Maddow has zeroed in on to prove that gun owners can’t stop crime wasn’t even at the scene of the crime. He was in fact in another area where he only heard the shots being fired and did not even witness any of the shootings. The facts are that he arrived after the shooting had stopped and after the shooter had already been subdued. Unlike what Maddow and Schultz want us to believe, there was no responsible gun owner at the actual scene of this crime as they so shamefully insist.
Had there been one or two responsible gun owners actually at the scene when that first terrible shot was fired, then it is entirely reasonable to believe that the evil carnage delivered by this lone crazed killer could have been reduced. It is no fantasy to believe that once this maniac started shooting that a well placed round could have saved innocent lives or others from being wounded.
I ask you, what is so hard to believe? Why is that a fantasy when just months ago we were shown a video of a madman firing point blank at members of a school board but he was then killed by a security guard before he could reload? No one died in that incident other than the madman, God only knows how many others would have died if not for that lone responsible gun owner that was actually present during the shootings.
In her deranged argument Maddow makes much of the fact that the lone responsible gun owner admitted that he almost shot an innocent man that was now holding the shooter’s gun. She suggests that when citizens are allowed to have guns that there is a very good chance that even more people will be killed or wounded than if only the deranged gunman has a weapon.
I mean to take nothing away from the courage of the young man who ran to help from Walgreens, but with his gun still holstered he was not ready to kill anyone. The fact that when he arrived he did not know that the man who was holding the gun was not the shooter also only reinforces the fact that he was not at the scene of the crime when the crime happened. All of this makes Maddow and Schultz’s arguments nothing more then twisted logic to advance their progressive agenda, and in fact makes their scenario into the fantasy.
Speaking of logic, or the lack of, when Maddow was discussing the five states with the highest and lowest gun deaths being in line with the number of guns in those states, isn’t it just logical that where there are more guns there is a higher degree of probability for more gun deaths? Wouldn’t that also be true that with fewer guns there would a lesser degree of probability of gun related deaths? Wouldn’t this also hold true with the five states that have the most cars probably having more traffic deaths and likewise for the five states with the fewest cars having fewer traffic deaths? How about Minnesota, The Land of Ten Thousand Lakes, and Hawaii, an island in the Pacific, wouldn’t they probably have more deaths due to drowning or boating accidents than say, North Dakota? And just how would these higher death rates by traffic accidents, drowning and boating accidents prove that having the most cars, lakes or being surrounded by the Pacific does not prevent crime?
While Maddow failed to teach us her desired progressive lesson from this tragedy there are many lessons we can learn from her failure. One is that the Left want us defenseless. They want us unarmed and at the mercy of crazed killers and yes, at the mercy of the government. If the Left had its way we would all be slaughtered like sheep when a lone crazed wolf decides to hunt its prey.
But perhaps the biggest lesson we can learn from Maddow’s show that night is that the Left never lets a crisis go to waste, not even one as tragic and horrific as that Saturday morning in Tucson. While calling for civility the Left continued to lie, slander and attack. And while Maddow spoke of the good judgment and class of Trent Franks for not using the Tucson tragedy for political purposes, in the very next breath she used the Tucson shootings to further the Left’s agenda of gun control. But then Maddow and her comrades at MSNBC are continually lacking in good judgment, class and any sense of reality.
So despite the lame efforts at MSNBC to dismiss the fantasy of the lone responsible gun owner, in the Tucson tragedy the only fantasy that was shattered was that even the Left has its limits.
God Bless America
"Copyright 2011. Michael E. Tank All rights reserved. No part of this document may be copied, faxed, electronically transmitted, or in any other manner duplicated without express written permission of the author.”