You write stuff like this, your credibility goes right into the toilet, along with your article.
Progressivism, trying to destroy America since the nation was birthed.
Camel's nose? We already have half of the camel in the tent with garbage like Schemer and botox face going for the whole thing (ie common sense gun control otherwise known as total confiscation of all firearms not in government hands)
“Will anything change after Las Vegas? I’m not making any bets on that. But this much I’m pretty sure of: Americans, a lot of them anyway, love their guns. And politicians — few of whom are profiles in courage — love their votes. So you tell me if anything will change after Las Vegas. And if it did, would it make any real difference regarding gun violence in America?”
Insofar as the Second Amendment goes, Bernie, no! Besides, give Chicago a good month and they can equal, if not exceed the carnage we saw in Las Vegas, and no pious reporter like you is out clucking about “comprehensive” solutions to the violence there.
I can’t understand why TownHall published this dross.
This might be because this encapsulates the difference between "Good Hearted Liberal Useful Idiots" and Conservatives.
Note that I specify what kind of liberals, not all liberals. The ones who are not the "Useful Idiot" liberals have no intention of "giving peace a chance". They know stupid liberalism is all about power over others at its core, and also understand the 2nd Amendment is a barrier to total government subjugation of the citizenry.
Most Conservatives understand that all too well.
I tried the Springfield XDs, but my hands are simply too big and my last two fingers couldn't find a purchase on the grip. That's why I love diversity!
There actually are reasonable steps that could be taken to much reduce these mass killings. They are well documented.
And, from Australia’s example, they seem to work:
They are:
Stop giving the mass killers fame and an incentive to kill.
Stop using the media to incentivise unstable people to become killing machines.
Here are specific things the establishment media could do, without *any* legislation:
http://gunwatch.blogspot.com/2013/01/stop-school-shootings-hold-media.html
No and no. And what Bernie and the rest of the elites don't care to address is that criminals don't obey laws. Even gun laws passed with the very best of intentions by people who say they really, really care about the little people.
The end game of their strategy is to deny law abiding Americans of their ability to protect themselves and their families.
The above little gem appeared in the article, and while it's not exactly about the topic, if there was ever any proof of reason to fear the concentration of power in the federal government, the Obama regime proved it.
The perfect example of a tyrannical federal government was "Operation Chokepoint." Using the power of the banking system, the government selected "objectionable" (objectionable to whom?) but perfectly legal businesses (or even people in professions that, again, were considered "objectionable,) and threatened the financial backers of the banks used by those businesses and people. Porn stars were informed that their bank accounts were being closed. Gun dealers and manufacturers were no longer able to accept credit cards.
This is a PERFECT example of the sort of tyranny from which the Constitution of the United States was supposed to protect The People.
Mark
There is nothing sexist in saying that her father would be ashamed of her over that. If a man said something equally absurd and treasonous, the man would be told the same thing.
Still, she can't play the worn out race card, so she has to reach for the equally worn "sexist" card. America's anti-freedom enemies have no better defense and no other recourse on this question.