Newt Gingrich: Isn't Your Real Ambition To Ban All Handguns?
Piers Morgan: That's Not My Priority "Right Now"
Newt Gingrich: Right Now, Got It

Yeah, obvious.

That'll be $0.99.

Posted by: Ace at 05:33 PM



Comments

1 ... how ... unexpected !!!!!

Posted by: a cynical but rarely angry Adriane at January 25, 2013 05:36 PM (TvO05)

2 Why does Piers always interrupt Newt, and yet never answer any of Newt's questions?

Enquiring Minds Want To Know ...

Posted by: Arbalest at January 25, 2013 05:36 PM (i8Eo5)

3 Newt him from orbit, just to be sure.

Posted by: Dr. Varno at January 25, 2013 05:38 PM (1/qA9)

4 When Piers was cut off was he going to say "you think the government will be tyrannical today? Impossible!"?

Posted by: Flapjackmaka at January 25, 2013 05:38 PM (FKQng)

5 It was never about guns, it was always about control.

MFM delenda est.

Posted by: Merovign, Dark Lord of the Sith at January 25, 2013 05:39 PM (bxiXv)

6 What kind of name is Pierced Organ? Hey, I'm still relevant!

Posted by: Keith Olbermann at January 25, 2013 05:39 PM (Cm5S0)

7 That's a two shot I didn't need right there.

Posted by: The Mega Independent at January 25, 2013 05:40 PM (YZqSb)

8 xxx

Posted by: Liberty Lover at January 25, 2013 05:40 PM (uexA8)

9 Why do you think he dodges every time someone asks him about the fact that handguns are the primary firearm responsible for homicides? He'd have to get into the conversation and admit that he wants them banned, as well, and he'd quickly be outed as a gun grabber.

Doesn't matter, anyway. This fucknut will be unemployed by summer.

Posted by: MadisonConservative at January 25, 2013 05:41 PM (Y/HG5)

10 Newt Judges You

Posted by: JDP at January 25, 2013 05:41 PM (60GaT)

11 The Piers Morgan self promotion campaign continues apace.

He's following the very successful footsteps of Jesse James (or Jackson, that twat) Jr. -- infamous or famous; doesn't matter. Gimme some headlines. Gimme some ink.

Posted by: GnuBreed at January 25, 2013 05:41 PM (ccXZP)

12 Imagine the Newt/Obama debates that could've been. If we were going to lose, I would've liked to do it that way

Posted by: Flapjackmaka at January 25, 2013 05:42 PM (FKQng)

13 I've got a priority "right now"---send this dipshit dickwad home to the UK and inflict him on the citizens there.

Posted by: Comanche Voter at January 25, 2013 05:42 PM (oe1aw)

14 6 What kind of name is Pierced Organ?

Harr!

Posted by: wheatie at January 25, 2013 05:43 PM (fH4X9)

15 How dare Newt take his position seriously and to its logical conclusion!

Posted by: alexthechick - SMOD. Take us away. at January 25, 2013 05:43 PM (Gk3SS)

16 Posted by: Comanche Voter at January 25, 2013 05:42 PM (oe1aw)

Fuck you.

Posted by: The UNited Kingdom at January 25, 2013 05:43 PM (GsoHv)

17 This is a delusional man , he has a compulsive disorder in which he is fixated on gun control every night... He spews nonsense with out knowing all the facts...

He needs Meds , he needs a vacation and a qualified person to talk to him....

That will be .05 cents
( The going rate for Lucy )

Posted by: American Dawg at January 25, 2013 05:43 PM (trA4n)

18 That Piers is a sly fox, isn't he?

Posted by: Cicero, Semiautomatic Assault Commenter at January 25, 2013 05:43 PM (QKKT0)

19 Was Alex Jones unavailable?

Posted by: somebody else, not me at January 25, 2013 05:44 PM (nZvGM)

20 I posted this yesterday. Got to see Newt and Helmet head at a mixer for the RNC. We chatted a bit, I've met him before. He's put on weight and helmet head did most of the chatting. I swear her hair never moved an inch. She is better looking in person than on TV.

Charlotte doesn't have much luck with these national conventions. DNC got rained out of The One's big speech and it sleeting now for the RNC. Airport departures are at least an hour behind.

Posted by: Billy Bob, Pseudo Intellectual at January 25, 2013 05:44 PM (wR+pz)

21 Posted by: alexthechick - SMOD. Take us away. at January 25, 2013 05:43 PM (Gk3SS)

He needs to be chairman of the RNC and teach our pussified (apologies to real pussies everywhere) politicians how to deal with the press.

Posted by: The UNited Kingdom at January 25, 2013 05:45 PM (GsoHv)

22 For a simpering ponce, he makes a lot of sense.
Piers, that is.

Posted by: Lisping Poofda Pride Parade at January 25, 2013 05:45 PM (Q7CEv)

23
What kind of name is Pierced Organ?



Beats the hell out of me.

Posted by: Peers...No Organ at January 25, 2013 05:45 PM (0WLla)

24 Yeah, and out, damned sock!

Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at January 25, 2013 05:45 PM (GsoHv)

25 Love Newt's expression: "this is gonna be so easy..."

Posted by: t-bird at January 25, 2013 05:46 PM (FcR7P)

26 Please come back, Larry. All is forgiven.

Posted by: Fourth Virginia at January 25, 2013 05:46 PM (P3dtw)

27 This Morgan chap is a whore, a toady who will say or do anything to please the people in power, a fop corrupt in his core who despises all those not in his class.

He dirties the very name of "Piers".

Posted by: Earl Gaveston of Cornhole at January 25, 2013 05:46 PM (p39hN)

28 I still think we can reason with these people.

Posted by: John Boehner (R) Crackerjack Negotiator at January 25, 2013 05:46 PM (QKKT0)

29 I've got a priority "right now"---send this dipshit dickwad home to the UK and inflict him on the citizens there.
Posted by: Comanche Voter at January 25, 2013 05:42 PM (oe1aw)

Fuck you.
Posted by: The UNited Kingdom at January 25, 2013 05:43 PM (GsoHv)


Guys, guys, let's meet halfway and drop Piers in the Atlantic.

Posted by: Dr. Varno at January 25, 2013 05:46 PM (6PSBj)

30
Wasn't he 007 for a few movies?

Posted by: MJ at January 25, 2013 05:47 PM (vl5mg)

31 Kneel before the crown!

Posted by: Simpering Ponce Piers at January 25, 2013 05:47 PM (Q7CEv)

32 He dirties the very name of "Piers".


Posted by: Earl Gaveston of Cornhole at January 25, 2013 05:46 PM (p39hN)


ISWYDT

Posted by: Edward II at January 25, 2013 05:47 PM (QKKT0)

33 Long walk.

Short Piers.

Posted by: Investment Advice at January 25, 2013 05:48 PM (Q7CEv)

34 Someone should stick their dick up his ass and ask him why he got fired at the Mirror, insider trading on a tip the paper was going to print the next week. Then he got fired for the telephone hacking scandal at the News of the World.


He's a sleazy little prick.

Posted by: Billy Bob, Pseudo Intellectual at January 25, 2013 05:48 PM (wR+pz)

35 Afellow Brit who knows Pier's history very well wrote an article which is on Instapundit. His main thrust is that Pier's doesn't really have any ideological bent, but that he will swing to whatever side can benefit him financially and provide him with attention/ratings.
Having Shapiro and Gingrich on is good as they hammer him - but bad because it gives Morgan legitimacy.
Alex Jones on the other hand made him seem like the reasonable one of the two.
Stop giving Morgan attention and eventually he'll go away.

Posted by: Cheri at January 25, 2013 05:49 PM (G+Wff)

36 I loved how Newt brought up the Revolutionary War, andsaid:

"When your army tried to defeat us, luckilyour peasants, weren't peasants...and were armed citizens who were able to defeat them."

Haaa.

Posted by: wheatie at January 25, 2013 05:49 PM (fH4X9)

37 "Yeah, obvious.

That'll be $0.99."


Snark like that is worth way more than anything King has put out. What an economy of words. Funny, funny words.

Posted by: AnonymousDrivel at January 25, 2013 05:50 PM (eHIJJ)

38 Yeah I commented earlier on it. You know we should point out that you can legally own an assault rifle or even a Vulcan 20mm if you pay for the stamp. The number of those weapons used in any mass shooting?

None.

Posted by: sven10077 at January 25, 2013 05:50 PM (LRFds)

39 Someone should stick their dick up his ass and ask him why he got fired
at the Mirror, insider trading on a tip the paper was going to print the
next week. Then he got fired for the telephone hacking scandal at the
News of the World.


I was doing great judging America's Got Talent until that creep Howard Stern came along with his olive oil voice and his guinea charm!

Posted by: Piers Morgan at January 25, 2013 05:51 PM (QKKT0)

40 More newt!

Posted by: gigg at January 25, 2013 05:51 PM (dDD3H)

41 @36

That was pure Newt. I am surprised he didn't pull a pound note and point out that Peirs is STILL a subject of teh Queen and not a free man.

Posted by: Billy Bob, Pseudo Intellectual at January 25, 2013 05:51 PM (wR+pz)

42 On the one hand, Hollyweird bank huge amounts of money by selling its audience extreme violence, including gun violence.

Then on the other hand, Hollyweird turn around and funnel a lot of that money into the political coffers of leftists who want to completely ban guns.

Time to stuff that glaring contradiction right down their ulcerated throats.

Step back for a moment and consider the legal status of porn. The courts have held repeatedly that industry have a perfect right under the First Amendment to make and sell porn. But the courts have also held repeatedly that it is perfectly consistent with the First for there to be an absolute prohibition on showing or providing porn to people who aren't yet legally adults.

Time for the GOP to propose applying an identical standard to gun violence in entertainment. Hollyweird can crank out as much gun violence entertainment as they want. First Amendment. But they can't show or provide it to anyone under age 18. Blanket prohibition. Again, consistent with prior court findings that such age based prohibitions are not violative of industry's 1A rights.

This would be a huge gut punch to Hollyweird. It would cost them quite literally hundreds of billions of dollars if they were held to this standard -- a standard wholly consistent with existing law and wholly consistent with their own sanctimonious "guns are bad" political stance.

Let's do this thing.

Posted by: torquewrench at January 25, 2013 05:52 PM (gqT4g)

43 That was pure Newt. I am surprised he didn't pull a pound note and point
out that Peirs is STILL a subject of teh Queen and not a free man.



She seems like a nice Queen, at least.

Posted by: Piers Morgan at January 25, 2013 05:52 PM (QKKT0)

44 I'm surprised Newt didn't skull-fuck Piers.

Posted by: Dr Spank at January 25, 2013 05:53 PM (w+Dvf)

45 3
Nice, sir very nice!

Posted by: gigg at January 25, 2013 05:53 PM (dDD3H)

46 MadisonConservative: "Why do you think he dodges every time someone asks
him about the fact that handguns are the primary firearm responsible for
homicides?"


Breitbart's Shapiro busted Morgan on that, and quite gloriously too, and Morgan has been desperately trying to rehabilitate himself ever since. Doesn't look like it's going too well for the worm.

Posted by: AnonymousDrivel at January 25, 2013 05:53 PM (eHIJJ)

47 She seems like a nice Queen, at least.

P-face morgan does not seem nice, you are sadly mistaken!

Posted by: gigg at January 25, 2013 05:54 PM (dDD3H)

48 Why does Piers always interrupt Newt, and yet never answer any of Newt's questions?

That's his schtick. It rattles people and allow PM to dominate the conversation. Even Newt let him get away with it. The only solution is to call him on it. "Piers, shut up while I'm talking or I walk and you have empty air".

Nonetheless, as I pointed out this morning, this is exactly what I anticipated from the left over the weekend, and to which I still haven't gotten a good counter.
Piers: if one weapon can be banned, the right isn't absolute and its a judgement call as to where we draw the line.
Newt: If you ban one weapon, there's nothing stopping you from banning them all. (except he doesn't say that, he says that we can ban some because they're horrific, a category left undefined, and doesn't justify why we can ban one and not the other)
The real issue, as pointed out by ChemJeff, is how we balance government coercion and the rule of law against the ability to resist tyranny. I haven't heard a serious argument on this yet.

Posted by: pep at January 25, 2013 05:54 PM (6TB1Z)

49 I'm smart! Not like everybody says... like dumb... I'm smart and I want respect!

Posted by: Piers Morgan at January 25, 2013 05:54 PM (QKKT0)

50
I was doing great judging America's Got Talent until that creep Howard Stern came along with his olive oil voice and his guinea charm!


A man in your position cannot be made to look ridiculous.

Posted by: Lurking Canuck at January 25, 2013 05:55 PM (0WLla)

51 Was Alex Jones unavailable?

Some people have pointed out that Morgan is going full carnival barker, but it's more than that.

I think he wants to be the guy conservatives tune in to hate. Or, at least, that would be his best move.

So he takes extreme positions, defends them poorly and has on articulate conservatives to beat him up over it.

Maybe I just think that's what he's doing because that's what I would do in his place. He can't out-liberal Maddow, so why not get conservative viewers.

But, yes, he should have been fired a long time ago. He's a bad lead-in for Anderson Cooper reruns.

Posted by: AmishDude at January 25, 2013 05:55 PM (T0NGe)

52 When Newt sticks with conservatism, he is awfully good.

Posted by: SH at January 25, 2013 05:55 PM (gmeXX)

53 Since when did we become a place where some ex newspaper hack can come here and act smug and superior about our country's foundational document?

That he even has any audience at all is pathetic.

Posted by: Bitter Clinger (aka 3 tooth) at January 25, 2013 05:56 PM (3E2th)

54 If Newt had never mentioned Moon bases....

Posted by: Al at January 25, 2013 05:56 PM (V70Uh)

55 @53

It's CNN, not like he's really on TV.

Posted by: Billy Bob, Pseudo Intellectual at January 25, 2013 05:57 PM (wR+pz)

56 54 Al,

I'd rather have our fucking NASA jockies trying to go to the moon than up Mohammed's moon,.

Posted by: sven10077 at January 25, 2013 05:57 PM (LRFds)

57 There is no reason to be afraid of these media idiots, so long as we send the right people on their shows. Morgan and his ilk think we are all Akin's. In fact, there are a good number of articulate conservatives who aren't afraid of his schtick and are willing to defend our beliefs, and give the historical context for doing so. Newt has always been able to do that. Here here.

Posted by: SH at January 25, 2013 05:58 PM (gmeXX)

58 Piers and his gun control fetish is like the camel who starts sticking its nose into you tent. If you don't stop the camel right then, soon the camel owns your tent and you are sleeping outside.

Posted by: Anna Puma (+SmuD) at January 25, 2013 05:58 PM (Mj6r9)

59 Someone should stick their dick up his ass and ask him why he got fired at the Mirror


Posted by: Billy Bob, Pseudo Intellectual at January 25, 2013 05:48 PM (wR+pz)


----------------------------------------------------


You first.

Posted by: Soona at January 25, 2013 05:59 PM (/ZV9/)

60 If you don't stop the camel right then, soon the camel owns your tent and you are sleeping outside.

But the camel is already inside the tent. You can own a machine gun only at the pleasure of the government. What's the difference? I'm not being argumentative, I'd really like an answer to this question.

Posted by: pep at January 25, 2013 06:00 PM (6TB1Z)

61 This article from 2004 should be attached to anything about Piers Morgan, when he was fired for faking photos claiming British troops tortured Iraqis

http://tinyurl.com/2almoob


Posted by: kbdabear at January 25, 2013 06:02 PM (wwsoB)

62 When did Newt get a show on CNN?

Posted by: huerfano at January 25, 2013 06:02 PM (bAGA/)

63 Piers Morgan obviously looked around after a few embarrassing discussions about his ratings and though, 'My hat, those blokes Michael Moore spew the most AMAZINGLY tendentious and silly drivel, and lefties eat it up by the bloody spoonful! Plus get the righties upset with you and you've got instant creds! That's for me! Either that or set me own mum on fire on the air, and she knows me too well to fall for it.'

Seems to work almost any time; it must burn the former on-air staff of Air America that they failed to make a living at it.

Posted by: Sort-of-Mad Max at January 25, 2013 06:04 PM (DLu2s)

64 Top Gear's new season starts in the UK this weekend and on BBC America Feb 4

I guarantee they'd set ratings record if Jeremy Clarkson test drives a Ferrari 458 with Piers Morgan tied to the back

Posted by: kbdabear at January 25, 2013 06:04 PM (wwsoB)

65 60 pep,

The difference is that another sweet talking shit licking donk who wanted to buy votes with the public coffers in a downturn convinced America to surrender its rights to "aid stopping criminals" and the feds went nuts.

At the end of the day it impacted criminals not at all, oddly THEY can get their hands on an UZI or AK whenever they like because you know "criminals" they import heroin and shit yeah?

Public safety if you take career criminals, and mafia out of the mix did not go up.

The courts have been VERY leery of undoing that piece of asshattery because of precedence, but in a sane Republic regulation of autos would be state not federal business.

Pretty goddamned amazing concept eh?

"Federalism"

My great grandpa owned a lewis gun.


Posted by: sven10077 at January 25, 2013 06:04 PM (LRFds)

66 I haven't heard a serious argument on this yet.

Posted by: pep at January 25, 2013 05:54 PM (6TB1Z)


Your homework: I'm not doing it.

This is not a new idea and millions of words have been spilled on its shores. It's an integral part of the discussion.

Go. Search. Read.

Posted by: Merovign, Dark Lord of the Sith at January 25, 2013 06:05 PM (bxiXv)

67 Just to rub it in, Newt should have told him, we'd have won the war in 44 if Montgomery wasn't such a pansy and we gave his gasoline to Patton.

Posted by: SH at January 25, 2013 06:05 PM (gmeXX)

68 Piers teh Putz

just wnated to say that.

Posted by: BignJames at January 25, 2013 06:06 PM (Sg0G/)

69 A gun gives an ordinary person the power of life and death.

Statists and other sorts of elitists can not abide that.

Know your place, is their message.

Posted by: eman at January 25, 2013 06:07 PM (jp2Ur)

70
Go. Search. Read.


Oh, humor me. Or is it just that you've got nothing.

Posted by: pep at January 25, 2013 06:07 PM (6TB1Z)

71 66 Mero,

It's funny....if you can own a gun you can pay the spare 200 bucks if you comply with state law...*bam* machine gun....

and "well er uh ah they are already restricted"

Uh no they are taxed.

I can own a goddamned Javelin ATGM/Bunker Buster if inclined and can show proper storage for it. Just takes a stamp and 200 buck tax per warhead and the knowledge that BATF will stick their nose up your ass forever.

Posted by: sven10077 at January 25, 2013 06:08 PM (LRFds)

72 70 pep,

or use your reason....

look up "class 3" here's a hint John Roberts knows..."it's a tax"

Posted by: sven10077 at January 25, 2013 06:08 PM (LRFds)

73 Uh no they are taxed.

It was my understanding that filling of copious forms is required, and not always granted. Admittedly, I know nothing of the process, but if this is true, are you not obtaining the gun at the sufferance of the state?

Posted by: pep at January 25, 2013 06:09 PM (6TB1Z)

74 Oh, humor me. Or is it just that you've got nothing.

Posted by: pep at January 25, 2013 06:07 PM (6TB1Z)


You see what you assholes do? Now *I'm* wasting my time responding to trolls!

Posted by: Merovign, Dark Lord of the Sith at January 25, 2013 06:10 PM (bxiXv)

75 Piers is from "Doesnthaveafuckingcluewhatheisonaboutstan"


Posted by: sven10077 at January 25, 2013 06:10 PM (LRFds)

76 Wow, go Newt. I wish he'd been our candidate. At least he stands for something and is willing to argue for it.

Posted by: BeckoningChasm at January 25, 2013 06:10 PM (xjpRj)

77 pep, I think that the argument that the camel's nose is already under the tent is not a good argument to push it under further.

Politics is often compromise and nobody's going to go for legalizing auto weapons. Why try to take ground you won't be able to take.

It's like the abortion debate. If you want the law to reflect a clear moral decision, well you'll take another tack, but it breaks down this way:
* If we talk about rape, we lose.
* If we talk about partial birth abortion, we win.

Posted by: AmishDude at January 25, 2013 06:11 PM (T0NGe)

78 @65
BTW, I agree with all of your points here, but that doesn't address the argument. Again, not trying to be difficult, but I just haven't seen a convincing answer, which I'd dearly like to have.

Posted by: pep at January 25, 2013 06:11 PM (6TB1Z)

79 and Obama's mind,

How else do we make sense of the whole, Bitter Clingers remarks he felt compelled to use.

They all want the same deal.

Posted by: Ette at January 25, 2013 06:12 PM (nqBYe)

80 74
Oh, humor me. Or is it just that you've got nothing.



Posted by: pep at January 25, 2013 06:07 PM (6TB1Z)



You see what you assholes do? Now *I'm* wasting my time responding to trolls


So, then nothing it is.

Posted by: pep at January 25, 2013 06:12 PM (6TB1Z)

81 I say LIB. LIFB.

And btw, in the Second Bolshevik Revolution -which is currently ongoing - the Kulaks win. Because this is America, not fucking Europe, or to be more precise, Russia. Serfdom is in the DNA over there. Here,not so much.

Posted by: LGoPs at January 25, 2013 06:13 PM (4x8W0)

82 pep, I think that the argument that the camel's nose is already under the tent is not a good argument to push it under further.



Politics is often compromise and nobody's going to go for legalizing
auto weapons. Why try to take ground you won't be able to take.


I agree, but the problem is that the other side wants to use this, and we'd better be prepared, or else Akin. I like to be prepared for the best the other side can throw at me, and this seems to be it. Plus, I like logical consistency.

Posted by: pep at January 25, 2013 06:14 PM (6TB1Z)

83 All these hypocrites have no problem with importing guns to other country's citizens to assist their battles against 'their specific Man"

they certainly do not want to avail us of the same right.

Posted by: Ette at January 25, 2013 06:15 PM (nqBYe)

84 35


His main thrust is that Pier's doesn't really have
any ideological bent, but that he will swing to whatever side can
benefit him financially and provide him with attention/ratings.


Posted by: Cheri at January 25, 2013 05:49 PM (G+Wff)

So, he's basically a limey version of O'Rielly or Geraldo.

Posted by: Sandra Fluke's solid gold diaphragm at January 25, 2013 06:15 PM (7xeJQ)

85 So, then nothing it is.
Posted by: pep at January 25, 2013 06:12 PM (6TB1Z)

Yay....you win.....happy now?

Posted by: BignJames at January 25, 2013 06:15 PM (Sg0G/)

86 @65
BTW, I agree with all of your points here, but that doesn't address the argument. Again, not trying to be difficult, but I just haven't seen a convincing answer, which I'd dearly like to have.
Posted by: pep at January 25, 2013 06:11 PM (6TB1Z)

If you look at the extra effort to get weapons of extra power, you could say okay to get that fancier toy I must put in more effort. If the amount of extra effort is enough to make success impossible or too burdensome, then government has gone too far.

I don't fully buy into this line of thought, but it is a place to start. I'd rather have the government have the burden, not the Citizen.

Posted by: eman at January 25, 2013 06:16 PM (jp2Ur)

87 Yay....you win.....happy now?

I'd be happy if I got an answer that addresses my question.

Posted by: pep at January 25, 2013 06:16 PM (6TB1Z)

88 Newt, He is like the Friend you want because He really Has no problem defending His ideas or yours if the Mood strikes him.
Unfortunately he has his baggage

Posted by: Ette at January 25, 2013 06:17 PM (nqBYe)

89 73 Pep,

Nope....that is the dodge that they used to try to keep SCotUS' own words in the review from taking hold.

Govt as it is wont to do tried to shitweasel its way to a defacto ban by refusing the stamps, so of course the courts said 'what the fuck it is a tax not a license" and the feds said "damn okay."

Congress then exerted pressure on states and cities to outlaw autos....

Yeah "super complex stamp application"

http://www.atf.gov/firearms/nfa/

Because filling out 4-6 pages is so onerous.

Hell an auto gun made prior to '68 is a two step process to transfer.

Again if it is legal in YOUR state, and you can legally own a gun you get the stamp.

If every state in the union banned guns total I would be less bothered than the feds playing games. SCotUS would knock their dicks in the dirt but they can restrict things a lot easier, but donk ass shithead doesn't go that route?

Why?

Because as has been stated this is not about 'safety" it is not about "killings being reduced" it is about coercive control and babystepping to a ban on the 2d A without amendment.

Hell you don't even get what our anxiety is about for fuck's sakes. You can kill the 2dA without Amendment the whole document is meaningless.

Guns don't kill, ammunition does.

I love the idea that Piers has that somehow a 5.56 round fired from a "evil black gun" is more deadly than a .44mag or .357mag....it's horseshit.

Fuck bite the apple and this AR-15 is bad but this Ruger Mini-14 is good....

ban 'em all go ahead and try let's get this over with and we'll start over.

Posted by: sven10077 at January 25, 2013 06:18 PM (LRFds)

90 THIS is how the Republicans should interact with the MSM. Newt is quite cheerful as he easily rebuts Morgan while pointedly questioning both his premise and his true motives.

Posted by: Lizzy at January 25, 2013 06:20 PM (amaU1)

91 For those who *genuinely* care about the issue, unlike certain obvious trolls who have nothing but vapid insults and the desire to lift no intellectual weight of their own, you might want to start by looking to what the founders themselves had to say, and follow on with That Every Man Be Armed and in general the works of Clayton Cramer, Stephen Halbrook, and look to the works they cite. Schulman is not bad if a little shallow.

But you have to do your homework, because its isn't about soundbites. And you have to convince yourself, because if you're incurious nobody is going to convince you.

Or you can sit on your thumb and demand intellectual Free Shit from society.

Posted by: Merovign, Dark Lord of the Sith at January 25, 2013 06:20 PM (bxiXv)

92 If you look at the extra effort to get weapons of extra power, you could
say okay to get that fancier toy I must put in more effort. If the
amount of extra effort is enough to make success impossible or too
burdensome, then government has gone too far.



I don't fully buy into this line of thought, but it is a place to
start. I'd rather have the government have the burden, not the Citizen.


But what about a doomsday weapon? Should that be difficult or impossible?

ChemJeff's argument was that (paraphrasing from memory) government needed only enough power to enforce the laws, or else there is no rule of law, so the peopl can be armed, but not with F-22s. That's a strong argument, but I countered that then government can enforce its will, and the resistance to tyranny argument for guns goes out the window. I've been thinking about the difference between an armed individual resisting the government (a criminal) vs. the armed people doing it (resistance to tyranny). Is this something?

Posted by: pep at January 25, 2013 06:21 PM (6TB1Z)

93 Hell you don't even get what our anxiety is about for fuck's sakes. You
can kill the 2dA without Amendment the whole document is meaningless.


I do get it. As I said, I'm an aspiring gun owner. But if we aren't prepared, we lose.

Posted by: pep at January 25, 2013 06:23 PM (6TB1Z)

94 I've been thinking about the difference between an armed individual resisting the government (a criminal) vs. the armed people doing it (resistance to tyranny). Is this something?
Posted by: pep at January 25, 2013 06:21 PM (6TB1Z)

Yeah, but at the moment I can't think of the word.

Posted by: BignJames at January 25, 2013 06:25 PM (Sg0G/)

95 Sophistry, I think that's the word.

Posted by: BignJames at January 25, 2013 06:26 PM (Sg0G/)

96 What Jefferson was saying was, "Hey! "We left this England place
'cause it was bogus."
"So if we don't get some cool rules ourselves... pronto,we'll just be bogus too."

So eat the peanuts out of my shit, Piers.

Posted by: Jeff Spicoli at January 25, 2013 06:26 PM (ccXZP)

97 Don't take this the wrong way but I'd like to point out that most all despots took over countries that had become either corrupt or so greedy that they neglected to ensure a reasonable path for the lower classes to rise.

Contrary to what you might think, the US has been remiss in this area for about 30 years. The haves got greedy and the have nots have empowered the government to redress the balance.

Of course this never works in real life but since we don't teach history anymore in school and even if we did, most are too stupid to understand the lessons.

Just saying that Poppy Bush begat Clinton and GW begat Obama and the whole upper and upper middle class decided to take what they could and left the lower classes to swing with no way for them to rise with any surety.

It seems to be a cyclical thing in human history.

Too bad we're at that stage now.

Posted by: Bitter Clinger (aka 3 tooth) at January 25, 2013 06:27 PM (3E2th)

98 Or I can simply state that I have a right to defend myself, my family and my property from those who would do me harm, including, the government, and I may use force to do so, particularly force that may match the force of any person who would do me harm, again including the government.Because I have that natural God-given right, I have the right to own this gun or that gun, including a gun that you may find highly reprehensible. This right isn't given to me by the 2nd A, it is from God. You wish to take this right away from me. Thankfullly, enough founders understood that governments will always try to take liberties away unless we specifically prohibit them from doing so, much of the lesson learned during the 1700's at the hand of the British, but basically a lesson all people learn from a totalitarian government or any government that wishes to oppress the people it governs. We are not subjects of a repressive state, we are citizens of a country with our own rights. Thus, the 2nd A was put into the Constitution. You wish to limit my God-given right. Give me one good reason why it should be so limited. And even if a good reason, I'll reject it, because it is my God-given right, and unless I waive it on my own, which may be through my own actions, then there is no way you can take it from me.

Posted by: SH at January 25, 2013 06:27 PM (gmeXX)

99 92 Pep,

You think like a civilian not a soldier.

"You can't possibly stop tyranny without a nuke."

Really? I need a Davy Crockett atomic cannon? No I need the ability to strike at the fingers of tyranny and make them afraid to inflict harm on the populace.

Is it perfect? No, but contrary to neo-luddites, feigned devil's advocates like Mr. moo-Moo's Columbo like wife, and your implications the Republic was never harmed by individuals having access to military weapons as private citizens until possibly the rise of chemical weapons level tech.

Private citizens at the founding owned cannon, the most sophisticated shoulder fired weapons of the day as income allowed and entire military class sailing vessels.

Somehow the republic endured. The first repeating arms in Union service were privately acquired. You defer a weapons superiority to the govt. in sub WMD munitions they are not entitled to.

Further you may be shocked in the event of an attempt at a full ban, the justices may well say you know what fuck you you can't be trusted it is all legal, they may not but this fucking constant attempt to change the Bill of Rights without amendment will sooner or later bear bitter fruit.

By the way if you are faking being as assholish as Piers great job, and if you are sincere "AWESOME WORK!"

Nice no sell of the underlying issue which is the undermining of the bill of rights without amendment.

Posted by: sven10077 at January 25, 2013 06:29 PM (LRFds)

100 93 pep,

No, we lose the argument such as it is the contract is broken the govt loses.

You are not getting our guns.

End of story, and there are whole states that will tell the feds "fuck off."

Posted by: sven10077 at January 25, 2013 06:30 PM (LRFds)

101 97 Bitter Clinger,

Horsefuck. Thanks for playing. If freeshit army hadn't kept empowering the hyper regulatory state we'd be okay.

Posted by: sven10077 at January 25, 2013 06:32 PM (LRFds)

102 I like how Kewt spanked that naughty little bitch.

Posted by: sTevo at January 25, 2013 06:32 PM (VMcEw)

103 Is Morgan a citizen ? Then he should keep his fuckin' mouth shut .

Posted by: awkward davies at January 25, 2013 06:38 PM (USjX1)

104 and your implications the Republic was never harmed by individuals
having access to military weapons as private citizens until possibly the
rise of chemical weapons level tech


Your inference, not my implication.

By the way if you are faking being as assholish as Piers great job, and if you are sincere "AWESOME WORK!"

Not the goal at all, but if we can't do anything but trade insults, we've lost.

Posted by: pep at January 25, 2013 06:41 PM (6TB1Z)

105 Even though Newt had no chance to actually win the Election, I sometimes regret we didn't nominate him just for the show.

The thing is, I could see him flipping a switch and morphing into a spineless Republican that focus groups say they want to see if he did get the nomination. He's not exactly the most principled man on Earth.

Posted by: McAdams at January 25, 2013 06:47 PM (RN4kh)

106 104 pep,

No your implications are the Republic is harmed by higher class weapons, by missing a comma you are stretching in a rather obtuse manner to reverse the meaning I will spell it out for you.

The United States was never harmed by a privately owned repeating firearm being in a citizen's hand before they were adopted by the military. The people of the United States have outgunned the Federal government for MOST of its history. I will not make the argument, because it is a stupid unserious point on the retards part, that Bob the good grocer should have a WMD although Bob has access everyday to the components needed to make Chemical weapons.

Perhaps if the Federal government had not decided to allow the ACLU to interfere with putting away nutballs, and was not happily sticking its dick in the electorates' ass on taxation and ususrpation of liberty it would not have a defacto dick fetish on outgunning the people.

My rifle has harmed no one, it would have harmed no one if it were a 106mm Recoiless Rifle. It could be a 203mm Howitzer and it would have harmed no one. There is no criminal act, no risk factor beyond that of the maluse of a car UNTIL some individual engages in another violation of the law using that device.

End of story.

This is not about reduction of violence, this is not about imperiled public safety, this is simply a very vocal minority trying to use hysteria and artificial division on the part of gun owners to inflict a preference cascade.

Again, you are not getting my guns.

I will follow this law as zealously as Hairy Reed followed the law on budgets.

Posted by: sven10077 at January 25, 2013 06:53 PM (LRFds)

107 105 McAdams,

and uh they will er try to ah scare you and say uh "he's dangerous and gonna get your gun!" and I uh will not get your gun...

//Barky Choom in '08

Posted by: sven10077 at January 25, 2013 06:54 PM (LRFds)

108 This is why I supported Newt in the primaries...

Posted by: The Political Hat at January 25, 2013 08:33 PM (Vk2pI)

109 Horsefuck. Thanks for playing. If freeshit army hadn't kept empowering the hyper regulatory state we'd be okay.
Posted by: sven10077 at January 25, 2013 06:32 PM (LRFds)

I knew someone would take what I said that way because you're not thinking with your brain, you're thinking with your pocket book and the fear from not having choices.

I'm not talking about giving the lower class anything. In fact, as I stated, the government's increase in giving out benefits closely follows the decrease in the lower classes buying power due to decreased job opportunities that they have the abilities for and the decreased quantity of any type of job. Along with the increased competition for the jobs that are available.

The "freeshit" army didn't empower anything until 2008. All those benefits were put into play by the upper classes (establishment as it were) to forestall unrest by the lower classes. They knew they were screwing up the economy by the things they were doing but it was paying too well for a small number of influential and moneyed interests to stop it.

Want to blame someone, blame the greedy cocksuckers who got million dollar bonuses for running companies into bankruptcy or how about MF Global? Where they STOLE billions from investors and NO ONE's gone or going to jail.

So re read what I said and step back a bit.

Posted by: Bitter Clinger (aka 3 tooth) at January 25, 2013 08:33 PM (3E2th)

110 109 Bitter Clinger,
hey guy they gave nanny McRictus Thors' Gavel in '06 no?

This was a targeted govt mandated 5 alarm clusterfuck with its roots going back to Carter with a slowly building bomb Obama helped get lit under Clinton and blew up at the tag end of "the Chimpster" plenty of blame to go around.

I did fine in the 80s and 90s.....

was not until SCOAMF decided "hey we're ina RUT I know let's double the fucking debt in a term" that shit turned to shit enperpetual.....

Posted by: sven10077 at January 25, 2013 08:46 PM (LRFds)






Processing 0.02, elapsed 0.5991 seconds.
15 queries taking 0.5857 seconds, 119 records returned.
Page size 74 kb.
Powered by Minx 0.7 alpha.

MuNuvians
MeeNuvians
Polls! Polls! Polls!
Frequently Asked Questions
The (Almost) Complete Paul Anka Integrity Kick
Top Top Tens
Greatest Hitjobs

The Ace of Spades HQ Sex-for-Money Skankathon
A D&D Guide to the Democratic Candidates
Margaret Cho: Just Not Funny
More Margaret Cho Abuse
Margaret Cho: Still Not Funny
Iraqi Prisoner Claims He Was Raped... By Woman
Wonkette Announces "Morning Zoo" Format
John Kerry's "Plan" Causes Surrender of Moqtada al-Sadr's Militia
World Muslim Leaders Apologize for Nick Berg's Beheading
Michael Moore Goes on Lunchtime Manhattan Death-Spree
Milestone: Oliver Willis Posts 400th "Fake News Article" Referencing Britney Spears
Liberal Economists Rue a "New Decade of Greed"
Artificial Insouciance: Maureen Dowd's Word Processor Revolts Against Her Numbing Imbecility
Intelligence Officials Eye Blogs for Tips
They Done Found Us Out, Cletus: Intrepid Internet Detective Figures Out Our Master Plan
Shock: Josh Marshall Almost Mentions Sarin Discovery in Iraq
Leather-Clad Biker Freaks Terrorize Australian Town
When Clinton Was President, Torture Was Cool
What Wonkette Means When She Explains What Tina Brown Means
Wonkette's Stand-Up Act
Wankette HQ Gay-Rumors Du Jour
Here's What's Bugging Me: Goose and Slider
My Own Micah Wright Style Confession of Dishonesty
Outraged "Conservatives" React to the FMA
An On-Line Impression of Dennis Miller Having Sex with a Kodiak Bear
The Story the Rightwing Media Refuses to Report!
Our Lunch with David "Glengarry Glen Ross" Mamet
The House of Love: Paul Krugman
A Michael Moore Mystery (TM)
The Dowd-O-Matic!
Liberal Consistency and Other Myths
Kepler's Laws of Liberal Media Bias
John Kerry-- The Splunge! Candidate
"Divisive" Politics & "Attacks on Patriotism" (very long)
The Donkey ("The Raven" parody)
News/Chat