-
The asshole / rapist / crook behind the "Girls Gone Wild" videos has adopted a new defense tactic for the court: pretending to be blindingly stupid. I'm not sure this is going to pan out for him.
-
The paper's editorial board is calling for a complete investigation into the apparent crimes of the Bush administration. I couldn't agree more.
-
On how to order in a restaurant: "Scratch off the appetizers and entrees that are most like dishes you’ve seen in many other restaurants, because they represent this one at its most dutiful, conservative and profit-minded. The chef’s heart isn’t in them. Scratch off the dishes that look the most aggressively fanciful. The chef’s vanity — possibly too much of it — spawned these. Then scratch off anything that mentions truffle oil."
-
Whitehead's point, which I agree with wholeheartedly, is that while it is legal to carry a tricked-out rifle into a town hall meeting with one's congressional representative (or president), it's a staggeringly stupid idea. The fact that you have a right to do something doesn't make it an appropriate thing to do.
Comments are closed.
First story: I’m not sure he’s “pretending”.
Fourth story: I agree. I’m a bit of a right winger, and fully support the bearing of arms and the right to do so, however, there needs to be some responsibility to go along with our rights. For example, you might have the right to free speech, but there is plenty you could say that wouldn’t really be responsible. Likewise, the media has the right of the freedom of the press, but they have the responsibility to use it wisely (i.e. not giving troop locations/movements, outing CIA agents, or exposing ways we’re tracking terrorist groups funding). I have no problem with concealed or open carrying, but you have the responsibilty to be smart about it. Showing up to a presidential event with an AR-15 or the like just isn’t responsible.
Never underestimate the power of stupidity. It often seems that fortune favors fools.
Agreed with Whitehead. That said, I wish the words “assault rifle” could be banished from journalists’ vocabulary.
Why in the world does anyone need a firearm at any event that the President is speaking? It’s not like it isn’t already the heaviest armed gathering outside of an NRA Convention.
Perlogik; Me and the boys were sitting around talking about that last week. What kind of suicidal, 70 virgins-waiting-in-heaven dumbass shows up to a crowded, guarded event packing heat? There have to be at least 6 red dots projected on each of their little melons and the certainty of being number uno on the threat reduction list. But that’s just me thinking.
When someone shows up at an Obama speech carrying an assault rifle, they’re considered patriots and citizens exercising their Second Amendment right, and are allowed to walk around unmolested.
My guess is if you had tried the same thing at a Bush speech, you’d have been tackled before you got close, made the evening news as a suspected terrorist, and would soon be getting an intimate introduction to Cheney style interview techniques in some remote exotic location.
I’m not sure what that means, except that it’s funny how the most ardent defenders of some specific rights are the quickest to take others away.
I’m just sayin;.
Barry: I will agree not to refer to your 4000 lb. Toyota with automatic transmission as an “assault vehicle” if you would please not refer to my autoloading rifle as an “assault rifle”. :)
Duly noted, Bubby. But you must agree it would take far less to mod-up your rifle to the real deal than my car. (Although . . . there is some appeal to a roof-mount, large caliber deer clearing device, local roads being what they are.)
Be that as it may, changing “assault” to “semi-automatic” doesn’t change the point of the original comment in the least, far as I can tell.
For that matter, neither would changing it to “carrying a protest sign” and the “First Amendment.” Even paid industry and political plants are allowed into Obama’s town halls to voice their dissent, no matter how obnoxious or threatening they become – they were summarily thrown out of Bush’s, even when they were just plain old citizens in t-shirts.
Again, I’m just sayin’.
Well OK, but nothing gets a latte-sipping liberal off the dime and out to the events like this.
Bubby,
I had the same thought about the red dots. Okay, want to hang out outside the president’s rally with a firearm? Prepare to tracked around by the red dots on your face. I stil don’t know why the Secret Service can’t just remove these people as security threats. Since when did they care anything about anybody’s constitutional rights?