ANGRY! man of the week

Oh brother. Talk about doing us no favors.

Check out the video:

[powerpress]

The Story:

In a video posted to YouTube and Facebook on Wednesday, Tactical Response CEO James Yeager went ballistic over reports that the president could take executive action with minor gun control measures after the mass shooting of 20 school children in Connecticut last month.

After the Drudge Report likened Obama to Adolf Hitler and Joseph Stalin on Wednesday, pro-gun conservatives expressed outrage over the idea that the White House could act without Congress.

“Vice President [Joe] Biden is asking the president to bypass Congress and use executive privilege, executive order to ban assault rifles and to impose stricter gun control,” Yeager explained in his video message. “Fuck that.”

“I’m telling you that if that happens, it’s going to spark a civil war, and I’ll be glad to fire the first shot. I’m not putting up with it. You shouldn’t put up with it. And I need all you patriots to start thinking about what you’re going to do, load your damn mags, make sure your rifle’s clean, pack a backpack with some food in it and get ready to fight.”

The CEO concluded: “I’m not fucking putting up with this. I’m not letting my country be ruled by a dictator. I’m not letting anybody take my guns! If it goes one inch further, I’m going to start killing people.”

via Unhinged Tactical Response CEO Threatens to ‘Start Killing People’ Over Obama’s Gun Control | Video Cafe.

Just like Alex Jones going on Piers Morgan and ranting like a mad man did the second amendment folk no favors. This idiot did none either. I look for this guy to either be arrested or find himself being watched for a while.

Some people, I tell ya… 🙄

Others: Talking Points MemoAMERICAblogNo More Mister Nice BlogPost PoliticsThe Mahablog,Hullabaloo and The Raw Story (via Memeorandum)

Honestly, why would NRA expect anything different?

This seems to be a bit silly, but I really think the NRA did not know what was coming:

Via the Weekly Standard:

NRA.gif“The National Rifle Association of America is made up of over 4 million moms and dads, daughters and sons, who are involved in the national conversation about how to prevent a tragedy like Newtown from ever happening again.  We attended today’s White House meeting to discuss how to keep our children safe and were prepared to have a meaningful conversation about school safety, mental health issues, the marketing of violence to our kids and the collapse of federal prosecutions of violent criminals,” reads the NRA statement.

“We were disappointed with how little this meeting had to do with keeping our children safe and how much it had to do with an agenda to attack the Second Amendment.  While claiming that no policy proposals would be “prejudged,” this Task Force spent most of its time on proposed restrictions on lawful firearms owners – honest, taxpaying, hardworking Americans.  It is unfortunate that this Administration continues to insist on pushing failed solutions to our nation’s most pressing problems.  We will not allow law-abiding gun owners to be blamed for the acts of criminals and madmen.  Instead, we will now take our commitment and meaningful contributions to members of congress of both parties who are interested in having an honest conversation about what works – and what does not.”

I hate to be the one to say “Well Duh!” but….um…:

The NRA should have known better than to even remotely think that they were going to get anything other than what they got from this Presidential Administration. This is why they need to hire me to do their political consultant work. I can tell them everything that they need to know about guns and Democrats. 😀

Interesting note about Jack Lew

Honestly, what does Barack Obama have against the working class in this Country? Quite a bit, it seems:

With President Obama poised to tap current chief of staff Jack Lew as his next treasury secretary, Republicans are already attacking Lew for supposed slights during budget talks. Some progressives may bring renewed scrutiny to his time at CitiGroup. But if history is any guide, there will be little talk about another line on Lew’s rĂ©sumĂ©: The key role he played in New York University’s campaign to rid itself of a graduate student workers’ union.

Lew, the former director of the Office of Management and Budget under President Clinton, joined NYU as chief operating officer and executive vice president in 2004. At the time, NYU was the only private university in the United States whose graduate students had a union contract. By the time Lew left two years later, NYU graduate students had lost their collective bargaining rights. In between, picketers hoisted “Wanted” posters with his face on them.

Reached over email, Andrew Ross, NYU professor of social and cultural analysis, charged that “the administration followed every page of the union-busting playbook, as instructed by the anti-union lawyers retained for that purpose.” Ross, a co-editor of the anthology “The University Against Itself: The NYU Strike and the Future of the Academic Workplace,” wrote that despite broad faculty and community support for the union, “students on the picket line were threatened with expulsion. There was no indication that Lew, as a senior member of the team who executed this policy, disagreed with any of these practices. To all appearances, he was a willing, and loyal, executor of decisions that trampled all over the students’ democratic right to organize.”

When contacted for a response, White House spokesperson Eric Schultz emailed: “Jack Lew has been a strong supporter of the right of workers to organize – as has the President. And that support will not change in his new role as Treasury Secretary.” – via Jack Lew’s union-busting past – Salon.com.

I always said, since day one of the first election cycle of Barack Obama; that he was nothing more than a two-bit phony. I believe that in his second term, we are going to find out just how big of a two-bit phony that he can really be towards the unions and the working class. Would Hillary have been any better? I really do not know. But, when I hear a Democrat basically say, “I care about the high-tech jobs.” and not say anything about the unskilled laborers, like myself. I have to really wonder, just what kind of person is he really? We are about to find out, I think and I believe it is not going to be good for the unions and the working class in general —- not to mention most gun owners.

White House considering executive action on guns

I knew this was coming, it was just a matter of time; and unlike this idiot here, who believes that the following headline was overdone. I happen to believe it to be very true:

drudgeheadline

From the Weekly Standard:

Vice President Joe Biden revealed that President Barack Obama might use an executive order to deal with guns. 

“The president is going to act,” said Biden, giving some comments to the press before a meeting with victims of gun violence. “There are executives orders, there’s executive action that can be taken. We haven’t decided what that is yet. But we’re compiling it all with the help of the attorney general and the rest of the cabinet members as well as legislative action that we believe is required.”

Biden said that this is a moral issue and that “it’s critically important that we act.”

Biden talked also about taking responsible action. “As the president said, if you’re actions result in only saving one life, they’re worth taking. But I’m convinced we can affect the well-being of millions of americans and take thousands of people out of harm’s way if we act responsibly.”

Biden, as he himself noted, helped write the Brady bill.

Eric Holder was scheduled to be at the meeting that’s currently take place at the White House. 

Ah yes, this ought to be very interesting to see what these Marxist gun grabbers come up with; as the Godfather of Chicago said, never let a crisis go to waste. As for what the idiot above that I linked to said about Drudge’s headline, I give you the words of Lew Rockwell:

In my experience, gun controllers are violent people, and private gun-owners are not. That is, gun controllers support mass murder; they just want it to be a monopoly of soldiers, police, etc. They would be glad to see Alex and the rest of us shot. Gun owners tend to abhor personal violence, and would only use it in defense of their family, themselves, and their property. And this is not a left-right issue. Non-commissar leftists like the late Alexander Cockburn are anti-gun control; neocons like Bill Kristol or the Randites are pro-gun control. Here is something that all good people across the spectrum can agree on: the state should be disarmed; the people should be packing.

It will be an amazing thing to see just whom on the right caves to the Marxist’s demands of gun surrender, or “control” as they like to call it. I just wonder which one of the Neoconservatives will fall first and say, :”Well, we have to have some sort of control!” I expect that Podhoretz or Kristol will be the first ones to falter to the demands of this administration.

Again, I do not know if having Alex Jones coming out as the circus act for the far right was a good idea, it may have just given the White House the ammo (sorry…) it needed to get what it wanted to carry out. Needless to say, there is going to be political fallout from something like this and it is not going to be good for the Democrats. I just hope that the GOP is ready to stage a comeback in 2014 or 2016. But from the looks of things at the moment, the GOP has some serious image issues, especially when it comes to the middle class.

What exactly is the point of doing this?

I wrote about the paper that did this, I believe, however, that it was lost in the server move.

Anyhow, what is the point of doing this? Just to be seen? What? It is stupid and makes no sense, then again, neither do most Democrats today:

Last month, the Journal News sparked a firestorm of protest when it published a mappable database of every licensed gun owner in Westchester and Rockland counties, north of New York City. The paper obtained the data—which New York state law explicitly and unambiguously demands be made public—through open records requests. The reaction was swift and furious—gun rights and privacy advocates published the names and addresses of the paper’s editors in retaliation, and the paper (ironically) hired armed guards to protect against threats.

One weird reaction came from TV wraith Ann Coulter, who told Fox News’ Sean Hannity last week: “If we’re producing lists of gun permit owners, I want them for Manhattan. I want to know how many rich liberals with their body guards have gun permits.” You’re in luck, Ann. I happened to have just such a list in my filing cabinet. Here it i

via Here Is a List of All the Assholes Handsome Law-Abiding Citizens Who Own Guns Some People in New York City.

Call me old school, call me a concern troll, call me whatever. But this strikes me as just plain stupid. If you are so ate up about having to know who owns a gun in some city; then you have a problem of the mental sort. Sorry, it’s how I feel. it is about as stupid as putting Alex Jones on to defend gun rights, I think.

Others: UrbanGrounds, Jammie Wearing Fools, Politico, Capital New York, Le·gal In·sur·rec· tion,Weasel Zippers, Poynter and New York Times, more at Mediagazer » (via Memeorandum) 

Giffords and Kelly are now gun-grabbers

This is sad, very sad…:

In response to a horrific series of shootings that has sown terror in our communities, victimized tens of thousands of Americans, and left one of its own bleeding and near death in a Tucson parking lot, Congress has done something quite extraordinary — nothing at all.

I was shot in the head while meeting with constituents two years ago today. Since then, my extensive rehabilitation has brought excitement and gratitude to our family. But time and time again, our joy has been diminished by new, all too familiar images of death on television: the breaking news alert, stunned witnesses blinking away tears over unspeakable carnage, another community in mourning. America has seen an astounding 11 mass shootings since a madman used a semiautomatic pistol with an extended ammunition clip to shoot me and kill six others. Gun violence kills more than 30,000 Americans annually.

via Giffords and Kelly: Fighting gun violence.

Jeez…. first Alex Jones going on Morgan’s show and now this.

Earlier, as in a few minutes ago, I had some rather nasty stuff in here. I changed my mind; it’s gone. This is just another example of exploiting a shooting victim, like Brady. It sucks, but it happens.

Roundup is here and here.

UPDATE : Alex Jones versus Piers Morgan

I have written in here before about how I am not a fan of Piers Morgan and I am not really. But this right here, did us no favors at all, those of us who believe in the second amendment:

If that was not bad enough, there is this:

http://youtu.be/v0sE9hAXXB4

Again, I am sympathetic to the second amendment cause as anyone; but putting Alex Jones on to rant about an American revolution is just not the way to fight for gun rights. I also notice that this story very quickly disappeared from Drudge’s front page and for good reason. I don’t believe we need Alex Jones as our spokesman for the second amendment.

 

—–

Update: I watched the second video. My impression is this, Alex Jones is either telling the truth or he is one hell of a good actor. Jones is not too far away from the truth about the Mafia and the New World Order stuff. Truth is, he did go into the belly of the beast there in New York.

As for Alex Jones himself, I believe that Morgan got the reaction he wanted from Jones and it suited his agenda well. It might have backfired against the gun defenders however, because toward the end, Jones sounded a bit like he was challenging Bloomberg to a duel or something. Again, it is not that I don’t support what the right believes in gun rights, I do. I still just do not believe that the purpose of gun rights was served well here.

—–

AllahPundit Snarks:

It’s like criticizing a skeptic for inviting the “experts” from “Ancient Aliens” on and then not asking thoughtful questions about aerodynamics. Just wind ‘em up and let ‘em go.

Now that, is funny. Ha! AP also asks for followup question. So, here’s mine. Who the hell had the idiotic idea of allowing this idiot on to defend gun rights!?!?! 😯

You can get Alex Jones version of events here.  I didn’t watch the video, I didn’t have the stomach.

Update #2: Mitch Berg is thinking along the same lines as me.

Others, Via Memeorandum: CNN, The Moderate Voice, his vorpal sword, Mediaite, Hot Air, Guardian, Mashable! and p m carpenter’s commentary, more at Mediagazer »

Why would you ever need an assault rifle?

Some food for thought….:

Why do I need an assault rifle you ask? I don’t need it for hunting. I don’t need it for home protection from a single invader, or even two. So I echo the sentiment of many gun control advocates; Why do I need an assault rifle, with a high capacity clip no less?

Here is why. I need an assault rifle because I live under the rule of a government who thinks it has the right to take away my assault rifle; a government who dictates who I can marry, what I can eat, drink, and smoke; a government who uses force to take my money away from me, who charges me rent (property tax) to live in my own home: a government who commits acts of war without the consent of the people, who murders it’s own citizens witout probable cause or due process; a government who has monopolized the currency with which I can trade my goods and services, then devalued that currency through inflation and taxation; a government which uses the tyranny of democracy rather than the freedom of a republic.

Rest the rest at: Why do I need an assault rifle? by SnakePit — The Daily Paul.

Interesting. I have no opinion one way or another on this one. Personally, I would only want to own a handgun for personal protection. But, I believe if one should want to own a firearm of this sort, they should be able to buy one and own it without some sort of hassle from the Government.

(Via Freedom’s Phoenix)