CNN's Rick Sanchez slams FOX News Fearmongering tactics against President Obama
By John Amato Wednesday Apr 08, 2009 5:00pmRick Sanchez used some air time today to help expose the insanely irresponsible behavior of all the members of the Limbaugh National Committee and their preachers of paranoia. Sanchez played some extremely disturbing video from Youtube by the patriot militia crowd and went over the high volume of shootings that are spreading across the country.
Our pal Mr. Gottlieb, of the Second Amendment Foundation, a gun toting, more extreme version of the NRA joins CNN with Media Matters' Eric Boehlert, who just wrote a piece called Glenn Beck and the rise of Fox News' militia media which piggybacks off of David Neiwert's reporting to debate the merits of the fringe right being terrified that President Obama will take away their guns. This is, of course, leading right-wing talkers to elevate their rhetoric in attacking President Obama and liberals in general, which seems to be having a very dangerous influence. (rough transcript)
Boehlert: Well I think people on the right, the single issue passionate people are desperate to find some sort of opening so they can push this narrative. I mean, Glenn Beck yesterday on his radio show said Barack Obama will take away your gun anyway, one way or another, he's going to take away your gun. This message has been on FOX news for weeks and months and it's not just the gun control issue. They are painting this doomsday scenario, almost mainstreaming this militia idea of tyranny and totalitarian state in America and it's incredibly irresponsible.
Rick: Alan, what do you think of that? Because you know, any independent person that looks at this coverage that we've been seeing, not just on FOX News, but other places as well. It seems alarmist, it almost seems...
Gottleib: Well, I think the alarming thing is not that there's a doomsday scenario, but there's no doubt, nobody can argue that the government isn't growing at alarming rates, at record levels of spending, record levels of...
Rick: It GREW during the Bush administration, where were your concerns then?
Gottelieb: I had concerns then too. but they're not growing at the alarming rate they are right now. Government regulations, controls---everything on individuals is significantly going in the direction to more and more government. Nobody can deny that. And of course, that goes right into the argument of more gun control as well when government wants to regulate people.
Boehlert: Saying government is growing in size is a lot different than saying they're going to come knock on your door and take your gun, that democracy in America is on the wane and that we're going to turn into a socialist or Marxist or fascist, depending on what week it is to Glenn Beck. That's quite a leap and again, it's incredibly irresponsible. We've never seen a television news outfit sort of exploit these kinds of fears before and they're doing it on a daily basis and again, they are basically mainstreaming this militia movement and this militia rhetoric. It's wildly irresponsible.
Gottelieb: I mean you're trying to label everyone in militias being evil, crazy people out there. There are 90 million gun owners out there and they're nor members of militias.
The Pew research Center did a poll that says President Obama is the most polarizing president we've had in four decades..
Rick: Hold on Alan, that's not fair. How can he not be polarizing when people are saying those messages that we have been talking about? If I was to get on the air and start saying horrible things about anyone day and and day out and scaring the bejesus out of you and telling you that the world was going to end as a result of this particular politician, maybe, whether he’s on the right or on the left, on in the middle, don’t you think he would be polarizing?
Gottlieb didn't have much of an argument in this segment. When more government is needed to save a country, how does that justify the hate and vitriol being spewed out by the right especially with no facts to back them up? And without regulation, the entire world almost collapsed under Bush, so if there hadn't been any government intervention, Gottleib wouldn't have an issue to fight against because he'd be out on the street like many Americans are now.
And that Pew research study makes no sense. It tracks approvals between Democrats and Republicans. The republican party is not the same party it used to be and it's a very silly poll to be honest. There is no merit to it. How is a president with a 66% approval rating considered polarizing so early in his term?
Login or Register to post comments.
What ya gonna do? Throw it in the gutter or on the wrong lane?
Nice :-(
going to take away their guns since 1776.
Hasn't happened
Well then Barack Obama should stop the madness and promise he won't violate the 2nd Amendment...then there is no problem.
It is so simple it disturbes me. :-)
How many times does he have to promise?? This is ludicrous. People choose to ignore his words when it suits their agendas. The only madness is coming from those who refuse to actually listen to what he has to say. He took crap for his secretly taped comment about people clinging to their guns and religion and boy was he dead on with that vision!
Obama could "promise" until he's blue in the face and these vigilant extremists will hear none of it...
... For their hatred of a black man clouds their vision.
.
We have a winner folks!
NAIL. ON. HEAD.
But, it's not just that he's black... he's one of them book educated folks, elitist you know... the kind that likes the French and knows that many of our American ideals came from the French Enlightenment. He's not a beer-swillin', squirrel shooting, bacon eatin' Amuhrican.
No? Well can I have a jet fighter?
So President Obama's promising he won't violate the 2nd amendment means you get to keep your nuclear bomb?
Will the religious zealots seek to restrict what you consider your constitutional rights as they do mine?
If Obama came out and said "I'm not taking your guns away, ever.", then Hannity, Beck and Levin would simply say "He's lying... he's just trying to lull you into a false sense of security SO HE CAN TAKE YOUR GUNS."
It's pretty clear that the right wing is going back to the basic playbook. There are three formations: God, Guns and Gays... from those three formations they will create a wall of noise to stoke the fears of the ignorant and bigoted "base" of the right wing movement.
It always works on about 20-25% of the population... I pray it won't work beyond that because focusing on those issues distracts us from the hard work we need to do to get this country back on the right course.
...should have been removed the moment congress decided to maintain a standing army in this country. The purpose of the 2nd amenedment was based on the framers belief that America would never have a standing army and would rely on it's citizens to come together in times of peril to defend her.
I can't even comprehend that people who rely on the 2nd amendment to validate their guns just don't seem able to read the whole sentence:
"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."
Do you not understand this very simple language? We don't need militias anymore, therefore the amendment is no longer valid and should be repealed.
That said, I have no problem with hunters having shotguns or high powered rifles for hunting; but, handguns and assault weapons are intended only for killing humans. They can be banned as far as I'm concerned.
The intent of the 2nd amendment is a very dense topic and there are those who think it was designed to give citizens the right to fight back against a tyrannical government. But, regardless... from a practical perspective, it is too late to ban guns. We have more guns than people in this country already. You can't hit a magic button and make them disappear. Only law-abiding citizens would comply and they would have no protection against the criminal who would keep them and traffic in them. It's simply too late to control firearms in the United States.
...argument. It's never too late, you have to start somewhere. No, nothing magical or overnight, but if you ban handguns and assault weapons, eventually, over a long period of time, they will get confiscated and destroyed. The key is to make their manufacture (except for the military) illegal. Do you have numbers on how many people successfully defended themselves against armed criminals? I would guess the number to be so low as to be insignificant.
"You're buying into the gun lobby argument."
Or just disagreeing based on his own reasoning. Maybe you're buying into the gun banning argument.
"It's never too late, you have to start somewhere. No, nothing magical or overnight, but if you ban handguns and assault weapons, eventually, over a long period of time, they will get confiscated and destroyed."
And how many innocents will be raped, murdered, assaulted during that period because only criminals have guns? What's an acceptable number for you?
"Do you have numbers on how many people successfully defended themselves against armed criminals? I would guess the number to be so low as to be insignificant."
You want to trade unknowable statistics for a guess? I say unknowable because unless you add the number of criminals who didn't attack because a person was armed, the unknowable part, you're missing the most important factor in owning a gun for self-protection: crime prevention and aversion. NO half-responsible gun-owner wants to shoot somebody and then, after taking a human life, no matter how much it may be improving the gene pool by doing that, deal with a slick lawyer and the creep's teary-eyed mother putting the blame on them in court.
As to your standing-militia argument, since the federal goverment now controls the National Guard thanks to Bush, which in itself was state usurpation of the standing militias, I say more than ever citizens of this once proud and free country need to have enough firepower at hand to keep the government hesitant about further reducing civil liberties.
Sad but true.
double-post
...to empower the populace to overthrow a tyrannical government, as well. Having just suffered through one, it was very much on their minds. Having just suffered through a wanna-be case myself, I have great empathy and identification to several of their possible mind-sets.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying that you're not partly right, but your not wholly right. And, truth be told, they may never have envisioned anyone having rapid-fire arms, either. Or nukes.
. . . and conclusions concerning the application of the Second Amendment, but the Supreme Court decided otherwise this past year. Obama acknowledged SCOTUS' holding, and it is at present the law of the land.
The Last Word, J.D.
It hasn't happened because no one has had the intent to make it happen. Did you know that arms were taken away from German americans when we declared war on the Germans? Didn't know that, did you, pinhead? And if they didn't take the weapons away then, why would they, now? Go back to your paranoid little corner and munch your leaded wall-paint chips.
to think that they would be able to describe their loony actions with some sort of sensible response was a bit naive. With that said though, I love the fact that CNN and others are attacking these loons directly. We have allowed Neo-Nazi Beck to spread his lies for long enough without challenge. It is time to paint the real picture of the Fox KKK crowd for all to see imho.
[deleted--please limit your comments to the topic and not other commenters. For assistance, please refer to the commenting policy.]
I rest my case.
{Then you would have been an EPIC FAIL in law school. Censorship is the GOVERNMENT keeping you from your right to free speech. This is not the government. This is a privately-owned blog who has the right to hold their commenters to their commenting policy. Think of this as John Amato's open house. You're welcome to come by. But you're not welcome to piss in the punchbowl and annoy the other guests. No one is keeping you from commenting ON THE TOPIC. You are not allowed to insult the other members of this community and/or start a flame war. At least we have the gonads to allow commenters of all stripes, unlike your typical right wing blog.]
Pretty funny.
couldn't even come close to the grilling Schuster did with this idiot and the idiot had the same talking pointd as he did with Schuster.
The wingnut gun nuts are far more likely to loose their jobs, their homes and a family member in a Republican economy or a Republican war than their guns under Obama. How can these people walk and chew gum at the same time is beyond me.
As fare as Mr. Whipple's argument that people said Bush was polarizing America, the man had a track record for 8 years to base that on. The world, unlike with Obama, hated Bush and only the 28percenters supported the man in this country when he left office compared to 65% who support Obama.
These ignorant sons of bitches are the number threat to this country....and I'm afraid the president personally. If something happens to Obama because of these wignuts Mr. Whipple hasn't seen polarizing.
Next time Mr. Whipple says "Please don't squeeze the Charmin", you better take him seriously. He might be packing.
more likely you'll find him in the corner wetting himself.
Depends
[deleted--Please consult the commenting policy. Comments left with the purpose of insulting or inciting a flame war will be deleted. Please limit your comment to the topic of the thread.]
Dang! Didn't see Mega's comment before it was deleted. Someone please tell me, is Mega pro-Depends or anti-Depends?
It think it all Depends.
A better question: Is Mega pro-baby powder or anti-baby powder. Sound like Mega's got a bad case diaper rash.
I guess it's beter to run down a man int he street while driving drunk? Like Sanchez did? Hmmmm,,,,your hypocrisy is showing!!!
And what exactly does this have to do with Mr Whipple?
at Daily Kos noted the other day:
The right then was saying the same sort of things about JFK. Really, this is going too far and it needs to stop. There was a list on here of sponsors the other day and we need to write them and let them know how we feel.
JFK was more conservative than the Republican Party. It was the left that killed him. The Democartic Party today is not the Party of JFK.
Oh I am sorry..I forgot you get your history lessons from movies.
from movies is where I get my history. Ad Hominem much?
Where do you get your history from MegaWhy?
Fox news?
Alex Jones?
The back of cereal boxes?
JFK was more conservative than Nixon who he ran against? The Nixon of the Nixon-Khrushchev Kitchen Debate? And JFK was killed by a lone marksman, trained in the Army. I admit I have to wonder though, a lone loon kills the president, and then is killed by a low level mobster Jack Ruby. That smells like a patsy set-up. The Mafia had been previously used by the FBI in at least one instance on an assasination attempt on Castro, so the links were existant.
However, Hoover was very much against the mob and spent his career fighting them. But he was also very anti-Communist, and he thought JFK was getting soft on the USSR, because after the Bay of Pigs fiasco, Kennedy was making overatures to the Russians to lessen tensions. However, at the same time he sent the first advisors into Vietnam to aid the French after France started making noises that they wanted to leave NATO.
I understand LBJ felt he was continuing the JFK initiatives in furthering Civil Rights in this country with the Voting Rights Act of 1965. However, at Republican goading he escalated the war in Vietnam after the Gulf of Tonkin. Nixon ran in 1968 as the moderate between Humphrey and Wallace and a "secret plan" to end Vietnam, which he did not do until he won his second term, with a fair amount of cheating with his "plumbers." The terms he could've gotten several years earlier.
However, interestingly enough he was the one who opened China, and started the first environmental regulations.
Alan Ginsburg in a PBS interview on the book on Hoover in which his fondness for black chiffon was revealed.. said that the important news in the book was that Hoover and Roy Cohn and Cardinal Spellman partied with boys on mafia boats in the Boston harbor.. that these closet cases brought together the church, government and organized crime to destroy the left in this country.
I was trying to avoid such commentary, since I don't know what proofs are behind them.
Is that the same Alan Ginsburg who wrote Howl?
He was my favorite poet when I was 12 (besides Edgar Allen Poe.)
Okay, Mad magazine song parody lyrics too.
I haven't read the book but it was sensational because of the black chiffon part.. the hypocracy of these guys is pretty well documented, at least Cohn's and Hoover's.
Thank you 6 & 7/8s. I knew that guy reminded me of someone, but I just couldn't figure out who it was.
I thought Mr. Whipple might be Sanity Claus with his green and red bow tie.
Good for Rick Sanchez....seems as if there is more and more pushing back on Fox and Beck these days. I only wish Sanchez didn't at the end say, "that's fair," when Mr. Whipple used his Bush bashing line again.
Comparing the hatred of Bush with the hatred of Obama is entirely different. Many of the people who hate Obama are gun nuts and racists, and their "leaders" talk about revolution and tell them to "do something."
First, the fringe right consists of real lunatics, who are far less flexible than the fringe left. Consequently, any president who doesn't slavishly espouse right-wing rhetoric is "polarizing" to the right. Compound this with circumstance with the fact of Barack's ethnicity, and it's "easy" to see how Pew characterizes him as the most polarizing president in the last 40 years. The fringe right will never, ever accept a black man as president. Thus, it's not his positions that are extreme, but the positions of the extreme right -- he just happens to be further from their position than Bush.
Second, you have to call into question the methodology of any poll that concludes that Obama is the most polarizing president in the last 40 years. Bush's approval ratings were in the 30s when he left office; Obama's presently in the low 60s. Consequently, one would logically conclude that Bush was more polarizing, because more people disliked his policies than the policies of Obama. This circumstance simply underscores the first point, and demonstrates that the Pew poll can't really measure how many people are polarized, but instead measures how polarized are the extremes -- the 30% that supported Bush, which is dominated by the fringe right, is replete with basket cases whose hatred knows no bounds. Does Obama engender more hate among this group than Bush engendered among the fringe left? Obviously. But this says less about Obama, and more about the fringe right.
put The Last Word, nicely put. I couldn't agree with you more.
The left is full of wingnuts. I believe the left did an asassination move about President Bush. So just who are the wingnuts?
This was how paranoid they were before Obama. Add the new paranoia over a Socialist/Fascist/Authoritarian/Black Supremecist/Anti-Christ administration and we have a much bigger problem.
Good job Sanchez, and CNN, it's about time!!!!!!!!!!
My heart goes out to the slain PA officers thinking they were about to talk to a "normal" American citizen about a dispute between this guy (his dog) and his mom.
I hope there is a nationwide re-training of 911 dispatchers in light of the "miscommunication" involved in this incident.
Also, the shooter's mother should be incarcerated, period.
And as far as guns go, and here I will probably cause a spat,
it has nothing to do with the guns.
Fuck that, there's nothing that mobilizes these freaks more than the mere mention of "gun control". The necessary laws are already in place. Just like with all laws, the people that are going to break them are doing just so.
Instead of riling up the fucking loonies, people should do this:
It's time the American people start "calling out" these psychos.
Notify the authorities if you have a founded suspicion.
If you're wrong, oh well, no harm, no foul.
If you're right, you may have saved a life (or more).
Don't fear these fucks, but don't take matter into your own hands (no, not Michelle Bachman's way) and don't "give them a reason".
The signs are usually there, be vigalent.
I imagine with the increase in this kind of batshit crazy killing that's going on....
The police will be more than willing to work with a sane and concerned citizen.
That's my take.
Peace.
Frankly, I never thought I'd see the day.
When he was in Miami, he wasn't a very popular man...
But regarding Guitar Mans post...yes I think that is a great idea.
He was a pompous prick on Channel 7 in Miami... and his political leanings were typical Cuban-American Republican... he's had a change of heart (or brain).
I didn't care for the guy much back then...
He wants to come out and blame Beck for causing people to kill...didn't he (RICK) ACTUALLY kill someone?
Rick Sanchez run someone over while drunk and left the scence!! What gives hime the right to point fingers to anyone!!
hime? Is that suppose to be anti-semetic?
that does the groundwork for all this shit, and even makes it acceptable
fox and the GOP hatemongers are nothing without those 1000 radio stations that are almost completely ignored by progressives because it gives them headaches to listen to it.
Hate radio caused the massacre in Rwanda! 800.000+ deaths! gunned downed or decapitated bodies by machetes, along the roads and floating in the rivers! Pure paranoia spread by fear and hatred!
the reason talk radio is as you say a monopoly is because it sells. that is what people want to listen to. Fox's numbers blows CNN, MSNBC, CNBC and all the others out of the water because that is what the majority listen to. Left wing Radio sucks and that is why their ratings are in the toilet.
Ignorant people prefer fictional news and bigoted points of view. We get that.
But Fox doesn't outdo all the other channels combined, does it?
best line the other day;
So people need guns in case the government tries to give them healthcare for free. This has to be the worst case for gun ownership that I have ever heard in my life. This guy is an idiot and he is out of his league.
Talk about taking things out of context. you are a Master!
listen in context. Perhaps look at my comments on other posts here before passing judgment. But that would mean actually reading though wouldn't it. Damn facts and all.
the polarizing issues, we'll get to the truth of the matter. "One of these things don't belong", can you guess?
Amended: They really like that "Pew" poll.
Class. Action. Lawsuit.
From the families of the victims against hate radio and cable right wing liars and alarmists. Him em in their pocketbooks. They don't care about the blood they spill or anyone else but they do care about themselves and their money. That's what makes them konservatives. Sue their asses, not over free speech, but over yelling fire in a crowded theatre when there is no fire. Take all of Rush's money so he won't even have enough left to buy Oxycontin or sex with a child.
These dangerous fools never answee the questions as asked.
What has Obama done to suggest that he wants their guns? NOTHING!!!
This brings up another wingnut talking point with no basis in reality:
The Fairness Doctrine.
What was so bad about that? Anything that counteracts these hysterics has got to be good.
1. Obama's record is anti 2nd Amendment. So logic would dictate that he will follow his histroy of past behavior.
2. The Fairness Doctrine is simply a way to silence opposition. But that law would be two edged. It would be nice to force CNN and MSNBC to have to give the opposition a full hearing.
[deleted-flamebait]
You sure like that word logic but I don't think it means what you think it does. CNN and MSNBC are liberal bastions now? Puh-lease. Read Manufacturing Consent.
Waaaah fuckin WAAAAH!
Prove it tough guy!
The fairness doctrine is simply a way to provide a means that more than ONE POV is seen or heard! GET. YOUR. SHIT. STRAIGHT!
Obama (or any President) can't ban guns... so what's the problem? Even if he's for gun control, he can't do anything about it. It's not his Constitutional role. Get over it.
When has that stopped anyone? They are shredding the constitution daily.
Shredded the constitution daily. Obama is doing all he can to put it back together.
What is it? Ya'll need to say what that record is and what you don't like about it.. I have a feeling that a majority of us would like it and find no conflict with the 2nd Amendment.. But Obama's platform had nothing to do with the 2nd Amendment.. I'll bet there are many parts of Obama's past records that were not part of his current platform.. Those parts aren't his concern now.. his concerns surely evolve like other sane people's concerns do..
Obama had a clear platform, gun contol wasn't part of it, we voted for him, he won and his work so far has been clearly in line with the platform. The biggest expansion of the government has been in response to the biggest problems we've faced in many many years, bequeathed to us by GWB and gang.
Ya'll want to force your opinions on the rest of us..but this is suppose to be a democracy.. I try to live by that and I believe in peace but my reptilian response to bullies is extreme resistance.. don't think you can bloviate and people will cower and give you what you want.. if you continue down the path of threats and calls for insurrection you will be responsible for the results
Following last year's decision in District of Columbia, et al. v. Heller, Obama stated:
"Today's decision reinforces that if we act responsibly, we can both protect the constitutional right to bear arms and keep our communities and our children safe."
The SCOTUS decision was the typical 5-4 split. Scalia wrote the majority opinion, and was joined by Roberts, Alito, Kennedy and Thomas. Breyer, Stevens, Ginsburg and Souter dissented.
Surprisingly, the issue of the protections extended under the Second Amendment had never before been reached by SCOTUS. And this case, like many others, underscores the president's importance in choosing Supreme Court appointees. I suspect that the decision would have been different (probably, but not certainly, a 6-3 split) if Gore had been assumed the presidency and served two terms.
Lawyers like Scalia and Thomas like to pretend that constitutional principles are immutable. Decisions rendered by the SCOTUS demonstrate that they're nothing more than the reflection of social and polictical mores of the individual justices, both left and right, and change according to the composition of the bench.
reality has forced people to wise up without it. The right has been gradually taking over all ownership of media, and now people are too smart to watch the Faux Noise crap, and yet, the right still fears the fairness doctrine.
So, in order to have any market at all, the media is now moving leftward after a big shift right. Instant karma, it's a bitch. CNN has been featuring more Rethugs than Democrats ever since (and before) the '09 elections, LOOK IT UP.
If anyone called bush on his ignorance he or she was labeled unpatriotic at best, say even worse things about Pres. Obama and you get cheered by the same assholes. republicans have nothing to offer but obstrustion and flat out lies, apparently it's just fine and ok to commit treason and expose a cia agrnt's identity, lie about invading a country with lots of oil and totally rip off citizens savings.....AAAARRRGGGGHHHH republ****s bite big time. JMHO
You want to talk treason. What about the President of the U.S. firing a CEO of a private company. What about our elected officials using the IRS as a weapon against contracted bonus at AIG? This administration is the most blatantly criminal we have ever seen. Bush was not much better. The problem with this country is the polaticians, all of them. The Dems and the Repubs. They are corrupt, even our beloved Kenyan Dictator MR. Obama. I hate where he is taking this country. But we will take it back, one way or another. You can help or get out of the way.
Be sure you got those jackboots polished nice and shiny, for when you go goosesteppin' down Pennsylvania Avenue.
GM was not a private company.. it was a corporation formed for a public purpose which failed so badly that we the people had to bail it out.. we had a duty to demand accountability.. the same with AIG.. Personally, I think we made a mistake not enforcing anti-monopoly laws but we the people decided not to do that.. you personally have a lot of opinions but unless we the people agree, your opinions are just your opinions.. your threats simply reveal you to be spoiled and dangerous..
Article III, Section 3.
Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court.
As controlling interest stockholder, as well as a new financier of the corporation, they can demand someone resign.
Ah, springtime and the trolls have returned to Cappastrano. So Rightmind is advocating a coup of the American government. Now who's the real traitor?
where did I say anything about a coup. I was talking about our moral obligation to see to it that the Constitution is upheld. I do not believe that it is. I think that there are laws being broken here.
If you feel the Constitution is being violated by the Obama administration, why don't you sue them and prove it?
Besides, I deal with you left wing nut jobs on my usual blog. I figured I'd see what's up over here.
With no links and all talk of being censored.
You are flame bating and just being a jerk.
I see no reasonable debate with you.
So, where does this administration say that they are going after your guns?
Defend that.
Any mind would be an improvement.
yes it would.
Saying that Obama's administration is the most blatantly criminal we have ever seen is an absolute fucking lie.
Get your head out of your fucking ass, you piece of shit troll bastard.
i used to be able to post here
So what are you doing now then?
Wht can't i post?
*
That Gottlieb guy looks kind of - gay. Not that there's anything wrong with that. But the bow-tie, the lisp, the squeaky voice . . . couldn't they have found someone else to represent them, someone a bit more, I don't know, male? Gun owner-like?
Replace the word 'gun' with 'penis', and I think those YouTube vids start to make sense. It's mass hysteria about loss of masculinity.
"Obama wants to take away your penis." That's the level of thinking here.
You mean: "you mothefucker can't take away my barrett .50, i need it for hunting and shit, to blow the head of a deer and shit, ya know! And an m4 sure can blow the crap out of a opossum.
Some old gun nutter: I always use a BAR, i use to blow krauts with it, i'm sure it's good enough for hunting squirrels!
off of South Park is who he sounds like.
Men, and I use the term advisedly, like Chee-knee and LaPierre and Chris Wallace, who have to dress up in war regalia before heading out to the dove pen to shoot them some little birdies, it's all about their manhood... Some booze, some dames, some guns...yep, they're Humphrey Bogart, all right.
not that there's anything wrong with that.. and one of us called Gottlieb a silly little man and another called Sanchez little for letting Gottlieb have the last word.. what does size have to do with any of this? or gender? or sexual orientation? Once it was pointed out to me in a post yesterday, I will say Gottlieb does remind me of several different characters from South Park.
I think the Gottlieb's a creep but like some of the characters in South Park, he held his ground pretty well.. we'd do well to have some better answers.. like Obama's giving us the largest growth in government because he's been given the largest problems.
From a logic basis Gottleib won. Guess having truth on your side helps!
Well no...he misrepresented facts and made gun owners look really strange to millions of americans. There was no logic to anything he said. If you think thats winning well there ya go.
Jesus, aren't you late for a Free Republic meeting or something?
Remember, you moron, facts have a liberal bias. That's because liberals live in the reality-based community.
Both yesterday and today he was bombastically challenged and he answered.. basically same challenges and same answers only today the answers were stronger since they weren't answered yesterday.. I'd say Rik Sanchez's people let him down, he should have been prepared for say addressing the legislation which Obama supported in Illinois.. Whatever we think of Gottlieb, he did his homework. I respect that. Just because Gottlieb comes across 'different' doesn't mean people won't root for him as the underdog standing up to ill-prepared arrogance..
as your side hasn't had truth on it's side for more than 8 years.
So..SHADDAP.
LOGIC and the Constitution would tell you that a President cannot make legislation or decree gun control. Logic would also tell you that there is no law before Congress aimed at taking anybody's guns away. Logic would further tell you that all of Gottlieb's claims were declaratory and not supported with example or facts.
That's what logic would have to say about that.
...are just small minded men with even smaller penises.
Just as Bush warned us he didn't have a problem with dictatorships as long as he got to be dictator in early days of the Bushie Era, Roger Ailes laid down his marker that he'd attack Obama until his last bullet was fired.
These thugs are consistent....
Ailes is in it for the money don't let him fool you. If he thought he could make money being the liberal channel he would be doing that too.
For calling out the lunatic fringe. Doesn't take much to get the wingnuts in a frenzied panic because they live in constant fear, just like 5 year olds, that they won't get their way. Wahhh!
Now this being a Democracy and all that, I think it only fair that we give the wingnut extremists Utah. The state is big enough to share with the Mormons and that way they can 'eat their own' and not be any danger to the rest of us.
The more desperate they become the more obvious it is just how marginalized they really are. The only people who believe this tripe are partisan goons on their end. When has Obama ever mentioned taking away their guns? A Constitutional Scholar thinks its Constitutional to take away the right to bear arms? Please. They're putting words in his mouth and the bobbleheads who follow them nod right along. Kool aid, anyone?
They're just throwing out anything and everything to see if they get a bite. Terrorist. Socialist. Communist. Fascist. Dictator. Now he's gonna take their guns. Whatever. Its like two idiots in a boat fishing a dry lake. "Worms aint workin!" "Try cheese balls!" "I'll try salmon eggs!"
I need a soundtrack. Somebody bust me some Bad Religion. I think New Dark Ages still rings true.
What a silly little man.
From Steve Benen:
have been hearing about this pole over and over from the right the last couple of days. A friend of mine ask me what I thought about it today. Thanks for the info. on it.
Thanks, MsJoanne.
Wonder if that troll here tonight has read that article?
that troll here tonight reads at all?
With all this rhetoric and scare tactics, it only leads our country closer and closer to a civil war. I sure hope not, but the right wingers sure want to scare people enough to take the law into their own hands, that we may not be able to ever right this ship that is the USA.
I weep for the future
because they were VOTED out of power. Effing crazy. A majority of the people in this country elected the leader that they wanted to represent them and their country and these wingers are just being sore losers about it. I guarantee if we had said some of the things that they are now saying that we would have been in Gitmo for sure.
They're confusing tyranny with LOSING.
was right on the money. He seems to be able to put into words what we are all thinking.
Absolutely, no doubt about it in my mind either. Maybe Obama should use the power he inherited from GWB to declare Beck an unlawful enemy combatant. (jk, I would be horrified)
The problem with the Republicans is that they prefer a system where if they can't win using ballots (and recently, electronic flipping of votes) they can substitute bullets. Seriously, who do you really think assassinated John F. Kennedy? The Russians, the Cubans and the Mafia may have had the wherewithal to commit the crime, but only forces operating within government could have arrange to fudge evidence and misdirect the investigation after the fact. Logically that narrows the list of suspects considerably.
With a minority president in power, I would not put it past them to agitate for civil war. They're that crazy.
my comment above at 18:37. Someone brought up how the right was doing the same sort of thing including putting an ad in the Dallas paper a few days before Kennedy's death. I have a couple links to it up above. I'm still looking into it, but it has frightened me a little so far.
Also,
Wouldn't that be something? You know it would have happened to us.
screeners that automatically delete some conspiracy messages.
trying to pass on a conspiracy at all. I just heard about this the other day and have been checking it out a little. My main point with this was the hateful and inciting rhetoric. I'm just pointing out that this same rhetoric was used then and it's just as dangerous, if not more dangerous, now. In times of uncertainty and fear people can very easily be exploited and have their fear redirected when they are looking for someone else to blame for their plight.
This has nothing to do with conspiracy, only the hate speech and exploitation of angry and confused people.
Shootings
1) IS BECK COMMITTING SEDITION by inciting people to rise up against the government? Is there a legal scholar in the house? Because I looked up the definition of "SEDITION" yesterday, Wikipedia says: "Put simply, sedition is the stirring up of rebellion against the government in power."
2) WE NEED TO WRITE LETTERS TO HIS SPONSORS. I wrote letters to all the Beck sponsors yesterday, as well as the FCC and the DOJ. Got one response so far stating that THEY DIDN'T EVEN KNOW THEY WERE ADVERTISING ON THE BECK SHOW. Wanna know why? Media conglomerates are selling their reach across their network, rather than individual shows.
Here's an excerpt of my letter, in case you want to copy it:
While I’m certainly against any censorship of free speech, I feel it’s irresponsible for your company to support someone who incites violence against the government and other Americans.
Although Beck may not be legally responsible for the actions of others, it’s reasonable to suspect that his rhetoric has inspired, and continues to inspire, some of his viewers to take violent action against other Americans. And your desire to capture an audience is certainly blinding you to your company’s culpability in the matter.
Following are a sampling of Glenn Beck’s opinions, which your company supports:
“We don't even understand freedom anymore. We are a country that is headed toward socialism, totalitarianism, beyond your wildest imagination.”
(SOBBING) “I’m sorry, I just love my country, and I fear for it.”
“The government and its friends are indoctrinating our children for the control of their minds, your freedom, and our choice and our future, it MUST stop."
“I mean, I think these guys -- these guys, they'll take away guns, they'll take away our sovereignty, they'll take away our, our, our currency, our money!”
“YOU are the protector of liberty. YOU are the guardian of freedom. It’s on YOUR shoulders. It’s not on the military. Damn it, this is YOUR country. And it’s about time we pledged together our LIVES, our fortunes, and our sacred honor.”
Regardless of the ratings he garners, your financial support lends Glenn Beck’s potentially deadly viewpoints a credibility that transforms him from a crazed street preacher into a demagogue. I truly hope you will reconsider your support of this program, and others that promote civil unrest at this point in our history.
WE'VE GOT TO LET THEM KNOW THAT THEIR COMPANY HAS NOTHING TO GAIN FROM SUPPORTING CIVIL UNREST OR WORSE.
Here is a pretty exhaustive list of sponsors that someone posted the other day. There are two messages, this one and one under it.
TAKE ACTION!!
p.s. That is a damned good letter!
just fired off letters to about 80% of the list.
Please, everyone do this. Once they realize that their customers are paying attention, they cannot ignore it. Spend a few minutes and use the links and the wonderful words of bamboozled to send some emails. This stuff is getting way out of hand really fast. People are anxious, angry, and upset about losing their jobs, houses, etc. and they want someone to blame. These wingers are exploiting their plight for political gain and they have crossed the line.
regarding pasting links ....
http://foxnewsboycott.com/
Enjoy folks!
letter. We need to get on this. I am for sure. Thanks for the well-worded excerpts.
I told them I love the show!
... and basic spelling skills, it's easy to see why you'd enjoy the ramblings of a doughy, bug-eyed, dry-drunk, unhinged, histrionic, paranoid maniac.
Idiots of a feather DO flock together ...
Did your parent have any children that lived?
Only a matter of time when Fox etc. gets sued.
I think Limbaugh, Colter, and Hannity are just full of shit and know it but are riding the money train. Beck however sounds insane. Malkin too for that matter.
let me ask you something. Do you listen to any of these people? Or do you just get the little sound bites the shit mainstream media spoon feeds you? Maybe if you took your head out of your rump and cleaned out the crap in your ears and listened to what some of these people have to say, you may even agree to some points. I am not a left wing lib like most here. But I come here to read what is going on. Maybe you should do the same instead of just assuming you are right.
lil Ricky Sanchez let that little weasel school him at the end. Bullshit. More proof that the media is propaganda. Tell me how Sanchez "won".
Not one fucking time did I ever hear Wolf Blitzer or Katie Couric call Bush a fascist or a traitor. Not One. Fuck this. This shit is gonna get a whole lot worse.
Yeah i was wondering about that. The little prig then nodded his head like he scored some big point.
spend more money on guns than on food and clothing. This is scary.
I think that they ARE scared. Not scary. There is a difference
facts to wingnuts are inconvienient things and they try to ignore them as much as possible, we need to constantly hammer them with the truth and continue to make them look like loons. It's a dirty job but it desperatly needs to be done, our silence will only embolden them into greater extreames.
I ignore no facts. If it is fact then so be it. Even if that means I'm wrong. If you only listen to one side how do you know it is truth?
-Listen with both ears, then process that with what is in between those ears and the truth will come to mind.
The only ones who have ever taken away anybody's guns in the history of the world were the Republicans during Katrina.
The funny thing is that these gun freaks are the biggest chicken shits in the world. If they think their dicks are so big why don't they head out to Afghanistan? Why didn't they sign up and go to Iraq? Instead they stay home and count their bullets and listen to Beck And Rash. The chicken shittiest of the chicken shits.
The only ones who have ever taken away anybody's guns in the history of the world were the Republicans during Katrina.
95% right.
You might want to rephrase that part about the world bud
Yeah, that ws a little over the top[. Hehehe. I was hoping that it was so far over the top that it was funny. I have to watch it. The deal is though, the Cheney/Bush-bots are the only ones to take away people's guns as far as I know (in the U.S.)
Bush always said he would sign a new assault weapons ban if congress sent him one. Just another little factoid they conveniently have forgotten.
Guess you flunked history. There was that Hitler guy who took away guns.. LOL
Germany passed laws that did not allow Jews to own guns and made registration of guns mandatory. The Jews had to turn in their guns. However, I am 100% certain that the Obama administration is not going to put people in ovens or lock them up forever.
Get a new talking point, will you? You guys are as original and thoughtful as a four year old reciting his ABC's.
the answer too your question..."why don't they head out to Afghanistan? Why didn't they sign up and go to Iraq?"
The "True" leaders were indeed fighting, but from afar, which is normally the case. It's not just about oil. IMO
Ding, ding, ding....thats right. Amazing how few of these heroes have ever been in the military. Or not Go to a gun show sometime and see them wearing them camies they bought at the surplus store and otherwise tarting themselves up in everything they can find. Very, very, few of these clowns have ever been in the military and would piss themselves at the first sound of a rifle shot.
I'm not a gun freak. I'm a Constitution freak. You know that little piece if paper that was written long ago, we used to follow it to the letter and it did us good for say 200 years. Ever sense we started to stray from it we have gone down the toilet. Also, if this country god forbid is ever invaded you will hide behind the chicken shits because their guns will protect your sorry ass
a militia member with a bowtie AND a lisp before. Who is this guy?
He is waiting for his balls to drop.
I have been reading his screeds for years. He's not all there. Just another nutball who had no problem with Bush wiping his ass with the constitution but think's Obama is the anti-christ.
It's odd that Sanchez kept blaming Fox when even before the election the NRA was passing out cards and posters of how Obama would change the gun laws.
It's odd too that Sanchez kept repeating the increase in background checks without providing a reference. It increased 1.2 million, but what was the number before?
This wasn't a particularly good interview.
BTW, guns and ammo sales truly skyrocketed in October. Even now it is very difficult to find any ammo to buy and it's hard to find assault rifles and popular handguns like Glocks. Shooters have moved from stockpiling ammo to stockpiling bullets, primers, and powder.
Do you hear yourself? "The NRA was PASSING OUT CARDS and POSTERS..." How many people did they reach, 1,500?
Fox News spreads their propaganda to tens of millions of people. It's certainly fair that they are far more responsible for this misinformation, as not only don't they correct it, they continue pushing it.
Login or Register to post comments.