In light of the recent terrorist attack on Americans in their homeland, and the NY Times front-page editorial about a so-called "Gun Epidemic" --- Americans must do something to END >>> The Knee-jerk Liberal Epidemic In Response Guns and Gun Rights in America and the simultaneous attempts to completely disarm us in the face of rising threats foreign and domestic
It's about time to consider BANNING all speech, writing or mass transmission of anything that seeks to limit the Second Amendment in any way - Shutting down the New York Times would be a good way to start
It is a moral outrage and national disgrace that Liberals can legally speak-out against the lawful purchase of firearms protected by the U.S. Constitution. This is especially true now, when Americans face an onslaught of radical Muslim Jihadis within their borders, in their communities --- and just this week, being present to kill Christians and Jews at their year end holiday observances.
All REAL AMERICANS feel sorrow and righteous fury about the latest attack on our freedoms first by terrorists -- and now by the Liberal Establishment's main organ of propaganda the New York Times.
Across the country REAL AMERICANS are searching for a proportional and effective response, including addressing the vital question of whether the Times and other liberal outlets might need to be SILENCED in their hateful jihad against Americans' bedrock and essential right to bear arms.
Given these times and the outrage perpetrated by the terrorist and the New York Times, that is only right and proper.
What better time than during a presidential election to show, at long last, that our nation has regained a righteous sense of itself? An outraged citizenry needs to rise up -- and -- SHUT DOWN THE NEW YORK TIMES -- to silence its hateful and un-American rantings once and for all.
3 comments:
UPDATE: THE "OBVIOUSLY, THE WASHINGTON POST SAW THAT I MEANT BUSINESS" EDITION
WAPO CRITICIZES NY TIMES FRONT PAGE EDITORIAL CALLING FOR CONFISCATION OF CERTAIN GUNS AS MOST-LIKELY COUNTER-PRODUCTIVE
ANOTHER LIBERAL MEDIA OUTLET IS QUITE WORRIED ABOUT A BACKLASH OF THE SORT THAT I ENGAGED IN ABOVE
According to one of the columnists for the Washington Post, "Once a century or so, the New York Times feels so strongly about an issue that it releases an editorial from the confines of the opinion page and lets it run free on the front page. On Saturday, the Times's view on "The Gun Epidemic" is on the loose -- on A1, above the fold...." (See "The folly of the New York Times pleading for gun control on Page 1" by Callum Borchers, 12/5/15, Washington Post/ The Fix [https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2015/12/05/the-new-york-times-pushes-for-gun-control-on-the-front-page-but-does-that-even-help-the-cause/]).
And here's what the WaPo guy had to say about that Times editorial: ".... [T]he New York Times is the New York Times. Swing voters in Middle America aren't its subscribers, and the swing voters in Congress don't have to appeal to voters who care much about what the New York Times thinks. In fact, you could make a pretty convincing case that this would have the opposite of the intended effect by overreaching on something most Americans simply don't think will do much to prevent mass shootings.... [T]he New York Times is the New York Times. Swing voters in Middle America aren't its subscribers, and the swing voters in Congress don't have to appeal to voters who care much about what the New York Times thinks. In fact, you could make a pretty convincing case that this would have the opposite of the intended effect by overreaching on something most Americans simply don't think will do much to prevent mass shootings.... Republicans have relentlessly accused the "mainstream media" (of which the Times is a flagship member) of advancing a liberal agenda. What they often fail to recognize -- or deliberately ignore -- is the separation of news and opinion. They'll read a column, blog or editorial that is critical of their policies and then angrily tell supporters that they can't get a fair shake in straight news reports. Most of the time, their complaints are unfounded or greatly exaggerated.... I this case, however, the Times has (at least temporarily) knocked down a wall by placing an editorial in a spot normally reserved for news. That... does give those candidates new cause for suspicion -- a cause they will almost certainly exploit on the campaign trail."
Yes, Republican presidential candidates and Galewyn Massey and his followers --- the left wing media is worried now.
UPDATE: THE "DIFFERING VIEWS ON THE FIRST AMENDMENT" EDITION
YESTERDAY I MADE MY "MODEST PROPOSAL" ABOUT LIBERALS, LIBERAL KNEE-JERK ANTI-GUN SPEECH AND THE SHUTTING DOWN OF THE NEW YORK TIMES [See my post and comment above]
RECENTLY, U.S.A.G. LORETTA LYNCH HAD ALSO DONE HER OWN DANCE OWN THE FIRST AMENDMENT TO THE U.S. CONSTITUTION --- AND FORMER GOVERNOR OF NYS GEORGE PATAKI RESPONDED STRONGLY
On Friday night, United States Attorney General Lynch spoke at a dinner held by the Muslim Advocates, a national legal advocacy group. That was on the night following the massacre of 14 Americans in San Bernardino by Islamic radical terrorists Syed Farook and his wife, Tashfeen Malik.
She assured the pro-Muslim group that “we stand with you”; and she said she would use her Justice Department to protect Muslims from “violence” and discrimination and here's the kicker >>> she promised to PROSECUTE anyone wh engaged in what she described as "violence-inspiring speech."
Lynch stated that -- “When we talk about the First Amendment we [have to] make it clear that actions predicated on violent talk are not American. They are not who we are, they are not what we do, and they will be prosecuted.”
FORMER GOVERNOR PATAKI'S RESPONSE
Former New York State Governor George Pataki, also a Republican candidate for president in 2016, responded with a Tweet calling for the DEATH of Islamic radicals as follows: "We must declare war on radical Islam. @LorettaLynch I'm not edging toward violent speech, I'm declaring we kill them. Go ahead, arrest me."
Arrest Pataki?
I thought he died in the 90's
Post a Comment