Here's why he consistently does it:
I am a liberal...Right.
You can't enable the enemy and be a friend. And denying the nature of that enemy is either a calculated act of deception or proof of useful idiocy.
Anybody think anything less than lives and freedom are at stake?
4 comments:
I stand with you. Simple.
"Liberal' is just another name for communist no matter how often they deny it. All socialists, including fascists and communists, want to use force "for our own good" which requires controlling firearms and weapons access.
This is why I refer to them as the "Gun Confiscation Lobby" and not gun grabbers of gun controllers.
I posted this reply to Mr. Cawthon in Guns magazine:
While I understand your concern regarding vituperative name calling, many gun control advocates do meet the definition of collectivist or socialist. I am not sure how many are communists, but (and I'm sorry I do not know the source of this quote), "A socialist is merely a communist who has not found their Kalashnikov yet." It is never abusive to call a thing by its true name.
Mr. Cawthon, you seem to believe that the anti-gun organizations are reasonable, and it is possible to sit down and reason with them, like that "conversation" they are always suggesting. As a former resident of New York as well as Massachusetts, let me assure you that you can give them anything they ask for, and the next legislative session they will be back with new demands. Also, the leaders of these organizations know that their proposals will have no positive effect on public safety, and may worsen it. It's only their followers and "useful idiot" clergymen who actually believe gun and magazine bans, "universal" background checks, etc. will be beneficial. At the top levels the goal is to abolish the private ownership of firearms. Several times, in unguarded moments, leaders like Shannon Watts have let this goal slip out.
That other National Rifle Association, in the United Kingdom, decided to be "reasonable." Now legal firearms ownership in Britain is hanging by a thread. Meanwhile criminals in Britain are finding ways to obtain firearms. As they are facing a cowed and passive populace they seldom have to shoot.
Being polite with people who despise you and want to crush your freedom avails you nothing, nor does being "reasonable" when they are defining what "reasonable" means. Go ahead and fight by Marquess of Queensberry rules and watch your freedoms evaporate.
In reply to Bill Cawthon:
Nice try but you’re an admitted “liberal”, i.e. a twinkletoed communist.
See www.usconcealedcarry.com/katie-couric-brainwashed-ignorant-liar-stupid/#comment-2715528098
Plenty of gun grabbers have used NRA membership to cover their gun grabbing including GmbH W Bush, who imposed the FIRST “assault weapon” ban, the import ban.
You can’t be a “cheap labor” dhimmigration ” RINO let alone a “liberal” and still honestly claim to support gun-rights, since your immigration polices are handing permanent hegemony to the gun-grabbing Dhimmicrats.
And YOU don’t support gun rights at all since you’re admittedly just a prag. Therefore as soon as someone comes up with a compelling prag argument for how gun control can “WORK”, you will betray us.
Post a Comment