The Lady Doth Protest Too Much, Methinks

Anti-gun male Bernd Debusmann has been wronged, and it's all my fault.

It seems in Friday's post, I accused him of writing "a fluff piece comparing tyrant Hugo Chavez to a rock star."

Bernd shot me an email with this link under the subject heading "Fluff Pieces for Chavez?" Unable to hold his water and wait for a response, he also posted it in a comment.

Read, Bernd, read.

I didn't say "fluff pieceS," I said "fluff piece." It was a perfectly accurate statement for an article where your words called this thug "the political equivalent of a rock star." If you wrote another article critical of him, bully for you. But I still note you make an effort to include words of praise even there for this collectivist strongman--a courtesy you have not extended to American gun owners in your hit piece on us (you truly couldn't find any positive examples of gun use to balance out any of that "massacre" meme?). Apparently even your enablers at Reuters found the piece to be enough of an embarrassment to want to put some distance between their reputations and yours.

Your outrage is amusing, Bernd. You present "facts," conveniently neglecting to mention who paid for them. You present sources, conveniently neglecting to mention they are bought and paid for by the same anti-gun benefactors. And you present this all as reliable information.

But the one thing you glom on is I didn't research everything you've ever written about Hugo Chavez? Sensitive, aren't we? Well, sorry, Bernd. When I catch a "man" lying to me, I have a tendency to lose interest in anything else he might have to say.

Tell you what, though, I'm a pretty fair guy--just ask anybody. You'll find plenty of examples on this site of people disagreeing with me, and that's fine. If you still have a beef, feel free to post a comment. I'm sure more than a couple regulars around here wouldn't mind hearing your side of things, and maybe even having a word with you themselves.

UPDATE: Armed and Safe gives us a summary of gun blogs deeply concerned with ensuring Bernd's reputation isn't unfairly sullied, making sure it only reflects what he's done to it himself.

Indignant Brock Lickspittle Stamps Feet, Lies, Demands Action on .50 Caliber Rifles

Assume the position.

Kurt's latest JPFO Alert brings us the latest comedy gold from Media Doesn't Matter. [More]

And their opinions should be so important to us. Especially to me.

After all, these are Eric Holder's fluffers, headed by a "viciously mean" paranoid and elitist anti-gun "gun criminal" employer who is notoriously abusive to those who work under him.

Which indicates anti-gun male Timothy Johnson gets some sort of sick fulfillment from the dominant/submissive relationship.

Thank you sir, may I have another?

I recommend reading Kurt's piece, sharing the link, and doing what you can to support JPFO. After pointing and laughing at Media Matters hissy-fitters.

Kathryn Johnston's Gun to Blame for Her Death

A handgun is not some useful tool that offers its owner safety and piece of mind. If it were, a gun-toting old lady in Atlanta would have survived Thanksgiving... Had she been without her precious gun, she’d no doubt be alive today.

One lying Constable shills for other lying constables.

Actually, I'm surprised it took the "it's her gun's fault" thesis this long to ooze to the surface.

What a disgusting and contemptible excuse for a man. No wonder he runs behind the skir...uh...slacks of a woman who is hostile to men--particularly the gun-owning kind, to bolster his snotty self-loathing.

He's obviously trolling for angry emails, presumably so he can show his editor how important he is--and he's counting on most of them being expressed in ways that "sophisticates" can feel superior to. If you're inclined to write but don't want to play his game, allow me to make a suggestion: Just send him the link to "The Anti-Gun Male" (http://www.gunowners.org/wv36.htm) with no other comment.

[Via HZ]

Speaking of Fantasies...

Combat Vets Destroy the NRA’s Heroic Gunslinger Fantasy [More]

That presupposes such fantasies exist outside the sick minds of juveniles and anti-gun "progressives"-- but I repeat myself. It also presumes to have destroyed something other than the credibility of National Socialist Review with anyone capable of independent thought. Right off the bat, anti-gun male Joshua Holland reveals he's only interested in disparaging better men who don't share in his contemptible self-imposed helplessness.

These bastards would rather that every survivor of a DGU had been killed than armed. Those people know from experience that fantasies and illusions of heroism had nothing to do with anything.

My first thoughts on reading what the "military experts" think the qualifiers ought to be were that we had better disarm most LEOs-- after all, how many times a year -- if that -- are most of them required to requalify, what does that consist of, what percentage do they have to score, and how many do-over attempts do they get?

My next thought was there was a time when one of our greatest military heroes was a guy named Arnold. How would you characterize someone who swore an oath and then betrays what the Founders knew to be necessary to the security of a free State?

Look for the antis to increasingly trot out these partisan operatives, and for the meme to spread like wildfire -- they're absolutely desperate and furious, and the Fourth Estate Fifth Column media has been looking for fresh material to "editorialize" and "report" on.

The He-Man Woman-Hater's Club

I was going to highlight the Grandmas and Guns story, but the sentiment by "Mac David" (click "Comments") is more interesting to me:

Gee, I live in big city and everyone I know doesn't feel the need or are scared enough to have a gun ready to level the playing field. Maybe as mothers, you should raise your children to respect others peacefully instead of acting like every disagreement needs to be addressed with a weapon. Fear is getting the best of you.

Yep, because Mac, evidently, has never been sodomized (against his will), and it's the female victims' fault for not showing proper peaceful respect. That's what your "progressive" feminist "sisters" claim, right? (Because it kind of sounds like the creepy justification a violent abuser would use, right up there with "She just wouldn't listen!")

Besides, nothing bad ever happens in "big cities," right?

Aside from the fact that Mac is obviously a self-righteous moron and blowhard, who would be absolutely useless to himself and others if a bona fide predator pegged him as prey to be hurt, I found his attitude telling in light of previous comments under other articles you can access by clicking on his name:

2 Men Charged In 1984 Rape Of Greeley Woman

Scumbag women haters. Mommy and daddy must be real proud of you two. I hope the boys in prison give you what you deserve.

Hey, she just didn't give them proper respect over that disagreement.  Good thing she didn't let fear get the better of her and have a gun, right Mac? And degenerate violence by sociopaths is something you approve of, but defensive force by women is not?

Tom Fallis Found Not Guilty In Murder Trial

If his next two wives end up dead, maybe a different conclusion will be found. Until then, I would stay far away from this dude.

Hey, nothing a little respect couldn't have cured.  The important thing is, Big City Mac doesn't know anyone who feels the need, or is scared enough, to have a gun ready to level the playing field (he intuitively gets that women are generally at a huge physical disadvantage and refuses to admit the obvious).

Typical Opposite day "progressive," throwing out "scumbag women hater" comments, but who would rather see women dead than armed. Typical projecting anti-gun male, afraid of tools his betters have mastered, and thus needing to accuse them of living in fear for being more capable than he is.

But Mac ain't done being respectful. Case in point, his "progressive" response to "Religious and city leaders ... building bridges with the Muslim community":

When you factor in all the possible reasons that people use to rationalize their fear, ignorance, and hatred of others unlike themselves, I am surprised that civilization made it to this point. The worst offenders are people who are conservative, religious or white.

I guess it's not just women Mac hates...

[Via cydl]

Speaking of Boston...

Ryan Horsley sent me two links where The Boston Globe is stumping for "Maximim Mike" Sullivan that are instructive.

"Held Up by Gun Lobby Radicals" and "Gunning for a Fight" tell us much about the mindset that evidently prefers police state secrecy over a right their city's founders deemed worthy of going to war to protect.

Rather than tell their readers why it is informed gun owners fear a Sullivan confirmation will officially sanction current abuses, the editor drops things immediately into name-calling, off-handedly dismisses concerns as "groundless" without addressing what they are, and even drags the NRA--the major "gun lobby" group that has conspicuously not called for ousting Sullivan into their tirade.

The second hit piece is a classic leftist, worthy perhaps of comments at Democratic Underground or The Huffington Post, but still somehow surprising (and I know it shouldn't be) to see in a "mainstream" paper (but I guess it's indicative of how far the profession has degenerated).

"Anti-gun male" Kevin Cullen makes his sophisticated, worldly and urbane contempt clear for "cow chip kickin' senator[s]" and the constituents they represent. It gets worse from there, as he drops all pretence of legitimate argument and goes right into attack dive/character assasination mode, while masking the real issues with generalized manipulation.

That's basically all the other side's got: Lies, omissions and name-calling. Along with the basest of betrayers to propagate them--"Authorized Journalists," the supposed watchdogs of government, who instead and bizarrely, have become its biggest apologists.

Lies, Damned Lies and Joyce Foundation Statistics

“When asked directly whether ‘gun control laws should be stricter, making it harder for people to purchase firearms’ as a result of the 9/11 terrorist attacks, 76.5 percent backed this idea and only 16 percent endorsed less strict gun controls,” said Smith. The findings are in “Public Attitudes Toward the Regulation of Firearms,” a study funded by Chicago’s Joyce Foundation as part of the 2006 GSS survey.

The Joyce Foundation said it, I believe it, that settles it.

Ri-ight.

This truly needs a John Lott type to give it the debunking it deserves, but I will say it's evident the survey group didn't have a clue as to what they profess beliefs in, which always allows for the results one wishes to produce. It's also clear what they thought they knew was merely regurguitated sound bites from mainstream propaganda conditioning.

I know it's wrong to judge books by their covers, but I can't help but look at Tom W. Smith and wonder what the hell good he'd be if someone decided to commit savage violence in front of him.

What I see is another advocate of disarming you and me who doesn't have the guts to try it himself, another "anti-gun male."

Another "Judas goat."

[Via Vinnie]

Clayton Cramer Interview

As announced earlier, historian, software engineer and Second Amendment activist Clayton Cramer is running for Idaho State Senate (District 22).

The author of numerous books and publications, Mr. Cramer played an instrumental role in proving that "Arming America" by Michael Bellesiles was based on fraudulent research, resulting in revocation of the Bancroft Prize and Bellesiles' resignation from Emory University. Cramer's work has been cited in RKBA-related legal cases, such as Emerson, and he recently devoted his knowledge and research skills to the current Heller case,partnering with attorneys David T. Hardy and Hamline University's Joseph E. Olson on the brief filed by Academics for the Second Amendment.

WarOnGuns caught up with Cramer to discuss his political campaign. Here's what we discussed:

DC: So--why in the world are you subjecting yourself to this? Has representation for people with conservative and libertarian leanings really been so poor in the 22nd district?

CC: Senator Corder, while in some respects somewhat conservative, has made some votes and introduced some bills that just make me scratch my head in amazement. The one that caused me to run against him was his sponsorship of S.1323, which proposed adding "sexual orientation and gender identity" to Idaho's employment discrimination law. I often describe myself as a conservative with libertarian leanings. Here was a bill that managed to offend both sensibilities at once. What consenting adults do in private should be none of the government's business--and it doesn't matter if it is employment or sodomy.

I've developed a grudging tolerance of anti discrimination laws based on race and sex because for decades, both federal and state governments either directly discriminated, or required private businesses to do so. Read Plessy v. Ferguson (1896), the case that made "separate but equal" the law of the land. It was a Louisiana law requiring railroads to discriminate against blacks--and "the refusal or neglect of the officers, directors, conductors, and employees of railway companies to comply with the act" would leave them personally liable. I can give you many other examples of such laws requiring racial discrimination against Asians. Similarly, West Coast Hotel Co. v. Parrish (1937) involved a Washington State law that set working conditions for women specifically to drive them out of the workforce.

With this history, I can grudgingly accept the argument that anti discrimination laws served a useful purpose for destroying discriminatory presumptions. I get a bit less comfortable with adding "sexual orientation and gender identity" to the list--especially with this week's freak show event, the "pregnant man" in California.

Senator Corder also voted against making English the official language of state business (which should be a no brainer), and against adding a protection of the right to hunt and fish to the state constitution. Right now, these are not in danger--but if enough anti hunting sorts move here, that could be a problem. Best to get those protections in place now.

DC: Why you? What does Clayton Cramer bring to the job that makes you the most qualified candidate?

CC: There's only one other candidate in the Republican primary! Part of why I moved to Idaho is that it is a very conservative place--a good place to raise kids, and a good place for gun owners. I want to keep it that way. I'm afraid that Senator Corder is in danger of Californicating this state.

DC: You say your opponent is rated C by NRA. That's pretty poor for an Idaho Republican. Why such a poor grade?

CC: When I received the NRA ratings in 2006, he was listed as a C. When I spoke to someone at NRA-ILA recently, they indicated that he was a D in 2004, a C in 2006--and seems to be improving. I wasn't able to get a detailed description of what gave him such a bad grade in previous years.

DC: If you're elected, give some examples of "gun rights"-related legislation you would be a leader on, including new measures you would propose or existing laws you would fight to modify or repeal altogether.

CC: One of the issues that a lot of states are grappling with right now is parking lot bans. Most large companies (including my employer), have bans on firearms at work. I can understand their reasoning, at least in the buildings. You can't just walk in the front door where I work. There are significant security barriers that would significantly prevent a spree shooter from entering the building, so there's really not much reason for anyone to need to be armed in the building. But the parking lot creates a different set of problems. There are people who have significant drives to and from neighborhoods where having a gun available is perhaps a good idea. I see no good reason for any employer to prohibit a person with a license to carry from having a gun in their car in the parking lot, and I see some good reasons why some employees might want that gun there.

At the same time, I am reluctant to have the state government passing laws that get unnecessarily in the middle of the employer/employee relationship, or interfere with private property. I think the strategy that might make the most sense is to see what can be done about creating a carrot and stick approach with respect to liability: statutorily exempt employers from any civil liability for injuries caused by a licensed employee having a gun secured in a car in the parking lot (which is effectively zero risk); create an obligation that an employer has for injuries that a licensed employee suffers because they were unable to protect themselves on their way to or from work.

The employer can still have their parking lot rules if they wish, but the consequences of exposing employees to unneeded danger now fall on who put the employee at risk: the employer.

DC: What's it cost to do something like this? What's your plan to raise that much money?

CC: Unlike California, surprisingly little. The filing fee was $30. I've raised more than a thousand dollars so far, almost all through the website http://www.cramerforsenate.org/index.shtml, and it is quite common for members of the state senate to spend $7000-$10,000 in an entire election cycle. Remember that there are about 1.5 million Idahoans, and 35 members of the state senate. In the 2006 general election, about 10,000 people in my district voted for members of the U.S. House of Representatives. It's government on a small scale.

DC: Give us the timeline you're facing. When's the first contest? What do you need to do between now and then?

CC: The primary is May 27. I had something of a late start, since I made the decision to run the day before the deadline. (I was off in D.C. for the Heller case.) I'm still getting organized on this--putting together campaign flyers, organizing speaking events, filling out interest group questionnaires, and meeting with lobbyists. But at least they buy lunch!

The good news is that because the district is so overwhelmingly Republican, if I win the primary, winning the general election should be fairly easy. I won't say it is a walk in the park--the Democrat will work hard to defeat a political novice, and I expect that the many enemies that I have made over the years will pour money into the Democrat's campaign.

DC: Tell us about your rival--how much tenure does he have, how much of a machine? What are you doing to establish an organization with a realistic chance of competing? And as a follow-up, what benchmark milestones do you need to set up to make sure you're on track with campaign goals?

CC: Senator Corder was first elected in 2004. From conversations with a number of different Republican activists, it appears that Senator Corder has managed to upset much of what might be called the Republican machine. Some of the upset is personalities; I'm told that Corder used the phrase "knuckle-dragger" to refer to certain other Republican legislators, and this has not helped him. The sexual orientation bill has also produced a mixture of head scratching and irritation as well.

Benchmark milestones? Uh oh. I have lots of experience with lots of things, but this is not one of them! I have fourspeaking engagements set up so far; I've just started sending out press releases to newspapers (none of whom I expect will be supportive of my effort). The campaign website is up and accepting contributions. I'm just sending out my first mailing--one targeted to the surprising number of Federal Firearms Licensees in my district.

DC: A lot of Republican politicians run from the gun issue. Sure, they give platitudes, but that's mostly when cornered, and there's always that sense they're somehow uneasy talking about it--particularly not wanting to scare off the well-heeled and the contributions they represent. I've always felt that a true leader would take it on himself to initiate discussion and use the privilege of a public platform to educate and inform the electorate--you know, bringing light to darkness, replacing ignorance and fear with reason. What are your plans along these lines?

CC: This is probably one of the more gun-friendly districts in Idaho--maybe America? District 22 consists of Boise County (which doesn't include the CITY of Boise) and Elmore County. The biggest city in the entire district is Mountain Home Air Force Base. Mountain Home had 11,143 people at the 2000 census. Glenns Ferry has about 1600 people. Idaho City, Horseshoe Bend, Garden Valley--none of them are that large.

People hunt here. Getting my house built was greatly delayed by the start of elk season. I live just outside of Horseshoe Bend--which has a mandatory gun ownership law. Ponderosa Sports, a combination gift shop and gun store north of town has this rather unique vehicle in the parking lot. Yes, that's a Barrett Light .50 in the bed.

I don't think that I am going to be so much defending or explaining gun ownership to my district, as defending or explaining gun ownership to the more urban members of the Idaho legislature--if I get elected! And the worst Idaho legislators about gun control are generally not all that bad!

DC: Tell me about the demographics in your district--party affiliation, age, race, income, education...what importance does the "gun rights" issue play? Will there be much resistance in your district from those who consider guns a liability?

CC: Based on the 2006 general election results, it appears to be about 64% Republican voters. The population is overwhelmingly white, fairly normal distribution on age--although Elmore County, where the Air Force Base is located, is heavily male: 123 men for every 100 women. Household incomes are low: $35,000 per year in Elmore County, just under $39,000 in Boise County. My involvement in gun rights activism won't be a liability here--but an asset.

DC: Where do you stand with the party? Are they going to resist someone going after their guy? Have you been meeting people and reaching out for allies?

CC: I am under strict orders not to say who asked me to run--let's just say that lots of people of considerable importance among Idaho Republicans personally asked me to run. So far, I am finding that not only do Republican activists around the state want me to unseat Corder, but so do ordinary citizens. One of the people here in town that I deal with on a regular basis knew that I had signed up, and I was pleased to find out that he knew about Corder's sexual orientation bill--and found it incomprehensible why he sponsored it.

DC: How about media contacts? We know you have plenty of interest within the RKBA Internet community, but are you making contacts and building bridges with established local media?

CC: There are two newspapers in the district; the Idaho World, which is a weekly--and the oldest continuously operating newspaper in Idaho (est. 1863), and the Mountain Home News. I have good relations with the reporters for the Idaho World, although I rather suspect that they are going to back Corder. The Idaho Statesman is the major newspaper in this state, based out of the capital city of Boise. While outside our district, we are close enough to cover. They have occasionally published opinion pieces by me--one about mental illness and mass murder just a few days before I filed to run. I'll be curious to see how they cover the race. Like most newspapers, they tend to lean liberal on social issues.

DC: So how do people help out? How do they join your campaign? How do they contribute?

CC: There's a contributions page on http://www.cramerforsenate.org. And if you live in the district, or you have friends or relatives in the district, it's amazing how little encouragement it takes to persuade people to vote for one person they don't know over another person that they don't know! I'm trying to get voters in the district to invite neighbors and friends over for coffee with the candidate, so that I can explain why I think I'm a better match for the voters than Corder.

DC: Anything else you'd like to say to WarOnGuns visitors before we open things up for their questions?

CC: Yes. I know that gun rights activists tend to be split between social conservatives and libertarians. I'm definitely a social conservative--although not quite as doctrinaire as some. For example, I think that those who want to dramatically restrict abortion need to spend a lot more time persuading their opponents before passing more laws. There is a strong case that criminal laws should reflect not just 51%, but a very overwhelming consensus. Trying to enforce laws when 30% of the population strongly disagrees produces enormous struggle--and accomplishes very little good.

----------

Thank you, Clayton Cramer. I appreciate your taking the time to provide these thoughtful responses.

Now comes the time when I promised I'd turn the questioning over to you, my site visitors. Before I do, I'd like to set the ground rules to keep everything on track.

First a caveat: Clayton and I do not agree on everything or on every approach, and that should not surprise anyone who knows me. We have disagreed in the past and will certainly do so in the future. And I don't adhere to all of his campaign issue positions. That's fine. It happens. That said, I have always held him in the highest regard as a person of formidable intelligence, accomplishment and integrity. So in short--if you disagree with something, please keep things respectful. I insist.

Second: Please look at the questions I have asked and the questions posed by others before you post so we are not covering the same ground twice.

Third: Please limit your questions and give everyone a chance--I'd really prefer not to have the same person taking over the thread with question after question or challenge after challenge. You can state your position, he can state his, and then let's please move on.

And of course, off-topic posts, spam and obscenities will be deleted without comment.

Finally, and this is important: Please ask him concise questions. We're here to hear him out, not post essays or engage other question posters in debate. Look at my questions as a general guide to requested length.

I'll be the final arbiter. If, based on my sole judgment I think it appropriate, I'll just hit "delete" and you can take it up with me by email [dcodreaAThotmailDOTcom].

Sorry if this seems rule-heavy, but I've learned I need to do this from past interviews to keep things running smoothly. If we keep things on track and just observe a few simple courtesies, we all ought to learn from this and have a good time.

One last note--I disabled CAPTCHA word verification on comment posts for the duration of this interview.

Ladies and gentlemen, the floor is open for questions.

QUESTIONING IS NOW CLOSED.

Mr. Cramer has left the building.

Thank you all for participating--I hope all found it worthwhile.

If you would like to know more about the Clayton Cramer for Senate District 22 campaign, or find out what you can do to support his candidacy, go to his website at http://www.cramerforsenate.org/index.shtml

Feel free to post a link to this interview and copy it entirely to forums and websites where you think it will help.

Mixed-Up Messages

An equal-opportunity offender, Clancy was a gun-collector and NRA supporter...[More]

Oh how cute. An "anti-gun male."

Ewwww, Benjamin Ivry--if you're gonna wear one of these things, you could at least keep it from popping out when you get worked up...

Bagel brain.

The Real Problem...

...is that Streicher Award candidates like Paul Waldman are Fourth Estate Fifth Columnists, not "journalists." [More]

"Borders on anti-democratic"?

Is that what you think rights are?

You want specific justifiable examples?

Wasn't Randy Weaver awarded $3.1 million?

Would you fight uniformed animals trying to stick a broom handle up your @$$, Paul, or is that something you pay extra for?

If Karina Obrycka and blown a hole through that feral swine Anthony Abbate's snout, would you have voted to convict her?

I could keep this up all day.

You want a broader example?  Ever hear of the Battle of Athens?

You want to press people for questions about when it's time to shoot the bastards, Paul, here's one: What level of tyrannical abuses and atrocities, where doors for peaceable recourse have been blocked and bolted shut, will you just roll over for? Is there anything that would induce you to pick up a weapon and resist?

If so, what is it?

If not, may your chains set lightly. Or let 'em weigh heavy, for all I care. It's not like you or your silly anti-gun male opinions are actually relevant to freedom.

Leave Your Gun at Home

Don't worry. Barry Saunders will protect you. [More]

An anti-gun male.  How...contemptible.

Gluttons for Punishment

Mainstream politicians aren’t asking to repeal the Second Amendment, they’re asking for common sense gun laws—like banning the kind of assault-style semiautomatic weapons and attachments that allowed the Las Vegas shooter to fire more than 1,100 rounds in less than 11 minutes. Or they’re asking to close loopholes in background checks in order to prevent domestic abusers from purchasing weapons. [More]

And then they're admitting it's a slippery slope with no bottom in sight.

I watched that episode, and it had pros and cons. The loudmouthed slob in the NRA hat turned out to be a stolen valor coward, so there was that bit of intentional stereotyping. By the same token, having an otherwise "progressive" woman defend concealed carry was an unusual touch, albeit that she had a permit in NYC reinforced that the show is fantasy fiction. I also liked how the anti-gun male politician relied on armed men for protection and ended up begging for his life, crawling and then running away, helpless and useless to himself and all others instead of being able to defend himself.

As an aside, modern television and movie violence certainly is unnecessarily graphic, to the point of pornographic. And the trend is to more gory spectacles to enthrall a bloodthirsty audience that will seemingly never have enough. Kind'a like the decadence of Rome...

Undisciplined parents who don't monitor what their children are exposed to are allowing them to blaze a trail into uncharted territory.

Snot in Cleveland

Christopher Evans is as good an indicator of how the old paradigm of public/private partnership between government and its lickspittle lapdogs just isn't working anymore, especially now that they're no longer such an exclusive opinion and information regulator valve... [Read]

An anti-gun male. How precious. Here, Chris--this popped out. Pick it up, wash it off, and ewww...just get it out of here.

Tighten up or something next time, especially when you look at the sustained circulation drop a snotty regressive editorial model combined with new media alternatives guarantees.

But never fear--if people in the area want newsworthy gun-related developments, there's a one-man home-based operation in nearby Hudson giving regular and breaking updates to a real story the regressive agenda-driven"Authorized Journalist" professionals at the PD barely acknowledge.

Along with a parallel independent effort in Pinson, AL, covering in depth what Birmingham dinosaur media refuses to.

[Via Joe M]

Another Anti-Gun Male

Mundy claims Stein — the campaign chairman for then-DA Rice’s 2010 bid for state attorney general — favored kinky role-playing that included him dressing like a “sissy maid” and calling himself “Jessica” while kneeling at Mundy’s feet. [More]

What, the same Kathleen Rice who demands universal registration and  gun bans?

Ain't it something, how "progressive" animal wannabe butt plug degenerates who won't control themselves are so obsessed with controlling those who are ... normal?

Some of us refuse to kneel at the feet those who would dominate.

Charles P. Pierce Wets Himself Having Authoritarian Hissy Fit

Oh, look, a police-state worshiping anti-gun male! And he's mad! Gosh, how formidable, unique and clever he is! [More]

After all, he writes for Esquire, where the "audience is well educated, urbane, and affluent – intellectually curious and confident modern men."

It's just they're scared of guns.

Cliff Schecter, Anti-Gun Male

The Alinsky Rule 5 is strong in this one. [More]

Backing the billionaire and scorching the grassroots -- there's a Prozi egalitarian for ya!

Hah! He's the head of a group called Libertas.

What is it we see proven time and time again about "progressives" and Opposite Day?

The Daily Beast.  Hmmm...

Q&A

Stand Your Ground laws reverse a centuries-old legal tenet...[More]

Oh, go bleat somewhere else, you...you anti-gun male. And if you're going to wear one of these things, stop popping it out in front of people and playing with it.

Natural law's a bit older than that, and fight or flight is a reaction best left to the one being threatened according to his or her mindset and level of preparedness, rather than some effete regressive getting the vapors over the fact that some of us realize bolting like a rabbit activates the chase instinct in predators on the hunt.

"Stand your ground" really only raises one question, which would weigh heavily in the mind of potential aggressors in a sane society, one that promoted the right and the means of individual self-defense:

Do I feel lucky?

Suits Them to a T

Anti-gun male Harmon Leon is feeling Alinsky Rule 5 clever! Snark-Snark! [More]

Oh, Harmony, you're such a Gundupe:

That's a word I wouldn't mind seeing entered into that "national conversation on guns" the brainless hive insects keep buzzing about.

The Anti-Gun Male

SORKIN: YOU KNOW ME. I'M SCARED OF GUNS IN ALL CONTEXT. [More]

No, I don't know you -- but Julia does.

There, there, Andrew. Did the scary men make you cry?

Rich Tosches, Anti-Gun Male

You know -- one of these.

Herschel provides a specific analysis.