Corrente

If you have "no place to go," come here!

Don't Take Your Guns To Town

The Mayberry Lane's picture

Now, as a good ol’-fashioned Southern girl, I always try to give credit where credit is due…and I’ve always been fair about givin’ credit to the Right for their amazing ability to make people vote against their own best interests. Despite all the Right’s talent, I was still amazed that they managed to motivate (translate: terrify) people into protesting an issue that doesn’t even exist. Now that’s somethin’!

Today, hundreds of pro-gun folks swarmed Washington to protest the non-existent Obama plot to repeal the Second Amendment. Un-Fuckin’-Believable!

So if the President’s repeated denials weren’t clear enough, I just gotta’ wonder: Did any of these douches stop for a second (and I DON’T mean the Amendment!) to consider the fact that he is a Constitutional scholar? Oh, that’s right… I forgot… he’s a Socialist, Commie, secret Muslim operative that only spent all those years knee deep in all that Constitution-y stuff to fool us all into electing him! What on Earth was I thinkin’?

The true-blue Americans that are actually afraid aren’t the ones that piss me off. Rather, it’s those who have made it perfectly clear that the only way you’re gettin’ their pistols is to pry them from their cold, dead hands. The real evil bastards comprise the so-called liberal media that refuses to practice actual journalism and mention that no one wants to take these folks’ fuckin’ guns. Unfortunately, if you scare the shit out of people (especially with lies and hyperbole), sometimes they buy it – and become afraid.

I guess for once, just once, I wish those corporate pricks would tell the American public the truth. But hey, on that note, I suppose I’ll have to follow one of my own favorite pieces of advice: wish in one hand, shit in the other, and see which one fills up first.

0
No votes yet

Comments

Submitted by Anne on

Did any of these douches stop for a second...to consider the fact that he is a Constitutional scholar?

Obama is not a constitutional scholar by any stretch of the imagination; yes, he taught a course in Con Law, but that did not, and does not, make him a Constitutional scholar. It seems he likes to bask in that myth, but please - if Obama is a Constitutional scholar then I must be rich and thin - and 20 years younger. Oh, and George Clooney is my boyfriend.

As for being knee-deep in the Constitution - oh, dear Lord - are you kidding me? Or, is that "are you fuckin' kiddin' me?"

Is it the Right that's responsible or the liberal media (that you even think there IS a liberal media has me shaking my head in wonder)? Because you've blamed them both. I didn't see any coverage of this so-called protest, but then, I don't waste my time and energy anymore watching the Brians and Katies and whoevers of the media reading 15-second bits off the teleprompter and calling it "news." As useless as the media can be, I rather doubt it is the so-called liberal media that has whipped these people into a frenzy of fear over losing their right to bear arms - are you sure it isn't Fox News and the Rush Limbaughs and Glenn Becks of the media who are doing that?

Come on.

And what the hell is the difference between the "true blue Americans" and the ones who don't want to give up their guns? You think anyone who doesn't want to give up a gun ISN'T a "true blue American?" Really? I know some pretty fine Americans who own guns - they hunt and target shoot - and they're about as American as anyone. They're not stupid, they still have all their teeth, most have college educations and none of them live in double-wides sitting on cinder blocks. But, I guess not being knee-deep in Constitutional lawyering like our elite president means they're still the kind of people who make your nose wrinkle, eh?

And I don't know what it is with this Southern thing you have to drag into every post, but it's wearing on my nerves.

The Mayberry Lane's picture
Submitted by The Mayberry Lane on

a scholar is simply someone who attends school or studies under a teacher. Thus, by defintion, Obama is definately a scholar... whether or not either of us agree with his interpretation of the Constitution does not change the definition.

In your assumption that I'm anti-gun or anti-"liberal-media' you neglected to notice the words "so-called"- the point was made in irony. All we hear from the Right is that any news outlet that doesn't support their propaganda is "liberal", but you didn't see any of those networks educating people on Obama's true position on the Second Amendment.

Additionally, you then assumed my description of gun owners as true-blue WAS irony. Wrong. I personally don't think there are "fake" Americans. I then never described them as "stupid", "having no teeth", "uneducated", or "double-wide residents"... so all of that is simply putting words into my mouth.

I take no issue with anyone who disagrees with me on any issue, but in your reply you have simply criticized your own assumptions.

And on the Southern thing... I am Southern...I'm not "dragging it in", it's who I am, and you'd be hard pressed to drag it out of me.

Submitted by Anne on

You said:

a scholar is simply someone who attends school or studies under a teacher. Thus, by defintion, Obama is definately a scholar... whether or not either of us agree with his interpretation of the Constitution does not change the definition.

“Simply?” Every online dictionary I have consulted has as its number one definition some variataion of the following:

1. a learned or erudite person, esp. one who has profound knowledge of a particular subject.

With the second being:

2. a student; pupil.

So, let’s be honest, shall we? You did not describe Obama as a Constitutional scholar as another way of saying he’s a student, you described him that way to say he’s the expert and knows more than the “douches” who showed up to protest. You dragged out another great Obama myth to claim that he spent “years knee deep in all that Constitution-y stuff” – when he did nothing of the kind; the only thing Obama has spent years knee-deep in is his own ambition.

Calling BS on your description of Obama had nothing to do with whether I agree or not with his interpretation of the Constitution (really? The entire thing? Is there a book or a treatise he wrote about his views? “The Lost Writings Of Barack Obama” perhaps?); it was about your using a myth to prop up a screed that apparently you don’t even know at whom it was directed.

You said:

In your assumption that I'm anti-gun or anti-"liberal-media' you neglected to notice the words "so-called"- the point was made in irony. All we hear from the Right is that any news outlet that doesn't support their propaganda is "liberal", but you didn't see any of those networks educating people on Obama's true position on the Second Amendment.

What? I made no assumptions about your views on guns; your post had nothing to do with guns and everything to do with Obama and the people who are too stupid to know what his views are. Are you anti-gun? As for your views on the media, didn’t you call them out for failing to do their job? Isn’t that “anti?” You never mentioned which media outlets are perpetuating the lies, but if it was from “the Right” then I’m guessing it wasn’t any outlet that the Right defines as liberal, so I not only cannot find the irony, I can’t find any coherent reasoning in either your origninal post or your response to my commentt.

What does this mean?

The true-blue Americans that are actually afraid aren’t the ones that piss me off. Rather, it’s those who have made it perfectly clear that the only way you’re gettin’ their pistols is to pry them from their cold, dead hands.

And how does this:

Additionally, you then assumed my description of gun owners as true-blue WAS irony. Wrong. I personally don't think there are "fake" Americans. I then never described them as "stupid", "having no teeth", "uneducated", or "double-wide residents"... so all of that is simply putting words into my mouth.

explain it? If you don’t think there are degrees of “American,” what was the point to be made by using “true-blue" in the first place? You were the one who juxtaposed this group against the “cold dead hands” crowd: why? Does membership in the NRA distinguish a gun owner in some special and negative way that isn’t there for non-members? If so, you didn’t explain it, you just threw it out there, lined it up against the “true-blue” crowd you apparently don’t really think of that way, and left it up to the reader to figure out what the hell your meaning was.

No, you never described the protesters using the terms I did; you just labeled them as “douches,” held them up for ridicule against the great and wonderful Constitutional scholar, and derided them for expressing that the only way their guns would be taken away from them was out of their “cold, dead hands.”

Let me be clear on something: people across the entire political spectrum have only themselves to blame for believing the crap that the media spew on a daily basis; it’s not just “the right” that is operating from ignorance of the truth and the facts and the whole story. I’m not big on guns, not big on threats of violence or the hyperbole on either side of the aisle; I’d like people to stop relying on the media for “news,” but that’s not happening anytime soon, is it?

Do the tea-partiers get on my nerves? Yes, because much of what they say makes no sense, and because Obama is going to use their anti-deficit message to foist yet more "reform" and "hard decisions" on those who can least afford it. Does it make sense to me that people would gather to protest something that no one has suggested? No, it doesn't - and they're being used, too.

Know who else is being used? People on the Obama side of the spectrum - people who continue to swallow whole the propaganda that comes out of the OFB and the access blogs, people who don't bother to get the facts on what Obama says and does and are willing to contort themselves into pretzels to defend it.

And on the Southern thing... I am Southern...I'm not "dragging it in", it's who I am, and you'd be hard pressed to drag it out of me.

But what does that have to do with giving "credit where credit is due?" Is that some special province of Southerners? I don’t see what is has to do with anything, frankly.

Here’s my problem: I expect more from posts than what I got from this one and others that you have written, and I don’t think I will be reading them in the future.

tarheel-leftist85's picture
Submitted by tarheel-leftist85 on

O never once published a scholarly article on his own--including one dealing with Constitutional law, so he's more like a dilettante which meshes well with the whole credentialized "creative class" status inflation.

Second, on the Second Amendment, and now i'm probably in speculative territory, Obama has no problem with mercenary thugz having weapons and all he merely wants is to perpetuate a culture war between the creative class and the pious cowboiz. Remember, the neoliberals depend upon cultural conflict (the "educated" v. non-educated, generational flame wars, woman-bashing, etc.) to achieve their desired policy outcomes, at least as long as we have this charade democracy.

Third, in regards to the notion of media bias, there is no such thing as a leftist mass media. All mass media demonstrates a neoliberal or neoconservative bias. But both have one aim: to restore/maintain/enhance the power of the economic elite.

Fourth, i am so fucking tired of the tea party obsession. They are merely a repository for one of the legacy parties, just as the coffee mov3m3nt is for the other legacy party. And with these legacy party-reinforcing repositories, the rachet effect can proceed unscathed. Of course, bashing tea partiers and Sarah Palin is all about deriving some sort of inflated status. And as a Southerner myself, i think it is Southern OFBs that derive the greatest status inflation. After all, there is sort of a niche market for all those "open-minded" Southerners who are better than their trailer-trash counterparts--the un-"educated," unwashed white working class that voted for Edwards/HRC in the primaries, or for McCain in the general, or (very likely) didn't vote at all--all because they are supposedly racist. The Southern OFBs love to look at everything through the prism of race rather than class because otherwise there will be an unstoppable, broad realization of the neoliberal takeover happening right now under both legacy parties and their allied interest groups/mov3m3nts.

P.S.: i have to say Corrente is obviously more open than "Open" "Left" in that we've allowed the Kendrick Meek spam and the Rachel Maddow tea party talking points. When the tables are turned over at OL (e.g., single-payer censorship), they ban us!

"It's all about rents and rent-seeking."

Shane-O's picture
Submitted by Shane-O on

Now it just makes me sad, grumpy.

Was once a place for all kind of views - now, even the most modest variance from the Corrente thinking is mercilessly attacked.

I'll leave the grumpy behind - but will remain sad about it.

Keep up your fight for the Corrente-defined "real" Left!!!

The Bill of Rights is a born rebel. It reeks with sedition. In every clause it shakes its fist in the face of constituted authority. . . . it is the one guaranty of human freedom to the American people. - Frank Irving Cobb

vastleft's picture
Submitted by vastleft on

Policy and honesty over tribe. Regrettable, I know.

sisterkenney's picture
Submitted by sisterkenney on

and generally have found that the conversation was about ideas and the ability to buttress statements with facts/quotes/historical truth. The give and take here is very well leavened with Lambert's generally easy-going, open, yet rigorously defined requirement of exchanges of clear communication (and this very frequently is helped along by the piercing analyses Lambert provides). I was abruptly, rudely and heavy-handedly banned from FDL for simply stating some simple facts/opinions in a totally nonthreatening way. I've found this site to be the most far-ranging, open, educating place for a proud Liberal to be. Yes, there is an eager, energetic exchange, but that is only to be commended, compared to many other so-called "Liberal, Progressive, Left" sites. One cannot judge the site by random blog entries, one has to see the whole number of exchanges and the interplay. I also don't care for certain entries, but, again, it goes to Corrente's favor that there is allowed a whole panoply of postings, and thus allows the reader to be exposed to other modes of thought/opinions that one would never see in the so-called "progressive blogs"

"Rule number one: pay attention"-Ded Bob

vastleft's picture
Submitted by vastleft on

Is that when the "progressive" conventional wisdom deviates from the facts, Corrente posters and commenters generally opt for the facts.

Prog heroes like George Lakoff pronounced Obama "deeply progressive," and Correntians didn't buy it. They were, of course right, but inappropriately right, since it harshed their betters' mellow.

When Hillary Clinton was wilded with vicious and uncalled-for attacks -- many founded in sexism, ageism, classism, and just plain bullshit -- Correntians called it out. They failed to heed the call that said facts and basic human decency be damned in order to elect The One. Shameful!

When the drumbeat for "public option" (ill-defined, undefined, hideously defined) fully drowned out, in "progressive" circles, the promised open and transparent consideration of all options for healthcare reform, Corrente called "bullshit" there, too.

The more the party line diverges from facts, common sense, empathy, actual liberal values and such, the more heinous Corrente becomes, because its culture doesn't honor reassuring tribal bullshit. It's a pretty awful site, when you think about it.

sisterkenney's picture
Submitted by sisterkenney on

historical truths vs. the "truthiness" of the so-called "a-list bloggers" who have without exception sold out either clandestinely (or FINALLY openly-due to some digging) to the siren song of "access" or "employment" or "importance" or better yet the ability to somehow "understand the machinations of government" that we simple people couldn't possibly get. (See FDL, especially Hamsher and Rosenbaum). This site is a haven and a pointer towards a diversity of thought..thanks to the many web citations I've been exposed to here I've had my head expanded. Perhaps it's a result or "feature" as Lambert would say, of the size, scope, and wide-ranging curiousity here. i once said to my SO "how could you not like a place that shows cute kitty pix along with MMT and a Kashmir video"? Gotta luv it.

"Rule number one: pay attention"-Ded Bob

Submitted by lambert on

Corrente is the blog that everybody hates and nobody reads!

First they ignore you, then they ridicule you, then they fight you, then you win. -- Mahatma Gandhi

sisterkenney's picture
Submitted by sisterkenney on

Sustainabilty Teach-in, and the ever-expanding awareness of this movement that was ACTUALIZED HERE. Take your bows, lambert, for your exposure and the work done here that has reached even "huffpost" (OMG). Good work/things are happening here.

"Rule number one: pay attention"-Ded Bob

Submitted by lambert on

We simply provided the vehicle ;-)

First they ignore you, then they ridicule you, then they fight you, then you win. -- Mahatma Gandhi