Via Robb.
Just like over at Robyn's and the Brady's, they want to discuss things "reasonably" w/ the new catch phrase "Values Centered Discussion". Sure you do Hubert. That's why you use the phrases:
"The response to the latter shootings has been so pathetically typical.."
Followed by:
"Practically no one has raised any questions about this nation's gun laws or, more accurately, this nation's lack of gun control legislation."
Catch that? Lack of gun control legislation
"a sharp, sober discussion "
as compared to the PSH we usually see from their ilk?
"advocacy of strong gun control laws,"
among the most draconian in the US.
"a sane discussion"
Translation: disagreeing w/ us is insane
values-centered discussion on guns would be one way to pay tribute to Tom Wales.
How? By defining "values" as ban guns?
So another report wrapped in comforting , reasonable sounding phrases with an alleged desire to "talk" while at the same time using loaded terminology and endorsing gun bans. All in the name of the "common good". This smarmy, disingenuous crap really cheeses me off. It's one of the prime reasons there will never be any actual discussion between the two sides. Sarah Brady, Paul Helmke, Hubert Locke et al. keep saying that they want discussion on the issue but phrase it in such a way that any dissension from their opinion is "unreasonable" or "insane". Just like the usual cries of "they won't compromise" really means "they won't give in to our most recent scheme to restrict anything related to firearms.
If I didn't know better, I'ld say the Brady's have a Media Commissar at all these outlets to make sure the proper message gets out. But that would take money and people supporting them.
No comments:
Post a Comment