Category: Crap For Brains

NY Times gets it right: polls showing support for gun control doesn’t mean the votes are there

How many times have you seen a news article talking about how most people support gun control? I know I’ve seen it a ton over the years. The media and politicians latch onto poll numbers as if they’re sacrosanct, telling us this proves the public supports them.

Then the election rolls around and gun control doesn’t seem to make a blip on the radar.

Over at the New York Times, they decided to delve into just why that is.

It’s one of the most puzzling questions for Democrats in American politics: Why is the political system so unresponsive to gun violence? Expanded background checks routinely receive more than 80 percent or 90 percent support in polling. Yet gun control legislation usually gets stymied in Washington and Republicans never seem to pay a political price for their opposition.

There have been countless explanations offered about why political reality seems so at odds with the polling, including the power of the gun lobby; the importance of single-issue voters; and the outsize influence of rural states in the Senate.

But there’s another possibility, one that might be the most sobering of all for gun control supporters: Their problem could also be the voters, not just politicians or special interests.

Oh, blaming the voters, right?

Not really.

You see, the argument being made isn’t that the voters are somehow wrong, but that issue polling is, well, useless.

Continue reading “”

Tools and puppets don’t have plans, and Biden is both.

There is no plan.
The closer attention you pay to Biden, the less he has to say.

President Joe Biden is “rattled,” according to NBC News, and “looking to regain voters’ confidence that he can provide the sure-handed leadership he promised during the campaign.”

How? By trying to change the media narrative. On May 30, Biden published an op-ed in the Wall Street Journal that explained “My Plan for Fighting Inflation.” The next day, Biden wrote a “guest essay” for the New York Times on “What America Will and Will Not Do in Ukraine.”

Bad poll numbers and a collapsing domestic and international situation have excited the typically drowsy president into action. There’s a problem, though. The closer you read Biden’s op-eds, the less he has to say. This new, annoyed, engaged Biden may be a prolific writer and speaker. But he’s not an incisive one. He won’t admit that there is a connection between his ideology and America’s problems. He can’t decide between giving Ukraine the weapons necessary to defeat Russia or settling for a war of attrition.

Biden’s Journal op-ed is a masterclass in passing the buck. He doesn’t bring up his “plan for fighting inflation” until midway through his thousand-word piece. My inner college professor wanted to send the article back to him with suggestions for revision. Number one: Always move your best material to the top!

The plan itself is gauzy and thin. “The Federal Reserve has a primary responsibility to control inflation.” You wouldn’t know that from listening to Progressives, including some of Biden’s nominees to the Federal Reserve, who argue that the Fed’s interest in price stability distracts it from promoting full employment, green energy, and diversity, equity, and inclusion. Now Biden wants the Fed to correct not only its mistakes, but his own. Let’s see if his faith in an independent central bank can stand the test of higher interest rates, higher unemployment, and lower incomes.

Parts two and three of Biden’s inflation plan are the remnants of his Build Back Better agenda: some clean energy and housing subsidies here, a few tax hikes there. He mentions his use of the Strategic Petroleum Reserve to lower gas prices, but not his appeals to Venezuela and OPEC to boost the oil supply. As for the obvious answers to America’s energy problems—a complete reversal of Biden’s hostility to oil and gas exploration and production, huge investments in nuclear power, and emergency efforts to increase refinery capacity—Biden has no words. His devotion to the environmental lobby and to green energy blinds him. If the Progressive Left rejects nuclear power, the “clean energy future” it desires won’t arrive.

This mismatch between ends and means is visible in Biden’s Ukraine policy. The president tells New York Times readers that the United States sends Ukraine weapons “so it can fight on the battlefield and be in the strongest possible position at the negotiating table.” The desired end state is “a democratic, independent, sovereign, and prosperous Ukraine with the means to deter and defend itself against further aggression.” And Ukrainian president Volodymyr Zelensky is in the driver’s seat. “I will not pressure the Ukrainian government—in private or public—to make any territorial concessions.”

All good. Why, then, limit the weapons deliveries to systems with ranges of 40 miles? Why slow-walk and agonize over each tranche of support? Why engage with Russia in farcical and dangerous negotiations over Iran’s nuclear weapons? Why not take a more active role in peace talks between Ukraine and Russia? The Biden policy is static even as the shape of the war changes in ways that favor the aggressor. The president’s goals are laudable. But his tactics are calibrated for a war that Ukraine is winning.

And Ukraine is not winning. At least not now. The Ukrainians defeated Russia’s attempt at regime change. But they have been less successful in removing Russia from eastern Ukraine and from their port cities in the south and southeast. Absent a change in Biden administration policy—in the ranges of weapons systems America provides Ukraine, in the establishment of a humanitarian corridor to relieve the Russian blockade of Ukrainian Black Sea ports, or in a major diplomatic effort—the war will turn into a frozen conflict with no clear resolution and with mounting humanitarian costs. How that situation would help anyone, including Biden, is unclear.

Then again, little Biden says or does makes sense from the vantage point of either policy or politics. He’s right to be rattled. He’s also clueless.

They’ve only cared about the Constitution when its powers were a benefit to what they wanted.

To confiscate guns, Democrats demoncraps are ready to destroy the courts and the Constitution

Most Democrats demoncraps in Congress do not care about institutions or the “commonsense” gun control proposals they profess to support. They want full-scale gun confiscation, and they don’t care how many norms and institutions they need to destroy to accomplish it.

Rep. Mondaire Jones (D-NY) laid out where the Democrap Party stands and why Republicans should not humor any Democratic “deal” on gun control. “If the filibuster obstructs us, we will abolish it,” Jones said. “If the Supreme Court objects, we will expand it, and we will not rest until we’ve taken weapons of war out of circulation in our communities.”

Rep. David Cicilline (D-RI) put it more bluntly: “Spare me the bulls*** about constitutional rights.”

Does Jones or Cicilline know anything about these “weapons of war” they want to ban and confiscate? Of course not. Cicilline said that he couldn’t think of a “single incident” where “an assailant using an assault weapon” was stopped by someone with a gun, even though such an example happened just last week in West Virginia. More prominently, there was Stephen Willeford, the man who confronted a shooter at a church in Sutherland Springs. Grabien’s Tom Elliott has a list of self-defense stories, with 315 examples going back to Jan. 1, 2019.

Jones is embarrassingly uneducated as well. When asked, he said that “semiautomatic weapons would qualify as assault weapons.” He then said that handguns “would not qualify” as assault weapons, even though the vast majority of handguns are semiautomatic. “Semiautomatic” simply means the gun fires one bullet every time the trigger is pulled and that you don’t need to cock or load the gun after every shot. Jones is either lying about not wanting to ban handguns or, more likely, he has absolutely no idea what he’s talking about.

The same is true for President Joe Biden, who wants to ban 9 mm guns because “a 9 mm bullet blows the lung out of the body,” and “there is no rational basis for it in terms of self-protection.” Biden wants you to think that the most popular handgun caliber in the country is like a sci-fi weapon. The White House then walked back the idea that Biden supported a handgun ban. Either the White House is lying now, or Biden, who has been advocating gun control for years, still has not learned a single fact about what guns are or how they work.

Democrats constantly trip over themselves on gun control, repeating blatant falsehoods and calling for gun control policies that contradict their rhetoric. While they claim their policies are commonsense and moderate, their rhetoric indicates that the only way they can get what they want is through gun confiscation, whether they are openly pursuing it or not. As Cicilline and Jones helpfully illustrated, they will destroy the Senate, the Supreme Court, and the Constitution to do so.

‘Killing Weapon’? So he wants what; Nerf Guns with marshmallow bullets? Using any gun is using a ‘killing weapon’. That’s why they’re referred to as a class of ‘deadly weapon’
And, again, it’s not about ‘need’. That comes from communism.
“From each according to his ability, to each according to his need”
— Karl Marx

“It’s a killing weapon, and we don’t need them.” Sisolak blasts assault weapon ownership at rally

****

Sisolak claimed assault style weapons weren’t designed for self defense calling them “weapons of war” not protected under the second amendment.

“The nonsense that it’s a right, well then why isn’t it a right to have a rocket launcher, or to drive a tank instead of a car,” he said……..

In point of fact, you can have a rocket launcher and a fully armed tank, as well as artillery. All it takes is money, and in the case of explosives, proper storage. And yet these mental midgets get elected to high office.

This looks like they want the proposed laws to be so ludicrous they know it will never pass in the Senate. Typical grandstanding.

Pelosi’s gun control package defines a high-capacity magazine as 10 rounds

The gun control package proposed by House Democrats identifies “high-capacity” magazines as holding 10 rounds or more.

The proposed new limit on ammunition clips is part of the six-piece gun-control package that the House Judiciary Committee is marking up Thursday during an emergency meeting……….

He apparently can’t even realize now that he contradicts himself in the same speech.

This is not about taking away anyone’s guns… Here’s what we have to do: ban assault rifles and high capacity magazines. –SloJoe

 

When even the Washington Post calls you a liar…….

As a StunnedTater, SloJoe got away with his meandering windbag storytelling and lies because the caricature of the blowhard politician speechifying on the floor of Congress, who no one really pays attention to, is an accurate one.
He got used to it because there never were any consequences to it; He always got reelected, so why worry?
He’s now too far gone mentally to get out of the rut he dug for himself and also realize that the BS he spouts has a real effect, as people do pay attention to the President of the U.S….. even if he is a senile lying blowhard.

Biden: CEOs told me my plan would save $500 per household in utility costs. WaPo: Lie.

A Four Pinocchio lie, in fact, as Glenn Kessler reports this morning. Joe Biden has a very bad habit of exaggerating and confusing details, but this claim goes well beyond that into sheer fantasy. In his op-ed at the Wall Street Journal on Monday, Biden claimed that utility-company executives told him that his economic plan would save American households an average of $500 a year, starting immediately:

“A dozen CEOs of America’s largest utility companies told me earlier this year that my plan would reduce the average family’s annual utility bills by $500 and accelerate our transition from energy produced by autocrats.”

Not only do those numbers not add up, Kessler concludes, Biden’s flat-out lying about the conversation:

But when we located the transcript of Biden’s conversation with utility executives on Feb. 9, we found no reference to $500 in utility savings. The figure was also not mentioned in the White House readout of the meeting.

Biden’s also lying about the numbers. He pulled the $500 figure from a friendly analysis by the Rhodium Group that was prepared in October. That report predicted $500 annual savings in overall energy costs, not just utilities, and not until 2030. Most of that savings came from eliminating gasoline from family budgets as cars would go completely onto the grid. The actual projected utility savings would be, er …

Indeed, the report notes that, if the Biden climate plan were adopted, home electricity bills by 2030 would be between one dollar more and five dollars less than under current policy. That might pay for an extra ice cream cone over the summer.

This is fanciful for other reasons, too. Moving tens of millions of personal vehicles onto the electrical grid would create a vast spike in demand for electricity. We can’t keep up with current demand now, thanks to increasingly restrictive policies on sources for electrical generation. Several states right now are warning about plans for rolling brownouts and blackouts as a means to ration access to limited electricity, including car-happy California. Prices would go through the roof by 2030, as supply won’t match current demand without expanding the fossil fuels used for electrical generation. Expecting the transition to be cost-free to households ignores the large amount of kilowatt hours it will take to keep vehicles charged, too.

But even apart from that, the economic situation has changed since October. Much of the increase in energy costs for households has come with gasoline, but electricity costs are also rising — both in price and rationed access in a price-controlled environment. Energy costs money regardless of how it originates, and gas-powered vehicles at least allow consumers to operate independent of grid shortages.

Kessler drops four Pinocchios on Biden in his conclusion:

[H]e didn’t hear that from utility executives. And the report he is citing is not about household utility-bill savings. Most of the claimed savings comes from the reduced cost of driving. And the estimate is for 2030 — when he would no longer be president, even if he served a second term.

Is there any doubt the president earns Four Pinocchios?

No doubt at all. Four Pinocchios is the minimum allowance for Biden on a daily basis. And if Biden wants to keep the US from being dependent on “autocrats” for our energy needs, then he needs to work to expand exploration, extraction, and refining in the US, rather than doing the opposite over the last 17 months.

With Inflation at Historic Highs, Biden Stoops to New Low in Blame Game.

Polls show that inflation has become the top issue for Americans, and as it hit historic highs, it’s been absolutely killing approval ratings for Joe Biden and the Democratic Party. In response, Biden has blamed COVID-19, Putin, Republicans, big oil — pretty much anyone whose name he can remember will get blamed for the 40-year-high inflation we’re experiencing.

However, Biden’s blame-everyone-else strategy hit a new low this week; The Washington Post reports that Biden is now blaming White House aides for the nation’s inflation woes.

“Biden has privately grumbled to top White House officials over the administration’s handling of inflation, expressing frustration over the past several months that aides were not doing enough to confront the problem directly,” the Post reported…………….

Lest we forget. Hypocrite SloJoe blames everyone but himself for his goobermint.

Grace 🌾 Profile picture
Here’s a thread of some of the people and things Biden has blamed. 🧵
Trump.
Afghans.
Americans.
Businesses.

Continue reading “”

President Biden’s wayward remarks a cause for concern, clarification

The president of the United States is a blowhard — again.

If the country thought that it was getting a buttoned-up, by-the-books communicator after four wildly undisciplined years of Donald Trump, it knew nothing about Joseph R. Biden’s long career as Washington’s standout long-winded, seat-of-the-pants, poorly informed and misleading talker.

Biden blew up two presidential campaigns with his verbal idiocy, and no one thought during his decades as a senator that he was just the statesman the country needed to handle sensitive international questions with precise, cogent communications.

Winston Churchill famously mobilized the English language and sent it into battle. Joe Biden tries to muster the English language but confuses and dispirits it, until the poor language slinks off ready to get its discharge papers and return to civilian life.

Biden’s handling of Russia and China in recent months has been marked by a basic inability to stay within the lines of U.S. policy — by seeming to give a kind of greenlight to a “minor” Russian incursion into Ukraine, by calling for Vladimir Putin to go, and by committing to defend Taiwan by force.

All these wayward statements required immediate and utterly predictable cleanup by a White House staff that must be on constant alert to explain on a moment’s notice what the president meant after he says something completely different.

Rarely have so few had to clarify so much.

Continue reading “”

Excellent lambs

In the 1960s, campus protesters rejected adult authority, writes William Deresiewicz. Now the “young progressive elite” want the grownups to protect them from emotional and psychological harm, writes William Deresiewicz on Bari Weiss’s Common Sense Substack.

Not much has changed since he wrote Excellent Sheep: The Miseducation of America’s Elite in 2013, he writes.

We are back to in loco parentis, in fact if not in law. College is now regarded as the last stage of childhood, not the first of adulthood. . . . The nature of woke protests, the absence of Covid and other protests, the whole phenomenon of excellent sheephood: all of them speak to the central dilemma of contemporary youth, which is that society has not given them any way to grow up — not financially, not psychologically, not morally.

. . . The attributes of adulthood — responsibility, maturity, self-sacrifice, self-control — are no longer valued, and frequently no longer modeled. So children are stuck: they want to be adults, but they don’t know how.

“Beware of prepackaged rebellions,” he tells the Class of 2022. “That protest march that you’re about to join may be a herd.”

Becoming an independent person isn’t easy, writes Deresiewicz. “Childhood is over. Dare to grow up.”

Stanford University (motto: “Let the winds of freedom blow.”) doesn’t want to let students grow up, writes Bill Evers of the Independent Institute in the Washington Examiner.

The Office of Student Affairs, which had fewer than 50 employees just three decades ago, now employs more than 400 administrators who micromanage students and infantilize adults who pay for an education at Stanford.

Under the ResX plan, students are assigned to a campus “neighborhood” for their undergraduate careers, Evers writes.  They will find ethnic-themed dorms for the “Black Diaspora” and “Chicanx/Latinx” students to apartment buildings promoting “the IDEAL (Inclusion, Diversity, Equity, and Access in a Learning community).”

Students’ social life is regulated: Students must register any party they host, he writes. Get-togethers during “dead weeks” before finals are banned, as is hard liquor and drinking games, even for students 21 and older.

These measures “have drawn widespread condemnation from students, including a student-led health and safety initiative that provides snacks and water at parties and walks students home on the weekends,” Evers writes. “These students say that the rule changes have spurred an increase in binge drinking.”

When you’ve lost NBC……………

I love this part:

Beyond policy, Biden is unhappy about a pattern that has developed inside the West Wing. He makes a clear and succinct [yeah, sure baby] statement — only to have aides rush to explain that he actually meant something else. The so-called clean-up campaign, he has told advisers, undermines him and smothers the authenticity that fueled his rise. Worse, it feeds a Republican talking point that he’s not fully in command.

Well, when you have apparently have senile dementia, making stupid off the cuff remarks that constantly get corrected by your staff the lackeys of your puppet masters, and also sound like a broken record repeating utter crap-for-brains nonsense, it sure does appear that he isn’t in command of anything. 
Just me, but the question arises about SloJoe­™ feeling his staff ‘undermines him’. If he feels that way, why weren’t those people fired the second time it happened? (figuring you’d warn them after the first time to stop it) One obvious answer is that he can’t, because he’s been told who is really running the show, and it ain’t him. He’s nothing more than a figurehead who gets ordered about like an actor.

BLUF
“We’re on a track — a losing track,” Faiz Shakir, a senior adviser to Sen. Bernie Sanders of Vermont, said of the Democrats.

Inside a Biden White House adrift
Amid a rolling series of calamities and sinking approval ratings, the president’s feeling lately is that he just can’t catch a break — and that angst is rippling through his party.

WASHINGTON — Faced with a worsening political predicament, President Joe Biden is pressing aides for a more compelling message and a sharper strategy while bristling at how they’ve tried to stifle the plain-speaking persona that has long been one of his most potent assets.

Biden is rattled by his sinking approval ratings and is looking to regain voters’ confidence that he can provide the sure-handed leadership he promised during the campaign, people close to the president say. 

Crises have piled up in ways that have at times made the Biden White House look flat-footed: record inflation, high gas prices, a rise in Covid case numbers — and now a Texas school massacre that is one more horrific reminder that he has been unable to get Congress to pass legislation to curb gun violence. Democratic leaders are at a loss about how he can revive his prospects by November, when midterm elections may cost his party control of Congress. 

“I don’t know what’s required here,” said Rep. James Clyburn, D-S.C., whose endorsement in the 2020 Democratic primaries helped rescue Biden’s struggling candidacy. “But I do know the poll numbers have been stuck where they are for far too long.”

Continue reading “”

A better term might be ‘willful ignorance‘. And the willfully ignorant take pride in their ignorance. They wear it like a medal. They don’t want to know anything about those icky guns. And in the case of politicians, they’re equal parts stupid and deceitful.

Certain Americans reveal their Second Amendment illiteracy

Biden capitalizes on every opportunity to broadcast how severely uninformed he is — but this Memorial Day, he settled on airing his ignorance via the gun debate, saying a 9mm bullet will blow a “lung out of the body.”  Those of us who have seen a 9mm round know how emphatically wrong he is.

Yet, despite the gross magnitude of his blunder, it’s not the worst I’ve heard.  As it turns out, many Americans are completely uneducated on every facet of the gun debate, and they share one common denominator — they’re all Democrats.  Let’s take a look back at some of the top contenders for the Democrats’ stupidest moments regarding the right to bear arms.

Patricia Eddington, a former state legislator for the state of New York, once said:

Some of these bullets, as you saw, have an incendiary device on the tip of it, which is a heat-seeking device. So, you don’t shoot deer with a bullet that size. If you do, you could cook it at the same time [emphasis added].

What does Eddington think?  You could shoot a deer and then walk over with a knife and fork, ready to feast?  Despite actually making this claim, Eddington said this prior to the introduction of a gun control package, including a bill she sponsored.

Next up, Mr. Thomas Binger, the prosecuting attorney in the Rittenhouse case.  Although Binger’s registered political affiliation is unknown, FEC contribution data lists donations to ActBlue.  Mr. Binger’s first blunder was picking up a rifle, immediately putting his finger in the trigger well, and aiming it at a room full of people.

Binger’s second mistake was speculating that hollow point rounds “explode” upon impact.  Again, for the educated among us, the appropriate word would be “expand,” as this type of bullet doesn’t detonate into fragments — it’s not a grenade.

Now we have Dianne Feinstein, federal senator from California, who declared:

We have federal regulations and state laws that prohibit hunting ducks with more than three rounds. And yet it’s legal to hunt humans with 15-round, 30-round, even 150-round magazines.

What?  Hunting humans is not legal.  The only legal way to kill humans is via abortion, which she unequivocally supports.

And lastly, we have Donzella James, a state senator out of the great state of Georgia, who stated, “Yes, I believe in the Second Amendment.  But why are we spreading the access to guns to everyone?”

Although we didn’t need a reminder, it is worth pointing out that somehow, being a Democrat politician apparently makes one incapable of understanding firearms, or the idea of a God-given right that is not to be infringed — and brings us a few laughs.

House Dems’ gun package to raise age limit for semi-automatic rifle purchases, ban ‘high capacity’ magazines

The House Judiciary Committee is set to hold an emergency meeting Thursday to pen an extensive gun control package.

Democrats are currently pushing a series of eight bills aimed at suppressing gun ownership, referred to collectively as the “Protecting Our Kids Act,” Fox News confirmed.

The bills contain proposals raising the minimum age for purchasing a semi-automatic weapon from 18 to 21, a ban on “high capacity magazines,” a registry for bump stocks, and more.

The House will vote on some form of the package when they return to session next week.

The House package is expected to go nowhere in the Senate and is seen as more of a show vote, as a bipartisan group of senators tries to agree on a bill that could pass the Senate.

Continue reading “”

48 shot, 9 dead in Chicago over the weekend but John Legend says it might be racist to talk about it

Biden hosts a photo op in Uvalde, but not before he disinvites Border Patrol agents who responded to the massacre.

Apparently, for Joe Biden, only certain murdered children are worth memorializing — ones who fit his political agenda.  Although it’s been over a year and a half since little eight-year-old Jackson Sparks was mowed down at a Christmas parade, Biden has yet to pay his respects to the community of Waukesha, because the killer didn’t use a gun.  However, Salvador Ramos did, so Biden’s handlers sprang into action for a press opportunity, but not before revoking invitations from heroes:

Biden administration officials uninvited many of the Border Patrol agents and other law enforcement officers who responded to the Robb Elementary School shooting from a meeting with the president scheduled for Sunday in Uvalde. Despite the event being planned for a large open-space facility, administration officials cited space as a reason for the retracted invitations.

His presence, unsurprisingly, was met with sincere disgust.

Other members of the public, upset about the fallout of lawless open-border policies in their border town, held signs directing Biden toward the scene of the chaos.

Given his very public history, Biden’s sleazy reputation is well earned and well known.  From relegating Black Americans to a position of Democrat footstool with his “well then you ain’t Black” comment to caressing and sniffing nearly every young child in his presence to simply fathering Hunter Biden, Joe Biden’s behavior is unbecoming of an American, a man, and particularly a president.  His gaffes are endless, and his entire political career is summed up by these defining characteristics: “incipient dementia, inability to lead, and sheer heartlessness.”  Biden has fully given in to the tenets and beliefs of the modern Democrat-Marxist party, which stands opposed to law and order and the very Americans who uphold constitutional limits and God-given rights of the individual — so his move to exclude the very men responsible for taking down the Robb Elementary child-killer ought to be predictable.

Just when you thought Biden couldn’t sink any lower into the pit of classlessness, he did — and I imagine he will be shoring up his indecency for as long as we have the misfortune of his “leadership.”

SloJoe™ confirms again that he has senile dementia
He’s gone off on 9mm before, as well as revolutionary cannon which means what’s left of his brain is like a record that is skipping.

Biden claims a ‘9mm bullet blows the lung of out of the body’

President Joe Biden urged Congress to work toward a bipartisan solution on gun violence on Monday, one day after visiting the Texas town where a gunman took the lives of 19 elementary school children and their two teachers last week.

‘I think things have gotten so bad that everybody is getting more rational about it – at least that’s my hope and prayer,’ the president told reporters outside of the White House.

Biden recounted been shown x-rays of what a firearm could do to the human body.

‘The .22 caliber bullet will lodge in the lungs and we can get it out. A 9mm bullet blows the lung out of the body,’ he said. ‘The idea of a high caliber weapon, there is no rationale for it in terms of self-protection, hunting.’

A 9mm bullet is typically known as the ammo used in handguns – the most common type to conceal carry. It’s not clear if Biden misspoke to mean a higher-caliber weapon such as the ones used in the recent mass shootings in Buffalo and Uvalde. …………

 

Classic gaslighting

Morning Joe: It’s ‘Paranoid’ To Say Gov. Coming For Guns, But Praises Beto Who Said Just That!

Can Joe Scarborough and the Morning Joe crew really be this clueless? On Thursday’s show, Scarborough and Willie Geist repeatedly claimed that it was “paranoid” for people to think that the government could be coming for their guns. But there’s just one problem: in that same segment, Scarborough praised Beto O’Rourke, who said just that, for the political stunt he pulled yesterday, in which he interrupted Texas Gov. Greg Abbott during his press conference on the Uvalde school shooting.

Beto O’Rourke, Joe. Surely you remember that in a Democratic presidential debate in 2019 during his failed, short-lived run, O’Rourke said:

“Hell yes! We’re going to take your AR-15, your AK-47.”

 

 

As you’ll see in the linked clip, that line drew huge cheers from the Democrat crowd in attendance.

Yes, O’Rourke subsequently backed away from that statement when it became politically untenable. But does anyone doubt that if he and his fellow Democrats could, they would take guns away from law-abiding Americans?

Responding to a person on the stage with Abbott who called O’Rourke a “sick son of a bitch” for his stunt, Scarborough claimed that the real sick sons of bitches were Abbott and others who won’t pass more gun-control legislation. For good measure, Scarborough twice called Abbott and those with him “freaks.”

So, is Joe Scarborough suffering from short-term memory loss? Or was he consciously covering up that Beto O’Rourke, the object of his praise, had boasted that “hell yes,” he would be taking guns away from lawful owners? Remind us again, Joe: who’s the SOB and the freak?

BIDEN SHOOTING BLANKS (AGAIN)

[Wednesday] at the White House executive-order signing ceremony commemorating the death of George Floyd, President Biden unleased a false bromide that he has often repeated (transcript here):

I spent my career, as chairman of the Judiciary Committee and as Vice President, working for commonsense gun reforms — as I said, as a senator and a Vice President.

While they clearly will not prevent every tragedy, we know certain ones will have significant impact and have no negative impact on the Second Amendment. The Second Amendment is not absolute. When it was passed, you couldn’t own a — you couldn’t own a cannon, you couldn’t own certain kinds of weapons. It’s just — there’s always been limitations.

Jonathan Turley notes several previous occasions on which Biden has shot off this falsehood “that many of us have corrected in the past,” as he did here last month on April 12. Today he reiterates his research:

Once again, there were no federal laws barring cannon ownership when the Second Amendment was enacted. Gun laws remained local matters and I do not know of any bans on cannons or other gun types until much later in our history. Early local laws did control concealed weapons, though concealed cannons were not part of those ordinances.

Indeed, the Constitution itself supports private cannon ownership in the case of privateers. Article 1, Section 8, Clause 11 allows Congress to “grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal.” That allowed private parties to privateer on the high seas with . . . cannons.

Its almost funny. As Ed Driscoll put it  on a previous Biden misfire this past February: “The gaslighting will continue until morale improves.”