1. Walter H says

    It appears that FOX is now advocating someone attack the president with an assault weapon. It’s the imagery that they’re putting forth. This needs to be shut down, NOW!

  2. Jack M says

    What I woudn’t give to have the Founding Fathers alive today to hear their comments on the Second Amendment and its application in 21st century America. I’m pretty sure they would be in shock.

  3. MikeKV says

    Of course it could be more blatant. They could post pictures of gay teens that took their own lives next to (or in some sort of collage with) the picture of assault weapons.

    Don’t think for a second that they *didn’t* create such a picture anyway…

  4. RK says

    Unfortunately, I guess it is time for gay people to arm themselves as well. As the horrible saying goes, “kill or be killed.” You know what the evangalists want to do to us. Uganda is a great example.

  5. David Hearne says

    RK – It has long been time for gay people to arm themselves. Not because Fox news runs a photo or the Boy Scouts are mean; because people get in cars and drive across town to attack gay people in West Hollywood, the Castro, Lakeland, NYC, Houston, Miami, Chicago, DC, Philadelphia, Rehoboth Beach, and Toronto.

  6. Caliban says

    No, David Hearne, YOU are an idiot!

    Please explain W.T.F a picture of an assault rifle has to do with either the Boy Scouts of America or Obama’s stance on their policy.

    Hint: There is no connection, other than the implicit threat of an armed response. It’s a complete non-sequitor to the article otherwise.

  7. Tom in Long Beach says

    Fox news is so irresponsible ! Many of the founding fathers were fond of a book called “The age of reason”
    I need to get a copy. Might be good reading for the Tea Party!

  8. MikeInQueens says

    Uh, Caliban, take a chill pill and cool down.

    First of all, that photo is a blatant provocation.

    When you use the word “Backlash” in a headlined news piece that purports to describe a general response to the President’s benign position on a topical issue and then use a photo of an assault weapon as an illustrative accompaniment, then what the hell do you think is being implied?

    That photo has every connection to the BSA or Obama’s stance on their anti-gay policies if only because FOX News has chosen to blatantly relate “backlash” to reactive gun violence.

    That you miss the connection is pathetic enough. That you choose to attack someone for pointing out the connection is ridiculous.

    Grow up, son. You need to think it through before you shoot off at the mouth.

    Regardless, RK and David Hearne make very good points in relation to LGBT self-defense. The Second Amendment, for better or for worse, exists. Use it wisely, but use it if necessary.

  9. Caliban says

    No, David Hearne, I’ve re-read your post and my reaction is exactly the same.

    How else is one to take your comment “The sky is falling! You guys are idiots.”?

    “The sky is falling” is a direct reference to the children’s story “Chicken Little,” about over-reacting to something, panicking without cause.

    I’d say that implied gun violence in response to President Obama’s stance (NOT a direct order or anything like that) on gays in the BSA *deserves* a reaction. Not panic, not a hysterical reaction, but a reasoned and responsible response to the offensive juxtaposition of an assault rifle with a story about a “conservative” backlash against gay rights.

    “You guys are idiots” speaks for itself.

    I am MORE than willing to admit when I “shoot off at the mouth” without reason. I have done so before and I fully expect I’ll have to do so in the future, because I try to admit my errors and apologize when necessary.

    In this case I’m not offering an apology because IMO you don’t deserve one. I stand by my first comment.

  10. Jeff York says

    Is the Secret Service going to investigate this as they did Ted Nugent? They should. Faux News would have a tantrum if their integrity were called into question, but that’s what happens when you allow zealots to control your network.

  11. says

    did anyone see the insane folks on Piers Morgan last night?

    personal feelings about Morgan aside, it was a terrifying bit of programming.

    why? because the anti-regulation nuts are completely full of s**t, don’t know what the heck they’re talking about, and refuse to clearly and directly address any actual issues.

    “enforced gun regulation” is being ignored so the Gun-Happy side can say “blah blah blah Mental Illness Blah Blah Blah.”

    really? mental illness…what?

    they’re against thorough background checks, but without them how does one get screened for, uh, “mental illness”? or how about all the gun owners who have *mentally-ill* “family members”?

    and how can one screen for mental illness in a country where medical attention only comes from those with the income to AFFORD it?

    the anti-regulation side proves over and over again that they’re incapable of intellectual honesty, or putting forth anything resembling actual pro-active plans to keep people safe. they merely fall back on meaningless buzz-terms that people spout when they don’t have the brains to actually form a coherent argument.

  12. Rod Roddy lookalike says

    Little Kiwi brings up an important point: a major mouthpiece of the anti-reg PARTY would not even answer a yes or no question from an interviewer on CBS This Morning (Tuesday, 2/5/13), albeit on a different subject matter. After the 2nd time she (Gayle or Norah) asked and Eric Cantor was apparently refusing to answer, I just turned the damn thing “OFF.” It appears to me that they are unwilling to do anything to be “cooperative”/”bi-partisan.” Or, rather, is it that they are incapable? And then they have actually have the “balls” to wonder why they didn’t get their candidate elected to the WH, last November? This all reminds me of a bumper-sticker I saw the other day: “Your Proctologist’s Office called. They found your head.”

Leave A Reply