Once Again Truth Doesn’t Matter to Media Matters for America
This week liberal watchdog Media Matters for America wasted time and space to defend Rachel Maddow for attacking the NRA. The blog post notes:
“On Friday’s edition of her MSNBC program Rachel Maddow highlighted a variety of right-wing extremist activities on gun related issues, including National Rifle Association (NRA) executive vice-president Wayne LaPierre’s increasingly infamous suggestion that because President Obama hasn’t pursued gun control he must be secretly plotting to ‘erase the Second Amendment.’ Maddow also highlighted Fox News mainstreaming right-wing blogger Mike Vanderboegh, who gained notoriety last year for advocating throwing bricks through the windows of Democratic offices in response to the health care reform bill.”
Why was this post even necessary? It just repeats the sentiments that Media Matters had made, and yet Maddow is as guilty. She never mentions that President Obama had told Sarah Brady he was working on gun control, but “under the radar.”
This also never notes the M1 rifles that were blocked from importation a year ago. It doesn’t mention that the EPA had taken proposals to ban lead ammunition. It doesn’t mention that the White House had a summit on what it called “reasonable gun control.”
This is just more Obama loving cronyism that tries to defect the truth from the issues.
MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow Hits the NRA Convention
On Friday night, Rachel Maddow was spotted by FirearmsTruth.com on a flight from Pittsburgh to Washington, D.C. The MSNBC talk show host took Meghan McCain up on her invitation and attended the show.
We asked her what she thought of the show, and she said that “she enjoyed it,” and when asked whether it was worth skipping the Royal Wedding coverage, Maddow responded (in full sarcasm), “I sooooooo wanted to see the wedding coverage, but this was better.”
We think we have to agree, but after all wasn’t it guns that made sure it wasn’t OUR Royals who got hitched?
Will Rachel Maddow Attend NRA Convention?
Earlier this week liberal talk show host Rachel Maddow of MSNBC said she would accept Meghan McCain’s invitation to the NRA convention, reports the Huffington Post.
We know that Maddow had said she enjoys shooting – but has previously compared it to a rollercoaster, and that being something you do but don’t own. Of course this just means that she doesn’t understand why people would want to own a gun, practice with their gun and improve because they use the same gun.
We’ll be curious to see if Maddow does indeed show up.
Rachel Maddow Brings Expert Who Doesn’t Know Guns
Don’t you love it when liberal talking heads get all worked up about firearms with so-called experts, who then just randomly start making up terms, which just proves that they’re not really all that experienced in the topic. Case in point, on the Rachel Maddow Show, Frank Shaeffer, author of Crazy for God: How I Grew Up as One of the Elect, Helped Found the Religious Right, and Lived to Take All (Or Almost All) Of It Back and a Huffington Post blogger offered this insight:
“I don’t take kindly to looking at a bunch of old white guys about my age with pot bellies grabbing 50-millimeter machine guns and putting them on pickup trucks .”
Maybe this was an off the cuff slip up, but he never corrected himself. There is a big difference between a .50 caliber machinegun and a 50mm gun. Big difference!
Video is available from our friends at Newsbusters.org.
Rachel Maddow: Guns Shouldn’t be Brought Home
Thank you to our friends at NewsBusters.org for catching a piece we missed. Earlier this week MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow was on Late Night With Jimmy Fallon, and discussed on how a first date she went shooting. She adds that she regularly used to take the staff of her radio program to a New York City pistol range. So far so good… but then she makes this statement:
“I like making liberals shoot guns – I just don’t think we should be allowed to bring them home.”
Well, I for one agree. I don’t like bringing liberals home either. They tend to argue with me, and bring up stupid points. But Ms. Maddow actually meant guns shouldn’t be brought home. That’s a great example of a stupid point to bring up. Why bother learning to shoot, or rather I should say attempt to learn to shoot if you can’t bring the gun home. Now I’m not saying you’re going to shoot at home, but learning to shoot is beyond pulling the trigger. Any good shooter knows how to strip and clean a firearm, and any good shooter knows you need to take care of your firearm. Think of it this way Rachel, seriously bowlers don’t use the lane’s balls. Serious golfers don’t use the course’s rental clubs. So why should shooters be forced to use the range’s rifles or pistols?
And there is a case to be made for the fact that you could store your firearms at the range. That’s great, unless you have an event to go to, or want to shoot elsewhere. In other words you set up an impossible scenario for serious targeting shooting. Worse Rachel, you make it impossible for hunters and collectors. As a collector I really don’t like the idea of my guns having to be stored somewhere. If I want to go see a collection of firearms I’ll go to a museum.
