I’ve often said 1/3rd of leanleft is retarded
The gun-fearing and generally stupid left looks at Zumbo. See, the anti-gunners dismiss outright that one might lose credibility and favor by referring to owners of politically incorrect rifles as terrorists. It’s all about how poor Zumbo is just a victim of extremists and nutjobs. Nothing to do with his choice of words.
Update: In other news, Zumbo made the Washington Post?
And I love the reference to his apology. Or, rather, his non-apology that apparently no one at the WaPo read.
Update 2: The WaPo trots out anti-gunners disguised as gunnies:
“This shows the zealousness of gun owners to the point of actual foolishness,” said Pat Wray, a freelance outdoors writer in Corvallis, Ore., and author of “A Chukar Hunter’s Companion.”
Wray said that what happened to Zumbo is a case study in how the NRA has trained members to attack their perceived enemies without mercy.
Yeah, right. I expect disingenuous hacks to lie about the NRA’s involvement. I don’t expect the media to print it though. The NRA responded several days after this whole thing was done and over. This incident was the result of blogs and message boards (like FR and Arfcom). No NRA prompting or involvement. David is correct that:
So they trot out an apologist for AHSA and present him as the voice of responsible sportsmen. You’d better believe this is an attempt to divide and draw battle lines, and we owe it to ourselves to know who’s on our side and who is a fifth columnist working to serve us up.
And Wray is a shill for the anti-gun American Hunters and Shooters Association.
February 24th, 2007 at 11:35 pm
I was wondering how many people the WaPo had to call to get a quote like that so they could spin the story the way they did.
February 24th, 2007 at 11:57 pm
His more recent “apology” for gun owners is found here: http://www.gazettetimes.com/articles/2007/01/28/sports/venture/1ven01_wray.txt
February 25th, 2007 at 12:10 am
He claims to speak for gun-owners with crap like this:
“We are willing to consider creative new ways to identify weapons that have been used for criminal purposes and wish the National Rifle Association were more cooperative in this effort.”
Blah, what an ass… He setup that sentence stating this just before:
“…we do not support the creation of new laws designed to restrict the 2nd Amendment rights of law-abiding citizens…”
It looks like as long as the liberals are willing to sell any new gun control laws as “designed” to stop crime, he will support it. When it further erodes the right to bear arms, I guess he, and his kind of gun-owners, will be simple surprised of that outcome. (No matter what history has shown happens with EVERY other feel-good law supporting further gun-control.)
Definition of insane. Maybe he can answer just one question: http://blog.joehuffman.org/2004/12/15/Just+One+Question.aspx
February 25th, 2007 at 1:40 am
Still want us to stand down?
February 25th, 2007 at 1:38 pm
Uncle,
Don’t you get it? To KTK and his ilk, the definition of “assault weapon” is “whatever Teddy Kennedy and Sarah Brady say they are.”
No wonder he can’t tell us the “strict” definition.
February 25th, 2007 at 2:31 pm
I don’t know who Mc is, but that was an impressive post he made.
I still have to wonder about the tendency for gun-grabbers to trot out the old “Guns are nothing more than an extension of your very small penis” argument; it seems to me that it needs a name such as when someone Godwin’s a discussion. I think we should get gunnies together and put a name to it. Should we name it the Gun Phallusy?
February 25th, 2007 at 6:35 pm
A fear of weapons is a sign of retarded sexual and emotional maturity.
-Sigmund Freud
February 26th, 2007 at 12:10 am
That would be me!
I’ve been reading Uncle and a few other blogs for a while, but I’ve never left comments. Well KTK’s post struck a nerve, and I decided now was as good as any time to speak up.
I’ve only ventured over to LeanLeft once or twice before this, and I never read any of KTK’s posts. Is he really incapable of stating his position without insulting or slandering someone every other paragraph?
February 26th, 2007 at 10:04 am
Is he really incapable of stating his position without insulting or slandering someone every other paragraph?
Uh, pretty much. It might be Tourettes.
February 26th, 2007 at 11:26 am
MC, you should get with the Gunblogs. It’s a free blog Unc set up for whoever wants to put something out.
February 26th, 2007 at 2:31 pm
It’s because Xumbo’s now an Official Victim – with that high status he becomes an Unimpeachable Moral Authority. That’s the only high-ground they can acquire.
February 26th, 2007 at 2:46 pm
“…we do not support the creation of new laws designed to restrict the 2nd Amendment rights of law-abiding citizens…”
Whatcha bet they view the 2nd Amendment in so narrow a manner as to give individuals almost no rights?
February 26th, 2007 at 3:02 pm
Thanks for the invite!
I think it’s about time I got more involved, be it blogging, writing my congresscritters or dragging more of my friends to the range.
February 26th, 2007 at 3:11 pm
I knew I was housebroken but I didn’t think I had been TRAINED…
February 26th, 2007 at 4:59 pm
[…] Uncle, I read a loosely written diatribe at LeanLeft that pretty much threw the word […]
February 26th, 2007 at 7:17 pm
Wray also wrote:
“And they are appalled by the NRA’s shilling for the Bush Administration’s removal of federal protection of 58.5 million acres of Inventoried Roadless Areas.”
I dunno ’bout you, but I don’t have the moohla to keep a string of pack animals around nor pay someone else that does for hire. When I go hunt, my kills have to be within a couple of miles of the truck or accessible by ATV to get it out. These goddamn “Roadless Areas” have lots of roads, they just don’t exist on an inventory and/or are closed to wheeled access. Very few can afford money or time wise to penetrate very far on foot or hoseback. So, he’s also a shill for the hunting elite too and Joe Sixpack and his weekend hunting on public lands can just piss off.