There are two guys having a “conversation.” One guy wants to take my property by force and leave me defenseless against him and everyone else. The other guy (me) just wants to be left alone.
Somehow the second guy is the bully. Wha?
There is no point whatsoever for gun control advocates to engage in discussion with the NRA or its allies at any level. Trying to have a debate with the NRA on this issue is like talking to a brick wall. Doing so makes one frustrated, angry and is ultimately unsuccessful.
As a media organization we don’t usually discourage direct dialogue and efforts at compromise resolution. In this case, however, ostracizing the bully is the only approach that will work; talk show and news program debates are only likely to continue serving as the wrong playing field.
This is an editorial from a publication called the Jewish Light, which doesn’t seem to put much of a premium on the lessons of history. Sweartagod, if I were a Jew I’d have trouble getting through my front door in the morning…
Come and get me, lessons of history!
Wait’ll they get a load of me.
H/T to Hofmann.
“Sweartagod, if I were a Jew I’d have trouble getting through my front door in the morning…”
Thanks, Joel, for that image. First coffee I’ve blown in quite a while, and I needed it.
Jeez, ima giggle on that one all day long.
‘Discussion’ and ‘debate’? Both terms have been Orwelled to mean ‘shut up and listen to your betters’. I completely agree that discussion and debate are no longer profitable since disagreeing with anything gets you labeled as a ‘right wing gun nut’ or a ‘hater’.
I remember (with no fondness) the years of ‘discussions’ with my daughter. She always thought that if she explained her actions loudly enough, that I would be sure to agree with her. She had trouble distinguishing between ‘understand’ and ‘agree’. While I understand the arguments offered by the left, I am unswayed.