Occasional Reader 6/29/2022 6:24:27 AM

1

Good morning.  Reposting this from the Frontier last night, because, why not:

So I subjected myself to a little NPR today [yesterday]while driving.  They had a panel discussion about the provisions of the latest Gun! Safety!!! Bill, that purportedly close the "boyfriend loophole".  See, apparently, previously under Federal law (or so they said), a spouse convicted of domestic abuse could be stripped of the ability to buy a gun, for a certain number of years; but a boyfriend/domestic partner, not married, could not be.  (Never mind that people convicted of felonies, generally, face restricted 2A rights.)    

The panel - who were, of course, all anti-gun "Progressives" (because we can't have diversity of opinion, can we... "this is NPR")  started out by agreeing (natch) that this was just "common sense", and who could be against it?  Well, apart from those big bullies of the NRA and GOP (same thing amirite?!), who, for years, have claimed that a measure like this would just be a first step to "take our guns away".  Which is ridiculous and silly!

And then, in the ensuing minutes, right there, live, on radio, the slippery slope (that they were so pooh-poohing) began to magically unfold before the listeners' very ears.  Because the panelists started griping that this provision doesn't go far enough.   Why does it have to be a "boyfriend", from an long-lasting relationship?  So many "relationships" now are very short... just a week... even just a day!  And yet women are still victimized by oppressive men, even then!  And why does it have to be a current or recent relationship?!  Women are victimized by evil, evil men from relationships that are years past.  And why does the offense have to have been one of physical violence?!  Demeaning words, and the like, can be just as harmful - nay, more harmful!  And why should the subsequent stripping of 2A rights be time-limited?!  Shouldn't the bar be for, like, the rest of the creep's life?!

And so, in the space of just a couple of minutes, the panel went from "it's common sense that a man who beats up his girlfriend should be barred from buying a gun for five years" to "a man who had one date with a woman, years ago, during which he (allegedly, according to her) said mean things to her, should lose a constitutional right for the rest of his life." 

And this is why we cannot give them even one... frickking... inch.  

Addendum:  Noticeably absent from the piece was any of that "gender inclusive language" that the NPR-ites usually employ so ostentatiously.  Nope, this piece was all about men abusing women... period.  

buzzsawmonkey 6/29/2022 7:42:27 AM

2

Reply to Occasional Reader in 1:

Reminds one of the old Leftist adage, "The issue is never the issue; the issue is the Revolution." 

I'm reminded, yet again, of the Dade County gay-rights ordinance hoo-ha which occurred during my last year of law school.  At the time, I could not understand the tactics of the pro-ordinance spokespeople who, it seemed, were doing everything they could to provoke their opponents and to lose spectacularly.  I was not, then, familiar with the Leftist tactic of "failing up," and of designing the apparent failure to plant the seeds for a future victory.  The ordinance proponents "lost," in that the ordinance was repealed---but they got national media exposure for their movement, built a nationwide fundraising network, and perfected their skills of character assassination of opponents, all of which were "wins" much greater than the apparent defeat.   And, less than ten years later, the ordinance was re-introduced in Dade County and passed without remark.

Repealing the "boyfriend loophole" seems, in some sense anyway, to appear, if not "reasonable," at least defensible/supportable---but, as you point out, it is merely intended as the thin end of the wedge, even if the "wedge" in this instance is merely the parameters of discussion.

lucius septimius 6/29/2022 7:52:34 AM

3

Reply to buzzsawmonkey in 2:

Yep.  There was also the rather pointless attack on Anita Bryant - let's get some dumb old former actress who does orange juice commercials and make her into the face of the oppressor. She and her followers were dumb enough to take the bait and by extension it led to a very effective characterization of religious people that is still one of the sharpest arrows in the leftist quiver.

buzzsawmonkey 6/29/2022 7:59:15 AM

4

Reply to lucius septimius in 3:

This is why I've said that the passage of laws pre-emptively banning legalization of same-sex marriage was ill-advised.  

Conservatives, as usual, allowed themselves to be suckered by the Left; passing a pre-emptive ban on same-sex marriage---something that at the time did not exist—and thus set themselves up to appear, spuriously, to be in the position of those racists who had supported banning interracial unions.  By banning something that did not then exist, conservatives called that thing into being and set themselves up for the Left's knockout punch.

Occasional Reader 6/29/2022 8:16:45 AM

5

In #2 buzzsawmonkey said: Repealing the "boyfriend loophole" seems, in some sense anyway, to appear, if not "reasonable," at least defensible/supportable---but, as you point out, it is merely intended as the thin end of the wedge

What I found surprising was how cluelessly the panelists immediately gave the game away.  The NPR crowd are usually a lot slicker than that. 

vxbush 6/29/2022 8:18:56 AM

6

In #4 buzzsawmonkey said: By banning something that did not then exist, conservatives called that thing into being and set themselves up for the Left's knockout punch.

So what is next on the Leftist marching list? 

• different types of marriage: multi-partner, children, animals?
• public displays of nudity anywhere and everywhere?

I simply have no idea what is any of their hot-button items right now except abortion. 

buzzsawmonkey 6/29/2022 8:25:29 AM

7

Reply to vxbush in 6:

Judging from the stark-naked cyclists at the Seattle Pride Parade---not to mention the near-nekkid youngster in bondage clothing I wrote about here on Sunday---public displays of nudity any- and everywhere are coming along nicely without the Left having to make it a formal issue.

Different types of marriage seems likely; note how much the Left is harping on same-sex marriage (and "trans rights") in the wake of the recent abortion ruling.

lucius septimius 6/29/2022 8:44:16 AM

8

Reply to vxbush in 6:

Normalizing pedophilia is, I believe, the primary goal right now. "Trans rights" and the multiplicity of genders is just a means to an end in that regard. They want unrestricted access to children.

vxbush 6/29/2022 10:25:24 AM

9

In #8 lucius septimius said: Normalizing pedophilia is, I believe, the primary goal right now. "Trans rights" and the multiplicity of genders is just a means to an end in that regard. They want unrestricted access to children.

You are probably right. I'm just trying to figure out what other insane thing they are going to push, because it's never ending. 

JCM 6/29/2022 10:58:20 AM

10

Reply to vxbush in 9:

We know what the end goal is for the left.

In their world view the ends really do justify the means.

Therefore, any and everything that can be used to advance the agenda, no matter how insane, or horrific, can and will be used.

We really should stop being surprised by the lengths they will go to, or the tactics used.

buzzsawmonkey 6/29/2022 11:20:45 AM

11

In #5 Occasional Reader said: What I found surprising was how cluelessly the panelists immediately gave the game away.  The NPR crowd are usually a lot slicker than that. 

I remember saying, quite some time back, that Leftists brag on NPR about the very things they vehemently deny elsewhere.  That's why NPR is the source for tomorrow's Leftist talking-points, today---they are secure in the belief that only their co-religionists will be listening.

Occasional Reader 6/29/2022 11:25:48 AM

12

BBC: “Sweden and Finland’s journey from neutral to NATO”

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-61397478

Look at the lead photo.

Totally typical Scandinavian soldier…

buzzsawmonkey 6/29/2022 11:36:19 AM

13

In #12 Occasional Reader said: Look at the lead photo. Totally typical Scandinavian soldier…

In further news, Denmark has posthumously changed Hans Christian Anderson's name to "Hans Muslim Anderson."

Occasional Reader 6/29/2022 12:17:26 PM

14

Well done.

https://twitter.com/DefSue3/status/1539279410255253507?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1539279410255253507%7Ctwgr%5E%7Ctwcon%5Es1_&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fdisqus.com%2Fembed%2Fcomments%2F%3Fbase%3Ddefaultf%3Dpj-instapunditt_i%3D1-528598t_u%3Dhttps3A2F2Finstapundit.com2F5285982Ft_e%3DKAMALA20WHO3F2020E2809CHer20name20hasnE28099t20appeared20in20The20Washington20Post20in202020days.E2809D0D0A0D0APlus3A2020E2809CWould20JenniferE280A6t_d%3DInstapundit20C2BB20Blog20Archive20C2BB20KAMALA20WHO3F20E2809CHer20name20hasnE28099t20appeared20in20The20Washington20Post20in202020days.E2809D20Plus3A20E2809CWould20JenniferE280A6t_t%3DKAMALA20WHO3F2020E2809CHer20name20hasnE28099t20appeared20in20The20Washington20Post20in202020days.E2809D0D0A0D0APlus3A2020E2809CWould20JenniferE280A6s_o%3Ddescl%3Dversion%3Dcfefa856cbcd7efb87102e7242c9a829

JCM 6/29/2022 12:45:51 PM

15

Reply to Occasional Reader in 14:

That has to be racist or sumthin!

LOL! too spot on.

Occasional Reader 6/29/2022 1:05:46 PM

16

Occasional Reader 6/29/2022 1:24:06 PM

17

Reply to buzzsawmonkey in 13:

Heh.

I don't really care much about the photo choice, per se; I'm just trying to imagine the poor Beeb intern who received the instruction, "find some stock photos of Swedish and/or Finnish troops... BUT THEY HAVE TO BE 'OF COLOR'."

It's also fun trying to imagine the reaction to a Beeb story with the headline, "Nigerian Army Prepares For Battle", that's illustrated with a photo of the only two white guys in the Nigerian Army. 

lucius septimius 6/29/2022 2:37:08 PM

18

Kosh's Shadow 6/29/2022 4:20:56 PM

19

So who else thinks the whole "Trump tried to grab the steering wheel" story stinks of rotten fish?

Trump may be impulsive, but is smart enough to realize he isn't the driver of the car.

And really, is the President even close enough to the steering wheel to grab it? Or is he way in back for safety?

buzzsawmonkey 6/29/2022 4:23:57 PM

20

Reply to Kosh's Shadow in 19:

There's no trial like a show trial
Like no trial that I know
Everything about it has all been rigged
Even before the press has been allowed
And if you're looking on and you just might have twigged
Then you should still be properly cowed
There's no tribunal like show tribunals
There's nothing that is too low
It's guaranteed that those presiding will ignore
Anyone whose testimony might just put before
The tribunal there's something that they should consider more
Let's go! On with the show!
Let's go! On with the show!

Kosh's Shadow 6/29/2022 4:56:18 PM

21

Kosh's Shadow 6/29/2022 4:56:51 PM

22

Reply to buzzsawmonkey in 20:

======================