Yep... ...this is what you get when you united the citizens... ...and passed it off as good federal legislation. ...hard to blame the NRA for this specifically, though...even though it is right out of their political playbook. ...Didn't they get the Supreme Court to change their interpretation of the Second Amendment, which had been supported by federal jurisprudence for 200 years or more...to mean that individual gun rights were what the "founding fathers" were trying to enshrine in law? And didn't they do that with a whole lot of money (buying whatever it was in opinion that they couldn't sell as fact)? ...I mean, it doesn't take a whole lot of looking to find that even before we had semi-automatic what-cha-ma-call-its and high-capacity thing-a-ma-doodles, there was a large precedent to regulate what you did or did not do with a firearm... ...think there was a law up in Massachusetts or Pennsylvania once that made it illegal to have a loaded gun in your house...because they tended to explode and set the house on fire (o irony, where is thy sting?)... ..."common-sense" gun legislation...or abridging that which shall not be abridged...whichever one is your thing... ...and anyway, what the NRA does with their money (once they get a fair rate of exchange for all those rubles) is their business... ...or ours...depends on how you read the laws...
Laura Ingraham was following the Right-wing textbook and it backfired on her. The right-wing tries to dehumanize every political opponent. It's one of the reasons why there are right-wingers who think liberals are a bigger threat to the United States than actual adversaries like Russia. Yet, this time, it didn't work out. Most folks won't support dehumanizing and attacking brave victims of attempted mass murder like the students of the high school. It's no wonder that she's trying to apologize now.
That's why it was so smart for the left to exploit children in order to advance their narratives. You can get them to say whatever stupid BS you want them to and no one is allowed to counter any of it without fierce backlash. You could say that the exploitation of children for political gain is a fairly awful thing to do, but for those who don't care about such things it can prove to be effective at least in the short term.
I've been away for a while, but hot dog - you are the best poster on here. You really know how to undress these pompous liberals. Love the way you think. You ever think about running for office?
I mean isn't this a faux politically correct driven scandal? All she did was say he was complaining about not getting into these colleges. I mean, the guy isn't just a survivor, he's become a celebrity and political activist - a powerful one. As a public figure, he is no longer able to be criticized because he carries this "I'm a survivor" badge? You're being self-righteous
You might have missed what's been going on lately, but the kids are the ones leading this charge themselves. The left is happy to be dragged along in their tidal wave of energy and jump on board. But the movement is one that sprang from the students.
LOL you really believe that? You realize that the "march for our lives" was only about 10% kids right? This "movement" is nothing more than an extension of the same people who have been protesting ever since their candidate for president lost. At one point the face of that was the "Women's march" and that proved ineffective, so now the face of it is that Hogg kid. They plan to milk it for all it is worth before moving on.
Well, I mean, it does. it's factually inaccurate that this "movement" is being led by the kids. The kids are merely being exploited in order to be used as the new face of an old protest. 70% of the people at the "March for OUR lives" event were middle aged women, most of which were at the "Woman's march" previously. There's nothing new about this "movement" other than the fact that they are exploiting children to use them as cover while pushing the same agenda. Same people, same agenda, different advertising gimmick.
The kids are the face of the movement by choice, not because they are being exploited. They themselves rekindled the dialogue of gun control. They themselves organized a nationwide school walkout. Children disproportionately support gun control compared to the general population as polls show. Kids are 100% in full alignment with what the movement is now and what it was prior. They are fully aware of what the message is and stand to gain as much if not more than adults if the movement is successful. How is it "exploitation" when both parties agree and are working towards the same goal in order to reap the same benefits? You want to know REAL exploitation? Just look in the mirror to see someone who's being exploited. You see, exploitation is when the NRA tries to convince people like you that owning semi-autos equates to "freedom" while also serving their ulterior motive of making millions of dollars in additional revenue for gun manufacturers.
LOL that's so naive....but at this point I'd expect nothing more from you. Is statutory rape "exploitation" even if both parties agree? Is child p*rnography "exploitation" even if both parties agree? Using children as a shield for your political movement is horribly immoral, especially when it is an anti-civil rights movement...but don't let that get in the way of your talking points.
First of all it's clear that some of these "kids" have political ambitions and are looking to exploit their status as a survivor and other kids to build a political career. We all know that the faces of this movement - Ms Gonzales and Mr Hogg - will soon be giving speeches at the DNC. It would not surprise me if in a few years we seem them run for political office. Bobby is 100% right here.
comparing child p*rn and rape, which are both illegal for a number of different reasons, to this? Political activism is not something that is reserved for adults, nor does it carry any inherent emotional or physical risks. Just like singing/acting (are teenage pop stars & actors being exploited?) or athletics (are teenage Olympians being exploited?) Face it the only reason you are outraged by this is because you disagree with the movement & are trying to scrape the bottom of the barrel for reasons to paint it in a negative light.
I assumed you would miss the point, and you didn't disappoint. The point is that children don't have the capacity to consent, so pointing out that their consent when they are being used by leftist groups to push their narrative and be a shield for political positions that can't stand up to scrutiny is inherently wrong. I mean, don't get me wrong, I fully understand why they want to do this. Children are naive enough to support the anti-civil rights positions they are pushing and we have a fame seeking culture so there's no shortage of children willing to be exploited. On top of that, when you use a child as a face to a movement, you get to use them as a shield effectively because any criticism of what the child is saying will cause a harsh backlash against those who speak out. When they used women, people just laughed at the crazy women that were saying stupid things, now they are getting children to say those stupid things for them. Clearly they learned their lesson.
