Piers Morgan no mo' (courtesy ftlive.com)

TTAG and our Facebook page lit up last night when we announced that CNN chat show host and notorious anti-gunner Piers Morgan had retreated from the electronic field of battle. Coming on the heels of the 9th Circuit Court’s dismissal of California’s “good cause” concealed carry permitting provision, you’d be forgiven for thinking gun rights are ascendent. In many way, in many places, they are. In many ways, in many places, they aren’t. The storm clouds are gathering in Connecticut and New York’s SAFE Act is profoundly unsafe. The courts have rubber-stamped these and other gun control regimes. And anti-gun pols keep getting voted into power. So what’s more important: cultural victories like Morgan’s dismissal, legal battles or the results at the ballot box?

104 Responses to Question of the Day: How Important Is Piers Morgan’s Departure?

  1. Not very. He pandered to what turned out to be a limited audience. The civilian disarmament movement has far more charismatic and effective spokesliars than Morgan.

    • Yeah, but now the other network execs are going to look at which talking heads they can give a timeslot, and they’re going to know that talking heads that bang on and on about the need for more gun control aren’t going to attract many eyeballs.

      So the execs are going to be inclined to pick talking heads that bang on and on about subjects other than gun control.

      It’s not a big thing, but it’s not nothing.

      • It’s not a big thing, but it’s not nothing.
        That is the complete and exact truth. Any reduction in the background agitprop noise is welcome.

  2. His presence did us more good than bad I think. He did a lot to de-legitimize the anti gun stance in the view of fence sitters, IMO.

    • Somewhat agree with you; where else will we find an rude, close minded, uneducated antigun person? He was the embodiment of the average antigunner and it showed how ridiculous and flawed the anti gun argument was.

      I still dont like him, but the negative image he presented did not help the antigun argument one bit.

      • They should hire Shannon Watts (of MDA) to fill the spot. She is just as dedicated to gun-control, as clueless about reality, and as annoying to listen to (she has a whiny voice). At least she would be better to look at.

    • Who? What network? Isn’t that the name of some pier in New Jersey that got washed out to sea by Hurricane Sandy?

  3. The voting booth is the most important place to win. If enough of the anti’s get voted out of office they will be backing off for a few years. Just to wait for another bloody shirt waving disaster to start pushing the agenda again.

    • Agreed. Way better to be proactive and stop bad laws before they’re passed than to depend on court battles that overturn laws with narrowly tailored opinions after the fact.

    • The voting booth is the most important victory, I agree. But we get victories there by winning the small battles of the culture war. We won this battle. On to the next one.

  4. I think his dismissal/resignation proves a point. That point being that, whatever the media, the anti-gun groups, or the anti-gun politicians are saying to the contrary, there are a larger majority of people who disagree with this point of view. They’ve long called pro-gun people a “vocal minority”. His resignation proves otherwise. If we were truly a minority, then his ratings wouldn’t have been so low.

    It also makes it necessary for less open opposition to gun rights from the media and politicians. Coupling his resignation with the recall of the two Colorado politicians last year further proves that pro-gun folk don’t want the 90s back. That we’ve gotten to where we are and what to keep moving forward instead of regressing.

    As to which is more important? That’s a hard question. We need the cultural front, because the people CAN have the power, especially if more of them arm themselves. The cultural victories can increase the number of legitimate gun owners, which lessens the effectiveness of unjust laws.

    The legal battles are just as important, setting precedent to be used in further debate and overturning unconstitutional laws. Using the judicial branch the way it needs to be used is just as important.

    And, arguably, the results at the ballot box are negligible. I haven’t seen many politicians lately that I would even consider casting my vote for, because they’re all liars.

    • This. In the culture war, the “loss” of one of the loudest anti gun talking heads is a win. Of course, his low ratings are equally due to the fact he isn’t very likeable. Should an anti gunner with any charisma come to the fore, then we may be fondly remembering the antics of Ol’ Musket Morgan.

      And to further agree, it’s the legal battles that are making the lasting difference. Any political battle we win is just until the next election cycle, court victories tend have longer term results.

    • You win a prize for your last paragraph. Elections are mostly farce. I wonder if Pierce is about to be indicted and extradicted to the UK? Did CNN have some inside baseball, and decide to cut bait.

      And I DO mean “bait”.

  5. Very little impact. Victories at the ballot box mean most. As many of you do not want to accept it, gun control is one of the top 5 religious tenants of the modern democratic party and the few that vote against gun control are endangered species. Face it, if there was this large swell of liberals that supported 2A, then the majority of the party would not be as rabidly anti as it is. Sadly, while the republicans are somewhat better, many have PTSD or desperately want to be liked by the anti gun media and coastal elite so they are less reliable than they should be.

  6. I haven’t lost any sleep.

    I don’t know anyone who actually agreed with him, he was more around for shock value. That shock wore off, apparently.

  7. I think it helps in a limited sense. It shows that the “guns are the problem for everything” line of thinking is a loser in the ratings game. I’ll reserve my final opinion unlit I see which direction CNN takes in (a) replacing Morgan and (b) where they will place Morgan until his contract is up? Until those two questions are answered, I don’t think we can put this in the “win” column. On the other hand, I have no problem with the pro-gun community pushing the “we won” line in the media when able (al la MDA & Starbucks). It might not be a true win except for in the court of public opinion.

    To your last line, cultural victories lead to wins at the ballot box, which lead to wins on the legal front.

    • My guess is that he’ll become a “permanent rotating guest” on the rest of their talk shows until he finally has to pack up and find a real job. It’s cheaper than flying the latest nut case celebrity in from the other coast, and will keep him occupied and out of the bosses’ office until he’s gone.

      Or they could just drop him off a pier – I don’t know.

      • Jus Bill, my sense is the same. He’ll make the rounds, for a time. Then, who knows where he’ll end up?
        Possibly in prison in GB.

  8. Not overly significant but a step in the right direction. Of course if it were a pro gunner getting the boot MDA / MAIG would be taking credit and claiming a huge victory.

  9. I want to believe that his dismissal is proof that America is tired of listening to somebody push their personal agenda and haphazardly constructed beliefs in their faces even against direct opposition from those he debates such as LEOs who deal with gun violence on a daily basis and still support our 2A freedoms. However, I do not have enough faith in our populous as a whole to cement these feelings.

    I do think getting him off the air is a victory in the sense that those who have no firearms knowledge or experience and are using media outlets to help shape their opinion will not be swayed by his blatant lies. This may impact the polls to a degree.

    What I’d really like to see is a decisive legal victory which will put an end to this nonsense. I do not know if that day will ever come, but I will remain hopeful. I have a strong background in early American history, and looking at the formation of our nation it is very clear why the second Amendment was drafted. Without going into a lecture, even with a new government for the people, by the people, the ‘people’ were still scared about reverting to a monarchy. The Bill of Rights was implemented to help alleviate these concerns. With the 2A being 2nd on a top 10 list, it is pretty obvious our Founding Fathers found that one pretty important. Attempting to harm that freedom is simply ludicrous, and is in direct opposition to the central pillars of our nation.

  10. Voting is becoming an exerciser in futility. The government was very maticulious in insuring Iraqis voted only once and were eleigable to do so. Here, not so much, which leaves endless the possibilities for fraud. Not to mention just about every voting machine in the country is controlled serviced by a union. I’m not accusing the union workers of a conflict of interest, but their leadership is a fish of a different odor.

    To Quote Joseph Stalin:

    ” It is enough that the people know there was an election. The people who cast the votes decide nothing. The people who count the votes decide everything.”

    Re: Florida/Bush vs. Gore

      • Plus about a million. Voting is a charade. The candidates are all vetted in advance by the Power Elite.

        No outliers allowed. It’s a closed shop.

    • The issue is not partisan. The issue is not the quality or inferiority of the chosen victor. The issue is fraud. People, by voting gives the proxy for their political choices to another person. When that process is corrupted, the inescapable result is the current Kabuki Theater that has replaced representative governance. The symptoms of the extent of corruption are the extremes that the PTB resort to. To my eye, policies are becoming quite extreme.

  11. Legal battles and ballot box are orders of magnitude more important than a talking head with a personal vendetta. In the end, it doesn’t really matter what a tool like Morgan says, what matters is what can lawfully be done and what it takes to keep it lawful.

  12. It’s ALL important,you need every advantage you can get when you are in a battle for Constitutional RIGHTS. Don’t think for a second he is done or won’t be replaced by someone worse!

  13. Culture wars.
    When they lose a mouthpiece we can concentrate in other arenas and not worry about the court of public opinion being swayed.

    • The notion of an arrogant, condescending Limey lecturing Americans about their own laws and Constitution didn’t sit well with many Americans, not just people of the gun.

      C’est la vie; bon débarras.

  14. Cultural victories are more important because grabbers never go away. Just last night there was some ridiculous huffing and puffing on MSNBC about how terrible it is that children can legally operate a firearm in most states. The excuse for the hyperventilating was that those same states have laws preventing them from operating power tools and buying beer, etc., but a private dealer could still legally sell them a rifle that they could then legally use to hunt with. Mix in some fluff about the NRA wanting 18 year olds (you know, the ones we send to fight in war) to have handgun rights and the resulting miasma reads “gun nuts arming children, stuffing pockets with souls.” It was a sneaky cultural attack on the rural hunting tradition. Such attacks flow from them like a river because they know that is the ground on which this battle is truly fought.

  15. Its important as it reminds these media folks that what plays well in their little echo chamber bubble they live in, doesn’t play well with the actual population.

    And telling us what is important (or so they think) doesnt really work. We know whats important and want to hear from the media about important items. Their little “feel good” rants that plays in NYC wont play everywhere else…

    Good Riddance Piers

    • Waiting a few days to see if Piers is a guest on The Tonight Show with Jimmy Fallon, that little power suck-up. I’ve REALLY grown to despise him.

  16. I don’t think Piers Morgan getting removed from his prime network slot was a victory for us so much as a defeat for them. Let’s face it, Morgan self-destructed all on his own without our help. His ratings were sliding long before Sandy Hook. Megyn Kelly was kicking his ass from day one. Morgan was, at best, preaching to his own side and judging by his ratings, a very small portion of his side.

    In the vast sea of media personalities arrayed against us, Morgan was just one. His removal will dent their operations slightly, until CNN replaces him with an equally dedicated anti-gun personality. Possibly one who is more of a threat to gun culture through persuasion.

    The legal battles are more important. They actually affect lives. Morgan’s loss of a prime time slot affects a handful of people who watch Piers Morgan.

  17. Both Political and media victories are important. The more MSNBC, and CNN drop in ratings, means that their agitprop is not being heard, regardless of issue.
    We like to say lame stream media, political mouth pieces. The more “hosts” drop off the radar due to bad ratings, means less chatter through media to promote the agenda. So I call this a win.
    Alternatively we need more pro 2A media coverage. We should be pushing this through the largest networks, Fox being the really only one that might do this. As more hosts who espouse the civilian disarmament agitprop drop off the screen, it is critical to replace them with those that provide at minimum balanced coverage.
    Furthermore, if we see more coverage of things like defensive gun uses, and shooting sports in a positive light this begins to win the heart and minds of even the most uneducated voter. The media campaign to normalize the idea of armed self defense must happen. If not we will forever remain on the defensive, and fighting an uphill battle.

  18. He would have failed regardless of his anti-2A, gun grabbing stand. Americans don’t take kindly to foreigners coming here, making millions of dollars by, not just responsibly criticizing, but mocking and condemning Americans for their opinions and principles. Uniquely American principles, I might add. So, I don’t think he would have ever reached the critical mass of viewers necessary to keep his job.

  19. I honestly think Piers insulting transgendered people the other day had a lot to do with his dismissal from CNN, given Anderson Cooper’s pull and staunch LGBT-advocacy.

    He got Baldwin’d.

    It certainly mattered more to the jokers at CNN than him insulting gun owners. They don’t give a **** about that.

  20. Anti-gun pols keep getting voted into power, but not necessarily on an anti-gun platform. It’s often simply party affiliation that gets them elected. The Democrats, who are invariably antis by default, get elected because a body politic of low information sheeple voters who fancy themselves as ‘progressive’ Democrats mindlessly keep voting for Dem pols even though it isn’t necessarily in their best interest to do so; it’s the ‘in’ thing to do, don’t you know. The barrage of union sponsored ads said so on the TV.

    Here in San Diego there are more than a few Democrat state legislators who don’t even mention guns in their newsletters and website content or, when seeking election, their campaign ads. This is for the obvious reason that ‘guns’ is a divisive issue and they don’t want to emphasize being anti-gun because they fear they may lose some votes, even from Democrat voters. They instead highlight a myriad of other issues that are, frankly, more important to their lib-progressive voting base, and to posture themselves in a politically correct light to their constituency. But when the time comes, there is no doubt which way they will vote on any anti-gun bill; tow the party line they do. That too, satisfies the voters who have elected them, even though it may not be a pivotal.

    So yes, “the anti-gun pols keep getting voted into power”, but not solely BECAUSE they are antis; rather because they have prioritized the social and entitlement issues most important to the Democrat voters they pander to for votes. Often the gun control element is just a side issue to these voters.

    • Same here in Maryland. We have this “Republican businessman” gubernatorial candidate, Larry Hogan, who is pretty much silent on any 2A position. He’s running under the “Change Maryland” slogan, but one needs to fork over $100 to find out what he has to say. Not much change there, IMO.

  21. “So what’s more important: cultural victories like Morgan’s dismissal, legal battles or the results at the ballot box?”

    Yes.

  22. The best thing that could happen is if he becomes a spokesperson for MAIG/MDA.

    He’s an unlikeable elitist twat, just the spokesperson that would drive people away from those organizations.

  23. As a writer, I am pre-disposed to believing that cultural shifts and changes portend changes in public policy, including gun control laws. In our nation, the power of government is derived from the consent of the governed, or the people, and it is in the values and principles held by the citizens that determine what lawmakers dare to do.

    As America has become more urbanized, many city dwelling Americans have adopted an interpretation of American values very different than their suburban/rural counterparts. It is really this divide that best describes the polarization between proponents of gun rights and those advocating more restrictions on guns.

    Rural and suburban Americans regard firearms as tools for hunting, self defense and providing a deterrent to the worst of what a would-be tyrant might try to impose on the freedoms granted by our Creator. Increasingly, urban Americans who rely more obviously on government services (e.g., infrastructure, security, social services, etc) are more inclined to view government in a positive way and see guns themselves as the threat. If rural and suburban citizens are more concerned about government infringement on their rights, then urban citizens are more concerned about their individual rights and safety being infringed by other people.

    The urban dweller turns to the agency of government for security and a feeling of safety. Even if criminals and the mentally impaired fail to comply with the law, gun restrictions (or restrictions on anything) put the onus of personal safety on someone else. Namely, the government upon which they rely more heavily on.

    In our media-satured, hyper-political society commentators like Piers Morgan have become cultural spokesmen for the urban American. The fact that Morgan could not muster enough of a following for CNN to justify keeping him in prime time probably says two things. First his subject matter, specifically his fetish for gun control, was not popular enough to overcome the second factor that is his distasteful persona. The guy was just never happy unless he was lecturing Americans about everything wrong with them!

    The cancellation of Piers Morgan’s show is indeed a win, but just one battle in the long campaign to preserve and strengthen freedom and Self government in America. Just because Piers Morgan has lost his current job, it does not mean that the gun control culture has gone away. It does, however, emphasize the point that gun rights advocates need to do a better job promoting our culture in a positive way that develops more adherents, not only in a negative and blaming way. Over the long run, that will manifest more progress.

    Let’s all be good, articulate and thoughtful ambassadors of the gun rights movement, worthy of the rights we hold so precious.

    • Insightful and articulate!

      This should be a headline post rather than a comment; it goes to the crux of the schism between those who support anti-gunners and the people of the gun.

      We should all be reminded of these elements so well stated on a regular basis in order to better focus our collective efforts.

    • I agree with your perspective more than any other here.

      The dismissal of Morgan from a prime-time yapping face show is a “win” in that his schtick didn’t sell. Advertisers take notice of those ratings – his dismal ratings were probably reviewed by the advert-selling arm of CNN and the boss was told “We’re losing ad revenue here, because his numbers are down to a point where no one is going to pay our prime-time rate for ad slots.”

      That’s what this is all about, remember: Money. Morgan and his anti-gun screeds in his pompous English accent didn’t sell.

      This sort of thing matters just as much as recalling political hacks in Colorado, where the pro-gun side was wildly outspent by the likes of Bloomberg, et al. This sort of thing matters as much as the fury that the newspaper in NY State that published the CCW and registration records of gun owners. It exposes these low-IQ, low-information, intellectual sloths to the harshness of reality.

    • Piers is just one example, and like Dyspeptic says- money talks.

      CNN is not the most left wing- but its in THE MOST trouble as middle class viewers abandon it in droves. CNN and NYT have both gone off the cliff in ad revenues and eyeballs as people start to realize what their “brand” has been- propagandists for this Administration, and most informed voters have realized that the MSM has become one and the same- as untrustworthy as MSNBC or HuffPo/Slate/Kos/DU now, in terms of credibility. Why do you think Bezos let Klein go, and brought on Volokh?

      As America realizes that the Democratics cant HELP but over-reach in taking away Americans individual freedom, not just in 2A, but 1A and 4A rights, in the same way the StateRunMedia cant acknowledge it openly, for they have been cheerfully complicit in shilling for Progressive talking points, and now are afraid- both for the further loss of credibility but also retaliation- NSA spying, IRS suppression of conservative voting rights groups, the investigations of A&P, the DOJ indictment of D’Souza, the FCC proposed “monitoring” of news, the DHS “license plate scanning”. The true nature of “Those Who Know Whats Best for All of Us” in DC is starting to look more like the movie Hunger Games all the time…and that is a vast sea change that has its own life…
      Pandora’s out of the box…

      All we need to do is keep on telling the truth, and dont get dragged into circular firing squads, or tempted into the gutter by the trolls –

      thats all the Evolves and MDAs and OFAs have-
      insults and increasingly desperate accusations,

      for the FACTS are against them, and people are walking from a long slumber,

      Keep spreading the word, and in the meantime- act as a group- $ to NRA, SAF, GOA, your state orgs. This is how we win, slowly but surely.

  24. I agree with the guy above who mentioned Morgan’s snafu with a transgender guest last week.
    That did expose him for what he really is. We already knew it… now everyone does.

    Still, political battles and especially legal battles are more important.

  25. It’s not important at all for gun rights. The reasons he’s so disliked all over the world are numerous.

    It should be pretty important to Piers Morgan though. He had an audience which was predisposed toward his political and ideological values and they simply grew to hate him as they grew to know him.

    Don’t ever change Piers! (that’s a curse, not empathy).

  26. Now if NBC got rid of that 13year old boy on MSNBC…all the NBC(NoBodyCares) networks are failing. Jay Leno gets canned so ultra liberal Fallon can push his outlook. Piers Morgan is just an annoying footnote. BTW as I type this Inside Edition is reporting on the black woman who fired an “assault rifle” at 3 thugs in Detroit. A Hi-Point rifle. LOL. Too bad no one died.

  27. Piers was on my “little list of those who won’t be missed”. Perhaps Kieth Olbermann will let him do some guest appearances.

  28. So what’s more important: cultural victories like Morgan’s dismissal, legal battles or the results at the ballot box?

    All three are important, in reverse order.

    Vote in pro-Constitution politicians wherever possible. This will help to stop future infringements from being passed in the first place.

    With fewer infringements being passed the legal battles have the best chance of getting existing infringements rolled back. In my experience, it’s easier to get the courts to rule in our favor than to get pols to vote in our favor (odd as THAT may sound) and repeal them.

    Then with both of those taken care of, we can get rid of the talking heads spouting anti-Constitution agitprop and brainwashing under informed citizens about “how it should be.”

    • Exactly.

      And the culture the anti-gunners wish to import is that from the UK. Sending a nancy boy from the Perfidious Albion packing sends a message on the cultural aspect as few other things could do.

      Now, if we could only rid ourselves of that other brainless English prat, Tina Brown.

  29. Without his vice to give folks headaches when the nap on the couch and don’t change the channel before he comes on, it’ll probably hurt Tylenol sales.

  30. You know, the more I think about this guy the more I realize perhaps losing him is a bad thing. He did such a great job galvinizing fence sitters on the gun-rights fence via his obnoxious priggish effete British personality.

    I think we will miss that.

  31. Legal battles. People can say two words separated by the word vs. and be all set as long as they are right. If everyone thought like gun guys than events like this would be important. Most people don’t think like us.

    But seriously F piers morgan. No uppercase for you!

  32. Meh. He was pretty ineffective as gun control people go… petulant, abrasive, and with a haughty foreign tone that had no place telling Americans what to do. As Kelsey Grammer’s character in the Pentagon Wars uttered, “We fought a war so we wouldn’t have to listen to the @#%^ Brits!”

  33. I think in the end you can’t have victories at the ballot box as long as media is slanting the issue one way or the other. The key to a functioning democracy is an informed voting population. Piers was an obstacle to that goal. And seeing him gone was just so, personally rewarding.
    In the grand scheme it’s not the end of the war, or even the battle, but it was a nice step forward.
    Which just also happened to make me feel good inside, and so little of what I read about gun rights in this country right now does that. This was a welcome change.

  34. He came to the US with a dark cloud of fraud over him, went to a has-been network that isn’t even a news organization anymore, and harped on a very narrow array of topics.

    Even the left wing media was citing his LOW ratings.

    England, you can have him back.

  35. Pies Morgan was fired, not because he had changed, and not because CNN had changed. He was fired, because America had changed, and they got tired of listening to his anti-gun tirades. When the viewers stopped watching his show, CNN had to make a financial choice and the network fired him.

    They will probably hire another ultra-liberal, anti-gun blowhard to fill the time slot, their ratings will go up for awhile, and then we will stop watching him also. Nothing changes at CNN, except the faces.

  36. I think we can feel a sort of moral victory in the affair. We won’t know its importance for a time. Maybe.

    Who wasn’t happy to see the Redcoat get the boot?

  37. It’s the people who put PM on CNN we need to be concerned about. There is a body of political influence who feel we must look alike, live alike, act alike, eat alike and think alike. This is contrary to the independent nature of man but can be achieved to a large degree as it is with livestock and prisoners. Those that do not fit in are culled.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *