Blue Force Gear Quote of the Day: Good Question

Hillary Clinton (courtesy progressivestoday.com)

“It’s time for someone to ask Clinton a simple question: Won’t overturning the Heller decision make gun bans possible again?” – John Lott, Four ways Hillary Clinton will work to end gun ownership as president [via foxnews.com]

BFG-Long-Logo-Blue-JPG-220x39

comments

  1. avatar cenonce says:

    Hillary has made history. She’s proven that women are just as corrupt and criminal as men when seeking the highest office in the nation.

    1. avatar Rusty Chains says:

      Actually she made history by being the most corrupt candidate to win a major party nomination. She should be in jail for using the US State Department to shake down foreign countries for hundreds of millions of dollars of “donations” to her foundation. She uses that money for her own personal slush fund to buy influence and funnel money to her, her husband, and her daughter.

      1. avatar pwrserge says:

        In theory, she could still lose if the super delegates grow a brain and switch to Bernie. If she gets indicted between now and the convention or if the Democrats realize that they will lose most of their enthusiasm if they lose Bernie, that may still happen.

        Now, I would enjoy either outcome. Bernie will never win swing voters and his terrorist supporters will either keep most of the DNC base at home or bring them over to Trump.

        1. avatar Pascal says:

          Theory is nice, but Democrats are like the Borg. The assimilate at all costs. Let us not pretend, she was the nominee before she even started and the rest just show for the masses. The “Tough” campaign was just show. There were a lot of people who could have ran this year and more likely were told no. Not but because Hillary is so great, but the Borg collective has willed it to be her and made moves to clear everyone else out of the way. Bernie never had a chance because the Clintons have a lot markers to call in and he lost the day he started he just did not know he had lost.

          Even the press called it a coronation before she began.

        2. avatar Bob316 says:

          Pascal is right, in my opinion. The Democrat Party does not tolerate disloyalty. Like a disease, they will destroy anyone who pushes anything that is not approved by the central party officials. And, once someone is no longer of use to them, they will discard them like a broken appendage.

        3. avatar pwrserge says:

          That makes it very difficult to explain why Bernie is close enough to her in the delegate count where the super delegates can easily swing the nomination.

        4. avatar Wilson says:

          I can totally see HRC saying “We are the Democrats. Lower your pants and surrender your wallets. We will add your intellectual and fiscal distinctiveness to our own. Your culture will adapt to service us. Resistance is futile”.

  2. avatar Tom in Oregon says:

    She scares the heck out of me, and not just because of what she will do to gun rights.
    I don’t think this country can handle 4 more years of rampant socialism.

    1. avatar Jjimmyjonga says:

      Agreed. But, nor can this country bear a big mouth douche who was handed daddys fortune (real estate sucess in big cities is realativley simple if you have the access to capitol). Our options are just so terrible this go around. What a mess. My ideal candidate respects individual rights, respects the constitution, has the respect of the military, fiscally conservative, is proven higly intellegent, speaks softly and is cool under fire. I only hope perhaps there is a secret super candidate waiting in the GOP wings…oy vey

      1. avatar Tom RKBA says:

        That guy was hammered by the GOP and did not get the money he needed to get the nomination.

      2. avatar Bob316 says:

        Unfortunately, neither candidate is great, but one of them will be president. If Hillary or Bernie wins, it will take decades and a war to return the US back to its fundamental, Constitutional principles. If Trump wins, we can fix whatever he may break.

    2. avatar IAmSeaMann says:

      Where is this rampant socialism? Are you sure you understand what socialism is? What is so wrong about the government helping people who deserve and don’t abuse it?

      1. avatar Geoff PR says:

        “What is so wrong about the government helping people who deserve and don’t abuse it?”

        The problem is far too many abuse it, and the *staggering* costs are crippling the economy.

        And oh, yes, I’m *fully* aware of what socialism is, a system of wealth redistribution, paid for by ‘those who can afford it’.

        The fatal flaw is a society rapidly runs out of other people’s money to pay for the blasted thing.

        I’m fine with a hand up. I’m not fine with a handout…

      2. avatar Curtis in IL says:

        You deserve what you earn. Everything else is a gift.
        When the government “helps” people by giving them what they have not earned, the incentive to work, learn, innovate and take risks goes away.

        Most of the nations that have implemented Karl Marx’s utopian dream are now on the ash heap of history.

      3. avatar Stu in AZ says:

        What’s wrong with it yes they do abuse it, it empowers the lazy, and the help they receive doesn’t come from some limitless supply of magical resources. It comes from you and me. Also tends to completely destroy economies eventually, whereas capitalism without government meddling has only been done once and with raving success like history has never before seen.

      4. avatar James says:

        If the government actually tried to deliver aid to those who need it and wouldn’t abuse it, then there wouldn’t be a problem.

        Instead, government sets ups a system mainly for the bureaucrats to get comfortable and to be abused through fraud. Instead the government attempts to give enough crumbs to barely make folks comfortable not working so they never go back to working while the connected cronies line their pockets with fat government contracts to administer welfare. The cronies skim or more like scoop a ton of money for themselves and some drips and drabs get to the truly needy.

      5. avatar Stinkeye says:

        One of the big flaws is that any government that is large and powerful enough to give you everything you want is also capable of taking everything you have.

      6. avatar Bob316 says:

        Holly !@#$, you didn’t just say that!!! Let me throw the question back at you: When has Socialism ever worked? Mercantilism? Did that work? No, it led to the American Revolution. How about Fascism, also known as National-Socialism? Did that work? No! How about Rome? The only way they kept going is by conquest and slavery. How did Communism work? Huge freaking failure. Venezuela’s economy is in shambles, if you haven’t opened your eyes recently. I could go on and on. Seriously, look at history before you speak. There is not one instance in history where Socialism or any of its derivatives worked, period.

      7. avatar peirsonb says:

        What is so wrong about the government helping people who deserve it?

        The rest of the replies are correct, but ultimately too nice.

        What’s wrong is that is not their effing job. Full stop.

        The government has a well defined at of powers and responsibilities. Social welfare ain’t one of them. That’s the job of churches and charities. Because when it’s their job then you have the choice whether you will contribute or not.

        1. avatar Wilson says:

          Not only does government remove the choice about contributing or not contributing the whole thing rapidly devolves into a vote buying scheme where one party tells the victims of learned helplessness that “If you vote for the other guys they’ll take everything you have away from you! Children will starve in the snow!”.

          The same thing is true of Social Security and Medicare. Any attempt to reform these systems which are quite obviously headed for rapid bankruptcy is met with fear-mongering about “granny going over the cliff” or “Grandma’s going to have to eat cat food”.

  3. avatar tdiinva (Now in Wisconsin) says:

    The Republican voters had a choice between some great candidates and it came down to Trump and Cruz. Of course the same voters who flocked to these two losers will blame McConnell, Boehner and Ryan.

    We don’t have corrupt politicians, we have a debased electorate.

    1. avatar ActionPhysicalMan says:

      Thanks for President Hillary and the new SCOTUS, Trump fans. My parents are among you, they just loved how he said whatever popped into his head and didn’t stop to consider it was evidence of a lack of impulse control and ignorance. But he was a reality TV star, those are the best people in the world!

      1. avatar IAmSeaMann says:

        Unfortunately, a surprising ammount of women will/have voted for Hilary simply because she is a woman…

        And men are supposed to be the sexist ones?

        I feel like I must preclude all my interactions with “let me apologize for being a straight white middle class male” or be slapped with a sexual harassment law suit.

        We’re fucked bro.

    2. avatar Mike J says:

      It seems odd to call a flamboyant billionaire who’s had several really hot wives a loser, but I certainly agree with your last sentence. How do we explain eight years of Barack Obama? My only answer is that most of America’s voters want the government to give them free stuff at someone else’s expense. If that’s true, we’re all screwed anyway. All any of us can do is to punch R and hope for the best. Do anything else and you’re asking for the horror of Hillary.

    3. avatar FedUp says:

      What “great candidates” were seriously running for president?

      Cruz would have been the best of that bunch by far, if he had been eligible to hold the office.

      John E Bush appears to be better than George W Bush, but that’s damning with faint praise if you ask me.
      Kasich might be marginally better than JEB, but that still doesn’t rise to the level of ‘good’, let alone ‘great’.

      1. avatar tdiinva (Now in Wisconsin) says:

        Cruz is one step above Trump. Every governor in race was more qualified than Trump, Cruz and Rubio. You can add Lindsey Graham to the Governors group as well. Just because that some of the Governors were ideologically compatible doesn’t mean they aren’t better qualfied to be President.

        And Jeb Bush is far more conservative than John Kasich. If there had been no Bush I or Bush II. Jeb would have been the Conservative favorite. As it is he could have sounded like Ted Cruz and he still would have been a non player.

      2. avatar rman says:

        None of which had a prayer of beating Hillary. Like it or not, American politics has turned into a popularity contest…

      3. avatar SteveInCO says:

        Cruz would have been the best of that bunch by far, if he had been eligible to hold the office.

        Let’s put this canard to rest.

        8 USC section 1401, paragraph g, qualifies Ted Cruz for the office. It also qualifies Obama, even assuming he wasn’t born in Hawaii (and there is legal record of him having been born there).

        https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/8/1401

    4. avatar pg2 says:

      Dude, that’s exactly the same as blaming a rape victim for being raped. The public gets to pick out of very small crowd of candidates who really have very little difference between them.

      1. avatar tdiinva (Now in Wisconsin) says:

        If you think Kasich, Christie, Bush, Perry and Walker are all the same then you are the prime example of the debased voter. The Constitutional system tends to force a degree of sameness because you have to work within its constraints. You can’t do what is impossible.

        The Republican buzzword for this cycle is Constitutional Conservative, I.e., I only support the Constitution when it gives the outcomes I like. The conflict resolution dude is more of a Constitutionalist that anyone who shouts statist at people who disagree with him.

        1. avatar pg2 says:

          “debased voter’…maybe unrepresented voter is a more accurate term. In fact, I think 99.99% of the population falls into that category.

  4. avatar jeepers says:

    New look, Navigation, style, color or lack of color, well everything, SUCKS!

    1. avatar Mack Bolan says:

      Because burying all your content behind a click is a proven way to attract readers.

      Seriously whoever thought that was a good idea…is a complete moron.

    2. avatar Cliff H says:

      Speeking of navigation, how in the hell do you move from one page to the next?

    3. avatar Vendetta says:

      Agreed. Sadly with all of the nonsense going on around here lately Im almost to the point of deleting ttag as a bookmark and multiple daily visit site for me. People bitching at each other about politics and trans gender bathrooms and whose e-peen is bigger. A sad majority of you internet commandos need to grow the fuck up, live your own life, and worry about the future of our society because my god it looks bleak.

  5. avatar Mark says:

    Yet, thousands of TTAG readers will sit at home and not vote, or waste a vote on an independent because they don’t like Trump. Robert Farago included.

    1. avatar ActionPhysicalMan says:

      It’s not that we simply don’t don’t like Trump, it is that he is an ignorant narcissistic psychopath. It’ll be really hard to pop that turd into your mouth, and hope the SCOTUS appointments will outweigh all of the dumb and unethical shit he will continue do.

      1. avatar pwrserge says:

        But he’s OUR dumb narcissistic sociopath. Sometimes it takes force to remove filth.

        1. avatar Hannibal says:

          That’s been said before with troubling results.

        2. avatar pwrserge says:

          … and it’s been said before with outstanding results.

        3. avatar Ing says:

          You don’t remove filth with more filth.

          That said, since it appears we only have filth to choose from, I’d rather sit down in the dirt than wallow in sewage. So Trump it must be.

      2. avatar Wilson says:

        For all Trump’s foibles at this point I would prefer him to HRC. Both are narcissists, both are arrogant. One’s an out-and-out criminal and the other’s being sued (though that case seems shaky to me).

        That said, I’d much rather have an semi-competent boob who likes the country but screws things up in the Oval Office than a slightly-more-competent criminal/serial-liar that hates this country and is out to harm it.

        I’m simply of the opinion that this country is on the edge of a number of cliffs and that while Trump wants to pull back from some of them HRC wants to shove the country over so she can use her Cloward-Piven/Alinskey strategy of creating a crisis so she can offer a pre-packaged solution that previously was in want of a problem. I don’t think this country can take another four to eight years of what amounts to socialistic stupidity without going past a number of points of no return.

        1. avatar Stinkeye says:

          You’re what I’d call an optimist. In my opinion, this country has already zoomed past several “points of no return”, and there’s no way back that isn’t extremely ugly and painful. Things are going to get a lot worse before they get better.

        2. avatar Wilson says:

          Whether or not we’re past those points largely depends on political will and that will only come from lot’s of people feeling some serious pain. The simple fact of the matter is that not enough people have felt enough pain to cause them to move out of their political comfort zone and vote for serious fixes for serious problems.

    2. avatar C.S. says:

      Victim blaming? You’d rather fault the non-voting gun owners for losing the election than fault Trump for being a bigot?

      1. avatar pwrserge says:

        Yes. People who choose to be victims deserve to be blamed.

      2. avatar Red Sox says:

        Please explain how he is a bigot.

        1. avatar James says:

          I don’t think he’s a bigot. He’s just plain stupid sometimes, too often for me to be comfortable yet. The Trump U fraud case judge comments are a perfect example. Instead of raising the fair trial issue on the fact that the judge is human (hence susceptible to going rogue), a democrat appointee, of Mexican heritage while Trump’s pushing immigration reform, and the temptation to meddle in the Presidental election, he ends up saying he’s Mexican. And Trump acolytes act like as long as Trump didn’t say he was a “dirty Mexican”, it was a brilliant play.

        2. avatar Red Sox says:

          To James;
          It took me a while to come over to Trump’s corner. Back in the ’90’s when he was peddling his book, The Art Of The Deal, I thought of him as someone born with a silver spoon in his mouth and a fraud. My opinion has not changed until recently when the only alternative is that beast of a human. Yeah there’s the Trump U thing but it does not put him in jeopardy of being indicted for treason like his opponent.

        3. avatar Mack Bolan says:

          @ James

          Except he was right about the judge and the prosecutor. Both are members of La Raza and are on record in fact and substance advocating for open borders and amnesty. Central themes to Trumps platform.

          He is correct that he will not have a fair proceeding. The judge, if he was truly concerned with justice, would recuse himself since he is a blatant and unapologetic Pro Mexican activist.

        4. avatar James says:

          @ Mack

          Way to completely miss the point.

          Instead of saying “He’s Mexican”, lay out the case with the facts and intelligence instead of his childish petulant personal attacks at the judge’s heritage. So now instead of attacking the beast of a human being who should be charged with serious crimes, he’s distracting everyone from how bad Ovary Clinton is and giving the main stream media a convenient excuse to paint Trump as racist.

          It’s just plain stupid since he’s going to lose all the generous and generally favorable free media he got in the primary. He’s only in this race because Ovary is that bad a candidate. He needs to be smarter, not just louder and more outlandish.

        5. avatar Wilson says:

          @James:

          I concur with your analysis completely. Handing ammo to the enemy is never a good idea.

          I mentioned this on another website and was flamed by dozens and dozens of people for pointing out that there is a difference between being right and being perceived as being right. This only gave me further evidence that many Trump supporters are flat out sycophants. In their eyes everything he does is a stroke of genius because he’s 20 moves ahead of the rest of us.

          Honestly, I was never a big fan of Trump, but I’ll vote for him over anyone the Democrats can put up against him. Trump’s big problem isn’t actually Trump or much of anything Trump says, it’s that a goodly number of his supporters are assholes.

    3. avatar SteveInCO says:

      or waste a vote on an independent because they don’t like Trump. Robert Farago included.

      Last I saw RF was planning to vote for Trump. While holding his nose and complaining about it, but nevertheless vote for him.

  6. avatar Silvio I says:

    I hate this format!!!!! Before, I could read the first paragraph of an article and then I would decide if I was interested. NOT ANYMORE!!!!!!!

  7. avatar Mike J says:

    “In Japan, which has a suicide rate that is 54 percent higher than the U.S. rate, many people take their lives by stepping in front of trains.”

    Yuck! That’s got to be an ugly mess to clean up. I hope that they’re not doing that at the height of morning or evening rush hours. “Sorry, honey, I’ll be a couple of hours late. Some jerkweed stepped in front of the train again.” Given the option, I’d prefer that people commit suicide in the privacy of their own homes with their own firearms.

    1. avatar Cliff H says:

      Stepping in front of BART trains is a not uncommon practice in San Francisco Bay Area. I used to live there – I can understand the phenomena and the self-centeredness that doesn’t give a fvck about the effects on other people.

      Maybe they should just build a ramp at the end of the line so people can take care of business just before the trains run through a wash cycle.

      1. avatar AnotherOne says:

        Or how about like ‘Futurama’ where they just built ‘Suicide Booths’ that looked like the old phone booths?

  8. avatar Winterborne says:

    Not a fan of the new look of the site. Oh well. Adapt, improvise, overcome.

  9. avatar Tom RKBA says:

    Michael Bane changed my mind on Trump. I intensely dislike Trump. BUT I VOTE GUNS AND ONLY GUNS!

    Hillary absolutely will not change her mind on guns. She will work to screw us over as much as she can. Trump may turn out to be great for gun rights or merely mediocre. Either way, a mediocre-on-gun-rights Trump is far better on guns than Hillary and the Socialist Party.

    “Should she be elected, we will be facing an Executive, a Judicial (remember, Scalia’s gone, along with the 5-4 stand on the Second Amendment) and probably a Legislative attack. Secondly, with Obama’s successes in weaponizing Federal agencies, we can expect attacks from those agencies, including the IRS, the EPA, Homeland Security, TSA, not to mention a reinvigorated BATFE.

    Those agencies along can do staggering damage to the gun culture without any vote in Congress. All it takes is a willingness to wield them against us. ”

    http://michaelbane.blogspot.com/2016/06/why-i-unconditionally-support-donald.html

    1. avatar JR_in_NC says:

      Milo Yiannopoulos changed my mind on Trump….at least to the point of making Trump a little more acceptable.

      I am essentially a single issue voter: 2A. But, very closely and intimately tied to 2A is 1A, and Milo’s remarks on what Trump has done for 1A are a bit compelling.

      The underlying point is that this election is less about what Trump will or will not do…he really won’t be able to DO much (which is a good thing on the whole), but he sure has cracked the veneer over political correctness and the control the Progressives have on “the narrative.”

      I think we’d do well to look at this strategy to regain control of the conversation regarding 2A. Playing “nice guy” and always trying to rise above the sewage the proggies spew leaves us always playing catch-up ball. Not sure that’s the best way to restoration of rights…ALL the BoR (in addition to 2A and 1A, I’d certainly put 4, 5 and 6 under tremendous attack).

      In other words, it ain’t for Trump to DO all this for us…but what he represents, certainly for younger (under 30) non-proggies, paves the way for US to regain what has been lost.

  10. avatar Taylor TX says:

    At first I thought the front page was broken as it was just a headline and a picture, then I realized to see the one sentence quote I had to click on the article. So there isnt any kind of preview now? I understand this is probably a revenue based decision, but damn it really takes away from the site itself. Not really diggin the new look thus far.

    She will do the full court press and you know it.

  11. avatar Jp says:

    You are calling trump a narcissistic psychopath?
    I admit he’s not my first choice for the nomination, alot of unknowns…. but I will take unknowns over the lunatic that got the dnc nomination. People call obummer the worst presidential run? There will be no America left if she gets the office. You won’t even have this website to go on cause she will make it illegal.
    When you get mugged or raped…. don’t forget to piss or shit yourself. That will be your only defense.

  12. avatar Priest of the center mass says:

    I thought i accidentally clicked on face book…
    Read a few comments that slowly drifted off topic…thought for sure i was on fb then scrolled to the top and nope….it’s ttag
    Maybe just not enough coffee yet?

  13. avatar AnotherOne says:

    This new format is awful. I’m not surprised though, so many websites think they need to charge their format to stay hip and then end up doing something everyone hates. Change for the sake of change, the same reason my wife feels like she needs to move the furniture every year in the living room.

    Anywho for those that don’t like Trump and are staying home or voting for the doper Johnson, good news, Hillary is already a huge favorite, and looks to moonwalk to victory easily in November based on current polling. I’m still baffled how some can line up behind the mainstream media and crucify him for a few non-PC things he says from time to time and give up the Supreme Court basically forever by not voting for him. Any gun owner that does not support him has NO reason to complain in the future as their rights are stripped away by the D’s.

    1. avatar Southern Cross says:

      +1 from me. I’m already missing the arrows to open the next article.

      Between the two candidates, Trump will realize he has limits imposed by the constitution and congress. Hillary will try to impose her will regardless of the constitution and congress because she will believe she has a mandate.

  14. avatar A A Ron says:

    I like the new look!

  15. avatar FormerWaterWalker says:

    I’m OK with my vote not counting(at all) here in south Cook Co,IL). Except locally. The new format? Meh. I see my 1st comment was double posted too. DATING the content is needed. I’m just happy at how smoothly it’s running(so far). YES-DATING as in 6-8-2016…as far as the hildebeast I see a huge pizzed off uprising.

    1. avatar SteveInCO says:

      Agree on dating, and I want to see the actual time, not just “one hour ago.” Stuff posted yesterday probably won’t give the time at all.

      1. avatar FormerWaterWalker says:

        Wow- we agree on stuff! Ted Cruz included…BTW the huge print is EZ to read by my old eyes too(no need for reading glasses). Go back to RED guys-the green is awful…other than minor quibbles it’s better(so far).

        1. avatar SteveInCO says:

          Yeah, when I saw we were agreeing on something, I decided to go get a lottery ticket. 🙂

          My eyes see the new color as a sort of dull blue (it’s probably a dark cyan color, cyan being the combo of pure blue and pure green. But if you see it as a shade of green…well, I’ve known people to argue over where the dividing line is (one guy I know insists rusty copper is blue, not pale green). But (going back to the TTAG Teal Color) maybe people who hate it are seeing more green than blue? I see it as bluish, and don’t dislike it.

  16. avatar Bob Sempre says:

    Here is a good question to ask Hillery:

    What was the Founding Fathers original intent when they included the Right to Keep and Bear Arms in the Constitution?

    Do you think the RTKABA is still relevant today?

  17. avatar jwm says:

    We have 2 choices for 2016. Hillery or Trump. I’ll take Trump.

    As for the new site look? I didn’t have to reboot my computer 3 times to make this comment. Yay.

  18. avatar hellofromillinois says:

    Good ol’ Johnny Lott. Nothing like a guy that falsifies data and makes false personas to defend himself.

    1. avatar SteveInCO says:

      As opposed to false personas to go troll sites. Got it.

Write a Comment

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

button to share on facebook
button to tweet
Blue Force Gear Quote of the Day: Good Question http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2016/06/robert-farago/blue-force-gear-quote-day-good-question/" title="Email to a friend/colleague">
button to share via email