New York Times Slimes NRA Spokesperson Dana Loesch

Dana-Loesch (courtesy youtube.com)

Yesterday, The New York Times published a profile of NRA Spokesperson Dana Loesch called The National Rifle Association’s Telegenic Warrior. Subtitled How Dana Loesch, a onetime Democrat, became a Second Amendment spokeswoman too incendiary for some right-wingers to handle. This was never going to end well . . .

Times writer Laura M. Holson starts her hit piece from the expected paranoid “gun nut” angle.

Dana Loesch has a biblical inscription tattooed on her forearm, a reference to a passage in the Book of Ephesians that calls for Christians to wear holy armor to protect themselves from a dark world. It is an apt precept for Ms. Loesch, a 39-year-old conservative radio talk-show host and political commentator who views the world through a lens of fear and violence.

It is why she has an arsenal of firearms strategically placed in safes throughout her home. She keeps a handgun near her bed in the event of an intruder, she said, which she can use until she finds a more powerful shotgun or rifle nearby. She sometimes tucks a gun in the small of her back. Other times, she keeps a knife in her purse.

“Evil is real,” she said over a plate of barbecued sausage last month in a suburban restaurant.

And if there is a question about what God has to do with any of this, she keeps a sign in the window of the house that she and her family recently vacated. “This home protected by the good lord and a gun,” it read. “If you came here to steal or do harm you might meet them both.”

A bit extreme, but fair enough. I mean the account is factual. It’s only when we reach the end of the piece that Ms. Holson gets jiggy with it.

“I’ve been told I’m a whore for the N.R.A.,” Ms. Loesch said. “I’m a prostitute for the N.R.A. But I believe so strongly in the natural right to bear arms. I feel so passionately about that.”

The way that passage is constructed it sounds like Ms. Loesch is saying (admitting?) that she’s a prostitute for the NRA. I highly doubt she’d refer to herself that way. It’s a cheap trick.

Unintentional? Maybe. But this sure isn’t:

Ms. Loesch’s boss, Mr. LaPierre, has a history of inflammatory rhetoric at the N.R.A., which has five million members. In 1995, he was forced to apologize after President George H. W. Bush canceled his N.R.A. membership in protest. The N.R.A. had sent out a fund-raising letter calling law enforcement “jackbooted government thugs” who threatened to hurt Americans. “That is what they do,” said Representative Kathleen Rice, a Democrat of New York, who has sparred with Ms. Loesch, also on Twitter. “The N.R.A says their members are under attack.”

What is this proverbial kick in the NRA’s balls doing in the middle of the profile? The Times could semi-plausibly claim it sets up the bit about Ms. Loesch’s death threats, but we know better.

The hit piece wants to end by criticizing Ms. Loesch, souring any readers who may have actually taken a shining to the feisty firearmsista. I have a feeling Ms. Holson’s editors channeled their inner HAL and said “I’m sorry Laura. I’m afraid you can’t do that.”

So Ms. Holson ends with a quote from Ms. Loesch where she digs herself:

“We are all sinners,” she said. “We are all people who have messed up. I fall short every single day.”

Another cheap trick. But what do you expect from a newspaper that’s vehemently and publicly sworn to support and enable civilian disarmament, that posted this anti-gun editorial on their front page?

Nothing less.

comments

  1. avatar CalGunsMD says:

    I’d read this article myself. Alas, I don’t keep birds.

  2. avatar Rammerjammer says:

    Dana is a hate filled troll who only closes off the “big tent” for Gun Rights with videos like “The Godless Left” for the NRA. Her rabid hyperbole does nothing to invite fence sitters over to protecting the Second Amendment.

    1. avatar GunzGunzGunz says:

      Unfortunately, the gun rights movement has been hijacked by anti-abortionists, religious zealots, and right wingers. To them, gun rights are secondary issues and POTG are their pawns.

      1. avatar Hank says:

        Ok, now name one true left wing gun rights supporter.

        1. avatar FedUp says:

          Mike the Gun Goof Weiser? (LOL)

        2. avatar JW says:

          I lean liberal on many issues.

          I also believe that the 2nd amendment protects a human right to self defense and provides for the possession and public carry, concealed or not, of personal weapons (arms) at least equivalent to those issued to a modern US infantry soldier – which does, of course, include fully automatic rifles… though one might run into some practical concealment issues there 🙂

          I am an NRA life member and RSO and I have made regular contributions to the 2nd amendment foundation. I don’t join and support gun rights groups to promote or oppose any other position in our culture wars – there are other groups available for that. If you are interested in preserving the right to keep and bear arms I am happy to ally with you on our common concern – wherever else we might disagree.

        3. avatar Tom Moscone says:

          Sam Harris et al? That whole movement isn’t exactly “leftist”, but it is extremely “liberal” in the traditional sense. E.g. they believe in individual liberty.

      2. avatar Cloud says:

        Lol yea because abortion isn’t the taking of a human life or anything right?

        You abortion absolutists are the zealots and by what, anti-science. Science is proving more and more that abortion is indeed, murder.

        http://dailycaller.com/2018/01/21/science-arguments-abortion/

      3. avatar John says:

        Since you seem to support abortion, perhaps you can be the first one of your group who can explain why you aren’t pronounced dead until your heart stops beating, but abortion supporters don’t believe you’re alive when it starts?

        1. avatar Gov. William J Le Petomane says:

          You’re wasting your keystrokes. No amount of logic or scientific reasoning will sway abortion enthusiasts because to admit they’re wrong is to admit they’ve been complicit in the deaths of over 50 million people.

        2. avatar Bob says:

          John, I am as anti-abortion, pro-life as you are.

          However, I must point out that the argument you just used does not work. It is not when the heart stops beating. It is when the brain stops functioning (brain death) that is used to define death in hospitals today.

          Don’t change your position on abortion, but you do need to stop using that argument, because it does not support your position, OK?

      4. avatar Carl B. says:

        Horses***.

    2. avatar tsbhoa.p.jr says:

      ojoy, pajamaslammer has returned.

    3. avatar Garrison Hall says:

      Well, this article sure brought out the trolls in a hurry.

    4. avatar ENSITUE says:

      To imply that the LIMPs will move away from their fundamentalist Marxist religion and become non-violent, responsible, American citizens has been proven again and again to be the basest sort of sophistry. Only when the free choppa rides have run out of passengers will the Leftist insanity end.

    5. avatar TruthTellers says:

      Yeah, I don’t think Dana is a positive symbol for gun rights and the 2nd amendment. She comes off as the stereotype of what all anti-gunners think gun owners are.

      If she’d tone down on the “if you believe in this or don’t believe in that, then you’re not a true defender of the 2nd amendment” crap and she wasn’t a member of the NRA, I would probably support her. I do think our rights come from God, nature, or nature’s God, but you can’t say that the right to armed self defense only applies to Christians. That’s bullshit.

    6. avatar NateInPA says:

      There are no “fence sitters” in this debate. There are only those that are for self preservation, or those that would rather die at someone else’s hands.

      That’s as dumb as saying there are fence sitters in the abortion debate.

  3. avatar GS650G says:

    Dana is a brave woman in the face of adversity. It would be easier to be quiet and just go along.

  4. avatar pieslapper says:

    I would wrap fish with the paper, but I’m afraid it might taint the fish.

    1. avatar tsbhoa.p.jr says:

      there is already some fish in the ‘taint.

      1. avatar strych9 says:

        *slow clap*

      2. avatar tsbhoa.p.jr says:

        i’ll be here all week. try the buffalo wings and a black rye saison. don’t forget to tip your bar gal. straight home, now.

      3. avatar Tom in Oregon says:

        I may have thrown up in my mouth a little bit…

  5. avatar jwtaylor says:

    New York Times? Never heard of it.

    1. avatar Rick the Bear says:

      “New York Times? Never heard of it.”

      To borrow from Andrew Klavan: a former newspaper.

  6. avatar Bob Watson says:

    Dana Loesch strikes me as being bright, articulate and tough. I assume that when she selects details of her personal life, for release to word murdering propagandists employed by extremist, left wing rags, she knows what she is doing. It is reminiscent of the tactics used by the current occupant of the white house.

  7. avatar HP says:

    It’s worth repeating that if the leftists in this country truly wish to discredit the NRA, then they need to stop proving them right.

    1. avatar BLoving says:

      ☝️👏
      🤠

  8. avatar Michael says:

    Fools mock what they do not understand.

  9. avatar Darkman says:

    The New York Times has for many decades been a Left Wing Rag. It uses the same tactics as the Fascist era De Sturmer used to support the Nazi’s. Use defamation to attempt to discredit anyone who doesn’t follow their Ideology. Twist others beliefs to make them look and seem evil all the while claiming purity of intent. Didn’t turn out very well for the Jews of the time. Keep Your Powder Dry…

  10. avatar The_Resistantis says:

    No bigger crime than wandering off the democrat plantation. That’s why they viciously attack people like Dana Loesch or Ben Carson.

  11. avatar Jim Bullock says:

    NRADana is kinda the last person you’d want giving Pravda on the Hudson an interview on substance. BUT, you gotta know there’s gonna be a hit piece whether she talks to them or not. What would they have printed if they weren’t talking about her tattoos?

    Of course, they’ll cheat. Live to air, or you give them only quotes crafted so the words can’t be sliced n diced. It isn’t a conversation, they aren’t looking to understand and they’ll make it about weird n distasteful you, as Uncle Saul taught them.

    Yet, declining to play the crooked game has costs, too.

    Sadly, with this hit piece, both players net out, throwing red meat to their already converted, and, oddly, the other side. I’m not sure whether over all, doing the interview was a net gain for the not-anti-gun position. (<- That's good. I'm gonna use that.)

    NRADana has cogent, on-point, anecdotes about why she's not-anti-gun that anyone honestly interviewing for that article would uncover:

    – Former D? Why the change? (Realized D policies harmed her life n surroundings.)

    – Why does she think guns are protective? (Not her gun, in fact did that for her in a real situation. With bonus if she uses the Michelle Obama quote every not-anti-gun person should flog constantly.)

    – Why'd she move? (Death threats n stalking, extending to her kids. Ask the cops, reporter-person. Guns in home make a different kind of sense if someone's threatening yr kid.)

    The theme *under* Pravda on the Hudson's piece is "Crazy Christians." The article is organized assuming that gun nuts are nuts first, believing in evil. They tool up because the voices in their heads tell them to. They're the "irredeemables" we were warned about. I gotta believe someone in that newsroom knew of those stories n they steered around them.

    While it's sound theology, morality, n even ethics to say "We're all sinners." the better not-anti-gun argument goes: "Sometimes the only thing that'll stop someone doing something bad to you, or your kid, is actually stopping them. I think people have that right. And I want that option for myself."

    Saying stuff that way isn't NRADana's role or persona. For the not-anti-gun position, she's a telegenic mom with tattoos, making a case that gunny folks aren't necessarily trolls by simply being the personal opposite of President Lurch of the NRA.

    1. avatar TX_Lawyer says:

      They think we are all “bitter clingers.” They think any reference to sincerely held faith is ludicrous. They think most people think like them. It’s honestly sad. I pity them.

      I usually agree with Loesch. I don’t really like her.

  12. avatar Gov. William J Le Petomane says:

    ‘…the house that she and her family recently vacated.’

    What, no mention of WHY her family recently vacated their house? People driven from their homes because of credible death threats and then they paint them as nuts for keeping guns in the house in case of an intruder? I’m sure they gave Martin Luther King Jr. the same treatment, I suppose…

  13. avatar Rick the Bear says:

    “…Ms. Loesch, a 39-year-old HOT, HOT, HOT conservative radio talk-show host and political commentator…”

    FIFY

    1. avatar TX_Lawyer says:

      Also, it’s Mrs. Loesch. It’s not like we don’t know she is married. Using Ms. when you don’t know is fine. Using it when you do know is just feminist nonsense.

      1. avatar Salty Bear says:

        Identifying someone based on whether or not they’re married is just nonsense.

        FIFY

        1. avatar TX_Lawyer says:

          Identifying someone based on whether or not they’re married is just accurate.

          FIFY

      2. avatar Gov. William J Le Petomane says:

        Lucky bastard…

  14. avatar st381183 says:

    The NRA no longer has 5 million members. They have 4,999,999 members because I resigned my NRA membership in favor of supporting Gun Owners of America. Tired of the NRA giving away freedom then asking for my money to buy them back.

  15. avatar Salty Bear says:

    “The way that passage is constructed it sounds like Ms. Loesch is saying (admitting?) that she’s a prostitute for the NRA…. It’s a cheap trick.”

    I see what you probably didn’t mean to do there.

  16. avatar former water walker says:

    I love Dana. I loathe the NY Slimes…that’s about it.

  17. avatar Garrison Hall says:

    Dana got targeted for a hit piece because she’s very good at what she does. I have a feeling she regards this article as a compliment.

  18. avatar Yellow Devil says:

    How sexist and misogynistic of the NYTs. Oh wait, nevermind, only the modern left can cast that rhetoric without thought or reason.

  19. avatar GS650G says:

    Your making progress when the NYT goes after you with a hit piece

  20. avatar Sneaky White 13 says:

    Dana…. GOOD!
    nyt……shit-hole fake news..second only to cnn.

    Only time I like the nyt is when they are laying off “workers” and pissing & moaning about losing money and readers.

    BTW, the nyt loves them some Schumer, and him putting a load of illegal aliens ahead of AMERICAN citizens. He also wants all those illegals to vote demonrat…

    Also, GOD, and the CONSTITUTION RULES the sane USA. The rest read and believe the nyt.

    1. avatar TX_Lawyer says:

      The New York Times isn’t all bad. Remember when they blamed the Democrats for Schumer’s Shutdown? “Democrats Seem Set to Block Bill to Keep Government Open.” – New York Times headline two days ago. It’s not as good as the Hill headline “Schumer’s shutdown reveals: Democrats will destroy America just to spite Trump.”

      1. avatar GS650G says:

        And they have 64 other articles lynching Trump daily

        1. avatar TX_Lawyer says:

          They’re just mostly bad. It’s kind of like mostly dead.

          https://youtu.be/d4ftmOI5NnI?t=39

  21. avatar ll says:

    Most NYT readers would read the whore and prostitute comments and see them as ugly anti women slurs, not associate them with the woman being unjustly attacked using her gender

    That said, I don’t think it is possible to slime someone using as ugly, hate filled propaganda as does Ms. loesch. She’s already maximum slimy. Our enemies couldn’t write a better script designed to awaken hate and violence towards their countrymen than her ads

  22. avatar ironicatbest says:

    She’s almost 40 years old, wow, sure doesn’t look it.

    1. avatar GS650G says:

      She should run for Senate

  23. avatar TruthTellers says:

    She didn’t say she wasn’t a prostitute for the NRA, but she basically said that she’s so passionate about the 2nd amendment that she probably would “entertain” a few senators with her big tits in Trump’s DC hotel to make sure they vote for HR38. Somebody tell Mitch McConnell he might have a change with her if he brings HR38 to the floor for a vote.

  24. avatar Kenneth G Maiden says:

    Dana has my support. The NRA not so much. GOA is my go to National fighter. I’d advise all to do as well. Gun Owners of America does not sellout like that other group of seven and six figure income money grabbing turncoats.

  25. avatar J says:

    Shall Not Be Infringed!!!
    Period.FullStop.F$&k You if you don’t understand.
    If a American Soldier can Bear it, so can a “Civilian”
    Gov’t is inherently evil because of it’s Structure.
    It’s to big and believes it is Royal.
    On those just those grounds, A Global EMP strike is Righteous.

  26. avatar AFGus says:

    There is not one single Conservative, Pro-America, Pro-Constitution, Pro-Second Amendment citizen who’s had their position on the NRA and Dana changed due to this ignorant New York RagTimes article, so what good is it other than to give anti-gun liberals a self-woodie. The only people who use that rag for anything other than to line the bottom of their bird cages, or potty train their puppies already have a negative view of both Dana and the NRA. As far as I’m concerned, the NYT and the non-journalists who write for them can pi ss up a rope.

  27. avatar Ben says:

    Wow did these comments go off topic, as normally happens with the anonymity the internet provides.
    If a loaded gun lies on a table and no one approaches it for 10000 years, how many people will it kill?
    When was the last man made creation that was “uninvented”? I wish we could uninvent the car, all tech, and especially insurance companies and pharmaceuticals. All are sperately responsible for more deaths than guns, even if you multiplied gun deaths by 10. Liberals are dreamers and Kool Aid drinking fools. The government will never take care of you. If guns are taken away, we will all be led to the gas chamber, regardless of left or right, only based on financial standing as always.

  28. avatar Jim says:

    Dana films stupid fearmongering nonsense for the NRA and should be ignored just like Dom Rasso.

  29. avatar Victoryman says:

    Love Dana L. She is right on target………and lives in the (Empty) heads of those like the writer for the New York Slimes. Keep up the good work Dana. God Bless you. We love you. Never forget……the are more of us than “Them.”

  30. avatar Molon Labe says:

    I like Dana. She is a strong woman. Ok, she can be hyperbolic at times, but at least she doesn’t shrink from her convictions. Regarding those who are left of center and pro-2A. Great, but seldom have I met a Democrat politician in recent times who is pro-2A. Everything they have done lately is anti-2A. They are just as hyperbolic in their rhetoric and the focus is to penalize law-abiding citizens and to make seld-defense, recreational shooting that much more difficult e.g. look at CT, CA and NJ. Over the years, I have grown more intolerant of the left when it comes to the 2A. I am reasonable and rational when the facts are presented when keeping guns out of the hands of prohibited persons. Restricting magazine size soured me on anything anymore they bring forth.

  31. avatar Jay in Florida says:

    Im a fan of hers. She says what she believes in with no bullshit sugar coating of it.
    Like anyone else. If you don’t want to hear what she has to say. Turn her off. Just like I wont buy a newspaper. For any reason. Papers don’t contain news. Just some idiot from CNNs parroted thoughts. Or the other way around maybe??
    The Times isn’t fit to line a bird cage. The bird might get upset reading it……..

Write a Comment

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

button to share on facebook
button to tweet
button to share via email