“I think Congress has to rethink these town hall meetings right now,” Geraldo Rivera told Fox and Friends. “Unless they get the kind of security you get at an airport, with Gabby Giffords and now what happened with Steve Scalise, I think you’ve really got to understand that there is a kind of an urgent, aberrant, emotional involvement now, and for right now, we’ve got to cool it. We’ve got to be hyper-aware that our elected officials are vulnerable.” Because guns . . .

“I think that it’s really very, very serious and unsettling times, and there’s going to be great frustration on both sides — the extremists on both sides, with easy access to these killing weapons, assault rifles and so forth.”

“So forth” meaning fertilizer bombs? ‘Cause that’s the way Timothy McVeigh rolled. Of course, fertilizer remains unregulated in most states while “assault rifles” are banned in some states. Like California. Which didn’t stop the San Berarndino Islamic terror duo. Go figure, Geraldo.

And while you’re at it, consider the fact that politics is, was and always will be a “hot” topic. Why wouldn’t it be? It’s serious business; the forum where issues of life, death and freedom are hashed out. It directly affects the daily lives and future of all Americans.

Which is why America has a long history of “hot” rhetoric and yes, “fake news.” Compared to the early days of the republic, today’s language is positively genteel. As Eric Burns wrote in his book Infamous Scribblers: The Founding Fathers and the Rowdy Beginnings of American Journalism.

The golden age of America’s founding was also the gutter age of American reporting. The Declaration of Independence was literature. The New England Courant talked trash. The Constitution of the United States was philosophy; the Boston Gazette slung mud, Philadelphia’s Aurora was less a celestial presence than a ground-level reek.

Free speech is protected from government infringement by the First Amendment to the aforementioned Constitution. The first amendment. Short of actual death threats, anything goes.

As it should. If Democrats want to call for civilian disarmament, so be it. If Republicans want to claim disarmed Americans will be shipped off to “re-education camps,” so be it. As Republican Barry Goldwater said, “Moderation in the protection of liberty is no virtue; extremism in the defense of freedom is no vice.”

Sandy Hook a hoax? Truly despicable, but so what? Trump a misogynist fascist and stooge of capitalist fat cats? You’re entitled to that opinion, too. But if you think that this kind of incendiary rhetoric leads directly to violence, or that political violence is something new or entirely avoidable, it’s time for a reality check.

Of course, that doesn’t mean that defenders of liberty — or enemies of liberty — should use violence to defend or assert their beliefs. The fact that some think so says more about them than it does about the American experiment. Which is alive and well and shouting at the top its lungs. Is that really an issue worthy of self-loathing and cowardice?

Recommended For You

42 Responses to The Wussification of American Political Discourse . . .and Guns

  1. Geraldo Rivera carried a rifle when sailing around the Horn of Africa to fight off pirates but still wants to lecture us on “too many guns.”

    • He also had an armed guard in Baltimore when he covered the riots there. The guy apparently didn’t have a Maryland carry permit either.

    • Well he is a part of the enlighten elite, who the rules do not apply to because they need to guide the unwashed masses to utopia.

      “that doesn’t mean that defenders of liberty should use violence to defend or assert their beliefs”.

      Sorry Robert, but you are shit out of luck on this idea. They started this war (shooting and or cultural) so we have to finish it.

      It takes two to screw but one side to start a war…Your principles can by the highest and most noble on Earth, but in the face of attack if not defended, advanced and maintained they will be destroyed and replaced with non compatible and inferior once.

    • Hell, I provided armed security for Geraldo in Iraq back in ’03!! His biggest flaw at that time was always wanting to walk out in the middle of a gun fight! I spent more time pulling him behind cover than I did in the trigger, and that was unacceptable. We had to give him an ultimatum- either do as we say, or no more trips outside the wire. On a positive note, he let us use his satellite phone all the time. At that time, we got to call home for ten minutes every two weeks. We loved him for that.

  2. It’s not speech before an attack that scares me. It’s speech after one. Geraldo “Empty Vault” Rivera mentioned Gabby Giffords and Steve Scalise, so let’s look at what the rhetoric was after each of those.

    After a clearly insane person shot Giffords at a public gathering, the rhetoric was searing hot about how all gun owners were responsible for this and he represented us and ban assault clipazines and so on. Total freakout by the left. He was caught, both sides were happy, and it moved to trial and sentencing.

    With Scalise, though, his shooter had a clear progressive mindset and specifically went out on a mission to kill his political enemies. He was not “smile for the mugshot” insane like Giffords’ would-be assassin was. He had a hit list and drove hundreds of miles to execute his plan. What did the left say after that? They’re blaming everyone but the shooter and themselves. Gun owners, conservatives, even Scalise himself. Anything to maintain the illusion that they are perfect angels sent to help. That’s what scares me. “He earned this with his policies.” “He deserved it because he threatens us with his politics.” By that logic, would gun owners be free to kill Democrats because they threaten us with their policies? I think Feinstein’s policies will be the end of the country. Can I go to her office and let loose with an AK?

    There’s a difference between political attacks (with words, of course) and condoning violence. Many actors on the left have found that line and leapt over it. That’s a dangerous line to ignore.

    • To your question, only if you are of the proper ethnic background, gender fluid identity, and the proper sexual orientation, then there would be no question that your actions were CLEARLY the fault of the victim.

      The above is an example of invective that does not move the conversation along towards consensus and unity, just stating that for the several viewers of the democrat persuasion who peruse these pages hunting for conflict. In my defense, I don’t normally produce such uncaring rhetoric, so this is a bit of a vacation for me.

    • I agree, JRO. For Robert to suggest that the differences between the left and right in this country are no different and not of greater concern than any other time in our history is to me, delusional, unless he is talking about the times just before our civil war.

      The left/progressives, birthed in the ideology of Marxism/communism, are even more dehumanizing towards most human beings than their Democratic ancestors that saw all blacks as sub-hunan and voted against freeing them. Now, with the leftists cut loose of any anchor in biblical based ethics and morals, I see them as being even more homicidal and murderous than any other group in history, except for possibly Ghengis Khan and his Golden Horde or Atila the Hun. The proof is in the pudding.

      Over 50 million of the unborn murdered, and the same mentality that allowed the Weather Underground to plan to murder 25 million Americans that would not be re-educated, once their marxist revolution succeeded, is the mentality that imbues many if not most of the regressives in power in the Democratic party today. The fact that retired Professor Bill Ayers from the university of Chicago, as an unrepentant former co-founder of the Weather Underground terrorist group(“I feel we did not do enough”)yet he was not denounced by the prominent members of the left in Congress or academia, which says it all. This is because many of them hold the same mentality that the ends justify the means, and if they could commit mass murder of those Americans that will not be re-educated to bow down to the demi-god the state, many would not hesitate.

      The fact that so many prominent leftists also have nothing but praise for the murderous thugs Castro and the once head of his secret police, Che Guevera; (yes, that Che Guevera that is shown so much reverence on so many T-shirts and posters by the leftist) that tortured and killed thousands of innocent men and women, (exact figures are unknown)and how Castro held complete tyrannical control of Cuba for decades, also speaks to this mentality.

      I believe the only reason they haven’t done so till now is because of how strong so many Americans still hold to our traditional freedoms, and the number of firearms held by patriotic Americans.

    • Rivera et al. have a goal in mind. They are willing to lie, cheat, and otherwise abuse the public in order to reach that goal. Speeches like these are merely grandstanding, a tool to maintain the narrative; facts, errors, inconsistencies, and outright hypocrisy are irrelevant, so long as the public believes what they have been told.

  3. POS (D) constantly asking the (R)s to fall back, fall back, fall back, fall back, fall back, fall back, fall back, fall back . . .

  4. Hey, RF, I bet you didn’t mean it, but ARs weren’t banned in CA when the San Bernardino shooting happened.

    • They had made an illegal (in California) modification to them, though. They removed the child-saving bullet buttons and installed Military-Style™ magazine releases. They used doubleplusungood High-Capacity™ magazines, too.

      • Good point both of you, but I still think it’s misleading the say that a law didn’t work when it wasn’t in place.

  5. I’m ashamed, our solution to troubled times is not to fight for what makes us strong as a group but to hide our precious elected officials behind a veil of armed guards and further cutoff from those they represent.

    You want people to take you seriously? Take a risk and stand up for your beliefs and look everyone in the eyes when you make bold or controversial claims.

    And if someone wants to take a potshot at you then just hope that you, your (reasonably sane) opponents and your constituents are armed and ready to take that person down.

  6. I seem to recall some heated rhetoric before. Led to the founding of our Republic..and the CSA. Both remediated by force of arms. Guess who has the vast majority of guns NOW?!? 🙂

  7. Geraldo is the biggest gun grabber on Fox News and a despicable human being. He was Jerry Springer before Jerry outdid him in the sleaze department and now he hocks his bullshit on Fox. Greg Gutfeld told him ‘screw you’ over his anti gun crap to his face live on the air, which I am eternally proud of.

  8. The only way this kind of crap will stop is if We The People stop it. These progressive liberal fools seem to want to use violence as a way to get their way. Maybe we need to show them what real violence looks like. When children act up and refuse to mind their manners sometimes you have to paddle their little backsides (sic). I believe that time has come. If it isn’t stopped now it will only get worse.

      • Because he didn’t want to type “kick their Leftist scum-sucking asses”?

        (Just offering a WAG, here…)

        • Setting the phrase off with ellipsis would clearly indicate such an intent. Sic is “used in brackets after a copied or quoted word that appears odd or erroneous to show that the word is quoted exactly as it stands in the original, as in a story must hold a child’s interest and ‘enrich his [ sic ] life.'”

          As an irrelevant side note, the example google uses isn’t a good one. I don’t think using a masculine gendered pronoun is “odd or erroneous” enough to call for the use of sic. The use of it is dehumanizing, and the use of one is to high falutin even if it can be made to work. These new gender neutral pronouns are just stupid. Therefore, any pronoun use in the example could be considered “odd or erroneous.”

  9. Geraldo Rivera is such a despicable example of a citizen, claiming to understand the USA Constitution yet lacking a clue (ignorance =curable) or stupidity (indicating a lack to be correctable by correct provable facts and knowledge) indicates his disease is or should be terminal. I am sure he is a nice fellow, never meeting him. However, he leans to the stupid side more than the ignorant side, IMHO. He could NOT live with his birth name so he changed his name to fit in with “minorities”? WTH?

    Jerry Rivers brought no fame as an upper class white boy.

    So now, using his minority name, professing to represent the “vocal minority” in the USA, SCREAMS to obliterate Creator given rights which the bill of rights GUARANTEED by the Federal Government could not and would not infringe on American rights as compared to say, the prohibition of liquor or other subsequent “amendments”, which only the collective “STATES” could amend, he now calls for restrictions to prevent our ultimate resistance to tyranny and the uneducated such as himself pursue. Go FIGURE!

  10. Short of actual death threats, anything goes.

    Well, there’s also slander, liable, bearing false witness, … which can get you in pretty deep shit civilly. But yeah, it takes very explicit threats, incitement to violence or outcry that threatens public safety to get you in the hoosegow.

  11. As a black kid in Sacramento CA, I watched as the KKK marched in front of the capital in the late 1970s. I watch as white jews supported white men in sheets with guns marching through black neighborhoods. The jews, like Jerry Rivers, said it was so important that these marches happened in support of the First amendment. But they never supported gun rights for blacks.
    Now all of a sudden its not save to have a public meeting with your elected representatives.

    Bernie Sanders words inspired the assassin. Bernie would be inspiring the Spartacus League in 1920s Germany as they shot people and set off bombs. The Germans couldn’t have guns.

    The best response to these attacks against the 1st amendment is to have well dressed peaceful people openly carrying guns standing outside the meeting room or if allowed inside the meeting room, like they can in Virginia. Or in the parking lot or the sidewalks.

    You say the second amendment protects the First amendment???
    Prove it.
    Last year we had open carriers at the Republican Convention. All was peaceful.
    The fixed bayonet is not obsolete.

  12. “I think that it’s really very, very serious and unsettling times, and there’s going to be great frustration on both sides — the extremists on both sides, with easy access to these killing weapons, assault rifles and so forth.”

    From what I’ve seen lately, I’m more worried about the extremists on the left than the ones on the right.

  13. Pro Tip: Whenever Gerald Rivera ( his real name) shows up on Fox ,just change channels.

    Works every time and every other channel is safe because no other news station wants anything to do with him.

  14. I’m warming up to the idea of Democrats voting to voluntarily exclude themselves from owning guns. Why that could reduce legal guns by 50%, surely the Brady Bloomers would back it? For the Children!

  15. It is really remarkable that Republicans have been consistently supporting rights of free speech and the media throughout everything while the left has been screaming and becoming increasingly frantic and violent. Why? Because the left lost with their position espousing control of guns, control of people’s money, control of peoples’ health. Their position and everything they were trying to force on an unwilling people was rejected. Freedom won, really, but to the left that is a horrible, horrible, horrible thing because they are less able to tell people how to live.

    Boo. Hoo.

    We’re all Americans. We should all support our freedoms. All of them, including the freedom to tell the one-world globalist, “you’re nothing special, America” left wing socialists and communists to get lost and leave us alone. And they can say whatever they want about that, but as soon as they break a law, they get caught and punished just like everyone else.

  16. This is one area where I think taking a philosophical look at things is useful.

    War is what politics is when talking has failed. What does that tell us about politics? That politics is a type of combat/competition but generally without the violence associated with skirmishes or outright open warfare. Effectively politics is war but (usually) without the bloodshed.

    It tells you that evolutionary biology is correct. We’re a violent primate but one with a big brain. We’ve found its generally better to talk things out than to beat each other to death over a fruit tree but ultimately we’re just using our new found intelligence to paint a veneer over our, far older and more deeply engrained, tribalistic selves.

    We will squabble and argue in groups but the capacity and the desire for violence is right under the surface. Scratch that thin layer of civilisation and we go straight at each other without much hesitation and with very little remorse or control. For some people, like the twatwaffle shooter last week, that scratch doesn’t have to be deep.

    • “The heart of democracy is violence, Miss Tagwynn,” Esterbrook said. “In order to decide what to do, we take a count of everyone for and against it, and then do whatever the larger side wishes to do. We’re having a symbolic battle, its outcome decided by simple numbers. It saves us time and no end of trouble counting actual bodies—but don’t mistake it for anything but ritualized violence. And every few years, if the person we elected doesn’t do the job we wanted, we vote him out of office—we symbolically behead him and replace him with someone else. Again, without the actual pain and bloodshed, but acting out the ritual of violence nonetheless. It’s actually a very practical way of getting things done.”
      ― Jim Butcher, The Aeronaut’s Windlass

  17. You’d think he’d be a bit more open to gun rights and armed self defense after his daughter nearly got culturally enriched during the Paris/Batalcan terror attacks, but I guess not.

  18. “‘So forth’ meaning fertilizer bombs?”

    If bullshit was explosive, Geraldo would have blown up years ago.

  19. The first amendment. Short of actual death threats, anything goes.

    I am going to disagree. Anything (speech) goes except advocating for harm against someone who has done no wrong. Obviously, this means we cannot advocate for the assault, battery, rape, or murder of an innocent person. It also means that we cannot advocate for stealing someone’s property or damaging their credit/reputation through libel or slander.

  20. That’s true Robert. Anyone that would ever propose that using anything other than the ballot box to fight tyranny is obviously unhinged and probably just out right insane, and we could never accept them as true Americans..

    Oh, wait, our Founding Fathers, after multiple attempts to effect change through their English courts and attempts to reason with their King, finally, as a last resort, resorted to the bullet box to fight against tyranny by their own English government.

    Which is what the second amendment specifically states in the preamble. “A well regulated militia, being necessary to the defense of a free state”.

    Oh Well, I guess that throws out that theory.

  21. Incite:
    verb
    encourage or stir up (violent or unlawful behavior).
    “the offense of inciting racial hatred”
    synonyms: stir up, whip up, encourage, fan the flames of, stoke up, fuel, kindle, ignite, inflame, stimulate, instigate, provoke, excite, arouse, awaken, inspire, engender, trigger, spark off, ferment, foment; More
    urge or persuade (someone) to act in a violent or unlawful way.
    “he incited loyal subjects to rebellion”

Leave a Reply

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