Previous Post
Next Post

I seem to have a severe reading comprehension problem. I frequently have trouble fathoming what passes for reason in the minds of many co-called mainstream media commentators. OK, I know Mike Lupica’s a loud-mouthed, wildly gesticulating lefty from New York. I get that and fully understand his viewpoint. Bud, damn, it really takes a twisted world view, not to mention incredible obtuseness, to say something of such monumental idiocy about the Norway massacre…

And Lupica is more than up to the task at hand:

We were reminded again that a gun in the hands of a true believer like Breivik is still the greatest weapon of mass destruction of them all. We are conditioned now to think of terrorism as planes flying into our buildings, or explosions in the London subway, or a stupid little amateur trying to blow up a car in Times Square. All it still takes is one guy with a gun.

Gosh, Mike, the families of the more than three thousand people who died on 9/11 might argue that point. I’m probably just having a senior moment, but I don’t recall anyone using a gun at all that day.

Let’s also not ask the decendents of the residents of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. I’m not saying those attacks weren’t warranted. They certainly were and they probably saved hundreds of thousands of American troops’ lives. But those WMDs did a pretty fair job, mass-destruction wise.

And I suppose Lupica thinks the Iranians are continuing to process uranium because they want to reduce their carbon footprint.

But show the proper respect, please. Lupica’s proclamation is no mean feat. You have to really apply yourself to crank out something on such a Goreian level of stupidity. True, this probably won’t achieve the fame of Al Gore’s pronouncement that “the internal combustion engine is a mortal threat . . . more deadly than that of any military enemy.” But let’s give Mike an E for effort, shall we?

Not satisfied, Lupica went on to admiringly quote Vidar Eldholm, the cultural director at the Norwegian Seamen’s Church in New York.

“In New York and now in Norway,” Vidar Eldholm was saying yesterday, “there is no way to protect yourself against such things.”

Except when there is. Anders Breivik was one armed man in a gun-free, target-rich environment. He was left to do his worst for sixty minutes. Had even one of the adults on that island been armed, scores of people might have been saved.

But that would have required another true believer. Someone who believes in the right of individuals to have the means to protect themselves when their lives are threatened. And that’s apparently too frightening for Lupica to contemplate.

Previous Post
Next Post


  1. It really makes you think that your never safe and you have to protect yourself. Also even if there are people in a uniforms, don’t let your guard down.

  2. I’m glad to see the Norway Incident finally covered in some manner here…even if no Mexicans were involved! (just joking)

    The problem with the 24 hour news cycle is that they have to fill 24 hours but only want to cover 6 hours of world events. That’s where the pundit comes in. They’re less for informative analysis and opinion than for pseudo-profound statements and theater. This guy talking is a perfect example of that.

    One guy with a gun could have definitely slowed this guy down on that island if not stopped him.

    I’m not sure the specifics but it’s kind of weird to me to have a bunch of political youth on an isolated island without some sort of security detail to begin with!

  3. “The problem with the 24 hour news cycle is that they have to fill 24 hours but only want to cover 6 hours of world events. That’s where the pundit comes in. They’re less for informative analysis and opinion than for pseudo-profound statements and theater. This guy talking is a perfect example of that.”

    Yep. “If it sounds good, say it!” …and keep saying it ad nauseam or until it becomes expedient to say something else. Never mind if there are contradictions, faulty logic, falsehoods or just plain silliness, just keep talking and eventually enough people will believe it.

    It’s this sort of talk, among other things, which has made reasonable conversation about anything controversial nearly impossible. It’s very frustrating.

  4. I’m tempted to say that he should stick to writing about sports, but he doesn’t know anything about that either because Lupica is just an idiot. See how that works?

    • Religion is the seed of some evil. Money is the seed of some evil. Mental illness is the seed of some evil. Envy is the seed of some evil. Ambition is the seed of some evil. Sometimes, evil doesn’t need a seed at all. It just is.

  5. The most dangerous tool against the inalienable rights of man is another man who thinks he knows what’s best for everyone else.

  6. Oh please, if Lupica mattered we would pay attention. The fact of the matter is that he has no idea what he is talking about, obviously. So why pay any attention to him or his ilk?

    • By himself Lupica might not matter, but he’s not alone. There are many like him and they never seem to get tired of saying what they say when they talk about gun control. If we ignore them they will prevail.

  7. How many gun deaths occur every year? In 2005, 10,000 homicides in the US ALONE were committed with firearms.

    The combined death toll from Hiroshima and Nagasaki was less than 250,000. In other words, at the current rate, more people in the US will be killed with firearms in 25 years, than have ever been killed with an atomic bomb.

    • Karmakaze
      How many people are killed in automobile accident? How many DUI drivers caused these accidents? Where the bars held responsible? I asked because Daniels point was guns are not WMD, one gun can only kill so many and can be countered by someone else with or without a gun. One atom bomb or canister of gas can kill millions. If you want to do numbers, death by infections disease far outnumber those by gun or car. Lastly this post was by Daniel not RF.

  8. I agree that’s silly hyperbole which makes too little sense to be an effective figure of speech. But the funny part is the way Daniel pretends it was a serious remark and counters it with all those examples.

  9. From the quote Lupica seems to mean it to be taken seriously…is there something I’m missing which should lead us to believe otherwise?


Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here