Previous Post
Next Post

We recently reported that MSNBC new anchor Rachel Maddow took her long-term partner to the gun range for their first date. And recommended busting caps for other potential soul mates. And yet here she is, telling Americans to accept a compromise on their natural, civil and Constitutionally protected right to keep and bear arms. A non-specified compromise. In other [non] words, Ms. Maddow is urging Americans to embrace the concept of change on gun laws, generally. Because guns! It’s the the same non-logic that informs the civilian disarmament movement to which she ascribes. Something must be done! For once I agree: we must roll back all the firearms-related laws that infringe on our gun rights. Lean forward! Move ahead! Try to detect it! It’s not to late . . . to whip it good. Just sayin’ . . . [h/t DrVino]

Previous Post
Next Post


  1. So much flashy editing; so little substance. It’s like a magician creating a diversion so the typical viewer won’t notice how the illusion works. Only it isn’t entertaining.

  2. Rachel Madcow…yikes. I had temporary hysterical blindness the last time you posted “her” video. Cease and desist.

  3. I was a fan of hers back when I didn’t know any better. The hassle I have with these “common sense gun law” requests is that the proponents don’t actually specifically state exactly the change and compromise they expect to see. So it means to me that they’re asking for a “total gun ban” which will more likely result in another Newtown disaster.

  4. Great. Now I have guys in black sleeveless turtle necks, wearing upside down flower pots on their head, stuck in my head.

    • People make all sorts of claims. Rudy Giuliani claims to support the second amendment.

      Rachel Maddow is an opportunistic media whore.

  5. I’ve said it for years…there are very few anti-gun people if you go by the strict meaning that they actually hate firearms. There are however a boat load of anti-you and me and all the other unwashed masses owning-guns elitists out there. They are totally miffed at the fact that in this country the people own the guns thus keeping in check their insatiable appetite for power. God bless the Founding Fathers of this Nation!

  6. Hey. If you’re going to continue to discuss anti-gun women can you at least focus on the hot, progressive, liber……….oh. Sigh. Nevermind…I’ll go back to prepping tomorrow’s dinner.

  7. Her beliefs do not represent a dichotomy, or paradox or contradiction. They certify her as a useful idiot.
    We all know what the idols do with useful idiots once they’re done being useful (or have an “Oh, wait a minute….” moment) don’t we?…

  8. This is ridiculous. What make wingnuts think that being for gun safety equates to being anti-gun? Your paranoia is only outpaced by your ignorance.

    • Le Chat, Maddow is on record claiming the AR is an “automatic weapon, and that gun murder is up (it is half of levels 20 years ago).

      You and she are the “wing nuts”. You don’t even know the basic facts of the issue

        • AR-style rifles/carbines are auto-loading/autoloaders, not automatic.

          Automatic is shorthand for fully-automatic (a machinegun), for those who know what the terms actually mean.

        • guyfromv, my guess a sockpuppet for “le chat”

          Half the statement is correct? No. both parts of the statements are utterly incorrect.

          Maddow has made dozens of factually incorrect statements on firearms and on firearms violence and law.

      • Exposing my brain to the facts, actual facts not regurgitated infographics/talking points got me to change sides from the gun grabbers to the gun owners/defenders.

        Get the basic facts. They support the pro-gun agenda, and not because of spin, because they are the facts.

    • “This is ridiculous. What make wingnuts think that being for gun safety equates to being anti-gun? Your paranoia is only outpaced by your ignorance.”

      Because the term “gun safety” is the new euphemism for “gun control”.

  9. It’s MSNBC. It’s not news it’s propaganda.

    Meadow is a talking head. LGBT flavor, but still a creature of the producers talking points, AND MSNBC as the most glaring example of the StateRunMedia. So, of course she lies, and sadly, she is also a hypocrite. Not the best role model for LGBT who have to push against so it I especially traditional convention, to embrace their own truth.

    I’m in favor of knowing what the anti-freedom crowds think and say, here.

    Keep your friends close and your enemies closer. Didn’t Sun Tzu say something similar?

    • I guess because I disagree with you I’m ‘anti-freedom’ so I’ll speak up. I think some of the stuff she said is hypocritical but there is nothing inherently hypocritical about liking guns and supporting gun control. I am a gun owner and have had the unfortunate necessity of using one in self defense. I also support some of the much-derided ‘common sense’ gun control like universal background checks and elimination of indiscriminate private sales because it makes sense to me that the laws on the books require this these to be reasonably enforceable and I mostly support the purchasing restrictions currently on the books. AWB, mag cap restrictions,’gun free zones’, CCW restrictions, and NFA status of SBRs and suppressors? These don’t make sense to me.

  10. Ps. That reminds me. W e should stop with the anti-aging shorthand and slang. Jus t as we point out it’s not about the tool, it’s about the person and their behaviour, we should s t art using slang that is more accurate; the anti-self defense mommies, the anti-liberty adventurers, the bitter propagandists for federal control, etc. We need something better.

  11. Actually, it’s her partner who is an NRA member and she took Rachel to the range, not the other way around.

    She remarked on her show (and yes I try and watch all sides of the debate) that she enjoyed shooting (at the range) but that’s where it should be, at the range. No one needs to have a gun for home or carry protection.

    But, when she interviewed the Kansas abortion provider who took over for the one murdered, she had no problem with her protecting herself with a CCW permit and firearm…now that’s hypocrisy!

  12. Christ are you all this bloodthirsty about gun control advocates? At least think long enough to realize that there is no immediate hypocrisy in using/enjoying guns and supporting some gun control measures. There is just no logical contradiction despite how much the author clearly wants there to be. Some of the specific stuff mentioned in the comments, however, is contradictory. Being against ccw permits and carrying in general is indefensible when advocating the opposite for specific cases. The body of this article, though, is rabid and thoughtless.

  13. Does anyone really watch these talking head, babbling idiots? Watch Big Bang or 2.5 Men instead. Punditocracy indeed.

Comments are closed.