Truth that the MSM needs to air

IMHO, it's pretty damned sad that a TV show that is over a decade old tells a poignant truth that I have yet to currently hear on the radio or TV political talk shows from our alleged "liberally biased media". This clip from "The West Wing" says it all:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bFIYLimyRHU

 

One of the greatest tools of the devil is to confuse.
Its no big deal bro, If you are on the right side of thinking.
It is what it is.
I personally would not put too much stock in Hollywood if I were a critical "decent" person.
They are clowns that the stupid see as hero's
So in short, Hollywood has become nothing but a cheap carnival act that only the truly stupid take seriously.
If you have a job and pay taxes and are not on the welfare you can see this.
Silly entertainment, that the silly and the unproductive take to heart.
But, if you are a productive citizen and need to relax and take in how stupid Hollyweird has become. Well that is relaxing in of its self.
Hollywood has jumped the shark, and I guess they had to with all the perverts that feel comfortable with being perverts.
Hollywood is just like the modern music industry in the sense that they appease the lowest of the low.
I have not been to a movie theater in years. Hollywood lost me a long time ago with their cheap CG cartoon crap.

 

Oh, I'm sorry.....I was waiting for you to actually respond to the CONTENT of what was being said...which was a truth. If you can't or won't address that, then spare yourself and the readers all this other clap trap.

 

Yes, very sad. The purpose of free speech has been being abridged further and further since 1792 when the BOR was written.

The most meaningful truths we can share are those which establish the form of government that is limited and has safeguards for our unalienable rights. If we do not begin, again, to share, understand and agree with those social compacts, agreements between our ancestors, its gets sadder and sadder.

Effective action needs to be taken, and taken soon. Not just any action either. Action based in law and with UNITY. Basically only the people will preserve the rights and freedoms we hold dear. Our lawful and peaceful revolution is needed NOW.

I did watch the video. I don't often because I'm normally on a phone, but not today.

It is a commentary on gun control. It ignores the manipulation of the people by media, it ignores the fact that America really has no culture that teaches common sense perspectives that originate behaviors. It ignores that America was taken over unconstitutionally in 1871.

It does not share the purpose of free speech.

 

Why does the guy lie and say it is only about a militia?

It clearly states "...the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

Yet the tv show decides to not include it?

This is a perfect example of media bias IMO. Thx op


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

Its simple. The ONLY people who will have the guns taken away are the ones that are NOT actually the problem. THAT's the truth. The gang bangers. The drug dealers. All the unregistered guns causing all the major problems, will only be found when the cops catch someone with one and by then, they've already shot someone. We can't even stop HUMANS from coming and going through our borders and the govt is supposed to be stop inanimate objects? And guess what? The illegal humans are far more dangerous and cost the country so much more than guns shooting people who don't actually deserve it. All the gang bangers knocking each other off are actually doing everyone a favor. People deciding to shoot themselves...so what?

Innocent lives really aren't as big a number as it seems. Remove suicides, all the idiots shot by cops and all the gang bangers and you're more likely to die from lightning or slipping in the tub or choking on a cookie.

 

The truth is somewhere between Roger Moore and Ted Nugent.

 

I believe Hollywood purposely targets the ignorant and uninformed for a reason.
As Draco previously mentioned, your TV show that you seem to think tells a poignant truth out right deceived you about the second amendment! And they also did a good job misinforming you on US gun deaths, the actual statistics tell a different story.
Your "poignant truth" TV show made it look like there were 32 thousand Americans killed by guns, what the don't say id that 60% of those deaths are suicide and the remains majority are committed by gang members.
What if they told you the truth, that Switzerland for instance encourages it's citizens to own and carry guns yet has one of the lowest violent gun deaths in the world?

The truth is, you got duped by Hollywood and that was totally their ntention.

 

As to your last sentence....neither do you....because in effect you refuse to acknowledge the truth and facts presented in the clips.

Spare us all this BS, because either your butt does NOT live here or you are doing quite well by a system you profess to hate, as you seem to have disposable income and free time to proselytize your bogus propaganda.

Start your own thread and stop trying to hijack others, will ya please?

- - - Updated - - -

just as I thought, another willfully ignorant right wing crank. Adios.

 

Because he DID NOT SAY IT WAS JUST ABOUT MILITIA.....he points out that folk like you love to OMIT that part of the amendment as if it's something separate or irrelevant....as opposed to what it actually is.....A COMPREHENSIVE PART OF THE WHOLE AMENDMENT.

Your a perfect example of what the clip is about...willful ignorance.

 

Table 10 Number of deaths from 113 selected causes, Enterocolitis due to Clostridium difficile, drug-induced causes, alcohol-induced causes, and injury by firearms, by age: United States, 2013

Accidental discharge of firearms (W32-W34) - 505
Intentional self-harm (suicide) by discharge of firearms (X72-X74) - 21,175
Assault (homicide) by discharge of firearms (*U01.4,X93-X95) - 11,208
Discharge of firearms, undetermined intent (Y22-Y24) - 281

Total: 33,168

Drug-induced deaths (2,3) - 46,471

http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvsr/nvsr64/nvsr64_02.pdf

There are 13,303 MORE drug induced deaths than folks dying as a result firearms. However, the left advocates a war on guns (restrictions and bans) and yet pushes to legalize drugs spending $10 billion to combat substance abuse 'epidemic'. So would you be in favor of removing gun laws and spending $10 billion on gun safety and mental health considering suicide it the largest cause of gun deaths? If not, why not be specific please.

 

What's sad is that you obviously do not watch much news at all. They have this debate all the freaking time almost verbatim ad nauseam.

Oh, obviously, in real life, someone would have pointed out that there was more than that first and last line, lol, what a convenient edit for somebody.

Then somebody might have said that if you subtract the places where guns are banned from the U.S. crime stats, we suddenly have some of the lowest crime rates in the world.

And this is just going through the motion of the same debate we all have had hundreds of times and I find it maddening that you are lamenting never hearing it on the news. How many times do they have to go through the same argument over and over and over and over until you catch it while flipping through the channels between Kardashians episodes?

If you don't hear the gun debate enough, you are obviously not a news junkie like I am.

Spoiler: Debate boils down to this: Gun owners will shoot to kill anyone who tries to take their guns, and they seem pleased with the prospect. So just try it. And that should keep you from even needing to hear the debate. But don't worry. It gets plenty of air time.

 

What's fascinating about this response is how this Maytag's insinuation as to the full content of that show belies what is said in the clip, plus an absurd proposed mathematics coupled with a conclusive assertion WITHOUT ANY FACTUAL DOCUMENTATION TO SUPPORT THEM.

Then he ends with the usual hysterics and blow-hard challenge TO A THREAT THAT HAS NEVER EXISTED IN THE LAST 60 YEARS OF GUN LEGISLATION IN THIS COUNTRY.

Bottom line: Maytag can't logically or factually refute or disprove the OP, so he just blows smoke.

 

What is there to refute? Are you saying that the media doesn't cover the gun debate?

It's one of the things they talk about all the time. Turn off the Kardashians, and you would know that.

 

Again, Maytag refuses to acknowledge the simple truth of the OP video. What he fails to realize is that the question I ask is that is the response of the character Toby in the West Wing clip actually used repeatedly in the numerous gun "debates" held on the MSM? I would say in my experience, I don't see or hear it used.

If Maytag is saying otherwise, then he's just being insipidly stubborn in not admitting that he just doesn't have a rational or logical rebuttal.

 

Allow me to make myself perfectly clear. The anti gun argument, presented by the character Toby in the pop culture television show designed for consumption by the politically illiterate masses, is the most basic anti gun interpretation of the 2nd amendment, and anyone who has spent any time discussing politics or watching political news has heard it many times. It is not some grand new theory that would rock the political landscape if someone blurted it out on tv. They do all the time, it is easily rebutted, and the discussion moves on. The argument is not compelling to anyone who does not already have an agenda to be blinded to the words "the right of the people to keep and bear Arms", and in fact, many anti gun activists freely admit those words are there, which is why there are other arguments you might hear in real life politics than the one from West Wing.

Oh but there isn't that inspirational music playing in the background! What you were watching was a tv show. In real life discussions, logic is used, not background music and cut angles, which must be the reason you have been so moved by such a sophomoric and cliched argument.

Oh and I didn't see any stats backing up your tv show either. But I don't need them. We've all seen them a million times in real life researching things like that, not from watching West Wing. lol

If you want to watch a show with truly groundbreaking political commentary, try South Park. It has been the most relevant for a decade. West Wing is kiddie table stuff.

 

\
Bla-bla-bla- typical NRA parroting of the 2nd Amendment that LEAVES OUT "a well regulated militia". bla-bla-bla insults...BUT NO LOGICAL, FACT BASED REBUTTAL OFFERED.

More smoke and sour grapes by Maytag. As to his challenge: http://www.cbsnews.com/news/how-u-s-gun-deaths-compare-to-other-countries/

 

You, and Toby, don't understand the second amendment and the words you want to focus on. The second amendment is granted the right to bear arms for the purpose of normal citizens to participate in a well regulated militia to protect the states individual sovereignty, to protect against foreign invasion OR a tyranical governmental force. We are granted the right to bear arms, as individuals, should the need arise to form or join well regulated militias.

Secondly, you completely ignore the stats just shown you, as does your dearest Toby. the overwhelming majority of gun deaths are suicides... furthermore the overwhelming majority of those are the elderly. You dont want to have a euthenasia discussion do you? did dear Toby mention suicide rates in the list of countries he combined to make a US sized population?

Lets talk about gun homicides (which includes people lawfully protecting their lives). Those which are not ligitimate self defense deaths... care to guess the segments of our society responsible for those? I think a much greater use of time might be addressing root problems with those segments of society... but I am guessing you dont want to talk about that either; right? Naaaaah...

 

the second amendment was developed because there were rich english people who oppressed peasant Americans.

the Founding Fathers were rich capitalists who empowered the peasants with the right to bare arms, to defend against guys who wore red coats and stockings and who wanted to steal their liberty for their own good, to make themselves richer unfairly.

it is similar to when corporations steal the wealth of the middle class, and call it capitalism.

 

Do we still have the right to form a militia since conscription? Not taking sides on the issue just a serious question that does kinda drift from the thread topic. From my understanding most of the militias we have are under the watch of law enforcement and the FBI. If you are a member of a militia and conscripted by the US military for service out of your militia does your 2nd Amendment rights conflict with the governments right to raise and support an army; which is the argument used for the draft?

Government watches the rise of well-armed American militias (VIDEO)
http://www.guns.com/2015/03/19/government-watches-the-rise-of-well-armed-american-militias-video/
Militia groups are on the government’s radar and considered by officials to be breeding grounds for right-wing extremism and domestic terrorism.
But its not just the Obama Administration that has been keeping tabs on the groups. A report written by the Department of Homeland Security under the Bush Administration and not published until Obama’s first term when then Homeland Secretary Janet Napolitano took office – and subsequently criticized the agency for the report – outlined concerns that right-wing militia groups were possibly recruiting veterans, CNN reported.

 

You know, maybe if you actually read some history you would not be so easily misled by TV shows and gun grabbers and be reduced to hysterical yell typing.

 

There's loads of truth the MSM needs to get out. How they portray Trump and Clinton has been near criminal.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

What you "think" and what you can prove, least what compares to reality, are two different things. What I'm pointing out is that the USA leads the world in gun homicides, albeit by criminal perpetrators or domestic abusers. If you had the assault weapons ban in effect, the body count in San Bernandino and Orlando would have been much less, as a hand gun would have had to been used, or a IED.....and if you had a better universal background check system up and running, you would have had fewer nut jobs getting any type of gun to commit the crimes done in the last 20 years. Period.

 

Umm, not quite. Defense against an invading army or totalitarian gov't is quite different from keeping paid politicians from legislating against the people. But indirectly, I get your point....the OP, however, still stands valid.

 

There are two types of militia groups...ones that are recognized officially by the State and subsequent federal government, and those who just band together under their own interpretation of the Constitution, state & federal laws as "anti-gov't" types.