Tuesday, January 25, 2011

Emulating Olbermann

Chris Matthews and Lawrence O’Donnell have just gone berserk over the concept of new gun laws since the Tucson shooting. I don’t have any objection to limiting the size of magazines, nor to laws designed to keep firearms out of the hands of criminals and those who are mentally deranged, but to make a semi-religion of the subject and advocate for those laws as if they were going to solve the problem is just silly. Reality is that the vast majority of gun crimes are committed with guns that are illegally in the possession of the criminals committing the crime. The fact that such was not the case in Tucson does not change the fact that such laws are not completely effective.

O’Donnell wanted to know how many times the lack of oversized magazines during the ten-year ban on them caused any law officer problems in self defense or law enforcement. I would ask a similar question of him; how many times have the oversized magazines increased the death toll in a shooting rampage? If he can tell me with any assurance that it was more than once, the Tucson event, I will be impressed.

O’Donnell last night even went to the extent of saying that if Obama does not address the subject of gun control in his speech tonight then O'Donnell “will be disappointed in him for the first time and he will become part of the problem.” Oh, please.

There is absolutely nothing that Obama can do or omit doing that can cause Obama to become part of the problem of gun violence in this nation. This is, after all, the president at greatest risk of being assassinated in recent history. O’Donnell is an absolute idiot to suggest that Obama could become part of the problem which places his own life at risk.

And after claiming this past couple of years to be a liberal, this would be “the first time” that O’Donnell would be disappointed in Obama? He was not disappointed when Obama voted to immunize the telecoms for spying on Americans? He was not disappointed by Obama’s lack of real effort to close Guantanamo? He was not disappointed when Obama made a deal with drug companies before even opening the discussion on health care reform? He was not disappointed when Obama failed to support the public option? He was not disappointed that Obama claims the right to assassinate American citizens without trial? He was not disappointed when Obama failed to ban rendition? Not disappointed by Obama's failure to investigate war crimes?

Apparently he is filling more than Olbermann’s time slot.

No comments:

Post a Comment