Countdown Clocks

Countdown Clocks

Tweets by @JGibsonDem
Posts tagged "Dana Loesch"

Routine sexist attacks from the National Rifle Association’s media outlets are undermining the organization’s political effort to reach out to women as a growing demographic. 

On August 25, NRA magazine America’s 1st Freedom attacked prominent gun safety advocate and Mom’s Demand Action for Gun Sense in America founder Shannon Watts. As Gawker’s Adam Weinstein explained, the article featured images of Watts “as a cutout mom with kitchen and housekeeping accoutrements, because moms oughta know their place!” The accompanying article accused Watts of lying about being a stay-at-home mom, because she had for a time run a PR firm out of her house while raising her children.

image

This offensive depiction of a woman from NRA media seems in stark contrast to the political arm of the NRA, which the very same day debuted several new ads narrated by women — in a series titled “Good Guys” — promoting the message that guns are a sign of empowerment for women and that women are an important part of the NRA community. One features a woman lauding the importance of “Mom and Dad”; one stars a woman emphasizing the “courage" it takes to be one of the "Good Guys." Another ad released earlier this month also featured a female narrator driving a pickup truck and attacking Everytown for Gun Safety founder Michael Bloomberg, telling him to “keep your hands off our guns.”

Right-wing female commentators have long argued that “guns are the great equalizer between sexes in crimes against women,” falsely claiming that guns make women safer. CNN’s S.E. Cupp, The Blaze’s Dana Loesch, and Fox News’ Katie Pavlich have regularly appeared on cable news and published books to promote the NRA as a pro-women organization.

But as Media Matters noted in a feature on the NRA’s annual meeting, 2014 seemed to mark a shift for the organization towards focusing increasingly on women and moms. In part that shift is monetary, as advertisers see women as a largely untapped market. It also seems, however, that the shift is in part in response to gun safety organizations, including Everytown for Gun Safety and Moms Demand Action, who increasingly emphasize how dangerous guns can be for women in abusive situations.

This recent recognition of women by the NRA is undermined, however, by the attack on Watts and the numerous misogynistic and sexist comments from NRA commentators and spokespeople.

Just two months ago, for example, an NRA commentator fetishized assault weapons by comparing them to attractive women. Noir, a Sunday web series hosted by NRA News commentator Colion Noir, aired two separate ads that at first appear to feature a narrator describing stylishly-dressed, flirtatious women (“Her Jimmy Choo’s can’t be comfortable, but you’d never know it … She’s the kind to tell the bartender how to make her drink”), only to reveal at the end that he was describing a gun the entire time. One of the ads aired just days after a mass shooting in Isla Vista, California, which was reportedly inspired by the shooter’s admitted hatred of women. 

Last year, the NRA featured Fox News’ Sean Hannity as a keynote speaker at the 7th Annual NRA Women’s Leadership Forum Luncheon, despite his association with a group whose leadership has claimed that one of America’s greatest mistakes was allowing women to vote.

NRA News host Cam Edwards once attacked Glamourmagazine’s Women of the Year Awards for making “the world a more dangerous place for women,” because the event honored victims of gun violence, including Pakistani education reformer Malala Yousafzai, and former Rep. Gabrielle Giffords (D-AZ) — who was wounded during a 2011 mass shooting in Tucson, Arizona.

Most outrageous is NRA board member Ted Nugent, whose rampant sexism - including calling Hillary Clinton a “toxic cunt,” comparing abstaining from drugs and alcohol to avoiding “fat chicks,” telling a CBS producer “I’ll fuck you, how’s that sound?”, and featuring a nude, bound woman with a grenade in her mouth on an album cover — has never been a problem for the organization.

Gun safety advocates and progressives have also been talking about women more lately, as part of a new push to recognize the dangers guns pose to women in domestic violence situations. The presence of a gun in an abusive situation increases the risk that a woman will be murdered by 500 percent, and women are more than three times as likely to be murdered when there is a gun in their house even when domestic violence isn’t a factor. In fact, more women in the U.S. were killed by an intimate partner using a gun from 2001 to 2012 than the total number of troops killed in action in the Iraq and Afghanistan wars combined.

As for the argument that those women could have defended themselves if they had a gun, The Atlanticexplained that according to a study published in the American Journal of Public Health, researchers interviewed women across 67 battered women’s shelters, and found that nearly a third of them had lived in a household with a firearm. “In two-thirds of the homes, their intimate partners had used the gun against them, usually threatening to kill (71.4 percent) them. A very small percentage of these women (7 percent) had used a gun successfully in self-defense, and primarily just to scare the attacking male partner away.”

The NRA doesn’t want to talk about the realities of domestic violence. Instead, they prefer to fearmonger about liberals attempting to “insult” women by “taking” their guns. But they can’t have it both ways, talking about women as nothing more than sex objects and housewives one day, and liberated gun owners the next.

h/t: Hannah Groch-Begley at MMFA

h/t: Joan Walsh at Salon

crooksandliars:

Media Punked By Fake 'Josie' Account Of Michael Brown Shooting

Last weekend, a caller named “Josie” called into Dana Loesch’s radio show claiming she knew the real story of Michael Brown’s shooting because Darren Wilson had told her. The story spread like wildfire through The Blaze, Breitbart.com, Drudge, and more. Then it shot right into mainstream media with CNN jumping on it too.

Just to make sure it caught fire, Loesch appeared on Fox News to defend Josie’s account of the killing.

The story was exactly what you would expect it to be. Michael Brown was the aggressor; Wilson was the victim. Brown rushed Wilson and he had no choice but to shoot. And so on.

As it turns out, that story was lifted from a fake Facebook page. Little Green Footballs reports that Jill Meadows posted this on Facebook on August 15th:

read more

On last Friday’s edition of The Dana Show, "Josie" tells her side of the story of how Michael Brown got shot by Ferguson Police Officer Darren Wilson, and of course, her story is full of lies, as she DEFENDED Officer Wilson’s decision to shoot Brown.


TheBlaze (where Loesch is employed at):

The alleged friend of Wilson continued: “So he goes in reverse back to them, tries to get out of his car. They slam his door shut violently. I think he said Michael did. And, then he opened the car again, you know, he tried to get out. He stands up. And then Michael just bum-rushes him and shoves him back into his car, punches him in the face and then, of course, Darren grabs for his gun. Michael grabbed for the gun. At one point, he got the gun entirely turned against his hip. And he shoves it away, and the gun goes off.” 
The caller went on to claim that Brown then ran from the officer, making it about 35 feet away before Wilson got up and ordered the suspect to “freeze.”
“Michael and his friend turn around. And Michael taunts him… And then all the sudden he just started bumrushing him. He just started coming at him full speed. And, so he just started shooting. And, he just kept coming. And, so he really thinks he was on something,” she concluded. “The final shot was in the forehead, and then he fell about two or three feet in front of the officer.”


“Josie” was indeed lying out of her ass, as is anyone who sticks up for murdering Ferguson Officer Darren Wilson.

Kaili Joy Gray at Wonkette for the REAL truth about “Josie”:

 We can all go home now, because Tucker Carlson’s cesspool of journamalism has a hot scoop that PROVES Ferguson police officer Darren Wilson is definitely not guilty of murdering unarmed teen Michael Brown.

Wilson’s claims match a woman who called herself “Josie” who called into Dana Loesch’s radio show on Friday. CNN confirmed with police officials that what Josie told Loesch matches what Wilson says happened during his encounter with Brown.
According to Josie, Wilson, a six-year police veteran, claims Brown assaulted and then “bum rushed” him during their encounter on August 9.
Hang tight, we need to bust out some charts and graphs and an abacus to follow this logic. Some lady named “Josie” — oh, right, “Josie,” she knows everything! — called Dana Loesch’s radio show to tell her version of Officer Wilson’s version of the events that occurred on the day Officer Wilson killed Michael Brown. Was “Josie” there? No, but she heard it from a very good, very unbiased source who was also not there: Mrs. Officer Wilson! And just in case you are questioning whether “Josie” really is a friend of a friend of a friend who knows a guy who knows a thing, she called Loesch’s programming director back after dropping this hot scoop to insist “that her relationship to the named officer is legitimate.” That definitely seals it. You know “Josie” would never lie about something like that.
At least Loesch had the semi-decency to admit she had not vetted “Josie” and could not yet confirm whether her story of Mrs. Wilson’s story of Officer Wilson’s story is in any way accurate. The Daily Caller felt no such journalistic obligation. And in case the air-tight report from “Josie” doesn’t convince you, the Daily Caller also has a tweet that DEFINITELY proves … something.



@MiamiLib also smacks down Loesch and “Josie“‘s lies:



From the 08.15.2014 edition of KFTK/Radio America’s The Dana Show:


Dana Loesch on the Ferguson Shooting:

(cross-posted from DanaBusted.blogspot.com)

Following the arrest of two journalists covering the protests in Ferguson, Missouri, some conservative media figures are attacking the reporters for being insufficiently deferential to police, doing “the opposite of journalism,” and trying to make the story about themselves.

Protests in Ferguson are ongoing following an August 9 incident that resulted in a police officer shooting and killing unarmed teenager Michael Brown. On August 13, Huffington Post reporter Ryan J. Reilly and Washington Post reporter Wesley Lowery were both detained by police in a Ferguson McDonald’s. 

According to accounts from both Reilly and Lowery, they were detained for not packing their things and leaving the restaurant quickly enough. From Lowery’s account of his arrest in the Post: 

Initially, both Ryan Reilly of the Huffington Post and I were asked for identification. I was wearing my lanyard, but Ryan asked why he had to show his ID. They didn’t press the point, but one added that if we called 911, no one would answer.

Then they walked away. Moments later, the police reemerged, telling us that we had to leave. I pulled my phone out and began recording video.

An officer with a large weapon came up to me and said, “Stop recording.”

I said, “Officer, do I not have the right to record you?”

He backed off but told me to hurry up. So I gathered my notebook and pens with one hand while recording him with the other hand.

As I exited, I saw Ryan to my left, having a similar argument with two officers. I recorded him, too, and that angered the officer. As I made my way toward the door, the officers gave me conflicting information.

One instructed me to exit to my left. As I turned left, another officer emerged, blocking my path.

"Go another way," he said.

As I turned, my backpack, which was slung over one shoulder, began to slip. I said, “Officers, let me just gather my bag.” As I did, one of them said, “Okay, let’s take him.”

Multiple officers grabbed me. I tried to turn my back to them to assist them in arresting me. I dropped the things from my hands.

"My hands are behind my back," I said. "I’m not resisting. I’m not resisting." At which point one officer said: "You’re resisting. Stop resisting."

While some conservative media figures have been critical of the arrests, others are responding to the incident by lashing out at the reporters and media coverage of the incident.

Scarborough Suggests Lowery Just Wanted “To Get On TV” 

On MSNBC’s Morning Joe, host Joe Scarborough responded to a recap of the arrests by saying, “I’m the one that always gets in trouble, I’ll get in trouble here.” Pointing to his son, a reporter for the Daily News, Scarborough said, “If I saw that video and my son was the one that the police arrested after that episode, I’d say Joey, here’s a clue. When the cops tell you, for like the thirtieth time, ‘let’s go,’ you know what that means, son? It means let’s go. I’m sorry.”

He continued, suggesting Lowery wanted “to get on TV and have people talk about [him] the next day.”

SCARBOROUGH: We’ve got a lot of questions out there. We’ve got people angry in the streets because they won’t release this cop’s name. We don’t even know what happened. We’ve got two sides telling something completely conflicting. So, there’s a lot of unanswered questions here. But I do know this, when a police officer asks you to pick up — I can only, I’ve been in places where police officers said, “alright, you know what, this is cordoned off, you guys need to move along.” And you know what I do? I go “yes sir” or “yes mam.” I don’t sit there and have a debate and film the police officer. Unless I want to get on TV and have people talk about me the next day. I am sure that I’m just the worst person in the world for saying this. I can only judge how I would treat my son, who is a reporter, who if he were in this position I’d go, “oh, you’re in jail? Ok. Well, you know what? Next time a police officer tells you that you’ve got to move along because you’ve got riots outside, well, you probably should move along.” But maybe I’m in the minority.

Later in the segment, Scarborough asked, “By the way, what was [Lowery] packing up? You know what, if he was packing up our entire control room, that’s fine. He had a freaking laptop. You — come on. ’Oh wait I’m packing up officer — let me ask you a question?’ I’m sorry.”

Scarborough clarified that he is “not standing up for everything that’s going on out there,” adding, “I find it really hard to believe that [police] couldn’t have shown a little more subtlety through this entire process.”

During an appearance on CNN, Lowery responded by telling Scarborough to “come down to Ferguson and get out of 30 Rock where he’s sitting, sipping his Starbucks, smugly.” He added later, “There’s so much happening here, and instead of putting more reporters on the ground we have people like Joe Scarborough running their mouth and have no idea what they’re talking about.”

Dana Loesch: “The OPPOSITE Of Journalism”

Conservative radio host and Blaze contributor Dana Loesch, who has called the Ferguson police’s use of rubber bullets, smoke, and tear gas “insane,” criticized Lowery and Reilly for their actions. Posting video Lowery took preceding his arrest, Loesch concluded, “So he didn’t listen when told to leave.” She added in a subsequent tweet, “And because these two guys didn’t they did the OPPOSITE of journalism and hijacked the light onto themselves.”

Lowery responded to Loesch on Twitter: “In which someone not here in Ferguson yet wildly speculating to 222k people subtweet lectures me on ‘journalism.’”

John Nolte: “Suck On The Fascism You Birthed”

Breitbart.com’s John Nolte ranted on Twitter following news of the arrests, repeatedly criticizing the media for making the story about themselves and suggesting reporters were being hypocrites for being outraged about the arrests after having ”ignored & enabled govt corruption since Jan of 2008.” According to Nolte, “I’m as worried about the media’s rights as they are mine. Cry me a river, gun-grabbing IRS apologists. Suck on the fascism you birthed.”

h/t: Ben Dimiero at MMFA 

mediamattersforamerica

Last night, in reaction to two journalists (HuffPost’s Ryan J. Reilly and WaPo's Wesley Lowery) being arrested (and later released), Tea Party shrieker Dana Loesch defended the Ferguson Police Department’s decision to arrest the two journalists.



No, Dana, they did NOT hijacked the light onto themselves, you lying turd!




Washington Post's Lowery isn't buying any of Loesch's grade-A++ bullshit lies:



HuffPost’s Reilly also nails Loesch for lying to the American people:

(cross-posted from DanaBusted.blogspot.com)

In his continued crusade against the Common Core education standards, Glenn Beck encouraged people across the country to boycott tests associated with Common Core, later declaring, “The day we’re all willing to peacefully go to jail like Martin Luther King, we will win.”

In a live broadcast to nearly 700 theaters nationwide, Beck and his fellow anti-Common Core “warriors” joined forces Tuesday night to “make Common Core history" (emphasis original) in a two-hour live movie titled We Will Not Conform. Those “warriors” included conservative commentator and notorious Common Core misinformer Michelle Malkin, hosts Dana Loesch and Pat Gray from Beck’s TheBlaze, “self-proclaimed historian” David Barton, Townhall columnist Terrence MooreJay Spencer of Liberty University (a sponsor of the event), and representatives from state-based groups waging war on Common Core.

The participants also included Matt Kibbe and Ellen Wheeler from FreedomWorks, a group which ”started out as the Koch-funded Citizens for a Sound Economy” and came under scrutiny last year “due to bizarre internal feuding and questions about its finances.” Former FreedomWorks chairman Dick Armey told Media Matters at the time that “the group wasted money by paying Glenn Beck $1 million … to fundraise for the organization.”

This live event is just the latest salvo in Beck’s campaign against the state-based education standards, which were originally adopted by 45 states and the District of Columbia. Beck and co-author Kyle Olson released a book in May called Conform, which, in addition to baselessly attacking teachers and public schools for 222 pages, argued that Common Core helps progressives remove parents from their children’s lives. The day before the event, Beck compared Common Core to slavery.

We Will Not Conform was structured around five “working groups,” each tasked with formulating strategies for the different types of tools viewers could use to help defeat Common Core in their states: research and resources, politics, messaging, grassroots organizing, and alternatives to public schools. Many of the right-wingmedia’sfavoritemyths about Common Core were featured in these working groups, including accusations of the standards as a “national program” and “takeover of education,” of being “top-down” and “control-usurping,” and wanting to “cash in on your children.”

Some of the most egregious rhetoric from the evening included:

  • Glenn Beck equating the fight against Common Core to "David versus Goliath," and saying that "The day we’re all willing to peacefully go to jail like Martin Luther King, we will win."
  • Michelle Malkin asserting that Common Core turns kids into experimental “guinea pigs,” and declaring,"We’re locked and loaded."
  • Terrence Moore claiming that "progressive education is trying to take away the great stories" of American education, which is not what “Thomas Jefferson” would have wanted.
  • The Blaze’s Buck Sexton interviewing six parents and their children about their experiences with Common Core, asking the children questions like, "How many of you think Common Core is confusing, for no reason?" and "Big thumbs down for Common Core, huh?"

These attacks come as a few states are pulling out of Common Core. Coincidentally, North Carolina Governor Pat McCrory (R), “previously a Common Core supporter,” signed legislation ”designed to replace the controversial Common Core academic standards” the same night as Beck’s event. States’ moves to repeal the standards come on the heels of extreme right-wing rhetoric from the likes of Beck, Malkin, and others.

At the end of the night, Beck encouraged viewers to “stand up” and “stay the course” because “our children’s future is at stake” and they “will thank you for it.” He also announced that a post-event action plan to “stop Common Core’s federal takeover of education” would be made available online.



h/t: Hilary Tone at MMFA 

mediamattersforamerica

All four of these morons are bad for society. 

h/t: Tim Peacock at Peacock Panache

In the wake of SCOTUS’ heinous anti-women ruling on Burwell v. Hobby Lobby, TheBlazeTV’s Dana Loesch is defending Hobby Lobby’s hypocritical decision NOT to provide birth control (which they once used to provide).

During the past couple of days, she and her husband Chris were celebrating the idiotic pro-Hobby Lobby SCOTUS ruling:

First, the ringleader, Dana:


Who’s taking facts now? Not you, Dana!


“Women’s rights remain unchanged?” What a big fucking whopper that lie is. Women’s reproductive rights are under attack because of the pro-HL ruling.

Her husband Chris piled on the anti-women/pro-Hobby Lobby cheerleading:



@TruthNWisdom is a truth-telling hero, unlike scum like you and your wife and their ilk.


He’s repeating the baseless lie that “Planned Parenthood kills minority babies.”



WRONG, Chris, this SCOTUS ruling INVITES the corporation into a women’s bedroom.



The idiots that make up a huge constituency belong to the GOP/Tea Party, NOT Liberals/Progressives and Democrats.



There’s religious zealots in the world, and that’s folks like you, Mr. Chris.

On Monday’s edition of The Glenn Beck Program, while subbing for Lonesome Rhodes Beck, Loesch deliberately lied about the negative impact on women due to the Burwell v. Hobby Lobby ruling in order to mock the boycotters of Hobby Lobby.

From the 06.30.2014 edition of TheBlazeTV’s The Glenn Beck Program:


On last night’s Hannity, Loesch debated with former National Organization For Women head Patricia Ireland on the ruling.

Ellen at Newshounds.us on the segment:

Last night, it was the Hannity show’s turn, via a “debate” about “some of the most outrageous rhetoric” from the left” – which just happened to solely include comments from NOW president Terry O’Neill. 
Hannity chose for his debate the ever hate-filled and hate mongering Dana Loesch. Loesch seems to particularly despise feminists. On The Kelly File in April, she sneered that she didn’t know the goal of another feminist conference other than “to raise up the next generation of women into old cat ladies.” She added, “It was like watching Mean Girls with less attractive women. …You don’t have to “get” progressives. They “get” themselves.” She’s a charmer, alright. 
Not surprisingly, Loesch brought her special brand of hostility to this segment. She started off with a condescending response to the other guest, former NOW president Patricia Ireland. “So the idea that women are somehow being denied anything – Look, my rights have not changed after this ruling, Sean, and women who work for Hobby Lobby, they still have access to birth control, as provided by Hobby Lobby,”Loesch said.


Of course, DL had to act like a smart-ass on national television and Ireland was correct.

From the 07.01.2014 edition of FNC’s Hannity:



(cross-posted at DanaBusted.Blogspot.com)

Wow, this Dana Loesch lady is nuts.

From the 06.25.2014 edition of TheBlazeTV’s The Glenn Beck Program:

See Also: Dana Busted: Dana Loesch defends Washington NFL Team’s racist name, slams USPTO for denying “Redskins” trademark

H/T: Gary Legum at Wonkette



Tea Party moron Dana Loesch is 
defending the awful racist slur of Washington NFL Team’s nickname, the “Redskins” by falsely claiming that the term honors Native Americans.


She even got cheapshots in at Senator Elizabeth Warren (D-MA). She slammed the United States Patent and Trademark Office for correctly denying the name.


Here are Loesch’s tweets slamming the USPTO’s decision:

 


More false logic from Loesch. The Blackhawks, Braves, Cleveland Indians team name, and Oklahoma’s names honor Native American heritage respectfully, whereas the Washington NFL Team name and Cleveland Indians mascot Chief Wahoo do not.


TOTAL LIE. Sen. Warren did NOT exploit her Native American ancestry.


Sorry, Dana, but the $20 will NOT be taken out of circulation; however, Andrew Jackson can be replaced with someone else more deserving.



The name “Redskins” does NOT honor Native American heritage (considering then-owner George P. Marshall was a vicious racist), you doofus!


Gary Legum hits back at Loesch’s falsehood-ridden statement that “Dems are the ones who hate Native Americans.”

Lindsey Adler at BuzzFeed:

recent study by the California State University, San Bernadino reports 67% of Native Americans find the Washington Redskins name and imagery racist.
12 percent of Native respondents were neutral and 20 percent disagreed. In contrast, 60 percent of white respondents do not find the name racist. When asked if they found the term “disrespectful,” the number of positive respondents rose to 68%.

This debunks the "90% of Native Americans support keeping the ‘Redskins’" canard in the infamous 2004 Annenberg poll espoused by anti-DC NFL Team name change folks like Loesch.




Travis Waldron at Think Progress Sports:

The United States Patent and Trademark Office has canceled six federal trademark registrations for the name of the Washington “Redskins”, ruling that the name is “disparaging to Native Americans” and thus cannot be trademarked under federal law that prohibits the protection of offensive or disparaging language. 
The U.S. PTO’s Trademark Trial and Appeal Board issued a ruling in the case, brought against the team by plaintiff Amanda Blackhorse, Wednesday morning.
“We decide, based on the evidence properly before us, that these registrations must be cancelled because they were disparaging to Native Americans at the respective times they were registered,” the board wrote in its opinion, which is here. A brief explanation of how the Board reached its decision is here. 
“The Trademark Trial and Appeal Board agreed with our clients that the team’s name and trademarks disparage Native Americans. The Board ruled that the Trademark Office should never have registered these trademarks in the first place,” Jesse Witten, the plaintiffs’ lead attorney, said in a press release. “We presented a wide variety of evidence – including dictionary definitions and other reference works, newspaper clippings, movie clips, scholarly articles, expert linguist testimony, and evidence of the historic opposition by Native American groups – to demonstrate that the word ‘redskin’ is an ethnic slur.”

Kudos to the USPTO, even it pisses off the pro-keep the “Redskins” name crowd.

Neil Irwin at The New York Times on the future of the DC NFL Team’s name: 

We can only guess the exact volume and color of the steam coming out of Daniel Snyder’s ears right about now. Wednesday morning, the United States Patent and Trademark Office canceled the trademark for the Washington Redskins, the pro football team that Mr. Snyder owns — and that he has steadfastly refused to rename, amid accusations that its mascot is racist.
It’s important to be clear on what the ruling from the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board ruling means and doesn’t mean. It does not prohibit Mr. Snyder from using “Redskins” as the team’s name. It merely prevents him from using the court system to prevent others from using the term.
One could now imagine someone opening the “Redskins Bar & Grill” without paying a royalty to Mr. Snyder, though that opens up an awkward Catch-22: It’s legal to use the name because a government commission found it disparages Native Americans, but you would then own a restaurant whose name disparages a minority group.





Continue reading the main story

And Mr. Snyder and the team will assuredly challenge the ruling in federal court. Native American groups won their case before the trademark appeal board once before, in 1999, only to have it overturned by a United States District Court. And there was a dissent in the ruling by the trademark review board this time around. (Amusingly, even the dissenter, Marc Bergsman, seemed to distance himself from the name, writing, “I am not suggesting that the term “redskins” was not disparaging in 1967, 1974, 1978, and 1990 … Rather, my conclusion is that the evidence petitioners put forth fails to show that it was.”)
But it’s hard to view the new ruling as anything other than the beginning of the end of the name. It has now been assailed not just by Native American groups but by the president of the United States and half the Senate, which ultimately controls the various tax and legal advantages the N.F.L. enjoys. Players in football and many other sports are now routinely asked their view of the name, and their evident discomfort with it is rising.

Yep. Time to change the name of Washington’s godawful team name.

(cross-posted from DanaBusted.blogspot.com)

Yet again, NRA mouthpiece and TheBlaze Dana Loesch is pandering to the fringe gun nuts by posing on the cover for her new book (Hands Off My Gun: Defeating The Plot To Disarm America, originally titled Defenseless) due to be out in October in a very offensive manner by insulting the survivors of the Sandy Hook Shooting.


John Amato at Crooks and Liars:

Dana Loesch, firebreather for Glenn Beck and other low brow conservatives has a new book out and decided to pose on the cover with an AR-15, a weapon that helped massacre so many innocent children in Sandy Hook. Glenn Beck is very excited that the cover will absolutely piss off liberals, but her crassness only proves the point I’ve been making for a long time.

image

Tim Peacock at Peacock Panache:

Dana Loesch is no stranger to controversy. She’s the extreme right conservative that applauded the desecration of enemy bodies overseas (urination on the bodies by American soldiers, in case everyone’s forgotten). She’s the Tea Party conservative that defendedArizona’s SB1062, a piece of legislation that would bring back a new era of Jim Crow public accommodation discrimination (which didn’t come as a surprise since Loesch supports Jim Crow in general). Loesch is the extremist that sided with Cliven Bundy even after he made (and doubled down on) egregiously racist statements in the course of his ‘sovereign citizen’ spiel. In her latest shock-jock stunt to generate publicity (and money), Loesch posed for the cover of her new book “Hands Off My Gun" (due out in October) with the same weapon used in both the Sandy Hook massacre and the Oregon high school shooting this week.  
[…] 
 Furthermore, Loesch’s intentional use of that particular firearm - a firearm now nationally associated with one of the worst school shooting tragedies in modern history - doesn’t just work to incense the gun regulation crowd; rather, it serves as a snub (perhaps even a rude gesture) to those families who lost family members in both Sandy Hook and the Oregon shooting. And Loesch knows this. To say anything otherwise would be disingenuous.
 

 This is typical crass moronic behavior we’ve come to expect from Loesch.

 More on Loesch’s idiocy and falsehoods on Guns and the 2nd Amendment:  


(cross-posted from DanaBusted.blogspot.com)

Her book was initially titled Defenseless

H/T: Tim Peacock at Peacock Panache

bulgebull:

Radio Shrieker Dana Loesch Poses With Sandy Hook Gun On New Book Cover

For her new book cover, wingnut radio shrieker Dana Loesch poses with the same style of gun used to murder 20 children in Sandy Hook. Glenn Beck’s The Blaze says the cover “will drive liberals crazy.” 

In the book, the co-founder of the St. Louis Tea Party and 2012 winner of Accuracy in Media’s Grassroots Journalism Award — not to mention fearless enemy of progressives — provides readers with a comprehensive guide to why the founders created the Second Amendment, the disastrous consequences of anti-gun legislation — particularly on women — and what citizens can do to protect themselves against a government and complicit media hell-bent on violating such rights. Having gone toe-to-toe with leftists on the issue many times, Loesch’s book further serves as a “how-to” guide for defeating the arguments parroted by the mainstream media and its champions.

The AR-15 was also used this week in Oregon’s school shooting. Dana Loesch: 

“Gun control is the ultimate war on women. Firearms are the equalizer between the sexes. Sam Colt made us equal, indeed. This book explores that, the racist roots of gun control, and debunks the biggest arguments made by anti-gun extremists. The AR is on the cover because it is the most vilified, misunderstood rifle in America, responsible for the fewest crimes. Education is the antidote to ignorance. Consider this book the medicine.”

I’m sure the parents of all those murdered children will appreciate having their misunderstanding corrected by Dana Loesch.