I just read about Wayne LaPierre’s vision of America in which debt riots, hurricane riots, Mexican drug gangs, domestic drug gangs, rampant crime, Morgantown couch fires and all manner of mayhem mean everyone should be loading up on the heavy weaponry to forestall being eaten alive.

Turns out that in an op-ed piece he presents such a paranoid vision that I truly believe if a petition for involuntary confinement for being dangerously mentally ill was filed against him that, immediately after the standard mental status exam, he’d be wearing the most inescapable strait jacket available and be put in a place that would make Ken Kesey’s Cuckoo’s Nest look like a day spa at Club Med by comparison.

Sorry, all who buy into this shit are themselves seriously disturbed and detached from reality.

But to be on the safe side I’ve already bought my ticket and am packed and ready to move to a much safer place…………San Pedro Sula, Honduras.

Post a comment or leave a trackback: Trackback URL.


  • Little_Minx  On February 13, 2013 at 11:44 PM

    Have you seen this reportage yet? “Education,” my eye!
    “Ackerman McQueen PR firm has been behind NRA’s provocative ads for decades”:

    “…The agency has been instrumental in the rise of Wayne LaPierre, the NRA’s executive vice president. The unprepossessing and introverted LaPierre was transformed into the bespoke and unyielding face of the group under the tutelage of Ackerman McQueen, said Richard Feldman, a former NRA lobbyist.

    “ ‘Wayne LaPierre couldn’t have given a speech 25 years ago to save his life,’ Feldman said. ‘Now he gives a very effective speech to the NRA membership. It’s a testament to how effective Ackerman McQueen is. And it’s a testament that education works…’ “

  • Mugsy  On February 14, 2013 at 8:15 AM

    UMOC, he’s not crazy, he’s speaking to his constituency. The people who are receptive to his message often are concerned that in the event of a breakdown of structure, do to natural disaster or some other factor, lawlessness often ensues, and perhaps it could snowball into a situation where the government could not keep order. You may think these people crazy too, but there are different degrees of things and while some people might be over the top into the survivalist thing others are responding in a more reserved fashion to what they view as a credible threat to their families security. The threat is vague, however, to the point of being unspecified, which I think must increase the level of concern.

    I think that these concerns are reasonable, and perhaps the solution to arm themselves brings a measure of security. It may be a false sense of security, that’s a matter for discussion, I guess, but in any case Mr. LaPierre’s statements that may seem outlandish to you may also resonate to some degree in others, who are quite sane.

    Mr. LaPierre isn’t trying to convert you to his organizations membership, he’s speaking to the choir and all those disposed to join. They’re not so crazy as you might think, they are normal people faced with an issue that seems like quite a threat, looking for a solution.

    • Little_Minx  On February 14, 2013 at 1:45 PM

      Of course LaPierre is speaking to the choir — trying to “gin up” his base to donate more money and exert more political pressure, as well buy more firearms so as to generate more profits for the firearm industry (manufacturers, sellers).

      Two questions spring immediately to mind, based on the Law of Unintended Consequences:

      1. Will LaPierre inadvertently motivate NRA opponents, thus mobilizing them successfully against these views?

      2. Will he go so far that he alienates even a significant portion of his base (a latter-day equivalent of Joseph Welch challenging McCarthyism-run-amok)?

      P.S. to UMOC: I bet San Pedro Sula, Honduras, was once a lovely place. How sad.

  • Mugsy  On February 14, 2013 at 4:01 PM

    . Will LaPierre inadvertently motivate NRA opponents, thus mobilizing them successfully against these views?

    Yes, but in lesser proportions than those positively motivated.

    2. Will he go so far that he alienates even a significant portion of his base (a latter-day equivalent of Joseph Welch challenging McCarthyism-run-amok)?

    I don’t think so.

    • Little_Minx  On February 14, 2013 at 4:50 PM

      I’m optimistic that LaPierre will do both of these things, if not sooner (I wish!) then at least later.

  • Mugsy  On February 15, 2013 at 8:01 PM

    I don’t know, Minx. There are more than a few out there that might be sympathetic to an opposing viewpoint but any disagreement on their part seems to result in charges of their being out of touch, stupid, crazy, or all of the above. They don’t feel as if they are engaged in conversation, they feel that they are being talked down to. Mr LaPierre may just have the quality of a populist to many reasonable people who feel that they are given no room to compromise by an opposing side that treats them with scorn.

  • Little_Minx  On February 19, 2013 at 4:23 PM

    As the WaPo article shows, LaPierre is merely an ad agency’s puppet. Sooner or later he will go too far, and the people will lash out against him and his extremist cause, just as happened to Joe McCarthy. This is not to say that he won’t retain a few true-believers, but as is occurring now with the GOP hardline stance against undocumented aliens, if Republicans want to rise again they have to unclench.

Please give me your thoughts.

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: