On the National Rifle Association’s (NRA’s) Facebook page. you can see their latest video, which has just gone up on YouTube. I’ve put it below (if it disappears, see it here). Listen to the rancor of NRA spokeswoman and conservative talk radio host Dana Loesch:
Here’s the transcript as it appears on Business Insider:
“They use their media to assassinate real news. They use their schools to teach children that their president is another Hitler. They use their movie stars and singers and comedy shows and award shows to repeat their narrative over and over again. And then they use their ex-president to endorse the resistance.
“All to make them march, make them protest, make them scream racism and sexism and xenophobia and homophobia. To smash windows, burn cars, shut down interstates and airports, bully and terrorize the law-abiding — until the only option left is for the police to do their jobs and stop the madness.
“And when that happens, they’ll use it as an excuse for their outrage. The only way we stop this, the only way we save our country and our freedom, is to fight this violence of lies with the clenched fist of truth. I’m the National Rifle Association of America, and I’m freedom’s safest place.”
Who are “they”? Apparently liberals, demonstrators (read: black people), and those who don’t like “President” Trump. What should we do about their actions? Shoot the bloody hell out of them! For “the clenched fist of truth” surely represents guns, though even the NRA dares not say, “Shoot those liberals and black people demonstrating in the streets.” I find the ad, as I said, bigoted, divisive, and almost an incitement to violence. It’s surely an incitement to join the NRA and BUY MORE GUNS.
As for Obama “endorsing the resistance,” all he’s done is say that Trump’s new policies are misguided, which they are. If that’s “resistance,” so be it.
And as Business Insider reports, liberals were predictably enraged, but so were some conservatives:
The ad prompted backlash from some progressives, who called it “an open call to violence” and “barely a whisper shy of a call for full civil war.”
The conservative columnist Anne Applebaum also denounced the ad, saying it called on Americans “to arm themselves to fight liberals. Violence is coming.”
Loesch doubled down in a Periscope video posted on Wednesday night, saying that “the language of the left is violence” and calling “these people … the dullest crayons in the box.”
The ad’s language echoes what NRA Executive Vice President Wayne LaPierre said at the Conservative Political Action Conference in February.
“Right now, we face a gathering of forces that are willing to use violence against us,” he said, citing “the leftist radical plan to tax capitalism to collapse” and “the ISIS dream of a worldwide caliphate.”
“A lot of people, for a lot of reasons, want to blow it all up and tear the whole thing down,” LaPierre said. “The left’s message is absolutely clear. They want revenge. You have to be punished. They say you are what is wrong with America and now you have to be purged.”
I can think of few organizations—besides those like the Klan or other white supremacist groups—that are as hateful as the NRA. But the NRA is even worse, for, by perpetuating America’s violent culture of guns, it’s immensely dangerous.
_______
UPDATE: Reader Pliny the in Between produced this cartoon called “I think this is another NRA PSA”:
I cannot bear to watch that woman, so thanks for the transcript.
Careful, this type of post somehow attracts the loonies from every corner of the intertubes.
I saw it yesterday and was aghast. The leash has been taken off and forgotten. I know this country has always had a simmering bloodlust and racist underbelly, but now, publicly advertising it – in this age of media image, it’s incredulous.
I have control over who posts here, so the loons will be binned.
But the work load. 😉
HA. I don’t think I’ve ever been called a crayon before. I guess I’m magenta?
O ? One gets used to it.
Gets used to being called a color.
Though I shall not abide Ms Loesch / her ilk
calling themselves “freedom’s safest place !” or their having .any. body part of
any semblance of … … TRUTH !
Yeah, red … … white … … and
Blue
er, so as to make sure that I am
not ever mistaken as being a “dull” one … …
“red … … white … … and (shimmering)
Sapphire !
“…even the NRA dares not say, “Shoot those liberals and black people demonstrating in the streets.”
When we have a president who openly encourages violence to supporters, and himself bragging he could shoot anyone and get away with it, nothing needs to be said.
+1
And isn’t it strange that the National Rifle Association does not seem to encourage gun ownership by blacks? Where was there outrage over the Philandro Castile shooting, where a legitimate gun owner was killed by police?
In the late Sixties, the NRA and its poster boy, Ronald Reagan, supported gun control laws, after the Black Panthers exercised their right to bear arms at the California state capitol building.
True, but that was a very different NRA.
That was a legitimate gun owner, high on drugs, driving a defective care and not following the officers directives.
There was no outrage because given the circumstance, it wasn’t outrageous.
There was *plenty* of outrage at the shooting. And if you’r talking about someone out of control- it was definitely the *police officer* based on two live videos!
My mistake, there was plenty of outrage.
There is definitely no shortage of ‘outrage’ these days.
I am not entering into a whole debate here but, a jury, sworn to follow the law found the officer not guilty.
Philando did not do what is required by police when confronted with concealed carry.
Show both hands and follow orders.
Simple. He did not, he continued to reach for something.
There is a video out showing specifically a guy saying “i’m not reaching’ while reaching and then shooting.
And I forgot to mention, the officer was charged but a jury found it justifiable.
If memory serves, Loesch opposed Trump during the Republican primaries. But this vid is straight outta the “American Carnage” playbook Trump/Bannon used for the inaugural address and at last year’s Republican convention.
This is a scary twist. The Republicans – and too many rotten businesspeople have been backing these sorts of sentiments for too long.
The regressives and the trump right have their own alternative realities – they both despise main stream media but the Trump right despises mainstream politics and turns to crazy mavericks who promise “freedom” from everything that satisfies no one. And they love guns and the threat of violence.
To call it an organization or a party is to give the NRA/Republican party undeserved credit. I would prefer to call it what it really is…a large cult. Puppets for the gun manufacturers of America.
Cult is a good word for the sub-section of gun owners who endorse the NRA.
I find this ad completely shocking. Dana Loesch is just Alex Jones in lipstick. I can’t believe normal, rational people find this ad in any way acceptable. It’s disgusting, and a disgrace.
I note Loesch finishes with the words “I am the NRA.” Does this mean USians are going to be subjected to a series of these appalling ads fronted by well known people? If so, I hope the backlash from this one stops the campaign in its tracks.
The “I am the NRA” ad campaign has been going on for quite some time now.
Sad to know. It’s horrible!
“Who are “they”?”
I would argue that “they” refers to the extreme illiberal regressive left who have done exactly the things she describes (make them protest, make them scream racism and sexism and xenophobia and homophobia. To smash windows, burn cars, shut down interstates and airports…)
I am actually having a hard time trying to find a good reason to disagree with much of what those conservatives said in regards to the blatant disdain that regressive leftists have for capitalism, America and Western Democracy. We have seen this first hand in the madness that is going on at Evergreen College. I don’t see any reason to think that it’s going to stop there.
The first step that needs to happen is for college campuses to be taken back from the hands of extreme left lunatics and defund post modernist, neo Marxist garbage from being taught as if it’s a legitimate academic discipline.
The tactics regularly displayed by these lunatics demonstrate that they are not even remotely interested in debate or dialogue, only violence.
While I would not endorse actively promoting another civil war, I don’t entirely disagree with the idea of arming yourself for your own protection. Simply put, don’t go looking for trouble yourself, but be ready when it comes looking for you.
When those regressives break out of campus and come looking for you, be sure and let us know. I believe that is what 911 is for so stay on guard on the front porch.
Yep, it’s worked really well for Bret Weinstein hasn’t it? And Charles Murray and Milo Yionopolous and Ben Shapiro….
Bret is unable to return to his campus to teach because it’s unsafe. There’s gangs of lunatics roaming the campus with baseball bats. So where’s 911? NOWEHERE TO BE FOUND.
You seriously think this is just going to stop at the academic level? We haven’t already seen violent protests by the “antifa” crowd well beyond the university campus? How naïve can you be?
If you’ve followed posts here, Ashley, then you know that of all the things Randy Schenck may be, including knowledgeable and articulate, ‘naive’ isn’t one of them. So the answer to your (rhetorical?) question is, ‘a lot more than he actually is.’
It will stop wherever reasonable people are to be found. But that will not be at a Trump rally or with exaggerated rants on the internet. How many guns to you need to own to hold back this paranoid exaggeration?
Yes yes, It’s all just a “paranoid exaggeration”. The people who attend the Trump rally are the real problem, not the antifa nuts who show up and hurl bottles and fire crackers at them or burn down sections of UC Berkley campus because Milo dared show up to give a speech.
Nothing to worry about I guess. Carry on.
And people are genuinely surprised that Donald Trump won the election.
If only those Evergreen College kids had guns instead of bats, everybody would be soooo much safer, huh?
No. If only the police showed up and did their job, then everyone would be much safter hunh? But since they won’t or can’t, people are going to resort to using guns to solve the problem. I’m not advocating it, but it’s not very hard to see that it could most definitely happen. Anyone who can’t see that most definitely isn’t paying attention.
I’m not sure why you are getting this push back.
Everything you say is correct.
The antifa loons and the other ‘punch a Nazi’ crowd, who will happily designate any who disagrees a Nazi, have advocating and instigating violence.
And if you don’a metal bicycle lock smashed into your head is extreme violence, what is?
The response is over the top, and does represent the gun crowd, but what actually is untrue in what she said?
I live in a country where guns are not allowed for personal protection.
There, guns are allowed for personal protection.
So the antidote to the control-left is … more authoritarianism?
That’s in reply to “Ashley.”
I wish I knew how you arrived at that conclusion, because it’s certainly not from anything I said.
Let me put it to you in simple terms. If you are part of antifa and roaming around campus with baseball bats looking to beat someone who is part of the “patriarchy”, then you should be expelled.
If an academic discipline is worthless (I.e. post modernism), it shouldn’t be taught at school.
Since none of those things are happening, the next step is resorting to violence. I don’t advocate it, I don’t endorse it. I simply say that it’s inevitably going to happen if it isn’t dealt with soon.
The real error in your message is that you want to treat your dislike of the regressive left on the college campus with the same response as our government has treated the endless war in the middle east. As if there was a violent solution to the problem as you see it. After 17 years of war in the middle east we know this is no solution and you need to learn this as well. It is a hearts and mind issue and your guns won’t work.
To Ken. No, the answer is a strong deterrent.
Nothing to do with authoritarianism.
And….down the rabbit hole we go
Ashley @8:
“The first step that needs to happen is for college campuses to be taken back from the hands of extreme left lunatics and defund post modernist, neo Marxist garbage from being taught as if it’s a legitimate academic discipline.”
Do you want to ‘take back from’ and ‘defund’ creationists, supply-side economist professors, EvoPsych professors, alt-righters, Ann Coulter, Milo Y, Rush Limbaugh, and all those others from spouting their garbage too?
Who, exactly, gets to keep their First Amendment rights in _your_ world? All citizens, or just the ones that agree with your bias?
I await your list.
Creationism isn’t a ubiquitous college subject is it.
And, hasn’t been challenged in court by proper academia.
There is nothing wrong with noting the absurdity going on, as Ashley has done, and thinking about what to do about it.
Perhaps we should fund the Ark park then.
I only read the transcript but it seems pretty accurate to me. To see it as racist seems a stretch. I agree with Ashley and applaud her for taking a decidedly unpopular stand.
‘While I would not endorse actively promoting another civil war, I don’t entirely disagree with the idea of arming yourself for your own protection.’
Two problems with equivalence here: 1) Trump supporters and NRA stalwarts number in the millions, Evergreen ilk and ctrl-leftists (probably) far, far fewer (the qualification is needed because I know the former statistic but haven’t seen the latter). 2) While I’m cheered to learn that you won’t be ‘actively promoting another civil war,’ the difference in U. S. sociopolitical conditions in 1860 and now makes even an implied comparison risible (almost no standing army then, a fully militarized state now; confederation then, federalized nationalism now, etc.).
I would suggest that if ‘trouble’ does indeed come looking for you, it will not be of the sort characterized by ‘us vs. them’ but rather the power of a state that serves itself first and, afterward and if ever, the people later. And even the best-armed, barricaded citizen will have no chance except to die in a blaze of inglory.
It’s not too shocking that authoritarian-minded right-wing paranoiacs feel threatened by protests, and feel an instinct to protect themselves against leftists caricatures. The Ctrl-Left has only served to fuel those fears and reactions. Every outrageous regressive video or tweet spreads like a flash flood though right-wing social media and “news” aggregators. Right after the election, the first round of protests was literally a protests against their votes, which they could easily see as a protest against democracy (honestly, a lot of Ctrl-Left types would endorse that interpretation). They perceive genuine threats of student revolutions spilling out of campuses, race wars erupting out of “inner cities,” and they see plausibility in rumors that Obama is orchestrating a coup via the “deep state.” It’s paranoid, downright pathological, but here we are.
For the NRA and the gun manufacturers it represents, it is a never ending battle to increase gun sales. With Obama out of office and Trump pro-gun, the NRA needs to create a new enemy of “freedom,” which is the regressive left. Since I have seen no reports (perhaps there are a few) of those on the far left using guns to promote their views, I guess the NRA message is pre-emptive: buy your guns before it is too late.
I have not seen the statistics, but I doubt that there are many people who want guns that do not already own them. If that is the case then the NRA pitch is for these people to own two or more guns, preferably one in every room of the house. So, when the regressive leftist breaks down the door, demanding that the resident immediately desist from engaging in cultural appropriation, the resident can grab the nearest weapon and shoot down the Un-American bastard. Who can blame him?
Yes, the NRA has discovered the key to success: stoke fear in white America, which immediately panics at the slightest perceived threat to its “way of life.” The NRA and right-wing tactic of divide-and-conquer is thousands of years old, but still eminently effective.
Lapierre got one thing right when he said (referring to the NRA members; “…you are what is wrong with America …”.
But he was also right when he said what the regressive left wants; “…you have to be purged.”
This will not end well.
So she’s concerned that someone is promoting xenophobia, is she?
Unfortunately I cannot on watch that. Insecurity is strong with that one.
This is truly chilling. I needed to watch the video to really understand just how dangerous this message is.
Not necessarily apologizing for the ad but…
Isn’t this sort of rhetoric pretty standard for the NRA? Haven’t they been saying stuff like this since they turned into a lobbying group in the ’70s?
It might just be normalcy* bias, but I didn’t find it all that alarming.
*I realize that “normalcy” might be a strange word to use in regards to Americans’ obsession with guns.
We should keep in mind that the danger for violence lies not just on the right. Just a couple of days ago a republican senator and several other people were shot and almost killed by what seems to have been a man with radical leftist motives.
You are referring to Steve Scalise, who is a member of the House of Representatives. He is not a senator.
@Michiel Genuine question for you…
You write that James T. Hodgkinson had radical leftist motives. What motives are those? All I can find is he wanted the rich to pay more taxes & he was a Bernie Sanders supporter.
Of my five friends or acquaintances (that I know of) who own guns, three are profoundly opposed to the NRA.
One of them bought a lifetime membership in the 1970s, and asked about 10 years ago to quit and and have her membership revoked. She was told they did not revoke lifetime memberships and she was still a member whether she liked it or not.
However, in 1995, former George Bush, Sr. resigned as a Life Member of the NRA in protest over recent statements. Did they give the same runaround to him?? Evidently not.
I wonder how many of the lifetime members they claim to have either no longer associate themselves with the NRA, or are no longer among the living?
I am also a gun owner who has no interest in being associated with the NRA’s fear mongering.
She should start (or join) a lobby group ‘NRA members for Gun Control’ and see how quickly they process her resignation…
😉
cr
Right now, the NRA and the gun manufacturers they represent have no boogeyman to boost gun sales, so they have to create a new one. The old cries of “Obumma and Hitlery are mobilizing the UN to come take your guns! And make you buy healthcare! Buy more AR’s while you can!” won’t work right now. Gun sales plummeted when a pro-gun president and pro-gun congress was elected, and the industry is suffering.
This is all about creating fear to drive sales. If you create enough fear, something may happen. Then profits rise again.
It’s sort of the Underpants Gnome theory in real life.
I had to look up ‘Underpants Gnomes’
Marvellous stuff
Republicans & the NRA (redundant?) have never had more power, so why have they never been more paranoid than now? This video is a travesty.
The more guns the more NRA members, the more guns the more NRA members, the more guns the……..
And so on.
Perhaps the NRA should also become a religion as it would then be Tax exempt?
Its ikon could be the crossed semi automatics below a skull.
Strange things can happen in the US.
There isn’t necessarily a correlation between gun ownership and NRA membership. Approximately 1/3 of the US say they or someone in their house owns a gun – approx. 110 million people. The NRA has a membership of 4.5 million. That would indicate to me that the majority of people who own guns are not part of the NRA (approximately 96% of gun owners)
Yes, that makes a lot of sense. There are a lot more hammers in the world than carpenters. So maybe a lot more people using hammers than simply carpenters?
True but how many NRA members do not own guns?
I have no idea. How many carpenters do you suppose don’t own hammers
I resign
Looking at this from outside the US, I get the impression that these people have been waiting a long time for this moment. They would have rolled this out had they lost the “fixed” election. But having won and even controlling both houses, they need to find another excuse for their unilateral civil war.
They would be much better off putting pressure on their own guy in the WH to protect the country against Russia, but it’s much easier and more entertaining to threaten to attack their fellow citizens.
I’m getting totally paranoid – this stuff looks like part of a concerted effort to delegitimize any party shift that might occur in the midterms?
I fear for America. This incites things like civil war. Good grief. Am I wrong to get a Nexus card?
“want to blow it all up and tear the whole thing down”
Oh, I thought that was Bannon.
/@
I don’t like the ad, but I support the NRA’s fight against gun grabbers, and thankfully we’re winning. Keep sour-graping, my fellow liberals. Some of us support gun ownership whether the snowflakes like it or not.
Gun grabbers? You are deluded.
Thanks, Mark, for further degrading the English language. ‘Gun grabbers’? (pretty much a null set in the U. S.) ‘Sour-Graping’ as a verb? And the long-melted cliché ‘snowflakes’ yet again? If you wish to make effective points, get a new writer.
“At a time of international Islamist terrorism, and domestic white nationalist terrorism, this kind of language is the most reckless form of incitement. For people who specialize in understanding terrorist recruitment, it’s entirely self-destructive.” -Richard Wolffe/The Guardian
Want to see something terrifying? 4 minutes.
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=youtu.be&v=iVuRLztDljY&app=desktop]
So that’s the gun the youtuber used.
The on who got his partner to shoot him with, for the ‘views’
He thought a book would stop the bullet.
I didn’t.
He’s dead, she may be going to jail, the kids lives are changed for the worse.
Isn’t there some kind of knowledge test for using these things when permits are issued?
Did you notice she says “clinched fist” rather than “clenched fist”?
Here is one of those scary white-supremacist militias:
https://hueypnewtongunclub.org/home
This is the kind of response/reaction that was obviously going to come from Antifa nonsense.
And ‘punch a Nazi’ nonsense.
There has been a lot of calls for violence from some aspects of the left and now in response, we have this.
Doesn’t sound a lot different from what I hear from the left. You could change a few words and it would be identical.
Insane,the only word for it.
Apologies if this was already noted, but Funny or Die has a retort video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2Sbn_dfliKQ
Enjoy!
The ad shows violence. It does not incite law abiding people to violence. It, and she, doesn’t say or hint for people to “start shooting” anyone. The ad does not “read black people.” I think she did a pretty good job of describing “They,” the people who always use violence and lies to promote their personal agendas.
Then you truly don’t understand the power of advertising.
Are the filmed riots, shown as the purpose for her statement, a form of advertising, then? That advertising certainly does seem to work well across the country. Bottom line: the NRA and law abiding citizens are not your problem, in reality, that is.
The are if they encourage others to break the law.
/@
Of course the “filmed riots” are a form of advertising. Any behavior- good or bad- can be manipulated by advertising.
Had I not watched the video in addition to reading the transcript, I would agree with you. My first reaction on reading the transcript was that Jerry had gone off the deep end with this one, since I generally agree with his political viewpoints. What’s hateful in this video is not the content–I think her assessment of the radical left was pretty accurate–but the vitriol in her voice. Sounds like she’d love to shoot someone and wouldn’t mind if others went out did the same. This is certainly no worse than antics from the left–e.g., holding up a decapitated head of Donald Trump–but I have to agree that the video, as opposed to the words themselves, is inflammatory (though to call it “racist” still seems a stretch).
A rational comment. However, no one seems to speak to the videos being shown behind her. Why? It’s all about Dana. And, the vitriol in her voice? To say that “she would love to shoot someone and wouldn’t mind if others went out and did the same thing” is subjective, projecting(?), and false. She spoke to two kinds of violence: the violence of criminal behavior and ideological falsehoods, and, “the violence of truth.” The latter is not a dog whistle. It is the spirit behind “Don’t tread on me.” Lastly, please accept the fact that it is not NRA members or any law abiding citizens who routinely rob, rape, riot, and murder. if i am wrong, please show me evidence. Thank you for your measured response.
NRA is not racist. Otis McDonald, a black Chicago resident, was denied the right to own a firearm by the laws of Chicago. The NRA went to bat for him and won.
In JANE DOE; CHARLES BOONE v.WILMINGTON HOUSING AUTHORITY, the NRA filed an amicus brief supporting the black residents’ rights to own a firearm.
The NRA has spent millions in outreach to black Americans. Whether it is successful or not, the NRA itself is not racist.
https://youtu.be/ZDjp66NdiNY
More to the point, I am getting sick of the r-word being thrown about so casually. It no longer means anything. Once it described a truly vile creature. Now it is just another epithet to be tossed at anyone who doesn’t agree with a far left agenda.
No, they aren’t racists- they welcome money in the form of memberships from any color.
When a police shot and killed Philando Castile on a traffic stop, Castile made the mistake of immediately telling the officer he had a gun in the car and had a permit for it.
The NRA didn’t come to his defense for doing what he was supposed to do. They were decidedly silent on the matter.
Those lines the NRA tells you to recite don’t seem to cover black people.
No, the NRA is not racist, they are cowards.
The bias, in this case, is bias in favor of the police. NRA has a large number of police members and works closely with many police departments. The NRA was deeply divided about this and while the membership generally wanted a more activist approach, the leadership put the brakes on, preferring not to jump into the fray until after a verdict. I believe that was too long to wait but not the mortal sin some are making it out to be.
After the verdict, the NRA finally came out saying they disagreed with it. No doubt the internal debate will continue for a long time. The NRA is flawed but no more so than any other large advocacy organization. Other second amendment organizations jumped to Mr. Castile’s defense immediately. These groups, like the Second Amendment Foundation and the CCRKBA, make the NRA look like a puppy in a wolf pack.
Since the Hispanic officer who shot the Black man was found not guilty of manslaughter in a jury trial, one wonders if the officer was as guilty as everyone made him out to be. Not having sat in the jury box and been privy to their deliberations, I cannot say and will not attempt to say.
IF I had been in charge of the NRA, I would have immediately come out with a blanket statement in favor of enhanced training for police officers to handle legitimate CCW cases and offered condolences to Mr. Castile’s loved ones. Then I would have called for public calm, pending investigation. More than that would be irresponsible for the NRA.
Mr. Castile wasn’t killed because he was black. My suspicion is that the cop gave an order, then changed his mind to give a different order. At that point in time, the victim was confused as to which order to follow and simply picked the wrong one. The motion of his hands triggered a deeply ingrained reflex on the part of the officer who may well have been more nervous than the man he’d stopped.
While I would consider that to be manslaughter, not being in the jury, I can’t speak to the verdict.
Of course, the critics of the NRA are simply jumping on an opportunity to criticize. I’m not hearing a lot of wailing for the violated rights of a CCW holder. If you really cared about human rights you’d be attacking the police department and the verdict, not a third party organization.
In American society, there is *more than enough* blame to go around.
Oh look, a nice young white Australian tourist was shot to death by a police officer. Because he was startled by “a loud noise.”
America- where police horses have more training than police officers.
The NYPD discovered that the number of shooting incidents initiated by police officers declined dramatically after they simply increased the trigger pull on the sidearms. There’s a very mild form of gun control I could support. It should take a deliberate pull and not a finger twitch by a jumpy cop (or any one else) to kill someone.
Interesting. And terrifying.
I figured we could find some common, tho terrifying, ground.
😀