Gabriel Garnica
February 13, 2013
Don't shoot the messengers, just burp them
By Gabriel Garnica


So Chris Rock, last seen waving a gun in Lethal Weapon 4 and Nurse Betty, is now lecturing us about the responsibility of gun control by reminding us that "The president and the first lady are kind of like the mom and the dad of the country. And when your dad says something, you listen. And when you don't, it usually bites you in the ass later on." As if that were not enough, we also have Sandra Fluke, the experienced radical activist last seen posing as a wide-eyed college girl, comparing abortion and contraception rights to leukemia treatment. Beyond the obvious absurdity of these two "messengers" for the Left speaking about anything more profound than waffles, this comparison just keeps getting better.

For one thing, Rock has a laundry list of comedy routines joking about gun ownership and violence in addition to waving weapons around in the above movies, so one wonders how he can joke and profit off something he claims is so serious. I know that I want someone who has played a hit man telling me that gun ownership should be better regulated. Secondly, I have two fathers, God and my Dad, and anyone who tells me Obama and his wife are like my parents is not someone I will nominate to Mensa anytime soon. This goes hand in hand with Ellen Barkin saying we belong to Obama because he is our leader. Neither Rock nor Barkin declared President Bush our father or our owner, so one must assume such talk only applies when the leader's name is followed by a (D).

We also have Sandra Fluke telling us that the government should stay out of her bedroom regarding abortion and contraception but, by the way, pay for what she does in her bedroom because sex can be really expensive sometimes. Liberal historians have long painted Marie Antoinette as this spoiled brat for wanting her cake both ways, but Marie must take a back seat to Fluke. While I am at it, I should add that you have no right to tell me what to eat for lunch, but you better damn help me pay for it because, you know, food can be expensive sometimes.

One might wonder who thought that it would be a good idea to pitch these two intellectual heavyweights as messengers for gun control and abortion/contraception rights in the first place. Obviously, both of these delegates of duh are in way over their heads making any sense, so why is anyone listening to them at all? First, they, like the mainstream media, are fawning Obama fans, so the media already feels a bond with them. Second, they are exactly the perfect pitch puppets for messages designed to resonate with precisely the lowest intellectual denominator that usually blindly supports radicalism in the first place.

One of the reasons so many conservatives cannot understand how and why the Left does what it does is because they are looking for sense, logic, and a modicum of rationality in either the message or the messenger. Remember, we have a leader whose home city, Chicago, is living proof that gun control is a disaster pitching gun control. We have a leadership telling us that the killing of innocent children must stop while promoting and defending abortion. Gun experts far and wide have observed that Obama is incorrectly holding the shotgun in the infamous photo above plus there are other abnormalities indicating that the photo is either doctored or, least, posed. On the other hand, many similar experts see no problem with Sara Palin's position in her photo above, indicating that, unlike Obama, she obviously knows her way around a gun.

There you have it; people railing against government involvement in one instance and in favor of it in another, joking about gun control in one instance and spewing absurdities about it in another, promoting gun control when they are clueless about guns while those who know their way around a gun argue that responsible gun owners far outnumber crazed, pampered, babied mama's boys living in basements playing violent video games ready to go off the edge. None of it makes sense if you are looking for rational, common sense.

At the end of the day, the above foolishness only makes sense if you are an extremist, Leftist radical or one of the sheep who love them. None of this is an answer to any question. Rather, all of this is simply a pretext to a much larger, more sinister, objective. This is not about freedom, privacy, safety, or democracy but, rather, everything about governmental control.

So don't shoot the messengers, because their drivel is not the language of common sense, rational thought, or what is best for America. Rather, burp them, for their pretexts for control and sychophantic babbling of the present leadership is nothing but hot air.

© Gabriel Garnica

 

The views expressed by RenewAmerica columnists are their own and do not necessarily reflect the position of RenewAmerica or its affiliates.
(See RenewAmerica's publishing standards.)

 

Alan Keyes
'A Bucket Brigade': The most simple, feasible way to take back America!

Stephen Stone
Will Obama be impeached now that Republicans control both houses of Congress?

Maureen Scott
Obama's immigration plan: don't fix the leaky roof, just get more buckets

Michael Bresciani
Second Coming of Christ -- beware of the gainsayers

Kevin Fobbs
IMPEACH - Obama's executive order allows illegal aliens to destroy America's soul

Laurie Roth
Our new Congress must impeach Obama--Attacks will happen anyway

Rev. Mark H. Creech
No room for divided loyalties

Sylvia Thompson
As goes the National Cathedral, so goes the nation...if we allow it

Tabitha Korol
ASA -- Anti-Semitic Association

Bryan Fischer
Why we oppose the normalization of transgenderism

Cliff Kincaid
Chuck Todd and other media dimwits

Ellis Washington
On Cervantes: when morality is replaced with madness

Alan Caruba
Is there anywhere safe to be a Jew?

Michael Oberndorf
Amnesty? No, treason!
  More columns

Cartoons


Michael Ramirez

RSS feeds

News:
Columns:

Columnists

Matt C. Abbott
Chris Adamo
Bonnie Alba
Jamie Freeze Baird
Chuck Baldwin
Kevin J. Banet
J. Matt Barber
Fr. Tom Bartolomeo
. . .
[See more]

Sister sites