The NRA Calls For Nancy Pelosi And Gabby Giffords To Be Shot
The NRA is trying to incite violence against Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi and former Rep. Gabby Giffords who almost lost her life in a mass shooting.
S E E D E D C O N T E N T
There is no other way to interpret the phrase target practice. The NRA was calling for violence against the most powerful woman in the United States. The NRA is an extremist organization that blocks efforts to curb gun violence because they are not an organization that represents the interests of responsible gun owners. The NRA is the powerful gun lobbying arm of gun manufacturers.
Every position that the NRA takes is designed with the intention of boosting profit for gun makers.
Tags
Who is online
571 visitors
Hummmmm wonder who will be first to defend the NRA?
Where is the call for violence?????
it is all in their heads.
You don't really think that Trump supporters would lose their collective minds if
Time or Esquire or some other "MSM" rag put the Presidents face on a magazine cover next to the words
Target Practice?
Really, no one would infer an intent of violence against Mr. Trump?
REally?
Don't you just love an empty charge?
Not even close to the same thing.
Another way of looking at the picture associated with the seed is that the "Target Practice" referred to the Democrats who are targeting gun owners for persecution with extreme firearm transfer bans, like what is stated clearly underneath that "Target Practice" banner.
Been through so many and seen so many now that it is all the same.
Ya REALLY! The title Target Practice refers to democrats targeting gun owners.
Liberals like to twist and point to some little thing to start a big lie.
Liberals suck.
And nobody calls out this false seed for what it is!
It is projection and obvious projection at that
I know. Just today's crisis.
Tomorrow someone else will be highly offended over something just as trivial.
Doesn't it get old?
Perceived transgressions and extreme sensitivity, it's all for the idiots watching CNN
They might, if there was no context right next to it explaining that title in big letters. But there is, so you'd have to be willfully blind to ignore them.
Because not everybody takes every gun regulation as a personal attack like some people do.
Gun regulation is not the point here. It is the misrepresentation of common language & common sense
Apparently you decided to ignore the article.
The use of the words "target practice" as a title for this article is odd at best. Placing the phrase in line with Pelosi's head only accentuates the oddity.
I am willing to think it might be unintentionally provocative, but there is also a good chance the seeded article is exactly correct and there is an instigation here.
Not really. I believe "Target Practice" is referring to what the Democrats are doing. The practice part is the legislation the article talks about, with the inference that they won't stop there.
it is probably easier to think there is some instigation going on rather than read and understand the article.
who told you that ?
That is what the article seems to say.
The pdf can be downloaded here or it can be read online.
Logic, common sense, and reason.
And look at the link in 1.4.3.
It is the use of a double entendre and it is deliberate. These covers are done to get the most bang, no pun intended (or was it?), for impact. Staffers know where the lines are which are a "go," a "caution," and " a do not cross." This cover toes the line, with barely plausible deniability.
and who do you know that possesses such admirable traits ?
Do you need an introduction to them?
It sure isn't certain posters claiming to have those traits.
Democrats are using gun owners for political target practice.
Democrats are taking pot shots at all gun owners to stir up political controversy in hopes of garnering more votes and win elections.
Bunch of complete and utter bullshit.
Spot on.
Maybe so. But Democrats don't hold the trademark on bullshit; although they seem to think they do.
No, your comments regarding democrats are complete and utter bullshit.
In no way, shape, or form, are you spot on.
Republicans hold the trademark on bullshit, lies, projection, more lies, and more bullshit.
Then why do Democrats try to make baseless hair-on-fire outrageous claims as do Republicans? They're all in the same cow pen and feed from the same trough.
Self-imposed blinders seem to work wonders at ignoring what your own party does.
Which would be the republicans.
You make no sense. You're really not worth responding to.
You blame all ills of the world on the democrats yet not a word against the republicans.
You must be a rump supporter.
No matter what, some will still not get it. You can explain it to them, but you can't understand it for them.
Oh but you said it with such complete and utter conviction! So you admit it's bullshit? Got it! Thanks for the admission.
How so? Proof? Citations?
Perhaps your very finest post ever.
The citation & proof is the posted image in comment 1.4 . Didn't you see it?
How you can say this is a democrat thing - makes no damned sense.
Still just reading the headlines? I suppose that's the easiest way to mislead the ignorant. And there are certainly a lot of ignorant Democrats and Republicans.
After all, look at who the parties ran for President last election. Neither Democrats or Republicans can be that bright.
Didn't vote for Trump. Won't vote for Trump. Don't care about Trump, he's a third-rate TV personality.
But running Hillary Clinton for President and not understanding why that was wrong means the Democratic Party MUST be removed from American politics. It's time to get rid of the party of Jackson.
Might I suggest an edit?
How about "Still just MIS-reading the headlines"?
Removed
removed for context
[Removed]
[deleted]
[deleted]
[deleted]
removed for context
lets put an end to this thread, now, thank you...
Who is the standard bearer for the Republican Party? Trump? Hahahahahahahahaha ... Yeah, sure, Trump is a true heir of Ronald Reagan.
Who is left to carry on the neo-liberal legacy of Ronald Reagan? Hillary Clinton? Nancy Pelosi? Chuck Schumer? I'm not sure there are any Republicans claiming to be the heir to Reagan.
It's time to do to the Democratic Party what has happened to the Republican Party. You know, the Republican field of candidates last Presidential election was more diverse than anything Democrats could put forward. People don't like to confront the possibility that Trump was specifically nominated to tear down the neo-liberal Republican nonsense. It took a bully clown to finally bury Ronald Reagan.
Hillary Clinton tried to keep the legacy of Ronald Reagan alive. And Democrat's are totally clueless about why that was wrong.
Yep, we all know the left is just pure as the new fallen snow and is never to blame for anything in your mind, is it?
Excellent post.
That is a good and true statement. I concur!
a lot more people claiming to be independent.
the lunatic left is shrinking the democrat party.
That's my perspective. The TEA Party insurgency in 2010 shifted the Republican Party toward extreme (and unrealistic) interpretations of Reagan politics. Eight years later both the TEA Party and Reagan politics have faded into the background. Today's Republican Party really is more moderate than it was before 2010.
The current insurgency in the Democratic Party is shifting the party toward extreme (and unrealistic) interpretations of Reagan (or anti-Reagan) politics. Eventually the Democratic Party will become more moderate, too.
Among potential Democratic candidates Joe Biden and Amy Klobuchar are best positioned to defend the legacy of Reagan; a status quo neo-liberal globalist view of both domestic and foreign policy. The rest of the announced and potential Democratic field are sounding more like Bernie Sanders than Hillary Clinton.
Purity testing isn't going to work for either party and both parties are doing it.
Until I see the headline, I don't think Biden really wants to run. Klobuchar has my vote already.
[Deleted]
What a load of horse manure by the anti-gun progressive liberal left!
Anyone with two brain cells to rub together. All you have to do is read the subtitle where it says that Democrats are targeting gun owners. It literally says "Congressional Democrats Target Gun Owners." To interpret it as something else would require a person to completely ignore the meaning of words.
Do you even know what the term "target practice" means? Look it up.
The equivalent in politics would be "focus group". So, it's really the Democrats who are engaging in political "target practice".
Nerm you should know by this time ever since NV I've mostly ignored everything you've ever said due to a lack of any use.
As the NRA is nowhere even close to guilty of what you claim, there is no need to defend it.
Dear Friend Don Overton: It seems the NRA has fallen on hard times.
Membership, funding, and political donations have been reported as declining by sources credible to me.
I am not in a position to confirm or deny their veracity.
Desperate times beget desperate measures.
P&AB.
Enoch.
Brother Enoch, I would suggest some "hard-times" for the NRA are in order. Because there is a counter programming circulating around that the NRA has been "paling around with Russians" in patriot country.
All money ain't good money.
And, if what we read, hear, and see of the Russian "femme fatale" Maria Butina infiltrating the NRA boardroom is true, then all that gun machismo melts its lead for an international spy!
This new look for the NRA does not look good from outside the building!
You know the literate people have spent the last 48 hours laughing at the democrats hot take about this, right?
I appreciated the entertainment.
Crisis du jour?
Come on people, quit taking every single word so literally.
Can you really not tell the difference between targeting a person to be shot and targeting them for defeat in legislation or elections?
Stop with all the hurt feelings already and grow up!
Quick! Retreat to a safe space!
Since the wording used by the NRA, i.e. an exact quotation of what it wrote, is omitted not only from this article but also from the seeded article itself, how could anyone be critical of what is obviously just an interpretation or opinion of what it was? Did I miss it?
Wasn't anything TO miss!
[deleted]
.
B leave me or not Tex, not everyone who is for some sort of common sense gun law modifications, thinks it means the seizure of All guns.
.
i n joy guns, while smelling roses, but realize just because you believe Trumpp, n wanna shoot hose B,
remember,
this doesn't give you the right, to shoot
Jose'.
Putin used the NRA and its shallow thinking 'horde' attacking culture,
to install his own Manchurian Candidate.
Trumpp, Gepeto Putins' own Pinocchio,( but with much smaller hands)
was Putin place with much financial backing, as in tens of millions were possibly dumped into the NRA coffrs via Putins' Russia, via the NRA's potential presidential election potential influences.
There is no doubt they influenced some, and sum ARE, just dumb, while many just unenlightened and easily led a stray
dawgz of War, aren't always Happy Daze, but AAYYyyyyyyyyyy N E Weigh
Was there a point in there somewhere?
Can you just post in plain English?
Tex, I read that and thought exactly the same thing!
[deleted]
I try to give the benefit of the doubt and occasionally read that stuff, but I get tired of wading through the word salad.
[Deleted]
.
To N E one, defending the NRA, and AFRAID of what they were suggesting via words done said , whats a matter ?
i own guns
i don't need to hide behind them
.
like watchin Trumpp
grabbin him a whole herd of snowflakes,
and them melting away
in the litter Box
.
Trumpp, The NRA, and ignorance,
imPerfect together.
.
hows that grab ya Tex...
.
sorta like Trump
or not
i do
.
.
.
not always
.
but then again
,
i'm not a PUSSY
Nothing to do with me, but I guess I'm flattered you think so?
It's a relief to hear you aren't a pussy.
Best be careful using that term, though. Some might think you are a misogynist using that term to disparage women.
well Tex,
no worries round here.
i somehow misplaced a comment,
probably for the best,
unless one thought i needed a Newstalkers rest.
Yea, i had written, a simply complex multi meaning mean ass non bearing post, to my thoughts on those who would run to moderation for cover, because buy themselves , they could not afford to by a vowel they coulduphold tight n to the light, to help decipher the secret code rings location of the decoder
ring, to help decipher what it is you do, without one .,!?
.
Are you an Indian cowboy ?
asz ussuallly only WW11 Indian Code Wind Walkers / Code Talkers wearing wind breakers in a where house, can trip mine.
ASz i once put clothes on a stripped mine,
but the Emperor still tripped and fell on his and assumed he was naked
& afraid
of a big bad wolf of Wall St, who actually livedin the woods, where bears shit, except when they are at the zoo.
C U N don't be late ext time,
asz it
is not on your side, but what does A Rolling Stone know about it
moss of the time n e way i mossley waste on checking on the growth of my most
interesting , both, time consuming and not improving fast, i'm about to Breake
Don't worry - people with 'logic, common sense, and reason' and a little bit of imagination, are able to navigate your posts just fine.
Here is the actual article. I don't know about China, but here it looks like the pdf is down loadable.
I think it is possible the meaning is being misinterpreted.
Yes, I could open the article and read it (with a magnifying glass. LOL)
There should be control to all increasing the size of the document. At least the controls are available here. there is also a down load pdf button. look along the top of the document.
Seems to me you meant that as an insult - which should teach me for wasting my time on anything that YOU post.
There might not be a dumber troll in Congress than Eric Swalwell. I say "might" because it's hard to accept that he really believes the stuff he says. He has to just be doing it to mess with people.
NRA did not incite anything. Things like this just rile up the base, which is in a permanent state of 'rile' anyway. Nothing new here. Today is the same as yesterday.
However, the NRA may be grasping at straws to deflect from their 'being had' my Maria Butina. If there is 'dirty money' involved, the 'gun grabbing' will be the least of their problems.
Exactly.
You may be right, many on the left seem particularly perturbed over this.
"Deflecting" to what end? Will anything they now do change facts already in evidence?
"change the facts...……." Do not know that. The facts will be the facts. Dirty money can be sticky and create otherwise unknown issues----and this is when 'the deflection' becomes necessary.
Right. Facts will be facts, so there is nothing any imaginary "deflection" could change.
And isn't this line exactly within what the NRA stands for and comments on all the time?
"imaginary deflection?" Really?
"what the NRA stands for...……………………" And that too?
Do you require further explanation?
how come the date on my calendar keeps decreasing then...
am i going back ?
.
yea, ive been waiting to hear more on Russia's NRA as well.
Funny, the some bedfellows that are made, whence they find mutual benefits.
Not friends with benefits...
sounds like a true marriage
This can help bring you up to date on the spy that wasn’t and how the deep state and its media arm made a mountain out of a molehill for use as propaganda.
[Discuss seeded topic, not members of the forum.]
[deleted]
Removed for context
i speak in tongues, but via telepathy
Sorry bud, but the New Republic has a habit of misinformation, try again
For a long time my position has been "Fuck the NRA", and it will remain so.
That is one of the more ignorant comments i’ve ever seen on NT. Not even close.
What part of his statement was incorrect?
Every