Opinion from a Libertarian ViewPoint

Does The Erie-times News Think We Are That Stupid/Senator Casey Flips Over Nagging Wife

Posted by M. C. on December 23, 2012

The Erie Times editorial of 23 Dec advocates more gun control laws in the wake of Sandy Hook.  No surprise there, they are an anti-gun paper.

Pat Cuneo is the editorial voice. ’nuff said?

The mainstream media and government is concentrating on gun control. To paraphrase myself in the last post, we had a high school hunting club where many brought rifles and shotguns to school, hunting before and after school. The only gun violence we heard about was massacres in Viet Nam.

 What is different now?

Alternative media, primarily Libertarian and paleo-conservative, have the same question and are looking elsewhere. Violent movies, violent computer games, the psychiatry biz and their friends the pharmaceutical industry.

How many of these whackos are on a mental health drugs that makes them kill crazy?

Why isn’t the Times addressing this?

The paper advised us to vote for a progressive, corporatist, anti-capitalist candidate in Obama. The logical extension is this is the Times agenda also. You say “but the Times accepts gun sales advertising and has a hunting column”. That non-sequitur can be explained.


Subscribers and advertising are diminishing.  Newspapers are dying.  The future is the ‘net.  News, education, you name it.  When it comes to survival philosophical issues can sit on the back burner. Most of the sheeple won’t think to question the dichotomy in any event.

Why not comment on violent media or big pharma? The media and Hollywood are brothers in arms.  Media, medicine and Pharma are tools of the progressive.  A marine recently spoke out about our policy in the middle east and the FBI had him committed. That is straight out of the KGB handbook. I mention in my previous post how the psychiatry biz is multiplying our maladies in its latest malady handbook DSM-5.  Good for its business and big pharma’s too.  It will make it easier for our benevolent government to stick more people in FEMA re-education camps when that time comes.

There were two items in today’s editorial that really got me going.

The last sentence. …”the desired action is to reduce gun crimes and deaths, not to confiscate guns.” That is definitely not what Obama has in mind. It was Sarah Brady that blabbed to her followers that Obama told her “don’t worry we are working on gun control under the radar.” If the Times didn’t hear that one they are in the wrong business. I can only assume they do know and we are being sold a bill of goods.  “Bill of goods” is a nice way of saying “lied to”.

The other point was Senator Casey saying he has decided to support gun control because his wife “…confronted him several times. She was very direct and persistent.”

So our senator has decided to turn his personal gun ownership philosophy upside down because his wife is a nag.

Excuses like this are due to Casey not having the integrity to tell us what the real reason is.

It is like when someone quits a position because they want to spend more time with their family. The real reason is often closer to they can’t take their fellow workers or some such thing.

I am guessing this turn about is due to one of two things.

Bobby was ordered to toe the line. Obama told him it was in his best interest to throw gun owners under the bus. An offer he couldn’t refuse.

The other possibility is he has always had this point of view and now is safe to come out of the closet.

Casey has more explaining to do.

How does his NEW gun control philosophy jive with his voting for the National Defense Authorization Act?This act allows the president to target anyone, anywhere with a drone strike. This now officially includes children.

Previously children were targeted, just unofficially. There is also the bungled drone strikes that take out wedding parties and other common gatherings. Anyone capable of holding a gun or is unfortunate enough to be spotted holding a shovel, broom or digging a hole is fair game. This now officially includes children.

Then there is Casey’s unabashed support of Israel and our giving them even more money to target rocket and bomb attacks on Gaza schools and hospitals? It is obvious to me Casey is bought and paid for by AIPAC, but that is another story.

Why isn’t the Erie Times asking the same question? Because…

The Erie Times News, Senator Casey and Obama are hand in glove. Remember the hand sanitizer if you ever have to shake hands with any of them.

Like I said, this editorial is a bill of goods.

Be seeing you.

2 Responses to “Does The Erie-times News Think We Are That Stupid/Senator Casey Flips Over Nagging Wife”

  1. Doug Rowley said

    We all know why honest citizens with valid carry permits are forbidden by law to carry guns on school property. Obviously they would go berserk and kill as many children as possible. And, conversely, the criminally insane would think twice about killing in a school due to the law prohibiting even carrying a gun on school property. Gun control is people control and only people in control of themselves comply. But it feels so good to punish targets of opportunity without the burden of a jury trial. Take Penn State, for example. It just isn’t enough to punish and control the perps.

  2. Mike Rowley said

    You have to put into perspective where the Erie newspaper is coming from. It’s owned by a wealthy family that have catered to the ideals of Socialism and Race mixing. Knowing full well that they have insulated themselves from the consequences.

Leave a Reply

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: