Conservatism is a Mental Illness

Good luck wrapping your head around this one.

According to the NRA, we make the world more dangerous for women by honoring famous women who are victims of gun violence. via Media Matters

NRA News host Cam Edwards claimed that Glamour magazine’s Women of the Year Awards had an “anti-gun agenda” and made “the world a more dangerous place for women” because the event honored victims of gun violence, including Pakistani education reformer Malala Yousafzai who was shot by the Taliban.

Glamour’s 23rd annual award event held on November 11 also honored former Rep. Gabrielle Giffords (D-AZ) — who was wounded during a 2011 mass shooting in Tucson, Arizona — and Sandy Hook Elementary School teacher Kaitlin Roig-Debellis, who saved the lives of 15 first-graders during the December 2012 mass shooting at her school in Newtown, Connecticut. Yousafzai, who at age 15 was targeted for assassination by the Taliban for protesting a ban on female education, told the crowd, “I believe the gun has no power at all.”

On the November 14 edition of NRA News show Cam & Company, guest Laura Carno, the founder of conservative non-profit I Am Created Equal, suggested that Yousafzai could have defended herself from the Taliban with a gun and later said that the award event should have invited Carno and other female gun rights activists.

PicardWTF

The world is more dangerous for women because these women (Gabby Giffords, a Sandy Hook teacher, and Malala) are sending the wrong message. The message they should be sending is that we need more guns.

These people are mentally ill.

This entry was posted in Gun Fetishists, Guns and tagged , , , . Bookmark the permalink.
  • mrbrink

    Inspiring violence against women is what defending America looks like to the crazy white men waving guns.

    I’m sure women would get fair trials in Conservatopia. After a more than fair and reasonable 20 mile walk of slut-shaming, they’d have quiet and dignified mass grave ceremonies.

  • Christopher Foxx

    These people are mentally ill.

    They are sociopaths. Plain and simple.

  • muselet

    There aren’t enough fuck yous in the universe.

    –alopecia

    • willpen

      Well said…..

  • Kitty Smith

    No, they are not mentally ill. They are evil. Big difference.

  • CygnusX1isaHole

    We should listen to what Malala Yousafzai told Barack Obama in an Oval Office meeting regarding drone strikes in Pakistan:

    From Commondreams (October 2013):

    Malala Yousafzai, the sixteen-year-old Pakistani girl who survived a gunshot to the head by members of the Taliban for speaking out on women’s right to education, told President Barack Obama in an Oval Office meeting on Friday that he should stop drone strikes in countries such as Pakistan.

    In a statement released after the meeting, Yousafzai said that she told Obama that she is concerned about the effect of U.S. drone strikes in her country—a portion of the conversation that was omitted from White House statements so far.

    “I [expressed] my concerns that drone attacks are fueling terrorism,” Yousafzai said in a statement released by the Associated Press. “Innocent victims are killed in these acts, and they lead to resentment among the Pakistani people. If we refocus efforts on education it will make a big impact.”

    “The best way to solve problems and to fight against war is through dialogue,” she told BBC. “That’s not an issue for me, that’s the job of the government… and that’s also the job of America.”

    Unedited:
    https://www.commondreams.org/headline/2013/10/12-2

    All acts of violence: guns, drones or otherwise need to be strongly opposed by the left no matter which party is in charge.

    • JMAshby

      Ratfucker says what?

      • CygnusX1isaHole

        Partisanship is a mental illness.

        May the duopoly soon perish.

        • Pink No More

          How much do you get paid to fuck those rats? ‘Cuz it ain’t enough, Junior.

        • JMAshby

          Third party 2016! Woo!

          Keep fucking that chicken

          • CygnusX1isaHole

            The extremist policies and positions supported by Democrats like yourself will drive more disenchanted Democrats into the arms of third parties than could be achieved by any other means.

            I thank you for your continued support.

          • Scopedog

            “The extremist policies and positions supported by Democrats like yourself”…

            To quote Will McAvoy: “What in the FUCK?!”

          • Badgerite

            Just to be clear. Pakistan is a country that has reeked savage bloody hell on its neighbors and destroyed any semblance of secular life ever since it came into existence. The Soviets invaded Afghanistan not because they wanted to get closer to the gulf states oil ( as the Saudi’s tried to convince the US so we would fight the Soviets there). They invaded because the radical Islamic fundamentalist Pakistani Intelligence services were training and infiltrating radical Islamic fighter to destabilize the country. Since the Soviet Union had a large Muslim population within its borders at the time, this was a great concern to them. The US (CIA) did help the Pakistanis and the Afghans kick the Soviets out. And then the US left. But Pakistan did not. In my class at school was a woman whose husband was an Afghan and who fought there. When the Soviets were defeated, the more secular political elements in the country were trying to gather evidence of the terrible abuses and genocide that the Soviets committed there to bring to the Hague. But before the rebuilding and evidence collection could even get started, the Taliban, which was funded, supported, trained, armed and directed by the Pakistani Intelligence Services went on a killing rampage of any and all political opponents in that country. A terrible slaughter happened. Afghanistan is still trying to recover and Pakistan is still making that pretty much impossible. I won’t even get into what they did in Bangladesh or Kashmir or what they recently did in Mumbai. I’ll just stick to the hell they have reeked on Afghanistan for decades.
            This does not address the issue raised as to whether drone strikes are creating a bigger problem than they are solving. It depends on who you listen to. This is just a “your a morally smug, complacent, not particularly well informed ___________. Vote however the hell you want. You are not worth the trouble.

    • mrbrink

      Remember when President Obama blew off Malala Yousafzai and told her through the media that she could have just defended herself from the Taliban and dismissed her for having “an anti-drone/gun agenda” while shitting all over her innocent, peaceful plight because she’s making “the world a more dangerous place” for women?

      Of course you do.

    • D_C_Wilson

      All acts of violence: guns, drones or otherwise need to be strongly opposed by the left no matter which party is in charge.

      Does that include acts of violence in defense of others or the nation? Because that is Obama’s rationale for continuing the drone strikes. Now, we can argue whether or that rationale is right, but defense of the nation is his job description as Commander-in-chief. If violence is used to thwart a terrorist attack, should the left oppose that?

    • Pink No More

      Flagged for your usual off-topic dronewhiner Greenwaldo fratfucker spam.

      • CygnusX1isaHole

        I come to this web site writing about the fundamental leftist value of PEACE and repeatedly get verbally assaulted and sworn at by those who claim to represent the left.

        Even those employed by this web site lack the restraint to respond in a civilized manner.

        I could’ve posted the same message on a dozen other progressive web sites. Only on this website do I get treated this way.

        What I wrote is more on-topic than thousands of meandering replies to hundreds of other articles on this web site.

        You’re simply upset because I highlighted the portion of Malala’s anti-violence message that reflects poorly on the president.

        Why have you prioritized partisanship over peace?

        • Badgerite

          You will not get peace in that part of the world if the only change is that drone strikes stop. This is the country that not that long ago killed Benazir Bhutto as she was campaigning for the Presidency of Pakistan. And no ‘drones’ were involved. Probably the Pakistani Intelligence and Military services were involved though. This is the country in which Malala just got shot in the head on a school bus for the crime of wanting to learn. What peace?

        • Badgerite

          Here’s a hanky!

  • trgahan

    Americans should really be more worried that even an indirect reference to potentially making guns slightly more difficult to obtain for law abiding citizens receives such intense denouncement from such a small minority of embittered, scared white men. Though I know most are just mad there are magazines with women in them that AREN”T porn.

    Anyway, just too easy to theorize what would happen to these “pro-gun” groups if they were muslim, black, latino, etc.

  • Victor_the_Crab

    Malala Yousafzai has far more courage and honor in her 16 year old frame than all of the despicable, penis enhancing pondscum of the NRA combined. None of those gun toting cowards will ever be as brave as her.

  • Scopedog

    “These people are mentally ill.”

    There must be _some_ way to unscrew their heads against the threads and puke down their necks. I mean….good God, you hope to the heavens that they are not serious–and yet, sadly, they are.