Finding Meaning In Madness: Clinton Blames NRA While Robertson Cites Disrespect For Trump

Hillary_Clinton_Testimony_to_House_Select_Committee_on_BenghaziAs is often the case, politicians and commentators were fast to draw political meaning from the latest massacre.  Of course, the most obvious explanation is that this was an attack by a demented and hateful individual.  At the base of this massacre seems utter madness — untractable and unfanthomable madness.  However, after saying that this was no time for politics, Hillary Clinton immediately denounced the National Rifle Association.  At the same time, televangelist Pat Robertson cited the disrespect for Trump and our flag.


After 58 people were killed and 515 were injured late Sunday night, Clinton went to Twitter to denounce the NRA: “The crowd fled at the sound of gunshots. Imagine the deaths if the shooter had a silencer, which the NRA wants to make easier to get.”  She added “Our grief isn’t enough. We can and must put politics aside, stand up to the NRA, and work together to try to stop this from happening again.”

The odd thing about the tweet is that the weapon being used by Stephen Paddock, 64, is believed to be a fully automatic machine gun.  It has been illegal since owning any fully automatic weapons since May 19, 1986 (unless it was grandfathered in) If this was a fully automatic weapon, it was likely already illegal.  Moreover, the suggestion that more would have been killed it a silencer was used is rather implausible.  Putting aside the sound even with a silencer, there is the sound of the victims being hit and crowd panicking.  A person may not actually hear the gun shots but would certainly see dozens of people being hit and a crowd stampeding.  The suggestion is that somehow a couple dozen people might be hit but not many people take note of the falling bodies.

Over at the The 700 Club, Pat Robertson had his own taken:

“Violence in the streets, ladies and gentlemen. Why is it happening? The fact that we have disrespect for authority; there is profound disrespect for our president, all across this nation they say terrible things about him. It’s in the news, it’s in other places. There is disrespect now for our national anthem, disrespect for our veterans, disrespect for the institutions of our government, disrespect for the court system. All the way up and down the line, disrespect.”

Once again, Paddock appears to be an unhinged lunatic who carried out his fantasy of hate and death.  I have as skeptical of the influence of anti-Trump comments as I am the relevance of silencer rules to this massacre.  It appears to be profound hate, not profound disrespect, that put Paddock in that room. In the end, there may be no “message” to an act of senseless savagery.

150 thoughts on “Finding Meaning In Madness: Clinton Blames NRA While Robertson Cites Disrespect For Trump”

  1. It is intuitive that Hillary would disappear. Who is telling Hills that her polling is up and to kick-off her 2020 campaign? If that is not sufficiently weird and bizarre, ex-FBI Director Comey proved Hillary’s guilt on numerous counts before exonerating her, which should mean that the new Trump DOJ should be salivating to charge her, in which case she should be keeping a low profile. How could Hillary and Bill commit more crimes than Bonnie and Clyde and remain prominently and fearlessly in the public eye? Could it be that all roads lead to Obama and his entire gang, not to mention the many multiple international co-conspirators? What do the Clintons know that will keep them out of the guillotines? “Too Big To Jail?”

    1. George, Judicial Watch is doing their best. I watch Tom Fitton’s weekly report – not only is State, which is filled with HRC/Obama appointees doing their best to delay release of documents so is the Trump administration.

    2. Pro tip: when the facts and the results don’t match your premise, re-examine your premise.

      this is to “but Rush tells me daily that Hillary is a bad witch” georgie

  2. Instead of everyone promoting their agenda have a little respect for the victims and their families. There will be ample time to point fingers after a thorough investigation has come to an end.

  3. Mandalay Bay Hotel says nothing appeared unusual.

    32nd floor, room 32135. So let me get this straight. Dear Leader Kim of North Korea, could have rolled an H-bomb on a cart into hotel room for testing, tip the hotel bell hop & get past hotel security?

    1. Why don’t Hilary and the anti-Constitution, anti-American psycho libs impose gun control on Dear Leader Kim of North Korea, ISIS, Iran, the Talibanman, et al.? Looks like the bad guys always have guns and whatever else they want.

  4. Who was in charge of Mandalay Bay Resort Hotel Security? This hotel is advertised as a family friendly Gun-Free-Zone.

    Bill Thaxton was an ex-Texas Ranger one of the bravest by far. It’s said that old Bill was the fastest man ever. Bad men all feared him way back in his day but he was now growing old.

    “Tell him that I’m on my way, I’ve never ran and I’ll meet this young man
    at any time of the day.” Bill got there just about sunset. The sun still hung like fire in the sky. In just a few moments out there in the street, old Bill or the outlaw would die.

  5. ” The hearing protection Act ” it is the NRA. Besides, Pat is just looking for more money, maybe he needs new Lear-Jets.

  6. Half of this country harbors a festering g political ideology that rests on the inherent evil of the other half. One political party has made its name by branding opponents as stupid and reprehensible. They’ve succeeded
    In ending all debate and imposing meme-like, slogans to make themselves feel good by portraying those who disagree as vile or “deplorable.” Then, they use the violence they’ve created to push further their agendas and further alienate their fellow citizens. And they’re perplexed that anyone could oppose them:
    despite their obvious corruption and destruction of all things previously considered communal. Go figure.

    1. And the other half of the country, I take it, does NOT have a festering political ideology ????

      1. Just from a survey of the posts on my Facebook Feed, I’m less likely to see my Republican/Conservative acquaintances post messages calling for violence against “The Other Half” or to resort to ad hominem beat downs. My acquaintances from “The Other Half” on the left, however, are much more likely to engage in name-calling and verbal beat-downs. Maybe it’s the age difference: my conservative friends are more likely to be older and the Left-oriented ones are younger. The holidays will be difficult this year. Yesterday I found out what my 20-something niece really thinks of me… I’m a “garbage human being” who deserves death. Time to re-write my Will.

        1. Based on our feed, I’d say there’s a systemically different conception of the importance of public life. We have only one Republican on our friend list who posts anything on political topics, and most of hers are vaguely amusing. Palaeos / alt-right are much more opinionated, but they’re not numerous (we know one). Our Democratic friends are much more voluble. They just have to tell you what they’re thinking (and what they’re thinking commonly consists of John Oliver clips and poster memes).

        2. So, uh, you think she cares? You might want to sit down; I have something to tell you, and it’s going to make you very sad…

          this is to “didn’t get the message” emanuelle

  7. I haven’t heard anyone else notice this, but the gunman’s vantage point also overlooked part of the airport. He could have easily shot up a bunch of airplanes, before turning his attention to the crowd.

  8. I always come back to the following issue: We have far and away more guns-per-capita than any other “advanced” country in the world, and far and away more gun deaths per capita. Is that just a coincidence? Are occasional massacres just the price we have to pay, in order to be armed to the teeth so as to be able to wage civil war against the Federal government? I think some have argued that with more and more guns, homicides by gunfire will decrease to zero. But I am dubious about that.

    And do we need to have an arms race as well? Machine guns? Rocket propelled grenades? Howitzers? Tactical nukes? All in the name of “freedom”?

    1. Right. Because after eight years of being ruled by an executive who—capitalizing on white guilt and liberal sloganisms—circumvented congress with impunity by issuing “orders;” hog-tied the executive by preventing enforcement of laws he deemed offensive; only allowed the prosecution of his political opponents; and swept away due process from those he deemed unworthy — were supposed to hand over our guns and trust the government. Ask Khadoffy how that went.

        1. You figure you can take on the Army and the Marines?

          You figure the Army and the Marines would follow unlawful orders? They have a sworn duty not to.

          Also, how well do you think it will go if you are successful in empowering the government to start confiscating any of the estimated 300 millions guns already in circulation and limiting the natural right of the citizens to self-defense? That’s right, you hadn’t thought that far ahead.

          Molon Labe!

          1. Personally, I wouldn’t mind if assault-style weapons were confiscated, or at least no longer for sale. A pistol or two, a hunting rifle, and a shotgun. Beyond that, I am not sure why anyone would want more firearms. Or, perhaps, the heavy-duty stuff might be required to be stored at (say) a gun club or shooting range.

            1. . Beyond that, I am not sure why anyone would want more firearms.

              So everyone’s to be hostage to your imagination and consumer tastes. Thanks!

            2. Personally I wouldn’t mind if we limited the franchise to legal gun owners that can pass a civics exam.

      1. So, occasional massacres are OK, as long as you can have as many guns as you want?

        1. No, they aren’t ‘OK’. There are, however, trade-offs that you consider in the formation of public policy.

          1. I think the trade off is, occasional massacres are OK as long as your right to an unlimited number of firearms is not compromised….

            1. In assessing the trade-off, you have to consider the marginal effect of any policy measure you care to name. You’re not doing that.

        2. Check out the meds with which these people were medicated.
          All of these mass shootings starting in the 1980s.
          Someone needs to sue these Pharmaceutical Companies over these SSRIs.

      2. You meant to say a black president who was slandered, demeaned, and mistreated by birthers and racists, right? His being a black man drove the racists out of their basements and into the public sphere. I’m grateful to him for that, because we saw, and now continue to see, them for the despicable snakes that they are.

        BTW, he never wanted to take away your stupid guns.

        1. You meant to say a black president who was slandered, demeaned, and mistreated by birthers and racists, right? H

          Strange as it may seem to you, politicians you favor have critics and adversaries. Obama was never ‘mistreated’ by anyone. As for being ‘slandered’ and ‘demeaned’, he got off lightly compared to just about any other president who has occupied the office in the last 30-odd years. He also got large loads of unearned and uncritical good press.

          1. LOL. Birtherism was the most racist and Despicable action against any president in history.

        2. betsyDvos – btw, he was as white as he was black. He just threw his white relatives under the bus.

          1. Racists invoke the one drop rule when it suits them and ignore it when it suits them. That’s one of the things that makes bigotry so powerful. He always spoke very lovingly about his mother

            1. He always spoke very lovingly about his mother

              While she lay dying of cancer in Honolulu, he was attending an idiot jamboree called the Million Man March. I don’t think he was all that invested in her in a visceral way. Cannot blame him really. Her biography is that of a vigilantly self-centered woman.

      3. I’m intrigued by your insight…Who is this “Khadoffy” person, and how does he fit into the international plot to steal our vital bodily fluids?

        This is to “I’ve got the scoop” debbie

    2. We have far and away more guns-per-capita than any other “advanced” country in the world, and far and away more gun deaths per capita. Is that just a coincidence?

      Gun ownership is close to universal in Switzerland, where homicide is unusual.

      And, of course, we have no ‘gun deaths’ in this country. As occidental countries go, we have a high homicide rate (though a fraction of what’s normal in Latin America). The frequency of robbery, rape, and aggravated assault is somewhat elevated here (but not so much as homicide). The frequency of burglary here would be about normal in Europe if not subnormal. Auto theft is a great deal less common here than in Europe.

      The disparity in homicide rates is largely due to inner city mayhem, and has been throughout the post-war period. Harassing exurban, small town, and rural gun owners does flat nothing to address inner city mayhem. Harassing the owners of long guns also accomplishes nothing. About 3% of the homicides in this country in a typical year are committed with long guns.

      You can address inner city mayhem, but that requires hiring more cops, deploying them optimally, and punishing slum criminals. Liberals do not want to do this because reasons. They do want to pin the blame for inner city mayhem on people they despise. Slum blacks are liberal clients and liberal’s tools. Countryside residents who collect guns are people liberals despise.

      1. About 25% of Swiss have private guns. It is not “universal.” Also, the Swiss government issues one rifle to each man, as each military-age man in Switzerland really is enrolled in a “well regulated militia.” But the ammo is kept at the armories.

        1. My regrets, gun ownership among young men is the usual rather than universal.

          as each military-age man in Switzerland really is enrolled in a “well regulated militia.”

          Something noted by Michael Kinsley a generation ago: it’s impossible to believe that in any other context the American Civil Liberties Union would have interpreted the phrase ‘the right of the people’ to mean anything but a personal right. The antecedent phrase does make one thing clear: the people have a right to possess military arms.

          Yes, I did notice what you ignored.

      2. Citations to authority for your claims? Or do we just rely on the “facts” you received without question from Hannity/Rush/Alex Jones/disguised guy at your tinfoil hat convention?

        this is to “fool me thrice” toad

  9. Sooo, a maniac with a gun kills a lot of people, and the answer from the Left is, that all the people who aren’t maniacs should give up their guns! Yeah real smart. Trickle Down Gun Control.

    Gee, why not start with enhanced penalties for felons with guns, and do it for real. Why not Stop and Frisk, and a significant jail term if the ex-felon has a gun? Why not put a bounty on a Gang Members? A Wanted: Dead or Alive law?

    Because while the Las Vegas Massacre is horrible, there’s like 30 or so people murdered every day in the country, which means there’s 3 1/2 Las Vega’s every week or so. And that number would be higher if there was not widespread gun ownership.

    Squeeky Fromm
    Girl Reporter

    1. Yup, Squeeky, if there were guns hanging from the trees, guns stacked on the sidewalks, guns in the churches, guns in every tavern, guns in the schools, then gun deaths would surely go down ……

      1. Well, do you plan to be the one going to the inner cities and taking the guns from the felons and gang members there??? Because isn’t that where most of the gun murders are coming from?

        Because if you don’t have a good workable plan to take those guns from those people, then all you are doing is playing Beauty Contestant, who says, “If I had had a wish, then all the people across the world would give up their guns and give their neighbor a hug!” You are just plain missing the practical aspects of this.

        And remember, most of these gang members are already breaking the law by having a gun in the first place. Sooo, legally, you don’t need a new law to take their guns. So why not go do it? Why don’t you advocate this as a first step?

        Squeeky Fromm
        Girl Reporter

        1. Actually, that’s not a bad idea. But I presume that whenever any inner-city toughs are arrested, their firearms are confiscated if no proof of legal ownership. The Chicago PD must have stats on confiscated firearms.

    2. Haha. Now I know you’re a bot.

      this is to “it’s not a bug, it’s a feature” sqeek

Comments are closed.

Res ipsa loquitur – The thing itself speaks
%d bloggers like this: