TexasCHLforum.com

Dana Loesch is one of my heroes.

I hope more Mom's join her.

I like that add. Will drive the gun control moms nuts

It sure makes sense to have protection at home but hearing about the old media conspiracy or media bias is tiresome. This stuff just appeals to the lowest common denominator. I'm sure NRA can do a lot better than this.

Great commercial, where are they running it? If it's just on hunting shows and The Blaze it won't get to the demographic that needs to see it.

I heard that The View lost some sponsors lately

dale blanker wrote:It sure makes sense to have protection at home but hearing about the old media conspiracy or media bias is tiresome. This stuff just appeals to the lowest common denominator. I'm sure NRA can do a lot better than this.

I've been employed in "the media"..... The media IS biased, and it sometimes DOES rise to the level of conspiracy. One may be tired of hearing it, but that doesn't change the fact of it.

Dale,

Read Bernard Goldberg's "Bias".

Then get back to us...

dale blanker wrote:It sure makes sense to have protection at home but hearing about the old media conspiracy or media bias is tiresome. This stuff just appeals to the lowest common denominator. I'm sure NRA can do a lot better than this.

If you're that naive, you will have some real surprises in your future.

I was in Washington, D.C. in 2005, attending the Gathering of Eagles. That was a group of vets who decided to counter protest A.N.S.W.E.R., the communist front group that was anti-war (what a laugher that is.) Cindy Sheehan was supposed to speak at their rally that day, but she never showed up. I guess it was too cold. Meanwhile, thousands and thousands of vets stood in the cold, on wet snow, and listened to patriotic speeches and songs. Then we marched to the Wall, to protect it, because there had been online discussions about defacing it.

EVERY major media outlet was there. ALL the tv trucks and reporters were at the A.N.S.W.E.R. rally. NOT ONE reporter covered our rally (which was at least 10 times the size of theirs) and NOT ONE story about the Gathering of Eagles made it on to tv or the front page of any newspaper.

If you don't think the media is biased, you have your eyes wide shut.

The Annoyed Man wrote:

dale blanker wrote:It sure makes sense to have protection at home but hearing about the old media conspiracy or media bias is tiresome. This stuff just appeals to the lowest common denominator. I'm sure NRA can do a lot better than this.

I've been employed in "the media"..... The media IS biased, and it sometimes DOES rise to the level of conspiracy. One may be tired of hearing it, but that doesn't change the fact of it.

You have be wandering through life with blinders on to believe otherwise, especially if you're a gun owner and take any interest in 2nd Amendment issues. For instance, how can anyone miss the fact that practically any public misuse of a gun, even one that doesn't result in causalities, is national news, whereas even heroic uses of a gun in legitimate self-defense are almost always only reported in the local news? And that's aside from the obvious manipulation in support of the liberal narrative and the general use of well documented propaganda techniques.

baldeagle wrote:

dale blanker wrote:It sure makes sense to have protection at home but hearing about the old media conspiracy or media bias is tiresome. This stuff just appeals to the lowest common denominator. I'm sure NRA can do a lot better than this.

If you're that naive, you will have some real surprises in your future.

I was in Washington, D.C. in 2005, attending the Gathering of Eagles. That was a group of vets who decided to counter protest A.N.S.W.E.R., the communist front group that was anti-war (what a laugher that is.) Cindy Sheehan was supposed to speak at their rally that day, but she never showed up. I guess it was too cold. Meanwhile, thousands and thousands of vets stood in the cold, on wet snow, and listened to patriotic speeches and songs. Then we marched to the Wall, to protect it, because there had been online discussions about defacing it.

EVERY major media outlet was there. ALL the tv trucks and reporters were at the A.N.S.W.E.R. rally. NOT ONE reporter covered our rally (which was at least 10 times the size of theirs) and NOT ONE story about the Gathering of Eagles made it on to tv or the front page of any newspaper.

If you don't think the media is biased, you have your eyes wide shut.

The Gathering of Eagles did not exist in 2005 - it started in 2007.

And it was reported that the number of protesters (ANSWER and others) on September 24, 2005 in DC was 150,000 or more but that the number of counter protesters was just a few hundred.

Anyway, thanks for protecting The Wall - I would too if I was sure the threat was real and not contrived to get attention.

Back to the video above... reporting about a woman scaring off an intruder with a gun versus a woman being murdered...hardly comparable wouldn't you say? I guess this is a matter of perception.

Richbirdhunter wrote:Great commercial, where are they running it? If it's just on hunting shows and The Blaze it won't get to the demographic that needs to see it.

I heard that The View lost some sponsors lately

I've seen the commercials on FOX News Channel.

Dana Loesch is an awesome American. Great message. I hope it reaches some women that may have wrongly joined the group of rabble rousing thuggish "unmotherly moms" out there running around demanding things of others...

Posted to my Facebook Page.

dale blanker wrote:

baldeagle wrote:

dale blanker wrote:It sure makes sense to have protection at home but hearing about the old media conspiracy or media bias is tiresome. This stuff just appeals to the lowest common denominator. I'm sure NRA can do a lot better than this.

If you're that naive, you will have some real surprises in your future.

I was in Washington, D.C. in 2005, attending the Gathering of Eagles. That was a group of vets who decided to counter protest A.N.S.W.E.R., the communist front group that was anti-war (what a laugher that is.) Cindy Sheehan was supposed to speak at their rally that day, but she never showed up. I guess it was too cold. Meanwhile, thousands and thousands of vets stood in the cold, on wet snow, and listened to patriotic speeches and songs. Then we marched to the Wall, to protect it, because there had been online discussions about defacing it.

EVERY major media outlet was there. ALL the tv trucks and reporters were at the A.N.S.W.E.R. rally. NOT ONE reporter covered our rally (which was at least 10 times the size of theirs) and NOT ONE story about the Gathering of Eagles made it on to tv or the front page of any newspaper.

If you don't think the media is biased, you have your eyes wide shut.

The Gathering of Eagles did not exist in 2005 - it started in 2007.

I was mistaken about the year. Trust me, I was there. I stood in the cold with thousands of fellow veterans, including my good friend and Marine Captain John Milliman and his wife Peggy.

dale blanker wrote:And it was reported that the number of protesters (ANSWER and others) on September 24, 2005 in DC was 150,000 or more but that the number of counter protesters was just a few hundred.

In 2007 there was about 10,000 at the A.N.S.W.E.R. protest. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/March_17, ... ar_protest
http://canadafreepress.com/2007/cover031807.htm
http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2007/03 ... -liberals/
There were 30,000 at the Gathering of Eagles. http://michellemalkin.com/2007/03/17/bl ... 00-strong/

dale blanker wrote:Anyway, thanks for protecting The Wall - I would too if I was sure the threat was real and not contrived to get attention.

It was not contrived. There were threats on anarchist and anti-war discussion forums and active plans to deface the Wall. The Gathering of Eagles was a grassroots reaction to that threat. We stood in line, three abreast, waiting to get in to the Wall while the protesters marched past us, heads down, signs down and reversed so they couldn't be read until they passed us. There were vets there spoiling for a fight, and if one protester had said something, they would have been cold cocked right there. I saw several protesters with spray paint cans in their hands. I don't think they were expecting us to be at the Wall when they got there.

Reply in Bold.

baldeagle wrote: In 2007 there was about 10,000 at the A.N.S.W.E.R. protest. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/March_17, ... ar_protest
Wikipedia does not support your claim. Have you even read it???

dale blanker wrote:Anyway, thanks for protecting The Wall - I would too if I was sure the threat was real and not contrived to get attention.

It was not contrived. There were threats on anarchist and anti-war discussion forums and active plans to deface the Wall. The Gathering of Eagles was a grassroots reaction to that threat.
Defacing The Wall makes no sense for pacifists who are objecting to war. The memorials are honoring those who gave their lives and are not glorifying war. But of course there are some that will believe anything.

We stood in line, three abreast, waiting to get in to the Wall while the protesters marched past us, heads down, signs down and reversed so they couldn't be read until they passed us. There were vets there spoiling for a fight, and if one protester had said something, they would have been cold cocked right there.
Hmm, so those who fought and died for our freedoms, including the 1st amendment, would have been proud(?) Don't think so. If the media saw this threat and did not report it maybe the media was doing the country a favor.