Health care town hall meetings
have been all over the news recently with concerned citizens voicing their views
over more and more government intrusion into the lives of the average
American. However, the news
coverage has been heating up lately because some of these concerned Americans
have decided to exercise their God-given right to bear arms at these events.
It all started when William Kostric, of New Hampshire, had (gasp) a handgun on him at
one of the Town Hall meetings put on by President Barak Obama.
The major media had a collective
brain seizure seeing a free man exercise his God given right to be able to
defend himself. They made
ridiculous statements over the air such as “disturbing news,” “Are the police
going to allow him to do that?”, “Is that legal?”, and my favorite, “You’re
saying a guy has a gun in the open!?”, as if it was the same thing as shooting
heroin in public. Several news outlets continued to make a big deal out of
something equal to walking your dog in the park for the next several days.
Although I appreciate Mr.
Kostric’s love of freedom, this could have easily been taken advantage of by
those that hate the Bill of Rights. An agent provocateur could easily copy these activities, and then take it
to the next level by waving it around or, Heaven forbid, fire it in public. This would allow the media and the
government the excuse they are craving to come down so hard they send the
freedom movement back into the Stone Age.
While our congress critters
continued showing their contempt for the people they are supposed to represent
by switching their public town hall events to secret conference calls with the
groups that are pushing this giant government take over, those crazy lovers of
constitutionally limited government did the unthinkable, they brought an
“assault weapon” to the protest in Phoenix!
Before I go on, I want to make
the point on how ridiculous the term “assault weapon” really is.
According to Webster.com,
“assault” means “a violent physical or verbal attack… a military attack… a
threat or attempt to inflict offensive contact or bodily harm…”
I am at a loss to understand how
an inanimate object can do all those things on its own or limit itself to
offensive action only.
Thanks to MSNBC, we all know that
Socialist is code for the “N” word http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ksNSopGHrLw
. And now, again thanks to MSNBC, we
know that the people carrying these “assault weapons” are also racists, and
probably members of the militia.
"A man (known only as Chris B) at
a pro-health care reform rally...wore a semiautomatic assault rifle on his
shoulder and a pistol on his hip....there are questions about whether this has
racial overtones.... Here we have a
man of color in the Presidency, and white people showing up with guns strapped
to their wastes." We also learn
that these people are mad about a black person being president, and we are going
to see someone try and do him harm, because of this anger towards having a black
What would we do without the mainstream
media? We would all likely be lost
and confused as to who and what kind of people are behind this “violent”
Now, all kidding aside, who was this black
hating racist? Why did MSNBC only
show his back? Could it be because
if they showed the full picture, it might challenge the story they had already
written in advance?
What? How could showing the face of one of these white racist African-American
haters challenge their story?
Maybe because this is
Chris is a clean cut young man, whom the
media could not label racist or paint as some back woods hick. As collectivists, compelled to group
people together based on race or how one looks, this must have been one of the
most frustrating news events these mainstream news reporters had ever come
across Those reporters must have
been livid to see someone defending the Constitution, whom they could not put
into some preconstructed box.
How could I make such a jaded claim? The first photo of Chris taken by
mainstream outlets leaves out any view of Chris’ skin; a search of the online
edition of the Arizona Republic has no photos of Chris, even
though the above
articles show plenty of photos. To top it off, the MSNBC video discussing the event only shows that same
obstructed view and makes references to racism and not wanting a black person to
If anyone claims there is no malice in the
media towards the lovers of freedom or even bias in general, please share with
them this clear example of animosity towards anyone exercising their rights
contrary to the will of the power elite.