Quote of the day—Ed Asner & Ed Weinberger

Let’s consider the case made by the NRA, its Congressional hired hands, the majority of the Supreme Court, and various right wing pundits who claim the Second Amendment is not simply about state militias but guarantees the unfettered right of everyone to own, carry, trade and eventually shoot someone with a gun.

Ed Asner & Ed Weinberger
December 16, 2017
Sorry, NRA: The U.S. was actually founded on gun control
[This is what they believe our, and the Supreme Court’s, opinion of the right to keep and bear arms is. You know they have a weak case when they start out with a straw man argument.

They continue with claims that the individual rights conclusion of Heller decision was a completely new interpretation of the 2nd Amendment. They claim it ignored 200 years of precedent and historical context when all nine justices agreed it referred to an individual right. Yes, only five justices agreed that D.C. had infringed upon the right but all nine agreed the 2nd Amendment protected an individual right. Apparently a couple of people who are best known for their work on the television series “The Mary Tyler Moore Show”, a work of fiction, think they know constitutional law and history better than the nine justices on the U.S Supreme Court in 2008.

I know these Hollywood types can develop an exaggerated sense of self importance, but WOW, these guys are operating on a different plane of existence.—Joe]

13 thoughts on “Quote of the day—Ed Asner & Ed Weinberger

  1. I will never understand what makes these asshole television and movie actors think they have some special insight of political and economic matters. Ed Asner is a huge communist, and not a very good actor.

    I think the correct answer is, crap for brains.

    F*ck that guy in particular.

    • I have no difficulty understanding the behavior of the “celebrities”. It’s the behavior of the rabble who enable them that mystifies me.

      I can’t think of any good reason why anyone should consider “celebrities” as being special people deserving of some measure of adulation, and yet millions of people do, even to the point of paying them (via buying tickets and such) millions of dollars to stand before a camera, to swing a stick, or to throw a ball, but millions of ordinary people do. It is therefore hardly surprising that “celebrities” think of themselves as being special people and milk such a status for every dollar it can provide. That some of these people are also crap-for-brains self-important assholes is not surprising, either, as that species is everywhere.

      • Don’t knock it. It’s been an effective system. You’ve seen the “man behind the curtain” so to speak, but surely you can still see and understand the ploy’s effectiveness.

        Calling them out on it won’t stop them. Not directly. They’ll stop only when their own observation shows them it no longer works.

        It still works, therefore they’ll keep doing it. You see this at work in some of the more deeply discredited, former celebrities.

        Furthermore, we keep paying them for their shit, so we’re part of the problem. From their point of view, and in fact, we complain but we still support them. Pretty great gig, huh?

  2. Let’s not be too hard on ol’ Ed. I believe he’s played a lawyer at least once in some sitcom.

  3. “At this writing, there have been over 1,500 gun-related homicides in America since the Las Vegas massacre on October 1, 2017 when 58 people were killed and 546 wounded, right on track with the national average of 1,000 gun deaths per month for the last two years.” – Article published on 16 December, 2017

    October 1st – December 16 = 2.5 months. 1500 homicides over 2.5 months is 600 per month. They can’t even make it through the first paragraph without inaccuracies. Good job guys.

    • Such negativity, man! Numbers and arithmetic are patriarchal and so one-percenter, they are automatically suspect.

    • Actually, that’s probably an understatement.

      If you go here:
      https://webappa.cdc.gov/sasweb/ncipc/mortrate.html

      And ask for the homicide numbers for firearms, for 2015 (latest year data is available) the number was 12,979, which works out to about 1,080 per month. Looking at it on a rate per 100,000, though, that’s about half of what it was just 25 years ago. And significantly lower than when Ed Asner was relevant.

      • “And significantly lower than when Ed Asner was relevant.” ZING! Almost spit out my coffee, that was a good one.

  4. Maintaining Congressional hired hands.
    If you have any power you’ll eventually use it to kill people.
    Do we see some willful projection there, that Marxist/Soviet tactic of, “Accuse others of what you do”?

  5. Apparently a couple of people who are best known for their work on the television series “The Mary Tyler Moore Show”, a work of fiction, think they know constitutional law and history better than the nine justices on the U.S Supreme Court in 2008.

    Given some of the decisions (*cough* ACA, Kelo *cough*), I think it is entirely possible that most everybody knows constitutional law and history better than the nine justices on the U.S Supreme Court in 2008.

    The mangling of law and sense in pursuit of an agenda, or in support of stare decisis, that goes on in those chambers sometimes makes me think they should be rubber-lined.

    • I agree with what you said about justices, though I would make it more general and apply it to the entire judicial branch going back at least to 1930 and probably to 1789.
      One illustrative example is the notion of “balancing legitimate state interests with …”. This absurdity has no basis whatsoever in the Constitution, but it entirely made up to justify whatever conclusions the judges in question want to reach. There is no “balancing” in “Congress shall make no law…” nor in “…shall not be infringed”.
      H. L. Mencken got it right:

      “In nothing did the founders of this country so demonstrate their essential naivete than in attempting to constrain government from all its favorite abuses, and entrusting the enforcement of those protections to judges; that is to say, men who had been lawyers; that is to say, men professionally trained in finding plausible excuses for dishonest and dishonorable acts.”

Comments are closed.