National Review

Uncategorized

Quote Of The Day

August 1, 2018 by 1 Comment

Charles C.W. Cooke, editor of NationalReview.com and recently naturalized American citizen, had this to say about the gun control industry’s flipping out about 3-D printing and self-made firearms.


Psychologically, though . . . in one fell swoop, a large number of people have realized that their aspirations for gun control are DOA. They have realized that the technology was well beyond what they had imagined. They have realized that there is nothing magical about firearms, and that there is nothing remarkable about their manufacture. They have realized, that is, that their crusade is effectively over. Thanks to the explosion of technology that is supposed to be on their side, the tide is rushing in without respect to their royal persons. And they don’t like that one bit.

He’s absolutely correct. No matter what they say to the media or what they say to gullible judges or say on the floor of Congress about “plastic guns”, their real fear is becoming irrelevant and that is why they are fighting this tooth and nail.

Uncategorized

The Sicilian Widow

June 28, 2016 by 1 Comment

I came across an editorial in the National Review from June 14th. While I’m a little behind times as we have family visiting, the editors of the National Review said we don’t need a new assault weapons (sic) ban. You can read the whole editorial here.

However, what caught my eye was this characterization of the AR-15:

An “assault weapon” is the Sicilian widow of the firearms world: a little scary-looking and all dressed in black. 

I love it! This can lead to a whole plethora of names for new AR builds. The old style one could be named Mrs. Corleone. A more modern one could be Francesca or Isabella or Carmella or Elena. The possibilities are endless.

No word, though, on whether an AR-15 can pull off the malocchio or evil eye.

Uncategorized

Quote Of The Day

November 11, 2015 by 2 Comments

If you have been watching the pathetic nonsense going on at the University of Missouri, you know that both the president and chancellor have resigned. This came after 30 African-American members of the football team threatened to boycott the next game if the president hadn’t quit. They were supported in this by their coach Gary Pinkel.

Rich Lowry of the National Review, noting that Mizzou is an SEC school, said that when the members of the football team team joined the protest it was all over for President Tim Wolfe. He did, however, go on to point out that the football program this year was 1-5 in conference. He then wrote this:

If anyone running the university had any guts, the school would have told the team, “Come back and talk to us when you can beat sad-sack Vanderbilt, or at least score more than three points against them.” Given the team’s performance, the proper rejoinder to its threatened boycott should have been, “How would anyone notice?”

Vanderbilt, by the way, is 1-4 in the conference and 3-6 overall. Mizzou was its only conference victory. The Commodores started the season by losing to Western Kentucky of Conference-USA in Nashville.

Uncategorized

Comment Of The Day

May 3, 2014 by

For a Brit, Charles C. W. Cooke of the National Review gets it on gun control and gun rights. Maybe because his native land has so eviscerated any semblance of gun rights, Cooke is more aware of what is at stake than many Americans. In an article published yesterday in the National Review, he takes on what he calls the “terminal vagueness” of Everytown Moms for Illegal Mayors. When he asks both a Demanding Mommies volunteer and Everytown Communications Director Erika Soto Lamb a direct question regarding whether they support a new AWB or mag restrictions, he gets evasiveness. While one would assume that they would have no problem supporting both of those restrictions, they don’t want to go on record.

Cooke concludes that the gun prohibitionists have a problem with being too specific about their intentions and it carries over to their “branding”.

While the National Rifle Association has maintained its name and branding since it was founded in 1871, the gun-control movement has gone through names and outfits faster than Prince. Before market research informed its leadership that words matter, the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence was named first the “National Council to Control Handguns” and then “Handgun Control Inc.” — both of which titles are nice and descriptive but, alas, leave little room for ambiguity. This, evidently, will not do. In a fight in which deception has become paramount — who honestly believes that Everytown would not support an assault-weapons ban? — vocabulary has become king and euphemism indispensable. Gun “control” has thus become gun “safety”; restrictions on ownership have become “gun-violence prevention”; and hard policy has been subordinated to woolly platitude. Michael Bloomberg may have rebranded his effort, but he has not yet managed to stop the truth getting out, nor to prevent his more moderate supporters from recognizing the ruse and bolting. And “a hog in a silk waistcoat,” as Charles Spurgeon famously quipped, is ultimately “still a hog.”