Dumb (?) quote of the day: ambiguous comma placement edition
As president, Mitt will work to expand and enhance access and opportunities for Americans to hunt, shoot, and protect their families, homes and property, and he will fight the battle on all fronts to protect and promote the Second Amendment.- Mitt Romney For President, "Gun Rights"
Okay, okay, okay. Yes. I know. We all know what Mitt Romney's campaign website was trying to say, and what they did say if you read it the way they meant for you to. Which, yes, is grammatically correct. Hence the question mark after the word "Dumb" in the title.
But am I the only one who read that paragraph and got a mental picture of President Romney signing legislation to allow people to hunt family members? Yeah, I didn't think so.
"Mama, I'm real, real sorry we couldn't afford to keep you in that rest home you liked so much. Now I'm gonna give you a fifteen minute head start because you got that walker and all, but then me and yer grandson, Billy, are gonna get the dogs and start beatin' the bushes. Billy, now you stop yer cryin' and you kiss your gramma and put your orange vest on like I tole you."
This, inevitably, leads me into a thorny maze of ethical questions. I'm not necessarily opposed to hunting, but it seems to me you're morally obligated to use every part of the grandma. Which probably means violating all sorts of state and Federal laws about meat safety and corpse disposal. Plus, y'know, cannibalism is a little unnecessary, increasing the risk of passing along various kinds of parasites and things.
Of course if you wanted to go and take this seriously or something--well, why would you want to go and do that? I mean, this is just the Romney campaign chumming the waters for the NRA crowd. The usual nonsense implying that reasonable limits on gun ownership are somehow an affront to fundamental human dignities, when of course the First Amendment (just to pull a f'r'instance out of the thin air) has gotten along pretty finely notwithstanding laws against libel, slander, making threats, obscenity, committing acts of sedition and treason, etc. As for the assertion that "The Second Amendment is essential to the functioning of our free society," well, seriously?! I don't know which is worse, the idea Romney might be serious about that or that he's more likely pandering so much he might as well go ahead and paint himself black-and-white and go live in a bamboo grove to eat shoots and stop having sex.
If you want to go bag a deer, I don't have a problem with that. If you're feeling charitable, I do love me some venison, hint, hint. But let's not kid ourselves about whether that pistol you have in a gun safe in your closet is keeping the United States Army from having a twenty-year-old kid drive a remote-controlled UAV up your ass to unload a coupla Hellfires. And as for self-defense: maybe you oughta have stayed in the goddamn truck, George, and let the cops do their goddamn job.
Hell, thinking about it, maybe letting Americans shoot and hunt their family and property is a better justification for gun ownership than the tripe that's often offered up by the NRA types. Take a weight off Social Security and maybe get rid of some of these empty foreclosed homes, y'know?
But am I the only one who read that paragraph and got a mental picture of President Romney signing legislation to allow people to hunt family members? Yeah, I didn't think so.
"Mama, I'm real, real sorry we couldn't afford to keep you in that rest home you liked so much. Now I'm gonna give you a fifteen minute head start because you got that walker and all, but then me and yer grandson, Billy, are gonna get the dogs and start beatin' the bushes. Billy, now you stop yer cryin' and you kiss your gramma and put your orange vest on like I tole you."
This, inevitably, leads me into a thorny maze of ethical questions. I'm not necessarily opposed to hunting, but it seems to me you're morally obligated to use every part of the grandma. Which probably means violating all sorts of state and Federal laws about meat safety and corpse disposal. Plus, y'know, cannibalism is a little unnecessary, increasing the risk of passing along various kinds of parasites and things.
Of course if you wanted to go and take this seriously or something--well, why would you want to go and do that? I mean, this is just the Romney campaign chumming the waters for the NRA crowd. The usual nonsense implying that reasonable limits on gun ownership are somehow an affront to fundamental human dignities, when of course the First Amendment (just to pull a f'r'instance out of the thin air) has gotten along pretty finely notwithstanding laws against libel, slander, making threats, obscenity, committing acts of sedition and treason, etc. As for the assertion that "The Second Amendment is essential to the functioning of our free society," well, seriously?! I don't know which is worse, the idea Romney might be serious about that or that he's more likely pandering so much he might as well go ahead and paint himself black-and-white and go live in a bamboo grove to eat shoots and stop having sex.
If you want to go bag a deer, I don't have a problem with that. If you're feeling charitable, I do love me some venison, hint, hint. But let's not kid ourselves about whether that pistol you have in a gun safe in your closet is keeping the United States Army from having a twenty-year-old kid drive a remote-controlled UAV up your ass to unload a coupla Hellfires. And as for self-defense: maybe you oughta have stayed in the goddamn truck, George, and let the cops do their goddamn job.
Hell, thinking about it, maybe letting Americans shoot and hunt their family and property is a better justification for gun ownership than the tripe that's often offered up by the NRA types. Take a weight off Social Security and maybe get rid of some of these empty foreclosed homes, y'know?
Comments
I mean, really...how often do you get a chance to pop a cap in some intruder's ass?