Home
Archive
Newsletters
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Advertisement
Advertisement

Right-Wing Pundits Now Lecturing the Military: Bases Need More Guns

Posted by Eric Boehlert, Media Matters for America at 1:15 PM on November 11, 2009.


Logically more guns would mean less shootings, right? Wait ...

Share and save this post:

      

      

Share on Facebook       

AlterNet Social Networks:
follow us on twitter
find us on Facebook

Got a tip for a post?:
Email us | Anonymous form

Get PEEK in your
mailbox!

 

Interesting to watch, to say the least. It's sort of like watching right-wing pundits lecture police chiefs about guns when they're not sufficiently radical in their pro-guns views. But watching the same commentators now target the U.S. military is really a bit much.

In the wake of the Ft. Hood handgun massacre, more and more conservative commentators, adopting an at-times openly hostile tone towards the military, are explaining exactly what went wrong on the Army base. Mostly, conservatives are calling out the U.S. military as a bastion of liberalism where political correctness runs amok, which I'm guessing comes as a surprise to those who actually serve in the military, especially Muslim American soldiers.

Now the latest emerging talking point is that U.S. Army bases need more guns and that, according to today's WashTimes editorial, basically everyone at Ft. Hood should be walking around with a loaded pistol, if they want.

The argument is to be expected, since following the gun massacre at Virginia Tech, conservatives immediately began lobbying in hopes of passing a law which would allow college students to carry loaded weapons and turn campuses into gun meccas. And now the rhetorical push is on to do the same at military bases, as conservative commentators lecture the military about how to deal with guns.

As General (Ret.) Barry McCaffrey noted on MSNBC, immediately following  the Ft. Hood shooting, "There is ferocious gun control measures on soldiers and families on a military installation." Who do you think has a better handle on how to deal with firearms in the real world, military commanders or editorial writers for the Washington Times?

UPDATED: And just so you know, according to the WashTimes, the Ft. Hood shooting was all Bill Clinton's fault. That's how the Times couches its rhetoric, which allows the editorial to directly attack Clinton (instead of the Pentagon) for allegedly instituting gun control measure on military bases. But the larger premise is unmistakable: the WashTimes know better how guns should be handled on bases than do military commanders.  

UPDATED: And no, of course the WashTimes doesn't spend one sentencing contemplating where and how the Ft. Hood shooter was able to purchase his guns and bags full of ammunition.

Digg!

Tagged as: shooting, guns, ft hood


How Congress May Keep Bloggers Out of Jail
Harvard's Citizen Media Law Project will provide free legal services for online media, just as Congress is trying to provide protection for traditional journalists and bloggers.
Post by Ari Melber. November 23, 2009.
Is Taxing Plastic Surgery Sexist?
Part of the funding for the Senate's health care bill will come from a 5 percent tax on cosmetic surgery, on procedures overwhelmingly obtained by women.
Post by Jill Filipovic. November 23, 2009.
Lieberman's Latest B.S. Excuse for Opposing Health Reform
Another month, another justification.
Post by Steve Benen. November 23, 2009.
Advertisement
You've chosen to turn comments off for the entire site. Would you like to turn them back on?