There is a fine line between having a sit-in to defend civil rights, and a sit-in to take civil rights away from people. The Democrats have just crossed that line.
The Congressional Democrats' sit-in to deprive people of gun rights is more like a temper tantrum from a spoiled child, than any kind of noble protest. Fortunately, the Republicans ignored the ploy. Even more fortunately, the "obstructionist" Republicans are in control of the Congress, so we don't have to worry about the Rugratocrats getting their way.
Here is the kind of argument we get from the Left:
.@davidharsanyi @AriMelber How many children do we have to sacrifice on the alter of the 2nd Amend to satisfy the gun gods?— Figment (@Figment_Imagine) June 23, 2016
This is absurd. If you want to protect children, why not get a gun and protect them? Oh wait, the Rugratocrats would rather have the nanny-state government do it. Forgive me if I don't trust your pathetic nanny-state government to protect our children. Heck, it can't even educate them properly!
On top of that, I love how the Rugratocrats roll out John Lewis ("who had participated in the civil rights sit-ins in the South in the 1960s") as if he were Martin Luther King Jr. News flash for the Rugratocrats: There were actually some stupid people at civil rights protests in the 1960's. If you don't believe me, just ask John Lewis, because he was one of them. Attending a civil rights protest in the 1960's is NOT a "get out of stupid" card.
So when you see Democrats like this:
(hat tip to CNN for the photo)
Just remember that rugrats tend to play on the floor.
No comments:
Post a Comment