WTF, JUST HAPPENED!!!

[TonyF]

Give me a break. I'm sorry, I normally try to be polite, but you hypocrites really piss me off. The Bill of Rights is a package deal, you're either for liberty or not; there is no such thing as half-way free.

We're not talking about abridging the banner holders 1A Rights, we're talking about the banners effect in the *court of public opinion* and that means allot in our struggle to preserve our 2A Rights.

There is a large sector of the public that we need to reach out to and educate. The effect of that banner will only serve to reinforce in many people's minds that we are a bunch of intemperate, knuckle-dragging neanderthals.

The point is, we can make our case with the non-gun owning public without resorting to emotionalized and sensationalized antics.

[Lougotzz]

antis are never going to like you.

media is never going to like you.

This is what the republicans do. They try to make friends. Then they get screwed.

I believe the sign is protected speech. I would not make an issue of it.




If the sign wasnt there do you think the media would give you a positive report on the rally? No they would have showed a corner of the hall with 3 people standing there and make it look like no one showed up,and put it in last years news paper.

The sign made its point. I think the politicians know how pissed we are. I think next time they should make more then one. I give them credit for having the balls to make a stand in the capital. They have protected speech like any of the political correct jerk offs do. They didnt threaten anyone. It was refrenced from history that know one seems to know.

[dgg9]

Give me a break. I'm sorry, I normally try to be polite, but you hypocrites really piss me off. The Bill of Rights is a package deal, you're either for liberty or not; there is no such thing as half-way free.

Indeed, but we're not talking philosophy here, or abstractions. The issue at hand is politics, which is 100% about appearances and demagoguery, not substance. In politics, if you have a political adversary, and the media is firmly on his side, not yours, you simply can't make stupid mistakes.

One such mistake is to allow your message to be instantly swept into an easily dismissable category. Then the adversary can use bully-words like "racist!" to pre-empt further discussion.

As soon as someone carries a quasi-threatening sign, the debate shifts away from the issues and onto the sign itself. Then you end up in a defensive posture, explaining yourself. At that point, you've lost.

It's completely pointless to bring up the fact that people who rally against George Bush etc also carry threatening signs. Why? Because the media will not allow the signs to become the isue in that case, because the media sides with the anti-Bush demonstrators.

If the game is politics, you can't afford to make naive mistakes.

[dmg1969]

An e-mail I sent to Rep. Cruz...

Representative Cruz: I am a pro-gun citizen living in the Harrisburg area. Although I was unable to attend the pro-gun rally at the capital yesterday, it has made the news around here...particularly the liberty tree banner. I want to let you know that, whoever it was who made and held the banner, in no way speaks for the majority of us...law-abiding gun owners.

Although I think too much is being made of the sign, I will agree that it was a poorly worded attempt to paraphrase a quote by Thomas Jefferson. That quote is:

"The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time, with the blood of patriots and tyrants. It is its natural manure."

I know that those of you on the other side of this issue will still refuse to debate the practicalities and effectiveness of the proposed bills. Rather, you will skirt the issue by demonizing all based on the actions of one. Please know that the pro-gun crowd is infinately larger than what was reflected at yesterday's rally. It's just that the majority of are busy working to pay the taxes which, if I may remind you, pays your salary.

Thank you.

[Ruger Mike]

The whole point of this thread is that the media missed the point of the rally because of an overreaction to a sign. Why does everything have to be so right or wrong? There are in betweens. Yes, the rep overreacted. Could anyone with a half a brain know it could be taken the wrong way? Yes. That's the point.

BTW, what happened to a threat is only a threat until someone acts upon it?

Thanks for the back up. You're right on your comment. Personally, (and I apologize for it) my brain retains only a bit of what was said on air. Those who were their have actually elaborated on what I left out. Does anyone remember the entire message?

My point originally was in how the post was taken. Dumb may it have been, a true threat I can't support. Too much political correctness, too much sensitivity and it sickens me to death. As I told my wife last night, If the sign had read "We know where you live and we are going to kill you", that's a threat. Not everything has to be turned into a racial issue. Again, I must point out. How do these guys know the authors weren't black or hispanic. Also, as some have pointed out, maybe it was anti's out to sabotage pro's right to peaceful assembly.

[billamj]

We're not talking about abridging the banner holders 1A Rights, we're talking about the banners effect in the *court of public opinion* and that means allot in our struggle to preserve our 2A Rights.

There is a large sector of the public that we need to reach out to and educate. The effect of that banner will only serve to reinforce in many people's minds that we are a bunch of intemperate, knuckle-dragging neanderthals.

The point is, we can make our case with the non-gun owning public without resorting to emotionalized and sensationalized antics.

Well said Tony. That is exactly the point that I've been trying to make in various threads for the past several weeks.

[dgg9]

Talk about screwing it up for the rest of the group. That banner is the only media we are gonna get from the whole rally.

And that's the point. Without that banner, would the media have had favorable coverage? No, but at least they would have had to deal with the issues. Now they don't have to. The entire rally, and every principle it stands for, can be lumped in with the sign and dismissed. The banner made is easy for the media to slander the whole group and avoid the issues.

Rule #1 of an unpopular cause, where the media is hostile: you absolutely can not allow your opponent to equate your entire cause with one easily maligned sound-bite. Don't HAND him the sound-bite. Don't look ridiculous on purpose.

[dgg9]

Don't over-react to a metaphor. Please note that the sign said "Tree of Liberty..." which is something I believe our forefathers and founders of the country would have said.

Nobody wants to hang Cruz...or anyone else.

We, here on this board, are not over-reacting. We all know what the maker of the banner intended to say. The point is that the banner, as written, is easily distortable. The problem is that some people here are shocked -- shocked -- that the anti-gun media would choose to not play fair. That's naive. The MSM are against gun owners. Hence, you simply can't lean into the punch like that.

[dgg9]

antis are never going to like you.

media is never going to like you.

Given that, isn't it foolish to make it so much easier for them to dismiss you into an easily maligned stereotype.

Each public event is a chances for publicity and hence a chance -- fleeting, but a chance, and it does happen -- for ISSUES to be brought up, or for the gun owner to be seen in a favorable light. This event was such a chance.

[RugerNiner]

That banner made going to the Capitol a waste of time.
The media is all over the banner and not about gun owners rights.