Gabby and her gun

| March 15, 2013

Gabby and a gun

The above picture is from Gabby Giffords’ Facebook page. She posted it after someone posted a cropped version of the picture taken when she was running for office a few years back and thought she needed to present a tougher image in her Arizona district before an election. Today, she runs a non-profit named Americans for Responsible Solutions which advocates for banning the same types of weapons and accoutrements which she is holding in the picture. In her statement which accompanies the photo she says;

I grew up with guns, and I like owning them. So does my husband Mark. It’s an interest we’ve shared ever since we met. It’s part of my heritage as an Arizonan and it’s my right as an American.

Yeah, well, there are a bunch of Americans who also grew up with guns and like owning them – so why does she think we shouldn’t be able to now?

You might remember that a few days ago, her husband, Mark, was spotted buying the same sort of scary-looking black rifle in Tuscon. He said that he was buying it because he wanted to see how difficult the paperwork was, because he didn’t get a good sense of the paperwork when he’d bought an M1911 semi-automatic handgun a few moments before.

Giffords released the photo because someone else had already done it, not because she wanted full disclosure about her previous activities back when she needed Arizonans’ votes. According to Breitbart, she initially claimed that she didn’t recognize the photo and a spokesperson from AFRS hinted that the photo had been altered.

Category: Gun Grabbing Fascists

58 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
2/17 Air Cav

I guess it wouldn’t be appropriate to start with the idiot jokes, huh?

She plays baseball? Yes, 3rd base. She plays 3rd base? No, she IS 3rd base. Baddabing!

DaveO

#49 2/17 AC: “Hey, she’s no more damaged than Biden, Feinstein, and a slew of others.”

Their brains aren’t damaged, they were born that way.

Ex-PH2

All right, you sorry bastards. That’s enough! Come on.

She got shot in the head just like some of the troops over in Afghanistan. She may actually be worse off than they are, because she’s only good for what those wretched bastards can get out of her. When that wears off, she’ll lose her usefulness to them as a victim. Then what happens to her? She’s barely able to speak, she probably has a lot of difficulty with simple tasks that we all take for granted, she’ll never be able to work again, and people with severe cranial injuries like hers frequently have shortened life spans.

Just how long do any of you really expect Mark Kelly to stick around, anyway? (I swear, he looks like Uncle Fester.)

I wouldn’t wish that off on anyone.

Old Trooper

@53: Of course she’s being used. So is Jim Brady. The kids and teachers in Newtown weren’t even cold, yet, before they were being used. If we (conservatives) were to do something like that, we would be labelled as lower than snail shit, but because the progressives have zero class to begin with, they are free to use every tragedy, no matter how bad, for their ultimate ends. That’s why I said to the Master Chief that I wasn’t going to bag on Gabby, but I will continue to go after her hubby. He’s an asshole.

Ex-PH2

@54 – Thrift, Old Trooper,thrift!! The funeral meats are still warm. — Hzmlet.

Hondo

Old Trooper: fully agree. IMO Giffords is twice a victim here. First, she was shot and disabled. Second, she’s being conned by people she trusts into supporting causes she likely does not agree with because of her condition. And due to her condition (and the possible diminished capacity resulting from it), I’m not even sure she realizes she’s being conned.

The only criticism I have for Giffords – and it’s a mild one – is if she passed on FEHB coverage as a Member of Congress and has large medical expenses as a result. In that case, she took a risk and came up short. In that, she’s not alone.

Different story if she does not have diminished faculties and was actually pro-gun control all along, but was previously hiding that fact for political reasons. But IMO what’s been made public points away from that latter conclusion pretty strongly.

teddy996

I think she’s a dirty racist. That target is clearly a picture of an hispanic male.

WOTN

The more personal attacks on Gabby are flat out wrong. There are some things, politically, that are within the left and right limits, but not the attacks on her personal cognitive abilities. The personal attacks are just as wrong as using her, in her diminished capacity, as a puppet. That is the line. It is perfectly within reason, and moral, to point out that she is being used. It is even reasonable to point out that her current advocacy is hypocritical to her previous campaign platforms. While the discussion of motivations for such a 180 have at points seemed irrelevant, the discussion itself is within range limits. We should recall some of the history of the case. She was shot by a deranged leftist. After a hell of a medical fight, she has regained the ability to speak, and walk. She did the right thing and resigned her seat in Congress, because she could no longer properly represent her constituency, could no longer logically consider the bills before her, and could no longer argue for her opinions. She is quite clearly “of severely diminished mental capacity” through no fault of her own. The true antagonists in this story, are those that are using her for their own agenda. It is with complete lack of morality that they use her in such a manner, and that does include Mark Kelly, who is clearly the implement pulling her strings for the puppetmasters, and the master of the circus. Finestain, Schumer, Biden, and Dick Durbin do not get the same protections, as they are supposedly of full mental capacities, and cannot point to an event which robbed them of it, not to mention they are the ones pushing an anti-Constitutional agenda. But no, in no oath I’ve sworn, nor heard sworn, has their been an expiration date. The only time limits related to the means of protection, the duty to risks, and the financial and benefit obligations returned for those risks, and/or duties. The term of the contract means that after expiration, I am no longer obligated to risk my life actively in… Read more »