Narrow in Orlando

After a little thought I’m starting to formulate the next The Alternative. Oh man these days are long. Lots to do. I’m tired. But the blog must go on.

From the left we have calls for better gun laws to stifle gun violence. From the other left we have calls for more better security, restricting immigration, more foreign aid, profiling, and The Minority Report. From the middle we have… Tadah! Silence.

A caller to Rush Limbaugh today laid it out well. He said the State of Florida is responsible for the magnitude of the slaughter because it is illegal to carry a gun where alcohol is served in Florida. 10% of adults in Florida have some kind of permit to carry a gun. But in a bar there are none. There were 300 people in The Pulse that morning. If 10% were carrying a gun, the shooter would have had some resistance.

How many loved ones of these victims will, rightfully, blame the state? Prolly none because the state is now god. Heaven help us.

3 responses to “Narrow in Orlando

  1. And, let;s see . . . the world’s largest arms dealers lecture Americans on ‘assault weapons.’ Talk about hypocrisy.

    Crooked Hillary states, “Weapons of war have no place on our [American] streets.” Oh, I see, but it’s okay for our military to walk the streets of Iraq and Afghanistan, shooting who they think are enemy combatants and, as a result, killing far too many innocents.

    • We need to work commentary like this into the conversation with those conservatives we were messaging with this week without causing them to burst.

      On Sat, Jun 18, 2016 at 10:10 AM, alternativebyfritz wrote:


      • I feel sorry for those you are messaging who believe themselves to be “conservatives.” They have to feel abandoned by those politicians for whom they voted and who they thought would champion their interests.

        Based on a few self-professed “conservatives” with whom I routinely share ideas and opinions, my sense is that if you try to work commentary like I wrote earlier into the conversation in a subtle manner, it is really quite over the target audience’s heads and they miss the point. Similarly, or antithetically, if you hit them squarely with inarguable opinion based on reasoned, logical thought, they get mad, because you burst their warm, cozy comfort bubble. I don’t believe they really want to be coerced into thinking.

        Writing of “thinking,” whenever I want a good laugh (maybe an anguished laugh owing to how misguided he typically is — but, yes, he’s just an entertainer), I record a “Hannity” TV show and watch it later when I can skip through the commercials or skip through his ultra-ridiculous nonsense. And he’s your “conservative” archetype. Go figure.

Leave a Reply to Frederick John Cancel reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s