Marvel unveils new, gun-weilding Captain America

http://www.pacificpublishingcompany.com/site/index.cfm?news id=18292069&BRD=855&PAG=461&dept_id=517907&rfi=8

"The National Rifle Association is one of the largest and most powerful lobbying groups in the country, giving the American COMMUNISTS LEGALIZATION Union a run for its money."

The only control we need over weaponry is with criminals (who violate the 2nd amendment) and Democrats - both of which are murderers (as in Waco Texas where the Democrats murdered children, mothers, & fathers).

I see you deleted your essay about the gun issue, and your support for gun control.

Decided the issue didn't need any further research after all? Didn't want to get into a debate? Acknowledging your status as a neo-con?

What happened?

I realize this post may seem like it has to do with gun control, but it's an apolitical post. Captain America was a Super-Soldier, developed by the military to be stronger than the average soldier. He doesn't need weapons.

I don't want to offend anyone here, as I respect you all for even taking the time to read anything I write.

I have to ask, however, why are you guys so big on this article I wrote now? I wrote it back in May and posted it on this very blog! It's not something I was hiding.

Also, the general thesis of my article has not been adressed by many of you. I argued that the presence of weapons and glorification of bad behavior is unhealthy and leads to violence.

Ironically enough when I sent this to more liberal friends of mine they shot back at me about calling for "censorship" of gangsta rap and heavy metal. So I guess I get it from both sides.

I wrote about it as soon as it was brought to my attention, and I was also talking about your newspaper column.

Further, contrary to what you've written here, I did indeed address your general thesis.

Doc,

I wrote that post a while ago, so I can't possibly get in the mode of myself a few weeks ago. I will say that "you guys" was probably lodged at those that were making my article a big issue. It was also getting a bit tedious, as I wanted to move on to other issues.

Of course, "you guys" didn't mean conservatives or Townhallers if that is what you thought. In referring to that group, I am part of it, and am proud to be. Townhall has been good to me while I've been here and I have met the funniest political commentator this side of Mark Steyn. =P

Good neo-con tactics.

Because, Mike, since you seem intent on dodging the issue and refusing to answer directly, I will answer YOUR rhetorical question.


Second Amendment rights are one of the core defining issues of true conservatism.

But, of course, you wouldn't know as you're obviously a neo-con.

intent on ignoring my posts.

Yeah, tough having your ears pinned to the wall, isn't it?

Don't be so sensitive, Brian. This is far from my only blog, and if you look at my latest post, you will see that I am not ignoring you at all.

As for me being a neo-conservative, this is a label you are insisting on me. I have a huge moral quibble with the guns rights lobby, as they seem to block measures that would keep guys like Cho legally obtaining massive amounts of firepower. I don't think Rudy Giuliani to be a desirable candidate, and I wasn't endorsing him in my article, in case it seemed as if I was. I was pointing out that he was the only candidate that sees that gun violence is a problem.

I don't want conservatives put into a mode where they stand against any measure that would restrict gun violence out of principle. I seriously want something to be done to make sure that Virginia Tech, the Newark, New Jersey shootings and other tragedies don't happen again. I'm sure we can both agree on that, and hopefully we can find some common ground in wanting that goal.