Skip to main content

Morning Joe is sticking to talking about firearms regulations, morning after morning, week after week.

Yes, he and Mika make me crazy.  I often disagree with him, and Mika makes me squirm regularly.  but I have to celebrate his speaking out on this issue.  He was shocked to his core by Newtown and impressed by Joe Manchin speaking out the next day on Morning Joe television show.  Joe has stuck by his support for Joe Manchin and Pat Toomey and is excoriating those who voted to filibuster background checks and trafficking laws.  

This is an important issue for me- and has been for years.  I have long been a commenter in the RKBA threads, I have read and researched this topic extensively, and I have struggled with despair over this issue.  I remember signing in from work one day to participate in a live blog from people on the Virginia Tech campus as they were under fire.  I signed in one day and the Tucson shooting had occured, and I cried when congresswoman Gaby Giffords was shot.  I came here after reading about Aurora shootings.  Sadly, I knew an event like Newtown was inevitable when earlier in the day we were arguing with an RKBA person who insisted that Michigan pass a law permitting firearms in daycare centers.  imagine my surprise when it happened later that day.  I spent the weekend crying while watching teevee.

Yes, Morning Joe is peculiarly fixated with violent video games, but he has no real traction on this issue, mostly because there isn't any research showing this is anything but a symptom of the disordered thinking associated with mass killers.  It's the guns that make these disordered thinkers able to take so many lives, not the games. The real issue is the paranoid conservative mind set, out of touch with reality and unable to believe a poll telling them that Mitt Romney will lose the election.  and interestingly, joe is begining to reah the same conclusion, mocking the survivalist wing of the party.  There is a good op ed by Charles Blow on this in the nytimes today, interestingly http://www.nytimes.com/....

So props from me to Joe and Mika and crew.  As long as you keep pushing the issue, I will keep watching.

And special thanks to Joe Manchin who I voted for so reluctantly.  I am proud of this action, and I will remember it next time there is a vote here.  Joe Manchin, don't give up on these bills.  They aren't enough, but they are better than nothing.

Originally posted to murrayewv on Thu Apr 25, 2013 at 04:49 AM PDT.

Also republished by Repeal or Amend the Second Amendment (RASA) and Shut Down the NRA.

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  Another interesting thing to note (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Box of Rain, koNko, murrayewv, gypsytoo

    This is what a media campaign looks like.  This is what Joe said he was going to do.  He told us.  He said he was making this his goal.  He said he use his show, his guests, his writings and his appearances elsewhere to push this.

    Relentlessly and one-sidedly.

    ....notice how similar it looks and feels to what FOX calls "reporting news"?

    At least Joe told us his plan before he did it.

    Красота спасет мир --F. Dostoevsky

    by Wisper on Thu Apr 25, 2013 at 05:39:17 AM PDT

    •  Thanks for that.... (0+ / 0-)

      I like someone who sticks their neck out on a real principle- like not murdering six year olds.  That is an important principle for me.   And there are those in his base who are mad at him over this, and still he is sticking to it.  I think he is reading the polls!

      You shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you mad. Aldous Huxley

      by murrayewv on Thu Apr 25, 2013 at 06:33:36 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Scorning Joe (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    a2nite

    I have not watched this show since his hypocritical, pernicious rant about Obama's tax returns and his similar refusal to show us his. And I won't. Join me.

    •  Obama's tax returns are more important (4+ / 0-)

      Than gun control?

      Sorry, but that is short-sighted and self-defeating (assuming you are pro).

      This issue needs as many advocates as it can get and if Scarborough is motivated to keep the discussion going, good on him.

      What about my Daughter's future?

      by koNko on Thu Apr 25, 2013 at 06:22:55 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  I know- the tax return diatribe.... (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Bob Duck, Miniaussiefan

        was so false and off base he just shut up about it.

        He remains a conservative blowhard on most issues that are important to me.  But on this vitally important one, he is being the voice that sounds sincere and frankly, like he will stick with it.

        You shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you mad. Aldous Huxley

        by murrayewv on Thu Apr 25, 2013 at 06:35:04 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Agreed. (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          murrayewv

          We don't have cable so I only watch Morning Joe when I'm on the treadmill at the gym. Naturally, I prefer watching when he's ranting about something I also believe in, as in this case, gun control and the shameful, horrendous, cowardly vote that was recently taken.

          Joe is absolutely on point with this issue.

          Being the single intellectual in a village of 1,100 souls ain't much fun, especially when 1,099 of those don't think you're all that smart.--Lucy Marsden

          by Miniaussiefan on Thu Apr 25, 2013 at 07:28:45 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

      •  I agree (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        koNko

        Not worth responding to all the comments calling me out for not praising the good he is doing on this issue. Regardless, he crossed the line for me with the tax return rant. I hope he keeps pushing on gun control.  

    •  Thats the bright line? (0+ / 0-)

      Tax returns?  

      Why would we want to see Joe Scarborough's tax returns?  Who cares?  If he runs for President, then I'd be curious.  Maybe even if he ran for Congress again.

      But he can be a private citizen on the teevee all he wants without showing the world his personal documents.

      Красота спасет мир --F. Dostoevsky

      by Wisper on Thu Apr 25, 2013 at 06:59:25 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Yes, props to Scarborough for using his show (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    murrayewv, Miniaussiefan, a2nite

    As a platform to keep this issue in front of viewers. Making progress will take persistence, and it's helpful to have a Republican vocalize it.

    And I realize it's not popular to criticize ultra-violent video games here, but I happen to agree with him this is a negative social factor and you won't find them in my house.

    What about my Daughter's future?

    by koNko on Thu Apr 25, 2013 at 06:19:33 AM PDT

    •  never bought them for my kids (0+ / 0-)

      never bought a fancy gaming console for them.  I bought a lot of strategy games on the computer though.

      You shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you mad. Aldous Huxley

      by murrayewv on Thu Apr 25, 2013 at 06:36:02 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  I think video games..... (0+ / 0-)

        cause a hit in productivity of students- especially our computer tech students who stay up all night playing them.  But no telling how much time I have wasted on solitaire over the years.

        You shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you mad. Aldous Huxley

        by murrayewv on Thu Apr 25, 2013 at 06:37:08 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  Huh? That's funny... (0+ / 0-)

      But no only did you bail and not continue our debate together on this issue a few weeks ago, and not only have you sought fit to post the same tired out diatribe here without anything to back up your claims against video games, but here you are caught in a lie, or maybe two or three by now, as I was going to hit you if you had the guts to come back to the previous thread of comments : http://www.dailykos.com/... where you already said you did infact play video games, pc games, but doesn't matter what format, and I tried to get you to name what games you play because such a claim needed to be atleast mildly substanciated, and when you didn't answer, I saw the reason why, pouring through your more recent comments, in another video game thread, you posted the same opinated bluster here, including the comment that won't allow video games into your home, so which is it then? Were you lying then, lying later, or lying now?

      "If you are really interested a meaningful discussion, I suggest you read my various comments on this thread where you will find I:

      - state that I, too, play computer games"

      Kind of hard to play computer games, if you don't allow them in your house, wouldn't you say?

      "realize it's not popular to criticize ultra-violent video games here"

      Wow... yeah, you go ahead with your bad self making ad hominem attacks while chiding people like me and accusing people like me of making them, "ultra-violent video games"... yeah can you get any more base and ad hominem in trying to have a discussion by smearing and framing the issue that clearly all free speech/video game advocates are wrong by claiming they are sticking up for "ultra-violent video games", you know as opposed to any other media, movies, music, books, anything with violence, and calling them "ultra-violent"... what's not popular around here, or actually it isn't though I wish it was more popular, is debating issues on the merits of the issues and sticking to facts, not hyperbole from uncredited or discredited sources, or one's "feelings", I hadn't realised the the level of the debate now includes jedi mind tricks of "using the force" as opposed to "using the facts", but what are facts to someone who not only lies about their own "bonafides" on the subject of the video games by claiming that they play PC games, while not answeing what they specifically play, while earlier on the site, they had posted they allow video games or "any media" is what you added in that same sentence, and here we are again going back to what you orignally said, but not to me, this is what you said weeks prior to another video game advocate, what you told me was you do infact play computer games, and how does this happen if you don't let them into your home?

      Again, as if this doen't need to be said on every issue right now on DK where the site has just blown up with a furver or right-wingy like conservatism, but ... FACTS MATTER!

      The reason like people  not unlike yourself don't siscuss the facts and go on tangents not relevant is because the facts are not on your side, and when that happens, you have no place to go but in the gutter.

      Have a nice day!

      PS, to anyone reading this, sorry about the bad format of the comment, I can't access the full panel of DK for posting including quoting and hyperlinking, I've had trouble on and off getting NoSCRIPT and ADBlock to okay this site and all domains being used on it, but even after refreshing the page, the damn thing still gives me only the post and preview buttons. If I could work this out, I might repost this comment before comments close on it, but this issue has been a problem for months, so, who knows when I'll get around to working it out.

      •  I didn't "bail" (0+ / 0-)

        We both said our piece and the discussion was not getting anywhere so it ended.

        And your comment here is more of the same.

        We disagree. I accept that.

        But in case it needs to be restated:

        - I pay video games in moderation

        - My kid does too, but I regulate the time

        - I don't allow violent games in my house, and I'm the parent so I make the rules and tough shit if people disagree and think I'm a fascist pig for that but it's not their business

        - the negative impacts of video game and internet addition are well documented and under further scholarly research, if you and other people chose to deny it that's your right but doesn't change the facts

        That's it. Full stop.

        Cheers!  

        [Not a sigline. You are hallucinating.]

        by koNko on Sat Apr 27, 2013 at 04:44:47 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  hmm (0+ / 0-)
          We both said our piece and the discussion was not getting anywhere so it ended.
          yeah, wrong on both accounts, bob.

          Clearly you didn't even read my last reply to you where I was actually just getting started/warmed up, waiting for what your next move was going to be, especially since you tried to claim I never read any of your responces in that diary other than the one you singled out to respond to, and after I posted that last comment that you stop responding to about check the comments I left on your other comments and their timestamp, I was at least expecting you to chime in to atleast apologize for that.

          And clearly you haven't said your "piece" on the matter, because here you are, a few eeks later posting the eaxct same thing as you were before, well, this time with some either truths or lies, its so hard to distuingh with you on this matter seeing how you've said conflicting statements on your own video game habits whenever the arguemnt calls for one thing or the other.

          and the discussion was not getting anywhere so it ended.
          Ah, I see, so only when someone disagrees with you and when you can't poke holes through their arguement, and are thusly "losing" said arguement, is when the arguement is "not getting anywhere", meaning you haven't finished saying "your piece" on your thoughts on video games, you just want to only bring them up when you think noone will disagree with you or won't bring their A game agianst your side of the debate, in other words you aren't looking for discussion, you are only looking for totally agreement on your views and positions on the subject of video games. You run away from anyone giving you enough "grief" to hold your feet to the floor on your own positions.

          Oh, were you not expecting viewpoints from the opposite in diaries you plan to post now into the future on games, are not my viewpoints not worthy of posting as much as yours are in diaries where they come up, and see, its only when me or someone as strong as me on my side of the issue comes out and speaks up is when the "discussion isn't getting anywhere" ... are you acertainly my commnets on the subject against your aren't getting anywhere, but your alone, unopposed and unachallenged are?

          You do realize I'm an advocate for this side of the arguement, right, meaning in every diary you feel like you have the duty to state your "piece" on games, so do I and other who feel like me, and just like you won't go away or drop the subject from keep posting these commnets  on Kos, neither will we? You do realise we will cross paths, maybe in other diaries where maybe I make the first ciomment, but, yeah, I'm sorry you don't get to call you dropping of anti-game comments into diaries like you did here something valid while trying to claim the opposition doesn't have the same value. Again, right-wing thinking.

          We disagree. I accept that.
          Do you, though? Since you bring it up nearly everytime a diary mentions games, or very close to it, it certainly doesn't seem you accept people have differing views on it, becuase you are still constantly trying to push your views or asuade your views onto other people like you are doing here. I'd just accept we disagree on the issue if you didn't keep brining it up, but since its brought up... and seeing you comments on the "radicalized" diary, I'm surprised you didn't blame excessive or violent video games on The Boston bombings.
          But in case it needs to be restated:
          Yes, incase it needs to be restated, you have conflicting stories on video games habits and where I come from, those are lies. IE, you are now stating an example of you and your children's interaction with games that already contradicts what you just said in this diary , but in one  by Meteor Blades back in March:
          Whether or not games & media are the root (0+ / 0-)

          or a symptom, it does propagate and reinforce the problem so you won't find them in our home.

          konko's comment

          Sorry, but there was NO discertion of "ultra-violent" video games in that comment, and you even added "media", meant to be taken I suppose, you don't allow DVDs or movies into the home, either.

          Personally, you as a parent have every right to keep things you disagree with out of your home as per your rule, but I wouldn't even bring this up if it weren't for in the other diary we sparred in you claimed you were infact a gamer, and again, I don't care if you want to quantify that with adding the "computer"prefix to it, it has no bearing what platform you play games on these days, most games are multiplatofrm these days, so its weird like you and few other people like you try to state this as if you think its absolving you of the "sin" you think vidoe games are.

          The problem comes with credibility with what you post and how it has changed over time, and how I can't get a simple straight answer from you, the questions I was asking you in the commnet that you claim you thought we had both "said our piece" which clearly now, if you are going to say that, that just proves you hadn't read my last commnet in that diary., or the one before that that you did respond to. You claim to play games, becuase you try to use this tidbit of background information to give you "cred" on the subject of games and what you are talking about, this was the arguement you kept making in the other diary, that "hey, I'm a gamer too, I know what I'm talking about "but you can't even give me simple even short list of games, I mean, hell, you could have lied and googled some by now, nothing.

          Yes, there are non-violent games out there, and I love many of them, but unlike you, I can name the ones I play habitually in a second. Also, many of the games that I might consider to be "non-violent" or atleast puzzle games, some fanatic against games could even say they were like in PvZ or even PQ because you may "slay" orcs or whatnot while completely puzzles. In other words, nearly everything about this subject is , while subjective, rightdown to what one's definition of violent is.

          - the negative impacts of video game and internet addition are well documented and under further scholarly research, if you and other people chose to deny it that's your right but doesn't change the facts
          Sigh. No, they are NOT. You are entitled to your own opnions, but not to your own set of facts. You kinda sound like Dubya who keeps insisting the WMDs are still there in Iraq. I've actually had you words EXACTLY spit back to me on right wing boards I use to troll like Free Republic, insisting that if you don't accept that there is no "there", there, that there is no WMDs, that  you are just in denial and something must be wrong with you.

          Oh, I sure did enjoy that you think Mitt Romney is a credible source on this subject, as I said to you the last time I spoke, you might want to actually check your sources and who owns these sites that you buy up like candy hook, line and sinker, you never know where Bain Capital's tentacles may lead to!

          Peace out!

          ps, dk is finally working for me for a change.

  •  Similarly, Mark Halperin (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    murrayewv

    pretty much will never totally negate for me the crap he put forward in 2004, but he was right about this today on Morning Joe:

    This can be taken back and nailed. Some small addressing of something that bothers one of the four Dems - he names Baucus - can be used to close the deal. The term fig leaf was used, and that's fine. But the point is that the four Dems are just flat going to need to change their vote, will need a reason to do the same even if it is a "fig lear," and then it depends on flipping two Republicans.

    Have you heard? The vice president's gone mad. - Bob Dylan, 1966

    by textus on Thu Apr 25, 2013 at 06:42:00 AM PDT

  •  I think it is a political calculation. (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    murrayewv

    I think he intends to seek elected office and hopes to position himself as the rational republican.  I also think he wishes at all costs to avoid any mention of austerity, Krugman or who was right and who was wrong.  I'd imagine we'll see extended soccer discussions, NFL draft previews and, yes, gun control discussions.  We will see anything from Scarborough but discussions about austerity.

  •  I happened to catch him yesterday (Apr 24) (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    murrayewv

    He had Tom Brokaw and another (black) journalist on (don't know his name), discussing the bombing campaign in Alabama in 1963.  They were comparing the "War on Terror" and bomings, anthrax-laced letters, etc. over the past few years with Alabama in 1963.

    Joe was "incredulous" that there were 50 bombings that year in Birmingham, a US city.  He was futher shocked, and "couldn't believe it", especially as an alumnus of the University of Alabama in the early 1970s!  It was all integrated, and EVERYTHING when he went there!  

    Nearly challenged the veracity of Tom Brokaw and the black journalist, nearly doubting their word, until they insisted several times it was true.  The two journalists called it "domestic terror" or a "bombing campaign", and Joe nearly did not believe it had actually happened.  

    Ignoramus.

    I'm part of the "bedwetting bunch of website Democrat base people (DKos)." - Rush Limbaugh, 10/16/2012 Torture is Wrong! We live near W so you don't have to. Send love.

    by tom 47 on Thu Apr 25, 2013 at 06:55:53 AM PDT

    •  I heard that too, but.... (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      murrayewv

      now note, I don't like Joe.  He is my 2nd least favorite person on that show after Mika.  But I thought people missed his point.

      He started that comment with "Thats like another world to me." Joe was born in 1963.  His comment was "That's hard to believe" and he was trying to make some kind of "look at how different it is now" or "how far things have come since then" point, which is not all that poignant or relevant and he made it badly on top of that.

      What he should have said to that other guy on the set when he was talking about hard that is to believe was "If I would have asked you, 5 minuted before Brokaw came on the set, to name an American City that suffered 50 bomb attacks in a single year, would you have said 'Birmingham - 1963'?"

      I know I wouldn't have.  I know my history, I know about the Civil Rights movement and burned and destroyd churches and Birmingham's role as an focal point, but fifty bombs?  My eyes opened up a bit on that stat as well.

      Its not that I thought Brokaw was lying ... it was just hard to believe a single city was hit by 50 bombs in a year.  

      Красота спасет мир --F. Dostoevsky

      by Wisper on Thu Apr 25, 2013 at 07:07:54 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Yes, and it's true perspective is everything (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        murrayewv

        I am actually a bit older than Joe, so I guess I  thought he knew his histroy, but it's clearly not first-hand for him.

        A lesson for me as time passes: folks don't always even know about the facts, much less what to make of them.

        I'm part of the "bedwetting bunch of website Democrat base people (DKos)." - Rush Limbaugh, 10/16/2012 Torture is Wrong! We live near W so you don't have to. Send love.

        by tom 47 on Thu Apr 25, 2013 at 10:56:19 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  What impressed me about this effort (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    murrayewv

    is that it is tactical.  He is not trying to shame Thad Cochran about his NRA vote.  Because Joe knows it won't work.  Thad Cochran will not suffer any political consequences for filibustering background checks.  Ever.

    This is a political fact.  Thad Cochran will be the Senator from Mississippi for as long as he wants to hold the office and will cruise to reelection (possibly unopposed) regardless of what Joe Scarborough and any number of other talking heads want to say about it.

    So Joe doesn't even bother.  What he does is zero in on Ayotte.  Northeast Republican (which is an endangered species), only GOP politician in a statewide office in NH, constituents that have a close proximity and relationship to Newtown, CT, is up for reelection in 4 years not 6, has very little established track record within the party or with her base.

    He is going after weakness.  The same reason he is not hitting Pryor or Begich but ALWAYS mentions Heidi Heitkamp. (Freshman, redstate Dem, Hunter state (not rabid Tea Party), barely won her 1st election, etc)

    This is a politician's strategy. With the new numbers coming out of NH, Joe smells blood in the water.

    Красота спасет мир --F. Dostoevsky

    by Wisper on Thu Apr 25, 2013 at 07:16:14 AM PDT

  •  As long as it sells soap... (0+ / 0-)

    Please don't believe that the media does anything for the good of the public; it is all profit motivated. Glenn Beck's latest outrageous conspiracy theory gets free advertising by the rest of the media. Morning Joe's new gun control position gets him free advertising on the KOS, hoping to draw more viewers. Joe's stand on guns would mean something if he was still an elected representative; now, not so much.

    •  oh I agree on that point..... (0+ / 0-)

      I think he is the soap he wants to sell.  But everytime he writes a book it gets remaindered but ole Mika is a best seller.  I am starting to enjoy her lean forward.

      You shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you mad. Aldous Huxley

      by murrayewv on Thu Apr 25, 2013 at 05:45:42 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site