Presidential candidate Ted Cruz was shown in a series of 14 photos taken by an American Pravda photographer at a ‘Celebrate the 2nd Amendment' event Saturday afternoon, held at a shooting range in Johnston, Iowa. Out of all the photographs taken, a controversial AP photograph demonstrates how hypocrisy can get guns banned forever.

AP spokesman Paul Colford — the same Colford who defended censoring cartoons of Muhammad in the wake of the Carlie Hebdo slaying — said in a statement late Sunday, “Five of the photos published by AP included images of guns seen on a wall in the background so that it appeared a pistol was pointed at Sen. Cruz's head. The images were not intended to portray Sen. Cruz in a negative light.”

Of course we know the motive was to portray the gun in a bad light as we have come to know that guns have a mind and will of their own. That a picture of a gun would happen to aim itself at Ted Cruz's head proves the point.

Some people found it offensive, not of the suggestive visual, but because American Pravda is agreeing with the motives of the Charleston shooter, Dylann Roof by illustrating their desire to have a violent and tragic event happen to Mr. Cruz — something the AP tacitly denounces, on the one hand, as it fervently howls against the constitutional right to own arms and 'gun violence' on the other.

What better way to win your argument that guns should be banned than by using hypocrisy! As the late great Father Prog once said, "Liberals are immune to choking on their own hypocrisy".

Bravo, American Pravda. Symbolism over substance.
~
However, if the picture were to have looked like this, there is no doubt in any prole's mind that the outcry from progressives everywhere would be as cacophonous as a Chinese New Year celebration. Undoubtedly, this would be a serious death threat with a deadly weapon. There is no second-guessing here, comrades. This violates every safety concern and oversteps every zero tolerance policy.

But if the picture looked like this, The Lord of the Waitress Sammich™ would have been proud to have realized his life's ambition of securing socialized, single payer healthcare for all. It's a shame he can't see the fruits of his labor.

Another fine example would be our very own Nanski Peloski outgrowing the hypodermic needle for her Botox treatments, in search for something larger.

I consider finger guns dangerous weapons.

Sugar Daddy Bear wrote:

cruz gun.jpg

Presidential candidate Ted Cruz was shown in a series of 14 photos taken by an American Pravda photographer at a ‘Celebrate the 2nd Amendment' event Saturday afternoon, held at a shooting range in Johnston, Iowa. Out of all the photographs taken, a controversial AP photograph demonstrates how hypocrisy can get guns banned forever.

AP spokesman Paul Colford — the same Colford who defended censoring cartoons of Muhammad in the wake of the Carlie Hebdo slaying — said in a statement late Sunday, “Five of the photos published by AP included images of guns seen on a wall in the background so that it appeared a pistol was pointed at Sen. Cruz's head. The images were not intended to portray Sen. Cruz in a negative light.”

Of course we know the motive was to portray the gun in a bad light as we have come to know that guns have a mind and will of their own. That a picture of a gun would happen to aim itself at Ted Cruz's head proves the point.

Some people found it offensive, not of the suggestive visual, but because American Pravda is agreeing with the motives of the Charleston shooter, Dylann Roof by illustrating their desire to have a violent and tragic event happen to Mr. Cruz — something the AP tacitly denounces, on the one hand, as it fervently howls against the constitutional right to own arms and 'gun violence' on the other.

What better way to win your argument that guns should be banned than by using hypocrisy! As the late great Father Prog once said, "Liberals are immune to choking on their own hypocrisy".

Bravo, American Pravda. Symbolism over substance.
~

cruz gun1.png

However, if the picture were to have looked like this, there is no doubt in any prole's mind that the outcry from progressives everywhere would be as cacophonous as a Chinese New Year celebration. Undoubtedly, this would be a serious death threat with a deadly weapon. There is no second-guessing here, comrades. This violates every safety concern and oversteps every zero tolerance policy.

dead kennedy.png

But if the picture looked like this, The Lord of the Waitress Sammich™ would have been proud to have realized his life's ambition of securing socialized, single payer healthcare for all. It's a shame he can't see the fruits of his labor.

peloski gun.png

Another fine example would be our very own Nanski Peloski outgrowing the hypodermic needle for her Botox treatments, in search for something larger.

A .22 caliber? Very small and won't kill your neighbors. Yeah, that's the ticket! Just a suggestion.

.22 hollow-points, Pammie. Guaranteed to get more attention; and in these days of tight money, it's important for all of us to get more out of our entertainment budget.

There are other pictures too.

“Modern Liberalism is the effort to divorce consequences from actions.” –Father Prog Theocritus

In other words, “Cause and effect are now invalid. The science is settled.” –Pamalinsky

Hammer and Loupe wrote:There are other pictures too.

Bananas for Cruz.png

What IS that? It looks like a gun filled with urine! With tattoos on the trigger device. A squirt gun? Harmless. Nothing to see here. Move along

Pamalinsky wrote:“Modern Liberalism is the effort to divorce consequences from actions.” –Father Prog Theocritus

In other words, “Cause and effect are now invalid. The science is settled.” –Pamalinsky

So true, my dear Pam. The American Pravda photographer said it was all coincidental and no harm, or bad karma, was intended. I'm so glad. Now we can move forward.

Sugar Daddy Bear wrote:

Pamalinsky wrote:“Modern Liberalism is the effort to divorce consequences from actions.” –Father Prog Theocritus

In other words, “Cause and effect are now invalid. The science is settled.” –Pamalinsky

So true, my dear Pam. The American Pravda photographer said it was all coincidental and no harm, or bad karma, was intended. I'm so glad. Now we can move forward.

[img]images/clipart/Prog_Off.gif[/img]

Not to worry, most darling Sugar Daddy Bear,

I think, sometimes, that I would like to leave this country just to have the freedom I used to enjoy. But, where would that be? I feel very treasonous about that. Because I still think this country is the very best place to live. Why else does anyone want to flock to our borders? No matter what happens, even if Hillary wins, this is still the most wonderful country in the history of the world.

I will not give up! Never! My patriotic heart could not be better spent!

Even if I have to die, which I will, sooner than later!

Pamalinsky wrote:“Modern Liberalism is the effort to divorce consequences from actions.” –Father Prog Theocritus

In other words, “Cause and effect are now invalid. The science is settled.” –Pamalinsky

Well played Comrade Pamalinsky.
Apparently our dear departed Father Prog uttered several versions of his quote, as I have recently discovered in a short bio of him, where he is quoted as saying:

“My pet peeve about liberalism is that liberals want to unlink actions from consequences. I believe in the freedom of actions and that I should be able to do what I want to do. As my mother said, your rights end where my nose begins."

and...

“With freedom comes responsibility, and if you look at the modern thrust of liberalism with the increased nanny state we live in, there is a freedom of responsibility but (liberals) are willing to give up the freedom of actions to avoid the responsibility of consequences."