During an appearance at a Tea Party event in Wyoming, National Rifle Association board member Ted Nugent used the derogatory term "Japs" while discussing how he believes America has changed since World War II.
Nugent, who is also a spokesman for Outdoor Channel, appeared alongside birther and former Fox News contributor Maj. Gen. (ret.) Paul Vallely at an August 2 rally hosted by the Big Horn Basin Tea Party. At the end of the event, Nugent and Vallely were deputized by the local sheriff.
During his remarks Nugent described his belief that the government has "turned on us" since the United States defeated the "Japs and Nazis" in World War II, citing his claim of "ranchers being arrested because of gerbils on their range." The term "Jap" is universally recognized as a racial slur since its derogatory usage during World War II.
NUGENT: I know I'm speaking your language. I know nothing I've said surprises you except maybe the insane depth of this self-inflicted curse of apathy. We have bent over since World War II because we couldn't believe that good -- the universally celebrated good of America crushed the universally understood evil of Japs and Nazis. We couldn't believe that that government that represented us in good over evil could possibly turn on us. They've turned on us. They've literally turned on us, ranchers being arrested because of gerbils on their range or some families arrested because the EPA claims they are building a barn on a wetland where for 200 years of satellite documentation, no moisture.
The National Rifle Association's lifestyle magazine, NRA Sharp, is using Apple and other popular brands to promote firearms that are manufactured by NRA corporate donors.
NRA Sharp showcases high-end products (guns and otherwise), opulent lifestyles, and pop culture musings, all with a pro-gun bent. As Daily Beast columnist Cliff Schecter noted, "It's the lifestyle of the armed and delusional. At NRASharp.com, there's $250 Gucci suspenders, dandelion recipes, and readers' fantasies of shooting with E.T. 'and his badass guns.'"
An August 4 post on NRA Sharp matches firearms, including an assault weapon, to their "'mainstream' cultural equals," namely BMW, Nike, luxury watchmaker Patek Philippe, and Apple. As the post explains, "We believe these pairings boost both brands to their full potential."
NRA Sharp matches Blaser, a manufacturer of high-end hunting rifles, with German car company BMW, describing both products as "German-made monsters of design" that can be used "to experience the elemental thrill of shooting/driving." According to a report from gun violence prevention group Violence Policy Center, Blaser's U.S. subsidiary has donated between $250,000 and $499,000 to the NRA.
The National Rifle Association made a botched attempt at statistics in order to defend economist and gun researcher John Lott, who famously put forward the debunked "more guns, less crime" thesis that undergirds the NRA's agenda.
In a 1997 paper Lott, along with David Mustard, purported to use econometrics to prove that the expansion of state laws allowing guns to be carried in public reduced crime rates in the United States. Since its publication, Lott's study has been endlessly cited by the NRA and other gun advocates even though the study's conclusions been repeatedly debunked by other academicians.
In an August 3 article for the conservative Daily Caller's "Guns and Gear" page, the NRA's lobbying arm, the Institute for Legislative Action (NRA-ILA), defended Lott's work from recent criticism in The Washington Post.
Writing that "anti-gun activists ... worked themselves into a rage over Lott's research," and that Lott has been accused by critics of "using bad data," the NRA-ILA claimed that reductions in crime since the early 1990s coupled with increases in the number of states allowing guns to be carried in public proved Lott's case:
Reality check, however. For starters, in 2012, the most recent year for which data are available, firearms were used in only 21.8 percent of aggravated assaults, according to the FBI. Furthermore, from the end of 1991, the year when violent crime hit an all-time high in the United States, through 2012, 24 states adopted [right to carry] laws (not counting Illinois, which adopted RTC in 2013). And according to the FBI, between 1991 and 2012, the nation's aggravated assault rate dropped 44 percent. The rates of 39 states and the District of Columbia decreased. And while the rates of 11 states increased, most of these states are ones with relatively low populations and aggravated assault numbers, thus small increases in the numbers of assaults can translate into seemingly large increases when the trend is measured on a percentage basis.
This defense of Lott purports to explain the entire decline in crime since the early 1990s as a result of gun carrying laws without offering any evidence to explain this unfounded claim. In fact, several plausible factors have been put forward to explain the crime drop including the end of the crack epidemic and reductions in the general public's exposure to lead. The General Social Survey indicates that the rate of household gun ownership has declined over time leading to speculation that recent increases in the number of guns sold are largely attributable to pre-existing gun owners buying more guns.
After a National Rifle Association lobbyist equated a proposal to expand background checks to the Nazi policies of Adolf Hitler, a prominent guns rights activist defended the offensive comparison and took it further, comparing gun registration to the Nazi practice of tattooing Jews with identification numbers.
The NRA is under fire after its Washington state lobbyist Brian Judy was heard telling opponents of the state's background check proposal that one of the proposal's primary supporters, who is Jewish, is "stupid" because "he's put half-a-million dollars toward this policy, the same policy that led to his family getting run out of Germany by the Nazis." Judy went on to mock the intelligence of Jewish individuals who support gun safety.
Now Alan Gottlieb, founder of the Second Amendment Foundation (SAF) and the chairman of the Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms (CCRKBA), is coming to Judy's defense.
Gottlieb reacted to Judy's comments on Seattle's CBS affiliate, saying "I don't see anything wrong with those remarks," before comparing the "registration" of Jews with number tattoos during the Holocaust to firearm registration:
ESSEX PORTER, KIRO 7: You're Jewish, are those remarks appropriate?
GOTTLIEB: I don't see anything wrong with those remarks. I mean it's a historical fact that Adolf Hitler registered people's firearms and then confiscated them.
PORTER: Gottlieb says many gun owners see it this way.
GOTTLIEB: Gun owners don't like the idea that Jewish people had to have, you know, numbers tattooed and registered on their arms. They don't like the fact that they have gun owners that get registered either.
National Rifle Association board member Ted Nugent lashed out after the cancellation of an upcoming concert, claiming his critics are like Nazi chief propagandist Joseph Goebbels.
On July 21 the Coeur d'Alene Tribe announced that Nugent will not perform at the tribe's Idaho casino on August 4, citing "Nugent's history of racist and hate-filled remarks." The Puyallup Tribe followed suit, cancelling two scheduled concerts at its Washington state Emerald Queen Casino because they didn't want their venue used "to promote his racism."
Nugent, who is also a spokesperson for Outdoor Channel, responded to his critics in his regular column for conspiracy website WND.com, comparing them to an infamous Nazi. While claiming that American Indians are his "BloodBrothers," Nugent wrote that those who lodged complaints against his scheduled performances were part of the "Josef Goebbels gang." He also wrote, "Josef Goebbels and Saul Alinsky would be very proud of them and very angry at me. Cool."
Nugent's Nazi comparison comes as the NRA is already under fire from a Jewish group after one of its lobbyists compared a proposal to expand background checks on gun sales in Washington state to the policies of Adolf Hilter, and mocked Jewish individuals who support gun safety.
Right-wing media reacted to an ad depicting gun-based domestic violence with the dangerous claim that keeping guns in the home would prevent such attacks. In fact, the presence of a firearm in a home where domestic abuse occurs increases the risk a woman will be murdered.
In an ad released on July 29, gun violence prevention group Everytown for Gun Safety depicted the harrowing scene of a domestic abuser breaking into his estranged partner's home and shooting her with a gun. The ad was released to bring attention to a July 30 Senate Judiciary Committee hearing on the relationship between guns and domestic violence. The Senate is currently considering legislation that would prohibit the purchase of firearms by individuals convicted of stalking and expand the definition of intimate partner violence "to include a dating partner."
Conservative media reacted to the ad by calling it a "mistake" and claiming that it "inadvertently proves why women need guns." Calling firearms "a great equalizer between men and women," National Review Online's Charles C.W. Cooke claimed that "the victim [in the ad] would have been better off with a gun in her hand than with a phone connected to the police department" and charged Everytown with supporting firearms policies that "put vulnerable people in danger." Fox News contributor Katie Pavlich wrote of the domestic violence scene shown in the ad: "All of this could have been prevented if the woman had a firearm in her possession as soon as she saw her ex-husband pounding on the door."
The National Rifle Association has once again drawn condemnation from a Jewish group after one of its lobbyists invoked the Holocaust to attack a Washington state ballot initiative to expand background checks on gun sales. Despite regular denunciations from Jewish groups for misappropriating the history of Holocaust, the NRA routinely uses this type of rhetoric to demonize its opponents and gun legislation it dislikes.
According to a report in the Seattle Post-Intelligencer, recently released audio captured NRA lobbyist Brian Judy attacking Seattle businessman Nick Hanauer's support of Initiative 594 -- which would expand background checks in Washington -- because of Hanauer's Jewish background. Calling Hanauer "stupid," Judy argued that "he's put half-a-million dollars toward this policy, the same policy that led to his family getting run out of Germany by the Nazis."
Judy went on to mock the intelligence of anyone who is "anti-gun" and Jewish:
JUDY: You know, it's staggering to me, it's just, you can't make this stuff up. That these people, it's like any Jewish people I meet who are anti-gun, I think: Are you serious? Do you not remember what happened?
And why did that happen? Because they registered guns and then they took them. And now you're supporting gun control -- you come to this country and you support gun control. Why did you have to flee to this country in the first place? Hello. Is anybody home here?
The Jewish Federation of Greater Seattle has called for Judy's resignation and asked that the NRA "make clear that it rejects his ignorant and unproductive dialogue."
The National Rifle Association is trying to smooth over the extreme ideas presented in a recent video suggesting children should have to receive mandatory gun training "to advance to the next grade" by mischaracterizing the video and airing a deceptively cropped version of it on NRA News.
In a July 21 NRA News video titled "Everyone Gets A Gun," NRA News commentator Billy Johnson imagined a compulsory education system that would require children to become proficient with firearms, just like "reading and writing," even "if they didn't want to learn" as a requirement to advance in school:
JOHNSON: Gun policy driven by our need for guns would insist that we introduce young people to guns early and that we'd give them the skills to use firearms safely. Just like we teach them reading and writing, necessary skills. We would teach shooting and firearm competency. It wouldn't matter if a child's parents weren't good at it. We'd find them a mentor. It wouldn't matter if they didn't want to learn. We would make it necessary to advance to the next grade.
Johnson's suggestion children would have to become proficient with a gun to move on in school was widely ridiculed. Now the NRA is responding to critics with the misleading suggestion that Johnson was merely talking about the importance of teaching children gun safety.
Johnson appeared on the July 24 edition of NRA News' Cam & Company on The Sportsman Channel to defend his video. Host Cam Edwards started the conversation by saying, "One of the things that specifically the anti-gunners are flipping out about is [Johnson's] suggestion that if we had a national gun policy, that again, embraced our right to keep and bear arms, one of the things we might be talking about is educating kids about how to be safe and responsible with a firearm, regardless of whether or not their parents were gun owners. That thought ... has really got people on the anti-gun side of the equation freaked out. They're saying that you're demanding compulsory education of firearms training for kids, they are wondering why on earth any child would need to know how to be safe and responsible with a firearm and I find it fascinating because they're ignoring the fact that there are already hundreds of thousands of kids across this country who are safely and responsibly learning about firearms."
A new commentary video from the National Rifle Association suggests we can live up to the Founding Fathers' ideals by creating "gun-required zones," and making gun training for children "necessary to advance to the next grade."
In a July 21 NRA News video titled "Everyone Gets A Gun," NRA News commentator Billy Johnson said, "We don't have a U.S. gun policy. We have a U.S. anti-gun policy" that is based on "the assumption that we need to protect people from guns" and "that guns are bad or dangerous."
Instead Johnson wondered what gun policies the United States would have "if we designed gun policy from the assumption that people need guns -- that guns make people's lives better." Johnson then made the following recommendations that would "encourage" and might "reward" people "to keep and bear arms at all times."
According to Johnson, "Gun policy, driven by our need for guns would protect equal access to guns, just like we protect equal access to voting, and due process, and free speech." While acknowledging that his ideas may be seen as "ridiculous," -- even by "Second Amendment advocates" -- he argued his proposal "does justice to [the Founding Fathers] intentions."
After an American Indian tribe canceled a Ted Nugent concert because of his history of using racist language, recently posted footage of Nugent shows what else they're missing out on: the use of anti-gay slurs to attack President Obama.
The Coeur d'Alene Tribe had initially hired Nugent, a National Rifle Association board member and spokesman for the Outdoor Channel, to perform on August 4 at its Idaho casino. The tribe had been unaware of Nugent's background of racially inflammatory commentary until being contacted by the Southern Poverty Law Center's Hatewatch project, and it canceled the concert hours later.
In video posted online, Nugent is seen during his July 6 concert at River Road Ice House in New Braunfels, Texas, calling Obama a "piece of shit," a "cocksucker," and a "motherfucker." (Nugent had previously promised to stop name-calling following controversy over his characterization of Obama as a "subhuman mongrel.")
During an onstage rant, Nugent claimed he is "the number one man that the president hates more than anybody in the whole world" and added, "I must be a fucking angel, because the devil don't like my ass."
NUGENT: The most important thing about tonight, the most important thing maybe in life, the most important thing certainly on planet earth, is that you are in the presence of the number one man that the president hates more than anybody in the whole world. That's right. I piss that piece of shit off every day, and I don't even try. I scare that cocksucker, you know what I mean? He don't like Uncle Ted because I celebrate freedom. That motherfucker don't like freedom. He don't like Texas. He don't like liberty, that piece of shit. He hates Uncle Ted. I'm proud. I'm proud. I must be an angel; I must be a fucking angel, because the devil don't like my ass.
Following reports of a .50 caliber sniper rifle attack on U.S. Border Patrol agents, Fox News hosts immediately recognized the threat the high-powered "battlefield weapon" poses to law enforcement. Criticism of the gun on Fox, however, stands in sharp contrast to the National Rifle Association's longstanding campaign to prevent the regulation of .50 caliber weapons, which are manufactured by one of its board members.
On July 20, FoxNews.com reported that U.S. Border Patrol agents working near the Rio Grande River came under fire from a .50 caliber weapon during the evening of July 18. According to the report, "Border Patrol sources said the rounds were clearly identifiable because .50- caliber weapons make a distinctive noise when fired." No agents were wounded in the attack.
In most of the United States the .50 caliber sniper rifle is regulated no more strenuously than a typical hunting rifle, thanks to efforts by the gun lobby. But Fox News personalities covering the border incident were quick to recognize the rifle's extremely dangerous capabilities and the threat it poses to law enforcement.
Fox News host Heather Nauert opened the July 20 edition of Fox & Friends Sunday by citing the .50 caliber rifle incident as evidence that "there is an all-out war on at our southern border." Throughout the show, Nauert's co-hosts repeatedly returned to the capabilities of the .50 caliber rifle. Fox's Jon Scott described the rifle as "a weapon of war," noted that, "The slugs a .50 caliber weapon fires are so big that body armor really won't do you much good," and called it a "battlefield weapon."
A new video commentary released by the NRA references the Holocaust and other instances of persecution to advance the baseless claim that "the government is collecting more and more gun registration data which could be used against gun owners in the form of full confiscation."
The July 18 commentary was published by NRA News and is part of the gun group's recent efforts to reach a younger, more diverse audience. In the video NRA News commentator Chris Cheng sets up his claim about government-sanctioned gun confiscation by citing recent reports of the persecution of Jewish people in Eastern Ukraine, as well as "what happened to our Jewish friends during World War II":
CHRIS CHENG: Masked men in Eastern Ukraine recently handed out fliers in front of a synagogue which told Jews to register with pro-Russian militants. I don't even need to go into detail about world history and what happened to our Jewish friends during World War II. So here's why government registration of a protected right is a bad thing.
National Rifle Association board member Ted Nugent demonized those in poverty, describing them as "stupid" and having "no one to blame but themselves," while attacking their access to "luxuries" such as "air-conditioning," "bling-bling," and "clean water."
Nugent, who is also a spokesperson for Outdoor Channel, wrote in a July 16 column for WND, "America's Whining 'Poor' -- And Other Conundrums," that "the squawking poor just keep on getting poorer, and as is always the case, they have no one to blame but themselves. Stupid is as stupid does."
He went on to complain that "America's so-called poor live a life far better than do real poor people around the world and have luxuries they can only dream of," citing access to clean water and other supposed "luxuries":
As the Democrats continue to get away with their crimes, the squawking poor just keep on getting poorer, and as is always the case, they have no one to blame but themselves. Stupid is as stupid does. Brainwashing only works if you give up your brain and your soul to the brainwashers.
Another mind-boggling conundrum is the fact that America's so-called poor live a life far better than do real poor people around the world and have luxuries they can only dream of.
With their cell phones, automobiles, microwave ovens, air-conditioning, new clothes, manicures and pedicures, bling-bling, clean water, more food than they can eat, pretty much redistributed everything handed to them, they still whine how America should be more like those other countries.
A new profile of Larry Pratt, the odious executive director of fringe group Gun Owners of America (GOA) documents Pratt's lengthy history of extremism while noting that he is still treated by media as an authority in the gun debate.
The Pratt profile, authored by The American Independent Institute (TAII) fellow Alexander Zaitchik, was published July 14 as part of a RollingStone.com package, "America's Gun Violence Epidemic." Other articles in the series include an interview with former New York City mayor and gun violence prevention advocate Michael Bloomberg, a message from Richard Martinez, whose son was murdered in the recent Isla Vista, California mass shooting, stories from gunshot wound survivors, and an interactive map on gun violence in America.
Interspersed with accounts of Pratt's association with anti-Semitic and white supremacist groups, his call for the quarantine of AIDS victims, his support for the death squads of a genocidal dictator, and his longstanding engagement with bizarre anti-government conspiracy theories, Zaitchik recounts how Pratt is regularly called on by mainstream media outlets to participate in the debate over gun laws.
Indeed, a Media Matters analysis of cable news and major newspapers finds that media regularly turns to Pratt despite his place in the far-right wing fringe. Since the December 2012 mass shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut, Pratt has appeared during evening and Sunday programming on CNN seven times and three times each on MSNBC and Fox News.
National Rifle Association board member Ted Nugent wrote that some people who supported President Obama "defiled the sacrifices and vision of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. and spat on his grave" because they voted for Obama "based on the color of his skin instead of the content of his character."
Nugent, who is also a spokesperson for Outdoor Channel, added in his July 9 column for conspiracy website WND that Obama's election represented "the worst case of racism I have ever witnessed in my lifetime":
We have all seen the roving reporter man-on-the-street interviews. I'm sure we all have some friends, acquaintances, even family members and others who have uttered the painful statement. I don't know about anyone else, but when I first heard people say that they voted for Barack Obama because he was black, or that it was "time" for a black president, my skin crawled.
I am well aware that that statement of mine will be isolated and made out to be "racist" by the dishonest media and the maniacally boneheaded Saul Alinsky gang over at the Huff-n-Puff Post and beyond, but the real horror is that the worst case of racism I have ever witnessed in my lifetime was the indecent choice en mass by millions of Americans who defiled the sacrifices and vision of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. and spat on his grave when they actually admitted that they voted for this president based on the color of his skin instead of the content of his character.
In a later section of his column that sought to downplay racism in the United States, Nugent claimed he has "never personality witnessed" it in his lifetime:
Does racism still exist in America today? I'm guessing that is does, but in my nonstop world travels over a lifetime, being the ultra-gregarious chap that I am, enjoying the friendships of many good people, performing more than 6,500 concerts around the globe, diligently pursuing diverse peoples and places, I have never personally witnessed racism or hatred of any kind with anyone I have ever met.