The stupid, it burns. But it just keeps on coming. I really think that there is something wrong in the head with Rep. Louie Gohmert (R-TX). Every time he opens his mouth utter nonsense comes out. Today’s classic, from an appearance on the Dennis Miller Show… (via Think Progress):

O’CONNOR: I want to ask you a question about one of your colleagues, Rep. Peter King in New York. He’s a very passionate guy, a great defender, he’s a great patriot. But he’s on board with this assault weapons ban. He was actually on MSNBC yesterday, openly saying, “I don’t understand why anybody would need an assault weapon.” I personally get nervous whenever a politician is asking me as a citizen why I need my right, but can you answer that question for your colleague? He might need some help here. Why would anyone need an assault weapon as they’re defining it?

GOHMERT: I refuse to play the game of “assault weapon.” That’s any weapon. It’s a hammer. It’s the machetes. In Rwanda that killed 800,000 people, an article that came out this week, the massive number that are killed with hammers.

Shall we go after all blunt objects? Not to be topped, the former president of the National Rifle Association, Marion Hammer, goes for the Hail Mary — folks interested in gun control are equivalent to racists. Try to digest this – never mind she’s inaccurate in her attack on the proposed legislation, it’s just insane “logic” (Raw Story):

“Banning people and things because of the way they look went out a long time ago,” Marion Hammer told host Ginny Simone. “But here they are again. The color of a gun. The way it looks. It’s just bad politics.”

According to Media Matters, Hammer’s interview was in response to Sen. Dianne Feinstein’s (D-CA) proposed ban, which is based on a firearm’s capacity, rather than its appearance. However, Simone encouraged Hammer’s inaccurate claim.

“They even admit this is about banning the ugliest guns, it’s about cosmetics and it has nothing to do about how a firearm works,” the host said.


Pam Spaulding

Pam Spaulding