Back in the day, I worked alongside Katie Couric at CNN. Ms. Couric was the producer for husband-and-wife anchor team Don Farmer and Chris Curle. Farmer was a blowhard. Curle was a you-know-what in heels. Both of them treated Ms. Couric (and everyone else) like dirt. How Ms. Couric maintained her cool is anyone’s guess. While her good looks certainly didn’t hurt, I reckon Ms. Couric’s intelligence, professionalism and persistence was the key to her meteoric rise in the mainstream media. That and . .

her ability to personify Oprah-like empathy with “the common” man. That’s her shtick: smarts and heart.

Unfortunately, Ms. Couric — now blessed with enough money and fame to do whatever the hell she wants — has decided to become a spokesperson for gun control. Sorry. As she points out in the beginning of her interview with Stephen Colbert, that phrase “makes people freak out.”

As well they should. The “conversation” she seeks to engender leads in only one direction: civilian disarmament. Or, at the least, more dilution of Americans’ natural, civil and Constitutionally protected right to keep and bear arms.

Ms. Couric attempts to pacify [vaguely] pro-gun rights folks by arguing that “universal background checks” are universally popular. Even NRA members want them!

Of course, she (and her documentary team) fail to define the term, leaving out the fact that the laws in question prevent all unsupervised private firearms sales and private transfers of guns (such as giving a gun to a family member).

The mask slips — at least for those of us with more than a passing understanding of her cotton candy-wrapped agenda.

“The tentacles of the gun lobby reach far and wide,” Ms. Couric says, falling into ye olde “gunmakers are evil” trope. Does she know that the Centers for Disease Control is only barred from conducting studies that advocate gun control? Does she know that the reason The Firearms Owners Protection Act prevents an electronic gun registry is to prevent the very real danger of federal gun confiscation? Would she even care?

No. Ms. Couric is a populist, just like Fox bombast Bill O’Reilly. In this case Ms. Couric uses her hard-earned public adoration to perpetuate the same old anti-agitprop, within her caring/sharing brand. “Everybody wants to reduce the number of gun deaths that are happening in this country,” she concludes, going all low-information touchy-feely for the audience (as is her wont).

If Ms. Couric would like to learn the truth about guns (and renew an old acquaintance), my cell number is on the home page. I suspect not. As wealthy as she is, Ms. Couric knows upon which side her bread is buttered.

RELATED ARTICLESMORE FROM AUTHOR

42 COMMENTS

    • She’s loaded like you wouldn’t believe.

      And both respected in the business, but also out among the sheeple, she is someone people listen to.

      Oh and this line is just a treat ‘“The tentacles of the gun lobby’

      The gun lobby is the gun owner, the NRA is the gun owner, firearms manufacturers make their living off the gun owner, her ‘tentacles’ line is us.

      And yet the tentacles of Big Media, and Big Anti2a actually don’t represent any form of ‘the people’, Big Media is run by huge corporations that are much farther removed from the people they reach – corporations that all have close ties with the state. And it’s the same with Anti 2a groups, these things are run by rich megalomaniacs, people like Bloomberg, also in league with the state to one degree or another. Big money, conspiring against the law respecting gun owner and the Constitution. Tentacles indeed.

      Pot, kettle.

      • ” but also out among the sheeple, she is someone people listen to.”

        I thought every show she has touched lately has bombed?

        Either way, all I know is every time I hear her name., i picture her getting a colonoscopy on national tv.

        ew….

        • Ha ha, yea I have the exact same memory.

          Her shows have bombed huh, that’s good to hear. I really don’t pay any attention to the woman so I wouldn’t know that.

          One can hope that the voting public is starting to see through all their BS, it’s certainly not impossible. Free (as in speech) information on the internet is having an impact, the media cannot get away with the stuff they used to be able to – to the same degree at least.

          One can hope.

  2. Drive by media does a docudrama on guns and “finds” NRA members who have no clue. I am not surprised. When these people can get an amendment into the constitution saying something about background checks, then I will yield, because it will then and ONLY then be constitutional. “The right to keep and bear arms shall NOT be infringed.” What part of the shall not do people understand?

  3. If you were as pretty as she, perhaps you could get an invite onto Colbert’s Late Show. Or maybe Alan Gura.

  4. Everybody wants to reduce the number of gun deaths that are happening in this country

    Since “everybody” includes me, I’d have to say that Ms. Carwreck is FOS. I don’t care about the number of so-called “gun deaths.” I care about innocent people being killed by bad people with a gun or otherwise. OTOH, if all the bad people offed each other en masse, I would go into my happy dance.

    • Is Katie in favor of reducing the number of violent felons killed by their victims? I think they are since they lump it all into one statistic. I bet she has guards who would have no qualms about increasing the number of gun deaths by a point or two if her life were on the line. Ditto for the rest of the elite.

  5. Gun owners, even those here, don’t want “violent felons” released from prison to own guns. Their support of that is a direct result of documentaries like this one and support for “universal background checks” and registration/permitting.

    You simply can’t logically say that you support legislation forbidding felons from owning guns and then in another sentence condemn universal background checks and registration. One is needed to enforce the other. You say “gun control doesn’t work” and then say you support legislation forbidding felons from owning guns. I keep waiting for you guys to figure it out.

    • “Gun owners, even those here, don’t want “violent felons” released from prison to own guns.”

      Count me out

      Slippery slope, people, slippery slope

      • I agree with his statement, but only because I don’t want violent felons released from prison.

    • I don’t support legislation forbidding felons from owning guns. If you are too dangerous to have a gun you are too dangerous to be out of jail.

      • As far as I’m concerned, if you’ve paid your debt to society, you should be able to exercise all the rights you had before you went in to incarnation.

        • Need to serve full sentence and parole. Need to repay your victims. Then, maybe, non violent offenders could be allowed a probationary weapon.

        • @ SelousX
          There’s a problem with your thought. The concept is good, but the practical application is where it fails. The cold fact is most people who are in prison are there because of drug, alcohol or mental illness or some combination of all three. Yeah sure, there’s some who get out, pull their head out of their ass and move on. For those, in many instances, they can petition for gun rights restorations, except in federal felonies, and have their firearms. But conversely, there are so many folks who just can’t keep from running their ship into the rock and with that, I disagree about granting rights because they paid their debt. It sounds pretty, but that’s all it is, sounding pretty.
          As Robert above pointed out, there are a lot of prerequisites that should be in place before we start granting back all rights lost to application of law.

        • “debt to society” is just one more BS progressive construct to excuse antisocial actions.

          How does murderer, rapist, pederast, slaver “repay” his debt? With money? Only if the survivor is an antisocial whore. Violent felons are to be locked up/throw away the key (or just execute). Either way not going to vote again (demtard) or own weapons.

      • Hear, hear. If they’re considered safe to allow on the street (and drive! Forget caliber wars, nothing hits quite like a 3000-pound vehicle going 60), they should not be denied ANY Constitutional right.

        • So would a multi-car garage with electronic doors be considered a high capacity, automatic, assault garage?

        • Says the guy who never allow a pedophile to coach his kid’s team or an embezzler to handle his family’s finances, no matter how skilled they were, once they’re released from prison.

          The idea that incarceration is the totality of one’s debt to society is a fiction. There can be multiple penalties piled up on someone for a given conviction. Some of which persist beyond actual prison time; such as loss of certain freedoms, restrictions on employment and living conditions, associations with others, and drinking, and destitution to victims, for starters.

    • “You simply can’t logically say that you support legislation forbidding felons from owning guns and then in another sentence condemn universal background checks and registration.”

      Of course you can. CURRENT LIMITED OR UNIVERSAL BACKGROUND CHECKS DON’T STOP FELONS FROM GETTING GUNS… they simply steal them or buy them stolen.

      Stay on message: UBC is simply a step forward to universal registration, which is necessary for confiscation.

      (They can’t take them all if they don’t know where they all are…)

      And they can’t enforce for violations of UBC without registering EVERYTHING WE MIGHT OWN, and placing a heavy penalty (confiscation, jail time, $$$$) for not registering everything you own. Oh and good luck proving that you sold some gun privately that you bought 5 years ago at an FFL…

      Put simply, UBC is simply another BS scheme to penalize the LAW ABIDING, cause the damn criminals won’t play along…

      Colonoscopy Couric and Bloomberg and his 24×7 armed bodyguards and Hilary and all the rest aren’t doing all this because they think its going to save lives.

      They are doing it because they HATE that millions of Conservative and Less than Progressive Americans are armed enough to prevent them from turning America into some daily-Executive-Order, PC Tyranny where they could finally put us in jail or reeducation camps for “climate denial” or “traditional values”…

      The Founders weren’t stupid.

  6. As far as I’m concerned, if you’ve paid your debt to society, you should be able to exercise all the rights you had before you went in to incarnation.

  7. You can’t blame them for being anti gun. Uncle Mikey’s checks sure do weigh down the mailbox.

  9. Aw, jeez … another “national conversation” about “common sense” “gun control”.

    Conducted entirely by people who don’t own guns, don’t know anybody who owns guns, don’t like people who own guns and think just because they use the term “common sense” that they lay claim to it. They think, just because they have college degrees, they are intellectuals. There’s nothing wrong with being uninitiated on any subject. But willful, purposeful ignorance is stupidity and bigotry. Bigotry practiced on a systemic and institutional scale is fascism.

    • There ya’ go: a “conversation” entirely conducted by people who literally don’t know what they are talking about and try to cover up their ignorance by hiding behind the term “common sense”.

  10. whelp, there is nothing nice to say, most everything else that is pertinent has been said, so I guess I will relax with a drink and start budgeting some monthly sums for steadily buying more ammo. None of the front running turkeys appeal to me this election, so I guess I will vote with my wallet and buy more o that famous .9 mm…..

  11. As always a Liberal instinctively picks and chooses specific context to promote a Liberal Progressive Socialists agenda…emphasizing how the “antis” are on your side but we just want to be able to control everything…so everyone else can be in lockstep to there wants…so as always they are just trying to repackage there goals in a new type of wrapping paper…if it looks like crap and smells like crap then it is crap…

  13. The DoD is eyebrow deep in the “gun industry”. How many firearms around this country (or the world for that matter) are in private hands either directly or indirectly because of the DoD?

    Should we trust a federal government that has given guns to mexican drug cartels and jihadis?

    A nation that gives away and sells weapons to countries that have little respect for human life does not have the moral authority to deem someone a “prohibited” person.

  14. Katie Couric:
    – Oh no. We don’t use the word “control.” It’s gun “safety” not gun “control” – after all we are trying to manipulate the public here. The public loves “safety” – they don’t like “control.” We take the same law and call it gun safety – not gun control and we get more votes for it.

  15. I never thought I’d see the words “professionalism” and “intelligence” in the same paragraph with “Katie Couric” (First paragraph above).

  16. How much time has our perky super hero devoted to the NSA and gross abuses of the Constitution?

  17. Couric has ALWAYS been an annoying leftist nag/shrew. Temporary cuteness does not outweigh bitchy. As Hillary now ageing beyond

    Hint – if you see a pinhead with a tv cam in Louisville next week ignore them.

  18. I’ve _never_ found her good looking, not even when she was young. She’s got that gummy smile, and perky just doesn’t work for me.

  19. Just saw bits and Pieces of Matt Lauer interviewing (?) her on the Today, Show, fortunately the Slanted/ biased ( look at both sides?) show will be airing on some obscure cable channel.

  21. That and . .

    her ability to personify Oprah-like empathy with “the common” man. That’s her shtick: smarts and heart.

    They are actors, playing a role, in an emotionally satisfying set piece, a kind of “everyman play” for our current culture. Go watch any two of Network, Wag the Dog, or Primary Colors, and see me again in the morning.

Comments are closed.