Loony Aunt Diane Joins Crazy Uncle Joe

Just when you thought the socialist gun haters couldn’t get any crazier…

In my last two essays we explored Crazy Uncle Joe Biden’s loony advice on self defense: firing your double-barreled shotgun blindly in the air or through your front door.

Well, it turns out his grip on reality is pretty firm compared to Loony Aunt Diane Feinstein. In a meeting last Thursday of the Senate Judiciary Committee, she made the following profoundly amazing claim:

“We have federal regulations and state laws that prohibit hunting ducks with more than three rounds, and yet it’s legal to hunt humans with 15-round, 30-round, even 150-round magazines.”

th[6]It is??????

Is there a bag limit? Or can you just get as many as you like on any given day?

And here I was dumb enough to think it wasn’t ever legal to hunt humans, regardless of what kind of weaponry one was using. Silly me…

When it comes to guns, the loons on the Left seem to come completely unglued.

See Her Craziness in action here.

© Brian Baker 2013

73 comments on “Loony Aunt Diane Joins Crazy Uncle Joe

  1. Gunny G says:

    Diane Feinswine is a fuggin moron. She should have been booted from the Senate for her MILCON scandal but as I wrote today, Mordor on the Potomac IS the problem.

    Jan Schakowski from Illinois is yapping about the “new” assault gun ban” being “just the beginning” and I sent her a scathing email about that great gun ban in Shitcago working so well.

    • BrianR says:

      Fineswine should have been booted from the human race for gross lack of brain cells.

      Sounds like at least one of the socialists is honest in her goal of a total gun ban. What happened to the SOP blather about “believing in the Second Amendment” and “no one wants to take your guns away”? She’ll prolly get a lecture from her Dumbocrat superiors on loose lips…

  2. Buck says:

    She’s right! We should institute a ban on all magazines over 10 round capacity for EVERY “gangsta”. That’ll work out real well….

  3. garnet92 says:

    Feinstein is the result of a mistake made by our founding fathers. Each representative and senator is elected by and is accountable to voters from their district or state – no one else. The mistake is that their actions affect the entire country, not just their little patch.

    Congress would be more accountable to the United States as a whole IF some portion of their vote total came from outside of their district or state. For example, “it’s only fair” (to use O’mammy’s words) that since their actions affect the entire country, the rest of the country should have a say in their election.

    Obviously, I’m pissed that I and my family are affected (detrimentally) by the likes of Feinstein, Reid, Schumer, et al, yet I have no say in their election. We, as a country, are at the mercy of the idiots in California, Nevada, New York, etc. and we can do little about it.

    I wonder how many of congress-critters who have occupied congress for 15-20 years or more would get reelected if they ran nationally?

    I know, wishful thinking.

    • BrianR says:

      I know what you mean. But there’s a double edge to that sword you describe.

      We have to remember that many if not most of the conservatives in Congress come from rural areas. The votes of those rural areas would be miserably diluted if people in New Yawk and Lost Angels and San Fran were able to vote on them. The population numbers in urban areas are far larger than in rural areas. There are more people in the San Fernando Valley section of LA than in the entire state of Utah, for example. I sure as hell wouldn’t want the lefty boneheads in the cities influencing how the results in the rural states come out.

    • CW says:

      I agree, it is a double-edged sword. The solution to that problem is to get back to the Constitution, if we can. When the powers of the federal government are severly restricted as was the original design, the power of any senator over people in other states is limited as well. This case is a perfect example. The Constitution says, “the right of the people to keep and bear arms, SHALL NOT be infringed.” That’s pretty clear.

      Good post Brian!

      • BrianR says:

        Thanks, CW.

        You’re exactly right. The further we stray from the Big C, the worse things get. Just as forecast by the Founders.

  4. thedrpete says:

    Senator Feinstein is just trying to compete for the title of California’s stupidest elected federal official. Maxine Waters has set the stupid bar awfully high.

  5. clyde says:

    Wow. She certainly gives new meaning to the term “out in left field”. Getting awful close to the stupidity level of SJL,and Maxine the Whacksine. Wonder if she will surrender HER guns FIRST? Not holding my breath.

    • BrianR says:

      C’mon, Clyde… You know there’s no WAY she’s gonna do that, man!

      She’s a socialist! “The rules are for thee, not for ME!!!”

  6. rightdetour says:

    Actually, hunting humans has been legal for quite some time.

    Yep. She’s looney.

  7. Grey Neely says:

    Since Feinstein says it is legal to hunt humans, when do we get to start?

    We probably also need to know the legal limit on Dumbocraps and Dumbocraps Elites.

    Brian do you have any info pertaining to the limits?

    Is there any limitations to shooting over a “BAITED” field (i.e., a townhall meeting as an example)? Can we use dogs? What about calls? I have a good friend who knows the “Duck Dynasty” boys in West Monroe, Louisiana. Perhaps they can manufacture a “Liberal” call.

    • BrianR says:

      Hahahaha, Grey!

      No limit on Dumbocraps and RINOs… As a matter of fact, it’s considered a public service to humanity, as it cleans up the shallow end of the gene pool.

  8. Buck says:

    Garnet 92: The reason you are so disturbed about Feinstein et al affecting the rest of the country is not the fault of the founding fathers but more the fault of the people who have allowed the government powergrab for the last century or so.
    All of those things that regionals are allowed to instigate nationally are things never intended by the founders to be in the pervue of the federal government. Not to mention things such as gun control and confiscation specifically outside the limits of government legislation.
    Yet these things have been allowed…

    • BrianR says:

      Great points. Agreed.

    • clyde says:

      Buck,you have just made Post Of The Thread. Take a bow.

    • garnet92 says:

      You’re right Buck – it’s just my frustration coming out.

      It just defies logic and common sense that the people who are doing their damnest to circumvent the Constitution are continually reelected by their constituents and have become a de facto “ruling class.” Those of us who are perfectly happy living under constitutional governance get overridden by low-information idiots who don’t look past their noses at what is being done outside of the constitution. To them, the Constitution and Bill of Rights were merely a bunch of “suggestions,” to be followed or ignored, at the whim of those who believe themselves to be our “betters.” I wish I could be more optimistic that this madness will change.

  9. Hardnox says:

    Di-Fi gets her butt handed to her yesterday by Ted Cruz and Turban admits that “none of our Rights are absolute”.

    We are being ruled not governed.


    • BrianR says:

      Yeah, she really has got diarrhea of the mouth coupled with constipation of the brain.

    • garnet92 says:

      That video was well worth the watching – Dianne was completely overpowered by Cruz, she hasn’t the intellectual gray matter to match wits with him and it showed in her obvious frustration. She never did really answer his question and he was sharp enough to not let that slide and pointed it out. It’s a shame that he wasn’t allowed to continue nailing her to the cross. Given a few more minutes, he would have left her a whimpering mass of wrinkles.

  10. Buck says:

    Clyde do I get a little Oscar like statue and get to make an acceptance speech?

    • clyde says:

      Buck,why would you want an awful Oscar statue?? Hanoi Jane Fonda has that,too.Acceptance speech will work,as long as the moderator will allow it! bwahahahahaha

  11. Buck says:

    To crack native pecans with.

  12. jevica says:


    Don’t forget we have to do something.

    That something we be to screw lawful, legal gun holders. Their laws etc. will do nothing to criminals [we have known this for years].

    Here is Sen Chuck, “Schumer’s Transfer Tyranny
    He wants you to get a background check if you lend your friend a gun for the weekend.”

    “. . . S. 374, or the “Protecting Responsible Gun Sellers Act of 2013” as it has been inexplicably termed, passed out of the Senate Judiciary Committee by ten votes to eight. If it were to become law, S. 374 would usher in what advocates refer to as a system of “universal background checks.” It would do a lot more, besides.”


    They always bury amendments in bills.

    Here in NY they passed an anti-gun bill which limited mag size. Except it did not exempt ACTIVE or retired PO’s, Mario Jr. just had to do something.

    BTW what’s with Bush Jr. and this “big tent” B.S.? Why is the PSP [main streamers] always ready to go with this across the aisle, bipartisan, etc. crap? Then they get so surprised when they get the crap beat out of them. The MSM, etc. will never be ok with the PSP except when they tell us how great the Left, liberal ideas are.

    Read about McLiberal the other day, he mentioned that he used to be a “the maverick” now he’s a “crazy” old man. Get used to it John.

    • BrianR says:

      Hey, Jev. Long time; how you been?

      Bush… yet ANOTHER damned Bush. Jesus Christ on a crutch…. I wish that whole damned family would move to Zimbabwe or something…

      As to McAsshat: he got ripped at his “townhalls” recently by constituents POed at him for being pro-amnesty and anti-gun. As I’ve always said, he’s in the wrong party.

      I am SOOOOOO glad I didn’t vote for that douche when he was running for Prez.

  13. clyde says:

    Great to read ya,Jev. The only thing a “big tent” does is smother more people when it collapses. Y’know,pard,it’s amazing that those who were ready to disembowel we Crispies are SILENT about McShamnesty now. Listening to Priebus at CPAC made me want to huck a shoe through the TV. But,the asshat isn’t worth the $2000 it would cost to replace the damned thing. Does make the decision to tell the repub party to piss off a good one.

  14. jevica says:


    “Republicans Can’t Win Latinos With Immigration Reform
    From big government to gay rights, America’s fastest-growing demographic bloc aligns with Democrats. ”


    ” They did not vote for Mitt Romney. They did not vote for John McCain.” Some Republican members of Congress echo this sentiment. Rep. Lou Barletta of Pennsylvania commented on the GOP’s scramble to come up with immigration reform. “I hope politics is not at the root of why we’re rushing to pass a bill,” he told The Morning Call of Allentown. “Anyone who believes that they’re going to win over the Latino vote is grossly mistaken.””

    “But it’s on the question of big government that Hispanics stand most solidly with Democrats. The 2011 Pew Hispanic Center survey asked Latinos whether they would “pay higher taxes to support a larger government or pay lower taxes and have a smaller government”? Hispanics backed higher taxes and more government by 75 percent to 19 percent. For the population as a whole, 48 percent favored smaller government to 41 percent wanting big government. Even Obama’s top political adviser, David Plouffe, seems to share the Coulter hypothesis: “The bigger problem [Republicans have] got with Latinos isn’t immigration,” Plouffe told Time. “It’s their economic policies and health care. The group that supported the president’s health care bill the most—Latinos.””

    There are enough in the PSP to go with this and really screw us good.


    “. . . there are probably seven or eight Republican squishes in the Senate who’ll vote for it regardless. McCain, Graham, Collins, Murkowski — you know the names by now. In fact, the RNC’s new “autopsy” released today fully endorses comprehensive immigration reform as a partial solution to the party’s woes. Pro-amnesty Republicans have plenty of cover on this from the top. The only question is whether there are enough of them who think they can survive primary challenges to join Reid and Schumer on passing the bill.”

    • BrianR says:

      Yes, exactly. That’s what I’ve been saying for YEARS.

      Not only that, but here’s another knife in the back for conservatives: today, Rand Paul came out for amnesty.

      This country is SCREWED. The PSP stands for absolutely anymore other than trying to get themselves elected.

  15. jevica says:


    The PSP in action.

    “This is why the Republican Party is flopping and floundering like a beached whale. You’ve heard the news, no doubt. Speaker John Boehner said that he’ll allow the CR (Continuing Resolution) that House Republicans are crafting to fund ObamaCare. The speaker, in a rather shallow, one-dimensional pronouncement, stated last week that tackling the federal budget is about “cutting spending.” The speaker fears that defunding ObamaCare in the CR risks shutting down government (perish the thought).”


    “There will never be a greater opportunity to contrast conservatism with what’s actually happened these past five years. We don’t have to warn people about what will happen if radical liberals get in office. It’s already happening!”

    “There will never be a greater opportunity to contrast conservatism with what’s actually happened these past five years. We don’t have to warn people about what will happen if radical liberals get in office. It’s already happening!”

    “You don’t have to be a Catholic, and you don’t have to follow them if you don’t want to. It’s not up to the Catholic Church to bend and shape and flake and form in order to conform with whatever the daily culture happens to be. That’s not what it is.”

    • BrianR says:

      Again, as you wrote, more of the continuing idiocy of the PSP.

      The ONLY thing they haven’t tried is actually standing up for traditional conservative principles, and they simply won’t do it, continually ignoring the historical precedent of winning their greatest victories on EXACTLY those principles. Instead, they worry about what the NY Times and WaPo are going to write about them, and go scurrying to the Left, like cockroaches when the kitchen light’s turned on.

      If brains were dynamite, those morons wouldn’t have enough to blow their own noses.

  16. Buck says:

    My 1957 Websters defines:
    Moron: 50-75 i.q.;
    Imbicile: 25-50 i.q.;
    Idiot: Less than 25 i.q.
    At this point, are you sure they’re morons????

  17. clyde says:

    Got a new one up about our pal,McCain. Hope you like it.

  18. jevica says:


    They can say whatever they want do what they want and no-one but those of us on the right will call them on it.

    Get this on Geraldo about the Bloomberg gun ban ad that got out of control.

    ‘Sodomy: We All Have To Pay!’ Coulter Debate On ‘Nannying’ Devolves Into Battle Over Gay Bathhouses”


    “. . . Ann Coulter attempted to flip the “liberal nannying” logic upside-down by bringing up illegitimacy, sodomy, AIDS, and gay bathhouses.”

    “Coulter was not having any of it. She tore into Bloomberg by suggesting we just be done with it already and “have a death penalty for smokers,” before changing the subject to the negative behaviors that liberals are unwilling to stigmatize, such as illegitimate birth.”

    “Mike Bloomberg: “I do think there are certain times we should infringe on your freedom””

    Here, http://hotair.com/archives/2013/03/25/mike-bloomberg-i-do-think-there-are-certain-times-we-should-infringe-on-your-freedom/

    As long as it’s us they have no problem stopping us. Watch SCOTUS put the camel’s nose under the tent. Why not Polygamy, let’s get NAMBLA in there also why not -bestiality? Hell it’s gotta be in the Constitution somewhere, they made up a so-called right to privacy out of no where.

    “Coulter spoke against the recent phenomena of incumbent Republicans in winnable elections being knocked out of the race in the primary by a more conservative candidate, who then goes on to lose the general.”

    Coulter On Christie: “We Have To Run Someone Who Can Win Or The Country Is Finished” Come on Ann, Christie is liberal enough to win in NJ but how many on the right in the PSP will work, etc. for him in the general election?


    Why won’t McLiberal just shut up and go away? Yes after the conservative candidate wins the PSP does everything it can to sink them. Like Bush 43 did to Towmey against Specter in PA.

    • BrianR says:

      Christie… I don’t know what it is with Coulter’s crush on that bonehead. A guy with his lips glued to Obozo’s butt. I’d NEVER EVER vote for that d-bag. Ever.

      Good comments, good links, Jev. Thanks.

  19. jevica says:


    “If everybody is your friend, then there’s no such thing as a friend. And if anybody can marry anybody, then there really isn’t anything called marriage anymore. Marriage is a word. It’s in the dictionary. Look it up, it has a meaning.”

    “Here’s the difference between conservatives and liberals: When we lose a vote of the people, we immediately set out trying to — within the boundaries of the democratic process — change people’s minds and hearts. We do not force things on people.”

    “. . . the left is forcing their agenda on us. They don’t care whether there are popular votes to support it or not. That doesn’t matter. It’s gonna be forced on us however, whichever, whenever. It doesn’t matter. Pure and simple.”

    ” The last thing we should be doing is paying these guys to run for office when they can get plenty of moolah without extracting it from taxpayers to use as some veil of credibility.” No to this ever, raise your own money

    • BrianR says:

      For me, the main issue in the Prop 8 case is that of states’ rights. The peeps of this state passed a referendum — exactly the same as those passed in several other states — in defining marriage. Now, this is really no different from the fact that states have a variety of different laws regarding marriage: blood test requirements, age of consent, forbidden familial relationships, etc.

      Further, we also enacted laws permitting “civil unions” for gays. So the bottom line here is that all they’re really trying to do is insist on the term “marriage” instead of “civil union”. When there’s no substance to the challenge, as is the case, and it’s simply over a semantic issue, then clearly their only goal is to redefine the social contract by changing the definition of a fundamental institution.

      But again, this is clearly a STATE issue to decide. And IMO that would be the proper decision from SCOTUS.

      So… we’ll see what the Pashas in Black Robes hand down from their mount.

  20. jevica says:


    “Obama: Shame on us for not enacting my gun-control agenda already”

    Shame on you for not knowing the Constitution.


    “. . . Obama spent more time on background checks in today’s speech than he did on “assault weapons.” (In fact, the term “assault weapons” is never used. O opted instead for the phrase “weapons of war,” which ought to bump the poll numbers for an AWB ban “

  21. jevica says:


    “If the Republicans are gonna win, it’s gonna be on the economy.”

    And the least free state in America, is…


    ” On the overall freedom ranking, North Dakota comes in first followed by South Dakota, Tennessee, New Hampshire, and Oklahoma. At the bottom of the ranking, New York ranks worst by a significant margin, with rent control and burdensome insurance regulations dragging down its regulatory freedom score. New York is behind California at 49th, then New Jersey, Hawaii, and Rhode Island. ”


    Flashback: Remember when Democrats swore they opposed same-sex marriage?

    “Actually, it was just nine years ago, with now-”evolved” Hillary Clinton lecturing Republicans on just how much she’d suffered for defending traditional marriage:”

    “. . . scoffing at Republican concerns over slippery slopes and the real commitment of Democrats to traditional marriage is certainly instructive to see once again at this point in time, less than a decade after having been assured that they couldn’t possibly support same-sex marriage.

    These Democrats obviously didn’t put that much stock in the sanctity of marriage, but they had plenty of sanctimony to offer.”


    Another example of hypocrites at work.

    “There’s a story in The Politico today that says Republican consultants (who are reputedly the source or the sources for this story) secretly want gay marriage to become the law of the land everywhere to get rid of the issue. ”

    “The Politico — I’ve got it right here, folks — is saying they found a couple of Republican consultants who said to them (summarized), “You know, the best thing could happen for us is if the Supreme Court legalizes gay marriage in every state and takes the issue off the table. We can’t be bigots in the 2014 election.” Why don’t we just give away every issue so it’s no longer a problem? Yeah, and let’s just cancel elections and say, “Democrats, you are now in power in perpetuity.””

    The PSP are they at it again? “my initial reaction to this was, “Well, okay, let’s just get rid of another issue. Let’s just give up another core belief, because we don’t want to be criticized for holding it.

    “So let’s just get rid of this core belief and move on to the next one.” It reminded me that this is exactly how the Republicans have behaved philosophically in all of these budget skirmishes. From the end-of-the-year fiscal cliff to the sequester to whatever it was, the Republican leadership said, “You know, let’s let Obama have this, and then we’ll really take it to him on the sequester.” That’s what they said on the fiscal cliff. Then the sequester came, they said, “You know, let’s not fight this.”

    “the Republican leadership thinks the best way to avoid losing elections is to let the Democrats win every controversial issue. Because these Republicans say, “We’re just gonna get beat up, and the longer the gay marriage issue is on the table, the more they’re gonna call us bigots and homophobes and racists. We can’t go into an election being called that! We don’t want to defend that. Let’s let ’em have it.” “

    • BrianR says:

      Well, that’s been my issue with GOPers for years, as you know. If they’re going to just throw principles to the wolves, what are they for? What’s their purpose? Why should ANYONE vote for them?

  22. jevica says:


    “I’m gay, and I oppose gay marriage”

    “Doug Mainwaring is co-founder of the National Capital Tea Party Patriots. This article reprinted with permission from The Public Discourse.”


    • BrianR says:

      You know, I’m not really invested in same-sex marriage per se. To me, the crux of the Prop 8 case is the validity of states’ rights, as I’ve said. “Marriage” is rightfully a state issue to define, and once a state DOES define it the feds have no reason or standing to interfere. That’s ALWAYS been the way it’s been in this country on the issue, which is why marriage laws have ALWAYS varied state-to-state. We have NO uniform national standard of marriage.

      THAT, to me, is the issue that SCOTUS must uphold if they’re to have any credibility at all. But I have to say, after the Obamacare decision, my confidence level in them is very low.

  23. Buck says:

    Brian: I read somewhere a day or so ago that one of the things SCOTUS judges can be impeached for is rendering an “unconstitutional” decision.
    How and who could decide the supposedly top authorities on Constitutional law have rendered an “unconstitutional” decision? I mean how much weight could that carry?

    • BrianR says:

      Buck, I don’t know where you read that, but it’s not true. First, for exactly the reason you cited. Second, grounds for impeachment are clearly defined in the Constitution. That’s not one of them.

      Sounds to me like one of those opinion pieces where someone just makes up a wishful idea, then tries to figure out some “logic” to support it.

  24. jevica says:


    I’m sure you read about the AP’s change and not using ‘illegal immigrant. Leno called it right with, “They will now use the phrase ‘undocumented Democrat.’ ” Which could go for the media also.

    • BrianR says:

      Yeah, that was pretty funny. Leno absolutely NAILED it.

      What surprised me was that the audience actually got the joke, and laughed. Couldn’t have been native Commiefornians; it must have been an audience of out-of-state tourists, in from some sane part of the country.

  25. clyde says:

    Cracks me up how the Associated Obama Press is an entity protected by the Constitution, but has NO understanding of what that means, apparently. Got a couple up at hardnoxandfriends@wordpress.com if you get a minute. There. I made a shameless plug.

  26. clyde says:

    Well,pard,we’ve got the shack loaded and ready to head for the north country. Check in with you later next week.

  27. clyde says:

    OK, back home and getting back at it. got a new one up if you’d like to check it out. A good, UNEVENTFUL trip home. Just the way I like it. The only bad part, is it’s cold and rainy here. Wife does NOT like THAT. And, has let me know in NO uncertain terms!! bwahahahahah

  28. clyde says:

    Got a couple new ones up. Seems as if Kristof from the Slimes has a problem with the Boston bombings.

  29. jevica says:


    Watch all the MSM [and elsewhere] talk about Boston bombing being RIGHT WING.

    • BrianR says:

      Of COURSE it is, Jev!

      In spite of the fact that the Batman theater shooter, the Newtown shooter, the Columbine shooters, the Giffords shooter were all lefties, it is, of course, the RIGHT WING that’s the problem.

  30. jevica says:


    “Democratic Super PAC already attacking Republican “Gang of Eight” members for being too hard on illegals”


    “The left’s supposed to wait until after Republicans help pass amnesty to start shrieking that they’re Latino-hating racists who’ll never change.”

    “According to a poll by Latino decisions, 87 percent of illegals say they would seek citizenship if given the chance. (Politico notes that this contradicts Jeb Bush’s talking point that many illegals don’t really want to become citizens.) Assuming that’s true, using the standard figure of 11 million illegals currently in the U.S., that’s almost 9.6 million potential citizens in the pipeline. Further assuming that that population breaks down 60/40 for Democrats, which is generously in line with voting patterns among U.S. citizens of Latino descent, that’s a net take of nearly 2 million voters for Dems. Why would O jeopardize that by doing something dramatic about removal?”

    • BrianR says:

      And, of course, that’s exactly why the Dems are always bleating for amnesty. And it IS exactly why I’ve said for years that amnesty is going to spell the death of this country.

      I have absolutely NO idea why any GOPer would ever support the idea. It’s one of the big reasons I call them a “Stupid” party. They’ve got their heads firmly buried up their butts.

  31. jevica says:


    “All taxes are bad. Even if the government started to itemize services, it would be a colossal failure. If the government wages war or builds bridges, fine, but apart from those things, government in general is extremely inefficient.”

    “In Canada, you have more choice for your pet when it comes to veterinary care than you do for a human being.”

    “More than eight in 10 Americans believe that you should do everything you can to pay the lowest tax rate possible, according to new Washington Post-ABC News polling, a finding that suggests that people likely hold politicians to a standard of conduct they themselves don’t adhere to.”


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s