Fox Host Tells Supermodel To Shut Up About Gun Control – ‘You Have A Nice Bottom…Stick To That

Fox Host Tells Supermodel To Shut Up About Gun Control – ‘You Have A Nice Bottom…Stick To That’

Not one to be outdone by an abhorrently sexist remark made by her Fox News colleague Kimberly Guilfoyle a few days ago, Andrea Tantaros had a lot to say about a supermodel expressing her opinion on gun control.
In the wake of the tragedy of the shooting in Ottawa, Canada that killed a Canadian soldier,
supermodel Chrissy Teigen tweeted this:
active shooting in Canada, or as we call it in america, wednesday
— christine teigen (@chrissyteigen) October 22, 2014

The Huffington Post called it a “good point” and I agree wholeheartedly. Canadians were horrified at something Americans have become desensitized to. Gun violence in this country seems to just be an accepted fact of life here and that was the point she was trying to make.

Fox news feigning disgust over the shooting in Canada.

She showing her disgust on how jaded America is towards gun violence. When a shooting happens in Canada and it's a huge story there ....it is not news in America..it is just another day.

She is getting death threads from her fellow Americans because although they love to bring the constitution into an argument for guns...they tend to forget the that the first amendment allows here to say what she wants.

This is your 2nd foxnews thread today.........

Do you have some sort of vendetta? No offense but....there seems to be some misplaced anger......

I happen to believe shes right.......its a little bit insensitive and too soon to start in with the "gun crime" bs while the whole thing was still in motion there.......

Not to mention it was a gun from a brave man that stopped the whole damn thing.......

Perhaps the "model" should have held her tongue long enough for the bodies to be cold before "shooting" her insensitive mouth off

edit to add, never mind I just looked at your thread history, seems you have some serious issues with "conservatives" and Fox

The 4th Amendment does protect the freedom of speech but doesn't protect you from the consequences the words you say might bring. I'm not saying it's right to threaten someone over something the say but, people tend to think they can say whatever they want without consequences because of the 4th amendment. Regardless whoever said this has absolutely no class.

originally posted by: ManBehindTheMask
This is your 2nd foxnews thread today.........

Do you have some sort of vendetta? No offense but....there seems to be some misplaced anger......

I happen to believe shes right.......its a little bit insensitive and too soon to start in with the "gun crime" bs while the whole thing was still in motion there.......

Not to mention it was a gun from a brave man that stopped the whole damn thing.......

Perhaps the "model" should have held her tongue long enough for the bodies to be cold before "shooting" her insensitive mouth off

edit to add, never mind I just looked at your thread history, seems you have some serious issues with "conservatives" and Fox

I'm sorry to say, but that is the excuse that people ALWAYS pull "not not, too soon, too soon! let's wait and not take focus away from the victim" and frankly that's BS, i'm not accusing you, to be clear, but the attitude of the media and many politicians. back home we have this saying, not sure of the english version, that syas "you have to hit metal when it's still hot" and that is the attitude we need. not to wait, because then the next tragedy happens and we wait again, and again, and again.
I'm all for guns, i feel if people want them, they should be able to get them. but the ease of access in america is crazy. when i was a kid i thought the whole "buy guns at wallmart" was an exagerated joke, until i went back there for vacation a few years ago...
What this story tells me, is the refusal to consider a rational approach to gun ownership/laws and it shows the bigotry of people that still think that a supermodel can't have opinions or a brain.

I hope you feel the same way about the severe anger issues that conservatives display on this forum on a daily basis.

Oh wait...

Model is a moron, but the professional should have stayed professional.

originally posted by: geldib
The 4th Amendment does protect the freedom of speech but doesn't protect you from the consequences the words you say might bring. I'm not saying it's right to threaten someone over something the say but, people tend to think they can say whatever they want without consequences because of the 4th amendment. Regardless whoever said this has absolutely no class.

It amazes me member actually starred your post. The freedom of speech is protected under the 1st amendment. If this is the level of understanding of what the founding fathers gave us it is any wonder why tyranny rules the day.

a reply to: Onslaught2996

Scratching my head...?

If you state a fact you`re an idiot in America ?

That explains a lot of the discussion I have seen here on this forum.

Without the 2nd, there would be no 1st.

When she is not selling her body she is taking bribes to promote the states thinking.

Yes i might fear a lone wolf but i feqr the power of the police state a darn site more and lets face it the cops carry out more executions on our streets than all the other groups put togeather.

It was an honest mistake which I should have caught but didn't.. The 4th Amendment protects against searches and seizures..

originally posted by: geldib
The 4th Amendment does protect the freedom of speech but doesn't protect you from the consequences the words you say might bring. I'm not saying it's right to threaten someone over something the say but, people tend to think they can say whatever they want without consequences because of the 4th amendment. Regardless whoever said this has absolutely no class.

The fourth amendment prohibits unreasonable searches and seizures.

Fourth Amendment in the Bill of Rights:

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects,[a] against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

What you are referencing is the First Amendment and the rest of your post is pretty much correct. Here's a link to the US Bill of Rights on wiki to avoid similar oopsies later on down the road:

en.wikipedia.org...

a reply to: ManBehindTheMask

Delicious irony is present in your post and I though you were a lot more self-aware. Golly!

Quota's for all then!

Maybe I'm missing something, but I didn't see any comment she made about gun control. I am very much pro gun-rights, but I too am saddened that we are desensitized to these crimes. They are very separate issues.

The fact that people (these shooters) think these kind of reactions to social stresses or anger are somehow a reasonable course of action is sign of fundamental flaws in society and we shouldn't just accept that as the norm.

The fact that a person can't voice that sentiment without being threatened just shows how much we have been divided/manipulated.

a reply to: Onslaught2996

1. She said NOTHING about gun control....
2. It's the FIRST amendment that protects speech, not the 4th. And that post was starred by those who know the difference.

Just shows how some people don't care about facts AT ALL. They will support someone who says something stupid and false if it's "against" the perceived enemy.

Craziness!

originally posted by: geldib
The 4th Amendment does protect the freedom of speech but doesn't protect you from the consequences the words you say might bring. I'm not saying it's right to threaten someone over something the say but, people tend to think they can say whatever they want without consequences because of the 4th amendment. Regardless whoever said this has absolutely no class.

Please read the Bill of Rights..........Freedom of speech in the United States is protected by the First Amendment to the United States Constitution

1st
The First Amendment (Amendment I) to the United States Constitution prohibits the making of any law respecting an establishment of religion, impeding the free exercise of religion, abridging the freedom of speech, infringing on the freedom of the press, interfering with the right to peaceably assemble or prohibiting the petitioning for a governmental redress of grievances.

4th
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

With the way the world is going, if the government were to take my guns away, I would feel sincerely unsafe and would rise up against it.

a reply to: Benevolent Heretic

* ladyinwaiting tosses rose petals towards the beautiful shepherd with the jackolantern ears, and gives him a big kiss on the snout because he is both beautiful and smart.

Personally?

I'm all for nice bottoms.

I don't know why people would get upset-. . . wait, what?

Oh.

Just opinions.

Well, I gave mine.......