« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

FRONT PAGE CONTRIBUTOR

Angela McGlowan, the National Tea Party Convention, and Due Diligence

By: streiff (Diary)  |  February 10th, 2010 at 09:19 AM  | 

RESIZE: AAA

Angela McGlowan, a FoxNews political analyst and candidate for Congress in MS-01 gave a well received speech at the recent National Tea Party Convention in Nashville.

In an August appearance on The Gallo Show she evinced some fairly exotic opinions on gun ownership. Such as:

“I think the government has the right to know what guns are in the homes ….”

The whole segment is below the fold and you need to listen to it all so you can see that this quote is not a brain fart in the course of an extended interview. The gun commentary starts almost immediately.

On the big picture side, both McGlowan and Joe Farah shared the stage at the National Tea Party Convention. McGlowan gave this extended interview back in August. Farah is a well known commodity. One has to question the degree of due diligence performed by the organizers of the Convention and how the high profile presence of either McGlowan or Farah moved the cause of conservatism forward.

COMMENTS

POSTING RULES  |  LOGIN TO COMMENT  |  REGISTER TODAY
  • fpete13527

    The TN Tea Party event was obviously motivating and inspiring for the participants in many ways. However, this does not excuse the poor judgment and lack of prior screening of speakers and topics.

    The birther issue is a major detriment to all responsible, conservative, forward action. The topic and speaker, Farrah, should not have been there, nor should they be at any responsible conservative event, IMO.

    I did not know that McGlowan was preaching gun registry and anti-second amendment speech. This is EXTREMELY inappropriate for an event intended to empower people?s constitutional rights. This definitely does serious damage to her claims to be conservative.

    Even though much of the overall event seemed to empower the people who came, I agree with many earlier assessments that Judson Phillip?s planning and screening get failing grades.

  • http://www.ArchitecturalShots.com mdyou

    …why are we listening to her?

    • http://www.veronicaestrada.com/ Veronica Estrada
  • greyfox65

    Judson Phillip did not have to screen Angela McGowan. She was already known as a “wplf in sheep’s clothing”. It really brings into question Phillip’s rationality and is one of the reasons I will not subscribe to the Tea Party Movement, though I do subscribe to their platform. Shame on you, Judson. You give the world and especially the main stream media cause to question your smarts.

  • Bobcat51

    to be a parasitic fifth columnist !

    The Constitution Rules ..OK?

    • Section9

      …for a long, long time. She was on FOX and I believe CNN for ages. It was natural for someone in Washington who was advising the TEA people to put together a speaker list (probably Joe Farah) to say “hey, invite Angela McGlowan! Then they can’t call you racist!”

      I didn’t know about Angela’s rather chequered history on RKBA issues. Now I do.

  • http://www.veronicaestrada.com/ Veronica Estrada

    thanks for bringing this to light, streiff.

    dig, dig, dig

  • Duke

    She appears to ask, “Why should anyone be concerned about the government knowing where all the private firearms are?”

    What if the question was asked instead, “Why should the government be concerned about knowing where all the private firearms are?”

    In the answer to the last question you’ll find the truth.

  • lockedandloaded

    that is revealing. She obviously enjoys the microphone a bit too much. We need pols who will shut up and listen a lot more. She is condescending; I immediately thought of Barbara Boxer when she snidely told the caller her name. And lo and behold, here comes the race (war) card!

  • http://dreamsfrommyforefathers.com RoguePolitics

    And the Big Tent Republicans.

    We need to stop with the chicken dance and say what it is we stand for.

    If they like the result the tent produces they will join us without our having to compromise our principles by accepting people who clearly don’t understand the constitution.

    I am of course assuming strict adherence to the constitution would be a core principle. That may not fly with enough people to need more than a pup tent.

    But if so I would rather live in the pup tent.

  • Richard Mullins

    Really, we don’t need more regulation just better enforcement of what we have on the books. More registration isn’t going to even stop any unscrupulous gun shops and dealers from selling anything to anyone. I tried to listen but all I got was a Republican candidate that sounds like the Democrat. No thanks.

    Over regulation drives things underground. There is no need to put more Regs on gun shops and owners than what’s there. I think I’ll ask my local gun shop what they think. I’m sure I’ll know the answer anyway.

    • kenchely

      The problem as far as guns in the hands of criminals is all the guns out on the street already. When gun ownership is more tightly regulated, those who would want a gun for legitimate purposes will have a harder time getting guns, but those who want a gun for criminal purposes will get them just as easily as before. They won’t get those guns at gun shops, gun fairs, gun shows, etc.. They’ll ask a friend who’ll ask a friend who’ll know a friend who can get a gun, and the deal happens. All cash, no paperwork.

      But there’s a much deeper issue. The right to bear arms was not safeguarded in order to safeguard the practice of hunting or sport target shooting, nor even to give people self-protection in what was still a wild frontier. It was to make sure that 1775 could happen again if need be. The National Guard is not that, so it can’t be what was intended with the second amendment. The whole point is that the people have to be able to rise up in arms if need be to overthrow a government that has overstepped its bounds, as arguably the British government had done in 1765-1775.

      The single greatest safeguard against our present government not becoming a dictatorship is not the democratic system–it’s that about a third of the people are armed and most of the rest could become so if necessary. The rule that those having been convicted of a felony may not purchase a handgun is ridiculous–what compelling state isterest is served by keeping someone who cheated on his taxes or juggled his trust accounts or sniffed cocaine from owning a handgun? Those are all felonies, yet none of them standing alone would make anyone a danger to his fellow citizens by reason of owning a handgun. The law should be amended to prohibit those who have been convicted of a violent felony from having a gun.

      • Richard Mullins

        That is the dumbest thing ever. Changing the law, ranks up there too. We don’t seem to enforce what rules we have. If you committed a felony, you shouldn’t be able to have a gun. You seem to be more of a anti-gun nut than you think.

      • nessa

        As I see it, the problem with all the criminals having guns is that >strong>all the law abiding folks don’t have guns.

        You’re absolutely right about the underlying purpose in the Second Amendment. We must demand that the Second Amendment is enforced as it is written.

        A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

        What part of “shall not be infringed” don’t they understand?

  • Michael Dugas

    of a Tea Party Rally. If an actual conversation were held with Tea Party supporters you would find that most of them would hold that
    gun registration belongs under the States purview at the MOST.
    Besides our never ending 2nd Amendment battle with the Lefties there has been a tremendous increase in the governments collection of personal information on its citizens. Privacy and free speech have changed from being Sacred Rights to becoming Weapons to be used
    against our county’s own citizens. Our governments desire for control over our public and private lives should be a clarion call to those who believe in and support Freedom. Liberty, our very Liberty sits on the edge of a cliff always at risk of going over unless we work continuously to protect it. At times it is closer to the edge of that cliff than at others and right now it sits balanced, half way over and barely holding on. We’ve won some skirmishes recently and there are some signs that give us real hope but we can’t ever again be lax and take the protection of our freedom, our liberty for granted.. These Tea Party Rally’s are a product of the citizens of this country telling the elected citizens of Washington D.C. that you have our full attention, we are watching you and we are pissed. You better start taking the Representative part of our Democratic Republic seriously.
    As far as the Convention went the Birther aspect was a negative. McGlowen’s participation was a bad decision and not a good match for the event. But as far as the gathering itself, I am really excited to see so many like minded people getting together, networking and supporting each other even if it’s just letting some know that they are not alone in how they feel and that they CAN have an effect.

  • strategerist

    This woman is ignorant.

    She thinks the “government should have the right to know what we have in our homes” and makes no attempt to connect this belief with a constitutional power.

    One caller tries to tell her about Class III weapons and how you need a special permit that subjects your premises to inspection and she completely misses the point and jumps to “my daddy taught me to shoot when I was 7″.

    After listening to her, the only thing I could conclude is that she holds some “conservative” positions more or less at random and because she does not seem to know her history or the founding principles, all of her positions are subject to change if she can be persuaded that it is a “good idea” or that it will “help people”.

    We don’t need another squish like her – Congress is full of them.

    • RedBeard

      There is no way to view a person like this except as being ignorant. She obviously has no idea what the Constitution says or why it says it.

      In addition, she is dealing with issues in the typically liberal fashion of letting her feelings, rather than facts, determine position.

      Even if she is on the right side of ceretain issues, she remains dangerous because that support is built upon shifting sands.

  • revolutionary

    I live in MS and I am thoroughly scared now! Guns don’t kill people…people kill people and the gun they choose is only a tool. Do you think criminals consistently file their taxes and that they will even admit to owning a gun? This heiffer is crazy!

    She is so naive…if the govt decides to invoke martial law at any time for any reason, they would use that information to round up the guns. She is so out of touch with reality. No one is questioning the registration of the guns, we are against declaring them on our freakin’ taxes?!?!?! She is a moron…

    • Richard Mullins

      why she’s sounds so much like a Donkey, she’s so much like them. My short time living Memphis I seem to remember that the leftist thought trends toward the south with over the border in MS being quite the same. I can say that she wouldn’t last here in TX-02.

  • renny

    The TN “convention” was neither approved nor attended by many 10′s of 1000s or even 100s of 1000s of those who see themselves as part of the tea parties.

    The tea party agenda for 2010 is ?

    Final Voting on Contract from America Begins: February 18, 2010
    ? Recharge the Movement Protests: February 27, 2010
    ? Nationwide Screenings of Tea Party Movie: February 27, 2010
    ? Tea Party Local Coordinator Training – How to Start a Tea Party
    ? Tax Day Tea Parties: April 15, 2010
    ? Rollout of Final Contract from America: April 15, 2010
    ? Constitutional Educational Training, Founding Principles Bus Tour
    ? Activist Educational Training
    ? Independence Day Events: July 2 – July 4, 2010
    ? AUGUST HEAT – Congressional Town Hall Meetings
    ? 912 March on DC: September 12, 2010
    ? Get Out the Vote and Voter Education: October – November, 2010
    ? ELECTION DAY, Tuesday, November 2, 2010
    ? Year-Round grassroots lobbying when legislation arises

    I’ve never heard of Angela Whoever and she can run for whatever and maybe get support from some tea parties, but she is not per se representative of nor sponsored by the tea parties.

    • streiff

      1. I think most of us know the backstory on Nashville and I think I was pretty clear in pointing out that I was talking about a single event.

      2. The fact that this person, and Joe Farah, could be given a position of prominence there should give pause to those who believe that any kind of party organization isn’t needed. I guarantee you that if I audit who speaks at local tea parties I will find all sorts of questionable characters simply because vetting speakers is a time consuming process.

      • bs

        If you contend that the “tea parties” should be totally grass-roots-driven, you’re gonna wind up with some folks involved that represent fringe elements of conservatism. We’ve seen that repeatedly already. If you want to eliminate that possibility, there must be some sort of oversight and overarching leadership. Thus the “movement” needs leadership (at some level)…and that’s what many folks are arguing against right now.

        No leadership = high risk of kooks, grass-roots-driven
        Leadership = reduced kook risk, increased risk of astroturfing

        • streiff

          but informal groups are always vulnerable to charlatans

  • Superheater

    She certainly is the typical public administration graduate.

    Her thought process on the radio show in regard to gun registration is so convoluted; I’ve heard better reasoned political discourse from children.

    The very fact that she responds to caller’s concerns with “why not” and then goes on about government “sending a message” shows her true political philosophy-statist. Am I supposed to lay low for every proposed law that doesn’t quite give her the slightest visceral pause?

    She should’ve been challenged on the strawman choice between anarchy and abridgment of the second amendment. Her insistence on being called by her first name shows a nasty streak of narcissism and a lack of understanding as to how a caller might have tuned in to the show after her identity was last provided.

    Should she ever come on the national stage; I’ll never vote or support her, I’m not sure what she could do to convince me she had seen the error of her ways.

    Some stuff is non-negotiable with me-one of those things is the second amendment.

  • swamphermit

    The new Tea Party movement seems unwelcomed by the ?Old Guard?, and I?m going to include CPAC in my ?Old Guard? term since it has apparently been around since ?1973? (I?ll get back to that ?1973? date in a moment).

    Personally, I find Angela McGlowan and the various Tea Party groups quite refreshing, and question the motives of anyone attacking them. I understand why the Left ? and its MSM ? attacks the movement, potential candidates and candidates, but am often left wondering why the ?Old Guard? does. This YouTube interview of Angela McGlowan is dated 8-5-09, and she clearly didn?t know much about the topic, and lacked the ?Old Guard? talking points, but so what. Besides, arguing over another ?proposed legislation? (or another version of the Blair Holt) distracts from bigger issues right now, IMO.

    I lost my gun ownership rights back in 1975 (two years after CPAC?s ?1973? start date) due to felony convictions. All my rights ? other than the ?specific authority to possess or own a firearm? ? were restored in 1989 (Certificate of Restoration of Civil Rights). Since advocates of firearm possession and ownership haven?t done much for me in 35 years, I?ll lump them in with the ?Old Guard,? and their issues are way down on my list?waaaaaay down! 35 years after my felony convictions, I?m stuck with a black powder muzzleloading Buckhunter Pro .50 cal pistol for protection, even though that protection is more useful for its looks than its ability to fire in self-defense.

    What has the ?Old Guard? actually done over the past 37 years, besides helping the country move further to the left?! The ?Old Guard? gave us John McCain as its Presidential candidate in 2008! I want fresh faces like Sarah Palin and Angela McGlowan, and gave up on Joe Farah several years ago; however, even though I dislike Joe Farah I saw nothing wrong with Tea Party Nation allowing him to speak?besides, Andrew Breibart did a great job of countering him.

    I also consider Rush Limbaugh as a member of the ?Old Guard.? However, he is wise enough to recognize the need for fresh faces and the new Tea Party movement. He did blow it recently ? which is rare for Rush ? by putting Sarah Palin in a tough spot. Instead of just following Sarah?s lead on calling for Rahm Emanuel?s head, Rush got carried away and pushed it a tad too far. I?m sure Rush regrets blowing it like that?he certainly recognizes Sarah?s appeal (and power), and has been quite supportive of her. The incident seemed to suggest that the ?Old Guard? needs to step back more often, and allow a fresh face to take the reins, unless they are willing to take on the wrath of ?Fresh Face? supporters?so to speak.

    Anyway, that my 2-cents, along with a lot of babbling expressing it. ;-)

    • streiff

      that once you start defending the bits and pieces of the Constitution that you happen to like you aren’t left with much.

      As to fresh faces, you got one in the White House now. How’s that working out for you?

      • swamphermit

        good luck with the NRCC’s choice, Alan “The Taxman” Nunnelee.

        • streiff

          have a basis in the Constitution

          • Section9

            …is going to come down and Bring Back Slavery.

            It’s a deeply Paranoid fear, but it’s there.

            But you don’t compromise on the 2nd Amendment to accomodate someone’s fears.

          • Richard Mullins

            and maybe she’s happy that were far removed in time from the time the constitution was written. Let it be no doubt that talk like that might have gotten her killed. Rights were a serious thing back then now it seems that simple speaking for some rights is permissible. It time to go line by line on this person. No thought unturned.

          • swamphermit

            like one of the Democrat’s talking points…

    • http://slcliberty.blogivists.com randy streu

      This is an attack on the Statist McGlowan. I’m sorry, I just don’t see how your personal beef with the NRA or “old guard” and what they have or haven’t done for you has anything at all to do with which sections of the Constitution ought to be defended.

      So, you lost your rights after a felony conviction? Who the hell cares? You SHOULD have lost those rights. If you can’t live within the laws of society, you forfeit certain rights within that society. What that has to do with Ms. Babbling Freakin’ Idiot, though, escapes me.

    • Section9

      Your reasoning wears clown shoes.

      No one doubts Sarah’s devotion to the 2nd Amendment and RKBA issues. There’s a reason that Palin has the Gun Rights crowd firmly in her corner: she’s a believer, and the Gunners KNOW that she’s a believer.

      The issue is not that Palin could come and give a bang-up, liberty-oriented speech, but that the same crowd could invite in a Birther like Farah who was simply trying to juice his magazine and a gungrabber like McGlowan.

      How could this have happened?

  • http://www.veronicaestrada.com/ Veronica Estrada

    I’ve thought about it — and the only conclusion I can come up with is that she’s pro-gun registration, pro-government “right to know” because of some previous run-ins — then and now — with white supremacists and other aggressive people.

    She’s an African-American woman and comes from a divisiive an contentious area.

    I would understand her feeling she needed the “right” (through, say, the government’s “gun database”) to know how many guns the crazy white supremace-y looking guy living across her house has.

    Maybe when she means “government,” she means “me.” Wouldn’t that be in line with her conservative “government of the people, by the people, etc.”?

    Just a suggestion.

    .. I mean, she can’t offer an explanation of this anti-gun stance.

    More than likely, it’s personal because of something she experienced (or is experiencing).

    For the record, I don’t support her views, nor am I racist.

    My response to the kook across the street would be to buy a bigger gun, buy more bullets and get in my gun-range practice — not require that every citizen register.

    • Richard Mullins

      she’s how to play that race card and I’m sure a White person or a Latino will not persuade her. We need to have all law-abiding citizens to own guns not make it onerous to own a gun.

      If we the that don’t break the laws had the guns, we wouldn’t have such a problem. It’s not guns that kill people, it guns in the hands of criminals that kill people. Ms McGlowan doesn’t seem to know that.

  • kenchely

    Someone with you on nine out of ten issues is your ally, not your enemy. If you demand 10 out of 10, you won’t have many allies and the result will be that you will lose on 10 out of 10 issues.

    Where is she on abortion? On spending? On taxes? On foreign policy? On the power of labor unions, especially public-sector unions? On the homosexual agenda? On environmental legislation?

    Scott Brown will probably be with movement conservatives on 60-70% of key roll-call votes. He will not be a movement conservative himself or be with them 90-100% of the time. Is there even one of you who thinks it isn’t better that he was elected than that Martha Coakley, who would have agreed with us 0% of the time as Ted Kennedy did, be senator?

    • nessa

      This issue is a deal breaker, nothing else matters. She could be the reincarnation of Jefferson, Franklin and Ronaldus Maximus all rolled into one. if she is willing to threaten my second amendment rights she’s through.

      And really, how could any of her other stances be truly conservative when she is so weak on the one right which guarantees all the others?

    • streiff

      how you listen to this interview and the underlying reasoning, such as it is, and think that any other position she might has matters.

      ?I think the government has the right to know what guns are in the homes ?.?

      The government has a right to know?

    • Richard Mullins

      When dealing with the 2nd Amendment, I’m a purist. I don’t expect to even have a person like her as congresscritter and I don’t want to have one. I’m happy my congresscritter won’t budge on this and I won’t either.

      • strategerist

        We might suffer evils while evils are sufferable but the 2nd Amendment is the right that gives us the power to protect all the others. We have let them take bits and pieces of it over the last 100 years but it stops now.

        We have seen the cost of civilian disarmament – in the 20th Century, it was something like 100,000,000 human lives lost to secular collectivist, socialist tyranny – and that does not even count those lost to criminals but for the lack of a pistol.

        No issue, no transient cause, no platform is worth giving up the civilian power of arms. Stop for a minute and think what might be happening in our country if there were not more than enough guns to arm every single man, woman and child – and the government has no idea exactly where many of those guns are.

        How much worse the lie? How much more grievous the attack on liberty? How much of the internet would we have left? What about that “civilian security force” that Obama wants so badly?

        It is only for the fear of an armed populace that the hand of tyranny hesitates. They have done every thing they can to work around the constitution and the rule of law – ask yourself, how much force would they be willing to turn against us if we had no chance of fighting back?

        There can be no compromise – this IS the hill to die on.

        • Richard Mullins

          Yep, just like the Alamo and people like her want to have a Goliad massacre. Give ground on the 2nd and the rest is meaningless. It’s a hill to die on(well I thank Erick for popularizing that). I’m really sure all of my elected officials here think that the same way(from State Rep,State Senator,Congressman to Senator). I’m sure no way,no how on giving ground on this. An armed society is a polite society.

    • http://slcliberty.blogivists.com randy streu

      The 2nd Amendment guarantees all the others. Not only that but if she believes the government has “The right to…” ANYTHING, she’s clearly an idiot unworthy of office.

  • aesthete

    I’ve heard more reasoned and intelligent political commentary from wasted sorority girls. Angela McGlowan is insulting, foolish, and crass; even if she were Edmund Burke reincarnated on the other issues, and even if the gun issue wasn’t an issue, I don’t know why one would want to listen to someone this ignorant and irritating speaking from a national platform.

    The NTPC just keeps getting better and better.

  • Dr. Botkin

    what I have just heard from this Angela person. What mental confusion and ignorance. And she spoke at the tea party convention? (I can believe the Fox News part. Isn’t Marc Lamont Hill still O’Reilly’s buddy?) Whoever this Judson character is he needs a background check. Angela sounds like she left sold her brains? for campaign funds. Pitiful stuff. I guess we must remember that Judson does not represent all the tea party groups, and I doubt that most of his participants were aware of Angela’s intellectual and political shortcomings. They all came for a celebration and to see Sarah Palin.

  • http://www.veronicaestrada.com/ Veronica Estrada

    This is why she’s for gun registration.

    Listened closely to this again. The CRUX begins at 7:30.

    Skip all this:

    [MCGLOWAN: I believe that you should be able to have weapons. I belive in the 2nd Amendment. I believe that you should be able to protect yourself]

    and continue to this:

    MCGLOWAN: But when you have crazies out there that are stockpiling guns because they believe that we are gonna have SOME TYPE OF RACE WAR, I think that that’s a problem.

    HOST: What would be the reason that the government would want to know?

    McGLOWAN: .. You’ve had conservative talk show radio [shows] where I’ve heard .. people who want to overthrow the government, people who don’t like the fact THAT WE HAVE A BLACK PRESIDENT.. they believe that there’s going to be a BIG RACE WAR.”

    The truth always comes out.

    Call her what she is: racist.

    She thinks I’m racist intentions because I might have 35 pistols in the house, 16 semi automatics, 7 ARs and 10,000 rounds of ammo.

    And I must therefore dislike my president because he’s black.

    .. which I don’t, by the way. Just illustrating a point.

    She sure works on a hell of a lot of assumptions about people who own guns.

  • Leopard1996

    But if this is the black woman who debates on the conservative side of Fox News, WTF. Did someone threaten to take away her black card, hence couldn’t get a contract unless she showed one dopey liberal view. The government needs to know who owns the guns really.., and this was said at a TEA Party convention. What the hell is this chick thinking.

    • Richard Mullins

      I’m hoping that since she says she’s a candidate that she’ll answer some question from ontheissues.org or something like that so we get more of an understanding. I think it might be time to check her background to see what other problem we might have. I’m thinking this is the tip of the iceberg.

      • Leopard1996

        I mean I would listen to her on Fox and she sounded like a resonable, conservative person, one that most of the black community would probably call a sell out. So with this little proclamation about guns and people with guns wanting to assasinate the president because he is black really has me confused.

        • Leopard1996

          I don’t want a thing to happen to him, and I am sure a majority of conservatives don’t want anything to happen to him, because if something did, how much garbage would get passed because it would have been his legacy, and any opposition would be political suicide.

          • Richard Mullins

            because doing so is martyrdom for him and that’s the last thing I want. Really, conservatives with guns will keep him from getting killed. It’s not a joke. We are not the ones, it’s likely to be a member of Code Pink or something like that.

          • Leopard1996
  • veritaseequitas

    What a total phony. Just another rude, big mouthed black chick that thinks she knows something when in reality she is nothing more than impressed with herself. She reminds me of the boring and insecure Barbara Boxer when she berated a member of our Armed Forces for calling her ma’am instead of Senator.
    Don’t be fooled, Angela McGowan is a political 2nd cousin to BO and is no Conservative.

    • Richard Mullins

      and look things over it seems that we have issues with here. Now if she want to come here and explain herself then that fine, but the Heavy handed gun registration isn’t good. It’s time to get a one on one with a RS Contributor on audio for all the world to hear. I suggest either Erick or Moe to do that. She’s probably running from this right now. With a conservative blog with clout, she’s toast.

  • DaMav

    Thanks for the heads up. We can certainly cross that one off any lists for support. She’s a gun grabber and doesn’t even seem to be aware of it.