I don’t know why the left has suddenly seized on this spot as a locus of outrage, as it’s nearly three months old and feels less hyperbolic than it did before after James Hodgkinson decided to go hunting for Republican congressmen in Virginia. Why things go viral when they do is one of the eternal mysteries of the Internet age.

Dana Loesch has been fielding complaints all day on Twitter that this is a call for violence. Not so, she notes: The key line is “fight this violence of lies with the clenched fist of truth,” a symbol the left knows well. Not only that, but after the footage of rioters rolls, she specifies that “the only option left is for the police to do their jobs and stop the madness.” It’s not a self-defense ad. But it plays like a self-defense ad because, after all, this is a spot for the NRA and the riot scenes imply that you have more to fear from rampaging loons than just the “violence of lies.” If angry leftists run amok and try to smash up your neighborhood, the clenched fist you greet them with will be more than just metaphorical, especially if you’re an NRA member who takes his/her right of self-defense seriously. In theory the police are the “only option” — but you know how the saying goes. If the truth fails to stop the “violence of lies,” what measures should be taken to stop that “violence”?

The most striking thing about it, I think, isn’t even the self-defense undertones, it’s how ideologically tendentious it is. There are some Democratic gun owners out there; not many compared to Republicans, perhaps, but the NRA’s kissing off a few pro-Resistance Second Amendment aficionados here. Why do that when a more bipartisan posture would put added pressure on Democratic politicians to keep their hands off gun rights?

Here’s the ad plus Loesch commenting on the uproar.