Monday, April 15, 2013
Sunday, April 14, 2013
Giving Me Pause
It's Sunday and I find myself this morning not being a very good Christian. Repeated more than any other command in the Bible, we are supposed to love thy neighbor. After reading this, I have to admit I'm finding it very hard to love Karl Denninger, one of the chief founders of the Tea Party Movement. Here's what Mr. Denninger had to say about Francine Wheeler, the mother of Newtown shooting victim, Ben Wheeler
Listen up, you incompetent and defective sack of meat -- your son is dead because you are unfit to be parents. You sat silently by while your state and our nation erected signs telling people who are criminally insane where they can find the maximum number of defenseless people to murder. You are personally, jointly and severably responsible for the consequences. You are unfit to possess a uterus and your husband is unfit to possess testicles.
Every time I think the Right can't get any lower, they somehow manage to find a subbasement. I suppose I could rip into him for being so despicable but it's obvious that this man is terribly unhappy. As I have said previously, conservatives don't do well with children.
They also seem to have a significant problem with denial, specifically DARVO.
You, Mrs. Wheeler, having willingly and intentionally refused to take responsibility for your acts of omission and commission that led to your son being murdered by a madman now have the audacity to stand in front of the nation and demand that everyone else give up their children to murderous goons as well. Go to Hell Mr. and Mrs. Wheeler and take your state and its alleged laws with you.
That's right, Karl. It's not Adam Lanza's fault that he killed all those kids. Nor is it his mother's fault. It's the fault of the parents of the victims. So much for individual responsibility.
The ugly is really coming out with this issue and I've realized that it's the case with others as well. When confronted with unpleasant truths about these situations, the Right categorically refuses to reflect and, sadly, digs in deeper. With the gun issue, liars and gun grabbers are everywhere with civil war imminent. Useful idiots like me are foolish because we don't operate in a state of full panic mode about the federal government 24/7.
The insecurity of these folks is so monumental that we are likely to see even worse behavior than Mr. Denninger's latest mouth foam. The threat they perceive isn't there but it's so very real to them that it makes me wonder just how bad they will get. I'm still leaning towards them all being big, cowardly babies but this latest attack certainly gives me a great deal of pause.
Like Colonel Potter said about Colonel Flagg, "I think someone mixed some locoweed into his feed."
Listen up, you incompetent and defective sack of meat -- your son is dead because you are unfit to be parents. You sat silently by while your state and our nation erected signs telling people who are criminally insane where they can find the maximum number of defenseless people to murder. You are personally, jointly and severably responsible for the consequences. You are unfit to possess a uterus and your husband is unfit to possess testicles.
Every time I think the Right can't get any lower, they somehow manage to find a subbasement. I suppose I could rip into him for being so despicable but it's obvious that this man is terribly unhappy. As I have said previously, conservatives don't do well with children.
They also seem to have a significant problem with denial, specifically DARVO.
You, Mrs. Wheeler, having willingly and intentionally refused to take responsibility for your acts of omission and commission that led to your son being murdered by a madman now have the audacity to stand in front of the nation and demand that everyone else give up their children to murderous goons as well. Go to Hell Mr. and Mrs. Wheeler and take your state and its alleged laws with you.
That's right, Karl. It's not Adam Lanza's fault that he killed all those kids. Nor is it his mother's fault. It's the fault of the parents of the victims. So much for individual responsibility.
The ugly is really coming out with this issue and I've realized that it's the case with others as well. When confronted with unpleasant truths about these situations, the Right categorically refuses to reflect and, sadly, digs in deeper. With the gun issue, liars and gun grabbers are everywhere with civil war imminent. Useful idiots like me are foolish because we don't operate in a state of full panic mode about the federal government 24/7.
The insecurity of these folks is so monumental that we are likely to see even worse behavior than Mr. Denninger's latest mouth foam. The threat they perceive isn't there but it's so very real to them that it makes me wonder just how bad they will get. I'm still leaning towards them all being big, cowardly babies but this latest attack certainly gives me a great deal of pause.
Like Colonel Potter said about Colonel Flagg, "I think someone mixed some locoweed into his feed."
Saturday, April 13, 2013
For The Children
Lately, it's become obvious that the Right doesn't do well with children. One would think that they would considering that they claim to want kids to become educated about civics and history. The problem, of course, is what they really want is for children is to be brainwashed with their horribly misguided and flawed ideology. And when children see the mistakes of this ideology (remember, they are smarter than we might think;)), they tend to move in a more sane direction.
Seeing those young eyes staring them in the face is a stark fucking reminder of just how much these issues affect the lives of children across the country. It completely torpedoes the Right's fact free zone and drives them insane. So, for example, when the Right sees frightened kids writing letters to the president asking about school safety after Sandy Hook and standing with him at a speech, they irrationally lash out, behaving like adolescent bullies. Accusations of children being used as "human shields" or "props" began to fly along with the customary bemoan about how it's all "for the children." Well, guess what?
It is.
Since these policies will have a profound affect on their future as well, I think it' fantastic that kids are involved, even at a young age, and regardless of their political stripe. That's why it's always important to treat them respect and not berate them, or their parents, when they try to become involved. The fact that I have to remind certain people of this gives you an idea about the level of mentality we are dealing with here.
Case in point is Tennessee State Senator Stacey Campfield. Mr. Campfield thought it might be a good idea to tie welfare benefits to grades so he put together Tennessee Senate Bill 132. Shocking that a child, who would be directly affected by this, got involved. Take a look at what happened.
After this protest, the bill was thankfully withdrawn but this incident is an excellent example of why the Right doesn't like to leave their bubble very much. They know that their views are truly deplorable and quite unacceptable to ...well...humans. It makes complete sense that their "courage" to say these sorts of things doesn't extend much past the comments sections of blogs.
Nonetheless, I extend a challenge to all the Stacey Campfields of the world, many of whom are located in the right wing blogsphere. Come out of your safe, little worlds and say more things in public like this to children. You need a wider audience. The 2014 elections are just around the corner and we'd like to take back the House!
Seeing those young eyes staring them in the face is a stark fucking reminder of just how much these issues affect the lives of children across the country. It completely torpedoes the Right's fact free zone and drives them insane. So, for example, when the Right sees frightened kids writing letters to the president asking about school safety after Sandy Hook and standing with him at a speech, they irrationally lash out, behaving like adolescent bullies. Accusations of children being used as "human shields" or "props" began to fly along with the customary bemoan about how it's all "for the children." Well, guess what?
It is.
Since these policies will have a profound affect on their future as well, I think it' fantastic that kids are involved, even at a young age, and regardless of their political stripe. That's why it's always important to treat them respect and not berate them, or their parents, when they try to become involved. The fact that I have to remind certain people of this gives you an idea about the level of mentality we are dealing with here.
Case in point is Tennessee State Senator Stacey Campfield. Mr. Campfield thought it might be a good idea to tie welfare benefits to grades so he put together Tennessee Senate Bill 132. Shocking that a child, who would be directly affected by this, got involved. Take a look at what happened.
After this protest, the bill was thankfully withdrawn but this incident is an excellent example of why the Right doesn't like to leave their bubble very much. They know that their views are truly deplorable and quite unacceptable to ...well...humans. It makes complete sense that their "courage" to say these sorts of things doesn't extend much past the comments sections of blogs.
Nonetheless, I extend a challenge to all the Stacey Campfields of the world, many of whom are located in the right wing blogsphere. Come out of your safe, little worlds and say more things in public like this to children. You need a wider audience. The 2014 elections are just around the corner and we'd like to take back the House!
Friday, April 12, 2013
His Biggest Worry?
One would think that Admiral Samuel J. Locklear III would have his hands full with the likes of North Korea and Chinese computer attacks but his attention is on a far greater concern.
Locklear , in an interview at a Cambridge hotel Friday after he met with scholars at Harvard and Tufts universities, said significant upheaval related to the warming planet “is probably the most likely thing that is going to happen . . . that will cripple the security environment, probably more likely than the other scenarios we all often talk about.’’
“People are surprised sometimes,” he added, describing the reaction to his assessment. “You have the real potential here in the not-too-distant future of nations displaced by rising sea level. Certainly weather patterns are more severe than they have been in the past. We are on super typhoon 27 or 28 this year in the Western Pacific. The average is about 17.
Well, you can add him to the list of American leaders who are trying to take away our freedom through a secret plot to control the world economy through renewable energy.
Locklear , in an interview at a Cambridge hotel Friday after he met with scholars at Harvard and Tufts universities, said significant upheaval related to the warming planet “is probably the most likely thing that is going to happen . . . that will cripple the security environment, probably more likely than the other scenarios we all often talk about.’’
“People are surprised sometimes,” he added, describing the reaction to his assessment. “You have the real potential here in the not-too-distant future of nations displaced by rising sea level. Certainly weather patterns are more severe than they have been in the past. We are on super typhoon 27 or 28 this year in the Western Pacific. The average is about 17.
Well, you can add him to the list of American leaders who are trying to take away our freedom through a secret plot to control the world economy through renewable energy.
Thursday, April 11, 2013
Wednesday, April 10, 2013
A Deal On Guns
Sens. Joe Manchin and Pat Toomey have released the details on a gun bill which I believe goes a long way to addressing the very serious problems we have with our nation's gun laws. It also addresses the concerns of the Right regarding universal registration.
The Manchin-Toomey proposal would require background checks for sales at gun shows and online, but it will exempt personal transfers from such checks.
That eliminates the problem of being able to tell whether or not to tell if someone did a background check when a family member sells his gun to another family member. This would also be true if someone sells their gun to a neighbor or a friend. In all of these cases, knowing the person you are selling the gun to makes it a littler easier to live without a background check. My hope is that responsible gun owners won't engage in personal transfers if they think that they buyer, even if known to them, is mentally unstable. If they do anyway, well, the responsibility lies with them.
It also calls for the creation of a “commission on mass violence” that will study the sources of, and ways to prevent, the mass shootings that have plagued the country over the last decade.
Definitely needed. The core of this should be our mental health as a nation. The first question at the first meeting should be why are we such a violent culture? Substantive answers on this question with thorough analysis leading to direct action could work to reduce the demand for guns and, thus, eliminate the need for bans and other regulation.
For those worried about a national registry...
When a sale occurs, the buyer and seller would meet at a federally licensed dealer, who would conduct the check. The dealer — not the government — would keep control of the sales record, as has been the process for the last four decades.
So, the gun dealers keep the records and, if there is a crime committed, the police can inquire with them.
Schumer negotiated several changes to the initial Manchin-Toomey proposal, including striking language from the agreement allowing concealed permit holders to carry their weapons in other states, and limiting Internet sales to five guns per year. He also worked to make sure there is a 72-hour window for performing background checks except for gun-show sales, which will be cleared in 48 hours initially.
These are all good things that needed to happen long ago.
So, all commercial sales of guns without a background check will be considered a felony. If this law passes, it's going to prevent gun violence and make it harder for criminals and unstable people to acquire guns.
The Manchin-Toomey proposal would require background checks for sales at gun shows and online, but it will exempt personal transfers from such checks.
That eliminates the problem of being able to tell whether or not to tell if someone did a background check when a family member sells his gun to another family member. This would also be true if someone sells their gun to a neighbor or a friend. In all of these cases, knowing the person you are selling the gun to makes it a littler easier to live without a background check. My hope is that responsible gun owners won't engage in personal transfers if they think that they buyer, even if known to them, is mentally unstable. If they do anyway, well, the responsibility lies with them.
It also calls for the creation of a “commission on mass violence” that will study the sources of, and ways to prevent, the mass shootings that have plagued the country over the last decade.
Definitely needed. The core of this should be our mental health as a nation. The first question at the first meeting should be why are we such a violent culture? Substantive answers on this question with thorough analysis leading to direct action could work to reduce the demand for guns and, thus, eliminate the need for bans and other regulation.
For those worried about a national registry...
When a sale occurs, the buyer and seller would meet at a federally licensed dealer, who would conduct the check. The dealer — not the government — would keep control of the sales record, as has been the process for the last four decades.
So, the gun dealers keep the records and, if there is a crime committed, the police can inquire with them.
Schumer negotiated several changes to the initial Manchin-Toomey proposal, including striking language from the agreement allowing concealed permit holders to carry their weapons in other states, and limiting Internet sales to five guns per year. He also worked to make sure there is a 72-hour window for performing background checks except for gun-show sales, which will be cleared in 48 hours initially.
These are all good things that needed to happen long ago.
So, all commercial sales of guns without a background check will be considered a felony. If this law passes, it's going to prevent gun violence and make it harder for criminals and unstable people to acquire guns.
Tuesday, April 09, 2013
More Cypresses and Fewer Newtowns
Every time there's a shooting at a school or a college campus and 10
or 20 people die, the NRA tells us that the problem isn't guns, it's
crazy people. Or video games. Or mean moms. They'll trot out statistics that say that hammers kill more people than shotguns or rifles.
Of course, that's a total load of horse hockey, and here are the numbers they cite, for murders in 2011:
It is a statistic that is totally misleading. Guns kill 67% of all murder victims, and hammer-like objects kill only 3.9%.
Note that explosives killed only 12 people, yet we have far greater government oversight of the sale of dynamite and fertilizer than we do of guns. (That's due, in part, to that self-proclaimed patriot Timothy McVeigh, a man who sounded all the same notes the NRA is sounding today.)
Which brings us to the atrocity of the day. a kid in Cypress, Texas went nuts and stabbed people at a Texas community college Tuesday. At least 12 people are in the hospital, and two are still in critical condition.
So far, no one has died. But if this kid had had a gun, we know from long and bitter experience that there would be a much higher body count. Because guns are so much better at killing people than knives. Or hammers.
Better gun control laws will simply give us more Cypresses and fewer Newtowns.
No reasonable person thinks that proposed legislation for background checks, smaller magazine capacities and assault rifle bans will stop all killing. We're not saying no one can have guns. We're just trying to reduce the number of guns in the hands of nut jobs, terrorists and criminals, knowing that it will only reduce the carnage, not eliminate it altogether.
But that's still a worthwhile goal: we spend hundreds of billions of dollars a year on medical research, hospitals, fire departments, and police departments, trying to reduce the number of people who die, but knowing full well that we won't be able to save everyone. If background checks on all gun purchases will cut down the eight thousand gun deaths each year by one thousand or two thousand or three thousand, it's well worth it.
And it's not just the loss of life. Reduced carnage will also save billions of dollars each year in lost wages, hospital costs, orphans going on Social Security, funeral expenses, expensive death penalty trials, endless lawyers' fees on appeals, prison guard salaries, and so on.
In the Sixties and Seventies conservatives warned that losing Vietnam would mean total world domination by communism and the destruction of freedom. Conservatives are now warning that background checks on gun purchases will lead to a communist takeover of our government and the destruction of freedom.
The slippery slopes and domino theories about gun laws and freedom are just the conservatives crying wolf about Vietnam all over again. The same people who had a vested interest in continuing the carnage in southeast Asia (gun manufacturers and their NRA shills), have the same vested interest in continuing the carnage in our streets and schools today.
Of course, that's a total load of horse hockey, and here are the numbers they cite, for murders in 2011:
- Shotguns: 356
- Rifles: 323
- Handguns: 6,220
- Other guns: 1,684
- Knives: 1,694
- All forms of blunt objects, including hammers, golf clubs, tire irons, Academy Award trophies, pool cues, candle sticks, lead pipes and so on: 496
- Explosives: 12
- Total firearms: 8,583
- Total murders: 12,664
It is a statistic that is totally misleading. Guns kill 67% of all murder victims, and hammer-like objects kill only 3.9%.
Note that explosives killed only 12 people, yet we have far greater government oversight of the sale of dynamite and fertilizer than we do of guns. (That's due, in part, to that self-proclaimed patriot Timothy McVeigh, a man who sounded all the same notes the NRA is sounding today.)
Which brings us to the atrocity of the day. a kid in Cypress, Texas went nuts and stabbed people at a Texas community college Tuesday. At least 12 people are in the hospital, and two are still in critical condition.
So far, no one has died. But if this kid had had a gun, we know from long and bitter experience that there would be a much higher body count. Because guns are so much better at killing people than knives. Or hammers.
Better gun control laws will simply give us more Cypresses and fewer Newtowns.
No reasonable person thinks that proposed legislation for background checks, smaller magazine capacities and assault rifle bans will stop all killing. We're not saying no one can have guns. We're just trying to reduce the number of guns in the hands of nut jobs, terrorists and criminals, knowing that it will only reduce the carnage, not eliminate it altogether.
But that's still a worthwhile goal: we spend hundreds of billions of dollars a year on medical research, hospitals, fire departments, and police departments, trying to reduce the number of people who die, but knowing full well that we won't be able to save everyone. If background checks on all gun purchases will cut down the eight thousand gun deaths each year by one thousand or two thousand or three thousand, it's well worth it.
And it's not just the loss of life. Reduced carnage will also save billions of dollars each year in lost wages, hospital costs, orphans going on Social Security, funeral expenses, expensive death penalty trials, endless lawyers' fees on appeals, prison guard salaries, and so on.
In the Sixties and Seventies conservatives warned that losing Vietnam would mean total world domination by communism and the destruction of freedom. Conservatives are now warning that background checks on gun purchases will lead to a communist takeover of our government and the destruction of freedom.
The slippery slopes and domino theories about gun laws and freedom are just the conservatives crying wolf about Vietnam all over again. The same people who had a vested interest in continuing the carnage in southeast Asia (gun manufacturers and their NRA shills), have the same vested interest in continuing the carnage in our streets and schools today.
What Are You Going To Do?
For those of you who are against any changes in current gun laws, I'd urge you to pay close to attention to the woman who introduces the president in this video. Her name is Nicole Hockley and she is the mother of one of the victims of the Sandy Hook shooting.
Take a good look at her face as she introduces the president. This is a woman with very deep sadness that is going to be with her for the rest of her life. Do you really want to be the person that tells her that we can't change the gun laws in this country because of some paranoid fantasy you are having?
She is not going to stop. She will never give up. That's what mothers do who lose their children. It's what fathers do as well. They are not going to go away unless you compromise on background checks and gun trafficking. Worse, if there is another shooting and nothing significant has changed, the number of people that support families like the Hockelys will mushroom and stand to lose significantly more than what your ginned up fears created by paid clowns have created.
With this speech, it's also time to stop looking at the president as having some sort of secret agenda to disarm the country. That's a giant load of paranoid bullshit that is not going to happen. I realize this will likely fall on bubble ears but he's simply trying to prevent more criminals from acquiring guns. You, on the other hand, are doing the opposite.
So, it's time for your come to Jesus moment. What are you going to do?
Labels:
Gun Safety,
Gun Violence,
Obama's policies,
President Obama
The Future Looks Fantastic
Remember Zach Kopplin? Well, home boy just made the big time by being a guest on Bill Maher last Friday and he as fantastic. In fact, he reminded me of many of my ex-students who are now around his age. Zach Kopplin is a young man who gives me a great deal of hope for the future of this country and is a stellar example of how smart the young generation is today despite popular misconceptions.
Check out this clip which someone in the bubble put up on YouTube in the hopes that would expose Kopplin as an atheist but it ended up exposing (ahem) something else...
Check out this clip which someone in the bubble put up on YouTube in the hopes that would expose Kopplin as an atheist but it ended up exposing (ahem) something else...
Monday, April 08, 2013
It's About Time
Props to Governor Malloy for calling LaPierre exactly what he is: a clown that is paid by circus owners. Moreover, people like LaPierre and their supporters are loud bullies that only understand this type of language.
Being cordial is the same thing as appeasement which ends with all too predictable circumstances.
And That's the End of the Whole Ayn Rand Business...
Hands down, the best and most accurate summation of Ayn Rand I have ever seen.
Sunday, April 07, 2013
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)