It's official: flying on airplanes is now even worse than riding a bus. Human beings packed into the flying crates that pass for airliners may even be more uncomfortable than cattle packed into semitrailers on their way to the slaughterhouse.
In the last nine days three flights have had to make emergency landings because passengers are fighting over reclining seats. You might blame hot-headed passengers who are stuck in unbearable conditions. You might blame airline execs who cram more and more seats into less and less space to make an extra buck in an industry in which every airline is perpetually on the brink of bankruptcy. You might blame the federal government for allowing consolidation in an industry in which a few major airlines have a monopoly on major routes, or the FAA for allowing airlines to get away with collusion in ticket pricing, which they accomplish through temporary ticket price changes that other airlines watch for.
In one incident air marshals blew their covers to subdue and handcuff an unruly passenger.
But the real problem is the deregulation of the airline industry that occurred in 1978. This has led to numerous problems besides the wretched state of affairs in the coach cabin, including massive consolidation in the airline industry creating de facto monopoly routes; airlines bailing on their pension commitments and letting American taxpayers pick up the tab; rural areas that have lost service; airlines going to the Supreme Court to argue that lying about ticket prices is free speech.
Passengers are being squeezed in every direction: going through the airport security checks is a nightmare, and sitting in coach is like being stuck between two puling brats on a cross-country road trip.
The state of affairs in the air has become dangerous. Not because terrorists are going to take over the plane, but because the guy sitting behind you might haul off and slug you because you reclined your seat -- because the guy in front of you reclined his seat.
Of course, nothing will be done about this because the decision makers and the 1% are completely unaffected by the chaos in the skies: they are literally wined and dined in business class and first class. They get to skip airport security, board first, and miss out on all the indignities the plebes are made to suffer.
And the thing is, the airlines are intentionally inflicting misery on their passengers in order to squeeze more dollars from them. They claim they're just making everyone pay for the services they use, but this is nonsense. Charging for carry-on baggage should be classified as a crime against humanity. And they intentionally use the slowest boarding method possible, just to rub it in.
And the stupidest thing is, all these shenanigans have not made the airline industry any more profitable: they're always on the brink of bankruptcy.
The experiment in airline deregulation is clearly a failure. Exactly how much latitude they should be given is not clear, but a good first step would be a passenger bill of rights that specifies minimum services and personal space for all passengers, regardless of what class they're flying in.
It's either that, or withing 10 years we'll be reading about riots aboard airplanes, air marshals whose guns have been taken away and shootings at 30,000 feet.
Tuesday, September 02, 2014
Good (and a very many) words.
From a question on Quora wondering what the future is of the Republican party. I am reprinting the entire answer because I couldn't pick a favorite part, although I will highlight:)
It's starting to become a monotonous preamble, but I identify as a Jeffersonian Republican with a dash of Teddy Roosevelt. At this point, I'm not sure the party has a future, because the party is no longer Republican.
Ensuring that government is funded adequately to meet what we charge it to do? As Dick Cheney said, "Deficits don't matter." Enshrining fundamental rights? The Bush administration brought us indefinite detention, extraordinary rendition, and torture, and tossed aside habeus corpus. Responsible, considered foreign policy? Nope. Civil rights? Nope. Conservative ethics? Utterly gone. Pursuing scientific advancement? Not so much. Right to live your life as you like? Gone as well. Valuing education? Don't be silly. Separation of church and state? *&@# that, we don't need religious freedom! Value the Republic? No need for that, right?
In the end, the party has become something of a self-parody, steeped in hypocrisy and weirdness, and I'm sorry to say that most of it can be traced to the absorption of the Southern Democrats (who were pissed off at JFK's and LBJ's acceptance of the civil-rights baton from the Republicans who had been carrying it all those years) during the Nixon administration during the period of his "Southern Strategy." Certainly, the false piousness, the surge in racism, and the hysterical xenophobia started around that time, and has now virtually taken over the party—and I don't see it changing.
I'm not saying that the Republican party has always done well in this regard, either. Historically, we've had brilliant moments, and we've had appalling ones. Actual conservatives would admit to this, but those are scarce in the GOP now as well. McCarthyism was a black stain on the Republican Party's reputation that we will never be able to erase, but at this rate, we'll never overcome it, either.
The modern-day GOP cannot convince any person who puts rationale and logic before hysteria and panic, and so it has devolved into playing election shenanigans through voter intimidation, lies, and laws designed to block people from voting. This isn't a new tactic, but it used to be the Southern Democrats who did it a lot. Thanks, Nixon.
These aren't conservatives—they're theocratic, hypocritical, dystopic radicals who cannot compromise, think, or be productive. They have spent four years blocking this president's policies, so that they can point in his direction now and claim that his policies don't work. They lie, insult, smear and distort; they are full of bile and feces, and fling it indiscriminately.
There will always be people who delight in this sort of behavior, and so there may always be what this party has become. But if enough thoughtful people who know what Republicanism was meant to be, who understand the constitutional principles at stake, who would dare to shout down the hysterics and the liars, who would dare to be honest, who would dare to shame those who would sacrifice the Republic on the basis of some of the most bizarrely inaccurate interpretations of the Bible and the Constitution ever rendered in this country, finally come together with one voice, the party might be restored.
I wish I could see that happening. The GOP has become a threat to the Republic, and will be so until it comes to its senses. Perhaps another party will come along to replace it. Something will eventually happen, but I dread some of the forms that could take.
And all of this was written 2 years ago and it's still fucking happening!!
It's starting to become a monotonous preamble, but I identify as a Jeffersonian Republican with a dash of Teddy Roosevelt. At this point, I'm not sure the party has a future, because the party is no longer Republican.
Ensuring that government is funded adequately to meet what we charge it to do? As Dick Cheney said, "Deficits don't matter." Enshrining fundamental rights? The Bush administration brought us indefinite detention, extraordinary rendition, and torture, and tossed aside habeus corpus. Responsible, considered foreign policy? Nope. Civil rights? Nope. Conservative ethics? Utterly gone. Pursuing scientific advancement? Not so much. Right to live your life as you like? Gone as well. Valuing education? Don't be silly. Separation of church and state? *&@# that, we don't need religious freedom! Value the Republic? No need for that, right?
In the end, the party has become something of a self-parody, steeped in hypocrisy and weirdness, and I'm sorry to say that most of it can be traced to the absorption of the Southern Democrats (who were pissed off at JFK's and LBJ's acceptance of the civil-rights baton from the Republicans who had been carrying it all those years) during the Nixon administration during the period of his "Southern Strategy." Certainly, the false piousness, the surge in racism, and the hysterical xenophobia started around that time, and has now virtually taken over the party—and I don't see it changing.
I'm not saying that the Republican party has always done well in this regard, either. Historically, we've had brilliant moments, and we've had appalling ones. Actual conservatives would admit to this, but those are scarce in the GOP now as well. McCarthyism was a black stain on the Republican Party's reputation that we will never be able to erase, but at this rate, we'll never overcome it, either.
The modern-day GOP cannot convince any person who puts rationale and logic before hysteria and panic, and so it has devolved into playing election shenanigans through voter intimidation, lies, and laws designed to block people from voting. This isn't a new tactic, but it used to be the Southern Democrats who did it a lot. Thanks, Nixon.
These aren't conservatives—they're theocratic, hypocritical, dystopic radicals who cannot compromise, think, or be productive. They have spent four years blocking this president's policies, so that they can point in his direction now and claim that his policies don't work. They lie, insult, smear and distort; they are full of bile and feces, and fling it indiscriminately.
There will always be people who delight in this sort of behavior, and so there may always be what this party has become. But if enough thoughtful people who know what Republicanism was meant to be, who understand the constitutional principles at stake, who would dare to shout down the hysterics and the liars, who would dare to be honest, who would dare to shame those who would sacrifice the Republic on the basis of some of the most bizarrely inaccurate interpretations of the Bible and the Constitution ever rendered in this country, finally come together with one voice, the party might be restored.
I wish I could see that happening. The GOP has become a threat to the Republic, and will be so until it comes to its senses. Perhaps another party will come along to replace it. Something will eventually happen, but I dread some of the forms that could take.
And all of this was written 2 years ago and it's still fucking happening!!
Monday, September 01, 2014
Great Question!
Here is a great question from Quora with a whole pile of great answers! I can't pick my favorite because they are all that fucking good:)
Where Would They Cut?
So, conservatives whine about cutting the budget. Alright, where would they cut? And what would the ramifications for our economy be? I've also included total spending by all governments (state, local etc) in the second graphic.
Whose Bull Market Is It?
So, who exactly is benefiting from our amazing bull market? Christian Science Monitor has the answer and it's exactly who you would expect.
As the stock market rise enters its sixth year – now becoming one of the longest bull markets in US history – it is benefiting Americans unevenly. Coming as the rest of the economy has stagnated, the boom has bolstered the fortunes of wealthy investors like Kalayjian while many other people, like Collins, have garnered no rewards at all.
It's a great piece that details exactly what our economy is like these days.
Oh, and take a look at this graphic.
Where exactly is Obama's destruction of the stock market occurring?
As the stock market rise enters its sixth year – now becoming one of the longest bull markets in US history – it is benefiting Americans unevenly. Coming as the rest of the economy has stagnated, the boom has bolstered the fortunes of wealthy investors like Kalayjian while many other people, like Collins, have garnered no rewards at all.
It's a great piece that details exactly what our economy is like these days.
Oh, and take a look at this graphic.
Where exactly is Obama's destruction of the stock market occurring?
Sunday, August 31, 2014
Good Words
From a recent comment thread on Quora regarding certain characteristics of conservative commenters...
Don't waste your time on THIS Charles. He is nothing but a mess of diversions, misdirections, equivocations, and outright denial. All of these points have been made before, but make absolutely no difference upon his ability to consider the impact of usage, intentions, or anything else that doesn't fit his narrative. I expect to see a "I know you are, but what am I?" Or "I'm rubber, you're glue..." response to this from him.
Sounds most familiar:)
Don't waste your time on THIS Charles. He is nothing but a mess of diversions, misdirections, equivocations, and outright denial. All of these points have been made before, but make absolutely no difference upon his ability to consider the impact of usage, intentions, or anything else that doesn't fit his narrative. I expect to see a "I know you are, but what am I?" Or "I'm rubber, you're glue..." response to this from him.
Sounds most familiar:)
Saturday, August 30, 2014
Not Such A Budget Buster
It looks like the predictions of impending doom and economic disaster for Medicare were blown all out of proportion.
The changes are big. The difference between the current estimate for Medicare’s 2019 budget and the estimate for the 2019 budget four years ago is about $95 billion. That sum is greater than the government is expected to spend that year on unemployment insurance, welfare and Amtrak — combined. It’s equal to about one-fifth of the expected Pentagon budget in 2019. Widely discussed policy changes, like raising the estate tax, would generate just a tiny fraction of the budget savings relative to the recent changes in Medicare’s spending estimates.
Check out the graph they provide. Pretty cool.
So, why did this happen?
Even as more people are getting access to health insurance, the costs of caring for individual patients is growing at a super-slow rate. That means that health care, which has eaten into salary gains for years and driven up debt and bankruptcies, may be starting to stabilize as a share of national spending.
Also...
..some are because of cuts in health care spending passed by Congress. The Affordable Care Act, in particular, made significant reductions to Medicare’s spending on hospitals and private Medicare plans, to help subsidize insurance coverage for low- and middle-income Americans. The Budget Control Act, which Congress passed in 2011, also made some across-the-board cuts to Medicare spending.
Further...
...much of the recent reductions come from changes in behavior among doctors, nurses, hospitals and patients. Medicare beneficiaries are using fewer high-cost health care services than in the past — taking fewer brand-name drugs, for example, or spending less time in the hospital. The C.B.O.'s economists call these changes “technical changes,” and they dominate the downward revisions since 2010.
Well, there goes that talking point:)
The changes are big. The difference between the current estimate for Medicare’s 2019 budget and the estimate for the 2019 budget four years ago is about $95 billion. That sum is greater than the government is expected to spend that year on unemployment insurance, welfare and Amtrak — combined. It’s equal to about one-fifth of the expected Pentagon budget in 2019. Widely discussed policy changes, like raising the estate tax, would generate just a tiny fraction of the budget savings relative to the recent changes in Medicare’s spending estimates.
Check out the graph they provide. Pretty cool.
So, why did this happen?
Even as more people are getting access to health insurance, the costs of caring for individual patients is growing at a super-slow rate. That means that health care, which has eaten into salary gains for years and driven up debt and bankruptcies, may be starting to stabilize as a share of national spending.
Also...
..some are because of cuts in health care spending passed by Congress. The Affordable Care Act, in particular, made significant reductions to Medicare’s spending on hospitals and private Medicare plans, to help subsidize insurance coverage for low- and middle-income Americans. The Budget Control Act, which Congress passed in 2011, also made some across-the-board cuts to Medicare spending.
Further...
...much of the recent reductions come from changes in behavior among doctors, nurses, hospitals and patients. Medicare beneficiaries are using fewer high-cost health care services than in the past — taking fewer brand-name drugs, for example, or spending less time in the hospital. The C.B.O.'s economists call these changes “technical changes,” and they dominate the downward revisions since 2010.
Well, there goes that talking point:)
Friday, August 29, 2014
Thursday, August 28, 2014
Can't Resist Being Greedy Around Election time
Looks like Mitch McConnell had some fun at a recent Koch Brothers retreat.
They just tend to get so greedy, don't they?
They just tend to get so greedy, don't they?
Wednesday, August 27, 2014
Statistics that Lie and Statistics that Don't
The Washington Post is running an opinion piece by Joel Shults, a retired university police chief, who tries to minimize the shooting of Michael Brown in Ferguson with "facts." Here's an example of one of his "facts:"
The percentage of homicide victims by all types of gunshot in 2012 by firearms was 69%. The percentage of victims killed by all beatings (include pushing) was 5.3%. That is, firearms killed 13 times more people than beatings.
Why obscure these facts by claiming that more people died from beatings than assault rifles? Assault rifles aren't even called out as a category in the statistics, so the numbers cited don't even support Shults's claim (13.76% of the firearms used had no type stated, and could have been assault weapons, for example).
But there are other statistics that are more relevant to this story that Shults does not mention.
Ferguson has more than double the number of police warrants issued per capita than the next closest city in Missouri, more than 1,500 per 1,000 people in the town. That's more than five to 10 times the rate in most of Missouri. That means that the cops stop every resident in Ferguson one and a half times a year. Except we all know it isn't every resident, it's the young black male ones.
The mess in Ferguson started because this cop was hassling two black kids walking in the street. This constant harassment is what black men and boys have to put up with every day of their lives.
CNN has a side-by-side comparison of both sides' version of the events that led to Michael Brown's death. In the kids' version, the cop swore at them for walking in the street, almost ran them down with his car, slammed his car door into them, pulled his gun on them, then shot Michael Brown.
In the cop's version, Brown punched him, so the cop pulled his gun, then Brown tried to take the gun, so the cop shot him to prevent Brown getting the gun.
I think both sides are lying about what precipitated the shooting. The cop was needlessly hassling the kids, and the kids were stupidly sassy. It looks like the cop caused the whole thing by being a dick about two kids who didn't get out of his way fast enough. But we'll never find out for sure.
In any case, Shults's point about beating deaths is completely irrelevant in this context: the cop wasn't afraid of a beating. He claims he was afraid that Brown would take his gun. The very weapon that is supposed to "protect" him was the thing he was most afraid would kill him.
The warrant statistics make it clear that Ferguson's cops are targeting the black community with intimidation and force. The cop in question, Darren Wilson, started out on the police force of Jennings, a nearby town, which also had a majority white police force with very similar history of conflict with the majority black population:
Across the country police departments justify the sort of harassment the cops in Ferguson practice by saying that it keeps crime down: "broken windows" policing targets economically deprived neighborhoods, where the slightest infraction gets you arrested and thrown in jail. In cities like New York stop-and-frisk policies explicitly target black and Hispanic youth for drugs searches, even though whites use drugs at almost the same rate (blacks were 11% and whites were 9% in 2013).
But even that small 2% difference could easily be explained by other statistics: people with college educations use drugs at half the rate as high-school dropouts. Blacks in general are poorer, have less education, partly because they live in bad neighborhoods with crummier schools and have a much higher drop-out rate.
What the crowds in Ferguson are protesting is incessant police harassment of blacks that masquerades as "broken windows policing." The cops respond by saying they're just going where the crime is.
But if you buy that argument, then you should also buy the argument that the IRS should only audit rich white people who contribute millions of dollars to political campaigns because that's who's committing all the tax evasion and influence peddling.
No gun doesn’t mean no threat. FBI murder statistics consistently show that more people are beaten to death with hands and feet each year than are killed by assault rifles. In Missouri, nearly a third of the 386 murders that occurred in 2011 were committed without firearms. A person’s size doesn’t mean that they are aggressive, but one’s stature is clearly a factor in a fight.The highlighted sentence is a carefully crafted statistical lie, intended to make you think that beatings kill more people than guns. This is a common tactic with gun people: cite some number and imply that it applies to all guns. If you go to the very page of murder statistics that he references, you get the following numbers (removing all years but 2012 for brevity and computing percentages; other years have similar percentages):
The percentage of homicide victims by all types of gunshot in 2012 by firearms was 69%. The percentage of victims killed by all beatings (include pushing) was 5.3%. That is, firearms killed 13 times more people than beatings.
Why obscure these facts by claiming that more people died from beatings than assault rifles? Assault rifles aren't even called out as a category in the statistics, so the numbers cited don't even support Shults's claim (13.76% of the firearms used had no type stated, and could have been assault weapons, for example).
But there are other statistics that are more relevant to this story that Shults does not mention.
Ferguson has more than double the number of police warrants issued per capita than the next closest city in Missouri, more than 1,500 per 1,000 people in the town. That's more than five to 10 times the rate in most of Missouri. That means that the cops stop every resident in Ferguson one and a half times a year. Except we all know it isn't every resident, it's the young black male ones.
The mess in Ferguson started because this cop was hassling two black kids walking in the street. This constant harassment is what black men and boys have to put up with every day of their lives.
CNN has a side-by-side comparison of both sides' version of the events that led to Michael Brown's death. In the kids' version, the cop swore at them for walking in the street, almost ran them down with his car, slammed his car door into them, pulled his gun on them, then shot Michael Brown.
In the cop's version, Brown punched him, so the cop pulled his gun, then Brown tried to take the gun, so the cop shot him to prevent Brown getting the gun.
I think both sides are lying about what precipitated the shooting. The cop was needlessly hassling the kids, and the kids were stupidly sassy. It looks like the cop caused the whole thing by being a dick about two kids who didn't get out of his way fast enough. But we'll never find out for sure.
In any case, Shults's point about beating deaths is completely irrelevant in this context: the cop wasn't afraid of a beating. He claims he was afraid that Brown would take his gun. The very weapon that is supposed to "protect" him was the thing he was most afraid would kill him.
The warrant statistics make it clear that Ferguson's cops are targeting the black community with intimidation and force. The cop in question, Darren Wilson, started out on the police force of Jennings, a nearby town, which also had a majority white police force with very similar history of conflict with the majority black population:
Yet Officer Wilson’s formative experiences in policing came in a department that wrestled historically with issues of racial tension, mismanagement and turmoil. During Officer Wilson’s brief tenure, another officer was fired for a wrongful shooting, and a lieutenant was accused of stealing federal funds. In 2011, in the wake of federal and state investigations into the misuse of grant money, the department closed, and the city entered into a contract to be policed by the county. The department was found to have used grant money to pay overtime for D.W.I. checkpoints that never took place.That is, Wilson learned the ropes from a bunch of corrupt and racist cops who all got fired when the department got shut down by the city council.
Across the country police departments justify the sort of harassment the cops in Ferguson practice by saying that it keeps crime down: "broken windows" policing targets economically deprived neighborhoods, where the slightest infraction gets you arrested and thrown in jail. In cities like New York stop-and-frisk policies explicitly target black and Hispanic youth for drugs searches, even though whites use drugs at almost the same rate (blacks were 11% and whites were 9% in 2013).
But even that small 2% difference could easily be explained by other statistics: people with college educations use drugs at half the rate as high-school dropouts. Blacks in general are poorer, have less education, partly because they live in bad neighborhoods with crummier schools and have a much higher drop-out rate.
What the crowds in Ferguson are protesting is incessant police harassment of blacks that masquerades as "broken windows policing." The cops respond by saying they're just going where the crime is.
But if you buy that argument, then you should also buy the argument that the IRS should only audit rich white people who contribute millions of dollars to political campaigns because that's who's committing all the tax evasion and influence peddling.
The Batshit Ideology Claims Another Victim
I woke up this morning to this story and to say that I am outraged and thoroughly disgusted would be the understatement of the fucking millennium.
A 9-year-old girl at a shooting range outside Las Vegas accidentally killed an instructor on Monday morning when she lost control of the Uzi he was showing her how to use.
Here is the video...
A NINE YEAR OLD? ARE YOU FUCKING KIDDING ME!!!??
What was Charles Vacca thinking? What were her parents thinking? Well, they were thinking this...
The image above is from Mr. Vacca's Facebook page. Juxtaposing this with the Chris Kyle shooting, can we now recognize that these people are a danger to themselves and others?
Because of this FUCKING BATSHIT ideology, this little girl is going to have to live the rest of her life with this horror on her conscience. The responsibility for this incident lies completely with the Gun Cult. Fuck you, assholes!!! Your adolescent fever dreams are presently causing the dystopic future you are worried about.
Do you know what would be really great? Just leave. Get the fuck out of our country and go live in Somalia where there are plenty of guns and no government.
Because that's exactly where you fucking belong.
A 9-year-old girl at a shooting range outside Las Vegas accidentally killed an instructor on Monday morning when she lost control of the Uzi he was showing her how to use.
Here is the video...
A NINE YEAR OLD? ARE YOU FUCKING KIDDING ME!!!??
What was Charles Vacca thinking? What were her parents thinking? Well, they were thinking this...
The image above is from Mr. Vacca's Facebook page. Juxtaposing this with the Chris Kyle shooting, can we now recognize that these people are a danger to themselves and others?
Because of this FUCKING BATSHIT ideology, this little girl is going to have to live the rest of her life with this horror on her conscience. The responsibility for this incident lies completely with the Gun Cult. Fuck you, assholes!!! Your adolescent fever dreams are presently causing the dystopic future you are worried about.
Do you know what would be really great? Just leave. Get the fuck out of our country and go live in Somalia where there are plenty of guns and no government.
Because that's exactly where you fucking belong.
Tuesday, August 26, 2014
The 242 Dilemma
A recent question on Quora echoed what I have been writing about here for quite some time. How exactly do Republicans overcome the "242" dilemma? The solid blue states add up to 242 which means the Democrats are always 28 EVs away from winning the presidential election. What that means for 2016 is that even without a Hillary Clinton campaign, all the Democrats have to do is set up camp in Florida and Ohio and win ONE of them. They could send surrogates to Virginia, Colorado, Iowa, Nevada, New Mexico. and New Hampshire and erode the numbers for the GOP further.
For the past six presidential elections, the Democrats have won 370, 379, 266, 251, 365, and 332 votes. That's an average of 327 EVs. The Republicans have won 168, 159, 271, 286, 173, 206. That's an average of 210 electoral votes for the GOP. What lesson should conservatives learn from this math?
Time to change. You are a dying party.
For the past six presidential elections, the Democrats have won 370, 379, 266, 251, 365, and 332 votes. That's an average of 327 EVs. The Republicans have won 168, 159, 271, 286, 173, 206. That's an average of 210 electoral votes for the GOP. What lesson should conservatives learn from this math?
Time to change. You are a dying party.
Good Words
Quite a few to choose from Jonathan Kay's recent piece
There is a fine line between responsible gun-rights advocacy and America’s GOP-enabled Yosemite Sam gun-cult carnival — and I feel comfortable drawing that line around the diaper section of my local big-box store.
...for these Canadians, guns are tools, not objects of psycho-sexual religious veneration. There is no Canadian equivalent of Charlton Heston, who declared at the NRA’s 2000 annual meeting that “Sacred stuff resides in that wooden stock and blue steel, something that gives the most common man the most uncommon of freedoms … When ordinary hands can possess such an extraordinary instrument, that symbolizes the full measure of human dignity and liberty.”
To a Canadian shooter, a gun is something used to kill gophers. To his American equivalent of the Heston school, it’s a sort of giant wand for killing Voldemort.
No shit.
There is a fine line between responsible gun-rights advocacy and America’s GOP-enabled Yosemite Sam gun-cult carnival — and I feel comfortable drawing that line around the diaper section of my local big-box store.
...for these Canadians, guns are tools, not objects of psycho-sexual religious veneration. There is no Canadian equivalent of Charlton Heston, who declared at the NRA’s 2000 annual meeting that “Sacred stuff resides in that wooden stock and blue steel, something that gives the most common man the most uncommon of freedoms … When ordinary hands can possess such an extraordinary instrument, that symbolizes the full measure of human dignity and liberty.”
To a Canadian shooter, a gun is something used to kill gophers. To his American equivalent of the Heston school, it’s a sort of giant wand for killing Voldemort.
No shit.
Monday, August 25, 2014
Hey Criminals! Here's a Gun!!
Kill someone in Georgia lately? Molest a child there as well? Well, rest easy, friend. You can get your right back to own a gun!
William Alvin Bishop paid for his crime – aggravated child molestation – with nine years in prison. But when he got out, he still wasn’t free. Because he is on Georgia’s sex offender registry, Bishop must notify his local sheriff of any change of address, which then is posted online with his photograph. He cannot live or work within 1,000 feet of a school, a church, a day-care center – any place where, in the expansive language of the state’s sex offender law, “minors congregate.”
He may, however, own a gun.
Georgia’s Board of Pardons and Paroles restored Bishop’s constitutional right to bear arms in 2012 despite the serious nature of his crime and his documented threat of additional violence. He is among a growing number of violent offenders who have received pardons that restore gun rights in recent years – and one of the seven from the sex offender registry.
Ground stood!
Thank goodness that Bishop's right to own a gun was preserved because you never know when he might need it against the federal government.
William Alvin Bishop paid for his crime – aggravated child molestation – with nine years in prison. But when he got out, he still wasn’t free. Because he is on Georgia’s sex offender registry, Bishop must notify his local sheriff of any change of address, which then is posted online with his photograph. He cannot live or work within 1,000 feet of a school, a church, a day-care center – any place where, in the expansive language of the state’s sex offender law, “minors congregate.”
He may, however, own a gun.
Georgia’s Board of Pardons and Paroles restored Bishop’s constitutional right to bear arms in 2012 despite the serious nature of his crime and his documented threat of additional violence. He is among a growing number of violent offenders who have received pardons that restore gun rights in recent years – and one of the seven from the sex offender registry.
Ground stood!
Thank goodness that Bishop's right to own a gun was preserved because you never know when he might need it against the federal government.
Sunday, August 24, 2014
Good Words
I think it is far past time I put some quotes up here from conservatives...
"Conservatives define themselves in terms of what they oppose." - George Will
"A Conservative is a fellow who is standing athwart history yelling 'Stop!'." - William F. Buckley, Jr.
"A Conservative Government is an organized hypocrisy." - Benjamin Disraeli
"Conservatism discards Prescription, shrinks from Principle, disavows Progress; having rejected all respect for antiquity, it offers no redress for the present, and makes no preparation for the future." - Benjamin Disraeli
"Conservatives define themselves in terms of what they oppose." - George Will
"A Conservative is a fellow who is standing athwart history yelling 'Stop!'." - William F. Buckley, Jr.
"A Conservative Government is an organized hypocrisy." - Benjamin Disraeli
"Conservatism discards Prescription, shrinks from Principle, disavows Progress; having rejected all respect for antiquity, it offers no redress for the present, and makes no preparation for the future." - Benjamin Disraeli
Saturday, August 23, 2014
Blogging Comes Back To Haunt HIm
Check this out.
Ah, the sweet sound of a butterfly emerging from his bubble...I mean cocoon...sorry...
It's not like MN-01 was really in play anyway but I found this story amusing on a number of levels. First, there was this...
“On behalf of all red-blooded American men: THANK YOU SENATOR McCAIN, SARAH’S HOT!” he wrote.
How old is Jim Hagedorn? Because he sounds like he's (ahem) an adolescent.
There's also this...
In a 2002 “masterpiece analysis,”...
In a 2008 “masterpiece analysis,”...
Gee, this sounds awfully familiar. The egos on these people..I suppose that's what comes with massive insecurity and the stereotypical inferiority complex.
And I'm SURE that his remarks on gays, women, and American Indians were COMPLETELY satirical...
Ah, the sweet sound of a butterfly emerging from his bubble...I mean cocoon...sorry...
It's not like MN-01 was really in play anyway but I found this story amusing on a number of levels. First, there was this...
“On behalf of all red-blooded American men: THANK YOU SENATOR McCAIN, SARAH’S HOT!” he wrote.
How old is Jim Hagedorn? Because he sounds like he's (ahem) an adolescent.
There's also this...
In a 2002 “masterpiece analysis,”...
In a 2008 “masterpiece analysis,”...
Gee, this sounds awfully familiar. The egos on these people..I suppose that's what comes with massive insecurity and the stereotypical inferiority complex.
And I'm SURE that his remarks on gays, women, and American Indians were COMPLETELY satirical...
Friday, August 22, 2014
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)