Showing posts with label politics. Show all posts
Showing posts with label politics. Show all posts

FILM THIN: Hollywood's Top Power Women Aren't Yet Excited about Hillary Clinton

MIA: Hollywood's Power Women for Hillary - Hollywood Reporter

Says one female executive (anonymous):
"Every woman I know who hasn't given to her feels guilty about it," says the industry dealmaker. "We all want a woman to be president — some of us just wish it were someone else."

Lara Bergthold, a campaign strategist at a group called RALLY, says:
The "fear factor" of the Republican field will drive donations from the notoriously liberal-leaning Hollywood. She says it is hard to imagine a Republican presidential candidate more likely to ignite anxiety in Hollywood than Donald Trump or Ted Cruz. 
"The stakes are so high given the candidates on the other side," she says. "They're scary."
Not asked in the article: ARE YOU WAITING TILL THE OUTCOME OF FBI INVESTIGATION INTO HER MISUSE OF SECRET COMMUNICATIONS? Err, not even likely many of them are aware of the facts behind the email investigation, nor do they want to accept it. They're elitists just like Hillary. They probably still suspect Benghazi was actually due to a crappy video from a whack-job pastor. Or, they just don't care about such distractions since they have no direct or apparent impact on their lives.



 - jR, aka AirFarceOne (Twitter)

Flint Water Crisis -- Snyder a scapegoat for mass failures

Via Reason, on Flint MI water crisis:

This Flint Lead Poisoning: The Anatomy of Government Failure - Hit 
"A dissection of the events... suggests that it isn’t government austerity that  is responsible for the debacle but the government itself. And at every level: local, state, federal, elected officials, administrative agencies, you name it..."
and this The Flint Water Crisis Is the Result of a Stimulus Project Gone Wrong


 - jR, aka AirFarceOne (Twitter)

Dude, it's like genocide or something! Flint water crisis brings out the worst and best in celebrity dullards

Thank you, music industry, for allowing such an idiot to prosper. It proves what focusing on specialized skills can do for a person. Too bad this idiot – P Diddy Combs or whatever he's calling himself this year – thinks his entertainment skills make him worthy to stand at the podium of social commentary. And fling turds from it.

Flint Michigan – run by Democrats since 1973 or something – only switched their water source from a Detroit water system to a local river in 2014. Problems ensued. The CITY water system and everyone else involved were slow in reacting to BLATANTLY obvious water issues. Like, the water was coming out of the tap brown. Not even beige – BROWN!

But it is not local elected officials' stupidity to blame, it is not horrible local managers, or even a failed environmental bureaucracies. It's RACISM.

More than that – it is not the fault of anyone... EXCEPT for the Republican governor. Who should be arrested.

I don't want to make bold assumptions, but I suspect this tragedy is being  used as a political tool. By idiots. For idiots.

  


P Diddums isn't the first to make the disgusting water problem about fostering feckless, heartless, brainless political divisiveness against a governor who had nothing to do with the decision to change sources of Flint's water. Piddle Dee Dumdum also won't be the last. 

Thankfully, the rapper-actor-producer-jerk is using his $$$ for good in the Flint situation, even if he cannot use his brains for it. 

See Breitbart for more on the happier side of the story

--

J Ruse 


Like, Totally Political, Dude! 
The LTPD blog on Blogger
Follow on Twitter: @airfarceone

Good Muslim states would do better to learn from Israel rather than attack it

I am sick of seeing supposedly informed, aware, non-radical Muslims bitching about "Zionists" and the Western World. They even do so while living right here in the United States. These people seem to be nothing other than shills, or worse. 

One, a cleric named Omar Suleiman (search him), in Dallas, TX, posted comments about radicals and those who supported them. Yet, in other posts this same imam complains about "Zionists" but seems not to really have any opinion about democracy ever popping up in the rest of the Middle East. Yet, he lives in the United States. In TEXAS, no less! Check out his Facebook page (his official one --?!).
It's simple: nothing will change for the better in the contentious Middle East until the wealthy Middle Eastern countries start really fighting their own terror war. 
Muslim countries are overdue for "putting on their big boy pants," as we say in the States. I heard nothing of "hate crimes" provoked by the French satirical magazine, Charlie Hebdo, but Imam Suleiman recently suggested that there were plenty. I noticed that there was not a single Muslim theocratic state that doubled down on squashing radicals in their midst after Hebdo. (Perhaps I only forgot, though; maybe the Saudis took some out, or Bahrain bombed some. No, not really.) I do recall hearing of Western kids trying to escape to jihadist enclaves, however.

I'm sure there were some contentious moments for Muslims after Charlie Hebdo, and I truly regret any of that. But when good people let the voices of monsters overcome their own, guess what? Bad things happen to good people. Good people who are cowardly about their principles, as well as those who are willing to stand up for positive principles. 

Rational, clear-headed, non-Islamist people in Muslim countries, as well Muslims in places where they are minorities, need to go after these murdering monsters with every words and with military vigor. This is a war, and you seem to expect others to wage it for you, then complain about it. 

Please, Muslims countries, do not complain about "anti-Muslim" foreign policies of Western countries when it seems you expect the USA to go after these radical groups for you, by default. What I see from your states is effectively trying to ignore these murdering radicals (those who are not quietly cheering them) like the British tried to ignore Hitler in the 1930s. 

The "Muslim World" had 30 years to rid of the monster Saddam Hussein, but did you? No. You needed the US and allies (few Arab soldiers) to kick him out of Kuwait, and look at the thanks we got from most of the Muslim World as a result of that. Appreciation didn't seem to last very long. Find the appreciation upon Hussein's removal in 2003. I am not seeing it. Does anyone else? Only the Kurds seemed to appreciate it. 

The "Muslim World" could have rid of the Taliban, but did you? No. You could have stopped bin Laden, but did you? I find it difficult to believe that Pakistan wasn't hiding him, frankly, seeing as he was living a few miles from the major military training center of the country. Yet Muslims note the mistakes that the Western allies made in attacking Afghanistan and Iraq, when they were comparably few, by contrast to the shameful habits of Muslim countries in matters of brutal totalitarian dictatorships over many, many decades. 

Please, Muslims, for your good and the world's, quit your mere whining and go after these beasts yourselves. No more Talibans, no more bin Ladens, no more Husseins, no more ISIS. This is your internal problem, not ours, but you made it ours by your seeming inaction or weakness of will against this evil. 

I'm not simply watching today's news. I have read Middle Eastern history. I respect the realities of the Sykes-Picot Agreement and other imperial maneuvers by Western European countries after the end of the Ottoman Empire. The West -- namely France and Great Britain in the aforementioned case -- only helped mess it up. That was 100 years ago, though. More intervention was done. But Muslim states also colluded with Hitler during WW II. He was a Western leader, yeah, but he's no Western statesmen of good repute. They were not exactly ready to be their own states then. But oil changed that. But that's history. 

What now? Tiny Israel is to blame for all of the Middle East's troubles? Please, Muslim states and Palestinian apologists. Quit being cowards and racists, and rid of the beasts in your midst and enforce civility in the Palestinian non-states. So they can some day become states. 

We've seen recent actions by Gulf states fighting ISIS. It's about time. The Saudis and others should get their hands dirty, very dirty, and dedicate some of their treasure to destroying Muslim extremism. That, or quite whining about Western action in the region. You can't have it both ways. 

As for Arab states involvement against ISIS and all radical Islamists, it's not yet enough. Sure, we have some wacky televangelists and other Christians or just plain unaffiliated types who believe all Muslims are dangerous or at least divisive. They're wrong. But they have not bombed buildings for it in neighborhoods, like terrorists. If they did, they would be arrested or killed in a war with police (their choice, really), if they did. I fight a war of words against their war of words online. Even amongst my friends. 

Ignorance is everywhere. I'm certainly not free of it. But I am not blissful in it, not when it comes to extremism. Too many are blissful in the peace and quiet of their own home or cities or nations while others are dying at the hands of -- quite sane, but cruel -- murderers in the "the name of Islam." Muslims need to learn how to be effective activists, not against Israel, but against Muslim extremists. And yes, that is a very accurate term for it. 

When the "Western World" won't need to try and rid of the monsters in your midst, Muslim World, they will not have a reason to be in your lands. They will only be there to do business, or as tourists. 

Of late ( thanks to something called freedom of speech, which you don't seem to like all that much), we are less and less able to practice in overseas propaganda wars (as we did in South American countries in the 1960s-80s). Speech is more wide open than ever now, which makes it harder to low to smarter people. 

Meanwhile, some continue to quietly, or loosely, refer to us as the great Satan, just as your extremist friends do. It's simple: nothing will change for the better in the contentious Middle East until the wealthy Middle Eastern countries start really fighting their own terror war. You're kidding yourselves if you think you are. 

Those who know liberty are proud to defend the ideas of liberty, even for those who are too ignorant to know what it is. Oppressive leaders of one kind or another don't really give people much hope or insight into human freedom and liberty. But they do cultivate an attraction to leaders such as bin Laden. 

I recognize evil and good. I've had some unfortunate run-ins with them, in paradox. Forget utopia, either New Age or Muslim. It sounds great, but utopia is like heaven: it's not of this Earth. Wake up and face the real world, Muslims. Israel and Western cultures are not your enemy, your own radicals are. 


- jR, aka AirFarceOne (Twitter)
(Revised)

LEFTIST RACISTS: Herman Cain, America were violated by stereotyping

The lies about criminal behavior of HERMAN CAIN hurt him, and America, in 2011, in the 2012 election cycle. This educated guy, this business leader, this free thinker, this open book, this conservative American, is owed more than an apology (which has yet to be given) from the attention-craving Gloria Allred and the two lying women who made headlines claiming that Cain sexually harassed them (link: http://ow.ly/qF0QX).

Americans are owed better than this lowest of political tactics in the age of social media and in-the-moment news reporting. If leading Democrats had any lack of cynicism among them, they'd have discouraged the effect of these unfounded claims during the campaign. I know some pundits on either side were frustrated by this bad showing, but I heard not a leader among Democrats say a thing against it certainly not the first black in the White House.

This was, in a way, the tale of two black men: the Conservative Black Man and the Liberal Black Man. It allows a comparison of the behavior of media and the supposed spokespeople for black people -- Democrats and black "liberal" pundits. The way they treat Cain, and other non-leftist thinkers such as Ben Carson, Allen West, Thomas Sowell, Clarence Thomas, is not compatible with their pandering habits toward blacks and other "special label" groups (minorities of whatever kind) in general. Yet, they give extra room to Barack Obama and ninnies such as former New Orleans mayor Ray Nagin (with a federal indictment on corruption charges and soon to be in court for it) and former Detroit mayor Kwame Kilpatrick (convicted to 26 years for his office's bribery practices). Democrats and most of the mainstream media looked the other way in the midst of corruption by these last two fellows, until the story was essentially over.

Ruining the campaign of Herman Cain bolstered the left's authority and dominion over blacks in America. The great majority of our black community, it seems, were fine with it, too. Or, they simply didn't speak out against it. Too many are too happy to resent those who have known success to the extent of cheering even unreasonable attacks on the successful, black or not. Sadly, that's another thing that the rhetoric of the Democrats feeds.

Today's "liberals" (modern American leftists, really, sparsely liberals in any true sense) need some of those who are successful on their side, but can only win elections, as I see it, by pandering to the less-informed unsuccessful with promises of... ease without effort. The rhetoric of Barack Obama, especially during 2008 and since his presidency, have only made this cynical tactic of the Democrats more familiar. Not less. Not less, as Obama pledged the divisiveness would be. (He pledged a lot of things that proved to be nothing, didn't he?)

The minority pandering, low-information voter wholesaling, diversity rejecting (they accept diversity only on their terms, after all), status quo adoring, big government, control-addicted Democrats and their media pledges want to keep minority conservatives down, and that hurts America.

Their habit to passionately reject traditionalist, Constitutionalist, limited government, conservative thinkers, and especially those who think this way who are not old white men, hurt America's ability to get beyond the wrongs of racism and social and economic ruts that plague groups of people, black or not. Democrats claim to be the party of caring. Yet they have been proven to be the party of lies, spying, control, monetary abuse, budgetary disregard, growth in bureaucracy, and intolerance toward individualism.

Democrats and others of such thinking are, intentionally or not, pigeonholing people in certain special groups - race, sexuality, sex, regions, etc. - into easy stereotypes that suit them. In an official way. Everyone deserves the sense of liberty that America was founded upon. That's inconvenient for relativist leftists.

They are convinced it is their duty, as folks such as Barack Obama, Harry Reid, Al Sharpton, prove again and again, to be the spokespeople for these groups, to take from others and give to those groups, to coddle them for the sake of the great statist plan. That's not American. That's utopian. It's absurd. It's anti-American.

Black conservatives have for a long time felt they needed to be quiet because Borg-like neighbors who are long entrenched in the pandering, Democratic race machine would think they were betraying race for their affinity for traditional American ideals. So much misinformation about conservatism persists that it's as if being a conservative was equivalent to being a slave salesman in Africa in the 1700s.

Modern Democrats, this current, bureaucracy-loving, conceited, elitist leadership of theirs, seek a  wholesale plan to buy votes to take more and more liberties away from Americans in the name of helping everyone reach an equal playing field, with welfare politics, driving the poor to their side in a cynical effort to hold power by mob, rather than by principle or love of the citizen and the individual. They love the idea of the state being the leader of society in every way, it seems, not the servant of a free people.

People like Herman Cain certainly get in the way of that.

- jR, aka AirFarceOne (Twitter)

Obama's decision on Syria: just a pragmatic coward's choice?

It shows that Obama wanted the job of president really bad, but he didn't want the WHOLE job. Perhaps he should have hired a stand-in Commander in Chief?

I don't know who talked Obama into facing the Syrian chemical attacks like a leader, but they must be silver-tongued advisers who aren't the peacenik hippy-bred types like Obama and most of those surrounding him.

I cannot imagine he'd have even brought up this idea of a missile attack himself, seeing how painfully long it took him to make his "decision" to act. Such magnificent drama must be going on in that self-adoring head of his: cowardly, academic, hippy-raised, political animal that he is!

It's a rare sight to see him forced to put on "big boy pants" and make some tactical decisions as a leader of a country of great military importance and substance. That's why he should never have been made CiC, but we don't elect presidents to be leaders of our military anymore, do we? We've enjoyed a relative freedom from ominous threats in the U.S. since WW II -- no matter what you think of Sept, 11, 2001. And it seems, even despite any concerns over terrorists, the impact has been so indirect that we are electing overzealous camp counselors (or professional campaigners, if you prefer), rather than experienced leaders of substance. Or, so the election of Obama twice would suggest.

This Syrian decision, slow-roasted as it was, suggests something at a broader level. It shows what a comparatively spoiled, entitled, isolated, coddled, misinformed, blissfully ignorant population can do to muddle up, through elections, a very free country, despite having options otherwise. It appears that, in the U.S., the slight majority of active voters are mainly interested in yet even greater domestic comforts (read: petty, selfish interests) compared to the citizens of much of the world. Consider such delusions in the US as a "fairness" doctrine or the silly notion that safety can be guaranteed by "gun-free zones." People who uphold such ideas are not interested in choosing leaders who wish to deal with the planet as it is, which is a "law of the wild" place. This world can be cruelly hierarchical (far worse in other countries than in the US), ruled by a specific pack of elites, with many peoples without basic liberty, many governments of tyrants, nations packed with populations who have deeply broken and haggard lives. People who dream of even being among the poor in America are all over the world.

This Syrian chemical weapons attack response decision-making drama shows that we elected a president who is only a political animal, and who is a mere government bureaucrat at heart, and a coward (where leadership is concerned, not where campaigning is concerned). This Syrian response shows that Obama wanted the job of president really bad, but he didn't want the WHOLE job. Perhaps he should have hired a stand-in Commander in Chief?

We elected Obama twice to be Commander in Chief. But, not really, because the duty of CiC doesn't really matter to his voters, it seems. The Coddler in Chief is more their style, maybe. Whoever is the star of the news and gets on magazine covers matters. To hell with substance, right? Well, no, actually, but it is what's important to the uninformed problem children of society. It seems they are topping the voter rolls.

It is stunning to me how the majority of voters would prefer to choose the lying rhetoric that feeds their delusions about domestic bliss rather than taking ownership of themselves and letting this robust nation be the caretaker that fights the tyrants of the planet. What's worse, the domestic bliss Obama has been peddling isn't working out either, is it? Unemployment, race relations and other issues are not improving under him.

Don't let anyone give you killing bin Laden as an example of Obama's brass. He just signed the paper and then shamelessly used the epic military covert action for himself, politically, like any coward would use others' heroism to prop themselves up. Some were even impressed by Obama's swagger after bin Laden's death. Fellow cowards.

Obama will likely use the missile action against Syria the same way he used SEAL Team Six. He will use it the way someone unaccustomed to being a leader would use such an action: for political advantage.


- jR, aka AirFarceOne (Twitter)

While polls find King's 'Dream' is elusive, so are commonsense attitudes about racism

Check out this quote from a recent Pew Research finding on race in America (under the heading King's Dream Remains an Elusive Goal... ). I make a few points in reaction to it, and the circular problem of misusing racism in today's America: 
Incarceration. Black men were more than six times as likely as white men in 2010 to be incarcerated in federal and state prisons, and local jails, the last year complete data are available. That is an increase from 1960, when black men were five times as likely as whites to be incarcerated.

SIX TIMES as likely?! Some want to call that racism. They are FOOLS of the highest order. Or, sad, piteous, willing victims of narrow-minded suspicions.

The disparity of prison time for whites versus blacks is about as much to do with race bias as someone being overweight has to do with food being advertised on TV. Not to mock actual racism, but those blame, the victimhood, and the paranoia that surrounds so much allegations of racism. That is: one's weight is about them, not food ads.

With criminal incarceration, it is about people being criminals, not some grand scheme to "keep them down." Racism exists, light and hard, but to run to it every time there's a philosophical or physical scuffle is a cycle of failure. That's not to minimize the matter, when facts prove racism had a hand in some event, but unreasonable aspersions ought not to be batched in with actual racist activities. Paranoia and habitual distrust isn't a reliable source for social change.

Committing crime and going to prison is a problem that cannot be solved through blame, racial or otherwise, but through improving one's plight. That's not easy, or simple, when one is steeped in a culture of victimhood, self-pity, misleading heroes, and a habit of blaming others for your problems. Changing the response of those who cry victim when it's not the case is what will change such a disparity as this prison one, not crazed claims of rampant racism in the courts.

Such lashing out is a cycle of failure, whether it is about racism or any other suspicion of being wronged. There is an understandable lingering sense of betrayal, frustration and anger in impoverished or dysfunctional communities, but that does not prove systemic racism.

How can getting jailed for committing a crime be racist, certainly to such an overwhelming degree, without it being proven as more than a mere suspicion? These claims amount to claims of having seen Bigfoot, though. Sometimes there is racial problems, but often, it's something else. You cannot call someone a racist for jailing a black criminal -- unless they let white criminals go SIX TIMES for every black criminal, for the same crime. Is this happening? Where's the exposés on that today?

Are we to all damn our lying eyes with regard to race and racial biases, or racial hypocrisy? I hope we can recover MLK's dream, but it won't be easy while people insist on pointing the finger, like stabbing their sword at imaginary dragons.

Let freedom ring, indeed. And let REASON reign! 



- jR, aka AirFarceOne (Twitter)

Meld this: 'I am not a dictator'

barack-obama

President Obama(Photo: Charles Dharapak, AP)

The sequester is getting attention for sure, but two other comments by President Obama at a brief news conference Friday are likely to have a long shelf life.

First, the president announced he is not a dictator.

Then Obama disclosed he could not "mind meld" with Republicans to force a sequester deal, though it appears he mixed his science fiction metaphors.

"Most people agree I'm presenting a fair deal, " Obama said. "The fact that they (Republicans) don't take it means that I should, somehow, you know, do a Jedi mind meld with these folks and convince them to do what's right."

Alas, the Vulcan Mind Meld is the property of Star Trek's Mr. Spock (a character Obama has been compared to, oddly enough).

The Jedi, of Star Wars fame, used "mind tricks" to get people to do what they want, according to numerous science fiction geeks who flocked to Twitter after the president's remarks.

Even the White House got on the Star Wars joke, tweeting out a picture of the president and advocating his budget plan with the caption, "we must bring balance to the Force." The White House also gave a shout-out to Mr. Spock, saying: "To Deny The Facts Would Be Illogical."

Spock himself -- also known as actor Leonard Nimoy -- weighed in, more or less defending Obama by tweeting: "Only a Vulcan mind meld will help with this congress."

The Atlantic website reports that Obama "shatters his nerd credibility" -- which strikes us as a good thing.

The president had made the same point earlier when he told reporters he couldn't force the Republicans to agree to a new budget deal.

"I am not a dictator," Obama said. "I'm the president."

He added: "So, ultimately if Mitch McConnell or John Boehner say, 'we need to go to catch a plane,' I can't have Secret Service block the doorway. Right?"

Who says this: "I am not a dictator. I'm the president."

I mean, who WOULD say such a thing? Someone whose ego and self-love is mountainous, one who teases himself with the idea that he should be a dictator. A benevolent dictator. That'd be fine. With him. And, obviously, plenty of poorly informed citizens of the United States (not to mention all those fans overseas).

Obama has confirmed -- if you want to use that term rather than 'woefully explained' -- that he also is not an emperor. On multiple occasions.

I think it's clear to everyone that Obama WISHES he could avoid all this make-believe compromising he's doing. Changing the goal posts, pretending he's a centrist when he's a statist, pretending he's "post-political" when he's created more divisiveness with his words than any president I can recall since radio was invented.

- jR

Posted via email from Like, Totally Political Dude! - posterous

Cry dog! Florida's Rick Scott abused by Democrats and loony left over his return of rescue dog

I Google searched the madness over Reagan the, uhh, mistreated governor's dog today, about a month after (Jan. 16. 2013) the story apparently went wild (I didn't know). See the search here.

Stunning: The joyful hate and spastic outrage against Florida governor Rick Scott upon the revelation, by his admin., that his family gave back his first rescue dog because it was too nervous in the mansion. And, as a result, the big dog made people nervous. So, he returned the dog, it's said, and it may or may not live on a ranch.
Oh, yes... horrible man! Just horrible! Bad governor! Baaad! The poor doggie has to live on a ranch! Oh my Goooood!
That must seem so cruel, to leftist sheep who live around almost nothing but concrete and steel, in the city, I guess, making anyone or anything live on a ranch like, eww, like George W. Bush does. Ahh, city liberals. (Kidding. As if there's any rationalizing the response as anything but blind partisan sniping.)
Obviously, folks like the Daily Kos are leading the misleading: http://www.dailykos.com/story/2013/01/16/1179352/-Gov-Rick-Scott-Bad-Reagan-T...
Others are rational about the story, because reality-challenged leftists aren't completely ruling the news media yet. For instance, Politico, and doubtless many others. http://www.politico.com/story/2013/01/rick-scott-shelter-dog-reagan-86245.html
Miraculously, those who aren't unhinged at the brain stem wind up well below the Daily Kos links on the search engine. I wonder why that is?
I can see a new ad from some leftist operator of dog adoption operation:
"Must loved dogs. Must hate Rick Scott!"
- jR

Vacationer-in-chief: Obama will be getting lessons... on sport

It looks like Golf Digest has unearthed the big reason President Obama is spending President's Day weekend in Palm City, Fla.
He's getting golf lessons from one of the sport's top coaches.
Butch Harmon, who has worked with Tiger Woods, Phil Mickelson, and other golf stars, will school Obama, as will son Claude Harmon III.
Read the story: http://www.usatoday.com/story/theoval/2013/02/15/obama-butch-harmon-golf-scho...

I'm very glad that the president is trying to improve his skills. I just wish they were skills that mattered AT ALL.

When's he start his economics training with Ben Stein or somebody? As if.

- jR

Posted via email from Like, Totally Political Dude! - posterous

Guns vs. severe mental problems: Ideologies don't make people right, and guns don't make them killers

From "Gun Ban Won't Stop Another Sandy Hook Massacre: Let's Have the Hard Conversation":
Does anybody really think the guns Nancy Lanza kept in their Newtown, Conn., house all on their own attracted her son to launch a murderous rampage that claimed the lives of 20 small children and seven adults? Such simplistic nonsense.
What if the answers aren't that simple?
Consider that last year in Norway, a nation with a tight gun-control and licensing program, Anders Breivik methodically gunned down 69 people, mostly teenagers, on the island of Utoya. Again, this didn't happen in the United States of America, where 311 million people own an estimated 200 million guns. It happened in orderly, gun-sparse Norway, where living by the rules is the modern-day path to Valhalla.
What if gun control is the wrong conversation for us to be having?
What if we dealt instead with the harder-to-comprehend realities that affected Adam Lanza's life -- the fact that he lived virtually locked up in a basement room playing violent video games over and over, hypnotized by war. Or that he kept to himself, couldn't look others in the eye, reacted without emotion. Or that he had cut his father out of his life, refused to see him after his parents divorced, when his father began dating another woman. Or that he was consumed with anger because his mother was going to have him committed for treatment.
Instead of more gun control, shouldn't we be talking about where to set the bar when it comes to forcing an individual into treatment –- and whether those caring for people with mental-health issues have enough resources available to head off potential crises? The state of Connecticut didn't do much to help Nancy Lanza. It's a state that makes involuntary treatment difficult because it leans strongly toward supporting the civil liberties of individuals. Let's talk a little more about that.
In his address in Newtown [the Sunday after,] President Obama promised a grieving community "meaningful action ... regardless of the politics."But if enacting more restrictive gun laws is the action he has in mind, it leaves a mountain to climb in light of the Second Amendment and its principle. And more important than that, more gun laws aren't going to prevent another Sandy Hook massacre.
That is from "Gun Ban Won't Stop Another Sandy Hook Massacre: Let's Have the Hard Conversation," by Nancy Smith. See more at: http://www.sunshinestatenews.com/story/gun-ban-wont-stop-another-sandy-hook-m...? Reach Nancy Smith at nsmith@sunshinestatenews.com or at (850) 727-0859. via sunshinestatenews.com

The problem is not guns, while there are some things to be addressed where guns are concerned. There are too many guns too easily available to the dangerous, it could be argued. But worse are such things as loopholes in the ability to sell and buy guns between private individuals with pretty much no oversight or checking. That is unseemly, but also quite easy to fix (does not require a gun control act, for goodness sake).
No, the problem is not one that requires further gun legislation. We can see from such despicable efforts like the government's own Fast and Furious disaster that regulations are only so good as the people we have enforcing them. And fools who are encouraging such a route as Fast and Furious gunrunning program included the President of the United States. Shameful.
It's proof that he may be the victor in a popular vote, but is far from being a man above a most unattractive, elitist deception that guns are a threat, not sick or criminal people. The last thing elitists who desire power want are an armed population. No matter how comfortable and apathetic citizens are, we should not let anyone forget that tyranny is potentially never more than a generation away.
I don't want to be a part of the generation who lays the carpet out for tyranny here in America by moving farther toward a no-guns population. Stiff gun controls work in comparably powerless and rather homogenous and passive Sweden, Finland and elsewhere. It won't work for us.
The problem is, as Nancy Smith argues, and I've felt and argued for some time: some people are very, very broken, as Adam Lanza was, as best as can be seen, and cannot be allowed around guns. The problem, too, those who are too preoccupied to face those things that afflict broken people, including the current "false prophet" of the downtrodden, the President of the United States with his anti-gun rhetoric that completely avoids the issue of severe mental illness. In my view that is crass, cynical political gamesmanship and nothing about the rights or benefits of men. Until those with the second problem can be adult enough to address the first problem, this will be a discussion that will give me deep, deep dismay at the ignorance and shallowness of the many.

- jR
(revised for clarity, Oct 6, 2013)







DNC blind mice ask what confusion? What division? Villaigairosa: 'I didn't see confusion'

Media_httpiusatodayne_fokmb

Republicans and others are roasting Democrats over the platform, first for leaving out God and Jerusalem, then for restoring them during what appeared to be a chaotic scene on the convention floor. Many delegates in the half-empty hall booed the changes.

Said Villaraigosa: "I didn't see confusion."

And these are folks insisting that GOP practices repetitious lying to convince people of their unreality? Unreal!

Posted via email from Like, Totally Political Dude! - posterous

Rape is rape, except when it's done by a liberal artiste

CORDES

Updated at 3:30 p.m ET

(CBS News) Republican Rep. Todd Akin on Monday apologized for the controversial remarks he made over the weekend about abortion and rape, but he said he has no plans to drop out of the Missouri Senate race despite building pressure from within the GOP.

"What I said was ill-conceived, and it was wrong," Akin said on former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee's radio show Monday. "I really just want to apologize to those that I've hurt."

Akin's apology came as President Obama suggested the Republican's remarks illustrated the broad differences between Democrats and Republicans on issues like health care and reproductive rights.

"Rape is rape," Mr. Obama told reporters at the daily White House briefing Monday. "And the idea that we should be parsing and qualifying and slicing what types of rape we're talking about doesn't make sense to the American people and certainly doesn't make sense to me."

Mr. Obama added that Akin's remarks underscore "why we shouldn't have a bunch of politicians, a majority of whom are men, making health care decisions on behalf of women."

The president acknowledged that his GOP rival Mitt Romney and other Republicans have distanced themselves from Akin's statements. However, he said, "The underlying notion that we should be making decisions on behalf of women for their health care decisions, or qualifying 'forcible rape' versus 'non-forcible rape' -- those are broader issues....between me and the other party."

The controversy started after Akin, a six-term Missouri conservative now running against Democratic Sen. Claire McCaskill, was asked in a local interview on Sunday whether he would support abortions for women who have been raped.

"It seems to me first of all, from what I understand from doctors, that's really rare," Akin said in the interview. "If it's a legitimate rape, the female body has ways to try to shut that whole thing down," Akin said of a rape victim's chances of becoming pregnant.

Romney abortion view overrides Ryan in Akin response
Romney, Scott Brown rebuke Akin's rape comments
Mo. Rep. Todd Akin: Rape rarely leads to pregnancy

Romney called the remarks "inexcusable," while some Republican senators like Scott Brown of Massachusetts and Ron Johnson of Wisconsin called for him to drop out of the Senate race.

Some liberals tried to tie other Republicans to Akin's comments, noting that Romney's running mate, Rep. Paul Ryan, co-sponsored an abortion-related bill with Akin that would have limited federal funding for abortions to victims of forcible rape," rather than just rape. The FBI's definition of rape is known as "forcible rape," and it is used to distinguish between statutory rape and other kinds of rape.

Huckabee asked Akin whether he was talking about "forcible rape" when he used the term "legitimate rape."

"I was talking about forcible rape, and it was absolutely the wrong word," Akin said.

Akin said he understands that women can become pregnant from rape. "I didn't mean to imply that wasn't the case," he said. "That does happen."

While Akin acknowledged he made a "very, very serious error," he added that he's not dropping out of the Senate race.

"I don't know that I'm the only person in public office who suffered from foot-in-mouth disease," he said. "I feel just as strongly as ever that my background and ability will be a big asset in replacing Claire McCaskill... Just because someone makes a mistake doesn't make them useless."

Later in the day, Akin wrote on Twitter, "I am in this race to win. We need a conservative Senate." His Twitter message also included a link to his fundraising page.

As the Washington Post notes, the Republican Party can't force Akin to drop out of the race, but he could voluntarily resign by 5 p.m. Tuesday, or he could withdraw from the race by court order by Sept. 25.

In spite of Akin's insistence that he'll stay in the race, the pressure Monday continued to build against him. The National Republican Senatorial Committee (NRSC) told Akin Monday it would no longer financially support his Senate bid if he chose to stay in the race, a GOP source told CBS News.

Sen. John Cornyn of Texas, chairman of the NRSC, said in a public statement that Akin's comments were "wrong, offensive, and indefensible," though he stopped short of explicitly calling on him to exit the race.

"I recognize that this is a difficult time for him, but over the next twenty-four hours, Congressman Akin should carefully consider what is best for him, his family, the Republican Party, and the values that he cares about and has fought for throughout his career in public service," Cornyn said.

Meanwhile, the Karl Rove-backed super PAC American Crossroads confirmed to CBS News that it is pulling its ads from Missouri. "The act speaks for itself," Crossroads said to CBS regarding its decision to pull its ads.

The editors of the conservative magazine the National Review wrote Monday that it was time for Akin to step aside.

Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell also called Akin's comments "totally inexcusable."

"What he said is just flat wrong in addition to being wildly offensive to any victim of sexual abuse," McConnell said in a statement. "Although Representative Akin has apologized, I believe he should take time with his family to consider whether this statement will prevent him from effectively representing our party in this critical election."


Remember when that master of relevant social commentary, Whoopi Goldberg, said that what Roman Polanski did to a young teenager in the 1970s wasn't "rape rape"? I won't say she is as vital to anyone as this Akin dude, but, really, where was THIS sort of broad shock across the media then?!

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-57496599-503544/akin-apologizes-for-ra...

Posted via email from Like, Totally Political Dude! - posterous

Rape is rape, except when it's done by a liberal artiste

Media_httpiicomcomcnw_fqgsw

Remember when that master of relevant social commentary, Whoopi Goldberg, said that what Roman Polanski did to a young teenager in the 1970s wasn't "rape rape"? I won't say she is as vital to anyone as this Akin dude, but, really, where was THIS sort of broad shock across the media then?!

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-57496599-503544/akin-apologizes-for-ra...

Posted via email from Like, Totally Political Dude! - posterous

JIM CROW Laws and Hangings - Again!? Allen West threatens to reconsider his membership in Black Caucus

What is a perfect example of what is deeply wrong with American leadership? Indiana Democratic Rep. Andre Carson. He inspires irrational fear and hatred: that is one way to divide, and win elections. Not just any fear, but fear of violence and dark images from shameful times in history, to inspire hatred. 

The Congressional Black Caucus effectively agrees with "hanging from trees" comment about Tea Party movement, made by this shell of a man. Because the CBC wouldn't condemn Carson's very divisive comments, Florida Republican Allen West said he was considering getting out of that caucus. 

This guy Carson ought to be hanging himself, politically, but instead it appears he's allowed to inspire and fuel illegitimate hatred toward a grass roots movement that chiefly opposes big government since he's a liberal, a racial minority, and thus a favorite to the liberal MSM. 

Shame. Totally predictable, but a shame. The PC cowards in the mass media, from my viewing this morning, barely stepped near the outrageous part of this story: Carson's comparing Tea Partiers to Jim Crow law supporters who want to hang black men. And throughout the day this spite-stricken race-baiter didn't really get any serious sway online, outside of venues that were conservative. 

Don't think that this is just him running at the mouth about the GOP bringing back Jim Crow laws: it's filthy politicking that was used by the DNC's chair, Florida's Rep. Debbie Wasserman-Schultz, about a month ago. Something she never backed off of, that I saw. 

Welcome to the Democratic Party of the 21st Century. 
If you can't win with even the vaguest use of reason, then make your enemies out to be racists, bigots, simpletons, extremist religious zealots, or worse -- wanton killers (hangings, gun-toters, mobs, extremists, etc.). Make it easy on yourself, attack your foes without shame, don't permit them to come off as even human, if you can manage it. Because you're a liberal, the assumption is that you are open-minded, even though your words show something closer to spite, not for despicable actions, but merely those who disagree with you. There's a theme of that... you've seen it. 
What is wrong with American leadership? Indiana Democratic Rep. Andre Carson is the big example from recorded events that aired today. Who will it be tomorrow, or over the weekend? 

Enjoy, it's going to be happening all through the 2012 cycle. 

Try not to let it upset you much, just get you to be more determined to get the country to back away from this craziness. Don't get too uptight over it, because people are ruined by hatred and anger. A leader would inspire people to be concerned about issues, not fear a return to Jim F-ing Crowe laws. 

Let overbearing, spastic, fuming hatred be the failure of those who disagree with you, if they gave to be that way. Let hate sting the politicians who encourage the hot, blind dislike of people who simply hold differing views, don't let it be yours. 

You be the rational ones. And enjoy reducing their hate speech to buffoonery and exploitation of their fans. Hopefully, enough will step back from such mad-chattering jerks and lean more toward something that holds reason. 


CBC brushes Allen West’s threat to reconsider his membership aside 
HOT AIR » TOP PICKS | SEP. 1, 2011
http://pulse.me/s/1rRIC 

Too busy to bother. Read more

Posted via email from Like, Totally Political Dude! - posterous

The Economic Asteroid Plan

The federal government failed to sort out a budget again, many months after the supposed due date, which was OCTOBER 2010. Just a little late now that it is April.

To budget or not to budget, that is the problem, it seems. It is way beyond WHEN.

I am already good and tired of the scare tactics by the leftists. They gave the same emotion-based proclamations over ObamaCare. Not surprisingly, these are the same "leaders" who in recents decades have always insisted on adding more and more government, Now they are insisting it will all be paid for with magic pixie dust or something. To the very brink, these folks had also insisted there was nothing wrong with certain federal financial programs, such as the CRA that allowed loans to the unemployed, and Fannie and Freddie, which were the nonsensical housing debt twins by the time 2008's economic fall happened. 

I'd like to see a real reason, not some emotion-charged twaddle that explains why a tightened budget shouldn't happen. Not just some 5% haircut that hurts education and the poor, but broad pay cuts (to put public employees on par with private!), nonessential program slimmings, defense project trimmings, etc. Barring that, how about a good reason -- emotion and threat-free -- why a shutdown should not happen, from leftists. 

Maybe I have it wrong, perhaps it is better to continue pretending that government is not too large and it is paid for, that the majority of citizens and our futures aren't getting a raw deal by the feds, that poor habits and waste are virtually gone from government, that loopy politicians and interest groups are not bent on further betraying the basic concepts of the republic. 

Yeah, it will aaaaall be OK so long as we keep putting off the tough trim-down. The US seems to be no longer the Eagle, instead the 500-lb man who refuses to see his doctor for a checkup. (You gonna eat that?) How very American and exceptional it is to pretend necessary decisions away! 

We can always hope an asteroid hits the planet and that solves the economic problems for us. Party till the planets bursts! 

jR

Enhanced by Zemanta

GOP: Priebus steps into the spotlight (Politico)

(Now, hopefully his next step won't be a foot in his mouth)

Perhaps the man who had helped Steele take the chair of the conservative GOP in 2009 can serve as more of a guide and chairman, and less of a media target, as the exiting chair. For that to happen, it will also require certain media segments to act like professionals and not gossips, of course. But it will be up to Chairman Reince Priebus to opine with clarity all the time, not fire one-offs that miss the mark, as Steele had done. Several times.

POLITICO: The diminutive chairman of the Wisconsin GOP vanquished Steele to become national chairman.  
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0111/47644.html

"Priebus often jokes about the pronunciation of his Greek name. The name is Rhine with a hard 's' at the end and pree-bus. After winning a hard-fought contest, he still pronounced his name carefully for reporters at a hastily convened press conference....

Priebus's mother, Dimitra, said in an interview that her son started volunteering for Republican causes when he was 10 years old by putting signs in people's yards. His father, Roula, was once a union electrician and now works in real estate...."

- jR
Enhanced by Zemanta

Hamas vows to never be tolerant, essentially

Flag of Hamas with Shahada calligraphy.Hamas flag. Image via Wikipedia
Hamas leader vows his group will never recognize Israel.
Hamas leader Ismail Haniyeh, whose group runs the Gaza Strip, said the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) headed by Western-backed President Mahmoud Abbas had made a "historic mistake" by recognizing Israel.
"We said it five years ago and we say it now ... we will never, we will never, we will never recognize Israel," Haniyeh told the gathering which some organizers said was attended by around 250,000 people.
The article from Reuters explains that the Islamist extremist also "voiced confidence that Hamas, which defeated Abbas's long-dominant Fatah movement in a 2006 election and seized the Gaza Strip in 2007 from forces loyal to the Palestinian leader, would win any future ballot."
And why, again, is it that Israel is treated as the aggressor, again? Because they won against multitudes of enemies 43 years ago? Time to admit defeat and get to the dealing table. For rational Palestinians not devoted to death as a bargaining chip.

- jR
Enhanced by Zemanta

The 'Worst Person in the World' guy is put on hold - msnbc.com

MSNBC NYC HQ StudioMSNBC Studios - Image via Wikipedia
KEITH OLBERMANN is suspended, indefinitely, for making campaign donations made in the fall: http://bit.ly/bR4A3g
Olbermann acknowledged the donations in a statement to Politico, saying he gave the maximum legal donation of $2,400 to Arizona Reps. Raul Grijalva and Gabrielle Giffords and Kentucky Attorney General Jack Conway, who waged an unsuccessful campaign for the U.S. Senate against Tea Party standard-bearer Rand Paul.
Like most news organizations, NBC News, parent of msnbc TV, prohibits political contributions by its journalists without prior approval of the president. (Msnbc.com, a joint venture of NBC Universal and Microsoft, also has a policy against its journalists contributing to political campaigns.)

Ha! ... Ha ha! ...  Ahahahahahahahahahaaaaaa! 

Sorry, I'm still laughing at something I read earlier: I read that he is MSNBC's biggest (highest rated) star. Not sure if I'm more stunned by his continued status on MSNBC, or that the network suspended him despite that. I mean, it's not that he never has anything of note to say, but he's such a BABY! Who grew the nerves to act on this? I guess they had to, since Politico already published the facts.

I wonder if this is just a publicity stunt, in essence, and will be for a week? Or just a few days? 

I hope his hair can stand being out of the studio makeup (and hair) chair and fending for itself for a while.

- jR (AirFarceOne on Twitter)
Enhanced by Zemanta

Stewart-Colbert Rally Mixes Sober Message with Silly People - Newsmax (AP)

BAGHDAD, IRAQ, JUNE 7:  In this handout image ...Image by Getty Images via @daylife
The Rally to Restore Sanity and/or Fear was ... a success? Yeah, sure. Why not. Proved a lawn full of mostly liberal types can be rational. This is part of the AP article from Newsmax.com (look up title to the read complete article, they don't do links well, at least not for mobile devices).

Stewart-Colbert Rally Mixes Fun with Sober Message

Saturday, 30, October 2010 07:06:50

NEW YORK (AP)Jon Stewart was right. As promised, his rally was fun.

Then, at the end, he took a few moments for "some sincerity." For some viewers, those clearly heartfelt remarks on the innate goodness of Americans may have upstaged everything that went before.

Fun was about as specific as Stewart had gotten in the weeks leading up to the Rally to Restore Sanity and/or Fear, which he hosted and produced with fellow Comedy Central star Stephen Colbert.

Exactly what the rally would be, and what big names might show up for it, had been a guessing game for fans of "The Daily Show" and "The Colbert Report," as well as the media, for weeks beforehand — at least until Wednesday, when a few names leaked.

On Saturday, viewers of Comedy Central's live telecast — and online streaming — of the three-hour shindig saw a dandy music-and-comedy concert with an inarguable social message. It was staged on Washington's National Mall, with the U.S. Capitol as the glorious backdrop.

The overarching theme was to redeclare Americans' ability to get along and work together, regardless of their ideological differences. And to chastise the media and politicians for promoting polarization.

To put this message across comedically, the rally harnessed the familiar on-air personalities of Stewart, who, as anchor of the "Daily Show" satirical newscast, radiates bemused reasonableness, and Colbert, who inhabits a bloviating right-wing pundit on "The Colbert Report."

Their make-believe clashing in comic bits during the rally was exemplified when Colbert defended the value of unreasonable fear, as in the Garden of Eden.

"If Eve had just had a healthy phobia of snakes, she would not have eaten that apple and cursed us all with original sin," he blustered. "Then I'd be able to walk around naked everywhere."

"You're just creating bogeymen," Stewart protested.

"Bogeymen?" Colbert erupted in alarm. "Where?"

Later, Stewart introduced Yosef (once known as pop star Cat Stevens), who sang his gentle 1970s anti-war anthem, "Peace Train," until Colbert brought out Ozzy Osbourne, who ripped into his classic hit with lyrics including, "I'm going off the rails on a crazy train."

These dueling songs led to a standoff, which was settled when the O'Jays arrived to perform "Love Train."

Other musical guests included the Roots, John Legend, Kid Rock, Sheryl Crow, Jeff Tweedy, Mavis Staples and Tony Bennett, who sang "America the Beautiful."

But the proceedings never strayed too far from funny business, however pointed.

Addressing a crowd in the tens of thousands, Stewart reminded them: "It doesn't matter what we say or do here today. It matters what is reported about what we said or did here today."

Demonstrating how the media could slant a given event in wildly different ways, he let two of his "Daily Show" correspondents take a whack.

... Stewart took time for some closing remarks and, playing it serious, attempted to explain the rally's purpose — in his mind, at least. ...

Americans, he said, do "impossible things every day that are only made possible through the little, reasonable compromises we all make."

But these are compromises the current crop of politicians are unwilling to make and the media are unwilling to recognize.

"The image of Americans that is reflected back to us by our political and media process is false. It is us through a fun house mirror," he said.

Americans work together to get things done every day, he said.

"The only place we don't is here," he said, pointing behind him at the Capitol building, "or on cable TV."

As a stirring pep talk and reality check, Stewart's remarks were the sanest moments on TV in memory — and the surprise many viewers were seeking from the rally.

Comedy Central is owned by Viacom.

Online: http://www.rallytorestoresanityandorfear.com

EDITOR'S NOTE — Frazier Moore is a national television columnist for The Associated Press. He can be reached at fmoore(at)ap.org

Newsmax Home

Points go to the dueling fakes for being sane, though typically more harsh on the right than against the left. The rally was less crass, from what I have read, than the sloppy words and piles of signs from OneNation. The inherent theme was, as the shows' overtones also convey, that modern liberalism maintains the majority and 'sane' view, since that is where the two comics' views sit, clearly. But it was less crass than many town halls and rallies and political campaign speeches within the last three years.


- jR (AirFarceOne on Twitter)
Enhanced by Zemanta