Category Archives: Politics
Update: Oh, look here; it appears someone took this thought straight to the White House.
I mean, really. If the best way to keep vulnerable children safe at school is to designate schools as gun-free zones, shouldn’t the First Family live in a gun-free bubble?
Oh, I know that John Doe can’t carry a firearm into the White House, but what about all those Secret Service agents milling about the place? They have guns! And what about those Marines? Do you suppose they’ve checked their weapons at the door? I think not! It’s a scandal, really, how cavalier we are with the First Family’s safety!
Does that sound silly to you? I certainly hope so, yet that is the favored strategy of the American Liberal for protecting the nation’s school children…unless they are lucky enough to attend school with Sasha and Malia Obama.
Before [Sasha and Malia] go to their first day in their new school, the Secret Service will run background checks on the school’s staff and maybe some of the students and their families. Agents will accompany the girls to and from school every day. They may, depending on space, set up a small command center inside the building. If not, they’ll set one up outside. They may tap into the school’s closed-circuit camera system if there is one.
How many agents will be assigned to the girls? “The appropriate number to get the job done,” according to my still secretive friend, Agent Alswang.
If gun-free zones are so safe, why all the fuss?
What about the President himself? Yes, he’s the most powerful man in the world and surely, very, very important, but is he more precious to us as a people than our children? (Note: If your answer is yes, please reassess your priorities.) I can say without hesitation, I would rather see a President dead – no matter who is sitting in the White House – than 20 six and seven-year-olds. At least those who choose to run for President know what they’re getting into.
My point here isn’t to say that the First Family needs less security; I’m saying that our nation’s schools need more. People who object to well-screened, well-trained, armed school personnel because they don’t want their children exposed to guns are living in a fantasy world where guns are malevolent beings in their own right and a gun-free zone sign extends magical protection to all who enter those hallowed halls.
If the events that unfolded in Newtown, Connecticut, last Friday haven’t disabused those magical thinkers of the idea that gun-free zones are anything other than killing zones, then nothing will; they should be ignored as unserious on this issue.
Doesn’t our nation’s most precious resource, our children, deserve the best protection we can provide? If so, arming school personnel should be considered as one part of the answer.
Ignorant, redneck teabaggers, don’t you just love to make fun of them? Of how stupid they are. How they never have an original thought. The way they believe everything that Rush Limbaugh and Fox News tell them, and then just parrot it back? They don’t even know what they’re saying! One look at their slack jaws and vacant stares tells you everything you need to know.
If it’s true that Tea Partiers are stupid, then liberals have redefined “stupid” to mean “able to correctly answer basic questions about current events.” Pew Research asked 1,101 adults three simple questions about the fiscal cliff and found that only 23% answered all three questions correctly, while 45% answered one or none correctly.
Republicans fared better than Democrats and independents, but their results were still lackluster.
Republicans are more knowledgeable about the fiscal cliff than either Democrats or independents. Yet even among Republicans, only 30% got all three questions correct and 37% missed at least two. Among Democrats and independents, 19% and 22%, respectively, could answer all three questions correctly. Nearly half of Democrats (47%) and 44% of independents missed at least two items.
There was one ray of hope, however.
However, one group of Republicans stands out as particularly aware of the details of the fiscal cliff standoff: Tea Party supporters. Among Republicans and Republican-leaning independents who agree with the Tea Party, 48% correctly answered all three questions, and another 34% got two out of three correct. Republicans who disagree with the Tea Party or have no opinion about it score no higher than the national average on the subject of the fiscal cliff.
Maybe – just maybe – more people should be watching Fox and listening to Rush. So everyone can be as stupid as a teabagger.
The American Left tosses the charge of racism around with abandon, so much so that they’ve cheapened the word to the point that it’s virtually meaningless; anything and everything that opposes any prominent liberal African-American person, but especially President Barack Obama, is subject to the accusation. (Liberal is key, here; conservative African-Americans will be ruthlessly and savagely attacked by the Left.)
The latest wave of baseless racism charges comes with speculation that U.N. Ambassador Susan Rice may be nominated to serve as Secretary of State during President Obama’s second term. Rep. James Clyburn (D-SC) has accused Senator John McCain of using a code word (we’ve discussed code words here before) by calling Ambassador Rice “incompetent” while questioning her qualifications to serve as Secretary of State. Rep. Clyburn apparently feels that the Ambassador’s recent and rather infamous appearances on no less than five Sunday morning news programs to promulgate the lie that the deaths of four Americans in Benghazi, Libya, were the result of a crass, anti-Islam YouTube video isn’t grounds for criticism…when even an amoeba could see it was a terrorist attack, coming, as it did, on the anniversary of the September 11th.
Robert Turner sums it up nicely.
Now we have a member of the House Democrat
icleadership saying words such as “incompetent” are code words for racism. Give me a [expletive deleted] break! In the case of U.N. Ambassador Susan Rice, the use of the term incompetent is code for lacking the qualities needed for effective action.
David Duke is a racist. There are many things you can call Senator John McCain, but that ain’t one of them.
Racism is an ugly thing; it has no place in a civil society, but voicing legitimate concerns isn’t racism; in fact, it is the opposite of racism in that it assumes that the recipient of the criticism is an individual capable of improving her performance rather than an otherwise featureless representative of her racial group in need of coddling and special protections in order to succeed.
Getting back to Rep. Clyburn’s claim that John McCain’s criticisms are based on racism…well, false charges of racism are ugly, too. Nothing in John McCain’s record would lead a reasonable person to believe he harbors any racist tendencies whatsoever. Rep. Clyburn knows this, but crassly makes the false charge. He demeans the experience of other African-Americans who have experienced real racism and dishonors the accomplishments of the Civil Rights era. Why? Because what he really wants to say sound so childish: “Shut up, Senator McCain! Shutupshutupshutupshutup!”
No one is more committed to logic and reason than the American Liberal. Take the debate about guns, for example. Who could possibly refute these extremely logical points?
- Banning guns works, which is why New York, DC, & Chicago cops need guns.
- Washington DC’s low murder rate of 69 per 100,000 is due to strict gun control, and Indianapolis’ high murder rate of 9 per 100,000 is due to the lack of gun control.
- Statistics showing high murder rates justify gun control but statistics showing increasing murder rates after gun control are “just statistics.”
- The Brady Bill and the Assault Weapons Ban, both of which went into effect in 1994 are responsible for the decrease in violent crime rates, which have been declining since 1991.
- We must get rid of guns because a deranged lunatic may go on a shooting spree at any time and anyone who would own a gun out of fear of such a lunatic is paranoid.
- The more helpless you are the safer you are from criminals.
- An intruder will be incapacitated by tear gas or oven spray, but if shot with a .357 Magnum will get angry and kill you.
- A woman raped and strangled is morally superior to a woman with a smoking gun and a dead rapist at her feet.
- When confronted by violent criminals, you should “put up no defense – give them what they want, or run” (Handgun Control Inc. Chairman Pete Shields, Guns Don’t Die – People Do, 1981, p. 125).
- The New England Journal of Medicine is filled with expert advice about guns; just like Guns & Ammo has some excellent treatises on heart surgery.
- One should consult an automotive engineer for safer seat belts, a civil engineer for a better bridge, a surgeon for internal medicine, a computer programmer for hard drive problems, and Sarah Brady for firearms expertise.
- The 2nd Amendment, ratified in 1787, refers to the National Guard, which was created 130 years later, in 1917.
- The National Guard, federally funded, with bases on federal land, using federally-owned weapons, vehicles, buildings and uniforms, punishing trespassers under federal law, is a “state” militia.
- These phrases: “right of the people peaceably to assemble,” “right of the people to be secure in their homes,” “enumerations herein of certain rights shall not be construed to disparage others retained by the people,” and “The powers not delegated herein are reserved to the states respectively, and to the people” all refer to individuals, but “the right of the people to keep and bear arms” refers to the state.
- “The Constitution is strong and will never change.” But we should ban and seize all guns thereby violating the 2nd, 4th, and 5th Amendments to that Constitution.
- Rifles and handguns aren’t necessary to national defense! Of course, the army has hundreds of thousands of them.
- Private citizens shouldn’t have handguns, because they aren’t “military weapons”, but private citizens shouldn’t have “assault rifles”, because they are military weapons.
- In spite of waiting periods, background checks, fingerprinting, government forms, etc., guns today are too readily available, which is responsible for recent school shootings. In the 1940′s, 1950′s and 1960′s, anyone could buy guns at hardware stores, army surplus stores, gas stations, variety stores, Sears mail order, no waiting, no background check, no fingerprints, no government forms and there were no school shootings.
- The NRA’s attempt to run a “don’t touch” campaign about kids handling guns is propaganda, but the anti-gun lobby’s attempt to run a “don’t touch” campaign is responsible social activity.
- Guns are so complex that special training is necessary to use them properly, and so simple to use that they make murder easy.
- A handgun, with up to 4 controls, is far too complex for the typical adult to learn to use, as opposed to an automobile that only has 20.
- Women are just as intelligent and capable as men but a woman with a gun is “an accident waiting to happen” and gun makers’ advertisements aimed at women are “preying on their fears.”
- Ordinary people in the presence of guns turn into slaughtering butchers but revert to normal when the weapon is removed.
- Guns cause violence, which is why there are so many mass killings at gun shows.
- A majority of the population supports gun control, just like a majority of the population supported owning slaves.
- Any self-loading small arm can legitimately be considered to be a “weapon of mass destruction” or an “assault weapon.”
- Most people can’t be trusted, so we should have laws against guns, which most people will abide by because they can be trusted.
- The right of Internet pornographers to exist cannot be questioned because it is constitutionally protected by the Bill of Rights, but the use of handguns for self-defense is not really protected by the Bill of Rights.
- Free speech entitles one to own newspapers, transmitters, computers, and typewriters, but self- defense only justifies bare hands.
- The ACLU is good because it uncompromisingly defends certain parts of the Constitution, and the NRA is bad, because it defends other parts of the Constitution.
- Charlton Heston, a movie actor as president of the NRA was a cheap lunatic who should be ignored, but Michael Douglas, a movie actor as a representative of Handgun Control, Inc. is an ambassador for peace who is entitled to an audience at the UN arms control summit.
- Police operate with backup within groups, which is why they need larger capacity pistol magazines than do “civilians” who must face criminals alone and therefore need less ammunition.
- We should ban “Saturday Night Specials” and other inexpensive guns because it’s not fair that poor people have access to guns too.
- Police officers have some special Jedi-like mastery over handguns that private citizens can never hope to obtain.
- Private citizens don’t need a gun for self- protection because the police are there to protect them even though the Supreme Court says the police are not responsible for their protection.
- Citizens don’t need to carry a gun for personal protection but police chiefs, who are desk-bound administrators who work in a building filled with cops, need a gun.
- “Assault weapons” have no purpose other than to kill large numbers of people. The police need assault weapons. You do not.
- When Microsoft pressures its distributors to give Microsoft preferential promotion, that’s bad; but when the Federal government pressures cities to buy guns only from Smith & Wesson, that’s good.
- Trigger locks do not interfere with the ability to use a gun for defensive purposes, which is why you see police officers with one on their duty weapon.
- Handgun Control, Inc., says they want to “keep guns out of the wrong hands.” Guess what? You have the wrong hands.
I’d love to credit the author of this list but it’s been kicking around the internet, I’ve been told, for at least a decade, it’s hard to say who that may have been. Likewise, I haven’t checked the current accuracy of any of the factual statements.
As opposed to, you know, the spoiled brats who want their poor choices subsidized by people they scorn.
Jay Carney claims he never lies in his capacity as Press Secretary to the Obama Administration.
Pants on fire, I say!
I’ve already pointed out how very unlikely it is that Carney knows, as he claimed, three women named Hilary Rosen. You can check out many more examples of Carney’s questionable brand of truthfulness here.
This is such an incredible coincidence, I just have to share! I heard that Jay Carney claims to know three (3!!!) separate women named Hilary Rosen.
Imagine that! Out of the 40 or so women in the U.S. who share that name, he knows three (3!!!) of them. Think about it…there are almost 13,000 women in the U.S. named Jennifer Smith and I don’t know a single one, but Jay Carney knows three (3!!!) women named Hilary Rosen. How. Freaky. Is. That.
Allahpundit thinks Jay is lying, but that can’t be right, can it? I mean, I trust Jay to keep me up-to-date on all the breaking news from the Obama Administration. He would never lie to me, right?
(Sadly, it’s come to my attention that not everyone shares my high opinion of Jay. I’m crushed.)