Apologies

Been out of pocket for a while, and haven’t really been in the mood to blog. So much has been going on, that I wasn’t sure how to even begin commenting on things. I keep wondering what the hell is happening to this country, then I want to blog about it, then I really just want to go out and choke the shit out of the first person I see, and then I just curl up in bed and watch SVU reruns.

Don’t judge me. That’s how I deal.

So I figured I’d catch you up on my views about what is going on lately.

1.  Benghazi: there’s not too much I can say about it, frankly. There have been lies told. There have been witnesses intimidated. The now infamous talking points were redacted to such a degree, that they said nothing at all. No mention of attacks. No mention of threats. No mention of al Q’aida. Nothing. Why is this important? Because four Americans died. Because they died even as this administration claimed Libya was all fabulous thanks to our involvement and the removal of Qaddafi. Security wasn’t what it should have been, apparently, given the threat level. Why? Maybe because the party line about having defeated al Q’aida and about how useful and good our involvement in Libya was was threatened by actual events. Yes, a lot more Americans die in Chicago on any given day, but you know what? It’s important. The truth always is.

2 . IRS targeting specific groups. This is so reprehensible, I don’t even know how to begin to address it. This is not the first time, and it’s not new. But this is the first time the IRS actually admitted it. Publicly. Brazenly. Also, I can’t help but think that at no time did the IRS have more technology and power than it does now. Targeting groups opposed to the government? This is exactly what the First Amendment is supposed to protect against – the right to speak out against the government. They’re in violation. Deep violation. Someone needs to be held accountable, and Eric Holder is not impartial or competent enough to do it.

3. Government’s grabbing phone records of the Associated Press. Not only does this administration have absolutely no respect for the Second Amendment, it’s now apparently going after the First – not just in its use of the IRS to target groups who oppose the government, but also in this unprecedented intrusion. From what I hear Holder is claiming this was a matter of national security, which is the catch-all phrase petty, pathetic tyrants use when they try to destroy your rights. And then he recused himself, claiming he knew nothing about it. So which was it? According to Justice Department regulations, subpoenas of this kind have to be signed by the Attorney General. Why did this not happen?

It is quite obvious that this administration has absolutely no respect for the Law of the Land, and no respect for individual rights. Again and again we see efforts to destroy the Second Amendment, as well as infringements on the First Amendment and continued lies to the American people.

I’m sick of it.

Aren’t you?

Gun Crime Down; Americans Ignorant

Well, apparently despite the expiration of the “assault” weapons ban in 2004 and a number of states passing concealed carry laws, the hoplophobes’ predictions of blood in the streets have fallen flat. Crimes committed with firearms have plunged, including murders, assaults and robberies.

In less than two decades, the gun murder rate has been nearly cut in half. Other gun crimes fell even more sharply, paralleling a broader drop in violent crimes committed with or without guns. Violent crime dropped steeply during the 1990s and has fallen less dramatically since the turn of the millennium.

This is great news, not that anyone would know it, because Americans still think that we’re in the midst of an epidemic of violence!

A newly-released survey by the Pew Research Center reveals that more than half of Americans believe that gun crimes are on the increase.

Now why would that be?

The LA Times article I cited above says it’s not clear whether the media shapes these perceptions, but I think their own article is telling.

The number of gun killings dropped 39% between 1993 and 2011, the Bureau of Justice Statistics reported in a separate report released Tuesday. Gun crimes that weren’t fatal fell by 69%. However, guns still remain the most common murder weapon in the United States, the report noted. Between 1993 and 2011, more than two out of three murders in the U.S. were carried out with guns, the Bureau of Justice Statistics found. [emphasis mine]

This type of focus on firearms and the media’s insistence on sensationalizing every shooting, while studiously ignoring instances of self defense is instructive.

When I Google “Sandy Hook shooting,” I get nearly 38 million results.

However, when I search for this story about a gas station manager recently defending himself against two armed suspects, I get…

Two relevant stories.

When I search for “Aurora Colorado Shooting,” I get 3.15 million Google hits.

When I try to search for news about Philly homeowner Lee Heng, who defended his children from two home invaders last month, I get…

2,400 stories.

As a journalist, you know the “If it bleeds, it leads” meme pretty well. Obviously, these two stories weren’t dramatic. They weren’t exciting. There was no drama. There was no blood. And no one knows how many lives were saved by putting an end to the armed thugs. Many instances of self defense go unreported, because ultimately, the gun isn’t brandished, and no crime is committed.

Self defense generally doesn’t bleed, so it won’t lead.

But the mainstream media will certainly take sensationalism to new lows with headlines such as this one in USA Today a few weeks ago – Epidemic: Guns kill twice as many kids as cancer does!

Nationally, guns still kill twice as many children and young people than cancer, five times as many than heart disease and 15 times more than infection, according to the New England Journal of Medicine.

“We see guns as much of a threat in their life as we used to see bacteria and viruses,” said Dr. Judith S. Palfrey, a past president of the American Academy of Pediatrics and the co-author of the New England journal report. “If you look at what’s actually killing children and disabling children, guns is one of the major things.”

Accidental firearms injuries have been on the decline nationwide. In 2001, 5,091 children ages 19 and under were injured by a firearm. Those numbers steadily decreased through 2009, when 3,587 children under 19 were reported injured by a firearm, according to the defense fund.

Interesting statistics from the American Academy of Pediatrics, which couldn’t in any way be described as political, could it?

All of a sudden young adults and legal adults ages 15-19 are considered “children” and counted as “killed” by guns. I guess the APA isn’t aware that this is the prime age for gang activity. Apparently 25 percent of gang members are aged 15-17. But I don’t suppose that would have anything to do with these statistics, would it?

According to the Centers for Disease Control, some of the leading causes of death for actual children between the ages of 0 and 14 are unintentional injury, congenital anomalies, malignant neoplasms, heart disease and homicides.

Unintentional injury statistics don’t support Palfrey’s analysis in the New England Journal of Medicine either.

Two percent of unintentional injuries that resulted in the deaths of children in 2010 were due to firearms. Motor vehicle accidents and drowning were responsible for more than 60 percent of these deaths.

And yet, the media screeches about a gun violence “epidemic,” and takes every opportunity to publish questionable research from obviously biased sources.

Is it any wonder that Americans are ignorant about significant declines in gun crime?

The politicians screech about stemming gun violence every time a lunatic or criminal goes on an armed rampage.

Gun grabbing advocacy groups exploit every tragedy to further their political agenda.

The media focuses on carnage, but not on positive stories involving firearms.

And groups such as the American Academy of Pediatrics, which is supposed to be apolitical, features biased political hacks such as Dr. Judith S. Palfrey, who push a political agenda while hiding behind their medical degrees to promote dangerous policies.

So crime committed with firearms decreases dramatically, despite the gun banners’ most dire predictions, despite the availability of high-capacity magazines and “assault” rifles, and despite the passage of concealed carry laws in numerous states.

And the majority of Americans don’t even know it.

What does that say about them?

States beginning to oppose the gun-grabbers in DC directly en masse

That’s what I’m talking about. Remind them of the 10th Amendment the hard way.

And Rep. Carolyn Maloney is still an idiot:

But the debate hinges on Congress. There are now around 50 bills related to gun control pending in the House and Senate.

Among them is legislation offered by Rep. Carolyn Maloney (D-NY), meant to crack down on gun trafficking. The bill targets “straw buyers,” who purchase firearms with the intent of delivering them to criminal interests. “Getting the guns out of the hands of the wrong people is an important goal,” Maloney said. She said gun control advocates in Congress were merely proposing minimum standards. “States can legislate what they want,” she said, but would ultimately have to follow federal gun laws.

WRONG… we have a constitutional republic with a federal government. Try again.

And of course, Dianne Feinstein never fails to demonstrate her utter ridiculosity:

On Thursday, the Senate Judiciary Committee approved Sen. Dianne Feinstein’s controversial assault weapons ban, setting the stage for consideration by the full Senate.The California Democrat said the measure would “dry up” the supply of military-style weapons readily available to the public.“These weapons are being used by grievance killers, the mentally unstable and others to kill significant numbers of people in our malls, our theaters, our workplaces and our schools,” Feinstein said.

Are you kidding me? Semi-automatic rifles are used in a SMALL percentage of gun murders! Also, stop using the murders of George Moscone and Harvey Milk as an argument against “assault weapons.” THEY WERE KILLED WITH A .38 REVOLVER! Please, shut up and retire, you old bat.

RLC National: Wrong On Immigration

A couple weeks back, I laid out my vision on the immigration issue. No amnesty, border security, one set of rules for everyone. Pretty straightforward stuff, even mostly endorsing a plan put forward by a Republican Liberty Caucus national board member.

Sadly, RLC National has gone ahead and released a plan that panders to Hispanics and apologists for illegals, with a supporting op-ed in the Examiner by RLC National Chairman Dave Nalle. I should point out that this is likely the only significant national issue where I disagree with Dave; however, this issue is very significant. I will urge the RLCVA state board to oppose this plan.

Amnesty now will be like the 1986 amnesty times ten, and there still won’t be any border security. We’ve seen this movie before. Washington will spend more energy coming up with a hundred excuses why they can’t secure the border than it would take to actually do so. No amnesty. If you’re illegal, go home and go to the back of the line, whether you entered illegally or overstayed a visa. No whining, no excuses.

Rove Declares War on Americans

Whether you agree with the Tea Party or not…

Whether you like what far right conservatives stand for or not…

Whether you agree with the liberty-wing of the GOP or not…

You cannot deny that these are Americans – grassroots voters who are dissatisfied with the Republican party, and who are demanding a change.

Well, according to the Republican establishment, these people’s voices don’t matter, and if they don’t march in lockstep with the Republican Old Guard, screw them.

I told you this a few weeks ago, when I cited an article showing the GOP’s war on its own voters.

As seen from the halls of power, the problem is that Republican voters think it’s OK to replace incumbent senators and congressman who don’t represent the views of their constituents. In 2012, for example, Republican voters in Indiana dumped longtime Sen. Richard Lugar in a primary battle.

This infuriated establishment Republicans for two reasons. First, because they liked Lugar and the way he worked. Second, because the replacement candidate was flawed and allowed Democrats to win what should have been a safe Republican seat.

So, according to Politico, the Washington team is gearing up a new effort to protect incumbents and limit the ability of Republican voters to successfully challenge establishment candidates.

Want to see what their “new effort” looks like?

It looks like this arrogant fatass.

Hi, I’m Karl Rove, and you don’t count.

The biggest donors in the Republican Party are financing a new group to recruit seasoned candidates and protect Senate incumbents from challenges by far-right conservatives and Tea Party enthusiasts who Republican leaders worry could complicate the party’s efforts to win control of the Senate.

The group, the Conservative Victory Project, is intended to counter other organizations that have helped defeat establishment Republican candidates over the last two election cycles. It is the most robust attempt yet by Republicans to impose a new sense of discipline on the party, particularly in primary races.

Conservative? If these people are conservative, then I’m a beaver in swimming trunks! Establishment Republicans are anything but conservative. They’ve entrenched themselves in the seats of power by spending other people’s money on Congressional pork meant to keep them right where they are by those who like to vote themselves free crap at others’ expense. The name of the group is deceptive, meant to add “conservative” credibility to a big-government agenda.

“There is a broad concern about having blown a significant number of races because the wrong candidates were selected,” said Steven J. Law, the president of American Crossroads, the “super PAC” creating the new project. “We don’t view ourselves as being in the incumbent protection business, but we want to pick the most conservative candidate who can win.”

“Wrong candidates.” Wrong, according to whom, pray tell? The grassroots conservatives obviously don’t want the incumbents, who have grown so accustomed to “politics as usual,” that they have forgotten whom they represent and why they’re in Washington in the first place, but apparently it’s the big money supporters who get to decide who’s right?

The Conservative Victory Project, which is backed by Karl Rove and his allies who built American Crossroads into the largest Republican super PAC of the 2012 election cycle, will start by intensely vetting prospective contenders for Congressional races to try to weed out candidates who are seen as too flawed to win general elections.

“Too flawed,” according to whom? Why is it up to Rove to decide who gets to run, and not the people? Why is retaining a Congressional or Senate seat – even if the ass that retains it happens to be a RINO that does not reflect the views of the people – more important than placing a representative in office who actually represents the people?

Sure, you will occasionally get the Todd Akin-type retard, who tanks the GOP’s chances at victory, but you may also get political superstars like Ted Cruz.

The grassroots spoke up and also gave us Justin Amash, Rand Paul and Pat Toomey, even as the establishment tried to protect their RINO buddies and spewed nothing but hate toward these guys, because they wouldn’t toe the party line.

And what did they give us? Arlen Specter (how did that work out for you, GOP?).  They also spent a buttload of money on Romney, whom they groomed and prepped even before he announced his run for the presidency.

And the establishment brought us No Child Left Behind Alone, TARP, Medicare Part D, the GM Bailout, etc. etc. etc.

But we’re supposed to support them anyway? We’re supposed to give the GOP our vote, because somehow things will be worse if Democrats gain those seats? We’re supposed to believe that a testicle-less squish in Washington is better than a Democrat, as long as it has an “R” next to its name?

No. That’s not going to happen.

More and more honest GOP voters are turning away from the GOP, and if the Republican Party thinks it can bully them back into the fold, I think it’s in for a rude awakening.

There are enough people that have had it with the establishment – with those whose main concern is their own power – with those whose main goal is to compromise away good economic sense and individual liberties, just so they can say their own petty tyranny got “bipartisan support.”

The people rejected “The Maverick.” And they rejected Romney. They rejected the Bush big-government, big-spending, “compassionate” conservatism so fully, that they voted in a snobby, inexperienced, partisan, Marxist just to avoid another Bush!

And these buffoons want to foist yet more of the same on us?

No thanks!

They don’t want to shrink government. They want to control it.

They don’t want to serve the people. They want to gain power at the people’s expense.

They don’t care about the Constitution, America, rule of law or any values that make this nation great. They care about gaining control and keeping it.

If this is where the morally corrupt, power-hungry GOP is headed, no thanks. I’ll pass.