LIBERALS NEED TO WAKE UP AND DO THE RIGHT THING

In a recent article in The Nation, Eric Alterman is putting out a "Wake Up Call for Us Liberals." He starts by citing the dinner Barack Obama had with arch conservatives like George Will, William Kristol and others. It was a misplaced confidence the newly elected President had that the extreme right could temper its ideologies and work with the left. No such luck. Alterman explains why defining the differences in beliefs: "The primary difference between liberalism and conservatism, at least in theory, is that the latter is an ideology and the former isn’t." He continues with an observation from Lionel Trilling, ” Liberalism is a large tendency rather than a concise body of doctrine.” In other words, the Progressive is free to be...progressive. The conservative is narrowly limited by its ideologies. Our political dysfunction has several sources but one of the most important is allowing, "...conservatives to define the terms of debate at a time when conservatives have lost all sense of moral, intellectual and especially practical responsibility."

More on this later.

TEA PARTY EMAIL BLASTS FEAR MONGERING THEN ASKS FOR MONEY

Here's the text of an email I received from Tea Party radicals this morning:

Mad As Hell: Boldly, brazenly and in the cockiest manner possible Obama spits in our faces. He lies, creates then covers up scandals, protects those who violate the law and targets innocent conservatives and citizens for their beliefs. Our military has been decimated at a time when world tension is heating up. US sovereignty has been compromised. Terrorists have been put in White House positions. Americans are being forced to turn in their guns. Congress won't do anything so we MUST.

 

And then they beg for money. 

 

Half of the crap they are espousing doesn't make sense. Like decimating our military and terrorists in the White House. If there is anything this country could do to get completely back on tract it is to get rid of these double-digit IQ conservative extremists.

WANT A BETTER ECONOMY? FORBES SAYS VOTE DEMOCRAT

In 2012 the very conservative magazine, Forbes, said "...laissez faire policies [strongly opposing government intervention] had far less benefits than expected, and in fact produced almost universal negative economic outcomes for the nation!" This 80-year analysis is significant for such a right wing publication. Thus, the horrid results George W. Bush left for Barack Obama which the current President has turned around into an increasingly improving economy. Forbes examines the compelling positive results of Democrats over the GOP in personal disposable income, Gross Domestic Product (GDP), corporate profits, stock market return, reduction of national debt and avoiding Great Depressions and Great Recessions. With these facts, anyone voting Republican on November 4 wants to return to the days of GWB.

FORMER SEN. HOWARD BAKER ONE OF A KIND

Former Sen. Howard Baker

Howard Baker, a Tennessee Republican who was first elected to the Senate in 1966 and served as its leader from 1981 to 1985 has died. He was 88. It may be just another passing politician to many but to those who know politics, it was the last of the great negotiators from a Congress that has evolved into a bunch of incompetent do-nothing deadbeats. Their only concern is to get reelected, the country be damned. Baker got regularly elected over four decades because he worked for the people of Tennessee and the American public, not for himself. President Obama called him the "Great Conciliator" because he could walk across the aisle and make a deal. Others of the same ilk who come to mind are Lyndon Johnson and Everett Dirksen. But can you name one person in Congress today who would put his or her country before their job? I think not.

163 DEMOCRATS FIND BALLS ON GUN CONTROL

Almost, but not all of the Democrat House caucus signed a letter to Speaker John Boehner demanding that he move to pass gun control legislation. That leaves 36 gutless Dems that should be voted out of office in November. The Blaze confirms the failure of this issue in the past but thinks in 2014's midterm election the tide could turn and the democratic base could come out strong for gun control. President Obama has charged gun control advocates to become as well organized as the National Rifle Assn., which, through its official big mouth wacky Wayne LaPierre, spews lies and propaganda on a regular basis. Obama's 2013 bill to strengthen background checks failed in a Democrat controlled Senate. But as Richard Martinez, father of Santa Barbara shooting victim Christopher Michaels-Martinez said, "Not one more."

WHO CARES WHAT DICK CHENEY, ESPECIALLY HIS DAUGHTER, SAYS

Dick Cheney to the American public

First of all, here's the man who orchestrated the U.S. into the Iraq War on an outright lie, touting the weapons of mass destruction. And second, he later tried to convince the American public that Saddam Hussein was in on planning the 9/11 attacks. The man lies when the truth is better and he has the gall to criticize Obama's handling of the current crisis in Iraq. But writing the op-ed with his daughter is laughable; what the hell does she know about foreign policy? There is something inherent about being in political office...whether you are qualified or not. Paul Waldman on CNN says 4,500 Americans died in Iraq, and between 100,000 and 400,000 Iraqis died with the U.S spending at least $800 billion. And I won't even get into the Halliburton scandal. George W. Bush may have been the worst President but Dick Cheney was certainly the biggest conniving shyster to ever serve in the U.S. government.

YOUR HOME IS NOT SAFE UNDER CURRENT GUN CONTROL LAWS

So says the Washington Post Editorial Board, one of the leading U.S. newspapers. This piece starts out with the simple but oft-repeated phrase, “THIS SHOULDN’T happen in Troutdale. You don’t expect something like that to happen in your hometown.” This reaction after a 15-year-old high school student killed a fellow 14-year-old student and then shot himself. The Post says don't expect anything from this Congress which refuses to even consider gun control legislation. But just take a look back...from an elementary school where 20 6-year-olds were massacred with an assault rifle to the Washington Navy Yard where a gunman killed 12 with a sawed-off shotgun, and the same thing happens in hundreds of other  venues around the country. The Editorial Board comments, “We’re the only developed country on earth where this happens. And it happens now once a week..." President Obama has spoken forcefully. Now we need action!

WHAT SHOULD PRESIDENT OBAMA DO ABOUT GUN VIOLENCE?

President Obama

Barack Obama is the President of the United States, after all. He should be able to put a stop to American gun violence that is one of a kind in developed countries. The Brits wouldn't allow this kind of bloodshed to continue over a period of time like it has in the U.S. Neither would Canada or Australia where gun control is the law. Columbine was in April of 1999; that's fifteen years. And through all this it has been the National Rifle Assn., led by wacky Wayne LaPierre, that keeps blaming it on everything but the real cause. GUNS. And it is a sniveling U.S. Congress, scared to death of the NRA, that refuses to pass the gun laws necessary to quell this violence. All of this perpetrated on the American people so gun manufacturers can sell more guns to more gun nuts. Obama has spoken out again. Will he follow up?

JOHN MCCAIN's TIME HAS PASSED

John McCain

He served the state of Arizona in the U.S. Senate well after being elected based on his Vietnam incarceration. Yes, there was a sympathy vote there which has arisen in many political articles over the years. Regardless, John McCain did good things for Arizona and the country. I had a great deal of respect for him as a GOP moderate and maverick who stood up for what was right, regardless of the party connection. But this is all history now. First there was his run for President against Barack Obama that was noteworthy...until he named Sarah Palin as his Vice President. Sheer stupidity based on choosing someone like Palin and dumber because it made the Republican Party look like a bunch of idiots. And then there were all the flip-flops first on immigration, on climate change, then on Bowe Bergdahl's prisoner exchange. All done for the sake of getting reelected. It's time to move on from John and hopefully in his next reelection we can send Jeff Flake packing.

Congress…and the President now…are losing the American public’s trust

With two-thirds of the public disapproving of the way Congress is handling the federal spending issue and only 26% on their side, you might think the blame lies squarely on the backs of the congressional leaders whose overall ratings are even worse.  Not so.  52% disapprove of the way President Obama has managed the issue but with 43% that do approve.  The latter is a lot better than Congress but David Gergen says right now this country is “leaderless.”  That is frightening when you consider the major issues facing the United States today.

Other than the lately infamous term, “Sequester,” also on the table is gun control legislation, immigration reform and taking the leadership on improving the environment.  This country cannot remain as a world leader without tackling and solving all four of these problems.  The typical Washington charade recently that is supposed to be governing is considered farcical by many throughout the free world.  In another poll, “…Americans are divided over whether Obama is emphasizing unifying the country or taking a partisan approach.”  That’s not good.

CNN Polling Director Keating Holland commented, "It looks like this could turn into a "lose-lose" scenario for both sides, although the Republicans appear to have more to lose than Obama."  But the President’s advantage has been diminishing over the last two months, according to CNN’s Political Editor, Paul Steinhauser.  DavidGergen on CNN was much blunter: “In times past, a president has usually risen to the demands of leadership when a Congress has stubbornly resisted tough choices…”  Gergen added:

“That's what Lyndon Johnson did in persuading key Republicans to help pass the civil rights bills of 1964 and 1965. And that's what Bill Clinton did in working with a Republican House led by Newt Gingrich. People forget how hostile House Republicans were to Clinton -- hell, they impeached him -- but he nonetheless worked with them to pass four straight balanced budgets and an overhaul of welfare.”

Excellent definition of sequester by The Young Turks:
 

It seems to me that it all boils down to the art of negotiation, which I emphasized in a recent post.  Sam Rayburn was a master, as was Lyndon Johnson, both from Texas.  Bill Clinton had this knack and even Barack Obama has exhibited moments of proclivity in bringing the two sides together as he did in passing the Affordable Care Act or Obamacare.  Negotiation is defined simply as a “mutual discussion and arrangement of the terms of a transaction or agreement.”   It means that both sides must give a little and take a little.  Is that so hard?

Well, apparently it is, because David Gergen says that both Congress and the White House are neglecting their responsibilities of bringing this country together.  And if there is no real leadership on either side, the USS America is basically sailing without a rudder.  Gergen continues, “One of the foremost duties of Congress is to pass a budget: It has failed for four straight years. Republicans, especially in the House, have continually refused to meet the White House halfway.”  My question is whether House Speaker John Boehner is still in control.

Americans have now become apathetic about the sequester with only 18% of the U.S. who say they understand “very well” what happens when it goes into effect.  I am frankly not sure whether or not enough of those in Congress and the White House honestly know the outcome following today’s deadline.  The fact of the matter is that some feel the President should have more power on deciding where the cuts should be made and Barbara Mikulski, D-MD, and Jim Inhofe, R-OK, are working on a bill right now to address that issue.

Whatever happens today, this Congress, and partially Barack Obama, will have to shoulder the blame for the fact that the greatest nation in the free world could not bring together its two main political factions in an agreement to keep its democratic government functioning normally.  Just the idea of the bickering that has been going on for the last 12 years is enough to turn your stomach.  But the idea of putting ideology before your country is unforgivable.  Enough is enough.

Gun nuts claim Obama Helter Skelter…the amassing of forces to annihilate White Americans

Although Taylor Marsh is a well-known political analyst, writer and strategist, I still might have discounted someone I never heard of like Stan Solomon whose Talk to Solomon Show recently had conservative blogger Greg W. Howard on his show.  I have also not heard of Howard but being new to the game of critical politics, just figure I may not yet be up to speed.  However, when Larry Pratt’s name came up I not only took notice but became very interested.  As a gun fanatic, Pratt is only topped by Wayne LaPierre, head of the National Rifle Assn. (NRA).



Charles Manson

Then I understood the first entry in Joyce Arnold’s article on the Taylor Marsh Blog.  Arnold quoted from Brian Tashman at Right Way Watch: “Gun Activists Warn Obama is Raising a Private Black Army to Massacre White Americans.”  Pratt was on the Talk to Solomon Show with Howard predicting that, “Obama may begin confiscating guns in order to provoke a violent response to justify further oppression, which host Stan Solomon feared would lead to the imprisonment of hundreds of thousands of people.  That’s heavy; also completely brainless.

There’s more.  “I believe they will put together a racial force to go against an opposite race resistance, basically a black force to go against a white resistance, and then they will claim anyone resisting the black force they are doing it because they are racist,” commented Solomon and seconded by Howard.  Can you believe this idiot Howard accuses Obama of sowing the seeds of racial hatred when it has been clear from the President’s first inauguration that many in this country dislike, even hate, Barack Obama simply because he is black?

Clip from the Helter Skelter movie:

There is a comparison between Obama’s gun control legislation and the incidents at Waco and Ruby Ridge where government force was used to quell an illegal uprising, resulting in lives lost.  Each of those episodes was carried out due to a defiance of the law and the people involved decided to fight rather than surrender peacefully.  Arnold asks the question which is no doubt uppermost in the mind of anyone who reads her article:

“I don’t know how many people take this kind of ‘thinking’ seriously, but it’s happening in the context of the ongoing national debates about gun and ammunition controls.”  It is gun hugger scare tactics at their worst…my words.

And then Arnold quotes Evan McMorris-Santoro of Talking Points Memo who exclaims the war over gun control has gone to the “ground;” in other words as the media decide it is yesterday’s news, both sides will depend on grass-roots action to get the job done.  McMorris-Santoro points out that the NRA is already running ads against weak Democrat and Republican moderates in states like Arkansas, Louisiana, Maine, North Carolina and West Virginia.  At the same time we can expect more on gun control through groups like Gabby Giffords new PAC.

Those moderate Democrats, above, are not as afraid this go-around because of the rash of firearm deaths across the country, particularly mass incidents like the Newtown, CT massacre. The Senate is working on a plan re, universal background checks but McMorris-Santoro comments, “there’s the usual GOP House members who oppose most everything that isn’t their idea. Some of them probably think it’s possible ‘Obama is Raising a Private Black Army to Massacre White Americans.’” Shades of Charles Manson and his HelterSkelter.

Hard to understand how anyone could believe the NRA’s Wayne LaPierre

But they do.  These die-hard gun bubbas who strut around with their weapons either at their side or concealed completely from the public, are the real believers who do it because they have to have some way to prove their manhood.  And they would follow the head fanatic, wacky Wayne, to the end of the world if he said so.  It is amazing to me just how easily he can arouse these double-digit IQs to do his bidding and then force them to come back again and again to feed from the same fount spewing this propaganda.  But such is the mentality of these wackos.

Wayne LaPierre is head of the NRA and since assuming this post in 1991 the organization has prospered dramatically in increased membership and donations flowing in.  This is all due to one single factor; LaPierre zeroed in on the 2^nd Amendment right to bear arms exclaiming it is an “absolutist” right of the people and the gun control advocates want to take it away.  And then along came a Democratic President, Barack Obama, and the screed switched to “Obama wants to take away your guns.”  Same crusade, just a different target.

Wacky Wayne laPierre



In each national incidence of guns killing innocent Americans, wacky Wayne used the situation to fire up his fellow gun worshippers by saying, as an example, they want to take away assault weapons today but tomorrow they will come for your handguns, then your hunting rifles.  The latest was delivered in a tirade from Salt Lake City during a speech at the Western Hunting and Conservation Expo.  He once again picked up on President Obama and other Democrats re. the drive for universal background checks.  This is what he saidon CNN:

"This so-called universal background check that you're hearing about all over the media ... is aimed at one thing: It's aimed at registering your guns.  And when another tragic opportunity presents itself, that registry will be used to confiscate your guns."

Actually, this registry of guns is a great idea for everyone but gun owners, and that raises a question within itself.  Why are you afraid to have your gun registered; got something to hide?  And it is absurd to think the feds would use any registry of firearms to confiscate legal guns.  It is the bad guys that they are after and if you gun huggers are a little bit inconvenienced, blame it on your head wacko LaPierre who has suppressed reasonable gun control legislation for years, putting 300 million guns on the streets of America, a record throughout the world.

Mark Kelly with wife Gabby Giffords

Astronaut Mark Kelly, husband of former Arizona U.S. Representative Gabby Giffords, who was seriously injured by Jared Loughner in the Tucson gun massacre, where 6 died, sort of whacked wacky Wayne up-side the head at the recent Senate Judiciary hearings on guns when the gun nut “LaPierre repeatedly voiced the talking point that there’s no need to expand the background check system because criminals don’t cooperate with background checks,” from the Washington Post.  Kelly’s retort was:

“The Tucson shooter was an admitted drug user. He was rejected from the U.S. Army because of his drug use. He was clearly mentally ill. And when he purchased that gun in November, his plan was to assassinate my wife and commit mass murder at that Safeway in Tucson. He was a criminal. Because of his drug use, and because of what he was planning on doing. But because of these gaps in the mental health system, in this case, those 121,000 records, I admit did not include a record on him. But it could have.

“And if it did, he would have failed that background check. He would have likely gone to a gun show, or a private seller, and avoided that background check. But if we close that gun show loophole, if we require private sellers to complete a background check, and we get those 121,000 records and others into the systems, we will prevent gun crime. That is an absolute truth. It would have happened in Tucson. My wife would not have been sitting here today if we had stronger background checks.”

LaPierre’s claims that background checks don’t work is obviously just another of his false statements since 1.5 million guns were prevented from going to those prohibited from having them in 2010.  In the hearing, after gun rights grunts pointed to Chicago’s tough gun laws, yet high volume of gun violence, Sen. Dick Durbin from Illinois commented:

When you take a look at where these guns come from, 25 percent plus are sold in the surrounding towns around the city of Chicago, not in the city. Look over the last 10 or 12 years. Of the 50,000 guns confiscated in crimes, almost one out of 10 crime guns in Chicago came to that city from Mississippi. Why? Because the background checks there, the gun dealers there, are a lot easier than in other places. And they end up selling these guns in volume.

It is easy enough to shoot holes in most claims made by Wayne LaPierre and his NRA minions, but what isn’t easy is having the equal time to advertise the gun control side of the issue.  Organizations like the Brady Campaign and the Coalition to Stop Gun Violence try but have limited budgets.  Just the opposite of the NRA, which is well funded in its advertising campaigns with the support of U.S. gun manufacturers.  The gun nuts are preparing to launch a new onslaught of major propaganda that will cause many more innocent people to be killed by guns.

Will the US Senate fix the Washington mess?

I did a post on Wednesday of last week, “How to fix a broken U.S. Government,” which emphasized the importance of negotiating, a lost art from the days of Sam Rayburn and Lyndon Johnson.  During those periods, an old hand at the job, and Johnson and Rayburn were not only well-entrenched but also well respected, could talk to his or her fellow legislators and somehow come to a reconciliation that was favorable for both side.  This mastery of politics has been gone for, let me see, at least as far back to when George W. Bush became president.

Mitch McConnell

So far the GOP hasn’t recovered from an election they thought they would win, and Sen. McConnell has never retreated from his statement to make Obama a one-term President, which obviously failed.  Joe Palermo said following the 2012 election, “McConnell now promises the next best thing: Continue to abuse the filibuster as no Senate minority in American history has and gum up the works while demanding total capitulation on Obama's part before any bill can escape the clutches of his icy, deadening hand.”  In Washington things never seem to change.



So with McConnell as the Senate Minority Leader, how is it that Ira Shapiro thinks this dysfunctional body can fix Washington?  He says the consensus is already formed and that politics under president Obama’s second term will continue to be polarized.  But he wants a “rejuvenated” Senate to be the nation’s mediator.  Somehow I can’t see Harry Reid, Senate Majority Leader and Mitch McConnell coming together on any major issues, except maybe gun control.  Reid has refused to back Obama on the assault weapons ban.

Democrats do have control of the Senate and won 25 out of 33 elections in 2012, which Shapiro reads as a reaction to GOP extremism and obstructionism.  The question is whether this trend can continue with momentum leading through the 2014 elections where the incumbent President’s party traditionally loses seats in Congress.  Palermo’s article was over three months ago but now Shapiro says the country is in need of responsible adult leadership, something sorely lacking in both houses of Congress. 

Harry Reid

Shapiro the optimist thinks, “The Senate is the only realistic partner to the president in seeking constructive solutions to the nation's challenges on guns, climate change and immigration.”  I hope he is right because, aside from the economy and jobs, these are the three most important issues facing the United States.  And in continued optimism he believes the majority of the Senate is serious about facing the challenges of the country.  On the other hand we are just four days away from the $1.2 trillion in budget cuts that many say will paralyze the U.S.

Lyndon Johnson, along with Mike Mansfield, Everett Dirksen and Howard Baker are cited in Shapiro’s article illustrating a quality of leadership lost on today’s Senate.  Although Harry Reid and Mitch McConnell didn’t create the current political barricades in the Senate, it has certainly flourished under their watch.  Will they eventually retire having failed to accomplish the demands facing Congress today, or will they emerge finally as leaders who figure out that it is necessary to negotiate, not constantly call checkmate?  The ball is clearly in their court.

How to fix a broken U.S. Government

 

I realize I am no expert on social science, wasn’t even really interested in the subject in college, but as a lowly progressive political blogger, I have become fascinated with our political system and its intricate workings.  Actually, the system isn’t working now and if we don’t fix it soon, this country’s downfall could make the decline and fall of the Roman Empire look like a Sunday school picnic.  We are no longer on the fiscal cliff, or curb as some described the problem, we are now headed toward a newly created political buzz word, “sequestration.”

Sequestration is defined by the HuffPost as, “referring to a series of draconian budget cuts, totaling $1.2 trillion, that {were} scheduled to go into effect on Jan. 1, 2013. These cuts are evenly split between defense and domestic discretionary spending (with some exemptions, such as Social Security, Medicare, and veterans' benefits).”  The GOP doesn’t want any more short-term fixes but refuses to budge on additional revenue mixed with spending cuts.  The President is standing firm on what he wants and is likely to win the battle in the long run.

Is the problem caused entirely by Republicans?  The answer is no and on the Democratic side, there is still the extreme left rallying for raising taxes and limiting spending cuts.  In some cases we have noticed House Speaker John Boehner shifting from his supporters on the right, particularly the fanatics of the Tea Party, moving further toward the middle for some reconciliation on the issues.  Sen. Minority Leader Mitch McConnell also seems conciliatory in his latest speeches.  So what is the problem?  I’m not sure anyone really knows.

The first thing that comes to mind is that the GOP hasn’t recovered from an election they thought they would win.  And Sen. McConnell has never retreated from his statement to make Obama a one-term President, which failed.  According to JoePalermo in November of 2012, “McConnell now promises the next best thing: Continue to abuse the filibuster as no Senate minority in American history has and gum up the works while demanding total capitulation on Obama's part before any bill can escape the clutches of his icy, deadening hand.”

Sam Rayburn, former Democratic Speaker of the house from Texas, was considered by many to be the great negotiator.  Lyndon Johnson was known to be good at bringing parties together in agreement on serious matters and even Barack Obama is looked on as a pretty good negotiator, considering the passage of the Affordable Care Act, or Obamacare.  What happened to the art of negotiation, which almost anyone will agree is the only objective way to arrive at a governing solution?  Where did this political necessity fall by the wayside, almost into oblivion?

Looking back at George W. Bush, he had a rather diverse Congress with the majority swinging from one party to the other in his eight years.  Regardless, with GWB it was his way or the highway, thanks in part to his henchman, Karl Rove.  Going back a few years, Ronald Reagan was known as the great communicator and managed to get a lot of what he wanted.  George H. W. Bush was known for managing the end of the cold war.  Bill Clinton was able to get those in his party to vote for the largest tax increase in history in 1993. He also passed sweeping trade and welfare reforms in the face of withering fire from the left. 

Not bad on both sides, except for the tyranny of George W. Bush, who many say will go down in history as this country’s worst president.

Negotiation is defined simply as a “mutual discussion and arrangement of the terms of a transaction or agreement.”  Well it’s not simple, at least as far as this Congress is concerned, a body that closed out 2012 with a 14% approval rating.  In picking that definition apart, there are three basic ingredients that have to be satisfied.  The first is there must be a discussion; second, there must be agreement on terms to fix the problem; and third, you must arrive at an agreement.  Here’s how I sum that up: 

There are discussions that tend to lead nowhere, basically blamed on a GOP Congress of “NO” to anything Barack Obama proposes.  No one can come to terms because Republicans would rather obstruct Democratic legislation than present their own, except in rare cases.  There can be no agreement because of one and two.

In simplification, it reminds me of the kid that didn’t like the way the football game was going, so he picked up his ball and went home.  Sure, the Dems have to shoulder some of the blame in this standoff, but they might be more amenable to the conservatives if they weren’t constantly being stonewalled.  But there is one thing that the right had better understand and that is the fact that Progressives are here to stay, and Republicans no longer have a free ride.

New surveys confirm Americans want more gun control…even NRA members

The studies keep pouring in on gun control vs. gun rights and they keep saying the same thing.  The American public wants more gun regulations, and this includes members of the National Rifle Assn. (NRA).  The time has come for the gun rights fanatics like Wayne LaPierre, head of the NRA, to prove these studies bogus or admit defeat and get on with saving people’s lives with reasonable gun control laws.  LaPierre’s “absolutist” hogwash on gun owners’ rights under the 2^nd Amendment is long overdue for an overhaul, and wacky Wayne knows it; except he’s trying to save his cushy million dollar job.

In the most recent poll by Johns Hopkins University, “89 percent of all respondents, and 75 percent of those identified as NRA members, support universal background checks for gun sales.”  Now this would include private sales at gun shows where 40% of U.S. gun sales come from.  Since there were 10,800,000guns sold in 2011 in the U.S., that means that 4,320,000 of those firearms went on the street knowing absolutely nothing about the individual buying them.  He or she just walked in, made the purchase, and walked out the door with a means to kill someone.  That is scary as hell.

 

 

There’s more.  Close to “70 percent of respondents supported bans on military-style semiautomatic weapons and high capacity ammunition magazines,” and “80 percent  backed measures restricting those who could buy guns, such as people with histories of domestic violence or serious juvenile crimes.”  The sampling also checked to find out if there were any differences between gun owners and non-gun owners.  There weren’t, which shows a consistency throughout the U.S. that more gun regulations are needed.

The above becomes even more significant when you consider the fact that a large majority of NRA members are included.  This majority also would prohibit, “people with recent alcohol or drug charges to purchase guns, and 70 percent supported a mandatory minimum of 2 years in prison for selling guns to persons who are not legally allowed to have one.”  The survey also found that Americans want more spending on mental health in relation to gun violence.    

But that’s not all.  A new Gallup poll found that two-thirds of the American public support heavy new restrictions on gun purchases, supporting all nine of President Obama’s key proposals.  They were:

 

• 91% for criminal background checks
• 82% want increased government spending on mental health programs
• 79% are for increased government spending for law enforcement and school officials for armed attacks
• 75% think criminal penalties should be increased for those buying guns for someone who hasn't passed background check
• 70% want the feds  to spend $4 billion to help keep 15,000 police officers on the street
• 69% would like the government to spend $30 million to help schools develop emergency response plans
• 67% want to ban the possession of armor-piercing bullets by anyone other than the military or law enforcement
• 60% would strengthen the ban on assault weapons that expired in 2004
• 54% want to limit the sale of ammunition magazines to 10 rounds or less

 

In some additional findings the respondents opted for school security over new gun laws and “Seventy-five per cent favor increasing criminal penalties for so-called 'straw purchasers', people who buy guns for others restricted from having weapons of their own.”  You might recall that it was these straw buyers in Arizona, where gun control almost doesn’t exist, that purchased firearms that ended up in the hands of the Mexican drug cartels.  Arizona not only is still passing laws to relax gun control even more, but now the state’s legislature is presenting a bill that would allow Arizona to ignore new federal gun laws.

Finally let me leave you with the fact that there have been 1,280 gun deaths since the Sandy Hook Elementary School carnage, as reported by the Huff Post. 

Newtown bereaved father just doesn’t get it

No one can feel the grief that MarkMattioli feels, except the other nineteen families whose children ages 6 and 7 were slaughtered by Adam Lanza in the Newtown Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting last December.  But the father is way off base when he said, “there are more than enough gun laws on the books.”  Although the proposed legislation by President Obama for universal background checks, including private sales at gun shows, wouldn’t have helped in this instance, it will certainly help identify responsible gun owners in the future.

 

True, Mattioli’s plea for improving the mental health system could have prevented Lanza from having access to the weapons he used; although since they belonged to his mother, that is debatable unless we extend the mental health requirements to forbidding any firearms in a home where there is a known mental health problem.  Wouldn’t that just drive wacky Wayne LaPierre, head of the National Rifle Assn. (NRA), right up the wall?  But when you think about it, there is really no other way to keep someone who is mentally incompetent away from guns.

 

Adam Lanza was diagnosed with Asperger’s syndrome and according to the National Institute of NeurologicalDisorders and Stroke, “Some individuals with ASD are severely disabled and require very substantial support for basic activities of daily living.  Asperger syndrome is considered by many to be the mildest form of ASD and is synonymous with the most highly functioning individuals with ASD.”  And most experts agree that Asperger’s syndrome doesn’t cause violence.  Since autism, which is what AS is a part of, is not considered a mental illness, is Sandy Hook even a mental health issue?

 

Yes, that's wacky Wayne LaPierre behind the sign

 

Contrary to Mattioli’s  position, a large group of Newtown residents voiced their opinions to Connecticut lawmakers to take state action that would prevent another tragedy like the mass shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary.  But other residents were concerned about their 2^nd Amendment rights at about the same time Wayne LaPierre was frothing at the mouth again over the NRA’s “absolutist” rights, which was in response to President Obama reminding the gun fanatics you cannot “mistake absolutism for principle.”  Apparently they just don’t get it either.

 

One Newtown mother said, “there's a national misperception that Newtown residents want to repeal the Second Amendment. Rather, Newtown residents want to protect people's rights while also protecting children and their safety.”  It is this belief by the gun nuts that gun control advocates want to take their guns away that has been instilled in them by LaPierre for years.  Fear works when you are trying to initiate action, like raising more money for the NRA.  I liken it to the selling of cancer insurance by junk mail years ago.  Scare the hell out of them to induce buying the insurance.

 

And then there was this classic statement by Bill Sherlach, whose wife, Mary, the school psychologist, was killed in the carnage:

 

He said he respects the 2^nd Amendment “but it was written in a long-ago era where armaments were different.  I have no idea how long it took to reload and refire a musket," he said. "I do know that the number of shots fired in the Sandy Hook Elementary School in those few short minutes is almost incomprehensible, even in today's modern age." 

 

David Wheeler’s 6-year-old son was killed in the massacre and cited the mental health angle again:

 

"That a person with these problems could live in a home where he had access to among the most powerful firearms available to non-military personnel is unacceptable," he said. "It doesn't matter to whom these weapons were registered. It doesn't matter if they were purchased legally. What matters is that it was far too easy for another mentally unbalanced, suicidal person who had violent obsessions to have easy access to unreasonably powerful weapons."

 

If the Newtown incident is ruled to be mentally incompetent connected, it will certainly be a clear sign that it is necessary to evaluate every home in which firearms are housed.  And that would significantly apply to those having assault-type weapons since this seems to be the weapon of choice for the mass gun murderers.  Once again this raises the need for a national database of firearms owned and with the improvement of identifying the mentally challenged, there could be an instant cross-reference that would identify any potential problem households.

 

To some gun owners and wacky Wayne LaPierre, that is blasphemy toward their sacred toys.  To me it is just common sense.

Immigration reform will happen this time

 

President Obama says “Now’s the time” and he is talking about making immigration reform a reality for the U.S. in a way that will benefit both the 11-plus million who are undocumented and our country as well.  Keep in mind, this legislation does not apply just to Hispanics but also to Asians, Europeans, etc.  Those of us who came here like Obama said for a better life, which includes everyone but Native Americans.  It is easy to forget the heritage of our ancestors who came to the U.S. through Ellis or Angel Islands to work and contribute in the new country.

 

It is true of course; they were legal, at least most of them.  And the 11-plus million undocumenteds are illegal.  But according to a CNN/ORC International poll conducted this month, 53% of Americans favor allowing this group to become legal residents opposed to 43% who don’t.  And what if we followed the latter’s advice and deported the illegals?  Restaurants and the hospitality industry would be without help; there would be no gardeners to take care of your yards; no one to clean your house; and agricultural fields would have no one to work them and the crops would rot.  Do we want that?

 

FACT CHECK reports that “Economists say immigration, legal or illegal, doesn’t hurt American workers.”  But a new House Caucus, Reclaim American Jobs consisting of 41 members says otherwise.  The economists counter there is little to support their claim that these undocumenteds take American jobs.  At least those in which Americans are willing to work.  With this obstacle out of the way you would think that most states would understand the need for this group of workers.  But a clueless Arizona Governor is still fighting to prevent illegals from getting driver licenses, even under Obama’s deferred action plan.

 

The President has a plan that is a broadly sweeping outline of what needs to be accomplished in immigration reform.  He advocates focusing on enforcement while strengthening border security then insuring that businesses don’t knowingly hire illegal workers.  Obama is convinced we must deal with the 11+ million illegal immigrants, but at the same time feels this group must have hope for citizenship.  And he would update and upgrade the current immigration system to the point that it is more user-friendly in accommodating legals to get their families into the U.S.

 

The Gang of Eight Senators

 

But CNN chief political analystGloria Borger said, “…she believes Obama is playing good cop-bad cop, with his own left-leaning proposals being the bad cop and his Senate colleagues being the good cop. He's essentially saying, if you don’t deal with them, you’re going to deal with me.”  So enter the on-and-off Senator from Arizona, John McCain.  He was for immigration reform when he wasn’t running for office but changed his position radically to conform to the demands of the AZ Tea Party when a presidential candidate.  Now he’s back on the side of immigrants again.  The classic flip-flop.

 

Time’s Swampland exclaims that John McCain has been a determined opponent of Barack Obama since the scathing loss to the President in 2008.  The Gang of Eight Senators includes 4 Democrats, Bob Menendez, NJ, Dick Durbin, IL, Charles Schumer, NY, and Michael Bennet, CO.  Republicans are McCain, AZ, Marco Rubio, FL, Lindsey Graham, SC and Jeff Flake, AZ.  Swampland says this bunch has a blueprint introduced the day before Obama’s but very much a parallel to what he proposed, as follows:

 

“It would create a ‘tough but fair’ path to citizenship for undocumented immigrants while beefing up border security. It would streamline the legal immigration system and create incentives to lure sought-after tech and science whizzes. It would establish a mechanism for employers to check the immigration status of potential hires. And it would try to create ways for employers — particularly in the agricultural sector — to find low-wage undocumented workers when Americans are not available.”

 

Any bill will have a hard time getting through the GOP-held House, particularly up against the Tea Party fanatics.  The House is also apparently working on a plan of its own.  Norm Ornstein, longtime political analyst and co-author of "It's Even Worse Than It Looks: How the American Constitutional System Collided with the New Politics of Extremism” had reservations:

 

“Will this compromise make it through the Senate, once the details are hammered out (always more difficult than frameworks) and with a lot more than 60 votes? Next, will House Republicans, who have very different impulses and constituencies, be supportive? Finally, if not, will (House Speaker John) Boehner bring an immigration bill to the floor that will get many more Democratic votes than Republican?"

 

If I were a Republican in Congress (God forbid) and I looked at the dynamics of the Hispanic demographic that is exploding throughout the country, I would figure some way to get on the bandwagon.  With the total Congress hovering around a 10% approval level, and Republicans who have repeatedly been identified as obstructionists, putting them at even a lower level, my gut tells me that immigration reform will happen this time.

 

 

Obama gets tough in opening second term

 

 

Mitch McConnell doing Obama

It looks like the President is tired of taking the crap that the Republicans have been dishing out for the last 4 years.  It started with a comment by Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell in October of 2011.  He said: “The single most important thing we want to achieve is for President Obama to be a one-term president.”   He wasn’t, and McConnell turns out to be the idiot he looked like for the last four years.  He and House Speaker John Boehner, since the GOP took over the house in 2010, have spewed a non-stop diatribe of what a failure Barack Obama had been.  They were wrong and the American people knew it.

 

And because the Republicans were trounced last November in the elections, Boehner now is taking a new approach.  He is saying that “Obama’sfocus is to annihilate the Republican Party.”  Actually, Obama doesn’t have to do anything.  The GOP, led by the Tea Party, is doing that all on their own without any help.  The remark from Boehner made at a Ripon Society luncheon was confirmed by the Speaker’s spokesperson.  Even with a Republican majority in the House that can block the President’s legislation, it is obvious that this gang of obstructionists is running scared, as they should be.

 

David Gergen, who has advised four Presidents, said: “Years from now, historians are likely to look back upon Barack Obama's second inaugural address as a rich treasure trove for understanding his presidency and possibly the course of American politics.”  It’s the sort of thing you say about a great President.  Another interesting comment by Gergen was that not only was Obama more confident, but that he was also “liberated.”  Gergen thinks that refers to the comfort of a second term and not having to run again, as well as showing that Republicans are not willing to compromise.  Either way it is very promising.

 

Obama’s inauguration speech reminds us of Lyndon Johnson’s brand of liberalism and the Great Society.  It is a welcome return to values that espouse equality with the emphasis off the wealthy and now directed at middle America, lower income brackets and the needy.  Another famous Mitch McConnell comment following Obama’s speech was: “The era of liberalism is back.”  How fitting that it comes at a time when we must pass new laws on gun control, comprehensive immigration reform and improving the environment.  The President also plans to work on his 2010 Obamacare.

 

Gergen says, “He emerged as an unapologetic, unabashed liberal -- just what the left has long wanted him to be and exactly what the right has feared.”     

 

Pulitzer Prize winner Historian Gary Willis writes about Lincoln’s maneuvering of the Declaration of Independence into the “founding creed of the country.”  In it, Lincoln says, we are all created equal, which was mirrored by Martin Luther King 100 years later in 1963, and what President Obama was talking about when referring to the declaration as our “founding creed.”  Gergen maintains that Obama has made equal opportunity the “central goal of his presidency.”  He adds that the GOP expected a plea for partisanship but received something of an ultimatum to cooperate, or else.

 

The question is whether Americans support Barack Obama in what he wants to accomplish in his second term.  According to a CNN/ORCInternational survey released Jan. 22, the percentage of those believing global warming is a fact resulting from cars, power plants and factories has doubled to 49%.  On immigration, 53% want a path for illegal immigrants to legal residents compared to 43% who want to deport them. Today, 51% favor all or most of the Affordable Care Act (Obamacare) with 44% opposed to all or most of it.  Is there any doubt why the President would demand cooperation from Republicans?

 

 

Albuquerque family massacre…just one more begging reason for stricter gun control

Gun bubbas masculinity

It happened on Jan. 19, a Sat. night, in the home of the Griego family living in a suburb of Albuquerque.  Nehemiah Griego, 15 years old, was charged with the murder of two adults and three children.  The killing of the children was described as “child abuse resulting in death.”  Authorities should define their meaning of “abuse” because there are several interpretations of what this could represent.  Several guns were found at the shooting, one an assault rifle that police said was used in the killings.  One described the weapon as an AR-15, also used by Adam Lanza in Newtown and James Holmes in Aurora.

Here we go again.  How many more mass killings will it take to convince a Congress and the general public that strict gun control is needed now?  A majority of Americans support most gun measures but are skeptical on some.  It’s 51% vs. 45% for more gun control over protecting gun rights.  It’s 52% to 35% for favoring some forms of gun control in a Pew Research poll.  But the country as a whole is still divided at about 50-50 on gun control, according to CNN Senior Political Analyst and National Journal Group's Editorial Director Ron Brownstein.  Naturally, Democrats are in favor of, Republicans against.

In more support figures, 85% to 90% want background checks for everyone, even private sales at gun shows.  80% want more laws to stop the mentally ill from getting a gun and an overall majority wants the feds to create a database to track gun sales, a ban on assault style weapons, high capacity magazine clips and online ammunition sales.  But there is a significant difference between Democrats and Republicans.  As an example, on banning semi-automatic weapons, two-thirds of women support the ban; the men are divided. 

With 44% of the public having an unfavorable view of the National Rifle Assn. (NRA), only 36% favorable, you would think that this would give Congress yet another reason to vote for more gun control.  But there is an obvious reason why they do not.  Two reasons actually, both based on money.  First, the money that will be used against them for voting for gun control.  Second, the contributions they will lose to their next political campaign.  This is in itself a glaring example of why we should have term limits.  Another 38% say the NRA has “too much influence.”  That is the understatement of the century.

The Huff Post laments that the day before president Obama laid out his plans for gun control:

• A student with mental illness and a violent past shot a downtown St. Louis business official yesterday after he lost his financial aid, before shooting himself, according to authorities.

• A gunman firing into a parked car at a Kentucky Community College killed a man and woman sitting inside and wounded a girl who was with them. Police suspect it was a domestic dispute, although they haven't made an arrest.

• A dramatic increase in gun violence in Baltimore so far this year continued with three shootings, including the killing of a 17-year-old girl in an alley. No one was arrested.

A typical day includes 30 gun-related murders and 162 wounded by firearms in this country.  Another 53 commit suicide with a firearm every day.  That breaks down to three people killed by a gun every hour and around 60 people shot during the same time period. The FBI reports that a violent crime occurs every 25.3 seconds.  And I’ve reported these figures before, there were 11,422 homicides and 19,392 suicides in 2010 using guns, according to the CDC, and guns were also used either intentionally or accidentally to wound 59,208 people in 2011.  And we’re supposed to be a civilized country.

There is no excuse for this carnage except an incompetent Congress and an apathetic public that still refuses to pressure Washington to do something about these unnecessary and innocent deaths.  Until they do, there will be more Albuquerques, Newtowns, Auroras, Tucsons and ad infinitum. Contact your congressional representatives: Senate; House of Representatives.