Already the nay sayers…but gun control will prevail

It’s been less than a month since the Newtown, CT, Sandy Hook Elementary School mass killing.  On December 14, 2012, Adam Lanza shot and killed 20 little children ages 6 and 7, six educators, and his mother.  He then killed himself and once again took with him the possibility of an understanding of why these maniacs do what they do.  Hopefully they will study his brain and possibly come up with something.  If he was mentally ill, at least that’s a start.

We’re not likely to get much from the Aurora shooter, James Holmes, nor is it likely that Jared Loughner who did the Tucson killings will tell us anything.  Holmes at least acts mentally unbalanced and Loughner was known to have mental issues.  Lanza used his mother’s guns to create his massacre but Holmes and Loughner got their weapons despite obvious mental problems.  The gun rights bunch is at least right about revamping the U.S. mental health system.

But they are wrong about trying to stop new gun laws that will help at least slow down these mass shooting carnages, as well as a number of firearm murders that occur on a daily basis across the country.  No. Dakota Sen. Heidi Heitkamp, a Democrat, said that gun control plans reportedly being considered by the White House are "way in extreme."  Of course even talking about gun control is in the extreme according to Wayne LaPierre and the Nat’l Rifle Assn. (NRA).

Let’s see, Obama wants to ban assault weapons and high capacity magazines, universal background checks for gun buyers, a national database of weapons, strengthen mental health checks and stiffen penalties for carrying guns near schools or giving them to minors.  Sounds like a great plan to me and probably any other individual of sound mind and body.  It’s only a bad plan to the gun nuts out there that love their weapons more than the life of others.

If this Heidi head wasn’t enough, Obama-smasher, KY Sen. Mitch McConnell, says any gun control legislation will take a backseat to working on federal spending and the country’s debt.  Whoa.  How many times has this issue been put on the backburner by conservatives never to be resurrected?  Hard to count the times.  But it won’t happen this time because the American public is tired of their relatives, friends and other innocent people being murdered by guns.

And here are the good guys, and ladies, who are going to give us this new life-saving gun control legislation.  Rep. Carolyn McCarthy, D-New York, wants background checks for all gun sales -- including at gun shows and a ban on online sales of ammunition.  Rep. Diana DeGette, D-Colorado, a bill to ban high-capacity magazines.  CA Sen. Dianne Feinstein is going after assault rifles, again, as well as other congressional leaders with similar bills.

But of course there are always the gun nuts in Congress that never give up.  CNN reports, “…two Republican freshmen, Rep. Steve Stockman of Texas and Rep. Thomas Massie of Kentucky, have introduced bills that would allow more guns around schools.  I thought we had gotten rid of all the fruitcakes at Christmas.  At this point no Republicans have proposed any gun control legislation, and even some Democrats are still standing firm on gun rights.

I continue to say the momentum is there and we mustn’t lose this chance to place laws on the books that will curb gun violence.  If we lose this one, we will never be able to beat the NRA.  And that would be a disaster.

I want concealed carry permits revoked for all except those with special needs…especially in Arizona



Arizona gun nuts



I can hear the screaming already from those gun bubbas that have to pack heat just to prove their masculinity.  And don’t throw the 2^nd Amendment at me because I really don’t believe the right to bear arms includes necessarily outside the home.  And if you people keep pushing this you are going to find yourselves without the right to even own a firearm, putting your buddy Wayne LaPierre and his organization the National Rifle Assn. (NRA) fanatics out of business.

For years the NRA has refused to budge on even negotiating over new gun control regulation.  And this has now come back to haunt them simply because the American public no longer believes the NRA’s bullshit about your “absolute” right to own a gun.  Nothing, particularly in respect to the U.S. Constitution, is absolute and this will be a key factor on any future decisions by the Supreme Court in deciding on gun control.  Just get used to being on the defense.

The Associated Press is reporting, “The next big issue in the national debate over guns — whether people have a right to be armed in public — is moving closer to review by the U.S. Supreme Court.”  It’s time to get these cowboys off the street and restrict the right to law enforcement and those with special needs.  I mentioned Arizona in the headline because there are people walking around all over this state that shouldn’t be carrying a gun.

Because of loose Arizona gun laws, loosest in the nation, you can buy a gun with no background check, use it without any training, and carry it anywhere you want to, including a bar.  Thanks to a Republican legislature that is one bullet short of a full cylinder, the gun nuts thrive here brandishing their toys with relish.  And although an Illinois federal appeals court struck down a state ban on carrying concealed weapons, there is disagreement here with other federal courts.

These courts have upheld state and local laws banning concealed weapons based on the Supreme Court’s ruling that individuals have the right to have a gun for self defense.  In Dist. Of Columbia v. Heller, the court ruled in favor of Dick Heller that allowed him to own a handgun in D.C. for self defense in his home.  Many have interpreted this to mean that the Supremes just might consider the banning of concealed weapons permits outside of the home.

The AP article points out that these split decisions between appeals courts is the very thing that whets the Supreme Court’s appetite for a juicy case.  UCLA law professor Adam Winkler, who published his book, “Gunfight,” last year believes SCOTUS just might take on the challenge.  Winkler thinks the Illinois statute would fall if put to a test before the Supreme Court.  He just isn’t sure how far the decision might reach re. an outright ban.  We’ll take our chances.

I’ll settle for the high Court to take a look at the whole concealed weapons issue, which could put yet another nail in the coffin of Wayne LaPierre and the National Rifle Assn. (NRA).  This organization and its radical management must be stopped and now is the time with the recent gun carnage in Newtown Sandy Hook School and other mass killings.  There is no doubt that gun control is on the move and the momentums is very encouraging.

NRA’s open gun culture costs U.S. $174 billion

The NRA takes millions from weapons manufacturers to promote more guns, resulting in increased violence on the streets.  It is time for the public to turn their attention to one of the major culprits in the gun violence issue, the companies that produce these firearms.  Some of these include Bushmaster Firearms, the rifle used in the Newtown Sandy Hook massacre, Colt Manufacturing, Remington, Magnum, Smith & Wesson and Springfield.

There is a complete list of gun manufacturers here, with their locations, so you might want to write to these companies and let them know what you think of the NRA’s stand for loose guns throughout the U.S.

Wayne LaPierre and his National Rifle Assn. (NRA) minions should understand the monetary side of gun violence and the fact that it cost the U.S. $174 billion in 2010.  Since 2005, according to the Violence Policy Center, gun manufacturers have contributed around $39 million to the NRA allowing them to do their dirty work.  Some of that goes into paying LaPierre’s hefty annual salary of $970,300 and the rest goes for other NRA execs., and pushing more guns on the street.   

All of this loose gun utopia came to a head with the shooting of 20 little children, ages 6 and 7, and 6 educators in Newtown, CT at the Sandy Hook Elementary School , plus the shooter’s mother, on December 14, 2012.  The gunman, Adam Lanza, did it with an assault type weapon that the NRA fights to keep legal.  You can see a list of mass shootings documented by Mother Jones here, which is really only the tip of the iceberg in total gun violence.

The real figure is the fact that there have been about 11,000 homicides by firearms a year with an additional 18,000 that commit suicide using a gun.  As an example, this is compared to 550 homicides a year in the UK where gun control laws are much tougher.  Even the double-digit IQs in the NRA should be able to understand these numbers.  In total there are some 310 million nonmilitary firearms in the US.  The gun culture is out of control and the public knows it

This $174 billion includes work lost, medical care, insurance, criminal-justice expenses and pain and suffering.  This number is even higher than for automobile crashes in the U.S. that are alcohol-related at $129.7 billion.  The Bloomberg report by Henry Goldman breaks down the average cost of just one gun homicide and it is an unbelievable $5 million.

He says, “That includes $1.6 million in lost work; $29,000 in medical care; $11,000 on surviving families’ mental-health treatment; $397,000 in criminal-justice, incarceration and police expenses; $9,000 in employer losses; and $3 million in pain, suffering and lost quality of life.”

Philip Cook of Duke U. and Jens Ludwig from Georgetown U. published “Gun Violence: The Real Costs,” claiming “It’s an economic cost in that it’s a reduction in the standard of living and quality of life in the same way that having dirty air or traffic congestion can be translated into an economic cost.”  The question the American public has to answer now is whether they are willing to pay this high price just so LaPierre and gun manufacturers can continue to get rich.

The most recent CDC data from 2010 reported 105,177 shootings resulting in injury including 31,672 who died by homicide, suicide, law-enforcement action or accident.  If all these numbers aren’t enough to convince the Congress and the American public that guns must be regulated strenuously and now, then there are more double-digit IQs out there than I had thought.

Public wants more gun control and looks like they will finally get it

Although it may be small, a new CNN/ORC poll found that “a bare majority now favor major restrictions on owning guns or an outright ban on gun ownership by ordinary citizens and more than six in ten favor a ban on semi-automatic assault rifles.”  This number has lingered around 50% in the past, which is also significant, but the figure is now 52% that want major restrictions on the ownership of firearms, even making all guns illegal.

Gun control advocates can thank wacky Wayne LaPierre, head of the National Rifle Assn. (NRA), and his gang of gun worshippers for this in a trend that looks like it will not only continue but escalate in the future.  An inept Congress which is paid by the NRA to vote the NRA way will not be able to continue to ignore a public outcry that demands action.  It looks like the Newtown, CT mass killings of 20 little children tipped the scales; and a shame it took so long.

The CNN survey’s breakdown is obviously skewed by the partisan divide.  80% of Democrats favor major restrictions, 42% for Independents and 31% for Republicans.  Females are at 62% compared to males at 41%.  On the other hand, 11 states back the NRA plan to arm teachers or others in schools to protect the children.  They are Arizona, Florida, So. Carolina, Virginia, Oklahoma, Nevada, So. Dakota, Minnesota, Oregon, Tennessee and Missouri.

The NY Daily News also reported, “Philadelphia Mayor Michael Nutter ridiculed the NRA's proposal, saying it was a ‘completely dumba-- idea.’”  And “New York officials also slammed the NRA stance, and a Staten Island school board is expected to vote against adding armed security measures next month.”  In the eight years I have been writing on gun violence, I have never seen gun control momentum like now, and with the NRA so on the defense.

The displeasure with firearm ownership has even entered the toy market where some mothers are taking toy guns away from their children.  A Chicago mom relieved her 7 and 10-year-old daughters of their Nerf revolver-style blasters right after the Newtown massacre.  Another mother collected a dozen toy guns from her 4 and 7-year-old sons.  And in Decatur, GA Shun Melson told her 7-year-old about the killings and he voluntarily threw his toy gun in the trash.

All of these impulses at the grass-roots level must now be nurtured and developed to rid the public of the absurd NRA belief, fostered by the head gun nut Wayne LaPierre, that it is OK for every person in the USA, regardless of whether or not they are qualified, to own a gun and take it anywhere they want.  But LaPierre and his bunch of hooligans won’t give up and it is up to the gun control advocates to keep the pressure on, increasing it regularly. 

And as one gun control advocate that is dedicated to this cause until we reach our goal, here are the new laws that I would like to see enacted:

1. Ban all assault or assault-type weapons
   
2. Ban all high-capacity magazines over 5 rounds
   
3. Close gun show loophole
   
4. Background checks for all gun purchases
   
5. Mandatory training for anyone owning a gun
   
6. Mandatory state reporting of the mentally ill

These are my six major targets.  Equally important, maybe in the future, but soon:

7. National Registry of all guns owned
   
8. Restrict concealed weapons permits to only those who need them

If it’s crazy to ask for gun laws that will protect the population, particularly our children, from firearm violence, then call me crazy.

Gun owners do not have a consummate right to own their weapons

In an opinion piece in the NY Times, Andrew Rosenthal said: “Even if you believe the Second Amendment grants each American an individual right to own a gun, which remains a matter of some debate, it does not follow logically, legally or constitutionally that this right is absolute. No right granted by the Constitution is totally exempt from limitations.”  The key word is absolute and refutes this claim by wacky Wayne LaPierre, head of the National Rifle Assn. (NRA).

Rosenthal continues by citing Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia’s 2008 comment that “offers to provide or requests to obtain child pornography are categorically excluded from the First Amendment.”  Rosenthal likens this thinking to the fact that it is also unreasonable to allow the purchase of semiautomatic rifles with 100-round magazines without even a background check.  Like at some gun shows by unlicensed dealers (the gun show loophole).

The carnage of this loophole is horrendous as evidenced by the recent mass shootings; see yesterday’s post.  Up to 40 percent of all private gun purchases at gun shows occur with no background check whatsoever, another absurd right the NRA protects like owning an assault rifle.  Bob Costas opened the media door to dialogue on this issue when he said emphatically that he believes we need more “comprehensive and more sensible gun control legislation.”  

But another gun rights activist wacko, David Kopel, said, following the murder-suicide by NFL player Jovan Belcher, that “there is no link between firearm availability and homicide.”  The conservative media followed suit with more false claims until Piers Morgan on CNN corrected this drivel with Harvard research stating, "states with higher levels of household gun ownership had higher rates of firearm homicide and overall homicide."

Morgan confronted Kopel that the United Kingdom has strong gun laws and a fraction of the gun homicides in the U.S.  Britain has 35 to 45 gun murders a year: America has 11 to 12 thousand.  Kopel wasn’t convinced.  The CNN host then cited Japan with the toughest gun control laws in the world and the fact that they have only 2 to 10 gun murders a year.  Harvard’s David Hemenway found firearm homicides in the U.S. 19.5 times higher than other high-income nations.

Kopel said Scotland was the most violent country in the world.  If this was supposed to relate to gun violence, the fact is that in 2009, there were two gun murders in Scotland, placing its rate at 0.04 per 100,000 people. In 2010, there were 11,078 gun homicides in the United States. Our per capita rate of 3.59 per 100,000 is nearly 90 times higher than Scotland's rate.  The numbers are stark yet the gun nuts continue to be completely clueless.

In an article in the New Yorker in early 2912, Jill Lepore says, “The modern gun debate began with a shooting. In 1963, Lee Harvey Oswald bought a bolt-action rifle—an Italian military-surplus weapon—for nineteen dollars and ninety-five cents by ordering it from an ad that he found in American Rifleman.”  Both junk mail and gun violence at their worst.  Legislation was introduced and passed to restrict mail-order sales of shotguns and rifles, agreeable then to the NRA.

That, of course, was before wacky Wayne LaPierre took over the NRA, after which it was downhill for gun control.  Until now.  LaPierre and his goons are on the run and it looks like there is no let up by the gun control advocates to push through new regulations on the ownership and use of guns.  The fiscal cliff issue has garnered the attention of the White House and Congress for now but that won’t last forever and then gun control will return to the forefront.

From Oregon to Connecticut, from adults to little children, NRA gun culture kills again

What a way to return from a vacation that also ended in a disaster but at least turned out better than the two events in the Crackamas Town Center Mall and Newtown’s Sandy Hook Elementary School.  In both Oregon and Connecticut, the shooter was using automatic assault-type rifles to do his dirty work, weapons that Wayne LaPierre and his gun nut members of the National Rifle Assn. (NRA) have been protecting since the ban was lifted in 2004.

In Crackamas, 2 were killed, one wounded; in Newtown, 27 shot dead, 20 of these children ages 6 and 7, the second worst mass shooting after Virginia Tech.  2 were wounded.  In both cases the gunmen killed themselves.  And, of course, before these two there were the Sikh Temple shooting, the Aurora Theatre shooting and the Tucson shooting.  But can you believe that sprinkled in between were another 6 mass shootings with a minimum killed of five?  Believe it!



LaPierre - Guns and more guns

So how does wacky Wayne of the NRA respond?  Without accepting any blame for what has happened in any of these firearm massacres, this blockhead wants to put armed guards in schools.  He continued, “The only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun.”  It’s always “more guns” because the only way LaPierre can hold on to his financially lucrative job is to sell tons of guns to satisfy the gun manufacturers that support the NRA.  Collusion at its worst.

However, there is no end to the negative reaction LaPierre has received from gun control advocates and also from gun owners.  Waldo Jaquith says the NRA looks “insane” and has now delayed joining the organization.  David Domke, communications professor at the U. of Washington, says LaPierre waited to make his statement to appease the Tea Party wing of the Republican Party.  Connecticut’s new congressman from Newtown labeled LaPierre “tone deaf.”

Watch demonstrators shame LaPierre, about 5 minutes in

NYC Mayor Michael Bloomberg called LaPierre’s statement, "a shameful evasion of the crisis facing our country."  Even former RNC Chairman Michael Steele said the NRA’s remarks were, “very haunting and very disturbing."  Democratic Sen. Frank Lautenberg from New Jersey called LaPierre “reckless.”  Another Dem, Sen. Barbara Boxer from Calif. says the man is “completely out of touch.”  It would appear only NRA Pres. David Keene came to wacky Wayne’s defense. 

Gabby Giffords’ husband, Mark Kelly, thinks even NRA members want more common sense gun regulation.  Ladd Everett of the Coalition to Stop Gun Violence is against putting our children in the middle of shootouts between the “good guys” and “bad guys.”  The right way, according to Ladd, is to ban military-style firearms and improve background checks.  I must add that there is no way at this point the NRA can defend not closing the gun show loophole.

David Frum, former special asst. to G. W. Bush, says that at least LaPierre’s press conference has shed light on the “foundational assumption of the modern American gun culture.”  He quotes an incident of a neighbor shooting a neighbor over barking dogs.  Frum says “There's solid research to show that most so-called defensive gun uses are not really defensive at all.”  Frum’s conclusion is that it isn’t really clear who is the “bad guy” and who is the “good guy.”

After Wayne LaPierre’s recent performance in answer to the Newtown mass murders, most will probably agree that he is the bad guy.

HIATUS RECOMMENDATIONS: Nasty Jack posts you might have missed or just want to re-read

Posts on Obama Health Care Act

Posts on Medicare

Posts on Social Security

Posts on U.S. Congress

HIATUS RECOMMENDATIONS: Nasty Jack posts you might have missed or just want to re-read

Posts on Blacks/African Americans

Posts on Hispanics

Posts on Racism

HIATUS RECOMMENDATIONS: Nasty Jack posts you might have missed or just want to re-read

Posts on National Rifle Assn. (NRA)

Posts on Wayne LaPierre

Posts on Gun Laws

HIATUS RECOMMENDATIONS: Nasty Jack posts you might have missed or just want to re-read

Posts on Gun Control

Posts on Mass Shootings

Posts on Guns and Firearms

HIATUS RECOMMENDATIONS: Nasty Jack posts you might have missed or just want to re-read

Posts on Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer

Posts on Hate

Posts on Arizona Politics

HIATUS RECOMMENDATIONS: Nasty Jack posts you might have missed or just want to re-read

Posts on Voting

Posts on Rush Limbaugh

Posts on Tea Party

HIATUS RECOMMENDATIONS: Nasty Jack posts you might have missed or just want to re-read

Posts on Presidential Debates

Posts on Democrats

Posts on Republicans

Posts on Independents

HIATUS RECOMMENDATIONS: Nasty Jack posts you might have missed or just want to re-read

Posts on Voter ID

Posts on Progressive Politics

Posts on Conservative Politics

HIATUS RECOMMENDATIONS: Nasty Jack posts you might have missed or just want to re-read

Posts on Electoral College

Posts on Mormons for Obama

Posts on Politics

BE SURE TO VOTE!

HIATUS RECOMMENDATIONS: Nasty Jack posts you might have missed or just want to re-read

Posts on the 2012 November Election

Posts on Barack Obama

Posts on Mitt Romney

Posts on Early Voting

BE SURE TO VOTE!

Nasty Jack is taking a HIATUS for the month of November

Sorry for leaving you on the brink of what will probably be the most important election that this country has experienced for years, maybe ever.  I have said pretty much all I can say, making sure that we progressives understand where we stand and what we have to do before Nov. 6.  So far, it seems most of us are doing our parts in support of President Obama and the other Democrats running for office.  If you haven’t voted do it, or at least by Election Day. 

I’ve decided to take a month off and work on a book that has been in progress for some time.  I hope my readers will stick with me and can promise a return on December 1.  In the meantime, I am leaving weekly periodic links to categories of subjects covered in this blog for the last fourteen months.  In case you want to re-read, or if you missed them, the links will cover all my issues from politics to gun control.  During this period I will not be publishing any new comments.

But let me leave you with a new site announced recently that could be another excellent source for information before the election.  It is powered by Bing search technology and combined with editorial excellence from MSN and political partnerships with Politico, Real Clear Politics, The Cook Political Report, Huffington Post and The Associated Press.  It is definitely worth a look.

Thank you for your support!

Jack E. Dunning

Nasty Jack Blog

Hurricane Sandy impacts the 2012 election - How bad is it?

Before we get into the path of Hurricane Sandy, let me bring you up to date on several Electoral Voting sites that I have been following and which I reported to you earlier in my posts of October 18 and October 23.  Of course the Electoral College takes its orders from the popular vote—although there has been at least one case when the candidate who won the popular vote lost—you might wonder just how these EC sites come up with their numbers.

Simply stated, and that is the only way I can approach this, they are projecting into some borderline/tossup states Electoral College votes based on mountains of political data present and past that the lay voter has no access to.  Nor do most of us care as long as we see accurate predictions of where the 2012 election is going at any given moment.  And that is the key because the figures are changing now on a daily basis and will continue that way until Nov. 6.

My favorites are Nate Silver’s 538 and Real Clear Politics, both of which measure a number of polls and then do their own thing with the numbers.  Silver employs a unique methodology using comparative demographic data to balance the polls, applying history, sample size and recency.  Here are the lineups from these two sites:

538

Elec. votes              Obama 296.6          Romney 241.4

Chance to win         Obama 74.6%         Romney 25.4%

Popular vote            Obama 50.4            Romney 48.7

Real Clear Politics

Elec. Votes              Obama 201             Romney 191

Vote Nov. 6

The 270 To Win site agrees with RCP, but the NYT has 243 votes for Obama, 206 for Romney.  As does 538, Time sees Obama already winning with 271 votes, Romney 206.  USA Today unwilling to commit as many total votes as some others shows Obama with 196 votes, Romney 191 and CNN has been static since I started following these polls, Obama 237, Romney 206.  The Huff Post has 277 Obama, 206 Romney, the Wash. Post Obama 255, Romney 206.

What can you do with this?  Well, you can’t take it to the bank but I’ll bet Vegas would give good odds on the numbers remaining the same, if not improving for Obama down the stretch.  When you have this many polls agreeing on the fact that Obama is ahead in the electoral vote, some significantly, the margin of error narrows considerably, particularly with such a small percent of undecided voters.  It isn’t a sure bet for the President but it is better than just comfortable.

Obama and the borderline/tossup states:

So what could happen?  HURRICANE SANDY!  Who could have possibly forecasted a weather disaster of catastrophic proportions hitting a part of the country with a population affected of 60 million?  So since we didn’t plan for this to happen, Nate Silver tries to do some prognosticating of his own.  He imagines 15 million individuals in this highly democratic area around New Jersey and New York not answering their phones for future polls.  In effect, they are shut down.

But if taken without this group, Obama is not likely to lose over one percentage point in those polls.  What is more important are those states in the path of Sandy where people may not be able to get out and vote.  As this is written on Mon. PM, there were 2.2 million people without power and getting worse.  So far, states have extended hours for absentee voting and on-site voting places like schools and fire stations will receive priorities in restoring their power.

Here are the states affected.  By election day, Florida will be completely out of the storm’s loop.  Other borderline/tossup states in Sandy’s way are North Carolina, Virginia, Pennsylvania and New Hampshire.  Most of the damage has been done in the first three and now it will depend on outages and follow-up crews to get things done in the few days remaining.  New Hampshire is at the tail end of the storm’s path and the status there more apparent by Tues. or Wed.

Those of us not affected by the storm should give thanks and offer our best to those in harm’s way.  You often wonder about things like this, at a time when this country is just beginning to dig out of a near economic collapse, and if someone is trying to tell us something.  Maybe it’s a shot at the downright despicable and hateful partisanship that has been going on in Congress, a kind of warning to clean up your act or else.  Will they listen?  We’ll see.

2.3 million early voters have already cast their ballots in 2012, a 10 point increase over 2008

According to the United States Election Project at George Mason University, 2,214,807 people had voted in the 2012 election as of October 18.  Paul Gronke, who runs the Early Voting Information Center estimates that 40% will vote early this election, compared to 30% in 2008.  Also in 2008, 91% of the domestic ballots mailed were returned in huge amounts for Barack Obama, according to a recent report from CNN.



 Although the early vote was trending Republican in early October, a later report by Reuters says the polls show that Obama has a “comfortable” lead over Romney with early voters.  Battleground Watch reported on four states: North Carolina, Florida, Iowa and Ohio, two critical to the candidates, one leaning Obama and one leaning Romney.  The very important two are Ohio and Florida, Iowa likes Obama and No. Carolina favors Romney.

The latest poll shows Obama holding a four-point lead in must-win state Ohio, and Romney with a two-point lead in Florida.

There are some160.3 million registered voters in the U.S., a mere 68% of the voting age population, which is, in itself, pathetic.  But when you look at other countries around the world, it is dismal compared to 100 percent of Argentinians, 97 percent of Brits, 93 percent of Canadians and 77 percent of South Africans.  Many Americans just don’t give a shit, and this is reflected in the low-life kind of congressional, state and local government we are stuck with in some cases.

How early vote turned North carolina Blue"

Republicans have strived in this election cycle to make it even harder for some to vote, primarily those who vote Democratic.  They have indiscriminately purged voter files and championed Voter ID when voting fraud is virtually non-existent.  And the GOP has even tried to stop early voting because it doesn’t favor their candidate.  Not necessarily the hate tactics of Karl Rove under George W. Bush, but certainly an extension of Rovian politics.



Barack Obama

John King of CNN asks the question of who benefits from early voting.  To find out he went to the state of Iowa where Presidents have traveled to for years to try and get the pulse of the nation.  In Johnson County, which is home to the University of Iowa, early voting accounted for 55% of the total compared to statewide of 36%.  Demand for early ballots are up significantly from 2008 and Democrats have a big edge; 12 to 1 over Republicans in Johnson County.

Does that mean that Democrats are smarter than Republicans?  Time did a study in 2010 that found this saying on college campuses: “The College Democrats are said to be ugly, smug and intellectual; the College Republicans, pretty, belligerent and dumb.”  On a more serious note, the study attempted to determine that if conservatives are dumber, why?  A non-partisan researcher found:

“…that more-intelligent people are more likely to say they are liberal. They are also less likely to say they go to religious services.”  Further, “…that smarter people are more willing to espouse "evolutionarily novel" values.”



Mitt Romney

If you are wondering just how important early voting is to the candidates, back to that bellwether state of Iowa.  Although the state has only six electoral votes, President Obama made repeated visits there because Iowa has more than a month of early voting.  In contrast, says Ben Jacobs of the Daily Beast, he has paid less attention to another battleground state, Virginia.  Even so, Obama is up 4 points in Virginia over Romney. 

Now get out there and vote early but be sure and vote!

More Mormons for Obama than you might think

Romney asks, which side yoday?

A June 2012 Gallup poll found that 84% of Mormons are for Mitt Romney, 13% for Barack Obama.  Based on a total figure of approximately 5.4 million Mormons living in the U.S., the President has a solid constituency of around 702,000.  A Seattle group, Mormons for Obama, says that Romney does not represent them.  They are progressive-minded Mormons, not officially affiliated with the LTD Church, who question Romney’s stand on gay marriage, health care and religion.

And then there are Mormon feminists who feel they can exercise their women’s rights and still be devout members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints.  Aimee Hickman, co-editor of Mormon feminist magazine Exponent II felt Romney’s remark about the “binders full of women” indicated his approval of powerful women around him.  But disagrees because the candidate still thinks women were meant primarily for domestic issues.

Feminist Mormon Housewives blogger Lisa Butterworth says of all the Mormon feminists she knows, none are going to vote for Romney.  An Exponent II unscientific poll recently found that Obama leads Romney in the upcoming election 72 to 30 votes.  Yet Andrea Alexander from Windham, NH said that she is socially liberal but fiscally conservative.  I could not determine just how big this group of feminists is but right now Romney can’t afford to lose any female votes.

Joanna Brooks, senior correspondent for ReligionDispatches.org and author of "The Book of Mormon Girl: A Memoir of an American Faith," said in Belief Blog that she wanted some “hard truths” and Obama did marginally address the following:

“This recession is fundamentally different than other recessions, and there are no short-term fixes.”

“Our old strategies for managing Middle Eastern conflict through military intervention or propped-up dictators don’t work. And there is no easy way forward.”

“The only thing the $3 trillion Iraq war produced for the United States was a mountain of debt and a legion of disabled Americans.”

“We need to have a serious discussion about Social Security.”

“Debts don’t get paid down without adjustments in revenues.”

Senate Majority leader and Democrat Harry Reid, a Mormon from Nevada, met with Mormon Democrats after the Charlotte convention and acknowledged there was pressure from the Mormon community to vote Republican.  He says his son was confronted at a new school by a classmate, when learning who he was, exclaimed that he didn’t know Mormons could be Democrats.  It’s not a joke the Senator said, and he’s been trying to change that for 30 years.

Mormon Democrats:

Jordan Morales, a Mormon Boise state student, learned his progressive page on Facebook was causing a real problem with LDS friends.  The whole thing even got “messy” when these friends started arguing with his mom.  All this comes at a time when Mormon Democrats are “trying to convince the rest of their church that Mormon teachings are more closely aligned with Democratic principles of social welfare and care for the needy, than conservatism's individualist ideal.”

It almost sounds like a revolution within the Mormon Church, much as I view the revived progressive movement that is going on in this country in a cycle that has determined that the conservative crusades of the last several years are not working.  Nothing from the financial to the social programs the GOP has tried has worked.  The U.S. economy almost tanked, millions are out of work, foreclose has become common and the middle class is listed among the homeless.

Unfortunately Mitt Romney wants to return the country to the policies of George W. Bush and others like him, and because of the big money Republicans favor he has been able to convince enough people that he is right to run a tight election race.  But there are factions who see through this like blacks, Hispanics and women.  In all likelihood, many Mormons will do the same on election day.

     

See my earlier blog on the major Utah newspaper that endorsed President Obama here.

NRA attacks Barack Obama on gun control…so who cares anymore

The President said in the October 16, debate at Hofstra University that he supported the 2^nd Amendment but wants to get the assault weapons ban reintroduced.  Mitt Romney stated flatly that he opposes any new gun legislation.  So gun control advocates were at least encouraged by the President’s approach, knowing full well we could not expect anything from Romney.  But the National Rifle Assn. (NRA) took note releasing the following ad with the same old crap:

"Freedom. These guys fought for it," begins the ad, which shows a soldier returning home to his family as gentle music plays. Then, the music turns frantic and the scenes go from color to black and white. "Now, imagine our country without it. Obama put two justices on the Supreme Court who threaten our right to self-defense. Defend Freedom. Defeat Obama."

As Joe Biden would say, “Malarkey.”

 

It ran in the states of Ohio, Virginia, Wisconsin, Florida, Colorado, Iowa and Nevada, according to Jennifer Bendery in the Huff Post.  All 7 states are considered toss-ups by Electoral College site Real Clear Politics.  What is interesting is that the NRA is not targeting Pennsylvania’s 20 electoral votes after Obama’s famous comment about these people clinging to their guns or religion.  A protocol mistake maybe but he is right here and in many other states.

Gun store gun bubbas from Des Moines:

I did a post on July 26, of this year, “It’s all fiction: NRA has no effectual control over elections, Part 1 and Part 2. ThinkProgress did a very comprehensive study on the effects of the National Rifle Assn. (NRA) on political elections in relation to money contributed to candidates and the organization’s influence on the outcome of the elections.  Paul Waldman of The American Prospect, and author of the study said: “The NRA has virtually no impact on congressional elections.”

  



How the NRA would have it

I thought this latter statement was significant considering how congressional wimps are scared to death of the NRA and its CEO Wayne LaPierre.  But plowing ahead in my research, I was even more confident in the statement and still cannot figure out why large gun control organizations like the Brady Campaign, Coalition to Stop Gun Violence, States United to Prevent Gun Violence and Mayors Against Illegal Guns haven’t focused on this data.

As an example, “In the last four elections, the NRA spent over $100,000 on an IE (independent expenditure) in 22 separate Senate races. The group’s favored candidate won 10 times, and lost 12 times.”  In all but a tiny number of races, the NRA endorsement is essentially meaningless and here’s why: 

In 2004, all of the 4 NRA-endorsed challengers lost to their Democratic opponents, as did all 4 NRA-endorsed challengers in 2006. In 2008, 11 out of the 12 NRA-endorsed challengers lost.  In 2010, only 18 of 36 challengers won.  in the last four federal elections, in which the NRA made a total of 1038 endorsements in House races, the group could claim credit for a grand total of 4 wins.”  



Wacky Wayne LaPierre on the loose

In my Part 2 post, there is insight into this myth—I call it a conspiracy by the NRA’s LaPierre to bolster the profits of gun manufacturers while lining his and other top NRA leaders’ pockets—that if you don’t follow wacky Wayne’s orders, you’ll be history in Congress.  Not true and Paul Waldman has made that statistically clear in his studies. 

On another side of the issue, according to a poll commissioned by Mayors Against Illegal Guns, gun owners, including a majority of National Rifle Association members, are in favor of some forms of tighter gun laws.  The poll found that:

71% of NRA members support prohibiting people on the terrorist watch list from buying guns (76% of all gun owners support the same), while 65% of NRA members back a law that would require gun owners to report a missing or stolen gun to police.

So I ask you again, who cares anymore if the NRA attacks President Obama on gun control?  Their presence and influence have been severely compromised in the way gun violence has taken over the country in the last year.  2013 is the year for gun control advocates.