In a recent article, More Guns, More Problems, the author considers getting a concealed carry permit in her new home state, and consults some “anti-gunners” to help her decide.
This idea is just wrong, said Joshua Horwitz, the executive director for the Coalition to Stop Gun Violence. Horwitz was quick to point out that Naveed Afzal Haq, the man who shot up a Jewish community center in Seattle last month, had a concealed carry permit.
“I think the idea that these people [legal concealed carriers] don’t do any damage is wrong,” said Horwitz. “More guns equal less crime is just false.”
The Democrats think they have found their smoking gun. A little-known Republican congressman has resigned in a cloud of immorality, and the left and their media minions are sounding the midterm election victory bell.
Hurray for them.
Of course, they can only succeed with this strategy – one that conveniently doesn’t require them to offer an alternate platform or one single idea to the electorate – if enough conservatives buy into the clarion call, and stay home on November 7.
Cynically, this is what the Democrats are counting on, and intelligent voters across the country must not fall prey to this charade. Instead, people must recognize that Nancy Pelosi as Speaker of the House certainly doesn’t represent an improvement in morality on Capitol Hill and across the fruited plain.
Larry Sabato of the University of Virginia's Center for Responsive Politics should, by rights, watch his reputation as a nonpartisan observer of the political scene go up in smoke as a result of inserting himself into the George Allen "N-word" controversy. More than that, he is a longtime practitioner of selective outrage at negative campaigning so characteristic of so many 527 Media journalists and the "experts" they go to for quotes.
Specifically in the Allen situation, Sabato claimed that he KNEW Allen used the "N-word," when he himself actually never heard Allen use it.
Rep. Barney Frank gave an interview to Advocate.com yesterday where he compared gay Republicans in
Congress to "secret Jews".
In what is billed as an Advocate.com exclusive Rep. Franks stated that the Foley scandal will result in a purge of gays from the Republican Party.
What do you think was the role of gay Republicans in all this?
Apparently, Kirk Fordham, Foley's ex–chief of staff and Rep. Thomas Reynolds's chief of staff, is a very active gay Republican [and] also had some role in the hush-up. [As of Wednesday, Fordham is no longer on Reynolds's staff.] There are others who were involved that I can't mention since they aren't out. They are all more like secret Jews.
How do the gay Republicans reconcile their consciences?
A lot of them chose between their gayness and their party. I'm sure the group of gay Republican staffers hid Foley's actions as best they could.
This is a real crisis, since before, gays in the Republican Party were willing to be tolerated, but Republicans will now be more nervous having gay people in positions of power. They have been critical of people who are out and gay—there could be a real purge of gays in the Republican Party now. It's probably just enough for people to be perceived to be gay.
One aspect of the Mark Foley scandal that hasn't gotten a lot of coverage is how the story even became one at all. The first public source of the story was an obscure blog called Stop Sex Predators which seemingly was started with the express intent of outing the GOP congressman's sex life.
How did such a small blog with no readership manage to score such a scoop? Its owner refuses to say. He/she/they has posted this message:
Maybe I'm not so happy that so many people are coming to this blog site.
not interested in media interviews. Thank you for your interest, but if
you were doing your job to begin with, Mark Foley would have been
exposed a long time ago. Instead of wanting to do a story about this
blog, how about covering the fact that the media sat on this story for
over a year. You're as bad as the Congressional Leadership that covered
Omar gives an Iraqis take on the latest poll numbers out of Iraq. One of the first things to strike me, is his characterization of how the media are misinforming the people about America's role in Iraq and as he notes:
"For over three years, the media kept focusing on the mistakes and shortcomings of the US military and US administration in what I can only describe as force-feeding hatred to the Iraqi people"
Sound familiar? I'd venture their reporting mirrors the left wing media in the US and the Democrats talking points. Omar states almost as much.
"What do you expect the attitude of the common Iraqi to be when he watches, hears or reads about the fairly wide anti-war movement in the west?
I haven’t posted much about the Foley Follies since this scandal erupted because I wanted to get a clearer picture of what exactly was going on.
As October Surprises break there is a tendency for the press and various political entities to hype up the leading story while neglecting the various stories behind the story.
Usually by the time the story has run its course the full picture is brushed aside in the wake of the lead. The damage is done and the press has moved on to the next item of the day.
NewsBusters gives us the opportunity to look beneath the scandal and dissect the way the media approaches these stories in real time. This post is my take.
Foley is gone. That’s good. If any laws were broken then I hope he gets what is coming to him. Lock him up; throw away the key. The same goes for anyone who is shown to have covered it up.
However, the Democrat and MSM attempts to paint this as a full blown Republican scandal is transparent and obvious. I find it hard to believe that these events just happened to unfold in a perfectly timed fashion a month before Congressional elections. Whoa, what are the chances?!
If I was an odds maker I would have bet on this sort of thing happening.
If you read the lawsuit, you won't get to the gist of what the State of California really wants from the six car companies it sued over their alleged contribution to the state's alleged global-warming problem.
(Aside: part of me would LOOOOOVE for this suit to go forward, so that global warming arguments can be shredded in open court.)
Here is the "relief" the lawsuit (15-page PDF) requests:
The People request that this Court:
1. Hold each defendant jointly and severally liable for creating, contributing to, and
maintaining a public nuisance;
2. Award monetary damages according to proof;
3. Enter a declaratory judgment for such future monetary expenses and damages as may
be incurred by California in connection with the nuisance of global warming;
4. Award attorneys fees;
5. Award costs and expenses; and
6. Award such other relief as this Court deems just and proper.
That's pretty vague. But this BBC article on the suit has this interesting unattributed sentence about what the state is actually after, something I have not seen mentioned in any other article I read on the topic:
The establishment news media places too much emphasis on the negative events happening in Iraq, so Defense Department employees need to side-step the media and get a positive message out to the American people, said Gen. Peter Pace, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.
According to an article by www.CNSNews.com, Pace was asked by a soldier what the department is doing to confront what the soldier called the "negativity in the press [that] is absolutely detrimental to the morale of our forces."
He said the limited coverage now tends to focus on what "captures people's attention" and "not the schools being built."
He said the military is finding ways to have soldiers bring good news about the war directly to the American people. "One of the things we've changed," Pace said, "is as troops come home ... they are given the opportunity to take an extra day or two of leave if they will stay at home and just talk to their local communities, not from a script ... [but] tell the people in their hometown what their experience was like."
Soldiers and others from DoD, according to Pace, have the responsibility "to be very open, forthright about not only the bad, but the good and to present it in a way that our fellow citizens can understand and accept."
In his rant against Chris Wallace of Fox News on Friday, former president Bill Clinton claimed that (bold is mine):
I tried. So I tried and failed. When I failed I left a comprehensive anti-terror strategy and the best guy in the country, Dick Clarke.
You would wait forever for someone in The 527 Media to do what blogger Patterico did earlier today. In the course of a longer entry dispelling other myths and falsehoods in the Clinton-Wallace interview, Patterico busted the Clinton claim about the anti-terror transition from his administration to the incoming Bush Adminstration. He located this interview of Richard Clarke in early 2002 that was cleared for distribution by the White House in 2004 and published at Fox News' web site in March of that year.
In 2002, the Coalition to Stop Handgun Violence (CSHV) published a report on the alleged merits of gun owner licensing, beginning with an unproven premise:
For years, polls have shown strong, stable public support for the idea of licensing access to handguns. The public intuitively understands both the concept of licensing and why it is appropriate to license people who want access to handguns.
The BBC has obtained evidence that Israelis have been giving military training to Kurds in northern Iraq.
A report on the BBC TV programme Newsnight showed Israeli experts in northern Iraq, drilling Kurdish militias in shooting techniques.
Kurdish officials have refused to comment on the report and Israel has denied it knows of any involvement.
From that point forward the story is literally riddled with assumptions about how other countries and the rest of Iraq will react, without a single quote or attribution from anyone who supposedly will object. Examples throughout the article's text (scare words in bold):
The Center for Immigration Studies (CIS) has released its list of media and elected “elitists” who are doing the most to prevent passage of meaningful immigration reform. This “motley crew” of media organizations that promote “unfettered immigration” and are completely out of touch with public opinion include (who else?) the New York Times and the Washington Post…and, even the Wall Street Journal.
There is “no other domestic issue where there is this gap between the elite and public opinion,” CIS Director of Communications John Keeley told CNSNews.com in an interview discussing CIS’s list of open border elitists.
"I'm always being accused of being a Hollywood Republican," Willis is quoted as saying, " — but I'm not!"
According to the story, Willis is particularly interested in foster care, certainly a worthy concern. But he doesn't think free individuals can effectively address the matter: "This is not something for the private sector to solve. This is a problem for the federal government."
Eric Burns, host of Fox News Channel's Fox News Watch, recently gave an interview to Bill Steigerwald of the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review. Following are two large portions of the Q&A, with emphasis added. What Burns has to say in the first will annoy much of the left, but some of his comments in the second presumably won't sit well with NewsBusters readers. Portion one:
Q: You don't give away much on the air. You're pretty good at playing the middle - the centrist. Can you tell us what your politics are, generally?
A: No. I won't do that because that's not what I'm paid for at Fox. There are a lot of people who do give their political opinions on the air. And I make it a point - and a point of pride - to have people not know my politics. I don't think they are relevant to a show that analyzes the news, so I prefer to keep them to myself off the air, as I do on.
Today's Chicago Tribune carried a brief analysis of the new team on "Today." Wrote staffer Maureen Ryan:
"(Meredith) Vieira and (Matt) Lauer are an inspired pairing. They were even able to turn her flubs into jokes, the true sign of on-air chemistry. Early on, she messed up a line leading into a commercial. 'Redo! Redo!' Lauer yelped.
"No need. The warm Vieira fit right in with 'Today's' mix of frothy celebrity updates, tabloid stories and bits and bites of actual news."
Earlier in the piece, Ms. Ryan noted that "Hiring Vieira was clearly a smart move."
Such enthusiasm at the Tribune is usually reserved for Democratic Senator Barack Obama and other selected liberals.
Remember all the talk from the Democrats about not mixing religion and politics? Well, it is just talk. When it comes to blatantly mixing religion and politics for advancing themselves in campaigns, the Democrats are not at all shy about wearing religion on their sleeves. But will the media notice?
A case in point is Harold Ford, Jr. who recently filmed a campaign commercial for the U.S. Senate from Tennessee attacking his opponent, Bob Corker, from the interior of a church. As you can see in this video, Ford is not the least bit shy about using a church as a campaign ornament. Of course, if a Republican had tried to pull the same stunt the MSM would be shouting in outrage over this cynical mixture of religion and politics.
Sept. 15: Rex Nutting, in the first BizzyBlog comment, noted that he e-mailed me support for how he calculated the item I contended needed correcting (which he believes does not, and therefore will not correct). I had to spend some time reverse engineering what he sent, because he did not provide a detailed calculation to support any of the figures he provided; those figures did check out, but doing so took time.
I will cover the dispute in detail Monday. I apologize for the delay, but will give away the ending in the interest of a peaceful weekend -- His calculation uses an averaging method that, while commonly used and therefore not "requiring" a correction, is nevertheless mathematically incorrect, as I will show in detail when I put the post up on Monday.
WSYR radio talkjock Jim Reith has just stated that if the government were serious about ending the War on Terror they would "nuke Baghdad, nuke the Sunni triangle, nuke Tehran...then look at Syria and say 'What?'" Reith apparently believes that the failure to use nuclear weapons proves that the "military-industrial complex" is directing the GWOT for profit. "That's how we ended World War II," Reith said.