Archive for oh just shut up already

Second Amendment "cited as holy writ on a par with scripture." #NotOneMore

FacebookTwitterRedditDiggStumbleUponTumblrLinkedInPinterestEmailShare

guns not one more Richard Martinez Santa Barbara shooting second amendmentFacebook page link

Richard Martinez was on "The Last Word" discussing the Second Amendment -ing of his son Christopher in the Isla Vista massacre. He ended with a comment about how gun zealots will come after him once they decide his grieving period is over:

"My son's dead, and there is NOTHING that you can do to me that's worse than that."

The Second Amendment is becoming a religion to gun fetishists. This is not healthy on so many levels, starting with, you know, living human beings being slaughtered. Here are a few links to the Los Angeles Times that you should read in full.

Let's start with Steve Lopez's column that examines how mass killings should affect us deeply, but instead, it appears that, disturbingly, we are becoming desensitized or increasingly uncivil. His post is titled "Ignoring the Insanity of Gun Violence":

Sensational gun violence... always gets us wringing our hands about gun control for a few days or maybe a few weeks, but that's about it. The focus is often on the mental health of the killers in those high-profile cases, and certainly there's room for vast improvement in identifying and treating illness and preventing violence.

But firearm violence is an everyday reality, and the truest expression of insanity is the argument that greater access to more guns can make anyone safer. No developed nation comes close to either the number of guns per capita in the U.S. or our rate of firearm deaths, and yet the NRA and its congressional stooges stay the course, money in their pockets and blood on their hands. [...]

[E]ither [the staggering statistics on gun violence] have lost their shock value or we have lost our civility. [...]

[I]t's worth noting that the states with the lowest gun control grades have the highest rates of gun death, while the states with the highest gun control grades have the lowest death rates.

In the video above, Ari Melber gave Richard Martinez well-deserved time to express himself, as-- especially in the second half of the video-- he shifted from beautiful memories of a wonderful son to his frustration with the status quo and revelations of how he, himself, failed to take action until his own son was murdered.

Lopez ended his column with an earlier quote from Martinez: "Chris died because of craven, irresponsible politicians and the NRA. They talk about gun rights. What about Chris' right to live? When will this insanity stop? When will enough people say, stop this madness, we don't have to live like this? Too many have died. We should say to ourselves — not one more."

Yesterday I linked to an op-ed in the L.A. Times in my post, "Joe the Plumber": "Your dead kids don’t trump my Constitutional rights." Here's the link: California needs a Gun Violence Restraining Order. Today the Times is reporting that the "gun violence restraining order" concept has now prompted a proposal for a new firearms bill:

If notified by a subject's family or friends that someone could harm himself or others, law enforcement officers would be able to petition a judge to grant a restraining order that could prohibit possession or purchase of a gun. [...]

The family of Elliot Rodger, the shooter, had raised concerns with law enforcement about his mental state, and Santa Barbara County sheriff's deputies visited Rodger at his apartment in April but took no action against him.

Of course, ignoring countless mass shootings over the past few decades, Sam Paredes, executive director of the Gun Owners of California, called the proposal a "knee-jerk reaction." Apparently, in his mind, "knee-jerk" means that lawmakers haven't had years upon years to carefully consider needless deaths caused by easy access to deadly weapons. Isn't that just like a gun fondler who reveres the Second Amendment the way GOP Senate nominee Ben Sasse reveres his religion over established law?

Finally, there was this letter to the editor, because despite how often we feel ignored, our voices do matter:

It has indeed been sadly demonstrated that no alarms were sounded about Elliot Rodger prior to his gun rampage in Isla Vista this past weekend despite some warnings. There have been, however, countless red flags raised about the dangers of having the access Rodger had to guns. ("In Isla Vista, red flags came too late," May 25)

I blame not only those who misread and misinterpret the U.S. Constitution, which they also unreasonably cite as holy writ on a par with scripture. I also blame the politicians who pontificate about the horrors of innocent people being killed by these weapons while continuing to accept money from the National Rifle Assn.

I am weary of this repeated scenario, and I await the next front-page article on another mass murder committed by someone with easy access to guns designed not for "protection," but primarily to kill people.

Don Fisher

Claremont

FacebookTwitterRedditDiggStumbleUponTumblrLinkedInPinterestEmailShare

"Joe the Plumber": "Your dead kids don’t trump my Constitutional rights."

FacebookTwitterRedditDiggStumbleUponTumblrLinkedInPinterestEmailShare

Joe the Plumber guns Santa Barbara shootings

joe the plumber idiot

"Joe the Plumber" (Sam Wurzelbacher, the not-plumber), wrote the following in response to the grieving parents of the kids slaughtered in Santa Barbara by a gun-toting, knife-wielding murderer who took his own life:

By Joe “The Plumber” Wurzelbacher

I’m not talking here about the three tragic murders Rodger committed by stabbing before his driving and shooting spree; I speak now only to the families of the gunshot victims in Santa Barbara:

It’s a tragedy.

I am sorry you lost your child. I myself have a son and daughter and the one thing I never want to go through, is what you are going through now. But:

As harsh as this sounds – your dead kids don’t trump my Constitutional rights.

Well, there is that weird thing about my right not to get shot trumping your right to abuse the right to own a murder weapon. Some of us kinda cherish the right to live and breathe without intimidation by gun fondlers. As someone in Nicole Sandler's chat room noted today while I was on air with her:

"We can move protestors to free speech zone. But, we can't remove those who show up with guns?"

And as another chatter observed, "The Plumber's crack is in his head." I think he's onto something. More from Joe the Cracked:

We still have the Right to Bear Arms and I intend to continue to speak out for that right, and against those who would restrict it – even in the face of this horrible incident by this sad and insane individual. I almost said “Obama Voter” but I’m waiting for it to be official.

But let's not politicize it, right "Joe"? Crossing lines is apparently his real profession.

Which brings me to today's Cliff Notes, a shortened version of a post by my dear friend Cliff Schecter, who has given me permission to share. The title of his article is How the Gun Nuts Try to Excuse Away the Santa Barbara Slaughter—and Why They’re All Wrong.  Apparently it got the Breitbartians so angry that they're going after him, so you know it must be good:

[T]he firearms fetishists have been up to their usual tricks trying to excuse away yet another gun massacre in America.

They have their talking points at the ready for these, and they immediately got started: If we ban guns, they warned, then we have to ban knives and cars, because he used those to kill and injure people, too. California has liberal gun laws, and this proves they don’t work, they insisted. There is nothing we can do to stop gun violence, they recited; guns don't kill people, people do.

As usual, the gun nuts are wrong, and not one of these stands up to the slightest scrutiny. [...]

[T]he fact that the shooter possessed only 10-bullet magazines and no assault weapon—or what he could legally buy—clearly did help. As terrible as this was, it could have been much worse if the gun fetishists had their way, and any manner of weapon or magazine was for sale.

Additionally, and I know this is a tough concept to understand, but we have these territories separated only by an imaginary boundary known as states. They border one another. People can drive across them at will, as they often do from Arizona—where gun laws are among the most lenient in the U.S.—to California. It is also quite easy to drive from California to Nevada, which also has lax gun laws.

This might be why when John Patrick Bedell, another angry and troubled man with a hatred for his own government, decided to try to  assassinate public servants at the Pentagon, he went next door to Nevada to get his guns no questions asked, once he couldn’t pass a background check in California. Wow, that was hard! [...]

And for those of you about to point out that cities like Chicago have both strict gun laws and horrifying gun violence, well, you might want to do some reading about how many of those guns came from Indiana, which has much less strict gun laws, or other parts of Illinois, where laws don’t come close to matching those in the city of Chicago. Use The Google, my friends. It's free.

If lax guns laws and more guns overall made people safer, the United States would be the safest place in the world. [...]

But, if like foaming NRA mouthpiece Wayne LaPierre, you still are a believer in the almighty assault weapon and like your guns plentiful and unregulated, I have a fantastic vacation destination for you! It’s called Iraq. Every household with a male in it is allowed to have an assault weapon, no questions asked.[...]

However, If you do truly fear that “the government is going to use any information to come get my guns,” then I have a real three-letter organization, not part of the government, that you may want to fear. It’s called the NRA, and they’re collecting your private information as we speak. Good luck convincing the money-grubbing charlatans among their leadership not to sell what has been called a “massive secret database” of member information to any advertiser looking to make a buck. [...]

I know, your mind is spinning right now. Don’t bother. You are wrong on this one, as you are on everything else. Your reaction to shootings is to think first of your guns, which is shameful. The rest of us prioritize our children’s lives first. As my friend, the brilliant host of The Zero Hour--the #1 most downloaded podcast when it debuted earlier this month—RJ Eskow says, we’re not anti-gun. We’re pro-kindergartner.

I urge you to read his entire piece at the Daily Beast, here.

And while you're at it, check out this proposal (please read the entire thing) from an L.A. Times op-ed by Renée Binder, a professor of psychiatry and director of the psychiatry and law program at UC San Francisco. She is president-elect of the American Psychiatric Assn. It's titled, California needs a Gun Violence Restraining Order:

A Gun Violence Restraining Order would allow a judge to temporarily stop an individual from buying or possessing a firearm. The judge would examine the situation and consider all the factors suggesting that the individual was a risk to himself and others. If granted by the judge, the restraining order would have to be reassessed after a short period to restore the individual's firearm rights if he or she is no longer at serious risk of harming himself, herself or others.

FacebookTwitterRedditDiggStumbleUponTumblrLinkedInPinterestEmailShare

Simpson responds to Lynne Cheney's "shut up": "You are going to get facts without rumor & innuendo, BS & mush."

FacebookTwitterRedditDiggStumbleUponTumblrLinkedInPinterestEmailShare

the simpsons logo

Here is a rather lengthy and colorful statement to the Cody Enterprise from Al Simpson, former U.S. Senator, Wyo. (Retired) and another from his wife Ann. They're responding to this:

(Lynne Cheney) said, “How could you forget the little eight-year-old girl (Liz) who campaigned with us and for you in 1978? How could you not support her?” I said, “You don’t understand. I’ve known Mike Enzi for over 35 years ...

... And then Lynne Cheney said, “Oh, I’ve heard enough of that and I don’t want to hear anymore. I just want to tell you something, ‘Shut up – just shut up – shut up.’” Three times. I wandered off – stunned.

lynne cheney

Here are a few excerpts from Alan Simpson's statement. Please follow the link for the entire response along with a much shorter one from his wife:

First, this is not about Dick Cheney... We have campaigned for each other each and every time we ran – and neither of us ever lost an election! We have been in the trenches, we’ve been carpet bombed, shot at and missed, shot at and hit, abused, trampled, been both victims and victorious, and I would lay my life down for him. So indeed, it is not about Dick. It is about Lynne and Liz Cheney. So hang on tight because you are going to get some clear and true facts without rumor and innuendo, or any accompanying B.S. and mush. When somebody tells me to “Shut up” then it’s time for me to say to them, “Put up!” [...]

[S]he continued to cajole and work on me for me to say something else that she wanted. I was rather appalled at that but we had a cordial conversation and she asked me to tell her what I had heard about her, and I told her, much to her irritation – at least as to one aspect – and I told her what negatives people have said about me, and she said, “I agree. I have heard that.” [...]

In public life I have been called everything – and that goes with the territory... I’ve been called fool, idiot, boob, bonehead, dink, slob, greenie, soot-covered slob, all the rest – and that is “fair,” believe it or not, in politics. But what is not “fair” in my mind – and never has been – is when someone tries to distort who I am – as a person – and that was done on that evening of Sept. 21. In all of my 35-40 years of public life in Wyoming, I’ve never been called one particularly offensive name – and that is, a liar... and it sure as hell won’t work this time.

so there dog

FacebookTwitterRedditDiggStumbleUponTumblrLinkedInPinterestEmailShare

What's that smell? Why, it's the smell of Obama victory: US judge dismisses suit against Dodd-Frank Wall St. reform law

FacebookTwitterRedditDiggStumbleUponTumblrLinkedInPinterestEmailShare

go away palms hands

Note to Republicans: Cordray was confirmed, so any questions about the legality of his appointment went bye-bye. Time to...

stfu shut your pie hole

To rub salt into that GOP wound, a U.S. district judge has now granted the Obama administration's motion to dismiss a  lawsuit filed by Georgia, Michigan, Ohio, Texas, and others who did not have standing to challenge the Dodd-Frank law.

Judge, short version: No harm, no foul. Now get outta here.

Take that, attorneys general of all eleven states.

Via the L.A. Times:

A federal judge has dismissed a lawsuit by a Texas bank, two free-market advocacy groups and 11 states against the Dodd-Frank Wall Street reform law, saying they did not show the likelihood of financial harm from the new government authority.

The suit specifically targeted the centerpiece of the law, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, charging the agency was granted too much power and that its director, Richard Cordray, was installed unconstitutionally with a recess appointment in 2012.

If Republicans would stop wasting everyone's time and money going after Dem-supported laws, maybe we could get a few things done around here.

FacebookTwitterRedditDiggStumbleUponTumblrLinkedInPinterestEmailShare

Michael Reagan: Pres. Obama is "doing to Latinos what...Jerry Sandusky...did to the children of Pennsylvania"

FacebookTwitterRedditDiggStumbleUponTumblrLinkedInPinterestEmailShare

Here is an NPR quote from a July, 2010 post titled A Reagan Legacy: Amnesty For Illegal Immigrants:

"I believe in the idea of amnesty for those who have put down roots and lived here, even though sometime back they may have entered illegally," Ronald Reagan said in 1984

Here is what Ronald Reagan's adopted lying, mentally ill son, Michael Reagan, said in his column on The Cagle Post:

Emperor Obama obviously could not care less about helping the Latino population. When Democrats had control of both houses of Congress he did absolutely nothing for them.

Now he’s doing to Latinos what Penn State coach Jerry Sandusky allegedly did to the children of Pennsylvania — using and abusing them. With his short-sighted politicking, Emperor Obama has hurt the Latino cause in the long run.

Way to trivialize child rape, Michael. Classy. Thanks to President Obama, the children of undocumented immigrants are now given a chance to succeed in the only country they really know, are loyal to, love, and pledge allegiance to. Yet to that vile, reprehensible, disgusting excuse for a commentator, Michael Reagan, this is tantamount to being sexually assaulted and traumatized for life by a sick pervert. Speaking of sick perverts...

Comparing President Obama to a deranged felon who molested children and destroyed their lives (not to mention Reagan's ranting erroneously about "power grabs" by "Emperor" Obama) is off-the-charts unacceptable and he should apologize immediately... and not one of those non-apologies that starts with, "If I offended anybody..." or "If anyone might have been offended by what I said..."

The blatant and highly inappropriate disrespect to the President of the United States and young Latino DREAMers trying to make it in the country is appallingly stupid, offensive, and a new low (as if that were even possible).

Be proud, conservatives, this is your guy.

H/t: @cheeriogrrrl, Robert Sobel

UPDATE: We had a Twitter exchange. Here you go:

As you can see from my tweets, I asked why he said such things in the first place and for a link to the apology. I'm still waiting for an explanation and the link. If Reagan decides to provide either or both, I'll update.

UPDATE: Reagan tweeted this just now. So he lied about a previous apology on Twitter. He must have been referring to this tweet two hours ago to one specific person, but certainly not out to the Twitterverse.

Comparing the president to a child predator is "cute" to him??

FacebookTwitterRedditDiggStumbleUponTumblrLinkedInPinterestEmailShare

VIDEO: Michele Bachmann confuses John Wayne (hero) with John Wayne Gacy (serial killer)

FacebookTwitterRedditDiggStumbleUponTumblrLinkedInPinterestEmailShare

Michele, Michele, Michele, John Wayne the movie legend wasn't from Waterloo, Iowa. John Wayne Gacy, the serial killer, on the other hand...

Via The Washington Times:

John Wayne, the movie legend, is in fact from Iowa and the John Wayne birthplace is a celebrated landmark — only it's in Winterset, which is a nearly three hour drive away from Waterloo.

Gacy, though, had his first taste of the criminal life in Waterloo...

Wiki:

John Wayne Gacy, Jr. (March 17, 1942 – May 10, 1994) was an American serial killer also known as the Killer Clown who committed the rape and murder of 33 teenage boys and young men between 1972 and 1978. Twenty-six of Gacy's victims were buried in the crawlspace of his home, three others elsewhere on his property and four victims were discarded in a nearby river.

Gacy became known as the "Killer Clown" due to his charitable services at fundraising events, parades and children's parties where he would dress as "Pogo the Clown," a character he devised himself.

-- "Well what I want them to know is just like, John Wayne was from Waterloo, Iowa. That's the kind of spirit that I have, too."

That's right, Prez-Wannabe Bachmann just boasted about having the spirit of a rapist and murderer. Okay, no she didn't, but it would be helpful if, again, she either checked her facts or her own mouth.

Poor Michele has made so many gaffes lately, it's nearly as hard to keep up with hers as it is with those emanating from Former Half-Gov Stupetta McBlooperPants.

H/t: @JabezMcB

FacebookTwitterRedditDiggStumbleUponTumblrLinkedInPinterestEmailShare

VIDEO: Fox's Cavuto Interrupts Michelle Obama's Speech to Call Her Husband a "Nobody"

FacebookTwitterRedditDiggStumbleUponTumblrLinkedInPinterestEmailShare

ClusterFox does it again:


First, how beautiful does Michelle look? I can't help but bring that up, and I usually don't preface a post with such blatant gushitude, but she really looks all kinds of gorgeous.

But let's get into Schmuckus Interruptus Cavuto's cutting into one of the most touching, effective moments in her speech. She's the first lady, you pig of a man. Did I say man? I meant douche. No matter who is speaking, barging in like an uncouth cave dweller is rude, period. But during a speech about one of the most painful moments in U.S. history? Unacceptable.

Second: Speaking of nobody's...

Third: To then compound the insult by saying that Mrs. President Obama was married to a "nobody" makes me want to hurl things at my computer screen. See "Second".

Finally: This is why I never, but never, watch ClusterFox.  Their nasty, offensive commentary influences their already susceptible, gullible viewers, which explains why we're seeing that same behavior reflected all over town hall meetings, rallies, and Beck/Palin love fests.  What I'd give to cut a few ClusterFoxers off at the knees in the middle of one of their asinine, unintelligible broadcasts the way Cavuto did to Michelle Obama's eloquent tribute.

Final Finally: The President and First Lady are, and always have been, about as "somebody" as you can get.

H/t: rosierifka

FacebookTwitterRedditDiggStumbleUponTumblrLinkedInPinterestEmailShare