Archive for priorities

Bet you didn't hear about this good US economic recovery news in the "liberal media"

FacebookTwitterRedditDiggStumbleUponTumblrLinkedInPinterestEmailShare

good news bad news paper game

Day in and day out we watch, listen, or read about the latest news stories, and they usually boil down to a few basic themes: criticism of the Obama administration; competing political commentary by the same old competing political talking heads; inordinate amounts of speculation; redundant beating of that poor dead horse, the (apparently) One and Only Very Important Headline of the Day; and trivial fluff.

I have the Tee Vee Machine running all day, so I manage to (over)expose myself to frustrating daytime cable coverage, and not once has there been a mention of today's Los Angeles Times above-the-fold, front page story, "Solid Growth for U.S. Likely in 2014."

That's right, there is such a thing as "economic recovery," yet economic news gets an overwhelming amount of negative attention and analysis, but nary a whisper about the recovery and growth that's being revealed in the Times:

The overall economic outlook for the U.S. has improved sharply in recent weeks amid a string of surprisingly robust economic data: Businesses have stepped up hiring, new factory orders from abroad are at a two-year high and consumers have been flocking to car lots and restaurants.

State and local governments that not long ago were in massive retrenchment are spending more too.

"We could see the unemployment rate down to 6% this time next year," said Robert Kleinhenz, chief economist for the Los Angeles County Economic Development Corp. That would be a full percentage point below the current rate and, in some analysts' views, close to full employment.

"Close to full employment." "Close to full employment." I'msorrywhat?

Anyone hear about this anywhere, any time, from anyone today? I sure didn't.

Ahem:

An acceleration to 3% would probably push up U.S. job growth to 250,000 a month on average, from a monthly average of 190,000 over the last 12 months, Kleinhenz said.

At that pace, the nation would recover all the jobs lost in the recession by the end of 2014. And it would push down the jobless rate closer to the 5.5% to 6% range that some now see as the potential long-term unemployment rate.

Maybe our so-called "liberal media" doesn't want to rock the "we're all sunk" (no pun) boat. After all, the more they can stir up even more speculation, anger, confusion, uncertainty, conflict, and controversy, the more opinionated commentators snap at each other, the more drama and rubbernecking they can generate, the stronger their readership, listenership, and viewership become.

And we all know by now that a big dose of what we can all agree is good news just doesn't bring in ratings.

bias liberal media my ass smaller

FacebookTwitterRedditDiggStumbleUponTumblrLinkedInPinterestEmailShare

Cartoons of the Day- GOP Priorities

FacebookTwitterRedditDiggStumbleUponTumblrLinkedInPinterestEmailShare

prioritiescar

Ed Gamble

prioritiescar1

Chris Britt

GOP Truisms

Rob Rogers

FacebookTwitterRedditDiggStumbleUponTumblrLinkedInPinterestEmailShare

Dorner case dispels the "nutty notion that a citizen can be heavily enough armed to fight off the government"

FacebookTwitterRedditDiggStumbleUponTumblrLinkedInPinterestEmailShare

no talking points

George Skelton's column in today's L.A. Times makes so many good points, it's hard to know where to start. Here's as good a place as any:

The nutty notion that a citizen can be heavily enough armed to fight off the government went up in smoke near Big Bear Lake.

Then Skelton went on to share some emails he's received from, erm, ardent gun owners. Here are a couple of excerpts:

The [purpose of the] 2nd Amendment is to enable 'the people' … to protect themselves against government tyranny." [...]

Then there are the right-wing racists, like Pam:

"When that redistributionist Marxist [deleted] Obama decides to take away decent people's homes and businesses and give them to the black criminal gangbangers, the garbage illegal aliens [deleted] and the rest of the low information welfare/food stamp crowd who voted for him, we who have our guns can meet them at the door, loaded and ready."

And there are many like Bryan, who asked: "What if the German Jews had been well armed" against Hitler?

My answer: They would have been slaughtered by the Nazi Panzer divisions.

The French and Poles were well armed. How'd that work out?

Skelton describes how many people believe the part about the Second Amendment right to bear arms "being necessary to the security of a free state," but ignore the part about the militia being "well regulated."

He explains how it should be "obvious to everyone by now that the right to bear arms can be 'infringed.' We're not allowed to bear bazookas. Or machine guns. No automatic rifles."

And for good reason, despite the recurring case being made these days about the right to own semi-automatics ("assault weapons") and large capacity magazines.

However:

As of this writing, it's not clear what suspected killer Christopher Dorner had in his arsenal. But it was enough to hold off law enforcement in Tuesday's shootout until someone upped the firepower, literally, by lobbying incendiary tear gas into the cabin where the axed cop apparently was making a last stand against the government.

The government virtually always wins.

He then reminds us that Jefferson Davis's rebels failed to fight off northern "tyranny" — and "back then the U.S. government didn't have tanks or drones, let alone ballistic missiles."

There's that.

But neither Washington, D.C., nor the LAPD is a foreign power. Americans are not going to permit Uzi-armed citizens to rebel against their country, regardless of any "tyranny" some disgruntled misfits might perceive.

Some in the Los Angeles Police Department who were on the lookout for Dorner ended up shooting at women and others who bore no resemblance to the suspect, a controversy our own David Garber wrote about in his post Mistaken Identity or Trigger Happy?

But as Skelton notes, "that calls for firing, not armed citizen rebellion."

As he also notes, guns are for hunting and for protection. I haven't seen too many arguments against those assertions, even from people like me who are no fans of guns in general. Of course, if it were up to me, I'd prefer that no animals be killed for sport, and that guns be as rare as "pro-lifers" would like abortion to be.

Skelton ends with this:

Guns to overthrow tyranny, irrational. That's why our founders gave us the ballot box.

The Second Amendment remedies for "government tyranny" just don't make sense. The way to "overthrow" government officials is to vote them out, not shoot at them. And in the unlikely event that the American government actually were to become a real threat, assault weapons would be no match for drones, tanks, or anything else in the government arsenal.

Time to retire that talking point and way of thinking and enter the real world.

FacebookTwitterRedditDiggStumbleUponTumblrLinkedInPinterestEmailShare

Largest gun show in DC raises admission to help bankroll fight against Obama’s gun safety measures

FacebookTwitterRedditDiggStumbleUponTumblrLinkedInPinterestEmailShare
Stop Handgun Violence sign Massachusetts gun shows background checks

Stop Handgun Violence sign, Massachusetts

 

What is so damned hard about processing this Constitutionally protected right and fact: America, you are still, and will continue to be, able to "keep and bear your guns."

Oversight and common sense safety measures to keep more children and adults from being sprayed with bullets will not infringe on anyone's Second Amendment rights. You know what infringes on rights? People who kill other people with weapons that belong-- exclusively-- in the hands of our military service members.

"Right-to-lifers" might want to check their hypocrisy at the door for two minutes and think about who and what they're defending.

They might want to consider twenty children and their right to not get killed.

They might want to have just a tad of empathy for those who couldn't fight back against an angry gun owner who fully intended to slaughter living, breathing human beings with his seemingly endless stream of bullets aimed at their heads... like Gabby Giffords, for example.

Or the five-year-olds at Sandy Hook Elementary whose little faces were blasted and shredded beyond recognition.

But clinging to the "right" to an assault rifle trumps men, women, and children clinging to their last breath.

And to make matters worse, these same self-righteous gunners prioritize lobbyists and profit over real liberty: The freedom to breathe.

Via The Hill:

Thousands of gun enthusiasts are descending upon the “Nation’s Gun Show” at the Dulles Expo Center this weekend and, for the first time in five years, are being greeted with a higher cost of entry as the gun rights community wages a tough, and costly, campaign to stop Obama and Congress from stiffening certain gun laws.

Admission has gone up because we are using the money to fight so you can keep and bear your guns,” read the sign on the front doors to the gun show.

“We have already spent $25,000 this year to stop impending legislation by hiring lawyers, lobbyists, and writing bills.” [...]

“Got to get them while you can,” said one man, who had just purchased an AR-15 assault-style weapon for $1,599 and a 42-round clip for $45. He did not want to be identified.

It has been well-established that military-style weapons and high-capacity magazines are not necessary for hunting, nor have any gun "enthusiasts" documented a case in which they've been used to defend a homeowner from an intruder.

That much was made clear at the Senate hearings on gun violence and in this video of Lawrence O’Donnell eviscerating gun hugger Gayle Trotter. But that didn't stop "the steadily paced stream of gun buyers slow[ing] to a stop in front of the dealers hawking assault-style weapons and high-capacity magazines."

It's rather important to note that the largest gun show in the DC area allowed for private sales. That means no sales tax and no background checks required.

What could possibly go wrong?

FacebookTwitterRedditDiggStumbleUponTumblrLinkedInPinterestEmailShare

Bonus Cartoon of the Day- Priorities

FacebookTwitterRedditDiggStumbleUponTumblrLinkedInPinterestEmailShare

priorities1

Via.

FacebookTwitterRedditDiggStumbleUponTumblrLinkedInPinterestEmailShare

The second most important thing to Mitch McConnell: the American people

FacebookTwitterRedditDiggStumbleUponTumblrLinkedInPinterestEmailShare

Mitch McConnell, 2010:

 

Today's L.A. Times letter to the editor, because our voices matter (but apparently not to the L.A. Times which, true to form, has yet to publish them on their web site today):

Elections matter

Re: "Obama takes fight to social media," Nov. 29

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) once said that his most important job was to make Barack Obama a one-term president. He failed. Now, with the fiscal cliff ahead, perhaps he can accomplish something for the second most important thing to him: the American people.

R.J. Cimiluca

Los Angeles

Second? Nah. We're way down on the list.

FacebookTwitterRedditDiggStumbleUponTumblrLinkedInPinterestEmailShare

VIDEO: United Auto Workers, 6 more organizations file ethics complaint against Mitt Romney

FacebookTwitterRedditDiggStumbleUponTumblrLinkedInPinterestEmailShare

In a previous post, "UAW Charges Romney With Profiteering From Auto Bailout," Greg Palast's report that Romney secretly made millions, and his biggest donors billions, off the taxpayer funded auto bailout got some attention.

Palast had written about how Mitt and “Ann, personally gained at least $15.3 million from the bailout—and a few of Romney’s most important Wall Street donors made more than $4 billion. Their gains, and the Romneys’, were astronomical—more than 3,000 percent on their investment.” And the UAW and others listened.

Bob King, President of the United Automobile Workers pointed out that Mitt Romney was busy writing op-eds opposing the Detroit auto rescue, but was even busier making money with his Delphi investor group “off the misfortunes of others.”

In the video below, you'll hear King's first hand account of how the UAW and Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics (CREW) “have filed a formal complaint with the US Office of Government Ethics in Washington stating that Gov. Romney improperly hid a profit of $15.3 million to $115.0 million in Ann Romney’s so-called ‘blind’ trust.”

Here is Ed Schultz interviewing him on last night's "The Ed Show":

Visit NBCNews.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

FacebookTwitterRedditDiggStumbleUponTumblrLinkedInPinterestEmailShare