Per Livewire, here is the message coming out of Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid’s office after Ted Cruz said he would use “any procedural means necessary” to thwart the proposed gun safety legislation that President Obama was so passionate about today:
“While this threat is entirely unsurprising, it’s outrageous that these senators are unwilling to even engage in a debate over gun violence in America,” Reid’s spokesman Adam Jentleson said in a statement to TPM. “No matter your opinion on this issue, we should all be able to agree with President Obama when he said that the children and teachers of Newtown, along with all other Americans who have been victims of gun violence, at least deserve a vote.”
Jentleson and Reid are absolutely right, the measures do deserve a vote, and if there were any justice, they would pass with flying colors.
But rather than common sense and decency, we’re seeing the same old GOP obstruction. How’s that gentleman’s agreement with Mitch McConnell workin’ for ya, Harry?
Every now and then on Twitter, I get a notification of an impending “Twitter bomb.” That means that at a specified time, as many people as possible organize to tweet a certain hashtag (#) so that a message will be sent out in large numbers, simultaneously, get a lot of attention, and hopefully trend.
Last night I got word that
#WhyRepublicansNeedToGo would be the hashtag du jour. I decided to jump in for the heck of it and posted a couple of tweets like (if I remember correctly): “ #WhyRepublicansNeedToGo Two words: Eric Cantor. Two more: Paul Ryan” and “ #WhyRepublicansNeedToGo Gay rights, civil rights, women’s rights, voting rights, and that’s just for starters.”
I mentioned nothing about Rand Paul (who delivered the ninth longest filibuster in U.S. history), other than to retweet breaking news updates. I didn’t say whether I agreed or disagreed with him or with the speaking filibuster or with his efforts to block John Brennan’s confirmation. I offered no opinion one way or the other.
However, had anyone bothered to ask, which nobody did, I would have said that I support a speaking filibuster (and oppose incessant GOP obstruction), I am not thrilled with Brennan, I am against the use of drones to target Americans, I am for major oversight of the use of drones by any president, I am for due process, getting a fair trial in a U.S. (civilian) court of law, and against assassinating Americans and denying them the option to give themselves up.
That said, I got an onslaught of trolls, all of them Rand Paul devotees, sending inane, nasty, baiting, and/or stupid tweets last night shortly after Twitter Bomb Thirty.
I’m sharing a few of them with you because 1) I’ve been meaning to do expose you to some of the extreme comments I get for awhile now to show you what many of us deal with on a daily basis, and 2) to point out the mentality of most of the tweets I get from Republicans and Libertarians. They always initiate these direct “conversations,” I never do.
What concerns me is not so much the infantile nature of the tweets, because that’s easy enough to ignore, but that so many people (or perhaps bots, accounts created solely for this purpose) have such hostility, anger, misinformation, ignorance, and feel the necessity to repeatedly direct it at those with whom they disagree. Even after I inform trolls that they are being blocked, they continue to obliviously tweet me as if I can see their tweets (there are ways to see them, which is how I know they do this).
Their irrationality and rage infects nearly every tweet.
Republicans, be careful what and whom you rile up, incite, and embrace. As the Southern Poverty Law Center is warning, this is fast becoming another Oklahoma City bombing waiting to happen:
Below are a few samples of what I was bombarded with last night. Notably, a recurring theme is that, after they enter my stream with intentionally provocative tweets and/or misinformation and I choose to block, they default to phony outrage. They get huffy and whiny over being deprived of their First Amendment rights, which of course, pertain to government censorship, not Twitter’s option to block tweets:
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
Welcome to my world:
@CreepySteveEnt (Bio: “game dev hobbyist”):
Keep drinking the blue Kool-aid. If this was a Democrat in 2006, your panties would have been wet.
if you were a dude, I’d have replaced that last part about with “jerking off.” Not everything that references sex is sexist
but, I guess its easier to just yell “sexist” than try to understand why people think you are an idiot.
Not every mention of skin color is racist. Not every reference to vaginas is sexist. Get over yourself
u r fucking braindamaged. “You’d be jerking off about a Democrat doing the same in 2006″ wouldn’t be called sexist
But, because I was referencing a girl… Completely different. Typical liberal victim syndrome.
People don’t say mean things 2 u because of ur sex. They say mean things 2 u because you have your head up ur ass.
I didn’t know that I lacked rights as a woman. Are you referring to little women in the womb? (I remember commenting about how developed the fetus must be if she’s referring to it as a little woman)
Another liberal that hates free speech if it means having a different opinion: @GottaLaff who blocks people she’s too ignorant to debate.
@JustinYoung30 (who apparently thinks teachers are worthy of disdain): @GottaLaff no shit you’re not a republican. That’s your problem. I’m gonna guess you’re a teacher or leaching the system @goodolick (3 followers, and please note the spelling of “you’re” from the account who called me stupid.):
@GottaLaff your a special kind of stupid aren’t you?
#WhyRepublicansNeedToGo Whoever created this ignorant hashtag is on food stamps. @KicheMalko (Bio: hard and raw with no regard for the law): @GottaLaff “civil rights” like letting illegal immigrants live have welfare and food stamps? “voting rights” like let illegals vote? @GottaLaff i dont know how im being rude but i think you need to be a little more educated on something called the constitution (I believe I reminded Malko that civil rights are indeed constitutional and that nobody has ever suggested that anyone should be allowed to vote illegally.)
What is the cause of all their anger? Why do they feel so afraid? Is it our African American president? Is it that whites are becoming a minority? Is it that they have an unhealthy reliance on firearms and solving problems with violence, so they feel common sense gun safety measures are a threat? Is it the “civil war” within their own party that makes them uneasy? They’re feeling powerless, so they have to dominate in inappropriate and dangerous ways?
Whatever it is, it is not good for this country, and they need to start listening more, agree to disagree, grow up, read and become aware of facts instead of relying solely on sources like Fox for their talking points, educate themselves, research, become more willing to hear opposing views, try using some civility, empathize, and realize we’re all in this together.
The Denver Post has a story up about Coloardo state Rep. Cheri Gerou (R) who filed an ethics complaint against gun lobbyist Joe Neville. She told Neville to ”(expletive) off” after demanding that he stop “scaring her constituents” by claiming she was going to support four gun bills that she actually voted against.
The gun lobbyist didn’t take too kindly to being told to f*** off and replied, “You just earned yourself another round of mailers in your district.” Of course, he interpreted her anger as an attempt to silence Second Amendment supporters.
Apparently his “another round of mailers” sentence broke a rule that says lobbyists must not influence lawmakers “by means of deceit or threat … or political reprisal.”
Gerou is probably grateful Neville didn’t whip out a Glock instead.
Just. Stop. Seriously, enough already from Republicans with Small Penis Syndrome. Yes I went there. Why? Because we have a real problem in this country, one in which deranged and/or angry and/or careless and/or stupid and/or otherwise defective people use military weapons that shoot way too many rounds too quickly into children and other living things.
And apparently the GOP sees very little wrong with that. They blame video games. They blame mental health disorders. They blame retaliation against those who disagree with them. But the things they do not blame are guns and the abuse of the Second Amendment by people who get off on firing guns.
So when most Americans (read the polls, talk to actual NRA members, Republicans) agree with common sense safety measures, it really irks them. When the president sees no end to GOP obstruction and considers using Constitutionally sound options, it really, really irks them.
Today it got under Rep. Steve Stockman’s skin when President Obama held a press conference and said this:
“… What you can count on is, is that the things that I’ve said in the past — the belief that we have to have stronger background checks, that we can do a much better job in terms of keeping these magazine clips with high capacity out of the hands of folks who shouldn’t have them, an assault weapons ban that is meaningful — that those are things I continue to believe make sense. (Inaudible) — will all of them get through this Congress? I don’t know.”
“I’m confident that there are some steps that we can take that don’t require legislation and that are within my authority as president… I think, for example, how we are gathering data, for example, on guns that fall into the hands of criminals and how we track that more effectively — there may be some steps that we can take administratively, as opposed — through legislation.
“As far as people lining up and purchasing more guns, you know, I think that we’ve seen for some time now that those who oppose any common-sense gun control or gun safety measures have a pretty effective way of ginning up fear on the part of gun owners that somehow the federal government’s about to take all your guns away. And you know, that — there’s probably an economic element to that. It obviously is good for business.
“But I think that, you know, those of us who look at this problem have repeatedly said that responsible gun owners, people who have a gun for protection, for hunting, for sportsmanship — they don’t have anything to worry about. The issue here is not whether or not we believe in the Second Amendment.
“The issue is, are there some sensible steps that we can take to make sure that somebody like the individual in Newtown can’t walk into a school and gun down a bunch of children in a — in a shockingly rapid fashion? And surely we can do something about that… I think it’s a fear that’s fanned by those who are — are worried about the possibility of any legislation getting out there.“
Those words from President Obama, per the freshman representative from Texas, were impeachment-worthy. No, I’m not kidding.
The Hill quotes Stockman:
The White House’s recent announcement they will use executive orders and executive actions to infringe on our constitutionally-protected right to keep and bear arms is an unconstitutional and unconscionable attack on the very founding principles of this republic. I will seek to thwart this action by any means necessary, including but not limited to eliminating funding for implementation, defunding the White House, and even filing articles of impeachment.
“The right of the people to keep and bear arms is what has kept this nation free and secure for over 200 years. The very purpose of the Second Amendment is to stop the government from disallowing people the means to defend themselves against tyranny. Any proposal to abuse executive power and infringe upon gun rights must be repelled with the stiffest legislative force possible.
“Under no circumstances whatsoever may the government take any action that disarms any peaceable person — much less without due process through an executive declaration without a vote of Congress or a ruling of a court. The President’s actions are not just an attack on the Constitution and a violation of his sworn oath of office, they are a direct attack on Americans that place all of us in danger. If the President is allowed to suspend constitutional rights on his own personal whims, our free republic has effectively ceased to exist.”
Gun manufacturers profiting off of death machines trumps everything, right Stockman? High capacity magazines resulting in mass homicide sits well with you, does it? Dead kids are not the priority, but NRA lobbyists are?
And which part of this didn’t you understand, genius?
“But I think that, you know, those of us who look at this problem have repeatedly said that responsible gun owners, people who have a gun for protection, for hunting, for sportsmanship — they don’t have anything to worry about. The issue here is not whether or not we believe in the Second Amendment.”
And Stockman’s, “The very purpose of the Second Amendment is to stop the government from disallowing people the means to defend themselves against tyranny” declaration isn’t quite accurate:
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
Tyranny isn’t mentioned. A militia is. Regulation is. A well-regulated militia is.
Not the freedom to spray innocent Americans with bullets, not overcompensation for personal insecurities, and not keeping the gun industry’s and politicans’ pockets stuffed with currency. Those aren’t mentioned in the Second Amendment.
And the president isn’t attempting to “disarm” America, nor is anyone else. Everyone gets to keep their precious firearms, nobody’s coming a-knockin’ to swoop into your home and take them away. As long as they’re legal. As long as the owners are responsible.
But you know what does “place all of us in danger”? Assault weapons in the hands of people who support gun magazines that hold 33 rounds of ammo, some of which ends up in a Congress member’s head.
And, hey, you know who else issued a whole slew of executive orders? George W. Bush.
Just another general threat, but the wingers are trying to make a deal out of this because “U.S. Park police say Ortega may have spent time blending in with Occupy D.C. protesters.” Sheesh.
Washington (CNN) — A bullet-proof window stopped a bullet at the White House, the Secret Service said Wednesday.
Authorities are investigating whether the bullet and another round found on the exterior of the White House are connected to shots fired nearby last Friday.
The damage to an exterior window was discovered Wednesday morning, the Secret Service said in a statement.
“A round was stopped by ballistic glass behind the historic exterior glass. One additional round has been found on the exterior of the White House. This damage has not been conclusively connected to Friday’s incident, and an assessment of the exterior of the White House is ongoing.”
There is no specific concern for President Barack Obama’s safety, a Secret Service official not authorized to speak on the record told CNN. The bullets were found Wednesday on the south side of the White House, the Secret Service official speaking on condition of anonymity told CNN.
It’s fundraiser time. Please donate if you can. We hate asking, but we must, in order to keep TPC going. Without you, we wouldn’t be here, and for that we thank you.
23456OWS on Oct 5, 2011:
An NYPD officer is caught talking about how he’ll beat peaceful #OccupyWallStreet protesters.
The Political Carnival T-Shirt
Modeled by @suzannegypsy
Lt. Col Barry Wingard is the lawyer for Gitmo detainee Fayiz Al-Kandari. For their ongoing story + related topics, please click on the link below:
Kuwaiti Citizen Detained at Guantanamo since 2002
The Political Carnival is a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for sites to earn advertising fees by advertising and linking to amazon.com.
Photographs on The Political Carnival site (please read):
Photographs from other sources sometimes appear on TPC for humorous or illustrative purposes. As it is not our intention to use these images in any inappropriate manner or to infringe upon any rights held by others, anyone holding legal rights in the use of these images who wishes to have them taken down please contact us immediately requesting such removal, with which we will comply promptly.