I just love Jon Stewart and Stephen Colbert. Their shows are just wonderful with humor, information, and satire. The last two nights have been great.
Jon did a wonderful bit about how the Dems are so curiously focused on the name of the Repubs attempt to repeal the health-care bill (about it being "job killing") that they completely miss the point that the bill substantively isn't "job killing". How about addressing the real issue Dems, instead of just the stupid name?
Then Stephen Colbert's show Tuesday night. He had a great bit about a tea party guy attempting to destroy an integrated school district because it actually was addressing the problems caused by separation.
# See, misguided government doogooders foolishly diluted the problem by addressing it. We need to ignore it so we'll pay attention to it.
# The injustices will become so apparent to everyone, that we'll put aside our differences that we worked so hard to reinstate, and join together in a new civil rights movement to undo the undoing of what we've already done.
Finally, Stephen's Palin rant was incredible. Copying it because it was so brilliant:
"Mika, you need to buck up. I know you think this story has no purpose other than keeping Sarah Palin's name in the headlines for another news cycle. I know you think she has nothing to offer the national dialogue, and that her speeches are just coded talking points mixed in with words picked up at random from a thesaurus. I know you think Sarah Palin is at best a self-promoting ignoramus and at worst a shameless media troll who'll abuse any platform to deliver dog whistle encouragement to a far right base that may include possible insurrectionists. I know you think her reality show was pathetically unstatesmanlike and at the same time, I know you also think it represents the pinnacle of her potential, and that her transparent desperation to be a celebrity so completely eclipsed her interest in public service so long ago that there would be more journalistic integrity in reporting on one of the lesser Kardashians' ass implants. I know when you arrive at the office each day you say a silent prayer that maybe, just maybe, Sarah Palin will at long last shut up for 10 fucking minutes. I know, because I can see it in your eyes."
Yes, don't we all wish that SP would shut the fuck up for 10 minutes.
OTOH, I hope both Jon Stewart and Stephen Colbert keep talking for a long long time.
Thursday, January 20, 2011
Sunday, January 16, 2011
Gun Culture
I've been surprised that not more had been said in the media about politicians and others calling for more gun control in the wake of the AZ attack. I guess I shouldn't have been. According to what I've read, any politician that suggests even the smallest bit of gun regulation apparently draws both barrels from the NRA and thensome. Apparently the NRA caused the Dems to lose Congress in 1994 and also caused Al Gore to lose the presidential election. Here we are wondering if the Tea Party is going to take over the country when the NRA has already done it. It seems the NRA controls which political party wins elections (if the NRA decides to exert itself). I'm surprised that the NRA didn't come out barrels blazing against Obama and in support of its poster-babe Palin.
It just incredible. Seriously, being able to shoot at 6 targets in a matter of seconds or a minute isn't good enough. It has to be 30. With the tragedies we've had in CO, VA and AZ, people still have no problems with having these automatic weapons available to anyone with a few bucks.
It just incredible. Seriously, being able to shoot at 6 targets in a matter of seconds or a minute isn't good enough. It has to be 30. With the tragedies we've had in CO, VA and AZ, people still have no problems with having these automatic weapons available to anyone with a few bucks.
Wednesday, January 12, 2011
The Second Amendment Should be Rethought
I'm posting some comments I made on a blog or two about the recent terrorist attack in AZ. I know a lot of people think we should focus on the Republican hate-speak people like Palin, Limbaugh, Beck, etc., which may be appropriate (they at least help stir things up), but in my opinion, we should just take the damn guns away. That's right, I said it, not everyone in this country has a God given right to bear any damn assault rifle, semi-automatic rifle, and handgun they want just because we have a Second Amendment. Maybe the 2nd Amendment isn't Godspeak, you think? It was written by a bunch of men who were fighting against a tyrannical government. They never had any expectation that some nutjob would be allowed to fire 30 bullets into a crowd at a market, resulting in the death of a 9 year old girl.
What really should happen is tougher gun laws, such as banning automatic guns. Seriously, they have no purpose except killing people. So to the Repubs and the NRA, I say shut the hell up about no gun restrictions. I'm calling for a ban on all automatic and semi-automatic weapons, just like we had in 1994. I'm even calling on more restrictions on handguns, the need for everyone to get a permit for one. I'd like to see them outlawed completely, but I know that won't happen. I say that the 2d Amendment, allowing everyone and anyone a gun is just wrong.
I respectfully disagree that if we have a law banning automatic and semi-automatic weapons that people like Jared would have been able to get one by other means. In that case, the bullets shot before reloading is significantly reduced and maybe, just may...be, a little 9 year old girl, as well as several others, would be alive today.
If we have more restrictions on getting handguns as well, more waiting time, better background checks, then maybe he wouldn't have gotten one of those either.
So where would this guy have gotten a gun if certain ones were barred and others significantly more difficult to obtain? Steal one? From who? Again, if said automatic and semi-automatic weapons were banned and handguns more difficult to obtain, the people from whom Jared could have stolen a gun would be significantly fewer.
And don't give me the bullshit that if we ban weapons or make them harder to get, only criminals will have weapons (I suppose that may be true, since you'll be a criminal if you have one). If automatic and semi-automatic weapons were banned, NO ONE would have such weapons. Persons caught with such weapons (including "criminals", who are "criminals" by definition of having such guns) would be arrested and the guns take...n away and eventually destroyed.
Second, many criminals get weapons either from gun shops or from "law abiding citizens" (straw buyers or theft). Again, if certain weapons were banned and more restrictions placed on other weapons, then criminals would have a hard time getting such guns either.
Third, if permits were required for every gun and must be produced upon request, then again, many criminals would lose their guns because they would not be able to produce such permits.
The 2d Amendment is not the Bible. It is not sacrosanct just because it's in the Constitution. Slavery used to be in the Constitution too, as well as forbidding the right to vote by women and blacks. Prohibition was an Amendment. All of this was in the Constitution and later removed because they were wrong. So maybe the 2d Amendment is wrong too.
I'm hoping that this tragedy will wake up people to realize that we have to do something about this gun-loving 'I can do whatever the hell I want culture.' NO YOU CAN'T. Not when the lives of 9 year old girls, mothers, fathers and others are at risk. Ban these automatic and semi-automatic weapons and their magazines. Place better background and more restrictive checks and permit requirements on other guns. Require more than a week of waiting before you get your gun. Stop the sales of guns by unregistered dealers at gun shows. Stop the ability to buy a gun immediately at said gun shows unless one has already passed a background check and brings said paperwork to the gun show. You want a gun? Then do the homework!
A gun has no purpose except to kill. Drugs can be helpful or harmful, and we regulate those, why the hell can't we regulate something that has a very small helpful purpose (hunting animals)?
See http://abovethelaw.com/2011/01/sarah-palin-doesnt-kill-people-guns-on-the-other-hand/#more-52245
What really should happen is tougher gun laws, such as banning automatic guns. Seriously, they have no purpose except killing people. So to the Repubs and the NRA, I say shut the hell up about no gun restrictions. I'm calling for a ban on all automatic and semi-automatic weapons, just like we had in 1994. I'm even calling on more restrictions on handguns, the need for everyone to get a permit for one. I'd like to see them outlawed completely, but I know that won't happen. I say that the 2d Amendment, allowing everyone and anyone a gun is just wrong.
I respectfully disagree that if we have a law banning automatic and semi-automatic weapons that people like Jared would have been able to get one by other means. In that case, the bullets shot before reloading is significantly reduced and maybe, just may...be, a little 9 year old girl, as well as several others, would be alive today.
If we have more restrictions on getting handguns as well, more waiting time, better background checks, then maybe he wouldn't have gotten one of those either.
So where would this guy have gotten a gun if certain ones were barred and others significantly more difficult to obtain? Steal one? From who? Again, if said automatic and semi-automatic weapons were banned and handguns more difficult to obtain, the people from whom Jared could have stolen a gun would be significantly fewer.
And don't give me the bullshit that if we ban weapons or make them harder to get, only criminals will have weapons (I suppose that may be true, since you'll be a criminal if you have one). If automatic and semi-automatic weapons were banned, NO ONE would have such weapons. Persons caught with such weapons (including "criminals", who are "criminals" by definition of having such guns) would be arrested and the guns take...n away and eventually destroyed.
Second, many criminals get weapons either from gun shops or from "law abiding citizens" (straw buyers or theft). Again, if certain weapons were banned and more restrictions placed on other weapons, then criminals would have a hard time getting such guns either.
Third, if permits were required for every gun and must be produced upon request, then again, many criminals would lose their guns because they would not be able to produce such permits.
The 2d Amendment is not the Bible. It is not sacrosanct just because it's in the Constitution. Slavery used to be in the Constitution too, as well as forbidding the right to vote by women and blacks. Prohibition was an Amendment. All of this was in the Constitution and later removed because they were wrong. So maybe the 2d Amendment is wrong too.
I'm hoping that this tragedy will wake up people to realize that we have to do something about this gun-loving 'I can do whatever the hell I want culture.' NO YOU CAN'T. Not when the lives of 9 year old girls, mothers, fathers and others are at risk. Ban these automatic and semi-automatic weapons and their magazines. Place better background and more restrictive checks and permit requirements on other guns. Require more than a week of waiting before you get your gun. Stop the sales of guns by unregistered dealers at gun shows. Stop the ability to buy a gun immediately at said gun shows unless one has already passed a background check and brings said paperwork to the gun show. You want a gun? Then do the homework!
A gun has no purpose except to kill. Drugs can be helpful or harmful, and we regulate those, why the hell can't we regulate something that has a very small helpful purpose (hunting animals)?
See http://abovethelaw.com/2011/01/sarah-palin-doesnt-kill-people-guns-on-the-other-hand/#more-52245
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)