Today's edition of quick hits:
* Hostage crisis in Algeria: "Kidnappers and at least some of their hostages were killed on Thursday as Algerian forces raided a gas facility where a heavily armed group of Islamist extremists was holding dozens of captives, including Americans and other foreigners, the Algerian government announced."
* Secretary of State Hillary Clinton addressed the situation with reporters this afternoon.
* More good economic news: "Groundbreaking to build new homes accelerated in December to its fastest pace in over four years, supporting the view that housing is poised to provide a substantial boost to the U.S. economy. The Commerce Department said on Thursday that starts at building sites for homes surged 12.1 percent last month to a 954,000-unit annual rate."
* VAWA: "Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) has several big-ticket items on his agenda this year -- gun violence and comprehensive immigration reform among them -- but he singled out one as his first priority: the Violence Against Women Act."
* Replacing Lew: "Deputy National Security Adviser Denis McDonough is expected to be named White House chief of staff, according to a source familiar with the process."
* Rewarding failure: "Fox News Channel is expected to announce shortly that Karl Rove has signed a multi-year deal to remain a Fox contributor through the 2016 election."
* The NRA doesn't worry about keeping those on the federal terrorist watch list from buying guns because "there's no evidence terrorists are buying guns." Well, I guess that settles it.
Anything to add? Consider this an open thread.
Leave a Comment:
The NRA claims that there is no evidence that terrorists are buying guns. Leaving to one side the definition of a terrorist, how would anyone know? The NRA has gone to great lengths with its trained seals in Congress to ensure that no records of any kind are kept concerning purchase and ownership of firearms.
NRA went from "No Real Answers" to "No Records Accessible"
"No Rules Allowed"
Step 2: They say there are a multitide of gun laws already, and that the key to saftey is enforcing the existing laws. THEN THEY BUY LEGISLATION TO PREVENT THE EXISTING LAWS FROM BEING ENFORCED.
All NRA cares more, and more guns does not matter who is buying.
Hakan@Florida
These are EXACTLY the people who would scream the loudest if it came out that terrorists DID buy weapons in the US. Hypocrisy is alive and well in the NRA.
Hey Mrs. S.O.S. - Good to see You Back in Action = Give Em-Hell , Straighten their britches up !!!!
Terrorists don't buy guns in the US they buy them from the US. What is the most interesting part of it all is they use our money to do it. foreign aid.
The Guardian newspaper has an online interactive page that you can check how gun laws vary from state to state:
www.guardian.co.uk/world/interactive/2013/jan/15/gun-laws-united-states
We have no proof that terrorists are buying guns because the NRA forbids research on gun violence of any stripe. Shades of RJ Reynolds squelching research of tobacco smoke causing health problems, then insisting there's no health problems associated with smoking or else the research would bear it out.
We have a military budget 10 times larger than anyone else and a Transportation Security Administration in addition to the Army, Navy, Air Force, Marines, Coast Guard, and CIA. If we are so safe without weapons then why are all these necessary?
I think we should give up our weapons when we are so safe that our military budget is smaller than Canada's. Until then an armed citizenry seems like a prudent choice. What if all our military profit centers refuse to downsize in peacetime?
Thank you for taking time from your busy schedule, fornicating your sheep over there in Wacko World, to come over here and give all of us a new and interesting demonstration of what the word "moron" means.
Yeah TC David is talking out of his Butz.
David. Answer this please. How the hell do you get "giving up your guns" from "safety regulations"? OH, I get it. Gun lovin, life hater. How is your right to own a gun more important than my right to be safe?
I think Daves point was that any country that feels the need for that much fire power is a little scary. But dear NRA members, an AR 15 is not going make much difference against a cluster bomb. All the more reason to sit down and question means verse ends. Or, why two wrongs still do not make a right. Atempting to end violence by countering with more violence will always have its draw backs.
So a lack of evidence that terrorists are buying guns means we don't have to make it illegal for terrorists to buy guns; but at the same time voter fraud requires IMMEDIATE ACTION to make it harder for everyone to vote to make absolutely sure no one is voting illegally, despite there being no evidence at all for voter fraud other than what the right-wing themselves have perpetrated.
Oh wingnuts, you and your cognitive dissonance: insisting that we're the greatest country on Earth, but that armed insurrection is a more appropriate method for getting your way than fair, free, peaceful elections.
They're just keeping up the tradition of their Confederate traitor ancestors.
You know, for a group that likes to think of themselves as hard-nosed, practical and logical, their positions are remarkably full of holes. Thanks for pointing out these discrepancies, Jesse. Just goes to show that others don't necessarily see us as we see ourselves.
I say we take a cue from the anti-abortion activists and pass gun laws of rough equivalency. After all, abortion is just as constitutional as owning a gun.
1) If you want a gun, you have to make an appointment with a Dr., in this case a psychiatrist, and he has to certify that you are not crazy after asking PROBING questions, including why you want to own a gun. That certification will be in a Government database, so we will know every person who wants to buy a gun and why. If the Dr. decides that your reasons aren't good enough or he suspects you are not a good prospect for gun ownership, then you will be added to the 'no-buy' list.
2) The prospective gun owner has to make an appointment with at group of liberals who hate guns or know someone killed by a gun, who will sit down and counsel the said owner on the hazards of guns, why the Second Amendment does not guarantee you can own a gun, and why the Feds are good for you. You can't leave the room.
3) After your counseling, you must wait in the vicinity of the licendsed gun shop of your choice for 72 hours, to give you time to think about your "choice".
4) If you wait too long to purchase your gun, you will start the process all over again
5) You must pay for any and all of the pre-gun ownership requirements yourself
6) Gun shops and owners have to be certified by the ATF. Gun shops will be built to government specifications as to door widths, arrangement of rooms, location of firearms and sanitation. The gun shop owner must pass a board certification test whenever the ATF feels like issuing it. If the owner cannot pass the test or his shop does not pass inspection, then the shop will be closed and the guns confiscated. All losses by the gun shop owner are forfeit.
7) If a liberal group would like to send 'reminder' literature about how you are harming society and perhaps come to speak to you at your door on a regular basis, they may. They are doing it for your own good.
Good job, Karen!
Give 'em a dose of their own medicine? C'mon, let's be fair. That's hitting below the belt. <big grin>
Brilliant idea...Democrats should pursue unpopular unconstitutional policy, just because Republicans did. To boot the 300 zillion anti abortion laws were passed in a house that knew full well wouldn't be taken up by the Senate and would be vetoed by the president.
Great Idea Karen, Now devise one for prospective parents.
Brilliant, Karen from San Diego!
Karen -- that is so very well done. Perhaps it needs a wider audience -- ??
Anyone may use it anywhere you think it might be appreciated. And, thanks!
I don't think these bozos see the irony of restricting one Constitutional Right all over the place and then threatening nullification or secession over some restrictions on another. But irony and consistency isn't exactly their strong suit.
The Democrats..(not entirely actually) As I have posted numerous times. This is the one major issue the left of the Democratic party is as way off base as the right of the R's is on well--almost everything else
Back when the United States Constitution was written the only kind of guns they had were muskets that took over a minute to load. I am sure if they would have thought in their wildest dreams we would have guns with the capacity to cut through a crowd in under a minute they would have worded the second amendment differently. How come no one addresses this point when they all cry about the second amendment; according to the NRA when we invent a ray-gun we should be aloud to have that out on the street as well.
I like it !! The NRA = National Ray-gun Assoication. Same difference to them. If there is a dollar in it for the taking.
Back when they wrote the Constitution of the United States the military weapons were typically kept in a secure location, under control of a senior commissioned officer such as Col. Patrick Henry (who led the militia of Richmond, VA, during the Revolutionary War).
Back then muskets were military weapons while rifles were considered personal weapons. This was because a musket in the proper hands could be loaded and fired three times a minute but was so inaccurate it was only useful when shooting at an opposing army, while a rifle took more than a minute to load and fire once and could be used to hunt.
Ray-guns, eh?...
I suppose every Republican would want one...
In honor of their God, Ronnie Ray-gun...
John
There were rifle units in the Continental Army. Morgan's Rifles being the most famous
http://www.wemakehistory.com/AZ1700/MorgansRifles/MorgansRifles.htm
They were more like a militia than a regular army unit. They did one very notable thing. They would target first the Indian scouts then the officers of British units. So rifles were not just used for hunting. I know people who reenact Morgan's Rifles.
In listening to the nonsensical rhetoric regarding gun control in this country, it is become clear to me that no matter how much outrage we express over the violence against children in this country, the Second Amendment to the US Constitution will continue to impede the drafting of reasonable laws addressing this national crisis.
Thus, I believe the only way to allow for reasonable progress in protecting the welfare of children is to draft and ratify the following Children’s Rights Amendment (CRA) to the United States Constitution.
Section 1. As a member of the United Nations, the United States of America, and all its peoples, fully endorse and support the following statement of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child: all children everywhere have the same rights, no matter where they live or what they believe.
Section 2: Every child born to this world has the right to life, survival and development; the child’s view should be taken into account in all decisions affecting his/her life.
Section 3. The best interest of the child born to this world will take primary consideration and will supersede all existing laws and amendments that otherwise could endanger the safety and welfare of children.
Section 4: All Children born to this world have the rights guaranteed by this amendment, without discrimination of any kind.
Section 5: The Congress shall have the power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article.
Section 6: This amendment shall take effect immediately upon ratification.
Section 3 is the key to this concept: only after we, as advocates for children, can pass a law that supersedes the Second Amendment will meaningful legislation be passed in this country.
This fight must have a beginning, so please work to ratify this proposed Children’s Rights Amendment to the US Constitution.
Thank you for considering,
Robert Flood, MD
Associate Professor of Pediatrics,
Saint Louis University
St. Louis, MO
As long as the babies are born inside the property lines of course. Now where do womens rights stand in this agruement ? Or are women our cattle of service ?
Dr. Flood,
Even Justice Scalia has stated that the Second Amendment does not guarantee a right to own and carry an AR-15 or any other semi-automatic weapon, including semi-automatic pistols.
Governments can place reasonable regulations on weapons. It will require people calling their congressmen and being collectively more frightening than the NRA to get them to act though.
In listening to the nonsensical rhetoric regarding gun control in this country, it is become clear to me that no matter how much outrage we express over the violence against children in this country, the Second Amendment to the US Constitution will continue to impede the drafting of reasonable laws addressing this national crisis.
Thus, I believe the only way to allow for reasonable progress in protecting the welfare of children is to draft and ratify the following Children’s Rights Amendment (CRA) to the United States Constitution.
Section 1. As a member of the United Nations, the United States of America, and all its peoples, fully endorse and support the following statement of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child: all children everywhere have the same rights, no matter where they live or what they believe.
Section 2: Every child born to this world has the right to life, survival and development; the child’s view should be taken into account in all decisions affecting his/her life.
Section 3. The best interest of the child born to this world will take primary consideration and will supersede all existing laws and amendments that otherwise could endanger the safety and welfare of children.
Section 4: All Children born to this world have the rights guaranteed by this amendment, without discrimination of any kind.
Section 5: The Congress shall have the power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article.
Section 6: This amendment shall take effect immediately upon ratification.
Section 3 is the key to this concept: only after we, as advocates for children, can pass a law that supersedes the Second Amendment will meaningful legislation be passed in this country.
This fight must have a beginning, so please work to ratify this proposed Children’s Rights Amendment to the US Constitution.
Thank you for considering,
Robert Flood, MD
Associate Professor of Pediatrics,
Saint Louis University
St. Louis, MO
When Reason fails, We at least always can fall back on Violence.
* We humans learn the most of the things we do most of. Mankind has honed brute-force to a tie. In accumulating the skills of violence, humanity should get an A++. Reading, writing, arithmetic, and wrestling, covered. The skill of rational communication ? Not that important. And if there was such a course, I would have to give humanity a D- for lack of effort. So let us face it. Apparently reason must not be that powerful. Or we would be spending more time learning it. When was the last time you ever saw 60,000 people storm an auditorium to witness a National Debate Teams Final ? Not going to happen. We are most interested in the things we know how to do. And in humanities case, it is swing clubs and calling names. We could be so much more, if we let ourselves.
* Comedian Pat Paulsen once gave a speech that started out like this: ( The time has come for us to sit down and reason together. ) But common sense was soon thrown out the window as he closed his argument with a Hitler style ranting of hate and violence. It could have been funnier if it were not so common place, or down-right scary.
"far right fringe" if Ruby Ridge was so clean, why did
they finally settle with the family???
I've come to expect better from you. Now I'm a man with
no party, they called me a RINO, & drove me away from the
party. You, "The Far Right Fringe". Maybe we Rockefeller
Repubs. are neither. Right now, you're doing what the GOP
can't, driving us back. It seems like every-time I watch
your show, it's hyper-focused on this issue. [Yes, it was
terrible, a sin, disgusting,
Get on the wrong side of a fed, or just a local cop then,
maybe only then, will you understand fear, & see just how
tenuous "innocent until proven guilty" really is.
Yes, lots of promises, just give up another part of the
bill of rights [we up to 3 now? habeas corpus, Sanctity of
your home & processions, guns]
I'd quote Franklin, but why, after you've made up you mind
already.
[http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15321167/#.UPjnfXeuiqc]
Banning machine guns and howitzers didn't destroy America's second amendment rights, neither will banning assault rifles. Assault Rifles are only good as lethal neat big boy toys but it's time to put down the toys and act like responsible adults.
Andy, what do you think constitutes an assault rifle?