First time visitor? Learn more.

Chuck Hagel likes Ike, but is he reading history correctly?

by Speranza ( 148 Comments › )
Filed under Cold War, Egypt, France, History, Iraq, Israel, Lebanon, Middle East, Russia, Syria, UK at January 31st, 2013 - 7:00 am

Although in many ways a fine president, Dwight Eisenhower (as he later admitted and as his Vice President at the time Richard Nixon also said) badly bungled the 1956 Suez War.  All it did was enhance the prestige of the Arab fascist dictator  Gamal Abdel Nasser, and helped drive our allies Britain and France out of the Middle East, (French distrust of America after World War II dates from Suez) all the while helping the Soviet Union consolidate its position in Egypt. Eisenhower learned the hard way (but at least he learned)  that the problem in the Middle East was not the Arab-Israeli conflict but Arab imperialism (now it is Islamic imperialism). I doubt whether Chuck Hagel or Barack Obama are capable of learning those lessons

by Lee Smith

When Barack Obama first came to office, the model bandied about by journalists and academics was Abraham Lincoln. The 44th president of the United States, our first African-American commander-in-chief, was the embodied legacy of the man who banished slavery and unified the country. And Obama, like Lincoln, assembled a “team of rivals”—a Cabinet not of “yes” men, but of prominent statesmen and policymakers in their own right, some of whom had a rocky history with the president, including most prominently his onetime rival, Hillary Clinton.

But now, with Obama’s second term just under way, the focus has turned to Dwight D. Eisenhower. Evan Thomas, author of a recent book on Eisenhower, suggested that Obama might look to Ike’s example for how to get out of Afghanistan and “draw down military spending.” The key lesson, wrote Thomas, is “have the confidence to be humble.” “Obama,” argued one Los Angeles Times editorial, “would do well to emulate [Eisenhower’s] patient pursuit of a peaceful world and productive economy.” And Clinton even bluntly cited the 34th president as a model in the recent 60 Minutes interview with her and Obama.  [……..]

That’s the version of Ike held by the Obama Administration: humble, prudent and patient. A five-star general who led the allies to victory over the axis knew how to corral America’s friends and thrash its enemies, but warning against the “military-industrial complex,” he also knew the limits of military force.

It’s easy to see why this version of Eisenhower would appeal to the president and his new Cabinet picks—especially his nominee for secretary of defense, Chuck Hagel, whom Peter Beinart called the “new Eisenhower,” and who called himself an “Eisenhower Republican.”

According to David Ignatius of the Washington Post, Hagel bought three dozen copies of a recent book about Eisenhower to distribute to Obama and top Cabinet officials, like Vice President Joe Biden and former Secretary of Defense Robert Gates. Eisenhower 1956: The President’s Year of Crisis—Suez and the Brink of War, is the latest book by Eisenhower scholar David Nichols, who’s also written a book on Eisenhower and civil rights and is working on another about Ike and the supreme court. But Nichols’ recent effort, writes Ignatius, “is a useful guide to how Hagel thinks about American power in the Middle East.”

Not unlike Obama, Eisenhower came to office believing that his predecessor had tilted too heavily in favor of Israel. After all, Harry Truman, the American president who recognized the Jewish state, once boasted that he was Cyrus, the ancient Persian king who saved the Jews from annihilation. Eisenhower believed it was necessary to recalibrate America’s Middle East policy lest it alienate the Arabs and put them all in the Soviet camp. The struggle then was essentially over Egyptian President Gamal Abdel Nasser. Whoever won the allegiance of the leading Arab nationalist of the day, a man who seemed to capture the collective Arab imagination stretching from North Africa to the Persian Gulf, would win the Cold War struggle for the Middle East. Seen from this perspective, siding too much with Israel was a non-starter.

Accordingly, when Israel, together with France and Great Britain, invaded the Suez Canal after Nasser had nationalized the strategically vital waterway, Eisenhower compelled the three American allies to withdraw. The United States, he believed, should never be perceived to be collaborating with the great European colonial powers, or else the Soviets could rightly portray Washington as complicit with colonialism. Eisenhower’s triumph at Suez then amounted to recognizing when the interests of U.S. allies clashed with our own and putting them in their place.

According to Ignatius, that’s the sort of strategic courage that Hagel prizes in Eisenhower. The problem, however, is that since neither London nor Paris have a position in the Middle East any longer, Hagel’s fascination with Suez—his determination that Obama’s senior decision-makers should all learn the same lesson from the same book—tends to underscore his unseemly obsession with Israel. Worse yet for the former Nebraska lawmaker, who once went out of his way to clarify that he was not an “Israeli senator,” is the fact that Eisenhower’s strategic understanding of the Middle East was long ago discredited—by none other than Ike himself.

In fact, Eisenhower came to believe that Suez had been the “biggest foreign-policy blunder of his administration.” In hindsight, it’s not hard to see why. He ruined the position of two longtime allies, effectively driving Britain out of the Middle East once and for all, and without any benefit to American interests. If Eisenhower expected Nasser to be grateful, he was sorely mistaken.

“From Nasser’s perspective, he played the superpowers against each other and came out the winner,” says Michael Doran, a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution’s Saban Center for Middle East Policy. “What Ike thought he was doing was laying the groundwork for a new order in the Middle East, a third course between the re-imposition of European colonialism and the Soviet Union.  [……..]”

Doran, a former George W. Bush Administration National Security Council staffer in charge of the Middle East, is finishing a book about Eisenhower and the Middle East that looks at how Eisenhower’s understanding of the region changed over time. “Eisenhower slammed his allies and aided his enemies at Suez,” Doran explains, “because his policy was based on certain key assumptions of how the Arab world worked. The most important of these was the notion of Arab unity. [……].”

Chief among them, Eisenhower and his Secretary of State John Foster Dulles believed, was the Arab-Israeli conflict. They saw the role of the United States then as playing the honest broker, mediating between Israel on one side and the Arab world on the other. If this conceit is still popular today with American policymakers, says Doran, “it’s partly because some Arab officials continue to talk this way. The idea is, to win over the Arabs we have to stop being so sympathetic to Israel.”

But in the wake of Suez, Eisenhower came to see the region through a different lens. He paid more attention to what Arab leaders actually did, rather than what they said. “Between March 1957 and July 1958, Eisenhower got the equivalent of the Arab spring,” says Doran. “It was a revolutionary wave around the region and for Ike a tutorial on Arab politics. There was upheaval after upheaval, in Syria, Lebanon, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, and then the Iraqi revolution of 1958 that toppled an American ally. All of them were internal conflicts, tantamount to Arab civil wars, and had nothing to do with Israel. With this, Eisenhower recognized that the image he had of the Arab world had nothing to do with the political realities of the Middle East.”

[…….]

In 1958, Nasser was enjoying his heyday, boosted largely by the victory in Suez that Eisenhower handed him on a silver platter. Evidence that Ike came to reject his earlier understanding of the Middle East was his decision to land the Marines in Lebanon in 1958 to protect a pro-U.S. government. “Nasser was monkeying around in Jordan and had stoked a low-level civil war in Lebanon,” says Doran. “The U.S. was aware that its allies, Camille Chamoun in Lebanon, and King Hussein in Jordan, were embattled. Eisenhower had already watched the pro-U.S. Hashemite dynasty in Iraq fall and saw it as a disaster for the West, and a victory for Nasser and the Soviet Union. [……..]”

This Eisenhower—defending allies and vanquishing foes in order to advance American interests—squares with neither the outdated and uninformed version of Ike that Hagel promotes, nor with Hagel’s own policy prescriptions. Hagel is against sanctions on Iran and even voted against designating its Revolutionary Guards Corps as a terrorist organization, and wants to engage other terror outfits, like Hamas.  […….] Because, by all indications, he has thus far been pushing an account of history more than 50 years out of date.

Read the rest  – Eisenhower’s new fans

Tags: , , , ,

Comments

Comments and respectful debate are both welcome and encouraged.

Comments are the sole opinion of the comment writer, just as each thread posted is the sole opinion or post idea of the administrator that posted it or of the readers that have written guest posts for the Blogmocracy.

Obscene, abusive, or annoying remarks may be deleted or moved to spam for admin review, but the fact that particular comments remain on the site in no way constitutes an endorsement of their content by any other commenter or the admins of this Blogmocracy.

We're not easily offended and don't want people to think they have to walk on eggshells around here (like at another place that shall remain nameless) but of course, there is a limit to everything.

Play nice!

148 Responses to “Chuck Hagel likes Ike, but is he reading history correctly?”
( jump to bottom )

  1. 1 | January 31, 2013 7:22 am

    I doubt whether Chuck Hagel or Barack Obama are capable of learning those lessons

    It is not that they can’t learn the lesson, rather that they take away from the lesson something different than you or I. We look at Islamic Imperialism, and say that it must be countered and stopped. They look at Islamic Imperialism and smile. They see it as something that must be nurtured and encouraged. So when they look at the Middle East and see Israel as the great impediment, don’t think that they mean an impediment to Peace. Rather, they see Israel as standing in the way of a successful Imperial Islam that would dominate that sector of the world.


  2. rain of lead
    2 | January 31, 2013 7:28 am

    @ Iron Fist:

    mornin IF,
    here is a chuckle to start the day

    ZUCKER UNTUCKED: @RuPaul scored 565,000 viewers on LOGO vs @piersmorgan 545,000 on CNN in Monday 9 PM showdown…

    BWAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!

    How unbelievably pathetic, Piers Morgan is on CNN, RuPaul is on some channel I’ve never heard of called Logo TV.


  3. Fritz Katz
    3 | January 31, 2013 7:28 am

    Don’t it always seem to go

    That you don’t know what you’ve got

    ‘Til it’s gone

    They’re demolishing & paving over Reagan’s childhood home

    And putting up a parking lot for Obama’s presidential library.


  4. rain of lead
    4 | January 31, 2013 7:30 am

    then there is this :(

    The head of the New York branch of a Hamas-affiliated group is seeking a seat on the New York City Council

    http://weaselzippers.us/2013/01/30/cair-leader-to-run-for-seat-on-new-york-city-council/

    (yeah, he’ll probably win)


  5. 5 | January 31, 2013 7:44 am

    Fritz Katz wrote:

    Don’t it always seem to go

    That you don’t know what you’ve got

    ‘Til it’s gone

    They’re demolishing & paving over Reagan’s childhood home

    And putting up a parking lot for Obama’s presidential library.

    Even aside from the historical significance, it’s a lovely century-old building that would seen to have value in its own right. The lyric selection is as perfect as it gets, kudos!


  6. 6 | January 31, 2013 8:05 am

    @ rain of lead:

    All of CNN’s ratings are in the shitter. I saw where they are canceling Soledad O’Brian. Good. I haven’t watched CNN since the ’90s. They are so last century! :P


  7. 7 | January 31, 2013 8:09 am

    @ Fritz Katz:
    Enemy action, that’s all it is. Time to memory hole all the good Republicans have done.


  8. 8 | January 31, 2013 8:18 am

    @ rain of lead:

    He will be cross endorsed by the Democrat and Republican Parties. McCain will campaign with him.


  9. MikeA
    9 | January 31, 2013 8:20 am

    @ Iron Fist:

    They are cencelling her?!?!? NICE!!!!! You made my morning which was going downhill from having a director with unrealistic schedules. In the project plan we are looking for the box that says… then a miracle happens…


  10. 10 | January 31, 2013 8:20 am

    The GDP drop is no big deal.

    Why the GDP Drop is No Big Deal


  11. 11 | January 31, 2013 8:22 am

    @ Iron Fist:

    Maybe Charles Johnson will get a show.


  12. 12 | January 31, 2013 8:28 am

    @ MikeA:

    I love those project plans! Actually, where I am right now they have pretty realistic schedules. It is a nice change. At my last job we didn’t have a schedule, so the lead developer on the project was always refactoring code that worked to make it more textbook “perfect”. That got old. We spent more time rewriting code that worked than we did writing new code.


  13. 13 | January 31, 2013 8:29 am

    @ Rodan:

    Hippie-palooza? :mrgreen:


  14. rain of lead
    14 | January 31, 2013 8:29 am

    Rodan wrote:

    The GDP drop is no big deal.

    Why the GDP Drop is No Big Deal

    yup cause in a good economy companys lay people off and close stores
    and shift to part time help as much as they can and reduce incentive/
    bonus plans,and trim and cut and lower costs as much as they can…

    cause that’s what they do…..when the economy is strong

    /
    ( very bitter / tag)


  15. 15 | January 31, 2013 8:33 am

    Rodan wrote:

    Why the GDP Drop is No Big Deal

    Whew, that was a close one! I feel sooomuch better now. :|


  16. 16 | January 31, 2013 8:39 am

    Iron Fist wrote:

    @ Rodan:
    Hippie-palooza?

    He can do specials on the Nazi threat. Hes back railing about Nazis taking over.


  17. 17 | January 31, 2013 8:41 am

    @ rain of lead:
    @ MacDuff:

    This is the strongest economy since the 90’s!
    ///

    That’s what I read on some blogs.


  18. Speranza
    18 | January 31, 2013 8:44 am

    MacDuff wrote:

    Even aside from the historical significance, it’s a lovely century-old building that would seen to have value in its own right. The lyric selection is as perfect as it gets, kudos!

    They can’t wait to demolish anything that deals with Reagan.


  19. buzzsawmonkey
    19 | January 31, 2013 8:44 am

    Rodan wrote:

    Maybe Charles Johnson will get a show.

    They can call it “The Wide-Angle Lens,” since they’ll want to fit him into the TV frame.


  20. Speranza
    20 | January 31, 2013 8:45 am

    Rodan wrote:

    @ Iron Fist:
    Maybe Charles Johnson will get a show.

    Back in 2006 he appeared on CNN.


  21. 21 | January 31, 2013 8:45 am

    Rodan wrote:

    He can do specials on the Nazi threat. Hes back railing about Nazis taking over.

    Tennessee is crawling with Nazis; shockingly, there’s a Nazi flag flying over the capital in Nashville!


  22. Speranza
    22 | January 31, 2013 8:46 am

    Rodan wrote:

    Iron Fist wrote:
    @ Rodan:
    Hippie-palooza?

    He can do specials on the Nazi threat. Hes back railing about Nazis taking over.

    Someone buy him William Shirer’s “Rise and Fall of the Third Reich” or better yet Ian Kershaw’s one volume biography “Hitler” already!


  23. buzzsawmonkey
    23 | January 31, 2013 8:46 am

    Fritz Katz wrote:

    They’re demolishing & paving over Reagan’s childhood home

    And putting up a parking lot for Obama’s presidential library.

    Destroying affordable housing.


  24. Speranza
    24 | January 31, 2013 8:47 am

    MacDuff wrote:

    Rodan wrote:
    He can do specials on the Nazi threat. Hes back railing about Nazis taking over.
    Tennessee is crawling with Nazis; shockingly, there’s a Nazi flag flying over the capital in Nashville!

    Nashville is the new Munich 1933!


  25. 25 | January 31, 2013 8:48 am

    @ Speranza:

    They can’t wait to demolish anything that deals with Reagan.

    A certain family will approve of this!


  26. 26 | January 31, 2013 8:49 am

    @ Speranza:

    He probably has all of them!


  27. buzzsawmonkey
    27 | January 31, 2013 8:49 am

    Fritz Katz wrote:

    a parking lot for Obama’s presidential library.

    How much space do you need for unread copies of Das Kapital, Invisible Man, and the Constitution, and well-thumbed paperbacks of Rules for Radicals, Derrick Bell’s Critical Race Theory, and Franz Fanon’s The Wretched of the Earth, anyway?


  28. 28 | January 31, 2013 8:51 am

    Boom Times!

    Income Surges, Spending Edges Higher

    American incomes rose in December by the most in eight years, a positive sign for consumer spending that could help the economy sustain momentum early this year.

    Personal income for Americans rose 2.6 percent last month, the Commerce Department said on Thursday. That was the biggest increase since December 2004 and well above analysts’ expectations for a 0.8 percent gain.

    Personal income rose in November and December, the Commerce Department said, because of special dividends and accelerated bonuses to beat increases in taxes this year.

    The big rise in incomes suggests total consumer spending power entered the new year on stronger footing, even though much of the gains may not have been distributed evenly throughout the workforce


  29. 29 | January 31, 2013 8:51 am

    @ buzzsawmonkey:

    I’m sure he will have a spot for Mein Kampf as well.


  30. buzzsawmonkey
    30 | January 31, 2013 8:54 am

    Rodan wrote:

    I’m sure he will have a spot for Mein Kampf as well.

    And The Mendacity of “Hope.”


  31. citizen_q
    31 | January 31, 2013 8:57 am

    buzzsawmonkey wrote:

    Fritz Katz wrote:
    a parking lot for Obama’s presidential library.
    How much space do you need for unread copies of Das Kapital, Invisible Man, and the Constitution, and well-thumbed paperbacks of Rules for Radicals, Derrick Bell’s Critical Race Theory, and Franz Fanon’s The Wretched of the Earth, anyway?

    As an aside, I am interested in foreign financing of presidential libraries. I have read that carter and the klintons had significant saudi financing. I wonder how oil-tick money will be laundered to komrade zero.


  32. 32 | January 31, 2013 9:00 am

    Rodan wrote:

    Personal income rose in November and December, the Commerce Department said, because of special dividends and accelerated bonuses to beat increases in taxes this year.

    That’s a one-time thing that is over and done with now. And GDP still went down. I’m not an economist, but it seems that I can read the writing on the wall better than the economists. Real unemployment is about 11%, with about 3% of that unemployment being people who have been out of work so long that they’ve stopped looking. Anyone who call that a good economy is delusional.


  33. 33 | January 31, 2013 9:01 am

    @ Iron Fist:

    Like the article says its concentrated with only certain workers. That is the rich Leftists on Wall Street.


  34. 34 | January 31, 2013 9:02 am

    @ Iron Fist:

    Jobless claims are up. Boom!


  35. 35 | January 31, 2013 9:03 am

    @ Rodan:

    Who took the dividends to avoid paying their Fair Share®


  36. buzzsawmonkey
    36 | January 31, 2013 9:04 am

    Iron Fist wrote:

    Who took the dividends to avoid paying their Fair Share®…

    You should have heard NPR this morning explaining that government spending is down.


  37. 37 | January 31, 2013 9:08 am

    @ Iron Fist:

    Like Al Gore!


  38. 38 | January 31, 2013 9:14 am

    @ buzzsawmonkey:

    That’s why we borrowed $1.6 trillion dollars last year. Where do they come up with these people? This shit really isn’t that hard.


  39. 39 | January 31, 2013 9:16 am

    Rodan wrote:

    @ Iron Fist:

    Like Al Gore!

    Yesterday Medved called Gore “a high functioning lunatic”. Pretty apt description except I might add “amoral”. Watching his TV tour of late, I was positively chilled to think just how close he came to being President.


  40. 40 | January 31, 2013 9:19 am

    @ MacDuff:

    He’s had a nervous breakdown.


  41. 41 | January 31, 2013 9:19 am

    buzzsawmonkey wrote:

    You should have heard NPR this morning explaining that government spending is down.

    Clearly, they put several shots of vodka in their Kool-Aid.


  42. buzzsawmonkey
    42 | January 31, 2013 9:25 am

    @ Iron Fist:
    @ MacDuff:

    If you remove entitlements from “government spending,” and only talk about, say, drops in procurement of military hardware, thus re-defining what falls within “government spending,” then you can say this sort of thing with a straight face.

    It’s a matter of moving the goalposts and obfuscating the fact that you’ve moved them, knowing that most people will accept your statements at face value if they are said earnestly and, preferably, uttered by someone with a nice resonant-sounding credential.


  43. Speranza
    43 | January 31, 2013 9:29 am

    MacDuff wrote:

    Yesterday Medved called Gore “a high functioning lunatic”. Pretty apt description except I might add “amoral”. Watching his TV tour of late, I was positively chilled to think just how close he came to being President.

    We dodged a bullet in 2000. (Thanks to morons in Florida).


  44. Speranza
    44 | January 31, 2013 9:30 am

    buzzsawmonkey wrote:

    Fritz Katz wrote:
    a parking lot for Obama’s presidential library.
    How much space do you need for unread copies of Das Kapital, Invisible Man, and the Constitution, and well-thumbed paperbacks of Rules for Radicals, Derrick Bell’s Critical Race Theory, and Franz Fanon’s The Wretched of the Earth, anyway?

    The Collective Works of Kim Il-Sung.


  45. Speranza
    45 | January 31, 2013 9:31 am

    Rodan wrote:

    @ MacDuff:
    He’s had a nervous breakdown.

    Yes he has. He (Al Gore) is an embittered aging man sort of like a fat fellow in Culver City.


  46. citizen_q
    46 | January 31, 2013 9:31 am

    O/T My hat’s off to parents. As difficult it must be to be one, I don’t see how they can cope with public schools.

    I have posted recently on a few instances locally here in MD where little kids were suspended by making guns with their extended index finger and thumb.

    6-Year-Old Expelled for Bringing Toy Gun to School

    Sumter, SC (WLTX) – A kindergartner at Alice Drive Elementary in Sumter has been expelled from school for bringing a toy gun to class.

    Naomi McKinney, who’s six-year-old, was expelled on January 7th.

    The problem began when Naomi grabbed her brother’s toy gun to bring in for show and tell.

    “I chose to bring it to school because I thought I could show my friends it because they might like seeing it,” Naomi explains.

    Her dad, Hank, says he and her mother didn’t see what she choose to bring until getting a call from the school.

    “The school needed me down there that my daughter was fixing to be expelled,” he says. “I got in the car and rushed down there and when I got in there the principal told me that she had a gun at school and she pulls it out and it is a little clear plastic gun.”

    The Mckinneys tried to appeal to the discipline hearing panel, but received a letter stating Naomi is not allowed on school property or at any school sponsored event on or off campus. She is subject to criminal charges if she’s caught trespassing.

    Naomi is not allowed to be on school property, even when her parents are picking up her siblings, so they have to park off school property.

    “She’s not interacting with her friends at school, she isn’t going on field trips or anything she thought was exciting,” Hank says. “It is all gone.”

    And understanding why that is suddenly all gone has been tough for the 6 year old

    I know this is a big country and if you are looking for lunacy you will find it. However IMHO on display here are the dangers of an all powerful government making decisions for everyone’s good.


  47. 47 | January 31, 2013 9:32 am

    @ Speranza:

    Part of me thinks it would been better for Gore to win. He would have wrecked the country and the GOP would have come to power in 04 nor 08. There would be no Obama and the economy would be good now. But this is all retrospect.


  48. Speranza
    48 | January 31, 2013 9:32 am

    I hope people here are reading the article I posted about Eisenhower. It is very interesting.


  49. Speranza
    49 | January 31, 2013 9:33 am

    Chuck Hagel comes before the Senate today for questioning. Watch him sound more pro Israel than Benjamin Netanyahu.


  50. 50 | January 31, 2013 9:35 am

    @ Iron Fist:

    Mark Pryor says no way to Dianne Feinstein’s bill!

    As a coalition of gun control advocates pushes for a new federal Assault Weapons Ban, U.S. Senators Mark Pryor and John Boozman of Arkansas say they cannot support California Senator Dianne Feinstein’s bill. Pryor says the objective should be to lessen gun violence not violate people’s constitutional rights.


  51. Speranza
    51 | January 31, 2013 9:35 am

    Rodan wrote:

    @ Speranza:
    Part of me thinks it would been better for Gore to win. He would have wrecked the country and the GOP would have come to power in 04 nor 08. There would be no Obama and the economy would be good now. But this is all retrospect.

    Oh I absolutely agree. If it would’ve spared us Obama it might’ve been worth it. I got an indication in the Autumn of 2000 of what W. would be like (the passive “turn the other cheek” fellow that would manifest itself throughout the next eight years) when he was not saying a word during the recounts all the while Gore and the Democrats were hogging the TV screen.


  52. RIX
    52 | January 31, 2013 9:36 am

    @ Speranza:
    The Democrats on the Committee will spend more time paying tribute
    to Hagel than they will asking any probing questions.


  53. 53 | January 31, 2013 9:37 am

    @ Speranza:

    I think Gore’s 2000 loss caused his breakdown.

    BTW- Fulton Chain had a meltdown last night.


  54. Speranza
    54 | January 31, 2013 9:38 am

    RIX wrote:

    @ Speranza:
    The Democrats on the Committee will spend more time paying tribute
    to Hagel than they will asking any probing questions.

    McCain will ask him a question (which he probably told Hagel in advance what it will be) in order to sound tough and then go back to his “my good friend and fellow vet Chuck Hagel” bullshit.


  55. citizen_q
    55 | January 31, 2013 9:38 am

    buzzsawmonkey wrote:

    knowing that most people will accept your statements at face value if they are said earnestly and, preferably, uttered by someone with a nice resonant-sounding credential.

    With the increasing availability of alternate news sources via the internet and renewed interest in world events, I was able to fact check many stories on NPR, especially its coverage of Israel.

    I stopped listening to NPR over a decade ago. Lies are still lies even when delivered with a honeyed tongue.


  56. buzzsawmonkey
    56 | January 31, 2013 9:38 am

    Rodan wrote:

    Mark Pryor says no way to Dianne Feinstein’s bill!

    Bait and switch.

    Feinstein’s bill is intended to go down so that something at least as bad, but more “reasonable”-sounding, can garner support under the theory that “we must be seen to be doing something.”


  57. Speranza
    57 | January 31, 2013 9:39 am

    Rodan wrote:

    @ Speranza:
    I think Gore’s 2000 loss caused his breakdown.
    BTW- Fulton Chain had a meltdown last night.

    Really (Fultonchain?). Let me look at it.
    Too many meltdowns lately and frankly I am sick of them.


  58. RIX
    58 | January 31, 2013 9:39 am

    Rodan wrote:

    @ Speranza:

    Part of me thinks it would been better for Gore to win. He would have wrecked the country and the GOP would have come to power in 04 nor 08. There would be no Obama and the economy would be good now. But this is all retrospect.

    if Mike Ditka would have accepted the Republican endorsement for the US Senate
    from Illinois things would have been different.
    Obama would have lost the race & would not be President now.


  59. 59 | January 31, 2013 9:40 am

    @ Speranza:

    Check it out.


  60. buzzsawmonkey
    60 | January 31, 2013 9:40 am

    citizen_q wrote:

    I stopped listening to NPR over a decade ago. Lies are still lies even when delivered with a honeyed tongue.

    I find it invaluable: proggie will talk candidly about his intentions when he figures he’s talking to his pals. You can get the regime’s talking points a day early if you listen to NPR.


  61. 61 | January 31, 2013 9:41 am

    @ RIX:

    Yeah Ditka screwed the country up.


  62. RIX
    62 | January 31, 2013 9:41 am

    McCain will ask him a question (which he probably told Hagel in advance what it will be) in order to sound tough and then go back to his “my good friend and fellow vet Chuck Hagel” bullshit.

    reply | quote@ Speranza:

    Count on it.


  63. citizen_q
    63 | January 31, 2013 9:42 am

    Speranza wrote:

    Chuck Hagel comes before the Senate today for questioning. Watch him sound more pro Israel than Benjamin Netanyahu.

    I don’t understand how people can purport to be suckered into believing a tiger is changing his stripes when trying to be confirmed for high office.

    Or for that matter think others will believe uncle tom’s, cough cumo cough, stamp of approval.


  64. RIX
    64 | January 31, 2013 9:42 am

    Rodan wrote:

    @ RIX:

    Yeah Ditka screwed the country up.

    Bet that he wishes that he had that back.


  65. 65 | January 31, 2013 9:44 am

    buzzsawmonkey wrote:

    Feinstein’s bill is intended to go down so that something at least as bad, but more “reasonable”-sounding, can garner support under the theory that “we must be seen to be doing something.”

    I think you are right, there. Feinstein’s bill is a dream bill for the gun-grabbers, and it lets you know where their intent is, but I don’t think it ever had a prayer of passing. What comes down the pike next will probably be a plea to “close the gun showw loophole”, but as David Kopel testified yesterday the only way they could ctually enforce that would be with universal registration. Which is a prelude to near universal confiscation (they’ll leave gns in the hands of the politically connected and the gang-bangers).


  66. 66 | January 31, 2013 9:44 am

    RIX wrote:

    if Mike Ditka would have accepted the Republican endorsement for the US Senate
    from Illinois things would have been different.
    Obama would have lost the race & would not be President now.

    16.4 TRILLION UPDINGS! Yes, I think Coach Ditka is very, very regretful at this decision.


  67. Speranza
    67 | January 31, 2013 9:46 am

    @ Rodan:
    I just read it. I did not like the swarming all over Fultonchain. He is a liberal but a pragmatic one and I do like when he comments here. Frankly I think some of the posters on that thread were imbibing.


  68. citizen_q
    68 | January 31, 2013 9:47 am

    buzzsawmonkey wrote:

    citizen_q wrote:
    I stopped listening to NPR over a decade ago. Lies are still lies even when delivered with a honeyed tongue.
    I find it invaluable: proggie will talk candidly about his intentions when he figures he’s talking to his pals. You can get the regime’s talking points a day early if you listen to NPR.

    Good point. MEMRI operates very successfully under the same principal.

    OTOH, back then I would listen to NPR while stuck in Washington D.C. area roads in bumper to bumper traffic while commuting. I did not need anything more to anger me.


  69. 69 | January 31, 2013 9:47 am

    @ Iron Fist:

    How many of those “viewers” are actually folks trapped in waiting rooms, airports, etc. and not voluntarily watching that crap channel? As I’ve pointed out, we’re forced to watch CNN (without sound, thankfully) on our commute buses because that is the channel some libturd at the corporation yard decided we needed to tune to. The awful thing is that in the timing of my commute, I have to look at Piers Morgan for 35 minutes. His look is always that of a man who enjoys the smell of his own farts.


  70. Speranza
    70 | January 31, 2013 9:49 am

    Carolina Girl wrote:

    @ Iron Fist:
    How many of those “viewers” are actually folks trapped in waiting rooms, airports, etc. and not voluntarily watching that crap channel? As I’ve pointed out, we’re forced to watch CNN (without sound, thankfully) on our commute buses because that is the channel some libturd at the corporation yard decided we needed to tune to. The awful thing is that in the timing of my commute, I have to look at Piers Morgan for 35 minutes. His look is always that of a man who enjoys the smell of his own farts.

    Jay Nordlinger suggested years ago a “CNN FREE ZONE” at airports.


  71. RIX
    71 | January 31, 2013 9:49 am

    16.4 TRILLION UPDINGS! Yes, I think Coach Ditka is very, very regretful at this decision.
    @ Macker:
    And Ditka would have been a piece of work in the Senate and a lot of fun,


  72. 72 | January 31, 2013 9:51 am

    Carolina Girl wrote:

    His look is always that of a man who enjoys the smell of his own farts.

    Indeed. And you are right. CNN’s viewership would be far worse if they didn’t have captive audiences like that to bolster them. Frankly, I’ll be surprised if they are still in business in five years unless they change their model. They can’t compete with Fox on the right and MSNBC on the Left. They aren’t really centerist, either. They are like MSNBC-lite. There’s no market for that.


  73. 73 | January 31, 2013 9:51 am

    @ Iron Fist:

    Didn’t you hear? The whole government spending is the problem is a lie being promulgated by Fox News, according to the always dumber than crap Mary Landrieu.

    I’m enjoying the fact that her brother Mitch is being roundly kick about on the internet by New Orleans residents after he “instructed” them to be on their best behavior during Super Bowl week and especially to be nice to Roger Goodell since he “gave” the City a Super Bowl.

    If I’m Goodell, I’d be ordering room service only and making sure the wait staff doesn’t know it’s me. Waiters in New Orleans are avid Saints fans.


  74. Speranza
    74 | January 31, 2013 9:52 am

    RIX wrote:

    16.4 TRILLION UPDINGS! Yes, I think Coach Ditka is very, very regretful at this decision.
    @ Macker:
    And Ditka would have been a piece of work in the Senate and a lot of fun,

    I am not so certain Mike Ditka would’ve won.


  75. 75 | January 31, 2013 9:52 am

    @ Speranza:

    Fulton started it and was not himself. His first comment was nasty and not in his nature. I did not attack him.


  76. 76 | January 31, 2013 9:52 am

    @ Rodan:
    @ Speranza:

    “What if” arguments are the stuff of science fiction, but I don’t think “totally wrecking the country” is a particularly good strategy in the long, or short run. I think Al’s been quite mad for quite some time (though it does seem to have accelerated of late) and I see no benefit to having him ensconced in the Oval Office at any time. It’s impossible to say how history would have been changed had he won (change one thing and everything changes), but I’m pretty sure it wouldn’t have been for the good.


  77. buzzsawmonkey
    77 | January 31, 2013 9:53 am

    BTW, take a look at the increasingly-ubiquitous “Stop the NRA” sign.

    They’ve been at a lot of demos lately. The white in the middle, flanked by red, with heavy black type is reminiscent of the red Nazi flag with the white circle and black swastika. And, while the eagle is an American eagle, the Nazis used a lot of eagle imagery too—often in the red-black-and-white palette.


  78. Speranza
    78 | January 31, 2013 9:53 am

    Rodan wrote:

    @ Speranza:
    Fulton started it and was not himself. His first comment was nasty and not in his nature. I did not attack him.

    I did not read it that way but to each his own.


  79. Speranza
    79 | January 31, 2013 9:53 am

    MacDuff wrote:

    on’t think “totally wrecking the country” is a particularly good strategy in the long, or short run. I think Al’s been quite mad for quite some time (though it does seem to have accelerated of late) and I see no benefit to having him ensconced in the Oval Office at any time. It’s impossible to say how history would have been changed had he won (change one thing and everything changes), but I’m pretty sure it wouldn’t have been for the good.

    I see your point. I was only speculating.
    Had Gore been POTUS on 9/11/01 he would have spoken about Global Warming and Carbon Foot prints.


  80. 80 | January 31, 2013 9:53 am

    @ Iron Fist:

    Actually, I think MSLSD has the lowest of all the ratings, although that honor might go to Headline News, home of the defunct and now relegated to the Siberia known as Current TV monstrosity called the Joy Behar Show.

    Actually, add up the ratings for MSLSD, CNN and Headline and they STILL don’t equal the viewership of Fox.


  81. 81 | January 31, 2013 9:55 am

    @ RIX:
    @ Speranza:

    Obama probably would be mayor of Chicago.


  82. Speranza
    82 | January 31, 2013 9:55 am

    Carolina Girl wrote:

    @ Iron Fist:
    Actually, I think MSLSD has the lowest of all the ratings, although that honor might go to Headline News, home of the defunct and now relegated to the Siberia known as Current TV monstrosity called the Joy Behar Show.
    Actually, add up the ratings for MSLSD, CNN and Headline and they STILL don’t equal the viewership of Fox.

    And Fox has gone down in my estimation recently yet they still are better then the other two CNN and PMSNBC.


  83. Speranza
    83 | January 31, 2013 9:56 am

    Rodan wrote:

    @ RIX:
    @ Speranza:
    Obama probably would be mayor of Chicago.

    That was his original goal.


  84. RIX
    84 | January 31, 2013 9:56 am

    Speranza wrote:

    RIX wrote:

    16.4 TRILLION UPDINGS! Yes, I think Coach Ditka is very, very regretful at this decision.
    @ Macker:
    And Ditka would have been a piece of work in the Senate and a lot of fun,

    I am not so certain Mike Ditka would’ve won.

    Chicago and the rest of the State still lives worships the 85 Bears Super Bowl Team.
    The Union guys even would have for for Ditka. Da Bears.
    But you make a good point, you never know.


  85. Speranza
    85 | January 31, 2013 9:57 am

    @ MacDuff:
    This was my thought on a President Gore

    If it would’ve spared us Obama it might’ve been worth it

    Again, we will never know.


  86. RIX
    86 | January 31, 2013 9:58 am

    Rodan wrote:

    @ RIX:
    @ Speranza:

    Obama probably would be mayor of Chicago.

    Which would have been better than screwing up the whole country.


  87. 87 | January 31, 2013 10:00 am

    @ RIX:

    no No NO! It’s DA BEARS! No mixed case there!


  88. 88 | January 31, 2013 10:01 am

    @ RIX:

    Well, all I know is Ditka didn’t do a damn thing for the Saints. Of course, it’s the Saints…..miracles may not have been his long suit.


  89. 89 | January 31, 2013 10:02 am

    @ Speranza:

    Shuda Wuda Cuda will always twist you into a pretzel.


  90. 90 | January 31, 2013 10:02 am

    Carolina Girl wrote:

    Actually, add up the ratings for MSLSD, CNN and Headline and they STILL don’t equal the viewership of Fox.

    I know. I love it!

    @ Speranza:
    Yep, I think Fox is trying to be more “centerist”. The only thing in the middle of the road is road-kill. They made their reputation by being willing to represent the Right side of the view, and that is why they have their audience. They need to play to their audience. If they don’t, a competitor will rise up, just as they did, and take their audience away from them. I think one of the reasons Current TV sank was because there are so many places the Left can go to get the news that they want to hear. The Right doesn’t have so many options.


  91. RIX
    91 | January 31, 2013 10:04 am

    Macker wrote:

    @ RIX:

    no No NO! It’s DA BEARS! No mixed case there!

    Got ya.


  92. 92 | January 31, 2013 10:04 am

    Oh dear, God, we are DOOOOOMED Dept. From Homeland Security:

    If you are caught out in the open and cannot conceal yourself or take cover, you might consider trying to overpower the shooter with whatever means are available,” says the narrator in the video, which shows an office worker pulling scissors out of a desk drawer.

    The real question is – are they allowed to RUN with them?


  93. 93 | January 31, 2013 10:04 am

    @ Speranza:

    If you think Bush’s “Turn the other cheek” response to 9-11 was bad, it was down right militaristic compared to what Gore would have done. He’d have broken a sweat cutting Israel off so fast, for one thing, and pulled the US out of the Middle East entirely. As bad as Obama’s been, he hasn’t yet had the oppertunity to fuck up on that scale.


  94. 94 | January 31, 2013 10:05 am

    @ RIX:

    Upward inflection on the first word, of course.


  95. 95 | January 31, 2013 10:06 am

    @ Carolina Girl:

    I’d rather shoot back, but I guess it isn’t PC for Homeland Security to talk about that… :roll:


  96. 96 | January 31, 2013 10:06 am

    @ Carolina Girl:

    BOOOOOOOOOOOO! :)


  97. 97 | January 31, 2013 10:07 am

    @ Macker:

    Yeah, if I’m ever the victim of a home invasion, I’ll forego the 12-gauge and grab my sewing kit instead….


  98. buzzsawmonkey
    98 | January 31, 2013 10:09 am

    re-post:

    I’m NRA You Hate, I Am
    —apologies to Herman’s Hermits, and “I’m Henry the Eighth, I Am”

    I’m NRA you hate, I am
    NRA you hate, I am, I am
    I own guns and I want to buy more
    You keep asking what I need ‘em for
    But thanks to the Second Amendment (Amendment!)
    It’s none of your business what I need (Indeed!)
    Whether for sport or personal defendment
    NRA you hate I a-a-a-a-am
    NRA you hate I am

    Second verse, same as the first!
    A little bit louder, and a little bit worse!

    I’m NRA you hate, I am
    NRA you hate, I am, I am
    I own guns and I want to buy more
    You keep asking what I need ‘em for
    But thanks to the Second Amendment (Amendment!)
    It’s none of your business what I need (Indeed!)
    Whether for sport or personal defendment
    NRA you hate I a-a-a-a-am
    NRA you hate I am


  99. 99 | January 31, 2013 10:10 am

    @ buzzsawmonkey:

    You need to post that at PJ’s and Zip, Buzz. That’s BRILLIANT. I’m sending that out on my email.


  100. RIX
    100 | January 31, 2013 10:10 am

    Carolina Girl wrote:

    @ RIX:

    Well, all I know is Ditka didn’t do a damn thing for the Saints. Of course, it’s the Saints…..miracles may not have been his long suit.

    Yeah, things didn’t go well for Ditka with the Saints.
    Actually, the 85 Bears were so dominant, probably any coach
    would have won.
    But Ditka gets the credit & I think that would have beat Obama.
    Besides he would have been a colorful Senator


  101. 101 | January 31, 2013 10:11 am

    BTW folks…I survived the Court hearing on Tuesday. She did not show up; and I was the second case of the afternoon…those with Attorneys get to go first.
    It lasted all of five minutes, the Referee signed the decree, and sent it to the Judge for his signature. I should have the final doc no later than Monday next week.
    And that’s all she wrote….


  102. 102 | January 31, 2013 10:14 am

    Carolina Girl wrote:

    @ RIX:

    Well, all I know is Ditka didn’t do a damn thing for the Saints. Of course, it’s the Saints…..miracles may not have been his long suit.

    I think the GM/Coach/QB triad the Saints have now has a lot of synergy and bodes very well for the future. As for Ditka, great coaches aren’t necessarily interchangeable between teams; they’re often the right guy in the right place at the right time. That doesn’t diminish their greatness, but greatness oft depends on the right situation. I don’t think George Washington would have necessarily achieved greatness in another environment.

    Washington and the Saints, all in one paragraph!


  103. 103 | January 31, 2013 10:14 am

    @ Iron Fist:

    pulled the US out of the Middle East entirely.

    Other than arm Israel, that’s my stance. I’m tired of nation building and being buddies with the Muzz.


  104. 104 | January 31, 2013 10:17 am

    Macker wrote:

    BTW folks…I survived the Court hearing on Tuesday. She did not show up; and I was the second case of the afternoon…those with Attorneys get to go first.
    It lasted all of five minutes, the Referee signed the decree, and sent it to the Judge for his signature. I should have the final doc no later than Monday next week.
    And that’s all she wrote….

    I suspect “CONGRATULATIONS!” is in order? I never know what is apropos……


  105. Speranza
    105 | January 31, 2013 10:18 am

    Iron Fist wrote:

    @ Speranza:
    If you think Bush’s “Turn the other cheek” response to 9-11 was bad, it was down right militaristic compared to what Gore would have done. He’d have broken a sweat cutting Israel off so fast, for one thing, and pulled the US out of the Middle East entirely. As bad as Obama’s been, he hasn’t yet had the oppertunity to fuck up on that scale.

    Hey you get no argument from me. The 1988 Gore I would have been fine with but not the Gore of the past 13 years.


  106. buzzsawmonkey
    106 | January 31, 2013 10:19 am

    Carolina Girl wrote:

    You need to post that at PJ’s and Zip, Buzz.

    Sent it to PJM. Zip, maybe later.


  107. 107 | January 31, 2013 10:21 am

    @ MacDuff:

    I’m just grateful that I can approach the game on Sunday without thinking “okay, wonder how much we’ll lose by THIS week?”


  108. 108 | January 31, 2013 10:21 am

    @ buzzsawmonkey:

    Oh, send link – I’ll leave comment.


  109. buzzsawmonkey
    109 | January 31, 2013 10:24 am

    Carolina Girl wrote:

    Oh, send link — I’ll leave comment.

    Probably won’t go up for a while; there’s a certain lag time, which varies. I’ll post it here when it does.


  110. buzzsawmonkey
    110 | January 31, 2013 10:26 am

    Carolina Girl wrote:

    Oh, send link — I’ll leave comment.

    Whoa—that was fast: “I’m NRA You Hate, I Am.”


  111. 111 | January 31, 2013 10:27 am

    China’s new militancy. For those who thought my questioning of China’s long-term designs was totally off-base…


  112. 112 | January 31, 2013 10:32 am

    @ buzzsawmonkey:

    Check my comment, toots!


  113. buzzsawmonkey
    113 | January 31, 2013 10:37 am

    Carolina Girl wrote:

    Check my comment, toots!

    Saw it—great idea, especially if it could be done with a guitar made from a rifle stock.


  114. 114 | January 31, 2013 10:39 am

    Carolina Girl wrote:

    @ MacDuff:

    I’m just grateful that I can approach the game on Sunday without thinking “okay, wonder how much we’ll lose by THIS week?”

    Indeed. We order “Direct Ticket” so my expatriate wife can watch the Saints; we’ve had good times and bad, but this season was particularly exasperating. Next year’s gonna be much better!


  115. 115 | January 31, 2013 10:42 am

    @ MacDuff:

    I have it as well, and for that reason. I didn’t even realize it until someone at the Black and Gold forum turned me on to it in 2003. It’s my yearly “Xmas and Birthday” gift to myself, in six equal installments!


  116. 116 | January 31, 2013 10:42 am

    @ buzzsawmonkey:

    And you just KNOW that Uncle Ted has to have something of that nature in his ax arsenal.


  117. 117 | January 31, 2013 10:42 am

    Iron Fist wrote:

    China’s new militancy. Fo rthose wh thought my questioning of China’s long-term designs was totally off-base…

    I’m sure if Obama bows deeply enough they’ll leave us alone, right? :|


  118. 118 | January 31, 2013 10:45 am

    @ MacDuff:

    Maybe we can give them another State Dinner?


  119. 119 | January 31, 2013 10:53 am

    Iron Fist wrote:

    China’s new militancy. For those who thought my questioning of China’s long-term designs was totally off-base…

    Ming China is back!


  120. lobo91
    120 | January 31, 2013 10:53 am

    BREAKING: White House Announces Obama’s Jobs Council Shutting Down…

    After the recent GDP figures, I guess they decided their work is done…


  121. lobo91
    122 | January 31, 2013 10:54 am

    Carolina Girl wrote:

    @ MacDuff:
    Maybe we can give them another State Dinner?

    Catered by Panda Express


  122. 123 | January 31, 2013 10:54 am

    @ lobo91:

    So much for that laser-like focus….


  123. 124 | January 31, 2013 10:55 am

    @ lobo91:

    Now with real panda!!


  124. lobo91
    125 | January 31, 2013 10:56 am

    Carolina Girl wrote:

    @ lobo91:
    So much for that laser-like focus….

    It was a laser pointer cat toy from PetsMart.

    And the batteries ran down.


  125. buzzsawmonkey
    126 | January 31, 2013 10:56 am

    Carolina Girl wrote:

    So much for that laser-like focus….

    Kinda lazy-like…


  126. 127 | January 31, 2013 11:00 am

    @ Carolina Girl:

    Screw ‘em. Union membership needs to start drawing up their own “Declaration of Independence”….


  127. lobo91
    128 | January 31, 2013 11:00 am

    Now that he’s done fixing health care, jobs, and the economy:

    Obama To Hit The Campaign Trail To Push For Gun Control…

    President Barack Obama will travel to Minneapolis Monday to pitch his proposals for reducing gun violence.

    Minneapolis? Why isn’t he going to Chicago, where there’s an actual problem?


  128. 129 | January 31, 2013 11:00 am

    @ lobo91:

    The economy is booming!


  129. 130 | January 31, 2013 11:01 am

    @ buzzsawmonkey:

    Wasn’t that Jobs Council made up of those millionaires and billionaires that really wanted him to pass higher taxes? Maybe that was the extent of their input. Then they looked at their bank account statements and said “WTF?” I wonder if the Council didn’t “disband” so much as “walked off the job.”


  130. lobo91
    131 | January 31, 2013 11:03 am

    @ Carolina Girl:

    They haven’t met in two years, anyway.


  131. 132 | January 31, 2013 11:04 am

    @ lobo91:

    The “Jobs Council” was like that treadmill that has been sitting in the closet, unused, and now it’s being set out for the trash to make room for a wardrobe of “fat clothes”.


  132. Speranza
    133 | January 31, 2013 11:05 am

    Rodan wrote:

    @ lobo91:
    The economy is booming!

    Yeah it is self exploding like one of those suicide vests.


  133. 134 | January 31, 2013 11:06 am

    @ lobo91:

    We have had it snarked at us very recently that we’re ridiculous and delusional that the government would take our guns. I’m not saying they can, but based on the previous statements of Oblahblah, Feinstein and others, I have no doubt in my mind that if they thought they could, they would. I have no doubt that if they had both houses of Congress they would pass laws that severely curtail gun ownership rights and that it would take a litigation to restore them, a la Heller.

    My biggest worry is that whole “mental health” prohibition they want to pass. Not that I think those with severe mental illness should have guns, but since Democrats can’t define “assault weapons” and thing $250,000 is actually $1,000,000, I would not trust them to define “mental illness.” I was depressed – severely – in 1983/84 and required medication. I would not trust the government to call that a “history of mental illness” and advise me that I should not own a firearm.


  134. citizen_q
    135 | January 31, 2013 11:10 am

    @ Carolina Girl:

    In early talks, the Obama administration dismissed the idea of applying the subsidies to people in union-sponsored plans, according to officials from the trade group, the National Coordinating Committee for Multiemployer Plans, that represents these insurance plans. Contacted for this article, Obama administration officials said the issue is subject to regulations still being written.

    They passed it and we still don’t know what’s in it, because they are making it up as they go.


  135. lobo91
    136 | January 31, 2013 11:10 am

    @ Carolina Girl:

    My biggest worry is that whole “mental health” prohibition they want to pass. Not that I think those with severe mental illness should have guns, but since Democrats can’t define “assault weapons” and thing $250,000 is actually $1,000,000, I would not trust them to define “mental illness.” I was depressed — severely — in 1983/84 and required medication. I would not trust the government to call that a “history of mental illness” and advise me that I should not own a firearm.

    The mental health prohibition is already spelled out in current law. You’re prohibited if you’ve been involuntarily committed or if you’ve been ruled incompetent by a judge.

    The problem is that in most states, that information isn’t transmitted to the people in charge of the NICS records.


  136. citizen_q
    137 | January 31, 2013 11:15 am

    Carolina Girl wrote:

    My biggest worry is that whole “mental health” prohibition they want to pass. Not that I think those with severe mental illness should have guns, but since Democrats can’t define “assault weapons” and thing $250,000 is actually $1,000,000, I would not trust them to define “mental illness.”

    IMHO, one only needs look at the old soviet union. They jailed opponents of the regime in mental institutions.

    I have no doubt our crop of marxists will also use such thinking with regards to healthcare access.


  137. buzzsawmonkey
    138 | January 31, 2013 11:17 am

    Carolina Girl wrote:

    My biggest worry is that whole “mental health” prohibition they want to pass. Not that I think those with severe mental illness should have guns, but since Democrats can’t define “assault weapons” and thing $250,000 is actually $1,000,000, I would not trust them to define “mental illness.” I was depressed — severely — in 1983/84 and required medication. I would not trust the government to call that a “history of mental illness” and advise me that I should not own a firearm.

    Given that there are “studies” being spat out by “respectable academic sources” which have attempted to claim that it is a mental illness to hold “conservative opinions,” any mental health provisions that are going to be written should be looked at extremely askance. It is both a means to get gun ownership under “public health” restrictions, and eerily similar to the Soviet Union’s practice of locking up dissidents in mental hospitals.


  138. unclassifiable
    139 | January 31, 2013 11:18 am

    @ Carolina Girl:

    Janet says to stretch well before doing your scissor attack.


  139. unclassifiable
    140 | January 31, 2013 11:24 am

    @ lobo91:

    If he does go to Chicago my advice would be that he and his security detail to move from place to place in a serpentine fashion.

    That should come naturally but if he needs advice on acting like a snake he can ask Rahm.


  140. unclassifiable
    141 | January 31, 2013 11:28 am

    @ Carolina Girl:

    I can see my membership in the NRA being an issue. I mean look at the extremist rhetoric they are throwing around about the group right now.


  141. 142 | January 31, 2013 11:29 am

    @ lobo91:

    IIRC, the Sheriff in Tucson who ranted about guns after the Giffords shooting conveniently ignored his own culpability in that he knew Loughler was a lunatic and did nothing to stop him obtaining weapons.


  142. 143 | January 31, 2013 11:30 am

    @ unclassifiable:

    They’re being called a “terrorist” organization in some quarters. I do not trust this criminal enterprise of an administration or their cohorts in the Democrat Congress as far as I can throw them.


  143. lobo91
    144 | January 31, 2013 11:32 am

    Carolina Girl wrote:

    @ lobo91:
    IIRC, the Sheriff in Tucson who ranted about guns after the Giffords shooting conveniently ignored his own culpability in that he knew Loughler was a lunatic and did nothing to stop him obtaining weapons.

    Yes, he did. Loughner’s mom was a long-time county employee, and he kept information about him out of the system because he thought it would make her look bad.


  144. 145 | January 31, 2013 11:32 am

    @ buzzsawmonkey:

    Being a pathological narcissist hasn’t stopped Obama from becoming the President of the United States, and as President he has control of the most fearsome weapons on the planet. Is Obama sure he wants to take this route? A wise man once said before you bitch about the mote in my eye, do something about the beam in your own…


  145. heysoos
    146 | January 31, 2013 11:35 am

    @ Iron Fist:
    the most fearsome weapon on the planet is the America voter…which has been mothballed in front of their tv sets


  146. lobo91
    147 | January 31, 2013 11:43 am

    I think I see where Fultonchain and theoutsider get their information:

    Krugman: “We Can Print The Money”…

    Liberal economist and New York Times columnist Paul Krugman said Wednesday that the U.S. is not in danger of a collapse, and the U.S. won’t run out of cash because “we can print the money.”

    “The United States is a country that has its own currency – can’t run out of cash, cause we print the money. If you even try to think what would happen – suppose that investors get down on the United States. Even so, that would weaken the dollar, not send interest rates soaring, and that would be good. That would help our exports,” Krugman said on C-SPAN’s “Newsmakers.”

    And this clown actually won a Nobel Prize in economics…


  147. 148 | January 31, 2013 7:33 pm

    Rodan wrote:

    The GDP drop is no big deal.
    Why the GDP Drop is No Big Deal

    :lol: Why, do they think it’s hit bottom and can’t drop any further?

    lobo91 wrote:

    @ Carolina Girl:
    My biggest worry is that whole “mental health” prohibition they want to pass. Not that I think those with severe mental illness should have guns, but since Democrats can’t define “assault weapons” and thing $250,000 is actually $1,000,000, I would not trust them to define “mental illness.” I was depressed — severely — in 1983/84 and required medication. I would not trust the government to call that a “history of mental illness” and advise me that I should not own a firearm.
    The mental health prohibition is already spelled out in current law. You’re prohibited if you’ve been involuntarily committed or if you’ve been ruled incompetent by a judge.
    The problem is that in most states, that information isn’t transmitted to the people in charge of the NICS records.

    There have been times when unscrupulous people have used subterfuge to get a harmless (and perhaps entirely sane) person committed involuntarily or ruled incompetent so as to gain control over their wealth and property.

    I think there should be some legal safeguards there, to expunge this from the records if it comes to light that the person was wrongfully committed or wrongfully declared incompetent.


Back to the Top

The Blogmocracy

website design was Built By David