Displaying 1,441 To 1,470 Of 3,237 Comments Gutless Shame in the American House of Lords I think there might have been a greater sense of safety for homeowners with firearms- in Mass. the users and the weapon are licensed. Now whether it would have created more danger for the police, for the public, or not is an open question. BUT noone can carry outside the home unless they have a special permit, which hardly anyone has. » Posted By MurphTheSurf3 On April 22, 2013 @ 10:55 am The sad thing is that the Senators from the Red States are being heralded as heroic defenders of the Constitution and of the right of citizens to defend themselves in those states. For those in purple states- the choice was more nuanced (as the co-sponsors of the background check bill…Toomey and Mancin, demonstrate). » Posted By MurphTheSurf3 On April 22, 2013 @ 10:50 am And now we know that the brothers did not have licenses to own/carry the weapons they had. Neither would have likely qualified. The older’s background check would have likely run into the FBI tag and the younger was too young. I wonder how they got them. Both sides in the issue are playing that fact to their advantage. Let the spinning of the plates begin. The pro gunners are saying that background checks only work with the law abiding and that this proves it. The anti gunners are saying the system is full of holes that must be closed. » Posted By MurphTheSurf3 On April 22, 2013 @ 10:34 am Limited impact I suspect but doing what can be done as a sign of good faith. » Posted By MurphTheSurf3 On April 22, 2013 @ 10:27 am Yes- power is morally neutral- it can be used for good or for ill. It is our value systems that drive the use of power. Well said. » Posted By MurphTheSurf3 On April 19, 2013 @ 4:50 am Power is an aphrodisiac. It is a good way of putting it. There is something very “sexy” about working one’s will over others for fun and profit. I like the idea of pairing my comment with Ad Libs from two days ago. » Posted By MurphTheSurf3 On April 19, 2013 @ 4:49 am Completely agree with you on all of this. Now add in the camouflage, cover that 2nd Amendment “Patriotism” provides and the nature of this political malpractice becomes even clearer. Such a misuse of the political process by such craven creatures….and most will win reelection handily support by Big Money and the zeal of Tea Party Types. » Posted By MurphTheSurf3 On April 19, 2013 @ 4:46 am Filibuster reform is certainly required. And by reform I mean a return to the system that dominated the 20th century. The filibuster used to carry real political risk and it took courage (even when done for the wrong reasons). Today it is a cheap tactic reflecting the kind of politics that now controls the governance of the nation. As you point out, with so much of the country now solidly blue or solidly red there is so little room to move and the impact of constituent pressure is large moot. It is either shouting in the face of a hurricane, or its lending one’s support to the wave that moves on with or without us. Add in the power of Big Money and you have a democratic process in bankruptcy. » Posted By MurphTheSurf3 On April 19, 2013 @ 4:42 am I do hope you are correct. There is not a thing in your comment with which I disagree. I wonder what the impact of the Mayhem in MA will be? I was at my favorite watering hole late yesterday afternoon. It rained all day yesterday and I worked in my barns much of the day. I thought a beer or two among friends/neighbors/adversaries might be a good idea. The discussion at the bar was interesting. There was hooping and hollering over the “victory” of the 2nd amendment, but there were also questions about the background checks, gun trafficking and that led to lots of stories of people getting around the law at gun shows, on line, via catalogs, through bartering/horse trading, and gifts. I raised the point that the guns in Chicago were from the towns around the city, from Indiana and Wi. How? Straw purchases and trafficking. Did the guys (and a couple of gals) think the answer was more guns in the hands of non-criminals, non gang members without training, without education? That led to more discussion and back to my belief that licensing is a much better approach than background checks as a stand alone. » Posted By MurphTheSurf3 On April 19, 2013 @ 4:35 am NRA leadership and principal supporters: Cowardly, politically craven, money grubbing, and the miitant. Yep. And aren’t they going to parlay the mayhem in MA. into a bonanza! We need more and bigger guns in more homes to protect us from the Chechnyans. » Posted By MurphTheSurf3 On April 19, 2013 @ 4:27 am The filibuster is a good idea IF it is done as it was done for nearly all of the 20th century. Rare, burdensome, and politically risky, undertaking a filibuster was an act political courage. Today it is a cheap tactic. Time for reform, by which I mean I return to the filibuster as it once was. Active, on the floor, sustainable by 40 votes publicly offered as a pledge of support for the action that stops all business in the Senate. The filibuster is a brilliant check on what can be the tyranny of the majority but as it is currently configured we have the tyranny of the minority. » Posted By MurphTheSurf3 On April 19, 2013 @ 4:25 am Among the first things I thought of when I saw this story was that the NRA is going to make major political hay out of this. “For Americans to be safe, we need assault weapons in every home, and every American ready to ‘go commando’, modern Minute Men and Women.” » Posted By MurphTheSurf3 On April 19, 2013 @ 4:20 am BREAKING NEWS: Explosions at Finish Line of Boston Marathon And now we will have second by second, minute by minute, hour by hour coverage of the same information over, and over and over again. It is just what those who do these kind of things want and need. By all means cover the event but what end. » Posted By MurphTheSurf3 On April 15, 2013 @ 3:59 pm Gay Marriage Undermines Christian Marriage…to the GOP I found the silence this week from the political right- from the governing right interesting. When Limbaugh calls this a lost cause, and the GOP in the House whose attorneys are defending DOMA in front of SCOTUS say nary a word about it….and yet the evangelical, ultra right social leadership is not moving an inch. My question is how we should exploit this. All of this seems to reflect your own thinking- hollowed out, internally struggling, fracturing…..So, how shall we respond…how do we take advantage of their mess. » Posted By MurphTheSurf3 On March 29, 2013 @ 3:39 pm I have hopes of a third, fourth and fifth right wing part (libertarian, constitution, stste parties, hate parties, apartheid parties)….any chance? » Posted By MurphTheSurf3 On March 29, 2013 @ 3:30 pm Just getting back to the article- thanks for the kudo! » Posted By MurphTheSurf3 On March 29, 2013 @ 3:29 pm WoW—- I am copying and pasting this into my archive. Four Stars **** » Posted By MurphTheSurf3 On March 29, 2013 @ 3:26 pm Ad Lib- if you want to- take a look at my reply to Sue in this thread regarding our Split Government System and the Parliamentary System. Be interested in your thinking on this. » Posted By MurphTheSurf3 On March 29, 2013 @ 3:25 pm It is my opinion that our system of government works against change. How many other countries have adopted the U.S. system? One. Liberia and it has been in civil war for 100 years. How many have adopted elements of our governmental structure? A half dozen or so. Our system of checks and balances creates the conditions for gridlock. Three issues are in front of the American people right now: a) Women’s health rights In all three cases public opinion is clear and yet our legislature feels free to ignore it. In a parliamentary system this would not be tolerated. The great danger in a parliamentary structure where the executive sits in the legislature and the judiciary has a far more limited role to create law, the danger is that things can change too quickly, but given the choice between gridlock and the express lane, I know which one I would choose. » Posted By MurphTheSurf3 On March 29, 2013 @ 3:23 pm Hey Ad Lib- thoughtful piece. The GOP has struggled with its identity for much of the 20th and 21st century. Its origins are in Reform- huge, massive, radical reform. And they have struggle with that ever since the end of the Civil War. But Reconstruction tainted the Party and rendered it ineffective and shattered. At the end of the 19th century the Party of Bob LaFollette and Teddy Roosevelt (generally a progressive reformer and part of the reforming wing of the GOP) became the Party of Taft, Harding, Coolidge and Hoover…..the party of Big Money, Small Government and Isolationism. After the Great Depression and WWII, the Party turned to reform again with its “patriotic millionaires” embracing the war hero IKE who proved to be a real reformer with strong progressive leanings. Goldwater was a throwback. Nixon was felled by his personal fears. Ford was a blip on the screen. But Nixon had turned his back on Ike’s reform in favor of dark politics (with Roger Ailes and Lee Atwater as poster boys) And then came Reagan who took all of the threads you lay before us in your post and wove them into the first GOP tapestry since the days of the Big Money Boys after WWI. Bush Sr. tried to restore a bit of Eisenhower rationality but was pushed overboard by the moral maority, neocon, supply side, Reagan worshipers who eventually created the Bush presidency and its cast of regime making characters. And now that tapestry seems to coming apart and so the weavers are busy trying to patch something else together. And the conflict between the Party and its former allies makes it clear how ham fisted that effort seems to be. Here are three contributions to your story featuring Gary Bauer, Michael Huckabee and Nicole Wallace. ***** Today, the National Organization for Marriage and allied groups organized a “March for Marriage” orchestrated to coincide with arguments at the Supreme Court over the constitutionality of Proposition 8 and the Defense of Marriage Act. The march ended with a rally on the National Mall featuring a variety of speakers, including Gary Bauer, who used it as a platform to send a message to the Republican Party that “if you bail out on this issue, I will leave the party and I will take as many people with me as I possibly can” http://www.rightwingwatch.org/content/gary-bauer-threatens-leave-gop-if-it-bails-out-issue-marriage-equality ****** Mike Huckabee was asked by Newsmax if he thinks the GOP will pivot to support marriage equality: “They might. And if they do, they’re going to lose a large part of their base because evangelicals will take a walk. And it’s not because there’s an anti-homosexual mood, and nobody’s homophobic that I know of, but many of us, and I consider myself included, base our standards not on the latest Washington Post poll, but on an objective standard, not a subjective såtandard. å have great sympathy and extraordinary admiration for Sen. Portman. I consider him a friend and I value his work in the Senate and think he’s a great person. The mistake is that we sometimes base our public policy decisions on how we feel, how we think, maybe even some personal experiences, and we don’t regard a lot of these issues from the standpoint of an objective standard.” ***** Former George W. Bush advisor Nicole Wallace countered that Bauer faces polling troubles in that 65% of evangelicals under the age of 33 support marriage equality; and more than 60% of Americans support some form of marriage equality. “The argument that the public is overwhelmingly in favor of same sex marriage is ludicrous,” evangelical leader Gary Bauer later responded. “33 states have voted to keep marriage the union of one man and one woman. If it was so obvious that the American public wants to try a radical social experiment that results in children in those households, definitely, definitely, not having a mother and a father … If the opinion of the American public was so overwhelming, the gay rights movement and their allies like Nicole wouldn’t be asking the Supreme Court to say to the American people, ‘You have no say on this issue.’” When presented with polling data that shows an upward trend in Americans supporting same-sex marriage, Bauer responded, “I’m not worried about that because the polls are skewed.” He added that the votes to legalize same-sex marriage in four states this past November still had around 45% “no” votes, outrunning Romney in many places. » Posted By MurphTheSurf3 On March 26, 2013 @ 10:07 pm VAWA – There Should Never Have Been a Debate On It’s Merits Thanks Sue for your fearless, uncompromising statement of what “absolutely should be” in this country but has of late become “it might be possible.” » Posted By MurphTheSurf3 On March 11, 2013 @ 6:53 pm WE’RE FOR IT TOO…THE GOP AND VAWA…… In February 2013, the Senate passed an extension of the Violence Against Women Act by a vote of 78-22, and the House of Representatives passed it by a vote of 286-138, with unanimous Democratic support and 87 Republicans voting in the affirmative. Don’t you just love the GOTP who are trying to get credit for supporting a bill they voted against. Just boast of supporting the amendment proposed by Rep. Cathy McMorris Rodgers, the one that only covered some women, the one that was never going to get through the Senate, the one the president said he would not sign—and ignore those pesky “no” votes they cast when the House voted on the real bill. Who will know the difference, right? Here’s the Rouges list (courtesy of the Daily Kos) Rep. Michelle Bachman of Minnesota “Rep. Bachmann recognizes the importance of giving local law enforcement and nonprofit programs the resources they need to fight against domestic violence and sexual assault, which is why she supported the stronger House version of the Violence Against Women Act,” said Bachmann spokesman Dan Kotman. She did vote for measure that passed- the one that was the stronger and more inclusive one. Rep. Tim Griffin of Arkansas issued this statement: For nearly two decades, VAWA has protected and helped victims of domestic violence and sexual assault. The House version extends the law for five years while strengthening criminal penalties, providing more resources for sexual assault investigations and care for victims, and I was proud to support its reauthorization. And here’s Rep. Steve King of Iowa applauding himself: “I supported this legislation because I know how important it is to empower women in difficult situations. If a woman is at risk, she should know that she has a place to turn for support and assistance. I supported VAWA in 2005, 2012, and today I voted in support of the House version to see that victims of domestic violence and sexual assault have access to the resources and protection when they need it the most.” Missouri Rep. Vicky Hartzler’s is also very proud of herself: “I am pleased to support efforts to protect all women in this country from domestic abuse and other forms of violence,” said Hartzler. “The House version of VAWA supports assistance to adult and youth victims of domestic violence, dating violence, sexual assault, and stalking.” “Violence against women, in all its forms, is unacceptable,” added Hartzler. “I support efforts to prosecute to the full extent of the law all those who engage in these deplorable acts of abuse and violence. This legislation provides states with the resources needed to combat domestic violence and allocates funding to college campuses for safety programs – all while ensuring no one is discriminated against. The House version of the Violence Against Women Act protects women, provides funding for the Rural Grant Program, and reauthorizes the Court Appointed Special Advocate (CASA) program. As a former board member of CASA, I understand how important it is to provide support for abused children and ensure the perpetrators are brought to justice.” Michigan Rep. Tim Walberg went on the radio to crow about his vote: Rep. Walberg told a local radio station that “he was proud to have voted in support of the act.” Walberg explained how “as a husband, father of a daughter and grandfather of a granddaughter, he is strongly committed to ensuring that all women have access to resources they need to protect themselves, their children and their families.” SOME OTHERS: Keith Rothfus, R-Pa., Tim Murphy, R-Pa., and Bill Johnson, R-Ohio AND Sen. John Cornyn » Posted By MurphTheSurf3 On March 11, 2013 @ 6:50 pm Oscar Night- When “not boring” is high praise I have heard that there is a group in Hollywood that dislikes Spielberg. “Spielberg is lousy film maker. All his characters are stereotypes, and every one of them is over-the-wall ridiculous. There’s hardly a realistic thing in any of his movies.” Yeah…that’s Spielberg alright. Saving Private Ryan, Schindler’s List, Sugarland Express, ET, The Color Purple, Empire of the Sun, Cape Fear, Amistad, Catch Me If You Can, Flags of Our Fathers, Letters from Iwo Jima, True Grit, Super 8, Real Steel, AND Lincoln. Spielberg won the Academy Award for Best Director for Schindler’s List (1993) and Saving Private Ryan (1998). He has been nominated six times, and his films have dozens of awards and even more nominations. Do you know of other reasons why Spielberg has been dissed by glitter town. As to Affleck….a director who casts himself for the lead earns a lot of opprobrium from the actors….. Ang Li- Life of Pi…it is a beautiful film but the acting chops are small- find a good young man to play the part and then coordinate all the special effects. I think either Argo or Lincoln was a greater director’s accomplishment. » Posted By MurphTheSurf3 On February 26, 2013 @ 6:08 pm Now that you mention them I too recall them….point taken…I wonder how they do ratings wise or are they subsidized by the commercial efforts like the programs we are talking about. One of my favorite musicals is Man of La Mancha – in part because its message is about the nobility of the little guy. Your points are very well given and taken. » Posted By MurphTheSurf3 On February 26, 2013 @ 10:00 am And in stone, he is as always was and always will be – the image we were born and raised with, the image in our mythology….except he was never really that person. Indeed it is in his infirmities and in his weakness that his great inner strength becomes clear. » Posted By MurphTheSurf3 On February 26, 2013 @ 9:55 am I found a TCM tribute from 2010 and it was excellent. Of course it focused almost entirely on the “screen personalities and directors” and the Academy really has to bring in all aspects of the industry. A day later I am less pleased with the MC’s performance as the jokes come under more scrutiny. Of course the responsibility for his patter is borne by a bunch of people since it is all geared to drive up viewership. » Posted By MurphTheSurf3 On February 26, 2013 @ 6:37 am I suspect I may have had a different feeling about the film had I seen it in the political context you identify. I would probably have linked it to that awful screed “Obama’s America” – Dineesh D’Souza’s propaganda piece. » Posted By MurphTheSurf3 On February 26, 2013 @ 6:32 am Howdy, Actually, we do not disagree I find something about the need to remain together and to hold onto a community compelling but the life it depicts has little to recommend it for all of the reasons you list. As I say in my post Beasts has the feel of a documentary but what it lays before us is profoundly disturbing. I did not find the film “entertaining” which is why I call it compelling. It is not pleasant but it feels very real. I did some work in Appalachia many years ago and the community there had the same feel to it. As to the timing….I never made that connection because I saw Beasts in January with a small group of friends. Of the six of us, the consensus was that there was truth there but it was fundamentally disturbing and an indictment on the entire social system. Well done, but horrifying…. So I think we really are within a page or two of each other. The documentary appeals to me because it is honest and their is something, even if small, redeeming about the sense of home and family in this sad drama. » Posted By MurphTheSurf3 On February 25, 2013 @ 11:30 pm I very much like Walt’s performance in Bastards and Django, but not the one from last night…Tarantino took risks but at this stage in his career success is pretty much guaranteed in some form. And then we have Lewis’ Speech: “I really don’t know how any of this happened. I do know that I’ve received so much more than my fair share of good fortune in my life and I’m so grateful to the Academy for this beautiful honor. It’s a strange thing because three years ago before we decided to do a straight swap, I had actually been committed to play Margaret Thatcher. [Laughs] And Meryl was Steven’s first choice for Lincoln. And I’d like to see that version. And Steven didn’t have to persuade me to play Lincoln but I had to persuade him that perhaps if I was going to do it that Lincoln shouldn’t be a musical. My fellow nominees, my equals, my betters, I’m so proud to have been included as one amongst you. When we got married 16 years ago, or since we got married 16 years ago, my wife Rebecca has lived with some very strange men. I mean they were strange as individuals and probably even stranger if taken as a group. But luckily she’s the versatile one in the family and she’s been the perfect companion to all of them.” Self-effacing, humble, self deprecating, grateful and truly earnest….. When he was asked to take the role of Lincoln he said he hesitated and took several weeks to make his decision. “I was hesitant in taking on the role of Lincoln because I did not to be responsible for irrevocably staining the reputation of the greatest president this country’s ever known.” Remember Streep getting her award last year: “I had this feeling I could hear half of America go, “Oh, no, why her again?” We need more of that- not just the words, but the inner spirit that puts these celebrities into a context outside of fame and fortune. » Posted By MurphTheSurf3 On February 25, 2013 @ 9:46 pm Beasts had the feel of a documentary and that was both its power and its failing. I found it very powerful and that it provided an insight into the life, the real life, of the very poor….we may not have much but we do have each other and that is worth holding onto. It is an important message. I remember when Color Purple failed to attract the honors many thought it deserved, despite critical acclaim and a strong box office. Sue makes a strong case for this in her comments. Love your comment about Lincoln as more than a stone profile – captures my thinking precisely. » Posted By MurphTheSurf3 On February 25, 2013 @ 9:32 pmComments Posted By MurphTheSurf3
b) Gun safety
c) Gay Marriage
On Fox News Sunday this morning, evangelical leader Gary Bauer and Republican strategist Nicolle Wallace went head-to-head over the upcoming Supreme Court hearings on overturning Proposition 8, California’s controversial law banning same-sex marriages within the state.
«« Back To Stats Page
Home Stats