The Times front-pages an editorial for the first time since 1920 to - I kid you not - renew their ongoing call for a new assault weapons ban (Yeah, that is a lot of history that couldn't break onto page 1). As a bonus, they want to attempt to confiscate existing 'assault weapons', so we know they are in full fantasy mode.
However, if this is the official Times editorial position position there will be pressure on Democratic candidates to support or reject it, and good luck to them. Run, indeed. Picture the Democratic campaign message: the jihadists are here, we can't stop them, so turn in your guns. Obama is sufficiently arrogant and out of touch to think that might be the winning ticket, but it's hard to believe Bill will let Hillary walk that plank. Which portends trouble in progressive paradise.
As a display of 'Too much free time' I posted the following comment for the Times moderators to reject (links added here):
So the Times is calling for another assault weapons ban? Just to trot out the obvious objections: (1) The DoJ studied the ban that expired in 2004: "Should it be renewed, the ban's effects on gun violence are likely to be small at best and perhaps too small for reliable measurement."
(2) Anyone familiar with the numbers knows we have (FBI UCR Table 20 8, 2014) about 8,000 gun homicides per year. That breaks down to roughly 5,500 by handgun, 250 by rifle (including "assault weapons"), 250 by shotgun, and 2,000 unclassified. Rifles are not the problem, so banning them is unlikely to be the solution.
(3) Just offhand the VaTech killer (32 dead) used handguns. The Gabby Gifford shooter (6 dead) used a handgun. The Navy Yard shooter (12 dead) used a shotgun. The first Ft. Hood shooter (13 dead) used a handgun.
Which might suggest that conventional firearms can be as effective as the scary looking rifles tricked out to look like a prop in a Schwarzenegger film. Well. People unafraid of guns (trigger warning!) can click on the link to see a Remington R-15 hunting rifle. Why an assailant brandishing that would be less terrifying than one brandishing a Times-banned "assault weapon" is left as an exercise to the editors.
I gave no shrift to the Constitutional issues because the Times editors have already decided to shred the Constitution with the terrorist watch list gun-buying ban.
FIRST. Locked and loaded.
Posted by: GUS | December 05, 2015 at 02:19 AM
Assault revolver:
http://youtu.be/lLk1v5bSFPw
Posted by: Threadkiller | December 05, 2015 at 02:34 AM
Thank you TM for this:
NYT editors: The jihadists are here, you may be working with them, turn in your guns.
I've been unable to articulate my thoughts and feelings on witnessing the news coverage since the slaughter in San Bernadino, but that sentence expresses them as well as any words I've been able to string together.
How in God's name can these people come to that conclusion? What fairy land do they live in?
Posted by: anonamom | December 05, 2015 at 05:19 AM
From a summary of the shitheads weekly radio address --
He recognized the possibility that the two attackers may have been radicalized, a reminder to all of us that we need to work together to prevent people from falling victim to attempts by extremist organizations to encourage violence.
So, what happens if no "organization" actually "radicalized" these two? What if they ended up where they did by doing nothing more than reading the Koran? What if the organization is Islam itself?
Posted by: danoso | December 05, 2015 at 06:35 AM
This is precisely the message on nbc network last night that I watched to avoid Huckabee on Fox. The media has their marching orders. I remember wondering where nbc thought the Paris terrorists got their guns given France's stricter laws.
One thing I know from studying the framing Institute's work is the role of a false narrative and this is precisely what is going on. Must not let facts get in the way. NYT knows full well how many professionals and reputedly well-educated people only get their news from the NYT on weekends and NPR while they drive and they are taking advantage of ignorance that is unaware it is.
Posted by: rse | December 05, 2015 at 06:56 AM
The irony in all these idiotically spouted memes about " if you do such and such the Terrorists will have won" or "don't do such and such because that's what the Terrorists want you to do" is that the Terrorists do indeed want us to give up our guns, and the Terrorists will indeed have won if we surrender our Constitutional Rights as a consequence of their actions.
Posted by: daddy on iPad | December 05, 2015 at 06:58 AM
Oh, silly daddy, don't you know the College Board already teaches the Interactive Constitution and Sotomayor has gone on the Board of iCivics to push role playing about social change while she is a sitting SCOTUS member.
Posted by: rse | December 05, 2015 at 07:04 AM
See why I read Charles I and Cromwell?
Posted by: Glorious and Inglorious Revolutions. | December 05, 2015 at 07:23 AM
The slavish devotion to the NYT and state radio is not the sign of a well informed mind, yet the arrogance of the dimwitted snobs who swallow the propaganda pretty much confirms the continued brainwashing.
Posted by: Captain Hate on the iPad | December 05, 2015 at 07:24 AM
Good Morning! Good news CH and NK!
I have terrible thought,God forbid there is a domino effect of terrorists attacks? The president,the attorney general,the media are going to run out of excuses. The denial of these people is stunning.
Posted by: Marlene | December 05, 2015 at 07:37 AM
A really excellent post TM. Those gutless bums won't publish your letter, but it's worth keeping in mind that the Times is the same organization that installed gatling guns in their front door during the deadly Civil War Draft Riots in downtown Manhattan. When it's their ass that's on the line, suddenly "Assault Weapons" are A-OK, and it don't get much more "Assaulty" than gatling guns.
Via The New York Times: "Crush the Mob!" ran The New York Times headline:
At Newspaper Row, across from City Hall, Henry Raymond, owner and editor of The New York Times, averted the rioters with Gatling guns, one of which he manned. The mob, instead, attacked the headquarters of abolitionist Horace Greeley's New York Tribune until forced to flee by the Brooklyn Police.
Posted by: daddy | December 05, 2015 at 07:38 AM
A really excellent post TM. Those gutless bums won't publish your letter, but it's worth keeping in mind that the Times is the same organization that installed gatling guns in their front door during the deadly Civil War Draft Riots in downtown Manhattan. When it's their ass that's on the line, suddenly "Assault Weapons" are A-OK, and it don't get much more "Assaulty" than gatling guns.
Via The New York Times: "Crush the Mob!" ran The New York Times headline:
At Newspaper Row, across from City Hall, Henry Raymond, owner and editor of The New York Times, averted the rioters with Gatling guns, one of which he manned. The mob, instead, attacked the headquarters of abolitionist Horace Greeley's New York Tribune until forced to flee by the Brooklyn Police.
Posted by: daddy | December 05, 2015 at 07:39 AM
2016 Presidential Straw Poll
Who do you support for President in 2016?
http://commoncts.blogspot.com/2015/12/presidential-straw-poll-who-do-you.html
Posted by: Steve | December 05, 2015 at 07:40 AM
TM and daddy 2 and the Times 0!
Self-destruction by petard.
Posted by: sbw | December 05, 2015 at 07:44 AM
The founding fathers knew that it would come to this and that was the purpose of our 2nd amendment. Not just an oppressive government but also a compliant and supportive 4th estate.
The Times editorial board ought to call Uber up and take a 100 mile trip west into north central PA if the want to see what they would be up against. It's deer season there and lots of scary guns carried by bitter clingers who vote.
Posted by: Jack is Back! | December 05, 2015 at 07:44 AM
Burning orphanages and blowing themselves up in the armory. We've come a long way, Baby.
Posted by: Only a short century and a shorter half one. | December 05, 2015 at 07:58 AM
What would we do without Steve?
Posted by: Captain Hate on the iPad | December 05, 2015 at 08:10 AM
Federal Soldiers fresh from Gettysburg restored order. Oops, better check that; Lee's retreat to Virginia allowed the use of the troops, who may not have been at Gettysburg.
Probably a good thing our present military abhors a draft.
Posted by: Weatherbeaters, for the cold, you know. | December 05, 2015 at 08:14 AM
Note in daddy's historic NYT page... the Tribune was called "abolitionist" as compared to the "slaver" (?) NYT.
Posted by: henry | December 05, 2015 at 08:29 AM
So, what happens if no "organization" actually "radicalized" these two? What if they ended up where they did by doing nothing more than reading the Koran? What if the organization is Islam itself?
Exactly, danoso. It is Islam.
Why did my Rep. Don Beyer go to a mosque prayer service if this has nothing to do with Islam??
Maybe some of the apologists could explain the different Islams - what parts of Islam that these groups preach are not true to Islam?
the Dar al-Hijrah Mosque in Virginia
ISIS
al Qaeda
What parts of the Koran are true & which are not? Give us specifics. What parts of the Hadith are true & which are not?
Posted by: Janet | December 05, 2015 at 08:32 AM
Here's the first line from today's NYTimes Editorial:
All decent people feel sorrow and righteous fury about the latest slaughter of innocents, in California.
It follows then that people who are not sorrowful or full of righteous anger are "indecent."
Logic tells us that the only people who would not be sorrowful or angry about the killings would be Muslims---not Christians, not Jews, not Buddhists, not Mormons, not Scientologists, not Hindu Thuggies, not even atheists. By default, the only people who will not be sorrowful or angry about these murders will be Muslims, and not all of them, but again using logic, hundreds of millions of them, and not just overseas but also here in America. Probably even some who were cheering on the rooftops of Patterson, New Jersey on 9/11.
So I bring this up because it is obvious that labeling Muslims, even by inference, as "indecent people" is offensive and inflammatory, and edges towards violence" and thus directly goes against the pronouncements of Attorney General Loretta Lynch yesterday, " to Prosecute Those Who Use 'Anti-Muslim' Speech That 'Edges Toward Violence.'
That said, I demand the Justice Department prosecute the New York Times for their front page Editorial this morning, (the first on it's front page since 1920), because it labels hundreds of millions of Muslims around the world and in America as "indecent people."
Posted by: daddy | December 05, 2015 at 08:33 AM
Mornin' Kim!
Looks like Ted Cruz will be holding a must-watch climate change hearing on Tuesday at 3:00, with Judith Curry & Mark Steyn, among others, on board. He's calling it “Data or Dogma? Promoting Open Inquiry in the Debate over the Magnitude of Human Impact on Earth’s Climate.” I'm assuming it will be televised….
Someone must have finally told Obama that the 97% consensus figure was bogus, so he updated his talking points: "[L]ook, here's what we know: 99.5 percent of scientists in the world say this is a really urgent problem."
Posted by: JMHanes | December 05, 2015 at 08:38 AM
From John Podhoretz's FB page:
12/4/2007-Giuliani 26, Thompson 14, McCain 14.
12/4/2011-Gingrich 27, Romney 20, Cain 14
12/4/2015-Trump 31,Carson 17.5,Cruz & Rubio 13.5 --
RealClearPolitics averages
Just saying.
Posted by: Jack is Back! (On Alert!) | December 05, 2015 at 08:41 AM
I was surprised Janet they would hold this at awlaki's mosque, I guess the islamic Saudi academy was booked that day.
Posted by: buccaneer morgan | December 05, 2015 at 08:41 AM
Hey, did you hear a bunch of people got shot in Southern California?
Posted by: Er | December 05, 2015 at 08:46 AM
In other news, Sheila Jackson Lee (D-Loon City) has declared that after much study it can be shown that "homicide" is the leading cause of most "murders".
YCNMTSU.
Posted by: Jack is Back! (On Alert!) | December 05, 2015 at 08:48 AM
JMH, funny thing about Obama's new stat... 99.5% of all climate data sets are fudged.
Posted by: henry | December 05, 2015 at 08:50 AM
Does it bother anybody besides me that Walker and others have dropped out of the running well before a single primary has been held? Leaving aside that he, as well as the others, has a real job to do for the voters that entrusted him to that, this televised Cash Explosion benefits nobody as much as the media and consultants. What happened to the voters getting to make the choice?
Posted by: Captain Hate on the iPad | December 05, 2015 at 08:54 AM
James Taranto @jamestaranto 39m
The New York Times today published the newspaper's opinion on the front page. The last time it did that was yesterday.
Posted by: jimmyk | December 05, 2015 at 08:55 AM
Good morning!
Here is a little bit more on the Pakistani bride:
http://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-california-shooting-pakistan-exclusiv-idUKKBN0TN1Z120151205
Posted by: Miss Marple 2 | December 05, 2015 at 08:57 AM
I can see no way to bridge the gap between people who now know beyond doubt that ISIS did jihad in San Bernardino this past week and the enemy within in government and media and even my own neighborhood who are not only denying that it was a muslim terror attack but are trying to spin up a "How many fingers, Winston?" campaign against me.
There is no way in hell I am going to toe their two-plus-two-makes-five line, so they had better get the hell off that hobby horse before there is no choice left but to knock them off.
Posted by: FTL | December 05, 2015 at 08:58 AM
t we need to work together to prevent people from falling victim to attempts by extremist organizations to encourage violence.
???...What exactly are we supposed to do? Call the police on a kid that brings something that looks like a bomb to school?
THat didn't work out so well for the school.
Posted by: Janet | December 05, 2015 at 08:59 AM
Captain Hate,
Yes, I am bothered by his dropping out and also Rick Perry. Jeb Bush tied up a lot of money at the very beginning, and then with Trump's arrival the few remaining big donors decided to wait on the sidelines.
I find it a bad thing that a small group of high-dollar donors has so much influence on the race, especially because in their wisdom they thought Jeb would be a good candidate, which shows you how gullible and clueless they are.
Posted by: Miss Marple 2 | December 05, 2015 at 09:01 AM
It does bother me, [email protected]:54, but it is largely about fund-raising, which fortunately does still come from the voters and is as important as voting. I don't fully understand why Walker is out but some 1%ers (pollwise) are still in there, but I think it's because Walker started out high and fell after the first two debates, which somehow looks worse than if you're always at 1%.
Posted by: jimmyk | December 05, 2015 at 09:07 AM
Hadn't seen Miss M's comment, but I guess it's two sides of the same coin. I don't see a better alternative to private funding of campaigns, even though it doesn't always lead to the "right" outcome.
Posted by: jimmyk | December 05, 2015 at 09:09 AM
Don Beyer should have gone to a church or synagogue or some secular gathering to show his support for Americans that are being murdered by Islamic jihad.
The Imam from the Dar al-Hijrah Mosque in Virginia could have come along & told everyone which parts of the koran & hadith are not to be followed anymore.
Posted by: Janet | December 05, 2015 at 09:09 AM
Don't get me started on the wisdom of the high rollers who write out large checks to the likes of Rove, Miss Marple. But my complaint goes beyond that and is more the ongoing entertainment spectacle of politics which ends up with Rupert Pupkin elected to two terms. Rather than complain about Trump, the RNC geniuses might look in the mirror to figure out why a media savvy entertainer is doing so well.
Posted by: Captain Hate on the iPad | December 05, 2015 at 09:11 AM
I agree Janet - First they create a climate where citizens feel to report suspicious activity could brand them as racist and islamophobic and THEN they say things like that.
We could "work together" to convert them to Christ but somehow I don't think that's what the government is saying....
Posted by: Momto2 | December 05, 2015 at 09:13 AM
The New York Times today published the newspaper's opinion on the front page. The last time it did that was yesterday.
Love it!
Posted by: sbw | December 05, 2015 at 09:13 AM
Janet, has your state elected anybody other than Bratt who isn't a complete idiot?
Posted by: Captain Hate on the iPad | December 05, 2015 at 09:14 AM
Switching to "self radicalized acting alone" terror from "workplace violence" terror won't last long.
One of the news agencies last night showed a bank statement in the home with $64,000 balance. How does a guy with wife and baby save that much cash on $51k per year plus buy all those guns, ammo and pipe bomb manufacturing supplies?
Posted by: windansea | December 05, 2015 at 09:14 AM
I would add that the mega-debates were a bad idea. They gave the MFM too much influence, and culled the wrong people.
Posted by: jimmyk | December 05, 2015 at 09:15 AM
I wouldn't count Walker completely out yet. His two greatest issues, the government union busting and the John Doe atrocities, are key and are completely under-reported by our slavish press.
Yeah, JMH, Cruz has been the most reliable on climate, and that show promises to be a wonderful circus. Wonder who the Democrats will put up in response? Michael Piltdown Mann's name has been proposed by several skeptics but it will be a cold day in Hell when he shows his face at anything resembling a climate debate.
Posted by: Sleeper issues, so to speak, heh. | December 05, 2015 at 09:15 AM
"The victims of the Intense Islamophobia Backlash always seem much healthier and less dead than do the victims of Islam." - @gzulux on Twitter
Posted by: Janet | December 05, 2015 at 09:17 AM
I bet they drag in Bill Nye the Science Guy and Neil Degrasse Tyson, who have Authority because they are on TV!
Sort of like when we had Meryl Streep testifying about pesticides or something.
Posted by: Miss Marple 2 | December 05, 2015 at 09:20 AM
He said authorities do not know yet if Farook and Malik were acting alone or where the couple’s money came from. A bank statement found at Farook’s apartment shows a balance of almost $64,000 when Farook’s annual salary was $51,000 as a San Bernardino county health inspector, according to Inside Edition.
http://losangeles.cbslocal.com/2015/12/04/fbi-investigating-san-bernardino-shooting-as-act-of-terrorism/
Posted by: windansea | December 05, 2015 at 09:22 AM
Maine's Senator Angus King is looking forward to the day the polar ice cap melts and Maine will benefit from the shipping created by the Northwest Passage. He was in Eastport,claiming that,"we can argue about policy questions,but I can't see arguing about the data."
He and Senator Murkowski are the co-founders and I believe the only two members of the "Arctic Caucus" in the Senate.
Posted by: Marlene | December 05, 2015 at 09:22 AM
Btw, the worse the terror threat becomes, despite the hamfisted efforts of the Praetorian MFM to minimize it, the worse Granny and Bernie Bernie look. I still expect some donk convention machinations to put some moderate quisling like Evan Bayh in place, at which point if the RNC had any sense (LOL) Miss Marple would be in charge of opposition research.
Posted by: Captain Hate on the iPad | December 05, 2015 at 09:23 AM
I feel a little guilty (well maybe not) but my first reaction to the San Bernadino shooting was not thougts and prayers but rather "I told you so".
Posted by: Jane | December 05, 2015 at 09:24 AM
http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2015/12/05/the-inhuman-reign-of-the-lie-why-trumps-words-dont-hurt-him/
Posted by: Miss Marple 2 | December 05, 2015 at 09:25 AM
We are so screwed. Obama will bring his Paris stupidity in via an amendment to TPP -- which can amend itself without Congress. (ht the lurking one).
Posted by: henry | December 05, 2015 at 09:30 AM
Since the 1930s, always against us.
https://pjmedia.com/trending/2015/12/5/journalism-is-dead-new-york-times-to-run-page-1-pushing-democrats-anti-gun-agenda
The top leftist propaganda spreader.
Posted by: pagar a bacon, ham and sausage supporter | December 05, 2015 at 09:32 AM
I feel a little guilty (well maybe not) but my first reaction to the San Bernadino shooting was not thougts and prayers but rather "I told you so".
Ain't like it was unpredictable. And this is not the end of it.
But the corollary, which most of the electorate is not ready for, is that you can't stop radical islam through defense. We can either fight them there or fight them here. Democrats have chosen to fight them here.
Posted by: Cecil Turner | December 05, 2015 at 09:33 AM
We are so screwed. Obama will bring his Paris stupidity in via an amendment to TPP -- which can amend itself without Congress. (ht the lurking one).
A self-amending treaty? If so, it won't pass.
Posted by: Cecil Turner | December 05, 2015 at 09:37 AM
Well, CT, the Democrats are not even fighting them here.
Posted by: Where's Our Beef? | December 05, 2015 at 09:37 AM
Heh, a pen and a phone is what got Charles the First in trouble.
Posted by: We don't need no stinkin' treaties. | December 05, 2015 at 09:38 AM
The problem is the last two cycles, we were saddled with two 'resoectable' candidates, one who three the match, and the other underperformed, honestly would we have done worse with Giuliani or Newt.
Posted by: buccaneer morgan | December 05, 2015 at 09:40 AM
Democrats have chosen to fight them here.
I don't know about that Cecil - I'm not sure what they are doing could be considered "fighting them"...more like enabling them!
Posted by: Momto2 | December 05, 2015 at 09:41 AM
CT @ 9:37
Considering the R Senate's track record, why would you say that?
Posted by: James D. | December 05, 2015 at 09:42 AM
Heh, bm, one threw the match and the other danced in the flames.
Posted by: Burning newspapers. | December 05, 2015 at 09:43 AM
Cecil, the TPP is what the chamber of cronies wants... it will pass.
Posted by: henry | December 05, 2015 at 09:44 AM
Agree with Momto2 - the Dems haven't chosen to fight here; they've chosen collaboration.
Posted by: James D. | December 05, 2015 at 09:44 AM
Dems = Vichy America
Posted by: Miss Marple 2 | December 05, 2015 at 09:46 AM
There is a wicked juxtapositionI(bedfellowed) between the international Left and ISIS style sharia. Is transnationalism the matchmaker? Or merely autocracy and absolutism?
Oh, what a tangle they've gotten themselves into, and progeny of Rosemary issue, ensue.
Posted by: Strangled at birth, or head chopped off. At this point, what difference does it make? | December 05, 2015 at 09:48 AM
http://www.jammiewf.com/2015/good-news-72-department-of-homeland-security-employees-on-terrorist-watch-list/
Posted by: Miss Marple 2 | December 05, 2015 at 09:49 AM
MM @ 9:49
Only 72? That's better than I would have expected, honestly.
Which is a thoroughly depressing thought.
Posted by: James D. | December 05, 2015 at 09:52 AM
we need to work together to prevent people from falling victim to attempts by extremist organizations to encourage violence.
There is one guy we know about that challenged the Calif. jihadi's beliefs ...& he is dead & the MFM are trying to make him look like the bad guy.
http://www.timesofisrael.com/jewish-victim-of-california-attack-had-argued-with-shooter-about-islam/
Posted by: Janet | December 05, 2015 at 09:53 AM
The American Left will make common cause with any group or nation that hates America. They have done it since the 30's. Whether it's Stalin, Pol Pot, Yassir Arafat, Saddam Hussein, or Hugo Chavez, there is no American enemy they won't suck up to and help.
Hence the rise of Islamicism is just another enemy for them to use as a weapon against America. The Left are traitors, Judas goats, collaborators, whatever. They should not be trusted any more than Syrian immigrants.
Posted by: Miss Marple 2 | December 05, 2015 at 09:55 AM
James D,
The 72 are the ones they positively identified. How many under the hood types like Farooq we do not know.
Posted by: Miss Marple 2 | December 05, 2015 at 09:57 AM
Are the comments coming and going for people?
Posted by: Miss Marple 2 | December 05, 2015 at 09:59 AM
first?
Posted by: peter | December 05, 2015 at 09:59 AM
Gosh, Miss Marple, aren't most of them native born American citizens of the United States? How can we not trust them?
Posted by: Rick Ballard | December 05, 2015 at 09:59 AM
Rick,
I don't trust ANYONE except blood relatives.
Posted by: Miss Marple 2 | December 05, 2015 at 10:00 AM
Cecil, the TPP is what the chamber of cronies wants... it will pass.
A decent trade agreement would be good for us--like NAFTA was/is--but it's going to be close anyway because of all the whingers (mostly on the left). Add in an easter egg like that one suggested by the AT article, and it's sunk.
Posted by: Cecil Turner | December 05, 2015 at 10:02 AM
According to Wretchard, "Everything
Old is NewBad is Good again!"Backtrack Obama
Posted by: daddy | December 05, 2015 at 10:05 AM
Bosch Fawstin
21 hrs · Twitter ·
Muslims are very lucky we're not like them.
Posted by: Janet | December 05, 2015 at 10:05 AM
http://www.allenbwest.com/2015/12/as-obama-orders-women-in-combat-look-what-we-discovered-about-female-army-rangers/
Unbelievable!
Posted by: pagar a bacon, ham and sausage supporter | December 05, 2015 at 10:06 AM
A charade without Chinese involvement, and a parade with it.
Posted by: Co-Prosperity Anyone? | December 05, 2015 at 10:06 AM
MM: "I don't trust ANYONE except blood relatives."
Have you met my sister or Iggy's brother?
Posted by: Old Lurker | December 05, 2015 at 10:11 AM
from Tim Blair - http://blogs.news.com.au/dailytelegraph/timblair/index.php/dailytelegraph/comments/horn_honked/
"Please take a few minutes to read about the victims of San Bernardino’s Islamist atrocity. And then, if you can tolerate it, read a Washington Post piece about the real victims:
--American Muslims say they are living through an intensely painful moment and feel growing anti-Muslim sentiment after the recent Islamic State attacks in Paris and this week’s San Bernardino shootings, carried out by a Muslim husband and wife.-- "
Again - "The victims of the Intense Islamophobia Backlash always seem much healthier and less dead than do the victims of Islam." - @gzulux on Twitter
Posted by: Janet | December 05, 2015 at 10:14 AM
So,the American invasion of ISIS has helped stocked the flames of right-wing Xenophobia and Nativism, which in turn is producing widespread anxiety and fear in the electorate.
It's beautiful. Republicans are actually creating the very market we Democrats need to sell our product;gun control.
Watch the poll numbers on gun-control change with every "terrorist" attack.Watch the position of our elected officials soften as they get an earfull from their Foxnews watching constituents.
The crazy truther Attorney hired by the Farooks seems to have accidentally stumbled upon this by implying that the Obama administration and those in the gun-control camp had everything to gain from making this shooting look like Islamic extremism.
Posted by: DublinDaveForever | December 05, 2015 at 10:14 AM
One of the news agencies last night showed a bank statement in the home with $64,000 balance. How does a guy with wife and baby save that much cash on $51k per year plus buy all those guns, ammo and pipe bomb manufacturing supplies?
Kudo's to Windandsea for asking the $64,000 Question:)
Posted by: daddy | December 05, 2015 at 10:14 AM
sorry....stoke
Posted by: DublinDaveForever | December 05, 2015 at 10:16 AM
I think it was Boris last night who opined that the Dems welcome immigrants and Muslims amomg other groups to sere as "cats' paws" for their Alinsky goals.
I would add the BLM crowd and white freeloaders including most government employees. AGWists and crony capitalists to that team.
Then I would point out the stupidity of inviting the Jihadists into their tent. While the others might be "handled" if they use the right gloves, the Muslim element they are using will, in the end, destroy them along with the rest of us. The Alinskies will come to seem like just another political party when compared to the objective of total submission and conversion intended by that one group. That's just what they are and what their religion demands of their true believers.
Not reading history is a dangerous thing.
Posted by: Old Lurker | December 05, 2015 at 10:20 AM
Here's the Washington Examiner's column on todays New York Times front page OpEd.
"All decent people," the editors began, "feel sorrow and righteous fury about the latest slaughter of innocents, in California." The politically liberal newspaper allowed that law enforcement should look for the "motivations" of deceased suspects Syed Farook and Tashfeen Malik, though it did not get around to naming them in the editorial. Other words absent from the piece were "Muslim" and "Islamic."
It's not bad, but TM's post is a heck of a lot better.
Posted by: daddy | December 05, 2015 at 10:21 AM
Please don't take the dud's Kodachrome away. That news program your watching is a selfie, U da day.
Posted by: Dissonant Davie. | December 05, 2015 at 10:24 AM
Of course Jimmy's 8:55 said it even better!
Posted by: Old Lurker | December 05, 2015 at 10:25 AM
sorry, 'you're'. Got stoked.
Posted by: Smokey chimney. | December 05, 2015 at 10:25 AM
OL, it won't be that simple, sorry to say.
Posted by: First they came.... | December 05, 2015 at 10:26 AM
72-department-of-homeland-security-employees-on-terrorist-watch-list/
Any of 'em virgins?
Posted by: daddy | December 05, 2015 at 10:30 AM
OK, I would like to blame typhus pad for my seemingly idiotic posting at 9:59. There were no comments showing. I swear. I have not started drinking yet.
Posted by: peter | December 05, 2015 at 10:33 AM
So why was Obama's daughter at the shoot-out? Oh, Malik, not Malia.
If he didn't have a daughter she wouldn't look like she's hajibed.
Posted by: Go First, Young Man. | December 05, 2015 at 10:35 AM
OL-that is why there are few places where history is taught properly anymore instead of a variation on anthropology or anachronistic critical analysis or a reason to role play what might have been given current perspectives.
Red was telling me about a question she asked in class last week that turned the whole class into a discussion. She thinks like the former ten year old who loved historical fiction and ww2 and whose mom is a walking, talking history thesaurus. That puts her off the narrative that simply uses facts to illustrate instead of what the narrative should grow out it.
Posted by: rse | December 05, 2015 at 10:35 AM
http://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2015/12/02/climate-jetset-climate-change-crisis-conference-hypocrisy-column/76619818/
Posted by: Miss Marple 2 | December 05, 2015 at 10:37 AM
Let me just say this. Please, please please Liar Party, please run on a thinly veiled gun confiscation program. I beg you.
Posted by: GMax | December 05, 2015 at 10:38 AM
OL,
No, but I was married to someone similar, which I will regret for the rest of my life.
Fortunately I come from a close famiy which has none of those attributes. I would of course, have a different attitude should I be in you guys' situation.
Posted by: Miss Marple 2 | December 05, 2015 at 10:38 AM
I must have missed Don Beyer's (D-VA) visit to a pro-life group. Where was the concern about a pro-life backlash??
Even though the Colorado pot smoking, nutcase wasn't a member of any pro-life group & didn't attend a church...the pro-life movement was still slandered & blamed.
Where was Don's concern then?
Posted by: Janet | December 05, 2015 at 10:44 AM
--a reminder to all of us that we need to work together to prevent people from falling victim to attempts by extremist organizations to encourage violence--
So he's going to go bomb that mosque in Pock-ee-ston where the dumb bitch was "radicalized"?
He's going to block Saudi and other Wahabbi and Salafist funding of new mosques here?
He's going to root out of the US mosques and felons who convert the peaceful and advocate jihad and other unAmerican treasonous "values" like sharia and dhimmitude?
He's going to ban the Muslim Brotherhood and CAIR and make sure none of our money goes to Hamas or the PA or the UN which is absolutely full of radical muslims?
Posted by: Ignatz Ratzkiwatzki | December 05, 2015 at 10:44 AM
MM-I have found that when you have blood relatives who are as mean as a snake and as delusional as an LSD devotee, it is a good reality check early on into the evils of the world.
I used my disinheritance inheritance from my gf to buy a single lovely watch to remind me of all the wisdom I had learned in that gorgeous but dysfunctional house.
Posted by: rse | December 05, 2015 at 10:45 AM
Janet's 9:09 needs to be shouted from the rooftops.
Posted by: Ignatz Ratzkiwatzki | December 05, 2015 at 10:46 AM