Whowhatwhy.com with some controversial takes on recent events. Are we even allowed to question the official version?
The Marathon Bombing: What The Media Didn't Warn You About
With the media’s constant “coverage” of the Boston tragedy, it’s easy to think you are well- informed. But are you? Here is some perspective you probably didn’t get from your favorite mainstream outlet.

Just Asking: Media Outfoxed On Spate Of Bizarre Shootings?
Should the media line up behind a Fox News reporter facing jail time for her refusal to name sources? Of course. But they might also look into where reporters get those “scoops”—and how they shape public perceptions. Particularly in the cases of these “lone nut” shooters that have become increasingly common, leaks from law enforcement should not be taken at face value.

DOWNLOADS: (108)

PLAYS: (824)

Embed

Ladies, forget about transvaginal ultrasounds or contraception coverage or any other concerns about a war on women. The real issue for Fox-lovin’, rootin’ tootin’ American women is packing heat. At least, that’s what the “fair and balanced” network would have you believe as Laura Ingraham and her like-minded pals on Fox & Friends ridiculed Colorado State Rep. Joe Salazar as a Democratic Todd Akin after he inartfully voiced concerns about allowing concealed weapons on college campuses.

I’ll agree that Salazar’s words were ill-chosen and perhaps insensitive. But it’s clear he was worried about Trayvon Martin-like situations and not being heedless of sexual assault.

That’s why we have call boxes, it’s why we have safe zones, that’s why we have the whistles. Because you just don’t know who you’re gonna be shooting at. And you don’t know if you feel like you’re gonna be raped, or if you feel like someone’s been following you around or if you feel like you’re in trouble and when you may actually not be, that you pop out that gun and you pop … pop a round at somebody.

Akin, on the other hand, is a staunch abortion opponent who was questioning whether claims of rape were “legitimate,” suggesting that women who said they got pregnant as a result of a rape were lying and, therefore, should not allow their fetuses to be “punished” with an abortion.

But while Fox spent a lot of time trying to ignore Akin’s comments, it loves comparing Salazar to Akin – and holding itself out as some kind of champion of women’s rights.

Carlson eventually got around to pointing out that Salazar has apologized for his remarks, though she “forgot” to mention that Salazar is a former civil rights attorney who has defended women’s rights. She also “forgot” to point out that Salazar was talking about students on college campuses, not women walking down dark alleys or home alone with children. Nor did anyone note that Salazar comes from a state that has suffered horrifically from gun tragedies. Instead, Carlson distorted Salazar's comments as, “Call boxes and whistles are the best way for women to protect themselves against an attacker.”

Ingraham wasted no time getting with the Fox News program of comparing Salazar to Akin. "Let's think back to the Richard Murdouck scandal, the Todd Akin, Murdouck - all the outrage about they said, OK? Fine. But what about this? What’s he going to shoot the attacker with, a squirt gun buried in that bow tie?” she sneered. Then she held up guns as the real empowerment for women:

He’s channeling what might happen during an attack of a 200-pound man vs. 110-pound woman. … When he’s attacked by someone, probably, 400 pounds, going up against him …Let’s see him crawl to a call box. That’s one of the most absurd things I’ve ever heard.

…The greatest equalizer is a gun in the hands of a woman who is well trained in its use. That’s the greatest equalizer out there when it comes to crime against women.

Nobody pointed out that what Salazar was really talking about was unnecessary gunfire nor that his worries are well-founded given the increased homicides in “stand your ground” states, e.g. – which Colorado is, by the way. Nor that women are five times more likely to be murdered by a gun in states with higher gun ownerships.

But they were ready to use their “sensitivity” to women to attack feminists for not attacking Salazar and/or not being more pro-gun. “Where are all the feminists, that’s what I say,” Ingraham sniped.

CNN has a group of 25 undecided voters in some room in Orlando, but not one Latino. #ThingsThatMakeYouGoHmmm

— Michael Skolnik (@MichaelSkolnik) October 23, 2012

As they have with every debate, CNN ran a focus group of 25 panelists during the debate. Here's the breakdown of these so-called undecided and likely voters:

We're going to be following exactly what they're feeling as they watch the debate. I want to give you more information about our focus group tonight. A racial breakdown -- 76% of the focus group is white, 20% black, 4% asian. Remember, we're not really talking about representing the community here in Orlando. We're talking about a very narrow sliver of people who say they're both undecided and likely voters.

Hmmm. Does that mean they think Latinos are all zipped up and delivered already, that there aren't any who might still be undecided? It's Orlando, for heaven's sake, and they can't dredge up one Latino voter for their panel?

That's really too bad, because the Latino vote could be the deciding bloc in this election. Latino voters do not move as a homogenous block -- there are conservatives, there are liberals, and there are independents who make decisions based upon some key issues. From the group Latino Decisions, some insight about the impact of the Latino vote in swing state Colorado for CNN's producers:

The Latino vote will help determine the presidential election. If one is not convinced, playing around with the Latino Decisions’ Latino Vote Map for a few of the battleground states with a sizeable Latino population ought to change your mind. The basic equation for each state is quite simple: the marginal (dis)advantage for one of the candidates among Latino voters multiplied by the Latino proportion of the electorate equals the net effect of the Latino vote. The Latino effect thus comes down to two variables—marginal group preferences and relative turnout. If one approaches zero, the Latino effect approaches zero. And in a state like Colorado, now one of the closest battleground states with a sizeable Latino population, how this equation plays out quite possibly determines who passes the 270 point in the Electoral College.

Yes, well, I'd say Florida would be one of those states. Last week's CNN snap poll reported weird, skewed results too, and at the time I challenged them on the value of reporting anything if they overweighted for Republicans by a ratio of 70:30. My point then was that any result coming out of that kind of group is meaningless for an overview look at reactions. It only matters if you care what Republicans thought. And this week, we have a panel with no Latinos in a state with a lot of Latinos. So CNN's results this time around only matter if you care what white people think.

If, on the other hand, you care about what the electorate thinks, try a more balanced poll. Or better yet, just make up your own mind and forget what the "panelists" think.

[h/t Kecko on Twitter]

Now, the true silly season begins. Here is a video shot by someone who saw a voter registration worker in front of her local supermarket. When she walked up the worker said she was "polling" for Obama or Romney, but admitted she asked the question because "[she] is only registering Romney voters." She also claimed to work for the County Clerk's office.

Brad Friedman did some digging:

As it turns out, the registration worker was not working for the El Paso County Clerk's office, according to responses sent to The BRAD BLOG by the CO Secretary of State's office as well as the El Paso County Clerk. Instead, she was a paid employee of the state Republican Committee, as confirmed by the local GOP Chairman. And, incredibly enough, both the Sec. of State and County Clerk, both Republicans, assert that what the registration worker is seen doing in the video, screening out potential voters based on who they might vote for, is absolutely legal in the state of Colorado...

All things that are legal are not necessarily ethical. When it comes to Republicans and voter registrations, ethics usually have very little to do with it.

Continue reading »

DOWNLOADS: (180)

PLAYS: (897)

Embed

Colorado should be Ground Zero for a renewed commitment to new gun control legislation. It has witnessed two of the worst mass shootings in US history over the past 13 years, and in both of which, children were among the victims. In the Aurora massacre, the stockpile that James Holmes was able to legally amass included a gas powered assault rifle with a 100-round clip (which would've been banned under the 1999 Assault Weapons Ban), and scores of online purchases including 6,000 rounds of ammunition,

"...bulletproof vests and other tactical gear, and a high-capacity “drum magazine” large enough to hold 100 rounds and capable of firing 50 or 60 rounds per minute — a purchase that would have been restricted under proposed legislation that has been stalled in Washington for more than a year."

But none of this suggests to the governor of Colorado, Democrat John Hickenlooper, that stricter gun control laws should be considered.

STEPHANOPOULOS: [...] As you can imagine, Governor, the debate over whether this could have been prevented has already began. You probably heard the comments of Mayor Bloomberg of New York, who made headlines on Friday with his calls for tougher gun laws. Other people, several in your state, saying that perhaps if someone else in that theater had a gun, the killer could have been stopped. Does it make you think at this point that you need to take another look at Colorado’s gun laws?

HICKENLOOPER: You know, I’m sure that that is going to happen, but I look at this, this wasn’t a Colorado problem, this is a human problem, right? And how we can have such a warped individual and no one around him be aware? You know, I worry that if we got rid all of the guns -- and certainly we have so many guns in this country, we do have a lot more than gun violence than many other countries -- but even if you didn't have access to guns, this guy was diabolical. Right? He would have found explosives, he would have found something else, some sort of poisonous gas, he would have done something to create this horror.

What an absurd hypothetical. I'd really like to know what "explosives" or "poison gas" Hickenlooper thinks Holmes could've "found" that would allow him to kill or injure 70 people in a few seconds. The fact is, bomb making requires patience, materials, skill, testing -- and a deployment strategy. Same goes for poison gas. Which is why we haven't had 36 mass poison gas attacks or mass bombings over the past 30 years.

Also, the notion that gun control laws don't work isn't supported by the evidence. After the Dublane school massacre in 1997, the UK effectively banned guns -- and they haven't had a mass shooting event since.

How does Hickenlooper explain that?

DOWNLOADS: (152)

PLAYS: (1007)

Embed

Following up on our discussion yesterday about the underlying issues raised by the horrifying murders in Aurora, there are several excellent and insightful pieces floating about that deserve to be well read.

One of the more interesting is Chip Berlet's piece at AlterNet:

Understanding the Colorado Shooting: Terrorism, Politics, Mental Illness and the Superhero Complex

Older models of psychological interpretation often dismissed the violent actors as dysfunctional or mentally ill and left it at that. Contemporary approaches factor in psychological considerations, but also consider the role of demonization and scapegoating in creating perceptual frames. Within sociology, the study of how the construction of frames and narratives assists ideological goals and attracts and retains recruits is well developed. In several disciplines there are studies of apocalyptic narrative storylines that cast the perpetrator in the role of hero for saving society from a mortal threat.

For some terrorists who are not clinically mentally ill, the act of violence has a clear goal of sending a message they hope will be understood and acted upon. They are seldom correct in their idea that their “propaganda of the deed” will have the desired outcome. For the tiny handful of those who struggle with serious mental illness and turn to violence, outside factors in the society play a role in writing the script they are following to justify their actions. This script is internally generated and generally incomprehensible to other people, however, it can be internally consistent and understandable to the perpetrator. So outside societal factors can be involved, even if they are greatly misinterpreted through the darkened glasses of psychosis.

Dan Froomkin has a great piece at HuffPo describing how the NRA will predictably kill any and all discussion of gun-law changes as a possible response:

Opponents of gun control have a powerful rhetorical argument in their arsenal. "The gun lobby is very effective at saying that 'Now is not the time to exploit these events for political purposes,'" Rand said. "Their goal is to delay so that the pressure comes off of policy makers, the immediacy fades and everyone turns their attention to something else."

Gross agreed. "That's the arc that these things always take and they know it," he said.

But, Gross said, the "now is not the time" argument would only be genuine "if history showed that there ever is a time to discuss the role of gun policy in preventing these tragedies."

And Rand said it's appropriate to start talking about solutions right away. "It's not politics, it's public health," she said. "You have an industry that manufactures a product that is completely unregulated from a health and safety standpoint."

As Digby says, the only real taboo among the Beltway pundit class is against examining the causes of these tragedies.

Also, be sure to read Roger Ebert at the NYT.

Earlier today, a gunman walked into a movie theater in Aurora, Colorado, where people were watching the midnight showing of the new Batman movie. He fired gas canisters into the crowd, and then opened fire. At least 12 people are dead and 59 people are injured. My heart and prayers go out to all of them.

On the day Gabby Giffords was shot, I was picking up my son Henry from a lesson when I got the text message saying there had been a shooting. I’d campaigned with Gabby in 2006. Henry didn’t understand why I’d stopped getting into the car and started crying.

Walking back from a haircut the other day, I passed Café Racer, where on May 30th a gunman walked in and killed four people.

It's time we had an adult conversation in this country about guns.

On January 17, 1989, a gunman in Stockton, California walked onto a playground and opened fire, killing 5 children and injuring 30 more.

On July 1, 1993, a gunman in San Francisco walked into a law office and opened fire, killing 8 and injuring 6.

On April 20, 1999, two gunmen in Columbine, Colorado walked into their high school and opened fire, killing 13 people and injuring 21 others.

On January 16, 2002, a gunman in Virginia walked into a law school and opened fire, killing 3 and injuring 3.

On July 8, 2003, a gunman in Mississippi walked into a factory and opened fire, killing 6 and injuring 8.

On March 21, 2005, a gunman in Minnesota walked into a high school and opened fire, killing 7 and injuring 5.

On November 20, 2005, a gunman in Tacoma walked into the mall and opened fire, injuring 6.

On March 25, 2006, a gunman in Seattle walked into a party and opened fire, killing 6 and injuring 2.

On February 12, 2007, a gunman in Utah walked into a mall and opened fire, killing 5 and injuring 4.

Continue reading »

DOWNLOADS: (132)

PLAYS: (975)

Embed

There's going to be a lot of finger-pointing and hand-wringing in the coming days as we begin to process the awful tragedy that unfolded early this morning in Aurora, Colorado. In particular, it seems that right-wingers are eager to point fingers and are being hypersensitive about any suggestion of right-wing politics being even remotely involved in this case.

Of course, one of the foremost facets of events like these is that premature speculation is almost always wrong. It's wisest to let the facts emerge first, at which time we can begin making a rational appraisal of the event and its underlying causes. (We will, of course, be keeping a close eye on just what is in those "items of interest" found in the home of the suspect, James Eagan Holmes, since that will tell us a great deal.)

Unlike a lot of the talking heads out there, though, it seems silly to run and hide from the political dimensions of these kinds of tragedies, especially when it comes some of the broader social ramifications, most notably the role of the mass proliferation of handguns in American society that's occurred in recent years. Just ask folks in Seattle if that conversation isn't already under way here.

As Michael Grunwald says, there are always political dimensions to cases like this, and it's absurd not to deal with them forthrightly -- once, at least, the dust begins to settle and the facts begin to emerge.

Still, there are things that are clear even at the outset. Regardless of any ideological affiliation the Aurora gunman may have had (and I will at least observe that stockpiling armaments and bomb-making materiel is not usually the provenance of liberals, but is very common indeed among NRA-ginned-up gun nuts), one thing we can almost say definitively, given the cold brutality of the rampage, is that it seems highly likely that Holmes is either mentally ill or a psychopath.

Of course, mental illness has been cropping up as a factor in these tragic rampages, most notably in the Tucson rampage of Jared Loughner. Unfortunately, this seems to stop any and all further conversation of the subject, as though insanity is some kind of random X-factor that renders the acts of the insane utterly meaningless. This is, of course, an obscene cop-out.

However, given the skill and care with which Holmes clearly planned out this rampage and its aftermath (particularly in booby-trapping his own apartment), it seems far more likely that what we're dealing with here is a psychopath.

Continue reading »

Mitt Romney's claim that there are too many firefighters might sound awesome to crazy conservatives, but to the residents of Colorado and New Mexico, it might sound like he doesn't really care if their homes burn down.

Via 9News.com in Colorado:

The High Park Fire is now at 36,930 acres and growing significantly, with zero percent containment. Larimer County says 400 personnel are fighting the blaze. Monday afternoon, officials said at least 100 structures have been damaged or destroyed by the fire.

According to Larimer County, flames lept 15 to 20 feet in the air, with some flames shooting 300 feet into the sky. Very dry brush, timber and grasses are providing the fuel for this fire.

What Larimer County is calling a "very aggressive" and "hard to fight" fire is growing at 20 to 40 feet a minute.

Larimer County officials say the lower temperatures, higher humidity levels and lower winds should help fire personnel to fight the fire. A number of air resources are battling the blaze, including five heavy-air tankers, five single-engine tankers and a few helicopters. Larimer County says two National Guard Blackhawks have been ordered, but only one is currently on the scene.

Larimer County says they are hoping at least 100 more personnel will join the fight by Monday night.

And in New Mexico, Governor Susana Martinez was ordering National Guard troops in to assist with fighting fires. Via Times-Union.com:

New Mexico Gov. Susana Martinez announced late Sunday that she was ordering an additional 100 National Guard troops to assist with evacuations. They will be dispatched to shelters or highways where people have to be turned back, Ruidoso spokeswoman Kerry Gladden said.

Military helicopters were also deployed to drop water at both fires in addition to air tankers dropping slurry.
Dan Ware, a spokesman for the New Mexico State Forestry Division, said the number of Ruidoso evacuees was in the hundreds, but he didn't have an exact figure. The nearby community of Capitan and others also could face evacuation, said Karen Takai, a spokeswoman for the Ruidoso fire crews.

Continue reading »

It's a good day for labor across the country as three anti-worker bills appear to have died in the legislatures of Arizona, Colorado and Pennsylvania. Arizona's was the worst, as it was a full-out assault on collective bargaining rights for state workers. It stalled in the state senate:

State Arizona Republicans acknowledged they don’t have enough votes to pass the bill. The collective bargaining bills were written with the help of the Goldwater Institute. The group flew in union-busting Governor Scott Walker from Wisconsin for an event late last year. The bills would have taken away the rights of unions to negotiate at the bargaining table.

The Professional Fire Fighters of Arizona are working with other public employee groups to engage elected officials to rally support and it has made a huge difference in this legislative session.

Unions are still fighting a dues deduction bill. The bill would ban government employees from having dues automatically deducted from their paychecks. The measure would also affect health insurance and deferred compensation deductions.

There is also an on-going push in Arizona to pay younger people less than the minimum wage.

Colorado Republicans failed in an attempt to make the state a right-to-work (for less) state:

Sources from the Colorado AFL-CIO have confirmed that Colorado Senate Bill 100 (Right to Work) has died in the Senate Business, Labor and Technology Committee.

SB 100 was sponsored by Tea Party State Senator Tim Neville.

Colorado voters previously defeated “Right-to-Work” in its 2008 form, Amendment 47. This round of “Right-to-Work” push was led by an adviser to the Independence Institute, Jeff Crank from Americans for Prosperity, The National Right to Work Committee, the Associated Builders & Contractors and Tony Gagliardi from the NFIB. The Colorado AFL-CIO alleges that “not one real worker or real business owner showed-up to back these extremists and it made them look pathetic.”

The bill died in a 4-2 vote.

Finally, Pennsylvania Republicans failed to weaken the state's prevailing wage statute:

An effort by Pennsylvania House Republicans to weaken the state’s prevailing wage law failed when, despite having the majority, they could not get enough votes. House Republicans claimed that raising the project cost threshold that triggers the prevailing wage from the current, 1961-established level of $25,000 would save local governments money. There is little evidence that this is true, however. In fact, many experts argue that raising the threshold would truly only guarantee that work would be done by under-trained, frequently non-union contractors, resulting in higher long-term costs.

The House GOP was stopped in its tracks by (gasp!) pro-labor Republicans, including roughly a dozen from the Philadelphia suburbs who refused to go along with party leadership because they believe the desired threshold of $185,000 is too high. Democrats, who opposed the bill, claimed it was an attack on PA workers.

These are all good signs that when we fight back, we can win, even in places where governors and legislatures are hostile to working families.