DOWNLOADS: (115)

PLAYS: (600)

Embed

Wednesday was a day of shame for Fox News and Megyn Kelly because they found an even darker shade of Goebbel-esque propaganda to paint their airwaves. Yesterday was also a day of gun control hearings which featured talk of background checks, assault weapons and high capacity magazines. Gabby Giffords and her husband Mark Kelly led the way, trying to bring sanity to the proceeding and they managed to offset the lunatic ramblings of Wayne LaPierre.

"Too many children are dying," she said. "We must do something."

Giffords, who survived a gunshot to the head two years ago during an assassination attempt that left six people dead, read slowly but forcefully from prepared remarks, and acknowledged that "speaking is difficult."

"But I need to say something important. Violence is a big problem," she said. "It will be hard. But the time is now. You must act. Be bold. Be courageous. Americans are counting on you."

That didn't stop Wayne from utterly embarrassing himself. And it also set the stage for another embarrassment; this time from FOX who used another tragic shooting to promote their pro-gun agenda:

Kelly: Well, a big hearing today in Washington DC as witnesses both for and against testified about firearms the second amendment and ways to keep our children safe.

But as we watched this debate about assault weapons and high capacity magazines, we are hearing a growing number of people suggesting that adding a ban on those will not address America's gun violence. That point illustrated in part today in a heartbreaking story out of Chicago. A fifteen-year-old honor student was shot and killed near her school. Just last week this woman had taken part in events surrounding president Obama's inauguration in DC and now she is dead, thanks to a senseless act. Trace Gallagher has the story.

Megyn Kelly and Fox News are trying to make the case against putting in actual regulations on an out-of-control gun culture in this country by using the tragic death of Hadiya Pendleton, the girl who had just attended President Obama's second inauguration, to make a point. They argue that, since she got killed by a handgun in Chicago, which has very strict gun laws, a ban on high-capacity mags and Bushmasters would be useless. I mean, this is sick.

Continue reading »

Bob Cesca points to this interview Chris Christie gave about gun control.

Christie was asked about specific gun control measures, and instead talked about violent video games. “We don’t allow those games into our house…we think it desensitizes children to all the effects of violence,” and added that all of the issues related to gun violence needed to be dealt with.

When pressed on why he couldn’t answer whether he supports a ban on assault weapons, he said that it depends. “These are complicated issues,” he said. “I’m willing to have that conversation.”

As Bob says, it sure sounds like Christie is toeing the NRA line.

But how good is that line?

Yesterday marked the two-year anniversary since a member of Congress was shot. Gabby Giffords, along with 19 other people, were shot on that day, leaving six dead, including a federal judge. In the days following the shooting there was a lot of finger-pointing going on. Some of that came from the left. They pointed to gun violence in political ads as a possible motivator, including this map Sarah Palin had posted on her website that includes a target over Gifford's district.

Quickly the right went into defensive mode, calling it "crazy" that anything could influence someone to do something so horrendous. They launched into the "personal responsibility" meme to defend Palin and any other political ads that portray violence. It's much the same as we hear when someone is arrested for planning or executing a serious crime and we find out their reading list was Bill O'Reilly, Michelle Malkin and Sean Hannity. They believe it's not them influencing the person, but just the person themselves.

So how does the same not apply to video games and movies? Are we to believe that video games and movies can create violent people, yet the images and words used by our leaders, both political and media, can't? If there was ever a definition of hypocrisy, it would be right here.

And speaking of hypocrisy, let's talk about a video game. The one I want to talk about is where you play a brave Christian soldier charged with the mission of ridding the world of non-believers. How do you do that? Well, by shooting them, of course! Here's the trailer from the game.

And did the right start condemning this video game for its violence and say it would provoke our people to go out and kill? Absolutely not. Instead, they went into a full force embrace of the game. Even the Department of Defense, under George Bush, was linked with sending the game to soldiers in Iraq. And you thought that war had something to do with religion!

Then there's the red herring of this argument. Our nation holds some sort of patent on these mass shootings, yet these games and movies are available in other countries as well. Ever wonder why something might be released in Japan or the UK and then take a couple of months before we get it here? That's because they are cleaning it up, removing language, sexual content and violence. They have to censor it for Americans.

So with more violent games and movies appearing overseas, why don't we see the shootings over there like we do here? Sure, you can point to tougher gun laws, but I thought gun laws didn't work. So why is it Americans are so influenced by this kind of media, yet no one else in the world is? That's a serious question that should be asked of the NRA.

All Christie, the NRA and the right in general is doing here is creating a straw man. They hope we will take our focus off their promotion of looser gun regulations and more guns in society and place that focus where it isn't due. Hopefully we can have some logic surface, and more people will realize that blaming movies and video games just doesn't add up.

DOWNLOADS: (118)

PLAYS: (1528)

Embed

There isn't much to say about Gabrielle Giffords' appearance last night to lead the Democratic National Convention in the Pledge of Allegiance. The moment speaks for itself.

From the Arizona Republic:

n what brought delegates to their feet and tears to eyes, former Rep. Gabrielle Giffords made a brief appearance Thursday that will likely rank as one of the Democratic National Convention's most memorable moments.

Nearly two years after she was shot by a would-be assassin at a constituent event, she slowly walked to the middle of the stage, and recited the Pledge of Allegiance. Then she flashed a broad smile to the cheering delegates.

Giffords, accompanied by Democratic National Committee Chair Debbie Wasserman Schultz, waved and blew kisses to the audience to chants of "Gabby! Gabby! Gabby!"

Giffords' speech skills were strong as she lead the congregation in the pledge. One arm remained weak at her side.

Giffords, 42, was shot in the head the morning of Jan. 8, 2011, one of 13 people injured when gunfire erupted at a "Congress on Your Corner" event outside a Safeway grocery store near Tucson. Six people died.

This was the second time since the shooting that Giffords has recited the Pledge of Allegiance in public.

On the first anniversary of the shooting, Giffords, was a surprise guest at a candlelight vigil in Tucson, where she used her left hand to lift her right hand to her heart before leading a crowd of about 3,500 people in the pledge. It was her first public appearance since the near-fatal assassination attempt.

Then, she emphasized the final words: "Indivisible, with liberty and justice for all."

Her words were clear, deliberate and cheered by the crowd.

DOWNLOADS: (421)

PLAYS: (4148)

Embed

It's great to see Gabrielle Giffords in any capacity right now. Good for her. She's going to see her husband's liftoff.

ABC News:

A fragile but determined Rep. Gabrielle Giffords walked one careful step at a time today up the steps of a plane that will take her Florida to watch her husband blast off on the final mission of the space shuttle Endeavor..

The gritty walk by Giffords, who was wearing a padded medical helmet, was her first public steps since being shot in the head at a public event in January.

The Arizona congresswoman left TIRR Memorial Hermann Hospital and boarded a waiting NASA plane at Ellington Airport in Houston.

Giffords was spotted leaving the hospital in a wheelchair and with her face covered before being driven to the airport. At the airport, she walked under her own power and without assistance from the car to the plane stairway and slowly up the steps.

Giffords' staff has tried to keep her out of view from the public, and said she would not be making any public appearances during the Endeavor's launch. Giffords will be joined on Friday by Kelly's three daughters, President Obama and the first lady at Cape Canaveral to watch the launch. Giffords' husband navy pilot and astronaut Mark Kelly arrived at Florida's Kennedy Space Center on Tuesday.

"She's been working really hard to make sure that her doctors would permit her to come," Kelly said Tuesday.

NASA said Giffords would receive a "little more care and attention" as she visited Florida to watch the launch...read on

This past Sunday, President Obama wrote an op-ed for Gabrielle Giffords' hometown paper, the Arizona Daily Star. Looking back on the tragic shootings in Tucson, he made it clear that we need to fix our nation's broken background check system and keep guns out of the hands of dangerous people:

That's why our focus right now should be on sound and effective steps that will actually keep those irresponsible, law-breaking few from getting their hands on a gun in the first place.

• First, we should begin by enforcing laws that are already on the books. The National Instant Criminal Background Check System is the filter that's supposed to stop the wrong people from getting their hands on a gun. Bipartisan legislation four years ago was supposed to strengthen this system, but it hasn't been properly implemented. It relies on data supplied by states - but that data is often incomplete and inadequate. We must do better.

• Second, we should in fact reward the states that provide the best data - and therefore do the most to protect our citizens.

• Third, we should make the system faster and nimbler. We should provide an instant, accurate, comprehensive and consistent system for background checks to sellers who want to do the right thing, and make sure that criminals can't escape it.

Porous background checks are bad for police officers, for law-abiding citizens and for the sellers themselves. If we're serious about keeping guns away from someone who's made up his mind to kill, then we can't allow a situation where a responsible seller denies him a weapon at one store, but he effortlessly buys the same gun someplace else.

This has been a long time coming, and I'd like to see the language bit stronger, but I can't say I am not pleased to see the President stepping up and addressing this important issue.

Continue reading »

DOWNLOADS: (672)

PLAYS: (845)

Embed

You may remember Eric Fuller -- the survivor of the Tucson massacre who fingered right-wing rhetoric for fueling the tragedy, and then a few days later was arrested for making a threatening remark at a Town Hall gathering directed at a local Tea Party leader. This, of course, made him a major target of right-wing talkers like Bill O'Reilly, who proceeded to demonize the man as a prime example of left-wing hate.

Fuller has now given a thoughtful interview to the local station in Tucson, KGUN, in which he tries to explain why he said what he did:

"Where Gabrielle Giffords was standing, when I began hearing the gunfire, I turned and looked and there was Jared [Loughner], athletically pumping out the rounds, taking aim and firing," Fuller recalled. For him, the memory of the shooting is fresh and sharp. So sharp, it got him into trouble.

He already believed guns are too easy to obtain when he became one of the shooting victims January 8th. A week later he was part of a town hall meeting sponsored by ABC News.

When Tucson Tea Party leader Trent Humphries suggested it was too soon to talk about tighter gun control, Fuller did something that got him arrested. He pointed a camera at Humphries and said, "You're dead." Now, Fuller has apologized for the perceived threat that landed him in hot water with the authorities.

"I'd like to reiterate my apology to Mr. Humphries. I really meant him no harm. However, what I was trying to do is demonstrate how very quickly within the same space of time as the click of a shutter on a camera that another person can pull a trigger and your life is over, it's done," Fuller said.

Back when this happened, Nicole suggested this might be what Fuller intended. And as she observed at the time, that's really no excuse: Even if Fuller intended no threat in his remark, two things remain obvious: A) it would be reasonable for anyone hearing that remark, especially the recipient, to interpret it as a threat; and B) it is nonetheless violent rhetoric in any event.

For people who are confronting the real-world ramifications of violent rhetoric, this sort of reaction (especially on an emotional level) is perfectly understandable -- but it is also perfectly destructive. Violent rhetoric cannot be beaten by more violent rhetoric. It can only be defused by breaking the cycle of violence, choosing words that advance the debate, as President Obama put it, "in a way that heals, not a way that wounds."

Still, given that the man was still recovering from his wounds, as Karoli pointed out, and was placed in an excruciatingly difficult situation to begin, I'd like to think most reasonable people would cut him some slack and accept his clear apologies. This, of course, necessarily excludes all the hosts, anchors and reporters at Fox News.

DOWNLOADS: (1123)

PLAYS: (1102)

Embed

The right-wing flying monkeys have been out in force in pursuit of Pima County Sheriff Clarence Dupnik ever since he spoke an important truth last week, in the wake of the tragic shooting of Rep. Gabrielle Giffords and 20 others, in calling out irresponsible, vitriolic right-wing talkers for creating the kind of political and cultural environment in Arizona where hateful violent acts are encouraged. One of the leaders in the "Get Dupnik" crowd, in fact, has been Fox News' Bill O'Reilly.

So now, encouraged by all the attention they're getting from Fox, the local Tea Partiers in Tucson are trying to get Dupnik recalled:

A group opposed to illegal immigration has begun an effort to recall the sheriff in a special election. Meanwhile, a Pima County tea party group is planning on holding a "Dump Dupnik" rally next week outside his office.

"I haven't been a fan of Dupnik's for a long time, but this really was the straw that broke the camel's back," said Tom Rompel, co-owner of Black Weapons Armory in Tucson. "He's law enforcement. We expect 'the facts, ma'am,' not his opinion. He leans far left, always has, and frankly, people have had enough."

You've gotta love how people who are big fans of Sheriff Joe Arpaio -- the state's most outspoken bigot -- hate when Clarence Dupnik expresses an opinion or two, eh?

Conservatives have bristled at Sheriff Dupnik's insinuation that Republicans and the tea party movement were somehow responsible for the rampage. The Pima County Tea Party Patriots plan to "indict" the sheriff at their rally for "politicizing the shootings, blaming free speech for the crime without evidence, failing to protect Giffords, failing to recuse himself from the investigation, and embarrassing the community in front of the nation," according to the Arizona Daily Star.

Sheriff Dupnik's office issued a statement Wednesday saying he would have no further comment on the shooting.

Dan Baltes, executive director of Americans Against Immigration Amnesty, said he began looking into the recall effort after being deluged by phone calls and e-mails from the group's members, including many in Arizona. The eight-month-old organization is based in Salt Lake City in neighboring Utah.

"I've gotten e-mails from people who support the sheriff, who support what he did, and who want me to keep my nose out of it," Mr. Baltes said. "But for every one of those, I'm getting 50 saying 'Thank you,' and that's from Republicans and Democrats alike."

The group needs to gather 90,809 valid signatures within 120 days to qualify the recall for the ballot. The recall would require a special election, which could be held at the earliest in March 2012, said Pima County Elections Director Brad Nelson.

You can imagine our surprise (or rather the complete lack thereof), then, when O'Reilly devoted a segment to promoting this effort. And guess who he brings on to attack Dupnik for his "divisive" rhetoric? Why, none other than that Nazi-coddling nativist state Senate president and noted Friend of Joe Arpaio, Russell Pearce:

Continue reading »

DOWNLOADS: (1530)

PLAYS: (1754)

Embed

Here's Elisabeth Hasselbeck last night on Sean Hannity's Fox News show, making excuses for Sarah Palin and her inexcusable "crosshairs" ads after the shooting of Gabrielle Giffords, one of the ad's targets:

HANNITY: You know, I fear we are getting to the point, you can't say anything -- you can't say war room, you can't say targeting. You can't, you know, say, we are going to put a bull's-eye on a map.

HASSELBECK: Yes we can say that. And I will use yes we can. And this is why I believe and I think the more that we link and say, we cannot say anything -- I mean, look, I grew up in a family that was based on speak kind words as much as possible and if you don't, apologize. Work hard and operate with integrity. That goes without saying. I think most civil people in the United States of America agree that you shouldn't go outside of those boundaries. Right now to even say that we have to curb what we're saying only links any rhetoric to what happened in Tucson. There's no link. We haven't found a link. There's no evidence that man even watched cable news. That he heard Sarah Palin say anything or saw the map with crosshairs. None. So the more that this conversation continues, in my opinion, it is a weak link that is trying to be strengthened by the left to Sarah and this man again.

And here's Hasselbeck last March, when she agreed with her colleagues at The View that the ads were outrageous and dangerous:

DOWNLOADS: (2117)

PLAYS: (5088)

Embed

"This hasn't been a great week in terms of, I think, the Constitution and where it says that you're supposed to, you know, everybody is, has a mandate to have insurance. But I think the way some Republicans are handling this is nothing more than purely despicable," Hasselbeck said. "The names that are next to and being highlighted by those crosshairs -- I think it's an abuse of the Second Amendment. I also feel as though every single person on here is a mother, a father, a friend, a brother, a sister, and to take it to this level is -- it's disappointing to see this come from the Party, and I would hope that leaders like Sarah Palin would end this."

Joy Behar thanked her for it, shaking her hand. "Republicans are not speaking out against this and you may be the first one to do it, and I salute you, my girl." Whoopi Goldberg would say "Republicans, whatever comes from this it's on your heads."

Something else Hasselbeck said was just flat-out bats--t crazy:

Continue reading »

DOWNLOADS: (1611)

PLAYS: (1140)

Embed

You just knew that when President Obama issued his call for a return to civility last week in Tucson, folks on the right would happily embrace the simple standard he elucidated -- "It's important for us to pause for a moment and make sure that we're talking with each other in a way that heals, not in a way that wounds" -- to everyone but themselves.

Sure enough, there was Bloviating BillO last night on Fox, complaining because that evil liberal Richard Cohen had called Sarah Palin stupid, and Bill Maher said that the Founders would despise the Tea Partiers:

Delightful. Now, I don't hold Mr. Maher to the same standard as The Washington Post because he's a comedian, a man who makes a living expressing a point of view. But apparently the president's point of view, more civility, is not being embraced by Mr. Maher.

Also, I've gotten a lot of mail asking me why I don't come down on right-wing talk radio, and it's the same thing: Talk radio is entertainment. People on there make a living expressing opinions. It's not a news forum; therefore the standards are not the same.

Of course not -- they exist in the zone known as the Fox Double Standard: If it attack liberals and Democrats, it's OK. Otherwise not.

And then he gets into outright projection:

Immediately after President Obama's speech last Wednesday, "Talking Points" said that the call for civility would most likely not be answered, and we pointed to the money train as the primary reason.

Once again, there is big money in the hate industry, and it's easy to attack people.

Indeed there is -- after all, look at all the dough Fox is rolling in.

And he's right: Obama's call to civility most likely will not be answered ... by ANYONE on the Right. They're too busy pretending their vicious, violent and eliminationist rhetoric has no effect on people.

Especially rhetoric that singles out people for demonization and elimination. Rhetoric like this:

Continue reading »

DOWNLOADS: (938)

PLAYS: (2735)

Embed

Boy, it really doesn't get much more lame than Sarah Palin's latest Hannity Job last night on Fox. Via Lynn Sweet:

HANNITY: A lot of these initial stories, Governor, had to do with this map that your PAC had put up during the last campaign, and the fact that Congresswoman Giffords was one of the people on, quote, "the target list," in the crosshairs that were there. What could you tell us about this map? And I'll get into more Questions after that.

PALIN: Well, that map wasn't an original graphic. In fact, for many, many years, maps in political races have been used to target certain districts that people would feel that they can get into those districts and find someone whom they believe would represent the constituents' will better than incumbent. And that is what this map represented that we used on my PAC. And the graphic that we used was crosshairs targeting the different districts. And, again, that's not original. In fact, Democrats have been using it for years. In fact, Bob Beckel, I believe that he had bragged on your show, Sean, that he is the one who invented these crosshairs or these targets. So, you know, that came up right away, that, oh, it must be a cause of this horrendous evil act of this shooter, that perhaps he saw that map and that incited him towards violence, which, of course, is ridiculous. Again, it's not an original use of an icon or a graphic.

Of course, what had gotten a lot of people's attention well before the Tucson tragedy was that Palin's 2010 campaign was soaked in violent, gun-related rhetoric like this, including exhortations to "Take Them Out" accompanying the gunsight graphic, as well as her oft-repeated exhortation to followers to "Lock and Load" and "Don't Retreat, Reload!" It just happened that Gabrielle Giffords was thus not just targeted by the graphic, but by Palin's rhetoric.

But doesn't she just sound like she's squirming like a seven-year-old, trying to explain to her teacher that honest, her dog really did eat her homework last night?

It continued on in this vein, only getting much worse when they tackled the subject of her wildly inappropriate appropriation of the term "blood libel" to describe her own supposed martyrdom:

Continue reading »