Despite President Trump issuing an Executive Order intended to help the families of illegal immigrants stick together while being processed and/or prosecuted, it would appear that our nation's heartbreaking Third Reich Holocaust-style abuse of children is still not at an end.
We know this because of a recently released study which could bring tears to a grown man's eyes. And yes, we're referring to Rachel Maddow.
Specifically, the study showed a small but significant decrease in the number of 18-to-34 year olds who were forced by economic necessity (i.e. the Obamaconomy) to continue living with their parents. As the children are dragged away to become members of the capitalist workforce, bitter tears are being shed.
"I thought, like, my parents needed a court order to make me leave," sobbed one 28-year-old pajama boy, "especially since I'm still being breast fed!"
President Trump, predictably, is unmoved by the children being separated from their parents, and ruthlessly continues to encourage job growth. This despite strong condemnation from Left-leaning leaders like Nancy Pelosi who has said, "You can look and look in the Bible, but you won't find any justification for young Americans taking "the jobs that Americans won't do" away from the undocumented and frequently gang-affiliated immigrants who would do "the jobs that Americans won't do" if Americans weren't doing them. If you don't believe me, then believe Jesus."
Far be it from us to argue theology with an expert like Ms. Pelosi. So we will suggest only that we all take time to pray for the families being ripped asunder by employment, prosperity, and a reawakening sense of self-worth and independence.
BONUS: SLEAZY WRITER
Alleged actor Peter Fonda took to Twitter recently to voice his hatred for the First Family, and to encourage kidnapping and pederasty as useful tools for the Left to demonstrate their moral superiority to the Deplorables in our nation.
Here's what he tweeted:
The First Lady has subsequently asked the Secret Service to investigate Mr. Fonda, not only because of the appalling nature of his threats, but because most movie fans have been convinced that the actor died years ago, along with his career.
Not that he didn't have one good scene in the only memorable movie he was ever in. Specifically, this scene:
|Even more enjoyable when viewed on a continuous loop!|
Even worse, he's making this call to action to his thousands of followers, any one of whom might decide to implement it. Especially since Peter Fonda can't possibly have any followers who are, as we say in the psychological field, "right in the head."
How could they be, when exposed to a regular diet of Fonda's other sociopathic tweets like this one about our nation's Director of Homeland Security:
For those blissfully unfamiliar with the term, "gash" is an obscene reference to female genitalia, and is considered to be even uglier, more unacceptable, and more sexually demeaning than Samantha Bee's "c-word" description of our First Lady.
It is a word so foul, fetid, and unforgivable that we would personally never use it about any woman.
Except, of course, Jane Fonda.
BREAKING NEWS: CHARLES KRAUTHAMMER 1950-2018
We were just finishing today's post when we got word that Fox News contributor (and so very much more) Dr. Charles Krauthammer has died of cancer. Little more than a month ago, he and we believed that he would be returning to the airways after an extended illness - at a time when his wit, wisdom, encyclopedic knowledge, and stunning gifts of insight and analysis were so desperately needed.
It didn't work out that way. Not quite two weeks ago, he wrote an eloquent and moving public letter to let everyone know that his cancer had returned and his battle was at an end. Sadly, he was right.
We can't express the sense of personal loss we're feeling right now. For years, we hung on Dr. Krauthammer's every word - not necessarily agreeing with everything he said, but recognizing the intellectual honesty and integrity which demanded that we take him seriously and, when necessary, reexamine our own opinions.
Besides his remarkable academic gifts, Charles Krauthammer could make us laugh, loudly and frequently. And he radiated a strength and positivity about life, despite facing and overcoming enormous personal obstacles, which was nothing less than inspirational.
His passing is a huge loss for our country, our culture, and to our lives. We are grateful for the time he shared with all of us, and wish there could have been so much more.
So.... A Fonda turns out to be a US-hating, unpatriotic douche bag. Do tell...
Dr. Krauthammer will be missed. He was a great mind among the mental munchkins of today. RIP.
I love how the libtards cannot conceive of the EVIL having been their own. Of course, when it is done by one of their own, it's not evil. It's only evil when the conservatives don't eliminate it when in charge...
Regarding dr. Krauthammer's sad passing, in the WSJ's article on his passing, there were unfortunately, spiteful, hate- filled comments from trolls. A sad symptom of where we as a people in a society that still os the envy of the world, have sunk to.
Because of their obvious compassion for the poor immigrants south of the border, I would love to see a comeback action/adventure movie made starring Peter Fonda and Robert DeNiro. To be relevant and exciting, they should be sent to film on location in Los Cabos, Mexico - which according to Worldatlas.com is ranked the most violent city in the world.
Then their visas should be revoked.
Rest in peace Dr. Krauthammer, you have earned it. Now heaven has a journalist who knows how to write. And spell, has correct punctuation, and grammar.
And as for pecker ... oops, I mean peter fonda, anything I may say here would have the liberal police knocking at my door. I dare not say that someone should practice their marksmanship on him or his sister ... or use a 16 gauge like in the one movie of his that someone watched. Naw, I would never say something like that.
Peter Fonda and Charles Krauthammer. Two ends of so many spectra.
Ignorant vs Insightful
Violent vs Kind
US hating vs US loving
Degenerate vs moral
Irrelevant vs impactful
Such a shame that the wrong one died. And so it goes.
Dr Krauthammer (love that name) passing is a tremendous loss to those that love truth, justice and the American way. He was a superman of journalism and what journalism was suppose to be about. RIP. You will be sorely missed by thinking people.
I suppose being the Neanderthal that I am, I never saw Fonda's movie. Just not into motorcycles and such. It really makes one wonder how his and his sister's brain got so warped as to hate the country that gave them and allowed them to excel but refuse to leave to greener pastures that are in line with their odd political beliefs. Probably Venezuela fits their thinking better than most. Unfortunately for them, N Viet Nam has drifted more toward Capitalism in the last thirty years. Lastly, I do love the way the expanding economy galls the liberals. I do believe they have now suffered an unrecoverable setback from the last Presidential economic's tryst.
I am completely baffled by the amount of sewage that has spewed from the mouths of the "enlightened left". It does not indicate a spontaneous, emotional response to something they perceive as horrendous. Their mouths send out a bitter, well thought, evil response to not getting their way. Yes, I said evil. And, I believe it will get even worse. Perhaps they are planning to pull a Kristallnacht on us. If it happens, I will not be hiding. I will be merrily double-tapping the night away. By the way, ammo is currently priced at a very reasonable level. Stock up for your Christmas stockings.
I will miss Charles Krauthammer. He was a voice crying in the wilderness. Like others have said, I didn't always agree with him, but I was always made to think. RIP, American Patriot.
@ Geoff King - while the thought of dropping off De Niro & Fonda in México is indeed sweet, for the of accuracy it should be acknowledged that Los Cabos is one of the safer areas in México (I have friends who vacation there every year with no problem). Now leaving them say in Culiacan or Ciudad Juarez on the other hand...
When can we finally be rid of Peter Fonda and his Viet Cong loving "cistern" Fonda Peters?
Fonda would probably be the first to slither into the cage behind young Barron to do the dirty deed to the lad. Why else would he suggest such a perverted action?
@Emmentaler Limburger- I knew Peter Fonda was liberal, but now he's on my "unforgivable" list. To Hell with that guy.
And if the Libs could actually detect evil right in front of their eyes, we'd see them begging God and everyone else for forgiveness.
@Fish Out of Water- I've seen some of the trolling remarks mocking Krauthammer's death, and they take me to a very bad place in which I fantasize about responding with more than words. I can only take myself out of that headspace by imagining the ease, grace, and devastating wit that Dr. Krauthammer would have used in dispatching these idiots.
@Geoff King- I like it! Or how about a reality series for ALL the Hollywood loudmouths where they're shipped to communist havens (without money or an entourage) to experience life. Call it "Walking the Walk." I'd tune in!
@TrickyRicky- You make a great (if heartbreaking) point. Peter Fonda and Charles Krauthammer were polar opposites in terms of intellect, compassion, and morality. As you say, the wrong one died.
@James Daily- I like your phrase "sorely missed by thinking people." That's a whole conversation starter right there.
I saw "Easy Rider" countless times because I was an usher at the theater where it was showing. It was what USED to be called an "entry level job" as opposed to "a job Americans won't do." But you didn't miss anything with the movie: it's about a couple of low-life drug dealers who tool around on motorcycles doing pretty much whatever the hell they want (like taking LSD and screwing hookers in a cemetery), and discovering that flyover country is filled with angry, stupid, violent, inbred rednecks. Not exactly enlightening.
@Sortahwitte- I don't think "evil" is too strong a word for the Left these days. I'm encountering more and more of it online, which is probably a good reminder not to spend too much time online.
And yes, Charles Krauthammer made people think. No wonder we loved him and the Left hated him.
@jpb252- I like the way you're fine-tuning the concept. We want to do this right!
@Bruce Bleu- In the fullness of time, they will represent the fullness in graves. At which time I hope I have a full bladder.
@Bobo- When you read Fonda's tweets, you get a LOT more insight about his peculiarities than he probably intended. He doesn't just want to kidnap a child...he wants the child caged and raped. He doesn't just want the Director of Homeland Security condemned, he wants her locked in stocks, and stripped NAKED, and then poked while people watch! That's not political commentary, that's a sick sexual fantasy...and one I'm pretty sure Fonda has entertained repeatedly in the past.
Sleep well, Dr. K. Your job is done. Your clarity and eloquence will be sorely absent. The world is a lesser place without you.........
Honored by the hat-tip. But it's America's Progressive media that really deserves the credit. Having no viable agenda of their own, the left needs to find, or lacking anything to find, create bad news. This isn't just to get the real bad news off the front page, but to justify their very existence, which is becoming more superfluous every single day. If Trump were to announce a cure to cancer today, these people would accuse him of putting doctors out of business.
As for the immigration situation which is actually a Democrat-created crisis for the last 30 years, it looks like they'll need something new. They were hoping to ride this into the mid-terms next fall, but the narrative has already run out of steam and Trump's executive order nullifies it, at least until the Democrats discover the horrors this new order creates. Either way, they're going into the midterms as the party of porn stars, illegal immigration, defending MS-13, and of wanting to take the tax cut away to pay for it all. Good luck with that.
At least Stormy Daniels is on the case. No doubt she'll be helping to rescue the poor little crying girls by guiding their path into the promised land of female empowerment in world of pornography and the other sex industries. (Taking more jobs away from American female workers)
Speaking of "Family Separation": Trump is now on TV with some families that have suffered permanent separation from their loved ones as a result of illegal immigration. (The stories these surviving families are telling are a bit too grim for Bloomberg, so they just pulled away) These people represent the real suffering and collateral damage of Progressive policy that remains out-of-sight and just doesn't matter to the mainstream media.
Sleazy Writer: It's reaffirming to know that I'm not the only one who thought that Easy Rider had a happy ending.
Perhaps he saw what happen to Kathy Griffin after her severed head episode and thought "Hey, that looks like a great way to jump-start my career."
But as with the rest of the TDS (Trump Derangement Syndrome) that has overtaken the thought leaders of the left, you really have to appreciate the favor they are doing for the Trump and the GOP. You guys want more Trump? Because this is how you get more Trump!
Dr. Charles Krauthammer, RIP: I can't imagine that I was the only one with a tear in his eye after reading his goodbye letter a few weeks ago. I can only hope that I could write such a graceful piece should I ever find myself in his situation. He will be missed.
I'm fed up with the venomous left. Now we have an employee of the DOJ, paid by us, plotting to destroy Kirstjen Nielson, the Secretary of DHS, on government computers and then physically berating her to the point she had to leave a Mexican restaurant in DC, with the full support of the manager. What have we come to when this in condoned? Particularly in light of the extreme corruption currently being exposed in the highest echelons of our intelligence services. I'm beginning to get really fearful there is another civil war brewing. This behavior cannot be tolerated.
I too mourn the passing of Charles K. I so wish we had his input on the current situation in politics as only he could impart. I must chuckle though at how he initially reacted to President Trump. He thought the first thing thrown at him would destroy his candidacy, then the next thing and the thing after that. Of course, he was playing by the old rules. He was a brilliant, good man who persevered through extreme circumstances. RIP.
“In March of 1993, The United States Supreme Court issued a ruling in Reno v Flores. (Yes, “That” Reno. Janet Reno, Bill Clinton’s first Attorney General who ordered that young Elian Gonzalez be torn from his family’s arms while hiding in a Miami closet. You might remember the iconic photograph.)
The Court in Flores decided that minors could not be incarcerated with the adults accompanying them across the United States border illegally. The decision was the result of a long dispute in how to best care for these children while the adults were detained for criminal proceedings.
You see, when aliens cross the border illegally, they are incarcerated until their criminal case is decided. The understandable argument at the time was “why should children be incarcerated while their parents are in jail?” It seemed a fundamental violation of international human rights. Makes sense, right?
As a result, The Flores case drew a line in the sand. Children could not be incarcerated with their parents or accompanying adult while being held for illegal immigration violations. And a subsequent 1997 agreement stipulated that children must be placed in a safer environment where they could enjoy certain privileges, including education, a clean, safe environment and other normal life cycle amenities that incarcerated individuals do not enjoy.
It was considered a “victory” for human rights. By separating adult and child, we protected the children, reducing any harm done to them for their parent’s or accompanying adult’s decisions.
A lot has happened since then. However; bottom line, these juvenile, shelters have been operating in accordance with the law, and overseen by the Department of Health and Human Services to protect those children from the hazards of parental incarceration since 1997.
So, since Donald Trump was running his real estate empire, selling wine and casinos in 1993, we are left to determine just how he managed to orchestrate this cruel “separation of immigrant parent and child” 25 years BEFORE he was President of the United States. The obvious answer is, he didn’t. He had nothing to do with establishing this United States immigration policy. Today, he simply enforces it.
This one story illustrates how important it is for us to do our research regarding today’s headlines. The Corporate Media either refuses to do the research, is incapable of doing the research or has done the research and decided to lie to you about its findings. Either way, this would make the Corporate Media lazy, incompetent or just plain deceptive. Liars, if you will.”
I wish the Secret Service agents wore body cameras - wouldn’t you just love to see the expression on Fonda’s face
Didn't I read something recently by Charles Krauthammer in which he voiced opposition to Americans' second amendment rights? I don't support, admire, or follow anyone who thinks I shouldn't be "permitted" to exercise my Constitutional rights.
As for Peter Fonda, I saw a movie within the last couple years in which he played an American farmer who had a grandson thrust upon him by a daughter who couldn't handle him. (Louis Gossett, Jr. was in it, too.) Fonda's character was apparently the exact opposite of he himself...
Trump’s 'lack of decorum, dignity, and statesmanship' By Marshall Kamena, Mayor of Livermore, CA.
My Leftist friends (as well as many ardent #NeverTrumpers) constantly ask me if I’m not bothered by Donald Trump’s lack of decorum. They ask if I don’t think his tweets are “beneath the dignity of the office.”
Here’s my answer: We Right-thinking people have tried dignity. There could not have been a man of more quiet dignity than George W. Bush as he suffered the outrageous lies and politically motivated hatreds that undermined his presidency.
We tried statesmanship.
Could there be another human being on this earth who so desperately prized “collegiality” as John McCain?
We tried propriety – has there been a nicer human being ever than Mitt Romney?
And the results were always the same. This is because, while we were playing by the rules of dignity, collegiality and propriety, the Left has been, for the past 60 years, engaged in a knife fight where the only rules are those of Saul Alinsky and the Chicago mob.
I don’t find anything “dignified,” “collegial” or “proper” about Barack Obama’s lying about what went down on the streets of Ferguson in order to ramp up racial hatreds because racial hatreds serve the Democratic Party.
I don’t see anything “dignified” in lying about the deaths of four Americans in Benghazi and imprisoning an innocent filmmaker to cover your tracks.
I don’t see anything “statesman-like” in weaponizing the IRS to be used to destroy your political opponents and any dissent.
Yes, Obama was “articulate” and “polished” but in no way was he in the least bit “dignified,” “collegial” or “proper.”
The Left has been engaged in a war against America since the rise of the Children of the ‘60s. To them, it has been an all-out war where nothing is held sacred and nothing is seen as beyond the pale.. It has been a war they’ve fought with violence, the threat of violence, demagoguery and lies from day one – the violent take-over of the universities – till today.
The problem is that, through these years, the Left has been the only side fighting this war. While the Left has been taking a knife to anyone who stands in their way, the Right has continued to act with dignity, collegiality and propriety.
With Donald Trump, this all has come to an end. Donald Trump is America ’s first wartime president in the Culture War.
During wartime, things like “dignity” and “collegiality” simply aren’t the most essential qualities one looks for in their warriors. Ulysses Grant was a drunk whose behavior in peacetime might well have seen him drummed out of the Army for conduct unbecoming.
Had Abraham Lincoln applied the peacetime rules of propriety and booted Grant, the Democrats might well still be holding their slaves today.
Lincoln rightly recognized that, “I cannot spare this man. He fights.”
General George Patton was a vulgar-talking.. In peacetime, this might have seen him stripped of rank. But, had Franklin Roosevelt applied the normal rules of decorum then, Hitler and the Socialists would barely be five decades into their thousand-year Reich.
Trump is fighting. And what’s particularly delicious is that, like Patton standing over the battlefield as his tanks obliterated Rommel’s, he’s shouting, “You magnificent bastards, I read your book!”
That is just the icing on the cake, but it’s wonderful to see that not only is Trump fighting, he’s defeating the Left using their own tactics. That book is Saul Alinsky’s Rules for Radicals – a book so essential to the Liberals’ war against America that it is and was the playbook for the entire Obama administration and the subject of Hillary Clinton’s senior thesis.
It is a book of such pure evil, that, just as the rest of us would dedicate our book to those we most love or those to whom we are most indebted, Alinsky dedicated his book to Lucifer.
Trump’s tweets may seem rash and unconsidered but, in reality, he is doing exactly what Alinsky suggested his followers do. First, instead of going after “the fake media” — and they are so fake that they have literally gotten every single significant story of the past 60 years not just wrong, but diametrically opposed to the truth, from the Tet Offensive to Benghazi, to what really happened on the streets of Ferguson, Missouri — Trump isolated CNN.. He made it personal.
Then, just as Alinsky suggests, he employs ridicule which Alinsky described as “the most powerful weapon of all.”... Most importantly, Trump’s tweets have put CNN in an untenable and unwinnable position. ... They need to respond.
This leaves them with only two choices. They can either “go high” (as Hillary would disingenuously declare of herself and the fake news would disingenuously report as the truth) and begin to honestly and accurately report the news or they can double-down on their usual tactics and hope to defeat Trump with twice their usual hysteria and demagoguery. The problem for CNN (et al.) with the former is that, if they were to start honestly reporting the news, that would be the end of the Democratic Party they serve. It is nothing but the incessant use of fake news (read: propaganda) that keeps the Left alive.
Imagine, for example, if CNN had honestly and accurately reported then-candidate Barack Obama’s close ties to foreign terrorists (Rashid Khalidi), domestic terrorists (William Ayers & Bernardine Dohrn), the mafia (Tony Rezko) or the true evils of his spiritual mentor, Jeremiah Wright’s church.
Imagine if they had honestly and accurately conveyed the evils of the Obama administration’s weaponizing of the IRS to be used against their political opponents or his running of guns to the Mexican cartels or the truth about the murder of Ambassador Christopher Stevens and the Obama administration’s cover-up.
So, to my friends on the Left — and the #NeverTrumpers as well — do I wish we lived in a time when our president could be “collegial” and “dignified” and “proper”? Of course I do.
These aren’t those times. This is war. And it’s a war that the Left has been fighting without opposition for the past 50 years.
So, say anything you want about this president - I get it - he can be vulgar, he can be crude, he can be undignified at times. I don’t care. I can’t spare this man. He fights for America!
@ Gee M: well stated!
And Peter's sister is just as bad. She's still ashamed of the only good movie she ever made. Of course, I'm talking about Barbarella:
@Regnad Kcin- I've been watching other newscasters (I use the term broadly) through the perspective of losing Charles Krauthammer, and I can't stand their dimwitted yammering. Krauthammer made sense in an arena where most just make noise.
@John the Econ- I can't tell you what a gift your punchline was for me (the basis of the Lefty Lucy cartoon). I was empty handed when I read your observation, and the rest easily wrote itself.
This whole "separating families" story is absolutely infuriating, for well documented (unlike the aliens) reasons. It is a fiction, impure and simple. And shame on me, but when I hear that Stormy Daniels is going to help out, I can't help but think of all the "breastfeeding babies" theoretically torn from their mothers. Open up, kids - Stormy is your new "Meals on Wheels!"
And I LOVE the way Trump appeared with the families of those who have lost loved ones to illegal aliens. He's taken the Alinsky playbook and jammed it up the Left's rear end. Sideways.
Peter Fonda's horrible tweets bother me even more than most, because they so clearly show the anger, viciousness, brutality, and idiocy of the left. A couple of days ago, Rush Limbaugh predicted that someone is going to get hurt (or worse) based on the way this fake story is being used to gin up emotions.
And no, you weren't the only one emotional over Dr. Krauthammer's farewell letter.
@Shelly- Amen to all you say about the corrupt and venomous Left. I want to see charges leveled against these traitorous creeps.
And I can't blame Charles Krauthammer for expecting the worst from Trump, as it was entirely logical to do so. I was so convinced that Trump would screw the pooch (to use the street vernacular) that I sold off a good bit of stock to beat a potential market crash. In hindsight, Trump has been doing great and the joke was on me.
@Gee M- What a tremendous job you've done of explaining this story in a way that the (ahem) "news" networks should be doing. Well done!
@Bobo the Hobo- I've declared that I won't watch anything with Fonda in it, but I'll make an exception for body cam footage of him being hauled off.
@JustaJeepGuy- I'm not familiar with the editorial you're referring to, though I'll do some digging. As far as the Peter Fonda flick, I can't imagine a scenario in which someone would want him to raise a child.
@Gee M- Wow, you own this blog today! Two excellent pieces about Trump, and both are compelling. When all is said and done, I like Trump despite my worries because I truly believe "he fights for America." And that's a job that couldn't be put off.
@Mark Matis- Good scene, and actually a lot sexier than a lot of scenes with total nudity. Are you paying attention, Hollywood?
TO me the sorriest thing about losing Dr.Charles Krauthammer is the fact that he was always willing to talk with you about an issue and not just preach at you. I think one of the only other famous person who had this type of attitude is G. Gordon Liddy. There were many times on his show a conversation would just end with a "We will just have to agree to disagree" about whatever it was they were talking about. He didn't just berate the caller. Both of these men are an example of what it is to be a gentleman.
I have always had the philosophy of always being willing to talk with anyone about anything if we could agree that facts were facts and opinions were just that. You can have whatever opinion you want because that is how you feel about something and is not necessarily factual. I also try to make sure that the other party knows that if I tell them something and they find out it is wrong to please correct me so in the future I can put out factual info.
I just wish more people had this type of attitude and in both real life and on forums where people just fly off into a rage and just try and yell people down.
@John Fernau- Very well expressed and I completely agree. Blind enmity doesn't get us anywhere, and I genuinely believe that there is a LOT of middle ground that progressives and conservatives could agree on if we could just talk and (importantly) listen.
And you're right that Charles Krauthammer was great about being able to make a persuasive argument rather than just attack those with differing opinions. How I wish he was still with us (or at least that others would follow his example).
Just to add...
Under current law and legal rulings, including this (9th) Court's, it is not possible
for the U.S. government to detain families together during the pendency of their
immigration proceedings. It cannot be done.to the Department of Homeland Security, the Flores agreement allows the agency to detain unaccompanied minors for only “20 days before releasing them to the Department of Health and Human Services which places the minors in foster or shelter situations until they locate a sponsor.”
But in a controversial decision, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit, the most liberal in the country, has interpreted the settlement agreement to apply to “both minors who are accompanied and unaccompanied by their parents.”
Of course, if those parents would simply agree to return to their home countries, they would be immediately reunited with their children. So those who come here illegally are themselves to blame for their children being assigned to foster care or to another family member or sponsor who may be in the country.
Stilton I believe there are more out there that do try and talk with others as opposed to shouting at them. The only problem is for the most part all you hear about are the one who shout. It is kind of like how a lot of people think that all youngsters are worthless no good brats. Having been in the military for the last 33 years (retiring 30 Sept thank God)I have seen a number of truly great young men and women join and serve while enduring a lot of personal sacrifice of both time and future in some cases. I feel pretty good knowing that I am handing the reins over to some truly wonderful Soldiers and have no reservations about leaving except I won't be working with them anymore.
PS I love how I have to prove to a robot that I am not a robot.
As to Dr Charles Krauthammer....a great light has left this known universe. I have missed his clarity of thought for quite sometime now and shall continue to miss it for the rest of my time here. There are not all that many seminal thinkers left in this world. What frightens me most is that Charles Krauthammer might very well have been the last one standing,she said with meaning exactly that. He might have been in a wheelchair but many wil never be able to reach his shoulders nor his stature.
I really detest any one whose last name is Fonda. Vile and traitorous.
For JUSTAJEEPGUY...?am thunking that the WaPo OpEd piece that you remember is the following........
Both Sides Blowing Smoke In Gun Debate
By Charles Krauthammer
Washington Post Writers Group
WASHINGTON, D.C. - In an election year you expect Washington to be full of phony arguments. But even a cynic must marvel at the all-round phoniness of the debate over repeal of the assault weapons ban. Both sides are blowing smoke.
The claim of the advocates that banning these 19 types of "assault weapons" will reduce the crime rate is laughable. (The term itself is priceless: What are all the other guns in America's home arsenal? Encounter weapons? Crime-enabling devices?) There are dozens of other weapons, the functional equivalent of these "assault weapons," that were left off the list and are perfect substitutes for anyone bent on mayhem.
On the other side you have Rep. Gerald Solomon, R-N.Y., demanding in trembling fury that the ban be repealed because his wife, alone in upstate New York, needs protection. Well, OK. But must it be an AK-47? Does, say, a .44 magnum - easier to carry, by the way - not suffice for issuing a credible "Go ahead, make my day"?
In fact, the assault weapons ban will have no significant effect either on the crime rate or on personal security. Nonetheless, it is a good idea, though for reasons its proponents dare not enunciate. I am not up for re-election. So let me elaborate the real logic of the ban:
It is simply crazy for a country as modern, industrial, advanced and now crowded as the United States to carry on its frontier infatuation with guns. Yes, we are a young country but the frontier has been closed for 100 years.
In 1992, there were 13,220 handgun murders in the United States. Canada (an equally young country, one might note) had 128; Britain, 33.
Ultimately, a civilized society must disarm its citizenry if it is to have a modicum of domestic tranquility of the kind enjoyed in sister democracies like Canada and Britain. Given the frontier history and individualist ideology of the United States, however, this will not come easily. It certainly cannot be done radically.
It will probably take one, maybe two generations. It might be 50 years before the United States gets to where Britain is today.
Passing a law like the assault weapons ban is a symbolic - purely symbolic - move in that direction. Its only real justification is not to reduce crime but to desensitize the public to the regulation of weapons in preparation for their ultimate confiscation. Its purpose is to spark debate, highlight the issue, make the case that the arms race between criminals and citizens is as dangerous as it is pointless.
to be contd on the next page
Charles Krauthammer's column appears Monday on editorial pages of The Times.
Copyright (c) 1996 Seattle Times Company, All Rights Reserved.
While I don’t agree with Dr Krauthammer’s take on the abolishment of guns (I certainly won’t be giving mine up anytime soon) he does make an eloquent argument, does he not?
Both Sides Now BLOWING SMOKE—continued
De-escalation begins with a change in mentality. And that change in mentality starts with the symbolic yielding of certain types of weapons. The real steps, like the banning of handguns, will never occur unless this one is taken first, and even then not for decades.
What needs to happen before this change in mentality can occur? What must occur first - and this is where liberals are fighting the gun control issue from the wrong end - is a decrease in crime. So long as crime is ubiquitous, so long as Americans cannot entrust their personal safety to the authorities, they will never agree to disarm. There will be no gun control before there is real crime control.
True, part of the reason for the high crime rate is the ubiquity of guns - which makes the argument circular and a solution seem impossible. But there are other, egregious encouragements to crime that gun control advocates ignore at their peril. The lack of swift and certain retribution, for example.
In the United States, 4 (!) percent of all robberies result in time served. Tell your stickup man, "You can go to jail for this," and he can correctly respond, "25-to-1 says I don't."
Yes, Sarah Brady is doing God's work. Yes, in the end America must follow the way of other democracies and disarm. But there is not the slightest chance that it will occur until liberals join in the other fights to reduce the incidence of and increase the penalties for crime. Only then will there be a public receptive to the idea of real gun control. (Copyright, 1996, Washington Post Writers Group)
Charles Krauthammer's column appears Monday on editorial pages of The Times.
Copyright (c) 1996 Seattle Times Company, All Rights Reserved.
This might be the column I remember. At the time, he seems to have leaned rather left-ly.
Krauthammer wrote that in 1996, after Slick Willie's "crime bill" had been shoved down our throats. As time showed, the "ban" on "assault weapons" did NOTHING to slow down crime. However, when he said that Britain was some place America should emulate, he was totally wrong. He was correct though that crime has not been addressed with the severity it should be. I can only remark that up until fairly recently, nobody would even think of shooting up a school or movie theater or mall.
We largely have the raving feminazi Kate Millett to thank for that. She was locked up against her will (more than once, I think) and somehow found an attorney who helped her get out and made it nearly impossible to lock up the Klebolds, Harrises, Jared Loughners, Adam Lanzas, Nicolas Cruzes, ad infinitum, who have made modern life so difficult to survive unscathed. I think the worst part is the power junkies on the Left who revel in the chaos and think that somehow they will get to be in charge when it all falls apart. George Soros foolishly believes he will be immune to the destruction that he wants to unleash upon the world.
Anyway, If Krauthammer still, at the end, believed disarming Americans was a good idea, I'm not willing to shed a tear. Sorry, but I'm of the opinion that "the more LIBERTY, the BETTER!!"
Post a Comment