Maryam Rajavi on Iran and ISIS
I have tremendous respect for this woman and her organization, which is headquartered in Paris because they would be put to death at home. Maryam Rajavi is the head of the National Council of Resistance - Iran, and keeps the focus on Iran's brutal human rights abuses and anti-democratic quality.
Here she advances a theory that I haven't heard before to explain why ISIS and Iran have such similar views on the execution of law. It's a little surprising that they should -- the Sunni/Shi'a split was more than a thousand years ago, and their schools of law have developed along different lines since then, with the Sunni schools 'closing' the law to reform after the 10th century, and the Shi'a schools remaining 'open' to new interpretations. They are different enough that in Afghanistan, whose constitution says that nothing shall counter sha'riah law, the Shi'a Muslims had to have constitutional provisions protecting their right to practices that Sunni schools of sha'riah do not permit.
Her suggestion is that the reason that ISIS's brutality looks so much like Iran's brutality is that Iran is the real model for ISIS:
Here she advances a theory that I haven't heard before to explain why ISIS and Iran have such similar views on the execution of law. It's a little surprising that they should -- the Sunni/Shi'a split was more than a thousand years ago, and their schools of law have developed along different lines since then, with the Sunni schools 'closing' the law to reform after the 10th century, and the Shi'a schools remaining 'open' to new interpretations. They are different enough that in Afghanistan, whose constitution says that nothing shall counter sha'riah law, the Shi'a Muslims had to have constitutional provisions protecting their right to practices that Sunni schools of sha'riah do not permit.
Her suggestion is that the reason that ISIS's brutality looks so much like Iran's brutality is that Iran is the real model for ISIS:
Ever since Ruhollah Khomeini came to power in 1979, Tehran championed itself as a successful model, which fundamentalists could follow in order to gain stature, power, and sovereign legitimacy. This presents a tantalizing message to Sunni extremists like the Islamic State– why can they not create their own “Islamic” State when Shiite fundamentalists have already done so?
While the conceptual origins of this extremist ideology took shape in the early years of Islam, it only turned into a formidable global force when fundamentalism gripped Iran in the aftermath of the 1979 revolution.
The regime that replaced the Shah—who was also detestable and undemocratic—began exporting Islamic fundamentalism on an unprecedented scale almost overnight. High-profile hostage-takings, bombings, suicide attacks, and assassinations became the norm as the mullahs in Tehran began building their own version of a theocratic state.
In these early stages, Shiite terrorist factions, including militias in Iraq, Hezbollah in Lebanon, the Houthis in Yemen, and others were directly formed by the Iranian regime. Without such state sponsorship from Tehran, their clout and influence would have quickly evaporated and they would have vanished. The vicious ideology and proliferative model grew increasingly lethal as its proponents gained access to veritable troves of military, diplomatic, political, and propaganda resources within the sovereign state borders of Iran.
So began the first modern-day “caliphate”—years before al-Qaida’s first attack burned in Yemen, and a full three decades prior to the rise of the Islamic State.
Many assume that Sunni fundamentalism is a unique phenomenon, entirely separate from the dogmas espoused by the Shiite mullahs in Tehran, but the differences are ancillary. In fact, Sunni fundamentalists have found tremendous strength under the political and spiritual umbrella of the Iranian theocracy. Both share the same ideological building blocks: the establishment of a religious state, which implements Sharia by force.
There is considerable evidence that the regime in Tehran has armed and financed Sunni extremists at various times and locations. Not only is Iran a long-standing sponsor of Hamas, but also as U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry said recently, “ISIS was created by Assad releasing 1,500 prisoners from jail, and Maliki releasing 1,000 people in Iraq who were put together as a force of terror.” Tehran is the known puppet-master of both.
DNC Moves to Sabotage Sanders Campaign
In addition to scheduling the Democratic debate on the Saturday night before Christmas during the exact same time as NFL football, Debbie Wasserman Schultz has used a minor scandal to cripple Sanders' access to voter data. It looks like some lower-level staffers managed to exploit a bug in the DNC's software to look at Clinton's own data, but the Sanders campaign both fired the chief staffer involved and itself reported the violation to the DNC. Meanwhile, as the Sanders' campaign points out, its data was just as available -- and there's no way to know that Clinton's campaign didn't look at their stuff too. In fact, as a betting man, I'd wager heavily that Clinton's campaign absolutely exploited the regular flaws in this software and simply hasn't reported itself for cheating.
All the stops are out on the Clinton Express, though. The DNC is wholly in the tank for her.
All the stops are out on the Clinton Express, though. The DNC is wholly in the tank for her.
Parallels in France
The American Interest considers the National Front:
Their focus on protecting or restoring this national character is what opens them to charges of racism or of xenophobia, but what is going on is less xenophobia than oikophilia, that is, love of home and the things of one's own. Love of home is such a deep, natural part of human beings that of course it is difficult to strategize against. Europe hoped it would be able to transfer the love of home to itself considered broadly, as France had earlier managed to become the emotional center of love-of-home for Gascons as well as Parisians. Great Britain once managed to become the emotional center of home-love for Englishmen as well as many Welshmen or Scots.
What's going on instead is that Europe's demands upon France, or Britain's on England, have begun to work against the interests of home too much for the collective to be thought of as the real home of the heart. In that way, the Scottish National Party is like these parties too in spite of its very different agenda. Because its leftist agenda is more acceptable to the media, it isn't demonized the way that UKIP and the FN are, and because of that it swept the Scottish elections recently. People are willing to associate with it without fear of being called racists or xenophobes.
That fear doesn't last forever, though, and the more because the charge isn't fully fair. There are racists and xenophobes among these nationalists, but there are also among the centralizing parties. The charge is that UKIP or FN are driven by hate, though, whereas racism is accidental when you find it in the Labour party.
In truth, that charge is 180 degrees off of reality. They are driven by love. It is an intense love of home, and the things associated with home, that is driving all these movements. To say that love is hate is not just slander. It becomes an incapacity to see things clearly. Sun Tzu warns that you can never be sure of defeating an enemy you don't understand.
[T]he National Front represents a deeper challenge for a French right, which now occupies an awkward centrist position.... The possibility of alliance is taboo for Republican leaders, who fear that the mere mention of it would break down the last barrier for voters; even mentioning the possibility publicly has led to the expulsion of party members (including an MP). But if alliance is out, what are the other options? Confronting the FN head on? Co-opt its message to attract its voters (thus running the risk of letting the FN shape the conversation)? Much as U.S. Republicans with Donald Trump, French strategists are at loss.The National Front is somewhat like UKIP in Britain. Both are nationalist parties in the old sense. They're proud of who they are, and they want to protect their nation and advance its interests, but more than that: they both want to protect their nation's character. They are proud of being French, or they are proud of being English. They want a country that takes that character seriously, protecting or restoring it as necessary.
Their focus on protecting or restoring this national character is what opens them to charges of racism or of xenophobia, but what is going on is less xenophobia than oikophilia, that is, love of home and the things of one's own. Love of home is such a deep, natural part of human beings that of course it is difficult to strategize against. Europe hoped it would be able to transfer the love of home to itself considered broadly, as France had earlier managed to become the emotional center of love-of-home for Gascons as well as Parisians. Great Britain once managed to become the emotional center of home-love for Englishmen as well as many Welshmen or Scots.
What's going on instead is that Europe's demands upon France, or Britain's on England, have begun to work against the interests of home too much for the collective to be thought of as the real home of the heart. In that way, the Scottish National Party is like these parties too in spite of its very different agenda. Because its leftist agenda is more acceptable to the media, it isn't demonized the way that UKIP and the FN are, and because of that it swept the Scottish elections recently. People are willing to associate with it without fear of being called racists or xenophobes.
That fear doesn't last forever, though, and the more because the charge isn't fully fair. There are racists and xenophobes among these nationalists, but there are also among the centralizing parties. The charge is that UKIP or FN are driven by hate, though, whereas racism is accidental when you find it in the Labour party.
In truth, that charge is 180 degrees off of reality. They are driven by love. It is an intense love of home, and the things associated with home, that is driving all these movements. To say that love is hate is not just slander. It becomes an incapacity to see things clearly. Sun Tzu warns that you can never be sure of defeating an enemy you don't understand.
A Price in Blood
I haven't said anything about the Defense Department's decision to open all jobs to women because, as Ranger Up's Nick Palmisciano says, our opinions no longer matter. This is no longer a political question. The decision has been made, and we're going to pay the price in blood for it however high it happens to be. The best thing to do is to support those who have to undertake this mission as well as we can.
Still, we should probably warn young people considering a military career that it just got more dangerous -- especially if they are women.
Still, we should probably warn young people considering a military career that it just got more dangerous -- especially if they are women.
Army women not only suffer more injuries than men during combat training, but the active-duty female soldiers also are stricken with significantly higher rates of mental health disorders.That it is dangerous isn't a reason not to do it -- the honor comes in large part from the danger. Best of luck.
The statistics come from a study conducted by the Army surgeon general last summer in conjunction with a bevy of analyses and experiments to judge women’s suitability for direct ground combat roles. It found, for example, that female soldiers suffer depression at more than double the rate of men and that one of the triggers is exposure to combat....
“This is a major scandal in the making,” Mrs. Donnelly said. “Here you have United States Army, with its own medical study pointing to the injury rates at least double compared to men. This is a consistent finding across the board. And they are proceeding anyway. And there is no indication that young women considering military service will be informed of the additional risk they will face over and above what men do. Once you sign up, they are going to be assigned to jobs beyond their strength anywhere the Army wants to send you.”
Two More Problems With the No-Fly List
Problem one: it's almost completely useless for any other purpose, according to Homeland Security. There are only like fifty guys on it who would be affected.
That's not a huge problem, though, because if the President gets the authority he wants, he'll just add everyone's name to it. Hope you didn't like flying very much.
Problem two: If you're a gentle, Santa-like veterinarian from Tennessee whose name is on there wrongfully, the process for clearing your name is both murky and ineffective.
That's not a huge problem, though, because if the President gets the authority he wants, he'll just add everyone's name to it. Hope you didn't like flying very much.
Problem two: If you're a gentle, Santa-like veterinarian from Tennessee whose name is on there wrongfully, the process for clearing your name is both murky and ineffective.
Hackett has never been arrested and never traveled to the Middle East or other centers of terrorist activity, but he found out more than a decade ago he's on the federal watch list because he shares the same name as notorious Irish Republican Army terrorist Patrick Joseph Hackett, who was jailed in the 1970s for planting bombs in Britain.That's not a problem either, though, since protecting your rights and liberty was the old purpose of the American government. The new purpose is progress!
The difference should be easy to spot. The terrorist is missing an arm and a leg — blown off when a bomb exploded prematurely — while the Knoxville veterinarian has all his limbs intact.
"I don't know how I got on the list, and I don't know how to get off the list," Hackett said.
Since learning he was on the list, Hackett has been denied boarding on planes and even spent time in a foreign jail.
Shame on "Liberals" Who Rationalize Terror
StandPoint magazine, out of the UK, writes:
John Kerry’s liberalism, and the liberalism of millions like him, ignores Chesterton’s warning not to be so open-minded that your brains fall out.It's always a possibility.
...
Perhaps I am being too kind to Kerry.
The Death of the Arab Spring
What went wrong?
Imagine a Battle of Lexington leading to a War of Independence that went horribly, horribly wrong. That wouldn't be hard if you could conceive of a leadership that decided to "lead from behind". Sohrab Ahmari, writing in the Wall Street Journal, says that when the old order collapsed an Islamism waiting in the wings came out to fill the vacuum left by a distant Barack Obama. "Good Guys" who were without guns found themselves abandoned by Western governments to bloodthirsty Mustache Petes in the cynical belief that it was easier to make a deal with political Islam or dictators than build a region on new democratic principles.Another perspective comes to a similar conclusion:
This was for some reason regarded as smart.
The Arab Spring, to the extent that the term is not now entirely a misnomer, was understood in its early days as a reiteration of the Prague Spring of 1968. That flowering of Soviet-era constitutional and democratic reform ended up crushed by Kremlin-directed Warsaw Pact tanks, troops and intrigues after a few months. It has taken only a little while longer for the hopes of most of the long-oppressed Arab masses to be broken between the grindstones of authoritarian police-state reaction and Islamist counter-revolutionary terror....
It was perhaps the Arab democrats’ greatest misfortune that their big moment came at a time when it was Obama holding the title that used to be called “the leader of the free world.” Obama’s strategic response to all the revolutionary tumult across the region has been distinguished by colossal hubris, capitulation to the expansionist Khomeinist regime in Tehran, hollow threats and a strange disregard for the growing sense of hopelessness that has descended across the political spectrum in Israel, traditionally the key American ally in the region.
Howard Dean's PAC Is For Bernie
"Democracy For America" decided, in line with their name, to hold a vote on which candidate they'd endorse. According to an emailed press release I just got:
It's very far from the whole Democratic party, and Clinton has locked up the superdelegates. Still, it's a fascinating display of support for the insurgent.
UPDATE: Communications Workers of America, a major union, has also endorsed Sanders based on a survey of members. Doubly interesting.
Bernie Sanders has earned Democracy for America's endorsement in the 2016 Democratic presidential primary with an astonishing, record-breaking 87.9% of the vote (including 77.8% of voters who were already members of DFA prior to the poll being launched on December 7).That's interesting. In 2008 the Dean PAC didn't take a stand on Clinton v. Obama either way, perhaps out of a fear that the split was too divisive for them to survive taking a side. Even if we restrict the field to those who were longstanding members of DFA, though, better than two thirds favor Sanders over Clinton.
It's very far from the whole Democratic party, and Clinton has locked up the superdelegates. Still, it's a fascinating display of support for the insurgent.
UPDATE: Communications Workers of America, a major union, has also endorsed Sanders based on a survey of members. Doubly interesting.
Ignoring The Voters Works Wonders
Specifically, the wonder of Donald Trump, who is going to win just because of things like this.
The voters' chief concern is a terrorism that the government has proven incapable of controlling -- let's push disarming the people, while doing nothing much about ISIS and actively helping Iran.
One of the terrorists got in on a badly-investigated visa at the same time that ISIS has proven capable of creating counterfeit Syrian passports and is promising to use the refugee crisis as a vector to infiltrate the West -- let's increase the number of Syrian refugees immediately!
The economy, the next biggest concern, is long-sluggish especially for middle- and lower-income workers for whom immigration represents a wage-suppressing mechanism -- obviously, we need many more work visas right away, especially ones that target the lower end of the American wage scale.
This is part of another major concern about a refusal to enforce border security that seems even to encourage rapid, mass immigration into the United States -- so let's allocate almost two billion dollars to resettling illegal immigrants inside the United States.
Even if you don't agree with the public, the thing about being an elected representative you are supposed to represent the public. If you don't do that, you'd better be really persuasive in accounting for your behavior and convincing the public that you were right and they were wrong. Otherwise, your performance review is coming up fast, and it sounds like the voters are looking to make a change.
In the wake of this month’s terrorist attack in San Bernardino, in which one of the perpetrators managed to enter the country on a K-1 “fiancée” visa without being detected, the least popular policy at the moment is increasing access to the US. Numerous polls now show confidence in the federal government plummeting when it comes to securing the nation. The big debate at the moment isn’t on whether to increase visa access, but whether it needs to get shut down for a while until we can improve scrutiny on applicants.This is clearly where the mind of the establishment is right now, both Democratic and Republican.
So what did elected representatives Congress do when it came time to pass a large omnibus bill to complete the FY2016 budget process? Sneak a large increase in foreign-worker visas into the legislation, of course....
The voters' chief concern is a terrorism that the government has proven incapable of controlling -- let's push disarming the people, while doing nothing much about ISIS and actively helping Iran.
One of the terrorists got in on a badly-investigated visa at the same time that ISIS has proven capable of creating counterfeit Syrian passports and is promising to use the refugee crisis as a vector to infiltrate the West -- let's increase the number of Syrian refugees immediately!
The economy, the next biggest concern, is long-sluggish especially for middle- and lower-income workers for whom immigration represents a wage-suppressing mechanism -- obviously, we need many more work visas right away, especially ones that target the lower end of the American wage scale.
This is part of another major concern about a refusal to enforce border security that seems even to encourage rapid, mass immigration into the United States -- so let's allocate almost two billion dollars to resettling illegal immigrants inside the United States.
Even if you don't agree with the public, the thing about being an elected representative you are supposed to represent the public. If you don't do that, you'd better be really persuasive in accounting for your behavior and convincing the public that you were right and they were wrong. Otherwise, your performance review is coming up fast, and it sounds like the voters are looking to make a change.
Well Done
As you will doubtless recall from our previous discussions of the subject, I am a great admirer of the Sikh religion. I think this is a fine step.
Heart beats
I'm about to become the proud new owner of a pacemaker. Apparently my heart has a curious habit of stopping now and then throughout the day--not that I ever notice a thing. My father also had weird heart rhythms and had a pacemaker, though somewhat later in life in his case. Well, it's a boatload of money and a little surprising, but it's a wildly low-risk procedure and won't put any restrictions on me afterwards, so who am I to complain? The good news is that I don't have a bit of A-fib, which was the heart problem I always expected to get. A-fib actually is rather hard to deal with, whereas a pacemaker should be a virtually 100% permanent solution to my bizarre heart rhythm.
Among other things, my heart rate drops to 34 during the night. Lub . . . dub . . . lub . . . dub. My father's used to drop to 40 while he was sitting up and talking, which used to confuse the doctors no end. Likewise, my cardiologist cannot explain how my heart could stop for 10 seconds at a time, as it apparently did last week, in the middle of the day, without my even feeling faint.
All of this came about because my new doctor, who spends time with his patients a la Marcus Welby, told me to get off my butt and reduce my weight. I'm making good progress, and this shouldn't interrupt that program at all.
Among other things, my heart rate drops to 34 during the night. Lub . . . dub . . . lub . . . dub. My father's used to drop to 40 while he was sitting up and talking, which used to confuse the doctors no end. Likewise, my cardiologist cannot explain how my heart could stop for 10 seconds at a time, as it apparently did last week, in the middle of the day, without my even feeling faint.
All of this came about because my new doctor, who spends time with his patients a la Marcus Welby, told me to get off my butt and reduce my weight. I'm making good progress, and this shouldn't interrupt that program at all.
Presidential Candidates as Star Wars Characters
It's interesting that our two frontrunners are both variations on Darth Vader.
Former Guardsman Facing Decades in Prison For Terror Plot
Fortunately, unlike in other cases we can see a clear causal factor here: Hasan was obviously a disgruntled veteran.
He was aiming at killing up to 150 people in an attack on his former comrades.
He was aiming at killing up to 150 people in an attack on his former comrades.
University of Georgia Discovers 27 Graves Beneath Baldwin Hall
As the article points out, the headline is more surprising than the story. The hall was built immediately beside the grounds of a historic cemetery, which has lovely old trees. It is mown by goats to protect the old stones from being darkened by fumes, or damage to the tree roots from mower blades.
The circa-1938 academic hall, where some 20,000 US navy cadets once learned to fly planes during the second world war, was set to receive its first major facelift in more than half a century....
According to one state estimate, the cemetery could be home to as many as 5,000 graves, including those of revolutionary war veterans, Confederate civil war soldiers, and family members of Georgia politicians. Hundreds of the graves are unmarked. Over the years, the university encroached on the six-acre plot. According to historic records, Darden said, UGA planners thought they had transferred bodies located at Baldwin Hall’s current location to the nearby Oconee Hill Cemetery.
33 Gifts for the Military Man
An article from Havok Journal. Most of these will work well for military women too, though they may want different work clothes.
I do prefer a slightly longer pocket knife than the one he recommends, but it depends on your branch of service. The USAF won't allow you to bring a pocket knife longer than 3" on base, as I recall. I usually carry one of these, which has a too-long-for-the-Air-Force blade length of 3.99". It's strong, keeps an edge well, has a serrated portion for those kind of cutting jobs, and opens easily with one hand.
I do prefer a slightly longer pocket knife than the one he recommends, but it depends on your branch of service. The USAF won't allow you to bring a pocket knife longer than 3" on base, as I recall. I usually carry one of these, which has a too-long-for-the-Air-Force blade length of 3.99". It's strong, keeps an edge well, has a serrated portion for those kind of cutting jobs, and opens easily with one hand.
Nordic Christmas Customs
Some of these far-Northern traditions may help you get into the spirit at a time when the weather outside feels more like Spring than Winter.
Also, some of you may want to give socks for Christmas.
Also, some of you may want to give socks for Christmas.
The keeper of the ultimate naughty list, Grýla is an Icelandic giantess who comes down from her mountain at Christmastime to eat misbehaving children. Her pet, the Christmas Cat, tags along and eats anyone who didn't get new clothes for Christmas, a tradition that probably makes Icelandic children a lot more grateful for those socks from grandma.That's right, you little punks. You'll take those socks and smile.
How To Turn A "Straight News" Story Into An Editorial
Everybody does it, but I've never seen it done harder than ABC TV News does it here.
Here's the lede from the print version of the story:
So, as a news story, this story is empirically opposed to the President's narrative and agenda.
Now, if you're inclined, watch the television version of the story at the link. Let us count the ways in which it bends this story into the approved form:
1) It opens with a "troubling headline" about a local news story in Albuquerque, which would normally never make national news, but which is elevated just so that ABC can link the shooting to the news story via a 'this comes at the same time as...' move.
2) The news story is built not around the poll, but around demonstrations in favor of the Second Amendment. These are described as having been organized "to push back against the President's campaign to rein in gun violence." That's right -- they're demonstrating in favor of gun violence! What they want is for gun violence to be unrestrained!
3) We still don't get the poll. First, an additional introductory feature about some accidental shootings, complete with footage of a bloody ambulance bed being moved to a hospital. We're now halfway into the story, and all we've heard is that people organized at rallies, shot each other accidentally, and "oppose the President's plans." Why? A man is allowed to explain just after the halfway point: he says that if you tell Americans they can't have something, they'll want it. So, really nothing more than childish defiance is at work -- no Constitutional principles, no concerns about government competence, no terrorism, just a kind of fit that Daddy won't let them have candy.
4) Now we get a segment about how the President is moved by the shootings at Sandy Hook. It runs for 1/6th of the length of the news story, and shows the President somber, hurt, and speaking "almost daily" about the need to "protect our children."
5) We are now 1:21 into a 2:00 story. The poll comes up: "The public agrees with the President on some of his proposals..."
6) We get specific numbers on those proposals the public agrees with.
7) "But a ban on assault weapons looks unlikely..." -- because the poll shows that public opposes it? No! "...as Republicans push back."
8) Ted Cruz is allowed literally half of a sentence in defense of whatever these "Republican" ideas might be.
9) Twenty seconds left! "The White House admits not all Democrats are on board." Do we hear from a Democrat explaining why? Of course not! No, we hear from a White House dude explaining that "We're going to twist the arms" of Democrats to get them on board.
10) They close without ever giving the numbers opposing assault weapons, never mentioning the doubts about government competence to stop attacks, and never allowing anyone to give any part of the countervailing principled arguments, nor the empirical ones either. Instead, they close with a pledge from the White House and its supporters to have a "fifty-state strategy" to get new gun control through Congress.
Television rots the brain. Sometimes, it's by design.
Here's the lede from the print version of the story:
A majority of Americans oppose banning assault weapons for the first time in more than 20 years of ABC News/Washington Post polls, with the public expressing vast doubt that the authorities can prevent “lone wolf” terrorist attacks and a substantial sense that armed citizens can help.So, the actual news is that a second poll now finds a majority opposed to an assault weapons ban for the first time since that scary term was invented out of whole cloth to sell gun control. The President has already moved on to calling these things "battlefield weapons," which they are not: the kind you take to the battlefield are automatic. But the shift in rhetoric is unlikely to be persuasive given that most Americans now doubt the government's competence to protect them from terrorist attacks of this kind. They're right, of course, to doubt it. The government can't possibly stop these sorts of attacks reliably. Even if they assume vast new surveillance powers and police powers, they just won't be everywhere all the time. The only institution that could possibly stop lone wolf attacks reliably is the militia, in the original sense of the ordinary people of the country armed for the defense of themselves as well as the common peace and lawful order. They're the only ones who will always be wherever the terrorist may pick to attack.
So, as a news story, this story is empirically opposed to the President's narrative and agenda.
Now, if you're inclined, watch the television version of the story at the link. Let us count the ways in which it bends this story into the approved form:
1) It opens with a "troubling headline" about a local news story in Albuquerque, which would normally never make national news, but which is elevated just so that ABC can link the shooting to the news story via a 'this comes at the same time as...' move.
2) The news story is built not around the poll, but around demonstrations in favor of the Second Amendment. These are described as having been organized "to push back against the President's campaign to rein in gun violence." That's right -- they're demonstrating in favor of gun violence! What they want is for gun violence to be unrestrained!
3) We still don't get the poll. First, an additional introductory feature about some accidental shootings, complete with footage of a bloody ambulance bed being moved to a hospital. We're now halfway into the story, and all we've heard is that people organized at rallies, shot each other accidentally, and "oppose the President's plans." Why? A man is allowed to explain just after the halfway point: he says that if you tell Americans they can't have something, they'll want it. So, really nothing more than childish defiance is at work -- no Constitutional principles, no concerns about government competence, no terrorism, just a kind of fit that Daddy won't let them have candy.
4) Now we get a segment about how the President is moved by the shootings at Sandy Hook. It runs for 1/6th of the length of the news story, and shows the President somber, hurt, and speaking "almost daily" about the need to "protect our children."
5) We are now 1:21 into a 2:00 story. The poll comes up: "The public agrees with the President on some of his proposals..."
6) We get specific numbers on those proposals the public agrees with.
7) "But a ban on assault weapons looks unlikely..." -- because the poll shows that public opposes it? No! "...as Republicans push back."
8) Ted Cruz is allowed literally half of a sentence in defense of whatever these "Republican" ideas might be.
9) Twenty seconds left! "The White House admits not all Democrats are on board." Do we hear from a Democrat explaining why? Of course not! No, we hear from a White House dude explaining that "We're going to twist the arms" of Democrats to get them on board.
10) They close without ever giving the numbers opposing assault weapons, never mentioning the doubts about government competence to stop attacks, and never allowing anyone to give any part of the countervailing principled arguments, nor the empirical ones either. Instead, they close with a pledge from the White House and its supporters to have a "fifty-state strategy" to get new gun control through Congress.
Television rots the brain. Sometimes, it's by design.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)