Political Roundtable Cosmic String of Cataclysm - Part V

[noworriesinmd]

STUPID GAT DAME IDIOT INCOMPETENT FRICKING FRICKING COWARDLY DEMOCRATS!!!! HOW CAN YOU FAIL TO PASS AN AMENDMENT THAT IS SUPPORTED BY A MAJORITY OF THE NRA????? WHY CAN'T YOU PUT THE PASSION INTO SAVING THE LIVES OF OUR CHILDREN AS YOU PUT INTO PROTECTING FRICKING MEDICARE????????

WHAT IS THE MATTER WITH THIS FRICKING COUNTRY??????

Here is a little secret..."All Politics is LOCAL". There is a reason why half the country voted for the "other" guy. Things that you hate....half the country is cheering. Politicians up for reelection in a non-presidential year are normally vulnerable...especially if they loose their 'A' rating with the NRA.

relax and take a deep breath

[montestewart]

STUPID GAT DAME IDIOT INCOMPETENT FRICKING FRICKING COWARDLY DEMOCRATS!!!! HOW CAN YOU FAIL TO PASS AN AMENDMENT THAT IS SUPPORTED BY A MAJORITY OF THE NRA????? WHY CAN'T YOU PUT THE PASSION INTO SAVING THE LIVES OF OUR CHILDREN AS YOU PUT INTO PROTECTING FRICKING MEDICARE????????

WHAT IS THE MATTER WITH THIS FRICKING COUNTRY??????

Here is a little secret..."All Politics is LOCAL". There is a reason why half the country voted for the "other" guy. Things that you hate....half the country is cheering. Politicians up for reelection in a non-presidential year are normally vulnerable...especially if they loose their 'A' rating with the NRA.

relax and take a deep breath

So you're saying that 100% of the "other" half is against the amendment? Or that the NRA has too much control over conservative politics?

PS: I hate child molestation, rape, slavery, murder, etc.

[noworriesinmd]

Poll are flawed, depending on how you frame the question.
I really want to know how the question was framed that reached 90%.
For example two questions on the same topic.
A. Based on the Conn massacre, are you for or against background checks that would have prevented the shooting?
B. Are you for background checks that would not have stopped the Conn shooting?

In terms of rants about the media, I believe the media has been overwhelmingly "FOR" the measure. BTW, I hate Fox news. You should listen to last weekends reliable source on CNN which talked about the media bias.

In terms of voting for things, the country is divided. I've travelled to every state and 6 of 7 continents. What amazes me is that the world is different and so is this country. What is very important in NYC is downright disapproved of in Utah. Yet comments I read tend to gloss over this fact. Even rural MD is totally different than Baltimore or the burbs of DC. Poll after poll in MD has show that western & eastern shore marylander's hate the new gun legislation by wide margins. Yet they are drowned out by the majority that live in cities. If you did a poll in aggregate in MD most would approve of new gun laws...but that same poll broken up by area might show a different story...hence multiple representatives in a state.

I'm neither for or against background checks. What bothers me is that this is something rushed through to feign action when it would not have prevented the Conn shootings. This is an excuse to push through legislation that does nothing. When American's are asked what should be Congress's priorities, Gun legislation is #4. I think most people are concerned about jobs and economic growth...that is what Congress should be working on. Instead our President is making this an issue so that he can capture the house in 2014. My heart goes out to the Newton victims, but they are pawns in a a battle that does not care about them. It's interesting that there is a parent who lost their kid that was not invited to the capital or on news programs...because he is against the legislation. It makes better news to drown out his opinion.

My problem with a lot of these comments can be summarized in the movie "The Campaign". Politicians are so intent on winning that they forget they have been elected to solve problems. People are enraged about this bill even though it is a NON ISSUE. Politicians are using this as smoke and mirrors to force you to forget about the fact that we are probably not going to have a budget, the sequester is taking points off our fragile GDP growth, entitlements and debt are not being fixed, education is broken, the country is VERY divided, there still is no comprehensive immigration reform.

I can think of many things to get upset over...a non issue is not one of them.

[hands11]

Combine 91% of New York residents in favor vs. 89% of Wyoming residents against and you will probably arrive at 90% in favor. We must not forget we live in a Constitutional Republic.

By your logic it's still bi-partisan issue . 36% of New York voters -- some 2.2M people -- cast votes for Romney in November. That's 5 times as many people that voted for either candidate in Montana.

I'm not sure I follow you Fish. The point I was trying to make is that even if 90% of the public support something it doesn't follow that an individual state (especially smaller ones) majority would support it. Therefore their reps, D or R, could very well vote against the wishes of the 90% general support and instead vote in support of a small (but majority) number within their own state.

Which is why this country is stuck on stupid.

You know how the USA thinks it needs to help the middle east come out of the dark ages so the world can move along without dragging them around like a bag of rocks living in the stone ages.

Well we have that same problem in our own country.

This country needs to pull it head out of its ass. To many politicians for too long have given a ribbon to everyone in the race. You are all brilliant citizens. And now they believe it.

Bubba may know how to plant a crop. Fix a car. Build a shed. But that doesn't mean he understand macro anything. Maaco maybe. Macro, nope.

It wasnt to long ago that people that were not educated in such matters understood they were not. There were the smart people and the non smart people knew they were not that kind of smart. Now Bubba thinks he can run the country. If you don't believe me, see GWB and Rick Perry.

Nothing wrong with a person with some country roots to him. I personally really like folks llke that. But at least get one with brains like Clinton or Carter.

Rs run people like Perry. Ah three agencies.. Dept of Educ. Dept of Commerce.. and ... what was the 3rd.
And Mr 999
Michelle insane women.
Sarah Palin I can see Russia.
And George Goober Bush.. Fool me once, sham on you. Fool me twice.. You wont get fooled again.

And Fox Noise is the PR branch for all of this.

[noworriesinmd]

Which is why this country is stuck on stupid.

You know how the USA thinks it needs to help the middle east come out of the dark ages so the world can move along without dragging them around like a bag of rocks living in the stone ages.

Well we have that same problem in our own country.

This country needs to pull it head out of its ass. To many politicians for too long have given a ribbon to everyone in the race. You are all brilliant citizens. And now they believe it.

Bubba may know how to plant a crop. Fix a car. Build a shed. But that doesn't mean he understand macro anything. Maaco maybe. Macro, nope.

It wasnt to long ago that people that were not educated in such matters understood they were not. There were the smart people and the non smart people knew they were not that kind of smart. Now Bubba thinks he can run the country. If you don't believe me, see GWB and Rick Perry.

Nothing wrong with a person with some country roots to him. I personally really like folks llke that. But at least get one with brains like Clinton or Carter.

Rs run people like Perry. Ah three agencies.. Dept of Educ. Dept of Commerce.. and ... what was the 3rd.
And Mr 999
Michelle insane women.
Sarah Palin I can see Russia.
And George Goober Bush.. Fool me once, sham on you. Fool me twice.. You wont get fooled again.

And Fox Noise is the PR branch for all of this.

Just because you disagree with someone doesn't make them stupid. The founding fathers once thought that only land owners could run this country... i.e the elite, i.e landowners i.e white men. They felt that no one else should have a say. There was a time when regular men could not elect the President. Do you think we should go back to that model? Do you think Democrats are better than Republicans? North Easterner's better than Mid Westerners. Educated better than uneducated?

I might disagree with someone, but their viewpoint is important to them and I respect that.

The real problem with this country is not racism, but classism. Thousands of inner city males can die from gun violence and no one cares. Kill a couple of suburban kids...now we MUST do something!!

[Zonkerbl]

STUPID GAT DAME IDIOT INCOMPETENT FRICKING FRICKING COWARDLY DEMOCRATS!!!! HOW CAN YOU FAIL TO PASS AN AMENDMENT THAT IS SUPPORTED BY A MAJORITY OF THE NRA????? WHY CAN'T YOU PUT THE PASSION INTO SAVING THE LIVES OF OUR CHILDREN AS YOU PUT INTO PROTECTING FRICKING MEDICARE????????

WHAT IS THE MATTER WITH THIS FRICKING COUNTRY??????

Here is a little secret..."All Politics is LOCAL". There is a reason why half the country voted for the "other" guy. Things that you hate....half the country is cheering. Politicians up for reelection in a non-presidential year are normally vulnerable...especially if they loose their 'A' rating with the NRA.

relax and take a deep breath

:facepalm:

[pineappleheadindc]

Poll are flawed, depending on how you frame the question.
I really want to know how the question was framed that reached 90%.
For example two questions on the same topic.
A. Based on the Conn massacre, are you for or against background checks that would have prevented the shooting?
B. Are you for background checks that would not have stopped the Conn shooting?

A number of polls:

Washington Post/ABC Poll, April 11-14. --- Link

Q: Would you support or oppose a law requiring background checks on people buying guns at gun shows or online?

Support: 86% Oppose: 13% Not Sure: 1%


Quinnapiac University Poll, April 4 -- Link

Q: Do you support or oppose - requiring background checks for all gun buyers?

Support: 91% Oppose: 8% Not Sure: 1%


CBS News Poll, March 21-24 -- Link

Q: Do you favor or oppose a federal law requiring background checks on all potential gun buyers?

Support: 90% Oppose: 8% Not Sure: 2%


Morning Joe/Marist Poll. March 25-27 --- Link

Q: Do you support or oppose legislation that would require background checks for private gun sales and sales at gun shows?

Support: 87% Oppose: 12% Not Sure: 1%


Quinnapiac University Poll, January 31, 2013 --- Link

Q: Would you favor or oppose requiring background checks on people buying guns at gun shows? (Asked specifically to Virginia registered voters)

Support: 92% Oppose: 7% Not Sure: 1%

Q: Would you favor or oppose requiring background checks on people buying guns at gun shows? (Asked specifically to New Jersey registered voters)

Support: 96% Oppose: 3% Not Sure: 1%

Q: Would you favor or oppose requiring background checks on people buying guns at gun shows? (Asked specifically to Pennsylvania registered voters)

Support: 95% Oppose: 5% Not Sure: 1%

[popper]

Inside baseball via the WSJ on what really led to the background check defeat.

http://newsbusters.org/blogs/ken-shephe ... rol-explai

[hands11]

I'm witnessing a complete failure/inability of the current US executive branch to create any level of bipartisan cooperation.

A leader unable or unwilling to find common ground, and create constructive communication between his/her opponents is a failure.

This administration has been the most incompetent US administration I've witnessed in my lifetime. Zero cooperation.

In a corporate setting, the CEO is tasked with fostering extensive/constructive communication amongst departments to help ensure success. If he/she fails at this task?

Fired.

Unfortunately the gang mentality of US politics has Obama administration supporters blaming republicans for "refusing to cooperate". There have been plenty of US presidents in my lifetime who have brokered sweeping legislation with their opposing party. In fact, most....

Do republicans share in the blame? Without a doubt, for whatever reason they can't stand to deal with the US President. The specifics we'll never fully know. One thing that is for certain, responsibility for a failing organization always finds its way to the leader/CEO.

History will not look kindly at this administration, or for that matter the past two administrations. Stubborn and pigheaded in their own despicable ways.....

What you are witnessing is the complete corporate takeover of our government as executed via the republican party. It is not Obamas fault. Obama has taken it to the people and the people are on his side. The Dems are on his side as well.

Because of the lobbing rules and Gerrymandering, the only way of getting anything passed is to either give in to them or vote them out of office. And because of Gerrymandering, they know voting them out of office isn't so easy so they are non responsive to what the public wants. They are dug in like ticks in your dogs ass.

We live in a minority controlled government system back by minority rules state representation.

Its going to take a huge turn out this midterm to take the house back so we can start to undo the damage they have done with Gerrymandering. The good news is, I think this will be the highest turn out midterm elections we have seems in 20 years.

[hands11]

Republicans didn't elect Obama.

Nicely played. Brilliant.

[hands11]

Indu appears to be ignoring the impact of gerrymandering and special interest money
politics when considering the ability of a Pres to sway members of the leg branch
to come over to his side, the personal animus of a large portion of the elected GOP
and the power of the RIGHT WING MEDIA. Yeah I said it. Actually lazy media would
be more accurate but the media is largely owned by huge corporations and that
has a major impact on the stories that are covered as well as the way what is
covered is discussed ie the bounds of acceptability.

(CNN) We'll have to leave it there...

or

Fox who's viewers are measurably more misinformed than viewers of other networks.

The NY Post acted like a tabloid magazine. Who the hell owns them.

[hands11]

.

I just want to ensure that I'm understanding your position. See illustration, below:





If that's correct, then yeah, I don't get that at all.

Dude, be kind. Bring out some grease while you are bending them over making your point.

See this is the problem. Its how blindly people get in their bubble think.

People are actually blaming the Dems who voted 90% for this instead of the 90% of Rs that voted against it ?

That is amazing logic.

But the reality is this. Both sides member who didnt vote for it are doing it for the same Macro and Micro reason. Its about control of the house and Gerrymandering. They have to win locally so the party can win nationally.

Reid voted in a way that this bill can come up again. It is not dead. Unlike those people that died.

Both sides are playing the long game. Its about the midterms and who controls the house and senate. The Dems in Red states are not going to weaken their hand because every single seat is going to matter when it comes to who controls the houses. That is the main game right now. Not this piece of legislation.

Rs are trying to hold onto their limited power and Dem are trying to kick their sorry asses out.

The votes cast paint the parties on the national stage. 90% Dems for it. 90% Rs against. See as 90% of America is for it, seems the Dems represent American. Now people have to go win their local races so the seat count allows congress to be representative of America. That is the tougher battle.

[popper]

First the gun bill, next the immigration bill. The way our leaders go about drafting legislation is comical.

First, convene a limited number of reps to become the all-powerful problem solvers (most of course have never held a private sector job in their entire lives) Second, draft legislation in secret. Third, introduce it in the Senate but limit debate and amendments so as to deprive other reps an opportunity to provide input. Fourth, rush it through to a vote before other reps, the media and the citizens get a chance to read and digest it. Fifth, blame whomever you can once the bill goes down in flames.

Or, the alternative - all of the above but the bill passes instead due to a blindly partisan super-majority and then sit back and watch as massive amounts of money go down the drain and the most intimate aspects of our lives become mere trading cards in the Leviathan's game of consolidated power.

[doclinkin]

Brilliant and funny takedown of anti marriage-equality fears. Wish we had a thoughtful and reasonable center-right representation in this country. Hell I wish we had a center right.

The youtube:

[YouTube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=XCA8CA2hUoQ[/YouTube]

grr: why is my youtube not embedding...

[Zonkerbl]

Some interesting data:

http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/cr ... a-table-11

[pineappleheadindc]

^
Well, at least I feel pretty safe that I won't be pushed out a window (statistically speaking).

[Zonkerbl]

Another "educating myself on gun control issues" link:

http://kontradictions.wordpress.com/201 ... -tell-you/

[pineappleheadindc]

.

I like charts. Posted without comment is a chart graphing data in the link Zonker just posted.

[nate33]

Another "educating myself on gun control issues" link:

http://kontradictions.wordpress.com/201 ... -tell-you/

Great stuff here:

I’m just going to submit this uncomfortable truth to both camps up front, with the vain hope that it will not sound callous:

Mass shootings are a tiny, tiny problem. Which isn’t to say that they aren’t utterly horrifying in more than one way. People’s lives are destroyed, both literally and figuratively. What I mean to say is that if we were to prioritize our political attention to topics according to how many lives were at stake, mass shootings wouldn’t even be on the radar.

Factoring in the rate of death caused by mass shootings from Columbine to the present (about 210 people in 13 years), it will be more than 300 years until we reach the number of casualties that occur from accidental drownings every single year in this country. In a little more than 150 years from now, we’ll approach the number of people who are poisoned to death every single year in this country. Sometime in 2014 we might surpass the number of people struck by lightning every single year in this country.

Which is to say that mass shootings are incredibly rare and don’t kill a lot of people when they do happen.

It is tempting to ask why accidental drowning is not 340 times more important a social issue than gun control. Or why poisoning isn’t 150 times as pressing a political issue. (If the number of people dying is truly what’s important, almost anything would be more pressing.) The problem is not hard to understand though, and rests in a psychological concept known as the “logical fallacy of misleading vividness”.

The fallacy of misleading vividness is when the thought, imagery or reality of something is so emotionally potent – positively or negatively – that you begin to overestimate the likelihood and frequency of its occurrence. This is why many people are afraid to fly. They can understand intellectually that crashes almost never happen, and that airplanes are statistically the safest way to travel, but the idea of being torn apart mid-air, or knowing that they’re about to die for a full two minutes in freefall, or being dragged under the ocean while stuck inside the cabin is so vivid and disturbing, that they actually experience intense fear about a process that is safer than their drive to the airport.

[fishercob]

nate, I hear what you're saying. It's very much an economist's point of view.

The thing is that it doesn't calculate the societal cost of the fear and anxiety caused by the relative frequency of mass shootings. I think if people don't feel safe and secure going about their business that there is a heavy societal price. I'm sure some PhD has tried to quantify it.