Linda Feldman, Gun Control, and Obama’s “State of the Union Address”

Above: Carolyn McCarthy tries to figer out which end is up.

On January 26, 20011, Linda Feldman, from “The Christian Science Monitor,” wrote that Obama should have addressed the issue of gun control in the 2011 State of the Union Address. She contends that the expired “Assault Weapons Ban” needs to be reinstated. Along with NY Congresswoman Carolyn McCarthy, (who doesn’t know the breech from the muzzle when it comes to guns and is writing a bill to ban high cap mags) I say she is a fool, who should spend some time researching what she is writing about.


Linda Feldman, either you are trying to stir the pot or you are clueless! Staff writer! Ah ha! Ha! I think your title is hilarious; only thing funnier could be “chief researcher!” Is idiocy contagious? And does CSM have a staff infection?

Do some research dunderhead! Duh! The 1994 Republican Party’s landslide election was largely attributed to Clinton’s gun ban. So let me try to grasp your thinking . . . Obama just jumped out of the fire and into the fryin’ pan during the midterm election, got burnt worse than Clinton in 1994, and now you expect him to jump back into the fire? Before he isn’t even re-elected? Yeah! I meant it just how it sounded!

As for the so called “assault weapons ban” you obviously didn’t read the specifics. The ban only applied to weapons manufactured after the date of the ban’s enactment. They didn’t, or couldn’t, nor wouldn’t go door to door and ask for everybody’s hi cap magazines. That’s a funny visual.

Go ahead; check it out on Wikipedia . . . its free even! A pistol grip, a muzzle brake, a telescoping stock, a detachable magazine, etc . . . . ; None of those things affect the operation of the weapon. All they do is make it look mean. The same damage could be done with an aesthetically pleasing lever or pump gun with a 10 round fixed tubular magazine.

P.S. Michael Bloomberg is an idiot with deep pockets! And MAIG (mayors against illegal guns), his pet project, is nothing more than an eminent front; they are a put on for political pandering! Just look at the attacks they make on “legal guns AND their OWNERS.” A gun is an inanimate object, the owner makes it illegal. So, it is the gun owner that needs to be held culpable, not the gun. Can you say “oxy-morons?”

And finally, like you, people perturb me when they don’t research both sides of the issue before running their mouths. IMHO, it makes you stupid and undeserving of the time I have spent to school you on your ignorance. That’s right! If you were dumb, you would have an excuse; but there is no excuse for ignorance! “A” is for apathy!


St. Louis County Prosecutor Bob McCullough in SEIUs Pocket!

Recall the summer of 2009?  Traditional values-loving Americans, all over the country were so shocked by the bailouts, cap and trade and other big government expansion programs that they took to the streets in numbers never seen before.  Liberals were shocked that the political right had figured out the playbook of the political left.  As the Congressional Summer recess got underway, leftist politicians found their town hall meetings packed to the rafters with angry people asking tough questions.  As the bloggers streamed the footage and America got a nearly daily dose of another Democrat politician getting hammered, it became clear that the left was unprepared.

Protesters were disparaged as “tea baggers” and Astroturf, but name-calling is not what they do in Chicago.  It might be over the top to say the President himself ordered the hit, but what about his people?  What he said of the conservative protestors is “If they are going to hit us, we will hit them back twice as hard “.  Within two days, a black man distributing patriotic flags and buttons, found himself struggling under a tremendous beating from as many as four separate assailants.  The Service Employees International Union members got the President’s message.  The SEIU members sporting their purple people beater shirts picked their first victim.  Perhaps most disturbing, the attack began with a black union member coming unglued on a black man who did not share his leftist political beliefs all the while calling him a “nigger”. Is this a hate crime?

It has been three months now, so what happened to the thugs?  Nothing.  Local Prosecutors appear to have taken a pass.  The St. Louis County Prosecutor is Bob McCullough.  The police report details a gang-style assault, resisting arrest, the arrest of a journalist for the major daily, the Post-Dispatch and the Prosecutor is claiming something between ignorance and lack of jurisdiction in the case.  So who has jurisdiction for such crimes?

In St. Louis County, an area holding the curious distinction of 92 separate municipalities within the boundaries, municipal prosecutors handle the traffic tickets, ordinance violations, and other minor offenses.  If the crime is committed in the County, but outside of any municipal boundaries, then police will usually hand the job to the County Counselor to be sure justice is done rather than hand it off to the County Prosecutor.  It appears that Prosecutor McCullough believes County Counselor Patricia Reddington should be handling the case.  One can wonder whether the police tried to give it to McCullough or if they took it directly to Reddington.  In any case, those who gang assaulted Ken Gladney walk the streets.  Why? 

Let Freedom Ring Obama

“The policies being proposed by the Obama administration are so radical across the board,” Cheney said. “Whether you’re a Republican or a Democrat, you want the nation to be strong and so many steps this president is taking are making the nation weaker.”

Read more:

A Fight, A Fight . . . Obama and the Right

boxing foxThink about this for a moment, regardless of whether a person voted for Obama or not, he is still the representative and envoy for all American citizens both domestically and abroad. So, whether he likes republicans or not, it is still his sworn duty to represent them and their best interests. For Anita Dunn, the White House Communications Director, to openly state that Fox News operates “almost as either the research arm or the communications arm of the Republican Party” is tantamount to her saying that the Obama administration is opposed to republicans. That statement in it self is biased, so you tell me, what is more sorry, a news organization that is partisan, or the president of the United States being partisan?


As for Fox news being an arm of the Republican Party, for certain they are center right as far as politics go. However, they are not far right of the center, like MSNBC is far left of center. On a regular basis, Fox news invites liberal commentators on their shows to repudiate the news they report. Sean Hannity, the most outspoken critic of Obama has Bob Beckel on his show nearly every night. Beckel, the former national campaign manager for Walter Mondale and a member of the Robert Kennedy’s 1968 campaign, is about as left leaning as they come. Likewise, on another segment of Hannity’s show, “The Great American Panel,” he usually employs a panel 3 people to respond to the issues of the day; most times two of them are democrats, although there are times when there is only one democrat, and yet sometimes I have seen three democrats on the panel.


Bill O’reilly’s, often refers to himself as an independent; I suspect he’s more conservative than liberal though. Either way his show is equally represented by both liberal and conservative views. He almost always leads off his 1 hour show with his “Talking Points;” he reports the events for the day, combined with his point of view, and then leaves it to the audience to make up their mind by stating firmly . . . “you decide.” After his talking points, he usually brings on a guest, letting them plug their book; sometimes they are liberals and sometimes conservatives, Nancy Grace being one of the well known liberal authors. Sometimes he interviews a conservative or liberal guest himself; and no matter the case, if he opposes their view, they get ripped a new one. Other times he moderates a two person panel, always representing equal sides of the political spectrum; Alan Colmes, a left leaning radio host is often a guest. Colmes was also a permanent fixture on Fox’s Hannity and Colmes during the 2008 Presidential Election, as a liberal counterpoint to Hannity’s conservatism. Of course, O’reilly invites conservative leaning Dennis Miller on his show pretty often, but he is more so there for entertainment value than actual political commentary, and he does not always agree with O’reilly either. Most everyone knows Miller is a comedian, so if you take him seriously, you may be doing so at your own peril.


I am not even going to try to defend Glenn Beck, other than to state that he is a self proclaimed libertarian, and that he often makes it aware publicly on his show that is not a journalist; but instead just an average everyday guy shedding light on little known facts that may otherwise go unnoticed. Nonetheless, he has a propensity to factually expose situations and circumstances that are of national significance. It is Glenn Beck’s goal to bring honesty and integrity back to our government officials and the political process. The fact that he has so many followers, does lead one to believe that he can’t be all wrong. Although he almost always cites the sources of his information, he encourages everyone to research the facts, and not to just take them for granted.


As for the rest of the Fox News Contributors, including Greta Van Susteran, they are mostly objective, fair, and balanced. And in some cases like Geraldo Rivera, a left leaning guy with his own show on Fox, they are public about their political ideology.


I do not see MSNBC or the other’s offering any conservative people their own show, so how can the government say Fox is 100% in the tank for the Republican Party? Especially when the likes of Keith Obeirman, Chris Matthews, Campbell Brown, Wolf Blitzer, Katie Curic, and others are walking around with “yes we did” stamped on their foreheads. Take note that, Dunn did not mention the innumerable news outlets that are in the tank for the Democratic Party. The more Anita Dunn and the all new Casa Blanca choose to bring this drama to the forefront of today’s issues, the more easy it is for people to recognize the truth about the Obama Administration; plain and simple they have an agenda to push, and whether or not the 47+% of people that didn’t vote for Obama like it, they are going to try to jam that agenda down their throat.

Obama Assassination Poll Posted on Facebook

Screenshot of Poll


Obama Assassination Poll Rocks Facebook


September 28th, 2009 | by Adam Ostrow

Politics and social media can sometimes be an explosive combination. But now, a poll posted to Facebook through a third-party application has gone so far as to draw the attention of the US Secret Service.

The poll, which has since been pulled, asked the question: “Should Obama be killed?” and offered users four multiple choice answers. According to Talking Points Memo, who obtained a screenshot of the poll, more than 750 users voted in the poll before it was pulled by Facebook.

Facebook, meanwhile, offered the following statement to Mashable:

“The third-party application that enabled an individual user to create the offensive poll was brought to our attention this morning. It was immediately suspended while the inappropriate content could be removed by the developer and until such time as the developer institutes better procedures to monitor their user-generated content. We’re working with the US Secret Service but they’ll need to provide any details of their investigation.”

Technically speaking, this isn’t much different than what we sometimes see with third-party ad networks violating Facebook’s policies and misusing member photos (creating plenty of confusion, myself included). In this case, it appears a user of a third-party app launched a poll that was able to spread relatively quickly and create at least a small national security concern before being pulled.

At this point, it’s unclear whether the poll will result in further action being taken against the developer or the individual that created it, but it does highlight a significant challenge for Facebook. With more than 350,000 applications on its platform, the company can’t possibly be expected to police everything, and most users probably wouldn’t want them to.

But it seems something is being lost in translation between Facebook, its developers, and users of applications, in spite of continued efforts to improve and clarify platform policies. Should Facebook be doing more, or has it simply reached a scale that abuse is something the site is going to continue to have to deal with as it happens? Share your thoughts in the comments.




Is It Time To Boycott Hollywood?

 I’ve two points to make: first, and foremost, how is it that a multimillionaire, who has a degree in sports casting, can walk a mile in my shoes? Ferrell did not exactly grow up poor; his dad was the keyboard player for the righteous brothers. I only wish some of that righteousness would have rubbed off on him, as his video is not exactly righteous for the many reasons listed in the comments section of Dave Cook’s article, “Will Ferrell Attacks Insurance Execs.” The other point I wanted to make is that in general, if you make more than ten grand a year, you pay taxes, the amount varies, however 30% of a year’s earnings is a pretty common. That 30% does not include property taxes and sales tax. Making healthcare mandatory and/or implementing fines for not having healthcare is essentially adding more taxes. So if we need to pay out another 10% of earnings, whether you’re 20 years old and fit as a fiddle or not, you will only be keeping 60% of your earnings. Add in another $1500 in property taxes and we then keep 55%. This is unacceptable. As for Ferrell, I advise him to look around at his surroundings; arguably, Oprah is losing her fan base, because of her political pandering, this should be an eye-opener for Hollywood types. We, the people who make or break celebrities, don’t want to hear your manurish ramblings. I’m like a freaking elephant, and I do not forget. The list of movie and TV personalities that I will not support, and vehemently oppose in public circles when they are introduced in conversation, just keeps growing and growing. I don’t mind that celebrities have an opinion, but theres no need to jam your opinion down the throats of those without one. I have no use for knuckleheads like Madonna, Matt Damon, Scarlett Johansson, Ben Affleck, Bill Maurer, Jessica Alba, Ryan Phillippe, John Legend, Anthony Kiedis, Taye Diggs, Kate Walsh, Steven Spielberg, Tom Hanks, Tobey Maguire, Edward Norton Jr., Morgan Freeman, Ben Stiller, Jeffrey Katzenberg, David Geffen, Will Smith, Chris Rock, Sean Penn, and the one that hurts me most, as I used to be such a big fan, Eddie Murphy; I refuse to watch them on the big screen or TV. Advertisers, should take heed as well, as it affects their bottom line when they use these pompous windbags. Do us all a favor Hollywood; keep your effer-vescing pie holes shut. Mr. Ferrell, and company, welcome to my black list!


 By Dave Cook | 09.22.09

The battle over health care reform took to the web Tuesday, as comedian Will Ferrell and a group of other Hollywood stars released a sarcastic video mocking health insurance executives and pitching the need for a publicly-run health insurance option.

The video was released by Ferrell’s video website “Funny or Die” and by the liberal political group

“Humor can serve as a powerful reminder to Americans about what exactly is at stake” Justin Ruben, executive director of, said in a statement.

Tongue in cheek

The video opens with Jon Hamm, star of TV’s “Mad Men,” saying, “Something terrible is happening.” Ferrell explains the terrible thing is that “health insurance executives are getting a bum rap.” Stars including Olivia Wilde of “House,” Masi Oka of “Heroes,” Donald Faison of “Scrubs,” and Linda Cardellini of “ER,” offer the tongue in check admonition that “we need to remember who the real victims are – health insurance executives.”

Ferrell sarcastically asks, “So why is Obama trying to reform health care when insurance companies are doing just fine making millions of dollars of profit?”

The video continues with an actor saying, “Insurance companies need our support because they keep our selfish priorities in check when we can’t.”

And Ferrell returns to the screen to say, “Insurance companies are detailed enough to reject claims for things like typos. If you spell something wrong, do you really deserve surgery? I don’t think so.”

Pitching the public option

The video closes with a slide urging viewers to “Call Congress: tell them we need a strong public health insurance option.”

The video hit the web on the same day the Senate Finance Committee began hearings on Chairman Max Baucus (D) of Montana’s draft health care reform legislation. The so-called chairman’s mark dos not include the public health insurance option Ferrell and his colleagues are pushing.

But Baucus did announce Tuesday several new measures to make health insurance more affordable for working families, including increased subsidies for lower income families, limits on additional charges insurance companies can impose on older workers, and lower penalties on those who defy rules requiring them to buy insurance.

Republicans attacked the plan, with Sen. Jon Kyl, R-Ariz., saying the legislation was a “stunning assault on our liberty.” He cited several provisions to strengthen the government’s role in health care.



If it were me writing the story, the headline would be: “ACORN Gives Legitimate Charities Black Eye.” As a journalist it would be my goal to give these guys a black eye. I applaud the efforts of those who have brought the truth to light, it needed doing for more than one reason. First, and foremost they manipulated the people who actually paid them membership dues; by embezzling from there own organization. Then, there is the consideration that ACORN intimidated politicians and manipulated the banking & housing industry, by barging into and disrupting private board meetings and blocking egress to banks in order to promulgate home loans for those who didn’t meet the financial requirements. And last, but not least, they duped all of America by misusing it’s tax dollars and promoting fraud. ACORN, in its entirety, needs to be dismantled; they should not be allowed to continue in any capacity. The good part of their demise is that the crooked political machine lost an ally due to these shenanigans, and that might be the organization’s biggest contribution to society yet!

CHICAGO — Stung by the recession and a string of scandals, the ACORN community activist organization has found itself shutting down in many of the communities it once worked to empower.

Brian Kettenring, a spokesman for the national organization, said that no new clients were being signed up while the group did an internal investigation into how business is conducted.

The freeze comes as ACORN has been closing offices across the nation. The organization has shuttered 40 percent of its centers over the last two years, dropping from its high of 105 offices two years ago, he said.

Dozens of branches, which helped low- and middle-income clients with housing, jobs and navigating government aid programs, have been closed, including those in Chicago, Salt Lake City, Atlanta and Omaha, Neb.

Kettenring said the closures were mostly due to the poor economy and had become more frequent in the last year. “We’re seeing the same challenges the entire nonprofit sector is seeing,” he said.

But former ACORN members say the scandals that have recently dogged the organization — including allegations of mismanagement and voter registration fraud — have been a bigger problem.

In the latest controversy, ACORN workers in several cities, including New York, Baltimore and Washington, were secretly videotaped giving advice to two conservative activists who posed as a prostitute and her pimp and said that they wanted to buy a house and run it as a brothel with teenage girls. Workers were recorded giving advice on how to evade taxes and conceal the nature of their business.

The appearance of the videos last week on a Fox News program set off a furor. The U.S. House voted this week to deny all federal funds for ACORN, while state lawmakers in California, Georgia and Minnesota called for investigations or a cutoff of state funds.

“When you have this big of a mess, it takes time to clean up and your funders drop like flies,” said Madeline Talbott, a former head organizer for ACORN’s operations in Illinois.

ACORN’s Chicago office closed in January 2008, when Talbott — along with 365 community members, the local ACORN board and at least a dozen paid staff members — quit the organization over concerns of mismanagement and a lack of financial transparency at the group’s national headquarters.

“I feel so torn about what’s happening now,” said Talbott, who today is an organizer with Action Now, an advocacy group for the poor in Chicago. “I’m so relieved not to be part of the organization any more, and so sad because they are trying to clean things up.”

Founded in Arkansas in 1970, ACORN advocates for higher minimum wages, easier access to affordable housing and bolstering voter registration in low-income communities.

It has been a top target for conservatives because of its liberal, grass-roots agenda. President Barack Obama worked as an attorney for the group in the early 1990s.

The organization mobilized a get-out-the-vote effort to support Obama’s presidential bid last year, but it was tainted when nearly one-third of the 1.3 million new voters the group registered were rejected.

Last week, authorities in Miami announced the arrests of 11 former registration canvassers on allegations that they had submitted nearly 200 falsified forms.

Later this month, a preliminary hearing is scheduled in Nevada, where state prosecutors have accused ACORN and two former top officials of using an illegal incentive system to motivate people registering voters just before the heated 2008 presidential election.

ACORN officials blame such woes on a conservative push to force the organization out of business.

Amy Schur, ACORN’s head organizer for California, acknowledged that the organization has had a tough year but said that the state’s 12 offices would survive. Membership is up and funding has been stable, she said.

“Our organization is under attack,” she said. “But we’re going to come out of this just fine.”

Schur said the decentralized nature of ACORN ensures that if an office in one part of the country founders, it won’t necessarily affect those in the rest of the country.

Still, Schur said, she has taken steps to quell any public uneasiness. Schur said the organization has hired an independent auditor to review the finances of the state’s programs and will require more staff training.

John Atlas, a writer who just completed a book about the history of ACORN, said the recent scandals had brought “overwhelming bad publicity” to the organization.

“The brand is tainted,” Atlas said. “This is going to make it harder for them to recruit new members, to get foundation funding and get funding for voter registration.”

But Atlas said ACORN had weathered a lot in its history, and he predicted that the organization would emerge from the scandals smaller but intact.

“They may have to shrink back; they may have to rebrand,” he said. “They’ll be smaller, but they’ll survive.”

Latrell Smith, a former ACORN worker in Chicago and now an organizer for Action Now, said the scandals had been sobering and infuriating

In his current job, he is more cautious when talking with families that approach him for help.

“I joined ACORN because I wanted to make a difference in my community,” Smith said. “Before the videos came out, I could never have imagined something like that happening in ACORN.”

Now, he said, “I wonder if we could be next.”

Los Angeles Times staff writers Huffstutter reported from Chicago and Linthicum from Los Angeles. Times staff writer Ashley Powers in Las Vegas contributed to this report.