Yesterday evening I was on AC360 to discuss the Arizona Tragedy with David Gergen and Roland Martin. While I personally like Gergen, his knowledge of Arizona’s gun laws and invalid premises on conceal carry were a disservice to our discussion. He presupposes that Jared Lee Loughner was a CCW permit holder, and thus, right to carry failed, which, to all knowledge Loughner did not possess a permit, a violation of AZ law.

More on the role of conceal carry in a bit. I’ve seen many are making the case that just “anyone” with mental illness can buy a gun and that Arizona’s “relaxed” gun laws contributed to the Arizona tragedy because a mentally ill individual was allowed to legally purchase a firearm and we can’t just have mentally ill people buying guns. No, we can’t, which is why Arizona has a law about this. AZ law expressly states that due to their prohibited possessor stipulation, anyone proving a danger to themselves or others pursuant to court order is not allowed to purchase a firearm.

Under Arizona law, prohibited possessor are defined in ARS 13-3101 which states:

7. “Prohibited possessor” means any person:

(a) Who has been found to constitute a danger to himself or to others or to be persistently or acutely disabled or gravely disabled pursuant to court order under section 36-540, and whose right to possess a firearm has not been restored pursuant to section 13-925.

Had campus security and his parents followed up with proper treatment and reported his actions, he, from what it sounds, would have been an easy PP and unable to buy a weapon. Had the Sheriff’s office acted upon what is suggested as their advanced knowledge of Loughner’s troubled history, they may have obtained a warrant and confiscated his firearm – or apprehended him before he bought it. Of course, this simply assumes that Loughner was only motivated to cause harm because he was in possession of a firearm and presupposes that the firearm was an accessory motivator and rules out for certain that Loughner would never have attacked anyone with, say, a knife, bat, or any other weapon.

The problem isn’t the fallacy that Arizona’s law failed – Arizona’s law, like every law, can only work if followed. Prohibited possession can only work if if troubled individuals are reported to authorities so that the existing laws can be applied to them and, in this case, prevent them from purchasing firearms.

Many are also targeting Arizona as a right to carry state, saying that concealed carry is a “loosening” of the laws and that it contributed to the AZ tragedy. I’m not sure if concealed carry records are public in Arizona, but considering that Loughner broke the law by killing people, I’m going to make a logical deduction here again and say that he likely didn’t obtain a CCW permit, either. Open carry is legal in Arizona and he could have openly carried his weapon just as easily as illegally concealing it.

As far as arguing against conceal carry, something else as well: statistically, states which adopt CCW laws see a dramatic crime reduction.

(more…)

Christine O’Donnell over Mike Castle, Carl Paladino over Rick Lazio… the conventional-wisdom scalps pile up. And yet the media continues to grasp at straws in the desperate hope that their beloved Democrat Party (whose tremendous legislative accomplishments simply haven’t yet been appreciated by the ignorant troglodytes out there in the dark) will somehow pull this out in November.

CNN was particularly egregious, offering the distressed RINO David Gergen, the ineffably biased Kate Zernike of the New York Times, former Clinton hack Paul Begala, and a surprisingly bland John Ridley, with only Erick Erickson making any sense at all of the latest wave of the coming tsunami. It’s saying something that the most perspicacious commentator of the evening was Chris Matthews over at MSNBC, who knows an electoral train wreck when he sees it coming down the tracks. (more…)

Tea Party Patriots, rejoice! With enemies like Michael Kinsley, who needs friends?

Read between the sneering lines of Kinsley’s May 18th column in The Atlantic and you may just find an unintended love-letter to the very Tea Party Patriots he so desperately would like to torpedo. In fact, Kinsley’s blindness to the movement’s power is a proxy for the entire Democratic party’s colossal blindness to the tsunami about to drown it out of office this November.

Kinsley’s sneer begins with the headline: “My Country, Tis of Me.” (Because no party ever acts in its own self-interest.)

The overarching purpose of Kinsley’s Tea Party obituary is the left’s standard 3M approach: moralize, marginalize, minimize. It’s done through a series of disinformation volleys. Here are Kinsley’s primary distortions.

The Tea Party Is Right-Wing.

Kinsley launches his first Scud: “The right-wing populist Tea Party movement has politicians of both parties spooked.” The most important word in this sentence is “right-wing.” The Winston Group’s three surveys conducted from December to February showed that while 57% of the Tea Party are Republicans, four in ten are Democrats and independents. The majority of the Tea Party is right-wing, but it is far from monolithic and hence representational of more than a fringe right segment of the country. (more…)

Last night on Anderson Cooper 360, there was a political panel discussion that focused on the growing doubts over whether racial epithets had, in fact, been hurled at members of the Congressional Black Caucus on the day of the Health Care vote in Washington, D.C.  The segment led with video of Andrew Breitbart repeating his offer of $100,000 to be donated to the United Negro College Fund if anyone provides video and audio proof of the alleged event.

The exchange that follows is notable for a handful of reasons.  First, the way Cooper frames the subject and introduces the discussion:

COOPER:  On March 20th, near the end of the bitter health care debate, Representative John Lewis, Andre Carson, Emanuel Cleaver say that some demonstrators, many of them Tea Party activists, yelled the “n” word as the Congressmen walked from House office building at the Capitol…

… Roland (Martin, CNN Political Analyst), what about that? I mean, if — if this happened, you would think there would be video by now. Does that — the fact that it is still being discussed. Is that a win for the Tea Party?

This is a new direction for CNN, which is desperately trying to reposition itself between Fox and MSNBC as the “objective” alternative, as well as other news outlets.  Until recently, the “N-word” slur has been reported as engraved-in-stone fact.  Now, the discussion is no longer about the alleged racism of the activists as much as it is about the validity of the charges. (more…)

Investigative Reporters & Editors (IRE) has announced their annual awards for investigative journalism.  I’m sure you’ve already guessed the winner in the “On-line” category.   Of course, it was a tough call for them.  The competition was stiff:

• Big Hollywood’s expose of the NEA Conference Call story which led to a resignation in shame and stern guidance from the White House.

• The blockbuster revelation of the bogus science behind global warming policy which led to the resignation of the UN’s chief climate policy maker.

• James O’Keefe and Hannah Giles’ undercover investigation of ACORN which led to their losing government funding and eventually to their bankruptcy and complete collapse

Hard to pick among those great stories, isn’t it?  But, the sober and experienced judges at IRE have finally announced their winner: (more…)

The day after the federal government hijacked one-fifth of the U.S. economy in order to give health insurance to unemployed 26-year-olds was a giddy day for CNN’s Rick Sanchez. The 3 p.m. EDT host for the low-rated cable news network couldn’t contain  excitement for the healthcare hijack that had just taken place in Washington.

Sanchez gave us 25 minutes of non-stop gloating from supporters of the healthcare take-over. Sanchez gave us Obama, Biden, Pelosi, more Obama, Biden’s over-the-top and profane characterization that this is a really big deal, more Obama, Ted Kennedy’s widow telling us this is a really big deal, more Obama and a really long pen-signing ceremony to celebrate the occasion. We also got some yucking-it-up moments from Democratic members of Congress telling the President they had cast some tough votes on a really big issue.

Then Sanchez gave us Analysis 101 with David Gergen and another reporter, conversing with him on how the Republicans keep talking about over-turning the legislation but the reality is they won’t be able to do it. Sanchez assured us that he knew it was all talk – and that it couldn’t be done. When Gergen tried to bring up the fact that public opinion was on the Republicans’ side as evident by the most recent poll showing a large number of Americans were not pleased with the takeover, Sanchez jumped in to say that in his humble opinion: (more…)

David Broder is known as the “Dean of the Washington press corps,” but it can more accurately be said that he’s the “David Gergen of the Washington press corps:” the apostle of conventional wisdom/custodian of institutional memory/protector of Democrat Party interests/and non-rocker of the boat.

Broder is the kind of journalist who facilitates the smooth operation of the rackets, the scribe who keeps the rubes out there in Flyoverland thinking that the game isn’t rigged, that somebody inside the Beltway takes those noble words inscribed on the D.C. buildings and monuments at face value, and that here in America the people — not the powerful — rule.

Which is why he could hardly let slide his Post colleague Dana Milbank’s astonishing act of lèse majesté against the Emperor Hussein in the form of this extraordinary paean to the genius of Obama hatchet man Rahm Emanuel, which included these gems:

Obama’s first year fell apart in large part because he didn’t follow his chief of staff’s advice on crucial matters. Arguably, Emanuel is the only person keeping Obama from becoming Jimmy Carter. (more…)

You know you’ve just had a bad day when the apostle of Washington Conventional Wisdom, David “Teddy Kennedy’s seat” Gergen puts on his serious mien (does he have any other?) and pronounces upon the weighty matters of the day.

Yes, when Gergen speaks, people not only listen — they’ve already heard it all before!  In fact, it’s what everybody else is already thinking!  By the time it gets to Gergen’s lips, God long ago changed the channel to re-runs of Happy Days.

So what do you think?  How did POTUS do, sans TOTUS — commanding college professor (okay, “senior lecturer”) or tongue-tied, smirking, classless community organizer?  Mr. Smile and a Shoeshine, or an anxious, cantankerous former wonder boy/palooka who can’t figure out why this particular fight wasn’t properly fixed by David “Jake Lingle” Axelrod, like all his others? A strike, or a gutter ball?

(more…)

The Democrats and their activist old media are running in circles and working themselves into pretzels trying to define the “Tea Party” movement. It can be quite entertaining to watch.  They really have no idea what is happening right in front of their eyes. The media would have an easier time reading Mandarin Chinese than they would deciphering the signs at a Tea Party rally.

You could argue that they don’t want to understand what they are seeing because that means they would have to admit that Democrats have lost the beloved grass roots that they claim to have had forever, and I would not disagree. But, for the moment, let’s just say that they are really trying hard to figure this out and it’s just not sinking in to their brilliant Ivy League minds.

Let’s give them a little hint:

Sunday on Meet the Press, Dee Dee Myers, the former Clinton press secretary, took a stab at defining the Tea Party movement. “I’m not sure exactly where this is going….is it a third party, is it part of the Republican Party?” (more…)

Headlines like the ones below tell the story:

“Democrats point fingers after stunning loss”

“GOP Win in Mass. Puts Dems on Offensive – Scott Brown’s Surprise Senate Victory Has Democrats Scrambling to Regain Footing”

“GOP Senate Victory Stuns Democrats”

“In Stunning Upset, GOP’s Brown Wins Mass. Seat“

Etc.

In one sense, yes, Scott Brown’s victory over Martha Coakley was stunning: In the bluest of blue states in the bluest region of the nation, voters rejected the Democrats’ — and Obama’s — agenda, sending a Republican to the Senate whom they hope will help stem the waves of left-wing socialism upon which our president, accompanied by a majority in Congress, has been bodysurfing since he came to office, despite campaigning as a moderate who would govern from the center. (more…)

The special election in Massachusetts on Tuesday for the open Senate seat once held by Teddy Kennedy is the hottest political story of the day. The race is so close that no one is sure who will win but signs are starting to point to a Republican Scott Brown’s victory. And it doesn’t help when Patrick Kennedy, son of the late Lion, doesn’t even know Coakley’s first name.

Cue the Associated Press with a Saturday puff piece on Democrat Martha Coakley that tries to sell her as an “historic candidate” perhaps in order to help push her over the top just before the polls open on Tuesday.

Written by Steve LeBlanc, the AP headlined its piece, “Coakley Hopes for Historic Win in Kennedy Seat Bid.”  The subtitle explains why her candidacy is “historic.” It reads: “Coakley aims to hold off GOP surge for Kennedy seat, become 1st woman elected senator in Mass.”

What puffery. The days when it was noteworthy that a woman was elected to high office are long past. For decades we’ve had women elected in just about every position in politics from the city and state level all the way to the highest offices. In fact, the only two jobs that have yet to see a female elected to them are president and vice president, though we have had credible candidates for both. For all else, women have long since shattered the glass ceiling. So, how “historic” could it be that we might have yet another elected female Senator? Aren’t there several female senators now serving? Of course there are – 16 of them, in fact. (more…)

Michael Kinsley, the former editor of Slate, once defined a gaffe as what happens when a politician inadvertently blurts out the truth.  But what about when a card-carrying member of the MSM does the same thing?

David “advisor to presidents” Gergen is perhaps the most conventional of the conventional-wisdom purveyors in Washington.  To paraphrase Mary McCarthy on Lillian Hellman, every word that comes out of his mouth is a cliche, and that includes “the,” “but,” and “and.”  Almost nothing he says is ever original, insightful or thoughtful, although he delivers his empty phrases in a professorial honk that seems to convey authority.  If you want to know what everybody else within the Beltway is thinking, Dave is your go-to guy.

So that’s why this clip from last night’s debate between Scott Brown and Martha Coakley, competing in a special election next week for the open Massachusetts Senate seat, and moderated by Gergen, is fascinating.  Watch it first, then we’ll discuss:

It’s not the Kennedy’s seat, and it’s not the Democrats’ seat.  It’s the people’s seat.

If, against overwhelming odds, given Massachusetts’ political proclivities (number of Republicans in the state’s congressional delegation: zero), Brown can wrest the open Senate seat from Ted Kennedy’s cold, dead hands, he’s not only going to send a message to the nation that Obamacare is doomed, and probably the Democrats next fall as well.  He’s also sending a message to the Democrat-Media Complex. (more…)