by Timothy Weisberg | Feb 4, 2013 | Blog
While Republicans are walking around on a crutch, Democrats are running marathons. When it comes to national issues–immigration, guns, taxes, spending–the Democrats are winning public support by a landslide. And while the Obama administration stands its ground on implementing more stringent gun control, the underlying issue remains an elephant in the room: mental illness.
Columbine, Virginia Tech, the recent shootings at Sandy Hook Elementary all had similar motives: the attacks were carried out by people suffering from severe mental illness. No sane person should believe one’s Second Amendment right to own a gun leads people to walk into an elementary school with an AR-15 and let loose. No sane person should reasonably believe, well, a sane person could carry out such heinous and despicable acts.
Even the term “assault” rifle is a misleading representation of the weapon, and ironically a reversal of “political correctness.” Yet the ultimate debate remains: the battle by some Democratic Senators to ban assault weapons and place limits on large-size magazines, and Republicans fighting back by arguing the ban would infringe on law-abiding citizens’ right to own a firearm.
We have tried prohibiting a multi-billion dollar industry from operating, and we all know how well Prohibition worked. Mexico, which has some of the strictest gun laws in the world, also is one of the most violent, run by drug cartels and filled with corruption.
Yesterday’s pictures showing President Obama skeet shooting should be enough evidence to point out that one’s right to own a firearm outweighs strict gun control for the very, very small proportion of the population that abuses this right.
According to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), 10,228 people died in drunk driving crashes in 2010, accounting for 31 percent of traffic-related deaths. We don’t see the GOP attempting to ban alcohol, so why should guns be treated any differently?
Tragedies occur every day. And tragedies are often obdurate, and impossible to prevent from happening or change in outcome. Banning high-capacity magazines and semiautomatic weapons only exasperates the problem, and prevention is miniscule, while Amendment rights’ violations are vast.
Maryland Gov. Martin O’Malley’s plan to push some of the strictest gun-licensing, ban assault weapons, and restrict visitor access to schools is a step in the wrong direction. Sure there is a need for tighter background checks and gun safety courses, as proper training should be required before owning a gun, but his plan also does little to address the problem of mental illness.
The question should be why people of mental illness with violent tendencies are not receiving more help. Why Seung-Hui Cho, the Virginia Tech shooter who went on a killing spree in 2007, was not a cause for concern after his bizarre behavior in class and often graphic, violent, and gruesome stories he wrote for an English class?
If there is a need to emphasize prevention, it begins with addressing mental illness. If there is a need to emphasize safety, place at least one armed police officer at every school. Paranoia and irrational thinking is one thing. Understanding a person’s Amendment rights and the elephant in the room is another.
Is the elephant that hard to find?
by Timothy Weisberg | Jan 30, 2013 | Blog
This time around, immigration reform is here to stay post-election. An all-in-one bill in the works as of Monday afternoon incorporates a systematic overhaul of current immigration laws, including a path to citizenship for the 11 million-plus illegal immigrants in the United States.
A compromise (for once) was made in the increasingly polarized political forum that is Congress: Democrats would get a single bill that does not deny any illegal immigrant from obtaining citizenship and Republicans relented on the condition that the policies not be implemented until there is a strong border enforcement in place.
Considered a major victory for Democrats, the bill also outlines proposals that will exempt children of illegal immigrants from many requirements for citizenship and allocate more visas for highly technical workers in fields like science, engineering and mathematics.
The overarching question is how and when a “stringent” border enforcement will be in place, or better yet, defined, under the new immigration bill that will be satisfactory enough to please Republicans.
The 2012 Presidential Election left many die-hard Republicans soul-searching, and looking for ways to reach the ever-diverse voters that were crucial for President Obama’s re-election campaign. And with nearly seven out of 10 votes by Latinos in support of Obama, Republicans knew they were being sold short by the ever-increasing minority masses.
Alluding to the loss of the Hispanic vote, Senator John McCain (R-Arizona) mentioned the importance of reaching out to Latino voters on issues that are historically contentious for that demographic: immigration.
“We can’t go on forever with 11 million people living in this country in the shadows in an illegal status,” McCain said Sunday on ABC’s “This Week With George Stephanopoulos.”
The idea of tackling immigration reform in one sweeping measure rather than in small bits and pieces exemplifies the effort for bipartisanship in Congress, something President Obama will almost certainly need in a Republican-dominated House.
Senator Marco Rubio (R-Florida), heralded by many as a likely Republican candidate for the 2016 election, agreed with the principles of the bill. In a recent Las Vegas Review-Journal column, Rubio outlined the need for changes to the agricultural workers and visa programs, the amount of border patrol personnel, and most importantly, illegal immigrants that are already in the United States.
While Rubio noted most illegal immigrants are not dangerous criminals, they should also not be painted as victims.
“They knowingly broke our immigration laws and do not have a legal right to remain here. But they are also human beings who made those choices in pursuit of a dream we recognize as the American dream,” he wrote.
Call it a Republicans’ change of heart. Call it progress. Immigration is one of many complex issues that creates a divisive GOP and short-sided Democrats and Republicans.
The reality is the pathway to citizenship is a long and arduous process. And with or without documents, many illegal immigrants are here to stay.
by Timothy Weisberg | Oct 30, 2012 | Blog
The third presidential debate was more of a gathering of knights at the round table than the pay-per-view boxing match of the second debate.
The third and final debate from Lynn University in Boca Raton, Fl. Oct. 22 focused on foreign policy (for the most part), as Romney played pacifist while the President continued to go on the offensive. In fact, moderator Bob Schieffer seemed more inclined to intervene during Obama’s character attacks than Romney.
This was certainly a stark shift from the second debate, where Romney often interjected and at one point claimed the President never classified the attack in Benghazi as a terrorist attack. Even moderator Candy Crowley interjected and informed governor Romney that Obama had in fact called the attack an “attack on terror” at a Sept. 12 press conference at the Rose Garden.
Yet Romney avoided any and all “Romneyisms;” there were no references to “binders full of women” or even his professed love for Big Bird. Rather, there was a stark role reversal of each candidate, whereby Romney emphasized fixing Middle East relations, closing the gap on gender equality, and a need for better education. The only stab at Obama’s foreign policy was stating that America “can’t kill our way out of this mess,” referring to Obama’s continual credit for ending the war in Iraq and taking out Osama Bin Laden.
And it was Obama who often had the snide comments up his sleeve. The most notable was when Romney criticized the spending cuts to the Navy, when Obama rebutted: “Well governor, we also have fewer horses and bayonets,” which produced laughs from the crowd, “because the nature of our military’s changed. We have these things called aircraft carriers, where planes land on them. We have these ships that go underwater, nuclear submarines.”
While Romney spoke softly, yet carried a big stick, Obama’s continual attacks on Romney’s character seemed, well, out of character and more personal than political. As opposed to domestic policy, foreign policy has some advantages for incumbents like Obama, who have experience to fall on when addressing issues such as Middle East relations. Obama can easily portray Romney as inexperienced, while Romney is unable to provide much detail about what could be done differently without any resume to fall back on.
Romney essentially had nothing to lose and all to gain in the final debate before the election. Romney has gained ground in recent polls, and the swing states in full motion, Romney could afford to play softball with the President, and turn his focus these last two weeks on the campaign trail in battleground states like Ohio, Iowa, and even Nevada. A Quinnipiac University/CBS News/New York Times poll last month had Obama ahead in Ohio by 10 points; that lead is now five percentage points, further tightening the race for key electoral votes in Ohio.
Forget a stalemate, this race could very well be a toss-up.
Notable things the candidates agreed on:
-Setting a deadline on the withdrawal of troops out of Iraq by the end of 2014
-The use of drones in Afghanistan to attack suspected militants
-Maintaining a strong relationship with Israel
-The liberation of women overseas
by Timothy Weisberg | Aug 21, 2012 | Blog
Representative Todd Akin is running for the Missouri Senate (Latinopost.com)
Never have I witnessed a single statement truly show the incompetence and ignorance of an individual, let alone a politician. But Rep. Todd Akin sure made it possible. When asked by a reporter if he would oppose abortion in instances of rape, the Missouri congressman implied that women cannot get pregnant unless it is a ‘legitimate rape.’
“It seems to me, from what I understand from doctors, that’s really rare,” Akin told KTVI-TV. “If it’s a legitimate rape, the female body has ways to try to shut that whole thing down. But let’s assume that maybe that didn’t work or something: I think there should be some punishment, but the punishment ought to be of the rapist, and not attacking the child.”
As opposed to an illegitimate rape? That’s the problem with some politicians these days. No matter how far they get backed into a corner, they will do literally anything to try and save face.
However, if you are so inclined to adhere to your pro-life position as to imply it is ‘really rare’ for women to get pregnant when raped, it’s time to reassess what you stand for.
Even Mitt Romney and his running mate, Rep. Paul D. Ryan of Wisconsin “disagree with Mr. Akin’s statement, and a Romney-Ryan administration would not oppose abortion in instances of rape,” according to Romney spokeswoman Amanda Henneberg.
There’s no sugar coating extenuating circumstances, and disregarding the physical and psychological harm done to women who are victims of rape is disheartening and unacceptable.
It took over 24 hours to hear a legitimate apology (yes this can be distinguishable) from Akin, who will not step out of the race for the Missouri senate despite the urging of his peers.
“The good people of Missouri nominated me, and I’m not a quitter,” said Akin. I guess Richard Nixon wasn’t a crook either, but that didn’t stop him from resigning as President during Watergate.
Call it a wrong choice of words or a brain fart; Akin has essentially ruined his campaign and put the Republican party under a deeper lens of the microscope that is politics. Yet instead of swallowing any pride that coincided with his run for Senator, Akin instead chooses stubbornness and resiliency at about the most inopportune time as his comments on abortion and rape.
And no matter how much Akin fights to salvage his campaign, you simply can’t un-bake a cake.
This is a car beyond repair, a scar that will never heal, and a hemophiliac’s worst nightmare: a wound that won’t stop bleeding.
Todd Akin on the Jaco Report
by Timothy Weisberg | Jul 27, 2012 | Blog
April 13, 2012
The Los Angeles Kings went from potential contenders to near pretenders, skating on thin ice into the playoffs as the eight-seed in the Western Conference.
Same story, different year. With two games remaining against the San Jose Sharks, the Kings were atop the Pacific Division and the three-seed. Three days later, they were the eight-seed, knocking themselves our of division title contention by blowing leads in consecutive games against the Sharks.
Problem is, Kings fans are used to not being able to fulfill lofty expectations. This is a Kings team that blew a four-goal lead in Game three of last year’s Western Conference quarterfinals. Truth is, the Kings haven’t won a playoff series since 2001, and appear to headed down the same bumpy road against the defending Western Conference champions, Stanley Cup runner-ups, and two-time defending President’s trophy winners: the Vancouver Canucks.
Maybe it was too much change. Firing Terry Murray before Christmas, adding forward Jeff Carter from the Columbus Blue Jackets at the trade deadline, or simply the unchanging notion the Kings have trouble getting pucks in the net.
One problem that can’t be undid: the lack of scoring. If the Kings are to have any chance against the Canucks, they need to hold 1-0 and 2-1 leads late in games. If the Canucks score three or more goals, expect another early exit.
The Kings have been shutout ten times this season, and two dozen times entered the third period trailing 1-0, tied 1-1, or down 2-1.
“We do have pressure on us,” Kings defenseman Drew Doughty told the LA Times. “But we have a little less pressure on us than a team like Vancouver. We’ve done well against them this season and we definitely think we can beat them. We don’t see ourselves as the underdog.”
Despite the politically correct response from Doughty, the Kings did split the season series with the Canucks, and injuries to each team’s front-line players will make the series interesting. The Canucks have been without Daniel Sedin for the past nine games, and the Kings’ Jeff Carter sustained a bone bruise March 28 and has sat out the last five games.
Fittingly enough, the last time the Kings played the Canucks, they lost 1-0 in Vancouver despite 38 shots on goal. Jonathan Quick versus Roberto Luongo.
Let the game of thrones begin. Kings fans have been waiting since 1968 to be “Kings.”
by Timothy Weisberg | Jul 27, 2012 | Blog
http://msn.foxsports.com/
Feb. 5, 2012
We can probably stop making the “Why Eli Manning isn’t an elite quarterback argument?” now after he secured his second defeat of the New England Patriots in as many Super Bowls.
That’s one more Super Bowl ring than his brother Peyton has, two more than his father Archie, and two rings to throw up a peace sign to Tom Brady and yell, “That’s twice buddy!”
Push come to shove, teams have to get hot at the right time. The Giants chose the most opportune time, the Green Bay Packers, the most inopportune time. It’s time to favor the Wild Card team, or the team who gets into the playoffs on the final game of the season.
The Las Vegas bookies have it all wrong: never trust the teams sitting their starters in weeks 16 and 17 and “prepping” for the playoffs. Complacency is the number one killer in sports, and living on the edge is what fuels the fire. Just ask the Macabees when lighting up a menorah.
2010 San Francisco Giants anyone? 2011 St. Louis Cardinals anyone? 2011 Green Bay Packers anyone? Need I say more?
So maybe this Super Bowl did not entail a football, David Tyree’s helmet, and a strip of Velcro, but it did feature an over-the-shoulder-tip-toeing-maintaining-possession-of-the-ball-while-falling-out-of-bounds catch that changed the complexion of the game (not to name any names but Eli Manning’s runner-up as Super Bowl MVP-if they had such an award-Mario Manningham.)
Brady even tried to reenact his own version of Manning to David Tyree, only to see linebacker Chase Blackburn jump in front of Brady’s intended target Rob Gronkowski. A linebacker who just sixth months ago was in the classroom with a piece of chalk and a ruler.
Wasn’t it just less than two months ago the Giants were up “that” creek without a paddle after a blowout loss to Washington, and sitting at 7-7 on the outside looking in?
Tally up Manning’s game-winning drives in the fourth quarter and overtime to seven. Seven come-from-behind wins in one season. Second to only Aaron Rodgers in fourth quarter QB rating, why is everyone so obsessed with Tim Tebow? Can’t you see Manning is out-Tebowing Tebow?
And for all you Patriots fans, don’t get all your “Bradys” in a bunch. An elite quarterback and leading a dynasty of the ages. Five Super Bowls in a little over 10 years, and three rings in four years during the 2000s.
But it takes an “Eli” to make an ELI-te quarterback.
