NPR Bingo

It’s time for Shot In The Dark’s new game, “NPR Bingo”.

The challenge is this: listen to NPR.

The game is this: Every time you hear one of the phrases below, mark off the square.

When you get a five in a row or four corners, you “win”.

Story on”Soccer catching on in Minnesota“Comedian” who isn’t in the least bit funny. Tribal drumming. Ironic Farfisa
organ music.
Reference to
Climate Change
A story on “hate” using the SPLC as a source. Interviewee who proclaims self a “Queer Woman of Color” Climate Change reference in a
story about
Florid Spanish
by non-Spanish-speaking
Story about a
Political story
using “reporters”
from Vox, 
Buzzfeed, Media
or Huffington
Post with implied
assumption that they do 
represent “the
(Or rerun of an “Aspen Ideas
Festival” piece
for filler. Same
Movement” in a story not related to sexual
More than three stories about
the border in an
news story;
“Context” =
chanting point.
“Queer Woman of Color”
reference in
story not about
sexuality or
Air staffer with
pronunciation of his/her name.
Reference to
Climate Change in a story about sports
Upper middle
class white Ivy
League graduate
reviewing a
hip-hop record.
A news piece
featuring Larry
Sabado (or,
locally, Larry
Continuing to
refer to the
Movement” as
a sustained,
organic thing.
Reference to
Climate change
in a restaurant

Keep us posted.


Joe Doakes from Como Park emails:

The governor of Virginia explained that a proposed law would allow a woman to give birth to her baby, then decide whether to kill it.  A “post-birth” abortion.  Aside from the fact that killing babies is what Kenneth Gosnell went to prison for, why only the mother? Why isn’t the father involved in the decision to kill the child?
In the past, the “women-only” argument was that a woman’s body should be free from government intrusion.  Government shouldn’t have the power to force her to carry a child, and neither should anybody else.  That’s involuntary servitude, a fancy of saying sexual slavery, which is evil.  Plainly, the woman is the only person with a right to decide what happens to her body, including whether to terminate the pregnancy by abortion.
But under the proposed law, the carrying is done.  The baby is out of her body.  No slavery involved.  So why should only the woman get to decide whether the baby lives or dies? Why isn’t the father involved?  For that matter, why isn’t the baby involved?   Who speaks on behalf of the living, breathing, child lying on the table?  Shouldn’t there be someone appointed to defend the child’s rights including the most fundamental right of all – the right to be alive?  
Serious flaws in the logic of the proposed law. Send it back for more work.

To be fair, it was never about logic.

The Flow

Joe Doakes from Como Park emails:

Ivoprop is a respected brand of ultralight propellers.  They have a great reputation.  The founder has an even better story.

Nobody ever flew one the other direction to escape from capitalist Austria into socialist Czechoslovakia.  Lesson for Ilhan and AOC in there, somewhere.

Somewhere, somehow, I’m pretty sure either Ilhan and AOC got it in their head that someone did, or they know that nobody in their voting pool would check them on it if they said “as many people fled east as west”.

Minnesota “progressives” aren’t that curious or critical.

It’s Technically Only Satire If It’s Not 100% True

SCENE: Mitch BERG is shopping for a new casserole trivet for his Instant Pot (C) when MyLysa SILBERMAN, Reporter for National Public Radio’s Saint Paul bureau covering the “Fake News” and “Diversity” beats, rounds the corner.

BERG: Er…Ms. Silberman.

SILBERMAN: [visibly searching for name] . Er – hello, Merg.

BERG: So – any comment about the allegations against Ralph “Satchmo” Northam?

SILBERMAN: In these inflammatory situations and divided times, it’s a journalist’s responsibility to make sure they get the facts straight.

BERG: OK. So – Brent Kavanaugh…

SILBERMAN: [Abruptly screams, face red with rage] WE ALWAYS #BELIEVEWOMEN, YOU SON OF A BITCH!!!

BERG: Huh. So – Democrat governor Northam…

SILBERMAN: [Abruptly calm again] Get the facts…

BERG: Northam, Ellison, Clinton…

SILBERMAN: [Abruptly calm again] We can’t report a story where we’re not absolutely sure…

BERG: The Covington kids..


BERG: Right. So I’ve predicted that the media will declare Northam “rehabilitated” within the year.

SILBERMAN: Rehabilitated from what?

BERG: Er…yeah. Exactly.


Hostile Takeover

Joe Doakes from Como Park emails:

When private health insurance was unable to provide uniform affordable coverage, Congress had no choice but to take it over through Obama-care.  The success of that program proves the principle is sound: government must do what private industry can’t do.
Thousands of people are without electricity during dangerously cold weather.  Private power companies have demonstrated they are incapable of providing uniform affordable coverage.  Congress has no choice but to take over the electrical industry. This is right in line with Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez’ socialist philosophy, she’s the logical choice to introduce the legislation.  Government, not private business, is the only way to ensure prompt and efficient delivery of essential services to women and minorities, whatever the weather might be
In other news, the Post Office isn’t delivering mail today.  Mn/DOT pulled its snowplows off the road.  St. Paul schools are closed and it’s mandatory recycling program is suspended.  Government workers cannot promptly and efficiently deliver essential services because of the weather. 
Hmm, maybe we should revisit the concept of government taking over private businesses?  Do we really expect union government employees to be climbing power poles in the howling freezing wind in the dead of night?  Would that idea work any better than Obama-care or its inevitable successor, Kamela-care?
Whatever those guys on the power poles make (and they’re almost all guys), it’s not enough.  Whatever those gals in Congress make (and the goofy ones are almost all gals), it’s too much.

I for one am so happy I’ve got private-sector power. Although it’s a private monopoly in the area, so it’s not quite free market…

Someone Give This To Ron Latz

Remember that quip you get from every bobbleheaded liberal when you remind them that the Second Amendment is supposed to be about defending freedom against tyranny?

“What?”, they inevitably respond, “you’re going to fight at tank with your AR15?” (No, I won’t have to, because if the government comes for the guns, it’ll be the AR15s and the tanks against the progressives with their protest signs. But I digress).

The question about whether tyranny in Venezuela will, to paraphrase Mick Jones, will stay or go, is partly about socialist power politics, partly about manipulation of mobs…

…and mostly about who’s got the guns.

Military defectors say it’s also all about guns.  The military apparently doesn’t have any, or at least access to them, despite the massive arms sales from Russia that Venezuela’s socialist regime has spent its oil bounty on. [Former soldier] Hidalgo Azuaje added: “We’re not saying that we need only US support, but also Brazil, Colombia, Peru, all brother countries, that are against this dictatorship.”
The military men are pleading for arms.  They’ll take care of the job, they say, if they have the tools to do it.
Recall that when Venezuelan soldiers mutinied in the area of Petare earlier this month, their priority also was seizing weapons.
It does suggest that a penurious armed force with no access to weapons is the problem.  Apparently, not even the soldiers are trusted with guns by the dictatorship.  The Maduro regime is starting to arm gangs as a means of checking the military.  They trust gangs and thugs, but not responsible military men with guns, and seem to have disarmed them

It’s worth noting that Hugo Chavez – whose death let to Maduro and his clacque ineriting and extending their absolute power – got his start as a paratrooper in the Venezuelan army. So the regime knows what it needs to defend against.

When Brazil’s new government instituted a right to keep and bear arms for Brazilians, it wasn’t entirely about street crime.

Totalitarian dictatorship has been described as “a boot on your face, forever”. A monopoly on firepower is what makes it possible to keep that boot there, unmolested.

Your Symbol

So the police roll up to a house, and the woman meets them out at the curb with two black eyes and a face puffed up from having been punched a couple times. 

The guy comes to the door in a, er wife beater (don’t look at me, I don’t invent these terms) without a scratch on him except for scraped knuckles with smears of blood up and down his fingers. 

Asked what happened, the guy responds “Sheprovoked the whoooole thing!”

How do you think that’s gonna play with the cops, the prosecutors, and a jury? 

Not well, most likely. Whatever the “provocation” may have been, it’d be pretty absurd to presume it warranted beating someone purple. It’s kind of a no-brainer. 

This past week, I’ve heard some people I otherwise have reason to believe are serviceably intelligent – who, in reference to the Covington flap, say “the MAGA cap is, itself, a provocation!” that warrants all manner of mayhem against people who wear them. 

I’m not big into wearing paraphernalia for political campaigns, even those I completely support. But this claim is one of the most toxic things I’ve heard lately. 

First of all – the MAGA cap is “racist” almost entirely because, for the past two years, Trump’s opponents have been *saying* it was. It has little or nothing to do with the actual behavior of actual individuals who supported or voted for Trump. It’s called “othering”, and it’s one of the most noxious tactics in modern politics. 

Photo via Babylon Bee – simultaneously the most brilliant satire site out there anymore, and oddly enough perhaps the best news outlet there is in the Trump era.

Second – the idea that there’s some license to try to destroy peoples’ lives (or worse), not just because of the (utterly legal) beliefs they have, not even because of the (utterly legal) symbols they may wear, but because of the meaning that (people have told) you the symbols have? 

Could there be a more toxic idea? 

In this society, the remedy for (for sake of argument) “bad speech” has always been “more better speech”, at least among those who deserve to be taken seriously. Unfortunately, a fair chunk of our society [1] believes “our ends justify our means”. 

I mean, don’t get me wrong – if the notion of the intellectual “Purge Night” takes off, the thought of taking a can of Pam to the next smug little fop wearing a “Che Guevara” t-shirt would work for me…

…but for the fact that *no free society can survive* that sort of thing, any more than the marriage in that first example is going to survive. 

But just like the “She provoked me!” at the top of the post, “wearing your symbol justifies any evil I want to commit against you” is the refuge of the entitled narcissist and the abuser. 

[1] And in the interest of diplomacy, I’ll say “both sides do it”, although my heart’s really not in it. Mike Pence’s kids aren’t throwing smoke bombs and punching 17 year old girls at their opposition’s rallies, but Tim Kane’s kid sure as hell did. Still, the point is “your (interpretation of) someone’s symbol doesn’t justify a response faaaaar out of proportion to the symbol itself”. Ever.

How To Change The World (When You’re A Sniveling Coward)

David Brooks wrote this piece – “The Cruelty of Call-Out Culture” – almost a solid week before the Covington kerfuffle, in which a dishonest media led a pack of bovine keyboard commandos to a high-tech lynching of a MAGA hat and the kids standing around it.  But the episode brought it back to mind for me.  

Brooks details a fascinating – and by “fascinating”, I mean “terrifying” – episode involving a chain of online “denunciations” that seem reminiscent of the sort of thing that got millions killed under Mao and Stalin.   And the chain led back to one, er, man:

The guy who called out Emily is named Herbert. He told [NPR podcast] “Invisibilia” that calling her out gave him a rush of pleasure, like an orgasm. He was asked if he cared about the pain Emily endured. “No, I don’t care,” he replied. “I don’t care because it’s obviously something you deserve, and it’s something that’s been coming. … I literally do not care about what happens to you after the situation. I don’t care if she’s dead, alive, whatever.”
When the interviewer, Hanna Rosin, showed skepticism, he revealed that he, too, was a victim. His father beat him throughout his childhood.
In this small story, we see something of the maladies that shape our brutal cultural moment. You see how zealotry is often fueled by people working out their psychological wounds. You see that when denunciation is done through social media, you can destroy people without even knowing them. There’s no personal connection that allows apology and forgiveness.

My theory? The Covington social lynching, like the paroxysm of gleeful hate around the Kavanaugh hearings, are the result of an awful lot of people who’ve never learned to see political differences as anything but “hate” being told to “punch a Nazi” – and they can’t find any actual Nazis, because there are bowling leagues in Cincinnati with more people and political clout than the Nazi party in the USA today – but then again, to them pretty much everyone they disagree with is a Nazi…

…and they can’t punch, anyway. So they use the only weapons they have; the social media mob.

“…I’ve Seen The Promised Land” (Repost)

I collect great speeches. I’ve got a whole slew of big ones; Churchill’s “Blood, Toil, Tears and Sweat” and the “Dunkirk” speech, Reagan’s “Shining City” and “A Time for Choosing” and the Brandenburg Gate speech, Kennedy’s “To The Moon!” and his Little Rock speech, “I Have A Dream”…

…and about a year ago, I finally got a copy of Martin Luther King’s “I’ve Been To The Mountain“, made the day before he was assassinated. And while I’ve been hearing about the speech for decades, it’s amazing to listen to. Some speeches inspire you; some make you angry; “I’ve Been To The Mountain” is a little of everything, but also draining. It is almost emotionally exhausting to listen to.

But it’s worth a listen; it’s one of the greatest speeches in American history.

It ends with an account of a near-death experience when a woman tried to stab him, years ago in New York.   

It came out in the New York Times the next morning, that if I had sneezed, I would have died. Well, about four days later, they allowed me, after the operation, after my chest had been opened, and the blade had been taken out, to move around in the wheel chair in the hospital. They allowed me to read some of the mail that came in, and from all over the states, and the world, kind letters came in. I read a few, but one of them I will never forget. I had received one from the President and the Vice-President. I’ve forgotten what those telegrams said. I’d received a visit and a letter from the Governor of New York, but I’ve forgotten what the letter said. But there was another letter that came from a little girl, a young girl who was a student at the White Plains High School. And I looked at that letter, and I’ll never forget it. It said simply, “Dear Dr. King: I am a ninth-grade student at the White Plains High School.” She said, “While it should not matter, I would like to mention that I am a white girl. I read in the paper of your misfortune, and of your suffering. And I read that if you had sneezed, you would have died. And I’m simply writing you to say that I’m so happy that you didn’t sneeze.”
And I want to say tonight, I want to say that I am happy that I didn’t sneeze. Because if I had sneezed, I wouldn’t have been around here in 1960, when students all over the South started sitting-in at lunch counters. And I knew that as they were sitting in, they were really standing up for the best in the American dream. And taking the whole nation back to those great wells of democracy which were dug deep by the Founding Fathers in the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution. If I had sneezed, I wouldn’t have been around in 1962, when Negroes in Albany, Georgia, decided to straighten their backs up. And whenever men and women straighten their backs up, they are going somewhere, because a man can’t ride your back unless it is bent. If I had sneezed, I wouldn’t have been here in 1963, when the black people of Birmingham, Alabama, aroused the conscience of this nation, and brought into being the Civil Rights Bill. If I had sneezed, I wouldn’t have had a chance later that year, in August, to try to tell America about a dream that I had had. If I had sneezed, I wouldn’t have been down in Selma, Alabama, been in Memphis to see the community rally around those brothers and sisters who are suffering. I’m so happy that I didn’t sneeze.
And they were telling me, now it doesn’t matter now. It really doesn’t matter what happens now. I left Atlanta this morning, and as we got started on the plane, there were six of us, the pilot said over the public address system, “We are sorry for the delay, but we have Dr. Martin Luther King on the plane. And to be sure that all of the bags were checked, and to be sure that nothing would be wrong with the plane, we had to check out everything carefully. And we’ve had the plane protected and guarded all night.”
And then I got to Memphis. And some began to say the threats, or talk about the threats that were out. What would happen to me from some of our sick white brothers?
Well, I don’t know what will happen now. We’ve got some difficult days ahead. But it doesn’t matter with me now. Because I’ve been to the mountaintop. And I don’t mind. Like anybody, I would like to live a long life. Longevity has its place. But I’m not concerned about that now. I just want to do God’s will. And He’s allowed me to go up to the mountain. And I’ve looked over. And I’ve seen the promised land. I may not get there with you. But I want you to know tonight, that we, as a people, will get to the promised land. And I’m happy, tonight. I’m not worried about anything. I’m not fearing any man. Mine eyes have seen the glory of the coming of the Lord”

The whole thing is very much worth a listen.

This post originally published on MLK Day 2010.

Great Moments In “Social Justice”

It’s close to becoming a Berg’s Law: terms like “White Privilege”, “Misogyny”, “Bigotry”, “Hate” and “Mansplaining” are rarely anything more than ad homina that one can use without being accused of trafficking in a logical fallacy.


Maybe after CNN “Legal Analyst” Areva Martin’s performance yesterday on Sirius XM’s David Webb show, we could start talking about changing that:

The embarrassing moment occurred during a discussion about experience being more important than race when determining whether or not someone is qualified for a particular job.
“I’ve chosen to cross different parts of the media world, done the work so that I’m qualified to be in each one. I never considered my color the issue, I considered my qualifications the issue,” Webb said.
“That’s a whole, another long conversation about white privilege, the things that you have the privilege of doing, that people of color don’t have the privilege of,” said Martin – who also hosts CBS’ “Face the Truth.”
A dumbfounded Webb asked, “How do I have the privilege of white privilege?”
Martin responded, “David, by virtue of being a white male you have white privilege.”
The Fox Nation host then explained that he was actually black.
“I stand corrected,” Martin said.

Of course, if Webb had been white, the proper response would have been “Ms. Martin, you’re not just illogical, you’re a bigot and get the hell off my show”.

The “Passive Aggression Toward Law-Abiding Gun Owners” Act

The Metrocrats dropped “House File 8” (HF8) this past week. The bill will institute “Universal Background Checks” for all firearms transfers in Minnesota.

The bill:

  • Expands background checks to all firearms. Current law requires the for pistols and “assaault weapons”.
  • Raises the age to purchase a firearm to 21.
  • A permit to purchase is good for one firearm, and expires immediately. They are currently valid for a year. And you’d need to get one to possess or receive any firearm at all, and it includes transfers between private parties. We’ll come back to this part.
  • A permit to carry is no longer usable as a permit to purchase or transfer.
  • Chiefs of police will no longer be able to process transfers.
  • All private party transfers are covered; you’ll need to get a background check. Even/especially if you’re a straw buyer!
  • Getting rid of all exemptions in current law.

Anyone notice what that third bullet does?

Every legal transfer includes a background check.

For making those checks useful in tracing crime weapons, they need to keep those on record.

And in IT, we have a term for “pieces of data that contain pointers to new pieces of data”. That term is “database”. HF8 would create a registry of guns in Minnesota – or at least of the guns owned by law-abiding citizens.

This is today’s DFL.

If you’re not a member of the MN Gun Owners Caucus, you need to be.


It was thirty years ago today Ronald Reagan gave his farewell address after two of the most defining terms in 20th Century politics.

And while he was his usual upbeat self, he had a question and challenge for Americans – one that may have seemed abstract-ish back then…:

But for all of his optimism, Reagan did leave his audience with one clear warning for the future. He said the country needed “an informed patriotism.” He greatly feared that we were not doing enough to foster it.
“Are we doing a good-enough job teaching our children what America is and what she represents in the long history of the world?” Reagan bluntly asked.
When he was young, the nation’s youth “were taught, very directly, what it means to be an American,” he noted. “And we absorbed, almost in the air, a love of country and an appreciation of its institutions.” Young people learned those lessons from family, in classrooms, and through popular culture.

…in a way that seems definitely concrete as hell today.

And I don’t think that’s been remotely accidental. If mainstream America doesn’t know what it’s got, how will it know how / whether to defend it? What, indeed, to defend it from?

A generation of our “best and brightest” are being raised in an academy that actively disparages the values Reagan espoused. The lowest form of life on the intersectional pecking order is “the conservative supporter of the American tradition”.

Is there any hope?

This’ll be a big topic this weekend on the show.

Dearth Of Capital – Intellectual And Fiscal

Alexandria Ocasio Cortez, self-described champion of the working person, fudged her workman’s comp for her own campaign employees.

That’s OK, there really are two different sets of rules out there, and nobody is going to make modern Progressivism’s “It Girl” accountable for anything of the sort.

But the rest of the world? That’s another story.

The restaurant at which the Congresswoman tended bar closed last August. And there, the story deepens – if you work for a living in the Bronx:

Interestingly, the progressive congresswoman bemoaned in August the closing of a restaurant where she was previously employed — however, the restaurant cited an Ocasio Cortez-endorsed policy as a partial reason for its closure.
“The times have changed in our industry. The rents are very high and now the minimum wage is going up and we have a huge number of employees,” one of restaurant’s co-founders said at the time.
“Ocasio-Cortez’s desired ‘living wage’ of $15 an hour has been a living hell for many small business owners in New York, who’ve been unable to offset the cost through higher prices,” Employment Policies Institute Managing Director Michael Saltsman said in response to the closure. “It’s fine to mourn the impending closure of your former employer — it’s better to understand the misguided minimum-wage mandates that contributed to that closure.”

That would require actual critical analysis on Ocasio Cortez’ part…

…heh. I slay me.

Long Term Planning

Joe Doakes from Como Park emails:

You are the supervisor hiring a new employee.  HR tells you that if the group of eligible candidates contains a woman, you must give her preference over the other candidates.  They send you five candidates, one of which is a woman.  You hire the woman.
Next job opening, same thing. You hire the woman.  And the next.  And the next.  And the next.  There’s always a woman in the candidate pool, and you’re always required to give her preference.  Eventually, your entire workforce will be women.  It’s a mathematical certainty.
Now see Minn. Stat. 480B.01, the balance of sexes in law school enrollment and in the ranks of County Attorney and Public Defender from which many judicial appointments are made, and the history of actual judicial appointments during the Dayton administration.  Now project the trend line to see where we’re headed.  Eventually, all of Minnesota’s judges will be women.  It’s a mathematical certainty.
Here’s the big question: is that wise?

Given that before long 2/3 of college students will be female, that’s pretty much the mathematical certainty for all non-blue-collar jobs.

Your Lying Ledger

A “Shoprite” store in Philadelphia is closing due to Philadelphia’s pop tax. 

Or so says the owners – someone with years of experience in the field, for what that’s worth:

Store owner Jeff Brown says this location has lost approximately 25 percent of its business over the last two years because of the tax on soda and sweetened drinks. 

The city, not to be “Mansplained”…er, “Bossplained?” “Enterepreneursplained?” Anyway, not to be taken to task by a mere prole, the city responded:

The mayor’s office responded with a lengthy statement pushing back against Brown.
“It is no surprise that Mr. Brown has decided to scapegoat the Philadelphia Beverage Tax, but neither he nor the beverage industry have yet to present any evidence that the tax has had any impact on sales. Here’s evidence to the contrary: an ongoing study by three of the most reputable academic institutions in the nation (Harvard University, Johns Hopkins and the University of Pennsylvania) finds the beverage tax has not affected overall store sales, contrary to other public claims by this supermarket chain.”
Brown says the 111 employees will be transferred to his 12 other supermarkets.

Anyone but me suspect hat Mr. Brown’s going to get an audit letter from the Pennsylvania Department of Revenue sometime soon here?

Up next: a Harvard Study on how taxes have nothing to do with “Food Deserts”, no way, no how.

Marginal Knowledge

Joe Doakes from Como Park emails:

The New Hotness wants higher income tax rates.  The Left says it’s sensible and there’s historical precedent.
The trouble with historical precedent is picking the right precedent.  College students who drink until they vomit could point to Rome, the pinnacle of civilization at the time, where vomitoria were provided in public entertainment venues.  So that makes it alright?   No.
Similarly, picking a time when America was the world economic superpower and capital investment had nowhere else to go, doesn’t mean that high earners today would find their wages captured by higher tax rates.  Rich people are rich, they’re not stupid.  They can move to low-tax venues.  They can shelter their incomes.  They can lobby for loopholes that only they can afford. 
The only way to ensure that everybody pays their “fair share” is to fully embrace Communism:  from each according to his ability, to each according to his need.  But getting ordinary people into that mental state will require a period of socialization, during which the recalcitrant, deplorable, bitter clingers are identified and sent for re-education in the far North, or sent to farm the land by hand, or buried in mass graves.  And who will decide who lives and who dies? 

But the fact that it used to be the status quo back when the US was the world’s only functional economy (with ample tax shelters provided for the fabulously wealthy, like Ocasio Cortez’s benefactors) makes it “moderate”, to Big Left.

Better Late Than Never

Joe Doakes from Como Park sent this to me back around Christmas Eve – and I spent most of that intervening week either on the road or on my back with the flu. But while holidays come and go, the economy is always timely:

You can judge the state of the economy by how many businesses are open Christmas Eve.
In bad times, you can’t miss a single customer.  You’re open for business, even if it’s only the owner and his wife staffing the store.
In good times, you can afford to take a day off and even pay your employees for no work.  The store closes early, if it opens at all.
How’s the economy in your neighborhood? 

Can’t speak for Christmas Eve – I was in North Dakota, where the rules are a little different – but I did notice I couldn’t find a place to grab a bite to eat anywhere on New Years Day.

Maybe there’s something to that…

Best Interests!

Dems and MSM (pardon the redundancy) alarmed that Trump’s rhetoric doesn’t seem to have changed the GOP’s support among Hispanics:

VoteCast data from the Associated Press showed that 32 percent of Latinos voted for Republicans at a time when many pundits and most Democrats hoped that the demographic group might lead an electoral revolt against President Donald Trump’s immigration policies.
“Data from November’s elections show the GOP’s position among Latinos has not weakened during the Trump administration, despite the president’s rhetoric and policy,” read the tweet from MSNBC.

Of course, the media has spent a decade ignoring the fact that Hispanics poll even more hawkish on border security than anglos do; the GOP loses them on mass deportation. Even the most conservative Latinos frequenlty have someone in the family who came here illegally.

Leyes De Seguridad De Armas De “Common Sense”

Some Venezuelans are realizing something that we Real Americans have been tryihg to explain to Califorians, New Yorkers, New Jersey-ites and Connecti…cutters (?); that the Right to Keep and Bear Arms has nothing to do with hunting, and is only coincidentally about self-defense against criminals.

They’re figuring it out

“Guns would have served as a vital pillar to remaining a free people, or at least able to put up a fight,” Javier Vanegas, 28, a Venezuelan teacher of English now exiled in Ecuador, told Fox News. “The government security forces, at the beginning of this debacle, knew they had no real opposition to their force. Once things were this bad, it was a clear declaration of war against an unarmed population.”

Under the direction of then-President Hugo Chavez, the Venezuelan National Assembly in 2012 enacted the “Control of Arms, Munitions and Disarmament Law,” with the explicit aim to “disarm all citizens.” The law took effect in 2013, with only minimal pushback from some pro-democracy opposition figures, banned the legal commercial sale of guns and munitions to all – except government entities.

Chavez initially ran a months-long amnesty program encouraging Venezuelans to trade their arms for electrical goods. That year, there were only 37 recorded voluntary gun surrenders, while the majority of seizures – more than 12,500 – were by force.

…just a tad too late.

Liberals scoff when Real Americans talk about guns being a bulwark against tyranny.

Perhaps because they’re OK with tyranny.