Liberal Messaging

On issue after issue after issue, the left’s messaging strategery seems to have changed to “pummel the public with inflammatory, scaremongering lies; the votes of the gullible, the incurious, the demented and the un-bright count the same as the votes of smart people, and are easier to secure”.

Focusing on the 2nd Amendment “debate” – it’s the one I read most constantly – the evergreen example is “Stand Your Ground laws allow people to KILL people because of the way they’re dressed”.

It’s balderdash, as we’ve explained in this space over and over.  The smart people know this.  The dumb people…

…are the intended customer for that particular lie.

With that in mind, New York’s junior machine apparatchik Kirsten Gillibrand has sounded off with a level of perspicacity reminiscent of Betty McCollum:


I was going to say “someone’s been watching too many “Miami Vice” reruns” – but that’d be too charitable.  While most liberals (and some Republicans) start out dumb on the gun issue, and some don’t get smarter (McCollum, ibid), it’s not like these hamsters exist in a vacuum.  It’s not like some NRA lobbyist, somewhere, hasn’t made Senator Gillibrand aware that silencers are far from silent.

Which means one of two things: Sen. Gillibrand is incurious about anything that doesn’t comport with the narrative she’s been given by her superiors, or she doesn’t care, and passing the narrative is the only goal.

I’m inclined to think “b”.

Lie First, Lie Always: Numbers

Last week at the hearings on  the “Constitutional Carry” and “Self-Defense Reform” bill, the clown antics of Ross Derp (or whatever his name was) got the headlines.  (Update:  It was Ross Koon.  I regret the error).

But something even more indicative of the anti-gun, criminal safety movement was buried in the background

But first, a quick factual tangent:

Berg’s Nineteenth Law:   It’s time to inaugurate Berg’s Nineteenth Law – one of my list of iron-clad laws of human political behavior.    It’s a law because it is always true.

The law reads as follows:

No Minnesota gun control group has ever made, nor will they ever make, a statement of fact that is simultaneously

  • Substantial
  • Original, and
  • True

OK.  Back to last Wednesday.

Dubious:  Before the hearing, “Protect” MN – the pack of ELCA-coiffed biddies who have “led” Minnesota’s clownish gun control “movement” (speaking physiologically, not politically, here), attempting to undercut the “Constitutional Carry” bill, distributed lists of people who’d been rejected for carry permits to the legislators on the committee.

Erick Lucero, from the solid red Northwest, picked up the narrative:

The organization passed out packets to each representative on the committee that contained names of constituents in their districts who were denied permits. Rep. Lucero’s packet consisted of 61 pages with approximately 15 denials on each page, making a grand total of 915 denials. All of the denials listed Hennepin as the county of denial.

So – nearly a thousand denials in Lucero’s district alone?

Sounds pretty damning!

But…

Lucero quickly noticed a discrepancy.

Lucero’s House District 30B exists almost entirely in Wright County. The only exception is the City of Hanover which is split between Wright County and Hennepin County. Of the 3,200 residents in Hanover, only a quarter reside in the Hennepin County portion.

In other words, “Protect” MN would have you believe that every man, woman and child in the Henco portion of Hanover had applied for a permit and been denied, 1.12 times over.  Every liberal exurban anti-gun zealot, every toddler, every man-jack breathing human in the Henco portion of Hanover!

Lucero says this is a classic example of how the left skews facts.

“The anti-Constitution, anti-Second Amendment, gun grabbers pervert statistics and use false information to to promote their anti-gun agenda,” Lucero said.

Being a sitting legisaltor, Lucero must be at least a little diplomatic.

I have no such restriction.

“Protect” MN/s entire “strategy” is to spout bullshit to fool the uninformed, the gullible, the incurious, the casually-irate, and Joan Peterson.

They are liars who think – hope – that Minnesotans are too dumb to know any better.

Lie First, Lie Always: The Anti-Gun Amateur Hour

Earlier this morning at the House Public Safety Committee hearings on the “Stand your Ground” billl, a “pro-bill” testifier erupted in a caracature of a pro-Trump, white supremacist tirade; at one point, he reportedly said it was time for gun owners to return to “lynching” people.

Then he got up and walked out.

He’s utterly unknown to Minnesota’s close-knit 2nd Amendment activist community.

The moment I saw the photo (a screen grab from video),  that voice in my head that monitors stereotypes screamed “Carlton graduate and non-profiteer paid to be a false-flagger”.

Sometimes you can judge a book by its cover.

“He” registered for the event as “Ross Koon”

And, sure enough, searching for “Russ Koon” leads you to a Facebook profile.

And here’s his publicly-visible post:

So he misrepresented himself about being a pro-gunner, and his “testimony” was a “satirical” sham designed to defame people he pretty much hates.

That’s pretty much the whole story, right?


Of course not.  Anti-gun ghoul Joan Peterson tweeted instantly:

Coincidence that the doyenne of Minnesota criminal-safety is right there ready to go with a tweet in support of this bit of “satire?”

But that’s just a clenched old liberal exercising her penchant for overheated hypberbole – right?

Of course not.   Mr. Koons’ pro-criminal-safety pedigree goes back a ways.  Turns out Mr. Koon’s mother is one Mary Koon.  And Mary Koon is a pastor at ultra-liberal Oak Grove Presbyterian Church, and publicly lists as her “likes”…

…Moms Want Action.

(“But” you might say, “that doesn’t make her a member!”.  Perhaps.  On the other hand, it’s pretty much all you need to do to be counted as a member, so we’ll run with it).

So let’s sum it up:

  • The scion of one of Minnesota’s white, privileged “elite” liberal families lied about his personal beliefs, in order to…
  • Slander gun owners in front of the legislature, and did it…
  • …with the obvious, full knowledge of Minnesota’s anti-gun/pro-criminal-safety “elite”.

This was just the most egregious episode in a hearing where the anti-gunners essentially beclowned themselves, treating the hearings like a private flash mob.

Keep up the good work, Reverend Bence!

(Thanks to the crew from MNGOC for all the research on this post)

UPDATE:  From a witness:

He didn’t immediately leave the building. I watched him get hugs and attaboys from several of the anti-gunners present, including the lady in charge of handing out red Everytown shirts.

This was no random happenstance.

Leftist Justice – Saint Paul Style

Last weekend, a group of “anarchists” attacked a pro-Trump rally at the Minnesota State Capitol.    Thugs wearing helmets and masks sucker-punched and kicked unsuspecting peaceful demonstrators, and in one case sprayed mace into a crowd of people.

It was not a spontaneous event; they were quite obviously organized, equipped, and had planned for the event.

They sprayed what was described as “Bear Mace” into a crowd of unsuspecting people – which can easily be a lethal weapon for people with respiratory conditions.   There were six arrests.

The entire fracas was caught on film, in front of dozens of witnesses.  There is not problem showing the violence, brutality and intent of the event.

No matter.  They are aligned with the left against the right.  And in Saint Paul, that’s license to block streets, clog freeways…

…and now, to physically attack people with potentially lethal force.   Ramsey County has declined to charge the arrested protesters – four boys and two girls – with anything.

Monday, the Ramsey County Attorney’s Office said there were insufficient facts to prove felony-level riot. The attorney’s office said State Patrol has presented the case to the St. Paul City Attorney’s Office for consideration of misdemeanor charges.

That is bullshit, stacked high and deep.

If it were a bunch of rednecks from Isanti County who’d maced the “Womens’ March” a couple weeks ago, they’d still be in jail.

Look at the boys and girls who were arrested.  Check out the names:  Anton.  Isabell.  Linwood.  Those are upper-middle-class white kid names.  Breck School names.  Names that drive Subarus until they get a Volvo.  Names like the children of John Choi’s law school classmates and Chris Coleman’s Crocus Hill and Kenwood cronies have.

It’s the special, deluxe, “for progressives only” justice, part of the “progressives only” school, university, public sector union and non-profit parallel universe of power and privilege that the Big Left in Minnesota gets.

UPDATE:  I’ve seen reports that Linwood Kaine is the son of Hillary Clinton’s VP candidate.

Well, I’m gonna guess there were some lawyers involved, huh?

Shame In? Shame Out!

THEM:  “The only reason you didn’t vote for Obama was because he’s black!”

US:  “Er, yeah, right.  Because if a while socialist were running or office, I’d vote for him because he was white.  Right?  That’s freaking ingenious!  You must be one of those ‘smart liberals’ everyone keeps talking about”.


THEM:  “The alt-right is an outlet for White America’s endemic racism”.

US:  “The “white supremacist right” is a fraction of the size it was 25-35 years ago – but has suddenly gotten a surge in mainstream media coverage.  So the “white supremacist right” is really more of an outlet for the Big Left’s hatred of Middle America, and a clumsy, Alinskyite attempt to frame Middle America.   But keep trying, genius”.


THEM:  “You’re insensitive to the plight of transsexuals and gays”

US:  “I’m a working stiff who has to bang out all kinds of overtime to break even. I don’t have time to be ‘sensitive’ to my own sexuality, ifyacatchmydrift, much less anyone else’s.  Carry on your little tantrum elsewhere, snowflake.


THEM:  “Stand your Ground’ allows white people to kill black people, no questions asked”.

US:  “Riiight.  Go buy a gun, go to Florida, kill a black kid at random, plead ‘I don’t like hoodies’, and see what happens.  Wave ‘hi’ from the electric chair, genius. ”


THEM (in this case, a woman with a German last name playing at being Native American):  “Have some Brawndo, Christianists.  You won’t be happy until the earth is dead and cold”.

US:  “Reel it in, lapsed-Catholic-with-Daddy-issues playing Native American dress-up.  Pollution is a fraction of what it was 40 years ago, at least here.   But science is hard, isn’t it?”


THEM:  “HItler was elected.  Just like Trump!”

US:  “No.  Hitler was elected, just like Al Capone was elected.  Learn your history, you gabbling illiterate”.


Tired of being “shamed” by our society’s useless yellow buildup of Social Justice warriors?

As Glenn Reynolds says, it’s ‘time to punch back twice as hard.

Bad Information

Rep. Erin Maye-Quade sent this bit out to her constituents earlier this week:

Looks familiar, doesn’t it?

It’s the same, precise set of fallacious claims made by The Reverend Nancy Nord Bence a few weeks ago.

Neither of the bills would “eliminate” the permit to carry.  That’s not the point, of course, so we’ll let that slide for now.

 

Neither bill will eliminate background checks for purchasing firearms.  Having a card saying you’ve got a clean background is more or less irrelevant; if a cop has time to see a card, they’ve got time to run your driver’s license or car’s license plates and make sure you’ve got a clean record themselves.  The carry permit does nothing but price the right to self-defense out of reach of working-class people.

And the last paragraph is gibberish.  Guns sold online have to go through a licensed firearm dealer, lest they break a slew of federal and state laws on both ends.  Every firearm sold at a gun show in Minnesota gets a background check already.  And the only thing separating a legal and illegal personal transaction is the participant’s honesty and willingness to tell the government what they’re up to.  Criminals don’t, and never will.  It’s not that complicated.

For most of us.

Rep. Maye Quade is either:

  • Grossly ininformed
  • Taking part in a disinformation campaign.

Given that Maye Quade’s wife is a field worker for the Bloombergs, I suspect the answer is “both”.

The Fix

Joe Doakes from Como Park emails:

Trump has only been President four weeks and already, inflation is out of control.  Higher than it’s been during the entire last term of President Obama’s administration. 

That . . . or the Obama administration faked the numbers and only now are the true numbers coming out.  Nobody wants bad economic news; but I’d rather have real bad news than fake good news.  But that’s not the real meaning of this story, here’s the deeper meaning:

The Federal Reserve during most of 2016 refrained from raising rates too quickly for fear of interrupting a fragile recovery but has taken a different view of the likely course of monetary policy in 2017, citing “uncertainty” as any expansionary fiscal policies from President Donald Trump have yet to take shape.

In other words, the Deep State and Quasi-Government wonks are Liberals who held down rates when they thought it would benefit Democrats in the election, but now intend to torpedo Trump any way they can.  One of the easiest is to “discover” rampant inflation so they can jack up interest rates to fight the rampant inflation they’ve suddenly discovered. 

Higher interest rates will panic consumers, kill housing, stifle growth, and mushroom debt service on The Light Bringer’s 20-Trillion Debt.  Shifting dollars to debt service will kill the possibility of a realistic budget and doom The Wall.

Liberals and Never-Trumpers will then proclaim it’s all Trump’s fault, except for the parts that are Bush’s fault.

Joe Doakes

There’s a reason the Establishmet is, well, established.

Field Recognition Guide

When I saw that Democrat protesters – led, inevitably, by paid activist shills – were howling and stomping at Republican town hall meetings, I knew it was a matter of time before our dimbulb media started making comparisons with the Tea Party.

And sure enough, they are.

So with two “Tea Parties” floating around, how can you tell the difference?

Never let it be said I’m not here to help.   Here’s the Shot In The Dark “Tea Party Field Recognition Guide.

If the “Tea Party” event you’re watching is: Then it is:
Large, organic, and animiated but well-mannered A conservative Tea Party
Foul-mouthed, vituperative and rife with threats (whether verbalized or not) A liberal “Tea Party”
Leaves the protest site a mess choked with trash and debris A liberal “Tea Party”
Leaves the place neater than when they showed up: A conservative Tea Party.
Is attended by leftist ringers with racist signs and t-shirts parading in front of a (let’s be charitable) gullible media A conservative Tea Party
A challenge to the GOP A conservative Tea Party
Indistinguishable from the Democrat Party, because it’s a paid offshoot of the Democrat Party A liberal “Tea Party”

Hope that helps!

Yelling And Breaking Things

I’ve been writing this blog for fifteen years.    In that time, I’ve written something like 20,000 posts.    I’ve written about a lot of topics, of course – but there’ve been some recurring themes.

Liberalism is bad for children and other living things.  The right to keep and bear arms is key among the things that separates citizens from subjects.  The less centralized authority is, the better.  The justification for “elites” being “elite” fades rapidly over intellectual generations.

And the Star/Tribune editorial board is a bunch of out-of-touch upper-middle-class patricians with little comprehension of the political world since Walter Mondale left office.

And I’m unlikely to change that any time soon.

But like the proverbial blind squirrel, they get one right once in a while, in their piece giving grudging support – the same grudging support I give – to increasing the penalties for blocking freeways during protests:

Blocking a freeway or a train track goes beyond peaceful protest. Those are inherently aggressive acts, designed to trigger a confrontation with law enforcement. They pose an immediate hazard to the protesters and motorists, as well as law enforcement.

The Legislature must be mindful of the right to peaceful protest, and of the danger in ignoring the concerns of those who feel aggrieved. But protesters must recognize they do not have a right to jeopardize the safety of others.

They’re pretty close, here.   Earlier in the piece, they say:

Any law that seeks to restrict the right to protest must strike a careful balance that preserves public safety, without trammeling on the right to speak against perceived injustice.

As Walter Hudson points out, there is no “balance” between freedom and criminal behavior.

If this particular reform doesn’t pass, though, I’d like to propose a further, different reform.  Currently, the “right” to block freeways is entirely contingent on a group’s level of favor with Betsy Hodges’ and Chris Coleman’s administrations.  Both need to stay cuddled up to the far left – so Black Lives Matter has carte blanche.  

So I say go ahead – let people protest on the freeways.  But require a permit, same as any other protest that impacts the public – not to censor the event, but to allow people notice.  And require them to be issued to everyone.

No.  Everyone.

So if the pro-lifers think they’d draw attention to their cause by protesting on the main arterials leading into Kenwood, Crocus Hill, Nicollet Island and Edina, keeping the DFL’s grandées from getting from their non-profits to their feminist drum circle meetings, they’d be able to do it, too.   They can check their Urban Liberal Privilege!

It’s a plan B.

Answers

Joe Doakes from Como Park emails:

I’m glad the women had fun marching, nice weather for it. But I remain unclear on what it’s all about or why I should care.
Votes for women? Already have them but don’t bother to use them, which is why Trump won.
Equality? So, what, end affirmative action for women in education and employment? I’m okay with that.
Abortion on demand, no-fault divorce, presumption of custody, mandatory child support, homosexual marriage, vigorous prosecution of sexual assault and domestic abuse . . . already have all that.
Look, I’m all in favor of ending oppression but you’ve got to give me a hint, here. How, exactly, are American women oppressed and what, specifically, must be done to end it? Mansplain it to me, please. I seriously want to know: what do women want?
Joe Doakes

My hunch – and it’s just a hunch?  It’s the Democrat party trying to whip up support / hysteria as a hedge against complete electoral catastrophe in 2018, and beyond that to gin up support for a field likely to be led by another geriatric white ultraliberal in 2020.

When Narratives Collapse

Donald Trump, as I’ve noted on my show more than a few times, is not only more gay-friendly than any of the Republicans in the 2016 field, but was in fact more consistently pro-gay longer than Barack Obama or Hillary Clinton were:

On gay-related issues, the news media couldn’t have picked a Republican president more in sync with their views than Donald Trump.

But the country isn’t dealing with a rational press right now.

The GOP was stuck on gay stuff until a New Yorker came along and cleared the field for them by saying he was not only “fine” with same-sex marriage but also by actively embracing gays in a bigger way than President Obama did.

Meanwhile, Trump, having grown up in the most diverse city in the world, is an outcast among the gay-supporting national media.
In a cover piece for Newsweek in 2012, Andrew Sullivan dubbed Obama “the first gay president.”

He also choked up on national television, calling Obama a “father figure” because he said he supported gay marriage.

Obama’s main claim to gay celebrity was changing his mind on marriage. He opposed same-sex marriage before he was first elected in 2008 and then he came to support it before his second term. (By the way, the Supreme Court handled the dirty work, Obama simply nodded in approval.)

Trump was not the first to support gay marriage, but he did a lot. After the mass terror shooting on the Orlando gay nightclub in June, he did what no other Republican would have ever done. He called it an attack on “the members of Orlando’s LGBTQ community” and said the tragedy was done “in order to execute gay and lesbian citizens because of their sexual orientation.”

In July, Peter Thiel, founder of PayPal and a big Trump supporter, was the first person ever to declare on stage at the Republican National Convention that he’s “proud to be gay.”

Further proof that the left’s narrative is:

  1. Entirely left over from 2006, down to the last specious “Hitler” reference.
  2. Aimed at gullible non-critical thinkers – whose votes, let’s never forget, count just as much as those of smart, curious people with functioning BS detectors.

I’m amazed it didn’t work last November.

When Narratives Are Relentlessly Reinforced

Back during the glory days of the Tea Party, we – the good guys – were famous, among other things, for leaving the sites of our demonstrations cleaner than they were when we arrived.  It was a bit of a point of pride…

…especially when compared with the rat-infested rape camps of the media darlings of the “Occupy” movement.

Last weekend’s “Bernie Bro Women’s March against Trump” continued the narrative:

Not sure where this was taken – i got it off social media – but on a deeper level, it doesn’t matter. The “protests” of the Big Left are all centrally planned, and are about as regionally unique as McDonalds’ french fries.

Does it ever fail?  No.  Not really.

Narrative Today

Compare and contrast the left’s modern mores.

Exhibit A:   Brave, courageous, strong, powerful people who are exercising their First Amendment rights, and must never be addressed disapprovingly, in any way, because they are freedom fighters and must not, ever, in any way, be “slut shamed” – indeed, “slut shaming” is, itself, sexist and misogynistic and probably racist, too.

I’m sorry. I truly am.  But as a journalist, I have to unflinchingly tackle the dirty jobs so you don’t have to.   Except for the redhead, third from the left in the front row – the one that looks like a ginger Sarah Chalke.  No shame in my game there.

Exhibit B:  Slut!  Slut!  Slut!   Immoral!  Threat to society!

HEY! HEY! DID YOU KNOW SHE WAS THE FIRST FIRST LADY TO POSE NUDE?

Any questions?

The Right Women

One of my favorite sociopolitical tales is that of Alan Dershowitz, the not-remotely-conservative legal scholar who once castigated the faculty of Harvard Law School for seeing diversity as “someone with different color skin, than you, or wearing a skirt, who thinks exactly the same as you do”.

As predicted, the “Womens March” over the weekend, in DC and Saint Paul, was precisely that.

Continue reading

Open Letter To Those Who Just Don’t Get It Yet

To:  Some Of You Trump Opponents Out There
From:  Mitch Berg, Ornery Peasant
Re:  Terminology

Dear Hollywood and New York Showbiz and Media “Elites”

As we come up on inauguration day, some of you are still sore about Donald Trump.  I get it.  I mean, I didn’t vote for him, either.

You’d like to pretend he’s not your president.  Yadda yadda.  Whatever.  Gotcha.  It’s a free country (and will stay that way, so quit  your whining), so you can say what you want, and I can mock you for it.  But relax; I’m not mocking you for that.  Not now.

No, this is worse.

It’s come to my attention that some of you Hollywood types are calling yourselves “the Resistance”.

Stop.  Now.

You are among the wealthiest, most privileged, most untouchable residents in one of hte wealthiest, most privileged parts of the wealthiest and free-est society in the world.   You lost an election.  In four years, you’ll get a rematch (although the way you all are going at this point, most of you will stroke out by mid-terms).  And you will get the rematch; there’ll be no dictatorships, no camps, no nothing.  Why, I bet a President Trump won’t even jabber about siccing the Federal Elections on your blogs, or turn a politicized IRS and DHS loose on your political movements, the way Obama did for eight years.  Our democratic process, imperfect as it is, will go on, and if you don’t go full-blown Joan Crawford on us, you might have a shot, again, someday, God help us all.

So stop using – I believe the term these days is “Appropriating” – the term “Resistance”.  That’s a term used by people who had actual skin in the game; the Jews who, as disarmed as you want us all to be, fought back against the Nazis in the Warsaw Ghetto; the Norwegians who overcame the impossible and destroyed the Nazi nuke program; the Polish fighters who rose and took Warsaw, only to be betrayed by one dictator and hunted down like rats by another; the Danes who, the risk of a summary execution hanging over their heads, snuck their nation’s Jews out to safety; people who, with all hope extinguished, still pulled together and rose up and, mostly, died, but gave their tormentors and murders and bloody nose and, in a few cases, against higher odds than Michael Moore winning the NYC Marathon, survived the war to witness against their captors.

Real people, who left behind whatever hadn’t been taken from them, and fought a real enemy who promised to kill them and their families if they failed.

Not overpaid, plushbottom Hollywood prima-donnas upset that they can’t install their choice of president by coup now that the hoi polloi have rejected their candidate.

Here’s my promise to you; call yourselves “the resistance” to my face, and I will spit in yours.

That is all.

Does Harvard Give Refunds?

Rachel Maddow – not the most overrated “public intellectual” in the leftymedia, but pretty dang close – threw out some hilarioiusly historicalliy-ignorant red meat organic gruel for her audience of ill-informed wannabe intellects.

Over the past year I’ve been reading a lot about what it was like when Hitler first became chancellor. I am gravitating toward moments in history for subliminal reference in terms of cultures that have unexpectedly veered into dark places, because I think that’s possibly where we are

Well, there’s a “subliminal reference” there, but not the one Maddow is thinking of.

Let’s look back on when Hitler became Chancellor.

It was a decade when political parties kept private armies that roamed the streets beating, stabbing and sometimes shooting their opponents. There were more than a few massacres, of both commies and Nazis.   The left has some groups that might, with a little more derangement, become “private armies”, but I’ll be charitable and assume thats not where we’re going, at least on purpose.  

Germany had a parliamentary system that gave a president – superannuated General Von Hindenburg – the power to dissolve the government – something easily used by a crafty plurality to stage what amounted to a bloodless consensual coup.   That’d be hard to do, at least legally, within the US’s constitutional system.  Of course, the left has spent the past eight weeks floating ideas to circumvent or avoid the constitution – but again, let’s just chalk that up to the whining of spoiled, entitled children of all ages.

It was a place deeply fractured among extremist parties that hated each other and often acted on that hate. OK – the left might be giving us that equivalence.

Otherwise? Shut up, Rachel, and make me a f****ng sandwich.

Unexpected!

Last summer, when the people of the UK voted to leave the EU in the fabled “Brexit”, the same pundits who routinely Americans for “voting against their best interests” took a time out to chide Brits for voting…against their “best interests”.   The Brit economy was going to tank, returning the UK, if not to the Third World, at least into an impemetrable economic fog.

The landed punditry hasn’t been doing so well this year:

Business activity hit a 17-month high last month, meaning that the economy grew by 2.2 per cent last year — more than the six other leading nations, including the US, Germany and Japan.

Far from slowing after the referendum in June, as predicted by the Treasury and Bank of England, [and a rogue’s gallery of American pundits with portfolio – Ed.] growth appeared to have improved. GDP grew at 0.3 per cent and 0.6 per cent in the first two quarters of last year, compared with 0.6 per cent and an estimated 0.5 per cent in the final period.

On the one hand, time will tell.

On the other hand, our departing president wishes he’d had two consecutive quarters as good as that particular “failed experiment”.

Heather Martens, Whitesplainer

Behold the spokeswoman for Minnesota’s minority community.

Voice of Minnesota “minorities”, Heather Martens, exploiting a dead woman to no avail back in 2013.

It’s Heather Martens, longtime “executive director” and, for most of the decade, pretty much sole “member” of “Protect” Minnesota, a criminal-safety group famous for its comic ineptitude.

She left “Protect” Minnesota a while ago; word has it that MIchael Bloomberg realized that he’d be throwing even more money away if he was filtering it through her; Minnesota’s Criminal Safety movement is essentially run from New York today (the Reverend Nancy Nord Bence notwithstanding).

Given that she isn’t formally involved in the Criminal Safety movement anymore, I’m not sure why the Strib is giving her free space to recite her chanting points.

But give her space, they did, last Friday.   The op-ed was titled “Story on ‘gun rush’ by minorities lacked evidence”.   And I’ll had Martens this much; she’s an expert at “lack of evidence”; she makes Jesse Ventura look like Alan Dershowitz.

I was disappointed in the Star Tribune’s article “New fear bolsters gun rush in state” (Jan. 1), which amounted to a grossly misleading advertisement for the gun industry.

If Andrew Rothman ordered a pizza in the woods, and Heather Martens wasn’t there to hear it, would he still be “advertising for the gun industry?”

The subheading, “Worried for their safety, minorities have increased applications since Nov.,” is not supported by any information in the article. The article itself states, “There is no data on the number of Muslim-Americans buying guns, and permit application records don’t reveal demographic information beyond the age, gender and the county of the applicant.”

One suspects Heather would recoil in horror at the notion of registering Muslims for any other reason – but she wouldn’t mind making the rest of us walk around with yellow “gun” shapes sewed to our shirts.

The only evidence of a “rush” on guns by Somalis and other minorities is the word of gun lobbyist Andrew Rothman and the existence of one minority gun group.

Well, yeah – and a lot of anecdotal evidence from an awful lot of other people, minority and gay and liberal.   Perhaps Ms. Martens believes NBC and the BBC are also emissaries of the “Gun Lobby”.

There may or may not have been any such rush on guns.

Which may or may not undercut the entire stated point of this op-ed.

You’ve got to hand it to Rothman, however. He scored, with no proof, a front-page story normalizing gun carrying for a market the gun lobby has been unsuccessfully pursuing for years.

And since Ms. Martens is putatively concerned about “evidence”, we’ll await her proof that the surge, if any (heh heh), is in any way related to “gun lobby” marketing efforts, rather than minorities, gays and liberals discovering what Second Amendment supporters of all races (including Dr. Martin Luther King) have always known.

Now for the reality. Gallup’s research shows that American household gun ownership reached a near-historic low of 37 percent in 2014, compared with 57 percent in 1977. According to the General Social Survey, overall household gun ownership has dropped fairly steadily for decades (though a small number of people continue to increase their already large collections, keeping the gun industry profitable).

And, as pointed out in this space, the Gallup Poll was a fairly risible effort – a telephone poll of a “minority” in this country, before the last election, when gun owners were legitimately reticent about talking.   Thin evidence?  Perhaps – but then, given Gallup’s performance in the last presidential election, not as bad as I might have once admitted.

Speaking of thin evience, it’s the point of the article where Ms. Martens drops a series of unsupported-to-fictional statements in hopes of gulling the gullible – a practice I call “Heathering”.

There are many reasons most Americans, including minorities, aren’t behaving the way the gun lobby wants.

So while neither Martens nor (for sake of argument) Rothman “has any evidence”, Martens states this as a conclusive fact?

Huh?

First, bringing a gun into the home puts the family at greater risk of injury or death. The Annals of Internal Medicine reported in a 2014 meta-analysis that a gun in the home doubles the risk of homicide and triples the risk of suicide. Unsecured guns also pose a lethal threat to young children.

And without context, that sounds pretty bad, doesn’t it?

Of course, the study doesn’t control for who it is doing the shooting; is the gun “in the house” of a felon?  A gang member?

As usual, Martens seems to think that simple hardware corrupts people.

The push to market guns to people of color is particularly ironic in light of the gun industry’s history of championing an extreme white supremacist agenda.

As has been noted in the past, this is a complete fiction.  The National Rifle Association armed Martin Luther King’s bodyguards, and allowed them to train at their range in Virginia – one of very very few integrated facilities in the DC area in 1960.

In 1977, extremists took over the formerly moderate National Rifle Association. In the post-civil rights movement era, the NRA found it advantageous to play on white Americans’ fear of people of color, and the organization has now become a platform for racist rhetoric from white supremacists…

WHOAH!

OK!  Strap yourselves in!   She’s going for the big claim here!

Here comes the “Evidence” she was talking about!  Here’s where she’s going to deliver on her claims!

Wait for it…wait for it…

….like board member Ted Nugent.

Oh.

Ted Nugent.

An over the hill rocker and loose rhetorical cannon who’s said some deeply stupid things.

But “supremacist?”

Feel free to pony up the evidence, Heather.  You’re verging on defamation, here.

Still – her claim about Nugent – devoid of fact as it is – is about as close as she’ll get to a fact in the rest of her wrticle.

In 2003, when [shall-issue carry] was being debated here in Minnesota, proponents dismissed all predictions of political intimidation with guns. But such intimidation is now commonplace. Men (it is almost entirely men) now openly carry loaded weapons to legislative hearings about guns at the State Capitol and to other government meetings and political events.

Intimidation?  With guns?

Why, that’s illegal!

Surely there were complaints filed, police called, a paper trail created?

No.  There was not.  What happened was a group of people, following the law to the letter, did something they were legally entitled to do.  The Capitol Police say, openly, that the carriers were among the most diligently law-abiding people in the building.

There was no “intimidation”.

Ms. Martens – feeling “intimidated” by law-abiding people doing things that are perfectly legal is your prerogative.  Whining about it puts you on par with people who don’t like being in rooms with black people.

A gun-toting group took over a national wildlife refuge in Oregon, with no legal consequences.

Ms. Martens is apparently as ignorant about the Fifth Amendment as she is of the Second; there were legal consequences.  There were arrests, arraignments, a trial…

…and an acquittal.   That, Ms. Martens,  is a legal consquence.

Following a shooting last year in Minneapolis at a demonstration led by people of color, one man whom a prosecutor identified as a “white supremacist” is soon to be tried on charges of shooting and wounding peaceful demonstrators.

Well, wait, Ms. Martens – there’s going to be a trial.  At issue was whether the protesters were peaceful, or in fact a legitimate threat of death or great bodily harm, potentially leading to a self-defense claim.   Until then, the suspect is innocent until proven guilty.

Now, this blog has made great sport of pointing out, debunking, and roundly mocking Ms. Martens’ endless parade of lies – all the while scampering away from any engagement from those who know better.

And it’s all been good clean political fun, as these things go, so far.

But next, Martens slides over the edge, from being a befuddled ninny to complete moral depravity.

Gun carry laws don’t go far enough for those who want to return to the “good old days” when it was easier for white men to kill black men with impunity.

We carry guns because we want to kill black people?

Wow.  And Martens thought Rothman made a claim with no evidence.

It seems I’ve been giving Martens too much credit all these years; where I used to think she was just a gabbling ninny, it seems she’s really something much, much less innocent.

That’s why the gun lobby invented “Stand Your Ground” or “Shoot First” laws, which allow a person to shoot and kill, in public, anyone they deem threatening — and people of color are well aware who that means.

Well, no – that’s not how “stand your ground” works.

But “people of color” are aware of what the law means; they use “Stand Your Ground” in self-defense cases twice as much per capita as white shooters.

In Heather Martens’ weird little world, where black people are nothing but hapless victims, I’m sure that comes as a shock.

So let’s recap:  in a column where Heather Martens accuses Andrew Rothman of presenting no evidence to support his claim, she presents…at best no evidence to support any claim, and at worst, evidence that debunks her and, finally, marks her as a fairly toxic little person.

Dear Minnesota Minorities:  you might want to specifically terminate Ms. Martens as your official spokesperson.

The Problem With Liberal Media Talking About “Fake News”

The left-leaning mainstream media – which has in the life of this blog:

…is wondering why people don’t trust it.

Perhaps because of paragraphs like this (emphasis added by me):

“What I think is so unsettling about the fake news cries now is that their audience has already sort of bought into this idea that journalism has no credibility or legitimacy,” said Angelo Carusone, the president of Media Matters, a liberal group that polices the news media for bias. “Therefore, by applying that term to credible outlets, it becomes much more believable.”

Media Matters is a Soros-funded propaganda mill.  It is a “media watchdog” only to the extent that an attack-PR firm is a watchdog of anything; relentlessly scouring media for congruence with liberal chanting points with all the grace of a German funk band.

Others see a larger effort to slander the basic journalistic function of fact-checking. Nonpartisan websites like Snopes and Factcheck.org have found themselves maligned when they have disproved stories that had been flattering to conservatives.

Neither is non-partisan.

While I think good reporting is essential to a representative Republic, I think our current mainstream media will not be the ones to perform any kind of “good reporting”.   The sooner it goes out of business, the better for democracy.

Get The Sad Trombone

Gun-control melodrama Miss Sloane has bombed at the box office.

Well, no.  That understates it.  Howard the Duck and Ishtar bombed.  Miss Sloane was dropped from a single B-29, and like that iconic single bomb, has a decent shot at helping to bring a war to an end.

After lavish television advertising – Miss Sloane had a bigger TV budget than the inescapable Rogue One – and fawning reviews from liberal critics and media, the movie earned $3.2 million dollars.  Which, divided by the number of screens and a $10 ticket price, meant an average of around ten people attending each showing.

And it wasn’t for lack of trying to get people to show up. Out of the 200 highest-grossing movies of 2016, only ten exceeded the $15.9 million television advertising budget of Miss Sloane, and seven of those did so by very small amounts. Miss Sloane spent more than the Star Wars spinoff Rogue One, Star Trek, Pete’s Dragon, Arrival, Doctor Strange, and Hacksaw Ridge. It had twice the advertising budget of such hits as Sully, The Girl on the Train, and The Secret Life of Pets. For every dollar spent on advertising, Miss Sloane brought in just 21 cents in ticket sales. By this measure, it came in dead last out of the 200 top-grossing movies in 2016. No one else was even close. Coming in second-to-last was Collateral Beauty, which made 53 cents per advertising dollar. The average movie made almost $2 for each dollar spent on advertising.

Of course, the movie’s core conceit – that gun grabbers are a bunch of plucky, underfunded underdogs, duking it out with a “gun lobby” that is floating in money – is a preposterous fiction.  Michael Bloomberg and other anti-gun plutocrats fund the “safe criminal” movement lavishly.

For example, here in Minnesota during the 2016 campaign, groups affiliated with the safe criminal lobby spent well over a million dollars – easily ten times as much as the Human Rights movement did – and employed at least four full-time paid staffers.   Not a single person in Minnesota is paid to lobby the legislature or organize the community; the movement is entirely volunteers, working on their own time out of pure devotion to the Bill of Rights.   In other states – Nevada, Washington, Maine – the spending ratio was closer to 30 to 1.

I suspect most Americans can tell the movie doesn’t pass the stink test;  Sloane’s premise reeks like a full pea-soup diaper on a dog day in the bayou.

And its failure is of a piece with the collapse, over the past fifteen years, of nearly every single Hollywood anti-war movie.

When I saw the trailer – during one of my ever-so-brief episodes of watching broadcast TV – I heard the trailer in the background.  I think it was the normally-excellent Sam Waterson, playing one of the “gun lobby” bad guys.  I think I envisioned a character wearing a black cape and top hat, twisting a painstakingly-maintained handlebar mustache as he tied Ms. Chastain…er, Sloane to the tracks.  I actually laughed out loud.

But hey, Hollywood; keep ’em coming.

Official

Today’s the day that the Electoral College will meet and, despite six weeks of demonstrations, threats and magical thinking, elect Donald Trump as president.

The Electoral College – which, back in the days when Hillary was considered inevitable, was above reproach – like so much in our federal system, is designed to protect the huge, diverse minority from the majority.

And it worked.  And that doesn’t sit well with our left:

Donald Trump’s election is difficult for many Americans to accept, but there is no good reason to question its democratic legitimacy. For better or worse, Trump won the presidency by constitutional and sensible democratic rules that guided both campaigns and were known to any politically conscious citizen. He also won the national popular vote cast outside of the single state of California. Moreover, Clinton won all of California’s 55 electoral votes despite the fact that 4.3 million of the state’s voters voted for Trump. That big winner-take-all advantage for California’s Democrats and Clinton was certainly felt, but it wasn’t enough to override her losses in many other states.

Under our electoral vote system, American voters elected a national president, not California’s choice. It is in the nation’s interest for Democratic Party’s leaders and for Clinton voters to fully recognize the legitimacy of the election as they had urged Trump to do after the third presidential debate.

I say this:  if you want to abolish the Electoral College, and make this nation a pure majority-rule state – i.e. ruled by California and New York – go for it.

But then, remove all impediments to secession.

UPDATE:  There’s one “faithless elector” so far.  It’s a Democrat, naturally – and, of course, from Minnesota:

Of course it was a Minnesota Democrat.

No word on whether Jill Stein is going to demand a recount.

UPDATE 2:  Democrat demonstrators outside the State Capitol urging Minnesota’s electors meeting therein to “vote their conscience”…:

Downtown St Paul

Posted by Deb Brown on Monday, December 19, 2016

…notwithstanding that, per state law, they were bound to vote HIllary.

UPDATE 3:   1:54PM ET:  Trump goes past 270 electoral votes.

1:55PM ET:  Democrats:  “Well?  Why isn’t America great again?  Huh?  Huh? Huh?”

This Changes EVERYTHING!

Celebrities – among the left’s most vital constituencies – are now asking for 37 electors to vote against Trump.

Don’t want to watch the whole video?  OK – the “highlight” is probably Martin Sheen, who preaches:

Sheen pledges that anyone who votes his or her way will go “down in the books as an American hero,” and others say those electors will “have my respect.”

Violating state election laws and party rules, and getting Martin Sheen’s “respect?”

Good News, Bad News

Good News:  After five years of “economic growth” under Obama, the economy might actually take off again.

The US economy will grow by 2.3 percent in 2017 and 3.0 percent in 2018, said the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development, revising its earlier forecast.

That compares to gross domestic product growth of 1.5 percent this year, according to the OECD.

Bad News:  Because Keynesianism:

The Republican property tycoon’s team has said he will devote $550 billion to rebuilding decrepit infrastructure.

Really Bad News:  And that’s all presuming the Democrats don’t call in their markers with Janet Yellen.