The Dawning Of Bevinstan

It's official as Governor Matt Bevin takes office today, and NPR talked to people in Jackson County, Kentucky -- one of the poorest counties in the nation -- about why they voted to end their own Medicaid.

And yes, for some it was "screw Obama, I'll still get mine."

Among those on Medicaid in Jackson County is Angel Strong, an unemployed nurse in McKee, Ky. — one of roughly half a million Kentuckians who received health insurance after outgoing Gov. Steve Beshear, a Democrat, embraced the Affordable Care Act's Medicaid expansion. Kentucky saw one of the sharpest declines in the rate of uninsured adults. 

"I had never had Medicaid, because I had insurance at my job," said Strong. "Now I am out of a job and I am looking for another job, but in the meantime I had no income."
Religious beliefs "outweigh" having health insurance 

Bevin's lack of support for expanded Medicaid didn't faze Strong, who voted for Bevin because she supported his socially conservative stands against gay marriage and abortion. 

"My religious beliefs outweigh whether or not I have insurance," Strong said. 

But the reality is the county doesn't think Bevin will dare take anything away from them, so losing Medicaid expansion was never a voting factor for them.

Most Jackson County residents are in Strong's shoes and need some kind of financial help to get health insurance coverage, said Doug Justice, who helps locals sign up for insurance. 

"I do have some who are subsidized," he explained. "They get some help there but the majority of [my cases are] Medicaid. A lot of it is. And it's helped a lot of people." 

Justice said many in Jackson County did not have the future of Medicaid in their state in mind when they went into the voting booth last month. 

"They are not getting into the details of that either," Justice said. "Maybe because they don't understand the ramifications of that should it happen, or they're just thinking, 'I'll deal with it when it takes place.'"

Bevin wouldn't dare, would he?  Ask our new Health and Family Services Secretary,  Vicki Glisson.

"Kentucky is consistently ranked as one of the least healthy states in the country," Bevin said, noting that about one in four Kentuckians are now enrolled in Medicaid, the government health plan for low-income, disabled and many elderly people in nursing homes. 

"We must be innovative in our efforts to improve health outcomes for Kentuckians but do so in a prudent and sustainable manner," he said. 

The cabinet also oversees kynect, the state's health insurance exchange Bevin has vowed to dismantle, and the Medicaid expansion authorized under the federal Affordable Care Act. Bevin has said he wants to scale back the expansion that has added about 400,000 people to the state Medicaid rolls.

The cuts are coming, but none of the people who voted for Bevin expect to be affected.  Only those people will be hurt, you see.

Night Of The Don's Knives

The political science performance art piece that is Donald Trump hit another box on the way to completing the Modern Fascism bingo card this week with The Donald calling for a "total and complete shutdown" of allowing Muslims into the United States, including American citizens.

Trump, in a formal statement from his campaign, urged a “total and complete shutdown” of all federal processes allowing followers of Islam into the country until elected leaders can “figure out what is going on.” Asked by The Hill whether that would include American Muslims currently abroad, Trump spokeswoman Hope Hicks replied over email: “Mr. Trump says, ‘everyone.’ ”

The call, which he made hours after the release of a poll showing Trump being overtaken by Sen. Ted Cruz (R-­Texas) in early-voting Iowa, drew swift and forceful condemnation from the White House and virtually every presidential candidate in both parties.

Describing Trump’s proposal as “unhinged,” “fascist” and “downright dangerous,” Trump’s rivals sought to characterize it as further evidence the bombastic real estate mogul is unfit to lead the country.

“Again, this is the kind of thing that people say when they have no experience and don’t know what they’re talking about,” New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie (R) said in an interview. “We do not need to endorse that type of activity, nor should we.”

Yet Trump maintains that a significant number of Muslims harbor a “hatred” toward America, citing a poll by the Center for Security Policy, a think-tank that has criticized the role of Muslims in America.

That survey showed that one-quarter of Muslims living in America polled “agreed that violence against Americans here in the United States is justified as part of the global jihad” and that a majority think that Muslims in America should be allowed to answer to Shariah law.

“Without looking at the various polling data, it is obvious to anybody the hatred is beyond comprehension. Where this hatred comes from and why we will have to determine,” Trump said.

“Until we are able to determine and understand this problem and the dangerous threat it poses, our country cannot be the victims of horrendous attacks by people that believe only in Jihad, and have no sense of reason or respect for human life.”

Trump isn't the problem, he's just the symptom.  The problem is the millions of Republicans who think his increasingly incendiary and racist hatred is permissible, even necessary, here in America today. 

I know I called him a performance artist above and many other things in the past, but let's remember his words are truly dangerous and people will be hurt because of what he says.  The Republican candidates attacking him now are across the board hypocrites who have called for religious tests, visa program restrictions, and monitoring of mosques and Muslims too...they've just been more polite about it.  Republicans are fascist at this point, Trump is just the most overt.  All of them would sacrifice human rights for votes in 2016.  All of them.

And reminder, this is nothing new.  WWII Japanese internment camps, black slavery and Jim Crow, Chinese indentured servants, mass deportation of Mexican-Americans under Operation Wetback, and oh yeah an entire country conquered from Native Americans...America has always been a real piece of work if you're not a white guy.  Why is anyone surprised that we have a major political party gunning for Muslims in this country literally built on racism and intolerance?

Hell, the Carson camp tried to one-up Trump with this idiocy last night.

Ben Carson, the retired neurosurgeon and Republican presidential hopeful, thinks everyone visiting the United States should register and be monitored while in the country, a spokesman for his campaign said on Monday.

The statement came after Donald Trump, the businessman and current front-runner for the 2016 Republican presidential nomination, called for an immediate halt to all Muslims entering the country until further notice.

“Everyone visiting our country should register and be monitored during their stay as is done in many countries,” said the spokesman, Doug Watts. “We do not and would not advocate being selective on one’s religion.”

All visitors.  I mean, it's not racist if you do it to everybody equally, right?  Jesus.  America, you've got to find something approximating a soul and fast.

StupidiNews!

• An Air France flight from San Francisco to Paris was diverted to Montreal after a threat was reported, passengers were taken off the plane and inspectors searched the craft, later clearing it.
• Chicago prosecutors have decided not to charge an officer who shot an allegedly armed black man in the back, the victim's lawyers contend the weapon was never in his possession.
• The son of Turkish President Tayyip Erdogan is denying allegations that he profited from smuggling ISIS oil, Moscow insists that they have evidence to the contrary.
• Chipotle restaurants continue to struggle as another E. coli outbreak at a Boston location now means 52 people have been sickened in nine states.
• AT&T is launching gigabit fiber optic internet service in Los Angeles this week and says it will bring service to 36 other metro areas over the next several years.

Last Call For Roger, Rahm Jet

As the Justice Department announced a civil rights investigation into the Chicago PD today...

The U.S. Department of Justice will investigate the Chicago Police Department following protests over the city's handling of last year's killing of a black teenager shot by a white police officer, U.S. Attorney General Loretta Lynch said on Monday. 

U.S. authorities will look at the department's use of force, including deadly force, among other issues, she said at a news briefing to announce the civil probe. 

"Our goal in this investigation ... is not to focus on individuals but to improve systems," Lynch said. 

She said federal officials would be investigating "constitutional violations" in one of the nation's largest police departments. 

"What we are looking is to see whether or not the police department as a systemic matter has engaged in constitutional violations of policing," the nation's top law enforcement official said.

...suddenly a lot of people in charge of that "system" in Chicago are suddenly resigning.

The Chicago Police Department's chief of detectives resigned from his post Monday amid a series of resignations following the release of the Laquan McDonald shooting video.

A police source confirmed Constantine "Dean" Andrews' resignation Monday. Andrews was promoted from deputy chief of detectives to the top spot by former Chicago Police Supt. Garry McCarthy in October. During his tenure as deputy chief of detectives, Andrews was in charge of investigating the David Koschman case, which he closed without charges against Richard J. "R.J." Vanecko, according to the Chicago Sun-Times.

It is unclear who will replace Andrews.

Andrews' resignation follows the resignation of Scott Ando, formerly the head of the Independent Police Review Authority, who stepped down on Sunday. McCarthy was also ousted last week by Mayor Rahm Emanuel.

Quite a lot of heads rolling in Chicago this week, and it's only Monday.

But Mayor Rahm Emanuel?  He's not going anywhere.  Guaranteed.

Trump-eting Your Failure

The Donald's increasingly dangerous rhetoric may have given him a safe lead among his GOP cohorts, but it's also increasingly costing him the general election, particularly among Latino voters.

Hillary Clinton leads the Republican presidential field in hypothetical general-election match-ups, with Ben Carson and Marco Rubio running the closest to her, according to a new national MSNBC/Telemundo/Marist poll. 

And with just one exception, the margin of Clinton's lead among Latino voters determines just how competitive each match-up is. 

Clinton's biggest lead is against current GOP frontrunner Donald Trump: She's ahead of him by 11 points among all voters, 52 percent to 41 percent, and a whopping 42 points among Latino voters, 69 percent to 27 percent. 

The former Democratic secretary of state leads Ted Cruz by seven points nationally, 51 percent to 44 percent, and by 27 points among Latinos, 61 percent to 34 percent.
Clinton holds a four-point advantage over Jeb Bush, 49 percent to 45 percent, and a 26-point lead among Latinos, 61 percent to 35 percent. 

She's ahead of Marco Rubio by three points among all voters, 48 percent to 45 percent, and 19 points among Latinos, 57 percent to 38 percent. 

And Clinton leads Ben Carson by just one point, 48 percent to 47 percent, and she holds a 26-point edge among Latinos, 61 percent to 35 percent.

I know there's not much stock you can put in polls eleven months out, but it's an indication at least that among those who are paying attention to the race, Clinton would have a cakewalk against Trump or Cruz.  Against Bush, Carson or Rubio, not so much.

Still a long way to go before November though, and while the race appears to be changing weekly, in reality both Clinton and Trump have lead their respective primary polls for several consecutive months now.

If things hold, it's going to be Goldwater all over again, and the Republicans know it.

President Obama Speaks To The Nation

President Obama's Oval Office address last night wasn't new, but it was newsworthy as he made a number of key points about the continuing battle against terrorists and what Americans can and should do to help.

For seven years, I’ve confronted this evolving threat each morning in my intelligence briefing. And since the day I took this office, I’ve authorized U.S. forces to take out terrorists abroad precisely because I know how real the danger is. As Commander-in-Chief, I have no greater responsibility than the security of the American people. As a father to two young daughters who are the most precious part of my life, I know that we see ourselves with friends and coworkers at a holiday party like the one in San Bernardino. I know we see our kids in the faces of the young people killed in Paris. And I know that after so much war, many Americans are asking whether we are confronted by a cancer that has no immediate cure.

Well, here’s what I want you to know: The threat from terrorism is real, but we will overcome it. We will destroy ISIL and any other organization that tries to harm us. Our success won’t depend on tough talk, or abandoning our values, or giving into fear. That’s what groups like ISIL are hoping for. Instead, we will prevail by being strong and smart, resilient and relentless, and by drawing upon every aspect of American power.

Here’s how. First, our military will continue to hunt down terrorist plotters in any country where it is necessary. In Iraq and Syria, airstrikes are taking out ISIL leaders, heavy weapons, oil tankers, infrastructure. And since the attacks in Paris, our closest allies -- including France, Germany, and the United Kingdom -- have ramped up their contributions to our military campaign, which will help us accelerate our effort to destroy ISIL.

Second, we will continue to provide training and equipment to tens of thousands of Iraqi and Syrian forces fighting ISIL on the ground so that we take away their safe havens. In both countries, we’re deploying Special Operations Forces who can accelerate that offensive. We’ve stepped up this effort since the attacks in Paris, and we’ll continue to invest more in approaches that are working on the ground.

Third, we’re working with friends and allies to stop ISIL’s operations -- to disrupt plots, cut off their financing, and prevent them from recruiting more fighters. Since the attacks in Paris, we’ve surged intelligence-sharing with our European allies. We’re working with Turkey to seal its border with Syria. And we are cooperating with Muslim-majority countries -- and with our Muslim communities here at home -- to counter the vicious ideology that ISIL promotes online.

Fourth, with American leadership, the international community has begun to establish a process -- and timeline -- to pursue ceasefires and a political resolution to the Syrian war. Doing so will allow the Syrian people and every country, including our allies, but also countries like Russia, to focus on the common goal of destroying ISIL -- a group that threatens us all.

And again, we've heard this before, but I think that in the noise from the GOP primary that this has gotten lost, and I definitely see why the President made this speech in a national address on a Sunday evening.  He also challenged Congress to give him the authority to do more about ISIS in Syria and Iraq, something that recalcitrant Republicans and worried Democrats will almost certainly not grant him.  It's much easier to blame the President's strategy when you've tied his hands and sabotaged it, just look at Obamacare.

President Obama's most important point however was what America should not do.

Here’s what else we cannot do. We cannot turn against one another by letting this fight be defined as a war between America and Islam. That, too, is what groups like ISIL want. ISIL does not speak for Islam. They are thugs and killers, part of a cult of death, and they account for a tiny fraction of more than a billion Muslims around the world -- including millions of patriotic Muslim Americans who reject their hateful ideology. Moreover, the vast majority of terrorist victims around the world are Muslim. If we’re to succeed in defeating terrorism we must enlist Muslim communities as some of our strongest allies, rather than push them away through suspicion and hate.

That does not mean denying the fact that an extremist ideology has spread within some Muslim communities. This is a real problem that Muslims must confront, without excuse. Muslim leaders here and around the globe have to continue working with us to decisively and unequivocally reject the hateful ideology that groups like ISIL and al Qaeda promote; to speak out against not just acts of violence, but also those interpretations of Islam that are incompatible with the values of religious tolerance, mutual respect, and human dignity.

But just as it is the responsibility of Muslims around the world to root out misguided ideas that lead to radicalization, it is the responsibility of all Americans -- of every faith -- to reject discrimination. It is our responsibility to reject religious tests on who we admit into this country. It’s our responsibility to reject proposals that Muslim Americans should somehow be treated differently. Because when we travel down that road, we lose. That kind of divisiveness, that betrayal of our values plays into the hands of groups like ISIL. Muslim Americans are our friends and our neighbors, our co-workers, our sports heroes -- and, yes, they are our men and women in uniform who are willing to die in defense of our country. We have to remember that.

My fellow Americans, I am confident we will succeed in this mission because we are on the right side of history. We were founded upon a belief in human dignity -- that no matter who you are, or where you come from, or what you look like, or what religion you practice, you are equal in the eyes of God and equal in the eyes of the law.

It's an idea that has long been lost on America, that Republicans allowed Bush 43 to make, that Muslim Americans are Americans.  That has been lost in the storm of hatred coming from the right, and I'm glad the President stood up to that in the most public way possible.

StupidiNews!

• President Obama addressed the nation from the Oval Office last night, calling on Congress to authorize military force against ISIS and for Americans to not give in to fear at home.
• Britain's parliament may soon take up a petition to ban Donald Trump from the UK for "hate speech".
• A magnitude 7.2 quake rocked Tajikistan early Monday, with the quake felt as far away as New Delhi and Pakistan.
• General Electric has abandoned its plans to sell its home appliance business to Swedish firm Electrolux over US anti-trust concerns that the market would be limited to just two companies.
• Space firm Orbital ATK's newest Cygnus-4 rocket launch on Sunday from Kennedy was a success, as the spacecraft headed for a resupply run to the International Space Station.

Last Call For The Lone Star

It seems not even the Texas GOP is willing to tolerate the party advocating open rebellion against the United States government.

State GOP leaders, in a predictable but closely watched vote, have defeated a proposal to ask Texas voters whether they favor secession.

In a voice vote Saturday afternoon, the State Republican Executive Committee rejected a measure that would have put the issue on the March 1 primary ballot. The ballot language would have been non-binding, amounting to a formal survey of voters on whether they would like to see Texas declare its independence from the United States.

While the proposal's defeat was expected, the measure had sparked some heated debate on the 60-member executive committee, the governing body of the Republican Party of Texas. Seeking to avoid a protracted fight, the executive committee voted earlier Saturday afternoon to cap discussion of the issue at 30 minutes then put it to an up-or-down vote.

Tanya Robertson, the SREC member who introduced the proposal, argued at the executive committee meeting in Austin that the measure would have been "harmless," allowing voters to register an "opinion only." She also suggested the ballot language would have helped "get out the vote" among some Texas Republicans who have been sitting out recent elections.

"The goal of these is to take a thermometer of how Texans feels about an issue, and what better issue for Texans to do that with?" she asked.

Opponents of the proposal argued it would have been an unproductive way for Texans to register their dissatisfaction with the federal government, however strongly they feel. One of the opponents, SREC member Mike Goldman, said he was "sorry we are even having the conversation" about secession.

The pro-secession measure was sent to the full body on Friday after approval by its Resolutions Committee. The ballot language before the executive committee Saturday afternoon read, "If the Federal Government continues to disregard the Constitution and the sovereignty of the State of Texas, the State of Texas should reassert its prior status as an independent nation."

I mean, you guys tried this 150 years ago.  Didn't work out so well for you. We've finally found a line that the Texas GOP is afraid to cross.

I wonder how that will play out with the base.

Doing It On Purpose

I swear that Salon.com is trying to throw the election and it has been for a while now.  First it was this drivel about how Hillary is worthless because selecting Supreme Court justices doesn't matter, then it was why you shouldn't vote for Hillary even if she's the Democratic nominee, then it was why Hillary Clinton is basically Dick Cheney, and today we have why we should let the Republicans burn the country down in order to issue in a liberal paradise.

Rowing in behind Clinton only justifies the establishment logic — “just feed the lefties a few scraps in the primary, wax poetic about the Republican bogeyman in the general, and they’ll shut up.” Progressives would be giving something quite important — their votes — for a party that hides behind fear-based arguments to maintain intimate ties with Wall Street while ignoring its supposed base.

But consider this: What if we didn’t vote, and Hillary lost as a result? Like it or not, that makes a profound statement. It would likely force the Democratic party to move left on economic issues and, fearing another schism, throw its weight behind a far more progressive candidate in 2020. Bernie Sanders himself says that we need a political revolution to enact real change, and if progressives plan to build a lasting movement in America, it has to start with making our voices heard on a national scale. Sending a message to the party that we won’t be placated by politicians who stand in the regressive center is one hell of an opening salvo.

If progressives like myself still believed that the party could right the ship of state without our intervention, perhaps this would be a very different discussion. But that’s not happening — since Bill Clinton, Democrats in Washington have slipped to the right one heartbreaking concession at a time, and the voters are the only ones who can stop that inertia. If we want the party to move left, we have to turn the ponderous ship around and drag it there ourselves.

There’s an analogy here to the far-right conservative movement, which has become so influential in the Republican party that establishment candidates are finding no traction in their own circus of a primary contest. Unlike progressives, the conservative far right has realized the extent of its power — they had a certain psychological advantage in the early days, propelled as they were by religious fervor — and for Sanders supporters to do the same, it’s imperative that we don’t capitulate to the Democratic party’s big money wing. If we do, we’ll never be taken seriously.

We have to lose in order to win!

Well see, we tried that in 2010 and 2014 and all that did was give even more of the country to the actual Tea Party at both the federal and state level.  Giving them the White House and letting the GOP scorch the country may push the Democrats to the left, sure.

It'll also destroy the place in the meantime.

See, here's what I don't get, do you know how the Tea Party keeps winning?

They actually vote.  Our side's brilliant idea is to not vote.

If you can't see where the problem is, then you're even more lost than I thought.  And I'm beginning to think Salon is doing this on purpose by having a bunch of white Bernie Bros talk America into   Feeling The Berning Country.

Anyone who advocates not voting is wrong, period.

Sunday Long Read: A Debt Never Repaid

At the NY Times Magazine, Eula Biss reflects on the price of white privilege in America and the cost on our society.

Whiteness is not a kinship or a culture. White people are no more closely related to one another, genetically, than we are to black people. American definitions of race allow for a white woman to give birth to black children, which should serve as a reminder that white people are not a family. What binds us is that we share a system of social advantages that can be traced back to the advent of slavery in the colonies that became the United States. ‘‘There is, in fact, no white community,’’ as Baldwin writes. Whiteness is not who you are. Which is why it is entirely possible to despise whiteness without disliking yourself.

When he was 4, my son brought home a library book about the slaves who built the White House. I didn’t tell him that slaves once accounted for more wealth than all the industry in this country combined, or that slaves were, as Ta-Nehisi Coates writes, ‘‘the down payment’’ on this country’s independence, or that freed slaves became, after the Civil War, ‘‘this country’s second mortgage.’’ Nonetheless, my overview of slavery and Jim Crow left my son worried about what it meant to be white, what legacy he had inherited. ‘‘I don’t want to be on this team,’’ he said, with his head in his hands. ‘‘You might be stuck on this team,’’ I told him, ‘‘but you don’t have to play by its rules.’’

Even as I said this, I knew that he would be encouraged, at every juncture in his life, to believe wholeheartedly in the power of his own hard work and deservedness, to ignore inequity, to accept that his sense of security mattered more than other people’s freedom and to agree, against all evidence, that a system that afforded him better housing, better education, better work and better pay than other people was inherently fair.

My son’s first week in kindergarten was devoted entirely to learning rules. At his school, obedience is rewarded with fake money that can be used, at the end of the week, to buy worthless toys that break immediately. Welcome to capitalism, I thought when I learned of this system, which produced, that week, a yo-yo that remained stuck at the bottom of its string. The principal asked all the parents to submit a signed form acknowledging that they had discussed the Code of Conduct with their children, but I didn’t sign the form. Instead, my son and I discussed the civil rights movement, and I reminded him that not all rules are good rules and that unjust rules must be broken. This was, I now see, a somewhat unhinged response to the first week of kindergarten. I know that schools need rules, and I am a teacher who makes rules, but I still want my son to know the difference between compliance and complicity.

I think Biss is too hard on herself, taking in too much of a burden on her shoulders.  We won't solve white privilege in this country in my lifetime, any more than we will gun violence or income inequality or any other of the massive social problems we have, because it's taken so long just to get to the point where we acknowledge that white privilege exists.

Baby steps indeed, but expecting us to get to a state where it doesn't matter will take a society far better than the one we have now.

The President Speaks

President Obama will address the nation from the Oval Office tonight, something he has only done twice before.

President Barack Obama on Sunday night will deliver a rare Oval Office address about terror threats in the aftermath of the San Bernardino, California, shootings that claimed 14 lives. CNN and other networks will broadcast it live at 8 p.m. ET.

The White House says the president will provide an update on the investigation. Federal authorities have said the attacks are being investigated as an act of terrorism.

"The President will also discuss the broader threat of terrorism, including the nature of the threat, how it has evolved, and how we will defeat it," White House Press Secretary Josh Earnest said in a statement. "He will reiterate his firm conviction that ISIL will be destroyed and that the United States must draw upon our values -- our unwavering commitment to justice, equality and freedom -- to prevail over terrorist groups that use violence to advance a destructive ideology."

ISIL on Saturday hailed the San Bernardino shooters as "supporters" of the terror group -- a message that came after U.S. investigators said they suspect one of the shooters professed loyalty to the Islamist network, CNN reports.

Republicans, on the presidential campaign trail and in Congress, have in recent days lambasted President Obama over his response to the San Bernardino killings. They've been particularly withering about comments by the president supporting gun control measures. In his Saturday radio address Obama said it's "insane" that people on the "no-fly" list are permitted to buy guns.

If you are hoping that the President will announce executive actions on gun control, frankly they'd never be enforced as they would immediately be challenged by Republicans in court and delayed until the end of his term.  At this point I think it's far more likely that we'll get plans for increased military action in Syria to deal with ISIS.

We'll see.

Last Call For Gunmerica TV

And finally today, while we're talking about how the left completely lost the gun control argument, let's not forget the real reason is because the NRA is another corporate lobby and represents an industry that is doing the best it has ever done.

As the fractious debate over American gun laws continues, two people in California are preparing to launch the country’s first all-gun home shopping television channel.

Created by Doug Bornstein and Valerie Castle—both of whom previously worked for home shopping networks—the new channel, named GunTV, is scheduled to launch on January 20, during the gun industry’s annual multi-day SHOT Show in Las Vegas. It will go live via national satellite and cable TV providers and eventually air 24 hours a day.

Neither founder was able to provide comment in time for publication.

GunTV, also known as GTV Live Shopping, will broadcast gun-related programming and sell firearms, ammunition and accessories. "The ease and convenience of purchasing firearms will be as simple as consumers calling a toll-free number and placing their order," GunTV says in a promotional video. The channel will also air safety, training and instructional content every hour, according to its website, as well as commercials from manufacturers.

Here’s how the purchasing process works: The channel will electronically deliver orders to Sports South, one of the largest distributors of sporting goods in the U.S. The distributor will then ship the firearms to a local gun store, where a viewer can pick it up, according to The Desert Sun, a newspaper in Palm Springs, California. To comply with gun regulations, customers likely will have to pass background checks before the federally licensed dealers sell them firearms. Federal law requires background checks at licensed dealers, so consumers can purchase guns without checks online and at firearm shows.

Sports South, which is based in Louisiana, will provide GunTV customers with access to more than 475 product lines and outdoor sporting goods.

The United States has an average of 89 firearms for every 100 residents, according to a promotional video from GunTV.

Initially, the channel will air six hours of daily programming, mostly shopping, starting at 1 a.m., seven nights a week. The founders hope to expand it to a 24/7 lineup during 2016, The Desert Sun reported.

The paranoid business has never been better.  GunTV: It's the most American thing imaginable!

The Gunmerican Epidemic

The NY Times, for the first time in 95 years, has put the paper's editorial board opinion on the paper's front page, blasting the country's deadly gun fetish and the people who enable it.

It is a moral outrage and a national disgrace that civilians can legally purchase weapons designed specifically to kill people with brutal speed and efficiency. These are weapons of war, barely modified and deliberately marketed as tools of macho vigilantism and even insurrection. America’s elected leaders offer prayers for gun victims and then, callously and without fear of consequence, reject the most basic restrictions on weapons of mass killing, as they did on Thursday. They distract us with arguments about the word terrorism. Let’s be clear: These spree killings are all, in their own ways, acts of terrorism.

Opponents of gun control are saying, as they do after every killing, that no law can unfailingly forestall a specific criminal. That is true. They are talking, many with sincerity, about the constitutional challenges to effective gun regulation. Those challenges exist. They point out that determined killers obtained weapons illegally in places like France, England and Norway that have strict gun laws. Yes, they did.

But at least those countries are trying. The United States is not. Worse, politicians abet would-be killers by creating gun markets for them, and voters allow those politicians to keep their jobs. It is past time to stop talking about halting the spread of firearms, and instead to reduce their number drastically — eliminating some large categories of weapons and ammunition.

It is not necessary to debate the peculiar wording of the Second Amendment. No right is unlimited and immune from reasonable regulation.

Certain kinds of weapons, like the slightly modified combat rifles used in California, and certain kinds of ammunition, must be outlawed for civilian ownership. It is possible to define those guns in a clear and effective way and, yes, it would require Americans who own those kinds of weapons to give them up for the good of their fellow citizens.

As I said, not messing around.  It's something that has needed to be said by a major American media outlet for a very long time, and yet as we approach 2016, nothing will have changed.  It will most likely not change in my lifetime, not unless the voting pattern and turnout of tens of millions of Americans change.

And our system is designed to make sure that will never happen.

If Newtown, if Aurora, if Charleston, if now Colorado Springs and San Bernardino don't motivate voters to throw out the NRA lobby, then nothing will.

It is screaming into the abyss, and the abyss will kill 30-35,000 every year and more and we will call it the price of freedom, the blood cost that must water the Tree of Liberty.  It was nice of the editorial board to try.  You're more likely to see this Congress pass laws stripping the paper of its editorial power than you are ridding the country of these weapons of war and death.

Gunmerica indeed.

This will be the first and only time that this blog says this, probably in 95 years, but Jonah Goldberg's conclusion is correct:

Similarly, while very, very, very few people outside the Times’ offices — and media nerds like me — could care less about what is essentially a P.R. gimmick, the Times thinks this is a Very Big Deal. For the staid grey lady this amounts to shouting “Unleash the Kraken!” It shows you how desperate and frustrated the editors — and liberals generally — are with the fact that this country doesn’t agree with them on guns. It also shows that the “national conversation” most Americans want has more to do with Islamist terrorism and less to do with the alleged “gun show loophole.” This alone doesn’t make The Times’ views or their arguments illegitimate or invalid. But it does illustrate how unpersuasive they are to much of the public.

The same can be said for the disgustingly hypocritical new fad of calling Wayne LaPierre a “terrorist.” This from the same crowd who insisted Sarah Palin had blood on her hands because of some cross-hairs on a congressional district map and that Michelle Bachmann should be put in the dock for her “eliminationist rhetoric.” I have no problem with criticizing LaPierre, but the double standard is just so appalling. I mean, seriously, to Hell with these people.

What’s true for lawyers is also true for newspapers: When you’re shouting and pounding the table, it’s probably because you’re losing the argument.

And in fact the gun control argument in this country has been lost.  It was never going to be won without blood. This applies to either side, and one side is proudly willing to accept tens of thousands of casualties in order to win. Our side has accepted the butcher's bill by default.

It's over, folks.  Gunmericans have won.  And it's been that way for decades.

All I Want For Christmas Is Pew (Pew Pew)

Here in America we don't stigmatize our mentally ill, we elect them to state legislatures.

'Tis the season — even for firearms. 

For Nevada Assemblywoman Michele Fiore's (R) 2015 family Christmas card, which she posted on Facebook on Monday, her family was each outfitted with a gun. If it wasn't immediately obvious, Fiore is a staunch defender of Second Amendment rights.

"It's up to Americans to protect America. We're just your ordinary American family. -With love & liberty, Michele," her message read. Here's the card:

You remember Michele Fiore, right?  The nice Republican lady who backed Cliven Bundy against the federal government and tore poor Chris Hayes a new asshole on national TV, and later went to speak at a rally for the nice people who want to take up armed resistance against America?

Yeah, that Michele Fiore.  Now pictured with her kids holding weapons designed to kill.

As a Christmas card. Jesus would approve, right?

But this is acceptable in America, and there are people who will choose to use weapons like those above to make sure that everyone else is terrorized into accepting it as normal.

Last Call For Good Enough For The Goose

If Missouri's restrictions on women seeking abortion are a "vital and necessary public safety issue" as Republicans insist, then the same restrictions should apply for purchasing a gun, right?

Missouri State Rep. Stacey Newman (D) has a creative idea for tackling the high rates of gun violence in her state: regulate gun purchases as tightly as abortion services. 

According to St. Louis Magazine, Newman pre-filed a bill this week that would make it just as difficult to buy a deadly weapon in Missouri as it currently it to get an abortion — including imposing a 72-hour waiting period for prospective gun buyers and requiring them to receive information about alternative to guns, like “peaceful and nonviolent conflict resolution.” 

Missouri, which is home to just one clinic that performs abortions, has some of the harshest restrictions on the procedure in the country. Patients must wait three full days before they’re allowed to end a pregnancy and make two separate trips to the state’s lone clinic. 

“It is logical we borrow similar restrictions to lower our horrific gun violence rates,” Newman said in a statement. “If we truly insist that Missouri cares about ‘all life’, then we must take immediate steps to address our major cities rising rates of gun violence.”

This is utterly brilliant, and of course it has no chance of passage, but it quite cleanly illustrates the rank hypocrisy of Republicans when it comes to "choosing life" and the massive stupidity of treating women like they need to have their little stupid minds changed by the state to dissuade them from exercising their constitutional right.

Under Newman’s proposed legislation, prospective gun buyers would be required to jump through multiple hoops before legally obtaining a firearm. 

At least 72 hours before attempting to buy a gun, they would be required to meet with a licensed physician to discuss the risks of gun ownership. After the three day waiting period, they would need to locate a licensed firearm dealer located at least 120 miles from their home, which is the average distance that women currently must travel to get an abortion. 

Before the sale, the buyer would also be required to complete several educational requirements. Newman’s bill stipulates that they must tour an emergency trauma center treating victims of gun violence, meet with at least two families affected by gun violence, and talk to two local faith leaders who have performed funerals for children who have been killed by guns. Then, before walking out of the store with their gun, they would need to watch a 30-minute video in the presence of the firearm dealer that details fatal gun injuries and review information about alternatives to purchasing a firearm.

 I'd love to see a national version of this bill introduced, again, just to make a point, but of course even Democrats fear the NRA more than they fear voters.