Do you notice that on all the media (Fox included) it’s a big no-no to piss off Muslims? Now with all the action going on in Mali, Obama’s lie about Al Qaeda being on the ropes is exposed, and the reporters are again having to talk about “the war on terror” a lot. But when they get down to reporting against whom the war is fought, they get all mushy and wind up calling them “Islamic militants”. That’s it, there are no other enemies in that misnamed conflict called “the war on terror”, except the ragheads who keep killing innocent civilians by the thousands wherever and whenever they can do it. But no one dare report that we are fighting ‘Islamic terrorists’, that’s a big no-no. It is politically very incorrect to juxtapose Islam and terrorism, or to call them bad names like ragheads. Those folks are only militants, you know, just like people all over who happen to be 'militating' for what’s good and right.
And there’s more. The WH spin is that Al Qaeda is just “shifting its focus” to north Africa, as opposed to expanding its operations from the middle East. I don’t know, given all the stuff that’s going on and growing in Afghanistan as we prepare for our victorious exit, it sure looks like more than a little shift of focus is going on. After all they are now operating in two theaters with boots on the ground and guns in hand, and kidnapping Americans. Oh well, I hope everyone here knows who is fighting whom for what.
Wonder what Hillary will say about Benghazi on 23 January? Maybe it will be the Richard Pryor confession about when he screwed up heating his heroin or something – ‘Best we can tell, the ambassador and his aides were in the compound getting ready for bed. They decided to have some milk and cookies in the kitchen before turning in. And when one of them dunked a cookie into his glass of milk, suddenly the whole thing blew up. Then a lot of people showed up. It was terrible. We really don’t know much more than that.’
Oh yes, the gun banners have gained another public relations advance. Recall that they went from wanting to ban guns to just ‘controlling’ them. Well, after Newtown, outlets like National Propaganda Radio have been reporting on Joe Biden meeting with all kinds different groups in order to fashion his recommendations that the President received this week. So here’s the new look for those who really don’t like guns in civilian hands, they’re now called the ‘gun safety groups’. Yep, the whole 2nd Amendment debate will be divided into folks belonging to the ‘gun rights’ groups opposing the ‘gun safety’ groups. Now which of you out there are against gun safety?
Remember all that blather for months and years about not raising taxes on the middle class. Bygones. The guy needed to get re-elected, and dammit he had to promise something, don’t you see? We now find out that taxes are going up for as long as this bunch is in Washington, and don’t you forget it. Why? Because that is the way we’re going to get the economy going again and reduce the deficits. They’ve looked at the whole mess from every which way, and that’s clearly the only solution that will work. Besides, you didn’t really think he wasn’t going to raise taxes on everyone who still pays them. After all, there aren’t that many of us suckers left out there – it’s either us or who?
Finally, we recall how responsive this White House was going to be to the people's inputs? You know, using the internet and all that. All it would take was 5,000 of you good folks out there signing a petition about some concern, then this White House would jump on the case and provide an answer. Well, that was a bit low, lotta petitions – how about 10,000? No, nope, that was still too many petitions. Let’s make that 25,000. Whoa! Now that didn’t work; how about we bump it to 50,000 little siggies required on a single petition. Well hell! Whatsamatta you out there, no one got a job or nothin’, signing petitions alla time!! Today the WH asked ‘how’s a cool 100,000 sound before we even peek into our inbox?’ I guess the real message is that all such bets are off until 2016 when Hillary can have a go at it. In the meantime you all can shove your ‘vox populi’ up where the sun don’t shine.
[18jan13 update] I was waiting for John R Lott Jr to weigh in on the current gun ban imbroglio. Lott has been the leading researcher on gun laws, and has published extensively on the subject. In the 18jan13 WSJ he writes ‘The Facts About Assault Weapons and Crime’. It’s worth a read, especially by those enthralled with all the ‘benefits’ to the safety of school children promised by Barack and Dianne when their next gun bans go into effect. This is bullpucky season in spades, and it might help to throw in a fact or two on the matter, even if they are inconvenient.