Sunday, December 11, 2005

Run Howard Run!

The chairman of the DNC has been briefed on how well his recent comments are playing in the sticks and has now "recast" his statement from a few days ago (can you smell the burning rubber as Howard reverses course?) What Howard said previously:
  • "The idea that we're going to win this war is an ideal that unfortunately is just plain wrong," Democratic Party Chair Howard Dean told a San Antonio radio show on Monday.
Hmm. Seems pretty straight forward to us. It's in English. No screaming at the end. Howard appears to be in control of his faculties. Perhaps one of our leftists would like to take a shot at parsing this sentence? Maybe explain it in context?

What Howard said Thursday:
  • Asked Thursday to defend his statement in the Texas radio interview, Dean said: "It was a little out of context. ... We can only win if we change our strategy dramatically. ... We want to serve our troops well. They're doing a fantastic job in Iraq."
Hmm. We're still not seeing the "out of context" part. We do agree that out and out retreat would be a dramatic strategy change, though. And it seems that Howard is taking a page out of John Kerry's playbook whereby he supported the troops before he stopped supporting them (and then read his poll numbers and started supporting them again.)

48 Comments:

Anonymous loaded dice said...

"Run Howard Run" ...it's on my front bumper right next to "Run Hillary Run"...........

12/11/2005 11:51:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Hillary is a Beeyatch with a Capital "C".

12/11/2005 11:54:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Wouldn't mind seeing a ten inch cigar hanging out of hillary while seated in the oval office...

12/11/2005 01:14:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Off topic but just read F.O.P. site regarding H.R. 218. They are not taking leagal action (Suprise!) at the city's refusal to certify retired officers. What corrupt fuckin joke this union is. See F.O.P. current updates.

12/11/2005 02:07:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Howard Dean for Prez!!!!!!!!

12/11/2005 02:17:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

FOP is not a UNION. Hey... we are the idiots who keep voting these daley fuckin hacks in.

Vote for them again. Or disband and cause the mayor a ton of aggravation. FOP will never do shit for us until we back them into a corner. They are all under daleys thumb. Fuckin sellouts that will rot in hell.

If you dont like takin it in the pooper quite bending over for FOP and daley.

12/11/2005 02:18:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

SCC.....maybe you should start another string on this concealed carry?

The city is dragging their feet because issues of liability haven't been made clear enough for King Daley. Remember, this is the same man who has never been without an armed bodyguard in his entire life.

King Daley doesn't want the city to be stuck with a liability issue should they certify someone who later embarresses the city. That's mostly a political issue, but as a copper and not a lawyer, I can imagine some imaginative attorney would attack the city's deep pockets should police officer jaggoff slip through the cracks and misuse his/her firearm off duty.

This needs to be attacked at the state level. Immunize local governments from the actions of retirees relative to H.B. 218. Once that is done, King Daley cannot refuse to cooperate. Call your legislator and state senator and express your opinion.

12/11/2005 03:25:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

You only need a gun when you retire or off-duty if you treated your arrestees like a jagoff! Besides if the bad guy is gonna take you out he probably will hit from behind or surprise! If he wants you he's gonna get you!

12/11/2005 03:41:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

The last comment was made from either an idiot officer or a troll. I can only think of a thousand situations a gun would come in handy for a retired guy besides an old arrest coming back to get him.

12/11/2005 03:45:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

WEEEEEEAAAKKKK!!! All SCC's gotz is baggin' Howie, who's just a DNC Talking Head...but noooo- Pay NO ATTENTION to the FUCKS behind the curtain... wrecking the country!
The GEORGIE "WHAT NEXT DICK & KARL" BUSH-LEAGUE!!! Truly awful! NOW we'll all KNOW what a SECOND CARTER Presidency would have felt like... OUCH! Not this bad!!!

12/11/2005 05:12:00 PM  
Anonymous leftisthebest said...

While, since Shady and Little Malcolm must be out Christmas shopping, I'll step to the plate from the request by M.

The first comment by Dean was the U.S. cannot win the invasion of Iraq. The second comment is we can win the invasion of Iraq if things are done differently. Where is the reverse course? He states the militaty establishment can win if the strategy is changed.

Secondly, one can be opposed to the invasion of Iraq but can still support the troops. That needs no explaining. Should me where Dean said he did not support the troops.

Finally, Dean as DNC chair? I dunno. He is a trifle too to the right for myself, but I'll take him as a Democratic candidate over Hillary.

12/11/2005 05:54:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

WE NEED A NATIONAL BAN ON HANDGUNS!! As for this H.R.218 crap put aside the beer balls most of you coppers got. Maybe you should have learned to fight back in the school yard and not hide behind your mama's back. Your daddy was probably one of those old time thief cops that they had back then.(some of you still are)

12/11/2005 06:09:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Yeeeeeeeeeeeaaaaaaaaaaahhhhhhhh!!!!!!!!

12/11/2005 06:09:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Yes your guys could scratch yer balls with yer gun while off-duty.... Pound nails into the wall like Barney Fife...

12/11/2005 06:11:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Re: Anonymous 6:09

Dear Anonymous,

Eat shit!

Respectfully,

Me

12/11/2005 06:17:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Howard Deano is a cock-smooching queer. Who the fuck really cares what he has to say about anything?

12/11/2005 06:35:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

SCC.. Dean is an idiot, and it is about time Democrats ask for his resignation. He is like President Bush in that both are putting the current situation in Iraq as a win or lose situation. First, the Iraq war is over. We won. The military's objective was to depose Sadaam Hussein, and to render safe his weapons. The military has done that in fantastic fashion, and with minimal casulties. The casulties started coming when we failed to deal with the political question. The Cheney Administration and the Rumsfeld Defense Department have in every measurable way failed. The outcome politically will be a government that is an Islamic theocracy that will have close ties to Iran. So we should all hail the great Cheney/Rumsfeld Administration in their great victory. Iran has finally won the Iran/Iraq War; it just took the U.S. military, billions of dollars of the U.S. treasury and thousands of U.S. soldier's lives to obtain that victory.

12/11/2005 06:36:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I believe 35 states have the carry and conceal law---its a great law!! Good citizens after background checks and training can protect themselves--Crime goes down in those areas! Just like our founding fathers stated we have a right to bear arms!!! REMEMBER YOU LIBERAL PINKO MORONS---ITS NOT THE GUN THAT KILLS PEOPLE ITS THE PERSON PULLING THE TRIGGER

12/11/2005 06:57:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

3:41/6:09/6:11 pm

Delusional asshole(s). Ever get the feeling you're being ignored?

12/11/2005 07:17:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I work in the suburbs, are all you city cops such boors.

12/11/2005 08:58:00 PM  
Anonymous almost 29 and a day said...

to 0207
I am not a defender of FOP BUT in this case it may be the proper action to delay lawsuits
The reason is that if a lawsuit is pending the City will be allowed to drag its heels until the lawsuit is resolved.
This could take ten-fifteen years
So at this time, inaction may be the best action

12/11/2005 09:18:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

06:57 You Pretzel Logic MORON!
A Handgun is a KILLING machine-The MORE of them easily available equals a GREATER CHANCE of MORE SHOOTING DEATHS, not LESS! NOT GOOD for you and I ON-DUTY to face MORE guns- and off-duty we're already set so leave well enough alone- no copper here in their right mind is going to pinch any retired member packing with half his wits still about him. The Founding Fathers were talking about long rifles, keeping the ability to form a militia... handguns are crappy to repel foreign invaders or domestic governmental tyranny, but just perfect to fuck up city life and COPPERS lives if any more get out there! New Long Rifles for all, new handguns for NONE except us! (Retired coppers also, fine) THE NRA & their gun manufacturing lobby masters could care less about us! It's all about the $$$$$

12/11/2005 10:15:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Hey dickwad (10:15) I'm a copper and I'm NRA! Go fuck yourself! I may not always be a copper, but I'll always be a gun owner. People kill people, not guns. Guns are a tool, use it well or use it poorly, but a tool.

With your hypocritcal logic, we should outlaw automobiles because as you know, far more people are killed with cars than are with guns.

And criminals....they call them criminals for a reason, because they break the law. Law abiding citizens should not be left defenseless.

Take your hypocritical head and shove it up your ass.

12/11/2005 10:21:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Okay 10:21 BRAINIAC- You're the TOOL!
HANDGUNS are a TOOL - to KILL THINGS- first and foremost people, occasionally a dog or something wild. Comparing CARS and GUNS is a dubious line of reasoning, go smoke another doobie rolled from LaPierre's underwear! The next time some headstrong westcide dawg turns and pulls a HUMMER H3 out of his waistband and tries to kill me with it, then I guess you told me so! You are SO brainwashed by the NRA!

12/11/2005 10:38:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

This is for all you liberal morons in the CRUSADE against guns!!!! In every state where carrying is legal the crime rate is by far lower than the national average. Here in Chicago, a city with the most stringent gun laws in the country, we still lead the world in murders by firearm per capita. Well ya know why??? The laws on carrying guns are only followed by LAW ABIDING CITIZENS!!! You really think Will or Juan or any other shithead can give a rats ass about having a F.O.I.D. card!!!! or even read the existing gun laws. Hell, they can't even bother to get a drivers license. But tell ya what they do know.... they know that only the police and themselves are armed. So when John Q. Public (un armed liberal prick) pulls up to the light at Grand and Central Park in his new BMW 700 series on his way downtown from Oak Park cause the 290 is jammed, Will knows that ride is his uncontested as soon as he ups the pistol in little Johnnies face. Then after Johnny is done pissing himself he can dial 911 on his cell phone while watching his ride drive off in the sunset. Then he can cry about "where were the police." Bottom line... cigarettes kill more people in one year than guns do in ten years. If you liberal jagoffs need a crusade to fight jump on that bandwagon. If you don't want to carry a gun well fine. You be a sheep, but dont force your pathetic pacifist liberal views on the rest of society. Every person should have the right to protect themselvs. The police can't be everywhere all the time and when that one in a million chance happens to you and the animal decides to take your life or have his way with your wife or whatever.... ask Michael Moore what he would have done!!!!!!!

12/11/2005 10:52:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

All those who advocate that retirees are just pussies that have never been in a fight are the same assholes that will be crying about it when they retire. HR218 is a national law....make them abide by it. END OF DISCUSSION!!!

12/11/2005 10:56:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

THE CRIMINAL WILL ALWAYS GET THE GUN IF HE WANTS IT---ITS THE LAWABIDING CITIZEN THAT NEEDS PROTECTION AND SHOULD BE ALLOWED TO BEAR ARMS-----AND OUR FOUNDING FATHERS WERE TALKING ABOUT PROTECTING OURSELVES !! NOT NECESSARILY WITH RIFLES--PROTECTING OURSELVES BY ANY MEANS!! YOU LIBERAL IDIOTS NEED A HISTORY LESSON

12/11/2005 11:43:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

READ THE LITERATURE ON CARRY AND CONCEAL YOU LIBERAL MORON---YOU WILL BE SHOCKED TO REALIZE THAT CARRY AND CONCEAL REALLY WORKS---I CHALLENGE YOU TO LOOK IT UP AND SEE FOR YOURSELF

12/11/2005 11:45:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Listen Mister Third Grade Insult Spewer-
admittedly your nightmare ghetto scenario has some fearmongering twinges of merit. No one wants to get punked. But entertain THIS scenario- say a hardcore copper like NORTHSIDE, who in his struggle with the angry mob forming, led by Bobby Rush when he was trying to successfully arrest a car thief: WHAT IF a few of those WONDERFUL, FULLY LEGIT "law abiding" citizens who "DIDN'T AGREE" with the real police decide not to back down? Don't you see the potential for vigilanteeism, that could very conceivable CONFLICT with our office AT ANY GIVEN TIME? This isn't the boondocks or some tumbleweed backwater in the desert Southwest- these are the streets of Chicago! If folks want or need guns bad enough here, hell- I'll bet they may already have them! It doesn't mean we need to ENCOURAGE every other green or possible unstable or wicked Tom, Dick and DIRTY HARRY to strap one on!

Remove your head from your nether regions soon- to be a cop and PRO-GUN CONTROL is logical and sensible! If a decent citizen must be an "OUTLAW" to wield a gun and save their life or anothers- they should be rewarded and ideally not harshly punished. Maybe even as far as one other here who will check their credentials and wish someone "a good night" when packing. But the answer is to not promote further proiliferation of urban GUNPLAY. Things WILL get worse and I believe MORE POLICEMEN will be at risk on a daily basis. More handguns produced, more sold, more stolen, more used equals MORE DEAD, possibly MORE of US! This will be an INEVITABLE FACT! WAKE UP!!! YES to SHOTGUNS, NO to CONCEALABLE WEAPONS! Let's pour some of the hundreds of billions soaking into the bloody Iraqi sands into stabilizing and improving our society so it doesn't have to resemble a cretinous Charles Bronson Death Wish flick!
I CHALLENGE Y-O-U TO OPEN YOUR CLOSED MIND AND ACTAULLY CONSIDER ANOTHER OUTCOME- I DOUBT THAT YOU CAN BECAUSE YOU'RE THE TYPE THAT THINK THEY KNOW E-V-E-R-Y-T-H-I-N-G... (a dime a dozen!)

12/11/2005 11:56:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

What can I say to 10:38 other than go fuck yourself. The NRA is the premier organization for gun safety. They train thousands of police and civilians in marksmanship as well as safety.

The NRA is America, I'm an American and I'm the NRA. So fuck you!

Merry Christmas everyone else!

12/12/2005 12:18:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

to 11:56 moron!

what good is a shotgun when somebody wants to take the family out to dinner or on a road trip to florida... there is a never ending supply of guns already so that argument that there will be more guns makes no sense. every law abiding citizen should have the RIGHT TO BEAR ARMS! so take YOUR head out of YOUR ass!

12/12/2005 12:27:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

11:56 stop pretending to be the police. wearing the badge and gun doesn't make you a cop, just a bleeding heart liberal in a halloween costume.

12/12/2005 12:31:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

11:56:51 You should not carry a gun at any time. above the law If you don't trust the citizens who ultimately pay our salary, you must really lord the fact over them that "you" can carry all the time.

12/12/2005 12:36:00 AM  
Anonymous Oops! Another one bites the dust said...

The ULTIMATE OXYMORON:

"GUN SAFETY"

We average 30,000 deaths a year- any other "PRODUCT" manufacturer would have been sued back to the Stone Ages by now... but Thanks N.R.A. - for our own AMERICAN HOLOCAUST (part three in a continuing series) How MANY P.O.'s CHILDREN ALONE, not to mention P.O.'s themselves have taken their own life with a gun? EVERY YEAR it's as much as a 10-to-1 ratio for every copper fatally shot in the line of duty many more will take their OWN lives... these things we carry are a necessary CURSE and it's more amazing every day that we are able to control them to the extent we do. Every pistol NOT in our COMMAND is THAT MUCH MORE FRIGHTENING! Try and stop "making love to your weapon" in your PRO-GUN CRUSADE and see the handgun for what it largely is- the actual WEAPON of MASS DESTRUCTION in OUR SOCIETY that we can do something about!

"Happiness is Warm Gun- (BANG-BANG-SHOOT-SHOOT)" - Mark David Chapman

12/12/2005 01:11:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

In 1987, when Florida passed a concealed gun law, politics warned that “the Sunshine State” would become the “Gunshine State.” Contrary to their prediction, homicide rates dropped faster than the national average. Also, in 1997 only one person with a permit, out of over 350,000 permits issued was convicted of homicide. So why shouldn’t a concealed gun law become a national law seeing these statistics. Stated with Right to Carry laws have the lowest violent crime rates. On an average, states with these laws have a 24% lower total crime rate, a 19% lower homicide rate, a 39% lower robbery rate, and a 19% lower aggravated assault rate, compared to other stated. The nine states with the lowest violent crime rates have right to carry laws. The NRA states that “An armed society is a polite society.” Requirements for carrying a concealed gun consist of a license fee, a safety training program, fingerprinting, having no criminal record, no history of mental illness, etc. These requirements should weed out the bad seeds of society. So if this happened, we would live in a much safer United States.

These are FACTS!!!! Look them up you illiterate pansy--or are you too afraid to be proven wrong????

12/12/2005 01:31:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

TO 01:11 ONLY A MENTALLY CHALLENGED LIBERAL DOG ASS COWARD PACIFIST (I COULD GO ON AND ON) LIKE YOUR SELF WOULD BRING UP SUICIDES AND ACCIDENTAL CHILD DEATHS WHEN TALKING ABOUT GUN CONTROL.

#1 IF SOMEONE WANTS TO TAKE THERE LIFE DO YOU REALLY THINK THAT IF THEY DONT HAVE ACCESS TO A GUN THAT WILL STOP THEM. " I REALLY WANT TO END MY LIFE TODAY BUT SINCE I DON'T HAVE A GUN AND I'M NOT SMART ENOUGH TO COME UP WITH THE THOUSANDS OF ALTERNATIVE MEANS I THINK I WILL GO ON LIVING OUT MY MISERABLE PATHETIC LIFE."

WORDS BY JOE LIBERAL

#2 FAR MORE CHILDREN DIE EACH YEAR BY ACCIDENTAL POISIONING THAN BY FIREARMS YET WE NEVER SEE YOU OR MICHAEL MOORE PROTESTING THE USE OF DRAINO, CLOROX, ROBATUSSIN, ASPIRIN, VITAMINS, PRECSRIPTION DRUGS, PESTICIDES, ETC., ETC. LEAVE IT TO A LIBERAL TO BRING " SAVING THE CHILDREN " INTO ANY DEBATE THEY HAVE. BUT IF I REMEMBER CORRECTLY, ITS WAS THAT DISGUSTING PATHETIC LIBERAL ORGANIZATION KNOWN AS THE A.C.L.U. THAT DEFENDED THE ORGANIZATION KNOWN AS NAMBLA (NORTH AMERICAN MAN/BOY LOVE ASSOCIATION). BOTH MENTIONED GROUPS MADE UP STRICTLY OF DEMOCRATS AND LIBERALS. SO MUCH FOR YOU LIBERAL ASSHOLES "PROTECTING THE CHILDREN."

ALL FUCKING LIBERALS SHOULD FUCKING HANG!!!!

12/12/2005 02:14:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

YOU DUMMIES KEEP QUOTING LOTT- HE'S A CHARLATAN and you are his DUPES! You DUPA-YOSHES! (and put on your clothes caveman- before you accidentally hang yourself with them- you're obsessed with death, pinhead!)

http://www.townhall.com/opinion/columns/michellemalkin/2003/02/05/169170.html

For those few of us in the mainstream media who openly support Second Amendment rights, research scholar John Lott has been -- or rather, had been -- an absolute godsend. Armed with top-notch credentials (including stints at Stanford, Rice, UCLA, Wharton, Cornell, the University of Chicago and Yale), Lott took on the entrenched anti-gun bias of the ivory tower with seemingly meticulous scholarship. His best-selling 1998 book, "More Guns, Less Crime," provided analysis of FBI crime data that showed a groundbreaking correlation between concealed-weapons laws and reduced violent crime rates. I met Lott briefly after a seminar at the University of Washington in Seattle several years ago and was deeply impressed by his intellectual rigor. Lott responded directly and extensively to critics' arguments. He made his data accessible to many other researchers. But as he prepares to release a new book, "Bias Against Guns," next month, Lott must grapple with an emerging controversy -- brought to the public eye by the blogosphere -- that goes to the heart of his academic integrity. The most disturbing charge, first raised by retired University of California, Santa Barbara professor Otis Dudley Duncan and pursued by Australian computer programmer Tim Lambert, is that Lott fabricated a study claiming that 98 percent of defensive gun uses involved mere brandishing, as opposed to shooting. When Lott cited the statistic peripherally on page three of his book, he attributed it to "national surveys." In the second edition, he changed the citation to "a national survey that I conducted." He has also incorrectly attributed the figure to newspaper polls and Florida State University criminologist Gary Kleck. Last fall, Northwestern University law professor James Lindgren volunteered to investigate the claimed existence of Lott's 1997 telephone survey of 2,424 people. "I thought it would be exceedingly simple to establish" that the research had been done, Lindgren wrote in his report (posted online at http://www.cse.unsw.edu.au/~lambert/guns/lindgren.html). It was not simple. Lott claims to have lost all of his data due to a computer crash. He financed the survey himself and kept no financial records. He has forgotten the names of the students who allegedly helped with the survey and who supposedly dialed thousands of survey respondents long-distance from their own dorm rooms using survey software Lott can't identify or produce. Assuming the survey data was lost in a computer crash, it is still remarkable that Lott could not produce a single, contemporaneous scrap of paper proving the survey's existence, such as the research protocol or survey instrument. After Lindgren's report was published, a Minnesota gun rights activist named David Gross came forward, claiming he was surveyed in 1997. Some have said that Gross's account proves that the survey was done. I think skepticism is warranted. Lott now admits he used a fake persona, "Mary Rosh," to post voluminous defenses of his work over the Internet. "Rosh" gushed that Lott was "the best professor that I ever had." She/he also penned an effusive review of "More Guns, Less Crime" on Amazon.com: "It was very interesting reading and Lott writes very well." (Lott claims that one of his sons posted the review in "Rosh's" name.) Just last week, "Rosh" complained on a blog comment board: "Critics such as Lambert and Lindgren ought to slink away and hide." By itself, there is nothing wrong with using a pseudonym. But Lott's invention of Mary Rosh to praise his own research and blast other scholars is beyond creepy. And it shows his extensive willingness to deceive to protect and promote his work. Some Second Amendment activists believe there is an anti-gun conspiracy to discredit Lott as "payback" for the fall of Michael Bellesiles, the disgraced former Emory University professor who engaged in rampant research fraud to bolster his anti-gun book, "Arming America." But it wasn't an anti-gun zealot who unmasked Rosh/Lott. It was Internet blogger Julian Sanchez, a staffer at the libertarian Cato Institute, which staunchly defends the Second Amendment. And it was the conservative Washington Times that first reported last week on the survey dispute in the mainstream press. In an interview Monday, Lott stressed that his new defensive gun use survey (whose results will be published in the new book) will show similar results to the lost survey. But the existence of the new survey does not lay to rest the still lingering doubts about the old survey's existence. The media coverage of the 1997 survey data dispute, Lott told me, is "a bunch to do about nothing." I wish I could agree.
Michelle Malkin is a syndicated columnist and maintains her weblog at michellemalkin.com.

12/12/2005 02:23:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

What Democrat are we going to support in the upcoming elections? They have done so much for us over the year, especially the Mayor and 49 goofs in our own city hall. Who the hell decides who we endorse?

12/12/2005 02:24:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

The State Health Division of the Oregon Department of Human Resources conducted a study of fatal and nonfatal suicide attempts among adolescents in Oregon from 1988-93 (5). Over the six-year period, there were 3,783 suicide attempts among persons aged 17 and under; 124 attempts resulted in death. The most common method of attempted suicide among this age group was the ingestion of drugs (75.5%), followed by cutting/piercing (11.1%), other poisonings (4.8%), suffocation/hanging (2.4%), and firearms (0.6%). The more common methods used were the least likely to result in death; for example, only 0.4% of all attempts by drug overdose were fatal. In contrast, 78.2% of attempts involving firearms resulted in the death of the adolescent. Sixty-four percent (63.7%) of all suicide deaths among adolescents in Oregon from 1988-93 were the result of firearm use.

12/12/2005 02:25:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

(If the ACLU will defend NAMBLA and RUSH, they might even defend you in your concealed-carry cock-up one day... don't knock them until you know you won't need them, Patrick Fucking Henry!)

Strange Bedfellows: ACLU and Rush Limbaugh
The ACLU is is siding with Rush Limbaugh:

The American Civil Liberties Union took sides with Rush Limbaugh on Monday by complaining that Florida investigators violated the conservative radio host's rights when they seized his medical records. The odd coupling of the civil liberties group and the broadcaster beloved for bashing came in a criminal probe of Limbaugh's admitted use of prescription painkillers, in which authorities in Palm Beach County used a search warrant to seize files from his doctors.

In a friend-of-the-court petition to Florida's Fourth District Court of Appeal, the ACLU said investigators violated Limbaugh's constitutional right to privacy when they took the records in a raid rather than notifying Limbaugh and using a subpoena, which would have given Limbaugh the right to object before the seizure.

The ACLU and Rush are right on this one.

12/12/2005 02:30:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Here is Dean's video where he breaks from reality....fucking sweet:

http://politicalhumor.about.com/gi/dynamic/offsite.htm?zi=1/XJ&sdn=politicalhumor&zu=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.baltimoresun.com%2Ffeatures%2Fla-dean19-video%2C0%2C6005088.realvideo%3Fcoll%3Dbal-features-headlines

12/12/2005 02:50:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

This statement reaffirms the 1992 position of the American Academy of Pediatrics that the absence of guns from children's homes and communities is the most reliable and effective measure to prevent firearm-related injuries in children and adolescents. A number of specific measures are supported to reduce the destructive effects of guns in the lives of children and adolescents, including the regulation of the manufacture, sale, purchase, ownership, and use of firearms; a ban on handguns and semiautomatic assault weapons; and expanded regulations of handguns for civilian use. In addition, this statement reviews recent data, trends, prevention, and intervention strategies of the past 5 years.

SCOPE OF THE PROBLEM

In 1997, 32 436 firearm-related deaths (12.12/100 000) occurred in the United States, of which 4223 of the victims were children and adolescents younger than 20 years of age.1 Handguns continue to account for the majority of deaths and injuries from firearms in the United States.2-6 Compared with the period from 1980 through 1985, death rates from firearms for children and adolescents increased by 31.8% during 1986 through 1992, primarily as a result of increases in the number of homicides.7 The data from 1993 through 1997 indicate a decline each year in the overall number of deaths and death rates from firearms. For all ages, the rate of firearm-related deaths fell in 1997 to 12.12 after peaking in 1993 at 15.36 per 100 000. In 1997, firearm-related deaths for adolescents 15 through 19 years of age decreased from 28.00 in 1994 to 18.84 in 1997 (Fig 1). This decrease establishes a downward trend after nearly 10 years of increase.

Nonetheless, by the year 2003, firearm-related deaths may become the leading cause of injury-related death.8 In fact, in 1996, in 5 states (Alaska, Louisiana, Maryland, Nevada, and Virginia) and the District of Columbia, firearm-related deaths already outnumbered the deaths related to motor vehicle crashes (A. Crosby, written communication, February 1999).

In 1997, firearm-related deaths accounted for 22.5% of all injury deaths in children and adolescents 1 through 19 years of age.1 Among adolescents 15 through 19 years of age, 32.2% of all injury deaths are firearm related (Table 1). Among black males 10 through 34 years of age, injuries from firearms are the leading cause of death.9 Most firearm-related deaths of children occur before their arrival at the hospital.

PATTERNS OF INJURY IN SUBPOPULATIONS OF CHILDREN AND ADOLESCENTS
Although national data cannot fully document urban and rural differences in the patterns of injuries from firearms that involve children, local data indicate that children in rural areas, as well as in urban areas, are at risk for firearm-related mortality.12-15 For rural and urban areas, handguns account for the greatest proportion of firearm-related injuries.15,16

National firearm-related death and injury statistics are presented overall, by age and sex and specifically for whites and blacks only.1 However, knowledge of the specific rates and an understanding of the patterns of injury in other ethnic groups and communities are important to direct community-specific interventions. Figure 2 illustrates firearm-related death rates for persons 15 through 24 years old of different racial and ethnic groups from 1970 through 1996.

INTERNATIONAL COMPARISONS

The United States has the highest rates of firearm-related deaths (including homicide, suicide, and unintentional deaths) among industrialized countries.17 The overall rate of firearm-related deaths for US children younger than 15 years of age is nearly 12 times greater than that found for 25 other industrialized countries, and the rate of firearm-related homicide is nearly 16 times higher than that in all the other countries combined.18 This difference in these rates seems to be related to a large extent to the ease of availability of guns in the United States compared with other industrialized countries. The lower rates of crime, assaults, and homicides in Vancouver, British Columbia, compared with Seattle, Washington, has been attributed to different handgun regulations.19,20 The available National Pediatric Trauma Registry morbidity data from Toronto, Ontario, for the years 1986 to 1992 are also in sharp contrast to the US experience; <.5% of trauma admissions were attributable to gunshot wounds in Toronto compared with 5% in the United States.13

ECONOMIC COSTS OF FIREARM-RELATED INJURY
Miller and Cohen21 calculated that the financial cost to society resulting from gunshot-related injuries totaled $112 billion in 1992. Half of the cost derives from assaults and murders; suicides and suicide attempts are responsible for most of the remaining cost. Medical direct costs for the average hospitalized person with gunshot wounds is $25 000.21 The method for calculating these costs, as described by Miller and Cohen,21 includes costs of life support; hospital room; intensive care unit; surgical theater; outpatient department use; and related supplies and services; professional fees; rehabilitation; nursing care; and for fatalities, autopsy, and burial. The most severe cases include a lifetime of care costs. A more recent publication cites the mean medical cost per gunshot injury of approximately $17 000, with the 134 445 gunshot injuries in the United States in 1994 producing $2.3 billion in lifetime medical costs, of which $1.1 billion (49%) was paid by US taxpayers. Gunshot injuries attributable to assaults represented 74% of the total costs.3 It is estimated that 20 000 people per year are left paralyzed by a bullet from a handgun; the approximate number of people paralyzed and the lifetime medical costs are analogous to those of the polio epidemic of the 1950s.22

12/12/2005 02:53:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Even funnier clip of Dean's famous clip:

http://www.consumptionjunction.com/content/detail.asp?ID=32460&type=1

(Might not want to open in public)

12/12/2005 02:54:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

HA!
WATCH A-N-Y AND EVERY BUSH JR. SPEECH...

NOW T-H-A-T-'S BREAKING FROM REALITY!!!

ONLY THREE MORE YEARS OF THIS RETARD-
-WHAT WILL HE FUCK UP AND CHARGE YOU FOR NEXT?

ENJOY, AND BEND OVER- CAUSE HERE IT COMES AGAIN- RIGHT IN YOUR BROWN EYE, REPUGNANTCONS!

WHO IS THE REAL YAHOO?

YOU AND YOUR GOD "DUBYA"!!!

DAMN ARE YOU STUPID- HIS HANDS ARE IN YOUR POCKETS WHILE YOU BASH DEAN AND DA DEMS!
DUH!

WAKE UP!!!

12/12/2005 02:58:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Sigmund Freud says, Men who play with guns have small penis!

12/12/2005 09:20:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

to 9:20:08.....

Sigmund Frued says..... YOU'RE GAY!!!

12/12/2005 09:43:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

HEY O'GRADY YOU FUCKING JAGGOFF, DID YOU RENEW YOUR NAMBLA MEMBERSHIP? ONLY A CUM SWALLOWING FAGGOT LIKE YOU WOULD DENY ME MY RIGHT TO KEEP AND BEAR ARMS WHICH IS WRITTEN INTO THE CONSTITUTION. UNLIKE YOU AND YOUR JAGOOF LIBERALS WHO WANT TO EXTEND CONSTITUTIONAL PROTECTIONS TO CAPTURED TERRORISTS. YOU STILL SUPPORT FREEING MUMMIA? YOU ARE ONE FUCKED UP IN THE HEAD LOOSER.

12/13/2005 09:02:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

This is for the anti-gun police.
Have you ever locked someone up with a pistol who purchased it legally??? I dont think so. Well maybe some guy you sandbanged on a domestic. You remember the guy with no record, a foid card, some hunting guns, and one or two pistols. You charged him with the MCC Failure to Register(nice way to beef up your stats). He bought his guns legally. Now other than him how many bad guys bought their firearm through proper channels? I bet your racking your brain trying to remeber.
Why shouldn't the Law abiding public be able to carry? The nurse who works nights in a shitty area? The store owner who has to deposit his earnings at the end of a night?
The elderly man or woman who cant afford to move out of a changing area? The residents of Chicago who are afraid to go out after dark? Maybe Daleys bodyguards could stop getting him coffe and volunteer their protective services to those types listed above.
Theres a lot of comments about how people should be able to protect themselves unarmed. I have no problem with that. I worked in the jail before coming on the job. Everyday I would walk on the deck with 66 inmates unarmed. Ive been attacked and taken my lumps. I was also able to defend my self while unarmed( IF YOU CANT TELL IM THROWING A SHOY AT THE GUY WHINNING ABOUT LEARNING TO FIGHT IN THE SCOOLYARD). That didnt bother me in the least. However not everyone has the physical prowess to defend themselves. Maybe things would have worked out diffrently for the woman who lost her finger on Archer ave, or the woman put in a trunk, if they were armed.
Last but not least any working coppers first instinct is to take action. Just because someone retirees do you really think that instinct is gone?? Do you want to be in a 7/11 when in gets robbed? Burglars get in to your house or robbed when you your xmas shopping and not be able to protect your self or your family?
Well I sure as hell dont! Im sure the law abiding public and retirees feel the same way.

Good day to you Sir.

P.S. You must have went to a pretty tough grammar school if you were fighting robbers, gang bangers, drug dealers,killers, sex offenders and regular bad guys on the play ground. This deparment is lucky to have you Sir.

12/17/2005 03:20:00 PM  

<< Home

Newer Posts.......................... ..........................Older Posts