South Carolina Congressman whips out gun during meeting with constituents, claims "I'm not going to be a Gabby Giffords."

Ralph Norman on the left, one of his constituents on the right.

Courtesy of CNN: 

Republican Rep. Ralph Norman pulled out his loaded, personal .38-caliber Smith & Wesson handgun Friday and laid it on the table at a diner where he was meeting with his constituents in Rock Hill, South Carolina. 

Norman told CNN he wanted to make a point in the debate over gun violence. 

"I merely proved a point that guns themselves are not the issue," he said. 

Norman said that having a loaded gun in the room should, if anything, have made people feel more safe. 

"Given the scenario that if someone had walked into that diner and began to fire a weapon, I told them I would be able to defend myself and them as well," he explained.

Jesus what is it with these little boys and their little toys?

And as if this were not pathetic enough this idiot went and said this: 

"I'm not going to be a Gabby Giffords," Norman told the newspaper, referring to the Democratic former congresswoman from Arizona who was shot at a constituent gathering in her district in 2011. "I don't mind dying, but whoever shoots me better shoot well or I'm shooting back."

Sounds like somebody has been watching too many John Wayne movies.

For the record being armed would not have protected Gabby Giffords, she was shot almost immediately in a place where she felt perfectly safe.

In fact Mark Kelly, Gabby's husband responded to this news on Twitter:

When I think of @GabbyGiffords, I think of courage and public service, not intimidating constituents. You’re no Gabby, @RepRalphNorman. You pull out a gun when you are prepared and need to use it – not for a stunt. https://t.co/kkAHo2eSuE

— Mark Kelly (@ShuttleCDRKelly) April 6, 2018

What this man did was to endanger everybody at that meeting, since ANYBODY could have grabbed that gun and started shooting.

This man has now demonstrated that he is unfit for office, and hopefully the voters in his district will do the right thing.

Sarah Palin brags about Breitbart giving her a platform after the Gabby Giffords shooting when Roger Ailes tried to keep her from embarrassing herself.

Still  from Sarah Palin's "Blood Libel" video.

Unfortunately I have to link to Breitbart in order to share this story.

I of course do not encourage you to click the link, but it is only good blogging etiquette to provide it.

Courtesy of Breitbart:  

The late Andrew Breitbart helped Sarah Palin defend herself when Fox News Channel’s former Chairman Roger Ailes denied her the opportunity to respond on air to the media’s false accusations framing her for inciting the attempted assassination of former Congresswoman Gabrielle “Gabby” Giffords (D-AZ) in the days immediately following the 2011 Tucson mass shooting incident. 

“If it weren’t for Breitbart, so much of our commonsense defense wouldn’t have gotten out there, because I was working for Fox News at the time, and I was not allowed to go on the air to defend myself for days,” Palin said, speaking publicly about this for the first time, during a Friday interview on SiriusXM’s Breitbart News Tonight with Breitbart’s Senior Editor-at-Large Rebecca Mansour.

(That's right, Palin and RAM together again.)

“I think that that time was our toughest time in this last decade of being out there on a public platform, [with] false accusations that we were to blame for the Gabby Giffords shooting,” said Palin. “If it weren’t for Breitbart, so much of our commonsense defense wouldn’t have gotten out there, because I was working for Fox News at the time, and I was not allowed to go on the air to defend myself for days, and finally I bucked management of Fox News—I never even talked about this publicly—I bucked management and said, ‘I’ll do my own video, and I’ll post it, and I’ll explain to people that, no, we are not to blame.’ My relationship with Fox was never the same after that.” 

Palin noted Ailes’ repeated refusal to allow her a platform to defend herself from a barrage of media attacks falsely accusing her of inciting mass murder. 

“I had asked [Roger Ailes], ‘How many days do we have to go listening to this with no defense articulated at all? May I please go on the air?’ And he wouldn’t let me,” said Palin. “So that was a tough time.”

Ailes, for his part, was simply trying to protect his on air talent from embarrassing herself and attracting national ridicule, since at that time she was still considered a draw for Fox News.

Of course Palin defied Ailes, made her now famous "Blood Libel" video, and attracted far more scorn and ridicule than any amount of silence on her part would ever have brought down on her.

Which apparently she STILL does not realize.

Palin went on to make it even worse: 

“[I wish] people understood what it does to a family, how it potentially could rip apart a family because everybody has a different idea of how to react to the circumstances around you, and that causes some stress,” said Palin. “I thank God every day that I have a strong family, and we’re doing great. Hopefully our story could inspire people to know that whatever they’re facing, the sun will come out tomorrow and things can get better. It’s just a matter of how you react to sometimes horrible circumstances around you.”

That's right folks the sun WILL come out tomorrow, and then if you have a "strong family" like the Palins by tomorrow evening your son might break into your house and beat your husband half to death, or y'all might show up drunk to a party and end up fighting with just about everybody until the police arrive, or you could once again wind up in court trying to help your daughter attempt to take custody away from another one her baby daddies. 

Apparently in Palin's world that's what constitutes "doing great." 

Editor called to testify in Sarah Palin defamation lawsuit says that article wanted to illustrate charged political rhetoric's connection to violence, not accuse Palin of directly influencing the shooting of Gabby Giffords.

Courtesy of the New York Times:  

The editor of The New York Times editorial page testified on Wednesday that he did not intend in an editorial to blame the former vice-presidential candidate Sarah Palin for a 2011 mass shooting, but was instead trying to make a point about the heated political environment. The editorial is the focus of a defamation lawsuit brought by Ms. Palin against the news organization. 

The editor, James Bennet, said he had wanted to draw a link between charged political rhetoric and an atmosphere of political incitement after a gunman opened fired in June on a baseball field where Republican congressmen were practicing, injuring several people including Representative Steve Scalise of Louisiana. But Mr. Bennet said he was not trying to make a direct connection between a map of targeted electoral districts that Ms. Palin’s political action committee had circulated and the 2011 shooting in Arizona by Jared Loughner that severely injured Representative Gabby Giffords. 

“I did not intend and was not thinking of it as a causal link to the crime,” Mr. Bennet said. During cross-examination, he said he did not know if Mr. Loughner had seen the map and “did not know if the map incited him to his conduct.”

I think that what Mr. Bennet wrote is a valid observation on the effects that violent rhetoric has on the behaviors of certain individuals.

We just saw that same thing take place in Charlottesville, where people reading White Supremacist postings online showed up ready to incite violence and kick ass.

We have seen this happen time and time again, what SarahPAC did with that map is nothing new, but it DID help to create an atmosphere of hostility that could be tapped into by people with certain violent tendencies.

The judge is still considering the idea of throwing this whole thing out, and if he does I really hope the Times counter sues Palin for everything she still has left.

New York Times asks judge to throw out Sarah Palin defamation suit.

Courtesy of the Miami Herald:

The New York Times has asked a judge to toss out a defamation lawsuit former Alaska governor Sarah Palin filed against it. 

The newspaper said in court papers late Friday that its prompt and full correction of an editorial that referenced Palin's political action committee nullifies her claims. 

Palin sued the Times in Manhattan federal court last month, saying the newspaper had accused her of inciting the mass shooting that severely wounded then-Arizona U.S. Rep. Gabby Giffords. She sought unspecified damages.

In court papers Friday, Times lawyers noted that the plain words of the editorial referenced Palin's "SarahPAC" political action committee rather than Palin herself.

I think ultimately that this case is going to either be thrown out or Palin will yes "uncle" and give up after the costs get too high for it to worthwhile anymore. 

Ultimately of course I would like to see Palin lose and then be forced to compensate the Times for court costs, but I do not see it going that far.

Sarah Palin will not appear at the opening day of her defamation case against the New York Times.

Courtesy of the New York Daily News: 

Conservative activist Sarah Palin won’t be attending the first court proceeding in her defamation case against The New York Times, according to her lawyer. 

The former vice presidential candidate and Alaska governor filed a lawsuit on June 27 alleging The Times ran a “fabricated story.” The initial conference in the case is set for 11 a.m. Friday. 

Asked Thursday whether Palin will be in the courtroom, her lawyer, S. Preston Ricardo, replied “No” in an email to the Daily News.

"Conservative activist?" Well I guess that sounds better than "failed reality show performer," or "political has been."

I love this part of the article: 

Palin wants The Times to pay up for “falsely stating to millions of people that she, a devoted wife, mother and grandmother, who committed a substantial portion of her adult life to public service, is part of a pattern of ‘lethal’ politics,” the suit contends.

"Devoted" wife, mother, and grandmother? 

If the court will indulge me I'd like to make an objection. Or vomit in my mouth, whichever is the more convenient.

And who is she kidding with this "committed a substantial portion of her adult life to public service?"

The only public that Palin ever served was her the public that looked back at her from a mirror every morning.

Remember this case is only seeking $75,000 in damages.

And since the Times has declared they are planning to aggressively fight this thing Palin could end up with hundreds of thousands of dollars in legal fees.

Sarah Palin really wants to prove to the naysayers that she WILL sue the New York Times. I'm a naysayer, and I say no she won't.

.@SarahPalinUSA suing @nytimes for editorial suggesting she incited Loughner attack on Gabby Giffords -- pic.twitter.com/xwJqNECW4H

— Jake Tapper (@jaketapper) June 27, 2017

Courtesy of the New York Times:

Sarah Palin, former vice-presidential candidate, filed a defamation lawsuit against The New York Times Company on Tuesday, saying the newspaper had published a statement about her in a recent editorial that it “knew to be false.” 

In the lawsuit, which was filed in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, Ms. Palin contends that The Times “violated the law and its own policies” when it linked her in an editorial to a mass shooting in January 2011.

The article points out that it issued a correction both online and on Twitter, however apparently that is not good enough for the attention whore.

Ms. Palin said in the lawsuit that The Times’s response “did not approach the degree of the retraction and apology necessary and warranted by The Times’s false assertion that Mrs. Palin incited murder.”

Aww, poor baby. So upset that somebody called her out for her inflammatory rhetoric.

However perhaps Palin and her attorney should carefully read the end of this Times article: 

In a statement, a spokeswoman for The Times said, “We have not reviewed the claim yet but will defend against any claim vigorously.”

I would contend that the Times has vastly more legal resources at their disposal than does this dried up has been. 

And if she thinks they will settle with her, then she probably does not realize that the Times is engaged in almost constant litigation for one reason or another, and does not make a habit of settling.

It would take literally no time at all, in fact I volunteer my services as a resource, for the Times to establish a pattern of Sarah Palin inciting violence against others.

I know there are multiple folks in Alaska who would be willing to testify, as would the family of the now deceased Joe McGinniss who were harassed to aggressively they were forced to change their contact information.

Hell, one of her supporters even threatened to shoot me at the school where I worked.

And let's not forget that she even fomented violence within her own family, which led to a brawl on the streets of Anchorage and her son brutalizing his fiance while waving a gun around.

No the truckloads of evidence available to paint Sarah Palin as an individual who aggressively fanned the flames of hatred and inspired death threats and even acts of violence all across the country will prove insurmountable to any legal team that Palin could afford to put together.

Having said that I actually hope that she calls my bluff and goes for it.

I have been writing about the lunacy surrounding Donald Trump for far too long now, and I welcome the opportunity to write about Sarah Palin getting her ass handed to her yet again.

Sarah Palin makes noise about suing the New York Times. She won't.

(1/2) @nytopinion - commonsense suggestion by a journalist, am talking to attorneys this AM and exploring options. BTW, wonder.. pic.twitter.com/jACvxwUBZH

— Sarah Palin (@SarahPalinUSA) June 15, 2017

(2/2) ...WHY someone would no longer be in public eye? Think constant libel & slander have anything to do with it? 🤔

— Sarah Palin (@SarahPalinUSA) June 15, 2017

Aww, poor baby.

Okay well first off this is never happening.

Palin has threatened to sue all kind of people over the years, yours truly included, and never follows up on those threats.

Secondly the Times corrected their story, which essentially shields them from any such lawsuit:

"An earlier version of this editorial incorrectly stated that a link existed between political incitement and the 2011 shooting of Representative Gabby Giffords," the Times wrote on Thursday. "In fact, no such link was established."

And thirdly the only reason that Palin is making this noise is because a couple of news outlets attacked the Times over their story. 

Smelling blood in the water, and an opportunity to get a little attention, Palin fired off those tweets.

I would bet money that she has not talked to a single lawyer about this, and that any legal conversations she HAS had more than likely have to do with keeping her first born out of jail.

As for the Times story itself, yes it is true that no link between the SarahPAC map and Loughner was ever proven, but it was still an outrageous thing to do and there is also no definitive proof that Loughner DIDN'T see the image. 

But we are agreed that he was a deeply troubled young man, but then again Palin herself is clearly also deeply troubled, or she would not tweet out these cries for help.

There was a tragic shooting today so Sarah Palin should make it all about her in 3..2..1...here we are.

Can't we all just get along? And for God's sake pay attention to me?

So apparently after all of the dust settled from that unfortunate shooting today in Virginia, which wounded Rep. Steve Scalise and three others, and resulted in the death of he gunman, Sarah Palin saw an opportunity.

So she contacted perhaps the only media outlet that still takes her calls. Breitbart News which itself is currently hemorrhaging advertisers at an alarming rate.

I will link to the website here, but feel in no way obligated to provide them with any clicks.

Here are the pertinent portions:  

“Prayers for healing are raised for all victims of today’s horrific violence, while we with lift up thankfulness that lives were not lost,” Palin told Breitbart News. “While justice is now sought upon the capture of the deranged attacker, an additional prayer must be for no acceptance of a rush to destroy anyone else in this horrible incident. Those seeking political advantage reacted so recklessly and irresponsibly the last time a member of Congress was brutally attacked, as media inexplicably played a knee-jerk blame game assuming that attacker’s motives. Today’s shooter appears to be a Bernie Sanders supporter and campaign volunteer. But Bernie Sanders is not to blame. Maybe the media have matured enough to allow coverage of this most recent violence to focus on facts, because media integrity will be crucial as America witnesses today’s events unfolding and, on behalf of our Congressional Representatives, we all seek justice.” 

Palin’s call for unity, and media responsibility—and her statement standing up for Sanders despite the shooter being a Sanders supporter—comes after she has been the target of vitriolic media rhetoric for years. Perhaps the worst example of the media targeting Palin was in the wake of the shooting of Giffords, where Palin was blamed inaccurately.

That's right Sarah Palin, who has fanned the flames of partisan rage and violence for years now, is suddenly calling for unity.

The only problem with the comparison of the Gabby Giffords shooting and what happened today is the existence of this:

Yes there are reports that this gunman once worked for the Bernie Sanders campaign, but there is no evidence that HE ever posted a map with gun sights on it that singled out a ball field in Virginia.

Not only that but Sanders IMMEDIATELY came out to condemn the shooting:

"I have just been informed that the alleged shooter at the Republican baseball practice is someone who apparently volunteered on my presidential campaign," Sanders said. "I am sickened by this despicable act. Let me be as clear as I can be: Violence of any kind is unacceptable in our society and I condemn this action in the strongest possible terms. Real change can only come about through nonviolent action, and anything else runs against our most deeply held American values."

By contrast Palin came out four days after the shooting of Gabby Giffords and gave her incredibly insensitive blood libel speech during which she made it all about her.

Gabby Giffords, by the way, also issued a timely response to the shooting today in which she said the following: 

"It doesn't matter if you're a Democrat or a Republican, nor if you're a senator or a representative, nor a staffer or a sworn officer," Giffords said. "If you serve the institution of Congress, you're connected to your colleagues, current and former, by a shared sense of service to ideals far greater than yourself. This shooting is an attack on all who serve and on all who participate in our democracy."

"I am heartbroken for the pain of Congressman Scalise, the other victims, and their family, friends, and colleagues who survived," Giffords continued in her statement. "I am thankful for the great courage of the Capitol Police, who were my protectors after I was shot and became my friends. I also know the courage it takes to recover from a shooting like this, and I know Steve and everyone there this morning have such courage in great supply."

Another very appropriate, non-partisan response that offers good wishes and a speedy recovery to others while exerting no effort to engage in blaming the media or shining the spotlight on herself.

THAT is the difference between what happened today and what happened back in 2011.

As for unity, yes we can all stand together against gun violence, and I welcome my Republican brothers and sisters to join us in that fight, but as for the partisanship, so long as the Republicans are attempting to do away with everything that President Obama accomplished in eight years, I fear that battle is only just beginning.

Cowardly Texas Congressman Louie Gohmert uses the shooting of Gabby Giffords as an excuse to avoid town halls. Giffords calls him out over it.

Louie Gohmert, who for all the world looks like an extra on the "Andy Griffith Show," posted this bullshit excuse on his website: 

Unfortunately, at this time there are groups from the more violent strains of the leftist ideology, some even being paid, who are preying on public town halls to wreak havoc and threaten public safety. Threats are nothing new to me and I have gotten my share as a felony judge. However, the House Sergeant at Arms advised us after former Congresswoman Gabby Giffords was shot at a public appearance, that civilian attendees at Congressional public events stand the most chance of being harmed or killed—just as happened there.

Notice there is no mention of the fact that there would be far less risk at these town halls if everybody in the country could not buy a gun as easily as they buy a pint of milk.

It should also be mentioned that the shooting of Giffords happened way back in 2011, and Gohmert is just NOW getting frightened by it?

For her part Gabby Giffords has no intention of allowing this chicken shit to use her unfortunate incident as an excuse not to do his job.

Courtesy of The Hill: 

Being the victim of gun violence didn't stop her from holding public events, she said in a statement. Since stepping down from Congress, Giffords and her husband, Mark Kelly, have made many public appearances on behalf of their group Americans for Responsible Solutions, which advocates for gun safety reform. 

She further noted that Ron Barber, her former district director who was also injured in the shooting, held town halls after succeeding her in Congress. 

"I was shot on a Saturday morning. By Monday morning my offices were open to the public. Ron Barber — at my side that Saturday, who was shot multiple times, then elected to Congress in my stead — held town halls. It's what the people deserve in a representative," Giffords said. On Tuesday, Rep. Louie Gohmert (R-Texas) invoked the 2011 shooting that killed six people as a reason not to hold a public town hall in his district.

It just shows that it is well past time to replace these cowardly little candy asses with strong Representatives who are not afraid to face criticism, or even a bullet or two. 

Sarah Palin suddenly and inexplicably becomes outraged again over being blamed for the shooting of Gabby Giffords.

I just remembered something else I've been pissed off about for years.

Courtesy of the Queen of Denial's Facebook page:

Another epitome in media double standards, in my opinion: A schizophrenic shoots an Arizona representative and the media goes berserk blaming me for the crime. That year's SarahPAC electoral map had included a "target" icon, and media erroneously claimed it somehow spurred on the criminal. https://www.facebook.com/notes/sarah-palin/dont-get-demoralized-get-organized-take-back-the-20/373854973434/  (This links to the 2010 Facebook post that preceded Gabby Giffords being shot.)

The attack on the Arizona politician and innocent bystanders was beyond horrific, and many of us continue to lift up in prayer those who are affected by any unwarranted violence, as the nation witnessed that day in Tucson. Also unwarranted is the blame game liberals capitalized on then, as they continue to do today. 

Back then, unable to defend myself with the obvious message that I had nothing to do with the shooting, and wanting to remind the media that using target icons in graphics is used universally by democrats and liberal media (including the liberal "Crossfire" news program), I finally disobeyed my employer's directive (FOX News) to stay silent about the false accusations. Days after the tragedy I made my own video to post a defense, hoping to help exonerate ALL who are falsely accused. http://abcnews.go.com/…/sarah-palin-gabrielle-giffor…/story… (This links to the jaw dropping "Blood Libel" video that essentially destroyed all of Palin's future political aspirations. For some reason she wants you to watch it again.)

The apoplectic media pinning me for the crime caused turmoil and threats that are inexplicable, stretching still to this day. I say this not to claim any sort of victimization, but to point out the power the media has to try to destroy someone's career, reputation and spirit, by employing its common double standards. http://www.breitbart.com/…/remember-when-the-gabrielle-gif…/  (This links to a Breitbart article that is almost four years old. I swear I'm getting whiplash here.)

This morning on MSNBC the liberal media once again features their "target" icon in their political graphics. And all is well in the lamestream media. Let's hear it for consistency... http://conservatives4palin.com/…/cnn-puts-sarah-palin-cross… 

- Sarah Palin

Okay the link at the end of her rant goes, not to a recent example of CNN using a target icon, but to a 2014 Sea O'Pee post falsely accusing CNN of using a "target" icon.

This is what they use to support that claim.

 As you probably know CNN has a wall filled with screens that often show a number of breaking stories.

 When they need to make an image larger they expand it over more than one screen which provides an image like this.

Apparently in the minds of the 2014 Palin sycophants this exonerated Palin's use of this image.

It didn't.

Now I have to admit that I was racking my brain to figure out what could have triggered this outburst from Palin.

And then I remembered this story from last week.

It featured this image that Arizona Republicans used against the Democrat challenging John McCain for his Senate seat.

Now for some reason Palin herself does not mention this poster, but since it caused news agencies all over the internet to reference her target icons it was most likely what triggered this latest psychotic break.

You know, a week later.

Boy it must be a real joy to live in the same house with this lunatic.

Arizona Republicans release bullet riddled wanted poster attacking Democrat challenging John McCain.

Courtesy of Think Progress:  

Arizona Republicans, who are scrambling to help Sen. John McCain win the “fight of his political life,” unveiled a poster this week depicting the face of McCain’s Democratic challenger surrounded by bullet holes. 

The Wild West-themed poster accuses Rep. Ann Kirkpatrick (D-AZ) — who is polling neck and neck with McCain — of not holding enough public events during her campaign. 

The image has outraged many in the state, as it comes just five years after another Arizona Democratic congresswoman was shot in the head at a public event.

Yes and we all remember the image that preceded THAT shooting.

In fact Gabby Giffords released this statement to Think Progress to express her disgust: 

“In a state and country that know the toll of gun violence too well, there is no room for invoking the use of firearms in our politics,” she said, in a statement emailed to ThinkProgress. “Our political leaders have the responsibility to avoid a descent into messages that might suggest that elections are settled anywhere else than at the ballot box.”

Damn Republicans are either the slowest learners on the planet, or they simply to not care if they foment gun violence as part of our political process.

Has Donald Trump's statements about a 2nd Amendment solution to Hillary Clinton's Supreme Court choices finally crossed the line? Update!

Donald Trump makes more gaffes before breakfast than most politicians make in an entire career, and they are far, far worse. And yet time and time again he survives them and moves on, often with very few consequences.

But this time, with these most recent comments, that might not be the case.

Courtesy of Time:

Donald Trump’s comments Tuesday about “Second Amendment people” could be considered a “veiled threat” against Hillary Clinton, a former top Secret Service official told TIME. 

The official said that if they were still working at the U.S. Secret Service, they would contact someone on Trump’s campaign staff to have a conversation about whether the understands the consequences of that rhetoric. 

The former Secret Service official said they would ask a U.S. attorney to see if Trump broke any laws with the comment. 

“Look, this guy is coming pretty close to the edge here,” the official said.

That former agent was being somewhat diplomatic, others are being less so.

This was how Gabby Giffords responded to the statements: 

“Donald Trump might astound Americans on a routine basis, but we must draw a bright red line between political speech and suggestions of violence. Responsible, stable individuals won’t take Trump’s rhetoric to its literal end, but his words may provide a magnet for those seeking infamy. They may provide inspiration or permission for those bent on bloodshed." “What political leaders say matters to their followers. When candidates descend into coarseness and insult, our politics follow suit. When they affirm violence, we should fear that violence will follow." “It must be the responsibility of all Americans – from Donald Trump himself, to his supporters, to those who remain silent or oppose him – to unambiguously condemn these remarks and the violence they insinuate. The integrity of our democracy and the decency of our nation is at stake.”

Of course Giffords is the perfect person to call Trump out over this as the internet lit up yesterday with a certain well known image:

Elizabeth Warren could barely contain her rage:

.@realDonaldTrump makes death threats because he's a pathetic coward who can’t handle the fact that he’s losing to a girl.

— Elizabeth Warren (@elizabethforma) August 9, 2016

Your reckless comments sound like a two-bit dictator, @realDonaldTrump. Not a man who wants to lead the greatest democracy on the planet.

— Elizabeth Warren (@elizabethforma) August 9, 2016

To the question of whether or not this comment will destroy what is left of his already badly damaged candidacy, there are certainly signs that it might.

Donald Trump has been speaking in Fayetteville, NC, for 26 minutes -- and a steady stream of people are leaving. pic.twitter.com/6Ywk0UFdrS

— Jenna Johnson (@wpjenna) August 9, 2016

Personally I have no idea HOW Donald Trump managed to win this Republican nomination, nor do I understand how he continues to garner any support whatsoever.

However if after making such an inflammatory comment he continues to attract support from the base of the Republican party, then I think that party needs to consider completely reevaluating who they are, what they stand for, who it is that supports them, and why.

Update: The Secret Service has now confirmed that they have spoken to Doanld Trump about his statements.

Has that every happened before, that the Secret Service had to warn somebody under their protection not to incite violence against another person under their protection?

I think this is a first.

Democratic convention night three open thread. Update!

Tonight's speakers include Jesse Jackson, Harry Reid, Joe Biden, Gavin Newsom, Martin O'Malley, Jerry Brown, Chris Murphy, actress Sigourney Weaver (I love her.), Gabby Giffords, Sherrod Brown, Michael Bloomberg, Tim Kaine, and of course President Obama to close out the night.

I am not expecting any huge surprises or disruptions tonight but it should be quite entertaining.

After all it features one of the greatest President's in our lifetime.

Jesse Jackson: "It's Hillary time!"

.@RevJJackson: "It's Hillary time" pic.twitter.com/w8eget6udi

— POLITICO (@politico) July 27, 2016

Apparently yesterday Andrew Sullivan, a longtime critic of Hillary Clinton, had already reached that decision as well:

Some readers think I’ve been too negative, even cynical, tonight. Believe me, I am utterly uncynical about this election. I’m worried sick. We need to put behind us any lingering beefs, any grudges, any memories from the past – and you know how I feel about the Clintons’ past – in order to save liberal democracy. The only thing between him and us is her. So – against all my previous emphatic denials – I’m with her now. As passionately as I ever was with Obama. For his legacy is at stake as well.

Now somebody needs to go tell those butt hurt Bernie supporters that.

Update: Powerful words from the mother of a victim from the Orlando shooting.

The mother of an #OrlandoShooting victim speaks to #DemsInPhilly https://t.co/TAG0SqRvbP https://t.co/A4n809GPCU

— CNN Politics (@CNNPolitics) July 27, 2016

This is just one of the many pro-gun control speeches being delivered tonight.

Update 2: Here he comes.

HERE COMES BIDEN#DemsInPhilly pic.twitter.com/Ls5zxQmAwc

— Ellie Hall (@ellievhall) July 28, 2016

Everybody loves Joe.

Update 3: And finally the grand finale.

.@POTUS gushes: @MichelleObama hasn't aged a day, same cannot be said for me https://t.co/H9n7JJUntx #DemsInPhilly https://t.co/1J32zvG4in

— CBS News (@CBSNews) July 28, 2016

Best President ever!

Update 4: Does not require comment.

Hillary Clinton joins President Obama on DNC stage after his speech #DemsInPhilly pic.twitter.com/fQOhrPd2aT

— BuzzFeed (@BuzzFeed) July 28, 2016

Hillary Clinton releases new ad in preparation for today's primary.

Courtesy of CBS News: 

In her closing ad before Tuesday's East Coast primaries in five states, former secretary of state Hillary Clinton is looking past the primaries with a message of unity. 

Her new ad, "Love and Kindness," presents a positive message of coming together and protecting each other--a sign she is beginning to move toward unifying Democrats behind her candidacy for the general election. 

"Let's break down barriers so we can all rise together," the ad says, in text running across the screen over footage of Clinton speaking and meeting supporters. "Do all the good we can in all the ways we can for all the people we can."

You probably saw Gabby Giffords in the advertisement, and this is what she is saying about Hillary and why she supporters her on mailers going out in Connecticut:   

“Time and time again, Hillary Clinton has done and said what is right, not what is politically expedient,” Giffords says on the mailers. “She is the only candidate I trust to stand up to the corporate gun lobby’s intimidation and bullying.” 

 Of course Connecticut, where that terrible Sandy Hook massacre took place, is one of the states holding primaries today. So clearly this message is tailored to them specifically.

However I think that the message of improving gun control laws, and working to keep military style weapons out of the hands of dangerous individuals, is one that resonates with ALL progressives.

I have mentioned in the past that I am not particularly inspired by Hillary Clinton as a rule, but her  courage in putting gun control front and center in her campaign is something that certainly gets my attention.

President Obama has said that one of his biggest frustrations as President was his failure to pass "common sense gun safety laws."

Will Hillary Clinton be any more successful?

Who knows, but at least she is willing to make it a priority. And that is certainly more than any other candidate has been willing to do.

Gabby Giffords to hit the campaign trail in support of Hillary Clinton.

Courtesy of NBC News: 

Former congresswoman Gabby Giffords will campaign with Hillary Clinton this weekend, joining the Democratic frontrunner's army of surrogates making a final push in the Hawkeye state before the caucuses on Monday. 

Giffords and her husband, retired astronaut Mark Kelly, will appear at a rally with Clinton in Ames on Saturday and kick off a canvassing event later in the day, the campaign confirmed. 

The couple became outspoken advocates for gun control after Giffords survived a shot to the head at a political event in Tucson five years ago. Two years later, they founded a superPAC called Americans for Responsible Solutions, just weeks weeks after a gunman killed 26 people—20 of them children—at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut. 

This weekend, the pair will praise Clinton's record to prevent gun violence and dedication to "common sense" safety measures, according to an aide.

I have to say that this sends a pretty powerful message that Hillary is really doubling down on her pledge to work on doing something significant about gun violence in this country.

And for those of us who are sick and tired of reading about new gun deaths every single day, and want to do something about it, Gabby Giffords is a rock star.

Man I cannot begin to imagine how much this is freaking out the gun nuts these days.

I guess that's why there are so many millions of dollars being spent trying to defeat Hillary.

President Obama announces gun initiatives in press conference.

Courtesy of HuffPo: 

In the first working week of his last calendar year in office, President Barack Obama defied Congress and pursued long-stalled gun control methods through executive action. 

Obama gave a speech on his proposals at the White House on Tuesday, where he was joined by former Rep. Gabrielle Giffords (D-Ariz.), who was shot in the head along with 18 others at a supermarket in Tucson five years ago this week. The president was introduced by Mark Barden, the father of one of the 20 children killed in the 2012 shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut. 

Tearing up during his remarks, Obama emphasized a point he's made after the many mass shootings that have occurred during his presidency, saying that America is "the only advanced country on Earth that sees this kind of mass violence erupt with this kind of frequency." 

"Somehow, we become numb to it and we start thinking, 'This is normal,'" Obama said. 

"Instead of thinking about how to solve the problem, this has become one of our most polarized, partisan debates," he added.

You cannot help but hear the pain in the President's voice, or recognize the sadness in his eyes.

You can even see him tear up when he mentions Sandy Hook at the 30 minute mark 

And who can blame him?

After all it seems as if every week he is addressing yet another mass shooting. That is the kind of thing that would destroy a lesser man.

So I hope that he not only gets these guidelines in place, but that the next President is willing to not only support them but to strengthen them as well.

By the way some of those on the other side are already using this to fund raise.

Like Ted Cruz for instance:

Gee nothing histrionic about that!

Just another reminder of why it is so important for Democrats to get out and vote this November.

Source close to Sarah Palin (Does his name rhyme with "odd?") slams Glenn Beck over his recent remarks. Update!

So as we all remember Glenn Beck recently came out and said that he was embarrassed that he had ever supported Sarah Palin, and even referred to her as a clown.

Which for most of us seemed a day late and a dollar short.

Then, possibly due to backlash or some ex-alcoholic's misplaced remorse, Beck backed off the clown comment, but stuck with his initial criticism.

Beck explained his change of heart in a long, rather slobbery, Facebook post that whined about Palin cutting him off and no longer wanting to be besties: 

I haven't had a relationship with Sarah since about the time of the shooting of Gabby Giffords. Nothing to do with that at all, but it was around that time that she withdrew from me and my team and it was because, as Todd told me on the phone, "we have been told who our real friends are." I was stunned. I had backed her hard in every way I knew how. At that time I really believed in her and in fact I really believed she had the ability to change the world for the better. 

While I have reached out since we have not spoken in an any meaningful way since. 

I don't know what they were told or by whom, but I can guess as it most likely was the same person that tried to drive a stake through my relationship with mark Levin and Sean Hannity and did for several years.

Now when I read all of this I figured that we were due for another wildly incoherent Facebook post slamming Beck for being a backstabbing crybaby.

But the whole weekend went by and.....nothing.

Until today.

However instead of firing up the old ghostwriter Palin has one her "sources" (Todd) contact Breitbart.

And this is what they said:

“The rift between Gov. Palin and Beck goes back to when Beck violated her trust by reading one of her private emails on the air without asking her permission,” the source tells Breitbart News. “It was right after the Gabby Giffords shooting, and Beck garnered a lot of publicity off of reading the email because up to that point Gov. Palin had not spoken publicly about the shooting.” 

The rift apparently got worse when Beck allowed one of his Blaze TV employees, Brian Sack, to trash Palin’s family and special needs son Trig in a crude segment with Beck lavishing praise on Sack as “the next Jon Stewart.”

But wait, there's more.

“The crux of the issue was his indiscretion in reading a private email on air. It was a betrayal of trust. She didn’t give consent to having it read publicly and never would have. There was a media firestorm brewing around her at the time. Everyone in the media was hounding her for a statement, but she was very clear that she wanted to wait, get all the facts, and give her full statement at a time and place of her own choosing. What Beck did totally disregarded her wishes,” the source added. “He’s shown that he has little regard for the feelings of anyone unless they’re useful to his ambitions or point of view.”

I speak Palinese, as you know,  so allow me to translate.

"Glenn Beck is a chubby booger brain, who did not jump through the hoops we held up for him. However we would never have attacked him over it in a way that could have been traced back to us. So his recent unprovoked attacks on the mother of both a combat veteran and a Down syndrome angel straight from heaven are completely unwarranted and only reveal him to be an impotent Nancy boy."

For his part Beck is apparently unraveling (Yet again) and threatening to pack up his dog and pony show and head off into the sunset.

Didn't he already do that when he left Fox News?

Update: Okay here is Glenn Beck talking about the e-mail back in 2011:  

Sarah, as you know, peace is always the answer. I know you are felling the same heat, if not much more on this,” Beck wrote. 

Beck expressed concern about Palin’s safety, and urged her to hire the same Los Angeles-based security firm that he uses. 

The rhetoric of both Beck and Palin has been cited by both liberals and some of the mainstream media as examples of the kind of overheated political discourse that, if not directly connected to the Tucson shooting, has created an environment in which a similar thing might happen again. 

“I hate violence,” Palin wrote back. “I hate war. Our children will not have peace if politicos just capitalize on this to succeed in portraying anyone as inciting terror and violence.”

Boy that almost makes Palin sound reasonable.

No wonder she was pissed.

No more Mrs. Nice Giffords. Gabby gets mean.

Courtesy of Politico: 

Gabby Giffords, irreproachable figure of sympathy, has fashioned an improbable new role for herself this election year: ruthless attack dog. 

The former Democratic congresswoman, whose recovery from a gunshot wound to the head captivated the country, has unleashed some of the nastiest ads of the campaign season, going after GOP candidates in Arizona and New Hampshire with attacks even some left-leaning commentators say go too far. And Republicans on the receiving end are largely helpless to hit back, knowing a fight with the much-admired survivor is not one they’re likely to win. 

One take no prisoners ad targets Republican Martha McSally who is running for Giffords old congressional seat. The ad features a mother talking about the death of her daughter and husband, and ends by pointing out that McSally opposes laws making it harder for stalkers to get access to guns. 

Here is the ad:

Ouch! that one is certain to leave a mark.

And it is no secret as to why Giffords is so aggressively going after McSally:

During her unsuccessful 2012 campaign, McSally ran TV commercials comparing herself to Giffords. The Giffords team fumed, and her husband, retired astronaut Mark Kelly, released a terse statement declaring, “Martha McSally is no Gabby Giffords.” 

Another anti-McSally ad features a woman named Carol who says her daughter was killed by a criminal who bought a firearm at a gun show and didn’t receive a background check — a check, she states, that McSally would oppose. 

“To McSally, it’s just politics,” Carol says as she clutches a picture of her deceased daughter. “To me, it’s personal.” 

Okay maybe it's just me, but in my opinion if a woman gets shot point blank in the head, and battles back for years to relearn how to walk, how to speak, and how to function as a normal person, she can get just as angry, just as mean, and just as partisan, as she wants in working to make sure that what happened to her NEVER happens to another person in this country. 

I think Gabby is a hero, and she is doing the hard job that most of our politicians are too cowardly to do themselves.

Sarah Palin tears up at political rally? Are we sure this is THE Sarah Palin?

Courtesy of the Daily Beast:  

At a rally for longshot Senate candidate on the bayou, Sarah Palin got choked up on Thursday. 

Sarah Palin, a former reality television star, appeared at rally for Rob Maness, the Tea Party candidate for Senate in Louisiana in New Orleans today, and promptly mocked President Obama for that “hopey-changey stuff.” 

But moments later, Palin’s eyes welled with tears at a very Obama-esque notion, when Maness, a retired colonel in the Air Force, describing spending 32 years “soaring above our fruited plain and seeing our purple mountains majesty. Because when you are high above the land of the free there is simply no red or blue states, just the United States of America.” 

Maness choked up as well, while it took Palin, standing to his side, several moments to dry her eyes and compose herself.”

Okay let me get this straight.

Sarah Palin did NOT get choked up when Native Alaskans were freezing and starving to death during the winter of 2009, her eyes did not "well up with tears" over news of the shooting deaths at Sandy Hook (After which she claimed to have bought Todd a new gun in response to all the "anti-gun chatter coming from Washington.") and she certainly was not overcome with emotion when Gabby Giffords was shot in the head.

Yet when some nobody Tea party candidate in New Orleans regurgitates a line originally used by President Obama she suddenly remembers she has tear ducts?

Yeah, I call bullshit on that.

I found the video of the event (The remarks in question start at the 9:00 minute mark.) and the camera did not catch Palin's tears, and until I see video proof to the contrary I think I will remain skeptical.

The only emotions I have witnessed from this woman are anger, hate, and almost overwhelming jealousy. And I am convinced that is about the depth of her emotional sensitivities.

After suffering setbacks in the political arena the gun control movement goes rogue. (Hey I can use that word too, she doesn't own it!)

Courtesy of The Hill:  

The American gun control movement is going corporate. 

Still reeling from the stinging legislative defeats of 2013, proponents of tougher firearm regulations are increasingly turning their focus to private sector campaigns. 

Gun control groups have claimed victories in recent months, successfully pushing Starbucks to declare guns unwelcome in stores and persuading Facebook to crack down on unregulated firearm solicitations. 

With no end in sight to the congressional gridlock that has thwarted more stringent federal gun laws, groups say they will continue to apply pressure on major companies. 

“Congress locked the door, so moms are going through the window,” said Shannon Watts, founder of Moms Demand Action. 

The gun control organization, modeled on Mothers Against Drunk Driving, has made the corporate push a third prong of its strategy, along with campaigns to influence state and federal policies, Watts said. 

Pro-gun groups downplayed the likely effectiveness of these tactics, which have also been embraced by Mayors Against Illegal Guns and Americans for Responsible Solutions. 

Americans for Responsible Solutions is Gabby Giffords organization.  

I am not at all surprised to see that she, and Mark, do not take defeat lying down.

In my opinion this has a real chance of working, and despite their statements to the contrary I imagine that it is causing quite a lot of consternation over at the NRA.

If politicians are unwilling, or unable, to listen to reason then taking the issue straight to the business leaders and the people seems like the best way to get the word out and start changing some minds.