1 in 6 Americans say they are buying guns in response to the violence they expect after this election.

Courtesy of Raw Story:

How long will it be before someone gets shot by a Donald Trump supporter in what the shooter may likely consider an act of patriotic civil disobedience? Or before someone uses a gun against right-wing vigilantes? 

There is no shortage of evidence pointing toward some violent outburst surrounding the presidential election results. Reporters interviewing Trump supporters at rallies, national polls showing likely voters are expecting Election Day violence, consumer-trend tracking firms saying demand is rising for gun purchases, and rhetoric from the longstanding cadre of right-wing loudmouths, all suggest some type of ugly response. 

“Sixteen percent of Americans plan on buying a gun as a result of the upcoming election,” said a press release Thursday from Elementum, “the real-time supply chain platform company, who polled 2,000 Americans from October 20-24 and found that among those living in the South, 19 percent will buy guns and among Gen Xers, the number is nearly 23 percent, especially among women, 24 percent.” 

Wrapping oneself in the flag and taking up arms is a staple of the far-right militia-embracing fringe. But the urge has found a new home in the Trump campaign, led by a presidential candidate who says the vote will be stolen unless he wins, a manager who publishes bomb-throwing Breitbart News, and backers who get their “news” from even more extreme sources like conspiracist Alex Jones of InfoWars.

Well that's a little chilling.

And don't think that Clinton supporters are going to be in a position to return fire either.

Courtesy of Think Progress: 

The 54-year-old business owner posted a sign on the door of Altra Firearms conveying those rules, and he’s currently running an ad in a local newspaper declaring: 

“Please NO Muslims or Hillary Supporters — We do not feel safe selling to terrorists!” Chandler told ThinkProgress that, as the owner of a store that brands itself as “politically incorrect firearms,” he is free to turn Democrats and Muslims away.

Now I am not one to overreact to news that the Right Wing is preparing to take up arms, after all we have been hearing this same warning now for at least eight years.

However I will say that these people seem even more unhinged than they have in years past, and that it would not at all surprise me to hear of folks being shot in the days following the election by angry Trump supporters.

I think it is clear that Donald Trump has gone out of his way to agitate the most unbalanced people in this country, and they are also the most heavily armed.

That is not a good combination, and I hope that if there ARE any murders attributed to the outcome of this election that the police will not hesitate to knock on Donald Trump's door and charge him with inciting violence.

Bernie Sanders gets booed by some House Democrats during tense early morning meeting. Gee, I guess I'm not the only one tired of Sanders' shit.

Courtesy of Politico: 

With the Democratic convention just weeks away, Sanders still hasn't endorsed one-time rival Hillary Clinton and dodged questions about when he would during a tense meeting Wednesday morning with House Democrats.

Sanders also stunned some of the Democrats in attendance when he told them that winning elections wasn't the only thing they should focus on. While they wanted to hear about how to beat Donald Trump — and how Sanders might help them win the House back — he was talking about remaking the country. 

"The goal isn't to win elections, the goal is to transform America," Sanders said at one point, according to multiple lawmakers and aides in the room. 

Some Democrats booed Sanders for that line, which plays better on the campaign trail than in front of a roomful of elected officials. 

Rank-and-file House Democrats want Sanders to officially drop out of the race and throw his support behind the presumptive nominee, and they can't understand why he hasn't so far. 

"It was frustrating because he's squandering the movement he built with a self-obsession that was totally on display," said a senior Democrat, speaking on the condition of anonymity. 

It probably will not soften the Democrats' opinions of Sanders once they learn that his campaign is seeking a permit for the night before the convention in order to hold a rally: 

The permit application for the event — which would involve an estimated 15,000 to 40,000 people in Franklin Delano Roosevelt Park — is one of ten applications filed with the Philadelphia mayor's office for pro-Sanders protests, marches and demonstrations during the convention. 

Several events have already secured approval, including multiple "March for Bernie" events throughout the week organized by activist Billy Taylor and a "Black Men for Bernie" rally on July 27-28, according to a list provided by the mayor's office.

Talk about biting the hand that feeds you.

Sanders would have received virtually no national coverage if the Democrats had not welcomed him to run under their banner and this is how the rewards them.

Maybe that's why he is so resistant to giving up his taxpayer funded Secret Services detail, he is worried about getting worked over by angry Democrats.

Why Atheists have every right to be angry.

Believe it  or not I have never considered myself to an angry Atheist.

I mean I get pissed off at some of the things done in the name of religion around the world, irritated at the fact that those identifying themselves as Christian get a kind of moral free pass, and frustrated that so many people allow themselves to be taken advantage of by religious leaders sometimes.

But I am not walking around with a chip on my shoulder just bruising for a fight.

Trust me I have been that guy, and I am quite a bit more calm, cool, and collected than I was in years past.

So I did not think that I would agree with too many of the points made by Greta Christina on her blog the other day.

But I was wrong.

Here take a look at some of her examples explaining why it is okay for Atheists to feel anger:

I'm angry that according to a recent Gallup poll, only 45 percent of Americans would vote for an atheist for President. 

I'm angry that it took until 1961 for atheists to be guaranteed the right to serve on juries, testify in court, or hold public office in every state in the country. 

I'm angry that almost half of Americans believe in creationism. And not a broad, "God had a hand in evolution" creationism, but a strict, young-earth, "God created man pretty much in his present form at one time within the last 10,000 years" creationism. 

I'm angry that women are dying of AIDS in Africa and South America because the Catholic Church has convinced them that using condoms makes baby Jesus cry. 

I'm angry that women are having septic abortions -- or are being forced to have unwanted children who they resent and mistreat -- because religious organizations have gotten laws passed making abortion illegal or inaccessible. 

I'm angry at preachers who tell women in their flock to submit to their husbands because it's the will of God, even when their husbands are beating them within an inch of their lives. 

I'm angry that so many parents and religious leaders terrorize children -- who (a) have brains that are hard-wired to trust adults and believe what they're told, and (b) are very literal-minded -- with vivid, traumatizing stories of eternal burning and torture to ensure that they'll be too frightened to even question religion.

There is more, much more, and I found myself agreeing with just about all of it. 

And do you know what? It made me a little bit angry.

It is incredibly hard to stand on the outside looking at a world at war over religious differences, at leaders who are directed by ancient religious teachings that have little or no value in the world today, and at the simple minded adherence to a faith that is based on misinformation and oft repeated lies.

You see we live in this world too. And the decisions of the magical thinkers, who often seek and attain important roles in our community, impact the rational among us as well.

And if we dare to disagree. If we dare to point out the obvious illogical thought process that went into the decision making, we are vilified and marginalized until our combined voices are less than the squeaking of a mouse.

That is why we must take our anger, take our frustration, take our bruised and battered psyches, and stand up for what we know is a right, and fight for an enlightened tomorrow.

We owe it to our country, we owe it to our children, and we owe it to ourselves.

The queen of the sore losers wants an investigation into why HER candidate did not win in Mississippi.

WTF? They ALL lost?

Courtesy of Snipey Wiglashes Facebook page:

With Friends Like These, Who Needs Liberals? 

As we pointed out last week, there were several potentially illegal political games afoot in Mississippi to motivate Democrat voters to "switch" over to the GOP for a day to help save a 42 year Republican member of Congress. (In other words Thad Cochran was better than Chris McDaniel at turning out the vote, including attracting Democrats to vote for him. You know, like Ronald Reagan.) On top of that, millions of dollars from out of state liberal billionaires like Mike Bloomberg poured in at the last minute on that same incumbent’s behalf. You have to ask yourself why? (They didn't want a lunatic like McDaniel in the Senate? Just a guess.) When a primary election is lost fairly, I am all for unifying behind the victor and joining forces to fight in November. (Yeah, right!) When an election is questionable, with potential legal violations, politics MUST be put aside and the irregularities MUST be fully investigated. Regardless of party, we owe it to voters and to democracy within our Republic. (You know I don't remember hearing any of this when Democrats supported Joe Miller in the Alaska Republican primary of 2010 because they thought that the Democratic challenger would have an easier time beating him than beating Lisa Murkowski. Where was this outrage then?) The integrity of the vote speaks directly to the integrity of those who serve and the trust we ask the American public to put in our institutions. I told Chris McDaniel last night that I stand with his effort to get to the bottom of this (Well he's doomed now.) – he needs to know average, but tremendously concerned, citizens want to make sure the integrity of last night’s results in Mississippi are verified. Voting shenanigans never cease to amaze, but they had better cease altogether for the sake of ethical elections. And any GOP “architect” behind these abhorrent voting shenanigans should be ashamed of this Pyrrhic victory for the establishment. (I cannot believe that a woman who ran as a Republican in Alaska, where the GOP breaks rules in virtually every single election, has the gall to to be "amazed" at any "shenanigans.") If we find out it's true that some of the characters alleged to have masterminded this Mississippi hijacking are the same ones who've tried to destroy other Republicans’ careers, they need to be taken to task and only be hired by unethical campaigns. Fool us once, shame on you; fool us twice, shame on us. And if any news organization ignores a free and fair elections issue like this, then whether left-leaning or center right, their silence will speak volumes. (Oooh, I bet every journalist is shaking in their boots over THAT threat.)

- Sarah Palin

Look, here's the thing. When candidates that Palin supports lose elections it makes her look like she  has no idea what the fuck she is doing and does not inspire ignorant people to send her their hard earned money so that she can get more botox, pay Track to stay out of trouble, and hire people to help her write awesome Facebook posts like this one.

So rather than accept the fact that McDaniel got spanked by a more experienced, better connected, politician she is going to side with the butt hurt conservatives who just hate it when facts screw up how they want to see the world, and roar her pitiful roar, gnash her terrible teeth, roll her wonky eyes, and stamp her star spangled shoes, until she gets her way or is distracted by the next shiny new primary that comes along.

(By the way speaking of frustrating facts perhaps Palin needs to take a look at these facts.)

Martin Bashir's apology to Sarah Palin.

Whether you support Bashir, and his right to make the comment that he did, or not one at least has to recognize that his apology seems heartfelt.

Of course there are many who have said much worse, and have never offered an apology. (I'm thinking of a certain half term governor whose rhetoric has inspired rampant racism and may have been connected to at least one attempted assassination.

Bashir may have taken his frustration with the Tundra Turd a bit too far, but I think many of us have little difficulty understanding what drove him to those lengths.

The Right Wing is all excited about President Obama "losing his cool" and "snapping at staff."

So the other day while the President was getting ready to talk about the success of the Affordable Care Act, there was a small kerfuffle over the fact that his remarks were not prepared.

This is how one Right Wing rag characterized his response under the headline "Grumpy Obama snaps at staff after not having remarks:"While preparing to give remarks at an event in San Jose, Calif., President Obama seemed to be lacking one thing: his actual remarks, and instead of asking nicely for them, he snapped at staff.

Okay so you got it? The President was pissed off and lost his cool and berated some poor staff member.  Well at least THAT is what some on the Right would like you to believe.

Here judge for yourself.

Okay, now speaking from personal experience I have both been the person that a boss has lost their cool with, and I have been the boss that lost their cool, and I have to say that if THIS is Obama's example for losing his cool, he is doing it COMPLETELY wrong!

Where is the red face? Where is the aggressive gesturing? Where are the threats of "firing your ass so fast it will make your damn head spin?"

Yeah I could only hope for a boss that lost his cool and snapped at me like that.

Frustrated Republicans push for "Brokered Convention." Really? Sounds good to me!

Courtesy of the Daily Caller:

Several long-time Republicans dissatisfied with the crop of candidates running for president have developed an unorthodox plan to upend what they consider a flawed GOP nomination process.

The chaos envisioned by the anonymous drafters of the idea would be a brokered Republican National Convention that might even lead to the nomination of dream candidates like New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie or Florida Sen. Marco Rubio.

The Daily Caller obtained a copy of the plan—that relies on primary voters voting for none of the above at the ballot — on the condition that the names of the Republicans behind the effort not be named.

“The whole thing came from a couple people who have political experience,” said one person involved with the project, “who are highly anxious about the status quo, who would like to see a better process, one that is more likely to be inviting to any number of these supposed dream candidates.”

The project, the Republican said, grew out of conversations about the perceived weak field and the primary process that rewards good campaigners — and not necessarily able leaders.

Despite their insistence on anonymity, that person said the GOPers behind the idea are not acting on behalf of a particular candidate who would benefit from the idea.

“The primary process is the problem,” the report states. “It has become a process of division, not addition. It is more likely to produce a loser in November 2012 than it is to produce a conservative who can unite the country and win.”

For those who are unaware of what the term "brokered convention" means, here is the Wikipedia definition.

A brokered convention is a situation in United States politics in which there are not enough delegates 'won' during the presidential primary and caucus elections for a single candidate to have a pre-existing majority, during the first official vote for a political party's presidential-candidate at its nominating convention.

Once the first ballot, or vote, has occurred, and no candidate has a majority of the delegates' votes, the convention is then considered brokered; thereafter, the nomination is decided through a process of alternating political horse-trading, and additional re-votes. In this circumstance, all regular delegates (who, previously, were pledged to the candidate who had won their respective state's primary or caucus election) are "released," and are able to switch their allegiance to a different candidate before the next round of balloting. It is hoped that this 'freedom' will result in a re-vote resulting in a clear majority of delegates for one candidate.

So in other words the GOP candidate would NOT be chosen until the day of the convention, leaving fundraisers without any idea of where to spend their money, making it impossible to come up with a unifying theme, and leaving Republicans in a state of disarray until the very last minute?

 Okey dokey.


Can't you just imagine what the floor of that convention would look like?  I picture a cross between the arena scene in Gladiator and the rescue scene from Blackhawk Down. In other words not pretty, but the Pay-Per-View possibilities would be amazing!

Somehow I DOUBT that when the dust settled this process would ensure that the best Republican candidate would be the last one standing.

I think it is far more likely to see a Michele Bachmann, or a Sarah Palin, or even a Ron Paul emerging with the nomination.

So, like I said in my headline, I am all for it.

By the way, despite what the Republican might tell their constituents, this is yet another indication that their party may in fact be fractured beyond all repair.