This is how I Feel Today

You know what the biggest problem with the Democrats right now is? They have done everything they can do to derail Bernie's campaign and they don't care what anybody thinks. They are talking about the leaked emails, but they are missing the point. While the party talks about "Russian hackers," something that sounds like a really cheesy spy novel, the real story is what those emails contained. Once again, the Democrats are going to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory. They will wring their hands and blame Bernie, but like in 2000, they miss the real reason for the loss and they won't learn the lesson. The party really needs to get its shit together and I fear it may be too late for this year.

Hypocrisy at its Finest

Since before this election campaign officially began, those of us who support Bernie Sanders have been told to sit down, shut up, and get on board with Hillary because that's who the nominee is going to be whether we like it or not. We started hearing this before Iowa had its caucus, before a single primary vote was cast. Dianne Feinstein laughing at Sanders' supporters in Nevada and then flipping them off as she left the stage is just one example of the way the party powers have tried to trivialize anybody but their chosen candidate.

We Sanders supporters had legitimate concerns about a Clinton candidacy. She is not well-liked, even by many Democrats. Republicans loathe her. Hillary is a war-hawk who supported the failed invasion of Iraq. She supported trade deals like NAFTA that killed the Middle Class dream for millions of Americans. She is a friend of Wall Street who does not support prosecuting the banksters who collapsed our economy back in 2008. She was one of the major backers of the bankruptcy "reform" act that made it harder for working Americans to get debt relief, but made it way easier for corporations and people like Donald Trump to discharge their debts and obligations, while screwing over the people that depended on them to survive. Now she is pushing the Trans Pacific Partnership, which will likely make things even worse in this country. She has rejected a $15.00 minimum wage. She has said universal health care will never happen. She is a friend of the private prison industry. For the LGBT community, she did not support marriage equality until it became politically popular to do so. She supported the horrible Don't Ask, Don't Tell law which discriminated against gay service members. She has opposed protections for gays and lesbians in the workplace until just recently.

Now it has been revealed that the DNC did everything it could to marginalize the Sanders campaign and its supporters. Emails have come to light that show the party questioned Sanders Jewish faith, even asserting that he just might be an atheist. Democrats were outraged when Republicans called the President a "secret Muslim" and questioned his Christian faith. How is this any different?

Debbie Wasserman Schultz was forced to resign yesterday when this story broke. within just a few hours, she was offered a high-powered position with, wait for it, the Clinton campaign. Here we have a woman forced to resign her position after proof of her corruption was revealed. And now, the candidate she was propping up offers her a job with the campaign?

I thought the idea of the nomination procedure was to nominate the best candidate, the one who has the best chance of beating the challenger on the other side. It is not supposed to be about propping up the candidate the power brokers decided on a few years ago, regardless of the will of the voters.

It's going to be an interesting convention and I fear not in a good way.

What is Gun Control?

[This was originally something I posted as a comment to a friend's post on Facebook. I have edited it here to stand alone as its own post.]

What is gun control? This seems to be a question a lot of people are asking right now. The answer is actually quite simple; we just don't seem to have the wherewithal as a society to actually do what we know inside ourselves needs to be done.

Gun control means universal background checks. Nobody, and I mean NOBODY, should be able to walk into a gun show, retailer, or wherever, and purchase a weapon with no questions asked. The mass murderer in Orlando was on the No fly List and was on Terrorist Watch Lists. He had been investigated a number of times by the FBI for domestic violence, yet he was able to buy a weapon of war without any red flags being raised. WTH?

Let's not forget, Republicans recently blocked that simple measure that could have prevented the Orlando shooting or, at the very least, reduced the number of casualties.

Gun control means a waiting period of minimum three days. Many states are instituting waiting periods for a woman seeking a legal form of medical treatment and are trying to take that right away from her entirely. Nobody needs to run out and buy a gun now, RIGHT NOW. If you feel that's what you need to do, perhaps you should step back and reexamine what it is you are trying to accomplish and, above all, cool your jets and let your temper subside. 

Gun control means a well-regulated militia. If you actually read the Second Amendment it clearly states that. As a matter of history, the Second Amendment was written at a time when the predominant weapon was a muzzle-loaded musket, which was unwieldy, difficult to load, difficult to fire, and frequently shot the person using it in the face. I don't believe for one minute that the founding Fathers intended the right to bear arms includes weapons of war for private citizens. You want a gun like that? Join the Army and go fight one of country's endless wars.

Gun control means an assault weapons ban. This country used to have one, remember? It expired in 1994 and Republicans (surprise!) have blocked all attempts to reinstate it. The ban was put in place after Ronald Reagan was shot back in 1981 and was included in the Brady Bill. As I said above, assault-style weapons are weapons of war. They are not used for hunting, nor are they used for sport. They are used for one thing only: killing and spilling the most blood as possible in an amazingly small amount of time.

Gun control means not allowing mentally ill people to get their hands on weapons of mass murder (or basically any gun). Every time a mass shooting happens, predictably, people will wring their hands and say, "So and so was mentally ill. It's a tragedy, really." But have they done anything to treat these mentally ill people or do anything to keep guns out of their hands? Do I really have to answer my own question? 

Allow me to digress for just a second. I've mentioned Republican obstructionism a couple of times and I am quite well aware that the Democrats are guilty of this, too. There are far too many Democrats also sucking Wayne LaPierre's tiny dick and I call them out when I see the same nonsense from them.

In 1996, in response to a mass shooting in Australia, the nation banned most weapons. How many mass shootings has Australia had in those ensuing 20 years? Not a single one. How many has the United States had in the same period? Too many to count and to try to gather the statistics makes my head hurt. Right now, we are averaging about one per day. At Sandy Hook in Newtown, innocent children died for no other reason than being shot by a mentally ill man who was able to buy a weapon without scrutiny. Are dead children the price we are willing to pay for protecting someone's "right" to carry a penis extension that goes bang?

The argument that only a good guy with a gun can stop a bad guy with a gun is false and a giant red herring. There WAS a good guy with a gun at the Pulse Nightclub. How effective was he in stopping the carnage? How do you know in a situation like that who the bad guy and theoretical good guys are? You don't and that situation just ends with many more corpses.

I have also heard the argument that the Pulse shooter did not use and AR-15, but a similarly-styled weapon that is actually less lethal. Does that make any difference at all? Are any of those innocent people less dead?

Full disclosure:  I am a gun-grabber. I want the United States to institute a ban like Australia did. However, I have the sense to realize that in our blood-soaked culture that is not going to happen, but we need to work toward that ideal and do what we can now and make progress.

Will these measure stop all shootings? Of course not, but does that mean we do nothing? Why do we have traffic laws since they don't prevent accidents? It's a stupid argument.

Are guns really used for self-protection? Not according to statistics. People who have weapons in their homes are something like 43 times more likely to use them on themselves or a family member than an intruder or the "bad guy" with a gun.

I firmly believe that my right not to get shot by a gun-toting yahoo with a small dick trumps any alleged Second Amendment rights. Falls in line with Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness.

A few months ago, I saw a bumper sticker that read, "An armed society is a polite society." Wrong! An armed society is a society that is scared all the time. I don't want to live in fear and have to question whether the next person I come in contact with is going to blow me away.

The day I saw that bumper sticker was the day of the massacre at Planned Parenthood in Colorado Springs. I saw the breaking news ten minutes after seeing that horrible sticker.

Society needs to change and sensible gun control measure like those I've listed here will definitely be a start in the right direction. I refuse to give in to these nuts.