. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

"Chuck Norris doesn't read books; he stares them down until he gets the information he wants out of them."
- ChuckNorrisFactsdotcom

Sunday, July 31, 2005
Woot! The astonishing ignorance on display in this article is just one reason I'm intensely glad that this bill passed. For example, in the last paragraph, "the gun industry gave 88 percent" versus "gun control advocates, meanwhile gave 98 percent," is extremely misleading. The 'gun industry' is generally shorthand for the NRA. Except that the NRA recieves no money from gun manufacturers. The NRA is funded by private donations and membership fees.

Imagine the wailing if someone described Planned Parenthood as 'the abortion industry.' It's a much more apt description than the first but the only people using that kind of language are the really whacko pro-lifers. Planned Parenthood doesn't make a profit on performing abortions, they're privately funded by fees and donors as a matter of principle ... just like the NRA. Except the NRA doesn't manufacture or sell guns. The NRA's primary activity, (even more than lobbying,) what it was started, way back in the 1800's, for, is civilian gun safety and marksmanship training. The NRA has been teaching gun safety longer than anyone else.

The portrayal of the NRA in the media would be called vicious racism, were it depicted at an ethnic group. (Though Charleton Heston didn't help anything with the cold dead hands thing.) I'd guess that at least a third of NRA members are 'in the closet.' 4 million people. You know at least one. Most people would never assume that I'm an NRA member. Mechanics assume that the sticker on my car came with it, or belongs to a parent or boyfriend or husband. Casual acquaintances do the gay/conservative politely concealed horror reaction. You're one of them.

posted by Rachel 7/31/2005
. . .
Ladies and Gents, I present to you
the face of today's Democratic party.

There are 3 major options that I see here. The party might decide that sir scream is too big a liability and ditch him before 2006. In that case I'd expect he'd be forced to step down due to 'health reasons' or 'to spend more time with the family.' That possibility would allow the party to wheel him out to toss red meat to the true believers when needed, while purchasing some plausible distance between his ranting and the official party position.

The second possibility is that they'll ditch him following another general loss in 2006. If the Repubs manage to pick up just a few more seats, it'll allow for the serious deadwood clearing needed before Hillary's 2008 campaign. Hillary and Dean don't mesh well enough for him to be sitting in any position of real power when she's the center of attention. Though she'll keep him around for the same raw meat to the faithful qualities, while ensuring that he's not seen to be speaking on her behalf but on his own while campaigning for her.

The idea that Dean would serve as DNC chair during Hillary's 2008 presidential campaign seems extremely unlikely at this point.

posted by Rachel 7/31/2005
. . .

. . .


web site traffic statistics