IN TODAY’S EDITION
*News from the heartland….. Michael Moore makes a pathetic attempt at relevance by pitching repeal of the Second Amendment and confiscation of guns. While leftists are focused on guns, they should be focusing on better law enforcement in Democrat urban centers. The Ferguson Effect is real and it’s devastating.
Plus our Daily Features: Top Headlines, Cartoons, Columnists and Short Cuts.*
“To preserve liberty, it is essential that the whole body of the people always possess arms, and be taught alike, especially when young, how to use them… The mind that aims at a select militia, must be influenced by a truly anti-republican principle; and when we see many men disposed to practice upon it, whenever they can prevail, no wonder true republicans are for carefully guarding against it.” —Federal Farmer (1787)
By Nate Jackson
Until leftists are willing to admit that they want to repeal the Second Amendment, there’s little point to their yammering about gun control after the massacre in Las Vegas. So in a way it’s refreshing to see documentarian Michael Moore’s pathetic attempt at relevance in his call for a 28th Amendment to heavily regulate gun ownership and “repeal the ancient and outdated 2nd Amendment.” At least he’s being honest about his intentions.
(To be fair, so is The New York Times’ token “conservative,” Bret Stephens.)
His proposed amendment reads: “A well regulated State National Guard, being helpful to the safety and security of a State in times of need, along with the strictly regulated right of the people to keep and bear a limited number of non-automatic Arms for sport and hunting, with respect to the primary right of all people to be free from gun violence, this shall not be infringed.” That just spells out more clearly how leftists already misinterpret the Second Amendment.
Moore’s further ideas include banning all automatic and semiautomatic guns, limiting magazine capacity to six, forcing men to obtain waivers from the significant woman (or man) in their lives in order to purchase guns, requiring “smart” guns that fire only for the registered owner and mandating storage of the few remaining guns in a “licensed gun club or government-regulated storage facility.”
We’d be outraged if Moore’s proposal wasn’t such a sad joke. Let’s say just for the sake of argument he succeeded in passing his amendment — what then? Confiscation. Otherwise, his new amendment is a dead letter. Why is it that deporting a few million illegal aliens is impossible but confiscating 300 million guns is just within reach? More pointedly, is he proposing to send armed government agents to confiscate all 300 million firearms in America? If so, they would collect the ammo first, if you know what we mean. Is “doing something” to stop the next murder worth a civil war?
It’s quite ironic that Moore has described President Donald Trump as an “authoritarian” and a “fascist” and yet is apparently calling for Trump’s government to have the power to take away the God-given and constitutional right of the people to defend themselves against tyranny.
By Mark Alexander
According to Pew Research crime data, the rate of violent crime dropped almost 50% in the decade up to 2015. At the same time, the rate of firearm sales and ownership has steadily increased. Thus, as research by former Yale professor John Lott concludes, “More Guns, Less Crime.”
Notably, however, the latest FBI crime stats indicate that violent crime in 2015 and 2016 is trending upward, due in large measure to the “Ferguson Effect,” a correlation noted by crime researcher Heather Mac Donald, who authored “Are Cops Racist?”
After the justified shooting of a Ferguson, Missouri, thug, national and local Demo politicians joined Barack Obama’s war on cops, condemning police for “racial profiling.”
Mac Donald explains, “Cops are backing off of proactive policing in high-crime minority neighborhoods, and criminals are becoming emboldened. Having been told incessantly by politicians, the media, and Black Lives Matter activists that they are bigoted for getting out of their cars and questioning someone loitering on a known drug corner at 2 AM, many officers are instead just driving by.”
After the Baltimore riots in 2015, Mac Donald wrote about rising crime: “The most plausible explanation of the current surge in lawlessness is the intense agitation against American police departments over the past nine months. Since last summer, the airwaves have been dominated by suggestions that the police are the biggest threat facing young black males today. A handful of highly publicized deaths of unarmed black men, often following a resisted arrest — including Eric Garner in Staten Island, N.Y., in July 2014, Michael Brown in Ferguson, Mo., in August 2014 and Freddie Gray in Baltimore last month — have led to riots, violent protests and attacks on the police. Murders of officers jumped 89% in 2014, to 51 from 27.”
She continued, “Obama and Attorney General Eric Holder … embraced the conceit that law enforcement in black communities is infected by bias. The news media pump out a seemingly constant stream of stories about alleged police mistreatment of blacks, with the reports often buttressed by cellphone videos that rarely capture the behavior that caused an officer to use force. … Acquittals of police officers for the use of deadly force against black suspects are now automatically presented as a miscarriage of justice. Proposals aimed at producing more cop convictions abound.”
Of course, now NFL celebrity athletes are taking a knee to protest and promote this fake injustice — a protest started by former San Francisco quarterback Colin Kaepernick, who recently donated funds to honor a cop-killer.
Professor Walter Williams observes that the issue should be intra-racial homicide — black-on-black murders. But as I have noted previously, that doesn’t fit the Democrats’ race-bait political agenda constituent narrative.
Attorney General Jeff Sessions previously voiced his concern that the 2015 increase was “the beginning of a trend,” noting, “That is the thing that has concerned me the most.” His concerns are now reality.
Trump meets with Las Vegas shooting survivors: “We’re going to pay our respects” (USA Today)
San Juan mayor feuding with Trump turned her back when asked to swear to uphold the Constitution (The Daily Signal)
Three Green Berets killed, two wounded in Niger ambush (Fox News)
Burn. NYC mayor not invited to Columbus Day parade (Hot Air)
Black Lives Matter students shut down the ACLU’s campus free speech event because “liberalism is white supremacy” (Reason)
House committee approves $10 billion initial payment for U.S.-Mexico border wall (The Washington Times)
DACA amnesty to increase illegal population to 14 million, cost billions (Washington Examiner)
Federal debt increases for 60th straight fiscal year (CNS News)
IRS awards $7.25M fraud-prevention contract to Equifax despite failure to secure consumers’ data (Consumerist)
Policy: What the Founders really thought about guns (The Daily Signal)
Policy: Should Trump re-certify the Iran Deal? (Washington Examiner)
For more, visit Patriot Headline Report.
Don’t Miss Alexander’s Column
Read The Evil in Las Vegas. There is no question about the magnitude of the Las Vegas tragedy, but there are as of yet no answers to questions about the assailant’s motives.
If you’d like to receive Alexander’s Column by email, update your subscription here.
By Caroline Camden Lewis
Even a casual observer can notice that something is deeply wrong in Congress. For eight years we trudged through vetoes and blocks by Barack Obama and his administration. Then things changed. Big time. Republicans won the House, the Senate and the presidency, a miracle so unbelievable that the opposition is still trying to figure out “what happened.”
This was the GOP’s moment. Conservatives were going to take the hill … literally. But while Hillary Clinton is still issuing blame for “what happened” in her campaign failure, conservatives are also asking “what happened” to our campaign victory. We wonder why Republicans can’t get health care done, and why tax policy is such a struggle. Why everything is such a struggle.
First, some assumed that an “R” by a person’s name meant “conservative.” That assumption has proven to be wrong. The big reveal this year has been the depth of the fault lines within the GOP, not the “deep divisions” between red states and blue states. On the Republican side of the aisle, there’s a blend of types spanning from the principled conservatives to the establishment types to the libertarian-leaning sort to the Trumpian populists.
On the other side of the aisle, the Democrats vote as a block and as a team, mainly because they tend to be more focused on the endgame: winning.
Republicans could learn something from this method. Conservatives vote for their principles while establishment types cling to their power. This fault line within the GOP has proven to be the greatest barrier to winning. So how do Republicans win when a minority establishment group continues to block the good things the rest of Congress supports? Is it too much to ask that all Republicans be conservative, or at least try to work together?
To begin our audit, we need to evaluate the team as a whole. Evoking a sports analogy, there are some players on the team who refuse to catch a pass. The ball is thrown and they stand around with their hands in their pockets. Or they dodge the ball entirely. In a real football game, the coach would pull them off the field and put them on the bench. Republicans can’t win the game with players who refuse to play … or even worse, play so that the other team wins. Rather than snatching victory from the jaws of defeat, these players manage to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory. The GOP has some really great players, and a president who will support them, but a handful of do-nothings continue to sabotage the ability to win.
Another issue within Congress is the incentive structure. Regular business incentivizes people to take risks so that they can make a profit. In business the goal is the endgame: selling your product. The congressional system motivates elected officials to play it safe. One wrong move and the media slam them with labels, followed by their election loss. One high-risk move can (or should) mean “out of a job” to a politician. Thus, the system motivates some members of Congress to do just enough to tell the constituents they did something, but not enough to really make any major changes. To return to the football analogy, success for some members of Congress means returning home with a clean uniform. “Look,” they brag, “I didn’t even get a scratch!” This is unacceptable. We sent them there to play the game, not to come home with a clean uniform.
In real life, we have no problem letting hotel managers know when the service they promised and failed to deliver was unacceptable. And we don’t wait two years to say something, hoping that the management will change.
We should have the same resolve to change unacceptable service from Congress. If this is a government by the people and for the people, then the people need to say something. Remember the old saying about crime? See something, say something. This should be the same way we deal with Congress. If we see something — something that inadequately represents our interests — then we should say something. The trick is that we need to be watching what is going on in order to “see something” so that we can “say something.”
There’s a caveat, here. People do say something, quite loudly and often. But voters rarely do anything. The congressional re-election rate is typically above 90%, despite lawmakers’ low approval. “Throw [the other guys’] bums out,” we suppose.
The final issue with Congress is how they are shielded from the laws they make. Case in point: ObamaCare. If members of Congress actually saw their health care options change from a reasonable price with reasonable care to ridiculously expensive and covering nothing, then maybe they would be more motivated to pass something.
In the end, “We the People” can pull the players off the field who just stand around and deliberately miss a pass. It’s called elections. And in the meantime, we need to call their offices and let them know when we see a poor performance, and encourage them when they do something right.
To find the contact information of your elected officials, click here.
MORE ANALYSIS FROM THE PATRIOT POST
- The Left’s Reflexive Repugnancy — After Las Vegas, leftists abandoned anything remotely resembling seemliness to advance their political agenda.
- Kimmel’s Clueless Condemnation — He chastises those who advise against politicizing the atrocity in Las Vegas by citing the First Amendment.
- The End of Tim Murphy’s Legislative Career? — The Pennsylvania lawmaker’s questionable character after an affair and abortion promotion should seal his fate.
- Political Correctness Is the Enemy of Truth — A university denies a proposal to research transgender persons who seek to reverse their reassignment surgeries.
- Get Offended With This New (Fake) App — Don’t miss you chance to get offended today about an issue you didn’t know existed yesterday!
BEST OF RIGHT OPINION
- Jeff Jacoby: Abusive Gerrymandering Can Be Stopped, but Not by Judges
- Ann Coulter: Media Finds Las Vegas Shooter’s Motive: He’s White!
- Tony Perkins: Will HHS Remain Pro-Life With Price Out?
For more, visit Right Opinion.
OPINION IN BRIEF
Jeff Jacoby: “Yes, redistricting is noxious. Yes, it makes American politics worse. But not every problem is one that courts can solve. The Constitution explicitly, and wisely, leaves the details of organizing congressional elections to the political branches: ‘The Times, Places, and Manner of holding Elections for Senators and Representatives, shall be prescribed in each State by the Legislature thereof; but the Congress may at any time by Law make or alter such Regulations.’ Political gerrymandering should be replaced with a fairer system. But it’s up to the states and Congress, not judges, to make that happen. Judicial confirmation battles are already bruising and unpleasant. Imagine how much uglier they will become if judges become the arbiters of whether political maps are too, er, political. The best alternative to gerrymandering is to take redistricting away from politicians and entrust it to an independent commission. It isn’t an impossible dream: Three states (California, Arizona, and Iowa) already use such commissions. If voters elsewhere really object to gerrymandering — not just when pollsters ask about it — they have the power to force change. Let the pressure for reform grow sufficiently acute and abusive mapmaking will be curtailed. But that pressure has to come from below. This is a political ill, to be healed by political means.”
Upright: “At the Las Vegas concert, men died protecting women, using their bodies as shields and standing up in the middle of gunfire to direct the women to safety. … Without many facts to go on, the only sweeping conclusion we can make so far is that there’s a reason feminism didn’t emerge from the country music community.” —Ann Coulter
Good luck with that: “Ban guns. All guns. Get rid of guns in homes, and on the streets, and, as much as possible, on police.” —New Republic’s Phoebe Maltz Bovy
Village Idiots: “They say it’s inappropriate to be talking about [gun control] because it’s too soon. Maybe it’s too soon for you because you know, deep down in your heart … you bear some responsibility for the fact that almost anyone can get any weapon they want. So now you want to cover yourself until the storm of outrage passes and you can go back to your dirty business as usual.” —Jimmy Kimmel
Non Compos Mentis: “I want any young men who buy a gun to be treated like young women who seek an abortion. Think about it: a mandatory 48-hours waiting period, written permission from a parent or a judge, a note from a doctor proving that he understands what he is about to do, time spent watching a video on individual and mass murders, traveling hundreds of miles at his own expense to the nearest gun shop, and walking through protesters holding photos of loved ones killed by guns, protesters who call him a murderer.” —Gloria Steinem
Race bait: “When you are in the [House chamber] what you can see is this real dichotomy. It’s a feeling of color almost. On one side of the room is literally gray and white. Literally, that is the color palette on one side of the room. On the other side of the room, there are yellows and blues and whites and greens. Physically there’s a difference in color, in the tone, because on one side all men, all white, on the other side some women, some people of color.” —Michelle Obama on the GOP’s supposed “all white men” identity
And last… “OK, let me explain this again: We’re celebs. We’re wiser & more empathetic than you. We are famous. Please take our opinions more seriously.” —Pat Sajak
Semper Vigilans Fortis Paratus et Fidelis
Managing Editor Nate Jackson
Join us in daily prayer for our Patriots in uniform — Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen, Marines and Coast Guardsmen — standing in harm’s way in defense of Liberty, and for their families.