Wednesday, 16 January 2013

KEEPING THE SCHOOLS SAFE.....

Ken Berwitz

Please read the following excerpt from an article at CBS News - Baltimore, and tell me if you think it makes you feel good, or not so good, about Talbot County School's commitment to keeping its students safe:

There's controversy at a Talbot County school after two 6-year-old boys were suspended while playing cops and robbers during recess and using their fingers to make an imaginary gun.

 

"It's ridiculous," said parent Julia Merchant.

 

This is the second time a Maryland child has been suspended for such play. Earlier this month, 6-year-old Rodney Lynch was suspended from his Montgomery County school after pretending to fire an imaginary gun more than once.

 

The school reversed its decision after Rodney's parents appealed.

 

 "They're saying he threatened a student, threatened to shoot a student. He was playing," said Rodney's father, Rodney Lynch Sr.

 

"I do not believe maliciousness was involved here," said child psychologist Dr. Joe Kaine.

 

Kaine says most 6-year-olds' minds aren't developed enough to understand why their idea of fun play might make adults upset. 

Let's see:  No armed guards; that's a terrible idea.  No faculty members being trained in the safe use of a firearm, with one such weapon securely locked away just in case; heaven forfend.

But if a 6 year old child points a finger at a schoolmate - probably imitating something he/she saw on a video game or TV show (neither of which are under more than the most nominal scrutiny by this administration -- far too much political $$$ contributed by the entertainment industry to allow it) - and it's all-out war.  Toss that child out of school, before there is mass carnage!!!

Let me end with a question:  is this going to keep the children safe, or is it doing nothing other than indulging a liberal fantasy of "doing something", which is guaranteed not to address the issue of school safety even one iota?

You tell me.

free` Ken, Did you see what is in Obama's gun control proposal? The media will be tearing him a new one for this. --- "He is also calling for improvements in school safety, including putting 1,000 police officers in schools..." -------- apnews.myway.com/article/20130116/DA3REMR02.html (01/16/13)


IS THE NRA "TARGETING" PRESIDENT OBAMA'S CHILDREN?

Ken Berwitz

Suppose someone said that the NRA was "targeting" two people.  That would be a pretty serious accusation, given that the NRA (National Rifle Association) is a proponent of legal guns, and the word "target" implies that the people being talked about were potential shooting victims.

Suppose someone said that the NRA was "targeting" President Barack Obama's daughters, Sasha and Malia?  That would be a huge accusation - one which suggested their lives were in danger from the source of the "targeting".

Now suppose the someone saying this was a the host of a national television show, watched by millions? 

Well, don't suppose.  Because you don't have to.  That was the language used by NBC's Chief White House Correspondent chuck todd, on this morning's Today Show before playing the NRA's latest web video.

Do you doubt me?  Do you assume I must be exaggerating?  Well, here are todd's exact words, and the entire verbiage he played of the NRA's ad. You be the judge:

TODD:  And before the President has even had a chance to unveil those bold (gun control) proposals, the NRA is signaling that it intends to fight the President, and is using this new web video that hits close to home, targeting his daughters.  Here's a clip:

NRA WEB VIDEO VERBIAGE:  "Are the President's kids more important than yours?  Then why is he skeptical about putting armed security in our schools, when his kids are protected by armed guards at their school?"

Is the NRA out to "get" Sasha and Malia Obama? 

Well, do you see anything there that demands they be put in danger, or disputes in any way the logic of armed guards at their school (as I blogged weeks ago, both girls attend Sidwell Friends School, which has a staff of 11 armed security guards)?

No, and no.

All the ad says - as plain as day - is that your children (I prefer that word to "kids") deserve protection too, and that President Obama is a hypocrite because, by sending Sasha and Malia to Sidwell Friends he is implicitly saying it is ok for his children to be protected this way, but not yours.

Try to imagine what NBC, and the preponderance of other mainstream media venues, would have said if conservative Republicans ever used the term "target" and "guns" in the same sentence about an organization they did not like.  As a reference point, consider the uproar over Sarah Palin's "crosshairs" map of vulnerable Democrat house districts, and the lie that it had anything at all to do with jared lee loughner shooting Gabrielle Giffords.

I don't care what you think of the NRA, I hope you are repulsed by the level that our media have sunk to when someone entrusted to be a network's Chief White House Correspondent mouths such a dishonest, sickening, fraudulent attack.

And I hope you are as saddened as I am by the fact that this kind of mindset informs news reporting on Today, and other morning shows, every day.

Juampi HA! I saw that picture too and I thuoght almost the exact same thing (though I didn't put it quite so eloquently in my own head it was more like what kinda baloney is this? Who lives like that, let alone creates something artistic like that. Then I went and ate an oreo or something because in my head I took it a step farther into the whole, I'll never have a workspace that's that tidy and therefore will never be crazy successful as an artist and I should really just hang it up now. Insane, I know, but there it is.) (01/27/13)


A LESSON EVEN A HUSBAND COULD UNDERSTAND

Ken Berwitz

A quick break from politics, to post a terrific little piece from one of my facebook friends, which provides a very important lesson for husbands:

A man came home from work and found his 3 children outside, still in their pajamas, playing in the mud, with empty food boxes and wrappers strewn around garden, The door of his wife's car was open, as was the front door to the house and no sign of the dog.

Walking in the door, he found an even bigger mess. A lamp had been knocked over, the throw rug was against one wall, In the front room the TV was on loudly with the cartoon channel, the family room was strewn with toys and various items of clothing.

In the kitchen, dishes filled the sink, breakfast food was spilled on the counter, the fridge door was open wide, dog food was spilled on the floor, a broken glass lay under the table, and a small pile of sand was spread by the back door.

He quickly headed up the stairs, stepping over toys and more piles of clothes, looking for his wife. He was worried she might be ill, or that something serious had happened.

He was met with a small trickle of water as it made its way out the bathroom door. As he peered inside he found wet towels, scummy soap and more toys strewn over the floor. Miles of toilet paper lay in a heap and toothpaste had been smeared over the mirror and walls.

As he rushed to the bedroom, he found his wife still curled up in the bed in her pajamas, reading a novel... She looked up at him, smiled and asked how his day went.

He looked at her bewildered and asked, "What happened here today?"

She again smiled and answered, "You know every day when you come home from work and you ask me what in the world do I do all day?"

''Yes," was his incredulous reply.

"Well, today I didn't do it".

Lesson taught?  I thought so.

Ok, back to politics.


MORNING JOE, AND THE NRA WEB VIDEO

Ken Berwitz

Do you by any chance think NBC Senior White House Correspondent chuck todd is the only one attacking the NRA without a valid reason?

If so, this transcript from today's Morning Joe show on MSNBC, which I pulled from Mark Finkelstein's blog at newsbusters.org, will most definitely disabuse you of that assumption:

Read it and see:

MIKE BARNICLE: Mika, Joe mentioned, in trying to link things, the issue of pornography. Pornographic videos. Let's get to the ad.

MIKA BRZEZINSKI: Okay.

BARNICLE: Because this is pornography.

BRZEZINSKI: The NRA has released a new ad that brings the president's daughters into the debate over guns in America. [Rolls ad].

DONNY DEUTSCH: That's a real ad.

BARNICLE: That, my friends, is political pornography.

DEUTSCH:That's one of the grossest things I've ever seen in my life.

BRZEZINSKI: I don't know what to say. Joe?

JOE SCARBOROUGH: What's wrong with these people, Mika? What's wrong with these people? You have children that had no say in the decision on whether their father was going to step forward to be President of the United States, to run for president, one of the most bone-crushing, sacrificing things any husband or wife can do to their family. And the second they make that decision, their children and their entire family have targets on their backs. And the NRA is putting something out like-- what's wrong with these people, putting out apps that 4-year-olds can play on the anniversary of the Newtown murders, and now putting out an ad talking about the president's daughters?

BRZEZINSKI: They are out of step, out of the mainstream, totally out of sync with what's going on in our society. And quite frankly after seeing that, I think some of the people who run that thing are sick. I really do. I think they are sick in the head. And I'm serious. I am embarrassed right now. I'm embarrassed for our country.

To remind you:  here is what the NRA ad says:

"Are the President's kids more important than yours?  Then why is he skeptical about putting armed security in our schools, when his kids are protected by armed guards at their school?"

Now, tell me:  do you see even one word from Barnicle, or Brzezinski, or Deutsch, or Scarborough, explaining what was factually incorrect, or in any way insulting or threatening to Mr. Obama's children, or in any way says the President did a thing wrong by sending them to a school protected by armed security guards? 

Me neither.

In other words, this is classic BS at its finest.  This is a panel of likeminded NRA-haters playing "can you top this" with their ad hominem attacks....and, evidently, hoping that no one notices they offer no basis for the attacks.

This is what passes for a panel discussion on Morning Joe these days...which is why I watch it significantly less frequently than I used to.  Why do I need to waste time listening to this bunch, when they offer nothing different than NBC's other "talent"?

If Morning Joe ever decides to change course by getting serious about presenting both sides of issues, let me know.  Somehow, I doubt it will be any time soon.


THE QUOTE OF THE DAY

Ken Berwitz

Today's quote comes to us from President Obama's secretary/mouthpiece, Jay Carney.  It is about Egypt's President and long-time member of the Muslim Brotherhood, mohamed morsi, who, according to the New York Times...

"Nearly three years ago...delivered a speech urging Egyptians to "nurse our children and our grandchildren on hatred" for Jews and Zionists...described Zionists as "these bloodsuckers who attack the Palestinians, these warmongers, the descendants of apes and pigs."

morsi has never, to this moment, renounced or retracted even one word of that statement.

So what does Carney, therefore Obama, have to say about it?

From Neil Munro's blog at dailycaller.com:

"(he has demonstrated in word and deed his commitment to Egypt's peace treaty with Israel. ... He obviously worked with us to resolve ... a ceasefire ... - in the Gaza conflict last year.  So this is about action; it's about deeds"

Fascinating. 

mohamed morsi hates Jews, calls them the descendants of apes and pigs, especially hates Zionists, thoroughly despises Israel.....but he is committed to maintaining peace with Israel. 

Based on what?  Based on the fact that he hasn't made good on his hatred of Israel...yet.

Carney also is quoted as saying that morsi "...should make clear that he respects people of all faithers, and that this type of rhetoric is not acceptable or productive in a democratic Egypt".

Uh, what's the difference if he said that, Jay?  You just finished excusing his hate speech on the grounds that "this is about action; it's about deeds"  Is your BS so obvious that even you can't abide it?  Evidently so.

The scariest part of this, obviously, is how dishonest and/or naive President Obama would have to be to claim morsi's comments are not a problem. 

But next scariest is the fact that so many members of the "Lost Tribe" (i.e. Jews, and non-Jews, who support Israel but voted for Obama anyway) will figure out a way to buy what he is selling. 

===================================================

UPDATE:  now morsi says his comments were taken "out of context". 

I wonder what the acceptable context was for calling Jews bloodsuckers, or descendants of apes and pigs.  Maybe Jay Carney can explain.....


A LESSON EVEN A HUSBAND COULD UNDERSTAND

Ken Berwitz

A quick break from politics, to post a terrific little piece from one of my facebook friends, which provides a very important lesson for husbands:

A man came home from work and found his 3 children outside, still in their pajamas, playing in the mud, with empty food boxes and wrappers strewn around garden, The door of his wife's car was open, as was the front door to the house and no sign of the dog.

Walking in the door, he found an even bigger mess. A lamp had been knocked over, the throw rug was against one wall, In the front room the TV was on loudly with the cartoon channel, the family room was strewn with toys and various items of clothing.

In the kitchen, dishes filled the sink, breakfast food was spilled on the counter, the fridge door was open wide, dog food was spilled on the floor, a broken glass lay under the table, and a small pile of sand was spread by the back door.

He quickly headed up the stairs, stepping over toys and more piles of clothes, looking for his wife. He was worried she might be ill, or that something serious had happened.

He was met with a small trickle of water as it made its way out the bathroom door. As he peered inside he found wet towels, scummy soap and more toys strewn over the floor. Miles of toilet paper lay in a heap and toothpaste had been smeared over the mirror and walls.

As he rushed to the bedroom, he found his wife still curled up in the bed in her pajamas, reading a novel... She looked up at him, smiled and asked how his day went.

He looked at her bewildered and asked, "What happened here today?"

She again smiled and answered, "You know every day when you come home from work and you ask me what in the world do I do all day?"

''Yes," was his incredulous reply.

"Well, today I didn't do it".

Lesson taught?  I thought so.

Ok, back to politics.


A DIALOGUE ON PRESIDENT OBAMA'S GUN/SCHOOL SAFETY PROPOSALS

Ken Berwitz

I just had a dialogue with someone (not a commenter in here) regarding the proposals made by President Obama on gun control and school safety.

The person in question feels that I am not giving Mr.Obama his due, because:

-He is addressing violence in media as well as guns;

-The school his children attend (Sidwell Friends) needs armed security guards because it is loaded with children of parents who might be political "targets", not just the Obama children;

-He did not stop at gun control, he also made proposals regarding security for schools in general - not just elite ones like Sidwell Friends.

Here is my response to this person.  Please read it and see if you agree:

Thanks for your comments. But, unfortunately, they are not very convincing.

President Obama proposed almost two dozen specific laws to limit gun usage --- and a $10 million dollar study - no laws, but a study - to see if violent entertainment media have anything to do with the problem. Sight unseen, I know you are smart enough to understand there is no equality between these two positions. Or, put another way, how would you feel if Mr. Obama proposed almost two dozen specific laws to limit violent media, and a $10 million dollar study to determine if legal gun ownership has anything to do with the problem? Somehow, I doubt you'd be impressed.

Regarding Sidwell Friends, yes, I know that the school educates lots of diplomat's, politician's and, generally, rich people's children. Yes, they need protection - and do they ever get it. But I wonder how many of the parents of dead 6 year olds in Newtown, Connecticut feel their children were less needful of protection on that awful day. I give you more credit than to believe your point is that children who don't attend Sidwell Friends are less important/more expendable.

Regarding the proposals for school safety, I am happy that at least some attention was paid to this issue. But can you not see the Obama proposals barely even qualify as half-hearted?

1,000 "school resource officers"? What, exactly would their function be? It certainly wouldn't be guarding individual schools since, according to the latest (2009-2010) data there are over 98.000 public schools in the USA. Plus, the administration isn't even paying for them; it is providing an "incentive" with local and state government picking up the actual tab.

And other than that next-to-nothing proposal, we have $150 million dollars more for a "Comprehensive School Safety Program" described so vaguely that no one can even tell what it is, let alone when it would start, who would be hired to do what, etc. - not you, not me, not anyone.

The sad truth is, this administration, in full "never let a crisis go to waste" mode, is not addressing the very real issue of protecting schoolchildren from lunatics bent on mass murder, it is using the corpses of dead children to push a gun control agenda.

Am I right?  Wrong?  Your call.

free` HotGranny wrote; "It looks to me to say" to have a Militia ready to protect our free States, these Militia's have a right to keep and bear arms, and shall not be infringed upon." -------- I guess if you can get the wording changed to what you have written, then it would be as you have written it, but that isn't what it says now. So all you have to do is get an Amendment to remove "the right of the people" and replace it with "the wishes of HotGranny and the vast majority of liberals". (01/17/13)

Zeke @hot granny.... .... The Supreme Court has already ruled on that point: The right to "keep and bear arms" is an INDIVIDUAL right. The "militia" consisted of armed citizens who would defend their homes and towns against marauders, savages, pirates. .... .... When seconds count, the Continental Army is just weeks away. ..... ..... (01/17/13)

Ken Berwitz Hot Granny (FYI I love that name): I understand your point. But over 200 years of Supreme Courts have ruled that the meaning is far more expansive than you are reading it I'm no lawyer (the only one of three siblings who isn't, by the way) - but when every Supreme court throughout the history of the country agrees on an amendment, I have to assume they know more about it than I do. (01/16/13)

hot granny Article [II.] A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed. Is this what everyone is Fighting over? Where dose it say every American has a right to own guns? It looks to me to say" to have a Militia ready to protect our free States, these Militia's have a right to keep and bear arms, and shall not be infringed upon." Remember our Country was won by the Militia. (01/16/13)

Ken Berwitz "The Wishes of Hot Granny"? Does that come in Blu-ray? (01/17/13)


Buy Our Book Here!


Return to Current Blog
We're Hopelessly Partisan

hopelesslypartisan.com, is a web site which is dedicated to honest, blunt, debate on the issues of our time.


About Us



Privacy Notice: In conjunction with the ads on this site, third parties may be placing and reading cookies on your browser, or using web beacons to collect information.


At “Hopelessly Partisan” we discuss all issues, big and small. In here, nothing is sacred and nothing is out of bounds.

So settle back, preferably after laughing your way through a copy of “The Hopelessly Partisan Guide To American Politics”, and let the battle begin. In this blog, your opinion counts every bit as much as anyone else's, maybe even more.

And to show that my willingness to provide all sides of the issues is sincere, here are links to a variety of web sites, from the left, the middle (more or less) and the right. Read them and either smile in agreement or gnash your teeth in anger!!