Crush Liberalism

Liberalism: Why think when you can “feel”?

MSM: If only Congress hadn’t authorized civilians to carry guns into national parks, that crazed gunman that shot four people at a party wouldn’t have killed a park ranger

I’ll never understand the logic, or lack thereof, of liberals when it comes to gun control.  Let’s set the background:

Mount Rainier National Park remained closed Tuesday following the discovery of the body of the suspected gunman in the fatal shooting of a park ranger that has devastated the close-knit group of park workers.

The park, which sees more than 1.5 million visitors annually, has been off-limits since Margaret Anderson was killed Sunday morning. The body of the man suspected of killing her was found Monday morning by a plane searching the rugged, snowy area.

“We have been through a horrific experience,” said park superintendent Randy King. “We’re going to need a little time to regroup.”

Benjamin Colton Barnes, 24, was lying partially submerged in a frigid mountain creek with snow banks standing several feet high on each side.

Authorities think Barnes fled to the park Sunday to hide after an early morning shooting at a New Year’s house party near Seattle that wounded four, two critically.

King County Sheriff’s spokeswoman Sgt. Cindi West said Barnes is a suspect in that shooting, as well. West said the shots were fired around 3 a.m. after a dispute over a gun. However, further details, including the vicitms’ identities, were not immediately available.

Parks spokesman Kevin Bacher said: “The speculation is that he may have come up here, specifically for that reason, to get away. The speculation is he threw some stuff in the car and headed up here to hide out.” 

So a crazed gunman (Barnes) shoots four people at a New Years Eve party, then flees to Mt. Rainier National Park and kills a park ranger who was part of a roadblock.  How does the MSM treat this?  Predictably:

The shooting renewed debate about a federal law that made it legal to take loaded weapons into national parks. The 2010 law made possession of firearms subject to state gun laws.

Bill Wade, the outgoing chair of the Coalition of National Park Service Retirees, said Congress should be regretting its decision.

“The many congressmen and senators that voted for the legislation that allowed loaded weapons to be brought into the parks ought to be feeling pretty bad right now,” Wade said.

So let me get this straight:

A mentally disturbed man who didn’t care about gun laws (or any laws) shoots four people at a party, critically wounding two of them.  This same lawbreaker retreats to the wilderness to hide out, and when he is stopped by a park ranger, he ignored the law again (you know, the law about killing people and stuff?) and shot and killed the park ranger.  But had Congress not authorized law-abiding citizens to carry firearms into national parks to defend themselves against bears and mountain lions, this otherwise lawbreaking gunman would have…um…not taken his gun to the national park on account of it being illegal to do so?  Because he would have gotten in big trouble for breaking a gun law, as opposed to commiting homicide?  And that fear would have made a mentally ill gunman reconsider his actions?

Got it.  Thanks for the clarification.

Nope…no liberal media bias!

January 3, 2012 Posted by | gun rights, media bias, Seattle | 3 Comments

Hilarious in Seattle

Mother Nature may have pounded my area last week, but she does have a sense of humor.  From Seattlestan:

Only in Seattle could an event touted as a way to help the environment get washed out during what is supposed to be the driest time of the year.


August 25, 2008 Posted by | environuts, global warming, Seattle | 1 Comment

Seattle Dems boo Pledge of Allegiance

But hey…don’t question their patriotism, right?  From The Stranger:

There was some time to kill as multiple tallies of the delegates and alternates were done, and when the time-killer of taking audience questions had run its course and the idea of teling jokes had been nixed, someone suggested doing the Pledge of Allegiance to pass the time. (Are you listening, right-wing bloggers? This is going to get good.)

At the mere mention of doing the pledge there were groans and boos. Then, when the district chair put the idea of doing the Pledge of Allegiance up to a vote, it was overwhelmingly voted down. One might more accurately say the idea of pledging allegiance to the flag (of which there was only one in the room, by the way, on some delegate’s hat) was shouted down.

Seattlestan…’nuff said.

April 7, 2008 Posted by | moonbats, Seattle | 2 Comments

Econuts torch “green” luxury homes

I have been saying for years that the environmentalist movement is, by and large, a home for displaced communists who needed something to do after communism failed.  A large number of these people are staunch anti-capitalists.  Heck, they have to be, in order to explain why their own lives have been failures.  While a number of them do indeed care about the environment, a large percentage of them could give a hoot about it.

Need more proof?  Look no further than Seattlestan:

For people who are anti-sprawl activists — or have baser motives — a new-built house sitting empty in a previously rural area evidently makes a ripe target for an attack by fire.

It happened again today north of Seattle, where three of six model homes on a so-called Street of Dreams burned to the ground and a fourth was damaged. Fire officials said the blazes were deliberately set, and that a sign was found at the scene claiming responsibility and signed E.L.F., which stands for a shadowy group or movement called the Earth Liberation Front.

The model homes were said by their builders to contain environmentally friendly or “green” elements. But the size and location of the houses appeared to irritate whoever left the sign and presumably set the fires: “Built Green? Nope black.” The sign said that “McMansions” in rural areas are “not green.”

Fire officials in suburban Seattle said the blazes could not have been accidental. “We’re certain that these homes were arson,” Fire Chief Rick Eastman said in a televised interview.

The E.L.F., or people using the initials, has claimed responsibility for other fires around the country, including attacks at three location in Suffolk County, Long Island, in early 2001. Three nearly-completed houses were burned by people claiming to represent E.L.F., who spray-painted messages on other houses nearby: “Stop Urban Sprawl”; “If you build it we will burn it”; and finally, “Burn the rich.”

How’s that for a media bias euphemism?  Domestic terrorist and arsonist = “anti-sprawl activist”!  Do you think if I went to Berserkley and beat the holy Hades out of some anti-Marine hippie retread miscreant who richly deserves it, maybe the MSM would refer to me as a “pro-Marine activist” or an “anti-moonbat activist”?  Me neither.

Anywho, back to the original point.  You have houses that were built to be environmentally friendly, and the econuts set them ablaze anyway, sending decidedly environmentally unfriendly smoke and ash into the air.  These a-holes put the “mental” in “environmental”, n’est-ce pas?

March 4, 2008 Posted by | environuts, media bias, Seattle | 5 Comments

NYT “jumped the shark” on McCain story

How do you know when you’ve “jumped the shark“?  When Seattlestan’s hopelessly leftist fishwrap calls your story “thin beer” and says they wouldn’t have run it at all, and when your own stooge ombudsman says you shouldn’t have run it, then you have officially jumped it.  From Seattlestan:

I chose not to run the New York Times story on John McCain in Thursday’s P-I, even though it was available to us on the New York Times News Service. I thought I’d take a shot at explaining why.

To me, the story had serious flaws. It did not convincingly make the case that McCain either had an affair with a lobbyist, or was improperly influenced by her. It used a raft of unnamed sources to assert that members of McCain’s campaign staff — not this campaign but his campaign eight years ago — were concerned about the amount of time McCain was spending with the lobbyist, Vicki Iseman. They were worried about the appearance of a close bond between the two of them.

Then it went even further back, re-establishing the difficulties McCain had with his close association to savings-and-loan criminal Charles Keating. It didn’t get back to the thing that (of course) the rest of the media immediately pounced on — McCain, Iseman and the nature of their relationship — until very deep in the story. And when the story did get back there, it didn’t do so with anything approaching convincing material.

A very good editor I happen to work for, P-I Editor and Publisher Roger Oglesby, said today that the story read like a candidate profile to him, not an investigative story, and I think that’s true. A candidate profile based on a lot of old anecdotes…

…Admitting that Keller was in a better position to vet the sourcing and facts than I am as, basically, a reader, let’s assume that every source is solid and every fact attributed in the story to an anonymous source is true. You’re still dealing with a possible appearance of impropriety, eight years ago, that is certainly unproven and probably unprovable.

Where is the solid evidence of this lobbyist improperly influencing (or bedding) McCain? I didn’t see it in the half-dozen times I read the story. In paragraphs fifty-eight through sixty-one of the sixty-five-paragraph story, the Times points out two matters in which McCain took actions favorable to the lobbyist’s clients — that were also clearly consistent with his previously stated positions.

That’s pretty thin beer.

Nope…no liberal media bias!

February 25, 2008 Posted by | McCain, media bias, Seattle | 2 Comments

Seattlestan government schools: White kids too smart

More and more each day, we see cases like this where moron educrats chip away at standards of excellence and achievement, especially if the end results don’t mesh with their egalitarian view of the world.  From Seattlestan’s fishwrap:

An outside review of gifted education in Seattle Public Schools said the district should act aggressively to diversify its program.

Almost three-quarters of the students enrolled in the Accelerated Progress Program (APP) are white, compared to about 40 percent districtwide.

Concerns about APP were noted by a group of consultants from the University of Virginia who were hired by the district to review the program. Their report was released today.

About 1,500 students in APP are admitted after testing in the 98th or 99th percentile nationally in cognitive ability and reading and math skills. … 

Got that?  If you test in the top 2% nationally, you’re gifted…unless you’re white, in which case you’re “favored” (despite being in the minority in the Seattlestan school district)!  Idiot educrats.

December 4, 2007 Posted by | political correctness, public education, Seattle | 10 Comments