Romney's ever-evolving record on guns and hunting

Remember, this is the guy who flip-flopped on catfish.  We shouldn't be surprised that his story on guns keeps changing too.  ABC reminds us of Romney's previous odd statements about guns:

During a virtual debate with the Boston Globe in 2007 Romney was corrected when he claimed to own a gun that he later clarified actually belonged to one of his five sons.

“I have a gun of my own. I go hunting myself. I’m a member of the NRA and believe firmly in the right to bear arms,” said Romney, to which the interview corrected him, “Ah, excuse me, but isn’t that son Josh’s gun?”

Romney responded, “Um, well, yes, but so what? He has several guns out at our vacation place in Utah, and I use them from time to time.”

Also in 2007, Romney explained during an interview exactly what kind of hunting he likes.
“I’m not a big game hunter. I’ve always been, if you will, a rodent and rabbit hunter all right, small varmints if you will,” Romney said.

Read the rest of this post...

American banks aren't good enough for Romney

HuffPo:

A conference call organized by President Barack Obama's presidential campaign on Monday to push for higher tax rates for millionaires quickly descended into an attack on Republican frontrunner Mitt Romney for his secretive Swiss bank account, with Sen. Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) declaring that no presidential aspirant has ever had such an exotic financial portfolio.

"I asked Warren Buffet in a meeting we had recently, 'Have you ever had a Swiss bank account?' He said, 'No, there are plenty of good banks in the United States,'" Durbin said.

"So I started asking people: 'Why do you have Swiss bank account?' One, you believe the Swiss Franc is a stronger currency than the United States dollar. And that is apparently the decision the Romney family made during the Bush presidency. And secondly, you want to conceal something. You want to hide something. Why would you have a Swiss bank account instead of one in the United States? I would like to ... ask the press to really press some of these questions, the obvious questions. When is the last time a presidential candidate for the United States had a Swiss bank account? I think the answer is never."

I'll bet Romney eats swiss cheese too. Read the rest of this post...

Rubio endorses Romney, then says wishes someone else won

Adios, señor vice presidente.  (This is from a week ago, but I hadn't seen it, and it's all the more relevant now that everyone is chattering about the possible VP candidates.) Read the rest of this post...

British government approved rendition to Gaddafi

Those would be the Tony "Middle East Peace Envoy" Blair years. BBC News:

The UK government approved the 2004 rendition of a terror suspect to the Gaddafi regime, the BBC can reveal.

A letter from an MI6 officer refers to Abdel Hakim Belhaj's rendition to Libya. It congratulates the Libyans on the "safe arrival" of the "air cargo".

Mr Belhaj says he was tortured in jail. Successive UK governments have denied complicity in rendition or torture.

Read the rest of this post...

Gay-immigrant-loving GOP sheriff hits Obama on immigration. Hypocrisy much?

Arizona's disgraced GOP Sheriff Paul Babeu has hit President Obama on his immigration policies in a new campaign ad released this week. The irony is not lost on those of us who also remember that this is the same border hawk who was exposed as being in a relationship with a male undocumented immigrant earlier this year.

Read more about Babeu's ad here. Read the rest of this post...

Why I'm worried about Project Glass

I know that John and others are incredibly excited about Google's Project Glass (Google's new project to put the Internet into a pair of eyeglasses). And, to a certain extent, I share in that excitement. But, aside from the fact that if and when Google Glasses become popular people are going to be driving cars with screens in front of their faces, I see further potential drawbacks to the increasingly digital existence that the product could bring (I'll go ahead and point out the irony of illustrating my concerns via a blog post up front).

As I wrote for the Kenyon Observer earlier, Project Glass reminds me of a book I read in middle school. And not in a good way. The book is M.T. Anderson's Feed, published in 2004, which illustrates a future in which everyone has chips planted in their heads at birth. The chips, or "feeds" do everything the Internet currently does and more: it's a search engine, instant messenger and online shopping mall. But, as I point out in my Observer post, your feed has a more important function:

...it constantly accumulates, aggregates and sells your personal information to corporations, which build up databases of buyer histories that help them tailor advertisements on an individual level. In one scene the main character, Titus, is picking out a hovercar and immediately receives competing advertisements for the two models he's considering: the ad for the smaller, sportier one shows him and his girlfriend on a romantic getaway; the ad for the larger one shows him taking all of his friends to a party. Both companies have access to Titus' mind to the point where they can literally construct dreams in his head about how the world could, and should, be for him.

Throughout the book, Titus and his cadre of shallow friends are gleeful participants in an empty, entertainment-driven culture featuring the hit sitcom "Oh? Wow! Thing!" and the constant message of "buy, buy, buy" in the background, personalized to fit their immediate desires. Not to spoil the ending, but when Titus' girlfriend's feed malfunctions, damaging her brain, the corporations in charge are unwilling to help her because she isn't a prolific shopper; helping her isn't worth it.

So why does this book have anything to do with Project Glass? Because securing the Internet to the front of your face is as close as you can come to putting it inside your head. The idea makes Google's famous "Don't be evil" mantra seem increasingly Orwellian:

I read [Feed] before things like Amazon.com's "customers who bought this also bought..." feature became really big, so the concept of personalized ads seemed plausible but nevertheless somewhat alien. Only a few years later my email, Facebook and Youtube accounts are all bombarding me with a combination of advertisements geared to suit me and me alone (in case I need a reminder that I'm young and single, I have my own lineup of Jewish dating, ab workout and college-themed clothing sites only one click away). This form of advertising, made possible by a massive network of data-mining and information-selling, is now so ubiquitous that companies don't even feel the need to hide the fact that they're doing it.

Don't get me wrong, there are uses for personalized advertising. As unlikely as I am to buy anything off of the Internet, I'm far more likely to buy something that is based on my search history than a product shown at random. But are the benefits of assimilating technology with my brain worth the costs?

[When] I saw the video promoting Project Glass, Feed was naturally the first thing that came to mind. How else could I interpret a systematic attempt to eliminate the ever-shrinking (and beneficial) gap between person and computer? While unlimited and instantaneous information has its uses, there is still a reason we go outside: to look at something other than a screen. The product is, without a doubt, incredibly cool. However, I worry that we have become complacent, and even excited, about a world that looks increasingly like this.

Read the rest of this post...

Alabama having second thoughts on harsh immigration law

One can only hope that the state loses even more money to other states before they finalize realize the obnoxiousness of their actions. NY Times:

Nearly a year after enacting an immigration law that supporters describe as the toughest in the country, Alabama is considering major revisions to its immigration policies.

On Thursday, a sponsor of the law, State Representative Micky Hammon, proposed eliminating or altering several of its most controversial sections. The law, which enhances police authority to deal with illegal immigrants, is popular with most Alabamians but faced a backlash from civil liberties advocates and business leaders.

The law’s supporters said the changes would make it clearer, easier to enforce and less susceptible to legal challenges.

Read the rest of this post...

US already setting record high temps for 2012

And once again, remember that climate change doesn't exist. Fox News keeps telling us this so it must be true.

Temperatures in the lower 48 states were 8.6 degrees above normal for March and 6 degrees higher than average for the first three months of the year, according to calculations by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. That far exceeds the old records.

The magnitude of how unusual the year has been in the U.S. has alarmed some meteorologists who have warned about global warming. One climate scientist said it's the weather equivalent of a baseball player on steroids, with old records obliterated.

"Everybody has this uneasy feeling. This is weird. This is not good," said Jerry Meehl, a climate scientist who specializes in extreme weather at the National Center for Atmospheric Research in Boulder, Colo. "It's a guilty pleasure. You're out enjoying this nice March weather, but you know it's not a good thing."

Read the rest of this post...

Chris Hayes: "The only hope on climate change is civil disobedience"—and the clock is ticking

This is a great watch, and Hayes does a terrific job. (My alternate title, by the way, is Hayes' great line midway: "The earth's atmosphere does not care about the filibuster.")

Our backgrounder on this BLM (Bureau of Land Management) practice is here. Do read if you can; it covers a lot.

But for the basics, keep this in mind:

• Homesteaders after 1916 never owned the mineral rights (including water rights) under their own land. The federal government does. This is called "split estate."


• These BLM "auctions" are where oil and natural gas (i.e. "fracking") companies buy and lease the mineral rights under land already owned by others (as well as on or near federal land).


• Let that sink in. If you own a farm or ranch in the west, the BLM can (and will) lease your land's mineral rights to Exxon (etc.) and force you to accept their wells on your property. Aerial views of "fracking" (natural gas) lands show these "small footprint" wells are everywhere. See below; also the google.


• You also get their fracking fluid in your water and air. Probably forever.


• Fracking destroys. Money talks. Is the government corrupt and complicit? (Do the math; you'll get there.)

Now Mr. Hayes. Please do watch if you can. This is too low on people's radar, and too important. This is the State in action (h/t Digby).

(To play this large in a separate tab, click here.)



Just one comment. Shouting "rule of law" when there is no "rule of law" for barons and their retainers is laughable, beyond hypocrisy.

There's more of this coming. Occupy was peaceful protest. This is peaceful protest. As Mario Savio said:

"One thousand people sitting down can stop any machine, including this machine."

But this time people are starving and broke, not just war-weary and draft-eligible. As the rich and the right (including our whistleblower-hating current resident) crack down harder and harder, it will be harder and harder to keep violence away from the movement that's growing.

I do not want to see that day.

GP

(To follow on Twitter or to send links: @Gaius_Publius)
  Read the rest of this post...

Bill Cosby on guns and Trayvon Martin's death

I've always liked Bill Cosby. Both as a comedian, and a social commentator. And he's spot on in this case. Guns played a huge role in Trayvon Martin's death, beyond the obvious. I doubt Zimmerman would have gotten out of his car and followed Martin had he not had a gun to embolden him. And even had Zimmerman and Martin scuffled, it's a lot harder to kill someone with your hands than with a gun.

As Myrddin wrote the other day:

The problem with guns is not simply that they provide a way in which one person can kill another, but that they make it possible to do so in an instant. Killing someone with a knife is hard. Suffocation even harder. Gunshots, a simple flick of the finger.

It is possible that Zimmerman or Martin might have been killed if neither one was armed, but it is much less likely that would have happened, just as it is much less likely that a domestic dispute will result in murder if no gun is present.

It's the same reason I worry about the easy availability of guns in this country more generally. They're a great way for half-cocked people to go off, because someone cut you off, took your parking space, or simply looked at you the wrong way.

We're a far cry from the Revolutionary War. Perhaps it's time we revisited the Second Amendment and our country's love affair with violence.

NY Daily News:

"Without a gun, I don't see Mr. Zimmerman approaching Trayvon by himself," he added. "The power-of-the-gun mentality had him unafraid to confront someone. Even police call for backup in similar situations."

"When you carry a gun, you mean to harm somebody, kill somebody," Cosby said.

Read the rest of this post...

Syria failing to withdraw troops as agreed

It's not much of a surprise that Assad is a liar and will continue the bloodshed in Syria. The only surprise is that anyone believed Assad would live up to his word. The Guardian:

Hopes for a peaceful end to the Syrian crisis were fading rapidly on Sunday after President Bashar al-Assad refused to meet Tuesday's deadline for withdrawing his forces from flashpoints across the country without guarantees from the opposition to stop fighting first.

Kofi Annan, the former UN secretary-general, had called for a pullout to be completed by Tuesday morning with a ceasefire taking effect 48 hours later as the first stage in a six-point international plan for political negotiations between the Assad regime and its opponents.

Amid evidence of continuing government operations, Syria's foreign ministry said it was demanding written guarantees that "armed terrorist groups" would lay down their weapons.

Read the rest of this post...