Minx Dynamic Pages for Movable Type

Confederate Yankee

September 06, 2009

Van Hit By Bus

How many more to go?

Posted by: Confederate Yankee at 01:37 AM | Comments (33) | Add Comment | Trackbacks (Suck)

September 04, 2009

Truther. Liar. Speed Bump.

Admitted communist community organizer and Obama "Green Jobs Czar" Van Jones has tried to spin his way out of signing his name on document that claims the Bush Administration played a role in allowing thousands of Americans to die during the 9/11 terrorist attacks.

Jones tries to claim he didn't know what he was signing. This would mark him as either an idiot, or a liar... or more than likely both.

Unfortunately for Jones and the White House, Gateway Pundit has evidence pointing to Jones being part of the Truther movement from its inception, with documentation showing his involvement in January of 2002, just months after the attack. Being on the ground floor of this conspiracy theorizing, this marks Jones as something of a "Truther birther."

Jones has been proven to be both a liar and an idiot.

That someone with Jones' radical background could be seen as a fit for this President's objectives should be seen as a wake-up call for all Americans. The fact that Jones is clearly a Truther from the beginning of the movement shows that the White House is incompetent when it comes to vetting personnel.

Then again, many of his appoints are tax cheats and ideologues, so I guess that was proven long ago.

Jones, however, has too much baggage, and is too far &qout;out there" to be kept on Obama's team. He'll likely be thrown under the proverbial bus this weekend to join the other radicals, racists, and domestic terrorists that share and shape our neophyte President's radical past.

Thump-thump.

Goodbye, Van.

Posted by: Confederate Yankee at 01:33 PM | Comments (32) | Add Comment | Trackbacks (Suck)

September 03, 2009

Find Young Cannibal

The Ventured County Star has posted a picture of a MoveOn.org agitator in his late 40s or 50s that crossed the street yesterday afternoon to confront a group of anti-Obamacare protesters, and caused a peaceful protest to devolve into violence.

The man on the far right of the photo wearing black shorts and tee shirt got in the face of one of the smaller seniors in attendence, Bill Rice, and began yelling at him. The confrontation escalated, with Rice throwing two punches in what other witnesses described as self-defense. The second punch ended up in the man's mouth, at which point the instigator of the conflict bit Mr. Rice's finger off.

The Ventura County Sheriff's Department is looking for the MoveOn.Org protester, who will likely be charged with felony mayhem.

If you can identify the suspect, please call the Sheriff's Department investigations bureau at (805)494-8201, and bring this elder-abusing thug to justice.

Posted by: Confederate Yankee at 09:04 PM | Comments (34) | Add Comment | Trackbacks (Suck)

Reality-Challenged Politics Daily Inverts Political Cannibalism Story

It really takes quite a pair to completely reverse the events and actors in an incident in order to promote the story you'd prefer, but Politics Daily seems up to the task, fabricating a story about a Move.org protester who had his finger bitten off at a California protest.

(Click the image to see the full-size version in another window.)

It is particularly dishonest (or grossly incompetent) to completely reverse the actual sequence of events and identities of those involved in a story that has garnered considerable attention, but to do so after linking to those news sources and blogs that reported what actually occurred is particularly brazen.

Posted by: Confederate Yankee at 12:25 PM | Comments (32) | Add Comment | Trackbacks (Suck)

~~Men Behaving Badly~~ Yes We Cannibal

From biting comments between MoveOn.org organized pro-government health-care protesters and free-market advocates, to straight-out biting:

A 65-year-old man had his finger bitten off Wednesday evening at a health care rally in Thousand Oaks, according to the Ventura County Sheriff's Department.
Sheriff's investigators were called to Hillcrest and Lynn Road at 7:26 p.m.
About 100 protesters sponsored by MoveOn.org were having a rally supporting health care reform. A group of anti-health care reform protesters formed across the street.
A witness from the scene says a man was walking through the anti-reform group to get to the pro-reform side when he got into an altercation with the 65-year-old, who opposes health care reform.

If that sounds clear as mud to you, you are not alone.

In English, a man trying to get to the MoveOn.Org rally got into an altercation with a free market supporter, and during the confrontation, the MoveOn.Org bit the man's pinky finger off.

Lefty blogger Karoli at Drums and Whistles was there as part of the MoveOn.Org crowd and claims that the 65-year-old free market supporter/biting victim was the aggressor and instigated the violence by intimidating one MoveOn.Org attendee before punching the guy who bit his finger off.

Law enforcement is investigating, but it seems possible that charges may be warranted on both sides.

Posted by: Confederate Yankee at 09:09 AM | Comments (45) | Add Comment | Trackbacks (Suck)

September 02, 2009

Repeat After Me: There Are No Death Panels in Socialized Heathcare...

There are no DeathEaters in the Government. There are no DeathEaters in the Government. There are no DeathEaters in the Government...

Like Hell:

In a letter to The Daily Telegraph, a group of experts who care for the terminally ill claim that some patients are being wrongly judged as close to death.
Under NHS guidance introduced across England to help doctors and medical staff deal with dying patients, they can then have fluid and drugs withdrawn and many are put on continuous sedation until they pass away.
But this approach can also mask the signs that their condition is improving, the experts warn.
As a result the scheme is causing a "national crisis" in patient care, the letter states. It has been signed palliative care experts including Professor Peter Millard, Emeritus Professor of Geriatrics, University of London, Dr Peter Hargreaves, a consultant in Palliative Medicine at St Luke's cancer centre in Guildford, and four others.
"Forecasting death is an inexact science," they say. Patients are being diagnosed as being close to death "without regard to the fact that the diagnosis could be wrong.
"As a result a national wave of discontent is building up, as family and friends witness the denial of fluids and food to patients."
The warning comes just a week after a report by the Patients Association estimated that up to one million patients had received poor or cruel care on the NHS.

Give Sarah Palin her due: "death panels," whether an actual board of ghouls or a less-direct but no less final demand for a reduction in cost on a beancounter's ledger, are a very real part of socialized health-care. Resources are finite; governments are wasteful. Patients that are already diagnosed as terminal (rightly or wrongly) are... expendable.

What's not to love?

Posted by: Confederate Yankee at 08:03 PM | Comments (40) | Add Comment | Trackbacks (Suck)

Is Teaching Kids to Quit a Better Idea?

I see a lot of my peers are getting angry at the thought of President Obama addressing schoolchildren in a nationwide address at 12:00 PM (Eastern) on September 8.

Some people are worried that the address is attempt at indoctrination, and considering that is precisely how Obama blew through millions of dollars in causing the Chicago Annenberg Challege to go belly-up, it probably isn't a completely unreasonable fear.

That said, look at his track record.

Barack Obama is incompetent at indoctrinating pretty much anyone, as his free-falling poll numbers suggest. He accomplished nothing for his effort in Chicago other than to provide funding for former domestic terrorists, and so I doubt another effort on September 8 would be anything other than yet another dismal failure on his already thin résumé.

Some people I admire say that we should keep our kids home that day, to send him a message. I think that's a bad idea.

First, as I already noted, Obama has a dismal record of being able to make converts out of kids, and can generally only affect children through those soft-skulled souls that have willingly chucked aside reason in order to maintain their community-based reality. While the children of liberals may be enthralled, the children of more rational moderates and independents and conservatives will recognize an infomercial when they see one. They will afford the President no more time or respect that they would any other huckster, and will tune him out within moments.

Further, forbidding your children from hearing his empty platitudes gives the impression that there is something in his speech that constitutes a threat to what they are being taught at home. It makes him forbidden fruit, instead of merely a fruitcake. It also teaches them that they should quit or skulk away when they encounter a bad idea of a problem, instead of taking it head-on. I want my kids to face life by taking on challenges, not shirking them.

Finally, it may behoove you to call your school and ask if they even intend to carry the President's address. My daughter's elementary school has no plans to participate, feeling that children are better served by learning.

People seem to forget that while Obama can try to get our children to be a captive audience, even reliably left-leaning educators know that our children should spend their time in more worthwhile pursuits.

Posted by: Confederate Yankee at 03:03 PM | Comments (36) | Add Comment | Trackbacks (Suck)

State Dept. Extended Blackwater's Air Arm in Iraq

The simple fact of the matter is that they're the best organization for the job.

State Department officials said Wednesday they have extended a contract with a subsidiary of the security firm once known as Blackwater USA despite the fact the North Carolina company is not allowed to work in the country.
Three officials said the contract with Presidential Airways to provide air support for U.S. diplomats was temporarily extended because the firm chosen to replace it is not yet ready to take over. The contract was due to expire on Sept. 3 and be taken over a day later by Dyncorp International.
Presidential is the air wing of Xe Services, of Moyock, N.C., which used to be known as Blackwater. The Iraqi government refused to grant the company an operating license earlier this year amid continued outrage over a 2007 lethal firefight involving some of its employees in Baghdad.
One official said that providing helicopter air support for American diplomats in Iraq - transporting them and overflying their convoys - is a "complex challenge" and that "a slower transition to DynCorp taking over the task order is in the best interest of the government."
"We unilaterally extended the current task order ... to ensure the continued security and safety of U.S. personnel in Iraq," the official said.

Numerous allegations have been made against Blackwater (now Xe) and founder Eric Prince, ranging from excessive use of force, to smuggling weapons to attempting a crusade, with allegation more hysteric than the last.

The simple fact of the matter, however, is that Xe is an entire range of companies, and does far more than just provide security contractors. Presidential performs a role that other contractors have not been able to perform to the same standards, freeing up military aviators to support the mission instead of ferrying VIPs.

I can only imagine that this news is going to cause a knee-jerk response among the less-informed, but the simple fact of the matter is that the decision is a pragmatic one, to ensure that our diplomats are in the best of care.

Posted by: Confederate Yankee at 02:09 PM | Comments (27) | Add Comment | Trackbacks (Suck)

On Being a Domestic Terrorist

I learned this morning that I am a domestic terrorist... or at least our President's allies consider me one.

I am under no illusions that the White House approved this specific language or had a direct hand in the wording of this appeal, but I do know that they have surrounded themselves with allies who feel exactly like the person who wrote about the majority of Americans opposed to government-run healthcare:

All 50 States are coordinating in this – as we fight back against our own Right-Wing Domestic Terrorists who are subverting the American Democratic Process, whipped to a frenzy by their Fox Propaganda Network ceaselessly re-seizing power for their treacherous leaders.

Americans with homemade posters protesting government intrusion into their very lives are "right wing domestic terrorists." Exercising our rights to peaceably assemble and raise our voices against the government thrusting themselves unwanted into our most private decisions is "subverting the American Democratic Process." And apparently we all watch Fox News (for the propaganda, of course) so we can re-seize power for our "treacherous leaders."

This message—which has since been taken down now that attention has been drawn to it—was not on a MySpace page or some amateur ranter's Blogspot site. It was posted on http://www.barackobama.com/.

It was on the President's web site, placed there by an ally, and summarily taken down without apology. The heated invective was aimed squarely at the majority of Americans that do not want this government involved with healthcare. And why should we trust them wit our lives, when they can't even run a simple rebate program correctly...or without pillaging the FAA of air traffic controllers to do the job?

We have every reason not to trust the government to be any more efficient with health-care than they have been with, well, anything else. We have no reason to expect that it would be more competently funded or solvent for the long term than Social Security or Medicare, and every reason to suspect that it will cause harm to the quality of health-care we receive.

Barack Obama and his allies swept into power on a promise of providing a new chapter in the relationship between Americans and their government. Now they tell me I'm a terrorist.

With his choice of allies and the messages they deliver and how they feel about us, he's certainly delivered on his promise.

Posted by: Confederate Yankee at 11:14 AM | Comments (28) | Add Comment | Trackbacks (Suck)

August 31, 2009

What Kind of "Man of God" is This?

I said several weeks ago that I thought carrying firearms to political events was needlessly provocative and counterproductive; now I find out that the man who carried the Bushmaster Carbon-15 rifle wants President Obama to die, and belongs to a fringe storefront church where the pastor proudly reiterates the same message. Lovely.

Charles has the video, which is utterly indefensible.

I think Barack Obama is an arrogant, incompetent ideologue. I disagree with almost every political position he holds and many moral positions as well. I think his Presidency will do far more harm to this country and to this world than good.

That said, we should be hoping that he ends up making the right decisions despite his incompetence and foolishness, or that at a minimum, that the makes mistakes that we can learn from and rectify.

Wishing death upon him—especially something as agonizing as cancer—is not the wish of a true follower of Christ's teaching, and to hear a so-called pastor praying for that makes me wonder if it is Christ he actually serves.

Posted by: Confederate Yankee at 09:05 PM | Comments (35) | Add Comment | Trackbacks (Suck)

August 28, 2009

Standing Your Ground

Apparently my most recent article for Pajamas Media didn't sit right for some people. The article, A Man's Wal-mart is His Castle? was written about a shooting that took place in a Billings, MT store after a argument escalated into gunplay.

More than one reader in the comments thought that my article was misleading and inflammatory, and they are welcome to their options. I'm sorry if you felt that way, because I didn't consciously mean to be provocative.

The reason the article come about is because Montana recently passed House Bill 228, which was the state's version of the "castle doctrine," also known as a "stand your ground" law. Many states have a variant of the law, but what makes Montana's law interesting is that the language of the bill has what appears to be a very low threshold to the use of lethal force.

Section 1. No duty to summon help or flee. Except as provided in 45-3-105, a person who is lawfully in a place or location and who is threatened with bodily injury or loss of life has no duty to retreat from a threat or summon law enforcement assistance prior to using force. The provisions of this section apply to a person offering evidence of justifiable use of force under 45-3-102, 45-3-103, or 45-3-104.

What constitutes a threat of bodily injury in the eyes of Montana's courts? That is a very broad term, and much lesser threshold than is common elsewhere.

Any number of found objects and makeshift weapons can be used to threaten bodily injury. Does this mean that a man cheating on his wife can then shoot her if she throws a plate at him when she finds out? Apparently so. Even a thrown punch or slap may be enough provocation to justify deadly force under this law, which seems to be the allegation in the Schmidt/Lira incident.

Quite a few people in the comments of that post seem to think that a thrown punch is enough to justify a bullet in return. The way I was trained, I find that excessive, and both illegal and ethically immoral in most instances.

I took my concealed carry course while other were preparing to watch the Steelers play the Cardinals in Super Bowl XLIII, and we were taught as many military and law enforcement officers are taught about the escalation of force or use of force continuum as it applies to us as concealed carry permit holders in North Carolina:

There are four rigid criteria that must be satisfied to justify shooting another person in self defense in North Carolina, but I imagine the law here isn't too much different in the 30 or so other states where concealed carry is allowed.
In plain English, we can't start a confrontation, must try to diffuse or escape the situation if we can, and can only pull a weapon when some tries to kill or sexually assault someone else or ourselves, and once we fire, we can only shoot to stop the threat, not to kill. That last detail was printed on the bottom of every page of the course syllabus, in bold text: Do not shoot to kill. Shoot to stop the lethal threat.
In practicality, there are three rules to follow in deciding whether or not deadly force is justified. explained as A.O.J.
Ability: the attacker or attackers must have the ability to kill or cripple.
Opportunity: the attacker must immediately be capable of employing that power.
Jeopardy: the attacker is acting in such a manner that a prudent person would conclude that the act was mean to kill or cripple.
You’ve got to decide if a threat meets all three criteria, and oh, and by the way… in "real world" scenarios, the CCH holder usually has just seconds to make that determination. Legal self defense is not for the stupid. At this point of the class, I was beginning to think that think it would be far more practical to apply for a "concealed lawyer" permit, if I could only find one small enough to shove in a holster.

Craig Schmidt shot Danny Lira in the face after Lira punched Schmidt, and Schmidt fell to the ground. That was enough justification for some, it seems. They make anecdotal arguments citing the relatively few number of people who have been killed with a punch, and also cite Lira's 260-pound weight (and roughly 100 pound weight difference) as justification for the much lighter Schmidt to shoot him.

If Lira was 260+ pounds of ripped muscle like UFC Heavyweight Champion Brock Lesnar or some sort of other imposing figure I may buy that argument, but Schmidt was three inches taller than the 5"9" 260-pound doughball that he shot. Lira is certainly heavy, but heavy does not automatically mean that person have an advantage.

Going back to the guidelines I have learned to operate under, this is how I might judge the defensibility of the Schmidt/Lira shooting.

Ability: the attacker or attackers must have the ability to kill or cripple.
Unknown, but doubtful.

Opportunity: the attacker must immediately be capable of employing that power.
Lira obviously had the ability to throw a punch, but it is dubious to claim he has the power or ability to kill or cripple.

Jeopardy: the attacker is acting in such a manner that a prudent person would conclude that the act was mean to kill or cripple.
Absolutely not. In no iterations of the story told by either man did Lira press his attack, and if Lira's version of events is closer to the truth than Schmidt's, the Lira was the one attacked when Schmidt hit him first, meaning his punch was a defensive reaction.

Additionally, if Lira's claim that Schmidt slammed into him with his shoulder can be verified, that would indicate that Schmidt was acting as a agent provocateur, attempting to escalate an argument in an attempt to justify an attempt at murder.

Admittedly, this is all speculation at this point, and many of the key details of this case as yet unknown to the public.

Perhaps Schmidt will be found justified.

Perhaps Lira will be proven the victim.

Either way, HB 228 remains a seriously flawed attempt at providing the citizens of Montana a variation of the castle doctrine, and one that needs to quickly be revised.

Posted by: Confederate Yankee at 08:50 PM | Comments (49) | Add Comment | Trackbacks (Suck)

NC Supreme Court Issues Emergency Room Stimulus

Because what this world needs is more armed ex-cons:

The North Carolina Supreme Court says a 2004 law that bars convicted felons from having a gun, even within their own home or business, is unconstitutional.
The state's high court ruled Friday in the case of Barney Britt of Wake County that the General Assembly went too far five years ago when it toughened restrictions on felons owning guns as part of a broad anti-domestic-violence bill.

Update: Okay, I'm a dolt.

For whatever reason, I had it in my head that the Court was allowing violent ex-cons to own firearms, and I was not thinking about non-violent offenders. Sadly, the article doesn't do a good job in defining precisely what the court said.

If it turns out that the ruling affects non-violent offenders, I'll agree with those that state they have paid their debt to society. If it applies to violent offenders as well, I still have a problem with it.

Posted by: Confederate Yankee at 04:47 PM | Comments (28) | Add Comment | Trackbacks (Suck)

Monster Kennedy Found Jokes About Kopechne's Drowning "One of His Favorite Topics of Humor"

Sick, Bloated, Evil.

Posted by: Confederate Yankee at 01:23 PM | Comments (25) | Add Comment | Trackbacks (Suck)

The Real Roots of Astroturf

You'll never guess where it really resides.

Well, maybe you will. There is a reason professional protesters seem to be uniformly liberal.

Posted by: Confederate Yankee at 09:27 AM | Comments (19) | Add Comment | Trackbacks (Suck)

August 27, 2009

A Man’s Wal-Mart Is His Castle?

An employee fight at Wal-Mart that ended in a gunshot to the head challenges Montana's new law regarding the use of deadly force in self-defense.

At Pajamas Media.

Posted by: Confederate Yankee at 07:43 AM | Comments (30) | Add Comment | Trackbacks (Suck)

August 26, 2009

Too Soon?

From a buddy on my high school football team, via Facebook:

So the Dems want to change the current bill to the Ted Kennedy Memorial Bill.
Does that mean they are going to do what he did with Mary Jo Kopechne?...Do nothing and watch it die??

Posted by: Confederate Yankee at 03:18 PM | Comments (32) | Add Comment | Trackbacks (Suck)

What They Won't Mention About Ted Kennedy: Treason

I don't like to use the word "treason." It is tossed around so casually these days by overly-inflamed people on both sides, and as a result, its use as an epithet has lost much of its sting.

I regret this today because it make sit that much harder to communicate the great disservice Edward Kennedy do to this nation years ago, as he conspired with our country's greatest enemy in an attempt to undermine a sitting President.

A third Kennedy boy who made it to the U.S. Senate and had his eyes on the presidency was Ted, who was politically to the left of his brothers, especially with regard to the Cold War and the Soviet threat.
Once Reagan was President, he found himself at odds with the latest Sen. Kennedy. Reagan ideas such as deploying intermediate-range nuclear forces (INFs) in Western Europe and the Strategic Defense Initiative infuriated Ted Kennedy, who, according to a highly sensitive KGB document discovered by reporter Tim Sebastian of the London Times (which ran an article on the document Feb. 2, 1992), was motivated to do something quite unusual:
On May 14, 1983, KGB head Viktor Chebrikov sent a message of "Special Importance" with the highest classification to General Secretary Yuri Andropov. The subject head to the letter read: "Regarding Senator Kennedy's request to the General Secretary of the Communist Party Y. V. Andropov." According to Chebrikov, Sen. Kennedy was "very troubled" by the state of U.S.-Soviet relations. Kennedy believed that the main reason for the dangerous situation was "Reagan's belligerence" and particularly his INF plan. "According to Kennedy," reported Chebrikov, "the current threat is due to the President's refusal to engage any modification to his politics."
The fourth and fifth paragraphs of Chebrikov's memo held out hope that Reagan's 1984 re-election bid could be thwarted. But where was the President vulnerable? Chebrikov stated that Kennedy had provided a possible answer. "The only real threats to Reagan are problems of war and peace and Soviet-American relations," wrote Chebrikov. "These issues, according to the senator [Kennedy], will without a doubt become the most important of the election campaign." According to Chebrikov, Kennedy lamented that Reagan was good at "propaganda," whereas statements from Soviet officials were quoted "out of context" or "whimsically discounted."
Soviet PR Campaign
Chebrikov then relayed Kennedy's alleged offer to Andropov: "Kennedy believes that, given the state of current affairs and in the interest of peace, it would be prudent and timely to undertake the following steps to counter the militaristic politics of Reagan." The first step, according to the document, was a recommendation by Kennedy that Andropov invite him to Moscow for a personal meeting. Chebrikov reported: "The main purpose of the meeting, according to the senator, would be to arm Soviet officials with explanations regarding problems of nuclear disarmament so they would be better prepared and more convincing during appearances in the USA."
Second, wrote the KGB head, "Kennedy believes that in order to influence Americans it would be important to organize in August-September of this year [1983], televised interviews with Y. V. Andropov in the USA." He said the Massachusetts senator had suggested a "direct appeal" by Andropov to the American people. "Kennedy and his friends," wrote Chebrikov, would hook up Andropov with television reporters such as Walter Cronkite and Barbara Walters. Chebrikov said that Kennedy had suggested arranging interviews not merely for Andropov but also for "lower-level Soviet officials, particularly from the military," who "would also have an opportunity to appeal directly to the American people about the peaceful intentions of the U.S.S.R."
In essence, Chebrikov reported that Kennedy offered to help organize a Soviet PR campaign, which would "root out the threat of nuclear war" and "improve Soviet-American relations" (and also hurt Reagan's 1984 re-election prospects). "Kennedy is very impressed with the activities of Y. V. Andropov and other Soviet leaders," explained Chebrikov.

The tale is not new, but people will try to forget or gloss over Kennedy's faults and crimes as character flaws or some other trivial, forgettable, and forgivable offense. But Ted Kennedy is not a great man with easily dismissed faults. He did this country a great wrong, conspiring with an enemy against our President.

Sadly the media and politicians will try to lionize him in his passing, never being honest enough to admit that despite some of the good things he accomplished while in office, he was in word and deed often no better than a jackal.

8/27 Update: Forbes decides to cover the same ground.

Posted by: Confederate Yankee at 11:15 AM | Comments (17) | Add Comment | Trackbacks (Suck)

Obese Womanizing Drunk Who Killed Young Woman in Alcohol-Related Accident Decades Ago And Who Spent His Career Increasing the Federal Deficit, Finally Dies

Ted Kennedy is dead. I will not miss him.

Ted Kennedy wanted more and bigger government, because he did not believe in nor understand the true genius of America.

Ted Kennedy wanted to force Americans to have gun control, even as he used his family's illegally-acquired fortune to hire armed bodyguards.

Ted Kennedy wanted to force us into socialized healthcare, even though he would have died long ago under the kind of healthcare rationing he wanted to force on the rest of us.

Ted Kennedy wanted to force us to use expensive alternative energy sources, even as he shot down plans for a wind farm that would have spoiled his beachfront views.

Ted Kennedy is dead, at long last.

He will not be missed here.

Update: And I almost forgot... he was a treasonous son-of-a-bitch as well, conspiring with the Soviet KGB during the Cold War in an attempt to undermine President Reagan for his own political gain.

That merits it own post.

Posted by: Confederate Yankee at 07:10 AM | Comments (69) | Add Comment | Trackbacks (Suck)

August 25, 2009

Some People Call Him Maurice... His Defense Attorney, For Instance

With a O.G. moniker like Maurice Schwenkler, you knew he was destined for trouble:

Police say they've arrested one suspect, but a second remains at large, after two men smashed 11 large, plate-glass windows with hammers at the Colorado Democratic Party Headquarters early Tuesday morning.
Denver Police say an officer was driving by the building, located at 777 Santa Fe Drive, around 2:20 a.m. and spotted two men with hammers smashing the windows.
The officer made his presence known, but police say that's when the two men hopped on their bicycles and tried to get away.
The officer followed the men until one veered off and the officer could only follow one of the suspects.
That man, 24-year-old Maurice Schwenkler, who was wearing a blue hooded sweatshirt, a shirt over his face, jeans and latex gloves, was taken into custody a few blocks away. Police are still looking for the other man.
Damage to the building is estimated at $10,000. Police say they're trying to figure out what motivated the men to commit the crime.
Officials with the Democratic Party, however, think the vandals had a specific target: the posters stating the party's position on health care reform and images of President Obama.

Before he got all smashy-smashy on Democrat HQ, Maurice worked for a progressive political activist group, Colorado Citizens' Coalition. From that, we can probably infer he is one of the leftist fanatics disenchanted with the probability that government-run healthcare isn't likely to become law anytime soon.

On the bright side, at least he'll have publicly-funded healthcare in jail.

Posted by: Confederate Yankee at 08:30 PM | Comments (20) | Add Comment | Trackbacks (Suck)

A Gun-toting Protester MSNBC Doesn't Mind

While I still think carrying firearms to political protests is counterproductive, it is interesting to note the media furor over the open display of firearms in recent events has not been matched by the most recent sighting of an armed protester in Mesa, Arizona on Saturday.

See if you can figure out why:

Except for one counterprotester, apparently the only one within shouting distance. The man would only give his first name as he stood alone, wearing a Yankee baseball team shirt, a handgun on his hip, holding a contrary sign.
Josh, who explained he would only give his first name because of the type of work he does, said he was a Democrat among a sea of non-Democrats, touting health care reform, but not reforms over his right to bear arms.
"Part of my passion as a Democrat is the right to bear arms," Josh said.
A veteran, and from a long family history of veterans, the man who was very much alone in the small crowd of protesters said he believed in fighting for the less fortunate.
"I am a firm supporter of health care for every American," he said.

Compared to last week's attempt by MSNBC to brand open carry advocates as violent racists—going so far as to doctor video to agree with their thesis—their treatment of this armed healthcare protester is laudatory.

The conclusion to be drawn from this seems obvious: The media doesn't mind if you carry firearms, as long as you carry their water as well.

(h/t CY reader cousin-merle)

Posted by: Confederate Yankee at 12:11 PM | Comments (30) | Add Comment | Trackbacks (Suck)

<< Page 85 >>

Processing 0.05, elapsed 0.2776 seconds.
37 queries taking 0.2377 seconds, 333 records returned.
Page size 246 kb.
Powered by Minx 0.8 beta.