Breaking Fake News Update (v18)

 Fake News Broke on September 7,2025

So, what's going on here? Do we really need to tariff chalk at the same level as drug prices are allegedly coming down?  You bet we do!

Florida cities are busy trying to remove all of their 'street art,' in an effort to satisfy both Department of Transportation Secretary Sean 'Lumberjack' Duffy and their Gov. Ron DeSantis. 

Sidewalk art, such as that in Orlando remembering those lost at the Pulse nightclub anti-LBGTQ mass shooting, a memorial to a high school student, and even one supporting police, were scrubbed out last month, some of them several times, as passionate citizens kept recoloring them.

At least for a while, and maybe still, law enforcement officers were 'guarding' the sidewalks, keeping their communities safe from the dastardly threat of rainbow colors, which have been deemed more distracting than, say, 

• touch screens in cars that are larger than my television, or
• this Florida Man's car, or 
• any of the rolling rallies that have been held for 45/FOTUS over the years, and even
• seeing our National Guard troops fighting landscaping crime in DC.

Somehow, the smaller, leaner, more efficient federal government that everyone likes to say they voted for seems to enjoy being knee-deep in the weeds, and, of course, threatening everyone that they'll lose their taxpayer funding if they don't toe the FOTUS line.

That last part? Not fake news, as we've seen. But rest assured, if there's fake news to report, we'll be on it!

TGIF 3/10/23

I could spend a lot of time on the good week / bad week lists, but I'm in the mood to keep things short and sweet tonight. 

Rep. Eric Swalwell (D-CA) made the good week list for calling out Rep. Jim Jordan (R - Blecch) for his incredibly blatant hypocrisy. 

Jordan asked folks from the Department of Justice and the Department of Education to appear before his Why Yes - Yes I am Weaponizing the Government subcommittee and be questioned about subpoena compliance.  Incredibly, Jordan must have assumed none of the Dems on the committee would remember, or question, his own lack of compliance with a subpoena from the January 6th Committee. He must have forgotten about Swalwell, who addressed the hypocrisy beautifully. 

Jordan, as always, is firmly perched on the bad week list. 

So, too, is the meme below.

According to the Gun Violence Archive, there have been over 100 mass shootings this year. There was one today, in Florida, with five dead, including the shooter. It wasn't one of the newsworthy mass shootings; nah, it was just a murder-suicide, with four victims and the shooter all dead. 

I'm putting the meme below on the good week list. It's too good not to.

TGIF, everyone.

In Case You Missed It (v116)

The writing was easier last week, at least for a while. Here's your recap of what made it out of my head. 

I opened the week with a Sidebar driven by all the attention received by What's-his-name, the guy who hosts Meet the Press. He "did his job," fans say, by having another on-air argument with Sen. Ron Johnson (R-WI). 

I'm no Johnson fan; I think he's a partisan hack. Even as I dislike him, I admit he's not wrong on everything. For example, he and I agree, the American people deserve to hear about the bad behavior of government officials, and Congress deserves the chance to provide 'oversight' of the government, even if no criminal statutes have been violated. 

WHN thinks that's ridiculous.

So, I guess the problem that I feel like you run into with that decision is what you're saying is if the Justice Department decides a crime wasn't committed, they're not going to prosecute a crime, it sounds like you still want the information out there because you want to politically damage the person that was investigated?

I suggested that maybe we want these bad actors to be held accountable, even if they're not 'officially' criminals, and it led to these questions.

Would WHN say that if the subject of the investigation was Clarence Thomas? Brett Kavanaugh? Marjorie Taylor Green? Matt Gaetz? Ron Johnson? Has he ever said that about any Donald Trump investigation?

We all know the answer to those questions, don't we?

Next up? A Quick Take inspired by the latest classified document finding - a "small number" of them, at the new home of former VP Mike Pence. I caught wind of that via a breaking news alert, and as often happens, my mind started racing. My former boss and co-workers would call out, "Oh, look - a squirrel!" when this happened in staff meetings. Here's a bit of that.

Shortly after seeing the headline, I had sketched out a perfect solution.

The houses, garages, car trunks, libraries, golf bags, duffel bags, diaper bags, bar carts, and sock drawers of every member of Congress, as well as every living president and vice president, must be searched for classified documents or other absconded-with items; the search must happen as soon as possible, to protect our national sanity, er, I mean, our national security.

And Ivanka's grave, too, must be searched - don't forget Ivanka's grave. I mean, who buries his ex-wife on his golf course while under investigation for missing documents?

Who does that? Donald Trump does, that's who.

If we need that kind of document-hunting effort, we'd need funding, which I figured out; and we'd need people to do the work. I had an answer for that, too.

Call up the Texas bounty hunters.

There's a reason they'd be perfect for the job - and it's in the post.  

I spent some time in the Sunday School classrooms, looking for discussions on the debt ceiling, which seems at least as important as worrying about which potential presidential candidate is hurt more by the politics of their document handling.  

Sen. Joe Manchin (D-WV) had some thoughts on the debt, how we got where we are, and a possible solution, which he shared on CNN's State of the Union.

Everybody believes -- I mean, my goodness, when you have $31.4 trillion, and we have thrown caution to the wind, and to blame the Republicans, Republicans to blame the Democrats, who's at fault? Everybody's at fault. We don't have a process. I have been there 12 years, no budget.

He thinks the government needs to have "guardrails" on spending; having a budget, and trying to stick to it, is a good start.  And, while some have suggested forming a commission to develop recommendations, he's not a fan.

Can't you look and find out in government where you can be more efficient, more basically prudent with the taxpayers' money and quit wasting it, don't you think? And we all talk about waste, fraud, and abuse. That's an easy thing to do. But no one looks at it.

Hear, hear! 

It took me until Thursday morning to get the post out, but I did do some Wondering on Wednesday, on hypocrisy and indifference, among other things. Here's the hypocrisy wondering.

One thing I don't have to wonder about? Whether the House Committee on Oversight and Accountability will be asking for Mike Pence's visitor logs. I'm pretty sure that's not going to happen - but I wouldn't be surprised at all if they asked for Jimmy Carter's. 

The indifference part? Mass shootings, and guns. There were three mass shootings in California in a matter of days. One was plastered all over the news; another was pretty widely covered. The other one?

You probably didn't hear much about the third one; it was likely gang- or drug-related, which means, you know, "it was their own damn fault" that young mom and her baby were executed along with several other family members. I wonder why the media doesn't talk about that kind of mass shooting so much? Is it because they wouldn't have time to tell us about storms headed for the I-95 corridor?

So, that's a wrap on last week; as always, feel free to drop a comment on any of the posts. 

In Case You Missed It (v101)

Here's your recap of last week's posts. It seems some of the posts in my head didn't make it to the interwebs; hopefully I can work on that this week, so I can get some sleep.

I started the week Ranting and Raving about our glorified Wild West culture, where in Texas - where else? - a man who was robbed at an ATM shot several rounds, and several more, in the general direction of where the person who robbed may or not have been, he didn't really know. 

It was also in the direction of a family's vehicle, and the nine-year-old little girl inside who died as a result of what people are laughably calling self-defense. The shooter was not charged with a crime, but he "continues to grieve for" the little girl and, according to his attorney, "the grand jury made the right decision and that the person responsible for her death is the robber." 

The murderer, they said, 

did what we believe anyone in that situation would have done. We are relieved that, despite the emotion and tough decisions that had to be made in dealing with this case, justice was served for (the murderer).

I'm sorry, but there is zero justice being served here, 

• Unless you think that an idiot who's so dumb, he'd shoot at a random vehicle in the ATM line deserves justice. 
• Unless you think that an innocent nine-year-old little girl is acceptable collateral damage for a robbery. 
• Unless you think that a person who shoots at a stranger's vehicle in an ATM line is acting in self-defense, when he doesn't even know whether the person who robbed him is in that car, or any other car in the ATM line.

This stuff is just nuts.

Also nuts? Sunday School, although I think it's better now that I focus on a single classroom instead of wandering up and down the halls. Last week's featured classroom was Face the Nation, where Sen. Joe Manchin made an appearance and explained that he hadn't changed his mind on things - he had just opened his eyes, or something. 

 ...the corporate tax in America in 2017, before the Republican tax cut, was 35 percent. They cut it to 21 percent, 14 percent reduction. All the people that I know are paying 21 percent or more. All the even larger corporations, but some of the largest corporations of a billion dollars of value or more don't even want to pay the minimum of 15 percent.

He said he "never thought" people (I think he meant corporations) weren't paying at least 21%. Has he had his head in his state's coal dust for the last decade or more? I mean, I did a post on GE not paying any federal income taxes back in 2011, for heaven's sake. And West Virginia's almost heaven, so Manchin clearly should have known about this.

For your Extra Credit, I listened in as my favorite Fed banker, Neel Kashkari, talked economics with John Dickerson. On the question of whether implementing a minimum 15% corporate tax would hurt supplies and increase inflation, Kashkari said we need to focus on the short-term,  

the demand side effects totally swamp the supply side effects. And so, when I look at a bill that's being considered, that your two senators talked about, my guess is over the next couple of years it's not going to have much of an impact on inflation. It's not going to affect how I analyze inflation over the next few years. I think long-term it may have some effect. But, over the near term, we have an acute mismatch between demand and supply. And it's really up to the Federal Reserve to be able to bring that demand down. 

For some reason, whatever I was Wondering on Wednesday didn't make it out of my head. I'm blaming the heat, the humidity, no A/C, and the fact that I don't have a light on my screened porch which means I can't write out there at night.

On Thursday, I threw it back to Sunday School from two years ago that day; Mick Mulvaney, former Trump budget guy, former Trump acting chief of staff, former Trump "dude sent to Ireland to get him out of the way," former Trump supporter, talked with Chuck Todd on MTP about mass shootings; the show was on right after the El Paso and Dayton murders.  

Let's just say they were both, well, they were both their 'best' selves. Here's some of their exchange, talking about Trump and his "dehumanizing rhetoric. Todd asked, "Is he not the president of all Americans here? It does seem as if he's always more worried about how his base is going to react to something than how the American, you know, moral fabric is protected?

He absolutely is the president of all Americans, alright...Listen, we're going to have policy discussions, but my guess is, you show me how you feel about the president, and I'll show you who you think was responsible for the shooting. 

Todd did not drop it there, adding "well, unfortunately, it does appear this was a political motive of this domestic terrorist." And here was Mulvaney's final thought.

This was a political motive by a crazy person with a gun. How do we stop crazy people from getting guns? That's a - -if we can't agree on that, if we can't figure out a way to prevent that from happening, there's very little hope for this nation. Let's try and fix what allows sick people to get these types of weapons.

Here we are, two years later, with the same arguments and the same lack of 'real' action, and, to a large degree, the same "very little hope for this nation." Mulvaney's words, remember - not mine. 

Finally, I attempted the good week/bad week stuff in TGIF. There was lots going on, but much of the post dealt with the Senate and their efforts - partisan and bipartisan - to get things accomplished. There was the Inflation Reduction Act, and the PACT Act, and more.

Speaking of the PACT Act, here's an excerpt from a WaPo editorial congratulating those who fought for the bill's passage, and blasting the Rs delaying the bill "at the last minute...and used to score political points..."

The objections hinged on a technicality: Sen. Patrick J. Toomey (R-Pa.) had raised concerns about reclassifying existing toxic-exposure benefits from discretionary spending to mandatory. He argued that this move could free up space in the discretionary budget for legislators to spend on other programs.

Officials, including Veterans Affairs Secretary Denis McDonough, warned that keeping those benefits in the discretionary budget could force the agency to “ration” care, and pointed out that the measure had bipartisan support in June. That did not stop Republican lawmakers from characterizing the bill as an insidious attempt by Democrats to spend hundreds of billions on unrelated causes.

As I get ready to post this, they're still at it in the Senate; the Rs are still fighting, but the Dems are holding strong. We'll see how long it takes for the 'vote-a-rama' to end.

See you later for Sunday School, if not sooner. 

Wondering on Wednesday 7/27/22

Ready... Set... Wonder!

I'm not really feeling the wondering tonight. Truth be told, some of it is the same stuff I've wondered off an on for ages, it seems, and I won't bore you with that.  

Instead, let's ponder these memes together. 

I share these particular memes because today's the day the House Oversight Committee invited gun manufacturer CEOs to Capitol Hill for a chat. Two - Daniel Defense and Storm, Ruger participated. Smith and Wesson didn't. 

Here are a few clips that made it to Twitter by the time I nosed around a bit. You can watch the full hearing here.

• Rep. Katie Porter wondering if Daniel Defense would add safety features to their guns
• Rep. Katie Porter wondering why her phone has more safety features than guns
• Rep. Raja Krishnamoorthi wondering about gun marketing
• Rep. Ro Khanna wondering if gun manufacturers would track crimes committed with their product
• Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez wondering about white supremacist marketing by gun manufacturers
• Rep. Nancy Mace wondering about liability

Wonder, if you want, about the memes, or about these clips, or anything else on this issue. The comment line is always open.

Yes, We Can Do Something (Part 2)

Continuing the conversation on things we could do about mass shootings, regardless of where they occur, based on years of discussion with friends and family, and information we've shared from our research on the topic. 

As a reminder, a couple of over-arching principles.

We need to change how we talk about the goal. It is not to prevent mass shootings from happening. The goal is to make it harder for someone to commit mass carnage, and to reduce the number of deaths should such an event occur. 

And, gun safety legislation must stand alone, with no unrelated amendments or attachments. Any attempts to attach anything that is not directly related to gun safety shall be considered a bribe. 

Part 1 addressed gun and ammunition purchases, background checks and data reporting. It also includes the definition of 'gun' we're using for this series.

Here are recommendations related to penalties for crimes involving guns and background checks. 

• Ensure a speedy trial - and sentencing - for mass shooting defendants. The person who was convicted of the Colorado movie theater shooting was sentenced just over three years after killing twelve and injuring dozens more. This is an absurdly - and unacceptable - delay in justice being served.

• Require mandatory prosecution for using a gun in the commission of a crime. Anyone convicted of using a gun in a crime will face a mandatory minimum sentence. 

• Require mandatory prosecution for attempting to purchase a gun when a failed background check is certain. Anyone who knows they will fail a background check for a legal gun purchase, but attempts to do so anyway, will face a mandatory minimum sentence upon conviction. Credit is not given for trying to do the right thing.

• Require mandatory prosecution for attempting to bypass a background check, in any manner, with a mandatory minimum sentence upon conviction.

• Require mandatory prosecution for providing false or incomplete information during the background check process. A mandatory minimum sentence will be served upon conviction.

• Require mandatory prosecution for holding or hiding a gun in order to protect another person from being charged with a gun crime. A mandatory minimum sentence will be served upon conviction.

• Require mandatory prosecution when guns are found improperly secured or transported, such as during TSA checks, law enforcement stops, etc., with a mandatory minimum sentence to be served upon conviction.

• Categorize all crimes in which a gun was used as 'non-bailable' federal offenses, and carve gun legislation out of the filibuster. These charges cannot be plea-bargained; and sentences upon conviction must be served consecutively with any other sentences, and must be served in full.

I can picture someone looking at these recommendations and wondering what's the tie-in to making it harder for someone to commit a mass shooting, and I get that - but remember, we are trying to pull together, in an 'all of the above' type of response, to get something accomplished.

One of the many arguments from the 'we don't need to do anything about guns' crowd is that we already have plenty of gun laws on the books, and they need to be enforced. They're right, at least about having them on the books; I don't know about the enforcement part, but I'll accept at face value that the folks who draw this line in the sand know what they're talking about.

Elevating gun crimes from a state-level felony to a federal-level felony will add some teeth (at least in theory) and (again, at least in theory) limit the possibility that some gang leader, organized crime guy, gun runner, a drug dealer or other criminal mastermind will be able to buy themselves some cops, prosecutors and/or judges who can make things disappear. 

It also put the onus on the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms to get more involved, and stay more involved, in helping trace, track and interdict illegal guns, gun runners and the like. 

And, using federal funds for this effort makes sense, as it's hard for states and municipalities to focus on this at the same time they're focusing on identifying and mitigating the social, economic, medical, psychological, cultural, and educational issues that play so heavily into gun crimes, whether we're talking about mass shootings or, as the politicians like to say, "just another weekend in Chicago."

And, the final benefit of pushing this all up to the federal level? US Senators and members of the House can no longer push responsibility to someone else. The policy-making, the regulations, the funding -- it all sits squarely in their laps.

And, in my eyes, that's the only way many of them will do anything other than offer up thoughts and prayers.

Yes, We Can Do Something (Introduction)

Over the years since the Sandy Hook school shooting, I've had many conversations with friends the 'gun problem' we have. 

What gun problem, you ask? 

The mass shooting problem, which happens with an alarming (if statistically insignificant) frequency in our country, at schools and grocery stores and movieplexes and abortion clinics and religious services (of all faiths) and Walmarts and restaurants and music festivals and office holiday parties and social clubs and community centers and nightclubs and, well, you get the drift. They happen everywhere and anywhere, in America - and they don't happen in other countries. 

Some of our conversations got a little contentious; after all, folks argued, and still argue, that we don't have a gun problem. Rather, we have a:

• lack of church attendance problem;
• a violent video game problem;
• a mental health problem;
• a criminal problem;
• a lack of respect problem;
• a missing father problem;
• a bad parent problem;
• a bullying problem; 
• a lack of prayer in school problem; 
• a lack of good guys with a gun problem; and more. 

My friends and I were able to give up our entrenched positions and work together to come up with things that might have a positive impact this issue; that's something that the people we elect to make to do this kind of stuff seem incapable of doing.

When they try to 'do something,' it seems that every conversation begins - and ends - with banning 'assault' weapons, changing the background check process, and implementing so-called red flag laws. Those are worthwhile changes, which they've tried several times, to no avail. And, they're trying again, now that a bunch of little children have been murdered at a school. Again. 

When they start in the same place every single time, knowing that there is virtually no chance of success, it makes me wonder why they do that, and what goal they're trying to accomplish. Whether it's the Dems or the Republicans, 

• Are they really trying to achieve consensus on meaningful legislation, or are they trying to make a point, or to convince us that at least they're trying?
• Do they really think the 2nd Amendment is the be-all and end-all?
• Are they really trying to protect Americans from danger, or are they trying to protect their own longevity in office?
• Are they really so short-sighted as to think there are only three options here?
• Is their loyalty to their PACs and super-donors and the lobbyists, or to the people of this country?
• Do they really believe that doing nothing is better than working together?

Regular readers of veritable pastiche are familiar with my lack of affection for most politicians, particularly those in the Senate, where legislation goes to die. I'm sick of partisan nonsense, of the do-nothingness that we often witness. 

 You may also know that I've written about gun safety or the lack thereof, all too often over the years. You can read those posts here, if you want to get your feet wet. 

And you are invited to stick around for, and chime in on, the posts in this Yes, We Can Do Something series; they summarize (and augment) the recommendations I've batted around with my friends over the years.

One more thing - you may be wondering about the 'And Now for Something Completely Different' meme that accompanies these posts. I included that because what we need now, if we're to accomplish anything at all, is just that: something completely different. 

• It's time for partisan, entrenched positions to be set aside for the greater good. 

• It's time for legislators to stop worrying about their next election, and start worrying about making it harder for Americans to be victimized by their countrymen in these heinous acts of gun violence. 

• It's time to stop deflecting the conversation away from mass shootings by pointing to gang-infested cities and saying "gun control doesn't work." 

• It's time to stop saying that risk is so low, we don't need to worry about it, and to stop making the argument that there are lots of other things that kill and injure more children than school shootings. 

• It's time to find common ground, no matter how hard it is to do that. 

It is time for something completely different. And frankly, if my friends and I can do it, it's long past time for the people we pay to do this to get to work. 

If they need some recommendations, I've got a bunch of them. First up? Guns and ammo, in Part 1. 

I hope you'll stick around.