It’s Wednesday, January 16th, 2013….but before we begin, keep in mind one thing: gun control, Chuck Hagel, immigration reform; it’s all obfuscation designed to take America’s eye off the real threat to her future:

$16,432,680,097,613.85

Now, here’s The Gouge!

Leading off the mid-week edition, another amazing first for the trailblazing Team Tick-Tock, as they become the only U.S. Administration ever to lag the enlightened House of Saud in anything but oil production:

Saudi King Abdullah Appoints Women to Shura Council

 

I bow before the greatness of your diversity; Allahu akbar!

Given the MSM’s reaction to Mitt Romney’s infamous, and wholly manufactured binder kerfuffle, The Obamao’s failure to appoint even one new woman to his cabinet surely raised more than eyebrows in professionally-sensitive Washington Press Corps….right?!?

Candy knows on which side her donuts are powdered.

Next up, as the Daily Caller reports….

Senate Democrats to Offer No-Limit Credit to Obama

 

Top Democrat leaders in the US Senate have reportedly told the executive branch they won’t object if the president simply declares he has the power to impose even greater financial debts on Americans. The announcement, leaked Jan. 10 by a Democrat aide to The Washington Post, would effectively give the White House the unprecedented power to borrow and spend as much money as it wishes — unless the Supreme Court intervenes. (Yeah….with Chief Justice John “YOU elected him!” Roberts presiding!)

If allowed to stand by the court, the decision by Senate Democrats would effectively gut the authority of Congress’ two bodies — the Senate and House of Representatives — to jointly govern borrowing by the executive branch. “The four Democrat leaders — Senators Harry Reid, Chuck Schumer, Dick Durbin and Patty Murray — have privately reached agreement that continued GOP intransigence on the debt ceiling means the White House needs the space to pursue options for raising it that don’t involve Congress,” according to the report in the Post.“The White House needs to know that Dems will support whatever it decides to do,” read the report.

GOP Senators have decried the self-imposed diminution of the Senate, which was once lauded as “world’s the greatest deliberative body.” The Democrats’ offer “is not only the height of irresponsibility, but also a guarantee that our national debt crisis will only get worse,” said the Republicans’ Senate leader Mitch McConnell. “Rather than offering any plan to break the spending habit that’s causing the problem, Democrats are looking at everything from the ridiculous (printing a trillion-dollar coin) to outright abdication of Congressional responsibility,” he said.

“Democrats in Washington are falling all over themselves in an effort to do anything they can to get around the law–and to avoid taking any responsibility for Washington’s out-of-control spending … which is why many of us view the upcoming debt limit debate as a perfect opportunity to face up to Washington’s spending,” he said.

Speaker of the House John Boehner also denounced the unprecedented move. “Senate Democrats cannot ignore their responsibilities for political convenience — and the American people will not tolerate an increase in the debt limit without spending cuts and reforms,” said Boehner spokesman Michael Steel. “Out-of-control Washington spending is costing jobs now, and condemning future generations of Americans to a lower standard of living. Washington Democrats must stop spending money we don’t have,” he said.

Congress’ sole authority over the nation’s debt is enshrined in Section 8 of Article 1 the Constitution, which says “Congress shall have the power to…borrow money on the credit of the United States.” The Constitution does not give the executive branch any legal authority to borrow money from outsides sources…

In recent weeks, the president’s aides have hinted they may seek to evade the Congress’ authority over the debt limit, because the GOP is demanding long-term spending reforms in exchange for another increase in the nation’s credit limit, now at $16.4 trillion. Under President Barack Obama’s current spending plans, the nation’s debt is slated to reach $20 trillion by 2017. That’s up by $10 trillion from 2009, and it will impose a debt worth $125,000 for every working-age American.

Meanwhile, The Hill details why The Obamao puts the “L-I-E” in Liberal:

White House tells Paul Ryan it won’t meet budget deadline

 

The White House has informed House Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan (R-Wis.) that it will miss the legal deadline for sending a budget to Congress. Acting Budget Director Jeff Zients told Ryan (R-Wis.) late Friday that the budget will not be delivered by Feb. 4, as required by law, a House aide said.

“Late Friday evening, Deputy Director Zients confirmed that for the fourth time in five years, the president’s budget will not be submitted in compliance with the law,” the aide said. “Zients did not indicate how late the administration will delay its submission, simply noting ‘We will submit it to Congress as soon as possible,’ ” the aide said.

Ryan last Wednesday had asked the White House in a letter if it would miss the deadline.

Under the law, Obama must submit a budget by the first Monday in February, but he has met the deadline only once. The annual budget submission is supposed to start a congressional budgeting process, but that has also broken down. The Senate last passed a budget resolution in 2009.

And in our continuing coverage of Team Tick-Tock’s ongoing effort to overthrow the Constitution, we present this year’s nominee for the Carl Rowan Memorial “Do As I Say, NOT As I DO!” Award, courtesy of David Gregory and the District of Columbia’s Department of Injustice; it’s well worth reading in its entirety:

David Gregory Will Not Be Prosecuted or Arrested for Illegal Magazine Possession

 

Having carefully reviewed all of the facts and circumstances of this matter, as it does in everycase involving firearms-related offenses or any other potential violation of D.C. law within ourcriminal jurisdiction, OAG has determined to exercise its prosecutorial discretion to decline tobring criminal charges against Mr. Gregory, who has no criminal record, or any other NBC employee based on the events associated with the December 23,2012 broadcast. OAG has made this determination, despite the clarity of the violation of this important law, because under all of the circumstances here a prosecution would not promote public safety in the District of Columbia nor serve the best interests of the people of the District to whom this office owes its trust.

Influencing our judgment in this case, among other things, is our recognition that the intent of the temporary possession and short display of the magazine was to promote the First Amendment purpose of informing an ongoing public debate about firearms policy in the United States,especially while this subject was foremost in the minds of the public following the previously mentioned events in Connecticut and the President’s speech to the nation about them. There were, however, other legal means available to demonstrate the point and to pursue this line of questioning with the guest that were suggested to NBC and that could have and should have been pursued.

OAG also appreciates that the magazine was immediately returned to the source that NBC understood to be its lawful owner outside of the District and that the magazine in question, with NBC’s assistance, has been surrendered to MPD. OAG also recognizes the cooperation NBC has provided in the investigation of this matter.

On the other hand, no specific intent is required for this violation, and ignorance of the law or even confusion about it is no defense. We therefore did not rely in making our judgment on the feeble and unsatisfactory efforts that NBC made to determine whether or not it was lawful to possess, display and broadcast this large capacity magazine as a means of fostering the public policy debate. Although there appears to have been some misinformation provided initially, NBC was clearly and timely advised by an MPD employee that its plans to exhibit on the broadcast a high capacity-magazine would violate D.C. law, and there was no contrary advice from any federal official. While you argue that some NBC employees subjectively felt uncertain as to whether its planned actions were lawful or not, we do not believe such uncertainty was justified and we note that NBC has now acknowledged that its interpretation of the information it received was incorrect.

NBC should be made aware that OAG’s decision not to press charges in this matter was a very close decision and not one to which it came lightly or easily. Accordingly, NBC and its employees should take meticulous care in the future to ensure that it is in full compliance with D.C. law whether its actions involve firearms or any other potential violation. Repetition by NBC or any employee of any similar or other firearms violation will be prosecuted to the full extent supported by the facts and the law.

I am confident that you will convey our deep concern and warning to your client.

Sincerely,

Irvin B. Nathan

Attorney General for the District of Columbia

Yet another example of how George Orwell was….

….dead-on balls accurate.

Turning from the absolutely accurate to the cynically counterfactual, Glenn Kessler, supposed truth-assessor for the WaPo, weighs in on the veracity of recent “statistics” quoted by the Oval Office version of Tommy Flanagan:

Bill Clinton’s over-the-top ‘fact’ on mass shootings

 

C’mon, Amurica….would I lie to you?!?

“Half of all mass killings in the United States have occurred since the assault weapons ban expired in 2005, half of all of them in the history of the country.” — Former president Bill Clinton, at the Consumer Electronics Show in Las Vegas, Jan. 9, 2013

A colleague spotted this eye-popping statistic by the former president and wondered if it was correct.President Clinton signed the assault weapons ban into law in 1994, but it expired after 10 years and was not renewed. Even supporters have said it was riddled with loopholes, limiting its effectiveness. But the rash of mass shootings in recent years, including the Newtown tragedy, have provided new impetus for a renewed ban.

 So let’s dig into the data and see what we find.

The Facts

 With gun shootings, you immediately get into some definitional issues. Depending on how one defines a “mass public shooting,” the answers might turn out to be different. There is also surprisingly little historical data about mass murder in the United States to go back all the way to the nation’s founding.

Grant Duwe, director of research and evaluation at the Minnesota Department of Corrections, assembled a data set going back 100 years for a 2007 book titled, “Mass Murder in the United States: A History.” He used the FBI Supplementary Homicide Reports, which date from 1976, and then supplemented the FBI reports with news reports (principally The New York Times) dating from 1900.

Duwe says the Times turned out to be a relatively reliable guide for mass murders across the country, since much of the post-1976 information also turned up in the contemporaneous FBI reports. As far as he knows, he is the only person who has assembled such a historical data set. According to his research, he has identified 156 mass public shootings in the United States in the past 100 years.

Duwe defines a mass public shooting as an incident in which four or more victims are killed publicly with guns within 24 hours — in the workplace, schools, restaurants and other public places — excluding shootings in connection with crimes such as robbery, drugs or gangs. (Note that this would exclude a number of “mass murders” that sometimes get lumped into the data, such as the Beltway sniper who killed 10 people over a three-week period in 2002.)

Since 2005, when the assault ban expired, there have been 32 such mass public shootings, including seven in 2012, Duwe said. So that’s just over 20 percent of all mass public shootings, which is much less than Clinton’s 50 percent.

Here’s a breakdown per decade of Duwe’s data. It is important to note that these are raw figures; the United States had far fewer people 50 or 100 years ago.

Mass Public Shootings per Decade

1900s : zero

1910s: 2

1920s: 2

1930s: 9

1940s: 8

1950s: 1

1960s: 6

1970s: 13

1980s: 32

1990s: 42

2000s: 28

2010s (three years): 14

Duwe says that 2012 was certainly a horrific year, but it is too early to tell if it signals an ominous trend. The worst year for public shootings was in 1991, when eight incidents took place, he said. With seven incidents, 2012 ranks second, along with 1999 — when the assault ban was in effect. (Duwe says his research shows that assault weapons are used in a relatively small number of cases, but they do result in far more wounded victims)

We ran this data past a spokesman for Clinton, but he declined to comment or offer an explanation for where the former president got his facts. That always makes us suspicious….

Suspicions which this next item, courtesy of Jeffrey Scott Shapiro, former DC criminal prosecutor writing at the WSJ, serves to confirm:

A Gun Ban That Misfired

What I saw as a prosecutor in Washington, D.C., makes me wary of strict firearms laws.

 

All animals are safe….some are just safer than others!

In the wake of the horrific elementary-school shootings in Newtown, Conn., last month, many Americans, desperate to do something in response, have decided that much stricter gun control is the answer. Democrats have proposed reinstating the 1994 Assault Weapons Ban, and Sen. Dianne Feinstein has proposed legislation that would even restrict the use of some semiautomatic handguns.

As a former prosecutor in Washington, D.C., who enforced firearms and ammunition cases while a severe local gun ban was still in effect, I am skeptical of the benefits that many imagine will result from additional gun-control efforts. I dislike guns, but I believe that a nationwide firearms crackdown would place an undue burden on law enforcement and endanger civil liberties while potentially increasing crime.

The D.C. gun ban, enacted in 1976, prohibited anyone other than law-enforcement officers from carrying a firearm in the city. Residents were even barred from keeping guns in their homes for self-defense. (Except of course Carl Rowan, who used an illegal “assault rifle” to shoot a pool-hopper in his back yard and, in the best David Gregory fashion, was not prosecuted.) 

Some in Washington who owned firearms before the ban were allowed to keep them as long as the weapons were disassembled or trigger-locked at all times. According to the law, trigger locks could not be removed for self-defense even if the owner was being robbed at gunpoint. The only way anyone could legally possess a firearm in the District without a trigger lock was to obtain written permission from the D.C. police. The granting of such permission was rare.

The gun ban had an unintended effect: It emboldened criminalsbecause they knew that law-abiding District residents were unarmed and powerless to defend themselves. Violent crime increased after the law was enacted, with homicides rising to 369 in 1988, from 188 in 1976 when the ban started. By 1993, annual homicides had reached 454.

The Washington, D.C., Metropolitan Police Department also waged a war on firearms by creating a special Gun Recovery Unit in 1995. The campaign meant that officers were obliged to spend time searching otherwise law-abiding citizens. That same year, the department launched a crackdown called Operation Cease Fire to rid the District of illegal firearms. But after four months, officers had confiscated only 282 guns out of the many thousands in the city.

Civil liberties were endangered. Legislative changes empowered judges to hold gun suspects in pretrial detention without bond for up to 100 days, and efforts were made to enact curfews and seize automobiles found to contain firearms. In 1997, Police Chief Charles Ramsey disbanded the unit so that he could assign more uniformed officers to patrol the streets instead, but the police periodically tried other gun crackdowns over the next decade—with little effect.

In 2007, a panel for the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit ruled that the city’s gun ban was unconstitutional. Senior Judge Laurence H. Silberman wrote in the majority opinion that “the black market for handguns in the District is so strong that handguns are readily available (probably at little premium) to criminals. It is asserted, therefore that the D.C. gun control laws irrationally prevent only law abiding citizens from owning handguns.”

The ruling was affirmed the following year by the Supreme Court in Columbia v. Heller. Justice Antonin Scalia’s majority opinion said that citizens were guaranteed a right to keep firearms that were in common use in their homes for self-defense, but that the government could pass reasonable regulations concerning firearms and ammunition.

Heller created a panic among gun-control advocates because it condoned the ownership of semiautomatic handguns, which are among the most common firearms in use but also the target of many restriction efforts. Supporters of the District gun ban maintained that because a semiautomatic handgun could potentially be converted into a machine gun—a class of firearms not expressly protected by Heller—they were in fact machine guns and therefore not protected by the Second Amendment. In response, Congress threatened to pass a law that specified the legality of semiautomatic handguns in the District. To avoid the embarrassment of being dictated to by Congress, the D.C. Council passed emergency legislation in September 2008 amending the gun ban to allow ownership of semiautomatic handguns for home defense.

Since the gun ban was struck down, murders in the District have steadily gone down, from 186 in 2008 to 88 in 2012, the lowest number since the law was enacted in 1976. The decline resulted from a variety of factors, but losing the gun ban certainly did not produce the rise in murders that many might have expected.

The urge to drastically restrict firearms after mass murders like those at Sandy Hook Elementary School last month and in Aurora, Colo., in July, is understandable. In effect, many people would like to apply the District’s legal philosophy on firearms to the entire nation. Based on what happened in Washington, I think that would be a mistake. Any sense of safety and security would be a false one.

But as this next article, courtesy of the Chicago Sun-Times, clearly confirms, there are none so blind as those who will not see; and when it comes to the ineffectiveness of forcing criminals to adhere to the law, Liberals are truly blind as….

Chicago Mayor Emanuel and Cook County Board President Preckwinkle team up on tougher gun rules, sentences

 

Mayor Rahm Emanuel wants to broaden the requirement for reporting the loss, theft, sale or transfer of firearms to all gun owners in all of Cook County and double the jail time for an array of gun violations to stop the bloodbath on Chicago streets. The latest in a string of Chicago-only gun control ordinances — and companion legislation that would impose a first-ever reporting requirement in Cook County — was hastily drawn after an assault weapons ban stalled during the lame-duck session of the Illinois General Assembly.

After 506 homicides in 2012 and more of the same during the opening days of the new year, Emanuel said he was determined to stretch the legal limits of his local authority to prod Springfield into action.

Only time will tell whether the tag-team approach with Cook County will succeed in stopping the flow of illegal guns into Chicago. The ordinance would require all firearms owners (i.e., law-abiding citizens!) — not just the holders of city firearms permits — to report the loss, theft, destruction, sale or transfer of a firearm to both the Chicago Police Department and the Cook County Sheriff’s office.

Violators would face up to six months in jail. That’s double the jail time for a reporting requirement that now applies only to permit holders in Chicago. (That’ll convince the gang-bangers to give up their guns!) For the first time, Cook County would impose a similar reporting requirement. Emanuel also wants to double the maximum jail time to six months for: possession of a firearm without a permit; possession of assault weapons and other firearms that cannot be registered in Chicago, and for sale or possession of high-capacity magazines and metal-piercing bullets.

David Spielfogel, a senior adviser to the mayor, said the countywide reporting requirement is pivotal. “There’s no one step that can solve the problem, but this is an important first step to make sure we can track crime guns. (You know….like Fast & Furious.) Anything we can do to crack down on crime guns is gonna have an impact” on the number of murders and shootings, he said.

“We see lost or stolen as a common excuse. It makes it hard to follow the track … and isolate gun runners supplying guns on Chicago streets. This changes the requirement. You can no longer use lost or stolen as an excuse. (Again, only effective against law-abiding citizens, i.e., the ones NOT committing Chicago’s murders!) It expands the requirement, enhances the penalties and creates a countywide system, so we can have a broader impact. They have nothing right now” in the way of a reporting requirement.

Spielfogel described the mayor’s ordinance as the “first step of many” that would be taken in the coming months to stop the violence on Chicago streets that became a national media obsession in 2012. “As we’re pushing the federal government on the assault weapons ban and large-clip ban and pushing the state, we’ve got to keep moving on the city level,” he said.

After all, as Newt Gingrich so pointedly notes in this video clip forwarded by Bill Meisen….

….gun control is working soooo well in Chicago, why not try it on a larger stage?!?

For more on the intellectual blindness of the modern Progressive, here’s today’s installment of International News of Note, and Bill Richardson’s conclusion the Google CEO….

Eric Schmidt is a ‘rock star’ in North Korea

 

Given his willingness to believe what he sees during a visit to the most rigidly-controlled society on the planet, Richardson’s demonstrated he’s ready to assume the duties of either Secretary of Defense, State or Director of the CIA in the 2nd Obamao Administration.  Only a Liberal could find anything funny about North Korea.

On the Lighter Side….

And in News of the Bizarre, we learn….

A baaaad idea? Fort Bragg to stop using goats in medical training

 

Though rumors Jared Loughneer, Nidal Hasan, James Holmes and Jerry Sandusky….

….were all being transferred to detention facilities in and around Fort Bragg remain unconfirmed.

Finally, in a related item….

18 human heads found at Chicago’s O’Hare International Airport

 

The Cook County Medical Examiner’s office confirmed Monday night that it had received 18 human specimens that were found at O’Hare International Airport on Monday. Sources said the specimens are human heads, still covered in skin and wrapped in plastic.

Sources tell FOX 32 News that they came from Italy, and may have been sent to be used for some kind of scientific research or a medical experiment. Authorities said no foul play was suspected. U.S. Customs and Border Protection were investigating but declined to comment Monday night.

Perhaps they were awaiting a connecting flight to Fort Bragg?

Magoo