Month: January 2016

U.S. responsible for 82% of all gun deaths in 23 high income nations

The Pew Research Center said in October of 2015 that gun homicides declined in the ’90s hitting a plateau between 2009 and 2014 of 11,000 to 12,000 a year. Suicides with guns, on the other hand, increased. But a new study by the National Institute of Health found that…

“While the United States has failed to significantly reduce its annual rate of gun deaths, other high income countries have been making steadier progress, resulting in a wider gap between the U.S. and its international peers when it comes to fatal shootings.”

PubMed under the NIH said:

CONCLUSIONS:
The United States has an enormous firearm problem compared with other high-income countries, with higher rates of homicide and firearm-related suicide. Compared with 2003 estimates, the US firearm death rate remains unchanged while firearm death rates in other countries decreased. Thus, the already high relative rates of firearm homicide, firearm suicide, and unintentional firearm death in the United States compared with other high-income countries increasebetween 2003 and 2010.

Researchers David Hemenway and Erin Grinshteyn found that “…firearm homicide rates were 25 times higher in the U.S. than in other high-income countries.” That is compared to 2003 when it was 19.5 times more than comparable countries. As the number of guns on the street goes up, so do the deaths by firearm violence.

The American public must continue to stand up to the gun lobby and put organizations like the National Rifle Assn. (NRA) out of business.

Bernie Sanders Sayings

Republican at the podium

Make no mistake about it: the wealthy and their political representatives are working hard to keep people away from the voting booths. They have vigorously opposed legislation that would make it easier for people to vote. They have corrupted campaign financing, so that citizens have lost faith in the political process. They have turned negative campaigning into a high art, with the result that huge numbers of voters demonstrate their disgust with gutter politics by refusing to vote on election day. They have begun the process of dismantling social programs so that citizens increasingly feel that government cannot and will not do anything to meet their needs.

Bernie sanders looking good in Iowa

In the latest Quinnipiac poll released yesterday, Bernie Sanders leads Hillary Clinton by 4 points, 49% to 45%. By demographics Bernie trounces her with men, trails slightly with women, way ahead on the age group 18-24, trails slightly on 45 to 64 year-olds and is way behind in the 65+ age group. An earlier Quinnipiac survey this month…

Clinton and Sanders are not far apart among women. Sanders has a net favorability of plus-81 with women; Clinton’s is +69. Among men? Sanders is +88 and Clinton is +29 — a massive gap.

Should Bernie bring more women over to his side, he would have two major groups along with the young. Not sure he’ll ever get the older folks 65+ and I believe it has something to do with Sanders Democratic Socialism; they remember Joe McCarthy and his fight against Communism and just seem to mistakenly put the two together. Another factor is that Sanders’s support is far heavier among the third of poll respondents who’ve never been to a caucus before.

But The Washington Post cautions there are red flags. One, in 2008 fewer men voted and traditionally young people don’t vote. I say, with the enthusiasm Bernie is getting from men in Iowa, and the fireworks this Presidential election has created, they will go to the caucuses on Feb. 1. And that goes double for the younger vote.

Oh, by the way, The Huff Post combination of several national polls had Bernie Sanders at 35.8% against Hillary Clinton’s 51.0% as of January 24. Bernie’s up from 33.3% and Hillary’s down from 54.8% since January 1. Pretty significant for less than a full month.

FLASH: Does Microsoft have a "Hillary" ulterior motive with Iowa caucus software

The Bernie Sanders camp is suspicious of the offer by Microsoft for the “free” software that will tabulate Iowa caucus results. MSNBC reports “The Sanders campaign has built their own reporting system to check the results from the official Microsoft-backed app.” Sanders aides noted that Microsoft employees have donated several hundred thousand dollars to Hillary Clinton over the years.

I did some research on my own to check on thesr donations and came up with the following April 2015 statements from the The Washington Free Beacon:

“Few corporate entities have managed to entwine themselves in the Clinton financial empire more thoroughly than Microsoft, a 20th century technology company that presumably feels great affinity toward a couple of 20th century politicians trying to recapture past glory.

“The feeling is apparently mutual. Hillary used Microsoft software, for example, to operate her now-deleted private email server.

“Microsoft has been supporting the Clintons years. When Hillary Clinton ran for president in 2008, Microsoft was one of her top campaign contributors: the company’s employees and political action committees donated $184,119.

“Microsoft is a regular sponsor of the Clinton Global Initiative, and has donated between $1 million and $5 million to the Clinton Foundation. The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, which also sponsors CGI events, has donated more than $25 million to the foundation.”

Coincidence, perhaps, but the ties that bind have a funny way of ending up tipping the scales in a favored direction. 

Would you vote for Hillary Clinton if Bernie Sanders isn’t nominated?

Sanders Warren ticket

One voter said Clinton is “bought and paid for,” another said he wouldn’t vote for Clinton unless Elizabeth Warren was on the ticket. Yet one more said the “dream” ticket would be Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren. Those are three viewpoints that do indicate a definite preference, but don’t demonstrate a voting population that would stay home from the polls without Bernie. And they shouldn’t. All you need to confirm this is to look at who leads the GOP ticket. Donald Trump.

If you want that maniac in office, or for that matter, any of his fellow candidates, especially Ted Cruz, then stay home on November 8. Most agree that “…a low-energy, low-turnout election in November would be disastrous for Democrats,” according to the Washington Times. Jeff Weaver, Sanders campaign manager, feels his candidate is the one to wake up new progressive candidates and bring them out in November.

RootsAction.org says, “The head of one of the two big political parties in the United States is trying to manipulate the presidential election process by limiting direct debate and tilting the national party apparatus in favor of one candidate. This is unacceptable,” A Democratic county chairman in Iowa, Jason Frerichs agrees. Debbie Wasserman Schultz was co-chair of Hillary’s campaign in 2008. There’s no doubt she’s putting her fingers on the scale, limiting the number of sanctioned debates,” Mr. Frerichs said.

And now Michael Bloomberg says he might run if Hillary Clinton isn’t nominated. Looking at Bernie Sanders momentum and his recent surge in the polls, don’t think the Bern will worry, although Bloomberg could take away some votes.