LTTE in Praise of Reagan

 I'm writing to thank Frank Fronhofer  for alerting me to the letter signed by Ronald Reagan, Jimmy Carter and Gerald Ford supporting the banning of assault rifles. Reagan's position was that of Democrats today. He stated, "I do not believe in taking away the right of the citizen for sporting, for hunting and so forth, or for home defense. But I do believe that an AK-47, a machine gun, is not a sporting weapon or needed for defense of a home." No, gunsplaining isn't necessary to tell me an AK-47 isn't a machine gun. If you don't mind the countless lies of Donald Trump, I'm sure you can grant Reagan a little literary license.

Of course, Reagan also treated immigrants humanely, didn't start a trade war with the world because he practiced free trade and he fashioned a cabinet that was competent and not filled with world-class swindlers. His philosophy towards Russia was expressed by "Trust, but verify" not just "Trust." He'd likely be a NeverTrumper and therefore blacklisted in today's GOP. He saw America as a shining city on a hill, not as carnage.  

Other folks deserving shoutouts for recent letters are Carol Simpson, Richard Hayes Phillips and Peggy Wiltberger who all wrote masterful explanations of the "raised taxes 20 times" nonsense. Search for their letters on the website for good nuance. Back to guns. I'm sure Rep. Stefanik will vote to keep assault rifles accessible and whatever else her NRA masters ask for. If that's your major concern then cast your ballot for her. I'm looking at who's going to protect my right, and that of friends, family and fellow citizens, to health insurance. Tedra Cobb is going to do that. I don't need Republican spies to tell me that. 

York Letter Final Draft

     I'm responding to Sheriff York's talk to the superintendents about putting armed officers (SRO's) in the schools. He says, "It's not about guns for me. It's about protecting our kids." He's dismissive of state Democrats for not providing funding for this. On the goal of limiting access to guns, "That's just a political statement that the politicians use to get elected." So, Governor Cuomo and the Assembly don't care about protecting kids, just getting re-elected. Mr. York says it's safety, not politics though.

    The article mistakenly states the Maryland shooter was killed by an SRO. In any case, the shooter was armed with a handgun. That state has laws similar to ours. The sheriff might say SRO's worked. Alternatively, the situation may have been different if the shooter had access to assault weapons. Most would agree, I believe, there's an advantage to being armed with a rifle over a handgun. That's even without throwing a bump stock on it.

     There's a recent Sheriff's Association release that requests, "Sufficient funding to provide at least one armed SRO at every grade school and high school in the state." There are over 6,700. At $30,000 just for salary, that's over $200 million per year. Add in regular training, weapon maintenance, uniforms and so on. Possibly state Democrats see gun control as more cost effective. From statements I've seen of Sheriffs York and Murphy they seem opposed to gun control. Can someone ask if they have a problem with New York gun laws? It seems to me that sensible regulation makes their jobs easier and relieves the need for armed officers in our schools.     

York article

Renewed push for armed officer

Lehman's blog

Options to keep guns out of schools - which is kind of odd since that's not what they're doing.  

Elected Employees of the NRA

Letter:

     With the story of the shooting in Parkland, this NRA story has been getting short shrift. The FBI is investigating whether a Russian banker with ties to Vladimir Putin illegally funneled money to the gun lobbying group to help Donald Trump win the election. The NRA spent $30 million to help him. This money came from a wing of the group which doesn't have to reveal who their donors are. Don't know if Congress is looking into it. They did spend $40 million on electing other candidates so all signs point to no. It's odd that an organization that "defends America's freedoms" would take money from a Russian oligarch to help subvert democracy. If I was really cynical I might think it's another reason Congress is releasing memos to tar the FBI.

     Do want to say a word of condolence for the students and praise for them waking a lot of people up. They're showing moral leadership Congress can only dream of. David Hogg on the respect of the NRA for their members, "(Dana Loesch) wants them to think she's on their side, but she's not. She's working for the gun manufacturers."

     In discussions with gun fanciers online, I've come to the conclusion the justification for owning assault style rifles is to take on a tyrannical government. So, Congress is protecting the rights of would-be subversives against our government. Not to worry though because they're also increasing funding for the military. Nothing is more profitable than arming both sides in a war. Loesch isn't the only one working for the gun manufacturers. No wonder they spent $70 million to put them into office. March for our lives, March 24th.

An Old Gun Grabber Letter

From June 20, 2014:

Candidates’ NRA ratings not needed

Editor:

Congrats to candidates Matt Doheny and Elise Stefanik on the AQ ratings from the NRA. Highest rating! The NRA recently affirmed support for a group called Open Carry Texas. OCT was in the news for showing up at restaurants with assault rifles slung across their backs. It would be interesting to know if there are any questions on the test pertaining to open carry laws.

All the candidates running for representative have expressed support for the rights of hunters. I don’t believe that is where the argument is joined, though. Anyone short of a PETA member is good with that. Me? I like living in a state where I can stop for a burger and not have to worry about the posse walking in. Gives me indigestion. Paradoxically, six with guns is better than one, though.

The NRA has become nothing more than a mouthpiece for the gun industry. I can’t see why anyone running for office still seeks their approval.

August 25, 2014:

Editor:

In reading some of the anti-President Barack Obama letters, I get the feeling democracy is not such a popular form of government in some circles. Mr. Syrell seems to favor skipping all that impeachment folderol and going straight to the military coup. The justification for the overthrow of the president being public opinion polls and the threat to this country of, what he himself refers to as, barbaric cave-dwellers. Not sure what his strategy toward ISIS is, but since he likes polls, 74 percent of the citizenry is against putting troops back into Iraq.

On the poll thing, there were periods during President George W. Bush’s and President Ronald Reagan’s administrations when their numbers were worse than Obama’s are now. I’m pretty sure he wouldn’t have been suggesting coups as a remedy then.

I survived eight years of their reigns, and I’m certain Mr. Syrell can survive two full terms of Clinton and Obama (barring a coup, naturally).

Also, in response to Mr. Farenell’s letter on Matt Funiciello — I like Mr. Funiciello and praise him for the many things he has done for the greater Glens Falls community. He made a statement that troubles me, though. He said, “If you don’t feel that we need to have guns to defend ourselves against tyranny, then you are not paying attention.” I’ve been paying attention for some time and prefer to put some faith in our system of government. We have enough Republicans in Congress making statements that sound a lot like that. I’d prefer we elect a moderate, sensible Democrat to replace the moderate, sensible Bill Owens.

Oct 17, 2015:

Editor:

I want to join The Post-Star in commending Congresswoman Stefanik for cosponsoring legislation to reform our mental health system. I'll mention Congressman Gibson for his efforts as well. I also wanted to comment on a story that ran in Monday's paper on funding for gun violence research. The article mentioned how the Republican-led Congress, at the behest of the NRA, killed this funding. What funding the CDC has received is only on account of the White House.

In a report they managed to put together for 2013, the statistics showed 33,636 firearm deaths in the U.S. Of these, 63 percent were suicides and 33 percent were homicides. Under 2 percent were from mass shooting events. So that's fewer than 700 from incidents like Roseburg and over 21,000 that are self-inflicted. The solution suggested by the NRA after every massacre is to arm more people. Looking at the stats above makes that sound like less than a good idea.

I'd also like to point out that there have been 3,380 deaths from terrorists since 2001, mostly on 9/11, of course. There have been 406,456 deaths from firearms. How much has been spent on the War on Terror? God knows, but we do know that Congress is spending as little on research into deaths from firearms as they can get away with. Zero.

I believe most NRA members are as concerned about this as any of us. Wayne LaPierre and its leadership are in the business of selling guns and ammunition though. My campaign advice is probably worth what I'm charging, but I'd urge Mike Derrick to reject Big Gun. Having rational ideas about overcoming this scourge will absolutely put him ahead of his two rivals in our district.

June 23, 2017:

Editor:

Hopefully enough time has passed so we can mention the shooting that wounded Rep. Scalise. As I write this, he is still hospitalized. We all wish him a speedy and full recovery. I also wish him and our representative a speedy change of heart.

Mr. Scalise has received $18,900 from the NRA and Ms. Stefanik, $4,000. Much has been said, in the wake of the shooting, about the lack of civility in our discourse. The NRA sells a T-shirt with an eagle clutching a rifle. The slogan is "Because you can't fist fight tyranny." Classy. We have a healthy enough system of government and a free press to prevent tyrants from taking root. It’s worked well so far and seems to still be.

Maybe it's time for Congress to make gun policy without the aid of these lobbyists for the gun industry. Would merchants of death have been uncivil? It's past time to get rid of the Dickey Amendment prohibiting funding of the CDC to reduce gun deaths. Jay Dickey himself, before he passed, called for its repeal. How about our reps doing the very least they can to address the problem? They can do it while they wait for the white puffs of smoke from the Senate chimney portending the "new and improved" AHCA.

Fortunately I got better at making sure I put these up on the blog at some point. 

Useful Idiots for the 21st Century

I seems like the only posts I've been putting up are LTTEs and I haven't been writing many of those. In any case, a letter to the editor in rough draft and associated links.

UPDATED: And new and improved(?)

     The Russians took actions to influence last November's election. That is a fact. Today I saw this posted on Facebook. "If liberal politicians treat the people this poorly when we're armed to the teeth, just imagine what they'll do once they've taken away your guns." In basic training, I was warned to beware of rumors and propaganda. I don't know the source of this meme, but it looks exactly like the products of Russian trolls recently released. Leaving aside the not so subtle threat to liberal politicians, are there folks "sharing" this who can't recognize propaganda when they see it?
     "What we're talking about is the beginning of cyber warfare. What we're talking about is a major foreign power with sophistication and ability to involve themselves in a presidential election and sow conflict and discontent all over this country" (Sen. Dianne Feinstein). "The strategy is to take a crack in our society and turn it into a chasm" (Sen. Angus King). They're both on Senate Intelligence and are investigating an adversary attacking us. Is it really necessary to help spread divisive material on the internet? I've struggled, but can't find a more appropriate term than the classic useful idiot.
     House Intelligence feels their time better served examining the sale of Uranium One to a company owned by Russians. Naturally, this conspiracy theory involves Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama. Lately, I've seen iterations that work in Robert Mueller. When nothing is found, we the people deserve a full report. The president should get one too so he can move onto another flight of fancy. 

WP Editorial 

David Ignatius 

Craig Timberg 

House Uranium 

Response to Stefanik Supporter

Another instance of the post title saying it all:

     I'd like to join Ms. Ramant and Mr. Derrick in condemning the remarks made by a Derrick supporter about Congresswoman Stefanik. Mr. Derrick stated, "My campaign does not condone any language that disparages women." Don't know what's "weak and phony" about that. Alright, the comments were deplorable, too.

     Here's what Megyn Kelly said about Donald Trump, "You've called women you don't like fat pigs, dogs, slobs and disgusting animals." On Carly Fiorina, he said, "Look at that face! Would anyone vote for that?" This is necessarily a small sample. Can you imagine what he's said about Ms. Clinton in private?

     In public he's said, "I think her bodyguards should drop all weapons. I think they should disarm. Let's see what happens to her. Take their guns away. It'll be very dangerous." And, "If she gets to pick her judges, nothing you can do, folks. Although the Second Amendment people - maybe there is."

     I've never heard words of contrition from Donald Trump over misogynistic comments, assassination fantasies or for seven and a half years of Birtherism. Ms. Stefanik is supporting him without a discouraging word. Won't Ms. Ramant and her candidate join me in denouncing the hideousness of Donald Trump?

In my new kinder and gentler mode, I'm not even going to use the Humorless Harpies of Hate label, mostly because she wasn't one. Another step toward sainthood.

UPDATED: Sainthood will have to wait. I'm going to upgrade Ms. Ramant to triple H status. Upon re-reading her letter I rediscover this line:

Should Derrick be allowed to let this slip through the cracks with his latent position of these words that were said at his own event with a weak, phony “apology?” Man up Derrick!

That is certainly adequately humorless, harpyish and hate-filled. Congratulations Kathi Ramant!

A Good Letter That is One of Mine

Actually, I'll leave the grading to others. I put up Bernice's, so I figured I'll put mine up, too. It'll likely run tomorrow.

This is in response to Mr. Funiciello's recent letter. It's impressive that he managed to work the phrase "corporate war parties" into a discussion about the Green Party ballot line. It's obvious that he must have a great concern about deaths in the Middle East from weaponry manufactured by American companies. Regular readers know I have an obsession over gun deaths, in our country, from weaponry manufactured by anyone. Do they ever know that! Mr. Funiciello had a radio show that aired on Thursdays. Shootings in Charleston and San Bernardino took place on Wednesdays. Maybe it's just my fanaticism, but I would have found time during those shows to have at least mentioned the tragic loss of life the day before. He didn't. Not a word. But, he can work "corporate war parties" into a letter about the Green Party ballot line.

     
I have seen two instances of Mr. Funiciello declaring his belief that we need guns to defend ourselves against tyranny. Those who endured my previous letters will recognize that's not the sort of sensible gun policy I endorse. Just out of curiosity, who is it that declares tyranny? Donald Trump? Matt Funiciello? Some said Obamacare was tyrannical. Did I miss the revolution? That raises the point that you are going up against the U.S. government. As comedian Jim Jefferies says, "You're bringing a gun to a drone fight." And how many people do you know who are willing to drop everything and go to war against the government?

You know who's in favor of common sense gun laws? The Democratic Party! It's easy to see who's not.

Have I mentioned lately how much I dislike that corporate war party smear? Obviously, I wrote this before Donald Trump's whole incitement to "correct" the election to the gun fanciers. Sometimes these things just work out and we go all Nostradamus.

Another Letter to Another Gun Nut

This is in response to Brendan Whelan's, let's ban cars and phones because they kill people too, letter.

    I'd like to respond to Ms. Whelan's letter and point out some differences between cars, phones and guns. You won't find a congressperson urging teens to text and drive. Nor will you find one urging people to drive drunk, not wear seat belts, exceed the speed limit, etc. The Kellerman study in 1996 stated, "A gun in the home is far more likely to be involved in the death of a member of the household than to be used in self-defense ... people should be strongly discouraged from keeping guns in their homes." That kind of talk doesn't sell guns. The only kind of discouraging the Congressional arm of the gun industry did was of gun studies. In 1996, they cut off funding the CDC with the Dickey Amendment.

     

     Your statistics are a bit off. Annual deaths from guns and autos are both in the range of 30,000 to 33,000. A big difference is that those from autos are declining. Another is that there is $240 million a year spent on traffic safety and next to nothing on deaths from firearms. Would more guns result in fewer deaths? Let's study it and find out. The NRA seems to feel everyone should be armed. Over 60% of fatalities are from suicide or accident. To me, that suggests more is not better. If not, let's cut out the gun industry propaganda and educate people. And educate Congress. Sensible legislation is not enacted out of ignorance and fear of reprisal from Wayne LaPierre.

     Condolences to the police of Dallas.

Link to my letter 

Crazy Letter Wednesday

This'll be a nice easy post. First, copy and paste the rantings of Andrew Dicroce.

Radicalized Islamic terrorists attack! Why don't you try those words on Ken or just like the rest of the pathetic pandering progressive lame stream media and low life politicians all you can do is blame law-abiding Americans. I don't shrug like you, I get mad at the fact that how many of these terrorists’ attacks on our soil do we have to tolerate before people like you wake up! Oh yeah it's easy to blame the gun and of course propose another wasted law that would have done nothing to stop this attack. 

Once again we get your left wing propaganda sources that are full of …. ; here is one for yougunfacts.info. Yeah Ken that is a site that backs up their claims with actual facts, something that is sorely missing from your diatribes.

Hey Mr. Credible news source, why don't you own up or admit to using Salon.com for one of your gun control diatribes? What's the matter Ken no guts to own up to it?

One thing all your propaganda can't seem to explain away is the fact that as more Americans own guns, including the evil AR-15, somehow crime has gone down, now how can that be! It's a shame you and your ilk are more upset with law-abiding Americans than with terrorists! 

And since I've already honed my response:

Mr. Dicroce's recent letter has driven me to write. I just wish I could match his peerless rhetoric. Mr. Tingley must still be smarting from the stern dressing down he received. Ouch!

     

Just to comment on the subject he broaches, I'd like to bring folks attention to a recent initiative. A group of veterans that includes Generals David Petraeus and Stanley McChrystal have formed the Veterans Coalition for Common Sense. Their aim is to push for sensible gun policies and to reduce firearm suicides. They're a welcome entry, since we've just seen that the Senate cannot even do the least thing possible. That is, preventing those on the no-fly list from obtaining weapons.

     

I'd urge the Derrick campaign to take a look at this effort. Congresswoman Stefanik has opposed stronger background checks and recently cashed a check from the NRA. Some checks are good ones. All I know of Mr. Funiciello's views is from a February 2014 interview. In that, he stated “we need guns to defend ourselves against tyranny." I prefer we work to strengthen democracy. You're our only hope, Mike. Let's show everyone that the Democratic Party is the one that aligns with common sense. Mr. Dicroce is not going to cast his vote for you.

     

Letter to a Texas Concern Troll

So, if the State of New York eliminates its income tax and all gun control laws, this guy will deign to once again live among us.

Yet another decade passes and still I hesitate moving back to my beloved southern Adirondacks. Why? I'm retired now so I certainly could go. The problems lie in the overbearing control that the state government exerts on its citizens. Your taxes are astronomical. Texas has no income tax. Your gun laws are horrifying. I buy and keep as many guns as I want in Texas including the dreaded AR-15. My Adirondacks will remain a distant memory and Texas my adopted home.

My response:

   

    In response to Scott Graves from El Paso: I'd like to say that your love for the Adirondacks must be very shallow if being required to pay a bit in taxes and follow some restrictions on your guns keeps you from living here. If you're retired, it doesn't even seem that your income tax bill would be that high. I know there are people here who own guns and hunt. Don't believe they use AR-15s, though. Unlike Texans, New Yorkers don't make a practice of going, en masse, into restaurants bearing assault rifles. We don't have that level of insecurity.

     Of course, recently a lot of folks in Texas were convinced that they were going to be invaded by the U.S. military. No, I don't get it either, but that's what they thought. So, they may have anxiety problems that are only relieved by their guns. And you know what; Governor Abbott, Senator Cruz and other Texas politicians did nothing to dissuade their citizenry of that notion. The governor even sent out the National Guard to keep an eye on the federal troops.

     The same Texas government fought the Affordable Care Act fervently while New York was working with the federal government to implement it here. The difference shows now, too. So, I'll take the "overbearing" government that works to ensure its citizens have health insurance over the one that doesn't, and is willing to allow its people to believe conspiracy theories. I'm retired, as well. I do love New York and I'm willing to pay taxes in order to live in a sane and civilized society.   

Have I mentioned lately how much I hate wingnuts in my morning paper? 

Thank the God of Rhetoric

Or Ken Tingley at the Post Star. My letter ran today. So, I was happy when I opened the paper and saw it was there. I got happier when I saw that Andrew DiCroce had the letter preceding mine and ecstatic when I saw that it was also on guns. Thanks for coming early, Santa.

Right on cue the good little puppets at The Post-Star come out with once again another in their long line of anti-gun propaganda, this time they use training as the lead in. Gun control makes it easier to defend yourself? What are you guys smoking? It is gun control that has put more people in harm’s way and got more people killed. Almost every one of these mass shootings has happened in gun free zones. Same weekend as California, 18 died and over 70 injured in Chicago, by the way has the toughest gun laws. Did real well for the 18 killed?

On 9/11 thousands of lives lost and tens of billions of damage was done with box cutters! Oklahoma City, hundreds killed and millions of dollars in damage done with a van, diesel fuel and fertilizer, not one gun used! Israel, how many have been killed or injured because of car and knife attacks? DWI, how many deaths and have more laws stopped them? Heroin, how many stories about the epidemic have you done? Last time I checked it's illegal to make, sell or use, will more laws change that?

It is not the tool that is used, but the heart and mind of the people who use it, and that is the "common sense" part that you keep missing! Let’s face it, your way of doing it has not worked, and you just want to keep going down the same road of insanity doing the same thing over and over. 

May as well rerun mine.

If there was an epidemic killing 90 Americans a day, 33,000 a year, do you think we would be wise to spend money researching it? Yes, is the answer I'm hoping for. If so, you're not a congressman protecting his precious standing with the NRA. Mass shootings are less than the tip of the iceberg at 2 percent to 3 percent of the firearm deaths in this country. We need to have someone to look at the 97 percent that don't run on TV for days on end.

The Dickey Amendment in 1996 cut off funding to the CDC because Congress (the NRA) was afraid that research into firearm deaths would hurt gun and ammo sales. A study prior to the amendment found that having a gun in your house does not make you and your family safer. Why are gun producers allowed to control research on their deadly product? And push misinformation on the public? We don't allow cigarette manufacturers to control tobacco research and education.

Even Jay Dickey now says, "Doing nothing is no longer an acceptable solution." Continuing to allow the National Rifle Association to control gun policy in the U.S. is also not an acceptable solution. We can start fixing that next November in this district. Anyone who's stamped Grade A Prime venal by their organization is not going to help solve the problem. 

I have a few random thoughts on Mr. DiCroce's letter, though I hope not as random as the thoughts that run skittering around in the letter itself. He starts out complaining about the editorial and ends up going onto 9/11, Oklahoma City, Israel, DWI and heroin.  At one time, I would respond to the Post Star with a letter of my own disputing some of those fine points he makes. Reasons not to; include not wanting to pick low hanging fruit, not wanting to pick on the slow kids and not wanting to discourage him from writing these sterling missives. Dear Lord, don't stop! I do, in some perverse way, enjoy reading them and I can't believe he's doing his side any good. In fact, it's hard to believe that there isn't some mucky-muck, GOP chairman or some such that doesn't contact this guy and say, "I beseech you to please stop writing to the editor."  

Also wanted to point out that at least I answer my rhetorical questions. Really wish he had because I believe that on some of them I may not have been answering quite as he was indicating. On DWI: yes, I believe more laws have at least caused there to be fewer, though of course it cannot be proven. On heroin: the PS has run stories on the epidemic. Though maybe his point is that the stories didn't stop the abuse of this drug. 

Letter to a Gun Nut

Have I used that post title before? Good chance. Anyway, here's a fellow from Corinth who's concerned that the French need to arm up to confront the menace they face.

My response:

     I'd like to respond to the letter by Jeff Collura. His feeling seems to be that the higher the level of violence in a society, the easier the government should make it to obtain guns. I believe that if the French take a look at our success with that strategy they'll likely opt for plan B. If you adjust their population to our level, they would have the equivalent of 6,000 yearly deaths from firearms compared with our more than 33,000. That's over 90 a day die from them in the U.S. and nearly two thirds are suicide or accident. Every day and a half, on average, we have more deaths than occurred in Paris.

     I agree there are a lot of illegal guns in France. Is that a reason to give up trying to regulate them? It's a border problem similar to the one Washington DC has. England, with no borders, has annual gun deaths in the low hundreds. A great book on firearms policy is "Gun Fight" by Adam Winkler. I know it's good because it caused me to change some of my liberal ideas. I also learned that "Gunsmoke" lied to us. Dodge City and all those western towns made folks check their weapons at the city limits. They had strict laws against concealed weapons, as well, and almost no deaths from gun violence.

     Interesting story I saw in the past few days is the Texas legislator who said he thought it would be a bad idea to allow in refugees because it's too easy to get guns in his state. To quote Cosmo Kramer, "Without rules, there's chaos." 

I hate wingnuts in my morning paper.


From Chas. Pierce:

"What shall remain? Ruins, thousands of children without education, so many innocent victims and lots of money in the pockets of arms dealers. Jesus once said: 'You can not serve two masters: Either God or riches.' War is the right choice for him, who would serve wealth: 'Let us build weapons, so that the economy will right itself somewhat, and let us go forward in pursuit of our interests.' There is an ugly word the Lord spoke: 'Cursed!' Because He said: 'Blessed are the peacemakers!'"

Bless you, Pope Frank! You are more eloquent than even Cosmo Kramer. 

Yes It Does, Just Ask Rick Santorum

Easy post. Now that I've written the letter. Here's a letter to the editor and area wingnuts who read the Post Star and to a certain someone. Enjoy!


     I haven't seen the movie about Chris Kyle, so I can't discuss that. I'd like to mention some other brave heroes who served in Iraq, and likely won't have movies made about them. Since March 2003, over 150 journalists and over 50 media support personnel have died there, in an effort to bring us the truth.

     Despite their sacrifice, and the efforts of others like them, some in this country see fit to disparage the press. I appreciate the fourth estate. If they tell me we've turned Iraq into a Hobbesian hell-hole, it's because we have. I'm sorry for those who cannot accept that or other truths. When you use the term liberal media, I can't give your opinions any more respect than if you had mentioned 9/11 Truth, Obama's birth certificate or the Illuminati.

     If someone can truly make the case for this grand conspiracy, then tell Congress to begin investigating immediately. They will, happily. In the meantime, could you drop me a few hints? Is it the wealthy owners or the reporters in the field or some nefarious group of jackals in between, who are pushing opinions ever leftward? Does anyone have in his hands, a list of names? Out of curiosity, does the internet have a liberal bias, as well?

And to my spell checker, Hobbesian is a fucking word.