NevadaBrad

I finally did it. I turned on KJFK and took a listen. Fortunately, I have a limited amount of time to listen to the radio, which is a good thing when you’re listening to KJFK. It immediately became clear why listenership is low on leftie stations. The hosts were petty, condescending and mean and rarely did I hear an intelligent argument put forward. This was a stark difference from what you usually hear on conservative talk radio. Worst of all, the entertainment factor was about zero.

When I listened to the liberal talk station I heard basically the same thing over and over. The right is afraid. The reason they are afraid is because they are so full of hate. Almost every caller called in to repeat that fear comes from hatred and hatred leads to violence.

Let me throw out some examples of things I heard that seem to exemplify liberal talk radio. Unfortunately, I don’t have exact quotes because I was driving at the time, but I will make an honest effort to objectively paraphrase what I heard.

- Randi Rhodes wanted to know who is more like the Nazis – People who throw bricks through windows or people who don’t throw bricks through windows? (Answer: Republicans are Nazis because some person, presumably associated with the tea party movement, may have thrown a brick through a window.) She also explained that the tea party movement is the result of middle-aged and senior white men who live in terror because America is changing and they are being left out. Also, she does not like Rush Limbaugh.

- Cory Farley is losing faith in people because of the reaction over Obamacare.

- Bill Press related a story about an armored car accident that left $20 bills scattered all over the street. He then related that if he found money all over the street he would steal it and not give it back. On the bright side, I heard him having a fairly thoughtful discussion about Afghanistan with a guest (although I wonder if the discussion was as thoughtful during the Bush years).

- Thom Hartmann opined that the Republicans have been hijacked by violent extremists and that there is no moderation left in the party.

I was interested to hear Cory Farley express that most people are either idiots or evil because they oppose Obamacare (my words). And although presented in a flippant manner, I was shocked to hear that Bill Press has no problem with stealing and would join in himself if given the chance. Perhaps that’s why he likes Obamacare. Among all the ridiculous comments, what I never heard was any kind of logical debate or argument. The conservatives were constantly labeled as racists and hateful fear-mongers. For example, one caller called in to ask if what he had been hearing from his conservative friends about Obamacare was true. The answer from the host was basically this: of course it’s not true! They’re just a bunch of fearful, hateful extremists! Did the host address the question? Not at all.

It also seemed clear that they never want to miss a chance to by hypocrites. Just to pick one small example, I heard a discussion about how spitting on a politician is a federal crime and the person who did it should be put in prison. I don’t recall any outrage over Cynthia McKinney assaulting a police officer (is that a crime?). But if you spit a little when you pronounce your P’s you should probably just be sent to the electric chair. Except the death penalty is bad. But since you spit when you talk to a politician we’ll make an exception.

So, it is painfully clear that the left is trying to focus on the racist, fear-mongering, spitting tea party so that no one will talk about Obamacare. They are hoping that between now and the November elections America will forget what our politicians just did to us. The lefties lack the ability to understand some simple concepts. THIS HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH RACE! And the only thing we fear is having all of our rights being taken away. Even if you disagree, can you please acknowledge that it is indeed a terrifying thought to have your basic rights stripped from you? Instead of stoking the flames of hatred why don’t you try to explain why the actions of our government will not lead to fewer freedoms?

I think the bottom line is this: the libs attack people because they can’t win a debate on issues. But people are smart and they see through that tripe. That’s why people like Limbaugh and Beck are so successful while leftie hosts enjoy a generally small audience. Although the lefties brand conservative hosts as bigots and fear-mongers DON’T BELIEVE IT! Hannity uses a good biblical quote to summarize his views: “Let not your heart be troubled.” Glenn Beck constantly tells people that violence is not an answer to our problems. His message is that we need to be educated and then come together as a nation. Washington is leading us to a very dark place and we’ve got to help each other survive. This is what people tend to believe. Although the skies are cloudy now, the storm can’t last forever. Eventually the sun is going to come out.

So, I’ve done my duty – I tried listening to the other side. I would love to know if there is something I’m missing. Am I listening to the wrong hosts? Or at the wrong time? Or on the wrong day? If anyone has some advice please let me know.

For years we’ve been told how precious our planet is. It’s one of a kind. It’s the only Earth we’ve got. After years of bludgeoning the ozone with our CFCs and warming the planet with our carnivorous lifestyles, we’re finally starting to come around. We bring our Earth-friendly shopping bags to the store and we carefully try to reduce the temperature of our breath before exhaling. No one is more vigilant about preserving Mother Earth than those on the left. While those on the right are more into exercising “dominion” over the earth, the lefties have selflessly turned their lives over to the planet to protect what fragile life may still be left in her.

While this liberals and progressives will stop at nothing to find the medicine that will finally reduce Earth’s imaginary fever, they bare their hypocrisy when it comes to an imminent threat that is very real. If the the Earth is a lone oasis in a hostile universe then the United States is no less so. The world is full of hostile governments that exercise ruthless control over their populations. Even fairly free societies such as England make no bones about watching their citizens from cameras installed on every corner or denying people the right to bear arms. The United States is an island where people can believe and say whatever they want. Life and liberty are guaranteed. At least that’s the way it used to be.

Now, the same people who to control what kind of light bulbs we use for the sake of the planet are willing to annihilate an oasis that is no less miraculous than our incredible planet. People can go anywhere in the world and see progressive ideas in effect. Of course, this is especially true of health care since socialized medicine is available just about anywhere else you go. And yet America has a fantastic health care system – the best in the world. Somehow they did it without the government running it.

So, why can’t the lib-progs leave us alone? Why can’t they show the same interest in protecting America that they do protecting the planet from fictitious man-made climate change? America did not become the greatest country on Earth because of how hard we tried to be like everyone else. We need to take a stand. Harry Reid, Shelley Berkley and Dina Titus need to be thrown out for what they’ve done. Instead of standing for liberty and freedom they trampled our rights. Instead of giving everyone a chance to succeed they voted to make people dependent on the government.

The politicians in Washington are counting on people tiring of the debate before the November elections. Let’s show Washington that Obamacare is not a cure – it’s a festering wound and it’s only going to get worse between now and November. The cure is to clean the filth out of Washington and elect people who will restore our freedoms.

If you listen to Obama he will tell you to give America the painkiller instead of opting for the life saving surgery. He wants you to forget what they’re doing in Washington. We owe the United States of America – the greatest nation in the history of the world – at least the same respect that we show our planet. We have nowhere to retreat and the threat is real. Let’s choose the surgery and cut out the disease in Washington this November.

I’m not sure why, but all my Facebook friends are big libs. I haven’t added anyone, but several people have added me. One blessing is that I get keen insight into what kind of people voted for our supreme leader, President Barack Obama (mmm, mmm, mmm). I imagine some of these are average people that you might find waiting in line at Wal*Mart; however, some of these people spew some serious ugliness.

I believe that most people are decent people, but there are some psychos on every edge of the political spectrum. I also believe that the liberal/progressive edge stretches much further toward the center than you see with other political ideologies. Those on the left repeatedly label people racists just because they don’t agree with them. I contend that the actual number of crazies on the left is proportional to how many racists they think there are on the right.

Rather than continue to babble, I include here a few comments found in the comments of my Facebook friends:

I’m not cheating I’m not a Republican thanks

raggio with the help of the Clark County repugliKKKans have been robbing the clark county treasury my whole life ! I think he even uses the money to dye his hair as it has been many different colors over the years ! He’s really cute when it’s that bright orange !

…democrats=the ones with the brain !

Will they stop by and visit with the “C” street terrorist ensign in his bordello ?

Full disclosure – I clipped out some parts of the comments that were not specific to the point, but I did not change the intent in any way. I’ll also admit that most of these comments came from one angry person.

I will also state that there were a (very) few kind words about Bill Raggio that came from this group. And I would be negligent if I declined to mention that there is a conservative involved in many of these discussions that is seemingly incapable of making an intelligent point. To this person: I’m sorry if you ever read this, but someone needed to tell you.

Many comments described disappointment at leaders that voted against SB 283. One person chimed in with a comment about gay marriage not being ordained of God. One response read thus:

Which god ? john ensigns ???? newt gingrich’s ??? bush’s ???
cheney’s ???? hamas ????? pedophile priests ???? dali llama ?? the polygamy god ???there are so many that keep women as slaves and concubines I get confused !

Bush’s name was actually spelled to include a profanity so I modified the spelling.

I’m curious if this is typical of discussions between liberals/progressives. When I talk with my like-minded friends, I never hear this type of speech. There is frustration that our political leaders do not listen to the people that elected them. There is discussion about corruption among our politicians, which is most rampant among the Democrats. These discussions involve specifics like Reid’s ties to trial lawyers and our supreme leader President Barack Obama’s (mmm, mmm, mmm) unarguably dishonest entry into the political scene. There is talk about Al Franken’s loss in his senate run, followed by repeatedly recounting the votes until he showed a win. ACORN was involved in this race and it is obvious beyond all doubt that ACORN is a very bad organization.

The point is that among my friends I never hear ugly personal attacks about others regardless of how strongly we disagree. Attacks are always based on specific facts, even if some disagree on how to interpret the facts. (William Jefferson was testing ways to save money. Freezing is how you save food, right?)

When I read the discussion among my Facebook buddies there is one thing I have never read: Intelligent discussion or debate about anything. I understand that the smart people probably sit back and shake their heads while they let the less thoughtful go at it. I guess all I’m looking for is some thoughtful and insightful argument between people whom I don’t agree with. I’ll need to look elsewhere.

I thought that with my last post I was done with the trial lawyer thing, but then I started wondering again. Why do trial lawyers support Democrat candidates so disproportionately? Do they truly believe in the liberal/progressive cause? Or are they simply investing their money where they think they’ll get the most return?

It seems that these firms advertise on Fox News in a huge way. In fact, with the exception of the local attorneys that I’ve mentioned, all the lawyers I’ve listed are advertisers on Fox News (I’ve got a few more to add at the end of this post). If you can believe what the reporters and politicians say, Fox News is the equivalent of the devil. Or maybe Rush Limbaugh is the devil and Fox News is hell. If that’s true, then where does Glenn Beck fit in? I don’t know how it all works, but Fox News is supposed to be bad (although I’m convinced that anyone who demonizes Fox News has never actually watched it). Do these firms also advertise on MSNBC or CNN?

I was further annoyed by Harry Reid’s response to a message I sent him. In my message I expressed my concern that Washington seems hellbent on passing a strange health care bill but they aren’t doing anything to stop the bleeding when it comes to job loss. I also mentioned that in regard to health care I consider tort reform to be a legitimate problem – much more so than the issues addressed in the bill. He seems to be avoiding legitimate problems while focusing on things that are just not critical right now. Finally, I demanded that he consider the voice of the people and discontinue his support of the current Democrat health care proposals. As always, in his response he just explained to me why I’m wrong and why he’s right. In part his message said this:

Proponents of tort reform link the rising costs of premiums for medical malpractice insurance to the rising cost of personal and group policy health insurance and assert that limiting punitive damage awards could significantly reduce the costs of health care. Critics of tort reform note that caps on punitive damages at the state level have been wholly ineffective in reducing the cost of malpractice insurance and have only served to enrich insurance companies. Furthermore, because medical malpractice suits result in less than one percent 1% of total health care costs, tort reform would do little to lower the overall cost of health care.

Just once I would like to get a response that says something like, “I value your opinion and will absolutely make it part of my consideration.” It will never happen, though.

Why would Harry Reid support tort reform? According to OpenSecrets.org, four of the top 20 donors for his 2010 campaign are trial attorney groups that would certainly be negatively impacted by tort reform. The second ranked donor is none other than Weitz & Luxenberg, a group that was previously featured here. Counting donations only from trial attorney groups in the top 20 (Weitz & Luxenberg, Simmons Cooper LLC, Waters & Kraus and Cooney & Conway), Harry Reid has received $203,800. In other words, about .22% of his donors contributed more than 7.6% of his current donations. All four firms specialize in asbestos/mesothelioma litigation. There are several more firms in the top 100 and I’m sure even more among the more than 1,800 donors. So, Harry Reid is clearly beholden to a bunch of shady lawyers that aren’t even located in Nevada while openly rebelling against the people who put him in office.

As a comparison, I looked up the same information for John Ensign. I could not find one trial attorney group among the top 100.

I don’t know if I’ll ever have answers to my questions. In the meantime, here is more campaign contribution information for attorneys I’ve seen advertising on TV.

First, Baron and Budd. Steve Baron donated $6600 to – that’s right – John Edwards between 2004 and 2007. He also donated $4600 each to Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama, $2300 to Joe Biden and a whopping $29,500 to the DNC.

Russell Budd was even more generous. Again, $6600 to John Edwards between 2004 and 2007 with similar contributions to the other candidates. He gave $25,000 to the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee in 2007 and $43,500(!) to the DNC in 2004. It used to be a free country, so I say use your money however you want. On the other hand, how many jobs could have been created with this money? Heck, give me the money and I’ll campaign for the candidates of your choice full time. The check should be for $133,900 (total contributions from 2004 to present). Or you can pay me cash under the table – I think that’s how Democrats work, isn’t it? But I digress.

Next is Adam Pulaski of Pulaski & Middleman. Of course, Mr. Pulaski donated to John Edwards, but it was a measly $1000 in 2004. More interestingly, he also gave a small donation to Ciresi for Senate. Mike Ciresi, of course, is the trial lawyer that was involved in the “big tobacco” class-action lawsuit. The one where he and his firm were thoroughly enriched through arguably devious methods. Strangely, Pulaski also donated a total of $7130 to Lindsey Graham in 2008. Why he would make a donation to a Republican senator from another state seems odd to me. This is certainly something I’m interested in researching further.

David Middleman of Pulaski & Middleman gave only a small $500 donation to Mike Ciresi in 2007. If it’s quality and not quantity that matter, then consider that the only money he donated went to a scummy trial attorney from another state.

As a side note, considering that Ciresi suddenly found himself with painful gobs of cash he seems to be pretty stingy with his money. He gave $1750 to a Minnesota congressman and $2300 to Hillary Clinton. Someone needs to ‘splain to him the rules.

I saved the least interesting for last. I couldn’t go on and on about these attorneys without mentioning Fox News mainstay Binder & Binder. You may remember Charles Binder. He wears a hat:

Charles Binder of Binder & Binder

It seems that most of his donations are for local people, but when he supported a presidential candidate he went for John Kerry (woo!). Same goes for Harry Binder. Each made a $2000 donation to John Kerry – nothing else too remarkable otherwise. There was a large donation to the DNC by a Charles Binder, but I couldn’t confirm this was the same person. BUT, Charles Binder has a program on Air America, so that should be entered into evidence. I’m not sure whether this firm technically counts since they specialize in dealing with the Social Security Administration. I’m inclined to call this business legitimate, but I”ll let you make the call.

Sorry – lots of words and nothing very interesting. I hope I’m done with this subject. Something new next time – I promise.

Since my last post regarding trial lawyers, I did a little more research. Specifically, I paid a little more attention to the ads that were on TV and I looked at the local trial lawyer pool to see how they compared. I shouldn’t be surprised by what I found, but I will admit I was a little disappointed.

I saw ads for additional firms that were advertising for whatever it is they advertise for (mesothelioma, asbestos exposure, drug side-effects, etc. – pick one). One was Weitz & Luxenberg. Perry Weitz donated $28,500 to the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee, in addition to $2300 and $2000 to John Edwards (WHAT!?!) for his 2008 and 2004 presidential runs respectively. He also gave $6600 collectively to Biden and Gephardt for their campaigns.

Working alongside Mr. Weitz is Arthur Luxenberg. He also donated $28,500 to the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee, as well as $2100 and $2000 for John Edwards 2008 and 2004 campaigns. Collectively he also gave $8820 to other Democrat candidates since 2004. He actually donated $2000 to Joe Lieberman in 2004 – by far his least extreme donation.

So, I decided to look at some of the personal injury lawyers local to the Reno area. When I searched on Google the first firm that came up was Bradley, Drendel & Jeanney. I grabbed information for Bill Bradley, Joseph Bradley, Thomas Drendel and William Jeanney. Their donations break down as follows:

• Bill Bradley – $2300 to John Edwards in 2007 and $1000 to Harry Reid in 2008
• Joseph Bradley – $1000 to John Edwards in 2007 and $1500 to John Edwards in 2004
• Thomas Drendel – $2000 to John Edwards in 2007 plus $1000 each to Harry Reid, Jill Derby, the Nevada State Democratic Party and the DNC
• William Jeanney – $1500 to John Edwards in 2004 (Juanita Jeanney also gave $1500 to John Edwards in 2004)

It seems like there may be a pattern, but I can’t quite pick out what it is.

While looking up information, one name came up regularly – Peter Neumann. He is also a trial lawyer in the Reno area. He is apparently a very successful lawyer because he gave almost $36,000 to Democrat causes and candidates in 2008, almost $25,000 in 2006 and more than $30,000 in 2004. He even gave $1000 to Al Franken in 2008. Strangely, he also donated $3100 to John Edwards in 2008. Oops, that’s not strange. I meant it was strange that he only donated $500 to John Edwards in 2004.

Anyway, I could go on all day like this, but there really wouldn’t be a point. In an extremely inaccurate stab, I went back to the Fundrace webpage and typed “trial lawyer” into the occupation field and did a search. The result showed that trial lawyers had donated $25,551 to Republican candidates and $164,048 to Democrat candidates. The flaw is that this number does not include large donations such as the $28,500 donations made to the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee or the DNC, for example. It also only gives a sampling – it’s not a complete list. I’m not sure how the page selects which donors will be included – it could be weighted heavily toward Republicans or Democrats. At face value it certainly illustrates what I’ve been trying to say.

Trial lawyers contribute more to our country’s health care problems than insurance companies. When trial lawyers are spending so much money making sure other trial lawyers are legislating then we can be assured that we will never see tort reform. We will never see our health care system improve. We will only see the corruption spread. John Edwards is the poster boy for what’s wrong with our legal system. Instead of despising him, the trial lawyers generally celebrate him and use their money to try to make him (or people like him) our president. To me, this is absolutely terrifying.

There is good news, though. If you are having trouble figuring out who to vote for, just look at who the trial lawyers are donating money to and then vote for that persons opponent. It makes research much easier. Had you done this, you would have voted against Harry Reid, Dina Titus and Jill Derby. It seems like a pretty safe system to me.

I finally did it. I took myself down to the county offices and changed my voter registration. I am now registered as an NP.

This is not the first time but it will be the last time until something drastic changes. I originally registered as an R right out of high school and voted in my first election five months later. My dad was a D, so I don’t remember how I ended up an R.

So, I first changed my registration in 2001 after the election of George W. Bush. I strongly supported him and was giddy when he won (yes, he was elected and not selected). One of the first things he tried to do was shove amnesty down our throats. I was so disgusted by this that I changed to an IA. The tragedy of 9/11 happened shortly after that and a lot of things changed. The Ds became very mean and hateful and seemed to quickly forget that our status as Americans came before our political affiliation. Partisan politics resumed and the vile things that came from the Ds was so offensive to me that I re-registered as an R to show support for President Bush.

As President Bush’s second term rolled along it became clear that his values were not quite in step with the people of this country. He again started pushing for amnesty and then saddled us with Medicare reform that only caused our hole to become deeper. As a capstone, near the end of his presidency he pushed for the original economic stimulus plan. Everyone seemed to know that it was a bad idea, but he pushed for it anyway. Then our supreme leader, President Barack Obama, came into office and continued the policies of President Bush.

It is clear that both major political parties are out of touch with the people of this country. I have chosen to shed my R because I’m tired of choosing the lesser of two evils. I can readily admit that President Bush made some major errors. I am further disgusted by news of John Ensign’s affair. I refuse to argue that he has done well for Nevada even though he has made such an egregious error in his personal life.

This is my challenge to any Ds that may be reading this: Admit that our supreme leader, President Barack Obama, has been a failure. Quit supporting his outrageous policies and hold him accountable in the same way that you would hold an R accountable. Hold Senator Reid accountable that same way you have held John Ensign accountable for his mistake. Finally, quit complaining about people in the townhall meetings and support them the same way you supported those who protested President Bush throughout his presidency.

Stop letting Washington pit everyone against each other! I’ve taken a step and I hope everyone reading this will find a way to take a step for themselves. There is no better time to start cleaning out Washington than now.

Last month I pondered on Obamacare and mentioned that we should be addressing the legal issues with health care rather than revamping the entire medical system. I was thinking about this again yesterday and a question came to mind: why don’t progressives want to touch tort reform? Of course, it seems that all politicians are unwilling to tackle tort reform; however, the Democrats are in total control with our supreme leader, President Barack Obama, at the helm. Thus, the question falls squarely on them.

No answer is necessary. It didn’t take long for me to figure it out for myself.

Have you ever seen the TV commercials about mesothelioma, asbestos exposure or side-effects caused by any of a million different medications? It’s almost always the same handful of lawyers – James G. Sokolove seems to be the most common. I have always considered these people to be among the lowest of lifeforms on the planet. So, when dealing with health care reform, I began to wonder why the Democrats don’t address attorneys who keep health care costs high through malpractice lawsuits and other class-action lawsuits. I looked up some contribution information for the first law offices that came to mind. Of course, Sokolove was an obvious choice. I also looked at Reich and Binstock since they’ve been advertising lately. I wasn’t surprised by what I found.

First, Sokolove is based in Massachusetts and contributes a LOT of money to political causes. His contributions include $8,600 to John Edwards for his 2008 presidential bid. This is on top of a $28,500 contribution to the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee. He also had some smaller contributions to people like Mike Ciresi, most famous for his role in suing “big tobacco” where his firm collected at least $440 million in fees. Sokolove also donated $25,000 to the DNC leading up to the 2004 elections, in addition to at least $2,250 for John Edwards. It seems that Sokolove was donating thousands more to Edwards through family members, but that involves some speculation outside the scope of the current subject.

Next I looked at Dennis Reich of Reich and Binstock. His contributions were far more modest, but would you like to guess who has received his money in the past? Of course, John Edwards received a $1,000 donation for his 2004 presidential bid. Quite measly compared to the $5,000 he gave to the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee and the $4,600 donation to Hillary Clinton leading up the the 2008 election.

Finally, I looked at Robert Binstock of Reich and Binstock. Shockingly, he gave $2,000 to John Edwards for his 2008 bid. He has also donated to other Democrat lawyers running for public office.

I’m all for anyone supporting anyone they want. The issue is that one of the biggest problems facing our country is rampant abuse of our legal system. Unfortunately, it seems that the people causing the problem are also the same people financing the party in power. The obvious solution, tort reform, is off the table because that would alienate a core constituency for the Democrats. The trial lawyers are supporting each other and working to elevate each other to positions of power. To take someone who abuses the law and put them them in a position where they are writing law seems to be a bad idea…

Almost as bad as putting a community organizer in the White House.

Just for the record, I am continuing to look into the subject and will gladly report any similar circumstances among Republicans. If you have useful information about this subject please feel free to contact me or post a comment. I collected information from a variety of sources, but was able to find corroborating information at http://fundrace.huffingtonpost.com/.

I find it interesting that during Bush’s two terms most of the critical comments made toward President Bush centered around his ability to speak, his intelligence, his supposed dodging of military service and so on. There were a few attacks that could be argued legitimately, such as the war in Iraq; however, this constituted the minority of attacks on President Bush. Now that Obama is in office the exact same attacks continue on the man that is no longer president.

For example, while cruising Facebook I recently viewed a picture of Barack Obama talking on a cell while walking across the tarmac. One person commented on the photo as follows: “So thankful we elected a president who not only can communicate in complete sentences, but knows how to use a cell phone!”

Right-wingers have attacked Obama on matters of substance with very few attacks lowering to the level of malicious and unfounded personal attacks. Yet again, the left and the right set themselves apart. While the left spent eight years calling Bush a bumbling idiot (a tactic which was not eliminated, just shifted to Sarah Palin), our current president is trying to fundamentally change our country by destroying everything good that America stands for. And the left has nothing to say about that. In fact, they can’t wait to help.

What’s more, the left constantly demanded records on Bush’s military service, univeristy transcripts and more. They jumped on the forged documents like they were candy because they were so eager to have some dirt on the president. If I remember correctly, I don’t think it took even 24 hours for the documents to be proven false. When Bush’s university transcripts were finally released, lefties dropped the subject fast because it showed that Bush (the “dummy”) actually had higher scores than John Kerry (the “intellectual”).

Now, when a legitimate question about Obama’s citizenship comes up they refuse to press the matter. If Obama is a citizen, simply release the birth certificate and end the debate. The continued denial and secrecy about the matter only makes President Obama look guilty.

While the right generally seeks to hold both sides accountable, the left will support any corrupt politician on their side and denounce any opposed. If we could work together instead of divided, we wouldn’t be in the mess we are now. We aren’t going to get out of this mess until those on the left recognize Obama for what he is.

I’m not one to watch local news on TV (as much as I love a good flub), but I saw two separate stories recently that were enough to make my brain ache. First, the question was asked, “Why is it easier to get a conceal carry permit than it is to get a driver’s license?” The second story asked, “What can we do in Reno to bolster our local economy during this economic downturn?” I believe the CCW story was on two different stations and they both asked the same thing. I’ll give credit to the reporter I watched, although I have no idea who she is. She took the CCW class at Scheel’s and the story was fair. I didn’t perceive it as positive or negative, with the exception of the one ridiculous question. I’m not an expert and I’m certainly not a journalist, but let me take a stab at answering the question. The reason it is easier to get a CCW than it is to get a driver’s license is…(drumroll)…because cars are far more dangerous than guns.

Here are some rough numbers pulled from the web. Death statistics were acquired from the NCHS (CDC) web site and other statistics were collected from Wikipedia (I know the information may be incorrect, but this isn’t a scientific study – it’s just a goofy blog entry). In 2005 (the most recent statistics I could find) there were about 45,000 motor vehicle related deaths. This comes from about 199,000,000 drivers. That should put the accident death rate at about .023%. That same year there were about 800 deaths as a result of accidental discharge of firearms. That is with about 80,000,000 gun owners. That puts the accident rate at about .001%. The only way to make guns to look more dangerous is to include all gun-related homicides (about 12,000) and suicides (about 17,000). This brings the total to .037% - just slightly higher than the car accident death rate. This is not fair, though, because this makes the assumption that all gun-related suicides and homicides would not happen if guns were not available. This may be true in a limited number of cases, but not in general.

Of course, these numbers slight the real issue. 1) Gun ownership is a consitutional right and 2) carry permits deter crime and make our communities safer. To speak as though there is imminent danger in allowing law-abiding citizens to carry concealed weapons – after required training, background checks and registration, mind you – is ridiculous. It’s difficult to argue since both sides of the discussion have their own statistics to point to. Of course, holes have been repeatedly poked in the gun control crowds statistics, but that won’t change their minds.

In case you want some good reading on the issue, here is a link to a brief interview with John R. Lott, Jr., author of More Guns, Less Crime:

http://www.press.uchicago.edu/Misc/Chicago/493636.html

I’m not one to follow local news very closely, except as it relates to me directly. Occasionally the local news will come on and for one reason or another it doesn’t get changed. Not that there’s any point in sharing this. In the not too distant past a couple of stories were played that I found either infuriating or humorous. I’m still undecided. I’ll only touch briefly on one of the topics – I’ll save the other for another day since it will likely be more involved to get all the information straight.

In this particular story the reporter was discussing Reno’s economic health during this downturn. I didn’t catch every word, but it looked like they were talking to Jessica Sferrazza so it seemed pretty official. At the end of the story, either the city or the reporter asked the viewers, “What ideas do you have to help Reno work this the economic crisis?” I may be paraphrasing.

I’m sure everyone was thinking what I was thinking: Station Casinos. Our city council sometimes seems hell-bent on looking for any opportunity it can find to grab a quick buck through taxation of casinos. We do live in Nevada, and that’s a choice I’ve made along with pretty much everyone else, but don’t complain to the public when the gambling industry begins to suffer.

Station Casinos was heavily protested by all the people who live in the area that would be affected. Petitions were signed and the people made it clear that they do not want a casino in this area. People also flooded the halls when the city council discussed the project. Wisely, the city council listened to the people and did not approve the casino permit; however, as our city council is prone to do, they quietly met a short time later and approved the permit when they didn’t have those nasty constituents breathing down their necks and forcing their opinions on the council representatives.

As Indian gaming and internet gaming grows and other states consider legalizing gambling, Reno must stop this foolish money grabbing. This recession/depression should be a lesson that we are putting our eggs in one basket. Let Las Vegas have the gaming tourism – Reno will never be able to compete. Northern Nevada needs to focus on other business and finding ways to make Northern Nevada attractive to a variety of industries. This means abandoning our city’s current policy of “A Casino on Every Corner”, also known as “No Compulsive Gambler Left Behind”.

Reno can correct a number of issues by taking my advice. The obvious benefits include fewer suicides, fewer alcoholics, less drug use and trafficking and a better enviroment and community for everyone. I would imagine there would be less tobacco use and fewer people killed by drunk drivers, but I’m not sure if there are statistics to back me up. That’s just my opinion.

While opining, I believe that the county should overhaul WCSD and encourage school vouchers and better school choice. Nevada spends a fortune on our kids and they are getting a very poor education in many cases. Yet, everywhere I look I see billboards (horrible, evil billboards) saying the educators need more money. Every election there is a bond issue on the ballot. I’m pretty sure that every bond measure passes, too. But it’s never enough. It will never be enough. The only thing that will improve our school district is some good old-fashioned competition – not more money.

So, to try to wrap this up into some type of coherent statement, quit focusing so much on gaming and tourism and try to find ways to attract businesses to Reno. Quit putting casinos outside of downtown. Quit taxing the living snot out of existing casinos to fund a failing school district that shows little tolerance for competition.

For additional reading about how our current funding helps our schools, check out this article at the Nevada Policy Research Institute: http://www.npri.org/publications/spending-for-spendings-sake

Oh, and quit raising my taxes every time I turn around. Okay, I’m done.