Posts Tagged ‘MITT ROMNEY’
2012 PRESIDENTIAL RACE, ABC NEWS, AFFORDABLE CARE ACT, BARACK OBAMA, CBS NEWS, CIA, CNN, FACEBOOK, FRANKLIN D. ROOSEVELT, FUNDRAISING, MITT ROMNEY, NBC NEWS, NEW DEAL, OBAMACARE, PAPA JOHN'S PIZZA, Ronald Reagan, THE LOS ANGELES TIMES, THE NEW YORK TIMES, THE WASHINGTON POST, TWITTER, WHITE CASTLE HAMBURGER CHAIN, WILLIAM J. CASEY
In Bureaucracy, Business, History, Law on August 2, 2013 at 9:59 pm
When William J. Casey was a young attorney during the Great Depression, he learned an important lesson.
Jobs were hard to come by, so Casey thought himself lucky to land one at the Tax Research Institute of America in New York.
His task was to closely read New Deal legislation and write reports explaining it to corporate chieftains.
At first, he thought they wanted detailed legal commentary on the meaning of the new legislation.
But then he quickly learned a blunt truth: Businessmen neither understood nor welcomed Franklin D. Roosevelt’s efforts to reform American capitalism. And they didn’t want legal commentary.
Instead, they wanted to know: “What must we do to achieve minimum compliance with the law?”
In short: How do we get by FDR’s new programs?
Fifty years later, Casey would bring a similar mindset to his duties as director of the Central Intelligence Agency for President Ronald Reagan.

William J. Casey
He was presiding over the CIA when it deliberately violated Congress’ ban on funding the “Contras,” the Right-wing death squads of Nicaragua.
Casey gave lip service to the demands of Congress. But privately, with the help of Marine Lieutenant Colonel Oliver North, he set up an “off-the-shelf” operation to provide arms to overthrow the leftist government of Daniel Ortega.
It was what President Ronald Reagan wanted. So Casey felt he had a duty to get it done.
But the “Casey Doctrine” of minimum compliance didn’t die with Casey (who expired of a brain tumor in 1987).
It’s very much alive among the American business community as President Barack Obama seeks to give medical coverage to all Americans, and not simply the ultra-wealthy.
The single most important provision of the Affordable Care Act (ACA)–better known as Obamacare–requires large businesses to provide insurance to full-time employees who work more than 30 hours a week.
For part-time employees, who work fewer than 30 hours, a company isn’t penalized for failing to provide health insurance coverage.
Obama prides himself on being a tough-minded practitioner of “Chicago politics.” So it’s easy to assume that he took the “Casey Doctrine” into account when he shepherded the ACA through Congress.
But he didn’t.
The result was predictable. And its consequences are daily becoming more clear.
Employers feel motivated to move fulltime workers into part-time positions–and thus avoid
- providing their employees with medical insurance and
- a fine for non-compliance with the law.
Some employers have openly shown their contempt for President Obama–and the idea that employers actually have an obligation to those who make their profits a reality.

The White Castle hamburger chain is considering hiring only part-time workers in the future to escape its obligations under Obamacare.
No less than Jamie Richardson, its vice president, has admitted this in an interview.
“If we were to keep our health insurance program exactly like it is with no changes, every forecast we’ve looked at has indicated our costs will go up 24%.”
Richardson claimed the profit per employee in restaurants is only $750 per year. So, as he sees it, giving health insurance to all employees over 30 hours isn’t feasible.
Nor is Richardson the only corporate executive determined to shirk his responsibility to his employees.
John Schnatter, CEO of Papa John’s Pizza, has been quoted as saying:
- The prices of his pizzas will go up–by eleven to fourteen cents price increase per pizza, or fifteen to twenty cents per order; and
- He will pass along these costs to his customers.
“If Obamacare is in fact not repealed,” Schnatter told Politico, “we will find tactics to shallow out any Obamacare costs and core strategies to pass that cost onto consumers in order to protect our shareholders’ best interests.”
After all, why should a multi-million-dollar company show any concern for those who make its profits a reality?
Consider:
- Papa John’s is the third-largest pizza takeout and delivery chain in the United States.
- Its 2012 revenues were $318.6 million, an 8.5 percent increase from 2011 revenues of $293.5 million.
- Its 2012 net income was $14.8 million, compared to its 2012 net income of $12.1 million.
In May, 2012, Schnatter hosted a fundraising event for Republican Presidential candidate Mitt Romney at his own Louisville, Kentucky mansion.
“What a home this is,” gushed Romney. “What grounds these are, the pool, the golf course.
“You know, if a Democrat were here he’d look around and say no one should live like this. Republicans come here and say everyone should live like this.”
Of course, Romney conveniently ignored a brutally ugly fact:
For the vast majority of Papa John’s minimum-wage-earning employees-–many of them working only part-time-–the odds of their owning a comparable estate are non-existent.
Had Obama been the serious student of Realpolitick that he claims to be, he would have predicted that most businesses would seek to avoid compliance with his law.
To counter that, he need only have required all employers to provide insurance coverage for all of their employees—regardless of their fulltime or part-time status.
This, in turn, would have provided two substantial benefits:
- All employees would have been able to obtain medical coverage; and
- Employers would have been encouraged to provide fulltime positions rather than part-time ones, since they would feel: “Since I’m paying for fulltime insurance coverage, I should be getting fulltime work in return.”
The “Casey Doctrine” needs to be kept constantly in mind when reformers try to protect Americans from predatory employers.
9/11, ABC NEWS, AL QAEDA, BARACK OBAMA, BATMAN, CBS NEWS, CNN, COLUMBINE HIGH SCHOOL SHOOTINGS, COP KILLER BULLETS, CRIME, ERIC HOLDER, FACEBOOK, FBI, FEDERAL ASSAULT WEAPONS BAN, GABRIELLE GIFFORDS, GEORGE ZIMMERMAN, GREEN BERETS, GUN CONTROL, JAMES HOLMES, JR., MARTIN LUTHER KING, MITT ROMNEY, NATIONAL RIFLE ASSOCIATION, NBC NEWS, NUCLEAR WEAPONS, OSAMA BIN LADEN, ROBERT F. KENNEDY, SECOND AMENDMENT, SELF-DEFENSE, SEPTEMBER 11 ATTACKS, STAND-YOUR-GROUND LAWS, TALIBAN, TERRORISM, THE DARK NIGHT, THE LOS ANGELES TIMES, THE NEW YORK TIMES, THE WASHINGTON POST, TRAVON MARTIN, TUSCON SHOOTINGS, TWITTER, U.S. CONSTITUTION, U.S. NAVY SEALS, VIRGINIA TECH SHOOTINGS, WAYNE LAPIERRE, WRONGFUL-DEATH LAWSUITS
In Bureaucracy, Law Enforcement, Politics, Social commentary on July 31, 2013 at 12:10 am
The victims of the violence are black and white, rich and poor, young and old, famous and unknown. They are, most important of all, human beings whom other human beings loved and needed. No one – no matter where he lives or what he does – can be certain who will suffer from some senseless act of bloodshed. And yet it goes on and on.
–Robert F. Kennedy, April 4, 1968

Senator Robert F. Kennedy announcing the murder of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.
What should the surviving victims of gun violence do to seek redress?
And how can the relatives and friends of those who didn’t survive seek justice for those they loved?
Two things:
First, don’t count on politicians to support a ban on assault weapons.
Politicians–with rare exceptions–have only two goals:
- Get elected to office, and
- Stay in office.
And too many of them fear the economic and voting clout of the NRA to risk its wrath.
Consider Mitt Romney and President Barack Obama.
Both rushed to offer condolences to the surviving victims of the Aurora massacre. And both have steadfastly refused to even discuss gun control–let alone support a ban on the type of assault weapons used by James Holmes.
On July 22, 2012–only two days after the Century 16 Theater slaughter in Aurora, Colorado–U.S. Senator Ron Johnson (R-Wis.) said: “The fact of the matter is there are 30-round magazines that are just common all over the place.
“You simply can’t keep these weapons out of the hands of sick, demented individuals who want to do harm. And when you try and do it, you restrict our freedom.”
That presumably includes the freedom of would-be mass murderers to carry out their fantasies.
Second, those who survived the massacre–and the relatives and friends of those who didn’t–should file wrongful death, class-action lawsuits against the NRA.
There is sound, legal precedent for this.
- For decades, the American tobacco industry peddled death and disability to millions and reaped billions of dollars in profits.
- The industry vigorously claimed there was no evidence that smoking caused cancer, heart disease, emphysema or any other ailment.

- Tobacco companies spent billions on slick advertising campaigns to win new smokers and attack medical warnings about the dangers of smoking.
- Tobacco companies spent millions to elect compliant politicians and block anti-smoking legislation.
- From 1954 to 1994, over 800 private lawsuits were filed against tobacco companies in state courts. But only two plaintiffs prevailed, and both of those decisions were reversed on appeal.
- In 1994, amidst great pessimism, Mississippi Attorney General Mike Moore filed a lawsuit against the tobacco industry. But other states soon followed, ultimately growing to 46.
- Their goal: To seek monetary, equitable and injunctive relief under various consumer-protection and anti-trust laws.
- The theory underlying these lawsuits was: Cigarettes produced by the tobacco industry created health problems among the population, which badly strained the states’ public healthcare systems.
- In 1998, the states settled their Medicaid lawsuits against the tobacco industry for recovery of their tobacco-related, health-care costs. In return, they exempted the companies from private lawsuits for tobacco-related injuries.
- The companies agreed to curtail or cease certain marketing practices. They also agreed to pay, forever, annual payments to the states to compensate some of the medical costs for patients with smoking-related illnesses.
The parallels with the NRA are obvious:
- For decades, the NRA has peddled deadly weapons to millions, reaped billions of dollars in profits and refused to admit the carnage those weapons have produced: “Guns don’t kill people. People kill people.” With guns.

- The NRA has bitterly fought background checks on gun-buyers, in effect granting even criminals and the mentally ill the right to own arsenals of death-dealing weaponry.
- The NRA has spent millions on slick advertising campaigns to win new members and frighten them into buying guns.

- The NRA has spent millions on political contributions to block gun-control legislation.
- The NRA has spent millions attacking political candidates and elected officials who warned about the dangers of unrestricted access to assault and/or concealed weapons.

- The NRA has spent millions pushing “Stand Your Ground” laws in more than half the states, which potentially give every citizen a “license to kill.”
- The NRA receives millions of dollars from online sales of ammunition, high-capacity ammunition magazines, and other accessories through its point-of-sale Round-Up Program–thus directly profiting by selling a product that kills about 30,288 people a year.

- Firearms made indiscriminately available through NRA lobbying have filled hospitals–such as those in Aurora–with casualties, and have thus badly strained the states’ public healthcare systems.
It will take a series of highly expensive and well-publicized lawsuits to significantly weaken the NRA, financially and politically.
The first ones will have to be brought by the surviving victims of gun violence–and by the friends and families of those who did not survive it. Only they will have the courage and motivation to take such a risk.

As with the cases first brought against tobacco companies, there will be losses. And the NRA will rejoice with each one.
But, in time, state Attorneys General will see the clear parallels between lawsuits filed against those who peddle death by cigarette and those who peddle death by armor-piercing bullet.
And then the NRA–like the tobacco industry–will face an adversary wealthy enough to stand up for the rights of the gun industry’s own victims.
9/11, ABC NEWS, AL QAEDA, BARACK OBAMA, BATMAN, CBS NEWS, CNN, COLUMBINE HIGH SCHOOL SHOOTINGS, COP KILLER BULLETS, CRIME, ERIC HOLDER, FACEBOOK, FBI, FEDERAL ASSAULT WEAPONS BAN, GABRIELLE GIFFORDS, GEORGE ZIMMERMAN, GREEN BERETS, GUN CONTROL, JAMES HOLMES, MITT ROMNEY, NATIONAL RIFLE ASSOCIATION, NBC NEWS, NUCLEAR WEAPONS, OSAMA BIN LADEN, SECOND AMENDMENT, SELF-DEFENSE, SEPTEMBER 11 ATTACKS, STAND-YOUR-GROUND LAWS, TALIBAN, TERRORISM, THE DARK NIGHT, THE LOS ANGELES TIMES, THE NEW YORK TIMES, THE WASHINGTON POST, TRAVON MARTIN, TUSCON SHOOTINGS, TWITTER, U.S. CONSTITUTION, U.S. NAVY SEALS, VIRGINIA TECH SHOOTINGS, WAYNE LAPIERRE, WRONGFUL-DEATH LAWSUITS
In Bureaucracy, Law Enforcement, Politics, Social commentary on July 30, 2013 at 12:00 am
Among the major accomplishments of the National Rifle Association:
- In July, 2005, George Zimmerman was arrested for shoving a police officer during an underage drinking raid. The charges were dropped after he completed an alcohol education program. That same summer, his ex-fiancée filed a restraining order against him, alleging that Zimmerman hit her.
- Yet he was allowed to carry a loaded, hidden handgun as a Florida resident–under the 2005 “Stand Your Ground” law the NRA had rammed through the legislature.
- Under that law: A Concealed Carry Permit is revoked only if a gun owner is convicted of a felony. It is not suspended if he’s being investigated for a felony. It is suspended only if he is actually charged.

George Zimmerman
- On February 26, 2012, Zimmerman shot unarmed, 17-year-old Trayvon Martin, who was wearing a “hoodie.”
- In March, the NRA issued its own version of a “hoodie”–the Concealed Carry Hooded Sweatshirt, designed to hide firearms. Selling on the NRA’s website for $60 to $65, it is advertised thusly:
- “Inside the sweatshirt you’ll find left and right concealment pockets. The included Velcro®-backed holster and double mag pouch can be repositioned inside the pockets for optimum draw. Ideal for carrying your favorite compact to mid-size pistol, the NRA Concealed Carry Hooded Sweatshirt gives you an extra tactical edge, because its unstructured, casual design appears incapable of concealing a heavy firearm – but it does so with ease!” http://www.nrastore.com/nrastore/ProductDetail.aspx?c=11&p=CO+635&ct=e

- Anyone—including convicted criminals—can buy these “hide-a-gun” sweatshirts, putting both the public and law enforcers at deadly risk.
- On July 13, 2013, a Florida jury found George Zimmerman not guilty of second-degree murder of Trayvon Martin–largely through the “Stand-Your-Ground” law the NRA had rammed through the Florida legislature.
- The NRA often claims that law-abiding citizens defend themselves with guns millions of times every year. But the FBI has determined that, of the approximately 11,000 gun homicides every year, fewer than 300 are justifiable self-defense killings.
- The NRA supports loopholes that allow criminals to buy guns without background checks, or allow terrorists to buy all the AK-47s they desire.
- In 2012, the NRA’s executive vice president, Wayne LaPierre, said the NRA was “all in” to defeat Barack Obama. Yet the President has meekly signed legislation allowing guns to be brought into national parks and onto trains. Since becoming Chief Executive, he has made no effort to curb gun violence.
- High-capacity magazines were prohibited under the 1994 Federal Assault Weapons Ban. It expired in 2004. The NRA–aided by the Bush administration and Republicans generally–easily overcame efforts to renew the ban.
- Political scientist Robert Spitzer, author of the book The Politics of Gun Control, notes that since the passage of the 1993 Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act and the assault weapons ban in 1994, state and national laws have been drifting toward more open gun access:
- “In 1988, there were about 18 states that had state laws that made it pretty easy for civilians to carry concealed hand guns around in society. By 2011, that number is up to 39 or 40 states having liberalized laws, depending on how you count it, and the NRA has worked very diligently at the state level to win political victories there, and they’ve really been quite successful.”
- On January 8, 2011, Democratic Rep. Gabrielle Giffords was shot in the head while meeting with constituents outside a,Tucson, Arizona, grocery store. Also killed was Arizona’s chief U.S. District judge, John Roll, who had just stopped by to see his friend Giffords after celebrating Mass. The total number of victims: 6 dead, 13 wounded.
- “The NRA’s response to the Tucson shootings has been to say as little as possible and to keep its head down,” says Spitzer. “And their approach even more has been to say as little as possible and to simply issue a statement of condolence to the families of those who were injured or killed and to wait for the political storm to pass over and then to pick up politics as usual.”
- In the spring of 2012, the House Oversight Committee prepared to vote on whether to hold U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder in contempt for allegedly refusing to provide documents related to “Fast and Furious.” This was an undercover operation launched by the Bush administration to track firearms being sold to Mexican drug cartels.
- The NRA notified Congressional members that how they voted would reflect how the NRA rated them in “candidate evaluations” for the November elections. This amounted to blatant extortion, since the NRA has long accused Holder of having an “anti-gun” agenda.
Summing up the current state of gun politics in America, the April 21, 2012 edition of The Economist noted:
“The debate about guns is no longer over whether assault rifles ought to be banned, but over whether guns should be allowed in bars, churches and colleges.”
That is precisely the aim of the NRA–an America where anyplace, anytime, can be turned into the O.K. Corral.
So what should the surviving victims of gun violence do to seek redress? And how can the relatives and friends of those who don’t survive seek justice for those they loved?
9/11, ABC NEWS, AL QAEDA, BARACK OBAMA, BATMAN, CBS NEWS, CNN, COLUMBINE HIGH SCHOOL SHOOTINGS, COP KILLER BULLETS, CRIME, ERIC HOLDER, FACEBOOK, FBI, FEDERAL ASSAULT WEAPONS BAN, GABRIELLE GIFFORDS, GEORGE ZIMMERMAN, GREEN BERETS, GUN CONTROL, JAMES HOLMES, MITT ROMNEY, NATIONAL RIFLE ASSOCIATION, NBC NEWS, NUCLEAR WEAPONS, OSAMA BIN LADEN, SECOND AMENDMENT, SELF-DEFENSE, SEPTEMBER 11 ATTACKS, STAND-YOUR-GROUND LAWS, TALIBAN, TERRORISM, THE DARK NIGHT, THE LOS ANGELES TIMES, THE NEW YORK TIMES, THE WASHINGTON POST, TRAVON MARTIN, TUSCON SHOOTINGS, TWITTER, U.S. CONSTITUTION, U.S. NAVY SEALS, VIRGINIA TECH SHOOTINGS, WAYNE LAPIERRE, WRONGFUL-DEATH LAWSUITS
In Bureaucracy, Law Enforcement, Politics, Social commentary on July 29, 2013 at 12:05 am
On September 11, 2001, Islamic terrorists snuffed out the lives of 3,000 Americans in New York, Washington, D.C. and Pennsylvania.

But within less than a month, American warplanes began carpet-bombing Afghanistan, whose rogue Islamic “government” refused to surrender Osama bin Laden, the mastermind of the attacks.
By December, the power of the Taliban was broken–and bin Laden was driven into hiding in Pakistan.
For more than ten years, the United States–through its global military and espionage networks–has relentlessly hunted down most of those responsible for that September carnage.
On May 1, 2011, U.S. Navy SEALS invaded bin Laden’s fortified mansion in Abbottabad, Pakistan–and shot him dead.

Now, consider these statistics of death, supplied by the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence:
Every day–365 days a year
- 270 people in America, 47 of them children and teens, are shot in murders, assaults, suicides, accidents and police intervention;
- 87 people die from gun violence, 33 of them murdered;
- 8 children and teens die from gun violence;
- 183 people are shot, but survive their gun injuries;
- 38 children and teens are shot, but survive their gun injuries.
And what does all of this add up to?
- In one year, almost 100,000 people in America are shot in murders, assaults, suicides, accidents, or by police intervention.
- Over a million Americans have been killed with guns since 1968, when Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. and Robert F. Kennedy were assassinated.
- U.S. homicide rates are 6.9 times higher than rates in 22 other populous high-income countries combined, despite similar non-lethal crime and violence rates. The firearm homicide rate in the U.S. is 19.5 times higher.
- Gun violence impacts society in numerous ways: medical costs; costs of the criminal justice system; security precautions; and reductions in quality of life owing to fear of gun violence.
- An estimated 41% of gun-related homicides would not occur under the same circumstances had no guns been present.
(This average annual estimated composite picture of gun violence is based on death certificates and estimates from emergency room admissions.)
And who, more than anyone (including the actual killers themselves) has made all this carnage possible?
The National Rifle Association, of course.
But unlike the leadership of Al Qaeda, that of the NRA is not simply known, but celebrated.
Its director, Wayne LaPierre, is courted as a rock star by Democrats and Republicans seeking NRA endorsements–and campaign contributions.

Wayne La Pierre
He frequently appears as an honored guest at testimonial dinners and political conventions.
The largest of the 13 national pro-gun groups, the NRA has nearly 4 million members, who focus most of their time lobbying Congress for unlimited “gun rights.”
The NRA claims that its mission is to “protect” the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution, which states:
“A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”
NRA members conveniently ignore the first half of that sentence: “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State….”
For the NRA, the Second Amendment is the Constitution, and the rest of the document is a mere appendage.
At the time Congress ratified the Constitution in 1788, the United States was not a world power. Only after World War II did the country maintain a powerful standing army during peacetime.
But World War II ended 68 years ago, and today the United States is a far different country than it was in 1788:
-
It boasts a nuclear arsenal that can turn any country into thermonuclear ash–anytime an American President decides to do so.
-
It boasts an Army, Navy, Air Force and Marine Corps that can target any enemy, anywhere in the world.
-
Its Special Forces–Green Berets, Delta Force and Navy SEALS–are rightly feared by international terrorists.
-
If a criminal flees or conducts business across state lines, powerful Federal law enforcement agencies–such as the FBI and Drug Enforcement Administration–can put him out of business.
But apparently the NRA hasn’t gotten the word.
- The NRA has steadfastly defended the right to own Teflon-coated “cop killer” bullets,” whose only purpose is to penetrate bullet-resistant vests worn by law enforcement officers.

- The NRA and its lobbying arm, the Institute for Legislative Action, is responsible for the “Stand-Your-Ground” ordinances now in effect in more than half the states. These allow for the use of deadly force in self-defence, without any obligation to attempt to retreat first.
- The NRA rushed to the defense of accused murderer George Zimmerman, the self-appointed “community watchman” who ignored police orders to stop following 17-year-old Trayvon Martin and ended up shooting him to death.
- Police did not initially charge Zimmerman because of Florida’s “Stand-Your-Ground” law, which the NRA had rammed through the legislature.
- The same “Stand-Your-Ground” law will play a major role in the coming trial of Michael Dunn, a white software engineer, for the first-degree murder of Jordan Davis. The shooting occurred on November 23, 2012, in Jacksonville, Florida.
- Dunn claimed that he argued with three young black men over the volume of their music in their SUV. He said that he saw a shotgun appear in one of the SUV’s windows and he fired his handgun eight or nine times before fleeing.
- Three of Dunn’s bullets killed Davis. Police said that the men in the SUV were unarmed.
2012 PRESIDENTIAL RACE, ABC NEWS, AFFORDABLE CARE ACT, BARACK OBAMA, CBS NEWS, CNN, EMPLOYERS RESPONSIBILITY ACT, FACEBOOK, FUNDRAISING, GODFATHER'S PIZZA, HERMAN CAIN, MITT ROMNEY, NBC NEWS, OBAMACARE, PAPA JOHN'S PIZZA, THE LOS ANGELES TIMES, THE NEW YORK TIMES, THE WASHINGTON POST, TWITTER
In Business, Law, Politics, Social commentary on July 1, 2013 at 12:01 am
Break out the handkerchiefs. A CEO is about to cry.
When the Affordable Care Act takes full effect, Papa John’s Pizza will change in two ways.
First, it will be forced to do something it hasn’t done since its founding in 1984: Offer healthcare coverage to its 16,5000 employees or pay a penalty to the government.
Second, according to the company’s CEO, John Schnatter, the prices of his pizzas will go up.

John Schnatter
How far up?
By as much as eleven to fourteen cents price increase per pizza, or fifteen to twenty cents per order.

But Schnatter isn’t going to take this lying down. He’s determined to pass along those costs to his customers.
“If Obamacare is in fact not repealed,” Schnatter told Politico, “we will find tactics to shallow out any Obamacare costs and core strategies to pass that cost onto consumers in order to protect our shareholders’ best interests.”
After all, why should a multi-million-dollar company show any concern for those who make its profits a reality?
Consider:
- Papa John’s is the third-largest pizza takeout and delivery chain in the United States.
- Its 2012 revenues were $318.6 million, an 8.5 percent increase from 2011 revenues of $293.5 million.
- Its 2012 net income was $14.8 million, compared to its 2012 net income of $12.1 million.
Click here: Papa John’s turns in strong domestic and international Q2 | PizzaMarketPlace.com
Nor should anyone expect Schnatter to take a pay cut, just so his employees can obtain medical care when they need it.
Schnatter’s total calculated compensation for 2011 came to $2,745,219.
Click here: John Schnatter: Executive Profile & Biography – Businessweek
“We’re not supportive of Obamacare, like most businesses in our industry,” Schnatter–a supporter of Mitt Romney–admitted in an interview with Politico.
To demonstrate his opposition to providing medical insurance for all Americans, Schnatter hosted a fundraising event for Mitt Romney at his own Louisville, Kentucky mansion in May.
The luxurious setting for the fundraiser gave Romney a rush of pure, plutocratic ecstasy.
“What a home this is,” gushed Romney. “What grounds these are, the pool, the golf course.
“You know, if a Democrat were here he’d look around and say no one should live like this. Republicans come here and say everyone should live like this.”

John Schnatter’s estate
Of course, Romney conveniently ignored a brutally ugly fact:
For the vast majority of Papa John’s minimum-wage-earning employees–many of them working only part-time–the odds of their owning a comparable estate are non-existent.
John Schnatter is not the first pizza magnate to attack proposed changes to federal health care.
In 1993, Godfather’s Pizza CEO Herman Cain charged that President Bill Clinton’s proposed health care reform law would cost his company Godfather’s Pizza money and jobs.
“For many many businesses like mine, the cost of your plan is simply a cost that will cause us to eliminate jobs,” Cain told Clinton in a famous exchange.
In a typical demonstration of corporate thinking, Judy Nichols, a Papa John’s franchise owner in Beaumont, Texas, said:
“I have two options, I can stop offering coverage and pay the $2,000 fine, or I could keep my number of staff under 50 so the mandate doesn’t apply,” she told Legal Newsline.
In short: Defy the law, and employee healthcare needs be damned.
Nichols added that the the law might cost her $20,000 to $30,000 in taxes: “Obamacare is making me think about cutting jobs instead,” she said.
Translation: If you force me to behave responsibly, I’ll just have to take it out on willing-to-work Americans.
So how can America cope with behavior that destroys not only lives but the economy as well?
By passing–and vigorously enforcing–a nationwide Employers Responsibility Act.
Among its provisions:
Employers would be required to provide full medical and pension benefits for all employees, regardless of their full-time or part-time status.
Increasingly, employers are replacing full-time workers with part-time ones—solely to avoid paying medical and pension benefits. Requiring employers to act humanely and responsibly toward all their employees would encourage them to provide full-time positions—and hasten the death of this greed-based practice.
The seeking of “economic incentives” by companies in return for moving to or remaining in cities/states would be strictly forbidden.
Such “economic incentives” usually:
- allow employers to ignore existing laws protecting employees from unsafe working conditions;
- allow employers to ignore existing laws protecting the environment;
- allow employers to pay their employees the lowest acceptable wages, in return for the “privilege” of working at these companies; and/or
- allow employers to pay little or no business taxes, at the expense of communities who are required to make up for lost tax revenues.
Employers who continue to make such overtures would be prosecuted for attempted bribery or extortion:
- Bribery, if they offered to move to a city/state in return for “economic incentives,” or
- Extortion, if they threatened to move their companies from a city/state if they did not receive such “economic incentives.”
This would
- protect employees against artificially-depressed wages and unsafe working conditions;
- protect the environment in which these employees live; and
- protect cities/states from being pitted against one another at the expense of their economic prosperity.
ABC NEWS, AL QAEDA, BARACK OBAMA, BOSTON MARATHON BOMBING, CBS NEWS, CIA, CNN, COLD WAR, CUBAN MISSILE CRISIS, DICK CHENEY, DONALD TRUMP, DZOKHAR TSARNAEV, FACEBOOK, FBI, GEORGE W. BUSH, GREG BALL, HARRY S. TRUMAN, HERMAN CAIN, JOHN F. KENNEDY, MICHELLE BACHMANN, MITT ROMNEY, NBC NEWS, NEWT GINGRICH, NICCOLO MACHIAVELL, OSAMA BIN LADEN, PIERS MORGAN, RICK PERRY, RICK SANTORUM, TERRORISM, THE LOS ANGELES TIMES, THE NEW YORK TIMES, THE PRINCE, THE WASHINGTON POST, TORTURE, TWITTER, WATERBOARDING
In Law, Law Enforcement, Politics, Social commentary on May 1, 2013 at 12:02 am
Throughout the Cold War, Republicans held themselves out as the ultimate practitioners of “real-politick,” at home and abroad. They convinced millions of Americans to believe that only their party could be trusted to not sell out America.
As a result, they held the White House–and often the Senate and/or House of Representatives–for most of the 20th Century.
According to Republicans and their Rightist supporters: A President–especially a Democratic one–could never be too aggressive or warlike.
- President Harry S. Truman hemmed in the Soviet Union with a ring of military bases, making its further expansion into Europe impossible.
- But the Right judged this as abject surrender. The reason: Truman refused to again turn Eastern Europe into a mass graveyard and ignite World War III by declaring war on the Soviet Union to “roll back” Communism.
- President John F. Kennedy forced Nikita Khrushchev to withdraw Soviet nuclear missiles from Cuba.
- But, according to Republicans, that was actually a defeat. The reason: He didn’t risk thermonuclear war with the Soviet Union by launching an all-out invasion of that island.
After the 1991 collapse of the Soviet Union, Republicans lost their Great Red Bogeyman. Now they could only accuse Democrats of being “soft” on crime, not Communism.
Then, on September 11, 2001, the Republicans found their next great enemy to rally against–-and to accuse Democrats of actively supporting: Islamic terrorism.
This ensured the 2004 re-election of George W. Bush–-who had hid out from the Vietnam war in the Texas Air National Guard–over John Kerry, a genuine war hero who had seen heavy action in the same conflict.
In the last column, we saw that the FBI’s “kill them with kindness” approach to interrogation has yielded far better results than the “Jack Bauer/24” methods favored by the CIA and military.
But this has not prevented Republicans from attacking even those FBI agents who have risked their lives at home and abroad to defend America from terrArabism.
According to the high priests of the Republican party, those agents are “naive” do-gooders who don’t have the guts to go “all the way” against America’s enemies.
But Niccolo Machiavelli, whose name is a byward for political ruthlessness, would disagree with those Republicans.
In his small and notorious book, The Prince, he writes about the methods a ruler must use to gain power. But in his larger and lesser-known work, The Discourses, he outlines the ways that liberty can be maintained in a republic.

Niccolo Machiavelli
For Machiavelli, only a well-protected state can hope for peace and prosperity. Toward that end, he wrote at length about the best ways to succeed militarily. And in war, humanity can prevail at least as often as severity.
Consider the following example from The Discourses:
Camillus [a Roman general] was besieging the city of the Faliscians, and had surrounded it….A teacher charged with the education of the children of some of the noblest families of that city [to ingratiate himself] with Camillus and the Romans, led these children…into the Roman camp.
And presenting them to Camillus [the teacher] said to him, “By means of these children as hostages, you will be able to compel the city to surrender.”
Camillus not only declined the offer but had the teacher stripped and his hands tied behind his back….[Then Camillus] had a rod put into the hands of each of the children…[and] directed them to whip [the teacher] all the way back to the city.
Upon learning this fact, the citizens of Faliscia were so much touched by the humanity and integrity of Camillus, that they surrendered the place to him without any further defense.
This example shows that an act of humanity and benevolence will at all times have more influence over the minds of men than violence and ferocity.
It also proves that provinces and cities which no armies…could conquer, have yielded to an act of humanity, benevolence, chastity or generosity.
This truth should be kept firmly in mind whenever Right-wingers start bragging about their own patriotism and willingness to get “down and dirty” with America’s enemies.
Many–like Newt Gingrich, Donald Trump, Rudolph Giuliani, Rick Santorum and Mitt Romney–did their heroic best to avoid military service. These “chickenhawks” talk tough and are always ready to send others into battle–but keep themselves well out of harm’s way.
Such men are not merely contemptible; they are dangerous.
ABC NEWS, AL QAEDA, BARACK OBAMA, BOSTON MARATHON BOMBING, CBS NEWS, CIA, CNN, COLD WAR, CUBAN MISSILE CRISIS, DICK CHENEY, DONALD TRUMP, DZOKHAR TSARNAEV, FACEBOOK, FBI, GEORGE W. BUSH, GREG BALL, HARRY S. TRUMAN, HERMAN CAIN, JOHN F. KENNEDY, MICHELLE BACHMANN, MITT ROMNEY, NBC NEWS, NEWT GINGRICH, NICCOLO MACHIAVELL, OSAMA BIN LADEN, PIERS MORGAN, RICK PERRY, RICK SANTORUM, TERRORISM, THE LOS ANGELES TIMES, THE NEW YORK TIMES, THE PRINCE, THE WASHINGTON POST, TORTURE, TWITTER, WATERBOARDING
In History, Law Enforcement, Politics, Social commentary on April 30, 2013 at 12:24 am
In his gung-ho views on torture, New York State Senator Greg Ball has plenty of company.
At the November 12, 2011 Republican debate on foreign policy, all seven candidates endorsed the use of torture as an effective counter-terrorism tactic.

Former Godfather Pizza CEO Herman Cain called for the re-authorized use of waterboarding to “persuade” captured terrArabists to talk.
“I don’t see it as torture, I see it as an enhanced interrogation technique,” said Cain.
Representative Michele Bachmann (R-Minn.) and Texas Governor Rick Perry agreed with Cain.
And Perry drew sustained applause when he declared, “This is war…I will defend them [waterboarding and other coercive techniques] until I die.”
The use of waterboarding was discontinued late in the administration of President George W. Bush.
Following much heated, internal debate, officials in the FBI and Justice Department admitted that it constituted torture and was therefore illegal.
But after the killing of Osama bin Laden, several Bush administration officials–notably former Vice President Dick Cheney–tried to reinstitute the technique, or at least its reputation.
They suggested that information acquired during the earlier waterboarding years may have provided an essential clue to locating bin Laden.
Unfortunately for Republicans, the truth about torture generally–and waterboarding in particular–is just the opposite.
Victims will say anything they think their captors want to hear to stop the agony. And, in fact, subsequent investigations have shown that just that happened with Al Qaeda suspects.

Waterboarding a captive
Shortly after the invasion of Afghanistan in October, 2001, hundreds of Al Qaeda members started falling into American hands. And so did a great many others who were simply accused by rival warlords of being Al Qaeda members.
The only way to learn if Al Qaeda was planning any more 9/11-style attacks on the United States was to interrogate those suspected captives. The question was: How?
The CIA and the Pentagon quickly took the “gloves off” approach. Their methods included such “stress techniques” as playing loud music and flashing strobe lights to keep detainees awake.
Some were “softened up” prior to interrogation by “third-degree” beatings. And still others were waterboarded.
In 2003, an FBI agent observing a CIA “interrogation” at Guantanamo was stunned to see a detainee sitting on the floor, wrapped in an Israeli flag. Nearby, music blared and strobe slights flashed.
In Osama bin Laden’s 1998 declaration of war against America, he had accused the country of being controlled by the Jews, saying the United States “served the Jews’ petty state.”
Draping an Islamic captive with an Israeli flag could only confirm such propaganda.
The FBI, on the other hand, followed its traditional “kill them with kindness” approach to interrogation.
Pat D’Amuro, a veteran FBI agent who had led the Bureau’s investigation into the 1998 bombing of the American embasy in Nairobi, Kenya, warned FBI Director Robert Mueller III:
The FBI should not be a party in the use of “enhanced intrrogation techniques.” They wouldn’t work and wouldn’t produce the dramatic results the CIA hoped for.
But there was a bigger danger, D’Amuro warned: “We’ll be handing every future defense attorney Giglio material.”
The Supreme Court had ruled in Giglio vs. the United States (1972) that the personal credibility of a government official was admissible in court.
Any FBI agent who made use of extra-legal interrogation techniques could potentially have that issue raised every time he testified in court on any other matter.
It was a defense attorney’s dream-come-true recipe for impeaching an agent’s credibility–and thus ruin his investigative career.
But there was another solid reason for avoiding interrogations that smacked of torture: Most Al Qaeda members relished appearing before grand juries.
Unlike organized crime members, they were talkative–and even tried to proslytize to the jury members. They were proud of what they had done–and wanted to talk.
“This is what the FBI does,” said Mike Rolince, an FBI experrt on counter-terrorism. “Nearly 100% of the terrorists we’ve taken into custody have confessed. The CIA wasn’t trained. They don’t do interrogations.”
According to The Threat Matrix: The FBI at War in the Age of Global Terror (2011), jihadists had been taught to expect severe torture at tha hands of American interrogators. Writes Author Garrett M. Graff:
“Often, in the FBI’s experience, their best cooperation came when detainees realized they weren’t going to get tortured, that the United States wasn’t the Great Satan. Interrogators were figuring out…that not playing into Al Qaeda’s propaganda could produce victories.”
And the FBI isn’t alone in believing that acts of simple humanity can turn even sworn entmies into allies.
No less an authority on “real-politick” than Niccolo Machiavelli reached the same conclusion more than 500 years ago.
ABC NEWS, AL QAEDA, BARACK OBAMA, BOSTON MARATHON BOMBING, CBS NEWS, CIA, CNN, COLD WAR, CUBAN MISSILE CRISIS, DICK CHENEY, DONALD TRUMP, DZOKHAR TSARNAEV, FACEBOOK, FBI, GEORGE W. BUSH, GREG BALL, HARRY S. TRUMAN, HERMAN CAIN, JOHN F. KENNEDY, MICHELLE BACHMANN, MITT ROMNEY, NBC NEWS, NEWT GINGRICH, NICCOLO MACHIAVELL, OSAMA BIN LADEN, PIERS MORGAN, RICK PERRY, RICK SANTORUM, TERRORISM, THE LOS ANGELES TIMES, THE NEW YORK TIMES, THE PRINCE, THE WASHINGTON POST, TORTURE, TWITTER, WATERBOARDING
In History, Law Enforcement, Politics, Social commentary on April 29, 2013 at 12:02 am
On the night of April 19, 19-year-old Dzokhar Tsarnaev, the Boston Marathon bombing suspect, was arrested.
And almost immediately afterward, New York State Senator Greg Ball (R) offered his unsolicited advice on how to deal with him. Ball took to his Twitter account and called for the Tsarnaev to be tortured:
“So, scum bag #2 in custody. Who wouldn’t use torture on this punk to save more lives?”
On April 22, Ball appeared on CNN’s Piers Morgan Show to elaborate on his approach to law-and-order.

Greg Ball
Morgan opened the interview by asking Ball if he still believed that Tsarnaev should be tortured. The following exchange then occurred:
BALL: Absolutely. At the end of the day–you know, I think you interview a lot of politicians. A lot of politicians are full of crap. They’re scared of their own shadow and scared to say what they feel.
I think that I share the feelings of a lot of red-blooded Americans who believe that if we can save even one innocent American life, including we’ve seen the killing of children, that they would use–and this is just for me–that they would use every tool at their disposal to do so.
MORGAN: But he’s an American citizen, Dzhokhar Tsarnaev. He committed a domestic crime in Boston, and he’ll be tried in a U.S. civilian criminal court system.
BALL: Right.
MORGAN: How you going to torture him?
BALL: I mean, dude, you’re talking to a guy that supports death penalty for cop killers, terrorists.
MORGAN: Yes, but how would you torture him?
BALL: Piers, I would support–I’m talking about me. If you want to talk to the president of the United States about his policies next time you golf or go play basketball with him, you can ask him. I’m telling you as Greg Ball, I’m telling you as Greg Ball personally–
MORGAN: I understand you’re Greg Ball.
BALL: If you would put me in the room with anybody from the most current scumbags to Osama bin Laden, I’m telling you what I would do. As far as the policy of the United States, you got to take it up with Obama.
MORGAN: I understand. But if you start to torture an American citizen for committing a domestic crime in America, you are crossing a Rubicon.
BALL: Can I ask you a question? What would you do if you were given the opportunity?
BALL: Before Osama bin Laden was shot, if you had 30 minutes in the room, what would you do? Would you play cards with Osama bin Laden?
MORGAN: It’s really a question–
BALL: What would you do?
MORGAN: Let me put this to you.
BALL: No. You answer this. If you met this scumbag–
MORGAN: I’m actually doing the interview, though.
BALL: If you met this scumbag–
MORGAN: No, I really am.
BALL: –before he killed these people and turned people into amputees, what would you do, play cards? Maybe I should have said it in a British accent. This man killed innocent men, women and children.
MORGAN: Can you stop being such a jerk?
BALL: What would you do? You get paid for it. I figured I would give you a taste of your own medicine.
MORGAN: Seriously–
MORGAN: Because you tweeted this to the world. I’m curious what you think. Your behavior so far has been really offensive.
BALL: Because you don’t like it when you don’t have another bobblehead that you can beat up and treat like a coward? The reality is is these men killed innocent men, women and children. As a red-blooded American, I said who out there if it would save an innocent–
MORGAN: But you’re not answering my questions.
BALL: — would not use torture. I would.
MORGAN: I understand all the gung-ho language you’re using. Here’s the point I’m making to you. Do you realize that if you torture this man, what you’re basically endorsing is the torture of American citizens for committing domestic crimes inside America?
Would you as a politician want to bring that in as a standard matter of practice in your country, yes or no?
BALL: What I am saying is that as an individual–
MORGAN: Yes or no?
BALL: If given the opportunity–
MORGAN: Yes or no.
BALL: –to be in a room with somebody like Osama bin Laden, it would be me, Osama bin Laden and a baseball bat. And yes, I would use torture.
MORGAN: It’s very macho.
BALL: It’s not about being macho. If I wanted to be macho, I would challenge you to an arm wrestling contest. I’m telling you how I feel. That’s what I said on Twitter.
And that’s what I said today. You can ask it 100 times over. I will give you the same answer.
ABC NEWS, ASHLEY JUDD, BARACK OBAMA, BOB WOODWARD, CBS NEWS, CNN, DEEP THROAT, FACEBOOK, FBI, FORTY-SEVEN PERCENT, MITCH MCCONNELL, MITT ROMNEY, NBC NEWS, REPUBLICAN PARTY, RICHARD NIXON, THE LOS ANGELES TIMES, THE NEW YORK TIMES, THE WASHINGTON POST, TWITTER, W. MARK FELT, WATERGATE
In History, Politics on April 17, 2013 at 12:02 am
President Barack Obama and Republican Presidential candidate Mitt Romney raised and spent millions of dollars for campaign ads.
And yet, when the 2012 Presidential race finally ended on November 6, its single most important video hadn’t been produced by an advertising agency.
It’s the infamous “47%” video of Romney speaking–for once, truthfully–at a private fundraiser:

“Well, there are 47% of the people who will vote for the President no matter what. All right? There are 47% who are with him. Who are dependent upon government. Who believe that–that they are victims. Who believe that government has a responsibility to care for them.
“Who believe that they’re entitled to healthcare, to food, to housing, to you name it. But that’s–it’s an entitlement.”
“…These are people who pay no income tax. 47% of Americans pay no income taxes. So our message of low taxes doesn’t connect. And he’ll be out there talking about tax cuts for the rich.”
A great deal of speculation has centered on: Who filmed it?
And in April, 2013, history repeated itself–with another Republican caught telling the ugly truth behind closed doors.
In this case, it was Kentucky United States Senator Mitch McConnell. A microphone (probably stationed outside his Senate office) caught him discussing how to attack Ashley Judd’s mental health if the actress decided to challenge him in 2014.
“She’s clearly, this sounds extreme, but she is emotionally unbalanced,” a McConnell aide said. “I mean, it’s been documented.
“Jesse can go in chapter and verse from her autobiography about…she’s suffered some suicidal tendencies. She was hospitalized for 42 days when she had a mental breakdown in the 90s.”
“I assume most of you have played the game Whac-A-Mole,” said McConnell. “This is the Whac-A-Mole period of the campaign…when anybody sticks their head up, do them out.”
McConnell, the Senate Minority Leader, refused to answer reporters’ questions about whether an opponent’s mental health or religious beliefs are fair game in a political campaign.
Instead, he accused “the political left” of mounting “quite a Nixonian move.” An ironic charge, considering that Nixon and McConnell rose to power within the same political party.
As in the case of the Mitt Romney videotape, the focus of the press has been on: Who recorded it? But this totally misses the point.
It doesn’t matter who provides vital information.
What does matter is: Is that information accurate?
In Romney’s case, it opened a window into a world seldom-seen by voters: The world of big-league donors and their money-grubbing political solicitors.
In McConnell’s case, it cast light on the how entrenched politicians ruthlessly defend their turf.
It should be clear that money-grubbing politicians have two versions of campaign speaking: One for donors whose money they seek, and another for the public whose votes they seek.
Rich and greed-obsessed donors are too smart to be fobbed off with appeals to their fears and prejudices. They expect a tangible return for their support–namely:
- Lower (preferably no) taxes
- Freedom to pollute
- Freedom to pay their employees the lowest possible wages
- Freedom to treat their employees like serfs
- Freedom to churn out shoddy or even dangerous goods
So what a candidate says in private, to his wealthy donors–or his campaign strategists–reflects what he really means and intends to do.
A similar frenzy of speculation centered on the identity of “Deep Throat”–the legendary source for Washington Post reporter Bob Woodward during the Watergate scandal. For decades, this proved a favorite guessing game for Washington reporters, politicians and government officials.

Bob Woodward and Carl Bernstein working on Watergate
In the end, “Deep Throat” turned out to be W. Mark Felt, assistant director of the FBI.
Commentators have endlessly debated his motives for leaking crucial Watergate evidence that ultimately ended the corrupt Presidency of Richard Nixon.
And, in the end, despite all the theories, it didn’t matter.
Felt provided Washington Woodward with the evidence necessary to keep the Watergate investigations going–by both the Post and the FBI.

W. Mark Felt
Thus, the question making the rounds about the McConnell discussion shouldn’t be: Who taped it?
It should be: How can more private fundraisers and political strategy sessions be penetrated and recorded–so voters can learn the truth about those who would become our elected rulers?
Definitely, those who specialize in “opposition research” should be thinking hard about this.
Private investigators–who regularly unearth secrets others want to keep secret–might also take an interest in this line of work.
And news organizations should offer financial rewards to those who provide such secret information.
With the advent of billionaires trying to buy the Presidency, and the unwillingness of Congress and the Supreme Court to stop the flow of unsavory money into politics, this may be our only chance to preserve what is left of the Republic.
Anyone who’s ever turned on a light to find roaches scurrying quickly over a kitchen floor knows the truth of this.
Turn on the lights–and watch the roaches scurry away.
9/11, ABC NEWS, AL QAEDA, BARACK OBAMA, BATMAN, CBS NEWS, CNN, COLUMBINE HIGH SCHOOL SHOOTINGS, COP KILLER BULLETS, CRIME, ERIC HOLDER, FACEBOOK, FBI, FEDERAL ASSAULT WEAPONS BAN, GABRIELLE GIFFORDS, GEORGE ZIMMERMAN, GREEN BERETS, GUN CONTROL, JAMES HOLMES, JR., MARTIN LUTHER KING, MITT ROMNEY, NATIONAL RIFLE ASSOCIATION, NBC NEWS, NUCLEAR WEAPONS, OSAMA BIN LADEN, ROBERT F. KENNEDY, SECOND AMENDMENT, SELF-DEFENSE, SEPTEMBER 11 ATTACKS, STAND-YOUR-GROUND LAWS, TALIBAN, TERRORISM, THE DARK NIGHT, THE LOS ANGELES TIMES, THE NEW YORK TIMES, THE WASHINGTON POST, TRAVON MARTIN, TUSCON SHOOTINGS, TWITTER, U.S. CONSTITUTION, U.S. NAVY SEALS, VIRGINIA TECH SHOOTINGS, WAYNE LAPIERRE, WRONGFUL-DEATH LAWSUITS
In Business, History, Law, Politics, Social commentary on April 12, 2013 at 12:00 am
The victims of the violence are black and white, rich and poor, young and old, famous and unknown. They are, most important of all, human beings whom other human beings loved and needed. No one – no matter where he lives or what he does – can be certain who will suffer from some senseless act of bloodshed. And yet it goes on and on.
–Robert F. Kennedy, April 4, 1968

Senator Robert F. Kennedy announcing the murder of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.
What should the surviving victims of gun-massacres do to seek redress?
And how can the relatives and friends of those who didn’t survive seek justice for those they loved?
Two things:
First, don’t count on politicians to support a ban on assault weapons.
Politicians–with rare exceptions–have only two goals:
- Get elected to office, and
- Stay in office.
And too many of them fear the economic and voting clout of the National Rifle Association (NRA) to risk its wrath.
On July 22–only two days after the Century 16 Theater slaughter in Aurora, Colorado–U.S. Senator Ron Johnson (R-Wis.) said: “The fact of the matter is there are 30-round magazines that are just common all over the place.
“You simply can’t keep these weapons out of the hands of sick, demented individuals who want to do harm. And when you try and do it, you restrict our freedom.”
That presumably includes the freedom of would-be mass murderers to carry out their fantasies.
Second, those who survive such massacres–and the relatives and friends of those who don’t–should file wrongful death, class-action lawsuits against the NRA.
There is sound, legal precedent for this.
- For decades, the American tobacco industry peddled death and disability to millions and reaped billions of dollars in profits.
- The industry vigorously claimed there was no evidence that smoking caused cancer, heart disease, emphysema or any other ailment.

- Tobacco companies spent billions on slick advertising campaigns to win new smokers and attack medical warnings about the dangers of smoking.
- Tobacco companies spent millions to elect compliant politicians and block anti-smoking legislation.
- From 1954 to 1994, over 800 private lawsuits were filed against tobacco companies in state courts. But only two plaintiffs prevailed, and both of those decisions were reversed on appeal.
- In 1994, amidst great pessimism, Mississippi Attorney General Mike Moore filed a lawsuit against the tobacco industry. But other states soon followed, ultimately growing to 46.
- Their goal: To seek monetary, equitable and injunctive relief under various consumer-protection and anti-trust laws.
- The theory underlying these lawsuits was: Cigarettes produced by the tobacco industry created health problems among the population, which badly strained the states’ public healthcare systems.
- In 1998, the states settled their Medicaid lawsuits against the tobacco industry for recovery of their tobacco-related, health-care costs. In return, they exempted the companies from private lawsuits for tobacco-related injuries.
- The companies agreed to curtail or cease certain marketing practices. They also agreed to pay, forever, annual payments to the states to compensate some of the medical costs for patients with smoking-related illnesses.
The parallels with the NRA are obvious:
- For decades, the NRA has peddled deadly weapons to millions, reaped billions of dollars in profits and refused to admit the carnage those weapons have produced: “Guns don’t kill people. People kill people.” With guns.

- The NRA has bitterly fought background checks on gun-buyers, in effect granting even criminals and the mentally ill the right to own arsenals of death-dealing weaponry.
- The NRA has spent millions on slick advertising campaigns to win new members and frighten them into buying guns.

- The NRA has spent millions on political contributions to block gun-control legislation.
- The NRA has spent millions attacking political candidates and elected officials who warned about the dangers of unrestricted access to assault and/or concealed weapons.

- The NRA has spent millions pushing “Stand Your Ground” laws in more than half the states, which potentially give every citizen a “license to kill.”
- The NRA receives millions of dollars from online sales of ammunition, high-capacity ammunition magazines, and other accessories through its point-of-sale Round-Up Program–thus directly profiting by selling a product that kills about 30,288 people a year.

- Firearms made indiscriminately available through NRA lobbying have filled hospitals–such as those in Aurora–with casualties, and have thus badly strained the states’ public healthcare systems.
It will take a series of highly expensive and well-publicized lawsuits to significantly weaken the NRA, financially and politically.
The first ones will have to be brought by the surviving victims of gun violence–and by the friends and families of those who did not survive it. Only they will have the courage and motivation to take such a risk.

As with the cases first brought against tobacco companies, there will be losses. And the NRA will rejoice with each one.
But, in time, state Attorneys General will see the clear parallels between lawsuits filed against those who peddle death by cigarette and those who peddle death by armor-piercing bullet.
And then the NRA–like the tobacco industry–will face an adversary wealthy enough to stand up for the rights of the gun industry’s own victims.
9/11, ABC NEWS, AL QAEDA, BARACK OBAMA, BATMAN, CBS NEWS, CNN, COLUMBINE HIGH SCHOOL SHOOTINGS, COP KILLER BULLETS, CRIME, ERIC HOLDER, FACEBOOK, FBI, FEDERAL ASSAULT WEAPONS BAN, GABRIELLE GIFFORDS, GEORGE ZIMMERMAN, GREEN BERETS, GUN CONTROL, JAMES HOLMES, JR., MARTIN LUTHER KING, MITT ROMNEY, NATIONAL RIFLE ASSOCIATION, NBC NEWS, NUCLEAR WEAPONS, OSAMA BIN LADEN, ROBERT F. KENNEDY, SECOND AMENDMENT, SELF-DEFENSE, SEPTEMBER 11 ATTACKS, STAND-YOUR-GROUND LAWS, TALIBAN, TERRORISM, THE DARK NIGHT, THE LOS ANGELES TIMES, THE NEW YORK TIMES, THE WASHINGTON POST, TRAVON MARTIN, TUSCON SHOOTINGS, TWITTER, U.S. CONSTITUTION, U.S. NAVY SEALS, VIRGINIA TECH SHOOTINGS, WAYNE LAPIERRE, WRONGFUL-DEATH LAWSUITS
TRAYVON’S REAL KILLER: THE NRA (PART THREE – END)
In Bureaucracy, Law Enforcement, Politics, Social commentary on July 31, 2013 at 12:10 amThe victims of the violence are black and white, rich and poor, young and old, famous and unknown. They are, most important of all, human beings whom other human beings loved and needed. No one – no matter where he lives or what he does – can be certain who will suffer from some senseless act of bloodshed. And yet it goes on and on.
–Robert F. Kennedy, April 4, 1968
Senator Robert F. Kennedy announcing the murder of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.
What should the surviving victims of gun violence do to seek redress?
And how can the relatives and friends of those who didn’t survive seek justice for those they loved?
Two things:
First, don’t count on politicians to support a ban on assault weapons.
Politicians–with rare exceptions–have only two goals:
And too many of them fear the economic and voting clout of the NRA to risk its wrath.
Consider Mitt Romney and President Barack Obama.
Both rushed to offer condolences to the surviving victims of the Aurora massacre. And both have steadfastly refused to even discuss gun control–let alone support a ban on the type of assault weapons used by James Holmes.
On July 22, 2012–only two days after the Century 16 Theater slaughter in Aurora, Colorado–U.S. Senator Ron Johnson (R-Wis.) said: “The fact of the matter is there are 30-round magazines that are just common all over the place.
“You simply can’t keep these weapons out of the hands of sick, demented individuals who want to do harm. And when you try and do it, you restrict our freedom.”
That presumably includes the freedom of would-be mass murderers to carry out their fantasies.
Second, those who survived the massacre–and the relatives and friends of those who didn’t–should file wrongful death, class-action lawsuits against the NRA.
There is sound, legal precedent for this.
The parallels with the NRA are obvious:
It will take a series of highly expensive and well-publicized lawsuits to significantly weaken the NRA, financially and politically.
The first ones will have to be brought by the surviving victims of gun violence–and by the friends and families of those who did not survive it. Only they will have the courage and motivation to take such a risk.
As with the cases first brought against tobacco companies, there will be losses. And the NRA will rejoice with each one.
But, in time, state Attorneys General will see the clear parallels between lawsuits filed against those who peddle death by cigarette and those who peddle death by armor-piercing bullet.
And then the NRA–like the tobacco industry–will face an adversary wealthy enough to stand up for the rights of the gun industry’s own victims.
Share this: